Legacy Data for a Northern Prairie Grassland—Woodworth Study 

Area, North Dakota, 1963–89

Open-File Report 2014–1188

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Legacy Data for a Northern Prairie Grassland—Woodworth Study 

Area, North Dakota, 1963–89

By Shelby H. Williams and Jane E. Austin 

Open-File Report 2014–1188

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
ii

U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit 

http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications,

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Suggested citation:

Williams, S.H., and Austin, J.E., 2014, Legacy data for a northern prairie grassland–Woodworth Study 

Area, North Dakota, 1963–89: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1188, 85 p., 

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/0fr20141188.

ISSN 2331-1258 (online)

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain

copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be 

secured from the copyright owner.
iii

Contents

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 1

Administrative and Research History ......................................................................................................... 3

Area Description ............................................................................................................................................ 4

Geography ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Glacial History............................................................................................................................................ 4

Wetland Water Balance ............................................................................................................................. 8

Wetland and Water Chemistry ................................................................................................................... 9

Atmospheric Chemistry............................................................................................................................ 10

Weather History ....................................................................................................................................... 12

Settlement History.................................................................................................................................... 14

Management History.................................................................................................................................... 15

General Land Use History........................................................................................................................ 15

Habitat Management................................................................................................................................ 16

Burning................................................................................................................................................. 19

Seeding ................................................................................................................................................ 20

Grazing and Agriculture........................................................................................................................ 22

Chemicals ............................................................................................................................................ 22

Vegetation Surveys...................................................................................................................................... 24

General Vegetation Description ............................................................................................................... 24

Early Studies............................................................................................................................................ 24

Long-term Vegetation Transects.............................................................................................................. 25

Meyer 1980 Vegetation Transects ........................................................................................................... 28

Plant Phenology....................................................................................................................................... 30

Vegetative Structure ................................................................................................................................ 31

Wetlands and Wetland Vegetation........................................................................................................... 33

Preliminary Summary of the WSA Plant Community ................................................................................... 35

The WSA Plant Community ..................................................................................................................... 35

Floristic Quality Assessment.................................................................................................................... 36

Additional Data Resources .......................................................................................................................... 38

Wildlife Data............................................................................................................................................. 38

Photograph Stations ................................................................................................................................ 38

Herbaria ................................................................................................................................................... 39

Spatial Data ............................................................................................................................................. 39

Data Management Strategy......................................................................................................................... 40

ASCII ....................................................................................................................................................... 41

Metadata.................................................................................................................................................. 41

Centinels.................................................................................................................................................. 42

Paper Copies ........................................................................................................................................... 42

Conclusion................................................................................................................................................... 42

References Cited......................................................................................................................................... 43

Appendices.................................................................................................................................................. 49
iv

Appendix 1. Unpublished reports relating to the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) archived at Northern 

Prairie Wildlife Research Center.............................................................................................................. 50

Appendix 2. Published and unpublished reports that use vegetation or weather data from the Woodworth 

Study Area (WSA) region......................................................................................................................... 51

Appendix 3. Woodworth Study Area (WSA) tract locations and ownership.............................................. 52

Appendix 4. Soil classifications at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) using the Soil Survey Geographic 

Database (SSURGO)............................................................................................................................... 54

Appendix 5. Original survey map of townships encompassing the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) from 

1875......................................................................................................................................................... 55

Appendix 6. Locations of man-made structures at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)............................ 56

Appendix 7. Location of North Dakota cities and survey sites mentioned in the text................................ 57

Appendix 8. Geographic Information System (GIS) layers of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) available 

as shapefiles............................................................................................................................................ 58

Appendix 9. Fertilizer treatments and locations at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA), 1966–75............. 60

Appendix 10. Master list of vegetation found at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89....... 62

Appendix 11. Plants collected at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) and stored in the Northern Prairie 

Wildlife Research Center herbarium ........................................................................................................ 74

Appendix 12. Aerial imagery available for the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) and surrounding area for 

1957–97................................................................................................................................................... 83

Appendix 13. Example of metadata used to document and preserve Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

datasets ................................................................................................................................................... 85

Figures

Figure 1. The Woodworth Study Area (WSA; 47o8’N, 99o14’W) lies within the Central Grasslands 

biome and Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of eastern North Dakota and along the eastern 

edge of the Missouri Coteau physiographic region. ................................................................ 2

Figure 2. The terrain and elevation above sea level (meters [m]) of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

based on light detection and ranging (lidar) data. ................................................................... 5

Figure 3. Spatial relation of underlying glacial features to test wells in and around the Woodworth 

Study Area (WSA). ................................................................................................................. 5

Figure 4. Soils of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)............................................................................. 7

Figure 5. Changing water conditions in wetlands in the Woodworth Study Area during 1963................ 8

Figure 6. Monthly average concentrations of particulate pollutants at the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA), Dunn Center, Park South, and Park North, North Dakota, in 1982........................... 12

Figure 7. Precipitation, temperature, and the Palmer Drought Severity Indices (PDSI) for the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA). ............................................................................................ 13

Figure 8. New broken ground and total area in cultivation of 24 quarter sections (1,550 hectares) 

around and including the Woodworth Study Area (WSA), 1903–55...................................... 15

Figure 9. Numbered study units and fields at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)................................ 17

Figure 10. Land use at the time of federal acquisition or agreement to use on the Woodworth Study 

Area (WSA), by study unit..................................................................................................... 17

Figure 11. Land uses and treatments for all fields on the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1964–

87.......................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 12. Total number and hectares of prescribed burns per month at the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) during 1965–84. ........................................................................................................ 20
v

Figure 13. Location of chemical treatments for control of undesirable species and fertilization on the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA). ............................................................................................ 23

Figure 14. Land uses of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) under federal management in 1964.......... 25

Figure 15. Locations of long-term vegetation transects (1966–89) and early vegetation transects (1963).26

Figure 16. Relative abundance of plant species surveyed in native fields at the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) in 1963, by their location in brush, upland, slope, or lowland areas. ......................... 26

Figure 17. Cumulative number of species recorded and number of long-term transects surveyed on the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89.................................................................... 27

Figure 18. Survey dates for long-term transects at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89.28

Figure 19. Approximate locations for the known vegetation transects surveyed in 1980 by Meyer (1985).29

Figure 20. First thorough vegetation map at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). .................................. 29

Figure 21. Detailed plant community maps of 3 study units of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) from 

Meyer’s 1980 surveys........................................................................................................... 30

Figure 22. Transect locations for visual obstruction readings at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

surveyed during 1974–89. .................................................................................................... 32

Figure 23. Measurement methods for vegetation density (visual obstruction reading [VOR]) and 

vegetation height using a Robel pole at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)......................... 32

Figure 24. Wetland water regimes as identified by the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA). ............................................................................................ 34

Figure 25. Summaries of plant types recorded on the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1963–89. 36

Figure 26. The frequencies of coefficients of conservatism (C) scores for all taxa recorded at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89.................................................................... 37

Figure 27. Boxplots of the coefficients of conservatism (C) of plants recorded on long-term transects on 

idle and treated fields during 1966–89.................................................................................. 37

Figure 28. Proportion of native plant species recorded each year (1966–89) by coefficients of 

conservatism (C) on long-term transects at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). .................. 38

Figure 29. Example of photographs taken at a photograph station (Station 8 in study unit 16) at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) over multiple years............................................................... 39

Figure 30. Composite aerial photograph of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) taken from 9,000 feet 

above the surface in May, 1963............................................................................................ 40

Tables

Table 1. Wells, springs, and test holes in and near the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) as of 1963...... 6

Table 2. Chemical analyses of water samples collected from Well C, Wetland 2, and Wetland 3 in 

1960, 1963, and 1972 at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)................................................ 10

Table 3. Concentration of ions from a rainfall sample at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) from May 

to October 1982.................................................................................................................... 11

Table 4. Working definitions of actions applied to land at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)............ 19

Table 5. Seeding mixtures used on a sample of fields at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)............. 21

Table 6. Wetland types within the federal boundaries of the Woodworth Study Area, according to 

National Wetland Inventory classification (NWI). .................................................................. 34
vi

Conversion Factors

SI to Inch/Pound

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.)

meter (m) 3.281 foot (ft) 

decimeter 0.3281 foot (ft)

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi)

Area

hectare (ha) 2.471 acre (ac)

square kilometer (km2) 247.1 acre (ac)

square meter (m2) 10.76 square foot (ft2) 

hectare (ha) 0.003861 square mile (mi2) 

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2)

Density

kilograms per hectare (kg/ha) 0.8922 pounds per acre (lb/ac)

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(°Cx1.8)+32

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.
vii

Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Chemical Symbols

Al3

+ Aluminum

ASCII American Standard Code for Information Interchange

C Coefficient of conservatism

Ca2

+ Calcium

Cl- Chloride

CLSA Cottonwood Lake Study Area

CLWMD Chase Lake Wetland Management District

Fe3

+ Ferrous iron

F- Fluoride

FQI Floristic Quality Index

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

GIS Geographic Information system

H+ Hydrogen

HCO3

- Bicarbonate

K+ Potassium

Mg2

+ Magnesium

Mn2

+ Manganese

Na+ Sodium

NEON National Ecological Observatory Network

NH4

+ Ammonium

NO3

- Nitrate

NPWRC Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center

NWI National Wetland Inventory

PDSI Palmer Drought Severity Index

PO4

- Phosphate

PPR Prairie Pothole Region

SSURGO U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Survey Geographic Database

SO4

- Sulfate

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VOR Visual obstruction method

WSA Woodworth Study Area 

Zn2

+ Zinc
viii

Acknowledgments

This project was funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Chase Lake Wetland 

Management District (CLWMD) Inventory and Monitoring initiative, and the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) at North Prairie Wildlife Research Center (NPWRC). The authors would like to

thank the following people for their contributions to this document:

Neil Shook, Project Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chase Lake Wetland Management 

District, and Cami Dixon, Inventory and Monitoring Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for 

their helpful discussions, project direction, and access to data relating to the Woodworth Study 

Area.

Staff of Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (NPWRC) David Cunningham, Betty Euliss, 

and Larry Strong for software and technical help, and David Mushet and Robert Woodward for 

assistance in finding and interpreting historical data.

NPWRC emeritus staff Ken Higgins and David Trauger for consulting on historical data sets and 

area history.

Donald Rosenberry, Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, and Stan Kohn, Biologist, North Dakota

Game and Fish Department, for assistance with finding historical data.

Brian Wangler, Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for loan of aerial imagery.

Clarence Lehman, Professor, University of Minnesota, for data management assistance.

Staff at Alfred Dickey Public Library in Jamestown, North Dakota, and State Historical Society of 

North Dakota in Bismarck, North Dakota, for help with history of the Woodworth Study Area. 

Ken Higgins, David Trauger, and Ryan Limb, North Dakota State Univesity, provided valuable 

comments on early versions of this report.
1

Legacy Data for a Northern Prairie Grassland: 

Woodworth Study Area, North Dakota, 1963–89

By Shelby H. Williams and Jane E. Austin 

Abstract

Ecological data commonly become more valuable through time. Such legacy data provide 

baseline records of past biological, physical, and social information that provide historical 

perspective and are necessary for assessment of stasis or change. Legacy data collected at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA), a contiguous block of grasslands, croplands, and wetlands

covering more than 1,000 hectares of the Prairie Pothole Region of North Dakota, are cataloged 

and summarized in this study. The WSA is one of the longest researched grassland sites in the 

Upper Midwest. It has an extensive history of settlement, land use, and management that 

provides a deeper context for future research. The WSA data include long-term vegetation 

transect records, land use history, habitat management records, geologic information, wetland 

hydrology and chemistry information, and spatial images. Substantial parts of these data have not 

been previously reported. The WSA is representative of many other lands purchased by the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service in the Prairie Pothole Region from the 1930s to the 1970s; therefore,

synthesized data from the WSA are broadly applicable to topics of concern in northern 

grasslands, such as increases in non-native plants, managing for biodiversity, and long-term 

effects of habitat management. New techniques are also described that were used to preserve 

these data for future analyses. The data preservation techniques are applicable to any project with 

data that should be preserved for 100 years or more.

Introduction

Many North American wetlands were rapidly lost during early half of the 1900s to the 

combined forces of the severe drought of the 1930s, increasing drainage activities, and 

mechanization of farming. By the 1950s, leading biologists recognized that migratory waterfowl 

and their wetland habitats were in “grave danger” (Gabrielson, 1958). One response by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) was an intensive effort in the late 1950s and 1960s to acquire 

wetland habitat for migratory waterfowl. Much of that effort, fueled by federal Duck Stamp 

funds (Higgins, 1981), was focused on the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR; fig. 1) which is known

for its abundant wetlands and waterfowl productivity (Mann, 1958; Batt and others, 1989). 

Acquisition and protection of wetlands through a combination of fee title purchases and 

easements, however, were recognized as insufficient to sustain productivity of migratory 

waterfowl populations. By the 1950s, wildlife biologists and managers were beginning to 

understand the intricate relation between the welfare of wildlife populations, and the quantity and 

quality of habitat, but much remained unknown. Nelson and Lee (1966) noted that “[m]ore 

sophisticated and penetrating research is needed to build a solid foundation of facts to guide 

future management of the Continent's waterfowl resources.” Biologists also recognized as early 
2

as the 1930s that a large percentage of wildlife species were produced on private land (Leopold,

1933). Hence, scientific research was needed to help guide management of upland and wetland 

habitats for the benefit of waterfowl and other wildlife, yet be economically feasible and 

acceptable to land owners (Cottam, 1958). New habitat management techniques needed to be 

properly researched and tested before being made available to managers and landowners. 

Figure 1. The Woodworth Study Area (WSA; 47o8’N, 99o14’W) lies within the Central Grasslands biome 

and Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of eastern North Dakota and along the eastern edge of the Missouri 

Coteau physiographic region.

To address these pressing needs, FWS personnel sought a permanent study area that 

would provide opportunities for short-term and long-term research on priority issues confronting 

the management of migratory birds and their habitats in the PPR. Primary emphasis was on 

wetland and grassland ecology, waterfowl breeding ecology, and the effects of agricultural land 

use practices on waterfowl production. In the early 1960s, Dr. Ingalf G. Bue was given a special 

assignment by FWS to find an appropriate area to establish a field research station. The criteria 

were that the area (1) be representative of the PPR, (2) be on the Coteau du Missouri (or

Missouri Coteau), (3) be a sizeable tract, (4) have a high density of wetlands, and a matrix of 

native grasslands and croplands, and (5) be within 80 kilometers (km) of the new Northern 

Prairie Wildlife Research Center (NPWRC) in Jamestown, North Dakota (Nelson and Lee, 

1966). Dr. Bue selected a 1,063-hecatare (ha) area near Woodworth, North Dakota (N. Dak.).

The Woodworth Study Area (WSA) was purchased using federal Duck Stamp funds in 1963 and

designated a waterfowl production area to help meet the research needs of the NPWRC. The 

initial intent of the WSA was to establish and maintain a long-term study area and collection of 

baseline data that would serve future studies. The primary mission of the WSA was to conduct 

research concerning the best land use and water management practices that would also keep with 

the mission of the FWS to maximize benefits to wildlife, with an emphasis on migratory birds. 

The WSA stands as one of the longest researched grassland sites in the Upper Midwest

(Johnson and others 1996). The WSA has an extensive history of settlement, land use, and 

management that provides a deeper context for investigations. It is representative of many other

tracts purchased by the FWS in the PPR during the 1930s–1970s. In addition to research on 
3

wildlife responses to habitat management, the WSA hosted extensive research on the ecology of 

waterfowl, grassland birds, and predators (Higgins and others, 1992). Data include vegetation, 

birds, mammals, soils, lands use and treatments, and weather. More than 30 years of research at 

the WSA resulted in volumes of data, 66 peer-reviewed publications, 16 theses, and many other 

published and unpublished reports on management of wetlands and wildlife. Data collected at the 

WSA also contributed directly to several domestic and international environmental policies 

including U.S. farm bills and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (Nelson, 1996).

However, a substantial part of the historical data collected at the WSA, particularly the 

vegetation data, has never been comprehensively assessed. Long-term records of vegetation 

composition, structure, and phenology remain largely digitized. Data from the early decades of 

habitat research were stored in paper files and as American Standard Code for Information 

Interchange (ASCII) datasets in NPWRC archives, and subject to limited or absent metadata, and 

often no comprehensive explanation. Extensive information about early land use by settlers, land 

management histories, and other aspects of the area existed in various unpublished reports 

(appendix 1) and memos.

This report provides a compilation and synthesis of the WSA’s settlement and land

management history, geography, abiotic features, vegetation data, and associated research 

conducted during 1963–89. The first section provides a general orientation to the geography, 

physical features, and settlement history of the WSA area. The second section describes the land 

use history and treatments applied under federal management. The third section presents a 

preliminary summary of the long-term vegetation data. Parts of the WSA vegetation data were 

published previously as supporting data in wildlife-related publications (appendix 2), but this is

the first compilation and synthesis of the core vegetation datasets from the first 3 decades of 

WSA research. In the final section, the data management strategy used to ensure that these

valuable data will be accessible to researchers for a century or more is described. This project 

meets the diverse requirements of the Chase Lake Wetland Management District (CLWMD), 

FWS, and NPWRC. It also serves as a foundation for analyzing the WSA legacy data and future 

data, most notably those from the National Ecology Observatory Network (NEON) Domain 9 

core site, which was established at the WSA in 2013 and is expected to remain there until 2047

(NEON, Inc., 2011).

As climate and land use continue to change in the PPR, the historical WSA datasets offer 

context and a baseline for future work on grassland reserves. These datasets will contribute to 

CLWMD’s planning process for their habitat management plan by forming a solid baseline of 

historic vegetation conditions. In addition, this information can be critical as biologists consider 

how abiotic factors and biotic factors have changed, and how the landscape can be better 

managed considering these changes. 

Administrative and Research History

The WSA has been owned by the FWS since its purchase from private landowners

(appendix 3) and was managed by NPWRC personnel until 1993. The WSA was managed by

Leo M. Kirsch (1964–79), Kenneth F. Higgins (1979–85), and J. Michael Callow (1985–89). 

Occasionally, private lands adjacent to the WSA also were used with permission in research and 

monitoring, such as monitoring wetland conditions. Most of the research was conducted by 

scientists and staff affiliated with the NPWRC; in addition, some 300 visiting scientists from 

state and federal agencies, universities, and graduate students have conducted research there 

(Johnson and others, 1996). In 1990, the WSA became headquarters for the Chase Lake Project 
4

of the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 

Thus the WSA has been a model of partnerships between government agencies, university 

researchers, and private ownership.

During 1989–93, the FWS contributed to management of the WSA with on-site biologists

in conjunction with researchers from the NPWRC. In 1993, the FWS retained ownership of the 

WSA lands when the NPWRC was transferred from the FWS to the National Biological Survey

and in 1997 to the U.S. Geological Survey. Operational management was shared between the 

NPWRC and FWS’s newly established CLWMD through formal agreements. The NPWRC 

maintained active research on the WSA until 1996 but continues some long-term data collection.

Area Description

Geography

The WSA is in east-central North Dakota within the PPR and Central Grasslands biome

of North America (fig. 1). It is about 5 km east of Woodworth, N. Dak., on the Missouri Coteau 

at latitude 47o8’N and longitude 99o14’W (fig. 1). The PPR is a formerly glaciated region 

defined by high densities of shallow wetlands (potholes) embedded in northern mixed-grass

prairie. The Missouri Coteau is a prominent terminal glacial moraine, a narrow band of land that 

separates the more intensively cultivated landscape of the Glaciated Plains to the east from the

Missouri Plateau to the west (fig. 1). Its irregular terrain supports hay fields, a variety of crops, 

native prairie, and range lands with livestock (fig. 2). The WSA consists of 1,063 hectares (ha) of 

land in federal management; an additional 168 ha of privately owned lands adjoining the WSA 

have been surveyed occasionally under agreements with their owners (appendix 3; Higgins and 

others, 1992).

Glacial History

The WSA is representative of how glaciation processes created the high densities of 

wetlands characteristic of the PPR. Almost one-fifth of the WSA is covered in wetlands formed 

by glacial retreat. The age of the glacial drift on the Missouri Coteau is estimated to be from 

9,000 years (Tutill and others, 1964) to 13,000 years before present (Clayton, 1966; Higgins and 

others, 1992). The WSA is divided into 2 glacial landforms: hummocky stagnation moraine in 

the northwest and outwash in the southeast (fig. 3; Winters, 1963). The hummocky stagnation 

moraine in the northwest was created by glacial stagnation, where the Wisconsin glacier slowly 

disintegrated and melted in place over thousands of years. Glacial till that accumulated within 

the glacier eventually rested in a disorganized layer on the surface, forming hummocky 

stagnation moraine (Bluemle, 1987). The topography is an irregular distribution of mounds and 

depressions, and some of the rugged local relief exceeds 30 meters per square kilometer (m/km2)

(Higgins and others, 1992). Till material is unsorted, so water moves through it more easily near 

the surface, affecting wetland hydrology (Sloan, 1972). 

The southeast corner of the WSA is a glacial outwash (fig. 3), which contains deposits 

from streams of glacial melt water flowing on the glacier surface (Winters, 1963). Soil formed 

on outwash can be highly permeable, which results in fewer but more permanent potholes than in 

adjacent deposited till (Sloan, 1972). The outwash plain covering the southeast portion of the 

WSA was characterized as “ice-walled gravel train” by Winters (1963, p. 44). The swath of 

outwash is about 2.4 km wide (fig. 3) and was once bordered by ice walls on the north and south 
5

Figure 2. The terrain and elevation above sea level (meters [m]) of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

based on light detection and ranging (lidar) data.

Figure 3. Spatial relation of underlying glacial features to test wells in and around the Woodworth Study 

Area (WSA). ). A, A band of glacial stagnation outwash runs through hummocky stagnation moraine in 

the southeast swath of the WSA. Test wells were located in both areas and were mapped to within 4 

ha. B, Vertical profiles of substrate material in test wells A and B.
6

sides. This resulted in rugged terrain similar to hummocky stagnation moraine and is 

indistinguishable from stagnation based on topography alone (Winters, 1963). In the northeastern 

study units of the WSA, exposed gravel pits were developed commercially until 1953; coarse 

gravel deposits were at least 7.5 meters (m) deep (Winters, 1963). The commercial history, and 

plant and animal communities of this so-called Goldwin gravel pit were published by Higgins 

(1982). WSA staff also created a small gravel pit about 0.75 km east of headquarters on the 

outwash.

At least 10 wells, springs, and test holes near the WSA have been examined (table 1; fig. 

3; Huxel and Petri, 1963). Data available for 2 wells illustrate the differences between profiles of 

glacial deposits of hummocky stagnation moraine and stagnation outwash. Test well 1815 (A)

was dug about 2.5 km west of the WSA on hummocky stagnation moraine; below a thick layer 

of soil (0.9 m) was almost 33 m of glacial till (fig. 3). Test well 1814 (B) was dug 4 km east of 

Test well 1815 (A) on the stagnation outwash (fig. 3). Test 1814 (B) revealed mainly gravel and 

clay below 0.61 m of soil; 7.3 m of gravel was followed by 49.1 m of clay (fig. 3; Huxel and 

Petri, 1963).

Table 1. Wells, springs, and test holes in and near the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) as of 1963.

[Ownership indicates whether the well was on federally owned or private land. No data is indicated by nd. Letters 

were assigned for IDs in the present report and correspond to figure 3. Year established is the year that the well, test 

hole, or spring was dug, if known. Depth is recorded as meters (m), diameter as centimeters (cm), and specific 

conductance as micromhos per centimeter (μmho/cm). Material indicates substrate type. Site H had no water depth 

recorded but water flowed (a fen with moving groundwater). Data from Huxel and Petri, 1963.]

