Management Plan for the Buhrley South Fork Ranch

Prepared by

December 2006

2

Contents Executive Summary 3 Purpose, owner information, property description Goals and Objectives 4 Bobolink Management Proposal Species Requirements 7 Life history, habitat requirements, migration and nesting patterns Proposed Target Area 10 Management Constraints 10 Recommendations and Management Action 10 Cost and Benefit Analysis of Management Actions 13 Mule Deer Management Proposal 14 Life history, habitat requirements Proposed Target Area 16 Management Constraints 16 Recommendations and Management Action 17 Cost and Benefit Analysis of Management Actions 20 Final Recommendations 21 Appendix 23 References 29

3

Executive Summary Purpose The purpose of this management plan is to provide information to the owner of

the Buhrley South Fork Ranch on management practices available to provide suitable

habitat for summer Bobolink breeding and increase mule deer populations without

greatly impeding general farming operations.

Owner Information The owner of the property is Helen M. Buhrley, 325 East 2550 North, Apt 17,

North Ogden, Utah, 84414.

Property Description General description The Buhrley South Fork Ranch is a 308.4 acre ranch located on the southern edge

of the Ogden Valley in the township of Huntsville, Weber County, Utah (see Figure 1,

appendix). The legal description of the property is as follows:

28.54 acres PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH,RANGE 2 EAST, SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN, U.S. SURVEY:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER;THENCE EAST 101 RODS; THENCE NORTH 19D EAST 4.5 CHAINS; THENCENORTH 5D WEST 3.1 CHAINS; THENCE NORTH 40D WEST 2 CHAINS;THENCE NORTH 67D30' WEST 2.5 CHAINS; THENCE SOUTH 53D WESTALONG THE CHANNEL OF THE RIVER 3.75 CHAINS TO A POINT 8 CHAINSNORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION20; THENCE NORTH 6.81 RODS; THENCE NORTH 65D13' WEST 44.93RODS TO THE MIDDLE OF THE SOUTH BRANCH OF THE SOUTH FORK OFOGDEN RIVER; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID RIVER TO THE SECTIONLINE; THENCE SOUTH 53.45 RODS TO BEGINNING. 270 acres THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER, THE WEST 15.1 CHAINS OFNORTHWEST QUARTER OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER, ALL OF SOUTHWESTQUARTER SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST, SALTLAKE MERIDIAN, U.S. SURVEY. CONTAINING 270.21 ACRES. 9.83 acres PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 6 NORTH,RANGE 2 EAST, SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN, U.S. SURVEY:BEGINNING AT A POINT SOUTH 00D04'50" WEST 1099.04 FEET OFTHE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20;SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF COTTONWOOD LANE, RUNNINGTHENCE SOUTH ALONG SECTION LINE 672.47 FEET TO THE CENTER OFSOUTH FORK OF THE OGDEN RIVER, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG CENTEROF RIVER TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 4, COTTONWOOD RIVERSUBDIVISION, THENCE ALONG LOT 4 NORTH 11D22'49" EAST 619.46FEET, THENCE NORTH 06D58'00" EAST 33.50 FEET TO THE SOUTHLINE OF COTTONWOOD LANE, THENCE WESTERLY ALONG ROAD THEFOLLOWING 8 COURSES: 1. NORTH 77D06'10" WEST 7.90 FEET,2. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF563.74 FEET A DISTIANCE OF 135.65 FEET (LONG CHORD BEARSNORTH 70D12'33" WEST 135.33 FEET), 3. NORTH 63D18'57" WEST44.54 FEET, 4. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVINGA RADIUS OF 85.89 FEET A DISTANCE OF 65.42 FEET (LONG CHORDBEARS NORTH 85D08'06" WEST 63.85 FEET), 5. SOUTH 73D02'44"WEST 75.62 FEET, 6. ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHTHAVING A RADIUS OF 211.89 FEET A DISTANCE OF 143.25 FEET(LONG CHORD BEARS NORTH 87D35'12" WEST 140.54 FEET, 7. ALONGTHE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 214.27 FEETA DISTANCE OF 88.28 FEET (LONG CHORD BEARS NORTH 80D01'19"WEST 87.66 FEET), 8. SOUTH 88D10'30" WEST 114.40 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH THE 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IN SECTION 19.(904-587). TOGETHER WITH EASEMENT (1680-1841

4

Land use Over the last century the property has been used for general farming including

cultivation of alfalfa (Medicago spp.), wheat (Triticum spp.) and tall grass hay. As well

the property has been used for grazing for dairy cattle.

