DOCSLIB.ORG

Exploration in Classifying Ponds and Small Lakes Into Natural Communities in Michigan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Exploration in Classifying Ponds and Small Lakes Into Natural Communities in Michigan Exploration in classifying ponds and small lakes into natural communities in Michigan Prepared by: Amy Derosier Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 Lansing, MI 48909-7944 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division Report Number 2008-20 ___________________________________________________________ Small Lakes as Natural Communities i Suggested citation: Derosier, A.L. 2008. Exploration of classifying small lakes into natural communities in Michigan. Report number MNFI 2008-20. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing MI. Copyright 2008 Michigan State Board of Trustees Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status, or family status. Cover photos (by): top left Doyle Lake (Amy L. Derosier); top right, Ready Lake (Brett Alger); bottom left Condon Lake (Amy L. Derosier); bottom right Lodge Lake (Melanie Weber). Small Lakes as Natural Communities ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .........................................................................................................................................III LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................................................. IV LIST OF APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................................... IV INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................5 SUMMARY OF OTHER STATE’S LAKE NATURAL COMMUNITY CLASSIFICATIONS.........................6 LAKE CLASSIFICATIONS PROPOSED IN MICHIGAN ......................................................................................................9 METHODS...................................................................................................................................................................9 CLASSIFICATION OF PONDS AND LAKES ..................................................................................................................10 Limitations .........................................................................................................................................................11 FIELD METHODS......................................................................................................................................................11 RESULTS...................................................................................................................................................................11 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................................................................15 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................................................................16 PROPOSED DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR EO SPECIFICATIONS .................................................................16 PROPOSED DRAFT EO RANK SPECIFICATIONS...........................................................................................16 FUTURE DIRECTIONS ...............................................................................................................................................18 PROPOSED DRAFT POND AND SMALL LAKE NATURAL COMMUNITY TYPES..................................18 ECOLOGICAL DRAINAGE UNITS...............................................................................................................................18 LANDSCAPE-LEVEL TYPES .......................................................................................................................................20 NATURAL COMMUNITIES (FIELD-BASED).................................................................................................................20 GLOSSARY ...............................................................................................................................................................21 DEFINITIONS MODIFIED FROM ARMANTROUT 1998.................................................................................21 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................21 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................................................21 Small Lakes as Natural Communities iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Size, location, and classification parameters of lakes sampled. Ha is size of lake in hectares. Connection denotes how the lake is connected to a stream network: headwater only has a outflow stream, riverine has an inflow and outflow stream, and unconnected doesn’t have any stream connections.........................................................................................................................................12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Locations of small lakes sampled……………………………………………………. 15 Figure 2. Variation in alkalinity; 0 = no connections, 1 = headwater lake; 2 = riverine lake….. 15 Figure 3: Ecological Drainage Units and Major Watersheds of Michigan……………………...20 LIST OF APPENDICES A. List of variables used in multivariate analysis. B. Draft EO and Rank Specifications for Lakes. C. Site descriptions of ponds and small lakes sampled in state game areas. D. Site descriptions of ponds and small lakes sampled in state park and recreation areas. E. Site descriptions of ponds and small lakes sampled in state and national forests. Small Lakes as Natural Communities iv INTRODUCTION Protecting aquatic biological diversity in Small lakes provide a variety of services towards Michigan depends heavily on our ability to the preservation of biodiversity. They are likely protect representative and unique habitats or to reflect extremes of certain key environmental ecosystems. The state is moving towards variables, such as pH and alkalinity (J. Breck, preserving ecosystem functions rather than pers. comm.), providing unique ecosystems and individual threatened or endangered species to communities. Small lakes have been shown to preserve biological diversity as seen in the act as refugia for native species susceptible to state’s Wildlife Action Plan (Eagle et al. 2005). declines from human alterations (e.g., Mwanja Currently, terrestrial and wetland natural 2001). Michigan has a variety of species that are communities are tracked in the Michigan at the edge of their range. These “edge of range” Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) Biotics populations have the potential to be genetically database, which aids in protecting high quality different than the central populations and are natural communities or ecosystems through therefore important for maintaining and environmental review and other conservation conserving the genetic diversity of species and planning efforts. However, Michigan does not providing opportunities for evolutionary yet have fully aquatic natural communities processes (Lescia and Allendorf 1995, Nielson, defined or described. To preserve the full Scott, and Aycrigg 2001). breadth of Michigan’s biodiversity, representative