FISCAL YEAR 2001 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION REPORT 

Little Missouri, Cedar River, Grand River, & Sheyenne 

National Grasslands 

of the 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands 

This document was prepared in cooperation with the District Rangers of the Little Missouri, 

Cedar River, Grand River, and Sheyenne National Grasslands and the Resource Program 

Managers in the Supervisor's Office of the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. 

Approved by: /s/ David M. Pieper

 David M. Pieper Date: September 30, 2002 

 Grasslands Supervisor 
Table of Contents 

I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3

II. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS and MONITORING RESULTS ...................................... 4

A. RECREATION ................................................................................................................. 4

B. WILDERNESS ................................................................................................................ 9

C. WILDLIFE ....................................................................................................................... 9

D. RANGE......................................................................................................................... 16

E. TIMBER ........................................................................................................................ 23

F. SOIL, AIR, WATER....................................................................................................... 23

G. MINERALS ................................................................................................................... 27

H. HUMAN AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND BUDGET..................................... 29

J. LANDS .......................................................................................................................... 32

L. FACILITIES ................................................................................................................... 34

P. PROTECTION .............................................................................................................. 34

ROADLESS AREAS........................................................................................................... 35

III. COMPLETED FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS .............................................................. 36

IV. GRASSLANDS PLAN REVISION................................................................................... 36

APPENDICES........................................................................................................................ 37

Appendix A: Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring................................................ 37

Appendix B: Custer Forest Plan Amendments .................................................................. 42

WITHDRAWN FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS ................................................................ 45
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

3 

I. INTRODUCTION 

This report documents the major activities that have occurred on the Little Missouri, Cedar 

River, Grand River, and Sheyenne National Grasslands for Fiscal Year 2001. These National 

Grasslands are divided into four administrative units, or districts. They are the Grand River 

District, consisting of the Cedar River and Grand River National Grasslands; the McKenzie 

District, made up of the northern one-half of the Little Missouri National Grassland; the 

Medora District, which is comprised of the southern one-half of the Little Missouri National 

Grassland; and the Sheyenne District, which consists of the Sheyenne National Grassland. 

Previously, these districts were administered by the Custer National Forest. Midway through 

Fiscal Year 1998, a new unit, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands, was formed to administer these 

districts. This new unit is headquartered in Bismarck, North Dakota. Dave Pieper is the 

Grasslands Supervisor. While the DPG unit has separated from the Custer, we are still in the 

process of updating signs throughout the grasslands to aid the public in identifying the new 

administrative unit. 

The USDA Forest Service, in consultation with its shareholders, manages the land and 

resources of the National Forest System under the guidelines described in Forest and 

Resource Management Plans. Commonly known as Forest/Grassland Plans, these 

documents are agreements between the public, or shareholders, and the Forest Service. 

The plans are arrived at through a lengthy and deliberate process that involves all interested 

parties. Forest/Grassland Plans are designed to guide the management of a specific national 

forest or grassland area for a period of 10 to 15 years. 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands is currently part of the Northern Great Plains Management 

Plans Revision process. The Final Environmental Impact Statement and the Revised Plan 

were released for public review and comment on July 27, 2001. Comments were accepted 

for a 6-month period ending January 22, 2002. There are a wide variety of viewpoints on the 

Revised Plan, the planning process, and the decisions that should be made with regards to 

management of these grasslands. After extensive review and analysis of the comments 

received, in addition to consultation with the North Dakota Congressional Delegation and 

Governors Schafer and Hoeven, the Record of Decision (ROD) was signed on July 31, 2002. 

Implementation began 7 days from the publication of the legal notice in the Bismarck Tribune, 

which was August 14, 2002. 

In order to help both the Forest Service and the public determine how well actual day to day 

management meets the stated goals in the Custer Forest Plan, Grassland managers monitor 

activities occurring on the ground and evaluate the results. The Custer National Forest Plan 

(1987) addresses monitoring in Chapter IV. The specific monitoring elements are described 

on pages 105-110. Throughout the rest of this report, the items referred to, and the major 

headings used, are from these pages. Since they do not apply to the National Grasslands, 

Categories "B. Wilderness" and "E. Timber" will not be discussed in this report. In addition, 

we have also begun monitoring items included in Chapter 4 of the Revised DPG Plan. We 

have included discussions of these undertakings as well (see Appendix A). This will be the 

last Annual Monitoring Report accomplished under the Custer Plan for the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands. 

Monitoring looks at management activities in three ways: 

Implementation Monitoring determines if plans, prescriptions, projects, and activities are 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

4 

being accomplished in compliance with Forest/Grassland Plan objectives, standards, and 

guidelines (i.e. Did we do what we said we would?). 

Effectiveness Monitoring determines if plans, prescriptions, projects, and activities are 

producing identifiable results in moving toward a desired future condition as identified in 

the Forest/Grassland Plan (i.e. Did our actions accomplish what we wanted?). 

Validation Monitoring determines if the assumptions, data, and models used to develop 

the Forest/Grassland Plan are correct, or if there are better ways, given new information 

and technology, to address resource management challenges. 

Implementation monitoring is generally done as projects are implemented on the ground. 

Much of the day-to-day activity of district personnel is devoted to assuring that we do what we 

said we would do. At the end of the year, we can look at broad program areas to see if we 

have accomplished the level of activities envisioned in the Forest/Grassland Plan. Monitoring 

Item C6 of the Custer Forest Plan, "At least 90 percent of planned wildlife habitat targets are 

met," is an example of implementation monitoring. 

This report will focus primarily on effectiveness monitoring. Monitoring Item C1, "Has 

effective wildlife habitat decreased by more than ten percent over levels estimated in the 

Forest Plan analysis?" is an example of effectiveness monitoring. 

Validation monitoring is often done at levels above the National Forest or Grassland through 

the development of more sophisticated models for simulating the effects of proposed action. 

Few, if any of the items in this report address this type of monitoring. 

Section II of this report describes what progress had been made to date in implementing and 

monitoring each element of the Custer Forest Plan that is applicable to the National 

Grasslands. Section III then summarizes how the plan has been modified, or amended, in 

response to new information or changing conditions. Lastly, Section IV describes the revision 

process. 

II. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS and MONITORING RESULTS 

This section addresses the monitoring items described in Chapter IV of the Custer Forest 

Plan (1987) and discusses the accomplishments made in meeting Forest/Grassland Plan 

goals. All other components of the Custer Forest Plan (objectives, standards and guidelines, 

and monitoring) were developed to move the Forest/Grassland condition toward the desired 

goals described in the Forest Plan. Accomplishments are listed below under the headings as 

they appear in the monitoring section of the Custer Forest Plan. 

A. RECREATION 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands (DPG) provides a wide spectrum of recreation opportunities. 

Of these, hunting is the most popular followed by travel/viewing scenery and bicycling. 

The Grand River/Cedar River District annually hosts a fishing day, bow and arrow shoot and 

black-powder shooting event. On this district, visitor use is moderate. People typically 

recreate in activities such as camping, picnicking, hunting, and fishing, with hunting being the 

most popular. 

Located further east, the Sheyenne Ranger District attracts photographers, birders, 

horseback riders, and others interested in the rare plant communities present in a tall-grass 

prairie. Horseback riding and motorized travel/viewing scenery are the most popular 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

5 

activities. This year the district sponsored the first annual Prairie Day, where visitors were 

treated to a variety of tours and activities including bird watching, viewing wild flowers, 

listening to talks given by professionals on wetland ecology and prairie invertebrates, and 

taking wagon rides through the prairie. Activities were also provided for children. 

In addition, Sheyenne Ranger District staff guided 15 other groups on nature and information 

tours of the tall-grass prairie. The brochure of the North Country Trail (NCT) was reprinted, 

and a professional editor designed the layout and edited the soon to be printed Explorer’s 

Guide. 

In proportion to the other grasslands on the DPG, the Little Missouri National Grassland 

(LMNG) receives the largest number of visitors each year. The Medora District hosts an 

annual fishing day. For 2001, a DPG recreation specialist resumed the highly successful 

Explorer Series, and plans to expand this series to other Ranger Districts in 2002. Fee demo 

funds purchased an industrial grade riding lawnmower used to maintain all LMNG developed 

sites. Forest Service staff processed and administered several special use permits and 

outfitter guide permits. Districts successfully involved Casey Program adolescents in several 

recreation and heritage projects. The McKenzie District hosted both an endurance ride for 

horses and an epic mountain bike ride. 

The Maah-Daah-Hey Trail continues to experience an explosion in use by mountain bikers 

and horse riders. National magazines feature it, and the Trail has become a major focus of 

North Dakota Tourism advertising efforts. The Maah-Daah-Hey Trail Association continues to 

be an important partner in trail management and maintenance. 

DPG personnel also worked on the National Grasslands Handbook, a quick reference guide 

of facts on all the Forest Service Grasslands in North America. The handbook is scheduled 

for completion in 2002.

Heritage 

National Grassland archaeologists were able to show further gains and accomplishments in 

Section 110 type activities for 2001. 

The Sheyenne Ranger District continues to lead the DPG in prescribed fire treatments. 

Project areas are relatively small and consist of burns in areas of encroaching willows on the 

open dune plains. An increase in willows is due to the rise in the water table and enlarged 

areas of standing water over the grassland. No cultural surveys were conducted on these 

prescribed fires as they are in areas of low probability and little potential for impact to cultural 

resources. 

For 2002, the Medora Ranger District is discussing the possibility of prescribed fire in 

Ponderosa Pine stands located in the southwest portion of the district. Prescribed fires in 

these badland wooded areas will require a heritage survey prior to implementation. This is 

due to the high potential for the presence of standing eagle trapping lodges, log cabins and 

site types that may be adversely affected by the fire treatments. Cultural resource surveys will 

be conducted as needed in the coming year. 

We began the Woods Cabin (32MZ1270) restoration project in 2001. This historic site is the 

only early 1900 homestead era structure that remains standing on the DPG. Dan Woods, the 

original owner, used cottonwood logs to construct the two-room cabin in 1932. During the 

summer of 2001, the Region 1 Historic Preservation Team from Missoula replaced the roof 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

6 

purloins and sheathing boards, along with the dirt and scoria roof covering. They spent two 

weeks in the reconstruction of the cabin site. The cabin renovation was also a Passports In 

Time project. Two individuals volunteered their time for the project. Seven Casey Program 

adolescents donated seven and a half-days of work. This completed the first stage of the 

reconstruction. 

Further work will be done the summer of 2002 using the Casey Program to remove flooring 

and the cement chinking on the outer and inner walls. The Region 1 Historic Preservation 

Team will return in 2003 to finish the cabin renovation. The reconstructed building will 

eventually serve as a rental. A trail connecting the cabin to the Maah-Daah-Hey Trail may 

also be possible. Woods Cabin will be the only cabin rental on the DPG. It will provide visitors 

with a unique opportunity to experience an historic setting from the early homesteading 

period on the Northern Great Plains. 

Work continues on plans for an overlook and trail at Tobacco Gardens for the Lewis and 

Clark Bicentennial. The project will feature a kiosk interpreting the location where Cruzat shot 

Merewether Lewis on August 11, 1806. Discussion with Calvin Grinnell, of the Three Affiliated 

Tribes, on further interpretation and an alternate version of the death of Sakakawea for 

possible signing at this kiosk overlook continues. This facility will be constructed in 2003. 

The DPG Heritage program continued to fund Amy Mossett, a Mandan/Hidatsa Native 

American, to make presentations of Sakakawea to school children and other groups. DPG 

heritage personnel and line officers continue to formally and informally consult with the Three 

Affiliated Tribes (Arikara, Mandan and Hidatsa) and Standing Rock Sioux on locations of 

traditional cultural properties and other issues. 