ID Ownership Year

established

Depth

(m)

Diameter 

(cm) Material

Water 

depth 

(m)

Specific conductance

(μmho/cm)

A Private 1960 160 12.7 nd nd nd

B Federal 1960 121.6 12.7 nd nd nd

C Private 1960 135.6 5.1 fine sand 68.6 nd

D Federal nd 64.6 10.2 sand 9.1 1,302

E Private nd 12.2 61.0 sand nd nd

F Private nd 6.1 61.0 sand nd nd

G Federal nd 12.2 61.0 gravel 8.5 nd

H Federal nd 2.6 121.9 gravel Flow 670

I Private 1949 15.2 61.0 sand 12.2 nd

J Private 1956 62.5 5.1 sand 36.6 nd

Glacial formations are the substrata or parent materials from which agricultural soils were 

formed. According to the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) classifications (U.S.

Department of Agriculture, 2009), there are eight soil series throughout the WSA (4B); the most 

common is the Buse series, followed by Barnes (fig. 4B). Bayha’s (written commun., 1963) soil 

survey contained more categories of soil (fig. 4A) but agrees with 2009 SSURGO data that the 

primary soil type (as defined in 1963) was Buse-Barnes (fig. 4B; Omodt and others, 1968; 

Patterson and others, 1968). Soils also were classified by drainage, runoff, and farmland types

(appendix 4). Vegetation studies at the WSA usually accounted for varieties and differences in 
7

soil types when choosing locations for transect surveys and controls. For an in-depth discussion 

of soil types at the WSA and the surrounding area, see the Stutsman County Soil Report (Abel 

and others, 1995).

Figure 4. Soils of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). A, Bayha’s initial survey in 1963. B, Publicly 

available Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) database.
8

Wetland Water Balance

There are no primary stream drainages from the WSA, and most surface runoff on the 

study site accumulates in wetland depressions (Higgins and others, 1992). The amount of water 

in a wetland basin is constrained by 2 dynamic factors: groundwater hydrology and atmospheric 

hydrology (Euliss and others, 2004). Research at the nearby Cottonwood Lake Study Area

(CLSA) indicates wetland dynamics were mainly driven by evaporative losses and precipitation 

inputs (Winter and Rosenberry, 1995). Minor additions to water levels were supplied from 

overland runoff or groundwater seepage, and direction and volume of seepage between a wetland 

basin and groundwater can vary on a seasonal or interannual basis (Euliss and others, 2004). 

Wetlands may also lose water through transpiration via wetland vegetation. Transpiration varied 

with the amount, height, and moisture content of wetland vegetation, and was about 15 percent 

higher for vegetated basins than unvegetated basins (Eisenlohr, 1972). 

The seasonal and interannual climate cycles that drive wetland water levels are integral to 

wetland processes and biotic communities (Euliss and others, 2004). Maps created by Bayha 

(written commun., 1963) illustrated seasonal changes in wetland water volume at the WSA 

during the dry year of 1963 (fig. 5). Water surfaces shrank from May to November, and 

demonstrate differences in wetland permanence between the east and west halves of the WSA

(fig. 5). The percentage of basins at the WSA containing water at various times throughout the 

year was first reported in Bayha (written commun., 1963) and later by Higgins and others (1992). 

Figure 5. Changing water conditions in wetlands in the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1963. A, 

May, 1963. Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 are also known as Clark Lake, Fish Lake, and Big Lake, respectively; 

in Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center archives they are labeled as 11-5, 11-17, and 10-2, 

respectively. B, July, 1963. C, August, 1963. D, November, 1963.
9

Changes in individual wetland levels were also measured with gages in some years. 

Eisenlohr (1972, p. A30) demonstrated the weekly fluctuations in 3 large wetlands at the WSA

from 1963 to 1965. Clark Lake (labeled wetland 1 in fig. 5) is spring fed and naturally outflows 

into Fish Lake (wetland 2) and Big Lake (wetland 3; fig. 5). The outlet of Big Lake was sealed 

off, and an earthen dam containing a 76.2-cm culvert and a gate valve was constructed in April 

1965 (Eisenlohr 1972). This retained all runoff reaching the basin, creating a more permanent 

wetland. Water heights for an additional 15 wetlands were recorded with gages during 1963–64. 

In a different dataset from 1964 to 1989, WSA staff recorded water amounts of 651 individual 

wetlands in and near the WSA using a subjective scale of 1 through 8. There was an average of

almost 100 measurements (range 1–129) for each wetland. Both of these datasets are available at 

the NPWRC. Historical records also illustrate wetland dynamics. Bayha’s (written commun., 

1964a) social history and early maps recorded that the 3 largest wetlands at the WSA were 

named Clark Lake (labeled wetland 11-5), Fish or Rosella Lake (wetland 11-17), and Big or 

Dittbenner Lake (wetland 10-2); these are labeled 1, 2, and 3, respectively on figure 5. Bayha 

(written commun., 1964a) reported that all of Big Lake and part of Fish Lake were dry in 1936

during a period of severe drought, and residents were able to harvest 20 tons of hay from the 

basins. Nearly a century earlier, original township surveys from 1875 (appendix 5) documented

these primary wetlands. Of the 3 large wetlands in the WSA, only Big Lake appeared in the 

original township surveys, likely because the others are not located on section lines.

Several wetlands were modified after federal acquisition with small earthwork dams. 

Dams and other man-made structures associated with wetlands at the WSA are mapped in 

appendix 6.

Wetland and Water Chemistry

Many surface waters in wetlands interact with groundwater in complex ways (Winter and 

Rosenberry, 1995). Wetlands tend to be connected with groundwater and exchange water and 

dissolved solids. Thus, dissolved solids leave a wetland through seepage outflow to groundwater 

or, less commonly, when a wetland overflows. Therefore, the brackishness of wetlands is 

determined by the rate of seepage outflow or overflow in relation to the amount of water and 

input of solids (Eisenlohr, 1972). Wetlands on outwash regions, such as the southeastern onethird of the WSA, tend to have greater seepage from groundwater into basins than from wetlands 

on till. The trapped salts create brackish or saline water in these outwash wetlands (Stewart and 

Kantrud, 1972).

Several studies examined water chemistry in wetlands and in groundwater at the WSA 

since the early 1960s. Dissolved solids in spring-fed wetland 1 (labeled in figure 5) in 1963 

ranged from 740 to 800 parts per million (Eisenlohr, 1972). Wetlands 2 and 3 were sampled in 

1963 and 1972, and groundwater in a private well near the WSA was analyzed in 1960 (table 2). 

Water chemistries of Wetlands 2 and 3 were largely consistent with each other and those of 

wetland 2 was consistent over time. The wetlands sampled had higher concentrations of the 

magnesium (Mg) and potassium (K) than the well sample, and lower concentrations of chloride

(Cl-

), sodium (Na), and bicarbonate (HCO3

-

). Sulfate (SO4

-

) in Wetland 2 samples from 1963 

were higher than in the 1972 samples. The specific conductance levels place the wetlands in the 

slightly to moderately brackish category of Stewart and Kantrud (1972). The groundwater 

sample from the private well is closer to moderately brackish.
10

Table 2. Chemical analyses of water samples collected from Well C, Wetland 2, and Wetland 3 in 1960, 

1963, and 1972 at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). 

[Location of Well C is shown in figure 3; locations of Wetlands 2 and 3 are shown in figure 5. Wetland 2 was 

sampled in 1963 and 1972; it is also known as 11-17 by WSA naming convention or informally as Fish Lake. 

Wetland 3 is also known as 10-2 by WSA naming convention or informally as Dittbenner or Big Lake. Calculated 

dissolved solids were measured as residue at 180 oC in parts per million (ppm). Specific conductance is in 

microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm) at 25 oC. Element and compound measurements are milligrams per liter 

(mg/L). Well C was privately owned, 136 m deep, and had a water temperature of 43 oF. No data is indicated by nd.]

Attribute Well C

1960

Wetland 2

1963

Wetland 2

1972

Wetland 3

1972

Data source Huxel and 

Petri, 1963

Eisenlohr, 

1972

Swanson and 

others, 1988

Swanson and 

others, 1988

Date sampled May 9, 1960 Oct. 29, 1963 July 1972 July 1972

Calculated dissolved solids (ppm) 1,340 796 nd Nd

Specific conductance (μS/cm) 2,060 1,070 1,160 1,300

pH 7.4 9.1 9.1 9.2

Bicarbonate (HCO3

-

) (mg/L) 677 21 nd nd

Calcium (Ca) (mg/L) nd 17 13 15

Chloride (Cl-) (mg/L) 163 20 20 20

Magnesium (Mg) (mg/L) 25 97 108 130

Potassium (K) (mg/L) 12 29 24 28

Sodium (Na) (mg/L) 357 69 60 89

Sulfate (SO4

-

) (mg/L) 340 326 190 140

Atmospheric Chemistry

Surrounding land use left a fingerprint in precipitation chemistry at the WSA. Results 

from a North Dakota Department of Health study (Angelo and Anderson, 1983) indicated

significantly greater concentration of ammonium (NH4

+

) at the WSA (table 3) than at Dunn 

Center, N. Dak., or Canfield Lake, N. Dak. Dunn Center is 250 km west of the WSA (appendix 

7) and was in the center of coal, oil, and natural gas energy production in 1982. Canfield Lake is 

90 km west of the WSA (appendix 7) between the Missouri Coteau and the Missouri River. 

Angelo and Anderson (1983) speculated that the elevated concentrations of ammonium may be 

related to the higher conversion of prairie to cropland near the WSA. Use of anhydrous NH3

fertilizers in agricultural practices in eastern North Dakota and the appearance of ammonium in 

the WSA precipitation coincide with typical timing of fall fertilizer application (fig. 6). Likewise, 

elevated levels of manganese (Mn) at the WSA relative to sites in western North Dakota (Park 

North, Park South, and Dunn Center; appendix 7) may be because of greater soil disturbance 

near the WSA. Mn is a crustal element that is included in precipitation when the soil is disturbed. 

Only the differences in Mn and NH4

+ between WSA and the western sites were statistically 

significant (p<0.05) (Angelo and Anderson, 1983). 
11

Table 3. Concentration of ions from a rainfall sample at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) from May to 

October 1982. 

[At least 20 samples were tested for each compound. Concentrations are arithmetic mean concentrations in 

microequivalents per liter (μeq/L) ± standard error of mean concentrations. No data is indicated by nd. From Angelo 

and Anderson (1983, p. 20)] 

Type Ion Concentration

(μeq/liter)

Cation NH4

+ 38.53 ± 5.15

H+ 21.12 ± 7.94

Ca2+ 16.08 ± 3.32

Mg2+ 4.54 ± 0.70

Na+ 2.03 ± 0.45

K+ 1.52 ± 0.30

Zn2+ 0.42 ± 0.20

Al3+ 0.70 ± 0.22

Mn2+ 0.27 ± 0.04

Fe3+ 0.12 ± 0.03

Anion SO4 23.61 ± 4.42

Cl- 7.30 ± 1.49

F- 0.48 ± 0.13

NO3

- 21.91 ± 2.83

HCO3

- 31.01 ± 6.23

PO4

- 1.16 ± 0.21
12

Figure 6. Monthly average concentrations of particulate pollutants at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA), 

Dunn Center, Park South, and Park North, North Dakota, in 1982. Locations of sampling sites are 

shown in appendix 7.

Weather History

Precipitation and water budgets are recognized for their importance to understanding 

vegetation and wetland dynamics. Data of daily total precipitation and ground cover of snow 

have been collected within 5 km of the WSA headquarters since 1951 as part of the National 

Weather Service Cooperative Network. In early 1965, 5 rain gages were placed in WSA fields 

and reported similar precipitation throughout the study area to precipitation collected in the town

of Woodworth, N. Dak. In November 1965, official precipitation recording moved from the town 

to the headquarters building at the WSA, where daily collection of precipitation and snow cover 

data continued until 2005. Original copies of these data from 1959 to 1990 are available in the 

NPWRC archives and scanned documents from 1951 to 2005 are available from the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/coop/coop.html).

Daily high and low temperatures on the WSA station were recorded only for March through 

August of 1979 and 1980. Publications reporting long-term temperature data generally used 

those collected at Pettibone, N. Dak., which is 18 km west of the WSA. Other long-term 

temperature and precipitation measurements from the area were recorded in Jamestown or

Napolean, N. Dak. (appendix 7) as part of the U.S. Historical Climate Network

(http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ epubs/ndp/ushcn/ushcn.html).

The WSA has a temperate continental climate typical of the northern Great Plains, with 

cold winters and warm summers (fig. 7A; Higgins and others, 1992). Winds averaged about 16 

kilometers per hour and were from the northwest (Angelo and Anderson, 1983; Higgins and 
13

Figure 7. Precipitation, temperature, and the Palmer Drought Severity Indices (PDSI) for the Woodworth 

Study Area (WSA). A, Average monthly precipitation measured at or near the WSA (1963–89) and 

mean monthly temperature (1962–88) measured at Pettibone, North Dakota, approximately 19 km from 

the WSA (appendix 7). B, Total annual precipitation measured at or near the WSA (1951–88). C, PDSI 

for the south-central region of North Dakota (1960–90).
14

others, 1992). Average relative humidity was 68 percent. Records from 1962 to 1988 indicate 

that July was the warmest month in the region, averaging 21 oC, and January was the coldest, 

averaging -15 oC (fig. 7A). Average monthly precipitation peaked in June in the form of rain (fig. 

7A). There were about 120 frost-free days, from mid-May to mid-September, and an average 

depth of frost penetration of 1.5 m (Higgins and others, 1992; Johnson and others, 1996). 

Between 1951 and 1988, total annual precipitation averaged 40.9 centimeters (cm; fig. 7B). 

Average annual precipitation between 1963 and 1989 was similar (40.4 cm) and ranged from 

21.3 cm in 1976 to 58.5 cm in 1965 (fig. 7B). 

The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) estimates the moisture balance accounting for 

inputs (such as precipitation and stored soil moisture) and losses (such as potential 

evapotranspiration, water storage, and runoff) (Huang and others, 2011). The PDSI provides a 

common metric to denote seasonal and long-term trends in moisture conditions that influence 

wetlands and vegetation. Scores of ±0–6 indicate level of drought (-) or wet (+) conditions. Data 

for the south-central region of North Dakota during 1960–90 indicate the WSA experienced 

moderate to extreme drought during its earliest years (fig. 7C). The drought of the early 1960s 

was followed by swings of increasing magnitude between high and low moisture (fig. 7C; 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2013).

Settlement History

Perhaps one of the most novel aspects of the WSA is the availability of land use history 

and concomitant social history. When lands for the WSA were acquired in the early 1960s, WSA 

staff members Keith Bayha and David Trauger made diligent efforts to document the land use 

history by interviewing local residents and mining public records for the history of each quarter

section of land. Their sources included the Stutsman County Register of Deeds, files of the 

former Jamestown Alert newspaper, local officers of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Soil 

Conservation Service and Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, Service books of 

FWS’s Area Acquisition Office, and books and direct observations by the investigators. Their

results were compiled, written, and mapped by Bayha (written commun., 1963, 1964a,b). No 

comprehensive archaeological survey of the WSA has been completed, but Bayha (written 

commun, 1964a) and Mason (1938) recorded early land uses and artifacts present in the area. 

The NPWRC archives maintain a map of the locations of teepee ring remnants and structures 

created during homesteading settlement (appendix 6). The first semipermanent European settlers 

were livestock ranchers, some of whom built structures on the land, but nonetheless moved 

elsewhere when homesteaders arrived. Homesteading farmers began breaking native prairie

around 1903 (fig. 8) and usually raised common flax (Linum usitatissimum) for the first 2 years 

(Bayha, written commun., 1964a). They also raised livestock and planted crops such as wheat

(Triticum spp.) and corn (Zea mays). The Northern Pacific Railway cut through the area that is 

now the WSA, transporting grain, coal, passengers, and cream (Mason, 1938). The railway

reached the town of Woodworth in 1912, 1 year after the town was established. The town grew 

to a population of nearly 300 in 1920, and nearly a century later the population had declined to 

less than 100 people (North Dakota State Data Center, 2000). The region remains wholly 

agricultural, and the main products today are soybeans (Glycine max), corn, wheat, and livestock 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2013a). 
15

Figure 8. New broken ground and total area in cultivation of 24 quarter sections (1,550 hectares) around 

and including the Woodworth Study Area (WSA), 1903–55.

Social histories of the WSA and surrounding communities are preserved through Bayha’s 

(written commun., 1964a) report as well as in documents available at institutions such as the 

State Historical Society of North Dakota (http://history.nd.gov/archives/index.html). Staff at 

CLWMD also compiled a small historical library. Social or cultural data are an often overlooked 

aspect of land use change (Higgs, 1997; Foster and others, 2003), but the resources available to 

the WSA offer an interesting opportunity for historical ecologists (Balée, 2006).

Management History

General Land Use History

Much of the WSA is remnant native prairie, although one-third of the area has a history 

of cultivation (Bayha, written commun. 1963, 1964a,b). The main road running east and west 

through the WSA serves as a general border between 2 historical land uses. North of the road, 

the soil is capable of cultivation (appendix 4), and much of that land has a history of agriculture. 

Land south of the road contains predominately native prairie and the soil is lower quality for 

cultivation. The first land acquisitions for the WSA were lands composed of 2 farms (referenced 

as the Eddy and Fish tracts; appendix 3). Appendix 1 contains the histories of each tract of land 

and the year acquired by the FWS or used for data collection. Physical features of the land look 

much the same as when it was managed by homesteaders with only minor changes. In addition to

the wetland work and gravel pits already discussed, WSA staff planted or replanted 4 tree 

shelterbelts (appendix 6). A 12-row shelterbelt was planted west of the WSA headquarters in

1965. A second shelterbelt site was planted several meters north and west of this shelterbelt the 

following spring, and in 1970, an even larger shelterbelt was planted north and west of those

plantings. Nearby willow trees growing along the station entrance road were cut to prevent snow
16

drift across the road. A fourth grove of trees was replanted in 1967 0.75 km southeast of 

headquarters on a former homesteading site. The gravel mining company in the northeast corner 

of the WSA filled in the gravel pits and built an airstrip on the site in 1948 (Woodworth

Betterment Community, 1986, p. 40). A geographic information systems (GIS) layer of 

shelterbelts, known structures, and remnants on the WSA is available from the NPWRC

(appendixes 6 and 8).

Habitat Management 

The WSA is divided into 24 units of which 17 units (1–4, 6–9, 9A, 11–13, 15–18, 22) are 

under federal management (fig. 9). The study units are numbered arbitrarily, although they 

largely follow quarter section lines and run boustrophedonically, following the conventions of 

township sections (appendix 6). Correspondingly, most study units are 64.7 ha (160 acres). 

Although a study unit and a quarter section are largely interchangeable in size, for this report,

study unit refers to the WSA labeling system (fig. 9) and quarter section refers to all other 

geographical references. The WSA contains all or part of 6 township sections. Plat information is 

listed in appendix 3. Initially, WSA staff used wetlands as the basic unit of study, and thus each 

wetland was assigned a number within its quarter (for example, 7-10 was wetland 7 within study 

unit 10), but in 1967 the basic study unit was increased to the quarter section. However, because 

initial homesteaders worked around the many changes in soil, elevation, and wetlands, actual 

land use was heterogeneous within a quarter section. Furthermore, most of the federal land 

management and land use took place at a unit smaller than a quarter section. Hence, we use field

as the current land use unit because land within a field has the same land use history and follows 

many natural boundaries, such as wetlands and soils. A study unit may contain as many as 12 

fields. Fields are labeled numerically within each study unit starting at 1 (fig. 9).

The proportional land use of each study unit at the time of federal acquisition is shown in 

figure 10. Cultivation dominated study units 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 in the north and 17 in the south, 

whereas native vegetation dominated land use in study unit 9, which entirely overlays an area of 

glacial stagnation outwash, and study units 11–15 and 18–22 in the south. Most study units had 

at least a small native field, and all had wetlands. Study unit 12 contained a farmstead and at the 

time of acquisition by FWS had more than 50 percent native cover, but that study unit was 

converted to the headquarters for the WSA, and later for the CLWMD. 

During the first 5 years of the WSA, the land was managed in line with previous private 

management. During this time, the WSA was mapped and characterized (Bayha, written 

commun., 1963, 1964a,b), and staff developed new monitoring techniques for waterfowl surveys 

and nesting studies (Higgins and Woodward, 1996). Several years of habitat manipulation 

followed, which was applied and recorded on the field scale (fig. 11). Widespread grazing in the 

early years gave way to prescribed burns and seeding by the 1970s (fig. 11). 
17

Figure 9. Numbered study units and fields at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). Field colors are for 

illustration purposes only.

Figure 10. Land use at the time of federal acquisition or agreement to use on the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA), by study unit.
18

Figure 11. Land uses and treatments for all fields on the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1964–87.

Some of the management practices illustrated in figure 11 can be difficult to define

precisely. To facilitate analysis and synthesis, the working definition of land treatments applied 

at the WSA and the resulting land cover are described in table 4. The definitions follow Kantrud 

and Higgins’s (1992) convention of distinguishing land use and land treatment based on time. 

For example, fallow refers to idling tilled land during a growing season; this was a common crop 

rotation practiced in the PPR through the 1960s. The lack of vegetative cover makes fallow fields 

subject to erosion or soil loss (Gleason and Euliss, 1996), so a field is generally left fallow for 

only one season in preparation for seeding in crops or nesting cover. Therefore, fallow is a shortterm treatment that can be applied to fields of various land uses or cover (such as a long-term 

pasture or cultivated field). Three other treatments that were commonly applied at the WSA were 

prescribed burning, seeding, and grazing.
19

Table 4. Working definitions of actions applied to land at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA).

[Actions are land management treatments or experimental activities applied at WSA. Definitions are gleaned from 

WSA reports, publications, and unpublished memos, and summarize the action as used at the WSA.] 

Action Definition

Burned Prescribed, accidental, or wildfire.

Cropland Cultivated or hayed broken field.

Fallow Cropland, then idled for one season.

Old field succession or “go-back” Pre-1960s cropland, which was idled for more than one season.

Grazed Grazed with sheep or cattle in low, medium, high, or crowd-grazed intensities.

Man-made Buildings, dams, or shelterbelts.

Native prairie Never cultivated.

Tame or seeded grassland Seeded with domestic forage or nesting cover.

Burning

Burning was a management tool developed and regularly applied at the WSA. The 

prescribed burning work during the 1960s and 1970s (fig. 11) provided new information on its 

use in maintaining optimum grassland conditions for nesting waterfowl, other migratory bird 

species, and resident wildlife species. The research and demonstrations were instrumental in 

leading FWS to embrace fire as a valuable management tool (for example, Higgins and others,

1989a). More than 200 separate burns were recorded from 1965 to 1984 on the WSA; the vast 

majority was prescribed, but 5 were wild fires or accidentally caused. Data include field location, 

date, time, weather, and logistical information. Areas from 0.4 to 65 ha were burned at one time, 

and the average burn covered 12 ha. Most fires occurred in the spring but timing ranged from

February to November (fig. 12). The frequency of burns of a particular field varied. Several

patterns of frequency emerge from figure 12, including many repeated fires, sporadic fires, and 

never burned under federal management. For example, fields 12-2 and 12-7 received yearly 

burns, whereas some fields in study units 15 and 16 received burns every 2–4 years (fig. 11). 

Maps of prescribed burns by year and a GIS layer of fire breaks, such as trails and roads, are 

available in the NPWRC archives. From 30 to 50 km of bare-soil fire breaks were tilled several 

times per season, but a few fire breaks established on section lines were graded rather than tilled. 

