Animal community

Animal Community – Wildlife Interpretations

Landscape
The MLRA 53B landscape is characterized by nearly level to rolling till plains including kettle holes, kames, moraines, and small glacial lakes. The MLRA is located within the heart of the Prairie Pothole (Coteau) Region with temporary, seasonal, and semi-permanent wetlands throughout the MLRA. MLRA 53B has a continental climate with cold winters and hot summers, low humidity, light rainfall, and much sunshine. Extremes in temperature are common and characteristic of the MLRA. This area supports natural prairie vegetation characterized by western wheatgrass, needle and thread, green needlegrass, and big bluestem. Little bluestem is an important species on sloping and shallow soils. Prairie cordgrass, northern reedgrass, and sedges are important species on wet soils. Western snowberry, chokecherry, plum, stiff goldenrod, blacksamson echinacea, and prairie rose are commonly interspersed throughout the area.

Complex and intermingled ecological sites create diverse grass and shrub land habitats. Ecological sites are interspersed with moderate to high densities of depressional wetlands. MLRA 53B includes headwaters to tributaries of the Missouri River, including the Big Muddy River, White Earth River, Painted Woods Creek and Apple Creek in North Dakota and Spring Creek in South Dakota. Numerous unnamed creeks and drainageways drain into the James River in North and South Dakota which are in MLRA 55B. These habitats provide critical life-cycle components for many wildlife species including aquatic species.

Historic Communities/Conditions within MLRA 53B:

The northern mixed-grass prairie was a disturbance-driven ecosystem with fire, herbivory, and climate functioning as the primary ecological drivers (either singly or often in combination). The high density of wetland and associated native grassland historically supported an abundance of waterfowl and other marsh dependent birds. Many species of grassland birds, small mammals, insects, reptiles, amphibians, and herds of roaming American bison, elk, and pronghorn were historically among the inhabitants adapted to this semi-arid region. Roaming herbivores, as well as several small mammal and insect species, were the primary consumers linking the grassland resources to large predators (such as the wolf and mountain lion) and smaller carnivores (such as the coyote, bobcat, red fox, and raptors). Extirpated species include free-ranging American bison, elk, black and grizzly bear, gray wolf, and peregrine falcon (breeding). Extinct from the region is the Rocky Mountain locust.

Present Communities/Conditions within MLRA 53B:

Following European influence, domestic livestock grazing, elimination of fire, energy development, and other anthropogenic factors influenced plant community composition and abundance. Approximately 34% of the native grassland in MLRA 53B remains intact but grassland continues to be converted to annual cropping systems. Annual cropping, wetland drainage, wind energy, woody encroachment, and transportation corridors are the main contributors to habitat fragmentation, which reduces habitat quality for area-sensitive species. The fragmented landscape reduced or eliminated ecological drivers (fire) and introduced exotic plant species including smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, Kentucky bluegrass, and leafy spurge - further impacting plant and animal communities. Loss of fire allowed woody species to expand onto historically grassland sites. The loss of these ecological drivers greatly influenced the remaining native plant communities and wildlife species presence, moving towards a more fragmented but diverse landscape; but in many cases a more homogeneous grassland dominated by cool-season exotic grass species develops.

The high density of wetlands provides habitat for large numbers and species of waterfowl and waterbirds. MLRA 53B is a major contributor to the annual production of waterfowl and waterbirds within the Central Flyway. Many wildlife species found in MLRA 53B are those that have adapted to annual crop production. Some wildlife species in this area are white-tailed deer, coyote, red fox, American badger, raccoon, beaver, striped skunk, American mink, white-tailed jackrabbit, Eastern turkey, sharp-tailed grouse, waterfowl, and numerous species of grassland-nesting birds and pollinating insects. Numerous fish species inhabit the lakes and creeks within the MLRA.

National wildlife refuges, waterfowl production areas, and state wildlife management areas along with North Dakota Department of Trust Lands and South Dakota State School Lands provide herbaceous and woody cover for wildlife. In addition, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the North Dakota Game and Fish Department (NDGFD) jointly manage one large manmade reservoir, Lake Audubon (16,612 acres), for waterfowl and fish production. The USFWS manages approximately 56,000 acres in National Wildlife Refuges and 59,000 acres of Waterfowl Production Areas including 5,526 acres of wilderness area within the Lostwood National Wildlife Refuge and 4,201 acres of wilderness area within the Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge. The NDGFD manages approximately 47,000 acres of Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) and the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks manages approximately 12,000 acres of Game Production Areas in the southern end of the MLRA.

Wildlife species presence is often determined by site characteristics including grass and forb species, hydrology, aspect, and other associated ecological sites. Home ranges of most species are larger than one ecological site or are dependent upon more than one ecological site for annual life requisites. Ecological sites offer different habitat elements as the annual life requisites change. Habitat improvement and creation must be conducted within the mobility limits of a known population for the species.

Insects play an important role providing ecological services for plant community development. Insects that are scavengers or aid in decomposition provide the food chain baseline sustaining the carnivorous insects feeding upon them. Many insects provide the ecological services necessary for pollination, keeping plant communities healthy and productive. Insects provide a protein food source for numerous species including grassland-nesting birds and their young.

Species of Concern within MLRA 53B:

The following is a list of species considered “species of conservation priority” in the North Dakota State Wildlife Action Plan (2015) and South Dakota State Wildlife Action Plan (2014); and species listed as “threatened, endangered, or petitioned” under the Endangered Species Act within MLRA 53B at the time this section was developed:

Invertebrates: Dakota skipper, Dakota stonefly, Iowa skipper, monarch butterfly, northern sandy tiger beetle, Ottoe skipper, regal fritillary, yellow-banded bumble bee, and western bumble bee.

