Acknowledgments

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

ii

Acknowledgments

Many people have contributed to this plan over

the last seven years. Several key staff positions,

including mine, have been filled by different people

during the planning period. Tom Palmer and Neil

Vincent of the Refuge staff are notable for having

been active in the planning for the entire extent.

Tom and Neil kept the details straight and the rest

of us on track throughout. Mike Brown joined the

staff in the midst of the process and contributed new

insights, analysis, and enthusiasm that kept us moving forward. Beth Kerley and John Magera provided valuable input on the industrial and public use

aspects of the plan. Although this is a refuge plan,

we received notable support from our regional office

planning staff. John Schomaker provided exceptional service coordinating among the multiple

interests and requirements within the Service. Jane

Hodgins edited and prepared the many documents

that were a part of the process. Jane also kept

everyone informed by keeping the planning website

current and packed with information. Her touch is

most visible to you, the reader, and we appreciate

her efforts. Jane Lardy-Nelson handled well the

many detailed and technical requirements of submissions to the Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Federal Register. Jon

Kauffeld’s and Nita Fuller’s leadership and oversight were invaluable. We benefited from close collaboration and cooperation with staff of the Illinois

Department of Natural Resources. Their staff participated from the early days of scoping through

reviews and re-writes. We appreciate their persistence, professional expertise, and commitment to

our natural resources. Finally, we value the tremendous involvement of citizens throughout the planning process. We heard from visitors to the Refuge

and from people who care about the Refuge without

ever having visited. Their input demonstrated a

level of caring and thought that constantly

reminded us of our responsibility as land stewards.

We sincerely thank the individuals and groups that

were involved and contributed ideas to make this a

better plan.

Dan Frisk

Refuge Manager

November 2006
Preface

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

iii

Preface

This Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP)

emerged from a 7-year planning process that

included the preparation of Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). In theory we

should have been able simply to extract portions of

the Final Environmental Impact Statement and

assemble them into this stand-alone plan. In reality

we had to introduce minor edits to the content of the

EIS to make a concise, accurate, and up-to-date

CCP that reads well. None of the edits introduce

new content. “Chapter 4: Management Direction”

consists of rearranged selections from Chapter 2

and Appendix A of the EIS. The rearrangement was

needed because of cross-references in the alternatives and features that were common to all alternatives in the EIS. We have also changed verb tenses

from the conditional form “would” in the EIS to a

definitive “will” in the plan. New U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service policies for the National Wildlife

Refuge System were issued in June 2006, late in the

planning process. These new policies set forth new

goals for the System, which we have substituted for

earlier goals in the background description in the

first chapter. In order to make the CCP a more complete reference document, we have included the

Record of Decision and the memo that transmitted

the Service’s Programmatic Biological Opinion as

appendices. We have also included a map that displays the Refuge’s approved boundary, which was

established during the planning process and

approved by the Regional Director who has authority to approve expansions that are less than 10 percent of the Refuge area.

Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Table of Contents

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

v

Acknowledgments ...........................................................................................................................................ii

Preface ............................................................................................................................................................. iii

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background ................................................................................................... 1

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission, Goals and Principles ...................................................................... 1

Mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System ........................................................................................ 1

Goals of the National Wildlife Refuge System ........................................................................................... 3

Guiding Principles of the National Wildlife Refuge System ....................................................................... 4

Brief History of Refuge Establishment, Acquisition, and Management ............................................................. 4

Recent Refuge Management Activities ....................................................................................................... 5

Wildlife and Fish Habitat ...................................................................................................................... 5

Agriculture ............................................................................................................................................ 5

Recreation ............................................................................................................................................. 6

Industry ................................................................................................................................................. 6

Wilderness ............................................................................................................................................ 6

Contaminants ........................................................................................................................................ 6

Archaeological and Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... 6

Refuge Purposes .................................................................................................................................................. 6

Refuge Vision Statement .................................................................................................................................... 7

Refuge Goals ....................................................................................................................................................... 7

Wildlife Conservation Goals ........................................................................................................................ 7

 Recreation/Public Use Goals ...................................................................................................................... 7

Agricultural Goal .......................................................................................................................................... 8

Industrial Goal .............................................................................................................................................. 8

Wilderness Goal ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Protection Goal ............................................................................................................................................. 8

Outreach Goal .............................................................................................................................................. 8

Ecosystem Goals ................................................................................................................................................. 8

Upper Mississippi River/Tallgrass Prairie Ecosystem ................................................................................. 8

Goals and Objectives for Other Landscape Level Plans .............................................................................. 9

Migratory Bird Conservation Initiatives ............................................................................................... 9

Region 3 Fish and Wildlife Resource Conservation Priorities (January 2002) ................................... 11

Legal and Policy Guidelines .............................................................................................................................. 11

Chapter 2: The Planning Process ............................................................................................................... 12

Overview of the Planning Process ..................................................................................................................... 12

Planning Issues ................................................................................................................................................. 13

Issue 1: Recreation ..................................................................................................................................... 13

Issue 2: Wildlife Conservation ................................................................................................................... 13

Issue 3: Refuge Purposes ........................................................................................................................... 14
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

vi

Issue: Recreational Boating ....................................................................................................................... 14

Issue 5: Role in Regional Economy ............................................................................................................ 14

Issue 6: Communication between Refuge and Community ....................................................................... 14

Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study ............................................................................................................. 14

Chapter 3: Affected Environment ............................................................................................................... 16

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 16

Physical Environment ........................................................................................................................................ 16

Physiography .............................................................................................................................................. 16

Geology ...................................................................................................................................................... 16

Soils ............................................................................................................................................................ 17

Climate ....................................................................................................................................................... 17

Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................................................... 17

Crab Orchard Lake .............................................................................................................................. 17

Little Grassy Lake ............................................................................................................................... 18

Devils Kitchen Lake ............................................................................................................................ 18

Contaminants ............................................................................................................................................. 19

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) ...................... 19

Administrative Facilities ............................................................................................................................ 19

Habitat Overview............................................................................................................................................... 20

Background ................................................................................................................................................. 20

Forests ........................................................................................................................................................ 21

Shrubland ................................................................................................................................................... 21

Grassland ................................................................................................................................................... 21

Wetlands .................................................................................................................................................... 21

Open Water ................................................................................................................................................ 21

Cropland ..................................................................................................................................................... 21

Developed Land ......................................................................................................................................... 23

Invasive Species ......................................................................................................................................... 23

Natural and Current Role of Fire ................................................................................................................ 24

Wildlife .............................................................................................................................................................. 25

Mammals ................................................................................................................................................... 25

Birds ........................................................................................................................................................... 26

Amphibians and Reptiles ........................................................................................................................... 28

Fish ............................................................................................................................................................. 28

Crab Orchard Lake .............................................................................................................................. 28

Devils Kitchen Lake ............................................................................................................................ 29

Little Grassy Lake ............................................................................................................................... 29

Small Impoundments .......................................................................................................................... 29

Monitoring .................................................................................................................................................. 30

Federal Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................................................................. 31

Mammals ................................................................................................................................................... 31

Birds ........................................................................................................................................................... 31

Plants .......................................................................................................................................................... 31

Public Use Resources and Trends ..................................................................................................................... 32

Hunting ....................................................................................................................................................... 32

Fishing ........................................................................................................................................................ 34

Camping ..................................................................................................................................................... 36

Wildlife Observation .................................................................................................................................. 37
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

vii

Hiking Trails ............................................................................................................................................... 37

Boating ...................................................................................................................................................... 39

Crab Orchard Lake .............................................................................................................................. 39

Devils Kitchen Lake ............................................................................................................................ 39

Little Grassy Lake ............................................................................................................................... 41

Swimming .................................................................................................................................................. 41

Picnicking ................................................................................................................................................... 41

Horseback Riding ....................................................................................................................................... 41

Group Camps .............................................................................................................................................. 43

Environmental Education ........................................................................................................................... 43

Interpretation ............................................................................................................................................. 44

 Visitor Center ............................................................................................................................................ 44

Existing Transportation Patterns and Visitor Facilities .............................................................................. 44

Special Management Areas .............................................................................................................................. 44

Wilderness ................................................................................................................................................. 44

Inholdings and Lands Contiguous to the Crab Orchard Wilderness .................................................. 45

Research Natural Areas ............................................................................................................................. 45

Conservation Easements ............................................................................................................................ 47

Industrial Use Status and Trends ...................................................................................................................... 47

Agriculture ......................................................................................................................................................... 48

Archaeological and Cultural Values .................................................................................................................. 50

Law Enforcement ............................................................................................................................................... 52

Socioeconomic Environment ............................................................................................................................. 52

Economic Setting ....................................................................................................................................... 52

Population .................................................................................................................................................. 53

Employment ................................................................................................................................................ 53

Employment Earnings and Personal Income .............................................................................................. 54

Impact of the Refuge Budget ..................................................................................................................... 57

Economic Impacts of Refuge Recreation ................................................................................................... 57

Tax Impacts of Refuge Recreation Spending ............................................................................................. 59

Economic Impacts of Refuge Agriculture, Grazing, Timber Harvesting and Commercial Use .................. 59

Comparison of Refuge-Related Economic Impacts to Study Area Economy ............................................. 60

Current Staff and Budget ........................................................................................................................... 62

Staff .................................................................................................................................................... 62

Budget ........................................................................................................................................................ 62

Partnerships ....................................................................................................................................................... 62

Chapter 4: Management Direction ............................................................................................................. 64

Operational Policies .......................................................................................................................................... 64

Area Designations ...................................................................................................................................... 64

Camping Length of Stay ............................................................................................................................. 65

Group Camps .............................................................................................................................................. 65

Recreational Fees ....................................................................................................................................... 66

Fishing Tournaments .................................................................................................................................. 67

Fish-offs ...................................................................................................................................................... 67

Recreational and Technical Rock Climbing ................................................................................................ 67

Scuba Diving .............................................................................................................................................. 67

Trapping ..................................................................................................................................................... 67

Dog Training ............................................................................................................................................... 68
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

viii

Boundary Modification ............................................................................................................................... 68

Wildlife Conservation Goals ...................................................................................................................... 68

Recreation/Public Use Goals ..................................................................................................................... 77

Agricultural Goal ........................................................................................................................................ 83

Industrial Goal ............................................................................................................................................ 83

Wilderness Goal ......................................................................................................................................... 87

Protection Goal ........................................................................................................................................... 88

Outreach Goal ............................................................................................................................................ 90

Chapter 5: Plan Implementation ................................................................................................................. 91

New and Existing Projects ................................................................................................................................ 91

Staffing ....................................................................................................................................................... 91

Partnership Opportunities .......................................................................................................................... 91

Step-down Management Plans ................................................................................................................. 92

Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................................................................... 92

Plan Review and Revision .......................................................................................................................... 92

Appendix A: Record of Decision .............................................................................................................. 95

Appendix B: Glossary ............................................................................................................................... 105

Appendix C: Laws and Orders ................................................................................................................ 111

Appendix D: Species Lists ....................................................................................................................... 129

Appendix E: State-listed Species Potentially Found at Crab Orchard NWR ................................. 183

Appendix F: Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 187

Appendix G: Public Law 80-361 .............................................................................................................. 197

Appendix H: Compatibility Determinations .......................................................................................... 201

Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and 

Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects .................................................... 203

Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo ............................................... 211
Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

List of Figures

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

ix

Figure 1: Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................................................................ 2

Figure 2: Location of Crab Orchard NWR ........................................................................................................ 3

Figure 3: Protected Lands in Southern Illinois ................................................................................................. 5

Figure 4: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Ecosystem Units .................................................................................. 9

Figure 5: Streams and Watersheds of Crab Orchard NWR ........................................................................... 18

Figure 6: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, 1807 and 2000 ........................................................................ 20

Figure 7: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, 2000 ........................................................................................ 22

Figure 8: Peak Counts of Wintering Canada Geese on Crab Orchard NWR, 1947 to 2001 .......................... 27

Figure 9: Canada Goose-use Days on Crab Orchard NWR, 1952 to 1999 ..................................................... 27

Figure 10: Bald Eagle Winter Survey Counts on Crab Orchard NWR, 1993-2002 .......................................... 32

Figure 11: Bald Eagle Fledgling Counts on Crab Orchard NWR, 1993-2000 ................................................... 32

Figure 12: 1948 Area Designations, Crab Orchard NWR ................................................................................ 33

Figure 13: Bank Fishing Sites on Crab Orchard NWR ...................................................................................... 35

Figure 14: Crab Orchard NWR Campground Visits Per Year ........................................................................... 37

Figure 15: Observation Areas on Crab Orchard NWR ..................................................................................... 38

Figure 16: Boat Launches on Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................................ 40

Figure 17: Picnic Areas on Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................................... 42

Figure 18: Annual Group Camp Attendance at Crab Orchard NWR, 1997-2001 ............................................. 43

Figure 19: Research Natural Areas on Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................. 46

Figure 20: Conservation Easements Administered by Crab Orchard NWR ..................................................... 48

Figure 21: Number of Agricultural Cooperators at Crab Orchard NWR, 1953, 1979, and 2001 ..................... 49

Figure 22: Total Area of Agricultural Fields on Crab Orchard NWR, 1947-2001 ............................................ 49

Figure 23: Area of Row Crop Fields, Pastures and Hay Fields in 1953, 1979, and 2001 ................................ 50

Figure 24: Crab Orchard NWR Current Staffing Chart ..................................................................................... 63

Figure 25: Crab Orchard NWR Approved Boundary Modification and Adjacent Public Lands ...................... 69

Figure 26: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, Projected Conditions 2021 ...................................................... 72

Figure 27: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, Projected Conditions 2106 ...................................................... 73

Figure 28: Crab Orchard Lake Watercraft Zoning ............................................................................................ 84

Figure 29: Devils Kitchen Lake Zoning, Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................ 85

Figure 30: Horseback Riding Trails on Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................ 86
Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

List of Tables

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

x

Table 1: Crab Orchard NWR Lake Details .................................................................................................... 18

Table 2: Area and Percent Cover of Habitats on Crab Orchard NWR, 1807 and 2000 ................................ 23

Table 3: Principal Invasive and Exotic Plant Species, Crab Orchard NWR .................................................. 24

Table 4: Principal Weed Species in Agricultural Fields, Crab Orchard NWR .............................................. 24

Table 5: Number of Wildlife Species Found in Illinois and at Crab Orchard NWR ...................................... 26

Table 6: Nongame Species of Management Concern, Crab Orchard NWR ................................................. 28

Table 7: Small Fishing Ponds on Crab Orchard NWR ................................................................................... 30

Table 8: Research Natural Areas on Crab Orchard NWR ............................................................................. 47

Table 9: Most Frequently Cited Offences on Crab Orchard NWR, 1997-2001 ............................................. 52

Table 10: Williamson County and Jackson County, Illinois and the United States Population, 

Percentage Change 1980, 1990, 2000 ............................................................................................ 53

Table 11: Demographic Profile of Jackson County, Williamson County, Illinois and the United States ....... 53

Table 12: Employment by Major Business Sector, Williamson County, 1980 and 2000 ............................... 54

Table 13: Employment by Major Business Sector, Jackson County, 1980 and 2000 .................................... 54

Table 14: Employment Earnings by Major Business Sector, Williamson County, 1980 and 2000 ................ 55

Table 15: Employment Earnings by Major Business Sector, Jackson County, 1980 and 2000 ..................... 55

Table 16: Williamson County and Jackson County Per Capita Income, 1980, 1990 and 2000 ...................... 56

Table 17: Annual Economic Impact of Refuge Budget Expenditures ............................................................. 56

Table 18: Annual Tax Impacts of Refuge Expenditures .................................................................................. 56

Table 19: Economic Impacts of Refuge Recreation in Two-county Study Area ............................................. 57

Table 20: Recreation Expenditures and Economic Impacts for Non-resident Visitors to the Refuge ............ 58

Table 21: Federal, State and Local Tax Revenue Derived From Refuge-related Recreational 

Spending by Residents and Non-residents .................................................................................... 59

Table 22: Tax Revenue Generated by Non-resident Refuge Recreation Spending ....................................... 59

Table 23: Annual Concession Revenue and Fees Paid for Crab Orchard NWR Recreational Facilities ........ 60

Table 24: Recreation and Refuge Budget Expenditures Compared with Study Area .................................... 60

Table 25: Annual Number of Refuge Acres Farmed and Production Value Compared 

with the Study Area ........................................................................................................................ 61

Table 26: Annual Refuge Grazing and Value Compared with the Study Area ............................................... 61

Table 27: Annual Amount of Timber Harvest on the Refuge Compared with the Study Area ...................... 61

Table 28: Recreational Entrance Fees and Federal Passes That Will Permit Entry ....................................... 66

Table 29: Areas of Land Cover at Crab Orchard NWR in 2000 and Acres Projected for 2021 and 2106, 

With Change from 2000 Shown in Parentheses ............................................................................ 70

Table 30: Forest, Grassland and Shrubland Bird Species of Conservation Priority ....................................... 71

Table 31: Step-down Management Plans, Crab Orchard NWR ..................................................................... 93
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

1

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is required to

prepare and implement a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for each unit in the National Wildlife Refuge System. This document is the

Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 1). The

CCP will guide the administration and management

of the Refuge for 15 years.

Located in southern Illinois, Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) was established in

1947 for wildlife, agriculture, recreation and industry. The Refuge consists of 43,888 acres. Figure 2

shows the location of the Refuge. 

National Wildlife Refuge 

System Mission, Goals and 

Principles

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting and enhancing fish, wildlife and plants and

their habitats for the continuing benefit of the

American people. The Service manages the 95-million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System of more

than 540 national wildlife refuges, thousands of

small wetlands and other special management

areas. It also operates 66 national fish hatcheries, 64

fishery resource offices and 78 ecological services

field stations. The agency enforces Federal wildlife

laws, administers the Endangered Species Act,

manages migratory bird populations, restores

nationally significant fisheries, conserves and

restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and helps

foreign governments with their conservation

efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program

that distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in

excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to

state fish and wildlife agencies.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's mission is:

“working with others, to conserve, protect and

enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats

for the continuing benefit of the American people.”

Mission of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System

By law, the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is: “to administer a national network of

lands and waters for the conservation, management,

and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within

the United States for the benefit of present and

future generations of Americans.” 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

2

Figure 1: Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

3

Goals of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System 

The development of comprehensive conservation

plans and the administration, management, and

growth of the System are guided by the following

goals:

# Conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants

and their habitats, including species that are

endangered or threatened with becoming

endangered.

# Develop and maintain a network of habitats for

migratory birds, anadromous and

interjurisdictional fish, and marine mammal

populations that is strategically distributed and

carefully managed to meet important life

history needs of these species across their

ranges.

# Conserve those ecosystems, plant communities,

wetlands of national or international

significance, and landscapes and seascapes that

are unique, rare, declining, or

underrepresented in existing protection efforts. 

# Provide and enhance opportunities to

participate in compatible wildlife-dependent

recreation (hunting, fishing, wildlife

o b se r v a t i o n a n d p h o t o g r a ph y, a n d

environmental education and interpretation). 

Figure 2: Location of Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

4

# Foster understanding and instill appreciation of

the diversity and interconnectedness of fish,

wildlife, and plants and their habitats.

Guiding Principles of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System

# We are land stewards, guided by Aldo Leopold's

teachings that land is a community of life and

that love and respect for the land is an extension

of ethics. 

# We seek to reflect that land ethic in our

stewardship and to instill it in others. 

# Wild lands and the perpetuation of diverse and

abundant wildlife are essential to the quality of

the American life. 

# We are public servants. We owe our employers,

the American people, hard work, integrity,

fairness, and a voice in the protection of their

trust resources. 

# Management, ranging from preservation to

active manipulation of habitats and populations,

is necessary to achieve Refuge System and U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service missions. 

# Wildlife-dependent uses involving hunting,

fishing, wildlife observation, photography,

interpretation, and education, when compatible,

are legitimate and appropriate uses of the

Refuge System. 

# Partnerships with those who want to help us

meet our mission are welcome and indeed

essential. 

# Employees are our most valuable resource.

They are respected and deserve an

empowering, mentoring, and caring work

environment. 

# We respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of

our neighbors. 

Brief History of Refuge 

Establishment, Acquisition, 

and Management

President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the

Crab Orchard Creek Project in 1936 as a Works

Progress Administration (WPA) project. The

project was “proposed largely as a recreational and

conservation program for water, soil and forestry

conservation.” Several benefits were envisioned for

the project: “(1) it will materially aid in eliminating

economic and social distress, (2) create the largest

recreational area in the state of Illinois, (3) conserve

a large water supply and eliminate flooding of privately-owned lands, (4) conserve existing forests, (5)

control soil erosion.” (Preliminary Plan for Land

Acquisition, Crab Orchard Creek Project, 1936) 

In late 1937, the U.S. Department of Agriculture

Soil Conservation Service assumed administration

of the Project. From 1937 to 1942, the federal government purchased 32,000 acres within the Project

area from private landowners. Over 80 percent of

the acquired land had been cleared and used for

agricultural crops and grazing. Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) workers planted more than 4.6

million trees in the area from 1938 to 1941. The Crab

Orchard Lake dam was completed in 1941. Crab

Orchard Lake was the largest lake in Illinois at that

time. In 1942 the Department of War appropriated

10,223 acres of the Crab Orchard Creek Project

land and purchased an additional 12,352 acres to

build the Illinois Ordnance Plant. Between 5,000

and 8,000 people worked at the plant, known as

Ordill, manufacturing bombs and anti-tank mines

during World War II.

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge was

established on August 5, 1947, by Public Law 80-

361. This Act of Congress transferred 22,575 acres

from the Department of War (Illinois Ordnance

Plant) and 21,425 acres from the Soil Conservation

Service (Crab Orchard Creek Project) to the Secretary of the Interior.

The Crab Orchard Creek Project proposed dams

for Little Grassy Creek and Grassy Creek to store

water and prevent siltation of Crab Orchard Lake.

The dam that created Little Grassy Lake was completed in 1950. The dam that created Devils Kitchen

Lake was completed in 1959.

Congress designated a 4,050-acre portion of the

Refuge as the Crab Orchard Wilderness in 1976.

Since the Refuge was established, the Service has

acquired and divested several parcels of land. In

1959, the Refuge transferred 921 acres of land

located in its southeast corner to the U.S. Department of Justice for construction of a maximum security prison. In 1969, the Refuge acquired several

scattered tracts of land in exchange for 160 acres

that is now the site of the John A. Logan College. In

a 1974 exchange, the Refuge acquired 15 acres of

State of Illinois land in the vicinity of Little Grassy

Fish Hatchery. In a 1979 exchange, Southern Illinois University acquired the current site of Touch of

Nature Environmental Center and the Refuge
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

5

acquired land south of Little Grassy Lake. Through

the years the Refuge has purchased a few scattered

parcels. In 2000, the Refuge used Natural Resource

Damage Assessment funds to purchase 216 acres on

its western edge. Several small land exchanges are

pending.

In addition to Crab Orchard NWR, a variety of

other state and federal agencies manage land in the

vicinity of the Refuge. Figure 3 illustrates these

protected lands.

Recent Refuge Management Activities

Wildlife and Fish Habitat

Refuge biologists use various techniques to maintain and enhance wildlife habitat. They manipulate

water levels in moist soil management units and

seed tallgrass prairie species to reestablish native

grasslands. Silvicultural treatments such as thinning, regeneration cutting, and improvement cutting are used in forest habitats to alter species

composition and increase growing space. Trees are

also planted to reduce forest fragmentation. Biologists use prescribed fire in pine and hardwood forests and grasslands. Biologists monitor wildlife

populations and, in cooperation with the Illinois

Department of Natural Resources staff, monitor

fish populations in the lakes and ponds, stock game

and prey fish, and enhance fishing opportunities by

placing discarded Christmas trees to increase

underwater structure. Trapping nuisance beavers in

the closed area is authorized by special use permit.

Biologists monitor and apply treatments for control

of invasive plants and animals.

Agriculture

The Refuge agriculture program includes about

4,500 acres of row crops (rotation of corn, soybeans,

clover) tended by cooperative farmers, about 800

acres of hay fields harvested under special use permits, and about 1,000 acres of pasture grazed under

Figure 3: Protected Lands in Southern Illinois
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

6

special use permits. The principal goal of the agriculture program is to provide habitat for wintering

Canada geese.

Recreation

The Refuge receives an estimated 1.1 million recreational visits annually. To accommodate the wide

variety of recreational uses, the Refuge operates a

visitor information center, environmental education

sites, hiking trails, four campgrounds, five marinas,

boat launch ramps, picnic areas, swimming beaches,

auto tour route, and observation deck. The Refuge

offers many opportunities for fishing, hunting, environmental education, interpretation, and wildlife

observation and photography. In addition, the Refuge permits camps under cooperative agreements

to Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts of America, United Methodist Church and Southeastern Illinois Presbytery.

Law enforcement officers provide safety and security for visitors and Refuge resources.

Industry

The Refuge leases 1.2 million square feet of facilities that are used for manufacturing, cold storage,

and explosives storage. In support of the industrial

operations, the Refuge also maintains extensive

transportation and utility infrastructure. The Refuge provides water and waste water services to an

adjacent college campus and water service to the

federal prison.

Wilderness

The Refuge staff disseminates wilderness use

information to visitors, controls vehicle access and

patrols and conducts informal monitoring to protect

the resources of the 4,050-acre Crab Orchard Wilderness.

Contaminants

The Service's Ecological Services branch has

Environmental Contaminants staff co-located at the

Refuge who manage the investigation, monitoring,

and remediation activities associated with sites contaminated with hazardous chemicals. The Refuge is

on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's

National Priority List of hazardous waste sites. 

Archaeological and Cultural Resources

The Refuge Manager ensures historic properties

are identified and protected as much as possible

while achieving Refuge purposes and the Refuge

System mission. The manager is guided by several

historic preservation laws and regulations. Early in

the planning of all projects, the Refuge Manager

asks the Regional Historic Preservation Officer

(RHPO) to initiate the Section 106 process, which is

a set of procedures specified in the National Historic Preservation Act. Then the manager informs

the public about the project and its cultural issues

through presentations, meetings, and media notices.

The manager asks for comments from the public

and local officials. Any comments relevant to cultural issues are reported to the RHPO.

Archeological investigations and collecting on the

Refuge are performed only in the public interest.

Qualified archeologists perform the work under an

Archaeological Resources Protection Act permit

issued by the Regional Director. Refuge personnel

take steps to prevent unauthorized collecting. If

unauthorized collecting is detected, Refuge officers

cite violators or take other appropriate action and

report the violations to the RHPO.

Guided by a Scope of Collection Statement dated

November 1992, the Refuge manages museum collections that contain archeological artifacts, art

work, historical items and documents, and zoological

specimens. To date, twelve archeological investigations have produced in excess of 55,400 artifacts

from Refuge lands. The artifacts are stored at 7

repositories, although most are kept at the Center

for Archaeological Investigations at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, under a cooperative

agreement.

Refuge Purposes

Public Law 80-361 mandated that the lands

transferred from the Department of War and Soil

Conservation Service be administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

7

Service “for the conservation of wildlife, and for the

development of the agricultural, recreational, industrial, and related purposes specified in this Act.”

An additional purpose was acquired when Congress designated the 4,050-acre Crab Orchard Wilderness in 1976. The establishing legislation for the

Wilderness (Public Law 94-557) states that “wilderness areas designated by this Act shall be administered in accordance with the applicable provisions of

the Wilderness Act...”. The purposes of the Wilderness Act (Public Law 88-577) are additional purposes of that part of the Refuge that is within the

Crab Orchard Wilderness. The purposes of the Wilderness Act are to secure an enduring resource of

wilderness, to protect and preserve the wilderness

character of areas within the National Wilderness

Preservation System (NWPS), and to administer

the NWPS for the use and enjoyment of the American people in a way that will leave these areas unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness. 

Refuge Vision Statement

The planning team considered the past vision

statement and emerging issues and drafted the following vision statement as the desired future state

of the Refuge:

The citizens of Southern Illinois recognize the

staff of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge as

government employees who listen and care and

who meet significant management challenges in a

sensible way. Within the Fish and Wildlife Service, Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge is

recognized not for its exceptions, but for its

exceptional management. The Refuge is held as

an example of an area once contaminated that is

now clean and safe for humans and wildlife. The

viewer of a satellite photograph can easily distinguish the Refuge with its large blocks of habitat

and its clean water lakes from the surrounding

fragmented and developed landscape. Wildlife

thrives. Farmers take pride in their operations on

the Refuge because they use model conservation

practices, benefit wildlife, and make money. The

Refuge and the community are proud to contribute to the Nation's defense through the industry

that is hosted on the Refuge. In Southern Illinois

where a spectrum of outdoor recreation opportunities ranges from the highly developed to the

primitive, the Refuge is known for high quality

wildlife-dependent opportunities.

Refuge Goals

Based on the purposes of the Refuge, the mission

of the National Wildlife Refuge System and ecosystem considerations, the planning team established

the following Refuge goals for the next 15 years.

Wildlife Conservation Goals

Canada Geese:

# Provide enough food for wintering Canada

geese to support 6.4 million goose-use-days

annually, in support of the Mississippi Valley

Population Canada Goose Management Plan. 

Forest, Early Successional and Grassland Birds:

# Maintain or enhance populations of forest, early

successional and grassland birds, with emphasis

on priority species, as identified in Partners in

Flight Physiographic Area Bird Conservation

Plans. 

Ducks, Shorebirds, and Other Waterbirds:

# Maintain or enhance populations of ducks,

shorebirds, and other waterbirds, with

emphasis on priority species, as identified in the

North American Waterfowl Management Plan,

U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, and North

American Waterbird Conservation Plan.

Threatened and Endangered Species:

# Maintain or enhance populations of federal and,

where compatible, state threatened and

endangered species that occur at or near Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

Water Quality:

# Maintain or enhance quality of water in streams

and lakes at Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge.

Resident Fish and Wildlife:

# Maintain or enhance resident fish and wildlife

populations consistent with management

activities for federal trust resources in

cooperation with the Illinois Department of

Natural Resources (DNR). Maintain a mixedspecies, warm-water sport fishery in

cooperation with the Illinois DNR. 

 Recreation/Public Use Goals

Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife Observation and 

Photography, Interpretation and Environmental 

Education:

# Hunters, anglers, viewers and photographers of

wildlife, general visitors and students will enjoy
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

8

high quality experiences through a variety of

opportunities that promote an understanding

and appreciation of natural and cultural

resources and their management.

Customer Service:

# Visitors of all abilities will feel welcome and

enjoy a safe visit to an area that they recognize

as a national wildlife refuge.

Volunteers and Support Groups:

# Volunteers and Refuge support groups will be

stewardship partners and strong advocates for

the Refuge.

Other Land and Water-based Recreation:

# Visitors will enjoy high quality, land- and waterbased activities that fulfill the recreation

purpose of the Refuge. 

Agricultural Goal

# Provide opportunities for agricultural uses on

Refuge lands that help attain wildlife

conservation goals.

Industrial Goal

# Provide an industrial complex and attendant

utility and transportation infrastructure, which

c o n f o r m t o p r e sc ri be d sa f e t y, h e a l t h ,

environmental and maintenance standards.

Wilderness Goal

# Protect the ecological integrity, preserve the

wilderness character, restore natural conditions

to the extent prac ticable and provide

opportunities for solitude and primitive

recreation within the Crab Orchard Wilderness.

Protection Goal

# Protect the integrity of Refuge biological and

cultural resources and the health and safety of

visitors, industrial workers, farmers, and

Service staff.

Outreach Goal

# Visitors, cooperators, tenants, and local

residents will understand Refuge goals, issues

and activities. Service personnel will

understand the expectations and concerns of

the general public by being receptive to their

feedback.

Ecosystem Goals

Upper Mississippi River/Tallgrass 

Prairie Ecosystem

The Service has adopted an ecosystem approach

to conservation and designated 53 ecosystem units

(Figure 4). The ecosystem units delineate portions

of the landscape where the Service and its partners

can set ecosystem-wide resource goals and work

together to achieve these goals.

The Refuge is located in the Upper Mississippi

River/Tallgrass Prairie Ecosystem (Number 23), an

ecologically diverse area encompassing 186,133

square miles in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri

and Wisconsin. An ecosystem team has identified

the following goals in response to resource management challenges and opportunities: 

Goal 1: Protect, restore, and enhance populations of native and trust species and their

habitats.

Goal 2: Restore natural ecosystem processes,

including hydrology and sediment transport to maintain species and habitat

diversity.

Goal 3: Promote environmental awareness of the

ecosystem and its needs with emphasis

on sustainable land use management.

Goal 4: Identify water quality problems affecting

native biodiversity and habitat of trust

species.

Goal 5: Reduce conflicts between fish and wildlife needs and other uses. 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

9

Goals and Objectives for Other 

Landscape Level Plans

Migratory Bird Conservation Initiatives

Over the last decade, bird conservation planning

has evolved from a largely local, site-based focus to

a more regional, landscape-oriented perspective.

Significant challenges include locating areas of highquality habitat for the conservation of particular

guilds and priority bird species, making sure no species are inadvertently left out of the regional planning process, avoiding unnecessary duplication of

effort, and identifying unique landscape and habitat

elements of particular tracts targeted for protection, management and restoration. Several migratory bird conservation initiatives have emerged to

help guide the planning and implementation process. Collectively, they comprise a tremendous

resource as Crab Orchard NWR engages in comprehensive conservation planning and its translation

into effective on-the-ground management.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan

Signed in 1986, the North American Waterfowl

Management Plan (NAWMP) outlines a broad

framework for waterfowl management strategies

and conservation efforts in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The goal of the NAWMP is to

restore waterfowl populations to historic levels. The

NAWMP is designed to reach its objectives through

key joint venture areas, species joint ventures, and

state implementation plans within these joint ventures.

The Refuge is in the Upper Mississippi RiverGreat Lakes Region Joint Venture. One of 12 habitat-based joint ventures, this Joint Venture encompasses the states of Michigan and Wisconsin in their

entirety, plus portions of Minnesota, Iowa,

Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana and

Ohio. The goal of this Joint Venture is to increase

populations of waterfowl and other wetland wildlife

by protecting, restoring and enhancing wetland and

associated upland habitats within the Joint Venture

region.

The objectives of this Joint Venture are:

Figure 4: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Ecosystem Units
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

10

 1. Conserve 9,118,884 acres of habitat capable of

supporting an annual breeding duck population of 1,542,000, under average environmental conditions, by the year 2013.

The breeding duck population objective for

Illinois is 20,000, which is a 365 percent

increase over the average breeding population of 4,300 birds.

 2. Conserve 532,711 acres of habitat on migration focus areas capable of supporting 266

million duck use days during annual fall

migration, under average environmental conditions, by the year 2013.

The migration habitat objective (acres of

managed wetland habitat) for the Southern

Illinois Focus Area is 77,950 acres, which is a

34 percent increase over the 58,171 acres

available in 1998.

3. When consistent with Objectives 1 and 2, contribute to the protection and/or increase of

habitats for wetland and associated upland

wildlife species in the Joint Venture, with

emphasis on declining non-waterfowl migratory birds.

Partners In Flight

Formed in 1990, Partners in Flight (PIF) is concerned with most landbirds and other species

requiring terrestrial habitats. Partners in Flight has

developed Bird Conservation Plans for numerous

Physiographic Areas across the U.S. (see http://

www.partnersinflight.org). These plans include priority species lists, associated habitats, and management strategies. Reflecting the local physiography,

the northern portion of Crab Orchard NWR lies

within PIF Physiographic Area 31, the Prairie Peninsula Physiographic Area. The southern portion of

the Refuge lies within PIF Physiographic Area 14,

the Interior Low Plateaus Physiographic Area.

U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan and the North 

American Waterbird Conservation Plan

The U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan and the

North American Waterbird Conservation Plan are

plans that address the concerns for shorebird and

waterbirds. These plans have corresponding

regional plans that cover the Upper Mississippi Valley/Great Lakes Region, which includes the Refuge.

These regional plans contain more specific information about the species priorities and habitat conservation needs of birds using the Refuge. These plans

are available at http://www.shorebirdplan.fws.gov

and http://www.nacwcp.org.

North American Bird Conservation Initiative

In a continental effort, the Partners in Flight,

North American Waterfowl Management, U. S.

Shorebird Conservation, and the North American

Waterbird Conservation plans are being integrated

under the umbrella of the North American Bird

Conservation Initiative (NABCI) (http://www.nabcius.org). The goal of NABCI is to facilitate the delivery of the full spectrum of bird conservation

through regionally-based, biologically-driven, landscape-oriented partnerships (see http://www.dodpif.org/nabci/index.htm). The NABCI strives to

integrate the conservation objectives for all birds in

order to optimize the effectiveness of management

strategies. NABCI uses Bird Conservation Regions

as its planning units. Bird Conservation Regions are

becoming increasingly common as the unit of choice

for regional bird conservation efforts; Crab Orchard

NWR lies within Bird Conservation Region 24, Central Hardwoods.

Each of the four bird conservation initiatives has

a process for designating conservation priority species, modeled to a large extent on the PIF method of

calculating scores based on independent assessments of global relative abundance, breeding and

wintering distribution, vulnerability to threats, area

importance (at a particular scale, e.g. Physiographic

Areas or Bird Conservation Regions), and population trend. These scores are often used by agencies

in developing lists of bird species of concern; e.g.,

the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service based its assessments for its 2002 list of nongame Birds of Conservation Concern primarily on the PIF, shorebird, and

waterbird status assessment scores.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

11

Region 3 Fish and Wildlife Resource Conservation 

Priorities (January 2002)

The Resource Conservation Priorities list is a

subset of all species that occur in the Region and

was derived from an objective synthesis of information on their status. The list includes all federally

listed threatened and endangered species and proposed and candidate species that occur in the

Region; migratory bird species derived from Service-wide and international conservation planning

efforts; and rare and declining terrestrial and

aquatic plants and animals that represent an abbreviation of the Endangered Species program's preliminary draft “Species of Concern” list for the

Region.

Although many species are not included in the

priority list, this does not mean that we consider

them unimportant.

The list includes 99 species or populations for the

Service's Upper Mississippi River/Tallgrass Prairie

Ecosystem. Approximately 45 of the listed species

inhabit the Refuge or immediate vicinity. 

Legal and Policy Guidelines

In addition to the Refuge's establishing legislation (Appendix G), several laws, executive orders,

and regulations govern its administration. See

Appendix C for a list and discussion of the guiding

laws and orders.
Chapter 2: The Planning Process

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

12

Chapter 2: The Planning Process

Overview of the Planning 

Process

Our planning process followed eight basic steps

described in the Service's planning policy. The steps

are:

# Preplanning: Planning the Plan

# Initiate Public Involvement and Scoping

# Review Vision Statement and Goals and

Determine Significant Issues

# Develop and Analyze Alternatives, Including

the Proposed Action

# Prepare Draft Plan and NEPA Document

# Prepare and Adopt Final Plan

# Implement Plan, Monitor, and Evaluate

# Review and Revise Plan

The Refuge began pre-planning for the CCP in

1999. There were initial discussions among the staff

on issues to be addressed and data that would be

necessary during planning. A planning team was

formed that consisted of Refuge staff, regional office

planning staff, representatives from other programs

within the Fish and Wildlife Service, and representatives from the Illinois Department of Natural

Resources. Geographic Information System (GIS)

data were assembled and organized.

The Service first began soliciting public comment

regarding the Comprehensive Conservation Plan in

October 2000. Three public meetings were held

using the “open house” format. The Service invited

people to drop in at their convenience to talk informally with Refuge staff, view exhibits, and fill out

comment forms. The dates, times and locations of

the meetings were announced in local papers and

special mailings. The first meeting was held Thursday, October 19, 2000, at Southwestern Illinois College, Redbud, Illinois. Twenty-two members of the

public and two news media representatives

attended. The second meeting was held Friday,

October 20, 2000, at the Marion Hotel & Conference

Center, Marion, Illinois. One-hundred and thirty

five members of the public plus seven members of

the media attended. The third meeting was held

Saturday, October 21, 2000, at the Crab Orchard

Refuge Visitor Center. One-hundred and fifty-nine

people attended.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 2: The Planning Process

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

13

At the open houses, on the Service's Region 3

website, and via the media, people were encouraged

to provide written comments on how they wanted

the Refuge to be managed. Hundreds of letters and

comments were received. Some letters covered one

specific interest, others spoke to several interests

(Mangi Environmental Group, 2001). 

Three focus group meetings were held at the Refuge Visitor Center on January 24 and 25, 2001. Invitations were extended to about 60 stakeholders that

had demonstrated a long-standing interest in the

Refuge. Additionally, some people were contacted

by the invited participants and attended the meetings. In all, 39 people attended the focus group

meetings. Each focus group generated and prioritized a list of issues (Mangi Environmental Group,

2001). 

In early 2001, the planning team formed special

topic work groups to deal with the Refuge purposes.

The groups included members of the planning team

and subject area experts from within the Service

and State. The groups reviewed the existing vision

and goals for the Refuge and drafted new goals for

the next 15 years.

In April 2001, using all of the comments received,

considering the goals and all of the rules and regulations that must be followed and considering the

given needs, the planning team developed four

alternative management concepts. The four concepts were: Existing Management; Land Exchange;

Open Land Management; and Forest Land Management. These management concepts were presented

to the public in a project update, which was mailed

to everyone on the planning mailing list, and people

were invited to comment on the concepts. Based on

the comments received and land cover data analysis,

the alternatives were refined and made more specific.

A Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS) and Comprehensive Conservation Plan was

written and released to the public in October 2005.

A 90-day period was provided for public comments

on the DEIS. The DEIS was distributed in hard

copy and compact disk formats. The document was

also available for viewing or downloading from the

planning web site. We received 1,983 comments via

letters, emails, public meeting comment forms, petition, and oral comments. We responded to all comments in the Final Environmental Impact

Statement and made changes to the document

based on comments received. The changes included

modification to the alternatives, including the proposed action, and typographical and factual corrections. The edited document was issued as a Final

Environmental Impact Statement and Comprehensive Conservation Plan in August 2006. After a 30

day waiting period, the Regional Director signed

the Record of Decision (Appendix A) on October 27,

2006.

Planning Issues 

During scoping, many issues or concerns were

identified by the public. The issues and concerns

ranged from general concerns, the economic effect

of the Refuge on the community, for example, to

very specific concerns, such as ruts in a gravel road

leading to a particular boat ramp. The issues and

concerns were classified under major headings. The

following paragraphs summarize the issues that

were addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement.

Issue 1: Recreation

Recreation was the most frequently mentioned

issue by the public. The public was concerned with

all facets of recreation, such as concern for loss of

recreation; desire to maintain existing recreational

facilities; support/maintain/enhance all forms of recreation; and to expand, improve, re-open and/or add

new facilities or activities to the Refuge. Comments

were made about the poor or inadequate conditions

of some of the facilities, including marinas, boat

ramps, restrooms, and campgrounds. Comments

made to expand, improve, re-open and/or add new

facilities or activities to the Refuge covered a wide

range of topics. Some people wanted to see the Refuge expand and improve by adding restaurants,

marinas, hotels, restrooms, bike trails, hiking trails,

disposal containers, roads, shooting range, dog

training areas, horse trails, or gas stations. Many

others wanted to see the Refuge re-open swimming

areas, picnic areas, and sailing facilities. Others

wanted to see additional nature walks, environmental education programs, and water quality monitoring. 

Issue 2: Wildlife Conservation

Another issue identified by the public was wildlife

conservation. The public recognized the need to conserve and protect wildlife populations as well as

their habitat. People felt that game and non-game

species should be protected, threatened and endangered species should be protected, habitats should

be preserved, and restoration efforts should be
Chapter 2: The Planning Process

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

14

properly employed. The public felt that this is a very

important aspect to maintaining the Refuge environment which reflects on how the public uses the

Refuge. 

Issue 3: Refuge Purposes

A third issue, support for the intended purposes

for Refuge management/concern for compatibility

of Refuge purposes, was identified as critical to the

Refuge. People who wrote or spoke to this concern

tended to feel that for some years Refuge management has not properly emphasized or supported the

four original purposes for which the Refuge was

established. Indeed, some expressed concern that

these very purposes may now be considered incompatible with the overall mission of the National

Wildlife Refuge System, due to recent legislation

and changing policies of the Service. 

Issue: Recreational Boating

A fourth issue, support for boating and its proper

regulation, was also addressed. There was broad,

strong support for the continuation and encouragement of boating at the Refuge. At the same time, the

commenting public recognized actual and potential

conflicts among boaters and between boaters and

other recreational users of the lakes. Comments on

regulation of boating included installing speed limits, removing “no wake” signs, and restricting

motorized vessels. Many people expressed opposition to jet-skis, or at least expressed the need for

more restrictive regulations for their use.

Issue 5: Role in Regional Economy

One issue identified as important in the focus

group meetings but not in the letters was the benefits the Refuge provides to the local economy. Focus

group participants recognized that the Refuge not

only provides tourism dollars, but also agricultural

and industrial dollars to the local economy. 

Issue 6: Communication between 

Refuge and Community

Another issue identified as important in the focus

group meetings, but not in the letters, was the need

for better communication between the Refuge and

the community. Some focus group attendees felt

that the Refuge could do a better job of informing

the local community of current issues facing the

Refuge.

Issues Eliminated from 

Detailed Study

The public identified some additional issues and

concerns during scoping. The Service determined

that the following issues did not merit detailed study

in the EIS.

ATV Use on the Refuge

Some people opposed the use of ATVs on the Refuge.

Rationale: The Refuge was not proposing to

expand the public's use of ATVs. The Refuge issues

a very limited number of special use permits to people with disabilities authorizing them to use specific

roads for specific activities.

Oil and Gas Production, Mining, Road Building, and 

Quarries

Some people opposed these activities.

Rationale: The Refuge was not proposing to

engage in any of these activities, except for possibly

building a minor amount of new road (Heron Flats

overlook). In fact, the amount of roads likely will

decrease as some industrial facilities become obsolete. The federal government owns and controls all

but a very small fraction of the mineral rights on

Refuge lands. Furthermore, the economics of

extracting any minerals appear to be extremely prohibitive for the foreseeable future.

Need for a CCP

Some people opposed the preparation of a CCP.

Rationale: Service policy, which is based on federal law, requires every national wildlife refuge to

have a CCP.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 2: The Planning Process

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

15

Privatization of Refuge Management

Some people supported a privately run Refuge.

Rationale: Public Law 80-361, the legislation that

established the Refuge, states: “...all lands herein

transferred shall be administered by the Secretary

of the Interior through the Fish and Wildlife Service..” As part of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the Service is mandated to administer the

Refuge.

Concession Operations

Some people oppose any concessions on the Refuge.

Rationale: Concession contracts are functional

tools the Refuge has used for many years to provide

certain services to the public that it otherwise could

not offer because of budget and personnel constraints.

Changing the Name of the Refuge

Some people would like to see the Refuge name

changed from “Refuge” to “Federal Wildlife Management Area.”

Rationale: As part of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the name “Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge” is appropriate.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

16

Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Introduction

Chapter 3 provides an overview of Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge and the resources it provides in terms of habitat, wildlife and people.

Physical Environment

Physiography

The physiography of the northern and southern

portions of the Refuge is quite different. The terrain

of the northern portion of the Refuge is characterized by low relief, broad valleys, and relatively welldeveloped drainage systems while the southern portion of the Refuge is uplands with narrow ridges dissected by deep, narrow valleys with steep slopes

and numerous sandstone outcrops. 

The northern portion of the Refuge is covered

with a heterogeneous mixture of rock fragments

ranging in size from clay to boulders deposited by

glaciers on bedrock. Generally the slopes in the area

are less than 3 percent. The southern portion of the

Refuge is part of a continuous ridge extending from

Battery Rock on the Ohio River to Horseshoe Bluff

overlooking the Mississippi River. The hills are

highly dissected uplands with little flat land and

nearly all of the area has steep slopes, most in

excess of 10 percent slope.

The Refuge's elevation ranges from less than 380

feet above mean sea level at Crab Orchard Creek in

Jackson County to over 740 feet at the southeast

corner of the Refuge in Union County. 

The most prominent features of the Refuge landscape are three artificial impoundments: Crab

Orchard Lake, Little Grassy Lake, and Devils

Kitchen Lake. Together these lakes total about

8,720 surface acres.

Geology

The bedrock underlying the Refuge is of Pennsylvanian age. In the northern part of the Refuge, the

bedrock is covered by a thin layer of glacial till of

Illinoian age. During the Wisconsin glacial age, the

weathered Illinoian glacial till was covered by the

Farmdale and the Peorian loess sheets. The present

upland soils developed from these loess sheets. The

Loveland loess sheet underlies the Peorian and

Farmdale sheets in the unglaciated areas in the

southern portion of the Refuge. The Mississippi

River valley is the main source of the loess.

Prairie restoration, Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

17

Although mining for bituminous coal has

occurred over extensive areas to the north of the

Refuge, no coal has been mined on Refuge lands. In

1940, an exploratory oil well was drilled in the central portion of the Refuge, but apparently it never

produced any oil. The federal government owns the

mineral estate on all lands originally transferred to

the Department of the Interior in 1947, except for a

one-half interest in oil and gas minerals on one 40-

acre tract. The government does not own the subsurface rights on several parcels of land acquired

since that time. These parcels amount to about 1,350

acres.

Soils

Information on soils is essential for their conservation, development, and productive use. The various soil types have characteristic properties that

determine their potential and limitations for specific

land uses. Knowledge of soils is important in managing the Refuge's agriculture and wildlife habitat programs, as well as recreational and industrial

facilities and activities.

Since the existing soil surveys were published for

Williamson County (Fehrenbacher and Odell, 1959)

and Jackson County (Herman et al., 1977), many

changes and dramatic improvements have been

made in soil classification and mapping techniques.

The Heartland Geographic Information System

Project will create an updated, digitized soil survey

of Williamson, Jackson, and Perry counties. The

Refuge is co-sponsoring the new soil survey of Williamson County. The soil survey, which will meet current National Cooperative Soil Survey standards, is

expected to be completed in 2007.

Climate

The climate of the area is typical of the mid-western region of the United States in which frequent

weather changes occur from day-to-day and seasonto-season. The weather is governed by cold air moving southward across the plains from Canada,

warm, moisture-laden air moving up from the Gulf

of Mexico, and dry air from the west and southwest.

Summers are generally hot and humid, with July

normally the hottest month. Winters are normally

mild with the coldest temperatures recorded in January. The average frost-free dates in spring and fall

for the area are April 15 and October 22. The mean

annual temperature of the area is about 57 degrees

Fahrenheit with mean monthly temperatures ranging from about 35 degrees Fahrenheit in January to

79 degrees Fahrenheit in July. Lake evaporation in

the area averages nearly 36 inches a year varying

from about 0.7 inch in December to 5.6 in July.

The average annual rainfall for the area is

approximately 44 inches. Precipitation is usually

highest March through June. Annual snowfall averages from 10 to 15 inches. 

Hydrology and Water Quality

The entire Refuge lies within the Crab Orchard

Creek watershed. Crab Orchard Creek is a tributary of the Big Muddy River, which drains into the

Mississippi River. Major tributaries of Crab

Orchard Creek include Drury Creek, Grassy Creek,

Little Grassy Creek and Wolf Creek; other tributaries include Prairie Creek, Pin Oak Creek, Pigeon

Creek, Rocky Comfort Creek, and numerous

smaller, unnamed streams (Figure 5). Surface water

on the Refuge exists almost exclusively as manmade reservoirs and ponds. Three large reservoirs

cover nearly 9,000 acres of the Refuge (Table 1 on

page 18). There are about 60 smaller impoundments

covering about 300 acres (range 0.5-100 acres, average = 6 acres). The only natural lake on the Refuge

is a 42-acre oxbow of Crab Orchard Creek. The

hydrology of this oxbow has been modified by drainage ditches and impoundment of Crab Orchard

Lake.

Water quality, drainage modification, shoreline

erosion and sedimentation remain ongoing concerns

for water bodies on the Refuge. Refuge waters are

impacted by agricultural runoff, wastewater treatment effluent, urban runoff, stream channelization,

and industrial contaminants. Pollutants from agriculture include sediment, nutrients and pesticides. 

Crab Orchard Lake

Crab Orchard Lake is the oldest (1940), largest,

and most heavily used lake on the Refuge. Although

created for water supply and recreation purposes, it

is no longer used as a source for industrial or drinking water. Crab Orchard Lake is eutrophic (high

nutrient levels, low oxygen levels) and rarely exhibits thermal stratification. Turbidity can be quite

high, especially following rain storms, and the lake

supports moderate plankton blooms during warm

months. Water surface temperatures reach 88

degrees Fahrenheit in August. The land cover of the

Crab Orchard Lake watershed consists of grasslands (34 percent), forests (31 percent), row crops

(15 percent), open water (12 percent), urban development (7 percent), and wetlands (2 percent). 
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

18

Little Grassy Lake

Little Grassy Lake was impounded in 1950 as a

recreation resource and today is most commonly

used for sport fishing. Little Grassy Lake is relatively clear, has low nutrient levels, and supports

light plankton blooms during warm months. The

land cover of the Little Grassy Lake watershed consists of forests (65 percent), grasslands (18 percent),

row crops (10 percent), open water (6 percent) and

wetlands (1 percent). 

Devils Kitchen Lake

Devils Kitchen Lake was impounded in 1959 as a

recreation resource and today is most commonly

used for sport fishing. Devils Kitchen is one of the

deepest and clearest lakes in Illinois, has low nutrient levels, and supports minimal plankton blooms

Figure 5: Streams and Watersheds of Crab Orchard NWR

Table 1: Crab Orchard NWR Lake Details

Name Crab Orchard Little Grassy Devils Kitchen

Surface Area (acres) 6,910 1,000 810

Capacity (acre feet) 72,525 27,000 29,200

Average Depth (feet) 10.7 27.0 36.0

Shoreline Length (miles) 125 28.3 24.0

Watershed Area (square miles) 215 15 18.3

Creek Dammed Crab Orchard Creek Little Grassy Creek Grassy Creek

Spillway Elevation 405.0 500.0 510.0

Maximum Depth (feet) 24.6 77.0 90.0
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

19

during warm months. Except for the dam area, the

lake shoreline consists primarily of oak-hickory forest. The land cover of the Devils Kitchen Lake

watershed consists of forests (62 percent), grasslands (25 percent), row crops (7 percent), open

water (5 percent), and wetlands (1 percent).

