T-9-T-2 Grant Submittal Package

Region 3 Federal Aid Transmittal Form U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Aid Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building One Federal Drive Fort Snelling, MN 55111-4056 ... Date Received: (RegioD 3 FA Date Stamp) Date Approval Requested by:

Date Submitted: June 4,2009

Project No.: T-9-T-2

Project Title: Michigan's Comprehensive State Wildlife Grant

State Contact: Eric Sink FWS Biologist: Jon Parker, 612-713-5142 Telephone Number: 517-335-1064 e-mail address: [email protected]

Track (circle one): Routine = 15 day Non-Routine = 30 day 1Non-Routine = 45 da~

Grant Segment: X Type(s): Grant Proposal (GP): GP Renewal:

GPAmend: SegmentAmend: USFWS will complete USFWS will complete ....

Obligation Intent: Sub-Account Federal Share Circle or Check if Applicable:

WR Regular 5220 $ In-Kind Value Program Income WR Sect 4 Hunter Ed 5210 $ SHPO

WR Sect 10 Hunter Ed 523- $ !NEPA (EA Letter or EA)I ISection 71 WL Cons. & Rest. 5511 $ !Lobby Certificationl

SFR Regular 9514 $ Other (describe in Note/Special Instructions section below)

Needs funding condition (describe in Note/Special SFR Aquatic Ed. 9511 $ Instructions section below)

SFR Boat Access 9521 $ COMPETITIVE 0 or NON-COMPETITIVE ()

5621 Other: $ 1,157,616

Notes/Special Instructions ( circle): Biologist lFisca~ Land Secretary

Chris, Please approve SAF. Eric APPLICATION FOR Version 7/03 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE 2. DATE SUBMITTED June 4, 2009 Applicant Identifier 1. TYPE OF SUBMISSION: 3. DATE RECEIVED BY STATE State Application Identifier Application : Pre-application Michigan Construction Construction 4. DATE RECEIVED BY FEDERAL AGENCY Federal Identifier Non-Construction Non-Construction T-9-T-2 5. APPLICANT INFORMATION Legal Name: MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Organizational Unit: Department: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Organizational DUNS: 805339991 Division: Wildlife Address: Name and telephone number of person to be contacted on matters involving this Street: PO BOX 30028 application (give area code) Prefix: Mr. First Name: Eric City: LANSING Middle Name: County: INGHAM Last Name: Sink State: MI Zip Code: 48909-7528 Suffix: Country: USA Email: [email protected] 6. EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN): Phone Number (give area code) Fax Number (give area code) 38-6000134 (517) 335-1064 (517) 335-4242 8. TYPE OF APPLICATION: 7. TYPE OF APPLICANT: (See back of form for Application Types) New If Revision, enter appropriate letter(s) in box(es) A. State Government (See back of form for description of letters.) Other (specify): None None Other (specify): Add new segment to the grant to cover FY 2009 9. NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY: U.S. DOI - Fish & Wildlife Service 10. CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBER: 11. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE OF APPLICANT’S PROJECT: 15.634 - State Wildlife Grants Michigan's Comprehensive State Wildlife Grant Other (specify): 12. AREAS AFFECTED BY PROJECT (Cities, Counties, States, etc.): Statewide 13. PROPOSED PROJECT 14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF: Start Date: 8/15/2009Ending Date: 9/30/2010 a. Applicant: Eighth b. Project: Statewide 15. ESTIMATED FUNDING: 16. IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS? a. Federal $ 2,315,232 a. YES THIS PREAPPLICATION/APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON b. Applicant $ 0 c. State $ 1,403,672 DATE: June 4, 2009 d. Local $ 0 b. NO PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E. O. 12372 e. Other $ 911,560 OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW f. Program Income $ 0 17. IS THE APPLICANT DELINQUENT ON ANY FEDERAL DEBT? g. TOTAL $ 4,630,464 Yes If “Yes” attach an explanation. No 18. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION/PREAPPLICATION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT. THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES. a. Authorized Representative Prefix: Ms. First Name: Mindy Middle Name: Last Name: Koch Suffix: b. Title: c. Telephone Number (give area code) Resource Management Deputy (517) 373-2425 Email: Fax Number (give area code) (517) 375-4242 d. Signature of Authorized Representative e. Date Signed: June 4, 2009

Previous Edition Usable Standard Form 424 (Rev. 9-2003) Authorized for Local Reproduction Prescribed by OMB Circular A-102 BUDGET INFORMATION - Non-Construction Programs OMB Approval No. 3048-0044 SECTION A - BUDGET SUMMARY Grant Program Catalog of Federal Estimated Unobligated Funds New or Revised Budget Function Domestic Assistance or Activity Number Federal Non-Federal Federal Non-Federal Total (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) 1. SWG Implementation 15.634 $0 $0 $2,315,232 $2,315,232 $4,630,464

2. SWG Planning 15.634 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5. Totals $0 $0 $2,315,232 $2,315,232 $4,630,464 SECTION B - BUDGET CATEGORIES GRANT SEGMENT BUDGET DETAILS Total 6. Object Class Categories (Segment 2 - Impl.) (Segment 2 - Plan.) (5)

a. Personnel $972,865 $0 $972,865

b. Fringe Benefits $369,689 $0 $369,689

c. Travel $75,000 $0 $75,000

d. Equipment $0 $0 $0

e. Supplies $315,000 $0 $315,000

f. Contractual $2,621,000 $0 $2,621,000

g. Construction $0 $0 $0

h. Other - Audit - 0.0038 $17,529 $0 $17,529

i. Total Direct Charges (sum of 6a-6h) $4,371,083 $0 $4,371,083

j. Indirect Charges - 0.1932 $259,381 $0 $259,381

k. TOTALS (sum of 6i-6j) $4,630,464 $0 $4,630,464

7. Program Income $0 $0 $0 Previous Edition Usable Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form 424A (Rev. 7-97) SECTION C - NON-FEDERAL RESOURCES (a) Grant Program (b) Applicant (c) State (d) Other Sources (e) TOTALS

8. 15.634 SWG Implementation $1,403,672 $911,560 $2,315,232

9. 15.634 SWG Planning $0 $0 $0

10. $0

11. $0

12. TOTAL (sum of lines 8-11) $0 $1,403,672 $911,560 $2,315,232 SECTION D - FORECASTED CASH NEEDS Total for 1st Year 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

13. Federal $2,315,232 $578,808 $578,808 $578,808 $578,808

14. Non-Federal $2,315,232 $578,808 $578,808 $578,808 $578,808

15. TOTAL (sum of lines 13 and 14) $4,630,464 $1,157,616 $1,157,616 $1,157,616 $1,157,616 SECTION E - BUDGET ESTIMATES OF FEDERAL FUNDS NEEDED FOR BALANCE OF THE PROJECT FUTURE FUNDING PERIODS (Years) (a) Grant Program (b) First (c) Second (d) Third (e) Fourth

16.

17.

18.

19.

20. TOTAL (sum of lines 16-19) $0 $0 $0 $0 SECTION F - OTHER BUDGET INFORMATION

21. Direct Charges: 22. Indirect Charges: 19.32% on Personnel and Fringe Benefits 23. Remarks:

Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form 424A (Rev. 7-97) Page 2

REGION 3 WSFR SECTION 7 EVALUATION DOCUMENTATION

PHASE I: COMPLETED BY GRANTEE (See Phase I Instructions for completing this form)

State: Michigan Grantee: Natural Resources Grant Program(s): State Wildlife Grant (SWG)

Grant Title and Number (add amendment no.): T-9-T-2 – Michigan’s Comprehensive SWG

I Location: A. List counties where grant activities will occur.

At least some of the activities supported in this grant will occur in all Michigan counties. This grant supports a number of project statements that are programmitic as opposed to project based. B. Describe the action area (see instructions).

This grant contains five chapters to support the following programmatic areas for managing species of greatest conservation need (SGCNs):

1. Technical Guidance

These activities include training and professional development. The action area includes offices and service centers throughout Michigan. Some training events are field based and may occur at select Department owned facilities and lands statewide (see Map 1).

2. Surveys, Monitoring and Research

This grant supports three studies that were previously approved under Segment 1 of this grant. All other studies previously approved have been completed; no work will be supported for these studies in this grant segment).

STUDY 1.1: Statewide surveys – This study is to survey and monitor avian and herptile species statewide. Surveys include spatial data analyses from existing data layers and field surveys. Data analyses work occurs in offices and labs in Lansing and East Lansing. Field surveys can occur statewide.

STUDY 1.3: Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory – This study uses available spatial data along with known occurrence data to determine areas of significant importance to SGCNs in offices and labs in Lansing and East Lansing. Using results of data analyses, targeted field surveys are conducted on Wildlife Division Lands in the four southern Michigan management units (see Map 2).

STUDY 1.4: Importance of coarse woody debris – This study analyzes methods to sample for coarse woody debris in forest in the eastern Upper Peninsula management unit (see Map 3). Study sites are located within state forests and on federal and private lands.

3. Habitat Management

This grant supports habitat management activities on Department owned lands statewide. Lands where activities may occur include State Game Areas (SGAs), State Recreation Areas (SRAs), State Parks (SPs) and State Forests (SFs) as well as some federal lands including national forests and military installations (see Map 1).

4. Population Management

This grant supports population management activities that may occur statewide.

5. Planning

This grant supports the planning activities of revising the Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) while developing and revising implementation plans from the WAP. These planning activities can occur at field offices

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 1 of 14 and service centers statewide as well as the main Wildlife Division office in Lansing. II. Species/Critical Habitat: A. Species information 1. Using the FWS web site (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/), list species that are/or may be present in the county(ies):

There are 22 species in Michigan on the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species (see attached table). These include 14 animal species and 8 plant species. In addition, the eastern Massasauga rattlesnake and rayed bean mussel are candidates for listing and will be taken into consideration during the proposed implementation activities. This form also considers potential impacts to gray wolf in the event it is relisted as threatened or endangered.

Because of the programmatic nature of this grant and the extent of activities proposed statewide, all listed and candidate species are in the action area.

2. List species, from “1.” above, that are not in the action area, and explain why:

None B. Using the FWS web site, identify whether federally designated or proposed critical habitat is present within the action area:

The only designated critical habitat in Michigan is for piping plover (see Map 3), Hine’s emerald dragonfly, and gray wolf on Isle Royale (if gray wolf is relisted).

Because of the programmatic nature of this grant and the extent of activities proposed statewide, all designated critical habitats are in the action area. *Note: If II.A and II.B above have no species or critical habitat, skip sections III and IV and go to V. III. Description of Proposed Action: In the space provided or on an attached sheet, describe the action(s) in sufficient detail so that the potential effects of the action can be identified and fully evaluated.

All of the project statements in this grant were previously approved Segment 1 of this grant. The only changes are that a number of studies in Chapter 2 have been completed and are not considered in this evaluation. For each of the five chapters in this grant, the project statements are given along with a description of the proposed actions for each:

1. Technical Guidance

1.1 Training and professional development

Primarily classroom, workshop, and symposium type activities. May be field training that does not involve any handling of species or habitat impacts.

1.2 Threatened, endangered, and listed species reviews and permits

Review projects submitted to evaluate potential impacts on wildlife species listed as state threatened or endangered and provide information needed to eliminate or reduce potential negative impacts through project changes. This includes obtaining additional expert review as necessary. It also includes providing input into federal activities related to wildlife species listed either under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11) or under the state endangered species regulations. Participate in the biennial review of the state threatened and endangered species list. Provide input and cooperation in endangered species activities related to the Federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, issue state permits related to the “take” of wildlife on the state endangered and threatened species list; does not include issuing permits for take of any federally listed species.

1.3 Aquatic habitat and natural resource protection through a coordinated process to review and provide scientifically based recommendations on permit applications that propose activities that may alter aquatic,

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 2 of 14 wetland, or riparian habitats or communities

Office setting review of permit applications, review of state endangered species list, recommendations for modifying proposed activities under certain permit applications. Does not involve any direct work with listed species or habitat modification. May involve field inspections but no intrusive data collection. Fisheries Division will coordinate with permitting agencies and provide science based recommendations on the various proposals that may alter aquatic habitat or the aquatic community.

1.4 Advising landowners and other agencies

Wildlife Division personnel will establish contacts with local governmental entities and organizations involved with land use planning. These would include local zoning boards, development authorities, purchase of development rights groups, open space preservation and watershed associations, etc. Meetings will be organized, held, and/or attended as needed.

1.5 Maintenance of existing databases

1.6 Biological surveys and community classifications

Conduct a statewide survey based upon currently known information and using GIS based analyses. Perform initial community and habitat analyses in three counties using a combination of field and GIS analyses. Evaluate models to help direct future activities.

Conduct physical/chemical surveys at 10-15 small lakes in each of 2 lake types using Higgins et al. lake classification; these are broad lake classes. Physicochemical measures will be taken for each lake, including Secchi depth, substrate composition, water depth, pH, conductivity, oxygen concentration, temperature, and percentage of pelagic and littoral area. Surveys of fish, macroinvertebrate, and aquatic macrophyte will be conducted at a subset of these lakes using guidance from last year’s survey effort work. Fish surveys will be conducted using limited-term scientific gill net sets, trap nets, beach seines, and minnow traps. Benthic samples will be collected using Eckman grabs, d-frame grab samples, and targeted surface and macrophyte collections. Aquatic macrophyte communities will be sampled using a rake. Conduct spatial analyses to determine the landscape and local features that characterize known (or expected) representative/unique aquatic systems and/or communities. Construct models to predict the occurrences of other representative/unique aquatic systems and/or communities in southern Lower Michigan. Develop criteria for defining systems-level and aquatic community elements of biodiversity to be included in the Biotics database. Conduct site visits for selected occurrences to evaluate the efficacy of the GIS-based computer models to predict/define representative/unique systems level and aquatic community elements of biodiversity.

Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNF) staff will conduct literature review, update community descriptions, and identify and scan relevant photographs for a subset of natural communities. As groups of natural communities are completed (e.g., forested wetlands), the updated descriptions and photos will be posted to the web and made available in a printed format.

2. Surveys, Monitoring, and Research

2.1 Wildlife Divisions surveys, monitoring, and research for species of greatest conservation need

This project provides support for surveys, monitoring, and research studies to address information needs for species of greatest conservation need (SGCN). Surveys are conducted to determine population or biological parameters of populations at a particular time for a particular reason. Most surveys in this project are designed to determine baseline population levels or other baseline biological parameters so that future management efforts can be evaluated to determine if they had the desired affect. In some cases, surveys are needed to complete our understanding of a species range or timing of when certain habitats are seasonally used. This information is needed to better prioritize management efforts to address limiting factors or those areas where management will have the biggest impact.

Monitoring studies are designed to track trends through time. These studies are needed to ensure populations are responding to management as expected or if management activities need to be modified. In some cases, these studies are needed to ensure land use activities unrelated to managing for the

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 3 of 14 species are not putting the species in jeopardy.

Research studies are conducted when there is an information need or problem that is impeding or is likely to impede our ability to manage for the species. These studies focus on determining the timing of critical life stages and the habitat components necessary for those life stages.

All of the studies contained in this project provide information needed to maintain and modify the state’s list of SGCN. All information gained through these studies will be incorporated in future revisions to MDNR’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). The results from all studies will be made available to MDNR staff along with the management implications and recommendations based on the findings. This information will be incorporated into site management plans, ecoregional plans, and as part of the adaptive management component of MDNR’s ecosystem management and planning efforts.

The following studies are supported under this project statement:

2.1.1 Statewide surveys

Biological surveys of herptile and avian species will be continued on state lands, using a team approach with biologists and contractual groups, such as Michigan State University Extension and MNFI, to determine the extent of species and abundance. New survey routes will be established annually to increase statewide coverage. All routes will be surveyed annually by trained staff and volunteers following standardized protocols. Information will be compiled by Natural Heritage Program staff who will also prepare reports including management recommendations. For herps, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, track counts, dip netting, aquatic trapping, visual encounters, and field follow-ups to public reports. For birds, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts of singing males, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, aerial counts, scat collection and identification, track counts, and field follow-ups to public reports. All birds observed during the course of the survey will be recorded according to MBBA II protocol. Surveys that involve capturing and handling of individuals will not be conducted for any federally listed species nor will they be conducted in any area where a federal listed species may be inadvertently captured.

2.1.3 Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory

This is the third phase of a 3-year effort to identify existing biodiversity information sources as well as gaps. From this information, MNFI will help to develop statewide biodiversity goals and objectives, identify important areas for conserving our state’s biodiversity, and develop innovative strategies for conserving these areas for future generations. In this phase, most of the work will target aquatic systems. Identifying areas of importance for aquatic SGCN is difficult for a variety of reasons. Many aquatic systems, especially flowing waters, do not have distinct boundaries where one habitat stops and the other starts. Moreover, aquatic systems are so inextricably tied with terrestrial systems they cannot be viewed outside of context. These aspects of aquatic systems make it difficult to define distinct units to protect. Additionally, Michigan does not currently have a classification system to identify aquatic natural communities (unlike terrestrial systems). Coarse descriptors are available (e.g., small, large, drainage, seepage, cold, warm, third order, etc.) but these do not provide for an understanding of the variability of habitats within these coarse classes. Consequently, what is representative and what is unique in aquatic systems is not well understood. Despite these limitations, MNFI will use existing resources to spatially identify important areas for aquatic biodiversity conservation.

Additionally, systematic inventories will be conducted on state lands in the four southern Michigan management units by MNFI. Two management units will be surveyed simultaneously; each management unit will require two years to survey. Two management units will be surveyed in the first and second years of this study with the remaining two surveyed in years three and four. These will be non-invasive surveys: individuals will not be trapped or collected; surveys will be by sight or sound detection. No habitat alteration or modification will result from the surveys. Upon completion, MNFI will deliver comprehensive, written reports for regional groupings of State Game and Wildlife Areas.

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 4 of 14 2.1.4 Importance of coarse woody debris (CWD)

MNFI will be contracted to sample selected managed and “natural” northern hardwood and aspen forest stands for CWD in order to determine the range within which CWD amounts vary in Michigan. Three sampling methods will be employed on a subset of forest stands and compared to evaluate current methods used to sample CWD (e.g. IFMAP Stage 2 sampling). The method shown to have the most accurate results will be used to conduct the remainder of sampling efforts. Methods for sampling CWD will include circuit-transects (IFMAP Stage 2 sampling method for down and dead material), circuit strip-plots, and systematically placed transects within a subset of the targeted stands. CWD data collected will include measures of: (a) volume, (b) diameter and length, and (c) decay class. Results of sampling will be used to determine CWD amounts, assess current forest management sustainability, and make recommendations for retention goals.

3. Habitat Management

3.1 Control of invasive species that threaten the integrity and sustainability of habitat required by species of greatest conservation need

The administration of the invasive species program will be conducted by the Habitat Unit of the Species/Habitat Section of the Wildlife Division. This unit will be responsible for compiling information on invasive species of concern and disseminating this information to other sections and the department.

Control activities may include one or more techniques from the following four categories, biological, chemical, physical, and prescribed fire. Adaptive management will be used to monitor efficacy of control methods and adjust as necessary or as new information becomes available. Biological Controls: These control activities include introducing a biological agent to control the target species. Biological agents may include other organisms or viruses. These agents may be native to systems where they are being released or they may be of a non-native origin. Chemical Controls: These activities include the use of various organic and inorganic pesticides. Physical Controls: These activities include direct control methods by hand or mechanical device. For plant species these may involve hand pulling, mowing, disking, plowing, chopping, or other methods. For animal species these may include shooting, trapping, snaring, entangling, or other methods. Prescribed Fire: These activities include the use of fire to control invasive species.

3.2 Grassland restoration and management

Restoration will include the use of prescribed fire, herbicides, mowing and other mechanical techniques, hand clearing of undesirable or exotic vegetation and seed augmentation as individual site needs dictate. Seed will be collected from remnant grasslands to be used as foundation stock for the propagation of local genotype sources. Original seed source collections will be completed by hand through volunteer projects. Propagation sites will be established on public lands.

3.3 Jack pine forest regeneration, maintenance, and management

Sites will be selected based on appropriateness for regeneration. Regeneration efforts include site preparation that can involve roller chopping or prescribed fires to prepare the seedbed. Soil disking and trenching may also be required. If an adequate seed source does not exist then the site will be planted with 2-3 year old jack pine seedlings. A total of 1,500 acres will be regenerated annually. Growth and stem density factors will be used determine the need additional plantings to meet optimum stem densities (minimum 1200 stems/acre) identified for Kirtland’s warbler nesting habitat. Management activities will be coordinated with other state and federal agencies through the federal Kirtland’s warbler recovery team. It is estimated that 1,000 – 1,500 acres will be affected each year. An annual warbler census will be used to determine the success of this management activity.

3.4 Great Lakes coastal wetlands restoration, enhancement, and management

A variety of techniques may be used in restoration, enhancement, and management projects including breaking tiles, plugging drains, installing water control structures when natural flow cannot be established, and providing buffer and filter strips adjacent to the wetlands. Erosion control measures will use soft engineering techniques whenever feasible while avoiding armoring such as rip-rap. Native vegetation may be restored by planting seeds or plugs. Exotics and other undesirable species may be controlled

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 5 of 14 with herbicides and prescribed fire. Woody vegetation may be controlled mechanically through hydro- axing, bulldozing, or other techniques.

Existing water control structures on state owned lands will be used to increase exposed mud flat habitat for wading and shorebirds during peak spring and fall migrations. Of particular importance will be those state lands along the Lake Huron shoreline where major migrations of these birds occur. On other water management areas water manipulation may be used to increase use by Black Terns, rails and other wading and water birds.

3.5 Inland wetland management, restoration, and enhancement

A variety of techniques may be used in management, restoration, and enhancement projects including breaking tiles, plugging drains, installing water control structures when natural flow cannot be established, and providing buffer and filter strips adjacent to the wetlands. Restoring natural water flow and water level fluctuations will be used to restore the natural disturbance regime of the wetland. Native vegetation may be restored by planting seeds or plugs. Exotics and other undesirable species may be controlled mechanically, with herbicides, and prescribed fire. Woody vegetation may be controlled mechanically through hydro-axing, bulldozing, or other techniques including chemical.

4. Population Management

4.1 Birds of prey hacking to enhance populations of species of greatest conservation need as set forth in the Wildlife Action Plan

No more hacking of Osprey chicks will occur in this segment of this grant; these activities were completed in the previous segment. The only activities supported in this segment are for surveys to determine if birds are returning and nesting in hacking locations.

4.2 Conservation of individuals and/or populations to ensure perseverance of populations of species of greatest conservation need identified in the Wildlife Action Plan

Gating of bat caves involves monitoring of abandoned mines to determine a priority list of caves to be gated. Gating consists of installing metal grating over the cave entrance.

Piping Plover protection involves fencing off nesting beaches with psychological string barriers and signs. Individual nests will have USFWS approved predator exclosures erected around them. All areas will be periodically surveyed and monitored for plover activity and fledging success. Piping Plover protection also involves banding adults and chicks at the nest site. This activity involves the capture and handling of plovers and placement of multiple bands on their legs.

5. Planning

5.1 Revising and developing implementation plans for Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan including public participation and stakeholder input

The planning activities covered by this project statement are administrative will occur only in office buildings. IV. Description of Effects: In the space provided or on an attached sheet, describe the effects, including beneficial, of the project actions on the identified species, species habitats, and federal critical habitat (see II above).

1. Technical Guidance

1.1 Training and professional development

The activities supported under this project statement are non-intrusive training, occurring mostly in offices and classrooms. Field training events will not involve any direct or indirect impacts on any listed species or designated critical habitat. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

1.2 Threatened, endangered, and listed species reviews and permits

The activities supported under this project statement are project review and administrative only, occurring

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 6 of 14 mostly in an office environment. Site visits will involve inspections only; no intrusive actions involving listed species will occur. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

The activities supported under this project statement are permit review and administrative only, occurring primarily in an office environment. Field reviews and site visits will not involve any intrusive effects on listed species. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

1.4 Advising landowners and other agencies

The activities supported under this project statement are support, review, and administrative only, occurring primarily in an office environment. Field reviews and site visits will not involve any intrusive effects on listed species. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

1.5 Maintenance of existing databases

The activities supported under this project statement are data management and administrative only, occurring only in an office environment. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

1.6 Biological surveys and community classifications

The sample, data compilation and classification activities supported under this project statement will not involve handling or in any other way affects to federally listed species. Many of the activities will occur within an office setting. The physical and chemical surveys of lakes do not involve any techniques that require collection or affecting federal listed species. Therefore, there will be no affect on any listed or candidate species.

2. Surveys, Monitoring, and Research

2.1 Wildlife Divisions surveys, monitoring, and research for species of greatest conservation need

The activities supported under this project statement primarily involve non-intrusive data collection, compilation, and analyses in office settings. These studies will not support any activities that could affect federally listed species even if they did occur in the action area. No activity supported by this project statement will occur in any designated critical habitat. Effects by study are listed as follows:

The following studies are supported under this project statement:

2.1.1 Statewide surveys

The activities supported by this grant for this study will have no affect or are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species. This study supports non-intrusive data collection, no listed species will be handled, and no habitat will be modified.

2.1.3 Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory

The activities supported by this grant for this study will have no effect on any federally listed species. This study supports non-intrusive data collection, no listed species will be handled, and no habitat will be modified.

2.1.4 Importance of coarse woody debris (CWD)

3. Habitat Management

3.1 Control of invasive species that threaten the integrity and sustainability of habitat required by species of greatest conservation need

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 7 of 14 Work in habitat occupied by Karner blue and Mitchell’s satyr butterflies may adversely affect individuals. Management of the Karner blue will be done in accordance with Michigan’s draft Habitat Conservation Plan. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s draft Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program.

Invasive control work in Indiana bat and Kirtland’s Warbler habitat will not affect individuals. Work can be timed to occur when these species are not present or the work activities will not be such that could affect individuals of these species. Most listed plant species could potentially be affected by control methods for invasive plant species. Activities in occupied habitat will be restricted to those hand clearing and spot treatments that avoid affects to individuals of listed species. If other methods are to be used that cannot avoid affecting individuals, a site specific consultation with USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office will occur before work is initiated.

3.2 Grassland restoration and management

Management techniques may affect non-plant listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential affects can be avoided by the timing of the management activities. Work in habitat occupied by Karner blue and Mitchell’s satyr butterflies may adversely affect individuals. Management of the Karner blue will be done in accordance with Michigan’s draft Habitat Conservation Plan. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s draft Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance.

Most listed plant species could potentially be affected by restoration and management methods. Activities in occupied habitat will be restricted to those that avoid affects to individuals of listed species. If other methods are to be used that cannot avoid affecting individuals, a site specific consultation with USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office will occur before work is initiated.

3.3 Jack pine forest regeneration, maintenance, and management

Work in habitat occupied by Kirtland’s Warbler may adversely affect individuals. MDNR has been working with USFWS Ecological Services on Kirtland’s Warbler for many years. Consultations have been conducted and biological opinions developed. All activities conducted as part of this project will be done in accordance of the results of those previous consultations and opinions. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance. Should any new management technique be used because of adaptive management that may adversely affect this species, a formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted.

3.4 Great Lakes coastal wetlands restoration, enhancement, and management

Restoration activities supported by this project are not likely to affect any listed or candidate species as areas selected for restoration are not likely to have any listed species or designated critical habitat present. Management activities may affect listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential affects will be avoided by the timing of the management activities. Management activities on sites with occupied habitat will occur when the listed species are seasonally not present or dormant. If management activities cannot be timed to avoid affecting listed species than a site-specific formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted before any management occurs. No activities will occur in any designated critical habitat. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s draft Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances.

3.5 Inland wetland management, restoration, and enhancement

Restoration activities supported by this project are not likely to affect any listed or candidate species as

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 8 of 14 areas selected for restoration are not likely to have any listed species present. Management activities may affect listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential affects will be avoided by the timing of the management activities. Management activities on sites with occupied habitat will occur when the listed species are seasonally not present or dormant.

Work in habitat occupied by Mitchell’s satyr butterfly may adversely affect individuals. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s draft Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. For all other species if management activities cannot be timed to avoid affecting listed species than a site-specific formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted before any management occurs. No activities will occur in any designated critical habitat.

4. Population Management

4.1 Birds of prey hacking to enhance populations of species of greatest conservation need as set forth in the Wildlife Action Plan

Surveys for returning/nesting Ospreys consist of monitoring with binoculars and spotting scopes. Bald Eagle nests do not occur in proximity to the Osprey hacking areas where surveys could potentially disturb nesting eagles. These activities do not have the potential to affect any other listed species even if the species occurred in the area.

4.2 Conservation of individuals and/or populations to ensure perseverance of populations of species of greatest conservation need identified in the Wildlife Action Plan

The timing and location of cave gating activities is such that no listed species could be affected even if the species were present.

Protection of Piping Plover nesting sites may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Piping Plovers. The psychological fencing is erected to help exclude people before plovers begin incubating eggs and has been conducted successfully for years in Michigan and other states without affecting the use of the beaches by nesting pairs. Constructing nest exclosures does keep incubating adults off the eggs for a brief period. These exclosures, however, are constructed by trained and experienced crews and adults are off the nests for less than 15 minutes. All nests are monitored after exclosures are constructed to ensure the adults can and do return to the nest and continue incubating. Years of monitoring have shown that a nest has never been abandoned as the result of the predator exclosures. These exclosures are beneficial and data have shown a dramatic increase in hatching success of exclosed versus unprotected nests.

The Piping Plover banding activity has the potential to adversely impact individual that are captured either through trauma from the capture or from the bands themselves. Although adverse impacts may occur to individuals, this activity has been ongoing for several years with funding from Federal Endangered Species Section 6 accounts. Banding activities have been a critical part of the recovery efforts for piping plovers. Several of the recovery tasks listed in the 2003 Great Lakes & Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan cannot be completed without banding activities.

Previous banding activities have helped in determining wintering grounds, nest site fidelity of both nesting pairs and their offspring, mixing of Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains populations, population expansion, development of a pedigree of the current population and pair bonding. This information has been essential in understanding the dynamics of the Great Lakes plover population.

The monitoring and fencing activities within designated critical habitat of Piping Plovers has no potential to alter the habitat or have any affect, positive or negative, on the suitability of the habitat for plovers.

5. Planning

5.1 Revising and developing implementation plans for Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan including public participation and stakeholder input

All planning activities are administrative in nature and will occur within existing buildings and

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 9 of 14 consequently have no effect on any listed species. V. Recommended Determination(s) of Effect(s): For all species and critical habitat identified in Section I, mark (X) the appropriate determinations. A. Listed, Proposed and Candidate Species

X a) “No Effect” List species for which this recommendation is applicable (or attach list): All listed species except Piping Plover, Indiana bat, and Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake.

b) “May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect” List species for which this recommendation is applicable (or attach list):

X c) “May Affect, and is Likely to Adversely Affect” List species for which this recommendation is applicable (or attach list): Piping Plover, Indiana bat and Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake

B. Federally Designated and Proposed Critical Habitat

X a) “No Effect” to Critical Habitat List critical habitat(s) for which the recommendation is applied. Piping Plover critical habitat, Gray Wolf critical habitat (if the species is relisted), proposed Hine’s Emerald Dragonfly critical habitat

b) “May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect” Critical Habitat List critical habitat(s) for which the recommendation is applied.

c) “May Affect, and is Likely to Adversely Affect” Critical Habitat List critical habitat(s) for which the recommendation is applied. Signatures:

Prepared by: Name/Title: Christopher Hoving

Signature: Date: Telephone No. (517) 373-3337 email: [email protected]

Reviewed by: Name/Title: Eric Sink

Signature: Date: Telephone No. (517) 335-1064 email: [email protected]

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 10 of 14 FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES IN MICHIGAN

Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Plants Asplenium scolopendrium americanum American Hart's-tongue Threatened Cirsium pitcheri Pitcher's Thistle Threatened Hymenoxys herbacea Lakeside Daisy Threatened Iris lacustris Dwarf Lake Iris Threatened Isotria medeoloides Small Whorled Pogonia Threatened Mimulus glabratus michiganensis Michigan Monkey-flower Endangered Platanthera leucophaea Eastern Prairie Fringed Orchid Threatened Solidago houghtonii Houghton's Goldenrod Threatened

Animals Myotis sodalis Indiana Bat Endangered Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx Threatened Puma [Felis] concolor Eastern Puma Endangered Canis lupus Gray Wolf Endangered Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle Threatened Charadrius melodus Piping Plover Endangered Dendroica kirtlandii Kirtland's Warbler Endangered Epioblasma obliquata perobliqua White Catspaw Mussel Endangered Pleurobema clava Clubshell Mussel Endangered Epioblasma torulosa rangiana Northern Riffleshell Endangered Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta Copperbelly Water Snake Threatened Sistrurus catenatus catenatus Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake Candidate Somatochlora hineana Hine's Emerald Dragonfly Endangered Nicophorus americanus American Burying Beetle Endangered Brychius hungerfordi Hungerford's Crawling Water Beetle Endangered Lycaeides melissa samuelis Karner Blue Butterfly Endangered Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly Endangered Villosa fabalis Rayed Bean Candidate

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 11 of 14 Map 1: Distribution of public lands by land ownership type in Michigan.