Birds: American avocet, American bittern, American kestrel, American white pelican, Baird’s sparrow, bald eagle, black-billed cuckoo, black tern, bobolink, burrowing owl, canvasback, chestnut-collared longspur, Dickcissel, ferruginous hawk, Franklin’s gull, grasshopper sparrow, greater prairie-chicken, horned grebe, horned lark, lark bunting, LeConte’s sparrow, lesser scaup, loggerhead shrike, long-billed curlew, marbled godwit, Nelson’s sparrow, northern goshawk, northern harrier, northern pintail, peregrine falcon (migration), piping plover (migration), red knot (migration), sharp-tailed grouse, short-eared owl, Sprague’s pipet, Swainson’s hawk, trumpeter swan, upland sandpiper, western meadowlark, willet, Wilson’s phalarope, whooping crane (migration), and yellow rail.

Mammals: Arctic shrew, big and little brown bats, Franklin’s ground squirrel, plains pocket mouse, Richardson’s ground squirrel, silver-haired bat, and swift fox (historical range).

Amphibians and Reptiles: Canadian toad, false map turtle, plains hognose snake, smooth green snake, and snapping turtle.

Fish and Mussels: Blacknose shiner, blue sucker, burbot, fathead chub, fragile papershell, northern pearl dace, northern redbelly dace, pink papershell, sicklefin chub, sturgeon chub, and yellow sandshell.

Grassland Management for Wildlife in the MLRA 53B:

Management activities within State and Transition models follow various community phase pathways. These management activities will impact wildlife, both positive and negative, but are essential for maintenance of healthy grassland ecosystems. Community phase, transitional, and restoration pathways are keys to long-term management within each State and between States. Timing, intensity, and frequency of these inputs can have dramatic positive or negative effects on local wildlife species. Ranchers and other land managers must always consider the long-term beneficial management effects of grassland and woodland resources in comparison to typically short-term negative effects to the habitats of individual species.

Ecological sites occur as intermingled complexes on the landscape with gradual or sometimes abrupt transitions. Rarely do ecological sites exist in large enough acreage to manage independently for wildlife. A management regime for one ecological site may negatively impact an adjacent site (e.g., alteration of a grazing regime within a Loamy Overflow ecological site to encourage tall warm-season grass development) may encourage exotic cool-season grasses to increase or dominate adjacent ecological sites.

Life requisites and habitat deficiencies are determined for targeted species, species guilds, or by land use. Deficiencies need to be addressed along community phase, transitional, and restoration pathways as presented in specific state-and-transition models. Ecological sites should be managed and restored within the site’s capabilities to provide sustainable habitat for targeted species or species guilds. Habitat fragmentation caused by the conversion to annual cropping, tree plantings, rural housing, and fragmentation due to transportation and electrical transmission corridors need to be considered when managing for target species.

With populations of many grassland-nesting birds in decline, it is important to maintain these ecological sites in a 1.0 Reference State (if found) or the 2.0 Native/Invaded State. Plant communities optimal for a guild of grassland species serve as a population source where the birth rate exceeds mortality. Species may use marginal plant communities; however, these sites may function as a population sink where mortality exceeds the birth rate.

Understanding preferred vegetative stature and sensitivity to woody encroachment is necessary to manage for the specific grassland species. Various grass heights may be used for breeding, nesting, or foraging habitat. While most species use varying heights, many have a preferred vegetative stature height. The following chart provides preferred vegetative stature heights and sensitivity to woody vegetation encroachment.

To see the chart go to this hyperlink.

https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/references/public/ND/53B_Loamy_Overflow_Narrative_FINAL_Ref_FSG.pdf

Loamy Overflow Wildlife Habitat Interpretation:

Loamy Overflow ecological sites have no restrictions in the soil profile. This complex of ecological sites provides habitat for many edge-sensitive, grassland bird species. Commonly found on terraces and concave landscapes, Loamy Overflow habitat features support nesting and foraging grassland birds; but vegetation may be too dense and tall for sharp-tailed grouse leks. Associated ecological sites include Clayey, Claypan, Limy Subirrigated, Loamy, Thin Loamy, Wet Meadow, Shallow Marsh, and Saline Lowland.

Loamy Overflow ecological sites may be found in five plant community states (1.0 Reference State,
2.0 Native/Invaded State, 3.0 Invaded Grass State, 4.0 Go-Back State, and 5.0 Invaded Wooded State). Multiple plant community phases exist within States 1.0 and 2.0. These states occur primarily in response to grazing, drought, and non-use. Secondary influences include fire and anthropogenic disturbances.

Because there is no known restoration pathway from State 2.0 to State 1.0, it is important to intensively manage using tools in State 1.0 and State 2.0 community phase pathways to prevent further plant community degradation along either the Transitional Pathway T1A to the Native/Invaded Grass State 2.0 or T2B to Invaded Wooded State 5.0. Conversion to a woody state along transitional pathway T2B, or T3A generally benefit wildlife species that can tolerate or require woody habitat within plant community State 5.0.

As plant communities degrade within State 2.0 warm-season grasses, particularly short-statured and cool-season exotic grasses, increase while native forbs are reduced. This transition results in reduced structure, increased plant community homogeneity, and reduced insect populations resulting in a reduction of breeding, nesting, foraging, or winter habitat for grassland birds. When adjacent/intermingled ecological sites undergo the same transition, the result can be an expansive, homogenous landscape. Success along restoration pathways R3A, R4A, and R5B to State 2.0 is very difficult and is dependent upon presence of remnant native grass populations, successful native range planting, and/or successful woody vegetation removal.

Invaded Wooded State 5.0 provides habitat features and components supporting woodland edge and interior birds and other wildlife species dependent upon trees and shrubs to meet their life requisites. Grassland-nesting birds that commonly avoid woody vegetation will not have their habitat needs met and may even avoid adjacent ecological sites dominated by grassland vegetation. A reduction in nesting success by grassland nesting birds on adjacent herbaceous sites is likely due to increase in avian predation. These forested sites provide quality loafing, escape, and winter cover for small and large herbivores and quality year-round habitat for American martin, snowshoe hare, elk, moose, and white-tailed deer. These sites provide seasonal habitat for many migratory passerines and year-round habitat for ruffed grouse and quality winter cover for eastern screech owl, great horned owl, wild turkey, and non-migrating passerine birds such as black-capped chickadee and white-breasted nuthatch.