What is the actual developed and dispersed recreation use compared with projected 

use levels? (A1) 

In FY01 demo fees were collected at two developed campgrounds on the DPG, Buffalo 

Gap on the Medora District, and CCC on the McKenzie District. At Buffalo Gap, fees 

collected totaled $1,387, up 1% from FY00; at CCC fees collected were $1,549, also up 

1% from FY00. The only slight increase in use may be contributed to the fact that both 

campgrounds underwent construction in FY01. CCC received new picnic tables, had 

gravel placed around each site, and saw the addition of garbage dumpsters. In Buffalo 

Gap, roads were totally repaved, approximately 15 sites were converted to universally 

accessible sites, 3 toilet facilities were replaced, and a coin-operated shower and group 

picnic site were added. 

 Also in FY01, recreation staff began working on a long-range recreation management 

plan for the Grasslands to answer questions on future needs for trails, developed facilities, 

and a range of recreation opportunities. For FY02, the National Visitors Monitoring Survey 

(NVUM) began October 1st 2001 and continues through September 30th 2002. This survey 

data will help answer questions on customer use and access. 

What are the conditions and trends in developed sites? Do developed site conditions 

meet or exceed acceptable standards? (A2) 

For 2001, recreation personnel successfully entered meaningful measures (MM) 

information and began to migrate it into Forest Services coporate database - INFRA. 

On the Grand River Ranger District, work continues on the development of the Blacktail 

trailhead and trail (formerly called Little Eygpt). Trail construction is expected to begin in 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

7 

2003. It is expected that road reconstruction, a picnic area, and toilets will be added 

sometime beyond FY04. 

On the Sheyenne, work continues on the development of a campground facility at 

Hankinson Hills. In addition, we completed the NEPA documentation and then relocated, 

surfaced with gravel, and installed self-closing gates on the west 15 miles of the North 

Country Trail (NCT). Relocating this segment of the trail out of water covered areas allows 

for the actual use of the trail where none could occur. Uncompleted tasks consist of 

installation of route markers; board walks over wet areas, signing, and decommissioning 

of the old trail. Future plans also include construction of a bridge over Iron Springs Creek, 

along with additional relocation and surfacing work on other segments of the NCT. 

The LMNG witnessed several improvements to recreation facilities in 2001. Upgrades at 

Buffalo Gap Campground (BGC) consisted of resurfaced roads, new accessible 

restrooms with a shower, shade trees, and resurfaced and enlarged campsites. 

Installation of a communal picnic shelter, some handicapped accessible picnic tables, 

signing and fire rings will take place in 2002. A new equestrian campground loop is 

planned at BGC for 2005. Further north at CCC Campground, contractors installed fire 

rings, picnic tables and a parking lot. A new campground host site with electricity has also 

been roughed out. 

In response to increased demand on the Maah-Daah-Hey Trail, the Forest Service built 

overnight camping facilities at sites near Wannagon, Bennett, Elkhorn and Magpie. These 

fenced compounds include gravel-surfaced access roads from county or high standard 

Forest Service roads, toilets, camp spurs and self-closing gates. Wannagon, Bennett and 

Magpie have potable water wells in place. Still to be installed are kiosks, signs, fire rings, 

and picnic tables. Hand crews also surfaced 2.5 miles of the Maah-Daah-Hey Trail. In 

addition, contractors excavated trails connecting the overnights with the Maah-Daah-Hey 

Trail. 

Some items to complete in 2002 include mowing, surfacing, signing, and locating posts on 

these trails. A new updated Maah-Daah-Hey Trail map showing the recent improvements 

should be available this coming spring. Also projected for 2002 is preliminary survey and 

location work for the new Maah-Daah-Hey II Trail, “The Deuce”, and other trails around 

the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. 

Trails on the Dakota Prairie meet or exceed regional standards. Standards for horizontal 

and vertical alignment include keeping the grade to a minimum and out-sloping the trail 

tread. This allows the water to sheet off decreasing the number of high maintenance 

water bars. Enlarging the turning radius of switchbacks creates greater sight distances, 

decreasing user conflicts and enhancing user safety. Trail crews surfaced clay and sandy 

areas with crushed rock aggregate, extending the trail tread maintenance intervals and 

providing a safer trail when wet. Reassurance markers are at every trail junction, 

enhancing user feelings of security. Self-closing gates decrease user conflicts by insuring 

the gates are not left open. 

Does off-highway vehicle (OHV) use and damage conflict with Forest Management area 

goals? (A3) 

In January 2001, the former Regional Forester Dale Bosworth (now Chief of the Forest 

Service), signed a ROD titled, Off-Highway Vehicle: Record of Decision and Plan 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

8 

amendment for Montana, North Dakota and Portions of South Dakota. Forest Service 

personnel began to implement the new Region 1 OHV policy by posting signs, distributing 

information and implementing area closures. Initially, corporate knowledge was used for 

baseline information. No monitoring took place in 2001; however, the DPG Law 

Enforcement Officer and other district personnel made visitor contacts throughout the 

summer and hunting season in the fall to educate grasslands users on the new policy. 

The DPG Grasslands Plan Revision incorporates the R1 OHV policy and also designates 

management areas such as 1.2a – Suitable for Wilderness, 1.31- Non-motorized 

Backcountry Recreation, and 2.2 – Research Natural Areas, which will be managed to 

provide non-motorized semi-primitive recreation opportunities.

Is cultural resource inventory and protection compliance being accomplished 

annually? (A4) 

Federal and contract archaeologists inventoried a total of 4,623 acres, investigated 53 

undertakings and recorded 35 new sites on the DPG. Use of the Programmatic 

Agreement and Site Identification Strategy standards again let heritage resource 

specialists make more efficient use of their time. We were able to update databases and 

records, and complete input of project data files. In addition, Forest Service heritage 

personnel were able to revisit, monitor and assess 20 archeological sites of high cultural 

significance on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. Additional sites will be revisited next year. 

The DPG continues to follow the Programmatic Agreements (PAs) concluded with the 

South Dakota and North Dakota State Historic Preservation Offices. Some of the 

standards include identified specific site inventory strategies to follow for ground 

disturbing activities including Oil and Gas inventory, linear surveys, seismic surveys and 

range permit re-issuance. As required by the PAs, annual meetings with the SHPOs were 

held to review the reports and compliance actions. For 2001, all actions were in 

compliance. 

Inventory strategies and consultant work on the Grasslands are conducted under special 

use permits and this work is field checked by Grasslands archaeologists to ensure 

accuracy and maintain quality control. Over the past three years an average of five 

antiquity permits have been issued to consultants, all of which have been checked and 

found to be reporting accurately. 

We also began to implement the recommendations found in the report, Cows, Tanks, 

Pipelines and Fences: The Effects of Grazing to Cultural Resources on the Little Missouri 

National Grasslands (Floodman 2000). The DPG hired an archaeologist that revisited and 

reviewed some of the sites identified on the Medora District as having experienced severe 

effects from cattle impacts. He revisited 47 sites and updated the condition of the affected 

sites. His report, Dakota Prairie Grasslands Heritage Resource Program: 2001 Site 

Monitoring in the Medora Ranger District (Olson 2002), documents the site conditions, 

and makes recommendations to mitigate adverse effects. No actions will be 

accomplished in correcting the effects from cattle damage until 2002. 

Contractors conducted four standard 3-D seismic projects in FY 2001. Project redesign 

avoided all potential impacts to archaeological sites. Forest Service personnel and 

contractors submitted these reports to the NDSHPO. Oil companies did not conduct any 

2-D seismic projects on the DPG in 2001. Seismic projects remain the prevailing type of 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

9 

heritage inventory surveys on the Little Missouri National Grasslands, accounting for 

3,168 acres, or 69% of the total inventory acres. Surveys recorded 23 sites or 68% of the 

recorded sites. 

Oil and gas development projects generated 25 new inventory reports, making them 

numerically the greatest caseload. The majority of these wells are located south of 

Fryburg and in the Davis Creek area. The Heritage Team determined that recently 

proposed oil developments in the Davis Creek area endanger the historic integrity of the 

Custer Trail/Campsites and Sully/Sioux Battlefields. Cumulative effects of continued 

mineral development threaten these National Register of Historic Places eligible sites. 

Exploration permits for the Davis Creek area were temporarily put on hold. This issue 

was recently resolved through a management and site treatment plan that was agreed to 

by all affected parties. 

What are the effects of management activities and allocations on the visual resource? 

(A5) 

We have worked successfully with Theodore Roosevelt National Park to mitigate adverse 

effects to visual resources around the park from oil and gas development. In addition, 

discussions have begun concerning photo point locations in the Davis Creek area. 

The Revised Plan for the DPG identifies scenic integrity objectives and provides 

standards and guidelines for meeting them. Future monitoring will determine if 

implemented projects are meeting the Scenic Integrity Objectives. 

B. WILDERNESS 

(Not applicable to National Grasslands.) 

C. WILDLIFE 

Big Game 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands did not complete any big game projects in 2001, though some 

projects are planned for upcoming years. Throughout 2001 however, we continued to 

manage for bighorn sheep by limiting disturbance caused by recreationists and oil and gas 

development. We accomplished this using the mitigation measures outlined in the Custer 

Forest Plan and the Northern and Southern Oil and Gas EIS’s. 

An important development that did occur this year was the North Dakota Game and Fish 

Departments translocating bighorn sheep to a National Grassland area south of Interstate 94. 

These efforts are attempting to reinforce the remnant bighorn sheep herd located there. 

Sharp-tailed Grouse 

As noted in earlier monitoring reports, concern has been expressed over the availability of 

sharp-tailed grouse nesting habitat on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. While the Custer Plan 

does not identify desired condition for grouse habitat, the most important component of such 

habitat is the presence of residual grass cover. Annual monitoring of this habitat component 

on the Little Missouri National Grassland began in 1996. Recent results are shown in Table 

1. Generally, a minimum VOR of 3.5 inches is desired for successful grouse nesting. No 

grassland structure monitoring has been completed on the Grand River National Grassland 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

10 

since the last monitoring report, but data is now available for the Cedar River National 

Grassland (Table 2). 

Table 1: Grassland structure monitoring results - Little Missouri National Grassland. 

Values indicate percent of transects with average Visual Obstruction Readings (VOR) in each 

category. Categories are in inches. 

YEAR # OF 

TRANSECTS 

LESS THAN 

2” 

2.0-2.9” 3.0-3.9” GREATER 

THAN 4” 

1999** 355 56% 26% 12% 6%

2000** 94 60% 31% 6% 3%

2001 94 54% 33% 9% 4%

**From Table 1, 1999/2000 Annual Monitoring Report. 

Table 2: Grassland structure monitoring results from the Cedar River National 

Grassland. 

Values indicate percent of transects with average Visual Obstruction Readings (VOR) in each 

category. Categories are in inches. 

YEAR # OF 

TRANSECTS 

LESS THAN 

2.0” 

2.0-2.9” 3.0-3.9” GREATER 

THAN 4” 

2001 34 56% 32% 12% 0%

In 2001, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands again monitored sharp-tailed grouse populations on 

the Sheyenne National Grassland. In 2000, censuses found 317 male sharp-tailed grouse, 

while counts in 2001 found 403 males. Increases in sharp-tailed grouse are of concern in this 

area, due to their competition with Greater Prairie Chickens. 

The Forest Service did not monitor sharp-tailed grouse populations on the Little Missouri, 

Cedar River, or Grand River National Grasslands in 2001. Monitoring by cooperating state 

agencies indicates that sharp-tailed grouse populations in the general area of these 

grasslands declined during this period. In order to more effectively monitor these grouse 

populations in the future, the Dakota Prairie National Grasslands recently entered into a 

cooperative agreement with North Dakota State University for the University to design a 

monitoring plan for the grasslands’ prairie grouse and their habitats. 