Contaminants

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and 

Liability Act (CERCLA) 

Following World War II and the transfer of the

War Department's Illinois Ordnance Plant to the

Department of the Interior, explosives production

continued to be the principal industry on the property. In addition, new industries moved into buildings formerly used by the wartime contractor. Over

the years, approximately 200 tenants have operated

a variety of manufacturing plants under lease from

the Refuge. In addition to munitions, manufactured

products included plated metal parts, ink, electrical

components, machined parts, various painted products, and boats.

A number of locations on the Refuge were contaminated with hazardous substances as a result of

handling and disposal methods that were once considered acceptable. These methods included placing

waste materials in unlined landfills and discharging

liquids into surface water bodies and impoundments. These practices contaminated soils, aquatic

sediments, and water, which eventually led to the

Refuge's designation by the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) in 1987 as a national

priority for hazardous waste investigation and

cleanup under the Comprehensive Environmental

Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).

In the 1970s, the State of Illinois identified polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) and cadmium contamination at the Refuge. A fish consumption advisory

has been in effect for Crab Orchard Lake since 1988.

In 1989, a Refuge-wide investigation was completed

on 33 sites. Several sites were remediated and other

sites are in different phases of clean-up. A subsequent investigation was conducted in 2001. This

investigation identified additional areas of significant contamination where efforts will fully characterize the nature and extent of contamination,

evaluate potential cleanup alternatives, and select

and implement protective cleanup measures.

The Department of the Interior, the Department

of Army, the USEPA, and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) are actively involved

in the site remediation process. The agencies

entered into a Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA)

in 1991 that defined roles and responsibilities for the

contaminants investigations and remediation. 

Approximately $85 million has been spent so far

for investigation and clean up of contaminated sites.

In one cleanup project, approximately 117,000 cubic

yards of hazardous PCB contaminated soils were

safely treated. The soils, along with other PCB contaminated soils and incinerator ash, were placed in a

repository on the site. Other cleanup projects

addressed contamination problems associated with

unexploded ordnance and lead-contaminated soils

around water towers. 

Investigation and cleanup are continuing at several sites in existing and former industrial areas

within the restricted use portion of the Refuge.

These activities are expected to continue into the

foreseeable future.

Administrative Facilities

The Service is responsible for maintaining the

Refuge headquarters building, visitor information

center, maintenance building, a small office building,

and three high hazard dams. The visitor information

center is described in the discussion of public use in

Section on page 32. 

The headquarters building consists primarily of

office space for four offices – Refuge administrative

staff, Ecological Services Marion Field Office, Ecological Services Crab Orchard Superfund Office,

and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The

building has 10,000 square feet and was completed

in 1981. 

The Refuge maintenance building consists of

office areas, supply and equipment storage areas,

and a large bay area for various equipment and

Crab Orchard NWR Headquarters, Bot Etzel
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

20

vehicle maintenance and repair functions. This

building has 10,000 square feet and was completed

in 1981.

The office building houses the Carterville Fishery Resource Office and the Illinois Department of

Natural Resources. This building, built in 1941, has

3,420 square feet. 

The three major dams on the Refuge are the

Crab Orchard Lake Dam, Devils Kitchen Lake

Dam, and Little Grassy Lake Dam.

The Crab Orchard Lake Dam was constructed to

provide a reservoir for an industrial and municipal

water supply, recreation, and work relief. Construction was authorized in 1936 and completed in 1939,

with extensive modifications completed in 1991. The

dam is a zoned earth fill embankment dam with a

service spillway.

Devils Kitchen Lake Dam was constructed to

provide recreation, water storage, habitat and

breeding grounds for migratory birds and other

wildlife, and conservation. The dam was designed in

1940. Construction began in 1941, but was suspended in 1943 because of World War II. In 1955,

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reviewed and

modified the original designs. Construction was

completed in 1959. The dam is concrete with a concrete spillway.

Little Grassy Lake Dam was constructed to provide recreation. Construction was authorized in

1936 and completed in 1942, with modifications in

1991, 1994 and 2003. The dam is a homogeneous

earth fill embankment dam with a concrete spillway

near the center of the embankment.

Habitat Overview

The purpose of this section is to broadly describe

the existing habitats and the changes that have

occurred in the last 200 years. The historic framework helps us implement the Fish and Wildlife Service’s policy on maintaining the biological integrity,

diversity, and environmental health of the National

Wildlife Refuge System. The historic perspective is

useful to us as a starting point for assessing the condition of the landscape, the potential for restoration

of habitats where appropriate, and the recognition

of irreversible changes that may preclude or greatly

limit restoration.

Background

The habitats of the Refuge area have changed

dramatically in the last 200 years. The area that is

now the Refuge was 90-95 percent forest prior to

European settlement (Anderson and Anderson

1975) (Figure 6). European settlement of southern

Illinois began in the early 1800s and by the mid

1800s Native Americans had been pushed out and

villages and primitive roads established. Change in

the area was greatest in the late 1800s and the first

half of the 1900s. Nearly all of the area was either

logged for timber or cleared and converted to other

uses, particularly agriculture. By the 1930s, the soils

in the area were depleted and severely eroded.

Starting in 1938, the Resettlement Administration

acquired 32,000 acres of the land along Crab

Orchard Creek in an effort to prevent further degradation. However, additional clearing and development ensued with the establishment of the Illinois

Ordnance Plant during World War II.

Figure 6: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, 1807 and 2000
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

21

The changes in Refuge habitats since 1807 can be

summarized as follows: the original hardwood forest

(92 percent of aboriginal area) was converted to

largely open habitats (agricultural fields and open

water) by the 1930s, where forests now exist the

mature hardwood forest has been changed to a forest in an earlier seral stage and pine plantations.

Savannah (7 percent of aboriginal area) and native

prairie (1 percent of aboriginal area) have been completely converted to other habitats. The overall

result has been the fragmentation of the hardwood

forest and an increase in aquatic habitats with the

construction of the lakes. The current land cover for

the Refuge is displayed in Figure 7; changes in land

cover are displayed in Table 2. 

Forests

Before European settlement, the area that is now

the Refuge was 92 percent forest. Essentially, all of

the original forest was either converted to other

habitats, harvested for timber, or otherwise disturbed. The amount of forest reached the lowest

point in the first half of the 1900s. Since that time,

forests have gradually become reestablished in

abandoned farm fields and industrial areas, and

some areas were actively replanted with trees. Presently, 56 percent of the Refuge is covered by forest.

Examples of wildlife that use Refuge forests are

deer, squirrels, raccoons, hawks, owls, and a variety

of forest song bird species. A Refuge goal has been

to manage for productive oak-hickory forest dominated by native species. Management activities have

included tree planting, prescribed burning, thinning, and control of exotic and invasive plants.

Shrubland

Before European settlement, the area that is now

the Refuge was about 7 percent savannah. Savannah

was probably dominated by prairie grasses interspersed with trees, but some of it was dominated by

shrubs. Presently, about 2 percent of the Refuge is

covered by shrubland. Examples of wildlife that use

shrubland are deer, rabbit, loggerhead shrike, Bell's

vireo, and field sparrow. Most Refuge shrubland is

the result of abandoning farm fields and industrial

areas.

Grassland

Before European settlement, the area that is now

the Refuge was 1 percent prairie. All of the prairie

was converted to other habitats. Presently, about 4

percent of the Refuge is covered by grassland.

Examples of wildlife that use grassland are deer,

rabbit, northern bobwhite, grasshopper sparrow,

loggerhead shrike, dickcissel, and eastern meadowlark. The majority of Refuge grassland is managed

pasture (55 percent) and hay (35 percent) with the

remainder (10 percent) represented by planted,

native warm-season grasses. Management activities

have included planting agricultural and native

grasses, prescribed burning, grazing, mowing, control of exotic and invasive plants, and fertilizing.

Wetlands

Before European settlement, there was relatively

little wetland habitat on the area that is now the

Refuge. Presently, most wetland habitat on the Refuge consists of man-made ponds and lakes, which

are discussed in the following paragraphs. Wetlands

cover about 6 percent of the Refuge. Examples of

wildlife that use wetlands are Canada goose, other

waterfowl, herons, raccoons, turtles, frogs, and

other amphibians and reptiles. The majority of

these wetlands are bottomland hardwood forests

(1,900 acres) and moist-soil units (450 acres). During

normal years, water levels in moist-soil units are

lowered during the summer to encourage the establishment of moist-soil vegetation. Water levels are

then raised during the fall to make the seeds produced by moist-soil plants available to waterfowl.

Management activities include maintenance of

levees and water control structures, water level

manipulation, mowing, disking, planting, and control of exotic and invasive plants.

Open Water

Before European settlement, the area that is now

the Refuge had little, if any, open water habitat.

Presently, about 20 percent of the Refuge is covered

by open water, almost all of it in man-made reservoirs. Open water serves as habitat for warm-water

sport fish, waterfowl and other waterbirds. Management activities include maintenance of dams, levees,

and water control structures, and manipulation of

water levels. 

Cropland

Row croplands are farmed through cooperative

farming agreements with eight farmers. The objectives of the cooperative farming program have been

to provide food for wintering Canada geese and

other waterfowl, protect and improve Refuge soils,

and fulfill the agricultural purpose of the Refuge.

Presently, about 10 percent of the Refuge is covered

by cropland. Examples of wildlife that use cropland

are deer, Canada goose, northern bobwhite, and
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

22

Figure 7: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, 2000 
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

23

wild turkey. Management activities include mowing,

disking, planting, herbicide and fertilizer application, and harvesting.

Developed Land 

Presently, about 2 percent of the Refuge is covered by developed land. This includes: roads and

adjacent rights-of-way, and industrial, administrative, and recreational facilities. 

Invasive Species

Three categories of undesirable species (invasive,

exotic, noxious) are found on the Refuge. 

Invasive species are alien species whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health. Executive

Order 13112 requires the Refuge to monitor, prevent, and control the presence of invasive species. 

Exotic species are species that are not native to a

particular ecosystem. Service policy directs the Refuge to try to maintain habitats free of exotic species.

 Noxious weeds are designated by the U.S.

Department of Agriculture or the Illinois Department of Agriculture as species which, when established, are destructive, competitive or difficult to

control. Principal weed species are shown in Table 3.

Table 2: Area and Percent Cover of Habitats on Crab Orchard NWR, 1807 and 2000

Habitat Type Acres in 2000 Percent 

Cover in 

2000

Acres in 1807 Percent 

Cover in 

1807

Forest 25,254 56 41,820 92

Eastern Red-cedar Forest (old field) 71 <1

Mixed Hardwood Upland Forest 18,923 42

Mixed Hardwood Bottomland Forest 1,908 4

Eastern Red-cedar Mixed Hardwood Forest 

(old field)

1,006 2

Pine Plantation/Mixed Hardwood Forest 1,633 4

Pine Plantation Forest 1,665 4

Bald-cypress Plantation Swamp Forest 44 <1

Early Successional Oak Forest (reforested) 5 <1

Shrubland 956 2 3,182 7

Upland Mixed Shrubland (old field) 872 2

Willow Wet Shrubland 3 <1

Buttonbush Swamp Shrubland 81 <1

Herbaceous 9,026 20 455 1

Restored Native Grassland 198 <1

Fallow Herbaceous Field 1,542 3

Forest Regeneration Herbaceous Land 168 <1

Perennial Grass Crops 1,752 4

Wet Herbaceous Meadow 389 1

Common Reed Marsh 7 <1

Cattail Marsh 25 <1

Aquatic Herbaceous Marsh 365 1

Agricultural Field 4,580 10

Other Land Cover 10,220 22 0 0

Open Water 9,082 20

Developed Land 1,138 2

Totals 45,456 100 45,456 100
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

24

Invasive, exotic and noxious weed species are relatively abundant on the Refuge. These species are

quite diverse and are found in most Refuge habitats,

although some are typically found in agricultural

fields or lakes and ponds. Johnsongrass, Canada

thistle and giant ragweed are Illinois state-listed

noxious weeds that occur on the Refuge. Currently,

most Refuge control efforts focus on Johnsongrass,

autumn olive, teasel, garlic mustard and common

reed. The principal invasive and exotic plant species

on Crab Orchard NWR are shown in Table 4.

Exotic and invasive plant species pose one of the

greatest threats to the maintenance and restoration

of the diverse habitats found on the Refuge. They

threaten biological diversity by causing population

declines of native species and by altering key ecosystem processes like hydrology, nitrogen fixation,

and fire regimes. Left unchecked, these plants have

come to dominate many areas on the Refuge and

reduced the value of the land as wildlife habitat.

There is a bountiful seed source of many of these

exotic/invasive species on the lands surrounding the

Refuge, thus in order to be effective in our management plans, we must bring together a complex set of

interests including private landowner, commercial,

and public agencies.

Natural and Current Role of Fire

Prior to European settlement, fire assuredly was

an influence on the structure and function of the

small patches of prairie and savannah in the area

that is now the Refuge. Fire was less of a factor in

open forests, and even less in closed forests. Now,

the natural process of fire has been replaced by fire

management that includes suppression and prescribed burning.

Table 3: Principal Weed Species in 

Agricultural Fields, Crab Orchard NWR

Common Name Scientific Name

crab grass Digitaria sp.

fall panicum grass Panicum sp.

foxtail grass Setaria sp.

cocklebur Xanthium strumarium

smartweed Polygonum sp.

shattercane Sorghum bicolor

ragweed Ambrosia sp.

pigweed Amaranthus sp.

lamb’s quarters Chenopodium album

trumpet-creeper Campsis radicans

morning-glory Ipomoea sp.

nutsedge Cyperus esculentus

Table 4: Principal Invasive and Exotic Plant 

Species, Crab Orchard NWR

Common Name Scientific Name

autumn olive Elaeagnus umbellata

multiflora rose Rosa multiflora

kudzu Pueraria montana

purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria

common reed Phragmites australis

Johnsongrass Sorghum halepense

reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea

fescue grass Festuca pratensis

tall fescue Festuca arundinacea

garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata

Japanese 

honeysuckle

 Lonicera japonica

Amur honeysuckle Lonicera maackii

Oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus

Canada thistle Cirsium arvense

bull thistle Cirsium vulgare lanceolatum

black-locust Robinia pseudoacacia

white poplar Populus alba

mimosa Albizia julibrissin

tree-of-heaven Ailanthus altissima

wintercreeper Euonymus fortunei

Chinese yam Dioscorea oppositifolia

crown vetch Coronilla varia

white sweet clover Melilotus alba 

yellow sweet clover Melilotus officinalis

sericea lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata

bush clover Lespedeza bicolor

Japanese stiltgrass Microstegium vimineum

dodder Cuscuta spp.

shortleaf pine Pinus echinata

loblolly pine Pinus taeda

Virginia pine Pinus virginiana

ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa

coontail Ceratophyllum demersum 

(aquatic)

Eurasian 

watermilfoil

 Myriophyllum spicatum 

(aquatic)

common teasel Dipsacus fullonum

cut-leaved teasel Dipsacus laciniatus
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

25

We have fire records for the Refuge from 1947 to

the present, but information prior to 1986 is incomplete. Records indicate that the area has an average

of 2.3 wildland fires annually, with a total of 127 wildland fires recorded from 1947 to 2001. Fires are

most likely to occur in the spring from March 1 to

May 15 and in the fall from October 15 to December

1. 

We use prescribed fire to manipulate vegetation

in a safe and cost-effective manner. Our principal

purpose is to improve the wildlife habitat conditions

in the southern pine plantations. Prescribed burning also reduces hazardous fuels, encourages oak

and hickory and discourages sugar maple. Burning

improves the condition of the understory. And,

although burning is not specifically undertaken for

these purposes, burning enhances the aesthetics of

the forest by making the understory more open and

improves access for both habitat management and

recreation.

Southern pine plantations are burned to reduce

fuels on the forest floor and to keep understory low

to better provide for wildlife. By burning, we keep

the understory vegetation in a young, vigorous condition, increasing seeds and fruit that are available

to wildlife near the ground. As a result of fire, more

light reaches the ground, which favors less shadetolerant species. We conduct inventories to determine if there are enough young hardwoods in the

understory of pine stands to permit succession to a

native hardwood forest. If succession is likely, we

will terminate prescribed burning.

Areas identified as “fallow herbaceous fields”

(Figure 7 on page 22) are old fields that have been

invaded by low, woody vegetation and vines. If we

want to maintain these lands in an early seral stage,

fire helps maintain the openings and habitat diversity. Burning also enhances conditions for deer and

upland game hunting and wildlife observation and

photography.

Fire is essential for proper management of

native, warm-season grasses and associated forbs.

Prescribed fire stimulates growth of the grasses,

increases seed germination and growth of forbs,

creates open ground for wildlife, retards encroachment of woody vegetation, and reduces the fuel load.

Tallgrass prairie has been established on several

areas on the Refuge. Fire will play a significant role

in maintaining this habitat type, which benefits prairie bird species.

Wildlife

Information on wildlife in the area before European settlement is limited. We do know that some

mammals that were in the area are no longer found

in Illinois (Hoffmeister 1989): bison (Bison bison),

elk (Cervus elaphus), black bear (Ursus americanus), and mountain lion (Felis concolor). The Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius) and

Carolina Parakeet (Conuropsis carolinensis) inhabited the area but are now extinct. The Greater Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido) has a greatly

reduced range (Bohlen 1989). We know little about

how amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates in the

area may have changed through the years. 

The Refuge provides habitat for many species

that occur in Illinois (Table 5). See Appendix D for a

complete list of wildlife species known to inhabit the

Refuge. 

Mammals

Forty-three species of mammals have been

recorded in or near the Refuge (Appendix D).

White-tailed deer, Virginia opossum, raccoon, rabbits, squirrels, beaver, and coyote are commonly

observed species on the Refuge. 

White-tailed deer numbers on the Refuge have

shown a pattern similar to the rest of Illinois. By the

early 1900s, deer had either been extirpated from

the Refuge, or occurred in very low numbers. Refuge records mention a release of deer in 1942, but no

numbers are provided. The number of deer on the

Refuge is estimated at 10 in 1947, 30 in 1949 and 70

in 1950. By 1953, deer were no longer an oddity on

the Refuge. The population increased and attained

such high levels that deer damage to crops and forest began to become an issue in the early 1960s. The

first Refuge deer hunt in the restricted use area

Prescribed burn on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

26

occurred in 1966. The average annual harvest in the

restricted use area since then has been about 600

per year. 

Birds

Two-hundred sixty-nine species of birds have

been recorded in or near the Refuge (Appendix D).

Herons, Canada goose and other waterfowl, raptors,

wild turkey, and songbirds are commonly observed

species on the Refuge.

 Canada Goose

Prior to European settlement, Canada geese

probably rarely used the Refuge area. The Refuge

was dominated by forest (more than 90 percent) and

had little habitat to attract geese. Refuge records

indicate that there were only about 2,200 Canada

geese on the Refuge in 1947. Establishing a large,

wintering population was a Refuge priority. Refuge

staff kept pinioned or penned geese as a decoy flock

to attract migrating geese and emphasized production of corn and other grains in the Refuge farm

program to provide food for wintering geese. The

response by Canada geese was relatively quick; in

1948 the peak count on the Refuge was 24,000 and

peak counts generally increased through the middle

1990s (Figure 8). The average peak count (1947-

2001) is 82,000. 

Overall, Canada Goose use of the Refuge, as measured in goose-use-days, has been more variable

and shows less of a trend than peak counts

(Figure 9). The average (1952-2002) has been 5.4

million goose-use-days. The Refuge goal is to provide food for 6.4 million goose-use-days each year. 

 Since the Refuge was created in 1947, attracting

and providing food for migratory Canada Geese has

been a primary focus of activities on the Refuge.

Early efforts to attract geese included maintaining a

captive flock of pinioned geese, increasing the production of desirable agricultural crops, and, sometimes, directly feeding geese by placing large

quantities of grain in open areas of the Refuge. Current efforts to supply food for geese emphasize providing sufficient quantities of diverse foodproducing habitats. Much of this food is provided by

the Refuge agriculture program. Row crops provide

corn, winter wheat, and clover. Hay fields and pastures provide grasses and legumes. Food is also provided in natural wetlands, managed moist soil

wetlands, lakes and ponds, and miscellaneous sites

such as mowed industrial areas and rights-of-way.

Other goose management activities include seasonal

closure to boating on the east end of Crab Orchard

Lake and fall mowing around selected ponds. 

In 1998, Service and Illinois DNR biologists completed a report that set a specific Refuge goal of providing food for 6.4 million goose-use days annually.

This goal was derived using over 40 years of Refuge

Canada Goose data (unpublished Crab Orchard

NWR report, 1998). This report also calculated that

the minimum amount of agricultural row crops

required to potentially provide for 6.4 million GUDs

is 1,500 acres, but this requires several critical

assumptions. These assumptions are: 1) geese have

unrestricted use of all fields, 2) average crop yields,

3) average winter temperatures, 4) average snow

fall, and 5) crops are not consumed by other animals.

In practice, we know these assumptions are not met

and goose food availability is influenced by the following factors: 1) geese do not use some fields

because they are too small to fly into or they are in

the portion of the Refuge open to the public and disturbance levels are higher, 2) crop yields can vary

substantially (winter wheat production was low in

fall 2001 because of late and wet planting conditions,

corn and clover production in 2002 was low because

of drought conditions, etc.), 3) lower than average

winter temperatures result in greater calorie

demand by Canada Geese, 4) some crops are

unavailable because of occasionally heavy snow

Table 5: Number of Wildlife Species Found in Illinois and at Crab Orchard NWR

Taxonomic Group Number of Species 

Found in Illinois

Number of 

Species Found 

at Crab 

Orchard NWR

Percent of Illinois 

Species Found at 

Crab Orchard NWR

Amphibians 41 22 54

Reptiles 61 28 46

Mammals 62 43 69

Birds 327 269 82

Terrestrial Vertebrates 491 362 74
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

27

cover, and 5) other animals (deer, raccoons, blackbirds, etc.) also consume crops. In order to compensate for factors that regularly decrease food

availability (ex., consumption by other species and

non-use of certain fields) and factors that occasionally decrease food availability (ex., low crop production due to drought, deep snow conditions) more

than 1,500 acres of crops are required. For example,

if each of these five factors reduced food availability

by just 10 percent, over 2,500 acres of row crops

would be required to provide 6.4 million goose-usedays. However, we know that in some instances

these factors can cause larger reductions. For example, in 2002 corn production was reduced by 50 percent or more. 

Wild Turkey 

Wild turkeys were not known to occur on the Refuge until 122 were released by the Illinois Department of Conservation in 1958. Occasional turkey

sightings were made on the Refuge through 1965. In

1966, Refuge records estimate a population of seven

wild turkeys and state that several observations

were made during the year. Wild turkey numbers

continued to increase enough that by 1989, the Illinois DNR trapped 14 hen turkeys for stocking off

the Refuge. The Refuge held its first wild turkey

hunting season in the restricted use area in the

spring of 2001, when 39 wild turkeys were harvested

by 52 hunters. 

Figure 8: Peak Counts of Wintering Canada Geese on Crab Orchard NWR, 

1947 to 2001

Figure 9: Canada Goose-use Days on Crab Orchard NWR, 1952 to 1999
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

28

USFWS Nongame Bird Species of Management 

Concern 

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1980,

requires that the Service identify “all migratory

nongame birds that, without additional conservation

action, are likely to become candidates for listing

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973." Additionally, the Act further underscores the need to

develop actions to assure the conservation of these

species with the underlying philosophy that “an

ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Species of management concern in Region 3 have been

identified in a Resource Conservation Priorities

report (USFWS 2002). Nongame species of management concern known to regularly occur on the Refuge are shown in Table 6. 

Amphibians and Reptiles

Twenty species of amphibians and 28 species of

reptiles have been recorded on the Refuge (Appendix D). Cricket frog, Fowler's toad, bullfrog, painted

turtle, eastern box turtle, racer, and diamondback

water snake are commonly observed species on the

Refuge. 

Fish1

Prior to dam construction, fish habitat in the area

consisted primarily of the larger, named streams.

No fish community survey data from streams from

before dam construction exists, and only one cursory survey has been completed since. Over the last

50-60 years, most fish habitat has been provided by

the three large lakes and eight smaller impoundments. Fish management on the Refuge has emphasized mixed-species, warm-water sport fish. Since

1998, the fisheries on the Refuge have been managed cooperatively by IDNR and the Refuge. 

Crab Orchard Lake

The fish community of Crab Orchard Lake is

dominated by carp and gizzard shad, which comprise 75 percent of the biomass. However, a popular

recreational fishery exists for largemouth bass,

bluegill, crappie, channel catfish and white bass.

The Lake's aquatic habitat has been affected by

shoreline erosion, sedimentation, excessive nutrient

loading from discharges of municipal wastewater

and nonpoint source pollution, and contamination by

PCBs and other contaminants. Sediments contaminated by PCBs were dredged from a bay of the lake

in 1996. 

The fish management goals for Crab Orchard

Lake are to: 

# maintain and/or improve the existing bluegill

and redear fisheries, 

# maintain and/or improve the existing

largemouth bass fishery, 

# maintain the existing channel catfish fishery, 

# maintain the existing white bass and hybrid

striped bass fishery, 

Table 6: Nongame Species of Management 

Concern, Crab Orchard NWR

Common Name Scientific Name

Common Loon Gavia immer

Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus

Red-shouldered 

Hawk 

Buteo lineatus

Greater Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes

Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus

Chuck-will's-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis

Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus

Red-headed 

Woodpecker 

Melanerpes erythrocepalus

Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus

Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens

Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus

Bell's Vireo Vireo belli

Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina

Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus

Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor

Prothonotary 

Warbler

Protonotaria citrea

Worm-eating 

Warbler

Helmitheros vermivorus

Louisiana 

Waterthrush

Seiurus motacilla

Kentucky Warbler Oporomis formosus

Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla

Grasshopper 

Sparrow

Ammordramus savannarum

Dickcissel Spiza americana

Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta

Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius

1. Information for this section comes primarily from: 1) Refuge records; 2) IDNR records and 3) an unpublished report

by the Carterville Fisheries Resource Office (Surprenant

1994).
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

29

# maintain the existing white and black crappie

fishery, and 

# monitor PCB concentrations in fish flesh. 

Species abundance and body condition, which are

monitored by annual surveys, determine population

objectives for bluegill, redear, largemouth bass,

black and white crappie, white and hybrid striped

bass, and channel catfish. 

Although initial stocking records are not available, if USDA Soil Conservation Service recommendations were followed, largemouth bass, bluegill,

channel catfish, and bullheads were stocked. Other

species now occurring were present in the watershed or have since been introduced. Following the

pattern of large impoundments in the 1940s and

1950s, the largemouth bass fishery flourished initially then declined through the late 1940s as carp,

gizzard shad, white crappie and yellow bass became

dominant. Supplemental stocking of game species

began with 1.5 million largemouth bass 2-inch fingerlings in the 1950s. Since then, millions of fry and

fingerlings of several species have been released

into Crab Orchard Lake.

Commercial fishing was permitted on Crab

Orchard Lake during the 1960s and 1970s and discontinued in 1979. There are no plans to resume

commercial fishing on Crab Orchard Lake. 

Contaminant levels in Crab Orchard Lake fish

have been studied by the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service and

Illinois Department of Natural Resources since

1975. PCBs in fish flesh have exceeded FDA safety

levels, especially in fish east of Route 148 (Hite and

King 1977, Ruelle 1983, Kohler and Heidinger 1990,

Kohler and Heidinger 1994). 

Based on analysis of PCB data, the first fish consumption advisory was issued in 1988. People were

advised that certain fish had high contamination and

should not be eaten. This advisory applied to channel catfish longer than 15 inches and to carp longer

than 15 inches caught east of Route 148. People

were advised that bluegill and largemouth bass

caught east of Route 148 had moderate contamination and should not be eaten by children and nursing

mothers. This advisory has since been modified and

covers largemouth bass, channel catfish, and carp.

Consumption advisory information is published

annually by IDNR in the Illinois Fishing Information booklet.

Devils Kitchen Lake

Devils Kitchen Lake is most commonly used for

sport fishing and is known for its quality-sized bluegill and redear, occasional trophy bass, and yearround rainbow trout. The fish management goals for

Devils Kitchen Lake are to: 1) maintain and/or

improve the existing bluegill and redear fisheries, 2)

maintain and/or improve the existing largemouth

bass fishery, and 3) maintain the existing rainbow

trout fishery through annual stockings. 

The forage base at Devils Kitchen Lake is augmented with annual stockings of threadfin shad, if

available. Population objectives for bluegill, redear,

and largemouth bass are based on species abundance and body condition, which are monitored by

annual surveys. Low lake fertility results in minimal

plankton blooms and limited food for fish leading to

lower fish numbers and growth rates. In 2004, the

Illinois Department of Public Health issued a fish

consumption advisory for largemouth bass caught in

Devils Kitchen Lake because of elevated levels of

methyl mercury. 

Little Grassy Lake

Little Grassy Lake is most commonly used for

sport fishing and is known for quality-sized bluegill,

redear, and largemouth bass. The fish management

goals for Little Grassy Lake are to: 1) maintain and/

or improve the existing bluegill and redear fisheries,

2) maintain and/or improve the existing largemouth

bass fishery, and 3) maintain the existing channel

catfish fishery through annual stockings. 

The forage base at Little Grassy Lake is augmented with annual stockings of threadfin shad,

when available. Population objectives for bluegill,

redear, and largemouth bass are based on species

abundance and body condition, which are monitored

by annual surveys. Like Devils Kitchen Lake, low

fertility limits fish management. Light plankton

blooms and limited food leads to lower fish numbers

and growth rates. 

Small Impoundments

Sport fisheries management also occurs on eight

small impoundments (Table 7). The IDNR attempts

to control algae blooms in some of the smaller

impoundments. Two ponds were treated in 1999 and

2001 with an aquatic herbicide. These impoundments are managed for warm-water, mixed species

sport fisheries. 
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

30

Monitoring

Refuge staff, staff from the IDNR, and volunteers survey wildlife use. The surveys provide information for Refuge management and support state

and national conservation efforts. The following

paragraphs describe current monitoring programs.

Canada Goose Surveys: Aerial surveys of Canada Geese are conducted by the IDNR, generally

from mid-October to mid-March. The data are used

to estimate goose-use-days. Refuge biologists also

conduct an informal survey of goose use of agricultural fields.

Weekly Waterfowl Survey: Refuge biologists survey waterfowl weekly from mid-August through

mid-April, traveling over 70 miles and covering 50

points to view large areas of Crab Orchard Lake

and several smaller impoundments and moist-soil

units. Survey data are entered into a database,

which can produce 16 types of reports. Gulls, shore,

wading, and predacious birds are also counted

throughout the route. Goose collar observations are

also recorded and reported to the Office of Migratory Bird Management. 

Bald Eagle Monitoring: Biologists monitor Bald

Eagle nests for use and productivity. As part of a

nation-wide effort, the Refuge has participated in

the mid-winter Bald Eagle survey since 1961.

Heron Rookeries: Biologists periodically check

the known heron rookeries for use and productivity.

Wild Turkeys: Biologists monitor wild turkeys to

keep track of their population. The data are used in

establishing harvest permits.

Bluebirds: Since 1992, a group of volunteers has

maintained and monitored bluebird boxes. In 2000,

nine volunteers monitored 220 boxes.

Christmas Bird Count: The Refuge participates

in the Christmas Bird Count, a national survey

organized by the National Audubon Society.

Spring Bird Count: The Refuge participates in

the Spring Bird Count, another national survey

organized by the National Audubon Society.

Mourning Dove Count: The Mourning Dove

Count is conducted off the Refuge as part of a

nation-wide survey coordinated by the Office of

Migratory Bird Management. The survey has been

conducted every year since 1964. 

American Woodcock Singing Ground Survey:

The North American Woodcock Singing Ground

Survey is a cooperative effort conducted on and off

the Refuge in conjunction with the Office of Migratory Bird Management.

White-tailed Deer: The Refuge uses a fall deer

count to establish a deer population index. The population index is used, in turn, to determine the number of available hunting permits. A 20-mile survey

route was developed by Southern Illinois University

in 1966 and the Refuge has conducted the survey

every year since then. 

Indiana Bat Surveys: The Indiana bat is a federally listed endangered species. Biologists have conducted limited mist-netting to determine if and

where the Indiana bat might be using the Refuge. 

Amphibian Surveys: Biologists have used a variety of techniques (searching, song counts and drift

fences) to determine what species of amphibians,

and to a lesser extent reptiles, inhabit the Refuge.

In a one-time effort, biologists surveyed for

deformed frogs as part of a nation-wide cooperative

Table 7: Small Fishing Ponds on Crab Orchard 

NWR

Name Surface 

Area (Acres)

Shoreline 

Length

(miles)

A-41 Pond 37 2.0

Bluegill Pond 6 0.6

Blue Heron Pond 10 0.6

Honker’s Corner 

Pond

6 0.5

Mann’s Pond 9 0.7

Manager’s Pond 2 0.3

North Prairie Pond 6 0.6

Visitor’s Center Pond 40 2.3

Barn Owl, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

31

effort. In an effort to evaluate certain CERCLA

sites, surveys for the absence or presence of

amphibians and deformed frogs are ongoing. 

Gypsy Moth: The Refuge cooperates with the

U.S. Forest Service by installing gypsy moth traps

each summer as part of a nation-wide effort to monitor this pest's distribution and population.

Exotic and Invasive Plants: Biologists informally monitor exotic and invasive plants. Some of

the species monitored are autumn-olive, Johnsongrass, common reed, purple loosestrife, Canada

thistle, musk thistle, kudzu, and reed canary grass.

Forest Watch: Forest Watch is a volunteer cooperative effort organized by the Illinois DNR. Volunteers conduct biological monitoring in order to

identify long-term changes in the health of forest

ecosystems. Two permanent monitoring plots are

located on the Refuge. 

River Watch: River Watch, like Forest Watch, is a

volunteer cooperative effort organized by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. Each spring

citizen scientists evaluate two streams on the Refuge. The data and results are reported to the state

for an evaluation of stream quality.

Fish Surveys: Refuge fish management is conducted by IDNR in conjunction with the Service's

Carterville Fishery Resource Office. The IDNR

uses electrofishing on the lakes and several of the

smaller ponds each year to determine population

diversity, structure and overall health. The IDNR

also collects fish for contaminant analysis as dictated by the State fish consumption advisory group

and studies delayed bass mortality associated with

fishing tournaments as appropriate. Creel surveys

were conducted in 1976, 1978 and 2000.

Lotus Surveys: The American lotus (Nelumbo

lutea) that grows in Grassy Bay is in apparent

decline and is being studied. The IDNR has done

some seeding and planting in the bay. The Refuge is

monitoring several new patches of lotus in Crab

Orchard Lake east of Route 148.

Shoreline Surveys: Shoreline and island erosion

has been shown to be a contributor of sediment to

the lakes, especially Crab Orchard Lake. Over the

years various surveys and control efforts have been

tried. The last effort was in 2001. 

Federal Threatened and 

Endangered Species

Mammals

The endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) is

not known to occur on the Refuge, but it has been

observed in areas nearby. In winter, Indiana bats

hibernate in caves and mines. There are no known

caves or mines on the Refuge, but Indiana bats are

known to hibernate in caves in Jackson County

adjacent to the Refuge. Summer maternity roosts

and colonies are found in well-developed riparian

woods and upland forests.

The first surveys for Indiana bats on the Refuge

occurred in 1989. During two nights of netting, none

were captured. However, Illinois DNR biologists

thought that some of the Refuge habitat looked suitable. There have been several attempts to capture

Indiana bats on the Refuge to determine if the species is present. A 1999 survey was unsuccessful in

capturing any Indiana bats.

Birds

The Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)

occurs as a winter migrant and a summer breeder

on the Refuge (Figure 10). The Bald Eagle is currently listed as a threatened species that has been

proposed to be delisted. Bald Eagles are probably

much more common in the area than they were

before construction of Crab Orchard Lake in 1940.

The Refuge estimated 10-14 wintering birds in 1961.

The history of eagles nesting can be summarized as:

1974-construction of the first nest; 1979-the first

nesting attempt; 1980-first nestling; 1981-first

fledglings. Generally, each year 10 to 30 bald eagles

winter on the Refuge; there are two or three active

nests and two to six fledglings (Figure 11).

Plants

There are no known federally listed threatened

or endangered plants on the Refuge. 
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

32

Public Use Resources and 

Trends

Swimming, boating, picnicking, dog field trials,

camping, hunting and fishing were a part of the

Crab Orchard Creek Project before the establishment of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

When Congress transferred the lands to the

Department of the Interior, they directed the Secretary to classify the lands for the most beneficial use.

Subsequently, the Secretary designated Area I and

Area III of the Refuge for recreational use, including hunting, fishing, picnicking, boating, swimming

and similar activities. In Area III group recreation

and camps were to take precedence over other public uses. Area II was classified as “closed refuge.”

(Figure 12)

When the Department of the Interior assumed

management of the lands, Area I was under a single

concession permit issued by the Soil Conservation

Service. The concessionaire operated two government owned bathing beaches, a boat docking concession (Playport) and a skeet and trap facility. The

Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht Club, an incorporated

group of individuals, leased property and paid concession royalties to the main concessionaire.

In 1956, the Refuge reached a milestone of 1 million annual visitors. Nine years later visitation surpassed 2 million annual visits. Visitation fell as

additional State and federal recreational areas were

constructed in Southern Illinois. Today the annual

visitation averages 1 million.

A wide spectrum of recreational activities continues to occur on and around Crab Orchard, Devils

Kitchen and Little Grassy lakes. The activities

include boating, water-skiing, swimming, camping,

picnicking, hunting, fishing, wildlife observation,

environmental education, environmental interpretation, horseback riding, and photography. Public use

facilities include campgrounds, marinas, boat

ramps, fishing piers, beaches, picnic areas, hiking

trails, auto tour, visitor center, environmental education complex, observation decks, and photo blinds.

Hunting

Several species of small game, big game, and

migratory waterfowl are hunted on the Refuge.

Federal and State hunting regulations apply. Recreational trapping requires a special use permit. Refuge records show only a few trappers setting traps

on the Refuge in the last few years.

Figure 10: Bald Eagle Winter Survey 

Counts on Crab Orchard NWR, 1993-2002

Figure 11: Bald Eagle Fledgling Counts on 

Crab Orchard NWR, 1993-2000
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

33

Figure 12: 1948 Area Designations, Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

34

 Most hunting occurs outside the restricted use

area. The public use area of the Refuge makes up

approximately 23,000 acres and is open to all hunting activities in accordance with State hunting seasons. Hunting includes muzzleloader, archery,

shotgun and pistol deer hunting, waterfowl hunting,

archery and shotgun wild turkey hunting, small

game hunting (rabbit, squirrel, quail, and woodchuck), game bird hunting (dove, woodcock, snipe

and crow) and furbearer hunting (raccoon, opossum,

fox and coyote).

A controlled white-tailed deer and wild turkey

hunt occur in the restricted use area. Other hunting

programs include controlled goose hunting, youth

deer hunting and deer hunting for people with physical disabilities. Hunting is prohibited in zones

around the youth camps on Little Grassy Lake and

industrial areas in the restricted use area.

Restricted Use Area Deer Hunt: Since 1973,

white-tailed deer hunting in the restricted use area

has been an important management tool and a popular recreational activity. The Refuge conducts two

hunts that coincide with State seasons. Five hundred permits are issued each season for a total of

1,000 permits. 

From 1973 through 1994, hunters could take

either sex of deer. They were encouraged to take

antlerless deer with the intent of keeping the Refuge's deer population strong and healthy by limiting

the herd size and balancing the sex ratio. However,

the Refuge did not achieve this goal. Therefore, in

1995, the first gun deer hunting season was designated antlerless only.

Restricted Use Area Spring Wild Turkey Hunt:

In the spring of 2001, the Refuge implemented a

spring turkey hunt in the restricted use area. The

Refuge requested 15 State-issued permits for each

of four seasons for a total of 60 permits. When the

State went to five seasons in 2002, the Refuge chose

to keep the same total number of permits (60) so 12

permits were issued for each season. The State also

added a youth season, so 12 additional restricted use

area permits were added in 2002. A total of 72 permits are currently offered. The public use area portion of the Refuge is open to all turkey hunters who

have an appropriate permit from the State. This can

result in hunter competition for prime hunting areas

and lower success rates. The Refuge goal for the

restricted use area hunt has been to offer an experience that focuses on lower numbers of hunters and

higher success rates. Hunter success rates in the

restricted use area during 2001-2004 have been 75

percent, 43 percent, 52 percent, and 35 percent,

respectively. The State-wide hunter success rate is

about 20 percent.

Controlled Goose Hunting: The area for this

hunt is within the portion of the Refuge open to public hunting. The controlled goose hunting areas, contain 18 land blinds and 15 water blinds. Two of the

blinds are accessible to people with disabilities and

can be reserved daily. 

Youth and Disabled Persons Deer Hunt: In

1991, volunteers constructed blinds and implemented the hunts, which have been very successful.

The hunts coincide with the first shotgun deer hunt

season. The Refuge reserves permits for 25 disabled

hunters and 25 youth hunters and a portion of the

restricted use area is designated for these hunts.

Hunters are required to have an aide or adult with

them in the field. 

Fishing

Fishing is one of the more popular visitor pastimes on the Refuge. Crab Orchard, Little Grassy

and Devils Kitchen Lakes are available for fishing

year-round with one exception. The eastern portion

of Crab Orchard Lake is closed to boating from

October 1 to March 14 to provide resting area for

wintering waterfowl. The main species of fish

sought by the anglers are largemouth bass, crappie,

bluegill and channel catfish. 

There are several bank fishing areas on the Refuge (see Figure 13). Although there are many other

good fishing areas, the areas described in the following paragraphs receive the highest visitation and

the most noticeable resource impacts. 

Visitor's Pond is a popular fishing site on the Refuge. It is located in the restricted use area behind

the visitor information center. The pond is open

from March 15 to September 30. A universally

accessible asphalt trail leading to a fishing pier

allows easy access to the pond. 

Wolf Creek Recreation Area consists of a causeway and a peninsula where pan fishing is popular

year-round. There are two gravel parking areas, a

restroom, fish attractors, and six accessible fishing

platforms along the causeway. Picnic tables and

benches are provided for day use. 

 Blue Heron Pond is located in the restricted use

area. The pond is open from March 15 to September

30. Because it is out of the way, the pond receives far

fewer visits than other ponds in the restricted use

area.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

35

Figure 13: Bank Fishing Sites on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

36

A-41 Pond is located in the restricted use area.

People walk from a gravel parking area approximately one-half mile to the pond. The pond is open

from March 15 to September 30. The opening coincides with cattle pasturing in the same area.

Manager's Pond is accessible from Old Route 13

near Carterville. The pond receives light use, possibly due to the scarcity of parking facilities and the

heavy algae growth covering the pond during most

of the summer.

Honker's Corner Pond is located on Old Route 13

approximately 1 mile west of Route 148. There is

ample roadside parking. The pond is used consistently in early spring, but slows as algae growth covers the pond during most of the summer months. 

Route 148 North is located on the northeast end

of the Route 148 causeway. There is a large gravel

parking lot and kiosk. The area receives moderate

use from spring to fall. Mostly anglers fish for pan

fish and channel catfish in Crab Orchard Lake.

Route 148 South is located on the southeast end

of the Route 148 causeway. There is a small gravel

parking lot. The area usually has one or more cars in

the parking lot during fishing season. 

Cambria Neck Area is located on a peninsula off

Cambria Road. The area is used by anglers often

during the height of fishing season. There are picnic

facilities, a restroom, a parking lot and a grassy recreation area. The area is visible from New Route 13,

which may account for a lot of first-time visitors. 

Ann Manns Pond is located on Spillway Road, 2

miles south of the Crab Orchard Lake Dam. Bank

fishing and fishing from non-motorized boats is permitted year around. There is a small parking area.

Bluegill Pond is located along the southern

boundary of the restricted use area. People walk

from a gravel parking area approximately one-half

mile to the pond. The pond is open from March 15 to

September 30. The opening coincides with cattle

pasturing in the same area.

Fishing Tournaments

Five fishing tournaments are held annually on

the Refuge's three lakes under special use permits.

The tournaments are well established and require

minimal assistance from Refuge staff, although the

Refuge's law enforcement staff and Illinois DNR

officers do run spot checks during the tournaments.

Approximately 500 anglers participate in these

events. Anglers and biologists have expressed concern over the lack of vegetation for spawning bass

and, with respect to tournaments, to post-release

mortality. 

Fish-Offs

The three major lakes receive many visits from

fishing clubs hosting club events called “fish-offs.” A

fish-off is defined as an organized club fishing event

of 20 boats or fewer. The Refuge registered over 130

fish-offs in 2001 and more occur without being registered. The Refuge recently instituted new rules

restricting fish-offs to one per club, per lake, per

year. All fish caught must be returned to the lake

and aerated live wells are required for all boats. 

Camping

At one time camping was allowed throughout

open areas of the Refuge. Because of litter and trash

problems, camping was restricted to a concessionoperated campground on each of the three major

lakes. Campground locations are shown in Figure 1

on page 2.

 Crab Orchard Campground began operation in

1964 under a concession contract. In 1969, the Refuge assumed operation of the campground and

upgraded electric service, restrooms and showers.

The campground returned to a concession contract

in 1972. 

Today Crab Orchard Campground is the largest

of the four campgrounds with 250 electric and nonelectric sites. Restroom and shower facilities are

located on each of the six loops. In addition, there is

a fish cleaning area, a store and a swimming beach.

The campground is open from April 1 through October 31. With management approval, campsites may

be made available during the off-season. There is no

limit on campground stays.

Little Grassy Campground is a concession-operated campground and marina that has 130 electric

and non-electric campsites. There is a restroom and

shower facility. A store offers bait, food items and

boat rental. The campground is open from April 1

through October 31 with limited campsites available

during the off season. 

Devils Kitchen Campground is a concession-operated campground and marina that has 45 electric

and non-electric campsites. The campsites are

tiered, because they are located on a steep hill.

There is a restroom and shower facility. A store

offers bait, food items and boat rental. The campground is open from April 1 through October 31

with limited campsites during the off season.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

37

Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht Club, a private organization, operates a marina and a campground with

40 electric campsites under a lease contract. Membership is required to use any part the facility.

Camping is permitted with an annual membership.

Figure 14 summarizes campground visits to the

Refuge. 

Wildlife Observation

Wildlife observation is the most popular activity

occurring on the Refuge, and there are many good

observation areas on the Refuge. Points of interest,

trails, auto tours and viewing blinds have been

developed in an effort to encourage and enhance

wildlife viewing. Figure 15 identifies existing observation blinds and decks.

The Route 148 observation platform is located

approximately 2 miles south of the Visitor Center.

The platform has interpretive signs and offers a

good view of an open field, but only adequate viewing of a pond area. There is a large, paved parking

lot.

Wolf Creek Causeway is a very popular location

when wintering waterfowl are present. The parking

lot is used to view birds from automobiles.

Waterfowl Display Pond is located on Wolf Creek

Road about one-half mile north of the causeway.

There is a roadside pull-off area from which visitors

can view waterfowl at the 1-acre pond, which is

about 100 yards west of the road.

Bald Eagle Lane is located off Spillway Road and

offers a view of Grassy Bay and an occasional Bald

Eagle sighting. There is a Bald Eagle nest not too

far from this site.

The Devils Kitchen Dam observation area offers

good viewing of the lake. The area has a restroom,

parking lot, picnic table, grassy area and trail leading to the bottom of the dam. 

Devils Kitchen Line No. 11 offers a good view of

the lake.

Little Grassy Lake Dam overlook offers an excellent view of the lake. The area has enough room for

a few automobiles and is occasionally congested

when anglers use it as a parking lot. 

Hiking Trails

Hiking is permitted throughout the public use

area of the Refuge. Refuge volunteers maintain

seven trails that are open to the general public and

one trail that is provided for educational purposes

only. Numerous fire trails have served as hiking

trails on the Refuge. The following is a list of maintained trails. 

Harmony Trail: The trail is about 1 mile long

and is a self-guided, non-interpretive trail. The trail

has an A-frame structure with interpretive panels at

the trailhead. There is an observation blind on this

trail at the edge of a moist-soil unit. The trail

receives heavy use, especially during the spring and

fall.

Prairie Trail: Located across from the Harmony

Trail, this trail makes a circle through a 7-acre prairie restoration area. Currently the trail is used very

little, because it is not well defined or interpreted.

Figure 14: Crab Orchard NWR Campground Visits Per Year
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

38

Figure 15: Observation Areas on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

39

Wild Turkey Trail: Located across from Devils

Kitchen Line No. 12 on Tacoma Lake Road, the 2-

mile trail zigzags through a pine plantation and continues along a ridge top, ending at a gravel parking

lot on Grassy Road. The trail has been signed at the

trailheads and throughout the trail.

Devils Kitchen Line No. 17: This loop trail is an

asphalt road that has been closed to automobile traffic. It borders and offers access to the Crab Orchard

Wilderness. There is a large, paved parking lot at

the trailhead.

Visitor Center Trail: The trail is located next to

the Visitor Center. The first quarter mile is universally accessible and has three benches and four

interpretive signs. A new half-mile section completes the loop trail. The new section awaits an

asphalt surface.

Homestead Trail: The gravel, 1-mile loop trail

next to Refuge Headquarters is designed as an environmental education trail. It has an observation

deck and a study platform.

Rocky Bluff Trail: The trail is the most popular

trail on the Refuge. Located across from Devils

Kitchen Line No. 11, the trail offers a magnificent

view of a unique part of the Refuge. The 1.9 mile

loop trail crosses the Wild Turkey Trail at mid-point.

During the spring, volunteers lead wildflower walks

along the trail. 

The National Trail System Act of 1968 (Public

Law 90-543) authorized creation of a national trail

system comprised of National Recreation Trails,

National Scenic Trails and National Historic Trails.

Legislation is pending in Congress to add National

Discovery Trails as a new category of long-distance

trails and designate the American Discovery Trail

as the first National Discovery Trail. The proposed

American Discovery Trail covers more than 6,000

miles from Delaware to California. The Southern

Midwest Route of the American Discovery Trail

crossing Illinois would overlay most of the River to

River Trail, which runs about 146 miles from Battery Rock on the Ohio River to Grand Tower on the

Mississippi River for a distance of about 176 miles

(River to River Trail Society, 1995).

In late 1997, the Shawnee National Forest

drafted a memorandum of understanding (MOU)

between the Shawnee National Forest, the Refuge,

and the River to River Trail Society to formalize

maintenance responsibilities and alignment of the

River to River Trail along a tentative route through

the Crab Orchard Wilderness. The parties have not

agreed to or signed the MOU.

Boating 

Boating has long been a popular activity on the

Refuge. When Crab Orchard Lake was completed in

1940, it was the largest man-made lake in Illinois.

Crab Orchard Lake hosted professional outboard

motor races in 1947. In 1953, the Southern Illinois

Sailing Club moved from St. Louis to Crab Orchard

Lake. Over the past 50 years boating on Crab

Orchard Lake has changed with the times, from 25

hp outboards in the 1940s to jet skis and house boats

today. 

The Refuge offers boating on Crab Orchard, Devils Kitchen, and Little Grassy lakes. Crab Orchard

Lake has 13 improved boat launching facilities;

three ramps are provided on Devils Kitchen Lake;

four are provided at Little Grassy Lake (see

Figure 16). The lakes and boating facilities are

described in the following paragraphs.

Crab Orchard Lake

Crab Orchard Lake is the largest of the three

main lakes and covers approximately 7,000 acres.

The area west of Wolf Creek Road is open all year

and serves as a multi-recreation area for pleasure

boating of all types (jet skis, house boats, runabouts,

sail boats, and pontoons) and fishing. The area east

of Wolf Creek Road is open March 15 to September

30. Thirteen boat ramps offer access to the lake.

Three marinas are operated on Crab Orchard

Lake. The Refuge operates Playport Marina and

the former Images Marina. Crab Orchard Boat &

Yacht Club offers docks, slips, a picnic area and

campsites to members only.

Devils Kitchen Lake

The smallest and most scenic of the three lakes,

Devils Kitchen Lake covers approximately 800

acres. Care must be used when boating in the lake

because numerous trees lie just under the water's

surface. The lake is used for boating, canoeing, and

fishing. Outboard motors on the lake are limited to

10 horsepower. There are three public boat ramps

and one marina on the lake.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

40

Figure 16: Boat Launches on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

41

Little Grassy Lake

Little Grassy Lake covers approximately 1,000

acres. The lake is heavily used by the public, four

group camps and Southern Illinois University's

Touch of Nature Environmental Center for fishing,

boating, swimming and canoeing. The lake is scenic

and has some underwater hazards from trees. Outboard motors on the lake are limited to 10 horsepower. There are four public boat ramps and one

marina on the lake.

Swimming

Swimming has long been a popular activity on the

Refuge. At one time the Refuge supported six public

beaches – four on Crab Orchard Lake and one each

on Devils Kitchen Lake and Little Grassy Lake. 

