DOC

I

49.2 :

T 82

Integrated Land Management on Tule Lake

National Wildlife Refuge

An alternative management strategy developed by the Integrated Land Management Working Group:

Promoting productive wetland

habitats and sustainable

agriculture on Tule Lake

National Wildlife Refuge

October 30, 2000 U.S.

I 2 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document describes the rationale for and implementation of an Integrated Land Management

(ILM) Plan for the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). The proposal is the

recommendation of 5 representative stakeholders in the Tule Lake area.

During the 1950fs, 1960's, and early 1970's, Tule Lake NWR was considered the single most

important waterfowl refuge in North America when peak populations exceeded 2.5 million ducks

and 1.0 million geese. The Kuchel Act of 1964 was enacted to preserve these waterfowl values as

well as the local agricultural economy dependent on Refuge lands. However, restrictive

management of wetlands and water levels under the Kuchel Act has eliminated the ecological

processes critical to the Refuge's sustained wetland diversity and productivity. Currently, Tule

Lake NWR supports a fraction of its past waterfowl use, species diversity has declined, and its

value to endangered species has diminished. Agricultural sustainability is also threatened.

Increasing populations of soil pests and declining soil organic matter content necessitate increased

production costs to maintain crop yields. Management issues on Tule Lake NWR are significant

because continued declines in wetland productivity threaten the status of the Refuge as a major

staging and breeding area for migratory birds on the Pacific Flyway. In addition, the further

degradation of Refuge soils may negatively impact the highly productive agricultural economy

that supports adjacent rural communities.

The goal of ILM is to revitalize wetlands and deep-water habitats while providing

economically viable and sustainable agriculture. To achieve this goal, we believe it is

necessary to combine wetland management strategies and agricultural practices in a

synergistic manner which restores ecosystem health and creates an ecologically and

economically sustainable landscape. Ramifications of such a program reach far beyond

Refuge boundaries to other landscapes where wetlands and agriculture coexist.

Objectives of ILM include:

• Improve the Refuge's biological integrity and diversity, through the creation of productive

wetland habitats.

• Provide deep-water habitat for the survival of endangered sucker fishes.

• Improve water quality.

• Increase the sustainability of agricultural operations on the Refuge.

• Improve the diversity and economic vitality of local rural communities.

• Improve the flood control and water storage capabilities of the Refuge.

• Provide flexibility in Refuge management.

ILM utilizes a variety of traditional as well as innovative management strategies including crop

rotations, wetland/cropland rotation, flooding of subsided lands, routing of Refuge waters, and

hydrologic diversity to mimic historic processes. These strategies will recreate the historic range

of endemic fish and wildlife habitat while improving water quality and the sustainability of Refuge
farming operations. ILM calls for the drainage of some current wetland areas and the

establishment of new deep-water habitat. It also calls for the creation of new, more vital

permanent and seasonal wetland areas. Productive agricultural lands will be created and the

proper coordination of water movement through these land forms will maximize water quality.

ILM will provide enhanced fish and wildlife habitat and improved integrated pest management on

agricultural lands.

The problems inherent in the coexistence of wetlands and agriculture are not restricted to the

Klamath Basin; they are problems of national and international significance. Symptoms of these

long standing problems include the high proportion of endangered plants and animals worldwide

that are dependent on wetlands, declining quality of water in the world's streams and lakes, and

the proliferation of pesticides and fertilizers in agricultural operations.

A Working Group, comprised of 5 stakeholders from the Tule Lake area, believes that the

multiple mandates of the Kuchel Act represent a unique opportunity and challenge for the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service take a lead role in developing and demonstrating techniques whereby

management of wetlands and agricultural lands can be integrated in ways that maintain ecological

integrity as well as the economic well being and sustainability of surrounding rural communities.

ILM on Tule Lake NWR would transform the Refuge into a valuable demonstration area where

techniques would be developed to solve these multiple problems.

-u-
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary i

I. Introduction 1

Working group members 2

II. History 5

III. Present Conditions - Tule Lake NWR 6

Wetland habitats 6

Deep water habitats 7

Agriculture 7

Recreation 8

Flood control 8

IV. Declining Refuge Resources 8

V. Integrated Land Management 10

VI. Rationale 12

An ecosystem approach to conservation 12

The Working Group's perspective 12

VII. Primary Management Strategies 13

Creating hydrologic diversity 13

Wetland/cropland rotation 13

Crop rotations 14

Flooding of subsided lands 14

Farming unproductive wetland habitats 14

Water routing to encourage nutrient uptake and filtering 14

VIII. Resulting Fish and Wildlife Habitats 16

Permanent emergent wetlands 16

Late successional seasonal wetlands 16

Early successional seasonal wetlands 17

Agricultural lands 17

Deep water habitat 18

-in-

I. INTRODUCTION

"In a mid-October day of almost any year when the southern migration along the

Pacific Flyway is in mid-flight, a visitor to northern California's Tule Lake may still

see a sight as full of wonder as that of the buffalo and [passenger] pigeons: the

sight of some 6 million ducks and geese gathered in a single rendevous" (Sports

Illustrated, December 1959)

"Klamath Basin, an expanse of rich upland athwart the California-Oregon border,

is today the scene of the world's most spectacular show on wings" (Readers

Digest, November 1959)

These passages and similar writings were published in several national magazines of the day. At

the time of these writings and through the 1960fs and early 1970's, Tule Lake National Wildlife

Refuge (NWR) was considered the single most important waterfowl refuge in North America

when peak waterfowl concentrations exceeded 2.5 million ducks and 1.0 million geese. At this

time, the Refuge consisted of productive wetland habitats surrounded by commercially valuable

agricultural crops. In addition to waterfowl, Refuge wetlands provided habitat to a multitude of

- 1-
wildlife species and was considered the most important diving duck breeding area in the

Intermountain West. Refuge agricultural crops provided high carbohydrate foods to millions of

waterfowl in the Pacific Flyway and delayed their southward migration into important agricultural

areas of the California's Central and Imperial Valleys. Agricultural crop values and millions of

dollars spent by waterfowl hunters and bird watchers spurred local business and provided a

significant share of the region's economy.

