Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan Management Direction

              Comprehensive
Conservation Plan
Management
Direction
Umatilla
National Wildlife
Refuge
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Vision for the Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge
Protected in a rare section of the Columbia River where islands and gentle mud and sand river
shorelines can still be found, the Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge links a network of diverse
habitats connecting the Oregon and Washington sides of the middle Columbia River. The Refuge’s
shrub-steppe, basalt cliff, riparian, river islands and aquatic habitats will be managed to fulfill the
needs of native fish, wildlife, and plants. By actively restoring habitat, controlling exotic species,
and enhancing existing habitats and resources, the Refuge will serve as an anchor for biodiversity
and a model for habitat restoration and land management.
Just as the Columbia River is an important corridor for the transportation of people and goods,
it is also an important natural corridor for migratory birds and fish, including endangered salmon
and steelhead stocks. Food, rest and sanctuary will be provided for large concentrations of
migratory and wintering waterfowl and shorebirds using the Refuges each year. Extensive
corridors of riparian and floodplain habitat will be restored and enhanced for nesting and
migrating neo-tropical songbirds. Management and enhancement of the Refuge’s waters,
shorelines, channels and bays will contribute to the needs and recovery of endangered salmon
and steelhead passing through and rearing in Refuge waters. By reaching out to neighbors and
building strategic partnerships, the Refuge will seek new and innovative ways to conserve
and protect fish and wildlife resources along the entire stretch of river.
Wildlife abundance and well planned and high quality interpretive facilities will attract
thousands of visitors to the Refuges. We will work with partners and volunteers to provide a wide
range of high quality recreational and environmental education programs, build Refuge support,
and attract visitors. Encouraging an understanding of and appreciation for the Refuge and the
mid-Columbia River environment will be a focus of the Umatilla Refuge for generations to come.
Disclaimer
CCPs provide long term guidance for management decisions and set forth goals, objectives
and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes and identify the Service's best estimate
of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially
above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and
program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing
increases, operational and maintenance increases or funding for future land acquisition.
Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Prepared by:
Mid-Columbia River National Wildlife Refuge Complex
64 Maple Street
Burbank, Washington 99323
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Planning, Visitor Services, and Transportation
911 NE 11th Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97232
Northern Pintail – Dave Menke/USFWS
i
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Summary of Comprehensive Conservation Plan..................................................................... 1-1
1.3 National Wildlife Refuge System Laws and Directives.......................................................... 1-2
1.4 Establishment History and Purposes of Umatilla Refuge..................................................... 1-6
1.5 Future Refuge Plans.................................................................................................................... 1-9
1.6 Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities......................................................................................... 1-10
Chapter 2: Management Direction
2.1 Considerations in Refuge Planning ........................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 General Guidelines ....................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies............................................................................................... 2-3
Goal 1. Manage high quality food and sanctuary to support large
concentrations of migratory waterfowl ............................................................. 2-6
Goal 2. Provide secure and productive foraging and nesting habitats for a
diversity of shorebirds ......................................................................................... 2-10
Goal 3. Contribute to the recovery of endangered, threatened, and sensitive
species by protecting, maintaining or increasing suitable habitats .............. 2-12
Goal 4. Provide a diversity of high quality wetland habitats for the benefit of
migratory birds and other wetland plants and animals .................................. 2-15
Goal 5. Provide high quality riparian habitats for the benefit of nesting and
migrating birds, fish, riparian plants, and other riparian wildlife................. 2-18
Goal 6. Protect the integrity of the biological resources of the river islands............ 2-22
Goal 7. Conserve and restore the plants, animals and shrub-steppe community
representative of historic Columbia Basin habitats ........................................ 2-24
Goal 8. Protect and maintain the ecological integrity of talus, outcropping, and
cliff habitats for natural levels of species diversity ......................................... 2-30
Goal 9. Visitors and local residents enjoy, value, learn about, and support the
Refuge .................................................................................................................... 2-31
Goal 10. Hunters appreciate and experience a variety of quality hunting
opportunities ......................................................................................................... 2-34
Goal 11. Anglers experience abundant opportunities to catch fish while
appreciating the Refuge ...................................................................................... 2-37
Goal 12. Students and teachers understand and value the Refuge System, and
the ecology and management of Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge............ 2-38
Goal 13. Manage cultural resources for their educational, scientific, and cultural
values for the benefit of present and future generations of Refuge users
and communities ................................................................................................... 2-39
Appendices
Appendix C. Compatibility Determinations ................................................................................... C-1
Maps
Map 1. Vicinity Map
Map 2. Refuge Boundary and Land Status
Map 3. Habitat Management Actions under Final CCP
ii
Map 4. Public Use Features under Final CCP
Map 5. Overall Hunt Area
Map 6. Main Habitats and Ecotypes
Map 7. Key Waterfowl Use Areas
Tables
Table 1-1. Umatilla Refuge Land Acquisition Subsequent to Original Refuge
Establishment ................................................................................................................. 1-9
Table 1-2. Umatilla Refuge Units................................................................................................... 1-9
Table 2.1. Summary of CCP Actions ............................................................................................. 2-4
Great blue heron / USFWS
Great blue heron, USFWS
CHAPTER 1. Introduction
Three American Avocets Landing - © Tim Bush
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-1
1.1 Introduction
When first encountered by Lewis and Clark and early settlers in the Pacific Northwest, the
Columbia River was enormous, wild, and seemingly uncontrollable. Yet for all its enormous flows,
the river was nearly unusable in its native state as a source of irrigation water. Early settlers
found that agriculture was nearly impossible in most of the hot, arid Columbia Plateau (Dietrich
1995).
A grassroots effort to provide water for struggling small farmers culminated in the construction of
Grand Coulee Dam. When it was completed in 1941, it was–at that time–the largest concrete
structure ever built anywhere in the world. Successful construction of it and the other initial
Columbia River dams led to increased confidence and enhanced expectations for development of
the water and hydroelectric resources in the basin. Within a few decades, more than 400 dams
had been constructed, including 11 run-of-the-river dams on the mainstem, and hundreds of major
and modest structures on tributaries. These dams tapped into a large portion—21 million
kilowatts—of the Columbia's generating capacity. The Columbia River is now considered the
most hydroelectrically developed river system in the world (Dietrich 1995).
Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) was established subsequent to the authorization of
John Day Lock and Dam on the mainstem of the middle Columbia River, as part of the Federal
Columbia River Power System. Umatilla Refuge is situated upstream of the John Day Lock and
Dam, on waters of the impounded Columbia River known as Lake Umatilla, and on adjoining
uplands about an hour’s drive southwest of the Tri-Cities. Map 1, the Vicinity Map, shows the
major features within the vicinity of the Refuge. Map 2 shows the Refuge’s boundary and units.
Dam structures fundamentally alter riverine systems. Rivers are transformed by large dams
from seasonally fluctuating, dynamic flows of water, into deep lakes, with slow-moving waters. In
recognition of this, the U.S. Congress passed the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. §§
661-667e, March 10, 1934, as amended 1946, 1958, 1978 and 1995), which requires consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and state fish and wildlife agencies for federally-licensed
dams and diversions. Consultation is to be undertaken for the purpose of "preventing loss
of and damage to wildlife resources." In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
authorizes land to be made available to the Secretary of the Interior for wildlife protection
purposes. Umatilla Refuge was established directly as a consequence of the Coordination Act
requirements for dams, and as such is often spoken of as a “mitigation” refuge. However, there is
no direct language in any establishing documents referencing mitigation.
1.2 Summary of Comprehensive Conservation Plan
This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge sets forth
management guidance for the Refuge for the years 2007-2022, as required by the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966. This CCP is based on the McNary and
Umatilla National Wildlife Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental
Assessment (US FWS 2007), hereon referred to as the CCP/EA or the final CCP/EA. The final
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-2 Chapter 1 – Introduction
CCP/EA revises a Draft CCP/EA (US FWS 2006) that was made available to the public
(approximately 700 persons and organizations), and members of partner agencies and other
governments, including States and Tribes, in January 2007. The document was posted on the
Refuge’s website and local media were notified. Public open house meetings were held to allow
members of the public to review the draft and talk with members of the staff and planning team
about the preferred and other alternatives. Comments received were analyzed and are presented
in Appendix L of the final CCP/EA, together with Service responses.
The McNary and Umatilla National Wildlife Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
Environmental Assessment (US FWS 2007) was signed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Pacific Region Regional Director in May 2007. The CCP will implement Alternative 2, which, as
modified after public comment, was approved as the preferred alternative under a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI), also signed by the Regional Director in May 2007. The FONSI
noted that this alternative best achieves the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System and
the purposes, vision, and goals for the Umatilla and McNary Refuges; best maintains and restores
the ecological integrity of habitats and populations on the Refuges; addresses the important issues
identified during the scoping process; addresses the legal mandates of the Service and the
Refuges; is consistent with scientific principles of sound wildlife management and endangered
species recovery; and facilitates priority public uses appropriate and compatible with the Refuges’
purposes and the National Wildlife Refuge System’s mission.
This CCP provides reasonable, scientifically grounded guidance for improving the Refuge’s shrub-steppe,
riparian, wetland, and cliff-talus habitats, for the long-term conservation of native plants
and animals and migratory birds. The Refuge will emphasize control and reduction of weeds and
improvement of riparian, shrub-steppe, island, and cliff habitats. It identifies appropriate actions
for protecting and sustaining the cultural and biological features of the river islands, the Refuge’s
wintering waterfowl populations and habitats, migratory shorebird populations that use the
Refuge, and threatened, endangered, or rare species. The CCP also provides guidance for
maintaining or improving high quality wildlife-dependent public use programs (hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation). Finally, the CCP
provides guidance for non-wildlife dependent uses, including horseback riding, beach use, and
boating; addresses strategies for illegal uses on Refuge lands, including off road use and trash
dumping; and provides goals and strategies for better protecting cultural resources. Disturbance
to island resources will be reduced through closure of all beach use on Refuge islands.
1.3 National Wildlife Refuge System Laws and Directives
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, an agency within the Department of the Interior, 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 96-million acre National Wildlife Refuge System (System), which encompasses 548 national
wildlife refuges, thousands of small wetlands and other special management areas. More than 36
million visitors annually fish, hunt, observe and photograph wildlife, or participate in
environmental education and interpretive activities on national wildlife refuges.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-3
Refuges are guided by various Federal laws and executive orders, Service policies, and
international treaties. Fundamental are the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge
System (NWRS or Refuge System) and the designated purposes of a refuge as described in
establishing legislation, executive orders, or other documents authorizing, establishing, or
expanding a refuge. The hierarchical relationship of these documents in regards to refuge-specific
planning and management are illustrated in Figure 1.
Key concepts and guidance of the Refuge System are derived from the National Wildlife Refuge
System Administration Act of 1966 as amended (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), the Refuge Recreation
Act of 1962 (16 U.S.C. 460k-460k4) as amended, Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and
the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act is
implemented through regulations covering the Refuge System, published in Title 50, subchapter C
of the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations govern general administration of units of
the Refuge System.
A. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act
Of all the laws governing activities on National Wildlife Refuges, the Refuge System
Administration Act undoubtedly exerts the greatest influence. The National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act (Improvement Act) amended the Refuge System Administration Act in
1977 by including a unifying mission for all refuges to be managed as a system, identifying a new
process for determining compatible uses on refuges, and requiring each refuge to be managed
under a comprehensive conservation plan, developed in an open public process.
As amended, the Refuge Administration Act states that the Secretary shall provide for the
conservation of fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats within the Refuge System as well as
ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are
maintained. House Report 105–106 accompanying the Improvement Act states ‘‘…the
fundamental mission of our System is wildlife conservation: wildlife and wildlife conservation must
come first.’’ Biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health are critical components of
wildlife conservation. As explained in section 1.5B of the Biological Integrity, Diversity and
Environmental Health Policy, “the highest measure of biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health is viewed as those intact and self-sustaining habitats and wildlife populations
that existed during historic conditions.”
