Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan and San Juan Islands Wilderness Stewardship Plan

              Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background ......................................................... 1-1
1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Significance of the Refuges ................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3 Purpose of and Need for the Plan ......................................................................................................... 1-9
1.4 Content and Scope of the Plan ............................................................................................................ 1-9
1.5 Legal and Policy Guidance ................................................................................................................ 1-10
1.6 Refuge Establishment and Purposes .................................................................................................. 1-12
1.7 Relationship to other Planning Efforts ............................................................................................... 1-13
1.8 Issues Addressed in the CCP/WSP .................................................................................................... 1-14
1.9 Refuge Vision Statements .................................................................................................................. 1-15
1.10 Refuge Goals ................................................................................................................................... 1-16
1.11 Planning Process .............................................................................................................................. 1-16
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction ........................................................ 2-1
2.1 Considerations in the Design of the CCP ............................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 General Guidelines .............................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.3 Summary of CCP Actions ................................................................................................................... 2-4
2.4 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ...................................................................................................... 2-17
Goal 1. Shoreline ............................................................................................................................... 2-17
Goal 2. Sandy Bluffs ......................................................................................................................... 2-21
Goal 3. Savanna, Grasslands, and Balds ........................................................................................... 2-25
Goal 4. Forests and Woodlands ......................................................................................................... 2-29
Goal 5. Small Wetlands ..................................................................................................................... 2-31
Goal 6. On-Refuge Visitor Services .................................................................................................. 2-32
Goal 7. Off-Refuge Visitor Services ................................................................................................. 2-37
Goal 8. Wilderness ............................................................................................................................ 2-40
Goal 9. Research and Monitoring ...................................................................................................... 2-42
Chapter 3. Physical Environment ....................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Climate and Climate Change ............................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Oceanography and Climate Change .................................................................................................... 3-5
3.3 Topography and Bathymetry ............................................................................................................. 3-10
3.4 Recent Geological History and Geomorphology ............................................................................... 3-11
3.5 Soils .................................................................................................................................................. 3-13
3.6 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................................ 3-14
3.7 Fire ................................................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.8 Air Quality ....................................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.9 Water Quality ................................................................................................................................... 3-16
3.10 Environmental Contaminants .......................................................................................................... 3-16
Chapter 4. Refuge Biology and Habitats ............................................................ 4-1
4.1 Biological Integrity Analysis ............................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Priority Resources of Concern Selection and Analysis ........................................................................ 4-6
4.3 Shoreline ........................................................................................................................................... 4-13
4.4 Sandy Bluffs ...................................................................................................................................... 4-16
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
ii Table of Contents
4.5 Savanna, Grasslands, and Herbaceous Balds ..................................................................................... 4-19
4.6 Forests and Woodlands ...................................................................................................................... 4-23
4.7 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................................... 4-28
4.8 Seabirds ............................................................................................................................................ 4-30
4.9 Bald Eagles ....................................................................................................................................... 4-42
4.10 Black Oystercatcher ......................................................................................................................... 4-45
4.11 Marine Mammals ............................................................................................................................. 4-47
4.12 Herbivores and Predtors of Management Concern ......................................................................... 4-52
4.13 Paleontological Resources ............................................................................................................... 4-54
Chapter 5. Human Environment ........................................................................ 5-1
5.1 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.2 Refuge Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 5-6
5.3 Research .............................................................................................................................................. 5-9
5.4 Refuge Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 5-12
5.5 Other Refuge Uses ............................................................................................................................ 5-16
5.6 Regional Recreational Opportunities ................................................................................................ 5-17
5.7 Regional Recreation Rates and Trends ............................................................................................. 5-25
5.8 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................................................ 5-27
Appendix A. Lands ........................................................................................... A-1
Appendix B. Rocks, Reefs, and Islands within San Juan Islands ................. B-1
Appendix C. Habitats and Wildlife ................................................................. C-1
Appendix D. Sign Plans .................................................................................... D-1
Appendix E. Integrated Pest Management Program ..................................... E-1
Appendix F. Area Beaches ................................................................................ F-1
Appendix G. Implementation ........................................................................... G-1
Appendix H. Wilderness .................................................................................... H-1
Appendix I. Appropriateness Findings ............................................................ I-1
Appendix J. Compatibility Determinations .................................................... J-1
Appendix K. CCP Team Members, Public Involvement, and Compliance K-1
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Table of Contents
iii
Appendix L. Public Comments and Response ................................................ L-1
Appendix M. Abbreviations and Glossary ...................................................... M-1
Figures
1.1 Salish Sea ............................................................................................................................................ 1-3
1.2 Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge ......................................................................................... 1-5
1.3 San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge ......................................................................................... 1-7
2.1 Protection Island NWR Management Actions .................................................................................... 2-9
2.2 San Juan Islands NWR, Smith and Minor Islands Management Actions ......................................... 2-11
2.3 San Juan Islands NWR, Matia Island Management Actions ............................................................ 2-13
2.4 San Juan Islands NWR, Turn Island Management Actions .............................................................. 2-15
3.1 Washington State average annual precipitation from 1971 to 2000 .................................................... 3-3
3.2 Global ocean (surface) currents ........................................................................................................... 3-6
3.3 Global sub-surface currents ................................................................................................................. 3-7
4.1 Protection Island Current Vegetation ................................................................................................... 4-9
4.2 Smith and Minor Islands Current Vegetation .................................................................................... 4-11
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-1
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background
1.1 Introduction
Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge (NWR or
Refuge or Refuges) are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS or Service) as part of the
National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS or System). They are two of the six refuges that comprise the
Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Both of these Refuges are within a geographic
area now known as the Salish Sea (Figure 1.1). The Salish Sea is a single estuarine ecosystem that
extends from the north end of the Strait of Georgia to the west end of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and south
to the southern extent of Puget Sound. It encompasses the inland marine waters of Southern British
Columbia, Canada, and northern Washington, USA (WWU 2009).
Protection Island NWR is located in the Strait of Juan de Fuca near the entrance to Discovery Bay in
Jefferson County, Washington. It includes 659 acres of land and tideland lease. Kanem Point, the part of
Protection Island closest to the mainland, is 1.4 miles due north of Diamond Point and 5 miles due west of
Port Townsend, Washington (Figure 1.2).
Most of the San Juan Islands NWR consists of rocks, reefs, and islands scattered throughout the San Juan
Archipelago. Two islands, Smith and Minor, however, are located south of the archipelago within the
Strait of Juan de Fuca. The Refuge consists of approximately 449 acres in Island, San Juan, Skagit, and
Whatcom Counties, Washington. Most (353 acres) of San Juan Islands NWR is also designated
wilderness known as the San Juan Islands Wilderness Area (see Figure 1.3).
1.2 Significance of the Refuges
Protection Island NWR
Protection Island was given its present name by Captain George Vancouver, who visited in May 1792 and
described the landscape “as enchantingly beautiful as any of the most elegantly finished pleasure grounds
in Europe” (Meany 1907). An early naturalist, Suckley (1859), referred to Protection Island as a “favored
breeding ground of the rhinoceros auklet.” Subsequent farming and livestock grazing for over 100 years,
introduction of domestic cats, establishment of a Coast Artillery battery during WWII, major fires that
burned much of the island during the 1940s and 50s, plus subdivision for summer homes and a resort
during the late 1960s-70s, took their toll on the native plants and wildlife of Protection Island. Despite
habitat alteration, local naturalists and conservation organizations recognized the significant wildlife
values of the island and lobbied for its protection. In 1975 Washington State established the Zella M.
Schultz Seabird Sanctuary on the southwestern tip of the island, and in 1982 Congress established the
Protection Island NWR on the remaining portions of the island.
Native wildlife recovered such that today six species of seabirds (rhinoceros auklets, tufted puffin, pigeon
guillemot, pelagic cormorant, double-crested cormorant, and glaucous-winged gulls) nest on Protection
Island. This island continues to be particularly important for rhinoceros auklets. A recent survey
indicates that the breeding colony on Protection Island may be the third largest in North America
(Pearson et al. 2009) and it is one of just eight islands that support more than 95% of the North American
breeding population of rhinoceros auklets (Gaston and Deschesne 1996). The island also supports a
nesting pair of bald eagles, several black oystercatcher territories, resting and feeding areas for harlequin
ducks and black brant, and many forest and grassland birds. In 1997, Protection Island became the first
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-2 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
location in Washington State where a few northern elephant seals were observed to haul-out and have
pups (Jeffries et al 2000). The island is also a haul-out and pupping site for hundreds of the much smaller
harbor seal. Paleontological materials, including remains of a mammoth and a giant beaver, have been
seen on Protection Island and at other nearby sites, indicating there may be much more to learn about
prehistoric wildlife from this nonrenewable resource.
Protection Island has been a center for learning and research since before the Refuge was established and
continues to the present. The Service, along with other Federal and State agencies, as well as university
professors and their students have conducted many studies on Protection Island. While Protection Island
remains closed to the public to provide wildlife sanctuary, visitors and local residents can enjoy observing
and listening to birds and marine mammals at a distance, from boats and points on the mainland.
San Juan Islands NWR
Though small in size, the scattered islands, rocks, and reefs of the San Juan Islands NWR are important
for marine wildlife. An estimated 80 percent of the breeding population of black oystercatchers in
Washington’s inland marine waters are using the rocks and islands within the San Juan Islands NWR for
nesting (Nysewander 2003). There is a rhinoceros auklet colony on Smith Island, which although much
smaller than the Protection Island colony, is still important for this species. Several pairs of Brandt’s
cormorants were recently confirmed nesting and tending their young on an island within the Refuge.
There are also 11 bald eagle nesting territories on Refuge islands. A few northern elephant seals and
hundreds of harbor seals haul-out and care for their pups on Smith Island (Hayward 2003, Jeffries et al
2000). Federally threatened Steller sea lions as well as California sea lions haul out on a few Refuge
rocks from fall through spring.
Matia Island, the largest within the Refuge, has a magnificent old-growth forest of Douglas-fir, cedars,
and hemlocks. Refuge rocks and islands are also home to a number of rare and endemic plants including
brittle prickly-pear cactus, California buttercup, and bear’s foot sanicle. Refuge islands have significantly
more species of native plants and fewer introduced species compared to adjacent islands (Bennett 2007).
The natural resources, recreational opportunities, and scenic beauty of the Salish Sea, including the San
Juan Archipelago, have resulted in several special designations of the area. In addition to establishing the
San Juan Islands NWR, most of this Refuge is also designated as the San Juan Islands Wilderness and
therefore part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. The Refuge is within the Cascadia Marine
Trail which is a National Recreation Trail and one of the premier water trails for non-motorized boaters in
the United States. Two Refuge islands, one of them a wilderness island, provide opportunities to camp
overnight. This facilitates wildlife observation and photography via non-motorized boats throughout the
area. The Refuge is also an important part of the San Juan Islands Scenic Byway. Residents and tourists
enjoy opportunities to learn about the Salish Sea and its natural resources as well as view wildlife and
Refuge islands from ferries, commercial tour boats, and private boats.
