DOCSLIB.ORG

The Recovery (Delisting) of the Columbian White-Tailed Deer (CWTD) Contact Information: Jackie Ferrier, Jackie [email protected], 360-484-3482

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Recovery (Delisting) of the Columbian White-Tailed Deer (CWTD) Contact Information: Jackie Ferrier, Jackie Ferrier@Fws.Gov, 360-484-3482 1. Title: The Recovery (Delisting) of the Columbian White-tailed Deer (CWTD) Contact Information: Jackie Ferrier, [email protected], 360-484-3482 Table 1. Partners in The Recovery (Delisting) of the Columbian White-tailed Deer REFUGES Willapa National Wildlife Refuge Complex Jackie Ferrier- Project Leader Manages Julia Butler Hansen Refuge for the Columbian white-tailed deer (JBH) and other refuges in Willapa NWR Complex. Member of the CWTD Working Group. Supervised development of preparation of the Emergency Translocation EA and associated documents. Supervised translocation efforts; monitoring efforts; predator control efforts; and outreach to various partners including private landowners, Tribes, and NGOs. Paul Meyers- Lead CWTD Biologist for Refuges Managed and conducted CWTD translocations in 2009, 2010, 2012, and current efforts underway in 2013. Extensive experience in trapping and handling wildlife, including deer, moose, ocelots, margays, and numerous bird species. Experience in handling and management of schedule II drugs for animal sedation. 20 years’ experience in wildlife management and research including translocations, surveys, monitoring, and research design. Author of numerous reports, proposals, peer-reviewed publications, and NEPA documents, including primary author of the 2012 and 2013 CWTD translocation EAs and Section 7 documents. Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Complex Chris Lapp- Project Leader Member of the CWTD Working Group, assisted in the preparation of the Emergency Translocation EA and supervised translocation efforts; monitoring efforts; predator control efforts; and outreach to various partners including private landowners, Tribes, and NGOs. Alex Chmielewski - Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Wildlife Biologist Assisted with CWTD translocations and monitoring. Experienced with wildlife capture and handling techniques. Also experienced with telemetry and wildlife monitoring study design and implementation. Have prepared numerous Sect 7 consultations and NEPA documents ECOLOGICAL SERVICES Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Theodore Thomas- CWTD Regional Recovery Lead (Ecologist) Team member of the CWTD Working Group. Serves as Ecological Service’s Regional Lead for CWTD, since 2001. Developed (co-authored) Section 10 permits for Animal Damage Management among participating agencies. Assisted with several CWTD translocations during past decade. Develops listing, critical habitat rules, and recovery planning documents. Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office Rebecca Toland- CWTD Oregon Recovery Lead (Wildlife Biologist) Member of CWTD Working Group, worked extensively on the 2013 Emergency Translocation of CWTD (wrote the Biological Opinion, drafted the Animal Damage Management Plan, assisted in developing NEPA documents, assisted in capture and relocation of CWTD), primary author of the 2013 CWTD 5-year status review, primary author of the 2014 CWTD CRI proposal. 1 2. Statement of Need: The Columbia River Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Columbian white-tailed deer (CWTD) was federally listed as endangered in 1967, initially under the authority of the Endangered Species Preservation Act and subsequently under the Endangered Species Act (USFWS 2013a). The November 2013 5-year status review of CWTD recommended reclassification of the DPS from endangered to threatened and stated that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is close to fully meeting its recovery objectives for CWTD (USFWS 2013a). With a large infusion of one-time funding, the Service could accelerate the recovery of CWTD, meet the delisting criteria for the DPS, and begin a delisting proposal in FY 2017. This project proposes to implement activities to augment and support the subpopulations at Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge (Ridgefield NWR) and the Mainland Unit of the Julia Butler Hansen Refuge for Columbian white-tailed deer (JBH) in order to meet or exceed the minimum viability threshold in both subpopulations. Historically, CWTD were common in riparian areas along