Tule Lake NWR is located immediately south of the Oregon border in Modoc and Siskiyou

Counties in California. The Refuge is part of the Klamath Basin NWR Complex and is jointly

administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

under a 1977 Cooperative Agreement. Tule Lake NWR is part of the Klamath Reclamation

Project (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation) and is dependent on the Project for its supply of water (Fig.

1). The Refuge (Fig. 2) consists of 13,000 acres of wetlands with a 3,000-acre emergent marsh

and the remaining acreage in open water. Agricultural lands (17,000 acres) on the Refuge are

comprised of spring planted small grains (2/3 of acreage) with barley the predominate crop and

row crops (potatoes, sugar beets, and onions) occupying the remaining acreage.

Over the last 35 years sedimentation and stabilized water levels on the Refuge have reduced

wetland habitat quality and flood storage capability. In addition, declining soil organic matter and

increasing levels of soil pests are necessitating increased production costs to maintain crop yields.

Because of these problems, it has become increasingly difficult to meet the multiple mandates of

legislation guiding Refuge management.

To address the multiple resource problems facing Tule Lake NWR, a working group comprised of

5 stakeholders from the Tule Lake area was formed in the late spring of 1999. The Working

Group's purpose was to develop potential solutions for the multiple problems facing the Refuge.

As a result of this process, a proposal called Integrated Land Management (ILM) was developed.

This document describes the ILM proposal, its rationale, benefits, and a potential implementation

and monitoring strategy.

Working Group Members:

• Harry L. Carlson, Ph.D, Superintendent, University of California Intermountain Research

and Extension Center.

• Earl Danosky, District Manager, Tulelake Irrigation District.

• Robert Davis, Chief of Natural Resources Div., U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

• David M. Mauser, Ph.D, Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

• Iva Rogers, Governmental Affairs, California Waterfowl Association.

In addition to the Working Group Members, Collin Bode served as Working Group Staff Analyst

and Writer.

-2-
Lower Klamath

National Wildlife

Refuge

Klamath Project

Refuges

Lakes & Wetlands

City

Hwys

Rivers

Tule Lake

National Wildlife

Refuge

Figure 1. Location of Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge within the Klamath Project,

California and Oregon.

-3-
Tule Lake

Sump 1A

Tule Lake

Sump 1B

Land Use

Agriculture 17,500 acres

Lake 13,000 acres

Wetland

Demonstration and

Experimental Marshes 640 acres

Figure 2. Current land uses, Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-4-

narrative by Secretary of Interior Stewart Udall during congressional hearings for the Kuchel Act

describes the values present on the Refiige during the early 1960s:

"Tule Lake refuge, established in 1928, is famous as the site of the largest annual

concentration of waterfowl on the continent. This refuge of more than 37,000

acres is set in the midst of rich grainlands that was once the bed of Tule Lake. The

13,000-acre sump filled with aquatic food plants, and the surrounding fertile

grainfields, provide ideal habitat for waterfowl. Here the photographer can find

flocks of ducks and geese that darken the sky-for millions of pintails and hundreds

of thousands of mallard and geese gather in the refuge during the fall migration."

III. PRESENT CONDITIONS - TULE LAKE NWR

Wetland habitats

Refuge wetlands provide habitat to a host of

wildlife species and are especially important

to waterfowl during the spring and fall

migrations. In recent years, peak populations

have averaged 200,000 to 400,000 birds. In

some cases, this Refuge is the first fall

staging area waterfowl reach after leaving

northern nesting areas. In addition to foods

obtained in wetlands, agricultural crops left

in the fields on Tule Lake NWR provide an

important food resource for a host of Pacific

Flyway waterfowl species. Of particular

importance are the Arctic nesting geese;

snow, Ross, and white-fronted geese. Geese

begin arriving in late August, peak in early

November, and have departed for southern

wintering areas by mid-December. In recent

years, goose populations have peaked at approximately 60,000 to 100,000 birds compared to

285,000 to 840,000 during the 1970fs.

In addition to waterfowl, the Refuge is host to a multitude of other wetland birds such as ibis,

herons, egrets, bitterns, rails, shorebirds, and terns which are dependent on wetlands for breeding

and migrational habitat. Aquatic plants, fish, and invertebrates produced by these marshes are

critical to the success of these birds in nesting, successfully rearing young, and obtaining the

resources needed for migration. In addition to avian species, reptile, amphibian, mammal, and fish

species are likewise dependent on Refuge wetlands.

Aerial view of Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge.

-6-

Recreation

Tule Lake and the neighboring Lower Klamath NWR are popular hunting and bird watching

destinations. In 1999, Tule Lake NWR recorded the following number of visitors:

Wildlife observation

Environmental education

Waterfowl hunting

Visitor center

Tour route

Wildlife photography

157,800

2,236

5,201

12,131

14,500

663

Many of the wildlife observers or non-consumptive visitors also visited the neighboring Lava Beds

National Monument. Recreation on the Refuge generates from $600,000 to $1 million annually

for the local economy. Nineteen jobs were generated directly from visitor demand with a total

employment income of $273,000 (1995 data). The decline in waterfowl use of Tule Lake NWR

has resulted in a significant decline in hunter use of this refuge.

Flood control

The Refuge serves an important flood control function. Water levels are manipulated to achieve

this purpose and are carried out via mutual agreement between Tule Lake Irrigation District

(TID), Bureau of Reclamation, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. The current sumps are lowered

by approximately 1 foot during winter to provide storage capacity for runoff resulting from heavy

storms. If the levels in the sumps are exceeded, levees may be breached to release flood waters

onto agricultural lands.