Management along community phase, transition or restoration pathways should focus upon attainable changes. Short- and long-term monetary costs must be evaluated against short- and long- term ecological services in creating and maintaining habitat of enough quality to support a sustainable population.

1.0 Reference State

Community Phase 1.1 Big Bluestem-Needlegrasses-Western Wheatgrass: This plant community offers quality wildlife habitat; every effort should be made to maintain this ecological site within this community phase. This phase retains high functionality through continued maintenance including prescribed grazing with adequate recovery period as well as prescribed fire. Predominance of grass species in this community favors grazers and mixed feeders (animals selecting grasses as well as forbs and shrubs).
The structural diversity provides habitat for a wide array of migratory and resident birds.

Invertebrates: Insects play a role in maintaining the forb community and provide a forage base for grassland birds, reptiles and rodents. Ecological services, historically provided by American bison, are simulated by domestic livestock. These services include putting plant material and dung in contact with mineral soil to be used by low trophic level consumers (such as invertebrate decomposers, scavengers, shredders, predators, herbivores, dung beetles and fungal feeders).

Dakota skippers may use this site since host plants (such as woody lily, big bluestem, little bluestem, and prairie dropseed) can be found on this site. Regal fritillary habitat is limited due to Nuttall's violet and prairie violets being uncommon. Monarch butterfly may use flowering forbs on this site; however, few milkweed species are found on this site to support breeding and larvae development. Bumblebees and other native bees utilize forbs for nectar and pollen and bare ground for nesting amongst bunchgrasses. Prescribed grazing with adequate recovery periods, as well as prescribed fire, to maintain the 1.1 phase, will have long term positive effects on ground dwelling insects.

Birds: This plant community provides quality nesting, foraging, and escape habitats favored by mid-to tall- grass nesting birds. Plant structure may be too dense or tall for species using short-grass habitats. The low scattered shrubs present in the plant community phase should not impact woody vegetation sensitive bird species.

Grassland birds preferring mid to tall-grass structure will use this site. In years with reduced precipitation or drought, nesting recruitment may be compromised. This plant community provides suitable areas for sharp-tailed grouse nesting and brood-rearing habitat but may be too tall for lek sites. Limited structure and diverse prey populations provide good hunting opportunity for grassland raptors. Many passerine species utilize MLRA 53B as a major migratory travel corridor. Grassland species sensitive to woody associations during nesting and brooding may utilize the woodier fragmented sites.

Mammals: The diversity of grasses and forbs provide high nutrition levels for small and large herbivores. Moderate to tall stature provides suitable food, thermal, protective, and escape cover for small and large herbivores.

Amphibians/Reptiles: This ecological site and associated plant communities provides habitat for smooth green snakes. This ecological site can provide habitat for the northern leopard frog and Great Plains toad if freshwater habitats (such as wetlands, streams, or lakes) are adjacent or near the site.

Fish and Mussels: This ecological site can be near or adjacent to wetlands, streams, rivers, or water bodies. Loamy Overflow sites receive run-on hydrology from up-slope ecological sites, such as Loamy and Thin Loamy ecological sites, and then out-let into receiving waters. Management on these interconnected sites can have direct effects on aquatic species.

Community Phase 1.2 Needlegrasses-Western Wheatgrass-Big Bluestem: Below normal precipitation or increased fire frequency, with or without heavy grazing, favors an increase in cool- season grasses and in decrease in warm-season grasses.

Invertebrates: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1 since the forb component remains similar.

Birds: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1. However, the increase of shorter cool-season grasses favors grassland-nesting bird species preferring short- to mid-statured vegetation. Winter cover for resident bird species, such as sharp-tailed grouse, is somewhat compromised due to the increase in cool-season grasses.

Mammals: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Amphibians and Reptiles: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Fish and Mussels: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

2.0 Native/Invaded State

Community Phase 2.1 Big Bluestem-Needlegrasses: This plant community results from the introduction and establishment of exotic cool-season grasses (commonly Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, and/or quackgrass). It is exacerbated by long-term, season-long grazing as well as long-term non-use and no fire events (via Transitional Pathway T1A). The threshold between the states is crossed when exotic grasses, such as Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome, become established on the site. This plant community phase has a very similar appearance and function to the Reference State of Community 1.1, except it has a minor amount of cool-season exotic grasses and forbs. This phase functions at a high level for native wildlife; therefore, managers should consider the 2.0 community phase pathways to avoid transitioning to the Invaded State 3.0. There is no known Community Phase Pathway back to State 1.0 from State 2.0.

Invertebrates: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1. Increase in sod-forming Kentucky bluegrass reduces bare ground availability for ground nesting bees. Although forb diversity is maintained, the amounts are reduced - limiting nectar and pollen availability.

Birds: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.
Mammals: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Amphibians and Reptiles: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Community Phase 2.2 Blue Grama/Sedges/Forbs: Heavy season-long grazing, with or without drought, along Community Phase Pathway 2.1A leads to shorter-statured grasses. Dominated by shorter-stature grasses and a loss of nitrogen-fixing or leguminous native forbs, the diversity of this plant community is reduced. Prescribed grazing with adequate recovery periods along Community Phase Pathway 2.2A is an efficient, effective method to regain the cool-season grass and forb diversity components in Community Phase 2.1.

Invertebrates: The reduction of native forbs and increase in sod-forming grasses limit foraging and nesting sites for all pollinators. Continuous, heavy season-long grazing or heavy seasonal grazing may reduce ground-nesting site availability. Homogeneity of forb species may limit season-long nectar availability. Late season pollen and nectar are available from white heath aster and velvety goldenrod.