Victoria
Vancouver
Powell River
Nanaimo
Courtenay
Campbell River
Seattle
Olympia
Bremerton
Everett
Bellingham
Tacoma
Figure 1.1. Salish Sea
Data Sources: Populated Places and Country Boundaries from Natural Earth; Imagery from NASA Blue Marble; Elevation from NASA/CGIAR-CSI
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-3
0 Miles 50
0 Kilometers 50
NAD 83
UTM ZONE 10N
Strait of Juan de Fuca
Strait of Georgia
Georgia
Basin
Puget
Sound
CANADA
UNITED STATES
Port Angeles
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-4 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; State and County Boundaries from BLM; Imagery from 2010 USDA NAIP True Color Aerial Photography
Figure 1.2 Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
ytnuoC nosreffeJ
ytnuoC mallalC
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-5
Violet Point
Kanem Point
Land Status
Approved Refuge Boundary
USFWS Fee Title
WDNR Easement/Lease
(from Mean High Tide to Mean Low Tide)
WDFW Zella Schultz Seabird Sanctuary
(excluded from Approved Refuge Boundary)
Adjacent Aquatic Lands
WDNR Bedlands Withdrawal
(200 Yards from Extreme Low Tide)
0 Miles 0.4
0 Kilometers 0.4
UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
WASHINGTON
Area of map
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-6 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Dungeness
Spit
Griffin
Bay
UNITED STATES
CANADA
Anacortes
Eastsound
Friday Harbor Guemes
Marietta
Orcas
Richardson
Roche Harbor
Shaw Island
Thatcher
Urban
Waldron
Washington
British Columbia
Whatcom County
San Juan County
Whatcom County
Skagit County
Skagit County
San Juan County
San Juan C ounty
Island County
Island County
Jefferson County
Bellingham
Bay
Burrows
Bay
Dugualla
Bay
Fidalgo
Bay
Kiket
Bay
Lummi
Bay
Allan
Island
Burrows
Island
Center
Island
Henry
Island
Hope
Island
Johns
Island
Jones
Island
Portage
Island
Spieden
Island
Sucia
Island
Blakely
Island
Cypress
Island
Decatur
Island
Guemes
Island
Lopez
Island
Lummi
Island
Orcas
San Juan
Island
Shaw
Island
Stuart
Island
Waldron
Island
Whidbey
Island
Sinclair
Island
Island
Saturna Island
Pender
Island
Barnes Island
Clark Island
Patos Island 44
77
43
48
34 38
39
32 37 65
33
31 62
36
40
42
45
50
53
30
64
68
77
61 60
29
49
70
72
73
54 58
28
55 57 52
56
1
18
25 24 4
3
78
79
84
81
80
5
83
16
6
10 12
8
11
7
75 76
14 13
26 23
2
9
19
20
21
35
27 22
46
47
59
66
69
74
82
63
41
71
51
17
15
Figure 1.3 San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; State and County Boundaries from BLM; Elevation from USGS; Bathymetry from UW PRISM,
NOAA, and NWIC; Roads from ESRI
Onamac
Point
Point
Demock
Admiralty
Bay
Dungeness
Bay
Padilla
Bay
Samish
Island
.
UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
0 Kilometers 4
0 Miles 4
Area of map
Wilderness Designation
Refuge Lands without
Wilderness Designation
Refuge Lands with
WASHINGTON
Land Status
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1-7
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1. Small Island
2. Rum & Rim Islands
3. Fortress Island
4. Skull Island
5. Crab Island
6. Boulder Island
7. Davidson Rock
8. Castle Island
9. Blind Islands
10. Aleck Rocks
11. Swirl Island
12. Unnamed Rock
13. Unnamed
14. Unnamed
15. Hall Island
16. Unnamed
17. Secar Rock
18. Unnamed
19. Unnamed
20. Unnamed
21. Mummy Rocks
22. Unnamed
23. Shark Reef
24. Harbor Rock
25. North Pacific Rock
26. Halftide Rocks
27. Unnamed
28. Low Island
29. Pole Island
57. Pointer Island
58. Black Rock
59. Spindle Rock
60. Brown Rock
61. Unnamed
62. South Peapod Rock
63. Peapod Rocks
64. North Peapod Rock
65. Eliza Rock
66. Viti Rocks
68. Bird Rock
69. Unnamed
70. Low Island
71. Nob Island
72. Unnamed
73. Unnamed
74. Unnamed
75. Smith Island
76. Minor Island
77. Matia Island
78. Puffin Island
79. Turn Island
80. Bird Rocks
81. Williamson Rocks
82. Colville Island
83. Buck Island
84. Bare Island
30. Barren Island
31. Battleship Island
32. Sentinel Rock
33. Center Reef
34. Gull Reef
35. Ripple Island
36. Unnamed (Shag Reef)
37. Unnamed (Little Cactus
Island)
38. Gull Rock
39. Flattop Island
40. White Rocks
41. Mouatt Reef
42. Skipjack Island
43. Unnamed
44. Clements Reef
45. Unnamed
46. Parker Reef
47. The Sisters
48. Unnamed (Little Sister
Island)
49. Unnamed
50. Tift Rocks
51. Reef Point
52. Turn Rock
53. Shag Rock
54. Flower Island
55. Willow Island
56. Lawson Rock
San Juan Islands Refuge ID and Name
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-8 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-9
1.3 Purpose of and Need for the Plan
National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) planning policy (Service Manual Part 602 FW3, June
21, 2000) states that the purpose of CCPs is to “describe the desired future conditions of a refuge and
provide long-range guidance and management direction to achieve refuge purposes; help fulfill the
National Wildlife Refuge System mission; maintain and, where appropriate, restore the ecological
integrity of each refuge and the Refuge System; . . . and meet other mandates.” The plan is expected to
serve as a management guide for approximately the next 15 years.
Long-range management direction for the Refuges is needed to address Refuge management concerns for
wildlife and habitats, including human-caused wildlife disturbance, the risk of oil spills, marine debris,
the increasing deer herd on Protection Island, invasive species, and where possible, to anticipate
management concerns related to climate change including sea level rise. There is a need to re-evaluate
the research activities and facilities on Protection Island to see if they can be improved in ways that better
support Refuge management. There is also a need to evaluate the quality, appropriateness, and
compatibility of visitor services programs and activities.
Prior management plans for these Refuges were developed in the 1980s. These older plans are now
outdated both in terms of Refuge resources and conditions, as well as current policies and mandates. This
CCP supersedes the Master Plan for Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS 1985), Refuge
Management Plan for San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge (USFWS 1986) and the San Juan
Islands Wilderness Plan (USFWS 1978).
1.4 Content and Scope of the Plan
The content and scope of this plan is based on meeting the requirements of the Administration Act,
NEPA, and Service policies within the context of the purposes of the Refuges and the natural, cultural,
and wilderness resources they contain. This plan includes:
 A long-term vision for each Refuge (inside cover and Chapter 1).
 Goals and objectives for Refuge resources, wilderness values, and public use programs, as well as
strategies for achieving the objectives (Chapter 2).
 A description of the physical environment including geology and climate change (Chapter 3).
 A description of the Refuge biological resources, their conditions, and trends on the Refuges and
within the ecosystem (Chapter 4).
 A description of the cultural resources and public use programs on and near the Refuges, as well as
Refuge facilities, and local socioeconomic conditions (Chapter 5).
 Detailed information about Refuge establishment, land status, and habitat protection priorities
(Appendix A).
 Information regarding specific rocks, islands, and reefs within the San Juan Islands NWR (Appendix
B).
 Additional information about Priority Resources of Concern and Ecological Systems (Appendix C).
 Sign Plans for each of the Refuges (Appendix D) and an Integrated Pest Management Plan for the
entire Complex (Appendix E).
 Descriptions of area beaches (Appendix F).
 Staffing, funding, and partnerships necessary to implement the plan (Appendix G).
 Wilderness Reviews and Minimum Requirements Analyses (Appendix H).
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-10 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
 Appropriateness Findings (Appendix I) and Compatibility Determinations (Appendix J) for Refuge
uses.
 Summary of public involvement activities as well as legal compliance information (Appendix K).
 Public comments and Services responses on the Draft CCP (Appendix L).
 Guide to acronyms used in the document and well as some definitions (Appendix M).
1.5 Legal and Policy Guidance
Protection Island NWR and San Juan Islands NWR are managed as part of the National Wildlife Refuge
System within the legal and policy framework of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service within the
Department of the Interior. The Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended, serves as the
primary guidance for management of the System. The Wilderness Act also guides the management of the
San Juan Islands NWR because most of this Refuge is included in the designated San Juan Islands
Wilderness Area.
1.5.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal Federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting
and enhancing fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American
people. The Service manages the National Wildlife Refuge System which includes Protection Island
NWR and San Juan Islands NWR. It also operates national fish hatcheries, fishery resources offices, and
ecological services field stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, administers the Endangered
Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and
restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and helps foreign and Native American tribal governments with
their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Assistance program, which distributes hundreds of
millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state fish and wildlife agencies.
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is:
“Working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their
habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.”
1.5.2 National Wildlife Refuge System
Starting with the first refuge, Florida’s Pelican Island, established in 1903 by President Theodore
Roosevelt, the National Wildlife Refuge System has grown to more than 150 million acres in size. It
includes more than 520 refuges, at least one in every state, and thousands of small wetlands and other
special management areas. The needs of wildlife and their habitats come first on refuges, in contrast to
other public lands managed for multiple uses.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.),
serves as the primary guidance for management of the System. One very important amendment to the
Administration Act was the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-
57). This amendment included a unifying mission for the Refuge System; a new process for determining
compatible uses on refuges; and a requirement that each refuge will be managed under a Comprehensive
Conservation Plan. It also states that wildlife conservation is the priority of NWRS lands and that the
Secretary of the Interior shall ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-11
refuge lands are maintained. Each refuge must be managed to fulfill the Refuge System mission and the
specific purposes for which it was established. The Service is required to monitor the status and trends of
fish, wildlife, and plants on each refuge. Additionally, the Act identifies six wildlife-dependent
recreational uses. These uses are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, environmental
education and interpretation. As priority public uses of the Refuge System, these uses will receive
enhanced consideration over other uses in planning and management. Lands within the National Wildlife
Refuge System are different from other, multiple-use public lands in that they are closed to all public uses
unless specifically and legally opened. No refuge use may be allowed unless it is determined to be
compatible with refuge purposes and the System Mission.
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 Goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System are:
 Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats, including species that are
endangered or threatened with becoming endangered.
 Develop and maintain a network of habitats for migratory birds, anadromous and interjurisdictional
fish, and marine mammal populations that is strategically distributed and carefully managed to meet
important life history needs of these species across their ranges.
 Conserve those ecosystems, plant communities, wetlands of national or international significance, and
landscapes and seascapes that are unique, rare, declining, or underrepresented in existing protection
efforts.
 Provide and enhance opportunities to participate in compatible wildlife-dependent recreation (hunting,
fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and interpretation).
 Foster understanding and instill appreciation of the diversity and interconnectedness of fish, wildlife,
and plants and their habitats. (Fish and Wildlife Service Manual Part 601 FW 1 sec1.8, June 2006)
1.5.3 National Wilderness Preservation System
The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136, 78 Stat. 890) -- Public Law 88-577, approved
September 3, 1964, directed the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to review every
roadless area of 5,000 or more acres and every roadless island (regardless of size) within National
Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, and National Forests and to recommend to the President the suitability
of each such area or island for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, with final
decisions made by Congress. The Act provides criteria for determining suitability and establishes
restrictions on activities that can be undertaken on a designated area.
Under the authority of the Wilderness Act, over 20 million acres of land and water in 66 National
Wildlife Refuges have been designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System by special
Acts of Congress. The San Juan Islands Wilderness area, which includes 353 acres within the San Juan
Islands NWR, was established in 1976 under Public law 94-557 (USFWS 2009a). The only parts of this
Refuge that are not designated wilderness are Smith and Minor Islands, Turn Island, and a small portion
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-12 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
of Matia Island.
1.5.4 Other laws and mandates
Many other Federal laws, executive orders, Service policies, and international treaties govern the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and Refuge System lands. Examples include the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of
1918, Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the Endangered
Species Act of 1973. A list and brief description of Federal laws of interest to the Service can be found in
the Laws Digest at http://www.fws.gov/laws.
Over the last few years, the Service has developed or revised numerous policies to reflect the mandates
and intent of the Improvement Act. Some of these key policies include Comprehensive Conservation
Planning process (602 FW 3); Appropriate Refuge Uses (603 FW 1); Compatibility (603 FW 2);
Wildlife-Dependent Recreation (605 FW 1-7); Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health
(601 FW 3); and Pesticide Safety (242 FW 7). In addition, the Service has recently revised the
Wilderness Stewardship policy (610 FW 2). These and many other policies that guide the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and management of Refuge System lands can be found within the Service Manual which
can be accessed at http://www.fws.gov/policy/manuals/.