IV. DECLINING REFUGE RESOURCES

Although land use on Tule Lake NWR has not changed significantly over the last 35 years,

wildlife use on the Refuge has declined primarily because past management of water has

eliminated the ecological processes critical to the Refuge's sustained wetland diversity and

productivity. Currently, Tule Lake NWR supports a fraction of its past waterfowl use (Fig. 3),

species diversity has declined, and its usefulness to endangered species has diminished. In

addition, agricultural production is impacted by increases in soil-born pathogens and decreases in

soil organic matter. This reduction in soil productivity has led to increasing dependence on

fertilizers and pesticides which drives up crop production costs and may negatively effect water

and wetland habitat quality.

-8-
150.0

135.0

120.0

15.0

0.0

Tule Lake NWR Duck and Geese

Lower Klamath NWR Duck and Geese

w ^v

Figure 3. Waterfowl Use Days (x1,000,000), Tule Lake and Lower Klamath NWRs, CA-OR,

1969-1998

Water quality in Tule Lake is characterized by high pH, low dissolved oxygen, and high

concentrations of unionized ammonia, similar to water quality conditions in Upper Klamath Lake

(Tule Lake's primary water source). These conditions are considered stressful to aquatic life and

results in a relatively simple assemblage of aquatic species.

Sedimentation in wetland areas has eliminated 90 percent of the water depth in emergent wetlands

as well as open water areas of the sumps. This sedimentation reduced water storage capacity by

an estimated 14 inches between the years 1958 and 1986 and represents a loss of 12,800 acre-feet

of storage capacity. In addition to reducing flood water storage, sedimentation reduces the

amount of deep water habitat available for the endangered suckers and reduces depth in emergent

wetlands, thereby eliminating large areas of wetlands as breeding habitat for colonial nesting

waterbirds and over-water nesting waterfowl.

Management issues on Tule Lake NWR are significant because continued declines in wetland

productivity and agricultural sustainability threaten the status of the Refuge as a major fall and

spring staging and breeding area for migratory birds on the Pacific Flyway and may negatively

impact the highly productive agricultural economy that supports surrounding rural communities.

-9-
V. INTEGRATED LAND MANAGEMENT

To address the multiple resource problems facing Tule Lake NWR, the Working Group proposes

a new management plan for Tulelake NWR called Integrated Land Management (ILM) (Fig. 4).

The goal of ILM is to revitalize wetlands and deep-water habitats while providing

economically viable and sustainable agriculture. To achieve this goal, we believe it is

necessary to combine wetland management strategies and agricultural practices in a

synergistic manner which restores ecosystem health and creates an ecologically and

economically sustainable landscape. Ramifications of such a program reach far beyond

Refuge boundaries to other landscapes where wetlands and agriculture coexist.

Objectives of ILM include:

• Improve the Refuge's biological integrity and diversity, through the creation of productive

wetland habitats.

• Provide deep-water habitat for the survival of endangered sucker fishes.

• Improve water quality.

• Increase the sustainability of Refuge agricultural operations.

• Improve the diversity and economic vitality of local rural communities.

• Improve the flood control and water storage capabilities of the Refuge.

• Provide flexibility in Refuge management.

While the total acreage of wetland habitat and agriculture will be unchanged, their relative

locations within the Refuge will shift. This proposal focuses on the complementary interaction

between management units with different habitat types and the rotation of habitats within units

over time. To accomplish ILM, extensive structural changes are required to separate habitat

types, such as wetland and deep water, to allow for cropland/wetland rotation, to promote

hydrologic diversity, and to direct flows for water quality improvement. To the extent possible,

proposed structural changes will take advantage of existing levees, pumps and water control

facilities.

Habitats will be managed to promote the full successional range of endemic habitats and species

that historically occupied the Tule Lake Basin including seasonally and permanently flooded

wetland and deep-water habitat. Wetland/cropland rotations will be implemented to introduce

disturbance regimes, thereby creating early successional habitats while providing conditions that

control soil pests and enhance soil fertility. Water quality improvements occur by routing water

between units to take advantage of the natural water filtration function of wetlands. These

measures will have the added benefit of increasing water storage capacity for flood control. ILM

has the additional benefit of creating the flexibility whereby future Refuge managers can alter

Refuge habitats as new information is developed.

-10-
Demonstration

Marsh

120 acres

2,360

acres

Lost River

2,550

acres 2,720 acres 1,010 acres

2,420 acres 2,440 acres

Example location of Rotated

Wetland. Actual location will

change over the years.

Experimental Marsh

200 acres

Land Use Types

| 1 Wetland/Cropland Rotation 18,810 acres

] Agriculture in Rotation 16,370 acres

] Seasonal Wetland in Rotation 2,440 acres

| | Permanent Emergent Wetland 3.350 acres

| [ Seasonal Wetland 3.230 acres

; Deep Water Habitat 5,350 acres

Figure 4. Land uses under proposed Integrated Land Management on Tule Lake

National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-11-
VI. RATIONALE

The issues facing natural resource managers today have become extremely complex. Society must

learn how to protect natural resources while meeting the socioeconomic needs of a rapidly

increasing world population. The Service has recognized that the fee title purchase offish and

wildlife habitats by Federal, state, and private entities are not sufficient to restore ecological

function. While tremendous areas have been preserved under these programs, ecosystem

conservation will not be achieved through the preservation of isolated parcels of land. The

Service in recognition of this fact has adopted an ecosystem approach to conservation.

An ecosystem approach to conservation

The primary goal of ecosystem conservation is conserving natural biological diversity and

ecosystem integrity, while supporting a sustainable level of human use. In implementing

ecosystem management, the Service emphasizes three major areas:

• Fulfill fish and wildlife needs in the context of the natural and human environment in which

they occur.

• Increase cross-program collaboration within the Service.

• Communicate, coordinate, and collaborate more frequently, more consistently, and more

effectively with our partners, affected stakeholders, and the public.

