DOCSLIB.ORG

Kirtland's Warbler Breeding Grounds Conservation Plan Sept 8 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kirtland's Warbler Breeding Grounds Conservation Plan Sept 8 2015 Kirtland’s Warbler Breeding Range Conservation Plan Kirtland’s Warbler photo by Dan Kennedy, Michigan Department of Natural Resources Developed by: Michigan Department of Natural Resources US Fish and Wildlife Service US Forest Service September 08, 2015 Table of Contents A. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 A.1. Purpose of the plan ............................................................................................................1 B. Background .................................................................................................................... 2 B.1. The Jack Pine Ecosystem ....................................................................................................3 Ecology ................................................................................................................................ 3 Social ................................................................................................................................... 3 Economics ........................................................................................................................... 3 B.2. Kirtland’s Warbler Biology and Ecology ...............................................................................4 Life History .......................................................................................................................... 4 Population Status ................................................................................................................ 8 Species Distribution ............................................................................................................ 9 Habitat Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 11 B.3. Past Breeding Ground Conservation Efforts ...................................................................... 12 Manage Breeding Habitat ................................................................................................. 12 Prevent Brown-headed Cowbird Nest Parasitism ............................................................ 14 Minimize Land Use Conflicts ............................................................................................. 15 Maintain Public Awareness and Support .......................................................................... 16 Maintain Sustainable Agency Funding .............................................................................. 17 Adaptive Management ..................................................................................................... 18 Track and Respond Appropriately to Emerging Threats: Climate Change ....................... 19 C. Kirtland’s Warbler Management Goal, Objectives and Actions...................................... 21 C.1. GOAL ............................................................................................................................... 21 Manage Kirtland’s Warbler Breeding Habitat ................................................................... 22 Manage Cowbird Parasitism ............................................................................................. 24 Minimize Land Use Activities and Associated Conflicts .................................................... 24 Maintain Public Awareness and Support .......................................................................... 25 Maintain Sustainable Funding .......................................................................................... 25 Adaptive Management ..................................................................................................... 26 D. Kirtland’s Warbler Habitat Management Guidance ....................................................... 28 D.1. The Framework for Developing Breeding Habitat .............................................................. 28 D.2. Management of Public Lands ........................................................................................... 29 The US Fish and Wildlife Service ....................................................................................... 30 The Michigan Department of Natural Resources ............................................................. 30 The US Forest Service ....................................................................................................... 30 D.3. Habitat Development ....................................................................................................... 31 D.4. Distribution of Breeding Habitat ....................................................................................... 32 D.5. Treatment Block Design ................................................................................................... 33 Background ....................................................................................................................... 33 Treatment Block Design .................................................................................................... 33 D.6. Managing Burned Areas ................................................................................................... 34 D.7. Adaptive Management..................................................................................................... 35 D.8. Management Using Timber Harvest .................................................................................. 35 Clearcutting ....................................................................................................................... 36 Seed Tree/Shelterwood .................................................................................................... 