Greater Prairie Chicken 

Like sharp-tailed grouse, greater prairie chickens are greatly affected by the availability of 

residual grass cover. The Sheyenne National Grassland has conducted grassland structure 

monitoring since 1992. Data for 1999-2001 is summarized in Table 3. It should be noted that 

although more than 10,000 acres have been sampled each year, the categorical data are 

specific to those vegetative communties that are capable of producing high cover (i.e. the 

percentages do not pertain to all herbaceous communities that were sampled). The reason 

for this approach is that it was the availability of high cover that has been the parameter of 

interest. Because this method is more subjective however, we have entered into a 

cooperative agreement with North Dakota State University to design a more robust 

monitoring system for future years. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

11 

Table 3: Grassland structure monitoring results - Sheyenne National Grassland. 

Values indicate percent of transects with average Visual Obstruction Readings (VOR), in 

each category. Categories are in inches. 

YEAR ACRES 

SAMPLED 

LESS 

THAN 2” 

2.0-3.0” 4.0-5.0” 6.0-7.9” GREATER 

THAN 8” 

1999* 14,727 29.4% 39.4% 15.4% 10.0% 5.8% 

2000* 11,251 13.6% 17.0% 44.3% 21.0% 4.0% 

2001 22,221 5.0% 18.0% 36.0% 34.0% 8.0% 

*From Table 2, 1999/2000 Annual Monitoring Report. 

In 1999, 106 male greater prairie chickens were counted during systematic surveys, while 

137 were found in 2000. Counts in 2001 found 140 males, as well as two hybrid sharp-tailed 

grouse/greater prairie chicken males. Data indicates that the long-term trend for the 

chickens is downward, most likely due to a lack of sufficient residual cover. As noted above, 

competition from sharp-tailed grouse is also of concern. 

Greater Sage-Grouse 

Greater sage grouse occur in southwestern North Dakota, and are found on the southwestern 

portion of the Little Missouri National Grassland (LMNG). Little is known of this population's 

ecology. In 2000, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands initiated a cooperative study of North 

Dakota's greater sage-grouse. This effort, led by South Dakota State University, and 

coordinated by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, will take several years to 

complete. Population monitoring by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department found 195 

male sage-grouse in 1999, 283 males in 2000, and 232 males in 2001. 

Waterfowl 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands did not complete or initiate any cooperative wetland 

development projects in 2001. 

Fisheries 

In 2001, fisheries work on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands focused on inventory of prairie 

stream fish communities. Fish surveys were contracted for the Cedar River and Grand River 

National Grasslands. Five species and 540 individuals were found on the Cedar River 

National Grassland, while approximately 9,400 individuals of 24 species were discovered on 

the Grand River National Grassland. Full results for the Cedar River National Grassland 

survey are posted on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ website. The Grand River National 

Grassland report is currently being finalized, and will be posted when available. The 

University of Idaho completed their first year of surveying on the Little Missouri National 

Grassland. Identification of collected fish is ongoing. See the Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ 

website for a progress report. Fish surveys on the Sheyenne National Grassland were 

completed in 2000; 873 individuals of 15 species were found. The full report of this survey is 

also available on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ website. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

12 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species (TES) 

A priority for the Dakota Prairie Grasslands is to update inventory and monitoring information 

for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. In 2001, surveys on the Grand River 

National Grassland focused on burrowing owls, Sprague’s pipits and Baird’s sparrows. 

Priorities for the Sheyenne National Grassland included northern leopard frogs and a wide 

variety of sensitive plants along the Sheyenne River. Burrowing owls, Sprague’s pipits, 

Baird’s sparrows, and Dakota buckwheat surveys were done on the Little Missouri National 

Grassland. In addition, surveys for sensitive butterfly species were conducted at Denbigh 

Experimental Forest, Cedar River National Grassland, and Sheyenne National Grassland. 

Project reports from these efforts are posted on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ website, as 

they become available. 

Western Prairie Fringed Orchid 

The Sheyenne National Grassland (SNG) population of the western prairie fringed orchid is 

one of three remaining meta-populations for this species. The SNG is an active participant in 

recovery efforts and monitoring for this federally threatened species. Management questions 

regarding the species are currently being addressed by two projects; one focusing on the 

impacts of grazing on the orchid, and one focusing on management impacts and biology of 

the orchid’s pollinators. 

Monitoring of orchids in 2001 included three components: 1) censusing in Milton Jr. allotment 

and Viking Prairie, 2) metapopulation monitoring, and 3) demographic monitoring. In addition 

to these Forest Service efforts, the ND Natural Heritage Program conducted orchid surveys 

on several allotments in 2001. Results from their surveys are available in the report “An 

inventory of the western prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera praeclara) in the Sheyenne 

National Grassland, Ransom County, North Dakota in July 2001”. 

Metapopulation monitoring of flowering orchids was continued in monitoring plots in six 

different allotments in 2001. This monitoring is being conducted in order to establish 

population trends across the SNG. 

Table 4: Orchid metapopulation monitoring results 2000 and 2001 

Allotment Name # of flowering orchids 2000 # of flowering orchids 2001 

Penberthy 91 120 

N Durler 34 10 

McLeod 69 37 

Sagvold 29 35 

North S 26 20 

Milton Jr. 26 3 

Totals: 275 225 

Demographic monitoring of orchids was done in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy in 

2001. This monitoring was conducted in order to track affects of management activities on 

orchids throughout their lifecycle. Results are found in the following table. For a complete 

report see “Western Prairie Fringed Orchid Monitoring Study Project Report for 2001”. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

13 

Table 5: Orchid demographic monitoring results. 

Average # of 

flowers/plant 

Fertile 

pods/plant 

# of plants 

that set 

seed 

# of plants 

damaged by 

insects 

# of plants 

damaged by 

cattle 

Grazed (Sagvold 

& Venlo) 

8.84 .44 8 16 10 

Burned & Grazed 

(McLeod) 

10 4.38 41 2 0 

Ungrazed (Viking 

and Brown 

Ranch) 

9.5 1.04 13 1 - 

Sensitive Plants 

In 2001, inventories were conducted for the sensitive plants found in woodland and wetland 

habitats on the SNG. All located populations were mapped using GPS. In conjunction with 

these inventories, monitoring plots were established to collect baseline data. Sixty monitoring 

plots were established within populations of sixteen different species. For more information 

on this monitoring project see “Rare plant survey in the Sheyenne Delta area, Richland and 

Ransom Counties, North Dakota”. 

On the LMNG and GRNG, a survey was conducted for Dakota buckwheat. All located 

populations were mapped using GPS technology and information collected during this survey 

will be used as baseline data. For more information see the report “2001 Sensitive Plant 

Inventory: Dakota Buckwheat (Eriogonum visheri)”. 

Black-tailed Prairie Dog 

Black-tailed prairie dogs provide important habitat for several other species, including TES 

species such as the burrowing owl. No systematic surveys for black-tailed prairie dogs were 

completed in 2001, but have been contracted for 2002. 

Wooded Draws 

Woodland surveys were completed in 1998 on 11,000 acres of the Little Missouri National 

Grassland. Seven habitats were investigated: Rocky Mountain Juniper, Ponderosa Pine, 

Limber Pine, Cottonwood, Quaking Aspen, Bur Oak, and Green Ash. Of these habitats, the 

condition of the green ash woody draws were of greatest concern. In general, these habitats 

were considered to be in poor condition, with approximately 77% of them in an early seral 

stage. Approximately 30% of the green ash woody draws investigated contained no green 

ash seedling or saplings. The presence of non-native species, such as leafy spurge and 

Kentucky bluegrass, was also of great concern. 

Research Natural Areas 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands currently has three established RNAs: Limber Pine, Two TopBig Top, and Sheyenne Springs. Basic Stewardship Monitoring (Natural Areas Source Book, 

USDA Forest Service, Region One, 1996) was conducted at Limber Pine and Two Top-Big 

Top RNAs in 2001. Sensitive plant surveys were conducted at Sheyenne Springs RNA. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

14 

Monitoring results from Limber Pine RNA indicate that overall the site remains in fair 

condition. New signs are needed for the RNA. Low regeneration of limber pine has been 

noted and porcupine damage to limber pine is causing some mortality. Monitoring results 

from Two Top-Big Top RNA indicate that the site is in satisfactory condition. However, 

Japanese brome is a problem. Litter accumulation is high on both sites. A prescribed burn 

has been suggested. Results from plant surveys at Sheyenne Springs RNA are available in 

FS files. 

Grassland Community Biodiversity 

Encroachment by exotic species, displacement of natural processes such as fire and 

herbivory, and current management practices potentially affect the floristic composition and 

structure of grassland communities. 

Botanical composition of native prairie habitats is a significant issue. In 1998, the Grasslands 

initiated data collection to assess the integrity of herbaceous plant communities in 

relationship to distance from livestock water developments on the LMNG (“Bullseye study”). 

Several plant composition attributes were considered in this study and response varied 

between attributes. However, all were impacted by distance to water. For example, analysis 

of species diversity (total number of species) found that the number of species was highest in 

the 1⁄2 to 3⁄4 mile zone from water. 

In addition to the Bullseye study, floristic similarity to reference conditions was assessed for 

grassland communities. A complete assessment will be available in the final “Little Missouri 

National Grassland Rangeland Assessment”. Data from this assessment may be used as a 

baseline for future monitoring. 

Has effective wildlife habitat decreased by more than ten percent over levels estimated 

in the Forest Plan FORPLAN analysis as a result of road construction and oil and gas 

activities? (C1) 

No new information is available since the 1999/2000 monitoring report. 

Have essential habitats or populations for Threatened and Endangered species of bald 

eagle, black footed ferret or peregrine decreased by more than five percent? (C2) 

No, essential habitats or populations of these species have not decreased by more than 

5%. In fact, we know of no declines at all. Peregrine falcon are no longer listed under 

the Endangered Species Act. No bald eagles nest on or near the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands. Based on current information, no prairie dog complexes on the DPG are 

currently large enough to support Black-footed ferrets. In 2002, the Dakota Prairie will be 

remapping all prairie dog colonies. 

Western prairie fringed orchid population numbers found on the Sheyenne National 

Grassland have generally increased since 1992. These increases in orchid numbers 

correlate with high precipation and wetland levels. However, not all sites or allotments 

have experienced population increases and some allotments have experienced declines. 

The expansion of leafy spurge poses one of the greatest threats to orchid habitats. The 

extent of leafy spurge infestions affecting orchid habitats on the SNG is currently 

unknown. Livestock grazing also impacts orchid populations by reducing the number of 

orchids that complete their life cycle and set seed. The full extent of this impact is 

unknown. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

15 

Have winter range capacity and population levels decreased by more than five percent 

for elk, bighorn sheep, or mule deer in the three year population average for these 

species? (C3) 

We have no new information regarding this question since the 1999/2000 report. 

Has there been greater than a five percent reduction of key wildlife habitats with 

special emphasis on riparian and woody draw areas? (C4) 

We have no information to assess whether riparian or woody draw areas changed in 

2001. However, we did complete “Proper Functioning Condition” surveys on the Little 

Missouri National Grassland in 1998 and 1999. Surveys were run on 405 miles of stream. 

Although 56% of the surveyed areas were classified as being in “proper functioning 

condition” or “functioning at risk – upward trend”, 27% were classified as “functioning at 

risk – trend unknown”, while 11% were classified as “functioning at risk - downward trend”, 

and 6% as “nonfunctional”. These latter three catagories are of concern. 

Have wildlife and livestock conflicts in key wildlife habitat areas caused more than a 

five percent decrease in effective wildlife habitat? (C5) 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands does not have any baseline information to make this 

determination. Two key ares where wildlife and livestock conflict are in prairie dog 

complex expansion and residual grass cover. 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands did not approve or fund any prairie dog control efforts in 

2001. Therefore, it is very unlikely that this key habitat was reduced overall during this 

timeframe. Remapping of all known prairie dog colonies is currently being completed. On 

the Dakota Prairie Grasslands residual cover availability for ground nesting birds (e.g. 

greater prairie chicken, sharp-tailed grouse and Baird's sparrow) is low. Livestock grazing 

patterns, along with weather and site conditions, have great influence on residual cover. 