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 12 of 14 Map 2: Wildlife Division Management Units in Michigan by geographic region (southern lower peninsula in yellow, northern lower peninsula in gray, and upper peninsula in blue).

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 13 of 14 Map 3: Piping Plover designated critical habitat in Michigan.

T-9-T-2 Phase I Section 7 Evaluation Form Page 14 of 14

Michigan Department of Natural Resources Findings of NEPA Compliance for Federal Assistance June 4, 2009 Grant Approval Action

Dear Mr. Bryant:

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is requesting approval of the AFA and Grant Proposal Narrative along with Segment 1 for the following federal assistance grant:

Federal ID: T-9-T-2 Amendment Number: N/A

Grant Name: Michigan’s Comprehensive State Wildlife Grant

This document has been prepared to serve as part of the administrative record for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Concerning the federal action requested above, I have reviewed the actions included in this grant for NEPA compliance and have found that the activities supported by this grant:

Will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment and are completely covered by the following categorical exclusion(s) 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, and 1.10 in Appendix 1 to 516 DM Chapter 2 and/or 1.4A(2), 1.4B(1), 1.4B(2), 1.4B(3), 1.4B(4), 1.4B(8), and 1.4C(1) in 516 DM Chapter 8.5. The definitions of the categorical exclusions used are as follows:

516 DM 2, Appendix 1 – Department of the Interior Categorical Exclusions revised in the Federal Register: March 8, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 45)

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.3 Routine financial transactions including such things as salaries and expenses, procurement contracts (in accordance with applicable procedures and Executive Orders for sustainable or green procurement), guarantees, financial assistance, income transfers, audits, fees, bonds, and royalties.

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial, and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research, and monitoring activities.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

516 DM 8.5 – US Fish and Wildlife Service Categorical Exclusions – Effective Date 5/27/2004

1.4A(2) Personnel training, environmental interpretation, public safety efforts, and other educational activities, which do not involve new construction or major additions to existing facilities.

T-9-T-2 MDNR NEPA Compliance Documentation Page 1 of 4 1.4B(1) Research, inventory, and information collection activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources which involve negligible animal mortality or habitat destruction, no introduction of contaminants, or no introduction of organisms not indigenous to the affected ecosystem.

1.4B(2) The operation, maintenance, and management of existing facilities and routine recurring management activities and improvements, including renovations and replacements which result in no or only minor changes in the use, and have no or negligible environmental effects on-site or in the vicinity of the site.

1.4B(3) The construction of new, or the addition of, small structures or improvements, including structures and improvements for the restoration of wetland, riparian, instream, or native habitats, which result in no or only minor changes in the use of the affected local area. The following are examples of activities that may be included.

(a) The installation of fences.

(b) The construction of small water control structures.

(d) The construction of small berms or dikes.

(e) The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

1.4C(1) The issuance, denial, suspension, and revocation of permits for activities involving fish, wildlife, or plants regulated under 50 CFR Chapter 1, Subsection B, when such permits cause no or negligible environmental disturbance. These permits involve endangered and threatened species, species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), marine mammals, exotic birds, migratory birds, eagles, and injurious wildlife.

Additionally, none of the following extraordinary circumstances applies that would disallow the use of the Categorical Exclusions listed above:

1. Have significant impacts on public health or safety. 2. Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation or refuge lands; wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers; national natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; wetlands (Executive Order 11990); floodplains (Executive Order 11988); national monuments; migratory birds; and other ecologically significant or critical areas. 3. Have highly controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources [NEPA Section 102(2)(E)].

T-9-T-2 MDNR NEPA Compliance Documentation Page 2 of 4 4. Have highly uncertain and potentially significant environmental effects or involve unique or unknown environmental risks. 5. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with potentially significant environmental effects. 6. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant environmental effects. 7. Have significant impacts on properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places as determined by either the bureau or office. 8. Have significant impacts on species listed, or proposed to be listed, on the List of Endangered or Threatened Species, or have significant impacts on designated Critical Habitat for these species. 9. Violate a Federal law, or a State, local, or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the environment. 10. Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (Executive Order 12898). 11. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or significantly adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (Executive Order 13007). 12. Contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area or actions that may promote the introduction, growth, or expansion of the range of such species (Federal Noxious Weed Control Act and Executive Order 13112).

However, one or more Extraordinary Circumstances applies and consequently an EA/EIS will be completed.

Are not completely covered by Categorical Exclusions and an EA/EIS will be completed.

Are completely covered by and will be conducted in accordance with the selected alternative of the following approved and published Environmental Assessment with a corresponding Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI):

Are completely covered by and will be conducted in accordance with the selected alternative approved and published in the following EIS:

MDNR requests concurrence with our finding and recommends USFWS adopt this finding to serve as the administrative record of compliance with the spirit and intent of NEPA.

Prepared by: Date: 06/04/2009 Stephen Beyer, Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator

T-9-T-2 MDNR NEPA Compliance Documentation Page 3 of 4

Date: USFWS Federal Assistance Program Staff Federal Assistance Concurrence Date: Federal Assistance Chief

T-9-T-2 MDNR NEPA Compliance Documentation Page 4 of 4 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT T-9-T-2

STATE WILDLIFE GRANT

GRANT PROPOSAL FOR THE PERIOD: AUGUST 10, 2009 – SEPTEMBER 30, 2010

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

SUBMITTED: THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROPOSAL SUMMARY: ...... 10

CHAPTER 1: TECHNICAL GUIDANCE FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED...... 11 PROJECT STATEMENT: Training and professional development...... 12 SUMMARY:...... 12 NEEDS:...... 12 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 13 OBJECTIVES:...... 14 Objective 1. Training and professional development ...... 14 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 14 APPROACH: ...... 14 Approach 1. Training and professional development...... 14 LOCATION:...... 15 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 15 COMPLIANCE: ...... 15 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 15 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 16 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 16 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 16 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 16 PROJECT STATEMENT: Threatened, endangered and listed species reviews and permits. 18 SUMMARY:...... 18 NEED:...... 18 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 18 OBJECTIVES:...... 19 Objective 1. Threatened and endangered species review...... 19 Objective 2. Listed species permits and list review ...... 19 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 19 APPROACH: ...... 19 Approach 1. Threatened and endangered species review ...... 19 Approach 2. Listed species permits and list review...... 20 LOCATION:...... 21 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 21 COMPLIANCE: ...... 22 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 22 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 22 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 22 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 23 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 23 PROJECT STATEMENT: Advising landowners and other agencies...... 24 SUMMARY:...... 24 NEED:...... 24 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 24 OBJECTIVES:...... 25

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 2 of 176 Objective 1. Land use planning outreach...... 25 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 26 APPROACH: ...... 26 Approach 1. Land use planning outreach ...... 26 LOCATION:...... 27 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 27 COMPLIANCE: ...... 27 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 27 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 28 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 28 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 28 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 28 PROJECT STATEMENT: Maintenance of existing databases...... 29 SUMMARY:...... 29 NEED:...... 29 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 29 OBJECTIVES:...... 30 Objective 1. Database updates and quality control ...... 30 Objective 2. Database access ...... 30 Objective 3. Develop GIS data...... 30 Objective 4. Public sighting reports...... 31 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 31 APPROACH: ...... 31 Approach 1. Database updates and quality control...... 31 Approach 2. Database access...... 31 Approach 3. Develop GIS data ...... 31 Approach 4. Public sighting reports...... 32 LOCATION:...... 32 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 32 COMPLIANCE: ...... 32 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 32 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 33 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 33 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 33 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 33 PROJECT STATEMENT: Biological surveys and community classifications...... 34 SUMMARY:...... 34 NEED:...... 34 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 37 OBJECTIVES:...... 38 Objective 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey of Michigan ...... 38 Objective 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural communities in Michigan... 38 Objective 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database ...... 38 Objective 4. Natural community classification...... 38 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 39

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 3 of 176 APPROACH: ...... 39 Approach 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey of Michigan...... 39 Approach 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural communities in Michigan... 40 Approach 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database ...... 40 Approach 4. Natural community classification ...... 40 LOCATION:...... 40 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 40 COMPLIANCE: ...... 41 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 41 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 42 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 42 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 42 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 42

CHAPTER 2: SURVEYS, MONITORING AND RESEARCH FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED ...... 43 PROJECT 1: Wildlife Divisions surveys, monitoring and research for species of greatest conservation need...... 44 PROJECT SUMMARY:...... 44 PROJECT NEEDS:...... 44 PROJECT OBJECTIVES:...... 45 Objective 1. Population Surveys...... 45 Objective 2. Population Monitoring...... 45 Objective 3. Population and Habitat Research...... 45 PROJECT EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 45 PROJECT APPROACH: ...... 45 Approach 1. Population surveys ...... 45 Approach 2. Population monitoring...... 45 Approach 3. Population and habitat research ...... 46 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 46 STUDY 1.1: Statewide surveys ...... 47 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 47 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 50 JOB 1.1.1: Baseline surveys to establish population status and distribution...... 53 JOB 1.1.2: Breeding status, habitat use and phenology surveys for selected species ..... 56 JOB 1.1.3: Annual frog and toad survey...... 59 JOB 1.1.4: Breeding Bird Atlas surveys and revisions...... 62 JOB 1.1.5: Preparation of performance and final reports ...... 65 STUDY 1.2: Surveys of selected avian guilds...... 68 STUDY 1.3: Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory...... 69 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 70 STUDY ESTIMATED COSTS:...... 74 JOB 1.3.1: Biodiversity assessment...... 77 JOB 1.3.2: EO inventory of southern Michigan Wildlife Division lands...... 78 JOB 1.3.3: Preparation of performance and final reports ...... 81

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 4 of 176 STUDY 1.4: Importance of coarse woody debris...... 83 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 83 STUDY ESTIMATED COSTS:...... 86 JOB 1.4.1: Evaluation of CWD survey techniques...... 88 JOB 1.4.2: Preparation of performance and final reports ...... 90 STUDY 1.5: Black Creek bat communities...... 92 STUDY 1.6: Eastern massasauga rattlesnake research...... 93 STUDY 1.7: CREP lands examination...... 94 STUDY 1.8: Refining wildlife habitat models ...... 95 STUDY 1.9: Eastern fox snakes ecology and conservation ...... 96 STUDY 1.10: Oak regeneration ...... 97

CHAPTER 3: HABITAT MANAGEMENT FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED ...... 98 PROJECT STATEMENT: Control of invasive species that threaten the integrity and sustainability of habitat required by species of greatest conservation need...... 99 SUMMARY:...... 99 NEED:...... 99 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 99 OBJECTIVES:...... 100 Objective 1. Invasive species program administration ...... 100 Objective 2. Invasive species control...... 100 Objective 3. Invasive species control outreach...... 100 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 100 APPROACH: ...... 101 Approach 1. Invasive species program administration...... 101 Approach 2. Invasive species control ...... 102 Approach 3. Invasive species control outreach...... 105 LOCATION:...... 105 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 105 COMPLIANCE: ...... 106 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 106 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 107 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 107 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 107 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 108 PROJECT STATEMENT: Grassland restoration and management...... 109 SUMMARY:...... 109 NEED:...... 109 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 110 OBJECTIVES:...... 110 Objective 1. Native grassland restoration and maintenance ...... 110 Objective 2. Local genotype collection and propagation...... 110 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 110 APPROACH: ...... 112 Approach 1. Native grassland restoration and maintenance...... 112 Approach 2. Local genotype collection and propagation ...... 112

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 5 of 176 LOCATION:...... 113 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 113 COMPLIANCE: ...... 114 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 114 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 114 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 115 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 115 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 115 PROJECT STATEMENT: Jack pine forest regeneration, maintenance and management. .. 116 SUMMARY:...... 116 NEED:...... 116 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 117 OBJECTIVES:...... 117 Objective 1. Regeneration of jack pine...... 117 Objective 2. Jack pine management...... 117 Objective 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach...... 117 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 117 APPROACH: ...... 118 Approach 1. Regeneration of jack pine...... 118 Approach 2. Jack pine management ...... 118 Approach 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach...... 118 LOCATION:...... 119 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 119 COMPLIANCE: ...... 120 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 120 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 121 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 121 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 121 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 121 PROJECT STATEMENT: Great Lakes coastal wetlands restoration, enhancement and management...... 123 SUMMARY:...... 123 NEED:...... 123 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 124 OBJECTIVES:...... 125 Objective 1. Coastal wetland restoration ...... 125 Objective 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and management ...... 125 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 125 APPROACH: ...... 126 Approach 1. Coastal wetland restoration...... 126 Approach 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and management...... 127 LOCATION:...... 128 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 128 COMPLIANCE: ...... 128 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 128 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 129

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 6 of 176 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 129 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 129 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 130 PROJECT STATEMENT: Inland wetland management, restoration and enhancement...... 131 SUMMARY:...... 131 NEED:...... 131 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 131 OBJECTIVES:...... 132 Objective 1. Inland wetland restoration ...... 132 Objective 2. Inland wetland enhancement and management...... 132 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 132 APPROACH: ...... 134 Approach 1. Inland wetland restoration...... 134 Approach 2. Inland wetland enhancement and management...... 135 LOCATION:...... 135 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 136 COMPLIANCE: ...... 136 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 136 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 137 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 137 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 137 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 138

CHAPTER 4: POPULATION MANAGEMENT FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED . 139 PROJECT STATEMENT: Birds of prey hacking to enhance populations of species of greatest conservation need as set forth in the Wildlife Action Plan...... 140 SUMMARY:...... 140 NEED:...... 140 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 140 OBJECTIVES:...... 141 Objective 1. Nesting and hacking site surveys...... 141 Objective 2. Chick collection, rearing and release...... 141 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 141 APPROACH: ...... 141 Approach 2. Nesting and hacking site surveys ...... 141 Approach 3. Chick collection, rearing and release ...... 142 LOCATION:...... 143 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 143 COMPLIANCE: ...... 143 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 143 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 144 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 144 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 144 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 144 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED: ...... 144

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 7 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Conservation of individuals and/or populations to ensure perseverance of populations of species of greatest conservation need identified in the Wildlife Action Plan...... 146 SUMMARY:...... 146 NEED:...... 146 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs...... 146 OBJECTIVES:...... 147 Objective 1. Nesting structures construction and maintenance ...... 147 Objective 2. Bat cave gate construction and maintenance...... 147 Objective 3. Piping Plover recovery management...... 147 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 147 APPROACH: ...... 148 Approach 1. Nesting structures construction and maintenance...... 148 Approach 2. Bat cave gate construction and maintenance ...... 148 Approach 3. Piping Plover recovery management ...... 149 LOCATION:...... 150 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 150 COMPLIANCE: ...... 151 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 151 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 152 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 152 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 152 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 153 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED: ...... 153

CHAPTER 5: WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN REVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS ...... 154 PROJECT STATEMENT: Revising and developing implementation plans for Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan including public participation and stakeholder input...... 155 SUMMARY:...... 155 NEED:...... 155 OBJECTIVES:...... 156 Objective 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision...... 156 Objective 3. Implementation Guidance...... 157 Objective 4. Planning Integration ...... 157 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS: ...... 157 APPROACH: ...... 158 Approach 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision ...... 158 Approach 2. Public Participation ...... 159 Approach 3. Implementation Guidance ...... 160 Approach 4. Planning Integration...... 161 LOCATION:...... 163 ESTIMATED COSTS: ...... 163 COMPLIANCE: ...... 163 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...... 163 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA) ...... 163

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 8 of 176 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ...... 164 Other Federal Compliance Issues ...... 164 PROJECT PERSONNEL: ...... 164

APPENDIX A: Segment 2 Accomplishment and Budget Detail for the Expenditure Period 1 October 2008 through 30 September 2010 ...... 165 CHAPTER 1: Technical Guidance for Species of Greatest Conservation Need...... 165 CHAPTER 2: Surveys, Monitoring and Research for Species of Greatest Conservation Need ...... 167 CHAPTER 3: Habitat Management for Species of Greatest Conservation Need ...... 170 CHAPTER 4: Population Management for Species of Greatest Conservation Need...... 172 CHAPTER 5: Wildlife Action Plan Revisions and Development of Implementation Plans 174 All CHAPTERS COMBINED BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010 ...... 176 SEGMENT CONDITIONS REQUEST ...... 176

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 9 of 176 PROPOSAL SUMMARY:

This proposal contains the second segment for this grant to provide for continued work in federal fiscal year 2009 and 2010. No new project statements, studies, or objectives are being added; the only changes from the previous approved grant are to the amount of planned accomplishments and amount of funds to be obligated. Additionally, some of the research, surveys, and monitoring projects contained in Chapter 2 have been completed or the timing of jobs for some studies has been updated as various parts of the studies have been completed or need to be initiated.

As previously noted and approved in Segment 1 of this grant, this proposal is a modification of the previously approved grants T-5-T and T-6-M. The revisions made to the grant proposal in Segment 1 were to address changes in the State Wildlife Grant (SWG) operational guidelines that went into effect in fiscal year 2007. The Needs section of each Project Statement has been modified to show specifically why the included objectives are necessary to implement Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP).

This proposal also reflects changes in Federal Assistance operational guidelines that went into effect in fiscal year 2007 that eliminated Grant Agreements. This proposal includes Segment 2 to support Wildlife Division expenditures for the federal fiscal year of 2009 and 2010. The planned accomplishments and budget narrative for Segment 2 are included as Appendix A to this proposal narrative. In subsequent fiscal years, this proposal will be continued by adding funds for the next fiscal year and revising the planned accomplishments and budget narrative as the next segment of the grant.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 10 of 176

CHAPTER 1: TECHNICAL GUIDANCE FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 11 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Training and professional development.

SUMMARY:

The Wildlife Division is the source for technical guidance on issues relating to Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCNs) and their habitat requirements in Michigan. The Division is often asked for advice, and many cases on activities by other agencies, organizations, businesses and citizens require formal consultation concerning impacts to wildlife resources. Decisions that affect land use practices and resource management are made based on the technical guidance provided by the Division. The majority of land in Michigan is not publicly owned; therefore, proper conservation of wildlife resources depends on the Division’s ability to be involved with decisions affecting land use anywhere in the state. Successful implementation of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources’ (MDNR) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) will depend on the ability to influence land use. The goal of this project is to ensure the Wildlife Division has the proper resources and appropriately trained staff to provide this necessary technical guidance.

NEEDS:

The development of Michigan’s WAP was a large and detailed undertaking. This plan consists of a nested ecosystem to landscape features to plant communities to habitat approach necessary to support those individual species of greatest conservation need. The information contained in the plan provides a cornerstone for our ecosystem planning and management efforts. To be successful in implementing the WAP, however, our staff need to have the proper tools and understanding to go with the plan. Training is an important need to move forward in implementing ecosystem management.

Even without the development of the WAP, training of Division staff is always an ongoing need. As the knowledge of wildlife conservation grows and changes, our staff need to be up to date with this knowledge. Previous training programs have included sessions on forest raptors, amphibians and reptiles, butterflies and satyrs and unique ecological systems such as fens, old growth forests and wetlands, as well as the suite of wildlife species associated with each. An important component of ecosystem management is adaptive management. We must learn as we apply new techniques to continue to build on management success. Information gained from this training is needed by staff to develop strategic and operational species and habitat management plans.

As MDNR continues to implement a system of ecosystem based planning and management, the need for addition professional development in these topics has grown. Enhancing the current training will provide an increase in knowledge and ability to design plans containing management strategies that address the full array of wildlife species.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 12 of 176 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Incorporating scientific knowledge into management decisions is a conservation need for all SGCN habitats as idenditified on page 65 of Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments of the WAP. The WAP calls for incrorporating added knowledge into management decisions, particularly when SGCNs are suseptible to incompatible management activities designed and implemented to benefit other species. The WAP identifies incompatible natural resource management as a threat for numerous SGCNs, as listed in Section 3. SGCN Status & Species Specific Issues including: six-whorl vertigo (p. 40) boreal fan moth (p. 108) Cooper’s hawk (p. 171) Pleistocene catinella (p. 42) three-staff underwing (p. 109) red-shouldered hawk (p. 172) Euconulus alderi (p. 46) magdalen underwing (p. 110) common moorhen (p. 175) spike-lip crater (p. 47) Doll’s merolonche (p. 111) American woodcock (p. 179) blue-legged locust (p. 72) blazing star borer (p. 114) black-billed cuckoo (p. 182) secretive locust (p. 75) maritime sunflower borer (p. 115) barn owl (p. 183) pine katydid (p. 79) Culver’s root borer (p. 115) common nighthawk (p. 184) tamarack tree cricket (p. 81) silphium borer moth (p. 116) black-backed woodpecker (p. 186) angular spittlebug (p. 82) phlox moth (p. 117) Acadian flycatcher (p. 188) red-legged spittlebug (p. 83) leadplant flower moth (p. 117) migrant loggerhead shrike (p. 189) Dorydiella kansana (p. 84) spartina borer moth (p. 118) wood thrush (p. 194) Flexamia reflexus (p. 85) blue-spotted salamander (p. 145) blue-winged warbler (p. 195) Hungerford’s crawling water beetle pickerel frog (p. 151) golden-winged warbler (p. 196) (p. 88) copperbelly water snake (p. 157) prairie warbler (p. 199) black lordithon rove beetle (p. 89) six-lined racerunner (p. 158) red crossbill (p. 210) six-banded longhorn beetle (p. 90) eastern massasauga (p. 159) white-winged crossbill (p. 211) persius duskywing (p. 93) spotted turtle (p. 159) silver-haired bat (p. 215) grizzled skipper (p. 94) wood turtle (p. 160) red bat (p. 215) ottoe skipper (p. 95) eastern box turtle (p. 161) hoary bat (p. 216) dusted skipper (p. 96) American black duck (p. 163) northern bat (p. 216) northern hairstreak (p. 97) blue-winged teal (p. 163) Indiana bat (p. 217) northern blue (p. 98) spruce grouse (p. 164) evening bat (p. 217) Karner blue (p. 99) sharp-tailed grouse (p. 164) eastern pipistrelle (p. 218) Henry’s elfin (p. 99) northern bobwhite (p. 165) lynx (p. 219) frosted elfin (p. 100) pied billed grebe (p. 166) American marten (p. 220) regal fritillary (p. 101) green heron (p. 168) moose (p. 221) Mitchell’s satyr (104) black-crowned night-heron (p. 169) northern flying squirrel (p. 222) barrens buckmoth (p. 106) osprey (p. 169) southern red-backed vole (p. 223) Sprague’s pygarctia (p. 107) northern harrier (p. 170) snowshoe hare (p. 225)

The WAP also identifies greater information on the protection needs of SGCNs by land managers as a need for numerous species in Section 3. SGCN Status & Species Specific Issues including: clubshell (p. 20) frosted elfin (p. 100) mooneye (p. 123) Hine’s emerald dragonfly (p. 63) frigga fritillary (p. 101) redside dace (p. 124) angular spittlebug (p. 67) freija fritillary (p. 102) pugnose minnow (p. 128) Huron River leafhopper (p. 85) tawny crescent (p. 103) southern redbelly dace (p. 128) Poweshiek skipperling (p. 94) Mitchell’s satyr (p. 104) spotted salamander (p. 146) Duke’s skipper (p. 95) silphium borer moth (p. 116) piping plover (p. 176). pipevine swallowtail (p. 96) phlox moth (p. 117) Karner blue butterfly (p. 99) spartina borer moth (p. 118)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 13 of 176 OBJECTIVES:

The goal for this project statement is to ensure MDNR staff have the proper knowledge and skills to effectively manage for SGCNs. This goal will be addressed by the following objective:

Objective 1. Training and professional development

Annually develop and conduct training courses for Department employees concerning the diverse array of species of greatest conservation need and their associated habitats, communities, landscape features and ecosystems. Continue to provide professional development on ecosystem based planning and management. Use training and other devices to increase staff support and involvement in the management of threatened, endangered and species of special concern. Offer support to Department employees to attend other professional development events related to the management of species of greatest conservation need. Staff will use this training to develop strategic and operational plans for habitats and species.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Employee training will improve the ability of MDNR staff to identify important wildlife species and better recognize the effects, both positive and negative, that management activities will have on wildlife species. This training will make our organization better prepared to implement the WAP as well as continuing to develop and institute ecosystem based planning and management. Implementing the WAP will involve incorporating its elements into strategic and operational plans for species and habitats. Training will also prepare field personnel to respond to situations or questions from other resource agencies and reduce the need to contact staff specialists.

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Training and professional development

Training sessions will be developed in relation to field needs and geographic location. For example, forest raptor training has been developed for forest managers and field biologists in northern Michigan. Training sessions on Karner blue butterflies may be conducted in southwestern Michigan while a frog and toad management and survey training may involve personnel statewide.

Workshops typically consist of classroom training. Additional training may be offered through field activities. Classroom activities include life history, survey techniques and identification training. This is typically followed by one or two field opportunities where participants gain hands-on experience.

All training and workshops conducted will involve species of greatest conservation need and/or implementation of the WAP. Training and workshops may also focus on ecosystem based planning and management. Training for species not covered by the WAP and training related to policies and procedures will not be supported by this grant.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 14 of 176 The following project code will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222100 Training and All aspects of developing and Number of training Professional conducting training sessions for sessions attended Development Department staff on species of greatest conservation need and their associated habitats, communities, landscape features and ecosystems. Includes providing support for staff to attend other training and personnel development opportunities related to species of greatest conservation need and implementation of the Wildlife Action Plan.

LOCATION:

All project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

Costs may vary by Grant Segment. The estimates provided below may include salaries and wages, contractual services, supplies, travel expenses and equipment. Specific work activities and direct cost categories may vary from segment to segment; these activities and cost detail are provided in the budget narrative for this segment included as Appendix A.

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Training and professional development $79,688 $79,688 $159,376 Totals $79,688 $79,688 $159,376

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities necessary to accomplish the objectives supported by this project statement will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The activities supported by this project statement are non-intrusive training, occurring mostly in offices and classrooms. Field training events will not involve any manipulation of habitats or land use changes. These

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 15 of 176 activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.1, 1.3 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2, Appendix 1; and/or 1.4A(2) in 516 DM 8.5, namely:

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4A(2) Personnel training, environmental interpretation, public safety efforts and other educational activities, which do not involve new construction or major additions to existing facilities.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The activities necessary to accomplish the objectives supported by this project statement do not have the potential to affect any sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The activities supported by this project statement are non- intrusive training, occurring mostly in offices and classrooms. Field training events will not involve any changes to existing buildings or structures nor will they involve any disturbance of soil. Consequently, no consultation with the State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers as part of a Section 106 process is necessary nor will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

The activities necessary to accomplish the objectives supported by this project statement do not involve any other federal compliance issue. When conducting these activities, MDNR will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations and policies including but not limited to Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management, 11990 Protection of Wetlands, 13112 Invasive Species, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 16 of 176 Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader and Objective 1 Coordinator Vicki Brown Training and Safety Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 373-1234

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 17 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Threatened, endangered and listed species reviews and permits.

SUMMARY:

The Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) provides guidance on wildlife issues, including reviewing projects that could affect Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCNs) included in Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). Review of projects includes Division staff, as well as consultation with the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI), which specializes in “at risk” species. This information is used to modify project design within the project plans. Additionally, this information is used by other MDNR staff when developing strategic and operational plans for species and habitats. The Division also biannually reviews the state list of threatened and endangered species and issues take permits for state listed species.

NEED:

MDNR has the statutory authority for the protection of state listed threatened and endangered species. Over 4,000 reviews of projects that may affect state listed species and or their associated habitats are conducted annually. All of the state listed species are also SGCNs identified in the WAP. If effects to species are identified, negotiations are conducted to either modify the project design or mitigate the effects.

The number of review requests has steadily increased for many years. The increased workload has reduced the amount of time that can be spent on individual projects as well as on follow up once a project has been completed. Additional support is needed to continue the level of project review and follow up required to ensure this process is meeting the statutory requirements.

Additional expert consultation is necessary for some environmental reviews. MDNR has a contract with MNFI, a service of the Michigan State University Extension Unit, to provide these services as needed. MNFI staff possesses significant expertise on various “at risk” wildlife species, their habitat requirements and the niche occupied by these species within their ecosystems.

Under state law, a biannual review of state listed species is required to identify species to add, reclassify or remove from the list. Input into federal endangered species rule changes is also necessary to ensure Michigan’s interests are represented.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

All federally and state listed species are included as SGCNs in the WAP. Maintenance of these lists, therefore, is needed for future revisions of the WAP. Incorporating added scientific knowledge into species protection is a conservation need to address the threat of lack of scientific knowledge as identified on page 65 of Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments of the WAP. Incorporating this knowledge into projects or permit requests that may

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 18 of 176 affect listed species is needed at the project review phase to incorporate protection measures before work is conducted.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Threatened and endangered species review

To review submitted projects to evaluate potential effects on state listed wildlife species and recommend project alterations when necessary to reduce or mitigate effects on listed species. This includes obtaining additional expert review as necessary. It also includes providing input into federal activities related to wildlife species listed either under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11) or under the state endangered species regulations.

Objective 2. Listed species permits and list review

To coordinate the biannual review of the state threatened and endangered species list. Additionally, consult and cooperate with federal agencies on activities affected by the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11). In addition, issue take permits for state listed endangered and threatened species in accordance with state laws and regulations.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Those SGCNs that are state listed species will benefit from reviewing projects that may affect these species. These reviews lead to additional information on these species and result in project modifications to avoid, reduce and/or mitigate effects on these species. These reviews also raise public awareness of these species and their conservation needs. Similarly, the issuance of take permits is tied to activities related to mitigating effects on listed species. The review of applications and issuance of these permits along with details of allowable activities helps increase the knowledge of the species and public awareness through third party educational activities.

MNFI reviews allow for a better integration of available science into management activities. MNFI provides data, information and expertise on imperiled species and natural communities to the Wildlife Division for use in management, planning and protection activities. This service allows the Division to fulfill legal obligations and to achieve its mission.

All of these activities taken together will benefit SGCNs, their habitats, natural communities and ecosystems.

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Threatened and endangered species review

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 19 of 176 Project reviews are received from two sources. The first is through an internal review process of management activities conducted by MDNR. These include review of management treatments planned for State Game Areas and those planned for State Forests as part of MDNR’s compartment review process. The second is through permit applications for various environmental activities, including but not limited to: wetland dredge and fill, dune development, oil and gas drilling and easement requests.

For planning and management activities initiated by federal agencies, the state often provides comments on impacts to species which are of concern at the state level but not represented on the federal endangered species list. All of these species are SGCNs.

Project locations are checked against a statewide database of known rare species occurrences. When the potential for negative impacts to known occurrences of listed wildlife species are found, a letter is sent notifying the project manager and identifying the conflict with recommendations to resolve the issue.

During some environmental reviews, additional expertise is required beyond what is available in MDNR. On these occasions, MNFI will be contracted to provide this additional level of expertise. This unit provides a high level of expertise and knowledge on species and ecological systems in the state.

The state will provide input and cooperation in endangered species activities related to the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.11) or state endangered species regulations. These activities include permit review, recovery planning and implementation and other cooperative activities related to federally listed species.