36 General Silvicultural Considerations ................................................................................. 36 Providing for Habitat Structure and Diversity................................................................... 37 Management Considerations for Other Animal and Plant Species .................................. 37 Non-native Invasive Species ............................................................................................. 39 D.9. Reforestation ................................................................................................................... 39 Site Preparation ................................................................................................................ 39 Planting ............................................................................................................................. 39 Seeding .............................................................................................................................. 40 Natural Regeneration ....................................................................................................... 40 Stocking Surveys ............................................................................................................... 41 D.10. Prescribed Burning ........................................................................................................... 41 D.11. Management of Private Lands .......................................................................................... 42 D.12. Management of Military Lands ......................................................................................... 42 D.13. Land Acquisition and Exchange ......................................................................................... 42 D.14. Consolidation of FWS Kirtland’s Warbler Wildlife Management Area Lands ....................... 42 D.15. Protection of the Kirtland’s Warbler and Its Habitat .......................................................... 43 Habitat Closures ................................................................................................................ 43 Bird Watching ................................................................................................................... 43 Recreational Trails and Associated Developments ........................................................... 44 Special Events ................................................................................................................... 44 Wind Turbines, Towers and Other Developments ........................................................... 44 Right-of-way Maintenance ............................................................................................... 44 Mineral Development ....................................................................................................... 44 D.16. Land Management Considerations ................................................................................... 45 Wildfire Suppression ......................................................................................................... 45 Fuelbreaks ......................................................................................................................... 46 Insect and Disease Control ............................................................................................... 46 Timber Harvest and Reforestation Activities Adjacent to Occupied Habitat ................... 46 Prescribed Burning Adjacent to Occupied Habitat ........................................................... 47 Non-native Invasive Species ............................................................................................. 47 Kirtland’s Warblers on Private Lands ...............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
    Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Fen Communitynorthern Abstract Fen, Page 1
    Northern Fen CommunityNorthern Abstract Fen, Page 1 Community Range Prevalent or likely prevalent Infrequent or likely infrequent Absent or likely absent Photo by Joshua G. Cohen Overview: Northern fen is a sedge- and rush-dominated 8,000 years. Expansion of peatlands likely occurred wetland occurring on neutral to moderately alkaline following climatic cooling, approximately 5,000 years saturated peat and/or marl influenced by groundwater ago (Heinselman 1970, Boelter and Verry 1977, Riley rich in calcium and magnesium carbonates. The 1989). community occurs north of the climatic tension zone and is found primarily where calcareous bedrock Several other natural peatland communities also underlies a thin mantle of glacial drift on flat areas or occur in Michigan and can be distinguished from shallow depressions of glacial outwash and glacial minerotrophic (nutrient-rich) northern fens, based on lakeplains and also in kettle depressions on pitted comparisons of nutrient levels, flora, canopy closure, outwash and moraines. distribution, landscape context, and groundwater influence (Kost et al. 2007). Northern fen is dominated Global and State Rank: G3G5/S3 by sedges, rushes, and grasses (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000). Additional open wetlands occurring on organic Range: Northern fen is a peatland type of glaciated soils include coastal fen, poor fen, prairie fen, bog, landscapes of the northern Great Lakes region, ranging intermittent wetland, and northern wet meadow. Bogs, from Michigan west to Minnesota and northward peat-covered wetlands raised above the surrounding into central Canada (Ontario, Manitoba, and Quebec) groundwater by an accumulation of peat, receive inputs (Gignac et al. 2000, Faber-Langendoen 2001, Amon of nutrients and water primarily from precipitation et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations
    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations Revised Report and Documentation Prepared for: Department of Defense U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted by: January 2004 Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations: Revised Report and Documentation CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary..........................................................................................iii 2.0 Introduction – Project Description................................................................. 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 NatureServe Data................................................................................................ 3 3.2 DOD Installations............................................................................................... 5 3.3 Species at Risk .................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Results................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Nationwide Assessment of Species at Risk on DOD Installations..................... 8 4.2 Assessment of Species at Risk by Military Service.......................................... 13 4.3 Assessment of Species at Risk on Installations ................................................ 15 5.0 Conclusion and Management Recommendations.................................... 22 6.0 Future Directions.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Karner Blue Butterfly HCP
    DRAFT MICHIGAN KARNER BLUE BUTTERFLY HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN Photograph by Jennifer Kleitch ATU F N RA O L T R Printed by Authority of: P.A. 451 of 1994 N E Michigan Department of Natural Resources E S Total Number of Copies Printed: .........XX M O T U Cost per Copy:.................................$XXX R R Wildlife Division Report No. _____ C A P Total Cost: ......................................$XXX DNR E E S D _____ 2007 Michigan Department of Natural Resources M ICHIG AN ICXXXXX (XXXXXX) DRAFT – November 2, 2007 2 DRAFT MICHIGAN KARNER BLUE BUTTERFLY HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN Prepared by: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division Stevens T. Mason Building P.O. Box 30180 Lansing, MI 48909 Submitted to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service East Lansing Field Office 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 November 2, 2007 DRAFT – November 2, 2007 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Michigan Department of Natural Resources appreciates the valuable contributions made by many agencies, organizations and individuals during the development of this plan. In particular, we thank the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for providing funding and technical support. We also thank the members of the Karner Blue Butterfly Working Group and the Karner Blue Butterfly Management Partners Workgroup, who shared important perspectives and expertise during their meetings and document reviews. Finally, we thank the members of the public who helped shape the content of this plan by offering input during public meetings and public- comment periods. A contribution of the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund Grants Program, Michigan Project E-3-HP Equal Rights for Natural Resource Users The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) provides equal opportunities for employment and access to Michigan’s natural resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    Appendix 1 - Species of Greatest Conservation Need Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 Cover Photos Credits Habitat – MNFI, Yu Man Lee Cerulean Warbler – Roger Eriksson MICHIGAN’S WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN 2015-2025 Species of Greatest Conservation Need List & Rationales SGCN List Mussels Snails A fingernail clam ( Pisidium simplex ) A land snail (no common name) ( Catinella gelida ) Black sandshell ( Ligumia recta ) A land snail (no common name) ( Catinella protracta ) Clubshell ( Pleurobema clava ) A land snail (no common name) ( Euconulus alderi ) Creek Heelsplitter ( Lasmigona compressa ) A land snail (no common name) ( Glyphyalinia solida ) Deertoe ( Truncilla truncata ) A land snail (no common name) ( Vallonia gracilicosta Eastern Elliptio ( Elliptio complanata ) albula ) Eastern pondmussel ( Ligumia nasuta ) A land snail (no common name) ( Vertigo modesta Elktoe ( Alasmidonta marginata ) modesta ) A land snail (no common name) ( Vertigo modesta Ellipse ( Venustaconcha ellipsiformis ) parietalis ) European pea clam ( Sphaerium corneum ) Acorn ramshorn ( Planorbella multivolvis ) Fawnsfoot ( Truncilla donaciformis ) An aquatic snail (no common name) ( Planorbella smithi ) Flutedshell ( Lasmigona costata ) Banded globe ( Anguispira kochi ) Giant northern pea clam ( Pisidium idahoense ) Boreal fossaria ( Fossaria galbana ) Greater European pea clam ( Pisidium amnicum ) Broadshoulder physa ( Physella parkeri ) Hickorynut ( Obovaria olivaria ) Brown walker ( Pomatiopsis cincinnatiensis ) Kidney shell ( Ptychobranchus fasciolaris ) Bugle
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, And