1.6 Refuge Establishment and Purposes
The Service defines the purposes of a National Wildlife Refuge when the refuge is established or when
new land is added to an existing refuge. When an addition to a refuge is acquired under an authority
different from the authority used to establish the original refuge, the addition takes on the purposes of the
original refuge, but the original refuge does not take on the purposes of the addition. Each refuge must
be managed to fulfill the Refuge System mission and the specific purposes for which the refuge was
established. Managers must consider all refuge purposes; however, purposes dealing with the
conservation, management, and restoration of fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats, take precedence
over other purposes. If a conflict exists between the Refuge System mission and the refuge purposes,
the purposes may supersede the mission. The following paragraphs identify refuge purposes with bold
italics and provide a brief description of refuge establishment history related to those purposes. For more
details on refuge establishment history, see Appendix A.
Protection Island NWR Establishment and Purposes (purposes are bold and italicized)
Refuge establishment was authorized by the Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge Act, Public Law
97 – 333, Oct 15, 1982 (96 Stat. 1623): ��The purposes of the refuge are to provide habitat for a broad
diversity of bird species, with particular emphasis on protecting the nesting habitat of the bald eagle,
tufted puffin, rhinoceros auklet, pigeon guillemot, and pelagic cormorant; to protect the hauling-out
area of harbor seals; and to provide for scientific research and wildlife-oriented public education and
interpretation (96 Stat. 1623)” and applies to all portions of Protection Island NWR. The first 1.42 acres
of the Refuge were donated by Admiralty Audubon Society “. . in accordance with Public law 97-333
(96 Stat. 1623) Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge Act (Donation Warranty Deed, December 22,
1982).” Most of the over 800 tracts that make up the Refuge were authorized by the same act and
purchased from 1983-1987 with funds authorized by the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965,
as amended. Purposes of this fund include “acquisition of ...(d) any areas authorized for the National
Wildlife Refuge System by specific Acts” (16 U.S.C. 460l-9). The Service also has a 20-year aquatic
lands lease for the second class tidelands around Protection Island (No 20-013245) from the Washington
Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). This lease is authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Act of
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-13
1956, “. . . for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and
wildlife resources . . .” (16 U.S.C.742 f(a)(4)).
San Juan Islands NWR Establishment and Purposes (purposes are bold and italicized)
San Juan Islands NWR was first established in 1960 to be “. . . reserved under jurisdiction of the Bureau
of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, United States Fish and Wildlife Service. . .” (PLO 2249). In 1975, the
San Juan Islands NWR was consolidated with Smith Island NWR (est. 1914), Matia Island NWR (est.
1937) and Jones Island NWR (est. 1937) and additional lands were reserved under the name of San Juan
Islands NWR (PLO 5515). PLO 5515 does not state a purpose for this newly consolidated Refuge but an
earlier proposal published in 38 FR 29831 on Oct 29, 1973, stated it was to “. . .facilitate the
management of migratory birds for which the United States has a responsibility under international
treaties and to further effectuate the purposes of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act.” Smith and
Minor Islands also retain their original establishing purpose from E.O. 1959 “as a preserve, breeding
ground and winter sanctuary for native birds.” Similarly, Matia Island retains its original establishing
purpose from E.O. 7595 “ . . . as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.”
In October 1976, the San Juan Islands Wilderness was established (P.L. 94-557) which added the
purposes of the Wilderness Act (P.L. 88-577, Sept. 3, 1964) including “. . .to secure for the American
people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness” to all
units of the Refuge except for Smith, Minor, Turn, and Jones Islands, and a small portion of Matia Island.
Under P.L. 97-333 (1982) and PLO 6489 (1983) Jones Island was removed from the San Juan Islands
NWR and transferred to the State of Washington for use as a public recreation area. Under executive
orders since the mid-to-late 1800s and in the Refuge establishing documents, it was stated that some
islands which are now units of the San Juan Islands NWR retain “lighthouse purposes.” These
“lighthouse purposes” today translate into a variety of navigation aids which are maintained under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Coast Guard.
1.7 Relationship to Other Planning Efforts
When developing a CCP, the Service considers the goals, objectives, strategies, and other information
available in existing national, regional, and ecosystem plans, state fish and wildlife conservation plans,
and other landscape-scale plans developed for the same watershed or ecosystem in which the Refuges are
located. To the extent possible, the CCP is expected to be consistent with the existing plans and assist in
meeting their conservation goals and objectives. The following table identifies some of the key plans
which were reviewed by members of the core team while developing the CCP. Columns indicate portions
of the CCP/WSP where these plans were applicable.
Relationship of Other Planning Efforts to the Protection Island
and San Juan Islands CCP/WSP
Plans Reviewed
Refuge
Management
Directon(Chap
ter 2)
Physical,
Biological and
Human
Aff d
Appendices
State of Washington Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
(WDFW 2005)
  
Willamette Valley, Puget Trough, Georgia Basin Ecoregional
Assessment (Floberg et al 2004)
 
San Juan County Marine Stewardship Area Plan (Evans and  
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-14 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
Kennedy 2007)
Strait of Juan de Fuca Geographic Response Plan (WDOE 2008)  
San Juan Islands and North Puget Sound Geographic Response
Plans (WDOE 2009)

DRAFT Rising to the Challenge: Strategic Plan for Responding to
Accelerating Climate Change (USFWS 2009b)

DRAFT Strategic Plan for Inventories and Monitoring on National
Wildlife Refuges: Adapting to Environmental Change (USFWS 2010)

The California Current Marine Bird Conservation Plan (Mills et al
2005)
 
Seabird Conservation Plan (USFWS 2005)   
Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani) Conservation Action
Plan (Tessler et al 2007)
 
National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007)  
Recovery Plan for the Stellar Sea Lion (NMFS 2008)  
2009-2015 Game Management Plan (WDFW 2008) 
Recovery Plan For The Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta).
(USFWS 2000)
 
1.8 Issues Addressed in the CCP/WSP
The Service defines an issue as “Any unsettled matter that requires a management decision, e.g., an
initiative, opportunity, resource management problem, threat to the resources of the unit, conflict in uses,
public concern, or the presence of an undesirable resource condition (602 FW 1 1.6 K).” The following
issues were addressed in the Draft CCP/WSP/EA (2010) and decisions regarding them are reflected in
this CCP/WSP.
Human-caused wildlife disturbance: How do we reduce the incidences of human-caused wildlife
disturbance? How do we keep people and their pets off closed Refuge islands? How do we encourage
boaters to stay far enough away from closed shorelines and closed islands to not disturb wildlife? How
do we discourage low-flying aircraft?
Oil and other contaminant spills: What can the Service do to reduce the risk of oil and other
contaminant spills? In the event of a spill, is there anything the Service can do to change or modify the
impacts? How can we reduce the amount of liquid fuel transported to Protection Island? What can be
done about local contaminants affecting Refuge resources (i.e., rogue creosote logs and marine pilings)?
Marine debris and derelict fishing gear: What role can the Service play in reducing the presence
of marine debris and derelict fishing gear from the Refuge and adjacent marine areas?
Invasive Species: What can the Service do to prevent the introduction and dispersal of invasive plants
and animals and facilitate their removal from the Refuges?
Climate Change: What monitoring is needed to better prepare for and address climate change impacts
to species and habitats?
Deer Management: Should the Service eliminate deer on Protection Island to enhance seabird nesting
habitat and reduce erosion?
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-15
Habitat Restoration: Should we actively restore native plant communities on the bluffs, shoreline,
grasslands, and forests of the Refuges, and if so, which areas should be restored?
Camping: Should we continue to allow camping on Matia and Turn Islands? Are there ways of
modifying the camping program to make it more appropriate for San Juan Islands Refuge and to better
facilitate wildlife-dependent uses? How do we prevent illegal camping?
Boat Access: What is the best way to manage watercraft access to Refuge islands and still provide
undisturbed shoreline for wildlife use? How do we reduce the incidences of unauthorized landings and
trespass on closed shorelines and closed islands?
Wildlife-Dependent Uses: How do we educate Refuge visitors and the communities around the
Refuges about the natural and cultural resources of the Salish Sea? How can we enhance visitors’
abilities and opportunities to observe and photograph wildlife both on- and off-Refuge?
Community Outreach: How can we use community outreach to enhance Salish Sea conservation
efforts?
Wilderness: How do we identify Refuge islands or inform the public to maintain a distance from the
islands to prevent disturbance with Refuge signs and still meet the intent of wilderness? How do we
maintain or enhance the visitor’s wilderness experience on Matia Island and within the San Juan
Archipelago?
Research: How can the Service improve coordination with the larger research community? What
research studies would assist in answering Refuge management questions? How can impacts to wildlife
and habitats from research activities be minimized? How can the Service encourage off-Refuge research
which benefits Refuge resources?
1.9 Refuge Vision Statements
Protection Island NWR
Protection Island’s unique combination of shoreline, spits, and sandy bluffs are a safe haven for thousands
of nesting rhinoceros auklets, as well as tufted puffins, pigeon guillemots, and pelagic cormorants. Bald
eagles roost and nest in the forested uplands while harbor seals and elephant seals haul out and raise their
pups on the shoreline. Environmental education opportunities are available to dedicated college students
and volunteers through research and stewardship projects. Staff and partners cooperatively conduct
monitoring and research on the flora and fauna, providing sound science to inform management. Refuge
staff and year-round resident caretakers maintain minimal infrastructure. Although the island is located
close to human population centers, people respect wildlife’s need for refugia and maintain a distance from
shorelines while viewing the abundant seabird and marine mammals that can be found on the island.
Amid the cacophony of wildlife, a sense of peace nurtures the desire to care for the natural treasure that is
Protection Island.
San Juan Islands NWR
The San Juan Islands NWR is a sanctuary for a dazzling array of marine life, including black
oystercatchers, pigeon guillemots, tufted puffins, pelagic and double-crested cormorants, glaucous-winged
gulls, and pinnipeds. Nestled among large islands and marine waters abuzz with human activity,
the Refuge encompasses many small islands, rocks, and reefs scattered throughout the San Juan
Archipelago. The breathtaking forces of nature shaped this marine wilderness embracing many miles of
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-16 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
shoreline, reefs, lichened rocks, bluffs and old-growth forests. These wild lands inhabited by wild
creatures and supporting healthy breeding seabird colonies provide the backdrop for folks to enjoy,
appreciate, and understand the Refuge’s valuable place in the Salish Sea ecosystem. Working with
partners, we provide opportunities for researchers, boaters, birders, and other nature lovers to develop a
stewardship ethic for our Refuge islands.
1.10 Refuge Goals
Goal 1: Protect, maintain, and restore high quality natural shoreline and rocky cliff habitats for optimum
productivity and abundance of seabirds, marine mammals, waterfowl, and shorebirds.
Goal 2: Protect, maintain, and restore the native vegetative communities and structure of sandy bluffs to
maximize habitat for breeding seabirds.
Goal 3: Restore, maintain, and protect high quality native savanna, grasslands, and herbaceous bald
habitat to increase the species diversity, richness, and population levels of associated flora and fauna.
Goal 4: Restore, maintain, and protect the species richness and diversity of the forests and woodlands by
fostering a complex understory and diversity of tree age classes.
Goal 5: Restore, maintain, and protect the biological integrity of natural, small wetlands to increase
species diversity and productivity.
Goal 6: Increase Refuge visitors’ knowledge of the natural and cultural resources of the Salish Sea
ecosystem; help visitors understand the role of the National Wildlife Refuge System; and encourage them
to contribute to the stewardship of Protection Island and San Juan Islands NWRs.
Goal 7: Increase Salish Sea residents’ and visitors’ knowledge of the natural and cultural resources of the
ecosystem; help them understand the Refuges’ role in protecting those resources, and learn how they can
reduce their impacts to those resources.
Goal 8: Promote the wilderness character and experience of the San Juan Islands Wilderness Area.
Goal 9: Encourage and support collection of scientific information that assists in managing Refuge
resources and contributes to a greater understanding of the natural and cultural resources of the Salish Sea
ecosystem.