Biological Description The elevation aspects of the ranch range from 1500m to 1634m. The majority of

the property is flat with several drainage draws from the higher elevation. The northern

border follows along the southern tributary of the South Fork of the Ogden River. Most

of the property is covered with quality topsoil with interspersed rockier terrain as the

elevation increases. The majority of the property is cultivated hay and alfalfa fields along

with intermixed sage brush (Artemisia spp). Along the river several larger woody species

such as Willow (Salix spp) and Cottonwood (Populus spp) can be found. A variety of

animal life is also found including numerous birds, deer, moose, rodents, mesopredators

(fox, skunk, raccoons), as well as several domesticated livestock.

Target Species There are two species of interest for this management proposal. First is a small

song bird, Bobolink (Dolichonyx orysicorus) and the second is mule deer (Odocoileus

hemionus).

Goals and Objectives The proposal is to create and preserve suitable breeding habitat for Bobolink and

suitable habitat for increasing and maintaining mule deer populations. The goals,

objectives and strategies are outlined below and will be addressed in detail in following

sections.

5

Goal 1 – Increase Bobolink breeding success in Northern Utah.

Objective 1.1 -Improve Bobolink breeding habitat on the Buhrley Ranch

Strategy 1.1.1 – Plant red clover (Trifolium pretense) for foraging

and cover.

Strategy 1.1.2 – Graze livestock on the prescribed areas in the late

summer and winter to minimize woody plant encroachment.

Objective 1.2 –Preserve Bobolink breeding habitat

Strategy 1.2.1-Annually graze prescribed areas to prevent high

levels of undergrowth that lead to predation.

Objective 1.3- Increase Bobolink breeding success

Strategy 1.3.1- Delay mowing of fields until July 15th to allow

birds to fledge nest.

Strategy 1.3.2 – Enroll landowner in the Grassland Reserve

Program to compensate for financial loss due to delayed mowing.

Objective 1.4 – Monitor Bobolink populations on the ranch

Strategy 1.4.1 – Conduct counts of observed adult birds and

mating pairs

Strategy 1.4.2 – Conduct surveys of nests in late summer to

determine nesting success

Goal 2 – Increase mule deer populations on Buhrley South Fork Ranch to a sustainable

level for hunting.

Objective 2.1- Improve overall mule deer habitat on the Farm using the CRP

program in Utah.

6

Strategy 2.1.1– Solicit the CRP program for funds to begin

management for mule deer by supplying the appropriate

habitat to the area.

Strategy 2.1.2 – Prepare and plant vegetation in the three areas of

interest.

Objective 2.2 – Maintain established trees on projected plots for the entire CRP

contract.

Strategy 2.2.1 – weed trees yearly

Strategy 2.2.2 – make certain trees have ample water for

conditions, if drier in areas water appropriately

Objective 2.3 – Encourage use of established vegetation by Mule deer

Strategy 2.3.1- Do not allow hunting in and around established

shelter belts.

Strategy 2.3.2 – Keep other activities around shelter belts to a

minimum.

Objective 2.4 – Establish counts of mule deer on an annual basis.

Strategy 2.4.1 – Each Year at a designated time early in the

morning and later in the evening point counts will be taken of mule

deer in the area.

7

Bobolink Species Requirements Life History The Bobolink is a small (~18cm long) songbird with a short, sharp beak and

feathers. The breeding male is black on the breast, a yellow or white patch on the back of

the head that resembles a cape and white and yellow markings across the back. The

female is slightly smaller than the male and very drab in color. The breast of the female is

light brown, and the head and back slightly darker with some lighter markings (DeGraaf,

and Rappole, 1995). The Bobolink is listed as a Utah state sensitive species. This means

that Bobolink populations in the state are declining and are in danger of disappearing

from the area completely.

Bobolink breeding habitats are found across North America in an east-west band

between the 50th and 39th parallels (Parrish et al, 2002). During the non breeding season

the Bobolink migrate to South America to the central and southern portions of the

continent (Giacomo et al, 2003). The breeding season usually starts in early May but can

start as late as mid June. The season lasts throughout the remainder of the summer ending

in late July or early August (Bollinger, 1995; Dale et al, 1997; Dechant et al, 1999;

Wittenberger, 1978).

Habitat Requirements Since this management plan is for an area that will serve as breeding habitat for

the Bobolink, only the breeding habitat requirements will be addressed in this proposal.

Successful breeding habitat for Bobolink includes large patches of suitable habitat,

controlling the vegetation succession of that habitat and protecting the nesting sites

during the breeding season (Dale et al, 1997).