habitats or ecosystems need to be There is some recent evidence to show that described and located for aquatic ecosystems. small lakes, especially small isolated lakes, contribute disproportionately to biodiversity In Michigan, most of the state’s listed as (Scheffer et al. 2006) often ‘containing endangered or threatened aquatic species occur specialized flora and fauna which are not in rivers and therefore rivers are considered and represented in other habitats (Bratton 1990, protected much more than lakes in the Williams et al. 1998, Williams et al. 2003). environmental review process and other Ponds and small lakes are often dominated by conservation planning efforts. Inland lakes make vegetation and this can lead to a higher diversity up a large portion of Michigan’s water bodies in many animal groups, including use of small and biodiversity and are ecosystems that need to lakes by bird species. As mentioned previously, be highlighted as such. There are 5,356 lakes ponds and small lakes are often more subject to between 4 and 40 acres in Michigan, which winter anoxia and if isolated may be fishless. accounts for 82% of Michigan lakes; yet, only Fishless lakes support greater diversity of 0.7% of them are sampled for fish every year by zooplankton, macro-invertebrates, water birds, the MDNR (Hayes et al. 2003). Small lakes and amphibians (Hunter et al. 1986, Havas and generally do not provide significant boating Rosseland 1995, Hecnar and McLoskey 1997). opportunities or public boat launches, and can Fishless lakes also tend to be dominated by therefore often be entirely privately owned vegetation. Hence, the current conservation and/or difficult to access. As such, small lakes emphasis on ‘preserving large habitat elements are often not targeted for stocking, management, and promoting connectivity thru maintenance of or monitoring efforts. However, these habitat corridors’ may actually represent a threat characteristics
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat Designation for the Piping Plover: Great Lakes Breeding Habitat
    April- 2001 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE PIPING PLOVER: GREAT LAKES BREEDING HABITAT Final Addendum Division of Economics U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 N. Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203 April 2001 April- 2001 Prepared by: Robert Unsworth, Sarah Malloy, Leslie Katz and Jeremy Sinaikin Industrial Economics, Incorporated 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 April- 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1 IMPLICATIONS AND REVISED ESTIMATES FOR THE DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS....................................................................................................................................1 Revisions to Critical Habitat Units.....................................................................................2 Baseline Statutory and Regulatory Requirements .............................................................2 Socioeconomic Profile of the Critical Habitat Areas.........................................................8 Impacts of Critical Habitat Designation on Land Use: Federal, Tribal, State, Local, and Private Lands....................................................9 ECONOMIC COSTS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION..........................................................................................................................30 Number of Consultations and Technical Assistance Calls...............................................30 Costs of
    [Show full text]
  • AMENDED and RESTATED COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN 2021 This Page Intentionally Left Blank
    OSCODA TOWNSHIP AMENDED AND RESTATED COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN 2021 This page intentionally left blank. OSCODA TOWNSHIP AMENDED AND RESTATED COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN 2021 TOWNSHIP BOARD Ann Richards, Supervisor Jaimie McGuire, Treasurer Joshua Sutton, Clerk Timothy Cummings, Trustee Steve Wusterbarth, Trustee Jeremy Spencer, Trustee William Palmer, Trustee PLANNING COMMISSION Mimi McDonald, Chairperson Edward Davis, Vice Chairperson Bernie Schenk Bill Palmer Cathy Wusterbarth John Minor Dan Gary (2020) Bob Tazior (2020) ADMINISTRATION Michael Mitchell, Township Superintendent Eric Szymanski, Planning & Zoning Director Todd Dickerson, Economic Improvement Director 2018 COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN 2019 STRATEGIC PLAN 2021 AMENDED AND RESTATED COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN LIST OF MAPS LIST OF TABLES Map 1: Regional Setting 13 Table 1: Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance Comparison 9 Map 2: Transportation Network 31 Table 2: Population Change in Oscoda Township 18 Map 3: Recreational Resources 35 Table 3: Population Change 19 Map 4: Recreational Resources 35 Table 4: Age Distribution 19 Map 5: Topography 39 Table 5: Household Characteristics 21 Map 6: Soils 39 Table 6: Housing Stock (2015 ACS) 22 Map 7: Wetlands 40 Table 7: Housing Tenure (2015 ACS) 23 Map 8: Waterbodies 40 Table 8: Age of Housing Structure 23 Map 9: Federal and State Land 43 Table 9: Educational Attainment (2015 ACS) 25 Map 10: Existing Land Use 49 Table 10: Income and Poverty (2015 ACS) 27 Map 11: Growth & Investment Areas 67 Table 11: Existing Land Use Calculations 46 Map 12.1: Future Land Use
    [Show full text]
  • Anas Platyrhynchos ) Habitat Site Selection and Management Using GIS
    Nesting Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) Habitat Site Selection and Management Using GIS Ben Strauss Date: 4/25/08 Approved: Dr. Dan Richter, Advisor Masters project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Environmental Management degree in the Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences of Duke University 2008 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………….3 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...4 Description of Study Area……………………………………………………5 Mallards and Habitat Selection……………………………………………….6 Social Considerations………………………………………………………...7 Methods………………………………………………………………………8 Wetland Patches……………………………………………………...8 Existing Reserves…………………………………………………….8 Existing Development………………………………………………..9 Wetland Density……………………………………………………...9 Protection Priorities…………………………………………………10 Acquisition Areas…………………………………………………...10 Habitat Connectivity………………………………………………..11 Results………………………………………………………………………13 Recommendations…………………………………………………………..16 Discussion…………………………………………………………………..17 Literary Citations……………………………………………………………18 Tables and Figures………………………………………………………….20 Appendix……………………………………………………………………34 2 Abstract Ducks Unlimited’s Saginaw Bay priority zone in eastern Michigan is highly concentrated area of wetland habitat patches. A set of criteria to prioritize these wetlands is needed so that managers can most effectively decide where to focus conservation efforts in the area. Nesting mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) pairs were chosen as the target species to base conservation decisions on.