Up to five percent of review requests for projects will be field inspected annually. Particularly targeted will be those projects where changes were negotiated to avoid impacts to state or federally listed species. The field inspections will be conducted to determine if the negotiated changes were incorporated into the project. Projects for which a permit was issued will be reviewed to determine if the permittee has met the conditions of the permit.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222101 Threatened and All aspects of reviewing projects Number of reviews Endangered for impacts to state listed species. completed Species Review Includes preparing recommendations and support for consultation with other experts when needed.

Approach 2. Listed species permits and list review

For those cases when impacts to state listed species cannot be avoided, the state endangered species coordinator is involved with development and issuance of permits. Permit negotiations may require site visits and/or meetings with project managers. Reviews are also completed on

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 20 of 176 research projects involving state listed wildlife species. In these instances the need for state permits is determined and the parameters of the permits negotiated.

The Wildlife Division’s Endangered Species Coordinator and other experts will participate in the biannual review of the state list. This review involves recommendations for species additions, status modifications and removals from the list. The endangered species review will involve the establishment of technical committees for birds, mammals, herptiles and invertebrates. Committees will be comprised of experts and specialists with knowledge in the various animal groupings. They will review information, studies and data collected since the last state review and recommend changes to state species status. MDNR will review the recommendation and submit a final list of classification changes through a formal rule making process in the state.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222102 Listed Species All aspects of issuing and tracking Number of permits Permits and List compliance with permits for the issued Review taking of state listed threatened and endangered species. Also includes support to prepare for and attend biannual list review meetings.

LOCATION:

All project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 1 Segment 2 1. Threatened and endangered species review $323,038 $323,038 $646,076 2. Listed species permits and list review $82,029 $82,029 $164,058 Totals $405,067 $405,067 $810,134

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 21 of 176 COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusion 1.1, 1.3 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4A(2), 1.4B(8) and 1.4C(1) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4A(2) Personnel training, environmental interpretation, public safety efforts and other educational activities, which do not involve new construction or major additions to existing facilities.

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

1.4C(1) The issuance, denial, suspension and revocation of permits for activities involving fish, wildlife, or plants regulated under 50 CFR Chapter 1, Subsection B, when such permits cause no or negligible environmental disturbance. These permits involve endangered and threatened species, species listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), marine mammals, exotic birds, migratory birds, eagles and injurious wildlife.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported under this project statement are project review and administrative only, occurring mostly in an office environment. Site visits will involve inspections only, and no intrusive actions involving listed species will occur. Therefore, there will be no effect on any listed or candidate species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The project review and administrative activities supported by this project will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 22 of 176 Other Federal Compliance Issues

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement do not involve any other federal compliance issue. MDNR will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations and policies including but not limited to Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Executive Order 11987 Exotic Organisms, Floodplains and Wetlands Protection, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader and Objectives Coordinator Christopher Hoving Endangered Species Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 373-3337

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 23 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Advising landowners and other agencies.

SUMMARY:

Only 21% of Michigan lands are held in some form of public ownership. Consequently, private lands provide significant resource opportunities for Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCNs). Despite the importance of private lands to Michigan’s overall biodiversity, only a fraction of these private lands are being managed for SGCNs.

Efforts identified in MDNR’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) to identify, restore, conserve and protect Michigan’s SGCNs have occurred throughout the state, yet these efforts have been conducted primarily on state and federal lands. Private organizations such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the Michigan Nature Association (MNA) and numerous other land trusts have created small nature preserves throughout Michigan to help protect rare species and unique natural communities. The challenges of biodiversity conservation, however, are too extensive to be met solely on public lands and small private preserves.

To improve management for wildlife resources on private lands throughout Michigan, MDNR offers technical assistance and program evaluation to private landowners and other agencies.

NEED:

Landowner associations, townships and other governmental agencies with local zoning authority affect how the majority of lands in Michigan are managed. These groups need information on SGCNs and how to incorporate management for SGCNs into their land use decisions. MDNR needs to integrate SGCNs conservation needs into planning meetings with these various land use groups. A major objective for MDNR at these meetings is to demonstrate how implementation of the WAP can be incorporated at various land use levels. Additionally, at these meetings MDNR staff need to explain the state regulations related to state and federally listed species and the review process for projects that could affect these species.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 24 of 176 six-banded longhorn beetle (p. 90) spartina borer moth (p. 118) barn owl (p. 183) persius duskywing (p. 93) blue-spotted salamander (p. 145) common nighthawk (p. 184) grizzled skipper (p. 94) pickerel frog (p. 151) black-backed woodpecker (p. 186) ottoe skipper (p. 95) copperbelly water snake (p. 157) Acadian flycatcher (p. 188) dusted skipper (p. 96) six-lined racerunner (p. 158) migrant loggerhead shrike (p. 189) northern hairstreak (p. 97) eastern massasauga (p. 159) wood thrush (p. 194) northern blue (p. 98) spotted turtle (p. 159) blue-winged warbler (p. 195) Karner blue (p. 99) wood turtle (p. 160) golden-winged warbler (p. 196) Henry’s elfin (p. 99) eastern box turtle (p. 161) prairie warbler (p. 199) frosted elfin (p. 100) American black duck (p. 163) red crossbill (p. 210) regal fritillary (p. 101) blue-winged teal (p. 163) white-winged crossbill (p. 211) Mitchell’s satyr (104) spruce grouse (p. 164) silver-haired bat (p. 215) barrens buckmoth (p. 106) sharp-tailed grouse (p. 164) red bat (p. 215) Sprague’s pygarctia (p. 107) northern bobwhite (p. 165) hoary bat (p. 216) boreal fan moth (p. 108) pied billed grebe (p. 166) northern bat (p. 216) three-staff underwing (p. 109) green heron (p. 168) Indiana bat (p. 217) magdalen underwing (p. 110) black-crowned night-heron (p. 169) evening bat (p. 217) Doll’s merolonche (p. 111) osprey (p. 169) eastern pipistrelle (p. 218) blazing star borer (p. 114) northern harrier (p. 170) lynx (p. 219) maritime sunflower borer (p. 115) Cooper’s hawk (p. 171) American marten (p. 220) Culver’s root borer (p. 115) red-shouldered hawk (p. 172) moose (p. 221) silphium borer moth (p. 116) common moorhen (p. 175) northern flying squirrel (p. 222) phlox moth (p. 117) American woodcock (p. 179) southern red-backed vole (p. 223) leadplant flower moth (p. 117) black-billed cuckoo (p. 182) snowshoe hare (p. 225)

Providing land use planning outreach to private landowners or other non-MDNR land managers is an optimal strategy for incorporating this knowledge to ensure maximum benefit to SGCNs.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Land use planning outreach

Expand the impact on land use decisions by increasing contact between MDNR and local governments concerning zoning and development activities in areas with SGCNs and their associated habitats. Also includes developing species management guidelines for use by private and public land managers.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 25 of 176 EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Private lands in many parts of Michigan play a vital role in maintaining the state’s biodiversity. Populations of SGCNs can be stabilized or increased while essential habitats are conserved through active guidance and consultation regarding management activities planned by private landowners and other agencies. Consultation and guidance will also increase landowner and public awareness about these species and the role private lands play in protecting Michigan’s biodiversity. It can also clarify many land management options and land use alternatives that can be used to benefit SGCNs as well as meet private and local goals.

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Land use planning outreach

Division personnel will establish contacts with local governmental entities and organizations involved with land use planning. These would include local zoning boards, development authorities, purchase of development rights groups, open space preservation, watershed associations, etc. Meetings will be organized, held and/or attended as needed. In other situations local associations may initiate the formal contact.

As landowners make decisions about management actions, it is important that they have guidelines about listed wildlife species. These guidelines will identify the species needs and actions that can be used to restore, maintain, or enhance species populations. Guidelines will be developed using the best current knowledge about the species including the Wildlife Conservation Strategy, recovery plans, publications and Nature Serve website information. Guidelines involving federally listed wildlife species will be reviewed and approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222107 Land Use Planning All aspects of outreach with land Number of Outreach use decision makers at local, guidelines developed regional and state levels including attending meetings, reviewing materials and providing written recommendations. Development and dissemination of guidelines regarding state listed and other rare species management needs and land use considerations.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 26 of 176 LOCATION:

All project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Land use planning outreach $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4A(2) Personnel training, environmental interpretation, public safety efforts and other educational activities, which do not involve new construction or major additions to existing facilities.

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 27 of 176 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported under this project statement are support, review and administrative only, occurring primarily in an office environment. Field reviews and site visits will not involve any intrusive effects on listed species. Therefore, there will be no effect on any listed or candidate species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The support, review and administrative activities supported by this project will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Kerry Fitzpatrick Habitat Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 373-9516

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 28 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Maintenance of existing databases.

SUMMARY:

The compilation of information and its availability to biologists and other users is essential for wildlife management and protection. MDNR relies on a number of databases to organize and provide for efficient retrieval of data related to biodiversity and its conservation. The foundation of these databases is the collection of element occurrence data and associated information that was begun as the Biodiversity Conservation Database. This database has continued to evolve; tabular data continues to be transformed into georeferenced attribute data. Work is continually needed on this core biodiversity database to ensure new information is integrated and functionalities are updated. In addition, the Wildlife Conservation Strategy has largely been incorporated into a database form, however, more work is needed to enhance query and reporting functionality as well as broaden access to its wealth of information.

NEED:

The compilation of information and its availability to biologists and other users is essential for wildlife management and protection. This is particularly important as MDNR implements its ecosystem planning and management systems that have an adaptive management component. The Department, in cooperation with the Michigan State University Extension Michigan Natural Features Inventory, maintains several databases. The value of such systems is determined by the information they contain and the frequency at which records are added and updated. Entry of new and updated information is often delayed due to limitations on personnel time. The databases need additional support to maintain accurate, up-to-date records.

There is also a need to enhance the database functionality and access that contains the information used to develop the Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Implementation of the strategy will depend on the ability to access relevant information in useful formats and to query information for summaries and reports not contained in the strategy itself.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Research, monitoring and adaptive management are identified as ongoing needs in the WAP to measure progress, success and failure of conservation actions. The WAP notes that collecting, storing and assessing information on individual species will always be necessary to prevent extinction and to evaluate the condition of more specific ecosystem components on page 83 of Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments. Additionally, this information will be needed to make further revisions to the WAP.

In addition, the following needs identified in Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments will be addressed by the objectives listed below from this project statement:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 29 of 176 Species Monitoring (page 83) - Collecting, storing and assessing information on individual species will always be necessary to prevent extinction and to evaluate the condition of more-specific ecosystem components. Addressed by Objectives 1, 2 and 4.

Existing Monitoring & Research Efforts (page 84) - Many monitoring and research efforts within the State and Great Lakes region already assess the status and condition of Michigan’s ecosystems, natural communities and wildlife populations. Whenever possible, these efforts should be used to address the needs identified in this action plan. For example, the MDNR, often in partnership with other agencies and organizations, already: conducts surveys, research and monitoring on the status and distribution of threatened, endangered and otherwise imperiled species. Addressed by Objective 1.

Research, Surveys & Monitoring (page 65) - Develop a comprehensive summary of significant knowledge gaps for SGCN, landscape features and ecological processes and prioritize research, survey and monitoring needs to fill the gaps: Coordinate collection, storage and distribution of existing and new species information. Addressed by Objective 1.

Existing Monitoring & Research Efforts (page 84) - Rigorous monitoring is not feasible for all SGCN across the entire State. Therefore conservation tools, including predictive models, can be useful for drawing broad-scale conclusions on distribution and abundance based on assessments made at smaller scales. These models can greatly increase the utility of information from monitoring programs. Addressed by Objective 3.

Species Monitoring (page 83) - General tracking of endangered, threatened and special concern species is already conducted by many entities who contribute data to MNFI’s Biotics database. Identification of ways to collect, store and share information for SGCNs that are not tracked in Biotics is also needed. Addressed by Objective 4.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Database updates and quality control

The Wildlife Division will continue to monitor and quality control data already in existing biodiversity databases. Procedures will be developed to increase the frequency of inputting new information. Whenever appropriate, new information will be georeferenced with spatial attribute data as well as biodiversity relational tabular data.

Objective 2. Database access

Increase accessibility for wildlife managers and outside users by increasing processing ability of the Department and by developing projects to allow certain levels of access.

Objective 3. Develop GIS data

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 30 of 176 Complete various GIS products, including datasets, GIS data layers and maps, for use in planning project and management activities. Link georeferenced data to existing biodiversity relational tabular data whenever possible.

Objective 4. Public sighting reports

Provide easy access for the public to provide sighting information on specific SGCNs to add to our understanding of the geographic distribution of these species.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Maintaining databases presents unique opportunities for proactive activities to manage SGCNs. The usefulness of data depends upon two aspects. First, information must be up-to-date and accurate. This ensures that users receive a quality product when requested. Occurrence data often over-represents the actual species occurrence because of a lack of site specificity. Increasing the accuracy and precision of the data ensures that environmental reviews neither omit vital information nor include nonessential information. Second, usefulness depends on accessibility either through processing specific information requests or by making different levels of information available to users in the state.

These activities will increase accuracy, efficiency and speed of data distribution.

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Database updates and quality control

In order to increase the timeliness of updates, additional assistance will be contracted. This additional staffing will help to ensure that new as well as backlogged records are inputted. Occurrence location is generally stored in databases using points and polygons. These data will be reviewed to verify and adjust polygon size and shape to increase data accuracy. Site visits will be conducted on the most questionable information to evaluate differences and changes and to identify locations accurately.

Approach 2. Database access

Databases will be evaluated using input from potential users in both the governmental and the private sectors. The Department can then establish and implement protocols to provide the information at appropriate levels while maintaining the integrity of the sensitive information contained in database records. The Department will also develop various products as requested by other Department Divisions, outside agencies, researchers and other units of government for planning, research and review activities.

Approach 3. Develop GIS data

This project will continue to support the development of a variety of GIS products that link biodiversity data contained within tracking databases and the Wildlife Conservation strategy to

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 31 of 176 georeference decision support systems. One product that will be supported is the Integrated Forest Management, Assessment and Prescription (IFMAP) project. Support will be provided for that portion of the system that links information on species of greatest conservation need to the inventory and decision support interfaces. Other GIS products for planning and implementing management of SGCNs will be developed as needed.

Approach 4. Public sighting reports

The Department currently supports a wildlife reporting system through its website. Interactive report forms allow citizens to provide sighting reports on species of interest. This site will be enhanced and updated to increase the ease and accuracy of public information gathered. Website reports will be linked to databases that will automatically accept the reports.

LOCATION:

Project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Database updates and quality control $48,106 $48,106 $96,212 2. Database access $0 $0 $ 0 3. Develop GIS data $0 $0 $ 0 4. Public sighting reports $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $48,106 $48,106 $96,212

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 32 of 176 1.3 Routine financial transactions including such things as salaries and expenses, procurement contracts (in accordance with applicable procedures and Executive Orders for sustainable or green procurement), guarantees, financial assistance, income transfers, audits, fees, bonds and royalties.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported under this project statement are data management and administrative only, occurring only in an office environment. Therefore, there will be no effect on any listed or candidate species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The data management and administrative activities supported by this project will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader and Objectives Coordinator Michael Donovan Research Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 373-7027

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 33 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Biological surveys and community classifications.

SUMMARY:

In order to make sound management decisions to implement the WAP and for SGCNs, managers and biologists require sound biological data and a uniform system for classification. Unfortunately, such data and systems are lacking. Several initiatives, outlined below, have been proposed to correct this situation and ensure the proper tools and information are available to facilitate decision-making.

NEED:

Needs are numbered to correspond to like-numbered objectives.

Need 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey of Michigan

Inadequate consideration of ecological concerns in land management decisions poses one of the greatest problems to the MDNR in managing lands and protecting the natural resources of the state. Informed land management decisions are based upon a foundation of sound and comprehensive information. Unfortunately, no comprehensive, systematic and scientifically sound survey has been conducted in Michigan to provide needed information about the ecological features of the state. The lack of reliable information regarding natural features of the landscape (e.g. ecological communities that perform important ecosystem services, endangered and threatened species, species of concern, species of greatest conservation need, rare ecological communities) impairs MDNR’s ability to make wise decisions. Multiple initiatives in the state require integrated and comprehensive analyses of the natural features of Michigan. These include: forest certification, updates to and confirmation of information in the WAP, biodiversity/old growth initiative and the natural areas program. This project will provide important information supporting these initiatives. This project will also provide essential information and analysis that will enable informed decision making by local governments in making land use planning decisions.

Need 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural communities in Michigan

Protecting aquatic biological diversity in Michigan depends heavily on our ability to protect representative and unique habitats or ecosystems. The state is moving towards preserving ecosystem functions rather than individual threatened or endangered species to preserve biological diversity as seen in the state’s Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Currently, terrestrial and wetland natural communities are tracked in the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) Biotics database, which aids in protecting high quality natural communities or ecosystems through environmental review and other venues. However, we do not yet have aquatic natural communities defined or described. To preserve the full breadth of Michigan’s biodiversity, representative habitats or ecosystems need to be described and located for aquatic ecosystems.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 34 of 176 In Michigan, most of the state’s listed aquatic species are found in rivers; therefore, rivers are considered and protected more than lakes in the environmental review process. Inland lakes make up a large portion of Michigan’s water bodies and biodiversity and are ecosystems that need to be highlighted as such. There are 5,356 lakes between 4 and 40 acres in Michigan, which accounts for 82% of Michigan lakes; yet only 0.7% of them are sampled for fish every year by the MDNR (Hayes et al. 2003). Small lakes generally do not provide significant boating opportunities or public boat launches and can therefore often be entirely privately owned and/or difficult to access. As such, small lakes are often not targeted for stocking, management, or monitoring efforts. These characteristics, however, also increase the potential likelihood that small lakes support intact native aquatic communities and are subject to less human disturbance. In addition, small lakes are an easier, more realistic conservation target since entire watersheds can be preserved. Hence, the conservation of small lakes is critical for the preservation of aquatic biodiversity in Michigan.

Small lakes provide a variety of services that contribute to the preservation of biodiversity. They are likely to reflect extremes of certain key environmental variables such as pH and alkalinity (J. Breck, pers. comm.), providing unique ecosystems and communities. Small lakes have been shown to act as refugia for native species susceptible to declines from human alterations (e.g., Mwanja 2001). Michigan has a variety of species that are at the edge of their range. These “edge of range” populations have the potential to be genetically different from the central populations and are therefore important for maintaining and conserving the genetic diversity of species and providing opportunities for evolutionary processes (Lescia and Allendorf 1995, Nielson, Scott and Aycrigg 2001).

The traditional role of MNFI as a component of the Natural Heritage Program has been to track endangered, threatened and special concern species occurring in Michigan. In the 1990s, MNFI and other heritage programs began to track and highlight natural communities to provide a greater level of protection for both rare species and species that may become rare in the future without broader landscape protection. To date, terrestrial and wetland communities have been included in this classification. In the past, MNFI has been involved in lake classification work based on physicochemical variables (Pringle 1983), but currently almost no lakes are incorporated into the Biotics database. We would like to expand this work to include lakes as elements of biodiversity in our database. In order to do this, however, we need to develop methods to assess which physical environmental variables and associated ecological processes help define species assemblages. We are currently developing methods to determine the level of sampling effort required to comprehensively describe small lake faunal and floral communities, assess ecological integrity of small lakes. Simultaneously, we are updating our knowledge of the status and distribution of rare, threatened and endangered aquatic species in Michigan. Using this information, we can now begin to explore which physical variables and species help define aquatic natural communities. Developing an aquatic community classification will allow us to identify lakes as significant representative elements of biodiversity in Michigan and will help MDNR to better manage and protect aquatic organisms and associated habitats as public trusts of Michigan.

Need 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 35 of 176 Michigan boasts an impressive array of aquatic organisms and ecosystems, including significant populations of many taxa, headwater streams, small inland lakes, large tributary rivers and the Great Lakes themselves. Despite the vastness of these resources, they are under great pressure from human activities, necessitating intervention on the part of resource professionals to maintain Michigan’s aquatic biodiversity into the near future. Such action will depend on our ability to protect representative and unique habitats and ecosystems. We are realizing an increased focus on preserving ecosystem functions rather than simply managing occurrences of individual threatened or endangered species via Michigan’s Wildlife Conservation Strategy. However, our ability to recognize and track systems-level aquatic biodiversity targets is currently impeded by a lack of formalized classification of these systems and understanding of the ways in which aquatic biological communities are associated with these systems.

There exists a relatively long history of classifying and tracking terrestrial and wetland natural communities as elements of biodiversity in the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) Biotics database and many relationships between terrestrial fauna and flora and these systems- level ecological units have been established. This has significantly aided efforts to protect high quality natural communities and ecosystems through environmental review while providing a means for predicting occurrences of specific listed taxa to prioritize survey and monitoring efforts. Despite the considerable progress and success of terrestrial classification and the inclusion of natural communities as elements of biodiversity in Biotics, aquatic systems-level elements remain undeveloped. This lack of development and tracking of comparable aquatic ecological units therefore reflects a significant gap in management of Michigan’s biodiversity. Preserving the full range of Michigan’s biodiversity, including aquatic resources, requires that we be able to classify, track and manage systems-level aquatics elements to protect ecosystem function, representative natural aquatic communities and rare and threatened taxa. Tracking aquatic ecological and community units would provide a vehicle for much more effective habitat conservation to help keep common species common and rare species viable.

This project will begin the process of incorporating systems-level elements of biodiversity into the MNFI Biotics database based on proposed classification schemes (e.g., Higgins et al. 1998) as well as our own assessments of relationships between known occurrences of SGCNs and aquatic landscape features (e.g., hydrology, stream size, water chemistry, geomorphology, etc.). This will involve both computer-driven exercises and limited fieldwork to evaluate the success of computer models in capturing representative aquatic ecological units, communities and significant SGCN populations. This first phase of incorporating aquatic systems-level elements into the Biotics database will focus on the southern two-thirds of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan.

Need 4. Natural community classification

The MNFI community classification plays a critical role in biodiversity conservation by serving as a foundation on which rare species information is gathered and analyzed. Multiple natural resource and conservation agencies rely on MNFI’s community classification for setting biodiversity protection and management priorities including the MDNR, MDEQ, US Forest Service, US Park Service, The Nature Conservancy and Huron-Clinton Metroparks. For example, the MDNR Old Growth and Biodiversity Stewardship Plan uses the classification as the basis for setting ecosystem representation goals. The community classification also serves as

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 36 of 176 an essential tool for building models to identify and evaluate habitat for SGCN. Recent efforts to convey habitat information for rare species to land managers and others are also based on the classification. Thus, the MNFI community classification underpins many current and past conservation efforts in Michigan.

While the framework for the community classification is well constructed, many of the community descriptions contain significant information gaps that limit its use as a conservation and management tool. We propose to fill current information gaps in the community classification and deliver a version of the document through the MNFI web page. Both the paper and web-based versions will contain a concise summary of pertinent information for each community type. In addition, the web-based version will contain photographs of each community to help convey important descriptive information. Lastly, the community descriptions will be hot-linked to associated rare species and community abstracts and reference tables to facilitate further an understanding of Michigan’s diverse ecosystems and habitats.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Inventories and surveys are identified as ongoing needs in Section 2. Landscape Features & Conservation Needs of the WAP to determine the distribution and condition of landscape features and natural communities. Additionally, more information is needed on the distribution and abundance of numerous SGCNs, as listed in Section 3. SGCN Status & Species Specific Issues, including:

scaleshell (p. 17) widespread column (p. 37) domed disc (p. 45) eastern elliptio (p. 20) delicate vertigo (p. 37) Euconulus alderi (p. 46) salamander mussel (p. 23) Vertigo cristata (p. 38) Guppya sterkii (p. 46) eastern pondmussel (p. 25) tapered vertigo (p. 38) spike-lip crater (p. 47) hickorynut (p. 27) Hubricht’s vertigo (p. 39) proud globe (p. 47) lilliput (p. 29) cross vertigo (p. 39) velvet wedge (p. 48) fawnsfoot (p. 29) Vertigo modesta perietalis (p. 40) copper button (p. 48) spindle lymnaea (p. 31) six-whorl vergigo (p. 40) cherrystone drop (p. 49) deepwater pondsnail (p. 32) deep-throat vertigo (p. 41) devil crawfish (p. 50) deepwater pondsnail (p. 32) Vertigo paradoxa (p. 41) digger crayfish (p. 51) acorn ramshorn (p. 33) crested vertigo (p. 42) Epeorus suffuses (p. 52) Planorbella smithi (p. 33) pleistocene catinella (p. 42) Habrophlebiodes americana (p. 53) watercress snail (p. 34) pale mantleslug (p. 43) Ameletus lineatus (p. 53) gravel pyrg (p. 34) foster mantleslug (p. 43) Siphloplecton basale (p. 54) eastern flat-whorl (p. 35) redfoot mantleslug (p. 44) grey petaltail (p. 54) Vallonia gracilicosta albula (p. 36) Carolina mantleslug (p. 44) many others. lambda snaggletooth (p. 36) Banded globe (p. 45)

In addition, the following needs identified in Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments will be addressed by the objectives listed below from this project statement:

Research & Surveys (page 80) - A statewide status assessment of wildlife distributions and abundance is necessary to identify baseline conditions for wildlife conservation, a need that is clearly identified as a priority in the SGCN Status & Species Specific Information section. Addressed by Objective 1.

Species Monitoring (page 83) - Collecting, storing and assessing information on individual species will always be necessary to prevent extinction and to evaluate the condition of more-specific ecosystem components. Addressed by Objective 1.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 37 of 176 Research, Surveys & Monitoring (page 52) - Develop a common classification system to describe wetlands and ensure that all representative wetland types present across a landscape are identified and maintained. Addressed by Objectives 2 and 3.

Landscape Feature Condition Monitoring (page 82) - Various classification systems may need to developed or improved to help determine which of the diverse components of landscape features are indicative of condition. Addressed by Objectives 2, 3 and 4.

Research and Monitoring Needs (page 88) - Improve classification systems as needed to ensure that they reflect the current state of knowledge (including MNFI’s Natural Communities and aquatic systems such as stream/river, lake and wetland). Addressed by Objectives 2, 3 and 4.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey of Michigan

Objective 1a. Conduct a statewide survey based upon currently known information and using GIS based analyses.

Objective 1b. Perform initial community and habitat analyses in three counties using a combination of field and GIS analyses.

Objective 1c. Evaluate models to help direct future activities.

Objective 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural communities in Michigan

Begin to define lake natural communities, using small lakes, which we define as assemblages of co-existing, interacting species and the physical environment and associated ecological processes in combination, as a starting point. We plan to explore which within-lake environmental variables best define lakes and species assemblages within those lakes. The results will provide a methodology that can be used across lake types and sizes to describe natural communities of lakes. Ultimately, this work will incorporate aquatic natural communities into Biotics to help manage and protect the biodiversity of Michigan.

Objective 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database

Begin incorporating aquatic systems-level elements of biodiversity into the Biotics database. We will assess the effectiveness of proposed classification frameworks to capture representative and unique aquatic systems and communities within the southern two-thirds of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. Our assessments will be based on both computer modeling exercises and field verification efforts.

Objective 4. Natural community classification

Objective 4a. Review literature for each community type.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 38 of 176 Objective 4b. Update community descriptions

Objective 4c. Collect and scan relevant photographs.

Objective 4d. Post updated community classification and photographs to MNFI webpage.

Objective 4e. Build web links between community classification and associated rare plant, animal and community abstracts and rare species reference tables.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Inadequate consideration of ecological concerns in land management decisions poses one of the greatest problems to the MDNR in managing lands and protecting the natural resources of the state. This problem stems from the fact that no comprehensive, systematic and scientifically sound survey has been conducted in the state of Michigan. A systematic and comprehensive biological survey will provide essential information and analysis that will enable informed decision-making.

Protection of aquatic biological diversity greatly depends upon our ability to discern and protect representative and unique habitats and ecosystems. Currently, terrestrial and wetlands natural communities are tracked by MNFI’s Biotics database; however, the same cannot be said for aquatic systems. Exploration and classification of Michigan lakes into natural communities and incorporating the classification into the Biotics database will allow us to identify aquatic systems as significant representatives of biodiversity, which will help MDNR better manage and protect aquatic organisms and their habitats.

The MNFI community classification plays a critical role in biodiversity conservation by serving as a foundation on which rare species information is gathered and analyzed. This classification is a tool relied upon by several natural resource and conservation agencies and is used in building models to identify and evaluate habitat for SGCN. While the framework of the community classification is well constructed, many of the community descriptions contain significant information gaps that limit its use as a conservation and management tool. These information gaps will be filled and availability will be enhanced through a web-based version that will include photographs of each community type. The web-version will also include links to associated rare species information, community abstracts and other reference tables to increase understanding of Michigan’s diverse ecosystems and habitats.

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey of Michigan

• Conduct a statewide survey based upon currently known information and using GIS based analyses.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 39 of 176 • Perform initial community and habitat analyses in three counties using a combination of field and GIS analyses.

• Evaluate models to help direct future activities.

Approach 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural communities in Michigan

• This work was completed and reported under the previous segment of this grant, no further work on this objective will be supported in this segment.

Approach 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database

• Compile existing information on potential aquatic systems-level units to be incorporated into the Biotics database (e.g., Higgins et al. classification, SGCN database, Biotics database, IFMAP data layers, ecoregional aquatics targets from The Nature Conservancy, expert opinion, etc.).

• Conduct spatial analyses to determine the landscape and local features that characterize known (or expected) representative/unique aquatic systems and/or communities. Construct models to predict the occurrences of other representative/unique aquatic systems and/or communities in southern lower Michigan.

• Develop criteria for defining systems-level and aquatic community elements of biodiversity to be included in the Biotics database.

• Conduct site visits for selected occurrences to evaluate the efficacy of the GIS-based computer models to predict/define representative/unique systems level and aquatic community elements of biodiversity.

• Compile the results of the study into a technical report to be presented to Wildlife and Fisheries Divisions, including a summary of new systems-level and aquatic community elements of biodiversity incorporated into the Biotics database.

• Submit an annual progress report at the end of fiscal year 2009.

Approach 4. Natural community classification

This work was completed and reported under the previous segment of this grant, no further work on this objective will be supported in this segment.

LOCATION:

Activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 40 of 176 Costs may vary by Grant Segment. The estimates provided below may include salaries and wages, contractual services, supplies, travel expenses and equipment. Specific work activities and direct cost categories may vary from segment to segment; these activities and cost detail are provided in the budget narrative for this segment included as Appendix A.

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Systematic and comprehensive biological survey $156,361 $156,361 $312,722 of Michigan. 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into natural $0 $0 $ 0 communities in Michigan. 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological classification $42,418 $42,418 $84,836 units as elements of biodiversity in the Biotics database. 4. Natural community classification. $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $198,779 $198,779 $397,558

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusion 1.1, 1.3 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(1) and 1.4B(8) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4B(1) Research, inventory and information collection activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources which involve negligible animal mortality or habitat destruction, no introduction of contaminants, or no introduction of organisms not indigenous to the affected ecosystem.

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 41 of 176 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The sample, data compilation and classification activities supported under this project statement will not involve handling or in any other way affect federally listed species. Many of the activities will occur within an office setting. The physical and chemical surveys of lakes do not involve any techniques that require collection or impacting federal listed species. Therefore, there will be no effect on any listed or candidate species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader and Objectives Coordinator Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 42 of 176

CHAPTER 2: SURVEYS, MONITORING AND RESEARCH FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 43 of 176 PROJECT 1: Wildlife Divisions surveys, monitoring and research for species of greatest conservation need.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

This project provides support for surveys, monitoring and research studies to address information needs for SGCNs. Surveys are conducted to determine population or biological parameters of populations at a particular time for a particular reason. Most surveys in this study are designed to determine baseline population levels or other baseline biological parameters so that future management efforts can be evaluated to determine if they had the desired effect. In some cases, surveys are needed to complete our understanding of a species’ range or timing of when certain habitats are seasonally used. This information is needed to better prioritize management efforts to address limiting factors on those areas where management will have the biggest impact.