Aside from research studies, prescribed burns were applied for other purposes, such as to 

stimulate seed head production on wild rye (Elymus sp.) for a harvestable seed crop, to evaluate 

effects on cattails (Typha sp.), or to remove annual weed seeds. For example, a 1977 memo

(Kirsch, L., written commun.) notes that a treatment plot with 3 prescribed burns at 3-year 

intervals concurrent with dry weather reduced cover of non-native grasses by more than 90 

percent, whereas cover of native grasses increased more than 70 percent. In a control plot over 

the same period, native grass cover decreased 31 percent, whereas non-native grass cover 

increased 14 percent. 
20

Figure 12. Total number and hectares of prescribed burns per month at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

during 1965–84.

WSA staff published reports on various aspects of fires based on experience at the WSA,

including guidelines (Higgins and others, 1989a), management reviews (Higgins and others, 

1989b), effects on breeding birds (Johnson, 1976), fires caused by lightning (Higgins, 1984), 

fires that did not go as planned (Higgins, 1978), and effects on vegetation and wildlife (Kirsch 

and Kruse, 1973; Kirsch and Higgins, 1976; Kirsch, 1978).

Seeding

Another treatment often applied at the WSA was seeding cover. Seeding a tilled field to 

create nesting cover is variably referred to as wildlife cover, tall dense rank cover, or dense 

nesting cover by state and federal wildlife agencies. However, the same field may be called 

forage or tame hayland by farmers and ranchers, or land retirement cover or wildlife cover 

plantings by agriculture agencies (Higgins and Barker, 1982). The WSA records generally use 

the wildlife terms but also use tame hayland term.

Seeded fields shared a history of cultivation occurring either before the 1960s (fields that 

had become tame hay or “go-back” fields by the time of federal management; fig. 11) or after the 

1960s (considered cultivated fields; fig. 11). The NPWRC archives document specific seed 

combinations for some fields, such as in field 3-6. This field was first broken around 1910 

(Bayha, written commun., 1964a) and had regular cultivation until the early 1970s (fig. 11). The 

standard preparation for a field was to plow it in the fall and leave it fallow the following 

summer to kill aboveground vegetation and rhizomes (Higgins and Duebbert, 1982). After a year 

of summer fallow, field 3-6 was seeded in June 1974 to a mixture of wheat and other seeds to 

create tall, dense, rank cover. The seeding mixtures for this and 3 other fields are listed in table 5.
21

Table 5. Seeding mixtures used on a sample of fields at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). 

[Study units refer to the location, following WSA convention, which contained the field that was planted. All values

of seeding mixtures are in kilograms per hectare (kg/ha), with pounds per acre (lb/ac) in parentheses. Wheat was 

also included in the mix for some fields.]

Species Study unit 1

[kg/ha (lb/ac)]

Study unit 2

[kg/ha (lb/ac)]

Study unit 3

[kg/ha (lb/ac)]

Study unit 6

[kg/ha (lb/ac)]

Date seeded August 19, 1974 June 3, 1974 June 3, 1974 May 1972

Intermediate wheatgrass

 Thinopyrum intermedium 6.7 (6) 4.5 (4) 4.5 (4) 6.7 (6)

Tall wheatgrass

 Thinopyrum ponticum 2.2 (2) 4.5 (4) 4.5 (4) 3.4 (3)

Alfalfa

 Medicago sativa 2.2 (2) 1.1 (1) 1.1 (1) 2.2 (2)

Yellow sweetclover

 Melilotus officinalis 1.1 (1) 1.1 (1) 1.1 (1) 2.8 (2.5)

Several studies of grassland establishment were conducted at the WSA with a focus on

how to establish wildlife cover using appropriate seed mixtures and techniques. Jacobson and 

others (1994) seeded a 12-ha field at the WSA in 1981 using “sculpted” seeding, which planted

seeds according to changes in soil and topography; Higgins and Duebbert (1982) reported on the 

seed bed preparation for this field. Duebbert and others (1981) published a comprehensive 

seeding guide for managers throughout the glaciated PPR and presented a review of this topic 

(Duebbert, 1983), as well as a proceedings paper (Duebbert, 1987). The NPWRC also published 

a pamphlet on seeding methods for wider distribution to the public (Meyer, 1987). 

Meyer (1996) recorded that “by 1970, more than 200 ha of former cropland were seeded 

into mostly non-native, cool-season grasses and legumes. The primary grass species were 

intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium), tall wheatgrass (Thinopyrum ponticum) and 

slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), and the legumes were alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and 

yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis). Two fields were seeded into basin wild rye (Leymus 

cinereus).” Meyer (1996) also reported that the WSA hosted experiments of “native grass 

seedings during the mid-1970s. About 15 percent of the area was seeded with native grasses by 

1980. The principal cool-season species were green needlegrass (Nassella viridula) and western 

wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii). Some fields were over-seeded with warm season species 

including switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), and Indian 

grass (Sorghastrum nutans).”

The combination of intermediate wheatgrass, tall wheatgrass, alfalfa, and sweetclover 

was planted at the WSA because these species were relatively easy to establish and they created 

good habitat for nesting ducks (Duebbert and others, 1981). This species combination was 

adaptable to many soils and conditions throughout the PPR and could enhance the soil when 

used in rotation with tillage (Duebbert and others, 1981). Cool-season plants, such as tall and 

intermediate wheatgrasses, were in general easier to establish than native, warm season grasses 

even though they need rejuvenation sooner than native species. For example, intermediate 

wheatgrass deteriorates in height, density, and vigor after 8–10 years (Duebbert and others, 

1981). 

Higgins and others (1984) discussed 3 fields that were seeded to native grasses in 1981 

and 1982. In the publication, they refer to fields 1, 2, and 3 (equivalent to WSA conventions 

fields 15-2, 16-2, and 13-4, respectively; figs. 9, 11). After leaving the fields in summer fallow, 
22

the fields were seeded the following year to a combination of cool- and warm-season grasses. 

The fields were then subjected to a burning, swathing, or herbicide regime (see Higgins and 

others, 1984, for details). The costs of re-seeding a field were offset by harvesting seeds from 

existing WSA fields (for example, study unit 16 in 1982) and proceeds from crop-sharing and 

grazing agreements with local producers.

Grazing and Agriculture

Cattle and sheep historically grazed on the WSA before and during federal management

(Bayha, written commun., 1964a, b; fig. 11). Grazing by cattle was recorded on almost one-half 

of the fields in the 1960s (fig. 11), and the intensity was classified as heavy, moderate or light. 

Kirsch (1969) gave one early definition of those terms at the WSA; grazing intensity was judged 

by residual vegetation left in the spring before new growth commenced. If two-thirds of the 

vegetation remained, the pasture was classified as lightly grazed. Between one-third and twothirds remaining was moderate, and less than one-third remaining was heavily grazed. At the 

WSA, light, moderate, and heavy grazing corresponded to 1 animal unit month per 6 acres (2.4 

ha), 1.35 acres (0.55 ha), and 1.0 acre (0.4 ha), respectively (Kirsch, 1969). Grazing records for

the WSA are in hardcopy, primarily in the form of contracts and receipts from private producers. 

WSA researchers analyzed grazing effects on upland nesting waterfowl pair numbers, nesting 

densities, and nest success (Kirsch, 1969), and waterfowl distribution, abundance, and 

productivity (Kirsch and others, 1978). However, little to no analysis has been conducted on the 

effects of cattle grazing on the vegetation. The general effects of grazing and burning on prairie 

wetlands were reviewed by Kantrud (1986).

Sheep grazing is noted in a 1973 memo (L. Kirsch, written commun., 1973), which 

recorded sheep on nearly the entire study unit 18. Under contract with a livestock owner, about

550 sheep and lambs were pastured in study unit 18 from July 29 to October 1, 1973. WSA staff 

recorded qualitative descriptions of vegetation during sheep grazing. The sheep were noted as 

patchy eaters, cutting grass short in places and leaving other areas untouched. Forbs were heavily 

browsed, and sheep preferred alfalfa after the rains started in mid-August. The following spring, 

450 ewes and 650 lambs were again grazed on this unit from late May to mid-July 1974 (fig. 11), 

and the effects were described in various memos. 

In addition to qualitative descriptions, researchers also conducted controlled experiments 

of sheep’s effect on vegetation. Four controlled plots were placed in study unit 18 for 

enclosure/exclosure experiments (appendix 8), and stem counts were recorded in 1973 and 1975. 

Researchers were particularly interested in the effects of sheep browsing on wolfberry 

(Symphoricarpos occidentalis), silverberry (Elaeagnus commutata), and Wood’s rose (Rosa 

woodsii). 

Chemicals

Chemicals and fertilizers have been applied periodically both for land management and 

experimental reasons. For land management, Banvel® (dicamba) was used for treatment of leafy 

spurge (Euphorbia esula) at 7 points across the WSA (fig. 13). Knapweed (Centaurea sp.) was 

treated with consecutive years of Tordon® (picloram), Banvel®, and 2,4-D (2,4-

Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) applications along with aggressive weeding. No records were 

apparently kept on the outcomes of these efforts.
23

Figure 13. Location of chemical treatments for control of undesirable species and fertilization on the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA). The background map is delineated into functional fields which share a 

homogenous land-use history.

Seeding a field after a summer fallow offered weeds opportunities to take hold. Plants 

such as lambquarters (Chenopodium album), annual marshelder (Iva annua), absinth wormwood 

(Artemisia absinthium), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) were sprayed several times 

with 2,4-D to stop their establishment in new fields (Higgins and Duebbert, 1982). 

Experimental applications of fertilizers were tested on the WSA from 1971 to 1975 

(appendix 9; fig. 13) to expand on results from nearby research plots of the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture. Lorenz and Rogler (1971) reported that semiarid grasslands of the Northern Plains 

did not appear to be primarily limited by soil moisture, and that nitrogen application increased 

forage production on seeded or native prairie. Soon after, WSA researchers similarly tested the 

use of nitrogen fertilizer in 11 native and seeded plots (fig. 13). The plots were placed throughout 

the WSA from high ridge to low prairie (fig. 13). Treatments were also stratified by plot 

treatments of grazing, burning, and an idled control plot. Each of the 11 plots was divided into 7

strips and 7 controls. Nitrogen (34-0-0) was applied once in spring 1971 to each of the 7

treatment strips with the plots at rates of 56–673 kg per hectare. Researchers revisited the plots in 

late summer from 1971 to 1975 and measured the average height of vegetation crowns of grass 

and percent cover of plant species. Results from the tests are reported only as unpublished data 

belonging to K.F. Higgins in Duebbert and others (1981, p. 19). The report states that 

preliminary analysis indicated a significant difference in crown height between fertilized and 

control plots. Furthermore, nitrogen treatments of less than 112 kg/ha increased plant height for 

1–2 years, whereas applications of 280–673 kg per hectare increased grass height for 3–5 years, 

generally relative to the amount applied.

In treatments separate from that unpublished test, nitrogen fertilizers were applied to 

isolated strips of land in study units 2 and 4 in 1971 at a rate of 280 kg/ha (dashed line in fig. 13). 

Nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium were also applied to select fields from 1969 to 1975

(appendix 9).
24

Vegetation Surveys 

General Vegetation Description

In the post-glacial landscape, grassland vegetation was a product of increased aridity, 

greater frequency of drought, ensuing fires, and intermittent foraging and trampling from 

herbivores. These factors kept shrubs and trees sparse, although they occur throughout the 

grasslands, implying that aridity is not the limiting factor for trees and shrubs (Axlerod, 1985). 

The WSA and, more broadly the Missouri Coteau, are in the mixed-grass prairie, which is 

botanically distinct from the tallgrass prairie to the east and shortgrass prairie to the west. The 

grasslands of the northern Great Plains have few endemic taxa and most occur near borders with 

other ecosystems (Axlerod, 1985). Axlerod (1985) attributed these patterns of endemism of 

grassland plants to the relatively young landscape compared to bordering forest or desert biomes.

The WSA lies at an important location for measuring plant biodiversity because a greater

variety of species grow where there is topographic variation (Coupland, 1979). Woody 

vegetation at the WSA is patchy because of the hummocky topography and occurs in thickets 

where soil and slope are discontinuous. Distinct data collections of upland vegetation include an 

initial survey of vegetation (1963), vegetation structure (1974–89), 2 sets of upland plant 

transects (1966–84 and 1979–81), plant phenology (1979–84), and photograph stations (1970–

89). A list of the 450 plant species present in the WSA from 1966 to 1989 is in appendix 10. This 

list is cumulative and was compiled from unique plant species noted in several surveys. The 

NPWRC herbaria collections contain 191 samples of plants collected at the WSA (appendix 11). 

Publications that used these datasets are in appendix 2. Note that no data were collected for

biomass or other measures of aboveground productivity.

Early Studies

Early studies of the area’s vegetation were modeled after those conducted by the FWS in 

Canadian parkland areas of Alberta and Saskatchewan (Higgins and others, 1992). Studies were

largely qualitative or observational in nature. In 1963 and 1964, baseline surveys of the WSA 

wildlife, vegetation types, water, and physical characteristics were conducted (Bayha, written 

commun., 1964b). In the first year, those surveys included 583 ha of federal land and 85 ha of 

private land, and in the second year they included 1,554 ha (Bayha, written commun., 1964b). A 

field inspection of plant species composition was used to map partial land use history and 

vegetative characteristics present in 1963, and the complete WSA in 1964 (fig. 14, from Bayha, 

written commun., 1964b). Vegetation around wetlands was characterized according to principal 

species and abundances. These data are available in hardcopy in the NPWRC archives. Nonnative fields were characterized by the dominant use or cover as hayed, grazed, cultivated, or not 

used (fig. 11). Native prairie was further surveyed by establishing transects in 1963 (fig. 15). 

Native fields were categorized at each ten-step interval along the transects as upland prairie, 

slope prairie, lowland prairie, or brush (fig. 16). Plant species were also recorded at the intervals

and were reported in Bayha (written commun., 1963, 1964b) along with qualitative abundance 

values (fig. 16). These data provide an early documentation of species distribution by 

topographic location.
25

Long-term Vegetation Transects 

An accidental burn during 1966 on the WSA resulted in noticeably increased growth of 

desirable grass species. Transects were established to test whether prescribed fire could be a 

management tool for prairie vegetation composition, and this was expanded to test additional 

treatments such as grazing, haying, or nonuse. The first systematic and quantitative vegetative 

surveys at the WSA were conducted by R. E. Stewart and L. Kirsch on November 23, 1966. Two 

transects were created initially: 1 in the northeast corner of study unit 8 and the second in study 

unit 12 (fig. 15). Five additional transects were established in 1968, 2 of which were 

discontinued in 1972 (fig. 15). As many as 13 transects were established, although a maximum 

of 12 were surveyed in any 1 year (fig. 15). Transects ranged from 215 m to 425 m long and 

included 7–14 sampling points or “stations.” The fields containing transects were mostly upland, 

native grassland sites, but 1 was on a “go-back” field, and several stations were in or near 

wetlands. 

Figure 14. Land uses of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) under federal management in 1964. Digitized 

from figure 10 in Bayha (written commun., 1964b).
26

Figure 15. Locations of long-term vegetation transects (1966–89) and early vegetation transects (1963).

The background map is delineated into functional fields which share a homogenous land-use history.

Figure 16. Relative abundance of plant species surveyed in native fields at the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) in 1963, by their location in brush, upland, slope, or lowland areas.
27

Stations were surveyed once per year in summer or fall (Johnson and others, 1996). The 

methods generally followed the Daubenmire (1959) method, using a 1.5 m × 1.5 m quadrat. 

Vegetation was recorded by aerial coverage of each species based on percent coverage levels of 

less than 5, 5–25, 25–50, 50–75, 75–95, and 95–100. Environmental data recorded at each station 

included soil type, moisture, slope, and aspect, as well as land uses such as grazing, idle, or 

burning. The end points of the transects were physically marked using steel t-posts. From 1966 

to 1972, the sampling stations were located by counting paces. In 1973, the individual stations 

were permanently marked by a 1-inch diameter pipe. These were pounded flush to the ground to 

prevent chain drags from catching (K.H. Higgins, oral commun., 2014). Hence, the number of 

stations in each transect was consistent during 1973–89, and station data may be compared year 

to year. Data are available from the initial survey in 1966 through August 16, 1989, when regular 

transect surveys were discontinued. Johnson (written commun., 1982) summarized methods and 

data collected from 1966 to 1982 in an unpublished report. About 230 plant species were 

identified on the transects during that time, and since Johnson’s analysis, more than 25 new 

species were identified on the transects (fig. 17). 

Johnson (written commun., 1982) discussed challenges of this dataset and study design, 

such as plant data being inherently non-independent from 1 year to the next because some 

grassland plants persist perennially. Annual differences in staff and volunteers conducting the 

surveys may have introduced some inconsistencies, although this information is recorded and

available for 1966–81. Inconsistent sampling dates (May to November; fig. 18) may introduce 

some longitudinal inconsistencies into the dataset. Finally, the design of the long-term transects 

is unbalanced in terms of number of replicates per treatment (Johnson, written commun., 1982). 

Data from 4 of the 13 transects were reported by Kirsch and Kruse (1973), but other than 

Johnson’s unpublished report (written commun., 1982), vegetation data from these long-term 

transects have not been summarized or analyzed before this report. Digital data and paper copies 

of the original data are available in the NPWRC archives.

Figure 17. Cumulative number of species recorded and number of long-term transects surveyed on the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89.
28

Figure 18. Survey dates for long-term transects at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89.

Darker shading of circles represents greater number of transects surveyed on the same day.

Meyer 1980 Vegetation Transects 

A separate set of vegetation transects were established and surveyed in 1980 by Meyer 

(fig. 19) to provide additional quantitative results that would help interpret these data from other 

on-going transect surveys. The objectives of this study were to collect voucher specimens of 

vascular plants occurring at the WSA; describe natural plant communities; relate them to soil, 

aspect, and land use; and to map the mosaic of vegetation types throughout the WSA. Thus, the 

transects for this study were chosen to represent vegetation from several soil type, slope, and 

aspect combinations. Forty-two transects were established (fig. 19), and each had a number of 1 

m × 0.5 m stations depending on the size of the transect. There were 292 stations spaced 3–4 m 

apart along each 32-m transect. Each transect was marked at the beginning and end with 30-cm 

tent stakes (K.H. Higgins, oral commun., 2014). Cover abundance was assessed using a modified 

Braun-Blanquet (1932) method similar to the long-term transects (aerial percent cover categories 

of 0–1, 1–10, 10–25, 25–50, 50–75, 75–90, and 90–100). These transects were surveyed between 

July 9 and August 19, 1980. All native vegetation was classified into 5 communities and mapped 

(fig. 20).

Results from the survey were published (Meyer, 1985), and copies of the original field 

cards are available at the NPWRC. As of 1980, WSA's 587 ha of native grasslands included 432 

ha of mixed grass, 87 ha of shrub, 42 ha of tall grass, 14 ha of forbs, and 3 ha of trees (fig. 20; 

Meyer, 1985). Additional products were generated from this study but are unpublished. Meyer 

surveyed all study units of the WSA on a sub-field scale and noted dominant vegetation; original 

data sheets are available in the NPWRC archives. Also, the plant communities of 3 select study 

units were mapped in detail (fig. 21). Voucher specimens of vascular plant species were 

collected and are stored in the herbaria at the NPWRC (appendix 11) and the WSA. 
29

Figure 19. Approximate locations for the known vegetation transects surveyed in 1980 by Meyer (1985).

The background map is delineated into functional fields that share a homogenous land-use history.

Figure 20. First thorough vegetation map at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). From Meyer (1985: fig. 1), 

reprinted with permission.
30

Figure 21. Detailed plant community maps of 3 study units of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) from 

Meyer’s 1980 surveys.

Plant Phenology

Several surveys of plant phenology have been conducted at the WSA. The most extensive 

was Callow and others’ (1992) bloom survey, which was conducted during 1979–84. They 

recorded bloom stages for 97 native and introduced angiosperms at the WSA. Variables included

date of first flowering or emergence, first 10 flowering individuals, full flowering aspect,

flowering 95 percent complete, last flowering, and start of seed dissemination. A summary of 

each plant over the course of the study was published in Callow and others (1992). Paper data 

cards, recording each plant by year rather than summarized over the study, are kept in the 

NPWRC archives. The cumulative list of plants occurring at the WSA around that time identified 

more than 300 species, so the Callow and others’ study included about one-third of all plant

species recognized at the WSA at the time of the study. 

Preceding Callow and others, 2 short phenology surveys were conducted at the WSA in 

1975. On May 22, 1975, Stewart (written commun., 1975) recorded 32 species in bloom and 4 

species with well-developed flower buds. During the course of a 6-hour survey on August 6, 

1975, Stewart and Kantrud (written commun., 1975) recorded 190 species in fruit or flowering at

the WSA. It is unclear what type of field or cover either survey traversed.
31

Vegetative Structure 

Managing grasslands for nesting waterfowl was a focus of much of the work at the WSA.

By the 1930s biologists recognized the importance of vegetative cover to attract nesting ducks 

and protect their nests from detection by predators (for example, Grange and McAtee, 1934; 

Williams and Marshall, 1938). Several species, particularly mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) and 

northern pintails (Anas acuta), begin nesting in early April before the new vegetation growth 

begins (Higgins and others, 1992). Therefore, residual vegetation from the previous growing 

season is important to spring-nesting ducks in the PPR. Kantrud and Higgins (1992) concluded 

that nesting birds respond to the structure of vegetation, especially height-density and litter layer, 

more than the specific plant species that were present. Terrestrial bird communities of the 

northern Great Plains were similarly influenced by vegetation structure, height, soils, and grazing 

effects (Kantrud and Kologiski, 1982).

The amount of vegetative coverage, i.e., the quality of nesting cover, is a combination of 

the height and density of the vegetation. To measure these 2 factors, researchers at the WSA used 

2 methods. From 1964 to 1975, they created and used a subjective method where in the early 

spring each field was assigned a cover value of 1 (poor), 2 (fair), 3 (good), or 4 (excellent). Poor

sites had little nesting material and secure cover, such as in overgrazed pastures, mowed areas 

with little or no regrowth, or brush clumps with no understory. Fair cover provided thin uniform 

cover or scattered clumps of fairly dense cover in sites such as standing stubble fields, 

moderately grazed pastures, or brush clumps with some understory vegetation. Good cover had 

large expanses of nesting cover, including lightly grazed pastures and idled vegetation on poor 

sites that had few openings or paths. Excellent cover provided dense vegetation not interrupted 

by roads or trails, and offered a heavy barrier for predator movement (Kirsch and Higgins, 1976).

Nesting surveys conducted at the WSA (such as Higgins and others, 1992) also routinely used 

this method to assign cover ratings to the area immediately around a nest. More than one-half of 

upland duck nests were found in cover deemed fair, and one-quarter of upland duck nests were 

found in good cover (Higgins and others, 1992). About an equal number were found in either 

poor or excellent cover. Composition of vegetation surrounding individual nests, hatching 

success, as well as the shape of the cover, are reported elsewhere and summarized in Higgins and 

others (1992). 

Starting in 1974, researchers used a recently developed and more objective method for 

quantifying vegetative structure, the visual obstruction reading (VOR), which is informally 

referred to as the Robel method (Robel and others, 1970). Visual obstruction readings were made 

at 25 stations along each transect (fig. 22), with transects placed in various fields representing 

different land use histories. Mean VOR for each transect was the average of full obstruction

heights for 4 cardinal directions around each station along a transect. Surveys from 1979 to 1989 

also measured vegetation height by sliding a clear, plastic disc, 30 cm in diameter, down the pole 

until the first piece of vegetation touched the disc (fig. 23). Measurements of full visual 

obstruction and vegetation height were rounded to the nearest 0.5 decimeter (dm). 

VOR data are available for 30 transects within 17 study units at the WSA. Litter height 

was recorded for 1974–75, and aspect or exposure of each station was recorded for 1974–77. 