1.11 Planning Process
The Service began the process of gathering information needed in developing a CCP/WSP for these
Refuges in 2006. The core planning team consists of a project leader, deputy project leader, biologist,
public use/law enforcement officer, GIS specialist, and a regional planner. An extended team assisted in
the development of the CCP by providing special expertise and/or by reviewing and commenting on early
drafts of the plan. The extended team consisted of various professionals from other agencies and within
the Service. A list of core and extended team members is located in Appendix K.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act requires that the public have an opportunity for
active involvement in CCP development and revision. Service policy also states that CCPs are to be
developed in an open, public process and the agency is committed to securing public input throughout the
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-17
process. A Notice of Intent (NOI) was published in the Federal Register on August 14, 2007, to invite the
public to participate in the planning process and solicit their comments. Additional outreach efforts
during initial scoping (Aug 2007-April 2008) emphasized face-to-face meetings with key state and federal
agencies, marine resource committees, federally elected officials, tribal governments, non-governmental
organizations, and the research community. After initial public scoping, preliminary management options
were presented at two public open house meetings in September 2008, and additional agency coordination
occurred. A Notice of Availability of the Draft CCP/WSP/EA was published in the Federal Register on
August 18, 2010 followed by a 30-day public comment period. The Service also distributed planning
updates, initiated news releases, and gave presentations at community and other non-governmental
organizations to inform the public, invite discussion and solicit feedback. Planning issues, preliminary
management alternatives and internal and public drafts of the CCP and this final CCP were developed
taking into consideration comments received throughout the planning process. Additional information
regarding public involvement activities is located in Appendix K.
References
Evens, K. and J. Kennedy. 2007. San Juan County Marine Stewardship Area Plan. Accessed at
http://www.sjcmrc.org/programs/msaplan_files/msaplan.htm on 2/2/2010.
Bennett, J. 2007. Summary of field work on NWR islands, 2007. Report to USFWS – Washington
Maritime NWRC. Sequim, WA. 2pp.
Floberg , J., M. Goering, G. Wilhere, C. MacDonald, C. Chappell, C. Rumsey, Z. Ferdana, A. Holt, P.
Skidmore, T. Horsman, E. Alverson, C. Tanner, M. Bryer, P. Iachetti, A. Harcombe, B.
McDonald, T. Cook, M. Summers, D. Rolph. 2004. Willamette Valley-Puget Trough-Georgia
Basin Ecoregional Assessment, Volume One: Report. Prepared by The Nature Conservancy with
support from the Nature Conservancy of Canada, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Washington Department of Natural Resources (Natural Heritage and Nearshore Habitat
programs), Oregon State Natural Heritage Information Center and the British Columbia
Conservation Data Centre. 150pp.
Gaston, A. J. and S. B. Dechesne. 1996. Rhinoceros Auklet (Cerorhinca monocerata), The Birds of North
America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved 2/10/2010 from
the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/212
Jeffries, S.J.1, P.J. Gearin2, H.R. Huber2, D.L. Saul1, and D.A. Pruett1. 2000. Atlas of Seal and Sea Lion
Haulout Sites in Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Science
Division, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia WA. 150pp. Retrieved 2/10/2010 from
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/research/papers/seal_haulout/seal_atlas.pdf
Meany, Edmond. 1907. Vancouver’s Discovery of Puget Sound: Portraits and Biographies of the Men
Honored in the Naming of Geographic Features of Northwestern America. The MacMillan
Company, London.
Mills, K. L., Sydeman, W.J. and Hodum, P. J. (Eds.). 2005. The California Current Marine Bird
Conservation Plan, v. 1, PRBO Conservation Science, Stinson Beach, CA
NMFS 2008. National Marine Fisheries Service. 2008. Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
1-18 Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background
(Eumetopias jubatus). Revision. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. 325 pp.
Nysewander, D. R. 2003. Summary of May 2003 survey of breeding American black oystercatchers in
the San Juan Island/Bellingham Bay/Deception Pass vicinity, in preparation for May 2005
oystercatcher breeding surveys. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.
Pearson, S.F., P.J. Hodum, M. Schrimpf, J. Dolliver, T.P. Good, and J.K. Parrish. 2009. Rhinoceros
Auklet (Cerorhinca monocerata) Burrow Counts, Burrow Density, Occupancy Rates, and
Associated Habitat Variables on Protection Island, Washington: 2008 Research Progress Report.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Science Division, Olympia, WA.
Suckley, G. 1859. Water birds. Zoological report. In Explorations and surveys for a railroad route from
the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. Vol. 12, Pt. 3, No. 3, Chap.II. Washington, D.C.
Tessler, D.F., J.A. Johnson, B.A. Andres, S. Thomas, and R.B. Lanctot. 2007. Black Oystercatcher
(Haematopus bachmani) Conservation Action Plan. International Black Oystercatcher Working
Group, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, Alaska, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Anchorage, Alaska, and Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Manomet,
Massachusetts. 115 pp.
USFWS 1985. Master Plan, Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge. USDI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Region 1.
USFWS 1986. Refuge Management Plan, San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuge. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Region 1.
USFWS 1978. San Juan Islands Wilderness Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, WA. 40 pp.
USFWS 2000. Recovery Plan for the Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta). U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Portland, Oregon. 51 pp.
USFWS 2005. Regional Seabird Conservation Plan, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Migratory Birds and Habitat Programs, Pacific Region, Portland, Oregon.
USFWS 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Arlington,
VA. 23 pp.
USFWS 2009a. Annual Report of Lands Under Control of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as of
September 30, 2009. USDI, USFWS, Division of Realty, January 2010.
USFWS 2009b. DRAFT Rising to the Challenge: Strategic Plan for Responding to Accelerating Climate
Change. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Accessed Feb 2, 2010 from
http://www.fws.gov/home/climatechange/strategic_plan.html
USFWS 2010. DRAFT Strategic Plan for Inventories and Monitoring on National Wildlife Refuges:
Adapting to Environmental Change. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 55
pp.
WDFW 2005. State of Washington Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 1 – Introduction and Background 1-19
WDFW 2008. 2009-2015 Game Management Plan. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.
WDOE 2008. Strait of Juan de Fuca Geographic Response Plan. Washington Department of Ecology.
Accessed from http://www.ecywa.gov/programs/spills.preparedness/GRP/strait_juan.htm
WDOE 2009. San Juan Islands and North Puget Sound Geographic Response Plan. Washington
Department of Ecology. Accessed from
http://www.ecywa.gov/programs/spills.preparedness/GRP/san_juan.htm
WWU 2009. The Salish Sea Map, Stefan Freelan, Western Washington University, 2009.
Accessed Feb. 8, 2010 from http://myweb.facstaff.wwu.edu/~stefan/SalishSea.htm
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-1
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction
2.1 Considerations in the Design of the CCP
During development of the CCP, the Service reviewed and considered a variety of local and regional
physical and biological resource conditions, as well as social, economic, and organizational aspects
important for managing the Refuges. This background information is described more fully in Chapters 3,
4, and 5. As is appropriate for a National Wildlife Refuge, natural resource considerations were
fundamental in designing the management plan. House Report 105-106, accompanying the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Pubic Law 105-57), states “…the fundamental
mission of our System is wildlife conservation: wildlife and wildlife conservation must come first.”
Public involvement was an important part of the planning process. Local, State, and Federal agencies and
elected officials were contacted by the Refuge planning team to ascertain priorities and problems as
perceived by others. The team also contacted Refuge users, nonprofit groups, and community
organizations to ensure that their comments and ideas were considered during the development of the
CCP. Preliminary management concepts and strategies were presented to the public in a planning update
and at two public meetings in September 2008. The Draft CCP/WSP/EA, which described three
management alternatives for the refuges, was released in August 2010. More details regarding public
involvement can be found in Appendix K. Changes to the plan were made based on comments
throughout the planning process. The goals, objectives, and strategies in this chapter comprise the adopted
management direction for the two refuges.
2.2 General Guidelines
2.2.1 Implementation Subject to Funding Availability
Actions will be implemented over a period of 15 years as funding becomes available. Priorities are
identified in Appendix G although special funding initiatives, unforeseeable management issues, and
other budget issues will likely require adjustments to the implementation schedule. The CCP will be
reviewed at least every five years and updated as necessary.
2.2.2 Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
In accordance with Department of the Interior and Service Policies (517 DM 1, 569 FW 1) and with state
law RCW 17.10, an integrated pest management (IPM) approach will be utilized to eradicate, control, or
contain pest, nuisance, and invasive species on the Washington Maritime National Wildlife Refuge
Complex (Complex). IPM would involve determining the best control methods based upon effectiveness,
cost, and minimal ecological disruption. These methods may include physical, cultural, biological, and
chemical treatments which may be used alone or in combinations. If a pesticide would be needed on a
Refuge, the most specific (selective) chemical available for the target species would be used unless
considerations of persistence or other environmental and/or biotic hazards would preclude it. Appendix E
provides more details regarding the selective use of pesticides for pest management on the Refuges.
2.2.3 Minimizing Human-caused Wildlife Disturbance
Current staffing and funding levels limit staff presence in this very popular boating area. As a result,
enforcement of regulations, including no trespassing on closed islands and no harassment of Refuge
wildlife, is limited. Limited staff also means there are few contacts with boaters and other visitors and
limited capacity to educate the public about “why a closer look hurts.” Refuge staff and partners have
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-2 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
identified the reduction of human disturbance to be one of the highest priorities for seabird and marine
mammal management (USFWS 2005, WDFW 2005, NMFS 2008, Evans and Kennedy 2007, Mills et al.
2005). Given the increasing levels of recreation in the area (see Chapter 5) and limited places of refuge
for wildlife in the San Juan Archipelago, efforts must be made to protect wildlife from human disturbance
on Refuge islands. Throughout the term of this plan, Refuge staff will continue to prohibit public access
on Refuge lands except for designated areas of Matia and Turn Islands; work with volunteers and partners
(U.S. Coast Guard, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife (WDFW), Sheriff’s Office, Sound Watch, commercial cruise boats, etc.) to adequately patrol
Refuge islands and to report incidences of non-compliance; and cooperate with Washington Department
of Natural Resources (WDNR) to maintain a 200-yard conservation lease and tideland withdrawal at
Protection Island NWR to reduce human disturbance. Also see Chapter 4 for more information regarding
the threat of human-caused disturbance.
2.2.4 Participation in Regional Planning and Conservation Efforts
Refuge staff will actively participate in and contribute to planning and conservation efforts for ongoing
and future land and energy development projects, monitoring and research associated with climate
change, oil spill response, removal of derelict fishing gear, and other activities that may affect Refuge
wildlife resources and habitats. Pre-spill planning and preparedness is required by the Federal Oil and
Pollution Act of 1990. Refuge staff have been involved with Washington State Department of Ecology
and others in preparing Area Geographic Response Plans, as part of the oil and hazardous substance spill
prevention and response (RCW Title 90 Chapter 90.56). Participation in the North Pacific Coast
Landscape Conservation Cooperative will provide Refuge staff with a means to tie in with a larger scale
assessment of the impacts of climate change (USFWS 2009a). Protecting focal resources by supporting
partners’ efforts to reduce or eliminate fisheries bycatch and the removal of derelict fishing gear continues
to be a priority for the Refuges. Staff will cultivate working relationships with pertinent local, county,
State, and Federal agencies to stay abreast of current and potential developments, and will utilize
outreach, education, and information as needed to raise awareness of Refuge resources and their
dependence on a healthy local environment.
2.2.5 Cultural Resources Protection
The Service will continue to uphold Federal laws protecting cultural resources, including the National
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), and Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). These laws also mandate consultation
with Native American tribes, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and other preservation
partners. The NHPA mandates that all projects that use federal funding, permitting, or licensing be
reviewed by a cultural resource professional to determine if there is the potential to affect cultural
resources. An inventory will be conducted as necessary, and appropriate actions to mitigate effects will
be identified prior to implementation of the project. A project-specific determination will be conducted
for all undertakings as defined by NHPA, including habitat maintenance and restoration projects as well
as new or expanded trails, roads, facilities, and public use areas.
2.2.6 Paleontological Resources Protection
The Service will continue to uphold laws protecting paleontological resources. These include the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act of
2009 (PRPA), and various sections of Fish and Wildlife Service regulations. If found in direct
association with archaeological resources, they are also protected by the Archaeological Resources
Protection Act (ARPA Section 3).
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-3
2.2.7 Maintenance of Existing Facilities
Periodic maintenance and upgrading of refuge buildings and facilities is necessary for safety and
accessibility and to support management and visitor needs, and is incorporated in the Service Asset
Management System.