All of the studies contained in this project provide information needed to maintain and modify the state’s list of SGCNs. All information gained through these studies will be incorporated in future revisions to MDNR’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). The results from all studies will be made available to MDNR staff along with the management implications and recommendations based on the findings. This information will be incorporated into site management plans, ecoregional plans and as part of the adaptive management component of MDNR’s ecosystem management and planning efforts.

PROJECT NEEDS:

Baseline population levels and biological parameters are not known for many species of greatest conservation need. This information is needed so that management efforts can be evaluated as part of adaptive management to ensure they are having the desired effects. This information is also needed to begin monitoring trends in species to determine the impacts of management over time or to help prioritize species and habitats for future management effort. Monitoring data is also needed to revise Michigan’s list of SGCN; recovered species will be removed and species that are declining may have to be added.

Research studies for some species are needed because critical habitat needs or biological requirements are not known. Before management for these species can be planned, this information is required to ensure management addresses the factors limiting the populations.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 44 of 176 All the information gathered from this project addresses information needs necessary to design management activities, update the list of SGCNs and to revise the WAP.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES:

The goal of this project is to provide land managers and planners with information on SGCNs necessary to ensure these species remain a component of Michigan’s biodiversity. This goal will be addressed by the following objectives:

Objective 1. Population Surveys

To conduct population surveys to determine species status for inclusion in the WAP, identify those species in priority need of management and to gather information necessary to revise the WAP.

Objective 2. Population Monitoring

To monitor select populations to determine effects of management activities for those species and provide adaptive management recommendations for those activities as needed.

Objective 3. Population and Habitat Research

To determine minimum viable population sizes and limiting habitat components while identifying management needs for selected species of greatest conservation need.

PROJECT EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Information will be used in revising the WAP. Species will be added to or removed from the SGCN list when appropriate. As part of adaptive management, this information will allow determination of which activities are having desired effect and which ones need to be modified.

PROJECT APPROACH:

Approach 1. Population surveys

The following studies will be conducted to address this project objective:

1.1. Statewide surveys

1.2. Surveys of selected avian guilds

Approach 2. Population monitoring

The following studies will be conducted to address this project objective:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 45 of 176 1.3. Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory

Approach 3. Population and habitat research

The following studies will be conducted to address this project objective:

1.4. Importance of coarse woody debris

1.5. Black Creek bat communities

1.6. Eastern massasauga rattlesnake research

1.7. CREP lands examination

1.8. Refining wildlife habitat models

1.9. Eastern fox snakes ecology and conservation

1.10. Oak regeneration

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Coordinator Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 46 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.1: Statewide surveys

STUDY NEED:

The Wildlife Division has a number of ongoing species surveys of lands administered by the Division. For some species, surveys are conducted statewide regardless of land ownership. This information has been and will continue to be used in determining the status of SGCNs, developing and modifying the list of SGCNs and developing and modifying the WAP. Additionally, these surveys provide inventory information used in land use planning initiatives, regional ecosystem management planning and statewide ecosystem management planning. This data is also needed to provide adaptive management feedback in our system of ecosystem management and planning. In order to continue to fulfill our requirements for modifying the WAP and integrating WAP implementation into other land use planning efforts, updated survey data will continue to be needed.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

A significant number of SGCNs have identified needs that include determination of population status, abundance and distribution. In addition, the following needs identified in Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments will be addressed by this study:

Research and Monitoring Needs (page 88) - Listed needs include the following:

• Complete a statewide baseline assessment of wildlife distribution and abundance.

• Assess species status and trends using MNFI’s Biotics database, MDNR Fisheries status and trends databases and other species-assemblage monitoring data.

• Conduct more specific and strategic monitoring for individual species that are imperiled, known indicators of ecological integrity, or known to have specific requirements that are not assessed by landscape feature monitoring.

• Determine habitat use by and threats to SGCN for which basic life-history information is unavailable.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 47 of 176 STUDY OBJECTIVES:

The following objectives will be completed to address the needs of this study:

Objective 1. Surveys on state lands

To annually conduct surveys on selected state lands for herptile species of greatest conservation need.

Objective 2. Statewide surveys

To conduct the annual frog and toad survey and breeding bird survey to determine population status, distribution and trends statewide.

Objective 3. Reporting

To produce performance reports with 90 days of the end of each grant agreement and a final study report at the end of the grant period.

STUDY EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

The results of this study will be used to update the WAP and incorporate the management needs of avian and herptile species into land management plans. This study will help ensure that our list of the species of greatest conservation need remains current and that limited resources are directed to management of those species of greater priority. This information will be used to develop WAP implementation plans and as part of the adaptive management component of the Wildlife Division’s ecosystem management strategy.

STUDY APPROACH:

Approach 1. Surveys on state lands

Biological surveys will be continued on state lands, using a team approach with biologists and contractual groups, such as Michigan State University Extension and Michigan Natural Features Inventory, to determine the distribution and abundance of species.

The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.1.1. Baseline surveys to establish population status and distribution

1.1.2. Breeding status, habitat use and phenology surveys for selected species

Approach 2. Statewide surveys

New survey routes will be established annually to increase statewide coverage. All routes will be surveyed annually by trained staff and volunteers following standardized protocols.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 48 of 176 Information will be compiled by Natural Heritage Program staff who will also prepare reports including management recommendations.

The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.1.3. Annual frog and toad survey

1.1.4. Breeding Bird Atlas surveys and revisions

Approach 3. Reporting

The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.1.5. Preparation of performance and final reports

The following state project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this study:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222108* SWG - Statewide All aspects of conducting surveys Baseline surveys Surveys of SGCNs for avian and herptile species of conducted greatest conservation need, or Population species whose status needs to be monitoring surveys determined to update the list of conducted species of greatest conservation need. Surveys must be for the purposes of establishing baseline distribution and population levels or surveys to monitor population status, determine seasonal habitat use, or phenology of specific life cycle events. Includes, compiling and analyzing data, making management recommendations and preparing reports. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

STUDY LOCATION:

Surveys will be conducted statewide. Data compilation, analyses, report writing and management recommendations will occur in the Lansing Wildlife Division offices.

STUDY SCHEDULE OF WORK:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 49 of 176 Jobs will be completed according to the following schedule; some minor modifications may be necessary and will be documented in each year’s grant agreement.

FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. Surveys on state lands Jobs 1-2 Jobs 1-2 Jobs 1-2 Jobs 1-2 2. Statewide surveys Jobs 3-4 Jobs 3-4 Jobs 3-4 Jobs 3-4 3. Reporting Job 5 Job 5 Job 5 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

Performance reports under Job 5 will be completed within 90 days after the end of each grant agreement. The final report for the study under Job 5 will be completed at the end of this grant period.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. Surveys on state lands $93,340 $97,074 $90,532 $197,464 2. Statewide surveys $53,667 $53,667 $68,341 $89,076 3. Reporting $12,783 $13,108 $8,230 $16,460 Totals $159,790 $163,849 $167,103 $303,000 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

In-Kind Match

Some of the jobs in this study may generate in-kind match from sources outside the Department. These sources may include volunteer services, donated employee time from outside organizations and supplies. When these matches are received, they will be valued using the following methods in accordance with 43 CFR 12.64:

Volunteer labor – Unpaid services will be valued at the pay for similar work conducted within the Wildlife Division. The per hour rate will be calculated by dividing the total reported cost of similar activity conducted by full time classified professional employees during the previous year by the total reported hours of similar activity conducted by full time classified professional employees. This rate will be multiplied by the total reported volunteer hours to obtain a final value.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 50 of 176 Employees of other organizations – These services will be valued at the employee’s regular rate of pay exclusive of fringe benefits and overhead costs.

Supplies – Supplies will be valued at their fair market value at the time of donation.

STUDY COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this study will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment and are completely covered under existing categorical exclusions. The applicable exclusions are 1.3 and 1.5 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and 1.4B(1) in 516 DM 6 Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported by this grant for this study will have no effect or are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species. This study supports non-intrusive data collection, no listed species will be handled and no habitat will be modified. Research and studies that involve handling species such as Eastern massasauga rattlesnake, Mitchell’s satyr butterfly, Indiana bat and Kirtland’s Warbler will be detailed under separate studies specific to those species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this study will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 51 of 176 Organisms, Floodplains and Wetlands Protection, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

STUDY PERSONNEL:

Principle Investigator Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 52 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.1

JOB 1.1.1: Baseline surveys to establish population status and distribution

JOB NEED:

Baseline information regarding many endangered, threatened and nongame herptile species on public lands is incomplete or outdated. Because of land use and attitudes towards herptile species, as well as collection for the pet trade, many of these species depend on public land as important refugia. With this group being under-surveyed, the importance of state land to species distribution, status and population trends needs to be assessed so appropriate habitat management can be incorporated into site management plans.

Similarly, baseline information regarding many endangered, threatened and nongame bird species on public lands is incomplete or outdated. This information is crucial in assessing the status of species of greatest conservation need and in identifying trends in populations. This information is needed for the development of area master plans that include population goals for these species along with appropriate management activities to achieve those goals. The ability to predict and assess population changes when habitat management activities are complete is essential in prioritizing activities and in making modifications to the area plans.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Baseline distribution and population status

To determine the current distribution and population status of selected herptile and avian species of greatest conservation need on state lands in Michigan

Objective 2. Confirm occurrence data of rare species

To opportunistically confirm occurrence data for selected rare species as surveys are conducted.

Objective 3. Methodology evaluation

To annually evaluate the efficacy of survey methods and modify protocols as necessary to improve future surveys.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 53 of 176 Sound information about the distribution and abundance of herptiles and birds is essential to their management and protection. This data will contribute to the inventory portion of the WAP, ecoregional plans and specific state land management plans.

Currently The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Michigan (Atlas) is the most comprehensive source of information on the birds that breed in the state. Periodic updates of the Atlas, such as the ongoing Michigan Breeding Bird Atlas (MBBA) II project, are necessary to keep the information current, monitor trends in breeding bird populations and ensure that proper conservation actions are taken. The MBBA II effort also provides an opportunity to improve and increase the data collected on species or guilds that are rare, were under surveyed in the initial project, or are inherently difficult to survey.

This is an ongoing project that will lead to a comprehensive understanding of herptile and bird populations throughout the state and the habitat needs of these species. Once the data is collected, future surveys will provide the basis for determining population impacts from management activities. The information will also be used to determine high priority areas requiring management to protect rare bird species and their habitats. Additional surveys or research projects can use the collected data to model habitat needs of bird species.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Baseline distribution and population status

All field surveys will be conducted by experience personnel properly trained in survey protocol. Population surveys will be completed on species of interest to establish baseline data and trend and range information. Priority will be given to species in the greatest need of conservation and to those species for which funding is limited. The frequency of the surveys will be dependent on the level of information being sought. A wide variety of surveys and techniques will be used to enhance our understanding of baseline data and trends. For herptiles, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, track counts, dip netting, aquatic trapping, visual encounters and field follow-ups to public reports.

For birds, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts of singing males, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, aerial counts, scat collection and identification, track counts and field follow-ups to public reports. All birds observed during the course of the survey will be recorded according to MBBA II protocol.

All avian and herptile species observed during the course of the survey will be recorded according to established protocol. Environmental data, such as temperature, wind speed, precipitation and moon visibility, may also be collected. Locations of species may be recorded using GPS equipment to allow for relocation during future surveys. Rare species observed during surveys will be included in the MNFI database according to Natural Heritage Methodology. Land cover data analysis using a GIS may be used to characterize the habitat in the landscape surrounding each observation.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 54 of 176 Genetic work, if conducted, will include collection of tissue samples, which will be analyzed using recognized techniques at facilities with expertise in conducting genetic studies.

Approach 2. Confirm occurrence data of rare species

MNFI will generate element occurrence reports by game area to be referred to whenever other surveys are conducted. Field investigators will make every effort to confirm occurrence reports opportunistically while conducting other surveys. Element occurrence (EO) ranking criteria will also be provided for species that have ranks. Field investigators will make every effort to rank or verify the rank of occurrences. Field data forms will be used to record observations and will be returned to MNFI to update element occurrence database.

Approach 3. Methodology evaluation

All persons conducting field surveys will be given forms to evaluate methodologies and comment on what is or is not working well. Independent work will be done with species experts to evaluate how well surveys are detecting species and if there appear to be any data anomalies. Comments and suggestions will be reviewed and methodologies will be updated when necessary. For surveys where efficacy does not appear to be adequate, the surveys will be discontinued and replaced with new methodologies.

JOB LOCATION:

Surveys for this job will occur on state lands throughout the state. Data compilation and analyses as well as report writing will occur in Lansing at Division offices.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leaders Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

Karen Cleveland All Bird Biologist Wildlife Division (517) 241-2450

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 55 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.1

JOB 1.1.2: Breeding status, habitat use and phenology surveys for selected species

JOB NEED:

Understanding current population trends for selected SGCNs is necessary to prioritize management activities when budgets and personnel are limited. We need to determine how species are responding to management activities, or how populations have varied from their baseline state, to ensure our management activities are having the desired effect. These results need to be incorporated into future versions of the WAP and reflected in land area master plans to ensure we are utilizing adaptive management.

Additionally, for some species we need to understand when they are present in certain habitat types and the annual timing of certain life stages to ensure our management is targeted at the proper limiting factors for those species. This is particularly important for many avian species that are migrants, using Michigan ecosystems for breeding. For herptile species, when they emerge from hibernation, when they are concentrating their breeding efforts, where they go for foraging habitat, when they return to hibernacula and how and when they move between these different life cycle habitats can affect how and when we apply certain habitat management treatments.

These surveys are also needed to update the list of SGCNs in the WAP, when species should be added to the list and when it is safe to remove them from the list. This is needed to ensure the state’s list of species of greatest conservation need correctly reflects the threats to biodiversity in the state. This information is also needed to fulfill our requirements to revise the WAP to continue to be eligible for SWG funding.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. State lands surveys

To conduct annual breeding status, habitat use and phenology surveys for selected herptile and avian species of greatest conservation need on state lands in Michigan

Objective 2. Confirm occurrence data of rare species

To confirm opportunistically occurrence data for selected rare species as surveys are conducted.

Objective 3. Methodology evaluation

To annually evaluate the efficacy of survey methods and modify protocols as necessary to improve future surveys.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 56 of 176 JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

This job will provide information on habitat use during specific life cycle stages of selected reptile, amphibian and avian SGCNs. These surveys will also help us determine if our management activities are having the desired effect on these populations. Consequently, we will be able to adapt our management as necessary when this new information is available. This information will allow us to modify our list of SGCNs as well as providing information necessary to modify the WAP.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Baseline distribution and population status

The surveys conducted as part of this job will be similar to those used to gather baseline data. They will be targeted, however, in both time and space depending on the species being surveyed and the phenology of the life cycle being investigated. Population monitoring will focus on species listed as threatened or endangered to determine population status and trends and to evaluate threats and habitat needs. Monitoring will also include observations and general knowledge of Department field staff and experts.

For herptile species, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, track counts, dip netting, aquatic trapping, visual encounters and field follow-ups to public reports. All herptiles observed during the course of the survey will be recorded according to established protocol. Environmental data, such as temperature, wind speed, precipitation and moon visibility, may also be collected. Locations of herptiles will be recorded using GPS equipment to allow for relocation during future surveys. Rare species observed during surveys will be included in the MNFI database according to Natural Heritage Methodology. Land cover data analysis using a GIS may be used to characterize the habitat in the landscape surrounding each observation. Genetic work will include collection of tissue samples, which will be analyzed using recognized techniques at facilities with expertise in conducting genetic studies.

For avian species, survey techniques may include one or more of the following: line transects, point counts of singing males, mark-recapture, telemetry, response to recorded calls, meander transects, aerial counts, scat collection and identification, track counts and field follow-ups to public reports. All birds observed during the course of the survey will be recorded according to MBBA II protocol. Environmental data, such as temperature, wind speed, precipitation and moon visibility, may also be collected. Locations of birds will be recorded using GPS equipment to allow for relocation during future surveys. Rare species observed during surveys will be included in the MNFI database according to Natural Heritage Methodology. Land cover data analysis using a GIS may be used to characterize the habitat in the landscape surrounding each observation. Genetic work will include collection of tissue samples, which will be analyzed using recognized techniques at facilities with expertise in conducting genetic studies.

Approach 2. Confirm occurrence data of rare species

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 57 of 176 MNFI will generate element occurrence reports by game area to be referred to whenever other surveys are conducted. Field investigators will make every effort to confirm occurrence reports opportunistically while conducting other surveys. EO ranking criteria will also be provided for species that have ranks. Field investigators will make every effort to rank or verify the rank of occurrences. Field data forms will be used to record observations and will be returned to MNFI to update element occurrence database.

Approach 3. Methodology evaluation

All persons conducting field surveys will be given forms to evaluate methodologies and comment on what is or is not working well. Independent work will be done with species experts to evaluate how well surveys are detecting species and if there appears to be any data anomalies. Comments and suggestions will be reviewed and methodologies will be updated when necessary. For surveys where efficacy does not appear to be appropriate, the surveys will be discontinued and replaced with new methodologies.

JOB LOCATION:

Surveys for this job will occur on state lands throughout the state. Data compilation and analyses as well as report writing will occur in Lansing at Division offices.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leaders Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

Karen Cleveland All Bird Biologist Wildlife Division (517) 241-2450

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 58 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.1

JOB 1.1.3: Annual frog and toad survey

JOB NEED:

The status, distribution and population trends of frogs and toads statewide are not well known. These species are often sensitive indicators of environmental change or contamination. There is a variety of anecdotal and a growing body of scientific information documenting declines in these species globally, statewide and at a local level. Populations need to be systematically surveyed to determine their status, distribution and population trends. Most of these species in Michigan are already listed as species of greatest conservation need; all may be heading towards that designation with few exceptions. This information is needed to update the WAP, but also to make habitat management recommendations.

Michigan is home to 13 native species of anurans (frogs and toads). In recent years, many observers have been concerned with the apparent rarity, decline and/or population die-offs of several of these species. This concern is not only for the species themselves, but also for the ecosystems on which they depend. Frogs and toads, like many other aquatic organisms, are sensitive to changes in water quality and adjacent land use practices, and their populations undoubtedly serve as an index to environmental quality.

The Michigan Frog and Toad Survey was initiated in 1988 on a limited basis to increase our knowledge of anuran abundance and distribution and to monitor populations over the long term. A statewide system of permanent survey routes has been and continues to be developed. This cooperative survey is modeled after the very successful Wisconsin Frog and Toad Survey, which was begun in 1981. The Michigan Frog and Toad Survey needs to continue to provide information on the status of Michigan frog and toad populations, update these species in the WAP and to make appropriate management recommendations.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Annual surveys

To conduct annual frog and toad surveys along all established routes and establish new routes as necessary to provide sufficient survey coverage

Objective 2. Methodology evaluation

To annually evaluate the efficacy of survey methods and modify protocols as necessary to improve future surveys.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 59 of 176 JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

This cooperative survey is modeled after the very successful Wisconsin Frog and Toad Survey, which was begun in 1981. Over the years, the Michigan Frog and Toad Survey will provide a wealth of information on the status of Michigan frog and toad populations and help monitor the quality of our environment. This information will be incorporated in future revisions of the WAP. Additionally, this information will be used in conservation planning, ecoregional planning and plans to implement the WAP.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Annual surveys

New routes are established that contain at least 10 wetland types. All new routes are accessible at night, usually along roadsides. Routes are less than 35 miles, with each stop along the route being at least ½ mile apart. New route locations are grossly determined by analysis of habitat layers in GIS compared with established routes. Then routes are specifically determined using local maps and wetland knowledge of the area. Sites are not determined based on observations of anurans, but rather on wetland habitat availability. Ephemeral ponds are included, however, swift streams and deep or denuded shores of lakes are avoided. Busy streets or highways, certain industrial sites and farms with barking dogs are avoided, as are any other areas with excessive background noise.

Surveys are conducted by trained and experienced staff and volunteers that annually review their knowledge of frog and toad calls. Established protocols call for surveying each route three times within time periods that coincide with latitude based phenology. Protocols include threshold limits for climatic and noise variables. A minimum of two weeks must separate each route survey. Individual sites along each route are surveyed at night by listening for up to 10 minutes and recording the species detected. In addition, a call index value is recorded by species depending on the number of individuals calling. Data is recorded on data sheets; also collected are data on time and climatic variables. Data is compiled and analyzed by Natural Heritage Program staff in Lansing.

Approach 2. Methodology evaluation

All persons conducting field surveys will be given forms to evaluate methodologies and comment on what is or is not working well. Independent work will be done with species experts to evaluate how well surveys are detecting species and if there appears to be any data anomalies. Comments and suggestions will be reviewed and methodologies will be updated when necessary.

JOB LOCATION:

Surveys for this job will occur on state lands throughout the state. Data compilation and analyses as well as report writing will occur in Lansing at Division offices.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 60 of 176 JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Lori Sargent Resource Analyst Wildlife Division (517) 373-9418

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 61 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.1

JOB 1.1.4: Breeding Bird Atlas surveys and revisions

JOB NEED:

In 1983, the Department initiated Michigan’s first comprehensive statewide breeding bird survey, leading to the publication of the first statewide Atlas of Breeding Birds of Michigan (Atlas) in 1991. This information provided a reference point for the abundance and distribution of birds statewide. Since its publication, the book and data have provided vital information for a number of planning and management projects. This information was vital in developing the species of greatest conservation need list as well as priority threats and conservation needs for many avian species in the original version of the WAP. This original information is now out of date and needs to be updated to ensure accuracy for use in planning initiatives.

The information compiled into the Atlas of Breeding Birds of Michigan is needed to address a number of planning initiatives that will guide management activities for avian species of greatest conservation need. These include, but are not limited to:

1. Identify high priority sites in Michigan that are important to the reproductive success of several declining bird species so they can be included in plans for protection and management.

2. Collect baseline data using an accepted protocol that will allow for long-term monitoring of trends.

3. Gathering information on the habitat use of nesting species at the landscape level that can be used in conservation planning and management.

4. Identify important bird habitats in Michigan that occur on private lands to be included in planning and establishing priority areas of focus for MDNR’s Landowner Incentive Program (LIP).

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Breeding bird surveys

To annually conduct breeding bird surveys along established routes according to established protocols. To establish annually new routes for inclusion in areas not adequately surveyed.

Objective 2. Publish revised atlas

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 62 of 176 To compile data from surveys and publish the second volume of The Atlas of Breeding Birds in Michigan by the end of the grant period.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Reliable data on the distribution and abundance of birds is essential to their management and protection. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Michigan is currently the most comprehensive source of information on the birds that breed in the state. Periodic updates of the Atlas, such as the ongoing Michigan Breeding Bird Atlas (MBBA) II project, are needed to keep the information current, monitor trends in breeding bird populations and ensure that proper conservation actions are taken. The MBBA II effort also provides an opportunity to improve and increase the data collected on species or guilds that are rare, were under surveyed in the initial project, or are inherently difficult to survey.

Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) proposes to conduct systematic surveys for birds that will supplement the ongoing MBBA II effort, while also providing baseline data that could be used to monitor population trends, evaluate bird survey protocols and develop conservation plans. The MNFI has extensive experience working with rare species, ecosystems and biodiversity issues in Michigan, which positions the organization well to develop and implement this project.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Breeding bird surveys

Potential survey areas will be identified using GIS land cover data, aerial photographs and/or existing information from the Atlas and MNFI database. Point counts will be conducted from roadsides to locate potential breeding grassland birds. Locations of point counts will be recorded using GPS equipment to allow for relocation during future surveys. All bird observations will be documented according to MBBA II protocol. Rare species observed during surveys will be recorded in the MNFI database according to Natural Heritage Methodology. Land cover data analysis using a GIS will be used to characterize the habitat in the landscape surrounding each point count location.

Breeding bird surveys will be conducted by professional biologists and skilled volunteer bird watchers. All participants in the survey will receive instruction on breeding bird data collection.

Approach 2. Publish revised atlas

The breeding bird atlas is designed to be a 7-8 year project, separated into three phases. The first phase involves surveys conducted throughout the state during a five-year period that began in the spring of 2002. The surveys are described in Approach 1. The second phase includes 12-18 months of data verification assessment that began in 2006. The final phase will include 12-18 months of manuscript development and publication of the second statewide breeding bird atlas.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 63 of 176 The coordination for this has been awarded to the Kalamazoo Nature Center, which was responsible for coordination of the first breeding bird survey.

JOB LOCATION:

Surveys for this job will occur statewide. Data compilation and analyses will occur in Lansing at Division offices. Further data compilation and manuscript preparation will occur at the Kalamazoo Nature Center in Cooper Township, Kalamazoo County.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Karen Cleveland All Bird Biologist Wildlife Division (517) 241-2450

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 64 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.1

JOB 1.1.5: Preparation of performance and final reports

JOB NEED:

This job reserves the time and other resources to prepare a report of the findings. The findings are needed by the agency to address the needs of this study. The report will serve to disseminate the findings to the appropriate field personnel for use in management decisions. Additionally, the report will be disseminated to other state and federal agencies so that they may benefit from the findings. The final report as well as a performance report on accomplishments at the study level are required by implementation guidance for survey and inventories federal assistance grants as provided by the USFWS.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Final report

To prepare a final report containing the findings of this study, including management recommendations and implications and disseminate to appropriate staff and cooperators at the completion of this study.

Objective 2. Annual performance report

To prepare and submit a performance report comparing work planned by study objective in the each grant agreement with actual accomplishments during the grant agreement period. Report will also include a comparison of the total estimated expenditures planned in the grant agreement with an estimate of the total expenditures incurred completing the accomplishments during the grant agreement period.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

This job will ensure the results of this study are made available to field staff, management practitioners, other agencies and organizations as necessary to ensure the management implications and recommendations resulting from this study are incorporated into management activities. This job will also ensure the federal assistance requirements for reporting are met and will provide accountability that funds are being spent correctly.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Final report

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 65 of 176 A final report will be submitted to USFWS at the completion of this study. This report will provide notice to the federal grant administrator that the study is concluded, no further work will be conducted after this point. This report will serve as the record of accomplishments that provides a summation of the findings and conclusions for the entire project or study. This report will include:

• Identification of the study effort that will show state, project/study title and number and period covered.

• A creditable report of the results of the study.

• A description of how the results will be used that will include management implications and guidelines.

• A signature of responsible state official

Approach 2. Annual performance report

Within 90 days from the end of each grant agreement for this study a performance report will be submitted to the UWFWS. The performance report will document the accomplishments by study objective for that agreement period. The accomplishments will be compared with the planned work set forth in the grant agreement. Any slippages of ten percent or greater will be explained. Estimated total expenditures by study objective will also be reported. These too will be compared with the planned expenditures set forth in the grant agreement. Any slippages of ten percent or greater will be explained. Should the grant agreement period last for more than one year, the requirement for an interim performance report (due 90 days after one calendar year from the start of the agreement period) may be requested to be waived in each grant agreement.

JOB LOCATION:

Activities supported under this job may occur at offices and university libraries statewide.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leaders Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

Lori Sargent Resource Analyst Wildlife Division (517) 373-9418

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 66 of 176 Karen Cleveland All Bird Biologist Wildlife Division (517) 241-2450

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 67 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.2: Surveys of selected avian guilds

All jobs for this study were completed in previous segments of this grant; no further work will be supported in this segment. See performance reports for previous segments for results of this study.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 68 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.3: Biodiversity assessment and EO Inventory

STUDY NEED:

The Wildlife Division has a number of ongoing statewide surveys to monitor populations of species of greatest conservation need (SGCN). This information has been and will continue to be used in determining the status of SGCNs, developing and modifying the list of SGCNs and developing and modifying the Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). Additionally, these surveys provide inventory information used in land use planning initiatives, regional ecosystem management planning and statewide ecosystem management planning. This data is also needed to provide adaptive management feedback in our system of ecosystem management and planning. In order to continue to fulfill our requirements in modifying the WAP and integrating WAP implementation into other land use planning efforts, monitoring data is an ongoing need.

Michigan’s natural landscape has undergone major changes over the last century and the pace of this change is rapidly increasing. Between 1982 and 1997, acreage of developed land in Michigan grew by over 30 percent (Public Sector Consultants, 2001). Between 1990 and 2020, 1.4 to 2 million acres of undeveloped land is projected to be converted to urban development (Planning and Zoning Center, Inc., 1995). This equals almost as much urbanized land as was recorded in 1978 for the entire state of Michigan. In addition to direct habitat destruction, sprawling development patterns are continuing to fragment Michigan’s remaining forests, grasslands and wetlands.

Rapid urbanization is having negative impacts on rare species. Over 600 species of the state’s plants, birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, insects and mollusks are listed as threatened, endangered and special concern. In addition, 46 plants and 10 animals are extinct or extirpated (Michigan Natural Features Inventory, 2003). A major factor contributing to this loss of biodiversity is loss of habitat. Since the mid 1800’s, Michigan has lost over 99 percent of its prairies, oak savannas and oak and oak-pine barrens. What remains of these communities tend to be in fragmented, isolated patches. Michigan has lost 35 percent of its wetlands through conversion to urban and agricultural land uses, with most of these losses occurring in the southern portion of the Lower Peninsula. In some counties, over 75 percent of the wetlands have been lost.

One of the first steps towards conserving Michigan’s natural heritage is determining what is left on the landscape. With limited resources, it is especially important to be able to identify and prioritize the best places to conserve biodiversity. Before too many resources have been allocated and before too much of our precious natural heritage is lost, a focused effort to assess Michigan’s biodiversity needs to be conducted.

In order to fulfill MDNR’s responsibility for managing the natural resources of the state, it is necessary to have knowledge of the natural features that occur on state lands. While the state has long performed inventories and kept records about game species and timber resources, thorough inventories of the rare wildlife species and the entire array of natural communities have not been

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 69 of 176 completed. This information is needed for assessing the opportunities, benefits and impacts of land management, recreation, restoration, development and other activities on state lands. Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) has over 20 years of experience conducting natural features inventories. MNFI employs staff with expertise on rare terrestrial and aquatic species and natural communities statewide. Additionally, MNFI staff has established rapport with many of the state land managers through collaborations on various projects, ecological workshops and day-to-day consultations. Consequently, MNFI is in an excellent position to perform biological inventories and convey information about recognition, survey methodology and stewardship needs to MDNR field staff.

Inadequate consideration of ecological concerns in land management decisions poses one of the greatest problems to the MDNR in managing lands and protecting the natural resources of the state. Informed land management decisions are based upon a foundation of sound and comprehensive information. Unfortunately, no comprehensive, systematic and scientifically sound survey has been conducted in Michigan to provide needed information about the ecological features of the state. The lack of reliable information regarding natural features of the landscape (e.g. ecological communities that perform important ecosystem services, endangered and threatened species, species of concern, rare ecological communities) impairs MDNR’s ability to make wise decisions. Multiple initiatives in the state require integrated and comprehensive analyses of the natural features of Michigan. These include forest certification, modification and revision of the WAP, biodiversity/old growth initiative and the natural areas program. This study will provide important information supporting these initiatives. This study will also provide essential information and analysis that will enable informed decision making by local governments in making land use planning decisions.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

A significant number of SGCN have identified needs that include determination of population status, abundance and distribution. In addition, the following needs identified in Section 1. Introductory Text & Statewide Assessments will be addressed by this study:

Research and Monitoring Needs (page 88) - Listed needs include the following:

• Complete a statewide baseline assessment of wildlife distribution and abundance.

• Develop criteria for identifying high quality representative occurrences of landscape features.

• Conduct inventories to ground-truth and refine spatial mapping of landscape features and high quality representative occurrences and to collect baseline data.

• Periodically map the spatial extent of landscape features and assess all occurrences and high quality occurrences to determine loss or gain (number of occurrences and/or acreage).

• Monitor high quality representatives of landscape features to assess whether ecological integrity is being maintained.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 70 of 176 • Inventory community composition across landscape features to develop baseline data.

• Monitor changes in community composition across landscape features.

Conservation Needs to Address Statewide Priority Threats & Issues (page 86) - The following categories (no order implied) have the greatest number of associated conservation needs, which should be considered statewide priorities:

• Identification and conservation of representative areas, high quality areas and other areas of high ecological significance (includes development of site conservation plans and any formal protection determined to be necessary).