Under the Refuge Administration Act, each refuge must be managed to fulfill the Refuge System
mission as well as the specific purposes for which it was established. The Act requires the Service
to monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants on each refuge.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-4 Chapter 1 – Introduction
Figure 1. Hierarchy of Guidance within the National Wildlife Refuge System
Applicable Federal laws and executive orders
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission
Refuge Purposes
National Wildlife Refuge System Mission*/Goals/Policies
Ecosystem Vision/Goals/Objectives
Refuge Vision
Refuge Goals
Refuge Objectives
Refuge Strategies
Developed or
revised as part of
the CCP process
Projects Developed as part
of the CCP or with
Step-down
Management Plans
* established by law
Additionally, the Act identifies six wildlife-dependent
recreational uses (these are
commonly referred to as the “Big Six”). These
uses are hunting, fishing, wildlife observation
and photography, environmental education
and interpretation. Under the Act, the
Service is to grant these six wildlife-dependent
public uses special consideration in the
planning for, management of, and
establishment and expansion of units of the
Refuge System. In addition, when determined compatible on a refuge-specific basis these six uses
assume priority status over any other uses proposed or occurring on a refuge. The Service is to
make extra efforts to facilitate priority wildlife-dependent public use opportunities.
When preparing a CCP, Refuge Managers must evaluate all general public, recreational, and
economic uses (even those occurring to further refuge habitat management goals) proposed or
occurring on a refuge for appropriateness and compatibility. No refuge use may be allowed or
continued unless it is determined to be appropriate and compatible. Generally, an appropriate use
is one that contributes to fulfilling the refuge purpose(s), the Refuge System mission, or goals or
“Big Six”
The six wildlife-dependent recreational
uses identified under the Refuge System
Improvement Act: hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation and photography,
environmental education and
interpretation. These uses receive
enhanced consideration over other uses .
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-5
objectives described in a refuge management plan. A compatible use is a use that, in the sound
professional judgment of the Director, will not materially interfere with or detract from the
fulfillment of the mission of the Refuge System or the purposes of the refuge. The authority to
make the determination is delegated to the Refuge Manager. Updated compatibility
determinations for existing and proposed uses for Umatilla Refuge are in Appendix C of this CCP.
The Refuge Administration Act also requires that the CCP must be developed with the
participation of the public. Issues and concerns articulated by the public play a role in guiding
alternatives considered during the development of the CCP, and can play a role in selection of the
preferred alternative.
B. Other Laws, Policies, and Orders
Many other laws govern the Service and management of Refuge System lands. A list and brief
description of each can be found at http://laws.fws.gov. In addition, over the last few years, the
Service has developed or revised numerous policies and Director’s Orders to reflect the mandates
and intent of the Improvement Act. Some of these key policies include the Biological Integrity,
Diversity, and Environmental Health Policy (601 FW3); the Compatibility Policy; the Refuge
Planning Policy; Mission, Goals, and Purposes (601 FW 1); Appropriate Refuge Uses (603 FW 1);
Wildlife-Dependent Public Uses (605 FW 1); and the Director’s Order for Coordination and
Cooperative Work with State Fish and Wildlife Agency Representatives on Management of the
National Wildlife Refuge System. These and other policies can be found at:
http://refuges.fws.gov/policymakers/nwrpolicies.html. During CCP development, these broader
laws and policies and Refuge System and ecosystem goals and visions must be considered.
C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission
The mission of the Service is: “working with others, to conserve, protect and enhance fish and
wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.”
National natural resources entrusted to the Service for conservation and protection include
migratory birds, endangered and threatened species, inter-jurisdictional fish, wetlands, and
certain marine mammals. The Service also manages national fish hatcheries, enforces federal
wildlife laws and international treaties on importing and exporting wildlife, assists with state fish
and wildlife programs, and helps other countries develop wildlife conservation programs.
D. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission and Goals
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.” (National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997)
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-6 Chapter 1 – Introduction
The goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System, as articulated in the Mission Goals and
Purposes Policy (601 FW1), 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.
E. Legal Significance of the Refuge Purpose
The purpose(s) for which a refuge was established or acquired is of key importance in refuge
planning. Purposes must form the foundation for management decisions. The purposes of a
refuge are specified in or derived from the law, proclamation, executive order, agreement, public
land order, donation document, or administrative memorandum establishing, authorizing, or
expanding the refuge, refuge unit, or refuge subunit.
Unless the establishing law, order, or other document indicates otherwise, purposes dealing with
the conservation, management, and restoration of fish, wildlife, and plants, and the habitats on
which they depend take precedence over other purposes in the management and administration of
any unit. Where a refuge has multiple purposes related to fish, wildlife, and plant conservation,
the more specific purpose will take precedence in instances of conflict. When an additional unit is
acquired under an authority different from the authority used to establish the original unit, the
addition takes on the purpose(s) of the original unit, but the original unit does not take on the
purpose(s) of the addition.
By law, refuges are to be managed to achieve their purposes. When a conflict exists between the
Refuge System mission and the purpose of an individual refuge, the refuge purpose may
supersede the Refuge System mission.
1.4 Establishment History and Purposes of Umatilla Refuge
The Umatilla National Wildlife Refuge was created under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act due to the construction of the John Day Dam on the Columbia River at River
Mile 215. The Dam impounded waters along a 76-mile stretch of the mainstem Columbia River,
with about 48,000 acres flooded (Rasmussen 1989). The General Plan, signed in 1968, designated
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-7
various lands and waters to be set aside for the “conservation, maintenance, and management of
wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon” including most of the lands located in the
present day boundaries of the Umatilla Refuge. Like McNary Refuge, the Umatilla Refuge is
administered by the Service and much of the underlying land and water are under ownership of
the Corps.
A. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (Act) requires consultation with the Service and the
States’ fish and wildlife agencies where the "waters of any stream or other body of water are
proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be impounded, diverted . . . or otherwise
controlled or modified" by any agency under a Federal permit or license. Consultation is to be
undertaken for the purpose of "preventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources." In addition,
the Act authorizes land to be made available to the Secretary of the Interior for wildlife protection
purposes.
Section 664 of the Act specifies that areas made available for the purposes of wildlife conservation
and development as outlined in sections 661 to 666c, must be administered by the Secretary
directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements, and “in accordance with rules and
regulations adopted by the Secretary for the conservation, maintenance and management of
wildlife resources thereof, and habitat thereon, under plans” approved jointly by the Secretary
and the head of the agency exercising primary administration of the areas. General plans may
also include the transfer of project lands to a state for management. Lands having value to the
National Migratory Bird Management Program may be made available without cost directly to
the state agency having control over wildlife resources.
Wildlife and wildlife resources are defined under section 666 as “birds, fish, mammals and all
other classes of wild animals and all types of aquatic and land vegetation upon which wildlife is
dependent.” The Cooperative Agreement/General Plan associated with the Umatilla and McNary
Refuges provides more detail about the Refuges resource values.
Initial Consultation: Consultation with the Secretary of the Interior as part of the process for
water resources development for the John Day Lock and Dam Project was completed with a
report by the Service titled A Detailed Report on Fish and Wildlife Resources Affected by the
John Day Lock and Dam Project (US FWS 1961). Information in this report as well as
correspondence between the Service and the Department of Army focused on Refuge creation for
proposed management areas as compensation for waterfowl losses. Additional correspondence
continued to focus on waterfowl resources for the proposed management area.
B. General Plan
A General Plan for the project (US DOA et al. 1968) was written in accordance with the
Coordination Act. The General Plan states “those lands and waters acquired for primary
purposes of the project [John Day Lock and Dam] and found to have their greatest value in
furthering the national migratory bird program will be made available by cooperative agreement
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-8 Chapter 1 – Introduction
to the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
administration and management.”
C. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-298)
Public Law 89-298 authorized the Secretary of Army to acquire additional lands to be part of the
management area “for waterfowl management.” These lands are referred to as ‘special law lands’
(Exhibit A described as Exhibit C in the Act) and are the original lands held in fee by the Service.
D. 1969 Cooperative Agreement
This agreement transferred administrative control of the nonfee lands to the Service for
management “for the purpose of development, conservation, and management of wildlife
resources thereon in accordance with said General Plan” (US DOA and US DOI, 1969b).
Specific language relative to wildlife management and public uses was included in the agreement.
The language is open-ended enough to be interpreted as recommended, but not mandated,
strategies to be pursued in perpetuity. The specifics follow.
• The Bureau…may enter into special use permits with local ranchers to graze and pasture
land for the purpose of maintaining optimum food and habitat conditions for wildlife.
• The Bureau may also plant and harvest crops…to provide: (a) food for wildlife; and (b)
necessary compensation to farmers under any sharecrop agreement…the lands will not be
used by the Bureau for the production of crops or any purpose solely to produce revenue
to defray costs of management of the wildlife area.
• Lands within the wildlife area which are not needed for the production of wildlife food and
the maintenance of wildlife habitat…will be leased by the District Engineer.
• The Bureau shall administer and maintain the area included in this Agreement in
accordance with its Master Plan for wildlife development…there shall be included within
this plan those areas that are designated for public hunting; for wildlife sanctuaries, and
for the production of food for wildlife or other purposes.
1995 Amendment to the 1969 Cooperative Agreement: The cooperative agreement was modified
to provide the Service authority to manage portions of Blalock and Sand Dune Islands, which had
formerly been under Corps management. The agreement stated that the cooperative agreement
of 1969 "is hereby modified to include the portions of Blalock and Sand Dune islands that were
previously classified for recreational use...All remaining terms and conditions of the Cooperative
Agreement remain unchanged.” Therefore, these lands are managed under the same purposes as
other lands under the cooperative agreement of 1969 and General Plan, namely "development,
conservation, and management of wildlife resources" and "furthering the national migratory bird
management program."
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-9
E. Additional Land Acquisitions
Additional land tracts were added to the Refuge as shown in Table 1-1.
Table 1-1. Umatilla Refuge Land Acquisitions Subsequent to Original Refuge
Establishment.
Tract Acres Acquisition Authority Purpose
10M 670 Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 “development, management, advancement,
conservation and protection of fish and wildlife
resources”
1121,
1122
136.45 Migratory Bird Conservation
Act
“for migratory bird Refuges, both for inviolate
sanctuaries and for other management purposes”
2a 27.6 Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956
and Emergency Wetland
Resources Act
See above. Also, authorizes the purchase of wetlands
or interests in wetlands, which are not acquired under
the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act,
consistent with the wetlands priority conservation plan
using LWCF monies.
3015 27.1 Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 See above
Map 2 shows the units of Umatilla Refuge. Acreages for each unit are shown in Table 1-2. The
Columbia River Navigation Channel acres are shown for informational purposes only; the Refuge
does not have any management authority over these waters and they are not considered further in
the analysis.
Table 1-2. Umatilla Refuge Units
Unit Name Management Authority Unit Acres
Boardman Partially fee title, coop. agreement 2,174.49
Columbia River (includes some islands) Coop. agreement 5,954.09
McCormack (includes some islands) Partially fee title; remainder coop. agreement 6,886.79
Paterson Partially fee title, coop. agreement 4,665.27
Ridge Coop. agreement 985.21
Whitcomb Partially fee title, coop agreement 4,463.26
Total Acreage 25,129.11
*Acreages calculated from GIS analysis of the umt_bnd coverage.
1.5 Future Refuge Plans
The CCP will be revised every 15 years or earlier if monitoring and evaluation determine that
changes are needed to achieve the Refuge purposes, vision, goals, or objectives. The CCP
provides guidance in the form of goals, objectives, and strategies for Refuge programs but may
lack some of the specifics needed for implementation. Step-down management plans will be
developed, as needed, following completion of the CCP. Step-down plans require appropriate
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Action of 1969 (NEPA). Several step-down
plans (Habitat Management Plan, Public Use Management Plan, Inventory and Monitoring Plan,
and Integrated Pest Management Plan) are appropriate to develop or update following CCP
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
1-10 Chapter 1 – Introduction
completion. The step-down plans should be founded on the management goals, objectives and
strategies outlined in the CCP. The Integrated Pest Management Plan should address
coordination with all other Federal, state, tribal, and local agencies as well as neighboring private
landowners in order to effectively combat the spread of invasive species.
1.6 Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities
A. Issues Addressed in the CCP
The following issues were addressed in the planning process.
Habitat and Species Management: What habitat conditions should be targeted and restored on
the Refuge’s shrub-steppe, riparian, wetland, and cliff/talus habitats, many of which are highly
degraded by invasive plants and animals? How can the Refuge best prevent wildfires, particularly
those that arise regularly from trains that cross many miles of each Refuge numerous times each
day? What are the best methods for maintaining productivity and diversity in wetlands, when
natural hydrologic fluctuations no longer exist? What other actions should the Refuge take to
sustain and restore priority species and habitats over the next 15 years?