"The Service is eager to work with others in exploring and adopting an ecosystem

approach. Our society places great value on fish, plants, wildlife, and the

ecosystems upon which all species, including humans, depend. An ecosystem

approach to fish and wildlife conservation is a common-sense, long-term strategy

designed to maintain natural communities, while at the same time providing a

sustainable level of recreational and economic security for the future. This is no

small challenge, but one in which the Service must play a crucial role." (U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service Refuge Manual).

The Working Group's perspective

To many individuals and interest groups, the Kuchel Act was and is controversial. When the Act

was passed many agriculturalists felt they were denied the opportunity to homestead and farm the

reclaimed bed of Tule Lake. To today's conservationists, the Act appears to contradict the spirit

of the National Wildlife Refuge System; that national network of lands and waters that preserves

the very best of North America's fish and wildlife habitats.

In contrast, the Working Group believes that the mandates of the Kuchel Act represent an

opportunity and a challenge for the Service to take a lead role in developing and demonstrating

techniques whereby wetlands and agricultural lands can be integrated in ways that maintain

ecological integrity as well as the economic well being and sustainability of surrounding rural

-12-
communities. The problems inherent in the coexistence of wetlands and agriculture are not

restricted to the Klamath Basin; they are problems of national and international significance.

Symptoms of these long standing problems include the high proportion of endangered plants and

animals worldwide that are dependent on wetlands, declining quality of water in the world's

streams and lakes, and the proliferation of pesticides and fertilizers in agricultural operations.

VH. PRIMARY MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Many of the management strategies used in ILM are based on techniques used successfiilly in

other areas of the Upper Klamath Basin. These and other strategies were also developed during

feasibility research conducted through the mid 1990fs on Tule Lake NWR by the University of

Washington, Seattle; U.S. Geological Survey, Dixon, CA; and the University of California, Davis.

This research was conducted on 4 pilot sites (640 acres) where previously farmed lands were

restored to wetlands or a rotation of wetlands and agriculture.

Primary strategies used in ILM include:

• Creating hydrologic diversity (with resultant habitat diversity).

• Wetland/cropland rotation.

• Crop rotations.

• Flooding of subsided lands.

• Farming unproductive wetland habitats.

• Water routing to encourage nutrient uptake and filtering.

Creating hydrologic diversity

Water elevations on historic Tule Lake fluctuated several feet within a given year with larger

fluctuations, up to 40 vertical feet, occurring between long-term wet and drought cycles. This

hydrologic diversity created a diverse array of habitats ranging from seasonally and permanently

flooded emergent wetlands to deep water lake habitats that supported a diversity offish and

wildlife species.

This natural process can be mimicked on the Refuge by having hydrologically separate

management units that reflect particular habitats from the broad continuum that once existed on

Tule Lake. Experimentation with varying water levels on the Refuge has proven to be extremely

successful in restoring a host of native wetland plants and a large diversity of wildlife species. For

example, seasonal water management on pilot research sites successfully reestablished Columbia

cress, a rare native plant not seen in the Tule Lake Basin since the 1930fs.

Wetland/cropland rotation

Decades of farming Refuge lands has decreased soil organic mater and built populations of soil

pathogens to crops, decreased yields, and increased reliance on pesticides and fertilizers. To

-13-
revitalize cropland areas, large blocks (1,000-3,000 acres) of currently farmed lands would be

converted to seasonal and year-round flooded wetland habitats for 5 years. Research into this

practice on Tule Lake NWR has documented reductions of plant parasitic nematodes as well as

elimination of other pests and plant diseases. In addition to the integrated pest management

benefits of this technique, wetland plant establishment has proven to be rapid and robust, creating

some of the most productive early successional wetland habitats in the Upper Klamath Basin.

Although the experimental wetland restoration sites referenced above encompass less than 5% of

Refuge wetlands, they have supported up to 57% of the Refuge's fall waterfowl population.

Crop rotations

Crop rotation is a long established IPM technique that maintains farmland productivity and

reduces populations of pathogens and pests on crops, reducing fertilizer and pesticide inputs to

crop production. This practice is currently established on the Refuge and would be continued and

improved upon as new information becomes available. Studies have indicated, for example, that

inserting cover crops such as rye or triticale in the rotation could provide additional suppression

of plant parasitic nematodes, as well as reductions in soil erosion, and increases in soil organic

matter. As an additional benefit, some cover crops are used extensively by ground nesting birds.

With proper crop rotation and washing of equipment between fields, soil pests may be controlled

for many years.

Flooding of subsided lands

Because of the high organic content of Refuge soils, decades of continuous farming has resulted

in 4 to 6 feet of subsidence in agricultural lands. Coupled with sedimentation in current wetland

areas, the differences in elevation between wetlands and farmlands has reached a maximum of 6 to

8 feet. Flooding of these subsided lands would create improved deep-water fish habitats as well

as additional water storage and flood protection capability.

Farming unproductive wetland habitats

Sediment filled wetland habitats would be reclaimed for agricultural production. These areas

would represent highly productive lands with reduced need for some classes of pesticides and

fertilizers.

Water routing to encourage nutrient uptake and filtering

Research and monitoring conducted on the Refuge and within the Upper Klamath Basin has

indicated that rotation of farming and seasonal water management as well as subsurface drainage

in agricultural lands may release nutrients to drain water that may, in turn, exacerbate already

poor water quality conditions. To alleviate this problem, water flow through the Refuge (Fig. 5)

will be routed to reduce nutrient concentrations. By routing drainage water back into

agricultural lands and through Refuge wetlands before reaching deep water habitats, nutrient

-14-
concentrations can be reduced. This water routing would take advantage of nutrient uptake by

actively growing crops as well as the natural filtration function of emergent wetlands. Wetlands

reduce nutrients through sedimentation, denitrification, microbial activity, and plant uptake.

Because many endemic fish species in the Basin are adapted to the naturally eutrophic water

quality conditions, relatively small improvements in water quality may greatly increase the

suitability of aquatic environments to these species.

