Conceptual Management Plan

Baca

National Wildlife Refuge

May 2005

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Alamosa / Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex

8249 Emperius Road

Alamosa, Colorado 81101-9003

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

National Wildlife Refuge System

Division of Planning

134 Union Blvd., Suite 300

Lakewood, Colorado 80228-1807
Conceptual Management Plan i

CHAPTERS

Executive Summary .............................................. S-1

Chapter 1. Introduction, Purpose and Need for 

 Plan ......................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ..................................................... 1

1.2 Purpose of the Plan ........................................ 1

1.3 National Wildlife Refuge Mission,

Goals, and Guiding Principles ............................. 2

1.4 History of Refuge Establishment ................ 4

1.5 Refuge Purpose .............................................. 4

1.6 Legal Policy and Guidance ............................ 5

1.7 Legal Policy and Guidance ............................ 5

Chapter 2. Planning Process and Key Issues ...... 9

2.1 Description of Planning Process ................. 9

2.2 Primary Planning Issues ............................. 9

Chapter 3. Management Direction ........................ 13

3.1 Habitats ........................................................ 13

3.2 Operations, Maintenance, and Law 

Enforcement ........................................................ 20

3.3 Public Use .................................................... 20

3.4 Cultural Resources ..................................... 22

3.5 Partnerships ................................................. 22

Chapter 4 Land Acquisition ................................... 25

4.1 Process .......................................................... 25

4.2 Land Acquisition Priorities ....................... 25

4.3 Ownership within Priority Zones ............ 26

4.4 Refuge Revenue Sharing Act .................. 26

Chapter 5. Resource Monitoring .......................... 31

5.1 Ecological and Biological Resources ....... 31

5.2 Cultural Resources .................................... 31

5.3 Hydrologic Resources ................................ 32

Chapter 6. Literature Cited .................................. 37

Chapter 7. List of Prepares and Reviewers ....... 41

TABLES

Table 1. Management Actions ............................. S-3

Table 2. Summary of Major Vegetation Classes 

within Baca National Wildlife Refuge. ........... 13

Table 3. Summary of Wetlands on the Baca 

National Wildlife Refuge (National Wetlands 

Inventory. USFWS) ............................................. 16

Table 4. Interim Compatibility Determination

Matrix .................................................................... 22

Table 5. List of Preparers and Reviewers .............. 41

FIGURES

Figure 1. Vicinity Map – San Luis Valley .................. 3

Figure 2. Approved Acquisition Boundary ............... 6

Figure 3. Vegetation Map ........................................... 15

Figure 4. National Wetland Inventory Map ........... .18

Figure 5. Land Acquisition Priority Zone ............... 27

Figure 6. Land Ownership Map ................................ 28

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Signed copy of General Agreement 

between The Nature Conservancy, the National 

Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

and the U.S. Forest Service ...............................A-1

Appendix B. Definitions of National Wetland 

Inventory Codes ................................................... B-1

Appendix C. Interim Compatibility Determination 

Colorado Division of Wildlife Dispersal Hunt 

Activities ................................................................ C-1

Cover photograph by Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski 

2005 © Grassland and shrubland habitats interspersed with playa wetlands are common on the Baca 

National Wildlife Refuge.

Contents
Summary
S-1

BACA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

Authorized in 2000, the Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

is one of the largest and most recent additions to 

the National Wildlife Refuge System. The refuge, 

at 92,500 acres, is located in Saguache and Alamosa 

counties in the San Luis Valley of south-central 

Colorado (figure 1). Congress authorized acquisition 

of land within the refuge with passage of Public 

Law 106-530, also known as the "Great Sand Dunes 

National Park and Preserve Act of 2000." This 

legislation, which received widespread support, 

focused not only on protecting the region's hydrology, 

which the incredibly unique sand dunes ecosystem 

depends upon, but also at protecting the exceptional 

ecological, cultural, and wildlife resources of the area.

Situated in the San Luis Valley, a high mountain 

desert surrounded by two 14,000 foot mountain 

ranges, the refuge contains a highly diverse suite of 

habitats including desert shrublands, grasslands, wet 

meadows, playa wetlands, and riparian areas. Fed 

largely by melting mountain snow, numerous streams 

crisscross the refuge providing an abundance of life in 

an otherwise arid landscape. The refuge is home to a 

multitude of wildlife and plant species, some of which 

only occur in the San Luis Valley. 

Adding to the uniqueness and importance of the 

refuge is its juxaposition to other conservation 

lands in the area. The refuge abuts lands owned or 

controlled by other conservation entities including 

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the National 

Park Service (NPS), the USDA Forest Service 

(USFS), and the Colorado State Land Board (SLB). 

This complex of lands, totaling more than 500,000 

acres, contains one of the largest and most diverse 

assemblages of wetland habitats remaining in 

Colorado.

In addition to the incredible plant and animal 

resources contained on the refuge, the area is also 

tremendously rich in cultural resource sites, some of 

which date over 12,000 years ago. Many of these 

sites have been added to the National Register of 

Historic Places. 

SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This conceptual management plan (CMP) will 

provide local landowners, neighboring governmental 

agencies, and the interested public with a general 

understanding of the anticipated management 

approaches for the refuge over the next 3 to 5 years. 

The purpose of this CMP is to provide a broad 

overview of the Service's proposed management 

approach to wildlife and their relative habitats, 

public uses, facilities, interagency coordination, 

and other operational needs. The comprehensive 

conservation plan (CCP) planning process, which is 

similar to the current NPS general management plan 

planning process, is scheduled to start in 2008. The 

CCP will provide a thorough, in-depth analysis of 

all facets of current and future refuge management 

Shrubland habitat on the Baca National Wildlife Refuge

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski

Conceptual Management Plan S-1

Executive Summary
Summary

S-2 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Wetlands in the San Luis Valley are critical for 

migratory birds.

 Bob Sanders/Ducks Unlimited

activities. Management actions described in 

this CMP apply only to those lands under the 

jurisdiction of the Service.

REFUGE PURPOSE

The legislation creating the refuge did not specify 

a refuge purpose. By default, the purpose of the 

refuge is the mission of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System until a new purpose is approved. 

Based on analysis of the intent of the enabling 

legislation, the following purpose is proposed and 

some form of it will likely be approved in the near 

future.

▪ The purpose of the Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge is to restore, enhance 

and maintain wetland, upland, riparian 

and other habitats for wildlife, plants 

and fish species that are native to the 

San Luis Valley, Colorado. Management 

of the refuge will emphasize migratory 

bird conservation and will consider 

the refuge's role in broader landscape 

conservation efforts. 

INTERIM REFUGE GOALS

Within the next 3 to 5 years, refuge staff, (given 

sufficient resources) will strive to achieve the 

following goals at the refuge and in doing so, protect 

and foster a better understanding of the ecological 

processes that have shaped and will continue to 

shape this unique landscape. 

▪ Evaluate pre-acquisition management 

strategies in relation to wetland, upland, 

and riparian habitats.

▪ Assemble resource information including 

wildlife and biological, hydrological, and 

cultural resources.

▪ Assemble visitor services information and 

needs for the development of the visitor 

services program.

▪ Assemble operational and funding 

needs including staff requirements and 

inventorying real property assets such as 

fences, windmills, buildings, water control 

structures, and roads.

▪ Maintain and evaluate pre-acquisition 

irrigation strategies. 

▪ Ensure law enforcement protection 

including but not limited to facilities, 

boundaries, cultural resources, and 

refuge-specific regulations.

▪ Respond to public concerns and provide 

information in a timely manner.

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

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. The underlying foundation of the Refuge 

System is that "wildlife comes first" (Fulfilling the 

Promise, USFWS 1999). The refuge will be managed 

with this underlying principle at the forefront. Table 1 

provides a summary of the major action items related 

to habitats, operations, public use, partnerships, and 

cultural resources for the Baca National Wildlife 

Refuge that can be expected, given sufficient 

resources, during the first 3 to 5 years of refuge 

activities. The level of assessment for any one action 
Conceptual Management Plan S-3

Summary

Table 1. Management Actions

Management Direction Component Actions

Habitat Type

Shrublands/Grasslands

▪ Assess habitat conditions.

▪ Evaluate grazing and haying 

 activities to improve vegetation 

 health and wildlife habitat.

▪ Evaluate prescribed fi re to 

 improve habitat for wildlife.

▪ Assess wildlife use.

Wetlands – Wet Meadows

▪ Assess habitat conditions.

▪ Continue and evaluate current 

 irrigation practices.

▪ Evaluate grazing and haying 

 activities to improve vegetation 

 health and wildlife habitat.

▪ Evaluate prescribed fi re to 

 improve habitat for wildlife. 

▪ Assess wildlife use.

▪ Assemble existing hydrology 

 data, develop research needs.

Wetlands - Playas

▪ Assess habitat conditions.

▪ Assemble hydrology data, 

 develop research needs.

▪ Evaluate water management 

 options.

▪ Assess wildlife use.

Riparian Areas

▪ Assess habitat conditions.

▪ Evaluate grazing activities to 

 improve vegetation health and 

 wildlife habitat.

▪ Evaluate prescribed fi re to 

 improve habitat for wildlife.

▪ Assess wildlife use.

Operations, Maintenance, 

Law Enforcement

Operations

▪ Assess and maintain real 

 property inventory.

▪ Secure funding and staff.

▪ Establish headquarters.

Maintenance

▪ Maintain boundary signs.

▪ Evaluate and maintain 

 infrastructure including roads, 

 water control structures, and 

 buildings.

▪ Evaluate existing fencing and 

 future needs.
Summary

S-4 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

item will depend upon sufficient funding 

and staffing.

FUTURE DIRECTION

The Baca National Wildlife Refuge will be 

managed following the direction provided in this 

document. As outlined in this document, a large 

percentage staff time will be devoted to acquiring 

baseline information and knowledge about the 

resources contained on the refuge and how those 

resources intact within the larger landscape of the 

area. In 2008, the refuge is scheduled to begin 

a comprehensive conservation planning process 

which will outline refuge activities for the next 15 

years. All interested individuals and groups will 

be asked to participate throughout this process. 

For more information on the content provided in 

this document or for additional clarification, please 

contact: 

Michael Blenden, Project Leader 

Alamosa/Monte Vista/Baca National Wildlife 

Refuge Complex 

Management Direction Component Actions

Operations, Maintenance, Law 

Enforcement Law Enforcement

▪ Assess habitat conditions.

▪ Evaluate grazing and haying 

 activities to improve vegetation 

 health and wildlife habitat.

▪ Evaluate prescribed fi re to 

 improve habitat for wildlife.

▪ Assess wildlife use.

Public Use Public Use

▪ Assemble information required 

 for development of a public use 

 plan.

Partnerships Partnerships

▪ Continue to develop partner

 ships and cooperation between 

 neighboring government agen

 cies, local governments, non-

 governmental organizations, 

 and the members of the public.

Cultural Resources Cultural Resources

▪ Coordinate with partners to 

 ensure the protection of known 

 culturally signifi cant sites.

▪ Survey areas where human-

 caused disturbance may occur 

 (such as any area proposed for 

 prescribed fi re activities).

Table 1. Management Actions Continued

8249 Emperius Road 

Alamosa, CO 81101-9003

719.589.4021

or 

Mike Artmann, Wildlife Biologist

Division of Refuge Planning

134 Union Blvd

Lakewood, CO 80228

303.236.4381
INTRODUCTION, PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR PLAN

chapter 1
1.1 BACKGROUND

The Baca National Wildlife Refuge is located in 

Saguache and Alamosa counties in the San Luis 

Valley of south-central Colorado (figure 1). Congress 

authorized acquisition of land within the boundary of 

the refuge with passage of Public Law 106-530, also 

known as the “Great Sand Dunes National Park and 

Preserve Act of 2000.” In addition to the refuge, the 

Act authorized the federal acquisition of lands adjacent 

to the Great Sand Dunes National Monument for 

the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve 

(hereafter “Park”). This legislation focused on 

protecting the region’s hydrology, which the entire 

sand dunes ecosystem depends upon, and at protecting 

the region’s exceptional ecological, cultural, and 

wildlife resources. 

With an approved acquisition boundary of 

approximately 92,500 acres, the refuge joins two 

existing national wildlife refuges (Alamosa and Monte 

Vista) in the San Luis Valley managed by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (figure 1). Although the authority 

has been granted to acquire land within this boundary, 

this does not guarantee that all of this area will ever be 

acquired by the Service. The refuge abuts lands owned 

or controlled by other conservation entities including 

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the National Park 

Service (NPS), the USDA Forest Service (USFS), and 

the Colorado State Land Board (SLB). This complex 

of lands, totaling more than 500,000 acres, contains 

one of the largest and most diverse assemblages of 

wetland habitats remaining in Colorado. In addition to 

the tremendous biological and ecological resources in 

this part of the San Luis Valley, there are significant 

cultural resources. 