8

Suitable habitat entails grassland species of moderate height and density (Dechant

et al, 1999). In surveys of historic non-agricultural nesting sites in Northern Utah the

common plant species are red top (Agrostis stolonifera), baltic rush (Juncus arcticus),

foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), timothy (Phleum

pratuese), and wheatgrass species (Lophopyrum spp.) (Unpublished data, Utah Division

of Wildlife Resources, Northern Region, Ogden, Utah). A moderate under story of forbs

has also been found to increase abundance (Bollinger, 1995; Ells, 1995; Swanson, 1996)

and sites containing red clover have been observed to provide the highest nest success

(Bollinger, 199; Rasmussen and Skilling, 2003). Nests in fields that have comparatively

high levels of understory experience higher levels of predation than nests in fields with a

moderate level of understory.

Edge effects should be minimized wherever possible. Bobolink abundance has

been found to be significantly reduced near woody edges and greater at distances greater

than 100 meters from woody edges (Johnson and Temple, 1990). However the plant

species that adults forage in for insects to feed the nestlings are more often found in

woody edge areas (Johnson and Temple, 1990; Wittenberger, 1978).

Bobolinks have been found to more frequently inhabit fields that are older and

more established. The fields with the highest abundance and nesting success in non-

agricultural fields are those that have been established for 8 years or more (Bollinger,

1995). However in agricultural areas, fields older than 3-4 years experience

encroachment of woody vegetation leading to both decreased habitat suitability for the

birds as well as unfavorable conditions for agricultural activities (Swanson, 1996).

9

The primary diet of adult Bobolink includes mainly seeds, primarily dandelion

(Taraxacum officinale) seeds (Wittenberger, 1978 ), although the birds have also been

observed feeding infrequently on seeds of other grass and forbs species. Adult birds also

forage in a wide variety of forbs for caterpillars to feed nestlings, the primary plant

species foraged being red clover (Wittenberger, 1978). A complete list of known dietary

vegetation for Bobolink is provided in Table 1 (appendix).

Migration and Nesting Patterns Bobolinks are migratory birds wintering in South America and nesting in North

America. Generally the males arrive two to three weeks before the females and begin

establishing territories (Swanson, 1996; Ells, 1995). Surveys of historic Bobolink sites in

the Ogden Valley over several years by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources

(UDWR) have found Bobolink arriving in the valley in late May and migrate out in late

July (Unpublished data, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Northern Region, Ogden,

Utah).

Once territories are established and the females arrive, nest building begins almost

immediately. This generally begins near the end of May and can continue until the

second week of June (Swanson, 1996). Nesting (incubating the eggs) will then last from

three to five weeks usually ending in early July when the chicks hatch (Wittenberger,

1978). This time frame can vary greatly depending on success in finding and building a

nest and success of nests as Bobolink will re-nest if a previous one was disturbed or

destroyed (Ells, 1995). Chicks will fledge from the nest within two to three weeks. Most

of the population will migrate south again by the first week of August. A timeline of

breeding behavior is provided in Table 2 (appendix).

10

Proposed Target Area Three plots on the north side of the property (Figure 2, appendix) have been

identified as suitable management plots. Plots 1 and 2 are both primarily alfalfa with

intermixed forbs and plot 3 is primarily wheat. Plots 1 and 2 are approximately 2.5 ha

each and plot 3 is approximately 3.0 ha. The Ogden River separates plots 1 and 2 and

runs along the north edge of plot 3, providing access to water as well as woody edging for

forage insects for nestlings.

Management Constraints The primary constraint to Bobolink habitat conservation is mowing of hayfields

where the birds nest. The peak of the nesting period for this species coincides with the

first mowing of hay and alfalfa fields in the late spring. If mowing is delayed by even a

few weeks, the financial loss to the landowner could be extensive. It has been shown that

the nutritional value (crude protein value) of the crop can be reduced 2.1% for each week

that it is delayed in mowing (Norcera et al, 2005). However, it has been shown that if

mowing is delayed until July 15th, over 70% of nest sites have fledged successfully (Dale

et al, 1997). Compensation for the loss of money due to the delay in mowing will be

addressed in the next section.

Burning fields in some areas has been successful for keeping woody growth and

undergrowth under control. However burning in Northern Utah in the later summer

would be impractical due to the extreme dry climate lending itself to higher fire danger.

Recommendations and Management Action Goal 1 – Increase Bobolink breeding success in Northern Utah.

Objective 1.1 -Improve Bobolink breeding habitat on the Buhrley Ranch

11

Strategy 1.1.1 – Plant red clover (Trifolium pretense) for foraging

and cover.

All three plots should retain the agricultural vegetation as it now stands. Wild

dandelions are already found throughout the plots providing food for the adult Bobolinks;

future weed treatments should exclude targeting dandelions. Red clover should be planted

throughout the plots to increase understory cover and foraging sites for the adults to feed

insects to the young. This will aid in increasing nesting success.

Strategy 1.1.2 – Graze livestock on the prescribed areas in the late

summer and winter to minimize woody plant encroachment.

Succession of vegetation should be closely managed to provide sufficient cover.