 The Soil Conservation Service ran two concession-operated beaches on Crab Orchard Lake at the

time the area was transferred to the Department of

the Interior. Each beach had a beach house with

showers, changing area, and vending area. Subsequently, the Fish and Wildlife Service ran these

beaches (Hogan's Point and Crab Orchard) as fee

areas. The Service also created beaches at Carterville and Lookout Point. In 1973, the Crab Orchard

Beach and Hogan's Point Beach were closed and

Carterville and Lookout Point were placed under

concession contracts. 

Today swimming is allowed in Crab Orchard and

Little Grassy lakes and prohibited in Devils Kitchen

Lake. In 1994, Carterville and Lookout Point

beaches were removed from concession contract.

The Service then ran Carterville Beach as a recreational area and Lookout Point was closed. Because

the Refuge was not able to meet public health standards at Carterville Beach, the beach was closed in

1998. The Refuge expanded the beach at the Crab

Orchard Campground and the concessionaire

opened the beach to the general public. The Little

Grassy Campground also operates a beach that is

open only to campers.

Picnicking

From the late 1940s through the 1960s, picnicking

was a very popular activity on the Refuge. In 1961

there were 20 designated picnic areas with more

than 200 picnic tables. When the Refuge experienced a $75,000 budget cut in non-program uses in

1973, several picnic areas were closed. Today picnicking is encouraged in four locations on the Refuge. The areas vary in size, character and type of

use (see Figure 17).

Cambria Neck: This is the largest of the picnic

areas. The area has several picnic tables with grills,

a restroom, a gravel boat ramp and parking lot. The

area is open during warm season months for picknicking and fishing. 

Greenbriar: This area has a parking lot, a

restroom, an accessible fishing dock and three picnic tables and grills. The area is used mostly by

anglers fishing along the bank.

Harmony Trail: The area has a heated restroom,

a large parking lot and two concrete picnic tables.

The area is used mainly by school groups and trail

visitors. 

Wolf Creek Recreation Area: This area is mostly

used by anglers fishing from the bank. The area has

five picnic tables and grills, a restroom, and fishing

access. 

Horseback Riding

Regulations controlling horseback riding on Crab

Orchard NWR have seen several changes over the

years. During the 1960s and up to 1979, horseback

riding was permitted only in areas designated by

signs or on marked horseback trails. In 1979, the

regulation permitted horseback riding only on existing paved or graveled roads in the open area (public

use area) of the Refuge. In 1984, the regulation prohibited horses in concession, agriculture and grazing areas.

Even though the 1984 regulation allowed horseback riding in most of the public use area, this activity is concentrated in the more wild and scenic

southern portion of the Refuge. In 1976, much of

Marion Boat Club, 1945
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

42

Figure 17: Picnic Areas on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

43

this southern portion was designated as the Crab

Orchard Wilderness and horseback riding was not

allowed. In the past two decades, probably as a

result of lax enforcement, horseback riding in the

Wilderness has become increasingly common.

Equestrians typically ride on old abandoned roads

and user-defined trails within the Wilderness and

adjacent lands. Recently there has been a marked

increase in the development of unauthorized trails

in the Wilderness.

Several organizations have proposed developing

trails in the Wilderness for hiking and horseback

riding. In 1980 the Shawnee Trails Conference, Inc.

proposed the 130-mile MISHIO trail traversing

southern Illinois from Grand Tower on the Mississippi River to Cave-in-Rock on the Ohio River. The

Refuge Manager decided not to authorize any trail

construction in the Wilderness based on the unsuitable soil and steep slopes. The Refuge’s Master

Plan, finalized in 1979, also recommended that no

trails be developed for these same reasons. The

Crab Orchard Wilderness Management Plan (1985)

states: “No trail construction will be undertaken in

the future ...” In 1993 The River to River Trail Society sought permission to realign the River to River

Trail from public, paved roads to a route through the

Wilderness. The Refuge Manager requested more

details from the Society regarding design criteria,

layout, construction and maintenance, as well as

modes of travel and expected levels of public use, to

assess the impacts on the Wilderness and the Refuge in general. In 1997 volunteers laid out and

cleared a tentative route, but the proposal has not

been formally evaluated. Later that year a formal

Memorandum of Understanding between the Society, the Refuge and the U.S. Forest Service was

drafted to define trail alignment and maintenance

responsibilities, but it has not been signed.

Group Camps

Four group camps are located on Little Grassy

Lake. The camps operate under a cooperative

agreement with the Refuge. 

Annually, approximately 5,700 people attend the

United Methodist Church Camp and 1,200 attend

Camp Carew, a Presbyterian Church camp. 

The Boy Scouts of America camp, Pine Ridge, is

primarily a day use facility that is active throughout

the year. Approximately 6,000 Scouts attend the

camp each year.

The Girl Scouts camp, Camp Cedar Point, is recognized as one of the oldest Girl Scout camps in the

nation. The camp is active throughout the year.

Approximately 7,000 Scouts attend this camp.

Almost 20,000 campers participate in group

camping activities on the Refuge every year

(Figure 18).

Environmental Education

The Refuge provides educational assistance to

area teachers, educators, and Refuge group camps.

Refuge staff, interns, and volunteers present both

on-site and off-site educational programs to area

school groups, Boy Scout groups, and other organizations upon request. In addition, each group camp

is required to provide a minimum of 1 hour of environmental education each day to campers. The Refuge provides camp instructors with workshops and

lesson plans prior to each camping season.

Figure 18: Annual Group Camp Attendance at Crab Orchard NWR, 1997-2001
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

44

Educational materials (books, posters, videos,

and other supplies) are maintained by the Refuge

and are available for loan to area educators. Educational kits focusing on key concepts and resources

are also available for loan. In addition, Refuge staff

provide assistance with curriculum development

and with special event programs conducted by other

agencies and organizations.

Interpretation

Interpretive programs are given by Refuge staff

and volunteers to school, civic and other groups. The

programs are presented through automobile tours,

talks and walks. Some of the better attended programs include Bald Eagle tours, wildflower walks

and owl prowls. The Refuge also presents its interpretive message through bulletin boards, signs and

wayside exhibits. Visitor services staff presented

114 programs to more than 3,400 individuals in 2001.

 Visitor Center

The Visitor Center contains an information and

exhibit area, auditorium/conference room, book

store and office space for visitor services staff. Built

in 1941, the building originally housed a fire station.

The building was renovated in 1993 and has 3,455

square feet. Approximately 1 million people visit the

Refuge every year, and the Center receives approximately 40,000 of those visitors. Visitor Center staff

answer questions, issue user passes, host workshops

and conferences, present interpretive programs,

and check-in deer and turkey hunters.

Existing Transportation Patterns and Visitor 

Facilities

Crab Orchard NWR is located in southern Illinois relatively close to Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky,

Missouri and Tennessee. Interstate highways 24, 55,

57, and 64 provide high speed routes to southern

Illinois. Several state and county roads provide

access to and within Refuge boundaries.

State Route 148 passes through the Refuge from

north to south, passes the Visitor Center and has an

average daily traffic count of 5,800. New State

Route 13 crosses the northern portion of the Refuge

and has an average daily traffic count of 25,000. New

State Route 13 provides the primary access to the

developed recreation sites in the northwestern portion of the Refuge. Interstate 57 passes through the

eastern portion of the Refuge and has an average

daily traffic count of 26,900.

The Refuge also maintains an extensive system of

roads within its boundaries. According to a 2001 survey of Refuge roads completed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge maintains 38 miles of paved surface

roads and 17 miles of gravel roadway for a total of

56 roadway miles. And additionally, 1.1 million

square feet of parking area, 21 boat launch ramps,

and three universally accessible areas are also maintained by Refuge personnel. 

Special Management Areas

Wilderness

Congress designated the Crab Orchard Wilderness as a unit of the National Wilderness Preservation System on October 19, 1976, when it enacted

Public Law 94-557. The 4,050-acre Wilderness was

the first in the State of Illinois; seven additional wilderness areas have since been established on the

Shawnee National Forest. The Crab Orchard Wilderness is located in the extreme southern portion

of the Refuge bordering the shores of Devils

Kitchen and Little Grassy lakes. (See Figure 1 on

page 2.) A Wilderness Management Plan was

approved for the Crab Orchard Wilderness in 1985. 

The rugged terrain of this unglaciated land is

interlaced with numerous creeks. The vegetation

cover in the Crab Orchard Wilderness is predominantly second growth deciduous forest on slopes

and typical old-fields with scattered trees, brush

and small grassy openings along ridges. There are

more than 700 acres of plantations, including 400

acres of hardwood (mostly black-locust) and 325

acres of non-native pine and pine-hardwood. Invasive species, such as autumn-olive, multiflora rose,

Japanese honeysuckle, Amur honeysuckle and Oriental bittersweet, are common throughout the Wilderness, and likely to become more problematic.

The Wilderness contains numerous old house sites

with relic exotic ornamental plants, sandstone pillars, open wells, ponds and trash. There is one

known cemetery (Baker) located in the north central portion. Rocky Comfort Road, which is maintained by Williamson County, runs north and south

through the area.

The Wilderness Act of 1964 permits certain activities within designated wilderness areas that do not

alter natural processes. Wilderness values are preserved through a “minimum tool” approach that

requires the Refuge to use the least intrusive methods, equipment and facilities necessary for adminis-
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

45

tering the areas. The Refuge staff maintains

boundary signs and barricades to prevent vehicle

trespass and occasionally patrols in the area. There

are no research projects presently being conducted

within the Wilderness.

Visitor activities in the Crab Orchard Wilderness

include hunting, hiking, horseback riding, nature

study, and mushroom picking. Although horseback

riding was prohibited when the Wilderness was designated, this use has become increasingly common

in the years since then, likely as a result of lax

enforcement. Hikers and horseback riders generally

follow old roads and user-defined trails, which have

become eroded in some places especially on the

steeper slopes. Horse traffic, though generally light,

has disturbed the fragile soils along the trails. Most

damage occurs during winter and spring when the

ground is wet and soft.

The Crab Orchard Wilderness is located near the

population center of southern Illinois and is readily

accessible to visitors who seek solitude in a natural

setting. The primary access points are along Rocky

Comfort Road, Devils Kitchen Lines #9 and #17,

Antioch Cemetery Road, and West Liberty Cemetery Road. The Wilderness is also accessible by boat

from Little Grassy and Devils Kitchen lakes. The

number and distribution of visitors in the Wilderness are not well documented. A study was conducted by Reeder (1977) soon after Wilderness

designation to characterize public use by surveying

128 visitors. A more detailed study by McCurdy and

others (1994) described the demographics and recreation use patterns of visitors to five wilderness

areas on the Shawnee National Forest, one of which

was Panther Den Wilderness which is adjacent to

the Crab Orchard Wilderness.

Inholdings and Lands Contiguous to the Crab Orchard 

Wilderness

The entire northern boundary and almost all of

the western boundary of the Wilderness border

other Refuge land (see Figure 1 on page 2). Much of

the northern boundary is formed by the Little

Grassy and Devils Kitchen lakes, which are manmade reservoirs. At the time of designation, the Wilderness designation excluded an inholding and

another parcel surrounded by Wilderness on three

sides, both owned by Southern Illinois University.

Through a land exchange in 1979, the Refuge

acquired these tracts, which together constitute

about 120 acres. An additional 558-acre tract contiguous with the southern boundary of the Crab

Orchard Wilderness was acquired in the same land

exchange. Rocky Comfort Road runs north-south

through this tract. 

Lands on the southern boundary of the Wilderness include the 779-acre Panther Den Wilderness,

managed by the USDA Forest Service. Additional

lands are owned by Southern Illinois University and

private individuals. Neighboring lands are primarily

second growth forest with a few fields making up

the rest of the boundary. Lands adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Wilderness are primarily fields

in private ownership. . 

Research Natural Areas

The Service administratively designates research

natural areas (RNA), which are part of a national

network of reserved areas under various ownerships. RNAs are intended to assist in the preservation of examples of all significant natural

ecosystems for comparison with those influenced by

man, to provide educational and research areas for

scientists to study the ecology, successional trends,

and other aspects of the natural environment, and to

serve as gene pools and preserves for rare and

endangered species of plants and animals. In RNAs,

as in designated Wilderness, natural processes are

allowed to predominate without human intervention. Under certain circumstances, deliberate

manipulation may be used to maintain the unique

features for which the RNA was established. ActiviCrab Orchard Wilderness Area
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

46

Figure 19: Research Natural Areas on Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

47

ties such as hiking, bird watching, hunting, fishing,

wildlife observation, and photography are permissible, but not mandated, in RNAs. Thirteen RNAs

totaling 1,353 acres have been established on the

Refuge (Figure 19 and Table 8). 

Conservation Easements

When the Farm Services Agency (FSA), formerly

the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA),

acquires property through default of loans, it is

required to protect wetland and floodplain

resources on the property prior to resale to the public. The Service assists the FSA in identifying

important wetland and floodplain resources on the

property. Once those resources have been identified,

FSA protects the areas through a perpetual conservation easement and transfers management responsibility to the Service. The authority and direction

comes from the Consolidated Farm and Rural

Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981 and 1985, as

amended); Executive Order 11990 providing for the

protection of wetlands; and Executive Order 11988

providing for the management of floodplain

resources. The Service administers the easements

as part of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

The Refuge manages 24 conservation easement

areas totaling 490 acres located within the Crab

Orchard Fish and Wildlife Management District, a

21-county area in southern Illinois (see Figure 20).

Inadequate staffing levels have impeded proper

management of the widely dispersed easements.

Some of the easements have not been surveyed or

marked on the ground. The easements should be

inspected regularly, but some have not been

inspected in over ten years. Without appropriate

monitoring the easements and their resources can

not be protected from the myriad forms of

encroachment. 

Industrial Use Status and 

Trends

In 1942, the eastern portion of the Crab Orchard

Creek Project was transferred to the War Department for construction of the Illinois Ordnance Plant.

The War Department acquired additional lands for

its purposes. The Illinois Ordnance Plant was built

during 1942 as a loading site for high explosive

shells, land mines, bombs and components. 

Initially, the Illinois Ordnance Plant contained

536 buildings with approximately 2.3 million square

feet of space, water and sewage treatment plants

and distribution systems, power and telephone utility systems, 88 miles of railroad track, 93 miles of

access and service roads, parking for 6,900 vehicles,

nine steam generating plants and a peak wartime

employment of approximately 10,000 workers. The

Illinois Ordnance Plant ceased ordnance operations

in 1945 with the end of World War II.

When the War Department and Soil Conservation Service lands were transferred to the Department of the Interior in 1947, approximately 1.6

million square feet of space suitable for industrial

leasing were included in the transfer.

From 1947 to 1978, the Refuge leased buildings to

a variety of tenants. Conventional buildings were

used for the manufacture of munitions, boats, stencil

board, marking machines, mobile homes, inks and

brushes. A vocational training school also operated

in the buildings. Cold storage warehouses were used

for washer/dryer parts storage, beverage distributorship, freight terminal and office space, among

other things. Igloo type buildings were leased primarily by munitions manufacturers, fireworks distributors, and coal mining companies for storage of

explosives or explosive components. 

 In 1978, in a master planning process, the Service considered divesting the industrial operations

on the Refuge. A 250-acre tract of land was identiTable 8: Research Natural Areas on Crab 

Orchard NWR

Name Area 

(Acres)

Date 

Established

Crab Orchard Creek 

Bottoms

105 1970

Devils Kitchen Dam 130 1970

Post Oak Flats 22 1970

Area 10 40 1972

Big Grassy Creek 210 1972

Crab Orchard 

Cemetery

70 1972

Devils Kitchen Lake 136 1972

Little Grassy Creek 20 1972

Pigeon Creek 40 1972

Post Oak Flats Addition 50 1972

The Oxbow 160 1972

Wolf Creek Bay 40 1972

Wolf Creek East 

Tributaries

330 1972

Total 1,353
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

48

fied on the north boundary of the Refuge as an

industrial park for the relocation of existing industrial tenants. The industrial park concept failed due

to distance requirements of munitions manufacturing, costs related to relocation of industrial operations, and the industrial purpose specified in the

public law that created the Refuge.

In 1981, in a cooperative effort with the Industrial Tenant Association, the Service implemented a

new industrial policy and new lease contracts. The

policy and leases have served as guidelines in the

administration of the industrial complex since 1981.

The industrial complex currently consists of about

1.2 million square feet. The Refuge collects about

$500,000 in rental receipts each year. Rental

receipts are returned to the Refuge and are used as

part of its operation and maintenance budget. 

Agriculture

The Refuge began farm management in 1948.

The original focus of management was to:

# reclaim farmland that had been fallow during

ordnance plant operations,

# improve soil fertility,

# improve farm practices,

# emphasize establishment of pasture, and

# use crops to help establish a wintering flock of

Canada Geese.

The Refuge started with 35 cooperative and 18

cash farmers in 1948. By 1952, there were 60 cooperative farmers and no cash farmers. Common

crops included corn, soybeans, wheat, sudan grass,

oats, rye, and barley. Crop fields were in a 5-year

rotation that included 2-3 years of grass or legumes.

Pastures of cheat (Bromus tectorum) and bluegrass

(Poa sp.) were grazed by cattle along with some

horses and sheep. There were no permanent hay

fields. 

Hay crops were red clover (Trifolium pratense),

lespedeza, red top (Agrostis alba), and timothy

(Phleum pratense). The number of cooperators was

high and the number of acres allocated to each coopFigure 20: Conservation Easements Administered by Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

49

erator was relatively small. In 1953, there were 99

cooperators with an average of 110 acres per cooperator (Figure 21). By 1979, there were 28 cooperators with an average of 280 acres per cooperator. In

2001, there were 20 cooperators with an average of

315 acres per cooperator 

Efforts to reclaim farmland continued through

the 1950s and 1960s (Figure 22). Some bottomland

forest was converted to farmland. In 1963, for example, 170 acres of bottomland forest were cleared and

converted to crop production. During this period,

the common rotation was: corn, soybeans, winter

grain, hay, hay. In 1966, 2,500 geese died from

impaction of soybeans in their crops. In 1967, soybeans were dropped from the rotation and replaced

with milo, and 1967 was the first year in 10 with no

impaction mortality of geese on the Refuge. Soybeans were added back into the rotation in 1992.

More has been learned about crop impaction in

geese and there has been no subsequent impactionrelated mortality. 

Current row crop management emphasizes soil

protection and integrated pest management. Management consists of crop rotation, no-till planting,

higher weed tolerance, restricted use of herbicides,

and no insecticide use.

The current rotation, which was implemented in

2005, is: 

# Year 1 – corn followed by rye

Figure 21: Number of Agricultural Cooperators at Crab Orchard NWR, 1953, 1979, and 2001

Figure 22: Total Area of Agricultural Fields on Crab Orchard NWR, 1947-2001
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

50

# Year 2 – soybeans (drilled) followed by winter

wheat (drilled)

# Year 3 – corn

# Year 4 – soybeans (drilled) followed by winter

wheat (drilled)

# Year 5 – clover

# Year 6 – clover

Approximately 300 acres are in a continuous rotation of corn and soybeans, because these areas are

too wet to produce clover. 

Until recently, cooperators signed 5-year agreements. In anticipation of comprehensive conservation planning, the agreements were changed to 1-

year agreements until a management direction for

the Refuge is specified within a plan. Cooperators

bear the expense of all planting and harvesting

costs. Cooperators receive 75 percent of the corn,

100 percent of the soybean harvest, and 100 percent

of any second year clover they cut for hay. Crab

Orchard NWR receives 25 percent of the corn and

100 percent of the winter wheat. The Refuge's share

of corn and wheat are left unharvested to be used by

geese and other wildlife. In 2001, approximately

4,464 acres were planted in corn, beans or clover

(Figure 23). There were 244 fields with an average

size of 18 acres. 

The current grazing program consists exclusively

of cattle grazing on fescue pastures. The grazing

period runs from April 15 to November 15. To make

pastures more attractive to geese, cooperators are

required to have their pastures grazed or mowed to

6 inches or lower in height by October. The Refuge's

pastures are in relatively poor condition with low

soil fertility. Cooperators currently sign a 1-year

special use permit. The grazing fee is $8.95 per animal unit month (AUM). Cooperators pay the fee

through a mowing credit of $9/acre and by fertilizing the pasture. In 2001, there were 10 pastures

with an average size of 108 acres – approximately

863 acres were grazed and 220 acres were cut for

hay. 

The current hay program consists of improved

timothy fields and unimproved fields that are mostly

old fescue pastures. Cooperators are allowed as

many cuttings as a field will produce each year, and

they are required to cut their field to 6 inches or

shorter by October. The Refuge's hay fields currently have low soil fertility. In 2001, cooperators

paid $8.50 per ton of hay. Payment is made by fertilizing their field. In 2001, approximately 767 acres

were cut for hay. There were 22 fields with an average size of 34 acres. 

Archaeological and Cultural 

Values2

Several investigations have shown that humans

have exploited southern Illinois, with its great variations in topography, geology, and vegetation, for

over 10,000 years. People of the nomadic huntergatherer PaleoIndian (10,000 to 8,000 BC) and

Figure 23: Area of Row Crop Fields, Pastures and Hay Fields in 1953, 1979, and 2001

2. This section is derived from the report, “Cultural Resource

Management Plan for Cultural Resources Within the Crab

Orchard NWR” (3 vols.) by Anthony Godfrey and Donna

Stubbs, dated August 2001, as well as other cultural

resources reports of studies at the Refuge from 1951 to the

present.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

51

Archaic (8000 to 600 BC) cultures found rich lithic

resources for tools, rock overhangs for shelter, and

animals and plants from both forests and prairies

for subsistence. Late Archaic people began farming

the prairies to supplement their hunting and gathering procurement. People of the Woodland culture

(600 BC to AD 1000) acquired pottery and the bow

and arrow and increased reliance on farming, with

cultural influences that came from the west via the

Mississippi River and from the east via the Ohio and

Illinois rivers. The Refuge area was the center for

the Woodland Crab Orchard Tradition, the archeological site type now flooded by Crab Orchard Lake.

Woodland people were further influenced by the

flowering of the Hopewellian and Mississippian culture (AD 1000 to 1500), resulting in the establishment of small agricultural communities in the

Refuge area. Southern Illinois essentially became

depopulated from about AD 1500 until after the first

European contact in AD 1673, although groups of

displaced eastern tribes intermittently settled the

area. 

Euro-American settlers began arriving in the

early 19th century, primarily from Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas. Even earlier, George

Rogers Clark passed through Williamson County

and possibly the Refuge area in 1788 while taking

Illinois from British control. Subsequent settlers

constructed fortifications for protection; three

blockhouses were located on or near the Refuge. 

Settlements established before the mid-1800s

near what is now the Refuge were Russell Corners

on Eight Mile Prairie, Bainbridge and Phelps Prairie on Phelps Prairie, Cottage Home and Fredonia.

One settlement located on what is now Refuge land

was the village of Chamnesstown (later known as

Mousertown), which became a center for agricultural trade.

By the 1930s farmsteads and small towns covered

the Refuge area. Documents indicate at least 28

farmsteads and habitations, 34 cemeteries, three

churches, 12 schools, and two towns within the Refuge boundaries.

About 1,000 acres of the Refuge have been subjected to controlled and reported archeological survey and investigation. One hundred and thirty-six

prehistoric sites have been reported on the Refuge,

and human remains have been identified for at least

98 persons. Moreau Maxwell conducted the important excavation of the Sugar Camp Hill site 11-WM1 in 1939 and identified the Crab Orchard Tradition

before the site was covered by Crab Orchard Lake.

The artifacts from this work have been dispersed to

various museums; many artifacts can no longer be

located. 

Some subsequent investigations at the Refuge in

the 1950s and 1960s have had similar or worse problems. Reyman reported a survey from which artifacts, field notes and other documents have all been

lost. The Refuge contracted, as part of its 1978 master planning, for an inventory of 28 recorded and

reported sites on the Refuge, but documentation

was still incomplete. During the 1980s and 1990s

several investigations have occurred on the Refuge

for which reports have been completed and collections are curated at appropriate repositories.

Recent studies indicate settlement patterns in the

Crab Orchard Creek basin may be more complex

than previously thought.

As of October 1, 2001, there were no National

Register properties on or in the vicinity of the Refuge. 

The area of the Refuge having been vacated of

most human occupancy from approximately 1500

and resettled by historic period tribes from the 17th

to 19th centuries, modern descendants of prehistoric cultures have not been identified. Three historic period tribes have legal or occupancy claims to

the Refuge area. The Kaskaskia (part of the Illiniwek or Illinois, now part of the Peoria Tribe) were

declared by the Indian Claims Commission as having jurisdiction over most of southern Illinois. The

Piankashaw, a sub-group of the Miami tribe, historically were in southern Indiana, then in southeastern

Illinois with a short-term reservation 75 miles

northeast of the Refuge, but actual occupation there

was historically late, brief, and tenuous. The Indian

Claims Commission determined the Piankashaw to

Peithman Collection, Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

52

be legally part of the Peoria tribe and later became

the United Peoria and Miami. The third tribe was

the Shawnee, who had homes in Ohio and Missouri

and used southern Illinois as transient travelers.

The Indian Claims Commission identified Shawnee

villages in the 18th century in Illinois south of the

Kaskaskia on the Mississippi, south of Grayville on

the Wabash, and along the Ohio River.

Although Indian tribes are generally considered

to have concerns about traditional cultural properties, the several church groups (and possibly other

groups) formerly within the Refuge boundaries

could also have similar concerns.

The Refuge archeological collections contain prehistoric artifacts currently not associated with any

modern tribe. Furthermore, the collections contain

human remains but no funerary objects, sacred

objects or objects of cultural patrimony as defined

in the Native American Graves Protection and

Repatriation Act. Although sites of historic period

Indian occupation have not been identified on the

Refuge, they may exist and contain cultural items. 

Law Enforcement

Enforcement of Federal wildlife laws, regulations

specific to the Refuge System, and State laws is an

essential part of Refuge operation. Law enforcement plays a crucial role in ensuring that natural

and cultural resources are protected and that visitors have a safe environment. The Refuge currently

has five employees, three full-time and two collateral duty, who conduct law enforcement duties on

the Refuge. Cooperative relationships exist with

state conservation officers and all county sheriff

departments in the area. Table 9 displays the most

frequently cited offences between 1997 and 2001. 

Socioeconomic Environment

Economic Setting

The study area for estimating the economic

effects of the recreational, agricultural and commercial use of the Refuge is defined as Williamson and

Jackson counties. Most visitors to the Refuge (about

89 percent) come from within a 50-mile radius of the

Refuge, and about 90 percent of these visitors come

from Williamson and Jackson counties. Since most

visitors come from these two counties, most of the

economic impact of Refuge visitation occurs within

these counties. All of the commercial activities that

take place on the Refuge are within these counties. 

Williamson County contains almost all of the Refuge lands. Williamson County was established in

1839 with Marion as the county seat. Major communities include Marion, Herrin, Carterville, Johnston

City, Pittsburg and Creal Springs. 

Jackson County contains portions of Little

Grassy Lake. The county was established in 1816.

Most of the county's residents live in one of three

cities: Carbondale, DeSoto, and Murphysboro,

which is the county seat. 

Table 9: Most Frequently Cited Offences on Crab Orchard NWR, 1997-2001

Offence 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Totals

Trespass 73 109 118 93 68 461

No Entrance Pass 57 103 91 73 49 373

State Vehicle Code 9 15 11 10 9 54

State Hunting Law 8 10 13 9 6 48

No Fishing License 25 21 14 19 17 96

Underage Drinking 16 21 29 20 10 96

Under Influence 3 11 14 8 5 41

Unauthorized Fire 7 5 12 9 6 39

Violate Posted Sign 4 6 9 7 8 34

Illegal Transport Alcohol 33 41 54 19 21 168

Special Regulations 17 15 29 12 28 101

Public Indecency 15 11 7 14 6 53

Possession of Controlled Substance 43 52 39 31 24 189

Off-road Vehicle 6 9 6 10 4 35

Total 316 429 446 334 261 1,788
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

53

Population

Table 10 compares the population growth of Williamson and Jackson counties, Illinois, and the

United States from 1980 to 2000. Williamson County

population grew at a slower rate than the state but

substantially less than the U.S. from 1980 to 2000.

The 1990s was a period of significantly increased

growth for both Williamson County and the state,

but both lagged behind national population growth. 

Jackson County population declined while the

State and U.S. population grew from 1980 to 2000.

From 1990 to 2000, Jackson County lost population

compared with significant increases in the state and

U.S. population. 

Demographic information for Williamson and

Jackson counties is provided in Table 11. 

Employment

Table 12 shows full- and part-time employment

by major business sector in Williamson County in

1980 and 2000. The majority (68 percent) of county

employment in 1980 was in four sectors: services,

retail trade, government and manufacturing. These

four sectors accounted for 75 percent of county

employment in 2000. 

Employment growth in Williamson County generally outpaced state growth from 1980 to 2000. Williamson County has had a substantially higher

unemployment rate than either the state or the U.S.

However, since 1983, Williamson County unemployment rates have slowly declined so that they more

closely resemble state and national unemployment

rates. 

Table 13 shows the major employment sectors in

Jackson County for 1980 and 2000. In 1980, the

major sectors – government, services and retail

trade – totaled 73 percent of county employment. In

2000, government, services and retail trade

accounted for 80 percent of county employment. 

Table 10: Williamson County and Jackson County, Illinois and the United States Population, 

Percentage Change 1980, 1990, 2000

Percent Change

1980 1990 2000 1980-

1990

1990-

2000

1980-

2000

Williamson County 56,846 57,717 61,296 1.5 6.20 7.8

Jackson County 61,846 61,055 59,612 -1.30 -2.40 -3.60

Illinois 11,434,702 11,446,979 12,419,293 0.10 8.50 8.60

United States 227,224,719 249,464,396 281,421,906 9.80 12.80 23.90

Table 11: Demographic Profile of Jackson County, Williamson County, Illinois and the United 

States

Jackson County Williamson County Illinois USA

Population, percent change 1990-2000 -2.40 6.20 8.60 13.10

White, percent 80.80 95.30 73.50 75.10

Black or African American, percent 13.00 2.50 15.10 12.30

American Indian and Alaska Native, 

percent

0.30 0.30 0.20 0.90

Asian, percent 3.00 0.50 3.40 3.60

Hispanic or Latino origin, percent 2.40 1.20 12.30 12.50

Home ownership rate, percent 53.3. 73.60 67.30 66.20

Persons per household 2.21 2.35 2.63 2.59

Persons below poverty level, percent 21.00 14.90 11.30 13.30
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

54

Employment Earnings and Personal Income3

Employment earnings in Williamson County

totaled $604 million in 1980 and $789 million in 2000,

an increase of 31 percent. This compares with a 51

percent statewide increase. Table 14 shows employment earnings for Williamson County by major

employment sectors for 1980 and 2000. 

Employment earnings in Jackson County totaled

just under $750 million in 1980 and about $985 million in 2000, an increase of 32 percent. Table 15

shows employment earnings for the major employment sectors in Jackson County.

Table 12: Employment by Major Business Sector, Williamson County, 1980 and 2000

Sector 1980 Percent of 

Total 

Employment

2000 Percent of 

Total 

Employment

Percent 

Change in 

Employment, 

1980-2000

Farming 788 3.80 591 1.90 -25.00

Mining 1,046 5.00 124 0.40 -88.10

Construction 1,443 6.90 2,105 6.80 45.90

Manufacturing 3,440 16.50 3,119 10.10 -9.30

Transportation/Public Utilities 1,293 6.20 1,681 9.50 30.00

Wholesale Trade 942 4.50 837 2.70 -11.10

Retail Trade 3,541 16.90 6,174 20.10 74.40

Finance, Insurance, and Real 

Estate

1,226 5.90 2,414 7.90 96.90

Services 3,615 17.30 8,166 26.60 125.90

Government 3,488 16.70 5,534 18.00 58.70

Total Employment 20,909 100.00 30,745 100.00 47.00

Illinois Total Employment 5,688,059 100.00 7,442,406 100.00 30.80

Table 13: Employment by Major Business Sector, Jackson County, 1980 and 2000 

Sector 1980 Percent of 

Total 

Employment

2000 Percent of 

Total 

Employment

Percent 

Change in 

Employment 

1980-2000

Farming 1,0611 3.50 973 2.50 -12.70

Mining 662 2.20 89 0.20 -86.60

Construction 1,119 3.70 1,729 4.50 54.50

Manufacturing 1,742 5.70 1,469 3.80 -15.70

Transportation/Public Utilities 1,473 4.90 1,062 2.70 -27.90

Wholesale Trade 488 1.60 460 1.20 -5.70

Retail Trade 5,548 18.30 7,285 18.80 31.30

Finance, Insurance and Real 

Estate

1,663 5.50 2,056 5.30 23.60

Services 5,828 19.20 9,920 25.50 70.20

Government 10,783 35.50 13,784 35.50 27.80

Total Employment 30,367 100.00 38,827 100.00 27.90

Illinois Total Employment 5,688,054 100.00 7,442,406 100.00 30.80

1.Equals 5-year average 1980-84.

3. All dollar figures have been adjusted for inflation for year

2000 dollars.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

55

Table 16 shows per capita personal income

(PCPI) for Williamson and Jackson counties, Illinois, and the U.S. for 1980, 1990 and 2000. During

the 1980s, PCPI growth in Williamson County was

significantly lower than both the state and the U.S.

However, in the 1990s county PCPI growth was

fairly even with state growth and much higher than

national growth. While growth rates were similar

for Jackson County and the state, 2000 PCPI is

almost 55 percent higher for the state than Jackson

County (Table 16). Overall, from 1980 to 2000, Williamson County PCPI grew at a substantially lower

rate than the state and national economies. 

Table 14: Employment Earnings by Major Business Sector, Williamson County, 1980 and 2000

Sector 1980 

(thousands)

Percent of 

Total 

Employment

2000 

(thousands)

Percent of 

Total 

Employment

Percent 

Change in 

Employment, 

1980-2000

Farming $1,985 0.30 $3,418 0.40 72.20

Mining $75,082 12.40 $2,655 0.30 -96.50

Construction $59,209 9.80 $56,674 7.20 -4.30

Manufacturing $111,770 18.50 $102,425 13.00 -8.40

Transportation/

Public Utilities

$56,286 9.30 $75,755 9.60 34.60

Wholesale Trade $29,358 4.90 $28,209 3.60 -3.90

Retail Trade $72,557 12.00 $92,471 11.70 27.40

Finance, Insurance 

and Real Estate

$16,200 2.70 $41,944 5.30 158.90

Services $77,965 12.90 $166,231 21.10 113.20

Government $103,644 17.20 $219,532 27.80 111.80

Total Employment 

Earnings

$604,056 100.00 $789,314 100.00 30.70

Illinois Total 

Employment 

Earnings

$194,155,230 100.00 $293,692,287 100.00 51.30

Table 15: Employment Earnings by Major Business Sector, Jackson County, 1980 and 2000

Sector 1980 

(thousands)

Percent of Total 

Employment

2000

(thousands)

Percent of 

Total 

Employment

Percent 

Change in 

Employment, 

1980-2000

Farming $5,420 0.70 $12,347 1.30 127.80

Mining $51,687 6.90 $3,342 0.30 -93.50

Construction $43,395 5.80 $51,886 5.30 19.60

Manufacturing $45,965 6.20 $41,334 4.20 -10.10

Transportation/Public Utilities $57,067 7.60 $47,429 4.80 -16.90

Wholesale Trade $13,131 1.80 $11,373 1.20 -13.40

Retail Trade $93,030 12.50 $98,023 9.90 5.40

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate $23,438 3.10 $30,692 3.10 30.90

Services $12,253 16.10 $234,441 23.80 95.00

Government $297,359 39.80 $454,432 46.10 52.80

Total Employment Earnings $749,284 100.00 $985,299 100.00 32.00

Illinois Total Employment Earnings $194,155,230 100.00 $293,692,287 100.00 51.30
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

56

Table 16: Williamson County and Jackson County Per Capita Income, 1980, 1990 and 2000

Percent Change

1980 1990 2000 1980-90 1990-2000 1980-2000

Williamson County $18,109 $19,698 $22,641 8.80 14.90 25.00

Jackson County $15,092 $17,559 $21,676 16.30 23.50 43.80

Illinois $22,625 $27,419 $31,856 21.20 16.20 40.10

United States $20,799 $27,127 $29,469 30.40 8.60 41.70

Table 17: Annual Economic Impact of Refuge Budget Expenditures

Expenditures Economic Output Jobs Labor Income

Salary Impacts

Two-county Study 

Area

$1,212,390 $1,625,313 25.2 $547,998

Illinois $166,888 $288,957 3.4 $106,369

United States $18,793 $32,539 0.4 $11,978

Total Salary Impacts $1,398,071 $1,946,809 29 $666,345

Non-salary Impacts

Two-county Study 

Area

$525,030 $691,622 7.8 $213,173

Illinois $61,605 $98,776 0.8 $33,718

United States $184,302 $295,457 2.5 $100,864

Total Non-salary 

Impacts

$770,937 $1,085,855 11.1 $347,755

Total Impacts $2,169,008 $3,032,664 40.1 $1,014,100

Table 18: Annual Tax Impacts of Refuge Expenditures

Federal Taxes State and Local Taxes Total Taxes

Salary Tax Impacts

Two-county Area $144,950 $114,805 $259,755

Illinois $30,631 $19,885 $50,516

United States $3,449 $2,239 $5,688

Total Salary Tax 

Impacts

$179,030 $136,929 $315,959

Non-salary Tax Impacts

Two-county Area $52,359 $27,325 $79,684

Illinois $9,352 $4,373 $13,725

United States $27,376 $13,802 $41,178

Total Non-salary Tax 

Impacts

$89,087 $45,500 $134,587

Total Tax Impacts $268,117 $182,429 $450,546
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

57

Impact of the Refuge Budget

Refuge budget expenditures contribute to local

and regional economies. Table 17 summarizes the

economic impact of both salary and non-salary budget expenditures. Separate input-output models

were used to estimate the impacts of local spending,

regional (in-state but not local), and out-of-state

spending for both salary and non-salary expenditures. These estimates are based on the annual

average Refuge budget from 1996 to 2000. 

Table 18 shows the tax revenues generated by

budget expenditures for each of the three spending

areas and by salary and non-salary expenditures.

Economic Impacts of Refuge Recreation

The Refuge has averaged between 1.1 and 1.2

million visits per year during the 1990s. During this

period, four major recreational activities – hunting,

fishing, boating and wildlife observation – comprised from 37 to 89 percent of total Refuge visits.

From 1995 to 2000, these activities averaged about

44 percent of all Refuge visits. Activities making up

the remaining Refuge visits include Visitor Center

visits, environmental education and tours.

Based on the average annual visitation over the 5-

year span between 1996-2000, 66 percent of all visits

were made by residents of the study area and 34

percent were made by non-residents (people residing outside the two-county study area). About 80

percent of Refuge visitors reside within 20 miles of

the Refuge. A significant portion of non-resident

visitors come from the St. Louis and Chicago metropolitan areas.

From 1996 to 2000, hunting visits averaged close

to 44,000 annually. Most of the hunting on the Refuge is migratory waterfowl hunting (62 percent),

followed by deer hunting (26 percent) and small

game hunting (12 percent). Overall, about 74 percent of annual hunting visits are made by non-residents. Annually, non-residents make up about 85

percent of deer hunters, 15 percent of small game

hunters and 80 percent of migratory waterfowl

hunters.

During the period from 1996 to 2000, annual fishing visits to the Refuge have averaged over 210,000.

Residents of the two-county area account for about

70 percent of total Refuge fishing visits. 

Boating use on the Refuge has increased from

73,334 visits in 1996 to 109,420 in 2000, an increase

of 49 percent. Residents make up about 60 percent

of annual boating use on the Refuge. 

Wildlife observation has increased from 93,692

annual visits in 1996 to 154,869 visits in 2000, an

increase of over 65 percent. Most of the wildlife

observation visits come from residents, comprising

80 percent of annual Refuge wildlife observation visitation. 

Camping and picnicking on the Refuge averages

193,400 visits annually. Residents comprise about 80

percent of annual camping and picnicking visitation. 

Recreation on the Refuge results in significant

expenditures for both travel-related goods and services and activity-related equipment purchases.

Table 19 shows expenditures by recreational activity

along with estimates of the economic output,

employment and income associated with these

expenditures. The impacts were estimated using

regional input-output models4 for each of the six

recreational activities. 

Table 19: Economic Impacts of Refuge Recreation in Two-county Study Area

Activity Total Expenditures Economic 

Output

Employment Labor Income

Big game hunting $451,620 $581,414 11 $238,742

Small game hunting $168,260 $205,545 4 $75,604

Migratory waterfowl hunting $1,163,229 $1,480,497 27 $624,816

Fishing $7,347,787 $9,260,444 181 $3,972,468

Boating $2,757,469 $3,459,091 84 $2,068,264

Wildlife observation $4,923,785 $6,088,532 118 $2,477,711

Camping $2,901,000 $3,655,260 72 $1,569,180

Refuge Total $19,713,150 $24,730,783 497 $11,026,785

4. The economic impacts of recreational spending were

derived using IMPLAN, a regional input-output modeling

and software system. For additional information, see MIG,

Inc., IMPLAN System and Olson and Lindall, IMPLAN

Professional Software, Analysis and Guide.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

58

Total expenditures shows the total annual expenditures associated with the indicated recreational

activity. The figures include spending by both residents and non-residents in the two-county study

area. 

Economic output shows the total industrial output generated by recreation-related expenditures.

Total output is the production value (alternatively,

the value of all sales plus or minus inventory) of all

output generated by recreation expenditures. Total

output includes the direct, indirect and induced

effects of these expenditures. Direct effects are simply the initial effects or impacts of spending money;

spending money in a grocery store for a fishing trip

or purchasing ammunition or a pair of binoculars

are examples of direct effects. The purchase of the

ammunition by a sporting goods retailer from the

manufacturer or the purchase of canned goods by a

grocery from a food wholesaler are examples of indirect effects. Finally, induced effects refer to the

changes in production associated with changes in

household income (and spending) caused by changes

in employment related to both direct and indirect

effects. More simply, people who are employed by

the grocery, by the food wholesaler, and by the

ammunition manufacturer spend their income on

various goods and services which in turn generate a

given level of output. The dollar value of this output

is the induced effect of the initial (or direct) recreation expenditures. 5

 

The economic impact of a given level of expenditures depends, in part, on the degree of self-sufficiency of the area under consideration. For example,

a county with a high degree of self-sufficiency (outof-county imports are comparatively small) will generally have a higher level of impact associated with a

given level of expenditures than a county with significantly higher imports (a comparatively lower

level of self-sufficiency). Consequently, the economic

impact of a given level of expenditures will generally

be less for rural and other less economically integrated areas compared with other, more economically diverse areas or regions. 

Employment and labor income include direct,

indirect and induced effects in a manner similar to

total industrial output. Employment includes both

full-time and part-time jobs, with a job defined as

one person working for at least part of the calendar

year, whether one day or the entire year. Labor

income in the IMPLAN system consists of both

employee compensation and proprietor income

(Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc. 1999). 

Table 20 shows recreation expenditures and economic impacts for non-resident visitors to the Refuge. 

The economic impacts from recreation expenditures estimated in this report are gross area-wide

(two-county area) impacts. Information on where

expenditures may occur locally and the magnitude

and location of resident and non-resident expenditures is not currently available. Generally speaking,

non-resident expenditures bring “outside” money

into the area and thus generate increases in real

income or wealth. Spending by residents is simply a

transfer of expenditures on one set of goods and services to a different set within the same area. In

order to calculate “net” economic impacts within a

given area derived from resident expenditures,

Table 20: Recreation Expenditures and Economic Impacts for Non-resident Visitors to the Refuge

Activity Total Expenditures Economic 

Output

Employment Labor Income

Big game hunting $383,877 $494,202 9 $202,931

Small game hunting $33,652 $41,109 1 $15,121

Migratory waterfowl hunting $930,583 $1,184,398 21 $499,853

Fishing $2,204,336 $2,778,133 54 $1,191,740

Boating $1,102,988 $1,383,636 33 $827,306

Wildlife Observation $984,757 $1,217,706 24 $495,542

Camping $580,200 $731,052 14 $313,836

Refuge Total $6,220,393 $7,830,236 156 $3,546,329

5. More technically, direct effects are production changes

associated with the immediate effects ofchanges in final

demand (in this case, changes in recreation expenditures);

indirect effects are production changes in those industries

directly affected by final demand; induced effects are

changes in regional household spending patterns caused by

changes in regional employment (generated from the direct

and indirect effects).
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

59

much more detailed information would be necessary

on expenditure patterns and visitor characteristics.

Since this information is not currently available, the

gross area-wide estimates are used as an upperbound for the net economic impacts of total resident

and non-resident spending in the two-county area.

The economic impacts of non-resident spending in

Table 17 represents a real increase in wealth and

income for the two-county area (for additional information, see Loomis p. 191 and U.S. Department of

Commerce pp. 7-9). 

Tax Impacts of Refuge Recreation Spending

Table 21 shows Federal, state and local tax revenue derived from Refuge-related recreational

spending in the two-county area by both residents

and non-residents. These estimates are based on tax

regulations and policies in effect in 1998. 

Table 22 shows tax revenue generated by nonresident recreation spending in the two-county area.

Economic Impacts of Refuge Agriculture, Grazing, 

Timber Harvesting and Commercial Use

Several different types of commercial activities

take place on the Refuge. Commercial uses include:

(1) the leasing of Refuge land for an industrial park

and storage facilities; (2) the use of lakes within the

Refuge for boat docks and marina concessions; (3)

timber harvesting; (4) grazing; and (5) farming.

The industrial park currently has 14 firms leasing

space. These 14 firms employ 551 people. Annual

rental receipts total $506,051. Eleven buildings are

currently vacant, which if leased would employ

about 20 people and bring in about $55,000 in rental

revenue. 

The Refuge has three boat docks, four campgrounds and two marinas. Table 23 shows annual

concession revenue and fees paid for each of these

facilities. 

The Refuge’s forests are managed strictly for

wildlife conservation. Forest habitat management

activities, such as thinning, sometimes generate

merchantable timber as a by-product. Some types of

timber the Refuge has sold include pine pulpwood,

Table 21: Federal, State and Local Tax Revenue Derived From Refuge-related Recreational 

Spending by Residents and Non-residents

Federal Taxes State and Local Taxes Total Tax Revenue

Big game hunting $46,672 $42,306 $89,043

Small game hunting $13,013 $11,893 $24,924

Migratory waterfowl 

hunting

$115,180 $106,828 $222,171

Fishing $665,325 $604,459 $1,270,722

Boating $248,213 $175,679 $424,259

Wildlife Observation $393,536 $375,150 $769,244

Camping $232,080 $212,785 $444,865

Totals $1,714,019 $1,529,100 $3,243,119

Table 22: Tax Revenue Generated by Non-resident Refuge Recreation Spending

Federal Taxes State and Local Taxes Total Tax Revenue

Big game hunting $39,671 $35,960 $75,687

Small game hunting $2,602 $2,378 $4,984

Migratory waterfowl 

hunting

$92,144 $85,462 $177,736

Fishing $199,598 $181,338 $381,217

Boating $99,285 $70,272 $169,704

Wildlife Observation $78,707 $75,030 $153,849

Camping $46,416 $42,557 $88,973

Totals $558,423 $492,997 $1,051,420
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

60

pine sawtimber, and hardwood pulpwood. Since

1989, there have been about 35 timber sales which

produced $264,266 in stumpage receipts. Most of the

timber harvested has been pine pulpwood, amounting to over 10,000 tons. About 2,800 tons of pine sawtimber and 425 tons of hardwood pulpwood have

been harvested over the same period. On average

about 1,927 tons are harvested annually with a value

of $6,641. 

The Refuge currently allocates 863 acres to support 375 head of cattle and 1,726 animal unit months

3 (AUM) with a value of $172,500. We assume that

all cattle are yearlings, and are thus sold at the end

of each grazing period. The period for cattle grazing

on the fescue pastures runs from April 15 to September 30. Also, the grazing fee is $8.95 per AUM,

and is paid through a mowing credit of $2.53 per

AUM and by fertilizing the pasture.

 In recent years, about 5,200 acres annually have

been farmed on the Refuge. Crops include corn

(1,877 acres with a market value of $507,000), clover

(1,484 acres with a value of $320,000), soybeans

(1,179 acres with a value of $212,000) and hay (767

acres with a value of $164,905). Total market value

of crops grown on the Refuge is $1.2 million.

Comparison of Refuge-Related Economic Impacts 

to Study Area Economy

Current recreational and commercial use of the

Refuge generates a considerable amount of economic effects. However, compared with either of the

two counties individually or in total, the economic

effects generated by the Refuge are comparatively

minor. This is not to say that businesses in certain

sectors in specific locations may not be significantly

affected by major changes in Refuge management

policy; however, in general the Refuge plays a relatively minor role in the study area economy as

whole. 

Tables 24 to 27 compare Refuge-related impacts

to the study area economy. Table 24 compares the

two major sources of Refuge economic impacts, recreation and Refuge budget expenditures, with the

two-county study area. Annual industrial output for

the study area (based on 1998 data) totals $4.35 billion. Refuge recreation and budget impacts total

$27.8 million, 0.64 percent of the study area total.

Similarly, Refuge recreation and budget impacts

account for 0.77 percent of total study area employment and 0.68 percent of study area employment

income. 

Table 25 shows the annual number of acres

farmed on the Refuge and production value compared with the study area. Farming on the Refuge

typically accounts for less than 2 percent of total

Table 23: Annual Concession Revenue and Fees Paid for Crab Orchard NWR 

Recreational Facilities

Recreational Facility Revenue Fees Paid

Devils Kitchen Marina and Campground $53,805 $1,076

Boat & Yacht Club $94,547 $9,454

Crab Orchard Campground $148,553 $14,682

Little Grassy Marina and Campground $97,582 $11,210

Playport Marina $97,625 NA

Images Marina $43,255 NA

Total $535,367 $36,422

Table 24: Recreation and Refuge Budget Expenditures Compared with Study Area

Area Industrial Output Employment Employment Income

Williamson County $2,280 million 30,745 $789 million

Jackson County $2,070 million 38,827 $985 million

Study Area Total $4,350 million 69,572 $1,770 million

Refuge Impacts $27.8 million 537 $12.0 million

Refuge Impacts as Percent 

of Study Area Total

0.64% 0.77% 0.68%
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

61

acres farmed in the study area. If only Williamson

County is considered, the Refuge accounts for 5.7

percent of total acres farmed in the county. Farming

on the Refuge comprises about 3 percent of total

crop value in the study area. Compared with Williamson County only, Refuge crop value is 12 percent

of total county crop value. 

Table 26 shows Refuge grazing and value compared with the study area. The 375 head of cattle on

the Refuge constitute 2.9 percent of all cattle grazed

in the study area and 7.2 percent of all cattle grazed

in Williamson County. Grazing value on the Refuge

is 2.8 percent of the study area total and is 7.8 percent of total grazing value for Williamson County.

Table 27 shows the amount of timber harvested

on the Refuge compared with the study area. Average annual tons harvested on the Refuge is 1,927,

which is 3.4 percent of total tons harvested in the

study area and about 32 percent of total tons harvested in Williamson County. Williamson and JackTable 25: Annual Number of Refuge Acres Farmed and Production Value Compared 

with the Study Area

Area Acres1 Value2

Williamson County 92,289 $10.1 million

Jackson County 202,558 $32.6 million

Study Area Total 294,847 $42.7 million

Refuge Impacts 5,231 $1.2 million

Refuge Impacts as a 

Percent of Study 

Area Total

1.8% 3.00%

1. County data source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999.

2. Value is based on statewide average market prices.

Table 26: Annual Refuge Grazing and Value Compared with the Study Area

Area Total Head1 Value2

Williamson County 5,185 $2.2 million

Jackson County 7,900 3.9 million

Study Area Total 13,085 $6.1 million

Refuge Impacts 375 $172,500

Refuge Impacts as Percent of 

Study Area Total

2.90% 2.80%

1. County data source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999.

2. Value is total county sales based on 1997 Census of Agriculture.

Table 27: Annual Amount of Timber Harvest on the Refuge Compared with the Study Area1

Area Tons Harvested Value

Williamson County 6,090 $97,440

Jackson County 49,778 $796,448

Study Area Total 55,868 $893,888

Refuge Impacts 1,927 $6,641

Refuge Impacts as Percent of Study 

Area Total

3.45%

1. Value for Williamson and Jackson counties is based on the average price received for hardwood stumpage ($140/mbf in Illinois, November 1999 to August 2000. Value for the Refuge

is based upon average stumpage receipts received by the Refuge.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

62

son counties harvest approximately 56,000 tons of

hardwoods annually, receiving about $900,000 annually. Timber value on the Refuge is 1 percent of the

study area total and 7 percent of total timber value

for Williamson County. 

Currently, the Refuge leases about 1.2 million

square feet of commercial and industrial building

space. As of March 2001, the Greater Marion, Illinois, area had industrial parks and sites that

included 2,231 acres (Regional Economic Development Corporation, 2002). 

Current Staff and Budget

Staff

The Refuge's staffing as of January 2003 is illustrated in Figure 24. 

Budget

Based on the annual average Refuge budget

between 1996 and 2000, the Refuge budget includes

$1.4 million in salaries and $770,937 in non-salary

expenditures. 

Partnerships

The Refuge has many partnerships with local,

state, and national organizations. These partnerships benefit the Refuge in many ways, including

fostering good community relations and enhancing

Refuge habitats and wildlife populations. The Refuge intends to continue partnerships such as the following:

Southern Illinois Hunting and Fishing Days, Inc.

is a non-profit organization that partners with the

Refuge to promote hunting and fishing in the area.

The Refuge initiated this program in the early

1980s. SI Hunting and Fishing Days assumed the

lead for this activity in the early 1990s. Several thousand people now attend an annual weekend event,

which is held at John A. Logan College.

