Shoreline vegetation and general wildlife values around Grand Lake, Oklahoma

              Z 2215.8 S559v 1988 c.1
SHORELINE VEGETATION AND GENERAL WILDLIFE VALUES
AROUND GRAND LAKE, OKLAHOMA
prepared By:
Nanette E. Erickson and David M. Leslie, Jr.
Oklahoma cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Department of Zoology
Oklahoma state university
stillwater, OK 74078
Prepared For:
Benham-Holway Power Group
Park Towers
5314 south Yale
Tulsa, OK 74135-7457
January 1988
Oklahoma State University Library
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
overview
study objectives
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
General vegetation Region
General Faunal Characteristics .' .
METHODS
Vegetation Associations
Delineation of Terrestrial and wetland Habitats
wildlife Habitat Values
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
vegetation Associations,
wildlife Habitat Values
LITERATURE CITED
APPENDICES
Appendix A •
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Page
1
1
2
2
3
4
4
45
8
9
9
18
22
•...,.
.-
24
29
37
40
46
52
55
59
68
INTRODUCTION
Overview
The Pensacola Hydropower Project in northeastern Oklahoma was licensed
by the Federal Power commission in 1939. The project includes Pensacola Dam,
the powerhouse, and the Grand Lake 0' the cherokees (i.e., Grand Lake).
During the application process for relicensing, the Federal Energy
Regulatory commission (FERC) required the Gr~nd River Dam Authority (GRDA) to I
"describe the lands between the 735-foot elevation and the 755-foot elevation
of the reservoir in terms of riparian vegetation, and the food, cover, and
nesting habitat that the lands provide for wildlife of recreational or :
commerical value (e.g., deer, waterfowl such as mallard and wood duck, other
game animals, furbearers, and raptorial birds)." Elevation 755 is the top of
the flood pool, whereas 735 generally was used as the bottom of the power pool
until 1981. Because extensive shoreline development has occurred adjacent to
the reservqir, both the Oklahoma Department of wildlife conservation (ODWC)
and the u.s. Fish and wildlife service (USFWS) recommended that this study
include habitat 0.25 miles inshore from the 755-foot contour.
The report that follows presents vegetation and general wildlife
information requested by FERC, as agreed upon by the ODWC and the USFWS.
Information on waterfowl will be presented in a separate report.
1
II
i
r
I
I
Sfudy OhjCCfivcs
specific objectives of the vegetation portion of our study were:
1) enumerate acreages of land cover types between elevations 735-742
Pensacola Datum (USGS CU. S. Geological survey elevation (feet)] 736.07-
743.07), 742-755 (USGS 756.07), and 755-1/4 mile from 755 of the Grand River
Dam Reservoir and provide cover type maps; and
2) assess vegetation within major cover types between 735-755 with
regard to its value as food, cover, and nesting habitat for wildlife of
recreational and commercial value.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
Grand Lake is located in northcentral Oklahoma (Lat. 36028', Long.
95002'). The reservoir originally was constructed for hydropower generation
but also is used for flood control, water supply, recreation, and fish and
wildlife. The reservoir has a drainage area of 10,298 mi2, and a mean depth
of 35.9 ft (Oklahoma Water Resources Board 1984). Maximum capacity of the
reservoir is 2,213,000 ac-ft, and mean discharge 3.6 mi downstream from the
Pensacola Dam is 6,909 cfs (Oklahoma Water Resources Board 1984). At the top
of the power pool (i.e., elevation 745 Pensacola Datum), the reservoir has a
surface area of 46,500 ac; it covers 59,200 ac at the top of the flood control
pool (i.e., elevation 755 penscaola Datum). The dam was completed by GRDA in
1940 and impounded part of the Grand (Neosho) River drainage system.
Environmental conditions of Grand Lake are typified by annual means of 600F
2
ambient air temperature, 40 inches of precipitation, and 48 inches of lake
evaporation (Oklahoma water Resources Board 1984).
