Environmental Assessment

Draft Environmental Assessment

BOWFISHING

TISHOMINGO NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, JOHNSTON COUNTY, OKLAHOMA

January 2020

Prepared By Rick Cantu Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge Tishomingo, OK

Table of Contents Proposed Action ...... 4 Background ...... 4 Purpose and Need for Proposed Action ...... 6 Alternatives ...... 8 Alternatives Considered ...... 8 Alternative A – No Action Alternative: Continuation of Ongoing Current Management Activities ...... 8 Alternative B – Proposed Action (Addition of Bowfishing on the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge) ...... 10 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ...... 11 Affected Environment ...... 11 Environmental Consequences of the Action ...... 13 Affected Natural Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives ...... 14 Nongame Fish Species – Common Carp ...... 14 Nongame Fish Species – Buffalo (Smallmouth and Bigmouth) ...... 15 Nongame Fish Species – Gar (Spotted, Longnose, Shortnose, and Alligator) ...... 15 Other Wildlife and Aquatic Species ...... 17 Threatened and Endangered Species and other Special Status Species ...... 19 Vegetation ...... 21 Soils ...... 22 Air Quality...... 22 Water Resources ...... 23 Affected Visitor Use and Experience Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives ...... 24 Visitor Use and Experience ...... 24 Affected Cultural Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives ...... 28 Cultural Resources ...... 28

Affected Refuge Management and Operations Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives...... 28 Refuge Management and Operations ...... 28 Affected Socioeconomic Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives ...... 30 Socioeconomics ...... 30 Environmental Justice ...... 31 Indian Trust Resources ...... 31 Cumulative Impact Analysis ...... 32 Anticipated Cumulative Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives ...... 33 Summary of Analysis ...... 38 Monitoring ...... 42 List of Sources, Agencies, and Persons Consulted ...... 42 References ...... 43 Appendix 1 ...... 45 List of Figures Figure 1. Location of Visitor Uses on Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge ...... 7 Figure 2. Tishomingo NWR Location ...... 13 Figure 3. Tishomingo NWR Hunt Units ...... 27 Figure 4. Oklahoma Oil and Gas Production and Infrastructure ...... 35

Draft Environmental Assessment for Bowfishing on Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge This Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared to evaluate the effects associated with this proposed action and complies with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500-1509) and Department of the Interior (43 CFR 46; 516 DM 8) and Service (550 FW 3) regulations and policies. NEPA requires examination of the effects of proposed actions on the natural and human environment.

Proposed Action The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is proposing to expand fishing opportunities by allowing bowfishing on the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge (Tishomingo NWR/refuge) in accordance with the refuge’s Fishing Plan, fishing compatibility determination, and the 2010 Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP). Bowfishing will allow the take of nongame fish only on the Washita River and Pennington Creek, which are new areas open to this activity and will provide an additional fishing opportunity on the refuge. Fishing and boating will also be allowed year-round at Bell Creek and Rock Creek Lakes.

This proposed action is often iterative and evolves throughout the process as the agency refines its proposal and learns more from the public, tribes, and other agencies. Therefore, the final proposed action may be different from the original. The final decision on the proposed action will be made at the conclusion of the public comment period for the EA and the 2020–2021 Refuge Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations. The Service cannot open a refuge to hunting and/or fishing until a final rule has been published in the Federal Register formally opening the refuge to hunting and/or fishing.

Background National wildlife refuges are guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS), the purposes of an individual refuge, Service policy, and laws and international treaties. Relevant guidance includes the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 and selected portions of the Code of Federal Regulations and Fish and Wildlife Service Manual.

Tishomingo NWR was established in 1946, under the Public Land Order 312 “…to provide refuge and breeding grounds for migratory birds and other wildlife,” “…and in accordance with such rules and regulation for the conservation, maintenance, and management of wildlife resources thereof, and its habitat thereon…” 16 U.S.C. (Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act).

The mission of the NWRS, as outlined by the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (NWRSAA), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd et sequ.), is:

“... to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and, where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources

and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”

The NWRSAA mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering the System to (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)):

 Provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants, and their habitats within the NWRS;  Ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the NWRS are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans;  Ensure that the mission of the NWRS described at 16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2) and the purposes of each refuge are carried out;  Ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the States in which the units of the NWRS are located;  Assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the mission of the NWRS and the purposes of each refuge;  Recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general public uses of the NWRS through which the American public can develop an appreciation for fish and wildlife;  Ensure that opportunities are provided within the NWRS for compatible wildlife- dependent recreational uses; and  Monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge.

Therefore, it is a priority of the Service to provide for wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities, including hunting and fishing, when those opportunities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and the mission of the NWRS.

Tishomingo NWR is an overlay on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) Denison Dam and Lake Texoma Project. The Corps retains primary jurisdiction of Denison Dam and Lake Texoma reservoir lands, including the lands on which the refuge is located. The refuge is managed under a cooperative agreement between the Corps and the Service. In addition, there is a cooperative agreement between Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC), the Corps, and the Service for management of the 3,150-acre Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) located on the west side of the refuge. Within the WMU, the Corps still retains primary jurisdiction of lands for the operation of its project. The Service and ODWC share secondary jurisdiction and jointly manage the natural resources that occur in the WMU. The WMU is managed cooperatively based on the objectives and responsibilities of each agency. Creating quality public hunting opportunities is a main objective for the ODWC; therefore, game management, including public hunting and fishing programs, are the primary responsibility of ODWC. Habitat enhancement and restoration for a diversity of species are the main objectives and responsibilities of the Service. The agencies work cooperatively to meet their respective responsibilities. The ODWC manages the hunting and fishing opportunities within the WMU. Currently, they allow hunting and fishing of the majority of game species for which there is a current season within the WMU.

The Secretary of the Interior Order 3356 continues the Department of the Interior's efforts to enhance conservation stewardship; increase outdoor recreation opportunities for all Americans, including opportunities to hunt and fish; and improve the management of game species and their habitats for this generation and beyond. It directs several components of the Department to assess past and ongoing implementation of the recommendations set forth in Executive Order 13443, “Facilitation of Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation,” to inform how best to enhance and expand public access to lands and waters administered by the Department, lands and waters owned by all Americans-for hunting, fishing, recreational shooting, and other forms of outdoor recreation.

The Secretary of the Interior Order 3366 mandates all Bureaus to ensure public lands and waters under the management and administration of the U.S. Department of the Interior (Department) are open and accessible for recreational pursuits by all Americans and visitors to the United States. Therefore, it is a priority of the Service to provide for wildlife-dependent recreation opportunities, including hunting and fishing, when those opportunities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

Throughout the remainder of the refuge, the Service manages the hunting and fishing opportunities. Fishing is permitted year round on the refuge in areas open to public access (see Figure 1).

Purpose and Need for Proposed Action The Service is proposing to update the existing fishing plan (1978) and add bowfishing to the method of take for fishing, which will increase fishing opportunities on Tishomingo NWR. This action is needed to meet the Service’s priorities and mandates as outlined by the NWRSAA, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, to “recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general uses of the NWRS” and “ensure that opportunities are provided within the NWRS for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses” (16 U.S.C. 668dd (a)(4)). Fishing has been found to be compatible with the purpose of the refuge. This action is also needed to effectively implement S.O. 3356, which directs bureaus and offices within the Department of Interior (DOI), in collaboration with states, tribes, and territorial partners, to implement programs to enhance hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting opportunities on DOI-managed lands and waters, while also promoting conservation activities. This action meets the objectives of the 2019 fish plan, which identified the need for increasing fishing opportunities on the refuge by offering bowfishing on Pennington Creek and the Washita River. The purpose of this EA is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed action.

Figure 1. Location of Visitor Uses on Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge

Alternatives

Alternatives Considered This chapter discusses the alternatives considered for expanding fishing opportunities on the refuge.

With the passing of S.O. 3356, ODWC identified potential hunting and fishing opportunities at each refuge in the state. A meeting early in 2018, between the state and refuges allowed for a healthy discussion regarding potential hunting opportunities at each refuge. Fishing plans were then developed as needed for each refuge, including Tishomingo NWR, updating and expanding fishing opportunities where possible.

Alternative A – No Action Alternative: Continuation of Ongoing Current Management Activities The No Action Alternative would continue the current fishing program. This action permits public fishing opportunities on the refuge and WMU as described below.

Public boat ramps are available for boating activities associated with fishing on the Cumberland Pool, at the campground boat ramp, Murray 23, and Nida Point.

Fishing opportunities on the refuge are currently available at Cumberland Pool, Washita River, Rock Creek Lake, Pennington Creek, Bell Creek Lake, Goose pen Pond, Dicks Pond, and Big Sandy Creek. Fishing is allowed in all of the wetlands listed above which total 5,289 acres and 21 river miles. Fishing is allowed on the Wildlife Management Unit portion of the refuge on McAdams Pond, Reeves Ravine Lake, Whiskey Creek, Bobcat Lake, Mule Lake, and Lost Lake.

Daytime fishing from the shore is allowed refuge-wide, year-round, and in accordance with State regulations. Fishing from boats is allowed 24 hours a day during the designated boating season. Night fishing from the bank is permitted at the headquarters area, Sandy Creek Bridge, Murray 23, Nida Point, and Pennington Creek, as well as within the WMU. Access to Sandy Creek, Goose Pen Pond, Pennington Creek, Dicks Pond and the Cumberland Pool is through the Refuge Road entrance, east of the city of Tishomingo. Access to Murray 23 is via Murray 23 Road from Highway 22. Access to Nida Point is from Highway 22. Access to Bell Creek Lake is from Bell Creek Road (from the south) and Management Unit Road (from the north). Access to Rock Creek Lake is from Linn and Cemetery Roads. Public boat ramps are available for boating activities associated with fishing on the Cumberland Pool, at the campground boat ramp, Murray 23, and Nida Point. Nida Point is kayak and two-person boat launching only depending on lake levels because during drought conditions full sized boats/trailers typically get stuck in the sand prior to launching. Parking areas are provided at all the fishing locations but there are no fish cleaning stations on the refuge as cleaning fish prior to reaching final destination is prohibited unless camping. There are no comfort stations on the refuge. Restrooms are located at the visitor center and at the pavilion, both of which are located on Refuge Road. See Figure 1 for access and additional facility information.

Fishing is conducted on the refuge with season stipulations. The established boating season within the refuge is March 1 through September 30. The vast majority of all boating activities are directly tied to fishing. A large portion of fishing visits occur during the spring season when crappie and white bass make their yearly spawning runs.

Fishing activities with the use of boats are not allowed during the months of October through February to provide an extended sanctuary zone for migratory and shore birds. The two established bird sanctuaries protect the Big Sandy Creek outlet and the Washita River inlet to the Cumberland Pool. Shoreline fishing is allowed on the refuge yearlong except for the two sanctuary zones.

The use of lead weights and tackle is allowed on the refuge to align with the WMU.

Largemouth, smallmouth and spotted bass; black and white crappie; rainbow and brown trout; sauger, saugeye and walleye; white and striped bass; blue and channel catfish are considered game fish by the state.