Residual cover information (VOR) is presented in Tables 1, 1a, and 2. 

Have at least 90 percent of planned fish and wildlife habitat targets been met? (C6 and 

C10) 

Fish, wildlife, and TES habitat improvement and inventory project accomplishment levels 

exceeded 90 percent of annual targets in 2001. Habitat improvement projects included 

prescribed burning to invigorate tallgrass prairie, control of leafy spurge in the Humphrey 

Draw Wildlife Area and on the newly acquired Viking Prairie, transplanting of aquatic 

plants to stockponds lacking such vegetation, and inventory and monitoring of vegetative 

cover and wildlife and fish populations. 

Has there been an increase or decrease in acreage of prairie dogs by more than ten 

percent? (C7) 

No new grassland-wide information is available since the last monitoring report. As noted 

above, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands will be remapping all prairie dog colonies in 2002. 

Have the population trends for mule deer, whitetail deer, mountain goats, and antelope 

decreased by more than ten percent from the previous five year average? (C8) 

No new information is available since the 1999/2000 monitoring report. The Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands does not collect such information, but relies on the expertise of state wildlife 

agencies in this matter. As noted in last year’s monitoring report, mountain goats do not 

occur on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

16 

Have harvest levels of bobcat and coyote decreased their populations by more than 

ten percent from the previous five year average? (C8) 

The status of these species is largely unknown for Grassland units. It is suspected that 

their populations are relatively stable, though outbreaks of mange have undoubtably 

reduced coyote population levels in recent years. It is unlikely that harvest levels on the 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands had a significant impact in 2001. 

Has the occupied/unoccupied habitat for golden eagle and prairie falcon decreased by 

more than ten percent? (C8) 

In 2001, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands initiated an inventory of nesting raptors on the 

Grand River National Grassland. The western 2/3rds of the district was covered. Five 

active golden eagle nests were found (this area does not contain suitable nesting habitat 

for prairie falcon). The eastern 1/3 of the district will be surveyed in 2002. See the 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ website for additional details. 

A comprehensive golden eagle survey was last conducted on the Little Missouri National 

Grassland in 1993. In 2001, 226 golden eagle nests were visited to determine their 

status. Overall, 60 nests were classified as being in good conditoin, and 37 nests were in 

fair conditon. Thirteen of the previously located nests were partially destroyed, while 116 

were wholly destroyed. In 2002, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands will revisit 34 known 

ferruginous hawk and 84 known prairie falcon nests to determine their status. Future 

plans call for maintaining the raptor database once it is updated. See the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands’ website for additional details on these projects. 

Does at least 90 percent of the prairie grouse dancing/booming grounds have an 

average stubble height of 12 inches or more within a one mile radius? (C9) 

As explained in earlier monitoring reports, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands likely does not 

meet this standard. The DPG has focused on monitoring Visual Obstruction Reading 

(a.k.a. Visual Obstruction Measurement), rather than stubble height. A direct comparison 

between the two elements is not possible; therefore we cannot provide a definitive 

answer to this monitoring element. Please see Table 1, 2, and 3 for recent Visual 

Obstruction Readings. Based on this data, it is very unlikely that we would currently retain 

12 inch stubble height within a one mile radius of this many dancing/booming grounds. 

D. RANGE 

In FY01, the Dakota Prairie Grasslands placed emphasis on completing the assessment of 

the Little Missouri National Grassland. The primary emphasis of this assessment was to 

provide a baseline for updating allotment management plans. That assessment is scheduled 

for completion in early summer 2002. The same type of assessment is planned for the 

Sheyenne National Grassland with data collection and analysis ongoing. Monitoring 

completed in 2001 included assessment of invasive species control and compliance with 

operating instructions on individual allotments. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

17 

Uplands 

The Little Missouri National 

Grassland assessment included 

an evaluation of how existing 

conditions compare to reference 

sites for existing vegetation 

habitat types. Comparison 

provides a basis for developing 

a rating of floristic similarity to 

reference conditions. The data 

is summarized by lifeform as 

grass, shrub, or tree. Plot data 

for what were considered to be 

relatively undisturbed sites were 

used to characterize reference 

conditions. The existing 

condition and reference 

conditions were mapped and 

compared to determine how 

similar existing conditions are to 

reference condition to assess 

similarity. The grass lifeform 

dominates the Little Missouri 

National Grassland. Figure 1 

pictorially shows the results of 

the grass lifeform similarity to 

reference analysis. 

Figure 1. Grass Lifeform Similarity to Reference 

Conditions 

The percentages in Table 6 characterize the grass lifeform floristic similarity to reference 

conditions: 

Table 6. Similarity (% lifeform) to Reference Conditions 

Total Badlands Rolling Prairie

0-25% (Very Low) 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 

25-50% (Low) 46.2% 26.4% 19.8% 

50-75% (Moderate) 40.5% 20.3% 20.2% 

75-100% (High) 7.0% 2.3% 4.7% 

N/A 5.7% 4.5% 1.2% 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

18 

Hardwood draws 

As part of the Assessment on the 

Little Missouri National 

Grasslands, 11,000 acres of 

hardwood draws were surveyed 

and a summary of survey results 

was completed in 2001. The 

results indicate that green ash 

draws are generally in poor 

condition because of early seral 

conditions (77%), many lack 

seedling and sapling regeneration 

(30%), and many are park like 

stands with single species in the 

understory. The same process to 

determine similarity to reference 

conditions was accomplished for 

the tree lifeform. Figure 2 

pictorially shows the results of the 

tree lifeform similarity to reference 

analysis. 

Floristic similarity was assessed 

for several layers within the 

broadleaf tree lifeform. Table 7 

displays the percentages at the 

15+-foot layer: 

Figure 2: Tree Lifeforms Similarity to Reference 

Conditions 

Table 7. Similarity (% lifeform) to Reference Conditions 

Total Badlands Rolling Prairie 

0-25% (Very Low) 1.2% 0.8% 0.4% 

25-50% (Low) 8.2% 6.2% 1.9% 

50-75% (Moderate) 19.9% 13.9% 6.0% 

75-100% (High) 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 

N/A 70.2% 32.7% 37.5% 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

19 

Shrublands 

The same process to 

determine similarity to 

reference conditions was 

accomplished for the 

shrubland lifeform. Figure 3 

pictorially shows the results 

of the shrub lifeform similarity 

to reference analysis. 

The percentages in Table 8 

characterize the shrub 

lifeform floristic similarity to 

refererence conditions. 

Figure 3: Shrub Lifeform Similarity to Reference Conditions 

Table 8. Similarity (% lifeform) to Reference Conditions 

Total Badlands Rolling Prairie 

0-25% (Very Low) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

25-50% (Low) 7.4% 2.7% 4.7% 

50-75% (Moderate) 49.0% 34.5% 14.5% 

75-100% (High) 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 

N/A 43.6% 16.6% 27.0% 

Tables 6, 7, and 8 reflect the percentages of mapping units occupied by plant lifeforms of 

grass, trees, and shrubs. Each of these tables contains a category labeled N/A (Not 

Applicable). This category represents plant lifeform mapping units that contains less than 

15% of the respective lifeform. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

20 

Riparian 

In 1996, the Forest Service adopted (USDA, Thomas, Jack Ward. 1996) the Proper 

Functioning Condition (PFC) assessment methodology (USDI Bureau of Land Management, 

and USDA Forest Service and Natural Resource Conservation Service Technical Reference 

TR-1737-15, 1998) as the minimum inventory for riparian assessments. 

PFC assessment data on 405 miles of streams on the Little Missouri National Grassland was 

summarized in 2001. The summary indicated that 56% of the stream miles assessed were in 

a properly functioning condition or in a functioning at risk condition with an upward trend. The 

remaining 44% were functioning at risk with no apparent or downward trend or nonfunctioning. 

Noxious Weeds 

The effort to control noxious weeds continues to emphasize a biologically based integrated 

pest management approach. Populations of flea beetles (Apthona lacertosa and A. 

nigriscutis) are becoming well established in several areas especially on the Medora Ranger 

District. During the 2001 season, District crews and Grazing Association members released 

apthona flea beetles on 2210 sites. Additionally, Apthona beetles were collected for redistribution on other Forest Service units in the Region. Biological control efforts in the 

Buffalo Campground area have successfully reduced spurge infestations to acceptable 

levels. It was estimated that control in the campground exceeded 95% in 2001. 

The Sheyenne Ranger District continues to include goat grazing as an integral part of their 

leafy spurge control program. In 2001 goat grazing was applied to 6000 acres of spurge 

infestations. Apthona beetles still have not established well in the sandy soils of the 

Sheyenne Ranger District and although insects are being released yearly, they have not 

established themselves as they have where they have been released on the Medora Ranger 

District. 

Herbicide use continues to be an important aspect of noxious weed control efforts. Plateau is 

a narrow spectrum pesticide that has been shown to be effective in controlling leafy spurge 

with limited effect on non-target herbaceous species. It was used to control leafy spurge on 

the Sheyenne, Grand River and Medora units. The effectiveness of Plateau in reducing stem 

densities of leafy spurge was monitored on the Sheyenne National Grassland. Control was 

between 85% and 93% the spring (2001) following a fall treatment. Table 9 provides an 

overview of herbicide use during the 2000 and 2001 seasons: 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

21 

Table 9: Herbicide Treatment Levels on the Dakota Prairie National Grasslands (2000 & 

2001)

UNIT TARGET SPECIES 

2000 TREATMENT 

LEVEL 

(acres) 

2001 TREATMENT 

LEVEL 

(acres) 

Sheyenne NG Leafy Spurge 4,443 4,063 

Grand 

River/CedarRiver 

NG’s 

Leafy Spurge 550 550 

Little Missouri NG 

McKenzie Unit 

Leafy Spurge 

Absinth Wormwood 

Canada Thistle 

273 

8 

11 

515 

Little Missouri NG 

Medora Unit 

Leafy Spurge 

Canada Thistle 

455 

6 

545 

5 

Note: Monitoring Item D5 does not apply to the Grasslands. 

Does range condition and trend analysis show less than a five percent increase in 

rangelands in a downward trend over the previous analysis? (D2) 

Range condition and trend analysis has not been accomplished in the past three years. 

The primary effort has been in developing the assessment for the Little Missouri National 

Grassland (known as the “Dragon”). This assessment will provide baseline information for 

identifying priorities for condition and trend studies during updates of Allotment 

Management Plans. 

Have noxious weed infestations increased more than 10 percent over the last five 

years? (D6) 

Infestations on the Dakota Prairie National Grassland are still estimated to be at the 1998 

reported total of 21,550 acres when it was noted that weed infestation had increased by 

more than 10 percent over the previous five years. We do not have estimates of any 

increase in infestations at this point in time. See Table 9 above for actual treatment 

levels.

In 2002, emphasis will be placed on obtaining better inventories of noxious weed acres. 

Spectral imagery, on-the-ground delineations using geographic positioning systems 

(GPS), and inventory mapping using geographic information systems (GIS) analysis will 

be utilized. This is an ongoing effort and we anticipate that existing inventories will be 

updated by the end of 2003. 

Is availability and use of forage for livestock grazing at least 90 percent of anticipated 

Forest Plan levels? (D1) 

The 2000 and 2001 authorized use levels, when compared to Forest Plan permit levels, 

were influenced by environmental conditions and consultation with each Grazing 

Association. Adjustments in authorized levels included changes in total livestock 

numbers, season of use, and complete rest where needed to allow movement toward 

desired conditions. Table 10 displays authorized use levels for 2000 and 2001. Both 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

22 

authorizations are compared to the 1980-1999 20-year average authorization. 

