camp ripley and arden hills minnesota army national guard training ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

shrubland/grassland sparrow was highest in areas with vegetation 1-2 m in height. Areas with shorter and taller vegetation received less use. In general, LiDAR data overestimated abundance at low observed counts and underestimated abundance at high observed counts. We offer the following general recommendations to improve the usefulness of LiDAR with respect to modeling the relationship between vegetative structure and bird species abundance: (1) establish additional bird point counts on Camp Ripley to capture the full range of vegetative structure. Forest metric estimates derived from LiDAR data can be used to identify new areas for bird abundance sampling; (2) focus counts on detecting the 12 focal species used in this analysis; (3) estimate probabilities of detection based on distance-sampling techniques or double sampling techniques. Or, consider use of spot mapping of territories; (4) combine structural data from LiDAR with cover type data (e.g., Quickbird) to improve the predictive ability of models estimating the relationship between vegetation structure and bird species abundance. Finally, our analyses of LiDAR data focused only on estimating forest metrics and the relationship between vegetation structure and bird abundance. The LiDAR acquired in 2007 can have a multitude of uses applicable to INRMP and military training. We strongly encourage use of this dataset in applications related to forest management, other wildlife research, and military training (e.g., estimating vehicle and personnel concealment in different areas across Camp Ripley). Eastern Bluebird (Sialis sialis) Nest Boxes Eastern bluebird populations declined significantly from the 1930s to 1960s due to loss of habitat and competition from other cavity nesting birds particularly non-native European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and house sparrows (Passer domesticus) (MNDNR 2007). Because of this population decline, nationwide bluebird recovery efforts began with the North American Bluebird Society in 1977 (North American Bluebird Society 2008a), and in 1979 statewide recovery efforts were initiated by the Audubon Chapter of Minneapolis Bluebird Recovery Program of Minnesota (Bluebird Recovery Program of Minnesota 2008) in cooperation with the Nongame Program of the MNDNR. These recovery efforts were centered upon providing artificial nest boxes for eastern bluebirds. Camp Ripley has participated in the eastern bluebird recovery by establishing artificial nest boxes since 1994 at the Minnesota Veteran‟s Cemetery. In addition, the nest boxes at the Minnesota Veteran‟s Cemetery provide visitors viewing opportunities. Bluebird nest boxes were also established along the Camp Ripley cantonment fence in 2007. In August 2008, the coordinator of the Bluebird Recovery Program of Minnesota evaluated the past nest boxes and locations for their benefit to bluebird use and production. Based on his recommendations, the nest boxes were replaced with Gilbertson PVC artificial nest boxes (North American Bluebird Society 2008b) and moved to different locations. As an event for National Public Lands Day, new bluebird boxes (Gilbertson PVC) were constructed and installed at the Minnesota Veteran‟s Cemetery (4 pairs (located across the Mississippi River from Camp Ripley)), DeParc 2009 Conservation Program Report Page 40
Figure 25. Location of eastern bluebird houses at Camp Ripley Veteran‟s Cemetery and Camp Ripley cantonment area, since 2008. Page 41 2009 Conservation Program Report
Page 1 and 2:
This document is made available ele
Page 3 and 4:
Camp Ripley and Arden Hills Minneso
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 9 and 10: Program Overview ..................
Page 11 and 12: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Conservation
Page 13: In 2009, the environmental team gav
Page 18 and 19: Figure 1. Location of Camp Ripley a
Page 20 and 21: land use activities between militar
Page 22 and 23: all of the buildings on AHATS have
Page 24 and 25: Figure 3. Forest stands re-inventor
Page 26 and 27: Figure 4. Forest Inventory and Anal
Page 28 and 29: Figure 5. Location of timber sales
Page 30 and 31: Table 4. Timber sale summary at Cam
Page 32 and 33: 2009 Sales Hodgden Logging B011023
Page 34 and 35: Specific information regarding thes
Page 36 and 37: Figure 10. VEGETATION MANAGEMENT Ca
Page 38 and 39: Figure 11. Fire units burned for ec
Page 40 and 41: Camp Ripley and Arden Hills Army Tr
Page 42 and 43: Figure 14. Picture of the large sca
Page 44 and 45: Figure 17. Results from spraying a
Page 46 and 47: techniques, to current 2009 updates
Page 48 and 49: Figure 20. Total phosphorus results
Page 50 and 51: Totals and Trends Camp Ripley provi
Page 52 and 53: The ovenbird, one of the most commo
Page 54 and 55: methodology were also considered, h
Page 58 and 59: Woods (3 single boxes) and Camp Rip
Page 60 and 61: Figure 26. Wood duck nesting box lo
Page 62 and 63: Figure 28. Bald eagle nests at and