• Identification and elimination of significant information gaps for SGCN, landscape features and ecological processes, including responses to threats.

Conservation Needs to Address Wetland Modification Threats (page 52) - List for Research, Surveys & Monitoring under this issue include:

• Complete a statewide wetland inventory.

Conservation Needs to Address Ecosystem Representation and Network Issues (page 72) - List for Research, Surveys & Monitoring under this issue include:

• Conduct an inventory of the location, condition and extent of natural landscape features.

• Complete an analysis of biodiversity elements (e.g., wildlife, plants, habitats) to identify areas of high biodiversity, regardless of ownership type.

STUDY OBJECTIVES:

The following objectives will be completed to address the needs of this study:

Objective 1. Biodiversity Assessment to support revising Wildlife Action Plan

To use available spatial data along with known occurrence data to determine areas of significant importance to SGCNs for management and protection as well as predict important biodiversity areas to guide monitoring efforts.

Objective 2. Element occurrence inventory

To conduct field inventories for element occurrences of SGCNs on Wildlife Division lands in the four southern Michigan management units during the first two years of the grant period.

Objective 3. Reporting

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 71 of 176 To produce performance reports with 90 days of the end of each grant agreement and a final study report at the end of the grant period.

STUDY EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

The results of this study will be used to update the WAP and incorporate the management needs of rare and underrepresented species into land management plans. This study will help ensure that our list of the SGCNs remains current and that limited resources are directed to management of those species of greater priority. This information will be used to develop WAP implementation plans and as part of the adaptive management component of the Wildlife Divisions ecosystem management strategy.

STUDY APPROACH:

Approach 1. Biodiversity Assessment to support revising Wildlife Action Plan

This multi-year, multi-phase project was completed during previous segments of this grant; the results were included in previous performance reports and in the following publication:

Paskus J. J., A. L. Derosier, E. H. Schools, H. D. Enander, B. S. Slaughter, M. A. Kost and R. L. Rogers. 2007. Biodiversity Assessment of Michigan Technical Report. Report to the Wildlife Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Report number MNFI 2007-11. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI.

A copy of this publication was submitted along with the corresponding performance report. There will be no further work or expenditures supported by this grant for the following job:

1.3.1. Biodiversity assessment

Approach 2. Element occurrence inventory

Systematic inventories will be conducted on state lands in the four southern Michigan management units by MNFI. Upon completion, MNFI will deliver comprehensive, written reports for regional groupings of State Game and Wildlife Areas. This project builds on natural features inventories of state lands conducted in prior years and seeks to provide critical information for effective natural resource planning. Both the systematic inventory and written reports will include the active participation of Wildlife Division staff. The reports will be designed to provide information on regional conservation priorities and will highlight key areas on state lands for biodiversity protection.

The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.3.2. EO inventory of southern Michigan Wildlife Division lands

Approach 3. Reporting

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 72 of 176 The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.3.3. Preparation of performance and final reports

The following state project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this study:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222150* SWG - Research All aspects of contracting vendors Number of contracts Projects Planning (including value of contract) to conduct surveys, monitoring and research studies to address a problem or need that is or is foreseeable to impede the Division’s ability to manage wildlife species and their habitats. Accomplishments by objectives will be tracked by the vendor and provided in annual performance reports to the Division. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

All activities supported by this study are planning in nature and eligible for 75% federal reimbursement. These surveys will be used to modify and update the state’s list of SGCNs. Additionally, the information from these surveys will be used to revise the WAP and will form a critical inventory component of the wildlife area strategic master plans. This information will be used to develop realistic goals and objectives that maintain and enhance SGCNs while managing the area for its intended purpose.

STUDY LOCATION:

Surveys will be conducted statewide. Data compilation, analyses, report writing and management recommendations will occur in the Lansing Wildlife Division offices.

STUDY SCHEDULE OF WORK:

Jobs will be completed according to the following schedule; some minor modifications may be necessary and will be documented in each year’s grant agreement.

FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. Biodiversity assessment Job 1 2. EO inventory Job 2 Job 2 Job 2 Job 2

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 73 of 176 3. Reporting Job 3 Job 3 Job 3 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

Performance reports under Job 3 will be completed within 90 days after the end of each grant agreement. The final report for the study under Job 3 will be completed at the end of this grant period.

STUDY ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. Biodiversity assessment $162,984 $0 $0 $0 2. EO inventory $23,184 $23,184 $45,000 $90,000 3. Reporting $16,188 $2,016 $3,500 $7,000 Totals $202,356 $25,200 $48,500 $97,000 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

In-Kind Match

Employees of other organizations – These services will be valued at the employee’s regular rate of pay exclusive of fringe benefits and overhead costs.

Supplies – Supplies will be valued at their fair market value at the time of donation.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 74 of 176 STUDY COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported by this grant for this study will have no effect or are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species. This study supports non-intrusive data collection, no listed species will be handled and no habitat will be modified. Research and surveys that involve handling species such as Eastern massasauga rattlesnake, Mitchell’s satyr butterfly, Indiana bat and Kirtland’s Warbler will be detailed under separate studies specific to those species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Other Federal Compliance Issues

The activities supported by this grant for this study do not involve any other federal compliance issue. MDNR will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations and policies including but not limited to Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Executive Order 11987 Exotic Organisms, Floodplains and Wetlands Protection, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

STUDY PERSONNEL:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 75 of 176 Principle Investigator Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED:

Michigan Natural Features Inventory. 2003. Natural heritage database. MDNR Wildlife Division. Lansing, MI.

Planning and Zoning Center, Inc. 1995. Patterns on the land: our choices - our future. Michigan Society of Planning Officials. Farmington Hills, MI.

Public Sector Consultants, Inc. 2001. Michigan Land Resource Project. Lansing, MI.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 76 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.3

JOB 1.3.1: Biodiversity assessment

This work was completed and reported under the previous segment of this grant, no further work on this objective will be supported in this segment.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 77 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.3

JOB 1.3.2: EO inventory of southern Michigan Wildlife Division lands

JOB NEED:

The Wildlife Division manages a number of project areas primarily within the Southern Lower Peninsula of Michigan. These areas include State Game Areas (SGAs), State Wildlife Management Areas (SWMAs), Fish and Wildlife Areas (FWAs), State Wildlife Research Areas (SWRAs), Waterfowl Production Areas (WPAs) and wildlife focus areas within State Forests and State Recreation Areas. The purpose of these areas in general is to provide, protect and enhance wildlife habitat while providing for the associated recreation of hunting and trapping. In most areas where they occur, these areas provide the only large, contiguous acreage of wildlife habitat in a landscape heavily fragmented by human development and agriculture. As a result, these areas have become refugia and potential source populations for many SGCNs. As the local Wildlife Habitat Biologists are preparing strategic master plans for these areas, they need to know which species are present and how the area can be important for the management of those species.

While the state has long performed inventories and kept records about game species and timber resources, thorough inventories the SGCNs and the array of natural communities where they reside have not been completed. This information is necessary for assessing the opportunities, benefits and impacts of land management, recreation, restoration, development and other activities on state lands.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Field surveys

To systematically survey selected wildlife areas and document the presence and geographic extent of high quality natural communities and the SGCNs contained in those communities. One of the four southern Michigan management units will be conducted at a time; each management unit will take two years to complete.

Objective 2. Data compilation and database management

To compile field data and update the statewide Biotics database with survey findings annually while compiling the field survey data in geospatially referenced digital databases.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 78 of 176 The results of the surveys will be provided to appropriate land managers to be used as inventory data in area strategic master plans within one year from completing the field surveys. Survey reports will include prioritized management recommendations and management implications. This information will be used by the land managers to assist in establishing strategic goals and objectives for SGCNs while managing the area in accordance with its intended use.

The goal of this project is to conduct systematic inventories of state lands in the four southern Michigan management units and deliver comprehensive, written reports for regional groupings of State Game and Wildlife Areas. This project builds on natural features inventories previously conducted and seeks to provide critical information for effective natural resource planning. The reports will be designed to provide information on regional conservation priorities and will highlight key areas on state lands for biodiversity protection.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Field surveys

Systematic surveys for high quality natural communities, rare species and their habitats will be conducted on state lands administered by the Wildlife Division in the four southern Michigan management units. Two management units will be surveyed simultaneously, each management unit will require two years to survey. Two management units will be surveyed in the first and second years of this study with the remaining two surveyed in years three and four. The Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) will be contracted to conduct the surveys, however, Wildlife Division staff will assist.

Approach 2. Data compilation and database management

All locations of high quality natural communities and rare species will be entered into the statewide Biotics database and made available for use in planning, research and environmental review. Additionally, survey data will be geospatially referenced and made available digitally as attributed data layers.

The surveys will be summarized in comprehensive written reports that discuss the regional and statewide significance of each management area and highlight critical areas for biodiversity protection. In addition, the reports will include a discussion of ecologically significant sites that may not harbor rare species or high quality communities but may be worthy of restoration efforts (e.g., wildlife corridors, buffer areas, potential nesting habitat for SGCNs, etc.).

Invasive species present a severe threat to ecological integrity; therefore, information gathered during the surveys and presented in the reports will include a list of invasive species and an estimate of their abundance in all high quality natural communities and whenever possible, rare species habitats.

JOB LOCATION:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 79 of 176 Surveys for this job will occur on Wildlife Division administered land throughout southern Michigan. Data compilation and analyses as well as report writing will occur in Lansing at Division offices.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 80 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.3

JOB 1.3.3: Preparation of performance and final reports

JOB NEED:

This job reserves the time and other resources to prepare a report of the findings. The findings are needed by the agency to address the needs of this study. The report will serve to disseminate the findings to the appropriate field personnel for use in management decisions. Additionally, the report will be disseminated to other state and federal agencies so that they may benefit from the findings. The final report and a performance report on accomplishments at the study level are required by implementation guidance for survey and inventories federal assistance grants as provided by the USFWS.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Final report

Objective 2. Annual performance report

To prepare and submit a performance report comparing work planned by study objective in the grant agreement with actual accomplishments during the grant agreement period. The report will also include a comparison of the total estimated expenditures planned in the grant agreement with an estimate of the total expenditures incurred while completing the accomplishments during the grant agreement period.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Final report

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 81 of 176 A final report will be submitted to USFWS at the completion of this study. This report will provide notice to the federal grant administrator that the study is concluded, no further work will be conducted after this point. This report will serve as the record of accomplishments that provides a summation of the findings and conclusions for the entire project or study. This report will include:

• Identification of the study effort that will show state, project/study title and number and period covered.

• A creditable report of the results of the study.

• A description of how the results will be used that will include management implications and guidelines.

• A signature of responsible state official

Approach 2. Annual performance report

JOB LOCATION:

Activities supported under this job may occur at offices and university libraries statewide.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 82 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.4: Importance of coarse woody debris

STUDY NEED:

Forest management practices are increasingly focused on maintaining forest biodiversity and ecological sustainability. The amount of dead wood or coarse woody debris (CWD) is an important contributor to understory and overall forest structure and can be used to evaluate sustainability of forest management. A number of species of greatest conservation need depend on coarse woody debris as an essential habitat component. Cavity nesting birds, most forest amphibians, numerous invertebrates, forest bats and many other mammal species are excluded from otherwise suitable habitat if coarse woody debris is lacking. Modern timber practices, however, often result in diminished amounts of coarse woody debris as much more biomass is used from forest products.

Amounts of CWD have been documented within many forest types, but little is known regarding CWD within Michigan’s northern hardwood and aspen forests, some of the most intensively managed forest types in the state. An understanding of the range of variation in amounts of CWD in these forest types is needed to evaluate current management practices and set goals for retention of snags, dying trees and culls during intermediate cuttings. These guidelines need to be established to ensure habitat availability for many species of greatest conservation need. The WAP lists increasing amounts of coarse woody debris as a conservation need in most northern Michigan terrestrial systems. These include lowland hardwood, mesic hardwood, dry hardwood and riparian corridors. Although an increase in CWD is listed as a need, the actual amounts needed in any of these systems for species of greatest conservation need are not determined in the WAP.

Accurate estimation of CWD characteristics is critical to assess effectively forest management sustainability. The Department of Natural Resources currently samples CWD using a circuit- transect method (IFMAP Stage 2 sampling). This method is efficient, but little is known about whether the results accurately represent CWD resources. Other methods, including strip plots (long, narrow fixed area plots), or systematically placed transects may result in a more accurate estimation of CWD characteristics. These methods need to be tested in Michigan’s forests and compared with current methods to determine the accuracy of current CWD data.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

The following needs identified in the Terrestrial Systems portion of Section 2. Landscape Features & Conservation Needs will be addressed by this study:

Landscape Feature Summaries (SLP-page 140, NLP-page 141, EUP-page 127, WUP- page 128) – The Research and Survey Needs for each region include the following:

• Document the historic and current range of variation of down woody debris. This includes variables such as species composition and size.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 83 of 176 • Develop a methodology for quantifying down woody debris.

• Identify the characteristics of down woody debris that contribute to its value to wildlife and which species may be affected by changes in these characteristics.

• Track the abundance, distribution and wildlife use of down woody debris across the landscape with attention to individual characteristics such as woody plant species and structural components.

STUDY OBJECTIVES:

The following objectives will be completed to address the needs of this study:

Objective 1. CWD survey techniques

To determine the best field survey methods of evaluating coarse woody debris and test methodology on managed and natural aspen and northern hardwood forest stands.

Objective 2. Reporting

To produce performance reports with 90 days of the end of each grant agreement and a final study report at the end of the grant period.

STUDY EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

This study will result in the modifications of methodologies in MDNR’s IFMAP project to measure efficiently CWD at appropriate scales. Habitat assessment and monitoring will be used to determine appropriate levels of CWD to retain on managed sites to ensure habitat suitability for those species of greatest conservation need that depend on CWD. This information will be used to modify those portions of the WAP that note the need for CWD with specific guidelines.

STUDY APPROACH:

Approach 1. CWD survey techniques

Data from mist-netted animals will help determine timing of migration.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 84 of 176 The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.4.1. Evaluation of CWD survey techniques

Approach 2. Reporting

Performance reports will include planned and actual accomplishments for each grant agreement with a discussion of any slippages exceeding 10%. The final report will include recommendations for retention goals of snags, dying trees and culls during intermediate cuttings. The following jobs will be conducted to address this study objective:

1.4.2. Preparation of performance and final reports

The following state project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this study:

STUDY LOCATION:

The fieldwork will take place throughout the eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Natural forest study sites will be located within state, federal, or private lands while managed forest sites will be located within state forests. Field biologists will be consulted to help select forest tracts that have the needed conditions. Analyses and report preparation will occur in Wildlife Division and MNFI offices in Lansing.

STUDY SCHEDULE OF WORK:

Jobs will be completed according to the following schedule; some minor modifications may be necessary and will be documented in each year’s grant agreement.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 85 of 176 FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. CWD survey techniques Job 1 Job 1 Job 1 2. Reporting Job 2 Job 2 Job 2 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

Performance reports under Job 2 will be completed within 90 days after the end of each grant agreement. The final report for the study under Job 3 will be completed at the end of this grant period.

STUDY ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009-2010 Objectives FY 20061 FY 20071 FY 20081 Segment 2 1. CWD survey techniques $0 $62,249 $41,400 $72,800 2. Reporting $0 $5,413 $3,600 $7,200 Totals $ 0 $67,662 $45,000 $80,000 1Fiscal years 2006-2008 were included in the previous proposals/segments, they are included here to show the work already completed for these multi-year projects.

STUDY COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 86 of 176 1.4B(1) Research, inventory and information collection activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources which involve negligible animal mortality or habitat destruction, no introduction of contaminants, or no introduction of organisms not indigenous to the affected ecosystem.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The activities supported by this grant for this study will have no effect or are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species. This study supports non-intrusive data collection; therefore, no listed species will be handled and no habitat will be modified. Research and surveys that involve handling species such as Eastern massasauga rattlesnake, Mitchell’s satyr butterfly, Indiana bat and Kirtland’s Warbler will be detailed under separate studies specific to those species.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Other Federal Compliance Issues

STUDY PERSONNEL:

Principal Investigator Michael Donovan Research Specialist MDNR Wildlife Division (517) 373-7027

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 87 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.4

JOB 1.4.1: Evaluation of CWD survey techniques

JOB NEED:

Efficient survey techniques for coarse woody debris (CWD) are needed to properly assess habitats and prescribe timber treatments in those forested areas that are heavily managed for timber products but are also critical to many species of greatest conservation need. We need a better understanding of the requirements for CWD by species of greatest conservation need to ensure our management practices are sufficiently addressing this critical habitat component.

JOB OBJECTIVES:

This job will be completed by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Method evaluation

To compare results of current CWD sampling methods with other common methods and determine most efficient method for suitable level of accuracy and precision.

Objective 2. CWD survey

To document CWD amounts in selected managed and natural aspen and northern hardwood forests using selected methodology.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

The methods established for measuring CWD in this study will replace those currently used by the Department in our IFMAP Stage II forest inventory procedures. This will give all Department land managers a better assessment of CWD by stands within compartments being considered for forest treatments. Managers will consequently have a better tool for making prescriptions that ensure stands are providing suitable habitat for species of greatest conservation need.

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Method evaluation

Methods for sampling CWD will include circuit-transects (IFMAP Stage 2 sampling method for down and dead material), circuit strip-plots and systematically placed transects within a subset of the targeted stands. An analysis to determine whether the results of these methods are

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 88 of 176 comparable will be run and the best method will be selected for use on the remainder of forest stands. CWD data collected will include measures of: (a) volume, (b) diameter and length and (c) decay class.

Approach 2. CWD survey

Sampling will be focused on determining the range of variability in CWD amounts within managed and natural aspen and northern hardwood forests in Michigan. Sites within natural forests will be selected based on (1) old growth character, (2) no known management history or (3) suggestions by knowledgeable biologists. Stands in even-aged managed aspen forests will be randomly selected from state forest stands and will represent five age classes: 0-5 years, 20-25 years, 40-45 years, 60-65 years and over 80 years since harvest based on stand year of origin in the Operations Inventory database. Northern hardwood stands will be randomly selected to represent the range of forest management treatments and rotations present on Michigan’s state forests.

JOB LOCATION:

The fieldwork will take place throughout the eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Natural forest study sites will be located within state, federal, or private lands while managed forest sites will be located within state forests. Field biologists will be consulted to help select forest tracts that have the needed conditions. Analyses will occur in Wildlife Division and MNFI offices in Lansing.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Michael Donovan Research Specialist MDNR Wildlife Division (517) 373-7027

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 89 of 176 Project #: 1 Study #: 1.4

JOB 1.4.2: Preparation of performance and final reports

JOB NEED:

JOB OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Final report

Objective 2. Annual performance report

To prepare and submit a performance report comparing work planned by study objective in the grant agreement with actual accomplishments during the grant agreement period. Report will also include a comparison of the total estimated expenditures planned in the grant agreement with an estimate of the total expenditures incurred completing the accomplishments during the grant agreement period.

JOB EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

JOB APPROACH:

Approach 1. Final report

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 90 of 176 MNFI will make a final report to MDNR at the conclusion of this study. This report will include recommendations for retention goals of snags, dying trees and culls during intermediate cuttings. This report will also be incorporated into a final report that will be submitted to USFWS at the completion of this study. This report will provide notice to the federal grant administrator that the study is concluded, no further work will be conducted after this point. This report will serve as the record of accomplishments that provides a summation of the findings and conclusions for the entire project or study. This report will include:

• Identification of the study effort that will show state, project/study title and number and period covered.

• A creditable report of the results of the study.

• A description of how the results will be used that will include management implications and guidelines.

• A signature of responsible state official

Approach 2. Annual performance report

JOB LOCATION:

Preparation of performance reports and for each segment of this study and final reports will occur in the Lansing offices of MNFI and the Wildlife Division.

JOB PERSONNEL:

Job Leader Michael Donovan Research Specialist MDNR Wildlife Division (517) 373-7027

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 91 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.5: Black Creek bat communities

This study was completed with support from the previous segment of this grant. The final report for this study was submitted as part of the previous segment’s performance report. No further work on this study will be supported by this grant.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 92 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.6: Eastern massasauga rattlesnake research

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 93 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.7: CREP lands examination

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 94 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.8: Refining wildlife habitat models

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 95 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.9: Eastern fox snakes ecology and conservation

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 96 of 176 Project #: 1

STUDY 1.10: Oak regeneration

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 97 of 176

CHAPTER 3: HABITAT MANAGEMENT FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 98 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Control of invasive species that threaten the integrity and sustainability of habitat required by species of greatest conservation need.

SUMMARY:

Invasive species of a non-native origin have significantly affected the landscape in Michigan. Native species have been displaced and in some cases ecosystem processes and functions have been disrupted. There is also a looming threat of even more introductions of non-native species that may become invasive and harmful to native biodiversity given the global nature of today’s society. This project is designed to combat those invasive species already present, conduct research on control techniques and their effectiveness and maintain an aggressive public outreach program to be proactive in preventing new releases.

NEED:

Beginning with European settlement of North America, the intentional and unintentional release of invasive exotic species has caused some of the most significant landscape impacts. High speed international travel has only increased the risk of establishing new species. Estimates place the number of established invasive exotics since the 1800s in Michigan at 160 with additional species projected to occur in the near future. Most recently has been the identification of the emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) in southeastern Michigan. The introduction of many non-native species has severely affected native species and their associated habitats. In some cases invasive species threaten the existence of native wildlife. Michigan has experienced significant impacts from many invasive species including: zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), common reed (Phragmites australis), kudzu (Pueraria montana), spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus), sea lampreys (Petromyzon marinus), European ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernuus), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar), black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), tartarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and others.

Control of invasive species is essential to protect native biodiversity. Research into different controls and management techniques has identified opportunities and protocols for controlling or eliminating some invasive species. Application of these findings and evaluation of activities on various sites will assist in control of invasive species. Public outreach is another essential need in controlling invasive species. Educating the public to the threats of invasive species will help prevent the intentional or unintentional introduction of even more species. This proactive approach will reduce the need to control more invasive species in the future.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Invasive species are identified in Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) as a priority threat in every Michigan ecoregion in both terrestrial and aquatic systems. Consequently, a Priority Conservation Action (PCA) in virtually all landscape features is to institute invasive species monitoring, prevention and control programs. An essential need of controlling exotics is public

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 99 of 176 education. The public must have some recognition of some particularly harmful species, how they are spread and what can be done to minimize these species effects. For example, the public must realize that the emerald ash borer can be moved with firewood to previously unaffected areas. Firewood quarantine areas and movement restriction zones will only work provided the public understands the need for them and participates. Enforcement alone will never stop all movements of infected firewood. Similarly, the need to treat bilge water and wash the bottom of boats to prevent spreading zebra mussels will only be successful with public awareness and cooperation.

OBJECTIVES:

The goal of this project is to reduce the impacts of invasive species on native communities and to limit the introduction of new invasive species. This will be accomplished by the following objectives:

Objective 1. Invasive species program administration

To provide ongoing support of the program infrastructure that:

• Identifies and maintains lists of species in need of control

• Evaluates threats and prioritizes control activities

• Consolidates control methods and provides control information to field units

• Organizes and evaluates survey and monitoring data

• Addresses legal and regulatory issues.

Objective 2. Invasive species control

To reduce invasive species impacts on wildlife and their habitats by implementing approved control methods annually.

Objective 3. Invasive species control outreach

To annually conduct public information and education campaigns to inform the public about the effects of invasive species on SGCNs and request their assistance in control methods.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

The control of invasive species, whether they are plant or animal, will protect native wildlife species and their associated habitats. Continued evaluation will provide additional resources and management tools to control or eliminate invasive exotic species. Public outreach will help prevent the introduction of new invasive species and limit the spread and impacts of invasive species already present in Michigan.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 100 of 176 APPROACH:

With support from this grant, the Division will continue to develop our invasive species program. This program is a function of the Habitat Unit of the Species/Habitat Section of the Wildlife Division. The purpose of the program is to compile information on exotic invasive species, determine the severity of their threat to native species and communities, coordinate information on effective control techniques, identify research needs on control methods, provide technical support to field units and continually update and revise information based on an adaptive management strategy. Implementation of control techniques is provided by field units and this grant will provide necessary financial support for control measures.

Approach 1. Invasive species program administration

• Develop and maintain a list of invasive species of concern to Michigan’s species of greatest conservation need and their habitats.

• For each species on the list the following information will be compiled:

o The species name, aliases and important identification characteristics.

o The origin of the species including geographic range, native habitat and factors affecting its natural control in native habitats.

o Michigan species of greatest conservation need that are potentially impacted by species.

o Current distribution of species in Michigan and vulnerable habitat types.

o Threats and their relative severity.

o Control and eradication techniques.

o Relative priority of control and eradication needs compared with other invasive species.

o Evaluation of control and eradication methods including feasibilities and potential efficacy.

• Develop and maintain an electronic means of disseminating information on each listed species to field personnel, researchers and habitat management practitioners. Currently, the Species/Habitat Unit is using a ListServ messaging system for habitat management related topics. This system will also be used for invasive species; the unit, however, will further develop electronic sources specific to invasive species.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 101 of 176 • Assist in identifying research needs on control and eradication methods.

• Assist in indentifying surveys and monitoring needs for the species as well as compiling surveys and monitoring data.

• Providing and reviewing technical information as needed to develop public outreach materials.

The administration of the invasive program will also be responsible for complying with the provisions of recently enacted state legislation. This legislation calls for creating an Invasive Species Advisory Council, developing and managing a list of prohibited and restricted invasive species, issuing permits, providing for enforcement and collection of fines into an invasive species fund. The invasive species fund will be used for public education about preventing the introduction of, controlling and eradicating prohibited species, restricted species and other nonnative species. Expenditures by the Department out of the invasive species fund may be used as matching funds for activities under this grant proposal.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222001* SWG - Invasive All activities related to Hours spent Species Program administering a program to control administering Admin invasive species. Includes setting program program goals and objectives, developing and maintaining species lists, compiling information on control techniques, prioritizing control efforts, providing technical support to field practitioners, developing research, surveys and monitoring needs. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 2. Invasive species control

Field personnel will identify areas with significant impacts from invasive species and implement control activities using the appropriate techniques and protocols. Activities available for implementation will vary with species and location. Control activities may include one or more techniques from the following four categories: biological, chemical, physical and prescribed fire. Adaptive management will be used to monitor efficacy of control methods and adjust as necessary or as new information becomes available. The surveys and monitoring portion of this adaptive management will be supported by a SWG Surveys and Monitoring Grant, and the research portion by a SWG Research Grant.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 102 of 176 Biological Controls: These control activities include introducing a biological agent to control the target species. Biological agents may include other organisms or viruses. These agents may be native to systems where they are being released or they may be of a non-native origin. The use of biological agents will follow all applicable state and federal laws, regulations and procedures. Procedures will be developed and followed to ensure there are no or minimal impact on non-target species both before and after release into native systems. This type of control can be very effective, particularly for some plant species.

Chemical Controls: These activities include the use of various organic and inorganic pesticides. The use of pesticides is governed by appropriate state and federal laws, regulations, policies and rules. Wildlife technicians and assistants involved in the use of pesticides must be accredited through the Michigan Department of Agriculture as certified pesticide applicators as a condition of employment. A certified pesticide applicator must be on site whenever pesticides are being used. Pesticide use will be restricted to approved chemicals at appropriate application rates as directed by the Habitat Unit and will follow all label instructions.

Physical Controls: These activities include direct control methods by hand or mechanical device. For plant species these may involve hand pulling, mowing, disking, plowing, chopping or other methods. For animal species these may include shooting, trapping, snaring, entangling or other methods. In addition, manipulating environmental conditions by mechanical means may be included such as fluctuating water levels.

Prescribed Fire: These activities include the use of fire to control invasive species. The use of prescribed fire follows strict MDNR policies and procedures. Fire is generally used to address a variety of habitat restoration or management objectives, normally not solely for controlling invasive species. As such, the use of fire is more completely described in other portions of this grant proposal. When necessary, however, this grant will support the use of prescribed fire for controlling invasive species.

The Wildlife Division has already initiated control activities for a variety of species in many locations throughout the state. The following are examples of species being controlled and some of the techniques currently being used. This grant proposal will fund similar work, but is not restricted to the species or techniques listed here. A complete listing of the species treated, areas treated and techniques used will be included in each grant segment performance report.

Species: Purple loosestrife, Lythrum salicaria Control Methods: Biological, Chemical To control purple loosestrife the Department has cooperated in several projects to release Galerucella sp. beetles. On test sites this method has proven successful in significantly reducing purple loosestrife. Protocols established under a cooperative project with Michigan State University will be used to control purple loosestrife at additional sites. Release sites will be identified and recommended by Department field staff. Release sites will include numerous major and minor sites. Final locations will be reported with the annual performance report. Release of Galerucella beetles is covered by an approved national Environmental Assessment. On sites where beetles cannot be established, the use of herbicides may be appropriate to provide short term relief.

Species: Common Reed, Phragmites australis Control Methods: Chemical, Physical,

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 103 of 176 Prescribed Fire The Department is implementing recommended techniques using prescribed burns, water manipulation and herbicides to control Phragmites. These management activities have shown potential but require additional evaluation through observation and monitoring of selected sites to determine long-term impacts on Phragmites regeneration.

Species: Garlic Mustard, Alliaria petiolata Control Methods: Chemical, Physical On sensitive areas such as designated Natural Areas, invasive species control may involve non- mechanized activities. On these sites control of garlic mustard requires manual labor to pull plants. To be successful in the long term this method may require the establishment of local volunteer stewardship efforts to assist in control activities. Plants removed from these sites will be destroyed using recommended methods to ensure no viable material remains. Established protocols to ensure that neither seeds nor any regenerative plant parts are transferred off infected sites will be implemented.

The potential for biological control of garlic mustard will also be evaluated. Based on findings of research studies, a 1% glyphosate has been shown to mimic damage caused by weevils and cause significant mortality. Applications will be applied to coincide with the natural occurrence of weevils. Sites will be monitored and compared to non-treated areas to determine the effectiveness of this method of control.

Species: Zebra Mussel, Dreissena polymorpha Control Methods: Physical Zebra mussels may be the most significant and most difficult species to control. No population control methods have been identified specific to zebra mussels. Evidence is mounting that zebra mussels have the potential to eliminate native mussel species. In the cases where significant populations of native mussel species are being impacted, long-term survival may require labor intensive activities. Activities will include one or more of the following: removal, cleaning and return of mussels to the original bed location. No federal listed species will be moved without prior consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Species: Autumn olive, Elaeagnus umbellata Control Methods: Physical, Chemical Glossy Buckthorn, Rhamnus frangula The best techniques for controlling invasive shrubs like autumn olive and buckthorn are cutting and direct herbicide application to the stumps. Additional treatment may include prescribed burning to reduce sprouting of new plants. Prescribed burning to control invasive plants will not be conducted on areas with populations of federally listed species.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222002* SWG - Invasive All activities related to the control Acres of invasive Species Control & and eradication of invasive species species treated Outreach affecting native wildlife or their associated habitats. All activities related to the production and

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 104 of 176 dissemination of educational materials to prevent introduction of new and assist in controlling established invasive species. Includes production of print and electronic media, mailings and presentations at public events. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 3. Invasive species control outreach

Existing informational efforts to educate the public on the threats and control methods for exotic species will be updated as necessary and disseminated in various formats. New information campaigns will be initiated as needed to aid in prevention of new species introductions and to help control established invasive species. The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222002* SWG - Invasive All activities related to the control Number of Species Control & and eradication of invasive species educational materials Outreach affecting native wildlife or their produced associated habitats. All activities related to the production and dissemination of educational materials to prevent introduction of new and assist in controlling established invasive species. Includes production of print and electronic media, mailings and presentations at public events. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

Costs may vary by Grant Segment. The estimates provided below may include salaries and wages, contractual services, supplies, travel expenses and equipment. Specific work activities

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 105 of 176 and direct cost categories may vary from segment to segment; these activities and cost detail are provided in the budget narrative for this segment included as Appendix A.