Data from all years (1974–89, excluding 1986) are available in the original datasheets in the 

NPWRC archive. Subsets have been digitized (data files ROBEL6A and VISUALOB) or 

included in publications (Higgins, 1986b; Higgins and others, 1984; Kirsch and others, 1978),

but they have not been analyzed as a whole dataset. 
32

Figure 22. Transect locations for visual obstruction readings (VOR) at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) 

surveyed during 1974–89. The background map is delineated into functional fields that share a 

homogenous land-use history.

Figure 23. Measurement methods for vegetation density (visual obstruction reading [VOR]) and vegetation 

height using a Robel pole at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA). A, WSA staff members recorded visual 

obstruction of the pole from 4 meters away. B, Vegetation height was measured in decimeters using a 

clear plastic disc at the height of first contact with vegetation. Photographs taken by U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service personnel.
33

Wetlands and Wetland Vegetation

The WSA contains over 300 wetland basins, thus the vegetation in and around them is a 

significant determinant of habitat for the study area. The pattern, density, and species 

composition of wetland vegetation are affected by the wetland’s water depth, brackishness, and 

permanence. Because water chemistry tends to vary seasonally and interannually, vegetation 

communities integrate the fluctuations in salinity to give a more average picture of seasonal 

changes (Stewart and Kantrud, 1972).

Wetland vegetation surveys began soon after the study area was established and pond 

numbers assigned. In 1963, Bayha (written commun., 1963) identified 294 wetlands. This was 

expanded in 1964 to 648 wetlands and totaled 241 ha within and immediately around the study 

area. About 450 of these wetlands were within the federally managed bounds. All wetlands were 

categorized as fresh to slightly brackish ponds and classified according to an early version 

(Stewart and Kantrud, written commun., 1963) of the Stewart and Kantrud (1971) wetland 

classification system. The dominant vegetation surrounding each wetland was classified once in 

each decade (early 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s). Original paper data sheets are available in the 

NPWRC archives; it is not clear to what extent they have been used in any publications.

National Wetland Inventory data classified wetlands according to Cowardin and others 

(1979). Within the federally managed bounds of the WSA, 376 wetlands that represented ten 

classes were recognized (table 6). The 3 largest wetlands on the WSA were littoral lacustrine 

systems, where aquatic plants dominate and surface water is present except in extreme droughts. 

Almost one-half of wetlands were classed as palustrine emergent seasonally flooded but 

averaged only 0.2 ha in size. These wetlands are characterized by perennial vegetation that is 

usually present through the growing season and seasonal surface water that dries by the end of 

the growing season. The WSA had greater numbers of seasonal wetlands than semipermanent 

wetlands and relatively few temporary wetlands (fig. 24). The discrepancy between Bayha’s 

(written commun., 1963) earlier, higher numbers of wetlands and NWI estimates has not been 

explored in detail, but is likely because of Bayha’s inclusion of more ephemeral and temporary 

wetlands not detected in NWI data, and the loss of some wetlands to modifications.

Two pilot studies took place around wetlands in early years of federal management. In 

1968 and 1969, WSA staff mowed the shorelines of ponds to test effects on distribution of 

breeding waterfowl (Klett and others, written commun., 1969). The mowed shorelines contained 

greater density of breeding waterfowl than the control wetlands even when the locations of the 

treatment and control were reversed. In the second pilot study, WSA staff installed snow fences 

around wetlands to test whether they could help accumulate moisture around shallow wetlands 

(K.F. Higgins, oral commun., 2014); no results are apparently available for this pilot study.
34

Table 6. Wetland types within the federal boundaries of the Woodworth Study Area, according to National 

Wetland Inventory classification (NWI). 

[The codes are for wetland types as defined in NWI (Cowardin and others 1979) and described in text form under 

Description.] 

NWI Code

Number 

of 

wetlands

Total 

hectares

Average 

wetland 

size 

(hectares)

Description

PEM/ABF 49 59.7 1.2 Palustrine, emergent, aquatic bed, semipermanently flooded

L2ABG 3 54.3 18.1 Lacustrine, littoral, aquatic bed, intermittently exposed

PEMF 66 52.6 0.8 Palustrine, emergent, semipermanently flooded

PEMC 180 28.3 0.2 Palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded

PEMA 50 17.4 0.3 Palustrine, emergent, temporary flooded

PABF 3 5.3 1.8 Palustrine, aquatic bed, semipermanently flooded

PEMCx 12 1.6 0.1 Palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded, excavated

PEM/SSC 1 1.1 1.1 Palustrine, emergent, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded

PEMAd 2 0.6 0.3 Palustrine, emergent, temporary flooded, partially 

drained/ditched

PABFx 1 0.1 0.1 Palustrine, aquatic bed, semipermanently flooded, excavated

Total 367 221.0

Figure 24. Wetland water regimes as identified by the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) at the Woodworth 

Study Area (WSA).
35

Preliminary Summary of the WSA Plant Community

The WSA Plant Community 

The digitized WSA vegetation datasets cumulatively consist of 450 plant species 

(appendix 10). The datasets included were from transect data and studies that focused mainly on 

upland vegetation, so although some wetland species were represented, there are likely more 

than 450 plant species historically found at the WSA. More than 20 years of wetland vegetation 

surveys are available in the NPWRC archives but are available only as original data sheets at this 

time. As those data are converted to digital files and examined relative to the cumulative species 

list, the number of wetland species recorded at the WSA may increase.

The WSA vegetation datasets include 71 taxonomic families, but 42 families were

represented by only 1 or 2 species (fig. 25A). The top 5 families (Asteraceae, Poaceae, Fabaceae, 

Cyperaceae, and Rosaceae) contained one-half of all species at the WSA. Most species at the 

WSA were perennial forbs, followed by perennial grasses and annual forbs (fig. 25B). Sedges 

and woody species (vines, shrubs, or trees) contributed similar numbers of species, and rushes 

were the least numerous group (fig. 25B), which might be related to the limited number of datacollection points in wetlands. Of the forbs, 22 species were biennial (not plotted in fig. 25B).

Native species outnumber non-natives in all functional categories (fig. 25C). The WSA had 348 

native species and at least 69 (16.5 percent) known non-natives (fig. 25C). This is comparable to 

the known proportion of non-natives (15 percent) observed at the nearby CLSA during 1992–

2001 (Mushet and others, 2004: fig. 1). The CLSA is a waterfowl production area 16 km 

southeast of the WSA that has been idled since purchased by the FWS in the early 1960s.

Nitrogen-fixing species are an important contribution to grassland productivity (LeBauer

and Treseder, 2008). There were 28 plant species at the WSA able to fix nitrogen (fig. 25D). 

Cool-season graminoids such as crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) and smooth brome 

(Bromus inermis) were twice as numerous as warm-season species such as alkali cordgrass 

(Spartina gracilis; fig. 25D). The mean annual temperature of 5.6 oC at the WSA falls below the 

10 oC threshold where cool-season plants occur more often than warm-season plants (Sims and 

Risser, 2000). 

Non-native species and some invasive native species were undesirable to biologists as 

they were perceived to reduce habitat quality by offering little cover for wildlife or by 

outcompeting those plants that do benefit wildlife. In 1977, the primary “pest” plants identified 

in the WSA records were Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), wolfberry, and silverberry. Once 

established, these tended to outcompete other plants deemed more desirable for waterfowl 

nesting cover. Other grasses such as smooth brome and quackgrass (Elymus repens) were 

common non-native species on unmanaged grasslands, which also competed with native plants. 

However, these species were considered more acceptable than Kentucky bluegrass for wildlife 

management because when in vigorous growth, they provided good nesting cover. From a 

potential community of over 200 plants, those deemed desirable for wildlife habitat in 1977 (L. 

Kirsch, written commun.) included big bluestem, switchgrass, Indian grass, green needlegrass 

(Nassella viridula), porcupine grass (Hesperostipa spartea), blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), 

prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata), bearded wheatgrass (Elymus caninus), prairie dropseed, 

(Sporobolus heterolepis), wild timothy (marsh muhly, Muhlenbergia racemosa), prairie sandreed 

(Calamovilfa longifolia), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), sideoats grama (Bouteloua 

curtipendula), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), needle and thread (Hesperostipa 

comata), and native legumes.
36

Figure 25. Summaries of plant types recorded on the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1963–89. A,

Histogram of the number of species per family. B, Plant functional groups by growth form. C, Numbers 

of native and non-native species by growth form. D, Numbers of annual or perennial cool-season, 

nitrogen (N)-fixing, and warm-season species.

Floristic Quality Assessment

Coefficients of conservatism and floristic quality assessments are tools for measuring the 

conservation status of a plant community. The coefficient of conservatism (C) is a number (0–

10) assigned to each plant by a committee of experts on the region’s flora (Swink and Wilhelm,

1979, 1994; Mushet and others, 2001). It is a composite score of fidelity of a species to specific 

environmental conditions or habitat, and tolerance to disturbance. For example, if a plant has low 

tolerance to disturbance and high fidelity to a region (i.e. rare or hard to find), its C value would 

be 10. In contrast, a plant that grows in many conditions and is robust to disturbance is assigned 

a C near 0. Non-native species are not assigned a C value. The Floristic Quality Index (FQI) uses

the C values of plants in an area to provide a standardized metric to evaluate the closeness of the 

plant community to undisturbed conditions (Swink and Wilhelm, 1994). For any area, FQI 

equals the average C times the square root of the number of species.

The mean C for the WSA master list of vegetation species was 5.3, and the median was 5.

The FQI was 98.6 (348 native species). Twenty-two species assigned a 10 have been observed at 

the WSA during 1966-89 (fig. 26). The data included in this assessment are the long-term 

vegetation transects, phenology records, and the most recent plant list of the WSA from 1986. To 

examine changes in C over time, we used the systematic surveys from the long-term vegetation 

transects, and separated the transects that had been treated by fire or grazing from transects that 
37

remained idle as a control. Mean C remained largely stable throughout the long-term data, and 

no clear pattern emerged across years or between idle and treated areas (fig. 27).

Similarly, the distribution of C values appears largely stable across years (fig. 28). The 

increasing proportion of plants with C values of 8–10 in the first 5 years (fig. 28) may reflect 

improved coverage by transects, better plant identification, or actual changes in plant 

occurrences. Overall, the observed occurrences of non-native species from 1966 to 1989 

averaged to 4.1 percent ± 5.5 percent (standard deviation) of species identified. 

Figure 26. The frequencies of coefficients of conservatism (C) scores for all taxa recorded at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 1966–89. Bar colors correspond to colors in figure 28.

Figure 27. Boxplots of the coefficients of conservatism (C) of plants recorded on long-term transects on 

idle and treated fields during 1966–89.
38

Figure 28. Proportion of native plant species recorded each year (1966–89) by coefficients of conservatism 

(C) on long-term transects at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA).

Additional Data Resources

Wildlife Data

In addition to the vegetative surveys discussed in this report, regular surveys included 

counts of duck breeding pairs and broods (Higgins and others 1992), upland waterfowl and 

shorebird nesting surveys, and terrestrial passerine surveys (Johnson, 1996, 1997). Surveys were 

conducted for varying lengths of time for other waterfowl and waterbird research (e.g., Klett and 

Kirsch 1976; Ryan and others, 1984). As part of state-wide surveys, sharp-tailed grouse 

(Tympanuchus phasianellus) surveys were conducted at the WSA and surrounding areas from 

1964 to 1985 (appendix 8). Surveys of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), ring-necked 

pheasants (Phasianus colchicus), small mammals, and predators were conducted occasionally, as 

were surveys of nests in nesting structures and on islands (Higgins and Woodward, 1996; 

Nelson, 1996). Early surveys of birds and small mammals were reported by Bayha (written 

commun., 1963). A systematic survey of small mammals was conducted in 1972 (Ladd, written 

comm., 1972). These data and unpublished reports are available in the NPWRC archive.

Photograph Stations

Photograph stations have been in place at the WSA since 1970. Over 30 permanent 

markers are placed throughout the WSA on fields with various land-use histories (native, seeded 

native, or seeded nesting cover) and treatments (grazed, burned, or idled). Photographs of the 

landscape were oriented in the same direction and taken as many as 3 times per year (fig. 29). 

The timing was meant to show vegetative conditions before new growth occurred in April or 

May, during the growing season, and near the end of the growing season in August (fig. 29; 

Johnson and others, 1996). All photographs have been scanned and georeferenced in a 

geodatabase. In recent years, photographs continue to be made at several photograph stations, so 

a 40-year record is available for certain stations. No analysis or reporting has been done on this 

dataset. 
39

Figure 29. Example of photographs taken at a photograph station (Station 8 in study unit 16) at the 

Woodworth Study Area (WSA) over multiple years. Photograph taken by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

personnel.

Herbaria

Plant species collected from the WSA are maintained in herbaria at the WSA and the 

NPWRC. By 1986, over 300 of the 450 identified plant species occurring on the WSA, 

representing 18 taxonomic families, were cataloged in the NPWRC herbaria. Appendix 11 lists 

the plants collected at the WSA that are archived in the NPWRC herbarium. The plants were 

collected by WSA staff from May 1978 to August 1981. All specimens have associated date,

location, and collector metadata.

Spatial Data

During most of the WSA history, biologists relied on aerial photographs, hand-drafted 

maps (for example, habitat maps of Bayha, written commun., 1963; Meyer, 1985), and printed 

maps (for example, soils maps) to link field data to location. Geographic information systems 

were rapidly embraced by the NPWRC as the technology became available, and many different 

types of spatial data have since been captured for use in GIS applications. As part of this project, 

several GIS layers have been digitized from maps held in the NPWRC archive. See appendix 8

for a list of GIS data layers and appendix 12 for a list of aerial imagery. The GIS layers that were 

created from hardcopy maps in the NPWRC archives were produced in ESRI ArcGIS® (ESRI, 

2011) and are available for download and viewing. Readers without access to ESRI ArcGIS®

Desktop 10+ can download and install the free ESRI ArcReader® 10 software that allows read, 

view, print, and identify features (ESRI, 2004). Features and layers that are currently available 

are categorized as locations of land treatments, features of the WSA, geophysical formations, 

base layers and outlines, land use and cover digitized from previous analyses, and vegetative 
40

transect locations. Light detection and ranging (lidar) data obtained in fall 2011 and spring 2012

are also available for the WSA at a vertical accuracy of less than or equal to 18.5 cm (Carswell, 

2014). Aerial photographs and negatives are available for several years beginning in July 1957 

(appendix 12; for example, fig. 30). WSA staff also made 2 aerial videos from 1988 and 1989

(appendix 12). All media are available in the NPWRC archives.

Figure 30. Composite aerial photograph of the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) taken from 9,000 feet above 

the surface in May, 1963. Photograph taken by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel.

Data Management Strategy

Data management for the WSA must satisfy several agencies. The CLWMD requires 

short- to mid-term use of the data addressing management options, whereas the NPWRC seeks a 

long-term data archiving solution to ensure the longevity and viability of these data for future 

study. Valuable data become obsolete quickly if not managed properly. The seemingly safe and 

well-organized compact disks used in the1990s–2000s were once the well-organized 8.5-inch 
41

floppy disks of the early 1980s or the magnetic tapes of the 1960s. In addition, storing data 

solely in proprietary formats is risky should a researcher or lab lose track of their copy of that 

software or find that it is no longer functional on newer computer systems.

We used a management strategy for this project to ensure the reliability and accessibility 

of the WSA data for 100 years or more. The so-called centinel system (Lehman and other, 2012)

has 4 main tenets: (1) store a copy of the data in plain ASCII-text format, (2) store metadata in 

the same file as the data, (3) protect data against accidental changes or omissions; and (4) print 

several copies and store them in separate locations for permanent or archival data.

ASCII

Numerical data should be both human and machine readable. We find that ASCII files 

stored in columns and delimited by vertical bars or colons, or the like, work well. The files can 

be visually understood on a computer screen or paper, as well as scanned into a computer or 

imported to spreadsheet software. The numerical data products of the WSA vegetation project

will be stored in ASCII-based datasets. These products include (1) all historical vegetation data 

gathered in the paper archives or already stored electronically, (2) concatenated data files, where 

possible, to maximize the amount and value of data, (3) a new crosswalk database to translate 

between original species symbols recorded at the WSA, current USDA Plant Database acronyms

(appendix 10), species physiognomy, and the coefficient of conservatism codes, and (4) 

complete accompanying metadata. Core layers of GIS data were also converted to an ASCIIbased format (GeoJson; Butler and others, 2008) for long-term storage. This creates a digital 

format that can be archived on paper, and it also removed the GIS layer from a proprietary 

format.

The data that we have archived as part of this project are at least 20 years old, so few 

regular edits are expected in the future. However, in practice, editing may be necessary as more 

robust metadata are discovered. In this case, changes should be made primarily to the ASCII-text 

files stored on the network, and the changes should be noted in the accompanying metadata.

Metadata

A primary focus of this project was to provide metadata that specify data sources, 

formats, storage locations, and procedures for data collection and data quality. For numerical 

data, the Centinel system (Lehman and others, 2012) recommends storing the metadata for a file 

with the data. Preferably, metadata will form a header for the data that includes a description of 

the data that addresses the what, why, when, who, and where of the data (appendix 13). 

Following that should be a description of each variable including any meanings of codes or 

abbreviations. A complete description of abbreviations in the heading will compact the data files

in the value (for example, assigning the value “native prairie” to “a”, “cultivation history” to “b”, 

etc.), and in the variable heading (for example, assigning the heading “Land use cover” to “L”).

Metadata should be written to be understandable to researchers not familiar with the project. For 

geospatial data, standards in Executive Order 12906 (The White House, 1994) were recognized, 

and metadata will be prepared in compliance with the Federal Geographic Data Committee 

Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata and Biological Resources Division Policy 

Issuance Number 8 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1999) following completion of the study. Data will 

be stored at CLWMD headquarters and at the NPWRC in compliance with FWS standards for 

metadata records. 
42

Centinels

Digital data are a precise method of recording data and can be stored electronically as 

well as on paper. For example, compare gathering data from a table (digital) to data from a 

graphical version (analog). Alphanumeric symbols can present a problem; for example, the letter 

l and the number 1 might be confused by either a reader or a scanner. To detect, prevent, and fix 

accidental changes or omissions, each line of data and metadata is protected by a string of 

characters called “centinels.” The methods and code needed to use centinels are freely available 

in Lehman and others (2012). 

Paper Copies

Given the value of the historical vegetation datasets from the WSA, at least 2 paper

copies of the ASCII-based data should be made. For the WSA data covered in this report, copies

have been printed, bound, and stored in both the NPWRC archive and at CLWMD headquarters. 

Digital copies are stored on the facilities’ network drives as well. Data can be easily imported 

into the analysis software of the user’s choice.

Conclusion

The Woodworth Study Area (WSA) has been called one of the largest controlled 

grassland research sites in North America (Higgins and Woodward, 1996). Research at the WSA 

was scaled down in the late 1980s, which unfortunately occurred just before the onset of a

significant drought (1988–92) and a series of extremely wet years (1993–95). Although the 

1990s and 2000s went largely unrecorded at the WSA, new attention is being given to future 

research there. The long record of baseline data, existing facilities at the WSA (such as the

office, lab, bunkhouse, shop), and land management information that has become available in the 

intervening years make the future of research promising at the WSA. The WSA was selected as a 

core site for the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), a National Science 

Foundation-funded initiative that is committing to 30 years of ecological data collection. These 

WSA data, and those from the nearby Cottonwood Lake Study Area, should provide invaluable 

resources to help understand long-term changes in this prairie ecosystem. All the data discussed 

in this report are available to researchers interested in legacy vegetation data, and researchers 

using NEON data in particular may find the historical context helpful in their analyses. Initial 

data collection for NEON will begin in 2014 on study units 16 and 17. Study unit 16 is native 

prairie, and study unit 17 was former cropland cultivated between the 1920s and 1969, after 

which it was seeded to nesting cover. Photograph stations 10, 14, and 15; visual obstruction

transect 17A; long-term transects 2 and 12; and Meyer transects 1 and 27 are also nearby. 

Compiling and summarizing the available WSA data may be helpful in interpreting future

data in a historical context and in designing future long-term monitoring surveys, such as 

vegetative responses to management practices. The available data may also be valuable in

addressing pressing management issues at the CLWMD, such as determining (1) reference states 

for the mixed-grass prairie in North Dakota (i.e. historic species composition before increases of 

Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, and the effects of decades of rest), (2) trends that identify 

shifts in plant species composition, (3) effects of management (such as fire, grazing, rest), and 

(4) effects of landscape factors that may be causing shifts in plant species composition and 

abundance. 
43

Although legacy datasets provide valuable opportunities, there are also distinct 

challenges for researchers. Long-term data collection may suffer from staff turnover, 

observational errors, chronological gaps, identification mistakes, undocumented protocol 

changes, or uncontrolled environmental changes. Study protocol and data at the WSA reflect the 

rapidly evolving nature of ecological science of the 1960s–1980s. Land management activities 

were not always conducted with research in mind. In addition, several datasets provide only a 

few years of data or breadth rather than depth of data. The WSA hosted researchers with diverse 

interests, creating a patchwork of projects; analyzing these smaller datasets may require 

supplementation with other datasets or a qualitative rather than quantitative approach. The 

purpose of this report was to present a summary of the individual datasets along with metadata 

and context without critical analysis. However, before using any of these datasets researchers 

should recognize both the accompanying opportunities and challenges. 

References Cited

Abel, P.L., Gulsvig, A., Johnson, D.L., and Seaholm, J., 1995, Soil survey of Stutsman County, 

North Dakota: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, accessed July 23, 2014 at 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/north_dakota/ND093/0/stutsman.pdf.

Angelo, R.T., and Anderson, K.W., 1983, The chemistry of atmospheric precipitation in North 

Dakota—Second annual report with comments on the ambient air quality and meteorological 

characteristics of North Dakota in 1982: Division of Environmental Waste Management and 

Research, North Dakota State Department of Health, 102 p. 

Axelrod, D.I., 1985, Rise of the grassland biome, central North America: The Botanical Review,

v. 51, p. 163–201.

Balée, W., 2006, The research program of historical ecology: Annual Review of Anthropology, 

v. 35, p. 75–98.

Batt, B.D.J., Anderson, M.G., Anderson, C.D., and Caswell, F.D., 1989, The use of prairie 

potholes by North American ducks, in van der Valk, A., ed., Northern Prairie Wetlands: Ames, 

Iowa, Iowa State University Press, p. 204–227. 

Braun-Blanquet, J., 1932, Plant sociology—The study of plant communities: Hafner, N.Y., 476 

p.

Butler, H., Daly, M., Doyle, A., Gillies, S., Schaub, T., and Schmidt, C., 2008, The GeoJSON 

format specification, revision 1.0: accessed April 21, 2014, at http://geojson.org/geojsonspec.html.

Callow, J.M., Kantrud, H.A., and Higgins, K.F., 1992, First flowering dates and flowering 

periods of prairie plants at Woodworth, North Dakota: Prairie Naturalist, v. 24, p. 57–64.

Carswell, W.J., Jr., 2014, The 3D Elevation Program—Summary for North Dakota: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2014–3036, accessed April 22, 2014, at

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/fs20143036.

Clayton, L., 1966, Notes on Pleistocene stratigraphy of North Dakota: North Dakota Geological 

Survey Report of Investigation, v. 44, 25 p.

Cottam, C., 1958, Waterfowl research—Why research is needed: Naturalist, v. 8, p. 28–31.

Coupland, R.T., ed., 1979, Grassland ecosystems of the world—Analysis of grasslands and their 

uses (18th ed.): Cambridge University Press, 401 p.
44

Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and LaRoe, E.T., 1979, Classification of wetlands and 

deepwater habitats of the United States: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of the Interior, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31, 131 p.

Daubenmire, R., 1959, A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis: Northwest Science, 

v. 33, p. 43–64.

