HABITAT

MANAGEMENT PLAN Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge April 2017 Draft Final

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.

This page intentionally left blank. Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) provides decisions regarding the priority resources of concern (ROC) at the Ohio River Island National Wildlife Refuge (ORINWR) and associated, specific guidance for enhancing and managing habitat for the ROC across the ORINWR for the next 15 years. The ORINWR is situated along the boundaries of four states and extends over 362 river miles. There are no other USFWS Refuges within 160 miles of ORINWR, nor are there any other Refuge lands along the 981-mile long Ohio River. The island habitats contain assemblages of plants and animals that are endemic to the Ohio River and its floodplain (Cardno 2014). A diversity of wildlife including waterfowl, shore and wading birds, neotropical migratory land birds, mammals, fish, and freshwater mussels are dependent on a functioning big river ecosystem. This HMP is a step-down plan, tiered from the ORINWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) (USFWS 2002). The CCP process was a multi-year, collaborative planning exercise resulting in the establishment of ORINWR-specific goals, objectives, and strategies, and this HMP further refines these goals and prescribes specific management actions for their implementation. Because the Service’s understanding of management and the science of conservation has increased since 2002, Chapters 1 and 2 of this HMP provide the context and background upon which we understand the ORINWR and its habitats. Chapter 3 identifies the ROC present at the NWR. As part of the HMP, the planning team and agency partners refined the list of potential ROC during the development of the HMP. Sixteen resources were selected as priority resources by the planning team. A list of these species and their general habitat requirements can be found in Tables 3-2 and 3-3. Priority habitats are also identified in Chapter 3. For ORINWR, the top three habitat priorities (in descending order) are riparian forest, riverine open water and unconsolidated river bottom, and riparian shorelines and banks. Chapter 4 refines habitat goals and objectives specific to selected focal species and prescribes management actions that will help the NWR successfully achieve the goals of the CCP. Chapter 4 outlines the management objectives defined for each habitat type. Then it describes the management actions and strategies used to accomplish the stated objective. The objectives and strategies are supported by rationale that describes the conservation science and reasoning for this management approach to inform future managers and decision makers. The habitat prioritization is then considered alongside logistical considerations in Chapter 4 to provide a prioritization of management units to help guide implementation and annual work planning for the Service staff entrusted with these unique resources.

Executive Summary ES-i April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Executive Summary ES-ii April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... I TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... I ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...... IV 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1 1.1 Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge ...... 1-1 1.2 Scope of Habitat Management Plan ...... 1-1 1.3 Mission Mandates ...... 1-3 1.3.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...... 1-3 1.3.2 National Wildlife Refuge System ...... 1-3 1.3.3 Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge ...... 1-4 1.4 Relationship to Other Plans ...... 1-6 1.4.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Policies and Plans ...... 1-6 1.4.2 Interagency Plans ...... 1-7 1.4.3 Multi-stakeholder Conservation Initiatives ...... 1-8 1.4.4 State Wildlife Action Plans ...... 1-10 1.4.5 ORINWR-Specific Plans ...... 1-11 2.0 BACKGROUND ...... 2-1 2.1 ORINWR Description ...... 2-1 2.1.1 Pre-ORINWR Land Use and Management ...... 2-4 2.1.2 Past USFWS Stewardship ...... 2-5 2.2 Current Conditions, Natural and Anthropogenic Influences ...... 2-6 2.2.1 Wildlife ...... 2-6 2.2.2 Land Classification and Vegetation Assemblages ...... 2-9 2.2.3 Existing Threats and Challenges ...... 2-20 2.2.4 Noted trends in Biological Communities ...... 2-21 3.0 RESOURCES OF CONCERN ...... 3-1 3.1 Introduction ...... 3-1 3.1.1 Defining Resources of Concern ...... 3-1 3.1.2 Importance of Defining Resources of Concern to Guide Refuge Activities...... 3-1 3.2 Identification of ORINWR Resources of Concern ...... 3-1 3.2.1 ORINWR Purposes and Resources of Concern ...... 3-2

Table of Contents i April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

3.2.2 Refuge System and USFWS Resources of Concern...... 3-2 3.3 Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health ...... 3-3 3.3.1 Defining Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health ...... 3-3 3.3.2 Identifying BIDEH within ORINWR ...... 3-4 3.3.3 Maintaining and Restoring BIDEH ...... 3-14 3.4 Priority Resources of Concern ...... 3-14 3.4.1 Priority Resources of Concern Selection ...... 3-14 3.4.2 ORINWR Focal Species and Relation to ORINWR BIDEH ...... 3-20 3.5 Broad Habitat Type Prioritization ...... 3-25 3.6 Conflicting Habitat Management ...... 3-27 3.7 Adaptive Management ...... 3-28 4.0 HABITAT GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES ...... 4-1 4.1 Refining CCP Objectives within the HMP ...... 4-1 4.2 HMP Goals, Objectives, and Management Strategies ...... 4-1 4.2.1 Habitat Management Goal ...... 4-1 4.2.2 Habitat Management Objectives ...... 4-2 4.3 Prioritization of Management Units ...... 4-4 4.4 Management Strategies Common to All ORINWR Habitats and Objectives ...... 4-8 4.4.1 Climate Change Adaptation Strategies ...... 4-9 4.4.2 Herbivory Management Strategies ...... 4-9 4.4.3 Invasive Species Control Strategies ...... 4-9 4.4.4 Land Protection Plan (LPP) Development Strategies ...... 4-10 4.5 HMP Objective 1: Riparian Forest ...... 4-10 4.6 HMP Objective 2: Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom ...... 4-17 4.7 HMP Objective 3: Riparian Shorelines and Banks...... 4-21 4.8 HMP Objective 4: Floodplain Wetlands ...... 4-24 4.9 HMP Objective 5: Temperate Upland Forest ...... 4-27 4.10 HMP Objective 6: Old Field and Meadows ...... 4-30 5.0 LITERATURE CITED ...... 5-1 6.0 ORINWR HMP PLANNING TEAM ...... 6-1 APPENDIX A. HABITAT MAPS ...... 1 APPENDIX B. REFUGE SPECIES LISTS ...... 1

Table of Contents ii April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

APPENDIX C. COMPREHENSIVE ROC LIST...... 1 APPENDIX D. POTENTIAL HABITAT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND PRESCRIPTIONS ...... 1

List of Figures Figure 1-1. Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge and Vicinity ...... 1-2 Figure 1-2. Using the Habitat Management Plan for Annual Habitat Work Planning ...... 1-13 Figure 2-1. Current Land Cover Distribution of ORINWR Vegetation Assemblages ...... 2-9 Figure 4-1. Habitat Management Objectives Hierarchy for Ohio River Islands NWR ...... 4-3 Figure 4-2. Diagram of Typical Riparian Shoreline and Riverbank Habitat ...... 4-21

List of Tables Table 1-1 Summary of the Establishment of the Ohio River Islands NWR ...... 1-4 Table 2-1 ORINWR Islands and Mainland Properties ...... 2-2 Table 2-2 Vegetation Associations at ORINWR ...... 2-10 Table 2-3 Acreages of Refuge Units by Habitat Types…………………………………………………. 2-17 Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR ...... 3-5 Table 3-2 Habitat Requirements for ORINWR Priority Resources of Concern ...... 3-17 Table 3-3 ORINWR Priority Focal Species and Other Benefiting Resources at ORINWR ...... 3-23 Table 3-4 Priority Habitats at ORINWR ...... 3-26 Table 4-1. ORINWR Unit Prioritization (see Appendix A for habitat maps) ...... 4-5

Table of Contents iii April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ABC American Bird Conservancy NWRS National Wildlife Refuge System AHWP Annual Habitat Work Plan NVCS National Vegetation Classification AMJV Appalachian Mountain System Joint Venture ODNR Ohio Department of Natural BCR Bird Conservation Region Resources BIDEH Biological Integrity, Diversity, ORINWR Ohio River Islands National and Environmental Health Wildlife Refuge CCP Comprehensive Conservation Plan ORSANCO Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission CCVI Climate Change Vulnerability Index PARC Partners in Amphibian DNR Department of Natural Resources and Reptile Conservation DOI U.S. Department of the Interior PIF Partners in Flight FMP Fire Management Plan ROC Resources of Concern HMP Habitat Management Plan ROCSTAR Resources of Concern IMP Inventory and Monitoring Plan Selection Tool for America’s Refuges LCC Landscape Conservation Cooperatives SHC Strategic Habitat Conservation LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund U.S. United States NAWMP North American Waterfowl USACE United States Army Management Plan Corps of Engineers NABCI North American Bird USFWS United States Fish and Conservation Initiative Wildlife Service NWR National Wildlife Refuge WD Warranty Deed WVDNR West Virginia Division of Natural Resources

Acronyms and Abbreviations iv April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Acronyms and Abbreviations v April 2017

Sunset over Buckley Island

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Ohio River Islands NWR 1.2 Scope of the Habitat Management Plan 1.3 Mission Mandates 1.4 Relationship to Other Plans

This page intentionally left blank.

Monarch on Tall Thistle

Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OHIO RIVER ISLANDS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge (ORINWR) is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS). Established in 1990, it was the first national wildlife refuge in the State of West Virginia. The ORINWR is situated along the boundaries of four states and extends over 362 river miles (Figure 1-1). There are no other USFWS Refuges within 160 miles of ORINWR, nor are there any other Refuge lands along the 981-mile long Ohio River. At present, there are 3,442 total acres of lands and waters in ORINWR, including all or parts of 22 islands and four adjacent mainland tracts located in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky. The island habitats contain assemblages of plants and animals that are endemic to the Ohio River and its floodplain (Cardno 2014; Appendix A). The distribution of bottomland and riparian habitats and deep and shallow water aquatic habitats make these areas extremely beneficial to and widely utilized by fish and wildlife species. A diversity of species (waterfowl, shore and wading birds, neotropical migratory land birds, mammals, fish, and benthic organisms, including freshwater mussels) are dependent on the big river ecosystem for resting, feeding, nesting, spawning, and other life functions.

1.2 SCOPE OF HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN

This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) provides decisions regarding the priority resources of concern (ROC) at ORINWR and associated specific guidance for enhancing and managing habitat for the ROC across ORINWR for the next 15 years. The HMP is reviewed every 5 years and adaptive management is regularly employed to assess and modify management activities. This HMP is a step-down plan, tiered from the Ohio River Islands NWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) (USFWS 2002). The CCP process was a multi-year, collaborative planning exercise resulting in the establishment of ORINWR-specific goals, objectives, and strategies, and this HMP further refines these goals and prescribes specific management actions for their implementation. To avoid duplication, yet still function as a stand-alone document, background information relevant to HMP planning, much of which is already detailed in the CCP, is summarized in Chapters 1 and 2 of this HMP. Chapter 3 identifies the ROC present at the NWR. Chapter 4 refines habitat goals and objectives specific to selected focal species and prescribes management actions that will help the NWR successfully achieve the goals of the CCP. Further, site-specific planning will continue based on the results of this HMP. Future planning processes tiered from the HMP effort are discussed in Section 1.4.5. Like the CCP, the HMP is a science-based, collaborative process that incorporates information from across the community of natural resource professionals, including scientific input from local field and regional USFWS offices, academic institutions, Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs), and various regional conservation partnerships.

1.0 Introduction 1-1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure 1-1. Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge and Vicinity

1.0 Introduction 1-2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

1.3 MISSION MANDATES

1.3.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service The USFWS mission is to “work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people,” and the Service functions as the primary Federal agency responsible for doing so. Specific responsibilities include enforcing Federal wildlife laws, managing migratory bird populations, restoring nationally significant fisheries, administering the Endangered Species Act, restoring wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and managing the NWRS. 1.3.2 National Wildlife Refuge System The mission of the NWRS is to “administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”

The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Federal Trust Resources refer to the Act (1966) as amended by the National Wildlife USFWS's responsibilities, as charged Refuge System Improvement Act (1997) (16 U.S.C. by Congress to the Secretary of the Interior, for the conservation of fish and 668dd668ee) defines the NWRS; directs the wildlife. These responsibilities are Secretary of the Interior to maintain the biological defined by legislation, treaty, or similar integrity, diversity, and environmental health authority (e.g., Fish and Wildlife Act, (BIDEH) of the NWRS; and it authorizes the Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Conservation Act). The duty to protect Secretary to permit any use of a Refuge provided and steward interjurisdictional fisheries, such use is compatible with the major purposes for listed species, and migratory birds are which the Refuge was established. The shared with other Federal agencies and Improvement Act established the legitimacy and state governments, and the degree to which the Service is involved varies with appropriateness of the six priority public uses species and situations. (hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, environmental education, and interpretation) and established a formal process for determining resource conservation and land use compatibility (i.e., CCP and HMP development). Although public uses are allowed within the NWRS, in order to fulfil primary habitat function and Refuge designation mandates, it is often necessary that the USFWS establish closed areas or otherwise restrict activities that are in conflict with Refuge establishment purposes and USFWS stewardship responsibilities for Federal trust resources. The Improvement Act offered a renewed vision for the NWRS where: • Wildlife comes first. • Refuges are cornerstones for biodiversity and ecosystem-level conservation. • Lands and waters of the System are biologically healthy. • Refuge lands reflect national and international leadership in habitat management and wildlife conservation. National Wildlife Refuges are established under a variety of authorities. The purposes of a Refuge are specified in, or derived from, the law, proclamation, executive order,

1.0 Introduction 1-3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

agreement, public land order, donation document, or administrative memorandum establishing, authorizing, or expanding a Refuge, Refuge unit, or Refuge subunit. 1.3.3 Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge The ORINWR was established in 1990 under authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956. Table 1-1 summarizes the establishment of ORINWR, including ongoing acquisitions, their corresponding authority, and management directives since inception of the NWR.

Table 1-1 Summary of the Establishment of the Ohio River Islands NWR Date Legal Document Direction 11/09/1989 Final Environmental Assessment approved for acquisition and establishment of the Ohio River Islands NWR, protecting over 2000 acres of bottomland habitat and 1500 acres of riverine habitat on 38 islands. 07/17/1990 Ohio River Islands NWR established by Under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of memo, funds for purchase of lands to come 1956, as amended, . . . “for the development, from the Land and Water Conservation Funds. advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources . . . for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services.” 11/13/1990 Warranty Deed (WD), tracts 10c (Williamson For administration by the Secretary of the Interior Island), 10d (Witten towhead), 10e (Crab through the Fish and Wildlife Service Island) 12/14/1990 WD, tracts 10 (Phillis Island) and 10a For administration by the Secretary of the Interior (Georgetown Island), excluding coal rights. through the Fish and Wildlife Service 12/14/1990 WD, tracts 10j (Grape and Bat Islands) and For administration by the Secretary of the Interior 10k (Broadback Island) through the Fish and Wildlife Service 12/18/1990 WD, tract 10b (Paden Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 11/27/1993 WD, tract 128 (Buffington Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 02/25/1994 WD, tract 150 (Manchester Island #1) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 02/25/1994 WD, tract 151 (Manchester Island #2) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 03/14/1994 WD, tract 121, Neal Island For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 04/19/1994 WD, tract 152 (Manchester Island #2) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 04/19/1994 WD, tract 152a (Manchester Island #2) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/30/1994 WD, tract 10f (Wells Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/30/1994 WD, tract 10g (Mill Creek Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/30/1994 WD, tract 10h (Grandview Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/30/1994 WD, tracts 10m, -R (Muskingum Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/30/1994 WD, tract 10p (Letart Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 01/24/1995 WD, tracts 115, 115a (Middle Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 05/31/1995 WD, tract 11 (Muskingum Island), reserving oil For administration by the Secretary of the Interior and gas rights through the Fish and Wildlife Service 01/03/1996 WD, categorical exclusion, tract 112 (Wheeling For administration by the Secretary of the Interior Island head) through the Fish and Wildlife Service

1.0 Introduction 1-4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 1-1 Summary of the Establishment of the Ohio River Islands NWR Date Legal Document Direction 12/16/1997 WD, tract 11 (Muskingum Island), transfer of For administration by the Secretary of the Interior oil and gas rights to USA through the Fish and Wildlife Service 08/04/1998 Categorical exclusion, transfer from U.S Army Letter of transfer Corps of Engineers (USACE) tracts 514, -I, -II, -F, -R (Buffalo Creek) 06/15/1998 WD, tracts 10q and 10r (Buckley Island and For administration by the Secretary of the Interior mainland less 5 acres life estate. categorical through the Fish and Wildlife Service exclusion for mainland. 03/03/2000 WD, tract 122 (Neal Island) For administration by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service 04/14/2000 WD, tracts 110, -a, -b (Captina Island and To the US Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife mainland). Categorical exclusion for Service under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife mainland. Act of 1956, as amended 06/21/2000 Tract 115b, transfer of oil and gas rights on Middle Island to USA 08/02/2002 WD, tract 10s, R (Buckley mainland) transfer For administration by the Secretary of the Interior of life estate through the Fish and Wildlife Service 04/01/2003 WD, tract 111 (Fish Creek Island) To the US Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended 05/27/2005 WD, tract 159, -I (Cullom mainland near HQ), To the US Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife categorical exclusion Service under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended 08/28/2006 WD, tract 160, -a (Giboney mainland near To the US Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife HQ), categorical exclusion Service under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended 7/23/2010 WD, tract 161, categorical exclusion (Law tract To the United States of America under the authority near HQ) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 8/18/2010 WD, tract 149 (Manchester Island #2) To the United States of America under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 8/18/2010 WD, tract 153 (Manchester Island #2) To the United States of America under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 8/18/2010 WD, tract 154 (Manchester Island #2) To the United States of America under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 8/18/2010 WD, tract 155 (Manchester Island #2) To the United States of America under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 8/18/2010 WD, tract 157 (Manchester Island #2) To the United States of America under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 7/13/2011 WD, tract 168, categorical exclusion To the United States of America under the authority (Muskingum mainland) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 7/19/2012 WD, tract 166, categorical exclusion, (Butler To the United States of America under the authority tract at HQ) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 11/8/2013 WD, tract 164, categorical exclusion, (Gallaher To the United States of America under the authority tract at HQ) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. 11/26/2013 WD, tract 159b, categorical exclusion (Cullum To the United States of America under the authority road at HQ) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended. As identified in the 2002 CCP, the ORINWR Vision Statement is as follows: The Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge will create a linked network of over 12,000 acres of floodplain forests, wetlands, and aquatic habitat stretching over 400 miles from Pittsburgh to Cincinnati. These Refuge lands and waters will fulfill the needs of fish, wildlife, and plants that are native to "big river" ecosystems. Through reforestation, exotic species control, and wetland restoration, the Refuge will serve as an anchor for biodiversity and a model for habitat restoration throughout the Ohio River Valley

1.0 Introduction 1-5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

ecosystem. We will forge habitat and management links with other units of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS

In addition to USFWS policies, orders, regulations, and other mandates, further guidance for wildlife habitat management at the ORINWR is provided by several ORINWR-specific, regional, national, and international plans. As a partner in many wildlife- or habitat-focused initiatives, the USFWS strives to incorporate relevant programs and support existing progress to the extent practicable. 1.4.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Policies and Plans The USFWS policies, orders, and other regulations that guide habitat management on Refuges are compiled into the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual (USFWS 2015). Several of these mandates, detailed below, are pertinent to the development of HMP’s. In response to these mandates, the USFWS likewise has undertaken various strategic planning efforts, which are also described below. Habitat Management Planning Policy – USFWS 620 FW 1 (2002) The Habitat Management Planning Policy applies to the development of Refuge HMPs and Annual Habitat Work Plans (AHWP) and discusses their relationship to Refuge CCPs. The HMP policy and guidance describe strategies and implementation schedules for meeting CCP goals and objectives, and thus direct the content and considerations addressed in this HMP. Biological Integrity, Diversity and Environmental Health Policy – USFWS 601 FW 3 (2001, with Amendment 1, 2006) The Biological Integrity, Diversity and Environmental Health Policy directs the maintenance and restoration, where appropriate, of the BIDEH of the NWRS and thus fosters the implementation of Refuge purpose(s) and NWRS mission. It provides guidance for conservation and management of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitat resources found on Refuges and associated ecosystems. Further, it provides Refuge managers with an evaluation process to analyze their Refuge and recommend the best management direction to prevent further degradation of environmental conditions; and where appropriate and in concert with Refuge purposes and NWRS mission, restore lost or severely degraded components. The role of BIDEH is considered in ORINWR habitat management planning to the extent that it supports the Refuge purpose, goals, and objectives. Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3226 (January 19, 2001) and Order 3289 (September 14, 2009) and USFWS Strategic Plan for Responding to Accelerating Climate Change (2010) Department of the Interior (DOI) Secretarial Order 3289 reiterated Order 3226 (2001), which requires global climate change to be addressed in governmental decision making. This Order ensures that climate change impacts are taken into account when undertaking long-range planning exercises, when setting priorities for research and investigations, when developing multi-year management plans, and/or when making major decisions regarding the potential utilization of resources under DOI purview. To uphold the vision in

1.0 Introduction 1-6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

these Orders, the USFWS Strategic Plan for Responding to Accelerating Climate Change (2010) provides guidance for the consideration of actual and projected climate change impacts to fish and wildlife populations and their habitats in USFWS planning, decision making, consultation and evaluation, management, and restoration efforts. Inventory and Monitoring Policy – USFWS 701 FW 2 (2014) The USFWS Inventory and Monitoring Policy provides guidance for developing an Inventory and Monitoring Plan (IMP) at a NWR, typically produced following the completion of the HMP. The IMP describes priorities for natural resource surveys, the selection, and design of survey protocols, data storage and analysis, and reporting results. It accommodates all levels of natural resource surveys from the Refuge level to participation in landscape, regional, national, and international inventory and monitoring programs, both internal and external to the USFWS. Overall, this policy promotes consistency in the planning and implementation of inventory and monitoring throughout the NWRS. USFWS Migratory Bird Program Strategic Plan, 2004 – 2014 (USFWS 2004) The Migratory Bird Program Strategic Plan provides direction for USFWS migratory bird management within its NWRS. It defines USFWS strategies that actively support bird conservation through monitoring, conservation, consultation, and recreation. To the extent practical, this HMP utilizes standard monitoring, habitat assessment, and management protocols and promotes nature-based recreation and education to forward the vision of the Migratory Bird Program Strategic Plan. The ORINWR is situated on the boundary between the Atlantic and Mississippi flyways. Strategic Plan for Conservation of Fish and Wildlife Trust Resources in the Ohio River Valley Ecosystem (USFWS 1999) Individual ecosystem teams, comprised of both Service professionals and partners, work together to develop goals and priorities for research and management in the Ohio River Valley Ecosystem (ORVE). To organize this effort, watersheds are used to define the basic unit for ecosystem management. Watersheds are clustered into ecosystem units, and interdisciplinary teams of Service personnel develop strategic plans for the conservation of Service trust resources in these ecosystem units. The ORVE includes portions of ten states and straddles three Service administrative regions (Northeast, Southeast, and Mid- West). The Ohio River Valley Ecosystem Team has developed and implemented a strategic plan for conserving Service trust resources in the ORVE, and this plan was considered during the development of ORINWR-specific focal species for this HMP. 1.4.2 Interagency Plans U.S. Department of the Interior Adaptive Management Guide (Williams et al. 2009) Adaptive management principles were employed in the development of this HMP, and adaptive management strategies will continue to be used at the NWR to respond to changing conditions and the dynamic nature of the ecosystem that may impair the ability to measure and achieve set habitat objectives. It should be noted that, although aspects and philosophies of the U.S. Department of Interior Adaptive Management Guide were considered throughout the HMP development process, USFWS policy for development of

1.0 Introduction 1-7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

HMPs (e.g., 620 FW 1, 601 FW 3, 701 FW 2) was the overarching direction used to complete this HMP. 1.4.3 Multi-stakeholder Conservation Initiatives Refuge efforts combined with activities and partnerships across the larger conservation network have a greater potential of mutual success for affected resources. Many landscape-scale wildlife conservation plans and initiatives overlap and compliment the ORINWR mission and vision. These plans often have different emphasis and geographic scope, but also can share common focal species, ecosystem traits, partners, or purposes. Most of the specific plans or initiatives likewise have produced species of concern data sets that are evaluated in Section 3 as part of the development and prioritization of ORINWR-specific ROC. The following discussion lists the various planning regions for the different initiatives that overlie ORINWR and/or the species that inhabit them. North American Waterfowl Management Plan (Ringleman et al. 2012a) and Action Plan (Ringleman et al. 2012b) The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP), originally drafted in 1986 and revised in 1994, 1998, 2004, and 2012, establishes a 15-year timeframe for waterfowl conservation in North America by assessing and defining the needs, priorities, and strategies required to guide waterfowl management. The 2012 Revision is further implemented by the NAWMP Action Plan (2012b). The Plans establish joint ventures between private and government organizations within geographic regions to coordinate waterfowl research and management activities. The ORINWR lies within the Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture (AMJV) region. Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture Implementation Plan (AMJV 2008) The AMJV is a self-directed partnership of public, private, and nonprofit entities, organized to advance the conservation (protection, restoration, and enhancement) of priority bird populations and their habitats throughout the Appalachian Mountains, which includes portions of Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and seven other states (AMJV 2013). The over-arching objective of the AMJV is to ensure the sustainability of native bird populations through strategic conservation of habitats (and overall ecosystem functionality) upon which they rely. The AMJV Implementation Plan (2008) integrates bird conservation priorities at the state, regional, national, and international levels; provides land managers with guidance regarding management for bird habitat; and promotes research, monitoring, and adaptive management strategies to improve existing information on bird populations. The AMJV partnership has committed their support to integrate and achieve the goals and vision of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI), and the conservation objectives established in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (Ringleman et al. 2012a), the Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan (Rosenberg and Dettmers 2004), the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (Brown et al. 2001), the Waterbird Conservation for the Americas Plan (Kushlan et al. 2002), the American Woodcock Conservation Plan (Wildlife Management Institute 2008), the Northern Bobwhite Conservation Initiative (National Bobwhite Technical Committee 2011), the Ruffed Grouse Conservation Plan (Association

1.0 Introduction 1-8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 2006), and bird conservation objectives identified in Wildlife Action Plans of partner states (Section 1.3.4). The species and habitat priority lists found in the AMJV Implementation Plan and other joint venture planning documents were reviewed during the development of ORINWR-specific ROC. North American Bird Conservation Initiative (Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Region [AMBCR] Partnership 2005) The NABCI brings together the Partners in Flight North American Landbird Conservation Plan (Rosenberg and Dettmers 2004), the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (Brown et al. 2001), the Waterbird Conservation for the Americas Plan (Kushlan et al. 2002), and North American Waterfowl Management Plan (Ringleman et al. 2012a) into a coordinated effort to protect and restore all native bird populations and their habitats in North America. All bird conservation partnerships reduce redundancy in the structure, planning, and implementation of conservation projects. NABCI utilizes Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) to guide landscape scale, science-based approaches to conserving birds and their habitats. BCRs are planning units comprised of ecologically distinct regions with similar bird communities, habitats, and resource management issues. This HMP incorporates the bird priorities set forth for BCR 28, Appalachian Mountains Region, which also includes the subset Ohio Hills Region bird planning area (AMBCR Partnership 2005). –BCR 28 extends from southern New York, through West Virginia and into northern Alabama. The terrain is rugged and generally dominated by oak-hickory and other deciduous forest types at lower elevations and by various combinations of pine, hemlock, spruce, and fir in higher areas. While flatter portions are in agricultural use, the majority of most segments of this region are forested. Partners in Flight Landbird Conservation Plan for the Ohio Hills Area (Rosenberg and Dettmers 2004) Partners in Flight (PIF) is a voluntary, nonadvocacy, international coalition dedicated to reversing declines of all landbirds, or birds specifically occupying terrestrial habitats. Current partners include Federal, state, provincial, and territorial government agencies, First Nations, tribes, non-governmental organizations, numerous universities, concerned individuals, and private industry in Canada, the U.S., Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America. PIF has created 99 physiographic areas that link conservation areas by natural environmental characteristics. The ORINWR falls within Physiographic Area 22, Ohio Hills (Rosenberg and Dettmers 2004). Historically, this area was dominated by oak-hickory forests; today these cover roughly 10.7 million acres, or 54% of the physiographic area. The Landbird Conservation Plan for the Ohio Hills Area outlines objectives for the conservation of bird populations across a variety of habitats; identifies species of concern and priority habitats based on established assessment criteria; and proposes science-based management strategies, research, modeling, and monitoring of bird populations within the region. The focal species identified in this physiographic area were considered during the development and prioritization of ORINWR-specific ROC.

1.0 Introduction 1-9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (Brown et al. 2001) The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan is the outcome of a collaborative process with intent to stabilize populations of shorebird species by protecting adequate quantities of wetland, shoreline, and grassland habitat to meet their breeding, wintering, and migrating needs. This Plan groups the BCRs to create 11 shorebird planning regions. The ORINWR lies within the Central Hardwoods (Region 24) and Appalachian Mountains (Region 28) Shorebird planning regions. North American Waterbird Conservation Plan (Kushlan et al. 2002) North American Waterbird Conservation Plan is the outcome of a collaborative process that focuses on the future of seabirds coastal water birds, wading birds, and marsh birds in response to threats like habitat loss, invasive and exotic species introductions, pollution, and industrial activity. Of the freshwater habitat requirements noted in the Plan, Ohio River Islands NWR provides those associated with stream corridors and wetlands. The ORINWR is positioned entirely within the Southeast U.S. Waterbird planning region. The State of the Birds: United States of America Watch List (Rosenberg et al. 2014) The Watch List is produced by NABCI from PIF data, which ranks species according to their vulnerability due to population size, range size (breeding and non-breeding), population trend, and future threats (breeding and non-breeding). Species are included on the Watch List if they exhibit a threshold of high combined vulnerability across all these factors. The Watch List is updated annually, and in 2014 included 233 U.S. bird species. Watch List species and their associated conservation management recommendations were considered in the development and prioritization of ORINWR-specific ROC. USFWS Landscape Conservation Cooperative (USFWS 2012a and 2012b) The USFWS established a national framework of 22 Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) to provide a forum for States, Tribes, Federal agencies, non- governmental organizations, universities and other groups to promote landscape-level conservation partnerships; pool resources to develop science, data, and technical expertise; and implement large-scale conservation actions (USFWS 2012b). LCCs provide a spatial context and an organizational structure for facilitating conservation planning, shared science, information exchange, and decision support in response to broad-scale, complex, and dynamic issues such as climate change. ORINWR is located within the Appalachian LCC (Appalachian LCC 2014). The Appalachian LCC is in the process of implementing their 5-year Work Plan (Appalachian LCC 2012), which among many other science-based decision making tools, will produce a surrogate species list for strategic habitat conservation in the Appalachian Mountains LCC (Appalachian LCC 2013). The draft lists were evaluated during our development of ORINWR-specific ROC. 1.4.4 State Wildlife Action Plans State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs) are non-regulatory, proactive natural resource management documents designed to prevent species imperilment and recover endangered and threatened species (i.e., listed species). SWAPs document the distribution and abundance of all species of wildlife within a state and identify those species with low and declining populations. Typically SWAPs must include a list of Species

1.0 Introduction 1-10 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

of Greatest Conservation Need, extent and condition of their habitats, threats to those species and habitats, and conservation actions to address the threats. USFWS approval of a state’s SWAP provides a nexus to Federal funds through the State Wildlife Grants Program, the nation’s core program for preventing species endangerment. ORINWR spans four states: Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania. Species of Greatest Conservation Need in each state have been identified and were considered during our development and prioritization of ORINWR-specific ROC; however, given the minimal above-water land areas within ORINWR and the fact that the River generally flows along state borders, the relative acreages of ORINWR-owned land that occur within each state are nominal. • The Ohio Wildlife Action Plan was developed in 2005 and is in the process of being updated (ODNR 2015; ODNR 2005). Approximately 240 Ohio species are designated as species of special concern in the state and are in need of conservation effort to prevent eventual candidacy for threatened or endangered status (ODNR 2001). The ORINWR lies within the Ohio River watershed state planning unit. • The West Virginia Wildlife Conservation Action Plan (WCAP) was developed in 2005/6 and is in the process of being updated (WV DNR 2015; WV DNR 2006). The WCAP includes 128 species of special concern (WV DNR 2006). • The Kentucky Wildlife Conservation Strategy was last updated in 2013 (KDFWR 2013). The Strategy identifies 301 Species of Greatest Conservation Need in the state. • The Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan was recently updated in 2015 (Pennsylvania Game Commission 2015). This SWAP identifies a total of 664 Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Approximately 25 percent of Pennsylvania’s non-game species are considered imperiled. 1.4.5 ORINWR-Specific Plans Comprehensive Conservation Plan The 1997 National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act requires all Refuges to complete CCPs by 2012. A CCP is an all-encompassing document that guides biological and public use actions on a NWR for a 15-year period. The ORINWR CCP was completed in 2002 (USFWS 2002). As described in Section 1.0, this HMP is a step-down plan of the CCP. Likewise, Inventory and Monitoring Plans (IMP), Annual Habitat Work Plans (AHWP), Fire Management Plans (FMP), Wetland Management Plans (WMP), Hunting Program Management Plans (HMP), Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP), and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan (SPCC) are also CCP/HMP step-down plans and will be further developed from and integrated into the CCP/HMP process as it advances. • ORINWR Habitat and Species Inventory and Monitoring Plan: An IMP is intended to record progress toward the management objectives and strategies developed in the HMP. The IMP provides the framework for the continuous measurement of

1.0 Introduction 1-11 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

HMP and CCP objectives implementation and monitoring to feed into adaptive management systems. • ORINWR Annual Habitat Work Plan: An AHWP details the specific habitat management strategies and prescriptions relevant to the Refuge each year. The AHWPs are a product of the adaptive management process (Figure 1-3); they are detailed on a yearly basis to capture site-specific and climate-specific needs in order to fulfill overall habitat management objectives set forth in HMPs. • ORINWR Fire Management Plan: Each refuge in the NWRS containing “vegetation capable of sustaining fire” is required to prepare a FMP as mandated by USFWS policy. A FMP addresses wildland and prescribed fire events with guidelines on the level of protection needed to ensure safety, protect facilities and resources, and restore and perpetuate natural processes. Prescribed fire, which is used to mimic natural processes and manage certain habitats, has been incorporated as a management strategy into this HMP as possible. • ORINWR Hunting Plan: A HMP establishes the appropriateness, locations, and allowable take of hunting recreation opportunities on the Refuge in order to maintain ecosystem and herd/flock population integrity, minimize disturbance to other wildlife, and provide safety separation between hunters and other recreationists on the Refuge. The ORINWR Hunting Plan was developed in 1994 and last revised in 2008, and the ORINWR Furbearer Management Plan was developed in 2006, with annual updates and revisions. • ORINWR Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Plan: The SPCC generally directs the actions to take in the event of a spill of materials that are considered hazardous or toxic to humans or the environment. The existing ORINWR SPCC Plan covers local (onsite origination) spill and personal protective equipment (PPE). The NWR does respond to off-ORINWR emergencies to prevent migration of disasters to ORINWR resources, but this relationship is not formalized in the existing SPCC. ORINWR Land Protection Plan (LPP). The LPP describes the authorized boundary and provides a roadmap for full acquisition of relevant NWRS lands. ORINWR does not have an approved LPP for expansion. ORINWR has prepared several draft LPPS between 2003 and 2013, but none have been approved by the USFWS Regional Office.

1.0 Introduction 1-12 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure 1-2. Using the Habitat Management Plan for Annual Habitat Work Planning

1.0 Introduction 1-13 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

1.0 Introduction 1-14 April 2017

Manchester #2 Island Riparian Forest

CHAPTER 2.

BACKGROUND 2.1 Refuge Description 2.2 Historic Conditions 2.3 Current Conditions

This page intentionally left blank.

Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2.0 BACKGROUND

The ORINWR CCP contains a detailed description of the Refuge, including the physical environment (water quality, topography and soils, geology and hydrology, and air quality); the biological environment (terrestrial, wetland, aquatic habitats, and fish and wildlife); the socioeconomic environment (geographic setting, history and archaeology, land use, and recreational use); and the implementation of ORINWR goals, management directions, and monitoring actions is found in the ORINWR CCP (USFWS 2002). Pertinent information summarized or updated from the CCP is presented in this Section. Historic and current ecosystem influences are also described as necessary to the understanding of the Ohio River system natural processes and human interaction. Previous and current management direction helps inform the development of appropriate future management actions.

2.1 ORINWR DESCRIPTION

The geographic area encompassed by the ORINWR is confined to the Ohio River floodplain located along the Ohio River between Miles 0 (Pittsburgh) to 437 (Meldahl Locks and Dam). The Ohio River itself begins at the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, forms the border of West Virginia and Kentucky with Ohio, and ends at mile 981, at Cairo, Illinois. The ORINWR lands and waters begin at mile 35 and extend down to Manchester, OH at mile 397. There are at present 3,442 total acres of lands and waters within the ORINWR’s boundaries (Figure 1-1; Table 2-1). The terrestrial portion of ORINWR is comprised of all or parts of 22 islands and four adjacent mainland tracts. The ORINWR also has management authority for an 8.37-acre wetland conservation easement acquired in 1994 under the authority of the 1990 Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act. An additional 100 embayments and wetlands adjacent to the mainland are within the proposed ORINWR LPP expansion boundary but are not currently managed or owned under fee-title by the ORINWR; thus, ORINWR could potentially add over 8,000 acres of high quality islands, wetlands, back channels, and underwater habitat to its existing area. Most of ORINWR's land and underwater habitat is located in West Virginia; however, Pennsylvania and Kentucky each contribute two ORINWR islands. Riparian rights law in West Virginia and Kentucky dictate that the ORINWR boundaries extend down to the original low water mark prior to the construction of the navigation dams; thus, ORINWR owns extensive underwater habitat in these states. In Pennsylvania, however, the Commonwealth lays claim to all inundated lands; thus, ORINWR owns only terrestrial portions of the Pennsylvania islands.