The San Luis Valley, a high mountain desert averaging 

only 7 inches of precipitation annually, is surrounded 

by towering 14,000 foot peaks of the Sangre de Cristo 

Mountains on the east and the San Juan Mountains 

to the west. In contrast to the valley floor, higher 

elevations of the mountains receive more than 30 

inches of precipitation annually, mostly as winter snow. 

Nearly everything and everyone in the valley depends 

upon these mountain snow packs. The refuge contains 

a diversity of habitat types including desert shrublands, 

grasslands, wet meadows, playa wetlands, and riparian 

areas, and is home to a multitude of wildlife and plant 

species, some of which only occur in the San Luis Valley.

1.2 PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The Service is formulating this conceptual management 

plan (CMP) during the acquisition planning process 

to provide local landowners, neighboring 

governmental agencies, and the interested public 

with a general understanding of the anticipated 

management approaches for the refuge over 

the next 3 to 5 years. The purpose of this CMP 

is to provide a broad overview of the Service’s 

proposed management approach to wildlife and 

their relative habitats, public uses, facilities, 

interagency coordination, and other operational 

needs. This CMP is not intended to provide 

substantive detail regarding issues such as where 

new facilities (if any) would be developed or how 

approved visitor services would be implemented. 

Answers to these types of questions and many 

others will be addressed with significant input 

from the public and others, as required by 

Service policy and the National Environmental 

Policy Act, during the Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan (CCP) planning process.

The CCP planning process, which is scheduled to 

start in 2008, will provide a thorough, in-depth 

analysis of all facets of current and future refuge 

management activities. Management actions 

described in this CMP only apply to those lands 

under the jurisdiction of the Service. 

Great blue heron

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski

Conceptual Management Plan 1

Chapter 1. Introduction, Purpose of and Need for Plan 
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need

2 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

▪ To perpetuate migratory bird, interjurisdictional fish, and marine mammal 

populations

▪ To conserve a diversity of fish, wildlife 

and plants

▪ To conserve and restore as appropriate 

representative ecosystems of the United 

States, including the ecological processes 

characteristic of those ecosystems

▪ To foster understanding and instill 

appreciation of fish, wildlife, and plants, 

and their conservation, by providing 

the public with safe, high-quality, and 

compatible wildlife-dependent public 

use. Such use includes hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation, wildlife photography, 

environmental education, and interpretation.

In addition to the goals outlined above, four guiding 

principles for the management and general public use 

of the Refuge System have been established:

▪ Habitat - Fish and wildlife will not prosper 

without high quality habitat, and without 

fish and wildlife, traditional uses of refuges 

cannot be sustained. The Refuge System 

will continue to conserve and enhance the 

quality and diversity of fish and wildlife 

habitat within refuges.

▪ Public Use - The Refuge System provides 

important opportunities for compatible 

wildlife-dependent recreational activities 

involving hunting, fishing, wildlife 

observation, wildlife photography, 

environmental education, and interpretation.

▪ Partnerships - America’s sportsmen and 

women were the first partners who insisted 

on protecting valuable wildlife habitat 

within wildlife refuges. Conservation 

partnerships with other federal agencies, 

state agencies, tribes, organizations, 

industry, and the general public can make 

significant contributions to the growth and 

management of the Refuge System.

▪ Public Involvement - The public should 

be given a full and open opportunity to 

participate in decisions regarding acquisition 

and management of our national wildlife 

refuges.

1.4 HISTORY OF REFUGE ESTABLISHMENT

Baca National Wildlife Refuge was authorized by 

1.3 NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE MISSION, 

GOALS, AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The National Wildlife Refuge System is a national 

network of lands set aside specifically for wildlife 

and their respective habitats. This priority-use 

mandate for wildlife is unique when compared to 

the mandates of other federal land management 

agencies such as the USFS and Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), which have multiple-use 

mandates. Since the first national wildlife refuge 

was established by President Theodore Roosevelt 

in 1903 (3-acre Pelican Island in Florida), the 

Refuge System has grown to 545 refuges 

encompassing over 95 million acres of land. The 

Refuge System is national in scope in that every 

state hosts at least one national wildlife refuge.

With the passage of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Improvement Act of 1997 (Refuge 

Improvement Act), the mission of the Refuge 

System was, for the first time, clearly defined and 

articulated. The Refuge Improvement Act can be 

regarded as the organic act for the Refuge System. 

The mission of the Refuge System originating from 

the Refuge Improvement Act 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.”

( National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997.)

Not surprisingly, the Refuge System mission is 

quite similar to the overall mission of the Service: 

“Working with others to conserve, protect, 

and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants 

and their habitats for the continuing 

benefit of the American people.”

Specific goals of the Refuge System include:

▪ To fulfill the Service’s statutory duty to 

achieve refuge purpose(s) and further 

the System mission

▪ To conserve, restore where appropriate, 

and enhance all species of fish, wildlife 

and plants that are endangered or 

threatened with becoming endangered
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need

Conceptual Management Plan 3

Figure 1. Vicinity Map – San Luis Valley

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

£¤ £¤

£¤

£¤

£¤

Rio Grande

Monte Vista NWR

Alamosa NWR

Huerfano River

County Road T

Lane Six

Conejos Rive r

COSTILLA COSTILLA

?Ç

?Ç

SAGUACHE SAGUACHE

ALAMOSA ALAMOSA

CUSTER CUSTER

COSTILLA COSTILLA

RIO GRANDE RIO GRANDE

CONEJOS CONEJOS

HUERFANO HUERFANO

Mosca

Moffat

Hooper

Center

Blanca

Capulin

Alamosa

Saguache

Crestone

Del Norte

Westcliffe

Monte Vista

Fort Garland

285

285

160

160 285

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

Vicinity Map -- San Luis Valley

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

UTM ZONE 13

NAD 27

Colorado

Map Location

Elevation

14,330 ft

7,450 ft.

Legend

Baca NWR Acquisition Boundary

Great Sand Dunes NP Acquistion Boundary

Great Sand Dunes National Preserve

Rio Grande National Forest*

San Luis State Park and Wildlife Area

Medano Zapata Ranch (TNC)

* Inholdings not depicted

048 2

Miles

048 2 Kilometers
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need

4 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Congress on November 22, 2000, with the signing 

of Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve 

Act. In addition to establishing the refuge, the Act 

authorized the federal acquisition of lands adjacent 

to the Great Sand Dunes National Monument for 

the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve. 

The legislation was sponsored by Colorado Senator 

Wayne Allard and Congressman Scott McInnis and 

received widespread bi-partisan support within 

Congress, as well as overwhelming state and local 

support in the San Luis Valley. This legislation was 

the successful culmination of federal, state and local 

attempts over the previous 15 years to protect the 

region’s vast water resources from trans-basin water 

exportation efforts originating from the 97,000 acre 

Baca Ranch. The legislation establishing the refuge 

and the Park mandates protection of the region’s 

hydrology which the Great Sand Dunes ecosystem 

depends upon, and exceptional biological, ecological, 

and cultural resources of the area. 

The approved acquisition boundary for the refuge 

is approximately 92,500 acres (figure 2). In April 

2003, the Service obtained the first unit of the 

refuge when the 3,315-acre White Ranch property 

was transferred from the Bureau of Reclamation 

(BOR) to the Service. The Notice to establish the 

refuge appeared in the Federal Register on March 

11, 2003 (Vol. 68 No. 47). BOR purchased the White 

Ranch as part of a mitigation settlement for wetland 

losses resulting from the construction and operation 

of the Closed Basin Project, a division of the San 

Luis Valley Project. The Closed Basin Project was 

authorized by Congress in 1972 to assist Colorado in 

meeting its delivery requirements to New Mexico 

and Texas under the Rio Grande Compact (1938). 

The Closed Basin Project consists of numerous 

shallow wells and canals that deliver water to the 

Rio Grande via the 42-mile Franklin Eddy canal. 

The Baca Ranch is approximately 97,000 acres, of 

which approximately 53,500 acres are within the 

refuge acquisition boundary. TNC, along with the 

U.S. Department of the Interior (NPS and the 

Service) officially purchased the Baca Ranch in 

September 2004. The federal buyout of TNC by 

the Department occurred on March 8, 2005. Prior 

to the buyout, there existed a considerable amount 

of uncertainty as to when the federal buyout would 

actually occur. To deal with this uncertainty and 

ease transition to the Department, the Service 

along with the NPS and the USFS, entered into an 

agreement with TNC to co-manage the Baca Ranch 

until the buyout occurred. A general agreement 

was signed September 2004 and later amended 

in February 2005. The current amended general 

agreement between the Service and TNC outlines 

management and procedural details for the refuge 

through 2005. A copy of the September 2004 and 

February 2005 general agreement documents can 

be found in Appendix A. With acquisition of the 

Baca Ranch, Service ownership within the refuge is 

approximately 57,000 acres (62 percent). For more 

information on future land acquisition for the refuge, 

see Chapter 5.

1.5 REFUGE PURPOSE

A refuge purpose may be derived from federal law, 

proclamation, executive order, agreement, public 

land order, donation document, or administrative 

memorandum. The purposes for which a refuge is 

established carry special importance. Not only does 

the purpose help provide a vision or mission for 

Sandhill cranes

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need

Conceptual Management Plan 5

the refuge, it serves as the basis for compatibility 

determinations. Each refuge use must be 

determined to be compatible with, and not materially 

detract from, the purpose for which the refuge was 

established. The legislation creating the refuge did 

not specify a refuge purpose. By default, the purpose 

of the refuge is the mission of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System until a new purpose is approved. 

Based on analysis of the intent of the enabling 

legislation, the following purpose is proposed 

and some form of it will likely be approved in the 

near future.

▪ The purpose of the Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge is to restore, enhance 

and maintain wetland, upland, riparian 

and other habitats for wildlife, plants and 

fish species that are native to the San 

Luis Valley, Colorado. Management of 

the refuge will emphasize migratory bird 

conservation and will consider the refuge’s 

role in broader landscape conservation 

efforts. 

1.6 INTERIM REFUGE GOALS

Within the next 3 to 5 years, refuge staff, (given 

sufficient resources) will strive to achieve the 

following goals at the refuge and, in doing so, protect 

and foster a better understanding of the ecological 

processes that have shaped and will continue to 

shape this unique landscape. 

▪ Evaluate pre-acquisition management 

strategies in relation to wetland, upland, 

and riparian habitats.

▪ Assemble resource information including 

wildlife and biological, hydrological, and 

cultural resources.

▪ Assemble visitor services information and 

needs for the development of the visitor 

services program.

▪ Assemble operational and funding 

needs including staff requirements and 

inventorying real property assets such as 

fences, buildings, irrigation facilities, and 

roads.

▪ Maintain and evaluate pre-acquisition 

irrigation strategies. 

▪ Ensure law enforcement protection 

including but not limited to facilities, 

boundaries, cultural resources, and refugespecific regulations.

▪ Respond to public concerns and 

provide information in a timely manner.

1.7 LEGAL POLICY AND GUIDANCE

Baca National Wildlife Refuge will be managed as 

a part of the Refuge System in accordance with the 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act of 1966 as amended with the National Wildlife 

Refuge Improvement Act of 1997, Executive Order 

12996, and other applicable Service and federal land 

management policies.
Chapter 1: Introduction, Purpose and Need

6 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Deadman Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Spanish Creek

Willow Creek

Crestone Creek

San Isabel Creek

Saguache Creek

San Luis Creek

San Luis Creek

Sand Creek

Hooper

Moffat Crestone

?Ç

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

Approved Acquisition Boundary

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Figure 2

Lexam Road

012

Miles

012

Kilometers

Legend

Baca NWR Approved Acquisition Boundary

Roads and Trails

Great Sand Dunes National Park Boundary

Rio Grande National Forest

San Luis State Park and Wildlife Area

Figure 2. Approved Acquisition Boundary
PLANNING PROCESS AND KEY ISSUES

chapter 2
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF PLANNING PROCESS

The planning process for this CMP began in earnest 

in early February 2004 with an internal meeting 

between local field staff, Denver regional office 

management, and planning staff at Alamosa National 

Wildlife Refuge. The purpose of this meeting was 

to discuss the new refuge, identify the core team 

to develop the CMP, outline planning objectives, 

strategies, and time lines, and identify known issues 

and data needs. Main issues generated during this 

meeting fell into two general categories: (1) lack of 

funding and staff to manage the refuge; and (2) lack 

of information about resources on the refuge.

On March 17, 2004, a news release was submitted 

to local and regional newspapers and other venues 

to notify the public of the Service’s intent to host 

two open-house public meetings. The purpose of 

these meetings was two-fold: (1) to disseminate 

information pertaining to the planning process 

for the refuge to the public; and (2) to gather 

public comments and concerns about future refuge 

management. Seven people attended the first 

meeting held at the Alamosa County courthouse 

on April 4, 2004. The second meeting was held on 

April 5, 2004, at the Baca Grande Property Owners 

Association Hall in Crestone; six people attended 

this meeting. The main concerns were the expanding 

elk population, spread of invasive plants, general 

public access to the refuge, differing regulations 

between the Park and the refuge, and access to the 

Park from the north, perhaps through the refuge. 