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Invasive species program administration $84,902 $84,902 $169,804 2. Invasive species control $225,386 $225,386 $450,772 3. Invasive species outreach $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $310,288 $310,288 $620,576

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3, 1.5 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

i. The installation of fences.

ii. The construction of small water control structures.

iii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

iv. The construction of small berms or dikes.

v. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 106 of 176 1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The planning, administrative and outreach activities supported by this project will not affect any listed or candidate species covered by the Endangered Species Act. The control of invasive species, however, may affect listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential effects can be avoided by the timing of the application of control measures. In occupied Piping Plover habitat and designated critical habitat, no control techniques will be conducted during the spring arrival, nesting and brood rearing periods. Any work within floodplains containing suitable habitat for the Indiana bat will be conducted in the winter or will only involve techniques that do not affect standing timber suitable as roosting or nesting trees.

Work in habitat occupied by Karner blue and Mitchell’s satyr butterflies may adversely affect individuals. Management of the Karner blue will be done in accordance with Michigan’s Habitat Conservation Plan. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The planning, administrative and outreach activities supported by this project will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Some control methods also will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. These would include those activities on lands that have been in active agriculture in the past 50 years and do not involve soil disturbance below normal plow depth. This includes plowing, seeding using no-till drill, culti-packing, hand clearing of brush and trees and prescribed fire for those areas with no structures more than 50 years old present.

For sites that have not been in active agriculture in the past 50 years and those activities likely to disturb the soil below the average plow depth, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be contacted and a site specific Section 106 review will be prepared.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 107 of 176 PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Objectives 1-2 Coordinator Mark Sargent Private Lands Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 241-0666

Objective 3 Coordinator Kelly Siciliano Carter Information and Education Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-5431

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 108 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Grassland restoration and management.

SUMMARY:

Though never dominated by grasses, Michigan contained an estimated 2.3 million acres of grasslands before European settlement. These grassland ecosystems included several plant communities such as wet prairies, tall grass prairies, pine barrens, oak barrens and oak savanna. The majority of large contiguous acreage of grasslands occurred primarily in the glacial interlobate regions of southern Michigan. Approximately 99% of these original grasslands have been lost or relegated to small remnant patches due to agriculture, urban sprawl, fire suppression and forest succession.

The significant loss of contiguous habitat has affected many grassland interior species. Notably, populations of Henslow’s Sparrow, Savannah Sparrow, Grasshopper Sparrow, Upland Sandpiper, Bobolink and Short-eared Owl have declined drastically. Plants such as prairie smoke, prairie Indian plantain, prairie dropseed and eastern prairie-fringed orchid depend on grassland communities and have become rare. Other species that depend on grasslands for a portion of their life history are also affected including animals such as the eastern fox snake, Prairie Warbler and Eastern Wild Turkey.

NEED:

The loss of grassland communities and the resultant impact on ecosystems has been severe. Remaining grasslands are relegated to small remnant patches where their continued existence is threatened by lack of management and restoration of natural processes. The grassland systems of particular concern and facing immediate threats are those along the prairie-savanna continuum. This includes communities dominated by native grasses where tree canopy cover ranges from less than 5% for prairies to 5-60% for savannas.

Many of the prairies in the Southern Lower Peninsula have been lost due to development, conversion to agriculture, or lack of disturbance leading to vegetative succession. Currently, most of the prairies in the Southern Lower Peninsula are considered to be degraded or highly degraded (>80%). Very few, roughly 5%, remain in good or excellent condition. Many of these natural communities are classified as imperiled or critically imperiled within the state or globally (e.g., lakeplain mesic sand prairie, mesic prairie), due to high or extreme rarity.

Most remaining savanna in the Southern Lower Peninsula is considered to be degraded or very degraded (~90%) due to vegetative succession and development. Several savanna natural communities are classified as imperiled or critically imperiled within the state and globally (e.g., lakeplain oak openings) due to high or extreme rarity.

The restoration of large contiguous grasslands is necessary to restore and maintain grassland species in Michigan. Grassland restoration is also necessary to restore proper community composition to interlobate ecosystems primarily in southern Michigan. These communities

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 109 of 176 contain 96 species of greatest conservation need identified in the WAP consisting of 44 insects, 6 amphibians, 11 reptiles, 30 birds and 5 mammals.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

The land management conservation actions needed as identified in the WAP for these grasslands that will be addressed by this proposal are:

• In remaining habitats manage to approximate natural disturbance regimes using prescribed fire, managed grazing or mowing.

• Institute invasive species monitoring, prevention and control programs.

• Provide contiguous dry and mesic grassland areas of at least 250 acres.

Additionally, a propagation program is needed to provide the seed source for grassland restorations. The collection and propagation of local genotypes will help ensure a bank of native biodiversity exists to mitigate the further loss of remnant grassland patches.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Native grassland restoration and maintenance

Up to 1,000 acres of native grasslands will be established, restored or maintained in Michigan annually. Whenever possible, grassland management will focus on using, restoring and protecting native genotypes.

Objective 2. Local genotype collection and propagation

To annually conduct surveys to identify remnant grasslands containing native genotypes of species important for propagation. Collect seeds for use in native genotype propagation programs to provide seed source for other restoration efforts.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Restoration of grassland on public and private lands will enhance the populations of grassland dependent birds and other wildlife species associated with grassland habitats. The collection of local genotypes will provide a seed source for restoration projects and help preserve Michigan’s native biodiversity. From the WAP, the associated natural communities that will be restored, managed and maintained are:

Bur Oak Plains Mesic Prairie Dry Sand Prairie Woodland Prairie Hillside Prairie Mesic Sand Prairie Lakeplain Mesic Sand Prairie Wet Prairie Lakeplain Wet Prairie Wet-mesic Prairie Lakeplain Wet-mesic Prairie Great Lakes Barrens Lakeplain Oak Openings Oak Barrens

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 110 of 176 Oak Openings Pine Barrens Oak-Pine Barrens Northern Bald (Krummholz ridgetop)

From the WAP the associated species of greatest conservation need that will benefit from this project are:

INSECTS spartina borer moth (Spartiniphaga inops) barrens locust (Orphulella pelidna pelidna) AMPHIBIANS a spur-throat grasshopper (Melanoplus smallmouth salamander (Ambystoma texanum) eurycercus) eastern tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum blue-legged locust (Melanoplus flavidus) tigrinum) Hebard's green-legged locust (Melanoplus Fowler's toad (Bufo fowleri) viridipes) Blanchard's cricket frog (Acris crepitans Atlantic-coast locust (Psinidia fenestralis blanchardi) fenestralis) pickerel frog (Rana palustris) secretive locust (Appalachia arcana) northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens) conehead grasshopper (Neoconocephalus retusus) REPTILES delicate meadow katydid (Orchelimum delicatum) Kirtland's snake (Clonophis kirtlandii) Davis's shield-bearer (Atlanticus davisi) blue racer (Coluber constrictor foxii) tamarack tree cricket (Oecanthus laricis) eastern fox snake (Elaphe gloydi) angular spittlebug (Lepyronia angulifera) black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) great plains spittlebug (Lepyronia gibbosa) western fox snake (Elaphe vulpina) a spittlebug (Philaenarcys killa) eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platirhinos) red-legged spittlebug (Prosapia ignipectus) smooth green snake (Liochlorophis vernalis) a leafhopper (Dorydiella kansana) six-lined racerunner (Apidoscelis sexlineatus) a leafhopper (Flexamia delongi) eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus Huron River leafhopper (Flexamia huroni) catenatus) a leafhopper (Flexamia reflexus) spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) American burying beetle (Nicrophorus Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) americanus) eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) wild indigo duskywing (Erynnis baptisiae) BIRDS persius duskywing (Erynnis persius persius) Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors) grizzled skipper (Pyrgus wyandot) Sharp-tailed Grouse (Tympanuchus poweshiek skipperling (Oarisma poweshiek) phasianellus) ottoe skipper (Hesperia ottoe) Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) dusted skipper (Atrytonopsis hianna) American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) pipevine swallowtail (Battus philenor) Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) northern hairstreak (Fixsenia favonius ontario) Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) northern blue (Lycaeides idas nabokovi) Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Karner blue (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) Merlin (Falco columbarius) Henry's elfin (Callophrys henrici) Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda) frosted elfin (Callophrys irus) Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) Barn Owl (Tyto alba) gorgone checkerspot (Chlosyne gorgone carlota) Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) tawny crescent (Phyciodes batesii) Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) Mitchell's satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii) Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes barrens buckmoth (Hemileuca maia) erythrocephalus) Sprague's pygarctia (Pygarctia spraguei) Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus) boreal fan moth (Brachionycha borealis) Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus) three-staff underwing (Catocala amestris) Least Flycatcher (Empidonax minimus) quiet underwing (Catocala dulciola) Eastern Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus) Doll's merolonche (Merolonche dolli) Migrant Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus Newman's brocade (Meropleon ambifusca) migrans) blazing star borer (Papaipema beeriana) Northern Shrike (Lanius excubitor) golden borer (Papaipema cerina) Purple Martin (Progne subis) maritime sunflower borer (Papaipema maritima) Sedge Wren (Cistothorus platensis) Culvers root borer (Papaipema sciata) Northern Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) silphium borer moth (Papaipema silphii) Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) regal fern borer (Papaipema speciosissima) Kirtland's Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) phlox moth (Schinia indiana) Prairie Warbler (Dendroica discolor)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 111 of 176 Eastern Towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus) MAMMALS Field Sparrow (Spizella pusilla) least shrew (Cryptotis parva) Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus) Indiana bat or Indiana myotis (Myotis sodalis) Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) least chipmunk (Tamias minimus) Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) Dickcissel (Spiza americana) woodland vole (Microtus pinetorum) Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi) Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna) deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus gracilis) Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta)

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Native grassland restoration and maintenance

Remnant prairie and savanna patches will be identified and prioritized for restoration. Restoration will include the use of prescribed fire, herbicides, mowing and other mechanical techniques, hand clearing of undesirable or exotic vegetation and seed augmentation as individual site needs dictate. Prescribed fire on state lands will be conducted in conjunction with Forest, Minerals and Fire Management Division of the Department of Natural Resources and will follow an approved burn plan.

Areas no longer having original plant material will be planted to native grasses using special native grass planters using seed purchased in cooperation with private conservation groups. Location of grassland establishment will be driven by the landscape ecology needs of the ecosystems in which they had previously occurred.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222003* SWG - Grassland All aspects related to the Acres of grasslands Restoration & Mgt establishment, restoration and restored, enhanced or maintenance of native grasslands. maintained Activities include site surveys and prioritization, site preparation, planting, chemical, mechanical and hand vegetation management and use of prescribed fires. All aspects related to identifying suitable remnant sites with local genotypes, seed collection, propagation and dissemination for use in native grassland restoration projects *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 2. Local genotype collection and propagation

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 112 of 176 Seed will be collected from remnant grasslands to be used as foundation stock for the propagation of local genotype sources. Original seed source collections will be completed by hand through volunteer projects. Propagation sites will be established on public lands. Seeds produced from this source will be used on other public land restoration and establishment projects.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222003* SWG - Grassland All aspects related to the Pounds of seed Restoration & Mgt establishment, restoration and collected and maintenance of native grasslands. produced Activities include site surveys and prioritization, site preparation, planting, chemical, mechanical and hand vegetation management and use of prescribed fires. All aspects related to identifying suitable remnant sites with local genotypes, seed collection, propagation and dissemination for use in native grassland restoration projects *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

All project activities will occur statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Native grassland restoration and maintenance $404,105 $404,105 $808,210 2. Local genotype collection and propagation $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 Totals $414,105 $414,105 $828,210

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 113 of 176 COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The amended activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusion 1.3 and 1.5 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

i. The installation of fences.

ii. The construction of small water control structures.

iii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

iv. The construction of small berms or dikes.

v. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Management techniques may affect listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential effects can be avoided by the timing of the management activities. Work in habitat occupied by Karner blue and Mitchell’s satyr butterflies may adversely affect individuals. Management of the Karner blue will be done in accordance with Michigan’s Habitat Conservation Plan. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 114 of 176 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Some management methods will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. These would include those activities on lands that have been in active agriculture in the past 50 years and do not involve soil disturbance below normal plow depth. This includes plowing, seeding using no-till drill, culti- packing, hand clearing of brush and trees and prescribed fire for those areas with no structures more than 50 years old present.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Mark Sargent Private Lands Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 241-0666

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 115 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Jack pine forest regeneration, maintenance and management.

SUMMARY:

The jack pine forests of Michigan’s Northern Lower Peninsula are part of a uniquely adapted system that developed on the dry sand outwash glacial plains. Historically, the most important process maintaining this system has been periodic wildfire. Jack pine and other commensal plant species evolved to take advantage of this ecological process. In turn, wildlife species also adapted to the changes initiated by and successional stages maintained by fire.

Over a century of fire suppression has interrupted the disturbance regime of the jack pine forest and eliminated the maintenance of much of the early successional stage on the landscape. Consequently, those species dependent on young jack pine stands also declined. Most notable of these declines is the federally listed endangered Kirtland’s Warbler, but other species such as the Black-backed Woodpecker, which depends on the standing dead pine left after burns, also declined.

The goal of this project is to reestablish the disturbance regime necessary to provide a sufficient amount of early successional jack pine forest to maintain dependent species and aid in the recovery of the Kirtland’s Warbler. As part of adaptive management this work will be monitored, assessed and modified as necessary to ensure proper application of techniques. This information will be used in planning efforts and as part of the recovery of the Kirtland’s Warbler. Public outreach and work with relevant stakeholders will occur to ensure planning and the proper subsequent implementation will occur across the landscape and land ownerships.

NEED:

The recovery of the federally listed Kirtland’s Warbler is dependent on sufficient acreage of early successional jack pine habitat. Historically, this habitat was created and maintained by periodic wildfires. Prescribed fires need to be used to mimic this ecological process. Development in the area, however, restricts the extent to which prescribed fires can be used. Therefore, other mechanical techniques need to be developed and used to recreate the necessary disturbance regime within the parent ecosystem. In the absence of fire, seeding and planting needs to occur to generate new stands of jack pines.

Monitoring and evaluation of regeneration techniques is needed along with additional research in new techniques as part of an adaptive management approach. The management of jack pine is still experimental; therefore, techniques used must be evaluated to ensure they are having the desired effect. The results of monitoring and evaluation need to be incorporated into a planning system to make sure management is suitably adapted to changing information.

The types of management necessary to maintain jack pine can be controversial. In addition, management is needed across land ownerships to have the proper landscape level effects. Therefore, stakeholder involvement and public outreach are needed to ensure the proper management can be implemented at an appropriate scale.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 116 of 176 Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

The Kirtland’s Warbler is a SGCN listed in the WAP. The SGCN Status & Species-Specific Issues section of the WAP on page 198 lists altered fire regime, fragmentation and forestry practices as threats to this species. The habitat work supported by this statement is needed to address these species-specific threats. Additionally, the WAP notes the Kirtland’s Warbler is very selective in regards to both vegetation species composition and structural composition of nesting sites.

OBJECTIVES:

The goal of this project is to restore and maintain the jack pine forests, which requires restoration of disturbance regimes and successful regeneration of the jack pine stands. This will be accomplished by the following objectives:

Objective 1. Regeneration of jack pine

To regenerate and/or maintain 1,500 acres of jack pine annually by preparing sites, planting and seeding.

Objective 2. Jack pine management

To annually assess impacts and benefits of current jack pine barrens management and recommend alterations for improvement. Includes conducting a regeneration analysis of acres treated under Objective 1.

Objective 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach

To respond to public requests for information both verbal and written and develop informational material concerning the Kirtland’s Warbler, its habitat and the management of the jack pine component of this ecosystem.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Jack pine forests occur within the dry conifer ecosystem of Michigan’s Northern Lower Peninsula. With its obvious importance to the federally listed endangered Kirtland’s Warbler, this ecosystem component has global significance. This management will also benefit other species of greatest conservation need within this ecosystem that depend on this community type. From the WAP, the associated natural communities where early successional jack pine forest can occur are:

Boreal Forest Dry-mesic Northern Forest Dry Northern Forest Wooded Dune and Swale Complex

From the WAP, the associated species of greatest conservation need that occur within these communities are:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 117 of 176 INSECTS Merlin (Falco columbarius) secretive locust (Appalachia arcana) Black-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus erythropthalmus) dusted skipper (Atrytonopsis hianna) Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) gorgone checkerspot (Chlosyne gorgone carlota) Whip-poor-will (Caprimulgus vociferus) pine imperial moth (Eacles imperialis pini) Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus) boreal fan moth (Brachionycha borealis) Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) Kirtland's Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) AMPHIBIANS Prairie Warbler (Dendroica discolor) blue-spotted salamander (Ambystoma laterale) Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis) Eastern Towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus) REPTILES Red Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra) black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) White-winged Crossbill (Loxia leucoptera) eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platirhinos) Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertinus) smooth green snake (Liochlorophis vernalis) eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus MAMMALS catenatus) pygmy shrew (Sorex hoyi) eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) red bat (Lasiurus borealis) hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) BIRDS American marten (Martes americana) Spruce Grouse (Falcipennis canadensis) northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus) Sharp-tailed Grouse (Tympanuchus woodland vole (Microtus pinetorum) phasianellus) southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus gracilis) Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Regeneration of jack pine

Any prescribed fires used as part of the site preparation on state owned lands will have burn plans developed in cooperation with Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division of the Department of Natural Resources. Prescribed fires will be conducted in accordance with applicable state and federal laws and regulations.

Approach 2. Jack pine management

Regeneration evaluations will be conducted on previously planted sites to determine need for additional plantings. Growth and stem density factors will be used determine the need for additional plantings to meet optimum stem densities (minimum 1,200 stems/acre) identified for Kirtland’s Warbler nesting habitat. Management activities will be coordinated with other state and federal agencies through the federal Kirtland’s Warbler recovery team. It is estimated that 1,000 – 1,500 acres will be affected each year. Annual warbler monitoring will be used to determine the success of this management activity.

Approach 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 118 of 176 Print and electronic media will be used to produce educational and outreach materials to support jack pine and Kirtland’s Warbler management. Public requests for information will be fulfilled as needed. Public educational efforts will be developed and presented.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenditures for these objectives:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222004* SWG - Jack Pine All aspects of site selection, Acres regenerated preparation and planting for jack pine regeneration. Includes use of Acres surveyed and prescribed fire and/or mechanical recommendations site preparation. Includes made procuring and planting jack pine

seedlings. All aspects of monitoring and evaluating jack Number of pine barrens management success. educational materials Includes preparing reports with produced recommendations and suggested plan updates. Includes surveys to determine regeneration success and warbler use of managed areas. All aspects of responding to public inquiries regarding jack pine/Kirtland's Warbler management. All aspects of developing and disseminating educational materials regarding jack pine/Kirtland's Warbler management activities and needs *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Kirtland’s Warbler management areas in the northern portion of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 119 of 176 FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Regeneration of jack pine $151,115 $151,115 $302,230 2. Jack pine management $21,413 $21,413 $42,826 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $172,528 $172,528 $345,056

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3, 1.5 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4B(3) The construction of new, or the addition of, small structures or improvements, including structures and improvements for the restoration of wetland, riparian, instream or native habitats, which result in no or only minor changes in the use of the affected local area. The following are examples of activities that may be included.

i. The installation of fences.

ii. The construction of small water control structures.

iii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

iv. The construction of small berms or dikes.

v. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 120 of 176 Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Work in habitat occupied by Kirtland’s Warbler may adversely affect individuals. MDNR has been working with USFWS Ecological Services on Kirtland’s Warbler for many years. Consultations have been conducted and biological opinions developed. All activities conducted as part of this project will be done in accordance of the results of those previous consultations and opinions. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance. Should any new management technique be used as a result of adaptive management that may adversely affect this species a formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Some management methods will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. These would include those activities on lands that have been in active agriculture in the past 50 years and do not involve soil disturbance below normal plow depth. This would also include those sites that have been actively managed for jack pine within the past 50 years. This includes seedbed preparation, seedling planting and prescribed fire for those areas with no structures more than 50 years old present.

For sites that have not been in actively managed in the past 50 years and those activities likely to disturb the soil below the average plow depth, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be contacted and a site specific Section 106 review will be prepared.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 121 of 176 Objectives 1 and 2 Coordinator Elaine Carlson Wildlife Habitat Biologist Wildlife Division (989) 826-3211

Objective 3 Coordinator Kelly Siciliano Carter Information and Education Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-5431

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 122 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Great Lakes coastal wetlands restoration, enhancement and management.

SUMMARY:

This project will use a variety of techniques to restore, enhance and manage coastal wetlands. As a group, coastal wetlands are some of the most impacted habitats in Michigan. Statewide, approximately half of the coastal wetlands present before European settlement have been lost; many of those that remain have been severely degraded. This project will support restoring lost wetlands including surrounding buffer and filter strips. The project will also support enhancing and managing existing wetlands including surrounding buffer and filter strips. This project also provides for short-term water level manipulations to provide mudflat foraging habitat for migrating wading and shorebirds.

NEED:

Degradation and loss of coastal wetlands have been severe in Michigan. Statewide, approximately half of all coastal wetlands present before European settlement have been lost, what remains has been heavily impacted. Loss and damage is particularly severe in the Southern Lower Peninsula while some Upper Peninsula wetlands remain relatively pristine. About 70% of the existing coastal emergent wetlands in the Southern Lower Peninsula are considered degraded or very degraded. Coastal wetlands are imperiled and include natural communities that are rare, uncommon, or imperiled in the state.

Coastal wetlands have been impacted primarily by urban and agricultural development. Impacts of urban development include (adapted from Albert 2003):

• Armoring of the shoreline and dredging of channels to create harbors eliminates marsh and wetland habitat.

• Dumping of waste materials such as sawdust and sewage and a wide variety of chemicals increases turbidity, reduces oxygen concentrations and alters the pH of the shallow-water marsh environment.

• Shipping traffic and associated wave action erode shoreline vegetation.

• Water level control of the Great Lakes and connecting rivers reduces short-term and inter-annual water level fluctuations and alters natural wetland dynamics.

• Marina development and beach grooming by lakeside residents removes aquatic vegetation; without roots to stabilize bottom sediments, lake currents erode adjacent shoreline, resulting in degradation.

Impacts of agricultural development include:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 123 of 176 • Field drainage has eliminated large areas of marsh and coastal wetlands.

• Erosion and sedimentation from plowed fields have greatly increased water turbidity and eliminated aquatic plants requiring clear water.

• Nutrient loading has reduced oxygen levels, prompted algal blooms and led to the dominance of species such as cattails that thrive on high nutrient levels.

• Heavy agricultural runoff has led to the deposition of rich organic mud in the wet meadows and along the shoreline, favoring the dominance of early successional and woody species.

• Introduced aggressive exotic plants have crowded out native plant species and reduced dependent insects and birds.

To mitigate these impacts and prevent further decline of many sensitive species, existing coastal wetlands need to be managed and enhanced while lost wetlands need to be restored.

Another particular concern of a group of species of greatest conservation need is the loss of foraging habitat along migration corridors of migrating wading and shorebirds. Particularly destructive has been the severe loss of mud flat feeding habitat along the western shore of Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair and the southeast shore of Lake Huron from Detroit north to Saginaw Bay. The majority of coastal wetlands in these areas have been impacted or lost from shoreline development, dredging and filling activities to provide shipping routes to inland rivers and pollution. The habitat loss and degradation has been extensive enough to act as a barrier to migrating birds in this area. Exposed mud flats with suitable invertebrate food are needed in this area to help restore this migration corridor.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Coastal wetlands across Michigan have been impacted by habitat conversion, particularly in the Southern Lower Peninsula where the WAP documents that more than 70% of emergent wetlands are degraded. The WAP includes the following priority actions for this habitat type:

• Manage to approximate natural disturbance regimes using restoration of natural water flow patterns. [Altered hydrologic regimes]

• Assess management goals to ensure that they provide for a diversity of communities across the landscape. [Removal of non-timber flora; Other biological interactions]

• Institute invasive species monitoring, prevention and control programs. [Invasive plants and animals]

• Where possible, motorized vehicle trails should be located a minimum of 100 feet (and preferably more than 500 feet) from rivers, streams, lakes and other wetlands except at designated crossings. [Non-consumptive recreation]

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 124 of 176 • Use best management practices for development, management and recreational activities around lakes, streams and wetlands to maintain natural shoreline stability (thereby reducing the need for restoration or artificial structures). [Industrial, residential and recreational development, Non-consumptive recreation]

• Support Landowner Incentive Programs to foster conservation on private land. [Variety of threats]

• Maintain or establish riparian buffers of at least 50 feet, but 500 feet or wider maximizes conservation benefits. [Altered sediment loads, riparian modifications]

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Coastal wetland restoration

To restore up to 100 acres of coastal wetlands annually by restoring hydrology, manipulating vegetation and controlling exotic vegetation. Acreage includes restoration of buffer areas to filter runoff for sedimentation and pollution control.

Objective 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and management

To enhance and manage up to 500 acres of coastal wetlands annually by maintaining natural hydrologic cycles, providing adequate acreages of different wetland seral stages, e.g., submergent, emergent, shrub/scrub and forested wetlands. Includes manipulating water levels to affect vegetation and to provide spring and fall migratory stopover sites for wading and shorebirds. Acreage includes management of buffer areas to filter runoff for sedimentation and pollution control.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Selected habitat enhancement techniques will shorten the time until full restoration and protection of wildlife species can be assured. These projects can provide acceptable substitutes for natural processes or features lacking in suitable habitats. This project will ensure the stability of the array of wildlife species in Michigan.

From the WAP, the associated natural communities that will be restored, managed and maintained are:

Great Lakes Marsh Open Dunes Interdunal Wetland Sand/Gravel Beach Cobble Beach Wooded Dune and Swale Complex Great Lakes Barrens

From the WAP the associated species of greatest conservation need that will benefit from this project are:

SNAILS eastern flat-whorl (Planogyra asteriscus)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 125 of 176 tapered vertigo (Vertigo elatior) spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) deep-throat vertigo (Vertigo nylanderi) Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) pleistocene catinella (Catinella exile) eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina)

INSECTS BIRDS Hine's emerald (Somatochlora hineana) American Black Duck (Anas rubripes) incurvate emerald (Somatochlora incurvata) Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors) Atlantic-coast locust (Psinidia fenestralis Common Loon (Gavia immer) fenestralis) Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) Lake Huron locust (Trimerotropis huroniana) American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) woodland meadow katydid (Conocephalus Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis) nemoralis) Black-crowned Night-heron (Nycticorax delicate meadow katydid (Orchelimum delicatum) nycticorax) a spittlebug (Philaenarcys killa) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) a leafhopper (Dorydiella kansana) Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) a tiger beetle (Cicindela hirticollis rhodensis) Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) little white tiger beetle (Cicindela lepida) King Rail (Rallus elegans) a tiger beetle (Cicindela macra) Common Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus) dune cutworm (Euxoa aurulenta) American Coot (Fulica americana) 3-striped oncocnemis (Oncocnemis piffardi) Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) aweme borer (Papaipema aweme) Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) Wilson's Snipe (Gallinago delicata) AMPHIBIANS Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia) Fowler's toad (Bufo fowleri) Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) Blanchard's cricket frog (Acris crepitans Forster's Tern (Sterna forsteri) blanchardi) Black Tern (Chlidonias niger) boreal chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) maculata) Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) Sedge Wren (Cistothorus platensis) REPTILES Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) northern ringneck snake (Diadophis punctatus Northern Parula (Parula americana) edwardsii) Prairie Warbler (Dendroica discolor) eastern fox snake (Elaphe gloydi) Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) western fox snake (Elaphe vulpina) Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna) eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platirhinos) Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xanthocephalus six-lined racerunner (Apidoscelis sexlineatus) xanthocephalus) eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus catenatus)

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Coastal wetland restoration

A major portion of coastal wetland restoration is restoring natural hydrology and water quality. A variety of techniques may be used in restoration projects including breaking tiles, plugging drains, installing water control structures when natural flow cannot be established and providing buffer and filter strips adjacent to the wetlands. Erosion control measures will use soft engineering techniques whenever feasible while avoiding armoring such as rip-rap. Native vegetation may be restored by planting seeds or plugs. Exotics and other undesirable species may be controlled with herbicides and prescribed fire. Woody vegetation may be controlled mechanically through hydro-axing, bulldozing or other techniques. Whenever commercially viable timber is to be removed, a timber sale will be conducted according to Department procedures. Income from timber sales on restoration projects funded through this grant will be considered program income that will be used to offset the costs of additional projects with the same objective.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 126 of 176 Approach 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and management

Existing wetlands may be enhanced using similar techniques provided for in the wetland restoration objective. Additionally, periodic maintenance and management activities will be conducted at existing and restored wetlands that includes vegetation modification through mechanical and/or chemical methods and prescribed fires. Hydrology will be managed and enhanced by maintaining water control structures, maintaining and managing adjacent filter and buffer strips. Erosion control techniques will be utilized to ensure continued effectiveness. Whenever commercially viable timber is to be removed, a timber sale will be conducted according to Department procedures. Income from timber sales on restoration projects funded through this grant will be considered program income that will be used to offset the costs of additional projects with the same objective.

Short-term water level management will occur at existing state-owned impoundments that already have water control structures. Improvement of water management will occur by reviewing current water management strategies and identifying locations where changes could provide early season stopover areas for migratory shorebirds. Existing water control structures on state owned lands will be used to increase exposed mud flat habitat during peak spring and fall migrations. Of particular importance will be those state lands along the Lake Huron shoreline where major migrations of these birds occur. On other water management areas, water manipulation may be used to increase use by Black Terns, rails and other wading and water birds.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for these objectives:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222005* SWG - Great Lakes All aspects of coastal wetland Acres restored Coastal Wetlands restoration including site preparation work, vegetation Acres maintained modification, hydrology

modification within and adjacent to project. Includes restoration of Number of acres adjacent buffer and filter areas where water levels necessary to provide proper water have been flow and quality. All aspects of manipulated enhancing and managing existing coastal wetlands including maintaining hydrology and water quality, maintaining and enhancing vegetation composition through chemical and mechanical means as well as prescribed fire, managing adjacent buffer and filter strips, maintain erosion control measures.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 127 of 176 *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Activities conducted as part of this project will occur in coastal counties statewide.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Coastal wetland restoration $8,281 $8,281 $16,562 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and management $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $8,281 $8,281 $16,562

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3 and 1.5 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 128 of 176 i. The installation of fences.

ii. The construction of small water control structures.

iii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

iv. The construction of small berms or dikes.

v. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Restoration activities supported by this project are not likely to affect any listed or candidate species as areas selected for restoration are not likely to have any listed species or designated critical habitat present. Management activities may affect listed species when applied in occupied habitat. Most of these potential effects will be avoided by the timing of the management activities. Management activities on sites with occupied habitat will occur when the listed species are seasonally not present or dormant. If management activities cannot be timed to avoid affecting listed species, then a site specific formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted before any management occurs. No activities will occur in any designated critical habitat. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. This document is on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Some management methods will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. These would include those activities on lands that are existing wetlands that have been at least periodically inundated on multiple occasions in the past 50 years. This includes plowing, seeding using no-till drill, culti- packing, hand clearing of brush and trees and prescribed fire for those areas with no structures more than 50 years old present.

Wetland restoration on sites that are not currently wetlands and not subject to periodic inundation within the past 50 years may have the potential to affect sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. For these sites the State Historic Preservation Officer will be contacted and a site specific Section 106 review will be prepared.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 129 of 176 Exotic Organisms, Floodplains and Wetlands Protection, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Barbara Avers Waterfowl/Wetland Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 241-3451

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 130 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Inland wetland management, restoration and enhancement.

SUMMARY:

This project will support the restoration, enhancement and management of Michigan’s inland wetlands. There are 25 natural communities found within the inland wetlands landscape feature, and over 200 SGCN use these communities for at least some portion of their life cycle. A variety of techniques will be used to restore, manage and enhance wetlands as well as the buffering uplands. Management of buffer and filter strips will help restore hydrology, improve water quality and reduce sedimentation from erosion and runoff.