Birds: Heavy season-long grazing or severe late-season grazing will reduce nesting sites, forage (invertebrates), and cover. A reduced forb component may limit foraging opportunities. The stature is generally short, serving both mid- and short-grass nesting birds. Shortgrass-nesting birds favor this phase. Species that prefer mid-grass stature generally will be successful with normal to above normal precipitation and a change in management along the 2.2A Community Phase Pathway. In years with reduced precipitation or heavy grazing during the nesting season, use by mid-grass nesting species may be compromised. Located in a concave landscape position, this plant community does not provide suitable areas for sharp-tailed grouse lek site development with limited nesting, brood, and winter cover. Limited stature and diverse prey populations provide good hunting opportunities for grassland raptors.

Mammals: Suitable food, thermal, protective, and escape cover (reduction in litter) for most mammals become limited. The loss of diversity of grasses and forbs reduces nutrition levels for small and large herbivores.

Amphibians and Reptiles: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Fish and Mussels: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Community Phase 2.3 Shrubs/Forbs/Exotic Cool-Season Grasses: Extended periods of non-use or very light season-long grazing, and no fire, enables native shrubs to become dominant. Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, and/or quackgrass may be found alone or as a mosaic across the site. Shrubs are dominated by shorter statured shrubs, but Saskatoon serviceberry, chokecherry, and silver buffaloberry may be found in this plant community phase. Continued extended periods of non- use or very light season-long grazing with no fire enables native trees to dominate the site, via Transitional Phase T2B, moving this state to 5.0. While implementation of prescribed grazing or prescribed burning, via Community Phase pathway 2.3A, may result in a reduction of the shrub component moving this plant community back to Community Phase 2.1.

Invertebrates: The invasion of woody vegetation and reduction or entire loss of bluestems reduces or eliminates habitats for all invertebrate species of concern within MLRA 53B. Season-long pollen and nectar availability becomes limited on this site. The woody shrub component will provide an early- to mid-season bloom period. Forbs are present as in other states; however, shading limits distribution across the site. Overall pollinator plant diversity is good, providing season-long nectar and pollen production.

Birds: Grassland nesting birds sensitive to woody vegetation encroachment may discontinue use of this community phase depending on the density of western snowberry, Saskatoon serviceberry, chokecherry, and silver buffaloberry. Tall shrub density will also have a negative impact on grassland nesting birds not tolerant to woody species. Woody vegetation typically does not reach enough density or height to provide habitat for bird species favoring woodland edge. Brown-headed cowbird use will increase with an increase in the woody cover component of this ecological site. Increases in the woody component will provide winter cover for pheasant and sharp-tailed grouse.

Mammals: Increases in woody habitat provides winter and escape cover, birthing sites, browse, etc. for white-tailed deer and moose. Small mammal cover is excellent.

Amphibians and Reptiles: This site no longer provides life requisites for the northern prairie skink and plains hog-nosed snake due to the dominance of western snowberry and other shrubs.

Fish and Mussels: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

3.0 Invaded State

Community Phase 3.1 Exotic Cool-Season Grasses/Forbs/Shrubs: Community Phase Pathway T2A is characterized by non-use and elimination of fire when exotic cool-season grasses are present as in Community Phase 2.0. This plant community phase is characterized by a dominance (>30%) of exotic cool-season grasses such as smooth brome; native grasses represent less than 40% of the plant community. Restoration Pathway R3A, through prescribed burning and high levels of grazing management, requires remnant amounts of native warm- and cool-season and forbs to be successful. The remnant native community needs frequent prescribed burns and high levels of grazing management targeting the exotic cool-season grasses to improve competitiveness and increase vigor and density. Without intensive management, the remnant native plants will not increase adequately to transition back to State 2.0. Managers need to evaluate impacts to wildlife while implementing these management practices. Intensified management along the R3A Pathway will have significant short-term negative impacts on wildlife habitat; however, this is necessary to restore long-term native habitat functions.

Invertebrates: Exotic grasses limit use by beneficial insects provided in States 1.0 and 2.0. However, western snowberry and prairie rose may provide early season pollen and nectar sources. Although forbs are a minor component in this community, they still offer mid- to late-season pollen and nectar opportunities. Increased litter and lack of grazing leads to limited contact between plant material and mineral soil resulting in a cooler micro-climate, which is unfavorable to most insects. Lack of bare soil limits ground-nesting sites for native bees and other ground-nesting insects.

Birds: The homogeneous community phase, dominated by exotic plant species, provides limited habitat and life requisites for most obligate grassland-nesting birds. Lack of plant diversity and stature, along with increased litter and the tendency of Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome to lay down, limits use by many grassland-nesting birds. Sharp-tailed grouse may use this plant community for lek sites and nesting cover; western snowberry may provide winter cover, dependent upon density.

Mammals: Litter accumulation and exotic grass cover favors thermal, protective, and escape cover for small rodents.

Amphibians and Reptiles: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

Fish and Mussels: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1.

4.0 Go-Back State

Community Phase 4.1 Annual/Pioneer Perennial/Exotics: Following cropland abandonment, these plant communities are dominated by early pioneer annual and perennial plant species. Plant species composition and production are highly variable. Weedy plants can provide pollinator habitat along with spring and summer cover for many mammals, birds, and their young. Dense weed cover can keep soils moist, increasing insect presence. Tall stature provided by some weeds, such as marsh elder and ragweed, offer thermal cover and seeds throughout winter for deer, small mammals, and over-wintering birds. The response by wildlife species will be dependent upon plant community composition, vegetative stature, patch size, and management activities (such as prescribed grazing, burning, inter-seeding, haying, or noxious weed control).