Irrigation

Source

Water

Irrigation

Source

Water

Legend

| H B Refuge Water Routing

t — Source Water

] Wetland/Cropland Rotation

"j Agncufrure in Rotation

~] Seasonal Wetland in Rotation

j Permanent Emergent Wetland

] Seasonal Wetland

Deep Water Habitat

Figure 5. Routing of water under proposed Integrated Land Management plan on

Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-15-
VIII. RESULTING FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS

The following is a more detailed description of habitat types that would result from implementing

ILM on Tule Lake NWR. Most of this discussion is based on experience gained by managing

these habitats on nearby Lower Klamath NWR as well as a series of research sites on Tule Lake

NWR.

Permanent emergent wetlands

This habitat type is characterized by year round flooding and contains

two major plant communities. The emergent plant community is

composed of hardstem bulrush and cattail with minor inclusion of river

bulrush. The dense emergent vegetation provides nesting substrate for

many species of waterbirds as well as cover during periods of inclement

weather. Of particular note are colonial nesting waterbirds such as great

blue herons, great and snowy egrets, black-crowned night herons, and

white-faced ibis.

The submergent plant community is dominated by sago

pondweed, a major food source to migrating canvasbacks,

American widgeons, lesser scaup, mallards, American coots, and

tundra swans. In addition, this plant community supports diverse

aquatic invertebrate populations which are sought by many

species of migratory waterfowl and other marsh birds. During

the summer months, aquatic invertebrates are a critical food

requirement of breeding waterfowl and most ducklings.

Late successional seasonal wetlands

Historic Tule Lake was characterized by emergent wetland vegetation

and annual seed producing plants in a wide band across the north end of

the lake with a narrower band down the west side. These seasonally

flooded wetlands dried during summer, thus promoting the germination

and growth of a variety of marsh plants. Under ILM, this historic

hydrology would be mimicked with late spring/summer drawdowns of

seasonally flooded wetlands. Food resources from resulting plant

production would become available to fall migrant waterfowl upon reflooding. Because disturbance regimes would be relatively infrequent

within this habitat, dense emergent vegetation would develop over time. Species adapted to this

habitat include nesting and migrating waterfowl, rails, bitterns, cranes, ibis, herons, and egrets.

-16-
•

Early successional seasonal wetlands

This habitat differs from late successional seasonal habitats in that more

frequent disturbance patterns (in this case farming) maintain the plant

community in fewer emergent wetland plants and more annual seed

producing plants. Resulting habitats are, therefore, more open and benefit

a slightly different array of wildlife species. Shorebirds and waterfowl in

particular find this habitat attractive.

Similar to late successional seasonal

habitats, this habitat is characterized by a flooding regime

extending 6 to 11 months with at least 2 months being during the

growing season (late spring and summer). Under the ILM

proposal, this habitat would occupy previously farmed areas for a

period of 5 years. After 5 years, the area would again be farmed

with the wetland moving to other farmed areas. This rotation of

wetlands and croplands prevents wetlands from reaching a late

successional stage where dense emergent vegetation dominates

the plant community. Historically, this habitat type occupied topographically higher elevations in

the historic lake bed and/or was present when wet periods reflooded areas made dry during

extended drought periods. Currently, stabilized water levels on Tule Lake have nearly eliminated

this habitat type from the Refuge.

Agricultural lands

Agricultural crops would continue to be grown over a similar acreage and

cropping pattern as the present. Dominant crops would remain small

grains (barley, oats, and wheat), row crops (potatoes, sugar beets, and

onions), and soil building crops (alfalfa), consistent with the mandates of

the Kuchel Act. Agricultural operations would conform to Department of

Interior policy regarding pesticide use and to a recently completed

Integrated Pest Management Plan for Tule Lake NWR.

Arctic nesting geese (up to 100,000 birds) and several species

of ducks utilize waste grains and potatoes left in the fields after

harvest during their twice-a-day feeding forays. These high

carbohydrate food resources are vital to providing the energy

resources needed for the southward migration to wintering

areas in California and Mexico. On the spring migration, Ross,

snow, and white fronted geese use fall planted cover crops,

alfalfa, and sprouting waste grains. This "green feed" tends to

be high in protein and is needed as the birds prepare themselves

-17-
for the breeding season in Alaska and Canada. Reproductive success of these geese is dependent

on the body reserves they have accumulated on spring staging areas because adequate food may

not be available for several weeks in the northern breeding habitats. Foods obtained in wetlands

and agricultural habitats in combination provide waterfowl a diversity of foods needed to obtain a

nutritionally balanced diet.

In addition to waterfowl, high densities of micotine rodents in agricultural habitats make these

areas attractive to wintering and breeding raptors. Species include redtail and rough legged

hawks, northern harriers, great-horned and barn owls, and kestrels.

Deep water habitat

Under ILM, deep water habitat mimics the deeper unvegetated habitats

present on the historic lake and would benefit a variety of endemic fish

species including the endangered suckers. Water depths would range from

3 feet in the south portion of Sump 1A to 8 feet in formerly subsided

agricultural lands. Water routing strategies in ILM use the natural water

filtration properties of wetlands to improve water

quality within this habitat type. Viable populations

of endemic fishes also represent an important food

resource to several species of colonial nesting waterbirds such as white

pelicans, double-crested cormorants, and western grebes. The location of

this habitat coincides with an area of Sump 1A that fisheries biologists

believe to be critical to the summer survival of the endangered suckers on

Tule Lake NWR.

IX. IMPLEMENTATION

The Working Group's primary goal was to develop an alternative management strategy for Tule

Lake NWR and explore an implementation of this strategy. To address implementation, the

Working Group developed a 3-phase process and defined pre-implementation and monitoring

needs.

Pre-implementation

Project manager—Because of the size and complexity of the ILM proposal, it is recommended

that the Service, or the Service and Reclamation in partnership, provide funding for a full-time

project manager. This person would be responsible for coordinating all aspects of the project

including environmental compliance, public participation, interagency coordination, and

monitoring.

