FY 2007-09 F&W Program Innovative Project Solicitation



PROJECT TITLE:

Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project 200002700 

A. Abstract and statement of innovation

The Burns Paiute Tribe has acquired the Denny Jones Ranch in Juntura, Oregon. This project allows the Tribe to manage 6,385 acres of meadow, wetland, and sagebrush steppe habitats along the Malheur River while addressing multiple goals for fish, wildlife and tribal members. The deeded property includes seven miles of the Malheur River, the largest private landholding along this waterway between Riverside and Harper. The property came with approximately 938 acres of senior water rights and 25,396 acres of federal and state grazing allotments. The project will benefit a diverse population of fish, wildlife, and plant species. Objectives include reviving and improving critical habitat for fish and wildlife populations, controlling/eradicating weed populations, improving water quality, and preserving cultural resources for tribal members. Our biological objectives will be completed by planting native vegetation, removing and improving fence, creating and restoring wetlands, haying, irrigating, controlling noxious weeds, juniper removal and providing hunting opportunities for Tribal members. The objectives will be met by seasonal and permanent staff of the Burns Paiute Fish and Wildlife.

B. Problem statement: technical and/or scientific background

The Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project is located seven miles east of Juntura, Oregon in Malheur County (Figure 1). The Project controls 31781 acres which include 6,535 deeded acres, 4,154 acres leased from the Department of State Lands, 21,242 acres leased from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Figure 2) and approximately 938 acres of senior water rights. There are seven miles of the Malheur River that are being managed by the Project. It is the largest private landholding on the river between Riverside and Harper, Oregon.

Figure 1. Location of the Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project

[pic]

Figure 2. Project and surrounding area land ownership.

[pic]

Before the Tribe acquired the project site, a combination of high cattle stocking rates, management strategy, and a disruption of natural disturbance regimes compromised the property’s ability to provide quality habitat to wildlife species found in the area. This has fueled the rapid expansion of noxious weed populations that resulted in successional retrogression in most of the riparian areas and bunch grass communities that are near water sources (Ashley 2005). Some alarming trends with noxious weeds are the introduction of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and medusa head (Elymus caputmedusae) which have displaced and/or severely altered native upland herbaceous plant communities due to past intensive grazing management practices (Ashley 2005). The Malheur River Subbasin Assessment and Management Plan for Fish and Wildlife Mitigation (MRSAMP) states noxious weed invasion along with other factors have been degrading the terrestrial habitat in the subbasin (NPCC 2004 pg. 51). Goal 17 of the MRSAMP addresses the need to assess, prevent and treat the noxious weed problem (NPCC 2004 p. 90, Appendix A Part 3 p.64).

Due to the past management of the project site, habitat restoration is a critical factor which will determine the overall success of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife populations on the Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project. Special status species on State or federal lists as threatened, endangered, sensitive and special concern (Table 1) use the wet meadows, black cottonwood stands, juniper stands, uplands and wetlands found on the site. Loss of habitat and degradation of habitat quality are the key disturbance factors limiting populations within the subbasin (NPCC 2004 Appendix A Part 3 p.58). Habitat protection and enhancement measures will benefit diverse fish and wildlife assemblages and plant communities (Ashley, 2005). The projects focus is on restoration of 3 major habitat types: riparian, wetlands and sagebrush steppe (NPCC 2004 p.63). Terrestrial focal species’ biological objectives can be achieved through restoration of two important habitat types: riparian and shrub steppe (NPCC 2004 Appendix A Part 3 p.61).

Table 1: Special Status Wildlife Species of the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion

|Scientific Name |Common Name |Federal Status |State Status |

|Amphibians and Reptiles |  |  |  |

|Bufo boreas |Western Toad |  |sensitive |

|Rana luteiventris |Columbia Spotted Frog |candidate for listing |sensitive |

|Rana pipiens |Northern Leopard Frog |  |critically sensitive |

|Birds |  |  |  |

|Baeolophus ridgwayi |Juniper Titmouse |  |not yet ranked |

|Buteo regalis |Ferruginous Hawk |species of concern |critically sensitive |

|Buteo swainsoni |Swainson's Hawk |  |sensitive |

|Centrocercus urophasianus |Greater Sage-grouse |species of concern |sensitive |

|Charadrius alexandrinus |Western Snowy Plover |threatened |threatened |

|Dolichonyx oryzivorus |Bobolink |  |sensitive |

|Egretta thula |Snowy Egret |  |sensitive |

|Empidonax traillii adsastus |Willow Flycatcher |  |sensitive |

|Falco peregrinus anatum |Peregrine Falcon |  |endangered |

|Grus canadensis tabida |Greater Sandhill Crane |  |sensitive |

|Himantopus mexicanus |Black-necked Stilt |  |not yet ranked |

|Larus pipixcan |Franklin's Gull |  |sensitive |

|Numenius americanus |Long-billed Curlew |  |sensitive |

|Oreortyx pictus |Mountain Quail |species of concern |sensitive |

|Pelecanus erythrorhynchos |American White Pelican |  |sensitive |

|Fish |  |  |  |

|Cottus bendirei |Malheur mottled Sculpin |species of concern |sensitive |

|Oncorhynchus kisutch |Coho Salmon |species of concern |ecoregion extirpation |

|Oncorhynchus mykiss |Redband Trout |species of concern |sensitive |

|Onocorhynchus mykiss |Steelhead |threatened |ecoregion extirpation |

|Oncorhynchus tshawytscha |Chinook Salmon |threatened |ecoregion extirpation |

|Salvelinus confluentus |Bull Trout |threatened |sensitive |

|Mammals |  |  |  |

|Antrozous pallidus |Pallid Bat |species of concern |sensitive |

|Brachylagus idahoensis |Pygmy Rabbit |species of concern |sensitive |

|Corynorhinus townsendii |Townsend's Big-eared Bat |species of concern |critically sensitive |

|Euderma maculatum |Spotted Bat |species of concern |  |

|Lasiurus cinereus |Hoary Bat |  |not yet ranked |

|Lepus townsendii |White-tailed Jackrabbit |  |sensitive |

|Myotis californicus |California Myotis |  |sensitive |

|Myotis volans |Long-legged Myotis |species of concern |sensitive |

|Vulpes macrotis |Kit Fox |  |threatened |

Adapted from The Oregon Conservation Strategy (ODFW 2006).