Additional meetings were held by refuge staff with 

the Saguache and Alamosa County commissioners 

throughout the summer to update the local 

governments on the refuge planning efforts and to 

address questions and concerns. Refuge staff also 

have participated in Great Sand Dunes Advisory 

Council meetings, local water conservation 

district meetings, and San Luis Valley Focus Area 

Committee meetings throughout 2004. Additional 

public meetings will be held in the future as new 

planning efforts are initiated. A discussion of the 

primary issues raised during the planning process 

are listed below.

2.2 PRIMARY PLANNING ISSUES 

LACK OF FUNDING AND PERSONNEL

With the addition of the Baca National Wildlife 

Refuge to the refuge complex (Alamosa, Monte 

Vista, and Baca National Wildlife Refuges), 

Congress significantly expanded the Service’s 

acquisition authority and subsequent management 

responsibilities in the San Luis Valley, without 

expanding its operating budget and personnel 

base. No additional funding or personnel are 

dedicated to the administration and operation of 

the refuge, therefore, the refuge will be managed 

initially with existing staff from Monte Vista and 

Alamosa refuges. 

Personnel required to effectively administer 

operations and management at the refuge include 

a refuge manager, biologist, administrative 

assistant, two maintenance workers, a full-time law 

enforcement officer, and two biological technicians. 

Initial costs for setup, administration, operations, 

maintenance, and developments are estimated 

at $2.7 million. This includes costs associated 

with staffing, law enforcement activities, fence 

maintenance, signing refuge boundaries, water 

distribution system repairs, and road and structure 

repair and removal if needed. Annual operating 

costs for the same items are estimated at $857,000. 

Without sufficient personnel and funding, most if 

not all of the goals and action items described in this 

CMP will be difficult, if not impossible, to attain.

ELK POPULATION

Based on annual surveys conducted by the 

Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), estimates 

of the elk population in the vicinity of the refuge 

total approximately 5,000 animals (Rivale, pers. 

comm. 2003). Generally, the elk travel between 

the refuge, neighboring NPS and TNC lands, and 

surrounding private lands. From an ecological 

standpoint, it is unclear how elk are affecting 

vegetative communities, and to what extent 

biological carrying capacities are being reached or 

exceeded. In October 2004, researchers from U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) and CDOW initiated 

a 3-year research effort within the Great Sand 

Dunes ecosystem to assess the condition of plant 

communities, and to assess the effects of large 

ungulate (elk, bison, and cattle) grazing on these 

communities. Although chronic wasting disease 

(CWD) has not been detected in wild ungulate 

populations within the San Luis Valley, CWD is a 

concern due to relatively high animal densities.

From an economic standpoint, area farmers and 

ranchers have expressed concerns about damage to 

crops and haystacks, and competition for available 

grass for cattle. Numerous comments were 

received during public scoping meetings such as 

Conceptual Management Plan 9

Chapter 2. Planning Process and Key Issues
Chapter 2: Planning Process and Key Issues

10 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

“there are too many elk,” and “keep the elk off my 

land.” CDOW has received similar comments for 

several years in relation to elk; as a result CDOW 

implemented special dispersal hunts on the entire 

Medano-Zapata Ranch (TNC) and on the leased state 

lands on the Baca Ranch (13,105 acres) in an attempt 

to reduce elk conflicts. These hunts are intended to 

keep elk east of State Highway 17.

General hunting has had limited success at reducing 

overall herd size due primarily to the inaccessibility 

of elk to hunters. Most of the areas where elk spend 

a large amount of time during the hunting season, 

like the Baca Ranch lands and the NPS lands, are 

not open to public hunting. Over the last 5 years, 

an average of 355 animals have been killed during 

the hunting season within game management unit 

#82 (CDOW 2004b). This number reflects combined 

hunter success and animals harvested during the 

dispersal hunts.

This research may provide important biological 

information needed to assist with the development 

and implementation of an elk management program 

on the refuge. Hunting will be considered as part 

of an elk and habitat management program. The 

refuge will have an approved hunting plan in place 

prior to establishing a hunting program. Hunting 

is recognized as a priority use on national wildlife 

refuges. A hunting plan will be developed as part 

of the visitor services planning process. Public 

comment will be encouraged during the development 

of a visitor services plan and hunting plan (see public 

use section for additional information.) 

INVASIVE PLANTS

Identification and control of invasive plants are 

considered a priority for the Service. Invasive plants 

are one of the greatest threats to intact landscapes 

and a major cause of reduced biodiversity. Plants 

of primary concern include Canada thistle (Cirsium 

arvense), tall whitetop (Lepidium latifolium), 

Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) and salt 

cedar (Tamarisk spp.) especially in the wetland and 

riparian habitats. In addition to ground surveys, the 

Service will assess the extent of weed infestations 

on the refuge through discussions with previous 

owners, TNC, and other knowledgeable individuals. 

Concurrent with an assessment, strategies will be 

developed to address known infestations given the 

reality of funding and staffing constraints. 

Building on a knowledge base assembled by Service 

personnel at Monte Vista and Alamosa Refuges, 

a variety of tools including herbicide applications, 

mechanical control including mowing and haying, 

biological control, grazing, and prescribed fire may 

be used to help combat the spread of invasive plants. 

In the short term, haying and grazing will be used as 

the primary means to combat existing infestations, 

especially in the wet meadows. Once the severity 

and locations of infestations are better understood, 

the role of haying and grazing for invasive control 

will be re-evaluated. Because invasive plants do not 

obey property boundaries, the Service is committed 

to active participation with neighboring agencies, 

TNC, and other property owners to collectively and 

efficiently combat infestations.

NORTHERN ACCESS TO THE NATIONAL PARK

The National Park Service is currently undergoing 

their general management plan (GMP) planning 

effort for the Park, which will guide management 

activities for the next 15-20 years. One of the 

biggest issues facing NPS involves public assess 

to new lands included in the northern portion of 

the Park. The process and details of developing 

additional public access has received considerable 

attention from the public. Currently, the primary 

access to the Park is available from the south via 

State Highway 150. Expansion of the Park adjacent 

to the Baca Grande Subdivision has created a defacto 

Rocky Mountain elk

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski
Chapter 2: Planning Process and Key Issues

Conceptual Management Plan 11

point of access to new Park lands. The Baca Grande 

Subdivision has a network of public, county roads, 

some of which end at the boundary between the Park 

and subdivision. Although residents of the property 

owners association are concerned with potential large 

increases in traffic and parking issues associated with 

visitors using these roads to access the Park, their 

ability to restrict traffic is very limited. Several 

alternatives are being considered for development by 

the NPS and their advisory council. None of these 

alternatives promote access via existing county roads 

in the Baca Grande community subdivision to specific 

trail head locations on the Park. However, one may be 

developed that accommodates parking inside the park 

boundary adjacent to the subdivision. 
MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

chapter 3
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. The underlying foundation of the Refuge 

System is that “wildlife comes first” (Fulfilling the 

Promise, USFWS 1999). The refuge will be managed 

with this underlying principle at the forefront.

3.1 HABITATS

UPLAND HABITATS

Semi-desert Shrublands and Grasslands

Semi-desert shrublands and grasslands are typical 

of arid continental interior basins and is widespread 

in areas affected by rain shadows in western North 

America where mean annual precipitation is less 

than 10 inches. This habitat type is widespread on 

the valley floor, where only 7 inches of precipitation 

falls annually. Approximately 77 percent of the 

refuge, or over 71,700 acres, fall into this habitat 

type (figure 3) (CDOW 2004a). The dominate shrubs 

include rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), 

greasewood (Sacrobatus vermiculatus), fourwing 

saltbush (Atriplex canescens), shadscale (Atriplex 

confertifolia), and winterfat (Krascheninnikovia 

Table 2. Summary of Major Vegetation Classes within Baca National Wildlife Refuge. 

lanata). Native grasses 

occurring in association 

with these and other 

shrubs typically include 

Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis 

hymenoides), Alkali sacaton 

(Sporobolus airoides), 

western wheat grass 

(Pascopyrum smithii), and 

blue grama (Bouleloua 

gracilis). Annual plants tend 

to be more abundant in this 

habitat type; however, many 

of these are exotic species Blue grama

including cheat grass (Bromus tectorum). Crested 

wheatgrass (Agropyron desertorum), an exotic 

perennial grass, also may be common. Many of the 

plants within this habitat type are drought resistant 

and tolerant to a range of soil salinity, conditions 

common on the valley floor.

Bird diversity and densities tend to be relatively 

low in semi-desert shrublands due to structural 

and floristic simplicity (Wiens and Rotenberry 

1981). Species common to this habitat include the 

horned lark (Eremophilo alpestris), mourning 

dove (Zenaida macroura), western meadowlark 

(Surnella neglecta), and loggerhead shrike 

(Lanius ludovicianus). Upland grassland habitats, 

depending on the amount and type of vegetation, 

have the potential to support rare grasslandConceptual Management Plan 13

Chapter 3. Management Direction

Vegetation Class Name Grid Code Acres %

Rabbitbrush Grass Mix 34 43,916 47.6

Greasewood 24 24,646 26.7

Herbaceous Riparian 112 9,009 9.8

Sedge 113 4,025 4.4

Grass Dominated 11 3,898 4.2

Shrub/Grass/Forb Mix 32 3,220 3.5

Cottonwood 106 1,703 1.8

Soil 93 794 0.9

Irrigated Agriculture 6 452 0.5

Sand Dune Complex 17 332 0.4

Total 91,995 99.5%

Note: Six other vegetation classes occur within Baca NWR with acreages (<100).

* Data from Colorado Vegetation Classification Project (www.ndis.nrel.colostate.edu).
Chapter 3: Management Direction

14 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

dependent species such as the burrowing 

owl (Athene cunicularia), mountain plover 

(Charadrius montanus), long-billed curlew 

(Numenius americanus) and several sparrow 

species. Another habitat type found in association 

with the playa wetlands portion of the shrublands 

are salt grass pans. These areas depending on the 

hydrologic conditions and juxtaposition to other 

habitat types, can support a range of invertebrate, 

mammal, and bird species including nesting 

American avocets (Recurvirostra americana). 

Two globally vulnerable subspecies of small 

mammals, the silky pocket mouse (Perognathus 

flavus sanluisi), and the thirteen-lined ground 

squirrel (Spermophilus tridecemlineatus blanca); 

and one globally vulnerable subspecies of butterfly 

(sandhills skipper; Polites sabuleti ministigma) 

were found in greasewood/salt grass dominated 

areas of the White Ranch (Rondeau et al. 1998). 

This subspecies of sandhill skipper is endemic 

to the San Luis Valley. Also, the globally rare 

slender spiderflower (Cleome multicaulis) can be 

found in the transition zone between the shrubland 

and salt grass pans.

Management of Shrublands and Grasslands

During the interim period, the Service will 

assess the condition of the shrublands and 

grasslands habitat on the refuge. Obvious signs 

of degradation, whether in vegetative condition 

or the presence of large infestations of invasive 

plants, will be addressed with corrective actions. 

Following an assessment, strategies will be 

developed and implemented to improve this 

habitat type for wildlife. Lands within the refuge 

have a long history of domestic cattle grazing, 

some of which recently, at least on the Baca Ranch, 

has been a season-long grazing scheme with high 

stocking rates. The Service considers domestic 

grazing as a management tool to improve habitat 

quality for wildlife. As more information is 

gathered about this habitat type and its condition, 

specific habitat-based goals and objectives will 

be developed. Domestic grazing activities within 

the shrublands and grasslands habitat on the 

refuge will be reduced over time; the degree and 

timeliness of changes will be dependent on, at 

least initially, the condition of the habitat, and 

later based on specific habitat-based goals and 

objectives for this habitat type. 

The Service will consider the use of prescribed 

fire in this habitat type, especially in areas with 

a larger grassland component, to improve or 

provide a matrix of various habitat types for 

wildlife. The Service has been an active partner 

in the development of a joint Greater Sand Dunes 

Fire Management Plan planning effort with 

the NPS and TNC, and will use this effort as the 

basis for further fire management planning for the 

refuge. This interagency effort will provide a general 

framework for fire-related actions to enhance and 

maintain wildlife habitat, biological diversity, healthy 

ecosystems, and cultural resources, while reducing 

the chance of a catastrophic wildfire. Prior to the 

use of prescribed fire on the refuge, fire management 

specialists will write site-specific burn plans tied to 

habitat management objectives. These site-specific 

plans will encompass all aspects of the prescribed 

fire planning process and must receive approval from 

regional fire management staff in Denver prior to 

implementation.