Successful restoration along Transition Pathway R4A can result in a native grass and forb community in State 2.0. Implementation of prescribed burning and/or chemical/mechanical brush management followed by a failed range planting, via Transition Pathway R4A, can result in an invaded plant community Invaded State 3.0.

5.0 Invaded Wooded State

Loamy Overflow ecological sites supported small patches trees and shrubs. Today, this invaded wooded state usually exists as a linear woody feature on a concave landscape commonly referred to as ‘woody draws’. The wooded state occurs when the Loamy Overflow ecological site is located near a seed source for woody vegetation such as a wooded Loamy ecological site or near a wooded riparian corridor. The removal of all disturbance through Transition Pathways T2B, or T3A are the major contributors to this community phase crossing the threshold from an herbaceous plant community to a community dominated by hardwoods and shrubs. The composition of this woody plant community will be dependent upon shading (tree canopy density), management (grazing), and the amount of invasive grass and shrub species.

Successful restoration along Transition Pathway R5A can result in a native grass and forb community in State 2.0. Implementation of prescribed burning and/or chemical/mechanical brush management followed by a failed range planting, via Transition Pathway R5B, can result in an invaded plant community (Invaded State 3.0).

Wooded State 5.1 Shrubs/Hardwoods/Sedges: Wooded draws are an important vegetative type used by many large herbivorous mammals. Multi-level canopy, high edge-to-area ratio, and prevalence of preferred forage provides high quality wildlife habitat. Within MLRA 53B, woody draws (such as those in Wooded State 5.1) provide important travel corridors, security cover, foraging, loafing, and parturition (birthing) areas.

Invertebrates: Early season flowering shrubs provide pollen and nectar. However, pollinating insects will need adjacent herbaceous- and forb-dominated ecological sites for mid- to late-season pollen sources. Lower trophic-level consumers (such as invertebrate decomposers, scavengers, shredders, predators, herbivores, dung beetles and fungal-feeders) will use woody plant material, leaves, and limited number of grasses in contact with mineral soil. The woody component of this site is not conducive to use by the Dakota skipper, monarch butterfly, and regal fritillary. Woody plant material is available for wood-nesting bees. These wind-protected, moist plant communities provide favorable habitat for flying insects (flies, mosquitoes, moths, etc.). Favorable climatic conditions can lead to large hatches of insects.

Birds: This site no longer provides habitat for grassland-nesting bird species due to the dominance of woody vegetation. Bird species that use and benefit from woodland edge (such as wild turkey, black- billed cuckoo, black-capped chickadee, gray catbird, and Swainson’s hawk) may be found in this community phase. These sites provide nesting habitat for many migratory passerines and quality winter cover for sharp-tailed grouse, eastern screech owl, great horned owl, wild turkey, and non- migrating passerine birds, such as black-capped chickadee and white-breasted nuthatch. Berry producing shrubs provide late summer, fall, and winter forage for many bird species. Wildlife use increases as the depth of snow increases during the winter, thereby becoming critical to the sustainment of winter resident bird populations. The presence of woody plant species may increase mammalian and avian predation and increase brood parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds on adjacent grassland ecological sites.

Mammals: Dead and mature trees provide cavities and loose bark for big brown bat, northern long-eared bat, and Townsend’s big-eared bat. Small herbivores that can use or tolerate woodland edge, such as American porcupine and cotton-tail rabbit, will benefit from this plant community phase. Shrubs and trees provide security and thermal cover used by white-tailed deer for foraging, loafing, and rearing young-of- the-year. Multi-layer shrub/tree communities provide concealment protection from predators during parturition. Plant species provide highly nutritious forage during peak lactation, one of the most energy demanding time periods of the year for female ungulates. Winter white-tailed deer diets are dominated by chokecherry, western snowberry, Saskatoon serviceberry, rose, and various species of gooseberry. When located near streams or other permanent water, these sites may be used by North American beaver as a woody material source.

Amphibians and Reptiles: This Wooded State does not provide habitat for species of conservation priority.

Fish and Mussels: Provides similar life requisites as Community Phase 1.1; however, the wooded state can occur within drainageways that are in close proximity to receiving water bodies. The bare soil found under the tree and shrub canopy may reduce infiltration and nutrient cycling. Run-off, sediment yield, and nutrient load increase from the site negatively impacting receiving water bodies.

Animal Community – Grazing Interpretations
This site is well adapted to managed grazing by domestic livestock. The predominance of herbaceous plants across all plant community phases best lends these sites to grazing by cattle, but other domestic grazers with differing diet preferences may also be a consideration depending upon management objectives. Often, the current plant community does not entirely match any particular plant community (as described in the ecological site description). Because of this, a resource inventory is necessary to document plant composition and production. Proper interpretation of this inventory data will permit the establishment of a safe, initial stocking rate for the type and class of animals and level of grazing management. More accurate stocking rate estimates should eventually be calculated using actual stocking rate information and monitoring data.

NRCS defines prescribed grazing as “managing the harvest of vegetation with grazing and/or browsing animals with the intent to achieve specific ecological, economic, and management objectives”. As used in this site description, the term ‘prescribed grazing’ is intended to include multiple grazing management systems (e.g., rotational grazing, twice-over grazing, conservation grazing, targeted grazing, etc.) provided that, whatever management system is implemented, it meets the intent of prescribed grazing definition.

The basic grazing prescription addresses balancing forage demand (quality and quantity) with available forage, varying grazing and deferment periods from year-to-year, matching recovery/deferment periods to growing conditions when pastures are grazed more than once in a growing season, implementation of a contingency (e.g., drought) plan, and a monitoring plan. When the management goal is to facilitate change from one plant community phase or state to another, then the prescription needs to be designed to shift the competitive advantage to favor the native grass and forb species.