2.0 Background 2-1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 2-1 ORINWR Islands and Mainland Properties Land Water USACE River Boat Car/Foot Unit Acres Acres Navigation Pool Mile Access Access Phillis Island 39 New Cumberland 35 Y N Georgetown Island 16.2 New Cumberland 38 Y N Buffalo Creek 19 Pike Island 74.7 Y Y Wheeling Island 17.8 30 Hannibal 89.5 Y Y Captina Mainland 138 Hannibal 107.5 Y Y Captina Island 17 61.4 Hannibal 108.5 Y N Fish Creek Island 48.3 86.4 Hannibal 113.5 Y N Paden Island 80.8 46.9 Willow Island 132 Y N Williamson Island 125.6 128 Willow Island 134 Y N Witten Towhead 8.1 Willow Island 135.5 Y N Crab Island 0.6 7.2 Willow Island 138.3 Y Y Wells Island 43 81.4 Willow Island 139 Y N Mill Creek Island 19 58.8 Willow Island 141.5 Y N Grandview Island 8 85.7 Willow Island 143 Y N Grape Island 44.5 70 Willow Island 151.7 Y N Middle Island 235 91 Willow Island 153 Y Y Broadback Island 51 78.6 Willow Island 158.5 Y N Buckley Island 160 75.7 Belleville 169 Y N Buckley Mainland (HQ) 50.7 Belleville 170 Y Y Giboney Wetland (HQ) 11.7 Belleville 170.5 N Y Muskingum Island 93 167.3 Belleville 175.5 Y N Neal Island 104 121.6 Belleville 181 Y N Belleville Wetlands 8.4 Belleville 202.5 N Y Buffington Island 162 85.9 Racine 216.5 Y N Letart Island 28.6 142.9 Racine 235 Y N Manchester Island #1 20.4 315.3 Meldahl 395 Y N Manchester Island #2 93.6 Meldahl 395 Y N Cullom Tract (HQ) 2.0 Belleville 170 N Y Law Tract (HQ) 1.24 Belleville 170 Y Y Manchester #2 4.931 Meldahl 395 Y Inholdings Muskingum Mainland 17.75 Belleville 177 Y Y (White Tract) Butler (HQ) 32.02 Belleville 170 N Y Gallaher (HQ) 1.85 Belleville 170 N Y Cullom Road (HQ) 0.09 Belleville 170 N Y Totals 1703.2 1734.1

Geomorphology

2.0 Background 2-2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

The Ohio River valley occupies a portion of the preglacial Teays River Valley, which drained a large portion of the east-central United States until roughly 1.5 million years ago. The formation of the Teays River is up for debate; it may have originated in Appalachian Mountain outwash during the Tertiary period (Hansen 1995), or been the result of even earlier Pleistocene glaciation which rerouted an earlier drainage system flowing into the Great Lakes (Gray 1991). The Teays system ended approximately 1.5 million years ago when the Laurentian ice sheet dammed the northern flow of the River. Scouring of the landscape by glaciers and damming of the Teays and its tributaries reorganized the drainages in the area and created substantial glacial lakes. Overflow of these glacial lakes carved new drainage basins and lead to the formation of the Ohio River system. By Illinoian times, the Ohio River was largely established in its present course. The River valley was broadened and deepened during interglacial stages, and filled with fluvioglacial deposits throughout the Pleistocene. The Ohio River flows down a very gently sloping plateau consisting of almost horizontal sedimentary strata of sandstones, shales, and limestone. The bed of the Ohio River is covered by deep alluvial deposits composed mainly of sand and gravel, which can be as much as 125 feet thick in some areas. The islands were formed by accretion of flood deposits. The base of all but two of the islands are composed of sand and gravel capped with sediments deposited by flooding (the bases of Eureka and Letart are composed of bedrock). Most soils on floodplains and islands are classified as fine sandy or silt loams of various drainage character. Commercial sand and gravel operations (instream and land-based) occur throughout the River. Gas, oil, and salt brine are also recovered from the underlying bedrock, and many islands contain the remnants of pre-1920 oil drilling operations. Hydrology The average width of the Ohio River adjacent to ORINWR varies from 1100 to 1600 feet, while the average depth ranges from 19 to 26 feet. The ORINWR properties are located in eight of the twelve upstream most navigation pools. These pools are run-of-river impoundments managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to maintain year-round navigation for commercial towboats and barges. The 12 navigation uppermost pools on the Ohio River are, in descending order: Emsworth, Dashields, Montgomery, New Cumberland, Pike Island, Hannibal, Willow Island, Belleville, Racine, R. C. Byrd, Greenup, and Meldahl. The immediate floodplain and all of the islands have flooded numerous times, as evidenced by extensive sediment layers over their sand and gravel cores; however, the extent and frequency of flooding on the Ohio River has been reduced by numerous tributary and headwater reservoirs. There are two major sources of groundwater in the ORINWR reach. Most of the groundwater immediately adjacent to the Ohio River is recovered via induced River discharge from the glacial deposits over which the Ohio River flows. The second source is found in the bedrock beneath the alluvial deposits and soils. It is important to note that the Ohio River is a greatly altered ecosystem, impounded for navigation purposes. The altered hydrology has affected significantly the quality of both aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Many islands, shallow gravel bars, riffles, and channel wetlands have been lost and have been replaced by deepwater habitats. Impoundment of the River and resulting

2.0 Background 2-3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

elevated water table year round has altered the plant community composition of the riparian corridor, now favoring a silver maple dominated forest (Romano 2010). At the same time, the reduced periodicity and height of flood events restricts the recruitment of species dependent on flooding for dispersal and establishment, such as cottonwood, black willow, etc. (Friedman and Auble 2000). Landscape Context The ORINWR is located within the Ohio River Basin Ecosystem, a watershed that spans fifteen states. The entire basin consists of more than 47,000 streams has a drainage basin of 204,000 square miles. The Ohio River basin supports nearly half of the freshwater fishes and over one- third of the mussel species in the United States, including 46 mussel species that are classified as endangered or species of concern (citation needed). Major biological concerns in the area include sedimentation, nutrient pollution from agricultural products, habitat destruction resulting from population growth and development, energy development, and invasive aquatic species including Asian carp and zebra mussels. The ORINWR lies primarily within the Western Allegheny Plateau ecoregion, and within the Appalachian Landscape Conservation Cooperative region. Extensive mixed mesophytic forests and mixed oak forests originally grew in the Western Allegheny Plateau, and today most of its rounded hills remain in forest; dairy, livestock, and general farms, as well as residential developments mostly concentrated in the valleys. Historic Condition, Natural and Anthropogenic Influences 2.1.1 Pre-ORINWR Land Use and Management French and British fur traders frequented the Ohio River Valley in the 18th Century, and the first extensive Euro-American settlement was established around 1790. Farm products such as grain, tobacco, livestock, and distilled liquor were the first produced for market. The River was the major route for transportation of goods, and an inflow of settlers, taverns, and markets were established along the shore. Throughout the 19th Century, battles of the Civil War and growth and development supporting the Industrial Revolution dominated the landscape. Between 1800 and 1970, 65% of the floodplain forest had been lost or converted to other uses (agriculture, urbanization, industrial development) (USACE 2006). In the 20th Century, the Ohio River was transformed by human engineering that raised the level of the River by a set of locks and dams, and the fords and portions of ORINWR islands that were above the water during the prehistoric and early historic periods became inundated. Historically, there were 54 islands in the upper Ohio River within the ORINWR acquisition boundary totaling 7,172 acres of terrestrial and wetland habitat. As the River was altered for navigation, dams backed up water overtopping many of the low lying islands. Those islands that were not overtopped were either dredged away, their land base used for lock and dam construction, or mined for sand and gravel. Currently, only 38 islands remain in the acquisition area with a total of 2,918 acres – a net loss of 60% or 4,254 acres USACE 2006). Additionally, at least four islands have been modified by natural forces. Grape and Bat Islands were "fused" through sedimentation, and a palustrine wetland complex now exists within the area between the two Islands. Goose Island, formally located between mile 230 and 231, disappeared due to sedimentation and a shift in the flow direction of Mill Creek. Upper Brothers Island (or

2.0 Background 2-4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

French Island) may have experienced the same fate. The Manchester Islands were once a cluster of five separate islands and are now only two. Those islands and riparian lands that were not inundated are nonetheless affected by altered hydrologic regime. As the purpose of the navigation dams is to maintain a minimum 9 feet of depth for year-round navigation throughout the River system, the consequence of a year-round elevated water table is that certain riparian areas do not go through a regular drying cycle. Many trees that are intolerant of flooding cannot re-colonize the immediate riparian interface. Likewise, clearing and settlement of the floodplain habitats have reduced the diversity of tree species and availability of seed to re-colonize open areas. For these reasons, riparian forests in the region are now typically dominated by silver maple. In the early 1900's, the average depth of the River was one foot. Over 140 species of fish, many long distance migratory species, and 72 species of native freshwater mussels occurred in the Ohio River. Following channelization, construction of back-channel closure dikes, impoundment, and dredging of the River for year-round navigation, many of these aquatic species were extirpated from the River, and a few big river riffle-dependent species are now extinct. Periodic disturbance by flooding, blow-downs, and agricultural and industrial activities on the islands has opened up forest canopy and allowed for the establishment of invasive plant species. Within the ORINWR boundary, biologists have identified over 500 species of plants to date, 100 of which are considered exotic, and approximately 35 are problematic invasive plants (see Appendix B). Since ORINWR is physically situated at the receiving end of a large watershed, almost any plant species growing in the watershed has the ability to move downstream with the flow and take up residence on ORINWR. Islands in the Ohio River have historically been used for a variety of purposes, the remnants of which are still evident and continue to significantly shape the available ecosystem. Evidence of previously occupied Indian encampments as well as past agricultural, commercial, and industrial activities can be found on some islands. Of the 40 existing islands in the ORINWR reach, six have been heavily urbanized, industrialized, and/or disturbed (Boggs, Brunot, Davis, Neville, Wheeling, and Browns). Four of the 40 islands (Eureka, Middle, Neal, and Blennerhassett) have established water wells that were installed for industrial and municipal use, some of which remain active today. Vegetation clearance for mining, agriculture, ditching, and silviculture activities occurred on most islands, which has resulted in extensive erosion along the islands’ mainland and shorelines over the last century. Agricultural and silvicultural activities previously occurred on all islands, and can still be seen on Williamson, Middle, Marietta, and Neal Islands. Remnants from past industrial activities also remain, including: gas/oil and water wells (Middle), stockpiling of sand and gravel (Georgetown and Williamson), spoil disposal (Manchester No. 1 and Boggs Islands), mooring (Williamson, Eightmile, and Boggs Islands), and oil drilling and loading operations (Mill Creek, Grandview, Wells, and Muskingum Islands). 2.1.2 Past USFWS Stewardship Since 1990, the ORINWR team has sought to serve the habitat needs of a variety of fish and wildlife. The enabling documents (e.g., Environmental Assessment establishing ORINWR) highlighted the need and capability to protect habitat for migratory birds, endangered species (Indiana bat, fanshell, sheepnose, and pink mucket pearly mussel), and other native freshwater mollusks. The major habitat activities undertaken on ORINWR to date include tree and shrub

2.0 Background 2-5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

planting (riparian forest restoration), wetland restoration, shoreline stabilization and island restoration projects, and invasive plant management. Inventories and monitoring activities to date have focused on breeding landbirds, heron rookeries, mid-winter bald eagle use, osprey and bald eagle nesting, bats, and freshwater mussels and snails. Most of the native tree and shrub planting occurred on Middle Island, which was an active corn and soybean farm in 1995 when it was acquired. Between 1995 and 2008, approximately 150 acres were planted with native trees and shrubs, while maintaining three 15-acre natural succession areas for comparison. Other plantings between 2007 and 2012 were concentrated on nine acres surrounding the Headquarters (HQ). Various shoreline stabilization projects have been implemented in conjunction with the USACE since 1996. Head of island stone treatments are in place on Grape, Williamson, and Manchester Island #2. Longitudinal low head rock dikes with gaps were built along Buckley Island, HQ- mainland shoreline, and the channel side of Paden Island. Spot treatment slope protection occurs on Middle Island and Captina mainland. The shoreline of Georgetown Island has been expanded and re-built with low head rock dikes and clean fill material.

2.2 CURRENT CONDITIONS, NATURAL AND ANTHROPOGENIC INFLUENCES

Islands in the Ohio River are currently used for a variety of purposes. Most of the ORINWR tracts or units are boat-access only, which limits the visitation and uses of the islands. Popular seasonal public recreation uses currently include fishing, pleasure boating, water-skiing, beach use, wildlife observation, and hunting. Although evidence of past activities remains in some areas, agricultural, industrial, or commercial activities no longer occur on NWR land. 2.2.1 Wildlife More than 231 species of birds, 41 species of mammals, 20 species of amphibians and reptiles, approximately 100 species of fish, 45 species of mollusk, and more than 100 species of insects have been recorded within the ORINWR’s acquisition boundary. Additional information about wildlife at ORINWR is summarized below and further detailed in the CCP. Updated Species Lists are contained in Appendix B. Birds Waterbirds. Waterbirds heavily use ORINWR floodplain habitats. Herons, egrets, ducks, geese, swans, loons, grebes, gulls, terns, shorebirds, osprey, and bald eagles are common along the islands and in the embayments. Nesting water birds include great blue heron, green heron, osprey, bald eagle, wood duck, mallard, American black duck, Canada goose, killdeer, spotted sandpiper, belted kingfisher, and herring gull. The remaining species of water birds are found on ORINWR during migration, or, in the case of most waterfowl, primarily in the winter. The ORINWR monitors on-Refuge nesting activities of osprey, bald eagle, and great blue herons. Shorebirds. Many species of shorebirds migrate through and a few nest on ORINWR, such as killdeer, greater and lesser yellowlegs, and numerous species of sandpipers. Raptors. Many ORINWR raptors are year-round residents, such as the great horned owl, eastern screech owl, barred owl, red-tailed hawk, Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, American kestrel, and red-shouldered hawk. Other birds of prey visit ORINWR primarily during migration or winter,

2.0 Background 2-6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

such as the merlin, peregrine falcon, northern harrier, and rough-legged hawk. There is an abundance of small mammals and birds that serve as food for the raptor populations. Migratory Landbirds. The Ohio River corridor is poised on the boundary between the Atlantic and Mississippi flyways, and is a major migration route for birds. Migratory landbirds (such as warblers, vireos, cuckoos, tanagers, thrushes, orioles, and flycatchers) migrate through the Ohio River Valley. Migratory landbirds are the dominant breeding birds on ORINWR, and the most abundant nesters include grey catbird, wood thrush, song sparrow, yellow warbler, common yellowthroat, northern cardinal, yellow-breasted chat, American robin, common grackle, Acadian flycatcher, Carolina wren, red-eyed vireo, American redstart, Carolina chickadee, Eastern towhee, American goldfinch and white-eyed vireo (ORINWR Breeding Bird surveys, 1995 – 2012). Mammals The most commonly observed mammals include white-tailed deer, fox squirrel, raccoon, muskrat, beaver, opossum, red fox, woodchuck, and eastern cottontail rabbit. The larger mammals are seen frequently swimming back and forth between the islands and the mainland. The small mammal populations include at least 9 species of bats, meadow vole, short-tailed shrew, meadow jumping mouse, white-footed mouse and deer mouse. Riparian fur bearers, such as mink, muskrat, and beaver, are noticeably more abundant along the back channels (protected from commercial traffic) and wetland habitats of the embayments than along the main channel/navigation sides of the islands. Although most of the mammals are considered residents, bats in particular migrate to their summer range along the Ohio River. The endangered Indiana bat and northern long-eared bat have been documented in riparian forests on ORINWR and in similar adjacent habitats (e.g., within Wayne National Forest). The distribution of mammals on ORINWR is heavily influenced by habitat type. As habitats continue to change in favor of the increasingly dominant bottomland hardwood forest, the mammal populations will respond with a shift towards the forest community and away from the old field community. Reptiles and Amphibians Due to accessibility issues, ORINWR reptile and amphibian fauna have not been well studied. The wetland habitats on and around the islands and within the embayments and mainland wetlands provide suitable habitat for a variety of amphibians, including American toad, Fowler's toad, green frog, bullfrog, gray tree frog complex, northern spring peeper, pickerel frog, and northern leopard frog. Limited information is available on salamander populations, but surveys have revealed ravine salamander, smallmouth salamander, mudpuppy, and hellbender on or near ORINWR. Snakes in general are not abundant on the islands due to periodic flooding, however, the occasional garter snake or black rat snake is seen on ORINWR, and northern water snakes swim to and from the islands. Five species of turtles have been recorded on ORINWR so far, including the terrestrial eastern box turtle, and the more aquatic snapping turtle, midland painted turtle, musk turtle, and eastern spiny softshell turtle. Fish Over 100 species of warm water fishes inhabit the Ohio River reach of the NWR. The islands provide a variety of habitat types for the diverse fish fauna - shallow gravel and sand bars, aquatic beds, overhanging cover, logs and snags, as well as large rock and cobble. Riverine emergent and submerged wetlands teem with young-of-year fishes. Deep water habitats have been difficult

2.0 Background 2-7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

to sample effectively, but ORINWR divers have noted numerous species of darters, minnows, and madtoms in 20 feet of water. The ORINWR reach of the Ohio River supports a diverse recreational fishery, highlighted by spotted, smallmouth and largemouth bass, white and hybrid striped bass, channel and flathead catfish, sauger, walleye, black and white crappie, and freshwater drum. There is currently no commercial fishery in the Ohio River adjacent to West Virginia, Ohio, or Pennsylvania. Mollusks ORINWR mollusks include freshwater mussels (the most diverse group), aquatic snails, and terrestrial snails. There are currently 50 species of freshwater mussels remaining in the Ohio River today, and 46 of these have been collected on the ORINWR. Every ORINWR island has been surveyed at least once, and each one has some mussel fauna associated with the underwater habitat surrounding it. At least 5 federally endangered mussels occur on the ORINWR (pink mucket, sheepnose, clubshell, northern riffleshell, and fanshell) in the Belleville, Racine, RC Byrd, and Greenup pools. The most diverse mussel bed is found at Muskingum Island, with 33 species now and an average density of 4 live mussels per square meter. Mussels generally require clean-swept sand, gravel, cobble and boulder habitat, and well oxygenated and nutrient rich waters. These habitats are abundant around the islands. Historically, there were upwards of 80 species in the free-flowing Ohio River, but habitat changes (e.g., impoundments for navigation) over the past 100 years have resulted in the extinction of at least 3 species (leaf shell, round combshell, and Tennessee riffleshell) and the extirpation of many more. Water quality degradation during the late 1800s through the 1970s stressed or eliminated many mussels and their fish hosts (WV DNR 2015; WV DNR 2006). In addition to the habitat and water quality problems that mussels have faced, the invasion of the exotic zebra mussel posed another challenge to endemic mussel sustainability. Zebra mussels first entered the ORINWR in 1993, and their density exploded to over 10,000 animals per square meter by 1999. However, zebra mussel populations in the mainstem Ohio River crashed in 2000, and have never built back up to the levels seen in the 1990s. They persist at generally low levels (< 100 per square meter) and, although settlement occurs most years, most juveniles do not survive to the next year. The reasons for this change in life history are unknown, but may be influenced by various environmental factors, such as water temperatures above 80 degrees can kill them; high flow velocities can sheer them off; high suspended sediment loads can sand-blast their thin shells; and high predation by fish and ducks. So far, ORINWR has not seen any species or mussel beds lost due to zebra mussels. Commercial harvest of mussels (primarily for the cultured pearl industry) is currently permitted in Kentucky waters, but not in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, or West Virginia. However, there are sanctuaries in place adjacent to the Kentucky ORINWR islands that prohibit commercial harvest from those areas. Recent studies indicate that 11 species of terrestrial snails are on the ORINWR, and some species’ distribution is restricted to islands and undisturbed floodplains. The aquatic snail diversity is improving in the upper Ohio River, and 5 species inhabit the waters around the islands. These populations are not yet as diverse yet as in the lower 500 miles, and those that remain are impacted by the zebra mussel as well.

2.0 Background 2-8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2.2.2 Land Classification and Vegetation Assemblages In 2014, ORINWR completed a remote sensing and field-verified inventory of all vegetative community associations across ORINWR (Cardno 2014). ORINWR habitats include forest, shrub, grassland/old field, palustrine wetlands, riverine, and developed land (Appendix A). The current distribution of these habitats is illustrated in Figure 2-1.

Forest

34% Shrub Grassland Wetland 52% Riverine Developed Water 9% 2%

1% 1% 2%

Figure 2-1. Current Land Cover Distribution of ORINWR Vegetation Assemblages

A total of 28 different land cover and habitat types were identified within the 22 islands and four mainland tracts of the ORINWR (Table 2-2; Appendix A). Of these 28 different classes, 14 of them were assigned National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) vegetation associations, while the remaining 14 classes were determined to be “cultural” vegetation associations. These cultural classes did not fall into any existing NVCS association and typically included areas that are either a unique native species monoculture, dominated by invasive species, or significantly impacted by anthropogenic activities such as farming, building, or other previous management.

2.0 Background 2-9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 2-2 Vegetation Associations at ORINWR NVCS Association Vegetation Hierarchy NVCS Code1 Acres Forested Black Willow Riparian Forest 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American Flooded & Swamp Forest CEGL002103 2.95 Box-elder Floodplain Forest 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American Flooded & Swamp Forest CEGL005033 57.00 Central Appalachian Rich Cove Forest 1.B.2.Na - Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest CEGL006237 97.61 Chestnut Oak - Shagbark Hickory - Sugar Maple Forest 1.B.2.Na - Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest CEGL007268 5.06 River Birch - Sycamore Small River Floodplain Forest 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American Flooded & Swamp Forest CEGL002086 11.95 Silver Maple - Elm Forest 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American Flooded & Swamp Forest CEGL002586 439.27 Sycamore - Silver Maple Calcareous Floodplain Forest 1.B.3.Na - Eastern North American Flooded & Swamp Forest CEGL007334 514.15 Black Cherry Forest NA NA 17.81 Shrubland Alluvial Alder Thicket 2.B.6.Na - Eastern North American Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh CEGL006062 1.69

Steeplebush - Blackberry species / Reed Canarygrass 2.B.6.Na - Eastern North American Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh CEGL006571 70.87 Shrubland Grasslands – Old Field Little Bluestem - Bluestem Grassland 2.B.2.Nc - Eastern North American Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland CEGL007707 4.56

Piedmont / Central Appalachian Riverbank Tall Herbaceous 2.B.4.Na - Eastern North American Dune & Coastal Grassland & Shrubland CEGL006480 111.4 Vegetation Old Field - Grassland NA NA 104.10 Old Field - Maintained Grassland/Shrubland NA NA 13.14 Old Field - Shrubland NA NA 2.6 Old Quarry - Grassland NA NA 8.80

1 NVCS Codes consists of community element codes (also referred to as ELCODEs) and always began with C for communities, followed by an E for Element. The next two bytes were an abbreviation that indicated either the source of the classification used (e.g., MN for Minnesota), or if the Element was global, whether it was a global community (CEGL), a global community Complex (CECX), or a global community Ecological System (CEES). The code always ended with sequentially generated numeric identifiers assigned by the NVCS data manager.

2.0 Background 2-10 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 2-2 Vegetation Associations at ORINWR NVCS Association Vegetation Hierarchy NVCS Code1 Acres Silvergrass Grassland NA NA 9.28 Kudzu Community NA NA 8.97 Knotweed Herbaceous Community NA NA 50.99 Palustrine Wetland Common Rush Marsh 2.B.6.Na - Eastern North American Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh CEGL004112 7.63 Woolgrass Marsh 2.B.6.Na - Eastern North American Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh CEGL006349 12.55 Reed Canary Grass Community NA NA 0.35 Riverine * Riverine Aquatic Bed NA NA 7.93 Riverine Unconsolidated Bottom NA NA 8.23 Riverine Unconsolidated Shore NA NA 33.68 Water-willow Rocky Bar and Shore 2.B.4.Na - Eastern North American Dune & Coastal Grassland & Shrubland CEGL004286 1.48 Developed Lands Developed NA NA 20.41 Riprap NA NA 1.93

* Not all “Riverine” habitat was mapped during the photointerpretation work in 2013-2014. Refuge underwater acreage is estimated at 1737 acres.

2.0 Background 2-11 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Forest Bottomland hardwood forests are the natural climax community along the floodplains of the Ohio River in this region. Much of this habitat type has been eliminated throughout the entire Ohio River corridor by industrial, residential, and agricultural development, and the remaining riparian area is often less than a few hundred feet in width (USACE 2006). This habitat type has the classic four layered plant structure. Dominant tree species in the overstory are silver maple, sycamore, cottonwood, and black willow; minor trees include American elm, pin oak, river birch, sweet gum, and hickories. (For management purposes, the ORINWR sub-divides the floodplain forest into 2 distinct classes – mature (dbh > 20”) and immature forest). Focal species in the lower canopy include hackberry, black locust, slippery elm, green ash, black cherry, box elder, pawpaw, buckeye, and black walnut. Shrubs include spice bush, Virginia creeper, poison ivy, dogwoods, black elderberry, and grape species. Herbaceous density and diversity of ground cover varies with the amount of light penetration. Typical ground cover includes wingstem, pale and spotted touch-me-nots, white snakeroot, tall coneflower, and a profusion of invasive exotic plants (Japanese knotweed, garlic mustard, mile-a-minute, Japanese hops, and kudzu).

Riparian Forest Community Structure at ORINWR. Portions of riparian forest contain mature mixed bottomland hardwoods including cottonwood,

The forested habitat on ORINWR is further divided into eight different classes, with seven of them falling into NVCS associations (Cardno 2014; see Table 2-2). The forested associations are primarily made up of bottomland forest types, and are dominated by two associations, the Silver Maple – Elm Forest, and the Sycamore – Silver Maple Calcareous Floodplain Forest. The remaining bottomland forest habitat falls within three other NVCS associations. These consist of the Black Willow Riparian Forest, Box-elder Floodplain Forest, and River Birch – Sycamore Small

2.0 Background 2-12 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

River Floodplain Forest. The four mainland ORINWR tracts are heavily covered with upland forest habitat. This habitat is characterized by two NVCS associations, the Central Appalachian Rich Cover Forest, and the Chestnut Oak – Shagbark Hickory – Sugar Maple Forest. The only forest class that does not fit within a NVCS association is Black Cherry Forest. This class was created to identify pure stands of black cherry. There were two different stands of the Black Cherry Forest identified during the surveys, with one found on Neal Island, and the other on Williamson Island. The mature forest supports a unique group of wildlife such as colonial nesting waterbirds, bald eagle, osprey, wood duck, owls, and bats which do not utilize the immature forest sector.

Upland Forest Community Structure at ORINWR. This example of upland forest at Butler Island is dominated by chestnut oak.

Shrubland Two different natural shrub communities, including the dominant Steeplebush - Blackberry species / Reed Canarygrass Shrubland association and Alluvial Alder Thicket association, which is located in the slough on Grape Island.

Grassland/Oldfield The early successional habitats were farmed, grazed, or otherwise disturbed in the recent past by oil and gas activities, recreational development, logging, and abandoned industrial sites. These fragmented oldfield habitat blocks are comprised of mostly herbaceous species and grasses (goldenrods, mustards, thistle, reed canarygrass, bindweed, ironweed, joe-pye weed, ragweed, asters, and pokeweed) with some woody species beginning to take hold (blackberry, raspberry, rose, false indigo, dogwoods, and black elderberry). There has been no active farming on any ORINWR unit since 1994.

2.0 Background 2-13 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Six different habitat types were identified in grassland and old field areas within ORINWR (Cardno 2014; Appendix A). Of these, only two classes, Little Bluestem—Bluestem Grassland, and Piedmont / Central Appalachian Riverbank Tall Herbaceous Vegetation match known NVCS associations. The Little Bluestem—Bluestem Grassland association is only found on the Captina mainland. The Piedmont / Central Appalachian Riverbank Tall Herbaceous Vegetation association is the most abundant of all old field habitats located on six different islands. Four additional old field habitat types were identified at ORINWR that do not have a species composition that is in line with any known NVCS association. Three of these classes, Old Field– Grassland, Old Field–Shrubland, and Silvergrass Grassland were found in areas that had been managed agricultural land in the past. The fourth class, Old Field–Maintained Grassland/Shrubland is located at ORINWR HQ. This habitat class is comprised of land that has been planted with shrubs and saplings and is currently under active land management.

Old field community at Middle Island. Many refuge grasslands were farmed at some time.

In some cases, grassland areas have become dominated by invasive species that have formed dense monocultures, and two cultural vegetation classes were created to describe these types of areas. The larger of these two classes is the Knotweed Herbaceous Community (Fallopia cuspidatum), which covers more than 60 acres of ORINWR land (as a mappable feature, only 60 acres is discernable on aerial photography; it is found in multiple locations throughout ORINWR, and is regularly seen as a component of the understory of several forest stands but is difficult to map or measure since the overstory tree canopy masks the knotweed understory in aerial photography. This class is often identified in old fields and in large forest canopy gaps. The second of these classes is the Kudzu Community. It was also designated as its own unique class due to similar site conditions. On the Captina mainland, kudzu (Pueraria montana) formed a dense monoculture that outcompeted all other vegetation over nine acres. Palustrine Wetlands

2.0 Background 2-14 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

These wetland habitats occur along floodplain benches and in embayments/back water areas. Many of these habitats used to be connected to the Ohio River directly through sloughs and overflow channels or during high water events. Palustrine emergent wetlands are composed of smartweeds, wild millet, cattail, sedges, rushes, sweet flag, bulrushes, wild rye, rice cutgrass, false nettle, spike rushes, swamp milkweed, sensitive fern, swamp rose mallow, burreed, marsh purslane, monkeyflowers, vervains, spotted and pale touch-me-nots, boneset, cardinal flower, begger-ticks, loosestrife, seedbox, bedstraw, bugleweed, water horehound, tickseed sunflowers, black elderberry, St. Johnswort, moneywort, ditch stonecrop, primrose willow, and dodder. Small scrub/shrub wetlands generally occur adjacent to the emergent, and include black willow, brookside alder, buttonbush, dogwoods, false indigo, sandbar willow, and swamp rose.

Floodplain wetland located on Grape Island. Many of these wetlands are, or were, directly connected to the river through sloughs and overflow channels or during high water events.

Three palustrine wetland communities were identified within ORINWR: Common Rush Marsh, Woolgrass Marsh, and a wet meadow floodplain within the Buffalo Creek tract dominated by the non-native, invasive, reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). Riverine Prior to impoundment, the Ohio River was relatively shallow (the average depth in summer was less than one foot), with numerous islands, gravel bars, channel wetlands (riverine emergent, and riverine aquatic bed), and adjacent overflow sloughs surrounded by bottomland hardwood forests. Impoundment of the River for navigation interests has created primarily deepwater habitat along the main channel corridor (average depth in channel is 20 to 30 feet, with a maximum of 50 feet) and many islands, shallow bars, and channel wetlands have disappeared. Most of the remaining shallow water and wetlands in the floodplain occur in the embayments - the drowned tributary mouths inundated by backwaters from the impounded Ohio River. (Think of the embayments as "displaced wetlands," situated off the main channel and up into the tributaries.)

2.0 Background 2-15 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Justicia americana (water willow) beds located in Riverine habitat at French Run.

Four riverine habitat types were identified within ORINWR, including water-willow rock bar and stone; riverine aquatic bed (water celery, pondweeds, milfoils, duckweed, Elodea sp., coontail, and naiadweed); riverine unconsolidated shore (sand and gravel beaches, exposed banks, logs, overhanging branches and exposed roots); and riverine unconsolidated bottom (sand, gravel, cobble, silt, mud, clay, and boulders). Developed Lands Developed lands include paved roads, parking lots, walkways, and buildings. Typically there is no vegetation growing in these areas unless it is heavily managed in relation to the installed landscaping of an adjacent building. Developed lands also include multiple areas of rock dike fields and riprap on Georgetown Island, Captina mainland, Paden Island, Williamson Island, Grape Island, Buckley Island, Manchester Island 2, and Middle Island. Table 2.3 below summarizes the amount of each habitat type by Refuge unit (alphabetically ordered).

2.0 Background 2-16 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 2-3 Acreages of refuge units by habitat types. Acreage by Habitat Type Riparian Temperate Oldfields Wetlands Unit Name Forest Open Upland and and Developed Total and Water Forest Grasslands Shorelines Shrub Broadback 26.15 11.54 78.6 3.79 120.00 Island Buckley 90.75 71.69 75.7 1.48 239.62 Island Buckley 3.55 40.72 24.54 5.21 74.01 Mainland Buffalo Creek 10.19 0.82 1.61 12.62 Buffington 130.20 10.28 85.9 226.38 Island Butler tract 28.18 3.39 0.24 31.81 (HQ) Captina Island and 75.33 28.71 19.96 61.4 3.59 2.08 191.06 mainland Crab Island 0.66 7.2 7.86 Fish Creek 32.64 10.91 86.4 1.09 131.05 Island Georgetown 2.37 0.70 3.08 Island Grandview 4.55 85.7 1.30 91.55 Island Grape Island 33.42 70 1.52 104.94 Letart Island 25.35 4.13 142.9 1.41 232.90 Manchester 315.3 12.35 1.52 6.28 20.10 Island #1 (islands were Manchester joined 84.70 10.72 4.91 1.78 417.41 Island #2 prior to dams)

2.0 Background 2-17 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Acreage by Habitat Type Riparian Temperate Oldfields Wetlands Unit Name Forest Open Upland and and Developed Total and Water Forest Grasslands Shorelines Shrub Middle Island 105.89 104.10 91 16.59 11.42 329.00 Mill Creek 17.14 3.62 58.8 0.8 80.37 Island Muskingum 90.40 167.3 5.80 263.49 Island Neal Island 50.95 66.41 121.6 238.95 Paden Island 78.46 46.9 4.96 130.32 Phillis Island 15.62 1.61 1.98 19.21 Wells Island 41.11 2.78 81.4 125.30 Wheeling 15.07 30.0 45.07 Island White Tract (Muskingum 13.98 5.06 2.0 21.04 Mainland) Williamson 128.0 88.57 35.21 12.92 264.70 Island (islands were Witten joined 2.26 0.38 1.41 4.05 Towhead prior to dams)

2.0 Background 2-18 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Bank swallow colony in a steep riverbank located on Manchester Island #1.

Refuge facilities located at Middle Island.

2.0 Background 2-19 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2.2.3 Existing Threats and Challenges New challenges to effective ORINWR management have emerged in addition to the legacy of disturbance described in Section 2.2, which included River alteration and management, human occupation, agriculture/silviculture, mining in the watersheds, stockpiling, spoil disposal, mooring, and gas/oil and water extraction activities. New challenges include the water quality, vegetation clearing and erosion in the floodplain, and the potential effects of climate change. Water Quality The industrial revolution of the 19th and 20th centuries contributed to a legacy of water pollution for the upper Ohio River system. Coal mining, timber harvest, steel production, sand and gravel dredging, urban development, chemical production, oil and gas development, and a general disregard for the basin’s rivers and streams created conditions that were unsuitable for fish and other aquatic life. As early as 1899 Samuel Rhoads, a well-known naturalist in the Upper Ohio River basin, noted the need to quickly document the disappearing mussel fauna of the River as new dams were being built to alter the river for year-round navigation and cities, towns, and industries were increasingly using the River to carry away their untreated wastes: “Owing to the steady extermination of the molluscan life of the Ohio River in western Pennsylvania, due to pollution and the damming of the waters of that River and of the Monongahela, and to a smaller extent of the Allegheny River, any information relating to the species still existing in these waters must be quickly put on record to be preserved” (Samuel Rhoads, 1899). After many decades of decline, Ohio River water quality protections became a priority in 1948 with the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and later the Clean Water Act of 1972 and amendments. Since that time, the River has steadily recovered and a remarkable resurgence of aquatic has occurred. At the present time, all reaches of the mainstem Ohio River fully support the needs of aquatic life (ORSANCO 2012). While most point source pollution is regulated, spills still occur and nonpoint source pollution (runoff from the land) has emerged as a more difficult issue to manage and adding a whole new suite of stressors to the system. Pesticides, oil, sediment, fertilizers, brines, and metals are carried with rainfall into streams and rivers, with impervious surfaces (roads, buildings, etc.) hastening the runoff. Newly emerging contaminants (pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors, etc.) are not removed by existing water treatment facilities and enter our waters causing adverse effects on aquatic resources. In addition, the recent surge in gas extraction using hydraulic fracturing has resulted in huge demands for freshwater (for injection underground) and vast road and pipeline transportation corridor development, which adds significant sediment to the basin streams that end up in the Ohio River. Fish consumption advisories still exist for many species in the mainstem Ohio River due primarily to mercury and PCBs. Mercury sources include atmospheric deposition and industrial inputs, while PCBs are a legacy pollutant with long retention times in sediments. Vegetation Clearing and Erosion The oil and natural gas mining industries are ubiquitous and highly influential on the landscape. Unmitigated, the increased development of oil and gas operations in the area can produce

2.0 Background 2-20 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

extensive run-off from pipeline and road construction. These impacts are already apparent in the Fishing Creek, Middle Island Creek, Fish Creek, Little Kanawha River watersheds. Climate Change Climate change may compound the existing challenges and threats described above. The climate of the Ohio River Island NWR is characterized as strongly seasonal with periodic extreme temperature and/or precipitation events. In 2010, NatureServe developed the Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI) to evaluate species that may be vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The CCVI is a programmed Microsoft Excel Workbook that is designed to work in concert with NatureServe’s Conservation Status Ranks. The CCVI ranks vulnerability based on a total of twenty factors that are distributed between components mentioned above. These factors are scored according to their relative influence on the species’ climate change vulnerability. A 2011 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (CCVA) for West Virginia indicated that species in the northern part of state may experience slightly greater warming than those at the southern margin (Byers and Norris 2011). Species dependent on moist habitats or ephemeral streams and wetlands are likely to experience greater drought stress than those in higher-elevations, but all habitats are likely to face increased drought stress, especially during the summer and early fall. In 2012, the Appalachian LLC initiated a CCVA for the Appalachian region and has currently completed the first phase of this project, which included assembling a panel of experts to provide guidance on species and habitat prioritization, select an approach for the assessment, and identify the appropriate climate change data to utilize in CCVAs. It was recommended that vulnerability analyses on selected species and habitats be performed utilizing NatureServe’s CCVI. To date, West Virginia is the only state within ORINWR to conduct a state-wide Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments based on the CCVI. 2.2.4 Noted trends in Biological Communities The following trends in ORINWR biological communities have been observed by ORINWR staff at the time of this HMP development. These observations are based on input provided by ORINWR biologist, Patty Morrison, and her more than 20 years of experience at ORINWR: • Shift in ecological assemblages due to sustained year-round high water levels for navigation, altered flooding and drying regimes, and the loss of major forest components due to non-native forest pests (e.g., Dutch elm disease, chestnut blight) that together favor silver maple dominated riparian forests. • Shift in grassland/old-field habitat to forestland due to removal of anthropogenic influences, moderation of ecological disturbance, and corresponding progression of natural succession. Existing grasslands at ORINWR consist largely of cool season grasses. Transition into native plant communities is occurring slowly and without managed intervention. • According to Ohio’s update to the 2015 State Wildlife Action Plan (ODNR 2015), the Ohio River itself is considered to be generally in good and stable condition for aquatic habitat. All pools adjacent to Ohio met aquatic life-use designations. Water quality has improved over time, although industrial spills continue to occur. The percentage of pollution tolerant fish has declined over time. Fish and mollusk diversity is still increasing over time. The

2.0 Background 2-21 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

river supports a tremendous diversity of terrestrial and aquatic species despite dams, hydropower facilities, and commercial navigation; however, this species assemblage has changed significantly since the river was modified from its free-flowing state to facilitate commercial navigation.

2.0 Background 2-22 April 2017

Sheepnose mussel collected at ORINWR

3.1 Introduction CHAPTER 3. 3.2 Identification of Refuge Resources RESOURCES OF of Concern CONCERN 3.3 Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health 3.4 Priority Resources of Concern 3.5 Broad Habitat Prioritization 3.6 Conflicting Habitat Management 3.7 Adaptive Management

This page intentionally left blank.

Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

3.0 RESOURCES OF CONCERN

3.1 INTRODUCTION

3.1.1 Defining Resources of Concern Resources of Concern (ROC) are the focal point of an HMP. The HMP policy (620 FW 1) defines ROC as:

All plant and/or animal species, species groups, or communities specifically identified in refuge purpose(s), System mission, or international, national, regional, state, or ecosystem conservation plans or acts. For example, waterfowl and shorebirds are a resource of concern on a refuge whose purpose is to protect "migrating waterfowl and shorebirds.” Federal or State threatened and endangered species on that same refuge are also a resource of concern under terms of the respective endangered species acts. The USFWS is entrusted by Congress to conserve and protect migratory birds, federally listed threatened and endangered species, inter-jurisdictional fish, and certain marine mammals (Federal trust species), which are protected for the benefit of the American people. Each Refuge also has its own specified purpose(s) for which it was created, which guides its management goals and objectives. Within these purposes, Refuges support other elements of biological diversity, such as locally rare plant, invertebrate, and vertebrate species, natural communities, and the ecological processes that contribute to the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health (BIDEH) at the Refuge, ecosystem, and broader scales (601 FW 3). See section 3.3.1 for a definition of BIDEH. 3.1.2 Importance of Defining Resources of Concern to Guide Refuge Activities Identifying ROC allows us to identify Refuge management unit and Refuge-wide scale objectives aimed at maintaining, increasing, and/or improving the habitats required by trust resources and populations identified in the Refuges’ purpose. The ROC process facilitates a targeted approach to identifying priority areas and/or gaps in management that may require additional resources, such as information (data collection and monitoring) or staff and equipment. Species respond to habitat management differently; identifying ROC allows us to focus management activities at the level that yields the greatest benefit to trust resources, complimenting BIDEH and the Refuges’ purpose. The first step of developing a focused habitat management strategy is to define a Refuge’s comprehensive list of ROC in light of the multiple mandates, purposes, policies, and regional/national plans applicable to that management unit (as discussed in Chapter 1).

3.2 IDENTIFICATION OF ORINWR RESOURCES OF CONCERN

National and regional conservation plans relevant to the ORINWR were considered in ROC selection. A comprehensive list of species that occur on ORINWR and are identified by any of the various conservation partners as species of concern are listed in the table in Appendix C. The comprehensive list of potential ROC was then narrowed down by selecting focal or surrogate species, or species most likely to represent a suite of habitat needs for other species, using the

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

process defined in Section 3.4.1. For the purposes of this HMP, ORINWR uses the terms “focal resources” and “focal species” to refer to those acting as representative species or priority ROC. 3.2.1 ORINWR Purposes and Resources of Concern As discussed in Chapter 1, the ORINWR was established in 1990 under the authority of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 to protect, conserve, and restore habitat for wildlife native to the Ohio River floodplain. The core mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is to “administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and where appropriate restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.” The ORINWR vision is to create a linked network of floodplain forests, wetlands, and aquatic habitat that would fulfill the needs of fish, wildlife, and plants that are native to “big river” ecosystems (USFWS 2002). The ORINWR currently consists of 22 islands and 4 mainland tracts scattered along 362 miles of the upper Ohio River. As discussed in Chapter 2, ORINWR habitats are distributed across six primary types: forest, shrub, grassland/old field, palustrine wetlands, riverine, and developed land. Figure 2.1 shows the approximate current distribution of ORINWR habitat types. The ORINWR is important in conserving the "wild" Ohio River within one of the nation's busiest inland waterways. The ORINWR works to protect wildlife and habitats native to the Ohio River and its floodplain, especially in light of more than a century of human disturbance in the region. Migratory birds, bats, and endangered freshwater mussels are among the important wildlife emphasized on the ORINWR. Currently the ORINWR’s habitat management vision is to implement biological policies and an ecosystem management approach to honor the core mission, vision, and unique suite of resources with which it is entrusted. 3.2.2 Refuge System and USFWS Resources of Concern 3.2.2.1 USFWS Trust Resources While the designated purpose is the foremost determinant of a particular Refuge’s management focus, managing trust resources also is a priority for all Service lands. Trust resources relevant to the ORINWR are migratory birds, threatened and endangered species, and inter-jurisdictional fish. For this HMP planning process, the primary sources of information used to identify potential ROC include:

• State and Federally Listed Species, and State Wildlife Action Plans (ODNR 2015; ODNR 2005; WV DNR 2015; WV DNR 2006; KDFWR 2013; Pennsylvania Game Commission 2015) • USFWS FY 2012-FY 2016 Focal Species (USFWS 2012a) • USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2008) • Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan (Stark 2013) • AMJV Conservation Plans (AMJV 2008) • AMBCR Partnership 2005 • PIF Landbird Conservation Plan for the Ohio Hills Area (Rosenberg and Dettmers 2004)

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

• Appalachian Landscape Cooperative, preliminary list of Global Trust Species (no fish or birds yet included) (Appalachian LCC 2013) Migratory Birds A list of all species of migratory birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703– 711) and subject to the regulations on migratory birds is contained in subchapter B of 50 CFR §10.13. The USFWS Division of Migratory Bird Management also maintains lists of priority bird species of concern at national, regional, and ecoregional (known as Bird Conservation Region or BCR) scales (USFWS 2004). Interjurisdictional Fish Some fish species move through the seasons of the year, or during different stages of their life cycle to fulfill their needs. As a consequence, fishes move across political boundaries, including state lines or international boundaries. These interjurisdictional fish requires managers to coordinate among political entities through tribal councils, interstate fishery commissions, or regional management councils. The primary sources of information ORINWR used to identify potential fish species of concern include: • State and Federal Listed Species • State Wildlife Action Plans • Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan Threatened and Endangered Species The Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531–1544, December 28, 1973, as amended 1976- 1982, 1984 and 1988) states in Sec. 8A (a) that:

“The Secretary of the Interior… is designated as the Management Authority and the Scientific Authority for purposes of the Convention and the respective functions of each such Authority shall be carried out through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.” The act also requires all Federal departments and agencies to conserve threatened and endangered species and to utilize their authorities to further the purposes of this Act. Federal threatened or endangered species were identified for inclusion in this HMP by reviewing the Federal threatened and endangered species list and relevant recovery plans for listed species (see http://ecos.fws.gov/ecos/indexPublic.do; last accessed June 3, 2016).

3.3 BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY, DIVERSITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

3.3.1 Defining Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 states that, in administering the System, the Service shall “ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the System are maintained.” The Service’s policy discusses the role of biological diversity, integrity, and environmental health (BIDEH). It also provides managers with an evaluation process to analyze their Refuge and recommend the best management direction to prevent further degradation of environmental conditions; and where appropriate and in concert with Refuge purposes and System mission, restore lost or severely degraded components (601 FW 3).

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

The Service defines BIDEH as:

• Biological Diversity - The variety of life and its processes, including the variety of living organisms, the genetic differences between them, and the communities and ecosystems in which they occur. • Biological Integrity - Biotic composition, structure, and functioning at genetic, organism, and community levels comparable with historic conditions, including the natural biological processes that shape genomes, organisms, and communities. • Environmental Health - Composition, structure, and functioning of soil, water, air, and other abiotic features comparable with historic conditions, including the natural abiotic processes that shape the environment. 3.3.2 Identifying BIDEH within ORINWR The Service will manage for focal species with habitat needs that are met along a continuum of vegetation structure and hydrologic regimes within habitat types present at ORINWR. To assess current and future potential conservation status, the Service has reviewed historic information regarding habitats, management changes, and species use within ORINWR-authorized boundaries, as well as relevant literature describing requirements of selected focal species and ecosystem processes that regulate natural communities. The resources used to describe ORINWR baseline environmental, abiotic, and biotic conditions include: • Reports and associated unpublished ORINWR data on site history and capabilities • ORINWR maps and aerial imagery of existing and historical vegetation types, including remote sensing and field-verified inventory of all vegetative community associations across ORINWR (Cardno 2014; Appendix A) • NVCS natural community descriptions (Natureserve 2013) • Status and trend information for potential species of concern as documented in regional and local assessments and reports or from ORINWR staff observations Based on a review of the existing and historical data listed above, a list of habitat types that contain elements of BIDEH was developed to evaluate processes that influence the ecological and biological integrity of habitat types within ORINWR (see Table 3-1; Appendix A; Cardno 2014).

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) Stands occur on the banks of small to large rivers where they are a The black willow forest type is found widely but sporadically across the component of point bar eastern United States. The vegetation is a closed-canopy forest succession. It may also be dominated by Salix nigra. Associates may include Populus deltoides, present in the inflows of Planera aquatica, Betula nigra, Platanus occidentalis, Celtis laevigata, manmade lakes where Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Carya illinoinensis, Diospyros virginiana, similar sand bars may Black Willow Altered hydrology Quercus nigra, Cornus drummondii, Ulmus americana, Acer rubrum, develop over time and Floodplain and invasive species G4 Riparian Forest Acer negundo, and Acer saccharinum. Shrubs and herbaceous plants where the seasonal Forest introductions. (CEGL002103) are absent to fairly dense. They include Ampelopsis arborea, Mikania draining patterns of the scandens, Toxicodendron radicans, Polygonum spp., Erechtites lake may mimic similar hieraciifolia, Boehmeria cylindrica, Commelina virginica, Phytolacca natural processes. americana, and Asplenium platyneuron. In Kentucky, stands may Surface water is present contain Dichanthelium commutatum. for brief periods during the growing season, but the water table usually lies well below soil surface.

