Chapter Six Waterbirds Principal Authors: Tara Zimmerman, Gary Ivey, and Josh Vest
Photo by Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Inside this Chapter
Introduction...... 6.3 Waterbirds & The Intermountain West Region...... 6.6 Overview of Planning Approach...... 6.9 Waterbird Population Status & Trends...... 6.10 • Eared Grebe...... 6.12 • Double-Crested Cormorant...... 6.12
Waterbirds • White-faced Ibis...... 6.13 • Sandhill Cranes...... 6.13 • Caspian Tern...... 6.15 Threats & Limiting Factors...... 6.16 • Loss and Degradation of Wetland Habitat...... 6.16 • Water Supply and Security...... 6.16 • Water Quality...... 6.18 • Loss of Foraging Habitat...... 6.18 • Climate Change...... 6.18 Population Estimates & Objectives...... 6.20 Focal Species...... 6.21 • Focal Species Approach...... 6.21 • Focal Species and Conservation Planning...... 6.24 • Focal Species Profiles...... 6.25 Population Inventory & Monitoring...... 6.28 • Western Colonial Waterbird Survey, 2009–2011...... 6.28 • North American Marsh Bird Monitoring...... 6.28 • Continental Marsh Bird Monitoring Pilot Study...... 6.29 • Periodic or Annual Waterbird Surveys...... 6.29 • Species-Specific Surveys...... 6.30 Next Steps...... 6.32 Literature Cited...... 6.33 Appendix A. Waterbird Science Team Members...... 6.39 Appendix B. Double-Crested Cormorant Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West...... 6.40 Appendix C. Caspian Tern Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West...... 6.41 Appendix D. White-faced Ibis Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West...... 6.43 Appendix E. Focal Area Profiles – Descriptions & Threats...... 6.46 Appendix F. Literature Cited in Appendices...... 6.64
6.2 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org INTRODUCTION
Photo by Rio de la Vista
The goal of the Waterbird chapter is to build upon the species assessments provide a common framework to IWJV 2005 Coordinated Bird Conservation Plan (2005 facilitate coordinated waterbird conservation across North Implementation Plan) by identifying priority waterbird America. species within the Intermountain West region and a The Intermountain West Waterbird Conservation suite of waterbird focal species from which to develop Plan (IWWCP; Ivey and Herziger 2006; http://www. a regional science-based framework for waterbird waterbirdconservation.org/intermountain_west.html ) conservation. Regional waterbird abundance and serves as the biological foundation for IWJV waterbird distribution data were updated with the most recent and conservation. Thirty-eight species of waterbirds available data which will inform the future derivation of representing nine families regularly utilize the IWJV area population objectives to support conservation planning. as year-round or seasonal habitat (Table 1). The IWWCP For the purposes of this chapter, waterbirds are defined as plan provides a foundation for biological planning for wetland dependent colonial, semi-colonial, and solitary these waterbirds. It prioritizes breeding and migrant nesting species such as loons, grebes, bitterns, herons, waterbird species at the regional scale; provides data on egrets, cranes, rails, gulls and terns. waterbird distribution and abundance; sets preliminary The framework for this chapter is established in waterbird population objectives by Bird Conservation continental and regional waterbird conservation plans. Region (BCR) and state; identifies important waterbird Recognizing that conservation is most effective when habitats in the region; and provides site-specific planned and implemented at the regional and local information on nine key waterbird sites with critical scales, The North American Waterbird Conservation conservation needs. The IWJV encompasses nearly all Plan (NAWCP; Kushlan et. al. 2002) delineated 16 of the Intermountain West Regional Waterbird Planning regional waterbird conservation planning areas within Area. North America. The NAWCP also provides conservation The IWJV’s 2013 Implementation Plan represents an assessments, population estimates, and identifies colonial- important, incremental step toward strategic conservation nesting waterbird species of conservation concern at planning for waterbirds as it provides the foundation continental and hemispheric scales. A 2006 supplement for biological planning. However, actions recommended to the NAWCP: the Conservation Status Assessment and to conserve important key sites and Bird Habitat Categories of Concern for Solitary-Nesting Waterbirds Conservation Areas (BHCA) identified in the 2005 (www.waterbirdconservation.org/assessment.html) Implementation Plan and IWWCP (Ivey and Herziger assesses and prioritizes the conservation status of 43 2006) will continue to benefit migratory bird populations species of solitary-nesting waterbirds. The NAWCP and in the Intermountain West.
6.3 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org INTRODUCTION
Table 1 Waterbird Seasonal occurrence, relative abundance1 and nesting strategy2 in the Intermountain West Joint Venture listed by Bird Conservation Region (BCR).
SPECIES Great Basin Great BCR 9 No. Rockies BCR 10 So. Rockies -Colorado Plateau BCR 16 Sonoran - Mohave Deserts BCR 33 Sierra Madre Occidental BCR 34 Chihuahuan Desert BCR 35 Nesting Strategy
Pacific Loon m, w m, w m m, w m,w m, w S
Common Loon b, m, w b, m m,w m, w m,w m,w S
Pied-billed Grebe b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w S
Horned Grebe b, m m b, m m, w - m, w S
Red-necked Grebe b, m b, m - - - - SC
Eared Grebe b, M b, m b, m, w m, w b, m, w m, w C
Western Grebe B, m, w b, m, w b, m m, w b, m b, m, w C
Clark’s Grebe B, m, w b, m, w b, m b, m, w b, m b, m, w C
American White Pelican B, M b, m b, m m, w m, w m, w C
Neotropic Cormorant - - m - - b, m, w C
Double-crested Cormorant b, m, w b, m b, m b, m, w b, m, w m, w C
American Bittern b, m, w b, m b, m m, w m m, w S
Least Bittern b, m - - b, m b, m b, m S
Great Blue Heron b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w C
Great Egret b, m, w m m m b, m, w C
Snowy Egret b, m b b, m m m b, m C
Cattle Egret b, m b b, m m m b, m C
Green Heron b ,m - b, m b, m b, m b, m, w SC
Black-crowned Night Heron B, m b b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w C
White-faced Ibis B, m b, m B, m m m m C
Yuma Clapper Rail3 - - - b - - S
Yellow Rail B, m, w - - - - - S
Black Rail4 - - - b3 - - S
Virginia Rail b, m, w b, m b, m, w b, m, w b, m b, m, w S
Sora b, m w b, m b, m, w b, m, w b, m b, m, w S
Common Moorhen b - b, m b, m - b, m, w S
American Coot b, m, w b, m b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w b, m, w S
Greater Sandhill Crane – LCRVP5 B, M b - - S
Greater Sandhill Crane – CVP5 B, M b - - S
Greater Sandhill Crane – RMP5 B B b, M - m, w M, W S
Lesser Sandhill Crane – PFP6 M, w m m - S
Lesser Sandhill Crane - MCP6 m - m, w M, W S
Franklin’s Gull b, m b, m b, m m m w C
Bonaparte’s Gull m, w m m m m m S
Ring-billed Gull b, m, w b, m, w m, w m, w m m C
California Gull B, m, w b, m, w b, m, w m m m C
Herring Gull m, w m, w m - - m, w C
Glaucous-winged Gull b, w - - - - - C
Caspian Tern b, m b, m m b m m C
Common Tern m b, m - - - m C
Forster’s Tern B, m b, m b, m b, m m m C
Black Tern b, m b, m b, m m m m SC
6.4 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org INTRODUCTION
1. Relative Abundance Indicators: B, M, W – high 3. Yuma Clapper Rail – Occurs in Muddy and Virgin concentrations, region is extremely important to the River valleys, NV. Breeding confirmed in Big Marsh, species relative to most other regions (Regional BCR Clark, County NV in 2001 (Floyd 2007). AI = 5 or 4 – 25% - 50% of N. American population); 4. Black Rail – Reported to occur along the Virgin B, M, W – common or locally abundant, region is River, Clark County NV in July 2003 but breeding not important to the species (Regional BCR AI = 3; with confirmed (Floyd 2007). 10% - 24% of N. American population) ; b, m, w – common to fairly uncommon, region is within the 5. Greater Sandhill Crane Population Designations: CVP species range but species occurs in low abundance – Central Valley Population; LCRVP – Lower Colorado relative to other regions (Regional AI = 2 or 1 (<1 – River Valley Population; RMP – Rocky Mountain 9% of NA population); b, m, w – status as breeder, Population; PFP – Pacific Flyway population; MCP – migrant, or wintering bird is known but abundance Mid Continent Population. relative to other regions is unknown. 6. Lesser Sandhill Crane Population Designations: PFP 2. Nesting Strategy - Most typical nesting strategy: – Pacific Flyway Population; MCP – Mid- continent C= colonial; S= solitary; SC= semi-colonial Population.
6.5 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRDS & THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST REGION
The IWJV is vast, stretching from Canada to Mexico, in implementation plans developed by other Joint Ventures and ranging in elevation from 282 feet below sea level to (i.e., Pacific Coast, Central Valley and Playa Lakes JVs). 14,775 feet above sea level. The region is bounded by the Sierra Nevada and Cascades mountains on the west and Saline Lakes the Rocky Mountains on the east. With more than 13.4 The large, terminal, hyper-saline lakes in the IWJV million acres of aquatic and wetland habitat types, this are renowned for their unique biographic features and unique area is characterized by a diverse assemblage of significance to wetland-dependant avifauna. Important saline ecosystems, freshwater marshes, deep water lakes sites include Mono Lake, California; Great Salt Lake, and reservoirs, agricultural lands, and riparian habitats. Utah, and Lake Abert, Harney Lake, and Summer Lake Waterbirds occupy the full spectrum of these habitats in eastern Oregon (Jehl 1994, Ivey and Herziger 2006). to meet their requirements for breeding, migrating, and These sites provide an abundance of brine shrimp (Artemia wintering. The IWWCP identifies the following important spp.) and brine flies (Ephydra spp.), both critical food waterbird habitat types, key sites, and their significance to resources to various waterbird species during breeding, waterbirds: migration, staging, and molting life-cycle stages. Although the overall number of hyper-saline lakes is small, they support enormous concentrations of waterbirds during key stages of their life cycle. Mono Lake and Great Salt Lake host the largest California Gull rookeries in the world with more than 130,000 breeding adults (Cooper 2004). These two sites alone support millions of Eared Grebes that stage and molt in the fall (Boyd and Jehl 1998; Neill et al. 2009).
Freshwater Wetlands In contrast to the comparatively few but critical saline lakes, lies an extended network of discrete freshwater marsh habitats dispersed throughout the IWJV landscape. These sites support waterbirds year-round including American White Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Greater Sandhill Crane, Sora, American Bittern, Virginia Rail, and numerous species of grebes, herons, egrets, gulls, and terns. Many of these species exhibit site- fidelity, occupying the same locations in multiple years. Yet waterbird colony locations and occupancy can change in response to site-specific and regional habitat conditions that fluctuate with short and long-term flood and drought cycles. Species such as White-faced Ibis have adapted to this variability by developing a nomadic breeding strategy at the landscape scale responding to dramatic shifts in Figure 1 Map of the Intermountain West Joint Venture Area, both seasonal and annual wetland habitat conditions Bird Conservation Region and State Boundaries. (Jehl 1994, Earnst et al. 1998, Haig et al. 1998). Other waterbirds, such as Franklin’s Gulls exhibit a similar The IWJV encompasses all or portions of 11 western strategy, and their colonies are often associated with states, the entire U.S. portions of BCR 9 (Great Basin) those of White-faced Ibis. The extended network of and 10 (Northern Rockies), and nearly all of BCR 16 semi-permanent wetlands dispersed across the arid west (Southern Rockies; NABCI; Fig. 1). Portions of the is critical to the reproductive success and long-term Sonoran and Mojave Deserts, Sierra Madre Occidental, population viability of waterbirds throughout the west. Chihuahuan Desert, Pacific Rainforest, Sierra Nevada, and Shortgrass Prairie BCRs are also encompassed by Seasonal wetlands and wet meadows in the region the IWJV. For planning purposes, the latter three BCRs serve as primary breeding and migration habitat for were not addressed because they comprise relatively small several subspecies and populations of waterbirds of portions of the IWJV or because these areas are addressed particular management concern. Approximately 90% of
6.6 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRDS & THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST REGION the three western Greater Sandhill Crane populations largely within the IWJV, rely on croplands, pasturelands, (Lower Colorado River Valley Population [LCRVP]; hayfields, and seasonal wetlands in the IWJV during both Rocky Mountain Population [RMP]; and Central Valley fall and spring migrations (Tacha et al. 1992; Pacific Population [CVP]) breed within the wet meadows and Flyway Committee 1983; Pacific and Central Flyway seasonal wetlands in the Great Basin and Northern Committees 2007). Rockies BCRs. The montane meadows of south central Oregon have recently been found to support nearly the Riparian entire population of Yellow Rails in the western United Riparian habitats in the IWJV range from broad deciduous States. Yellow Rails in Oregon were considered extirpated tree and shrub flood-plain vegetation to narrow stringers by the mid-1900’s (AOU 1983) but were rediscovered of tamarisk in lowland desert habitats. Tree and shrub- in the 1980’s (Stern et al.. 1993). Currently thought lined rivers, streams, springs and ponds are primary to number between 400 and 1,000 birds, the western habitat for nesting herons, cormorants, and egrets. Gallery population is largely confined to the Klamath Basin and riparian forests are particularly important to herons and Great Basin wetlands of Oregon in the summer, and is cormorants. Vegetated islands in river mouths and braided thought to winter in marshes of coastal northern California river channels offer protected nesting habitat for tree and (Lundsten and Popper 2002, Bookhout 1995, Popper and shrub nesters, and islands barren of vegetation provide the Stern 2000). requisite predator-free breeding habitat for ground-nesting waterbirds such as terns and gulls. When riparian borders Deep Water Lakes and Reservoirs occur in combination with freshwater wetland habitat Construction of dams and other water projects in the types, these ecosystems can support a higher number and IWJV has created open water habitats beneficial to diversity of waterbird species. breeding, migrating, wintering and roosting waterbirds. Pelicans, cormorants, loons, and grebes depend on deep Key Sites water lakes and reservoirs to meet their year-round habitat Ivey and Herziger (2006) identified 44 individual requirements. Reservoirs with nesting islands and an wetland sites as very important to waterbirds within the abundance of fish support important breeding colonies Intermountain West (Fig. 2; IWWCP). Many of these of pelicans, terns and, gulls (e.g. Blackfoot Reservoir, function as discrete oases for some species while also Idaho and Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), functioning as part of a linked network of wetlands critical California). Other natural lakes and reservoirs important to waterbird populations at the larger landscape scale. to waterbirds identified in the IWJV include Eagle Lake; All of these sites and other areas important to waterbirds Goose Lake and Lake Almanor in California; Upper are identified in the IWJV’s 2005 Implementation Plan Klamath Lake in Oregon; and Lake Cascade and Lake and IWJV State Plans as BHCAs (note: these plans were Lowell (Deer Flat NWR) in Idaho. developed by the IWJV’s 11 State Steering Committee, now referred to as State Conservation Partnerships). They Flood-Irrigated Agricultural Fields include: Harney Basin and Lake Abert in Oregon; Klamath Flood-irrigated agricultural fields and flooded pastures, Basin and Goose Lake in Oregon and California; Lahontan often occurring adjacent to wetlands, provide important Valley and Pyramid Lake in Nevada; Blackfoot Reservoir, foraging habitat for many waterbirds including ibises, Bear Lake NWR, and Grays Lake NWR in Idaho; Great herons, egrets, cranes, rails, and gulls during the breeding, Salt Lake in Utah; Centennial Valley in Montana; migration, and winter seasons. In Nevada, ibises fed in San Luis Valley in Colorado; Middle Rio Grande irrigated alfalfa fields 86% of the time throughout the (including Bosque del Apache NWR) in New Mexico, and early summer, and by late summer they fed exclusively in the White Mountain wetlands in Arizona. The protection these irrigated fields (Bray and Klebanow 1988). Virginia and enhancement of BCHAs for migratory birds will Rails and Soras use this habitat for post-breeding and continue to play an important role in conservation efforts brood-rearing life stages (Johnson and Dinsmore 1986). for waterbirds addressed in this strategy and for all bird The entire management populations of Greater and Lesser conservation. Sandhill Cranes that migrate through the Pacific Flyway,
6.7 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRDS & THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST REGION
Figure 2 Key Wetland sites identified in the Intermountain West Waterbird Conservation Plan (Ivey and Herziger 2006).
6.8 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org OVERVIEW OF PLANNING APPROACH
A Waterbird Science Team (WST) comprised of State-of-the-art conservation planning incorporates the biologists with expertise in waterbird conservation in use of population-habitat models and geospatial data the Intermountain West convened to develop and guide to link population and habitat goals. Ideally, this level this Strategy (Appendix A). The WST reviewed priority of planning would utilize knowledge of the population species, population estimates, population objectives, status and trends, habitat affiliations, limiting factors, conservation assessments, and key site conservation and spatial and temporal characteristics of the species and strategies identified in the IWWCP and other available landscape of interest (Will et al. 2005, USFWS 2006). The sources. When possible, waterbird population estimates use of population-habitat modeling and a focal species and objectives were updated to reflect the current state approach to conservation also requires many assumptions of information available to support planning. A suite of (Caro and O’Doherty 1998, Fleishman et al. 2000, waterbirds representing IWJV wetland habitat types, nest Chase and Guepel 2005). This is particularly true for site attributes, and foraging guilds were identified as waterbirds in the Intermountain West because information Focal Species for future conservation planning purposes. and data necessary to support biological planning is A subset of geographic areas of known significance to severely lacking or limited; consequently, our capacity focal species, or those with significant concentrations of to conduct science-based conservation planning for waterbirds (see Ivey and Herziger 2006) were identified western waterbirds is similarly challenged. Nonetheless, as Focal Areas appropriate for future IWJV waterbird to initiate the conservation planning process, we identify conservation planning at a sub-BCR scale. a subset of focal species and landscapes (Focal Areas) deemed most appropriate for initial IWJV conservation planning for waterbirds. Improvements and advances in population monitoring, wetland inventory, and a better understanding of habitat affiliations, threats, limiting factors, and the spatial and temporal scales of western waterbird populations in the Intermountain West will provide the means to achieve strategic conservation for focal waterbirds in future plan updates. In consideration of data limitation and the limitations inherent to the use of an umbrella or focal-species approach to landscape scale restoration and protection (see Fleishman et al. 2001, Chase and Guepel 2005, Lindenmayer et al. 2006) the information in this plan is intended to supplement, not replace, the conservation goals and strategies identified in the IWWCP and 2005 IWJV Implementation Plan. The achievement of BHCA goals and wetland habitat acreage objectives at those sites currently documented to support significant waterbird communities (i.e., key sites) will continue to facilitate important habitat enhancement and restoration for waterbirds in the Intermountain West. In this manner, the IWJV will implement a range of approaches to waterbird habitat conservation, while continuing to improve the base of information necessary to advance conservation strategies for waterbirds in future plan updates. As such, this strategy serves as an intermediate step in Photo by Gary Ivey the development of explicit conservation targets for waterbirds in the Intermountain West.
6.9 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS
Photo by Gary Ivey
Expert opinion and data from local, state, regional and For most waterbirds, data on population sizes over time is national population monitoring programs were considered unavailable or insufficient for the purpose of estimating and compiled in the species conservation assessment population trends. The North American Breeding Bird process documented in the regional IWWCP (Ivey and Survey (BBS) long-term trend results (1966 – 2007) Herziger 2006). For breeding waterbirds, IWWCP species indicate significant increasing population trends (P< priorities were identified using a modified conservation .05) for four waterbird species in the Western Region: assessment process based on the Partners in Flight Species Common Loon, Eared Grebe, Snowy Egret, and Green Assessment (Panjabi et al. 2005). Migrant waterbirds Heron (Table 2; Sauer et al. 2008). Because the BBS uses were identified as high conservation concern in the a roadside point-count survey technique, certain habitats IWWCP if a site within a BCR supported 10% or more and species such as wetlands and colonial waterbirds are of the North American population during migration or under-sampled (Bystrack 1981, Robbins et al. 1986). BBS if specific threats were identified at primary staging trend estimates for waterbirds are particularly subject sites. Of the 33 waterbird species that regularly breed in to known BBS data deficiencies including small sample the IWJV, the regional IWWCP identified six colonial- sizes, low relative abundance on survey routes, and nesting and four solitary-nesting waterbirds as species of imprecise trends (Sauer et al. 2008). Even species with high concern: Western Grebe, Clark’s Grebe, American reported significant trends may have data deficiencies White Pelican, Snowy Egret, Franklin’s Gull, and Black that affect the credibility of regional estimates of trend. Tern; and Common Loon, American Bittern, Yellow Rail, For example, Western Region BBS data collected during and Greater Sandhill Crane (CVP). Migrant or wintering the breeding season indicate that the population of Eared populations of Eared Grebe, Lesser Sandhill Crane, and Grebes significantly increased 1966-2007 and 1980-2007 LCRVP, RMP and CVP migrant Greater Sandhill Crane are (Table 2); however, standardized species-specific annual also identified as species of high conservation concern at monitoring efforts conducted at two saline lakes in the the regional scale. Intermountain West that support 99% of this population during the fall indicate declining population trends for this waterbird (see next page).
6.10 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS
Table 2 North American Breeding Bird Survey Trend Results for Waterbirds the Western Region, 1966-2007 and 1980-2007. 1966–2007 trends 1980–2007 trends
SPECIES TREND1 P2 N3 (95% CI)4 R.A.5 TREND P N
Common Loon 1.6 0.01 131 0.4 2.8 0.46 0.9 0.15 123 Pied-billed Grebe 0.7 0.54 231 -1.6 3.1 0.24 0.9 0.57 206 Horned Grebe -2.8 0.06 75 -5.7 0 0.38 -4.2 0.04 63 Red-necked Grebe 0.3 0.69 80 -1.3 1.9 0.42 -0.3 0.75 78 Eared Grebe 3.7 0.03 95 0.5 6.8 1.05 4.1 0.05 80 American White Pelican 1.7 0.31 106 -1.6 5.1 2.13 2.8 0.05 101 Double-crested Cormorant 2.9 0.1 147 -0.5 6.3 0.54 1.9 0.55 141 American Bittern -4.4 0 122 -6.4 -2.3 0.33 -2.3 0.26 105 Least Bittern 22.1 0.14 2 12.7 31.5 0.03 22.8 0.14 2 Great Blue Heron -0.5 0.47 464 -1.9 0.9 0.53 -0.8 0.21 422 Great Egret 3.3 0.09 73 -0.5 7.2 0.68 2 0.26 70 Snowy Egret 2.9 0.01 54 0.8 4.9 0.45 4.2 0.11 50 Cattle Egret 3.2 0.35 23 -3.3 9.6 2.08 0.1 0.98 23 Green Heron 2.3 0.02 76 0.4 4.2 0.11 -0.3 0.73 74
Black-crowned. Night Heron 1.7 0.22 101 -1 4.4 0.18 -1.7 0.33 91
White-faced Ibis 11.6 0 42 5.3 18 20.06 8.5 0 41 Virginia Rail 3.3 0.04 42 0.4 6.2 0.03 5.8 0.01 41 Sora 0.1 0.92 298 -1.2 1.3 0.91 -0.6 0.28 283 Common Moorhen 4.9 0.1 16 -0.4 10.2 0.13 4.2 0.15 14 American Coot -0.7 0.24 383 -1.9 0.5 2.47 -1.2 0.04 345 Sandhill Crane 1.7 0.3 181 -1.5 4.9 0.98 0.9 0.42 178 Franklin's Gull 7.7 0.26 133 -5.7 21.2 17 10.2 0.16 120 Ring-billed Gull 0.7 0.54 260 -1.6 3.1 4.62 0.3 0.82 233 California Gull -1.7 0.25 189 -4.7 1.2 3.91 0.5 0.84 174 Herring Gull -1.6 0.07 18 -3.1 -0.1 0.91 -1.9 0.06 16 Western Gull -1.3 0.57 21 -5.8 3.2 4 -0.5 0.86 19 Caspian Tern 0.8 0.61 59 -2.2 3.8 0.23 1.3 0.51 55 Common Tern -5 0.15 33 - 11.5 1.6 0.51 -8 0.04 29 Forster's Tern -1.1 0.48 50 -4.3 2 0.27 -1.2 0.51 44
Black Tern -2.5 0.13 160 -5.7 0.7 2.15 -2.1 0.06 138
1. Trend - Estimated trend, summarized as a % change/year. Source - Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The 2. P - Value indicates the statistical significance of the trend. North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis P greater than 0.05 indicates that we cannot reject the null 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife hypothesis that the trend is different from Research Center, Laurel, MD (Updated 15 May 2001; 3. N - Number of survey routes in the analysis. http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/atlasa99.pl?WE %20&2&07 4. (95% CI ) - 95% confidence interval for the trend estimate. Estimated as a constant rate of change in counts over time, with co-variables to adjust for differences in observer quality. Regional trends are estimated as a weighted average of the route trends 5. R. A - Relative abundance for the species, in birds/ route. An approximate measure of how many birds are seen on a route in the region.