    [Show full text]
  • Recreation Plan 2019-2023
    Recreation Plan 2019-2023 A Joint Recreation Planning Effort by the Communities of: Alpena County Alpena Charter Township Green Township Ossineke Township Wilson Township i A JOINT RECREATION PLANNING EFFORT BY THE COMMUNITIES OF: Alpena County Alpena Charter Township Green Township Ossineke Township Wilson Township Recreation Plan Adopted_______ Prepared by: Northeast Michigan Council of Governments 80 Livingston Blvd Suite 8 P. O. Box 457 Gaylord, Michigan 49735 www.nemcog.org 989-705-3730 i RECREATION PLAN Table of Contents Chapter 1 Community Description _______________________________________________ 1-7 Extent of Plan Focus ________________________________________________________ 1-7 Location and Regional Setting ________________________________________________ 1-7 A Snapshot of Natural Features of the Community _______________________________ 1-8 Chapter 2 Administrative Structures ____________________________________________ 2-15 Alpena County Administration ______________________________________________ 2-15 Alpena Charter Township Administration ______________________________________ 2-22 Green Township Administration _____________________________________________ 2-24 Ossineke Township Administration ___________________________________________ 2-26 Wilson Township Administration ____________________________________________ 2-28 Chapter 3 Recreation Inventory ________________________________________________ 3-31 Alpena County Recreation Inventory _________________________________________ 3-31 Alpena Charter Township Recreation
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Equestrian Trails and Facilities Inventory
    Trail Length EQ User Trailer Parking Campground/Dispersed Campground GPS Campground Campground Trail Name (Associated Facility) Contact Phone Number County PRD District ETS Region GPS Coordinates (Trailhead) Trail Fee EQ Friends Group # Sites Comments (mi) Experience (#) Camping Coordinates Type Fee Latitude Longitude FEDERAL Alligator Hill Hiking Trail (Sleeping Northern Lower (231) 326.5134 Leelanau Cadillac 44.89254602 ‐86.02071762 9 Day-Use N/A N/A N/A N/A Bear Dunes National Lakeshore) Peninsula Bay De Noc Grand Island National Horses at Hiawatha are allowed on Multi-Day (Multiple Dispersed: at trailhead or Recreation Trail (Hiawatha National (906) 387.2512 Alger Western UP Upper Peninsula 45.91698979 ‐86.92329168 40 Rustic $0-$3 any trail or road unless otherwise Locations) along trail Forest) posted No horses allowed in Big Island Multi-Day (Multiple Dispersed: at trailhead or Delta Western Up Upper Peninsula Lake Wilderness or Rock River Locations) along trail Canyon Wilderness Bigelow Creek (Manistee National Southwest Lower Multi-Day (Multiple (231) 745.4631 Newaygo Cadillac Rustic Forest) Peninsula Locations) $5 Daily Hungerfod Lake Trail (Manistee Southwest Lower Multi-Day (Multiple Hungerford Trail Riders 48 Designated, 1 Vehicle pass required; Rustic camp (231) 745‐4631 Newaygo Cadillac 43. 701452 -85.622118 26.62 21 $15 Hungerford Trail Camp Rustic $15 Peninsula Locations) Association Group area limited to 14 consecutive days National Forest) Weekly Oakwood Horse Trail (Hiawatha Multi-Day (Multiple (906) 387.2512 Alger
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Annual Beach Monitoring Report
    MI/DEQ/WRD-17/008 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WATER RESOURCES DIVISION MARCH 2017 STAFF REPORT MICHIGAN BEACH MONITORING YEAR 2016 ANNUAL REPORT INTRODUCTION The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program is summarized in the January 1997 report entitled, “A Strategic Environmental Quality Monitoring Program for Michigan’s Surface Waters” (Strategy) (MDEQ, 1997). The objectives of the beach monitoring component of the Strategy are listed below: 1. Assist local health departments to implement and strengthen beach monitoring programs. 2. Create and maintain a statewide database. 3. Determine whether waters of the state are safe for total body contact recreation. 4. Compile data to determine overall water quality. 5. Evaluate the effectiveness of MDEQ programs in attaining Water Quality Standards (WQS) for pathogen indicators. 1. ASSIST LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS TO IMPLEMENT AND STRENGTHEN BEACH MONITORING PROGRAMS Beach Monitoring The monitoring of beaches in Michigan is voluntary and is conducted by the local health departments. Health departments are required to comply with Michigan’s WQS according to R 333.12544 of the Public Health Code, 1978 PA 368 (Act 368), as amended. According to R 333.12541 of Act 368, a local health officer or an authorized representative of a local health department that conducts tests at bathing beaches is required to notify the MDEQ and other entities of the test results within 36 hours of conducting a test or evaluation. This rule also states that the local health department may petition the circuit court for an injunction ordering the owners of a beach to close the beach.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2008