Duebbert, H.F., 1983, Seeded grasslands for wildlife habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region: 

Bismarck, N. Dak., Wildlife Society of North Dakota, North Dakota Game and Fish 

Department, 43 p.

Duebbert, H.F., 1987, Planted grasslands for wildlife habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region, in

Johnson, A.W., ed., Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Moorhead, Minn.,

41 p.

Duebbert, H.F., Jacobson, E.T., Higgins, K.F., and Podoll, E.B., 1981, Establishment of seeded 

grasslands for wildlife habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Special Scientific Report, Wildlife no. 234, 21 p. 

Eisenlohr, W.S., Jr., 1972, Hydrologic investigations of prairie potholes in North Dakota, 1959–

1968: Washington, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-A, 102 p. 

ESRI, 2004, ArcReader release 10.2: Redlands, Calif., Environmental Systems Research 

Institute, accessed April 21, 2014, at http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcreader.

——— 2011, ArcGIS Desktop release 10: Redlands, Calif., Environmental Systems Research 

Institute, accessed April 21, 2014, at http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgis-for-desktop. 

Euliss, N.H., Jr., LaBaugh, J.W., Fredrickson, L.H., Mushet, D.M., Laubhan, M.K., Swanson, 

G.A., Winter, T.C., Rosenberry, D.O., and Nelson, R.D., 2004, The wetland continuum—A

conceptual framework for interpreting biological studies: Wetlands, v. 24, p. 448–458.

Fernald, M.L., 1950, Gray's Manual of botany; a handbook of the flowering plants and ferns of 

the central and northeastern United States and adjacent Canada: New York, N.Y., American 

Book Company. 1632 p.

Foster, D., Swanson, F., Aber, J., Burke, I., Brokaw, N., Tilman, D., and Knapp, A., 2003, The 

importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation: BioScience, v. 53, p. 77–88.

Gabrielson, I., 1958, Waterfowl—A problem of national significance: Naturalist, v. 8, p. 8–12.

Gleason, R.A., and Euliss, N.H., Jr., 1996, Impact of agriculture land-use on prairie wetland 

ecosystems—Experimental design and overview, in Garvey, R., ed., Proceedings of the North 

Dakota Academy of Science: Valley City, N. Dak., p. 103–107. 

Grange, W.B., and McAtee, W.L., 1934, Improving the farm environment for wildlife: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Farmer’s Bulletin no. 1719, 64 p.

Higgins, K.F., 1978, Fire bloopers, in Proceedings of the Prairie Prescribed Burning Symposium 

and Workshop: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 4 p.

Higgins, K.F., 1981, “Duck stamp” dollars reserve native prairie tracts: Rangelands, v. 3, p. 190–

191.

Higgins, K.F., 1982, Principal flora and wildlife use of a 35-40 year old gravel pit in North 

Dakota, in Svedarsky, W.D., and Crawford, R.D., eds., Wildlife Values of Gravel Pits 

Symposium Proceedings: Crookston, Minn., Northwest Agricultural Experiment Station,

University of Minnesota, p. 159–161.

Higgins, K.F., 1984, Lightning fires in North Dakota grasslands and in pine-savanna lands of 

South Dakota and Montana: Journal of Range Management, v. 37, p. 100–103.
45

Higgins, K.F., 1986a, Interpretation and compendium of historical fire accounts in the Northern 

Great Plains: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication 161, 39 p.

Higgins, K.F., 1986b, A comparison of burn season effects on nesting birds in North Dakota 

mixed-grass prairie: Prairie Naturalist, v. 18, p. 219–228.

Higgins, K.F., Arnold, T.W., and Barta, R.M., 1984, Breeding bird community colonization of 

sown stands of native grasses in North Dakota: Prairie Naturalist, v. 16, p. 177–182.

Higgins, K.F., and Barker, W.T., 1982, Changes in vegetation structure in seeded nesting cover 

in the Prairie Pothole Region: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report, 

Wildlife no. 242, 26 p. 

Higgins, K.F., and Duebbert, H.F., 1982, Successful establishment of stands of cool-season 

native grasses (North Dakota): Restoration and Management Notes, v. 1, p. 12.

Higgins, K.F., Kirsch, L.M., Klett, A.T., and Miller, H.W., 1992, Waterfowl production on the 

Woodworth Station in south-central North Dakota, 1965–1981: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Resource Publication 180, 79 p. 

Higgins, K.F., Kruse, A.D., and Piehl, J.L., 1989a, Prescribed burning guidelines in the Northern 

Great Plains: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cooperative Extension Service, South Dakota 

State University, U.S. Department of Agriculture EC 760, 36 p., accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/habitat/burning/index.htm.

——— 1989b, Effects of fire in the Northern Great Plains: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

Cooperative Extension Service, South Dakota State University, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture EC 761, 48 p., accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/habitat/fire/index.htm.

Higgins, K.F, and Woodward, R.O., 1996, Waterfowl studies at the Woodworth Study Area, 

Stutsman County, North Dakota—1965–1995, in Garvey, R., ed., Proceedings of the North 

Dakota Academy of Science: Valley City, N. Dak., p. 132–134.

Higgs, E.S., 1997, What is good ecological restoration?: Conservation biology, v. 11, p. 338–

348.

Huang, S., Dahal, D., Young, C., Chander, G., and Liu, S., 2011, Integration of Palmer Drought 

Severity Index and remote sensing data to simulate wetland water surface from 1910 to 2009 

in Cottonwood Lake area, North Dakota: Remote Sensing of Environment, v. 115, p. 3377–

3389.

Huxel, C.J., Jr., and Petri, L.R., 1963, Ground water basic data, part 2: U.S. Geological Survey, 

County Ground Water Studies 2, Bulletin 41, accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://www.swc.state.nd.us/4dlink9/4dcgi/GetContentRecord/PB-279.

Jacobson, E.T., Wark, D.B., Arnott, R.G., Haas, R.J., and Tober, D.A., 1994, Sculptured 

seeding—An ecological approach to revegetation: Ecological Restoration, v. 12, p. 46–50.

Johnson, D.H., 1976, Effects of grassland burning on breeding birds—preliminary report, in

McCullough, D., ed., Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Moorhead, 

Minn., p. 24.

——— 1996, Terrestrial bird communities of the Woodworth Study Area in Garvey, R., ed., 

Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Valley City, N. Dak, p. 127–131.

——— 1997. Effects of fire on bird populations in mixed-grass prairie in Knopf, F.L. and 

Samson, F.B., eds., Ecology and of Great Plains vertebrates, Chapter 8: New York, N.Y., 

Springer, p. 181-206.
46

Johnson, D.H., Higgins, K.F., and Woodward, R.O., 1996, An introduction to the Woodworth 

Study Area, in Garvey, R., ed., Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Valley 

City, N. Dak., p. 95–102.

Kantrud, H.A., 1983, An environmental overview of North Dakota—Past and present: Bismarck, 

N. Dak., Presentation to Department of Energy's Subcommittee on Environmental Research, 

Committee on Coal Gasification Research, accessed April 10, 2014, at

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/habitat/envovrvw/index.htm.

——— 1986, Effects of vegetation manipulation on breeding waterfowl in prairie wetlands—A

literature review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fish and Wildlife Technical Report no. 3, 15 

p.

Kantrud, H.A., and Higgins, K.F., 1992, Nest and nest site characteristics of some groundnesting, non-passerine birds of northern grasslands: Prairie Naturalist, v. 24, p. 67–84.

Kantrud, H.A., and Kologiski, R.L., 1982, Effects of soils and grazing on breeding birds of 

uncultivated upland grasslands of the Northern Great Plains: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Wildlife Research Report no. 15, 33 p.

Kirsch, L.M., 1969, Waterfowl production in relation to grazing: The Journal of Wildlife 

Management, v. 33, p. 821–828.

——— 1978, Effects of fire upon wildlife habitat, in Proceedings Fire and Range Management 

Seminar: Regina, Saskatchewan, Land Use Service DREE-PFRA, Lands Branch, 

Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture, p. 47–51.

Kirsch, L.M., Duebbert, H.F., and Kruse, A.D., 1978, Grazing and haying effects on habitats of 

upland nesting birds: Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources 

Conference, v. 43, p. 486–497.

Kirsch, L.M., and Higgins, K.F., 1976, Upland sandpiper nesting and management in North 

Dakota: Wildlife Society Bulletin, v. 4, p. 16–20.

Kirsch, L.M., and Kruse, A.D., 1973, Prairie fires and wildlife, in Proceedings Annual Tall 

Timbers Fire Ecology Conference: Lubbock, Tex., p. 289–303.

Klett, A.T., and Kirsch, L.M., 1976, Diurnal use of small wetlands by ducks: Journal of Wildlife 

Management, v. 40, p. 351-353.

LeBauer, D.S., and Treseder, K.K., 2008, Nitrogen limitation of net primary productivity in 

terrestrial ecosystems is globally distributed: Ecology, v. 89, p. 371–379.

Lehman, C., Williams, S., and Keen, A., 2012, The Centinel data format—Reliably 

communicating through time and place in Proceedings of the International Conference on 

Information and Knowledge Engineering: v. 12, p. 47–53, accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://world-comp.org/p2012/IKE3167.pdf.

Leopold, A., 1933, Game management: New York, Charles Scribners’ Sons.

Lorenz, R.J., and Rogler, G.A., 1971, Increasing production of native and seeded pastures with 

nitrogen fertilizer, in Proceedings of the 22d Annual Fertilizer Conference of the Pacific 

Northwest: Bozeman, Mont., p. 65––74.

Mann, G.E., 1958, Duck troubles...on the prairie: Naturalist, v. 8, p.50–52.

——— 1974, The prairie pothole region: A zone of environmental opportunity: Naturalist vol.

21, p. 2–7.

Mason, N.A., 1938, Dakota Pioneer of Gold-Wood-Mars, 1963-1938: Woodworth, N. Dak., 

distributed by J. J. Dittbenner, 73 p.

Meyer, M.I., 1985, Classification of native vegetation at the Woodworth Station, North Dakota:

Prairie Naturalist, v. 17, p. 167–175.
47

Meyer, M.I., 1987, Planting grasslands for wildlife habitat: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Report, 12 p.

Meyer, M.I., 1996, Upland vegetation at the Woodworth Study Area in Garvey, R., ed.,

Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Valley City, N. Dak., p. 126.

Mushet, D.M., Euliss, N.H., Jr., Lane, S.P., and Goldade, C.M., 2004, The flora of the 

Cottonwood Lake Study Area, Stutsman County, North Dakota: The Prairie Naturalist, v. 36, 

p. 43–62.

Mushet, D.M., Barker, W.T., Dekeyser, E.S., Kantrud, H.A., Kirby, D.R., Larson, G.E., Lenz, 

D.M., Maxwell, J.A., Melvin, N.C., III, Ode, D.J., and Pelizza, C.A., 2001, Coefficients of 

conservatism for the vascular flora of the Dakotas and adjacent grasslands: U.S. Geological 

Survey, Biological Resources Division, Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR2001-0001, 32 p.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2013, National Climate Data Center online

divisional climate data: Silver Spring, Md., National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, accessed June 8, 2013, at

http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/CDO/CDODivisionalSelect.jsp.

Nelson, H.K., 1996, Linking research with management—A historical perspective, in Garvey, 

R., ed., Proceedings of the North Dakota Academy of Science: Valley City, N. Dak., p. 152–

156.

Nelson, H.K., and Lee, F.B, 1966, A new center for waterfowl research: Naturalist, v. 17, p. 29–

32, accessed April 1, 2014, at http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/about/npwrc.htm.

Neon, Inc., 2011, 2011 Science strategy –– enabling continental scale ecological forecasting: 

Boulder, Colo., Pressmo.com, 56 p.

North Dakota State Data Center, 2000, Total population for North Dakota cities—1920 to 2000:

accessed April 2, 2014, at http://www.ndsu.edu/sdc/.

Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E.D., Burgess, N.D., Powell, G.V., Underwood, 

E.C., D'amico, J.A., Itoua, I., Strand, H.E., Morrison, J.C., Loucks, C.J., Allnutt, T.F., Ricketts, 

T.H., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J.F., Wettengel, W.W., Heda, P, and Kassem, K.R., 2001, 

Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: A new map of life on Earth, BioScience vol. 51, p. 933–

938.

Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E.D., Burgess, N.D., Powell, G.V.N., Underwood, 

E.C., D'Amico, J.A., Itoua, I., Strand, H.E., Morrison, J.C., Loucks, C.J., Allnutt, T.F., 

Ricketts, T.H., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J.F., Wettengel, W.W., Hedao, P., and Kassem, K.R., 

2001, Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth: BioScience, v. 51, p. 

933–938.

Omodt, H.W., Johnsgard, G.A., Patterson, D.D., and Olson, O.P., 1968, The major soils of North 

Dakota: North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 472, 60 p.

Patterson, D.D., Johnsgard, G.A., Sweeney, M.D., and Omodt, H.W., 1968, Soil Survey Report, 

County General Soil Maps, North Dakota: North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station 

Bulletin 473, 150 p.

Robel, R.J., Briggs, J.N., Dayton, A.D., and Hulbert, L.C., 1970, Relationships between visual 

obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation: Journal of Range Management, 

v. 23, p 295–297.

Ryan, M.R, Renken, R.B., and. Dinsmore, J.J., 1984, Marbled godwit habitat selection in the 

northern prairie region. Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 48, p. 1206–1218.
48

Sims, P.L., and Risser, P.G., 2000, Grasslands, in Barbour, M.G., and Billings, W.D., eds., North 

American terrestrial vegetation (2d ed.): Cambridge University Press, p. 323–356.

Sloan, C.E., 1972, Ground-water hydrology of prairie potholes in North Dakota: Washington,

D.C., U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 585-C, 28 p.

Stewart, R.E., and Kantrud, H. A., 1971, Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the 

glaciated prairie region: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource 

Publication 92, 57 p.

——— 1972, Vegetation of prairie potholes, North Dakota, in relation to quality of water and 

other environmental factors: Washington, D.C., U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 

585-D, 36 p.

Swanson, G.A., Winter, T.C., Adomaitis, V.A., and LaBaugh, J.W., 1988, Chemical 

characteristics of prairie lakes in south-central North Dakota—Their potential for influencing 

use by fish and wildlife: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Technical Report 

18, 44 p.

Swink, F., and Wilhelm, G.S., 1979, Plants of the Chicago region (3d ed.): Lisle, Ill., Morton 

Arboretum, 932 p.

——— 1994, Plants of the Chicago region (4th ed.): Indianapolis, Ind., Indiana Academy of 

Science, 921 p.

The White House, 1994, Executive Order 12906, Coordinating Geographic Data Acquisition and 

Access: The National Spatial Data Infrastructure, 59 Fed. Reg. 17671-74 (Apr. 11, 1994).

Tutill, S.J., Clayton, L., and Laird, W.M., 1964, A comparison of a fossil Pleistocene molluscan 

fauna from North Dakota with a recent molluscan fauna from Minnesota: American Midland 

Naturalist, v. 71, p. 344–362.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2009, Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO): Lincoln, 

Nebr., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil 

Survey Center, accessed March 1, 2014, at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.

——— 2013, 2012 acreage data as of January 2013: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=newsroom&subject=landing&topic=foi-er-fricad.

——— 2014, The PLANTS database: Greensboro, N. C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Plant Data Team, accessed April 3, 2014, at 

http://plants.usda.gov. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1999, Metadata for data sets and information products: Reston, Virg., 

U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Policy Issuance no. 08, 2 p.

Williams, C.S., and Marshall, W.H., 1938, Duck nesting studies, Bear River Migratory Bird 

Refuge, Utah, 1937: Journal of Wildlife Management, v. 2, p. 29–48.

Winter, T.C., and Rosenberry, D.O., 1995, The interaction of ground water with prairie pothole 

wetlands in the Cottonwood Lake area, east-central North Dakota, 1979–1990: Wetlands, v.

15, p. 193–211.

Winters, H.A., 1963, Geology and ground water resources of Stutsman County, North Dakota,

Bulletin 41: Grand Forks, N. Dak., North Dakota Geological Survey County Ground Water 

Studies 2, accessed April 1, 2014, at

http://www.swc.state.nd.us/4dlink9/4dcgi/GetContentRecord/PB-279.

Woodworth Betterment Community, 1986, The Woodworth Rustler, Woodworth, Stutsman 

County, North Dakota, June 20-21, 1986: Two Rivers Printing, 388 p.
49

Appendices
50

Appendix 1. Unpublished reports relating to the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) archived at 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center

Bayha, K.D., 1963, Preliminary waterfowl and habitat surveys on the Woodworth substation, 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, during 1963: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, unpublished report, 64 p.

——— 1964a, History of the Woodworth Study Area with emphasis on land use: Jamestown, N. 

Dak., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, unpublished 

report, 76 p.

——— 1964b, Inventory of wildlife populations and habitat conditions on the Woodworth Study 

Area, 1963–1964: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie 

Wildlife Research Center, unpublished report, 81 p.

Johnson, D.H., 1982, Relations of selected prairie plants with environmental attributes on the 

Woodworth Study Area, North Dakota: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center internal files, 30 p.

Klett, A.T., Kirsch, L.M., Higgins, K.F., King, R., Dwyer, T., and Murdy, H.W., 1969, Effect of 

land-use on waterfowl and other wildlife populations, zone of influence of land-use on 

waterfowl populations, Annual Progress Report 1968–1969: Jamestown, N. Dak., Northern 

Prairie Wildlife Research Center, unpublished report, 30 p. 

Ladd, W.N., 1972, Relationships of small mammals to land use treatments, Woodworth Study 

Area, North Dakota, 1972: Jamestown, N. Dak., Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, 

unpublished report, 39 p.

Stewart, R.E., and Kantrud, H.A., 1963, Long-term investigations of pothole complexes on the 

Missouri Coteau in Stutsman County, North Dakota, Annual Progress Report, Wildlife 

Research Work Unit A-7.1: Denver, Colo., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver Wildlife 

Research Center, unpublished report, 62 p.
51

Appendix 2. Published and unpublished reports that use vegetation or weather data from 

the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) region

Arnold, T.W., and Higgins, K.F., 1986, Effects of shrub coverages on birds of North Dakota 

mixed-grass prairies: Canadian Field-Naturalist, v. 100, p. 10–14.

Bayha, K.D., 1963, Preliminary waterfowl and habitat surveys on the Woodworth substation, 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, during 1963: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, unpublished report, 64 p.

Callow, J.M., Kantrud, H.A., and Higgins, K.F., 1992, First flowering dates and flowering 

periods of prairie plants at Woodworth, North Dakota: Prairie Naturalist, v. 24, p. 57–64.

Hammond, M.C., and Johnson, D.H., 1984, Effects of weather on breeding ducks in North 

Dakota: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report FWS-TR-1, 17 p. 

Higgins, K.F., 1986, A comparison of burn season effects on nesting birds in North Dakota 

mixed-grass prairie: Prairie Naturalist, v. 18, p. 219–228.

Higgins, K.F., and Barker, W.T., 1982, Changes in vegetation structure in seeded nesting cover 

in the Prairie Pothole Region: Washington, D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special 

Scientific Report Wildlife no. 242, 27 p.

Higgins, K.F., Arnold, T.W., and Barta, R.M., 1984, Breeding bird community colonization of 

sown stands of native grasses in North Dakota: Prairie Naturalist, v. 16 p. 177–182.

Higgins, K.F., Kirsch, L.M., Klett, A.T., and Miller, H.W., 1992, Waterfowl production on the 

Woodworth Station in south-central North Dakota, 1965-1981: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Resource Publication no. 180, 79 p. 

Higgins, K.F., 1982, Principal flora and wildlife use of a 35–40 year old gravel pit in North 

Dakota, in Svedarsky, W.D. and Crawford, R.D., eds., Wildlife Values of Gravel Pits 

Symposium Proceedings: Crookston, Minn., Northwest Agricultural Experiment Station, 

University of Minnesota, p. 159–161.

Johnson, D.H., 1982, Relations of selected prairie plants with environmental attributes on the 

Woodworth Study Area, North Dakota: Jamestown, N. Dak, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center internal files, 30 p.

Kirsch, L.M., Duebbert, H.F., and Kruse, A.D., 1978, Grazing and haying effects on habitats of 

upland nesting birds: Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources 

Conference, v. 43, p. 486–497.

Ladd, W.N., 1972, Relationships of small mammals to land use treatments, Woodworth Study 

Area, North Dakota, 1972: Jamestown, N. Dak., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern 

Prairie Wildlife Research Center, unpublished report, 39 p. 

Meyer, M.I., 1985, Classification of native vegetation at the Woodworth Station, North Dakota: 

Prairie Naturalist, v. 17, p. 167–175.

Renken, R.B., and Dinsmore, J.J., 1987, Nongame bird communities on managed grasslands in 

North Dakota: Canadian Field Naturalist, v. 101, p. 551–557.
52

Appendix 3. Woodworth Study Area (WSA) tract locations and ownership

[Study unit follows WSA convention. Year acquired is when the tract came under federal management; NA indicates the tract remained in private ownership. 

Tract name is the reference name used on land management records. The final three columns are number of wetlands on the tracts in 1970, the tract size in both 

hectares (ha) and acres (ac), and township plat location. T. = Township, R. = Range, sec.= section, and R.R = railroad. Tracts with no wetland data are indicated 

by nd.]

Study 

unit

Year 

acquired Tract name

Number of 

wetlands

in 1970

Tract size in 

ha (ac) Plat location

 1 1968 Rickford 21 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 1, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 2 1968 Rickford 35 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 1, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 3 1968 Rickford 18 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 2, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 4 1968 Rickford 9 26.4 (65.1) E1⁄2NW1⁄4 north of R.R. sec. 2, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 4 1975 Hotchkiss nd 12.6 (31.1) NW1⁄4 south of R.R. sec. 2, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 5 NA Hotchkiss nd 59.47 (147) SW1⁄4 sec. 2, T. 142 N., R. 68 W. 

 6 1967 Bohl 39 64.7 (160) SE1⁄4 sec. 1, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 7 1969 Kutz 35 64.7 (160) SW1⁄4 sec. 1, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 8 1963 Eddy 34 64.7 (160) SE1⁄4 sec. 1, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

 9 1966 Railroad 11 70 (173) SW1⁄4 sec. 6, T. 142 N., R. 67 W.; NW1⁄4 south of R.R.

 9A 1966 Railroad nd 65.5 (161.8) W. 435 ft of SE1⁄4 sec. 6, T. 142 N., R. 67 W.; NE1⁄4 south of R.R.

10 NA Holzworth nd 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 7, T. 142 N., R. 67 W.

11 1962 Fish 22 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 12, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

12 1963 Eddy 19 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 12, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

13 1963 Eddy 47 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 11, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

14 NA Hotchkiss 36 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 11, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

15 1963 Eddy 24 64.7 (160) SW1⁄4 sec. 11, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

16 1963 Eddy 32 64.7 (160) SE1⁄4 sec. 11, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

17 1962 Fish 28 64.7 (160) SW1⁄4 sec. 12, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.
53

Study 

unit

Year 

acquired Tract name

Number of 

wetlands

in 1970

Tract size in 

ha (ac) Plat location

18 1962 Fish 23 64.7 (160) SE1⁄4 sec. 12, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

19 NA Holzworth nd 64.7 (160) SW1⁄4 sec. 7, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

20 NA Holzworth nd 34.2 (84.5) E1⁄2NW1⁄4 sec. 18, T. 142 N., R. 67 W.

20 NA Stoppleworth nd 29.4 (72.6) W1⁄2NW1⁄4 sec. 18, T. 142 N., R.67W.

21 NA Stoppleworth nd 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 13, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

22 1962 Fish 39 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 13, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

23 NA Krenz 49 64.7 (160) NE1⁄4 sec. 14, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.

24 NA Krenz nd 64.7 (160) NW1⁄4 sec. 14, T. 142 N., R. 68 W.
54

Appendix 4. Soil classifications at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) using the Soil Survey 

Geographic Database (SSURGO)

Data source is the U.S. Department of Agriculture (2009). Scale is consistent across the 3 

maps.
55

Appendix 5. Original survey map of townships encompassing the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) from 1875

The original township survey from 1875 shows several of the Woodworth Study Area’s larger 

wetlands that lie on the section survey lines. Big Lake is the large wetland mapped along the A 

line. Plat maps and notes are available online at http://survey.swc.nd.gov/. Accessed 14 April, 

2014.
56

Appendix 6. Locations of man-made structures at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA)
57

Appendix 7. Location of North Dakota cities and survey sites mentioned in the text

Jamestown is the location of the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Locations of U.S. 