6.11 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS
With few exceptions, trend estimates for waterbirds in this decline represents a range-wide population decline, the NAWCP and IWWCP necessarily relied on expert a change in the peak timing of the fall migration, or opinion and both published and unpublished literature. changing environmental conditions such as water levels or The majority of IWWCP population trend (PT) scores abundance of prey resources at staging areas. for waterbirds listed by BCRs and states were assigned as “unknown” or “historically declined and apparently recovered” (PT = 3). Population size and trend estimates are most notably lacking for bitterns, rails and other secretive marsh birds but even the more common and widespread colonial waterbirds such as Great Blue Heron and Black-crowned Night Heron lack reliable trend estimates for the western U.S., the IWJV region, and most states. Population trends are known for a few waterbird species of particular management concern. Standardized annual monitoring programs, periodic rangewide surveys, and comprehensive status reviews provide insight into population trends of RMP and LCRV Sandhill Cranes, Eared Grebes, Caspian Terns and Double-crested Cormorants: Figure 3 Numbers of Eared Grebes staging at Mono Lake, Eared Grebe California and Great Salt Lake, Utah 1977–2010. Derived from: www.monobasinresearch.org/ Over 99% of the Eared Grebes in North America stage research/boyd.htm; S. Boyd, Canadian Wildlife at Mono Lake, California and Great Salt Lake, Utah Service, Pacific Science Research Center and the during the fall (Jehl 1988, 1994). Surveys using an CDFG; Neill et. al. 2009, GSL Ecosystem Program, aerial-photo technique with a correction factor applied Utah Division of Wildlife Resources; http:// ggweather.com/enso/years.htm to account for birds that are present but submerged have been implemented at both of these sites for most years Double-Crested Cormorant since 1997 (Boyd and Jehl 1998; Neill et al. 2010). Total abundance on Mono Lake has varied between 0.6 and 1.8 Adkins and Roby (2010) defined the Western Population million birds annually with an average annual estimate of of Double-crested Cormorants as birds breeding in 1.14 million grebes for the 9 survey years between 1997 southern British Columbia and all U.S. states west of the and 2010 (www.monobasinresearch.org/research/boyd. Continental Divide. In 2009, they estimated this breeding htm; Fig. 3). Estimates at Great Salt Lake averaged about population at 29,240 breeding pairs with about 18% 1.2 million birds for 13 survey years during this same located in breeding colonies within the IWJV. period. A high count of 2.7 million birds at Great Salt Until 2009, Double-crested Cormorants in the Lake was recorded in 2006 but no survey was conducted Intermountain West were monitored sporadically and at Mono Lake that year. Similar to observations on Mono incompletely. Data is available for some sites in 1998, Lake, Neill et al. (2009) noted the wide variation in 1999 and 2003–2009 (Appendix B), and this information estimates at Great Salt Lake with numbers swinging as provides some insight into cormorant distribution and much as one million in either direction of the average abundance. In recent years, southeastern Idaho, the count. Steep population declines occur in association Columbia River Plateau in Washington, and southern with El Nino events but population numbers rebound Oregon northeastern California (SONEC) supported the in subsequent years (Jehl 2002). Additionally, Eared majority of nesting cormorants in the Intermountain Grebes populations may be sensitive to brine shrimp West. The number and location of colonies in these areas productivity at key staging sites (Belovsky et al. 2011). fluctuated annually and colony sizes ranged from 48 to The total estimated number of fall-staging Eared Grebes just over 1,600 nesting pairs. The number of breeding in the IWJV ranged from a high of 3.3 million in 2001 pairs in Idaho may have increased 2005–2009 with up to a low of about 1.0 million in 2004 corresponding with to 11 colony sites and a high count of 1,163 pairs in post-El Nino conditions. Overall, numbers appear to be 2009. However, these increasing numbers could also be declining over time at both staging sites. It is unknown if attributed to improvements and expansion of waterbird
6.12 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS monitoring in Idaho implemented 2005–2009 (see 1992, nesting colonies failed but successful ibis colonies Moulton 2005–2009). During this same period, numbers were re-established at Great Salt Lake (Ivey et al. 1988, of breeding cormorants in the Columbia Plateau of Jehl 1994, Earnst 1998). Washington remained relatively stable, fluctuating from Surveys conducted in 2009 and 2010 again documented a high of 1,554 in 2006 at five colony sites to a low of significant population growth and redistribution of 1,196 in 2009 at four colony sites (Roby and Adkins breeding White-faced Ibises in the IWJV compared to 2010). In the SONEC area, the Upper Klamath Marsh, previous decades (Appendix C). All states in the IWJV Lower Klamath NWR, Tule Lake NWR and Clear Lake region surveyed ibises as part of the Western Colonial NWR support most of the cormorants that breed in this Waterbird Survey (WCWS) in 2010 (USFWS 2011) region. Recent drought conditions in the Klamath Basin with the exception of Utah where ibis colonies were eliminated nesting islands and reduced foraging habitat at surveyed in 2009. Preliminary results from these surveys many known colony sites; thus, population levels in 2009 documented about 67,000 pairs of ibises in 2010 and were lower than in most years (Shuford and Henderson 23,600 pairs in Utah in 2009 for a combined total of 2010). The peak Double-Crested Cormorant count in the about 90,600 pairs at 47 colony sites for the 2 year survey Klamath Basin occurred in 2003 when 1,603 breeding period (Appendix C). This is triple the number of breeding pairs were estimated (Shuford and Henderson 2010). In White-faced Ibises documented in the late 1990s. The Nevada numbers of cormorants have declined from 1,677 core of the population now breeds in southeastern Idaho, pairs at 4 colony sites in 1999 to 660 breeding pairs at 6 followed by smaller numbers in SONEC (Lower Klamath colony sites in 2009 (Adkins and Roby 2010). NWR, California; Malheur NWR, and Goose Lake, In total, about 60 sites scattered across the IWJV have Oregon) and the Great Salt Lake. The six active colonies been colonized by cormorants but many are occupied in Idaho supported 44,250 nesting pairs representing infrequently. Double-crested Cormorants in the nearly half of the total Intermountain West population Intermountain West are subject to the effects of drought, of breeding ibises for the combined 2009-2010 survey recurrent flooding and stranding of colonies, and loss of period. When numbers of breeding ibises in southeastern foraging habitat due to agricultural withdrawals and runoff Idaho are combined with those breeding at Bear River for irrigation purposes. These conditions likely limit the Migratory Bird Refuge, Utah and Cokeville Meadows, population growth of Double-crested Cormorants in the Wyoming (in the Bear River Basin) and Great Salt Lake, IWJV area. Utah, this tri-state region currently supports 65.3% of the total number of breeding ibises in the Intermountain West. White-faced Ibis Reasons for this recent redistribution are unclear but are Between the 1960s and 1970s the numbers of White- likely related to drought conditions and forage availability faced Ibises breeding in the Great Basin Region declined at traditional colony sites. A landscape-scale analysis of significantly (King et al. 1980; Steele 1980), presumably, ibis breeding and foraging habitat in current and historic from exposure to DDT on their wintering grounds in the key locations for this species (i.e. Southeast Idaho, interior of Mexico (Capen 1977, Henny 1997). Between SONEC, and Great Salt Lake and Lahontan Valley) will 1985–1997, the Great Basin population rebounded and the aid in informing conservation for this species. number of breeding ibises nearly tripled from an estimated 7,500 pairs among 19 colonies in the mid-1980s to about Sandhill Cranes 30,000 pairs at 40 sites in the late 1990s (Earnst et. al. The Pacific Flyway Council established management 1998). Breeding distribution shifted radically over time plans for the RMP, CVP and LCRV populations of in response to seasonal environmental conditions such Greater Sandhill Cranes (1995, 1997 and 2007) and as flood and drought (Earnst et al. 1998). In 1979-1980, also for the Pacific Flyway Population (PFP) of Lesser the majority of ibises in the Intermountain West were Sandhill Cranes (Pacific Flyway Council 1983). These breeding at Great Salt Lake; however, when marshes of plans established population objectives and multi- the Great Salt Lake were flooded 1983–1989 ibis colony state cooperative monitoring programs that have been sites were submerged and ibis numbers there decreased implemented annually since 1992 for RMP and 1998 for approximatley 80%; (Jehl 1994). Concomitantly, numbers LCRV. Standardized monitoring programs have not been of breeding ibises increased at Malheur and Summer implemented for the CVP or PFP. Lakes, Oregon as did colony sizes at the Stillwater and The highest nesting concentrations of RMP Greater Carson Lakes areas of Nevada (Ivey et al. 1988, Jehl Sandhill Cranes occur in western Montana and Wyoming, 1994). When drought conditions dried these areas 1987– eastern Idaho, northern Utah, and northwestern Colorado
6.13 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS
(Kruse 2011). The major spring and fall migration staging the LCRVP stages in Ruby Valley, near Lund, and at area for the RMP is the San Luis Valley Colorado, Pahranagat NWR in Nevada. Since 1998, a standardized where virtually the entire population spends 3–4 months aerial cruise survey has been conducted to cover 4 primary annually (Drewien and Bizeau 1974, Kauffeld 1982). LCRV winter concentration areas which are believed to Several important overnight stopovers are used by support over 90% of the LCRV crane population: Cibola RMP cranes during spring and fall migration including NWR, and adjacent Colorado River Indian Tribal areas Harts Basin and the Grand Valley, Colorado, and the in southwestern AZ; and smaller concentrations at Sonny Green River near Jensen to Ouray National Wildlife Bono Salton Sea NWR and the Gila River, AZ (Kruse et Refuge in Utah (Drewien and Bizeau 1974, Peterson and al. 2011). The recent LCRVP survey results indicate a Drewien 1997) and Cochiti and Jemez reservoirs, New slight increase from 2,264 birds in 2010 to 2,415 birds in Mexico (Stahlecker 1992). Other important fall staging 2011. The 3-year average is 2,360 LCRVP cranes which is sites include the Teton Basin, Grays Lake, in Idaho, below the population objective of 2,500 (Fig. 5). Eden Valley in Wyoming, and the Bear River Valley in Idaho, Utah and Wyoming (Drewien and Bizeau 1974, R. Drewien, pers. comm.). The 2010 standardized fall pre-migration count documented 21,064 RMP cranes with a 3-year average of 20,847 (Fig. 4). This is within the population objective established by the flyways of 17,000–21,000 for the RMP (Kruse 2011). Their principal wintering area is the Middle Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. Smaller numbers winter in northeastern and southwestern New Mexico, southeastern Arizona, and the northern highlands of Mexico (Drewien and Bizeau 1974, Perkins and Brown 1981, Drewien et al. 1996). On winter areas, RMP cranes mix with the Mid-continent Population (MCP), and cannot be managed separately from them. Figure 5 Abundance indices for the wintering Lower Colorado River Valley Population of Sandhill Cranes in Arizona and California. Derived from Kruse et al. (2011).
The CVP breeds primarily in central and eastern Oregon and northeastern California. Malheur NWR supports the highest number of breeding pairs in these two states (Ivey and Herziger 2000), where major concentrations of breeding cranes occur in Harney and Lake Counties, Oregon, and Modoc County, California. A few pairs nest in central Washington, on and near Conboy Lake NWR in south-central Washington and several hundred pairs also breed in the interior of British Columbia (Pacific Flyway Council 1997). Important migrational staging areas include Malheur NWR, the Silvies Floodplain, Warner Figure 4 Fall pre-migration abundance indices for the Basin, Summer Lake Wildlife Area and Langell Valley in Rocky Mountain population of Sandhill Cranes. Derived from Kruse et al. (2011). Oregon; Lower Klamath and Modoc NWRs, and Honey Lake, Butte Valley, Shasta, and Ash Creek Wildlife Areas The LCRVP of Greater Sandhill Cranes is comprised of in California, and the Othello area, on Columbia NWR in cranes that breed primarily in northeastern Nevada, with Washington. Additionally, a few Greater Sandhill Cranes smaller numbers in adjacent parts of Idaho and Utah stage in southwest Idaho, near the communities of Letha (and presumably, Oregon) and winters in the Colorado and Parma; the latter site includes Idaho’s Fort Boise River Valley of Arizona and Imperial Valley of California Wildlife Area. It is uncertain whether those birds are (Kruse et al. 2011). During spring and fall migration,
6.14 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org WATERBIRD POPULATION STATUS & TRENDS from the CVP or the LCRVP. They share these sites with unsuitable for estimating population trends over time. migrating PFP Lesser Sandhill Cranes. Nevertheless, this information serves to identify and characterize tern distribution and relative abundance. Core The PFP of Lesser Sandhill Cranes numbers more than breeding range for Caspian Terns in the Intermountain 30,000 birds that breed in south-central and south-west West includes colonies in the Mid-Columbia River and Alaska and migrates through the IWJV via California, Columbia Basin Plateau, Washington; SONEC, and Idaho, Oregon, and Washington during spring and fall. southeastern Idaho. Surveys in these areas were most The most important staging site is located on Columbia complete in 2001, 2003, 2008 and 2009 (Appendix B). NWR at Othello, Washington, where more than 90% of Numbers of breeding pairs in these 4 years ranged from the population stops during spring migration. Important a low of 1,161 pairs in 2003 to a high of 1,846 pairs in Oregon sites include the Silvies Floodplain in Harney 2009, when the most comprehensive and complete survey County, Summer Lake Wildlife Area, and the Chewaucan, of breeding pairs was implemented. The population in Goose Lake and Warner Basins. Major staging sites in the IWJV is characterized by fluctuations in both colony California include Modoc NWR vicinity, Surprise Valley, locations and size as terns respond to annual variations and Lower Klamath NWR. PFP cranes winter outside of in habitat conditions. Areas of highest concentration the IWJV, in the Central Valley of California, primarily of breeding pairs shifted from northeastern California in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the San Joaquin where numerous colonies were documented in the late Valley near the cities of Modesto, Merced, and Pixley. 1970’s to dispersed colonies in eastern Oregon, eastern Caspian Tern Washington and Idaho in more recent years. Colonies in the Intermountain West have not experienced the rapid Many colonies of breeding Caspian Terns in the growth observed at the large colony on East Sand Island Intermountain West area have been monitored annually located in the Columbia River Estuary. by agency biologists and researchers since 1997. Surveys were incomplete, however, in most years and therefore
Photo by Colleen Moulton
6.15 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org THREATS & LIMITING FACTORS
Ratti and Kadlec (1992) estimated that approximately Primary Threats to Waterbirds 57% of wetlands in the Intermountain West had been lost to drainage associated with agriculture and in the Intermountain West Region development. Wetlands now cover only about 1% of • Wetland Habitat Loss the regions land area compared to 5% nationwide (Dahl 2006). The remaining wetlands are critical to waterbird • Loss of water or modified flow populations at local, regional, and continental scales. regimes Wetlands of the Great Basin support 38% of North • Water Quality and Contaminants America’s waterbird diversity (waterbirds, shorebirds, and waterfowl; Haig et al. 1998) and nearly the entire • Exotic Plant and Fish Species North American populations of breeding White-face • Human Disturbance Ibises, California Gulls, and migrant Eared Grebes (Jehl 2004; Engilis and Reid 1996). The Klamath, Harney, • Conflicts with other species Lahontan, and Great Salt Lake Basins are of continental (Ivey and Herziger, 2006) or regional significance to waterbirds such as pelicans, ibises, grebes and gulls (Shuford 2006; Shuford and Henderson 2010; G. Ivey, unpublished data). Wetlands Ivey and Herziger (2006) identified and reviewed primary in southeastern Idaho are emerging as an increasingly threats and limiting factors for waterbird populations in significant component of the network of Intermountain the Intermountain West. Of greatest conservation concern West sites that support breeding White-faced Ibises and are issues associated with wetland loss, declining water Franklin’s Gulls (Moulton 2006, 2007). Unfortunately, supply/delivery to wetland habitats, and poor water information to assess the amount, distribution and quality quality. In recent years, the effects of climate change on of wetland habitats in most of the Intermountain West is migratory birds have been a topic of increasing concern. inadequate or unavailable at this time (refer to Chapter 2 Quantifying the effects of various anthropogenic and of the IWJV 2013 Implementation Plan). Updated USFWS natural threats on waterbird populations is difficult; but, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data is a critical these threats cumulatively or individually can negatively need throughout the western United States. The lack of impact waterbird abundance, distribution, and this baseline habitat data and paucity of standardized reproductive success at the site specific, regional, or range population monitoring for waterbirds continues to impede wide scale. Threats may also vary by individual species progress and effectiveness of waterbird conservation and these have been described and characterized for efforts in the West. several waterbirds in the West including Double-crested Cormorants (Adkins and Roby 2010), Caspian Terns Water Supply and Security (Shuford and Craig 2002), and Black Terns (Shuford Historic and contemporary policies pertaining to the 1999). Below we summarize broad-scale threats to protection and use of water in the arid West prioritize waterbirds: wetland loss; wetland water supply and agriculture and municipal uses over environmental security; water quality; and climate change. Region- uses such as wetland management for migratory birds specific summaries of threats for five waterbird Focal (Downard 2010). In 1990, about 80% of the water diverted Areas are presented in Appendix D. from streams in the western United States was used for agricultural purposes (Solly 1997). In 2005, the states Loss and Degradation of Wetland Habitat of California, Idaho, Colorado and Montana combined The IWWCP identifies one of the most important issues accounted for 64% of all surface water withdrawals facing waterbird conservation in the Intermountain West for irrigation nationwide (Kenny et al. 2009). These as wetland loss. Between the time of initial European diversions and withdrawals, primarily from snow-melt settlement and the mid-1980s, more than 50% of dependant streams, can leave natural and managed freshwater wetlands were lost in the states of Idaho, wetlands dry mid-summer through fall when waterbirds Nevada, and Colorado and 91% in California, though require wetlands for breeding, fledging, post-breeding, mostly in the Central Valley (Dahl 1990). Although the rate and foraging, particularly in years experiencing drought of wetland loss has slowed over time, the loss of freshwater conditions. Wetland complexes critical to western emergent marsh habitat has continued (Dahl 2006). waterbird populations such as Mono Lake, California, Great Salt Lake, Utah, Lahontan Valley, Nevada and Klamath Basin, Oregon have all been subject to
6.16 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org THREATS & LIMITING FACTORS significant declines in water supply due to diversions and Carson River system, Nevada until sufficiently wet withdrawals from inflow streams and tributaries, primarily conditions in 2005 recharged wetlands (Hill et al. 2007). for agricultural purposes (Jehl 1994, Ivey 2001, Downard Drought conditions in the West 2001–2002 and 2007–2009 2010, Mono Lake Committee 2011). were considered severe to extreme (Fig. 6). Increasing competition for water supplies stemming Whether the result of surface or ground water withdrawals from population growth in the Intermountain West is for human uses, increasingly frequent and severe drought further taxing already limited water resources in the arid conditions, or combinations thereof, the lack of water to region. Between 2000 and 2010 the human population maintain and recharge wetland and associated foraging increased 21% in Idaho, 23% in Utah and 35% in Nevada habitats (flooded agricultural fields and pastures) results (U.S. Census Bureau 2011). With population growth the in the loss of waterbird nesting and foraging habitat, demands for water for urban, municipal, and industrial nest abandonment, predation, and poor reproductive uses escalate. Although surface runoff can account for up success. All of these conditions may vary among the many to 80% of lake and wetland recharge among the terminal ecoregions encompassed by the IWJV. Maintaining an lakes and wetlands in the Great Basin (Hoffman 1994), extensive network of varied wetland types (e.g., emergent many wetland complexes in the Intermountain West are wetlands, deep water lakes, saline systems) is critical to equally impacted by groundwater recharge (Engilis and waterbirds in the Intermountain West that use this these Reid 1996). Ground water withdrawals to support growing habitats at the local and larger landscape scale. urban and suburban communities in the west can also pose threats to wetlands, as recently documented at Great Salt Lake (Bishop et al. 2009, Yidana et al. 2010). Wetland protection provided by federal legislation such as Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, public ownership of wetlands (e.g. NWRs and WMAs), and restoration programs such as the Wetlands Reserve Program may protect or restore wetland habitat, but these mechanisms do not always protect water supplies or ensure water security to wetlands managed for migratory birds. Downard (2010) defined water security “the availability of a quantity of water, during most years, sufficient to support enough flooded or periodically flooded wetlands to meet habitat needs established by each refuge”. The lack of water security combined with the scarcity and annual variability of water in Intermountain West represent a substantial and ongoing threat to waterbirds in the region. Increasing demands for water from population growth, urban Figure 6 Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI1), Western expansion, and power generation will further exacerbate Region October 1999–2011. 1PDSI Values: 0.49 future competition for water in the arid West. PDSI = near normal; PDSI = -3.00 or below indicates severe to extreme drought; PDSI= +2.00 Availability of both surface and ground water has been or above indicates moderately wet to extremely further stressed by frequent and persistent droughts. wet conditions. PDSI is displayed for the standard Drought conditions in the West occurred during most years USGS Water Year: 1 October – 31 September. Source: http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/CDO/ 2000–2011 (Fig. 6) with 2005-2006 and 2010- 2011 being CDODivisionalSelect.jsp; Accessed October 2011. the exceptions. At Great Salt Lake, drought conditions 1999–2004 reduced the amount of recharge to ground- water aquifers and the lake elevation declined to a near historic low in 2005 and 2008 (Yidana 2010). Drought conditions in 2001–2004 dried wetlands and eliminated nesting and feeding habitat for waterbirds in the Lower
6.17 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org THREATS & LIMITING FACTORS
Water Quality Climate Change Many of the major wetlands in the Intermountain West Profound changes in temperature, precipitation, snowpack, are located at the terminus of irrigated lands and are and spring melt dates have already occurred in the IWJV dependent upon agricultural return flows as a source region and more change is predicted for the future. of water (e.g. wetlands in Lahontan Valley, Nevada Projections of future climate change vary depending and Harney and Klamath Basins, Oregon). Typically, upon the type and scale of models employed to assess the these return flows are higher in salt concentrations and consequences of increased greenhouse gases. Because the nutrients, both of which can reduce productivity and IWJV encompasses such a wide variety of ecoregions, the diversity of wetlands. Reduced agricultural return flows range and scope of predicted climate change also varies due to increasing withdrawals for municipal or industrial greatly across the region. use and conversion of flood irrigation to sprinkler • Temperature: The Great Basin has experienced region- systems can result in return flows insufficient for wetland wide increases in average temperatures of 0.5–1.1° F habitat goals. Reduced return flows can also exacerbate (Baldwin et al. 2003; Chambers 2008). Although the contaminant problems, thereby threatening wildlife values degree of temperature change has varied across the of important areas (Ivey and Herziger 2006; Downard region, climatologists predict continuing temperature 2010). Drought conditions appeared to exacerbate the increases in Western North America ranging from about negative effects of mercury on productivity of Snowy 4–11°F over the next century (IPCC 2007 Working Egrets at Lahontan Reservoir (Hoffman et al. 2009). Water Group I Report). Predictions of rising temperature are quality and contaminants continues to be a concern at further supported by various downscale and regional many Intermountain West wetlands most renowned for circulation models for the Great Basin/Rocky Mountain supporting large numbers of waterbirds including the Region, northeastern California, and the Sierra Nevada Great Salt Lake, the Lower Carson River system including in eastern California (Baldwin 2003, Bell 2004; Reichler Lahontan Reservoir, Nevada and wetland complexes in the 2009; and PRBO 2011) Klamath Basin, Oregon. • Precipitation: Increases in average annual precipitation Loss of Foraging Habitat ranging from 6–16% throughout most of the Great Basin Loss of flood-irrigated agricultural lands is a potential have been documented with more frequent extreme threat to waterbirds that forage on these habitats. In the high-precipitation years (Baldwin 2003; Chambers Lahonton Valley/Carson Sink region of Nevada, ibis 2008). Conversely, the southern portions of Nevada, colonies are associated with foraging sites in flood- Utah, Colorado, Southeastern California and all portions irrigated alfalfa (Bray and Klebenow 1988). Ibises nesting of Arizona and Mexico within the Intermountain West in the Klamath NWR foraged on surrounding private lands, are experiencing drying climatic conditions (Seager mostly in flooded-irrigated pastures (Follansbee 1994). 2007). Recent investigations underscore the high During the last 20 years, there has been a steady loss of uncertainty about the effects of climate change on these farmland habitats to housing and urbanization as annual precipitation across the Intermountain West. well as the conversion of flood-irrigated agriculture to In some regions, models predict little change or sprinkler irrigation. In the West, acres irrigated by surface drier conditions (Chambers 2008, PRBO 2011) while irrigation methods declined by 16% whereas acres irrigated other regional models predict continued increases in by sprinkler methods increased by 9% between 2000 and precipitation (Baldwin 2003) or wetter winters and drier 2005 (Kenny et al. 2009). In the four southeastern Idaho summers (Reichler 2009). However, portions of the arid counties within the Bear River Basin (Bannock, Bear southwest are predicted with growing certainty to be Lake, Caribou, and Franklin Counties) about 1,300 acres increasingly dry (Seager et al. 2007). of flooded agricultural lands per year have been converted • Snowpack and Snowmelt: Significant declines in to sprinkler irrigation, rendering these sites unsuitable snowpack and earlier spring snowmelts are well as potential waterbird foraging habitat. Continued loss documented in the intermountain west (Mote 2005, of flooded pasture and irrigated croplands is likely to Bedford and Douglas 2008). Consistency among continue as demands for land and water resources increase climate models strongly suggest continued reductions in with population growth and shifts to more efficient snowpack throughout most of the IWJV area, with the sprinkler irrigation systems continue. potential for extreme reductions of up to 70% in eastern and northeastern California (Mote 2005, PRBO 2011).
6.18 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org THREATS & LIMITING FACTORS
The documented effects of climate change on bird of waterbirds during critical life stages. Even if annual populations include: earlier nest initiation dates; changes levels of precipitation remain relatively unchanged from in population size and distribution (predominantly the present, reductions in snow-pack and earlier snow- northerly range extensions); shifts in the timing of melt runoff dates can dramatically influence the timing migration; changes in availability of prey resources; and of water availability to wetlands. The shift to earlier changes in distribution and abundance of predators (Butler snowmelt dates will undoubtedly alter the wetland plant and Vannesland 2000, Crick 2004, National Audubon communities on which waterbirds depend. For example, Society 2009, NABCI 2010). earlier snow melt with reduced annual precipitation would likely diminish wetland quantity and quality in the The effects of climate change may severely impact late summer and fall, potentially leading to premature wetland habitats in the arid Intermountain West. Increases drying of important breeding and fall migration habitat. in temperature without commensurate increases in Alternatively, earlier snow melt with equivalent (or precipitation will result in loss of wetland habitat, increased) annual precipitation may result in different particularly seasonal and shallow wetlands used by many plant communities from which waterbird migration and waterbirds as breeding, foraging, and migration stop-over breeding phenologies have evolved. sites. Wetlands that depend on snowmelt for spring re- charge are particularly at risk (NABCI 2010). This is of The indirect effects of climate change such as changes particular concern for most wetlands in the Intermountain in vegetation; the spread of invasive species, increased West which are predominantly reliant on snowmelt for frequency and magnitude of flood and drought events; source water. increases in fire events; and the increased water demands from the rapidly growing human population Significant changes in the amount of precipitation, all have the potential to negatively impact wetland and whether increasing or decreasing, may alter salinity levels associated upland foraging habitat for waterbirds. The at critical sites such as Mono Lake, Great Salt Lake, and consequences of the effects of climate change have the other saline water bodies in the Intermountain West. Such potential to significantly alter the distribution, abundance, changes have the potential to greatly alter food resources reproductive success and survival of waterbirds at these sites, known to support hundreds of thousands throughout the Intermountain West.
Photo by Larry Kruckenberg
6.19 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org POPULATION ESTIMATES & OBJECTIVES
Photo by USFWS
Waterbird population estimates in the IWWCP were waterbirds in 11 western states, including all states generated by compiling available inventory and encompassed in the IWJV. Nearly all known and potential monitoring data from regional, statewide, and local waterbird breeding sites within the Intermountain West surveys. Expert opinion and data from various sources, were surveyed during the initial two year survey effort. years, and survey techniques were collated and used to Estimates generated from this inventory will represent generate population estimates for 17 of the 39 waterbird minimum population sizes and will improve prior species (including the CVP, LCRVP, and RMP breeding estimates because surveys were conducted in a more populations of Sandhill Cranes) that occur in the IWJV. coordinated, comprehensive, and synchronized manner. The IWWCP then established spopulation objectives for Issues stemming from over-counting or undercounting due these High or Moderate Concern priority waterbird species to temporal and spatial shifts in colony locations among for each state and BCR. For priority migrant species, and between years, and incomplete survey coverage population objectives were set for individual sites that should be minimal in comparison to estimates previously support high numbers and were derived from estimates of generated from discrete survey efforts conducted peak numbers of staging birds using each site. IWWCP independently by many entities across many years. population estimates and objectives are lacking for These results will provide the IWJV with more current many waterbirds, particularly secretive marsh birds and and accurate information on waterbird abundance and including some priority species such as Sora and American distribution which will greatly improve our capacity for Bittern. waterbird conservation planning. In 2009–2011 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service collaborated with state and NGO partners to plan and implement a comprehensive inventory of colonial
6.20 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES
Photo by USFWS
Focal Species Approach This list includes waterbirds that are: Practical conservation and management considerations, 1. Ranked as highly imperiled or of high concern along with limited data and knowledge of most waterbird in the NAWCP; populations necessitate, that only a subset of species can 2. Ranked as high or moderate concern in the be used for future landscape-scale conservation planning regional IWWCP; at this time. To select focal waterbirds for this Strategy, the WST implemented a process similar to that used by 3. Included on USFWS Birds of Conservation California Partners in Flight for landbird conservation Concern (BCC) BCR lists (USFWS 2009); and planning (Chase and Guepel 2005). This entailed 4. Identified as priority species in State Wildlife identifying species associated with important habitat Action Plans (SWAPs). elements or microhabitat attributes, identifying species with special conservation needs, and then selecting a suite In total, 31 waterbird species and subspecies representing of species that together represent the full range of critical a broad array of taxonomic groups, geographic ranges, ecosystem/habitat elements within the planning area. abundance, and conservation status were identified as priority species (Table 3). Most of these occur as resident To select focal species for IWJV habitat conservation or breeding birds, but migrant Common Loons, Eared efforts, the WST initially compiled a list of priority Grebes, Lesser Sandhill Cranes, Franklin’s Gulls; and species from waterbird conservation plans and federal and several management populations of Greater Sandhill state lists of bird conservation priorities. Cranes that stage at various key locations within the IWJV are also included.
