# *Field Report *Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge

##  1.0 Summary

The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge at Brigham City, Utah, was created
in 1929 by the USFWS. The purpose of the refuge has been to "provide a
suitable refuge and feeding, and breeding grounds for migratory
wildfowl." The refuge is located on the eastern edge of the Pacific
Flyway and the western edge of the Central Flyway (see Figure 1). Within
the refuge, over 200 species of birds have been recorded and over 60
species breed in the refuge.

Figure 1. Western Hemisphere Flyways

![](media/image1.png){width="2.825in" height="2.995138888888889in"}

In 1991, the refuge was designated as a Western Hemispheric Shorebird
Reserve.

Two consecutive years of 100 years floods of the Great Salt Lake
resulted in inundation of the refuge with salt water in 1983. Salt water
flooding completely destroyed all of the vegetation, buildings and many
of the water control structures located throughout the refuge. By 1989,
the flood waters had receded, however, the process of cleaning a
restora­tion of the refuge could not occur overnight. Receding water left
deposits of salt and other minerals that have resulted in a slow
recovery of the refuge vegetation; which is required in order to sustain
a bird population.

The slow process of restoration is nearly complete, including an
increased awareness of the potential impacts associated with the
proximity and makeup of the Great Salt Lake. The area has emerged from
the virtual destruction of the refuge with a stronger com­mitment that is
expressed through the Friends of the Refuge, a non-profit organization
focusing on maintenance and promotion of the refuge.

Visitation at the refuge has rebounded to approximately 30,000 persons
per year (1998). With the relatively low visitation and distribution of
the visitation over the year, transit is not considered a viable
alternative for the facility.

##  2.0 Background Information

### 2.1 Location

The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge is located approximately 15 miles
west of Brigham City, Utah along an extension of Forest Street. Brigham
City is located approximately 55 miles north of Salt Lake City. The
regional location is displayed in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Regional Locations

![](media/image2.png){width="2.5819444444444444in"
height="2.563888888888889in"}

### 2.2 Administration and Classification

The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge is managed by the USFWS. The site
manager is Alan Trout.

### 2.3 Physical Description

The refuge, displayed in Figure 3, is located on 74,000 acres of open
water, marsh, uplands and mud flats. The original refuge (circa 1929)
was approximately 65,000 acres and was expanded through a 9,000-acre
land purchase in 1993-1994. Access within the refuge is restricted to
designated trails and roadways, as well as open waterways during
desig­nated hunting seasons. The Bear River channel upstream from the Old
Headquarters site is open to the public. Facilities within the refuge
are few and relatively basic, including:

Figure 3. Site Layout

![](media/image3.wmf)

-   Twelve-mile auto/bike tour route. The route is gravel/dirt surface.
    There are no plans to pave the route. The auto route is open daily,
    except for the period from January through mid-March.

-   Old Headquarters site: The area includes vehicle parking, a small
    picnic area, a fishing pier, restrooms (vault-type system/no running
    water) that are fully accessible.

-   Pull-outs with limited parking area are located intermittently along
    the auto route. Pull-out locations are displayed in Figure 3.
    Pull-out areas include visitor interpretive kiosks containing
    information about resources at the refuge.

### 2.4 Mission and Goals of the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge

The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge serves two primary purposes in the
overall USFWS plan:

-   Feeding, nesting and breeding grounds for wildfowl along the Pacific
    and Central Flyways; and

-   Provide a facility for public education and viewing enjoyment of
    wildfowl.

As a means of documenting the goals and objectives for users, the Public
Use and Education Master Plan was prepared and is periodically updated.
The most recent update was December 1997. User objectives documented in
the most recent master plan were divided into the following categories;
educational, emotional and motivational experi­ences. Documented in the
following bullet points are the key elements of each program:

#### Educational Objectives

Through their trips, visitors should gain an understanding of:

1.  The dynamic nature of the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge; how the
    refuge func­tions and how it relates to the Greater Salt Lake
    Ecosystem; the refuge's importance in local, national, hemispheric
    and global perspectives as a major migratory shorebird and waterfowl
    stopover;

2.  What wetlands are and their importance as a part of the overall
    ecosystem;

3.  The potential threats to the wetlands (construction, draining,
    pollution, toxic wastes, etc.);

4.  The recreational opportunities associated with the refuge and the
    Bear River;

5.  The association between the refuge and the Great Salt Lake;

6.  The importance of the Great Salt Lake and the refuge to birds of
    special concern (trumpeter swans, snowy plover, redneck ducks,
    white-faced ibis, white pelican, phalarope, bald eagle and peregrine
    falcon;