Table 10. Authorized Grazing Level Compared with the 20-Year Average (1980-1999) 

Grasslands District 

20-Year Average 

(% Of 1987 Permit 

Level) 

2000 Authorization 

(% Of 20-Year 

Average) 

2001 Authorization 

(% Of 20-Year 

Average) 

Sheyenne NG 90% 95% 95% 

Grand/Cedar River NG’s 96% 106% 106% 

Little Missouri NG 84% 96% 105% 

Have at least 95% of Allotment Management Plans targeted for updates been 

accomplished? (D3): 

There has been no change in the status of NEPA analysis for the Rescission Bill 

schedule. The Little Missouri National Grassland assessment will facilitate the NEPA 

analysis process for allotments on the Little Missouri National Grassland. NEPA analysis 

on a group of allotments on the McKenzie Ranger District will begin in the spring of 2002. 

NEPA analysis for allotments on the Cedar River National Grassland was initiated in late 

2000 and were planned to be completed in the early summer of 2002. The interim 

decision on the Revised Plan will delay the completion of these AMP’s. 

Are at least 20 percent of allotments inspected annually for grazing permit 

compliance? (D4): 

Yes, at least 20 percent of allotments are inspected annually for grazing permit 

complance (see Table 11). In addition to finishing monitoring of structural improvements, 

field inspections of allotments for compliance with the grazing permit increased in 2001. 

This compliance monitoring was geared toward asking the question of whether 

implementing guidelines identified in the Annual Operating Instructions (AOI’s) were 

followed. Compliance monitoring deals primarily with instructions having to do with 

systems such as livestock numbers and season of use including annual changes due to 

environmental conditions. Although compliance monitoring did not indicate concerns on 

most allotments, that does not mean that all of those allotments were in full compliance 

with the Custer Forest Plan. For instance, resource issues dealing with structural 

objectives may not have been monitored in every allotment or around every grouse lek. 

When an allotment was reported as being inspected, any compliance concern issues that 

were observed have been documented for the files. In some cases, livestock were 

removed from the allotments earlier than the "off" dates because of concern with excess 

forage use. All issues of concern were addressed after consultation with the responsible 

Grazing Association. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

23 

Table 11. 2001 Field Inspections 

Sheyenne 

Grand 

River & 

Cedar 

River 

Medora McKenzie 

Total Allotments 55 76 254 184 

# Of Allotments Visited 25 19 63 46 

% Of Allotments Visited 45% 25% 25% 25% 

# Allotments with resource or 

range improvment concerns 

noted 

1 0 8 3 

# Allotments with concern due to 

not following plans or instructions 0 0 0 0 

# Allotments with concern due to 

resource issues or early removal 

for resource concerns 

0 0 8 2 

# Allotments with concern due to 

not maintaining range 

improvements 

0 0 0 1 

E. TIMBER 

(Not applicable to National Grasslands.) 

F. SOIL, AIR, WATER 

In accordance to the Custer Plan we have continued to monitor and evaluate changes in 

surface water quality and quanity in selected streams, changes in ground water levels in 

areas with Threatened and Endangered Species, and grazing effects on watershed 

conditions in riparian areas and woody draws. For the purpose of the DPG Plan Revison we 

have continued in our efforts to collect baseline data for on going projects. As a result we 

have updated the Memomorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Natural Resources 

Conservation Services (NRCS) to continue mapping those lands on the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands that have not been updated or digitized. Those areas include 10 quads on the 

McKenzie Ranger District, the Sheyenne, Cedar and Grand River Grasslands. They are 

presently in different stages of the soil survey process. Those lands on the Medora District 

have been completed and the results can be found in the NRCS national data bases, Soil 

Survey Geographic Data Base (SSURGO) or National Soil Information System (NASIS). 

The entire Dakota Prairie Grasslands Hydrologic Unit Boundaries (HUBs) have been 

delineated and digitized and they are in draft form until they have been certified by NRCS. 

The watershed layer is a Geographical Information System (GIS) core layer needed to 

perform GIS analysis. We are working under an MOU with North Dakota Department of 

Health, NRCS, North Dakota Geological Survey, United States Geological Survey (ND Water 

Resource Division), and the North Dakota Water Commission using the Federal Standards 

for the Delineation of Hydrologic Boundaries (dated June, 2001). 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

24 

On site observations are being 

inventoried in management areas 

and preliminary assessment 

indicate that soil and water quality 

may be adversely impacted. As 

we quantify the damage in those 

areas utilizing appropriate 

protocols we are implementing 

baseline monitoring prior to 

changing management practices. 

Many of the management areas 

with detrimental soil sites and 

poor water quality appear to occur 

near trails, stream banks and 

crossings in proximity of roads 

with natural erosion occurring in 

the badlands, see Figure 4. 

Figure 4. Ash Coulee, October 2000, livestock effects 

near a low water stream crossing after a grazing 

season.

We recognize that past cultivation practices over much of the grasslands have affected the 

soil and their properties and in managing the area this will be a consideration for mitigation 

designs. 

Preliminary analysis of sampling on the Medora and McKenzie Districts in 1997 and 1998 

indicated that soil conditions are negatively impacted in some areas where livestock tend to 

congregate (riparian and hardwood draws). Fifty-six percent of the areas sampled are in a 

properly functioning condition and the remainder are functioning at risk or non-functioning. A 

properly functioning riparian-wetland area has adequate vegetation, landform, and/or large 

woody debris present to dissipate stream energy associated with high waterflows. These 

components combine to reduce erosion and improve water quality; filter sediment, capture 

bedload and aid floodplain development; improve flood-water retention and ground-water 

recharge; and develop root masses that stabilize stream banks against cutting action. The 

above attributes aid in the development of diverse ponding and channel characteristics to 

provide the habitat, water depth, duration and temperature necessary for fish production, 

waterfowl breeding and other uses; and support greater biodiversity (see Figure 4). A 

functional at risk designation means that the riparian-wetland area is in a functional conditon, 

but an existing soil, water or vegetation attribute makes it suseceptible to degradation (USDI, 

BLM Technical Ref. 1737-9, 1993). 

For FY01, several watershed sites were assessed and monitoring was implemented or 

planned. On the Sheyenne National Grassland all the streams were measured and digitized 

and that information is on CD-ROM, waiting to be added to the National Data Hydrography 

(NDH) core layer in GIS and the NRIS water module (NRIS water module will be installed, 

05/2002). The measured streams will also include ground truthed data for our streams. Iron 

Springs is one of the measured streams that was preliminarily assessed as functioning at risk 

using PFC, see Figure 5 and Figure 6. It is being monitored for stream flow, bank full 

measurements, and chemical, biological and physical properties. The project is contracted 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

25 

with USGS (North Dakota Water Division). It is a 2 year project with analysis being reported 

in November 2002. 

Figure 5. Figure 6. 

These are pictures of the conditons on Iron Springs Creek on the Sheyenne National 

Grasslands. The stream has become unstable due to the Increased water flowing into 

the stream and the lack of vegetation to dissipate the energy flowing through the 

hydrologic system. Notice the increased down cutting of the banks as well as the lack 

of flood plains. To design and implement changes in management for this riparian 

habitat we are monitoring water quanity and quality. 

We have also installed a well monitoring system on the Sheyenne Grasslands to measure the 

impact of irrigation systems in proximity to meta populations of the Western Prairie Fringed 

Orchid and tall grass prairie habitats. We have scientifically designed the placement of the 

wells so that we can measure water levels for scientific significance. We are also measuring 

the effects of irrigation systems on the ground water levels during their usage. The irrigation 

systems have been placed in proximity to the Sheyenne Grasslands and in areas that may 

threaten the Western Prairie Fringed Orchid. We are also testing the water in wells for 

chemical, physical and biological parameters as a quality control measure to insure that our 

management practices to eradicate leafy spruge is not harming the environment. 

The Grand River Ranger District, Cedar and Grand River Grasslands will have a complete 

Hydrologic Condition Assessement (HCA) in FY02. 

The Medora Ranger District implemented a watershed improvement project. The district is 

restoring one segement of Ash Coulee Creek that has become functioning at risk due to the 

adverse affects of grazing and a low water crossing used by oil and gas companies. Figure 

7 and 8 below, show the seasonal first year results (May 2001 and September 2001). We 

are also collecting chemical, biological and physical properties of the water as well as 

vegetative data on the floodplains and the buffer zones. All points were GPS’d for input into 

a GIS layer as well as NRIS Terra Module. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

26 

Figure 7. Ash Coulee, May 2001. Riparian area 

after 3 months of fencing and no grazing. 

Figure 8. Ash Coulee, Septermber 2001 

approximately 1 year after fencing. 

Monitoring will be complete and the data analyzed for this project in FY03. 

We have also completed the first year of monitoring on the Blacktail Complex Fire Burned 

Area Rehabilitation (2000). The monitoring was contracted to North Dakota State University 

Soil Science and Hydrology Department. The preliminary data shows that in areas that have 

a large stand of junipers, fires tend to burn extremely hot and cause hydrophic soils, thereby 

increasing erosion and sedimentation in the reaches of that particular watershed and 

damaging stream crossings (paper presented to the Manitoba Soil Science of Canada 

Conference, February, 2002). 

On the McKenzie Ranger District we have implemented a National Fire Plan (NFP) project for 

the Rough Creek Complex Fire (October, 1999). We have scientifically designed the project 

areas to be monitored for grasshoppers (contracted to ARS for 3 years); sedimentation and 

erosions rates (contract with USGS pending); grazing best management practices, fire 

regimes, and vegetative classification (contracted to North Dakota State University, Range 

Department for 3 years); and wildlife inventory (contracted to Montana State University for 2 

years). The completion of these projects are dependent upon NFP funding. 

Grassland-wide we began plugging old abandoned water wells for safety, one of the Regional 

and National priorites. To date we have plugged 25 wells in FY99; 19 wells in FY00; and 25 

wells in FY01. We have also begun inventory of our dams on the grasslands and have 

located several that are unsafe and/or no longer being used or maintained. We have 

contracted to have 4 of the dams removed and those areas restored to original contours in 

their respective watersheds. 

Note: Monitoring Items F1, F2, F3, F4, and F7 do not apply to the Grasslands. 

Have the effects of mineral development activities shown signs of excessive erosion, 

loss of vegetation, or surface damage on more than 25 percent of well sites or roads? 

(F5) 

Both the McKenzie District and the Medora District conduct annual inspections on oil and 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

27 

gas activity areas and inspections on reclamation activities. As evidence of detrimental 

impacts are identified, notice is sent to the responsible party requesting mitigation. To 

date, we have identified several sites that fall within the >15% detrimental soil quality 

limits as well as exhibiting loss of vegetation and excessive erosion. On the McKenzie 

Ranger District, a segment of Magpie Creek has been assessed and the District, in 

conjuction with the Supervisor’s Office and Burllington Resources, is in the process of 

implementing a design to mitigate the sites. The priority for FY02 and FY03 is to 

complete NEPA for the mitigation on Magpie Creek. 

In the same area, Rough Rider Creek has had several road failures but the oil and gas 

companies on the respective districts have been amenable to doing work necessary to 

mitigate adverse impacts. 

Are soil conditions as a result of grazing better than fair with either an upward trend or 

a range condition of good or better? (F6) 

Three areas on the DPG were monitored for soil conditions in FY01. It was identified that 

soil conditons on Ash Coulee on the Medora District, Sand Creek on the McKenzie 

District, and Iron Springs on the Sheyenne District are in fair or less than fair condition. 

The conditions in these areas are attributed to a combination of factors including grazing 

and trampling. 