Take Pride in America has been organized and

worked with the Refuge since 1988. Take Pride in

America has built courtesy docks for boat landings

at all three lakes. Take Pride in America organized

the construction of bass-rearing ponds and maintains Take Pride in America Point (formerly known

as Hogan's Point) for fish-offs.

The Crab Orchard Waterfowl Association has

provided funds for the construction of moist soil

units on the Refuge. Quail Unlimited has provided

native grass seed for Refuge prairie restoration.

Southern Illinois University, Touch of Nature, the

Friends of Crab Orchard NWR and the Refuge's

Visitor Services Program have partnered to provided environmental education opportunities for

local schools. 

With the help of the following partners, the Refuge has been able to provide one of the most successful Kids Fishing Derby events in the area: 

# University of Illinois Extension

# Illinois DNR

# Southern Illinois National Hunting and Fishing

Days

# Timberline Fisheries

# Zimmer Radio Group

# WalMart

# Silkworm Inc.

# Marion Pepsi-Cola

# Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht Club

The Refuge has many dedicated groups and volunteers who assist with a variety of tasks. The

Friends of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge,

John A. Logan College, University of Southern Illinois, Southern Illinois Audubon Society, Williamson

County Tourism Bureau, and Marion U.S. Penitentiary are just a few of the organizations that contribute time to the Refuge.
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

63

Figure 24: Crab Orchard NWR Current Staffing Chart
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

64

Chapter 4: Management Direction

Operational Policies

Area Designations

Background: Twice since the establishment of the

Refuge, the Service has published its land use policy

in the Federal Register. These documents used the

concept of dividing the Refuge into three areas and

describing the types of use that would be considered

within a particular area. This policy was last published in the Federal Register on September 6, 1961.

It called for using Area I for “various forms of recreation, including public hunting and fishing in

accordance with State laws, picnicking, boating,

swimming, and similar activities;” Area II for

“industrial purposes;” and Area III “for use and

administration as a public recreation area on which

group recreation, group camps and private cabin or

cottage site developments on lands zoned for those

purposes.”

Since the publication of the policy described

above, Congress has passed several laws governing

the management of the National Wildlife Refuge

System. The most recent, the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Act) sets

forth guiding principles for management of all

national wildlife refuges, such as wildlife-dependent

recreation having priority over non-wildlife-dependent recreation. It challenges the managers of Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge to balance Refuge

purposes, which are “...conservation of wildlife and

for the development of agriculture, recreation,

industrial and related purposes...,” with the Refuge

System mission of “administering a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of fish,

wildlife and plant resources and their habitats...”

The Act states that: “... if a conflict exists between

the purposes of a refuge and the mission of the System, the conflict shall be resolved in a manner that

first protects the purposes of the refuge, and, to the

extent practicable, that also achieves the mission of

the System.”

Policy: With this comprehensive conservation

plan, the Service is attempting to balance its management responsibilities across all portions of the

Refuge. The concept of classifying uses of the Refuge into Areas I, II and III will be dropped. Only

the industrial area of the Refuge, formerly known as

either Area II or the Closed Area, will retain the

designation of “restricted use area” because of

safety and security concerns. 

The safety and security concerns are associated

with property protection, contaminants and the

storage of explosive materials. The warehouse area

on the east end of Ogden Road (Area 7) will be

closed to the general public, thereby precluding

access to Blue Heron Pond for recreational fishing.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

65

Wildlife management is a major focus for all

lands encompassed by the boundaries of Crab

Orchard NWR.

Camping Length of Stay

Background: People camped near Crab Orchard

Lake before the Refuge was established. In the

early days of the Refuge, camping was allowed

throughout the open areas of the Refuge. However,

the dispersed camping caused unacceptable litter

and resource damage. In order to minimize the

problems, four concession-operated campgrounds

were constructed and camping was permitted only

in the campgrounds. Crab Orchard Lake Campground began operation in 1964. Since then, the Refuge campgrounds have been operated by both

concessionaires and the Service at different times. 

Refuge regulations have not limited the length of

stay for campers. By not limiting the length of stay,

campers have been able to occupy a site for an

entire season. The result is that sometimes families

on a short vacation or a weekend visit have limited

opportunity to camp in the most desirable sites near

the water. Some people who have occupied sites for

the entire season have brought in equipment and

material that have created an atmosphere more typical of a permanent trailer park than a campground.

The lack of a length of stay regulation is unusual in

public campgrounds. In order to provide a more

equitable opportunity to stay in desirable camping

sites, we will establish a maximum length of stay at

all Refuge campgrounds. 

Policy: We will limit the length of stay at Refuge

campgrounds to 14 nights comparable with other

Federal and State campgrounds in the area. For the

first 2 years, approximately one-half of the campsites will remain available for long-term camping

and the other half for stays up to 14 days maximum.

The second 2-year period will permit up to one-third

of campsites to be available for 28 days and the

remaining two-thirds will be limited to 14-day maximum stays. Finally, beginning in the fifth year, a 14-

day maximum stay will apply to all campsites. At the

end of a camping stay, we will require persons to

remove all camping equipment from the campground for a minimum of 48 hours. Personal property such as trailers or recreational vehicles may not

be stored in the campground during this 48-hour

period. In addition, a reservation system will be

phased in for Refuge campgrounds. 

Group Camps

Background: Refuge policy that immediately followed establishment of the Refuge had provisions

that permitted group recreation, group camps and

private cabin or cottage site development on lands

zoned for that purpose. The areas chosen for group

camps were along the shoreline of the proposed Little Grassy Lake. Interest from organizations on how

to establish a group camp in this area was shown as

early as December 1947.

The Service prioritized the availability of this

opportunity for planned group camping with the

policy of first serving strictly youth camping groups,

second youth/adult church camp educational programs and last fraternal organizations. In 1950, the

Refuge began reviewing applications for group

camping from a number of organizations. The Service issued several group camping leases to organizations such as: The Boy Scouts of America, the Girl

Scouts, the Educational Council of 100 Inc., Pioneer

Communications Club, Independent Order of Odd

Fellows, The United Methodist Church, The Presbyterian Church and others. Many of these organizations began using the area in 1952. Today there

are four group camps still operating on the Refuge:

Pine Ridge Camp (Boy Scouts), Camp Cedar Point

(Girl Scouts), Camp Carew (Presbyterian Church),

and the United Methodist Church Camp. 

Policy: Group camps will continue with the

requirement that they provide environmental education as specified in current agreements. The infrastructure associated with the existing camps will not

expand beyond current square footage occupied by

U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

66

the camps. The camps will be assessed a fee for use

of federal lands. Because the use authorized under

the agreements includes environmental education

with no profit gained by the camps, the fees will be

minimal administrative and use fees. If an organization decides to no longer operate their camp, the

Refuge will determine if the site should be closed or

leased to another organization based on Refuge's

environmental education goals, the purpose and

mission of the organization wishing to occupy the

camp, the condition of the facilities and existing

National Wildlife Refuge System policies.

Recreational Fees

Background: Entrance fees were implemented in

1988 under the authorization of the Emergency

Wetland Resource Act of 1986. The entrance fee

program admitted anyone holding a permit and

accompanying passengers in their vehicle to the

Refuge. In 1997, under authorization of the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations

Act of 1996, the entrance fee program was modified

to a recreation use fee program. The user fee program requires all vehicles and boats using the Refuge to have a valid fee decal. In evaluating the use

fee program as part of the comprehensive conservation planning process, we recognized that the current program does not fairly implement the intent of

the Federal Demonstration Fee Program. 

Policy: We will implement a recreational fee program that is comparable to other fee programs

within the Service. These changes will be consistent

with the new Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act and increase convenience for the visiting

public. The Refuge will have an entrance fee as well

as an expanded amenity recreation fee. Federal

Duck Stamps, America the Beautiful Passes, and

Crab Orchard Refuge annual, weekly and daily

passes will permit entry to the Refuge. An

expanded amenity recreation fee will be charged in

addition to the entrance fee for using boat launching

facilities and participating in quota hunts. Table 28

summarizes recreational fees. 

Table 28: Recreational Entrance Fees and Federal Passes That Will Permit Entry

Fee Option Cost Eligibility Allows Entry to... Validation Period

Daily Fee $2/vehicle Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 1 day

Weekly Fee $5/vehicle Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 7 consecutive days

Commercial bus $20 For buses up to 20 

passengers

Crab Orchard NWR 1 day

Refuge Annual1 $15/vehicle Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 1 year (July 1 - June 

30)

Duck Stamp $15 Anyone Any national wildlife 

refuge

1 year (July 1 - June 

30)

Golden Eagle $65 Anyone Any federal fee area 1 year from month of 

purchase

Golden Age $10 Persons 62 years or 

older

Any federal fee area Lifetime

Golden Access Free Anyone who is 

permanently disabled

Any federal fee area Lifetime

Hologram2 $15 Anyone holding a 

National Park Pass

Any federal fee area 1 year from month of 

purchase

Daily boat launch fee $2/boat Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 1 day

Daily boat launch fee $2/boat Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 1 day

Weekly boat launch 

fee

$5/boat Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 7 consecutive days

Annual boat launch1 $10/boat Anyone Crab Orchard NWR 1 year (July 1 to June 

30)

1. Additional passes for vehicles and boats may be purchased for $5.

2. The National Park Pass ($50) can be upgraded through the purchase of a $15 Golden Eagle hologram. The Golden Eagle hologram

can be affixed to the Park pass to allow for entrance into all federal fee areas. The National Park pass will not be available at the

Refuge, but the hologram can be made available.
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

67

Fishing Tournaments

Background: Five fishing tournaments are held

each year on the Refuge's three lakes under special

use permits. Devils Kitchen Lake and Little Grassy

Lake each host one tournament. Crab Orchard

Lake hosts three tournaments. The tournaments

are well established and require minimal assistance

from Refuge staff, although Refuge and Illinois

Department of Natural Resources officers do conduct spot checks for violations during the tournaments. Anglers and biologists have expressed

concern over reduced fish populations because of

post-release mortality and the lack of vegetation for

spawning bass.

Policy: The five current fishing tournaments will

continue on the Refuge's three lakes. However, if

any of these five organizations decide to discontinue

a tournament, the event will be eliminated and not

replaced in the future. We will continue to work with

tournament organizers to reduce post-release mortality.

Fish-offs

Background: The three lakes receive many visits

from fishing clubs hosting events called “fish-offs.”

A fish-off is defined as an organized club fishing

event having 20 boats or fewer. Recreational anglers

and biologists have expressed concern over reduced

fish populations and catch rates as a result of fishing

pressure on Refuge lakes. In the past, the total

number of fish-offs has not been limited, and as

many as 95 Refuge-authorized fish-offs have been

held in a single year, in addition to unauthorized

events.

Policy: Organizers of fishing events must obtain a

fish-off use permit. The permit allows the organizer

to have one fish-off per lake, per year. The total

number of fish-offs allowed on the Refuge will be

determined annually by the Refuge Manager. There

is a $35 charge for the permit and the organizer

must follow terms and conditions of the permit.

Recreational and Technical Rock 

Climbing

Background: Crab Orchard NWR is not typically

considered a climber's destination, but some

demanding and varied rock climbs can be found in

the southern portions of the Refuge. Over the years

Refuge visitors have inquired about climbing, but

climbing has never been officially permitted. Rock

climbing has occurred in the Devils Kitchen and Little Grassy areas. The Refuge has in the past discouraged rock climbing activities such as jumping

and diving from the rocks of Devils Kitchen Lake by

not permitting swimming in the lake and by closing

the area below the Crab Orchard Dam spillway to

public access. Climbing opportunities can be found

at nearby Giant City State Park. 

Policy: Recreational and technical rock climbing

will not be permitted on the Refuge. This includes

free-style rock climbing, rappelling and technical

rock climbing. (Also see the rock climbing discussion in the Record of Decision, Appendix A.)

Scuba Diving

Background: Limited opportunities for scuba diving do exist on Crab Orchard NWR, however this

activity has never explicitly been permitted. Some

visitors have participated in this activity under the

assumption that it was allowed. Due to the relatively

shallow and turbid condition of Crab Orchard Lake

and the fact that swimming is prohibited on Devils

Kitchen Lake, Little Grassy Lake is the only location where a visitor could reasonably expect to participate in this activity. 

Policy: Due to the fact that swimming is already

allowed in Little Grassy Lake, the lake is already

heavily used by youth camps, and it is a popular fishing destination, we will prohibit scuba diving on the

Refuge to reduce conflicts between these user

groups.

Trapping

Background: Opportunities for trapping do exist

on Crab Orchard NWR. In the past, trapping has

been loosely regulated through special use permits

in areas designated by the refuge biologist. A maximum number of 50 recreational trapping permits

had been determined, but due to changes in culture

and markets, that number does not reflect actual

demand.

Policy: Limited trapping will be allowed in designated areas of the Refuge through special use permits. Carefully controlled trapping is considered a

management tool, and contributes to the habitat and

wildlife management goals of the Refuge. In some

cases it is the only means by which nuisance wildlife

can be removed. The activity will be limited in scope

to areas of the Refuge that are identified by the Refuge biologist, and carefully regulated through the

use of special use permits. 
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

68

Dog Training

Background: Dog field trials were a part of the

Crab Orchard Creek Project before the establishment of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

Training of dogs has occurred sporadically on the

Refuge, and is regulated through special use permits. In addition, dogs are allowed on the Refuge,

provided they are leashed. Hunting is a priority

public use and supports the recreation purpose for

which the Refuge was established, and well trained

hunting dogs contribute to this activity by locating

and retrieving game that may otherwise be lost.

Policy: The training of dogs that are to be used

for hunting will be allowed in designated areas of

the Refuge through special use permits. This use

does not include field trials or commercial/professional dog training, which remains prohibited. This

use also does not include training of dogs from sunset to sunrise, also known as “running” furbearers

with dogs, which will also be prohibited. 

Boundary Modification

Expand authorized Refuge boundary to include additional

lands contiguous with the current Refuge boundary.

Background: The Washington Office of the Service

approved the study of potential additional Refuge

lands in 1990. The Refuge did not pursue the study

of additional lands until the CCP process. The CCP

planning effort was the logical time to re-examine

all management and land protection issues related

to the Refuge. So, during the CCP effort we again

looked at the possible need to adjust the boundary

of the Refuge. Land acquisition and subsequent

habitat management will enhance the purposes of

the Refuge and offer additional protection to existing lands as development accelerates along Refuge

boundaries.

The boundary modification, which was approved

as part of the EIS/CCP, is depicted in Figure 25. 

Wildlife Conservation Goals

Several of the objecctives under these goals refer

to changing acreages of land cover on the Refuge.

Figure 26 and Figure 27 show projected land cover

in 15 years and 100 years. Table 29 on page 70 compares the land cover in 2000 with the projected land

cover in 2021 and 2106. Given the uncertainties in

future conditions, the acreages are approximate.

Canada Geese Goal

Provide enough food for wintering Canada geese to support

6.4 million goose-use-days annually, in support of the Mississippi Valley Population Canada Goose Management Plan.

Background: When established, the Refuge was

recognized as being important to providing habitat

for wintering Canada Geese. The Refuge was also

established with an agricultural purpose. The agricultural purpose and supporting wintering Canada

Geese are interrelated. The importance of wintering

refuge habitat to the Mississippi Valley population

of Canada Geese has been recognized in population

management plans. The Refuge’s approach to meeting the goal of 6.4 million goose-use-days is to provide relatively large amounts of a diverse array of

food-producing habitats. This approach provides

relatively high assurance that even if a major habitat fails to provide, sufficient foods will be available

in other habitats. The Refuge has about 4,500 acres

of cropland, 1,000 acres of pasture, 700 acres of hay

fields, and 450 acres of moist-soil units commonly

used by geese (see Figure 7 on page 22). Other

goose management activities include seasonal closure to boating on the east end of Crab Orchard

Lake and fall mowing around selected ponds. 

Objective 1

Provide enough food for wintering Canada Geese

to support 6.4 million goose-use-days. 

Strategy

Contributing Refuge Operating Needs System

(RONS) projects: 02006, 020007, 02008, 02009

1. Maintain 4,300 acres of cropland in agricultural production (see Figure 26). Manage 450

acres of moist-soil units. Continue fall mowing

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

69

Figure 25: Crab Orchard NWR Approved Boundary Modification and Adjacent Public Lands
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

70

around selected ponds. Maintain seasonal closure to boating on the east end of Crab

Orchard Lake.

Forest, Early Successional and Grassland Birds Goal

Maintain or enhance populations of forest, early successional

and grassland birds, with emphasis on priority species, as

identified in Partners in Flight Physiographic Area Bird Conservation Plans.

Background: The Refuge has about 25,000 acres of

forest habitat. Most of this acreage is in old-field or

second-growth hardwood forest cover on upland and

bottomland sites. Oaks are keystone species that

are essential to a healthy, diverse forest ecosystem

in this region. Typically with a lack of disturbance

shade-tolerant trees increase in dominance while

oaks steadily decrease, and understory diversity is

greatly diminished. On many sites timber harvesting, prescribed burning, and other methods of disturbance must occur for oaks to flourish. Past forest

management activities have included prescribed

burning and the thinning of hardwood stands to

maintain tree health, promote mast production and

control species composition. Our management

actions will apply these same treatments in order to

provide habitat for the full spectrum of native plants

and animals with an emphasis on the habitat needs

of the resource conservation priority species. No

commercial timber harvesting will take place in the

Crab Orchard Wilderness or any research natural

area. 

Studies have shown that forest fragmentation

reduces nesting success of migratory birds because

of increased nest predation and parasitism. The

Refuge has carried out reforestation activities in

recent years to reduce fragmentation of forested

habitats and retire former agricultural fields and

pastures. 

Table 29: Areas of Land Cover at Crab Orchard NWR in 2000 and Acres Projected for 2021 and 2106, 

With Change from 2000 Shown in Parentheses

Land Cover 2000 2021 2106

Agricultural Field 4,540 4,412 (-128) 4,412 (-128)

Aquatic Herbaceous Marsh 365 365 (0) 365 (0)

Bald-cypress Plantation, Swamp Forest 44 44 (0) 44 (0)

Buttonbush Swamp Shrubland 81 81 (0) 81 (0)

Cattail Marsh 25 25 (0) 25 (0)

Common Reed Marsh 7 7 (0) 7 (0)

Developed Land 1,138 1,138 (0) 1,138 (0)

Early Successional Oak Forest 

(reforested)

5 0 (-5) 0 (-5)

Eastern Red-cedar, Mixed Hardwood 

Forest (old field)

1,006 1,006 (0) 0 (-1,006)

Eastern Red-cedar Forest (old field) 71 71 (0) 0 (-71)

Fallow Herbaceous Field 1,567 172 (-1,395) 172 (-1,394)

Forest Regeneration Herbaceous Land 168 0 (-168) 0 (-168)

Mixed Hardwood Bottomland Forest 1,907 2,042 (+135) 2,042 (+135)

Mixed Hardwood Upland Forest 18,923 21,148 (+2,225) 25,869 (+6,946)

Open Water 9,082 9,082 (0) 9,082 (0)

Perennial Grass Crops 1,725 1,564 (-161) 1,564 (-160)

Pine Plantation / Mixed Hardwood 

Forest

1,633 1,633 (0) 0 (-1,633)

Pine Plantation Forest 1,665 1,665 (0) 0 (-1,665)

Restored native Grassland 240 261 (+21) 261 (+21)

Upland Mixed Shrubland (old field) 872 347 (-525) 0 (-872)

Wet Herbaceous Meadow 389 389 (0) 389 (0)

Willow Wet Shrubland 3 3 (0) 3 (0)
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

71

The Refuge has about 3,300 acres of pine plantations. Most of the pine plantations were established

between 1938 and 1941 by the USDA Soil Conservation Service for the purpose of controlling soil erosion. Pines, which are not native to the Refuge,

generally provide lower quality wildlife habitat than

native hardwoods. The existing plans call for thinning and prescribed burning pine plantations to

encourage the growth of desirable, mast-producing

hardwoods. 

The Refuge has about 2,500 acres of early successional habitat. Some migratory birds primarily use

early successional habitats, such as shrubland and

fallow herbaceous fields. Without active management, these habitat types will succeed to forest.

These habitat types are identified in Figure 7 on

page 22. 

Refuge grasslands include pastures (1,000 acres),

hay fields (700 acres), and native grasslands (240

acres). Pastures and hay fields provide the majority

of the grassland habitat for migratory birds. However, the pastures are relatively poor quality habitat

for many migratory birds because they are dominated by fescue, a non-native grass. Prior to 2005,

Refuge hay fields were mowed in spring and summer when migratory birds are nesting, which

reduces nesting success. The presence of woody

vegetation along fence rows and roadsides tends to

reduce the value of grasslands for some birds. .

The Refuge has 4,500 acres in the row crop program. The crop rotation is generally corn/soybeans/

corn/clover/clover. Grassland birds, such as the dickcissel and eastern meadowlark, use clover fields for

nesting habitat. Cooperative farmers commonly

mow second year clover to make hay during the

nesting season of migratory birds, which reduces

nesting success.

The forest, shrubland and grassland resource

conservation priority bird species that are expected

to benefit from our habitat management are listed in

Table 30. These priority bird species are a regional

subset of the priority species found in Partners in

Flight plans. 

Objective 1

Manage forest land to favor oak-hickory forest

types on suitable sites with all age classes from

seedling stage to old-growth represented. Manage native, shade-tolerant tree species (such as

sugar maple) to prevent wide-spread succession

to climax forest cover types.

Strategies

1. Write and implement a Habitat Management

Plan following policy in the Fish and Wildlife

Service Manual (620 FW 1). 

2. Apply appropriate silvicultural treatments to

manage forest health, species composition,

and age structure. Treatments may include

non-commercial forest stand improvement

treatments (girdling, cutting, and/or applying herbicide to individual stems), commercial timber cutting (thinnings, improvement

cuttings, and regeneration cuttings) and prescribed burning. Forest stand improvement

treatments may occur in any forest type (up

to 25,000 acres). Commercial timber cutting

may occur in any forest type outside the

Crab Orchard Wilderness and research natural areas (up to 19,700 acres). Commercial

harvest operations are not likely to take

place on more than 400 acres annually on

average, half of which will be considered

regeneration cuttings. Our preferred regeneration technique is the shelterwood method.

More specifically, the shelterwood method

with reserves will be used in hardwood (and

Table 30: Forest, Grassland and Shrubland Bird Species of Conservation Priority

Forest Birds Grassland Birds Shrubland Birds

Acadian Flycatcher Dickcissel Bell’s Vireo

Cerulean Warbler Eastern Meadowlark Blue-winged Warbler

Chuck-will’s-widow Field Sparrow Field Sparrow

Kentucky Warbler Grasshopper Sparrow Loggerhead Shrike

Louisiana Waterthrush Prairie Warbler

Red-shouldered Hawk

Whip-poor-will

Wood Thrush

Worm-eating Warbler
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

72

Figure 26: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, Projected Conditions 2021
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

73

Figure 27: Land Cover of Crab Orchard NWR, Projected Conditions 2106
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

74

pine) stands where some hardwoods will be

left standing following the final removal cutting. Prescribed fire may be applied in

upland forest (up to 23,000 acres of hardwood

and pine types), but not in bottomland forest.

3. Reforest available open sites located outside

of the two large forest blocks (see Objective 2

below) by planting native hardwoods, with

preference given to oaks and hickories, to

reduce forest fragmentation. Examples of

such sites would be small agricultural fields

(or portions thereof) no longer being farmed,

abandoned industrial areas, abandoned

rights-of-way (roads, powerlines, and pipelines), and remediated contaminant areas.

4. Control exotic, invasive plants through integrated pest management practices. 

Objective 2

Manage two portions of the Refuge as large forest blocks to benefit area-sensitive forest birds.

The first area (about 13,000 acres) extends from

the southern end of Grassy Bay east to Caney

Creek, and south including the wilderness area.

The second area (about 1,700 acres) extends from

the federal prison north and includes the Crab

Orchard Creek bottomlands. This will include

about 490 acres of reforestation of open habitat to

consolidate large blocks of forest habitat.

Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 02001, 97001, 97009,

97008, 98027

1. Reforest about 290 acres of crop fields, 130

acres of fallow fields, and 90 acres of perennial

grasslands. This may include site preparation,

planting a cover crop, planting tree seedlings,

and weed control treatments.

Objective 3

Accelerate succession of all (about 3,300 acres)

pine plantations to native hardwood forest. 

Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 97001, 97008, 02001,

98027

1. Thin pine plantations to promote establishment and growth of native hardwoods. In

some cases, remove pine overstory to release

young hardwoods. Most silvicultural treatments will be conducted under contract by

commercial timber harvesting firms. Conduct prescribed burning during the dormant

season (November through March) on a 3- to

5-year cycle to enhance habitat conditions and

promote desirable hardwood regeneration.

Objective 4

Maintain about 300 acres in early successional

habitat. 

Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 02005, 97001.

1. Use prescribed fire or mechanical treatment

(mowing, discing) to disturb about 200 acres

every 3 to 5 years. Add about 100 acres of 30-

foot-wide borders of native warm-season

grasses in row crop fields in the open portion

of the Refuge.

Objective 5

Maintain 260 acres of native warm-season grassland.

 Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 02008, 97001.

1. Prescribed burn all native warm-season

grasslands on a 2- to 3-year cycle to favor

grassland vegetation and control undesirable

plants. Apply mechanical or herbicide treatments to control vegetation, when needed. 

Glenn Smart
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

75

Objective 6

Maintain 1,000 acres of pasture, 700 acres of hay

fields, and about 1,600 acres of clover fields with

increased emphasis on habitat quality for grassland birds. 

Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 02008, 02002, 97001,

02007, 02009.

1. Remove 124 acres of linear forest habitat and

8 miles of hedge rows. Install fences to create

paddocks within pastures to enable greater

control of grazing intensity. Convert fescue

pastures to other cool-season and native

warm-season grasses by preparing the site

and reseeding. The typical Refuge pasture

will become three or four paddocks with a

paddock of cool-season grass and two or three

paddocks of native warm-season grasses. Cattle will enter the cool-season grass paddock in

the spring switch to the warm season grasses

in the summer, and move back to the cool season grass in the fall. The native warm season

grass will provide the grassland birds with

nesting, migration, and winter habitat. Vegetation structure will be managed by the

amount of grazing applied to each paddock.

Most of the pasture grass will not require fall

mowing and will be taller than 6 inches during

the winter. All mowing of hay fields, pastures,

and clover fields will take place after August

1. 

Rationale for converting pasture fescue: Tall

fescue (Festuca arundinacea) is a cool-season, perennial grass native to Europe that

is invasive in many natural communities in

the U.S. Tall fescue has been planted for

forage and soil conservation and now covers

more than 35 million acres in the U.S. (Ball

et al. 1993). It has become the most abundant or dominant plant in many areas,

including the Refuge's grasslands. Most

(75-80 percent) tall fescue in the U.S. is

infected with a fungus (Neotyphodium

coenophialum) that produces compounds

that are toxic to insects (Breen 1994), small

mammals (Coley et al. 1995, Conover 1998),

and birds (Conover and Messmer 1996,

Madej and Clay 1991). Tall fescue often

results in loss of plant diversity (Clay and

Holah 1999). Livestock losses related to tall

fescue in the U.S. have been estimated

between $500 million and $1 billion annually

(Ball et al. 1993). 

Conversion of tall fescue pastures to native

warm-season grasses and cool-season

grasses with higher wildlife values will provide several benefits: 1) reduce the abundance of an invasive, non-native species, 2)

increase plant diversity, 3) increase plant

productivity, 4) improve forage for cattle

production, and 5) improve pastures for

wildlife production.

Ducks, Shorebirds, and Other Waterbirds Goal

Maintain or enhance populations of ducks, shorebirds, and

other waterbirds, with emphasis on priority species, as identified in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, U.S.

Shorebird Conservation Plan, and North American Waterbird

Conservation Plan.

Background: The Refuge has several types of habitat that support ducks, shorebirds, and other

waterbirds: 9,100 acres of open water in artificial

lakes and ponds, 1,900 acres of bottomland forest,

and 500 acres of swamps, marshes, and wet meadows. The Refuge manages about 450 acres of these

wetlands to encourage the growth of moist-soil

plants and aquatic invertebrates to provide food for

waterfowl, shorebirds, and other waterbirds.

Objective 1

Provide 450 to 500 acres of moist-soil habitat during fall, winter and spring for migrating shorebirds, waterfowl, and other waterbirds.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

76

Strategy

Contributing RONS projects: 02006, 97001.

1. Construct 150-200 acres of new moist-soil habitat. Maintain dikes and water control structures. Manipulate water levels and vegetation

to encourage production of waterfowl foods.

Threatened and Endangered Species Goal

Maintain or enhance populations of federal and, where compatible, state threatened and endangered species that occur

at or near Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

Background: The Bald Eagle is the only federally

designated threatened species known to occur on

the Refuge. The Indiana bat, which is federally classified as endangered, is known to occur in proximity

to the Refuge. Thirty-one state-listed threatened

and endangered species inhabit, or have inhabited,

the Refuge (see Appendix E). Chapter 3 describes

the threatened and endangered species on the Refuge. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act outlines a mechanism for ensuring that actions taken

by federal agencies do not jeopardize the existence

of any listed species. We conducted a “Section 7”

review concurrent with preparation of the EIS. The

memo accompanying the Service’s Programmatic

Biological Opinion is included as Appendix J.

Objective 1

Assure that federally listed species, state-listed

species and federally proposed species and their

habitats are protected.

Strategies:

1. No disturbance of bald eagles will take place

during critical periods within protective zones

as described in the Northern States Bald

Eagle Recovery Plan (USFWS, 1983). Areas

are designated closed through signing and

brochures.

2. Forest management activities, such as thinning and prescribed burning, will require

close coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services personnel.

These activities may require standard surveys to determine whether Indiana bats are

present in a given forest unit or the activities

may be scheduled outside of the season when

Indiana bats are likely to use Refuge forests.

Water Quality Goal

Provide and manage for quality of water in streams and lakes

at Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

Background: Natural processes along with various

human activities occurring in the watershed affect

water quality on the Refuge. Since the Refuge controls only a portion of the watershed, increased

efforts to protect water quality both on the Refuge

and beyond its boundaries are essential. Urbanization of lands adjacent to the Refuge is likely to have

even greater impacts on water quality in the future. 

Objective 1

Improve the quality of water within the watershed of the Refuge. 

Strategies

1. Cooperate with Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to monitor water quality. Identify landowners and land uses in the

watershed. Provide education and technical

assistance to landowners with particularly

sensitive riparian areas. Work with municipalities and developers to enhance on-site storm

water retention. 

2. Work with farmers to establish buffer strips

and keep livestock away from streams and

ponds. Continue using current soil and water

protection measures in the Refuge farm program: use no insecticides, use only Serviceapproved herbicides, use minimum tillage

practices, and use winter cover crops.

3. Continue clean-up of contaminated sites.

Ensure Refuge industrial operations conform to prescribed environmental standards.

Resident Fish and Wildlife Goal 

Maintain or enhance resident fish and wildlife populations

consistent with management activities for federal trust

resources in cooperation with the Illinois DNR.

Background: There is a long history of public fishing, public hunting, and management of resident

fish and wildlife species on the Refuge.

Objective 1

Manage Refuge fisheries with emphasis on

mixed-species, warm-water sport fishing. 

Strategy

1. Continue cooperative management of Refuge

fisheries with Illinois DNR. Continue managing fish populations and habitat through activities such as: setting length and creel limits,
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

77

seasonal closures of spawning bed areas, habitat enhancements, annual surveys, and fish

stocking.

Objective 2

Manage Refuge resident wildlife populations at

levels that allow opportunities for sport hunting

of game species.

Strategies

1. Continue managing the Refuge agriculture

program with methods that benefit resident

game species, such as: leave up to 25 percent

of the corn crop unharvested, plant winter

wheat in soybean fields each fall, use low tillage planting techniques, keep fields in clover

2 years out of the 6-year rotation, delay mowing until after August 1, and use no insecticides.

2. Incorporate beneficial practices such as those

suggested in the Northern Bobwhite Conservation Initiative: convert cool-season to

warm-season grasses and burn and thin pine

plantations.

3. Continue controlled hunting for turkey and

deer in the restricted use portion of the Refuge.

Recreation/Public Use Goals

Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife Observation and Photography, Interpretation and Environmental Education Goal

Hunters, anglers, viewers and photographers of wildlife, general visitors, and students enjoy high-quality experiences

through a variety of opportunities that promote an understanding and appreciation of the Refuge's natural and cultural

resources and their management.

Background: The Refuge System Improvement

Act of 1997 identified six wildlife-dependent, priority public uses that should be facilitated on national

wildlife refuges if compatible with the purposes of

the Refuge. These priority uses, which include hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography,

interpretation, and environmental education, are

compatible and can be facilitated at the Refuge.

While all of these uses are provided at the Refuge to

an extent, support for some of these uses has been

inconsistent and the quality of the experience has

been variable. The Refuge can provide high-quality

experiences for these priority wildlife-dependent

uses through improvement of supporting facilities,

programs, and materials over the next 15 years. A

high-quality experience includes uncrowded conditions, no conflicts with other users, a reasonable

opportunity, and overall satisfaction. Understanding

and appreciation of Refuge resources, management

strategies, and purposes also contribute to quality of

experience and influence visitor enjoyment. 

Objective 1

Increase the quality of hunting opportunities to a

level where 75 percent of hunters experience

uncrowded conditions, no conflicts with other

users, a reasonable harvest opportunity, and satisfaction with their overall experience. Instill a

sense of awareness among hunters of the Refuge

as a component of the National Wildlife Refuge

System and of hunting as a wildlife management

tool. 

Strategies

1. In the public hunting area of the Refuge, continue the policy of providing hunting opportunities based on state hunting seasons and

state and federal regulations.

2. In the restricted use area of the Refuge,

maintain hunting opportunities, by permit,

during shotgun deer and spring shotgun turkey seasons. Areas with high concentrations

of waterfowl may occasionally be closed during the restricted use area shotgun hunts.

Maintain shotgun deer season hunting

opportunities for youth and persons with disabilities and, within 3 years of the plan's

approval, provide these groups with opportunities for spring shotgun turkey season hunting when populations warrant.

3. Administer goose hunts in the controlled area

through an agreement with a partner organization. 

4. Over the life of the plan, promote ethical

hunting behavior and increase hunter adherence to federal and state regulations through

effective informational brochures and signs.

Increase the visibility of Refuge law enforcement.

5. Over the life of the plan, enhance public

understanding of Refuge hunting opportunities, ethical behaviors, the role of hunting in

wildlife management, and the Refuge as a

component of the National Wildlife Refuge

System by increasing the quality of maps,

signs, and brochures. 
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

78

Objective 2

Increase the quality of fishing opportunities to a

level where 75 percent of anglers experience

uncrowded conditions, no conflicts with other

users, a reasonable harvest opportunity, and satisfaction with their overall experience. At least 75

percent of anglers understand the issues, strategies, and policies involved in Refuge fisheries

management and conservation. 

Strategies

1. In the public fishing areas, continue the policy

of providing fishing opportunities based on

state and federal regulations.

2. Continue to allow tournaments and fish-offs

on the Refuge. Continue current policies on

limited closures of Refuge waters east of

Wolf Creek Road.

3. Continue to provide bank and boat fishing

opportunities in accordance with state and

federal regulations. Maintain Refuge boat

ramps, fishing piers, and parking facilities.

Study the feasibility for and construct accessible fishing facilities at Little Grassy and

Devils Kitchen lakes within 4 years of the

plan’s approval.

4. Over the life of the plan, promote Refuge

fishing opportunities and encourage conservation practices, such as catch-and-release

fishing, through the development and maintenance of high-quality maps, signs, brochures and the Refuge web page. 

5. Ensure that the fishing public clearly understands the fish consumption advisories for

Crab Orchard Lake through signs and brochures.

6. Over the life of the plan, provide insight to

anglers regarding Refuge strategies, issues,

and policies for fisheries management and

conservation by redesigning and developing

more effective informational signs and brochures. Increase angler awareness of the

Refuge as a component of the National Wildlife Refuge System by improving the quality

and content of maps, signs, and brochures.

Objective 3

Ensure that viewing and photography opportunities meet the needs of 95 percent of participants.

Establish and maintain viewing and photography

opportunities for all major Refuge habitat types

and optimum seasons. 

Strategies

1. Within 2 years of the plan’s approval, develop

an annual observation/photography fact sheet

for the Refuge that will include a calendar of

established tours, programs, and events;

information on identified and recommended

viewing and photography areas; guidelines to

enhance viewing enjoyment; and a Refuge

map delineating trails, blinds, platforms, and

identified viewing areas. 

2. Continue popular, established programs and

tours like the October Discovery Auto Tours,

January Eagle Tours, and Spring Wildflower

Walks that enhance visitor experience, bring

visitors in closer proximity to resources, and

provide optimum seasonal opportunities for

observation and photography and continually

evaluate these programs for effectiveness.

3. Within 2 years of the plan's approval, improve

the existing photography/observation blinds

and platforms by adding camouflage as

needed to enhance viewing opportunities.

Evaluate location of existing blinds and platforms and move as needed. Position interpretive and identification panels in or near

blinds and platforms to promote understanding and appreciation of Refuge resources.

Enhance panels to promote awareness of the

Refuge as a component of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

4. Within 5 years of the plan’s approval, evaluate need for and add additional blinds/platforms, including interpretive and

identification panels, where and if needed to

ensure observation and photography opporBob Etzel
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

79

tunities in all major Refuge habitat types.

Maintain all identified viewing and photography sites.

5. Over the life of the plan and in cooperation

with other partners, encourage utilization of

the Refuge for birding and other wildlife

observation through development of informational materials, programs, trails, tours,

and special events. Promote the Refuge as a

site for quality wildlife observation and photography through participation in selected

community and regional birding, nature, and

photography festivals and events. 

6. Within 8 years of the plan's approval, identify

and create a Refuge birding trail that may

include enhancement and coordination of

existing trails, viewing areas and signs, and

creation of a birding trail brochure and map.

7. Over the life of the plan, expand the Refuge

web site to promote wildlife observation and

photography. Include updates on Refuge and

area sightings of rare birds and other wildlife; profiles of selected seasonally-occurring

and resident species; suggested optimal

viewing times and locations; and current Refuge programs, facilities, tours, and other

opportunities for observation and photography. 

Objective 4

Increase the effectiveness of the Refuge interpretive program so that 70 percent of visitors gain a

better understanding of three primary concepts:

(1) the value and unique purposes of the Refuge,

(2) the Refuge as a component of the national network of refuges, and (3) the significance and mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

Heighten awareness of conservation and stewardship concepts. Encourage visitors to adopt

ethical behaviors and to take positive actions that

support Refuge goals and the Refuge System

mission.

Strategies

1. Within 3 years of the plan's approval, develop

the interpretation portion of the Visitor Services Plan outlining a comprehensive, multifaceted approach emphasizing selected

themes and key Refuge resources. Themes

will be selected based on importance to Refuge and System goals and relevance to surrounding communities. All interpretive

materials, tours, and programs will focus on

one or more of these Refuge themes, along

with the three basic concepts of the Refuge

and Refuge System. Refuge interpretive

themes may be in a storyline form that

includes three or more themes. Themes may

include: Exploring the Diversity of Wildlife,

Understanding the Past, Protecting the Balance, and Communicating Visitor Opportunities.

2. Within 4 years of the plan's approval, renovate and replace damaged and outdated

interpretive and information panels on Refuge kiosks, wayside exhibits, trails, ramps,

structures and other facilities. Ensure all

panels comply with Service standards.

3. In cooperation with Refuge volunteers and

other partners, conduct a variety of high

quality interpretive programs annually. Continue popular and established interpretive

programs and special events, such as the

Families Understanding Nature program

and National Wildlife Refuge Week. Ensure

interpretive programming remains current

and dynamic by continually creating new

programs, incorporating new ideas, updating

information, and revitalizing ongoing programs. Focus each interpretive program on

one or more Refuge themes. 

4. Over the life of the plan and in cooperation

with Friends of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge and other partners, revise RefU.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

80

uge interpretive brochures, handouts, and

other written materials as needed to improve

consistency and to meet Service standards.

5. Within 1 year of the plan’s approval, create a

custom audiovisual program that provides

visitors with orientation information about

the Refuge. Ensure this program and a variety of other wildlife-related audiovisual programs are made available for viewing at the

Visitor Center and for use in interpretive

programs.

6. Within 3 years of the plan’s approval, establish and maintain an interpretive auto tour

route, using existing roads, that will facilitate

opportunities for wildlife and cultural

resource observation and provide visitors

with an overview of the Refuge, its

resources, and its management. Include

identified stations with interpretive panels

and corresponding, radio-broadcasted interpretive messages.

Objective 5

Increase the effectiveness of the Refuge environmental education program so that 75 percent of

participants gain a better understanding and

appreciation of the resources, purposes, and

value of the Refuge and the Refuge System.

Heighten awareness of conservation and stewardship concepts and encourage participants to

take positive actions on the Refuge and in their

community that support Refuge goals and the

Refuge System mission. 

Strategies

1. Within 2 years of the plan's approval, develop

the environmental education portion of the

Visitor Services Plan, outlining a comprehensive, curriculum-based approach structured

to be compatible with state learning standards and national environmental education

guidelines. Emphasize key Refuge resources,

the Refuge, the National Wildlife Refuge System, and selected Refuge themes. These

themes will be based on importance to Refuge

and System goals and relevance to surrounding communities. All environmental education

materials, facilities, and programs will focus

on one or more of these Refuge themes, along

with the basic concepts of the Refuge and the

Refuge System. Refuge themes may be in a

storyline form that incudes three or more

themes. Themes may include: Exploring the

Diversity of Wildlife, Understanding the Past,

Protecting the Balance, and Communicating

Visitor Opportunities.

2. Within 3 years of the plan's approval and in

cooperation with Friends of Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge and other partners,

create an array of environmental education

kits, each focusing on one or more aspects of

Refuge themes. Educational kits will include

interactive materials and a detailed instructional and activity guide designed with a

clear, consistent format and coordinated with

state learning standards. Develop and maintain a multi-faceted environmental education

resource library, available for use by educators and in Refuge educational programs,

comprised of books, videos, posters, audio

tapes, written materials, and environmental

education kits. 

3. Within 4 years of the plan's approval and in

cooperation with other partners, establish an

environmental education complex that incorporates an outdoor amphitheater with educational displays, a set of associated trails, the

Refuge Visitor Center, and an educator's trail

specifically designed to facilitate environmental education activities and function as an

outdoor classroom. 

4. Within 4 years of the plan's approval and in

cooperation with other partners, create an

Educator's Guide to Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge that provides an orientation,

guidelines, grade-level and state learning

standards information, maps, and site-specific activities that focus on one or more Refuge themes. Incorporate input from area

educators to ensure the Refuge guide meets

area teachers’ needs.

5. In cooperation with other partners, conduct

or host annual teacher workshops that

encourage area educators to incorporate

environmental education into their curriculum and to utilize Refuge materials, staff, and

resources, both in the classroom and during

field trips. 

6. Continue currently-offered environmental

education programs done by request, including on-site and off-site programs, special

educational events, group camp programs,

and special interest group programs. Over

the life of the plan, expand the environmental

education program to include additional on-
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

81

site and off-site programs, special educational events, group camp programs, and

special interest group programs. Develop

pre- and post-visit activities in addition to onsite activities.

7. Over the life of the plan, establish partnerships with selected local schools, agencies,

and nonprofit organizations to more effectively develop and expand environmental

education programs. Involve volunteers in

educational programs and explore the potential for environmental education interns

through Southern Illinois University and

John A. Logan College. Explore the potential

for creating a grant program to help area

schools with field trip expenses.

8. Conduct an annual review of the Refuge environmental education program. Invite feedback from area educators. Revise as

necessary. 

Customer Service Goal

Visitors of all abilities will feel welcome and enjoy a safe visit

to an area that they recognize as a national wildlife refuge.

Background: Policy and guidance of the Service

directs each refuge to meet basic standards in hosting visitors. The guidance covers signs, kiosks, leaflets, facility and road maintenance, customer

service, and opportunities for visitor feedback.

Awareness of Crab Orchard NWR as a national

wildlife refuge can also influence visitor experience

and enjoyment. 

Objective 1

Improve Refuge signs, kiosks, and facilities so

that 90 percent of visitors feel welcome and

secure, enjoy their visit, and recognize the area

as a national wildlife refuge.

Strategies

1. Within 3 years of the plan's approval, revise

information on existing kiosks, trailhead and

other identification markers, boundary signs,

and other such signs as necessary to meet

Service standards.

2. Within 5 years of the plan's approval, create

and install additional kiosks where needed at

Refuge access points to ensure that all visitors are greeted and informed that they are

entering a national wildlife refuge. Ensure

that all structures comply with Service standards.

3. Verify annually that visitors are welcomed

and treated courteously by staff and volunteers. Confirm customer service standards

during employee and volunteer orientations.

Provide visitors with opportunities for feedback through suggestion cards, verbal

reports, written mail, and e-mail through the

Refuge web page. Address customer service

issues promptly and professionally according

to Service standards.

4. Within 2 years of the plan's approval, develop

a Refuge brochure with detailed information

on accessible facilities, trails, programs, and

recreational opportunities at the Refuge.

5. Conduct semi-annual safety inspections of all

Refuge facilities and reaffirm compliance

with Service standards.

6. Maintain recognizable, consistent signs that

clearly identify public hunting areas.

Increase awareness among non-hunting visitors of hunting areas and seasons through

effective signs and brochures.

7. Respond to notification of safety problems

and unsafe situations promptly and in accordance with Service standards. Increase visibility of Refuge law enforcement,

particularly during periods of heavy visitation.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

82

Volunteers and Support Groups Goal

Volunteers and Refuge support groups will be stewardship

partners and strong advocates for the Refuge.

Background: Volunteers, support groups, and

other partnerships strengthen Refuge activities and

contribute to making the Refuge an integral part of

the community.

Objective 1

Improve Refuge support for volunteer and

Friends of Crab Orchard NWR activities to a

point where at least 95 percent of volunteers and

Friends members feel like valued contributors to

the success of Refuge programs and endeavors.

Strategies

1. Continue to manage volunteer and support

programs in accordance with Service guidelines detailed in “A Guidebook for Working

with Volunteers.” Maintain an active liaison

with support groups and partners.

2. Provide in-depth initial training to Refuge

volunteers that will enable them to effectively and efficiently complete projects and

responsibilities. Encourage involvement in

diverse volunteer activities that match volunteer interests.

3. Continue demonstrating Refuge appreciation for volunteer contributions and Friends

support annually through a Volunteer Appreciation Banquet and other appropriate

means. Present awards for service hours in

accordance with Service guidelines. 

Other Land- and Water-based Recreation Goal

Visitors will enjoy high quality, land- and water-based activities that fulfill the recreation purpose of the Refuge when the

Refuge was established.

Background: There is a recognized need to

improve the facilities at the Refuge. Under current

trends of resource allocation, the current facilities

can not be maintained at acceptable standards. The

intent will be to reduce the facilities so that the quality could be improved.

A conflict has existed between anglers and high

speed watercraft. A 150-foot no-wake zone along the

shoreline of Crab Orchard Lake will reduce this

conflict, as will additional no-wake zones in several

necks on the lake and east of Highway 148.

The Haven and the Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht

Club are available only to a limited segment of the

general population. The facilities and activities at

these clubs amount to private use of public land. Our

long-term goal is to make these areas available to a

broader portion of the public.

The Haven is a 10-acre site located on the north

side of Crab Orchard Lake, near the Highway 13

and Cambria Neck Road intersection. This site has

been leased to the Egyptian Past Commanders Club

of the American Legion since 1948 for the benefit

and enjoyment of disabled veterans primarily from

the Marion Veterans Hospital and the Anna State

Hospital. The Haven includes a one-story lodge

building, and several outside picnic sites, that are

used for day visits by veterans for recreation and

socializing. During the length of the planning period

established for this Refuge CCP (next 15 years), the

Refuge Staff will work collaboratively with the

Egyptian Past Commanders Club to evaluate the

effectiveness of this facility in achieving the purpose

of Haven’s establishment, and to make recommendations for its future use. 

We will extend the lease of the Crab Orchard

Boat & Yacht Club for 2 years after the approval of

the Refuge CCP. After the lease expires, we will convert the operation of the club facilities to a concession contract. This will end what amounts to private

use of public land and make the facilities available to

a wider portion of the public. 

Objective 1

Improve the quality of boat launches, marinas,

beaches, picnic areas, and campground to industry standards within the life of the CCP.

Strategies

1. Maintain picnicking at the Refuge recreational areas of Greenbriar, Wolf Creek, and

Harmony Trail, and relocate picnic facilities

from Cambria Neck and Playport Marina to a

day use area at the current Images Marina

site. Explore the option of concession-operated picnic shelters at Little Grassy and Crab

Orchard campgrounds. 

2. Explore the potential for a bicycle route

within the restricted use area of the Refuge.

The route will run mainly along old railroad

beds. 

3. Continue current policies on swimming at

Devils Kitchen, Little Grassy and Crab

Orchard lakes. Prohibit scuba diving.
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

83

4. Within 10 years of the plan’s approval,

upgrade boat ramps and associated parking

at Devils Kitchen, Little Grassy and Crab

Orchard lakes.

5. Continue current zoning on Crab Orchard

Lake with additional no wake zones (see

Figure 28). Gas motors will be prohibited in

the most southeastern arm of Devils Kitchen

Lake, from the mouth of Grassy Creek south

to the Refuge boundary, and in ponds within

the public use area. The portion of the lake

south of Line Road 6 boat ramp will be designated a no-wake zone (see Figure 29).

6. Horseback use on the Refuge will be confined

to a designated River to River Trail (see Figure 30 on page 86) and erosion due to trail

use will be actively controlled through maintenance and/or seasonal closures. 

7. Camping at Devils Kitchen will be reduced to

primitive sites only. Crab Orchard and Little

Grassy campgrounds will be upgraded to

standards comparable to others in the area. 

8. Within 2 years of the plan's approval, consolidate Playport and Images marinas on Crab

Orchard Lake. Images marina slips will be

moved to Playport marina. Within 5 years of

the plan's approval, remove the building at

Images Marina and develop the area into a

large access area to the lake with a comfort

station.

9. After 2 years of the completion of the CCP,

the Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht Club will be

converted to a concession.

Agricultural Goal

Provide opportunities for agricultural uses on Refuge lands

that help attain wildlife conservation goals.

Background: Agriculture, one of the specified purposes of the Refuge, has been a part of the landscape since early settlement. After many years of

soil depletion and erosion, beginning in the 1930s

efforts have been made to implement better farming

practices. On the Refuge, agriculture has been used

to benefit wildlife, chiefly wintering Canada Geese. 

Objective 1

Continue farming operations on about 4,400 acres

of row crops with greater emphasis on conservation practices.

Strategy

1. Maintain infrastructure (roads, fences) in support of agricultural operations. Drop small,

less profitable fields (less than 5 acres) from

row cropping and convert to other cover

(about 15 fields totaling 52 acres).Identify and

drop farmed wetlands from the farm program. Permit cooperator to harvest corn

remaining in the field in the spring. Emphasize Johnsongrass control. Prohibit mowing of

clover in the crop rotation until after August

1. Enlist technical oversight from Natural

Resource Conservation Service and University of Illinois Extension.

Objective 2

Continue farming operations on about 700 acres

of hay fields with greater emphasis on conservation practices.

Strategy

1. Prohibit mowing of hay until after August 1.

Maintain an updated rate charge for hay.

Objective 3

Enhance nesting habitat for grassland birds

while maintaining or increasing the value for

grazing on about 1,000 acres of pastures.

Strategy

1. Convert fescue pastures to other cool-season

grasses and native warm season grasses with

higher wildlife value. Divide existing pastures

into three or four paddocks with a paddock of

cool season grass and two or three paddocks

of native warm season grasses. Rotate grazing cattle among the paddocks during the season. Enlist technical oversight from Natural

Resource Conservation Service and University of Illinois Extension. 

Industrial Goal

Provide an industrial complex and attendant utility and transportation infrastructure, which conform to prescribed safety,

health, environmental and maintenance standards.

Background: Industry began in the area during

World War II. When the Refuge was established it

was given an industrial purpose, because industry

was seen as a way of improving the economy of the

area. The war time industry and some subsequent

industrial tenants have contaminated the soils and

waters of the Refuge. Providing the water and

sewer infrastructure in support of industry has been
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

84

Figure 28: Crab Orchard Lake Watercraft Zoning 
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

85

Figure 29: Devils Kitchen Lake Zoning, Crab Orchard NWR
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

86

difficult for the Refuge to accomplish. Most of the

manufacturing and storage buildings are reaching

the limits of their expected lifetime. The buildings

require a lot of maintenance and refurbishing to

meet today's standards. Recently, several industrial

parks have been developed in the area that offer

amenities not available on the Refuge. Of the industries on the Refuge, the munitions industry is in a

unique position of requiring widely spaced facilities

for safety. By providing a safe area for munitions

manufacture, the Refuge is able to contribute to and

support the national defense. The Refuge will continue to provide an area for defense munitions manufacture. The Service will seek not to compete with

neighboring industrial parks. The Refuge will maintain roads and provide water and sewer services

sufficient for current industrial tenants. Tenants

will be expected to bring their facilities up to prescribed safety, health, environmental and maintenance standards under any new leases. If tenants do

not renew leases, the Refuge will seek new tenants

for facilities that continue to be suitable for occupancy. The intent will be to consolidate the areas

occupied by industry.

Objective 1

Consolidate the areas occupied by industry.

Strategies

1. Update Industrial Policy. Maintain the current

infrastructure to support existing facilities.

2. Remove buildings that are no longer suitable

for occupancy for reasons of contamination,

safety or lack of structural integrity and

restore to natural habitats. 