Western meadowlark

USFWS/John and Karen Hollingsworth
Chapter 3: Management Direction

Conceptual Management Plan 15

Deadman Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Spanish Creek

Willow Creek

Crestone Creek

San Isabel Creek

Saguache Creek

San Luis Creek

San Luis Creek

Sand Creek

Hooper

Moffat Crestone

?Ç

B ig Spring Creek

County Road T

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

Vegetation Map

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Figure 3

Vegetation within Refuge

Cottonwood

Grass Dominated

Grass/Forb Mix

Greasewood

Herbaceous Riparian

Irrigated Agriculture

Rabbitbrush/Grass Mix

Sand Dune Complex

Sedge

Shrub Riparian

Shrub/Grass/Forb Mix

Soil

Sparse/PJ/Shrub/Rock Mix

Water

Willow

012

Miles

012

Kilometers

Entity

Baca NWR

Great Sand Dunes N.P.

Rio Grande N.F.

San Luis State Park/Wildlife Area

Legend

Figure 3. Vegetation Map
Chapter 3: Management Direction

16 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

WETLAND HABITATS

Protection of water resources in the Great Sand 

Dunes ecosystem was one of the primary driving 

forces behind the legislation establishing the refuge. 

The refuge contains a diversity of wetland types, 

each possessing unique hydrologic characteristics 

and each supporting a diversity of plant and animal 

species, some of which are very rare (e.g., slender 

spiderflower). According to the National Wetland 

Inventory (NWI), approximately 14 percent 

(13,112 acres) of the refuge has been classified as 

wetlands (table 3; figure 4). Wetland type, which 

is directly affected by water permanence and other 

abiotic factors, varies greatly within the refuge. 

Intermittent wetlands (or “playa wetlands”) can 

experience weeks, months, or even years between 

periods of inundation (see appendix B for NWI 

definitions). Temporary wetlands tend to have 

surface water for brief periods early in the growing 

season, while seasonal wetlands typically have 

surface water for most of the growing season. The 

vast majority of temporary and seasonal wetlands 

are referred to locally as “wet meadows.” 

Semipermanent wetlands and lakes usually have 

surface water that persists throughout the growing 

season and often beyond during most years. These 

wetlands are far less common on the refuge, yet, 

where they do occur, they provide important 

habitat for water birds such as the white-faced ibis 

(Plegadis chihi), eared grebe (Podiceps nigricollis), 

pied-billed grebe (Podilymbus podiceps), and 

sandhill crane (Grus canadensis). 

This range of water permanence contributes 

greatly to the biological value of the refuge. 

Many of the wetland and riparian habitats on 

the refuge have been identified as conservation 

sites by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program 

(CNHP) because they provide “significant” or 

“very significant” contributions to global biological 

diversity (Rondeau et al. 1998). For example, 

creeks and wetlands on the Baca Ranch support 

the globally rare Rio Grande chub (Gila pandora) 

(Blenden, pers. comm. 2004; Rondeau et al. 1998). 

Wet meadows and playa wetlands, which comprise 

the largest component of wetland habitats on the 

refuge, are discussed in-depth in the following 

sections.

Wet Meadows

Wet meadows (the majority being temporary and 

seasonal wetlands) comprise the largest wetland 

type on the refuge covering over 10,000 acres 

(table 3). The wet meadows on the refuge tend to 

be dominated by sedges (Carex spp.), baltic rush 

(Juncus balticus), and hairgrass (Deschampsia 

cespitosa) plant communities. These communities 

are common in the northern portion of the San 

Luis Valley and occupy more area than all other 

wetland types in the valley (Cooper and Severn 

1992). These communities tend to occur where 

the water table just reaches the soil surface during 

the early part of the growing season or inundates 

the surface for short periods. Wet meadows occur 

predominately in the central and northeast portion 

of the refuge along all of the creeks, and to a lesser 

extent in the southeast portion of the refuge along 

Sand Creek and Big Spring Creek. 

Depending on plant structure and density, and 

water depth and duration, wet meadows offer 

tremendous foraging and nesting opportunities 

for a variety of wetland avian species including 

numerous species of waterfowl, the sora (Porzana 

carolina) and Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), 

white-faced ibis, American avocet, Wilson’s snipe 

(Gallinago delicata), and Wilson’s phalarope 

(Phalaropus tricolor). Wet meadows also provide 

critical roosting and foraging areas for a segment of 

the Rocky Mountain population of greater sandhill 

cranes, which migrate through the valley in the 

spring and fall. Wet meadows provide habitat for 

a variety of rare or unique amphibian species such 

as northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens) and Plains 

spadefoot toad (Scaphiopus bombifrons). 

Table 3. Summary of Wetlands on the Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Wetland Type Total Wetland Acres % of Refuge Area

Intermittent 2,067 2.2

Temporary 8,426 8.7

Seasonal 2,253 2.4

Semi-permanent 172 <1.0

Lake 183 <1.0

Total 13,112 14.1

1

See Appendix B for NWI code defi nitions
Chapter 3: Management Direction

Conceptual Management Plan 17

In the transition areas between the wet meadows 

and the adjacent salt grass/greasewood uplands, 

the globally rare slender spiderflower thrives in the 

moist, slightly saline conditions (Rondeau et al. 1998). 

Although once widespread in the southern Rocky 

Mountains, this species now occur almost exclusively 

in the San Luis Valley. Significant populations of this 

rare plant are known to occur on the refuge.

Management of Wet Meadows

The extent of the wet meadows is largely tied to how 

water has been managed on the refuge over the last 

100 years. Historical irrigation practices have created, 

to a large extent, these wetland plant communities. 

Wet meadows on the refuge are irrigated using a 

relatively simple set of diversion structures and 

ditches diverting from all of the creeks crossing the 

refuge. In addition to the creeks, several wells are 

also used for irrigation. Irrigation generally begins 

in late spring with the onset of increased flows from 

melting snow and continues into the summer. Flow 

into individual wet meadows is manipulated at 

specific times allowing the meadows to dry for 

hay harvest in late summer. At the completion 

of the irrigation season, excess water is typically 

diverted into pastures. West of the meadows, 

surface flows are greatly reduced or nonexistent 

as water percolates into the ground or is lost to 

evaporation. During the last 10 years, drought 

and the deterioration of irrigation infrastructure 

has decreased the quantity of water reaching the 

wetlands located along Saguache Creek and San 

Luis Creek, west of the wet meadows. 

Management of the wet meadows is of great 

interest to water users of the San Luis Valley. 

The Great Sand Dunes Park and Preserve Act 

requires the Secretary of Interior, in administering 

water resources for the national wildlife refuge, 

to “minimize, to the extent consistent with the 

protection of national wildlife refuge resources, 

adverse impacts on other water users.” Current 

understanding of hydrology on the refuge 

considers these wet meadows and the historic 

irrigation practices that have maintained them, as 

important sources of recharge for the Closed Basin 

Project and its associated water right. Although 

restoration of natural hydrologic conditions to the 

playa wetlands down stream of the wet meadows 

potentially has significant biological value, this 

objective has to be pursued with considerable 

caution and collaboration with other water users. 

The Service intends to work with all interested 

parties in the development of a comprehensive 

analysis of the hydrological characteristics in the 

vicinity of the Great Sand Dunes. One goal of this 

analysis will be to determine how alteration of 

the wet meadow irrigation regime impacts down 

stream users. This information will be useful in 

determining how, if at all, water can deliberately 

be used to irrigate other habitats that have 

historically been irrigated such as playa wetlands 

and their associated vegetation.

Traditionally, the wet meadows on the refuge have 

been hayed and grazed as part of the ranching 

operation. The Service views activities such as 

haying and grazing as tools used as part of an 

overall habitat management scheme to improve 

habitat quality for wildlife. The Service is 

concerned about the spread of invasive plants 

especially Canada thistle and tall whitetop, which 

are present in the wet meadows. These concerns 

will factor directly into decisions about current 

and future haying and grazing within the wet 

meadows. As knowledge increases related to 

overall condition of the wet meadows and wildlife 

use of these areas, and the location and severity 

of infestations, haying and grazing activities will 

be altered accordingly. The Service will also 

Slender spiderflower

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski
Chapter 3: Management Direction

18 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Deadman Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Spanish Creek

Willow Creek

Crestone Creek

San Isabel Creek

Saguache Creek

San Luis Creek

San Luis Creek

Sand Creek

Hooper

Moffat Crestone

?Ç

B ig Spring Creek

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

National Wetland Inventory

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Figure 4

Water Regime

Intermittent

Temporary

Seasonal

Semipermanent

Lake

Roads and Trails

012

Miles

012

Kilometers

UTM ZONE 13

NAD 27

Figure 4. National Wetland Inventory Map
Chapter 3: Management Direction

Conceptual Management Plan 19

regime. In some cases, especially during years of 

below average precipitation, many of these wetlands 

remain dry. The ephemeral nature of these wetlands 

adds to their uniqueness and high productivity when 

water does return. During wet years, playas will fill 

during spring runoff and thunderstorms, and slowly 

dry up over summer. This drying and wetting cycle 

provides for the nutrient cycling conditions ideal for the 

production of invertebrates, a valuable food resource 

for numerous vertebrate species. During times of 

above average precipitation, these wetlands are some 

of the most productive wetlands in the valley (Cooper 

and Severn 1992). Greasewood and rabbitbrush with an 

understory of saltgrass (Distichlis stricta) and western 

wheat grass typically surround playa wetlands. As 

mentioned earlier, salt grass pans are an important 

habitat for several rare species of small mammals and 

a rare butterfly. Barren salt flats are also a component 

of playa wetland systems and can be important to 

foraging and nesting shorebirds.

Management of Playa Wetlands

Except in years of exceptional snow pack conditions in 

the Sangre de Cristo Mountains when water literally 

pours uncontrollably onto the valley floor, water 

management in the wet meadows directly affects how 

much, if any, surface water enters the playa wetlands. 

In recent history, very little surface water enters the 

playa wetlands. The Service recognizes the valuable 

contribution of functioning playa wetlands to the 

overall biological productivity and ecological richness 

of the region. At some point in the future, the Service, 

in coordination with partners, intends to evaluate 

different water management options within the wet 

meadows and measure their resultant effect on the 

playa wetlands. These options may include managing 

waters so there are at least some surface flows back 

consider the use of prescribed fire 

in this habitat type to improve or 

provide a matrix of various habitat 

types for wildlife (see management 

activities under “Semi-desert 

Shrublands and Grasslands” for 

more information on prescribe fire). 

As the refuge develops specific 

habitat goals and objectives for the 

wet meadows, the role of haying, 

grazing, and fire, will be more 

clearly defined.

Playa Wetlands

Playa wetlands on the refuge 

generally occur to the west of the 

wet meadows along Saguache 

and San Luis Creeks (figure 

4). These wetlands have an 

intermittent or ephemeral water 

to portions of playa wetlands. Please refer to the 

previous discussion of management activities, 

under “wet meadows” for more information. 

RIPARIAN HABITATS

The refuge contains a variety of woody and nonwoody riparian habitats along seven main creeks 

flowing from the Sangre de Cristo Mountains. 

These creeks (from north to south) are North 

Crestone, South Crestone, Willow, Spanish, 

Cottonwood, Deadman, and Sand Creeks. Riparian 

zones are the transition areas between aquatic 

and terrestrial habitats. In arid climates like that 

in the San Luis Valley, riparian zones typically 

compose a very small percentage of the overall 

landscape. However, they can contain some of the 

richest species diversity of any habitat type. 

Riparian habitats with a tree and shrub component 

are located primarily along North Crestone and 

South Crestone Creeks (and associated irrigation 

ditches) in the north and northeastern portion 

of the refuge. Narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus 

angustifolia) is the dominant tree species with 

understory vegetation of willows (Salix spp.), 

red-oiser dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), and 

greasewood (figure 3) (CDOW 2004a). Healthy 

riparian vegetation plays a major role to stabilize 

and shade stream banks, thereby reducing 

sedimentation and providing quality habitat for 

aquatic species including the Rio Grande chub. 

Riparian vegetation along these creeks may 

provide habitat for the endangered southwestern 

willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus). 

This small songbird migrates and nests in dense 

willow and cottonwood areas throughout the San 

Wet meadows and playa wetlands

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski
Chapter 3: Management Direction

20 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Luis Valley, primarily at elevations below 8,500 feet, 

and may use similar habitat on the refuge. 