Is watershed rehabilitation backlog accomplishment at least 20 percent of planned 

levels if funding is available? (F8) 

On the DPG there is a backlog of watershed rehabilitation work; however, backlog 

accomplishments are at least 20 percent of planned levels with available funding. In 

FY01 we implemented the Ash Coulee rehabilitation project which consisted of monitoring 

physical, biological and chemical parameters in the water and inventoring the vegetation 

on the stream banks using GPS to map the inventoried points, so that we will be able to 

go back over the years to measure seral stages after having fenced the area. We 

plugged 25 abandoned wells, and removed four dams with associated rehabilitation 

(recontouring and revegetating with native seeds) of the respective areas.

Does air quality management for hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, and smoke meet 

standards in the State Implementation Plan, the Smoke Management Plan, and Federal 

Air Quality Standards? (F9) 

Oil and gas companies with mineral leases on both the Medora and McKenzie Districts 

are required to meet state and federal air quality standards for hydrogen sulfide as part of 

their lease permits. The State of North Dakota is responsible for monitoring air quality 

standards. 

For prescribed burns, districts obtain and abide by the necessary State burning permits. 

G. MINERALS 

Educating the public, oil & gas/utility operators and contractors on oil & gas operations 

pertaining to Forest Service lands was a major project for fiscal year 2001. A one day 

session with oil industry participants was held to discuss regulations, procedures, permits and 

any relevant issues associated with oil & gas operations. A week long cooperative project 

with the North Dakota Petroleum Council, North Dakota Industrial Commission and the Forest 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

28 

Service was held to teach North Dakota High School teachers the basics of petroleum 

geology, exploration, production, refining and marketing of petroleum products. Pre work was 

started this summer for the Rough Creek Continuing Education Program involving students 

from Williston and Watford City High Schools. The class will be taught by Forest Service 

personnel covering geology, oil & gas minerals, paleontology and other disciplines within the 

Forest Service. Class date is scheduled for July 2002. The DPG also hosted employees from 

the WO and Lolo NF for a two week orientation pertaining to oil & gas operations. In addition, 

we also completed and released the DPG Oil and Gas Showcase video. 

Several paleontology sites were excavated in the summer of 2001 including a “Paleocene 

Epoch crocodile site” that was open to media coverage. 

Note: Monitoring Items G7 & G8 do not apply to the DPG. Monitoring Element G6 relates to 

Coal Leasing. Currently there are no coal leases on the DPG. 

Are at least 95 percent of geophysical permit applications processed within 15 working 

days or 20 working days if not covered by a programmatic EA? Are at least 95 

percent of plans administered in compliance with critical conditions and terms of 

permits? (G1) 

The “clock” for processing permits starts when all surveys and needed information is 

supplied. Once that happens, 75 percent of sampled permits were issued within these 

timeframes. Compliance with NEPA and other agency requirement surveys (such as 

botanical, wildlife, archaeological) make meeting these timeframes on 95% of submitted 

APD’s improbable. All (100 percent) of critical conditions and terms of permits have been 

met. 

Are at least 95 percent of lease applications, APD, and sundry notices reviewed within 

specified time frames? Were at least 95 percent of drilling permits in compliance with 

critical conditions and terms? Was there at least 80 percent of projected production 

estimates? (G2) 

The DPG processed 90 lease parcels covering a total of 48,835 acres for FY01. For 

FY01, 40 percent of APD’s were processed within specified time frames. This reduction in 

timely processing was caused by the majority of APD’s within the Davis Creek area of 

Billings County being delayed pending completion of a historical analysis. 

One hundred percent of APD’s/SN’s are in compliance with critical conditions or 

stipulations. Activities on these are not allowed to proceed unless in compliance. 

The tracking of production rates is not within Forest Service purview. 

Was there at least 95 percent compliance with critical conditions and terms of 

operating plans for mineral rights reserved or outstanding? (G3) 

One hundred percent of operations on lands with mineral rights reserved or outstanding 

are in compliance with critical conditions and terms of operating plans. 

Are saltwater spills being adequately prevented (no more than three unintentional 

spills, two intentional spills, or five spills from saltwater flowlines for any one 

operator)? (G4) 

Assuming that the “reporting quantity” for salt water spills is considered to be one Barrel 

(42 gallons), the answer to all situations is none have occurred. The monitoring items 

detailed here dealt with concerns or problems that existed at the time the Forest Plan was 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

29 

signed. Since then, management of operations has changed to the point where these 

generally no longer are issues. An efficient tracking system enables us to respond in short 

time frames to get salt water spills cleaned up rapidly with minimal environmental 

damage. The DPG requires more maintenance on what were problem pipelines that were 

particularly subject to spills in the past. Also in the past, salt water was intentionally 

applied (spilled) on pads for vegetative control. By utilizing other approved methods of 

vegetative control, intentional salt water “spills” are no longer allowed. 

The type and quantity of spills are reported per regulatory or policy requirements. The 

Custer and DPG in November 1998 formalized a policy regarding reporting quantities of 

oil and salt water spills in a manual supplement. An additional factor to counting and 

categorizing is response to the spills. 

Does reclamation from salt water or toxic drilling fluids provide for at least 90 percent 

of plant density of adjacent sites within three growing seasons? (G5) 

The DPG tracks areas that have had spills until rehabilitation is considered complete. It is 

not unusual for this to take longer than three years depending on climate and soil 

variability. DPG experience has shown that rehabilitation normally takes at least four to six 

years. 

H. HUMAN AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND BUDGET 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands works in partnership with the North Dakota Forest Service to 

provide assistance to communities through Economic Action and Rural Development 

programs. Economic Action programs help rural communities and businesses that are 

dependent on natural resources to become sustainable and self-sufficient. The Rural 

Community Assistance (RCA) program is one program under Economic Action that helps 

rural communities build skills, network, and develop strategies to address social, 

environmental, and economic changes.

In 2001, five rural communities were awarded grants through the RCA grant program, and 

one grant was awarded under Rural Development program authorities (see Table 12). 

In addition to the grants provided to local communities, Dakota Prairie Grassland staff often 

work with communities to develop strategic action plans to identify opportunities, establish 

goals and objectives, and prioritize projects. We develop and promote conservation 

education activities through local schools, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, various youth and 

community programs. 

In 2001, the Rough Creek Conservation Education project was initiated on the McKenzie 

Ranger District in partnership with local school districts to provide summer science students 

the opportunity to participate in field research activities of a burned area. Students will learn 

about range ecology and the impact of fire on the grasslands ecosystem. This project is 

about 50% complete. 

We also initiated and implemented Prairie Days on the Sheyenne National Grasslands to 

educate the general public about the tall grass prairie ecosystem, and provide visitors the 

opportunity to experience native prairie grasslands. Approximately 150 persons participated 

in the Prairie Days event. 

The DPG continued its partnership with the Casey Family Program to implement the 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

30 

Conservation Education Youth Camp in 2001. The project targets underserved and 

disadvantaged youth the opportunity to increase awareness of natural resources, grasslands 

ecosystem, and related conservation issues while enhancing work skills and team building 

skills through trail and campground development on the Little Missouri National Grasslands. 

Approximately 10 youth participated in the 2001 Casey Family/Forest Service event. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

31 

Table 12. Grants awarded through the RCA grant program and Rural Development program in 2

Grant Applicant and Name 

of Project 

Amount 

Awarded: 

Purpose of Grant 

Cooperstown/Griggs Economic Development Corporation- Cooperstown,ND Highway 200 Project. 

$20,000 RCA Grant 

To enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the command surrounding area. The project includes development of a park and Highway 200 to improve recreational facilities; add value and function tpark access; and to enhance the aesthetic value of the community. Thcomplete with anticipated completion date in summer 2002. 

Development Inc. -- Milnor, ND Gateway to the Grasslands Project. 

$12,000 RCA Grant 

To promote the cultural, social, and economic opportunities associated nature-based tourism opportunities on the Sheyenne National Grasslandevelopment includes the development of a “Gateway to Grasslands” msignage that will enhance Milnor’s business district, attract and direct inof interest in the community. This project is 70% complete with anticipasummer of 2002. 

City of St. John, ND (grant administered by the Rolette County Historical Society). Martineau House Tourism Information Center 

$15,000 RCA Grant 

To enhance economic development through tourism by restoring the Myear old Victorian cottage listed on the National Registry of Historic Plainformation center. The City of St. John is located along a scenic bywaMountains and this project is one of several to promote the cultural and community and surrounding area. This project is 80% complete with adate in summer 2002. 

City of Tioga Park District, Tioga, ND Tioga Park Improvement Project 

$12,000 RCA Grant 

To encourage tourism by developing park facilities that can accommodtraveling the Lewis and Clark route and to improve the quality of life for surrounding communities by improving existing park and recreational faimprovements include the construction of a bath house/shower facilitiescampground improvements. This project is 70% complete with anticipasummer of 2002. 

City of Washburn, ND Washburn Recreational Trail. 

$20,000 RCA Grant 

To improve recreational opportunities and quality of life for residents anthrough the construction of a recreational trail along the Missouri River of Washburn business district and park facilities to the Lewis and Clark This project is 50% complete with anticipated completion date in fall of 

Porcupine Local District Porcupine, ND Community Action Plan 

$1,000 RCA Grant 

For the completion of the Porcupine Community Action Plan. The planstarted in 2000 through assistance from the USDA Forest Service and Service. This project is 100% complete. 

Great Lakes Inter Tribal Council American Indian Tourism Conference 

$2,500 Rural Development Grant 

For the sponsorship of the American Indian Tourism Conference to prothe United States and international communities the opportunity to expopportunities in domestic and international tourism and identify benefits tourism. The conference was held in Bismarck, North Dakota in Septe350 participants from 25 States, and from Canada, Germany, Japan, aproject is 100% complete. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

32 

Are issues identified in the Forest Plan resolved through Forest Plan implementation 

or with minor shifts in the Forest Plan? (H1) Are there new or emerging issues or 

changing socioeconomic values? (H2) 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands is currently in the process of revising the Land and 

Resource Management Plan. The FEIS and Revised Plan were made available to the 

public on July 27, 2001 through January 22, 2002 for a 180-day comment period. After 

analyzing the comments and preparing responses, Norhern Regional Forester Brad 

Powell signed the Record of Decision (ROD) on July 31, 2002. 

Are the actual local economic effects of Forest Plan implementation as predicted or 

are they significantly different? (H3) 

On the Dakota Prairie Grasslands units, the 1987 Custer Land and Resource 

Management Plan has never been completely implemented with regards to livestock 

grazing and achieving desired range and wildlife habitat conditions. Because these 

portions of the plan were never implemented, it is impossible to know whether the actual 

local economic effects of the Forest Plan are as predicted or significantly different. 

Populations surrounding the DPG units continue to decline, but determining the 

percentage of decline associated with Grassland management would be difficult. 

Do annual budget fluctuations cause a ten percent or more loss of Forest outputs or 

significant changes in Forest Plan allocations? (H4) 

Since the creation of the Dakota Prairie Grasslands administrative unit in November 1998, 

additional budgetary resources for the management of facilities and resources have made 

attaining outputs more feasible. This administrative change has brought needed skills 

closer to the ground where they are more accessible and able to implement management 

direction. 

Are returns to treasury 80 percent or more of predicted levels? (H5) 

Oil and gas revenues, disbursed to North Dakota from the DPG were up from $3,309,186 

in FY2000 to $4,797,438 in FY2001. Total revenues in 2001 from all Federal onshore 

lands in North Dakota were up by 18 percent over 2000.

J. LANDS 

The Forest Service may acquire rights of way by 1) purchase/donation of easement; 2) as 

part of a land exchange; or 3) in a cooperative effort with other governmental entities such 

as a County, State or other Federal agencies. Easements and land exchanges/purchases 

must have a Final Title Opinion from Office of General Council before they are considered 

accomplished and federal money spent on management and capital improvements. 