The refuge and WMU follow the special regulations set by the state of Oklahoma and Texas for Lake Texoma. Special daily bag limits and size limits are included in Table 1.

Table 1. Special daily bag limits and size limits for game fish Species Size Daily Limit White/Black Crappie 10 inch minimum 37 Channel/Blue Catfish 12 inch minimum 15 Combined Flathead Catfish 20 inch minimum 5 Striped/Hybrid Bass Only 2 may be longer than 10 Combined 20” White Bass No size limit 25 Largemouth/Smallmouth 14 inch minimum 5 Combined Spotted Bass No size limit 5 Combined with Largemouth/Smallmouth

The refuge has many recreation facilities, roads, trails, and other features that support refuge management and visitor use. Visitors can access the refuge easily with four roadways into the refuge (see Figure 1). The main entrance road through the heart of the refuge is open year- round. The refuge is open to limited hunting, fishing, boating, camping, wildlife observation, photography, hiking, and picnicking. Hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental education and interpretation are priority wildlife-dependent recreational uses as defined by the Refuge Improvement Act, so they receive enhanced management consideration on the refuge.

This EA is focused on the fishing opportunities provided by the refuge. Currently, fishing occurs within the 3,150-acre WMU, which is managed by the State of Oklahoma. With few exceptions, the WMU allows for the fishing of nearly all of the game species for which a legal fishing season exists consistent with Oklahoma game regulations. Fish species include, but are not limited to, white crappie (Pomoxis annularis), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus), flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris), striped bass (Morone saxatilis), white bass (Morone saxatilis), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), river carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio), smallmouth buffalo (Ictiobus bubalus), bigmouth buffalo (Ictiobus cyprinellus), spotted gar (Lepisosteus oculatus), longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus), shortnose gar (Lepisosteus platostomus), and alligator gar (Atractosteus spatula). Alligator gar

currently have a daily limit of one per day and must be reported to ODWC within 24 hours of harvest.

These same species may be found within the remainder of the refuge open to fishing as frequent flood events have displaced fish species to wetlands located throughout the refuge.

For the purpose of this document, we will focus on the fishing opportunities provided by the refuge outside of the WMU (see Figure 1).

Alternative B – Proposed Action (Addition of Bowfishing on the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge) Fishing within the refuge and the WMU would remain the same as described in Alternative A. The proposed action would allow the additional activity of bowfishing on the refuge as described below. It would also allow boating and fishing on Bell Creek and Rock Creek Lakes year-round.

Bowfishing would be allowed on the Washita River and Pennington Creek. This would allow for the proposed action to occur on approximately five miles of Pennington Creek and approximately 14 miles of the Washita River located within the refuge boundary. We expect an increase in fishing as visitors learn bowfishing is allowed on the refuge but are not certain if the activity would result in a substantial increase as bowfishing is currently allowed on the WMU. Pennington Creek and the Washita River currently allow fishing with pole and line or rod and reel and that permitted use would continue. This activity would be open to the public year-round during daylight hours only, in order to remain consistent with regulations currently in effect at the WMU.

All species not considered game fish, except shad and species of special concern, have no daily or minimum size limits. We expect the majority of individuals that participate in bowfishing to focus on carp, buffalo and gar species, all of which have no daily limits with the exception of the alligator gar. Alligator gar currently have a daily limit of one per day and must be reported to ODWC within 24 hours of harvest.

Access to Pennington Creek would be by entering the refuge from Refuge Road or Murray 23, proceeding to a boat ramp, and launching a boat in order to reach Pennington Creek. Access to Pennington Creek may also be gained from Refuge Road, parking at the end of West Road, and walking south to the Creek. The nearest locations to access the Washita River are from one of the refuge boat ramps or the WMU. The Washita River can also be accessed from east of the refuge by launching a boat from Bee/Butcher Pen Lake. Bowfishing would not be allowed in the Cumberland Pool and the boating season closes from October 1 until the end of February in order to serve as a waterfowl sanctuary.

The proposed action alternative offers increased opportunities for public fishing and fulfills the Service’s mandate under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. The Service expects that the fishing plan will be compatible with the purposes of the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge and the mission of the NWRS. This action is also needed to effectively implement Secretarial Orders 3356 & 3366, which direct bureaus and offices within DOI, in collaboration with states, tribes, and territorial partners, to implement programs to

enhance hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting opportunities on DOI-managed lands and waters, while also promoting conservation activities.

Although the workload would increase as a result of implementing this activity, actual administrative conflicts should be minimal. Educating the public, responding to inquiries, and placing and updating boundary signs as needed, will still be required. The workload should not significantly impact required staff duties other than to highlight the need for a permanent full- time law enforcement officer at Tishomingo NWR as the refuge does not have a full time wildlife officer assigned to the station. Additional assistance is sought from the zone officer, other refuges or state game wardens as necessary. Staffing requirements for implementing new fishing activities include additional law enforcement patrols, boundary posting, mowing areas as needed, printing hunting and fishing brochures and fuel are estimated to be $5,000.

Mitigation Measures to Avoid Conflicts:

● There are two established bird sanctuaries that are closed to all public entry. ● Refuge fishing information brochures will be available at all kiosks and other information boxes at most access points. ● Refuge hunting and fishing information will be available on refuge website. ● Fishermen would not have access to the refuge during deer hunts to ensure public safety.

Public Scoping Prior to development of this document an informal scoping period occurred from September 6– 20 2018, seeking comments regarding implementing a refuge hunt for deer, feral hogs, waterfowl, and wild turkey. Comments were also requested regarding allowing bowfishing. No comments were received during the comment period and no issues were raised by any party.

Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Affected Environment Approximately 62 species of fish have the potential to be found within the refuge boundary. The ODWC lists 14 species of fish which are considered game fish. We propose to allow bowfishing for all non-game fish species on the refuge in alignment with the state. The sections below contain brief descriptions of each resource affected by the alternatives considered and anticipated direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on each resource. The following resources are not discussed in this EA because the proposed fishing activities are not expected to have any impacts on them: geology, minerals, water quantity, and visual resources. The tables below describe the resources that could be impacted (directly or indirectly) by the alternatives discussed in this document. The following species are considered game fish: largemouth bass, smallmouth, and spotted bass; black and white crappie; saugeye and walleye; white and striped bass; and blue and channel catfish. All other species not listed above are considered nongame fish. Lake Texoma encompasses 139 square miles along the Texas/Oklahoma border and consists of approximately 89,000 acres. It is considered the tenth largest lake in the United States and the

lake is well known for its striper fishing but also provides fishing opportunities for the game fish listed above. Lake Texoma also attracts approximately six million visitors per year. Visitation to the refuge is approximately 125,000 per year with 94,190 participating in wildlife observation; 4,000 participating in wildlife photography; and fishing visits reaching approximately 10,500 in 2019. Fishermen on the refuge usually focus on catfish and crappie but the overall take of fish species is minimal in comparison to the overall harvest for the entire Lake. No negative impacts are expected by continuing to allow fishing on the refuge in its current state. An improvement in water clarity may also occur by implementing bowfishing on the refuge due to the reduction of nongame fish. The refuge is an overlay project of the Corps’ Denison Dam and Lake Texoma Project located within Johnston and Marshall Counties in south central Oklahoma (See Figure 2). The 16,464- acre refuge supports a variety of habitats, including forests, prairies, riparian areas, wetlands, and agricultural areas that support and are managed for resident and migratory wildlife and fish species. Current and proposed fishing areas are located across the west and south sides of the refuge. The following resources are not discussed in this EA because the proposed hunting activities are not expected to have any impacts on them: physiography, geology, minerals, water quantity, visual resources, and wilderness. The tables below describe the resources that could be impacted (directly or indirectly) by the alternatives discussed in this document. The refuge lies within the Oak and Bluestem Parkland of the Prairie Parkland Province and consists of the Osage Savanna and Mixed Grass Plains Biota and Eastern Cross Timbers, which form a gently rolling sandy belt and rugged topography marked by steep ravines on the south and east sides of the refuge. Most of the refuge lies within the floodplain of Lake Texoma. The north and west sides of the refuge consist of rolling hills divided by a wide and flat valley near the center. During years with significant flooding up to 85 percent of the refuge may be inundated for extended periods.

Figure 2. Tishomingo NWR Location

Environmental Consequences of the Action This section analyzes the environmental consequences of the action on each affected resource, including direct and indirect effects. This EA only includes the written analyses of the environmental consequences on a resource when the impacts on that resource could be more than negligible and therefore considered an “affected resource.” An analysis of the effects of management actions has been conducted on the physical environment (air quality, water quality, and soils); biological environment (vegetation, wildlife, and threatened and endangered species); and socioeconomic environment (cultural resources, socioeconomic features including public use/recreation, and visual and aesthetic resource). Any resources that will not be more than negligibly impacted by the action have been dismissed from further analyses.

Impact Types: ● Direct effects are those which are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place. ● Indirect effects are those which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. ● Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions.

Affected Natural Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Nongame Fish Species – Common Carp Regional Analysis Common carp were introduced to North America in 1831, and now are widely distributed in most of the U.S. Common carp increase turbidity in water, which can result in decreased populations of native fish. The common carp is usually considered a nuisance fish (Page and Burr 2011). Nongame fish typically feed on detritus and are opportunistic bottom feeders (with the exception of gar), whereas game fish typically feed on baitfish, so competition is unlikely. Local Analysis The common carp occurs throughout Oklahoma, though dense populations are fairly localized. The carp is probably the most adaptable fish found in the state. Although it seems to prefer quiet, shallow waters of rivers and impoundments, it can survive almost anywhere it can find organic detritus or other kinds of organisms it can engulf for food. It primarily serves as bait in Oklahoma but can also be prepared to eat (Miller and Robison 2004).

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Visitors engaged in fishing on the refuge usually focus on catfish and crappie, but the overall take of fish species is minimal in comparison to the overall harvest for the Lake Texoma project. Of our 10,500 fishing visits, we estimate that no more than five percent of fishermen engage in fishing for non-game fish species. This alternative would result in direct mortality to the species. Fishermen rarely focus specifically on carp when on the refuge. Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) The proposed action would allow bowfishing on Pennington Creek and the Washita River. This activity would be open to the public year-round during daylight hours only. Implementation of the proposed action would result in direct mortality to the species. Fishing with rod and reel with the addition of bowfishing should still have a minimal impact on the carp population. Since this activity currently occurs in wetlands located on the WMU, we do not expect a significant increase in this activity because it requires the use of a boat. This alternative would likely result in an increased harvest and an overall decrease in the population. An improvement in water clarity and game fish populations may also occur by implementing bowfishing due to the reduction of nongame fish. This may result in an increase in native fish populations.