2 To interpret classification codes, For NVCS: NVCS Codes consists of community element codes (also referred to as ELCODEs) and always began with C for communities, followed by an E for Element. The next two bytes were an abbreviation that indicated either the source of the classification used (e.g., MN for Minnesota), or if the Element was global, whether it was a global community (CEGL), a global community Complex (CECX), or a global community Ecological System (CEES). The code always ended with sequentially generated numeric identifiers assigned by the NVCS data manager. For Cowardin codes, see: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Documents/Classification-of-Wetlands-and-Deepwater-Habitats-of-the-United- States-2013.pdf 3 Conservation status ranks are based on a one to five scale, ranging from critically imperiled (G1) to demonstrably secure (G5). Status is assessed and documented at three distinct geographic scales-global (G), national (N), and state/province (S). For more details, see: http://explorer.natureserve.org/granks.htm

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic)

Forests are dominated by Acer negundo. Other characteristic species Stands occur on large include Platanus occidentalis, Celtis laevigata, Acer rubrum, rivers in the active Liriodendron tulipifera, Robinia pseudoacacia, Liquidambar styraciflua, floodplain and on Acer saccharinum, Ulmus alata, Ulmus rubra, Carya cordiformis, sandbars, and may form Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Juglans nigra, Carpinus caroliniana, Morus farther from the riverfront Box-elder rubra, and Populus deltoides. The shrub and herb layers range from following disturbance. Altered hydrology Floodplain sparse to relatively lush, and the vine component often is heavy. Occurrences are mostly and various invasive GNA Lindera benzoin may be dominant in the shrub layer. The herb layer on higher floodplain Forest consists of a mixture of weedy exotics and native floodplain species, Lonicera species. (CEGL005033) terraces with less rocky including Ageratina altissima, Alliaria petiolata, Boehmeria cylindrica, soils which were used for Carex grayi, Cryptotaenia canadensis, Glechoma hederacea, agriculture or habitation. Lysimachia nummularia, Mertensia virginica, Polygonum virginianum, They are typically Prunella vulgaris, Urtica dioica ssp. dioica, and Verbesina alternifolia. temporarily flooded in the spring. Flooding is seasonal A wide range of canopy species are present, both common bottomland and/or occasional and species (e.g., Ulmus americana, Acer rubrum, Acer negundo, Fraxinus shallow, but never pennsylvanica, Quercus spp., and Celtis laevigata) and mesophytic prolonged. This species from nearby uplands and terraces (e.g., Juglans nigra, Prunus community experiences serotina, and Fraxinus americana). Vines that may reach into the seasonal inundation or canopy include Toxicodendron radicans and Vitis aestivalis var. River Birch - groundwater saturation for bicolor. A variety of wetland species may be found on more poorly approximately 12.5-25% Exotic herbs Sycamore drained sites. Stands are subjected to frequent, fast, short-duration of the year, usually during including Lysimachia Small River flooding, which contributes to a typically thin understory. Native spring and early summer nummularia, Alliaria species in the shrub layer include Carpinus caroliniana ssp. virginiana, with a frequency of 51- G5 Floodplain petiolata, and Urtica Lindera benzoin, Alnus serrulata, and Cornus amomum; the exotic 100%. These soils are Forest dioica ssp. dioica. Rosa multiflora may be prevalent at some sites. Commonly deep, nearly level, well- (CEGL002086) encountered herbaceous species include Saururus cernuus, drained, and moderately Amphicarpaea bracteata, Arisaema dracontium, Boehmeria cylindrica, well-drained soils on Carex amphibola, Glyceria striata, Impatiens capensis, Leersia bottomlands along virginica, Onoclea sensibilis, Symphyotrichum ontarionis (= Aster streams throughout ontarionis), Pilea pumila, Polygonum virginianum, Verbesina southern Illinois with low alternifolia, and Verbesina occidentalis. organic matter content, moderate permeability,

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) and moderate to high available water capacity.

The canopy cover is more-or-less closed and dominated by Acer saccharinum, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Ulmus americana, and Populus Community occurs on deltoides. Associated species may include Ulmus rubra, Acer terraces of medium to negundo, Salix nigra, Celtis occidentalis, and Carya cordiformis. More larger rivers. Soils may be southward, Platanus occidentalis and Betula nigra may occur. The well-drained and sandy, shrub and sapling layer is often open (<25% cover). Species that may more loamy on be present include Sambucus canadensis, Rubus occidentalis, or Altered hydrology infrequently flooded Lindera benzoin. Woody and herbaceous vines can be prominent, and exotic species bottomlands and levees, including among the woody vines Parthenocissus quinquefolia, including Lysimachia Silver Maple - or deep silts on stabilized Toxicodendron radicans, and Vitis riparia. Herbaceous vine species spp., Microstegium sites of terraces along Elm Forest include Apios americana, Amphicarpaea bracteata, and Echinocystis vimineum, G4 larger rivers.Favored by (CEGL002586) lobata. Grasses, forbs, and ferns dominate the ground layer, including Glechoma deposition of deep sandy various combinations of Symphyotrichum lateriflorum (= Aster hederacea, and sediments by low-energy lateriflorus), Boehmeria cylindrica, Chasmanthium latifolium, others. floodwaters. Community Cryptotaenia canadensis, Erythronium americanum, Solidago may form small linear gigantea, Cinna arundinacea, Leersia virginica, Elymus virginicus, patches among other Helianthus sp., Impatiens capensis, Impatiens pallida, Laportea floodplain associations or canadensis, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Menispermum canadense, be locally extensive. Onoclea sensibilis, Pilea pumila, Polygonum virginianum, Rudbeckia laciniata, Verbesina alternifolia, Urtica dioica, and others.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) Stands are dominated by Platanus occidentalis, with a mixture of other Sycamore - species, including Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum, Fraxinus americana, Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Juglans nigra, Ulmus americana, This association occurs Silver Maple Altered hydrology and Ulmus rubra. Shrubs include Asimina triloba and Lindera benzoin. along riverfronts in Calcareous and threatened by Vines may be abundant, including Parthenocissus quinquefolia and calcareous areas, forestry and G4 Floodplain Toxicodendron radicans. Herbaceous species include Arisaema including forests along agriculture. Forest triphyllum, Asarum canadense, Boehmeria cylindrica, Elymus small streams. (CEGL007334) virginicus, Pilea pumila, Polygonum virginianum, and others.

This system is best distinguished from others in its range by the This system consists of mesophytic hardwood or hemlock-hardwood combination of sheltered Central forests of sheltered topographic positions in the Southern Blue Ridge topography, low elevation, Appalachian and mesophytic flora with Upland and central Appalachian Mountains. Characteristic species in the Logging and shade- Rich Cove canopy include Aesculus flava, Acer saccharum, Fraxinus americana, high species richness. It is tolerant exotic G4 Forest presently defined as not Forest Tilia americana, Liriodendron tulipifera, Halesia tetraptera, Tsuga weeds. canadensis, Fagus grandifolia, Magnolia acuminata, and Magnolia including rich, mesophytic (CEGL006237) fraseri. "cove" forests of the Cumberland Plateau and Interior Low Plateau.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) This association is a closed-canopy (or occasionally somewhat open- canopy) deciduous forest dominated by species of Quercus, often with Carya spp., and characteristically with an abundance of Acer These forests occur near saccharum in the canopy and/or shrub layers. Quercus prinus is the the tops of calcareous most typical canopy dominant; other dominants can include Quercus ridges and knobs with rubra, Acer saccharum, Quercus alba, Quercus velutina, Fraxinus northerly aspects that americana, Carya glabra, Carya alba, and Carya ovata. Subcanopy range from 250 to 1000 m Chestnut Oak - species include Carya ovata, Carya glabra, Quercus rubra, Quercus (800-3250 feet) elevation, Shagbark muehlenbergii, Acer saccharum, Aesculus flava, Tilia americana, Acer on very well-drained, Hickory - Sugar rubrum, and Juniperus virginiana. The subcanopy may be dominated gravelly, sandy soils and Fire suppression. G4 by Acer saccharum in some examples. Vines, which may occur in the Maple Forest exposed topographical understory or reach into the canopy, include Aristolochia macrophylla, positions. This is a late- (CEGL007268) Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Toxicodendron radicans, and Vitis successional forest type aestivalis var. bicolor. Common tall shrubs or short trees include with minimal Amelanchier arborea var. arborea, Common herbs include Actaea anthropogenic disturbance racemosa, Ageratina altissima, Arisaema triphyllum, Asplenium because of steepness and platyneuron, Brachyelytrum erectum, Bromus pubescens, Carex general inaccessibility. albursina, Carex cumberlandensis, and Carex digitalis.

Tall shrubs (1.5-3 m in height) dominate the vegetation, usually These shrublands occur forming at least 50% cover and often creating a dense thicket. along large streams and Bryophytes are usually sparse but may be locally abundant in some rivers in New England, settings. Alnus incana is a constant and usually dominant shrub. northern New York and Cornus sericea or Cornus amomum, along with Salix spp., are western Pennsylvania. frequent associates and may dominate in some areas. Viburnum They are found on river- nudum var. cassinoides is occasional but not abundant. Acer rubrum, margin alluvial deposits of Alluvial Alder Ice-scour on river Prunus serotina, Ulmus americana, and/or Acer saccharinum may be moderate-energy reaches, reaches and altered Shrubland Thicket present as sparse individuals; in more southerly examples of this type, where the flooding regime G4 hydrology. (CEGL006062) Acer negundo and Salix nigra may occur. Spiraea alba is usually prevents forests from present and may be abundant as a lower shrub. Clematis virginiana is developing. The setting a typical vine, often clambering in tangles on the shrubs. Common can range from flats to herbs include Doellingeria umbellata (= Aster umbellatus), moderately steep banks; Calamagrostis canadensis, Boehmeria cylindrica, Elymus riparius, soils are usually sandy or Elymus virginicus, Eupatorium maculatum, Iris versicolor, Lycopus silty. Most are temporarily uniflorus, Lysimachia ciliata, Lysimachia terrestris, Osmunda flooded, and the soils may

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) claytoniana, Matteuccia struthiopteris, Muhlenbergia glomerata, not remain saturated Onoclea sensibilis, and Thalictrum pubescens. through the entire growing season.

Stands are found in both minerotrophic basin Stands are dominated by Phalaris arundinacea, a 0.5- to 2-m tall wetlands as well as perennial grass that is native to the United States and Canada, but rivershores. The dominant which has also been introduced from European strains. It tends to species has been widely Steeplebush - occur in monocultures or associated with Calamagrostis canadensis used as a forage and hay Exotic species such or, less commonly, with a mixture of forbs equaling the graminoid crop, especially in Blackberry as Glechoma cover. Associates in the glaciated Northeast include Viburnum nudum, marshes and floodplains, species / Reed hederacea, Coronilla Salix spp., Alnus incana or Alnus serrulata, Viburnum dentatum, Poa and it is used for wildlife varia, Rosa Canarygrass palustris, Mentha arvensis, Leersia virginica, Lythrum salicaria, and food and for shoreline and GNA multiflora, and Shrubland Agrostis gigantea. In Central Appalachian bottomland old fields, ditch stabilization. Elaeagnus (CEGL006571) characteristic associates include Verbesina alternifolia (which may be Shoreline habitats can be temporarily or seasonally umbellata. [CEGL006044] codominant), Solidago rugosa, Boehmeria cylindrica, and Euthamia graminifolia Midwest associates include species characteristic of wet flooded in spring. Phalaris meadows. arundinacea may respond well to summer drawdowns.

In stands Schizachyrium scoparium is codominant along with a variable mixture of the nominal Andropogon species. In examples from the Eastern Highland Rim of Coffee County, Tennessee (Arnold Air Force Base), other dominant grasses may include Dichanthelium This association may aciculare (= Dichanthelium angustifolium), Gymnopogon brevifolius, occur on annually mowed Little Bluestem and Dichanthelium dichotomum var. dichotomum (= Dichanthelium Lack of fire, powerline rights-of-way, - Bluestem dichotomum var. ramulosum). Other common species may include changing agricultural Grasslands / mowed successional or Eurybia hemispherica (= Aster paludosus ssp. hemisphericus), patterns, and land G3 Old Field Grassland abandoned agricultural Symphyotrichum dumosum (= Aster dumosus), Sericocarpus linifolius conversion. (CEGL007707) fields, roadsides, (= Aster solidagineus), Coreopsis major, Eupatorium hyssopifolium, pastures, etc. Eupatorium rotundifolium, Helianthus angustifolius, Liatris microcephala, Liatris spicata, Packera anonyma (= Senecio anonymus), Solidago juncea, Solidago odora, Chamaecrista fasciculata, Chamaecrista nictitans, Lespedeza capitata, Stylosanthes

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-10 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) biflora, Lobelia puberula, Diodia teres, Potentilla simplex, Aristida longispica, Calamagrostis coarctata, Dichanthelium dichotomum, Sorghastrum nutans, Pteridium aquilinum, and Smilax glauca.

Vegetation cover ranges from sparse or somewhat sparse (5 to 20% vascular cover) to moderately dense (20 to 50% vascular cover) along the Potomac River and Bull Run. Saplings and stunted trees of Fraxinus americana, Ostrya virginiana, Tsuga canadensis, Ulmus This association is rubra, Ulmus americana, Acer saccharum, Acer nigrum, Tilia currently known from cliff- americana, Juniperus virginiana var. virginiana, Carpinus caroliniana, faces weathered from Quercus rubra, and Quercus prinus may occur on the cliff-faces. siltstone, shale, Piedmont / calcareous sandstone, Hydrangea arborescens is a characteristic and sometimes abundant Exotic weeds, and metabasalt. Sites Central shrub, while Toxicodendron radicans and Parthenocissus quinquefolia including Stellaria subtend rivers and large Appalachian are constant vines. Less constant shrubs include Physocarpus media, Lonicera streams, where opulifolius, Ptelea trifoliata, Hamamelis virginiana, and Viburnum japonica, Alliaria Riverbank Tall progressive stream GNR acerifolium. Characteristic herbaceous species include Polypodium petiolata, and Herbaceous incision has formed virginianum (locally abundant), Sedum ternatum (locally abundant), Microstegium escarpments of exposed Vegetation Symphyotrichum cordifolium (= Aster cordifolius), Dryopteris vimineum. (CEGL006479) marginalis, Pilea pumila, Asplenium trichomanes, Woodsia obtusa ssp. bedrock. All of the obtusa, Aquilegia canadensis, Saxifraga virginiensis, Eurybia documented cliffs have divaricata (= Aster divaricatus), Asplenium rhizophyllum, Ageratina northerly aspects and are altissima, Carex communis, Carex platyphylla, Heuchera americana, partly to heavily shaded Arabis laevigata var. laevigata, Polymnia canadensis, Polystichum by overhanging trees. acrostichoides, and Solidago caesia.

This is a seasonally (to temporarily) flooded This type is currently broadly and literally defined, based on marsh vegetation type; it dominance by Juncus effusus. In various parts of its broad range as Common Rush may occur in natural or Altered hydrology. currently defined, associated species may include Andropogon Palustrine artificial ponds, including Invasive species Marsh glomeratus, Carex spp., Cyperus spp., other Juncus spp., Typha G5 Wetland beaver-enhanced ponds, introductions. (CEGL004112) latifolia, Scirpus cyperinus, Triadenum walteri, Apios americana, and artificial waterways (wet Galium aparine. ditches), and disturbed wet fields.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-11 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic)

This community is dominated or characterized by Scirpus cyperinus. Woolgrass Altered hydrology. Composition is variable. Associates include Glyceria spp., Thelypteris These are seasonally Invasive species Marsh palustris, as well as other species of Scirpus, including Scirpus flooded marshes. GNR introductions. (CEGL006349) microcarpus (= Scirpus rubrotinctus) and Scirpus atrovirens.

Aquatic habitat dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water for most of the growing season in most years. Water regimes include irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, semipermanently flooded, and seasonally flooded depending on location within the channel and River alteration, hard River morphology and along the river. armoring of the bed hydraulics that influence Riverine and banks, scour and depositional Vegetation can occur in sheltered areas where there is little water degraded water GNR Aquatic Bed features within the river movement (Wetzel 1975): however, they also occur in the flowing quality, invasive channel. water of the Riverine System, where they may be streamlined or Hydrilla. flattened in response to high water velocities. Typical inland genera include pondweeds, ditch grasses (Ruppia), wild celery, and waterweed (Elodea). Algal growth may also occur in areas.

Riverine Submerged riverine areas with at least 25% cover of particles smaller than stones, and a vegetative cover less than 30%. Water regimes are River alteration, hard River morphology and restricted to permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, and armoring of the bed Riverine hydraulics that influence semipermanently flooded. Unconsolidated bottom areas lack large and banks, scour and depositional Unconsolidated stable surfaces for plant and animal attachment and may be degraded water GNR features within the river Bottom dominated by a range of material depending on river velocities and quality, and channel. energy: cobble, gravel, sand, or mud. sedimentation.

Shore areas are characterized by three features: (1) unconsolidated River morphology and River alteration, hard Riverine substrates with less than 75% areal cover of stones, boulders, or hydraulics that influence armoring of the bed Unconsolidated bedrock; (2) less than 30% areal cover of vegetation other than scour and depositional and banks, GNR Shore pioneering plants; and (3) one of the following water regimes: features within the river degraded water irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, irregularly flooded, seasonally channel. quality, wave wash.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-12 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-1 Summary of Habitats that Represent Existing BIDEH at ORINWR

Natural Broad Community Habitat Type Classification (Communities Limiting Global NVCS2 Populations and Habitat Attributes Natural Processes 3 Representing Factors/Threats Rank (Terrestrial) or Existing Cowardin BIDEH) (Aquatic) flooded, temporarily flooded, intermittently flooded, saturated, or artificially flooded. Intermittent channels of the Riverine System also meet this definition and classification.

This association occurs on the shoals or bars of rocky streams and riverbeds, on Justicia americana is the dominant (and sometimes the only) species, bedrock, boulders, cobble, forming lawnlike stands in shallow reaches of rivers. Cover by Justicia gravel, and sands. They americana ranges from 40 to 85%. Saururus cernuus is often present are subject to frequent and may be codominant. Other herbaceous species may be present high-energy floods, and River channeling Water-willow are entirely submerged by Rocky Bar and but rarely achieve more than 2% cover; they include Bidens spp., and exotics such as Cyperus spp., Diodia teres, Elodea sp., Eleocharis spp., Equisetum most flood events. During Lythrum salicaria G4 Shore arvense, Gratiola brevifolia, Leersia oryzoides, Leersia virginica, extreme low water and Lysimachia (CEGL004286) Lemna minor, Orontium aquaticum, Physostegia virginiana, periods, the substrate can vulgaris. Podostemum ceratophyllum, Polygonum caespitosum var. longisetum, be exposed, showing a Scirpus spp., Schoenoplectus pungens, Schoenoplectus varied mixture of sand, tabernaemontani, and Xyris difformis var. difformis. gravel and cobbles, often with deposits of silt and muck.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-13 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

3.3.3 Maintaining and Restoring BIDEH Human settlement has influenced species and habitats in the vicinity of ORINWR and the Ohio River floodplain for thousands of years. However, extensive anthropogenic changes beginning in the mid-19th century significantly reduced the acreage of forest, wetland, and riverine habitat, and quickly altered many existing processes that reduced BIDEH along the Ohio River. In addition to the changes on the River itself, the entire watershed has been modified over time through land conversion, drainage, development, and extensive management of flows (e.g., tributary reservoirs and dams) along the Ohio River and its tributaries. Improvement came with the U.S. Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and complementary state, regional, and local programs. Chapter 2 provides details of historic habitat alteration within ORINWR. These modifications have altered the naturally occurring riverine hydrology that historically sustained ORINWR riverine and floodplain habitats area (Fleming 2015). Existing ORINWR habitat requires proactive management to maintain and enhance BIDEH and meet its purposes. To comply with BIDEH policy (610 FW 3) and encourage the effective conservation of BIDEH, this HMP has amended the original objectives from the ORINWR CCP (USFWS 2002) to add specificity and account for BIDEH in development of associated management strategies, outlined in Chapter 4. Maintaining existing BIDEH and sustainably managing it over the life of this HMP supports the ORINWR purpose and habitat needs of focal resources and other benefitting species.

3.4 PRIORITY RESOURCES OF CONCERN

3.4.1 Priority Resources of Concern Selection The potential ROC table (Appendix C) lists species with a broad array of habitat needs that occur within the ORINWR. This initial list of 6 habitats, 107 species, and 8 “species groupings” was developed in cooperation with an Interagency Habitat Planning Team, comprised of ORINWR staff and representatives of adjacent states and conservation organizations (West Virginia Division of Natural Resources [WVDNR], PAFBC, WPC, ORBFHP). Since there is so little acreage in KY, KYDFWR deferred to the other two states’ input. The Interagency Habitat Planning Team and ORINWR staff then refined and reduced this list to identify focal species representing the spectrum of habitat needs for species at ORINWR. Focal species were selected using the Service’s Identifying Refuge Resources of Concern Handbook (the Handbook) (Paveglio and Taylor 2010), as well as aspects of SHC, which is an iterative process developed by the Service to support strategic decisions on habitat conservation for species on landscape-level scales (USFWS 2008). The selection process outlined within the Handbook and SHC guidance uses a focal resource concept (i.e., surrogate species approaches). The Handbook guides the selection of Refuge priority focal species by considering which resources best address relevance to legal mandates, management significance, and ecological significance. The Team also used a Region 3 tool called ROCSTAR (Resources of Concern Selection Tool for America’s Refuges) to help identify and quantify the relevance of potential focal species. The ROCSTAR tool was developed by Cardno to assist NWRs, waterfowl production areas, wetland management districts, and other conservation lands in identifying focal resources for management and monitoring. This tool is intended to assist managers and planners in completing the selection process outlined within the Handbook. The ROCSTAR tool allows the

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-14 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

planning team to review the applicable filters required when considering Refuge priority focal species selection. It also provides a decision support framework that allows users to compare various resources and their ability to address the selection considerations outlined in the Handbook (Paveglio and Taylor 2010), and also incorporates aspects of the surrogate species concept as described in Caro (2010) and USFWS (2012b). The tool results in a series of resource scorings sorted by habitat type. Based on the scoring results, the planning team can then make an informed decision on the number and type of ORINWR priority focal species to select for each habitat type managed. 3.4.1.1 Relevance to Legal Mandates Candidate focal resources were evaluated for their ability to be managed to fulfill the ORINWR purpose and associated Service policies and mandates. Specifically:

• Contribution to ORINWR purpose – Achieving ORINWR purposes and managing for trust resources as well as BIDEH can be addressed through habitat requirements of focal species, i.e., species that may represent guilds that are associated with important attributes or conditions within habitat types. The use of focal species is particularly valuable in addressing Service trust resources, such as migratory birds. By selecting focal species, we can document the ORINWR-specific contribution to migratory bird conservation. • Contribution to Refuge System – Conservation of ORINWR focal species within has an important role in supporting the long-term mission of the NWRS. By selecting focal species that can be used as a measure of management success, and developing an inventory and monitoring program around these species, we can more efficiently evaluate and communicate management successes and challenges with others. Management Significance Candidate focal resources were evaluated for their management significance to ORINWR. A species was considered significant to ORINWR management if it had the following characteristics: 1) Species have a direct application to key management decisions or effectiveness of past management activities, 2) Species rely on habitat management to provide suitable or improved conditions, 3) Management and protection of the species or its habitat is recognized as important (i.e., presence in regional conservation plans and lists noted previously) by managers, researchers, policy makers, and the public. Evaluating management significance is important because data on the species and its habitats can help inform management decisions and progress toward ORINWR goals. Specifically, • Habitat requirements of focal species – Habitat suitability and availability may limit the capability of ORINWR to support or manage for a focal species of concern. The following species-specific factors were evaluated:

o Historic habitat use and abundance on ORINWR o Connectedness and species utilization of habitat types

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-15 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

o Environmental conditions including soils, hydrology, disturbance patterns, contaminants, predation, and invasive species o Specific life history needs, such as habitat needs for breeding, migrating, and overwintering stages of avian species. • Habitat management for selected focal species – Observations and institutional knowledge of ORINWR personnel were used to determine the feasibility for ORINWR to support a particular species throughout specific seasons (e.g., breeding, migration, overwintering). • Recognized need for management and protection of the focal species – Chapter 1 highlighted numerous national, regional, and state conservation plans used to identify conservation priorities for ORINWR. Some species that ranked high on conservation plans, but were only incidental or did not occur on ORINWR, consequently were not included in the focal species selection, as it was presumed that they could not be effectively managed for substantial benefit. • Ability to inform inventory and monitoring – Candidate focal species are to be evaluated for their potential contribution to the development of the ORINWR inventory and monitoring program and to help determine that the management objectives have been met. Focal species ideally should be present in detectable numbers, directly responsive to management actions, and relatively easy to monitor. Ecological Significance Candidate focal resources were evaluated through a series of planning team meetings, literature reviews, and an interagency partner review for their ecological significance to ORINWR. Ecological significance was defined as a species with the following characteristics: 1) A strong, defensible link to overall ecological function of the landscape or strongly associated with a critical resource of ORINWR, 2) Sensitive to larger landscape or habitat changes so that it can act as an indicator of potential change, and 3) Status of the species or its habitat is representative of other focal species, ecological processes, or biological organizations. Evaluating the ecological significance of candidate focal species helps ensure that management and monitoring activities associated with focal species and their habitats contribute to ORINWR BIDEH. Priority resources can be used as an indicator of BIDEH based on their presence, absence, abundance, or relative well-being in a given habitat niche. In doing so, a focal species can serve as a marker of the overall health of its required habitat type. The planning team refined the list of potential ROC during the development of the HMP, based on continued review of these criteria. The planning team selected 17 ORINWR priority focal species (Table 3-2).

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-16 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-2 Habitat Requirements for ORINWR Priority Resources of Concern

Key Habitat Relationships Priority ORINWR Focal Species Habitat Composition Habitat Structure Patch Size Special Considerations Types Habitat

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus Large mature coniferous or Mature and old-growth forest with 1–2 km2 is a Top avian predator, immature leucocephalus deciduous trees, particularly in relatively open canopy; close (<2 km) to typical eagles prefer undisturbed (breeding and floodplain forest or upland water with suitable foraging; needs territory size areas, indicator for wintering) forest within 2 km of water. some habitat discontinuity or edge. bioaccumulation of contaminants. Generally requires Canopy tree basal area 110- Mid-story or sub-canopy of mature patches 120 square feet per acre. Acadian Flycatcher Oak-gum-cypress and elm-ash- forest. Moist deciduous forests with a greater than (Wood et al. 2013). Major Empidonax virescens cottonwood are optimal, utilize moderate understory, generally near a 95 acres in threats are habitat (breeding) a variety of hardwoods. stream. Requires a high dense canopy size loss/fragmentation and cowbird and an open understory. Scarce or (Anderson parasitism. absent in small forest tracts. and Robbins 1981). Structurally mature hardwood Require large tracts of forest in a mesic or wetter protected forest. Canopy tree Cerulean Warbler situation, with a closed canopy. Nests in large tracts of bottomland basal area 40-90 square feet Setophaga cerulea Size of trees more important forests in larger, more mature trees (> per acre. (Wood et al. 2013). 25 to 60 acres (breeding and than species. Oak, hickories, 16 inches). Canopy has both vertical Gaps across water not migration) elm, sycamore, black cherry, and horizontal heterogeneity. significant. grapevines. Many populations already Riparian Forest Riparian restricted to public lands. Tree Dwelling Bats [e.g., Indiana bat Deciduous woodlands with (Myotis sodalis), little some dead but standing trees, Trees with suitable habitat in bark, >16 ha Some species are threatened brown bat (Myotis and abundant leaf cover; elm, cavities, crevices, or dense leaf packs. fragments by white-nose syndrome. lucifugus), tricolored oak, beech, hickory, maple, Variable understory and often near (northern Some winter in caves while bat (Pipistrellus ash, sassafras, birch, water or wetlands. Feed extensively long-eared other species migrate south to subflavus), and red sycamore, locust, cottonwood, over water. bat) winter in trees. bat (Lasiurus borealis pine, and other hardwoods. )] (summer and migration) Found on leaf litter, moss, and Striped whitelip land saturated soil while using logs, snail rocks, moss hummocks, and Wetlands, river floodplains, lowland Unique to forested Ohio River N/A Webbhelix hillocks for protection and forest, wet meadows, and marshes islands. multilineata cover.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-17 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-2 Habitat Requirements for ORINWR Priority Resources of Concern

Key Habitat Relationships Priority ORINWR Focal Species Habitat Composition Habitat Structure Patch Size Special Considerations Types Habitat

Open waters of large rivers and Deep water with low current velocity; Paddlefish river lakes, oxbow lakes, and spawns over gravel bars in temporarily N/A Polyodon spathula backwaters. flooded tributaries of large rivers. Large rivers of low or moderate Shovelnose sturgeon Deep channels and gradient, often over sand mixed with Scaphirhynchus embayments of large turbid N/A gravel or mud in areas with strong

platorynchus rivers. current. Usually occurs in channels and flowing Habitat includes the largest pools with moderate current (1.0-2.6 Blue sucker rivers and lower parts of major meters/sec). Also in some N/A Cycleptus elongatus tributaries. impoundments. Migrate upstream to spawn on riffles.

Riverine dependent mussels

Unconsolidated Bottom Unconsolidated Found in clean swept sand, Many found in swift flowing currents,

[e.g., sheepnose and Water Open Riverine N/A gravel, and cobbles in rivers. others found in slow flowing water. mussel Plethobasus cyphyus]

Marshes, ponds, floodplains, Waterways and wetlands with a variety Migrating and flooded basins, flooded of depths and cover types, depending Variable wintering waterfowl agricultural fields, lakes, on species. Submerged aquatic rivers/streams. vegetation is near shore areas. Nests are in steep sand, dirt, or gravel banks, in burrows dug Habitat includes open and partly open Bank Swallow near the top of the bank, along situations, frequently near flowing water. Artificial habitat/habitat N/A

Riparia riparia the edge of inland water, or May used abandoned cavities of bank restoration. along the coast, or in gravel swallows or belted kingfishers.

anks pits, road embankments. Usually concentrated on Cobblestone tiger upstream side in sparsely Habitat is almost always cobblestone Riverb beetle vegetated or unvegetated islands in rivers, rarely cobblestone N/A Cicindela patches. Associated plants are shore areas. Larvae live in burrows in marginipennis and Shorelines Riverine Salix spp. and Amorpha small patches of sand. fruticosa.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-18 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-2 Habitat Requirements for ORINWR Priority Resources of Concern

Key Habitat Relationships Priority ORINWR Focal Species Habitat Composition Habitat Structure Patch Size Special Considerations Types Habitat A variety of emergent and American Black Duck Shallow, relatively permanent wetlands shrub-scrub wetland vegetation

Anas rubripes with emergent vegetation with some Variable, including bluejoint grass, (wintering and woody vegetation nearby. Nest sites 0.16–3.8 ha sedges, water lily, and migration) often near edges or breaks in cover. pondweed. Resident Native Wetlands

Known to be indicative of Anuran Community ecotoxicology and pollution [represented by Flooded areas or pools in riparian areas, Seasonal and semi-permanent impacts. Some species such northern leopard frog range on land through most types of wetland hydrology required for N/A as wood frog require (Rana pipiens) and riparian herbaceous wetland and edge

Floodplain successful breeding landscape connectivity wood frog (Rana of forested habitat. between both wetland and sylvaticus)] connected upland habitat.

Humid deciduous forest, dense

second growth, swamps. Territory size Prefers rich, moist deciduous forests; Kentucky Warbler Occurs in stands of various ~ 1 ha, bottomland hardwoods and woods near Geothlypis formosa ages but is most common in recommended streams are ideal as long as they have a (breeding) medium-aged forests. Seldom patch size dense hardwood understory. found in conifers. >500 ha

Mature deciduous and mixed Forest loss and fragmentation forests, wide variety of tree and Trees >16 m in height, high variety of in breeding and wintering Wood Thrush shrub species. deciduous tree species, moderate >100 ha (PIF); areas are factors in the Hylocichla mustelina subcanopy and shrub density, shade, Min = 2.1ha species’ decline. Vulnerable to

(breeding) Forest Upland Temperate fairly open forest floor, moist soil, and Best = 15ha nest parasitism by brown- decaying leaf litter. headed cowbirds.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-19 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

3.4.2 ORINWR Focal Species and Relation to ORINWR BIDEH Bald eagle inhabits areas along large open waters with abundant fish and surrounding mature forest. At ORINWR, this species is considered to be an ecological indicator of an intact floodplain forest system containing mature canopy and super-canopy trees, and healthy aquatic ecosystem to support its primary foods (fish, waterfowl). It is a focal resource for other species requiring mature forest in close proximity to water for breeding and/or migratory stopover. Acadian flycatcher inhabits intact, moist deciduous forests with a moderate understory, generally near a river or stream. Acadian flycatchers require large patches (generally 95 acres or more) with a high dense canopy and open understory and are therefore considered a focal resource for other migratory and breeding birds dependent on intact forests and sub-canopy nesting. Cerulean warbler are a focal resource and ecological indicator for those migratory birds dependent on structurally mature mesic or wet hardwood forest with a closed canopy. Size of trees more important than species composition for breeding habitat requirements. Therefore, cerulean warblers act as a focal resource for other super canopy dwelling riparian forest birds that also use ORINWR mature forests for migratory stopover and breeding. Tree-dwelling bats refers to Indiana bat, little brown bat, Image. Output of the North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative’s tricolored bat, and red bat as (NALCC) Landscape Capability Model for Cerulean Warbler, Version 2.0, focal species for other forest- Northeast displaying moderate habitat suitability at Grape Island. Refuge dwelling bat species that islands provide suitable habitat, but are modeled here as low to moderate quality due to patch/island size. ORINWR forests provide suitable maternal roosting conditions for, as well as an ecological indicator of mature forest structure. With the onset of white- nose syndrome, many bat species are being considered conservation priorities and being listed on Federal or State threatened or endangered species lists. These bats rely on trees with suitable maternal roosting habitat in bark or cavities of various forest species such as dead but standing trees including elm, oak, beech, hickory, maple, ash, sassafras, birch, sycamore, locust, cottonwood, pine, and other hardwoods. Many species also roost among the leaves. Striped whitelip land snail is a unique invertebrate in the forested island habitats of the Ohio River, where it can be quite common. As a species unique to ORINWR and region, it is considered an inherent priority itself, but also represents other invertebrates reliant on undisturbed riverine forest habitats with abundant downed trees, logs, and leaf litter, such as other land snails.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-20 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Paddlefish are found in open waters of large rivers and river lakes, oxbow lakes, and backwaters. For ORINWR, the paddlefish is a pelagic species and a planktivore, representing other aquatic species that require this habitat. Shovelnose sturgeon are similar to paddlefish in that they rely upon the open waters of large rivers and river lakes, oxbow lakes, and backwaters, but they are benthic as opposed to pelagic in habit. For ORINWR, shovelnose sturgeon represent an ecological indicator of deep open water habitats associated with the Ohio River and also act as a representative for other aquatic species that require this habitat. Blue sucker is a migratory bottom feeder of large river systems that is becoming increasingly rare. They prefer moderate to swift currents of channels with gravel or cobble bottom. They act as an ecological indicator of water quality and sedimentation. At ORINWR, its presence in the river also represents other large benthic fish that require coarse substrate and swift current, and are important fish hosts for mussels (e.g., walleye, sauger, bass, catfish, and freshwater drum). Sheepnose mussel represents the large group of riverine-dependent mussels that inhabit the aquatic habitats of ORINWR. The riverine-dependent mussels species group includes other species of conservation need such as pink mucket, fanshell, clubshell, northern riffleshell, snuffbox, plus 40 species of more common mussels. Migrating and wintering waterfowl is a broad group of ducks, geese, and other waterfowl that frequent the ORINWR and river during migration and rely on the open waters of the river for overwintering. As a group, their presence within the open waters in and around ORINWR act as an ecological indicator of relatively undisturbed areas of open water during spring, fall, and winter that provide for resting and foraging. Bank Swallow is a Priority 1 Species under the new WV State Wildlife Action Plan (2015). They act as an ecological indicator for streambanks along ORINWR. Bank swallows require steep, exposed, yet relatively stable riverbanks in which they burrow their nests. Other riparian-focused migratory birds, such as belted kingfishers, also require this condition. Some stabilization treatments such as sheet piling or rip rap all along the bank can indirectly eliminate this unique habitat niche, and excessive erosion can negatively impact this habitat. Cobblestone tiger beetle is an invertebrate that requires exposed coarse riverbed material for its larval and adult stages. This species is found only on exposed pebble and cobblestone deposits, sometimes mixed with sand on sparsely vegetated islands and edges of rivers. For ORINWR, cobblestone tiger beetle acts as an ecological indicator for coarse riverbed substrate maintained free of excessive sedimentation by riverine geomorphic processes. American black duck is a waterfowl species of conservation concern. It is observed at ORINWR during migration and overwintering. While ORINWR does not contain extensive emergent wetlands required for suitable breeding habitat, this habitat is regionally limited due to river management and historic disturbance. As such, the American black duck acts as focal species for other waterfowl that require these habitats and an indicator for emergent wetland habitats containing open water within the floodplain of the Ohio River. Resident native anurans (northern leopard frog and wood frog) are important ecological indicators for ORINWR. As a community they act as indicators for the seasonal and semi- permanent wetland hydrology required for successful breeding. Anuran populations are also

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-21 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

known to be indicative of ecotoxicology and pollution impacts. Additionally, some species such as wood frog, require both wetland and connected upland habitat, and can therefore act as indicators of landscape connectivity. Annually, the staff and State partners conduct frog and toad vocalization monitoring. Comparison of annual results and long-term trends both on ORINWR and off can help inform the health and management of floodplain wetland habitats and surrounding riparian and upland forests. Kentucky warbler nests in the upland forests of ORINWR. They prefer a dense understory of shrubs and saplings for optimal breeding habitat. Kentucky warblers act as a focal species for other migratory birds that breed in ORINWR upland forests. Their breeding site requirements also provide an ecological indicator of a moderately dense forest understory sustained by forest structure, composition, and processes. Wood thrush inhabits mature forests with an intact understory of shrubs and saplings. For ORINWR, wood thrush acts as an ecological indicator of mature forest succession and intact forest canopy and sub-canopy structure. It also represents other migratory birds and bats that require similar conditions for breeding, migratory stopover, or roosting. Table 3-3 summarizes the life history use and requirements for each of the aforementioned ORINWR focal ORINWR species. It also notes associated species that are considered to be managed for through application of the ORINWR priority focal species.

Output of the North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative’s (NALCC) Landscape Capability Model for Wood Thrush, Version 3.0, Northeast displaying moderate to high habitat suitability at Buckley Island and Mainland near the Refuge headquarters.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-22 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-3 ORINWR Priority Focal Species and Other Benefiting Resources at ORINWR Priority Life History Other Benefitting ORINWR Focal Habitat Habitat Structure Requirement 4 Resources Species Riparian Mature and old-growth Forest forest with relatively open Bald eagle canopy; close (<2 km) to • Osprey B, M, W water with suitable Haliaeetus • Great blue heron leucocephalus foraging; needs some habitat discontinuity or edge. Mid-story or sub-canopy of mature forest. Moist deciduous forests with Acadian flycatcher moderate understory, generally near a stream. • Scarlet tanager B, M Empidonax Requires a high dense • Red-eyed vireo virescens canopy and an open understory. Scarce or absent in small forest tracts. Nests in large tracts of bottomland forests in Cerulean warbler larger, more mature trees • Yellow-throated B, M Setophaga cerulea (> 16 inches). Canopy has warbler both vertical and horizontal heterogeneity.

Tree dwelling bat • Prothonotary warbler community • Wood duck Trees greater than 16 • Indiana bat [e.g., Indiana bat inches in diameter with • Red bat (Myotis sodalis), suitable mature forest • Hoary bat little brown bat habitat dominated by mixed S, M • Tri-colored bat (Myotis lucifugus), hardwoods containing • tri-colored bat cracks, crevices, cavities, Silver haired bat (Pipistrellus and dense leaf packs. Feed • Little brown bat subflavus) and red extensively over water. • Eastern screech owl bat (Lasiurus • Southern flying borealis)] squirrel Striped whitelip Wetlands, river floodplains, land snail lowland forest, wet • Other land snails Y Webbhelix meadows, and marshes. • Insects multilineata Paddlefish Open Deep water with low Polyodon spathula Water and current velocity; spawns Y Riverine over gravel bars in • Pelagic fish temporarily flooded tributaries of large rivers. Shovelnose Large rivers of low or sturgeon moderate gradient, often • Benthic fish (fish hosts Y Scaphirhynchus over sand mixed with for mussels) platorynchus

4 B = breeding; M = migration; Y = year-round resident; W = wintering

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-23 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-3 ORINWR Priority Focal Species and Other Benefiting Resources at ORINWR Priority Life History Other Benefitting ORINWR Focal Habitat Habitat Structure Requirement 4 Resources Species gravel or mud in areas with strong current. Blue sucker Usually occurs in channels Cycleptus and flowing pools with elongatus moderate current (1.0-2.6 Y meters/sec). Also in some • Big river suckers impoundments. Migrate upstream to spawn on riffles.

Riverine-dependent Many found in swift flowing • Pink mucket mussels currents, others found in • Clubshell slow flowing water. [e.g., sheepnose • Northern riffleshell mussel • Y Fanshell Plethobasus • Snuffbox cyphyus] • Eastern hellbender • 40 species of common mussels

Migrating and Waterways and wetlands wintering waterfowl with a variety of depths and M, W cover types, depending on species. Submerged aquatic vegetation in nearshore areas. Bank Swallow Riparian Habitat includes open and partly open situations, Riparia riparia Shorelines • Belted kingfisher frequently near flowing B, M and Banks • Northern rough-winged water. May used swallow abandoned cavities of Belted Kingfishers. Cobblestone tiger Habitat is almost always beetle cobblestone islands in rivers, rarely cobblestone • Spotted sandpiper Cicindela Y marginipennis shore areas. Larvae live in • Softshell turtle burrows in small patches of sand. American black Floodplain Shallow, relatively duck Wetlands permanent wetlands with emergent vegetation with Anas rubripes • Mallard M, W some woody vegetation • Migrating shorebirds nearby. Nest sites often near edges or breaks in cover. Resident native Seasonal pools to semi- • Smallmouth anurans [northern permanent ponds in salamander leopard frog riparian areas • All resident frogs and (Lithobates pipiens) Y toads and wood frog • (Lithobates Dragonflies and sylvaticus)] damselflies

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-24 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-3 ORINWR Priority Focal Species and Other Benefiting Resources at ORINWR Priority Life History Other Benefitting ORINWR Focal Habitat Habitat Structure Requirement 4 Resources Species Kentucky warbler Temperate Prefers rich, moist Geothlypis formosa Upland deciduous forests; bottomland hardwoods and Forest • Hooded warbler B, M woods near streams are • Summer bats ideal as long as they have a dense hardwood understory. Wood thrush Trees >16 m in height, high Hylocichla variety of deciduous tree species, moderate mustelina • Worm-eating warbler B, M subcanopy and shrub • Summer bats density, shade, fairly open forest floor, moist soil, and decaying leaf litter.