    National List of Beaches September 2008 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-08-004 Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama........................................................................................................................................... 3 Alaska .............................................................................................................................................. 5 California.......................................................................................................................................... 6 Connecticut .................................................................................................................................... 15 Delaware........................................................................................................................................ 17 Florida ............................................................................................................................................ 18 Georgia .......................................................................................................................................... 31 Hawaii ............................................................................................................................................ 33 Illinois ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sundav House Fire J Cause Still Unknown Cause of a Fire That De- Was Burning
    f A note of thanks New businesses filling We did it again! United from Brewster Shaw those vacant buildings Way goes over the top Page 3 Page 6 Page 9 ?’ I’ I VOLUME ‘77, NUMBER 32 Family loses -. Sundav house fire J cause still unknown Cause of a fire that de- was burning. turned to the fire hall about have been very helpful, stroyed the home of Chuck Englehart said he was 11:15, but a half hour later which is really nice,” she and Sara Watros southwest watching television when, some of them went back to said. of Cass City Sunday even- “I saw the sky light up. I the house with the pumper Their immediate need, ing is still unknown didn’t know what it was.” and tanker because the fire sbe continued, is to find a Mr. and Mrs. Watros, Another neighbor, Ber- flared again. They were house to rent, with a build- who lived there with their nard Dadacki, was the first there 15-20 minutes. ing to house the horses and son, Bryan, 9 -- they also to report the fire to the fire Back at the fire hall, rabbits, which for now are have some older children department, at 8:39 p.m. It hoses had to be cleaned and still at their property. no longer living at home -- was spotted through a win- put back,on trucks, water Water has to be hauled lost everything they had in dow by his wife, Mary. tanks refilled, etc., so the there. the fire except for one car, The house was engulfed last firemen didn’t go home wasThe on house, 15 acres.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Use Orders of the Director
    LAND USE ORDERS OF THE DIRECTOR By authority conferred on the Director of the Department of Natural Resources by Section 504 of the Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended, MCL 324.504, and in accordance with R 299.921 to R 299.933 , the Director of the Department of Natural Resources orders the following: Chapter I Definitions and General Provisions 1.1 Title. Order 1.1 These orders shall be known and may be cited as the "Land Use Orders of the Director." History: Iss. Sept. 17, 1993. 1.2 Definitions. Order 1.2 As used in these orders: (1) “Alcoholic beverage” means any liquids and components, except over-the-counter and prescription medications, containing ½ of 1 percent or more of alcohol by volume. (2) “A.N.S.I.” means American national standards institute. (3) “ATV” means an all-terrain vehicle as defined by section 81101 of 1994 PA 451, as amended, MCL 324.81101. (4) “Camp” means the opening or setting up of a tent or tent-type camper; the parking and occupancy of a recreation vehicle; sleeping in any type motor vehicle, sleeping bag, or in any other manner after 10:00 p.m.; and for the purposes of chapter II of these orders shall also include sleeping in an anchored, tied, or moored boat or floating craft of any type in waters immediately offshore of state-owned public access site lands after 10:00 p.m. (5) “Commercial operations” means any activity which involves the buying or selling of goods or services, or the exchange or attempt or offer to exchange goods or services for money, barter, or for anything of value.