Encroachment of woody vegetation can be discouraged by allowing livestock to begin

grazing the plots in the late summer (after the birds have migrated) and continuing

grazing throughout the winter. Grazing should be stopped before the beginning of spring

as to not discourage incoming birds from occupying the plots.

Objective 1.2 –Preserve Bobolink breeding habitat

Strategy 1.2.1-Annually graze prescribed areas to prevent high

levels of undergrowth that lead to predation.

High levels of understory, that lead to higher nest predation, can be minimized by

burning the However burning in Northern Utah in the late summers would be impossible.

Grazing should continue in the plots after the Bobolink have successfully fledged. This

will aid in keeping the undergrowth at moderate levels and decrease predation.

Objective 1.3- Increase Bobolink breeding success

12

Strategy 1.3.1- Delay mowing of fields until July 15th to allow

birds to fledge nest.

Strategy 1.3.2 – Enroll landowner in the Grassland Reserve

Program to compensate for financial loss due to delayed mowing.

The first mow of every season should be delayed until after July 15th. Studies

indicate that 70% of chicks have left the nest by this point (Dale et al, 1997).

Compensation for the loss of money due to the delay in mowing will be provided by a

voluntary easement. The landowner would agree to enroll in the Grassland Reserve

Program (GRP) through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource

Conservations Service. Under this program the landowner is compensated for allowing

conservation activities to occur on the property. The landowner voluntarily limits future

use of the land while retaining the right to conduct common grazing practices; produce

hay, mow, or harvest for seed production, subject to certain restrictions during the nesting

season of bird species that are in significant decline such as the Bobolink (US Dept of

Agriculture, 2002). Under the agreement the only stipulation will be to delay mowing of

the three target plots until July 15th each year. Mowing can occur after this time. The

value of the compensation will be addressed in the market section of this proposal.

The UDWR will conduct and pay for all management practices according to this

plan and management practices will not interfere with the operation of the farm aside

from the annual delay in mowing.

Objective 1.4 – Monitor Bobolink populations on the ranch

Strategy 1.4.1 – Conduct counts of observed adult birds and

mating pairs

13

Strategy 1.4.2 – Conduct surveys of nests in late summer to

determine nesting success

The UDWR will conduct annual surveys of the plots throughout the breeding

season in order to monitor the success of the management practices. Observations will

include counts of observed individuals, mated pairs and successful nesting, with success

being determined by an annual increase in successful nesting. Management practices will

be revised if no increase in nesting success is observed within five years or if nesting

success begins to decline within three years of the beginning of the treatment.

A time line of management activities is provided in Table 3 (appendix).

Cost and Benefit Analysis of Management Actions According to the GRP agreement the landowner has the option of choosing a 10-

year, 15-year, 20-year, or 30-year easement. Under the agreement the USDA will pay a

landowner in Weber County $6.00/acre/year over the time of the easement. For the

Buhrley Farm this equates to $1850.40 per year. At an average value of $60.00 per acre

for hay alfalfa, the loss to the land owner for one cutting is approximately $480.00, so the

landowner is more than compensated for the loss of one mowing. As well, the USDA

pays for all filing and court costs of the easement.

The cost of the red clover is between $1.00 and $1.50 per pound. The relatively

low cost for this plant is part of the reason for its choice (Probyn, 2006). Planting

guidelines recommend about 10lbs per acre, so in the case of the Buhrley Farm 80lbs

would be needed to seed the area.. Initially it is recommended to purchase 90lbs to seed

all three plots; every three years the undergrowth will be assessed to determine if

reseeding is needed

14

An estimated 200 man hours will be needed to establish the management plan

during the first year. A portion of this will include seeding and maintenance of the plots.

The large majority of the hours will be dedicated to observations and monitoring

activities. During the succeeding years, since reseeding will not be necessary, the

estimated man hours will drop to 100. The average rate for a wildlife technician to carry

out these duties is $10.00 per hour.

A complete breakdown of the costs associated with this management proposal is

provided in Table 4 (appendix).

Mule deer Species Requirements Life History Mule deer in Utah have been a recreational and aesthetic part of the state for

many years. This species provides economic value to the state as it brings in hunters and

wildlife viewers from around the world. As the mule deer is such an important

commodity to the state of Utah it is important to preserve its populations and help

populations grow.

During the daytime hours mule deer spend most of their time resting in sagebrush

draws, juniper(Cupressacae juniperas) or aspen (Populus tremuloides) thickets, or in

front of rocky outcrops that give them protection of some kind during the day. Since mule

deer are most active during the morning and evening hours these locations are important

to enable the deer to have concealment as well as being able to watch for possible threats.