Nongame Fish Species – Buffalo (Smallmouth and Bigmouth) Regional Analysis Smallmouth buffalo are found in the Mississippi Basin from the Gulf states north to Ohio and the Dakotas. Young feed on microcrustaceans and adults are opportunistic bottom feeders that are found in deeper, less turbid waters than the bigmouth buffalo and sometimes found in smaller streams (Miller and Robison 2004). Bigmouth Buffalo Bigmouth buffalo are found in the Mississippi Valley from Minnesota and Ohio in the north and from Alabama and Texas to the south. The bigmouth buffalo is a common inhabitant of deeper pool regions of larger rivers and lakes. Foods include a variety of small organisms and a considerable amount of algae and diatoms, which allows for the species to function as a filter feeder (Miller and Robison 2004). Local Analysis Both the smallmouth buffalo and bigmouth buffalo are found in the eastern half of Oklahoma. Both species also spawn sometime in April and May, with the breeding season potentially triggered by floodwaters (Miller and Robison 2004). This is the time period when most take advantage of the bowfishing opportunity.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) The proposed action would allow bowfishing for nongame fish species on the Washita River and Pennington Creek during daylight hours. Implementation of the proposed action would result in direct mortality to the species. Estimated harvest is unknown as this will be a new activity. Since this activity currently occurs on the banks of wetlands located within the WMU, we do not expect a significant visitor increase because it requires the use of a boat. These species are not considered popular tablefare, and a decrease in their population may have a positive effect on water turbidity, which could result in an increase in native fish populations.

Nongame Fish Species – Gar (Spotted, Longnose, Shortnose, and Alligator) Regional Analysis Spotted Gar The spotted gar seems to prefer waters that contain abundant aquatic vegetation, but there seems to be little else in its known ecology to differentiate it from its relatives. It is found from the Great Lakes through Mississippi basin south, west to central Texas, and east to Western Florida. The gar spawns in spring, usually in shallow waters and its eggs are poisonous but the flesh of the fish may be eaten (Miller and Robison 2004).

Longnose Gar Longnose gar are widely distributed throughout the eastern United States from Quebec to the Great Lakes to the Dakotas, reaching south to West Texas and east to Florida. The widespread distribution illustrates the success of this predator. The longnose seems to be somewhat more adaptable than some of its relatives (Miller and Robison 2004). Shortnose Gar Shortnose gar are found in the mainstream portion of the larger rivers of the Mississippi basin and the larger tributaries and rivers in most of the eastern half of Oklahoma. Although found in many lakes, oxbows, and other sluggish habitats, this species may be better suited for living in the main streams of large muddy rivers, though it prefers quiet sand or mud bottomed pools and backwaters (Miller and Robison 2004). Alligator Gar Alligator gar are found in the major rivers from the Mississippi Basin from Illinois and Ohio to the Gulf of Mexico. The alligator gar inhabits quiet parts of the large river tributaries to the Gulf of Mexico and is found in brackish water from Florida to Mexico. The large size (up to seven feet in Oklahoma) has prompted a minor fishing industry for it in some parts of its range (Miller and Robison 2004). Local Analysis The gars are all inhabitants of relatively clear, sluggish waters, where they feed entirely on small fish. Gars are all air breathers with a well-developed lung-like gas bladder. Feeding behavior consists of a very slow approach to the prey and a quick darting, lateral movement of the head, which impales the prey on sharp teeth. While some of these species may be eaten, most of the species in this family are not considered high tablefare.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Of 10,500 fishing visits, we estimate that no more than five percent of fishermen engage in fishing for non-game fish species. Implementation of this alternative would result in direct mortality to the species. The overall take of fish species on the refuge is minimal in comparison to the overall harvest for the entire lake. Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Implementation of the proposed action would result in mortality to the species as bowfishing would be implemented. Fishermen rarely focus specifically on gar when on the refuge when using rod and reel but do focus on the gar species when bowfishing. Since this activity currently occurs on the banks of wetlands located within the WMU, we do not expect a significant visitor increase because it requires the use of a boat; therefore, the implementation of Alternative B should still have a minimal impact on the nongame fish population. This may result in decreased turbidity which could have a positive effect on native fish populations. While the alligator gar is not currently protected in Oklahoma, only one may be harvested per day and must be reported to the ODWC.

Game Fish Species – largemouth, smallmouth, and spotted bass; black and white crappie; rainbow and brown trout; sauger, saugeye and walleye; white and striped bass; blue and channel catfish.

Regional Analysis Lake Texoma encompasses 139 square miles along the Texas/Oklahoma border and consists of approximately 89,000 acres. It is considered the tenth largest lake in the United States and the lake is well known for its striper fishing but also provides fishing opportunities for the majority of the game fish listed above. Lake Texoma also attracts approximately six million visitors per year. The fish population and species in this lake have continued to thrive since the lake was created in the 1940s. Largemouth, smallmouth and spotted bass; black and white crappie; rainbow and brown trout; sauger, saugeye and walleye; white and striped bass; and blue and channel catfish are considered game fish by the state.

Local Analysis All of the game species listed above occur in the Cumberland Pool and surrounding wetlands and rivers. The majority of these species spawn in spring and summer and may be found throughout the water column. Changes in species composition does occur during flood events, which are becoming more frequent.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Lake Texoma receives approximately six million visitors each year, in comparison the number of refuge fishermen, was 10,500 visits in 2019. Under the no action alternative, current management direction would continue to include fishing opportunities on the refuge and WMU as described below: The refuge and WMU follow the special regulations set by the State of Oklahoma and Texas for Lake Texoma. See Table 1 above for special daily bag limits and size limits. Fishermen on the refuge usually focus on catfish and crappie, but the overall take of fish species is minimal in comparison to the overall harvest for the entire Lake. This alternative would result in direct mortality to the species.

Other Wildlife and Aquatic Species The refuge supports a diversity of wildlife species of eastern Oklahoma, including game and nongame species, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates, which are important contributors to the overall biodiversity on the refuge. Songbirds, raptors, and rails breed at the refuge, whereas shorebirds and waterfowl primarily utilize the refuge as wintering and migratory habitat. Wintering waterfowl concentrations on the refuge are highest from late November through February. The refuge maintains a waterfowl sanctuary (Cumberland Pool) that excludes access to the public for boating from October through February. This area provides sanctuary and roosting areas for migratory birds and helps to offset potential disturbance effects. The refuge has documented 284 species of birds, 30 species of mammals, at least 65 species of reptiles and amphibians, and 62 species of fish. Management of many of these species

remains a collaborative effort with the ODWC. The refuge's rich mixture of bottomland hardwood forests, open lakes, and wetland habitats also support other rare and declining migratory birds, particularly neo-tropical songbirds and federally listed species.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Under the No Action Alternative, fishing would continue to result in minor disturbance to other wildlife species. While there is typically an impact to the majority of wildlife species whenever human presence is noted, many animals have developed a tolerance especially on refuges when visitors remain in vehicles. Many animals also remain motionless until the perceived threat from visitors has dissipated; however, it is likely that similar habitat can be found on the refuge and no loss of species diversity or abundance is likely. The refuge receives 10,500 fishing visits per year. This results in some temporary disturbance to small mammals, birds, and other wildlife over 1.5 miles of shoreline as fishermen continue to move in search of fish in these localized areas. Songbirds and raptors use the refuge year-round, whereas shorebirds and waterfowl primarily utilize the refuge as wintering and migratory habitat. Wintering waterfowl concentrations on the refuge are highest from late November to February. From October to February, the refuge maintains a waterfowl sanctuary that prohibits public entry. This area provides sanctuary and roosting areas for migratory birds and helps to offset potential disturbance effects. The active breeding season for most birds (with the exception of winter breeding raptors) is April–July. The potential exists that short-term disturbance to bird species would occur while visitors engage in fishing. Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Bowfishing may result in additional short-term disturbance to wildlife over the five-mile stretch along the banks of Pennington Creek and approximately 14 miles of the Washita River banks. This includes temporary displacement of turkey, deer, waterfowl, and other resident wildlife from boat or foot traffic moving through the area. Impacts to migrating waterfowl and other birds and wildlife is expected to be negligible because no bowfishing will occur in the waterfowl sanctuary area (Cumberland Pool). The proposed activity will occur year-round during daylight hours, but since bowfishing will be limited to Pennington Creek and the Washita River, minimal conflict is expected. Breeding raptors (e.g., bald eagles) may initiate nesting during periods of fishing activity on the Washita River. To mitigate this possible conflict during the active breeding season, those engaging in fishing activities will be instructed to stay at least 600 feet from an active bald eagle nest. Numerous water resources are located within the immediate area of the proposed actions for waterfowl, so impacts to shorebirds, raptors, and other avian species may occur as bowfishing would be open year- round, but the proposed action would typically occur during the spring and summer months when the majority of waterfowl have departed for their northern breeding grounds. Most of the mammals listed may be encountered in the proposed action areas where bowfishing would occur. Many of the reptile and amphibian species listed above are forest- and edge-dependent species and may be affected by the proposed action; however, a reduction in population is not expected to occur. Approximately 62 fish species could potentially be

found within the refuge boundary, any of which could experience a negligible level of disturbance and/or mortality while visitors engage in the proposed activity. Impacts are similar to Alternative A; disturbance effects to wildlife would increase, but they would be spread out over a larger area, would be temporary, and are not likely to significantly affect wildlife populations.

Threatened and Endangered Species and other Special Status Species The refuge provides habitat for the following four threatened and endangered species:

Whooping Crane (Grus americana) The whooping crane was listed as endangered on March 11, 1967 (USFWS 2009). Once widespread in North America, by 1941, the species had declined to about 16 individuals in a single wild flock that migrated between Canada and coastal Texas (Lewis 1995). Several factors contributed to the historic decline of the species, including habitat loss and alteration, coastal and marine pollution, illegal hunting, disease, predation, collision with utility lines, loss of genetic diversity within the population, and vulnerability to natural and human caused disturbances (Lewis 1995). Whooping cranes are associated with marshes, shallow river bottoms, potholes, prairies, and agricultural fields. Overall decline of the species is attributed to habitat loss and alteration; once reduced in numbers, killing and disturbance by humans, disease, and collision with manmade objects became important (Lewis 1995). The whooping crane has begun a slow but seemingly steady recovery, and as of 2018, the wild population of cranes had increased to 505 cranes counted in and around the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge (Allaboutbirds.org 2018). The historic wintering grounds included southwestern Louisiana, the Gulf Coast of Texas, interior west Texas, the highlands of northern Mexico, and Atlantic coastal areas of New Jersey, Delaware, South Carolina, and Georgia (De Hoyo et al. 2000). During migration, they feed and roost in a wide variety of habitats, including croplands, large and small freshwater marshes, the margins of lakes and reservoirs, and submerged sandbars in rivers. Whooping cranes have not been observed on the refuge, but are known to occur in Johnston County (USFWS 2010).