3.5 BROAD HABITAT TYPE PRIORITIZATION

Maintaining quality habitat requires long-term dedication of resources. Managing with limited resources requires prioritization to ensure the most important resource needs are met. The habitat types within ORINWR were prioritized by the planning team based on current condition, availability within the landscape, management capability, and conservation needs of focal and priority resources. Because personnel and funding resources are limited, management activities are generally directed toward riparian forest restoration (tree and shrub planting), wetland restoration, island shoreline restoration, and invasive plant management. Habitat types on ORINWR can be categorized into six general types:

• Riparian forest • Riverine open water and unconsolidated river bottom • Riparian shorelines and banks • Floodplain wetlands • Temperate upland forest • Old fields and meadows An overview of these habitats, their priority for management, and how they benefit the ORINWR focal species are presented in Table 3-4.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-25 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-4 Priority Habitats at ORINWR Habitat (acres Priority Reasons for Priority Ranking Limiting Factors/Stressors on ORINWR) Rank • Represents largest terrestrial habitat Riparian Forest on ORINWR. • Extensive invasive species including (1,043 ac) • Supports a large and diverse range of Japanese knotweed, garlic mustard, priority resources. multiflora rose, tree of heaven, and • Regionally significant in landscape as other species. habitat is otherwise limited; Ohio River • River hydrology and flood floodplain is predominately developed management provides occasional 1 and floodplains are shared with urban, disturbance required to maintain industrial, and agricultural uses. ecological processes. However, the • Sufficient access to habitat to frequency and duration of flooding is implement management actions often altered from historical (except for remote islands). occurrences. • Striped white-lip snail is unique to • Most units are only accessible by island habitats boat.

• Represents the largest aquatic habitat • Management actions are Riverine Open type within ORINWR. necessarily partnership-based due Water and • Supports unique fish, mussel, and to watershed influences on water Unconsolidated other aquatic invertebrate priority quality, sedimentation, hydrology, Bottom resources. etc. (1,740 ac) • Requires natural river morphological • Accessibility and management of processes to maintain required habitat needs requires specialized habitats and therefore represents an skills, tools, and understanding of indicator of river health. river systems and the associated resources. • 2 Jurisdiction of ownership and management varies by State: In KY and WV, ORINWR owns the riverbed (underwater boundary is described by polygon around island) but ORINWR does not own water that flows over it; ORINWR can prevent activities such as dredging and mooring in these states. In PA, ORINWR does not own the riverbed. Therefore, management of aquatic habitats is more limited. • Habitat is present on every unit in • Difficult to manage due to dispersed Riparian ORINWR. location across ORINWR. However, Shorelines and • Supports unique habitat niche for bank in some areas lowhead dikes have Banks nesting species and other resources. been installed to prevent erosion 3 (31 ac) and maintain bank profile. • Erosion control and shoreline habitat

management is dependent on special funding from partners. • Small wetland areas are dispersed • The ORINWR does not have active Floodplain throughout ORINWR (habitat is water level management structures, Wetlands located only on Captina, Middle, HQ, although, some water diversion (20 ac) 4 and Belleville units). structures exist to enhance water input into wetlands. Therefore, the emergent wetlands currently require minimal management to maintain.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-26 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 3-4 Priority Habitats at ORINWR Habitat (acres Priority Reasons for Priority Ranking Limiting Factors/Stressors on ORINWR) Rank • Not prevalent at ORINWR, but • Habitat management is limited to extensive coverage in regional primarily invasive control and landscape (e.g., Daniel Boone plantings of native trees and shrubs. National Forest and Wayne NF). • All ORINWR acreage is on Temperate • Suitable patch size for priority mainland tracts (HQ and Captina Upland Forest 5 resources is available due to forest mainland), where public use is (103 ac) cover available on neighboring lands. concentrated (hiking trails, interpretive areas, some archery, and nontoxic steel shotgun hunting available). • Most grassland habitat is comprised of • Passive management; this habitat is legacy old fields (former agriculture). succeeding on its own and will become either upland or riparian forest; thus, will not be actively Old fields and managed to support any particular Meadows 6 early successional dependent ROC. (386 ac) Invasive species management and targeted planting of trees, shrubs, and flowering herbaceous plants for pollinators will take place.

3.6 CONFLICTING HABITAT MANAGEMENT

Given the NWRS diverse goals, purposes, mandates, and conservation priorities, it is not uncommon for a Refuge to have conflicting management priorities. Balancing the types and proportion of habitats (and their management) requires special consideration and a process for determining the best course of action. Some habitat management decisions at ORINWR require such consideration. Those considerations are reflected in the rationale noted for the various objectives and strategies developed by the HMP planning team (Chapter 4). In particular, old field and meadow management was considered to have some conflict in determining management direction. Many grassland and shrubland obligate birds require conservation protection. ORINWR currently contains approximately 386 acres of old field and meadow grassland that could potentially provide suitable migratory stopover and very limited breeding habitat for various grassland or shrubland birds. In reviewing ORINWR’s management ability, habitat availability in the surrounding landscape, and ecological condition and processes of existing habitats, the planning team involved in this HMP development determined that the best course of action for ORINWR is to not invest time and effort into managing for grassland habitat. Because of ORINWR’s location and overall low quality of grasslands on the Refuge, management effort is better focused on the unique aquatic and extensive riparian forest (tree and shrub) habitat. Shrubs are an important and conspicuous component in the forested understory, and there are numerous fruit and berry bearing species (e.g., dogwoods, holly, spicebush, and sumac) present within ORINWR forests. This is a resource condition that supports many species during fall migration; in spring, it is abundant invertebrates that support migrating birds. For this reason, the 386 acres of grassland will be allowed to transition, via successional processes and some targeted plantings, to riparian forest over the next 50 to 100 years.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-27 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

3.7 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

Through the development of this HMP, ORINWR is working towards enhancement of adaptive management and Strategic Habitat Conservation (SHC) principles in their delivery of on-the- ground management. Chapter 4 outlines objectives for habitat management, which will enable ORINWR to evaluate their ability to provide the conditions required for priority ROC. The associated management strategies are the intended actions assigned by the planning team (including ORINWR staff) to achieve these management objectives. Following HMP completion, ORINWR staff will develop an inventory and monitoring plan (IMP) to establish strategies needed to measure achievement of stated objectives. Additionally, annual habitat work plans (AHWPs) will be produced to respond to immediate, site-specific needs in individual habitats, which may require the adjustment of previously determined management priorities (see Figure 1-3). In developing, reviewing, and revising these management planning efforts and executing associated management and monitoring actions, ORINWR staff will implement an adaptive management framework to inform future management.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-28 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

3.0 Resources of Concern 3-29 April 2017

Photo Credit: Kent Mason CHAPTER 4. HABITAT GOALS, 4.1 Refining CCP Objectives and OBJECTIVES, AND Management Strategies MANAGEMENT 4.2 HMP Goals, Objectives, and STRATEGIES Management Strategies 4.3 Prioritization of Management Units

This page intentionally left blank.

Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.0 HABITAT GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES

4.1 REFINING CCP OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE HMP

The CCP habitat management goal and associated objectives for Ohio River Islands NWR were developed from 1998 to 2002 and act as a broad framework from which to further define desired habitat conditions on ORINWR over a 15-year timeframe (602 FW 1.4A). The 15-year timeframe outlined by the CCP comes to its term in 2017. In the 15 years since the original CCP additional science has informed resource management and habitat management efforts have progressed on ORINWR. The management strategies and rationales stated in the 2002 CCP for each of the goals and objectives are further refined to specifically relate to and justify the revised HMP objectives as listed below.

4.2 HMP GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

4.2.1 Habitat Management Goal According to the 2002 CCP for Ohio River Islands NWR, there was only one overarching goal of habitat management on ORINWR: Preserve and restore wetland, riverine, and riparian habitat in order to maintain a natural abundance and diversity of native species that are endemic to the Ohio River floodplain (with emphasis on trust resources, endangered and threatened species, and other species of concern). For the purposes and needs of this more detailed Plan, ORINWR has developed more specific habitat goals for each of the priority habitats. 1. Riparian Forest Goal: Conserve and enhance floodplain forest to meet the needs of migrating and breeding birds, bats, and resident wildlife dependent on the riparian forest ecosystem. 2. Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom Goal: Protect and improve physical habitat and water quality in order to support big river fishes, freshwater mussels, benthic macro-invertebrates, and migrating and wintering waterbirds. 3. Riparian Shorelines and Banks: Protect and enhance the long term stability of riverbanks and island shoreline habitat to support migrating and nesting birds, reptiles, and rare invertebrates. 4. Floodplain Wetlands: Protect and restore open water and emergent floodplain wetlands hydrologically connected to the Ohio River to reduce sediment, improve water quality, and support migrating and wintering waterbirds and resident amphibians. 5. Temperate Upland Forest: Maintain landscape level connectivity of upland forest for migrating and nesting landbirds, and summering bats. 6. Old Fields and Meadows: Convert remnant early successional habitats to natural forest habitats in support of forest dependent species.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-1 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.2.2 Habitat Management Objectives Although the CCP included strategies on how to achieve its desired goal, since the development of the original CCP, Service policy (601 FW 2) has encouraged development and application of measurable objectives to help define success in achieving management goals. The five habitat types at ORINWR were identified and prioritized in Chapter 3 based on current vegetation, management capability, and conservation needs of focal species (see Table 3-4). For directing management resources, the planning team created the objectives hierarchy shown in Figure 4-1. This hierarchy depicts the relationships among ORINWR purpose and goals, the habitat management objectives, and measurable attributes, which are features that tie habitat management into the adaptive management framework noted previously in Chapter 3. Figure 4- 1 also presents administrative objectives potentially influenced by cost and public perception. While these factors do not directly dictate habitat management actions, planning and implementation of management strategies should consider their potential influence on timing and duration of certain activities.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-2 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure 4-1. Habitat Management Objectives Hierarchy for Ohio River Islands NWR

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-3 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Refined objectives are stated for each habitat type. These refined objectives include specific and measurable thresholds based on life history requirements of the identified ROC. Invasive plant management was intentionally removed as a stand-alone objective (i.e., not carried forward from the CCP) to reinforce the management focus on providing quality habitat for native fish and wildlife and Federal trust resources, and to specifically acknowledge the various types of species and control methods relevant to each habitat type. The intent of the original CCP invasive species management objective is retained in this HMP as a component of all habitat objectives and associated management strategies. The objectives were crafted to span the 15 year time frame within which the HMP is anticipated to be relevant. “Over the life of the HMP” refers to that time frame, although objectives may be actively managed and monitored according to the supporting Inventory and Monitoring Plan, and specific measurables may be knowingly or deliberately not met on any given year. Where applicable, objectives refer to annual average, ranges of values, or other thresholds within which average or “normal year” values are expected to fall.

4.3 PRIORITIZATION OF MANAGEMENT UNITS

Table 4-1 provides a prioritization of ORINWR units intended to help guide management efforts within priority objectives and habitats. This table reflects the HMP planning team’s assessment of where management is capable of achieving its greatest contribution to ROC highlighted in Chapter 3, while considering the overall management purpose, goals and objectives (Figure 4-1), and the need for annual work planning prioritization (Figure 1-2). Ranking is based upon consideration of numerous factors, including (in general order of priority): • Determined habitat priority • Value or contribution to ROC • Management capabilities, including access challenges • Use by Federal and State listed species • Habitat quality and potential • Spatial patch size and connectivity to similar habitat types • Intensity, frequency, and type of management needed • Personnel availability and operating costs Factors such as climate change could shift the priority of these units, for instance, if severe declines in precipitation impact river or wetland levels and associated habitat needs of focal species on ORINWR. Priority 1 Generally receive more management effort than other units. They tend to have higher value for ROC, have larger habitat blocks, and have good management capability. Priority 2 Usually still receive active management, but at a reduced level as compared to Priority 1 units. Generally, this reduction is due to increasingly limited management capabilities and challenges of access to remote islands. Most of these units are smaller and have lower value for ROC. If

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-4 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge factors limiting the unit are repaired or upgraded, or as funding becomes available to address management limitations, these units could be reclassified as Priority 1. Priority 3 Generally have severe limitations impacting management potential, such as a lack of authority or jurisdiction to manage water levels, or altered ecological condition that prohibits management success. Some units are also limited by the adjacent land use (e.g., they are smaller units embedded in a developed landscape). Additionally, most Priority 3 units would require significant resources or restoration to achieve designated potential. If restoration funds become available, some of these units could be elevated to a higher priority. Table 4-1. ORINWR Unit Prioritization (see Appendix A for habitat maps) Unit Management Size Primary Habitats Rationale Unit (Land Acres)

Priority 1 Units: Comparatively large, high-quality units that encompass top priority habitat types and provide habitat for priority resources. Single management actions (i.e., exotic species control or vegetation management) from existing, USFWS-owned, and accessible land could have beneficial impact or connect prioritized habitats.

Middle Island • Riparian Forest 238.0 Contains nearly 67 acres of riverine habitat • Riparian Shorelines and in addition to the 238 acres of terrestrial Banks habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom

Buckley Island • Riparian Forest 237.9 Headquarters / interpretative outreach and Mainland • Riparian Shorelines and center are located on this unit. Also Banks contains nearly 75 acres of riverine habitat • Riverine Open Water and in addition to the 237.9 acres of terrestrial Unconsolidated Bottom habitat. • Old Field and Meadow

Captina Island • Riparian and Upland Forest 155.0 Large and easily accessible tract. Contains and Mainland • Riparian Shorelines and nearly 202.3 acres of riverine habitat in Banks addition to the 155.0 acres of terrestrial • Riverine Open Water and habitat. Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow

Williamson and • Riparian Forest 140.7 One of four largest, continuous tracts in Witten Towhead • Riparian Shorelines and ORINWR. Relatively isolated to outside Islands Banks disturbance, (i.e., accessible by boat only) • Riverine Open Water and and therefore no pedestrian or car traffic is Unconsolidated Bottom present. • Old Field and Meadow Contains nearly 128 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 140.7 acres of terrestrial habitat. Buffington Island • Riparian Forest 140.5 One of four largest, continuous tracts in • Riparian Shorelines and ORINWR. Relatively isolated to outside Banks disturbance, (i.e., accessible by boat only)

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-5 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 4-1. ORINWR Unit Prioritization (see Appendix A for habitat maps) Unit Management Size Primary Habitats Rationale Unit (Land Acres)

• Riverine Open Water and and therefore no pedestrian or car traffic is Unconsolidated Bottom present. • Old Field and Meadow Contains nearly 89.5 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 140.5 acres of terrestrial habitat. Neal Island • Riparian Forest 104 One of four largest, continuous tracts in • Riparian Shorelines and ORINWR. Relatively isolated to outside Banks disturbance, (i.e., accessible by boat only) • Riverine Open Water and and therefore no pedestrian or car traffic is Unconsolidated Bottom present. • Old Field and Meadow Contains nearly 121.6 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 104 acres of terrestrial habitat. Manchester • Riparian Forest 122.3 One of four largest, continuous tracts in Islands #1 and #2 • Riparian Shorelines and ORINWR. Relatively isolated to outside Banks disturbance, (i.e., accessible by boat only) • Riverine Open Water and and therefore no pedestrian or car traffic is Unconsolidated Bottom present. • Old Field and Meadow The riverbed around both Manchester Islands protects nearly 269.8 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 122.3 acres of terrestrial habitat. Muskingum Island • Riparian Forest 96.2 Contains nearly 165.2 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 96.2 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom

Priority 2 Units: Generally large enough to support minimum ROC patch requirements. These units provide important habitat for ROC but generally are smaller and not spatially connected to larger habitat blocks. Includes larger areas of jurisdiction on open water habitats.

Paden Island • Riparian Forest 83.4 Contains nearly 45.3 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 83.4 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom

Fish Creek Island • Riparian Forest 43.6 Contains nearly 103 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 43.6 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow

Letart Island • Riparian Forest 29.5 Contains nearly 153.2 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 29.5 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-6 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 4-1. ORINWR Unit Prioritization (see Appendix A for habitat maps) Unit Management Size Primary Habitats Rationale Unit (Land Acres)

• Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow Wells Island • Riparian Forest 43.9 Contains nearly 81.2 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 43.9 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow • Broadback Island • Riparian Forest 41.5 Contains nearly 88.2 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 41.5 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow Grape Island • Riparian Forest 33.4 Contains nearly 81.1 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 33.4 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow Butler Tract • Upland Forest 31.8 Mainland tract. Adjacent to Buckley Island • Old Field and Meadow Mainland Unit and ORINWR HQ.

Priority 3 Units: This class includes lowest priority units and areas that are relatively inaccessible. For the Priority 3 areas, the patches are generally fragmented from the greater landscape and are too small to meet habitat objectives for selected ROC. Alternatively, logistical constraints due to access or distance may contribute to high management costs or significant time investments.

Mill Creek Island • Riparian Forest 21.6 Contains nearly 58.1 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 21.6 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow Phillis Island • Riparian Forest 17.2 Contains nearly 21.9 acres of riverine • Riparian Shorelines and habitat in addition to the 17.2 acres of Banks terrestrial habitat. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow White Tract • Riparian Forest 19.0 Small mainland tract across the channel • Upland Forest from Muskingum Island. Wheeling Island • Riparian Forest 15.1 Small tract at downstream end of • Riverine Open Water and developed island. Unconsolidated Bottom Contains nearly 29.0 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 15.1 acres of terrestrial habitat.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-7 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table 4-1. ORINWR Unit Prioritization (see Appendix A for habitat maps) Unit Management Size Primary Habitats Rationale Unit (Land Acres)

Buffalo Creek • Riparian Forest 12.6 Small mainland tract, disjunct from other • Riparian Shorelines and units and surrounded by residential land Banks use. • Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom Contains nearly 4.5 acres of riverine • Old Field and Meadow habitat (Buffalo Creek) in addition to the 12.6 acres of terrestrial habitat. Grandview Island • Riparian Forest 4.6 Small island unit. • Riparian Shorelines and Banks Contains nearly 87.8 acres of riverine • Riverine Open Water and habitat in addition to the 4.6 acres of Unconsolidated Bottom terrestrial habitat. • Old Field and Meadow Georgetown • Riparian Shorelines and 2.4 Small island unit, actively being restored Island Banks through a cooperative project with the • Riverine Open Water and USACE. Unconsolidated Bottom • Old Field and Meadow Contains nearly 15.3 acres of riverine habitat in addition to the 2.4 acres of terrestrial habitat. Crab Island • Riparian Forest 0.7 Small island unit, fused to the mainland. • Riparian Shorelines and Banks Contains nearly 8.8 acres of riverine • Riverine Open Water and habitat in addition to the 0.7 acres of Unconsolidated Bottom terrestrial habitat.

4.4 MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES COMMON TO ALL ORINWR HABITATS AND OBJECTIVES

The following management strategies are generally common to all terrestrial habitats or are landscape-scale strategies that may equally benefit all habitats and the ROC supported by ORINWR. All management activities are subject to available funding and staffing. In all cases, with input of additional resources, such as funding, partnerships, or staff, the Refuge will: • Increase intensity and implementation of other strategies, including more planting in vegetated habitats and more invasive species management • Identify/establish systematic monitoring/inventory/assessment protocol to characterize and understand ecosystem services provided by habitats and organisms across ORINWR. While BIDEH may describe the degree of “intactness” of an ecosystem, “ecosystem services” describes the overall benefits of the system and its components to people. • Explore use of in-lieu fee/mitigation banking programs to implement additional restoration and enhancement actions. The Service’s draft mitigation policy was published in the Federal Register on March 8, 2016. As with the original 1981 Mitigation Policy, the Service intends, with this revision, to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for future generations. Given the new conservation challenges and changes in land use, effective mitigation is a powerful tool for furthering this mission.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-8 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.4.1 Climate Change Adaptation Strategies Strategy

Facilitate ecosystem adaptation to climate change projections through: A. The development of climate adaptation strategy specific to ORINWR, based on current projections and downscaled climate data for the region surrounding ORINWR. B. Considering climate adaptation in species selections included as part of supplemental planting.

4.4.2 Herbivory Management Strategies Strategy Controlling herbivory is important to achieve the plant composition and structure outlined within terrestrial habitat objectives. Herbivory is controlled through a variety of lethal and non-lethal methods. The ORINWR will select the appropriate technique based on the identified need, extent of the threat, and effectiveness of the control method: A. Hunting and targeted removals (in accordance with deer management hunt plan) B. Exclusions; installation of tree guards for new plantings C. Beaver management through trapping program

4.4.3 Invasive Species Control Strategies Strategy Across all terrestrial habitats, there is a long-term goal of maintaining some level of “good” ecological integrity, which is defined as <10% cover of noxious (transformer) invasive plant species in wetlands (Faber-Langdendoen et al. 2012). However, the current infestation level is variable across the refuge and therefore, realistic management targets, and the amount of time to attain them, will vary across the refuge. Therefore, areas where resources of concern are threatened, and areas where invasives can be most successfully managed will receive highest priority. Where habitats are regularly disturbed, such as floodplains, containment may be the best management target that can be expected. Annually, ORINWR will conduct management of invasive and other undesirable species using guidance outlined in this HMP via physical, chemical, and biological treatments (see Appendix D for additional detail): A. Immediately treat new infestations through Early Detection and Rapid Response (EDRR) B. Target isolated populations (especially kudzu and mile-a-minute weed) or species with initially limited distribution C. Prioritize public use areas D. Implement treatments specific to known species (see Appendix D) E. Maintain relationship with WV working groups, private lands program, and others to control drift of invasives from private lands F. Establish management protocol appropriate for most problematic invasive species and develop/adjust management strategies accordingly (invasive decision-tree tool, see Appendix D) G. Continue monitoring for forest pests and pathogens H. Consider existing pests and pathogens when developing/conducting supplemental plantings (e.g., don’t plant ash for ash borer or oaks for the threat of sudden oak disease)

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-9 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

I. Continue to use and develop biocontrols (such as mile-a-minuite weevils, purple loosestrife beetles, goats, etc.)

4.4.4 Land Protection Plan (LPP) Development Strategies Strategy The ORINWR area of responsibility is protected and expanded as necessary through a variety of partnerships, including those beneficial to planning landscape-scale initiatives as well as real property interests (acquisition, easements, etc.). Consideration may be made to expand the boundaries of ORINWR as necessary to provide greatest protection to trust species and USFWS mission. A. Coordinate with Appalachian LCC on landscape level conservation design relevant to the Ohio River Valley ecosystem B. Update / finalize LPP consistent with the outcome of conservation design in A, above C. Work with partners to explore and pursue, if appropriate, connecting corridors of habitat (this includes but is not limited to connecting forests along historic river and stream corridors)

4.5 HMP OBJECTIVE 1: RIPARIAN FOREST

Goal: Conserve and enhance floodplain forest to meet the needs of migrating and breeding birds, bats, and resident wildlife dependent on the riparian forest ecosystem.

Objective 1: Conserve and Enhance Riparian Forest Habitat / Promote Old Growth

Through 2032, conserve and enhance approximately 1,043 acres of riparian forest across the ORINWR to promote mature or old growth forest structure in at least 60% of forest acres. These forests will support a range of migrating and breeding landbirds, including ideally up to four nesting pair of bald eagles, four or more nesting pair of Acadian flycatcher, and at least nine nesting pair of cerulean warbler. Riparian forests will also sustain a component of life history requirements for other species of conservation need such as tree-dwelling bats and invertebrates such as the striped whitelip land snail. Over the next 15 to 30 years, ORINWR will allow transition of up to an additional 386 acres from old field to riparian forest. Over the next 100 years, these areas will also promote mature or old growth forest structure. Riparian forest management will allow natural disturbance regimes, plus active management to enhance forest structure, composition, and regeneration to support the following mature / old growth characteristics: • Forest patch sizes greater than 16 ha (40 acres), including consideration of adjacent mainland habitat. • Average tree diameters greater than 16 inches DBH. • Where possible, preserve standing nesting snags and dead trees maintaining an average of at least 16 inches DBH with a target density of 15 snags per acre. • Canopy composition with greater than 80% cover with a basal area of 40-90 ft2 per acre for cerulean warbler. Canopy will be dominated by native species such as silver maple, sycamore, cottonwood, willow, birch, ash, and other large, strong branching trees for bald eagles and trees with peeling bark for Indiana bat. Incorporate plant species (e.g., more southern and inundation adapted) that increase resilience to landscape level threats such as climate change, hydrological alterations, and rural landscape conversion.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-10 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

• A subcanopy/shrub layer less than 50% canopy cover and sapling tree basal area of 110-120 ft2 per acre for Acadian flycatcher. • Herbaceous ground cover of at least 70% and contain scattered leaf litter, moss, and downed woody material for striped white-lip land snail. • Invasives will be addressed for each management unit, considering the level of invasion, the noxiousness of the invasive plants, the threat to resources of concern, and the difficulty of control. Ideally, noxious invasive plants will comprise <10% of the vegetative cover to sustain “good” ecological integrity. • Preserve live and downed shrubs and trees that overhang the water’s edge to provide shading and aquatic habitat structure.

Acres to Achieve Objective: 1,043, plus an additional 336 in transition from old field

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources

A. Enhance and restore the overall health of the river forest community by: 1) Planting supplemental riparian-adapted trees (e.g., sycamore, cottonwood, black willow, hickories, hackberry) and shrubs (e.g., pawpaw, dogwoods, Eastern wahoo, and spicebush) to achieve mixed-age structure in areas where monitoring indicates low recruitment of stratum or canopy replacement species. 2) Girdling and basal spraying with herbicide to remove undesirable species (princess tree, amur cork and tree of heaven) as encountered on management units. 3) Direct intervention to create canopy gaps / open canopy when forest restoration requires it for species composition, regeneration, or structural restoration where trees and shrubs are too dense to achieve the habitat objective. 4) Leave large dead trees > 16 inches in place on all divisions for Indiana bats and cavity- nesting birds (dead trees creating a safety hazard near roads and trails will be removed). 5) Planting supplemental tree species based on NVCS community assemblages and their ongoing adaptation to climate change. 6) Passively (through succession) and actively (through plantings of trees and shrubs) allow transition of up to an additional 336 acres from old field to riparian forest. B. Promote health of striped whitelip land snail: 1) Minimize use of pesticides on ground cover 2) Maintain leaf litter, moss, and log cover 3) Maintain soil moisture through tree canopy cover C. Promote health of tree-dwelling bat communities: 1) If large dead trees are lacking, girdle for snag creation to achieve snag density target and maintain snag trees in the early stages of decay that maintain peeling/flaking bark. 2) Maintain tree species (live and dead) with peeling and flaking bark, such as silver maple, hickories, cottonwood, and sycamore. 3) Evaluate use of bat boxes/artificial structures, as needed D. Implement plant control techniques specifically applicable to riparian forest habitats and invasive species (See Appendix D for details): 1) Mechanical: hand pulling and cutting, power cutting, and mowing 2) Chemical: pesticide application with sprayers, booms, cut stump, and aerial application 3) Natural: flooding, prescribed fire 4) Biological: targeted insects, pathogens, and grazers (e.g., sheep, goats); overplanting/shading out with desired vegetation

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-11 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

E. Habitat Monitoring: 1) Obtain baseline data relevant to the structure and composition described in the objective, including metrics related to forest inventory and existing community, floristic quality, and disturbance regime. 2) Develop a protocol for the inventory and monitoring of the striped whitelip land snail.

With input of additional resources (such as funding, partnerships, or staff) ORINWR will: • Sample all units for presence of bat roosting and/or feeding, primarily through habitat suitability evaluation and acoustic monitoring. Acoustic data can provide a measure of species presence and an index of bat activity that can be compared across seasons and years. Mist netting and telemetry, when resources allow, would be beneficial to inform site-specific use on ORINWR. • Pursue partnerships for island restoration to historical occurrence and extent. • Pursue additional protection for existing island units through partnerships and landowner agreements. • Complete additional monitoring and evaluation efforts as identified in the ORINWR Inventory and Monitoring Plan.

What management-related tools are needed or additional data are necessary to properly inform management decisions into the future?

• Additional methods are needed, including the testing and evaluating of new biological controls for problematic invasive species, understanding the availability of ORINWR to be selected as a case-study location for existing controls not yet USFWS-approved, and the eventual implementation of new methods. • Need to understand the importance of Ohio River corridor to migrating birds as relevant to the potential habitat needs for specific, targeted real estate acquisition. Is there an “Area of Irreplaceability” (related to landscape design) that is within ORINWR purview? • Need to understand bat population diversity and dynamics at ORINWR. Currently, ORINWR has only acoustic data to rely upon for species identification. More in-depth bat monitoring via mist netting and telemetry would inform habitat needs and species use. Mist netting verifies presence of species that are difficult to discern acoustically such as Indiana bat, and allows for collection of demographic information such as sex, age, reproductive status and health condition. Telemetry can help located roost trees and home ranges.

Rationale

Importance of Riparian Forest Habitat Conservation The greatest bird conservation asset in the Appalachian Mountains region (BCR28) is its concentration of forest species. Modelling of avian abundance completed by the USGS’s Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center (Thogmartin 2008) indicates that the Ohio River valley provides some of the highest density of cerulean warbler breeding habitat within BCR 28. The majority of the conservation efforts in the region are focused on these habitats (AMBCR 2005). As noted by the AMJV (2015), the connectivity, structure, and condition of mature forests within the Appalachian region have changed drastically over the last century, with an overwhelming tendency towards increasingly fragmented, homogeneous, closed-canopy forest blocks. A number of mature forest obligates, such as cerulean warbler, wood thrush, Canada warbler, and worm-eating warbler, are declining throughout the Appalachians and have been identified as high priority species by AMJV partners. Similarly, cerulean warbler and wood thrush have been identified as focal species for ORINWR.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-12 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Riparian forests are critical to supporting bald eagles and rare plant communities unique to the landscape. Bald eagles rely on mature riparian forests and large canopy trees in close proximity to open waters (within 2 kilometers). These habitats occupy a very small area of the watershed but they are represented by a disproportionately high number of NVCS associations, many of them globally and/or state rare. In particular, Sycamore - Silver Maple Calcareous Floodplain Forest (CEGL007334) mapped at ORINWR are considered State-critically imperiled (S1) by WVDNR.

Riparian forests are an important conservation focus at ORINWR as this habitat represents the largest terrestrial habitat cover on ORINWR. Although not well documented, the Ohio River corridor is used as a flyway for migratory birds, and the islands are a unique feature within the Ohio River system and landscape that could have significance to nesting, foraging, and other needs of migrating species. Analysis of radar data of fall bird migration in the Northeast showed that the most consistent and highest bird stopover densities occurred primarily in (1) areas near the shores of major water bodies; (2) hardwood forest patches, particularly narrow floodplain forests of rivers and streams, embedded within landscapes dominated by developed and agricultural lands, and (3) hardwood forests within forest- dominated landscapes of the southwestern portion of the region (Ohio Hills and Northern Cumberland Plateau of West Virginia and Virginia) (Buler and Dawson 2014).

Radar observations demonstrated that forest patches in highly developed landscapes support some of the highest densities of migrating landbirds. That juxtaposition of habitats fairly characterizes the Ohio River Valley in which ORINWR is situated. More data from closer radar stations would be helpful to better pinpoint landbird migration hot spots (in Buler and Dawson 2014). As part of that study, there were only two stations in this landscape separated by over 300 river miles in hilly topography.

Likewise, ORINWR has high potential to be managed in a way that significantly contributes to bat conservation, and minor habitat improvements across ORINWR could benefit up to ten bat species, including endangered bats (Dixon et al. 2013). The ORINWR is situated on the boundaries of several planning regions and provides transitional corridors between overlapping regional priorities (JV, LCC, SWAP, Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership [ORBFHP], etc.). These regions overlap with the area of greatest declines experienced by bats across the U.S. as a result of white-nose syndrome. On a local scale, the ORINWR islands provide the ideal landscape context for bat foraging. Many bat species prefer foraging along open waters and roosting within close proximity to such areas. No known hibernaculum occur on ORINWR.

The riparian forest is an essential landscape linkage between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, providing specific environmental services to aquatic communities such as woody debris contribution; sediment, nutrient, and chemical filtration; as well as obvious valuable habitat attributes. The riparian forests also play a key role in maintaining the health and quality of ORINWR’s second highest priority habitat: Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated Bottom. Riparian forests provide shading and cover for fish and other aquatic species. Large woody debris supplied by forests add to habitat stability and complexity in stream systems (WVDNR 2015). The vegetated cover and rooting systems of the trees, shrubs, and herbaceous cover of these forests also provides bank stability and protects against erosion and soil loss, which prevents sedimentation of sensitive areas for mussel beds and fish spawning.

Climate change was noted as a management concern in Chapter 2. For riparian forests at ORINWR, the threat of climate change could pose issues related to forest composition. Some tree species may be more susceptible than others to the forecasted changes in temperature and precipitation. Trees, along with other species may be forced to adapt to new conditions or shift their ranges to more favorable

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-13 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

environments. In addition, climate change could result in the emergence of new diseases and plant pests. Diverse species composition increases resilience and adaptive capacity against landscape scale threats, such as climate change, hydrological alterations, and rural landscape conversion.

The ForeCASTS Project, a partnership between USDA Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center and the North Carolina State University Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, has modeled the response of tree species at two time steps (2050 and 2100), under two global climate models (Hadley model and Parallel Climate Model [PCM]), and under two emissions scenarios (higher emissions [A1] and lower emissions [B1]) (USFS 2016). Two of the tree species that cover the majority of riparian forests (American sycamore and silver maple) were modeled as part of this effort. Mapped results forecast both species to be generally trending northward. Under the lower climate scenario (A1), both species are generally stable or slightly reduced in the vicinity of ORINWR. In contrast, under the higher climate scenario (B1), both species are moderately to greatly reduced in the vicinity of ORINWR (USFS 2016). Depending on the severity of changes actually experienced in climate, the resulting change in ORINWR forests could range from minimal to severe. For this reason, future inventory and monitoring will be key to understanding future trends in forest composition at ORINWR.

Management Direction and Expected Impact The long-term goal of riparian forest management is to sustain mature, healthy forests through natural disturbance regimes or the use of active management/mechanical disturbance techniques that mimic and achieve objectives of passive management (including: flooding, windthrow, ice storms, fire, and insects/fungal infestation), acknowledging that there is some subset (around 10%) that will not be mature old growth due to future disturbance and transition. The promotion of mature forests in this region is crucial as they are generally limited in the landscape but essential to address ROC conservation needs. The ORINWR already supports large tracts of mature riparian forest. The vision of the HMP planning team is to continue to protect and maintain these habitats into the future and enhance them where needed. Issues such as education of the public regarding habitat management, the importance of mussels, riparian buffers, maintaining stream stability, reducing the spread of invasive species, and other conservation issues have been noted previously and will likely continue into the future (WVDNR 2015).

Current mapping of the ORINWR plant communities indicates that approximately 386 acres of old field and shrubland communities are present across the 22 islands and units. These early successional habitats are largely degraded and dominated by invasive species such as Japanese knotweed, kudzu, and reed canarygrass. As a result of their poor quality, small patch size, and location within the landscape, they provide little or no value to grassland birds of conservation concern. As a result, the HMP planning team has determined that their best conservation value lies in transitioning to riparian forest cover. Doing so will reduce the fragmentation of forest habitat in these islands and promote priority ROC on ORINWR. Because these cover types are targeted for transition to forest, there is no management objective specific to grasslands or shrublands at ORINWR.

Relationship of Management Strategies to Objective The management strategies outlined above are intended to promote desired forest structure and composition endpoints. Likewise, they are sufficiently broad and adaptive to address both known and unknown external challenges and threats, such as climate change, artificial and variable water level management, exotic pests and invasive species (plant, animal, insect, fungus, and algae), deer herbivory, and water quality. Additionally, the proposed management strategies address internal limiting factors that may act as potential impediments to successful habitat management such as access to and distribution of remote units and level of ORINWR staffing.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-14 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Maintaining large forest habitat patch sizes is important to sustain the spatial requirements for breeding ROC. Species such as the tree roosting, northern long-eared bat, generally require forest patch sizes greater than 16 ha (40 acres) (Henderson et al. 2008). Spatial patch size is important for many forest dwelling birds of conservation need as well. According to Wood et al. (2013), cerulean warblers will use relatively small forest patches (~25 ac), but typically in landscapes that are primarily forested (e.g., >75% forest cover within ~6 miles of the project area). For the more forested Ohio Hills region, the average patch size required is roughly 60 acres. The objective target of 40 acres is intended to be the minimum target required to achieve the needs of forest dwelling birds and bats of conservation concern.

For ROC associated with this habitat, maintaining forest structure is crucial. The Acadian flycatcher requires snags for foraging with a minimum diameter at breast height (DBH) of 6 inches (15 cm) and exposed perches in the midstory canopy (Hamel et al. 1982 as cited in Natureserve 2015). Tree roosting bats require a mixture of roost sites. Many prefer large (16 inch DBH or larger) mature trees (live or dead) with crevices, flaky bark, and leaf piles. For species such as Indiana bat, exposure to direct sunlight is important in the selection of the roost/maternity tree, which warms the air space under the bark. More than half of studied roost trees in Illinois were in areas having 80-100% canopy closure and 30% of the roost trees were found with 30-80% canopy cover. No roosts were located in areas with less than 10% canopy coverage. Other bats, such as little brown bat and eastern red bat, do not require open canopy conditions required for Indiana bats. Instead, the prevalence of roost trees in the landscape is more critical. Such species prefer old-growth and mature trees because they provide more crevices and cavities (Fenton and Barclay 1980, Crampton and Barclay 1998). Bats roost in a variety of species of trees common to ORINWR, including elm, oak, beech, hickory, maple, ash, sassafras, birch, sycamore, locust, aspen, cottonwood, pine, and hemlock (Natureserve 2015). Strategies outlined are intended to help promote forest structure beneficial to ORINWR priority ROC and sustain the long-term health of the overall forest community.

Invasive plant species have been, and will continue to be, a major focus of forest management. Invasive species such as Japanese knotweed and kudzu have the ability to grow in thick, dense colonies such that little to no natural forest regeneration can occur in areas dominated by these species. Without natural regeneration, the forest composition and structure objective elements will not be successfully met. Therefore, the habitat management objective targets an overall reduction of invasive plant species present at ORINWR. While the literature may suggest a target of 10% for invasive cover to maintain biological integrity, attainment will vary with the level and frequency of habitat disturbance, ease of access for active management, and other factors that vary across units. See Appendix D and prioritization tools.

Achieving the objective as outlined will benefit ORINWR priority focal species, as well as the others resources of conservation priority noted. For the purposes of quantifying predictions associated with management, the HMP planning team developed associated wildlife response breeding use estimates for the riparian forest. These estimates were rough projections based on a comparison of ORINWR priority focal species spatial needs. This initial estimate was then multiplied by a habitat suitability factor determined by HMP planning team professional judgment based on known species habitat needs and personal knowledge of existing/potential habitat conditions. Considering this, if the habitat objective is accomplished successfully, this target condition would then ideally support up to four bald eagle nests, four or more Acadian flycatcher nests, and at least nine cerulean warbler nests. This projection may be updated based on future knowledge and understanding of habitat conditions and species use on ORINWR.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-15 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-16 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.6 HMP OBJECTIVE 2: RIVERINE OPEN WATER AND UNCONSOLIDATED BOTTOM

Goal: Protect and improve physical habitat and water quality in order to support big river fishes, freshwater mussels, benthic macro-invertebrates, and migrating and wintering waterbirds.

Objective 2: Protect and Improve Riverine Open Water and Unconsolidated River Bottom Habitat

Over the life of the HMP, protect and improve the 1,740 acres of physical habitat and water quality supporting riverine open water and riverbed. Riffles and runs will contain primarily sand, gravel, cobble, and boulder substrate with less than 1 inch depth of persistent silt or soft materials. Areas with water less than 5 feet deep will also support submerged aquatic vegetation and natural woody material. This will help sustain healthy populations of native freshwater mussels; sustain foraging, velocity shelters, and spawning habitat for paddlefish, blue sucker, shovelnose sturgeon, and other riverine fish; and provide stopover foraging and resting for migrating and wintering waterfowl. Through partner efforts, continue to maintain or improve water quality and sustain biologically appropriate river dynamics and flow regimes supporting resources of concern. These targets include: • Substrate dominated by coarse materials greater than 1 mm in diameter (e.g., coarse sand, gravel, cobble) with occasional larger boulders • Water regimes consisting of un-impounded waters greater than 1.5-meters in mean annual depth • Sustaining reproducing populations of native freshwater mussels, including sheepnose, pink mucket, fanshell, clubshell, northern riffleshell, and snuffbox o A mean density of the mussel community of > 1 mussel per square meter, with a minimum diversity at each unit of at least 15 species. • Presence of in-channel structural velocity refugia such as tree falls, rootwads, rock features, sandbars, or similar structure • Presence of submerged aquatic vegetation in nearshore shallows, such as eelgrass, pondweeds, milfoils, naiad weed, and elodea as fish cover and food for migrating waterfowl. • Ensure water quality conditions adequate to sustain warmwater fish and mussels year-round, with dissolved oxygen > 5 ppm, pH 6 to 8, and total ammonia nitrogen < 1.9 mg/L (rolling 30- day average) (USEPA 2013. Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia – Freshwater).

Acres to Achieve Objective: 1,740

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources • Manage mussel community: o Continue mussel quarantine and captive rearing program implemented in conjunction with identified regulatory entities (FWS Ecological Services, states), propagation facilities, and partners. o A restoration plan and recovery team is maintained for each species, and these teams target specific streams and approve River relocation sites for mussels that need to be moved from other areas.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-17 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

o Management will be based on recovery plans for individual species and will be focused on areas with long-term absence of a mussel community or where a known community is lost due to event. o Augmentation will be used for demographic or genetic purposes, such as to sustain or supplement populations that are too small to reproduce o Reintroduction of species which were extirpated historically but can now be sustained. o New target areas will be identified each year. • Train appropriate ORINWR personnel to assist with interagency emergency and spill response efforts on the River • Place structures to reduce erosion and promote depositional processes (zipperdikes, rock or log vanes, bendway weirs, and longitudinal dikes) • Establish baseline to monitor water quality. Take advantage of existing datasets and partner initiatives: o track spill notification and response o perform regular species group (mussel/fish) monitoring o adopt and utilize Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) Ohio River Fish Inventory (ORFIN), currently used to measure and track changes in fish community metrics. They are currently considering the feasibility of adding long-term mussel monitoring at the fish stations and developing a similar “index” of mussel community condition o utilize FWS water quality monitoring pilot program as it comes online o utilize state fish tissue contaminant data • Perform habitat mapping of submerged areas (substrate, aquatic beds, bathymetry). • Continue to host and participate in the Ohio River focus group (ORSANCO or similar) and ORBFHP. • Explore solutions for fish passage through locks and lateral obstructions (levees, drain pipes and water control structures), using tools such as such as rock ramps and rock arch rapids, to enhance migration and increase area for spawning opportunities for big river fish species. • Explore potential with USACE for the retirement of underutilized locks and dams. • Explore potential with USACE to manage pools to mimic historic hydrologic cycle (e.g., high water in late winter/early spring connecting the river to floodplain wetlands and slough, and low water recession in summer/fall, allowing for colonization of exposed shoreline habitat by annual and perennial vegetation.)

With input of additional resources, such as funding, partnerships, or staff, ORINWR will: • Install additional longitudinal dikes (erosion capture) along navigation side of islands • Perform additional habitat mapping of submerged areas (substrate, aquatic beds, bathymetry) • Complete additional monitoring and evaluation efforts as identified in the ORINWR Inventory and Monitoring Plan.