Figure 30: Horseback Riding Trails on Crab Orchard NWR 
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

87

Wilderness Goal

Protect the ecological integrity, preserve the wilderness character, restore natural conditions to the extent practicable, and

provide opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation

within the Crab Orchard Wilderness.

Background: As long as they do not alter natural

processes, the Wilderness Act of 1964 permits certain activities within designated wilderness areas.

The Crab Orchard Wilderness is a popular area for

hunting, hiking, nature study, horseback riding, and

mushroom picking. Prohibited activities, such as

camping and off-road vehicle use, occasionally occur.

Horseback use and trails have developed inconsistent with the existing Wilderness Management

Plan. The Wilderness Management Plan, which was

approved in 1985, is dated and needs to be revised. 

Suitability

The CCP planning included a wilderness review

to identify Service-owned lands and waters within

the planning unit that may qualify for inclusion in

the National Wilderness Preservation System. The

Service identified two tracts of land within the planning unit that meet the criteria for Wilderness

Study Areas: an 80-acre tract completely surrounded by the existing Crab Orchard Wilderness

and a 40-acre tract surrounded on three sides by the

Crab Orchard Wilderness. Southern Illinois University owned both tracts when the Crab Orchard Wilderness was designated in 1976. The Refuge

subsequently acquired the tracts through a land

exchange in 1979. The two tracts are roadless, contiguous to designated wilderness, appear natural,

and offer opportunities for solitude and primitive

recreation. Both tracts are currently managed as a

part of the Crab Orchard Wilderness.

The two parcels should be recommended for wilderness designation. This will add consistency to the

protection and management of the Wilderness. The

Wilderness will be managed in accordance with Service policy for Wilderness management (6 Refuge

Manual 8). All activities in designated Wilderness

will be carried out in conformance with the mandates of the Wilderness Act and the establishing

legislation for the Crab Orchard Wilderness, Public

Law 95-557. The use of motorized vehicles and

mechanical transport is prohibited, except in emergency situations.

Objective 1

Recommend the designation of two parcels (120

acres) as Wilderness within 2 years of approval of

the CCP.

Strategy

1. Prepare and submit a Wilderness Study

Report. Service wilderness policy is currently

under revision. The direction of the new policy

will be followed when it is adopted.

Objective 2

Revise and implement the Crab Orchard Wilderness Management Plan within 5 years of approval

of the CCP.

Strategy

1. Prepare and implement a Wilderness Management Plan. Service wilderness policy is

currently under revision. The direction of the

new policy will be followed when it is adopted.

Objective 3

Restore native hardwood forest on 325 acres of

pine and pine-hardwood forest in the Crab

Orchard Wilderness within 15 years of approval

of the CCP. 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

88

Strategies

1. Thin the pine plantations (229 acres) and pinehardwood stands (96 acres) in the Wilderness

to promote establishment and growth of

native hardwoods. Thinning will be conducted

in several phases over a 10- to 15-year period

to mimic the natural process of succession

where pines are gradually replaced by hardwoods. Individual pines will be killed by cutting, girdling or injecting herbicide. No trees

will be removed from the site. Treatments will

be conducted so that the results will appear

natural as much as possible. However, trees

along heavily used trails may need to be felled

to avoid personal injury to visitors, in which

case this zone may appear unnatural for several years. Eventual removal of all the nonnative pines will restore the natural vegetative cover of the area and enhance wilderness

characteristics. 

2. Prescribed burn the pine and pine-hardwood

stands during the dormant season (November through March) on a 3- to 5-year cycle to

enhance habitat conditions and promote

desirable hardwood regeneration. Control

lines will be established by hand tools where

necessary, using natural firebreaks as much

as possible.

Objective 4

Control or eradicate invasive species (especially

autumn-olive, multiflora rose, Amur honeysuckle,

white poplar, and Oriental bittersweet) over the

15-year life of the CCP.

Strategy

1. Prepare and implement an Integrated Pest

Management Plan following guidance developed by the Service’s “Promises Invasive

Species Team.”

Objective 5

Explore ways to increase cooperation with the

U.S. Forest Service on management of the Crab

Orchard Wilderness and the adjoining Panther

Den Wilderness within 2 years of approval of the

CCP.

Strategy

1. Contact the Forest Supervisor of the Shawnee

National Forest and discuss ways our agencies could work together in managing the

adjoining wildernesses.

Objective 6

Provide opportunities for primitive recreation,

such as hiking, hunting, nature study and wild

food collection, over the 15-year life of the CCP.

Strategies

1. Continue current primitive recreational

opportunities.

2. Prepare and distribute a wilderness brochure

and conduct interpretive programs to inform

the public about primitive recreational

opportunities available.

Objective 7

Within 5 years of approval of the CCP, determine

an appropriate level of opportunities to offer

equestrians based on an evaluation of the current

level and extent of horseback riding use and its

effects on the Wilderness.

Strategy

1. Evaluate the current, unauthorized River to

River route. Cooperate with partners to plan,

construct, and maintain an authorized River

to River trail route through the Refuge.

Protection Goal

Protect the integrity of Refuge biological and cultural

resources and the health and safety of visitors, industrial

workers, farmers, and Service staff.

Background: Past industrial practices at the Refuge contaminated some lands and waters. As a

result, in 1987 the Refuge was added to the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency's National Priorities List of contaminated sites. Studies have located

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

89

many sites of contamination within the former Illinois Ordnance Plant (IOP) resulting from military

activities that occurred during World War II or subsequent activities of private industrial tenants.

Lands no longer used by industry are converted to

habitat for fish and wildlife. Some of these lands

have been contaminated. These contaminants may

need to be removed so that they do not adversely

impact plants, fish, wildlife, or public health and welfare. Refuge visitors should be able to use these

habitats for hunting, fishing, wildlife observation

and other potential future uses without being

exposed to unacceptable levels of contaminants. The

Service is seeking remedy for past acts of contamination through the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as “Superfund.” The Service

believes past acts of contamination should be remedied with the best and most cost effective technologies available. The Service also believes that the

Refuge should not be burdened with residual contamination that may impair the ability of the Service

to manage the Refuge for appropriate uses in the

future. 

The Refuge's law enforcement officers serve to

protect the natural and cultural resources, as well as

the health and safety of visitors, staff, and tenants.

The Refuge depends on cooperative relationships

with the Illinois DNR and several local sheriff

departments.

The Refuge faces a significant challenge of controlling exotic and invasive plants to protect biological diversity, provide high quality habitats for fish

and wildlife, and facilitate agriculture, recreation,

and industry.

The Refuge contains many documented cultural

resources, and other undiscovered sites probably

exist.

The Refuge manages 24 conservation easements

within a 21-county area in southern Illinois. Inadequate staffing levels have impeded proper management of the widely dispersed easements. Some of

the easements have not been surveyed or marked

on the ground. The easements should be inspected

regularly, but there have been long periods between

inspections. Without appropriate monitoring the

easements and their resources can not be protected

from encroachment. 

Objective 1

Refuge lands and waters are safe for fish, wildlife, plants, and people.

Strategy

1. Work with USEPA, Illinois EPA, Departments of Interior and Justice, and responsible

parties to remediate contaminated sites.

Where contamination is left in place, or where

there is potential for undiscovered contamination that may pose a risk from exposure, institutional controls may be formulated. An

institutional control plan will be written by

the CERCLA staff and made available to Refuge management for implementation.

Objective 2

Visitors will feel safe on the Refuge and illegal

harvest of fish and wildlife will be reduced.

Strategy

1. Maintain full-time law enforcement staff.

Objective 3

Manage or eliminate invasive species on the Refuge.

Strategy

1. Write and implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan following guidance

developed by the Service's “Promises Invasive Species Team.” The IPM plan will

address target species control methods, mapping and monitoring.

Objective 4

Protect the cultural, historic, and pre-historic

resources of federally-owned lands within the

Refuge.

Strategies

1. Implement the Cultural Resource Management Plan for Cultural Resources within the

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge (Godfrey and Stubbs 2001).

2. Ensure archeological and cultural values are

described, identified, and taken into consideration prior to implementing undertakings.

Notify the Regional Historic Preservation

Officer early in project planning or upon

receipt of a request for permitted activities.

3. Develop a step-down plan for surveying lands

to identify archeological resources and for

developing a preservation program.
Chapter 4: Management Direction

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

90

4. Complete accessioning, cataloging, inventorying, and preserving the museum collection

at the Refuge in accordance with “Survey of

Collections at Crab Orchard NWR” by

Mayda S. Jensen. 

Objective 5

Meet Service policy guidelines (“Administration

and Enforcement Procedures for Conservation

Easement”) for 12 conservation easements by

2007, for all easements by 2010.

1. Complete legal surveys on 50 percent (12

tracts) of all conservation easements by 2007

through contracted services. Complete contracted surveys on the remaining tracts by

2010.

2. Conduct annual inspections of all conservation easements.

3. Develop land use plans for 50 percent (12

tracts) of the conservation easements and

restore grassland and wetland habitats on 25

percent of these tracts by 2009.

4. Hire a permanent 6-month law enforcement

officer to conduct annual inspections, develop

land use plans, and restore wetland and

grassland habitat projects.

Outreach Goal

Visitors, cooperators, tenants, and local residents will understand Refuge goals, issues and activities. Service personnel

will understand the expectations and concerns of the general

public by being receptive to their feedback.

Background: During the scoping process, residents of local communities reported they felt uninformed by the Refuge about activities occurring on

the Refuge and about the reasons for certain activities. To resolve this concern, the Refuge will communicate more effectively with local communities

and listen more attentively to community concerns.

In keeping with the history of public use on the

Refuge, many non-wildlife oriented special events

have been permitted on the Refuge. These special

events have included organized running, bicycling,

and swimming events, use of Refuge for “National

Hunting and Fishing Days” activities, and American

Red Cross Blood Drives.

The Refuge will continue to support special

events that foster good community relations and are

organized by nonprofit organizations. To be permitted, these events cannot damage Refuge habitats or

facilities, nor can they adversely impact fish and

wildlife populations. In addition these events cannot

interfere with Refuge visitors and wildlife-dependent activities such as hunting, fishing, and environmental education. Permitted activities will be

limited to one-time and annual events.

Objective 1

The positive attitude toward Refuge management will increase among visitors, cooperators,

tenants, and local residents throughout the life of

the plan.

Strategies

1. Issue press releases, hold Refuge open houses

and hold regularly scheduled forums.

2. Within 2 years of the Plan's approval, create

and maintain a “listening log” of written and

verbal public input submitted to the Refuge.

Review this log quarterly and address voiced

community concerns.

3. Provide annual reports on the “State of the

Refuge.” Distribute these reports upon

request at the Visitor Center and by mail and

post the current year's report on the Refuge

website. 

4. Continue to permit selected annual and special events that are organized by nonprofit

organizations, provided they are compatible

and do not damage Refuge resources or

interfere with wildlife-dependent recreation.

Glenn Smart
Chapter 5: Plan Implementation

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

91

Chapter 5: Plan Implementation

New and Existing Projects

This CCP outlines an ambitious course of action

for the future management of Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. It will require considerable staff commitment as well as funding commitment to actively manage the wildlife habitats and

add and improve public use facilities. The Refuge

will continually need appropriate operational and

maintenance funding to implement the strategies in

this plan.

A full listing of unfunded Refuge projects and

operational needs can be found in Appendix I. In the

appendix, the highest priority Refuge projects are

described briefly.

Staffing

Reforestation, aggressive control of invasive species, an increase in the number of acres managed as

moist soil units, and improvements to the open land

units will require additional staff and operating

funds. A person with expertise in agriculture and

invasive species will be added to the biological program staff. Also, a person with expertise in Geographic Information Systems will be needed to

assist the biological staff with mapping and record

keeping for invasive species control and other habitat work. A seasonal tractor operator will need to be

hired to help accomplish the habitat work. To

improve the quality of services, the Refuge will add

a position in the visitor information center to assist

with administrative duties.

The completion of the consolidation of the former

Playport and Images Marinas will require moving

the remainder of the docks from the Images area,

removal of the concession building and construction

of a boat ramp.

Meeting the goals and objectives of this plan will

require a 15 percent increase in the Refuge's current operations and maintenance budget.

Partnership Opportunities

Partnerships have become an essential element

for the successful accomplishment of Crab Orchard

NWR goals, objectives and strategies. The objectives outlined in this CCP need the support and the

partnerships of federal, state and local agencies,

non-governmental organizations and individual citizens. This broad-based approach to managing Refuge resources extends beyond social and political

boundaries and requires a foundation of support

from many organizations and people. The Refuge

will continue to seek creative partnership opportunities to achieve its vision for the future. 

Southern Illinois Hunting and Fishing Days, Inc.

is a non-profit organization that partners with the

Refuge to promote hunting and fishing in the area.

The Refuge initiated this program in the early

1980s. SI Hunting and Fishing Days assumed the

Glenn Smart
Chapter 5: Plan Implementation

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

92

lead for this activity in the early 1990s. Several thousand people now attend this annual weekend event,

which is held at John A. Logan College.

Take Pride in America has been organized and

worked with the Refuge since 1988. Take Pride in

America has built courtesy docks for boat landings

at all three lakes. Take Pride in America organized

the construction of bass-rearing ponds and maintains Hogan's Point (Take Pride Point) for fish-offs.

The Crab Orchard Waterfowl Association has

provided funds for the construction of moist soil

units on the Refuge. Quail Unlimited has provided

native grass seed for Refuge prairie restoration.

Touch of Nature, the Friends of Crab Orchard

NWR and the Refuge's Visitor Services Program

have partnered to provide environmental education

opportunities for local schools.

With the help of the following partners, the Refuge is able to provide one of the most successful

Kids Fishing Derbys in the area:

# University of Illinois Extension 

# Illinois DNR

# Southern Illinois National Hunting and Fishing

Days

# Timberline Fisheries

# Zimmer Radio Group

# WalMart

# Silkworm Inc.

# Marion Pepsi-Cola

# Crab Orchard Boat & Yacht Club

The Refuge has many dedicated friends and volunteers that assist with a variety of tasks. The

Friends of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge,

John A. Logan College, University of Southern Illinois, Southern Illinois Audubon Society, Williamson

County Tourism, and Marion U.S. Penitentiary are

just a few of the organizations that contribute time

to the Refuge. We expect to maintain and enhance

these partnerships in the future. 

Step-down Management Plans

Step-down management plans describe the specific strategies and implementation schedules for

meeting general goals and objectives identified in

the CCP. Table 31 shows the step-down management plans we intend to prepare. We have completed two management plans that will be adopted/

included under the CCP.

The Natural Resource Damage Assessment

(NRDA) Restoration Plan was approved July 21,

1997. The NRDA Restoration Plan describes activities proposed to compensate for lost resources and

the services they provide that resulted from PCB

contamination on part of the Refuge. Restoration

activities included in the plan include reforestation,

shoreline and riparian restoration, grassland restoration, public education/outreach, and land acquisition.

The Fire Management Plan, approved January

16, 2002, provides direction and establishes procedures to guide various wildland fire program activities. The Fire Management Plan covers historical

and ecological role of fire, fire management objectives, preparedness, suppression, fire management

actions and responses, fire impacts, use of prescribed fire, and fire management restrictions.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring is critical to successful implementation of this plan. Monitoring is necessary to evaluate

the progress toward objectives and to determine if

conditions are changing.

Accomplishment of the objectives described in

this CCP will be monitored annually by the Refuge

Manager's supervisor. Successful performance will

be tied to the accomplishment of objectives that are

scheduled for that year. The public will be informed

about the activities of the Refuge staff through an

“Annual Report” that will be mailed to all persons on

the Refuge mailing list, published on the Refuge’s

Web site, and its availability will be announced

through news releases to the media. The annual

report will be published each year in February.

The techniques and details for monitoring related

to specific objectives will be specified in the Inventory and Monitoring Step Down Plan.

Substantial changes are likely to occur within the

Service and the community during the next 15

years. This plan and its objectives will be examined

at least every 5 years to determine if any modifications are necessary to meet the changing conditions. 

Plan Review and Revision

The CCP for the Refuge is meant to provide guidance to refuge managers and staff over the next 15

years. However, the CCP is also a dynamic and flexible document and several of the strategies contained in this plan are subject to natural,

uncontrollable events such as windstorms and

droughts. Likewise, many of the strategies are
Chapter 5: Plan Implementation

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

93

Table 31: Step-down Management Plans, Crab Orchard NWR 

Title Service Manual 

Reference

Occupational Safety and Health Parts 240-249

Safety Program 240 FW 1-9

Safety Operations 241 FW 1-9

Industrial Hygiene 242 FW 1-13

Hazardous Materials Operations 242 FW 6

Contaminant Institutional Control

Law Enforcement Parts 440-459

Pollution Control Parts 560-569

Policy and Responsibilities 560 FW 1

Pollution Prevention 560 FW 2

Compliance Requirements Part 561

Clean Water Act 561 FW 3

RCRA – Hazardous Waste 561 FW 6

Pesticide Use and Disposal Part 562

Pest Management 562 FW 1

External Threats to FWS Facilities Part 563

Air Quality Protection 563 FW 2

National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) Uses Part 603

NWRS Uses (Appropriate Refuge Uses) 603 FW 1

Priority Wildlife-dependent Recreation Part 605

Hunting 605 FW 2

Fishing 605 FW 3

Wildlife Observation 605 FW 4

Wildlife Photography 605 FW 5

Environmental Education 605 FW 6

Interpretation 605 FW 7

Visitor Services

Wilderness Management Part 610

Special Area Management Part 611

Research Natural Areas 611 FW 1

National Trails 611 FW 4

Minerals Management Part 612

Minerals and Mining 612 FW 1

Oil and Gas 612 FW 2

Archeological Resources Inventory Sec. 110 NHPA;

sec. 14 ARPA

Habitat Management Planning Part 620

Natural Resources Damage Assessment Restoration

Fire Management Part 621

Population Management Part 701
Chapter 5: Plan Implementation

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

94

dependent upon Service funding for staff and

projects. Because of these factors, the recommendations in the CCP will be reviewed periodically and, if

necessary, revised to meet new circumstances. If

any revisions are major, the review and revision will

include the public. 

Inventory and Monitoring 701 FW 2

Propagation and Stocking 701 FW 3

Marking and Banding 701 FW 4

Disease Prevention and Control 701 FW 7

Trapping 701 FW 11

Fishery Resources Management Part 710

Industrial Operations Management

Table 31: Step-down Management Plans, Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Title Service Manual 

Reference
Appendix A: Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

95

Appendix A: Record of Decision

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Crab Orchard 

National Wildlife Refuge

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Record of Decision

October 2006
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

2

Introduction

This Record of Decision (ROD) has been

developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) in compliance with agency decision-making

requirements of the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended. It documents the

decision of the Service, based on the information

contained in the Final Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) for the Comprehensive

Conservation Plan and the entire administrative

record. The Service has selected the preferred

alternative (Alternative E) as described in the Final

EIS as the best alternative for the Comprehensive

Conservation Plan for the Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge (NWR). A notice of this decision will

be published in the Federal Register and a news

release will be sent to the media. This document will

also be posted on the planning website for the

Refuge.

Purpose of Action

The purpose of this action is to specify and adopt a

long-term management direction for the Crab

Orchard NWR that will achieve the Refuge purposes

and the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge

System (Refuge System).

Need for Action

For Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge, there

is a need to meet the Refuge purposes of wildlife

conservation, recreation, industry and agriculture as

much as possible as a unit of the National Wildlife

Refuge System that emphasizes its mission of

wildlife conservation. This need has proven difficult

to meet in the past because the purposes of the

Refuge, which outrank the mission of the Refuge

System, often conflict with wildlife conservation and

compete unfavorably in the budgeting process.

There is a need to specify the priority wildlife species

of management concern and, within budget

constraints and other limitations, reduce habitat

fragmentation. There is a need to recognize the

recreational demands of the public, and within

budget constraints and the Refuge mission, attempt

to meet this demand. There is a need to address the

conflicting demands of wildlife- and non-wildlifedependent recreation. There is a need to improve the

relations between the community and the Refuge. In

addition, a plan is needed to satisfy the legislative

mandates of the National Wildlife Refuge System

Improvement Act of 1997, which requires the Service

to develop and implement a Comprehensive

Conservation Plan for each national wildlife refuge.

Key Issues

Through public scoping and with input from

various agencies and publics, key issues and possible

solutions were identified. The issues were grouped

into six main topics: 1) recreation, 2) wildlife

conservation, 3) refuge purposes, 4) recreational

boating, 5) role in regional economy, and 6)

communication between the Refuge and community.

These issues were thoroughly examined in the Draft

and Final EIS. 

Alternatives Considered

Five alternatives and their consequences were

described in detail in the Draft and Final EISs.

Under all alternatives the objective to provide

enough food for wintering Canada Geese to support

6.4 million goose-use-days annually would be met;

federally listed species, state-listed species and

federally proposed species and their habitats would

be protected; resident fish and wildlife populations

would be maintained or enhanced; communication

between the Refuge and the community would be

improved; cultural resources, the health and safety

of refuge users and staff, and the ecological integrity

and the wilderness character of the Crab Orchard

Wilderness would be protected; and the Refuge’s

Fire Management Plan would guide prescribed fire

and wildland fire prevention and suppression. The

following policies would also apply under all

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

3

alternatives: The concept of classifying Refuge lands

for various uses and designation as Areas I, II, and

III would be dropped; only the industrial area would

retain the designation “restricted use area” for

safety and security reasons. The length of stay at

Refuge campgrounds would be limited to 14

consecutive nights. Group camps would be required

to provide environmental education as specified in

current agreements. Recreational fees would be

made consistent with the Federal Lands Recreation

Enhancement Act of 2005 and the standard schedule

of fees for most refuges. Small competitive fishing

events called “fish-offs” would be limited to three

events per year per organization and managed under

a permit system. All mowing of pastures, hay fields,

and clover fields would take place after August 1 to

protect nesting birds.

Alternative A. Current Management 

(No Action)

Under this alternative the current management

activities at the Refuge would continue. The Refuge

would continue to provide sufficient habitat for the

needs of wintering geese. All current authorized

recreation uses and patterns on the Refuge would

continue. Current industrial policies would remain in

place and the Refuge would provide facilities for the

existing tenants at fair market value rental rates.

The amount of agricultural land would remain fairly

constant. However, some loss of cropland may occur

through installing buffer strips needed for soil and

water protection.

Alternative B. Reduced Habitat Fragmentation: 

Wildlife-dependent Recreation Emphasis With 

Land Exchange

Through the years the Refuge has been criticized

for its lack of support of the recreational purpose of

the Refuge. Recreation on the Refuge drew the

greatest number of comments during the scoping of

issues. When the Refuge was established, the

Director of the Service assured Congress that the

Service would be able to manage for the four

purposes of the Refuge. In 50 years of management,

the Service has not been able consistently to provide

facilities and management for quality non-wildlifedependent recreational experiences. Providing for

swimming, picnicking, and power boating does not fit

well with the capabilities and resources of the

Service. Under this alternative the non-wildlifedependent recreation that would remain the

responsibility of the Refuge would be guided by the

philosophy of “consolidate and improve.” Over the

last decade habitat fragmentation has been identified

as a significant result of changing land use. Habitat

fragmentation is known to have negative effects on

biological diversity. 

Under this alternative, management emphasis

would be on reducing habitat fragmentation and

reconciling conflicts between the Refuge’s recreation

purpose and the Refuge System mission by focusing

on wildlife-dependent recreation on the Refuge while

still providing a full spectrum of recreational

activities in the area. 

Some of the current management activities at the

Refuge would be modified to provide greater

benefits to wildlife. The main point of this alternative

is to offer increased recreational opportunities by

exchanging land in the developed northwestern

portion of the Refuge for undeveloped land at

another location. 

The Refuge would update the industrial use policy

with the intent of not promoting expansion and

consolidating the areas occupied by industrial

tenants. The Service would aim to not compete with

neighboring industrial parks. If an industrial tenant

were to leave the Refuge and their facilities were

suitable for occupancy, the Refuge would make them

Glenn Smart
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

4

available for new tenants. The amount of row crops

would decrease slightly. Current acreage of hay

fields and pastures would remain about the same.

The Refuge would convert fescue pastures to other

cool-season and native warm-season grasses over a

period of 15 years and modify grazing regimes to

benefit grassland birds.

Alternative C. Open Land Management: 

Consolidate and Improve Recreation

Both grassland and forest species are negatively

affected by habitat fragmentation. Under this

alternative the Refuge would take advantage of the

lands that are already open and consolidate existing

large blocks of open land for grassland dependent

species, especially birds. The Refuge recognizes that

improvements in the recreation program are needed.

Under this alternative the Refuge would satisfy the

Refuge’s recreation purpose as much as possible

within Service budget priorities and expanding

emphasis on wildlife-dependent recreation. 

Under this alternative cropland and grassland

would increase slightly. Pasture and hayfield

management would change to provide more

emphasis on habitat quality for grassland birds. The

Refuge would manage one large forest block to

benefit area-sensitive forest birds. To enhance nonwildlife-dependent recreational activities, the Refuge

would consolidate marinas and picnic areas, upgrade

existing boat ramps, and designate times and places

for the various types of boating activities. Camping

capacity would be reduced, the quality of camping

facilities would be upgraded, and a 14-day maximum

stay policy would be implemented. A spectrum of

recreational opportunities ranging from more

developed recreation at Crab Orchard Lake to less

developed opportunities at Devils Kitchen Lake

would be provided. If an industrial tenant left the

Refuge, the Refuge would not seek a new tenant for

the vacant facility. The amount of row crops would

increase slightly.

Alternative D: Forest Land Management: 

Consolidate and Improve Recreation

Under this alternative the Refuge would take

advantage of the natural tendency and historical

prevalence of forests in the area and consolidate

existing large blocks of forest for forest-interior

species, especially birds. The Refuge would manage

two large forest blocks to benefit area-sensitive

forest birds. The Refuge would maintain some early

successional habitat. Pasture and hayfield

management would change to provide more

emphasis on habitat quality for grassland birds,

along with an emphasis on cattle production on

pastures. To enhance non-wildlife-dependent

recreational activities, the Refuge would consolidate

marinas and picnic areas, upgrade existing boat

ramps, and designate times and places for the

various types of boating activities. Camping capacity

would be reduced, the quality of camping facilities

would be upgraded, and a 14-day maximum stay

policy would be implemented. If an industrial tenant

left the Refuge, the Refuge would not seek a new

tenant for the vacant facility. The amount of row

crops and hay fields would decrease slightly. The

Refuge would increase forage diversity and use

rotational grazing in pastures to increase cattle

production.

Alternative E: Reduced Habitat Fragmentation: 

Consolidate and Improve Recreation (Preferred 

Alternative)

This alternative has the same habitat, industrial,

and agricultural programs as Alternative B and the

same recreation management program as

Alternative C. 

Under this alternative, management emphasis

would be on reducing habitat fragmentation by

making small changes in the current habitat cover to

gain larger, unfragmented blocks of both forest and

grassland habitats. Some of the current management

activities at the Refuge would be modified to provide

greater benefits to wildlife. 

The Refuge would update the industrial use policy

with the intent of not promoting expansion and

Bob Etzel
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

5

consolidating the areas occupied by industrial

tenants. The Service would aim to not compete with

neighboring industrial parks. If an industrial tenant

were to leave the Refuge and their facilities were

suitable for occupancy, the Refuge would make them

available for new tenants. The amount of row crops

would decrease slightly. Current acreage of hay

fields and pastures would remain about the same.

The Refuge would convert fescue pastures to other

cool-season and native warm-season grasses over a

period of 15 years and modify grazing regimes to

benefit grassland birds. 

The Refuge would satisfy the Refuge’s recreation

purpose as much as possible within Service budget

priorities and expanding emphasis on wildlifedependent recreation. To enhance non-wildlifedependent recreational activities, the Refuge would

consolidate marinas and picnic areas, upgrade

existing boat ramps, and designate times and places

for the various types of boating activities. Camping

capacity would be reduced, the quality of camping

facilities would be upgraded, and a 14-day maximum

stay policy would be implemented. A spectrum of

recreational opportunities ranging from more

developed recreation at Crab Orchard Lake to less

developed opportunities at Devils Kitchen Lake

would be provided. 

Environmentally Preferable 

Alternative

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

regulations for implementing the NEPA require that

the ROD specify “the alternative or alternatives

which were considered to be environmentally

preferable” (40 CFR 1505.2(b)). This alternative has

generally been interpreted to be the alternative that

will promote the national environmental policy as

expressed in NEPA's Section 101 (CEQ's “Forty

Most-Asked Questions,” 46 Federal Register, 18026,

March 23, 1981). Ordinarily, this means the

alternative that causes the least damage to the

biological and physical environment; it also means

the alternative that best protects, preserves, and

enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources.

All action alternatives (B through E) are

considered environmentally preferable alternative to

Alternative A (No Action). Among the four action

alternatives there is little to distinguish their

environmental impacts. The primary differences

among the alternatives relate to the recreational

uses of the Refuge. Alternatives B and E balance

benefits to forest and grassland birds slightly more

than Alternatives C and D. In Alternative B some

wildlife habitat would be lost as additional recreation

areas were developed, although overall there would

be an increase of about 1,200 acres of wildlife habitat.

Alternative E is the alternative considered to have

the least adverse effects on the physical and

biological environments.

Basis for the Decision

The Service selected Alternative E, as described

in the Final EIS, as the best alternative for the

Comprehensive Conservation Plan to guide refuge

management for the next 15 years. The rationale for

choosing the selected alternative as the best

alternative for the Comprehensive Conservation

Plan is based on the impact of this alternative on the

purposes of the Refuge and the issues and needs that

surfaced during the planning process. Other factors

considered in the decision were public and resource

benefits gained for the cost incurred and the

extensive public comment. Alternative E is the most

environmentally preferable alternative. Alternative

E is likely to lead to improvements under the

agricultural, wildlife conservation, and recreation

purposes of the Refuge. Alternative E is also

expected to lead to wider and fairer access to public

recreational opportunities. Alternative A was not

selected because it would inadequately address the

needs and issues that were documented during

planning. Alternative B was not selected because

the land exchange, which was the heart of the

alternative, could not be accomplished within the

authorities of the Department of the Interior.

Alternatives C and D served to contrast an emphasis

on grassland birds with an emphasis on forest birds,

and we learned that only marginal benefits would

accrue to either group of birds over the reduced

habitat fragmentation approach of Alternative B or

E.

 Chapter 7 of the Final EIS summarized all

written comments submitted to the Service

regarding the Draft EIS and gave the Service’s

response to the comments. Based on the comments

the preferred alternative was modified to: include an

objective and strategies related to hardwood forest

management; more explicitly describe the

implementation of the 14-day camping length of stay;

include a provision for primitive camping at Devils

Kitchen Campground; expand the area on Devils
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

6

Kitchen Lake in which gas motors would be

permitted; and reduce the extent of no wake zoning

on Crab Orchard Lake.

 Public Comments to Final EIS

The Service filed the Final EIS for the

Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) on September 1, 2006. In

compliance with agency decision-making

requirements of the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969, as amended, the Service is required to

circulate the Final EIS for 30 days after filing with

the EPA before issuing a Record of Decision on the

Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

The Final EIS was announced in the Federal

Register (71 FR 52138-52139) and distributed to

agencies, state and local elected officials, local

newspapers, and to businesses and organizations

with an interest in the Refuge. The Final EIS was

also placed in thirteen local libraries and posted on

the planning website for the Refuge. A news release

was sent to local newspapers announcing the

availability of the Final EIS, and a summary of the

Final EIS was mailed to over 1,750 people on the

planning mailing list.

During the 30-day circulation period, which ended

October 9, 2006, the Service received 67 written

comments, which are on file at Refuge headquarters

in Marion, Illinois. With one exception, the

comments did not raise any issues not addressed in

the Final EIS, and the comments did not result in

changes to the analysis of environmental

consequences or affect the Service’s response to

similar comments in the Final EIS/CCP. One

comment pointed out an inconsistency in the

document, which was introduced in the final editing,

related to the acres of new moist soil impoundments

in the preferred alternative. The Refuge’s intention

is, as indicated by the response on page 181 of the

Final EIS/CCP, to develop 150-200 additional acres

of moist soil impoundments. The stand-alone CCP

will reflect that intention. The new topic raised

during the waiting period was an advocacy for rock

climbing on the Refuge.

During the comment period for the Draft EIS/

CCP we received only two comments on rock

climbing; both were opposed to allowing it on the

Refuge. However, sixty-one comments received

during the waiting period concerned rock climbing.

The Access Fund, a national advocacy organization

whose mission is to keep climbing areas open and to

conserve the climbing environment, is concerned

that we prohibited rock climbing without preparing a

Compatibility Determination (CD). They requested

that we complete a CD for rock climbing and amend

the Final EIS/CCP prior to a Record of Decision.

During the waiting period, other citizens and groups

have expressed an interest in allowing access for

climbing. The Service’s consideration of rock

climbing is described in the following paragraphs.

Background

Rock climbing has been occurring on Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge as an

unauthorized use. It has never been officially

permitted, nor has it been explicitly addressed in

past regulations or plans. In contrast to most public

lands that are open to a use unless it is specifically

prohibited, a national wildlife refuge is closed until it

is opened for a particular use.

To address past ambiguity, the policy of not

permitting rock climbing was stated explicitly in the

Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements

(EIS) and Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP)

as a policy common to all alternatives. This policy is

not a change from the past. It is an explicit

statement of current policy.

The only known location rock climbing occurs on

the Refuge is at a rock formation near the Devils

Kitchen Dam climbers have named “Opie’s Kitchen.”

The following section describes the Service

procedure for determining whether a use is

appropriate for a refuge and the application of the

procedure to rock climbing at Crab Orchard NWR.

Service Guidance for Determining Appropriate 

and Compatible Uses

“The refuge manager will decide if a new or

existing use is an appropriate use. If an existing use

is not appropriate, the refuge manager will eliminate

or modify the use as expeditiously as practicable. If

a use is not appropriate, the refuge manager will

deny the use without determining compatibility.”

(603 FW 1.3). If a use is found to be appropriate,

then it must be determined to be compatible before it

is allowed on a refuge. A refuge use is appropriate if

the use meets at least one of the following three

conditions:
Record of Decision

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

7

1. It is a wildlife-dependent recreational use.

2. It contributes to fulfilling the refuge purpose(s), the Refuge System mission, or goals

or objectives described in a refuge management plan approved after October 9, 1997.

3. The refuge manager has evaluated the use

following the guidelines in the appropriate

use policy and found that it is appropriate.(603 FW 1.11A)

Rock climbing was evaluated against the above

three conditions.

Rock climbing is not a wildlife-dependent

recreational use and, therefore, does not meet the

first condition.

Rock climbing is recreation and the Refuge has a

recreational purpose. The Refuge’s recreational

purpose is limited, however. The Ser vice’s

interpretation of the Refuge’s purpose is derived

from the intent when the Refuge was established.

These uses included public hunting, picnicking,

fishing, boating, and other aquatic activities.

Additionally, there was the expectation of group

camps, such as Boy and Girl Scout camps. Rock

climbing is considered to be outside the original

intent of the recreational purpose and, therefore,

does not contribute to the refuge purpose. Rock

climbing does not contribute to the Refuge System

mission or goals or objectives described in a refuge

management plan approved after October 9, 1997.

Rock climbing does not meet the second condition.

The refuge manager determines appropriateness

of a use by evaluating the use against ten criteria

(603 FW 1.11A(3)). Refuge Manager Dan Frisk

evaluated the appropriateness of rock climbing and

found:

The rock formation used by climbers is within an

area of the Refuge designated as the Devil’s Kitchen

Dam Research Natural Area. The area was

designated as a Research Natural Area in 1970.

Rock climbing is inconsistent with the goals and

objectives of the Devil’s Kitchen Dam Research

Natural Area in which activities are limited to

research, study, observation, monitoring, and

educational activities that are non-destructive, nonmanipulative, and maintain unmodified conditions (8

RM 10.2). When established, the area was

recognized as having a Grade A (essentially

undisturbed) sandstone cliff community. Climbers

have trampled vegetation, exposed soil to erosion,

and exposed tree roots in a sensitive zone known for

supporting rare plants. Magnesium carbonate chalk

left on rock faces is an additional, visible modification

to the area. The nearby Shawnee National Forest

also contains natural areas. In 1997 the USDA

Forest Service closed approximately half of their

natural areas to rappelling and rock climbing. The

remaining natural areas are being analyzed for

future closures.

Rock climbing is not manageable within available

budget and staff and its management would divert

efforts and resources away from the proper and

reasonable management of other priority programs.

The possibility of relying heavily on volunteers to aid

in management was considered, but the coordination

of volunteer efforts would still divert efforts and

resources from other priority management needs

directly related to the Refuge’s purpose and the

System mission.

Rock climbing will not be manageable in the

future within existing resources. Resources

available to the Refuge must be managed carefully to

meet its core responsibilities. Given the fifteen year

program described in the CCP and the prospect of

increasingly tight budgets, we project that it will be

even more challenging to meet our core

responsibilities in the future. We can envision no

scenario where we will have the resources necessary

to manage rock climbing.

Rock climbing does not measurably contribute to

the public’s understanding and appreciation of the

Refuge’s natural or cultural resources. Certainly, as

an outdoor activity, rock climbing may add to a

participant’s appreciation for the Refuge’s natural

resources and climbing on a natural feature has

characteristics that can not be duplicated indoors.

However, given the impacts to the resource, rock

climbing’s focus on the physical aspect of the sport,

and in comparison to other visitors whose intent is

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Appendix B: Glossary

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

105

Appendix B: Glossary

Appendix B: Glossary

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

107

Appendix B: Glossary

Aquatic Species

Includes all freshwater, anadromous and estuarine fishes, freshwater mollusks, freshwater crustaceans and freshwater amphibians.

Archaeological and Cultural Values

Any material remains of past human life or activity greater than 100 years old which are of

archaeological interest as defined by Section 4(a)

of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act

and 43 CFR Part 7.3.

Biodiversity

The variety of life and its processes, including the

variety of living organisms, the genetic differences among them, and the communities and ecosystems in which they occur.

Candidate Species

Those species for which the Service has on file

sufficient information on biological vulnerability

and threats to propose them for listing.

Compatible Use

A wildlife-dependent recreational use or any

other use of a refuge that, in the sound professional judgment of the Director or designee, will

not materially interfere with or detract from the

fulfillment of the mission of the System or the

purposes of the refuge (PL 105-57).

Comprehensive Conservation Plan

Plan: A document, completed with public involvement, that describes the desired future condition

and provides long-term (15 year planning horizon) guidance to accomplish the purposes of the

refuge system and the individual refuge units.

Conservation

The management of natural resources to prevent

loss or waste. Management actions may include

preservation, restoration and enhancement.

Conservation (Species)

The use of all methods and procedures which are

necessary to bring any species to the point at

which the measures provided are no longer necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but

are not limited to, all activities associated with

scientific resources management such as

research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and transplantation. Conservation is the act

of managing a resource to ensure its survival and

availability.

Cultural Resources

Cultural Resources: “those parts of the physical

environment – natural and built – that have cultural value to some kind of sociocultural group...

[and] those non-material human social institutions....” (King, p.9). Cultural resources include

historic sites, archeological sites and associated

artifacts, sacred sites, traditional cultural properties, cultural items (human remains, funerary

objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural

patrimony) (McManamon, Francis P. DCA-NPS;

letter 12-23-97 to Walla Walla District, COE), and

buildings and structures.

Deepwater

Permanently flooded lands lying below the deepwater boundary of wetlands (Cowardin et al.,

1979). Deepwater areas are located below the elevation of the extreme low water of the spring tide

in oceans and estuaries, and those portions of rivers and lakes greater than 6.6 feet in depth.

Ecosystem

Dynamic and interrelating complex of plant and

animal (including humans) communities and their

associated non-living environment.

Ecosystem Approach

1) Protecting or restoring the natural function,

structure, and species composition of an ecosystem, recognizing that all components are interrelated. 2) Management of natural resources using

system-wide concepts to ensure that all plants

and animals in ecosystems are maintained at viable levels in native habitats and that basic ecosystem processes are perpetuated indefinitely

(Clark and Zaunbrecher 1987).

Endangered Species

A listed species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Appendix B: Glossary

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

108

Enhance (habitats)

Improves habitat through alteration, treatment,

or other land management of existing habitat to

increase habitat value for one or more species without bringing the habitat to a fully restored or naturally occurring condition.

Forest Fragmentation

Fragmentation may occur when a forested landscape is subdivided into patches. Fragmentation

may also occur when numerous openings for such

things as fields, roads, and powerlines interrupt a

continuous forest canopy. The resulting landscape

pattern alters habitat connectivity and edge characteristics, influencing a variety of species.

Forest Stand Improvement Treatment

A non-commercial, intermediate treatment made

in older stands to regulate composition by species

and improve stand quality. Techniques include

girdling, cutting, and application of herbicide to

individual stems.

Geographic Information System, spatial

GIS aids in the collection, analysis, output and

distribution of spaital data and information.

Goose-use-day

Enough food to feed one goose for one day.

Improvement Cutting

A commercial, intermediate cutting made in older

stands to regulate composition by species and

improve stand quality. This type of cutting treatment is accomplished by the sale and harvesting

of merchantable trees.

Interjurisdictional Fish

Populations of fish that are managed by two or

more states or national or tribal governments

because of the scope of their geographic distributions or migrations.

Intermediate Cutting/Treatment

A cutting or treatment applied during that portion of the rotation from the reproduction stage

to maturity.

Institutional Control

Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments such as administrative and/or legal controls that minimize the potential for human

exposure to contamination by limiting land or

resource use. They are generally used in conjunction with, rather than in lieu of, engineering measures such as waste treatment or containment.

Institutional controls can be used during all

stages of the clean-up process to accomplish various clean-up-related objectives. More than one

institutional control should be used and they

should be implemented in a series to provide

overlapping assurances of protection from contamination.

Invasive Species

An alien species whose introduction does or is

likely to cause economic or environmental harm

or harm to human health.

Migratory Nongame Birds of Management Concern

Those species of nongame birds that (a) are

believed to have undergone significant population

declines; (b) have small or restricted populations;

or (c) are dependent upon restricted or vulnerable habitats.

Migratory Species

Species that move substantial distances to satisfy

one or more biological needs, most often to reproduce or escape intolerable cyclic environmental

conditions.

National Wildlife Refuge System

All lands and waters and interests therein administered by the Service as wildlife refuges, wildlife

ranges, wildlife management areas, waterfowl

production areas, and other areas for the protection and conservation of fish and wildlife, including those that are threatened with extinction.

Protect (habitat)

Maintain current quality or prevent degradation

to habitat. The act of ensuring that habitat quantity and quality do not change, most often as a

result of human activities but sometimes in

response to unwelcome natural processes or phenomena.
Appendix B: Glossary

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

109

Recovery Plans (species)

Documents developed by the Service that outline

tasks necessary to stabilize and recover listed

species. Recovery plans include goals for measuring species progress towards recovery, estimated

costs and time frames for the recovery process,

and an identification of public and private partners that can contribute to implementation of the

recovery plan.

Regeneration Cutting

A commercial cutting in a mature stand for the

purposes of removing the old trees and creating

environmental conditions favorable for establishment of reproduction.

Regeneration/Reproduction

These terms are synonymous, meaning the young

trees established at the beginning of a rotation.

Restore (habitat)

Returns the quantity and quality of habitat to

some previous naturally occurring condition,

most often some baseline considered suitable and

sufficient to support self-sustaining populations

of fish and wildlife.

Riparian Habitats

Those lands adjacent to streams or rivers that

form a transition zone between aquatic and

upland systems and are typically dominated by

woody vegetation that is of a noticeably different

growth form than adjacent vegetation. Riparian

areas may or may not meet the definition of wetlands used by Cowardin et al. (1979).

Rotation

The period during which a single generation is

allowed to grow.

Shelterwood Method

A regeneration method in which the older stand

is gradually removed in a series of partial cuttings to secure establishment of reproduction

before completion of the preceding rotation. The

sequence of operations may include preparatory

cuttings, seed cuttings, and removal cuttings, in

that order.

Species of Concern

A species not on the federal list of threatened or

endangered species, but a species for which the

Service or one of its partners has concerns.

Stakeholders

State, tribal, and local government agencies, academic institutions, the scientific community, nongovernmental entities including environmental,

agricultural, and conservation organizations,

trade groups, commercial interests, and private

landowners.

Threatened Species

A listed species which is likely to become an

endangered species within the foreseeable future

throughout all or a significant portion of its

range.

Undertaking

A project, activity, or program funded in whole or

in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of

a Federal agency, including those carried out by

or on behalf of a Federal agency; those carried

out with Federal financial assistance; those

requiring a Federal permit, license or approval...”

(36 CFR 800.16(y); 12-12-2000), i.e., all Federal

actions.

Uplands

All lands not meeting the definition of wetlands,

deepwater, or riverine.

Watershed

The area drained by a river or stream and its

tributaries.

Wetlands

Lands transitional between terrestrial and

aquatic systems where the water table is usually

at or near the surface or the land is covered by

shallow water (Cowardin et al., 1979. In layman's

terms, this habitat category includes marshes,

swamps and bogs.

Wildlife-dependent Recreational Use

A use of a refuge involving hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, or environmental education and interpretation.

Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

111

Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

113

Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Numerous Congressional Acts, Executive Orders

signed by the President, and regulations grant

authority and govern the administration of the Refuge. The following laws and executive orders provide substantive and procedural requirements to be

satisfied in the development and implementation of

the CCP.

Public Law 80-361

(Approved August 5, 1947; 61 Stat. 770) This Act

established Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge by directing the transfer of certain lands in

Illinois to the Department of the Interior for

wildlife conservation, and agricultural, recreational, industrial development and related purposes. The full text is presented in Appendix G.

Public Law 90-339 

(Approved June 15, 1968; 82 Stat. 177) This Act

provides for adjustment of legislative jurisdiction

of the United States on the Refuge.

Public Law 95-616 

(Approved November 8, 1978; 92 Stat. 3114) This

Act provided that revenue generated on the Refuge will be subject to the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act rather than being deposited in the

Treasury as general receipts.

Public Law 99-662

(Approved November 17, 1986; 100 Stat 4257)

This Act directed the Secretary to sell surplus

water which may be available from Devils

Kitchen Lake on the Refuge to the City of Marion, Illinois.

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration

Act of 1966 

(Derived from sections 4 and 5 of Public Law 89-

669, approved October 15, 1966; 80 Stat. 927; 16

USC 668dd et seq.) This Act serves as the

“organic act” for the National Wildlife Refuge

System. The Act, as amended (National Wildlife

Refuge System Improvement Act, Public Law

105-57, October 9, 1997), consolidated the various

categories of lands administered by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) through the Service into a single National Wildlife Refuge

System. 

The Act establishes a unifying mission for the

Refuge System, a process for determining compatible uses of refuges, and a requirement for

preparing comprehensive conservation plans.

The Act states first and foremost that the mission

of the National Wildlife Refuge System be

focused singularly on wildlife conservation. 

The Act identifies six priority wildlife-dependent

recreation uses, clarified the Secretary’s authority to accept donations of money for land acquisition and placed restrictions on the transfer,

exchange or other disposal of lands within the

Refuge System.

Most importantly, this Act reinforces and

expands the “compatibility standard” of the Refuge Recreation Act. The Refuge Administration

Act authorizes the Secretary, under such regulations as he may prescribe, to “permit the use of

any area within the System for any purpose,

including but not limited to hunting, fishing, public recreation and accommodations, and access

whenever he determines that such uses are compatible with the major purposes for which such

areas were established.”

It provides guidelines and directives for administration and management of all areas in the system, including “wildlife refuges, areas for the

protection and conservation of fish and wildlife

that are threatened with extinction, wildlife

ranges, game ranges, wildlife management areas,

or waterfowl production areas.”

The Secretary is authorized to permit by regulations the use of any area within the system provided “such uses are compatible with the major

purposes for which such areas were established.”

Public Law 90-404

(Approved July 18, 1968, (82 Stat. 359) This law

provides that proceeds from disposal of lands in

the system acquired with “duck stamp” funds or

by donation are to be paid into the Migratory

Bird Conservation Fund, and that the Migratory

Bird Conservation Commission must be consulted before disposal of any such acquired land. 

A December 3, 1974, amendment entitled

“National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act Amendments of 1974" (P.L. 93-509; 88

Stat. 1603), requires payment of the fair market
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

114

value for rights-of-way or other interests

granted, with the proceeds deposited into the

Migratory Bird Conservation Fund and made

available for land acquisition.

Public Law 94-215

(Approved February 17, 1976) (90 Stat. 190) clarified that acquired lands or interests therein can

be exchanged for acquired or public lands.

An amendment of February 27, 1976, (P.L. 94-223;

90 Stat. 199) commonly called the Game Range

Act, directs that all areas in the system on or

after January 1, 1975, “shall be administered by

the Secretary through the United States Fish

and Wildlife Service” and cannot be transferred

or disposed of unless otherwise directed by Acts

of Congress. Exceptions are provided for areas

administered as part of the system pursuant to

cooperative agreements and for transfer or disposal and exchange of acquired lands.

Public Law 95-616

(Approved November 8, 1978, (92 Stat. 3110)

amends the 1966 Act to permit the opening of

more than 40 percent of an area acquired as a

migratory bird sanctuary to hunting when it is

determined to be beneficial to the species hunted.

Contracts may be entered into for public accommodations and donations of funds may be

accepted for land acquisition and management.

Public Law 100-653

(Approved November 14, 1988, (101 Stat. 3825)

made violations of the Act or implementing regulations subject to fines under the provisions of

Title 18 of the U.S. Code (sections 3571-3574), or

one year’s imprisonment, or both. This Act also

authorized the Secretary to relinquish exclusive

legislative jurisdiction over any Service lands to

State or territorial authorities (16 U.S.C. 742m).

This Act, Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (16 U.S.C.

715s) – Section 401 of the Act of June 15, 1935, (49

Stat. 383) provided for payments to counties in

lieu of taxes, using revenues derived from the

sale of products from refuges. 

Public Law 88-523

(Approved August 30, 1964, (78 Stat. 701) made

major revisions by requiring that all revenues

received from refuge products, such as animals,

timber and minerals, or from leases or other privileges, be deposited in a special Treasury account

and net receipts distributed to counties for public

schools and roads.

Public Law 93-509

(Approved December 3, 1974, (88 Stat. 1603)

required that moneys remaining in the fund after

payments be transferred to the Migratory Bird

Conservation Fund for land acquisition under

provisions of the Migratory Bird Conservation

Act.

Public Law 95-469

(Approved October 17, 1978, (92 Stat. 1319)

expanded the revenue sharing system to include

National Fish Hatcheries and Service research

stations. It also included in the Refuge Revenue

Sharing Fund receipts from the sale of salmonid

carcasses. Payments to counties were established

as:

# on acquired land, the greatest amount

calculated on the basis of 75 cents per acre,

three-fourths of one percent of the appraised

value, or 25 percent of the net receipts produced

from the land; and

# on land withdrawn from the public domain, 25

percent of net receipts and basic payments

under Public Law 94-565 (31 U.S.C. 1601-1607,

90 Stat. 2662), payment in lieu of taxes on public

lands. 

This amendment also authorized appropriations

to make up any difference between the amount in

the Fund and the amount scheduled for payment

in any year. The stipulation that payments be

used for schools and roads was removed, but

counties were required to pass payments along to

other units of local government within the county

which suffer losses in revenues due to the establishment of Service areas.

Refuge Trespass Act (18 U.S.C. 41) 

The Act of June 25, 1948, (62 Stat. 686) consolidated penalty provisions of various Acts from

1905 through 1934 establishing and protecting

fish and wildlife areas, and restated the intent of

Congress to protect all wildlife within Federal

sanctuaries, refuges, fish hatcheries and breeding grounds. 
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

115

Except as provided by rules and regulations promulgated under authority of law, the Act provides

that anyone who hunts, traps or willfully disturbs

any wildlife on such areas, or willfully injures,

molests or destroys any property of the United

States on such lands or waters, shall be fined not

more than $500, imprisoned not more than six

months, or both.

Public Law 100-653

(Approved November 14, 1988, (102 Stat. 3825)

provided that any violation of the Refuge System

Administration Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq), or

regulations issued under its authority, would be

fined in accordance with uniform sentencing provisions established in Public Law 98-473,

approved October 12, 1984, (98 Stat. 2028, 2031;

18 U.S.C. 3551 to 3586) or imprisoned not more

than one year, or both. This largely supersedes

the provisions of the Trespass Act, although the

Act was not repealed.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) 

(16 U.S.C. 703-712; Ch. 128; July 13, 1918; 40

Stat. 755) as amended by: Chapter 634; June 20,

1936; 49 Stat. 1556; P.L. 86-732; September 8,

1960; 74 Stat. 866; P.L. 90-578; October 17, 1968;

82 Stat. 1118; P.L. 91-135; December 5, 1969; 83

Stat. 282; P.L. 93-300; June 1, 1974; 88 Stat. 190;

P.L. 95-616; November 8, 1978; 92 Stat. 3111; P.L.

99-645; November 10, 1986; 100 Stat. 3590 as

amended. This Act designates the protection of

migratory birds as a Federal responsibility. The

Act enables the setting of seasons, and other regulations including the closing of areas, Federal or

non-Federal, to the hunting of migratory birds.

The original 1918 statute implemented the 1916

Convention between the U.S. and Great Britain

(for Canada) for the protection of migratory

birds. Specific provisions in the statute included:

# Establishment of a Federal prohibition, unless

permitted by regulations, to “pursue, hunt,

take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or

kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to

purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship,

cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation,

transport, cause to be transported, carry, or

cause to be carried by any means whatever,

receive for shipment, transportation or

carriage, or export, at any time, or in any

manner, any migratory bird, included in the

terms of this Convention... for the protection of

migratory birds... or any part, nest, or egg of

any such bird.” (16 U.S.C. 703) This prohibition

applies to birds included in the respective

international conventions between the U.S. and

Great Britain, the U.S. and Mexico, the U.S.

and Japan, and the U.S. and the Soviet Union.