-18-
Lost River and shortnose sucker ecology studies—Studies of basic sucker habitat preferences and

ecology are ongoing in the Tulelake sumps. Results of these studies will be used to modify ILM

as needed to provide enhanced sucker habitat and to avoid negative impacts to both species.

Topographic surveys—Prior to construction within the farmlands of Tule Lake NWR, up-to-date

topographic surveys should be conducted. This information is needed so the dimensions of levees

and other infrastructure can be determined. The most recent survey conducted on the lease lands

was during the 1950s. Given the subsidence in agricultural areas, it is likely that these surveys,

now over 40 years old, are inaccurate.

Public participation—The Working Group's make-up represented different perspectives and

experiences of individuals familiar with issues surrounding Tule Lake NWR. The group developed

a proposal to meet the needs of most stakeholder groups while staying within the multiple

mandates of the Kuchel Act. The development of this proposal, however, does not absolve the

responsible agency(s) from utilizing public input to implement, improve, or change this project

proposal, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Environmental compliance—Clearly, a project of this size and scope will require compliance with

a host of environmental regulations and laws including:

• National Environmental Policy Act

• Endangered Species Act

• National Wildlife Refuge Administration Act, as amended.

• Clean Water Act, Section 404 (dredge and fill permit)

• Clear Water Act, Section 401 (state water quality certification)

• National Historic Preservation Act

• Kuchel Act

-19-
Phase I: Preserving deep water fish habitat

The primary focus of Phase I (Fig. 6) is to construct the primary levees to allow for the

preservation of critical fish habitat in Sump 1A and the creation of deep water fish habitat in a

portion of Sump 2. The north half of Sump 1A would be reclaimed for agricultural use. While

agricultural facilities are constructed in Sump 1 A, this area would be managed as a seasonal

wetland (dry in late spring and summer). Also included in Phase I is the construction of levees to

redirect the Lost River around the reclaimed area.

Land Use and Dikes

• I Wetland — Dikes

] Seasonal Wetland \^J Agriculture

[ 1 Deep Water

Habitat

_i

Phase 1 Construction Phase 1 Land Use

Figure 6. Phase 1 construction and resultant land use under proposed Integrated Land

Management Plan on Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-20-
Phase II: Seasonal wetland construction

The primary activity in Phase II (Fig. 7) is construction of an east-west levee across the center of

Sump 2. This levee would allow for the conversion of the southern half of Sump 2 to seasonal

wetland to compensate for the reclamation and conversion to agriculture on the north half of

Sump 1A. Secondly, drainage from Sump 3 and newly reclaimed lands in the north half of Sump

1A would be directed to Pump C (located on the north levee of Sump IB). This action would

redirect drainage flows to improve water quality.

Land Use and Dikes

yyj&j Permanent Wetland —

[~~~] Seasonal Wetland [ ]

j^^ j Wetland/Cropland Rotation |

] Rotated Agriculture

] Example of Marsh in Rotation

Dikes

Agriculture

Deep Water

Habitat

Phase 2 Construction Phase 2 Land Use

Figure 7. Phase 2 construction and resultant land use under proposed Integrated Land

Management Plan on Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-21-
Phase III: Conversion of Sump 3 to wetland/cropland rotation

Phase III (Fig. 8) would involve construction of one north-south and two east-west levees in

Sump 3 and a north-south levee in north Sump 1 A. This would result in agricultural areas being

divided into 1,010 to 2,714-acre management units which would be primarily farmed but would

include 1 to 2 management units in seasonal wetland on a rotating basis.

Land Use and Dikes

1 Permanent Wetland —

\

r

3 Seasonal Wetland [~~]

t ^ j Wstland/Cropland Rotation | |

|__ J Rotated Agriculture

] Example of Marsh m Rotation

Dikes

Agriculture

Deep Water

Habitat

Phase 3 Construction Phase 3 Land Use

Figure 8. Phase 3 construction and resultant land use under proposed Integrated Land

Management Plan on Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, California.

-22-
Vffl. MONITORING

Unless specifically stated, monitoring will be ongoing throughout implementation. The phase in

which the monitoring starts is noted in parenthesis.

Sucker movements in response to creation of deep water habitats (Phase I)

Phase I would create 683 acres of deep water (6 to 8 feet) habitat within Sump 2 thereby

increasing deep water habitat available to the fish. A sample of radio-marked fish would be used

to determine the degree of use of this habitat as well as the timing of use. Of principal concern is

the summer period when water quality is its poorest (low dissolved oxygen).

Water quality in newly created deep water habitats (Phase I)

For comparative purposes, water quality within the "Donut Hole", Sump IB, and the newly

created deep water habitat would be monitored during summer in concert with sucker monitoring.

Research conducted on the suckers of Tule Lake NWR indicates that individual fish are relatively

parasite free and in better condition than suckers elsewhere in the Basin. This may be attributable

to both the extreme productivity of the sumps to produce food resources and/or the relatively

good summer water quality in the "Donut Hole". Because sedimentation and associated loss of

depth may eventually make the "Donut Hole" unsuitable, the potential of improved water quality

within created deep water habitats must be determined.

Seasonal wetland development (Phase II)

Monitoring would involve documenting wetland plant establishment and subsequent bird use of

newly created seasonal wetlands. Bird monitoring would be accomplished as part of regular aerial

waterfowl surveys conducted from September through April. Vegetation monitoring would be

accomplished using aerial photography with ground-truthing to confirm plant communities.

Effectiveness of wetlands in improving water quality (Phase II)

Water quality will be monitored in Sump IB to determine its effectiveness in improving water

quality. Points monitored will be Pump C entering Sump IB, middle of Sump IB, and water

exiting into deep water habitat.