Interior Least Tern (Sternula antillarum) The interior least tern was listed as endangered on May 28, 1985. All subspecies of the least tern apparently were abundant through the late 1880s, but were nearly extirpated for their delicate plumage used for fashionable hats at that time. After the signing of the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, commercial harvesting became illegal, and the species began to increase through the 1940s. However, human development and use of tern nesting beaches for housing and recreation subsequently led to another rapid population decline. In the interior United States, river channelization, irrigation diversions, and the construction of dams contributed to the destruction of much of the tern’s sandbar nesting habitat. By the mid-1970s, least tern populations had decreased by more than 80 percent from the 1940s. This colonially nesting waterbird is a species that seldom swims, spending much of its time on the wing (Hubbard 1985). The least tern is the smallest North American tern with gray above, black cap and nape, and white below. The flight is light, swift, and graceful, and it is developed to the point that flight is the major means of foraging, allowing the birds to snatch fish, crustaceans, and insect food from the surface. They nest on the ground, on sandbars, in rivers, or along lake or pond edges, typically on sites that are sandy and relatively free of vegetation.

Interior least terns are migratory and breed along the Red, Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and Rio Grande River systems. Interior least terns are occasionally seen on the refuge during the summer months but potential for disturbance should be low to non-existent, as the proposed activity will be limited to Pennington Creek and the Washita River while the species seems to prefer the shorelines and the Cumberland Pool.

American Burying Beetle (Nicrophorus americanus) The American burying beetle was originally listed as endangered on July 13, 1989. This species is the largest within its genus and has two distinct markings of orange-red scallops upon its shiny black wings and a large orange-red marking on the raised portion of the pronotum (unique to this species). The American burying beetle is nocturnal, lives for one year, and typically reproduces only once. They are beetles which emerge from the soil in search of food and mating when soil temperatures reach 60 degrees Fahrenheit or higher. The American burying beetles are scavengers, dependent on carrion, and play an important role in breaking down decaying matter. They reproduce by utilizing a small carcass to bury and lay their eggs within for the growing larvae. The American burying beetle is unusual in that both parents provide care to their young. The distribution for the American burying beetle includes the eastern half of North America, from southern Ontario, Canada, to the southern Atlantic coastal plain. The range of the American burying beetle within Oklahoma occurs on the eastern half of the state, with confirmed sightings in over 20 counties. The decline in population is still uncertain, due to a lack in data; however, declines could possibly be attributed to habitat loss and degradation, habitat fragmentation, carcass limitation, pesticides, disease, and possibly light pollution, or a combination of these factors. Ecological Service has confirmed that they have been known to occur within Johnston County (USFWS, 2010) but surveys conducted in 2017 and 2018, did not document any occurrences within any of the areas surveyed and this species has not been confirmed to occur on the refuge. In 1989, the American burying beetle was known to be found in Oklahoma and Rhode Island. There are now confirmed populations in nine states. As a result, the Service is currently in the process of conducting a species status assessment in order to determine if the American burying beetle should be down-listed from Endangered to Threatened.

Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) The Great Lakes population (found in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario, and Great Lakes of Canada) of the piping plover was listed as endangered in 1985, while all other populations are listed as threatened. Critical habitat has not been designated. Piping plovers migrate north in the spring to breed and nest, seeking habitat in open, sparsely vegetated areas near the water, such as sand bars, prairie sloughs and sandy beaches. Nesting begins in late April or early May and can last into September. The piping plover is rarely seen on the refuge during migration. The proposed activity is not expected to overlap with areas used by piping plovers.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) There would not be any known impact, disturbance, or displacement of the whooping crane, as the species has never been confirmed on the refuge. However, it is possible for the species to utilize the refuge during the fall and winter migration. American burying beetle surveys were

conducted in 2017 and 2018 and no American burying beetles have ever been found on the refuge, although they have been found in the county.

While Tishomingo NWR has no documented resident endangered or threatened species, least tern and piping plover do sporadically use the refuge shorelines along the Cumberland Pool. Current and new fishing opportunities pose a minimal threat to the least tern and piping plover.

The piping plover is typically only seen during migration, but if least tern are found nesting along the shores of the Cumberland Pool, the area will be closed to the public until nesting season has concluded. Continuing the current fishing program and not expanding it to include bowfishing may result in degraded wetlands in the Cumberland Pool by not removing additional nongame fish species. Least tern typically forage in the Cumberland Pool.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) While bowfishing would be allowed year-round, it would not be allowed in the Cumberland Pool but would be restricted to Pennington Creek and the Washita River. The least tern and piping plover may utilize the refuge during the spring and summer months, but typically prefer the Cumberland Pool area. Both species are sometimes seen during migration and may be found in April, May, and September, but they prefer sandy beaches and exposed sandy sites along the lakeshore where bowfishing will not be occurring.

Vegetation The general vegetation within the refuge is classified as mid-grass prairie and Eastern Cross Timbers (Hoagland 2000). General plant communities found on the refuge are forest, prairie, riparian/wetland, and agriculture. The general areas identified in the proposed action include a variety of habitats, including forest, riparian areas, creeks, rivers, wetlands, and agricultural lands.

Forest Bowfishing would occur in Pennington Creek and the Washita River. The vegetation immediately adjacent to these areas includes forest types ranging from bottomland hardwood timber to heavy brush in the floodplains and savannah and scattered brush uplands. Species adjacent to the proposed sites include winged elm, osage orange, hackberry, and eastern red cedar.

Riparian/Wetland The river and creek channels feature riparian species such as boxelder (Acer negundo), black willow (Salix nigra), eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis).

Agriculture The refuge currently farms approximately 340 acres to provide browse (typically winter wheat) for wintering waterfowl and spring feeding needs for geese and resident wildlife. All refuge farm fields are farmed by refuge personnel. While not immediately adjacent to where the proposed activity would occur, agriculture fields are near the Pennington Creek area.

Direct and Indirect Impacts

Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Under this alternative, the existing vegetation and habitat conditions would likely remain the same. The current level of fishing has not had any detectable negative impacts. In the last two years, the refuge has stopped farming immediately adjacent to the Cumberland Pool as frequent floods have deposited debris along the shore and into the fields. This has created a buffer zone, which greatly reduces runoff and erosion by creating a barrier to the Cumberland Pool. The farm fields near Pennington Creek also have fields and trees as barriers, which also aid in reducing erosion and agricultural field runoff. Trampling would not occur as the majority of the areas where fishing occurs is free of vegetation.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Negligible effects are expected to vegetation from trampling as a result of bowfishing due to the manner in which the proposed activity would likely occur. Bowfishing would occur from a boat, which will mean launching from a boat ramp on the refuge when boating season is open to reach Pennington Creek or by accessing the Washita River from off-refuge. We would also allow access to Pennington Creek by parking at the end of West Road and walking to Pennington Creek when the Cumberland Pool is closed to boating. This distance is approximately two tenths of a mile, so trampling should be minimal.

Soils The refuge upland soils are a conglomeration of sand, blackland, light clay, heavy clay, gravel, and sandy loam. Fertility is low and the soils are highly erodible. The south and east sides of the refuge are primarily limestone with a light cover of loam. Konaw-Dougherty soils make up about 40 percent of the refuge and are located primarily on the northwest side of the refuge.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Current fishing activities on the refuge are not known to have any direct or indirect effects on soil quality based on the current level of foot traffic. In 2019, the refuge saw approximately 10,500 fishing visits. The refuge is in the process of placing counters at various areas (hiking trails and fishing locations) to determine actual use at these locations. The majority of fishing visits involve fishermen driving to a location and fishing near their vehicles. Vehicles are confined to public access roads and parking areas.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Overall, impacts are expected to be negligible because vehicles would continue to be confined to public access roads, boat ramps, and parking facilities. The proposed action would result in a negligible increase in disturbance to surface soils by compaction from foot traffic compared to Alternative A, as an increase in foot traffic by fishermen attempting to reach Pennington Creek may occur. In addition, the increase in fishing visits compared to overall public use on the refuge is considered negligible.

Air Quality The major sources of air pollution in the region are oil and gas production and/or refining, agriculture, manufacturing, transportation, and fires (both wild and prescribed). Prescribed burning is conducted by the refuge, ODWC, and some private landowners as part of

agricultural practices and habitat management. Prescribed burning is conducted by government agencies only under specific meteorological conditions and approved burn plans. Each individual project or activity in the region that produces air emissions could affect the region’s air quality but the overall impact will depend on a variety of factors including: project activity, length of time, wind direction, etc. The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for monitoring several pollutants throughout the state including: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, fine particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Monitoring stations are set-up throughout the state and typically allow the public to view and monitor air quality from each specific site.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) No impacts to air quality are expected from continuation of current management. The current level of public use on the refuge (which is approximately 125,000 visits per year based on 2019 data) does not appear to be impacting air quality, as current air quality in the area meets air quality standards established by the EPA. Fishing accounts for approximately 9 percent (10,500 visits per year) of total visitation on the refuge. Fishermen use gas powered boat on the Cumberland Pool, Pennington Creek and the Washita River. Fishing traffic on roads and trails may cause a slight decrease in air quality due to vehicle emissions and the stirring of road dust.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) By implementing the proposed action, we assume that there will be a maximum increase of five percent in the number of fishing visits. Increased traffic on roads and trails would result in an increase in vehicle emissions and stirring of dust; however, this impact is expected to be negligible. The refuge is in the process of adding additional road counters to quantify the number of vehicles that use specific areas throughout the refuge. The expected slight increase in the amount of traffic that results from increased fishing activity would be spread out over the same acreage as Alternative A. This increase in the number of fishing visits when compared to overall public use on the refuge is considered negligible; no changes to air quality are anticipated.

There should be no noticeable impact to air quality on the refuge by implementing the proposed action. There may be an increase in emissions on the Washita River and Pennington Creek as gasoline-powered boats will be used to reach these locations during the boating season and with the Washita River open to boating year around. Each individual project or activity in the region that produces air emissions could affect the region’s air quality but the overall impact will depend on a variety of factors, including project activity, length of time, wind direction, etc.

Water Resources Bowfishing would be allowed on approximately five miles of Pennington Creek and approximately 14 miles of the Washita River. Some fishermen would likely conduct this activity from a boat, which will mean launching from a boat ramp on the refuge when boating season is open to reach Pennington Creek or by accessing the Washita River from off-refuge. We would also allow access to Pennington Creek by parking at the end of West Road and walking to Pennington Creek when the Cumberland Pool is closed to boating. Bowfishing is

also currently allowed in the WMU. Several water resources are located within and around Pennington Creek and the Washita River, the areas where the proposed activity would occur. This includes the Big Sandy Creek and the following wetlands located south of the Washita River: Bell Creek, Polecat Lake, Upper Rock Creek, and Rock Creek. Several other wetlands are found on the refuge, including Cottonwood Pond, Twin Ponds, Goose Pen Pond, and Dick’s Pond. The Cumberland Pool is located at the center of the refuge and is approximately 4,280 acres in size and the largest body of water on the refuge. It was developed as a de- sedimentation pool for Lake Texoma and is functioning as planned. The majority of the wetlands located on the refuge are subject to flooding on an annual basis, which usually results in sedimentation and debris deposited as a result. Water quality is not monitored on the refuge but has been monitored on Pennington Creek by the Blue Thumb Program, a water pollution education program of the Oklahoma Conservation Commission’s Water Quality Division.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Existing fishing activities resulting from boat use on the Cumberland Pool, adjacent rivers, and creeks lessen water clarity due to disturbance and wave action, but impacts should be negligible and limited due to the existing boating season, which occurs from March 1 through September 30. Restricting boat use during the winter months eliminates wave action caused by boats and allows for increased water clarity while the refuge is closed to boating in order to serve as a wildlife sanctuary. Flood events impact water quality and clarity due to increased stirring of sedimentation.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) There may be an increase of five percent in the number of fishing visits on the Washita River and Pennington Creek, as gasoline-powered boats will be used to reach those locations. Boat use on the river and creek will lessen water clarity due to disturbance and increased wave action, as Pennington Creek will only by accessible by boat during the boating season, which is no different from Alternative A, while the Washita River would now be open year-round. While the proposed action would be allowed year-round on Pennington Creek and the Washita River, we do not expect a large drawn out increase in boating activity as most outdoor activities undergo a peak of activity such as when spawning occurs for nongame fish species (typically the spring/summer months). Heavy visitor use for the proposed action is not expected during the fall and winter months due to lower temperatures at that time of year, in addition to other outdoor activities being available such as hunting.