Historical Climate Network data sites near the Woodworth Study Area are in Pettibone and 

Napolean, N. Dak. Dunn Center and Canfield Lake, N. Dak. were two additional sampling sites 

for precipitation chemistry, and Park North, Park South, and Dunn Center, N. Dak., were 

additional sites of air chemistry sampling in Angelo and Anderson (1983).
58

Appendix 8. Geographic Information System (GIS) layers of the Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) available as shapefiles

[Feature is a general keyword description of the layer. Year is the associated time of the activity or creation of the 

feature; dashes indicate not applicable. Source is from where the digital file was procured. Hardcopy maps were 

digitized into ESRI ArcGIS® 10 (ESRI, 2011) in 2013. FWS is U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.]

Feature Years Description Source

Features

Buildings ~1900–50 Homes, farms Bayha (written comm., 

1964a)

Dams 1960s Wetland dams Existing file

Water gauges 1963–1965 Wetland water depths Hardcopy map

Teepee rings Unknown Reported teepee rings Hardcopy map

Shelterbelt trees ~1900–65 Trees planted by settlers and staff Archived memos

Auto tour 2000s Features for visitors Existing digital file

Sharp-tailed 

grouse

1964–85 Survey locations Hardcopy map

Railroad 1912–2014 Northern Pacific railroad Existing digital file

Roads 1900s–2014 Main road through the WSA Existing digital file

Water wells 1963 Private wells Huxel and Petri (1963)

Airstrip 1948 Historical airstrip Bayha (written commun., 

1964a); 

Woodworth Betterment 

Community (1986)

Plat markers 1934, 1951 Federal survey markers http://survey.swc.nd.gov

Treatments

Weed chemical 1989 Leafy spurge and knapweed spray 

treatment

Hardcopy map

Nitrogen fertilizer 1971–75 Experimental and treatment 

applications

Hardcopy map

Prescribed burns 1965–90 Areas burned by year Hardcopy map

Fire breaks 1987 Dirt, mowed, trail breaks Hardcopy map

Sheep grazing 1973, 1975 Enclosure, exclosure areas Hardcopy map

Geophysical

Permeable soils --- Band of few wetlands Bayha (written commun., 

1964b)

Glacial features --- Hummocky stagnation and 

outwash border

Winters (1963)

Physiographic --- Four physical regions of N. Dak. FWS existing digital file

Current soil series --- SSURGO soils (U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, 2011)

Existing digital file

Wetland classes --- National Wetland Inventory FWS; Cowardin and others 

(1979)
59

Feature Years Description Source

Base layers

Field outlines Pre-1960s Pioneer fields, delineated by use Bayha (written commun., 

1964b)

Field outlines Post-1960s Fields delineated after federal 

management

Bayha (written commun., 

1964b)

WSA border 1975 Federally managed land Existing digital file

Study units 1975 Study unit or quarter section lines Existing digital file

Vegetation transects

Bayha 1963 First upland transects at the WSA Bayha (written commun., 

1963)

Meyer 1980 One year of percent cover Hardcopy map

Higgins, 

approximate

1966 Approximate transect locations Existing digital file

Higgins, ground 

truthed

1966 Existing transect end poles Ground truthed in 2013 by 

K. Higgins

Robel 1975 Approx. transect locations Hardcopy maps

Photograph 

stations

1970 Current photograph stations Existing digital file

Land cover

Bayha land cover 1964 Habitat types Bayha (written commun., 

1964b)

Bayha land cover 1963 Upland vegetation Bayha (written commun., 

1963)

Field land use 1964–87 Available as GeoJson file Hardcopy file
60

Appendix 9. Fertilizer treatments and locations at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA), 1966–

75

[ID was arbitrarily assigned for the present report and corresponds to the location of the treatment in the map figure 

below. Study unit follows WSA convention. Date is the month (if known) and year of fertilizer application. Original 

descriptions are as written in archived notes and maps in the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center archives; see 

Conversion Factors for metric equivalents. Descriptions indicate application rates in pounds (lbs) or pounds per acre 

(lb/ac) of phosphorous (phos.), nitrogen (N), or potassium (K).]

ID Study

unit Date Original description

A 15 October 1971 100 lb/ac actual phos., 100 lbs/ac actual N on ~40 acres

B 13 October 1971 100 lb/ac actual phos., 100 lbs/ac actual N, on ~40 ac

C 6 October 1971 100 lbs/acres actual phosphate on 36.80 acres

D 12 September 1969 100 lbs 25-25-0

E 16 1969 25-25-0

F 16 1969 25-25-0

G 17 September 1969 100 lbs 0-46-0

H 15 November 1972 100 lbs K, 100 lbs N; 400 lbs 25-25-0/acre

I 17 1968 46 lbs K; 100 lbs/acre 0-46-0

J 13 November 1972 100 lbs K, 100 lbs N; 400 lbs 25-25-0/acre

K 6 September 1969 46 lbs K; 100 lbs 0-46-0

L 6 November 1972 100 lbs phos.; 217 lbs of 0-46-0/acre

M 3 September 1969 100 lbs 0-46-0; 46 lbs K

N 3 September 1969 100 lbs 0-46-0; 46 lbs K

O 2 1969 25 lbs K, 25 lbs N; 100 lbs+ 25-25-0

O 2 October 1974 11-48-0, 200 lbs/acre; 96 lbs K; 22 lbs N

P 3 October 1974 200 lbs, 11-48-0; almost all covered by low areas

Q 1 1975 41 lbs phos; 16 lbs N
61

Appendix 9 – Figure 1. Location of the fertilizer treatment on the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) between 

1969 and 1975.
62

Appendix 10. Master list of vegetation found at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) during 

1966–89

[Plants that were recorded in at least one survey at the WSA during 1966–89, listed alphabetically by scientific 

name. Scientific species name and USDA symbol are from USDA Plant Database (2014). Common name(s) are 

from USDA Plant Database (2014), WSA files, or the Northern Great Plains Floristic Quality Assessment Panel 

(Mushet and others, 2001); INV is invasive species, UNK is unknown C value. The C is coefficient of conservatism 

assigned by Mushet and others (2001). Functional group is sedge, forb, grass, or VST (vine, shrub, or tree).]

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Acer negundo boxelder ACNE2 1 VST

Achillea millefolium common yarrow ACMI2 3 forb

Acroptilon repens hardheads ACRE3 INV forb

Agalinis tenuifolia slenderleaf false foxglove, slender 

gerardia

AGTEM 8 forb

Agoseris glauca pale agoseris, false dandelion AGGL 8 forb

Agoseris retrorsa spearleaf agoseris AGRE UNK forb

Agrimonia striata roadside agrimony, agrimony AGST 5 forb

Agropyron cristatum crested wheatgrass AGCR INV grass

Agrostis hyemalis winter bentgrass, ticklegrass AGHY 1 grass

Agrostis scabra rough bentgrass AGSC5 1 grass

Alisma gramineum narrowleaf water plantain ALGR 2 forb

Alisma subcordatum American water plantain ALSU 2 forb

Allium stellatum autumn onion, pink wild onion ALST 7 forb

Allium textile textile onion, white wild onion ALTE 7 forb

Alopecurus aequalis shortawn foxtail ALAE 2 grass

Amaranthus retroflexus redroot amaranth, rough pigweed AMRE 0 forb

Ambrosia psilostachya Cuman ragweed, western ragweed AMPS 2 forb

Amelanchier alnifolia Saskatoon serviceberry, juneberry AMAL2 6 VST

Amorpha canescens leadplant AMCA6 9 VST

Amorpha fruticosa false indigo bush AMFR 4 VST

Amorpha nana dwarf false indigo, dwarf wild indigo AMNA 9 VST

Andropogon gerardii big bluestem ANGE 5 grass

Androsace occidentalis western rockjasmine ANOC2 5 forb

Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone, meadow anemone ANCA8 4 forb

Anemone cylindrica candle anemone ANCY 7 forb

Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes ANNE 5 forb

Antennaria parvifolia small-leaf pussytoes, pussy toes ANPA4 6 forb

Antennaria rosea rosy pussytoes ANRO2 UNK forb

Anthriscus caucalis bur chervil ANSC8 UNK forb

Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane APAN2 6 forb

Apocynum cannabinum Indianhemp, prairie dogbane APCA 4 forb

Arabis × divaricarpa spreadingpod rockcress, rock cress ARDI2 9 forb
63

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Arabis hirsuta hairy rockcress, rock cress ARHI 7 forb

Arabis holboellii Holboell's rockcress, rock cress ARHO2 5 forb

Arabis spp. rockcress ARABI UNK forb

Arctium minus lesser burdock ARMI2 INV forb

Argentina anserina silverweed cinquefoil, silverweed ARAN7 2 forb

Artemisia absinthium absinthium, wormwood ARAB3 INV forb

Artemisia biennis biennial wormwood ARBI2 INV forb

Artemisia campestris field sagewort, western sagebrush ARCAC 5 forb

Artemisia dracunculus tarragon, silky wormwood ARDR4 4 forb

Artemisia frigida prairie sagewort ARFR4 4 VST

Artemisia ludoviciana white sagebrush, white sage ARLU 3 forb

Asclepias ovalifolia oval-leaf milkweed ASOV 9 forb

Asclepias speciosa showy milkweed ASSP 4 forb

Asclepias syriaca common milkweed ASSY 0 forb

Asclepias verticillata whorled milkweed ASVE 3 forb

Asclepias viridiflora green comet milkweed, green 

milkweed 

ASVI 8 forb

Asclepias incarnata swamp milkweed ASIN 5 forb

Asclepias pumila plains milkweed ASPU 7 forb

Astragalus agrestis purple milkvetch ASAG2 6 forb

Astragalus bisulcatus twogrooved milkvetch ASBI2 5 forb

Astragalus canadensis Canadian milkvetch ASCA11 5 forb

Astragalus canadensis var.

brevidense

shorttooth Canadian milkvetch ASCAB 5 forb

Astragalus crassicarpus groundplum milkvetch ASCR2 7 forb

Astragalus flexuosus flexile milkvetch, slender milkvetch ASFL2 4 forb

Astragalus gilviflorus plains milkvetch, tufted milkvetch ASGI5 7 forb

Astragalus laxmannii prairie milkvetch ASLAR 8 forb

Astragalus pectinatus narrowleaf milkvetch ASPE5 8 forb

Astragalus racemosus cream milkvetch ASRA2 7 forb

Astragalus tenellus looseflower milkvetch ASTE5 8 forb

Astragalus lotiflorus lotus milkvetch ASLO4 6 forb

Avena fatua wild oat AVFA INV grass

Avenula hookeri spikeoat AVHO3 9 grass

Bassia scoparia burningbush, kochia BASC5 INV forb

Beckmannia syzigachne American sloughgrass BESY 1 grass

Bidens frondosa devil's beggartick, beggarticks BIFR 1 forb

Bidens vulgata big devils beggartick, beggarticks BIVU 1 forb

Bidens comosa threelobe beggarticks, swamp tickseed BICO3 2 forb

Boltonia asteroides white doll's daisy, violet boltonia BOASL 3 forb

Bouteloua curtipendula sideoats grama BOCU 5 grass

Bouteloua gracilis blue grama BOGR2 7 grass
64

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Bromus arvensis field brome, Japanese brome BRAR5 INV grass

Bromus inermis smooth brome BRIN2 INV grass

Bromus tectorum cheatgrass, downy brome BRTE INV grass

Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint CACA4 5 grass

Calamagrostis montanensis plains reedgrass CAMO 8 grass

Calamagrostis stricta northern reedgrass CASTI3 5 grass

Calamovilfa gigantea giant sandreed CAGI3 UNK grass

Calamovilfa longifolia prairie sandreed CALO 5 grass

Callitriche hermaphroditica northern water-starwort CAHE2 7 forb

Calochortus lyallii Lyall's mariposa lily, yellow evening 

primrose

CALY 7 forb

Calylophus serrulatus yellow sundrops CASE12 7 forb

Calystegia sepium hedge false bindweed, hedge 

bindweed

CASEA2 0 forb

Campanula rotundifolia bluebell bellflower, harebell CARO2 7 forb

Capsella bursa-pastoris shepherd's purse CABU2 INV forb

Carex atherodes wheat sedge, slough sedge CAAT2 4 sedge

Carex brevior shortbeak sedge, fescue sedge CABR10 4 sedge

Carex duriuscula needleleaf sedge CADU6 4 sedge

Carex filifolia threadleaf sedge CAFI 7 sedge

Carex inops sun sedge CAINH2 7 sedge

Carex interior inland sedge CAIN11 10 sedge

Carex laxiculmis spreading sedge CALAC UNK sedge

Carex pellita woolly sedge CAPE42 4 sedge

Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge CAPE6 8 sedge

Carex praegracilis clustered field sedge CAPR5 5 sedge

Carex rostrata beaked sedge CARO6 8 sedge

Carex aquatilis water sedge CAAQA5 10 sedge

Carex crawei Crawe's sedge CACR3 9 sedge

Carex obtusata obtuse sedge CAOB4 8 sedge

Carex sartwellii Sartwell's sedge CASA8 5 sedge

Castilleja sessiliflora downy paintedcup CASE5 8 forb

Castilleja coccinea scarlet Indian paintbrush CACO17 UNK forb

Ceanothus arboreus feltleaf ceanothus CEAR UNK VST

Celastrus scandens American bittersweet CESC 5 VST

Centaurea maculosa spotted knapweed CEMA4 INV forb

Cerastium arvense field chickweed, prairie chickweed CEAR4 2 forb

Chamaerhodos erecta little rose CHER 6 forb

Chamaesyce serpyllifolia thymeleaf sandmat, thyme-leaved 

spurge

CHSES 0 forb

Chamaesyce maculata spotted sandmat CHMA15 UNK forb

Chamaesyce serpens matted sandmat CHSE4 UNK forb
65

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Chamerion angustifolium fireweed CHANA2 5 forb

Chenopodium album lambsquarters CHAL7 INV forb

Chenopodium glaucum oakleaf goosefoot CHGL3 INV forb

Cicuta maculata spotted, common water hemlock CIMA2 4 forb

Cirsium arvense Canada thistle CIAR4 INV forb

Cirsium flodmanii Flodman's thistle, prairie thistle CIFL 5 forb

Cirsium undulatum wavyleaf thistle CIUN 7 forb

Cirsium vulgare bull thistle CIVU INV forb

Cistanthe umbellata Mt. Hood pussypaws CIUM UNK forb

Collomia linearis tiny trumpet, collomia COLI2 5 forb

Comandra umbellata bastard toadflax COUM 8 forb

Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed COAR4 INV forb

Conyza canadensis Canadian horseweed, horseweed COCA5 0 forb

Cornus sericea redosier dogwood COSES UNK VST

Crataegus chrysocarpa fireberry hawthorn, roundleaf 

hawthorn 

CRCH UNK VST

Crepis runcinata fiddleleaf hawksbeard, hawk's-beard CRRU3 8 forb

Cypripedium parviflorum lesser yellow lady's slipper CYPAP4 10 forb

Cypripedium parviflorum greater yellow lady's slipper CYPAP3 10 forb

Dalea candida white prairie clover DACA7 8 forb

Dalea purpurea purple prairie clover DAPU5 8 forb

Dalea candida white prairie clover DACAC 8 forb

Dalea leporina foxtail prairie clover DALE3 2 forb

Deschampsia cespitosa tufted hairgrass DECE 9 grass

Descurainia sophia herb sophia, flixweed DESO2 INV forb

Dichanthelium leibergii Leiberg's panicum DILE2 8 grass

Dichanthelium wilcoxianum fall rosette grass, Wilcox panicum DIWI5 8 grass

Distichlis spicata saltgrass DISP 2 grass

Draba nemorosa woodland draba, yellow whitlowwort DRNE 1 forb

Echinacea angustifolia blacksamson echinacea, 

purple coneflower

ECAN2 7 forb

Echinochloa crus-galli barnyardgrass ECCR INV grass

Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive ELAN INV VST

Elaeagnus commutata silverberry ELCO 5 VST

Eleocharis acicularis needle spikerush ELAC 3 sedge

Eleocharis erythropoda bald spikerush ELER 2 sedge

Eleocharis palustris common spikerush, spike rush ELPA3 4 sedge

Eleocharis compressa flatstem spikerush ELCO2 8 sedge

Eleocharis macrostachya pale spikerush ELMA5 4 sedge

Elymus canadensis Canada wildrye ELCA4 3 grass

Elymus caninus bearded wheatgrass, slender 

wheatgrass 

ELCA11 6 grass
66

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Elyleymus hirtiflorus Canadian wildrye ELHI4 UNK grass

Elymus lanceolatus thickspike wheatgrass ELLAL 7 grass

Elymus repens quackgrass ELRE4 INV grass

Elymus trachycaulus slender wheatgrass ELTRS 6 grass

Epilobium brachycarpum tall annual willowherb, willow herb EPBR3 3 forb

Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb EPCIC 3 forb

Epilobium palustre marsh willowherb, 

narrow-leaved willow herb

EPPA 6 forb

Epilobium angustifolium fireweed EPAN2 5 forb

Equisetum arvense field horsetail EQAR 4 forb

Equisetum laevigatum smooth horsetail EQLA 3 forb

Equisetum hyemale scouringrush horsetail EQHY 3 forb

Erigeron glabellus streamside fleabane, smooth fleabane ERGL2 7 forb

Erigeron philadelphicus Philadelphia fleabane ERPH 2 forb

Erigeron strigosus prairie fleabane, daisy fleabane ERST3 3 forb

Eriophorum viridicarinatum thinleaf cottonsedge ERVI9 10 sedge

Eriophorum polystachion cottongrass ERPO6 8 sedge

Erucastrum gallicum common dogmustard, dog mustard ERGA INV forb

Erysimum asperum western wallflower ERAS2 3 forb

Erysimum cheiranthoides wormseed wallflower ERCH9 INV forb

Erysimum inconspicuum shy wallflower, smallflower wallflower ERIN7 7 forb

Escobaria vivipara spinystar, pincushion cactus ESVIV 10 forb

Eupatoriadelphus maculatus spotted trumpetweed,

spotted joe-pye-weed

EUMAM3 9 forb

Euphorbia esula leafy spurge EUESE INV forb

Eurybia sibirica arctic aster, simple aster EUSI13 3 forb

Euthamia graminifolia flat-top goldentop,

narrow-leaved goldenrod

EUGRG 6 forb

Festuca ovina sheep fescue FEOV 8 grass

Fragaria virginiana Virginia strawberry, wild strawberry FRVI 4 forb

Fumaria officinalis drug fumitory FUOF UNK forb

Gaillardia aristata common gaillardia, blanketflower GAAR 5 forb

Galium boreale northern bedstraw GABO2 4 forb

Galium trifidum threepetal bedstraw, small bedstraw GATR2 8 forb

Gaura coccinea scarlet beeblossom, scarlet gaura GACO5 4 forb

Gentiana affinis pleated gentian, northern gentian GEAF 10 forb

Gentiana andrewsii closed bottle gentian GEAN 10 forb

Gentianella amarella autumn dwarf gentian GEAM3 7 forb

Gentianopsis procera lesser fringed gentian GEPR6 10 forb

Geum aleppicum yellow avens GEAL3 4 forb

Geum triflorum old man's whiskers, purple avens GETR 8 forb

Glyceria grandis American mannagrass, tall 

mannagrass

GLGR 4 grass
67

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass GLST 6 grass

Glycyrrhiza lepidota American licorice, wild licorice GLLE3 2 forb

Graphina sophisticascens sophisticated graphina lichen,

curly-top gumweed

GRSO 1 forb

Gutierrezia sarothrae broom snakeweed GUSA2 6 VST

Hackelia virginiana beggarslice, Virginia stickseed HAVI2 0 forb

Hedeoma hispida rough false pennyroyal, rough 

pennyroyal

HEHI 2 forb

Helianthus × laetiflorus cheerful sunflower, stiff sunflower HELA UNK forb

Helianthus annuus common sunflower HEAN3 0 forb

Helianthus maximiliani Maximilian sunflower HEMA2 5 forb

Helianthus nuttallii Nuttall's sunflower HENU 8 forb

Helianthus nuttallii 

ssp. Rydbergii

Rydberg's sunflower, 

Nuttall's sunflower

HENUR 8 forb

Hesperis matronalis dames rocket HEMA3 INV forb

Hesperostipa comata needle and thread HECOC8 6 grass

Hesperostipa spartea porcupinegrass HESP11 8 grass

Heterotheca camporum lemonyellow false goldenaster,

golden aster

HECAC2 UNK forb

Heterotheca villosa hairy false goldenaster HEVIV 3 forb

Heuchera richardsonii Richardson's alumroot HERI 8 forb

Hierochloe odorata sweetgrass HIOD 10 grass

Hippuris vulgaris common mare's-tail, mare's-tail HIVU2 5 forb

Hordeum jubatum foxtail barley HOJU 0 grass

Hypoxis hirsuta common goldstar, yellow stargrass HYHI2 8 forb

Iva annua annual marsh elder, marsh elder IVAN2 INV forb

Juncus arcticus mountain rush, Baltic rush JUARL 5 rush

Juncus bufonius toad rush JUBU 1 rush

Juncus dudleyi Dudley's rush JUDU2 4 rush

Juncus interior inland rush JUIN2 5 rush

Juncus longistylis longstyle rush JULO 10 rush

Juncus nodosus knotted rush JUNO2 7 rush

Juncus torreyi Torrey's rush JUTO 2 rush

Koeleria macrantha prairie junegrass, junegrass KOMA 7 grass

Lactuca serriola prickly lettuce LASE INV forb

Lactuca tatarica blue lettuce LATAP 1 forb

Lappula occidentalis flatspine stickseed, low stickseed LAOCO 2 forb

Lappula squarrosa European stickseed, blue stickseed LASQ INV forb

Lathyrus ochroleucus cream pea, yellow vetchling LAOC2 8 forb

Lathyrus venosus veiny pea LAVE 8 forb

Lemna minor common duckweed LEMI3 9 forb

Lemna trisulca star duckweed LETR 2 forb

Lepidium densiflorum common pepperweed, peppergrass LEDE 0 forb
68

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Lesquerella ludoviciana foothill bladderpod, silver bladderpod LELU 6 forb

Leymus cinereus basin wildrye LECI4 UNK grass

Liatris ligulistylis Rocky Mountain blazing star, gayfeatherLILI 10 forb

Liatris punctata dotted blazing star, blazing star LIPU 7 forb

Lilium philadelphicum wood lily, wild lily LIPH 8 forb

Lilium canadense Canada lily LICAC 10 forb

Linaria vulgaris butter and eggs LIVU2 INV forb

Linum rigidum stiffstem flax LIRI 5 forb

Linum sulcatum grooved flax LISU4 7 forb

Lithospermum canescens hoary puccoon, Indiana plant LICA12 7 forb

Lithospermum incisum narrowleaf stoneseed, 

narrow-leaved puccoon

LIIN2 7 forb

Lobelia kalmia Ontario lobelia, Kalm's lobelia LOKA 10 forb

Lobelia spicata palespike lobelia LOSP 6 forb

Lomatium foeniculaceum desert biscuitroot, yellow wild parsley LOFO 6 forb

Lomatium orientale northern Idaho biscuitroot, wild 

parsley 

LOOR 8 forb

Lonicera tatarica Tatarian honeysuckle LOTA INV VST

Lotus unifoliolatus American bird's-foot trefoil, 

prairie bird's feet trefoil 

LOUNU 3 forb

Lycopus americanus American water horehound, 

American bugleweed 

LYAM 4 forb

Lycopus asper rough bugleweed LYAS 4 forb

Lygodesmia juncea rush skeletonplant LYJU 2 forb

Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife, fringed loosestripe LYCI 6 forb