What management-related tools are needed or additional data are necessary to properly inform management decisions into the future? • Need to identify the spectrum of newly emerging contaminants (pharmaceuticals; endocrine disrupters; pesticides, and others) and the synergistic/cumulative effects of multiple inputs, especially on the reproductive success of endangered mussels. • Need to identify the effects of the range of contaminants in the Ohio River on aquatic ecosystem components, especially ORINWR trust species.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-18 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

• Need to understand fish use of ORINWR area. • Need to describe the metapopulation structure of mussel beds and define minimal viable populations.

Rationale Importance of Habitat Conservation: Ohio River is a unique feature within the greater forested and human occupied landscape. The River is inextricably linked to the viability and function of other ORINWR priority habitats and ROC are dependent on predictable and healthy water flow. This habitat is integral among regional aquatic biological priorities (see Section 1.4). Altered flow, in-river structures (locks and dams), pre-Clean Water Act water quality degradation, dredging, sedimentation, isolation of key habitats from river mainstem, pollution received from tributaries, and intensive industrial and other development along the mainstem Ohio River collectively stress fish and mussel populations in the river (WVDNR 2015).

According to the 2015 Draft of the West Virginia State Wildlife Action Plan (WVDNR 2015), water quality continues to be of significant conservation concern. Spills can cause acute mussel impacts, such as a spill-related, 30 mile long mussel kill on the Ohio River in 1999, a coal slurry spill on the Tug Fork in 2000, and the complete loss of mussel populations in Dunkard Creek in 2009. WVDNR (2015) also notes that the greatest impact to mussel populations may be from chronic watershed input, such as elevated ammonia for wastewater discharges or chloride discharges from industrial effluents. Recent research shows that mussels are much more susceptible to chemicals such as ammonia and chlorides than the typical aquatic organisms used to establish water quality standards (WVDNR 2015 citing Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 2011; Patnode et al. in prep.).

Large river systems like the Ohio River sustain unique fish and aquatic life that are suited specifically for these large rivers. Historic and current impacts to the river have resulted in many species being identified as conservation priorities. Sand and gravel dredging is still permitted in the West Virginia portion of the upper Ohio River (with the current permit expiring in 2017). Altered flow, pre-Clean Water Act water quality degradation, and intensive industrial and other development occur along the mainstem Ohio River. Today, West Virginia’s SGCN list for mussels includes 53 species, with 27 considered Priority 1 species (WVDNR 2015). The updated draft of West Virginia’s State Wildlife Action Plan notes the northern panhandle region and adjacent section of the mainstem Ohio River have great potential for mussel restoration in areas not impacted by commercial sand and gravel dredging. WVDNR (2015) also notes that additional improvements in water quality are needed, and stream segments with high water quality need to be maintained.

The Ohio 2015 Update to the State Wildlife Action Plan (ODNR 2015) provides a good summary, organized by pool, of the habitat condition and regional management efforts along the Ohio River (See ODNR 2015 Section 6.15: Ohio River). As noted in this summary, “considering that the Ohio River today bears no resemblance to the river that existed in pre-settlement days, the river still supports tremendous numbers and diversity of aquatic species.” The largest threats to habitat quality on the Ohio River are the results of sediment inputs, invasive species introductions, agricultural and sewage effluent, and channel modifications (dams and channel dredging) associated with navigation.

Management Direction and Expected Impact: Due to inability to control the Ohio River both in terms of water flow and the water quality contribution of the greater watershed, USFWS direct management capability is to some extent “passive” and otherwise dependent on local and regional partnerships. The long-term goal is to continue to participate in or lead efforts to sustain and improve River biological integrity. On the ORINWR, the USFWS strives to establish

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-19 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

and maintain healthy populations of native freshwater mussels; fish foraging, velocity shelter, and spawning habitat; and other parameters that address ROC conservation needs. ORINWR can support ecosystem functions on a localized scale (especially with respect to mussel communities, which provide water quality services/filtration, and organic processing, etc.), restoration of aquatic species communities (e.g., establishing new population “nodes” at specific locations), and construct or install flow-altering devices (e.g., dikes) and fish passage structures. These activities are expected to protect rare species and sustain these unique native riverine species assemblages within the altered hydrology of the Ohio River.

Relationship of Management Strategies to Objectives: The ORINWR open water habitat is influenced by, and managed in conjunction with consideration of, river hydrology, morphology, and known and unknown external challenges and threats. Legacy impacts include past, current, and future commercial sand gravel dredging adjacent to ORINWR. Shorelines are affected by increased wave action derived from navigation through the channel and suspension of sediment from wake-induced erosion. The management of dams and lock and pool function affect aquatic species and their population connectivity, and hydropower priorities alter water flow. Nonpoint source inputs throughout the watershed include sediment and chemical runoff from logging, oil and gas, roads, pipelines, agriculture, and impervious surfaces.

The multi-jurisdictional nature of ORINWR (ORINWR overlaps 4 states and 3 USFWS regions) requires extensive collaboration to tailor specific solutions to localized areas, especially in regions with aging infrastructure and sewage and water treatment plants that may contribute to nutrient and ammonia loading into aquatic systems. Selected management strategies addresses internal limiting factors and potential impediments to successful habitat management, such as the complexity of conducting underwater surveys in big river ecosystems. Past projects and efforts have involved partnerships such as USFWS Ecological Services and Fisheries Programs, Ohio River Fisheries Management Team (ORFMT), and Mississippi Interstate Cooperative Resource Association (MICRA), Ohio Environmental Protection Agency’s statewide biological and water quality monitoring program, the Ohio River Sanitation Commission’s (ORSANCO) Ohio River monitoring program, and other various State partners (ODNR 2015; WVDNR 2015). Maintaining strong partnerships over the life of this HMP and beyond will continue to be critical to improving the health of the Ohio River and its corresponding improvements to aquatic habitat at ORINWR.

Jurisdictionality in regards to land ownership and regulatory authority along the Ohio River varies by State. This is an added layer of complexity in regards to ORINWR’s ability to manage or protect parcels owned as part of ORINWR. In Kentucky and West Virginia, ORINWR owns the riverbed down to the historic low water mark prior to the construction of the locks and dams (which includes an underwater boundary around islands). Thus, the Service can prevent activities such as dredging and mooring in these states. In Pennsylvania, the Service does not own the riverbed and therefore, has more limited influence on this habitat. In these cases, ORINWR ownership terminates at the ordinary high water mark. In all cases, ORINWR does not own the water that flows across, around, or over its boundaries. Therefore, activities such as boating are not regulated by ORINWR.

Other strategies are aligned with the need to work within the natural river morphology present at the various ORINWR aquatic habitats. The morphology of the Ohio River has been impacted by the channel modifications noted previously for navigational purposes. In areas outside of the impounding effect of dams, river morphological processes still shape the habitat present. Deep scour pools create resting and foraging areas for large river fish, like paddlefish, while more shallow depositional features, such as riffles and gravel bars, provide for spawning habitat and mussel beds. Future strategies may involve working

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-20 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

with these natural river processes to enhance habitat availability for critical needs of ROC, such as paddlefish, blue sucker, shovelnose sturgeon, and other riverine fish, plus riverine-dependent mussels. Research on paddlefish found that individuals may congregate near human-made structures that create eddies and reduce current velocity (Southall and Hubert 1984 as cited by Natureserve 2015). In summer, in the unimpounded, unchannelized Missouri River in South Dakota-Nebraska, paddlefish are most often found in areas downstream from submerged sandbars (Rosen et al. 1982 as cited by Natureserve 2015).

Fish populations and communities are monitored by the WVDNR, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and ORSANCO. The ORINWR, in partnership with these agencies, can monitor status and trends in fish populations over time.

4.7 HMP OBJECTIVE 3: RIPARIAN SHORELINES AND BANKS

Figure 4-2. Diagram of Typical Riparian Shoreline and Riverbank Habitat

Goal: Protect and enhance the long term stability of riverbanks and island shoreline habitat to support migrating and nesting birds, reptiles, and rare invertebrates.

Objective 3: Protect and Enhance Shoreline and Riverbank Habitat

Over the life of the HMP, protect and enhance the long term stability of riverbanks and island shoreline habitat that maintain natural profiles free of hard armoring, unless required for infrastructure or safety. Shorelines and banks will support the nesting and foraging needs of migratory birds like bank swallows, and nesting habitat for riverine turtles (Eastern spiny softshell and snapping turtle). Protect depositional processes and nearshore river morphology dynamics to sustain nearshore cobble areas in support of full life history needs of rare invertebrates such as the cobblestone tiger beetle.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-21 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Protection of these habitats will include maintaining the following characteristics: • Shorelines: Retain a minimum of 70% of the horizontal shoreline habitat features in a mixture of coarse sand, gravel, and cobble with less than 10% shrubby vegetation (black willow, false indigo bush, alder, and dogwoods). • Low Bank: will contain stable bank slopes of 50% or flatter that are persistently vegetated by native shrubs including willows, alders, and dogwoods, plus herbaceous plants such as wild rye and dogbane. • High Banks: Preserve a minimum of 30% of the vertical bank features (i.e., those banks having greater than 50% slope) for nesting bank swallows and other birds (e.g., belted kingfisher). Desired bank soil composition is a sand-gravel-clay mixed alluvium/silt sand including less than 5% persistent vegetation.

Acres to Achieve Objective: 31

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources

A. Review bank erosion rate data as provided by USACE; establish permanent benchmarks in control areas with little to no visible erosion, plus areas of visible soil loss. This will aid future prioritization and selection of appropriate techniques. B. Where erosion control is required to protect water quality and riverine habitat, stabilization methods such as low rise (< 4 feet tall) longitudinal stone dikes (or similar) with gaps will maintain natural bank profiles and allow ingress and egress for wildlife and people C. Communicate/work with Pennsylvania partners to pursue dredge hole remediation/filling D. Continue to pursue bank stabilization with partners (USACE, States) as funding and needs allow. E. Develop outreach efforts to promote no wake zones near islands/shoreline zones F. Invasive Species control: conduct EDRR for new potential threats (see Appendix D and prioritization tools)

With input of additional resources, such as funding, partnerships, or staff, ORINWR will: • Create habitat for cobblestone tiger beetle using existing research and partnerships to guide locations and techniques for habitat restoration and/or enhancement. Consider enhancement measures to encourage course or cobble substrate in areas suitable for beetle colonization.

What management-related tools are needed or additional data are necessary to properly inform management decisions into the future?

• Need to develop monitoring protocol for measuring trends in cobblestone tiger beetle populations. • Need to identify desirable substrate for cobblestone tiger beetle habitat requirements. • Need to define bank nesting bird survey protocols. • Need to evaluate extent of high bank versus low bank across ORINWR to identify existing plus potential habitat for focal species. • Complete additional monitoring and evaluation efforts as identified in the ORINWR Inventory and Monitoring Plan.

Rationale

Importance of Habitat Conservation:

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-22 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Shorelines and riverbanks provide unique transition zones between aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Sandy patches within cobblestone islands, typically found on the upstream shoreline of river islands, support lifecycle needs of the cobblestone beetle. These unique habitats are highly vulnerable to alterations in water level and flow; they can be easily scoured by increased velocity and can be damaged by sustained high or low water levels.

Conservation strategies such as the State’s wildlife action plans (Ohio Division of Wildlife and WVDNR 2015) note stream and riverbank erosion as a major contributor to degraded water quality. Siltation/sedimentation caused by bank erosion causes the deposition of fine soil particles on the bottom of stream and river channels, which can adversely impact fish and mussel habitat. This sediment deposition typically follows high-flow events that erode banks and pick up soil particles from the land. These eroded soils also transport other pollutants, which bond to the soil particles. As the flow decreases, these soil particles fall to the river bottom. In doing so, they cover and bury coarse gravel and sand substrate that is necessary stream habitat for many aquatic organisms.

Management Direction and Expected Impact: The focus of ORINWR shoreline and riverbank habitat management is the continued maintenance of shoreline (or near-shore gravel bars and transient sediment depositional areas) presence, preservation/maintenance of stable, yet steep and exposed, riverbanks that provide suitable nesting for bank burrowing birds, and maintaining overall stability in this modified river environment. As described for Objective 2 (see Section 4.5), the USFWS does not have a large scale influence on water flow or quality throughout the greater Ohio River watershed. However, within the boundaries of the ORINWR, ORINWR can maintain natural banks and support localized geomorphic processes that sustain habitat and promote stability.

Relationship of Management Strategies to Objectives: Riverbanks are essential for the movement of wildlife, including nesting stages of species such as turtles, sandpipers, and bank swallows. Turtles (such as the eastern spiny softshell and snapping turtle) require sandy or fine gravel substrate to dig nests, which again are vulnerable to scour or unseasonally elevated or depressed water levels. Bank swallows, kingfishers, and other birds that burrow into steep, exposed riverbanks require this habitat niche within the river corridor for their nest site selection.

A large river with heavy use and modified hydrology, is susceptible to bank erosion. All rivers and streams experience some level of bank erosion as part of their natural morphology. However, many of the river alterations and land use changes over the past 100 years or more have led to increasing instability for many river systems. These changes result in an increased rate of erosion when compared to historic levels or levels observed in stable channels (Rosgen 2006). As a result of this instability, bank stabilization efforts are constructed to protect against ongoing erosion. These efforts commonly rely upon hard armoring such as sheet piling or rip rap from the water’s edge all the way up to the top of the riverbank. These hard armoring techniques often stop erosion locally, however they can transfer energy downstream to other locations, and eliminate habitat availability for bank nesting bird species. Furthermore, the vertical or uneven bank profiles created by these structures makes access along the riparian zone difficult, and eliminates habitat features for resident amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. As such, ORINWR proposes using low impact bank stabilization methods where needed, such as low head longitudinal stone dikes with gaps to allow ingress and egress by wildlife and people. The minimization of hard armoring along banks will allow for increased use by burrowing species, such as turtles and bank swallow.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-23 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Shoreline areas, embodied by transitional riverbed features dominated by coarse sediment (greater than 1 mm in diameter) include features such as gravel bars, seasonally exposed gravel beds, riffles, and near-bank areas containing little or no vegetation. These areas (e.g., Buckley Island, Muskingum Island, and Paden Island) provide conditions favorable for the cobblestone tiger beetle. This species is predaceous in both the larval and adult stage. Larvae are "sit and wait" predators on small insects. The beetle larvae inhabit burrows from one to four mm in diameter, dug in sandy spots between the cobbles (Natureserve 2015).

The strategies envisioned for the protecting and enhancing shoreline and riverbank habitat are aimed at providing a stable and enhanced condition given the modified river system. These strategies attempt to address known external challenges and threats identified by ORINWR, as well as resource managers along the Ohio River (Ohio Division of Wildlife and WVDNR 2015): o Fill historic dredge holes to a depth more consistent with geographically stable pool formations within undisturbed reaches of the River. o Remove exotic species that displace natives and can cause loss of bank stability, such as from Japanese knotweed colonization. o Reduce navigation and recreational boat wake-induced erosion. o Work with partners to reduce habitat impacts (e.g., sediment, pollutants, nutrients, etc.) caused by off-ORINWR land use

Strategies tied to stabilization efforts and localized riverbed enhancement using flow re-direction and morphologic enhancements require specialized expertise, detailed designs, regulatory approvals, and heavy equipment to construct. Implementing a single project requires a great deal of time, effort, and cost. The USACE has designed projects for all the ORINWR island units, and some have been already built, using grants, FEMA money, and cooperative programs with other agencies. The biggest impediment to implementing these projects is funding; the most promising potential source looks to be state mitigation banks and in-lieu fee programs, which have assets in excess of $20 million dollars in WV alone. In Pennsylvania, ORINWR has partnered with the Pittsburgh Corps of Engineers to build low head dikes at Phillis and Georgetown islands as a beneficial use of dredged material project. This saves the USACE money compared with its traditional disposal at landfills, and benefits the ORINWR by stabilizing and restoring island habitat. The ORINWR will continue and hopefully expand this partnership.

4.8 HMP OBJECTIVE 4: FLOODPLAIN WETLANDS

Goal: Protect and restore open water and emergent floodplain wetlands hydrologically connected to the Ohio River to reduce sediment, improve water quality, and support migrating and wintering waterbirds and resident amphibians.

Objective 4: Protect and Restore Floodplain Wetlands Habitat

Protect and restore 20 acres of open water and emergent floodplain wetlands hydrologically connected to the Ohio River to reduce sediment, improve water quality, and to sustain biological integrity that provide for the life history needs of resident amphibian communities, including species such as northern leopard frog and wood frog, and stopover habitat for migrating waterfowl, including the American black duck. Through 2032, manage 20 acres of wetlands to support:

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-24 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

• Shallow water (less than 3 feet deep) and emergent wetlands with a mixture of rushes, sedges, woolgrass, downed trees and logs • Maintaining less than 10% cover of trees and less than 10% cover by invasive grasses and forbs • Restoring an additional 10 acres of historic wetlands on ORINWR where they have been filled or drained

Acres to Achieve Objective: 20, plus restoration of additional 10 acres on ORINWR units that historically supported wetland habitat.

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources

• Evaluate the restoration potential for additional wetland acres in areas of islands with evidence of historic scour and wetland presence. o Identify and evaluate potential restoration sites via desktop analysis and field surveys with local NRCS personnel and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Offices. o Identify, then remove or break former agricultural tile where possible/feasible on ORINWR units with historic agricultural activities to restore wetland hydrology. • Annually conduct invasive species control techniques specifically applicable to floodplain wetlands for purple loosestrife, Phragmites, and non-native narrowleaf cattail. Possible techniques to be used include: o Mechanical: hand pulling and cutting, power cutting, and mowing o Chemical: pesticide application with sprayers, booms, cut stump, and aerial application o Natural: flooding, prescribed fire o Biological: targeted insects, pathogens, and grazers (e.g., sheep, goats); overplanting/shading out with desired vegetation

With input of additional resources, such as funding, partnerships, or staff, ORINWR will: • Work with other partners with holdings of floodplain property to pursue additional floodplain wetland restoration on, or adjacent to, ORINWR. Possible partners include USACE, USFS, States, and Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program.

• Complete additional monitoring and evaluation efforts as identified in the ORINWR Inventory and Monitoring Plan.

What management-related tools are needed or additional data are necessary to properly inform management decisions into the future?

• Work with partners to review projected changes in precipitation and River stages and consider implications for floodplain wetland hydrology • Monitor functional quality / assessment of wetlands [see West Virginia tool currently under development or the Ohio Rapid Assessment Method (ORAM)] • Evaluate the utility of conducting annual frog and toad monitoring consistent with State partner agency protocols to monitor long term status and trends. • Determine what is natural or desirable for this system and establish a potential comparative endpoint

Rationale

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-25 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Importance of Habitat Conservation: Floodplain wetlands are limited in their overall presence along the Ohio River and ORINWR. Across this region, wetlands were converted for agriculture, industry, and transportation development. The floodplain wetlands that remain on ORINWR today are scattered remnant features. . Since the late 18th century, 90% of Ohio’s wetland resources have been destroyed or degraded through draining, filling or other wetland modifications (OEPA 2013). Losses in West Virginia and Pennsylvania have been 24% and 56% respectively over the same time period (Dahl 1990). With the extensive human development that exists along the Ohio River today, ORINWR-owned habitats present the largest opportunity for restoration of open water and emergent floodplain wetlands along the river.

Floodplain wetlands originated geologically as scour sites resulting from flooding and depositional processes that resulted in the creation of the islands in the Ohio River. Large flood events have become less frequent with the manipulation of the watershed through tributary reservoir management and damming of the river for navigation. As a result, the morphological processes that created and sustained these wetland features are impeded within the river corridor. The remnant wetlands present today still provide some ecological services and functionality (e.g., wildlife habitat, water storage, and filtration of sediment and pollutants).

Management Direction and Expected Impact: At the present time, the 20 acres of floodplain wetlands at ORINWR are located on Middle, Grape, Captina mainland property, the Headquarters unit, and the Belleville FmHA conservation easement. Due to their small size, these features provide some habitat value for focal species, but there is at present limited opportunity for restoration or expansion at ORINWR within its current ownership. As such, the focus of management envisioned within this Plan is to preserve existing wetlands and sustain their biological integrity. Where feasible on-refuge, the Refuge staff will consider restoring new wetlands as the opportunity arises and funds are available. Where located adjacent to the Refuge, the Refuge will help facilitate restoration via the Partners for Wildlife program.

Relationship of Management Strategies to Objectives: A. Annually address external challenges and threats: 1) Reduce/control invasive species, such as purple loosestrife through use of biological and chemical controls. 2) Evaluate the range of potential impacts of climate change on river discharge, seasonality, flow, duration, and elevations. Hydrologic inputs to floodplain wetlands are generally precipitation driven (rarely overbank flooding under the current hydrologic regime). Climate change scenarios affecting river stage will directly impact ORINWR wetland resources B. Work with partners to educate the public on the value of wetlands as flood storage, reduction in flood heights elsewhere, and the gradual release of flood waters over time to help mitigate droughts. Annually address internal limiting factors/potential impediments to successful habitat management: 1) Evaluate opportunities to team with partners to improve and expand wetland acreage on or adjacent to ORINWR.

In maintaining open water wetlands surrounded by riparian forests, the condition sustained by these wetlands will support ROC such as waterfowl and amphibians and reptiles. American black ducks, as well as other waterfowl, require a variety of emergent and shrub-scrub wetland vegetation including bluejoint grass, sedges, water lily, and pondweed. This vegetation is typical of shallow, relatively

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-26 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

permanent wetlands with emergent vegetation with some woody vegetation nearby. Waterfowl, such as ducks, nest in sites often near edges or breaks in cover (Longcore et al. 2000). Some of these wetlands are persistent year-round, while others are temporal and may dry up by late summer. Most of these wetlands support a diverse community of native frogs and toads, including spring peeper, American toad, Fowler’s toad, spadefoot toad, pickerel frog, northern leopard frog and wood frog. Emergent vegetation and absence of fish predators are key habitat feature of the wetlands supporting frogs and toads (Myers et al. 2017).

4.9 HMP OBJECTIVE 5: TEMPERATE UPLAND FOREST

Goal: Maintain landscape level connectivity of upland forest for migrating and nesting landbirds, and summering bats.

Objective 5: Sustain and Enhance Temperate Upland Forest

Over the life of the HMP, manage approximately 103 acres of existing upland forest at Buckley Mainland, and Captina Islands, plus transition up to an additional 50 acres from early successional old field habitat, to promote mature forest structure. This condition will support a range of migratory and breeding landbirds, including annually an average of at least 9 breeding pairs of Kentucky warbler, 40 breeding pairs of wood thrush, and at least seven species of bats. Upland forest will be managed through allowing natural succession and disturbance to occur, as well as active management techniques to enhance forest structure, composition, and regeneration to support the following mature / old growth characteristics: • Mature trees (around 80 years old) transition to old growth (around 150 years+) • Minimum patch size of 100 ha (250 acres), including surrounding non-ORINWR forest cover; maintain connectivity between adjacent forest patches • Average tree diameters greater than 16 inches DBH • Forest structure will contain a mix of canopy, moderate subcanopy, and shrub/saplings • Standing nesting snags and dead trees with cavities, crevices, and flaky bark, greater than 16 inches in diameter, with a target density of 15 snags per acre. • Live trees (>16 inches dbh) with cavities and dead limbs • Canopy composition with greater than 80% cover dominated by species such as oak, hickory, cherry, and other hardwoods • A dense shrub/sapling layer containing 30 to 60% shrub or subcanopy cover • Diverse species composition that increases resilience and adaptive capacity against landscape scale threats, such as climate change, hydrological alterations, rural landscape conversion, and others • Dense ground cover containing 70% or higher cover by native forest understory vegetation and downed woody material

Acres to Achieve Objective: 103, plus an additional 50 in transition from old field

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources A. Maintain where adequate and restore where needed the structural health of the mature upland forest community : 1) Conduct a Forest Inventory and Condition Assessment

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-27 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2) Plant supplemental trees and shrubs to achieve mixed-age structure, based on historic species assemblages and predicted adaptation to climate change 3) Girdling and chemical treatment for snag creation to achieve snag density target 4) Girdling to remove undesirable species (amur cork and tree of heaven) 5) Direct intervention to create canopy gaps / open canopy if metrics for ROC are not being met 6) Leave large dead trees in place on all divisions for Indiana bat, little brown bat, and red bat, as well as cavity-nesting birds (dead trees creating a safety hazard will be removed) 7) Passively allow transition of up to an additional 50 acres from old field to upland forest B. If habitat metrics for maternal roosting of tree-dwelling bat communities are not being met: 1) Evaluate use of bat boxes/artificial structures, as needed 2) Ensure forest areas provide the target size of snags 3) Ensure presence of tree species with peeling and flaking bark, such as maples, hickories, and sycamore, and healthy dense leaf cover C. Annually plan and implement techniques for controlling invasive species in forested habitats include: 1) Mechanical: cutting, power cutting, and mowing 2) Chemical: pesticide application with sprayers, booms, cut stump, and hand-spray application 3) Biological: targeted insects, pathogens, and grazers (e.g., sheep, goats); overplanting/shading out with desired vegetation D. Establish forest health monitoring to evaluate long-term success in management and trajectory towards habitat objective: 1) Develop a baseline for forest condition (including: designated metrics for forest inventory and existing community, floristic quality, and disturbance regime) 2) Establish management protocol appropriate for most problematic invasive species and develop/adjust management strategies accordingly (invasive decision-tree tool)

With input of additional resources, such as funding, partnerships, or staff, ORINWR will: • Sample all units for bat presence (currently only 1 acoustic sample in upland forest habitat) • Complete additional monitoring and evaluation efforts as identified in the ORINWR Inventory and Monitoring Plan.

What management-related tools are needed or additional data are necessary to properly inform management decisions into the future? • Improved tools for invasive species management: Need further biological controls, including the testing and evaluating of new controls for problematic invasive species, understanding the availability of ORINWR to be selected as a case-study location for existing controls not yet USFWS-approved, and the eventual implementation of new controls. • Work with partners in the surrounding States, LCC, TNC to improve our understanding of the habitats along the Ohio River corridor and ORINWR’s best conservation contribution within the landscape. • What is the importance of Ohio River corridor to migrating birds as relevant to the potential need for further, targeted habitat protection? • Is there an “Area of Irreplaceability” (related to landscape design) that is within ORINWR purview? • What are the bat population diversity and dynamics at ORINWR, and what habitat requirements or preferences do bats have within ORINWR?

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-28 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Rationale Importance of Habitat Conservation: The mixed hardwood upland forest is characteristic of the low hills adjacent to the Ohio River Valley. Its relatively small presence on ORINWR is due to the limited ownership of tracts out of the floodplain. Many of these tracts came into ORINWR contiguous to riparian habitat sold or donated by a given landowner. This upland forest type is well represented in the regional landscape, such as the Wayne and Boone National Forests. The maintenance of the same forest habitat at ORINWR promotes landscape connectivity and reduces edge. The value to ORINWR ROC is only possible, in part, through the availability and presence of upland forest in neighboring lands. Combined, ORINWR’s upland forests contain patch sizes large enough to support nesting ROC such as landbirds, including Kentucky warbler and wood thrush, plus mammals, such as some species of tree-roosting bats.

Management Direction and Expected Impact: Over the course of this HMP, ORINWR’s long-term goal is to sustain mature, healthy forests through natural disturbance regimes and/or the use of active management /mechanical disturbance techniques that mimic and achieve objectives of passive management (including: flooding, windthrow, ice storms, fire, and insects/fungal infestation). Beyond the life of the HMP, ORINWR envisions management will continue to promote successional development to mature and old growth forests. By promoting this forest structure and development, the Service will address the conservation needs of ROC.

Relationship of Management Strategies to Objectives: Implementing the strategies noted is intended to promote desired forest structure and composition endpoints, which require a timeframe beyond the 15-years encompassed within this HMP. In doing so, ORINWR will attempt to address known and unknown external challenges and threats: o climate change o exotic pests and invasive species o deer herbivory o access to and distribution of remote units supporting this habitat o internal constraints due to funding and staffing

Many of the details regarding management strategies and ROC habitat associations were described previously under the Riparian Forests objective. In addition to the rationale detailed there, some of the strategies outlined for upland forests are intended to sustain conditions for different ROC. In particular, Kentucky warblers prefer a dense understory of thicket-forming species for their optimal breeding habitat. However, the degree to which shade, i.e., closed canopy, is preferred is not clear in the published literature. More recent research has indicated that patches of light, perhaps for increased foraging, are a determinant of optimal habitat. For example, one study of nesting sites in a bottomland hardwood forest found that Kentucky warblers prefer tree-fall gaps in densely shaded forest (Kilgo et al. 1996 as cited by McDonald 2013). Dense groundcover is another important component of providing habitat for Kentucky warbler and other forest landbirds. In Arkansas, Hunt (2000), using Principle Component Analysis on 72 occupied and unoccupied plots, also showed the importance of dense ground cover and the foliage layer from ground up to 1 m. Slope was the most important environmental variable, however, with flatter landform more likely to be occupied (Hunt 2000 as cited by McDonald 2013).

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-29 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

4.10 HMP OBJECTIVE 6: OLD FIELD AND MEADOWS

Goal: Convert remnant early successional habitats to natural forest habitats in support of forest-dependent species.

Objective 6: Transition Old Field and Meadows to Riparian and Upland Forests

Over the life of the HMP, allow the current 386 acres of old field and meadow habitat dispersed throughout ORINWR to transition to riparian (336 acres) or upland forest (50 acres) habitat as appropriate. As a result, associated targets and ROC for the relevant forest communities are discussed in Objective 1: Riparian Forest and Objective 5: Upland Forest. Small patches of meadows and lawns adjacent to headquarters and on Middle Island (6 to 7 acres total) will be managed as native pollinator habitat and provide opportunities for environmental education and outreach on pollinator plantings.

Acres to Achieve Objective: < 10 (Currently there are 386 acres of old fields and meadows, but after 15 years, we plan for 6 to 7 acres)

Prioritized Strategies for Achieving Objective With Existing Resources

A. After 2020, as needed to achieve the habitat objective, plant native trees and shrubs to accelerate succession to desired forest assemblages. B. Annually plan and implement invasive species control techniques specifically applicable to fields and shrublands: 1) Mechanical: hand pulling and cutting, power cutting, and mowing 2) Chemical: pesticide application with sprayers, booms, cut stump, and aerial application 3) Natural: prescribed fire C. Consider supporting habitat management through additional interpretative educational pursuits: 1) Where applicable/as appropriate, maximize/enhance educational opportunity for pollinator outreach. 2) Maintain 6 to 7 acres of persistent early successional old fields as pollinator habitat around headquarters and Middle Island using native plant landscaping. 3) With volunteer help, build and manage a native plant nursery to demonstrate best management practices for raising native plants that benefit pollinators. 4) Consider pollinator monitoring via citizen scientist involvement. Service guidance on pollinator monitoring protocols is forthcoming.

Rationale

Field habitats (e.g., meadows, glades, etc.) were not an important habitat in this landscape historically, and the old field acres on ORINWR are remnants of agriculture and human occupation (not natural ecosystem processes). The ORINWR does not have enough contiguous early successional acreage to be ultimately beneficial to focal species that require grassland habitat; thus, it is cheaper and more effective to focus management efforts to benefit priority habitats and the range of ROC and trust resources present on ORINWR. Maintaining dispersed old field and meadow habitats (e.g., mowing, burning, spraying, removing taller trees, etc.) spread out among 18 units (and most requiring boat access for equipment) are an expensive commitment. Connecting forest blocks together reduces edge effects and creates more contiguous forest habitats for ORINWR focal species. The suite of forest dependent species of concern in this ecosystem greatly exceeds the list of early successional species (see Appendix B).

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-30 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

While old fields and shrublands are transitioning to forest habitats, they still can provide valuable habitat. These areas will continue to provide migratory stopover for a range of breeding landbirds. Additionally, the current conservation emphasis on pollinators can be supported by all ORINWR habitats: herbaceous flowering plants, shrubs, and trees. Long-term, over the life of this HMP and in the following years, the added forested acres (riparian and upland forest) will more fully support ORINWR’s purpose and major habitat goals. At the same time, there are six to seven acres of old field and current “lawn” habitat near the Refuge headquarters and Middle Island (both of which are easily accessible to the public) that can and will be managed to support a broad suite of pollinators (bees, butterflies, moth, birds, etc.), with emphasis on monarch butterfly breeding and migrating habitat. Although acreages may be small, the position of the ORINWR within the larger landscape in PA, WV and KY indicates a high relative importance for breeding monarch butterfly (Flockhart et al. 2013; and Wassenaar and Hobson 1998). Seed mixes for plantings are chosen with milkweeds and other flowering perennials and annuals to support monarch butterfly and other pollinators throughout the seasons of their occurrence on ORINWR.

4.0 Habitat Goal, Objectives, and 4-31 April 2017 Management Strategies Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

5.0 LITERATURE CITED

Anderson, S.H., and C.S. Robbins. 1981. Habitat size and bird community management. Transatlantic North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 46:511-20. Appalachian Landscape Conservation Cooperative (LCC). 2014. Annual Report. _____. 2013. 5-Year Work Plan. _____. 2012. Indicators/Surrogate Species, Natural Resource Indicators/Surrogates Species Work Group, from the 5-Year Work Plan. Available online at: http://applcc.org/cooperative/our-organization/sc/sc-past-meetings-and-materials/sc- meeting-workshop-april-22-24-2013/indicators-surrogate-species Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Region (AMBCR) Partnership. 2005. Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Initiative Concept Plan. August. Available online at: http://www.partnersinflight.org/bcps/pifplans.htm Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture. 2015. 3-Year Operational Plan (2015-2018). Online at: http://amjv.org/documents/AMJV_2015-18_operational_plan_Approved_June_2015.pdf _____. 2013. Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture Program Summary Brochure. _____. 2008. Implementation Plan for the Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture: A Foundation for All-Bird Conservation in the Region. Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 2006. Dessecker, D.R., G.W. Norman, and S.J. Williamson, eds. Ruffed Grouse Conservation Plan. September. Brown, S., C. Hickey, B. Harrington, and R. Gill, eds. 2001. The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, 2nd ed. Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, Manomet, MA. Buler J.J. and D.K. Dawson. 2014. Radar analysis of fall bird migration stopover sites in the northeastern U.S. The Condor Ornithological Applications. Volume 116, 2014, pp. 357– 370. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2011. Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life: Chloride. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Online at: http://www.fwspubs.org/doi/suppl/10.3996/052013-JFWM- 033/suppl_file/patnodereference+s2.pdf Cardno. 2014. Ohio River Islands Vegetation Mapping Report. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge. Caro, T. 2010. Conservation by Proxy: Indicator, Umbrella, Keystone, Flagship and Other Surrogate Species. Island Press, Washington, DC. 374 pp. Crampton, L.H. and R. Barclay. 1998. Selection of roosting and foraging habitat by bats in different-aged aspen mixedwood stands. Conservation Biology 12:1347-1358. Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetland Losses in the United States: 1780's to 1980’s. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington. D.C. 13pp.

6.0 Literature Cited 5-1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Dixon M.D., K. Heist, K. Tinsley. 2013. The state of bats in conservation planning for the National Wildlife Refuge System, with recommendations. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management. 4: 406–422. doi: 10.3996/122012-JFWM-106 Faber-Langendoen, J. Rocchio, S. Thomas, M. Kost, C. Hedge, B. Nichols, K. Strakosch Walz, G. Kittel, S. Mennard, J. Drake, and E. Muldavin. 2012. Assessment of wetlands ecosystem condition across landscape regions: a mult-metric approach. Part B. Ecological integrity assessment protocols for rapid field methods. EPA/600/R-12/021b. Fenton, M.B., R.M. Barclay. 1980. Myotis lucifugus. Mammalian Species 142:1-8. Fleming, K. 2015. Designing, Creating, and Regulating the Ohio River. University of Cincinnati. 11pp. Online: http://filsonhistorical.org/wp-content/uploads/Fleming-Filson- Conference.pdf Flockhart D.T.T., L.I. Wassenaar, T.G. Martin, K.A. Hobson, M.B. Wunder, and D.R. Norris. 2013. Tracking multi-generational colonization of the breeding grounds by monarch butterflies in eastern North America. Proc R Soc B 280: 20131087. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.1087 Friedman, J.M., and G.T. Auble. 2000. Floods, flood control and bottomland vegetation. In Inland Flood Hazards: Human, Riparian, and Aquatic Communities, 219-237. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Gray, H.H. 1991. Origin and History of the Teays Drainage System: The View from Midstream. In Melhorn, W.N., and Kempton, K.P., eds. Geology and Hydrogeology of the Teays- Mahoment Bedrock Valley System. Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Special Paper 258. Hamel, P. B., H. E. LeGrand Jr., M. R. Lennartz, and S. A. Gauthreaux, Jr. 1982. Bird-habitat relationships on southeastern forest lands. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report SE-22. Hansen, M. C. 1995. The Teays River. GeoFacts No. 10, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological Survey. Henderson, L.E., Farrow, L.J., and Broders, H.G. 2008. Intra-specific effects of forest loss on the distribution of the forest-dependent northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentionalis). Biological Conservation 141:1819-1828. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR). 2013. Kentucky's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Accessed on 01 Dec 2015 at: http://fw.ky.gov/WAP/Pages/Default.aspx Kilgo, J. C., R. A. Sargent, K. V. Miller and B. R. Chapman. 1996b. Nest sites of Kentucky Warblers in bottomland hardwoods of South Carolina. Journal of Field Ornithology no. 67 (2):300-306. Kushlan, J., M. Steinkamp, K. Parsons, J. Capp, M. Cruz, M. Coulter, I. Davidson, L. Dickson, N. Edelson, R. Elliot, R. Michael Erwin, S. Hatch, S. Kress, R. Milko, S. Miller, K. Mills, R. Paul, R. Phillips, J. Saliva, B. Sydeman, J. Trapp, J. Wheeler, and K. Wohl. 2002.

6.0 Literature Cited 5-2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Waterbird Conservation for the Americas: The North American Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version 1. Waterbird Conservation for the Americas. Washington, DC, U.S.A. Longcore, J.R., D.G. Mcauley, G. R. Hepp and Judith M. Rhymer. 2000. American Black Duck (Anas rubripes), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online:http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/481. doi:10.2173/bna.481 McDonald, M.V. 2013. Kentucky Warbler (Geothlypis formosa), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/324. doi:10.2173/bna.324 Myers, P., R. Espinosa, C. S. Parr, T. Jones, G. S. Hammond, and T. A. Dewey. 2017. The Animal Diversity Web (online). Accessed at http://animaldiversity.org. National Bobwhite Technical Committee. 2011. Palmer, W.E., T.M. Terhune, and D.F. McKenzie (eds). The National Bobwhite Conservation Initiative: A Range-Wide Plan for Recovering Bobwhites. National Bobwhite Technical Committee Technical Publication, ver. 2.0 , Knoxville, TN. NatureServe. 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. _____. 2013. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). 2015. Ohio's State Wildlife Action Plan Update. Accessed on 01 Dec 2015 at: http://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/ohioswap _____. 2005. Ohio's State Wildlife Action Plan, 2005-2015. _____. 2001. Ohio Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy 2001-2010. Ohio Division of Wildlife. 2015. Ohio’s State Wildlife Action Plan. Columbus, Ohio, USA. Online at: http://wildlife.ohiodnr.gov/Portals/wildlife/pdfs/proposed%20rule%20changes/OHIO%202 015%20SWAP.pdf Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA). 2013. Ohio Wetlands Fact Sheet. Division of Surface Water. Columbus, OH. Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission. 2012. Biennial Assessment of Ohio River Water Quality Conditions 2007 ‐ 2011. ORSANCO, Cincinnati, Ohio. Patnode, K.A., E. Hittle, R.M. Anderson, L. Zimmerman, and J.W. Fulton. In Prep. of High Salinity Wastewater Discharges on Unionid Mussels in the Allegheny River, Pennsylvania. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management. Paveglio, F.L. and J.D. Taylor. 2010. Identifying Refuge Resources of Concern and Management Priorities: A Handbook. Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 60 pp. Pennsylvania Game Commission. 2015. State Wildlife Action Plan, 2015-2025. Accessed on 01 Dec 2015 at:

6.0 Literature Cited 5-3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=622722&mode=2 Ringleman, J., Anderson, K., Babcock, K. Bliss, D., Boomer, S., Case, D., Clark, B., Coppen, J., Dickson, K., Eadie, J., Goad, D., Humburg, D., Johnson, F., Johnson, M., Koneff, M., Mott, S., Raedeke, A., Smith, D., Soulliere, G., and S. Williams. 2012a. North American Waterfowl Management Plan 2012: People Conserving Waterfowl and Wetlands. Ringleman, J., Anderson, K., Babcock, K. Bliss, D., Boomer, S., Case, D., Clark, B., Coppen, J., Dickson, K., Eadie, J., Goad, D., Humburg, D., Johnson, F., Johnson, M., Koneff, M., Mott, S., Raedeke, A., Smith, D., Soulliere, G., and S. Williams. 2012b. North American Waterfowl Management Plan Action Plan: A Companion Document to the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. December.

Romano, S.P. 2010. Our Current Understanding of the Upper Mississippi River System Floodplain Forest. Hydrobiologia 640 (1): 115-124. Rosen, R. A., D. C. Hales, and D. G. Unkenholz. 1982. Biology and exploitation of paddlefish in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 111:216-222. Rosenberg, K.V., D. Pashley, B. Andres, P. J. Blancher, G.S. Butcher, W.C. Hunter, D. Mehlman, A.O. Panjabi, M. Parr, G. Wallace, and D. Wiedenfeld. 2014. The State of the Birds 2014 Watch List. North American Bird Conservation Initiative, U.S. Committee. Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://abcbirds.org/birds/watchlist/ Rosenberg, K.V, and R. Dettmers. 2004. Partners in Flight Landbird Conservation Plan, Physiographic Area 22: Ohio Hills, Version 1.1. April. Rosgen, D.L. 2006. Watershed Assessment for River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS). Wildland Hydrology. Fort Collins, CO. Southall, P. D., and W. A. Hubert. 1984. Habitat use by paddlefish in the upper Mississippi River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:125-131. Stark, J. 2013. Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan. The Nature Conservancy, Columbus, OH. Thogmartin, W. 2008. Modeling Avian Abundance: Results - Cerulean Warbler. Avian Species- of-Concern in the Appalachian Mountains (Bird Conservation Region 28). USGS. Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center. Online at: http://www.umesc.usgs.gov/terrestrial/migratory_birds/bird_conservation/bcr28_cerulean _warbler.html U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2006. Ohio River Mainstem Navigation Study, System Investmant Plan and Programmatic EIS. Nashville District. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2013. Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria For Ammonia – Freshwater. EPA-822-R-13-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water/Office of Science and Technology. Washington, DC. 255pp.