2.2.8 State Coordination
The Service will continue to coordinate with Washington State agencies regarding areas of mutual
interest. This includes communications with WDFW regarding management of state wildlife resources,
and in particular, the state-owned Zella Schultz Seabird Sanctuary on Protection Island; WDNR regarding
aquatic lands management; Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission regarding Visitor
Services programs on Turn and Matia Islands.
2.2.9 Tribal Coordination
Communication with Native American Tribes who have an interest in the Refuges would continue. The
Service seeks assistance from Tribes on NAGPRA and NHPA and related issues. The Service is also
interested in partnering with Tribes to provide cultural resources education and interpretation
opportunities.
2.2.10 Protection Island Site Plan Development and Implementation
Many Refuge buildings on Protection Island NWR need to be removed, upgraded, or replaced.
Expanding solar power capabilities and reducing the need to transport liquid fuels to the island is another
high priority. Several roads associated with prior resort development on the island have been
decommissioned while others are still being used for Refuge management purposes, however their
locations may not be ideal. At the same time, some seabird areas have expanded or changed locations and
are now in close proximity to buildings. The CCP includes the development and implementation of a site
plan for all Refuge administration and research facilities, buildings, roads, and trails on Protection Island
NWR to improve Refuge management capability, facilitate research activities, and reduce disturbance to
important wildlife habitat areas.
2.2.11 Increase Land and Resource Protection
Due to the high level of management concern, Refuge staff will work in cooperation with the State to
increase protection of Refuge islands. Protections include coordinating with WDFW to include Zella M.
Schultz Seabird Sanctuary in the Protection Island Refuge boundary; allowing the enforcement of Refuge
laws and regulations throughout the island; cooperating with WDNR in establishing an aquatic reserve
designation around Protection and Smith/Minor Islands; working with WDNR to acquire tideland and
bedland leases/withdrawls around Refuge islands; and limiting or eliminating aquaculture activities near
Refuge islands.
2.2.12 Fire Management
The overall objective for fire management on the Refuges is to promote a program that provides for
firefighter and public safety, reduces the occurrence of human-caused fires, and ensures appropriate
suppression response capability to meet expected wildland fire complexity. A Fire Management Plan was
completed for the entire Complex, including Protection Island and San Juan Islands Refuges, in 2004.
The use of prescribed fire as a management tool was not included in that plan. Because the CCP
describes habitat restoration projects and IPM techniques that may include the use of prescibed fire, the
Fire Management Plan will be updated to reflect this.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-4 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
2.2.13 Increase Staffing Levels
Increased staffing is needed to accomplish the actions identified in the CCP. While increased staffing is
never guaranteed, it is anticipated that over the 15-year life of the CCP there will be some increase in
staffing levels. For additional information regarding staffing levels, see Appendix G.
2.3 Summary of CCP Actions
The CCP will continue many current management practices, such as removing unnecessary roads and
human structures; monitoring wildlife species; and working with partners to reduce the risk of oil spills,
clean up marine debris, and educate boaters to minimize human-caused wildlife disturbance. The Plan
also furthers Refuge management with more active habitat management projects, such as removing deer
from Protection Island to enhance seabird nesting habitat and forest habitat; restoration projects on the
spits, grasslands, and forests to increase native plant diversity; and the facilitation of research studies that
answer Refuge management questions.
Public use changes include enforcing no-pets regulations on all San Juan Islands Refuge lands and closing
some areas on Turn Island, including all of the rocky shoreline to the east and the south east “pocket”
beach as well as some of the Island’s interior. Overnight camping on Turn and Matia Islands would be
limited to visitors arriving by human-powered craft only. There would be more emphasis on enhancing
the public’s understanding and appreciation of the Refuges’ natural, cultural, and wilderness resources
through both on- and off-Refuge interpretation and education programs. There would be fewer large
signs but more medium sized signs installed on San Juan Islands Refuge units to discourage close
approach or trespassing on closed islands. There would also be more emphasis on working with existing
partners and developing new partnerships to accomplish objectives. Table 2.1 contains additional details
regarding actions associated with the CCP.
Table 2.1 Summary of CCP Actions (PI = Protection Island Refuge and SJI = San Juan Islands Refuge)
HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Multiple Habitats - Increase efforts to work with partners to minimize human disturbance to wildlife and habitats.
- Work with WDNR to renew and enhance the Service’s ability to manage the tidelands and protect bedlands up to 200 yards
waterward from the low water line around PI and SJI.
- Participate in oil spill prevention and preparedness planning and activities in PI and SJI vicinity.
- Regularly work with partners and volunteers to conduct yearly shoreline clean-up activities on all Refuge islands. Support off-
Refuge efforts to remove derelict fishing gear from the marine environment surrounding the Refuges.
- Survey and use IPM strategies on invasive species. Include prescribed burning as a potential restoration and IPM tool.
- Coordinate with WDFW and the Point No Point Treaty Tribes in the development of a step-down plan to remove deer from
Protection Island.
- Monitor for and remove non-native rats, rabbits, and red fox.
- Conduct a survey of mammalian predators, assess impacts, and develop a management plan if necessary.
Shoreline - Restore a total of approximately 41 acres of spit habitat on PI, Smith, and Minor Islands to native-species-dominated strand
community and manage spits for more open vegetation.
- Occasional mowing of spits on PI.
- Continue shoreline nourishment with gravel stockpiles on PI.
- Remove marine debris and contaminated materials.
- Conduct a survey of herbivores and predators of management concern, assess impacts, and develop a management plan if
necessary.
Sandy Bluffs - Control invasive plants and increase native plants.
- At end of lease term, remove structures and improve habitat conditions in the expanding area of the auklet colony.
- Enhance vegetation characteristics on up to 20 acres of bluffs on PI.
Savanna Grasslands
and Herbaceous Balds
- Removal of unnecessary roads and structures on PI.
- Restore up to 200 acres of savanna grassland on PI and up to 20 acres on Smith and Turn Islands to increase native species
composition to benefit a variety of wildlife.
- Maintain herbaceous bald patches, and where appropriate, associated rare plants on 28 islands within SJI.
Forests and Woodlands - Removal of unnecessary roads on PI.
- Restore connectivity, crown closure, regeneration, and associated understory of 80 acres of forest and woodland on PI.
- Increase protection and maintenance of mature and old-growth forests and associated understory on 6 islands within SJI.
Wetlands - Determine if it is feasible to restore part of the historic wetlands on PI.
- Conduct hydrologic study, and if needed, restore natural hydrology to Smith and Matia Islands wetlands.
- Monitor and control invasive plants and animals.
RESEARCH AND MONITORING
Research Program
Management
- Increase collaboration between the Service and the larger research community.
- Place more emphasis on studies that answer Refuge management questions and species information gaps.
- Replace old buildings with a single bunkhouse relocated on PI to serve researchers and short-term volunteers.
-Develop Refuge databases, GIS layers, and integrate data into regional databases.
________________P_rot_e_c_ti_o_n_ I_s_la_n_d_ _and_ S_a_n_ Jua_n_ _Isl_a_n_d_s N_a_t_iona_l_ W_i_ld_l_ife_ R_e_fuge_s_ C_C_P_/_W__S_P_______________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
2-5
Research - Conduct research to determine best habitat restoration methods.
- Study erosion rates of bluffs and deposition on spits.
- Research to evaluate wildlife response to habitat restoration.
- Demography studies of seabirds and marine mammals.
- Hydrology studies of wetlands.
- Glaucous-winged gull behavior studies.
- Studies on a variety of other topics.
Surveys - Long-term monitoring of rhinoceros auklets, pigeon guillemots, glaucous-winged gulls, and marine mammals.
- Summer wildlife surveys.
- Refuge and ecosystem-wide monitoring of nesting seabirds and black oystercatchers.
- Bald eagle surveys.
- Periodic surveys for rare butterflies and rare plants.
-Winter wildlife surveys.
- Breeding bird survey on PI.
Scientific Assessments - Systematically complete plant surveys on SJI.
- Determine and map Refuge vegetation types to the association level.
- Conduct assessment of reptiles and amphibians.
- Conduct assessment of invasive wetland species as well as herbivores and predators of management concern.
Cultural and
Paleontological
Resources
- Complete prioritized systematic cultural resource surveys of all Refuge lands and resurvey known sites approximately every 5
years.
- Systematic paleontological survey on PI.
- Develop GIS layer for paleontological resources.
Effectiveness
Monitoring
- As strategies are implemented, monitor progress toward meeting CCP objectives under Goals 1-8.
ON-REFUGE VISITOR SERVICES AND FACILITIES
Protection Island No public access.
SJI - Refuge entry areas
and open and closed
areas.
Turn Island
- West and southwest beaches are the only authorized entry and boat landing areas.
- Southeast beach is closed to landing and public use.
- Designated public use area and loop trail are open to visitors; the rest of the island is closed.
Matia Island
- Rolfe Cove dock and beach are the only authorized entrances to the island.
- Refuge access and camping prohibited at or from the 4 other pocket beaches.
- 2-acre public use area adjacent to Rolfe Cove is open to day-use and camping.
- Wilderness loop trail is open to visitors; the rest of the island (wilderness area and island perimeter) is closed.
- All other Refuge islands and rocks are closed.
SJI - Public Use Times
and Other Restrictions
. - Turn and Matia public use areas open to day-use.
- Outside of day-use hours, only authorized campers arriving via human-powered boats are allowed on Turn and Matia Islands.
________________P_rot_e_c_ti_o_n_ I_s_la_n_d_ _and_ S_a_n_ Jua_n_ _Isl_a_n_d_s N_a_t_iona_l_ W_i_ld_l_ife_ R_e_fuge_s_ C_C_P_/_W__S_P_______________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
2-6
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
- No pets allowed.
SJI - WA State Parks
Seasonal Dock and
Mooring Buoys
Dock on Matia Island at Rolfe Cove from mid-April to mid/late-October.
Turn – 3 buoys off N. beach – available year round.
Matia – 2 buoys in Rolfe Cove - available year round.
SJI - Camping - Camping allowed only in designated campsites: Turn Is. - 8 campsites. Matia Is. - 6 campsites.
- Only visitors arriving by human-powered boats are permitted to camp on the Refuge.
- New camping reservation system may be initiated pending additional monitoring of camping compliance.
SJI - Campfires Matia and Turn – Better enforcement of no fires. Liquid fuel or gel camp stoves allowed.
SJI - Trails Re-evaluate trail locations for impacts to cultural resources and small meadow. Reroute if necessary but continue to provide a loop
trail on both Turn and Matia Islands.
Wildlife Observation,
Photography, and
Interpretation
- Design and install informational and interpretive signs at Turn and Matia Islands.
- Develop interpretive trail at Turn Island.
- Local experts and/or trained volunteers provide short “ranger” programs during some summer weekends.
Environmental
Education - Scientific
Studies
At least 3 college students/5 years given opportunities to do scientific studies on PI and SJI.
Environmental
Education -
Stewardship Projects
PI - 1+ projects per year
SJI - 1+ projects per year
SJI - Commercial
Outfitters
Outfitters allowed for camping and day-use on Turn and Matia Islands. Special use permit required.
Visitor Services
Facilities and
Maintenance
WA State Parks provides public-use facilities (toilets, picnic tables, campsite markers, etc.) and maintenance on Turn and Matia
Islands.
SJI - Law enforcement
for public
safety/resource
protection on Turn and
Matia.
WA State Parks enforces State Parks regulations and new Service regulations on all of Turn and Matia Islands. The Service enforces
regulations on all Refuge lands.
OFF-REFUGE VISITOR SERVICES
Wildlife Observation
and Photography
- Increased Refuge staff time, volunteers, and partners facilitate and educate many individuals, organizations, and ecotourism
businesses to enhance wildlife observation and appreciation of Refuge wildlife and minimize human-caused wildlife disturbance.
Natural and Cultural
Resource Interpretation
- PI – 1 panel at John Wayne Marina,1 panel in Port Townsend area, and 2 additional interpretive venues.
- SJI – Panels at 5 marina locations and 2 additional interpretive venues.