Rights of way are acquired in support of resources such as trails for recreation, road 

access for oil and gas leases, for wildlife purposes such as Ducks Unlimited projects, for 

range stockwater purposes, fire and fuels management, and for capital investment 

projects. In addition, rights of way are acquired to provide general access to public lands. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

33 

Has at least 90 percent of the five year right-of-way/easement plan been 

accomplished? (J1) 

Table 13: Rights-of-way Acquired, Roads and Trails 

FY Rights of Way Acquired By 

2001 1 road Easement 

2000 0 

99 1 road Easement 

98 2 roads Easement 

97 2 roads, 4 trails Easement, cooperative efforts other agencies 

Total 10 rights-of-way aquired for an average of 2 per year 

The Grasslands have acquired 67% of planned rights of ways in the Five Year Plan. In 

addition, the Grassland units have acquired the following rights for stockwater 

developments. 

Table 14: Rights-of-way Acquired, Stockwater Developments 

FY Rights of Way Acquired By 

2001 0 

2000 0 

99 0 

98 2 stockwater pipelines Notice of Ditches and Canals 

97 2 stockwater pipelines Notice of Ditches and Canals 

Total 4 stockwater rights-of-way aquired for an average of .8 per year 

Has at least 80 percent of the five year land ownership adjustment been 

accomplished? (J2) 

The United States, through the Forest Service may accomplish land adjustments by 

purchase, exchange, partial interest acquisition (such as minerals only estate) or Small 

Tracts Act Sale. Accomplishments are considered complete when a Final Title Opinion is 

granted by Office of General Council. 

Criteria for land adjustment projects: Must be in the public's best interest; acquire a critical 

right of way; resolve an encroachment; protect/improve by acquisition a significant 

resource; reduce cadastral costs by reducing landlines and section corners; provide a 

more effective, and efficient public ownership pattern. 

Land exchanges, purchases, donations, and partial interest acquisitions must have a Final 

Title Opinion from the Office of General Council before they are considered accomplished. 

A Small Tract Act Sale is considered complete when an executed Quitclaim Deed is 

conveyed to the landowner. 

The Grassland Districts' Five Year Plan projects a five year average for the Grasslands of 

822 acres per year accomplishment. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

34 

Table 15: Acres Acquired 

FY Acres Acquired By 

2001 160 Donation 

2000 46.62 LWCF purchase 

99 17.7 Donation 

98 740 + 9,854 Partial Interest Exchange, partial interest 

97 794 Exchange 

Total 1,759 acres aquired for a five year average of 352 acres. 

The Grasslands acquired 43% of the planned acres in the Five Year Plan. The partial 

interest exchange acquisition noted in 1998 was the legislated Burlington 

Resources/Meridian exchange of oil and gas. 

L. FACILITIES 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands completed planning efforts and NEPA documentation of 

Buffalo Gap Campground, the Maah Daah Hey Trail Overnights, and CCC Campground. 

Construction and upgrades were completed in 2001. 

Is road and trail construction/reconstruction at 80 percent of the five year program? 

(L1) 

Trail construction continues to exceed Forest Plan estimates for FY2001. On the LMNG 

we constructed 6 miles of access trails from the new overnight sites on the Maah Daah 

Hey trail and from the Ice Caves parking lot to the MDH and 11 miles of the Buffalo Gap 

Trail. 

On the Sheyenne we relocated and constructed 15 miles of the North Country Trail. 

Miles of road construction and reconstruction across the DPG were 4.2 miles for 

recreation and 14.8 miles for oil and gas well development. 

Is gained public access (defined by miles of road open) within plus or minus 20 

percent of anticipated levels? (L2) 

The DPG acquired one right-of-way in FY2001. The unit has aqcuired 67% of planned 

rights-of-ways in the five year plan, putting us within 33% of anticpated levels (reference 

Table 13). 

Are at least 95 percent of road identified as no longer needed, closed within two 

years? (L3) 

Seventeen miles of roads were decommissioned in 2001. These roads are oil and gas 

roads that have been identified for decommissioning when mineral production ceases. 

Under the Custer Plan we have not accomplished access and travel management, 

therefore roads have not been identified as no longer being needed. 

P. PROTECTION 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands developed two engine modules, each consisting of a type 6 

engine, engine foreman and four firefighters, to improve initial attack and extended attack 

capabilities, increase prescribed burning, and provide interagency fire assistance. The 

engine modules are stationed at the Medora and McKenzie Ranger Districts. Efforts continue 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

35 

to develop agreements and provide training to rural fire departments to improve overall initial 

attack response and firefighter safety on the National Grasslands. 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands reported thirteen wildland fires in the 2001 fire season. All 

wildfires were five acres or less in size with the exception of the Elkhorn Fire, on the Medora 

Ranger District, which burned 158 acres. Suppression action was also taken on sixteen 

burning coal vein fires that resulted from the 1999 Gap Fire. Suppression strategies on 

thirteen of the coal vein fires involved trenching the perimeters and backfilling to prevent 

further movement of the fire along the coal vein. No suppression action was taken on three 

coal vein fires due to rugged topography and access. These fires will be monitored and 

adjacent fuels burned out periodically to reduce the risk of igniting wildland fires. 

Note: Monitoring Items P2 and P4 do not apply to the Grasslands. 

Have fuel treatment levels been at least 80 percent of programmed levels? (P1) Are 90 

percent of fuel treatments meeting air quality standards? (P3) 

Target fuel treatment levels for FY01 were set at 5,000 acres for the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands. Approximately 4,643 acres were burned, slightly below programmed levels. 

This was a result of wet weather conditions in the spring that cut the optimal burning 

window short by several weeks. All burn plans address air quality, burn projects are 

subject to approval by the ND Department of Health, and burning occurs only when 

acceptable air standards can be met. 

The Sheyenne District continues to implement prescribed fire aggressively for hazard fuel 

reduction, tall grass prairie restoration, improved forage, and reintroduction of fire as a 

natural disturbance process. Approximately 1,000 acres were burned during the fall, 

when lower areas were sufficiently dry to carry fire. Approximately 3,600 acres were 

burned in the spring, which was slightly below target expectations due to wet weather 

conditions. 

The Grand River District has treated large acreages with prescribed fire in the past; 

however, in FY01 no prescribed burning was accomplished as the District focused their 

efforts on planning. As a result, more consistent opportunities for prescribed fire projects 

will occur beginning in FY02. 

The Medora and McKenzie Districts are continuing to build trust and experience levels 

with cooperators and permittees. In FY01, no prescribed fire activity occurred; however, 

planning continued for a hazardous fuel reduction project in the Ponderosa pine area, 

which involves burning across private, state and federal lands. The Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands, Little Missouri Grazing Association, ND Forest Service, Amidon Fire 

Protection District, and private landowners are partners in the project that is scheduled for 

implementation in the fall FY02. 

ROADLESS AREAS 

Under the 1979 Roadless Area Review and Evaluation (RARE II), twelve areas were 

identified as inventoried roadless on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. As required during Land 

and Resource Management Plan revision, roadless areas were again reviewed and an 

updated inventory was created. This new inventory for the DPG has since been finalized 

based on modifications made during the NEPA process for the Roadless Area Conservation 

FEIS dated November 2000. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

36 

Are the acres in a roadless condition (including low development areas) at least 90 

percent of anticipated levels? 

The new inventory includes a total of 24 areas equalling 279,637 acres on the Little 

Missouri, Sheyenne, and Grand River National Grasslands. There are 218,925 acres in 

17 areas on the Little Missouri; 46,522 acres in five areas on the Sheyenne; and 14,190 

acres in two areas on the Grand River. 

Given the presence of private mineral rights under Forest Service surface ownership; as 

well as existing government leases that lack special stipulations to prevent development 

of the surface, oil and gas development has and is occurring in some of these areas. 

Because of the success of development, it is expected that more future mineral 

development in these areas will occur. 

III. COMPLETED FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS 

The Custer National Forest Plan has been amended thirty-six times since it was approved in 

1987. A number of these amendments apply to the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. See 

Appendix B for a complete list of amendments. 

IV. GRASSLANDS PLAN REVISION 

The Northern Great Plains Land and Resource Manangement Plan Revision process began 

in 1996. Revision topics and preliminary alternatives were presented at a series of public 

meetings from February through April of that year. Revision topics included: 

• Community relationships 

• Livestock grazing 

• Oil and gas leasing 

• Plant and animal damage control 

• Rangeland and forest health 

• Recreation and travel management 

• Special area designation 

Publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and proposed Revised Plan on July 

16, 1999 was followed by a 90-day public comment period which was scheduled to end 

October 13, 1999. In response to public requests, the comment period was extended three 

additional times until February 3, 2000. 

Letters were received from over 26,000 agencies, local governments, organizations, tribes, 

and individuals resulting in nearly 110,000 individual comments. Approximately 14,258 

letters containing comments specific to the Dakota Prairie Grasslands were received. 

Each comment was analyzed for issues (content analysis) and entered into a database. 

From that point we began identifying where in the existing documentation that issues had 

been dealt with and a determination was made if the issue had been dealt with adequately. 

As a result of the content analysis, we reworked some of the effects analyses using better 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

37 

information and improved procedures. Some of the management direction presented in the 

draft LRMP was also changed. 

The Final Environmental Impact Statement and the Revised Plan were released for public 

review and comment on July 27, 2001. Comments were accepted for a 6-month period 

ending January 22, 2002. Over 48,000 comments were received on the the FEIS. 

There are a wide variety of viewpoints on the Revised Plan, the planning process, and the 

decisions that should be made with regards to management of these grasslands. After 

extensive review and analysis of the comments received; in addition to consultation with the 

North Dakota Congressional Delegation and Governor’s Schafer and Hoeven, the Record of 

Decision (ROD) was signed on July 31, 2002. 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A: Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands Land and Resource Management Plan (July 2001). Monitoring 

questions in Chapter 4. Questions presented are only those that we are actively collecting 

data for. 

RIPARIAN 1: 

To what extent are perennial streams in proper functioning condition and riparian areas and 

wooded draws self perpetuating? 

We have not performed an assessment on any of the perennial streams, riparian areas, or 

wooded draws that are self-perpetuating. We have contracted to have Hydrologic 

Condition Assessments completed for Cedar River National Grasslands, There are 

several perennial streams on this grassland and we will provide a report in FY03. 

SOIL 1: 

To what extent have soils eroded or disturbed by Forest Service management or permitted 

activities been restored? 

There are several areas where soil has eroded on our grasslands but we did not have a 

reliable tool to measure the damage. We have contracted with USGS-ND Water 

Resources Division to monitor erosion in the uplands, rolling prairie and the badlands to 

determine how fast the soil in activity areas is eroding and what tools we should use to 

restore those areas. We have restored the stream banks in the Ash Coulee project by 

fencing but we may be able to use other tools once we have the conclusions from USGS. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

38 

WATERSHED 1: 

To what extent has water quality condition on watersheds containing national grasslands 

been restored, maintained or improved? 

We are also monitoring Ash Coulee water quality. We will not know to what extent we 

have restored, maintained or improved the water quality in that area until we have data 

from a minimum of 2 years of monitoring. 

WATERSHED 2: 

To what extent have water bodies on the national grasslands that have been degraded by 

Forest Service permitted or management actions been restored? 

There are several areas where water bodies have been degraded by damming. We are 

inventorying those areas and we have identified four dams that have not been maintained. 

We have contracted to have them removed and for the stream/spring to be restored to 

natural flows. 

WATERSHED 3: 

To what extent have instream flows been assured to provide adequate water for fisheries and 

other riverine flora and fauna in streams and rivers with high resource values? 

On the Sheyenne District we have contracted with USGS to install a weir on Iron Springs 

to measure the flow quantity and quality. We are also performing bank full measurements 

so that we can control the amount of water passing down the stream and control bank 

erosion. There are fish in the stream but they are not rare or sensitive. We have not 

inventoried the riverine flora or fauna. 