Mule deer need a variety of food, cover and water requirements and their densities

depend on an ideal combination of these three variables. Some deer will have adequate

habitat requirements to live in an area all year long, but most have migrations from their

summer ranges to their winter ones (Pierce 2004).

15

Habitat Requirements The requirements for food for the deer vary from season to season. Sometimes a

species of vegetation will fulfill the requirements of food and cover. Deer require a

variety of trees, shrubs, forbs, and grasses. During the winter time mule deer diets

consist mostly of browse type vegetation (Wallmo 1981). These plants include true

mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), curlleaf mountain mahogany

(Cercocarpus leifolius), antelope bitter brush (Prushia tridentata), serviceberry

(Almanchier canadensis), willow (Salix spp.), rocky mountain juniper (Cupressaceae

juniperus), currant (Ribes alpininum), sagebrush (Artmisia tridentata), and rabbitbrush

(Chrysothanus nauseous). During this time of year trees and shrubs comprise most of the

animal’s diet since most all other vegetation is inaccessible or dead. For the spring and

summer the majority of the diet is comprised of a variety of grasses and forbs, since they

contain a higher nutritional value to the animal’s diet. Important plants to mule deer

during the summer and spring include plants required for winter months, but also

cottonwood (Populus fremontii), shrubby cinquefoil (Dasiphora floribundae) and buffalo

berry (Shephordia canadensis) plus forbs such as red clover (Trifolium pratense),

dandelion (Taraxacum juponium), huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) and grasses. It is

important to note that a combination of vegetation required for all seasons are an

optimum for deer habitat (Wyoming 1978).

Deer require adequate cover for thermal protection and for the ability to hide.

Since deer are not likely to leave cover at a very far distance it is important to provide

cover to deer which will give the deer access to food and water as well. Scattered patches

of dense shrubs and vegetation as well as juniper stands and sapling trees of at least five

feet in height will provide good hiding cover as well as ample protection from weather in

16

the winter. Mostly coniferous forest stands and junipers will give the highest winter

protection, and most deciduous trees give good summer cover. Any combination of

vegetation of these cover types will provide the best habitat to mule deer (Wallmo 1981).

An area that provides good cover, food and access to water will provide the best

habitat for mule deer. An accomplishment of these requirements can be done by

providing a variety of plants that give a combination of benefits to the animal. This can

be done by planting plots of different types of vegetation and selecting vegetation types

best suitable to mule deer.

Proposed Target Area The proposed areas of interest on the Buhrley South Fork Ranch are three

different areas on the ranch. Theses areas have been marked and labeled on Figure 3

(appendix) and correspondingly are named Plot A, Plot B and Plot C. Plot A is on the

eastern side of the ranch and is a proposed section of 250 feet in width 850 feet in length

or approximately 4.88 acres. Plot B is 200 feet in width and 850 feet in length or

approximately 3.90 acres in size. Plot C is much smaller only 100 feet in width and 850

feet in length or approximately 2.73 acres in total size. The positioning of the three plots

will give adequate cover to animals and provide necessary access to water and other food

types.

Management Constraints There are no known constraints to this type of management at this time. Since all

of the proposed management activities are to be done on already established farm land.

The only constraints that are involved are those processed by the CRP program of Utah.

This program has certain specifications requiring individuals whom use it to establish and

maintain wildlife habitat. CRP is a voluntary program which offers financial incentives

17

to private landowners to protect farmland from erosion and also to provide wildlife

habitat. The contract terms are to be secured for a period of 10-15 years and participants

within the program receive annual payments for rental of property under the CRP

program. This incentive is based on the rental of property per acre and also provides

compensation of 50% of total cost to establish vegetation. The constraints of this

program are as follows: first, the property must be physically and legally capable of

agricultural production; second, the property must have been planted in an agricultural

commodity in two of the five most recent crop years or third; be marginal pasture land

that is either enrolled in the water bank program, or is suitable for use as a riparian buffer

to be planted in trees. (Haggen 1997). Another constraint of this management plan is the

idea of increasing the population for hunting in the area. This ranch is in close proximity

to the township of Huntsville, UT and has houses close to its borders. Hunting of deer in

the area especially by rifle may disrupt neighbors in proximity. In order to ensure that

mule deer populations will be able to be harvested on the ranch a proposal to hunt the

animals with archery equipment might reduce the ill effects of rifle fire in the area. With

exception of the constraints of the CRP program the plan seem very feasible to continue

with the management practices recommended in the following section.

Recommendations and Management Action Goal 2 – Increase mule deer populations on Buhrley South Fork Ranch to a sustainable

level for hunting.

Objective 2.1- Improve overall mule deer habitat on the Farm using the CRP

program in Utah.

Strategy 2.1.1– Solicit the CRP program for funds to begin management

for mule deer by supplying the appropriate habitat to the area.