Affected Visitor Use and Experience Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Visitor Use and Experience The refuge has been experiencing a wet cycle for the last several years, which caused historic flooding in 2015 with continuous flood events since then. The floods highlighted the need for constructing a new visitor center and maintenance shop at a much higher elevation. The refuge has experienced a slight decrease in visitation since then as the center and maintenance shop are still under construction and have yet to be completed with staff currently housed in a temporary office. In 2019, the refuge received 125,000 visitors with approximately 42,000

wildlife observers; 10,500 fishing visits; 4,000 wildlife photography visits; 595 hunting visits; 3,560 interpretation visits; and 1,507 environmental education visits. The refuge is in the process of adding counters to various areas of the refuge to quantify the estimated visits in reporting. Camping is allowed year-round at the headquarters camping area. The camping area has one accessible site and six additional sites. There is also one restroom located near the pavilion, which allows for picnics and social gatherings. There are also two hiking trails located on the refuge. The Craven Nature Trail, which is approximately three-quarters of a mile, and the Sandy Creek Trail, which is a quarter-mile trail along Big Sandy Creek. Public boat ramps are available for boating activities associated with fishing on the Cumberland Pool, at the campground boat ramp, Murray 23, and Nida Point. Nida Point is kayak and two-person boat launching only depending on lake levels because during drought conditions full-sized boats/trailers typically get stuck in the sand prior to launching. Parking areas are provided at all the fishing locations but there are no fish cleaning stations on the refuge as cleaning fish prior to reaching final destination is prohibited unless camping. There are no comfort stations on the refuge. Restrooms are located at the visitor center and at the pavilion, both of which are located on Refuge Road. See Figure 1 for access and additional facility information.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) There is no change to visitor use and experience from continuation of current management. The refuge currently holds a controlled youth, non-ambulatory, and general deer hunt. Each of these hunts is two days long. The refuge is currently closed to public access during each of the deer hunts for a total of six days in order to prevent non-hunters from interfering with hunters while reducing the possibility of hunting accidents. Visitors are directed to the WMU or the south end of the refuge during the six days that the refuge is closed. The refuge also holds a controlled turkey hunt and a controlled archery deer hunt in hunt unit 21 located south of the Washita River. A general waterfowl season on the wetlands located south of the Washita River and hunt unit 2 has also been implemented (see Figure 3). Bank fishing occurs around the Cumberland Pool year-round, except when the refuge is closed for a total of six days while deer and turkey hunts are held on the refuge. Boating is permitted from March 1 to September 30, annually. Fishermen wishing to access the refuge for bank fishing during the deer hunt will be unable to reach their destinations as the entrances to the refuge, Murray 23, and Nida Point are closed for safety reasons. The fishermen would be directed to other areas such as the WMU to pursue that activity. Unit 21 is considered a closed unit and although fishing is allowed at Bell Creek and Rock Creek, the unit is closed to public access unless the archery deer hunt (three day hunt) and/or accessing the area for waterfowl hunting is occurring. The waterfowl seasons are set by the state and currently include the youth season (October 5 and February 1), waterfowl season (November 2–December 1 and December 14–January 26). Dark geese season (November 2– December 1 and December 14–February 16), light geese season (same dates as the dark geese season dates) and the light goose conservation order (February 17–March 30). Overall, the impacts to visitor services/recreational opportunities are considered short-term and minor since other parts of the refuge like the WMU are available for use by non-fishing visitors.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) The activities described in Alternative A would continue with the addition of bowfishing on Pennington Creek and the Washita River. There are no anticipated conflicts with allowing this activity as we do not expect a drastic change in visitor use. The use is allowed on the WMU and allowing this activity on the refuge should not result in a significant change to visitor experience from what is already occurring as we only expect a five percent increase in fishing visits.

Figure 3. Tishomingo NWR Hunt Units

Affected Cultural Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Cultural Resources In 1938, Congress authorized the Corps to build a dam near Denison, Texas, thereby creating Lake Texoma along the Texas-Oklahoma border. The Chapman family, owners of what is also referred to as the Washita Farms, fought to save their farming showplace, but ultimately lost and their land was condemned by the Federal government. Dismantling of the farm began in 1941, and was completed in 1943, as the impounded waters began to flood the fertile fields. In 1928, the farm consisted of 42 five-room concrete homes for managers and tenants, a concrete hatchery building, a concrete hog barn housing 400 hogs, a concrete main office, a 10,000 square foot store, 14 concrete grain silos, and several additional farm houses, box houses, and barns. Only the concrete structures remain standing today. The refuge complex has not been fully surveyed for cultural resources. Surveys that have occurred are usually initiated on a project-specific basis, such as water or construction projects, and to comply with requirements of Section 106 regulations of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (36 CFR Part 800).

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Under this alternative, there are no anticipated direct or indirect impacts to the cultural environment, as current conditions would be maintained and no ground disturbance would occur. The majority of the existing concrete structures are in areas that are closed to public access. As a result, continuing current fishing activities under this alternative have little to no impact on these resources. Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Under the proposed action alternative, there are no anticipated impacts to cultural resources because the majority of the remaining structures are located in areas that are closed to public access and there are no structures located near the Washita River and Pennington Creek where the proposed action would occur. If any archeological sites or other historical items are found or any impacts to cultural resources are identified during the proposed action, the refuge will close the area and coordinate with the regional archeologist.

Affected Refuge Management and Operations Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Refuge Management and Operations Land Use Prescribed burning: Tishomingo NWR has an active prescribed burning program. The refuge typically attempts to conduct winter/spring burns in February or March. Burn units vary in size from 16 acres to approximately 1,000 acres. None of the current hunts or proposed fishing activities will conflict with prescribed burning efforts. Conducting burns may result in temporary erosion which may possibly impact water quality, but the refuge typically conducts burns in early spring to remove thatch layer and stimulate spring/summer growth. Depending on timing of rains, burned areas typically “green up” quickly, which should limit erosion.

Mowing/farming: Refuge staff usually completes farming activities by November and resumes mowing in July with the exception of the pavilion, prairie pathways walking trail and areas around the visitor center which continue to be mowed during the spring and summer months. This will result in between 3 and 10 acres mowed. Most of the access lanes and boundary fence in the hunt units are mowed prior to prescribed burning or in the fall prior to hunts, resulting in 3 to 15 miles mowed. Scheduled mowing events are flexible and can be adjusted according to activities and weather patterns as needed. Trail maintenance (mowing) may be needed while visitors are engaged in fishing. If this occurs, staff will mow trails as needed and vacate the area as quickly as possible. If many visitors are fishing, staff will postpone mowing and return at a later time to complete mowing activities. Administration The staff consists of a refuge manager, wildlife refuge specialist, education specialist, engineering equipment operator, and a maintenance worker. General budget for refuge operations and maintenance is approximately $600,000.00 per fiscal year. Although the staff workload will increase as a result of the additional hunts, actual administrative conflicts due to implementing the proposed activity is not expected as the refuge currently allows fishing. Educating the public, responding to inquiries, placing and removing boundary signs, and adjusting work schedules to monitor activity will still be required. The workload should not significantly impact required staff duties other than to highlight the need for a permanent full- time law enforcement officer at Tishomingo NWR as the refuge continues to increase hunting and fishing activities. The federal wildlife officer currently splits patrol duties between Tishomingo and Hagerman NWRs. Additional assistance is sought from the zone officer, other refuges, or state game wardens as necessary. There are no additional fees required for participating in the proposed activity other than meeting the general fishing license requirements set by ODWC.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) Land use impacts include possible closure of Refuge Road during prescribed burns which typically occur in winter/early spring. These burns usually take 1–4 days to complete. There should be no impacts to fishing as areas to be mowed (approximately 3 to 10 acres) such as campgrounds, roadsides, the immediate area around the pavilion and the hiking trails are not located near fishing areas with the exception of the Sandy Creek Trail. Impacts to administration would include educating the public regarding current fishing regulations, posting boundary and informational signs, maintaining campsites, developing tearsheets, and closing campsites during refuge deer hunts. Annual costs to administer the fishing program at Tishomingo NWR, including salary, equipment, and maintenance, total approximately $5,000. Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Impacts to land use should be similar to Alternative A, as no additional areas will be mowed/farmed in order to promote this activity with the exception of the access road leading to Pennington Creek located at the end of West Road.

Administrative impacts will include staffing for implementing bowfishing activities, additional law enforcement patrols in order to educate fishermen and visitors of new activities, boundary posting, mowing fishing areas as needed, printing fishing brochures, and fuel. Annual costs to administer the fishing program with the addition of bowfishing, at Tishomingo NWR, including salary, equipment, and maintenance, total approximately $5,000. Impacts should be minimal as these administrative activities are already occurring in order to educate the public on other allowed uses.

Affected Socioeconomic Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Socioeconomics Local and Regional Economies The 16,464-acre Tishomingo NWR is located within Johnston and Marshall Counties in south central Oklahoma. The refuge is south-southwest of Oklahoma City and due north of the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area. The refuge is also located within 125 miles of six million people, although it is still considered a rural setting approximately three miles southeast of the city of Tishomingo in Johnston County, Oklahoma. The primary economic sectors (categories of economic activities) in the region include manufacturing, public administration, healthcare services, retail, and agriculture. However, there has been a steady decline in agricultural occupations over the years, with those jobs being replaced by manufacturing, retail, and healthcare services (Citydata.com 2009).

The estimated median household income for Tishomingo in 2013 was $28,365, with an estimated median home value of $74,568. The median real estate property taxes paid for housing units in the area during 2013 were $400 (0.5 percent). The average unemployment rate for the region in 2015 was 6.4 percent.

The economic impact of refuge operations is felt mainly in the neighboring communities of Tishomingo, Madill, Milburn, and Durant, Oklahoma respectively as most refuge employees live and shop within these areas. Youth and other cooperative programs also provide occasional employment to members of the community.