# Authority for the Secretary of the Interior to

determine, periodically, when, consistent with

the Conventions, “hunting, taking, capture,

killing, possession, sale, purchase, shipment,

transportation, carriage, or export of any... bird,

or any part, nest or egg” could be undertaken

and to adopt regulations for this purpose. These

determinations are to be made based on “due

regard to the zones of temperature and to the

distribution, abundance, economic value,

breeding habits, and times of migratory flight.”

(16 U.S.C. 704)

# A decree that domestic interstate and

international transportation of migratory birds

which are taken in violation of this law is

unlawful, as well as importation of any

migratory birds which are taken in violation of

Canadian laws. (16 U.S.C. 705)

# Authority for Interior officials to enforce the

provisions of this law, including seizure of birds

illegally taken which can be forfeited to the U.S.

and disposed of as directed by the courts. (16

U.S.C. 706)

# Establishment of fines for violation of this law,

including misdemeanor charges. (16 U.S.C. 707)

# Authority for States to enact and implement

laws or regulations to allow for greater

protection of migratory birds, provided that

such laws are consistent with the respective

Conventions and that open seasons do not

extend beyond those established at the national

level. (16 U.S.C. 708)

# Authority to take migratory birds exclusively

for scientific or propagation purposes, pending

the development of Federal regulations,

provided that the take does not violate State or

local laws. (16 U.S.C. 709)

# A repeal of all laws inconsistent with the

provisions of this Act.

# Authority for the continued breeding and sale of

migratory game birds on farms and preserves

for the purpose of increasing the food supply.

(16 U.S.C. 711)
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

116

The 1936 statute implemented the Convention

between the U.S. and Mexico for the Protection

of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals. Migratory bird import and export restrictions between

Mexico and the U.S. were also authorized, and in

issuing any regulations to implement this section,

the Secretary of Agriculture was required to consider U.S. laws forbidding importation of certain

mammals injurious to agricultural and horticultural interests. Monies for the Secretary of Agriculture to implement these provisions were also

authorized.

The 1960 statute (P.L. 86-732) amended the

MBTA by altering earlier penalty provisions. The

new provisions stipulated that violations of this

Act would constitute a misdemeanor and conviction would result in a fine of not more than $500

or imprisonment of not more than six months.

Activities aimed at selling migratory birds in violation of this law would be subject to fine of not

more than $2000 and imprisonment could not

exceed two years. Guilty offenses would constitute a felony. Equipment used for sale purchases

was authorized to be seized and held, by the Secretary of the Interior, pending prosecution, and,

upon conviction, be treated as a penalty.

Section 10 of the 1969 amendments to the Lacey

Act (P.L. 91-135) repealed the provisions of the

MBTA prohibiting the shipment of wild game

mammals or parts to and from the U.S. or Mexico

unless permitted by the Secretary of the Interior.

The definition of “wildlife” under these amendments does not include migratory birds, however,

which are protected under the MBTA. 

The 1974 statute (P.L. 93-300) amended the

MBTA to include the provisions of the 1972 Convention between the U.S. and Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger

of Extinction. This law also amended the title of

the MBTA to read: “An Act to give effect to the

conventions between the U.S. and other nations

for the protection of migratory birds, birds in

danger of extinction, game mammals, and their

environment.”

Section 3(h) of the Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-616) amended the

MBTA to authorize forfeiture to the U.S. of birds

and their parts illegally taken, for disposal by the

Secretary of the Interior as he deems appropriate. These amendments also authorized the Secretary to issue regulations to permit Alaskan

natives to take migratory birds for their subsistence needs during established seasons. The Secretary was required to consider the related

migratory bird conventions with Great Britain,

Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union in establishing these regulations and to establish seasons to

provide for the preservation and maintenance of

migratory bird stocks.

Public Law 95-616 also ratified a treaty with the

Soviet Union specifying that both nations will

take measures to protect identified ecosystems of

special importance to migratory birds against

pollution, detrimental alterations, and other environmental degradations. (See entry for the Convention Between the United States of America

and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Concerning the Conservation of Migratory Birds and

Their Environment; T.I.A.S. 9073; signed on

November 19, 1976, and approved by the Senate

on July 12, 1978; 92 Stat. 3110.)

The most recent amendment was part of the 1986

Emergency Wetlands Resources Act (P.L. 99-

645), and amended the Act to require that felony

violations under the MBTA must be “knowingly”

committed.

Bald Eagle Protection Act of 1940

(16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 54 Stat. 250, approved June

8, 1940, and amended by P.L. 86-70 (73 Stat. 143)

June 25, 1959; P.L. 87-884 (76 Stat. 1346) October

24, 1962; P.L. 92-535 (86 Stat. 1064) October 23,

1972; and P.L. 95-616 (92 Stat. 3114) November 8,

1978. This Act provides for the protection of the

bald eagle (the national emblem) and the golden

eagle on and off Federal lands by prohibiting,

except under certain specified conditions, the taking, possession and commerce of such birds.

The 1972 amendments increased penalties for

violating provisions of the Act or regulations

issued pursuant thereto and strengthened other

enforcement measures. Rewards are provided for

information leading to arrest and conviction for

violation of the Act. The 1978 amendment authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to permit the

taking of golden eagle nests that interfere with

resource development or recovery operations.
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

117

Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929

(16 U.S.C. 715-715d, 715e, 715f-715r approved

February 18, 1929; 45 Stat. 1222) This Act established a Migratory Bird Conservation Commission to approve areas recommended by the

Secretary of the Interior for acquisition with

Migratory Bird Conservation Funds. The Commission consists of the Secretary of the Interior

(as chairman), the Secretaries of Transportation

and Agriculture, two members of the Senate and

two of the House of Representatives, and an exofficio member from each State in which acquisition is being considered.

The Commission, through its chairman, is

directed to report by the first Monday in December of each year to Congress on its activities during the preceding fiscal year. The Secretary of

the Interior is authorized to cooperate with local

authorities in wildlife conservation and to conduct

investigations, to publish documents related to

North American birds, and to maintain and

develop refuges. The Act provides for cooperation with States in enforcement. It established

procedures for acquisition by purchase, rental or

gift of areas approved by the Commission.

Public Law 94-215

(Approved February 17, 1976) (90 Stat. 190)

included in acquisition authority under the Act

the purchase or rental of a partial interest in land

or waters.

Public Law 95-552

(Approved October 30, 1978, (92 Stat. 2071)

required that the Secretary of the Interior consult with the appropriate units of local government and with the Governor of the State

concerned, or the appropriate State agency,

before recommending an area for purchase or

rental under the provisions of the Act. This provision was subsequently amended by P.L. 98-200,

approved December 2, 1983 (97 Stat. 1378); P.L.

98-548, approved October 26, 1984 (98 Stat. 2774);

and P.L. 99-645, approved November 10, 1986

(100 Stat. 3584) to require that either the Governor or the State agency approve each proposed

acquisition. 

Public Law 95-616

(Approved November 8, 1978, (92 Stat. 3110)

authorized acquisition of areas for purposes other

than inviolate sanctuary.

Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp

Act of 1934 

(16 U.S.C. 718-718j, 48 Stat. 452) This Act authorized opening a certain portion of a national wildlife refuge to waterfowl hunting. 

North American Wetlands Conservation Act

(Public Law 101-233, enacted December 13, 1989;

103 Stat. 1968; 16 U.S.C. 4401-4412) This Act provides funding and administrative direction for

implementation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the Tripartite Agreement on wetlands between Canada, U.S. and

Mexico.

The Act converts the Pittman-Robertson account

into a trust fund, with the interest available without appropriation through the year 2006 to carry

out the programs authorized by the Act, along

with an authorization for annual appropriation of

$15 million plus an amount equal to the fines and

forfeitures collected under the Migratory Bird

Treaty Act.

Available funds may be expended, upon approval

of the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission,

for payment of not to exceed 50 percent of the

United States share of the cost of wetlands conservation projects in Canada, Mexico, or the

United States (or 100 percent of the cost of

projects on Federal lands). At least 50 percent

and no more than 70 percent of the funds

received are to go to Canada and Mexico each

year.

A North American Wetlands Conservation Council is created to recommend projects to be funded

under the Act to the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission. The Council is to be composed

of the Director of the Service, the Secretary of

the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, a

State fish and game agency director from each

Flyway, and three representatives of different

non-profit organizations participating in projects

under the Plan or the Act. The Chairman of the
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

118

Council and one other member serve ex officio on

the Commission for consideration of the Council’s

recommendations.

The Commission must justify in writing to the

Council and, annually, to Congress, any decisions

not to accept Council recommendations.

Public Law 101-593

(Approved November 16, 1990 (104 Stat. 2962)

provided that the Director is the Federal official

responsible for compliance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) with respect

to Council actions, and that recommendation(s)

from the Council to the Commission constitute

agency action requiring the preparation of Environmental Assessments or Impact Statements.

The Chairman of the Council is also required to

take steps to ensure public notice of Council

meetings.

This Act provides funding and administrative

direction for implementation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the Tripartite Agreement on wetlands between Canada,

Mexico and the U.S. It establishes a North American Wetlands Conservation Council, the purpose

of which is to recommend wetlands conservation

projects to the Migratory Bird Conservation

Commission. Federal funds may be expended for

payment of no more than half of the U.S. share of

the cost of wetlands conservation projects in Canada, Mexico or the U.S. (or 100 percent of the cost

of projects on federal lands). The Act directs the

Secretary of the Interior to develop and implement a wetlands conservation strategy, and

report to Congress on project implementation

and assessment. 

Clean Air Act of 1977, as amended. 

The primary objective of this Act is to establish

Federal standards for various pollutants from

both stationary and mobile sources and to provide for the regulation of polluting emissions via

state implementation plans. In addition, and of

special interest for Refuges, some amendments

are designed to prevent significant deterioration

in certain areas where air quality exceeds

national standards, and to provide for improved

air quality in areas which do not meet Federal

standards (non-attainment areas). Part C of the

1977 amendments stipulates requirements to prevent significant deterioration of air quality and, in

particular, to preserve air quality in national

parks, national wilderness areas, national monuments, and national seashores. The majority of

the amendments to the Clean Air Act were

enacted in 1977 and are known as the Clean Air

Amendments of 1977 (P.L. 95-95; 91 Stat. 685).

The primary objective of the Clean Air Act is to

establish Federal standards for various pollutants

from both stationary and mobile sources and to

provide for the regulation of polluting emissions

via state implementation plans. In addition, the

amendments are designed to prevent significant

deterioration in certain areas where air quality

exceeds national standards, and to provide for

improved air quality in areas which do not meet

Federal standards (“nonattainment” areas).

Federal facilities are required to comply with air

quality standards to the same extent as non-governmental entities (42 U.S.C. 7418). Part C of the

1977 amendments stipulates requirements to prevent significant deterioration of air quality and, in

particular, to preserve air quality in national

parks, national wilderness areas, national monuments and national seashores (42 U.S.C. 7470).

The amendments establish Class I, II and III

areas, where emissions of particulate matter and

sulfur dioxide are to be restricted. The restrictions are most severe in Class I areas and are

progressively more lenient in Class II and III

areas.

Mandatory Class I Federal lands include all

national wilderness areas exceeding 500 acres.

Such lands may not be redesignated (42 U.S.C.

7472). Additionally, national wildlife refuges

which exceed 10,000 acres may only be redesignated by States as Class I or Class II areas (42

U.S.C. 7474).

Federal land managers are charged with direct

responsibility to protect the air quality and

related values (including visibility) of Class I

lands and to consider, in consultation with EPA,

whether proposed industrial facilities will have an

adverse impact on these values (42 U.S.C.

7475(c)). Federal land managers are also required

to determine whether existing industrial sources

of air pollution must be retrofitted to reduce

impacts on Class I areas to acceptable levels.
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

119

The Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with

other Federal land managers, is required to

review all mandatory Class I Federal areas and

to identify those where visibility is an important

value of the area (42 U.S.C. 7491). Such identifications are to be revised periodically. 

EPA is requested to report to Congress regarding methods for achieving greater visibility and

to issue regulations towards that objective (42

U.S.C. 7491). Exemptions from such regulations

are contingent upon the concurrence of the

involved Federal land manager.

Data Quality Act

The Data Quality Act (DQA) is an attempt by

Congress to ensure that federal agencies use and

disseminate accurate information. The DQA

requires federal agencies to issue information

quality guidelines ensuring the quality, utility,

objectivity and integrity of information that it

disseminates and provide mechanisms for

affected persons to correct such information. 

Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly

known as the Clean Water Act

(P.L. 92-500, enacted in 1972; amended by P.L. 95-

217 in 1977, P.L. 97-117 in 1981, and P.L. 100-4 in

1987). This is the principal law governing pollution in the nation’s streams, lakes, and estuaries.

It consists of two major parts: regulatory provisions that impose progressively more stringent

requirements on industries and cities to abate

pollution and meet the statutory goal of zero discharge of pollutants; and provisions that authorize federal financial assistance for municipal

wastewater treatment construction. Both parts

are supported by research activities, plus permit

and enforcement provisions. Programs at the federal level are administered by the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA); state and local governments have major responsibilities to implement

those programs.

The objective declared in the 1972 Act is to

restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and

biological integrity of the nation’s water. That

objective was accompanied by statutory goals to

eliminate the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters by 1985 and to attain, wherever possible, waters deemed “fishable and swimmable” by

1983. While those goals have not yet been

achieved, considerable progress has been made,

especially in controlling conventional pollutants

(suspended solids, bacteria, and oxygen-consuming materials) discharged by industries and

municipal sewage treatment plants. Nearly 75%

of assessed waters comply with standards for

these pollutants. Progress has been mixed in controlling discharges of toxic pollutants (heavy metals, inorganic and organic chemicals), which are

more numerous and can harm human health and

the environment even when present in minute

amounts-at the parts-per-billion level. Moreover,

efforts to control pollution from diffuse sources

(rainfall runoff, for example) have only recently

begun. Overall, data reported by EPA and states

indicate that 40% of waters surveyed by states

fail to meet water quality standards. Forty-seven

states now have some form of fish-consumption

advisory in effect (including 100% of Great Lakes

waters and a large portion of the nation’s coastal

waters), due to water pollution problems, and

one-third of shellfishing beds are closed or

restricted, due to toxic pollutant contamination. 

Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986

(Public Law 99-645, approved November 10,

1986; 100 Stat. 3582) The purpose of this Act is:

“To promote the conservation of migratory

waterfowl and to offset or prevent the serious

loss of wetlands by the acquisition of wetlands

and other essential habitat, and for other purposes.” The Act authorized the purchase of wetlands from Land and Water Conservation Fund

monies, removing a prior prohibition on such

acquisitions. It required the Secretary to establish a National Wetlands Priority Conservation

Plan, required the States to include wetlands in

their Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans,

and transferred to the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund amounts equal to the import duties on

arms and ammunition.

It extended the Wetlands Loan Act authorization

through 1988, and forgave the previous advances

under the Act. It also required the Secretary to

report to Congress on wetlands loss, including an

analysis of the role of Federal programs and policies in inducing such losses. In addition, it

directed the Secretary, through the Service, to

continue the National Wetlands Inventory; to

complete by September 30, 1998, mapping of the

contiguous United States; to produce, as soon as

practicable, maps of Alaska and other noncontiguous portions of the United States; and to pro-
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

120

duce, by September 30, 1990, and at ten-year

intervals thereafter, reports to update and

improve in the September 1982 Status and

Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat in the

Conterminous United States, 1950s to 1970s.

Other provisions included: the establishment of

entrance fees at National Wildlife Refuges, with

fee receipts to be allocated 70 percent into the

Migratory Bird Conservation Fund and 30 percent for operations and maintenance at the refuges; an increase in the price of duck stamps

from $7.50 to $15.00, to be phased in through

1991; and the establishment of the Bayou Sauvage National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana.

Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 

This Act established a comprehensive national

fish and wildlife policy and broadened the authority for acquisition and development of refuges.

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 

This Act allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to

enter into agreements with private landowners

for wildlife management purposes.

Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 

(Public Law 95-616, approved November 8, 1978;

16 U.S.C. 7421; 92 Stat. 3110) This Act authorizes

the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce to

establish, conduct, and assist with national training programs for State fish and wildlife law

enforcement personnel. It also authorized funding for research and development of new or

improved methods to support fish and wildlife

law enforcement.

The law provides authority to the Secretaries to

enter into law enforcement cooperative agreements with State or other Federal agencies, and

authorizes the disposal of abandoned or forfeited

items under the fish, wildlife, and plant jurisdictions of these Secretaries. It strengthened the

law enforcement operational capability of the

Service by authorizing the disbursement and use

of funds to facilitate various types of investigative

efforts.

The statute also contains amendments to: Bald

Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668-668d); Central

Valley Project, California, Reauthorization Act of

August 27, 1954 (16 USC 695d-695j); Cooperative

Research and Training Units Act (16 USC 7853a753h); Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 USC

742a-742j); Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16

USC 715 et seq.); Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16

USC 703 et. seq.); National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 USC 668dd668ee); Refuge Recreation Act (16 USC 460k460k-4); the Act of August 5, 1947, (16 USC 666g)

establishing Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge; the Act of April 23, 1928, (16 USC 690e)

establishing the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge; and the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16

USC 3503).

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act 

(Public Law 88-578, approved September 3, 1964;

78 Stat. 897; 16 USC 460l - 460l-11) Since its

inception on January 1, 1965, the LWCF has been

the principal source of funds for acquiring new

recreation lands. It was originally intended to be

a revolving fund, and the initial legislation

required it to repay advanced appropriations in

the 10th year of operation. However, it has never

operated as a revolving fund. The authority has

been amended frequently, most notably to

increase the authorized level of the fund, and to

mandate that offshore oil and gas leasing revenues should make up any shortfall from other

authorized financing sources. However, the fund’s

basic purpose has not been altered. 

Most appropriations in recent years have been to

the four major federal land management agencies-the Forest Service in the Department of

Agriculture, and the National Park Service, Fish

and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land Management in the Department of the Interior. These

agencies have purchased or acquired through

exchange about 4.5 million acres

This Act authorizes the use of receipts from the

sale of surplus Federal land, outer continental

shelf oil and gas sales, and other sources for land

acquisition under several authorities. The Recreation Coordination and Development Act (Public

Law 88-29, approved May 28, 1963, 77 Stat. 49)

declared a Congressional policy that “present

and future generations be assured adequate outdoor recreation resources” and that “all levels of

government and private interests... take prompt

and coordinated action... to conserve, develop,

and utilize such [their] resources for the benefit

and enjoyment of the American people.” The Sec-
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

121

retary of the Interior was directed to inventory,

evaluate and classify outdoor recreation facilities,

and formulate and maintain a comprehensive

nationwide outdoor recreation plan.

Public Law 88-578

Approved September 3, 1964, (78 Stat. 897) created the Land and Water Conservation Fund,

derived from various types of revenue (primarily

Outer Continental Shelf oil monies) and authorizes appropriations from the fund for (1) matching grants to States for outdoor recreation

projects and (2) land acquisition for various Federal agencies.

P.L. 94-422

Approved September 28, 1976, (90 Stat. 1313)

authorized funds for, among other things, the

National Wildlife Refuge System for acquisition

of: (1) habitat of endangered and threatened species of fish, wildlife and plants under section 5(a)

of the Endangered Species Act; (2) areas authorized by section 2 of the Refuge Recreation Act;

(3) areas under section 7(a)(5) of the Fish and

Wildlife Act of 1956, except migratory waterfowl

areas which are authorized by the Migratory

Bird Conservation Act; and (4) any areas authorized by specific Acts of Congress. 

P.L. 95-42

Approved June 10, 1977, (91 Stat. 210) increased

the authorizations for acquisition of certain previously authorized areas.

P.L. 98-369

Approved July 18, 1984, (98 Stat. 1020) provided

that up to $1 million annually in excess motorboat

fuels tax revenues shall be transferred to the

Fund.

P.L. 100-17

Approved April 2, 1987, (101 Stat. 132) extended

the motorboat fuels tax component of the Fund

through October 1993, and extended the authorization to pay funds received to the Land and

Water Conservation Fund, and the Sport Fish

Restoration Account through that date.

Public Law 100-203

Approved December 22, 1987, (101 Stat. 1330)

reauthorized the Fund without change through

the

Lacey Act Amendments 

This Act replaces the Black Bass Act of 1926 and

most of the original Lacey Act. The Lacey Act

Amendments make it unlawful to import, export,

transport, buy or sell fish, wildlife and plants

taken or possessed in violation of federal, state or

tribal law. Interstate or foreign commerce in fish

and wildlife taken or possessed in violation of foreign law also is illegal. The Act requires that

packages containing fish or wildlife be plainly

marked. Enforcement measures include civil and

criminal penalties, cancellation of hunting and

fishing licenses, and forfeiture.

Timber Protection Act 

(Approved September 20, 1922; 16 U.S.C. 594; 42

Stat. 857) This Act authorizes the Secretary of

the Interior to protect timber on lands under the

Department’s jurisdiction from fire, disease and

insects, and to cooperate with other Federal

agencies, States, or owners of timber.

Reciprocal Fire Protection Act 

(Approved May 27, 1955) as amended by the

Wildfire Suppression Assistance Act of 1989 (69

Stat. 66, 67; 42 U.S.C. 1856a)(102 Stat. 1615) This

Act authorizes reciprocal fire protection agreements with any fire organization for mutual aid

with or without reimbursement and allows for

emergency assistance in the vicinity of agency

facilities in extinguishing fires when no agreement exists.

Wilderness Act of 1964 

(PL 88-577, 78 Stat. 890; 16 USC 1121 [note],

1131-1136), as amended. In order to assure that

an increasing population, accompanied by

expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within

the United States and its possessions, leaving no

lands designated for preservation and protection

in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to

be the policy of the Congress to secure for the

American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. or this purpose there is hereby

established a National Wilderness Preservation
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

122

System to be composed of federally owned areas

designated by Congress as “wilderness areas,”

and these shall be administered for the use and

enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use

and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the

gathering and dissemination of information

regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness;

and no Federal lands shall be designated as “wilderness areas” except as provided for in this

chapter or by a subsequent Act.

Public Law 94-577

(Approved October 19, 1976 (90 Stat. 2633) Section 1(f) designated the Crab Orchard Wilderness

and Section 6 addressed the administration and

management of the area.

Endangered Species Act of 1973 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. as amended) This Act

directs Federal agencies to take actions that

would further the purposes of the Act and to

ensure that actions they carry out, authorize or

fund do not jeopardize endangered species or

their critical habitat. The Act also provides

authority for land acquisition. Conservation of

threatened and endangered species has become a

major objective of both land acquisition and Refuge management programs.

The Recreation Act 

(Public Law 87-714, approved September 28,

1962, 76 Stat. 653; as amended by Public Law 89-

669, approved October 14, 1966, 80 Stat. 930; and

Public Law 92-534, approved October 23, 1972, 86

Stat. 1063; 16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4) This Act

authorized the Secretary of the Interior to

administer refuges, hatcheries and other conservation areas for recreational use, when such uses

do not interfere with the area’s primary purposes. The Act requires that any recreational use

on areas of the National Wildlife Refuge System

be “compatible” with the primary purpose(s) for

which the area was acquired or established. The

Act also requires that sufficient funding be available for the development, operation and maintenance of recreational uses that are not directly

related to the area’s primary purpose(s). The Act

provided for public use fees and permits, and

penalties for violation of regulations. It also

authorized the acceptance of donations of funds

and real and personal property to assist in carrying out its purposes.

Public Law 93-205

Approved December 28, 1973 (87 Stat. 902),

authorized acquisition of lands and interests suitable for: 1) fish and wildlife-oriented recreation,

2) protection of natural resources, 3) conservation

of endangered or threatened species, or 4) carrying out two or more of the above. Such lands were

required to be adjacent to or within an existing

conservation area. Acquisition was not permitted

with “duck stamp” receipts for these purposes.

Enforcement provisions were amended by Public

Law 95-616, approved November 8, 1978 (92 Stat.

3110), and were further revised by Public Law

98-473, approved October 12, 1984 (98 Stat. 2028,

2031), which made violations misdemeanors in

accordance with the uniform sentencing provisions of that law (18 U.S.C. 3551-3586).

National Trails System Act 

(Public Law 90-543, approved October 2, 1968; 82

Stat. 919; 16 U.S.C. 1241-1249) This Act and its

subsequent amendments authorized a national

system of trails and defined four categories of

trails.

Public Law 95-625

Approved November 10, 1978, (92 Stat. 3511)

amended the NTSA to create a new category of

National Historic Trails, to closely follow original

routes of national historic significance.

National Recreation Trails may be established by

the Secretaries of Interior or Agriculture on land

wholly or partly within their jurisdiction, with the

consent of the involved State(s), and other land

managing agencies, if any. National Scenic and

National Historic Trails may only be designated

by an Act of Congress. Connecting or Side Trails

provide access to or among the other classes of

trails.

As of 1998, the National Trails System included

20 trails (8 scenic, 12 historic), and of these, segments of 12 crossed units of the National Wildlife

Refuge System.
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

123

Legislation is pending to add National Discovery

Trails as a new category of long-distance trails

and designate the American Discovery Trail as

the first National Discovery Trail. The American

Discovery Trail covers more than 6,000 miles

from Delaware to California and crosses through

the southern portion of Crab Orchard Refuge.

National Hunting and Fishing Day Statutes

National Hunting and Fishing Day Statutes

establishing the fourth Saturday in September of

the year indicated as National Hunting and Fishing Day include:

# 1973 – Public Law 93-23, approved April 20,

1973 (87 Stat. 24)

# 1974 – Public Law 93-424, approved September

27, 1974 (88 Stat. 1166)

# 1975 – Public Law 94-96, approved September

18, 1975 (89 Stat. 478)

In addition, P.L. 99-217, approved April 1, 1986

(100 Stat. 81), and P.L. 100-22, approved April 10,

1987 (101 Stat. 267), established the first week of

June of those years as National Fishing Week.

After 1975, private organizations have worked

directly with the White House to secure Presidential proclamations for the designation. In

1979, former President Carter designated the

third Saturday in October of that year, “and

thereafter,” as National Hunting and Fishing

Day, eliminating the need for annual proclamations. Since then, it has been the usual practice

for the President to issue a statement each year

commemorating the day.

Take Pride in America Program 

(Title XI of Public Law 101-628, signed November 28, 1990; 16 USC 4601 note; 104 Stat. 4502)

This Act established the TPIA within the Department of the Interior. The purposes of the program include: 

# Establishing and maintaining a public

awareness campaign to instill in the public an

appreciation for Federal, State, and local lands,

facilities, and cultural and natural resources.

# Conducting a national awards program to honor

individuals and entities that distinguish

themselves in the appreciation, conservation,

and stewardship of these resources. 

# Administering the “Take Pride in America”

slogan and logo. 

Environmental Education Act of 1990 

(Public Law 101-619, signed November 16, 1990;

20 USC 5501-5510; 104 Stat. 3325) This Act established the Office of Environmental Education

within the Environmental Protection Agency to

develop and administer a Federal environmental

education program.

Responsibilities of the Office include developing

and supporting programs to improve understanding of the natural and developed environment,

and the relationships between humans and their

environment; supporting the dissemination of

educational materials; developing and supporting

training programs and environmental education

seminars; managing a Federal grant program;

and administering an environmental internship

and fellowship program. The Office is required to

develop and support environmental programs in

consultation with other Federal natural resource

management agencies, including the Fish and

Wildlife Service.

The Act requires the Education Office Advisory

Council to submit a report to Congress by

November 16, 1992, regarding obstacles to

improving environmental education programs,

including those relating to national parks and

wildlife refuges. 

Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. 431-433) 

This Act authorizes the scientific investigation of

antiquities on Federal land, subject to the stipulations outlined in permits issued to recognized

educational, scientific, and other institutions for

the purposes of systematically gathering data.

The Act provides that objects taken or collected

without a permit may result in a fine and imprisonment of the convicted person.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as

amended (16 U.S.C. 470-470t) 

This Act establishes as policy that the Federal

Government is to provide leadership in the preservation of the Nation’s prehistoric and historic

resources. Historic preservation is defined in the

Act as the protection, rehabilitation, restoration,

and reconstruction of sites, buildings, structures,

and objects significant in American history, architecture, engineering, and archaeology. Sections
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

124

106 and 110 of the Act define the primary

requirements for Federal agencies to follow in

identifying, evaluating, and protecting significant

cultural resources.

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of

1974 (16 U.S.C. 469-469c) 

This Act directs the preservation of historic and

archaeological data in Federal construction

projects. The Act authorizes Federal agencies to

seek future appropriations, to obligate available

funding, or to reprogram existing appropriations

to provide for the identification and preservation

of data.

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979,

as amended

This Act protects materials of archaeological

interest from unauthorized removal or destruction, and requires Federal managers to develop

plans and schedules to locate archaeological

resources.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),

as amended (42 USC 4321-4347; 40 CFR 1500).

This Act requires Federal agencies to examine

the impacts upon the environment that their

actions might have, to incorporate the best available environmental information, and public participation in the planning and implementation of

any major Federal action significantly affecting

the quality of the human environment. All Federal agencies must integrate NEPA with other

planning 

Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment (1971) 

This Executive Order directs the Service to consult with Federal and State Historic Preservation

Officers when the Service proposes any development activities that would affect archaeological or

historic sites to comply with Section 106 of the

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as

amended.

Executive Order 11644, Use of Off-road Vehicles on

Public Lands

(Signed February 8, 1972) This purpose of this

Executive Order is to establish policies and provide for procedures that will ensure that the use

of off-road vehicles on public lands will be controlled and directed so as to protect the resources

of those lands, promote the safety of all users of

those lands, and to minimize conflicts among the

various uses of those lands.

Executive Order 12962, Recreational Fisheries

This Executive Order directs the Service to conserve, restore, and enhance aquatic ecosystems

to provide for increased recreational fishing

opportunities nationwide. Additionally, the Order

directs the Service to provide access to, and promote awareness of, opportunities for public participation and enjoyment of U.S. recreational

fishery resources.

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management

(signed May 24, 1977) 

This Executive Order states that each Federal

agency shall, in the course of fulfilling their

respective authorities, provide leadership and

take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health

and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by floodplains.

The purpose of this Order is to prevent Federal

agencies from contributing to the “adverse

impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains” and the “direct or indirect

support of floodplain development.”

Before proposing, conducting, supporting or

allowing an action in a floodplain, each agency is

to determine if planned activities will affect the

floodplain and evaluate the potential effects of the

intended actions on its functions. Agencies shall

avoid siting development in a floodplain “to avoid

adverse effects and incompatible development in

the floodplains.”

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands

(Signed May 24, 1977) The purpose of this Executive Order is to avoid to the extent possible the

long and short term adverse impacts associated

with the destruction or modification of wetlands

and to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative.
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

125

Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review

of Federal Programs 

(Signed July 14, 1982) The purpose of this Executive Order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism by relying

on State and local processes for the State and

local government coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development.

Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice in

Minority Populations and Low-income Populations

(Signed February 11, 1994; 59 FR 7629; February

16, 1994; Amends: EO 12250, November 2, 1980;

Amended by: EO 12948, January 30, 1995)

Executive Order 12996, Management and General

Public Use of the National Wildlife Refuge System 

(Signed March 25, 1996; 61 FR 13647; March 28,

1996; See: EO 13022, October 31, 1996) This

Executive Order states that the System provides

important opportunities for compatible wildlifedependent recreational activities involving hunting, fishing, wildlife viewing, and photography.

The Order also directs the Service to recognize

these compatible wildlife-dependent uses as priority general public uses of the System, and uses

through which the American public can develop

an appreciation for fish and wildlife.

Executive Order 13112, Management of Invasive

Species 

(Signed February 3, 1999) The purpose of this

Executive Order is to prevent the introduction of

invasive species and provide for their control and

to minimize the economic, ecological, and human

health impacts that invasive species cause. Each

Federal agency whose actions may affect the status of invasive species is directed, to the extent

practicable and permitted by law, to identify such

actions; and, subject to the availability of appropriations, and within Administration budgetary

limits, use relevant programs and authorities to:

prevent the introduction of invasive species;

detect and respond rapidly to and control populations of such species in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner; monitor invasive

species populations accurately and reliably; provide for restoration of native species and habitat

conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded;

conduct research on invasive species and develop

technologies to prevent introduction and provide

for environmentally sound control of invasive

species; and promote public education on invasive

species and the means to address them; and not

authorize, fund, or carry out actions that it

believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species.

Executive Order 13186, Responsibilities of Federal

Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds

(Signed January 10, 2001) This Executive Order

directed each Federal agency taking actions that

have, or are likely to have, a measurable negative

effect on migratory bird populations to develop and

implement, within 2 years, a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) with the Fish and Wildlife

Service that promotes the conservation of migratory bird populations. A subsequent Director’s

Order (No. 172), developed in accordance with

Executive Order 13186, provides guidance for Service programs relative to the management and conservation of migratory birds. Its purpose is to

minimize the potential adverse effects of migratory

bird take, with the goal of striving to eliminate take,

while implementing our mission. The Director’s

Order includes guidelines for Migratory Birds and

State Programs, National Wildlife Refuge System,

Endangered Species, Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, Law Enforcement, International Affairs, and

Business Management and Operations.

Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974 

(Public Law 93-629, enacted January 3, 1975; 7

U.S.C. 2801 et. seq.; 88 Stat. 2148) This Act

requires the use of integrated management systems to control or contain undesirable plant species, and an interdisciplinary approach with the

cooperation of other Federal and State agencies.

The Secretary of Agriculture was given the

authority to designate plants as noxious weeds by

regulation, and the movement of all such weeds in

interstate or foreign commerce was prohibited

except under permit. The Secretary was also

given authority to inspect, seize and destroy

products, and to quarantine areas, if necessary to

prevent the spread of such weeds. He was also

authorized to cooperate with other Federal, State

and local agencies, farmers associations and private individuals in measures to control, eradicate,

or prevent or retard the spread of such weeds.
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

126

Section 1453 of P.L. 101-624, the 1990 Farm Bill

Enacted November 28, 1990 (104 Stat 3611),

amended the Act by requiring each Federal landmanaging agency to:

# Designate an office or person adequately

trained in managing undesirable plant species

to develop and coordinate a program to control

such plants on the agency’s land;

# Establish and adequately fund this plant

management program through the agency’s

budget process;

# Complete and implement cooperative

agreements (requirements for which are

provided) with the States regarding undesirable

plants on agency land; and

# Establish integrated management systems (as

defined in the section) to control or contain

undesirable plants targeted under the

cooperative agreements.

The law also requires that any environmental

assessments or impact statements that may be

required to implement plant control agreements

must be completed within 1 year of the time the

need for the document is established.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) 

(26 U.S.C. 4611-4682; P.L. 96-510, December 11,

1980; 94 Stat. 2797). Major amendments were

enacted in 1983 (42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; P.L. 98-802,

August 23, 1983; 97 Stat. 485) and in 1986 (P.L. 99-

499; October 17, 1986; 100 Stat. 1613). (The two

sets of amendments reconstituted the 26 U.S.C.

4611-82 provisions into a new trust fund at 26

U.S.C. 9507 and operational provisions into the

Title 42 sections.) This Act created the Superfund

program to clean up hazardous waste sites that

pose the greatest risk to public health in the

United States and established the National Priorities List (NPL) to track them.

The 1980 statute authorized, through 1985, the

collection of taxes on crude oil and petroleum

products, certain chemicals, and hazardous

wastes. It also established liability to the U.S.

Government for damage to natural resources

over which the U.S. has sovereign rights [42

U.S.C. 9607(f)(1)] and requires the President to

designate Federal officials to act as trustees for

natural resources. Use of Superfund monies to

conduct natural resource damage assessments

was provided in section 11(c)(1) [42 U.S.C. 9611

(c)(1)].

Subchapter I of the 1983 amendments established a comprehensive system to react to

releases of hazardous substances and to determine liability and compensation for those affected

(42 U.S.C. 9601-9626). The President is authorized to notify Federal and State natural resource

trustees of potential damages to natural

resources and to coordinate related assessments

[42 U.S.C. 9604 (b)(2)]. Revisions to the national

contingency plan for removal of oil and hazardous

substances and to prioritize such releases were

required by the 1983 amendments [42 U.S.C.

9605(a)].

Amendments enacted in 1986 (known as the

Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act,

or SARA): 

# listed conditions under which a facility or vessel

owner may be authorized by the President to

conduct remedial or removal actions for the

release of hazardous substances (42 U.S.C.

9604); 

# added effects on natural resources as a criterion

for determining facilities to be placed on the

National Priorities List, and required the

National Contingency Plan to be revised to

incorporate a Hazard Ranking System (42

U.S.C. 9605);

# mandated the designation of Federal officials to

act as trustees for natural resources and to

assess damages and injury to, as well as

destruction of, or loss of, natural resources (42

U.S.C. 9607);

# stipulated that Superfund monies may only be

used for natural resource damage claims if all

administrative and judicial remedies to recover

costs from liable parties have been exhausted

(42 U.S.C. 9611);

# provided that claims cannot be made to recover

for natural resource damages unless the claim is

presented within three years after discovering

the loss (42 U.S.C. 9612);

# added a new section to clarify that Federal

facilities are subject to the same cleanup

requirements and liability standards as nongovernmental entities (42 U.S.C. 9620);
Appendix C: Laws and Orders

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

127

# specified that no Federal permits are required

for remedial action conducted entirely on-site

when such actions comply with the cleanup

standards (42 U.S.C. 9604); 

# required that Federal trustees be notified of any

settlement negotiations regarding damages to

natural resources, and established

circumstances under which Federal trustees

may agree not to sue for natural resource

damages (42 U.S.C. 9607); and

# eliminated the authorization for use of

Superfund monies to conduct damage

assessments - section 517 of SARA, codified at

26 U.S.C. 9507(c), and reinforced by section 531

of SARA.

The Department of the Interior is a trustee for

natural resources, and the Service is responsible

for the protection and restoration of trust

resources injured by uncontrolled releases of

hazardous materials. The Service is responsible

for conducting assessments to establish injury

and the dollar equivalent of that injury for collection of damages from parties responsible for

releasing hazardous materials.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 

This Act requires programmatic accessibility in

addition to physical accessibility for all facilities

and programs funded by the Federal government

to ensure that anybody can participate in any

program.

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 

This Act requires federally owned, leased, or

funded buildings and facilities to be accessible to

persons with disabilities.

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1992

This Act prohibits discrimination in public accommodations and services.

Bureau and agency legal and policy guidance is

found in:

1. Departmental Manual: The Departmental 

Manual can be accessed on-line at http://

elips.doi.gov/tableofcontents1.cfm

2. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual: The Fish 

and Wildlife Service Manual has regulatory 

force and effect within the Service. It 

implements the Service’s authorities and the 

Director’s policies, and steps down the 

Service’s compliance with other 

requirements, such as statutes, Executive 

Orders, Departmental directives, and 

regulations of other agencies. The Fish and 

Wildlife Service Manual can be accessed online at http://policy.fws.gov/manual.html

3. Refuge Manual: Guidance found in the earlier 

Refuge Manual may be used when the 

specific chapter of the Fish and Wildlife 

Service Manual has not yet been published.

Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

129

Appendix D: Species Lists

Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

131

Appendix D: Species Lists, Crab Orchard NWR

This bird list contains 220 species which have

been recorded on the refuge. Another 40 species,

very rare or accidental and out of their normal

range, are listed under “Accidental” birds. This list

is based on: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994.

Birds of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge,

Illinois.

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W

# – irruptive species seen only during invasion years (2-10 year 

intervals)

* – nests on refuge

Sp – March-May

S – June-August

F – September-November

W – December-February

a – abundant: common species that is very numerous

c – common: certain to be seen in suitable habitat

u – uncommon: present but not certain to be seen

o – occasional: seen only a few times during a season

r – rare: seen only once or twice a year; some years not at all.

LOONS u - o u

Common Loon

GREBES Sp S F W

 Pied-billed Grebe u - c c

 Horned Grebe c - c o

 Eared Grebe o - - o

CORMORANTS Sp S F W

 Double-crested Cormorant c o a a

BITTERNS, HERONS Sp S F W

 American Bittern o - r -

 Great Blue Heron c c c c

 Great Egret o u u -

 Little Blue Heron u u u -

 Cattle Egret o u o -

 Green Heron* u c c -

 Black-crowned Night-Heron* r o o -

 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron r - o -
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

132

SWANS, GEESE, DUCKS Sp S F W

 Tundra Swan (Whistling Swan) o r u u

 Mute Swan r - r r

 Greater White-fronted Goose - - r o

 Snow Goose o - u u

 Canada Goose* c u a a

 Wood Duck c c c c

 Green-winged Teal o - o r

 American Black Duck c - a a

 Mallard* c c a a

 Northern Pintail o - u c

 Blue-winged Teal c u a o

 Northern Shoveler a o a c

 Gadwall a - a a

 American Wigeon c - c u

 Canvasback u - o c

 Redhead a - u o

 Ring-necked Duck a - a a

 Greater Scaup r - r -

 Lesser Scaup a - a c

 Common Goldeneye c - o a

 Bufflehead c - c c

 Hooded Merganser c - a a

 Common Merganser a - c a

 Red-breasted Merganser a - c o

 Ruddy Duck a - u c

VULTURES, HAWKS, FALCONS Sp S F W

 Turkey Vulture* c c c r

 Osprey o r o r

 Mississippi Kite rrr-

 Bald Eagle* u u c c

 Northern Harrier (Marsh Hawk) o r o o

 Sharp-shinned Hawk o - u u

 Cooper's Hawk* u u u o

 Northern Goshawk r - r r

 Red-shouldered Hawk* c u u c

 Broad-winged Hawk* o u u o

 Red-tailed Hawk* c c c c

 Rough-legged Hawk o r r o

 Golden Eagle o - o o

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

133

 American Kestrel* c c c c

 Merlin r - r r

GALLINACEOUS BIRDS Sp S F W

 Wild Turkey* c c c c

 Northern Bobwhite* c c c c

RAILS Sp S F W

 Virginia Rail r r r -

 Sora o - o -

 American Coot u u c c

SHOREBIRDS Sp S F W

 American Golden-Plover c - u -

 Semipalmated Plover c - o -

 Killdeer* c c c c

 American Avocet - - o -

 Greater Yellowlegs c - u -

 Lesser Yellowlegs c u c -

 Solitary Sandpiper c o c -

 Willet r o - -

 Spotted Sandpiper* u u - -

 Semipalmated Sandpiper u - u -

 Least Sandpiper c u u -

 White-rumped Sandpiper o - r -

 Pectoral Sandpiper a c c -

 Stilt Sandpiper r - u -

 Short-billed Dowitcher o - c -

 Long-billed Dowitcher o - o -

 Common Snipe c - c o

 American Woodcock* c c c o

 Wilson's Phalarope o r o -

GULLS, TERNS Sp S F W

 Bonaparte's Gull c - u c

 Ring-billed Gull a o c a

 Herring Gull c - u c

 Caspian Tern r - r -

 Forster's Tern o - r -

 Black Tern o r u -

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

134

DOVES Sp S F W

 Rock Dove u u u u

 Mourning Dove c c c c

CUCKOOS Sp S F W

 Black-billed Cuckoo o o o -

 Yellow-billed Cuckoo u c c -

OWLS Sp S F W

 Barn Owl o o o o

 Eastern Screech-Owl* u u u u

 Great Horned Owl* c c c c

 Barred Owl* c c c c

 Short-eared Owl r - o r

GOATSUCKERS Sp S F W

 Common Nighthawk* o u o -

 Chuck-will's-widow* o o - -

 Whip-poor-will u u o -

SWIFTS, HUMMINGBIRDS Sp S F W

 Chimney Swift* c c c -

 Ruby-throated Hummingbird* u c o -

KINGFISHERS Sp S F W

 Belted Kingfisher* u u u u

WOODPECKERS Sp S F W

 Red-headed Woodpecker* u u u u

 Red-bellied Woodpecker* c c c c

 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker o - o r

 Downy Woodpecker* c c c c

 Hairy Woodpecker* o o o o

 Northern Flicker (Common 

Flicker)*

cccc

 Pileated Woodpecker* o o o o

FLYCATCHERS Sp S F W

 Olive-sided Flycatcher r - r -

 Eastern Wood-Pewee* c c u u

 Yellow-bellied Flycatcher r - r -

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

135

 Acadian Flycatcher* o u u -

 Alder Flycatcher* r - r -

 Willow Flycatcher r - r -

 Least Flycatcher o - o -

 Eastern Phoebe* c c c o

 Great Crested Flycatcher* c c r -

 Eastern Kingbird* c c o -

LARKS Sp S F W

 Horned Lark* o o o o

SWALLOWS Sp S F W

 Purple Martin* c c o -

 Tree Swallow* c c c -

 Northern Rough-winged Swallow* u c u -

 Bank Swallow o - - -

 Cliff Swallow* c c o -

 Barn Swallow* c c u -

JAYS, CROWS Sp S F W

 Blue Jay* a a a a

 American Crow* c c c -

 Fish Crow o o o o

CHICKADEES Sp S F W

 Carolina Chickadee* c c c c

 Tufted Titmouse* c c c c

NUTHATCHES Sp S F W

 Red-breasted Nuthatch o - o u

 White-breasted Nuthatch u o u u

CREEPERS Sp S F W

 Brown Creeper o - o o

WRENS Sp S F W

 Carolina Wren* c c c u

 House Wren* c c c -

 Winter Wren o o o -

 Sedge Wren o o o -

 Marsh Wren r - r -

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

136

KINGLETS Sp S F W

 Golden-crowned Kinglet u - u u

 Ruby-crowned Kinglet u - u u

 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher* c c o -

THRUSHES Sp S F W

 Eastern Bluebird* c c c c

 Veery o - r -

 Gray-cheeked Thrush u - u -

 Swainson's Thrush o - o -

 Hermit Thrush o - u r

 Wood Thrush* o u r -

 American Robin* c c c u

THRASHERS Sp S F W

 Gray Catbird* c c c -

 Northern Mockingbird* c c c c

 Brown Thrasher* c c c o

WAXWINGS Sp S F W

 Cedar Waxwing* c u u c

SHRIKES Sp S F W

 Loggerhead Shrike u u u u

STARLINGS Sp S F W

 European Starling* a a a a

VIREOS Sp S F W

 White-eyed Vireo* c c u -

 Bell's Vireo r r - -

 Yellow-throated Vireo* o u o -

 Warbling Vireo* c c o -

 Red-eyed Vireo* u u o -

WOOD WARBLERS Sp S F W

 Blue-winged Warbler o r r -

 Golden-winged Warbler o r - r

 Tennessee Warbler u - o -

 Nashville Warbler r - r -

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

137

 Northern Parula* c c u -

 Yellow Warbler* o o - -

 Chestnut-sided Warbler o - o -

 Magnolia Warbler o - o -

 Cape May Warbler r - r -

 Yellow-rumped Warbler u - u o

 Black-throated Green Warbler o - o -

 Blackburnian Warbler o r r -

 Pine Warbler* o u o -

 Prairie Warbler* u u o -

 Palm Warbler o - o -

 Bay-breasted Warbler u - o -

 Blackpoll Warbler u - r -

 Cerulean Warbler* o r - -

 Black-and-white Warbler o r o -

 American Redstart o r o -

 Prothonotary Warbler* u u r -

 Worm-eating Warbler r - r -

 Ovenbird o r r -

 Northern Waterthrush o - o -

 Louisiana Waterthrush u u r -

 Kentucky Warbler* u u r -

 Common Yellowthroat* c c c r

 Hooded Warbler o - r -

 Wilson's Warbler o - o -

 Canada Warbler o - r -

 Yellow-breasted Chat* u u o -

TANAGERS Sp S F W

 Summer Tanager* u u o -

 Scarlet Tanager* u u o -

SPARROWS Sp S F W

 Northern Cardinal* a a a a

 Rose-breasted Grosbeak o - o -

 Blue Grosbeak* o o o -

 Indigo Bunting* a a a -

 Dickcissel* u u - -

 Rufous-sided Towhee* c c c u

 American Tree Sparrow* c - o c

 Chipping Sparrow* u u o -

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

138

Accidental Species:

Least Bittern

Vermillion Flycatcher

Glossy Ibis

Scissor-tailed Flycatcher

Sandhill Crane

Bewick's Wren

Whooper Swan

Rock Wren

Trumpeter Swan

Water Pipit

Oldsquaw

Solitary Vireo

White-winged Scoter

Philadelphia Vireo

Black Vulture

Orange-crowned Warbler

Common Moorhen

Black-throated Blue Warbler

 Field Sparrow* u u o -

 Savannah Sparrow o - u o

 Grasshopper Sparrow* o o r -

 Le Conte's Sparrow o - o u

 Fox Sparrow o - r u

 Song Sparrow* u o o c

 Swamp Sparrow u - u u

 White-throated Sparrow c - c c

 White-crowned Sparrow c - c c

 Dark-eyed Junco a - c a

MEADOWLARKS, BLACKBIRDS, ORIOLESSp S F W

 Red-winged Blackbird* c c a c

 Eastern Meadowlark* c c c c

 Common Grackle* c c a c

 Brown-headed Cowbird* c c c c

 Orchard Oriole* u u o -

 Baltimore Oriole* u u o -

FINCHES Sp S F W

 House Finch c c c c

 Purple Finch c - u c

 Pine Siskin# o - o o

 American Goldfinch* c c c c

 Evening Grosbeak# o - - o

OLD WORLD SPARROWS Sp S F W

 House Sparrow* c c c c 

Bird Species Found on Crab Orchard NWR

Species Sp S F W
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

139

Black-bellied Plover

Mourning Warbler

Ruddy Turnston

Connecticut Warbler

Dunlin

Swainson's Warbler

Sanderling

Henslow's Sparrow

Baird's Sandpiper

Vesper Sparrow

Upland Sandpiper

Lark Sparrow

Franklin's Gull

Lincoln's Sparrow

Laughing GullLapland Longspur

Black-headed Gull

Pine Grosbeak

Sabine's Gull

Red Crossbill

Least Tern

Rusty Blackbird

 
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

140

Potential Reptile and Amphibian Check List for Crab Orchard 

National Wildlife Refuge

Common Name Scientific Name Class Residence Status on 

Refuge

Habitat

Salamanders

spotted salamander Ambystoma maculatum A B, W U W, BF, UF

 marbled salamander Ambystoma opacum A B, W U W, BF

smallmouth salamander Ambystoma texanum A B, W U W, BF

tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum A B, W U W, UF, BF

eastern newt Notophthalmus viridescens A B, W U W, BF

northern slimy salamander Plethodon glutinosus A B, W C UF, BF, RB

lesser siren Siren intermedia A B, W U W, S

Toads and Frogs

cricket frog Acris crepitans A B, W A W, RB, R, UF, S, 

BF 

American toad Bufo americanus A B, W C W, RB, UF, PF, 

BF

Fowler=s toad Bufo fowleri A B, W C W, RB, UF, PF, 

BF

green treefrog Hyla cinerea A B, W U W, R, BF 

gray treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis / versicolor A B, W C W, UF, BF, PF

spring peeper Pseudacris crucifer A B, W C W, UF, BF

upland chorus frog Pseudacris feriarum A B, W C W, RB, UF, BF

crawfish frog Rana areolata A B, W R W

bullfrog Rana catesbeiana A B, W A W, R, BF, S

green frog Rana clamitans A B, W C W, R, BF, S

southern leopard frog Rana sphenocephala A B, W A W, R, BF, S

wood frog Rana sylvatica A B, W R W, BF

eastern spadefoot Scaphiopus holbrookii A B, W R W, BF

Turtles 

snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina R B, W C W, R, S

painted turtle Chrysemys picta R B, W C W, S

eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina R B, W A RB, UF, PF, BF

red-eared slider Trachemys scripta R B, W C W, R, S

eastern mud turtle Kinosternon subrubrum R B, W U W, BF

common musk turtle Sternotherus odoratus R B, W C W, BF

spiny softshell turtle Apalone spinifera R B, W U W, R, S

Lizards

fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus R B, W U UF, RB, BF

ground skink Scincella lateralis R B, W C UF, RB, BF

five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus R B, W C UF, RB, BF 

six-lined racerunner Cnemidophorus sexlineatus R B, W R RB

Snakes

worm snake Carphophis amoenus R B, W U RB, UF, BF

racer Coluber constrictor R B, W C RB, UF, PF, BF
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

141

ringneck snake Diadophis punctatus R B, W U RB, UF, BF 

rat snake Elaphe obsoleta R B, W C RB, UF, PF, BF

mud snake Farancia abacura R B, W R W

eastern hognose snake Heterodon platirhinos R B, W U RB, UF, PF, BF

prairie kingsnake Lampropeltis calligaster R B, W C RB

common kingsnake Lampropeltis getula R B, W U RB, UF, BF 

plainbelly water snake Nerodia erythrogaster R B, W C W, R, S 

diamondback water snake Nerodia rhombifer R B, W C W, R, S 

midland water snake Nerodia sipedon R B, W C W, R, S

rough green snake Opheodrys aestivus R B, W U RB, UF, BF, PF

brown snake Storeria dekayi R B, W U RB, UF, BF

redbelly snake Storeria occipitomaculata R B, W R RB, UF, BF

common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis R B, W C W, S, RB, UF, 

BF

smooth earth snake Virginia valeriae R B, W R RB, UF, BF

copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix R B, W U RB, UF, BF

Total Amphibians = 20 Total Reptiles = 28

Potential Reptile and Amphibian Check List for Crab Orchard 

National Wildlife Refuge

Common Name Scientific Name Class Residence Status on 

Refuge

Habitat
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

142

Mammal Checklist, CrabOrchard NWR

Common Name Scientific Name Status on Refuge

Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana C

Southeastern shrew Sorex longirostris U

Southern short-tailed shrew Blarina carolinensis U

Least Shrew Cryptotis parva U

Eastern mole Scalopus aquaticus U

Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus U

Northern myotis Myotis septentrionalis U

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis unknown

Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans U

Eastern pipistrelle Pipistrellus subflavus U

Big brown bat eptesicus fuscus U

Red bat Lasiurus borealis U

Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus U

Evening bat Nycticeius humeralis unknown

Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus U

Swamp rabbit Sylvilagus aquaticus U

Eastern chipmunk Tamias striatus U

Woodchuck Marmota monax U

Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis A

Fox squirrel Sciurus niger A

Southern flying squirrel Glaucomys volans U

Beaver Castor canadensis C

Marsh rice rat oryzomys palustris unknown

Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus U

White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus U

Cotton mouse peromyscus gossypinus U

Golden mouse Peromyscus nuttalli R

Prairie vole microtus ochrogaster U

Woodland (pine) vole Microtus pinetorum U

Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus U

Norway rat Rattus norvegicus U

House mouse Mus musculus U

Meadow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius U

Coyote Canis latrans U

Red fox Vulpes fulva U

Gray fox urocyon cinereoargenteus R

Raccoon Procyon lotor C

Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata U

Mink Mustela vison U

Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis C

River otter Lutra canadensis R

Bobcat Felis rufus U

White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus C
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

143

Class Code Type Code Status Code Habitat Code

A= Agnatha

C= Chondricthyes

O= Osteichthyes

A= anadromous

C= catadromous

F= freshwater

S= saltwater

A= Abundant, a common species that is very common

C= Common, certain to be seen or encountered in suitable habitat

U= Uncommon, present but not always seen

R= Rare, seen only occasionally

S= Stocked populations

L= Lake

R= River

P= Pone

SL=Slough

S=Stream

Names of the fish herein are after: Mayden, R.L. 1992. Systematics, Historical Ecology, & North American 

Freshwater Fishes. Stanford University Press. Stanford, California. Fish distribution data were collected 

from the following sources:Runyon, K.R. 1997. Determination of the effects of discharge from Little Grassy 

Fish Hatchery on Little Grassy Creek. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 82p.U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 1999. Survey of the fish of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. An intensive survey of the Big Muddy River Basin.Additional presence, absence 

and distributional data was obtained from the ichthyology museum at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. 