6.0 Literature Cited 5-4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual. Available online at http://www.fws.gov/policy/manuals/ _____. 2012a. USFWS Migratory Bird Program Focal Species Strategy, FY2012 – FY2016. Accessed on 24 Feb 2015 at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/FocalSpecies.html _____. 2012b. Strategic Habitat Conservation: Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. July _____. 2010. Rising to the Urgent Challenge: Strategic Plan for Responding to Accelerating Climate Change. _____. 2004. Migratory Bird Program Strategic Plan. Available online at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/AboutUS.html _____. 2002. Final Ohio River Islands Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Available online at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/ORI_WEB/chap1.htm _____. 1999. The Strategic Plan for Conservation of Fish and Wildlife Service Trust Resources in the Ohio River Valley Ecosystem. December U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Accessed on 2016. The ForeCASTS Project: Forecasts of Climate Associated Shifts in Tree Species. USDA Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center and the North Carolina State University Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, supported by funding from the USDA Forest Service Forest Health Monitoring Program. Online at: http://www.geobabble.org/~hnw/global/treeranges3/climate_change/index.html Wassenaar, L.I., and K.A. Hobson. 1998. Natal origins of migratory monarch butterflies at wintering colonies in Mexico: New isotopic evidence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:15436–15439. West Virginia Division of Natural Resources (WVDNR). 2015. Draft 2015 West Virginia State Wildlife Action Plan. Accessed on 01 Dec 2015 at: http://www.wvdnr.gov/Wildlife/Action_Plan.shtm _____. 2006. West Virginia Wildlife Conservation Action Plan. Wildlife Management Institute. 2008. American Woodcock Conservation Plan. Available online at: http://timberdoodle.org/sites/default/files/woodcockPlan_0.pdf Williams, B.K., R.C. Szaro, and C.D. Shapiro. 2009. Adaptive management: the U.S. Department of the Interior technical guide. Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. Wood, P.B., J. Sheehan, P. Keyser, D. Buehler, J. Larkin, A. Rodewald, S. Stoleson, T.B., Wigley, J. Mizel, T. Boves, G. George, M. Bakermans, T. Beachy, A. Evans, M. McDermott, F. Newell, K. Perkins, and M. White. 2013. Management guidelines for enhancing Cerulean Warbler breeding habitat in Appalachian hardwood forests. American Bird Conservancy. The Plains, Virginia. 28 pp.

6.0 Literature Cited 5-5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

6.0 ORINWR HMP PLANNING TEAM

Rebecca Young Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge Manager Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Patricia Morrison Refuge Biologist Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Laura Eaton Regional Refuge Biologist USFWS Region 5

West Virginia Division of Natural Clifford Brown Resources

Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Nevin Welte Commission

Western Pennsylvania Charles Bier Conservancy

The Nature Conservancy (Ohio) John Stark

Contracted Dan Salas Senior Ecologist, ESA/Senior Consultant Cardno, Inc.

Amy Paulson Environmental Analyst/Planner/Senior Associate Cardno, Inc.

6.0 ORINWR HMP Planning Team 6-1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

6.0 ORINWR HMP Planning Team 6-2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

APPENDIX A. HABITAT MAPS

(SEE SEPARATE PDF FILE ATTACHED)

Appendix A 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix A 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

APPENDIX B. REFUGE SPECIES LISTS

Appendix B 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix B 2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table B-1. Refuge Plants (Trees, Shrubs, Herbaceous)

Trees

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Aceraceae Acer negundo Boxelder N Aceraceae Acer nigrum Black sugar maple N Aceraceae Acer rubrum Red maple N Aceraceae Acer saccharinum Silver maple N Aceraceae Acer saccharum Sugar maple N Anacardiaceae Rhus glabra Smooth sumac N Anacardiaceae Rhus typhina Staghorn sumac N Annonaceae Asimina triloba Paw-paw N Aquifoliaceae Ilex opaca American holly N Betulaceae Betula lenta Black birch N Betulaceae Betula nigra River birch N Bignoniaceae Catalpa bignonioides Common catalpa E Bigoniaceaee Paulownia tomentosa Princess tree E Cornaceae Nyssa sylvatica Black gum N Cupressaceae Juniperus virginiana Red cedar N Cupressaceae Taxodium distichum Bald cypress I Ebenaccae Diospyros disyna Persimmon N Fabaceae Albizia julibrissin Mimosa tree E Fabaceae Cercis canadensis Redbud N Fabaceae Gleditsia tricanthos Honeylocust N Fabaceae Robinia pseudo-acacia Black locust N Fagaceae Castenea dentata American chestnut N Fagaceae Fagus grandifolia American beech N Fagaceae Quercus alba White oak N Fagaceae Quercus bicolor Swamp white oak N Fagaceae Quercus coccinea Scarlet oak N Fagaceae Quercus palustris Pin oak N Fagaceae Quercus prinus Chestnut oak N Fagaceae Quercus rubra Red oak N Fagaceae Quercus shumardii Shumard oak N Fagaceae Quercus velutina Black oak N Hamamelidaceae Liquidambar styraciflua Sweet gum N Hippocastanaceae Aesculus flava Sweet buckeye N Hippocastanaceae Aesculus glabra Ohio buckeye N Juglandaceae Carya cordiformis Bitternut hickory N Juglandaceae Carya glabra Pignut hickory N Juglandaceae Carya lacinosa Shellbark hickory, kingnut N Juglandaceae Carya ovata Shagbark hickory N Juglandaceae Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory N Juglandaceae Juglans nigra Black walnut N Juglandaceae Julgans cinerea Butternut N Lauraceae Sassafras albidium Sassafras N Magnoliaceae Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip-tree,Yellow poplar N

Appendix B 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Magnoliaceae Magnolia acuminata Cucumber tree N Moraceae Maclura pomifera Osage orange E Moraceae Morus alba White mulberry E Moraceae Morus rubra Red mulberry N Oleaceae Fraxinus americana White ash N Oleaceae Fraxinus pennsylvanica Red (Green) ash N Pinaceae Pinus virginiana Virginia pine N Plantanaceae Platanus occidentalis American sycamore N Rosaceae Amelanchier arborea Common serviceberry N Rosaceae Prunus americana American plum N Rosaceae Prunus serotina Black cherry N Rosaceae Pyrus sp. Wild crab apple E Rutaceae Phellodendron japonicum Amur corktree E Salicaceae Populous alba White poplar E Salicaceae Populous deltoides Cottonwood N Salicaceae Salix alba White willow E Salicaceae Salix babylonica Weeping willow E Salicaceae Salix interior Sandbar willow N Salicaceae Salix nigra Black willow N Simaroubaceae Ailanthus altissima Tree-of-heaven E Ulmaceae Celtis occidentalis Hackberry N Ulmaceae Ulmus americana American elm N Ulmaceae Ulmus rubra Slippery elm N

Shrubs

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Anacardiaceae Rhus radicans Poison ivy N Berberidaceae Berberis thunbergii Japanese barberry E Betulaceae Corylus americana Hazelnut N Bigoniaceae Campsis radicans Trumpet creeper N Caprifoliaceae Lonicera japonica Japanese honeysuckle E Caprifoliaceae Lonicera maackii Shrubby honeysuckle E Caprifoliaceae Sambucus canadensis Black elderberry N Caprifoliaceae Viburnum lantanoides Hobblebush N Caprifoliaceae Viburnum prunifolium Black haw N Celastraceae Celastrus orbiculata Asian (Oriental) bittersweet E Climbing (American) Celastraceae Celastrus scandens bittersweet N Winged euonymus (burning Celastraceae Euonymus alatus bush) E Celastraceae Euonymus atropurpurea Wahoo N Celastraceae Euonymus fortunei Chinese spindle tree E Cornaceae Cornus amomum Silky cornel N Cornaceae Cornus florida Flowering dogwood N

Appendix B 2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Cornaceae Cornus obliqua Pale dogwood N Cornaceae Cornus rugosa Round leaved dogwood N Cornaceae Cornus stolonifera Red-osier dogwood E Corylaceae Alnus serrulata Brookside alder, Smooth alder N Elaeagnaceae Elaeagnus umbellata Autumn olive E Lauraceae Lindera benzoin Spicebush N Leguminosae Amorpha fruticosa False indigo N Leguminosae Wisteria frutescens American wisteria E Leguminosae Wisteria sinensis Chinese wisteria E Menispermaceae Menispermum canadense Canada moonseed N Oleaceae Ligustrum sinense Chinese privet E Oleaceae Ligustrum vulgare European privet E Rosaceae Craetaegus spp Hawthorn N Rosaceae Physocarpus opulifolius Ninebark N Rosaceae Prunus virginiana Choke cherry N Rosaceae Rosa multiflora Multiflora rose E Rosaceae Rosa palustris Swamp rose N Rosaceae Rubus occidentalis Black raspberry N Rosaceae Rubus phoenicolasius Wineberry E Rosaceae Rubus sp. Blackberry N Rosaceae Spirea tomentosa Steeplebush N Rubiaceae Cephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush N Rubiaceae Diodia virginiana Larger buttonbush N Rutaceae Ptelea trifoliata Hoptree N Smilacaceae Smilax rotundifolia Common greenbrier N Staphyleaceae Staphylea trifolia Bladdernut N Styracaceae Halesia tetraptera Mountain silverbell N Vitaceae Ampelopsis cordata Heartleaf peppervine N Parthenocissus Vitaceae quinquefolia Virginia creeper N Vitaceae Vitis labrusca Fox grape N Vitaceae Vitis riparia Riverbank grape N Vitaceae Vitis vulpina Winter grape N

Herbaceous Plants

ORIGIN FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME * Acanthaceae Justicia americana Water willow N Agavaceae Yucca filamentosa Yucca E Alismataceae Alisma subcordatum Common water plantain N Alismataceae Sagittaria latifolia Duck potato N Alismataceae Sagittaria rigida Stiff arrowhead E

Appendix B 3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Amaranthaceae Achyranthes japonica Japanese chafflower E Amaranthaceae Amaranthus hybridus Common pigweed N Amaranthaceae Amaranthus spinosus Spiny amaranth E Apiaceae Angelica atropupurea Purple angelica N Apiaceae Cicuta maculata Water hemlock N Apiaceae Conium maculatum Poison hemlock E Apiaceae Cryptotaenia canadensis Honewort N Apiaceae Daucus carota Queen Anne's lace E Apiaceae Herocleum maximum Cow parsnip N Apiaceae Osmorhiza longistylis Smooth sweet cicely N Apiaceae Sanicula canadensis Black snakeroot N Apiaceae Sanicula gregaria Clustered snakeroot N Apiaceae Sium suave Water parsnip N Apiaceae Thaspium trifoliatum Woodland meadow parsnip N Apocynaceae Apocynum cannabinum Indian hemp N Araceae Arisaema dracontium Green dragon N Araceae Arisaema triphyllum Jack-in-the-pulpit N Araceae Arum italicum Italian arum E Asclepiadaceae Asclepias incarnata Swamp milkweed N Asclepiadaceae Asclepias syriaca Common milkweed N Asclepiadaceae Asclepias tuberosa Butterfly weed N Asclepiadaceae Cynanchum laeve Sandvine N Asteraceae Achillea millefolium Yarrow E Asteraceae Achillea ptarmica Sneezeweed E Asteraceae Ambrosia artemisifolia Common ragweed N Asteraceae Ambrosia trifida Giant ragweed N Asteraceae Antennaria neglecta Field pussytoes N Asteraceae Arctium minus Common burdock E Asteraceae Artemesia annua Annual wormwood E Asteraceae Artemesia vulgaris Common mugwort E Asteraceae Aster divaricatus Whitewood aster N Asteraceae Aster lateriflorus Calico aster N Asteraceae Aster novae-angliae New England aster N Asteraceae Aster ontarionus Bottomland aster N Asteraceae Aster pilosus White heath aster N Asteraceae Aster prenanthoides Crooked stem aster N Asteraceae Aster simplex Panicled aster N Asteraceae Aster vimineus Small white aster N Asteraceae Bidens cernua Beggars ticks, Bar marigold N Asteraceae Bidens frondosa Devil's beggers ticks N Asteraceae Bidens polyepsis Tickseed sunflower E Asteraceae Bidens tripartita Beggars ticks,Tickseed N Asteraceae Cacalia suaveolens Sweet Indian plantain N

Appendix B 4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Asteraceae Cirsium arvense Canada thistle E Asteraceae Cirsium discolor Field thistle N Asteraceae Conyza canadensis Horseweed N Asteraceae Coreopsis lanceolata Lance-leaved tickseed N Asteraceae Echinacea purpurea Purple coneflower A Asteraceae Eclipta alba Herb of stumps N Asteraceae Erichtites hieracifolia Pilewort N Asteraceae Erigeron annus White top N Asteraceae Erigeron canadensis Horseweed N Asteraceae Erigeron philadelphicus Philadelphia flea bane N Asteraceae Erigeron strigosus Daisy fleabane N Asteraceae Eupatorium coelestinum Mistflower N Asteraceae Eupatorium fistulosum Joe-pye weed N Asteraceae Eupatorium perfoliatum Boneset N Asteraceae Eupatorium purpureum Wide leaved Joe-pye weed N Asteraceae Eupatorium rugosum White snakeroot N Asteraceae Eupatorium serotinum Late flowering thoroughwort N Asteraceae Galinsoga ciliata Devil's delight, Raceweed E Asteraceae Gnaphalium obtusifolium Everlasting, Cudweed N Asteraceae Gnaphalium purpureum Purplish cudweed N Asteraceae Gnaphalium uliginosum Low cudweed N Asteraceae Helenium autumnale Yellow sneezeweed N Asteraceae Helianthus decapetalus Thin leaved sunflower N Asteraceae Helianthus tuberosus Jerusalem artichoke N Asteraceae Hieracium pratense King devil, Field hawkweed E Asteraceae Lactuca canadensis Wild lettuce N Asteraceae Lactuca floridana Florida blue lettuce N Asteraceae Lactuca scariola Compass plant E Asteraceae Leucanthemum vulgare Ox-eye daisy E Asteraceae Polymnia canadensis White-flowered leafcup N Asteraceae Prenanthes altissima Tall white lettuce N Asteraceae Ratibida pinnata Gray coneflower A Asteraceae Rudbeckia laciniata Tall coneflower N Asteraceae Senecio aureus Golden ragwort N Asteraceae Senecio glabellus Yellowtop N Asteraceae Silphium perfoliatum Cup-plant N Asteraceae Solidago caesia Blue-stemmed goldenrod N Asteraceae Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod N Asteraceae Solidago giganta Late goldenrod N Asteraceae Solidago graminifolia Grass-leaved goldenrod N Asteraceae Sonchus asper Spiny sow thistle E Asteraceae Taraxacum officinale Common dandelion E Asteraceae Tussilago farfara Coltsfoot E

Appendix B 5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Asteraceae Verbesina alternifolia Wingstem N Asteraceae Verbesina occidentalis Small yellow crownbeard N Asteraceae Veronia gigantea Tall ironweed N Asteraceae Veronia noveboracensis New York ironweed N Asteraceae Xanthium italicum Hairy cocklebur N Balasaminaceae Impatiens capensis Spotted touch-me-not N Balasaminaceae Impatiens pallida Pale touch-me-not N Berberidaceae Podophyllum peltatum Mayapple N Boraginaceae Hackelia virginiana Beggers lice E Boraginaceae Myosotis scorpioides Forget-me-not E Boraginaceae Mertensia virginica Virginia Bluebell N Brassicaceae Alliaria petiolata Garlic mustard E Brassicaceae Arabis laevigata Smooth rock grass E Brassicaceae Arabis lyrata Lyreleaf rockcress N Brassicaceae Barbarea vulgaris Yellow rocket, Winter cress E Brassicaceae Brassica nigra Black mustard E Brassicaceae Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's purse E Brassicaceae Cardamine hirsuta Hoary bittercress N Brassicaceae Cardamine impatiens A bittercress E Brassicaceae Cardamine pratensis Cuckoo-flower E Brassicaceae Dentaria laciniata Cutleaf toothwort N Brassicaceae Hesperis matronalis Dame's rocket E Brassicaceae Lepidium campestre Field cress E Brassicaceae Lepidium virginicum Wild peppergrass N Brassicaceae Rorippa islandica Marsh yellow cress N Brassicaceae Rorippa palustris fernaldiana Common yellow cress N Brassicaceae Rorippa sylvestris Creeping yellow cress N Brassicaceae Sibara virginica Virginia cress N Brassicaceae Sisymbrium altissimum Thimble mustard E Campanulaceae Campanula americana Tall bell flower N Campanulaceae Triodanis perfoliata Venus' looking glass N Cannabinaceae Cannabis sativa Hemp E Cannabinaceae Humulus japonicus Japanese hops E Cannabinaceae Humulus lupulus Common hops N Capparaceae Cleome spinosa Spiderflower E Caryophyllaceae Cerastium viscosum Sticky chickweed E Caryophyllaceae Dianthus armeria Deptford pink E Caryophyllaceae Myosoton aquaticum Giant chickweed E Caryophyllaceae Saponaria officinalis Bouncing bet E Caryophyllaceae Silene nevea Snowy campion N Caryophyllaceae Stellaria aquatica Water mouse ear chickweed E Caryophyllaceae Stellaria graminea Lesser stitchwort E Caryophyllaceae Stellaria media Common chickweed E

Appendix B 6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Celastraceae Celastrus scandens Climbing bittersweet N Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium album Lamb's quarters E Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium ambrosoides Mexican tea E Jerusalem oak, Feather Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium botrys geranium E Clusiaceae Hypericum ellipticum Elliptic leaved St. John's wort N Clusiaceae Hypericum mutilum Dwarf St. John's wort N Clusiaceae Hypericum punctatum Dotted St. John's wort N Commelinaceae Commelina communis Asiatic day-flower E Commelinaceae Commelina virginica Virginia day-flower N Convolvulaceae Convulvulus sepium Hedge bindweed N Convolvulaceae Ipomoea coccinea Red morning glory E Convolvulaceae Ipomoea hederacea Ivy leaved morning glory E Convolvulaceae Ipomoea lancunosa Small flowered morning glory N Convolvulaceae Ipomoea pandurata Wild potato vine N Convolvulaceae Tradescantia virginiana Spiderwort N Crassulaceae Sedum ternatum Wild stonecrop N Cucurbiaceae Citrullus lanatus Watermelon E Cucurbitaceae Echinocystis lobata Wild cucumber N Cucurbitaceae Sicyos ongulatus One seeded cucumber N Cuscutaceae Cuscuta gronovii Common dodder N Cyperaceae Carex aggregata Glomerate Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex blanda Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex bromoides Brome-like Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex conjuncta Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex crinita fringed sedge N Cyperaceae Carex crisatella Crested sedge N Cyperaceae Carex davisii Davis' Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex frankii Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex grayii Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex grisea Grey sedge N Cyperaceae Carex gynandra Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex lurida Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex normalis Larger Straw Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex scoparia Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex tribuloides Sedge N Cyperaceae Carex vulpinoidea Foxtail sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus erythrorhizos Sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus esculentus Edible nutgrass N Cyperaceae Cyperus flavescens Sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus lancastriensis Many flowered umbrella sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus odoratus Sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus refractus Reflexed umbrella sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus rivularis Sedge N

Appendix B 7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Cyperaceae Cyperus squarrosus Awned cyperus sedge N Cyperaceae Cyperus strigosis Sedge N Cyperaceae Dilichium arundiaceum Three-way sedge N Cyperaceae Eleocharis acicularis Spikerush N Cyperaceae Eleocharis tenuis Spikerush, Kill cow N Cyperaceae Fimbristylis autumnales Sedge N Cyperaceae Kyllinga pumila Low killinga N Cyperaceae Scirpus atrovirens Wool grass N Cyperaceae Scirpus polyphyllus A bulrush, Wool grass N Cyperaceae Scirpus rubricosus Wool grass N Cyperaceae Scirpus validus Great bulrush N Dipsacaceae Dipsacus sylvestris Common teasel E Equisetaceae Equisetum sp. Horsetail N Euphorbiaceae Acalypha rhombidea Common three-seeded mercury N Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia vermiculata Hairy spurge N Euphorbicaceae Chamaesyce maculata Spotted spurge N Euphorbicaceae Chamaesyce nutans Eyebane N Amphicarpa bracteata Fabaceae comosa Hog peanut N Fabaceae Apios americana Groundnut N Fabaceae Chamaecrista fasciculata Partridge pea N Fabaceae Coronilla varia Crown fetch E Fabaceae Desmodium glabellum Dillen's tick trefoil N Fabaceae Lespedeza bicolor Japanese bushclover E Fabaceae Lespedeza cuneata Sericea E Fabaceae Melilotus alba White sweet clover E Fabaceae Melilotus officinalis Yellow sweet clover E Fabaceae Strophostyles helvola Trailing Wild bean N Fabaceae Trifolium pratense Red clover E Fabaceae Trifolium repens White clover E Fabaceae Vicia dasycarpa Hairy fruit vetch E Fumariaceae Corydalis flavula Yellow corydalis N Geraniaceae Geranium carolinianum Carolina cranesbill N Haloragaceae Myriophyllum heterophyllum Two-leaved water milfoil N Hydrocharitceae Vallisneria americana Eel grass, water celery N Hydrophyllaceae Hydrophyllum canadense Broad leaved waterleaf N Iridaceae Iris pseudacorus Yellow iris E Juncaceae Juncus acuminatus Rush N Juncaceae Juncus canadensis Rush N Juncaceae Juncus effusus Common rush N Juncaceae Juncus filiformes Thread Rush N Juncaceae Juncus tenuis Yard rush N Lamiaceae Agastache neptoides Yellow giant hyssop N Lamiaceae Agastache scrophulariaefolia Purple giant hyssop N

Appendix B 8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Lamiaceae Blephilia hirsuta Hairy woodmint N Lamiaceae Collinsonia canadensis Horse balm, Richweed N Lamiaceae Glechoma hederacea Ground Ivy E Lamiaceae Lamium amplexicaule Henbit E Lamiaceae Lamium pupureum Purple dead nettle E Lamiaceae Lycopus americanus Water horehound N Lamiaceae Lycopus virginicus Bugleweed N Lamiaceae Mentha arvensis Field mint N Lamiaceae Mentha piperita Peppermint E Lamiaceae Mentha rotundifolia Roundleaf mint E Lamiaceae Mentha verticillata Whorled mint E Lamiaceae Monarda fistulosa Wild bergamot N Lamiaceae Perilla frutescens Beefsteak plant E Lamiaceae Physostegia virginiana Dragon head N Lamiaceae Prunella vulgaris Heal-all N Lamiaceae Salvia lyrata Lyre-leaved sage N Lamiaceae Scutellaria laterfoilia Mad-dog skullcap N Lamiaceae Stachys tenuifolia Smooth hedge nettle N Lamiaceae Teucrium canadense American germander N Lemnaceae Lemna sp. Duckweed N Liliaceae Allium canadense Meadow garlic N Liliaceae Allium cernum Wild onion N Liliaceae Allium vineale Wild garlic E Liliaceae Erythronium americanum Yellow trout lily N Liliaceae Lilium superbum Turk's cap lily N Liliaceae Ornithogalum nutans Drooping star-of-Bethlehem E Liliaceae Ornithogalum umbellatum Star-of-Bethlehem E Liliaceae Streptopus lanceolatus Twisted stalk N Liliaceae Uvularia sessifolia Sessile-leaved bellwort N Limanthaceae Floerkea proseroinacoides False mermaid weed N Lobeliaceae Lobelia cardinalis Cardinal flower N Lobeliaceae Lobelia inflata Indian tobacco N Lobeliaceae Lobelia siphilitica Great blue lobelia N Lythraceae Ammannia coccinea Scarlet ammannia E Lythraceae Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife E Lythraceae Rotala ramosior Toothcup N Malvaceae Hibiscus moscheutos Swamp rose mallow N Malvaceae Hibiscus trionum Flower of an hour E Malvaceae Sida hermaphrodita Virginia mallow E Malvaceae Sida spinosa Prickley sida E Molluginaceae Mollugo verticillata Carpetweed N Nyctaginaceae Mirabilis nyctaginea Heartleaf umbrellawort E Oleaceae Ligustrum obtusifolium Border privet E

Appendix B 9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Onagraceae Circaea lutetiana canadensis Enchanters night shade N Epilobium ciliatum Onagraceae glandulosum Northern willow herb N Onagraceae Epilobium coloratum Purple-leaved willow herb N Onagraceae Gaura biennis Gaura N Onagraceae Ludwigia alternifolia Seedbox N Onagraceae Ludwigia decurrens Primrose willow N Onagraceae Ludwigia leptocarpa Primrose willow N Onagraceae Ludwigia palustris Marsh purslane N Onagraceae Oenothera biennis Common evening primrose N Orchidaceae Goodyera sp. Rattlesnake plantain N Orchidaceae Habenaria lacer Ragged fringed orchid N Oxalidaceae Oxalis corniculata Creeping lady's sorrel E Oxalidaceae Oxalis dillenii Slender yellow wood sorrel N Oxalidaceae Oxalis europaea European yellow wood sorrel N Oxalidaceae Oxalis stricta Upright yellow wood sorrel N Phytolaccaceae Phytolacca americana Pokeweed N Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata English plantain E Plantaginaceae Plantago rugelii Common plantain N Poaceae Agrimonia parviflora Small-flowered agrimony N Poaceae Agrimonia sp. Agrimony N Poaceae Agrostis perennans Autumn bent grass N Poaceae Agrostis stolonifera Creeping bent grass N Poaceae Arthraxon hispidus Jointed grass E Poaceae Bromus sp. Grass N,E Poaceae Chasmanthium latifolium Wild oats N Poaceae Cinna arundinacea Wood reed grass N Poaceae Dactylis glomerata Orchard grass E Poaceae Digitaria ischaemum Smooth crab grass N Poaceae Digitaria sanguinalis Crabgrass N Poaceae Echinochloa crusgalli Barnyard grass N Poaceae Echinochloa muricata Barnyard grass E Poaceae Eleusine indica Goose grass E Poaceae Elymus canadensis Canada wild rye N Poaceae Elymus virginicus Virginia wild rye N Poaceae Eragrostis hypnoides Creeping lovegrass N Poaceae Eragrostis pectinacea Lovegrass N Poaceae Festuca elatior Meadow tall fescue E Poaceae Festuca subverticillata Nodding fescue N Poaceae Geum sp. Avens N Poaceae Glyceria striata Fowl mannagrass N Poaceae Leersia orzyoides Rice cutgrass N Poaceae Leersia virginica White grass N Poaceae Leptochloa mucronata Red sprangletop E

Appendix B 10 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Poaceae Microstegium vimineum Eulalia, Japanese stiltgrass E Poaceae Miscanthus sinensis Chinese silvergrass E Poaceae Muhlenbergia frondosa Wirestem muhly N Poaceae Muhlenbergia sp. Muhly grass N,E Poaceae Panicum capillare Witch grass N Poaceae Panicum clandestinum Deer tongue grass N Poaceae Panicum dichotomiflorum Spreading witchgrass N Poaceae Panicum stipitatum Tall flat panic grass N Poaceae Panicum virgatum Switch grass N Poaceae Paspalum fluitans Riverbank paspalum E Poaceae Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass N Poaceae Phyllostachys nigra Black bamboo E Poaceae Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass E Poaceae Setaria faberii Giant fox-tail grass E Poaceae Sorghum halepense Johnson grass E Poaceae Spartina pectinata Prairie cordgrass N Poaceae Tridens flavus Purple top N Poaceae Triticum aestivum Common wheat E Poaceae Uniola latifolia Wild oats N Polemoniaceae Phlox divaricata Wild blue phlox N Polemoniaceae Phlox maculata Wild sweet William N Polygonaceae Fallopia japonica Japanese knotweed E Polygonaceae Fallopia sachalinensis Sachaline E Polygonaceae Polygonum arifolium Halberdleaf tearthumb N Polygonaceae Polygonum careyi Carey's knotweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum cespitosum Asiatic water pepper E Polygonaceae Polygonum cilinode Mountain bindweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum coccineum Water smartweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum convolvulus Black bindweed E Polygonaceae Polygonum hydropiper Common smartweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum hydropiperoides Mild water pepper N Polygonaceae Polygonum lapathifolium Dock leaved smartweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum pensylvanicum Pennsylvania smartweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum perfoliatum Mile-a-minute E Polygonaceae Polygonum persicaria Lady's thumb E Polygonaceae Polygonum punctatum Water smartweed N Polygonaceae Polygonum sagittatum Arrowleaf tearthumb N Polygonaceae Polygonum scandens Climbing false buckwheat N Polygonum scandens Polygonaceae eristatum Hedge buckwheat N Polygonaceae Polygonum virginianum Virginia knotweed N Polygonaceae Rumex acetosella Sheep sorrel E Polygonaceae Rumex altissimus Pale dock, Tall dock N Polygonaceae Rumex crispus Curly dock E

Appendix B 11 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Polygonaceae Rumex obtusifolius Broadleaf dock E Polygonaceae Rumex patienta Patience dock E Polygonaceae Rumex verticillatus Water dock N Polypodiaceae Matteuccia pensylvanica Ostrich fern N Polypodiaceae Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern N Polypodiaceae Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas fern N Portulacaceae Claytonia virginica Spring beauty N Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Common purselane E Potederiaceae Heteranthera reniformis Kidney-leafed Mud plantain N Primulaceae Lysimachia vulgaris Garden lysimachia E Primulaceae Lysmachia ciliata Fringed loosestrife N Primulaceae Lysmachia nummularia Moneywort E Ranunculaceae Clematis virginiana Virgins bower N Ranunculaceae Ranunculus abortivus Kidneyleaf crowfoot N Ranunculaceae Ranunculus ficaria Lesser celandine E Ranunculaceae Ranunculus recurvatus Hooked crowfoot N Ranunculaceae Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup E Ranunculaceae Ranunculus sceleratus Cursed crowfoot N Ranunculaceae Thalictrum polygamum Tall meadowrue N Ranunculaceae Thalictrum pubescens Late meadowrue N Carolina buckthorn, Indian Rhamnaceae Rhamnus caroliniana cherry N Rosaceae Duchesnea indica Indian strawberry E Rosaceae Geum canadense White avens N Rosaceae Geum laciniatum Rough avens N Rosaceae Geum macrophyllum Large leaved avens N Rosaceae Geum vernum Spring avens N Rosaceae Potentilla canadensis Dwarf cinquefoil N Rosaceae Potentilla norvegica Rough cinquefoil N Rubiaceae Galium circaezans Wild licorice N Rubiaceae Galium triflorum Sweet scented bedstraw N Rubiaceae Gallium aparine Cleavers N Rubiaceae Gallium obtusum Stiff marsh bedstraw N Rubiaceae Gallium tinctorium Clayton's bedstraw N Rubiaceae Houstonia caerulea Bluet N Rubiaceae Spermacoce glabra Buttonweed N Saxifragaceae Heuchera americana American alumroot N Saxifragaceae Penthorum sedoides Ditch stonecrop N Saxifragaceae Saxifraga virginiensis Early saxifrage N Scrophulariaceae Chelone glabra Turtlehead N Scrophulariaceae Gratiola neglecta Hedge hyssop N Scrophulariaceae Linaria vulgaris Butter and eggs, Toadflax E Scrophulariaceae Lindernia dubia False pimpernel N Scrophulariaceae Mimulus alatus Winged monkeyflower N

Appendix B 12 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Scrophulariaceae Mimulus moschatus Muskflower E Square-stemmed Scrophulariaceae Mimulus ringens monkeyflower N Scrophulariaceae Penstemon laevigatus Smooth beardtongue N Scrophulariaceae Scrophularia marilandica Maryland figwort N Scrophulariaceae Verbascum blattaria Moth mullein E Scrophulariaceae Verbascum thaspus Great mullein E Scrophulariaceae Veronica anagallis-aquatica Water speedwell N Scrophulariaceae Veronica arvensis corn speedwell E Scrophulariaceae Veronica hederaefolia Ivy leaved speedwell E Scrophulariaceae Veronica peregrina Purslane speedwell N Smilacaceae Smilax glauca Saw brier N Smilacaceae Smilax hispida Hispid greenbrier N Solanaceae Datura stramonium Jimsonweed E Solanaceae Lycopersicon esculentum Tomato E Physalis longifolia Solanaceae subglabrata Smooth ground cherry N Solanaceae Solanum americanum Black nightshade N Solanaceae Solanum carolinense Horse nettle N Solanaceae Solanum dulcamara Bittersweet E Sparganiaceae Sparganium androcladum Keeled staminate burreed N Sparganiaceae Sparganium eurycarpum Large burreed N Thelypteridaceae Thelypteris noveboracensis New York fern N Typhaceae Typha latifolia Broad-leaved cattail N Urticaceae Boehmeria cylindrica False nettle N Urticaceae Laportea canadensis Wood nettle N Urticaceae Pilea pumila Clearweed N Urticaceae Urtica dioica dioica Stinging nettle E Urticaceae Urtica dioica gracilis Wild nettle N Valerianaceae Valerianella sp. Corn salad N Verbenaceae Phyla lancealata Fogfruit N Verbenaceae Verbena hastata Blue vervain N Verbenaceae Verbena urticifolia White vervain N Violaceae Viola papilionacea Common blue violet N Violaceae Viola sororia Downy wood violet N Violaceae Viola striata Striped violet N Zosteraceae Potamogeton crispus Curly pondweed E Zosteraceae Potamogeton foliosus Leafy pondweed N Zosteraceae Potamogeton pectinatus Sago pondweed N

N = Native; E = Exotic; A = Adventive; I = Introduced

Appendix B 13 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table B-2. Refuge Birds

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anser albifrons Greater M,W N Swans White- fronted Goose Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Branta canadensis Canada Goose PR N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Branta hutchinsii Cackling M,W N Swans Goose Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Chen caerulescens Lesser Snow M,W N Swans Goose Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Chen rossii Ross's Goose A N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter A N Swans Swan Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Cygnus columbianus Tundra Swan M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Cygnus olor Mute Swan M,W E Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Clangula hyemalis Long-tailed M,W N Swans Duck Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aix sponsa Wood Duck B,M N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas acuta Northern M,W N Swans Pintail Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas americana American M,W N Swans Wigeon Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas clypeata Northern M,W N Swans Shoveler Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas crecca Green- M N Swans winged Teal Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas discors Blue-winged M N Swans Teal Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas platyrhynchos Mallard B,W,M N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas rubripes American B,W,M N Swans Black Duck Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Anas strepera Gadwall M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aythya americana Redhead M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aythya collaris Ring-necked M,W N Swans Duck

Appendix B 14 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aythya marila Greater M,W N Swans Scaup Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Aythya valisneria Canvasback M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Bucephala albeola Bufflehead M,W N Swans Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Bucephala clangula Common M,W N Swans Goldeneye Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Lophodytes Hooded M,W N Swans cucullaus Merganser Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Melanitta fusca White- M,W N Swans winged Scoter Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Melanitta Surf Scoter M,W N Swans perspicillata Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Melanitta Black Scoter A N Swans americana Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Histrionicus Harlequin A N Swans histrionicus Duck Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Mergus merganser Common M,W N Swans Merganser Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Mergus serrator Red-breasted M,W N Swans Merganser Ducks, Geese, Anatidae Oxyura jamaicensis Ruddy Duck M,W N Swans New World Odontophoridae Colinus virginianus Northern A N Quail Bobwhite Partridges, Phasianidae Phasianus colchicus Ring-necked A E Grouse, Pheasant Turkey Partridges, Ruffed Grouse, Phasianidae Bonasa umbellus PR N Grouse Turkey Partridges, Grouse, Phasianidae Meleagris gallopavo Wild Turkey PR N Turkey Grebes Podicipedidae Podiceps auritus Horned M,W N Grebe Grebes Podicipedidae Podiceps grisegena Red-necked M,W N Grebe Grebes Podicipedidae Podilymbus Pie-billed M,W N podiceps Grebe Pigeons and Columbidae Columba livia Rock Dove PR E Doves Pigeons and Columbidae Streptopelia Eurasian A E Doves decaocto Collared Dove

Appendix B 15 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Pigeons and Columbidae Zenaida macroura Mourning PR N Doves Dove Cuckoos Cuculidae Coccyzus americana Yellow-billed B,M N Cuckoo Cuckoos Cuculidae Coccyzus Black-billed B,M N erythrophthalmus Cuckoo Goatsuckers Caprimulgidae Chordeiles minor Common M,SR N Nighthawk Swifts Apodidae Chaetura pelagica Chimney M,SR N Swift Ruby- Hummingbir throated Trochilidae Archilochus colubris B,M N d Hummingbir d Rails, Rallidae Fulica americana American M,W N Gallinules, Coot Coots Rails, Rallidae Porphyrula Purple A N Gallinules, martinica Gallinule Coots Rails, Rallidae Porzana carolina Sora M N Gallinules, Coots Rails, Rallidae Rallus limicola Virginia Rail M N Gallinules, Coots Rails, Rallidae Rallus elegans King Rail A N Gallinules, Coots Cranes Gruidae Antigone canadensis Sandhill A N crane Stilts and Recurvirostridae Himantopus Black-necked A N Avocets mexicanus Stilt Stilts and Recurvirostridae Recurvirostra American A N Avocets americana Avocet Plovers Charadriidae Charadrius Semipalmate M N semipalmatus d Plover Plovers Charadriidae Charadrius melodus Piping plover A N Plovers Charadriidae Charadrius vociferus Killdeer PR N Plovers Charadriidae Pluvialis squatarola Black-bellied A N Plover Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel A N Phalaropes Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Actitis macularia Spotted B,M N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Limosa haemastica Hudsonian A N Phalaropes Godwit

Appendix B 16 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Limosa fedoa Marbled A N Phalaropes Godwit Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Arenaria interpres Ruddy M N Phalaropes Turnstone Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris canutus Red Knot A N Phalaropes Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris himantopus Stilt A N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris alpina Dunlin M N Phalaropes Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris bairdii Baird’s A N Phalaropes sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris fusciollis White- M N Phalaropes rumped Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris melanotos Pectoral M N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris minutilla Least M N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris subruficollis Buff-breasted A N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris pusilla Semipalmate M N Phalaropes d Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Calidris mauri Western A N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Limnodromus Short-billed M N Phalaropes griseus Dowitcher Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Limnodromus Long-billed M N Phalaropes scolopaceus Dowitcher Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Tringa flavipes Lesser M N Phalaropes Yellowlegs Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Tringa melanoleuca Greater M N Phalaropes Yellowlegs Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Tringa solitaria Solitary M N Phalaropes Sandpiper Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Gallinago gallinago Common M N Phalaropes Snipe Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Scolopax minor American B,M N Phalaropes Woodcock Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Phalaropus tricolor Wilson’s A N Phalaropes Phalarope Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Phalaropus lobatus Red-necked A N Phalaropes Phalarope Sandpipers, Scolopacidae Phalaropus Red A N Phalaropes fulicarius Phalarope Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus argentatus Herring Gull B,M,W N

Appendix B 17 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus delawarensis Ring-billed M,W N Gull Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus hyperboreus Glaucous Gull A N Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus marinus Great Black- A N backed Gull Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus dominicanus Kelp Gull A N Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus philadelphia Bonaparte's M N Gull Gulls, Terns Laridae Xema sabini Sabine's Gull A N Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus fuscus Lesser Black- A N backed Gull Gulls, Terns Laridae Larus glaucoides Iceland Gull A N Gulls, Terns Laridae Chlidonias niger Black Tern M N Gulls, Terns Laridae Sterna caspia Caspian Tern M N Gulls, Terns Laridae Sterna fosteri Forster's M N Tern Gulls, Terns Laridae Sterna hirundo Common M N Tern Loons Gaviidae Gavia immer Common M,W N Loon Loons Gaviidae Gavia stellata Red-throated M,W N Loon Frigatebirds Fregatidae Fregata magnificens Magnificent A N Frigatebird Cormorants Phalacrocoracida Phalacrocorax Double- M,W N e auritus crested Cormorant Pelicans Pelecanidae Pelecanus American A N erythrorynchos White Pelican Bitterns, Ardeidae Botaurus American M,SR N Herons lentiginosus Bittern Bitterns, Ardeidae Casmerodius albus Great Egret M N Herons Bitterns, Ardeidae Egretta thula Snowy Egret M N Herons Bitterns, Ardeidae Ixobrychus exilis Least Bittern M N Herons Bitterns, Ardeidae Ardea herodias Great Blue PR N Herons Heron Bitterns, Ardeidae Butorides striatus Green Heron B,M N Herons Bitterns, Ardeidae Egretta tricolor Tricolored A N Herons Heron Bitterns, Ardeidae Nyctanassa violacea Yellow- A N Herons crowned Night Heron

Appendix B 18 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Bitterns, Ardeidae Nycticorax Black- M,SR N Herons nycticorax crowned Night Heron Ibises and Threskiornithida Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis A N Spoonbills e Ibises and Threskiornithida Plegadis chihi White-faced A N Spoonbills e Ibis New World Cathartidae Cathartes aura Turkey B,M N Vultures Vulture New World Cathartidae Coragyps atratus Black Vulture B,M N Vultures Ospreys Pandionidae Pandion haliaeetus Osprey B,M N Hawks, Accipitridae Accipiter cooperii Cooper's PR N Eagles Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Accipiter striatus Sharp- PR N Eagles shinned Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed PR N Eagles Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Buteo lagopus Rough-legged M,W N Eagles Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Buteo lineatus Red- PR N Eagles shouldered Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Buteo platypterus Broad- M N Eagles winged Hawk Hawks, Accipitridae Circus cyaneus Northern M,W N Eagles Harrier Hawks, Accipitridae Haliaeetus Bald Eagle M,W,B N Eagles leucocephalus Hawks, Accipitridae Aquila chrysaetos Golden Eagle M,W N Eagles Barn Owls Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl PR N Typical Owls Strigidae Bubo virginianus Great Horned PR N Owl Typical Owls Strigidae Megascops asio Eastern PR N Screech Owl Typical Owls Strigidae Strix varia Barred Owl PR N Typical Owls Strigidae Asio otus Long-eared A N Owl Kingfishers Alcedinidae Megaceryle alcyon Belted PR N Kingfisher Woodpeckers Picidae Dryocopus pileatus Pileated PR N Woodpecker Woodpeckers Picidae Melanerpes Red-bellied PR N carolinus Woodpecker

Appendix B 19 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Woodpeckers Picidae Melanerpes Red-headed PR N erythrocephalus Woodpecker Woodpeckers Picidae Picoides pubescens Downy PR N Woodpecker Woodpeckers Picidae Picoides villosus Hairy PR N Woodpecker Woodpeckers Picidae Sphyrapicus varius Yellow- M,W N bellied Sapsucker Woodpeckers Picidae Colaptes auratus Northern PR N Flicker Falcons Falconidae Falco columbarius Merlin M,W N Falcons Falconidae Falco peregrinus Peregrine PR N Falcon Falcons Falconidae Falco sparverius American PR N Kestrel Tyrant Tyrannidae Contopus virens Eastern B,M N Flycatchers Wood-pewee Tyrant Tyrannidae Empidonax minimus Least M N Flycatchers Flycatcher Tyrant Tyrannidae Empidonax alnorum Alder M N Flycatchers Flycatcher Tyrant Tyrannidae Empidonax traillii Willow B,M N Flycatchers Flycatcher Tyrant Tyrannidae Empidonax Acadian B,M N Flycatchers virescens Flycatcher Tyrant Tyrannidae Myiarchus crinitus Great Crested B,M N Flycatchers Flycatcher Tyrant Tyrannidae Sayornis phoebe Eastern B,M N Flycatchers Phoebe Tyrant Tyrannidae Tyrannus tyrannus Eastern B,M N Flycatchers Kingbird Vireos Vireonidae Vireo flavifrons Yellow- B,M N throated Vireo Vireos Vireonidae Vireo gilvus Warbling B,M N Vireo Vireos Vireonidae Vireo griseus White-eyed B,M N Vireo Vireos Vireonidae Vireo olivaceus Red-eyed B,M N Vireo Vireos Vireonidae Vireo philadelphicus Philadelphia M N Vireo Vireos Vireonidae Vireo solitarius Blue-headed M N Vireo Jays and Corvidae Corvus American PR N Crows brachyrhynchos Crow