Grazing levels are noted within the plant community narratives and pathways in reference to grazing management. “Degree of utilization” is defined as the proportion of the current years forage production that is consumed and/or destroyed by grazing animals (may refer to a single plant species or a portion or all the vegetation). “Grazing utilization” is classified as slight, moderate, full, close, and severe (see the following table for description of each grazing use category). The following utilization levels are also described in the Ranchers Guide to Grassland Management IV. Utilization levels are determined by using the landscape appearance method as outlined in the Interagency Technical Reference “Utilization Studies and Residual Measurements” 1734-3.

Utilization Level % Use Description
Slight (Light) 0-20 Appears practically undisturbed when viewed obliquely. Only choice areas and forage utilized.

Moderate 20-40 Almost all of accessable range shows grazing. Little or no use of poor forage. Little evidence of trailing to grazing.

Full 40-60 All fully accessable areas are grazed. The major sites have key forage species properly utilized (about half taken, half left). Points of concentration with overuse limited to 5 to 10 percent of accessible area.

Close (Heavy) 60-80 All accessible range plainly shows use and major sections closely cropped. Livestock forced to use less desirable forage, considering seasonal preference.

Severe > 80 Key forage species completely used. Low-value forages are dominant.

Hydrological functions

Water is the principal factor limiting herbage production on this site. The site is dominated by soils in hydrologic group B, but includes some soils in group C. Infiltration varies from moderately slow to moderately rapid; runoff potential varies from negligible to medium depending upon hydrologic group, surface texture, slope percent, and ground cover. In many cases, areas with greater than 75% ground cover have the greatest potential for high infiltration and lower runoff. An exception would be where short grasses form a dense sod and dominate the site. Areas where ground cover is less than 50% have the greatest potential to have reduced infiltration and higher runoff (refer to Section 4, NRCS National Engineering Handbook for runoff quantities and hydrologic curves).

Recreational uses

National wildlife refuges (NWR) (56,476 acres), waterfowl production areas (WPAs) (183,465 acres), state wildlife management areas (WMAs) (59,476 acres), Department of Trust Lands/State School Lands (284,695 acres), and the United State Army Corps of Engineers (65,619 acres) provide hunting, bird watching, hiking, and other outdoor recreation opportunities. Audubon WMA, North Dakota, is the largest state managed, wildlife area covering 6,716 acres. The largest refuges managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife service are Audubon NWR (14,735 acres); Lostwood NWR (26,747 acres with 5,526 acres designated as wilderness area); Chase Lake NWR (4,385 acres, of which 4,201 acres were designated a wilderness area); and Long Lake NWR (22,300 acres). United States Bureau of Reclamation manages approximately 2,215 acres for fish and wildlife habitat. The Bureau of Land Management manages 6,042 acres in small, scattered tracts across the MLRA.

Bird watching: Prairie-dependent and migratory birds provide quality birding opportunities within this MLRA. NWRs, WPAs, and WMAs provide essential habitat for prairie-dependent bird species (such as Sprague's pipit and Baird's sparrow) along with some of the larger, showy members of the upland prairie including marbled godwit, upland sandpipes, and willet. MLRA 53B is in the heart of spring and fall bird migratory routes.

Chase Lake NWR is home to one of the largest breeding colonies of American white pelicans and has been identified by the American Bird Conservancy as one of the top 100 Globally Important Bird Areas in the United States. Lostwood NWR is designated a Globally Important Bird Area by the American Birding Conservancy and the Audubon Society. Long Lake NWR consists of a 15,000-acre saline basin that is 18 miles long and is appropriately named "Long Lake". The refuge was listed as a top 10 birding site by Wild Bird Magazine. It was also recently designated as both a Globally Important Bird Area and a Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) site because of its importance as both a breeding and migratory stopover site for more than 20,000 shorebirds, annually.

Hunting/Fishing: MLRA 53B is a fall destination for thousands of waterfowl hunters. The density of prairie pothole wetlands, WPAs, state owned trust lands, and WMAs provide quality opportunities for waterfowl and upland game bird hunting. This MLRA also provides quality white-tailed deer hunting opportunities along with moose hunting opportunities.

Quality fishing (summer and winter fishing) opportunities are available in the MLRA. The North Dakota Game and Fish Department and the South Dakota Game Fish and Parks manages approximately 125 fishing lakes within the MLRA. Available species include yellow perch, walleye, northern pike, muskellunge, crappie, bluegill, and small mouth bass. Lake Audubon is the largest fishing lake within the MLRA. A portion of Lake Audubon, within the National Wildlife refuge system, provides ice fishing access only; there is no open-water fishing on the refuge portion of Lake Audubon.

Camping: The Bureau of Reclamation manages the Brekken-Holmes Recreation Area in the Turtle Lake area. The recreation area consists of approximately 675 water surface acres, 620 land acres, and 10 miles of shoreline. The Garrison Conservancy District provides primitive camping along the chain of lakes connected by the McClusky Canal diverting water eastward into central North Dakota. Nine state parks are located within the MLRA totaling 1,340 acres. Fort Stevenson State Park is the only State Park in the MLRA that provides boating access to Lake Sakakawea. Other numerous camping (primitive and improved) sites are available in numerous city and county parks.

Hiking: The North Country Trail dissects the MLRA east to west following the 76-mile section of the McClusky Canal; in addition is has 12 miles of off-road trails through the Audubon National Wildlife Refuge, a road walk from Coleharbor to Riverdale and across Garrison Dam, and a short, off-road segment leading to the Western Terminus within Lake Sakakawea State Park. Hiking is also permitted on other state and federally owned lands. In addition, the Lostwood NWR and the Audubon NWR have 7 and 8 miles, respectively, of self-guided auto tours.

Wood products

No appreciable wood products are found on this site.

Other products

Seed harvest of native plant species can provide additional income on this site.