    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 1 Number 9 -- An Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, and Orthoptera of Michigan Number 9 -- An Article 1 Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, and Orthoptera of Michigan December 1968 An Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, and Orthoptera of Michigan Irving J. Cantrall University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Cantrall, Irving J. 1968. "An Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, and Orthoptera of Michigan," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 1 (9) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol1/iss9/1 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Cantrall: An Annotated List of the Dermaptera, Dictyoptera, Phasmatoptera, 1968 THE MICHIGAN ENTOMOLOGIST 299 AN ANNOTATED LIST OF THE DERMAPTERA, DICTYOPTERA, PHASMATOPTERA, AND ORTHOPTERA OF MICHIGAN* Irving J. Cantrall Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 The only publication to date dealing exclusively with the Orthoptera and Dermaptera of Michigan is that of Pettit and McDaniel (1918). In the fifty years since their paper, several factors have combined to increase by nearly one-third the number of orthopterous and dermapterous taxa known for the state. These have been better understanding of the taxonomy of some groups, more extensive collecting, the establishment over the past several years of five advents, and the unquestioned northerly extension during the past two or three decades of the ranges of several species previously known to occur to the south in Ohio and Indiana.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Islands National Wildlife Refuge (Lake Huron Islands Managed by Shiawassee NWR)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Michigan Islands National Wildlife Refuge (Lake Huron islands managed by Shiawassee NWR) Habitat Management Plan October 2018 Little Charity Island 2013. (Photo credit: USFWS) Michigan Islands NWR: Shiawassee NWR Habitat Management Plan Habitat Management Plans provide long-term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Fish and Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. The National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the world's premier system of public lands and waters set aside to conserve America's fish, wildlife, and plants. Since the designation of the first wildlife refuge in 1903, the System has grown to encompass more than 150 million acres, 556 national wildlife refuges and other units of the Refuge System, plus 38 wetland management districts. Michigan Islands NWR: Shiawassee NWR Habitat Management Plan Table of Contents Signature Page .................................................................................................................................ii Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Candidate Review for Listing As Endangered Or Threatened
    58982 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 1994 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OFTHE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: Interested persons or Street, Anchorage. Alaska 99501 (907— organizations should submit comments 786—3605). Fish and Wildlife Service regarding particular taxa to the Regional FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director of the Region specified with Jamie Rappaport Clark, Chief, Division 5OCFRPartI7 each taxon as having the lead of Endangered Species (703—358—2171) Endangered and Threatened Wildlife responsibility for that taxon. Comments or Endangered Species Coordinator(s) in and Plants; Animal Candidate Review of a more general nature maybe the appropriate Regional Office(s) listed for Listing as Endangered or submitted to: Chief—Division of above. Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Threatened Species SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Wildlife Service, Mail Stop 452 ARLSQ AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington. D.C. 20240. Written Background Interior. comments and materials received in The Endangered Species Act (16 ACTION: Notice of review. response to this notice will be available U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires the for public inspection by appointment in Secretary of the Interior (or Commerce SL.YMARY: In this notice the U.S. Fish the Regional Offices listed below. according to vested program and Wildlife Service (Service) presents Region 1.—California, Hawaii, Idaho, responsibilities) to determine whether an updated compilation of vertebrate Nevada, Oregon, Washington, wildlife and plant species are and iA~vertebrateanimal taxa native to Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana endangered or threatened, based on the the United States that are being Islands, and Pacific Territories of the best available scientific and commercial reviewed for possible addition to the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • SGCN Summaries
    Appendix 3 - SGCN Summaries Michigan’s Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 Cover Photos Credits Habitat – MNFI, Dave Cuthrell Eastern Massasauga – Jennifer Moore MICHIGAN’S WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN 2015-2025 SGCN DISTRIBUTION, STATUS, HABITATS & THREATS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION TO SGCN SUMMARIES .................................................................................................................. 2 SGCN SUMMARIES ................................................................................................................................................. 3 MUSSELS ................................................................................................................................................................... 6 SNAILS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 26 CRAYFISH ................................................................................................................................................................. 57 INSECTS ................................................................................................................................................................... 59 MAYFLIES ............................................................................................................................................................ 60 DRAGONFLIES & DAMSELFLIES .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appalachia Arcana (Hubbell and Cantrall) Secretive Locust