6.21 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES Table 3 Conservation Concern Rankings for Priority Waterbirds in the Intermountain West. STATE WILDIFE ACTION PLANS Species of Greatest Conservation Concern
COMMON NAME NAWCP1 IWWCP2 BCC3 AZ CA CO ID MT NV NM OR UT WA WY
Common Loon High (b/m) X X X X X X
Pied-billed Grebe High Concern - WH Moderate
Red-necked Grebe X X
Eared Grebe High (m) BCR 9 X X X X
Western Grebe High X X X X X X
Clark’s Grebe High X X X X
American White Pelican High (b/m) X X X X X X X X
Double-crested Cormorant X X
Neotropic Cormorant X
American Bittern High Concern - NA High BCR 16 X X X X X
Least Bittern High Concern - WH Moderate BCR 33 X
Great Blue Heron Moderate X X X
Great Egret X X X
Snowy Egret High X X X X X X X
Cattle Egret X X
Green Heron Moderate
Black-crowned Night Heron Moderate X X X
White-faced Ibis Moderate X X X X X X
Yellow Rail4 High Concern - NA High BCR 9 X X
Virginia Rail Moderate X
Black Rail5 Highest Concern - WH BCR 33 X X X
Yuma Clapper Rail6 High Concern4 X X X
Sora High Concern - WH Moderate
SANDHILL CRANE X X X
Greater Sandhill Crane X X X X X
Central Valley Population High (b/m)
Lower Colorado River High (m); Population Moderate (b)
Rocky Mountain Population High (m); Moderate (b)
Lesser Sandhill Crane High (m) X
Franklin’s Gull High (b/m) X X X X
California Gull Moderate X X
Caspian Tern X X X X X
Least Tern (interior) X X
Forster’s Tern Moderate X X X X X
Black Tern High X X X X WH = Western Hemisphere; NA = North America; (m) = migrant; (b/m) = breeding and migrant
1. NAWCP - Colonial Waterbird Rankings are from the North American Waterbird provided for both breeding and migrant populations of a the particular species or Conservation Plan, Kushlan et al. 2002; Rankings for solitary- nesting waterbirds management population. are from the NAWCP Update: http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/nacwcp/pdfs/ 3. BCC - Birds of Conservation Concern, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Birds , 2008; status_assessment/FinalTableWorksheet.pdf Bird Conservation Region (BCR) level rankings. 2. IWWCP - Intermountain West Waterbird Conservation Plan, Ivey and Herziger 4. Yellow Rail - Also listed as a USFWS BCC at the FWS Regional Scale in the Pacific 2006; all rankings are for breeding waterbirds unless otherwise noted by (m) to Region (R1), Southwest Region(R2), Mountain Prairie Region (R6), CA/NV Region indicate ranking is for the migrating population or (b/m) to indicate rankings were (R8) and nationally.
6.22 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES
5. Black Rail - species occurrence in AZ, CA, and CO are outside the IWJV To facilitate selection of focal species from the list of boundary; Occurrences in NV are from observations in 2003 in the Virgin River and Henderson, NV areas (BCR 33; Floyd et al. 2007); Also listed as a USFWS BCC priority waterbirds, breeding waterbirds were assigned at the FWS Regional Scale in the Southwest Region(R2), Mountain Prairie Region to one or more of four wetland habitat types that are (R6), CA/NV Region (R8) and nationally. characteristic of the Intermountain West. Within each 6. Yuma Clapper Rail - NWACP ranking is for the Yuma subspecies; confirmed breeding in Big Marsh, Clark Co , NV 2001 (Floyd et al. 2007); Also listed as a habitat type, species were then grouped into one of five USFWS BCC at the Regional Scale in the Southwest Region (R2), Mountain nesting guilds representative of basic nest-type attributes: Prairie Region (R6), and CA/NV Region (R8) emergent vegetation nesters, meadows nesters, over- water floating platform nesters, tree /shrub nesters, or open ground nesters (Table 4). Migrating or wintering waterbirds were assigned to wetland habitat types and one of three foraging guilds (Table 5).
Table 4 Primary Wetland Habitat Association and Nesting Guilds for IWJV Priority Breeding Waterbirds WETLAND HABITAT TYPE EMERGENT WETLANDS, SEMI-PERMANENT OPEN WATER LAKES1, RIPARIAN: LAKES, PONDS, SEASONAL WETLANDS, WETLANDS AND RESERVOIRS, AND DEEP RIVERS, STREAMS AND AND WET MEADOWS HEMI-MARSH WETLANDS WATER WETLANDS DELTAS
Emergent Vegetation Nesters Emergent Vegetation Nesters Floating Platform Nester2 Tree/shrub nesters • Eared Grebe • Pied-billed Grebe • Common Loon • Double-crested Cormorant • American Bittern • Western Grebe • Red-necked Grebe • Neotropic Cormorant • Least Bittern • Clark’s Grebe • Western Grebe • Great Blue Heron • Yellow Rail • American Bittern • Clark’s Grebe • Great Egret • Virginia Rail • Least Bittern • Snowy Egret Open ground / Island Nesters3 • Sora • Great Egret • Cattle Egret • American White Pelican • Snowy Egret • Green Heron Meadow Nesters • California Gull • Black-crowned Night Heron • Black-Crowned Night Heron • Yellow Rail • Caspian Tern • White-faced Ibis • Greater Sandhill Crane - • Least Tern Open ground /Island nesters3 CVP • Black Rail • California Gull • Greater Sandhill Crane - • Virginia Rail • Caspian Tern RMP • Sora • Least Tern • Greater Sandhill Crane • Franklin’s Gull -LCRVP • Forster’s Tern • Black Tern • Black Tern
Floating Platform Nesters1 • Common Loon • Red-necked Grebe • Western Grebe • Clark’s Grebe
Italics – Nesting Substrate Guild; Bold – Focal Species 1. Includes freshwater and saline lakes 2. Floating Platform Nesters – nests constructed with emergent vegetation over water. 3. Open Ground nesters – breed on islands in open water, deltas or braided river channels with minimal or no vegetation.
6.23 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES
Table 5 Primary Habitat and Foraging Guild for Priority Migrant Waterbirds in the IWJV Planning Area FORAGING HABITAT TYPE IRRIGATED PASTURES FRESHWATER LAKES SALINE LAKES AND CROPLANDS
• Omnivorous • Picsivorous • Brine Shrimp/Brine Flies • Greater Sandhill Crane - CVP • Common Loon • Eared Grebe • Greater Sandhill Crane - RMP • American White Pelican • Franklin’s Gull • Greater Sandhill Crane - LCRVP • California Gull • Lesser Sandhill Crane - PFP
Italics – Foraging Guild; Bold – Focal Species
We used expert opinion to select focal species from each populations in the Intermountain West, the population size habitat and nesting guild with the following considerations: and locations of White-faced Ibis breeding colonies are 1) species present in numbers suitable for management comparatively well documented. Though nearly all ibis and monitoring, 2) representation of colonial and solitary- colonies are located on protected lands, there is concern nesting species; 3) geographic representation across the regarding water security for wetlands and the continued Intermountain West; and 4) available or attainable data on availability of foraging habitat, particularly flood irrigated population size, distribution, and habitat affiliations with agricultural lands surrounding NWRs and WMAs that serve the potential to support biological planning. Ten breeding as a network of habitat for breeding ibises and many other waterbirds were selected as focal waterbirds: Western waterbirds. A landscape analysis approach to the protection Grebe, Clarks Grebe, American White Pelican, American of foraging habitat and actions taken to protect, reserve, or Bittern, Great Blue Heron, Snowy Egret, White-faced improve water supplies at sites that traditionally support Ibis, Sora, Greater Sandhill Crane and California Gull. breeding colonies is proposed as a potential conservation Two of these waterbirds, the American White Pelican and strategy for this species. Greater Sandhill Crane were also selected as representative Emerging information on the distribution, abundance, and focal species for non-breeding foraging guilds, along wetland habitat affiliations of Soras and American Bitterns with migrant Eared Grebes and Lesser Sandhill Cranes. from surveys using the standardized North American Marsh Management populations of breeding and wintering Bird Monitoring Protocols (NAMBMP; Conway 2009) in Greater and Lesser Sandhill Cranes occur in discrete the Intermountain West will likely serve as an important geographic areas of the Intermountain West with differing basis for developing spatially explicit conservation management needs, and thus are individually identified on objectives for secretive marsh birds. American Bitterns the list of focal species. and Soras are target species for marsh bird monitoring Focal Species and Conservation Planning programs and appear to be well sampled with the marsh bird protocols. Their affiliations with various features and From the suite of ten breeding and four migrant sizes of emergent wetland habitats may serve to identify waterbird focal species identified in this chapter, the key wetland habitat types and locations for protection, WST recommended the White-faced Ibis, American enhancement, and conservation. The applicability of Bittern, Sora, and the RMP population of Greater Sandhill NAMBMP data to eco-regional conservation planning Cranes as potential focal species for further conservation efforts should be further explored. This would be a new planning during the life of this plan. Ibises, bitterns and application of NAMBMP data that holds promise for the Soras utilize differing types, sizes and characteristics of development of population/habitat models for secretive emergent wetland habitats in the IWJV. This habitat type marsh birds as we better our understanding of their has incurred substantial loss and degradation throughout populations, habitat relationships, and use of the landscape the west and is subject to continuing anthropogenic at large and smaller site-specific scales. and natural threats. In contrast to many other waterbird
6.24 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES
Similarly, completion of the WCWS will provide valuable and habitat data. Development of habitat-suitability current data regarding the abundance and distribution models at broad geographic scales may be an informative of focal waterbirds at a geographic scale appropriate for first step to identify regional extents to focus conservation IWJV conservation planning. These data will be important planning for focal species and establish linkages to for increasing our understanding of the temporal dynamics regional population objectives. Ultimately, future for waterbirds in the Intermountain West that will be planning efforts should identify spatially explicit habitat required for the development of meaningful conservation objectives that can be linked to programmatic objectives, strategies. The acquisition and assessment of habitat conservation treatments, and biological outcomes that information appropriate for waterbird conservation address identified limiting factors. Ideally, habitat planning purposes will be a priority for the IWJV in inventory and population monitoring programs at these the upcoming years. Ultimately, conservation planning same eco-regional scales should be developed to inform for focal waterbirds should be initiated in landscapes whether conservation is successful and consistent with recognized as key sites for waterbirds. Great Salt Lake expected biological outcomes. in Utah; Southeast Idaho (including the Bear River Basin encompassing wetlands in southeastern Idaho, Focal Species Profiles northeastern Utah and western in Wyoming); Southern White-faced Ibis: The White-faced Ibis is a Oregon and Northeast California (SONEC); Lahontan colonial waterbird that breeds in freshwater Valley and Pyramid Lake Nevada; and the San Luis hemi-marsh habitat where emergent Valley, Colorado and Upper/Middle Rio Grande Corridor vegetation is interspersed with open water. in New Mexico are regions with key wetland complexes In the Great Basin region, ibises most of known significance to high priority waterbird species Photo by Dave Menke commonly nest in stands of hardstem in the Intermountain West (Jehl 1994, Haig 1998, Jehl bulrush or cattails (Ryder and Manry1994). These semi- 1998, Shuford et al. 2006; Ivey and Herziger 2006; permanent wetlands are susceptible to highly variable Shuford 2010, and others). In most cases, wetland drought and flood conditions, a defining characteristic of habitat complexes within these regions have a base of the Great Basin ecoregion. In response to these cyclic waterbird population monitoring data that merits further conditions and within-year variation in local habitat assessment to determine its suitability for conservation conditions, ibis colony locations shift both spatially and planning purposes, particularly when combined with new temporally (Ivey et al. 1988, Taylor et al. 1989, Jehl 1994, information gained from the WCWS. Earnst et al. 1998). When conditions at traditional nesting sites are poor, ibis move among other colony sites or The development of population-driven habitat objectives rapidly colonize new sites with suitable nesting habitat for focal waterbirds is proposed for future updates as information on western waterbird populations and wetland White-faced Ibis are opportunistic foragers that feed inventory and habitat trends improve. In the interim, in receding wetlands and newly flooded habitats where commensurate planning efforts for landbird conservation moist-soil invertebrate prey is concentrated. Seasonal may benefit priority waterbirds such as Great Blue wetlands, shallow lake shores, mudflats, shallowly Heron and Snowy Egret that typically nest in tree and flooded pond margins, reservoirs, and marshes are typical shrub riparian habitats. Landscape characterizations foraging habitats (Taylor et al.. 1989, Ryder and Manry and objectives based on energetic models developed for 1994). Irrigated agricultural lands are important feeding shorebirds at the Great Salt Lake and waterfowl at Great sites, particularly native hay meadows, pastures, and Salt Lake and SONEC will also likely benefit waterbirds alfalfa and barley fields within 4 miles of breeding areas breeding and migrating in these landscapes, including (Capen 1977, Bray and Klebenow 1988). Ibis also forage Western and Clark’s Grebe, California and Franklin’s in flooded, grazed pastures even in areas where various gulls, Sandhill Crane, and Eared Grebe. Future efforts agricultural crops are also available (Follansbee 1994). to build conservation strategies around focal waterbird Flooded pastures, and irrigated agricultural lands are a species will require identification of the appropriate source of earthworms, a particularly important prey item eco-regional scales on which to base planning, and the (Bray and Klebenow 1988). identification of habitat-related population limiting The selection of White-faced Ibis as a one of the focal factors at those same scales. Developing habitat objectives species for conservation planning addresses several key to address limiting factors will require development considerations for wetland habitat conservation in the of spatially explicit conceptual or empirical models Intermountain West area. Their nomadic breeding strategy dependent upon the availability and utility of population exemplifies the ecological connectivity among wetlands
6.25 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES in the Great Basin and indicates that wetland management Until recent years, information on the distribution and decisions should be made in a regional context (Earnst et abundance of Soras was primarily limited to BBS data al. 1998, Jehl 1998, Taylor et al. 1989). Conservation of and state bird atlases. These methods and datasets are nesting and foraging habitat for this waterbird will require insufficient for estimating population size or trends, and a network of emergent wetlands and surrounding irrigated thus the IWWCP did not provide population estimates or agricultural and wet pasture habitat at the landscape scale. objectives for Soras. In 2004, secretive marsh-bird surveys These habitats are known to support a wide variety of using the North American Marsh Bird Survey (NAMBS) nesting, migrating, and wintering waterbirds but have been protocols were initiated at some sites in the Intermountain subject to significant levels of historic and contemporary West. Soras are a target species for these tape-playback habitat loss and degradation. The conservation of habitat surveys. By 2009, these standardized surveys were in support of White-faced Ibis breeding colonies and underway at many locations sites within the Intermountain associated irrigated agricultural and pasture lands is West. An analysis of survey results may aid in establishing thus intended to benefit a suite of waterbirds affiliated population estimates, population objectives, and nesting with these same habitats, including breeding Western and densities for various wetland habitat types used by Soras Clark’s grebes, Black-crowned Night-Heron, Franklin’s in the southeastern Idaho, SONEC, and GSL focal areas; Gull and Forster’s Tern and foraging Sandhill Crane, and potentially the Intermountain West in its entirety. Great Blue Heron, and Cattle Egret. In this manner, Consequently, further exploration into the utility of NAMBS ibis may function as an “umbrella species” in that the data for landscape-scale conservation planning is warranted. protection of habitat for ibis provides for the needs of a American Bittern: This is a northerly larger suite of co-occurring species (Caro and O’Doherty breeding heron that inhabits tall emergent 1999, Fleishman et al. 2001, Chase and Guepel 2005). vegetation in freshwater wetlands. The Sora: This species is a solitary-nesting American Bittern is a solitary-nesting, migratory rail that breeds throughout the crepuscular waterbird with cryptic plumage. Intermountain West area in freshwater Photo by USFWS Little information is available about the wetland marshes with dense stands of species habitat preferences in the western U.S., but studies cattail, bulrush, and sedge. Breeding Soras in the northeastern and midwestern states found that Photo by Dan Casey are typically found near edges between American Bitterns most frequently occupy palustrine vegetation types among patches of open water and in the emergent, scrub-shrub, and aquatic bed wetlands (Gibbs et shallow, shoreward portions of wetlands where water level al. 1992). These wetland types are similar to those used by instability produces diverse mosaics of fine and robust Sora but the two species differ substantially in nest emergent vegetation (Melvin and Gibbs 1996). Their nests structure, diet, and foraging habits. American Bitterns are constructed over water with emergent vegetation and feed at vegetation fringes and shorelines of wetlands include a characteristic ramp and an overhead canopy built dominated by tall emergent vegetation, avoiding older, from surrounding vegetation. Wetland edges and upland dense, or dry vegetation (Gibbs et al. 1992). Dense stands fields, including row crops, adjacent to wetlands are of decadent emergents do not appear to be beneficial to sometimes used for brood-rearing or post-breeding this species. In contrast to the primarily seed-eating Sora, dispersal (Kantrud and Stewart 1984; Johnson and American Bitterns consume insects, fish, crustaceans, Dinsmore 1986). Soras feed in stands of robust emergent snakes and small mammals, relying on stealth more than vegetation interspersed with shorter, seed-producing pursuit to capture prey (Gibbs et al. 1992). The platform emergents. They are primarily seed-eaters, consuming nest is typically placed in dense emergent vegetation over seeds of smartweeds, sedges, bulrushes and grasses, but water of 2–8 inches in depth; upland habitats modified by also consume some aquatic invertebrates found near the agricultural practices are not used for breeding. This water surface, often in areas with floating and submergent waterbird is likely area-dependant and the preservation of vegetation and debris (Melvin and Gibbs 1996). In large (>25 acres), shallow wetlands with dense growth of contrast to White-faced Ibis that typically colonize robust emergents has been identified as the most urgent breeding habitat within relatively large wetland complexes need for the conservation of this species (Gibbs 1991). (e.g. Lahonton Wetlands, Nevada; Malheur NWR, Oregon, Blackfoot Reservoir, Idaho) Soras are relatively area- independent and wider ranging in their selection of wetlands and have been found breeding in wetlands < 0.05 ha in size (Melvin and Gibbs 1996).
6.26 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org FOCAL SPECIES
Greater Sandhill Crane: The Greater the marsh edge. Nesting habitat includes open meadows Sandhill Crane is one of six subspecies in with scattered stands of hardstem bulrush, cattails, and North America (Tacha et al. 1992). burreed (Littlefield 2001). They will also utilize small Historically, they bred in suitable wetland lakes and reservoirs as breeding sites, if suitable meadow sites throughout the Intermountain West. or grassland foraging habitat is nearby. Littlefield and
Photo by Utah Division However, populations declined and the Ryder (1968) outlined three essential ingredients for a of Wildlife Resources breeding distribution contracted and crane nesting territory; a feeding meadow, nesting cover, fragmented due to the pressures of human settlement and water. Territories average 43 acres at Malheur NWR (Walkinshaw 1949). Because of these historic declines, the and contain irrigated meadow for feeding and flooded Greater Sandhill Crane was listed as endangered in marsh nesting cover (Littlefield and Ryder 1967). An Washington in 1981, threatened in California in 1983, ideal territory contains a shallow marsh with residual sensitive in Oregon in 1989, and as a British Columbia emergents in close proximity to foraging meadows. Most Blue List species in 1998 (Ivey and Dugger 2008). The nests are constructed from wetland vegetation as floating breeding biology of cranes is characterized by delayed platforms in shallow water. They are omnivores and forage maturity, long-term monogamy, annual breeding, small for small vertebrate and invertebrate prey in seasonal clutch size, and extensive pre- and post-fledging parental wetlands and wet meadows; therefore, their needs overlap care (Tacha et al. 1989; Drewien et al. 1995). These with many other waterbirds, such as American Bittern, demographic factors result in naturally low recruitment Sora and White-faced Ibis. The majority of crane pairs in that limits the species’ ability to recover from declines the Intermountain West nest on private lands; primarily (Tacha et al.1992). Recruitment rates of the three on ranches that utilize flood-irrigation to manage wet populations of Greater Sandhill Cranes that breed in the meadow habitats for livestock haying and grazing Intermountain West (CVP, LCRVP and RMP) are among (Littlefield et al.. 1994, Ivey and Herziger 2000, 2001). the lowest for North American cranes and are believed to Therefore, preservation of flood-irrigation practices on be the major factor limiting population growth (Drewien these private haylands is important. et al. 1995). Wintering and staging cranes primarily depend on cereal Cranes are territorial and solitary breeders that show grain crops, but they also feed in pastures (particularly high fidelity to their nesting territories throughout on dairy farms), alfalfa fields, seasonal wetlands, their lifetime. Greater Sandhill Cranes nest in isolated, and grasslands located in proximity to shallow lakes, well watered river valleys, marshes, and meadows at marshes, and river bottoms, that are used as roosting elevations above 1,200 m in the northern Great Basin, sites. Therefore, maintaining and conserving traditional Cascades, and Rocky Mountains (Littlefield and Ryder roost sites and the agricultural landscape surrounding 1968, Drewien 1973, Drewien and Bizeau 1974). Their them is important. An energetic approach to planning for primary breeding season habitat is wet meadows, and maintenance of their foraging landscape is appropriate. most nest in wet meadow-shallow marsh zones along
6.27 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org POPULATION INVENTORY & MONITORING
Western Colonial Waterbird Survey, North American Marsh Bird Monitoring 2009–2011 Monitoring Objectives: Survey Objectives: • Document the presence or distribution • Document species composition, size, of marsh birds within a defined area. and location of colonial waterbird breeding colonies from 2009 – 2011 • Estimate or compare density in 11 western states. of secretive marsh birds among management units, wetlands, or • Estimate the minimum population regions. size of waterbird species within the project area. • Estimate population trend for marsh birds at local or regional scale. • Produce an atlas of western colonial waterbird breeding colonies, • Evaluate effects of management 2011-2013. actions (often actions that target other species) on secretive marsh birds • Establish a benchmark for the development of a long-term monitoring program for colonial Efforts have been underway for the past decade to waterbirds in the west. develop and field test continental survey protocols for marsh birds in North America (Conway and Timmermans 2005). Marsh birds are difficult to survey due to their The Western Colonial Waterbird Survey (WCWS) was inconspicuous behavior and cryptic characteristics. initiated in 2009 to inventory the location and abundance Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring of 17 species of waterbirds in 11 western states. The survey Protocols (NAMBMPs) have been developed, field was coordinated by the USFWS and implemented by state tested, and implemented on many NWRs, state Wildlife wildlife agencies and nongovernmental partners in 2009– Management Areas, and other locations (Conway 2009). 2011 (http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/birds/ Waterbirds included as focal species in these surveys western_colonial/index.html). Raw data from some states include Clapper Rail, Sora, Virginia Rail, Least Bittern, and for some species has been provided for use in this and American Bittern. The NAMBMPs were first Strategy by the USFWS and WCWS partners (i.e. USFWS implemented on sites within the IWJV area in 2004 by the Regions 1 and 6, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Additional surveys Klamath Bird Observatory, Great Basin Bird Observatory, have since been added throughout the region by state, Nevada Department of Wildlife, and Point Reyes Bird federal, and nongovernmental cooperators. Surveys have Observatory). Publication of final results and an associated been implemented in all of the states within the IWJV Waterbird Colony Atlas are scheduled for 2013. with implementation ranging from one to eight years at individual survey sites. Although results from these Most WCWS field surveys in the Intermountain West marsh bird surveys were produced in years when survey were completed in 2009 and 2010. The WCWS is the first protocols and the continental marsh bird monitoring comprehensive survey for waterbirds conducted within a program were still in the development and assessment specific time period in a coordinated manner throughout stage, this information may offer the best opportunity to the western states. Survey results will serve to refine better estimate population sizes, nesting densities, and waterbird population estimates in the IWWCP, many habitat associations of these secretive marsh bird species. of which were generated by combining population data from many sources and across multiple years. Population estimates derived from WCWS inventory data will represent minimum population sizes and will improve upon estimates derived from individual site surveys conducted independently across many years.