Waterfowl Management: Where shall specific waterfowl management tools and techniques be
utilized at the Refuge, including provision of cropping areas and sanctuary areas? What role shall
the Refuge play in providing wintering waterfowl habitat and hunting areas within the Mid-
Columbia basin?
Shorebirds: How shall the Refuge best manage thriving long-billed curlew breeding and staging
areas?
Salmonids and Other Declining Species: What actions should the Refuge undertake to protect
and enhance habitat for the migratory and rearing needs of seven stocks of listed salmon and
steelhead? Should backwater areas be restored? What actions can be taken to protect and
restore habitat values for other declining species?
Islands: To what extent should islands located in the Columbia River be maintained free from
human disturbance? Are diverse suites of waterbird colonies that currently nest on the islands
significant sources of mortality to listed salmonids? If so, should populations or habitats be
managed to prevent their increase?
Wildlife Dependent Uses: Which “Big Six” programs should be offered at the Refuge and what
kinds of improvements to these programs can be provided to enhance public enjoyment and
ensure a quality experiences for Refuge visitors?
Camping and other Non-wildlife Dependent Uses: Shall the Refuge continue to offer additional
various non-wildlife dependent recreational opportunities, such as swimming and beach use, and
horseback riding? What facilities and program support should be offered?
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1-11
Cultural Resources: What steps should be taken to better protect and interpret cultural
resources?
Effective Law Enforcement, Outreach, and Prevention of Illegal Uses: Between 2003 and
2006, the Refuge Complex that manages the Refuge lost 75% of its law enforcement capacity.
How can the Refuge better prevent the use of Refuge lands for a variety of illegal uses, including
dumping, ATVs, target shooting, and vandalism?
B. Issues outside the scope of the CCP
Columbia River Hydropower Operations: Operations of the Columbia River hydropower
system are not within the scope of the CCP. Minor changes in pool level may be recommended
under some alternatives for limited periods of time, but analysis or proposals dealing with major
modifications of operations at John Day Dam are outside the scope of this CCP. Ongoing
litigation over management of anadromous fish may result in major changes to hydropower
operations. If this occurs, many of the CCP actions may require rework.
References
Dietrich, William. 1995. Northwest Passage: The Great Columbia River. Simon & Schuster, New
York, NY.
Rasmussen L. and P. Wright. 1989. Wildlife Impact Assessment, John Day Project, Oregon and
Washington. Annual Report 1989, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland Field Station,
Annual Report, Project No. 88-12. Portland, OR.
The Nature Conservancy. 2000. The Five-S Framework for Site Conservation: A Practitioner’s
Handbook for Site Conservation Planning and Measuring Conservation Success. Second
Edition, June 2000.
US DOA, US DOI, State of Oregon and State of Washington. 1968. General Plan for the Use of
Lands. John Day Lock and Dam Project for Wildlife Conservation and Management.
Signed and finalized May 2, 1968.
US DOA and US DOI. 1969a. Cooperative Agreement between the Department of the Army and
the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries. Signed and finalized
September 25, 1969.
US DOA and US DOI. 1969b. Cooperative Agreement between the Department of the Army and
the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. DACW57-4-70-14.
Signed and finalized July 3, 1969.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. McNary and Umatilla National Wildlife Refuges:
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment. Portland, OR.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. McNary and Umatilla National Wildlife Refuges: Draft
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment. Portland, OR.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1961. A Detailed Report on Fish and Wildlife Resources Affected
by the John Day Lock and Dam Project.
CHAPTER 2. Management Direction
McCormack Slough - © Lyn Topinka
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-1
2.1 Considerations in Refuge Planning
In drafting the CCP, the Service reviewed and considered a variety of resource, social, economic,
and organizational aspects important for managing the Refuge. These background conditions are
described more fully in Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the final CCP/EA (US FWS 2007). As is
appropriate for a national wildlife refuge, resources were fundamental considerations. House
Report 105-106 accompanying the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
states "…the fundamental mission of our System is wildlife conservation: wildlife and wildlife
conservation must come first."
The planning team reviewed scientific reports and studies to better understand ecosystem trends
and the latest scientific recommendations for species and habitats.
The Service met with staff from local, State, and Federal agencies and elected officials to ascertain
priorities and problems as perceived by others. Refuge staff met with Refuge users, nonprofit
groups, and community organizations to ensure that their comments and ideas were considered
during CCP development. Details of public involvement are located in Appendix A of the final
CCP/EA (US FWS 2007). Appendix L of the final CCP/EA (US FWS 2007) contains the public
comments received on the Draft CCP/EA and the Service’s responses.
The planning team considered allowing hunting of wildlife species other than deer, waterfowl,
migratory birds and upland game birds, such as cottontail rabbit, cougar, bobcat, coyote, fox,
raccoon, turkey and crow, which is permitted by state law in other areas of Washington. These
activities were not included in the CCP because of conflicts with year-round public safety,
resource protection, inconsequential populations, and/or seasons outside of existing waterfowl
seasons.
The planning team considered the appropriateness of providing opportunities for various
nonwildlife dependent recreational activities suggested during scoping, including field dog trials,
geocaching, hang gliding, paragliding, rock climbing, motorized and nonmotorized off-road use,
waterskiing, camping, beach use, and personal watercraft. Based on policy guidance in the
Service’s Appropriate Refuge Uses Policy 603 FW 1 (2006), these uses were determined not
appropriate, and are documented on FWS Form 3-2319 in Appendix K of the final CCP/EA (US
FWS 2007).
2.2 General Guidelines
A summary table is presented on the following pages. It summarizes the key elements of the
CCP. Detailed descriptions of the goals, objectives, and strategies follow the table. Map 3
displays the Habitat Management actions under the final CCP. Map 4 displays the Public Use
facilities under the final CCP/EA, and Map 5 shows the overall hunting areas and sanctuary areas
under the final CCP/EA.
In addition to the specific actions listed in the objectives and strategies, the CCP will be
implemented under the following general guidelines.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-2 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Implementation Subject to Funding Availability:
Actions will be implemented over a period of 15 years
as funding becomes available. Project priorities are
in Appendix D of the final CCP/EA.
Refuge Fire Management: Fire Management Plans, and accompanying NEPA documents and
Endangered Species Act consultations, were finalized for the Refuge in 2001. Fire management
actions will continue to be guided by the direction set forth in the plans.
Tribal Coordination: Regular communication with Native American Tribes who have an interest
in the Refuge will continue. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
(consisting of the Cayuse, Umatilla, and Walla Tribes) are the major local Tribes the Refuge will
coordinate and consult with on a regular basis regarding issues of shared interest. However,
other Tribes with special interests, especially relating to the traditionally shared resource
corridors along the Columbia River and near the confluence of the Columbia and Snake Rivers,
will also be included in consultations affecting those resources. These traditionally local Tribes
include the Yakama, Nez Perce, Colville (Palouse), and the Wanapum. Currently, the Service
seeks assistance from Tribes in both Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
(NAGPRA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) related issues.
State Coordination: Similarly, the Service will continue to maintain regular discussions with the
Washington and Oregon Departments of Fish and Wildlife. Key topics for discussion will be the
Columbia Basin Waterfowl Management Plan, colonial nesting birds, wildlife monitoring, big
game management, hunting and fishing seasons and regulations, and endangered species
management.
Volunteer Opportunities and Partnerships: Volunteer opportunities and partnerships will
continue to be supported and are recognized as key components of the successful management of
public lands and vital to implementation of Refuge programs, plans, and projects, especially in
times of declining budgets.
Refuge Revenue Sharing Payment: Annual payments to counties under the Refuge Revenue
Sharing Program will continue according to the established formula, subject to payments
authorized by Congress. Payments made to local counties in 2005 are in Appendix D of the final
CCP/EA.
Maintenance and Updating of Existing Facilities: Periodic maintenance and updating of
Refuge buildings and facilities will be necessary. Periodic updating of facilities is necessary for
safety and accessibility and to support staff and management needs and is incorporated in the
Service Asset Management System.
Management of Minor Recreational Uses: Minor recreational activities are occasionally
pursued on the Refuge. Such recreational activities not specifically addressed in this CCP may be
allowed on Refuge lands if the Refuge Manager first finds they do not conflict with wildlife or
habitat objectives.
Actions will be implemented over a
period of 15 years as funding
becomes available.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-3
Participation in Planning and Review of Regional Development Activities: The Service will
actively participate in planning and studies for ongoing and future industrial and urban
development, contamination, and other potential concerns that may adversely affect Refuge and
wildlife resources and habitats. The Service will cultivate working relationships with pertinent
county, State, and Federal agencies to stay abreast of current and potential developments; and
will utilize outreach and education as needed to raise awareness of Refuge resources and
dependence on the local environment.
Maintain Existing Waterfowl Sanctuary in Support of Mid-Columbia Basin Planning
Efforts: Waterfowl sanctuary is an area that is closed to hunting and significant disturbance from
other public uses to provide important resting and/or feeding areas for waterfowl during the
hunting season. Security, indicated partly by the acres of sanctuary area provided during hunting
season, was listed as a key ecological attribute supporting waterfowl. There is public support for
maintaining “large concentrations” of waterfowl, as they have been important for hunting and
viewing users. However, Refuge sanctuary must be considered within the wider scope of Pacific
Flyway and/or Region-wide area closures and numbers of birds wintering in the Lower Columbia
Basin. Defining the role and extent of such sanctuary areas is a major component of the
Wintering Waterfowl Redistribution Plan for the Columbia Basin of Oregon and Washington
(Lloyd 1983). It is presently being re-written and updated through a partnership that includes
Washington and Oregon Departments of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW/ODFW), the Yakama Nation,
the Corps, and the Service. Therefore, except for very minor changes at McCormack Unit
proposed in this CCP, the McNary and Umatilla Refuges will continue to manage waterfowl
sanctuary in accordance with open and closed areas called for in the 1983 Wintering Waterfowl
Plan and existing Refuge closed/open zones, and will make adjustments as needed, in accordance
with the revised Columbia Basin Waterfowl Management Plan being developed with the
partnership agencies.
Vegetation Inventory and Condition Ranking: A vegetation inventory was begun during the
summer of 2005. Map 6 displays the preliminary results from the vegetation inventory. Ground-truthing
from randomly selected sites is still incomplete. When finished, it will be used to
complete an inventory map to the alliance level (as defined by the National Vegetation
Classification System) for all vegetation polygons. In addition, the data can be used to rank
habitat conditions according to criteria outlined in the objectives. Further refinement of the
condition classes may occur.
Section 106 Compliance: All ground-disturbing projects will undergo a review under Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act.
2.3 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies
Goals and objectives are the unifying elements of successful refuge management. They identify
and focus management priorities, resolve issues, and link to refuge purposes, Service policy, and
the Refuge System Mission.
A CCP describes management actions that 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. Goals then define general targets in support
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-4 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
of the vision, followed by objectives that direct effort into incremental and measurable steps
toward achieving those goals. Strategies identify specific tools and actions to accomplish
objectives (USDI 2002).
The goals, objectives and strategies that will guide the management of Umatilla Refuge over the
next 15 years are described in detail below. The goal order does not imply any priority in this
CCP. Priority actions are assigned in Appendix D of the final CCP/EA. Some objectives will help
achieve multiple goals but are listed only once, for brevity’s sake. Table 2-1 summarizes the main
actions and outcomes under the CCP, by topic.
Table 2-1. Summary of CCP Actions
Key Themes/Issues Summary of CCP Actions and Outcomes over Next 15 Years
Waterfowl
Croplands:
Total Acreage
Share to Refuge
1,500 acres
25%
Grain Availability over Season
and During Emergency
Weather Conditions
305 acres scheduled for staged mid-winter (post-hunting season)
knockdown. Emergency knockdown under severe weather
conditions.
Moist Soil Management:
Total Acreage
Floodup for Early Migrants
163-178 acres
10-20 acres flooded by September 15 each year
Shorebirds
Foraging Area:
Mudflats on Columbia River
Alternate Foraging Sites
2 acre increase for migration.
Alternate sites at moist soil units.
Curlew Upland Habitats Existing habitat maintained and suitable nesting and foraging
habitat increased by 25% on inactive former croplands.
Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species
Salmon Rearing Habitats Protect and where feasible enhance backwaters and side-channel
habitats.
Inventory for Rare Species not
Monitored by Other Agencies
Undertake inventory. Specific habitat or population management
strategies determined in step down plan.
Wetland and Deepwater Habitats
Shallow Marsh Management:
Open Water Areas Created
Emergent Invasives Cover
24 acres/year
<20%
Elimination of Carp Eliminated at least 1 wetland
Riparian Habitats
Nesting Habitats Improved 31 acres/year
Cottonwood Developed 5 acres/year
Islands and Cliffs
Waterbird Populations and
Coordination
Habitat maintained to support island-nesting birds and colonies.
Continued coordination with partners on research, monitoring and
managing the Refuge’s colonies of salmonid-smolt eating birds.
Reduce Disturbance to Island
Wildlife to Protect Nesting and
Breeding Areas
Existing island closures to be enforced. No beach use on Refuge
islands.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-5
Protection of Rocky Habitats No mining, collection or extractive activities permitted on any
natural Refuge rocky features. Baseline inventory of plant and
wildlife resources. Protection for raptor nesting sites and limit
public uses to Big Six uses.
Shrub-Steppe Habitats
Existing Habitats Improved 133 acres/year
Restoration of Roads, Mining
Sites, and Inactive Croplands
up to 75 acres
Protection from Fire and
Ground Disturbance
Active measures taken with partners, public, and contractors to
reduce fire damage and soil disturbances.
Wildlife Observation, Photography, Interpretation, and Trails
Umatilla Hwy 14 Interpretive
Overlooks
Improved and expanded
Columbia River Heritage Trail Add benches, blind, sun shades, and potential side trails to Heritage
Trail; consider realignment. Add interpretive area at check station.
Hunting
Waterfowl Hunt Types Reservation fee hunting, posts/free roam, and youth hunts.
Waterfowl Hunt Areas 16,805 acres
Sanctuary Areas Existing sanctuary areas except remove sanctuary at Columbia
River shoreline at McCormack and add sanctuary at East
McCormack Slough.
Upland Bird Hunt Schedule Hunt start time standardized to noon
Upland Permits (McCormack) Permits reduced to 15 on opening two weekends.
Deer Hunt (McCormack) Doe hunting emphasis to reduce population and address vegetation
impacts issue.
Fishing
Diversity of Fishing
Opportunities
Maintain diverse opportunities. Improve parking facilities and
access.
Tournament Fishing Work in partnership with States and others to develop standard
tournament permit conditions. No tournament access within ½ mile
of pelican nest colonies.
Fishing Outreach and
Information
Develop fishing brochure or tear sheets. Install kiosks at one on-
Refuge and one off-Refuge boat launches.
Environmental Education
Number of Students Served 100-500
EE Facilities Field study sites integrated into East McCormack Slough
Non-Wildlife Dependent Uses
Horseback Riding Improve signing, outreach, and interpretive materials. Riders
allowed on public roads and horseback designated trails.
Swimming and Beach Use Island beaches closed to all use.
Cultural Resources
Monitoring and Protection Increased with greater survey effort, enforcement, training, and
consultation with Tribes.
Interpretation Programs Develop interpretive materials in partnership with Tribes and
historical societies.
Bank Stabilization Seek funding to stabilize eroding banks to protect buried resources.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-6 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 1: Manage high quality food and
sanctuary to support large concentrations
of migratory waterfowl.
Objective 1a: Provide Crops for Waterfowl
Maintain 1,500 acres at Umatilla Refuge for the production of crops, with a minimum of 280
acres to a maximum of 410 acres to be grown as grain (corn preferred) and left standing to
benefit trust species of waterfowl (mainly mallard, northern pintail, Canada geese, and greater
white-fronted geese). As part of this acreage, provide a minimum of 700 acres (over both
Refuges combined) in green feed for waterfowl use during winter.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Conduct cooperative farming in accordance with guidelines, best practices and acreages
outlined in the existing Umatilla Cropland Management Plan; and maintain Organic
Farming Program on Whitcomb Island and McCormack Units of Umatilla Refuge.
• Consider force account farming to increase net food availability if and when appropriate.
To do so, increase Refuge funding $70,000 annually for force account equipment,
supplies and staffing and submit funding requests (RONS) for $210,000 to develop new
irrigation circles.
• Develop partnership programs to provide incentives and funding to private landowners
to provide standing corn and other grains off-Refuge.
• Follow all stipulations in the Farming Compatibility Determination for Umatilla Refuge.
Rationale: Upland food availability, including the amount of land in corn and available as green
feed, was identified as a key ecological attribute for waterfowl by the CCP team. Approximately
1,500 acres of Refuge lands are currently farmed under cooperative agreement. Under the
Cropland Management Plans for Umatilla Refuge (USDI, 1996; USDI, 1999), croplands are
managed for the benefit of waterfowl, but many other species benefit (i.e. bald eagles which rely
on Refuge waterfowl concentrations). Refuge crop shares are generally 25% of what is grown
and are limited to 1) cereal grains, preferably corn, to meet the high energy demands of
migrating and wintering waterfowl, and 2) green winter forage and cover crops which provide for
Canada geese. In addition, harvested areas provide foods for waterfowl, including waste grains
and green forage such as alfalfa and grasses. Opportunities to provide natural foods on the
Refuge are limited, especially for the large concentrations of waterfowl (peaks of nearly 250,000
to 500,000 birds for both McNary and Umatilla Refuges combined). The 2003 Wildlife and
Habitat Management Review of McNary and Umatilla Refuges recommended providing
additional corn for wintering waterfowl. Increasing corn is limited by costs of installing
irrigation systems, operation of the Organic Farming Program at Whitcomb Island, the need to
rotate crops, and use of negotiated cooperative agreements with farming cooperators versus
force account. Substantial increases in funding to both develop and maintain force account
irrigation circles for corn would provide the best scenario for corn production. Partnerships and
incentives to area farmers to grow grains is another possibility.
Waterfowl/USFWS
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-7
Objective 1b: Extend Time Period Grain is Made Available to Birds.
• Extend time period grain is made available to waterfowl and provide grains during
emergency weather conditions. Provide for mid-season and late-season nutritional
needs of migrating and wintering waterfowl, especially mallard, northern pintail and
greater white-fronted geese, by scheduling both the cooperative farmer harvest and
“knockdown” of 305 acres of refuge shares of agricultural grain crops.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Expand knockdown of refuge crop shares; both earlier and later in the post-hunting
season as follows:
• Post-hunting season (approximately January 18 – March 1): 305 acres total staged
knockdown over this time period, if possible.
• Coordinate with cooperators and/or increase force account crop knockdowns to achieve
the schedule listed above.
• Explore possibility of staging cooperator harvests to provide grains for waterfowl from
September through December: work with farm cooperators to stage corn harvest dates
throughout the fall/winter season
• Consider locating any new crop development in areas where grains could be made
available throughout the fall/winter season
• Allow for emergency knockdown during the hunting season if severe weather causes a
documented need. This action may require closure of hunting due to baiting regulations;
therefore coordinate with law enforcement and the public. Severe weather is snow or ice
covering of most local fields and or weather below 0 degrees F for an extended time
leading to generally inaccessible food supply on surrounding farms and agricultural
fields.
• Follow all stipulations in the Farming Compatibility Determination for Umatilla Refuge.
Rationale: Providing grain crops in a staged way throughout the fall/winter season will help
provide for fall and spring migrants as well as the wintering population of ducks and geese.
Farm cooperators have traditionally harvested their grain shares as they became available,
versus staging the harvest to increase waste grain availability throughout the fall/winter season.
Traditionally refuges reserved the majority (85%) of the refuge’s share of standing grains to be
knocked down immediately after the close of hunting season in late January to mid February.
Staff have noted that in years when the corn crop was “late” (February-March) to be knocked
down, more white-fronted geese (early spring migrants) were attracted to McNary Refuge.
White-fronted geese have increased significantly there in recent years, presumably in response
to this late food availability. The Refuge has occasionally allowed the knockdown of refuge
shares during the hunting season when severe weather has threatened waterfowl populations.
Refuge managers have documented extreme winter weather events leading to area fields being
covered with ice and snow; in such times Refuge corn fields have been mowed to supply the
nutritional need for a large percentage of Columbia Basin wintering waterfowl and have likely
prevented die-off events.
Objective 1c: Increase Size and Availablity of Moist Soil Areas
Add 5-20 acres to the existing 158 acres of managed moist soil units for the Refuge, and increase
efforts to provide high production of natural foods favored by mallards and northern pintails,
such as smartweed (Polygonum spp.), wild millet (Echinochloa spp.) and swamp timothy
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-8 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
(Crypsis schoenoides). Provide early flood-up, by September 15, on 10-20 acres of existing moist
soil units to support early migrants such as northern pintail.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Flood units in fall and follow with a late spring drawdown, properly timed to maximize
germination and growth of the desired species.
• Utilize disking at Umatilla’s McCormack Slough to set back taller persistent wetland
vegetation, and to provide a seed bed for preferred moist soil annual vegetation.
• Where water and precise water control is available, utilize summer irrigations to keep
vegetation actively growing (timed to minimize standing water since mosquito larvae
production period is 5-7 days).
• Develop 5-20 acres of new moist soil units from the following potential areas: Boardman
and Paterson units. Utilize irrigation water and manage piping/pumps as needed.
• Coordinate irrigations and new moist soil development with local mosquito control
districts (see West Nile Virus Contingency Plans for the Refuge).
• Annually provide water for early flood up (by September 15) of 10-20 acres of moist soil
from the following units: Kathy’s Pond and any sites to be developed (see objective 4a).
• Coordinate timing and treatment of early fall flood-ups with the local mosquito control
districts to reduce risks of mosquito-borne diseases (see West Nile Virus Contingency
Plan).
Rationale: Wetland food availability was identified as a key ecological attribute supporting
waterfowl. Moist soil wetlands use annual water control regimes to promote production of
annual plants preferred by waterfowl, such as wild millet, smartweeds, swamp timothy and
goosefoot. Typically this includes a spring drawdown, one to two summer irrigations, and a
fall/winter flood-up. These wetlands also provide a variety of water depths that support a wide
variety of waterbird species including shorebirds and wading birds and serve as important
feeding areas for young waterfowl broods.
Although not considered typical moist soil management units (due to a lack of direct water
control), some Refuge areas are already being managed for moist soil plant production. These
include shoreline areas at McCormack Unit. Expanses within McCormack Slough have been
excavated to elevations that fall between the annual minimum and maximum water levels of the
slough, as dictated by John Day Dam forebay operations. Under the influence of this operation,
these sites are inundated with shallow water from November through June and are exposed as
saturated or moist soils from July to October, thus performing as a seasonal wetland that is
highly suitable for moist soil plant production. Disking has been used at these sites to eliminate
development of tall persistent vegetation such as bulrush, and to promote establishment of
annuals as soon as the flats become exposed early in July. Managed moist soil areas on the
slough are used heavily by waterfowl, particularly northern pintail, green-winged teal, and
mallards. There has also been much use by shorebirds and wading birds in the spring season.
New moist soil areas that could be developed and/or managed for moist soil include: additional
sites at McCormack Unit near Hunt Blinds 1, 2, 5, 28, 31, 32, 33, 36, and 37, and shorelines at
hunt blinds 7 and 30.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-9
The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (2004) lists the long-term trend for northern
pintail populations as declining. The Refuge could distribute the benefits of moist soil
management to a greater diversity of waterfowl, including northern pintail, by providing earlier
fall flood-up of units. Pintail generally arrive earliest of the waterfowl, with peak concentrations
sometimes occurring in September. The Refuge has limited ability to control the timing of flood-up
at some of the moist soil units. In the past, mosquito breeding and the potential for mosquito-borne
diseases (such as West Nile Virus) limited use of early flood ups. In close coordination and
cooperation with the local mosquito control districts, early flood-up could occur.
Objective 1d: Relocate Sanctuary Area within McCormack Unit
Improve resting and feeding opportunities for migratory birds and wintering waterfowl and
increase opportunities for wildlife observation on the eastern portion of McCormack Slough by
closing the area to hunting, eliminating foot traffic and access to the wetlands, and restricting
public use and access to the auto tour route and selected public viewing or overlook sites. Move
current waterfowl and upland game bird hunting on the eastern portion of the Slough to a new
area within the current sanctuary along the river shoreline on the north side of the unit.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Close all public access to the east portion of McCormack Slough except at designated
viewing and interpretive sites, and designated trails and roads (see Objective 9d and 9e).