The refuge provides various wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities, with fishing, hunting, and wildlife observation being the most popular. Visitation to the refuge is approximately 125,000 per year with 94,190 participating in wildlife observation; 4,000 participating in wildlife photography; and fishing visits reaching approximately 10,500 in 2019. While the refuge has many out-of-state visitors, the majority of visitors are from nearby communities. Local community businesses, including restaurants, grocery stores, motels, service stations, and sporting goods stores, profit significantly from these public use programs.

The refuge’s annual budget is approximately $600,000 and the majority of this money is recycled in the local economy through refuge staff salaries, purchases from local suppliers, and service contracts.

Johnston and Marshall Counties do not receive payments from the Service under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act of 1978, public law 95-469, because all refuge lands in Johnston and

Marshall Counties are considered the property of the USACE and that agency makes a payment to the county in lieu of taxes. However, Johnston County does receive payment in lieu of taxes from the Service for the 235 acres occupied by the Tishomingo National Fish Hatchery, which was established in 1929.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Alternative A (No Action Alternative) The economic and social condition of the area would remain the same. The refuge would continue to be one of the area’s main attractions. The presence and operation of the refuge provides economic benefits to the surrounding communities within a 30-mile radius in several ways. The refuge attracts visitors and by attracting visitors to the area, the refuge generates revenue for the local economy. Much of the refuge’s annual budget is recycled into local businesses through refuge staff, purchases of equipment and supplies, as well as contracts for local labor to accomplish refuge projects. The refuge provides full-time employment for five individuals that live in nearby communities.

Alternative B (Proposed Action Alternative) Overall, the economic and social condition of the area would remain similar to Alternative A. Increased fishing opportunities should result in increased visitation and generate additional revenue to the local economy. Since the activity is already allowed on the WMU, we expect that allowing it on the refuge should result in approximately five percent increase in additional fishermen to engage in the activity. The proposed action would have a direct positive impact on the local economy by providing increased fishing opportunities for visitors thereby increasing business potential for vendors in our region of Oklahoma. Convenience stores and restaurants in the local area would also see short-term benefits from fishing visits to the area. A slight increase in business for these types of facilities would likely result from the increased visitation and recognition provided by having additional fishing opportunities at Tishomingo NWR located near the city of Tishomingo.

Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, requires all Federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice into their missions by identifying and addressing disproportionately high or adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs and policies on minorities and low-income populations and communities.

Direct and Indirect Impacts The Service has not identified any potential high and adverse environmental or human health impacts from this proposed action or any of the alternatives. The Service has identified no minority or low-income communities within the impact area. Minority or low-income communities will not be disproportionately affected by any impacts from the proposed action or any of the alternatives.

Indian Trust Resources No Indian Trust Resources have been identified on the refuge. There are no reservations or ceded lands present.

Direct and Indirect Impacts Because resources are not believed to be present, no impacts are anticipated to result from implementation of either alternative describe in the EA.

Cumulative Impact Analysis Cumulative impacts are defined as “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions” (40 CFR 1508.7). Cumulative impacts are the overall, net effects on a resource that arise from multiple actions. Impacts can “accumulate” spatially when different actions affect different areas of the same resource. They can also accumulate over the course of time from actions in the past, the present, and the future. Occasionally, different actions counterbalance one another, partially cancelling out each other’s effects on a resource. But, more typically, multiple effects add up, with each additional action contributing an incremental impact on the resource. Refuges, including Tishomingo NWR, conduct fishing programs within the framework of state and federal regulations. Population estimates of fishable species are developed at a regional and state scale. Fishing frameworks and take limits are set based upon these estimates. The proposed refuge fishing program rules will be the same as, or more restrictive than, fishing regulations throughout the State of Oklahoma. By maintaining fishing regulations that are the same as or more restrictive than the state, individual refuges ensure that they are maintaining seasons, which are supportive of management on a more regional basis. Such an approach also provides consistency with large-scale population status and objectives. The refuge coordinates with the state on our fishing program. The refuge is located in a rural part of southern Oklahoma with increasing influences from the nearby urban areas of Dallas, Texas, and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The refuge is an overlay on the Corps Denison Dam and Lake Texoma Project. The Corps retains primary jurisdiction of refuge lands. There is also a WMU on the refuge that is managed in cooperation with ODWC. Other federal lands in the area include the Tishomingo Fish Hatchery, which is also managed by the Service. Otherwise the refuge is surrounded by private lands, where activities include farming, ranching, oil and gas development, and increasing urbanization. Activities on other state and federal lands include water management, prescribed burning, cropland management, oil and gas activities, hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities. These activities were considering in the following assessment of cumulative impacts.

Anticipated Cumulative Impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives Other past, present, and foreseeable Descriptions of Anticipated Cumulative activity impacting the affected environment Impacts Lake Texoma Refuges, including Tishomingo NWR, Lake Texoma is approximately 89,000 acres conduct fishing programs within the in size and has approximately six million framework of state and federal regulations. visitors per year which participate in camping, boating, and fishing. The lake functions We propose to allow bowfishing for all non- mostly as water retention. game fish species on the refuge (Pennington Creek and Washita River) in alignment with The most recent flood event occurred in 2015 the state. The proposed refuge fishing and flooded approximately 85 percent of the program rules will be the same as, or more refuge. This caused flooding of office restrictive than, fishing regulations facilities and identified the need to construct throughout the State of Oklahoma. The new office facilities at a higher elevation. refuge consistently coordinates with the State Historic flooding may also affect threatened regarding the fishing program. Overall, and endangered species by temporarily impacts resulting from implementing the removing habitat. Army Corps of Engineers action include improved water clarity, has primary jurisdiction over the lake and decreased water turbidity, potential increase manages it for flood control, public water in game fish species, and a decrease in storage, recreational use, and wildlife. Army nongame fish species. Temporary Corps of Engineers diverts water to other disturbance to wildlife and aquatic species areas, which may result in fluctuations of may also occur in the immediate areas where water levels in the lake. bowfishing is taking place. It is possible that implementing the action may impact least Most of the grazing surrounding the lake is terns; if this is observed, these sites will be small-scale, so no major sources of point or closed until nesting season has concluded. non-point pollution occurs. Minor vegetation trampling may also occur along Pennington Creek, but should be Population estimates of species open to minimal. Implementing this action should fishing are developed by the State of also increase revenue of the local economy. Oklahoma in conjunction with the State of Texas because Lake Texoma is on the border Visitors to Lake Texoma may also visit the between Oklahoma and Texas. Fishing refuge while in the area, this may result in an frameworks and take limits are set based upon increase in fishermen during certain times of these estimates. By maintaining fishing the year, especially holidays which may lead regulations that are the same as or more to increased littering and vehicle traffic. The restrictive than the state, individual refuges increased visitation may also result in a ensure that they are maintaining seasons that decrease of non-game fish species if visitors are supportive of management on a more choose to bowfish. regional basis. Such an approach also provides consistency with large scale population status and objectives. The refuge consistently coordinates with the state on our fishing program.

Visitor Use Under current management, there are no Current hunting programs on the refuge do not anticipated cumulative impacts. While we have cumulative impacts on refuge vegetation may have more fishermen than hunters, because hunters number from 10 to 20 during fishermen typically walk along the shore and each of our hunts and having one hunter walk bank and are typically not trampling through a grassy field for a day and a half will vegetation with the exception of the not negatively harm the environment. Pennington Creek area. It is also possible that soil erosion may occur, and visitors may Waterfowl hunting in areas adjacent to the experience up to six days where the refuge is refuge may cause waterfowl to alter feeding closed due to scheduled deer hunts. and loafing patterns due to hunting pressure. This may result in an increase of waterfowl on An increase of approximately 5 percent of the refuges specifically the Cumberland Pool visitation by implementing the proposed which is closed to boating during the winter. action may result in additional wildlife disturbance, including waterfowl, altering Oklahoma has limited public lands open for feeding and loafing patterns. hunting and fishing as roughly 97 percent of the state is privately owned. It is anticipated that the new fishing opportunities will be highly desirable and Tishomingo NWR offers a variety of wildlife- also appreciated by our consumptive users. dependent recreational opportunities (hunting, Because the refuge uses an adaptive fishing, wildlife observation, and wildlife management approach for its hunting and photography, interpretation and environmental fishing program, reviewing the fishing education programs) and conducts various program annually and revising as necessary, administrative activities including a wetlands the Service’s fishing program can be adjusted management program to support habitat as needed. management and recreational opportunities. These activities require staff time and The proposed action would provide increased resources (vehicle, heavy equipment opportunities for the fishing community in operation, fuel, etc.). All of these activities Oklahoma. Since there is limited opportunity require the use of roads, trails, and parking. throughout the state, creating this new Periodic maintenance or improvement of the opportunity may result in a positive use and existing small parking areas, roads, and trails experience for the visitor and angler. The are needed depending on the number of proposed action is not expected to impact visitors and volume of hunters and fishermen. abundance and distribution of any species of fish or wildlife. The refuge plans to provide several additional trails along the new visitor center currently Based on current levels of visitation, under development. The unit in which the potential impacts from visitors engaged in new center will be developed was formerly a wildlife observation, photography, and hunt unit but it was closed for visitor safety. associated uses include damage to vegetation. An additional new trail is also scheduled for Groups of visitors typically use established development on the West Road. foot trails and produce little impact to vegetation. Under the proposed action, there Adjacent to the WMU to the west of the would be a negligible increase in trampling refuge, is the Washita Arm Wildlife of vegetation. Overall, these impacts would Management Area owned and managed by not be cumulatively significant. ODWC. It covers 13,286 acres and is open to

public hunting, fishing, shooting, and None of the new trails will impact the camping. The Washita River also runs proposed action. through this area.

Oil and Gas Neither the current nor the proposed fishing The major sources of air pollution in the program is expected to result in any region are oil and gas production and/or cumulative impacts to air quality. Even refining, agriculture, manufacturing, though there may be an approximate 5 transportation, and fires (both wild and percent increase in boating and vehicle prescribed). Oklahoma is responsible for 3.9 activity on the refuge from the proposed percent of the U.S. total crude oil reserves (see action, the emissions are not anticipated to Figure 4). incrementally add to any impacts to air or water quality from oil and gas operations in While no oil and gas activity currently occurs the area. on the refuge, it is possible that oil may contaminate water and lower quality should a spill occur and reach a drainage leading into the refuge.