Another riparian-obligate species, the yellow-billed 

cuckoo, which is a candidate species for federal 

listing under the Endangered Species Act, has 

been documented in dense, old-growth cottonwood 

forests on McIntire Springs (BLM) in the valley 

(Lucero, pers. comm. 2004). This species may also 

occur on the refuge, if the appropriate habitat type 

and structure exists. Riparian habitats also host a 

large number of migrating and nesting neotropical 

songbirds and raptors. In addition, several plant 

communities associated with riparian habitats of 

global importance have been identified by CNHP 

in close proximity to the refuge including rare 

examples of narrowleaf cottonwood/rocky mountain 

juniper (Populus angustifolia/Juniperus scopulorum) 

and aspen/rocky mountain maple (Populus 

tremuloides/Acer glabrum) (Rondeau et al. 1998). 

The remainder of the riparian habitats along Willow, 

Spanish, Cottonwood, Deadman, and Sand Creeks 

are dominated by sedges and other herbaceous 

plant species. Historically, these creeks may have 

contained a larger component of woody species, such 

as willows, especially in the upper reaches within 

the refuge.

Management of Riparian Habitats

Similar to the other habitat types, the initial focus 

of management activities within the riparian 

habitats will be to evaluate the condition of the 

vegetation and identify areas of degradation and 

invasive species. Obvious signs of degradation, such 

as actively cutting or denuded streambanks, will 

be addressed as promptly as possible. Corrective 

actions may include realigning or adding additional 

fences, or removing cattle altogether from these 

riparian habitats. The Service will evaluate the 

riparian areas for presence of invasive plants such 

as salt cedar, Canada thistle, and tall whitetop and 

develop strategies to reduce their impact to native 

plants and wildlife. In addition, the process of 

gathering baseline wildlife-use information will be 

undertaken, especially related to possible use by 

southwestern willow flycatchers and yellow-billed 

cuckoos.

3.2 OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND LAW 

ENFORCEMENT

The refuge will be managed using existing staff 

based at Alamosa and Monte Vista refuges and 

any additional staff that are added to the refuge 

complex. Personnel needed to effectively administer 

operations and management include a refuge 

manager, biologist, administrative assistant, two 

maintenance workers, law enforcement officer, and 

two biological technicians. 

The Service anticipates the interim refuge 

headquarters will be located at the Baca Ranch 

house on the north end of the refuge near the town 

of Crestone. This site will be evaluated as potential 

permanent headquarters location. From this 

location, daily activities and management operations 

will be conducted. If deemed necessary at a later 

date, location and construction of new buildings will 

be evaluated with input from the public. Inventory 

and maintenance of existing real property (e.g., 

buildings and infrastructure) will be conducted as 

personnel and funding allow. As lands are added 

to the refuge, appropriate boundary signs will be 

erected and maintained

Law enforcement is a critical component of the 

interim management of the refuge. The Service 

views protection of facilities, cultural and biological 

resources, and enforcement of refuge specific 

regulations as the highest priorities related to law 

enforcement activities. The Service has estimated 

that a minimum of 1.5 full time employees (FTE’s) 

will be required to adequately address law 

enforcement issues on the refuge during the interim 

period. Indications gathered from public meetings, 

as well as from conversations with partners and the 

public, are that there is a widespread interest in 

general access onto the property, which has never 

been open to the public. The desire for access 

is primarily targeted toward cultural resources, 

hunting opportunities, and a general curiosity to 

what lies beyond fences that have essentially been 

off-limits for several generations.

The current law enforcement staff for the Refuge 

Complex consists of three dual-function officers. 

These officers currently spend 30 percent of their 

time addressing issues on Alamosa and Monte Vista 

refuges (approximately 0.7 to 0.9 FTEs). Law 

enforcement needs for Alamosa and Monte Vista 

refuges are approximately 1.25 to 1.5 FTEs (USFWS 

2003). Partnerships with the Park, the CDOW, and 

the Saguache and Alamosa County Sheriffs Office 

are being pursued to address the shortfall. Given 

the lack of law enforcement resources within the 

Refuge Complex, the Service’s ability to provide any 

kind of access or public use on the refuge as well as 

the ability to maintain current levels of public use 

and access on the Monte Vista and Alamosa refuges, 

likely will be impacted

3.3 PUBLIC USE

National wildlife refuges can provide a tremendous 

boost in revenue to local economies. A recent 

analysis of the economic impact of refuges estimated 

that 35.5 million people visited a national wildlife 

refuge in 2002 and spent over $800 million in regional 
Chapter 3: Management Direction

Conceptual Management Plan 21

economies (Caudill and Henderson 2003). Within the 

San Luis Valley, Monte Vista and Alamosa National 

Wildlife Refuges continue to play a major role in 

the success of the Monte Vista Crane Festival, held 

annually during the sandhill crane spring migration 

(approximately 18,000 cranes). This event, held in 

March, attracts an estimated 10,000 visitors from all 

over Colorado and the nation to the San Luis Valley.

Providing wildlife-dependent opportunities to the 

public is one of the four guiding principles for the 

Refuge System. The Refuge Improvement Act of 

1997 identified six priority public uses that receive 

special consideration above others on refuge lands. 

The six priority wildlife-dependent public uses are:

▪ Hunting

▪ Fishing

▪ Wildlife Observation

▪ Wildlife Photography

▪ Environmental Education

▪ Interpretation 

Although these public uses have priority over 

others, new refuge lands are not inherently open 

to the public following acquisition. Unlike new 

lands acquired by other federal land management 

agencies, which are generally open until closed, 

lands added to the Refuge System are closed until 

opened to the public for a particular use.

The Compatibility Standard

Before activities or uses can be allowed on a national 

wildlife refuge, federal law requires that the uses 

formally determined “...compatible with the major 

purposes for which such areas were established...” 

(National Wildlife Refuge Recreation Act of 1966, 

as amended in Refuge Improvement Act of 1997). 

A compatible use is an allowed use that will not 

materially interfere with or detract from the 

purposes for which the unit was established (U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, 603 FW2.6B).

Existing Public Uses

Service policy requires the identification of all 

existing public uses that occur on lands under 

consideration for acquisition prior to transfer 

to the Service (Service Manual 603 FW 2.17A). 

Once existing public uses have been identified, an 

interim compatibility determination is made by 

the onsite refuge manager. Interim compatibility 

determination outlines which public uses will 

be allowed to continue if land is acquired by the 

Service. The interim compatibility determination 

applies to the period between land acquisition 

and the completion of a CCP, or appropriate 

step-down management plan, in this case, a 

visitor services plan.

A review of existing public uses has revealed 

very limited access to the lands within the 

refuge acquisition boundary (table 4). The Baca 

Ranch lands, which comprise approximately 

58 percent of the refuge (see figure 5), are 

presently closed to all public access. The SLB 

annually leases 13,105 acres of their land to 

the CDOW from September 1– February 28 

for a limited dispersal elk hunt (cow elk only). 

The dispersal hunt is open to the public in that 

anyone can get on a list of potential hunters 

(Rivale, pers. comm. 2004). This hunt is 

administered on a need-only basis (when animals 

are accessible) and all hunters are accompanied 

by a CDOW representative. 

The Service has recognized the CDOW dispersal 

hunt as an existing public hunting opportunity 

and has prepared an interim compatibility 

determination for this activity (see appendix C). 

This activity will be allowed to continue during 

the interim period from the time of acquisition 

until a hunting plan is developed for the refuge. 

At this time, general public access to the CDOW 

leased lands and to the remaining state lands is 

not allowed by the SLB. 

The Hooper Pool facility is a private business 

currently open to the public for pool/spa 

activities. At this time, the Service has no 

intention of pursuing any land acquisition 

activities involving the Hooper Pool. At some 

point in the future, if the owners of this facility 
Chapter 3: Management Direction

22 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

express interest in selling to the Service, the 

Service will review the feasibility of this parcel. If 

the parcel is feasible for inclusion into the refuge, 

a compatibility determination will be completed 

detailing how the facility would be or would not be 

operated. The remaining private lands within the 

refuge are not open to the public, including a portion 

of the Medano-Zapata Ranch, except by special 

arrangement (i.e., nature tour or workshop). 

Future Public Use

Under the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 (10 

U.S.C. 460k), the Service may permit a public use 

on a national wildlife refuge only if that use is: (1) 

determined to be compatible with the purpose of the 

refuge; and (2) if sufficient resources are available for 

the development, operation, and maintenance of the 

permitted public use. It is the policy of the Service 

that when a proposed wildlife-dependent public use, 

especially a priority public use, is compatible with 

the refuge purpose, the activity should be facilitated. 

Whether sufficient resources are available to 

undertake a public use is determined based on sound 

professional judgment, with input from the affected 

public. The refuge manager must consider all aspects 

including financial, personnel, law enforcement, and 

infrastructure, among others, which currently exists 

or can be provided in some manner by the Service or 

its partners to properly manage a public use in a safe 

and effective manner.

The Service will consider all six priority uses for 

implementation on the Baca National Wildlife Refuge, 

and other uses as requested by the public. The 

Service intends to develop a visitor services plan 

that will address issues related to public access and 

wildlife-dependent activities on the refuge. This 

planning process will follow guidelines of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) allowing for 

significant public input. Prior to an approved visitor 

services plan, public access to the refuge will likely 

be limited with greater access over time as resources 

and staff are increased, and as more information is 

assembled. 

3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES

The land within the refuge boundary and surrounding 

areas have long been regarded as important areas 

from a cultural and historic perspective. Some 

cultural sites date to almost 12,000 years ago. The 

protection of known culturally significant structures 

and sites will be a priority for refuge staff. The 

Service intends to coordinate with the NPS, TNC, 

and local law enforcement authorities to develop 

strategies to coordinate law enforcement activities to 

protect cultural resources. 

Over time, the Service will evaluate and inventory 

additional areas within the Baca Refuge that have not 

been surveyed. The only area surveyed within the 

refuge has been the White Ranch property, which was 

surveyed in 1995 (Mabry et al. 1997). As a result of 

this effort, 64 new sites, two previously known sites, 

and 83 isolated occurrence sites were documented, 

many of which may be eligible for the National 

Register of Historic Places (Mabry et al. 1997). The 

Service will survey areas where disturbance to 

cultural sites, e.g., prescribed fire, may occur. 

3.5 PARTNERSHIPS

Due to its sheer size and juxtaposition to other 

conservation entities, the refuge will play an 

important role in the protection and stability of the 

entire Great Sand Dunes ecosystem. The Service 

is committed to working with neighboring agencies, 

local groups, and individuals on issues related to the 

refuge and surrounding lands. The Service is excited 

about the opportunity to partner with others to better 

leverage scarce resources. Coordination and initial 

partnership efforts currently underway by Service 

representatives include:

Table 4. Interim Compatibility Determination Matrix

Wildlife Dependent

Recreational Activity

Existing Public

Activity

Funds and 

Staff Available 

to Manage

Caompatibility for

Interim Period

Interim Use

Allowed

Wildlife Observation No No No No

Wildlife Photography No No No No

Interpretation No No No No

Environmental Education No No No No

Hunting Yes1 No2 Yes Yes

Fishing No No No No

1

 Occurs only on State-owned lands.

2

 Currently, no funds or staff have been dedicated to refuge operations or management. Activity will be conducted with CDOW 

cooperation and assistance. See interim compatibility determination for details. 
Chapter 3: Management Direction

Conceptual Management Plan 23

▪ Participation in Great Sand Dunes Advisory 

Council meetings for NPS general management 

plan.

▪ Briefings with Alamosa and Saguache County 

commissioners.

▪ Interagency fire management plan (NPS, TNC, 

and the Service).

▪ State land exchange project (SLB, BLM, NPS, 

and the Service).

▪ Blanca Habitat Partnership Program.

▪ Joint vegetation mapping project (NPS, TNC, 

CNHP, USFS, the Service, and others).

▪ Interagency law enforcement activities.

▪ Baca National Wildlife Refuge conceptual 

management plan.

The Service will continue to keep members of other 

agencies and the public informed about issues at 

the refuge. 
LAND ACQUISITION

chapter 4
4.1 PROCESS

With the passage of the Great Sand Dunes National 

Park and Preserve Act of 2000, Congress granted 

the Service the authority to acquire land within 

the approved acquisition boundary of the refuge. 

Although the authority has been granted, this does 

not guarantee that all of this area will ever 

be acquired. 

It is the policy of the Service to acquire the 

minimum interest in land that will achieve 

necessary habitat protection. The Service utilizes 

various methods to add units into the Refuge 

System including purchasing conservation 

easements, land exchanges, transfers, donations, 

and fee-title purchase. If land is purchased, it is 

the long-standing policy of the Service to purchase 

land on a willing seller-willing buyer premise. The 

Service will pay fair market value for all property 

purchased based on current real estate appraisals. 

Landowners who sell property may be eligible for 

relocation assistance under the Uniform Relocation 

Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies 

Act (1970).

In the case of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge, 

the enabling legislation clearly stipulated that 

lands owned by SLB, which total approximately 

27,000 acres or 29 percent of the refuge, can only be 

acquired through donation or exchange. Given that 

SLB lands must generate revenue for the state, 

donation to the Service is not realistic or expected. 