Habitat development in wetland/cropland rotational management areas (Phase III)

Monitoring would involve documenting wetland plant establishment and subsequent bird use of

newly created seasonal wetlands . Bird monitoring would be accomplished as part of regular

aerial waterfowl surveys conducted from September through April. Vegetation monitoring would

be accomplished using aerial photography with ground-truthing to confirm plant communities.

-23-
Agricultural response to wetland/cropland rotation (Phase III)

Crop yields, soil quality, and pathogen levels would be monitored. The purpose would be to

determine whether soil quality improves, pathogen levels are reduced, and fertilizer and pesticide

input reduction occurs.

Swans at sunset, Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge.

-24-

APPENDIX B: Design alternatives

The working group deliberated over many potential land-use approaches. Of the concepts

developed, four concepts seemed to best address the goals of the group. These concepts are

described below with relative strengths and weaknesses.

Concept A

This plan maximized endangered fish habitat in the south Vi of Sump IB and converts the north

 lA

of Sump 2 into deep water habitat. There was general agreement that Concept A overemphasized deep open water habitat to the detriment of other wetland habitat values.

Concept B

Concept B reduces the acreage of deep water fish habitat in the south Vi of Sump 1A while

creating a relatively large area of deep water habitat in Sump 2. Although this Concept is more

balanced than Concept A, the reduction in currently used sucker habitat in Sump 1A was

unacceptable.

Concept C

Concept C (preferred concept) was ranked as the most balanced option evaluated because it

preserves important endangered fish habitat in Sump 1A while providing a balance of different

habitats in the remainder of the Refuge. The concept of a treatment wetland in this concept was

later modified in favor water routing (see Figure 5) to improve water quality. In addition,

Concept C was ultimately further modified to reflect the need to preserve important sucker habitat

at the northwest corner of Sump 1A and incorporate other construction needs not initially

identified. The modifications to Concept C can be viewed in Figure 4.

Concept D

Concept D represented the minimum cost option (no cross-lake levees) among the alternatives. It

included the largest acreage of deep water (6 to 8 ft) habitat and maximum acreage reclaimed for

agriculture. However, this concept eliminates current summer sucker habitat in the south half of

Sump 1A.

-26-
Concept A Land Use

[ 1 Weoand/Cropiand Rotation 19,500 acres

|

Pomanent Emergent Weland 4,500 acres

Seasonal Wetland 350 acres

Deep Water Habitat 6,400 acres

Total 30,750 acres

Concept B Land Use •

1 Wetland/Cropland Rotation 18,200 acres

Permanent Emergent Wetland 4,600 acres

Seasonal Wetland 3,200 acres

Deep Water Habitat 4.800 acres

Total 30,800 acres

Figure 9. Concept A. Figure 10. Concept B.

1

Concept C Land Use

'.VHtand/Cropland Rotation

| Agncumn In Retrton

19.100 acres

g ] Swanil Wiflml In Rditbn

Ptrmincnt LmfrQcnt WfftJind

Total

4.500 acras

3.400 acres

31000 aaes

^ v

I 120 acres

Concept D Land Use

] Wetland/Cropland Rotation 19,400 acres

^2 Aflrteumw n RotaOen

~ ] S o ond W stland ki Rotatton

[ Permanent Emergent Wetfand 4,400 acres

" Seasonal Wefland 360 acres

Deep Water Hatxtat 6.600 acres

Total 3O.aOO acres

2,440 acres

Figurell. Concept C. Figure 12. Concept D.

-27-
APPENDIX C: Kuchel Act of 1964

September 2, 1964 1771

KUCHEL ACT (PL 88-567)

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, KLAMATH PROJECT

An act to promote the conservation of the Nation's wildlife resources on the Pacific Flyway in the Tule Lake,

Lower Klamath, Upper Klamath, and Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuges in Oregon and California and to aid in

the administration of the Klamath Reclamation Project. (Act of September 2, 1964, Public Law 88-567,

78 Stat. 850)

Sec. 1. [Policy of the Congress.] - It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress

to stabilize the ownership of the land in the Klamath Federal reclamation project, Oregon and

California, as well as the administration and management of the Klamath Federal reclamation

project and the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge,

Upper Klamath National Wildlife Refuge, and Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuge, to preserve

intact the necessary existing habitat for migratory waterfowl in this vital area of the Pacific

Flyway, and to prevent depredations of migratory waterfowl on agricultural crops in the Pacific

Coast States. (78 Stat. 850; 16 U.S.C. §695k)

Sec. 2. [Areas preserved for migratory waterfowl - Agricultural use.] -

Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, all lands owned by the United States lying within the

Executive order boundaries of the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge, the Lower Klamath

National Wildlife Refuge, the Upper Klamath National Wildlife Refuge and the Clear Lake

National Wildlife Refuge are hereby dedicated to wildlife conservation. Such lands shall be

administered by the Secretary of the Interior for the major purpose of waterfowl management, but

with foil consideration to optimum agricultural use that is consistent therewith. Such lands shall

not be opened to homestead entry. The following public lands shall also be included within the

boundaries of the area dedicated to wildlife conservation, shall be administered by the Secretary of

the Interior for the major purpose of waterfowl management, but with foil consideration to

optimum agricultural use that is consistent therewith, and shall not be opened to homestead entry:

Hanks Marsh, and first form withdrawal lands (approximately one thousand four hundred and

forty acres) in Klamath County, Oregon, lying adjacent to Upper Klamath National Wildlife

Refuge; White Lake in Klamath County, Oregon, and Siskiyou County, California; and thirteen

tracts of land in Siskiyou County, California, lettered as tracts 'A', 'B', 'C\ 'D',

 lE\ 'F\ 'G',

'H', T, T , 'K\

 CL', and 'N' totaling approximately three thousand two hundred and ninety-two

acres, and tract "P" in Modoc County, California, containing about ten acres, all as shown on

plate 4 of the report entitled "Plan for Wildlife Use of Federal Lands in the Upper Klamath

Basin, Oregon-California, " dated April 1956, prepared by the United States Fish and Wildlife

Service. All the above lands shall remain permanently the property of the United States. (78 Stat.