major rivers west of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington, with a range extending from Grants Pass, Oregon, in the south, to The Dalles, Oregon, in the east, and along the Cowlitz River to the north. The decline in CWTD numbers was rapid with the arrival and settlement of pioneers in the fertile river valleys (Gavin 1979). Conversion of brushy riparian land to agriculture, urbanization, uncontrolled sport and commercial hunting, and perhaps other factors caused the extirpation of this deer over most of its range by the early 1900s (Gavin 1979). Despite the precipitous decline, the Service has worked diligently on CWTD recovery. A clear path to delisting CWTD (as it is currently defined with regard to population and distribution goals) now exists. Delisting criteria call for at least 400 CWTD, in at least 3 “viable and secure” subpopulations, where “viable” is defined as a minimum November population of at least 50 deer and “secure” is defined as habitat protected from adverse human activity and relatively safe from natural phenomena (USFWS 1983). Currently, the total population estimate for the Columbia River DPS is 603 deer, with 4 secure subpopulations (JBH Mainland Unit, JBH Tenasillahe Island Unit, Ridgefield NWR, and Puget Island). However, only two of the secure subpopulations are currently considered viable (Puget Island and JBH Tenasillahe Island Unit) (USFWS 2013a). A recent large-scale, cross-program effort highlights the Pacific Region’s prioritization of CWTD recovery. In 2013, in response to the threat of an imminent dike failure at JBH, the Service invested substantial staff time and resources to translocate 37 CWTD from the JBH Mainland Unit to Ridgefield NWR, which is 50 miles upriver from JBH (USFWS 2013b). While creating a new secure subpopulation, it came at the expense of both a reduction in the JBH Mainland Unit subpopulation to below 50 animals, and a net loss of 70 acres of CWTD habitat (via the creation of a new setback dike to protect the JBH Mainland Unit from imminent flooding). Region 1 is committed to managing and supporting CWTD at Ridgefield NWR to ensure that the new subpopulation grows and ultimately stabilizes at 80 deer (the population goal for Ridgefield NWR as set in the CCP) (USFWS 2013a). Management needs at Ridgefield include, but are not limited to, monitoring, continued predator control, an additional translocation of CWTD to supplement Ridgefield NWR’s subpopulation, and habitat enhancement. Furthermore, now that a setback dike has been constructed at JBH, the Service is committed to supporting the JBH Mainland Unit subpopulation to ensure its return to its previous status as a viable and secure subpopulation (USFWS 2013a). The JBH Mainland Unit will require significant habitat work to compensate for the 70 acres of land lost to the setback levee. In addition, predator control will be required to increase fawn recruitment and grow the population to former, stable levels above 80 to 100 deer. 2 One of the key limiting factors to recovery has been the lack of contiguous land that provides adequate protection (i.e., secure) and is large enough to support a viable subpopulation. The establishment of additional viable and secure subpopulations has been a long-term goal of the recovery team since the initial listing. The Service had early success at Tenasillahe Island, but subsequent translocation efforts to smaller parcels resulted in subpopulations of less than 50 animals. Ridgefield NWR is the largest tract of secure habitat that has been available for translocation since listing, and additional translocations will quite likely bring Ridgefield NWR’s current nascent population to a self-sustaining level. Should that take place in parallel with regrowth of the JBH Mainland Unit subpopulation, the establishment of two additional viable and secure subpopulations would occur (in addition to the currently viable and secure subpopulations on Puget Island and JBH Tenasillahe Island Unit). This result would allow us to not only meet, but to exceed the delisting criteria, providing CWTD with the best chance for a robust recovery. In support of this assertion, the Minimum Viable Population (MVP) analysis for this DPS (Skalski 2013) suggests nearly a four-fold decrease in extinction probability over 60 years with 4 secure subpopulations of 50 rather than 3 (0.5 percent vs. 1.9 percent, respectively). In addition, a fourth subpopulation of 80 animals (which the Ridgefield NWR