Since the development of the Warm Springs dam in 1919, water flows of the Malheur River have been controlled for irrigation purposes which have a negative effect on riparian habitats. To add to the problem, in the 1900’s settlers cleared most of the valley floor, including riparian shrub, wet meadow and riparian habitats, for agriculture or pasture land (Ashley 2005). The dam causes the water to remain in a single incised channel excluding the floodplain from the natural flood events during the spring time. This has caused the riparian ecosystems to lose its natural vegetation and ecosystem processes. An example of a species that has been directly impacted by the lack of flood events is black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa). Black cottonwood is a wetland species that depends on the action of water to establish on unvegetated mineral soils that are created by a flooded event (WCB 1995). Without the flooded event, critical habitat is lost and black cottonwood reproduction doesn’t exist. With the projects habitat restoration plan, black cottonwoods can be planted every year developing a multi-age stand, provide habitat that is no longer available to wildlife and add to the rivers complexity. The site is identified as core habitat needed to fully recover bull trout populations (USFWS 2002). The MRSAMP ranks the reach 6 out of 17 in priority ranking for restoring bull trout habitat. The habitat restoration priority ranking is 5 of 57 for redband trout and 3 out of 13 for Spring Chinook salmon. This reach of the river is critical habitat needed for the recovery of these three species of salmonids. The MRSAMP plan describes riparian habitat as being high priority for protection and has been identified as habitat needing restoration (NPCC 2004 p.62-63).

The historical wetlands on the site have been negatively impacted by settlers through removal of beavers (Castor Canadensis) which changes the hydrology of the system. In the 1800’s beavers were trapped intensively by the Hudson’s Bay Company and were largely extirpated by the mid-1800’s (Ogden 1950, 1961, 1971; USFS 2000). The loss of beaver and beaver dam complexes from the river and meadows has eliminated productive riparian and floodplain habitat important to many native wildlife species (NPCC 2004). In the MRSAMP, wetlands are identified as high priority for protection as well as habitat identified for restoration (NPCC 2004 p.62-63). It is not feasible to establish naturally functioning wetlands due to the controlled water releases from the irrigation projects upstream. Therefore, the wetlands must be created to provide waterfowl/shorebird nesting and brood rearing habitat and habitat for a host of other birds, mammals, and amphibians (Ashley 2005).

Sagebrush steppe habitat, which covers most of the mid and lower elevation, has been severely altered by over 150 years of livestock grazing, fire suppression and invasion of numerous exotic plant species (Ashley 2005). The majority of focal species populations decline can be attributed to reduction and degradation of shrub steppe and riparian habitat in the watershed (NPCC 2004 Appendix A Part 3 p.61). Out of the fifteen terrestrial focal species described in the MRSAMP, eleven would be directly affected by protection and restoration of native shrub steppe and riparian habitat (NPCC 2004 Appendix A Part 3 p.61). Under the habitat level objectives in the MRSAMP the restoration of native grasses, forbs, and shrub composition within the sagebrush-steppe is considered a priority (NPCC Appendix A. Part 3 p.64).

Juniper encroachment of shrub steppe habitats has altered structure and function, and reduced habitat for sage grouse, elk (Cervus elaphus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and other species (NPCC 2004 p.57). Juniper encroachment has increased in many of the higher elevation areas (MOWC 1999) due to lack of grass/forbs fuel loads to carry a fire, reduced by severe livestock grazing in past management (Ashley 2005). Juniper, described as an “invader” in big sagebrush communities (Anderson 1956; Burkardt and Tisdale 1969, 1976), is a robust dominate native species, which historically has been kept in subordinate role on some sites because of natural fires (Dealy et al. 1956, 1978a). The increase in juniper has altered habitats from grasslands and shrubland to woodlands (NPCC 2004 p.57).

Historically, the project site was located in the Burns Paiute Tribal territory. The Treaty of 1868 reserved 1,792,000 acres for the tribe which was terminated in 1883 due to armed conflicts between the Tribe and settlers over encroachment by Euro-Americans on reservation lands (NPPC 2004). Due to the conversions of aboriginal lands to private ownership and extermination of the Malheur Indian Reservation and Treaty of 1872, Tribal members have lost the rights and access to hunt for traditional game and gather botanical resources.

Since acquiring the project, the tribe has gained some land for terrestrial harvest that historically provided abundant resources to the members. With the acquisition of this project and the Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Site, the Tribe has received 5 mule deer and 5 Rocky Mountain elk tags issued by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) under the Landowner Preference program.

C. Rationale and significance to regional programs

In less than 100 years, anadromous fish were extirpated from the Malheur River Subbasin that included chinook salmon, steelhead trout, pacific lamprey(Lampetra tridentata), and possibly coho salmon (Thompson and Haas 1960). The contemporary society of the 1900’s had the need to manipulate and control the environment. The construction and operation of large instream dams provided the water, electrical power and control over the environment for the greatly expanding population. As each instream dam was constructed, the range and distribution of anadromous fish declined. The anadromous resource that was the center of economics, religion and survival for many Native Americans was decreased, and for some tribes, was completely eliminated. This project is providing off-site mitigation to the Burns Paiute Tribe for the destroyed wildlife resources in the Malheur Subbasin due to hydropower construction and inundation.