18

Strategy 2.1.2 – Prepare and plant vegetation in the three areas of interest.

As a part of the CRP program there are underlying recommendations given by the

State of Utah. The program will pay for 50% of the cost to establish the stand of

vegetation. A minimum of two grasses and two legume or shrubs must be planted in the

stands. An application for the CRP program should be filled out and submitted before any

action shall take place. A number of recommendations on how to seed and prepare the

stands are given in the lessons learned from 15 years of CRP in Utah, but with

application of the program they will provide all necessary information. The CRP

program will also rent the property not being farmed, and will pay an amount of

$5.00/acre for maintenance of the land.

The action to take place for the first year is as follows:

1. Mow existing grasses and weeds from plots A, B, C as shown on (Figure 1 in

appendix).

2. Mow strips of approximately 12-15 feet at center apart from one another.

3. Each strip should be sprayed with high strength roundup on a windless day.

4. Strips should remain without vegetation for at least one year.

5. Plot A should have at least 13-14 rows of trees planted.

6. Plot B should prepare 10 rows.

7. Plot C should prepare 8 rows to be planted.

8. Lines of weed plastic should be laid down along the rows to provide a weed

less environment for the trees to be planted the following year.

As proposed earlier in this section it is recommended to plant vegetation that will

provide the adequate cover and food requirements of mule deer. These vegetation types

19

should be purchased and used for the three plots on the farm and planted in a way that

will allow for the best corridors and access of the wildlife in the area.

The action for the second year is as follows:

1. In Plot A, 7 rows of cedars and pines should be planted at 8 ft centers. 6

rows to be planted in shrubs such mountain mahogany, antelope bitterbrush,

willow, service berry, buffalo berry, and currant, of which should be

planted at 4 ft centers. The rest of the 100 feet on each side shown in green

on the referred map will be planted in legumes and grasses.

2. In Plots B and C a few rows should be given to cedar and pine patches and

the rest to small shrubs and bushes for browse. With the subsequent green

areas on the map to be planted in grasses and legumes. Tree selection

should be of the species listed above and should have patches of different

species throughout the entire stand area.

The action for the following years to be taken:

1. As the trees will be sensitive especially to grazing of livestock, care should be

taken to keep livestock out of the three areas for several years to ensure that

the trees may grow to optimal height for wildlife.

2. Care should be taken to ensure that trees are weed free and supplied with

necessary water.

3. Mowing between lanes for a few years will allow access to the trees in order

to weed and care for the trees more efficiently.

4. Other maintenance can be followed as given in the CRP program description.

Objective 2.2 – Maintain established trees on projected plots for the entire CRP contract.

20

Maintenance is very important to allow trees and shrubs to grow to their optimal

height and stature. This maintenance will allow access and use by wildlife in the

area.

Strategy 2.2.1 – weed trees yearly

Strategy 2.2.2 – make certain trees have ample water for conditions, if drier in

areas, water appropriately

Objective 2.3 – Encourage use of established vegetation by mule deer

It is very important that the wildlife use the newly established vegetation.

In order to ensure that the shelter belts are being utilized hunting should be

postponed around such areas, in order not to shy deer from using the cover

and food available here.

Strategy 2.3.1- Do not allow hunting in and around established shelter belts.

Strategy 2.3.2 – Keep other activities around shelter belts to a minimum.

Objective 2.4 – Establish counts of mule deer on an annual basis.

Strategy 2.4.1 – Each year at a designated time early in the morning and later in

the evening counts will be taken of mule deer in the area.

In order to provide accurate information of population numbers on the Buhrley

South Fork Ranch, counting of populations must take place on a year to year basis. This

can be done by using a line transect method, but as the area does allow, a point count

method would be most useful

Cost and Benefit Analysis of Management Actions Table 5 (appendix) shows the inherent cost and benefits of the above proposed

management actions. All cost should be considered as paid for using funds provided

21

through the CRP program. Some cost to the owner will accrue, but through rental of the

property on the program these costs should minimal.

Final Recommendations Bobolink

Successful Bobolink habitat is relatively easy to create and maintain. As already

discussed much of what compromises successful breeding habitat is already in place on

the Buhrley Ranch. Moderately irrigated fields with moderate height grasses and

understory are already present in the three plots. With moderate management practices

the three target plots can become successful habitat. Planting of red clover will provide

sufficient amounts of cover and forage plants for the birds. Annually g grazing will keep

understory levels from becoming too dense, inviting higher predation and prevent woody

plant encroachment. The key to the recommendations is delaying the first mow of the

summer during the Bobolink breeding season. Delaying mowing until after July 15th will

greatly increase the percentage of nests that successfully fledge.

The costs for establishing and maintaining this management plan are modest. The

initial cost for the establishment of the habitat is $2135.00 for man hours and materials.