subpopulation is expected to reach) reduces the 100-year extinction probability of the viable and secure subpopulations alone from 3.4 percent to 1.8 percent (i.e., roughly half). Extinction probabilities in this range would put the DPS on track for a robust recovery. If the Columbian White-tailed Deer Cooperative Recovery Initiative proposal is not funded, full recovery would likely be delayed. The minimum criteria for delisting would eventually be met; however without habitat enhancement, the JBH Mainland Unit subpopulation may take longer to stabilize, and the direction of the Ridgefield NWR subpopulation would remain uncertain (successful establishment of a subpopulation normally takes several translocation efforts). As such, a longer period of monitoring would probably have to occur before delisting discussions could be initiated. In addition, the existing recovery criteria do not contain a temporal element specifying how long the minimum populations are to be maintained prior to delisting. The presence of four viable and secure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Columbian White-Tailed Deer Translocation
    Columbian White-tailed Deer Translocation from Tenasillahe Island to Columbia Stock Ranch Final Environmental Assessment U.S. Department of Energy - Bonneville Power Administration Department of the Interior – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service August 2019 DOE/EA 2088 This page deliberately left blank Table of Contents Chapter 1 Purpose and Need........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Bonneville Power Administration ................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................................................ 4 1.3.3 Columbian White-tailed Deer ......................................................................................... 4 1.3.4 Columbia Land Trust...................................................................................................... 4 1.3.5 Columbia Stock Ranch ................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Public Involvement .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Butler Hansen a Trailblazing Washington Politician John C
    Julia Butler Hansen A trailblazing Washington politician John C. Hughes Julia Butler Hansen A trailblazing Washington politician John C. Hughes First Edition Second Printing Copyright © 2020 Legacy Washington Office of the Secretary of State All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-889320-45-8 Ebook ISBN 978-1-889320-44-1 Front cover photo: John C. Hughes Back cover photo: Hansen Family Collection Book Design by Amber Raney Cover Design by Amber Raney and Laura Mott Printed in the United States of America by Gorham Printing, Centralia, Washington Also by John C. Hughes: On the Harbor: From Black Friday to Nirvana, with Ryan Teague Beckwith Booth Who? A Biography of Booth Gardner Nancy Evans, First-Rate First Lady Lillian Walker, Washington State Civil Rights Pioneer The Inimitable Adele Ferguson Slade Gorton, a Half Century in Politics John Spellman: Politics Never Broke His Heart Pressing On: Two Family-Owned Newspapers in the 21st Century Washington Remembers World War II, with Trova Heffernan Korea 65, the Forgotten War Remembered, with Trova Heffernan and Lori Larson 1968: The Year that Rocked Washington, with Bob Young and Lori Larson Ahead of the Curve: Washington Women Lead the Way, 1910-2020, with Bob Young Legacy Washington is dedicated to preserving the history of Washington and its continuing story. www.sos.wa.gov/legacy For Bob Bailey, Alan Thompson and Peter Jackson Julia poses at the historic site sign outside the Wahkiakum County Courthouse in 1960. Alan Thompson photo Contents Preface: “Like money in the bank” 6 Introduction: “Julia Who?” 10 Chapter 1: “Just Plain Me” 17 Chapter 2: “Quite a bit of gumption” 25 Chapter 3: Grief compounded 31 Chapter 4: “Oh! Dear Diary” 35 Chapter 5: Paddling into politics 44 Chapter 6: Smart enough, too 49 Chapter 7: Hopelessly disgusted 58 Chapter 8: To the last ditch 65 Chapter 9: The fighter remains 73 Chapter 10: Lean times 78 Chapter 11: “Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Cumulative Ecosystem Response to Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary, 2008