The Northwest Power Act (1980) identifies measures to “protect, mitigate, and enhance” fish and wildlife resources impacted from the development of hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin. The Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Basinwide Provisions, (NPCC 2000) stated the vision for the fish and wildlife program is to sustain an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife valued by the people of the region. The 2000 NPCC Amendments also recognize that anadromous fish losses have occurred in the blocked area and a corresponding part of the mitigation for these losses must occur in these areas. The specific objectives for biological performance as found in the NPCC’s Fish and Wildlife Program include: quantify losses caused by the construction, inundation, and operation of the hydropower projects; the coordination of mitigation-related activities throughout the basin, specifically those that promote connectivity between the management of terrestrial and aquatic areas, maintaining existing and created habitat values, and determining the species response to mitigation action through monitoring and evaluation.

The NPCC’s 2000 Basinwide Fish and Wildlife strategies relevant to this project include: 1) identify the current condition and biological potential of the habitat, 2) assure that Subbasin plans are consistent with harvest management practices and increase opportunities for harvest wherever feasible 3) complete the current mitigation program for construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat protection and restoration (allocation of habitat units and habitat enhancement credits).

The MRSAMP was adopted into the NPCC Fish and Wildlife Program in 2004. The overarching goal of the project is to “mitigate Tribes and communities for the loss of the anadromous fish resource in the Malheur Subbasin” which is directly related to the MRSAMP. Site specific objectives and associated strategies consistent with the (NPCC 2004) are:

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Stream Channel Processes and Conditions.

Strategy- Reduce mechanical stream bank damage associated with grazing.

Strategy- Beaver management.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Riparian Conditions.

Strategy- Riparian buffer restoration- cropland areas.

Strategy- Riparian buffer restoration- rangeland areas.

Strategy- Exotic vegetation and noxious weeds in riparian areas.

Strategy- Wetland protection and restoration.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Increase Harvest Opportunities.

Strategy- Property acquisition for culturally significant terrestrial resource harvest.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Shrub-steppe Habitat Processes and Functions.

Strategy- Overstory vegetation, increase native shrub cover.

Strategy- Understory vegetation, increase native grass cover and forage.

Strategy- Restore/manage weed and juniper encroachment.

Strategy- Road closures.

Strategy- Management through the measurement and evaluation of indicators.

Strategy- Protection.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Mountain Mahogany and Bitterbrush Habitat Processes and Functions.

Strategy- Overstory habitat, increase native shrub cover.

Strategy- Protection.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Herbaceous Wetlands Habitat Processes and Function.

Strategy- Restoration.

Strategy- Protection.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore Riparian Habitat Processes and Function.

Strategy- Restoration.

Strategy- Beaver management.

Strategy- Upland erosion management.

Strategy- Protection.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Address Habitat Losses Resulting from Development and Operation of Hydrosystem Projects.

Strategy- Acquisition and Enhancement.

Strategy- Coordinate and implement wildlife mitigation projects.

Strategy- Protect and maintain habitat.

Strategy- Management planning.

Strategy- Monitor.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Restore, Enhance and Protect Critical Wildlife Habitat.

Strategy- Mitigate or enhance Neo-tropical migrant bird populations.

Strategy- Mitigate or enhance reptile and amphibian populations.

Strategy- Mitigate or enhance big game population for cultural and subsistence uses.

Strategy- Mitigate small game populations.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Assess and Map Habitat extent and Condition Information.

Strategy- Habitat mapping.

Strategy- Habitat monitoring.

Malheur Subbasin Plan Objective – Identify Noxious Weed Communities, Prevent Their Introduction, Reproduction, and Spread, and Reduce Their Density Where Already Established.

Strategy- Evaluate noxious weed problems in the subbasin.

Strategy- Develop and implement noxious weed control.

In 2006, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) released the Oregon Conservation Strategy. Invasive species and altered fire regimes were cited as two factors having had the most detriment to the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion (ODFW 2006, p. 18). Recommended actions for the Northern Basin and Range Ecoregion were to initiate riparian shrubland restoration, maintain functioning sagebrush habitat, and improve fish passage (ODFW 2006, p. 212). The Burns Paiute Tribe is carrying forward these conservation objectives by:

· restoring riparian habitat through Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) planting and cattle exclusion from riparian areas.

· Enhancing sagebrush habitat through less intense, temporally dispersed grazing rotations and by planning juniper thinning treatments in needed areas.

· Improving fish passage by installing fish screens at diversion canals and by plans to modify the traditional water impoundment structure on site into a fish-passable rock weir.

BPT has allocated substantial resources to the conservation and management of three of the four key species listed for the Northern Basin and Range sub-region 10 (ODFW 2006, p. 220). Those key species are the sage grouse, bull trout, and inland Columbia basin redband trout.

D. Relationships to other projects

The management of this project is being coordinated with that of the Logan Valley Project (BPA Project # 2000-009-00), which is located approximately 38 miles upstream. Both projects are being managed cooperatively by the Tribe to minimize duplicate equipment purchases and to share staff and other resources as permitted.

BPA Project # 19970190: Evaluate the Life History of Native Salmonids in the Malheur River Subbasin is also related to the Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project. Research is actively being conducted on parts of the Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Project site located within the boundaries of the ongoing research activities. Management and use of data will be coordinated with this proposal and future activities of this project. Some of this work has occurred on the Mitigation Site, has contributed to the local subbasin planning effort and annual progress reports are distributed to several agencies including: Bureau of Reclamation, BPA, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, BLM, U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In addition to annual reports, other means of information transfer are occurring. BPA has recently produced “Pisces” which we see as an information sharing opportunity allowing other entities to see proposed work and successes. In addition, CBFWA’s Wildlife Advisory Committee is actively visiting multiple mitigation sites to discuss problems, successes and concerns. The Malheur River Wildlife Mitigation Site was visited by CBFWA on May 31st, 2006. Also, presentations are often given to multiple state/federal agencies, Tribal managers and general members of the Tribe and other public members.

E. Project history

The Malheur River Mitigation Project was purchased in November 2000. Over the past 8 years, major accomplishments have been achieved to reverse the trend of land and stream degradation. Habitat improvements have been conducted to help habitat functions and sustainability. Studies have also been conducted and continue to provide management direction on the site.