6.28 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org POPULATION INVENTORY & MONITORING
The number and duration of NAMBMPs vary across Periodic or Annual Waterbird Surveys the region including surveys in three areas of particular significance to waterbirds: Inland Breeding Colonial Waterbird Surveys (California) • In 2004 Idaho Department of Fish and Game conducted From 1997–1999 PRBO Conservation Science (PRBO) 10 pilot marsh bird surveys at two sites. In 2005, 65 and collaborators conducted a study to document the marsh bird surveys were conducted at 12 sites throughout distribution and abundance of seven species of inland- the state (Moulton and Sallabanks, 2006). Additional breeding waterbirds in California (Shuford 2010). This annual survey routes have been added over time and survey established the first statewide baseline inventory surveys were conducted at 29 wetland sites in 2008. of seven waterbird species during the breeding season: • At Great Salt Lake, eight survey routes began in 2007. American White Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Ring- Focal species include American Bittern, Virginia Rail, billed Gull, California Gull, Caspian Tern, Black Tern, and and Sora. Secondary species include Pied-billed Grebe Forester’s Tern. Surveys for these species were repeated in and American Coot. the Klamath Basin, including sites in southeastern Oregon, and particularly at Clear Lake and Lower Klamath NWRs, • In eastern Oregon, Klamath Bird Observatory during 2003 and 2004 (Shuford et al. 2006). This suite established and implemented marsh bird surveys on of seven colonial nesting waterbirds was again surveyed 10 areas in 2008 including six sites in the Klamath throughout northeastern California in 2009 and 2010 Basin (Bruce et al. 2008). Surveys at some sites were during the WCWS (Shuford and Henderson 2010). conducted in 2010. Marsh bird surveys at Ladd Marsh, eastern Oregon were implemented 2006–2008 (K. Mono Lake Waterbird Surveys – PRBO has monitored Novak, ODFW pers com) California Gull breeding colonies on Mono Lake annually since 1983 (Shuford 2010). Surveys are conducted to Continental Marsh Bird measure annual variation in population size and reproductive Monitoring Pilot Study success as they relate to changing lake levels and other In 2008, the USFWS Division of Migratory Management, environmental conditions (Nelson and Greiner 2010). in cooperation with multiple partners, initiated a pilot study to examine the feasibility of a nationwide survey for Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey (IBIS) secretive marsh birds. Survey objectives are to estimate In 2004 the Idaho Department of Fish and Game initiated species-specific: (1) temporal trends in abundance; (2) this statewide coordinated all-bird monitoring program changes in abundance from year to year; and (3) habitat that addresses monitoring priorities identified in the Idaho associations at multiple spatial scales (Seamans 2009). Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan (Idaho Partners The North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocols in Flight 2000) and in the bird monitoring components of (Conway 2009) are proposed for use in this developing Idaho’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. large-scale monitoring program, and survey routes will Phase I of IBIS has focused on aquatic birds, a group be chosen as part of a continental sampling design. for which updated monitoring information was the most The survey will be designed to allow for inference to lacking in Idaho. Preliminary work began in spring of population status at regional flyway, and continental 2004 and was greatly expanded in 2005 through 2007. A scales. The design is flexible and allows for more three year inventory of 29 wetland sites was completed intensive surveys within pre-determined strata such as in 2007, and new sites were added in 2008 through states, wildlife management areas, or bird conservation 2010. Thus far, aquatic bird monitoring under the IBIS regions (Seamans 2009). Four states and the District framework includes three survey types: general aquatic of Columbia have participated in the pilot study. Idaho bird surveys, secretive marsh bird surveys, and colonial Department of Fish and Game has participated in the pilot waterbird counts. At this time, Idaho Department Fish and effort since 2009, and Idaho is the only western state Game plans to continue implementation of the IBIS for represented in the study. these waterbirds on an annual basis
6.29 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org POPULATION INVENTORY & MONITORING
Great Salt Lake Waterbird Survey (Utah) Oregon Coordinated Aquatic Bird The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources initiated the Monitoring Program Great Salt Lake (GSL) Waterbird Survey (WBS) in 1997. This program, led by the Klamath Bird Observatory, This was a five-year effort to catalog migratory waterbirds works to facilitate coordinated monitoring efforts to over a variety of the most productive habitats in the Great address priority information gaps and inform aquatic Salt Lake ecosystem (http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/gsl/ bird and wetland conservation. This program contributes waterbirdsurvey); (Paul and Manning 2002). The WBS to regional, national, and international efforts such as included surveys of loons, grebes, pelicans, ibis, cranes, the USFWS Western Colonial Waterbird Survey and the rails, herons, gulls, and terns. Waterbird surveys were Marsh Birds Population Assessment and Monitoring conducted by state, federal, and private cooperators every Project. Through this program Klamath Bird Observatory 10 days from April through September at 50 different has created Important Aquatic Bird Site Descriptions for survey areas. Oregon and northwestern California. Site descriptions are available online at www.klamathbird.org/science/ Following this five-year survey, the lake level began to aquaticbirds.html and include information such as drop, and a second survey from 2004 to 2006 was initiated seasonal bird presence, water levels, conservation issues, to document waterbird numbers during a period of information gaps, existing monitoring programs, land relatively low lake levels. This three-year survey focused ownership, contact information, and maps. With continued on 22 focal survey areas with surveys conducted during input from partners, the site descriptions will provide peak spring (April 15–May 14) and fall (July 8–September current information to land managers, scientists, and 5) migration. Following the three-year WBS there was bird enthusiasts. This information is intended to inform shift to a Coordinated Bird Monitoring (CBM) Bart et al.) resource management decisions about restoration, water approach in order to sustain waterbird monitoring at GSL. management, and other activities that effect wetland There are now 13 permanent annual and 11 rotational ecosystem function. (once every three years) waterbird surveys. Survey periods lengthened to 15 days but lessened in number, with Species-Specific Surveys surveys conducted during spring and fall migration. Of the 38 waterbird species that occur in the Columbia Plateau Piscivorous Waterbird Colony Intermountain West only 5 are routinely monitored at Surveys (Washington) the population or IWJV scale: including Eared Grebes, hunted populations of Greater Sandhill Cranes (RMP and In 2004–2009 Roby et al. (2011) monitored the size and LCRVP), Double-crested Cormorants, American White population trends of piscivorous waterbird colonies in Pelican, and Caspian Tern. the Columbia Plateau region of Washington. The species monitored included Caspian Terns, Double-crested Eared Grebe: Starting in 1996 at Mono Lake and 1997 Cormorants, American White Pelicans, California Gulls, at Great Salt Lake, a systematic aerial photo technique and Ring-billed Gulls. Eighteen sites were monitored, developed by Boyd and Jehl (1998) was utilized to survey including 4 islands in the mid Columbia River; 3 islands enormous concentrations of Eared Grebes during the near the confluence of the Snake and Columbia Rivers; fall molt/staging period (Neill et al. 2009; Mono Lake Potholes Reservoir; the mouth of the Okanogan River; Research Community 2011). This survey is completed in Goose and Twining islands in Banks Lake; Harper Island October and has been implemented in most years since in Sprague Lake; and the Lyons Ferry Railroad trestle first initiated. on the Snake River. Colonies at these sites have a history Sandhill Cranes: Monitoring occurs annually for the of, or are suspected of, preying on juvenile salmonids of RMP and LCRVP Sandhill Cranes. These populations have conservation concern. In addition to colony size, nesting regulated hunting seasons and monitoring is specifically success and potential limiting factors for colonies of designed to determine population trends. For the RMP, a piscivorous waterbirds in the study area were investigated. cooperative 5-state (Utah, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming and At the time of this writing, implementation of annual Montana) September pre-migration staging-area survey monitoring efforts described in this region are ongoing. has been in place since 1995 (Kruse et al. 2011). No other crane population co-mingles with the RMP cranes
6.30 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org POPULATION INVENTORY & MONITORING during that time. The trend for the LCRVP is determined American White Pelican: Nearly all breeding colonies from a winter aerial cruise survey which covers the four of this waterbird in the Intermountain West are routinely main winter concentration areas in southwest Arizona and surveyed annually by state or Federal agency personnel. southeast California, and has been conducted since 1998 Idaho colonies have been monitored annually since 1989 (Kruse 2011). With the exception of recent partial LCRVP at Mindoka NWR and since 202 at Blackfoot Reservoir breeding population surveys conducted in Nevada by (Sallabanks 2009). The colony on Gunnison Island, Great Nevada Department of Wildlife and University of Nevada, Salt Lake was monitored using ground-based surveys Reno in 2009-10, and annual monitoring of Central Valley from 1963–1975. Aerial surveys were initiated in 1976 Population (CVP) cranes in the State of Washington, and are conducted in most years as part of the Great Salt near Conboy Lake National Wildlife Refuge, no recent Lake Waterbird Survey. The single pelican colony on breeding population surveys have been conducted. Badger Island in the Mid Columbia River was monitored Surveys of CVP breeding populations in California and 2004–2010 (Roby et al. 2011). Colonies in northeastern Oregon were last conducted in 2000 (Ivey and Herziger California at Clear Lake and Lower Klamath NWRs in the 2000, 2001). Klamath Basin have been monitored annually since 1952, with prior years monitored sporadically (Shuford 2010; Double-Crested Cormorant: In 2009, Adkins et al. (2010) Mauser pers com). conducted aerial and ground surveys and collaborated with other agencies and individuals to locate and document all Caspian Tern: In response to concerns regarding the active breeding colonies of Double-crested Cormorants population growth, distribution, and potential impact of (>25 breeding pairs) in the Western Population. Nearly tern predation on endangered and threatened salmonids in all of the Intermountain West was included, including the Columbia River, the USFWS and PRBO coordinated colonies in eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, Idaho, and collated annual surveys of Caspian Tern colonies northeastern California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona and and numbers of breeding pairs in the Pacific Region the portions of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and New in 2000–2008. The Pacific Region population includes Mexico lying west of the Continental Divide. Surveys terns breeding in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, for this species in 2009 and 2010 were also conducted Nevada, Montana, and Wyoming (Wires et al. 2000). throughout the IWJV as part of the WCWS. Numbers of Counts of breeding terns on colonies were conducted pairs at Double-crested Cormorant breeding colonies in by representatives of various Federal, state, and non- the Intermountain West were frequently monitored by governmental agencies and organizations. In Washington, local biologists and land managers prior to these most Caspian Terns in the Mid Columbia River and Columbia recent surveys, but comprehensive and complete annual Plateau are monitored annually (Roby et al. 2011). surveys of colonies in the IWJV area were lacking. Surveys for this species in 2009 and 2010 were conducted throughout the Intermountain West as part of the WCWS.
6.31 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org NEXT STEPS
Photo by Larry Kruckenberg
This chapter addresses the initial stages of biological may provide a foundation on which to expand our planning for waterbirds including designation of priority understanding of limiting factors and conservation needs species and identification of focal species for conservation of waterbirds in the Intermountain West. planning purposes. We also identify Focal Areas The IWJV will review WCWS survey results when comprised of multiple wetland complexes of particular available and update waterbird population estimates and significance to waterbirds to serve as landscapes for initial objectives as appropriate. The IWJV will work through a waterbird conservation planning efforts. Limiting factors Technical Committee to evaluate potential strategies for have been reviewed in the context of both widespread landscape scale conservation planning relative to priority threats and more specific threats associated with each waterbirds identified in this Strategy. Development of Focal Area. Data limitations and information gaps regional and/or taxa based working groups may serve to regarding western waterbird populations and habitats facilitate sub-BCR scale conservation planning efforts. in the Intermountain West are significant challenges to development of population-driven habitat objectives Specifically, an objective of the IWJV will be to identify, for focal waterbirds. However, population information facilitate, and initiate relevant conservation planning suitable for continued conservation planning is available strategies for priority waterbirds at appropriate scales over or pending for a small suite of colonial waterbirds the next planning horizon. In the interim, conservation and the results of standardized secretive marsh bird and management objectives in the IWWCP (Ivey and surveys may offer opportunities to better identify and Herziger 2006) will serve as the guiding documents for address conservation needs for these solitary waterbirds. implementing waterbird conservation. Landscape analysis of habitat in selected Focal Areas
6.32 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Adkins, J. Y. and D. D. Roby. 2010. A status assessment of Secretive Marsh Bird Effort Report, Unpublished Report, the Double-crested Cormorant (Phalacorcorax auritus) in 9 pp. Klamath Bird Observatory, Ashland, Oregon. western North America. USGS – Oregon Cooperative Fish Butler, R. W. and R.G. Vennesland. 2000. Integrating and Wildlife Research Unit 104 Nash Hall, Oregon State climate change and predation risk with wading bird University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331-3803 conservation research in North America. Waterbirds 23 American Ornithologists’ Union. 1983. Checklist of North (3): 535-540 American Birds, 6th Edition. Bystrak, D. 1981. The North American Breeding Bird Baldwin, C.K., F.H. Wagner, and U. Lall. 2003. Water Survey. Pages 34-41 in C.J. Ralph and J.M. Scott, eds. resources. Pp. 79-112 in F.H. Wagner (ed). Rocky Estimating numbers of terrestrial birds. Studies in Avian Mountain/Great Basin Regional Climate-Change Biology No. 6. Assessment. Report for the U. S. Global Change Research Capen, D. E. 1977. The impact of pesticides on the White- Program. Utah State University, Logan, Utah: IV + 240 pp. faced Ibis. Ph.D. dissertation. Utah State University, Bedford, D. and A. Douglass. 2008. Changing Properties Logan, Utah. of Snowpack in the Great Salt Lake Basin, Western Caro T.M., and G. O’Doherty. 1999. On the use of United States, from a 26-Year SNOTEL Record. The surrogate species in conservation biology. Conservation Professional Geographer, 60:3, 374 — 386. : http://dx.doi. Biology, 13(4): 805-814 org/10.1080/00330120802013646 Chambers, J.C. 2008. Climate Change and the Great Bell, J. L., L.C. Sloan, and M.A. Snyder. 2004. Regional Basin. USDA Forest Service. General Technical Report. Changes in Extreme Climatic Events: A Future Climate Rocky Mountain Research Station. GTR-204. Scenario. American Meteorological Society (17): 81-87 Chase, M. K. and G. R. Guepel. 2005. The use of Avian Belovsky, G. E., D. Stephens, C. Perschon, P. Birdsey, D. Focal Species for Conservation Planning in California. Paul, D. Naftz, R. Baskin, C. Larson, C. Mellison, J. Luft, USDA Forest Service General Technical Report. PSW- R. Mosley, H. Mahon, J. Van Leeuwen, and D. V. Allen. GTR-191. 2011. The Great Salt Lake ecosystem (Utah, USA): long term data and a structural equation approach. Ecosphere Conway, C. J. 2009. Standardized North American Marsh 2:1–40. Bird Monitoring Protocols, version 2009-2. Wildlife Research Report #2009-02. U.S. Geological Survey, Bishop, C.E., M. Lowe, J. Wallace, R.L. Emerson and J.S. Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Horn. 2009. Wetlands in the Farmington Bay Area, Davis Tucson, Arizona. County: An evaluation of threats posed by ground-water development and drought. Report of Investigation 264. Conway, C. J. and S.T.A. Timmermans. 2005. Progress Utah Geological Survey RI 264 (CD). toward developing field protocols for a North American marsh bird monitoring program. Pages 997-1005 in Ralph Bookhout, T.A. 1995. Yellow Rail (Coturnicops and T.D. Rich, editors. Bird Conservation Implementation noveboracensis). In The Birds of North America, No. and Integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the Third 139 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural International Partners in Flight Conference, 20-24 March Sciences, Philadelphia, and the American Ornithologists’ 2002, Asilomar, California. Volume 2. U.S. Department Union, Washington DC. of Agriculture General Technical Report PSW-GTR-191. Boyd, S. 2007. Mono Lake Newsletter. Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, www.monolake.org. Albany, California. Boyd, S. and J.R. Jehl, Jr. 1998. Estimating the abundance Cooper, D. S. 2004. Important Bird Areas of California. of Eared Grebes on Mono Lake, California, by aerial Audubon California, Los Angeles, California. photography. Colonial Waterbirds 21:236-241. Crick, H.Q. 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Bray, M. P. and D. A. Klebanow. 1988. Feeding Ecology Ibis, 146(Suppl.1), 48-56. of White-faced Ibis in a Great Basin Valley, USA. Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetlands losses in the United States, Colonial Waterbirds 11-1: 24-31. 1780’s to 1980’s. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish Bruce, J., J. L. Stephens, J. D. Alexander, and N. David. and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 13 pp. 2009. Oregon Coordinated Aquatic Bird Monitoring: 2008
6.33 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Dahl, T.E. 2006. Status and trends of wetlands in the Gibbs, J. P., S. Melvin, and F.A. Reid. 1992. American conterminous United States 1998 to 2004.U.S. Department Bittern. In the Birds of North America, No. 18 (A. Poole, of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, P. Stettenheim, and F. Gill, Eds.). Philadelphia: The D.C. 112 pp. Academy of Natural Sciences; Washington, DC: The American Ornithologists’ Union. Downard, R. 2010. Keeping wetlands wet: The hydrology of wetlands in the Bear River Basin. 2010. Haig, S.M., D.W. Mehlman, and L.W. Oring. 1998. All Graduate Thesis and Dissertations. Paper 829. Avian movement and wetland connectivity in landscape Utah State University. Graduate Studies, School of conservation. Conservation Biology, Vol. 12, No. 4: 749- DigitalCommons@USU. http://digitalcommons.usu. 758. etd/829 Henny, C. J. 1997. DDE still high in White-faced ibis eggs Drewien, R. C. 1973. Ecology of Rocky Mountain Greater from Carson Lake, Nevada. Colonial Waterbirds 20: 478 – Sandhill Cranes. Dissertation, University of Idaho, 484. Moscow. Hill, E.F., C.J. Henny, and R.A. Grove 2008. Mercury and Drewien, R. C., and E. G. Bizeau. 1974. Status and drought along the lower Carson River, Nevada: II.Snowy distribution of greater sandhill cranes in the Rocky egret and black-crowned night-heron reproduction on Mountains. Journal of Wildlife Management 38:720-742. Lahontan Reservoir, 1997–2006. Ecotoxicology (2008) 17:117–131. Drewien, R. C., W. M. Brown and W. L. Kendall. 1995. Recruitment in Rocky Mountain Greater Sandhill Cranes Hoffman, D.J., C.J. Henny, E.F. Hill, R. A. Grove, J.L. and comparisons with other crane populations. Journal of Kaiser, and K.R. Stebbins. 2009. Mercury and drought Wildlife Management 59: 339-356. along the Lower Carson River, Nevada: III. Effects on blood and organ biochemistry and histopathology Earnst, S.L., L. Neel, G.L. Ivey, and T. Zimmerman. 1998. of Snowy Egrets and Black-crowned Night Herons on Status of the White-faced Ibis: Breeding Colony Dynamics Lahonton Reservoir, 2002-2006. Journal of Toxicology of the Great Basin Population, 1985 – 1997. Colonial and Environmental Health, Part A, 72: 1223–1241. Waterbirds: 20-3: 301-476. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Engilis A., Jr, and F. A Reid. 1996. Challenges in wetland 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of restoration of the western Great Basin. International Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Wader Studies 9:71-79. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Solomon, S., Fleishman, E., D.D. Murphy, and P.F. Brussard. 2000. D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, A new method for selection of umbrella species for M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.). Cambridge University conservation planning. Ecological Applications 10 Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, (2):569-579. USA, 996 pp. http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg1_report_ Fleishman, E., R.B. Blair, and D.D. Murphy. 2001. the_physical_science_basis.htm Empirical validation of a method for umbrella species selection. Ecological Applications, 11(5): 1489-1501. Ivey, G.L. 2001. Klamath Basin Joint Venture Implementation Plan. Unpublished Report prepared Floyd, T., C .S. Elphick, G. Chisholm, K. Mack, R.G. in partnership with Oregon Department of Fish and Elston, E.M. Ammon, and J.D. Boone. 2007. Atlas of the Wildlife, California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Breeding Birds of Nevada. University of Nevada Press. Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Oregon Wetlands Joint Venture, Reno, Nevada. Lake Oswego, Oregon. 38pp. http://www.ohjv.org/pdfs/ Follansbee, D. M. and D. M. Mauser. 1994. Ecology of klamath_basin.pdf breeding White-faced Ibis on Lower Klamath NWR, CA. Ivey, G. L., and B. E. Dugger. 2008. Factors Influencing Unpublished progress report. Nest Success of Greater Sandhill Cranes at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon. Waterbirds 31:52-61. Ivey, G. L., and C. P. Herziger. 2000. Distribution of greater sandhill crane pairs in Oregon, 1999/2000. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Nongame Technical Report #03-01-00. Portland, Oregon.
6.34 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Ivey, G. L., and C. P. Herziger. 2001. Distribution of Lindenmayer, D. B., A.D. Manning, P.L. Smith, H.P. greater sandhill crane pairs in California, 2000. California Possingham, J. Fischer, I. Oliver, and M. A. McCarthy. Dept. Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. 2002. The focal-species approach and landscape scale restoration: a critique. Conservation Biology 16-2: 338- Ivey, G.L. and C.P. Herziger. 2006. Intermountain 345. West Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version 1.2. A plan associated with the Waterbird Conservation for the Littlefield, C. D. 2001. Sandhill Crane nest and egg Americas Initiative. Published by U.S. Fish and Wildlife characteristics at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Service, Pacific Region, Portland, Oregon. Oregon. Proceedings of the North American Crane Workshop 8:40-44. Ivey, G. L., M. A. Stern and C. G. Carey. 1988. An increasing White-faced Ibis population in Oregon. Western Littlefield, C. D. and R. A. Ryder. 1968. Breeding biology Birds 19: 105-108. of the Greater Sandhill Crane on Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon. Transactions of the North Jehl, J.R., Jr. 1988. Biology of the Eared Grebe and American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 33: Wilson’s Phalarope in the nonbreeding season: a study of 444-454. adaptations to saline lakes. Studies in Avian Biology (12). Littlefield, C. D., M. A. Stern, and R. W. Schlorff. 1994. Jehl, J.R. Jr. 1994. Changes in saline and alkaline lake Summer distribution, status, and trends of greater sandhill avifaunas in Western North America in the past 150 years. crane populations in Oregon and California. Northwestern Studies in Avian Biology No. 15:258-272. Naturalist 75:1-10. Jehl, J. R., Jr, W.S. Boyd, D.S. Paul, and D.W. Anderson. Lundsten, S, and K.J. Popper. 2002. Breeding ecology of 2002. Massive collapse and rapid rebound: Population Yellow Rails at Fourmile Creek, Wood River Wetland, dynamics of Eared Grebes (Podiceps nigricollis) during an Mares Egg Spring, and additional areas in southern ENSO event. Auk 119(4): 1162-1166. Oregon, 2002. Unpublished Report submitted to the Johnson, R. R. and J.J. Dinsmore. 1986 Habitat use by Bureau of Land Management, Deschutes National Forest, breeding Virginia rails and soras. Journal of Wildlife and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Management 50(3):387-392. Melvin, S. M., and J. P. Gibbs. 1996. Sora. Account No. Kantrud, H.A. and R.E. Stewart. 1984. Ecological 250 in A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North distribution and crude density of breeding birds on Prairie America, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Wetlands. Journal of Wildlife Management 48: 426-437. Pennsylvania and American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C., US Kenny, J.F., Barber, N.L., Hutson, S.S., Linsey, K.S., Lovelace, J.K., and Maupin, M.A., 2009, Estimated use Mono Lake Committee. 2011. Impacts of Water Diversions of water in the United States in 2005: U.S. Geological on the Mono Basin. www.monolake.org. Accessed July Survey Circular 1344, 52 p. 2011. Kruse, K.L., J.A. Dubovsky, and T.R. Cooper. 2011. Mote, P. W., A. F. Hamlet, M. P. Clark, and D. P. Status and harvests of sandhill cranes: Mid-Continent, Lettenmaier.2005. Declining mountain snowpack in Rocky Mountain, Lower Colorado River Valley and western North America. Bulletin of the American Eastern Populations. Administrative Report, U.S. Fish and Meteorological Society 86:39-49. Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. 12pp. Moulton, C. E. 2007. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Kushlan, J. A., M. Steinkamp, K. Parsons, J. Capp, (IBIS) 2006 Annual Report. 39 pgs. Unpublished Report. M. A. Cruz, M. Coulter, I. Davidson, L. Dickson, N. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and Edelson, R. Elliot, R. M. Erwin, S. Hatch, S. Kress, R. Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut Milko, S. Miller, K. Mills, R. Paul, R. Phillips, J. E. St. Boise, Idaho http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/ Saliva, B. Sydeman, J. Trapp, J. Wheeler, and K. Wohl. wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2007report.pdf 2002. Waterbird Conservation for the Americas: The North American Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version 1.Waterbird Conservation for the Americas, Washington, DC, USA., 78 pp.
6.35 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Moulton, C. E. 2008. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Pacific Flyway Council. 1997. Pacific Flyway (IBIS) 2007 Annual Report. 42 pgs. Unpublished Report. management plan for the Central Valley Population of Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and Greater Sandhill Cranes. Pacific Flyway Study Committee Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut [c/o USFWS, MBMO], Portland, Oregon. 97pp. 46 pp. St. Boise, Idaho http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/ Pacific Flyway Council. 2007. Management plan wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2007report.pdf of the Pacific and Central Flyways for the Rocky Moulton, C. E. 2009. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Mountain population of Greater Sandhill Cranes. [Joint] (IBIS) 2008 Annual Report. 37 pgs. Unpublished Report. Subcommittees, Rocky Mountain Population Greater Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and Sandhill Cranes, Pacific Flyway Study Committee, Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut Central Flyway Webless Migratory Game Bird Technical St. Boise, Idaho http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/ Committee [c/o USFWS, MBMO], Portland, Oregon. wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2008report.pdf 97pp. Moulton, C. E. and R. Sallabanks. 2006. Idaho Bird Panjabi, A. O., E. H. Dunn, P. J. Blancher, W. C. Hunter, Inventory and Survey (IBIS) 2005 Annual Report. 40 pgs. B. Altman, J. Bart, C. J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, G. S. Unpublished Report. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Butcher, S. K. Davis, D. W. Demarest, R. Dettmers, W. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, Easton, H. Gomez de de Silva Garza, E. E. Iñigo-Elias, D. 600 S. Walnut St. Boise, Idaho 83707 N. Pashley, C. J. Ralph, T. D. Rich, K. V. Rosenberg, C. M. Rustay, J. M. Ruth, J. S. Wendt, and T. C. Will. 2005. National Audubon Society (NAS). 2009. Birds and The Partners in Flight handbook on species assessment. Climate Change: Ecological Disruption in Motion. A Version 2005. Partners in Flight Technical Series No. 3. Briefing for Policymakers and Concerned Citizens on http://www.rmbo.org/pubs/downloads/Handbook2005.pdf Audubon’s Analyses of North American Bird Movements in the Face of Global Warming. http://web4.audubon.org/ Paul, D.S., A.E. Ellison, and E.M Annand. 2000a. Great news/pressroom/bacc/pdfs/Birds%20and%20Climate%20 Salt Lake Waterbird Nesting Colonies 1998 and 1999. Report.pdf Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Program, Unpublished Report, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah. Neill, J., M. Dalton, and J. Luft. 2009. 2009 Great Salt 13 pgs. Lake Eared Grebe Aerial Photo Survey. Unpublished Report. Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Program, Utah Paul, D.S., A. E. Manning, and L.H. Dewey. 2000b. Great Division of Wildlife Resources, Hooper, Utah 84315. Salt Lake Waterbird Nesting Colonies, 2000. Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Program, Unpublished Report, Utah Nelson, K.N. and A. Greiner. 2010. Population size Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah, and reproductive success of California Gulls at Mono 13pgs. Lake, California in 2010. PRBO Conservation Science, Petaluma, California 94954. 19pps. http://www. Paul, D.S., A.E. Manning, and J.C. Neill. 2001. Great Salt monobasinresearch.org/images/gulls/2010.pdf Lake Waterbird Nesting Colonies 2001, Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Program, Unpublished Report, Utah Division North American Bird Conservation Initiative, U.S. of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah . 5pgs. Committee, 2010. The State of the Birds 2010 Report on Climate Change, United States of America. U.S. Paul, D.S. and A.E. Manning. 2002. Great Salt Lake Department of the Interior: Washington, DC. http://www. Waterbird Survey Five-Year Report (1997-2001). stateofthebirds.org/2010/ Publication Number 08-38. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah. Pacific Flyway Council. 1983. Pacific Flyway Management Plan: Pacific Flyway Population of Lesser Popper, K.J, and M.A. Stern. 2000. Nesting ecology Sandhill Cranes. Pacific Flyway Study Committee [c/o of Yellow Rails in south central Oregon. J. Field USFWS, MBMO], Portland, Oregon. 22 pp. Ornithology, 71(3): 460-466. Pacific Flyway Council. 1995. Pacific Flyway PRBO Conservation Science. 2011. Projected Effects of Management Plan for the Greater Sandhill Crane Climate Change in California: Ecoregional Summaries Population Wintering along the Lower Colorado River Emphasizing Consequences for Wildlife. Version 1.0. Valley. Pacific Flyway Study Committee; [c/o USFWS, http://data.prbo.org/apps/bssc/climatechange (Accessed MBMO], Portland, Oregon. 39 pp. June 15, 2011).