The USDA will provide the funding for the cost of the easement at a value of $1,850.40

per year. The benefits to the land owner are two fold: first is the $1,850.40 per year for

simply waiting a few weeks to mow the fields and the second is the satisfaction of being

involved in providing and protecting precious habitat for a rare and declining animal.

Mule deer

Establishing shelter belts in the three plots suggested along with planting of

legume and forbs in the suggested areas will substantially increase the habitat for mule

deer. With successful planting comes years of required maintenance which, if guidelines

22

set out in this plan are met, will be low. If established plots of trees are maintained they

will provide considerable habitat for the mule deer, but also a variety of other wildlife.

Planting of suggested trees increases food and cover requirements for the mule deer and

should allow increased numbers of mule deer to occupy the area. Maintenance of trees is

required and should be done on an annual basis. This new laid out vegetation on the

ranch will add to the beauty of the surrounding area and increase the value of the

property.

Most of the total costs involved will be accrued during the first and second years.

The establishment of the trees and shrubs will initially cost $8824.24. This includes the

cost of the trees, maintenance materials, and all other supplies. As equipment of the land

owner is assumed to be used in the operation of establishing the trees, this costs has not

been added. After the initial cost, most costs will be minimal at most, mainly

maintenance of the trees. As part of the CRP program the program will provide funding

at $5/acre for maintenance purposes. The practices of this plan do not need to be

incorporated in one year. To keep costs low it is suggested that the plots be planted in

separate years.

23

Appendix

Figure 1. Location of Buhrley South Fork Ranch.

24

Figure 2. Target plots for Bobolink habitat management on the Buhrley South Fork Ranch.

25

Table 1. Dietary vegetation for Bobolink.

Adult Diet Foraging sites for insects fed to nestlings Dandelion† (Taraxacum officinale) Red clover‡ (Trifolium pratense) Cinquefoil* (Potentilla glomerata) Sweet clover** (Melilotus officinalis) Yarrow* (Achillea millefolium) Bur clover** (Medicago lupulina) Canadian thistle* (Cirsium arvense) Vetch** (Vicia americana) False lupine* (Thermopsis montana) Groundsel** (Senecio hydrophilus & S. hydrophobus) Dock* (Rumex crispus) False Soloman's seal ** (Smilacina stellata) Mallow* (Malva Moschata) Pepper grass** (Lepidium perfolatum) † indicates the primary diet source for adults, and * indicates secondary dietary sources, ‡ indicates primary species foraged for insects feed to nestlings, and ** indicates secondary forage species.

Table 2. Timeline of breeding behavior in Bobolink._______________________________________ Third week of May:

-Male Bobolink migrate in to North America from South America -Males begin establishing territories

First week of June: -Female birds arrive from the south, and choose nest sites

Second week of June: -Nests are completed and breeding begins

Second week of June through first week of July: -Eggs incubated in nests

First week of July: -Eggs hatch

Second week of July: -Chicks fledge from nest

First week of August: -Bobolink migrate back to South America__________________________________________ Timeline approximated from unpublished data from UDWR; DeGraaf and Rappole, 1995; Ells, 1995; Giacomo et al, 2003; Parrish et al, 2002; Rasmussen and Skilling, 2003; Swanson, 1996; Wittenberger, 1978.

26

Table 3.Timeline of management practices for Bobolink habitat.______________________________ First of September

-Begin grazing livestock on the plots after the last harvest, continue throughout winter Late March

-Seeding of red clover should occur as close as possible to the last winter frost. Since this is impossible to predict the seeding will occur during the last week of March in all three plots. This will give the clover time to begin establishing undergrowth before nesting occurs

Third week of May -Male Bobolink begin migrating in, begin observing and monitoring. Second week of June

-Females arrive; nest sites should not be disturbed but begin observations from a distance. Second week of June through first week of July:

-Nest surveys should be conducted in the early morning or late afternoon while adults are foraging.

Second week of July: -Chicks fledge from nest; nesting success surveys begin.

JULY 15th -First mowing may be done First week of August -Birds migrate out; complete nesting success surveys First of September -Begin grazing livestock_______________________________________________________

Table 4. Management Costs for Bobolink Plan.

Initial Cost Benefit Recurring Costs Easement ($6.00/acre/yr) $1,850.40

Compensate landowner for loss of crop

Easement ($ 6.00/acre/yr) $1,850.40

Red Clover (90lbs @ $1.50/lb) $135.00 Provide cover

Administration (200 man hours @ $10.00/hr annually $2,000.00

For seeding, and monitoring of management plan

Administration (100 man hours @ $10.00/hr annually $1,000.00

TOTAL INITIAL COST $3,985.40

TOTAL ANNUAL COST $2,850.40

27

Figure 3. Proposed shelter belt plots on the Buhrley South Fork Ranch.