2001: Expended Amount $1,495,536.00

Since acquiring the project, a proactive Citizen Advisory Group (CAG) and the development of a coordinated resource management plan with neighboring landowners, county, state, and federal agencies has been created. The BLM allowed us to cut our stocking rate by 50 percent to enhance recovery of shrub steppe plant communities. Representatives of the Malheur County Soil and Water Conservation District toured the project and discussed land management actions to ensure the project remains compliant with the Clean Water Act. The National Riparian Team also visited the project to assess riparian areas and provide additional insight regarding stream corridor management. Weed scientists from the Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Service, as well as industry professionals assisted in initiating actions to hinder weed proliferation on the site. Haying and irrigating of the meadows was continued, which provided removal of decadent material, increase nutritional quality, and increase rate and quantity of regrowth for wintering ungulates. We managed the public access to BLM allotments through the deeded lands in such a manner to protect the roads, wildlife and wintering ungulates.

Tribal elders and plant ecologists have also lent their assistance in creating a long-term meadow revegetation effort that will reintroduce native habitat to irrigated acres as well as promote cultural use of the site by Tribal members. The creation of microhabitats hosting vegetation long since removed from the site will benefit many species of wildlife.

2002: Expended Amount $254,875.00

The Hunter Creek Enclosure Project was completed in October and consists of 2.5 miles of fence to exclude cattle from the riparian at Hunter Creek. Fences throughout the project area and associated leased lands were maintained throughout the year, with repairing efforts focused primarily on a one-mile stretch at the north end of the southernmost parcel of deeded land (Hunter Creek). Three hundred head of beef cattle were used as a manipulative tool to not only direct plant community processes toward more favorable habitats for selected species (sage grouse), but to increase forage quality and attractiveness for native ruminants as well. Three hundred acres received weed control methods to meet the management goals. The control methods administered were spraying, burning and hand pulling (non-rhizomatous species). Haying and irrigating of the meadows was continued, which provided removal of decadent material, increase nutritional quality, and increase rate and quantity of regrowth for wintering ungulates. The ranch’s only bridge across the Malheur River was rebuilt to make the crossing safer for staff. We managed the public access to BLM allotments through the deeded lands in such a manner to protect the roads, wildlife and wintering ungulates. Plant community information was collected for the northernmost deeded parcel to prioritize upland rehabilitation projects in the future.

2003: Expended Amount $284,466.00

Representatives from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service assisted in conducting the baseline Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP). Mapping of plant communities was done to document the trends of the plant communities, which will allow us to understand the impacts of our management. Noxious weeds were assessed and controlled. The control methods administered were spraying, burning and hand pulling (non-rhizomatous species). Haying and irrigating of the meadows was continued, which provided removal of decadent material, increase nutritional quality, and increase rate and quantity of regrowth for wintering ungulates. We managed the public access to BLM allotments through the deeded lands in such a manner to protect the roads, wildlife and wintering ungulates.

2004: Expended Amount $320,506.00

Twenty acres of non producing meadow was reseeded with rye grass. The meadows were fertilized by Simplot to enhance and maintain meadow productivity. Riparian areas and associated lands were protected from uncontrolled impacts of domestic herbivores along the north side of the Malheur River. The fence around Sidehill Spring was replaced to protect the spring. The Division of State Lands (DSL) was concerned that skeleton weed might spread onto their allotment so with the tribe’s permission they spot sprayed. We managed the public access to BLM allotments through the deeded lands in such a manner to protect the roads, wildlife and wintering ungulates. Noxious weeds were assessed and controlled. The control methods administered were spraying, burning and hand pulling (non-rhizomatous species). Haying and irrigating of the meadows was continued, which provided removal of decadent material, increase nutritional quality, and increase rate and quantity of regrowth for wintering ungulates.

2005: Budgeted Amount $324,607.00 Expended Amount $321,038.57

The Malheur River Wildlife Management Plan prepared by Paul R. Ashley was completed. A total of multiple plantings of upland and riparian plant species have occurred. 2,000 Blue bunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum), 2,000 Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), 2,000 bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) and 1,200 black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa) were planted. Passive restoration efforts have resulted in the creation of a wetland approx. 3 acres in size. We removed and improved 2.5 miles of fence to enhance movement of native ungulates on deeded land. Biological surveys were done on sage grouse, amphibians, and small mammals. We began to compile a list of all the mammals and birds that were present on the project site. Noxious weeds were assessed and controlled. The control methods administered were spraying, hand pulling (non-rhizomatous species) and planting annual crops. Haying and irrigating of the meadows was continued, which provided removal of decadent material, increase nutritional quality, and increase rate and quantity of regrowth for wintering ungulates. We managed the public access to BLM allotments through the deeded lands in such a manner to protect the roads, wildlife and wintering ungulates. An annual report was created and submitted to BPA.