7.  History of human interaction;

8.  The reasons birds migrate;

9.  The life cycles of wildlife, including why certain species need to
    be left undisturbed; and

10. Programs and techniques employed by USFWS in restoring, preserving
    and managing the refuge and other wetlands.

#### Emotional Objectives

During and following their visit, patrons should feel:

1.  Sense of respect and awe for the natural process;

2.  An appreciation for the refuge and its associated wetlands;

3.  Sense of excitement about interacting with the refuge through
    exploration of the many facets of the ecosystem;

4.  Responsibility for conserving natural resources;

5.  They can help in the effort to preserve wetlands;

6.  Wanted and welcome at the Headquarters and Education Center, as well
    as other public use facilities;

7.  Appreciation of the concept of varying perspectives regarding the
    wetlands; and

8.  Positively about the USFWS and other agencies in the work that is
    being accomplished.

#### Motivational Objectives

As a result of the information taken away from a visit, people should:

1.  Visit other interpretive/recreational sites around the region that
    afford similar opportunities;

2.  Engage in other recreational experiences involving wetlands;

3.  Utilize interpretive information obtained from the refuge;

4.  Tread lightly when visiting the refuge and other wetlands;

5.  Visit other wetland interpretive sites;

6.  Learn more about wetlands;

7.  Get involved in conservation efforts for protecting wetlands; and

8.  Actively support the refuge's programs by getting involved with the
    "Friends" group.

### 2.5 Visitation Levels and Visitor Profile

The Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge visitation in 1988 was
approximately 30,000 people. Visitation to the refuge was impacted
significantly by flooding from the Great Salt Lake. In the period from
1984 through 1989, the facility was essentially closed to the public.
From 1990 through 1998, visitation has rebounded dramatically.
Visitation in 1990 was approximately 12,000 people and, except for
declines in 1991 and 1992, has grown each year.

Visitation patterns are generally as follows:

-   Spring peak (April through June) -- Bird watching peak.

-   Fall peak (October through November) -- Hunting season peak.

-   Weekend days are peak days throughout most of the season. Sunday is
    the peak day with approximately 30 percent of the weekly visitation.

-   Length of stay -- The latest study was completed in 1971. From that
    study, is was reported that the average stay was approximately two
    hours. There was a slight variation based on the distance traveled
    to get to the park (divided into less than 50 miles and more than 50
    miles), but the variation was minor.

-   For most of the visitors (80 percent) the refuge was the primary
    reason for their visit to the area. Visitors who were "passing
    through" the area accounted for approximately 17 percent of the
    total users.

-   Most visitors to the refuge are repeat clients. From the 1971 study
    approximately 63 percent of the visitors had been there before.

-   Most users are from the local area.

-   Demographics of users: In 1971 (the last study date), approximately
    42 percent of the visitors were under 18, 52 percent in the range
    from 18 to 64 years of age.

-   Reasons for visits reported by users: Sightseeing, observe birds and
    hunting waterfowl.

##  3.0 Existing Conditions, Issues and Concerns

### 3.1 Transportation Conditions, Issues and Concerns

During the typical day, transportation is not a significant issue for
the refuge. The most significant transportation concerns are:

-   Poor condition of the access road. The paved surface ends
    approximately seven to eight miles from the refuge. Travel
    conditions on the road are variable throughout the year. At times
    the road is impassable except with four-wheel drive vehicles. Staff
    have encountered potential visitors turning around on the access
    road prior to reaching the refuge. Improving the access route would
    improve emergency vehicle access, which is required from time to
    time, especially during the designated hunting season.

-   There are small turnout areas periodically along the auto route.
    Staff would like to see these areas enhanced to improve safety and
    add parking.

-   Security at the refuge has not been a significant issue, however,
    staff have some con­cerns about unauthorized access to the site (it
    is closed after dark). An access route gate would increase the level
    of site access control.

Transit service is provided in Brigham City by the Utah Transit
Authority (UTA). Two routes serve Brigham City, providing
intra-community circulation and inter-city connec­tions to Ogden. No
transit service is provided to the refuge.

The Utah Department of Transportation has been studying commuter rail
connections throughout the Wasatch Front. Brigham City is located such
that access to commuter rail would be feasible, should the DOT go
forward with implementation of a system.

An eight-foot-wide trail adjacent to Forest Street connects downtown to
I‑15. Engineering studies are ongoing for upgrading the county access
route to the refuge. USFWS has allo­cated \$500,000 for work in 1999-2000
on the engineering.

### 3.2 Community Development Conditions, Issues and Concerns

Brigham City is the gateway community for the refuge. The refuge is a
significant element of Brigham City's recreational/tourism economy.
Brigham City is a community of approximately 16,600 residents (1994
estimate), and Box Elder County has a population of approximately
41,0000 persons.