Figure 4. Oklahoma Oil and Gas Production and Infrastructure

Refuge Management and Operations Under both alternatives, the refuge would Management actions on the refuge are a small continue farming, wetlands management, part of a number of integrated efforts to native habitat enhancement, and invasive manage migratory birds on the flyway, species control. continental, and hemispheric scales. The refuge contributes to and collaborates with Other refuge management activities and public uses are not expected to cause

waterfowl management efforts by the Service significant cumulative impacts to air quality and ODWC in the Central Flyway. in the area because the majority of activities the refuge participates in, whether conducting Refuge activities affecting air quality include burns, working on roads, farming or prescribed fire, construction and maintenance maintaining wetlands are not typically long- of roads, public use structures, and wetlands; term activities. Impacts from work activities, emissions from vehicles, heavy equipment and including equipment use and seed farm equipment; spraying of herbicides; broadcasting in the fields, are completed control of invasive species; public use within a reasonably short time frame, activities; restoration projects; and forestry typically between one and three days. practices. Overall, these activities occur for a total of two to three weeks per year. Outside of these Projects on the refuge that result in effects to scheduled maintenance activities, we leave air quality would be about the same over time, fields in a natural state. with minimal differences based on conditions. Adverse impacts will occur through the The additional fishing opportunities would be cooperative farming program, prescribed incorporated into the refuge’s operations and burning, public use activities, moist soil maintenance budget and will not diminish management, and maintenance projects. resources dedicated to other refuge management programs. Therefore, when Refuge activities would continue to impact looking at the current refuge management water quality through the agricultural practices activities and the additional number of (pesticide and fertilizer use, increased fishermen, the proposed action would be sedimentation), construction and maintenance incrementally negligible. projects, wetland maintenance projects, invasive species control, and public use activities (foot traffic, runoff from visitor vehicles, and petroleum products from boat motors) generally have direct to indirect effects with adverse, short- to long-term, minor to moderate, site-specific to wide scale impacts. Prescribed burning is conducted by the refuge, ODWC, and private landowners as part of agricultural practices and habitat management. Each individual project or activity in the region that produces air emissions would affect the region’s air quality. Prescribed burning is conducted by government agencies only under specific meteorological conditions and permits to burn.

Grazing Impacts to soils and habitat from current Grazing on adjacent lands may also impact fishing opportunities, or the addition of water quality. Current and foreseeable future bowfishing on the refuge, would be area impacts to soils from nearby grazing incrementally negligible when added to the activities include ground disturbance, which impacts of adjacent grazing activities. Even

can result in erosion and sedimentation, and though there may be an approximate 5 nutrient loss. Grazing disrupts soils and may percent increase in fishing visits to the refuge result in erosion and increased runoff during with the addition of bowfishing, this is not large rain events. This may result in algal expected to result in any additional erosion or blooms and a decline in water quality due to soil disturbance that would cumulatively add nutrient rich waters, affecting fish species. to impacts from current grazing in the area. This is more likely to occur when overgrazing occurs near wetlands. Invasive grasses such as Johnsongrass also have a much greater opportunity of becoming established whenever soil is disturbed or overgrazed. The refuge maintains and conserves large areas of healthy, vegetated habitats that protect soil and water. These vegetated habitats filter out contaminants and minimize erosion. Minimization of erosion improves water quality by decreasing turbidity and sedimentation.

Socioeconomics Impacts to socioeconomics from current Population growth continues north from fishing opportunities, or the addition of Dallas, Texas at a very fast rate. Several bowfishing on the refuge, would be counties in north Texas are ranked among the incrementally negligible when added to the fastest growing counties in the nation (Denton, impacts of nearby development and Collin, and Dallas Counties). While population growth. Even though there may expansion continues northwards in Texas, it is be an approximate 5 percent increase in uncertain whether the growth will stop at the fishing visits on the refuge from Red River or continue into Oklahoma. Either implementing the proposed action, the way, population growth, which results in loss proposed action will not cumulatively add to of habitat, does not have to be immediately the impacts to habitats, soil, and wildlife adjacent to the Tishomingo NWR in order to disturbance due to human population growth place stress upon an ecosystem. in the surrounding areas. Depending upon the amount of habitat lost due to construction of new homes, roads, highways, etc., displacement or mortality of wildlife will likely occur. This will stress remaining habitats as resources on those habitats will be depleted at a faster rate due to the increase in population caused by displaced species. Development and population growth are events which are most likely to affect waterfowl and other migratory species through the continued loss of wetlands and fewer waterfowl in the future. Soil disturbance could increase into the future on lands

surrounding the refuge as population and associated development grow. We are also located near the edge of the city of Tishomingo and based on the uses that occur on the refuge, we are more likely to be impacted by the activities that occur around the refuge and in the City of Tishomingo than by what occurs inside the refuge boundary.

Climate Change Under the proposed action alternative, the Climate change, whether it results from refuge would use an adaptive management anthropogenic or natural sources, is expected approach for its fishing program, reviewing to affect a variety of natural processes and the fishing program annually and revising associated resources. However, the annually (if necessary). The Service’s complexity of ecological systems means that fishing program can be adjusted to ensure there is a tremendous amount of uncertainty that it does not contribute further to the about the impact climate change will actually impacts of climate change on resident have. In particular, the localized effects of wildlife. climate change are still a matter of much debate. That said, the combination of warming temperatures and increased frequency and severity of drought could reduce the amount and quality of fish habitat.

Use of Lead Tackle Lead weights may be used to cast further into ODWC does not have any restrictions on deeper water. Fishermen reel in their line using lead weights or tackle. The refuge once finished and remove the hook and allows the use of lead weights and tackle weight from the water. Therefore, under when fishing on the refuge and WMU. either alternative, we do not expect to cumulatively add to the impacts of statewide use of lead weights and tackle.

Summary of Analysis The purpose of this EA is to briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

Alternative A – No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the refuge would continue current refuge management activities, providing existing levels of public use, visitor services, ecological enhancement, and overall refuge improvement. Current management efforts would continue to focus on farming, maintenance and/or enhancement of biological diversity, preservation of native prairie and management of public use activities that includes providing hunting and fishing opportunities on the refuge and WMU when and where possible.

Of our 10,500 fishing visits, we estimate that no more than five percent of fishermen engage in fishing for non-game fish species. Fishermen rarely focus specifically on these species when on the refuge and using rod and reel. There is some temporary disturbance to small mammals, birds, and other wildlife over 1.5 miles of shoreline as fishermen continue to move in search of fish in these localized areas. However, it is likely that similar habitat can be found on the refuge and no loss of species diversity or abundance is likely. Songbirds and raptors use the refuge year-round, whereas shorebirds and waterfowl primarily utilize the refuge as wintering and migratory habitat. Listed species within Johnston County, Oklahoma include the whooping crane, American burying beetle interior least tern, and the piping plover. Tishomingo NWR has no documented resident endangered or threatened species. The current level of fishing has not had any detectable negative impacts to vegetation and habitat conditions. Current fishing activities on the refuge are not known to have any direct or indirect effects on soil quality based on the current level of foot traffic. The majority of fishing visits involve fishermen driving to a location and fishing near their vehicles. Vehicles are also confined to public access roads and parking areas. The current level of public use on the refuge (which is approximately 125,000 visits per year based on 2019 data) does not appear to be impacting air quality, as current air quality in the area meets air quality standards established by EPA. Fishing traffic on roads and trails may cause a slight decrease in air quality due to vehicle emissions and the stirring of road dust. Restricting boat use during the winter months eliminates wave action caused by boats and allows for increased water clarity while the refuge is closed to boating in order to serve as a wildlife sanctuary. Flood events impact water quality and clarity due to increased stirring of sedimentation. There is no change to visitor use and experience from continuation of current management. The refuge currently holds a controlled youth, non-ambulatory, and general deer hunt. The refuge also holds a controlled turkey hunt and a controlled archery deer hunt in hunt unit 21 located south of the Washita River. A general waterfowl season on the wetlands located south of the Washita River and hunt unit 2 has also been implemented. Bank fishing occurs around the Cumberland Pool year-round, except when the refuge is closed for a total of six days while deer and turkey hunts are held on the refuge. Boating is permitted from March 1 to September 30, annually. Fishermen wishing to access the refuge for bank fishing during the hunts will be unable to reach their destinations as the entrances to the refuge, Murray 23 and Nida Point, are closed for safety reasons. The fishermen would be directed to other areas such as the WMU to pursue that activity. Overall, the impacts to visitor services/recreational opportunities are considered short-term and minor since other parts of the refuge like the WMU are available for use by non-fishing visitors. Groups of visitors typically use established foot trails and produce little impact to vegetation. Fishermen typically walk along the shore and bank and are typically not trampling vegetation. Under this alternative, there are no anticipated direct or indirect impacts to the cultural environment, as current conditions would be maintained, and no ground disturbance would occur. The majority of the existing concrete structures are in areas that are closed to public access.

Current conditions would be maintained, and proposed activity would not be implemented. Funding requirements are estimated to be $5,000 for current and proposed activities. Summary of cost for Fishing Program Staff Salaries for fishing activities: $1,000 LE Annual cost: $3,500 Fishing Brochure: $500

Refuge Road may be closed during prescribed burns which typically occur in winter/early spring. These burns usually take 1–4 days to complete. There should be no impacts to fishing as areas to be mowed are in different locations.

The economic and social condition of the area would remain the same. The refuge would continue to be one of the area’s main attractions. The presence and operation of the refuge provides economic benefits to the surrounding communities within a 30-mile radius by attracting visitors to the area, generating revenue for the local economy. Much of the refuge’s annual budget is recycled into local businesses through refuge staff, purchases of equipment and supplies, as well as contracts for local labor to accomplish refuge projects. The refuge provides full-time employment for five individuals that live in nearby communities.

Alternative B – Proposed Action (Bowfishing on the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge) Under the Proposed Action Alternative, bowfishing would be allowed on Pennington Creek and the Washita River during daylight hours year-round. Pennington Creek would be open to bowfishing by boat from March 1 through September 30. When the boating season closes, access to Pennington Creek would be allowed by parking at the end of West Road and walking to the creek using a two-lane access road that is mowed during the growing season. Access to the Washita River when the Cumberland Pool boat ramps are closed to boating would be from off refuge with the nearest boat ramp at the Butcher Pen/Bee area located east of the refuge. We do not expect a significant impact accessing the Washita River during the winter months because bowfishing is typically an early spring/summer time activity. In the fall/winter, the majority of individuals which frequent the outdoors have a greater tendency to focus on hunting activities rather than fishing. Direct mortality would occur to nongame fish species primarily carp, buffalo, and gar species. Trampling of vegetation and minor disturbance would also occur as fishermen walk from the West Road to Pennington Creek. The local economy may benefit from having the activity implemented as stores, gas stations, and restaurants may see an increase in visitation due to fishermen participating in the activity. Implementation of the proposed action would result in direct mortality primarily to carp, buffalo and gar species. Fishing with rod and reel with the additional of bowfishing should still have a minimal impact on the carp population. Since this activity currently occurs on the banks of wetlands located within the WMU, we do not expect a significant visitor increase in this activity due to the fact that it requires a boat. This alternative would likely result in an increased harvest and an overall decrease in the population. A decreased population would also decrease water turbidity, which may result in an increase in native fish populations. Because bowfishing does not target game species, there would not be any additional impacts to game fish.