2006: Budgeted Amount $324,607.00 Expended Amount $311,277.34

Haying activities didn’t occur in the meadows because local contractors were not interested in the hay due to the amount of weeds present in the meadows. Irrigation was continued for wild ungulates, but also benefiting migrating waterfowl, neo-tropical birds and keeping wetlands full for amphibians and other species. Grazing in the meadow occurred, removing decadent material to benefit wild ungulates, with all project generated funds going to taxes and grazing fees. Four ponds were expanded in the meadows creating seasonal wetlands filled by irrigation water. Two different planting projects occurred involving riparian shrubs (snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), blue elderberry (Sambucus caerulaea), serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), golden currant (Ribes aureum), wax currant (Ribes cerneum), red osier dogwood (Cornus serecia) and black hawthorne (Crataegus douglasii)), and 2,000 Bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum), 2,000 Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), 2,000 bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata). Both planting projects failed due to multiple factors including: bitterbrush, Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass was not harden off from the nursery and that fall was particularly dry. The riparian planting failed most likely because of competition for resources. Because of the watering schedule, cheatgrass grew to several feet in height. In addition, soil types, nutrient levels and depth to groundwater may not have been able to support the planting. Approximately 0.78 miles of unused fence was removed along the railroad right away. One spring in Hunter Creek was fenced off protecting it from wild ungulates and trespass cattle. Nearly 500 acres were treated for noxious weeds. Sage grouse leks were monitored following ODFW protocol on Roy Reservoir and Tim’s Peak Reservoir (Table 2). Baseline and survey protocol was developed for avian point count surveys (Table 3). A small mammal presence and absence survey was conducted. Capture consisted of deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), Ord’s kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ordii) and great basin pocket mouse (Perognathus parvus). Amphibian presence and absence survey was conducted using electroshocking and funnel traps, but efforts proved to be unsuccessful. Forty five trap nights resulted in 0 amphibians caught. Hunting access was controlled through a permitting system (Table 4). A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was generated and signed by the Tribe and Oregon State University. Two grants were received: United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Tribal Land owner Incentive Program (TLIP) and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Cost Share Screen and Passage Grant to install a fish screen and fish passage on the irrigation diversion dam. All Project income were tracked and recorded (Table 5).

[pic]

Table 2: Sage Grouse Lek Data

[pic]

Table 3: Base Line Bird Data

[pic]

Table 4: Hunting Access Data

[pic]

Table 5: Project Income Expenditures

2007: Budgeted Amount $334,345.00 Expended Amount $325,285.61

The ODFW and USFWS completed installation of the fish screen on the irrigation ditch. All alfalfa and meadow grass was harvested. The grass meadows and Department of State Lands (DSL) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) winter allotment were grazed, with all project generated funds going to taxes and grazing fees. The project treated 500 acres of noxious weed and 372 acres of medusahead rye via helicopter application. Staff planted 177.8 acres of native grass (Figure 3) (Great Basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Sherman big bluegrass (Poa secunda) and thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus)). Converted 22 acres of meadow grass into alfalfa. Monitoring of sage grouse lek following ODFW protocol continued on Roy Reservoir and Tim’s Peak Reservoir. McCloud Reservoir and Antelope Swale were added but no birds were present (Table 6). Avian point count surveys following established protocol titled A Habitat-Based Point-Count Protocol for Terrestrial Birds, Emphasizing Washington and Oregon (Huff et al. 2000), developed for the U.S. Forest Service and developed through collaboration with Washington-Oregon Partners in Flight was conducted. An assessment of relative abundance (percent species per habitat type) comparing 2006 and 2007 was graphed (Graph 1-5). A small mammal protocol was developed and implemented according to Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project (2002). Trapping success was very low with only one animal captured, therefore there was not enough data to establish population trends. Baseline photo points were established to visual reference documenting change in riparian condition before and after CREP planting. An azimuth was taken of the upstream and downstream to ensure similar pictures and a metal t-post was place on the site. Hunting access was controlled through a permitting system (Table 7). All project income was tracked and recorded (Table 8).

[pic]

Figure 3: Native Grass Planting

[pic]

Table 6: Sage Grouse Data

[pic]

Graph 1: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 2: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 3: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 4: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 5: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Table 7: Access data

[pic]

Table 8: Project Income Expenditures

2008: Budgeted Amount $324,607.00

The first stages of CREP planting began in April when Natural Reclamation Service (NRS) laid 1,084,511 lineal square feet of permeable mulch fabric, 5,815 feet of fence and 900 pounds of native grass seed Great Basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Sherman big bluegrass (Poa secunda) and thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus)). Native grass mixture was used in the medusa head treatment area, treating 50 acres. The mixture consisted of western wheatgrass (35%), thickspike wheatgrass (25%), Idaho fescue (15%), bluebunch wheatgrass (10%), Sandberg’s bluegrass (5%), bottlebrush squirreltail (5%) and Indian ricegrass (5%). We planted 30 acres of weed control grass consisting of crested wheatgrass (30%), intermediate wheatgrass (15%), pubescent wheatgrass (15%), smooth brome (30%) and Russian wildrye (10%). Field 7 was converted into alfalfa production. One hundred and forty black cottonwood trees were planted in areas not included in CREP. The Burns Paiute Tribe Fisheries Department continued redband trout life history studies on main stem Malheur River tributaries in 2008. Objectives for 2008 were: 1) Determine population trend for redband trout, and 2) Describe the genetic makeup of redband trout. Research efforts have been funded through the project entitled Evaluation of the Life History of Native Salmonids in the Malheur River Subbasin. Sage grouse surveys were conducted in coordination with ODFW. Counts occurred primarily on Tim’s Reservoir and Roy Reservoir, but four additional lek sites were observed, i.e. Antelope Swale, McCloud Reservoir, Upper Decon Flat and Bull Canyon Reservoir. Average attendance at Tim’s Peak Reservoir and Roy Reservoir was graphed (Graph 6-7). Counts before 2005 in Graph 6 and 7 were provided by ODFW. An assessment of avian relative abundance comparing 2006, 2007 and 2008 was graphed (Graph 8-12). An assessment of small mammal populations was conducted for the second consecutive year producing an estimated catch per 1000 traps (Table 9). Bat surveys were conducted creating four new sites following Bat Grid Draft Protocol (Ormsbee 08). Hunting access was controlled through a permitting system (Table 10). All project income was tracked and recorded (Table 11).

[pic][pic]

Graph 6: Tim's Peak Lek Attendance Graph 7: Roy Reservoir Lek Attendance.