A joint effort between the SLB, BLM, NPS, and 

the Service is currently underway to exchange 

approximately 51,000 acres of surface and mineral 

rights within the refuge and Park acquisition 

boundaries for approximately 23,000 to 40,000 

acres of BLM lands (acreage dependent on land 

valuations). BLM lands proposed for transfer to the 

SLB are located in Fremont, Saguache, and Conejos 

Counties adjacent to existing SLB properties. This 

multi-agency exchange project is well underway and 

is anticipated to be completed in 2006. 

4.2 LAND ACQUISITION PRIORITIES

The Service has the primary responsibility to 

provide protection for a suite of trust resources 

including migratory birds, threatened and 

endangered species, inter-jurisdictional fish species, 

and certain marine mammals, and their respective 

habitats. With these responsibilities in mind, the 

Service has conducted a preliminary evaluation 

of the resources within the refuge to determine 

which lands comprise the highest priority for land 

acquisition. The result of this preliminary evaluation 

was the creation of three priority zones for land 

acquisition – Zones 1, 2, and 3 (figure 5). 

Priority zones were developed based on the 

availability of wetland/riparian habitats as 

delineated by the NWI. The Service regards 

wetlands and riparian areas as the most important 

habitats requiring protection and preservation in 

the San Luis Valley. These habitat types generally 

Black-necked stilts

USFWS/Tupper Ansel Blake

Conceptual Management Plan 25

Chapter 4. Land Acquisition
Chapter 4: Land Acquisition 

26 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

support a high diversity of plant and animal species. 

Because Colorado has lost nearly 50 percent of its 

wetlands (Dahl 1990, 2000) and because the San Luis 

Valley contains the highest remaining concentration 

of wetlands within Colorado, the protection of every 

additional wetland acre is considered a high priority.

Another criteria for determining priority zones 

for land acquisition addresses landowner parcel 

boundaries. It is the policy of the Service not to 

intentionally divide ownership parcels. Doing 

this could create an uneconomic remnant for the 

landowner. An uneconomic remnant is defined as 

“a parcel of real property in which the owner is 

left with an interest after the partial acquisition of 

the owner’s property....which has been determined 

to have little or no value or utility to the owner” 

(Sec. 301, (9) Uniform Relocation Assistance and 

Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970.) 

Therefore, the priority zone boundaries were 

adjusted with this in mind.

4.3 OWNERSHIP WITHIN PRIORITY ZONES

Priority zone 1 includes approximately 44,500 acres 

of the 100,000-acre Luis Maria Cabeza de Baca 

Grant #4 (figure 6) plus the remainder of the Baca 

Ranch and smaller tracts of private land, BLM, 

and state lands. The Baca Grant #4 is one of five 

replacement land grants issued to settle a land 

grant dispute around Las Vegas, New Mexico. In 

1860, Congress allowed the owners of the original 

Luis Maria Cabeza de Baca Grant, which was issued 

in 1823, to select five alternative parcels within 

the territory of New Mexico. The fourth of these 

parcels was located in the San Luis Valley, which 

later became part of Colorado. This particular 

parcel persisted through the years essentially intact 

as it was passed through numerous owners.

Priority zone 2 includes approximately 27,100 acres 

(30 percent of the refuge) and comprises land east 

of the Franklin Eddy Canal to the priority zone 

1 boundary (figure 5). This canal is the primary 

conveyance channel for water collected from the 

Closed Basin Project. The SLB is the largest 

landowner within this zone owning approximately 

19,000 acres (66 percent ) followed by TNC’s 

Medano Ranch (6,525 acres). Small tracts of BLM 

and private land comprise the remaining tracts. 

Currently, the state leases its lands for cattle 

grazing to local ranchers. As stated above, the 

Service is currently working with the state and 

other federal agencies on a land exchange project 

involving these state-owned lands. 

Priority zone 3 includes the remaining lands (6,640 

acres) within the refuge (figure 5). The SLB is the 

largest landowner owning approximately 6,320 acres 

(95 percent). The remaining 320 acres is in private 

ownership, mostly in agricultural production. One 

functional center pivot irrigation system is present 

in this zone. In addition, the Hooper Pool, a 

privately owned pool/spa facility, is located within 

this zone (figure 6).

4.4 REFUGE REVENUE SHARING ACT

Lands owned by the Service are not subject to 

taxation. However, under provisions of the Refuge 

Revenue Sharing Act of 1935, as amended (Public 

Law 95-469), the Service annually reimburses 

counties to offset revenue lost as a result of land 

acquisition. This law states that the Secretary of 

the Interior shall pay to each county in which any 

area acquired in fee-title is situated, the greater of 

the following amounts:

▪ An amount equal to the product of 75 

cents multiplied by the total acreage 

of that portion of the fee area which is 

located within such county.

▪ An amount equal to 3/4 of 1 percent of the 

fair market value, as determined by the 

Secretary, for that portion of the fee area 

which is located within such county.

▪ An amount equal to 25 percent of the 

net receipts collected by the Secretary 

in connection with the operation and 

management of such fee area during 

the fiscal year. However, if a fee area 

is located in two or more counties, 

the amount for each county shall be 

apportioned in relationship to the acreage 

in that county.

Payments under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act 

are subject to Congressional appropriations to 

fully fund the amount paid to counties. In the past, 

Congress has appropriated only 50-60 percent of 

the necessary funding needed to fulfill the Refuge 

Revenue Sharing Act requirements. As a result, 

payments received by counties are usually less than 

what is outlined following the three criteria above. 

The Refuge Revenue Sharing Act also requires that 

Service lands be reappraised every five years to 

ensure that payments to local governments remain 

equitable. The first revenue sharing payment to 

Saguache County in the amount of $2,261.00 for the 

White Ranch (3,315 acres) occurred in July 2004.
Chapter 4: Land Acquisition

Conceptual Management Plan 27

Deadman Creek

Cottonwood Creek

Spanish Creek

Willow Creek

Crestone Creek

San Isabel Creek

Saguache Creek

San Luis Creek

San Luis Creek

Sand Creek

Hooper

Moffat Crestone

?Ç

White Ranch (FWS)

B ig Spring Creek

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

Land Acquisition Priority Zones

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Figure 5

Priority Zone 1

Priority Zone 2

Priority Zone 3

UTM ZONE 13

NAD 27

012

Miles

012

Kilometers

National Wetland Inventory

Water Regime

Temporary

Seasonal

Semipermanent

Lake

Intermittent

Priority Zones

Zone 3

Zone 2

Zone 1

Figure 5. Land Acquisition Priority Zones
Chapter 4: Land Acquisition 

28 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

?Ç

!( Hooper Pool

Franklin Eddy Canal

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Saguache and Alamosa Counties, Colorado

Land Ownership Map

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Figure 6

Hooper

Moffat Crestone

County Road T

Disclaimer: This map is not intended to be used as

a land survey or representation of land for

conveyance or tax purposes.

Legend

BLM

Other Private

Colorado State Land Board

TNC

USFWS

UTM ZONE 13

NAD 27

Current to: 3/28/05

012

Miles

012

Kilometers

^_

^_

^_

^_

^_

^_

^_ BOR 1-acre tracts

G

G Baca Grande WSD ~1-acre tract

Figure 6. Land Ownership Map
RESOURCE MONITORING

chapter 5
5.1 ECOLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The refuge occurs in a unique and complex 

hydrological and geomorphological setting. For 

example, five significant drainages spill off the 

adjacent Sangre de Cristo Range and disappear into 

the ground on the refuge, feeding both the shallow, 

unconfined and underlying, confined aquifers. This, 

along with wind and other natural forces, supports 

one of the most unique systems in the North America, 

the Great Sand Dunes. Combined with adjacent lands 

managed by NPS, USFS, and TNC, a tremendous 

opportunity for resource management exists on a 

large landscape scale (more than 500,000 acres). 

The complexity, uniqueness, and value of these new 

refuge lands demand that refuge managers begin to 

better understanding the geomorphological setting, 

as well as other important abiotic characteristics 

such as soils, in order effectively manage the unique 

habitats found on the refuge. Complicating effective 

management and monitoring of this system is 

the reality of a relatively small refuge staff with 

very limited resources. Much research will have 

to be conducted through partnerships with other 

organizations, but even this approach will require 

significant staff time for coordination, fund raising, 

and administration. 

Refuge staff have identified geomorphology, 

hydrology, and other abiotic factors influencing 

habitat as the most critical research and monitoring 

needs. Monitoring fish and wildlife, albeit critical to 

the success of refuge management, will be secondary 

until a better understanding of the physical setting 

those animals depend upon is obtained. Specific 

research and monitoring needs have not been 

identified yet. However, it is clear that the specific 

research and monitoring studies must be designed 

to provide information to assist refuge managers in 

making well-informed on-the-ground decisions. 

The biological significance and condition of the 

resources is not fully understood at this time due 

to limited access and lack of widespread biological 

inventories. However, given what is known from 

inventories conducted by the CNHP within the Closed 

Basin region, the refuge clearly represents a vital 

component in a large complex of relatively unaltered 

and intact lands with high biological diversity and 

ecological richness. CNHP identified 116 “elements” 

(rare plant or animal species or significant plant 

communities tracked by CHNP) within the Closed 

Basin region (Rondeau et al. 1998). Several proposed 

conservation sites (i.e., areas with high element 

Conceptual Managment Plan 31

occurrences) occur on the Baca National Wildlife 

Refuge including the Weisman Lakes area and the 

Cottonwood Creek drainage. Ecologically rich 

lands surrounding the refuge include the Great 

Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, Mishak 

Lakes Preserve and Medano-Zapata Ranch (TNC), 

and San Luis Lakes State Park and Wildlife Area. 

These areas are known to contain highly diverse 

plant and animal communities, some of which only 

occur in the San Luis Valley.

Assessing the ecological and biological integrity 

of the refuge and understanding how it fits into 

the larger Great Sand Dunes and other valley 

ecosystems will help lay the groundwork from 

which habitat-based goals and objectives will be 

developed. These goals and objectives will help 

guide on-the-ground management activities, such as 

water management, and other habitat improvement 

activities. The Service anticipates that TNC will 

initiate a preliminary ecological assessment prior to 

transfer to the Service. If this occurs, the Service 

will use this information to develop a working 

knowledge of the biological resources of the refuge, 

and assist further development of inventory and 

monitoring protocols. The Service will actively 

develop partnerships with the research community 

to assist with the continued inventory of biological 

resources at the refuge. The Service also will 

work with the staff from TNC and NPS to develop 

ecosystem-wide monitoring protocols.

5.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES

The refuge and neighboring lands are known to 

contain a tremendous amount of cultural resources 

dating to at least 11,500 years ago. The earliest 

known inhabitants of the San Luis Valley were the 

Clovis people who occupied the area around 11,500 

to 10,900 years before present (BP) (Jodry 1999). 

Ancient mammoth sites and tools used by Clovis 

have been discovered in the region. The Folsom 

people followed the Clovis around 10,900 to 10,200 

years BP. Some prominent Folsom sites in the 

vicinity include the Linger Folsom site, Zapata 

Folsom site, and Stewart’s Cattle Guard site (Jodry 

1999). A succession of other groups utilized the San 

Luis Valley from 10,000 to 1,450 years BP, at least 

seasonally to hunt big game and gather food items 

like pinon nuts and Indian ricegrass (Jodry 1999; 

Hoefer 1999). The abundance of water in this region 

is believed to have attracted a multitude of wildlife, 

which were in turn used extensively by these early 

peoples (Jodry 1999).

Chapter 5. Resource Monitoring
Chapter 5: Resource Monitoring

32 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

The Late Prehistoric period, which is typically 

characterized by the development of some form of 

agricultural activities in addition to hunting and 

gathering, occurred between 1,450 to 400 years 

BP (Martorona 1999). Many sites discovered 

from this time period occurred near wetlands, 

streams, and springs, further signifying the 

importance of water to the survival of early 

peoples. Remains including projectile points, 

ceramics, ground stone, fire-cracked rock, and 

other lithic items are common in these sites 

(Martorano 1999). 

The Protohistoric period began around the mid1600s to the late-1800s and included the first 

contact between existing cultural groups and 

Spanish and Euro-American groups (Martorano 

1999). These existing cultural groups included 

the Ute, Comanche, Apache, Navajo, Arapaho, 

Cheyenne, and northern Pueblo including the 

Taos, Tewa, and Tesuque (Martorano 1999). The 

Ute are considered the primary inhabitants 

during this period.

The influence of Mexican and Spanish peoples 

in the area is also quite evident during this time 

period. Mexican and Spanish settlers established 

San Luis, the oldest town in Colorado, in 1851. 

The Trujillo Homestead, which was built in 1879 

Emergent wetland

 © 2005 Wendy Shattil/Bob Rozinski

near the refuge, was recently added to the National 

Register of Historic Places. The Trujillo Homestead 

was representative of typical small-scale ranches in 

the area.