• Sign perimeter of new sanctuary area to inform public of area closure and make changes
to Refuge brochures and hunting tear sheets.
• Open new designated site along river shoreline for waterfowl and upland bird hunting
and sign as needed (see Objective 10a)
Rationale: The East McCormack Slough is an ideal area for sanctuary and use by waterfowl
away from the buffeting winds on the river. Its high quality wetlands and intensively managed
foraging areas are used by large numbers of waterfowl and other wildlife. The area is also
currently heavily used, both as a hunt area and also (and at the same time) by birdwatchers,
photographers and general wildlife observation. Fewer disturbances on East McCormack
Slough will improve the quality of Objectives 9b and 9c, and better separate hunting from the
visiting public using the tour route and Heritage Trail. All three of these objectives, if
implemented together, will complement and benefit one another. If any one of them were to be
implemented alone, the area would be less valuable as a resource to the public. The loss of
waterfowl and upland bird hunting on East McCormack Slough will be replaced with a new hunt
area located along the river shoreline with nearly an equal amount of hunting opportunities and
overall land area. Hunting quality at the new site will likely be the same or better than that
provided in the east slough since an interior sanctuary wetland could be expected to increase
overall bird distribution and hunting success (similar to McNary Refuge with Units 3 (sanctuary)
and 2 (hunted). Intensively managed sites in the east slough will also provide opportunity to
expand desired habitats for various species other than waterfowl, such as shorebirds, wading
birds, and other water birds. Hikers, birders, and photographers will lose direct and close access
to the wetlands; but the auto tour route and carefully placed designated observation sites and
decks will still provide for quality wildlife observation visits.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-10 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 2: Provide secure and productive foraging
and nesting habitats for a diversity of shorebirds.
Objective 2a: Provide Alternate Shorebird Foraging Areas
Annually provide 2 acres of alternative shorebird foraging areas
within moist soil units at McCormack Unit during the peak of the
migration period (August/September).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Determine best time periods for providing alternative foraging sites based on the Corps’
projected reservoir levels and peak migration periods. Annually select and prepare 2
acres of moist soil units needing treatment (i.e., disking and invasive plant removal) and
flood/drawdown these units just prior to projected periods of high reservoir levels.
Potential sites include McCormack Slough and Paterson Slough.
• After disking and where water control is available, flood to a maximum depth of one-to-three
inches over the disked area for approximately one week; allowing water to drop
naturally and provide habitat.
Rationale: Large numbers of migratory shorebirds often find themselves without adequate
foraging habitat when the Corps suddenly increases and maintains reservoir levels for an
extended period. Examples include boat race week and 2 to 4 day increases for special
shipping/barging requests. Alternative foraging sites nearby could be valuable during such
events and this objective will benefit up to 40 species of shorebirds documented to use the Delta,
including species identified as “critically important” such as black-necked stilt, American avocet,
long-billed dowitcher, and Wilson’s phalarope. The availability of alternate sites was identified in
a literature review as a key consideration for managing shorebird populations effectively (Prindle
2004). Properly timed draw downs, disking treatments, and/or irrigations of existing moist soil
units will help provide more habitats for shorebirds on the Refuge if the Delta becomes
unavailable. Alternative mudflat shorebird foraging sites will have the side benefit of providing
irrigation for the surrounding moist soil vegetation that remains untreated. Weedy areas and
canary grass portions needing a treatment (disking) will be chosen, not good moist soil sections.
Remaining moist soil plants will be allowed to continue to grow productively, and could produce
larger seed heads irrigated. Many shorebird experts have recognized the importance of
providing alternate sites, especially along river systems (EDAW 2004). The timing will have to
be precise to provide habitat during the projected high water periods, requiring close Corps dam
reservoir coordination. Irrigations will also have to be conducted with shallow water and short
time periods to prevent mosquito breeding. Under current operations, the Delta should continue
to expand in area, and if properly managed, may someday qualify as a Western Hemisphere
Shorebird Reserve Network Regional Site (supporting greater than 20,000 shorebirds per year).
Long-Billed Curlew - Gary Kramer/USFWS
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-11
Objective 2b: Maintain or Increase Long-billed Curlew Habitat
Maintain long-billed curlew nesting and foraging habitat, and increase existing curlew nesting
habitat by 25% on appropriate sites at Umatilla Refuge to benefit this species. Restored
habitats should be characterized by shorter vegetation (<24 cm), preferably dominated by a
mixture of downy brome and Sandberg's bluegrass, intermixed with bare ground and even forb
height (Denchant et al. 2003; Pampush and Anthony 1993).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Continue to identify and quantify existing curlew nesting and foraging areas to
determine location and amount of habitat on the Refuge.
• After habitat has been identified and quantified; increase existing acreage at Umatilla
Refuge by 25% by restoring inactive, formerly cultivated lands to curlew foraging and
nesting habitat, specifically the edges of field circle 5 and the surrounding grassland.
• Focus management in curlew use areas toward maintaining and restoring native
shortgrass habitats; use planting, burning, and mowing methods. In native shortgrass
areas, management may include removal of encroaching shrubs or weeds not
contributing to curlew preferred habitat features.
• Monitor populations and/or nest success using transects or other standardized
techniques.
• When conducting restoration efforts under objectives 7a and 7c, avoid planting shrubs in
curlew focal areas.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for the Refuge.
Rationale: The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan’s list of High Priority Shorebirds (USFWS
2004) lists the long-billed curlew as a “globally highly imperiled” species in need off protection
measures. Long–billed curlews have been assigned the highest score (5 on a scale of 1-5) for
conservation efforts under criteria established by the Intermountain West Regional Shorebird
Plan (Oring et al. 2004). The Intermountain West Region is considered an area of critical
importance (compared to other regions globally) for their conservation. The Umatilla Refuge
and surrounding lands serve as a key breeding area for long-billed curlews. An accurate
estimate of the curlew’s current abundance on the Refuge is not available, but range-wide survey
efforts completed in 2004 showed curlew numbers on Umatilla Refuge to be higher than all other
sites surveyed that year. There is likely an opportunity to increase the number of breeding
curlews. Areas that have been known to be used by curlews at Umatilla include: McCormack
Slough, uplands south of McCormack Slough, Kathy’s Pond, Whitcomb Islands, and agricultural
field #5 near the auto tour route on McCormack Unit. Because curlews tend to avoid habitats
with dense vegetation cover (both vertical height and horizontal density), the Refuge could
manage for short vegetation during the curlew nesting season (mid-March to mid-May). Curlews
favor areas with a mosaic of shortgrass and downy brome, typically within one mile of a water
source (Pampush 1980; Pampush and Anthony 1993).
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-12 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 3: Contribute to the
recovery of endangered,
threatened, and sensitive species
by protecting, maintaining or
increasing suitable habitats.
Objective 3a: Salmon Backwater Enhancements
Protect, and where feasible restore or enhance backwater sloughs, side channel connections,
shallow water marshes, or embayments that support juvenile salmon to benefit federally listed
species/stocks, including Snake River Chinook, sockeye, and steelhead; Mid-Columbia
steelhead; and Upper Columbia Chinook and steelhead.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Assess the biological benefits (both waterfowl and fisheries) of restoring side-channel
fish habitats at Paterson Unit and coordinate with State/Federal/Tribal fishery
biologists.
• If deemed likely to provide biological benefits to listed salmon, prepare technical
feasibility report and funding requests for salmon backwater enhancement projects.
• Evaluate and develop strategies to maintain and/or enhance connectivity between
Columbia River and backwater slough areas.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for Umatilla
Refuge.
Rationale: Seven federally-listed species/stocks of anadromous fish, including Snake River
Chinook, sockeye, and steelhead; Mid Columbia steelhead; Bull trout; and Upper Columbia
Chinook and steelhead spend portions of their life history either on, or adjacent to, Refuge
waters and shorelines on the Snake, Columbia, and Walla Walla Rivers. The Hanford Reach
contains the last major mainstem spawning habitat in the Columbia River System for fall
Chinook salmon, and up to 80% of the total run of adult fall Chinook salmon returning to the
Columbia River spawn in the Hanford Reach (Dauble and Watson 1990). The Casey Pond area
at McNary Refuge, and other shorelines and embayments on the Refuge, serve as nurseries for
young developing fall Chinook (John Easterbrooks 1999, pers. comm.). Conserving and restoring
salmon and steelhead populations is an important regional goal, not least because of their
cultural, historical, and ecological values. Salmon are an important food source for numerous
other wildlife species. Sixty-seven wildlife species of the Pacific Northwest, including many
known to inhabit the Refuge, have been shown to have a “strong” or “recurrent” relationship
with salmon (Cedarholm et al. 2000). Protection and/or restoration of these shallow habitats may
also benefit waterfowl as embayments and backwater areas are now less common than
historically. Paterson Slough also constitutes one of the larger embayments on the Middle
Columbia.
Salmon - © Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-13
Objective 3b: Conduct Inventory and Establish Habitat/Population Management
Strategies for Certain Rare Species
Identify potential habitat areas and conduct a targeted inventory (primarily focused on
determining presence/absence and indication of breeding) for the following species or species
groups. If species are present, document population information. After determining species
status, determine which, if any, habitat or population management strategies should be
undertaken for the benefit of rare species. This determination may be made in a step-down
plan.
• Washington ground squirrel (OR–Endangered. WA–candidate. Federal–Candidate).
• Burrowing owl (WA–Candidate. Federal–Species of Concern.
• Peregrine falcon (Federal–Species of Concern).
• Golden eagle (WA–Candidate. Federal–No Status).
• Swainson’s hawk (OR–Sensitive. Federal–No Status)
• Ferruginous hawk (WA–Threatened. Federal–No Status).
• Native Amphibians and reptiles (Varied status).
• Bats (Varied status).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Follow established and current protocols for surveys of rare species/species groups.
When and where possible, participate in regional partnership efforts and conform to
recommended timeframes.
• Alert Heritage programs and key State biologists of any new or expanded locations as
well as the results of any negative searches.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for the Refuge.
Rationale: Rare species were selected for inventory work primarily due to their sensitive status
(threatened, endangered, etc) and because they may occur on either Refuge, thus possibly
providing opportunities for habitat restoration or enhancement that could help to further their
recovery. Specific information is summarized below.
• Washington ground squirrel. The Oregon portion of Umatilla Refuge lies within the
historic range of the Washington ground squirrel. The species is likely extirpated from
the Refuge and its historical occurrence is unknown, however, the Refuge could possibly
provide habitat for any proposed future re-introductions.
• Burrowing owl. A dramatic loss of habitat has occurred in the area due to conversion to
agriculture or urban development. Burrowing owls are known to nest on the Refuge,
but data on colony locations is limited and data on population size is non-existent.
• Peregrine falcon. The Refuge provides foraging habitat.
• Golden eagle. Current status on the Refuge is unknown.
• Swainson’s hawk. This species nests in the local area, but current status on the Refuge
is unknown.
• Ferruginous hawk. Nests locally, though status is unknown on the Refuge.
• Native amphibians and reptiles. Little information exists on the occurrence and
abundance of native amphibians and reptiles both historically and/or following creation
of the Refuge. Paralleling a global decline by at least a third of the world’s amphibians
(Stuart et al. 2004), many of the Refuge’s native amphibian populations thought to be
present at Refuge establishment appear to be dwindling or absent. The causes of
declines at the Refuge (and elsewhere for other amphibians) are not fully known but
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-14 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
may be related to loss of habitat, changes in hydrology, habitat fragmentation,
introduction of nonnative predatory fish and bullfrogs into historic habitats, drought,
mortalities on roads, environmental contaminants, disease, and other factors (McAllister
et al. 1999). The Refuge needs to improve its knowledge of potential and occupied
habitats for native amphibians and may be able to play a role in reestablishment of
declining populations.
• Bats. Virtually no information exists on bats occurring on either Refuge. Further
information will help to understand Refuge species richness and diversity.