Lysimachia hybrida lowland yellow loosestrife, loosestrife LYHY 5 forb

Lysimachia thyrsiflora tufted loosestrife LYTH2 7 forb

Machaeranthera canescens hoary tansyaster, skeleton weed MACA2 2 forb

Machaeranthera pinnatifida machaeranthera, spiny ironplant MAPIS 7 forb

Maianthemum stellatum starry false lily of the valley, spikeard MAST4 5 forb

Matricaria discoidea disc mayweed, pineappleweed MADI6 INV forb

Medicago lupulina black medick MELU INV forb

Medicago sativa alfalfa MESA INV forb

Melilotus officinalis yellow sweetclover, white sweet 

clover

MEOF INV forb

Mentha arvensis wild mint, field mint MEAR4 3 forb

Mirabilis hirsuta hairy four o'clock MIHI 4 forb

Mirabilis nyctaginea heartleaf four o'clock MINY 2 forb

Moehringia lateriflora bluntleaf sandwort, grove sandwort MOLA6 8 forb

Muhlenbergia asperifolia scratchgrass MUAS 2 grass

Muhlenbergia cuspidata plains muhly MUCU3 8 grass

Muhlenbergia racemosa marsh muhly MURA 4 grass

Muhlenbergia richardsonis mat muhly MURI 10 grass
69

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Muhlenbergia glomerata spiked muhly MUGL3 10 grass

Myriophyllum spicatum shortpike watermilfoil MYSPE INV forb

Nassella viridula green needlegrass NAVI4 5 grass

Nepeta cataria catnip NECA2 INV forb

Oenothera nuttallii Nuttall's evening primrose, white 

stemmed evening primrose

OENU 8 forb

Oenothera villosa hairy evening primrose, common 

evening primrose

OEVIS 0 forb

Oenothera biennis common evening primrose OEBI 0 forb

Oligoneuron album prairie goldenrod, sneezewort aster OLAL2 5 forb

Oligoneuron rigidum stiff goldenrod, rigid goldenrod OLRIR 4 forb

Onobrychis viciifolia sainfoin ONVI UNK forb

Onosmodium bejariense western marbleseed, false gromwell ONBEO 7 forb

Orobanche fasciculata clustered broomrape ORFA 9 forb

Orobanche ludoviciana Louisiana broomrape, broomrape ORLU 10 forb

Orthocarpus luteus yellow owl's-clover, owl clover ORLU2 6 forb

Oxalis stricta common yellow oxalis, yellow wood 

sorrel

OXST 0 forb

Oxytropis lambertii purple locoweed OXLA3 5 forb

Packera cana woolly groundsel, gray ragwort PACA15 8 forb

Packera plattensis prairie groundsel, prairie ragwort PAPL12 6 forb

Panicum capillare witchgrass PACA6 0 grass

Panicum virgatum switchgrass PAVI2 5 grass

Parnassia palustris marsh grass of parnassus, northern 

grass-of-parnassus

PAPA8 10 forb

Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper PAIN10 2 VST

Pascopyrum smithii western wheatgrass PASM 4 grass

Pastinaca sativa wild parsnip PASA2 INV forb

Pediomelum argophyllum silverleaf Indian breadroot, silver leaf 

scurf pea

PEAR6 4 forb

Pediomelum esculentum large Indian breadroot, breadroot 

scurf pea

PEES 9 forb

Penstemon albidus white penstemon, white beardtongue PEAL2 7 forb

Penstemon gracilis lilac penstemon, slender beardtongue PEGR5 6 forb

Phacelia viscida tacky phacelia PHVI UNK forb

Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass PHAR3 0 grass

Phleum pratense timothy PHPR3 INV grass

Phlox hoodii spiny phlox, hood's phlox PHHO 6 forb

Phragmites australis common reed PHAU7 0 grass

Physalis heterophylla clammy groundcherry PHHE5 5 forb

Physalis virginiana Virginia groundcherry, ground cherry PHVI5 4 forb

Plantago eriopoda redwool plantain, alkali plantain PLER 5 forb

Plantago major common plantain PLMA2 INV forb

Plantago lanceolata narrowleaf plantain PLLA INV forb
70

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Platanthera aquilonis northern green orchid PLAQ2 9 forb

Poa compressa Canada bluegrass POCO INV grass

Poa nemoralis inland bluegrass PONEI2 5 grass

Poa paludigena bog bluegrass POPA UNK grass

Poa palustris fowl bluegrass POPA2 4 grass

Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass POPR INV grass

Polygala alba white milkwort POAL4 5 forb

Polygala senega Seneca snakeroot POSE3 10 forb

Polygala verticillata whorled milkwort POVE 8 forb

Polygonatum biflorum smooth Solomon's seal POBI2 8 forb

Polygonum achoreum leathery knotweed, erect knotweed POAC3 INV forb

Polygonum aviculare prostrate knotweed, common 

knotweed 

POAV 0 forb

Polygonum convolvulus black bindweed, wild buckwheat POCO10 INV VST

Polygonum lapathifolium curlytop knotweed, pale smartweed POLA4 1 forb

Polygonum persicaria spotted ladysthumb, lady's thumb POPE3 INV forb

Polygonum amphibium water smartweed POAMS 6 forb

Pontederia cordata pickerelweed POCO14 UNK forb

Populus deltoides eastern cottonwood, cottonwood PODE3 3 VST

Portulaca oleracea little hogweed POOL INV forb

Potamogeton gramineus variableleaf pondweed POGR8 6 forb

Potamogeton pusillus small pondweed POPUP5 2 forb

Potamogeton richardsonii Richardson's pondweed PORI2 4 forb

Potentilla arguta tall cinquefoil POAR7 8 forb

Potentilla concinna elegant cinquefoil, early cinquefoil POCO13 8 forb

Potentilla gracilis slender cinquefoil, graceful cinquefoil POGR9 5 forb

Potentilla hickmanii Hickman's cinquefoil, woolly 

cinquefoil

POHI5 8 forb

Potentilla norvegica Norwegian cinquefoil, 

strawberryweed

PONO3 0 forb

Potentilla pensylvanica Pennsylvania cinquefoil POPE8 9 forb

Potentilla rivalis Nutt. brook cinquefoil PORI3 3 forb

Potentilla concinna elegant cinquefoil POCOC3 8 forb

Prenanthes racemosa purple rattlesnakeroot PRRA 10 forb

Prunus americana American plum, wild plum PRAM 4 VST

Prunus virginiana chokecherry PRVI 4 VST

Puccinellia nuttalliana Nuttall's alkaligrass, alkali grass PUNU2 4 grass

Pulsatilla patens cutleaf anemone, pasque-flower PUPAM 9 forb

Ranunculus glaberrimus sagebrush buttercup, 

shiny-leaved buttercup

RAGL 8 forb

Ranunculus macounii Macoun's buttercup RAMA2 4 forb

Ranunculus rhomboideus Labrador buttercup, prairie buttercup RARH 8 forb

Ranunculus aquatilis white water crowfoot RAAQ UNK forb
71

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Ranunculus cymbalaria alkali buttercup RACY 3 forb

Ranunculus flabellaris yellow water buttercup RAFL 7 forb

Ranunculus gmelinii Gmelin's buttercup RAGM 8 forb

Ranunculus longirostris longbeak buttercup RASU 7 forb

Ranunculus sceleratus cursed buttercup RASC3 3 forb

Ratibida columnifera upright prairie coneflower,

prairie coneflower

RACO3 3 forb

Rhamnus cathartica common buckthorn RHCA3 INV VST

Ribes americanum American black currant, wild black 

currant

RIAM2 7 VST

Ribes missouriense Missouri gooseberry RIMI 4 VST

Rorippa palustris bog yellowcress ROPA2 2 forb

Rosa arkansana prairie rose, prairie wild rose ROAR3 3 VST

Rosa woodsii Woods' rose, western wild rose ROWO 5 VST

Rubus idaeus grayleaf red raspberry RUIDS2 5 VST

Rudbeckia hirta blackeyed susan RUHI2 5 forb

Rumex aquaticus western dock RUAQF 7 forb

Rumex crispus curly dock RUCR INV forb

Rumex longifolius dooryard dock RULO2 INV forb

Rumex maritimus golden dock RUMA4 1 forb

Rumex salicifolius Mexican dock, willow-leaved dock RUSAM 1 forb

Sagittaria cuneata arumleaf arrowhead SACU 6 forb

Salix discolor pussy willow SADI 7 VST

Salsola kali Russian thistle SAKA INV forb

Schedonnardus paniculatus tumblegrass SCPA 1 grass

Schizachyrium scoparium little bluestem SCSC 6 grass

Schoenoplectus acutus hardstem bulrush SCACA 5 sedge

Schoenoplectus fluviatilis river bulrush SCFL11 UNK sedge

Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani softstem bulrush SCVA 3 sedge

Scirpu americanus chairmaker's bulrush SCAM2 UNK sedge

Scirpus atrovirens green bulrush SCAT2 5 sedge

Scolochloa festucacea common rivergrass, sprangletop SCFE 6 grass

Scutellaria galericulata marsh skullcap SCGA 7 forb

Senecio congestus marsh fleabane, swamp ragwort SECO2 2 forb

Senecio integerrimus lambstongue ragwort,

entire-leaved groundsel 

SEIN2 7 forb

Senecio pseudoarnica seaside ragwort, falsegold groundsel SEPS 5 forb

Setaria pumila yellow foxtail SEPUP2 INV grass

Setaria viridis green bristlegrass SEVI4 INV grass

Silene csereii Balkan catchfly, smooth catchfly SICS INV forb

Silene latifolia bladder campion, white cockle SILAA3 INV forb

Silene noctiflora nightflowering silene, 

night-flowering catchfly 

SINO INV forb
72

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Sinapis arvensis wild mustard, charlock SIARA INV forb

Sisymbrium altissimum tall tumblemustard, tumbling mustard SIAL2 INV forb

Sisyrinchium angustifolium narrowleaf blue-eyed grass, 

blue eyed grass

SIAN3 UNK forb

Sisyrinchium montanum strict blue-eyed grass SIMO2 8 forb

Sium suave hemlock waterparsnip SISU2 3 forb

Smilax herbacea smooth carrionflower, carrion-flower SMHE 8 VST

Solanum americanum American black nightshade SOAM UNK forb

Solanum campechiense redberry nightshade SOCA UNK forb

Solanum nigrum black nightshade SONI 0 forb

Solanum triflorum cutleaf nightshade SOTR 0 forb

Solidago arguta Atlantic goldenrod SOAR UNK forb

Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod SOCA6 1 forb

Solidago gigantea giant goldenrod SOGI 4 forb

Solidago missouriensis Missouri goldenrod, prairie goldenrod SOMI2 5 forb

Solidago mollis velvety goldenrod, soft goldenrod SOMO 6 forb

Solidago nemoralis gray goldenrod SONE 6 forb

Sonchus arvensis field sowthistle, field sow thistle SOAR2 INV forb

Sonchus oleraceus common sowthistle SOOL INV forb

Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass SONU2 6 grass

Sparganium eurycarpum broadfruit bur-reed, giant burreed SPEU 4 forb

Spartina gracilis alkali cordgrass SPGR 6 grass

Spartina pectinata prairie cordgrass SPPE 5 grass

Sphaeralcea coccinea scarlet globemallow, red false mallow SPCO 4 forb

Sphenopholis obtusata prairie wedgescale, prairie 

wedgegrass

SPOB 7 grass

Spiraea alba white meadowsweet, meadowsweet SPAL2 7 VST

Sporobolus compositus composite dropseed, rough dropseed SPCOC2 4 grass

Sporobolus cryptandrus sand dropseed SPCR 6 grass

Sporobolus heterolepis prairie dropseed SPHE 10 grass

Stachys palustris marsh hedgenettle, hedge nettle STPA 3 forb

Stellaria longifolia longleaf starwort, long-leaved 

stitchwort

STLO 8 forb

Stellaria media common chickweed STME2 INV forb

Stuckenia pectinata sago pondweed STPE15 4 forb

Symphoricarpos occidentalis western snowberry SYOC 3 VST

Symphoricarpos orbiculatus coralberry SYOR UNK VST

Symphyotrichum boreale northern bog aster, rush aster SYBO2 10 forb

Symphyotrichum ericoides white heath aster SYERE UNK forb

Symphyotrichum laeve smooth blue aster SYLAL3 5 forb

Syringa vulgaris common lilac SYVU UNK VST

Taraxacum laevigatum rock dandelion, red-seeded dandelion TALA2 INV forb
73

Scientific name Common name(s) USDA C Functional 

group

Taraxacum officinale common dandelion, dandelion TAOF INV forb

Teucrium canadense Canada germander TECA3 3 forb

Thalictrum dasycarpum purple meadow-rue THDA 7 forb

Thinopyrum intermedium intermediate wheatgrass THIN6 INV grass

Thinopyrum ponticum tall wheatgrass THPO7 INV grass

Thlaspi arvense field pennycress, penny cress THAR5 INV forb

Toxicodendron rydbergii western poison ivy TORY 3 VST

Tragopogon dubius yellow salsify, goatsbeard TRDU INV forb

Trifolium hybridum alsike clover TRHY INV forb

Trifolium repens white clover TRRE3 INV forb

Triglochin maritima seaside arrowgrass TRMA20 5 grass

Typha angustifolia narrowleaf cattail TYAN INV forb

Typha latifolia broadleaf cattail TYLA 2 forb

Urtica dioica stinging nettle URDI 0 forb

Utricularia vulgaris common bladderwort UTVU 2 forb

Verbena bracteata bigbract verbena, bracted vervain VEBR 0 forb

Verbena hastata swamp verbena, blue vervain VEHA2 5 forb

Verbena stricta hoary verbena VEST 2 forb

Vernonia fasciculata prairie ironweed VEFA2 3 forb

Vicia americana American vetch VIAM 6 VST

Viola adunca hookedspur violet, small blue violet VIAD 8 forb

Viola nuttallii Nuttall's violet VINU2 8 forb

Viola pedata birdfoot violet VIPE UNK forb

Viola pedatifida prairie violet VIPE2 8 forb

Viola nephrophylla northern bog violet VINE 8 forb

Zannichellia palustris horned pondweed ZAPA 2 forb

Zigadenus elegans mountain deathcamas, white camass ZIEL2 8 forb

Zigadenus venenosus meadow deathcamas, death camass ZIVE 7 forb

Zizia aptera meadow zizia, meadow parsnip ZIAP 8 forb
74

Appendix 11. Plants collected at the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) and stored in the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center

herbarium

[Plant scientific names are those recorded at the time of collection; taxonomy was primarily based on Gray’s Manual of Botany (Fernald, 1950). U.S. Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) acronyms reflect accepted taxonomy as of 2014; see Appendix 10 for accepted scientific and common names. Collector is the staff or 

researcher at WSA who collected the sample, listed by their initials: AB = Allison Banks, CS = Charles Schaiffer, EL = Eric Larsen, KH = Kenneth F. Higgins, 

LHM = Lyla (Hotchkiss) Martin, MM = Mavis Meyer, MC = Michael Callow, RK = R.O. Kologiski, and WB = William J. Berg. Date is the date of plant 

collection. Location and original description are notes as recorded by the collectors. Location is described by field or plat location: T = Township (north [N]), R 

= Range (west [W]), sec= section, quarter (qtr). Later locations were determined by geographic position unit (GPS) and described by Universal Transverse 

Locator (UTM) system in zone 14: meters east (mE) and north (mN). Other abbreviations in the description include vegetation height (meters, m; decimeters, 

dm); W.P.A. is Waterfowl Production Area; slope angle, deg. is degree; and DNC is dense nesting cover.]

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Acer negundo ACNE2 MM 25-May-79 Shelterbelt south of station building. Quarter 12. UTM: 81,950mE, 19,600mN, 

zone 14.

Acer negundo ACNE2 AB 18-Jun-79 Old farmstead, along road ditch. Tree, 10m tall. Quarter 4. UTM: 80,700mE, 

21,880mN, zone 14.

Acer negundo ACNE2 MC 6-May-80 In Quarter 3 at the Rickford farm site. Tree planting.

Agropyron caninum ELCA11 MM, MC 16-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 13 in Buse Soil on dry prairie hill.

Agropyron caninum ELCA11 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec. 6. On sandy gravely soils.

Agropyron caninum ELCA11 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec. 6. On sandy gravely soils.

Agropyron caninum ELCA11 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec.6. On sandy gravely soil.

Agropyron cristatum AGCR KH, EL 22-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #146

Agropyron cristatum AGCR AB 24-Jul-79 Located in Quarter 9-A on the old airstrip. Plant to 1m. Tall.

Agropyron dasystachyum ELLAL MM 12-Jul-79 Wet Meadow. Quarter 20, NW1/4.

Agropyron elongatum THPO7 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 14, T142N, R68W, 

Sec. 11. Collected on a seeded road right-of-way.

Agropyron elongatum THPO7 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 14, T142N, R68W, 

Sec. 11. Collected on a seeded road right-of-way. 

Agropyron intermedium THIN6 KH 16-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth, ND on the Woodworth Study Area in 

Quarter 6, T142N, R68W, Sec. 2. Specimen collected from a stand of seeded 

cover in heavy soils. 

Agropyron repens ELRE4 KH, MC 1-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in low area.

Agropyron smithii PASM MM 14-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 7 on East facing slope in Barnes Soil.
75

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Agrostis hyemalis AGHY AB 17-Jul-79 Dry prairie hillside. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 520mE, 18, 770mN, zone 14. 

Agrostis hyemalis AGHY MC, KH 1-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in low moist prairie.

Agrostis hyemalis AGHY MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A.

Agrostis hyemalis AGHY MM 8-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 22 growing on exposed soil in dry wetland.

Agrostis hyemalis AGHY MM 8-Jul-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 22, T142N, R68W, 

Sec.13. On exposed soils in a dry wetland.

Alisma plantago-aquatica ALSU AB 12-Jul-79 Growing in standing water in marshy pothole. Petals white. Plants to 1m tall 

Quarter 2. UTM: 82, 000mE, 21, 750mN, zone 14.

Alisma plantago-aquatica ALSU AB 12-Jul-79 Growing in standing water in marshy pothole. Petals white. Plants to 1m tall 

Quarter 2. UTM: 82, 000mE, 21, 750mN, zone 14.

Allium stellalum ALST AB 1-Aug-79 Upland prairie, burned in Spring. Silty loam. Flowers pink with Andropogon 

gerardi. Quarter 18. UTM: 82, 240mE, 19, 050mN, zone14.

Allium stellalum ALST AB 1-Aug-79 Upland prairie, burned in Spring. Silty loam. Flowers pink with Andropogon 

gerardi. Quarter 18. UTM: 82, 240mE, 19, 050mN, zone14.

Allium stellalum ALST MM, MC 6-Aug-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in Svea Soil.

Allium textile ALTE KH, EL 18-May-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #105

Allium textile ALTE MM 13-May-81 Located in Quarter 18. Fairly common on dry prairie, flowers white.

Allium textile ALTE MM 13-May-81 Located in Quarter 18. Fairly common on dry prairie, flowers white.

Alopecurus aequalis ALAE MM 20-Aug-79 Growing in 1.5 feet of water. Wetland 3, Quarter 9. UTM: 82, 900mE, 21, 

250mN, zone 14.

Alopecurus aequalis ALAE MM 17-Jun-80 West shore of Fish Lake in Quarter 12 on the Woodworth Study Area.

Andropogon gerardi ANGE AB 1-Aug-79 Moist base of hill near pothole, in silty clay loam. To 1.6m tall. Quarter 16. 

UTM: 81, 200mE, 19, 240mN, zone 14.

Andropogon gerardi ANGE MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9.

Andropogon scoparius SCSC AB 30-Aug-79 Damp lowland prairie. Bunch grass to 1m tall. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 730mE, 

19, 580mN, zone 14.

Andropogon scoparius SCSC MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9 in Barnes Soil.

Andropogon scoparius SCSC MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9 in Barnes Soil. 

Andropogon scoparius SCSC MM 15-Aug-80 Located in Quarter 22 in Hamerly Soil. 

Andropogon scoparius SCSC MM 15-Aug-80 Located in Quarter 22 in Hamerly Soil. 

Asclepias incarnata ASIN KH 24-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 22 along 22-18.

Asclepias ovalifolia ASOV KH, EL 21-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #140

Asclepias ovalifolia ASOV AB 28-Jun-79 Damp depression between 2 hills leading to pothole. E. 30 deg. slope. Flowers 

greenish white, plant 2-3 dm tall. Quarter 8. UTM: 82,110mE, 20,880mN, zone 

14.

Asclepias ovalifolia ASOV KH 27-Jul-79 Kutz W.P.A.- DNC in Woodworth, North Dakota in Stutsman County.
76

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Asclepias ovalifolia ASOV KH, MC 28-Jul-79 Native grassland on the Kutz W.P.A.- DNC field in Woodworth, North Dakota. 

#615

Asclepias ovalifolia ASOV MM 18-Jun-80 Growing in lowland with Anemone canadensis. Quarter 9. UTM: 82,800mE, 

20,800mN.

Asclepias syriaca ASSY MM 28-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 9-A in low area with Bromus inermis. Flowers pale 

pink/purple.

Asclepias verticillata ASVE MC 25-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in association with Andropogon and Sorghastrum. 

Flowers white.

Asclepias verticillata ASVE MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9 with Liatrus ligulistylis. Site has high water table in 

undisturbed native prairie.

Avena fatua AVFA MM, CS 28-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 8 growing near field.

Bouteloua curtipendula BOCU AB 1-Aug-79 Upland prairie hillside, burned in spring. 3-5dm tall. With Bouteloua gracilis. 

Quarter 16. UTM: 81, 160mE, 19, 180mN, zone 14.

Bouteloua curtipendula BOCU MM 14-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 7 on East facing slope in Barnes Soil.

Bouteloua curtipendula BOCU MM 14-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 7 on East facing slope in Barnes Soil.

Bouteloua curtipendula BOCU KH 13-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 4, T142N, R68W, Sec. 

2. In good soil along west side of 3-5 by crossing, east facing slope.

Bouteloua curtipendula BOCU KH 13-Aug-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 4, T142N, R68W, Sec. 

2. In good soil along west side of 3-5 by crossing, east facing slope.

Bouteloua gracilis BOGR2 MM 18-Jul-79 Growing on dry sites in mixed grass native prairie. Quarter 12. UTM: 81, 

600mE, 19, 800mN, zone 14.

Bouteloua gracilis BOGR2 MM 7-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in Sioux soils.

Bromus inermis BRIN2 MM 18-Jun-80 With Symphorocarpus occidentalis in Quarter 22.

Bromus inermis BRIN2 MC 23-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 22. 

Bromus japonicus BRAR5 AB 10-Jul-79 Steep, dry bank near gravel pit. Quarter 9. UTM: 83, 080mE, 20, 780mN, zone 

14.

Bromus japonicus BRAR5 MM 30-Jun-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9, T142N, R67W, Sec. 

6. In gravel pit area on thin soils. 

Bromus japonicus BRAR5 MM 30-Jun-81 Located in Quarter 9 in the gravel pit area.

Carex atherodes CAAT2 KH, EL 22-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #148

Carex atherodes CAAT2 MM 18-Jun-80 Located on West shore of Fish Lake at Woodworth Station.