    [Show full text]
  • The Watersheds of Northeast Michigan
    The Watersheds of Northeast Michigan What is a Watershed? Did you know that everywhere you are, you’re within a watershed? A watershed is an area of land that contains a common set of streams, rivers and lakes that all drain into a larger waterbody. Watershed boundaries follow natural features of the landscape, such as a ridgeline or a height-of-land (see diagram at right). Watersheds include both the water features within the area, as well as the land surrounding those water bodies. As a result of the connected nature of a watershed, all activities on the land and water can affect the condition of the larger watershed. A watershed can be divided into progressively smaller watersheds, which are often referred to as subswatersheds. For example, the Klacking Creek Watershed is one of many subwatersheds that can be identified within the larger Rifle River Watershed. Likewise, the Rifle River Watershed itself is part of the larger Lake Huron Watershed. Watershed diagram: www.upperdesplainsriver.org Huron Pines is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and an equal opportunity provider. Our dynamic staff of ecologists, geographers, biologists and environmental educators think big and act quickly to ensure that Northeast Michigan’s watersheds and wild places will stay healthy and resilient for future generations. Located right in the center of the Great Lakes system, we have the unique privilege and responsibility to protect our treasured lands teeming with wildlife, and to sustain the world’s most important source of fresh water. Learn more at
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessment for Pterospora Andromedea Nutt
    Conservation Assessment For Pterospora andromedea Nutt. (Pine-drops) USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Hiawatha National Forest November 2004 This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on Pterospora andromedea Nutt. This report provides information to serve as a Conservation Assessment for the Eastern Region of the Forest Service. It is an administrative study only and does not represent a management decision by the U.S. Forest Service. Although the best scientific information available was used and subject experts were consulted in preparation of this document and its review, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if the reader has any information that will assist in conserving this species, please contact the Eastern Region of the Forest Service – Threatened and Endangered Species Program at 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 580 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. Conservation Assessment for Pterospora andromedea ii Acknowledgements Outside Reviewers: We would like to thank our academic reviewers and agency reviewers outside of the United States Forest Service for their helpful comments on this manuscript. • Phyllis Higman, Botanist, Michigan Natural Features Inventory National Forest Reviewers: We also thank our internal National Forest reviewers for their suggestions and corrections and for providing element occurrences for their National Forests. Complete contact information is available under Contacts section. • Jan Schultz, Forest Plant Ecologist, on the Hiawatha National Forest • Sue Trull, Forest Botanist, on the Ottawa National Forest • Ian Shackleford, Botanist, on the Ottawa National Forest Herbarium and Heritage Data: We appreciate the sharing of occurrence information for this species from Heritage personnel both in the United States and Canada, along with the helpful assistance of Herbarium personnel.
    [Show full text]
  • “The Newspaper for People Who Love the North”
    “The news paper for people who love the north” Early September 2013 Vol. 60, No. 17 $2.50 Digital Delivery Michigan’s Conservation Sentinel Since 1953 Jim Curwood & Conservation Page 4 Judge Dismisses Graymont Still Voices of North Barry DNR Suit Seeking Mine Site Manitou Island Page 1 Page 1 Page 6 Poacher Pays A A Life At Kirtland’s Warbler High Price Au Sable Institute Partnership Page 1 Page 3 Page 8 www.mynorthwoodscall.com $75,000 restitution in poaching case Graymont still analyzing U.P. mine sites A Shiawassee County man counts of illegal baiting. Officials at Graymont, one of North America’s Information Act (FOIA) request, Graymont may be nabbed for poaching will pay the It is one of the largest poach - leading lime producers, say they will likely complete zeroing in on 10,000 acres near Rexton, but Robison state of Michigan $75,000 in ing cases in recent Michigan his - their analysis of potential sites for a proposed quar - declined to reveal the locations of any specific pieces restitution and have his hunting tory, DNR officials said. rying operation in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula (U.P.) of property being considered. privileges revoked for the next Birchmeier pleaded no contest within the next couple of months. “I’m not at liberty to say which ones,” he said, three years. on three counts of taking and/or “We’re still moving ahead with the project,” said “but we will share that information as soon as we Brian Birchmeier, 51, of possessing deer and turkey, and Bob Robison, the company’s director of mining and can.” Owosso Township, was sen - one county of licensing viola - geology, noting that Graymont has spent a significant Robison said the final decision about the project tenced Aug.
    [Show full text]