Bowfishing may result in additional short-term disturbance to wildlife over the five mile stretch along the banks of Pennington Creek and approximately 14 miles of the Washita River banks. This includes temporary displacement of turkey, deer, waterfowl, and other resident wildlife from boat or foot traffic moving through the area. While bowfishing would be allowed year-round, it would not be allowed in the Cumberland Pool but would be restricted to Pennington Creek and the Washita River. The least tern and piping plover may utilize the refuge during the spring and summer months, but typically prefer the Cumberland Pool area. Both species are sometimes seen during migration and may be found in April, May, and September, but they prefer sandy beaches and exposed sandy sites along the lakeshore where bowfishing will not be occurring. If nesting activity is noted along the Cumberland Pool, the area would be closed until the completion of nesting season. Most fishermen would likely conduct this activity from a boat, which will mean launching from a boat ramp on the refuge when boating season is open to reach Pennington Creek or by accessing the Washita River from off-refuge. We would also allow access to Pennington Creek by parking at the end of West Road and walking to Pennington Creek when the Cumberland Pool is closed to boating. This distance is approximately two tenths of a mile, so trampling should be minimal. Overall, impacts from compaction due to foot traffic are expected to be negligible to soils because vehicles would continue to be confined to public access roads, boat ramps, and parking facilities. By implementing the proposed action, we assume that there will be a maximum increase of five percent in the number of fishing visits. Increased traffic on roads and trails would result in an increase in vehicle emissions and stirring of dust; however, this impact is expected to be negligible. The refuge is in the process of adding additional road counters to quantify the number of vehicles that use specific areas throughout the refuge. The expected slight increase in the amount of traffic that results from increased fishing activity would be spread out over the same acreage as Alternative A. This increase in the number of fishing visits when compared to overall public use on the refuge is considered negligible; no changes to air quality are anticipated. There may be an increase in emissions on the Washita River and Pennington Creek as gasoline-powered boats will be used to reach these locations during the boating season and with the Washita River open to boating year around. Each individual project or activity in the region that produces air emissions could affect the region’s air quality but the overall impact will depend on a variety of factors including: project activity, length of time, wind direction, etc. Boat use on the river and creek will lessen water clarity due to disturbance and increased wave action, as Pennington Creek will only by accessible by boat during the boating season, which is no different from Alternative A, while the Washita River will now be open year-round. While the proposed action will be allowed year-round on Pennington Creek and the Washita River, we do not expect a large drawn out increase in boating activity as most outdoor activities undergo a peak of activity such as when spawning occurs for nongame fish species (typically the spring/summer months). Heavy visitor use for the proposed action is not expected during the fall and winter months due to lower temperatures at that time of year, in addition to other outdoor activities such as hunting being available. There are no anticipated conflicts with allowing this activity as we do not expect a drastic change in visitor use. The use is allowed on the WMU and allowing this activity on the refuge should

not result in a significant change to visitor experience from what is already occurring as we expect a five percent increase in fishing visits. Under the proposed action alternative, there are no anticipated impacts to cultural resources because the majority of the remaining structures are located in areas that are closed to public access and there are no structures located near the Washita River and Pennington Creek where the proposed action would occur. Implementing this action should have no effect on these resources. If any archeological sites or other historical items are found or any impacts to cultural resources are identified during the proposed action, the refuge will close the area and coordinate with the regional archeologist. Staffing requirements for implementing new fishing activities include additional law enforcement patrols in order to educate fishermen and visitors of new activities, boundary posting, mowing fishing areas as needed, printing fishing brochures and fuel. Impacts should be minimal as these administrative activities are already occurring in order to educate the public on other allowed uses. No additional areas will be mowed other than the short trail leading from West Road to Pennington Creek in order to promote this activity. Overall, the economic and social condition of the area would remain similar to Alternative A. Increased fishing opportunities should result in increased visitation and generate additional revenue to the local economy. Since the activity is already allowed on the WMU, we expect that allowing it on the refuge should result in approximately five percent increase in additional fishermen engaging in the activity. The proposed action would have a direct positive impact on the local economy by providing increased fishing opportunities for visitors thereby increasing business potential for vendors in our region of Oklahoma. Convenience stores and restaurants in the local area would also see short-term benefits from fishing visits to the area. A slight increase in business for these types of facilities would likely result from the increased visitation and recognition provided by having additional fishing opportunities at Tishomingo NWR located near the city of Tishomingo. Monitoring The refuge works with the state to ensure that all of its proposed hunting and fishing activities are in alignment with monitoring efforts and regulatory frameworks, using an adaptive management process to adjust hunting and fishing activities as necessary to ensure no adverse impacts to wildlife populations.

List of Sources, Agencies, and Persons Consulted List of Preparers Rick Cantu, Refuge Manager, Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Tishomingo, Oklahoma Persons Consulted Juli Niemann, Regional Hunt/Fish Coordinator, NWRS Jackie Albert, Natural Resources Planner, NWRS Anibal Vazquez, Natural Resource Planner, NWRS Joanne Ryan, Visitor Services, Tishomingo NWR

State Coordination A meeting was held with the ODWC on January 31, 2018, to discuss potential hunts which could be developed at each national wildlife refuge located in Oklahoma. The meeting played a significant role in the development and implementation of the hunting and fishing activities proposed for implementation at Tishomingo NWR.

Tribal Consultation A TREES annual meeting was held on November 16, 2019, where the refuge manager informed the friends group of the proposed hunts and fishing activities to be implemented at the refuge. One of the members present at the meeting functions as a liaison with the Chickasaw Nation Tribe. The member may provide comments regarding the proposed hunting and fishing after further consultation with tribal leaders. The refuge also strives to maintain contact with the Chickasaw Nation directly to keep the tribe aware of proposed changes and activities to be implemented on the refuge.

Public Outreach A public notice seeking comments regarding the development of a hunt plan was placed on the Tishomingo refuge website, county courthouse and library and refuge office in September 2018. The proposed plan would allow archery deer hunting, migratory bird hunting, and wild turkey hunting at the Tishomingo National Wildlife Refuge. A second plan would allow bowfishing on the refuge. No comments were received during the comment period.

Prior to development of this document, an informal scoping period occurred September 6–20, 2018, seeking comments regarding implementing a refuge hunt for deer, feral hogs, waterfowl, and wild turkey. Comments were also requested regarding allowing bowfishing. No comments were received during the comment period and no issues were raised by any party.

A public notice seeking comments of the final draft documents was also placed on the refuge website from April 1 to May 1, 2020. This notice was seeking public input and comments on the final draft Compatibility Determination, Fishing Plan and this Environmental Assessment.

References Allaboutbirds.org 2018. Whooping Crane Population Hits Historic High in 2018. Accessed January 2020.

Ballotpedia.org 2017. Fracking in Oklahoma, Public Policy in Oklahoma. Accessed December 2019.

Citydata.com 2009. Avameg, INc. http://www.citydata.com/county/johnston county Accessed February 2010.

Hubbard, J.P., 1985. Interior Least Tern, Handbook of Endangered Species in New Mexico, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish.

Hoagland B.W. 2000. The Vegetation of Oklahoma: A Classification of Landscape Mapping and Conservation Planning, Southwest Naturalist 5:385-420.

Lewis, J. C. 1995. Whooping Crane (Gus Americana), The birds of North America, The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 153:28

Miller, R.J. and H.W. Robison. 2004. Fishes of Oklahoma.

Page, L.M and B.M. Burr. 2011. Peterson Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes of North America North of Mexico.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Tom Stehn, Species Status and Fact Sheet, USFWS, North Florida Ecological Services Office. http://www.gov/north florida/Whooping Crane. Accessed November 2009Waterfowl Population Status, 2009

United States Geological Survey. 2009. http://tin.er.usgs.gov/geology/state. Accessed November 2009

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Threatened and Endangered Species List by County. USFWS Southwest Region Ecological Services Office. http://www.fws.gov/southwest/ES/endangered species/list/Accessed February 2010.

Appendix 1 OTHER APPLICABLE STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS & REGULATIONS STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS Cultural Resources

American Indian Religious Freedom The proposed action includes no ground-disturbing activities, or other Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1996 – activities that might disturb undocumented paleontological, 1996a; 43 CFR Part 7 archaeological, or historic sites.

Antiquities Act of 1906, 16 U.S.C. 431-433; 43 CFR Part 3

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S.C. 470aa – 470mm; 18 CFR Part 1312; 32 CFR Part 229; 36 CFR Part 296; 43 CFR Part 7

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470- 470x-6; 36 CFR Parts 60, 63, 78, 79, 800, 801, and 810

Paleontological Resources Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. 470aaa – 470aaa-11

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013; 43 CFR Part 10

Executive Order 11593 – Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 36 Fed. Reg. 8921 (1971)

Executive Order 13007 – Indian Sacred Sites, 61 Fed. Reg. 26771 (1996) Fish & Wildlife

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Several federally-listed threatened or endangered species are known to Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 668- occur on the refuge; an Intra-Service Section 7 Consultation was 668c, 50 CFR 22 conducted with the Service’s Tulsa Ecological Services Field Office. The proposed action is consistent with Executive Order 13186 because the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Environmental Assessment for implementing bowfishing on Tishomingo amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 36 NWR evaluates the effects of agency actions on migratory birds. CFR Part 13; 50 CFR Parts 10, 17,

23, 81, 217, 222, 225, 402, and 450

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, 16 U.S.C. 742 a-m

Lacey Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.; 15 CFR Parts 10, 11, 12, 14, 300, and 904

Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 703-712; 50 CFR Parts 10, 12, 20, and 21

Executive Order 13186 – Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, 66 Fed. Reg. 3853 (2001)

Natural Resources

Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 The refuge does not currently contain any designated wilderness areas. U.S.C. 7401-7671q; 40 CFR Parts There are no National Wild and Scenic Rivers on the refuge. 23, 50, 51, 52, 58, 60, 61, 82, and 93; The proposed action would have negligible effects to air quality. 48 CFR Part 23 The proposed action is consistent with Executive Order 13112 because Wilderness Act, 16 U.S.C. 1131 et stipulations in permits would be designed to prevent the introduction of seq. invasive species.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.

Executive Order 13112 – Invasive Species, 64 Fed. Reg. 6183 (1999)

Water Resources

Coastal Zone Management Act of The refuge is not within a coastal zone. 1972, 16 U.S.C. There would be negligible impacts of the proposed action on water quality 1451 et seq.; 15 CFR Parts 923, 930, or water resources. 933 The refuge contains no drinking water sources and does not supply

drinking water to any community. Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (commonly referred to as The proposed action is consistent with Executive Order 11990 because Clean Water Act), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et implementation of the Fishing Plan would protect existing wetlands. seq.; 33 CFR Parts 320-330; 40 CFR The proposed action is consistent with Executive Order 11988, because Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 230-232, implementation of the Fishing Plan would not result in the modification or 323, and 328 destruction of floodplains.

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.; 33 CFR Parts 114, 115, 116, 321, 322, and 333

Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.; 40 CFR Parts 141-148

Executive Order 11988 – Floodplain Management, 42 Fed. Reg. 26951 (1977)

Executive Order 11990 – Protection of Wetlands, 42 Fed. Reg. 26961 (1977)