WATERSHED 4: 

To what extent have surface water, subsurface flows, and aquifers been protected from 

contamination by management actions on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands? 

On the Sheyenne District we have installed monitoring wells in areas where we have meta 

populations of the listed, Western Prairie Fringe Orchid. We are measuring the chemical, 

biological and physical properties of the water as a quality control measure to insure that 

our weed management program is not contaminating the surface and subsurface flows. 

We also have wells monitoring the quantity of water, given the proximity of centrifugal 

irrigations systems adjacent to the tall grass prairie habitat and the orchids. 

MIS 2: 

What is the current habitat suitability for each management indicator species? 

Evaluating the current condition and trend of key habitats for the DPG’s management 

indicator species is a requirement under NFMA. In 2001, key habitat for western prairie 

fringed orchid (see section C, tables 4 and 5) and the three species of prairie grouse 

(greater prairie chicken, greater sage-grouse, and sharp-tailed grouse) were assessed 

(see Table 1, 1a, and 2 above). Key habitat suitability for the remaining management 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

39 

indicator species, black-tailed prairie dog, will be addressed in 2002. 

 

MIS 3: 

What are the population trends for western prairie fringed orchid and associated species? 

How have management activities affected this trend and the species’ overall recovery? 

Population trends for the orchid have been followed through metapopulation monitoring 

and pasture counts (see section C, tables 4 and 5). The impact of management activities 

was monitored by demographic monitoring (see section C, table 5). 

 

MIS 5: 

What are the population trends for sage and sharp-tailed grouse and greater prairie chicken 

and associated species? How have management activities affected these trends? 

Lek counts for greater sage-grouse are conducted annually by the North Dakota Game 

and Fish Department. The Dakota Prairie Grasslands annually monitors greater prairie 

chickens and sharp-tailed grouse. Results are given above. 

T & E 1: 

To what extent is the Dakota Prairie Grasslands and its management contributing to the 

recovery and viability of black-footed ferrets? 

On the Dakota Prairie Grasslands, black-tailed prairie dog colonies are potential habitat 

for the endangered black-footed ferret. The USDI Fish and Wildlife Service is interested 

in evaluating black-footed ferret reintroduction in any area where a prairie dog complex 

exceeds 1,500 acres. Currently no area meets this criteria. Under the Dakota Prairie 

Grasslands proposed Land and Resource Management Plan, prairie dog expansion 

would be emphasized in the Horse Creek area, the area surrounding the South Unit of 

Theodore National Park, Indian and Boyce Creek, and the south 1⁄2 of the Grand River 

National Grassland. 

 

T & E 2: 

To what extent is the Dakota Prairie Grasslands and its management contributing to the 

recovery and viability of bald eagles? 

Bald eagles do not nest on the DPG, nor does regular wintering occur. Incidental use is 

made of the grassland by migrating bald eagles, and occasionally by wintering ones. 

T & E 3: 

To what extent is the Dakota Prairie Grasslands and its management contributing to the 

recovery and viability of whooping crane? 

The Dakota Prairie Grasslands might occasionally be used by migrant whooping cranes, 

but no nesting or wintering habitat is available. In 2001, no whooping cranes were sighted 

on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

40 

T & E 4 

Are actions identified in national recovery plans for threatened and endangered species being 

implemented where opportunities exist on national grasslands? 

The recovery plan for the western prairie fringed orchid identifies several tasks that the 

US Forest Service is currently implementing. The primary tasks relevant to the Dakota 

Prairie Grasslands include: 

• Develop and implement habitat management plans that sustain and enhance 

orchid populations. 

• Conduct appropriate research and monitoring. 

• Identify and search potential habitat. 

For more information on how we are accomplishing these tasks see section C in this 

report. 

VIABILITY 2: 

To what extent is the Dakota Prairie Grasslands contributing to the viability of sensitive plant, 

animal, and fish species? 

A priority for the Dakota Prairie Grasslands is to update inventory and monitoring 

information for sensitive plant, animal, and fish species. Great progress was made in 

2001, with the initiation and/or completion of several new projects. Among these was the 

resurveying of most of the known populations of Dakota buckwheat on the Little Missouri 

National Grassland and Grand River National Grassland. Surveys for sensitive butterflies 

were conducted at Denbigh Experimental Forest and on the Sheyenne, Grand, and Cedar 

River National Grasslands. In addition, all prairie dog colonies were surveyed for 

burrowing owls in 2001. Other projects benefiting sensitive species included monitoring of 

grassland birds, prairie grouse, and amphibians. The most ambitious effort was the 

surveying, mapping and monitoring of sensitive plant species along the Sheyenne River 

on the Sheyenne National Grassland. Project reports from these efforts are being posted 

on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands’ website, as they become available. Also see section C 

within this monitoring report. 

 

DAMAGE CONTROL 1: 

To what extent are noxious weeds, invasive species, and animal damage expanding or being 

reduced? 

Dakota Prairie Grasslands employees will emphasize updating current inventory and 

mapping of invasive species during the field season of 2002. This information will be 

used to assess the monitoring question concerning the effectiveness of ongoing invasive 

species control efforts. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

41 

RECREATION 1: 

To what extent are trails managed to meet regional standards and to minimize conflicts 

among users? 

The DPG in conjuction with partners such as the Maah-Daah-Hey Trail Association, North 

Dakota Department of Parks and Recreation, and the National Park Service will conduct 

trail condition surveys on 20% of the DPG’s trails each year, 2002-2015. 

RECREATION 2: 

Where does the demand for recreation opportunities warrant development of additonal 

opportunities such as trails or campgrounds? 

In 2002, a National Visitation and Use Management (NVUM) survey is being completed 

on the DPG. 

HERITAGE 1: 

To what extent are national register sites and districts being identified, protected, and 

preserved? 

The DPG provides an annual report to ND and SD and Tribal Historic Preservation 

Offices. As part of this assessment, a cattle damage survey will continue to be run into 

2004. 

RESEARCH NATURAL AREAS 1: 

To what extent have the unique research features of research natural areas been conserved 

or enhanced? 

Monitoring was conducted at Two Top-Big Top, Limber Pine, and Sheyenne Springs 

RNAs. For more information see section C of this report. 

GEOLOGIC & PALEONTOLOGIC RESOURCES 1: 

To what extent are geologic and paleontologic resources being made available for the 

education, use or enjoyment of the general public? 

The DPG has entered into an MOU with the ND Geological Survey to collect paleontologic 

resources and make them available for education of the general public. In addition, for 

2002 we have a Passport in Time project involving the recovery of paleontologic 

resources under supervision of the ND Geologic Survey and the Forest Service. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

42 

Appendix B: Custer Forest Plan Amendments 

Amendment 

Number 

Description Date 

Approved 

1 Includes "Uniform Format for Oil and Gas Lease 

Stipulations" in the Forest Plan 

03/29/91 

2 Adds Wild/Scenic/Recreational River Forest-wide 

Management Standards to the Forest Plan 

12/15/89 

3 Corrects table on page 49 that identifies key wildlife 

habitat by Ranger District and species of concern 

03/29/91 

5 Eliminates oil and gas production as a monitoring 

item 

03/29/91 

6 Changes the wording that allows camping in the 

administrative site at Meyers Creek Station on the 

Beartooth District 

03/29/91 

7 Changes the budget as displayed on page 163 03/29/91 

8 Includes management standards and guides in 

response to the passage of the Federal Cave 

Resource Protection Act of 1988 

03/29/91 

9 Makes Dutchman's Barn, Long X Divide, Twin 

Buttes, and Blue Buttes not administratively 

available for oil and gas leasing 

10/24/91 

10 Changes the visual classification from partial 

retention to retention for certain areas surrounding 

Theodore Roosevelt National Park 

10/24/91 

11 Includes the Ferruginous Hawk as a sensitive 

species in North Dakota 

10/24/91 

12 Changes the dates for protection of prairie grouse 

dancing grounds from 3/1-4/15 annually to 3/1-4/30 

annually 

10/24/91 

13 Management standards changed for Woody Draws 

(Mgt Area N) to require a "No Surface Occupancy" 

(NSO) stipulations 

10/24/91 

14 Removes 459 acres from the suitable timber base 

on the Sioux Ranger District 

05/21/93 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

43 

16 Adds definitions of "Existing Visual Condition" to the 

Forest Plan 

05/21/93 

17 Adds the name of Whitetail Area to the list of 

Management Area Cs 

05/21/93 

18 Revises table on pages 77 and 78 of the Forest 

Plan to reflect the current status of RNAs and SIAs 

05/21/93 

19 Changes the Oil and Gas Administratively Available 

decision for portions of the Beartooth District 

05/23/96 

20 Updates the key species/critical timing periods 

found on page 19 of the Forest Plan 

05/23/96 

21 Removes the area-wide NSO requirement for MA C 

Line Creek and replaces it with the stipulations 

identified in Alternative 4A of the Beartooth 

Mountain Oil and Gas Leasing FEIS and related 

Record of Decision 

05/23/96 

23 Corrects the list of Ranger Districts at the top of 

page 80 of the Forest Plan showing where MA M 

occurs 

06/93 

26 Incorporates a list of Recreation Residence Tracts 

into the Forest Plan 

Correction 

01/94 

27 Adds a list of plants, animals and fish that are 

sensitive in Montana. 

06/93 

28 Changes the status, acreage and wording of Forest 

Plan Amendment Number 18 for Lost Water 

Canyon. 

07/20/94 

29 Modifies/adds stipulations to be applied to new oil 

and gas leases as identified in Amendment Number 

1. 

04/27/96 

30 Changes the dates and disturbance zones shown 

for key species on pages 19 and 172, as amended 

by Amendment Number 12. 

04/27/96 

31 Adds the name of Round Top Butte to the table on 

pages 77 and 78, as replaced by Amendment 

Number 18. 

04/27/96 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

44 

32 Includes the Ashland Ranger District on the list of 

areas where Management Area N occurs. 

03/09/96 

33 Re-classifies 170 acres (in portions of seven 

stands) on the Ashland Ranger District from 

unsuitable to suitable for timber production. 

05/17/96 

34 Changes status of Line Creek Plateau Research 

Natural Area from “Candidate RNA” to “Established 

RNA.” Acreage is changed from undetermined to 

19,369 acres. 

6/29/2000; 

pending 

outcome 

of appeal. 

35 Re-classifies 109 acres (in portions of seven 

stands) on the Ashland Ranger District from 

unsuitable to suitable for timber production. 

6/19/1998 

36 Permits the continued use of 16 acres within 

Management Area H for the Timberline Snow 

Survey Course on the Beartooth Ranger District. 
2001 Dakota Prairie Grasslands LRMP Monitoring Report 

45 

WITHDRAWN FOREST PLAN AMENDMENTS 

Amendment 

Number 

Remarks 

4 Not implemented 4/5/91. The Forest did not have a 

Forest Biologist at the time to do the necessary 

consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to 

finalize the amendment. 

15 Allowed a site-specific exception to create openings in 

excess of 40 acres to facilitate development of fuel 

breaks on the Sioux Ranger District. Withdrawn 

7/28/93. 

22 Identified specific communication sites in response to 

changing requirements. Withdrawn pending further 

analysis. 

24 Applied the Wild/Scenic/Recreation River Forest-Wide 

Management Standards that were developed in Forest 

Plan Amendment Number 2 to the Little Missouri River, 

Rock Creek, the West Fork of Rock Creek and the 

Stillwater River. Withdrawn in 1994. Covered under 

Forest Plan Amendment Number 2. 

25 Added timing restrictions and dates for the protection of 

the ferruginous hawk. Withdrawn in 1994. 

Incorporated into Forest Plan Amendment Number 20. 

37 Re-classifies 7,963 acres of lands designated as 

tentatively suitable for timber production to unsuitable. 

12/22/00