[pic]

Graph 8: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 9: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 10: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 11: Relative Abundance

[pic]

Graph 12: Relative Abundance

|Estimated Catch Per 1000 Traps |

|  |Deer Mouse |Montane Vole |Ord's Kangaroo Rat¹ |Great Basin Pocket Mouse |

|Location |

| | |Number Classified |Fawn/100 adults |% Spring Survival |

|Year |Count |Adult |Fawn |Spring |Prev. Fall | |

|2000 |932 |720 |212 |29 |48 |60% |

|2001 |Not Counted |25 |Not Counted |

|2002 |Not Counted |53 |Not Counted |

|2003 |303 |233 |70 |36 |83 |43% |

|2004 |536 |437 |99 |23 |37 |62% |

|2005 |758 |533 |214 |40 |37 |108% |

|2006 |1111 |728 |383 |53 |53 |100% |

|2007 |699 |542 |157 |29 |32 |90% |

|2008 |1181 |958 |223 |23 |21 |121% |

Table 12: Deer counts for a subset of Malheur River Unit, Oregon.

6) Bat Surveys

Bat Grid survey protocol was developed by Pat Ormsbee, Bat Specialist for the U.S. Forest Service.

The objectives of the Bat Grid sampling are:

• To inventory the presence of bat species using a standardized survey effort and sample unit across the region.

• To collect baseline data on acoustic, morphologic, and genetic characteristics that serve as references for identifying all bat species in the region.

• For select sample units monitor changes in:

o Occupancy

o Detection Probabilities

o Species distribution and relative rarity

Bats are sampled while in flight, typically in association with drinking at a water body, or while they are roosting. A site is sampled using several methods:

• In flight:

o Acoustic

o Visual

o Capture (mist net or harp trap)

• Roosting:

o Visual

o Capture (hand net, mist net, or harp trap)

o Guano analysis

Mist net surveys are conducted within the period of June 1 – September 1. Repeat visits to the same site will occur allowing 1 week between repeat visits to the same site to prevent depression of capture success and to take advantage of potential shifts in bat activity that may occur across the summer.

Mist net surveys will be selected on features in the following order of priority:

• Small water features (e.g. creek, spring, pond, exposed guzzler or tank), especially where water may be a limiting factor.

• Larger water features (e.g. small river or lake) where mist netting is an effective method of capture.

• Arroyo, roadway, or other potential flight corridors.

One to three nets will be placed on each survey. Documenting net sets by photos, drawings, and maps, so that the configuration can be repeated in the future. Surveys are conducted by at least 2 people who are qualified and trained to do all aspects of the mist net survey, and if there is an additional acoustic component. Mist net is only done in dry weather or in situations where nets will stay dry. Windy conditions will be avoided. Mist net will be done for 3.5 hr. after civil sunset or until 1 hr. has passed without visual or acoustic detection of bats in the vicinity.

The above surveys will likely detect population fluctuations, focal species or not. The only exception would be large ungulates in which we have not developed a standardized survey protocol. We expect some species will decline in abundance as we change the habitat type to a historic species composition, reduce grazing pressures, and increase streamside vegetation. However, it is also possible these populations may be inflated in relation to historic numbers because of past management practices that have altered habitat conditions. All management activities are designed for the benefit of wildlife species.

H. Facilities and equipment

This project has adequate facilities, equipment, and staff levels. Currently 4 trucks are available and are adequate to both carry personnel and haul trailers and equipment. There are 2 tractors and a backhoe used to conduct the farming activities and perform weed control. The Project has 4 four-wheelers that are used for farming and weed control actives. There are two houses and three barns located on the Project site, where a full time employee resides, to prevent theft and vandalism. Office space has been provided by the Tribe and high quality communication equipment is funded through BPA to administer the project. Three full time employees and 3 seasonal employees work to accomplish project goals. All of the Equipment and facilities are shared with Logan Valley Wildlife Mitigation Project to minimize duplicate equipment purchases, staff and other resources as permitted.

I. References

Albeni Falls Interagency Work Group. 2002. Monitoring and evaluation plan for the Albeni Fall Wildlife Mitigation Project.

Anderson, E.W. 1956. Some soil-plant relationships in eastern Oregon. J. Range Manage. 9(4): 171-175

Ashley, Paul R. 2005. Malheur River Wildlife Management Plan. Lone Pine Butte Consulting, Spokane, WA.

Barbour M.G., J.H. Burk, W.D. Pitts, F.S. Gilliam, and M.W. Schwartz, 1979, 1987, 1999. Terrestrial Plant Ecology. Third Edition. Benjamin/Cummings, an imprint of Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. Menlo Park, CA.

Bowers, P., Editor. 1999. Aquatic inventory project, intermediate level methods for stream habitat surveys. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, OR. 52pp.

Burkhardt, J.W., and E.W. Tisdale. 1969. Nature and successional status of western juniper vegetation in Idaho. J. Range Manage. 22(4):264-270.

Burkhardt, J.W., and E.W. Tisdale. 1976. Causes of juniper invasion in southwestern Idaho. Ecology 57(3): 472-484.

Cooperrider, A.Y., R.J. Boyd, and H.R. Stuart, eds. 1986. Inventory and monitoring of wildlife habitat. U.S. Dept. Inter., Bur. Land Manage. Service Center. Denver, CO. xviii, 858 pp.

Dealy, J.E., J.M. Geist, and R.S. Driscoll. 1956. Western juniper communities on range lands of the Pacific Northwest. Proc. 1st Int. Rangeland Congr., p. 201-204. D.N. Hyder, ed. Soc. Range Manage., Denver, Colo.

Dealy, J.E., J.M. Geist, and R.S. Driscoll. 1978a. Western juniper communities on rangelands of the Pacific Northwest. Proc.1st Int. Rangeland Congr., p. 201-204

Huff, M.H., K.A. Bettinger, H.L. Ferguson, M.J. Brown, and B. Altman. 2000. A habitat-based point-count protocol for terrestrial birds, emphasizing Washington and Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-501. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 39pp.

Jones, K.B. 1981. Effects of grazing on lizard abundance and diversity in western Arizona. Southwest Nat. 26: 107-115.

Lancia, R.A., J.D. Nichols, and K.H. Pollock. 1996. Estimating the number of animals in wildlife populations. Pages 215-253 in T.A. Bookhout, ed. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth ed., rev. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD

Malheur-Owyhee Watershed Council (MOWC). 1999. Malheur Basin Action Plan. MOWC. Ontario, Oregon.