28

Table 5. Proposed costs and benefits to increase mule deer populations of the Buhrley Ranch

Management Action Cost ($) Benefit Shelter belts

Trees (5088 trees @ $1.00/ Tree) 5088.00

Provide sufficient food and cover habitat for mule deer

Mowing and killing of weeds

Round up (2- 2.5 gallon containers of concentrate

@ $158 each 316.00 Enable trees to grow following year when

planted

Viscuine ($68.84/200ft for 27200ft) 8954.24 Keep maintenance down around trees

Maintenance of established trees

Hard work each year

None if done by land owner and reimbursement from

government Ensure growth of trees and increase of

habitat Fertilizer ($7.76/12 tree pellets at 424 packages) 3290.24 Trees grow better

Total Cost 17648.48 Cost after CRP = 8824.24

Important to note that total costs for this plan is divided by two since CRP program will pay for 50% of cost

29

References Bollinger, E. K. 1995. Successional Changes and Habitat Selection in Hayfield Bird

Communities. Auk 112:720-730. Dale, B. C., Martin, P.A., and Taylor, P.S. 1997. Effects of Hay Management Regimes on

Grassland Songbirds in Saskatchewan. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:616-626. Dechant, J. A., Sondreal, M.L., Johnson, D.H., IGL, L.D., Goldade, C.M., Zimmerman,

A.L. and Euliss, B.R. 1999. Effects of Management Practices on Grassland Birds: Bobolink. in Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND.

DeGraaf, R.M. and Rappole, J.H. 1995. Neotropical Migratory Birds. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.

Ells, S. F. 1995. Bobolink Protection and Mortality on Suburban Conservation Lands. Bird Observer 23:98-112.

Giacomo, A. S., Giacomo, A.G. and Contreras, J.R. 2003. Status and Conservation of the Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) in Argentina. in R. a. C. Ralph, editor. Bird Conservation Implementation and Integration in the Americas. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station.

Haggen A. L., Newhall R.L., Post D.J., Stuart D, “Lessons Learned form Fifteen Years of CRP in Utah” USDA-FSA Revision 3, CRP in Utah, 1997.

Johnson, R. G., and Temple, S.A. 1990. Nest Predation and Brood Parasitism of Tallgrass Prairie Birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:106-111.

Kantrud, H. A. 1981. Grazing Intensity Effects on the Breeding Avifauna of North Dakota Native Grasslands. Canadian Field-Naturalist 95:404-417.

Norcera, J. J., Parsons, G.J., Milton, G.R., and Fredeen, A.H. 2005. Compatibility of Delayed Cutting Regime with Bird Breeding and Hay Nutritional Quality. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 107:245-253.

Parrish, J. R., Howe, F.P., Norvell, R.E. 2002. Utah Partners in Flight Avian Conservation Strategy Version 2.0. in U. D. o. W. R. Utah Partners in Flight Program, editor. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

Pierce Becky, Bowyer Terry, Bleich Vernon. “Habitat Selection by Mule Deer: Forage Benefits or Risk of Predation” Journal of wildlife Management Vol. 68 Issue 3 July 2004.

Probyn, L. 2006. Frost-Seeded Red Clover Recycles Manure Nutrients and More. in MSU News. East Lansing, MI.

Rasmussen, R. and Skilling, T. 2003. Grassland Management Plan, Union Slough National Wildlife Refuge. in U. S. F. a. W. Service, editor. USFWS.

Stewart Ron Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, “Mule Deer” Wildlife Notebook Series No.13 Feb. 1999.

Swanson, D. A. 1996. Nesting Ecology and Nesting Habitat Requirements of Ohio's Grassland-nesting Birds: A Literature Review. in O. D. o. N. R.-D. o. Wildlife, editor.

Taylor Nancy, Knight James, Short Jeffrey. “Fall Cattle grazing versus mowing to increase big game forage” Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 32, Issue 2, June 2004.

Torsten Wenedy, Mosley Jeffrey, Brewer Tracy, Tess Michael, Knight James. “Elk, Mule Deer, and cattle foraging relationships on foothill and mountain rangeland” Rangeland Ecology and Management Vol. 59 Iss.1 Jan. 2006.

30

US Department of Agriculture. 2002. Grassland Reserve Program Environmental Assessment. in F. S. A. Department of Agriculture, editor. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.

Wallmo Olof, “Deer of North America” University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln and London 1981.

Wittenberger, J. F. 1978. The Breeding Biology of and Isolated Bobolink Population in Oregon. The Condor 80:355-371.

Wyoming Game and Fish Department. “The Mule Deer of Wyoming” Bulletin no. 15 Cheyenne: Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 1978.