850; 16 U.S.C. §6951)

-28-
September 2, 1964 1772

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, KLAMATH PROJECT

Explanatory Note

Klamath Project and Klamath Compact. All lands compact relating to the waters of the Klamath River by

referred to in Section 2 above lie within, adjacent to or the States of Oregon and California was given by the

nearby the Klamath Federal reclamation project, Act of August 9, 1955, 69 Stat. 613. The consent of

Oregon-California. The project was authorized by the Congress to the resulting compact was given by the

Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the Reclamation Act of August 30, 1957, 71 Stat. 497. Each of these

Act of June 17, 1902, 32 Stat. 388, on May 15, 1905. acts appears herein in chronological order.

The consent of Congress to the negotiation of a

Sec. 3. [Payments to counties in lieu of taxes.] - Subject to conditions hereafter

prescribed, and pursuant to such regulations as may be issued by the Secretary, 25 per centum of the

net revenues collected during each fiscal year from the leasing of Klamath project reserved Federal

lands within the Executive order boundaries of the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge and the

Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge shall be paid annually by the Secretary, without further

authorization for each full fiscal year after the date of this Act to the counties in which such refuges

are located, such payments to be made on a pro rata basis to each county based upon the refuge

acreage in each county: Provided, That the total annual payment per acre to each county shall not

exceed 50 per centum of the average per acre tax levied on similar lands in private ownership in each

county, as determined by the Secretary: Provided further, That no such payments shall be made

which will reduce the credits or the payments to be made pursuant to contractual obligations of the

United States with the Tulelake Irrigation District or the payments to the Klamath Drainage District

as full reimbursement for the construction of irrigation facilities within said district, and that the

priority of use of the total net revenues collected from the leasing of the lands described in this

section shall be (1) to credit or pay from such revenues to the Tulelake Irrigation District the

amounts already committed to such payment or credit; (2) to pay from such revenues to the Klamath

Drainage District the sum of $197,315; and (3) to pay from such revenues to the counties the

amounts prescribed by this section. (78 Stat. 850; 16 U.S.C. § 695m)

Sec. 4. [Leasing of reserved lands continued.] - The Secretary shall, consistent with

proper waterfowl management, continue the present pattern of leasing the reserved lands of the

Klamath Straits unit, the Southwest sump, the League of Nations unit, the Henzel lease, and the

Frog Pond unit, all within the Executive order boundaries of the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake

National Wildlife Refuges and shown in plate 4 of the report entitled "Plan for Wildlife Use of

Federal Lands in the Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon-California", dated April 1956. Leases for

these lands shall be at a price or prices designed to obtain the maximum lease revenues. The leases

shall provide for the growing of grain, forage, and soil-building crops, except that not more than 25

per centum of the total leased lands may be planted to row crops. All other reserved public lands

included in section 2 of this Act shall continue to be managed by the Secretary for waterfowl

purposes, including the growing of agricultural crops by direct planting and sharecrop agreements

with local cooperators where necessary. (78 Stat. 851; 16 U.S.C. § 695m)

-29-
September 2, 1964 1773

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, KLAMATH PROJECT

Sec, 5. [Areas not to be reduced.] - The areas of sumps l(a) and l(b) in the Klamath

project lying within the Executive order boundaries of the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge shall

not be reduced by diking or by any other construction to less than the existing thirteen thousand

acres. (78 Stat. 851; 16 U.S.C. § 695o)

Sec. 6. [Water levels to be maintained.] - In carrying out the obligations of the United

States under any migratory bird treaty, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (40 Stat. 755), as amended or

the Migratory Bird Conservation Act (45 Stat. 1222), as amended, waters under the control of the

Secretary of the Interior shall be regulated, subject to valid existing rights, to maintain sump levels in

the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge at levels established by regulations issued by the Secretary

pursuant to the contract between the United States and the Tulelake Irrigation District, dated

September 10, 1956, or any amendment thereof. Such regulations shall accommodate to the

maximum extent practicable waterfowl management needs. (78 Stat. 851; 16 U.S.C. § 695p)

Explanatory Notes

Reference in the Text. The Migratory Bird Treaty

Act of July 3, 1918, 40 Stat. 755, as amended, which

is referred to in the text, does not appear herein. The

Act is codified in 16 U.S.C. § 703, it seq.

Reference in the Text. The Migratory Birds

Conservation Act of February 18, 1929, 45 Stat. 1222,

as amended, which is referred to in the text, does not

appear herein. The Act is codified in 16 U.S.C. § 715,

it seq.

Sec. 1. [Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuge studies continued.] - The Secretary is

hereby directed to complete studies that have been undertaken relating to the development of the

water resources and waterfowl management potential of the Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuge.

The results of such studies, when completed, and the recommendations of the Secretary shall be

submitted to the Congress. (78 Stat. 851; 16 U.S.C. § 69rq)

Sec. 8. [Regulations to implement Act.] - The Secretary may prescribe such regulations as

may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. (78 Stat. 851; 16 U.S.C. § 695r)

Explanatory Notes

Editor's Note, Annotations. Annotations of opinions

are not included because none were found dealing

primarily with the activities of the Bureau of

Reclamation under this statute.

Legislative History. S. 793, Public Law 88-567 in

the 88th Congress. Reported in Senate from Interior

and Insular Affairs June 28, 1963; S. Rept No. 341.

Passed Senate July 15, 1963. Reported in House from

Interior and Insular Affairs Dec. 19, 1963; H.R. Rept.

No. 1072. Passed House, amended, Apr. 20, 1964.

Senate asks for a conference Apr. 23, 1964. House

agrees to a conference May 7, 1964. Conference

report filed Aug. 17, 1964; H.R. Rept. No. 1820.

House agrees to conference report Aug. 18, 1964.

Senate agrees to conference report Aug. 19, 1964.

-30-