We did not include here other species such as the bald eagle, American white pelican, and
salmonids, for the following reasons. The Refuge tallies bald eagles observed during aerial
waterfowl surveys, and contributes data to the annual Oregon Winter Eagle Survey. American
white pelican population numbers are “rough” but data is collected by researchers as part of
their work on the piscivorous fish research. American white pelican counts are estimated by
researchers from aquatic and aerial counts. Once additional information is available on each of
these species or groups population status on the Refuge, the staff can better determine
appropriate habitat or population management objectives and strategies. Such detail may best
be developed in a step down Habitat Management Plan. Salmonids: Endangered salmon stocks
and other Columbia River System salmon are regularly monitored and/or studied by the
WADFW, Corps, Tribes, Service, and NOAA Fisheries. Data is available for Refuge use.
Objective 3c: Conduct Baseline Inventory for Small Mammals
Conduct a one-week long baseline inventory in approximately three shrub-steppe priority areas
to collect initial data on the presence, abundance, and diversity of small mammals.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Map Quincy and Warden soil types, and an overlay with areas of less-disturbed
vegetation cover likely to be suitable for the Washington ground squirrel, to prioritize
search areas for this species.
• Select other areas for survey based on State records and historic reports.
• Alert heritage programs and key State biologists of any new or expanded locations as
well as the results of any negative searches.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for the Refuge.
Rationale: Small mammals are very important as a food source to higher level predators,
including several migratory birds of interest, such as the golden eagle and Swainson’s hawk. In
addition, structures made by some burrowing small mammals are important for use as nest sites
for the burrowing owl. There is a need for the Refuge to have a greater understanding of the
diversity of small mammal species inhabiting Refuge habitats, their relative abundances, and
locations of highest habitat value, as Refuge data is lacking in this area. An abundance rating for
certain small mammals was provided in the McNary Habitat Management Assessment baseline
inventory (WADFG 1980). Some of the data presented in that report originated in the Columbia
River System inventory. The Washington ground squirrel, listed as endangered by the State of
Oregon, is currently thought to be restricted to three populations in Oregon and Washington.
Suitable soil types may exist on the Refuge. Restoration of shrub-steppe and grassland habitats
as described in shrub-steppe objectives should also aid in supporting native small mammals.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-15
GOAL 4: Provide a diversity of high-quality
wetland habitats for the
benefit of migratory birds and other
wetland plants and animals.
Objective 4a: Increase Amount of High Quality Shallow Marsh
Conduct needed management on 350 acres at Umatilla Refuge, resulting in an increase in
acreage of high quality shallow marsh available for use by waterfowl and other waterbirds.
High quality marsh will consist of open shallow marsh habitat with less than a 50% cover of tall
persistent emergent vegetation (bulrush, cattail) at full pool level, with persistent emergent
vegetation patches smaller than 10 acres, and no unbroken shoreline patches longer than 300
yards. In addition, in managed areas, no more than 20% plant cover in the wetland emergent
plant zone shall be comprised of the following non-native invasive wetland plants: purple
loosestrife, phragmites, cocklebur, and false indigo. Conduct needed management at the rate of
about 24 acres per year over the life of the CCP.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Mechanically re-open areas that have become vegetated with persistent emergent
vegetation in order to set back succession and maintain open, shallow water areas.
Mechanically remove longer term mineral and organic deposits that lead to filling and
wetland loss.
• Utilize mowing, disking and burning for elimination of vegetation mats and organic
material.
• Utilize surface excavation and shoreline recontouring where appropriate to open
marshes.
• Develop and implement an IPM plan (use mechanical, cultural, biological, hydro
management and chemical methods) to aggressively reduce the presence of the five
nonnative plants in the wetland emergent plant zone.
• Inventory plant communities and annually monitor effectiveness of treatments. Control
any reinvasion by nonnatives; and plant native emergents as needed.
• Partner with counties for education/weed control along Refuge borders and reduce
sources.
• Increase annual funding by $40,000 to address costs of monitoring, biological controls,
equipment and chemicals used under an Integrated Pest Management Plan.
Rationale: The Refuge was established to mitigate losses of habitat, including wetlands, caused
by dam building in the Columbia River. Providing a diversity of wetlands is vital to the purposes
of the Refuge. Yet because of the numerous dams along the length of the Columbia River, and
the specific dam and lock operations encompassing river sections within the Refuge, the natural
fluvial processes of a free-flowing riverine system have been eliminated. Refuge waters, which
are now human-managed and relatively constant-elevation reservoirs, alternately support
lacustrine and palustrine systems, but lack necessary disturbance mechanisms to provide and
Turtles on the Refuge – John Gahr/USFWS
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-16 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
maintain the cyclical aging and renewal processes of wetlands over time. Non-persistent
wetlands and mudflats, for example, are vital to a variety of migratory birds and other wetland
animals. Both habitat types are mostly non-existent on the Refuge because of the absence of
natural disturbance mechanisms. By increasing the number of acres of open shallow marsh
through artificial means such as mechanical operations or prescribed fire, the Refuge will mimic
natural processes and provide a diversity of successional stages that increase overall biodiversity
and prevent wetland loss over time. Species benefiting by such actions could include shorebirds,
wading birds, rails, waterfowl and muskrats.
Invasive plants (primarily purple loosestrife, phragmites, cocklebur, and false indigo) are
widespread in the emergent plant zone of most wetlands on the Refuge and may currently be as
high as 30-50% of plant cover in certain areas. Altered plant and animal community composition
was identified by the CCP team as a very high stress to wetland systems. Invasive plants limit
native plant production and cause impacts to food, nesting, and cover for wildlife. Invasives in
wetlands reduce waterfowl food availability during the migration and wintering periods.
Limiting invasive species will help the Refuge to comply with county and state ordinances, as
well as improve habitat values. However, the task is immense, thus a threshold value for
invasives was established as a reasonable objective over the next fifteen years as opposed to a
zero-tolerance level.
Objective 4b: Maintain and Improve Aquatic Bed Habitats.
Manage wetlands to increase submerged aquatic vegetation cover by eliminating rough fish
(carp and bullhead). By the end of 15 years maintain carp-free conditions in at least 1 of these
wetlands - McCormack Slough, Sasquatch, or Figure Eight - and determine the most effective
control methods to reduce carp numbers from present levels in areas open to the Columbia
River (Paterson). Objective will benefit migratory waterfowl (mallard, pintail, lesser scaup,
tundra swan) as well as waterbirds (pied-bill grebe) and other native aquatic species.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Conduct initial inventory for submerged plants within two years after CCP is finalized;
and monitor every five years after that.
• Obtain bathymetric data for Paterson and Whitcomb Sloughs.
• Eradicate carp and bullhead at one or more of the following wetland locations:
McCormack Slough, Sasquatch or Figure Eight Ponds) by the end of 15 years. Draw
down these wetland areas and if needed utilize rotenone to kill carp and bullhead
populations. For effective use of rotenone, and facilitation of equipment needs, burn
residual vegetation when appropriate. Coordinate with WDFW and ODFW on rotenone
projects, funding initiatives, and partnerships.
• Experiment with water draw downs in advance (work with the Corps on schedule) to
determine how low water can get, and make any needed changes in water control
structures to facilitate carp removal and growth of submergent vegetation used by
waterfowl.
• Consider permitting commercial carp and bullhead fishing in areas open to the
Columbia River (Paterson).
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for the Refuge.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-17
Rationale: Umatilla Refuge has significant wetland resources that provide habitat for wildlife.
However, outside of their extensive use by waterfowl and other migratory birds, little is known
about submerged vegetation and other aquatic species inhabiting Refuge wetlands. Carp, which
are widespread in permanently flooded wetland habitats on the Refuge, are thought to represent
a high threat to the functioning of the wetland system, due to their impacts on submergent
vegetation and water quality. Carp uproot and eliminate submerged vegetation, increase
turbidity (see stress source analysis), and decrease the overall abundance and diversity of the
invertebrate community (Miller 2006). Treatments using the natural plant chemical rotenone are
expensive, but can be more effective if the amount of water to be treated is minimal and carp and
bullhead are concentrated in a small area. Past rotenone treatments have generally been
effective, but reintroduction and infestation have occurred at varying rates. This may have
occurred because adequate water draw downs did not occur, and/or, all connected pools/sloughs
were not treated at the same time. Partnering with experienced State fishery program
managers should increase success rates.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-18 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 5: Provide high quality riparian
habitats for the benefit of nesting and
migrating birds, fish, riparian plants,
and other riparian wildlife.
Objective 5a: Improve Condition of Riparian Habitat for Nesting and Migrating Native
Passerines
Conduct needed management on approximately 30% (463 acres) of the total 1,556 acres of
priority riparian habitat over the next fifteen years to improve nesting success for native
riparian passerines such as the Lazuli bunting, yellow warbler, and yellow breasted chat, and
other riparian species identified as Partners In Flight focal species. Needed management is
defined as that combination of treatments and re-treatments which successfully improve the
overall condition rating, resulting in a rise into the next highest condition class (poor, fair, good).
Conduct needed management at the rate of about 31 new acres per year over the life of the
CCP. See condition definition ratings below.
Riparian Tree-Dominated Habitats: Condition Class Categories
Condition Class
Overstory
Canopy
Cover*
Overstory Trees
Age Classes
Percent of Native Forb
and Grass Cover
Comprised of Natives
Native
Understory
Shrub Cover
Poor <5% 1 <25% <10%
Fair 5-20% 1-2 25-50% 11-20%
Good 21-30% Several 51-75% 21-50%
Excellent 31-60% Several >75% 51-80%
Recommended Conditions for Various Target Species
Bullock’s Oriole
(Altman and Holmes
2000)
30-60% Protect large
gallery
cottonwoods
*native and nonnative cottonwood, peachleaf willow, pacific willow, white alder, etc.
Riparian Shrub-Dominated Habitats: Condition Class Categories
Condition Class Percent of Native
Forb and Grass Cover
Native Shrub
Cover
Shrub
Height
Poor <25% <10%
Fair 25-50% 11-20%
Good 51-75% 21-50%
Excellent >75% 51-80
Recommended Conditions for Various Target Species
Other species-specific
parameters
Lazuli Bunting
(Altman and
Holmes 2000)
>25% and <70% >25% and
<70%
Interspersion of shrub
patches and herbaceous
openings
Banding a Yellow-breasted
Chat– Howard Browers/USFWS
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-19
Willow Flycatcher
(Altman and
Holmes 2000)
interspersed 40-80%
(patches 10
square meters
in size)
>3 feet
high
Patches exceeding 5 acres,
preferably 20 acres or more.
Tree cover <30%.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Each year, improve native plant cover and distribution within one or more of the five
priority areas. While implementing strategies to move blocks into the next higher
condition rating, consider specific habitat requirements of both tree-dominated and
shrub-dominated species. The five blocks follow:
Area Acres Condition Area Description
Paterson Unit 585 Good Large cottonwoods and good willow cover. Wildfire
damaged about 100 acres in 2002.
Whitcomb Unit 251 Fair
McCormack Unit 553 Poor Many large cottonwoods dying or dead with little to no
regeneration around McCormack Unit due to past wildfire
and lowering of John Day pool. Willows overbrowsed by
deer. Areas along river in better shape but invaded by false
indigo.
Longwalk Islands 146 Fair Large cottonwoods and good willow cover.
Boardman Unit 21 Fair Some large cottonwoods, but also large areas of Russian
olive.
Total Acres 1,556
• Develop Integrated Pest Management Plan within 1 year of CCP completion and
address control of invasives in riparian understory (reed canarygrass, poison hemlock,
false indigo, and Russian olive seedlings) and overstory (Russian olive). Existing stands
of large Russian olive trees will not be targeted unless other multi-layered woody stands
exist in close proximity.
• Enhance nesting opportunities within riparian areas by decreasing invasives using weed
control techniques (chemical, mechanical, biocontrols) on 5-62 acres of riparian habitat
per year.
• Enhance shrub and tree layers within existing blocks of habitat by selective planting of
native shrubs and cuttings on 5-62 acres per year.
• Reduce browse damage to trees and shrubs by using fencing, the hunt program, and
tree guards.
• Construct one exclosure in each key riparian area to assess effects of herbivory in the
stand.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for the Refuge.