Appendix B 20 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Jays and Corvidae Cyanocitta cristata Blue Jay PR N Crows Jays and Corvidae Corvus corax Common A N Crows Raven Swallows Hirundinidae Petrochelidon Cliff Swallow B,M N pyrrhonota Swallows Hirundinidae Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow B,M N Swallows Hirundinidae Riparia riparia Bank B,M N Swallow Swallows Hirundinidae Progne subis Purple Martin B,M N Swallows Hirundinidae Stelgidopteryx Northern B,M N serripennis Rough- winged Swallow Swallows Hirundinidae Tachycineta bicolor Tree Swallow B,M N Chickadees Paridae Parus atricapillus Black-capped M,W N and Titmice Chickadee Chickadees Paridae Parus carolinensis Carolina PR N and Titmice Chickadee Chickadees Paridae Parus bicolor Eastern PR N and Titmice Tufted Titmouse Nuthatches Sittidae Sitta canadensis Red Breasted M,W N Nuthatch Nuthatches Sittidae Sitta carolinensis White PR N Breasted Nuthatch Creepers Certhiidae Certhia americana Brown M,W N Creeper Wrens Trogloditidae Cistothorus Sedge Wren M, SR N platensis Wrens Trogloditidae Thryothorus Carolina PR N ludovicianus Wren Wrens Trogloditidae Troglodytes aedon House Wren B,M N Wrens Trogloditidae Troglodytes Winter Wren M,W N troglodytes Wrens Trogloditidae Cistothorus palustris Marsh wren A N Gnatcatchers Polioptilidae Polioptila caerilea Blue-grey B,M N Gnatcatcher Kinglets Regulidae Regulus calendula Ruby- M N crowned Kinglet Kinglets Regulidae Regulus satrapa Golden- M,W N crowned Kinglet Thrushes Turdidae Catharus minimus Gray-cheeked M N Thrush

Appendix B 21 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Thrushes Turdidae Catharus ustulatus Swainson's M N Thrush Thrushes Turdidae Hylocichla Wood Thrush B,M N mustelina Thrushes Turdidae Catharus guttatus Hermit M N Thrush Thrushes Turdidae Turdus migratorius American PR N Robin Thrushes Turdidae Sialia sialis Eastern PR N Bluebird Mockingbirds Mimidae Dumetella Gray Catbird B,M N and carolinensis Thrashers Mockingbirds Mimidae Mimus polyglottos Northern PR N and Mockingbird Thrashers Mockingbirds Mimidae Toxostoma rufum Brown B,M N and Thrasher Thrashers Starlings Sturnidae Sturnus vulgaris European PR E Starling Waxwings Bombycillidae Bombycilla Cedar B,M N cedrorum Waxwing Old World Passeridae Passer domesticus House PR E Sparrows Sparrow Wagtails and Motacillidae Anthus rubescens American M N Pipits Pipit Finches and Fringillidae Acanthis flammea Common A N Allies Redpoll Finches and Fringillidae Spinus tristis American PR N Allies Goldfinch Finches and Fringillidae Haemorhous House Finch PR E Allies mexicanus Finches and Fringillidae Haemorhous Purple Finch M,W N Allies purpureus Wood- Parulidae Dendroica Black- M N warbler caerulescens throated Blue Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica castanae Bay-breasted M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica cerulea Cerulean B,M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica coronata Yellow- M,W N warbler rumped Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica discolor Prairie M,SR N warbler Warbler

Appendix B 22 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Wood- Parulidae Dendroica dominica Yellow- B,M N warbler throated Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica magnolia Magnolia M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica Yellow Palm M N warbler palmarum Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica Chestnut- M N warbler pensylvanica sided Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica petechia Yellow B,M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica striata Blackpoll M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Dendroica virens Black- B,M N warbler throated Green Warbler Wood- Parulidae Geothlypis trichas Common B,M N warbler Yellowthroat Wood- Parulidae Icteria virens Yellow- B,M N warbler breasted Chat Wood- Parulidae Mniotilta varia Black and B,M N warbler White Warbler Wood- Parulidae Oporornis formosus Kentucky B,M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Oporornis Mourning M N warbler philadelphia Warbler Wood- Parulidae Parula americana Northern B,M N warbler Parula Wood- Parulidae Protonotaria citrea Prothonotary B,M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Seiurus aurocapillus Ovenbird B,M N warbler Wood- Parulidae Seiurus motacilla Louisiana B,M N warbler Waterthrush Wood- Parulidae Seiurus Northern M N warbler noveboracensis Waterthrush Wood- Parulidae Setophaga ruticilla American B,M N warbler Redstart Wood- Parulidae Vermivora Tennessee M N warbler peregrina Warbler Wood- Parulidae Oreothlypis celata Orange- A N warbler crowned Warbler

Appendix B 23 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Wood- Parulidae Vermivora Nashville M N warbler ruficapilla Warbler Wood- Parulidae Wilsonia citrina Hooded B,M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Wilsonia pusilla Wilson's M N warbler Warbler Wood- Parulidae Vermivora pinus Blue-winged B,M N warblers Warbler Sparrows Emberizidae Ammodramus Grasshopper M,SR N and Allies savannarum Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Ammodramus Le Conte’s A N and Allies leconteii Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Ammodramus Nelson’s A N and Allies nelsoni Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Melospiza Swamp PR N and Allies georgiana Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln's M N and Allies Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Melospiza melodia Song Sparrow PR N and Allies Sparrows Emberizidae Passerculus Savannah M,SR N and Allies sandwhichensis Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Passerella iliaca Fox Sparrow W N and Allies Sparrows Emberizidae Pooecetes Vesper M,SR N and Allies gramineus Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Spizella arborea American M,W N and Allies Tree Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Spizella passerina Chipping M,SR N and Allies Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Spizella pallida Clay colored M N and Allies sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Spizella pusilla Field B,M N and Allies Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Zonotrichia White- M,W N and Allies albicollis throated Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Zonotrichia White- M,W N and Allies leucophrys crowned Sparrow Sparrows Emberizidae Junco hyemalis Dark-eyed W N and Allies Junco Sparrows Emberizidae Pipilo Eastern PR N and Allies erthrophthalmus Towhee Cardinals and Cardinalidae Passerina cyanea Indigo B,M N Allies Bunting

Appendix B 24 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON RESIDENC ORIGIN NAME E * ** Cardinals and Cardinalidae Cardinalis cardinalis Northern PR N Allies Cardinal Cardinals and Cardinalidae Guiraca caerulea Blue B,M N Allies Grosbeak Cardinals and Cardinalidae Pheucticus Rose- B,M N Allies ludovicianus breasted Grosbeak Cardinals and Cardinalidae Piranga olivacea Scarlet B,M N Allies Tanager Cardinals and Cardinalidae Piranga rubra Summer B,M N Allies Tanager Cardinals and Cardinalidae Spiza americana Dickcissel M N Allies Blackbirds Icteridae Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged PR N Blackbird Blackbirds Icteridae Dolichonyx Bobolink M N orizivorus Blackbirds Icteridae Euphagus carolinus Rusty M,W N Blackbird Blackbirds Icteridae Molothrus ater Brown- PR N headed Cowbird Blackbirds Icteridae Quiscalus quiscula Common PR N Grackle Blackbirds Icteridae Sturnella magno Eastern PR N Meadowlark Blackbirds Icteridae Icterus galbula Baltimore B,M N Oriole Blackbirds Icteridae Icterus spurius Orchard B,M N Oriole

* B = breeding; PR = permanent resident (also breeds here); M = migration; W = wintering; SR = summer resident (no breeding records in Refuge habitats); A = accidental ** N = native; E = exotic Table B-3. Refuge Mammals

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS ORIGIN * Canidae Canis latrans Coyote E Canidae Urocyon cinereoargenteus Grey fox N Canidae Vulpes fulva Red fox N Castoridae Castor canadensis Beaver N Cervidae Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed deer N Cricetidae Microtus pennsylvanicus Meadow vole N Cricetidae Peromyscus leucopus White-footed mouse N Cricetinae Peromyscus maniculatus Deer mouse N

Appendix B 25 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Didelphiidae Didelphis marsupialis Opossum N Leporidae Sylvilagus floridanus Eastern cottontail N rabbit Microtinae Ondatra zibethicus Muskrat N Mustelidae Lantra canadensis River otter N Mustelidae Mephitus mephitus Striped skunk N Mustelidae Mustela erminea Short-tailed weasel N Mustelidae Mustela frenata Long-tailed weasel N Mustelidae Mustela vison Mink N Procyonidae Procyon lotor Raccoon N Sciuridae Marmota monax Woodchuck N Sciuridae Sciurus carolinensis Grey squirrel N Sciuridae Sciurus niger Fox squirrel N Sciuridae Tamius striatus Chipmunk N Soricidae Blarina brevicauda Short-tailed shrew N Vespertilionidae Eptesicus fuscus Big brown bat N Vespertilionidae Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver haired bat N Vespertilionidae Lasiurus borealis Eastern red bat N Vespertilionidae Lasiurus cinereus Hoary bat N Vespertilionidae Myotis leibii Eastern small footed N bat Vespertilionidae Myotis lucifugus Little brown bat N Vespertilionidae Myotis septentrionalis Northern long-eared Threatened N bat Vespertilionidae Myotis sodalis Indiana bat Endangered N Vespertilionidae Pipistrellus subflavus Tri-colored bat N Zapodidae Napaeozapus insignis Woodland jumping N mouse Zapodidae Zapus hudsonius Meadow jumping N mouse

* N = Native; E = Exotic

Table B-4. Refuge Mollusks (Mussels, Clams, Snails, Slugs) FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS ORIGIN * Cionellidae Cionella lubrica Glossy pillar N Helicodiscodae Helicodiscus Compound coil N parallelus Hydrobiidae Birgella Globe siltsnail N subglobosus Limacidae Deroceras leave Meadow slug N Limacidae Lehmannia poirieri Banded slug E Pleuroceridae Pleurocera Silty hornsnail N canaliculata Pleuroceridae Lithasia verrucosa Varicose N

Appendix B 26 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

rocksnail Pleuroceridae Lithasia armigera Armored N rocksnail Polygyridae Neohelix albolabris Whitelip N Polygyridae Mesodon thyroidus Whitelip globe N Polygyridae Mesodon Sealed globelet N mitchellianus Polygyridae Webbhelix Striped whitelip N multilineata Pupillidae Gastrocopta Armed N armifera snaggletooth Pupillidae Gastrocopta Bottleneck N contracta snaggletooth Succineidae Novisuccinea ovalis Oval ambersnail N Viviparidae Campeloma Pointed N decisum campeloma Zonitidae Hawaiia minuscule Minute gem E Zonitidae Ventridens ligera Globose dome N Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea Asiatic clam E Dreissenidae Dreissena Zebra mussel E polymorpha Unionidae Actinonaias Mucket N ligamentina Unionidae Amblema plicata Three-ridge N Unionidae Anodonta Flat Floater N suborbiculata Unionidae Cyclonaias Purple N tuberculata wartyback Unionidae Cyprogenia Fanshell Federally endangered N stegaria Unionidae Ellipsaria lineolata Butterfly N Unionidae Elliptio crassidens Elephant ear N Unionidae Elliptio dilatata Spike Reintroduced in PA, WV N Unionidae Epioblasma Northern Federally endangered; N torulosa rangiana riffleshell reintroduced in WV Unionidae Epioblasma Snuffbox Federally endangered N triquetra Unionidae Fusconaia ebena Ebony shell N Unionidae Fusconaia flava Wabash pigtoe N Unionidae Fusconaia Long solid N subrotunda Unionidae Lampsilis abrupta Pink mucket Federally Endangered N Unionidae Lampsilis cardium Plain N pocketbook Unionidae Lampsilis fasciola Wavy-rayed N lampmussel Unionidae Lampsilis ovata Sharp-ridged N

Appendix B 27 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

pocketbook Unionidae Lampsilis Fatmucket N siliquoidea Unionidae Lampsilis teres Yellow sandshell N Unionidae Lasmigona White N complanata heelsplitter Unionidae Lasmigona costata Fluted shell N Unionidae Leptodea fragilis Fragile N papershell Unionidae Ligumia recta Black sandshell N Unionidae Megalonaias Washboard N nervosa Unionidae Obliquaria reflexa Threehorn N wartyback Unionidae Obovaria Round N subrotunda hickorynut Unionidae Plethobasus Sheepnose Federally endangered N cyphyus Unionidae Pleurobema clava Clubshell Federally endangered; N reintroduced in WV Unionidae Pleurobema Ohio pigtoe N cordatum Unionidae Pleurobema Round pigtoe N sintoxia Unionidae Potamilus alatus Pink heelsplitter N Unionidae Potamilus ohiensis Pink papershell N Unionidae Pyganodon grandis Giant floater N Unionidae Quadrula Monkeyface N metanevra Unionidae Quadrula nodulata Wartyback N Unionidae Quadrula pustulosa Pimpleback N Unionidae Quadrula quadrula Mapleleaf N Unionidae Simpsonaias Salamander N ambugua mussel Unionidae Strophitus Creeper N undulatus Unionidae Toxolasma parvus Lilliput N Unionidae Tritogonia Pistolgrip N verrucosa Unionidae Truncilla Fawnsfoot N donaciformis Unionidae Truncilla truncata Deertoe N Unionidae Uniomerus Pondhorn N tetralasmus Unionidae Utterbackia Paper pondshell N imbecillis Unionidae Villosa fabalis Rayed bean Federally endangered N

Appendix B 28 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

* N = Native; E = Exotic

Appendix B 29 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table B-5. Refuge Fishes

Family Scientific Name Common Name Status Origin * Amiidae Amia calva Bowfin N Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American Eel N Atherinidae Labidesthes sicculus Brook Silverside N Catastomidae Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker N Catostomidae Carpiodes velifer Highfin Carpsucker N Catostomidae Carpoides carpio River carpsucker N Catostomidae Carpoides cyprinus Quillback N Catostomidae Catostoomus commersoni White Sucker N Catostomidae Hypentelium nigricans Northern Hogsucker N Catostomidae Ictiobus bubalus Smallmouth Buffalo N Catostomidae Ictiobus cyprinellus Bigmouth Buffalo N Catostomidae Ictiobus niger Black Buffalo N Catostomidae Minytrema melanops Spotted Sucker N Catostomidae Moxostoma anisurum Silver Redhorse N Catostomidae Moxostoma carinatum River Redhorse N Catostomidae Moxostoma duquesnei Black Redhorse N Catostomidae Moxostoma erythrurum Golden Redhorse N Catostomidae Moxostoma macrolepidotum Shorthead Redhorse N Centarchidae Lepomis gibbosus Pumpkinseed N Centrarchidae Ambloplites rupestris Rock Bass N Centrarchidae Lepomis cyanellus Green Sunfish N Centrarchidae Lepomis gulosis Warmouth N Centrarchidae Lepomis humilis Orangespotted Sunfish N Centrarchidae Lepomis hybrid Hybrid E Centrarchidae Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill N Centrarchidae Lepomis megalotis Longear Sunfish N Centrarchidae Lepomis microlophus Redear Sunfish N Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth Bass N Centrarchidae Micropterus punctulatus Largemouth Bass N Centrarchidae Micropterus punctulatus Spotted Bass N Centrarchidae Poxomis annularis White Crappie N Centrarchidae Poxomis nigromaculatus Black Crappie N Characidae Carassius auratus Goldfish E Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris Skipjack Herring N Clupeidae Alosa pseudohargengus Alewife N Clupeidae Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard Shad N Clupeidae Dorosoma petenense Threadfin Shad N Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum Central Stoneroller N Cyprinidae Carassius auratus X Cyprinus Goldfish Hybrid E Cyprinidae Cyprinella galactura Whitetail Shiner N Cyprinidae Cyprinus carpio Common Carp E Cyprinidae Ericymba buccata Silverjaw Minnow N Cyprinidae Hybopsis storeriana Silver Chub N

Appendix B 30 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Family Scientific Name Common Name Status Origin * Cyprinidae Luxilus cornutus Common Shiner N Cyprinidae Nocomis micropogon River Chub N Cyprinidae Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis antherinoides Emerald Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis blennius River Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis boops Bigeye Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis chrysocephalus Striped Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis hudsonius Spotail Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis photogenis Silver Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis rubellus Rosyface Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis spilopterus Spotfin Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis stramineus Sand Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis volucellus Mimic Shiner N Cyprinidae Notropis wickliffi Channel Shiner N Cyprinidae Phenacobius mirabilis Suckermouth Minnow N Cyprinidae Pimephales notatus Bluntnose Minnow N Cyprinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead Minnow N Cyprinidae Pimephales vigilax Bullhead Minnow N Cyprinidae Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose Dace N Cyprinidae Semotilus atromaculatus Creek Chub N Esocidae Esox lucius Northern Pike N Esocidae Esox lucius X masquinongy Tiger musky hybrid E Esocidae Esox masquinongy Muskellunge N Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides Goldeye N Hiodontidae Hiodon tergisus Mooneye N Ictaluridae Ameiurus natalis Yellow Bullhead N Ictaluridae Ameiurus nebulosus Brown Bullhead N Ictaluridae Ameius melas Black Bullhead N Ictaluridae Ictalurus furcatus Blue catfish N Ictaluridae Ictalurus punctatus Channel Catfish N Ictaluridae Pylodictis olivaris Flathead Catfish N Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus osseus Longnose Gar N Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus platostomus Shortnose Gar N Moronidae Morone americana White Perch N Moronidae Morone chrysops White Bass N Moronidae Morone chrysops X saxatilis Hybrid striped bass E Moronidae Morone saxatilis Striped Bass E Percidae Etheostoma blennoides Greenside Darter N Percidae Etheostoma caeruleum Rainbow Darter N Percidae Etheostoma camurum Bluebreast Darter N Percidae Etheostoma flabellare Fantail Darter N Percidae Etheostoma nigrum Johnny Darter N Percidae Etheostoma zonale Banded Darter N Percidae Perca flavescens Yellow perch N Percidae Percina caprodes Logperch N

Appendix B 31 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Family Scientific Name Common Name Status Origin * Percidae Percina copelandi Channel Darter N Percidae Percina maculata Blackside Darter N Percidae Percina phoxocephala Slenderhead Darter N Percidae Percina sciera Dusky Darter N Percidae Percina shumardi River Darter N Percidae Stizostedion canadense Sauger N Percidae Stizostedion vitreum Walleye N Percopsidae Percopsis spp. Trout Perch N Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio Lamprey N Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon unicupsis Silver Lamprey N Petromyzontidae Lampetra appendix American Brook Lamprey N Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula Paddlefish N Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout E, S Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout N, S Salmonidae Salmo trutta Brown Trout E, S Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater Drum N

* N = Native; E = Exotic; S = Stocked in tributary systems

Appendix B 32 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table B-6. Refuge Reptiles and Amphibians

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON_NAME CLASS STATUS * Bufonidae Bufo americanus American Toad Amphibia N Bufonidae Bufo woodhouseii fowleri Fowler's Toad Amphibia N Pelobatidae Scaphiopus holbrookii Eastern spadefoot toad Amphibia N Hylidae Hyla crucifer crucifer Northern Spring Peeper Amphibia N Hylidae Hyla versicolor Gray Tree Frog Amphibia N Plethodontidae Plethodon richmondii Ravine salamander Amphibia N Plethodontidae Plethodon cinereus Red-backed salamander Amphibia N Ranidae Lithobates catesbeiana Bullfrog Amphibia N Ranidae Lithobates clamitans Green Frog Amphibia N melanota Ranidae Lithobates palustris Pickerel Frog Amphibia N Ranidae Lithobates pipiens Northern Leopard Frog Amphibia N Ranidae Lithobates sylvatigus Wood frog Amphibia N Proteidae Necturus maculosus Mudpuppy Amphibia N Chelydridae Chelydra serpentina Snapping Turtle Reptilia N Colubridae Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta Black Rat Snake Reptilia N Colubridae Nerodia sipedon sipedon Northern Watersnake Reptilia N Colubridae Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis Eastern Garter Snake Reptilia N Colubridae Lampropeltis triangulum Milk snake Reptilia N Kinosternidae Sternothorus odoratus Musk turtle Reptilia N Emydidae Chrysemys picta marginata Midland Painted Turtle Reptilia N Emydidae Terrapene carolina carolina Eastern Box Turtle Reptilia N Trionychidae Trionyx spiniferus spiniferus Eastern Spiny Softshell Reptilia N

* N = Native

Appendix B 33 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table B-7. Refuge Insects

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Bees – Plasterer Bees Colletidae Hylaeus mesillae No common name N Bees – Plasterer Bees Colletidae Hylaeus modestus Yellow- faced bee N Bees – Plasterer Bees Colletidae Hylaeus affinis No common name N Bees – Plasterer Bees Colletidae Colletes compactus No common name N Bees – Plasterer Bees Colletidae Colletes inaequalis Unequal cellophane bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Agapostemon virescens Green bee; bicolor N sweat bee Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Augochlora pura Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Augochlorella aurata Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Augochloropsis metallica Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Halictus confusus Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Halictus ligatus Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Halictus rubicundus Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum coriaceum Sweat bee N

Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum Sweat bee N fattigi/apocyni

Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum imitatum Sweat bee N

Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum rohweri Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum viridatum Sweat bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum No common name N admirandum Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum bruneri Bruner’s dialictus N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum ephialtum No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum foxii No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum gotham Gotham bee N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum hitchensi No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum leatherinae No common name N ?? Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum obscurum No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum pectorale No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum smilacinae No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum No common name N subviridatum Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum timothyi No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum versatum No common name N Bees - Halictid and Sweat Bees Halictidae Lasioglossum weemsi No common name N Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia atriventris N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae Bufflehead mason bee Osmia bucephala N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia collinsiae N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia conjuncta N Bees

Appendix B 34 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia georgica N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae Blue orchard bee Osmia lignaria N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia pumila N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae No common name Osmia taurus N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae Hoplitis pilosifrons No common name N Bees Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae Megachile mendica Flat tailed Leaf cutter N bees bee Bees - Leafcutting Bees, Mason Megachilidae Coelioxys sayi Say’s cuckoo leaf cutter N bees Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Bombus impatiens Bumble bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Bombus griseocollis Brown belted bumble N bee Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Eucera atriventris No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Eucera dubitata No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Apis mellifera Honey bee E Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Melissodes denticulata No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Melissodes bimaculata Long-horned bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Melissodes desponsa Thistle long-horned bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Melissodes druriella No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Nomada bidentate No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Nomada pygmaea No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Nomada sulphurata No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Nomada superba No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Melitoma taurea No common name N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Ceratina calcarata Small carpenter bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Ceratina dupla Small carpenter bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Ceratina mikmaqi Small carpenter bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Ceratina strenua Small carpenter bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Xylocopa virginica Northern carpenter bee N Bees - Long-tongued Bees Apidae Peponapis pruinosa Pruinose squash bee N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Calliopsis andreniformis Miner bee N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena carlini Carlin’s Andrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena imitatrix No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena miserabilis Miserable Adrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena nasonii Nason’s Adrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena placata No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena vicina Neighborly Adrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena cressonii No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena erigeniae Spring beauty Andrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena erythronii No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena hirticincta Hairy-banded Adrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena illini No common name N

Appendix B 35 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena arabis No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena asteris Aster Adrena N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Andrena violae No common name N Bees - Mining Bees Andrenidae Pseudopanurgus No common name N compositarum Beetles - Blister Beetles Meloidae Epicauta pennsylvanica Black blister beetle N Beetles - Ladybird Beetles Coccinellidae Harmonia axyridis Asian ladybird beetle N Beetles - Ladybird Beetles Coccinellidae Coccinella Six-spotted ladybird N septempunctata beetle Beetles - leaf Beetles Chrysomelidae Labidomera clivicollis Swamp milkweed leaf N beetle Beetles - leaf Beetles Chrysomelidae Chrysochus auratus Dogbane leaf beetle N Beetles - Long-horned Beetles Cerambycidae Megacyllene robiniae Black locust borer N Beetles - Sap Beetles Nitidulidae Carpophilus sp. Sap beetle sp. N Beetles - Scarab Beetles Scarabaeidae Popillia japonica Japanese beetle N Beetles - Soldier Beetles Cantharidae Chauliognathus Goldenrod Leatherwing N pennsylvanicus Beetles – Tiger Beetles Carabidae Cicindela marginipennis Cobblestone Tiger N Beetle Beetles – Tiger Beetles Carabidae Cicindela repanda Bronzed Tiger Beetle N Beetles – Tiger Beetles Carabidae Cicindela cuprascens Coppery Tiger Beetle N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Junonia coenia Common Buckeye N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Speyeria cybele Great Spangled N Fritillary Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Asterocampa celtis Hackberry Emperor N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Boloria bellona Meadow Fritillary N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Danaus plexippus Monarch N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Phyciodes tharos Pearl Crescent N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Polygonia interrogationis Question Mark N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Vanessa atalanta Red Admiral N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Chlosyne nycteis Silvery Checkerspot N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Euptoieta claudia Variegated Fritillary N Butterflies - Brushfoots Nymphalidae Limenitis archippus Viceroy N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Lerema accius Clouded Skipper N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Hesperiidae spp. Dun Dusky Skipper N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Thymelicus lineola European Skipper N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Ancyloxypha numitor Least Skipper N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Polites peckius Peck's Skipper N Butterflies - Grass Skippers Hesperiidae Poanes zabulon Zabulon Skipper N Butterflies - Hairstreaks, & Lycaenidae Satyrium calanus Banded Hairstreak N Blues Butterflies - Hairstreaks, & Lycaenidae Satyrium titus Coral Hairstreak N Blues Butterflies - Hairstreaks, & Lycaenidae Everes comyntas Eastern Tailed-Blue N Blues comyntas Butterflies - Hairstreaks, & Lycaenidae Satyrium caryaevorus Hickory Hairstreak N Blues

Appendix B 36 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Butterflies - Hairstreaks, & Lycaenidae Celastrina ladon Spring Azure N Blues Butterflies - Spread-wing Hesperiidae Pholisora catullus Common Sootywing N Skippers Butterflies - Spread-wing Hesperiidae Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper N Skippers Butterflies - Swallowtails Papilionidae Papilio polyxenes Black Swallowtail N Butterflies - Swallowtails Papilionidae Papilio glaucus Eastern Tiger N Swallowtail

Butterflies - Swallowtails Papilionidae Battus philenor Pipevine Swallowtail N Butterflies - Swallowtails Papilionidae Papilio troilus Spicebush Swallowtail N Butterflies - Swallowtails Papilionidae Eurytides marcellus Zebra Swallowtail N Butterflies - Whites, Sulphurs Pieridae Pontia rapae Cabbage Butterfly E Butterflies - Whites, Sulphurs Pieridae Colias philodice philodice Clouded Sulphur N Butterflies - Whites, Sulphurs Pieridae Phoebis sennae eubule Cloudless Sulphur N Butterflies - Whites, Sulphurs Pieridae Colias eurytheme Orange Sulphur N Damselflies Coenagrionidae Argia apicalis Blue-fronted Dancer N Damselflies Coenagrionidae Argia translata Dusky Dancer N Dragonflies Libellulidae Perithemis ternera Eastern Amberwing N Dragonflies Gomphidae Stylurus notatus Elusive Clubtail N Dragonflies Macromiidae Macromia taeniolata Royal River Cruiser N Flies - Fruit Flies Tephritidae Eurosta sp. Goldenrod gall fly sp. N Flies - Hoverflies Syrphidae Eristalis dimidiatus Sphyrid (hover) fly sp. N Flies - Hoverflies Syrphidae Baccha Syrphid (hover) fly sp. costata/Allograpta N obliqua Flies - Robber Flies Asilidae Holcocephala fusca Robber fly sp. N Grasshoppers, Crickets, and Gryllidae Phyllopalpus pulchellus Red-headed bush N Katydids cricket Mantid Flies Mantispidae sp. Mantid fly sp. N Mantises Mantidae Tenodera sinensis Chinese mantis E Millipedes Spirobolidae Narceus americanus North American N millipede Moths - Ermine Moths Yponomeutidae Atteva aurea Ailanthus webworm N Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Concylodes ovulalis Zebra Concylodes N Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Crambus agitatellus Double-banded Grass- N veneer Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Desmia Grape Leaffolder N funeralis/maculalis Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Fissicrambus mutabilis Changeable Grass- N veneer Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Haimbachia placidellus Peppered Haimbacia N Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Microcrambus elegans Elegant Grass-veneer N Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Nomophila nearctica Lucerne Moth N Moths – Crambid Snout Moths Crambidae Parapediasia teterrella Bluegrass Webworm N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Allotria elonympha False Underwing N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Apantesis phalerata Harnessed Tiger Moth N

Appendix B 37 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Caenurgina erechtea Forage Looper N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Condica vecors Dusky Groundling N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Cycnia tenera Delicate Cycnia N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Halysidota tessellaris Banded Tussock Moth N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Hypena baltimoralis Baltimore Snout N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Idia aemula Common Idia N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Panopoda carneicosta Brown Panopoda N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Pyrrharctica isabella Isabella Tiger Moth N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Spilosoma congrua Agreeable Tiger Moth N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Zale horrida Horrid Zale N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Zale undularis Black Zale N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Zanclognatha crualis Early Fan-foot N Moths – Erebid Moths Erebidae Zanclognatha Yellowish Fan-foot N marcidilinea Moths - Gelechiid Moths Gelechiidae Gnorimoschema sp. Moth sp. N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Besma quercivoria Oak Besma N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Biston betularia Pepper-and-salt N Geometer Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Cabera variolaria The Vestal N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Digrammia ocellinata Faint-spotted N Anglewing Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Ectropis crepuscularia Small Engrailed N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Epimecis hortaria Tulip Tree Beauty N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Eubaphe mendica The Beggar N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Eulithis diversilineta Lesser Grapevine N Looper Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Hygagytris unipunctata One-spotted Variant N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Iridopsis ephyraria Pale-winged Gray N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Iridopsis larvaria Bent-line Gray N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Iridopsis vellivolata Purplish Gray N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Nemoria lixaria Red-bordered Emerald N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Plagodis alcoorlaria Hollow-spotted N Plagodis Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Pleuroprucha insulsaria Common Tan Wave N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Xanthorhoe lacustrata Toothed Brown Carpet N Moths – Geometrid Moths Geometridae Xanthotype urticaria False Crocus Geometer N Moths – Giant Silkmoths Saturniidae Antheracea polyphemus Polyphemus Moth N Moths – Giant Silkmoths Saturniidae Dryocampa rubicunda Rosy Maple Moth N Moths – Giant Silkmoths Saturniidae Eacles imperialis Imperial Moth N Moths – Giant Silkmoths Saturniidae Anisota senatoria Orange striped N oakworm Moths – Sphinx Moths Sphingidae Darapsa myron Virginia Creeper Sphinx N Moth – Slug moths Limacodidae Isochaetes Spun Glass Slug Moth N beutenmuelleri Moth – Slug moths Limacodidae Parasa chloris Smaller Parasa N Moth – Slug moths Limacodidae Prolimacodes badia Skiff Moth N

Appendix B 38 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Moths - Tent Caterpillars Lasiocampidae Malacosoma Eastern tent caterpillar N americanum Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Acronicta ovata Ovate N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Allagrapha aerea Unspotted Looper N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Eudryas grata Beautiful Wood Nymph N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Leuconycta diphteroides Green Leuconycta N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Lithacodia musta Small Mossy Glyph N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Marimatha nigrofimbra Black-bordered Lemon N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Mythimna unipunctata The White-speck N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Polygrammate The Hebrew N hebraeicum Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Protodeltodes muscosula Large Mossy Glyph N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Spragueia leo Common Spragueia N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Xestia c-nigrum/dolosa Black-letter Dart N Moths – Owlet moths Noctuidae Psychomorpha epimenis Grapevine Epimenis N Moth – Prominent Moths Notodontidae Gluphisia septentrionis Common Gluphisia N Moths - Tiger Moths Arctiidae Cisseps fulvicollis Yellow Collared Scape N Moth Moths - Tiger moths Arctiidae Halysidota tessellaris Banded tussock moth N Moth – Tube moths Acrolophidae Acrolophus popeanella Clemen’s tube moth N Moth – Tortricid moths Tortricidae Acleris nivisellana Snowy-shouldered N Acleris Moth – Tortricid moths Tortricidae Clepsis veritata Garden Tortrix N Moth – Tortricid moths Tortricidae Platynoda flavedana Black-shaded Platynoda N True Bugs - Aphids Aphidae Aphis nerii Yellow milkweed aphid N True Bugs - Cicadas Cicadidae Magicicada cassini Cassini periodical N cicada True Bugs - Cicadas Cicadidae Magicicada septendecula Decula periodical cicada N True Bugs - Cicadas Cicadidae Magicicada septendecim Decim periodical cicada N True Bugs - Cicadas Cicadidae Neotibicen pruinosus Dog-day cicada N True Bugs - Milkweed Lygaeidae Oncopeltus faciatus Large milkweed bug N True Bugs - Milkweed Lygaeidae Lygaeus kalmii Small milkweed bug N True Bugs - Spittlebugs Cercopidae sp. Spittlebug sp. N True Bugs - Stink Bugs Pentatomidae Acrosternum hilare Green stink bug N True Bugs - Stink Bugs Pentatomidae Brochymena Fourhumped stink bug N quadripustulata True Bugs - Stink Bugs Pentatomidae Thyanta accerra Redshouldered stink N bug True Bugs - Stink Bugs Pentatomidae Brochymena sp. Stink Bug N True Bugs - Stink Bugs Pentatomidae Halyomorpha halys Brown marmorated E stink bug True Bugs - Treehoppers Membracidae Publilia reticulata Treehopper Bug N True Bugs – Wheel bug Reduviidae Arilus cristatus Wheel bug; assassin bug N Wasps Crabronidae Trypoxylon sp. Wasp sp. N Wasps - Gall Cynipidae sp. Gall wasp sp. N Wasps – Wood wasps Siricidae Tremex columba Pigeon tremex horntail N

Appendix B 39 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

GROUP FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME ORIGIN * Wasps - Mud Daubers, Sphecid Sphecidae Chalybion californicum Blue mud dauber N Wasps Wasps - Mud Daubers, Sphecid Sphecidae Ammophila sp. Thread-waisted wasp N Wasps sp. Wasps - Scoliid Wasps Scoliidae Scolia dubia Digger wasp N Yellowjackets, Wasps, Hornets Vespidae Parancistrocerus Mason wasp N pedestris Yellowjackets, Wasps, Hornets Vespidae Polistes fuscatus Paper wasp N Yellowjackets, Wasps, Hornets Vespidae Vespula maculifrons Eastern yellow jacket N Yellowjackets, Wasps, Hornets Vespidae Eumenes verticalis Potter wasp N Yellowjackets, Wasps, Hornets Vespidae Eumenes fraternus Potter wasp N

* N = Native; E = Exotic

Appendix B 40 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Appendix C. Comprehensive Resources of Concern (ROC) List

Appendix C 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix C 2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Comprehensive Resources of Concern List for the ORINWR There are currently 6 habitats, 107 species, and 8 “species groups” in the Comprehensive ROC Table, which were taken from the various sources along the top of the columns. This is not a comprehensive list of all species found on ORINWR. Criteria used in narrowing down to a manageable number of “focal species” for habitat planning (adapted from Great River HMP, Region 3): • ORINWR purposes and trust resources (migratory birds, endangered species, inter- jurisdictional fish) • BCR and AMJV priority species most in need of conservation (H+, H, and M) • Indicator species that can be used as representative of habitat quality/health • Habitat conditions in the landscape surrounding ORINWR, and its impact on the ORINWR’s capability to manage for the species

o e.g., patch size requirements, habitat connectivity, incompatible land use, soils, hydrology, contaminants, predation, and invasive species. • Likelihood that the species or group would respond positively to management actions • Sustainability of habitat conditions within a natural range of variability that is still suitable for the species or group

o e.g., consider natural processes, human induced regulation of habitat, and climate change • Combining species into logical groups or guilds (those having similar life history, habitat needs, or seasonality of occurrence on ORINWR)

Appendix C 3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking HABITATS riparian forest 1043 X X X X riparian shoreline and banks 35 + X X riverine open water and wetlands 1740 X X X

(ROW, REM, RAB) temperate broadleaf upland forest 103 X X X floodplain wetlands (POW, PEM, 20 X X X X X PSS) early successional field and shrub 386 X X X

SPECIES ENDANGERED & THREATENED pink mucket pearly mussel X X 1 E Y G2 fanshell X X 1 E X Y G1 sheepnose X X 1 E G3 snuffbox X X 1 E G3 spectaclecase X 1 E G3 clubshell X X 1 @ E Y G1 northern riffleshell X x X 1 @ E G2 tuberculed-blossom pearly mussel X x Y G2 ring pink X x E Y G1 orange-foot pimpleback X x E Y G1 purple cat’s paw X x X E Y G1 cracking pearlymussel X x X G1 white wartyback X x G1 rabbitsfoot X x X T G3 rough pigtoe X x E Y G5 rayed bean X x X 1 @ X Y G2

Appendix C 4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking Indiana bat X X IC X G2 BIRDS X IA X HLC, X N X G4 cerulean warbler 1 H+ RS @ Acadian flycatcher IIA MC X H G5 Louisiana waterthrush X X IIA X 1 RS @ N H G5 yellow-throated warbler IIB X G5 American woodcock 1 MC N X H+ G5 American bittern X X 1 HLC H M G4 wood thrush X X IA X 1 RS @ N X H+ G5 blue-winged warbler X X IA X 2 RS X N H+ G5 prothonotary warbler X 2 HLC N G5 scarlet tanager X IIB RS @ G5 yellow-throated vireo IIB MC X G5 osprey X 2 V T G5 bald eagle X X 2 HLC T X G4 peregrine falcon X X X 1 HLC E G4 great blue heron 2 MC G5 wood duck M G5 mallard M G5 American black duck 1 MC N X H G5 spotted sandpiper 1 E M G5 Kentucky warbler X IA X 1 MC N H+ G5 prairie warbler X IA X 1 MC N H+ G5 worm-eating warbler X X IA X 1 RS @ X N H+ G5 field sparrow IIA 1 H G5 hooded warbler IIB X H G5 yellow-breasted chat IIA 1 MC G5

Appendix C 5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking eastern towhee IIA G5 indigo bunting IIA G5 whip-poor-will X X 2 MC X N G5 red-headed woodpecker X X 2 MC X N G5 barn owl X 1 S G5 bank swallow 1 MC S G5

FISH paddlefish X 2 HLC N X G4 shovelnose sturgeon X 2 X G5 lake sturgeon X IC E X G3 blue sucker X 1 X G3 American eel X 1 MC G5 black buffalo 2 V S G5 channel darter X 2 V G4 bluebreast darter X HLC G4 goldeye X 2 V G5 black bullhead X 1 G5 bigmouth buffalo X 2 G5 highfin carpsucker 1 V G4 longear sunfish X V G5 X HLC, S G4 northern madtom 1 RS @ Ohio lamprey X 1 RS @ G3 IC, RS spotted darter X 1 T G2 @ river darter X 2 G5 river shiner X 2 V G5

Appendix C 6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking shoal chub X 2 G5 Tippecanoe darter X 1 HLC G3 gilt darter X 2 HLC G4

AMPHIBIANS eastern hellbender X 1 IC @ S Y G3 smallmouth salamander 1 X G5 eastern spadefoot toad X 1 HLC N G5 Blanchard’s cricket frog 1 G5 northern leopard frog 1 MC S G5

INSECTS cobblestone tiger beetle X 1 G2 monarch butterfly (FWS initiative)

MOLLUSKS black sandshell 1 G5 butterfly 2 N G4 deertoe X 2 G5 fawnsfoot X 2 G5 ebonyshell X 1 G4 elephantear X 1 N G5 pyramid pigtoe X E G2 long-solid X 1 S Y G3 monkeyface X 2 G4 Ohio pigtoe X 2 Y G3 pistolgrip X 2 G4 pocketbook X 2 E G5

Appendix C 7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking purple wartyback X 1 G5 round hickorynut X 1 N Y G4 round pigtoe X 1 G4 salamander mussel X 1 T G3 three-horn wartyback X 2 G5 wartyback X 2 washboard X 2 G5 yellow sandshell X 1 G5 striped whitelip (land snail) X 2 G5

MAMMALS eastern red bat X 1 MC X G5 hoary bat X 1 MC X G5 silver haired bat X 2 HLC X G5 tri-colored bat X 1 little brown bat X 1 northern long-eared bat X 1 RS @ X X IC, RS eastern small-footed bat 1 @ Rafinesque bat X 1

REPTILES rough green snake X 2 V X G5 midland smooth softshell turtle 1 S G5

GROUPINGS OF SPECIES fluvial dependent mussels X native aquatic vegetation X

Appendix C 8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

2008

-

Purpose

Regions 3, 5 3, Regions

FWS BCC

Acreage (2013 mapping) (2013 Acreage ORINWR Documents BIDEH T&E Federal State PA,OH T&E only ) 2008 # 28 (BCC BCR PIF Ohio Hills (Area 22) * (2004) Plan Action Wildlife WV PA Wildlife Action Plan OH Wildlife Strategic Plan KY Wildlife Action Plan (2012) Species Focal FWS and PriorityAMJV Species Habitats Plan Strategic ORBFHP 2013 Appalachian LCC Global Species Trust Global Ranking native pollinators bats (summer habitat) wintering and migrating waterfowl native aquatic macro invertebrates migrating shorebirds big river darters

* Refuge selection criteria from PIF = species that are (1A or 2A or 2B) AND (% pop > 5% OR BBS concentration 3 or 4). Xx – federally listed species whose historic range includes the Refuge area, but may be extirpated at present. Codes for PA Wildlife Action Plan Status: IC = immediate concern; HLC = high level concern; RS = responsibility species; V = vulnerable in PA; MC = maintenance concern. @ indicates overall species of greatest conservation need (Combined Responsibility and Imperilment) Codes for the WV Wildlife Action Plan (WV DNR 2015; WV DNR 2006): 1 = priority species with global rank of G1-G3G4, and a state rank of SH, S1, S1S2; 2 = species with a state ranking of S2, S2S3, S3S4. Codes for KY Wildlife Action Plan: N or blank = none; E = endangered; T = threatened; S = special concern; H = historic; X = extirpated

Appendix C 9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Sources: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, November 1989. Final Environmental Assessment for the Establishment of the Ohio River Islands NWR. Newton Corner, MA. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, November 2001. Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan. Hadley, MA. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2011. Great River and Clarence Cannon National Wildlife Refuges Habitat Management Plan, Final. Rosenburg, K. and R. Dettmers. 2004. Partners in Flight Landbird Conservation Plan: Physiographic Area 22: Ohio Hills. American Bird Conservancy, Ithaca, NY. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Program, 2011. FY 2012-2016 Focal Species. www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/dmbmdbhc.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. [Online version available at http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds] Stark, J. 2013. Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan. The Nature Conservancy, Columbus, OH. Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture (AMJV) Priority Species and Habitats. http://www.amjv.org State Wildlife Action Plans: WV - http://www.wvdnr.gov/Wildlife/PDFFiles/wvwcap.pdf KY - http://fw.ky.gov/WAP/Pages/default.aspx PA - http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=622722&mode=2 OH - http://www.fws.gov/midwest/FederalAid/documents/01OHWAP06Dmjs.pdf Appalachian Landscape Cooperative, preliminary list of Global Trust Species (no fish or birds yet included) http://applcc.org/the-cooperative/sc/sc-past-meetings-and-materials/sc-meeting- workshop-april-22-24-2013/sc-indicator-and-surrogate-species-work-group/lcc-global- priority-species ORSANCO detailed biological pool assessment reports: 2009 – 2013.