    PNNL-18677 Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District Under an Interagency Agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC05-76RLO 1830 Evaluating Cumulative Ecosystem Response to Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary, 2008 FINAL ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Marine Sciences Laboratory National Marine Fisheries Service, Pt. Adams Biological Field Station Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce University of Washington December 2009 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Cumulative Ecosystem Response to Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary, 2009
    PNNL-19440 Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District Under an Interagency Agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Evaluating Cumulative Ecosystem Response to Restoration Projects in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary, 2009 FINAL ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory National Marine Fisheries Service Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce University of Washington October 2010 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Assembling, Amplifying, and Ascending Recent Trends Among Women in Congress, 1977–2006
    Assembling, Amplifying, and Ascending recent trends among women in congress, 1977–2006 The fourth wave of women to enter Congress–from 1977 to 2006– was by far the largest and most diverse group. These 134 women accounted for more than half (58 percent) of all the women who have served in the history of Congress. In the House, the women formed a Congresswomen’s Caucus (later called the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues), to publicize legislative initiatives that were important to women. By honing their message and by cultivating political action groups to support female candidates, women became more powerful. Most important, as the numbers of Congresswomen increased and their legislative inter- ests expanded, women accrued the seniority and influence to advance into the ranks of leadership. Despite such achievements, women in Congress historically account for a only a small fraction—about 2 percent—of the approximately 12,000 individuals who have served in the U.S. Congress since 1789, although recent trends suggest that the presence of women in Congress will continue to increase. Based on gains principally in the House of Representatives, each of the 13 Congresses since 1981 has had a record number of women Members. (From left) Marilyn Lloyd, Tennessee; Martha Keys, Kansas; Patricia Schroeder, Colorado; Margaret Heckler, Massachusetts; Virginia Smith, Nebraska; Helen Meyner, New Jersey; and Marjorie Holt, Maryland, in 1978 in the Congresswomen’s Suite in the Capitol—now known as the Lindy Claiborne Boggs Congressional Reading Room. Schroeder and Heckler co-chaired the Congresswomen’s Caucus, which met here in its early years.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4. Biological Environment
    Chapter 4. Biological Environment Photos: Above, White-tailed deer mother and fawn. Right, tracking Columbian white- tailed deer / USFWS Lewis and Clark and Julia Butler Hansen National Wildlife Refuges Draft CCP/EIS Chapter 4. Biological Environment 4.1 Biological Integrity Analysis The National Wildlife Refuges System Improvement Act of 1997 directs the Service to ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health (BIDEH) of the Refuge System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans. In simplistic terms, elements of BIDEH are represented by native fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats as well as those ecological processes that support them. The Refuge System policy on BIDEH (601 FW 3) also provides guidance on consideration and protection of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitat resources found on refuges and in associated ecosystems, that represents BIDEH on each refuge. The BIDEH of the Columbia River estuary has been profoundly impacted by human activities. Land development for agriculture, industry, and housing, made possible by diking and draining, has disconnected large areas of the historical floodplain, marsh, and swamp habitat from the estuary (LCREP 1999). From Bonneville Dam to the river’s mouth, an estimated 84,000 acres of floodplain have been lost from the construction of dikes (Marriott and McEwen 2005). In the lower estuary (the river mouth to the upstream end of Puget Island), where most refuge lands are located, Thomas (1983) estimated that more than 23,000 acres of forested and scrub-shrub tidal swamp and nearly 7,000 acres of tidal marsh, have been lost since 1870.