This project will support restoration activities including breaking drainage tiles, plugging ditches and installing water control structures when necessary. Undesired vegetation may be cleared using mechanical and chemical techniques as well as using prescribed fire. Wetland vegetation may be established by seeding and planting plugs. Buffer and filter strips will be managed in many cases by utilizing deep-rooted prairie plants to assist in ground water infiltration and to reduce runoff.

NEED:

As a group, wetlands provide habitat for the greatest diversity of species in Michigan. Wetland habitats, however, have been severely impacted, particularly in southern Michigan. Following the national trend, a large portion of wetlands in Michigan that were present before European settlement have been lost. Virtually all remaining wetlands have suffered some degree of degradation. Impacts to water quality from development and agriculture, loss of buffer and filter areas, altered hydrology from ditching and draining, introduction of invasive exotic species and interrupted successional patterns have all affected Michigan’s wetlands. Generally, degradation is most severe in the Southern Lower Peninsula with less impacts moving north. Some wetlands in the Upper Peninsula remain nearly pristine, although no wetlands have been unaffected.

Because of the loss and degradation of wetlands, some of Michigan’s rarest species are wetland obligates. The eastern massasauga rattlesnake, a federal listing candidate, depends on wetlands for hibernacula and for spring and fall foraging habitat. The federally listed endangered Mitchell’s satyr butterfly depends on prairie fens for all portions of its life cycle. A number of freshwater mussels have been severely impacted at least partially by declining water quality and increased turbidity resulting from a decreased filtering capacity of wetlands in riparian areas.

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

From the WAP, more SGCN are dependent on interior wetlands than on any other landscape feature. Consequently, the restoration, enhancement and management of interior wetlands is one of the most important and challenging needs of conservation in Michigan.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 131 of 176 OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Inland wetland restoration

To restore up to 100 acres annually of inland wetlands by restoring hydrology, manipulating vegetation and controlling exotic vegetation. Acreage includes restoration of buffer areas to filter runoff for sedimentation and pollution control.

Objective 2. Inland wetland enhancement and management

To enhance and manage up to 500 acres annually of inland wetlands by maintaining natural hydrologic cycles, providing adequate acreages of different wetland seral stages, e.g., submergent, emergent, shrub/scrub and forested wetlands. Includes manipulating water levels to affect vegetation. Acreage includes management of buffer areas to filter runoff for sedimentation and pollution control.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

From the WAP, the associated natural communities that may be restored, managed and enhanced are:

Bog Patterned Fen Intermittent Wetland Poor Fen Muskeg Hardwood-Conifer Swamp Coastal Plain Marsh Inundated Shrub Swamp Emergent Marsh Southern Swamp Submergent Marsh Northern Swamp Inland Salt Marsh Poor Conifer Swamp Southern Wet Meadow Relict Conifer Swamp Northern Wet Meadow Rich Conifer Swamp Wet Prairie Southern Shrub-Carr Wet-mesic Prairie Northern Shrub Thicket Prairie Fen Southern Floodplain Forest Northern Fen

From the WAP the associated species of greatest conservation need that will benefit from this project are:

SNAILS devil crawfish (Cambarus diogenes) eastern flat-whorl (Planogyra asteriscus) digger crayfish (Fallicambarus fodiens) widespread column (Pupilla muscorum) delicate vertigo (Vertigo bollesiana) INSECTS tapered vertigo (Vertigo elatior) grey petaltail (Tachopteryx thoreyi) six-whorl vertigo (Vertigo morsei) sedge darner (Aeshna juncea) deep-throat vertigo (Vertigo nylanderi) spatterdock darner (Aeshna mutata) crested vertigo (Vertigo pygmaea) zigzag darner (Aeshna sitchensis) pleistocene catinella (Catinella exile) muskeg darner (Aeshna subarctica) Foster mantleslug (Pallifera fosteri) ocellated darner (Boyeria grafiana) Carolina mantleslug (Philomycus carolinianus) splendid clubtail (Gomphus lineatifrons) a land snail (Euconulus alderi) rapids clubtail (Gomphus quadricolor) spike-lip crater (Appalachina sayana) extra-striped snaketail (Ophiogomphus cherrystone drop (Hendersonia occulta) anomalus) pygmy snaketail (Ophiogomphus howei) CRAYFISH riverine snaketail (Stylurus amnicola)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 132 of 176 laura's snaketail (Stylurus laurae) Culvers root borer (Papaipema sciata) elusive snaketail (Stylurus notatus) silphium borer moth (Papaipema silphii) russet-tipped clubtail (Stylurus plagiatus) regal fern borer (Papaipema speciosissima) tiger spiketail (Cordulegaster erronea) spartina borer moth (Spartiniphaga inops) arrowhead spiketail (Cordulegaster obliqua) riley's lappet moth (Heteropacha rileyana) stygian shadowdragon (Neurocordulia small heterocampa (Heterocampa subrotata) yamaskanensis) lake emerald (Somatochlora cingulata) AMPHIBIANS Hine's emerald (Somatochlora hineana) blue-spotted salamander (Ambystoma laterale) incurvate emerald (Somatochlora incurvata) spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum) ebony boghaunter (Williamsonia fletcheri) marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum) ringed boghaunter (Williamsonia lintneri) smallmouth salamander (Ambystoma texanum) smoky rubyspot (Hetaerina titia) eastern tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum subarctic bluet (Coenagrion interrogatum) tigrinum) barrens locust (Orphulella pelidna pelidna) four-toed salamander (Hemidactylium scutatum) Hoosier locust (Paroxya hoosieri) Fowler's toad (Bufo fowleri) Atlantic-coast locust (Psinidia fenestralis Blanchard's cricket frog (Acris crepitans fenestralis) blanchardi) secretive locust (Appalachia arcana) boreal chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata woodland camel cricket (Ceuthophilus silvestris) maculata) bog conehead (Neoconocephalus lyristes) western chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata conehead grasshopper (Neoconocephalus triseriata) retusus) pickerel frog (Rana palustris) red-faced meadow katydid (Orchelimum northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens) concinnum) delicate meadow katydid (Orchelimum delicatum) REPTILES Davis's shield-bearer (Atlanticus davisi) Kirtland's snake (Clonophis kirtlandii) melodious ground cricket (Eunemobius melodius) blue racer (Coluber constrictor foxii) tamarack tree cricket (Oecanthus laricis) eastern fox snake (Elaphe gloydi) angular spittlebug (Lepyronia angulifera) black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) great plains spittlebug (Lepyronia gibbosa) western fox snake (Elaphe vulpina) red-legged spittlebug (Prosapia ignipectus) eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platirhinos) Huron River leafhopper (Flexamia huroni) smooth green snake (Liochlorophis vernalis) a leafhopper (Flexamia reflexus) copperbelly watersnake (Nerodia erythrogaster a tiger beetle (Cicindela hirticollis rhodensis) neglecta) a tiger beetle (Cicindela limbalis) queen snake (Regina septemvittata) a tiger beetle (Cicindela macra) six-lined racerunner (Apidoscelis sexlineatus) six-banded longhorn beetle (Dryobius eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus sexnotatus) catenatus) persius duskywing (Erynnis persius persius) spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) poweshiek skipperling (Oarisma poweshiek) Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) Dukes' skipper (Euphyes dukesi) wood turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) pipevine swallowtail (Battus philenor) eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) northern blue (Lycaeides idas nabokovi) Henry's elfin (Callophrys henrici) BIRDS swamp metalmark (Calephelis mutica) Trumpeter Swan (Cygnus buccinator) regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) American Black Duck (Anas rubripes) frigga fritillary (Boloria frigga) Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors) freija fritillary (Boloria freija) Sharp-tailed Grouse (Tympanuchus tawny crescent (Phyciodes batesii) phasianellus) hoary comma (Polygonia gracilis) Common Loon (Gavia immer) red-disked alpine (Erebia discoidalis) Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) Mitchell's satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii) American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) gold moth (Basilodes pepita) Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis) quiet underwing (Catocala dulciola) Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) magdalen underwing (Catocala illecta) Green Heron (Butorides virescens) Doll's merolonche (Merolonche dolli) Black-crowned Night-heron (Nycticorax Newman's brocade (Meropleon ambifusca) nycticorax) 3-striped oncocnemis (Oncocnemis piffardi) Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) blazing star borer (Papaipema beeriana) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) golden borer (Papaipema cerina) Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) maritime sunflower borer (Papaipema maritima) Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 133 of 176 Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) Prothonotary Warbler (Protonotaria citrea) Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Worm-eating Warbler (Helmitheros vermivorus) Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) Louisiana Waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla) King Rail (Rallus elegans) Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis) Virginia Rail (Rallus limicola) Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia citrina) Sora (Porzana carolina) Canada Warbler (Wilsonia canadensis) Common Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus) Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis) American Coot (Fulica americana) Le Conte's Sparrow (Ammodramus leconteii) Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia) Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna) Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda) Western Meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) Wilson's Snipe (Gallinago delicata) Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xanthocephalus American Woodcock (Scolopax minor) xanthocephalus) Wilson's Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) Forster's Tern (Sterna forsteri) MAMMALS Black Tern (Chlidonias niger) least shrew (Cryptotis parva) Barn Owl (Tyto alba) arctic shrew (Sorex arcticus) Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) pygmy shrew (Sorex hoyi) Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes water shrew (Sorex palustris) erythrocephalus) silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus) red bat (Lasiurus borealis) Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus) hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) northern bat or northern myotis (Myotis Acadian Flycatcher (Empidonax virescens) septentrionalis) Northern Shrike (Lanius excubitor) Indiana bat or Indiana myotis (Myotis sodalis) White-eyed Vireo (Vireo griseus) evening bat (Nycticeius humeralis) Gray Jay (Perisoreus canadensis) eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus) Purple Martin (Progne subis) gray wolf (Canis lupus) Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica) cougar (Puma concolor) Sedge Wren (Cistothorus platensis) lynx (Lynx canadensis) Marsh Wren (Cistothorus palustris) American marten (Martes americana) Ruby-crowned Kinglet (Regulus calendula) least weasel (Mustela nivalis) Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina) moose (Alces alces) Blue-winged Warbler (Vermivora pinus) least chipmunk (Tamias minimus) Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) woodland jumping mouse (Napaeozapus Northern Parula (Parula americana) insignis) Blackburnian Warbler (Dendroica fusca) southern red-backed vole (Clethrionomys Yellow-throated Warbler (Dendroica dominica) gapperi) Palm Warbler (Dendroica palmarum) southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi) Cerulean Warbler (Dendroica cerulea) snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus)

APPROACH:

Approach 1. Inland wetland restoration

A major portion of inland wetland restoration is restoring natural hydrology and water quality. A variety of techniques may be used in restoration projects, including breaking tiles, plugging drains, installing water control structures when natural flow cannot be established and providing buffer and filter strips adjacent to the wetlands. Restoring natural water flow and water level fluctuations will be used to restore the natural disturbance regime of the wetland. Native vegetation may be restored by planting seeds or plugs. Exotics and other undesirable species may be controlled mechanically, with herbicides and prescribed fire. Woody vegetation may be controlled mechanically through hydro-axing, bulldozing or other techniques including chemical application. Whenever commercially viable timber is to be removed, a timber sale will be conducted according to Department procedures. Income from timber sales on restoration

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 134 of 176 projects funded through this grant will be considered program income that will be used to offset the costs of additional projects with the same objective.

Approach 2. Inland wetland enhancement and management

As with restoration, management to maintain natural hydrology and water quality will be conducted. Water control structures may be used to manipulate water levels when natural flow cannot be maintained. Restoring natural water flow and water level fluctuations will be used to restore the natural disturbance regime of the wetland. Chemical and mechanical methods will be used to maintain and enhance native vegetation. Prescribed fire will be used where feasible. Exotics and other undesirable species may be controlled mechanically, with herbicides and prescribed fire. Woody vegetation may be controlled mechanically through hydro-axing, bulldozing or other techniques including chemical. Whenever commercially viable timber is to be removed, a timber sale will be conducted according to Department procedures. Income from timber sales on restoration projects funded through this grant will be considered program income that will be used to offset the costs of additional projects with the same objective.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenses for these objectives:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222006* SWG - Inland All aspects of enhancing and Acres restored Wetlands managing existing inland wetlands including maintaining hydrology Acres maintained and water quality, maintaining and enhancing vegetation composition through chemical and mechanical means as well as prescribed fire, managing adjacent buffer and filter strips, maintain erosion control measures. All aspects of inland wetland restoration including site preparation work, vegetation modification, hydrology modification within and adjacent to project. Includes restoration of adjacent buffer and filter areas necessary to provide proper water flow and quality. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Activities conducted as part of this project will occur statewide.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 135 of 176 ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Inland wetland restoration $0 $0 $ 0 2. Inland wetland enhancement and management $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3, 1.5 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(2), 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

vi. The installation of fences.

vii. The construction of small water control structures.

viii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

ix. The construction of small berms or dikes.

x. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 136 of 176 1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and state ordinances and laws.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Work in habitat occupied by Mitchell’s satyr butterfly may adversely affect individuals. Management within occupied satyr habitat will be done in accordance with the consultation and biological opinions developed for this species as part of Michigan’s Landowner Incentive Program. Management within occupied habitat of the Eastern massasauga rattlesnake will be done in accordance with the guidelines approved in Michigan’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances. All of these documents are on file and available from MDNR, USFWS Ecological Services East Lansing Office and USFWS Region 3 Federal Assistance. For all other species if management activities cannot be timed to avoid affecting listed species than a site specific formal consultation with USFWS Ecological Services will be conducted before any management occurs. No activities will occur in any designated critical habitat.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Some management methods will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. These would include those activities on lands that are existing wetlands that have been at least periodically inundated on multiple occasions in the past 50 years. This includes plowing, seeding using no-till drill, culti- packing, hand clearing of brush and trees and prescribed fire for those areas with no structures more than 50 years old present.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 137 of 176 PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Barbara Avers Waterfowl/Wetland Specialist Wildlife Division (517) 241-3451

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 138 of 176

CHAPTER 4: POPULATION MANAGEMENT FOR SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 139 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Birds of prey hacking to enhance populations of species of greatest conservation need as set forth in the Wildlife Action Plan.

SUMMARY:

This project is designed to speed the colonization of previously occupied and suitable habitat by birds of prey in Michigan. Although bird of prey reproductive success has improved since the banning and regulation of certain pesticides, some have yet to reoccupy much of their former range in Michigan and consequently they remain on the state’s list of SGCN. The ultimate goal of this project is to ensure the long-term viability of bird of prey populations in Michigan.

Chicks will be collected from donor nests in Michigan and hacked, raised and released at appropriate sites elsewhere in Michigan. This technique has proven effective for reintroducing birds of prey, specifically osprey and bald eagles, into their former range.

NEED:

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

Eight bird of prey species are species of greatest conservation need under MDNR’s Wildlife Action Plan (Eagle et al. 2005). Six of these species are state listed threatened species, and the remaining two, the Bald Eagle and Osprey, were just removed from the state threatened list in 2009. These species experienced dramatic population declines in the 1900s largely because of environmental contamination by persistent pesticides. Since the ban on the use of DDT and enhanced regulation of other pesticides, some species have expanded back into available habitat. Others, however, have not repopulated their former range as quickly even with several years of successful reproduction (Figure 1). Documented in breeding Programs where chicks are raised to fledgling season stages and released in appropriate habitat, i.e., hacking, have shown success in increasing the rate of colonization in osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). Parts of Michigan contain an abundance of suitable habitat for these species. Hacking programs Figure 1: Current breeding distribution of Osprey in contributed to the recovery of these species to the Michigan by county (Eagle et al. 2005). point that they were recently removed from the state threatened list, and continuation of these programs will ensure continued expansion and stabilization of these populations.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 140 of 176 OBJECTIVES:

The goal of this project is to ensure the recovery of birds of prey in Michigan by assisting in the colonization into their former range. The objectives necessary to achieve this goal are:

Objective 1. Nesting and hacking site surveys

To survey two counties in southern Michigan annually to determine suitable sites for constructing hacking stations and conducting Osprey releases. Additionally, to monitor five counties in northern Michigan annually to determine nesting success and suitable donor nests.

Objective 2. Chick collection, rearing and release

To collect up to a maximum of 16 Osprey chicks annually from successful nests in northern Michigan for rearing and release at the hacking stations in southern Michigan.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Although there is an abundance of suitable habitat in southern Michigan, Ospreys and Bald Eagles have not yet returned to these historically occupied areas. The hacking program for Ospreys will accelerate the natural expansion of this bird’s range in Michigan. By expanding the breeding range, Osprey populations will be less susceptible to stochastic localized events having a drastic impact on the species in the state. Experience gained in hacking Ospreys will be useful in hacking other birds of prey in the future.

APPROACH:

The Wildlife Division will assemble teams (one per hacking site) to coordinate efforts to identify hacking sites and collect, rear and release birds. The teams will include local Wildlife biologists, local nature centers or park organizations, veterinarians and other interested organizations.

Approach 2. Nesting and hacking site surveys

The local teams will identify potential hacking sites in Michigan. The sites must contain suitable habitat containing appropriate perch sites and access to foraging areas. Sites must also contain suitable areas to locate the hacking towers. Suitable areas are those that provide access to personnel and equipment, but are protected from other human disturbance. Temporary hacking towers/boxes will be constructed at each site. Each hacking box will be built using specifications provided by The Raptor Center, University of Minnesota to accommodate a minimum of three chicks.

As hatching begins, surveys will be conducted at locations containing concentrations of nesting birds of prey to identify potential chicks. Priority for chick capture will be given to nests containing three chicks. Nests with only one chick will not be considered for capture. Once chicks have reached 4½ - 5 weeks of age, they will be relocated to one of the rearing sites. All

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 141 of 176 chicks will be banded with US Fish and Wildlife Service bands as well as color bands to identify location and year of release.

Approach 3. Chick collection, rearing and release

Rearing to fledge stage in northern Michigan takes five to six weeks. During this period, daily feeding and monitoring will be conducted by both trained volunteers and paid staff. Supplies of fresh and frozen fish will be provided through normal netting activities conducted by MDNR Fisheries Division.

Behavioral observations will be used to identify the appropriate times for release. A sample of birds will be fitted with radio transmitters to gather information on movement and location after release. Once birds have been released, they will continued to be fed and monitored until it has been determined that all released birds are self-sufficient. Radio telemetry tracking will continue until birds leave the area.

As birds continue to expand their range, news releases will be issued to garner additional sightings of ospreys from local residents. When possible, telemetry will be used to verify sightings of released ospreys. Releases will continue over consecutive years (approximately 4-5) when formerly released birds are expected to return. Once the area is being used by wild nesting birds, new areas will be considered for release.

In subsequent years, artificial nesting platforms will be erected in the release sites to entice nesting by previously released birds.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for these objectives:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 220090* SWG - Osprey All activities related to capture, Number of Surveys Restoration rearing and release of osprey chicks from northern Michigan Number of Chicks into southern Michigan. Includes Reared construction of hacking towers and procurement of food. (Construction of nesting platforms for osprey should use 220091, Population Restoration). Includes field surveys to monitor active Osprey nesting sites in northern lower Michigan necessary to determine hatching dates, nesting success and identification of nests suitable to use for donor chicks. Also includes all aspects relating to identifying suitable hacking sites for Ospreys in southern lower Michigan. Includes GIS analysis,

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 142 of 176 site surveys and access control work necessary to reduce human disturbance. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Donor nests and corresponding surveys will most often be in the Northern Lower Peninsula and hacking sites will most often be established in the Southern Lower Peninsula. However, there may be instances when areas outside these established areas will be used.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2008 FY 2009-2010 Objectives Totals Segment 1 Segment 2 1. Nesting and hacking site surveys $4,078 $4,078 $8,156 2. Chick collection, rearing and release $0 $0 $ 0 Totals $4,078 $4,078 $8,156

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3, 1.5 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(6) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 143 of 176 1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals or the public.

1.4B(6) The reintroduction or supplementation (e.g., stocking) of native, formerly native, or established species into suitable habitat within their historic or established range, where no or negligible environmental disturbances are anticipated.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Although activities will be occurring in counties where federally listed species are know to occur, these activities will not affect any listed species should those species be present.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

The activities supported by this project will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink Department Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Lori Sargent Resource Analyst Wildlife Division (517) 373-9418

REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 144 of 176 Eagle, A.C., E.M. Hay-Chmielewski, K. Cleveland, A. Derosier, M. Herbert and R. Rustem, eds. 2005. Michigan's Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Lansing, Michigan. 1548+ pp. Available: http://www.michigan.gov/wildlifeconservationstrategy.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 145 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Conservation of individuals and/or populations to ensure perseverance of populations of species of greatest conservation need identified in the Wildlife Action Plan.

SUMMARY:

This project is designed to complement habitat management for species of greatest conservation need. For certain species, habitat components necessary to complete their life cycle or protect stages of their life cycle are needed. Coarse filter habitat management efforts would miss these species-specific needs. This project provides support to construct nesting structures for a variety of avian species of greatest conservation need. Support is also provide to protect winter hibernacula for a variety of bats listed as species of greatest conservation need by gating abandoned mine entrances. Additionally, this project supports protection of beach nesting sites of Piping Plovers.

NEED:

Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Needs

More than 400 plant and animal species have been identified as species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) in Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan (WAP, Eagle et al. 2005). As the habitat needs of these species have been recognized and addressed, many of the land use practices that led to the wide scale degradation of habitat in Michigan have been eliminated or modernized. As a result, many habitat types have recovered, offering suitable habitat to a variety of species that have suffered drastic population declines. For some species and populations, however, habitat restoration in and of itself is not sufficient for repopulation. Further action at the individual and population levels is required.

Pesticide exposure dramatically affected several raptor species listed as SGCNs. With the elimination of certain pesticides and regulation of others, the breeding success of some species has rebounded. Habitat conditions, particularly in southern Michigan, have also rebounded. The WAP (Eagle et al. 2005), however, still lists nesting structures as a limiting habitat factor for Osprey (Pandion haliaetus), Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus). Human built structures have become primary breeding sites for these species, particularly in southern Michigan. Osprey and Bald Eagles require super canopy trees for nesting; in many areas the forests are too young to contain super canopy trees. Similarly, Peregrine Falcons require nesting ledges similar to cliffs where young birds can be hatched, sheltered and fed safely until they are ready to fledge, but cities, which provide food such as feral pigeons, lack such ledges. Establishing and maintaining nesting structures for these SGCN is needed for their recovery while these habitat components are still lacking.

The Barn Owl (Tyto alba) is identified as extremely rare in the WAP (Eagle et al. 2005). Because of the relatively young age of most of Michigan forests, nesting is currently associated predominantly with artificial structures, especially barns. Areas containing all other habitat components for barn owls are now common, however, where large structures such as barns are

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 146 of 176 absent. Other artificial cavity nesting structures are needed to provide this critical habitat component until large standing dead trees can again provide natural nesting cavities.

Caves and mines are associated habitat for four bat species listed in the WAP as SGCN; silver- haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) Northern bat (Myotis septentrionalis), Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) and Eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus). All of these species use abandoned mines for winter hibernacula. Abandoned mines, however, are often closed to address human safety concerns. Closure typically involves filling or blasting mine entrances to seal them, resulting in an ecological trap for many of these species already impacted by other habitat degradation. Mine closures have become a significant threat to the conservation of these bat species. Bat friendly cave gates are needed to maintain hibernacula while providing for human safety around abandoned mines. Once mines are gated, surveys are needed to determine the impact, if any, to bat use of the mine.

Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) reproductive success is affected by human disturbance on the open sandy beaches where they nest. The WAP identifies protection of breeding pairs and nest sites, public education and awareness as key components for successful reproduction and recovery of the species (Eagle et al. 2005). A nest protection program is needed to identify nesting areas, enclose individual nests to prevent trampling and predation of the camouflaged eggs, band chicks and adults to determine reproductive outputs and educate beach goers to prevent them from inadvertently disturbing nests and chicks.

OBJECTIVES:

Objective 1. Nesting structures construction and maintenance

To provide up to 50 structures annually for SGCN opportunistically in areas where nesting opportunities are limited but the habitat is otherwise suitable.

Objective 2. Bat cave gate construction and maintenance

To construct up to five cave gates annually to protect winter hibernating sites for bats.

Objective 3. Piping Plover recovery management

To annually protect all known nesting locations in Michigan by erecting nesting area fencing, individual nest predator exclosures and provide education and outreach to beach goers.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

Selected habitat enhancement techniques will shorten the time until full restoration and protection of wildlife species can be assured. These projects will provide acceptable substitutes for natural processes or features lacking in suitable habitats. Consequently, populations of SGCN will expand into habitat that would otherwise not be suitable. Long-term, this project will ensure the stability of the array of wildlife species in Michigan.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 147 of 176 APPROACH:

Progress on addressing the above objectives will be made annually by conducting the following activities:

Approach 1. Nesting structures construction and maintenance

Wildlife restoration techniques using nest boxes or platform structures to enhance nesting opportunities for selected species such as Eastern Bluebird, Common Loon, Osprey and Peregrine Falcon will be recommended by field personnel. Sites and projects will be selected based on the appropriateness of the activity for the site and the species. Nest types may include osprey or eagle platforms, loon nesting platforms, cavity nesting species boxes, Barn Owl nest structures and other appropriate structures that may improve nesting potential. Once selected, Natural Heritage Program staff will provide appropriate plans and technical guidance to Division field personnel who will construct the structures.

In subsequent years, all constructed structures will be inspected and maintained in usable condition. All structures will be monitored for use and productivity. Data will be compiled by Natural Heritage Program staff for use in adaptive management. Based on monitoring results, plans for construction, site selection criteria and placement guidance may be modified.

Approach 2. Bat cave gate construction and maintenance

To protect winter bat hibernacula, mining records and mine blueprints/diagrams will be reviewed and surveys will be conducted to identify and prioritize sites. Additionally, mine surveys will be conducted each year for suitability and use by wintering bats. Baseline data will be compiled by Natural Heritage Program staff on species composition and population sizes of hibernating bats. Sites will be selected by intersecting bat use data with sites having high human safety concerns.

Exclusion gates will be designed and constructed to allow bat use while eliminating potential for human entrance at selected mines. For each gated mine, a sample of bats will be examined to determine species and sex composition; in addition, environmental parameters (temperature and humidity) will be recorded. These parameters will be measured over successive years to determine the impacts of the gating on bat use. Constructed gates will be annually inspected with maintenance and repairs conducted as needed. Design of individual gates will follow recommendations by Bat Conservation International modified for various locations and conditions as needed.

The following project code will be used to track time and expenditures for objectives 1 and 2:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 220091* SWG - Population All aspects of site selection, Number of nesting Restoration construction and maintenance of structures nesting platforms for Bald Eagles, constructed or Peregrine Falcons, Common maintained Loons and Ospreys. All aspects of site selection, construction and Number of cave maintenance of artificial nesting

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 148 of 176 cavities for cavity nesting birds gates constructed or including Eastern Bluebird and maintained Barn Owl. Activities related to hacking Osprey chicks are covered Number of under 220090. monitoring trips All aspects of site selection, made. design, construction and maintenance of bat cave exclusion gates. Includes subsequent monitoring for bat use impacts. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 3. Piping Plover recovery management

Many of the activities in this project involve the use of volunteers, seasonal and short term employees and contracted individuals. Contract employees will need to meet the following minimum qualifications: (1) Proven expertise not less than 5 years in working with Piping Plovers or a related species; (2) Expertise and knowledge of the Piping Plover recovery efforts in Michigan; (3) Proven expertise in working with multiple state and federal agencies, conservation organizations and private individuals (volunteers); and (4) Experience in coordinating projects across wide geographic areas.

A) Piping Plover nest protection: Once nests have been found, temporary and permanent predator exclosures will be erected over the nest. The nest will be monitored to ensure continued access to nesting adults. Nest sites will be monitored and abandoned eggs will be recovered for potential incubation and hatching. Incubation will occur at the University of Michigan Biological Station in Pellston. Non-viable eggs will be submitted for contaminant level analysis.

Psychological fencing used to protect nesting, foraging and brood rearing areas will consist of stakes, posts and twine. These sites will also be posted with signs indicating the use of the area by Piping Plovers. The sites will be periodically monitored to ensure that human activity does not occur within the fenced area. Beach monitors will make contacts with humans whose activity violates any closures. They will provide information on the Piping Plovers, purpose and need for closures and answer questions about plover management.

Chicks produced at the Biological Station will be reared in fenced areas on Douglas Lake shoreline. Once they have attained fledging status, the chicks will be released at the site of their original collection.

All survey, exclusion construction & placement, egg collection and rearing will be conducted according to protocols established by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for Piping Plover recovery activities.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 149 of 176 B) Piping Plover banding: Once chicks have hatched, they will be collected with both U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service bands and individual color bands. Unbanded adults that can be captured on nests sites will also be collected using hand nets when possible. Banding activities will be conducted in accordance with protocols established by the US Banding Lab, United States Geological Survey.

C) Piping Plover outreach: Informational flyers and brochures may be developed for use at nest site locations to provide beach users information about the Piping Plover nesting program and the need for beach use restrictions. These brochures will be distributed by beach monitors, park employees and at beach information and concession stations. Interpretive signs will be used to provide information on Piping Plovers at areas of high human use to increase public awareness where individual contact with all beach users is impractical.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 220095* SWG - Piping Activities related to identification Number of fences Plover of nesting sites, placement of constructed predator and human exclosures and monitoring. Includes banding Number of birds adults and chicks at nest sites to banded determine productivity. Includes

preparation and dissemination of educational materials to users of Number of materials nesting beaches. developed *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

LOCATION:

Activities conducted as part of this project will occur statewide. Nesting structures may be constructed anywhere in the state, but most will occur in the Southern Lower Peninsula. Cave gates will primarily occur in the northwest portion of the Lower Peninsula and the Upper Peninsula. Piping Plover nest protection will occur in occupied costal areas primarily in the Northern Lower Peninsula.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 150 of 176

FY 2009 FY 2010 Objectives Totals Segment 2 Segment 2 1. Nesting structures construction and maintenance $5,709 $5,709 $11,418 2. Bat cave gate construction and maintenance $1,606 $1,606 $3,212 3. Piping Plover recovery management $15,980 $15,980 $31,960 Totals $23,295 $23,295 $46,590

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

The activities supported by this grant for this project statement will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. These activities are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.3, 1.5 and 1.10 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and by 1.4B(1), 1.4B(2), 1.4B(3) and 1.4B(4) in 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.5 Nondestructive data collection, inventory (including field, aerial and satellite surveying and mapping), study, research and monitoring activities.

1.10 Activities which are educational, informational, advisory, or consultative to other agencies, public and private entities, visitors, individuals, or the general public.

1.4B(2) The operation, maintenance and management of existing facilities and routine recurring management activities and improvements, including renovations and replacements which result in no or only minor changes in the use and have no or negligible environmental effects on-site or in the vicinity of the site.

vi. The installation of fences.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 151 of 176 vii. The construction of small water control structures.

viii. The planting of seeds or seedlings and other minor revegetation actions.

ix. The construction of small berms or dikes.

x. The development of limited access for routine maintenance and management purposes.

1.4B(4) The use of prescribed burning for habitat improvement purposes, when conducted in accordance with local and State ordinances and laws.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

The construction of nesting structures will not adversely affect any federally listed species in Michigan. Construction of these platforms will not occur during the nesting season and therefore will not disturb nesting adults. The structures will not replace existing natural nesting substrates. Monitoring activities of structures will be conducted in a manner that will not disturb ongoing nesting activities.

Construction of bat cave gates will not adversely affect any federally listed species in Michigan. The only federally listed bat species in Michigan occurs only in southern Michigan and does not hibernate in Michigan nor is known to use caves as hibernacula. Consequently, monitoring activities that occur during the winter cannot affect any listed species.

Construction of nesting exclosures and banding individuals will affect Piping Plovers. These activities have been conducted for many years and will only be done by experienced individuals. These activities have been shown to not adversely affect the individuals and will not place the Michigan population in jeopardy.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

Other Federal Compliance Issues

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 152 of 176 PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader and Objectives 1-2 Amy Derosier Coordinator Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

Objective 3 Coordinator Christopher Hoving Endangered Species Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 373-3337

REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CITED:

Eagle, A.C., E.M. Hay-Chmielewski, K. Cleveland, A. Derosier, M. Herbert and R. Rustem, eds. 2005. Michigan's Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Michigan Department of Natural Resources. Lansing, Michigan. 1548+ pp. Available: http://www.michigan.gov/wildlifeconservationstrategy.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 153 of 176

CHAPTER 5: WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN REVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 154 of 176 PROJECT STATEMENT: Revising and developing implementation plans for Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan including public participation and stakeholder input.