Principal industries in the community include Autoliv (manufacturer of
airbag elements), Thiokol (rockets/engines), Lazyboy, Flying J
Headquarters (truck stops), WalMart Distribution Center (located in
Corrine approximately eight miles away). A Malt-O-Meal plant is located
in Tremont, approximately 12 miles north of Brigham City.

Box Elder County has prepared the following documents relative to
planning activities in the area:

-   *Box Elder County Comprehensive Wetlands Management Plan* (1999);
    and

-   *Box Elder County General Plan* (1998).

Brigham City has recently updated their Comprehensive Plan.

Development ideas and plans that may impact the refuge are limited. Area
around the refuge is privately held by a few land owners (generally
hunting clubs). There are no plans for development of these areas.

### 3.3 Natural or Cultural Resource Conditions, Issues and Concerns

The refuge is comprised of a combination of marshland, open water
channels of the Bear River, mud flats and limited uplands. When asked
about potential concerns, none were expressed, with the exception of
potential flooding of the Great Salt Lake. As has been witnessed in the
recent past, lake flooding can result in virtually complete inundation
of the refuge and destruction of the habitat and structures.

### 3.4 Recreation Conditions, Issues and Concerns

Principal recreation activities at the refuge are bird watching and
hunting. The only issues identified were some concerns with mixing the
two activities.

##  4.0 Planning and Coordination

### 4.1 USFWS Plans

USFWS and the community are planning construction of an educational
center in the southwest quadrant of I‑15/Forest Street. The general
location and site plan for the pro­posed facility are displayed in
Figures 4 and 5. The facility is proposed to include:

-   Refuge Headquarters and Education Center;

-   Interpretive trails/boardwalk;

-   Education station shelter; and

-   Maintenance offices and facilities.

The purpose of the headquarters facilities is to enhance the overall
refuge visit experience. Both the refuge and the headquarters facilities
should be evaluated as an integrated unit. Construction cost estimates
for the facilities are approximately \$7.5 million for center building
and approximately \$1.4 million for site development.

### 4.2 Public and Agency Coordination

As part of an integrated County plan, expanding tourism has been
addressed as a key economic development tool. The County envisions
connecting the refuge with other tourist destinations/activities in the
County, including:

-   Golden Spike National Historic Site;

-   Thiokol Rocket Museum; and

-   Centennial Tour Train.

Figure 4. Proposed Education Center/Headquarters Site Layout

![](media/image4.png){width="3.408333333333333in"
height="3.578472222222222in"}

Figure 5. Internal Site Layout (Detail)

![](media/image5.png){width="5.092361111111111in"
height="3.9583333333333335in"}

County planning participants are interested in developing a loop route
that would pro­vide improved access between communities and activities
(Rocket Museum) to the north of the refuge. At present, an "out and back
trip" is required to access the refuge. Partici­pants believe creating a
loop route that connected the refuge to other activity centers could be
marketed to a broader audience. No specific analysis of this service has
been initiated.

##  5.0 Assessment of Need and System Options

### 5.1 Magnitude of Need

The level of Alternative Transportation Systems (ATS) need for the site
is moderate to low. Visitation is relatively low and traffic is not
generally a concern. The site access road, however, is in need of
significant improvement (paving). In addition, the following safety or
alternative mode improvements should explored:

-   Providing an entrance gate to enhance security/safety.

-   Include a paved bike route on either the shoulder of the access
    route or in an adjacent corridor. Traffic volumes on the route are
    relatively light (several hundred vehicles per day). Thus,
    incorporating a bike lane into the shoulder would be acceptable.

-   Evaluate potential use of the Bear River as a short trip length mode
    of travel within the refuge.

### 5.2 Range of Feasible Transit Alternatives

Based on the relatively light use, a portion of the users transporting
firearms and limited season of activity, transit is not considered a
viable alternative.

##  6.0 Bibliography

*Box Elder County General Plan*, Spring 1998.

*Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge Public Use and Education Master Plan*,
December 1997.

*Box Elder County Comprehensive Wetlands Management Plan*, August 1999.

##  7.0 Persons Interviewed

Alan Trout, USFWS/Site Manager

Jerry Mason, Utah Wildlife Federation/Box Elder County Economic
Development

Bryce Hoderlie, Brigham City Corporation/City Building Inspection

Bruce Leonard, Brigham City Corporation/Director of Public Works

Jim Davis, Brigham City Council

Beth Gurrister, Box Elder County Economic Development

Susan Thakeray, Box Elder County Economic Development

Paul Larsen, Brigham City Planning

Cindy Monson, Brigham City Area Chamber of Commerce