Northwest Power Conservation Council. (NPCC) 2000 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. Council document 2000-19. NPPC. Portland, OR. 82pps.

Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC). 2004. Malheur River Subbasin

Assessment and Management Plan. NPCC, Portland, OR.

Northwest Power Act.  1980.  16 United States Code Chapter 12H (1994 & Supp. I 1995). Act of Dec. 5, 1980, 94 Stat. 2697. Public Law No. 96-501, S. 885.

The Nature Conservancy. 2006. . July 13, 2006.

Ogden, P.S. 1950. Peter Skene Ogden’s Snake Country Journal 1824-25 and 1825-1826. E.E. Rich (ed). Hudson’s Bay Record Society, London.

Ogden, P.S. 1961. Peter Skene Ogden’s Snake Country Journal 1823-27 K.G. Davies (ed). Hudson’s Bay Record Society, London.

Ogden, P.S. 1971. Peter Skene Ogden’s Snake Country Journal 1827-28 and 1826-1829. G. Williams (ed). Hudson’s Bay Record Society, London.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2006 Oregon conservation strategy.

Ormsbee, P. 2008. Bat Grid Protocol. U.S. Forest Service. Unpublished.

ODFW 1999. Aquatic inventory project: intermediate level methods for stream habitat surveys.

OWEB 1999. Water quality monitoring handbook: Oregon salmon plan.

Thompson R.N. and J.B. Haas 1960. Environmental Survey Report pertaining to salmon and steelhead in certain rivers of eastern Oregon and the Willamette River and it is tributaries. Part I. Surveys reports of eastern Oregon Rivers. Fish commission of Oregon. Contact 14-17-001-178 Clackamas, OR.

U.S. Forest Service. 2000. Malheur Headwaters Watershed analysis. Prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. in association with Integrated Resource Management, Inc. and Shapiro and Associates, Inc. for Prairie City Ranger District, Prairie City, OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (USFWS) 2002. Chapter 14, Malheur Recovery Unit, Oregon. 71p. In: U.S. fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus Confluentus) Draft Recover Plan. Portland, Oregon

Wetlands Characteristics and Boundaries (WCB), 1995. Committee on Characterization of Wetland. National Academy Press. Washington D.C.

J. Key personnel

Lawrence Tangog Schwabe

Current Position: 8% of time dedicated to this project.

Job Title: Fisheries and Wildlife Director, Burns Paiute Tribe

Develop and Implement Fisheries Programs

Collaborate with Federal and State Agencies

Obtain Fish and Wildlife Take Permits

Write Quarterly and Annual Reports

Supervise Data Collection

Supervise Data Analysis

Submit Annual Statements of Work to Sponsors and Tribal Council

Over See Budgets, and Spending

Hire Staff

Conduct Performance Evaluations

Write and Submit Research and Restoration Grants

Serve as Tribal Representative on State and Regional Technical Panels

Work Experience:

Burns Paiute Tribe

Natural Resource Director 10/2004 to Present (1.0 FTE)

Fisheries Program Manager- 02/2002 to 10/2004 (1.0 FTE)

Fisheries Biologist- Burns Paiute Tribe 07/98-02/2002 (1.0 FTE)

USFS Chocó National Forest

Fisheries Biologist (Project Inspector) 5/98-6/98 (1.0 FTE)

Fisheries Biologist (Data Entry, Data Collection, Data Analysis, Report Writing) 6/96-5/98 (1.0 FTE)

Fisheries Technician (Data Entry, Data Collection, Data Analysis, Report Writing) 6/95-6/96 (1.0 FTE)

Fisheries Technician (Data Collection, Fish Identification, and data entry)

[1.0 FTE = (40+ HRS/Week)]

Oregon State University

Biological Aide (Data Collection) 6/94-10/94

Job Related Training

Electrofishing Operation and Fish Handling Techniques 2003, Principles of Rosgen Channel Classification 2002, FERC Re-Licensing Information Course 2001, ATV, Boat Certification 2000, ODFW Stream Survey Habitat 1998;2000, Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) analysis 1998

USFWS Certifications

ODFW Stream Surveys 1998;2000, Grant Writing Seminar 1998, USFS Region 6 Stream Survey Habitat 1995,96,97,99, CORT/Inspector Certification 1997, Data Interpretation Course1997, Water Pump and Engine Fire Course 1997, Fire Fighting Training/Refresher Course 1995,96,97,98

Education:

B. S. in Fisheries Science 1995, Oregon State University. Corvallis, OR

Jason Kesling

Current Position: 50% of time dedicated to this project.

Job Title: Wildlife Program Manager, Burns Paiute Tribe

Develop and Implement Wildlife Programs

Collaborate with Federal and State Agencies

Obtain Fish and Wildlife Take Permits

Write Quarterly and Annual Reports

Supervise Data Collection

Supervise Data Analysis

Submit Annual Statements of Work to Sponsors and Tribal Council

Over See Budgets, and Spending

Hire Staff

Conduct Performance Evaluations

Write and Submit Research and Restoration Grants

Serve as Tribal Representative on State and Regional Technical Panels

Work Experience:

Burns Paiute Tribe

Wildlife Program Director- Burns, OR. 8/2008-Present (1.0 FTE)

Burns Paiute Tribe

Wildlife Assistant Manager-Burns, OR. 5/2005-8/2008 (1.0 FTE)

Louisiana State University

Research Assistant- Baton Rouge, LA. Research Assistant Waterfowl Surveys 10/2004-3/2005 (1.0 FTE)

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Habitat Technician- Hines OR. Habitat Improvement 6/2004-9/2004 (1.0 FTE)

California Waterfowl Association

Crew Leader-San Joaquin Valley, CA. Waterfowl Study 6/2003-8/2003 (1.0 FTE)

Tulelake National Wildlife Refuge (TNWR)