Appendix C 10 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

APPENDIX D. POTENTIAL HABITAT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND PRESCRIPTIONS

Appendix D 1 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix D 2 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This section identifies potential management tools or strategies that are available to land managers to achieve desired habitat objectives. These strategies were identified through successful Refuge application, literature review and in consultation with other land managers. This appendix is broken up into two main areas of habitat management routinely encountered by Service staff: • Invasive Species Management • Moist Soil and Impoundment Management • Forest Management • Bank Stabilization and Erosion Control The information provided herein is intended to act as a baseline source of background information for managers, technicians, and other individuals involved in management decision making. Additional resources are linked in many sections for additional information regarding management strategies and prescriptions for individual treatments. C-1 INVASIVE SPECIES MANAGEMENT Controlling and managing invasive species is a strategy for maintaining the biological integrity and diversity of all habitats. The Fulfilling the Promise National Invasive Species Management Strategy Team developed a national strategy for management of invasive species for the National Wildlife Refuge System in 2002. The importance of invasive species management was also underscored in the Conserving the Future vision document. The strategy recommends the following priority order of action for invasive species management: 1. Prevent invasion of potential invaders. 2. Eradicate new and/or small infestations. 3. Control and/or contain large established infestations. Potential management strategies for preventing invasive species, prioritizing control efforts for established invasive species, and controlling invasive species are described in detail below. Prior to the initiation of invasive species control efforts, the Refuge manager must understand the biology of the species to be controlled. The ORINWR is situated at the “bottom of a bowl” so to speak. The Ohio River watershed feeding into ORINWR is thousands of square miles in area, and any problematic plant in upstream watersheds has the potential to eventually colonize ORINWR. Of the over 500 species of plants currently known on ORINWR, over 100 are non-native, and approximately 35 are invasive to some degree (Table C-1). Managing for “natural” habitats in the face of such high invasion pressures is challenging to say the least. The costs, in terms of staff time and money, can overwhelm a small station and take resources away from other important programs.

Appendix D 3 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table C-1. Invasive Species Present on ORINWR, Categorized by Distribution New Invaders, Low % Established, But Limited Well Established and Cover, EDRR Species Distribution on ORINWR Widespread Italian arum Amur cork tree Japanese knotweed group

Asian bittersweet Mile-a-minute weed Multifora rose

Japanese chaff flower Canada thistle Tree of heaven

Princess tree kudzu Shrubby honeysuckles

English ivy Japanese barberry Garlic mustard

White poplar privet Autumn olive

bamboo Johnson grass Japanese honeysuckle

Common reed Chinese silvergrass Japanese stiltgrass

Jimsonweed Japanese hops Ground ivy

Purple loosestrife Poison hemlock Alien stinging nettle

Lesser celandine Hydrilla

When invasive species become established, a number of resources are available to assist Refuge managers with selecting strategies for invasive species management. Some good sources of management information include: • National Invasive Species Information Center: http://invasivespeciesinfo.gov/index.shtml • Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health: http://www.invasive.org/ • USGS Invasive Species Program: http://biology.usgs.gov/invasive/ • Midwest Invasive Plant Network (MIPN): http://mipn.org/ • Weeds Gone Wild: http://www.nps.gov/plants/alien/index.htm

C-2 PREVENTION STRATEGIES Refuge managers should conduct appropriate and applicable pest detection, environmental surveillance, and monitoring before, during, and after any management activity to determine whether pest management goals are achieved and whether the activity caused any significant unanticipated effects. In addition to Service staff actively treating and controlling invasive species, there are other areas in which invasive species management strategies can be considered or incorporated into habitat management:

Appendix D 4 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Working with Partners Working with partners is one of the most effective way to manage invasive species on a Refuge. Control efforts on ORINWR will have little long-term impact if the surrounding lands and waters are infested with invasive species. Working with partners on invasives management is important to USFWS. A detailed summary of invasive species related partnerships and funding sources is available online at: http://www.fws.gov/invasives/partnerships.html. Where possible, ORINWR habitat management should consider the support available through partnerships and resources listed here. Incorporate Invasive Species Prevention in All Facilities and Construction Projects Construction projects or mobilization of large equipment and vehicles for habitat management can introduce invasive species and create disturbances favorable to species introductions. Some considerations for prevention include: • Minimize ground disturbance and restore disturbed areas. • Require mulch, sand, gravel, dirt, and other construction materials to be certified as free of noxious weed seeds. • Avoid stockpiles of weed-infested materials. To prevent the spread of invasive species along transportation corridors: • Maintain invasive species-free zones along trails, around parking lots and boat launches, and at other related facilities. • Inspect these areas often and control new infestations immediately. • Minimize the number and size of roads on ORINWR. • Remove all mud, dirt, and plant parts from all equipment between projects or when equipment is moved from one location to another. Incorporate Invasive Species Prevention in Impoundment Design and Management Minimize infrastructure development in managed wetland units to reduce unnecessary dikes, waterways, and access roads. These often are sources of infestation and pathways of spread. Plant a native cool season grass mix that will establish quickly to stabilize banks and dikes and to prevent the establishment of invasive species. Make sure that water manipulation activities, such as flooding and drawdowns, minimize the germination and spread of invasive plant seeds and encourage the growth of native species. Flooding can also be used to stunt the growth of some invasive species as described below under water level management. C-3 CONTROL STRATEGIES The control prioritization order noted in the introductory section has been demonstrated as the most successful approach to proactively treating invasive species infestations. This is also reinforced by more recent invasive management guidance (Rawlins et al. 2011) and depicted in Figure C-1 below.

Appendix D 5 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-1. Phases of Invasive Species Invasion and Control (from Rawlins et al. 2011).

Early Detection and Rapid Response Where prevention is not possible, early detection and rapid response is the next best strategy. Success will depend, in part, on participation by all ORINWR staff, contractors, volunteers, and visitors in efforts to report and respond to invasions. The ORINWR Refuge Manager must have access to up-to-date reliable scientific and management information on species that are likely to invade. For some species, an active monitoring protocol may be established to facilitate early detection. Tools and resources for early detection and distribution mapping have been developed and are readily available online from a number of sources. One such source of information includes EDDMapS (Early Detection and Distribution Mapping System) developed by The University of Georgia - Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health. This site includes mapping tools, species distribution maps, and other spatial datasets that inform invasive species distribution: • EDDMapS: https://www.eddmaps.org/ When small infestations are spotted, they should be eradicated as soon as possible. The site must then be monitored for several years to ensure the control was effective. Prioritizing Invasive Species Control Efforts The first step in prioritizing invasive species control efforts is to determine the abundance and distribution of invasive species on ORINWR or management unit. However, control efforts should not be delayed to collect statistically rigorous survey data. Baseline data regarding the location of

Appendix D 6 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

many invasives on ORINWR already may be available via observations of staff, volunteers, contractors, and ORINWR visitors. These observations should be documented and mapped. There are a number of ranking tools to assist land managers with the daunting task of prioritizing their invasive plant control efforts. The Fulfilling the Promise National Invasive Species Management Strategy Team recommends using the following order of priority to determine appropriate actions: 1. Smallest scale of infestation 2. Poses greatest threat to land management objectives 3. Greatest ease of control. The following ranking systems are available for prioritizing invasive plant species control: • Morse, L.E., J.M. Randall, N. Benton, R. Hiebert, and S. Lu. 2004. An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol: Evaluating Non-Native Plants for Their Impact on Biodiversity. Version 1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. • Hiebert, R.D. and J. Stubbendieck. 1993. Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control. National Park Service. Natural Resources Report NPS/NRMWRO/NRR-93/08. Denver, Colorado. • APRS Implementation Team. 2000. Alien plants ranking system version 5.1. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. (Version 30SEP2002). • Zimmerman, C., M. Jordan, G. Sargis, H. Smith, K. Schwager. 2011. An Invasive Plant Management Decision Tool. Version 1.1. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia. Categories of treatment control are adapted from guidance outlined in The Nature Conservancy’s Invasive Plant Management Decision Analysis Tool Report (Zimmerman et al. 2011). This recommended approach contains three potential control options: eradication, containment, and suppression. • Eradication attempts to eliminate all individuals and the seed bank from an area with the low likelihood of needing to address the species again in the future. • A containment/reduction approach prevents infestations of invasive species from spreading to uninfested areas and (where possible) seeks to reduce population sizes to a level suitable for eradication. • Suppression attempts to reduce an invasive plant population in size, abundance, and/or reproductive output below the threshold needed to maintain a species or ecological process. Eradication is considered successful when no plants are recovered from the initial infested area for three consecutive years (Zimmerman et al. 2011 citing Rejmánek and Pitcairn 2002). Eradication is practical only for small-scale infestations, generally identified in the introduction phase. Rejmánek and Pitcairn (2002) recommend infestations of < 1 ha (2.47 acres) be considered for eradication in California. According to Zimmerman et al. (2011), containment may involve methods that prevent reproduction and dispersal, treating the perimeter of a large infestation, and/or eliminating small

Appendix D 7 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge satellite infestations. Containment is most effective with species that spread slowly, move short distances, and for which effective barriers can be established (Hulme 2006, as cited by Zimmerman et al. 2011). Reduction seeks to eliminate any occurrences within the area and/or prevent the invasive species from spreading into the project area from the surrounding landscape. Similar techniques and management thresholds are at work for either focus of this approach. The ORINWR has developed a prioritization tool to help focus invasive species management, based on species characteristics and site or unit characteristics (see Figures C-2 and C-3). Depending on the species being targeted, different strategies are employed at different times of the year. For example, woody plants can be treated with certain types of herbicide year round, as long as there is no snow covering the lower basal stems. Early growth phases of certain herbaceous species can be effectively pulled. Mowing is effective to remove biomass to make treatments more accessible, and to stress the energy supply of perennial invasive plants. Table C-2 is an illustration of an annual treatment calendar for ORINWR. Annual unit based treatment plans are also helpful, to organize equipment and personnel needed to implement invasive species management on priority units (see Table C-3). These are best placed in an Annual Habitat Workplan, as often times priorities can change from year to year.

Table C-2. Sample Annual Treatment Calendar for ORINWR

Annual Calendar of Invasive Management Tasks Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Move debris and mow old stalks and ground cover Spray basal stems of all woody plants and vines Pull young mile-a-minute shoots Pull or hoe Japanese hops shoots Early Japanese knotweed mowing Mid summer Japanese knotweed mowing Spray knotweed with herbicide when plants 2-3' tall Check kudzu for leaf out Spray kudzu leaves, cut and spray vine stems Spray mile-a-minute and Japanese hops Mow or cut silvergrass Spray silvergrass before flowering

Appendix D 8 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Table C-3. Sample of ORINWR Unit-Based Invasives Management Plan

Unit Target Species Treatment and Chemical or Personnel Responsible Date Equipment Needed CPA (on site or Needed within reasonable distance, and briefed ahead) Buffalo Creek Japanese move debris and Backhoe Terry and knotweed mow old stalks loader and Smitty mower mow late Mower, weed Terry or Smitty May/early June whacker for mower mow July Mower, weed Terry or Smitty whacker for mower spray when 2-3’ Backpack or 2 Patty or Matt tall, Aug/Sept Gator, Milestone and Rodeo shrubby Anytime, stem Backpack, 4 Patty or Matt honeysuckle, spraying woody Garlon 4 Ultra multiflora rose, bases. Or cut stem mix (with autumn olive and spray stumps. basal seed oil)

Captina Kudzu After leaf out, June Backpack or 4 Patty or Matt Mainland – Oct., cut vines Gator, and spray base to Milestone and kill roots; spray Garlon 4 Ultra ground cover mix, or Rodeo leaves 50% Japanese Map extent Mower if open Terry or Smitty knotweed adjacent to kudzu enough area; for mower; and assess for otherwise interns “mowability.” Mow weed whacker late May/early June mow July Mower if open Terry or Smitty enough area; for mower; otherwise interns weed whacker spray when 2-3’tall, Backpack or 4 Patty or Matt Aug/Sept Gator, Milestone and Rodeo

Middle Island Japanese mow late Mower Terry or Smitty knotweed May/early June mow July Mower Terry or Smitty spray when 2-3’tall, Backpack or 2 Patty or Matt Aug/Sept Gator, Milestone and Rodeo

Appendix D 9 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Unit Target Species Treatment and Chemical or Personnel Responsible Date Equipment Needed CPA (on site or Needed within reasonable distance, and briefed ahead) multiflora rose, Spray basal stems Backpack, 4 Patty or Matt shrubby anytime; or cut Garlon 4 Ultra honeysuckles, stem and spray the mix (with autumn olive cut stump basal seed oil) Poison hemlock spray leaves, Backpack or 2 Patty or Matt April/May Gator, Rodeo

HQ (priorities multiflora rose, Spray basal stems Backpack or 2-4 Patty or Matt are previous shrubby anytime; or cut hand sprayer, tree planting honeysuckles, stem and spray the Garlon 4 Ultra areas, autumn olive, cut stump. mix trailsides, barberry, privet isolated core areas, new invaders ****) tree of heaven hack and squirt Backpack or 2 Patty or Matt trunk anytime; cut hand sprayer, down trees along Garlon 4 Ultra roads and trails mix where they are hazards Mile-a-minute For annuals like Backpack or 2 to 4 Patty or Matt weed, Japanese MAM and hops, Gator, Rodeo hops pull young plants when < 18” tall (April – June). Mow and/or spray leaves prior to setting fruit or seed. silvergrass Mow early spring; Backpack or 2 to 4 Patty or Matt spray leaves prior Gator, Rodeo to flowering Wheeling English ivy Cut out section of Backpack or 2 (with Patty or Matt Island stem out of reach hand sprayer, Wheeling Boy of the ground; Garlon 4 Ultra Scouts) spray base mix

**** New invaders to keep a lookout for: Asian bittersweet, giant hogweed, Phragmites. CPA = Certified Public Applicator under WV pesticide licensing.

Appendix D 10 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-2. Species-Based Invasive Management Tool

Appendix D 11 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-3. Site-Based Invasive Management Tool

The timeframe of a suppression effort may vary depending on the invasive plant and desired conservation outcome. Zimmerman et al. (2011) cites several examples where suppression is best suited: 1. Areas targeted for planting desired species in order to establish and become competitive. 2. Interim competition pressure on desired species needs to be reduced so that they may persist. 3. Areas where suppression helps maintain conditions for rare or listed species. Restore Altered Habitats and Reintroduce Native Plants Restoration is critically important because the conditions responsible for the initial invasion will expose the site to a resurgence of the invasive species, as well as a secondary invasion of one or more different species. Furthermore, restoration of a disturbed area before the initial invasion may preclude the need for further control efforts. The goal is to conserve and promote natural processes that will inherently suppress potential pest populations (Department of the Interior 2007). If funding or personnel are not available to restore highly disturbed areas in a timely manner, consider planting a cover crop for several years to stabilize the site prior to reintroducing native

Appendix D 12 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

plants. This will prevent more invasive seeds from entering the environment until the site can be restored. Native plants can then be established by direct seeding or planting with less competition from invasives in the seed bank. When practical, local genotypes of native species should be used. Biological Control Biological control is the use of animals or disease organisms that feed upon or parasitize the invasive species target. Usually, the control agent is imported from the invasive species’ home country, and artificially high numbers of the control agent are fostered and maintained. There are also “conservation” or “augmentation” biological control methods where populations of biological agents already in the environment (usually native) are maintained or enhanced to target an invasive species. The advantages of this method are that it avoids the use of chemicals and can provide relatively inexpensive and permanent control over large areas. Appropriate control agents do not exist for all invasive species. Petitions must be submitted to, and approved by, the USDA Technical Advisory Group on weed biological control before any proposed biological control agent can be released in the United States. Detailed discussion of the application and impacts of biological controls on Service lands is available at: http://www.fws.gov/invasives/staffTrainingModule/methods/biological/impacts.html Physical Control Physical (also referred to as mechanical or manual) removal of invasive organisms can be effective against some herbaceous plants, shrubs and saplings, and aquatic organisms. This is particularly effective for plants that are annuals or have a taproot. Care should be taken to minimize soil disturbance to prevent creating conditions ideal for weed seed germination. Repeated cutting over a growing period is needed for effective control of many invasive plant species. Care should be taken to properly remove and dispose of any plant parts that can re- sprout. Treatments should be timed to prevent seed set and re-sprouting. The following methods are available: hand-pulling, pulling with hand tools (weed wrench, etc.), mowing, brush-hogging, weed-eating, stabbing (cutting roots while leaving in place), girdling (removing cambium layer), mulching, tilling, smothering (black plastic or other), and flooding. Mowing can be used to reduce plant height and deplete energy reserves of invasive and robust plants. Repeated mowing within a growing season is often necessary to successfully control invasive plants. This can be logistically difficult in a habitat that is managed for various resources of concern. However, mowing can be effective when combined with other strategies, such as chemical treatment, spring flooding, and disking. Timing of mowing should be scheduled to maximize above ground energy reserves and to prevent seed dispersal (late summer). Mowing may also increase plant diversity by creating space (light) for other species to germinate Disking and tilling (turning over of top soil and cutting turned soil) is often used in combination with mowing to set back succession and promote both seed germination and invertebrate populations. Disking and tilling breaks up organic root matter, encouraging decomposition, and increasing invertebrate populations. At the same time, it breaks up dense root matter, killing perennial plant and encouraging germinations of annual seed producing plants.

Appendix D 13 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

The advantages of mechanical treatment are low cost for equipment and supplies and minimal damage to neighboring plants and the environment. The disadvantages are higher costs for labor and inability to control large areas. For many invasive species, mechanical treatments alone are not effective, especially for mature plants or well-established plants. Mechanical treatments are most effective when combined with herbicide treatments (e.g. girdle and herbicide treatment). Detailed discussion of the application and impacts of physical controls on Service lands is available at: http://www.fws.gov/invasives/staffTrainingModule/methods/physical/impacts.html Water Level Management in Wetlands and Impoundments Water level management is also used to control invasive and promote desirable plants. The use of flooding in the impoundment, through all or part of a growing season, particularly after mowing or chemical application, stymies vegetative growth of robust vegetation. Subsequent drawdown will allow for germination of moist-soil plants preferred by waterfowl. Timing and speed of drawdown affects species diversity, density, and seed production. Slow drawdown (4-8 weeks) early in the season creates greater species diversity, while fast drawdown (a few to less than 2 weeks) results in lush extensive stands of similar vegetation. Late in the season, however, slow drawdown promotes greater diversity and density, whereas fast drawdown promotes undesirable plant composition (Lane and Jensen 1999). Flooding also promotes robust perennial control by muskrats. Winter drawdowns are also possible, but should be avoided as they have detrimental effects on species over-wintering in the impoundments such as invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians, and muskrats. Herbicides Invasive and robust plants in impoundments can be managed using herbicides approved for use in wetlands. The most commonly used chemical for controlling invasive and robust vegetation in impoundment is glyphosate (Rodeo). The ORINWR uses many formulations of glyphosate (e.g., Roundup, Rodeo, Accord, etc.) as well as trichlorpyr (Garlon 4 Ultra mixed with methylated seed oil, Pathfinder II, etc.), imazipyr (e.g., Arsenal), and aminopyralids (e.g., Milestone). Methods of application include spot-treatment using back pack or ATV mounted sprayer, or aerial application. Spot-treated is more targeted (avoiding neighboring plants), but can be very labor intensive when treating large areas. Aerial application is less labor-intense, but is not as target-specific, and requires extensive planning to execute. Herbicides are applied during various times of the growing season depending on plant species and overall goal. For long term control, herbicide application is typically combined with other methods, such as mowing, burning, and flooding. There are a wide variety of chemicals that are toxic to plant and animal species. They may work in different ways and be very target specific, or affect a wide range of species. Herbicides may be “pre-emergent,” that is, applied prior to germination to prevent germination or kill the seedling, or “post-emergent” and may have various modes of action (auxin mimic, amino acid inhibitor, mitosis inhibitor, photosynthesis inhibitor, lipid biosynthesis inhibitor). Products may come in granular, pelleted, dust or liquid forms. Liquid herbicides are commonly diluted to an appropriate formula and mixed with other chemicals that facilitate mixing, application, or efficacy. Common application methods include foliar spray, basal bark, hack and squirt, injection, and cut stump. The timing of

Appendix D 14 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge applications is critical to achieve good control, as the growth stage at which an organism will be most effectively controlled varies with different species. The advantages are that the right chemicals, applied correctly, can produce desired results over a large area for a reasonable cost. The disadvantages are that the chemicals may affect non- target species at the site (including the applicator) and/or contaminate surface or groundwater. Proper planning includes using the most target-specific, least hazardous (humans and the environment), and most effective chemical for the job. Additionally, one should research minimum effective dosage, as the chemical labels often give higher than necessary concentrations. Herbicides often are most effective when used in combination with mechanical methods described above. Attention to protective gear, licensing requirements and other regulations is essential. In the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, all pesticide and other chemical applications (including adjuvants designed to enhance effectiveness) are covered by Service and departmental regulations, and a Pesticide Use Proposal (PUP) is required for all pesticide applications. Prescribed Fire Fire can either suppress or encourage any given plant species, so great care must be taken to understand the ecosystem and the life histories of the native and invasive plants before using this tool. This tool is most successful when it is used to mimic natural fire regimes. Proper timing of prescribed burns is essential for controlling target invasive species. The most effective fires for invasive plant control occur just prior to flower or seed set, or at the young sapling/seedling stage. Invasive plants are well adapted to disturbance, often surviving fire and rapidly spreading through a disturbed landscape. Studies in northeastern successional habitats have generally shown that fire alone will not remove invasive shrubs. Additional herbicide and/or cutting treatments are necessary (Patterson 2003). This tool requires a good deal of pre-planning (including permitting) and requires a trained crew available on short notice during the burn window. Spot burning using a propane torch can be a good method to control small infestations of invasive plants. It can be advantageous where it is too wet or where there is too little fuel to carry a prescribed fire. There are several principles that should be considered when employing prescribed fire to control woody plants: • Plant mortality is strongly tied to death of “growth points” (i.e. meristems/buds), which are more sensitive to heat damage when actively growing, and when tissue moisture is high (Miller 2000). Therefore, applying fire during spring, when target plants are mobilizing water/nutrients and breaking dormancy of leaf/flower buds, or during fall cold-acclimation periods, is more likely to kill growth points than prescribed fire during dormant periods. • Concentrations of metabolic compounds, i.e. sugars, salts, lignins, vary seasonally, and have been shown to relate to seasonal effects on shrubs. Consequently, timing of treatments may be more important than the type (cutting versus burning) in controlling invasive plants. To reduce biomass, fires should be applied during periods of low below-ground carbohydrate storage (i.e. immediately

Appendix D 15 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

after spring flushing and growth) and should be followed with a second growing season treatment (such as mowing, herbicide, or more prescribed fire) before total non-structural carbohydrate (TNC) levels are replenished. Repeated burning (several consecutive years) during the low point of a plant’s TNC cycle can amplify the negative effects of the treatment (Richburg and Patterson 2003, 2004). Deer Control Invasive plant problems often are exacerbated by white-tailed deer over browsing native species, and when deer numbers rise above the carrying capacity, biodiversity declines (Rawinski 2008). Hunting should be used to reduce the deer population wherever necessary and logistically feasible. Hunting must be regulated (e.g., hunting methods, timing of seasons, hunting pressure) and harvests monitored to prevent negative impact to long-term survival of deer populations. Deer control must be conducted in combination with other invasive plant control measures as deer control alone will not be effective if the invasive plants are already established. More details on the impacts of white-tailed deer specific to forest ecosystems and invasive plants can be found in Rawinski (2008) and elsewhere.

C-4 MOIST SOIL AND IMPOUNDMENT MANAGEMENT Water Level Manipulation At the present time, there is only one “impoundment” on ORINWR – the wetland on Middle Island. However, there are other floodplain wetlands that may in the future come into Refuge ownership and management, so this section is applicable. Water level management (drawdown and flooding) is a strategy used to mimic the dynamic water regime of some natural wetlands, and is typically timed to benefit shorebirds, wading birds, and/or waterfowl. During a draw down, mudflats and shallow waters areas are created to provide foraging habitat for shorebirds, while at the same time concentrating food for wading birds. Some waterfowl (e.g., teal) will also take advantage of the concentrated and more accessible food resources. Eventually, the soils in these mudflat areas begin to oxidize and warm. This in turn causes moist-soil vegetation to germinate. If the water is removed early in the growing season, moist-soil vegetation will out compete most perennial emergent vegetation, which requires warmer soil temperatures for germination. When water is removed later in the growing season, perennial emergent vegetation usually dominates. This is often an undesirable outcome of a drawdown and is usually avoided. As moist-soil annual vegetation grows, shallow (not to exceed 1/3 plant height) flooding can be used to irrigate growing vegetation, create shallow water foraging habitat for waterfowl or discourage growth of perennial or invasive plants. Water levels are usually returned to the desired management level prior to fall migration, or the following spring migration if water is not available in the fall. Generally, slow (over several weeks) drawdowns will provide a greater diversity of moist-soil plants than faster (over a few days) drawdowns (Frederickson and Taylor 1982). Alternatively, drawdowns may occur in fall to provide foraging habitat for fall migrating shorebirds and some waterfowl. This is typically done when spring water levels were too high to provide conditions for growing quality moist-soil vegetation. Winter drawdowns are also possible, but

Appendix D 16 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

should be avoided as they have detrimental effects on species over-wintering in the impoundments such as invertebrates, reptiles and amphibians and muskrats. Water may also be held in an impoundment over the growing season, or several growing seasons, to provide breeding habitat for waterfowl and marsh birds. This is usually done in areas where a healthy desirable perennial emergent component exists in the wetland. Over time, water stress and/or muskrat activity will often reduce the amount of emergent vegetation until it is no longer a significant component of the impoundment. At this point the impoundment has little value to breeding waterfowl and marsh birds and another drawdown should be considered. Resources for water level manipulation include the following: • Moist-Soil Management Guidelines for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region: http://www.fws.gov/columbiawildlife/MoistSoilReport.pdf • Wetland Management for Waterfowl: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_016986.pdf

Vegetation Management Plants that occur in an impoundment can be either desirable or undesirable based on their value to wildlife. Generally, plants that provide cover, energy, or nutritional value for objective wildlife are desirable. Plants that quickly develop monocultures and impede foraging by wildlife are undesirable. Whether a plant is desirable or not also depends on why the impoundment is being managed. For example, cattail is undesirable to shorebirds and waterfowl because it forms dense monotypic stands, and reduces foraging habitat (mudflats and moist-soil vegetation) of shorebirds and waterfowl. In contrast, it provides cover and breeding habitat for marsh birds, and therefore is desirable if managing for those species. The challenge of impoundment management is balancing the needs of various wildlife guilds. In addition to the water level manipulation techniques listed in the previous paragraphs, below are available strategies for promoting desirable vegetation and controlling undesirable or invasive plants. Herbicide The most commonly used herbicide for controlling robust vegetation in impoundments is glyphosate. Methods of application include spot-treatment using backpack or ATV mounted sprayer, or aerial application. Spot-treatment is more targeted (avoiding neighboring plants), but can be very labor intensive when treating large areas. Aerial application is less labor-intensive, but is not as target-specific, and requires extensive planning to execute. Herbicides are applied during various times of the year depending on plant species and management goal. Note: If using a non-selective herbicide such as glyphosate over an entire unit to thin out established stands of undesired vegetation early in the growing season, it may be best to apply prior to drawdown of the unit, so not to kill desirable vegetation that geminates from the drawdown. It is recommended to use a boom-less type spray rig during pre-drawdown applications of chemicals as standard boom sprayers may clog due to the wet/muddy conditions. Boom-less sprayers also allow for application of chemicals near woody vegetation (Image C-1).

Appendix D 17 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Image C-1. Boom-less spray rigs allow for closer application near woody species and also allow less wind drift than standard boom sprayers.

Seeding/Planting Most impoundments contain abundant stock of moist-soil plant seeds native to a locality, therefore making seeding and planting unnecessary (Frederickson and Taylor 1982). These seeds may remain viable in the soil for many years, and germinate under suitable environmental conditions (Lane and Jensen 1999). In extreme circumstances, past human activities (such as extensive herbicide use, prolonged flooding, and promoting monotypic plants for many years) may have altered site conditions such that the soil seed bank is inadequate or nonexistent (Weller 1990). In these situations, the seed bank may need to be augmented through planting of seeds, rhizomes, or seedlings to ensure growth of desirable plants. Only native species should be used for seeding and planting. Whenever possible, seeds and other plant material should be obtained from a local reference site, either through direct seed harvest or transplant, or from a nursery that procured their stock locally. Prescribed Burning Prescribed burning in impoundments has been used to control undesirable vegetation and may promote growth of desirable plants (Baldassarre and Bolen 1994). Burning can kill perennial plants and reduce excessive litter accumulation, allowing moist-soil vegetation to germinate. However, successful control of species such as cattail requires root burns, which rarely occur since rhizomes are usually covered by a layer of soil, mud and/or water. Prescribed fire will often remove accumulated leaf litter and dead standing material, giving seeds of other species an opportunity to germinate. Removing litter may also increase shoot germination of undesirable plants by increasing light availability to the ground.

Appendix D 18 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Soil Manipulations

Some research indicates that soil disturbances (disking or tilling) can promote invasive plants by cutting rhizomes into numerous segments that may eventually grow into adult plants (Frederickson and Taylor 1982). To avoid promoting expansion of invasive species such as Phragmites, disking should only be implemented where there are existing dense stands of invasives, or where invasive species monitoring and control can ensure that these species do not expand their area of coverage (Lane and Jenson 1999). Disking can also be used to provide habitat for shorebirds. As described above under water level manipulation, slow spring drawdowns not only promote the growth of moist-soil vegetation but also create mudflats and shallow water areas for spring migrating shorebirds. Disking during summer will break up organic root matter, which encourages decomposition, and therefore increases invertebrate populations. After disking, the impoundment can be flooded slightly (approximately 3 inches) to provide mudflats and shallow water for fall-migrating shorebirds. During wet years, the window of opportunity for performing soil manipulations within drained units may be short. There are times when desired results may be achieved by performing wet-soil manipulations within units prior to drawdown. This type of manipulation consists of pulling a field roller throughout shallow flooded units until the desired soil conditions are achieved. This method can be used in depths of water ranging from saturated soil to greater than 12 inches, but shallower water (saturated soil to 6 inches) usually gives the most favorable results (Image C-2). Image C-2: Performing soil manipulations prior to drawdown in the spring can save both time and money.

Appendix D 19 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

More information regarding soil manipulations for moist soil management can be found in the resources listed at the start of this section, as well as the specific guidance noted below: • Disking Effects on Seed Production and Distribution of Moist-Soil Vegetation: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-033199-130907/unrestricted/chapter3.pdf • Evaluating Moist-Soil Seed Production and Management in Central Valley Wetlands to Determine Habitat Needs for Waterfowl: http://www.centralvalleyjointventure.org/assets/pdf/Naylor_Final_Thesis.pdf • Light Disking to Enhance Early Successional Wildlife Habitat in Grasslands and Old Fields: https://www.mdwfp.com/media/7869/lightdisking.pdf

Impoundment Improvement through Depression Creation

Impoundments are created when an ecological system has been altered and the hydrology has been modified and cannot be restored by other means due to surrounding land uses. Impoundments are managed to mimic natural hydro periods or to provide the best possible habitat for high-priority wildlife species. Impoundments that do not provide high quality habitat should be modified to achieve ORINWR’s highest priority habitat goals and objectives. Annual and perennial wetland vegetation establishment within impoundments is dependent on site elevation relative to hydrology (inundation or saturation levels). In impoundments with little or no change in bathymetric elevation, enhancing the gradient of elevation changes may be a suitable technique for habitat enhancement. Due to the degree of habitat degradation and the lack of wildlife use, it is beneficial to create depressions to restore these areas to high-quality wetland habitat. Depressions will create a mix of emergent marsh and open water habitat that will improve biological diversity and productivity. Depressions should be created by physically removing material. Other methods that leave the material onsite create temporary openings that fill in as the displaced sediment slumps back in and undesired vegetation re-invades. Material should be removed to create open water areas and channels in an irregular/natural pattern. Regular shapes (squares, circles, rectangles, triangles, etc.) are inherently desired by humans but wildlife perceives things differently and put different value on other characteristics that provide a better quality habitat. The irregular/natural pattern visually attracts wildlife and creates more edge/interspersion between open water and emergent vegetation. The finished bottom of all excavations should be 6 to 12 inches lower than the managed water level of the rest of the impoundment. A meandering channel should connect the newly created depressions to the rest of the impoundment, thus permitting water flow and water level management by the same structures used to control water levels in the surrounding impoundment. Slopes as flat as 10:1 are preferable if possible. Construction should be planned for the summer following a spring drawdown when earth moving equipment is least likely to sink in the unconsolidated substrate. Beaver Control Because beavers are part of the natural landscape, and can be beneficial in terms of creating wetland habitats, harvest of nuisance beavers will only be conducted when negative impacts are determined to be excessive. Beavers interfere with impoundment management by damaging or

Appendix D 20 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

clogging water control structures and altering water levels on surrounding lands so impoundments either cannot be filled or cannot be drained. Whenever possible, water control structures and drainage pipes should be fitted with guards to prevent beavers from clogging the pipes or damaging the structures. Alternatively, a Clemson Leveler-style device could be used if conditions allow and it is desired to leave the animals in place. Trapping is often the most effective method of removing problem beavers and may be conducted either during fur season or by nuisance trappers during other times of the year. Muskrat Population Management Muskrats are efficient at reducing the cover of robust perennial vegetation. The impoundment should be held high for at least one year, and muskrat trapping in the impoundment interior should be prohibited when the cover of robust perennial vegetation needs to be decreased. However, if perennial vegetative cover is lower than desired, muskrat control should be conducted. Muskrat trapping also should be employed when muskrat numbers are high enough to damage impoundment dikes or water control structures. C-5 FOREST MANAGEMENT Silvicultural Prescriptions Active management generally is not necessary to maintain forest communities. However, if a forested tract is degraded and not meeting habitat objectives, then a silvicultural prescription may be needed. A silvicultural prescription is a detailed set of written instructions for the treatment of a forested property and should be developed prior to the treatment of forested tracts other than invasive species treatments. A forester should be consulted to develop a prescription based on the site conditions and habitat objectives identified in the Habitat Management Plan. • US Forest Service Silvicultural Methods Overview: http://www.fs.fed.us/ne/newtown_square/publications/technical_reports/pdfs/scanned/ne _gtr144b.pdf • Wisconsin DNR Silviculture Handbook: http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ForestManagement/documents/24315/24315.pdf • Natural Disturbance and Stand Development Principles for Ecological Forestry: http://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/gtr/gtr_nrs19.pdf

Forest Establishment/Reforestation Patch size and distribution on the landscape are important considerations in planning and managing habitats. Forest restoration should only occur on parcels within large forested blocks (at least 500 acres, if possible) to reduce fragmentation of the landscape and because many forest-dependent species are area sensitive. Forest restoration also is appropriate along rivers as riparian forest corridors are often more diverse than adjacent upland areas despite occupying a small area. These areas should be chosen based on their juxtaposition to currently existing forested tracts. Riparian corridors that connect existing forested tracts should be prioritized for reforestation.

Appendix D 21 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

In former agricultural fields, forests may be established by allowing the area to succeed naturally, by seeding herbaceous, shrub, and tree species, by planting shrub and tree seedlings or saplings, or by a combination of these methods. Shade-tolerant herbaceous species may need to be seeded or planted after a canopy is established as they may not survive full sun conditions. The plants in the surrounding landscape should be surveyed to determine the seed stock. If desirable species are in the surrounding landscape and the invasive species load is low, then natural succession should be allowed to proceed. Invasive or other undesirable species can be selected out with herbicides. It may be desirable to plant only those species that are not already present in the surrounding landscape. If the area is surrounded by invasive species, then allowing natural succession without seeding or planting natives likely will not be successful. Planting seeds of native species is less expensive than planting seedlings or saplings, but it will take longer for these to become established. A combination of seeding and planting may be the best strategy to “flood” the site with natives to out-compete surrounding invasive species. The seedlings and saplings will produce seed and provide shade more quickly, and the planted seeds will provide competition for invasive seeds already present in the soil. The site must be monitored, and invasive species must be controlled before they become well-established. The invasive species in the surrounding landscape also should be controlled as resources permit. Whenever nursery shrubs and trees are planted, they should be protected from deer and other herbivores. Selection of species and ecotypes is a critical step in seeding and restoration. Using local seed and plant materials is important in restoration as plants have wide genetic diversity across geographic space. Additional information regarding tree regeneration, including seeding and planting recommendations, can be found in the links provided above under silvicultural prescriptions.

C-6 BANK STABILIZATION AND EROSION CONTROL As mentioned in earlier sections, many of the islands experience erosion and bank failures, due to a variety of factors. The Ohio River is a modified river system, due to the presence of 20 navigation lock and dam facilities (eight within the extent of ORINWR) and numerous tributary reservoirs which manage water releases for a variety of purposes (flood control, water quality and low flow augmentation, recreation, etc.). The hydrologic cycle is altered significantly. In addition, the maintenance of year round navigation “pools” creates an artificially high water levels which exposes the island banks to more boat wakes and wave wash year round. Failed soils from episodic flood events is deposited along the shorelines, but is re-worked and transported away by boat wakes. Historic commercial dredging of sand and gravel deposits near the islands formed unstable excavation features, which cause island and riparian bank failures. (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE] 2012). The presence of the navigation dams impedes migration of coarser substrates throughout the system, reducing the amount of accretion that typically occurs with islands in river systems. Beginning in the mid-1990s, ORINWR has partnered with the USACE to study the erosion patterns along the river and the islands, develop and evaluate alternative protection strategies,

Appendix D 22 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge and build a number of shoreline stabilization and bank protection projects. Throughout this long term partnership, the USACE has developed innovative design and construction methods to arrest the loss of important island habitats. That work continues. These treatments have resulted in the stabilization of scour features and the retention of recent sediments and failed soils to form terrace features permitting the re-establishment of persistent native vegetation. In addition to the classic stone slope protection which has been built on the heads of Manchester Island, Grape Island, and channel side portions of Middle Island, the preferred designs include discontinuous (i.e., with gaps) low head stone dikes, parallel to shore (longitudinal) and placed offshore on the shallow underwater bench features. The gaps allow wildlife and people to access ORINWR. Within the first year after placement, river borne and bank sediment from high water events build up behind the dikes, form stable shorelines above the reach of normal wake and wave wash, and re-vegetate with persistent perennial vegetation (native trees and shrubs)(see Image C-3). This type of treatment also reclaims or restores actual terrestrial island acreage that has been lost due to erosion. It is markedly cheaper than traditional stone slope protection (orders of magnitude less rock required), accomplishes the same objective, and retains and enhances the adjacent riparian. Image C-3. Example of discontinuous stone dike protection along Buckley Island

In addition to allowing the river to fill in behind the dikes, another option being used is to backfill the dikes immediately with clean material and re-vegetate. That has been done at the Captina mainland unit. In partnership with the Pittsburgh District Corps of Engineers, this work is underway at Georgetown Island in PA, and will soon be implemented at Phillis Island (Image C-4).

Appendix D 23 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Image C-4. Dike structures at Georgetown Island in PA, built and backfilled by the Pittsburgh District, Corps of Engineers

In total, the recent USACE report recommended specific treatment types and extent (in linear feet) for all ORINWR islands. Figures C-4 through C-8 illustrate the cross sections of the different treatments, and Table C-4 contains an itemization of total treatments, by type, for all ORINWR islands. The report contains detailed island by island recommendations on structure types, linear feet needed of each treatment, and cost estimates. The major limiting factor for ORINWR to implement all recommended treatments is cost. However, there are some promising partnerships, continuing to work with the USACE, and establishing new ones with private conservation organizations to help ORINWR conserve and restore island habitats. In addition, the potential for tapping state and regional mitigation funds holds promise, as the USFWS finalizes a new mitigation policy affecting Refuge lands nationwide.

Appendix D 24 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-4. Treatment Type 1: Discontinuous Channel-ward Longitudinal Dike

Figure C-5. Treatment Type 2: Head of Island Deep Water Stone Slope Protection

Normal Pool

Scour feature stone slope protection, head of island

Appendix D 25 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-6. Treatment Type 3: Limited Subaqueous Stone Slope Protection

Normal Pool

Subaqueous scour feature stone slope protection, channel and backchannel Typical Cross Section

Figure C-7. Treatment Type 4: Longitudinal Crescent Dikes, Head and Toe, Riverward of Normal Pool

Discontinuous crescent dikes, head and toe of islands

Typical Cross Section

Appendix D 26 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Figure C-8. Treatment Type 5: Discontinuous Longitudinal Dikes Landward of Normal Pool

Discontinuous landward longitudinal dike bank protection

Typical Cross Section

Table C-4. Type and Amount of Bank and Shoreline Treatment Recommended for ORINWR Islands

Treatment Name Total Linear Feet Needed

Type 1. Discontinuous longitudinal dikes riverward of normal pool 17,220

Type 2. Head of island deep water stone slope protection 8,700

Type 3. Limited subaqueous stone slope protection 11,300

Type 4. Longitudinal crescent dikes riverward of normal pool 5,780

Type 5. Discontinuous longitudinal dikes landward of normal pool 39,350

Appendix D 27 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

C-7 REFERENCES

APRS Implementation Team. 2000. Alien Plants Ranking System, Version 5.1. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. (Version 30SEP2002).

Baldassarre, G. A., and E. G. Bolen. 1994. Waterfowl Ecology and Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA.

Fredrickson, L. H., and T. S. Taylor. 1982. Management of seasonally flooded impoundments for wildlife. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 148. 29 pp.

Hiebert, R.D. and J. Stubbendieck. 1993. Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control. National Park Service. Natural Resources Report NPS/NRMWRO/NRR- 93/08. Denver, Colorado.

Lane JL, Jensen KC. 1999. Moist-soil impoundments for wetland wildlife. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Technical Report EL-99-11. Available: http:// el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/trel99-11.pdf (March 2011).

Morse, L.E., J.M. Randall, N. Benton, R. Hiebert, and S. Lu. 2004. An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol: Evaluating Non-Native Plants for Their Impact on Biodiversity. Version 1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Website:

Rawinski, T.J. 2008. Impacts of White-Tailed Deer Overabundance in Forest Ecosystems: An Overview. Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Newtown Square, PA. Available online at: http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/special_interests/white_tailed_deer.pdf

Rawlins, K.A., J.E. Griffin, D.J. Moorhead, C.T. Bargeron, and C.W. Evans. 2011. EDDMapS: Invasive Plant Mapping Handbook. The University of Georgia. Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health, Tifton GA. BW-2011-02. 32 p.

Rejmanek, M. and M. J. Pitcairn. 2002. When Is Eradication of Exotic Pest Plants a Realistic Goal? Page 249-253 in C. R. Veitch and M. N. Clout, eds. Turning the Tide: The Eradication of Invasive Species. Auckland, New Zealand: Invasive Species Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union (IUCN).

Weller, M. W. 1990. Waterfowl Management Techniques for Wetland Enhancement, Restoration and Creation Useful in Mitigation Procedures. Pp. 517-528. J. A. Kusler and M. E. Kentula, editors. Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Huntington District. 2012. Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge Engineering and Scientific Study on Island Stabilization. Huntington, WV.

Appendix D 28 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

Zimmerman, C., M. Jordan, G. Sargis, H. Smith, K. Schwager. 2011. An Invasive Plant Management Decision Tool. Version 1.1. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Appendix D 29 April 2017 Habitat Management Plan for Ohio River Islands National Wildlife Refuge

This page intentionally left blank.

Appendix D 30 April 2017