6.36 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Ratti, J.T. and J.A. Kadlec. 1992. Intermountain West Seager, R., M. Ting, I. Held, Y. Kushnir, J. Lu, G. Vecchi, wetland concept plan for the North American Waterfowl H. Huang, N. Harnick, A. Leetmaa, N.-C. Lau, C. Li, Management Plan. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Office of J.Velez, N. Naik. 2007. Model Projections of an Imminent Migratory Bird Management. Portland, Oregon. Transition to a More Arid Climate in Southwestern North America. Science, Vol 316: 1181-1184. DOI: 10.1126/ Robbins, C.S., D.A. Bystrak, and P.H. Geissler. 1986. The science.1139601. Breeding Bird Survey: its first fifteen years, 1965-1979. USDOI, Fish and Wildlife Service resource publication Seamans, M. (2009). Unpublished report to 157. Washington, D.C. Flyway Technical Committees, Spring 2009. www. waterbirdconservation.org/pdfs/marshbirdmonitoring/ Reichler, T. 2009: Fine-scale climate projections for Utah Report to Flyways Spring 2009.pdf from statistical downscaling of global climate models, Climate Change and the Intermountain West: 5th Spring Shuford, W. D. 1999. Status Assessment and Conservation Runoff Conference/14th Intermountain Meteorology Plan for the Black Tern in North America. U. S. Dept. of Workshop, PowerPoint Presentation. Utah State Interior, Fish & Wildlife Serv., Denver Federal Center, University Logan, Utah, April 2-3. http://www.inscc.utah. Denver, Colorado. edu/~reichler/talks/papers/Reichler_Logan_0904.pdf Shuford, W. D. 2010. Inland-breeding pelicans, Roby, D.D.; K. Collis, J. Adkins, L. Adrean, D. Battaglia, cormorants, terns and gulls in California: A catalogue, B. Cramer, P. Loschl, T. Marcella, K. Nelson, D. Lyons, digital atlas, and conservation tool. Wildlife Branch, F. Mayer, Y. Suzuki, A. Evans, M. Hawbecker, and J. Nongame Wildlife Program Report 2010-01. California Sheggeby. 2009. Caspian Tern Nesting Ecology and Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. www.dfg. Diet in San Franscisco Bay and Interior Oregon; Final ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/waterbirdcatalogue/ 2008 Annual Report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Shuford, W. D., and D. P. Craig. 2002. Status Assessment Portland District. www.birdresearchnw.org/CEDocuments/ and Conservation Recommendations for the Caspian Tern Downloads_GetFile.aspx?id=403427&fd=0 (Sterna Caspia) in North America. U.S. Department of the Roby, D.D., K. Collis, D.E. Lyons, A. Evans, J.Y. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Adkins, N. Hostetter, B. Cramer, P. Loschl, Y. Suzuki, Shuford W. D. and R.P. Henderson. 2010. Surveys of T. Marcella, L. Kerr, B.P. Sandford, R.D. Ledgerwood, Colonial Waterbirds in Northeastern and East-central D.R. Kuligowski, and S. Sebring. 2011. Impacts of avian California in 2009. Report to U. S. Fish and wildlife predation on salmonid smolts from the Columbia and Service, Region 8. 18 pgs. http://www.fws.gov/mountain- Snake rivers: 2004-2009 draft synthesis report. Prepared prairie/species/birds/western_colonial/Colonial- for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla Waterbirds-Final-Report-2009.pdf District, Walla Walla, Washington. 240 pp. Shuford, W.D., D.L. Thomson, D.M. Mauser, and Ryder, R. A. and D. E. Manry. 1994. White-faced Ibis J. Beckstrand. 2006. Abundance and distribution of (Plegadis chihi). In The Birds of North America, No.130 nongame waterbirds in the Klamath Basin of Oregon and (A.P. Poole and F. Gill, Eds). Philadelphia: The Academy California from Comprehensive Surveys in 2003 and of Natural Sciences: Washington, D.C.: The American 2004. Unpublished Final Report to U. S. Fish and Wildlife Ornithological Union. Service, Klamath Basin NWR Complex, Tulelake, CA. Sallabanks, R. 2009. Management of American White 87pgs. Pelicans in Idaho: A five-year plan (2009-2013) to Silva Garza, E. E. Iñigo-Elias, D. N. Pashley, C. J. balance American white pelican and native cutthroat trout Ralph, T. D. Rich, K. V. Rosenberg, C. M. Rustay, J. M. conservation needs and manage impacts to recreational Ruth, J. S. Wendt, and T. C. Will. 2005. The Partners in fisheries in southeast Idaho. Unpublished Report; Idaho Flight handbook on species assessment. Version 2005. Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. 72pp. Partners in Flight Technical Series No. 3. Rocky Mountain Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North Bird Observatory website: http://www.rmbo.org/pubs/ American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis downloads/Handbook2005.pdf 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD (Updated 15 May 2008) http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/cred.html
6.37 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org LITERATURE CITED
Solley, W. B. 1997. Report to the Western Water Policy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Western Colonial Review Advisory Commission. U.S. Geological Survey, Waterbird Survey, Update on Survey, 2011. http://www. Reston, Virginia. http://bee.oregonstate.edu/Faculty/selker/ fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/birds/western_colonial/ Oregon%20Water%20Policy%20and%20Law%20Website/ index.html Report%20of%20the%20WWPRAC/WATERUSE.PDF U.S. Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report Stern, M.A, , J.F .Morawski, and G.A. Rosenberg. 1993. 2007–5050. Version 1.1, April 2010 http://pubs.usgs.gov/ Rediscovery and status of a disjunct population of sir/2007/5050/section2.html breeding Yellow Rails in southern Oregon. The Condor 95: Walkinshaw, L. H. 1949. The Sandhill Crane. Cranbrook 1024-1027. Institute of Science. Bulletin 29. Bloomfield Hills, MI. Tacha, T. C., D. E. Haley and P. A. Vohs. 1989. Age of Will, T.C., J.M. Ruth, K.V. Rosenberg, D. Krueper, D. sexual maturity of Sandhill Cranes from mid-continental Hahn, J. Fitzgerald, R. Dettmers, C.J. Beardmore. 2005. North America. Journal of Wildlife Management 53: 43-46. The five elements process: designing optimal landscapes Tacha, T. C., S.A. Nesbitt, and P. A. Vohs. 1992. Sandhill to meet bird conservation objectives. Partners in Flight Crane. In The Birds of North America, No.31 (A.Poole, P. Technical Series No. 1. Stettenheim, and F. Gill, Eds.) Philidelphia: The Academy Wires, L. R., and F. J. Cuthbert. 2000. Trends in Caspian of Natural Sciences; Washington, DC: The American Tern numbers and distribution in North America: A review. Ornithologists’ Union. Waterbirds 23:388-404. Taylor, D.M., C.H. Trost, and B. Jamison. 1989. The Yidana, S.M., M. Lowe and R.L. Emerson. 2010 Wetlands Biology of the White-faced Ibis in Idaho. Western Birds In Northern Salt Lake Valley, Salt Lake County, Utah: 20: 125-133. An Evaluation of Threats Posed by Ground-Water U.S. Fish and Wildlife and U.S Geological Survey. Development and Drought. Utah Geological Survey, Utah 2006. Strategic Habitat Conservation, Final Report of Department of Natural Resources. Report of Investigation the National Ecological Assessment Team Washington 268. 37pgs. DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/ science/SHC/index.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 85 pp. [Online version available at
6.38 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX A. WATERBIRD SCIENCE TEAM MEMBERS
• John Alexander, Klamath Bird Observatory • Suzanne Fellows, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Jenny Hoskins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Dave Mauser, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Colleen Moulton, Idaho Department of Fish and Game • John Neill, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources • Andrea Orabona, Wyoming Game & Fish Department • Don Paul, AvianWest, Inc. • Dave Shuford, PRBO Conservation Science • Jennifer Wheeler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
6.39 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX B. DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANT BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Table B Estimated Numbers of Double-crested Cormorant Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West Area, 1998-1999 and 2003-2009.a
LOCATION 1998 1999 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Eastern Washingtonb 250 300 1,218 1,554 1,367 1,428 1,196
Eastern Oregon 242c 913c 883d 1,043d 48a 1,041e,f
Northeastern California 280d 574d 521e 604e 259e
Idahog 388 1,008 1,180 1,418 1,613
Montanah 17 32
Nevadai 911 1,677g 269 720 872 165 660
Utahj 177
Coloradok 21 18 19 29 41
Arizonal 325
TOTAL 1433 3,164 1,654 1,947 1,816 3,317 3,438 3,088 5,344
Blank cell - indicates no data available for the particular location or year Bold - indicates incomplete or missing data due to 1) lack of estimates of a large number of sites, 2) no estimate for a site likely to represent a large portion of breeding pairs for the area, or 3) only a visual approximation of breeding pairs was available for a given site(s), rather than a precise count. a. Summarized data from Adkins and Roby (2010) with source g. C. Moulton, (2005-2008) references footnoted. h. C. Wightman, pers. comm. in Adkins and Roby (2010) b. Oregon State University; Realtime Research and i. D. Withers, J. Jeffers, and P. Bradley, pers. comm. Bird Research Northwest in Adkins and Roby (2010) c. USFWS, unpubl. data, M. Naughton j. S. Jones, J. Neill, and J. Cavitt, pers. comm. in Adkins d. Shuford (2006) and Roby (2010) e. Shuford and Henderson (2010) k. J. Beason, pers. comm. in Adkins and Roby (2010) f. P. Milburn pers. Comm. in Adkins and Roby (2010) l. T. Corman, pers. comm. in Adkins and Roby (2010)
6.40 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX C. CASPIAN TERN BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Table C Estimated Numbers of Caspian Tern Breeding Pairs in the IWJV Planning Area 1979 and 1997-2009.
STATE/SITE 1979a 1997b 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009g
WASHINGTON
Mid Columbia Riverc
Miller Rocks, Klickitat river 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Threemile Canyon Island 210 354 210 238 260 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rock Island (Blalock Is. ) 0 6 110 43 104 79
Anvil Island (Blalock Is.) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Crescent Island 0 614 357 552 571 720 578 509 530 476 448 355 388 349
Columbia Basin/Plateauc
Banks Lake, Twining and Goose 10 23 21 B 23 31 27 61 Islands
Potholes Reservoir 100 259 150 250 250 205 191 323
Goose Island 87 325 273 282 293 487
Solstice Island 42 0 0 0 0
Sprague Lake, Harper Island ~50 20 20 7 7 0 11 4
OREGON
Malheur Lake 65 25 30 192 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Crump Lake, Warner Valley 155 0 49 0 0 0 0 428 697
Summer Lake 38 16 0 5 5 0 3 0 0 0 15
CALIFORNIA
Meiss lake Butte Valley WA 50 25 16 27 19 0 0 0 0 0
Lower Klamath NWR 20 0 0 0 0
Clear Lake NWR 200 180 68 118 242 201 0 29 93 45 104a 53 0 71
Goose Lake 200 143 310 4 240 133 282 0 0
Big Sage Reservoir 75 62 0 48 0 0 0 0 0
Honey Lake 15 152 87 82 92 46 13 0 0 0
Mono Lake 12 0 0 0 8 6 11 8 8 3 3 0 0 0
IDAHO
Morman Reservoir 2 25 0 0 0 28 22 0 0
Magic Reservoir, Island 2 20 0 7 15 42 58 55
Blackfoot Reservoir, Gull Island 5 0 50 40 0 0 39 37 45 7
Minidoka NWR, Tern Island 1 0 4 0 0 0 8 7 12 3
Bear Lake NWR 21 0 0 0 0
Island Park Reservoir, South Island 36 18
(Continued on next page)
6.41 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX C. CASPIAN TERN BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Table C (Continued) Estimated Numbers of Caspian Tern Breeding Pairs in the IWJV Planning Area 1979 and 1997-2009.
STATE/SITE 1979a 1997b 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009g
NEVADA
Carson Sink, Churchill Co 0 685 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Anaho Island NWR, Pyramid Lake 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 5 30 9 20 0 0
Stillwater NWR, Stillwater Point 5 0 0 0 0 0
UTAH
GSL, Farmington Bay WMA 0 0 0 0 1
Mona Reservoir 3
Stansbury Park, Sewage Lagoons 11
Utah Lake, Provo Bay 55
Neponset Reservoir
Scipio Lake, Unit 1
MONTANA
Canyon lake Ferry Reservoir 5 0 2 7 35 43 11 12 0 6 2 12
WYOMING
Molly Island, Yellowstone Lake NP 4 5 4 0 3 5 6 4 3 0
Soda Lake, Natrona Co 0 0 0 7 12 19 0
Blank cell - indicates no data available for the particular location or year B - birds present, numbers and breeding status unknown a. Estimates for 1979, and 1997 - 2001 from Shuford, and Craig. e. Estimates for 2009 California from Shuford and Henderson (2010) (2002) f. Estimates for 2005-2008 Idaho from Moulton, C. E. Idaho Bird b. Unless otherwise noted, estimates for 2002 -2007 from USFWS Inventory and Survey (IBIS) Annual Reports (2006-2009) and PRBO summary table of Pacific Region Caspian Tern colonies g. Estimates for all other areas 2009-2010 from USFWS, Western (unpublished; various contributors), courtesy of D. Shuford and J. Colonial Waterbird Survey draft survey results; ID- C. Moulton IDFG; Hoskins OR- K. Hussey, Klamath Bird Observatory; WY - A. Orbana, WFG; c. Estimates for 2004-2009 for Mid Columbia River & Columbia Basin UT - Great Salt Lake (J. Neil) and Interior - Weber State University; Plateau from Roby et al. (2011) NV - Jennifer Ballard, Great Basin Bird Observatory; d. Estimates for 2008 Eastern Oregon from Roby et al. 2009; www.birdresearchnw.org;
6.42 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX D. WHITE-FACED IBIS BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Table D Estimated Numbers of White-faced Ibis Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West Joint Venture, 1998-2010.a
STATE/SITE 1998B 1999B 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009C 2010C
CALIFORNIA
Goose Lake South 250
Leavitt Lake (mulitple colonies) 2,349
Lower Klamath NWRd 674 1,444 3,741 4,555 2,427 2862 1122 1,549 167 2,760 0 3,500 2,348 (Units 6a,7a,8b, 12c, 13a , 13b)
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 6A 0 0 0 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,500 2,348
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 7A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 8b 0 999 1,878 1,555 695 50 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 12c 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 2,760 0 0 0
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 13a 0 0 0 0 0 2,812 1,063 0 167 0 0 0
Lower Klamath NWR, Unit 13b 0 445 1,863 0 1,732 0 1,549 0 0 0 0
Sierra Valley 1,427 1,893
Tule Lake NWR, Sump 1bd 0 0 0 0 0 0 1039 1,588 110 7,620 852 0 0
Whitehorse Flat Reservoir 56
Willow Creek Wildlife Area 302
IDAHOe
Bear Lake NWR 1,800 1,800 12,729 9,576
Camas NWR 225 250 0
Duck Valley b b 5,300 7,631
Grays Lake NWR 600 703 6,037
Market Lake WMA b b 10,089 8,499 12,250
Mud Lake WMA b b 5,844 4,015
Oxford Slough WPA 500 800 4,608 4,741
MONTANA
Red Rock Lakes NWR 95 195
NEVADAf
Ash Meadows, NWR 32
Carson Lake 2,955 3,636 1,422 1,070 800 980 715 1,550 600 1,700
Franklin Lake 135 244
Humboldt River (Humboldt Sink; 750 500 418 multiple subcolonies)
Humboldt WMA 0 0
Secret Soldier 350
Lockes Pond, Railroad Valley 35 13
Piermont Slough, Spring Valley 40
Quinn Lakes 0 2,070
Quinn River - Hog John Slough 0 2,160 420 and Orovada
Ruby Lake NWRg 130 115
Squaw Valley, Rock Creek 40
Stillwater NWR 325 376 430 717 600 800 235 600 1,100 850 25
Canvasback Club 15 103 25
Withington Slough, Franklin River 200
(Continued on next page)
6.43 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX D. WHITE-FACED IBIS BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Table D (Continued) Estimated Numbers of White-faced Ibis Breeding Pairs in the Intermountain West Joint Venture, 1998-2010.a
STATE/SITE 1998B 1999B 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009C 2010C
OREGON
20 Mile Slough 1,128 Blitzen Valley 2000 Diamond Swamp, Malheur NWR 0 1,729 Ibis Pond 150 5,419 Retherford Lake 1500 Wright’s Pond 0 60 Chewaucan Marshes 200 250 Crump Lake 60 Goose Lake, Garrett Marsh b b 3,004 Greaser Reservoir 22 Knox Pond 500 Malheur Lake 0 Mouth of Blitzen River 100 234 Mouth of Silvies River East 8500 b 45 Malheur NWR , S. Meadow Field 171 North Jones, Frenchglen 217 Paulina Marsh 75 0 Silver Lake, Lake Co. 350 Smokey Lake, Sprague River Valley 100 160 Sycan Marsh 45 200 200 30 Warbler Pond, Derrick Lake 0 1,605 UTAH Interior Cutler Reservoir 0 0 63 Fish Springs NWR - Mallard pond 42 91 35 Utah Lake - Goshen Bay 257 Great Salt Lakej Bear River Club b 973 Bear River MBR b Unit 1C 6,783 2,360 Unit 2D 915 Unit 4C 290 Unit 7 1,819 7,210 Unit 9 1,148 7,282 Farmington Bay WMA South Crystal Unit 400 0 0 5,982 Turpin Unit 1,300 West Kaysville Marsh (Layton Wetlands) 6,194 2,427 2,250 474 Ogden Bay WMA 53 Pintail Flats 762 2,996 Unit 1 1,729 Willard Spur 1,775 WYOMING Cokeville Meadows NWR 0 160 200 0 0 0 0 15 0
6.44 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX D. WHITE-FACED IBIS BREEDING PAIRS IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST
Blank cell – no data available (b) - colony present, numbers of breeding pairs unknown. a. Colonies with estimates of 25 or more breeding pairs in d. Data for 1998 and 1999 from Lower Klamath NWR files, any year 1998–2010 are reported. Survey methodologies courtesy of J. Beckstrand in Ivey et al. (2004); 2003 and included dawn fly-out counts, nest counts from aerial 2004 Lower Klamath NWR data from Shuford et al (2006). All surveys, and line transects. Each adult observed during other years from Klamath NWR Annual Narrative Reports. dawn fly-out counts and single adults observed on-colony e. 1998 and 1999 data for Bear Lake NWR from R. Sjostrom, and/or attending a nest are considered representative of pers comm and Camas NWR from NWR narrative reports in one breeding pair. Correction factors for non-breeders and Ivey et al. (2004); Idaho colony data 2005–2009 from IDFG asynchronous nesting are unavailable. Estimates of breeding Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Annual Reports, Moulton pairs for individual sites may represent the sum of multiple and Sallabanks (2006); Moulton (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010). sub-colonies at that location within a given year. f. Data for Nevada 1998–2008 provided by J. Jeffers, NDOW b. Data for 1998 and 1999 collated in Ivey et al. (2004) unless and collated electronically courtesy of J. Hoskins, USFWS. otherwise noted. Primary data sources: L. Neil, NDOW, P. Bradley NDOW c. Western Colonial Waterbird Survey (WCWS) preliminary g. Data for 1998 and 1999 from J. Mackey, Ruby Lake NWR in results: 2009–2010 courtesy of S. Jones, USFWS Region 6 Ivey et al. (2004). and J. Hoskins, USFWS Region 1. Primary data sources: Shuford W.D. and R.P. Henderson (2010); PRBO (CA); C. h. 1998 and 1999 data from Malheur NWR files, in Ivey et al. Moulton, IDFG (ID); K. Hussey, Klamath Bird Observatory (2004). (OR); J. Ballard, Great Basin Bird Observatory, P. Bradley, i. 1998 and 1999 data for Lake County, OR sites from ODFW NDOW, J. Jeffers, NDOW and (NV); A. Orbana, WFG (WY); data files, in Ivey et al. (2004). C. Wightman, MFWP (MT); J. Neill, (UT - Great Salt Lake j. Great Salt Lake 1998–2001 colony data from Paul et al Ecosystem Project ); E. Parker, Weber State University, (UT - (2000a,b), Paul et al (2001). interior sites). Data for 2000–2008 were compiled by WCWS k. Data from Gary Ivey and Chris Carey, Oregon Department of contributors and presented herein unless otherwise noted. Fish and Wildlife, unpublished data..
6.45 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
1. Southern Oregon And Northeastern California (37.1%), pasture/hay (24.6%), marsh (15.9%), open (SONEC) Waterbird Focal Area wetland (2.3%), and cropland (2.1%). On average, 15.4% of these habitats were flooded April – May when many waterbirds are present and breeding. The composition and amount of flooded habitats varied greatly among the various SONEC sub regions but overall the most abundant flooded habitat during all months was open wetland, comprising 58–78% of the total flooded area followed by marsh (8–18%), pasture/hay (4–11%), grassland (4–17%), and cropland at 3–8% (Fleskes and Gregory 2010). Information about the persistence, amount, distribution and quality of wetland habitat throughout summer and early fall, when wetlands serve as important brood- rearing, post-fledging and migration habitat for both colonial and solitary-nesting waterbirds is lacking. This information would greatly facilitate effective conservation planning for waterbirds. Wetlands in the Klamath and Harney Basins are recognized as one of the most important to wildlife in western North America (Ivey 2000, Shuford et al 2006). These two basins are of regional or continental importance to breeding and migrant populations of waterbirds including Eared, Western, and Clark’s grebe, American White Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Great Egret, White-faced Ibis, Sandhill Crane, Ring-billed Gull; and Caspian, Forster’s, and Black terns (Ivey 2001, Shuford et al 2006). Based on population estimates identified in Ivey and Herziger (2006) or Shuford et al. (2006) the SONEC region hosts the following proportions of Figure 1 Southern Oregon-Northeast California (SONEC) continental populations (Kushlan 2002): 50% of the sub-regions (Fleskes and Gregory 2010) and Central Valley Population of Greater Sandhill Crane, ecoregional extent of intermountain basins. >21% of White-faced Ibis, 12–24% of Clark’s Grebe, Description: The SONEC region encompasses wetlands >10% of Forster’s Tern (70% of BCR 9 estimate), and in southern Oregon, northeastern California, and extreme 15% of California Gull. The entire western population of northwestern Nevada including major wetland complexes Yellow Rail likely breed in SONEC (Shuford and Gardali in the Upper Klamath, Summer Lake, Harney Basin, 2008). Additionally, 90% of the Central Valley Population Warner Valley, Catlow Valley, Goose Lake, and Pueblo of Greater Sandhill Crane and the Pacific Flyway Valley regions of Oregon; and the Lower Klamath, Modoc Population of Lesser Sandhill Crane migrate through the Plateau, Surprise Valley, Honey Lake, and Shasta Valley region annually. In 2009, Shuford and Henderson (2010) regions in northeastern and California and northwestern documented 3,245 pairs of American White Pelicans at 3 Nevada (Fig. 1; Fleskes and Gregory 2010). The lakes, colony sites in the Klamath Basin; 1,109 pairs of Double- marshes, and reservoirs and associated upland habitat in crested Cormorants at 6 sites, and hundreds of breeding SONEC provide habitat for large numbers of waterbirds pairs of Eared Grebes, Great Blue Herons, and Black- including Eared, Red-necked, and Western Grebes; White- crowned Night Herons at various sites within the Basin. faced Ibis, Sandhill Crane, Yellow Rail, Sora, American The breeding season in 2009 followed a three-year period Bittern , and other waterbirds. Fleskes and Gregory (2010) of drought and consequently, low water levels may have characterized the dynamics and distribution of waterbird suppressed breeding waterbird numbers (Shuford and habitat types in the SONEC region in the spring and Henderson 2010). Historic waterbird counts at Malheur early summer, 2002–2003. They documented 13,727 km2 NWR documented thousands of breeding White-faced of potential waterbird habitat comprised of grasslands Ibises, Franklin’s Gulls and Eared Grebes. A survey
6.46 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS in 2009 found 2,500 pairs of ibises and 300 pairs of River (Deltistes luxatus) and shortnose (Chasmistes Franklin’s Gulls (G. Ivey, unpublished data). Malheur also brevirostris) suckers in Upper Klamath Lake and Coho supports high numbers of breeding Sandhill Cranes, with salmon in the Klamath River, coupled with existing 245 pairs recorded in 1999 (Ivey and Herziger 2000). demand for agricultural irrigation water, have led to significant shortages of water available to refuges. Recent Threats: Threats to waterbirds in the SONEC region drought conditions have exacerbated pre-existing water include wetland loss, conversion of upland habitats to uses shortages. Ongoing and predicted declines in snowpack unsuitable for waterbirds, changes in irrigation practices, resulting from climate change may further impact habitat degraded water quality, contamination, and negative management opportunities for waterbirds, particularly in effects of common carp on waterbird food resources, the late summer and fall. particularly in the Harney Basin (Ivey et al. 1998, Ivey 2000). These threats are well documented, and perhaps The proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement is are most extreme in the Klamath Basin. The Klamath intended to settle many of the aquatic resource issues in River Basin encompasses over 9.8 million acres. Akins the Klamath Basin, including providing adequate water (1970) estimated there were originally 142,000 ha of for refuges. As of this writing, this agreement has not wetlands in the upper basin alone. In 1905, the Bureau been implemented and remains uncertain (Shuford 2010). of Reclamation (BOR) initiated the draining and the Additionally, the FWS has filed water rights claims for reclamation of lakebeds for agricultural, water storage, Tule Lake and Lower Klamath NWRs in the Oregon water and flood control purposes. Lower Klamath Lake, Upper rights adjudication process. Resolution of the Klamath Klamath Lake, Tule Lake and the Klamath River were all Basin adjudication is likely several decades in the future. manipulated for BOR water use purposes. Today, less than Flood-irrigated agricultural lands in the SONEC region 25% of historic wetlands remain (NRCS 2006), and only a provide important foraging habitat for many waterbirds. portion of those areas hold water into the fall (Ivey 2001). Not including refuge lands, there were about 499,990 acres Of this remaining wetland acreage, about 17,400 acres of of agricultural land under irrigation in the upper Klamath naturally occurring historic wetlands are protected by state Basin in 2007 with roughly 190,000 acres of this total and Federal agencies and an additional 18,200 wetland included in the BOR Klamath Project (Gannet et al 2007). acres have been restored or are currently under restoration The proportion of waterbirds that use agricultural fields (NRCS 2006). Wetlands managed for migratory birds versus wetlands is unknown, but irrigated fields clearly are maintained largely via drain water deemed surplus to add to the diversity of habitats available to waterbirds and agricultural needs. likely boost the carrying capacity of the area for some Today, lack of secure water rights for wetlands and species (Shuford 2006). Flood irrigation is increasingly streams is the most critical threat to waterbirds in the being challenged because of the relatively large quantities Klamath Basin (Ivey 2001). Although all of the remaining of water required. Many ranchers and farmers are wetlands are individually and collectively important attempting to increase the efficiency of water use through to waterbirds, Clear Lake, Klamath Marsh, Lower conversions to sprinklers and land leveling. Although Klamath, and Tule Lake NWRs; Sycan Marsh and Upper this reduces water consumption, it also reduces the area Klamath Lake are particularly significant to waterbirds and diversity of surface water available to waterbirds (Shuford 2006). Many of these areas are dependent on (D. Mauser pers comm). The trend toward increasing use the BOR Klamath Project for water. The Project does of sprinkler irrigation and reduction in flood irrigation not have a fish or wildlife purpose, thus placing NWRs practices (Kenny et. al., 2009) will result in the loss of last in priority for water. Recent ESA listings of Lost foraging habitat for a wide range of waterbirds.