The protection of known culturally significant 

structures and sites will be a priority for refuge staff. 

The Service intends to coordinate with the NPS, 

TNC, and local law enforcement authorities to develop 

strategies to coordinate law enforcement activities to 

protect cultural resources. 

Over time, the Service will evaluate and inventory 

additional areas within the Baca Refuge that have not 

been surveyed. The only area surveyed within the 

refuge has been the White Ranch property, which was 

surveyed in 1995 (Mabry et al. 1997). As a result of 

this effort, 64 new sites, two previously known sites, 

and 83 isolated occurrence sites were documented, 

many of which may be eligible for the National 

Register of Historic Places (Mabry et al. 1997). The 

Service will survey areas where disturbance to 

cultural sites, e.g., prescribed fire, may occur.

5.3 HYDROLOGIC RESOURCES

The refuge lies within a topographic basin referred 

to as the “Closed Basin.” The lowest portion of the 

Closed Basin is known locally as the “sump,” which 
Chapter 5: Resource Monitoring

Conceptual Managment Plan 33

occurs on part of the refuge. Historically, the sump 

area was described by early explorers as “a vast swamp 

or bog with a few small lakes, one of which is said to be 

three miles in length” (Hayden 1869). Hayden went on 

to note that “although entirely disconnected from any 

other water system the little streams are full of trout,” 

referring to the unusual isolation of the Closed Basin in 

relation to the Rio Grande drainage. Maps generated 

during the Wheeler Survey in 1871 described the same 

area of the valley as the “San Luis Valley Marshes.” 

Presently, the Closed Basin covers approximately 

2,940 square miles in the northern part of the valley 

and is separated from the rest of the valley by a low 

alluvial fan. Water enters the closed basin through 

precipitation and snowmelt, and exits primarily through 

evapotranspiration. 

The refuge is underlain by two relatively distinct 

aquifers, the unconfined or shallow aquifer, and the 

confined or deep aquifer. In most areas, the unconfined 

aquifer ranges to a depth of about 100 feet. Where 

the unconfined aquifer comes to the surface, natural 

seeps, wet meadows, and interdunal wetlands typically 

result. Below the unconfined aquifer are a number of 

clay-based layers that serve to separate, although not 

disconnect entirely, the unconfined aquifer from the 

deeper layers of sands and gravels containing water in 

the confined aquifer. The clay layers reduce upward 

movement of water from the deeper layers creating 

water pressure. In areas where water from the deep 

aquifer can access the surface through either fractures 

in the clay layers or wells, artesian water pressure is 

common. The aquifers are recharged by infiltration of 

irrigation waters, canal leakage, seepage from mountain 

streams that flow across permeable alluvial fans, and 

infiltration from precipitation. 

From a water resources standpoint, one of the first 

priorities will be to assemble all available hydrological 

information and data. Assembling this information 

will enable refuge staff to identify any major data 

gaps, which if obtained, could significantly improve our 

understanding of the critical hydrological processes. 

Key information will be sought from agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and private consultants 

collecting hydrological data in and around the refuge. 

This information will form the basis of the eventual 

development of a water management plan for the 

refuge. The hydrology of this region is the glue that 

holds the Great Sand Dunes ecosystem together and 

the refuge will play a major role in maintaining and 

protecting the stability of this resource and the wildlife 

resources it supports.
LITERATURE CITED

chapter 6
Blenden, M. 2004. Project Leader, Alamosa/Monte 

Vista Baca Refuge Complex, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. Personal communication.

Caudill, J. and E. Henderson. 2003. Banking on 

nature 2002: The economic benefits to local 

communities of national wildlife refuge visitation. 

Division of Economics, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Washington, D.C. 117 pp.

Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2004a. Colorado 

vegetation classification project. http://www. ndis.

nrel.colostate.edu/coveg.

Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2004b. Elk harvest 

summary information obtained at Colorado 

Division of Wildlife Website (http://wildlife.state.

co.us/huntrecap). 

Cooper, D.J., and C. Severn. 1992. Wetlands of the 

San Luis Valley, Colorado: an ecological study and 

analysis of the hydrologic regime, soil chemistry, 

vegetation and the potential effects of a water 

table drawdown. Unpublished report prepared 

for the State of Colorado Division of Wildlife, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, and Rio Grande Water 

Conservation District.

Dahl, Thomas E. 1990. Wetlands losses in the 

United States 1780s to 1980s. U.S. Department 

of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Washington, D.C. 13 pp.

Dahl, Thomas E. 2000. Report to Congress on the 

status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous 

United States 1986 to 1997. U.S. Department 

of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Washington, D.C. 82 pp. 

Hayden, F.V. 1869. Preliminary field report of the 

United States Geological Survey of Colorado and 

New Mexico, conducted under the authority of 

Hon. J.D. Cox, Secretary of the Interior.

Hoefer, T. 1999. Archaic stage. In Colorado 

Prehistory: 

A Context for the Rio Grande Basin, M.A. 

Martorano, T. Hoefer, M.A. Jodry, V. Spero, and 

M.L. Taylor, (eds.). pp 115-128. Colorado Council 

of Professional Archeologists, Denver, CO.

Jodry, M.A. 1999. Paleoindian stage. In Colorado 

Prehistory: A Context for the Rio Grande Basin, 

M.A. Martorano, T. Hoefer, M.A. Jodry, V. Spero, 

and M.L. Taylor, (eds.). Pp. 45-114. Colorado 

Council of Professional Archeologists, Denver, 

CO.

Lucero, J. 2004. Wildlife biologist, Bureau of Land 

Management. Personal communication.

Mabry, J., D. Phillips, and B. Clark. 1997. Class III 

cultural resources survey of the White 

Ranch property, Saguache County, Colorado. 

Unpublished report prepared for Albuquerque 

Area Office USDI, Bureau of Reclamation. 

SWCA Archaeological Report No. 96-92.

Martorano, M.A., 1999. Late prehistoric/ceramic 

Stage. In Colorado Prehistory: A Context for the 

Rio Grande Basin, M.A. Martorano, T. Hoefer, 

M.A. Jodry, V. Spero, and M.L. Taylor, (eds.). 

pp 129-137. Colorado Council of Professional 

Archeologists, Denver, CO.

Rivale, R. 2004. Wildlife biologist, Colorado Division 

of Wildlife. Personal communication.

Rondeau, R.J., D. Sarr, M. Wunder, P. Pineda, G. 

Kittel. 1998. Saguache County, Closed Basin 

biological inventory: Volume I: a natural heritage 

assessment final report. 195 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Fulfilling the 

Promise: National Wildlife Refuge System. U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington Virginia. 

94 pp. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Alamosa - 

Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex 

comprehensive conservation plan. September 

2003. 147 pp.

Wiens, J. A., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1981. Habitat 

associations and community structure of birds in 

shrubsteppe environments. Ecological 

Monograph 51:21- 41.

Conceptual Management Plan 37

Chapter 6. Literature Cited
LIST OF PREPARERS AND REVIEWERS

chapter 7
Chapter 7. List of Preparers and Reviewers

Conceptual Management Plan 41

Author’s name Position Work Unit

Mike Artmann wildlife biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Region 6, 

Branch of Land Protection Planning, Lakewood, CO

Mike Blenden project leader USFWS, Alamosa/Monte Vista/ Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, Alamosa, CO

Brian Devries refuge manager USFWS, Alamosa/Monte Vista/ Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, Alamosa, CO

Ron Garcia deputy project leader USFWS, Alamosa/Monte Vista/ Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, Alamosa, CO

Kelli Stone wildlife biologist USFWS, Alamosa/Monte Vista/ Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, Alamosa, CO

Reviewer’s name Position Work Unit

John Esperance chief USFWS, Region 6, Branch of Land Protection 

Planning, Lakewood, CO

Sheri Fetherman chief USFWS, Region 6, Division of Educational and 

Visitor Services, Lakewood, CO

Vanessa Fields wildlife biologist USFWS, Region 6, Branch of Land Protection 

Planning, Lakewood, CO

Sean Fields GIS specialist USFWS, Region 6, Division of Refuge Planning, 

Lakewood, CO

Wayne King regional biologist USFWS, Region 6, Lakewood, CO

Rhoda Lewis regional archeologist USFWS, Region 6, Lakewood, CO

Deb Parker writer-editor USFWS, Region 6, Division of Refuge Planning, 

Lakewood, CO

Michael Spratt chief USFWS, Region 6, Division of Refuge Planning, 

Lakewood, CO

Cheryl Williss chief USFWS, Region 6, Division of Water Resources, 

Lakewood, CO

Dave Wiseman refuge supervisor USFWS, Region 6, Lakewood, CO

The document was assembled by Josh Mehlem and Tom Gibney, Shapins and Associates, Boulder, CO.

Table 5. List of Preparers and Reviewers.
Appendices
Conceptual Management Plan A-1

Appendix A. Signed copy of General Agreement between The Nature Conservancy, the National Park 

Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

Forest Service
A-2 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS
Conceptual Management Plan A-3

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS
A-4 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS
Conceptual Management Plan A-5

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS
A-6 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS

FIRST AMENDMENT

TO

GENERAL AGREEMENT

between

The Nature Conservancy

and

the United States of America

(through its U.S. National Park Service

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Forest Service agencies)

I. Definitions 

Except as expressly defined herein, all capitalized 

terms shall have the meanings defined in that certain 

General Agreement between the TNC and U.S. 

dated September 10, 2004.

a. Amendment – This First Amendment to 

General Agreement. 

II. Purpose

The purpose of this Amendment is to amend certain 

provisions and extend the term of the Agreement 

for management of the FWS Lands after 100% of 

the interest therein has been conveyed from TNC 

to the U.S. This Amendment will survive the 

Amended Offer. The continuing management goals 

of the Owners are to develop sustainable range 

management, explore cross boundary collaborative 

wildlife, fire and weed management, and review the 

water rights’ uses and appropriations, in order to 

conserve the ecological resources of the Great Sand 

Dunes area through sound stewardship. Further, 

this Amendment is intended to ensure a smooth 

transition in the management activities on the FWS 

Lands. 

III. Application

This Amendment applies to a portion of the lands 

described as the Remainder in the Amended 

Offer defined herein as the FWS Lands and the 

Colorado State Land Board leases appurtenant 

thereto. The U.S. will manage the NPS Lands and 

the USFS Lands, and TNC will manage the FWS 

Lands, including the Colorado State Land Board 

leases. Some of the Colorado State Land Board 

leases are currently held by FWS, and therefore, 

TNC’s management under this Amendment shall 

include the express authority to manage such lands 

under the Colorado State Land Board leases. TNC 

management of Colorado State Land Board leases 

will be extended to individual leases as the leases are 

acquired by FWS for the duration of this agreement.

IV. Management Structure

a. The U.S. will manage the NPS Lands 

and the USFS Lands for the term of 

this Amendment per the terms of the 

Agreement. 

b. TNC will remain the manager of the FWS 

Lands for the term of this Amendment 

per the terms of the Agreement, including 

the scheduling of meetings with FWS 

regarding the FWS Lands, as described 

therein. 

V. Rules of Order

Management decisions that vary from or are not 

addressed in the Agreement or Amendment, 

proposals by the U.S. (or through NPS, FWS 

or USFS) or TNC for management actions, and 

resolution of conflicts that may arise, will be 

reviewed at ownership meetings. Approval for such 

actions will be by consensus. If consensus cannot be 

reached, the parties agree to submit such decision 

or conflict for mediation by a mutually-acceptable 

trained neutral third-party mediator in a good faith 

effort to reach consensus on such decision or conflict. 

If such mediation fails, resolution by the U.S. shall 

control; provided, however, that TNC’s right to take 

any and all legal actions necessary to terminate any 

hold-over occupancy, as described in Section VI(II)a 

below, shall not be affected. 

VI. Uses 

(I) TNC Management of FWS Lands. 

TNC management of FWS Lands shall continue per 

the terms of the Agreement.

(II) U.S. Management of NPS Lands and USFS 

Lands.

U.S. management of the NPS Lands and USFS 

Lands shall continue per the terms of the 

Agreement. 