    [Show full text]
  • A Changing of the Guard Traditionalists, Feminists, and the New Face of Women in Congress, 1955–1976
    A Changing of the Guard traditionalists, feminists, and the new face of women in congress, 1955–1976 The third generation of women in Congress, the 39 individuals who entered the House and the Senate between 1955 and 1976, legislated during an era of upheaval in America. Overlapping social and political movements during this period —the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, the groundswell of protest against American intervention in the Vietnam War in the mid- to late 1960s, the women’s liberation movement and the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, and the Watergate Scandal and efforts to reform Congress in the 1970s—provided experience and impetus for a new group of feminist reformers. Within a decade, an older generation of women Members, most of whom believed they could best excel in a man’s world by conforming to male expectations, was supplanted by a younger group who challenged narrowly prescribed social roles and long-standing congres- sional practices.1 Several trends persisted, however. As did the pioneer generation and the second generation, the third generation of women accounted for only a small fraction of the total population of Congress. At the peak of the third generation, 20 women served in the 87th Congress (1961–1963)—about 3.7 percent. The latter 1960s were the nadir for new women entering the institution; only 11 were elected or appointed to Representatives Bella Abzug (left) and Shirley Chisholm of New York confer outside a committee hearing room in the early 1970s. Abzug and Chisholm represented a new type of feminist Congresswoman who entered Congress during the 1960s and 1970s.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited Bailey, V. 1936. the Mammals and Life Zones of Oregon
    Literature Cited Bailey, V. 1936. The mammals and life zones of Oregon. North American Fauna. No.55. U.S. Department of Agriculture Biological Survey. 416 pp. Baker, R. H. 1984. Origin, classification, and distribution. Pages 1-19 in L. K. Halls (ed.). White-tailed deer: ecology and management. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 870 pp. Beiderbeck, H. 2002. Monitoring of Deer Hair Loss Syndrome in Columbian Black tailed deer and White-tailed deer in the Northern Coast Range of Oregon. Interim Report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Tillamook, Oregon. 19 pp. Beiderbeck, H. 2004. Monitoring of Deer Hair Loss Syndrome in Columbian Black tailed deer and White-tailed deer in the Northern Coast Range of Oregon , 2000-04. Final Report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Tillamook, Oregon. 16 pp. Bergh, S. 2014. Personal communication with Stephanie Bergh, Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Boechler, J. 2014. Personal communication with Jeff Boechler, North Willamette Watershed District Manager, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Brookshier, J. 2004. Columbian White-tailed Deer: Odocoileus virginianus leucurus. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Volume 5: Mammals. 9 pp. Clark, A. C., G. E. Phillips, K. M. Kilbride, and T. M. Kollasch. 2010. Factors Affecting the Survival of Columbian white-tailed deer fawns in the Lower Columbia River. Unpublished manuscript. 21 pp. Cowlitz Tribe of Indians. 2010. Columbian white-tailed deer summary report. 7 pp. Creekmore, T. and L. Glaser. 1999. Health Evaluation of Columbian White-tailed Deer on the Julia Butler Hansen Refuge for the Columbian White-tailed Deer. U.S. Geological Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3. Physical Environment
    Chapter 3. Physical Environment Top, an eagle’s nest on the Lewis and Clark Refuge. Above, a Canada geese brood. Photos: USFWS Lewis and Clark and Julia Butler Hansen National Wildlife Refuges Draft CCP/EIS Chapter 3. Physical Environment 3.1 Refuge Introductions Where the Columbia River nears the end of its journey to the Pacific Ocean, the river’s fresh water merges with the Pacific Ocean’s salt water forming the lower Columbia River estuary. In an estuary, the river has a direct, natural connection with the open sea. This transition from fresh to salt water creates a special environment that supports unique communities of plants and animals, adapted for life at the margin of the sea. Estuarine environments are among the most productive ecosystems on earth (Odum 1971, Reimold 1977, Jerrick 1999, and a bibliography of coastal marsh productivity in Gulf South Research Institute 1977). It is at this area of the Columbia River that two national wildlife refuges, Julia Butler Hansen and Lewis and Clark, become intertwined with the Columbia River and the lower Columbia River estuary. Both refuges are located in the lower reach of the Columbia River with lands and waters in southwest Washington (Wahkiakum County) and in northwest Oregon (Clatsop and Columbia Counties). Since the early 1970s both refuges have played important roles in the protection and management of this ecologically rich area. Both refuges are part of the Willapa National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The refuge complex office is located approximately two miles west of Cathlamet, Washington, along Washington State Highway 4, within the Julia Butler Hansen Refuge.
    [Show full text]