Other information

Site Development and Testing Plan
• The slope range for this site is currently 0 to 6 percent. In several areas of the associated Loamy ecological site, plant communities similar to Loamy Overflow have been observed on slopes exceeding 6 percent. These areas generally are a minor component, but some may make up more than 15 percent of the spatial extent of a map unit. Further investigation and documentation of the vegetation of these areas is recommended.
• Further evaluation is recommended on soils in areas of reclaimed coal mines that meet the slope percent and slope criteria for the Loamy Overflow ecological site. Determining CaCO3 content should be part of any investigations. Since these soils are reclaimed, range plantings should be periodically revisited to see what species establish and respond to management.
• This site currently includes soils on terraces and flood plain steps. A unique, provisional ecological site (Loamy Floodplain) had been proposed to separate these areas from Loamy Overflow soils which occur in upland swales but has not been developed. Some of the terraces may have the frequency and duration of flooding to be best represented by a Riparian Complex ESD; other terraces may be better represented by a Loamy Terrace site similar to the one used in MLRA 54. The major soil of interest in MLRA 53B is Straw. These soils, map units, and flooding frequency/duration need further review to determine the appropriate ESD and MLRA soil survey projects to be pursued to resolve the issue in a consistent manner.
• Further documentation may be needed for plant communities in all states. Plant data has been collected in previous range-site investigations, including clipping data; however, this data needs review to determine which sampling sites occur in upland swales and which sampling sites occur on floodplains. The data also needs review to determine if geo-referenced sites meeting Tier 3 standards for either vegetative or soil data are available; if not, representative sites will be selected for further investigation.
• Further evaluation and refinement of the State-and-Transition model may be needed to identify disturbance driven dynamics. Additional states and/or phases may be required to address grazing response.
• Site concepts will be refined as the above noted investigations are completed.
• The long-term goal is to complete an approved, correlated Ecological Site Description as defined by the National Ecological Site Handbook.
• NASIS revisions needed:
o The criteria for separating Loamy ES and Loamy Overflow ES have not been consistently applied. Components of the following soil series need review and some relinking: Arnegard, Bowbells, Emrick, Grassna, Makoti, Mandan, Roseglen, and Wilton.
o Some Parshall components need to be relinked from Sandy to Loamy Overflow.
o Occasionally flooded and frequently flooded components of Straw soils need to be reviewed. Occasionally flooded components should be relinked to 54 Loamy Terrace; frequently flooded components should probably be Riparian Complex ES.

This ESD is the best available knowledge. The site concept and species composition table have been used in the field and tested for more than five years. It is expected that as additional information becomes available revisions may be required.

Inventory data references

Information presented here has been derived from NRCS and other federal/state agency clipping and inventory data. Also, field knowledge of range-trained personnel was used. All descriptions were peer reviewed and/or field-tested by various private, state, and federal agency specialists.

Other references

Bakker, K.K. 2003. The effect of woody vegetation on grassland nesting birds: an annotated bibliography. The Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Science 82:119-141.

Barker, W.T. and W. C. Whitman. 1988. Vegetation of the Northern Great Plains. Rangelands 10(6): 266-272. Bluemle. J.P. 2016. North Dakota’s geologic legacy. North Dakota State University Press. 382 pages.

Briske, D.D. (editor). 2017. Rangeland systems – processes, management, and challenges. Springer Series on Environmental Management. 661 pages.

Burgess, R.L. 1965. A study of plant succession in the sandhills of southeastern North Dakota. Proceedings ND Academy of Science 19:62-80

DeKeyser, E.S., G. Clambey, K. Krabbenhoft, and J. Ostendorf. 2009. Are changes in species composition on central North Dakota rangelands due to non-use management? Rangelands 31:16-19

Dix, R.L. and F.E. Smeins. 1967. The prairie, meadow, and marsh vegetation of Nelson County, North Dakota. Canadian Journal of Botany 45:21-57.

Dornbusch, M.J., R.F. Limb, and C.K. Gasch. 2018. Facilitation of an exotic grass through nitrogen enrichment by an exotic legume. Rangeland Ecology & Management 71:691-694.

Dyke, S.R., S.K. Johnson, and P.T. Isakson. 2015. North Dakota state wildlife action plan. North Dakota Game and Fish Department, Bismarck, ND. 468 pages.

Ehrenfeld, Joan G. 2002. Effects of exotic plant invasions on soil nutrient cycling processes. Ecosystems 6:503-523.

Ereth, C., J. Hendrickson, D. Kirby, E. DeKeyser, K. Sedevic, and M. West. Controlling Kentucky bluegrass with herbicide and burning is influenced by invasion level. Invasive Plant Science and Management 10: 80-89.

Ewing, J. 1924. Plant succession on the brush prairie in northwestern Minnesota. Journal of Ecology 12:228- 266.

Gilgert, W. and S. Zack. 2010. Integrating multiple ecosystem services into ecological site descriptions. Rangelands: 32:49-54.

Grant, T.A. and R.K. Murphy. 2005. Changes on woodland cover on prairie refuges in North Dakota, USA. Natural Areas Journal 25:359-368.

Heitschmidt, R. K., K. D. Klement, and M. R. Haferkamp. 2005. Interactive effects of drought and grazing on northern great plains rangelands. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58:11-19.

Hendrickson, J.R., P. S. Johnson, M. A. Liebig, K. K. Sedivec, and G. A. Halvorson. 2016. Use of ecological sites in managing wildlife and livestock: an example with prairie dogs. Rangelands

Hendrickson, J.R., S.L. Kronberg, and E.J. Scholljegerdes. 2020. Can targeted grazing reduce abundance of invasive perennial grass (Kentucky Bluegrass) on native mixed-grass prairie? Rangeland Ecology and Management, 73:547-551.

Higgins, K.F. 1984. Lightning fires in grasslands in North Dakota and in pine-savanna lands in nearby South Dakota and Montana. J. Range Manage. 37:100-103.

Higgins, K.F. 1986. Interpretation and compendium of historical fire accounts in the Northern Great Plains. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Resource Publication 161. 39 pages.