    Appalachia arcana (Hubbell and Cantrall) secretive locust State Distribution Photos By David L. Cuthrell male Best Survey Period female Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Status: State special concern species are quite similar in appearance (Higman et al. 1994). Appalachia arcana males range in length from Global and state rank: G2G3/S2S3 17-19 mm (0.7-0.8 inches) and females from 24-30 mm (1.0-1.2 inches). Males are brownish gray in color Other common names: Michigan bog grasshopper and have a conspicuous broad pale stripe dorsally, with contrasting lateral black stripes extending from the Family: Acrididae (short-horned grasshopper) head almost to the end of the abdomen. Females are more subtle shades of brown and lack the prominent Range: Appalachia arcana is endemic to the northern striping of the males. The hind femora of both sexes half of Michigan’s lower peninsula (Vickery & Kevan are prominently striped laterally with alternating 1985). light and dark brown bands. Though the male’s coloration is more noticeable, both sexes can be quite State distribution: This species has been collected cryptic and difficult to see against the bark of trees and from 9 Michigan counties; records for 2 of these (Iosco, shrubs. Missaukee) are known only from the late 1930s or early 1940s. Best survey time: Adults have been observed from early July until November, though typically they are Recognition: The secretive locust is a relatively small, found between August and September. They are most short-winged grasshopper which does not have the easily seen in the mid-mornings and early evenings ability to sing or fly.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reassessment of High Quality Natural Communities on Camp Grayling
    A Reassessment of High Quality Natural Communities on Camp Grayling Prepared by: Michael A. Kost and Joshua G. Cohen Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O Box 30444 Lansing, MI 48909-7944 For: Michigan Department of Military and Veterans Affairs Camp Grayling, MI 49739 June 30, 2005 Report Number 2005-11 Cover photograph: Best Bog on Camp Grayling (M. Kost). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of a reevaluation of 14 natural communities first identified in the early 1990s and discussed in Higman et al. (1994). Several significant changes have occurred since the natural communities were originally documented. Most notably, invasive species present a threat to many of the communities, particularly the mesic sand prairie at the Portage Lake Complex. This site contains a population of the invasive plant, leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), that threatens to degrade habitat for numerous rare species including Houghton’s goldenrod (Solidago houghtonii), a federally threatened species. Several of the wetlands recently experienced fire, which appears to have bolstered species diversity and habitat heterogeneity in both the wetland and upland habitats. Water levels for many of the wetlands have dropped considerably since first surveyed in the 1990s. This phenomenon is likely the result of regional decreases in water levels tied throughout the Upper Great Lakes Region. Degradation by off road vehicles was observed in two wetlands but was not severe in either, indicating that education, enforcement, and deterrent efforts are having a positive affect. The report contains detailed site summaries and conservation and management recommendations for each natural community with the Results section entitled Site Descriptions and Management Recommendation.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol.47 No.3-4
    Newsletter of the Michigan Entomological Society Volume 47, Numbers 3 & 4 September 2002 The Emerald Ash Borer: A New Exotic Inside this Pest in North America Issue: Robert A. Haack1, Eduard Jendek2, Houping Liu3, Kenneth R. Marchant4, Toby R. Petrice1, Therese M. Poland1; and Hui Ye5 Abstracts from the 1USDA Forest Service, North Central Research Station, 1407 S. Harrison Annual Meeting Road, East Lansing, MI 48823; 2Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of 3 ....6-10, 14-15 Sciences, Dubravska cesta 9, 842 06 Bratislava, Slovakia; Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824;4Canadian Photos from the Annual Food Inspection Agency, 174 Stone Rd W., Guelph, Ontario N1G 4S9, Canada; Meeting 5Institute of Ecology and Geobotany, Yunnan University, Kunming, Yunnan, China. Email: [email protected] ....11 Yet another new exotic forest pest has been discovered in North America, and this Photo Salon Winners time the infestation is centered in Michigan and Ontario. In May and June 2002, adults of an unidentified buprestid beetle were collected from ash (Fraxinus) trees in the ....12-13 Detroit area of southeastern Michigan. Later, in July 2002, after various world experts Winners of the Student examined the beetles, they were positively identified as the Asian species Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire. This finding was quickly followed by the discovery of A. Paper Competition planipennis in neighboring Ontario, Canada. A flurry of activities soon followed, including conducting surveys, establishing quarantines, hosting public meetings and ....16-17 initiating research programs. Martinoptera Common name. The name “Emerald Ash Borer” was submitted to the Entomological Society of ....20-21 America for consideration as A.
    [Show full text]