SUMMARY:

Michigan's Wildlife Action Plan is the first ever attempt to consider the conservation needs of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife that are representative of the full diversity of our state's wildlife populations and their habitats, in a manner that is consistent throughout the entire state. Further planning efforts are needed, however, to keep the plan updated and to ensure priority needs and conservation actions are implemented. As the WAP is implemented, results of management activities are monitored and new information is gained about the status of species of greatest conservation need (SGCN), the WAP will be updated to incorparate new information and as part of adaptive management. Sucessful implementation of the action plan can only be achieved through cooperation with and active participation from the diverse community of conservation partners concerned with Michigan's wildlife. In order to fully participate, these partners must be well informed and be part of processes for implementing the current and developing future editions of the action plan. Additionally, the action plan does not include fully developed processes for implementing these conservation needs identified within, nor measuring their success when completed. This project will address the needs identified here and provide the fundamental planning necessary to ensure that the action plan is sucessfully implemented and SWG funds are effectively and appropriately used.

NEED:

Michigan's Wildlife Action Plan is based on the best scientific knowledge that was available as the action plan was developed. Through research, monitoring of activities and species responses and surveys, however, new information will be continually amassed and the plan will need to be modified accordingly. Information to be incorporated may include, but is not limited to the following:

• SGCN population status and trends,

• Changes in SGCN habitat conditions,

• Emerging threats to species and their habitats,

• Research and monitoring needs to address emerging threats,

• Adaptive management feedback on management activities and their effectiveness.

Congress originally identified the required elements of state wildlife action plans in the WCRP legislation, including the need to review the action plans at intervals not to exceed ten years.

Because of the scope and extraordinary number of conservation needs identified in the action plan, it would be impossible for MNDR to complete them all, necessitating partnerships with

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 155 of 176 other agencies, governments, organizations and individuals. Additionally, the participation of these partners will be essential when revising the action plan as described above. These conservation partners, however, must be well informed about the intent of the action plan, as well as the conservation action, research and monitoring needs identified within the action plan before they can effectively participate in addressing those needs and developing future editions of the action plan. Congress originally identified the required elements of state wildlife action plans in the WCRP legislation, including recognition that broad public participation is an essential element of developing and implementing these action plans. We need to develop the means by which to most effectively inform and foster active participation from all our conservation partners (any entity interested in conserving aquatic and terrestrial wildlife in Michigan, including State, Federal and tribal agencies, local governments, conservation organizations, academic institutions, private landowners and other interested individuals).

In order to maintain or restore populations of Michigan's SGCN, the action plan must be implemented and the conservation needs identified in the action plan have to be addressed. The action plan, however, only identifies conservation needs at a strategic level; it does not provide the operational detail on how to implement the conservation measures. Consequently, implementation guidance is needed to ensure the action plan is implemented in the most effective and efficient manner. This includes processes for helping conservation partners identify how they can best participate in implementation, for identifying projects that will best address identified needs, for maximizing the effectiveness of coordination within and without MNDR during implementation and for measuring the success of implementation.

To maximize the implementation of the WAP, the Wildlife Division needs to ensure the strategies contained in the WAP are integrated and incorporated into other land use plans and planning initiatives. MDNR has a variety of statewide, regional and site specific land use plans and planning initiatives for Department owned and controlled lands. These initiatives have come about as a result of stewardship needs, forest certification requirements and our efforts to implement a system of ecosystem management that includes adaptive management. Effective and efficient implementation of the WAP will require integration of the conservation needs, priority threats and priority actions into these other planning efforts.

OBJECTIVES:

The goals of this project are to ensure the WAP remains up to date with the latest scientific information, the actions called for in the plan are successfully implemented, SWG funds to implement the plan are appropriately and efficiently used and that the public and stakeholder groups are active participants in the conservation of Michigan’s biodiversity. Progress towards these goals will be made by addressing the following objectives:

Objective 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision

To develop updated editions of Michigan's Wildlife Action Plan at intervals not to exceed ten years. Data used to make revisions will be annually collected and compiled.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 156 of 176 Objective 2. Public Participation

To inform the public about the contents of the action plan and ensure public participation in implementation of the action plan, as well as development of future editions, through web pages or other media as necessary, to be created and then updated on an annual basis.

Objective 3. Implementation Guidance

To develop conservation tools, including administrative processes, which will guide implementation of the action plan by MNDR and non-MDNR partners, to be updated on an annual basis.

Objective 4. Planning Integration

To ensure the priority conservation needs, actions and threats identified in the WAP are integrated into other Department and Division plans and initiatives on an ongoing basis to maximize implementation of the WAP and benefit SGCN.

EXPECTED RESULTS OR BENEFITS:

As conditions in Michigan change, the recommended conservation actions, research and monitoring must be updated as needed to adapt to these changes and integrate new information that becomes available. By continuing to revise the action plan on a regular, periodic basis, it will remain relevant and useful to all of Michigan's conservation partners and will continue to help guide conservation of SGCN and their habitats into the future.

Improved communication and cooperation with conservation partners will lead to more effective management of Michigan’s lands and waters, which in turn will benefit the full diversity of Michigan’s wildlife species and the landscapes they use. An active and involved public will result in better programs and projects to benefit SGCN and their habitats. If our conservation partners are aware of identified conservation needs, they will be more likely to become active participants in implementing activities to address those needs. Additionally, the larger and more diverse the participation in revision of the action plan, the more complete and objective each new edition will be.

As programs and projects are successfully implemented, fulfilling conservation needs identified in the action plan, Michigan will see improvement in the status of its SGCN and their habitats. At the same time, species presently considered common will benefit from the conservation of those habitats. By creating conservation tools that will guide this implementation, we will help us to reach our goals in a more effective and efficent manner, finding the best uses for SWG and other funds.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 157 of 176 APPROACH:

All activities in this project are directly related to revision of the WAP and providing operational planning guidance to implement the WAP. Consequently, all activities are considered planning and will be reimbursable with 75% federal funds.

Approach 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision

Development and maintenance of a relational database that documents identified associations between SGCN, the landscape features (habitats) they use, threats to SGCN and landscape features and conservation actions, research and monitoring recommended to address identified threats.

Development and maintenance of geographic information systems (GIS) to assist in assessment of SGCN, landscape features and threats to SGCN and landscape features. These may include known or estimated spatial distribution of SGCN, landscape features and threats, condition of SGCN, landscape features and threats, spatial distribution of implemented conservation actions, research and monitoring recommended in the action plan, or identification of priority landscapes for conservation of SGCN and landscape features or addressing threats.

Review of action plan data, including: standardized set of landscape features used by SGCN; standardized set of threats that affect SGCN and landscape features in Michigan; the set of SGCN in Michigan; associations between SGCN, landscape features, threats to SGCN and landscape features and conservation actions, research and monitoring recommended to address identified threats; and assessments of the status of SGCN, landscape features and threats to SGCN and landscape features in Michigan. This review will be completed preferentially through literature review and electronic communication, but may require paper correspondence, workshops, or other face-to-face meetings.

Review of monitoring outcomes, both for program assessment and for changes in the condition and status of SGCN, landscape features and threats to SGCN and landscape features. This review will be completed preferentially through electronic communication, but may require paper correspondence, workshops, or other face-to-face meetings.

MDNR and non-MDNR (including general public) review of action plan product materials and revisions to action plan product materials to address comments received. These reviews will be completed preferentially through electronic correspondence, but may require paper correspondence, or face-to-face meetings.

Development and updates to action plan product materials to reflect recommendations and results received during review of action plan data, monitoring outcomes and action plan product materials. These product materials may include full text versions of the action plan or summaries of the full text and may be in paper, CD-ROM, or web-accessible formats.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 158 of 176 Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222010* SWG WAP Review All aspects related to reviewing Plan revision and Revision and revising the WAP. Official Datasets compiled revised versions of the WAP will be produced every 10 years. Databases developed Between revision releases, all and maintained activities related to compiling data, Spatial data layers developing and maintaining developed and relational databases, developing maintained and maintaining spatial data, Surveys and interpreting surveys and monitoring results monitoring results and providing compiled and adaptive management feedback interpreted will be supported. Hours

*This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 2. Public Participation

Development and maintenance of web pages to provide conservation partners with detailed information about the intent and content of the action plan. This may include the development and maintenance of a web application to allow conservation partners to directly access WAP data in order to query, sort and report action plan data for themselves.

Respond to MDNR and non-MDNR data and information requests pertinent to the action plan intent and contents. Responses will preferentially be handled electronically, but may require paper correspondence or face-to-face meetings.

Efforts to increase active participation from currently participating and non-participating conservation partners in order to improve the cooperative nature and public participation of action plan implementation and revision. These efforts will preferentially be completed through web pages, but may require other electronic correspondence, paper correspondence, or face-to- face meetings.

Development and maintenance of web pages to allow conservation partners to remotely participate in action plan revision and monitoring of implementation. This may include development of web applications that allow partners to review and comment on action plan materials, submit new data pertinent to the action plan, or report on progress implementing conservation actions, research and monitoring recommended in the action plan.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222012* SWG Public Input All aspects of soliciting public and Meetings/Workshops stakeholder input for WAP

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 159 of 176 revisions and development of held implementation plans and planning Web portals initiatives. Includes making developed and information and draft plans maintained available on-line, developing web pages to collect public comments, Responses to public holding public meetings and inquiries workshops and respond to public inquiries regarding the WAP, its revisions and its implementation. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 3. Implementation Guidance

Develop and update a conservation tool to assist MNDR and non-MDNR partners in determining which of the broad range of conservation actions, research and monitoring needs identified in the action plan should be considered priorities for that partner individually, with consideration of statewide priority conservation needs identified in the action plan. This may require electronic correspondence, paper correspondence or face-to-face meetings and may result in paper, CD- ROM or web-accessible product(s).

Develop and maintain a process to assist MDNR in planning initiatives that identify the activities that will best address MDNR-specific priority conservation needs identified, with consideration of SWG funding and other funding sources. This may require electronic correspondence, paper correspondence or face-to-face meetings.

Develop and update a monitoring plan to address both program assessment and SGCN, landscape feature and threat assessments. This may require literature review, electronic correspondence, paper correspondence or fact-to-face meetings.

Develop and update a conservation tool for tracking MDNR and non-MDNR partner proposed, ongoing and completed accomplishments/successes associated with the action plan and SWG funding. This may require electronic correspondence, paper correspondence or face-to-face meetings and will likely result in the development of a new database or an extension of the database described in Approach 1.

As part of the planning functions in this project, the Division needs to ensure SWG funds are correctly expended for the appropriate projects identified in the plan. This requires tracking time and expenditures, establishing contracts with vendors, following state and federal procedures when purchasing necessary goods and services, tracking inventories of equipment and supplies, preparing state and federal progress reports and preparing and monitoring federal grant documents.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 160 of 176 Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222013* SWG All aspects of developing planning Tools and plans Implementation tools for the effective and efficient developed Planning implementation of the WAP. Involves prioritizing actions to be implemented from the WAP, providing planning assistance to stakeholder groups on portions of the WAP they will be implementing, developing and revising a monitoring plan to assess management success, tracking plan accomplishments

222000* SWG All aspects of ensuring monies are Hours Administration available and correctly used to develop and implement the WAP. Includes tracking time and expenditures, establishing vendor contracts according to state and federal procedures, purchasing equipment and supplies according to state and federal procedures, preparing federal assistance grant documentation. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

Approach 4. Planning Integration

Natural Heritage Program Staff as well as other Wildlife Division staff including Habitat Specialists, Ecologist Planners and Habitat Biologists will work to integrate the priority actions, needs and address threats from the WAP into other plans and planning initiatives. This will be done to ensure those strategies identified in the WAP are implemented through the inclusion and integration with the objectives of other strategic and operational plans and planning initiatives. The plans and planning initiatives will include, but are not limited to the following:

1. North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI).

2. North American Wetlands Management Plan (NAWMP).

3. MDNR State Forest Planning as part of forest certification process and procedures.

4. MDNR Compartment Review Process for forest management operational planning at the stand level.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 161 of 176 5. Ecoregional plans being developed as a joint venture project between all MDNR divisions as part of ecosystem management.

6. Habitat management plans as a component of State Game Area, State Wildlife Area, State Fish and Wildlife Area and State Research Area Master Plans.

7. Assisting Forest, Minerals and Fire Management Division (FMFMD) and Parks and Recreation Bureau (PRB) with site specific management plans for lands on which Wildlife Division has comanagement responsibilities.

8. Assisting federal land management agencies in their planning efforts such as National Forest Management Plan reviews and Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (INRMP) for military installations.

The specific plans or planning initiatives where Wildlife Division integrated components of the WAP will be detailed in each grant segment’s performance reports. The reports will also enumerate which portions of the WAP were integrated into each plan. Only activities that integrate components of the WAP for the management of species of greatest conservation need will be eligible for reimbursement under this project statement. Activities eligible for reimbursement will include attending meetings, reviewing drafts, writing plans, facilitating meetings and public input and providing technical assistance to plan writers.

The following project codes will be used to track time and expenditures for this objective:

Project Code Project Title Project Definition Reporting Units 222014* SWG Planning All aspects of incorporating the Plans or planning Integration strategies for managing species of initiatives integrated greatest conservation need detailed with WAP in the WAP into other Department and Division strategic and operational plans and planning initiatives. Includes attending meetings, facilitating meetings and public input sessions, plan writing, draft review and providing technical assistance to plan writers. Only activities related to integrating specific actions, needs and threats detailed in the WAP into other plans and initiatives are eligible. *This project code is used for any time and expenditures that are reimbursable under this objective, regardless if they are actually charged to this grant. This code is not used for any time or expenditures that are not reimbursable under this objective.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 162 of 176 LOCATION:

The planning activities supported under this project may occur statewide, but will primarily occur within the Division’s offices in Lansing.

ESTIMATED COSTS:

FY 2008 FY 2009-2010 Objectives Totals Segment 1 Segment 2 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision $93,047 $93,047 $186,094 2. Public Participation $22,461 $22,461 $44,922 3. Implementation Guidance $167,347 $167,347 $334,694 4. Planning Integration $128,163 $128,163 $256,326 Totals $411,018 $411,018 $822,036

COMPLIANCE:

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

All the planning activities supported by this grant for this project statement will occur in existing buildings. Consequently, these activities will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment and are completely covered by categorical exclusions 1.1, 1.5 and 1.6 in 516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and 1.4B(8) 516 DM 6, Appendix 1 as follows:

1.1 Personnel actions and investigations and personnel services contracts.

1.6 Routine and continuing government business, including such things as supervision, administration, operations, maintenance, renovations and replacement activities having limited context and intensity (e.g., limited size and magnitude or short-term effects).

1.4B(8) Consultation and technical assistance activities directly related to the conservation of fish and wildlife resources.

Section 7, Endangered Species Act (ESA)

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 163 of 176 All the planning activities supported by this grant for this project statement will occur in existing buildings. Consequently, these activities will not affect any federally listed species or designated critical habitat.

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

All the planning activities supported by this grant for this project statement will occur in existing buildings. Therefore, these activities will not have any effects on sites that are listed on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Consequently, no Section 106 review is necessary or will be completed.

Other Federal Compliance Issues

The planning activities supported by this grant for this project statement do not involve any other federal compliance issue. MDNR will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations and policies including but not limited to Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, Executive Order 11987 Exotic Organisms, Floodplains and Wetlands Protection, Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and Coastal Barriers Resources Act of 1982.

PROJECT PERSONNEL:

Federal Aid Coordinator Eric Sink MDNR Federal Aid Coordinator Budget and Support Services (517) 335-1064

Grant Coordinator Stephen Beyer Wildlife Division Federal Aid Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 241-3450

Project Leader Amy Derosier Wildlife Action Plan Coordinator Wildlife Division (517) 335-3843

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 164 of 176 APPENDIX A: Segment 2 Accomplishment and Budget Detail for the Expenditure Period 1 October 2008 through 30 September 2010

CHAPTER 1: Technical Guidance for Species of Greatest Conservation Need

SUMMARY:

This Grant Segment is to support providing technical guidance to Department, Division, cooperating agencies and the public on species of greatest conservation need and using the Wildlife Action Plan as an important planning tool. This segment supports those activities that will be conducted by the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The activities to be conducted for each project are detailed in the grant proposal. All of the activities contained in this chapter of this segment are considered implementation and are reimbursable with 50% federal funds.

The planned accomplishments and estimated costs by objective are listed in the table below. Because of funding priorities and availability, some objectives will not be supported during this segment period. Should funding priorities and availabilities change this segment may be amended to add funding and accomplishments for these objectives.

PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS BY PROJECT STATEMENT OBJECTIVES:

Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost Training and professional development 1. Training and professional development 2 Events developed $79,688 and presented Threatened, endangered and listed species reviews and permits 1. Threatened and endangered species 1,500 Hours reviewing $323,038 review 2. Listed species permits and list review 700 Hours reviewing $82,029 Advising landowners and other agencies 1. Land use planning outreach 0 Hours advising $0 Maintenance of existing databases 1. Database updates and quality control 400 Hours updating $48,106 2. Database access 0 Hours $0 programming 3. Develop GIS data 0 Data layers $0 developed 4. Public sighting reports 0 Public data entry $0 interfaces

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 165 of 176 Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost developed Biological surveys and community classifications 1. Systematic and comprehensive 10 Statewide remote $156,361 biological survey of Michigan sensing survey 1 Counties surveyed 1 Models evaluated 2. Exploration of classifying lakes into 0 Lakes surveyed $0 natural communities in Michigan 3. Incorporating aquatic ecological 1 Analyses $42,418 classification units as elements of conducted biodiversity in the Biotics database 4. Natural community classification 0 Hours updating $0 information Annual Chapter Total $731,640 1The costs provided are for grant evaluation purposes only. These values will not be included in Financial Status Reports nor are they subject to financial audits. Actual grant expenditure tracking with supporting documentation necessary for audit purposes will not be maintained by MDNR at the objective level. All financial tracking and reporting for the purposes of audits is at the grant level only.

BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $132,921 $132,921 $265,842 Fringe Benefits (38%) $50,510 $50,510 $101,020 Salary Sub-total $183,431 $183,431 $366,862

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $35,439 $35,439 $70,878 Total Salaries $218,869 $218,869 $437,738

Contracts $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $5,000 $5,000 $10,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $5,000 $5,000 $10,000 Project Sub-total $728,869 $728,869 $1,457,738

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $2,770 $2,770 $5,540 TOTAL COST $731,639 $731,639 $1,463,278

Federal Share: $365,820 $365,820 $731,640 Other Share1: $365,820 $365,820 $731,640 State Share: $0 $0 $ 0 1In-kind match is being provided as waived overhead costs from Michigan State University for work being conducted for this segment under contract.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 166 of 176 CHAPTER 2: Surveys, Monitoring and Research for Species of Greatest Conservation Need

SUMMARY:

This Grant Segment is to support surveys, monitoring and research for species of greatest conservation need that will guide the implementation of the strategies contained in the WAP. This segment supports those activities that will be conducted by the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The activities to be conducted for each project are detailed in the grant proposal. All of the activities contained in this chapter of this segment are considered implementation and are reimbursable with 50% federal funds. The planned accomplishments and estimated costs by objective are listed in the table below.

PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS BY PROJECT STATEMENT OBJECTIVES:

Study and Objectives Jobs to be Conducted Annual Cost1 1.1 Statewide surveys 1. Surveys on state lands 1.1.1-1.1.2 $98,732 2. Statewide surveys 1.1.3-1.1.4 $44,538 3. Reporting 1.1.5 $8,230 1.2 Surveys of selected avian guilds 1. Woodland Owls $0 2. Nocturnal birds $0 3. Grassland birds $0 4. Reporting $0 1.3 Biodiversity assessment, EO Inventory and Systematic Inventory 1. Biodiversity assessment $0 2. EO inventory 1.3.2 $45,000 3. Reporting 1.3.3 $3,500 1.4 Importance of coarse woody debris 1. CWD survey techniques 1.4.1 $36,400 2. Reporting 1.4.2 $3,600 1.5 Black Creek bat communities 1. Seasonal patterns $0 2. Sex/age ratios $0 3. Roosting habitat $0 4. Activity and diet $0 5. Reporting $0 1.6 Eastern massasauga rattlesnake research 1. Massasauga ecology and response $0

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 167 of 176 2. Conservation status and population viability $0 3. Reporting $0 1.7 CREP lands examination 1. Avian communities on CREP lands $0 2. Non-native versus native CREP grasslands $0 3. Pilot GIS $0 4. Reporting $0 1.8 Refining wildlife habitat models 1. Field surveys $0 2. Model development and evaluation $0 3. Reporting $0 1.9 Eastern fox snakes ecology and conservation 1. Seasonal activity patterns and habitat use $0 2. Population biology $0 3. Reporting $0 1.10 Oak regeneration 1. Overstory, understory and ground layer $0 documentation 2. Systematic evaluation of management $0 3. Model successional pathways $0 4. Reporting $0 Annual Chapter Total $240,000 1The costs provided are for grant evaluation purposes only. These values will not be included in Financial Status Reports nor are they subject to financial audits. Actual grant expenditure tracking with supporting documentation necessary for audit purposes will not be maintained by MDNR at the objective level. All financial tracking and reporting for the purposes of audits is at the grant level only.

BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $1,270 $1,270 $2,540 Fringe Benefits (38%) $483 $483 $ 966 Salary Sub-total $1,753 $1,753 $3,506

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $339 $339 $ 678 Total Salaries $2,091 $2,091 $4,182

Contracts $235,000 $235,000 $470,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 Project Sub-total $239,091 $239,091 $478,182

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 168 of 176

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $909 $909 $1,818 TOTAL COST $240,000 $240,000 $480,000

Federal Share: $120,000 $120,000 $240,000 Other Share1: $16,060 $16,060 $32,120 State Share: $103,940 $103,940 $207,880 1In-kind match is being provided as waived overhead costs from Michigan State University for work being conducted for this segment under contract.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 169 of 176 CHAPTER 3: Habitat Management for Species of Greatest Conservation Need

SUMMARY:

This Grant Segment supports habitat restoration, enhancement and management for a number of species of greatest conservation need. The purpose of the activities funded under this segment are to ensure specific habitat components that might render otherwise suitable habitat unusable by certain species are provided. This segment supports those activities that will be conducted by the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The activities to be conducted for each project are detailed in the grant proposal. All of the activities contained in this chapter of this segment are considered implementation and are reimbursable with 50% federal funds.

PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS BY PROJECT STATEMENT OBJECTIVES:

Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost Control of invasive species that threaten the integrity and sustainability of habitat required by species of greatest conservation need 1. Invasive species program administration 750 Hours $84,902 administering program 2. Invasive species control 150 Acres treated $225,386 3. Invasive species outreach 0 Number of $0 materials produced Grassland restoration and management 1. Native grassland restoration and 800 Acres restored and $404,105 maintenance maintained 2. Local genotype collection and 500 Pounds of seed $10,000 propagation collected and produced Jack pine forest regeneration, maintenance and management 1. Regeneration of jack pine 500 Acres regenerated $151,115 2. Jack pine management 200 Acres surveyed $21,412 1 Recommendations made 3. Jack pine/Kirtland’s Warbler outreach 0 Number of $0 materials produced

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 170 of 176 Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost Great Lakes coastal wetlands restoration, enhancement and management 1. Coastal wetland restoration 5 Acres restored $8,281 2. Coastal wetland enhancement and 0 Acres maintained $0 management Inland wetlands restoration, enhancement and management 1. Inland wetland restoration 0 Acres restored $0 2. Inland wetland enhancement and 0 Acres maintained $0 management Annual Chapter Total $905,202 1The costs provided are for grant evaluation purposes only. These values will not be included in Financial Status Reports nor are they subject to financial audits. Actual grant expenditure tracking with supporting documentation necessary for audit purposes will not be maintained by MDNR at the objective level. All financial tracking and reporting for the purposes of audits is at the grant level only.

BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $104,320 $104,320 $208,640 Fringe Benefits (38%) $39,642 $39,642 $79,284 Salary Sub-total $143,962 $143,962 $287,924

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $27,813 $27,813 $55,626 Total Salaries $171,775 $171,775 $343,550

Contracts $550,000 $550,000 $1,100,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $30,000 $30,000 $60,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 Project Sub-total $901,775 $901,775 $1,803,550

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $3,427 $3,427 $6,854 TOTAL COST $905,202 $905,202 $1,810,404

Federal Share: $452,601 $452,601 $905,202 Other Share1: $6,300 $6,300 $12,600 State Share: $446,301 $446,301 $892,602 1In-kind match is being provided as waived overhead costs from Michigan State University for work being conducted for this agreement under contract.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 171 of 176 CHAPTER 4: Population Management for Species of Greatest Conservation Need

SUMMARY:

This Grant Segment supports population management for a number of species of greatest conservation need. This fine filter approach is designed to compliment the habitat management activities supported under Chapter 3 of this segment. This segment supports those activities that will be conducted by the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The activities to be conducted for each project are detailed in the grant proposal. All of the activities contained in this chapter of this segment are considered implementation and are reimbursable with 50% federal funds.

PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS BY PROJECT STATEMENT OBJECTIVES:

Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost Birds of prey hacking to enhance populations of species of greatest conservation need as set forth in the Wildlife Action Plan 1. Nesting and hacking site surveys 1 Number of $4,078 Surveys annually 2. Chick collection, rearing and release 0 Number of Chicks $0 Reared annually Conservation of individuals and/or populations to ensure perseverance of populations of species of greatest conservation need identified in the Wildlife Action Plan. 1. Nesting structures construction and 1 Number of nesting $5,709 maintenance structures constructed or maintained annually 1 Number of monitoring trips made annually 2. Bat cave gate construction and 1 Number of cave $1,606 maintenance gates constructed or maintained annually 1 Number of monitoring trips made annually

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 172 of 176 Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost 3. Piping Plover recovery management 10 Number of fences $15,980 constructed annually 50 Number of birds banded annually 0 Number of materials developed annually Annual Chapter Total $27,373 1The costs provided are for grant evaluation purposes only. These values will not be included in Financial Status Reports nor are they subject to financial audits. Actual grant expenditure tracking with supporting documentation necessary for audit purposes will not be maintained by MDNR at the objective level. All financial tracking and reporting for the purposes of audits is at the grant level only.

BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $163 $163 $ 326 Fringe Benefits (38%) $62 $62 $ 124 Salary Sub-total $225 $225 $ 450

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $44 $44 $ 88 Total Salaries $269 $269 $ 538

Contracts $25,000 $25,000 $50,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $1,000 $1,000 $2,000 Project Sub-total $27,269 $27,269 $54,538

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $104 $104 $ 208 TOTAL COST $27,373 $27,373 $54,746

Federal Share: $13,686 $13,686 $27,372 Other Share: $0 $0 $ 0 State Share: $13,686 $13,686 $27,372

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 173 of 176 CHAPTER 5: Wildlife Action Plan Revisions and Development of Implementation Plans

SUMMARY:

This Grant Segment supports revisions to the Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) as well as developing prioritized implementation plans from the WAP to ensure needs identified for species of greatest conservation need are met. This agreement supports those activities that will be conducted by the Wildlife Division of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The purpose of the activities funded under this segment are to ensure requirements for funding under State Wildlife Grants are met, the WAP is implemented, we incorporate adaptive management into revising the WAP and that interested stakeholders and the public are involved in these planning processes. The WAP is the ultimate resource guiding the population and habitat management activities funded under all other chapters of this grant. Although all activities in this chapter may qualify as planning and are reimbursable at the 75% level, for administrative ease and to use federal funds in more projects, all activities will be treated as implementation and will be reimbursed at the 50% level.

The activities to be conducted for each project are detailed in the grant proposal. The planned accomplishments and estimated costs by objective are listed in the table below.

PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS BY PROJECT STATEMENT OBJECTIVES:

Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost Planning 1. Wildlife Action Plan Revision 1 Datasets annually $93,047 compiled 1 Databases annually developed and maintained 2 Spatial data layers annually developed and maintained 2 Surveys and monitoring results annually compiled and interpreted 2. Public Participation 1 Meetings/Workshops held $22,461 annually 0 Web portals annually developed and maintained 50 Annual responses to public inquiries 3. Implementation Guidance 1 Tools and plans developed $167,347 annually 500 Hours administrating

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 174 of 176 Annual Planned Annual Project Statement and Objectives Reporting Units 1 Accomplishments Cost annually 4. Planning Integration 5 Plans or planning initiatives $128,163 annually integrated with WAP Annual Chapter Total $411,018 1The costs provided are for grant evaluation purposes only. These values will not be included in Financial Status Reports nor are they subject to financial audits. Actual grant expenditure tracking with supporting documentation necessary for audit purposes will not be maintained by MDNR at the objective level. All financial tracking and reporting for the purposes of audits is at the grant level only.

BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $238,648 $238,648 $477,296 Fringe Benefits (38%) $90,686 $90,686 $181,372 Salary Sub-total $329,335 $329,335 $658,670

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $63,627 $63,627 $127,254 Total Salaries $392,962 $392,962 $785,924

Contracts $5,500 $5,500 $11,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $5,500 $5,500 $11,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $5,500 $5,500 $11,000 Project Sub-total $409,462 $409,462 $818,924

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $1,556 $1,556 $3,112 TOTAL COST $411,018 $411,018 $822,036

Federal Share: $205,509 $205,509 $411,018 Other Share: $67,600 $67,600 $135,200 State Share: $137,909 $137,909 $275,818 1In-kind match is being provided as waived overhead costs from Michigan State University for work being conducted for this segment under contract.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 175 of 176 All CHAPTERS COMBINED BUDGET SUMMARY: Expenditure Period: 1 October 2008 – 30 September 2010

Implementation Activities FY 2009 FY 2010 Totals Salaries and Wages $486,432 $486,432 $972,864 Fringe Benefits (38%) $184,844 $184,844 $369,688 Salary Sub-total $671,277 $671,277 $1,342,554

Indirect Rate (19.32%) $129,691 $129,691 $259,382 Total Salaries $800,968 $800,968 $1,601,936

Contracts $1,310,500 $1,310,500 $2,621,000 Equipment $0 $0 $ 0 Travel $37,500 $37,500 $75,000 Supplies, Services and Materials $157,500 $157,500 $315,000 Project Sub-total $2,306,468 $2,306,468 $4,612,936

Indirect for Audit (0.38%) $8,765 $8,765 $17,530 TOTAL COST $2,315,232 $2,315,232 $4,630,464

Federal Share: $1,157,616 $1,157,616 $2,315,232 Other Share1: $455,780 $455,780 $911,560 State Share: $701,836 $701,836 $1,403,672 1In-kind match is being provided as waived overhead costs from Michigan State University for work being conducted for this segment under contract.

SEGMENT CONDITIONS REQUEST

1. MNDR requests that expenditures for Segment 1 not be subject to the prior written approval requirements of 43 CFR 12.70(c)(1)(ii), the “10 percent rule.”

2. Because of the current budget conditions in Michigan, the amounts needed to complete activities during Fiscal Year 2010 could not be finalized at the time of the original submittal of this program. Consequently, the grant will be amended in early Fiscal Year 2010 to reflect actual needed costs and planned accomplishments through Fiscal Year 2010.

3. All of the activities supported by this grant were previously approved in Segment 1 and no new activities have been added to this segment. Consequently, MDNR requests that costs necessary to ensure that all eligible activities occurring in fiscal year 2009 can be charged to this grant, be allowed as pre-award costs beginning 1 October 2008. The majority of costs included as pre-award costs are to secure necessary contracts and supplies to be ready for field work and research primarily conducted during the summer of 2009. MDNR expects these costs not to exceed $600,000 in federal funds.

T-9-T-2 MICHIGAN'S COMPREHENSIVE STATE WILDLIFE GRANT, MDNR Page 176 of 176