Higgins, K.F., A.D. Kruse, and J.L. Piehl. 1989. Effects of fire in the Northern Great Plains. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Cooperative Extension Service South, Dakota State University. Extension Circular 761. 48 pages.

High Plains Regional Climate Center, University of Nebraska, 830728 Chase Hall, Lincoln, NE 68583-0728. (http://hprcc.unl.edu)

Johnson, Sandra. 2015. Reptiles and amphibians of North Dakota. North Dakota Game and Fish Department. 64 pages.

Jordan, N. R., D.L. Larson, and S.C. Huerd. 2008. Soil modification by invasive plants: effects on native and invasive species of mixed-grass prairies. Biological Invasions 10:177-190.

Lura, C.L., W.T. Barker, and P.E. Nyren.1988. Range plant communities of the Central Grasslands Research Station in south central North Dakota. Prairie Naturalist 20:177-192.

Mader, E., M. Shepherd, M. Vaughan, and S.H. Black. 2011. Attracting native pollinators: protecting North America's bees and butterflies. Accessed at https://xerces.org, May 1, 2017.

North Dakota Division of Tourism, Accessed on February 25, 2019. Available at https://www.ndtourism.com/sports-recreation

North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, Accessed on February 25, 2019. Available at http://www.parkrec.nd.gov/recreationareas/recreationareas.html

Palit, R., G. and E.S. DeKeyser. 2022. Impacts and drivers of smooth brome (Bromus inermis Leyes.) invasion in native ecosystems. Plants: 10,3390. https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/11/10/1340

Palit, R., G. Gramig, and E.S. DeKeyser. 2021. Kentucky bluegrass invasion in the Northern Great Plains and prospective management approaches to mitigate its spread. Plants: 10,817. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10040817

Printz, J.L. and J.R. Hendrickson. 2015. Impacts of Kentucky bluegrass Invasion (Poa pratensis) on ecological processes in the Northern Great Plains. Rangelands 37(6):226-232.

Redmann, Robert E. 1975. Production ecology of grassland plant communities in western North Dakota. Ecological Monographs 45:83-106.

Reeves, J.L., J.D. Derner, M.A. Sanderson, J.R. Hendrickson, S.L. Kronberg, M.K. Petersen, and L.T. Vermeire. 2014. Seasonal weather influences on yearling beef steer production in C3-dominated Northern Great Plains rangeland. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 183:110-117.

Royer, R. A., 2003. Butterflies of North Dakota: an atlas and guide. Minot State University, Minot, ND.

Seabloom, R. 2020. Mammals of North Dakota. North Dakota Institute for Regional Studies, Fargo, ND. 470 pages.

Sedivec, K.D., J.L. Printz. 2014. Ranchers guide to grassland management IV. NDSU Extension Service publication R1707.

Severson, K. E. and C. Hull Sieg. 2006. The nature of eastern North Dakota: pre-1880 historical ecology. North Dakota Institute for Regional Studies.

South Dakota Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks. 2014. South Dakota Wildlife Action Plan. Wildlife Division Report 2014-03.

Spaeth, K.E., Hayek, M.A., Toledo, D., and Hendrickson, J. 2019. Cool season grass impacts on native mixedgrass prairie species in the Norther Great Plains. America’s Grassland Conference: Working Across Boundaries. The Fifth Biennial Conference on the Conservation of America’s Grasslands. Bismarck, ND. 20-22 August.

Tidwell, D., D.T. Fogarty, and J.R. Weir. 2021. Woody encroachment in grasslands, a guide for understanding risk and vulnerability. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service publication E- 1054. 32 pages.

Toledo, D., M. Sanderson, K. Spaeth, J. Hendrickson, and J. Printz. 2014. Extent of Kentucky bluegrass and its effect on native plant species diversity and ecosystem services in the northern great plains of the United State. Invasive Plant Science and Management 7(4): 543-552.

USDA, NRCS. 2021. National range and pasture handbook, (https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084)

USDA, NRCS. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.

USDA, NRCS. National Soil Information System, 100 Centennial Mall North, Room 152, Lincoln, NE 68508- 3866 (https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/survey/tools/?cid=nrcs142p2_053552)

USDA, NRCS. National Water & Climate Center, 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd, Suite 802, Portland, OR 97232-1274. (https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/)

USDA, NRCS. 2001. The PLANTS database, Version 3.1 (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.

USDA, NRCS, Various Published Soil Surveys.

USDI BLM.1999. Utilization studies and residual measurements. Interagency Technical Reference 1734-3.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; designation of critical habitat for the Dakota skipper and Poweshiek skipperling; Vol. 79 No. Final Rule October 1, 2015, 50 CFR Part 17.

Vinton, M.A. and E.M. Goergen. 2006. Plant-soil feedbacks contribute to the persistence of Bromus inermis in tallgrass prairie. Ecosystems 9: 967-976.

Whitman, W.H., H. Hanson, and R. Peterson. 1943. Relation of drought and grazing to North Dakota range lands. North Dakota Agricultural Experimentation Bulletin 340.

Contributors

Stan Boltz, NRCS Range Management Specialist; Michael D. Brand, State Land Dept., Director Surface Management; David Dewald, NRCS State Biologist; Paul Drayton, NRCS District Conservationist; Jody Forman, NRCS Range Management Specialist;
Dennis Froemke, NRCS Range Management Specialist; Jeff Printz, NRCS State Range Management Specialist; Josh Saunders, NRCS Range Management Specialist; Kevin Sedivec, Extension Rangeland Management Specialist;
Jeff Printz/Stan Boltz
Darrell Vanderbusch, NRCS Resource Soil Scientist; and Lee Voigt, NRCS Range Management Specialist.
ND NRCS: David Dewald, Jonathan Fettig, Alan Gulsvig, Mark Hayek, John Kempenich, Chuck Lura, Jeff Printz, Steve Sieler, and Hal Weiser.

Approval

Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 3/31/2025

Print Options