Carex brevior CABR10 MM 28-Jun-79 Growing in moist grassy low area with Poa pratensis. Quarter 14 in pasture. 

UTM: 80, 330mN, zone 14.

Carex brevior CABR10 MM 21-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 11 in Eckman Gardena Soil. UTM: 82, 700mE; 19,650mN.

Carex eleocharis CADU6 MM 28-Jun-79 Growing in native short grass prairie. Quarter 12. 81, 500m E, 20, 000m N 

UTM. Zone 14.

Carex eleocharis CADU6 MM 8-Jun-81 Located in Quarter 9 on dry prairie in mixed grasses.
77

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Carex filifolia CAFI MM 27-Jun-79 Growing on short grass hill tops with Bouteloua gracilis. Quarter 22. 81, 

600mE, 18, 400mN utm. Zone 14.

Carex interior CAIN11 MM 17-Jun-80 Located on West shore of Fish Lake in Quarter 12.

Carex interior CAIN11 MM 18-Jun-80 Located on West shore of Fish Lake at Woodworth Station.

Carex interior CAIN11 MM 30-Jun-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec. 6. In moist meadow with other sedges.

Carex interior CAIN11 MM 30-Jun-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec. 6. In moist meadow with other sedges.

Carex lanuginosa CAPE42 MM 17-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 12 on west shore of Fish Lake with Erigeron philadelphicus

and Carex interior.

Carex obtusata CAOB4 MM 6-Jun-79 Dry sites in mixed grass prairie. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 350m E, 18, 700m N, 

zone 14.

Carex obtusata CAOB4 MM 28-Jun-79 Mixed grass prairie. Quarter 12. UTM: 81, 500m E, 20, 000m N, zone 14.

Carex obtusata CAOB4 MM 28-Jun-79 Mixed grass prairie. Quarter 12. UTM: 81, 500m E, 20, 000m N, zone 14.

Carex obtusata CAOB4 MM 28-Jun-79 Mixed grass prairie. Quarter 12. UTM: 81, 500m E, 20, 000m N, zone 14.

Carex obtusata CAOB4 MM 8-Jun-81 Located in Quarter 17 in Sioux Soil on the dry prairie.

Carex pensylvanica CAPE6 MM 6-Jun-79 Located in Quarter 22 with Artemisia ludoviciana and Allium and 

Symphoricarpos.

Carex pensylvanica CAPE6 MM 27-Jun-79 Mixed grass prairie on slopes. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 600m E, 18, 400m N, zone 

14.

Carex pensylvanica CAPE6 MM 28-Jun-79 Growing on dry mixed grass prairie slopes. Quarter 23 UTM: 80, 900m E, 18, 

500m N, zone 14.

Carex pensylvanica CAPE6 MM 28-Jun-79 Growing on dry, mixed grass prairie on slopes. Quarter 23. UTM: 80, 900m E, 

18, 500m N, Zone 14.

Carex praegracilis CAPR5 MM 24-Aug-79 Drier high areas in mixed grass prairie. Growing in transect. Quarter 12.

Carex praegracilis CAPR5 MM 9-Jun-80 Tall grass prairie in Quarter 9-A.

Carex praegracilis CAPR5 MM 7-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in wet meadow.

Carex preagracilis CAPR5 MM 10-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 4 near wetland.

Carex rostrata CARO6 MM 26-Jul-79 Growing in wet boggy marsh with other Carex, Epilobium and Sium suave. 

Quarter 9-A. UTM: 83, 800m E, 21, 200m N, Zone 14.

Carex rostrata CARO6 MM 26-Jul-79 Growing in wet boggy marsh with other Carex, Epilobium and Sium suave. 

Quarter 9-A. UTM: 83, 800m E, 21, 200m N, Zone 14.

Cicuta maculata CIMA2 MM 16-Jul-79 Growing on moist ground around wetlands. Flowers white. Plants up to 1.5 m 

tall. Quarter 7. UTM: 81,950m E, 20,700m N, zone 14.

Cypridpedium calceolus CYPAP3 LK, WB 26-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #174

Cypridpedium calceolus CYPAP3 MM 2-Jun-80 Located in Qtr 22 growing in colony of plants. In Hamerly soil. UTM: 81, 750m 

E, 18, 250m N.
78

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Eleocharis compressa ELCO2 MM 21-May-80 Located in Quarter 10 in moist area in small valley.

Eleocharis macrostachya ELMA5 MM 20-Aug-79 Growing near wetland 3, quarter 9. UTM: 82, 900m E, 21, 300m N, zone 14.

Equisetum arvense EQAR MM 26-Jul-79 Wet marsh near airstrip. Quarter 9-A. UTM: 83, 700m E, 21, 200m N, zone 14.

Equisetum arvense EQAR MM 21-May-80 Located in Quarter 9-A. Sandy area around wetland near gravel pit. Sterile 

shoots.

Equisetum arvense EQAR MM 27-May-80 Located in Quarter 9 around wetland in sandy soil. UTM: 83, 150m E, 20, 600m 

N.

Equisetum hyemale EQHY MM, MC 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A. Fen Area.

Equisetum hyemale EQHY MM, MC 30-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A. Fen Area.

Equisetum laevigatum EQLA MM 28-Jun-79 Moist low area with Poa pratensis. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 530m E, 18, 800m N, 

zone 14. 

Equisetum laevigatum EQLA MM 9-Jun-80 In moist depression in Quarter 12.

Equisetum laevigatum EQLA MM 30-Jun-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 9-A, T142N, R67W, 

Sec. 6. In a low prairie site in heavy soils.

Habenaria hyperborea PLAQ2 MC, MM 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A. Fen area.

Hypoxis hirsuta HYHI2 MM 28-Jun-79 Low grassland around wetland 33. Quarter 23. UTM: 80, 800m E, 18, 450m N, 

zone 14.

Hypoxis hirsuta HYHI2 MC 22-May-80 In Quarter 7 along wet zone of pond 7-1. Flowers yellow.

Hypoxis hirsuta HYHI2 MM 27-May-80 Located in Quarter 22. In wet meadow around wetland. UTM: 81, 350m E, 18, 

100m N.

Juncus balticus JUARL MM 26-Jul-79 Growing in moist low area near wetland 2. Qtr 16. UTM: 81, 000m E, 19, 500m 

N, zone 14.

Juncus bufonius JUBU MM 20-Jul-79 Growing in moist low area in fire break. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 500m E, 18, 

050m N, zone 14.

Juncus bufonius JUBU MM 20-Jul-79 Growing in moist lowland area in fire break. Quarter 22. UTM: 81, 500m E, 

zone 14.

Juncus dudleyi JUDU2 MM 8-Jun-80 Located on West Shore of Fish Lake. Woodworth Study Area.

Juncus interior JUIN2 MM 20-Jul-79 Growing in moist lowland area in fire break. Qtr 22. UTM: 81, 450m E, 18, 

050m N, zone 14.

Juncus interior JUIN2 MM 20-Jul-79 Growing in moist lowland area in fire break. Qtr 22. UTM: 81, 450m E, 18, 

050m N, zone 14.

Juncus interior JUIN2 MM, MC 16-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 21 near dugout.

Juncus interior JUIN2 MM 17-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 12 on west shore of Fish Lake.

Juncus longistylis JULO AB 8-Aug-79 Growing in wet meadow trampled by cattle. Clay soil. Quarter 20. UTM: 82, 

970m E, 18, 810m N, zone 14.

Juncus longistylis JULO AB 8-Aug-79 Growing in wet meadow trampled by cattle. Clay soil. Quarter 20. UTM: 82, 

970m E, 18, 810m N, zone 14.
79

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Juncus longistylis JULO MM, MC 29-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9-A in Fen Area.

Juncus nodosus JUNO2 AB 8-Aug-79 Growing in wet meadow trampled by cattle. Clay soil. Quarter 20. UTM: 82, 

970m E, 18, 810m N, zone 14.

Juncus torreyi JUTO AB 8-Aug-79 Growing in wet meadow trampled by cattle. Clay soil. Quarter 20. UTM: 82, 

970m E, 18, 810m N, zone 14.

Lemna trisulca LETR MM 18-Jul-79 Growing in 2 to 3 feet of water in wetland #35, qtr 7. UTM: 81, 900m E, 20, 

450m N, zone 14.

Lemna trisulca LETR MM 20-Aug-79 Growing in 2 to 3 feet of water in wetland #3, qtr 9. UTM: 82, 900m E, 21, 

300m N, zone 14.

Lilium philadephicum LIPH LK, WB 6-Jul-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #186

Lilium philadephicum LIPH MM 10-Jul-79 Growing in low prairie near wetland. Flowers deep red-orange. Quarter 14. 

UTM: 80, 100m E, 19, 650m N, zone 14.

Lilium philadephicum LIPH MM 10-Jul-79 Growing in low prairie near wetland. Flowers deep red-orange. Quarter 14. 

UTM: 80, 100mE, 19, 650mN, zone 14.

Lomatium foeniculaceum LOFO AB 14-May-79 Located in Quarter 4, Sec 2, NE Corner. Flowers yellow, 7-8 cm high.

Lomatium foeniculaceum LOFO MM 23-May-79 Growing in mixed grass native prairie. Flowers yellow. With Anemone patens, 

Bouteloua, and Artemisia. Quarter 4. UTM: 80,300mE, 21,900mN, zone 14.

Lomatium orientale LOOR MM 8-May-79 Located in Quarter 12, Sec. 2, east half at center. Whitish flowers with pale pink 

cast.

Lomatium orientale LOOR MM 21-Apr-80 Located in Quarter 9 on Bouteloua, Agropyron smithii prairie. Flowers pinkish 

white. UTM: 83,000mE, 20,900mN.

Lomatium orientale LOOR MC 23-Apr-80 Located in Quarter 10. Grazed pasture in association with Blue grama. Flowers 

yellow. Native prairie habitat.

Lomatium orientale LOOR MC 23-Apr-80 Located in Quarter 10. Grazed pasture in association with Blue grama. Flowers 

white.

Pastinaca sativa PASA2 AB 28-Jun-79 Growing on sandy lake shore south of Fish Lake. Flowers yellow. Plant 1 m tall. 

With Scirpus and Potentilla anserina. Quarter 18. UTM: 82,720mE, 19,410mN, 

zone 14

Polygonatum biflorum POBI2 MC 18-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 11 along steep shore of Big Lake in brushy area.

Polygonatum biflorum POBI2 MC 18-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 11 along steep shore of Big Lake in choke cherry thicket.

Potamogeton gramineus POGR8 MM 30-Jul-79 Emersed in 0.5-1.0m water in semi-permanent wetland. With P. pusillus and P. 

gramineus. Quarter 9. UTM: 82,850mE, 21,450, zone 14.

Potamogeton pectinatus STPE15 MM 26-Jul-79 Growing in 12-18 inches of water with Lemna and Drepanocladus. Quarter 16, 

wetland 2. UTM: 80,950mE, 19,500mN, zone14.

Potamogeton pusillus POPUP5 MM 30-Jul-79 Emersed in 0.5-1.0m water with P. gramineus and P. richardsonii. Quarter 9. 

UTM: 82,850mE, 21,450mN, zone 14.

Potamogeton richardsonii PORI2 MM 30-Jul-79 Emersed in 0.5-1.0m water in semi-permanent wetland. With P. pusillus and P. 

gramineus. Quarter 9. UTM: 82,850mE, 21,450, zone 14.
80

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Potamogeton richardsonii PORI2 MM 17-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 12 in shallow water in west side of Fish Lake.

Potamogeton richardsonii PORI2 MM 17-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 12 in shallow water on west shore of Fish Lake.

Puccinellia nuttalliana PUNU2 MM 12-Jul-79 Growing in low prairie in pasture. Qtr. 20. UTM: 82,900mE, 18,800mN, zone 

14.

Puccinellia nuttalliana PUNU2 MM 18-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 12 West shore of Fish Lake.

Puccinellia nuttiana PUNU2 MM 12-Jul-79 Growing in low prairie pasture. Quarter 20. UTM: 82,900mE, 18,800mN, zone 

14.

Rhus radicanis TORY MC 29-Aug-80 Large patch growing near Crataegus Clumps.

Sagittaria cuneata SACU MM 2-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in wetland near station in draw down damp basin. 

Sagittaria cuneata SACU MM 2-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in wetland near station. In a damp basin.

Schedonnardus paniculatus SCPA MC 6/25/1980 Located in Quarter 10 on dry prairie in association with Bouteloua.

Scirpus actutus SCACA MM, CS 28-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 4 around wetlands.

Scirpus americanus SCAM2 MM 6-Aug-79 Growing in 2 inches of water near edge of large wetland. Quarter 9-A. UTM: 

84, 150mE, 20, 450mN, zone 14.

Scirpus atrovirens SCAT2 MM 6-Aug-79 Growing in Carex wet marsh. Quarter 9. UTM: 83, 800mE, 21, 200mN, aone14.

Scirpus fluviatilis SCFL11 MM 30-May-79 Located in wet marsh of sedge bordered with willows. Quarter 9. UTM: 83, 

750mE, 21, 200mN, zone14.

Scirpus fluviatilis SCFL11 MM 30-May-79 Wet Carex marsh boarded with Willows. Quarter 9. UTM: 83, 750mE, 21, 

200mN, zone 14. 

Scirpus validus SCVA AB 27-Jun-79 Emerging from 1 ft. water in channel leading into large lake. With Senecio 

congestus. To 1 m tall. Quarter 12. UTM: 81, 750mE 20, 200mN, zone 14.

Scirpus validus SCVA AB 20-Jul-79 Border of large lake to 2m tall. Quarter 12. UTM:81, 700mE, 20, 100mN, zone

14. 

Scirpus validus SCVA MM 28-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 12 around Clark Lake.

Scirpus validus SCVA MM, CS 28-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 12 around Clark Lake.

Scirpus validus SCVA AB 27-Jun-79 Located in Channel leading into large lake emerging from lift of water. Quarter 

12. UTM: 81, 750mE, 20, 200mN, zone 14.

Scolochloa festucacea SCFE MM 20-Jul-79 Growing in 2 feet of water in wetland 23. Quarter 22. UTM: 81,450mE, 

18,050mN, zone 14.

Scripus americanus SCAM2 MM 6-Aug-79 Growing in 2 inches of water near edge of large wetland. Quarter 9-A. UTM: 

84, 150mE, 20, 450mN, zone 14.

Setaria glauca SEPUP2 MM 22-Aug-79 Growing in disturbed prairie which had been burning during spring. Quarter 18. 

UTM: 82,100mE, 19,200mN, zone 14.

Setaria viridis SEVI4 MM 22-Aug-79 Growing in disturbed prairie which had been burning during spring. Quarter 18. 

UTM: 82,000mE, 19,400mN, zone 14.

Sisyrinchium angustifolium SIAN3 MM 23-Jun-80 Located in Quarter 8 on dry prairie hilltops.

Sisyrinchium montanum SIMO2 KH, EL 26-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #176
81

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Sisyrinchium montanum Greene SIMO2 AB 12-Jun-79 Damp loam in lowland prairie. Aspect NW, 20 degree slope. Quarter 15, 

80200mE, 19550mN, UTM zone 14. Flowers purple, plant 14 cm tall. 

Associates: Poa pratensis

Smilacina stellata MAST4 MM 6-Jun-79 Growing in understory of shrubs along south side of Fish Lake, flowers white. 

Quarter 18. UTM: 82, 800mE, 19, 400mN, zone 14.

Smilacina stellata MAST4 MM 6-Jun-79 Growing in understory of shrubs along south side of Fish Lake, flowers white. 

Quarter 18. UTM: 82, 800mE, 19, 400mN, zone 14.

Smilax herbacea SMHE AB 21-Jun-79 Growing along rocky lake shore. Vine, woody base, flowers pale green in 

clusters. With Amelanchier, Smilacina, Rhus. Quarter 18. UTM: 82, 490mE, 19, 

390mN, zone 14. 

Smilax herbacea SMHE MM 18-Jul-79 Growing in shrub area on S. side of Fish Lake. Qtr 18. UTM: 82, 500mE, 19, 

400mN, zone 14.

Smilax herbacea SMHE KH, LHM 17-Jul-81 Located 2 miles East of Woodworth. T142N, R68W, Sec. 10. Located on the 

edge of a Juneberry clump.

Sorghastrum avenaceum SONU2 AB 20-Aug-79 Damp grassy meadow with Andropogon gerardi. Plants to 1m tall. Quarter 9. 

UTM: 83,500mE, 20,700mN, zone 14.

Sparaganium eurycarpum SPEU MM 10-Jul-79 Growing in 1-2 ft of water in wetland 10. Qtr 7. UTM: 81,300mE, 21,150mN, 

zone 14.

Sparganium eurycarpum SPEU MM 2-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in wetland near station.

Sparganium eurycarpum SPEU MM 2-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in wetland near station.

Sparganium eurycarpum SPEU MM 8-Jul-81 Located 3 miles East of Woodworth on WSA in Quarter 12, T142N, R68W, 

Sec. 12. Site was in moist ground around dry wetland

Sparganium eurycarpum SPEU MM 8-Jul-81 Located in Quarter 12 in moist ground around dry wetland. 2 stigmas.

Spartina gracilis SPGR KH, EL 22-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #143

Spartina pectinata SPPE MM 6-Aug-79 Growing in wet Carex marsh. Quarter 9. UTM: 83,800mE, 21,150mN, zone 14.

Sporobolus cryptandrus SPCR MC 29-Aug-80 Along a R.R. track in Quarter 9-A in heavily sprayed area only plant growing in 

this spray zone.

Sporobolus heterolepis SPHE RK, MM 27-Aug-79 Transect 8, Quarter 9.

Stipa comata HECOC8 MM 9-Jun-80 Found on airstrip in Quarter 9-A

Stipa Comata HECOC8 MM 10-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in Fordville Soil.

Stipa spartea HESP11 MC 23-Jun-80 Located in Qtr. 22.

Stipa spartea HESP11 MM 10-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in Fordville Soil.

Stipa viridula NAVI4 MM 10-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 12 in Fordville Soil.

Stipa viridula NAVI4 MM 18-Jul-80 Located in Quarter 9.

Triglochin maritimum TRMA20 AB 16-Jul-79 Growing in wet meadow around slough. Flowers greenish yellow. Quarter 19. 

UTM: 83, 370mE, 19540mN, zone 14.

Triglochin maritimum TRMA20 MM, MC 29-Aug-80 Located in Quarter 9-A. Fen Area.
82

Scientific name USDA

acronym

Collector Date Location and original description

Typha augustifolia TYAN MM 10-Jul-79 Growing in 2 dm water in quarter 7, Wetland 10. UTM: 81,300mE, 21,150mN, 

zone 14.

Zannichellia palustris ZAPA MM 18-Jul-79 Emersed in two feet of water in seasonal wetland. Quarter 8. UTM: 81,950mE, 

20,450mN, zone 14.

Zigadenus elegans ZIEL2 AB 2-Jul-79 Located in Quarter 9; section 6, SW corner. UTM: 83, 080E, 20, 580N. Soilloose, moist, silty loam. Flowers greenish white. Plants 60-100cm tall.

Zigadenus elegans ZIEL2 AB 2-Jul-79 Located in Quarter 9; section 6, SW corner. UTM: 83, 080E, 20, 580N. Soilloose, moist, silty loam. Flowers greenish white. Plants 60-100cm tall.

Zigadenus elegans ZIEL2 AB 2-Jul-79 Moist depression along marshy pothole. Loose, moist silty loam. Flowers 

greenish white. Plants 6-10dm tall. With Commandra, Asclepias. Quarter 9. 

UTM: 83, 080mE, 20, 580mN, zone 14.

Zigadenus elegans ZIEL2 AB 2-Jul-79 Moist depression along marshy pothole. Loose, moist silty loam. Flowers 

greenish white. Plants 6-10dm tall. With Commandra, Asclepias. Quarter 9. 

UTM: 83, 080mE, 20, 580mN, zone 14.

Zizia aptera ZIAP KH, EL 8-Jun-78 Native grassland on the Woodworth Study Area 3-East of Woodworth. #121

Zizia aptera ZIAP AB 6-Jun-79 Growing in boggy pothole in tall dead grass. Petals yellow, plant 2.5 dm tall. 

With Viola nephrophylla and Stipa. Quarter 9. UTM: 83,900, 21,200mN, zone 

14.
83

Appendix 12. Aerial imagery available for the Woodworth Study Area (WSA) and 

surrounding area for 1957–97

[Date is when the images or recording was made; media is the format. Originals prints, where available, are kept in 

the archive room of Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, and select collections are currently available 

digitally. Notes provide useful information describing the imagery. A mark under the last column indicates that the 

images are immediately viewable, meaning they are in photographic form, the WSA area is complete, and the 

images have an associated month and year.]

Date Media Notes (complete, label names) Area X

1949–1951 Black and 

white print

Eddy tract folder; study units 8, 12, 

13, 15, 16

Eddy tract

1957–July Digital color 

image

Full WSA and 

surrounding area

X

1963–May 3 Black and 

white prints

Altitude of 3,000 feet; A1–>A3, B1–

>B6, C1–>C8, D1–>D6, E1–>E3; 

flying from south to north beginning 

on the west, into a northwest wind; 

taken same day at 1b.

Full WSA X

1963–May 3 Black and 

white prints

Altitude of 9,000 feet; I1 –> I6, II–

>II6, III1–>III6; one photo is missing 

from this collection (I–2)

Full WSA X

1963–August 22 Black and 

white prints

Labeled 1–35 Full WSA X

1964– May 24 Digital Black 

and white 

images

Full WSA and 

surrounding area

X

1966–May Black and 

white prints

Labeled 1–8 (WSA), 28–31, and 36–

39

Full WSA X

1968– May 31 Black and 

white prints, 

positive 

transparencies

“High” and “low” altitude, 2 inch × 2 

inch prints

X

1969–May 1 Black and 

white prints

168–170, 177, 179, 186 Full WSA and

49 square-mile 

area around 

WSA

X

1969–May 1 Black and 

white prints

Labeled 269–304 Full WSA and 9 

square-mile area

around WSA

X
84

Date Media Notes (complete, label names) Area X

1970–July 31 Colorinfrared prints70 mm

1972–July 28 Black and 

white prints 

and positive 

transparencies

Altitude of 4,500 feet X

1973–May 12 Various 

media

Altitude of 4,500 feet; Prints (9 inch 

× 9 inch), color 70mm

WSA in 6 

transects

X

1973–August 12 Various 

media

Color infrared (9 inch × 9 inch), 

70mm positive transparency; 2 inch 

× 2 inch black and white prints

X

1980–August 21 Negatives Altitude of 6,000 feet; Labeled 1–19 Full WSA

1978–79–May Negatives, 

prints

Labeled by study unit; unclear if the 

negatives (1978) or the prints (1979)

are labeled correctly; photographs 

are slightly out of focus.

Full WSA, with 

surrounding area 

1979–May 16 Color digital 

images

National Wetland Inventory WSA and 

surrounding 

areas

X

1983–1991 Color digital 

images

NRCS slides for all WSA study 

units; Month, date unclear

1996 or 1997 Black and 

white digital 

images

Digital orthophoto quadrangles in 

.bil raster forma; month and date 

unclear.

WSA proper

1988–April 30 Aerial video Altitude of 12,500 feet; 10.5 mm lens

1989–Nov 28 Aerial video

Unknown Prints Labeled 1–1 through 1–43; noted on 

back “Must be after 1965.”

Unknown Prints WSA photos are labeled 207–210, 

214, 239; surrounding area is 211–

213, 215; HQ has the south building 

by this time.

WSA

Unknown Photos Labeled lines 1–6 and 2–11 Full WSA; 

Missing 3 of 60 

for surrounding

areas
85

Appendix 13. Example of metadata used to document and preserve Woodworth Study Area 

(WSA) datasets

ISSN 2331-1258 (online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141188