VII. Access 

a. Owners

Irrespective of the identity of the Manager, Owners 

and their employees, invitees, and assigns, will 

be permitted reasonable access to the property 

for purposes of, research, monitoring, inventory, 

administrative use, and other legitimate, non-public 

purposes. With the exception of law enforcement and 

life/health/safety emergencies, FWS will coordinate 
Conceptual Management Plan A-7

Appendix A: Signed copy of General Agreement between NPS, USFWS, TNC and USFS

its access to the FWS Lands with TNC at least 1 

day in advance, providing information regarding 

the purpose, location, and intended duration of such 

visit. TNC may specify certain locations for certain 

periods of time, when no access will be allowed to 

prevent undue interference with lessee’s activities 

(i.e. during and prior to elk hunting seasons). In 

addition to providing such 1-day advance notice 

regarding entry, and in accordance with the terms of 

that certain Indemnification Agreement dated March 

10, 2004, the U.S. agrees that any use by the U.S. 

of the road depicted on the map attached hereto as 

Exhibit B or any other road over the Remainder that 

has been constructed by surface lessee Challenger 

Gold or Lexam (or their successors in interest) shall 

be restricted to administrative use only and only 

used when alternative access is impractical. For the 

purposes of this provision, administrative use shall 

include research, monitoring, inventory and other 

legitimate, non-public purposes. 

b. Inholders

TNC will provide reasonable access to inholders 

who have no other reasonable alternative access, 

provided in no event shall use of any road on the 

Remainder that has been constructed by surface 

lessee Challenger Gold or Lexam (or their successors 

in interest) be required.

VIII. Term/ Effect.

a. This Amendment is effective as of the 15th 

day of February, 2005 and shall continue 

through December 31, 2005, unless 

mutually extended in writing by the 

parties hereto.

b. Except as expressly amended herein, the 

provisions of the Agreement shall remain 

in full force and effect.

IX. Standard Clauses 

a. Civil Rights. During the performance of 

this Agreement, the participants will not 

discriminate against any person because of 

race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 

The participants will take affirmative 

action to ensure that applicants are 

employed without regard to their race, 

color, sexual orientation, national origin, 

disabilities, religion, age, or sex.

b. Anti-Deficiency Act - 31 U.S.C. §1341. 

Nothing contained in this Agreement 

shall be construed as binding the NPS, 

FWS or USFS to expend in any one fiscal 

year any sum in excess of appropriations 

made by Congress for the purposes of this 

Agreement for that fiscal year, or other 

obligation for the further expenditure of 

money in excess of such appropriations.

c. Officials Not to Benefit. No member 

of, or delegate to Congress or Resident 

Commissioner shall be admitted to any 

share of any benefit that may arise from 

this Agreement.

Approved:

_______________________________________________

_ 

Charles Bedford, State Dirctor Date

The Nature Conservancy, Colorado 

Field Office

_______________________________________________

_ 

Mike Blenden, Manager Date

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

_______________________________________________

_ 

Peter Clark, Supervisor Date

Rio Grande National Forest

U.S. Forest Service

____________________________________________ 

Steve W. Chaney, Superintendent Date

Great Sand Dunes National Park

U.S. National Park Service
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY WETLAND 

TYPES AND CODES

PEMJ; Intermittently Flooded 

PEMA; Temporarily Flooded

PEMC; Seasonally Flooded 

PEMF; Semi-Permanently Flooded

PABF; Lake; Semi-Permanently Flooded 

Descriptions for each segment of the Code

[P] Palustrine - The Palustrine System includes 

all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, 

emergents, mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands 

that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean 

derived salts is below 0.5 ppt. Wetlands lacking such 

vegetation are also included if they exhibit all of the 

following characteristics:

1. are less than 8 hectares ( 20 acres)

2. do not have an active wave-formed or 

bedrock shoreline feature;

3. have at low water a depth less than 2 

meters (6.6 feet ) in the deepest part of 

the basin;

4. have a salinity due to ocean-derived salts 

of less than 0.5 ppt.

All water bodies visible on the aerial photography 

that are less than 8 hectares (20 acres) in size are 

considered to be in the Palustrine System unless 

depth information is available, or unless an active 

wave-formed or bedrock shoreline feature is visible.

Limits. The Palustrine System is bounded by 

upland or by any of the other four systems.

Description. The Palustrine System was developed 

to group the vegetated wetlands traditionally 

called by such names as marsh,swamp, bog, fen, 

and prairie, which are found throughout the 

United States. It also includes the small, shallow, 

permanent or intermittent water bodies often 

called ponds. Palustrine wetlands may be situated 

shoreward of lakes, river channels, or estuaries; 

on river floodplains; in isolated catchments; or on 

slopes. They may also occur as islands in lakes or 

rivers.

Class. Class describes the general appearance of the 

habitat in terms of either the dominant fife form of 

the vegetation or the physiography and composition 

of the substrate. Life forms (e.g. trees, shrubs, 

emergents ) are used to defineclasses because they 

are easily recognizable, do not change distribution 

rapidly, and have traditionally been used to classify 

wetlands. Other forms of vegetation such as 

submerged or floating-leaved vascular plants are 

more difficult to detect. Substrates reflect regional 

and local variations in geology and the influence of 

wind, waves, and currents on erosion and deposition 

of substrate materials.

[EM] Emergent - Characterized by erect, rooted, 

herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and 

lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the 

growing season in most years. These wetlands are 

usually dominated by perennial plants. All water 

regimes are included except subtidal and 

irregularly exposed.

Water Regime. Freshwater Non-Tidal areas (L, P, 

and R systems) Though not influenced by oceanic 

tides, nontidal water regimes may be affected by 

wind or seiches in lakes. Water regimes are defined 

in terms of the growing season, which we equate to 

the frost free period. The rest of the year is defined 

as the dormant season, a time when even extended 

periods of flooding may have little influence on the 

development of plant communities.

[J] Intermittently Flooded - Substrate is usually 

exposed, but surface water is present for variable 

periods without detectable seasonal periodicity. 

Weeks or months or even years may intervene 

between periods of inundation. The dominant plant 

communities under this regime may change as soil 

moisture conditions change. Some areas exhibiting 

this regime do not fall within our definition of 

wetland because they do not have hydric soils 

or support hydrophytes. In areas mapped as 

intermittently flooded, refer to regional guidelines 

for specific applications.

[A] Temporarily Flooded - Surface water is present 

for brief periods during growing season, but the 

water table usually lies well below the soil surface. 

Plants that grow both in uplands and wetlands may 

be characteristic of this water regime.

[C] Seasonally Flooded - Surface water is present 

for extended periods especially early in the growing 

season, but is absent by the end of the growing 

Conceptual Management Plan B-1

Appendix B. Definitions of National Wetland 

Inventory Codes
B-2 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix B: Definitions of National Wetland Inventory Codes

season in most years. The water table after flooding 

ceases is variable, extending from saturated to the 

surface to a water table well below the 

ground surface.

[F] Semipermanently Flooded - Surface water 

persists throughout the growing season in most 

years. When surface water is absent, the water 

table is usually at or very near the land’s surface.

[AB] Aquatic Bed - Includes wetlands and 

deepwater habitats dominated by plants that grow 

principally on or below the surface of the water for 

most of the growing season in most years. Aquatic 

beds generally occur in water less than 2 meters (6.6 

feet) deep and are placed in the Littoral Subsystem 

( if in Lacustrine System ). Water regimes 

include the following: subtidal, permanent-tidal, 

semipermanent-tidal, irregularly exposed, regularly 

flooded, permanently flooded, intermittently flooded, 

semipermanently flooded, and seasonally flooded.

From: 

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 

1979. 

Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater 

Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 103 pp.
COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION

Dispersal Elk Hunt on

Lands Formerly Leased by Colorado Division of 

Wildlife for Hunting 

Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Use: Elk Hunting 

Refuge Name: Baca National Wildlife Refuge

Establishing and Acquisition Authority: 

Great Sand Dunes Park and Preserve Act of 2000, 

Public Law 106-530.

Purpose for which Established: 

The purpose of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge is 

to restore, enhance, and maintain wetland, upland, 

riparian and other habitats for native wildlife, plants 

and fish species in the San Luis Valley. Management 

of the refuge will emphasize migratory bird 

conservation and will consider the refuge’s role in 

broader landscape conservation efforts.

National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: 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.

Description of Use: 

This Compatibility Determination only applies 

to lands currently owned by the Colorado State 

Land Board on the west side of Baca National 

Wildlife Refuge and will only come in to effect when 

ownership of these lands are transferred to the 

United States and managed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service as part of Baca National Wildlife 

Refuge. See attached map.

This use is an elk hunting program conducted under 

the guidelines and authorities of the Colorado 

Division of Wildlife (CDOW). Section #271 “Big 

Game Animals Causing Damage and Big Game 

Populations Over Objective” is part of Article XII, 

of the Colorado Wildlife Commission Regulations 

entitled “Special Hunting Seasons for Big Game 

Ungulates.” This regulation authorizes the Director 

of Colorado Division of Wildlife to establish special 

hunting seasons for big game ungulates between 

August 15 and February 28 when necessary to 

control damage to property. Such a hunting season 

has been established for elk and is being conducted 

on state lands within the boundary of the 

Baca NWR.

The hunting covered by this Compatibility 

Determination will be designed to primarily 

contain elk populations east of highway 17 as it 

passes through Baca National Wildlife Refuge and 

secondarily to reduce the size of an elk population 

substantially over its desired objective level. 

CDOW estimates the elk population in this game 

management unit to be 5,000 to 6,000 animals 

while the population objective is 1500. There is 

discussion concerning the appropriateness of the 

current population objective. The CDOW feels the 

population has grown so dramatically due to the 

hunting history on several large ranches on the 

east side of the San Luis Valley and the negligible 

harvest that has occurred on these ranches over the 

past 20 years. Baca NWR was established with the 

acquisition of one of these ranches.

One of the driving concerns of the community 

and CDOW is the liability associated with these 

animals if they increase use of an area just west of 

the Baca NWR that is managed intensively as high 

value cropland. Specific concerns are the impact 

and resulting devaluation of certified seed potato 

crops if spread of disease organisms is linked to elk 

movement through these fields. Such devaluation 

can easily approach $250,000 per field per year. 

As it is currently conducted the CDOW maintains 

a list of potential hunters that apply on a “first 

come first serve” basis. The agency also employs 

“hunt coordinators.” These individuals are skilled 

in hunting practices and in supervising people to 

meet land and wildlife manager’s needs. Their job 

is to coordinate with the landowner, neighboring 

landowners, the CDOW district wildlife manager, 

and potential hunters to achieve the distribution and 

population objectives of the specific hunt in a safe, 

Conceptual Management Plan C-1

Appendix C. Interim Compatibility Determination, 

Colorado Division of Wildlife Dispersal Hunt 

Activities
C-2 Baca National Wildlife Refuge 

Appendix C: Interim Compatibility Determination - Colorado Division of Wildlife Dispersal Hunt Activities

legal and orderly manner. When conditions warrant 

the hunt coordinator requests one or more hunters 

from the CDOW list to participate in a hunt, usually 

the next day. The hunt coordinator takes hunters 

out to the group of animals of concern and directs 

the hunter in his or her attempt to take one of 

the elk. 

This is not a guiding service. The hunter is not 

assisted by the hunt coordinator but under his or her 

direction. The hunter is responsible for retrieval and 

must comply with the land owner’s stipulations.

Anticipated Impacts of the Use:

There are beneficial and negative impacts of this use 

on the Baca NWR. Beneficial impacts include:

1) This is a practical and cost effective tool to 

strategically manage this elk population.

2) Although not a traditional hunt, it is a 

wildlife dependent public use that refuges 

are encouraged to facilitate.

Negative impacts include:

1) The normal disturbance to other species 

associated with any hunting activity.

2) Use of refuge roads and trails during 

wet periods will likely result in their 

deterioration.

3) This hunt is another activity that must 

be considered in day to day work on the 

refuge for the sake of not disrupting the 

hunt and to maintain safe operations.

Determination:

Use is compatible with the following stipulations.

Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility:

1) The hunt is coordinated by a CDOW 

contractor or employee.

2) The hunt coordinator is responsible for 

conducting hunts in a safe, professional 

manner while communicating to the 

refuge manager the timing of hunts, 

location of hunts, result of hunts, daily 

restrictions and problems encountered.

3) Annual (or more frequent as needed) 

planning takes place between refuge staff 

and the CDOW that outlines projected 

needs for the hunt based upon elk 

distribution and predicted movements. 

4) Elk hunting will not conflict with ongoing 

or planned refuge operations.

5) It is clearly understood that the refuge 

manager can stop hunts at any time.

Justification:

Proper management of elk on the eastern side of the 

San Luis Valley is necessary to maintain sustainable 

population levels and control to some degree damage 

caused by elk on private lands. This kind of hunt is 

the best, viable alternative that can be immediately 

used to control elk movement while adding some 

level of mortality to this rapidly expanding 

population. This use will not materially interfere 

with or detract from fulfillment of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System mission and the purpose of 

the Baca National Wildlife Refuge.
Conceptual Management Plan C-3

Appendix C: Interim Compatibility Determination - Colorado Division of Wildlife Dispersal Hunt Activities

Signature: Refuge Manager:___________________________________________

 (Signature and Date)

Concurrence: Refuge Supervisor: _________________________________________

 (Signature and Date)

 Regional Chief:____________________________________________

 (Signature and Date)

Mandatory 10- or 15- year Re-evaluation Date:________________