Paid Internship- Klamath Falls OR. Avian Surveys 8/2003-9/2004 (200 HRS)

Research Assistant- Klamath Falls, OR. Waterfowl Surveys 6/2002-9-2002

(1.0 FTE)

Oregon State University

Paid Internship- Habitat Improvement at TNWR 10/2002-3/2003 (300 HRS)

Miller Island Wildlife Area (Refuge)

Wildlife Technician- Upland Game Management August 2001

Work Relate Training

Avian Identification Sight and Sound, Operate Heavy Equipment, Operation of Airboats, Grant Writing Seminar, Plant Identification, Equipment Maintenance, First Aid, CPR Oregon Boater Education Card

Scholarships and Awards

E. R. Jackman Internship Scholarship

Native American in Marine and Space Sciences Internship (NAMSS)

Education

B. S. Fish and Wildlife Science 2004, Specialty Option: Avian Ecology.

Chad Eric Abel

Current Position 50% of time dedicated to this project.

Job Title: Wildlife Assistant Manager, Burns Paiute Tribe

Develop and Implement Wildlife Programs

Collaborate with Federal and State Agencies

Obtain Fish and Wildlife Take Permits

Write Quarterly and Annual Reports

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Submit Annual Statements of Work to Sponsors and Tribal Council

Conduct Performance Evaluations

Write and Submit Research and Restoration Grants

Serve as Tribal Representative on State and Regional Technical Panels

Work Experience

Burns Paiute Tribe

Wildlife Assistant Manager – Burns, OR 9/2008-present (1.0 FTE)

ODFW

Mountain Quail Technician – Burns, OR 3/2008-9/2008 (1.0 FTE)

Tracking, data collection and research on radio-collared mtn. quail translocations to the Trout Creek Mountains

BLM

Wildlife Technician – Eugene, OR 4/2007-10/2007 (1.0 FTE)

Wildlife surveys and habitat mapping in the Siuslaw Coastal Range

Simon Frasier University

Field Research Assistant – Baja, Mexico 11/2006-12/2006 (1.0 FTE)

Decoy mist net and net gun trapping effort to radio collar wintering surf scoters

Bighorn Institute

Field Biologist – Coachella Valley, CA 3/2006-9/2006 (1.0 FTE)

Tracked radio collared bighorn sheep in the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains

University of Montana

Wildlife Technician – Buffalo, WY 3/2005-9/2005 (1.0 FTE)

Trapped then tracked nesting sage grouse near methane drilling projects

University of Wisconsin Institute of Environmental Studies

Student Researcher – Madison, WI 5/2003-12/2003 (20hr/wk)

Research on exotic shrub invasion across two distinct habitat types

University of Wisconsin Botany Department

Research Assistant – Madison, WI 5/2002-10/2002 (25hr/wk)

Vegetative survey to quantify historical changes to WI River floodplain

University of Wisconsin Wildlife Department

Field Assistant – Spring Green, WI 5/2001-8/2001 (1.0 FTE)

Nest searching and monitoring of tall grass prairie passerines

Scholarships and Awards

Vicky Lee Hirsch Conservation Scholarship 2001-2002

Education

BS Conservation Biology, University of Wisconsin 12/2003

Certificate, Environmental Studies

Neil Lunt

Current Position: 95% of time dedicated to this project.

Job Title: Ranch Manager/ Wildlife Technician

Maintain Irrigation

Haying Operations

Weed Control

Cattle Management

Perform Reseeding Operations

Fence Removal and Modifications

Maintain Farm Equipment

Oversee Seasonal Technicians

Heavy Equipment Operator

On-site Personnel

Work Experience

Burns Paiute Tribe

Ranch Manager/ Wildlife Technician- Burns, OR. (1.0 FTE)

Double C Ranch

Cattle Forman-Vale, Oregon Cattle Management (1.0 FTE)

Lamar Roche

Cattle Forman-Parma, Idaho Cattle Management (1.0 FTE)

Topo Ranch

Cattle Forman- King City, California Cattle Management (1.0 FTE)

Education

High School Graduate 1964, Fort Ann Central High School NY

-----------------------

Biological Objective #6 – Evaluate opportunities to restore native wildlife species that have been eliminated or reduced in their historic range. (MRSAMP, p.81,82,90,91)

Biological Objective # 7 – Conduct M&E Activities to Evaluate and Adapt Management Strategies (MRSAMP p.88,89).

Biological Objective #5 – Reduce domestic use on shrub-steppe habitat and riparian corridors increase biodiversity and provide multiple serial stages (MRSAMP p.69,71,73,75,83-84,86-87,90) .

Biological Objective #4 – Continue increasing hunting opportunities for tribal members on 6,535 deeded acres. (MRSAMP, p.79,80,87,88)

Biological Objective #3 – Restore riparian structure and function on approximately 10 miles of stream and restore stream channel processes and function to benefit fish and wildlife populations. (MRSAMP, p.69-79,86-88,)

Biological Objective #2 – Restore shrub-steppe habitat structure and function on 6385 acres. (MRSAMP, p.83-85,90)

Biological Objective #1 – Identify noxious weed communities, prevent their introduction, reproduction and spread, and reduce their density where already established on 6385 acres per year. (MRSAMP, p.9BCDOTUabklmåæ^d‰

Š

<

\

#

$

'

;

a

Ü

Ý

ò

÷

"

%

0

O

W

]

€‡ˆžŸ ¡ÜÝüøñåøÞ×Ó×Ó×ÉÁø½ø½ø¶ø²ø­©ü©ø­ø½ø½ø¥ø½ø›Œ›ŒŒ›uh„5”hvs5?CJhè¤5?CJmHnHu[pic]jh:

+hvs5?CJU[pic]h:

+hvs5?CJhC>¸ha"[pic] hvs5?h„5”

h |%

hvs83-86,88,90)

Objective # 8 – Protect cultural resources on Project (Burns Paiute Tribe Cultural Resources Protection and Management Code).

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download