Environmental
Education Materials
- Provide educational materials prepared for use by local teachers.
- Provide information at local community events, tourist agencies, ferries, etc.
- SJI - Refuge poster at marinas.
________________P_rot_e_c_ti_o_n_ I_s_la_n_d_ _and_ S_a_n_ Jua_n_ _Isl_a_n_d_s N_a_t_iona_l_ W_i_ld_l_ife_ R_e_fuge_s_ C_C_P_/_W__S_P_________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
2-7
- SJI - Refuge poster at marinas.
Boater Education to
Reduce Human-Caused
Wildlife Disturbance
PI - Continue direct boater education.
PI & SJI - Increase educational materials, working with partners, and direct contacts with boaters to improve education regarding
human-caused disturbance to wildlife.
SAN JUAN ISLANDS WILDERNESS
Many of the above actions apply to wilderness as well as non-wilderness lands. The following items are more specific to wilderness concerns.
Refuge Signs to Reduce
Human-Caused
Wildlife Disturbance
Improve text and increase size of boundary/ closure signs to medium (15’’ x 20’’) on most islands and a larger version (22” x 28”)
on some islands. Use very large “stay away 200 yds” signs on up to 10 of the most sensitive islands.
Sights and Sounds - Use only tools authorized for wilderness areas (e.g., no chainsaws) to maintain a narrow and natural appearing trail on Matia Island.
- Conduct garbage and marine debris cleanups.
- Promote 2000-foot aircraft ceiling over wilderness islands.
Solitude and Numbers
of Visitors
- Enhance enforcement of limited landing and camping areas.
- Limit the size of commercial day-use groups to not more than 20 people.
Wilderness Education Integrate wilderness themes and messages in new or updated Refuge information products, interpretive panels, volunteer training,
and outreach programs whenever appropriate.
________________P_rot_e_c_ti_o_n_ I_s_la_n_d_ _and_ S_a_n_ Jua_n_ _Isl_a_n_d_s N_a_t_iona_l_ W_i_ld_l_ife_ R_e_fuge_s_ C_C_P_/_W__S_P_______________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
2-8
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
Relocate and Replace
Researchers' House
with Bunkhouse
Maintain Marina and
Replace Creosote Pilings with
Non-Toxic Pilings
Maintain
Maintenance Shop
and Garage
Replace and Possibly Relocate
Field/Research Office
Remove Unoccupied Residences
As Soon As Possible
Remove Extended User's Residence
at the End of Extended User's Term
Relocate and Replace
Refuge Caretaker's Cabin
Coinciding with End of
Extended User's Term
Maintain Pumphouse
Maintain and Upgrade
Water Storage and Delivery Infrastructure
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; Imagery from 2010 USDA NAIP True Color Aerial Photography
Figure 2.1 Protection Island NWR Management Actions
!
!
Sequim Bay
Discovery
Bay
PROTECTION ISLAND
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
Port Townsend
Sequim
)l
AÎ
?¨
VICINITY MAP UV19
Strait of Juan de Fuca
0 5 10
Miles
Legend
Habitat Restoration
Forest and Woodland
Restore connectivity, crown closure,
regeneration, and associated understory
of approximately 80 acres.
Spits
Restore up to 40 acres on Protection,
Smith, and Minor Islands.
Wetland
If feasible, restore part of the extent of the
historic (1868) wetland.
Savanna and Grassland
Manage and/or restore up to 200 acres.
Rhinoceros Auklet Nesting Habitat
Evaluate and improve vegetation
characteristics on up to 20 acres.
Facilities and Infrastructure
Remove
Maintain and/or Upgrade
Relocate/Replace
Roads, Trails, and Yards
Land Status
Refuge Managed Lands
Zella Schultz Seabird Sanctuary
(coordinate with WDFW to include within
Approved Refuge Boundary)
No public access is allowed on Protection Island
NWR. Extended users' access is based on the
terms of their lease. Researchers and others'
access is by special use permit.
UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
Kilometers
Miles
0 0.4
0 0.4
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction 2-9
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-10 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Leave Large Unused USCG Cistern
As Is but Seal Holes
NOAA Tower
Metal SST RADAR Tower
USCG Light Tower
Unused USCG Concrete Block Light and Foghorn
Remove Unused USCG Wooden Residential Building and
Associated Contaminants to the Maximum Extent Possible
Remove Unused USCG Concrete Watch Shack and
Associated Contaminants to the Maximum Extent Possible
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; Imagery from 2006 USDA NAIP True Color Aerial Photography
Figure 2.2 San Juan Islands NWR, Smith and Minor Islands Management Actions
!
!
!
!
! !
!
Sequim Bay
Disc overy
Bay
!`
Victoria
Sidney
Bellingham
Anacortes
Port Angeles Port Townsend
Friday Harbor
!`
0 20 40
Miles
Legend
Habitat Management
Spits
Restore up to 40 acres on Protection,
Smith, and Minor Islands.
Wetland
Conduct hydrologic study and if necessary,
restore hydrological processes.
Savanna, Grassland, and Balds
Manage and/or restore up to 20 acres on
Smith and Turn Islands.
Facilitites and Infrastructure
Remove
Leave As Is with Modifications
and/or Contaminants Removal
Land Status
Refuge Managed Lands
VICINITY MAP
Smith and Minor Islands are closed to public
use.
UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
Kilometers
Miles
0 0.2
0 0.2
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction 2-11
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-12 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Wilderness Loop Trail
1.2 Mile Loop Trail
Reevaluate trail locations for impacts.
Reroute if necessary.
FWS Partnership with WSPRC for
Management of Public Uses and Facilities
WSPRC Seasonal Dock
Available mid-April
to mid/late-October
6 Fee-Use Campsites
Only visitors arriving by human-powered
boats are permitted to camp.
Design and install informational
and interpretive signs.
Liquid Fuel Camp Stoves Only
!] L L
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; Imagery from 2004 WDNR True Color Aerial Photography
Figure 2.3 San Juan Islands NWR, Matia Island Management Actions
!
!
!
!
! !
!
Sequim Bay
Discovery
Bay
!`
Victoria
Sidney
Bellingham
Anacortes
Port Angeles Port Townsend
Friday Harbor
!`
0 20 40
Miles
Legend
Shading of text and/or symbols indicates:
Planned Action
Public Use
!x Dock
!g Information and Pay Station
!9 Campsite
! Composting Toilet
!5 Picnic Site
!] Large Refuge Sign
L Mooring Buoy (available year-round)
Wilderness Loop Trail
Shoreline Landing and Public Access
Open Shoreline
Closed Shoreline
2 Acre Public Use Area
Closed to Public Access
Habitat Management
Forest and Woodland
Protect and maintain existing areas.
Wetland
Conduct hydrologic study and if necessary,
restore hydrological processes.
Savanna, Grassland, and Balds
Maintain patches and associated rare
plants on 28 islands.
Land Status
Refuge Managed Lands
Public use areas open to day-use. Outside of
day-use hours, only authorized campers arriving
via human-powered boats are allowed.
WSPRC enforces all State Parks regulations and
the laws of the State of Washington on the entire
area of Matia Island. FWS enforces regulations
on all refuge lands.
VICINITY MAP
!
!
Rolfe Cove
!9
!9
!g
!5
!9 !9
!9
!x !9 !
!]
Area Enlarged
Kilometers
Miles
0 0.2
0 0.2
UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction 2-13
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-14 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
L
L
L
8 Fee-Use Campsites
Only visitors arriving by human-powered
boats are permitted to camp.
FWS Partnership with WSPRC for
Management of Public Uses and Facilities
Liquid Fuel Camp Stoves Only
0.9 Mile Interpretive Loop Trail
Reevaluate trail locations for impacts.
Reroute if necessary.
Design and install informational
and interpretive signs.
!]
!9
!9
!9 !g
!9
!9
!
!9
!9
!9 !!5
Data Sources: Refuge Boundaries from USFWS/R1; Imagery from 2004 WDNR True Color Aerial Photography
Figure 2.4 San Juan Islands NWR, Turn Island Management Actions
!
!
!
!
! !
!
Sequim Bay
Discovery
Bay
!`
Victoria
Sidney
Bellingham
Anacortes
Port Angeles Port Townsend
Friday Harbor
!`
0 20 40
Miles
Legend
Shading of text and/or symbols indicates:
Planned Action
Public Use
!g Information and Pay Station
!9 Campsite
! Composting Toilet
!5 Picnic Site
!] Large Refuge Sign
L Mooring Buoy (available year-round)
Hiking Trail
Shoreline Landing and Public Access
Open Shoreline
Closed Shoreline
Closed to Public Access
Habitat Management
Forest and Woodland
Protect and maintain existing areas.
Savanna, Grassland, and Balds
Manage and/or restore up to 20 acres on
Smith and Turn Islands.
Land Status
Refuge Managed Lands
Designated public use areas and loop trail open
to day-use. Outside of day-use hours, only
authorized campers arriving via non-motorized
boats are allowed. WSPRC enforces all State
Park regulations and the laws of the State of
Washington on the entire area of Turn Island.
FWS enforces regulations on all refuge lands.
VICINITY MAP
Miles
Kilometers
0 0.1
0 0.1 UTM ZONE 10N
NAD 83
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2. Refuge Management Direction 2-15
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-16 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
To preserve the quality of our map, this side was left blank intentionally.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-17
2.4 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Goals and objectives are the unifying elements of successful refuge management. They focus and
describe management priorities and actions that resolve issues and help bring a refuge closer to its
vision. A vision broadly reflects the refuge purposes, the Refuge System mission and goals, other
statutory requirements, and larger-scale plans as appropriate. Public use and wildlife/habitat
management goals then define general targets in support of the vision, followed by objectives that
direct effort into incremental and measurable steps toward achieving those goals. Finally, strategies
identify specific tools and actions to accomplish objectives.
The goals for Protection Island and San Juan Islands Refuges over the next 15 years under the CCP
are presented on the following pages. The goal order does not imply any priority. Each goal is
followed by the objectives that pertain to that goal. Some objectives pertain to multiple goals and
have simply been placed in the most appropriate spot. Similarly, some strategies pertain to multiple
objectives. The “Rationale” section provides additional information and the reasoning behind the
objectives and strategies. The timeframe for accomplishing CCP objectives is the 15-year life of the
CCP, unless otherwise specified in the objective.
GOAL 1: Protect, maintain, and restore high quality, natural shoreline and cliff habitats for
optimum productivity and abundance of seabirds, marine mammals, waterfowl, and
shorebirds.
Objective 1.1 Restore Spit Habitat
Restore and manage up to 41 acres on Violet Spit, Protection Island, and spits associated with
Smith/Minor Islands for nesting glaucous-winged gulls, breeding and molting elephant seals, and other
native wildlife and plant species with the following attributes:
 Sparse (<30% cover), medium to low (max. 3-4 feet in height) grasses interspersed with vegetation
composed of species associated with the North Pacific Maritime Coastal Sand Dune and Strand
ecological system (e.g., gum weed, dune grass, sand verbena, plantain, and yarrow).
 Natural screens (e.g., driftwood or variation in topography) for concealment of nearest nests.
 <25% invasive species on spit habitat.
 Eliminate disturbance and impacts to seabird nesting habitats from deer.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Refuge/Unit
a. Remove, control, and prevent establishment of invasive non-native plant species
and treat infestations with IPM techniques using cultural, mechanical, physical,
biological, or chemical means.
PI and
Smith/Minor
b. Restore the strand vegetation community using prescribed burns and mechanical
techniques (e.g., mowing, grading), planting, and maintenance. Update the fire
management plan to include prescribed fires and wildfire suppression tactics.
PI
c. Monitor response of glaucous-winged gull fledgling rates and predation after
restoration.
PI
d. Coordinate with WDFW and the Point No Point Treaty Tribes in the
development of a step-down plan to remove deer from Protection Island.
PI
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-18 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
e. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, feral
cats, and use appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
PI and
Smith/Minor
f. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink,
and river otter), determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions
under a separate step-down management plan.