Page 64 and 65: Figure 29. Owl survey route at Camp
Page 66 and 67: Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus
Page 68 and 69: Figure 33. Red-shouldered hawk call
Page 70 and 71: Ruffed Grouse (Bonasa umbellus) Ruf
Page 72 and 73: Figure 37. Ruffed grouse drumming s
Page 74 and 75: (Helianthus spp.), and grass (Poa s
Page 76 and 77: Table 11. Gray wolves captured at C
Page 78 and 79: Figure 40. Locations for Wolf #31 a
Page 80 and 81: Wolf Mortalities Wolf #28 was first
Page 82 and 83: monitoring of reproduction and cub
Page 84 and 85: Figure 44. Bear #2079‟s (7 year o
Page 86 and 87: Figure 45. Bear #2081‟s home rang
Page 88 and 89: Scent Post Survey The MNDNR has con
Page 90 and 91: Cougar (Puma concolor) and Canada L
Page 92 and 93: Figure 50. Cougar and Canada lynx d
Page 94 and 95: Ground and aerial tracking were use
Page 96 and 97: Figure 51. Calculated 90% minimum c
Page 98 and 99: Many problem areas can be addressed
Page 100 and 101: Figure 54. Locations of ANABAT surv
Page 102 and 103: Table 16. Summary of Blanding‟s t
Page 104 and 105: Figure 56. Observations and nest lo
Page 106 and 107:
Figure 59. Precipitation (inches) a
Page 108 and 109:
Figure 62. Anuran survey routes at
Page 110 and 111:
Table 17. Anuran survey index data
Page 112 and 113:
Grassland plots (n=7) contained 20
Page 114 and 115:
Average Number of Species per Plot
Page 116 and 117:
Henslow’s sparrow (Ammodramus hen
Page 118 and 119:
large (See Hunting Programs section
Page 120 and 121:
Table 22. Small mammal live trappin
Page 122 and 123:
and was completed by 3:30 PM. Surve
Page 124 and 125:
Table 24. Bird species observed at
Page 126 and 127:
Lake Allot is managed for a wide di
Page 128 and 129:
Complete details regarding the ACUB
Page 130 and 131:
Figure 72. Camp Ripley ACUB fiscal
Page 132 and 133:
Range and Training Land Assessment
Page 134 and 135:
Figure 73. Farmstead mitigation sit
Page 136 and 137:
A natural resource damage assessmen
Page 138 and 139:
UTILIZATION Derived Digital Terrain
Page 140 and 141:
HUNTING PROGRAMS Camp Ripley has ha
Page 142 and 143:
Table 32. Deployed soldier‟s arch
Page 144 and 145:
Table 34. General public archery wh
Page 146 and 147:
AHATS Volunteer Archery Deer Hunt T
Page 148 and 149:
2009 Conservation Program Report RE
Page 150 and 151:
Koper, N. and R. J. Brooks. 2000. E
Page 152 and 153:
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 200
Page 154 and 155:
Section INRMP Goal INRMP Ensure ade
Page 156 and 157:
Section INRMP Goal Section INRMP Go
Page 158 and 159:
Section INRMP Goal 2009 Conservatio
Page 160 and 161:
Section INRMP Goal Forestry Emphasi
Page 162 and 163:
Section INRMP Goal Forestry Monitor
Page 164 and 165:
Section INRMP Goal Goal Created Sec
Page 166 and 167:
Section INRMP Goal Land Use Minimiz
Page 168 and 169:
Section INRMP Goal Wildlife Monitor
Page 170 and 171:
Section INRMP Goal Wildlife Monitor
Page 172 and 173:
Section INRMP Goal Fisheries Contin
Page 174 and 175:
Section INRMP Goal 2009 Conservatio
Page 176 and 177:
Section INRMP Goal RTLA Provide inf
Page 178 and 179:
Section INRMP Goal GIS Maintain har
Page 180 and 181:
Section INRMP Goal TRI Provide mili
Page 182 and 183:
Section INRMP Goal SRA Instill a se
Page 184 and 185:
2009 Conservation Program Report AD
Page 186 and 187:
2009 Conservation Program Report RT
Page 188 and 189:
Section INRMP Goal Goal Created TRI
Page 190 and 191:
Section INRMP Goal Goal Created 200
Page 192 and 193:
Section INRMP Goal Goal Created 200
Page 194 and 195:
2009 Conservation Program Report FI
Page 196 and 197:
2009 Conservation Program Report FI
Page 198 and 199:
2009 Conservation Program Report Pa
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
2. Opening Remarks. COL Weaver welc
Page 210 and 211:
4. Fifteen of the most hazardous fa
Page 212 and 213:
Natural Resources: There was an inf
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
2008 Minnesota Statutes 190.25 LAND
Page 222 and 223:
2009 Conservation Program Report BY
Page 224 and 225:
d. Old business e. New business f.
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
# of ECS subsections Tax Scientific
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
To meet thermoregulatory demands as
Page 236 and 237:
Hillerman, J. P., F. H. Kratzer, an
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Principal Investigator: Dr. John Kr
Page 242 and 243:
3. Determine characteristics used b
Page 244 and 245:
calculated following Kuehn (1985).
Page 246 and 247:
Zielinski, W. J., F. V. Schlexer, K
Page 248 and 249:
2009 Conservation Program Report Na
Page 250 and 251:
Project Title: Training Area 4 Nati
Page 252 and 253:
Project Title: Training Area 8 Borr
Page 254 and 255:
Project Title: Training Area 9 Wild
Page 256 and 257:
Project Title: Training Area 10 Wil
Page 258 and 259:
Listed below is a summery table tha
Page 260 and 261:
Page 244 2009 Conservation Program
Page 264:
Equal opportunity to participate in
show all

camp ripley and arden hills minnesota army national guard training ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?