6.47 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
2. Great Salt Lake Waterbird Focal Area from snowpack-driven river systems to sustain ecological functions. Surface water flows supply roughly 65% of total freshwater to the GSL, with direct precipitation (28%) and groundwater discharge (8%) comprising the remainder. Of the surface water flows, the Bear River supplies the majority of freshwater (55%) followed by the Weber (23%) and Jordan Rivers (14%) (Aldrich and Paul 2002). Significant anthropogenic alterations to the hydrology of the GSL have occurred over the last century. These alterations have influenced the stratification of the GSL into four water regions with differing ecologies driven primarily by salinity gradients: 1) Bear River Bay, 2) Farmington Bay, 3) Gilbert Bay (South Arm), and 4) Gunnison Bay (North Arm). Bear River Bay receives the largest volume of riverine inflow and is the freshest region of the GSL. Submerged (e.g., sago pondweed, widgeon grass) and emergent (e.g., alkali bulrush) hydrophytes are supported here and, depending on lake elevations, an important fishery for piscivorous birds persists. Within Bear River Bay, the Willard Spur is an area that affords a magnificent display of bird diversity and abundance, providing an exceptional contribution to the lake’s avian population. Farmington Bay is the next freshest region but does not provide a submergent vegetation community or fishery due to the elevated salinity levels. It does support an invertebrate community tolerant of brackish conditions which can be important to waterbirds such as Eared Grebe. Figure 2 Great Salt Lake Focal Area. Gilbert Bay (South Arm) is the largest expanse of water on the lake and salinities often exceed 100 ppt (or 10%). Description: The Great Salt Lake (GSL) is a distinctive Halophile macroinvertebrates flourish in this region of physiographic and ecological feature within the the lake and produce millions of pounds of potential food Intermountain West, one of several terminal lake systems for birds such as Eared Grebe, adept at exploiting this in the Great Basin and the fourth largest terminal food resource. Islands in Gilbert Bay provide critically lake in the world. The GSL ecosystem encompasses important nesting areas to waterbirds such as California approximately 3,000 mi2 consisting of a mixture of saline Gulls. Gunnison Bay (North Arm) is segregated from the and freshwater lakes, uplands, wetlands, and drainage South Arm of the lake by the Southern Pacific Railroad stems which are all used by waterbirds. The GSL is causeway, which has essentially eliminated hydrologic recognized regionally, nationally, and hemispherically for exchange between the other lake regions. Consequently, its extensive wetland resources and profound significance salinity levels in the North Arm can exceed 240 ppt, to migratory bird populations. These values result from a or >7 times that of sea water. Although these dramatic high diversity of aquatic environments, extensive wetland hypersaline conditions limit use of this region by complexes, dynamic water levels, and the geographic waterbirds, Gunnison Island provides critical and secure setting and large scale of the system. The GSL lies within nesting habitat for American white-pelicans, which fly a predominantly xeric environment receiving an average > 60 miles round trip to feeding sites (Aldrich and Paul of 15 inches of moisture near the Wasatch Front but <10 2002). inches on the west side of the lake. Consequently, the GSL system provides an important “oasis” effect for waterbirds Wetlands of the GSL have long been recognized for their in the Intermountain West (Aldrich and Paul 2002). importance to migratory birds. The majority of wetlands in the GSL system are primarily associated with the The GSL is a terminal lake and it, along with its historic deltas of the Bear, Weber, and Jordan Rivers along associated wetlands, rely predominantly on water inflows the eastern portion of the lake. Diversity, extent, and
6.48 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS abundance are driven primarily by availability of fresh significant areas are managed by NGOs (>3,000 acres) water and surface elevation of the GSL. Surface elevations including The Nature Conservancy and National Audubon of GSL are extremely dynamic in response to long-term Society or entities such as Kennecott Utah Copper’s precipitation cycles as well as seasonal variability in Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve (3,800 acres). The dynamic evapotranspiration and inflow rates. Both of these factors mosaic of lake, managed and unmanaged wetland habitats, play important roles in the ecology and productivity and associated uplands results in the GSL supporting one of wetlands. For example, dramatic increases in GSL of the most diverse and abundant waterbird populations lake levels occurred in the mid-1980s due to significant in the Intermountain West. Publicly and privately increases in multi-year regional precipitation rates. This managed wetland complexes are paramount to meeting the resulted in the GSL inundating approximately 80% of biological needs of a diverse group of waterbirds here. wetlands in the system and killing essentially all wetland The GSL system is host to 16 species of colonial vegetation through increased salinity. Although the GSL nesting waterbirds, some representing the largest single began to recede in the late 1980s it has taken nearly two populations known to occur in the world and others decades for the wetland resources to approach the extent a significant proportion of the Pacific Flyway. Some and diversity observed prior to the 1980s (Aldrich and notable examples include Eared Grebe, California gull, Paul 2002). Conversely, sustained drought conditions American White-Pelican, and White-faced Ibis. Eared in the early 2000s resulted in the some of the lowest Grebes occur at the GSL during all seasons except mid- lake elevations on record and dramatic reductions in winter, bur the primary significance of the GSL for this available wetland habitat, up to 75% in some management species occurs during migration. Approximately half of complexes (Olson 2009, Downard 2010). Seasonally, the known continental population of eared grebes stages GSL levels change in response to evapotranspiration and at the GSL during fall migration. Where they undergo a inflow rates which produce san annual high during May– critical molt event and are rendered flightless for 35–40 July and a low during October–November. Consequently, days. During this time they forage extensively on an winter and spring increases in lake levels can inundate abundant supply of halophile invertebrates, primarily tens of thousands of acres in most years and hundreds of brine shrimp. Consequently, the GSL and its halophile thousands of acres in exceptionally wet years (Aldrich and invertebrate population is of continental significance to Paul 2002). Although this variability creates challenges the conservation of this species (Belovsky et al. 2011). for natural resource managers and planners, it is an important driver in the long-term productivity of these Although several species of gulls (Franklin’s, Ring- wetland resources. billed, and California) breed in the GSL system, the California Gull population at GSL is the largest in the The significant presence of private, state, and federally world, comprising approximately 34% of the continental managed wetland complexes is testament to the profound population. Post-breeding estimates of Franklin’s Gull wetland and avian resources at GSL. Sportsman’s at GSL may comprise as much as 27% of the continental groups began forming hunting clubs in the 1890s to population. California Gull populations at GSL have more protect waterfowl habitat, and up to 50,000 acres are than tripled since the early 1980s. This population growth incorporated into hunting clubs around the GSL today. is attributed primarily to a combination of highly available During the 1920s and 1930s the state developed several natural and human food resources within close proximity waterfowl management areas around the GSL including to anthropogenically enhanced nest sites such as dikes and Public Shootings Grounds, Ogden Bay, Farmington levees at wildlife management areas, solar evaporation Bay, and Locomotive Springs. The Utah Division of ponds, and sewage lagoons. Wildlife Resources currently manages eight Waterfowl Management Areas consisting of approximately 80,000 The GSL also supports a significant portion of the acres around the margins of GSL. Included in these are continental population of American White Pelicans. Gunnison and Hat Islands within the GSL, acquired by During the GSL Waterbird Survey coordinated by the Utah UDWR to protect nesting waterbird colonies (Aldrich Division of Wildlife Resources, over 85,000 individuals and Paul 2002). Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge was were counted during one 10-day survey period in established in 1929 on the historic delta of the Bear September of 1997 (Paul and Manning 2002). Gunnison River in response to substantial losses in wetlands Island serves as one of the largest breeding colonies from irrigation diversions and to dramatic losses of in North America with its highest recorded breeding waterfowl to botulism observed in that decade. Today population exceeding 20,000. This peak represents about BRMBR encompasses approximately 75,000 acres. Other 16% of the continent-wide total. Currently, Gunnison
6.49 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Island is the only continental colony to show an increasing exceeded many renewable natural resource supplies (Utah population over the past three decades (Neill et al. 2009). Population and Environment Coalition 2007). Increased Size and viability of this colony is largely a reflection demands and pressures on freshwater resources are of the greater GSL ecosystem, especially shallow-water, inevitable to accommodate future human growth. For carp-dominated fisheries. Before carp and other non- example, although many water users on the Bear River native fishes such as gizzard shad were inmtroduced, believe the system is fully allocated, the UDWR has been small native chubs and shiners were found in the system directed to develop an additional 275,000 acre feet of and supported historic populations of pelicans but likely water from the Bear River to support this rapid population not to the extent the large freshwater impoundments on growth (Downard 2010). This development equates to management areas support today (Aldrich and Paul 2002). >60% of the current annual water allocation to Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge. Over the past decade BRMBR The GSL hosts more than 30,000 nesting White-faced has consistently experienced a deficit in water allocation Ibis, on average, and until recently harbored the largest between July and September (Downard 2010). Further breeding population in North America. Hence, the GSL water developments in the Bear River may compromise supports at least 25% of the continental population, with the refuges ability to meet wetland management peak estimates approaching 40% (Paul and Manning objectives. The myriad of saline lake systems around the 2008). These birds typically select emergent marshes, world whose ecological integrity has been significantly often keying in on hardstem bulrush or robust alkali compromised, or has collapsed, due to redistribution bulrush as nesting sites. They nest in colonies that can of water resources provides poignant examples of the vary dramatically in size and are frequently associated challenges GSL natural resource managers face (Williams with other colonial nesting waterbirds such as Franklin’s 2002). Gull, Black-crowned Night Heron, Forster’s Tern, and Snowy Egret. White-faced Ibis exhibit a nomadic and Shifts in climatic patterns will undoubtedly impact human opportunistic nesting behavior within the GSL system water use patterns and wetland resources in the GSL and between other Great Basin wetland sites due to system. Current stresses on the GSL ecosystem may be the variability in the amount and distribution of their exacerbated by the influences of climate change: models preferred nesting habitat. For example, when the GSL for the Intermountain West predict a warmer climate flooded the adjacent marsh complexes in the mid-1980s and a shift in precipitation patterns to wetter winters White-faced Ibis populations were substantially reduced and drier summers (Reichler 2009). Reductions in water in the GSL but other sites such as Cache Valley in the equivalent snowpack, an earlier peak snowpack, and an Bear River Watershed and other sites throughout the earlier snowmelt in the GSL watershed have already been Great Basin such as the Carson/Lahontan complex in documented (Bedford and Douglas 2008). Earlier spring NV, Malheur Lake in Oregon, and wetland complexes in runoff, reduced spring flows, and a greater human demand the Upper Snake River of Idaho experienced increases in for water in the summer will likely influence the amount, available nesting habitat and breeding ibis (Aldrich and location, and value of habitats for waterbirds and all Paul 2002). wetland dependent wildlife that rely on the GSL system. Threats: The single greatest threat to the aquatic and Although the availability of water is of primary concern wetland habitats that waterbirds rely upon in the GSL by natural resource managers, the quality of water system is, and will continue to be, the availability of resources is also of significant concern. Because the freshwater supplies. This threat emanates from two GSL and associated wetlands lie at the terminus of the primary sources: 1) anthropogenic changes in water watershed with no outlets and is closely associated with use and distribution, and 2) long-term shifts in climatic major industrial and metropolitan areas, the accumulation patterns. The GSL lies immediately adjacent to one of of a multitude of environmental contaminants is of the largest metropolitan areas in the Intermountain West. concern. High concentrations of several contaminants More than 70% of Utah’s population (2.5 million) lives (e.g., mercury, selenium, PCBs) have been identified in along the Wasatch Front and within the GSL watershed; aquatic resources and wildlife within the GSL system this population has more than tripled since the 1950s. (Wingert 2008, Naftz et al. 2008; Vest et al. 2009; Current growth estimates project this population will Conover and Vest 2009a,b). Investigations are currently nearly double by 2050, exceeding national and global underway to more fully understand the potential impacts human population growth rate projections. Some studies to waterbirds. suggest current population levels in Utah have already
6.50 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Invasive and exotic species also pose significant threats targets for habitats and water resources that are expressly to the wetland values and functions relative to waterbirds linked to the population demands of waterbirds and in the GSL system. Of particular concern is the dramatic other wetland dependent wildlife will be important for spread of common reed (Phragmites australis) over the informing policy and management decisions within the past two decades. This invasive plant has proliferated GSL system. throughout the GSL system, forming dense monotypic 3. Bear River Basin Waterbird Focal Area stands that significantly limit availability and value of many wetland units for a host of wetland-dependent birds. Management of this invasive is a high priority for many private and public managed wetland units and will require coordinated and sustained efforts by partners in GSL. Prior to the 1970s, several efficient nest predators such as red fox and raccoons were absent from the GSL system but exist in very high densities today. These nest predators can have substantial impacts to breeding waterfowl at the GSL and could similarly impact breeding waterbirds (Frey and Conover 2006). Further reductions in available nesting sites could exacerbate predation impacts to waterbird survival and recruitment in this system. Exotic fish species in the GSL provide a mixed-bag of resource management issues. Exotic fish such as carp can have devastating impacts to wetland plant and invertebrate communities which several waterbird species rely upon (e.g., White-faced Ibis, secretive marsh birds). However, these fecund fish populations also currently provide a substantial forage base for piscivorous waterbirds (Aldrich and Paul 2002). Consequently, exotic fisheries will likely continue to be a complex resource management issue at GSL.
The continued urban development and changes in land/ Figure 3 Bear River Basin. water-use in the GSL system may directly impact several Map courtesy of USFWS Region 6: Bear River Basin waterbird species. Upland open-space buffers have Conservation Area been converted from pastures and agriculture use to Description: Located in southeastern Idaho, western subdivisions at an alarming rate. At GSL and other areas, Wyoming, and northeastern Utah the Bear River Basin flood-irrigated pastures and alfalfa fields provide an (Basin) encompasses a network of wetlands of particular important and unique foraging habitat for White-faced significance to waterbirds including: Bear River Migratory Ibis and other waterbirds such as Franklin’s Gull. This Bird Refuge in Utah; Bear Lake NWR and Oxford Slough flood irrigation provides an abundance of earthworms Waterfowl Production Area in southeastern Idaho; and and other invertebrates that rise to the soil surface and Cokeville Meadows NWR in western Wyoming (Fig. 3). thus become available to foraging birds (Aldrich and The Bear River originates in the Uinta Mountains of Utah Paul 2002). However, economic pressures to convert to at an elevation of approximately 11,000 ft. It courses pressurized sprinkler irrigation or conversion to urban use northward through the western edge of Wyoming and will degrade this valuable resource for waterbirds. southeastern Idaho then loops southward crossing back In summary, a diversity of short- and long-term threats to into Utah, where it empties into the Great Salt Lake about the GSL system which will impact waterbird populations 90 miles northwest of its origin. The 500-mile long river at a regional and continental scale. Therefore it will be drains the Bear River Basin, comprising 7,500 mi2 of imperative that private and public wetland managers mountain and valley lands that are entirely enclosed by have the capacity, infrastructure, and resources necessary mountains, with no external drainage outlet (Utah Water to optimize the mitigation of these threats through Research Laboratory [UWRL] 2010). management, restoration, and enhancement of wetland and aquatic habitats. Additionally, identifying conservation
6.51 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Annual precipitation in the Basin ranges from about Bear River. Multiple threats to Refuge water supply and 9–60 inches reflecting highly variable conditions among security include water loss from upstream withdrawals arable valleys and surrounding mountain ranges. Mean for agricultural, municipal and industrial users and events annual precipitation is 8 inches with most of this received related to climate change including low snowpack levels, as winter snowfall in the high elevation forests (UWRL and annual drought and flood conditions (Downard 2010). 2010, Downard 2010). The landscape is predominantly The refuge intensively manages a large and complex dry with about 60% of the area in arid-land shrub, grass, system of dikes and canals to impound freshwater and and herbaceous cover types. Open water and emergent exclude salt water to benefit waterbirds, waterfowl, and wetlands comprise about 4.5% of the Basin; rangeland shorebirds. But even with aggressive management, up to and agriculture account for the majority (78.3%) of land 75% of wetland units dry up due to low summer flows. use (UWRL 2010). The lower reaches of the river are The population of Box Elder County, Utah where BRMBR used extensively for irrigation in the farming valleys of is located increased by 17% between 2000 and 2010 (U.S. southeastern Idaho and northern Utah. The Bear River is Census Bureau, 2011). This growth represents increasing the largest tributary to the Great Salt Lake and the lower competition for land and water resources in a region 10 miles near its delta are protected as part of the Bear already experiencing water shortfalls from drought and River Migratory Bird Refuge. escalating water use. Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge (BRMBR): BRMBR During the irrigation season (May 1-September 30), lies within the Great Salt Lake (GSL) basin and is the water in the Bear River flowing into the Refuge considered part of the GSL focal area. However, because consists mainly of irrigation return flows, and pollution of BRMBRs reliance on the Bear River and association from agricultural pesticides and toxins is an ongoing with the Bear River Basin Conservation Area a description concern. Following historic floods of the 1980’s, a non- of its value to the avian resources of the Bear River Basin native invasive subspecies of common reed (Phragmites is warranted here. Established in 1928 and encompassing australis) spread rapidly into the BRMBR. This continuing approximately 74,000 acres, the BRMBR is the oldest threat was addressed with a specific management plan for refuge located along the Bear River. It encompasses more invasive species control but it will be many years before than 41,000 acres of freshwater marsh and open water this threat is abated (Olson 2007). habitats that are managed in a series of 25 impoundments Bear Lake NWR: Bear Lake is a 1,090 mi2 natural for the benefit of migratory birds (Olson et al 2004). freshwater lake that straddles the border of Idaho and BRMBR marshes are the largest freshwater component Utah at an elevation of nearly 6,000 ft. The Refuge lies at of the Great Salt Lake ecosystem. The unique location, the northern tip of Bear Lake and encompasses the Mud juxtaposition of wetlands within an arid landscape, Lake wetland complex. Spring runoff water from the Bear and abundance of aquatic food resources on this refuge River is diverted into Mud Lake which serves as a filter provide critical nesting, feeding and migratory stop-over before the water is released into Bear Lake and stored habitat for waterbirds in both the Pacific and Central for future agricultural use (Downard 2010). The refuge is Flyways. Breeding White-faced Ibis, Franklin’s Gull and managed as system of dikes and marsh management units Black Tern; and foraging American White Pelican are comprising 18,000 acres of hardstem bulrush, cattail, and priority species for management on BRMBR lands (Olson open water habitat with nesting islands and surrounding et al 2004). wet meadows (National Audubon Society 2011, UWRL From 1956 to 2002 Olson et al (2004) estimated an 2011). The Refuge also cultivates nearby fields to provide average of 5,286 pairs of White-faced Ibis on the BRMBR. food crops of barley and alfalfa for Sandhill Cranes and In 2009 J. Neill (pers com) estimated about 10,775 pairs other waterbirds. of ibis, 7,000 pairs of Franklin’s Gull, 1,900 pairs of Bear Lake NWR has become increasingly important to Eared Grebe, and lesser numbers of Black-crowned Night breeding White-faced Ibis in recent years supporting Heron, and Cattle Egrets nesting on refuge lands in Bear 12,729 pairs in 2008 and 9576 in 2010, likely the largest River Bay. The BRMBR also serves as an important colony in the west (Moulton 2009; M. Moulton, pers com). feeding area for American White Pelicans that breed at These numbers far exceed those documented by Bear Great Salt Lake. Lake NWR staff 1985-1999 when ibis colonies averaged Threats: Water availability and security are significant 1,645 nesting pairs (Earnst et al 1998). In 2008 and 2010 threats to waterbird habitat at the BRMBR, in part due to an estimated 29,326 and 11,750 pairs of Franklin’s Gulls the location of the refuge at the downstream end of the nested on Bear Lake NWR (Moulton 2009, Moulton pers
6.52 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS com) again far surpassing numbers documented in the foraging habitat for Sandhill Cranes, Franklin’s Gulls, and early 1990’s (Trost and Gerstell 1994). Other breeding White-faced Ibis (IDFG 2005; NAS 2011). Meadows are waterbirds include Sandhill Crane, Great Blue Heron, hayed to provide short grass for waterbird feeding areas Snowy Egret; Caspian and Black terns; and Western, along with managed alfalfa and grain fields. The marsh is Clarks’ and Eared Grebes. This wetland complex also allowed to fluctuate naturally and may dry out in drought may contain the densest breeding population of American years. Moulton (pers com) documented about 4,740 pairs Bitterns in Idaho (NAS 2011). Bear Lake NWR is an of White-faced Ibis and 6,860 pairs of Franklins Gulls in important fall staging area for Greater Sandhill Cranes, breeding colonies at Oxford Slough WPA in 2010. These generally supporting 300–500 individuals. numbers far exceed those documented in the mid-1980s and mid-1990s when ibis colonies were documented at Threats: Water for wetland management at the BRNWR about 500 to 1,050 pairs (Earnst et al 1998). About 300- is relatively secure because flows from the Bear River 400 Sandhill Cranes use this area to feed and rest during are diverted through the NWR before entering Bear Lake fall migration. for later agricultural uses and the Bear River Compact requires no net loss of water into Bear Lake from any Threats: Other than some concern for introduced future upstream developments (Downard 2010). Threats noxious weeds, few apparent threats to waterbirds or to water supplies at this site stem from climate change waterbird habitat occur at Oxford Slough. However, and the possibility of significant reductions in snowpack changes in agricultural and land-use practices in adjacent which could severely diminish water supply to wetlands in habitats may threaten foraging values for waterbirds or the Bear River Basin. compromise hydrology. Concerns for water quality focus largely on levels of Cokeville Meadows NWR: Located in western Wyoming phosphorous, pesticides, and sediments (NAS 2011). this relatively new refuge has an approved boundary that Muddy water from carp feeding and silt from the Bear encompasses 26,200 acres along a 20 mile stretch of the River have reduced water quality, resulting in a decline Bear River. To date, 9,260 acres have been purchased or in wildlife use (Downard 2010, NAS 2011). Management protected with conservation easements (USFWS 2011). of introduced carp and noxious weeds is ongoing, and The refuge includes large contiguous tracts of high diking and strategic timing of water intake are measures elevation (6,200 ft) wet meadow habitat interspersed implemented to reduce the influx of nutrients and with marshes and sloughs. Adjacent agricultural fields sediments into refuge wetlands (NAS 2011). provide a supplemental food supply of small grains and alfalfa used by migrating Sandhill Crane, Franklin’s Between 2006 and 2010, approximately 5,100 acres of Gull and other waterbirds (NAS 2011, USFWS 2011). agricultural lands were converted from flood to sprinkler Breeding waterbirds include Sandhill Crane, White-faced irrigation in the four counties in Idaho encompassed Ibis, American Bittern and Black Tern. This portion of partially or entirely within the Bear River Basin (Bear the Bear River Basin in Wyoming was identified as the Lake, Franklin, Bannock, and Caribou Counties). Flood highest ranked priority wetland landscape by the Wyoming irrigated agricultural lands surrounding colonial waterbird Joint Ventures Steering Committee’s Wyoming Wetlands nesting sites serve as important foraging areas (Trost Conservation Strategy (Copeland 2010). and Gerstell 1984; Ivey and Herziger 2006; Bray and Klebenow 1988). Conversion from flood to sprinkler Threats: Threats include invasive species (grasses), rural irrigation in the surrounding landscape may reduce the residential development, and some grazing practices forage base for breeding and migrating waterbirds in (Copeland et al. 2010). Restoration and improvements southeastern Idaho. in the irrigation infrastructure are needed to improve management capacity (Downard 2010, NAS 2011). Both Oxford Slough Waterfowl Production Area (WPA): grazing and haying practices require management to This 18,800 acre site is a deep, hardstem bulrush marsh, ensure the extent and timing of these activities do not interspersed with open water and surrounded by areas negatively impact breeding waterbirds. This refuge holds of playa, saltgrass flats, native wet meadow, and some secure surface and ground water rights sufficient for cropland (IDFG 2005). The WPA provides valuable wetland management (Downard 2010).