Rationale: Refuge riparian habitats are threatened and/or degraded by the presence and
dominance of invasive weeds; lack of native shrub components, herbivory by large deer herds,
and altered hydrology. Restoration and enhancement efforts are needed to improve overall
habitat conditions for migratory birds. Photographs dating from the early 1900s suggest that
cottonwood dominated riparian was not common, and willow dominated riparian shrub
communities were present along narrow corridors of the river. Ninety-seven native bird species
are highly associated with riparian habitat (Altman and Holmes 2000) and six of these are “focal
species.” Small riparian acreages in the arid west provide food and shelter and thus are critical
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-20 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
for thousands of birds needing to refuel during migration. Migration monitoring could be
implemented to document this benefit to migrants passing through Umatilla Refuge.
The team chose to use a 4-tier condition class category system to facilitate the Service’s ability
to enumerate acres of habitat that might be in less than stellar condition. While achieving good
or excellent habitat conditions as described by various species experts remains an important
goal, realistically the Refuges will more likely be able to gradually improve habitats to move
them closer to the type of condition favored by the target species. In addition, using
management condition categories to track habitats over time will enable more fine-tuned
monitoring of Refuge habitats and will facilitate reporting of acres in Refuges Annual
Performance Plan (RAPP).
The condition classes described above were defined by the team after examining the habitat
requirements of several selected species closely tied to shrub-steppe and riparian habitat types
in this area. (Each table includes the selected species habitat requirements below the condition
class categories). Because scientific reports often show slight differences in the habitat
requirements of different species, the team chose to integrate the main structural habitat
requirements of these selected species. Finer details, such as proximity to water or patch size,
may be described in the specific habitat requirement for a selected species, but was not
necessarily carried through to the broader condition class descriptions, because these often differ
species by species.
Objective 5b: Enhanced Cottonwood Recruitment:
Promote enhanced recruitment (at least 300 stems per acre) and development of cottonwood
stands on 5 acres per year at Umatilla Refuge.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Select sites and use managed pool and wetland water levels in concert with soil
disturbance (disking) to promote more favorable conditions to induce germination of
available cottonwood seed source on exposed soils.
• Request that dam operations make short duration increases in pool levels during the
summer to irrigate and enhance young cottonwood survival and recruitment at sites.
• Provide weed control in newly developing cottonwood riparian sites using
techniques/treatments identified in the IPM Plan.
• Undertake supplemental plantings of cottonwoods in riparian areas to increase tree
diversity and density.
Rationale: As the dominant native overstory tree species of mainstem and low elevation
tributary riparian zones, cottonwood is recognized as a “keystone” species in riparian areas.
These stands provide important nesting and migrating habitat for migratory birds. Reliable
cottonwood recruitment is necessary for the perpetuation of cottonwood dominated riparian
stands. The altered water regime of the Columbia River was identified by the CCP team as a
high source of stress, leading to low or altered recruitment of native plants and an altered plant
community composition in most Refuge riparian zones. Major losses to riparian vegetation and
ecological function have occurred in response to regulated flows in river systems (Jamieson and
Braatne 2001). Cottonwood recruitment may be improved, however, by using managed
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-21
pool/wetland levels which mimic natural timing of cottonwood seed dispersal and germination
(Jamieson and Braatne 2001). Managers have noted extensive cottonwood regeneration after soil
disturbance within reservoir dominated embayments at Paterson and McCormack. Recruitment
density of about 300 stems per acre would achieve approximately 12’ by 12’ spacing at the mature
stage, assuming no mortality. The cottonwood species that is currently regenerating most
naturally in the system is the plains cottonwood (Populus deltoides). However, when
constructing restoration and planting using cuttings/rootstock, the Refuge will try to use the
native black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera spp. tricarpa).
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-22 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 6: Protect the
integrity of the
biological resources
of the river islands.
Objective 6a: Maintain Waterbird Populations
Manage river island habitats at Umatilla Refuge to benefit a diversity of nesting birds (ducks,
geese, songbirds and shorebirds) and waterbird colonies (gulls, terns, herons, and cormorants) at
their current population levels.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Increase law enforcement patrols, news releases, and signage to protect island nesting
birds from disturbance.
• Manage island substrate and vegetation to ensure that a diversity of nesting habitats for
colonial waterbirds is available.
• Monitor size of nesting and waterbird colonies, including Canada geese, mallard,
Forster’s tern, Caspian tern, and great blue herons; and identify potential threats to
production.
• Increase coordination with various agencies, scientists, and others studying island
resources, and assist their efforts by seeking funding, issuing special use permits, helping
design study protocols, and monitoring research progress.
• In response to Endangered Species Act requirements for federally listed salmon stocks,
consider a range of options to limit piscivorous waterbird depredation, if scientifically
sound data demonstrate a critical need to limit depredation due to significant impacts on
salmon survival. If controls are deemed appropriate, a written step-down plan and the
National Environmental Policy Act documentation shall be developed with evaluation of
the effects to fish and waterbird populations. Actions shall be planned and implemented
using a multi-agency approach and multiple funding sources.
• Continue to monitor, measure, and document rates of erosion of all islands.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for Umatilla Refuge.
Rationale: Canada geese nest on all Refuge islands, as do lesser numbers of mallards and other
migratory birds. Piscivorous colonial nesting birds, especially Caspian terns, have been identified
as having negative effects on salmon smolt survival (US FWS 2005). Double-crested cormorants
can consume relatively large numbers of salmonids at certain times of the year. Nesting gull
colonies, mainly ring-billed and California gulls have increased significantly in the last 20 years.
Forster’s terns have declined as a nesting species, while great egrets have recently expanded into
the area. As conditions continue to change in the larger Basin-wide area due to prey species,
human recreation/disturbance, management of water/hydropower, and animal and human
American pelicans –
Art Shine/USFWS
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-23
population changes, waterbird populations will continue to change and provide a good barometer
of island integrity. Erosion of Refuge islands has been documented in the past; however, more
recent changes in reservoir elevations and pool operations have likely reduced the rate. Any
erosion that does occur means remaining island acreage becomes more important to wildlife. It is
important to monitor measure and document changes in island erosion rates.
Objective 6b: Limit Island Disturbance
Limit disturbance to island habitats, wildlife, and other island resources by enforcing existing
and new island closures as follows:
• Umatilla Islands: Total closure of all Umatilla Islands to all public use, including closing
the islands to existing seasonal beach use.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Increase public education and outreach to notify and inform public about the sensitivity
of biological resources on the islands and the need for closures to protect birds.
• Improve and increase island signs as needed.
• Increase law enforcement patrols, enforce beach closures, and deter use in unauthorized
areas.
• Follow all stipulations in the Boating and Fishing Compatibility Determinations for
Umatilla Refuge, as well as the Waterfowl Hunting Compatibility Determination for
Umatilla Refuge.
Rationale: The river islands on Umatilla Refuge support breeding habitat for several groups of
species, including colonial waterbirds, shorebirds, geese, ducks, swallows and deer. Wildlife seek
out the islands for breeding habitat because of the islands’ relative isolation, security, and
general lack of mammalian predators. Security was identified as a key ecological attribute
supporting the islands’ wildlife communities. The islands also have important cultural resources.
Because of these unique traits, recreational disturbance and recreation-induced habitat
modification such as accidental fire, has long been a concern. Human use causes direct impact on
the beaches themselves, including direct displacement of geese, shorebirds, and bank nesting
swallows from potential foraging and nesting habitat. Garbage and human waste present
ongoing problems. Island closures are necessary to protect biological and cultural resources from
adverse modification. Umatilla islands previously open to seasonal beach use will be closed to
protect archeological resources and habitat and wildlife resources. Of particular concern is the
potential of human-induced fire on the islands, which would threaten the heron rookeries on Big
Sand Dune Island, and important sagebrush habitat used by nesting geese on Blalock Island.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-24 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 7: Conserve and
restore the plants, animals
and shrub-steppe community
representative of historic
Columbia Basin habitats.
Sand dock – Howard Browers/USFWS
Objective 7a: Improve Shrub-Steppe Condition
Conduct needed management on approximately 2,000 acres (or 30% of the 6,809 acres)
encompassed by eight priority shrub-steppe areas. Needed management is defined as that
combination of treatments and re-treatments which successfully improve the overall condition
rating resulting in a rise into the next highest condition class (poor, fair, and good) as outlined
below. Conduct needed management at the rate of about 133 new acres per year over the life of
the CCP. See the definitions and habitat condition class ratings below.
Shrub-Steppe Habitats: Condition Class Categories
Condition Class
Native
Shrub Cover
*
Understory vegetation
cover percent native species
Open
Ground
Cover
Poor < 5 % <25% native species cover 0 or >75%
Fair 5-10% 25-50 % native species cover 51-75%
Good 11-20% 51-75% native species cover 21-50%
Excellent 21-30% >75% native species cover 10-20%
Recommended Conditions for Various Target Species
Other species-specific
parameters
Sage sparrow
(Vander Haegen
2004)
10-25% >10% native (exotic annual
grasses <10%)
>10 % Shrub height
generally >20
inches
Sage thrasher
(Altman and
Holmes 2000;
Vander Haegen
2004a)
5-20% big
sagebrush,
clumped
5-20% (<10% cover exotic
annual grasses)
>10% Sagebrush height
>31 inches; <10%
cover other shrubs;
patches of 40 acres
or greater
*Target composition for native shrub cover is sagebrush and/or bitterbrush predominant
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-25
Grassland Habitats: Condition Class Categories
Condition
Class
Grass
Cover
Percentage native
species for all
herbaceous plants
(grasses and forbs)
Open
Ground
Cover
Poor 1-10% <25% native species 0 or >80%
Fair 11-20% 25-50% native species 61-80%
Good 21-30% 51-75% native species 50-60%
Excellent 31-60% >75% native species 10-40%
Based on the Following Recommended Conditions for Various
Target Species
Other species-specific
parameters
Burrowing owl
(Altman and
Holmes 2000)
Native
grass cover
<40% and
<16 inches
tall
>40%,
including
bare and/or
cryptogram
mic crust
Burrow providers, 660 ft.
buffer zone around nest
burrows with no pesticide
applications or disturbances
allowed.
Grasshopper
sparrow
(Altman and
Holmes 2000)
>15%
(bunch-grasses)
Species composition
>60% of grasses
present are native
bunchgrasses
Bunchgrass height >10”;
native shrubs <10%; patches
>100 acres or multiple
patches >20 acres
Long-billed
curlew
(Denchant et al.
2003)
See also
Colorado PIF
and Monatana
Bird
Conservation
Plan
Shrubs or areas of cheatgrass
intermixed with patches of
Sandberg's bluegrass (Poa
sandbergii)
Shorter vegetation (<24 cm),
nest density was positively
correlated with percent cover
of bare ground and with the
evenness of forb height.
Limit grasshopper or
insecticide use
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Each year, improve native plant cover and distribution within one or more of the eight
priority areas by active planting or seeding appropriate native species. Consider specific
habitat requirements of both shrub-associated and grass-associated species. Eight
blocks are as follows:
Eight priority areas for treatment
Area Acres Condition Area Description
Paterson Unit 2,584 Fair Largest block of shrub-steppe habitat on Complex.
Wildfire damaged about 500 acres of shrub-steppe in 2002
taking out sagebrush and bitterbrush. Area seeded with
native grasses and sagebrush seedlings planted in fall
2002. Large areas still dominated by invasives. Excellent
bunchgrass cover on a portion of unit north of RR tracks.
Ridge Unit 208 Poor Narrow block on north side of Columbia River. Wildfire
damage
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-26 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Whitcomb Unit 340 Poor Area damaged by wildlife in 2000.
Crow Butte Unit 692 Fair Damaged by wildfire. Most sagebrush burned off.
Blalock Islands 102 Good Good sagebrush cover and native understory.
McCormack Unit -
Kathy’s Pond
624 Fair East of Paterson Ferry Road. Shrub cover, mostly
rabbitbrush with some sagebrush and bitterbrush.
Understory dominated by non-natives.
McCormack Unit
South
1,667 Fair About 1000 acres burned in wildfire in 2000. Much
sagebrush and bitterbrush consumed. High curlew use for
nesting in portions of area. Some burrowing owl use as
well. Maintain as grassland in these areas.
McCormack Unit
Desert Area
592 Fair Good shrub cover but mostly rabbitbrush. Patchy native
bunchgrass cover.
Total Acres 6,809
• Conduct follow up treatments for weeds and/or additional plantings on each managed
block as needed.
• Conduct chemical weed control to reduce cheatgrass and other targeted weeds annually.
• Initiate integrated pest management by writing an IPM step-down plan by 2008.