Fish Species of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

Common Name Scientific Name Class Type Status on Refuge Habitat Exotic or 

Native

Bigmouth buffalo Ictiobus cyprinellus OFU L N

Black bullhead Ameiurus melas O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Black buffalo Ictiobus niger OFU R N

Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus OFR S N

Blackspotted topminnow Fundulus olivaceus O F C S,L,P,R N

Blackstripe topminnow Fundulus notatus O F C S,L,P,R N

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus O F A L,S,SL,P,R N

Bluntnose darter Etheostoma chlorosomum O F R S,R N

Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus O F A L,S,R N

Bowfin Amia calva O F C L,SL,P,R N

Brown trout Salmo trutta O F U,S L E

Brook silverside Labidesthes sicculus O F C L,S,R N

Bullhead minnow Pimephales vigilax O F U S,SL N

Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum O F U S,R N

Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus O F C S,L,P,R N

Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus O F C S,SL N

Common carp Cyprinus carpio O F A L,S,SL,P,R E

Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus O F C S,R N

Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas O F U S,SL N

Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris O F U,S L E

Flier Centrarchus macropterus O F U S,SL N

Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens OFU R N

Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum O F A L,S,R N

Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Grass pickeral Esox americanus O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Hybrid stripedbass O F U,S L E

Johnny darter Etheostoma nigrum O F U S,R N

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

Logperch Percina caprodes O F U L,S N

Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis O F C L,S,P,R N
Appendix D: Species Lists

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

144

Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis O F A L,S,SL,P,R N

Orangespotted sunfish Lepomis humilis O F U L,S,SL,P,R N

Orangethroat darter Etheostoma spectabile O F U S,R N

Paddlefish Polyodon spathula AFR R N

Pirate perch Aphredoderus sayanus O F U S,SL N

Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss O F U,S L E

Red shiner Cyprinella lutrensis O F C S,R N

Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus O F C L,S,P,R N

Redfin shiner Lythrurus umbratilis O F U S,R N

Ribbon Shiner Lythrurus fumeus O F R S,R N

River darter Percina shumardi OFR R N

Shortnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus OFR R N

Slough darter Etheostoma gracile O F U S,SL N

Small mouth bass Micropterus dolomieu O F R,S L E

Small mouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus OFU R N

Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus OFR S N

Spotted sucker Minytrema melanops O F C L,S,R N

Steelcolor shiner Cyprinella whipplei O F U L,S,R N

Striped bass Morone saxatilis O F C,S L,R E

Tadpole madtom Noturus gyrinus O F U S,R N

Threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense O F C,S L E

Walleye Stizostedion vitreum O F U,S L E

Walleye x sauger hybrid O F U,S L E

Warmouth Chaenobryttus gulosus O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

White bass Morone chrysops O F C L,S,R N

White crappie Pomoxis annularis O F C L,S,SL,P,R N

White sucker Catostomus commersoni O F U L,S,R N

Yellow bass Morone mississippiensis O F C L,R N

Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis O F U L,S,SL,P,R N

Yellow perch Perca flavescens OFC L N

TOTALSPECIESCOUNT=61

Fish Species of Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

Common Name Scientific Name Class Type Status on Refuge Habitat Exotic or 

Native
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

145

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR 

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence

Lycopodiales Lycopodiaceae

C Clubmoss ground-cedar Lycopodium complanatum 

var. flabelliforme

U 

Isoetales Isoetaceae

C Quillwort black quillwort Isoetes melanopoda U 

Equisetales Equisetaceae

C Horsetail common horsetail [field horsetail] Equisetum arvense LC 

Equisetales Equisetaceae

C Horsetail scouring rush Equisetum hyemale affine LA 

Ophioglossales Ophioglossaceae

C Adder=stongue bronze fern [cut-leaved grape fern] Botrychium dissectum dis- sectum U 

Ophioglossales Ophioglossaceae

C Adder=stongue bronze fern [grape fern] Botrychium dissectum obliq- uum LC 

Ophioglossales Ophioglossaceae

C Adder=stongue rattlesnake fern Botrychium virginianum C 

Ophioglossales Ophioglossaceae

C Adder=stongue adder=s-tongue fern Ophioglossum vulgatum pycnostichumm O 

Ficales Osmundaceae

C Royal Fern interrupted fern Osmunda claytoniana R 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern resurrection fern Polypodium polypodioides U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern polypody Polypodium virginianum LC 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern maidenhair fern Adiantum pedatum LC 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern pinnatifid [lobed] spleenwort Asplenium pinnatifidum R 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern ebony spleenwort Asplenium platyneuron C 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern walking fern Asplenium rhizophyllum LC 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern maidenhair spleenwort Asplenium trichomanes ssp. 

trichomanes

U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern lady fern Athyrium angustum U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern southern lady fern Athyrium asplenioides U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern glade fern [narrow-leaved

spleenwort]

Athyrium pycnocarpon U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern silvery spleenwort Athyrium thelypterioides U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern fragile fern Cystopteris protrusa LA 
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

146

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern Tennessee fragile fern Cystopteris X tennesseensis R 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern Goldie=s fern Dryopteris goldiana U 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern marginal shield fern [leather

fern]

Dryopteris marginalis LC 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern sensitive fern Onoclea sensibilis O 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern Christmas fern Polystichum acrostichoides LC 

Ficales Polypodiaceae

C Fern blunt-lobed woodsia [common

woodsia]

Woodsia obtusa O-C 

Ginkgoales Ginkgoaceae

C Ginkgo ginkgo [maidenhair tree] Ginkgo biloba tree R 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine shortleaf pine Pinus echinata tree A 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine loblolly pine Pinus taeda tree C 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine Virginia pine [scrub, Jersey,

poverty pine]

Pinus virginiana tree C 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine Scotch pine Pinus sylvestris tree R 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa tree R 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine eastern white pine Pinus strobus tree R 

Coniferales Pinaceae

C Pine Norway spruce Picea abies tree R 

Coniferales Taxodiaceae

C Baldcypress baldcypress Taxodium distichum tree O 

Coniferales Cupressaceae

C Cypress eastern redcedar Juniperus virginiana tree LC 

Typhales Typhaceae

C Cat-tail narrow-leaved cat-tail Typha angustifolia 

Typhales Typhaceae

C Cat-tail common cat-tail Typha latifolia 

Najadales Potamogetonaceae

C Pondweed waterthread pondweed Potamogeton diversifolius O 

Najadales Potamogetonaceae

C Pondweed leafy pondweed Potamogeton foliosus U 

Najadales Potamogetonaceae

C Pondweed American pondweed Potamogeton nodosus LC 

Alismatales Alismaceae

C Water Plantain arrowhead [arrowleaf] Sagittaria calycina R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

147

Alismatales Alismaceae

C Water Plantain water plantain [small-flowered water plantain] Alisma plantago-aquatica parviflorum R(1) C 

Hydrocharitales Hydrocharitaceae

C Frog=sbit anacharis [Canadian water- weed] Elodea canadensis U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass giant cane Arundinaria gigantea shrub U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass goose grass [yard grass] Eleusine indica LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass three-flowered melic grass Melica nitens U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass orchard grass Dactylis glomerata C 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bluegrass Poa angustifolia R 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass annual bluegrass [low speargrass] Poa annua O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Canadian bluegrass Poa compressa O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Kentucky bluegrass Poa pratensis LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass woodland bluegrass Poa sylvestris U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass chess [field brome] Bromus arvensis LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass hairy brome [hairy chess] Bromus commutatus LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass awnless brome [Hungarian,

smooth brome]

Bromus inermis O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Japanese brome [Japanese

chess]

Bromus japonicus LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Canada brome [woodland

brome]

Bromus pubescens O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bald brome [chess] Bromus racemosus LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass cheat grass brome [downy

brome]

Bromus tectorum LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass fowl manna grass Glyceria striata LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass purple-top [false red-top, tall

red-top]

Tridens flavus A 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass lace grass Eragrostis capillaris O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

148

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass stink grass [stinking love

grass]

Eragrostis cilianensis O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass sandbar love grass Eragrostis frankii U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Carolina love grass [small love

grass]

Eragrostis pectinacea LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass purple love grass [sand love

grass]

Eragrostis spectabilis O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass nodding fescue Festuca obtusa O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass English bluegrass [meadow

fescue]

Festuca pratensis O-LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass curly grass [poverty oat

grass]

Danthonia spicata LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass shining wedge grass Sphenopholis nitida R 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass prairie wedge grass [prairie

wedgescale]

Sphenopholis obtusata O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bearded wheat [wheat] Triticum aestivum R 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass little barley [small wild barley] Hordeum pusillum LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bottlebrush grass Elymus histrix 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass hairy wild rye [silky wild rye,

slender wild rye]

Elymus villosus 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass lyme grass [Virginia wild rye] Elymus virginicus virginicus

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass lyme grass [Virginia wild rye] Elymus virginicus glabriflorus

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass giant foxtail [nodding foxtail] Setaria faberii LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass pigeon grass [yellow foxtail] Setaria glauca O-LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass common foxtail [green foxtail] Setaria viridis O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass barnyard grass Echinochloa muricata LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

149

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bead grass [hairy lens grass] Paspalum ciliatifolium LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bead grass Paspalum dissectum R 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass smooth lens grass Paspalum laeve LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass bead grass [hairy seed

paspalum]

Paspalum pubiflorum O-LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass panic grass Panicum anceps LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass fall panicum [knee grass] Panicum dichotomiflorum LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass panic grass Panicum gattingeri LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Munro grass Panicum rigidulum LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass smooth crab grass Digitaria ischaemum LA 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass hairy crab grass [common

crab grass]

Digitaria sanguinalis LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass stoutwood reed Cinna arundinacea O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass red top Agrostis alba LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass tickle-grass [hair grass, winter bent grass] Agrostis hyemalis LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass autumn bent grass [upland

bent grass]

Agrostis perennans C 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass muhly Muhlenbergia bushii R 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass common satin grass [nimble

will, wirestem muhly]

Muhlenbergia frondosa LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass nimble will Muhlenbergia schreberi LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass muhly [rock satin grass] Muhlenbergia sobolifera O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass three-awn Aristida longispica O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass plains three-awn [prairie

three-awn, wire grass]

Aristida oligantha LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass timothy Phleum pratense O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

150

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass dropseed [rough dropseed,

tall dropseed]

Sporobolus asper U 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass northern rush grass [poverty

dropseed]

Sporobolus vaginiflorus LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass long-awned wood grass Brachyelytrum erectum O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass rice cutgrass Leersia oryzoides LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass white grass Leersia virginica O 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass silver plume grass Erianthus alopecuroides LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Indian grass [yellow Indian

grass]

Sorghastrum nutans LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Johnsongrass [Egyptian millet] Sorghum halepense LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass Elliott=s broom-sedge Andropogon elliotii LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass big bluestem [turkeyfoot] Andropogon gerardii LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass broom-sedge Andropogon virginicus C 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass little bluestem Schizachyrium scoparium 

[Andropogon scoparius]

LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass gama grass Tripsacum dactyloides LC 

Cyperales Poaceae

C Grass corn [maize] Zea mays LA

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge bearded flat sedge Cyperus aristatus O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge chufa [ground almond, nut

sedge, yellow nutgrass]

Cyperus esculentus LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge slender flatsedge Cyperus ferruginescens O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge fern flatsedge Cyperus filiculmis R 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge hedgehog club rush Cyperus ovularis O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge straw colored flatsedge Cyperus strigosus LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge needle spike rush Eleocharis acicularis LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge spike rush Eleocharis elliptica elliptica U 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

151

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Eleocharis obtusa LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge hair sedge [threadleaf beakseed] Bulbostylis capillaris

U

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge dark green rush [green bulrush] Scirpus atrovirens LC

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge wool grass Scirpus cyperinus LC

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge red bulrush Scirpus pendulus

O

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge great bulrush Scirpus acutus R 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge nut-rush Scleria pauciflora R 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex albursina O-C 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex artitecta C 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge woodland sedge Carex blanda O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex bushii C 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Carex cephalophora O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Carex convoluta O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge fringed sedge Carex crinita O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex cristatella U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex digitalis U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Emory sedge Carex emoryi U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex festucacea O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex frankii O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex glaucodea C 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex hirsutella LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge bottlebrush sedge Carex hystricina LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge grass sedge Carex jamesii O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex lurida LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Mead sedge Carex meadii U 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

152

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex muhlenbergii C 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex normalis O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex oligocarpa R 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge Pennsylvania sedge Carex pennsylvanica LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex physorhyncha LC 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex retroflexa O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex rosea O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge broom sedge Carex scoparia U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex styloflexa U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex tenera U 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex texensis O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex torta LA 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex tribuloides O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge sedge Carex umbellata O 

Cyperales Cyperaceae

C Sedge fox sedge Carex vulpinoidea LC 

Arales Araceae

C Arum green dragon Arisaema dracontium O 

Arales Araceae

C Arum jack-in-the-pulpit [Indian turnip] Arisaema triphyllum C-O 

Arales Araceae

C Arum sweet flag [flag root, calamus] Acorus americanus U 

Arales Lemnaceae

C Duckweed Columbian water-meal [common water-meal] Wolffia columbiana LA 

Arales Lemnaceae

C Duckweed big duckweed [common

ducksmeat, duckweed]

Spirodela polyrhiza LA 

Arales Lemnaceae

C Duckweed duckweed Wolffiella gladiata LA 

Commelinales Commelinaceae

C Spiderwort spiderwort Tradescantia ohiensis U 

Commelinales Commelinaceae

C Spiderwort common spiderwort Tradescantia virginiana C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

153

Commelinales Commelinaceae

C Spiderwort wide-leaved spiderwort Tradescantia subaspera LC 

Commelinales Commelinaceae

C Spiderwort common dayflower Commelina communis LC 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush knotty-leaved rush [tapertip

rush]

Juncus acuminatus LC 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush two-flowered rush Juncus biflorus LC 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush rush Juncus brachycarpus LA 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush Dudley rush Juncus dudleyi O 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush common rush Juncus effusus solutus O 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush inland rush Juncus interior U 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush rush Juncus nodatus U 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush rush Juncus secundus O 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush path rush [poverty rush] Juncus tenuis LA 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush Torrey rush Juncus torreyi LC 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush common wood rush Luzula multiflora multiflora C 

Juncales Juncaceae

C Rush wood rush Luzula multiflora echinata O 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily large-flowered bellwort [big

merry bells]

Uvularia grandiflora O 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily field garlic Allium vineale A 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily wild garlic [wild onion] Allium canadense LA 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily garlic [garlic onion] Allium sativum O 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily false garlic [crow poison] Nothoscordum bivalve LC 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily orange day-lily [day-lily] Hemerocallis fulva LC 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily Turk=s-cap lily [Michigan lily] Lilium michiganense U 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily superb lily [Turk=s-cap lily] Lilium superbum R 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily yellow dog-tooth violet [yellow

adder=s tongue]

Erythronium americanum LA 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

154

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily common star-of-Bethlehem

[dove=s dung]

Ornithogalum umbellatum LC 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily yucca [Adam=s needle, Spanish bayonet] Yucca flaccida U 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily asparagus [garden asparagus] Asparagus officinalis O 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily false Solomon=s-seal [wild

spikenard]

Smilacina racemosa LA 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily small Solomon=s-seal Polygonatum biflorum O 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily great Solomon=s-seal Polygonatum commutatum U 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily red trillium [recurved wakerobin] Trillium recurvatum C 

Liliales Liliaceae

C Lily white trillium [declined trillium] Trillium flexipes LC 

Liliales Smilacaceae

C Greenbrier greenbrier [catbrier, bullbrier] Smilax bona-nox U 

Liliales Smilacaceae

C Greenbrier greenbrier [catbrier] Smilax glauca LC 

Liliales Smilacaceae

C Greenbrier bristly greenbrier [catbrier] Smilax hispida O 

Liliales Smilacaceae

C Greenbrier carrion flower Smilax pulverulenta O 

Liliales Smilacaceae

C Greenbrier greenbrier [catbrier] Smilax rotundifolia U 

Liliales Dioscoreaceae

C Yam wild yam Dioscorea villosa LC 

Liliales Dioscoreaceae

C Yam wild yam Dioscorea quaternata C 

Liliales Dioscoreaceae

C Yam Chinese yam [cinnamon vine] Dioscorea oppositifolia [D. 

batatas]

U 

Liliales Amaryllidaceae

C Amaryllis common goldstargrass [yellow stargrass] Hypoxis hirsuta LC 

Liliales Amaryllidaceae

C Amaryllis daffodil Narcissus pseudo-narcissus LC 

Liliales Amaryllidaceae

C Amaryllis poet=s narcissus Narcissus poeticus U 

Liliales Iridaceae

C Iris blackberry lily Belamcanda chinensis U 

Liliales Iridaceae

C Iris flag [German iris, fleur-de-lis] Iris X germanica

O

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

155

Liliales Iridaceae

C Iris blue-eyed grass Sisyrinchium albidum

O

Liliales Iridaceae

C Iris common blue-eyed grass

[stout blue-eyed grass]

Sisyrinchium angustifolium

O

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid nodding ladies-tresses Spiranthes cernua O-LC

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid little ladies-tresses Spiranthes tuberosa

U

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid rattlesnake plantain Goodyera pubescens

R

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid large twayblade [lily twayblade, purple twayblade] Liparis lilifolia LC-O

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid puttyroot orchid [Adam-andEve] Aplectrum hyemale LC-O

Orchidales Orchidaceae

C Orchid Wister=s coral-root orchid

[coral root]

Corallorhiza wisteriana

R

Piperales Saururaceae

C Lizard-tail lizard=s-tail Saururus cernuus LC

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow black willow Salix nigra tree C 

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow brittle willow [crack willow] Salix fragilis O 

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow prairie willow [dwarf prairie

willow]

Salix humilis R 

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow sandbar willow Salix exigua [S. interior] O 

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow white poplar Populus alba tree O 

Salicales Salicaceae

C Willow eastern cottonwood Populus deltoides tree C 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut butternut [white walnut] Juglans cinerea tree R 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut black walnut Juglans nigra tree O 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut shagbark hickory [scaly-bark

hickory]

Carya ovata tree O-C 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut shellbark hickory [kingnut

hickory]

Carya laciniosa tree R 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut mockernut hickory Carya tomentosa tree O 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut pignut hickory Carya glabra tree C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

156

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut small pignut hickory [false

shagbark hickory]

Carya ovalis tree C 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut bitternut hickory Carya cordiformis tree C 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut black hickory Carya texana tree R 

Juglandales Juglandaceae

C Walnut pecan Carya illinoensis tree O 

Fagales Betulaceae

C Birch river birch [red birch] Betula nigra tree C 

Fagales Betulaceae

C Birch common alder [smooth alder] Alnus serrulata tree R 

Fagales Betulaceae

C Birch eastern hophornbeam [ironwood] Ostrya virginiana tree C 

Fagales Betulaceae

C Birch American hornbeam [bluebeech] Carpinus caroliniana tree R 

Fagales Betulaceae

C Birch hazelnut [American filbert] Corylus americana shrub O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech American beech [beech] Fagus grandifolia caroliniana tree O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech American chestnut Castanea dentata tree R 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech Chinese chestnut (various

hybrids)

Castanea mollissima tree R 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech white oak Quercus alba tree C 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech post oak Quercus stellata tree A 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech bur oak [mossy cup oak] Quercus macrocarpa tree O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech swamp white oak Quercus bicolor tree R 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech swamp chestnut oak [cow oak,

basket oak]

Quercus michauxii tree C 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech chinkapin oak [yellow chestnut oak] Quercus prinoides acumi- nata [Q. muehlenbergii] tree O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech northern red oak Quercus rubra tree C 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech pin oak Quercus palustris tree A 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech scarlet oak Quercus coccinea tree R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

157

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech black oak [yellow-barked oak] Quercus velutina tree C-O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech southern red oak [Spanish

oak]

Quercus falcata tree O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech cherrybark oak Quercus pagoda tree R 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech blackjack oak Quercus marilandica tree O 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech willow oak Quercus phellos tree R 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech shingle oak Quercus imbricaria tree A 

Fagales Fagaceae

C Beech Shumard oak Quercus shumardii tree O 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm sugarberry Celtis laevigata tree R 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm common hackberry Celtis occidentalis tree C 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm dwarf hackberry Celtis tenuifolia var. georgiana tree R 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm slippery elm [red elm] Ulmus rubra tree O 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm American elm Ulmus americana tree C 

Utricales Ulmaceae

C Elm winged elm Ulmus alata tree C 

Utricales Moraceae

C Mulberry osage-orange [hedge-apple] Maclura pomifera tree O 

Utricales Moraceae

C Mulberry red mulberry Morus rubra tree O 

Utricales Moraceae

C Mulberry white mulberry Morus alba tree O 

Utricales Moraceae

C Mulberry paper-mulberry Broussonetia papyrifera shrub O 

Utricales Urticaceae

C Nettle Canada wood nettle [wood

nettle]

Laportea canadensis LA 

Utricales Urticaceae

C Nettle Pennsylvania pellitory Parietaria pensylvanica U 

Utricales Urticaceae

C Nettle false nettle Boehmeria cylindrica LC 

Utricales Urticaceae

C Nettle Canada clearweed [coolwort,

richweed]

Pilea pumila LC 

Aristolochiales Aristolochiaceae

C Birthwort Virginia snakeroot [birthwort] Aristolochia serpentaria O 

Aristolochiales Aristolochiaceae

C Birthwort Canada wild ginger Asarum canadense reflexum C-LA 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat slender knotweed Polygonum tenue C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

158

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat knotweed Polygonum aviculare LC 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat copse bindweed [false buckwheat] Polygonum cristatum [P. scandens dumetorum] O 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat Virginia knotweed Polygonum virginianum C 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat curttop lady=s thumb [pale

smartweed]

Polygonum lapathifolium O 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat Pennsylvania smartweed

[common smartweed]

Polygonum pensylvanicum laevigatum

O 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat mild water pepper [swamp

smartweed]

Polygonum hydropiperoides LA 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat bristly smartweed [smartweed] Polygonum setaceum inter- jectum U 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat dotted smartweed Polygonum punctatum LC 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat spotted lady=s thumb Polygonum persicaria U 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat creeping smartweed Polygonum cespitosum longisetum LC 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat common sorrel [red sorrel,

sheep sorrel]

Rumex acetosella LC 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat bitter dock [blunt-leaved

dock, broad-leaved dock]

Rumex obtusifolius U 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat curly dock [sour dock, yellow

dock]

Rumex crispus O 

Polygonales Polygonaceae

C Buckwheat pale dock [smooth dock, water

dock]

Rumex altissimus R 

Caryophyllales Chenopodiaceae

C Goosefoot goosefoot Chenopodium standleyanum 

[C. boscianum]

U 

Caryophyllales Chenopodiaceae

C Goosefoot lamb=s-quarters Chenopodium album O-LC 

Caryophyllales Amaranthaceae

C Amaranth pigweed Amaranthus sp.

Caryophyllales Phytolaccaceae

C Pokeweed pokeweed Phytolacca americana O-LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

159

Caryophyllales Portulacaceae C Purslane common garden purslane Portulaca oleracea LC Caryophyllales Portulacaceae C Purslane spring beauty Claytonia virginica LA Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink nodding mouse-ear chickweed Cerastium nutans O 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink mouse-ear chickweed Cerastium pumilum O 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink common mouse-ear chickweed Cerastium vulgatum LC 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink common chickweed Stellaria media LA 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink thyme-leaved sandwort Arenaria serpyllifolia O 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink jagged chickweed Holosteum umbellatum U 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink Debtford pink Dianthus armeria LC 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink sleepy catchfly Silene antirrhina O 

Caryophyllales Caryophyllaceae C Pink starry campion Silene stellata O 

Magnoliales Magnoliaceae C Magnolia yellow-poplar [tulip-tree,

tulip-poplar]

Liriodendron tulipifera tree O-LC 

Magnoliales Annonaceae C Custard-apple common pawpaw [banana

tree]

Asimina triloba small

tree

LC 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup wild columbine Aquilegia canadensis R 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup dwarf larkspur [wild larkspur] Delphinium tricorne LC 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup virgin=s bower Clematis virginiana O 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup bristly buttercup Ranunculus hispidus C 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup early buttercup Ranunculus fascicularis LC 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup hooked buttercup Ranunculus recurvatus O 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup little-leaf buttercup [smallflowered crowfoot] Ranunculus abortivus abor- tivus C 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup small-flowered crowfoot Ranunculus abortivus acrolasius U 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup small-flowered crowfoot Ranunculus micranthus O 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup goldenseal Hydrastis canadensis LC 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae C Buttercup tall anemone Anemone virginiana O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

160

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae

C Buttercup doll=s-eyes [white baneberry] Actaea pachypoda LC 

Ranunculales Ranunculaceae

C Buttercup false rue-anemone Isopyrum biternatum LC 

Ranunculales Berberidaceae

C Barberry mayapple Podophyllum peltatum LA 

Ranunculales Berberidaceae

C Barberry blue cohosh Caulophyllum thalictroides U 

Ranunculales Berberidaceae

C Barberry Japanese barberry Berberis thunbergii shrub R 

Ranunculales Menispermaceae

C Moonvine moonseed Menispermum canadense O 

Ranunculales Menispermaceae

C Moonvine cupseed Calycocarpum lyonii R 

Nymphaeales Nelumbonaceae

C Lotus American lotus [giant lotus

lily]

Nelumbo lutea LC

Nymphaeales Nymphaeaceae

C Waterlily spatterdock Nuphar luteum LA 

Nymphaeales Ceratophyllaceae

C Hornwort coontail [hornwort] Ceratophyllum demersum U 

Magnoliales Lauraceae

C Laurel common sassafras [red sassafras, white sassafras] Sassafras albidum tree C 

Magnoliales Lauraceae

C Laurel spicebush [feverbush, wild allspice] Lindera benzoin shrub LA 

Papaverales Papaveraceae

C Poppy bloodroot Sanguinaria canadensis C 

Papaverales Papaveraceae

C Poppy Celandine poppy [wood

poppy]

Stylophorum diphyllum LA 

Papaverales Papaveraceae

C Poppy Celandine Chelidonium majus 

Papaverales Fumariaceae

C Fumitory pale corydalis Corydalis flavula LA 

Papaverales Fumariaceae

C Fumitory squirrel-corn Dicentra canadensis LA 

Papaverales Fumariaceae

C Fumitory Dutchman=s-breeches Dicentra cucullaria C 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard mouse-eared cress Arabidopsis thaliana O 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard smooth rock cress Arabis laevigata LC

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard wintercress [yellow rocket] Barbarea vulgaris O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

161

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard bird=s rape [field mustard,

turnip]

Brassica rapa R 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard shepherd=s-purse Capsella bursa-pastoris O 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard Pennsylvania bitter cress Cardamine pensylvanica LC 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard hairy bitter cress Cardamine hirsuta O 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard small-flowered bitter cress Cardamine parviflora arenicola U 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard toothwort [pepper-root] Dentaria laciniata LA 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard short-fruited Whitlow-grass Draba brachycarpa O 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard mouse-eared Whitlow-grass

[vernal Whitlow-grass]

Eriophila verna O 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard common peppergrass [poorman=s pepper] Lepidium virginicum O-LA 

Capparales Cruciferae

C Mustard field peppergrass [field cress] Lepidium campestre O 

Hamamelidales Hamamelidaceae

C Witchhazel sweetgum [red gum] Liquidambar styraciflua tree O-LA 

Hamamelidales Platanaceae

C Planetree American sycamore [buttonwod] Platanus occidentalis tree LC 

Rosales Crassulaceae

C Stonecrop widow=s-cross [stonecrop] Sedum pulchellum LC 

Rosales Escalloniaceae Virginia willow [sweet-spires] Itea virginica shrub ?

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage ditch stonecrop Penthorum sedoides O 

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage wild hydrangea Hydrangea arborescens shrub O 

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage Forbes= saxifrage Saxifraga forbesii LA 

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage bishop=s-cap Mitella diphylla R 

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage small-flowered alumroot [late

alumroot]

Heuchera parviflora rugelii LC 

Rosales Saxifragaceae

C Saxifrage tall alumroot Heuchera americana hirsuticaulis C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

162

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Allegheny blackberry [common blackberry] Rubus allegheniensis C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose blackberry Rubus alumnus [R. orarius] O 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose arching dewberry [southern

dewberry]

Rubus enslenii U 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose dewberry Rubus flagellaris C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose black raspberry [blackcap

raspberry]

Rubus occidentalis LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose blackberry Rubus pensylvanicus C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose velvet-leaved dewberry Rubus roribaccus LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose hawthorn Crataegus pruniosa ? 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose red haw Crataegus mollis C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose cock-spur hawthorn Crataegus crus-galli small

tree

O 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose serviceberry [shadbush, shadblow, juneberry] Amelanchier arborea small tree LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose common apple Malus pumila tree R

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose wild sweet crabapple Malus coronaria tree U 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Iowa crabapple Malus ioensis tree U 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose common pear Pyrus communis tree R

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose pasture rose Rosa carolina vine C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose swamp rose Rosa palustris vine O 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose multiflora rose [Japanese

rose]

Rosa multiflora shrub A 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Illinois rose [prairie rose,

climbing rose]

Rosa setigera O-LC

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Rosa sp. (Hybrid cultivar)

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose black cherry Prunus serotina tree C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

163

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose American plum [wild plum] Prunus americana shrub C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Chickasaw plum Prunus angustifolia LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose wild goose plum Prunus hortulana U 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose peach Prunus persica tree R 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose swamp agrimony [small-flowered agrimony] Agrimonia parviflora LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose soft agrimony Agrimonia pubescens U 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose woodland agrimony Agrimonia rostellata C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose wild strawberry Fragaria virginiana LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose white avens Geum canadense C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose spring avens Geum vernum LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose sulfur cinquefoil Potentilla recta LC 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose common cinquefoil Potentilla simplex C 

Rosales Rosaceae

C Rose Indian physic [American ipecac] Porteranthus stipulatus [Gillenia stipulata] C 

Rosales Caesalpiniaceae

CCaesalpinia eastern redbud Cercis canadensis tree O-C 

Rosales Caesalpiniaceae

CCaesalpinia honeylocust Gleditsia triacanthos tree O 

Rosales Caesalpiniaceae

CCaesalpinia Kentucky coffeetree Gymnocladus dioicus tree O 

Rosales Caesalpiniaceae

CCaesalpinia wild senna Cassia marilandica

Rosales Caesalpiniaceae

CCaesalpinia partridge pea [locust-weed] Cassia fasciculata

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean kudzu-vine Puereria lobata vine R 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean soybean Glycine max LA 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean American wisteria Wisteria frutescens vine ?

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

164

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean sesbania Sesbania macrocarpa [S. 

exaltata]

LC

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean dull-leaf indigobush [false

indigobush]

Amorpha fruticosa shrub R 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean black-locust Robinia pseudoacacia tree LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean rattlebox Crotalaria sagittalis O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean pencil-flower Stylosanthes biflora O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean low hop clover Trifolium campestre O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean Alsike clover Trifolium hybridum U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean red clover Trifolium pratense LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean white clover Trifolium repens LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean black medic Medicago lupulina O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean alfalfa Medicago sativa U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean butterfly-pea Clitoria mariana U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean hoary tick trefoil Desmodium canescens O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean hairy tick trefoil Desmodium ciliare LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean beggar=s lice [pointed tick trefoil] Desmodium glutinosum U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean glaucus tick trefoil Desmodium laevigatum C 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean bare-stemmed tick trefoil Desmodium nudiflorum LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean Nuttall=s tick trefoil Desmodium nuttallii O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean stiff tick trefoil Desmodium obtusum U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean panicled tick trefoil Desmodium paniculatum C 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean beggar=s lice [white-flowered

tick trefoil]

Desmodium pauciflorum U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean round-leaved tick trefoil Desmodium rotundifolium U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean sessile-leaved tick trefoil Desmodium sessilifolium U 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

165

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean scurf-pea [Sampson=s snakeroot] Psoralea psoralioides eglan- dulosa LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean wild bean Strophostyles helvola O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean wild bean Strophostyles leiosperma O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean umbellate wild bean Strophostyles umbellata U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean hog-peanut Amphicarpa bracteata bracteata U 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean hog-peanut Amphicarpa bracteata 

comosa

O 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean hairy-fruited vetch Vicia dasycarpa LA 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean ground nut Apios americana LC 

Rosales Fabaceae

CBean goat=s-rue Tephrosia virginiana O 

Rosales Mimosaceae mimosa Albizia julibrissin tree R Rosales Mimosaceae Illinois/prairie mimosa [Illinois bundleflower] Desmanthus illinoensis

Geraniales Geraniaceae

C Geranium Carolina cranesbill Geranium carolinianum LC 

Geraniales Geraniaceae

C Geranium wild geranium Geranium maculatum C 

Geraniales Oxalidaceae

C Wood-sorrel upright yellow wood-sorrel Oxalis dillenii A 

Geraniales Oxalidaceae

C Wood-sorrel common wood-sorrel [yellow

wood sorrel]

Oxalis stricta U 

Geraniales Oxalidaceae

C Wood-sorrel violet wood-sorrel [purple

oxalis]

Oxalis violacea LC-O 

Geraniales Balsaminaceae

C Balsam orange-spotted touch-me-not

[jewelweed]

Impatiens capensis [I. Biflora]

LA 

Geraniales Balsaminaceae

C Balsam pale touch-me-not Impatiens pallida LA 

Linales Linaceae

C Flax flax Linum medium LC 

Linales Linaceae

C Flax stiff yellow flax Linum striatum U-R 

Sapindales Rutaceae

C Rue prickly-ash [toothache tree] Zanthoxylum americanum U-R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

166

Sapindales Simarubaceae

C Quassia tree-of-heaven Ailanthus altissima tree U-R 

Sapindales Anacardiaceae

C Sumac smooth sumac Rhus glabra shrub C 

Sapindales Anacardiaceae

C Sumac winged [shining, dwarf]

sumac

Rhus copallina shrub C 

Sapindales Anacardiaceae

C Sumac fragrant sumac [aromatic

sumac]

Rhus aromatica shrub O 

Sapindales Anacardiaceae

C Sumac poison-ivy Toxicodendron radicans shrub,

vine

A 

Sapindales Staphyleaceae

C Bladdernut American bladdernut Staphylea trifolia shrub LA 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple sugar maple [hard maple,

rock maple]

Acer saccharum tree C 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple southern sugar maple Acer barbatum tree O 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple silver maple [river, soft, white

maple]

Acer saccharinum tree C 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple red maple Acer rubrum var. rubrum tree O 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple red maple Acer rubrum var. trilobum tree R 

Sapindales Aceraceae

C Maple boxelder [ash-leaved maple] Acer negundo tree O-LA 

Polygalales Polygalaceae

C Milkwort red milkwort [field milkwort] Polygala sanguinea O 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge nodding spurge [wartweed] Chamaesyce maculata 

[Euphorbia maculata]

C 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge milk spurge Chamaesyce supina 

[Euphorbia supina]

LC 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge milk spurge Chamaesyce humistrata 

[Euphorbia humistrata]

U 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge flowering spurge Euphorbia corollata C 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge wood spurge Euphorbia commutata LC 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge wild poinsettia Euphorbia dentata [Poinsettia dentata] O 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge sand croton [rushfoil] Crotonopsis elliptica LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

167

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge capitate croton [wooly croton] Croton capitatus O 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge croton [prairie tea] Croton monanthogynus LC 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge slender three-seeded mercury Acalypha gracilens O 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge three-seeded mercury Acalypha rhomboidea C 

Euphorbiales Euphorbiaceae

C Spurge Virginia three-seeded mercury Acalypha virginica O 

Celastrales Celastraceae

C Staff-tree bittersweet [climbing bittersweet] Celastrus scandens vine C 

Celastrales Celastraceae

C Staff-tree eastern wahoo [burningbush] Euonymus atropurpureus shrub O 

Celastrales Celastraceae

C Staff-tree climbing euonymus [winter

creeper]

Euonymus fortunei var. radicans vine O 

Celastrales Aquifoliaceae

C Holly deciduous holly [swamp holly] Ilex decidua shrub R 

Celastrales Aquifoliaceae

C Holly American holly Ilex opaca shrub R 

Rhamnales Rhamnaceae

C Buckthorn New-Jersey-tea [wild snowball] Ceanothus americanus shrub O 

Rhamnales Vitaceae

C Grape Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia vine C 

Rhamnales Vitaceae

C Grape raccoon grape Ampelopsis cordata vine U 

Rhamnales Vitaceae

C Grape summer grape Vitis aestivalis vine C 

Rhamnales Vitaceae

C Grape winter grape Vitis cinerea vine U 

Rhamnales Vitaceae

C Grape frost grape Vitis vulpina vine O 

Malvales Tiliaceae

C Linden American linden [basswood] Tilia americana tree U-R 

Malvales Malvaceae

C Mallow prickly sida Sida spinosa O 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort marsh St. John=s-wort Triadenum walteri O 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort shrubby St. John's-wort Hypericum prolificum shrub LC 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort nits-and-lice Hypericum drummondii U 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

168

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort pineweed Hypericum gentianoides O 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort dwarf St. John=s-wort Hypericum mutilum O 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort common St. John=s-wort Hypericum perforatum U 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort spotted St. John=s-wort Hypericum punctatum O 

Theales Hypericaceae

C St. John=swort St. Andrew=s cross Hypericum stragulum O 

Violales Cistaceae

C Rockrose narrow-leaved pinweed Lechea tenuifolia O 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet common blue violet Viola pratincola LC 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet downy yellow violet Viola pubescens C 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet Johnny-jump-up [wild pansy] Viola rafinesquii LA 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet wooly blue violet Viola sororia C 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet cream violet [common white

violet]

Viola striata LA 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet cleft violet Viola triloba var. triloba C 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet lobed violet [cleft violet] Viola triloba var. dilatata [V. 

falcata]

O 

Violales Violaceae

C Violet green violet Hybanthus concolor LC 

Violales Passifloraceae

C Passionflower small passion-flower Passiflora lutea var. glabri- flora O 

Violales Passifloraceae

C Passionflower large passion-flower [may- pops] Passiflora incarnata R 

Proteales Elaeagnaceae

C Oleaster autumn-olive [oleaster] Elaeagnus umbellata shrub LC 

Myrtales Lythraceae

C Loosestrife tooth-cup Rotala ramosior O 

Myrtales Lythraceae

C Loosestrife purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria shrub R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

169

Myrtales Lythraceae

C Loosestrife water-willow [swamp loosestrife] Decodon verticillatus

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose enchanter=s nightshade Circaea lutetiana O 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose marsh purslane Ludwigia palustris var. americana U 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose seedbox Ludwigia alternifolia LC 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose creeping primrose willow Ludwigia peploides LC 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose common evening primrose Oenothera biennis C 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose ragged evening primrose Oenothera laciniata U 

Myrtales Onagraceae

C Evening Primrose cinnamon willow herb Epilobium coloratum O 

Caryophyllales Cactaceae

C Cactus prickly-pear Opuntia humifusa [O. 

rafinesquii, O. compressa]

Haloragales Haloragidaceae

C Water Milfoil spiked water milfoil Myriophyllum exalbescens LA 

Lamiales Callitrichaceae

C Water

Starwort

terrestrial starwort [waterstarwort]

Callitriche terestris O 

Cornales Cornaceae

C Dogwood blackgum [sour gum, black

tupelo]

Nyssa sylvatica tree O 

Cornales Cornaceae

C Dogwood flowering dogwood [white

dogwood]

Cornus florida small

tree

C 

Cornales Cornaceae

C Dogwood rough-leaved dogwood Cornus drummondii shrub O 

Cornales Cornaceae

C Dogwood gray [panicled] dogwood Cornus racemosa shrub O 

Umbellales Araliaceae

C Ginseng devil's-walking-stick [Hercules'-club, angelica-tree]] Aralia spinosa small tree O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

170

Umbellales Araliaceae

C Ginseng American spikenard Aralia racemosa R 

Umbellales Araliaceae

C Ginseng ginseng Panax quinquefolium U 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley rattlesnake master Eryngium yuccifolium 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley Queen Anne=s lace [wild carrot] Daucus carota 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley water hemlock Cicuta maculata 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley wood angelica Angelica venenosa R 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley wild chervil Chaerophyllum procumbens LC 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley wild chervil Chaerophyllum tainturieri U 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley honewort Cryptotaenia canadensis LC 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley harbinger-of-spring [pepperand-salt] Erigenia bulbosa C 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley anise-root Osmorhiza longistylis 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley Canadian black snakeroot

[short-styled snakeroot]

Sanicula canadensis C 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley yellow meadow parsnip Thaspium trifoliatum var. 

flavum

R 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley meadow parsnip Thaspium trifoliatum var. 

trifoliatum

O 

Umbellales Apiaceae

CCarrot or Parsley hedge parsley Torilis japonica LC 

Ericales Ericaceae

C Heath farkleberry Vaccinium arboreum shrub C 

Primulales Primulaceae

C Primrose shooting-star Dodecatheon meadia LC 

Primulales Primulaceae

C Primrose French=s shooting-star Dodecatheon frenchii LC 

Primulales Primulaceae

C Primrose brookweed [water pimpernel] Samolus valerandii U 

Primulales Primulaceae

C Primrose fringed loosestrife Lysimachia ciliata LC 

Primulales Primulaceae

C Primrose lance-leaved loosestrife [narrow-leaved loosestrife] Lysimachia lanceolata O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

171

Ebenales Ebenaceae

C Ebony common persimmon [possumwood] Diospyros virginiana tree A 

Scrophulariales Oleaceae

C Olive white ash Fraxinus americana tree O 

Scrophulariales Oleaceae

C Olive green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica tree A 

Scrophulariales Oleaceae

C Olive Forsythia Forsythia spp. shrub R

Scrophulariales Oleaceae

C Olive common lilac Syringa vulgaris shrub R

Scrophulariales Oleaceae

C Olive European privet Ligustrum vulgare shrub R 

Gentianales Gentianaceae

C Gentian American columbo Frasera caroliniensis O 

Gentianales Gentianaceae

C Gentian rose gentian [rose pink, marsh

pink]

Sabatia angularis O 

Gentianales Apocynaceae

C Dogbane dogbane [Indian hemp] Apocynum cannabinum LC 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed tall green milkweed Asclepias hirtella U 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed swamp milkweed Asclepias incarnata LC 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed purple milkweed Asclepias purpurascens O 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed common milkweed Asclepias syriaca C 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed butterfly-weed Asclepias tuberosa var. interior C 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed variegated milkweed [white

milkweed]

Asclepias variegata O 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed horsetail milkweed [whorled

milkweed]

Asclepias verticillata O 

Gentianales Asclepiadaceae

C Milkweed blue vine Cynanchum laeve O 

Polemoniales Convolvulaceae

C Morningglory small white morning-glory Ipomoea lacunosa O 

Polemoniales Convolvulaceae

C Morningglory wild sweet potato vine Ipomoea pandurata U 

Polemoniales Polemoniaceae

C Phlox cleft phlox Phlox bifida LC 

Polemoniales Polemoniaceae

C Phlox blue phlox Phlox divaricata ssp. laphamii C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

172

Polemoniales Polemoniaceae

C Phlox garden phlox Phlox paniculata O-LC 

Polemoniales Polemoniaceae

C Phlox Jacob=s-ladder Polemonium reptans C 

Polemoniales Hydrophyllaceae

C Waterleaf broad-leaved waterleaf Hydrophyllum canadense LA 

Polemoniales Hydrophyllaceae

C Waterleaf Phacelia bipinnatifida C 

Lamiales Boraginaceae

C Borage wild comfrey Cynoglossum virginianum O 

Lamiales Boraginaceae

C Borage stickseed Hackelia virginiana LC 

Lamiales Boraginaceae

C Borage bluebells [Virginia cowslip] Mertensia virginica LA 

Lamiales Boraginaceae

C Borage scorpion-grass Myosotis macrosperma O 

Lamiales Verbenaceae

C Verbena blue vervain Verbena hastata O 

Lamiales Verbenaceae

C Verbena Verbena X illicita R 

Lamiales Verbenaceae

C Verbena narrow-leaved vervain Verbena simplex U 

Lamiales Verbenaceae

C Verbena white vervain Verbena urticifolia O 

Lamiales Verbenaceae

C Verbena fog-fruit Phyla lanceolata LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint lyre-leaved sage [cancerweed] Salvia lyrata O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint downy skullcap Scutellaria incana LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint mad-dog skullcap Scutellaria lateriflora O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint small skullcap Scutellaria leonardii U 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint ground ivy [gill-over-theground] Glechoma hederacea var. micrantha LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint burgamot mint [Monarda, bee

balm]

Monarda bradburiana LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint wild bergamot Monarda fistulosa O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint henbit Lamium amplexicaule O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint purple dead nettle Lamium purpureum LA 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint pagoda plant [wood mint] Blephilia ciliata O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

173

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint pagoda plant Blephilia hirsuta LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint stone mint [dittany] Cunila origanoides C-O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint common water horehound Lycopus americanus O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint bugle weed Lycopus virginicus LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint self heal [heal-all] Prunella vulgaris var. elongata LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint mountain mint Pycnanthemum pycnanthemoides O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint slender mountain mint Pycnanthemum tenuifolium 

[P. flexuosum]

C 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint American germander [wood

sage]

Teucrium canadense var. virginicum

O 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint richweed [citronella horse

balm]

Collinsonia canadensis U 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint yellow giant hyssop Agastache nepetoides R 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint beefsteak plant Perilla frutescens LC 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint hairy synandra [white-flowered mint, synandra] Synandra hispidula R 

Lamiales Lamiaceae

C Mint false pennyroyal Trichostema brachiatum LC 

Polemoniales Solanaceae

C Nightshade ground-cherry Physalis heterophylla U 

Polemoniales Solanaceae

C Nightshade annual ground-cherry Physalis pubescens R 

Polemoniales Solanaceae

C Nightshade horse-nettle Solanum carolinense O 

Polemoniales Solanaceae

C Nightshade black nightshade Solanum ptycanthum U 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort moth mullein Verbascum blattaria O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort wooly mullein Verbascum thapsus C 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort candelabra plant [Culver=sroot] Veronicastrum virginicum O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort corn speedwell [blue speedwell] Veronica arvensis C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

174

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort purslane speedwell [white

speedwell]

Veronica peregrina C 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort false pimpernel Lindernia dubia U 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort clammy hedge-hyssop [common hedge-hyssop] Gratiola neglecta O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort Leucospora multifida O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort smooth false foxglove Aureolaria flava LC 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort water hyssop Bacopa rotundifolia LC 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort smooth beard-tongue Penstemon calycosus O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort foxglove beard-tongue [foxglove penstemon] Penstemon digitalis O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort pale beard-tongue Penstemon pallidus LC 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort winged monkey-flower [common monkey-flower] Mimulus alatus O 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort blue-eyed Mary Collinsia verna LA 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort late figwort Scrophularia marilandica LC 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort false foxglove Agalinis fasciculata U 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort false foxglove Agalinis paupercula U 

Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae

C Figwort slender false foxglove Agalinis tenuifolia O 

Scrophulariales Acanthaceae

C Acanthus water-willow Justicia americana LC 

Scrophulariales Acanthaceae

C Acanthus hairy ruellia [wild petunia] Ruellia humilis O 

Scrophulariales Acanthaceae

C Acanthus stalked ruellia [wild petunia] Ruellia pedunculata C 

Scrophulariales Bignoniaceae

C Trumpet

Creeper

trumpet-creeper [trumpetvine] Campsis radicans vine C 

Scrophulariales Bignoniaceae

C Trumpet

Creeper

northern [hardy] catalpa[cigar tree, Indian bean]

Catalpa speciosa tree O 

Scrophulariales Bignoniaceae

C Trumpet

Creeper

southern [common] catalpa[lady cigar tree]

Catalpa bignonioides tree R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

175

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain bracted plantain Plantago aristata LA 

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain buckhorn [English plantain] Plantago lanceolata LC 

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain common plantain Plantago major LC 

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain small plantain Plantago pusilla O 

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain red-stalked plantain [Rugel=s

plantain]

Plantago rugelli LC 

Plantaginales Plantaginaceae

C Plantain dwarf plantain Plantago virginica LC 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder common buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis shrub O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder annual bedstraw [goosegrass,

cleavers]

Galium aparine LA 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder wild licorice Galium circaezans C 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder shining bedstraw Galium concinnum C-O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder hairy bedstraw [purple bedstraw] Galium pilosum O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder sweet-scented bedstraw Galium triflorum O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder rough buttonweed [poorjoe] Diodia teres LC 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder large buttonweed [Virginia

buttonweed]

Diodia virginiana R 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder tiny bluets Hedyotis crassifolia [Houstonia minima] LC 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder long-leaved bluets Hedyotis longifolia [Houstonia longifolia] O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder slender-leaved bluets Hedyotis nuttalliana [Houstonia tenuifolia] O 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder broad-leaved bluets Hedyotis purpurea [Houstonia purpurea] U 

Rubiales Rubiaceae

C Madder small bluets [star violet] Hedyotis pusilla [Houstonia pusilla] LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

176

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle arrowwood Viburnum dentatum [recog- nitum] shrub C 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle southern wild-raisin Viburnum nudum shrub ?

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle smooth arrowood Viburnum recognitum ?

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle nannyberry Viburnum lentago shrub ?