6.53 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
4. Southeastern Idaho Focal Area to waterbirds at the landscape scale. Although it is not possible to estimate or compare population sizes or trends, waterbird surveys have documented large numbers of Sora, American Bittern and other secretive marsh birds at wetland complexes in southeast Idaho (Moulton and Sallabanks 2006; Moulton 2007, 2008, and 2009). Wetlands of particular significance to waterbirds include: Mud Lake WMA, Market Lake WMA, Camas NWR, American Falls Reservoir, Minidoka NWR and Blackfoot Reservoir located in the Snake River Basalt and Northwestern Basin and Range Ecosections of Idaho; and Grays Lake NWR a montane wetland system in Idaho’s Overthrust Mountains Ecological Section. For the purpose of describing IWJV Focal Areas and threats, these wetlands are grouped and described below by ecosection as defined by the Idaho Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (ICWCS; IDFG 2005) to place them in ecological context with their surroundings. Snake River Basalts and Northwestern Basin and Range Ecosection Wetlands: Mud Lake WMA, Market Lake WMA, American Falls Reservoir, Camas NWR, Minidoka NWR and Blackfoot Reservoir Waterbird habitat in the Snake River Basalts and Northwestern Basin and Range Ecosections lie in an arid landscape dominated by shrub-steppe habitat and agricultural lands (~77%) with only about 1% of the area Figure 4 Southeast Idaho Focal Area in open water or wetland habitat (IDFG 2005). About half of this ecological region is managed rangeland and In addition to the Bear River Basin, wetlands throughout 25% is dryland or sprinkler-irrigated agriculture (IDFG southeastern Idaho are recognized as important breeding 2005). Within the Northwest Basin and Range section, habitat for colonial waterbirds (Peterson 1977; Trost and 3% is flood-irrigated land whereas 16% is under flood Gerstell 1994; Austin and Pyle 2004, Ivey and Herziger irrigation in the Snake River Basalts Ecosection. Flooded 2006). In recent years, this region has become increasingly agricultural fields provide important foraging habitat important to breeding White-faced Ibis and Franklin’s for many breeding and migrating waterbirds and are an Gulls. Wetland complexes in southeastern Idaho supported important habitat component used by large numbers of 40% of all breeding White-faced Ibis in the Intermountain waterbirds during the breeding season and migration. West. When combined with wetland complexes at the Bear Trost and Gerstell (1994) identified flood-irrigation in River Migratory Bird Refuge and Great Salt Lake in Utah, the Snake River Plains as the single most important factor this bi-state region collectively supports about 65% of all leading to the increase in numbers of breeding White- ibis breeding in the Intermountain West in 2009–2010. faced Ibis in the early 1990’s. Reservoirs in southeast Idaho support nesting colonies of American White Pelican and Double-crested Cormorant. Market Lake and Mud Lake WMAs: These wetland These areas also provide a substantial amount of foraging complexes are located in Jefferson County. Market Lake habitat for pelicans from nesting colonies at the Great Salt consists of 17,000 acres of bulrush/cattail marshes and Lake and migrating pelicans from Utah, Montana, and wetland meadows surrounded by sagebrush/grassland Wyoming (IDFG 2009). Ongoing investigations have also desert, with approximately 200 acres of agricultural fields revealed post-breeding movements of banded White-faced and 0.75 miles of Snake River riparian area. All of the Ibis and American White Pelicans from natal colonies in source water to the wetlands comes from springs, seeps, Idaho to foraging sites on the Great Salt Lake (C. Moulton and artesian wells. Mud Lake WMA is an open water lake pers com) underscoring the connectivity of these sites surround by bulrush wetlands, willow wetlands, salt-grass filled sloughs, and grass/sagebrush uplands. About 60%
6.54 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS of the 8,850 acre area is open water, 15% is emergent Camas NWR: About 50% of this Refuge consists of lakes, wetlands, and the remainder is a mix of upland habitats. ponds, and marshlands; the remainder is grass, sagebrush Mud Lake is used as a water storage reservoir for the uplands, meadows, and farm fields (USFWS 2011). local canal company, and has seasonally fluctuating water Primary habitats are cattail and hardstem bulrush marsh, levels. However, water levels are always sufficient for and sagebrush steppe and bunchgrass uplands (IDFG supporting large numbers of waterbirds throughout the 2005). Dense willow and cottonwood stands line stream summer (NAS 2011). sides. An extensive system of canals, dikes, wells, ponds, and water control structures allows water manipulatation Moulton (2009) documented 12,250 pairs of White-faced for the benefit of wildlife. Colonial breeders include Eared Ibis and 14,426 pairs of Franklin’s Gull nesting in mixed, Grebe, Western and Clark’s Grebe, Great Blue Heron, scattered colonies throughout impoundment areas at Black-crowned Night Heron, Snowy Egret, Great Egret, Market Lake WMA. Mud Lake WMA also hosts mixed Cattle Egret, and Franklin’s Gull. Solitary breeders on colonies of White-faced Ibis (4,016 pairs) and Franklin’s site include Pied-billed Grebe, Horned Grebe, American Gull (13,074 pairs;C. Moulton pers com). In the fall, Bittern, and Sora. Sandhill Cranes use this area as a fall the Market Lake is a staging area for approximately 50 staging site (USFWS 2011, NAS 2011). American White Pelicans, and pelicans forage and rest at Mud Lake WMA spring through fall (NAS 2011). Other Threats: The water supply at Camas has decreased nesting waterbirds at these sites include Black-crowned over the years due to natural drought and agricultural Night-heron, Great Blue Heron, Snowy Egret and Cattle development, which have lowered the water table. Camas Egrets; Eared, Western, and Clark’s Grebes; Forester’s Creek and Beaver Creek do not flow long enough to Tern and Ring-billed gull. provide as much water as they once did and cannot sustain the refuge’s wetlands at certain times of the year, through Threats: At Market Lake, the water output of springs is wells and ditches have been constructed to provide only 25% that of the output in the 1970’s (IDFG 2005). additional water. Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) is Idaho Department of Fish and Game is investigating the present. Upstream channelization has increased sediment potential to purchase water in the reservoir system for flow onto the refuge; increased groundwater pumping in use in the marshes. Noxious weed species (e.g. Canada agricultural lands upslope from the refuge have lowered thistle, Musk thistle, Russian knapweed, field bindweed, the water table, drying up some of the marsh units. and white top) are present at both WMAs and abatement Further reductions of water supply will have significant measures underway include biological, mechanical, and consequences for waterbird habitat. (IDFG 2005; USFWS chemical methods (IDFG 2005). Increasing public use 2011). at Mud WMA and demands for additional and different recreational activities could increase disturbance to Minidoka NWR: The Minidoka Dam and power plant waterbirds in the future. on the Snake River was constructed in the early 1900s to provide water for irrigation and hydroelectric power. Between 2000–2010 the human population in Jefferson The refuge includes about 80 miles of shoreline around County, Idaho grew 36.5%. With population growth Lake Walcott, from Minidoka Dam upstream about 25 comes increasing demand for land and water resources for miles. Open water, marshes and mudflats provide habitat housing and other municipal, agricultural, and recreational for an assortment of waterbirds. Large, shallow beds of uses. To what extent waterbirds use the surrounding submergent vegetation support warm water fish. These agricultural lands is unknown, but many of the species aquatic resources provide food for colonial nesting found at these WMAs utilize agricultural croplands for waterbirds including one of two American White Pelican feeding. Conversions of agricultural lands to housing and colonies in Idaho, and colonies of Double-Crested other uses could affect the sustainability of large colonies Cormorant, Western and Clark’s Grebe, Great Blue Heron, of ibis and gulls at these sites in the future. Further, Snowy Egret, and Black-crowned Night-heron. Following continued conversion of flood-irrigated agricultural lands a period of absence (1950–1979) apparently due to in the Henry’s Fork corridor to sprinkler irrigation could disturbance from recreational boating, pelican numbers ultimately eliminate the foraging habitat that sustains on the refuge increased from 1980–2010. IDFG (2009) white-faced ibis populations nesting on Market Lake reported pelicans numbered about 400 breeding birds WMA. in 2002 and increased to about 4,000 breeding birds in 2008. Moulton (pers comm) reported 700 breeding pairs of pelicans in 2010. Portions of the refuge are closed to
6.55 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS public access during the nesting season to protect the American Falls Reservoir: The reservoir is about 22 colonies from disturbance. miles long, 6 miles wide at its widest point, and covers approximately 58,000 acres at full capacity. This is an Threats: Lake Walcott is currently zoned to prevent irrigation reservoir with some associated wetland habitat. boating disturbance to waterbird colony areas. There The surrounding area is predominantly sagebrush and is a potential for disturbance to nesting and molting agricultural lands. The reservoir provides shallow water birds if the boating area is expanded. The population in feeding areas and mudflats for foraging shorebirds and surrounding Minidoka County has remained relatively waterbirds. Taylor et al. (1989) described thousands of unchanged 2000–2010 (U.S. Census 2011) thus threats post-breeding ibis feeding on chironomid fly larvae and a associated with increasing demands on lands and water small oligochaete in the Springfield Bottoms, an extensive resources do not appear to be of concern at this time. mudflat where the Snake River enters the reservoir. Blackfoot Reservoir: This open water reservoir includes This shoreline constantly changed as water levels in the several islands vegetated with sagebrush, willow riparian reservoir dropped during the summer and fall, offering a habitat, and surrounding sagebrush uplands. Gull Island continual supply of soft substrate for feeding waterbirds. (6 acres) supports the largest nesting colony of American Gull Island on American Falls Reservoir is the breeding White Pelicans in Idaho (1,400 nests in 2005) and large site of the largest California and Ring-billed Gull colony nesting colonies of Double-crested Cormorant (~300 in the state (NAS 2011). There were 7,455 California Gull pairs) and California Gull (~6,000 pairs;NAS 2011). Other nests in 2005 and 8,361 in 2006 and almost 800 pairs waterbirds present include nesting colonies Great Blue of Double-crested Cormorants (Moulton and Sallabanks Heron, Black-crowned Night-heron, and Snowy Egret. 2006, Moulton 2007). Other breeding waterbirds found Fish species present include stocked rainbow trout and here include: Eared Grebe, Western and Clark’s Grebe, native Yellowstone cutthroat trout (YCT; Oncorhynchus Great Blue Heron, Black-crowned Night Heron, Snowy clarkii bouvieri). Egret, Great Egret, Cattle Egret, Forster’s Tern, and Black Threats: Reservoir levels can be drastically lowered for Tern. irrigation needs which exposes waterbirds to predation Threats: Pesticide and nutrient runoff from surrounding and increased disturbance, conditions that are exacerbated agricultural lands is of concern. Additionally, populations during drought or low water years. Fisheries managers in the surrounding counties increased 2000-2010 with are concerned about pelican and cormorant impacts on Bannock and Bingham County populations growing nearly stocked rainbow trout, and on the native YCT, a species 10% (U.S Census Bureau 2011). Increasing recreational of special concern in the state. Pelican predation on use may result in increased disturbance to waterbirds. YCT that migrate out of Blackfoot Reservoir into the Blackfoot River is a significant concern to IDFG and low Overthrust Mountains Ecological Section Wetland: Grays flows in the Blackfoot River increases the loss of YCT to Lake NWR pelican predation (IDFG 2009). Fisheries managers have Mountain ranges and valleys with scattered lakes and adjusted the timing of fish stocking and have implemented montane wet meadows characterize this region. Timber various methods of bird deterrence (hazing with zon guns, harvest, livestock grazing, and recreation are the primary cracker shells, airboat, and flagged lines across the river) land uses. The majority of precipitation falls as snow in to exclude pelicans during the sensitive YCT migration the winter. period (IDFG 2009). Limited lethal take of pelicans (13 individuals in 2006 and 10 in 2008) was implemented in Grays Lake NWR: At 22,000 acres, Grays Lake is conjunction with non-lethal hazing program in an effort one of the largest hardstem bulrush marshes in North to increase the effectiveness of the hazing and to reduce America. It is located in the Caribou Range of the Rocky impacts to the fishery. Mountains on the western edge of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The high elevation marshland (6,400 ft) is IDFG has established a population five-year average surrounded by wet meadows and grasslands. Water sources population objective of 700 pelicans at Blackfoot are from snowmelt and numerous springs. Grays Lake Reservoir. Consultation with the USFWS to determine the NWR encompasses most of this habitat (19,500 acres) but feasibility, scope and duration of continued lethal control water levels cannot be manipulated due to water rights as one means to help minimize pelican predation on YCT and agreements with the Fort Hall Irrigation District and is ongoing. local landowners (USFWS 2011). Water discharge has been controlled by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for use in
6.56 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Fort Hall Irrigation Project since the early 1920s. Clark’s 5. Upper and Middle Rio Grande Valleys, Colorado and Cut, a man-made channel completed in 1924, drains into New Mexico the Blackfoot Reservoir via Meadow Creek. The refuge is considered prime habitat for Sandhill Cranes. During fall staging and migration, Greater Sandhill Cranes congregate in numbers up to 1,200 individuals and this site supports one of the largest breeding populations of Greater Sandhill Cranes in the world (~250 pairs). Franklin’s gulls nest in large colonies in bulrush habitat, along with lesser numbers of White-faced Ibis and grebes, bitterns and rails. There were 6,037 pairs of breeding ibises in 2010, 16,000 pairs of Franklin’s gulls, and 5,775 pairs of Ring-billed gulls in 2009. Threats: Drought conditions and climate change may pose threats to the water supply at this site since water sources are from snowmelt and springs and water security for wildlife purposes is lacking. The Fort Hall Irrigation District has priority for water use. The Shoshone-Bannock tribes receive the majority of the water controlled by the district followed by privately owned lands. The timing and amount of water drained from this site is determined by the District with irrigation use being the priority rather than water management for waterbirds or other wildlife. The population in Bonneville County, Idaho increased 26.3% from 2000 to 2010 (U.S. Census Bureau 2011) which may increase demands for surface and ground water resources to meet domestic and industrial uses.
Figure 5 Upper (San Luis Valley) and Middle Rio Grande Corridor
Colorado.—The Upper Rio Grande Basin is located in south-central Colorado and encompasses about 7,700 mi2 (San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus Area Committee 2000). Headwaters of the Rio Grande, Colorado’s Closed Basin and the San Luis Valley comprise the Basin. The area is bounded on the north and west by the Continental Divide, on the east by the Sangre de Cristo range, and the south by the New Mexico state line. The San Luis Valley lies at the headwaters of the Rio Grande River in the Basin and Range Province. Although they are widely scattered in this dry area, wetlands support dense waterbird populations. Many of Colorado’s largest and richest ponds, lakes, and marshes lie in the San Luis Valley. This region has an economy based on irrigation agriculture, tourism, livestock production, and mining. Cropland comprises about 9% of the basin, while an additional 4.3% of the basin exists as irrigated hay meadow. The human
6.57 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS population reflects the general decline occurring in rural breeding pair habitat and summer brood habitat. Water is areas; declining from a high of 49,000 in l940 to 42,000 provided through numerous artesian wells and pumps, and at the turn of the century (San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus canal water diverted from the Rio Grande River. Other Area Committee 2000). habitat management practices include high intensity-short duration grazing, prescribed burning, farming, and moist- Virtually the entire Rocky Mountain Population (RMP) soil plant management. The refuge is a major stopover for of Greater Sandhill Cranes stage in the Valley in October migrating RMP Greater Sandhill Cranes moving between and March each year. Numerous other nongame waterbirds their wintering area around Bosque del Apache NWR in occur in the Valley at various times of the year. These New Mexico and northern breedin grounds. Up to 20,000 species will be managed by providing the specific wetland cranes pass through in the spring and again in the fall. The habitat types required. The four types of habitat are refuge also supports colonies of White-faced Ibis, Snowy emergent marsh, wet meadow, playa (mud flat) and open and Cattle Egrets, and Black-Crowned Night Herons (San water. Luis Valley Wetlands Focus Area Committee 2000). Alamosa NWR: This 11,200 acre refuge consists of Threats: Development of resources including water, real nearly 8,000 acres of wetlands, including open water estate, and agriculture are the primary threats to fish and with extensive cattail stands and Baltic rush/wet meadow wildlife resources in the San Luis Valley. Lack of secure communities, river oxbows, and riparian corridors, water supplies and diminishing ground-water resources are primarily within the flood plain of the Rio Grande. The the major threat to region wetlands. refuge lies at just over 7,500 ft elevation and is relatively flat. Habitat management practices include high intensity- New Mexico.—The Middle Rio Grande Valley of central short duration grazing, prescribed burning, moist-soil New Mexico spans both the Chihuahuan desert scrub and plant management, farming, and water management. semidesert grassland biotic communities and is bounded Water from the Rio Grande is supplemented by artesian by mountain ranges rising 6,560 ft to the west and 5,250 wells and pumped water from the Closed Basin Project. ft to the east. This region lies along the Rio Grande and The refuge has supported substantial nesting colonies of spans between Cochiti Dam to Elephant Butte Reservoir. White-faced Ibises, Black-Crowned Night Herons, and Valley floor elevations average 4,820 ft. Wetlands within Snowy and Cattle Egrets (San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus this valley are critical for supporting migrating and Area Committee 2000). wintering waterfowl, cranes, and a wide variety of other waterbirds. The valley hosts 5 federal and state wildlife Blanca Wetlands Area: This is a wetlands development refuges, which cooperatively provide habitat for these and restoration area administered by BLM. Lying just species (Taylor 1999). Limited wetland availability above 7,500 ft in elevation, the area is relatively flat with within this arid landscape requires intensive management no significant topographic features. Sparsely vegetated programs focused on maximum food production to support sand dunes with intermingled depressions and historical high numbers of cranes and waterfowl. playa basins characterize the landscape. The site provides 207 wetland sites (2,500 acres) consisting of fresh water This region is the principal winter range for RMP Greater ponds, marshes, and meadows; alkali ponds, marshes, Sandhill Cranes that utilize west-central New Mexico, and meadows; and playa lakes. Portions of this area have mainly from the Albuquerque-Los Lunas region in inadequate water supplies to meet their potential. The Bernalillo and Valencia counties south to the Bosque del primary objective of the area is to serve as a waterbird Apache NWR (Drewien and Bizeau 1974, Drewien et al. production site (San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus Area 2000), as well as a growing number of Mid-Continent Committee 2000). See Chapter 5b of the 2013 IWJV Population Sandhill Cranes. Most greaters winter at or Implementation Plan for a more detailed characterization near the Bosque del Apache NWR or areas 40-mi north of the Blanca Wetlands Area. near Bernardo Waterfowl Managemant Area and La Joya Wildlife Area. Smaller groups are scattered throughout Monte Vista NWR: This 14,200 acre refuge consists the valley north to Tome and Los Lunas areas in Valencia primarily of flat terrain at an elevation above 7,500 County (Drewien and Bizeau 1974). Flock counts and ft. It contains nearly 3,240 acres of wetlands. Water is observations of marked cranes show that Bosque del intensively managed using numerous dikes and other Apache NWR is the RMP’s single most important water control structures to create wetland habitats ranging wintering location with over 50% of the entire population from shallow wet meadows to open water. Approximately wintering here (Drewien and Bizeau 1974). 26,500 acre feet of water is applied annually to these areas to manage for seasonal waterbird needs, such as spring
6.58 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Bosque del Apache NWR: The Refuge is 57,300 lined ditches and different irrigation techniques, will acres located near Socorro, New Mexico, lying at the become higher priority projects in the future. Another northern edge of the Chihuahuan desert and straddling major threat to riparian ecosystems is the rapid spread approximately 10 miles of the Rio Grande. The heart of of exotic saltcedar. This species dominates wide areas the Refuge is about 12,900 acres of moist bottomlands; throughout the Middle Rio Grande Valley as well as 3,800 acres are active floodplain of the Rio Grande and the refuge floodplain. Periodic catastrophic fires have 9,100 acres are areas where water is diverted to create reduced fire-intolerant native species, creating new voids extensive wetlands, farmlands, and riparian forests. which saltcedar rapidly fills. The negative aspects of Artificially created marshes replace natural wetlands lost saltcedar include not only its aggressive nature, but also with the development of reservoirs and channelization its propensity to use large quantities of water resulting of the Rio Grande. The rest of Bosque del Apache NWR in altered wetland hydrology, function, and quality for is made up of arid foothills and mesas that rise to the waterbirds Chupadera Mountains on the west and the San Pascual 6. West-Central Nevada Focal Area Mountains on the east. Most of these desert lands are preserved as wilderness areas. About 7,400 acres are extensively managed for crop production and moist-soil plant production for waterfowl and waterbird use. Threats: The Middle Rio Grande Valley has experienced increasing impacts from human influences that are compromising the long-term capability of these areas to provide adequate forage and roosting habitats to sustain cranes at objective levels (Case and Sanders 2009). Changing practices on private lands (e.g., shifts from farming small grains to alfalfa and vegetables or conversion of farmland to residential tracts) has limited availability of suitable winter Sandhill Crane food resources to fields occurring on three state-owned waterfowl management areas (Bernardo, La Joya, Belen) and on Bosque del Apache NWR. Agriculture crops, including wheat and barley, are capable of meeting cranes’ energetic needs, but increasing use of fall tillage makes these resources less available. Increased numbers of people in rural landscapes are increasing human/crane conflicts and disturbance to cranes (Mitchusson 2003). Changes in agricultural markets have greatly reduced the Figure 6 West Central Nevada Focal Area including Carson total acreage being planted in barley, which historically Sink and Lahontan Valley wetland complexes. has been important to cranes. Uncertainty in the future of water availability (physical and legal), increasing urban Rivers and wetlands in this focal area are remnants of expansion, and loss of farming traditions will further the once vast Pleistocene-era Lake Lahontan which reduce the future value of the Middle Rio Grande Valley is estimated to have covered about 8,500 mi2. Present to cranes. Reduced water flows in the Rio Grande have day conditions include four major river systems that resulted in limited suitable roost sites, requiring cranes to empty into deep-water desert lakes and terminal basins expend greater amounts of energy in search of available of the ancient lakebed: the Truckee, Walker, Carson food resources (Case and Sanders 2009). Water quality and Humboldt Rivers. Source water for these rivers and quantity issues are common in the Middle Rio Grande originates in the high-elevation, steep-gradient Sierra Valley. Bosque del Apache NWR has a senior water right Nevada Mountains. The terminus of these closed-basin in the Valley, but is geographically located at the end of systems provide important habitat for waterbirds in the the irrigation system. Consequently, lack of surface water Intermountain West including Pyramid Lake, Walker Lake, to support natural processes on the active floodplain and and the expansive low elevation, flat-alkali playas in the irrigation on managed areas threatens during drought Lahontan Valley and Humboldt Sink. Basins and valleys years. Efforts to reduce water loss, such as concrete- in West-central Nevada are encompassed in the arid Great
6.59 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Basin Region with precipitation in ranging from about 5–8 acres of open water, 91,000 acres of vegetated wetlands in/year (Maurer et. al., 2009; USFWS 2002) and annual and 155,000 acres of alkali playa (Nevada Natural evaporation that can exceed 60 in/year. (USFWS 2002). Heritage Program [NNHP] 2006). Desert shrublands and Uplands in the region are dry, desert shrublands and land playas characterize the lower basins whereas wetlands, use is predominantly agriculture, grazing and ranching. farmlands, the City of Fallon and associated suburbs comprise a small component (7%) of the Lahontan Valley About 82% of wetland acreage in the terminal valleys of (USFWS 2002). In 2005 there were about 39,000 acres of the Truckee, Carson, and Humboldt River basins were irrigated native pasture and alfalfa in the Carson Valley lost through conversion or development since the 1850’s below Lahontan Reservoir, and an additional 3,100 acres (Thompson and Merritt 1988). These rivers, and the and 1,200 acres were flood irrigated in the Dayton and Walker River, have been highly modified by complex Churchill Valleys above the reservoir. In recent years, networks of dams, reservoirs, ditches and canals that the Carson River basin has experienced increases in serve to store, divert, transport and withdraw water to residential, commercial and municipal growth (Maurer et support extensive agricultural and ranching practices al 2009). Grazing, rangelands, and agriculture represent in surrounding valleys, especially in Douglas, Lyon, the predominant land use (USFWS 2002). Mineral, and Churchill Counties, Nevada. Despite the severe alterations to the natural hydrologic conditions North of the Carson River system, the Humboldt River in these basins, they continue to support regionally terminates in the Humboldt Sink an expansive alkali pan and nationally significant populations of waterbirds, wetland complex with water ranging from centimeters to shorebirds and waterfowl. From the mid-1980s through 13 feet deep depending upon annual flow levels (Nevada the late 1990s, a significant proportion of White-faced Partners in Flight [NPIF] 1999). The Humboldt River and Ibises in the Intermountain West were located in colonies its tributaries drain a 17,200 mi2 basin which includes in the Lahontan Valley/Humboldt Sink wetlands (Neel nearly 12,100 acres of playa, 510 mi2 of vegetated 1997, Earnst et al 1998). The area also serves as an wetland habitat, and 16,100 acres of open water (NNHP important foraging area for American White Pelicans from 2006). The Carson Sink is hydrologically connected to breeding colonies Anaho Island NWR, and as breeding the Humboldt River Basin via the Humboldt River and the and foraging habitat for hundreds of Snowy Egrets, Great Humboldt Slough. However, water entering the Carson Egrets, Black-crowned Night-Herons and Double-Crested Sink from the Humboldt River Basin via this connection Cormorants (Neel 1997, GBBO 2010). Pyramid and occurs only during extremely wet years. Walker Lakes support waterbirds able to exploit resources In 1915 the Newlands Irrigation Project was completed found in deep saline waters and surrounding alkali and to provide irrigation water for agriculture in the lower fresh-water wetlands including American White Pelicans, Carson River Basin. This included construction the California Gulls, Double-crested Cormorants, Common Lahontan Dam and Reservoir on the Carson River and Loons, and Clark’s and Western Grebes. the Truckee Canal which diverts Truckee River flows In 1990, Congress passed The Truckee-Carson-Pyramid into the Lahontan Reservoir. Water from the Lahontan Lake Water Rights Settlement Act, Public Law 101-618 Reservoir irrigates about 56,000 acres in the Lahontan (PL101-118) which authorizes the transfer of the 22,700 Valley (Maurer et. al., 2009). Flows not used for irrigation acre Carson Lake and Pasture area to the State of Nevada provide water for Lahontan Valley wetlands, including the to be managed by NDOW as a WMA. Additionally, PL Carson Sink at the basins terminus. The Humboldt River is 101-618 mandates the Department of the Interior to similarly altered with four reservoirs including Rye Patch. acquire, in conjunction with the State of Nevada, enough Constructed in 1935, the Rye Patch Reservoir effectively water to sustain a long-term average of 24,700 acres of cut-off the wetlands of the Humboldt Sink from Humboldt primary wetland habitat in four designated areas in the River source water (NPIV 1999). Humboldt Sink wetlands Lahontan Valley: Stillwater NWR, Stillwater WMA, are now supplied with agricultural return flows when they Carson Lake WMA and the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone are available Reservation. The Stillwater NWR Complex and Carson Lake WMA Lahontan Valley/Humboldt Sink Wetlands: The (AKA Carson Lake and Pasture) comprise the majority Lahontan Valley/Humboldt Sink wetlands are low of the Lahontan Valley wetland complex. The Stillwater elevation terminal basins characterized by desert NWR Complex includes the Stillwater NWR, the adjacent shrublands and vast, flat- alkali playas and mudflats. Stillwater WMA, and Fallon NWR for a combined total The Carson River Basin includes an estimated 12,600 of 163,000 acres of land managed by the USFWS. The