PI and
Smith/Minor
g. Monitor, and when found, remove marine debris and contaminated material. PI and
Smith/Minor
Rationale: This objective will preserve this rare habitat type in the Salish Sea and restore the plant
communities found there. These spits are formed when marine currents sweep large volumes of sand
and gravel from the sandy cliffs and bluffs of Protection and Smith Islands and deposit them onto the
shoreline. Armoring of the shorelines with jetties, bulkheads, and seawalls has often resulted in the
alteration or disappearance of these unique habitats in the Salish Sea. The distal end of Violet Spit on
Protection Island is densely choked with non-native beach grass that fills deep ruts left from machinery.
Closer to the marina, a remnant population of native plants can be found that are associated with spit
habitats (called strand communities) such as gum weed, yarrow, beach morning glory, sea plantain,
thrift, and yellow sand verbena. Strand communities typically grow in sand, have low density of
vegetation, and provide open spaces between plants.
This objective will also reduce gull chick mortality through habitat management. An invasion by non-native
plant species (i.e., beach grass) has rendered sections of the spit that once supported the highest
abundance of gull nests as unsuitable. Researchers have noted that gull nests located in or near the
taller, dense vegetation are more susceptible to bald eagle predation (80%), while those located in more
open strand communities appear to be more successful (Hayward and Henson 2010, Hayward et. al.
2010,15%, J Galusha, pers. comm.). This is due, in part, because the open space allows better access to
eagles on the ground by mobbing gulls. In addition, research in other colonies has shown that a high
degree of heterogeneity (i.e., debris) around nests provides concealment from predation and natural
screens from nearby nests (Good 2002). These components are particularly important in areas with
high disturbance and predation pressure, as is the case on Violet Spit, where disturbance or predation
from bald eagles, other gulls, and deer can limit reproductive success (Hayward and Henson 2008,
Galusha et al. 2005). Restoration should be conducted in a manner that maintains the cohesion of the
colony because the colony is less likely to shift to new, disjointed areas (J. Galousha, pers. comm.). In
addition, this objective will also benefit elephant seals which have recently pupped on Protection and
Smith/Minor Islands. Replacing the thick European beach grass with more open vegetation will
provide more habitat for elephant seals, which prefer open sandy beaches, dunes, and spits for breeding
and molting.
Approximately 93% of bird species or subspecies that have become extinct since the 1800s were found
on island habitats and 42% of those occurred due to predation by introduced mammals (Courchamp et
al. 2003). Rats are present on approximately 80% of the world’s islands and are responsible for at least
50% of global extinctions and countless local extinctions (Dolan and Heneman, 2007). There is no
indication that rats are present on Refuge islands, however they could potentially colonize an island via
a shipwreck or by accessing the island via authorized vessels. Given that they reproduce quickly and
can have a devastating effect on island breeding seabirds, detection and control must be rapid. Rabbits
are ubiquitous on San Juan and Lopez Islands and pellets have been observed on Nob Island within the
San Juan Islands NWR (Murphy pers. comm.), however, they have not been found on Protection
Island. Rabbits can denude small islands of vegetation leading to erosion and loss of nesting habitat,
compete for nesting burrows and eject eggs from occupied burrows, and serve as a year-round food
resource for predators (USFWS 2005, McChesney & Tershy 1998, Hodum & Wainstein 2002, Donlan
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-19
& Heneman 2007). Rabbits also reproduce rapidly and control measures must be rapid to be effective.
Other non-native mammalian predators include red fox, feral cats, and domestic cats and dogs; native
mammalian predators of concern are coyote, raccoon, mink, and river otter.
Deer populations can thrive with an increase in abundance of forage as will be the case with intensive
revegetation efforts planned for the island. In fact, Simberloff (2008) noted that deer can reduce
biological diversity in an area while at just 25% of their carrying capacity depending on the habitat type
and environmental conditions. In addition, Simberloff (2008) noted that deer can foster the invasion of
weedy exotics by ingestion and dispersing seed of non-native plants (Donlan et al. 2002, Waller 2008).
Given the abundance of deer in Northwestern Washington, removing deer from Protection Island in
order to protect this unique seabird habitat would have little impact on the deer population of the area.
Also see rationale for objective 2.1 for impacts of deer to seabirds.
Objective 1.2 Protect and Maintain Sandy/Gravel Shoreline
Increase protection and maintenance of sandy/gravel shoreline on Protection and Smith/Minor Islands
for the benefit of harbor and elephant seals, pigeon guillemots, black oystercatchers, and harlequin
ducks with the following attributes:
 Continued long shore sandy/gravelly movement and deposition.
 Presence of large continuous expanses of driftwood piles with cavities suitable for pigeon
guillemot nesting and camouflage of guillemot and oystercatcher chicks.
 No creosote pilings in marina on Protection Island.
 No marine debris on PI or Smith/Minor shorelines.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective Refuge/Unit
a. Continue nourishing shoreline to the west of the marina by using remaining
gravel stockpiles left from marina dredging.
PI
b. Facilitate the removal and replacement of the creosote pilings used in the marina
at Protection Island.
PI
c. Monitor, and when found, remove marine debris and contaminated material. PI and
Smith/Minor
d. Continue to prohibit collection of driftwood from shorelines and within the
marina on Protection Island.
PI
e. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, and
feral cats and use appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
PI and
Smith/Minor
f. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink,
and river otter), determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions
under a separate step-down management plan.
PI and
Smith/Minor
Rationale: Wildlife use this type of shoreline to varying degrees. Pigeon guillemots use the shoreline
for nesting under driftwood and to roost; black oystercatchers nest and forage here; harbor and elephant
seals haulout and pup in this habitat. Forage fish, such as sand lance and surf smelt, spawn in the
gravel within the shallow water adjacent to the shoreline. They in turn provide a rich food source,
close to the colony, for breeding seabirds. Black brant collect small pieces of gravel that they require
for grit to digest their food.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-20 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
One third of the Salish Sea shoreline has been modified by human use, interrupting the processes that
move sediment and nourish beaches and vegetation along the shorelines (WDNR 2001, Evens and
Kennedy 2007). On Protection Island, the marina entrance breakwater impedes the flow of sediment to
the adjacent shoreline to the west. In 2002, 4000 yd3 of gravel stockpiled from dredging the marina
were placed on the shoreline to the west to mimic the natural process. Removing the remainder of the
gravel stockpile will restore the spit and nourish the shoreline that is impacted by the marina’s
breakwater.
Creosote is of concern because, according to the EPA, it is toxic to fish, shellfish, and aquatic
invertebrates, all important forage for seabirds, oystercatchers, and marine mammals. There are
currently creosote coated logs forming old pilings in the marina of Protection Island and creosote
impregnated logs are relatively common on the shorelines of all islands. More than 100 tons were
removed from nearby Dungeness Spit in 2006. Marine debris (e.g., Styrofoam, nets, and plastics)
poses a more direct threat to seabirds and marine mammals as it can entangle seals or be fed to seabird
chicks causing mortality. Marine debris is removed from the shoreline of Protection Island by staff and
volunteers annually, but because they are more difficult to access, regular clean-up of debris is limited
in the San Juan Islands NWR (including Smith/Minor).
Extensive logging throughout the past century has reduced the supply of large trees with intact roots
that support the upper shoreline, provide nesting sites for pigeon guillemots and cover for black
oystercatcher chicks from predators. Harbor development, firewood collection, and human-caused
beach fires have reduced driftwood on the shorelines of Protection Island. Maintaining the current
amount of driftwood on the island’s rocky shoreline would provide concealment from predators and
potentially increase productivity of guillemots and oystercatchers on Protection Island.
For more information about rats, rabbits, and mammalian predators, see rationale for objective 1.1.
Objective 1.3 Protect and Maintain Rocky Shoreline and Cliff Habitats
Increase protection and maintenance of rocky shoreline and cliff habitats in the San Juan Islands NWR
for the benefit of marine mammals, cormorants, and black oystercatchers by managing for the
following attributes:
 No marine debris on shorelines on islands of San Juan Islands NWR.
 Viable populations of brittle prickly pear cactus are established on 5 Refuge islands.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter)
 Human disturbance on Matia and Turn Islands is minimized during oystercatcher nesting and brood
rearing periods (April – Sept).
 Human disturbance is minimized near rocky shoreline and cliff habitats used by breeding
cormorants, oystercatchers, and marine mammals year-round on all Refuge islands.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
a. Coordinate with DNR to establish appropriate shoreline buffers (conservation leases and/or
withdrawals) to minimize disturbance from boat landings and tideland development.
b. Grow and outplant populations of brittle prickly-pear cactus on 5 Refuge islands and monitor to
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-21
ensure success of restoration.
c. Monitor, and when found, remove marine debris and contaminated material.
d. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, and feral cats and use
appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
e. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river otter),
determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions under a separate step-down
management plan.
f. Provide shoreline access
Matia: Allow shoreline access at Rolfe Cove and maintain closure on remainder of shoreline.
Turn: Allow shoreline access on West and Southwest beaches; close Southeast beach and remainder of
shoreline to protect wildlife and habitat.
Rationale: With a few exceptions, most marine birds use the rocky shorelines for foraging and roosting
and the marine mammals use them to pup and molt. Cormorants primarily nest on cliffs, rocky islands,
or human-made structures such as towers or navigational aids. They are very sensitive to human
disturbance during the nesting season and will abandon eggs or young if disturbance is too great.
Marine mammal pups can be separated from their mothers or crushed during a stampede to the water if
boaters approach too closely. Brittle prickly-pear cactus was once more common on Refuge islands.
Given minimal amounts of disturbance due to closed access, Refuge islands would serve as an ideal
site for reestablishment of this rare plant. Reducing disturbance from humans (shoreline closure and
creation of buffer zones) in the San Juan Archipelago has also been identified by San Juan County as a
strategy to conserve two of their conservation target species: black oystercatchers and pelagic
cormorants (Evans and Kennedy 2007).
The black oystercatcher is considered an obligate species of the rocky shoreline and a strong indicator
of the ecological integrity of this habitat type. Recent surveys of 95 potential islands in the inner
marine waters revealed that 40 islands, islets, and rocks within the San Juan Islands NWR supported
approximately 80% of breeding pairs (Nysewander 2003). However, there are no breeding black
oystercatchers nesting on Turn Island and limited nesting on Matia. In fact, there are very limited
reports of marine mammal or other wildlife use of Turn Island with the exception of raccoons.
Growing pressure from recreational activities on and around breeding areas can have negative effects
on oystercatcher productivity (Tessler et al. 2007).
For more information about rats, rabbits, and mammalian predators, see rationale for objective 1.1.
Goal 2: Protect, maintain, and restore the native vegetative communities and structure of
sandy bluffs to maximize habitat for breeding seabirds.
Objective 2.1 Restore Burrow Nesting Seabird Habitat
Restore up to 5 acres of sandy bluff habitat on Protection Island NWR in areas where human structures
(roads, homes, etc.) have been removed for the benefit of nesting rhinoceros auklets with the following
characteristics:
 No roads, buildings, or other human structures within the restoration area unless they are essential
for research or Refuge management purposes.
 Presence of suitable slope angle and soil compaction to facilitate auklet burrow construction.
 >75% of the vegetation is composed of species associated with the Willamette Valley Upland
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-22 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
Prairie and Savanna and North Pacific Maritime Coastal Sand Dune and Strand ecological systems.
 >50% vegetative cover present at the beginning of the rainy season.
 <25% cover of invasive plant species (e.g., cheat grass).
 No Scotch broom or other invasive shrub species.
 Eliminate disturbance and impacts to seabird nesting habitats from deer.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
a. Develop a site plan for infrastructure on Protection Island NWR that minimizes impacts to wildlife.
Consider current and future administrative, research, and volunteer needs. Establish new transportation
routes and modes for necessary activities to minimize impacts in burrow nesting areas.
b. Develop handbook of Refuge guidelines that includes maps of breeding areas and distribute to all
authorized people on islands to prevent unintentional disturbance or trampling.
c. Remove buildings associated with the Refuge caretaker’s cabin and at the end of the extended user’s
term, eliminate building and associated access roads within the restoration area.
d. Expand use of solar energy to reduce transport of gas, oil, and propane.
e. Determine the best restoration techniques within test plots and monitor prior to full-scale restoration.
f. Conduct studies to determine which native plant species will provide the best erosion control
throughout the year.
g. Prevent wildfires by continuing to prohibit public access and open fires by all island users.
h. Pre-wash equipment before bringing to islands to prevent the establishment of invasive plant species.