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle rusty nannyberry [southern blackhaw] Viburnum rufidulum shrub U 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle blackhaw [nannyberry] Viburnum prunifolium shrub O 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle American elder [elderberry, golden elder] Sambucus canadensis shrub LC 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle coralberry [Indian-currant, buck-brush] Symphoricarpos orbiculatus shrub LC 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica var. japonica vine A 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica var. chin- ense vine R 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle Amur honeysuckle Lonicera maackii U 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle trumpet honeysuckle [fire- cracker honeysuckle] Lonicera sempervirens vine U 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle Illinois horse gentian Triosteum illinoense O 

Dipsacales Caprifoliaceae

C Honeysuckle late horse gentian Triosteum perfoliatum O 

Dipsacales Valerianaceae

C Valerian pink valerian Valeriana pauciflora LC 

Dipsacales Valerianaceae

C Valerian corn salad [lamb=s lettuce] Valerianella radiata LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

177

Dipsacales Dipsacaceae

C Teasel common teasel Dipsacus sylvestris O 

Cucurbitales Cucurbitaceae 

CGourd bur cucumber Sicyos angulatus vine

Campanulales Campanulaceae

C Bellflower Venus= looking glass Triodanis perfoliata LC 

Campanulales Campanulaceae

C Bellflower American bellflower Campanula americana C 

Campanulales Campanulaceae

C Bellflower cardinal-flower Lobelia cardinalis U 

Campanulales Campanulaceae

C Bellflower Indian tobacco Lobelia inflata LC 

Campanulales Campanulaceae

C Bellflower blue cardinal-flower Lobelia siphilitica O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common milfoil [common yarrow, nosebleed] Achillea millefolium C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common ragweed [bitterweed,

Roman wormwood]

Ambrosia artemisiifolia C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster lanceleaf ragweed [southern

ragweed]

Ambrosia bidentata LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster giant ragweed [buffalo weed,

horse weed]

Ambrosia trifida O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster everlasting [ladies= tobacco] Antennaria plantaginifolia 

var. plantaginifolia

LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster everlasting [ladies= tobacco,

pussytoes]

Antennaria plantaginifolia var. ambigens

U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common burdock [smaller

burdock]

Arctium minus U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Drummond=s aster Aster drummondii O-LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster side-flowered aster [white

woodland aster]

Aster lateriflorus LA 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster New England aster Aster novae-angliae R 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

178

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster purple daisy [spreading aster] Aster patens C-O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster hairy aster Aster pilosus C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster arrow aster [arrow-leaved

aster]

Aster X sagittifolius U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Short=s aster Aster shortii LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster panicled aster [tall white

aster, white field aster]

Aster simplex R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster aster Aster turbinellus O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster swamp marigold [tickseed

sunflower]

Bidens aristosa LA 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Spanish needles Bidens bipinnata LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster nodding beggar-ticks [sticktight] Bidens cernua U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster European beggar-ticks

[swamp tickseed]

Bidens tripartita O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster false aster Boltonia asteroides LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster false boneset Brickellia eupatorioides O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster pale Indian plantain Cacalia atriplicifolia O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster great Indian plantain Cacalia muhlenbergii LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common chicory [blue sailors] Cichorium intybus R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster field thistle [pasture thistle] Cirsium discolor O-LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster bull thistle Cirsium vulgare R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster horseweed [mule weed] Conyza canadensis LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster tall coreopsis Coreopsis tripteris O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster yerba de tajo Eclipta prostrata O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster elephant=s-foot Elephantopus carolinianum O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster fire weed Erechtites hieracifolia O-LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster annual fleabane Erigeron annuus LC 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

179

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster marsh fleabane [Philadelphia

fleabane] 

Erigeron philadelphicus C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster daisy fleabane [rough fleabane, whitetop fleabane] Erigeron strigosus C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster tall boneset [tall thoroughwort] Eupatorium altissimum R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster blue boneset [mistflower, wild

ageratum]

Eupatorium coelestinum LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster hollow joe-pye weed [trumpet

weed]

Eupatorium fistulosum U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common boneset [thoroughwort] Eupatorium perfoliatum LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster white snakeroot Eupatorium rugosum C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster late boneset Eupatorium serotinum LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster grassleaf goldenrod Euthamia graminifolia U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster catfoot [old-field balsam,

sweet everlasting]

Gnaphalium obtusifolium O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster early cudweed [purple cudweed] Gnaphalium purpureum U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster purple-headed sneezeweed Helenium flexuosum O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster pale sunflower [ten-petal sunflower] Helianthus decapetalus R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster divergent sunflower [woodland sunflower] Helianthus divaricatus C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster small wood sunflower Helianthus microcephalus O-LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Jerusalem artichoke Helianthus tuberosus var. 

subcanescens

LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster false sunflower [sunflower

heliopsis]

Heliopsis helianthoides U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster hairy hawkweed Hieracium gronovii C 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refu

ge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

180

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster marsh elder [sumpweed] Iva annua U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster false dandelion Krigia biflora O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster dwarf dandelion [potato dandelion] Krigia dandelion LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Canada lettuce [horseweed,

wild lettuce]

Lactuca canadensis C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster blue lettuce [woodland lettuce] Lactuca floridana O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster willow-leaved lettuce Lactuca saligna LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster compass plant [prickly lettuce] Lactuca serriola C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common tansy [ox-eye daisy,

white daisy]

Leucanthemum vulgare C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster blazing star Liatris scabra LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster button snakeroot [marsh blazing star] Liatris spicata LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster pineapple weed Matricaria matricarioides LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster American feverfew [wild quinine] Parthenium integrifolium O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster leafcup Polymnia canadensis O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster bears foot [leafcup, yellowflower] Polymnia uvedalia U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster tall white lettuce Prenanthes altissima LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster great white lettuce Prenanthes crepidinea LA 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster false dandelion Pyrrhopappus carolinianus O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster black-eyed Susan Rudbeckia hirta C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster cutleaf coneflower [wild

golden glow]

Rudbeckia laciniata O 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

181

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster golden ragwort [groundsel,

squaw-weed]

Senecio aureus LA 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster butterweed [groundsel, ragwort] Senecio glabellus LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster wholeleaf rosinweed Silphium integrifolium 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster cup plant [cup rosinweed] Silphium perfoliatum O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster tall goldenrod Solidago altissima A 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Buckley=s goldenrod Solidago buckleyi U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster bluestem goldenrod [woodland goldenrod] Solidago caesia C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster early goldenrod Solidago juncea C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Dyersweed goldenrod [gray

goldenrod]

Solidago nemoralis C-O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster elm-leaved goldenrod Solidago ulmifolia C 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster red-seeded dandelion [smooth

dandelion]

Taraxacum laevigatum R 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster common dandelion Taraxacum officinale LC 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster goat=s beard [sand goat=s

beard]

Tragopogon dubius O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster wing stem [yellow iron weed] Verbesina alternifolia LA 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster yellow crownbeard Verbesina helianthoides O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster tall iron weed Vernonia gigantea O 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster Missouri ironweed Vernonia missurica U 

Asterales Asteraceae

C Aster cocklebur Xanthium strumarium var. 

canadensis

O-LA 

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Frequency of Occurrence Key

A = abundantLA = locally abundantC = commonLC = locally commonO = occasionalR = rare? = undocumentedReference Key1 = Ulaszek, Eric F. 1988. The vascular flora of the Devils Kitchen Lake area, Williamson and Union counties, Illinois. M

University, Carbondale. 98p.2 = Mohlenbrock, Robert H., and John W. Voigt. 1959. A flora of southern Illinois. Southern Illinois UniverEdwardsville. 390 p.General ReferencesIverson, L.R., D. Ketzner, and J. Karnes. 1999. Illinois Plant Information Network. Database at h

ware/ilpin.html. Illinois Natural History Survey and USDA Forest Service.Mohlenbrock, Robert H., and John W. Voigt. 1959. A flora of sIllinois University Press, Carbondale and Edwardsville. 390 p.Petrides, George A. 1986. A field guide to trees and shrubs. Peterson Fiel

Mifflin Co., Boston. 428 p.Pohl, Richard W. 1968. How to know the grasses. William C. Brown Co. Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa. 200 p.

Vascular Plants of Crab Orchard NWR (Continued)

Order Family Common Name(s) Scientific Name(s) Growth

Form

Frequency 

of 

Occurrence
Appendix E: State-listed Species Potentially Found at Crab Orchard NWR

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

183

Appendix E: State-listed Species 

Potentially Found at Crab Orchard NWR

Appendix E: State-listed Species Potentially Found at Crab Orchard NWR

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

185

State-listed Species Potentially Found at Crab Orchard NWR

Birds Status Breeding Status

Birds

Pied-billed Grebe (Podilymbus podiceps) Threatened Migrant

American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus) Endangered Migrant; former breeder

Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis) Threatened Migrant; former breeder

Snowy Egret (Egretta thula) Endangered Migrant

Little Blue Heron (Egretta caerulea) Endangered Migrant

Black-crowned Night Heron (Nyctanassa nycitcorax) Endangered Migrant

Yellow-crowned Night Heron (Nyctanassa violacea) Endangered Migrant

Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) Endangered Migrant

Mississippi kite (Icitinia mississippiensis) Endangered Migrant

Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus) Threatened Breeder

Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Threatened Breeder

Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) Endangered Migrant; former breeder

Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Endangered Migrant

Common Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus) Threatened Migrant

Sandhill Crane (Grus Canadensis) Threatened Migrant

Upland Sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda) Endangered Migrant; former breeder

Wilson’s Phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor) Endangered Migrant

Forster’s Tern (Sterna forsteri) Endangered Migrant

Least Tern (Sterna antillarum) Endangered Migrant

Black Tern (Chlidonias niger) Endangered Migrant

Barn Owl (Tyto alba) Endangered Migrant

Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) Endangered Migrant

Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) Threatened Breeder

Brown Creeper (Certhia americana) Threatened Migrant

Bewick’s Wren (Thryomanes bewickii) Endangered Migrant

Henslow’s Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) Endangered Breeder

Mammals

Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) Endangered Status Unknown

Golden mouse (Ochrotomys nuttalli) Threatened Breeder

Marsh rice rat (Oryzomys palustris) Threatened Breeder

River otter (Lutra canadensis) Threatened Status Unknown

Plants

Hairy synandra (Synandra hispidula) Endangered

Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

187

Appendix F: Bibliography

Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

189

Appendix F: Bibliography

Anderson, Dana R. 1983. Movements of Canada

geese in relation to Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 67p.

Anderson, Roger C., and M. Rebecca Anderson.

1975. The presettlement vegetation of Williamson County, Illinois. Castanea 40:345-363.

Anderson, Roger C., and C. Van Valkenburg. 1976.

Response of a southern Illinois, USA, grassland

community to burning. Illinois State Academy of

Science Transactions 69:399-414.

Anthony, Mark. 1961. Observed activity and behavior of the woodchuck in southern Illinois. M.A.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

73p.

Arnold, Lester E., and W.R. Boggess. 1971. Effects

of pine plantations on natural succession in southern Illinois. University of Illinois, Agricultural

Experiment Station Forest Research Report 71-

1. Urbana-Champaign. 6p.

Autry, D. C. 1964. Movements of white-tailed deer

in response to hunting on Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 70p.

Ball, D.M., J.F. Pederson, and G.D. Lacefield. 1993.

The tall fescue endophyte. Am. Sci. 81:370-379.

Bazzaz, F.A. 1968. Succession on abandoned fields

in the Shawnee Hills, southern Illinois. Ecology

49:924-936.

Bell, Roger Q. 1957. Food coactions of Canada

geese (Branta canadensis interior) in southern

Illinois. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 78p.

Bell, R.Q., and W.D. Klimstra. 1970. Feeding activities of Canada geese in southern Illinois. Trans.

Illinois State Acad. Sci. 63:295-304.

Bennett, Esther V. 1953. Nesting birds of the

shoreline and islands of Crab Orchard Lake with

particular reference to the Canada goose, Branta

canadensis (Linnaeus), and the eastern red-wing,

Agelaius phoeniceus (Linnaeus). M.S. Thesis.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 45p.

Biotic Consultants, Inc. 1976. Endangered, threatened, and rare plants of the Shawnee National

Forest (Illinois). Carbondale. 39p.

Bohlen, H. David. 1989. The birds of Illinois. Indian

University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis.

Borger, W.M. 1968. A phytosociological survey of a

post oak (Quercus stellata) community at Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished. Department of Botany, Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale.

Breen, J.P. 1994. Acremonium endophyte interactions with enhanced plan resistance to insects.

Ann. Rev. Entomol. 39:401-423.

Brucher, Victor J. 1941. Selection of major recreational areas, Crab Orchard Project, Carbondale,

Illinois. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil

Conservation Service. 14 p. + maps.

Caithamer, David F. 1989. Habitat use and time and

energy allocations of Mississippi Valley population Canada geese. Ph.D. Dissertation. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 165p.

Cheniae, Gordon L. A profile study of visitors using

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge waterfowl observation towers. M.S. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 54p.

Clark, T., and D. Zaunbrecher. 1987. The greater

Yellowstone ecosystem: The ecosystem concept

in natural resource policy and management.

Renewable Resources Journal 5(3):8-16.

Clay, K. and J. Hola. 1999. Fungal endophyte symbiosis and plant diversity in successional fields. Science 285:1742-1744.

Coley, A.B., Fribourg, H.A., Pelton, M.R. and Gwinn,

K.D. 1995. Effects of tall fescue endophyte infestation on small mammal abundance. J. environ.

Qual. 24:472-475.

Conover, M.R. 1998. Impact of consuming tall fescue

leaves with the endophytic fungus, Acremonium

coenophialum, on meadow voles. Journal of

Mammalogy 79:457-463.

Conover, M.R., and T.A. Messmer. 1996. Feeding

preferences and changes in mass of Canada geese

grazing endophyte-infected tall fescue. Condor

98:859-862.

Corlas, Maureen. 1996. The effects of polychlorinated biphenyls on the reproduction of nesting

bld eagle pairs at Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. M.A. Thesis, University of Illinois,

Springfield. 136p. + appendices.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

190

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T.

LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and

deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/

OBS-79/31.

Crawford, G.J. 1962. A preliminary investigation of

the white-tailed deer on Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 43p.

Davis, John A. 1974. A study of annual recreation

permit owners at the Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge, 1973. M.S. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 42p.

Ellsworth, Darrell L. 1986. Comparative biochemical genetics and differential survival of wild,

game farm, and first filial generation bobwhite

quail. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 197p.

Fehrenbacher, J.B., and R.T. Odell. 1959. Williamson County soils. University of Illinois, Agricultural Experiment Station in cooperation with

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Report 79. Urbana, IL.

Fernald, Raymond T. 1977. Past and current land

use practices and habitat conditions of Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge as they affect

the distribution and abundance of bobwhite quail.

M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 179p.

Fox, Timothy J., Jason J. Rohweder, Kevin P. Kenow,

Carl E. Korschgen, and Henry C. DeHaan. 2003.

Geographic information system tools for conservation planning: user’s manual. U.S. Geological

Survey, Biological Resources Discipline Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR2003-0005. 4p. +Appendices A-B +CD-ROM. 

Franklin, J.F., R.E. Jenkins, and R.M. Romancier.

1972. Research natural areas: contributors to

environmental quality programs. Journal of

Environmental Quality 1(2):133-139.

Galvin, Michael T. 1967. Recommendation for the

development of the visitor interpretation service

at Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

86p.

Gates, Robert J. 1989. Physiological condition and

nutrition of Canada geese of the Mississippi Valley Population: temporal, spatial, and social variation. Ph.D. Dissertation. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 216p.

Gholson, Tommy R. 1966. Characteristics of visitor-groups at Crab Orchard Lake with emphasis

on factors influencing a visitor group's choice of

recreational activities, summer 1965. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 

Godfrey, Anthony, and Donna L. Stubbs. 2001. Cultural resource management plan for cultural

resources within the Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. volumes I, II and III.

Graber, R.R., and J.W. Graber. 1963. A comparative

study of bird populations in Illinois, 1906-1909

and 1956-1958. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. 28:383-

528.

Griffis, John L. 1984. Effects of Swareflex wildlife

highway warning reflectors on behavior and mortality of white-tailed deer. M.A. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 70p.

Halbrook, Richard S., and S. Gray. 1999. Starlings

as avian model and monitors of remedial actions

at the polychlorinated biphenyl areas operable

unit on Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Annual Report,

Marion, Illinois, USA. 9pp. 

Hankla, D. J. 1952. Aquatic vegetation of Crab

Orchard Lake and its utilization as food by waterfowl. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 59p.

Hankla, D. J., and R.R. Rudolph. 1967. Changes in

the migration and wintering habits of Canada

geese in the lower portion of the Atlantic and

Mississippi Flyways-with special reference to

national wildlife refuges. Proc. Anu. Conf. Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners

21:133-144.

Hardin, J.W., and J.L. Roseberry. 1975. Estimates

of unreported loss resulting from a special deer

hunt on Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge.

Proc. Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners Conf. 29:

Hardy, Joel D. 1987. Age-related recruitment of

interior geese of the Mississippi Valley Population. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 27p.

Harnishfeger, Ralph L. 1986. Influence of harvest

on the ecology of farm pond muskrats. Ph.D. Dissertation. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 210p.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

191

Harris, Stanley E., Jr., C. William Horrell, and

Daniel Irwin. 1977. Exploring the land and rocks

of southern Illinois, a geological guide. Southern

Illinois University Press, Carbondale and

Edwardsville. 240p.

Harrison, Peter K. 1979. Utilization of field corn by

white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

50p.

Hartman, Neill S. 1972. A pilot study of the Bureau

of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife resource inventory and land capability program. M.S. Thesis.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 101p.

Hawkins, Robert E. 1967. Social organization of

the white-tailed deer on Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 180p.

Hawkins, R.E., W.D. Klimstra, and D.C. Autry.

1971. Dispersal of deer from Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. J. Wildl. Manage.

35(2):216-220.

Herman, R.J., C.C. Miles, L.A. Dungan, B.E. Currie

and P.W. Ice. 1979. Soil survey of Jackson

County, Illinois. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil

Conservation Service and Forest Service in cooperation with Illinois Agricultural Experiment

Station. 192p. + maps.

Hite, Robert L., and Marvin King. 1977. Biological

investigation of the Crab Orchard Creek basin,

summer 1975. Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency, Division of Water Pollution Control.

Hoffmeister, D.F. 1989. Mammals of Illinois. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago.

348pp.

Hop, Kevin D. 2001. Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge land cover and land use spatial database

(2000) project report, December 2001. U.S. Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental

Sciences Center, LaCrosse, Wisconsin. 31p +

Appendices A-B + CD-ROM.

Horvath, Joseph C. (no date) Economic feasibility

study for a resort lodge complex in the Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Prepared for:

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 90p.

Hutchison, Max. 1988. A guide to understanding,

interpreting and using the Public Land Survey

field notes in Illinois. Natural Areas Journal

8:245-255.

Illinois Nature Preserves Commission. 1973. The

natural divisions of Illinois. Comprehensive Plan

for the Nature Preserves System, Part 2.

Springfield. 32p.

Iverson, L.R., D. Ketzner, and J. Karnes. 1999. Illinois Plant Information Network. Database at

http://www.fs.fed.us/ne/delaware/ilpin.html. Illinois Natural History Survey and USDA Forest

Service.

Iverson, Louis R., Richard L. Oliver, Dennis P.

Tucker, Paul G. Risser, Christopher D. Burnett

and Ronald G. Rayburn. 1989. The forest

resources of Illinois: an atlas and analysis of spatial and temporal trends. Illinois Natural History

Survey Special Publication 11. 181p.

James, William R., III. 1976. The relationships of

selected weather parameters with automobile

census counts of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus

virginianus) on Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. M.S. Research Paper. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 49p.

Jarvis, Robert L. 1969. Ecology and physiological

aspects of soybean impaction in Canada geese.

Ph.D. Dissertation. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 106p.

Jordan, Charles B. 1968. The extent of Fomes

annosus in pine plantations of the Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 71p. + attachments.

Kasul, Richard L., and Vernon Wright. 1980. Analysis of Canada goose band recovery data from

southern Illinois bandings, 1939-76. III. Recovery and survival characteristics. A progress

report to: Illinois Department of Conservation

and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 3.

Dept. Experimental Statistics, Louisiana State

University, Baton Rouge. 42p.

Kennedy, D.D. 1972. Evaluation of unregistered

goose harvest in Williamson County. M.S. Thesis.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 22p.

Klimstra, W.D., and K. Thomas. 1964. Effects of

deer browsing on soybean plants, Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. Trans. Illinois State

Acad. Sci. 57(3):179-181.

Koford, Rolf R., and Louis B. Best. 1996. Management of agricultural landscapes for the conservation of neotropical migratory birds. Pages 68-88

in Thompson, Frank R., III (ed.) 1996. Management of midwestern landscapes for the conserva-
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

192

tion of neotropical migratory birds. General

Technical Report GTR-NC-187. USDA Forest

Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn. 207p.

Kohler, Christopher C., and Roy C. Heidinger. 1990.

Levels of PCBs and trace metals in Crab Orchard

Lake sediment, benthos, zooplankton, and fish.

Fisheries Research Laboratory, Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale.

Kohler, C.C., and R.C. Heidinger. 1994. Seasonal/

temporal and spatial patterns of PCB contamination of fishes in Crab Orchard Lake. HWRIC

RR-072. Hazardous Waste Research and Information Center, Champaign, Ill. 37p.

Krukewitt, Charles W. 1966. A system for charging

entrance fees at Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge in accordance with the Land and Water

Conservation Fund Act of 1965. M.S. Thesis.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 80p.

LaForest, Michael J. 1967. A forest recreation master plan for the Devils Kitchen Lake area within

the Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

111p.

Lancia, Richard A. 1974. Aspects of the ecology of

wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) on Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.A. Thesis.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 97p.

Leighton, M.M., G.E. Ekblaw and L. Horberg.

1948. Physiographic divisions of Illinois. Illinois

State Geological Survey Report of Investigations

No. 129.

Leitner, L.A. 1976. Analysis of the presettlement

forests of the unglaciated portions of southern

Illinois. M.A. Thesis. Indiana State University,

Terre Haute. 134p.

Leitner, L.A., and M.T. Jackson. 1981. Presettlement forests of the unglaciated portion of southern Illinois, USA. American Midland Naturalist

105(2):290-304.

Lewis, Janet E., and Marvin C. McCarty. Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge wilderness

area access report. Student field study report,

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 9p.

Loomis, John B. 1993. Integrated public lands management: principles and applications to national

forests, parks, wildlife refuges and BLM lands.

Columbia University Press. New York.

Madej, C.W., and K. Clay. 1991. Avian seed preference and wight loss experiments. The effect of

fungal endophyte-infected tall fescue seeds.

Oecologia 88:296-302.

Maffei, Mark D. 1985. Spacial heterogeneity of

allele frequencies in white-tailed deer on Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Ph.D. Dissertation. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 149p.

Mangi Environmental Group. March, 2001. Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge, Marion, Illinois. Comprehensive conservation planning process, summary of public input. 46p.

Marshalla, Raymond W. 1977. An analysis of characteristics of deer hunters at Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. M.A. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 81p.

McArdle, T.G. 1991. Comparison of presettlement

and present forest communities by site type in

the Illinois Ozark Hills. M.S. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 

McCurdy, Dwight R., and B. Gene Miller. 1968. The

recreationist at the Crab Orchard National wildlife Refuge and his opinions of user-fees. Southern Illinois University, School of Agriculture,

Department of Forestry, Publication No. 1. Carbondale. 

Miles, C.C., J.W. Scott, B.E. Currie, and L.A. Dungan. 1979. A soil survey of Union County, Illinois. University of Illinois Agricultural

Experiment Station Soil Report 110. 143p. +

maps

Miller, Beverly G. 1967. User opinions of the Land

and Water Conservation entrance fees at the

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

61p.

Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc. 1998. IMPLAN

system (1998 data and software). Stillwater, Minnesota.

Mohlenbrock, Robert H. 1976. A new geography of

Williamson County. Outdoor Illinois 15:13-44

Mohlenbrock, Robert H., and John W. Voigt. 1959.

A flora of southern Illinois. Southern Illinois

University Press, Carbondale. 390p.

Mohlenbrock. Robert H. et al. 1962. A floristics

study of the Devils Kitchen area, Williamson and

Union counties, Illinois. Castanea 27:101-131.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

193

Molla, Paul A., and Kenneth C. Chilman. 1983. Recreation resource inventory for Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge, Carterville, Illinois.

Phase I: Identification of resource inventory

units. Study Report. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 22p.

Moran, Richard J. 1953. A study of a refuge population of the southern gray squirrel, Sciurus carolinensis carolinensis Gmelin, and western fox

squirrel, Sciurus niger rufiventer (Geoffroy), in

southern Illinois. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 76p.

Muir, David B. 1978. Beaver impoundments in

southern Illinois. M.S. Research Report. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 40p.

Muir, D.B., M.M. King, M.R. Matson, G.L. Minton,

S.P. Shasteen, M.D. Bundren, R.L. Hite, and L.J.

Pitcher. 1997. An intensive survey of the Big

Muddy River basin. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Report IEPA/BOW/97-002.

Springfield.

Nawa, Richard K. 1979. Behavior of adult whitetailed deer on Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 54p.

Nelson, Thomas A. 1980. The effect of white-tailed

deer on the regeneration and growth of natural

vegetation on Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 85p.

Nelson, Thomas A. 1984. The production and survival of white-tailed deer fawns on Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. Ph.D. Dissertation.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 166p.

Newbold, M. 1967. Fomes annosus on Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Unpublished

term paper for research credit hours under the

direction of Dr. Neil Hosley, Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 7p.

Olson, Doug, and Scott Lindall. 1996. IMPLAN professional software, analysis and data guide. Stillwater, Minnesota.

Oman, R.W. 1972. Some population dynamics and

behavioral characteristics of radio-marked fawns

on Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

31p.

Peterjohn, Bruce G. 1976. Factors contributing to

the decline of a nonhunted bobwhite population.

M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 74p.

Raines, Robert A. 1972. A comparison of the

growth and stand density of four white oak

(Quercus alba L.) Plantations as related to site

characteristics on the Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 54p.

Raveling, Dennis G. 1967. Sociobiology and ecology

of Canada geese in winter. Ph.D. Dissertation.

Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 213p.

River to River Trail Society. 1995. River to River

Trail Guide, Southern Illinois. Harrisburg, Illinois. 52p.

Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker,

E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991.

Common and scientific names of fishes from the

United States and Canada, 5th edition. American

Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20.

Bethesda, MD.

Robinson, Scott K. 1996. Threats to breeding neotropical migratory birds in the Midwest (1-21 pp.)

in Thompson, Frank R. III. ed. 1996. Management of Midwestern Landscapes for the Conservation of Neotropical Migratory Birds. Gen. Tech.

Rep. NC-187. North Central Forest Experiment

Station, Forest Service-U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota

55108. 207 p. 

Roseberry, J.L., and W.D. Klimstra. 1970. Productivity of white-tailed deer on Crab Orchard

National Wildlife Refuge. J. Wildl. Manage.

34(1):23-38.

Roseberry, J.L., and W.D. Klimstra. 1974. Differential vulnerability during a controlled deer harvest. J. Wildl. Manage. 38(3):499-507.

Roseberry, J.L., D.C. Autry, W.D. Klimstra, and

L.A. Mehrhoff, Jr. 1969. A controlled deer hunt

on Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. J.

Wildl. Manage. 33(4):791-795.

Ruelle, Richard. 1983. Mercury levels in Crab

Orchard Lake largemouth bass 1982. U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, Rock Island, Ill. 6p.

Ruelle, Richard. 1983. Survey for lead on Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Rock Island, Ill. 14p.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

194

Ruelle, Richard. 1983. Survey for polychlorinated

biphenyls on Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rock

Island, Ill. 9p.

Runyon, Kip R. 1997. Determination of the effects

of discharge from Little Grassy Fish Hatchery on

Little Grassy Creek. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 82p.

Sabine, Neil. 1981. Ecology of bald eagles wintering in southern Illinois. M.A. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale.

Schildt, Amy L. 1995. A study of presettlement,

present, and projected future forest in the

Coastal Plain Region of southern Illinois. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

136p.

Schindler, John D. 1968. A study of the efficiency of

the double sampling technique for measuring recreational use at the Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 76p.

Schmidt, David R. 1976. An analysis of law violations at federal recreation areas, southern Illinois. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 61p.

Schunke, William H. 1939. Wildlife survey and recommendation report for Crab Orchard Creek

Project, Carbondale, Illinois. Project LD-IL-11.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Region 5. 40p. + maps.

Schwegman, John E. 1975. The natural divisions of

Illinois. Pages 1-48 in Guide to the vascular flora

of Illinois. Robert H. Mohlenbrock, editor.

Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale

Shaffer, David M., and Bruce Blair. 1980. Wilderness protection project, Crab Orchard National

Wildlife Refuge. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

Region 3, Twin Cities Area Office. 49p. + appendices.

Single, Jeffrey R. 1978. Reproduction of the woodchuck (Marmota monax) in southern Illinois.

M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 50p.

St. John, Terry. 1979. Species, abundances, and

habitat preferences of diurnal raptors wintering

on Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.S.

Research Paper. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 35p.

Stall, J.B., J.B. Fehrenbacher, L.J. Bartelli, G.O.

Walker, E.L. Sauer, and S.W. Melsted. 1954.

Water and land resources of the Crab Orchard

Lake basin. Ill. State Water Survey Bull. 42. 53p.

Stookey, D.G., P.L. Fore, and R.H. Mohlenbrock.

1964. Primary aquatic succession and floristics of

Devils Kitchen Lake, Illinois. Castanea 29:150-

155.

Thomas, K.P. 1966. Nocturnal activities of whitetailed deer on Crab Orchard National Wildlife

Refuge. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 37p.

Thompson, Frank R., III. (ed.) 1996. Management of

midwestern landscapes for the conservation of

neotropical birds. General Technical Report

GTR-NC-187. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minn.

207p.

Trost, Robert E. 1979. Winter ecology of Canada

geese in the Mississippi Flyway. 

Tucker, Patricia. 1978. A trend study and Markov

chain model of visitation patterns at Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge beaches. M.S.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

47p.

Turner, Monica G. et al. 1998. Land Use (37-61pp) in

Mac, M.J., P.A. Opler, C.E. Puckett Haecker, and

P.D. Doran. 1998. Status and Trends of the

Nation's Biological Resources. Vol. 1. U.S.

Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey,

Reston, Va. 1-436 pp. 

Ulaszek, Eric F. 1988. The vascular flora of the

Devils Kitchen Lake area, Williamson and Union

counties, Illinois. M.S. Thesis. Southern Illinois

University, Carbondale. 98p.

Urban, Dean L. 1981. Habitat relationships of

birds and small mammals in second-growth forests. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University,

Carbondale. 78p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Division of Project Organization. 1938. Land acquisition plan: Crab Orchard

Creek Project, LU-IL-38-11.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service. 1942. Project plan: Crab Orchard

Creek Project, IL-LU-11. Carbondale, Ill.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

195

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service. 1990. Watershed plan–environmental

impact statement, Upper Crab Orchard Creek

watershed, Williamson county, Illinois. Champaign, Ill. 85p. + Appendices.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1997. Regional multipliers: a user handbook for the regional inputoutput modeling system (RIMS II). 3rd Edition.

U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,

D.C.

U.S. Department of Energy. 1999. Carbon Sequestration Research and Development. Washington,

D.C.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service. 1949. Recreational survey of the Crab

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Region 2,

Omaha, Neb.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service. 1997. Environmental Assessment and

Natural Resource Damage Assessment Restoration Plan, Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. 40p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Region 3. September 1999. Fish & wildlife resource conservation priorities. Fort Snelling, MN 27p.

U.S. Department Department of the Interior, Fish

and Wildlife Service. 1983. 75 p. plus appendices.

Northern States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Division of Economics. 1997. Banking

on nature: The economic benefits to local communities of national wildlife refuge visitation. Washington, DC. 118p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Division of Refuges. 1998. Biological

needs assessment. Washington, DC. 20p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service. 1994. An ecosystem approach to fish

and wildlife conservation: An approach to more

effectively conserve the Nation's biodiversity.

Washington, DC. 14p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Canadian Wildlife Service, and SEMARNAP Mexico. 1998. North American Waterfowl

Management Plan-1998 Update, Expanding the

Vision. 33p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Canadian Wildlife Service, and SEMARNAP Mexico. 1998. North American Waterfowl

Management Plan-Upper Mississippi River and

Great Lakes Region Joint Venture, Implementation Plan Update. 22p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service. 2000. Employee pocket guide: conserving the nature of America 2001. Washington, DC.

88p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service. 2002. Fish and wildlife resource conservation priorities, Region 3. Version 2.0. 33p.

U.S. General Accounting Office, Comptroller General. 1984. Economic uses of the National Wildlife Refuge System unlikely to increase

significantly. Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, House

Committee on Energy and Commerce. GAO/

RCED-84-108. 100p.

Vaughn, Martin E. 1978. The behavior of whitetailed deer on a highway right-of-way in southern

Illinois. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 90p.

Vance, D.R. 1976. Changes in land use and wildlife

populations in southeastern Illinois. Wildl. Soc.

Bull. 4:11-15.

Warburton, David. 1978. Characteristic fauna associated with conventional and conservation tillage

systems. M.A. Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. 67p.

Ward, William C. 1976. Fall food habits of the

white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.A.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

63p.

Whitaker, Maurice A. 1952. The fishes of Crab

Orchard Lake, Illinois. M.A. Thesis. Southern

Illinois University, Carbondale. 60p.

White, J. 1978. Illinois natural areas inventory technical report. Volume 1. Survey methods and

results. Illinois Natural Areas Inventory, Urbana.

426 pp.

Wise, Gerald A. 1967. Canada goose mortality at

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. M.A.

Thesis. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

44p.
Appendix F: Bibliography

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

196

Woolf, A., and C.K. Nielsen. 1999. Status of the

bobcat in Illinois. Illinois Department of Natural

Resources, Final Report, IDNR-W-126-R-4,

Springfield, Illinois, USA. 79pp. + attachments. 

Wright, Vernon L., and Richard L. Kasul. 1979.

Analysis of Canada goose band recovery data

from southern Illinois bandings, 1939-76. II. Distribution analysis. A progress report to: U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 3, Twin Cities,

Minn. Dept. Experimental Statistics, Louisiana

State University, Baton Rouge. 35p.
Appendix G: Public Law 80-361

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

197

Appendix G: Public Law 80-361

Appendix G: Public Law 80-361

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

199

Appendix G: Public Law 80-361

[Public Law 361 - 80th Congress]

[Chapter 489 - 1st Session]

[H.R. 3043]

AN ACT

To provide for the transfer of certain lands to the

Secretary of the Interior, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in order to promote the

orderly development and use of the lands and interests therein acquired by the United States in connection with the Crab Orchard Creek project and

the Illinois Ordnance Plant in Williamson, Jackson,

and Union Counties, Illinois, consistent with the

needs of agriculture, industry, recreation, and wildlife conservation, all of the interests of the United

States in and to such lands are hereby transferred

to the Secretary of Interior for administration,

development, and disposition, in accordance with

the provisions of this Act.

Sec. 2. All of the lands transferred to the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the provisions of

this Act, first shall be classified by him with a view

to determining, in cooperation with Federal, State,

and public or private agencies and organizations,

the most beneficial use that may be made thereof to

carry out the purposes of this Act, including the

development of wildlife conservation, agricultural,

recreational, industrial, and related purposes. Such

lands as have been or may hereafter be determined

to be chiefly valuable for industrial purposes shall

be leased for such purposes at such times and under

such terms and conditions as are consistent with the

general purposes of Section 2 of the Surplus Property Act of 1944, as amended, and with the purposes

of this Act. Except to the extent otherwise provided

in this Act, all lands herein transferred shall be

administered by the Secretary of the Interior

through the Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance

with the provisions of the Act of August 14, 1946

(Public Law 732, Seventy-ninth Congress), and Acts

supplementary thereto and amendatory thereof for

the conservation of wildlife, and for the development

of the agricultural, recreational, industrial, and

related purposes specified in this Act: Provided, that

no jurisdiction shall be exercised by the Secretary of

the Interior over that portion of such lands and the

improvements thereon which are now utilized by the

War Department directly or indirectly until such

time as it is determined by the Secretary or War

that utilization of such portions of such lands and

the improvements thereon directly or indirectly by

the War Department is no longer required: Provided further, That, subsequent to the determination referred to in the preceding proviso, the lands

and improvements mentioned therein shall be

administered by the Secretary of the Interior, and

any lease or other disposition thereof shall be made

subject to such terms, conditions, restrictions, and

reservations imposed by the Secretary of War as

will, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, be adequate to assure the continued availability for war

production purposes of such lands and improvements.

Approved August 5, 1947.

Appendix H: Compatibility Determinations

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

201

Appendix H: Compatibility Determinations

In accordance with the Refuge Improvement Act

of 1997, no uses for which the Service has authority

to regulate may be allowed on a unit of Refuge System unless it is determined to be compatible. A

compatible use is a use that, in the sound professional judgment of the refuge manager, will not

materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the National Wildlife Refuge System mission or the purposes of the national wildlife refuge.

Managers must complete a written compatibility

determination for each use, or collection of likeuses, that is signed by the manager and the

Regional Chief of Refuges in the respective Service

region. 

Below is a list of draft compatibility determinations that were included in the Draft EIS/CCP to

allow public review and comment:

 

# Biking/Jogging and Footraces 

# Boating

# Camping, Swimming and Picnicking

# Cemetery Operations

# Collection of Wild Plant Foods for Personal Use

# Cooperative Farming

# Fire Department Training

# Fishing (Competitive Events)

# Fishing (Recreational)

# Grazing of Livestock

# The Haven Operations

# Haying

# Horseback Riding

# Hunting of Fox

# Hunting of Migratory Waterfowl and Game

Birds, Resident Game and Furbearers

(Recreational)

# Industrial Operations

# Installation of Nesting Structures by Public or

Groups

# Interpretation and Environmental Education

# Priority Wildlife-dependent Recreational Uses

on Lands Proposed to be Acquired

# Sewage Collection System Replacement by the

City of Marion

# Trapping of Furbearers

# Waterskiing

# Wildlife Observation and Interpretation

# Wood Cutting and Timber Harvest

# Youth Camp Operations

Final compatibility determinations for all the

above uses, except foxhunting, were prepared following release of the Record of Decision. The compatibility determinations are available for viewing at

Refuge headquarters. A draft compatibility determination for foxhunting was initially prepared as

part of the planning process and as a reevaluation of

a determination of “not compatible” made in 1992.

Foxhunting was again determined to be “not compatible” in the draft compatibility determination.

With the signing of the Record of Decision, the Refuge now has an approved comprehensive conservation plan. Because foxhunting with horses conflicts

with the comprehensive conservation plan goals of

protecting the integrity of the Refuge’s biological

resources and the enjoyment of high quality experiences for a wide-range of wildlife dependent uses,

foxhunting on the Refuge has been denied without

formally determining its compatibility with a final

compatibility determination (603 FW 2.10D(1)(c)).

This section of the Service Manual documents the

process whereby a refuge manager should deny a

proposed use without determining compatibility if

the proposed use conflicts with the goals or objectives in an approved management plan such as a

comprehensive conservation plan.

Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

203

Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs 

System (RONS) and Maintenance 

Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

205

Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and 

Maintenance Management System (MMS) Projects

Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS)

Project No. Project Title and Description Cost 

Estimate 

(1,000 of $)

97001 Increase Pest Plant Control: Use a combination of mechanical and chemical 

measures to eliminate autumn olive on the Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. Natural plant succession is virtually impossible on areas of the refuge due 

to the existence and increasing amount of autumn olive. This exotic woody plant 

is an early invader and tends to out-compete native woody plants. The project 

will reduce and control invasion of autumn olive throughout the refuge. 

$56.808

97003 Conduct Nongame Bird Census: Conduct a nongame bird census on the refuge 

to provide a better understanding of bird use of the refuge with emphasis on 

Midwest species of concern. Information will be used to help the refuge make 

management decisions relating to restoring fragmented forests and grasslands. 

A standardized census method will be used in cooperation with the Illinois Natural History Survey and Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

$34.56

97009 Reduce Forest Fragmentation:Forest habitat fragmentation will be reduced by 

restoring the native hardwood vegetative cover on selected parcels of open land. 

Restoration involves mechanical and chemical site preparation treatment, cover 

crop establishment, planting native seedlings, monitoring forest development, 

and follow-up silvicultural treatments. Providing large blocks of high quality 

habitat should increase nesting success of forest interior bird species and also 

help preserve biological diversity. This project will decrease habitat fragmentation and improve wildlife productivity.

$20.24

97008 Enhance Timber Management:Conduct forest habitat improvement treatments using various silvicultural practices including thinning, stand improvement cutting, and regeneration cutting. A priority project on the Refuge is the 

conversion of 3,500 acres of non-native pine plantations to an oak-hickory forest. 

An inventory of advanced hardwood seedlings and sprouts will be conducted on 

600 acres of pine plantation per year to determine if an adequate number of 

trees are present before the overstory is converted to native hardwoods. 

Removal of pine trees will be done to improve habitat conditions for many species of migratory birds that depend on large tracts of native hardwood forest. 

$181.6

98027 Conduct Indiana Bat survey: Conduct an Indiana bat survey on the Crab 

Orchard National Wildlife Refuge. In order to avoid adverse impacts to the federally endangered Indiana bat and to comply with endangered species laws and 

regulations, surveys will be conducted within refuge pine stands. Conversion of 

3,500 acres of nonnative pine trees to native hardwood forest is a very high refuge priority. 

$27

98036 Provide Shoreline Stabilization for Crab Orchard Lake: Stabilize the shoreline 

of Crab Orchard Lake with filter fabric and rock. Erosion is occurring along 14 

miles of the shoreline of Crab Orchard Lake. Wind driven waves are the primary cause of the erosion and rock will slow the process, reducing siltation and 

improving water quality. Crab Orchard Lake provides habitat for waterfowl, 

herons, egrets, shorebirds and fish. The lake is also used for various forms of 

water recreation. 

$418 
Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

206

RONS Tier 2

03001 Law Enforcement Position Increased Funding: $5

04001 Fulltime Law Enforcement Officer $136

02001 Thin non-native pine plantations to encourage growth of desirable hardwoods $90

02002 Convert fescue pastures to native warm season grasses and better cool season 

non-native grasses

$58

02007 Increase technical oversight of Refuge agricultural program $40

99801 Volunteer Program Enhancement $50

99003 Improve Visitor Services $630

02003 Convert hay fields from cool-season cover to warm-season cover $16

02012 Protect visitors and provide officer safety $31

02005 Maintain early succession habitat (shrubland) with burning and mowing $46

02011 Educate Visitors and schoolchildren $28

02008 Remove woody fence row and roadside vegetation to enhance Refuge grasslands for breeding birds$40

02004 Add 30-foot wide field borders of native warm season grasses to farm fields $4

02010 Install water monitoring devices on the Refuge's 3 large reservoirs $38

98029 Increase aquatic resources surveys and monitoring $102

02009 Remove trees from 140 ammunition storage bunkers $114

98010 Conduct archeological survey of the refuge $595

00003 Protect Visitors and Refuge Resources from illegal activities $160

Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS)

Project No. Project Title and Description Cost 

Estimate 

(1,000 of $)

Maintenance Management System (MMS) Projects

Project No. Project Title CostEstimate

(1000's of $)

00432 Replace / Replace Deficient Heating System in the 

Headquarters Building

$153

00364 Devils Kitchen Dam – Phase I [d] $500

03507 CN Construct Turning Lanes at Visitor Center on SR 

148.

$600

00434 Replace West Gate Road Bridge. $377

00364 Devils Kitchen Dam – Phase II [cc] $1,700

98052 Shoreline habitat restoration and stabilization $3,563

02003 Replace deteriorated 4 inch steel waterline at Crab 

Orchard Campground

$364

98333 CN Repair Devils Kitchen bridge. $139

00130 Replace deteriorated water distribution lines in the 

SE quadrant.

$471

98022 Remove Sewage & Water Treatment Plant $2,279

98042 Construct Visitor & Learning Center 17,092

02001 Repair Deficiencies on Pond A-41 as Outlined in Dam 

Safety Report

$485
Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

207

00130 Replace deteriorated water distribution lines in NW 

Quadrant.

$471

02504 Upgrade Line Roads at Devils Kitchen Area. FHWA 

Route No. 115

$4,500

02502 Repair Devils Kitchen Road. FHWA Route No. 017 $770

86015 Replace deteriorated Pond A-41 Water Control Structure.157

03508 "PE Road, Parking Lot, and Bridge Rehabilitation" $300

86004 Resurface Cambria Point Lane. FHWA Route No. 105 $153

00130 Replace deteriorated water distribution lines in the 

NE quadrant.

$472

98011 Remove unused warehouses in Area-7 of the industrial area$294

00435 Repair deficient Wolf Creek Bridge at Causeway $110

98020 Remove line roads at Devils Kitchen Lake $281

01019 "John Deere 550B Dozer, 78hp, winch" $152

01028 "Champion 710A Road Grader, 135hp, 12' blade" $142

01047 "Caterpillar D4C III LGP Dozer, 87hp w/cab, 25"" 

track shoes"

$121

02502 Repair Surfacing on Headquarters Parking – FHWA 

Route No. 901 

$180

02503 Repair Surfacing on Chamesstown School Trail Parking - FHWA Route No. 902 $215

02505 Repair Surfacing on Primex Stringtown Parking $339

02506 Repair Surfacing on Images Marina Parking – FHWA 

Route No. 906

$393

02507 Repair Surfacing on SR 13 Boat Landing – FHWA 

Route No. 907

$168

02509 Repair Surfacing on Line 16 Parking – FHWA Route 

No. 914

$122

02510 Repair Surfacing on Wolf Creek Fishing Access Parking – FHWA Route No. 915 $115

02513 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Campground 

Parking - FHWA Route No. 925

$139

02514 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Boat Ramp Parking – FHWA Route No. 926 $146

02515 Repair Surfacing on Tacoma Lake Road Parking – 

FHWA Route No. 927

$105

02524 Repair Surfacing on Primex Warehouse Parking – 

FHWA Route No. 939

$201

02526 Repair Surfacing on Ensign-Bickford Parking – 

FHWA Route No. 941 

$297

02527 Repair Surfacing on Diagraph Corporation Main 

Parking – FHWA Route No. 942

$166

02531 Repair Surfacing on Pigeon Creek Road – FHWA 

Route No. 010

$121

Maintenance Management System (MMS) Projects

Project No. Project Title CostEstimate

(1000's of $)
Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

208

02533 Repair Surfacing on Stringtown Road – FHWA Route 

No. 012

$884

02534 Repair Surfacing on Post Oak Road – FHWA Route 

No. 013

$184

02535 Repair Surfacing on Research Road – FHWA Route 

No. 014

$126

02536 Repair Surfacing on Wolf Creek Road – FHWA Route 

No. 015

$919

02537 Repair Surfacing on Tacoma Road – FHWA Route 

No. 016

$998

02539 Repair Surfacing on Odgen Road East – FHWA 

Route No. 018

$292

02539 Repair Surfacing on Odgen Road West – FHWA 

Route No. 019

$686

02541 Repair Surfacing on Old Highway 13 – FHWA Route 

No. 100

$359

02543 Repair Surfacing on Greenbriar Road – FHWA Route 

No. 102

$442

02544 Repair Surfacing on Crab Orchard Campground – 

FHWA Route No. 103

$2,111

02545 Repair Surfacing on Images Marina Road – FHWA 

Route 

$310

02546 Repair Surfacing on Cambria Point Lane – FHWA 

Route 

$152

02547 Repair Surfacing on Haven Access Loop – FHWA 

Route 

$129

02550 Repair Surfacing on Spillway Landing Road - FHWA 

Route No. 109

$148

02551 Repair Surfacing on Propeller Road – FHWA Route 

No. 110

$413

02552 Repair Surfacing on Broken Handle Road – FHWA 

Route 

$207

02553 Repair Surfacing on Bald Eagle Lane – FHWA Route $562

02554 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Campground – 

FHWA Route No. 113

$412

02555 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Boat Ramp 

Access – FHWA Route No. 114

$114

02556 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Line 11 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 115

$571

02558 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Line 13 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 117

$734

02559 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Line 16 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 118

$587

02561 Repair Surfacing on Cedar Point Youth Camp Road – 

FHWA Route No. 120

$285

02562 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Line 3 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 121

$294

Maintenance Management System (MMS) Projects

Project No. Project Title CostEstimate

(1000's of $)
Appendix I: Refuge Operating Needs System (RONS) and Maintenance Mangement System (MMS) Projects

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

209

02563 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Line 5 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 122

$1,036

02565 Repair Surfacing on Devil's Kitchen Line 6 Road – 

FHWA Route No. 124

$177

02566 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Line 6 Loop Road 

– FHWA Route No. 125

$530

02567 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Line 6 Spur Road 

– FHWA Route No. 126

$106

02568 Repair Surfacing on Devils Kitchen Line 6 Loop Spur 

Road – FHWA Route No. 127

$163

02571 Repair Surfacing on Little Grassy Lake Campground 

Road – FHWA Route No. 130

$212

02004 "Freightliner Dump Truck, 52000 GVWR" $100

00399 Visitor Center Dam Rehabilitation [d/cc] $3,000

01NNN Cleanup of Pesticide Contamination in Area 7 Buildings$140

98033 Enhance environmental education and interpretation 

opportunities 

$162

00001 "Develop interpretive, regulatory, and directional 

signing"

$112

99001 Improve access to house boat pumpout station $130

98035 Provide adequate parking for the Playport Marina $370

99003 Improve Visitor Services $630

00003 Protect Visitors and Refuge Resources from illegal 

activities

$160

03001 Demolition and Disposal of an abandoned water tower 

a the south end.

$100

03002 Removal and Disposal of Wharehouse S-4-3. $130

03004 Construct a Building Addition to the Headquarters 

Building

$350

03006 Construct and Office Addition to the Visitor Center. $300

03007 Repair erosion on Little Grassy Dam. $180

03008 Replace deteriorated cyclone fence around Area 6 

Igloo Complex

$804

03009 Replace deteriorated cyclone fence around Area 13 

Igloo Complex.

$917

03010 Upgrade Crab Orchard Campground Campsites. $360

Maintenance Management System (MMS) Projects

Project No. Project Title CostEstimate

(1000's of $)

Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

211

Appendix J: Programmatic Biological 

Opinion Transmittal Memo

Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

213

 
Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

214
Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

215

APPENDIX A

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR 

INDIANA BAT PROTECTION

Potential Indiana Bat Roosting Habitat in 

Refuge Forests

Where large overstory, hardwood trees will be 

cut from 4/1 – 9/30, mist-netting surveys, exit 

surveys or other surveys approved by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, would be 

done prior to harvest or cutting to identify known 

roosting habitats. Mature leave trees in areas 

where the shelterwood and shelterwood with 

reserves harvest methods are applied (including 

throughout the uplands) will include mixtures of the 

following tree species preferred by Indiana bats for 

roosting where they exist: silver maple (Acer 

saccharinum), bitternut hickory (Carya 

cordiformis), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), 

white ash (Fraxinus americana), green ash 

(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), eastern cottonwood 

(Populus deltoides), white oak (Quercus alba), post 

oak (Quercus stallata), black locust (Robinia 

pseudoacacia), American elm (Ulmus americana), 

and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra).

Should a roost site be discovered the Refuge will 

initiate Tier II consultation with U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service Ecological Services Office in 

Marion, Illinois before forest management occurs 

within 5 miles of the site.

Snags and Cavity Trees

Retain all standing dead trees (snags and stubs) 

and cavity trees unless necessary to cut for human 

safety or to accomplish project objectives. Dead 

trees and cavity trees that are potential roost trees 

cannot be removed from 4/1-9/30 unless they are 

evaluated (biological evaluation by biologists) and/or 

surveyed according to accepted protocols to 

document non-use by roosting bats.

Hibernacula

There are no known or historic hibernacula 

located on the Refuge or within five miles of the 

Refuge boundary. Should a hibernaculum be 

discovered, The Refuge will initiate consultation 

with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological 

Services Office in Marion, Illinois before forest 

management occurs within 5 miles of a known 

hibernaculum.

Pesticides

The use of pesticides is allowed following 

appropriate environmental consideration that 

indicates use will meet management objectives. 

Protective measures will be implemented where 

needed wherever aquatic pesticides would be used 

and near stream courses wherever terrestrial 

pesticides would be used.

Non-native Invasive Species

The risk of damage from existing non-native 

invasive species should be reduced through 

integrated pest management. Invasion-prevention 

measures should be implemented to maintain native 

ecosystems. Existing population of non-native 

invasive species should be eradicated, controlled 

and/or reduced. Effects of management activities 

on the invasion and spread of non-native invasive 

species should be considered and mitigated, if 

needed. Natural areas and lands adjacent to natural 

areas have the highest priority for the prevention 

and control of non-native invasive species.

Prescribed Fire Timing

Fire Management Plan - To reduce the chances of 

affecting maternity roosts and foraging habitats of 

Indiana bats, no prescribed burns shall occur in 

forest habitat from 1 April-30 September. 

Prescribed burns in grassland habitat between 1-15 

April will require consultation with and approval by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ecological Services Office 

in Marion, Illinois 

Smoke Management

Fire Management Plan - Smoke-management 

planning is used to control the effects of smoke 

emissions and meet air-quality standards. 

Prescribed burning will comply with state air 

pollution regulations. During prescribed fires, 

consideration shall be given to smoke-sensitive 

areas including Indiana bat hibernacula that may lie 

downwind of the burn.

Soil and Water Protection

Work with farmers to establish buffer strips and 

keep livestock away from streams and ponds. 

Continue using current soil and water protection 

measures in the Refuge farm program: use no 

insecticides, use only Service-approved herbicides, 
Appendix J: Programmatic Biological Opinion Transmittal Memo

Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge / Comprehensive Conservation Plan

216

use minimum tillage practices, and use winter cover 

crops.

Continue cleanup of contaminated sites. Ensure 

Refuge industrial operations conform to prescribed 

environmental standards.

Refuge forest management activities will be 

guided by the best-management practices defined 

by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources 

Division of Forest Resources (October 2000) and 

may include streambank restoration and/or 

stabilization, and management of large woody 

debris.

Air Protection

Emissions from prescribed burning activities 

must comply with applicable Federal and state 

standards. The latest guidelines are in the Interim 

Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fire

(USEPA 1998). 

All management-ignited prescribed fires shall be 

carried out in accordance with the provisions of an 

approved burning plan, in accordance with manual 

direction and other appropriate guidelines and 

direction.

Monitoring and Reporting

Any surveys for Indiana bats that involve bat 

handling will require consultation with U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, and 

adequate training of survey crews by experienced 

personnel. Mist-netting procedures developed by 

Garner and Gardner (1992) will be used. For 

surveys that include bat handling, an annual report 

of bat-monitoring activities and involved personnel 

will be provided to the Marion, Illinois office of the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.