6.60 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Carson Lake WMA (22,000 acres) is federally owned Threats: Water supply, security, and quality are significant land managed by the NDOW pending transfer to the state threats to waterbird habitat in the Lahontan Valley per PL 101-618. Additional wetlands are located on the wetlands. Flows from the Carson and Truckee Rivers Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Reservation, and along the Carson are fully allocated, almost entirely to off-stream uses River and the Carson Sink terminus. NDOW manages the including agriculture, urban, and industrial use. Water 27,900 acre Humboldt Sink WMA. Habitats for waterbirds that ultimately flows into the terminal lakes and sinks is a on these lands include freshwater and brackish marshes, mixture of re-used surface and groundwater (NNHP 2006). shallow flooded alkali playas and associated mudflats, In addition to historic loss of wetland acreage, recent and cottonwood and willow riparian areas. Surrounding suburban and municipal growth is permanently converting uplands are salt desert shrub lands, sand dunes, and habitat in these basins. From 1970 to 2005, about 2,200 extensive irrigated crop and pasturelands. acres of land below Lahontan Reservoir were converted from irrigated agricultural land to residential and The extent and quality of wetland habitats in the Lahontan commercial use (Maurer et. al., 2009). In the past decade Valley/Humboldt Sink vary tremendously both seasonally (2000–2010) counties in west-central Nevada experienced and annually, depending on snowpack levels in the Sierra relatively high rates of population growth with increases Nevada and on withdrawals for irrigation, municipal, of 51% in Lyon County, 14% in Douglas County, 29% and residential uses. Within the span of one season, these in Washoe County and nearly 4% in Churchill County wetlands can transform from shallow lakes with clear, (U.S Census Bureau 2011). Municipal, commercial, and fresh water, to shallow, brackish marshes with high salt subdivision developments have further impacted water concentrations (USFWS 2002). Numbers of waterbirds and wetland resources. From the late 1980s to 2005, recorded at these sites fluctuate in accord with water about 6,300 acres of land have been converted from flood levels and widely ranging salinity levels. However, the irrigation to sprinkler systems (Maurer 2009), thereby region is renowned for supporting thousands of waterbirds degrading their value to foraging waterbirds. Ongoing and high concentrations of shorebirds and waterfowl. and predicted increases in temperature associated with Between 1992–1997, Neel (1997) estimated about 4,083 climate change could potentially increase already severe breeding pairs of White-faced Ibis annually inhabiting evaporation rates in the Lahontan Valley/Humboldt wetlands in northwestern Nevada. Carson Lake WMA Sink. Predicted declines in Sierra Nevada snowpack and traditionally hosted the largest ibis colonies among the earlier spring snowmelt dates could drastically modify Lahontan Valley/Humboldt Sink wetland sites. During water regimes in the mid- to late-summer seasons when this same 5-year period, about 300 nesting pairs of Snowy waterbirds are nesting and fledging young. The effects of Egrets, and 160 pairs of Great Egrets, 180 Black-crowned climate change will exacerbate water shortages and poor Night Herons and lesser number of Cattle Egret and water quality in these drainages that are already stressed Double-crested Cormorants were documented nesting by limited water and contaminants. in these wetlands. Numbers of nesting ibises declined Contaminant concerns in the Lower Lahontan and dramatically 2000–2004 corresponding with severe Humboldt River Basins result primarily from hydrologic drought conditions. Although water conditions at wetlands modifications, discharge of agricultural drainage to improved in 2005–2006 and in some later years, ibises wetlands, and the historic release of mercury into the have yet to rebound to the high counts of the late 1990s. Carson River (Henny et al. 1985, Henny and Herron 1989, However, these wetlands continue to serve as part of the Henny et al 2002, Oring et al 2000). During the mid to late network of sites necessary to support Intermountain West 1800s, mining activities for precious metals resulted in the waterbird populations over the long term. The Lahontan release of liquid mercury into the Carson River. Mercury Valley wetlands also serve a vital function as shallow- concentrations in the floodplain of the Lower Carson water feeding areas for American White Pelicans from River Basin are some of the highest ever reported, and the breeding colony on Anaho Island in Pyramid Lake (up Lahontan Reservoir has served as a sink for most of the to 13,000 birds). Pelicans from Anaho Island frequently sediment-bound mercury washed downstream (Hill et. al., travel about 70 miles one-way to feed in shallow water 2008). The Lower Carson River Basin, including Lahontan bodies in the Lahontan Valley. Common Loons and Reservoir is now on the U.S. Environmental Protection Sandhill Cranes were also once common to these wetlands Agency’s National Priorities List (Superfund) for research but loss of deep water and wet meadow habitat has greatly and cleanup. Mercury contamination has resulted in reduced the number of these waterbirds from historic cellular damage in the nervous, immune, hepatic, and times (USFWS 2002) renal systems of young Snowy Egrets, Black-crowned
6.61 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Night Herons, and Double-crested Cormorant fledgling Lake. Great blue herons, Black-crowned night herons from colonies in the Lahontan Reservoir (Henny et al and occasionally Caspian Terns also nest on the island 2002). During the drought years of 2000–2004, Hill et al. (USFWS 2002). Pyramid Lake provides migration stop- (2008) found snowy egret eggs with high concentrations over opportunities for significant numbers of waterbirds. of total mercury and methylmercury (> .80ug TH) all Large numbers of Clark’s and Western Grebes, Eared failed to hatch. Yet during wet years, substantial numbers Grebes, and American White Pelicans pass through in of young were produced from nests with eggs thus migration (NAS 2011). exceeding these thresholds. Drought conditions exacerbate Threats: Pyramid Lake has experienced deficit inflows the negative physiological reproductive effects of mercury from the Truckee River since the early 1900s when contamination in snowy egret nestlings (Hoffman et. al., diversions began from the lower Truckee River at Derby 2009). These studies revealed complex associations among Dam. Although legislative action has somewhat stabilized contaminant levels and drought/flood conditions in the Truckee River water allocations, continued withdrawals Lahontan Valley that merit further research and emphasize and drought cycles represent the primary threats to the the critical need to improve water supply and quality to quantity and quality of water in Pyramid Lake. In turn, wetlands in the Lahontan Valley and Humboldt Sink. these factors threaten the sustainability of Cui-ui and Pyramid Lake /Anaho Island NWR: Pyramid Lake Lahontan Cutthroat Trout populations, the primary food is a 125,000 acre natural saline lake and is one of the source for pelicans and other waterbirds that congregate largest and deepest (338 ft) remnants of ancient Lake to nest on Anaho Island. Declining snow pack and earlier Lahontan. The lake supports amphipods, fish including the snowmelt dates predicted in various climate change endangered Cui-ui, and other aquatic species that provide models would reduce magnitude and duration of snow- a forage base for waterbirds. The island constitutes the melt dependent flows in the Truckee and Carson Rivers. entire extent of the Anaho Island NWR, which is managed In turn, this could potentially result in increased salinity by the USFWS under an agreement with the Pyramid at Pyramid Lake and insufficient water to wetlands in the Lake Paiute Tribe. Derby Dam and Truckee Canal were Lahontan Valley. constructed in 1913 to divert Truckee River water to the Walker Lake: The Walker River drains the 4050 mi2 Lower Carson River Basin for irrigation. This reduced Walker River Basin and empties into Walker Lake, located the flow of water into Pyramid Lake and consequently, about 160 miles from the rivers headwaters in the Sierra the island fluctuates in size from 220 to 740 acres Nevada Mountains. This 12 mile long, 5 mile wide desert- depending on water supply. Anaho Island is characterized terminal lake covers about 25,900 acres. The shoreline by gentle slopes near the shoreline and steep, rocky is predominantly barren with some scattered low-desert topography toward its peak. Island habitat includes shrub vegetation, with the exception of the river delta area desert shrub communities, nonnative annual grasses, where limited riparian/wetland community types occur. native bunchgrasses and forbs, and open areas with scant Over the past 100 years, the lake has decreased from about vegetation near the shorelines. 10 million to less than 2 million acre feet (Horton 1996). Anaho Island supports some of the largest concentrations Virtually all surface water flows within the Walker River of colonial waterbirds in Nevada, including a long- Basin are appropriated for agricultural use (Horton 1996), persistent breeding colony of American White Pelicans. and are diverted onto tens of thousands of acres of alfalfa, The number of American White Pelicans at Anaho Island onion, and garlic fields and to support cattle grazing. over the past 50 years has varied from 2,670 to 21,500 Extensive ground water pumping also occurs to meet the birds, with an annual average of 8,600 and a typical ten- water needs of the surrounding agricultural communities year peak of 13,500 birds (Stillwater NWR Complex data). in Douglas, Mineral, and particularly Lyon counties, In 2009 and 2010, refuge waterbird surveys documented Nevada (Horton 1996, Sharpe et al 2007). As a result of an average of 3,760 breeding pairs of pelicans, 3,565 surface and groundwater withdrawals, water supply to pairs of California Gulls, and about 400 pairs of Double- the lake has declined significantly and, consequently, crested Cormorants breeding on the island within 18 concentration of salt and total dissolved solids has subcolonies (GBBO 2010). In 2011, about 4,000 pairs of dramatically increased. Lake water is of relatively poor pelicans produced roughly 2,000 young (Stillwater NWR quality, with high concentrations of total dissolved solids, Complex data). This relatively high reproductive success (mostly salts), relatively high temperatures, low dissolved was attributed to high water levels from reserve snowpack oxygen, and hydrogen sulfide (Horton 1996, Sharpe et al in the Sierra Nevada Range resulting in above average 2007). flows in the Truckee River, the main inflow to Pyramid
6.62 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX E. FOCAL AREA PROFILES – DESCRIPTIONS & THREATS
Despite these Walker Lake is one of only three desert Walker River in essentially only three years: 1987, 1995, terminus lakes in the U.S. that support a fishery. and 1996 (Horton 1996, Bureau of Reclamation 2010). A population of the native Lahontan tui chub (Gila Walker Lake’s TDS concentrations are well above levels bicolor) and a stocked strain of the threatened Lahontan existing in Pyramid Lake and are approaching levels Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii henshawi) inhabit that exceed conditions where fish can reproduce (Horton the headwaters of the Walker River and Walker Lake. 1996, Sharpe et. al., 2007). The lake also experiences Common loons stage at Walker Lake for about 30 days large blooms of blue-green algae, which, when combined during southward fall migration and during the spring with high TDS concentrations and low dissolved oxygen, migration as they head north to breeding grounds in creates a relatively inhospitable environment to fish Saskatchewan, Canada. NDOW bi-annual surveys at species. Collapse of the fisheries would result in the Walker Lake have documented a high count of 1,433 complete loss of this site as an important waterbird loons during the spring of 1997 to a low of 150 during migration and staging area. Additionally, mercury the spring of 2009. The lake also hosts between 2,000 and contamination from historical upstream mining has 9,000 migrating Clark’s Grebes each fall, as well as Eared also occurred and looms at Walker Lake are heavily Grebes, Double-Crested Cormorants, White-faced Ibises, contaminated with mercury (NAS 2011). All of these and American White Pelicans. conditions result in significant threats to waterbirds at the local and regional scale. Threats: Surface water withdrawals for agricultural and ranching purposes, the increasing frequency and duration Since 2002, Congress has passed eight pieces of Desert of drought cycles, and reduced snowpack in the Sierra Terminal Lakes Legislation related to the Walker River Nevada Mountains resulting from climate change are Basin. The overall direction and goal of programs significant threats to waterbirds and waterbird habitat at stemming from these laws is to increase the long-term Walker Lake. These ongoing water shortages and droughts average annual inflow to Walker Lake by up to 50,000 have necessitated increasing ground water withdrawals acre feet per annually through purchases of water from from the Walker River Basin to support agriculture in willing sellers in Nevada. As directed by legislation the surrounding landscape, further stressing hydrologic and subsequent agreements among responsible and conditions in the lake. Due to surface and ground water participating parties, the National Fish and Wildlife diversions and withdrawals over the past century, the Foundation will determine how the Acquisition Program is lake’s level has declined by 47 m and its volume has to be developed and implemented (see Revised DEIS for shrunk by more than 80% (Bureau of Reclamation 2010). the Walker River Basin Acquisition Program, Department, During the ten-year period of 1987–1996, an eight-year Bureau of Reclamation, 2010) drought period, Walker Lake received inflows from the
6.63 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX F. LITERATURE CITED IN APPENDICES
Akins, G. J. 1970. The effects of land use and land Copeland, H., S. Tessmann, M. Hogan, S. Jester, management on the wetlands of the Upper Klamath Basin. A. Orabona, S. Patla, K. Sambor, and J. Kiesecker. M.S. Thesis. Western Washington College, Bellingham, 2010. Wyoming Wetlands: Conservation Priorities and Washington. Strategies. Lander, Wyoming: The Nature Conservancy. 9pp. Aldrich, T. W., and D. S. Paul. 2002. Avian ecology of Great Salt Lake. Pages 343–374 in J. W. Gwynn, editor. Downard, R. 2010. Keeping wetlands wet: The Great Salt Lake: an overview of change. Utah Department hydrology of wetlands in the Bear River Basin. 2010. of Natural Resources and Utah Geological Survey Special All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 829. Publication, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. Utah State University. Graduate Studies, School of DigitalCommons@USU. Online: http://digitalcommons. Austin, J. E. and W. H. Pyle. 2004. Nesting Ecology of usu.etd/829 Waterbirds at Grays Lake, Idaho. Western North American Naturalist 64: 277–292. Drewien, R. C., and E. G. Bizeau. 1974. Status and distribution of greater sandhill cranes in the Rocky Bedford, D., and A. Douglass. 2008. Changing properties Mountains. Journal of Wildlife Management 38:720-742. of snowpack in the Great Salt Lake Basin, Western United States, from a 26-year SNOTEL record. Professional Drewien, R. C., W. M. Brown, D. C. Lockman, W. L. Geographer 60:374–386. Kendall, K. R. Clegg, V. K. Graham, S. S. Manes. 2000. Band recoveries, mortality factors, and survival of Rocky Belovsky, G. E., D. Stephens, C. Perschon, P. Birdsey, Mountain greater sandhill cranes. Unpublished report, D. Paul, D. Naftz, R. Gaskin, C. Larson, C. Mellison, J. Hornocker Wildlife Institute, Bozeman, MT. Luft, R. Mosley, H. Mahon, J. V. Leeuwn, and D. V. Allen. 2011. The Great Salt Lake ecosystem (Utah, USA): long Earnst, S.L., L. Neel, G.L. Ivey, and T. Zimmerman. 1998. term data and a structural equation approach. Ecosphere Status of the White-faced Ibis: Breeding Colony Dynamics 2:1–40. of the Great Basin Population, 1985 – 1997. Colonial Waterbirds: 20: 301-476. Bray, M.P. and D. A. Klebenow, 1988. Feeding ecology of White-faced Ibis in a Great Basin Valley, USA. Colonial Fleskes, J. P., and C. J. Gregory. 2010. Distribution and Waterbirds 11:24-31. dynamics of waterbird habitat during spring in southern Oregon–Northeastern California. Western North American Bureau of Reclamation [BOR]. 2010. Revised Draft Naturalist 70:26–38. Environmental Impact Statement for the Walker River Basin Acquisition Program. Online: http://www.usbr.gov/ Frey, S. N., and M. R. Conover. 2006. Habitat use by mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=2810 meso-predators in a corridor environment. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1111-1118. Case, D. J. and S. J. Sanders. 2009. Priority Information needs for Sandhill Cranes: A funding strategy. Developed Gannett, M.W., K. E. Lite, Jr., J.L. La Marche, B.J. by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ Fisher, and D.J. Polette, 2007. Ground-water hydrology Migratory Shore and Upland Game Bird Support Task of the upper Klamath Basin, Oregon and California. U.S. Force. Online: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007- NewReportsPublications/Research/WMGBMR/Priority_ 5050. 84 pp. Information_Needs_for_Sandhill_Cranes_10-09-09_ Great Basin Bird Observatory. 2010. Surveys of Colonial FINAL.pdf Waterbirds within Nevada, 2010. Final Annual Report. Conover, M. R. and J. L. Vest. 2009a. Selenium and Unpublished Report to American Bird Conservancy and mercury concentrations in California Gulls breeding U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Reno Nevada. 19 pp. on the Great Salt Lake, Utah, USA. Environmental Henny, C.J., L.J. Blus, and C.S. Hulse. 1985. Trends and Toxicology and Chemistry. 28:324–329. effects of organochlorine residues on Oregon and Nevada Conover, M. R. and J. L. Vest. 2009b. Concentrations of wading birds. Colonial Waterbirds 8:117-128 selenium and mercury in Eared Grebes from Utah’s Great Henny, C.J. and G.B. Herron. 1989. DDE, selenium, Salt Lake, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry mercury and White-faced Ibis reproduction at Carson 28:1319–1323. Lake, Nevada. Journal of Wildlife Management. 53:1032- 1045.
6.64 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX F. LITERATURE CITED IN APPENDICES
Henny, C.J., E.F. Hill, D.J. Hoffman, M. G. Spalding, and Ivey, G. L., and C. P. Herziger. 2000. Distribution of R.A. Brove. 2002. Nineteenth century mercury: Hazard to greater sandhill crane pairs in Oregon, 1999/00. Oregon wading birds and cormorants of the Carson River, Nevada. Department of Fish and Wildlife Nongame Technical Ecotoxicology 11:213-231. Report #03-01-00. Salem, Oregon. Hill, E.F., C. J. Henny, and R.A. Grove. 2008. Mercury Ivey, G.L. and C.P. Herziger. 2006. Intermountain and drought along the Lower Carson River, Nevada: II. West Waterbird Conservation Plan, Version 1.2. A plan Snowy Egret and Black-crowned Night-heron reproduction associated with the Waterbird Conservation for the on Lahontan Reservoir, 1997-2006. Ecotoxicology 17:117- Americas Initiative. Published by U.S. Fish and Wildlife 131. Service, Pacific Region, Portland, Oregon. Hoffman, D. J., C.J. Henny, E.F Hill, R.A. Grove, J.L. Ivey, G. L., S. L. Earnst, E. P. Kelchlin, L. Neel, and D. S. Kaiser, and K.R. Stebbins, 2009. Mercury and drought Paul. 2004. White-faced Ibis staus update and guidelines: along the Lower Carson River, Nevada: III. Effects Great Basin Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, on blood and organ biochemistry and histopathology Portland, Oregon, USA. of Snowy Egrets and Black-crowned Night-Herons on Kenny, J.F., N.L. Barber, S.S. Hutson, K.S. Linsey, J.K. Lahontan Reservoir, 2002–2006. Journal of Toxicology Lovelace, and M.A. Maupin. 2009. Estimated use of water and Environmental Health, Part A, 72: 1223–1241. in the United States in 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Horton, G. 1996. Walker River Chronology: A Circular 1344, 52 pp. chronological history of the Walker River and related Maurer, D.K., A.P. Paul, D.L. Berger, and C.J. Mayers, water issues. Nevada Division of Water Planning, Carson 2009. Analysis of streamflow trends, ground-water City, NV. 80pp. Online: http://water.nv.gov/mapping/ and surface-water interactions, and water quality in chronologies/walker/part1.cfm the upper Carson River Basin, Nevada and California: Idaho Department of Fish and Game [IDFG], 2005. Idaho U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (ICWCS). 2008–5238, 192 pp. Idaho Conservation Data Center, Idaho Department of Naftz, D., C. Angeroth, T. Kenney, B. Waddell, N. Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. Online: http://fishandgame. Darnell, S. Silva, C. Perschon, and J. Whitehead. 2008. idaho.gov/cms/tech/CDC/cwcs.cfm Anthropogenic influences on the input and biogeochemical Idaho Department of Fish and Game [IDFG], 2009. cycling of nutrients and mercury in Great Salt Lake, Utah, Management of American White Pelicans In Idaho: A five- USA. Applied Geochemistry 23:1731–1734. year plan (2009–2013) to balance American white pelican Neill, J., J. O. Hall, and J. Luft. 2009. 2009 American and native cutthroat trout conservation needs and manage white pelican census, Gunnison Island, Utah. Great Salt impacts to recreational fisheries in southeast Idaho. 72pp. Lake Ecosystem Program and Utah Division of Wildlife Ivey, G. L. 2000. Joint Venture Implementation Plans for Resources unpublished report. Utah Division of Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas in Eastern Oregon: Oregon Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. Closed Basin. Oregon Wetlands Joint Venture, Portland, Olson, B. 2009. Annual habitat management plan: Bear Oregon. Online: www.ohjv.org/pdfs/closed_basin_plan. River Migratory Bird Refuge. Bear River Migratory Bird pdf. Refuge, Brigham City, Utah, USA [online] URL: http:// Ivey, G. L. 2001. Joint Venture Implementation Plans for www.fws.gov/bearriver/management_plans/2009-annual- Habitat Conservation Areas in Eastern Oregon: Klamath hmp.pdf Basin. Oregon Wetlands Joint Venture, Portland, Oregon. Nevada and California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Online: www.ohjv.org/pdfs/klamath_basin %20.pdf. Investigations Report 2008–5238, 192 pp. Online: http:// Ivey, G. L., J. E. Cornely, and B. D. Ehlers. 1998. Carp pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5238/sir20085238.pdf impacts on waterfowl at Malheur National Wildlife Mitchusson, T. E., 2003. Long-range plan for the Refuge, Oregon. Transactions North American Wildlife management of Sandhill Cranes in New Mexico. New and Natural Resource Conference 63:66 74. Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico 46pp.
6.65 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX F. LITERATURE CITED IN APPENDICES
Moulton, C. E. 2007. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Olson, B.E. 2007. Phragmites Control Plan. USFWS, Bear (IBIS) 2006 Annual Report. 39 pgs. Unpublished Report. River Migratory Bird Refuge, Brigham City, Utah. Online: Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and http://www.fws.gov/bearriver/Phragmites_Control_Plan.pdf Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut Paul, D. and A. E. Manning. 2008. Great Salt Lake St. Boise, Idaho. Online: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/ waterbird survey five-year report (1997–2001). Great Salt cms/wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2007report.pdf Lake Ecosystem Program and Utah Division of Wildlife Moulton, C. E. 2008. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [online] URL: (IBIS) 2007 Annual Report. 42 p. Unpublished Report. http://wildlife.utah.gov/gsl/waterbirdsurvey/ Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and Reichler, 2009. Fine-scale climate projections for Utah Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut from statistical downscaling of global climate models, St. Boise, Idaho. Online: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/ Climate Change and the Intermountain West: 5th Spring cms/wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2007report.pdf Runoff Conference/14th Intermountain Meteorology Moulton, C. E. 2009. Idaho Bird Inventory and Survey Workshop, Utah State University Logan, Utah, [online] (IBIS) 2008 Annual Report. 37 pgs. Unpublished Report. URL: http://www.inscc.utah.edu/~reichler/talks/tjr_talks. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nongame and shtml Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, 600 S. Walnut San Luis Valley Wetlands Focus Area Committee. St. Boise, Idaho. Online: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/ 2000. The San Luis Valley Community Wetlands cms/wildlife/nongame/birds/IBIS_2008report.pdf Strategy. Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Moulton, C. E. and R. Sallabanks. 2006. Idaho Bird Fort Collins, CO. Online: http://wildlife.state. Inventory and Survey (IBIS) 2005 Annual Report. 40 pgs. co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/DOW/LandWater/ Unpublished Report. Idaho Department of Fish and Game WetlandsProgram/stratplan-SLV9-00.pdf. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program P.O. Box 25, Sharpe, S.E., M.E. Cablk, and J.M. Thomas. 2007. 600 S. Walnut St. Boise, Idaho 83707 The Walker Basin, Nevada and California: Physical National Audubon Society (NAS) 2011. Important Bird Environment, Hydrology, and Biology. Desert Research Areas in the U.S. Accessed July - November 2011. Online: Institute, Publication No. 41231. 70 pp. http://www.audubon.org/bird/iba. Shuford, W. D. and T. Gardali. 2008. California bird Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. species of special concern: a ranked assessment of Conservation Resource Brief: Klamath River Basin. No. species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of 0607. 10 pp. immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, Neel, L. Survey of Colony-Nesting Birds in Northwestern California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Nevada, 1997. Great Basin Birds, Vol. 1: 30-31. Sacramento, California. [online] URL: http://www.dfg. Nevada Natural Heritage Program. 2006. Nevada Wetlands ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ssc/birds.html Priority Conservation Plan Technical Review Draft. E. Shuford W. D. and R.P. Henderson. 2010. Surveys of Skudlarek, ed. Carson City, Nevada. 226 pp. Colonial Waterbirds in Northeastern and East-central Nevada Partners in Flight, 1999. L. Neel, Ed. Bird California in 2009. Report to U. S. Fish and wildlife Conservation Plan. 260 pp. Online: http://www.blm.gov/ Service, Region 8. 18 pp. Online: http://www.fws.gov/ wildlife/plan/pl-nv-10.pdf mountain-prairie/species/birds/western_colonial/Colonial- Waterbirds-Final-Report-2009.pdf Olson, B. E. Lindsay, K. and Hirschboeck, V. 2004. Habitat management plan: Bear River Migratory Bird Shuford, W.D., D.L. Thomson, D.M. Mauser, and Refuge, Brigham City Utah. Bear River Migratory Bird J. Beckstrand. 2006. Abundance and distribution of Refuge: Brigham City, Utah. 213pp. Online: http://www. nongame waterbirds in the Klamath Basin of Oregon and fws.gov/bearriver/management_plans/BR_HMP.pdf California from Comprehensive Surveys in 2003 and 2004. Unpublished Final Report to U. S. Fish and Wildlife Oring, L.W., L. Neel, and K. E. Oring. 2000 Intermountain Service, Klamath Basin NWR Complex, Tulelake, CA. West Regional Shorebird Plan, Version 1.0. 48pp. Online: 87pp. http://www.fws.gov/shorebirdplan/RegionalShorebird/ downloads/IMWEST4.pdf
6.66 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org APPENDIX F. LITERATURE CITED IN APPENDICES
Taylor D. M., C.H. Trost, and B. Jamison. 1989. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2002. Stillwater Biology of the White-Faced Ibis in Idaho. Western Birds National Wildlife Refuge Complex Comprehensive 20: 125-133. Conservation Plan and Boundary Revision, Churchill and Washoe Counties, Nevada, Final Environmental Impact Taylor, J. P. 1999. A plan for the management of Statement. waterfowl, sandhill cranes, and other migratory birds in the middle Rio Grande valley of New Mexico. USFWS, Utah Population and Environment Coalition. 2007. Living New Mexico, USA. 51 pp. Beyond Our (Ecological) Means: A Fact Sheet from Utah Vital Signs. [online] URL:http://www.utahpop.org/ Taylor, J. P., and L. M. Smith. 2003. Chufa Management vitalsigns in the Middle Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31: 156-162. Utah Water Research Laboratory, 2010. Bear River Watershed Information System: Watershed Description. Thompson, S.P. and K. L. Merritt. 1988. Western Nevada Accessed July 2011. Online: http://www.bearriverinfo.org/ wetlands history and current status. In Nevada Public description/ Affairs Review, No. 1 (R. Bless and P. Goin, eds.) University of Nevada, Reno. Utah Division of Water Resources, 2004. Bear River Basin, Planning for the Future. Utah State Water Plan. Salt Trost, C.H. and A. Gerstell 1994. Status and Distribution Lake City, Utah. 105 pp. Online: http://www.water.utah. of colonial nesting waterbirds in Southern Idaho, 1993. gov/Planning/SWP/bear/bearRiver-1A.pdf Idaho Bureau of Land Management Technical bulletin No. 94-6. July 1994. BLM-ID-PT-94-020-4070. Boise, Idaho. Vest, J. L., M. R. Conover, C. Perschon, J. Luft, and J. 108 pp. O. Hall. 2009. Trace element concentrations in wintering waterfowl from the Great Salt Lake, Utah. Archives of U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. State and County QuickFacts. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 56:302– Data derived from Population Estimates, Census of 316. Population and Housing, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, State and County Housing Unit Estimates, Williams, W. D. 2002. Environmental threats to salt lakes County Business Patterns, Non-employer Statistics, and the likely status of inland saline ecosystems in 2025. Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Environmental Conservation 29:154–167. Permits, Consolidated Federal Funds Report Last Revised: Wingert, S. 2008. Final Report: PCBs in Utah Lake Friday, 03-Jun-2011 15:26:30 EDT. Online: http:// sediment study. Utah Division of Water Quality, Salt Lake quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/16000.html City, Utah. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011. National Wildlife Refuge Profiles. Accessed August 2011. Online: http://www.fws.gov/refuges/profiles
6.67 Intermountain West Joint Venture | Conserving Habitat Through Partnerships | www.iwjv.org