Treat existing and new infestations with IPM techniques; See Appendix E.
i. Coordinate with WDFW and the Point No Point Treaty Tribes in the development of a step-down plan
to remove deer from Protection Island.
j. Search equipment and supplies to prevent the establishment of non-native species.
k. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, and feral cats and use
appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
l. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river otter),
determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions under a separate step-down
management plan.
Rationale: Prior to Refuge establishment, Protection Island was developed as a residential and resort
area. After Refuge establishment, much of the prior development was removed to improve wildlife
habitat. Some of the roads and buildings were retained by the Service and retrofitted to serve Refuge
management or research purposes and are in need of major repair or replacement. A few of the former
landowners, known as extended users, retained their residences under various terms, but most of the
terms have or will expire. Now is the ideal time to assess future Refuge management and research needs
and develop a site plan for building and transportation routes that meets those needs while minimizing
impact to wildlife and habitats. Refuge staff transport gasoline, oil, and propane for Protection Island
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-23
vehicles, cabin appliances, and generators. There is always a risk of spills when moving the 50-gallon
drums from the boat to the shore. Converting to solar power to produce electricity would reduce the
amount of fuel needed on the island.
Approximately 90% of the North American rhinoceros auklet breeding population occurs on 8 islands
(Gaston and Dechesne 1996), with Protection Island NWR supporting the third largest colony (Pearson
et.al. 2009). However, in recent years the area occupied by the rhinoceros auklet colony has expanded
into an area of approximately 5 acres that is currently occupied by the Refuge caretaker’s cabin and an
extended user’s residence. At the end of the extended user’s life term, all buildings and access roads
will be removed in this area in order to restore burrow-nesting seabird habitat quality, reduce human
disturbance and physical obstructions. One important feature of all known rhinoceros auklet colonies is
a well-developed soil to support burrow excavation (Leschner 1976, Speich and Wahl 1989, Richardson
1961). Thus, soil compaction will be an important component in habitat restoration. Specific measures
are currently not available; however, research has been initiated to qualify soil characteristics near
burrows on the island. In addition, Wilson (1977) and Leschner (1976) note that auklets do not burrow
far into the level, interior portion of the islands, primarily because slope aids take-off. Wilson and
Manuwal (1986) noted that burrow density was ‘significantly correlated with angle of slope,’ thus where
feasible, every effort should be made to establish a slope angle within the preferred range for the species
or consider placing artificial nest boxes in flat surfaces.
Vegetation varies greatly among auklet colony sites in North America and serves a key role in providing
stability and support for burrows and entrances (Leschner 1976). The vegetation on PI has been highly
altered from an extensive pre-Refuge history of grazing and agriculture (Richardson 1961). Further
information is needed to determine the best native species to use in revegetation efforts. Those
providing the best soil stabilizing qualities without impeding burrow construction will be sought. These
would include a mix of native annual and perennial, bunch and sod-forming grasses, as well cool and
warm season grasses, interspersed with native low growing shrubs. This heterogeneous plant
community would provide the bluffs with the greatest adaptive responses to maintain slope stability,
drought tolerance, and fire resistance. Annual plants which typically have a shorter root system, die
after reproduction and may not germinate at all if conditions are unfavorable, therefore are not the
preferred long-term cover for slope stabilization. Perennials, with a more developed root system, can
persist during unfavorable times and are generally better at holding the soil than annuals. Annuals such
as cheat grass can increase the frequency of natural fire regimes. An increase in the number of wildfires
may in turn reduce or alter the beneficial perennial component of this habitat (Young 1987).
On Protection Island, a high-density herd of black-tailed deer are using suitable rhinoceros auklet
burrow nesting habitat to browse and bed down. Rhinoceros auklet burrows collapsed by deer hoofs
have been observed by researchers and Refuge staff. When deer bed down on top of rhinoceros auklet
burrow entrances, they prevent these nocturnal birds from leaving or entering burrows to feed their
young and have been observed to startle auklets, causing them to lose a beak-load of fish for their
young. Given the many threats to auklet populations that cannot be addressed by Refuge management
(e.g., climate change, fisheries interactions, oil spills), the importance of the colony to the North
American population and its unique location, the Refuge must consider all possible conservation actions
to protect auklet breeding habitat, including the reduction of deer on Protection Island. Black-tailed deer
are abundant in Northwestern Washington with the Washington Natural Heritage Program ranking of
‘demonstrably secure’ both globally and by state (WDNR 2009). Removing deer from Protection Island
in order to protect this unique seabird habitat would have little impact on the deer population of the area.
However, it will benefit the preservation of auklet burrows, increase the success of native plant
revegetation and the potential for establishing threatened plant species on the island. For more
information about rats, rabbits, and mammalian predators, see the rationale for objective 1.1.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-24 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
Objective 2.2 Enhance Rhinoceros Auklet and Tufted Puffin Nesting Habitat Quality
Enhance sandy bluff habitat quality on up to 20 acres of Protection Island NWR for the benefit of
breeding rhinoceros auklets and tufted puffins with the following attributes:
 > 75% of the vegetation is composed of species associated with the Willamette Valley Upland
Prairie and Savanna and North Pacific Maritime Coastal Sand Dune and Strand ecological systems.
 >50% vegetative cover at the beginning of the rainy season.
 <25% cover of invasive plant species (e.g., cheat grass).
 No Scotch broom or other invasive shrub species.
 Eliminate disturbance and impacts to seabird nesting habitats from deer.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
a. Establish vegetation restoration test plots for non-native plant removal and develop techniques for
establishing native vegetation.
b. Conduct studies to determine which native plant species will provide the best erosion control
throughout the year.
c. Prevent wildfires by continuing to prohibit public access and open fires by island users.
d. Pre-wash equipment before bringing to the islands to prevent the establishment of invasive plant
species. Treat existing and new infestations with IPM techniques.
e. Coordinate with WDFW and the Point No Point Treaty Tribes in the development of a step-down
plan to remove deer from Protection Island.
f. Search equipment and supplies to prevent the establishment of non-native species.
g. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, and feral cats and use
appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
h. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river otter),
determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions under a separate step-down
management plan.
Rationale: This objective is very similar to Objective 2.1; however, it is focused on enhancing existing
bluff habitat with extremely limited access on foot. Therefore any means that can be employed to
facilitate successful competition by native species on the sandy bluffs and minimize access to the area
on foot will be considered for management action. This is primarily because removal would be
impossible without damaging established burrows. Planting appropriate species on the edge of the
bluff habitat so that continual beneficial seeding by upwind natives is one option under consideration.
This option will be especially successful if those natives go to seed during the most appropriate season
to out-compete invasive species (i.e., cheat grass). Broadcast seeding into sandy bluff habitat by
helicopter is another option since no access to the colony would be necessary. However some species,
such as scotch broom, are much more difficult to eliminate and management would necessitate access
to the colony for removal as soon as it is detected. Aerial application of an herbicide may be
considered for more abundant invasive species if injury to non-target vegetation is acceptable. For
further details, see the IPM Strategy.
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction 2-25
For more information on habitat characteristics of interest in this restoration and the effects of deer on
auklets and their habitat, see objective 2.1. For more information on rats, rabbits, and mammalian
predators, see the rationale for objective 1.1.
Goal 3: Restore, maintain, and protect high quality, native savanna, grasslands, and
herbaceous bald habitat to increase the species diversity, richness, and population levels of
associated flora and fauna.
Objective 3.1 Restore Savanna, Grassland, and Herbaceous Bald Habitat
Manage and/or restore, where necessary, up to 200 acres of the savanna, grassland, and herbaceous
bald habitat on Protection Island NWR for the benefit of native plants, butterflies, and passerines by
providing habitat with the following attributes:
 <15-20% canopy cover of trees (e.g., Douglas-fir, madrone, Garry oak) and native shrubs (e.g.,
ocean spray, Nootka rose).
 >50% cover of native grasses (e.g., Roemer’s and red fescue, California oatgrass) and native forbs
(e.g., camas) of the Willamette Valley Upland Prairie and Savanna ecological system.
 <25% cover of non-native plant species.
 Establish one or more populations of priority resource of concern plant species (e.g., California
buttercup and golden paintbrush).
 At least three locations of larval host plants and nectar host plants suitable for adult Taylor’s
checkerspot butterfly.
 <10% cover of invasive plant species (e.g., Himalayan blackberry, Canada thistle, cheat grass,
Kentucky bluegrass, and European beach grass).
 No English ivy, Scotch broom, Dalmatian toadflax, or new invasions of noxious weeds.
 Eliminate disturbance and impacts to seabird nesting habitats from deer.
 No non-native rats, rabbits, or red fox.
 No feral cats or trespassing domestic cats or dogs.
 Reduce impacts from other native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river
otter).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
a. Determine extent and composition of historical (pre-farming) savanna, grassland, and herbaceous
bald habitat.
b. Evaluate restoration techniques, such as prescribed fire or mechanical means for up to 20-40 acres of
grassland. Use results for restoration of additional areas on the island.
c. Update fire plan to outline Refuge response to wildfires and use of prescribed burns. All prescribed
burns will be conducted under an approved burn plan.
d. Control or eradicate invasive and non-native plants with IPM techniques using cultural, mechanical,
physical, biological and/or chemical means. Prohibit off-road vehicle use to the greatest extent
possible to prevent the spread of noxious weed seed, particularly in restoration sites.
e. Re-introduce rare plant species (such as golden paintbrush and California buttercup) and Taylor’s
checkerspot larval host plants and nectar sources for adults either from seed sources or live plant
material.
f. Develop partnerships to propagate difficult to obtain plant materials for re-introductions.
g. Standard vegetation surveys conducted pre- and post-restoration; conduct surveys for Taylor’s
checkerspot butterfly; continue conducting breeding bird and Christmas bird count surveys with Refuge
Protection Island and San Juan Islands National Wildlife Refuges CCP/WSP
2-26 Chapter 2 Refuge Management Direction
volunteers.
h. Coordinate with WDFW and the Point No Point Treaty Tribes in the development of a step-down
plan to remove deer from Protection Island.
i. Continue to survey for presence of non-native rats, rabbits, red foxes, dogs, and feral cats and use
appropriate tools to maintain zero population levels.
j. Conduct a survey of native mammalian predators (e.g., coyote, raccoon, mink, and river otter),
determine impacts, and if necessary develop management actions under a separate step-down
management plan.
Rationale: In 1792, Captain George Vancouver described the island as having luxuriant grasses mixed
with an abundance of flowers. Pre-Refuge grazing, farming, and development have eliminated all but a
small remnant of this rare system on the upland plateau. Although a daunting challenge, the Service’s
policy for Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health (601 FW 3.3 [3.6D]) establishes
historic conditions “prior to substantial human related changes to the landscape” as the basic reference
for protecting, mimicking, or restoring natural processes. The vegetative community now found where
the native savanna, grassland, and herbaceous bald habitats existed in the past has been radically
changed through more than a century of grazing and farming. Rare or threatened species of savanna,
grassland, and herbaceous balds include golden paintbrush, slender crazyweed, Bear’s foot sanicle, and
California buttercup. The golden paintbrush is threatened by competition with native and non-native
plant species, habitat conversion by humans and natural succession, and grazing by herbivores (Federal
Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / June 1997). Restoration techniques under consideration include: 1)
cultural—prescribed fire as part of a one-two method with another tool such as mechanical or
chemical; 2) mechanical —plowing, discing, mowing, and rototilling; 3) physical—hand plant removal
and planting; 4) biological—for non-native plant control using approved and proven biological agents
(e.g., insects ); 5) chemical—herbicide applications. Prescribed fire would also be used once
restoration is completed to maintain grassland vigor and diversity.
Throughout the term of this CCP, management will focus on restoring larval host plants and adult
nectar sources in the event that rare butterflies should recolonize the islands. Some of these plants
include mustard, verbena, plantain, and hairy Indian paintbrush. The Taylor’s checkerspot butter