Rationale: An estimated 10.4 million acres of shrub-steppe habitat occurred in the state of
Washington at the time of European settlement (Dobler et al. 1996). By the late 1980s only about
40% remained. Locally, Benton County had 48% of the original shrub-steppe habitat remaining
(Dobler et al. 1996). Most shrub-steppe areas on the Refuge are threatened and/or remain in a
degraded condition due to invasive plants, wildfire, and poor native plant recruitment/ recovery.
Eight of the larger blocks of shrub-steppe habitat totaling 6,809 acres were selected for the focus
of shrub-steppe restoration and enhancement activities based on their size and connectivity on-and-
off the Refuge. These areas were selected partly due to size and current condition, i.e. they
were already in some form of shrub-steppe rather than agriculture or some other heavily
degraded areas such as roads or gravel pits.
Because “shrub-steppe” encompasses a wide variety of different plant communities and
structural conditions, and management to promote conditions for some of the inhabitants may
conflict with management to promote conditions for other inhabitants, the shrub-steppe target
has here been subdivided into two sub-types: shrub-steppe and grasslands. Shrub-steppe is
typified by a higher level of native shrub cover—areas chosen to be managed for this subtype
should be able to achieve >10% mature sagebrush or bitterbrush component by the end of
fifteen years. Grasslands are typified by few or no sagebrush or bitterbrush shrubs.
Approximately half of the priority shrub-steppe areas should be managed to improve conditions
for shrub-steppe habitats. The other half should be managed to improve conditions for grassland
habitats. Though these acreages are relatively small, restoration efforts may provide valuable
habitat for some shrub-steppe dependent species.
The team chose to use a 4-tier condition class category system to facilitate the Service’s ability to
enumerate acres of habitat that might be in less than stellar condition. While achieving good or
excellent habitat conditions as described by various species experts remains an important goal,
realistically the Refuges will more likely be able to gradually improve habitats to move them
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-27
closer to the type of condition favored by the target species. In addition, using management
condition categories to track habitats over time will enable more fine-tuned monitoring of Refuge
habitats and will facilitate reporting of acres in Refuges Annual Performance Plan (RAPP).
The condition classes described were defined by the team after examining the habitat
requirements of several selected species closely tied to shrub-steppe and riparian habitat types in
this area. (Each table includes the selected species habitat requirements below the condition class
categories). Because scientific reports often show slight differences in the habitat requirements
of different species, the team chose to integrate the main structural habitat requirements of these
selected species. Finer details, such as proximity to water or patch size, may be described in the
specific habitat requirement for a selected species, but was not necessarily carried through to the
broader condition class descriptions, because these often differ species by species.
Objective 7b: Protect and Restore Burrowing Owls
Pending the results of inventories listed above in 3b, protect and restore suitable habitats for the
benefit of burrowing owls. At a minimum, we will maintain one viable colony at the McCormack
Unit of Umatilla Refuge.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Investigate the possibility of transplanting ground squirrels in appropriate areas on the
Refuge
• Experiment with the creation of artificial burrows adjacent to existing nesting areas
• Identify historic sites that may have been occupied by colonies on the Refuge.
• Restrict public access to known and historic breeding sites.
• Prepare materials and messages for public outreach and education efforts to raise
awareness of burrowing owls and the threats posed by urban development, including
shooting/poisoning/control of burrowing mammals.
• Follow all stipulations in the Research Compatibility Determination for Umatilla Refuge.
Rationale: Burrowing owls are declining within the states of Oregon and Washington and may
be at risk on the Refuge. Small numbers have historically nested on the Refuge, but there has not
been an extensive inventory.
Objective 7c: Protect Shrub‐Steppe Habitats
Over the life of the CCP, protect and/or maintain the 6,809 acres encompassed by the eight
priority shrub-steppe interest areas (see objective 7a), by minimizing ground disturbance,
reducing fire starts, and implementing emergency stabilization and rehabilitation of wildfire
impacts.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-28 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Incorporate standards and procedures for maintenance and management activities to
minimize activities that disturb soil surfaces.
• Increase fire crew availability and readiness for initial attack by maintaining a fire
engine crew at Umatilla Refuge.
• Reduce likelihood of fire ignitions from recreational activities in priority shrub-steppe
areas through education, interpretation, and careful planning of recreational facilities.
• Increase coordination and cooperation with rural fire districts and expand mutual aide
agreements. Provide education and assistance to rural fire district staffs.
• Coordinate with railroad companies to alter train operations, if possible, to reduce fire
ignitions. Investigate and document fire starts and seek compensation from railroads
for restoration needs where ignitions can be tied to train operations.
• Implement emergency stabilization and rehabilitation actions following wildfires;
including soil stabilization, cultural resource protection, nonnative invasive species
control, native grass/shrub seeding and planting, and effectiveness monitoring
• Continue to inventory and control nonnative invasive plant species (cheatgrass,
starthistle, knapweed) based on IPM plans and procedures.
Rationale: Remaining shrub-steppe habitats are threatened and/or remain in a degraded
condition due to an extensive history of wildfires, poor native plant recruitment/recovery
following fires, and ground disturbance activities (roads, trails, heavy equipment).
Limiting/eliminating ground disturbing activities and reducing fire starts and/or decreasing fire
sizes by through fire suppression and aggressive initial attacks, will benefit habitats. Fire
regime is one of the key ecological attributes affecting the viability of the shrub-steppe system.
A less intense and less frequent fire regime was present historically. The current more intense
and frequent fires create a cycle of habitat modification and degradation that needs to be
reversed and better post-fire rehabilitation and stabilization project planning and on-the-ground
success instituted.
Objective 7d. Bitterbrush Management
Over the life of the CCP, maintain existing stands of shrub-steppe habitat containing
bitterbrush as a key shrub component on the Umatilla Refuge; and increase acreage by planting
bitterbrush in 50 acres of shrub-steppe to achieve at least a 30% bitterbrush component.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Review, consult with experts, and if necessary, initiate research studies to explore local
causes of bitterbrush decadence and death at Umatilla Refuge.
• Increase the rate of reduction of the deer herd at Umatilla Refuge, McCormack Unit
(see Objective 10d).
• Over the life the CCP, plant 50-100 acres of bitterbrush in appropriate areas of shrub-steppe
to obtain a minimum 30% bitterbrush shrub component at Umatilla; avoiding
areas known or potentially inhabited by Long-billed curlew.
Rationale: Shrub-steppe habitats on Umatilla Refuge historically contained areas of high
density bitterbrush. Bitterbrush has been declining at an alarming rate in recent years; possibly
from fires, altered hydrology, herbivory by deer, and/or all three. Herbivory was identified as a
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-29
moderate stress on shrub-steppe habitats as a whole, but it disproportionately affects
bitterbrush. Reductions in fire ignitions and fire damage can benefit bitterbrush and are covered
in Objective 7c. At this time, the Refuge does not have a strategy for addressing altered
hydrology. Restoring bitterbrush to these areas will increase the overall plant diversity and
integrity that is characteristic of good quality Lower Columbia Basin shrub-steppe. Restoring
bitterbrush as a natural component of the historical assemblage of plants present on the Refuge’s
shrub-steppe habitat will also be consistent with the Service’s 2001 policy on Biological Integrity,
Diversity, and Environmental Health (601 FW 3). However, the Refuge will avoid concentrating
bitterbrush plantings in curlew focal areas because curlews tend to avoid dense shrubs.
Pampush (1981) found that nest density was negatively correlated with vegetation height and
vertical density, and areas with bitterbrush and dense forbs were avoided by curlews.
Objective 7e. Restore Shrub-Steppe Habitats by Decreasing Roads and Development
Restore native shrub-steppe habitats on suitable lands such as those occupied by unnecessary
roads, waste sites, gravel pits and cropland no longer suitable or needed for crop production for
waterfowl. Restore up to 75 acres during the life of the CCP.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Close all remaining unnecessary and unauthorized roads or trails in the Paterson units
at Umatilla, as well as other Refuge sites as needed. Restore up to 25 acres of shrub-steppe
on these areas.
• Restore native shrub-steppe plant communities on 50 acres of fallow croplands which
are not needed or are unsuitable for crop production as identified on the vegetation map.
• Use chemical weed control treatments and fall native grass seed drilling when possible.
• Use site monitoring, multiyear follow-up treatments, and selective planting of shrubs
and forbs in all restoration treatments.
• Consider needs of high priority wildlife species including: burrowing owl, long-billed
curlew, and ground squirrels in site plans.
Rationale: Shrub-steppe habitats can be restored on many areas, including areas those occupied
by unnecessary and unauthorized roads. The existing spider-like web of trails is the result of
illegal and/or unfettered public access over many years of management with little enforcement
presence. Public use of these illegal roads and trails increases the potential for wildfire, garbage
dumping, and further fragmentation of shrub-steppe habitat. Once access is restricted to
designated roads, all unnecessary roads can be restored to shrub-steppe habitat. In addition,
there are approximately 50 acres of abandoned former agricultural lands in a weedy condition
are absent of native grasses or shrubs. These lands can also be restored using chemical weed
control, fall native grass drilling, and selective plantings of shrubs and forbs. Because much of
the restoration will occur on smaller habitat fragments, it is important to carefully consider the
needs of high priority wildlife species including: burrowing owl, long-billed curlew, and ground
squirrels in all site plans prior to initiating restoration projects.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
2-30 Chapter 2 – Management Direction
GOAL 8: Protect and maintain the ecological integrity of talus,
outcropping, and cliff habitats for natural levels of species diversity.
Objective 8a: Maintain Intact Rock Structures
Protect and maintain all cliffs, talus slopes, and outcroppings in intact structural condition to
benefit cliff nesting birds (peregrine falcon, prairie falcon, and white-throated swift) and other
unique species (common night snake, and rattlesnake hibernacula).
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Prevent illegal mining or extractive activities on the Refuge’s natural rocky features and
basalt columns, including collection for home landscaping, through proper signing and
education. Photograph/document significant areas most threatened by illegal activities.
• Provide adequate sanctuary for raptor nesting sites, and limit public uses to the Big Six
uses only, in areas without significant nesting bird populations.
Rationale: Maintaining the size and composition of rocky habitats was identified as a key
ecological attribute of the cliff/rimrock/talus and outcroppings target as indicated by cliff
dominance (high cliffs), the variety of rock features and the amount of talus with larger rocks and
deeper masses. The Refuge has received requests for rip-rap and basalt columns, used in home
landscaping, and at least one incidence of theft/vandalism occurred at a neighboring Refuge.
Signing, law enforcement and education may help prevent illegal activities and theft. The rock
outcroppings represent a small portion of Refuge lands, but they provide habitat for cliff nesting
birds (peregrine and prairie falcons, white-throated swift, and golden eagle) and other unique
species (common night snake, rattlesnake hibernacula, big-horned sheep, and mule deer).
Objective 8b: Conduct Baseline Inventory of Rocky Habitats
Conduct baseline inventory of plant and wildlife resources inhabiting rocky habitats, with
particular emphasis on Crow Butte and Ridge Units at Umatilla Refuge. Inventories should
focus on determining the presence and abundance of birds, bats, reptiles, amphibians, rare
plants, and any key functional areas such as nest sites or hibernacula.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Pursue cooperative funding and partner contributions for the inventory.
Rationale: The wildlife and plant resources utilizing the Refuge’s rocky habitats have not been
systematically inventoried. There is a known rattlesnake hibernaculum at Paterson Unit).
There is the potential for several species of bats and various reptile, and amphibian species to be
present as well. An inventory is needed.
Umatilla Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Chapter 2 – Management Direction 2-31
GOAL 9: Visitors and local residents
enjoy, value, learn about, and support
the Refuge.
Objective 9a: Expand Interpretive Overlooks along Highway 14
Develop (expand upon) interpretive overlooks along Highway 14 overlooking the Columbia River
Islands on Umatilla Refuge.
Strategies Applied to Achieve Objective
• Identify sites and develop interpretive themes with assistance from the Service’s Branch
of Visitor Services and Communications.
• Improve Refuge boundary signage where it parallels or is adjacent to State Highway 14.
• Work with the State of Washington and the railroads to plan and fund safe pull-offs with
identification signs along State Highway 14.
• Expand, improve, and pave parking lots at overlooks as necessary using Refuge Roads
funding.
• Follow all stipulations in the Wildlife Observation a