General Vecefative Recion
Grand Lake lies within the oak (Quercus spp.)-hickory (Carya spp.)
forest and oak-hickory bluestem (Andropogon spp.) parkland ecoregions
described by Bailey (1976). The oak-hickory. forest ecoregion represents the
most western portion of the eastern deciduous forest. Bottomland succession
in this ecoregion is characterized by eastern cottonwood (Populus deltoides)
and willow (salix spp.) pioneers in areas that undergo periodic flooding
(e.g., exposed mudflats), followed by establishment of elm (ulmus spp.), ash
(Fraxinus spp.), maple (~ spp.), pin oak (Quercus palustris), and hackberry
(celtis occidentalis) on stable land surfaces (Teskey and Einckley 1977a).
Secondary succession includes dominance by boxelder (Acer negundo) and silver
maple (Acer saccharinurn). Eastern cottonwood also is a pioneer species in
bottomlands of the oak-hickory bluestem parkland ecoregion; later seral stages
are dominated by silver maple and American elm (ulmus americana), associated
with pecan (Carya illinoensis), hackberry, pin oak, swamp privet (Forestiera
acuminata), and hawthorn (Craetagus spp.) (Teskey and Hinckley 1977a).
Prior to impoundment, all woody vegetation within the reservoir below
elevation 745 was removed. Therefore, the woody vegetation now occurring
below that elevation has developed since 1940.
3
General Faunal Characlcri!>lic<;
Numerous fish and wildlife species of state and federal interest occur
.-
in northeastern oklahoma near Grand Lake. Generally, terrestrial species that
are typical of the eastern deciduous forest are present in the area east of
Grand Lake, while species with greater tall grass prairie affinity occur west
of the lake. Bottomland forests near Grand Lake and its associated wetlands
, are habitats that likely support the greatest diversity of wildlife (Brabander
~-;' et a1. 19~5). Mid-winter waterfowl surveys conducted by the Oklahoma
Department of wildlife Conservation indicate that Grand Lake can be an
important area for wintering ducks and geese. The lake al~o supports
productive communal and recreational fisheries.
METHODS
Vegetation As!>ocialions
All field investigations followed procedures that were acceptable to the
u.s. Fish and wildlife Service' and theoklaho~a .Department. of _.wildlife
Conservation. Vegetation classifications were those recommended for use in
the u.s. Fish and wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP).
Data vere collected from the folloving land cover types: upland deciduous
forest, bottomland forest, cropland, grassland/savannah, mudflat
(unconsolidated shoreline), emergent wetland, and steep rocky shbreline.
4
Generally, twenty 50-m line transects were placed randomly in each habitat
type. vegetative cover of the canopy and shrub layer were measured along each
line transect; herbaceous cover was estimated in five I_m2 plots in
association with each line transect. Additional habitat attributes were
measured following standard HEP guidelines and methods based on habitat values
for great blue heron (Ardea herodias), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens),
gray squirrel (sciurus carolinensis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginiana), eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), wood duck (Aix
sponsa), and eastern cottontail (sylvilagus floridanus) (Appendix A).
Dc)inC<llion ofTcrrc~lria) Hahilals
Land cover types within three elevation zones (pensacola Data_ 735-742,c
742-755, and 755-1/4 mile from 755) of Grand Lake were determined from aerial
photographs. Photointerpretations were performed by the center for
Applications of Remote sensing, oklahoma state University, stillwater,
Oklahoma. Habitat types below elevation 744 were delineated from color
infrared paper positive photographs (1:58,OOO scale) from 18 March .. 1980
(elevation 737) and 5 April 1980 (elevation 743); the majority of the lake was
covered by"the 18 March 1980 photographs •. Color infrared film positives
(1:58,000 scale) obtained on 22 July 1984 (elevation 744) and 5 september 1984
(elevation 744) also were used.
Interpretation of 1980 and 1984 photography for land cover types used
standard photo interpretative techniques, such as color, tone, texture, and
pattern, and areal association. For example, 1980 photography used color to
5
,i~-
1-°I'
'-,I,;,",:"
~ I~·
differentiate coniferous from deciduous forest, as the latter had not leafed
out by that date, whereas conifers were bright green (or red on the infrared
photography). upland and bottomland forests were separated based on tone and
texture of the forested areas on the 1984 photography.
National wetland Inventory (NWI) maps were used to identify wetland
categories (see Cowardin [1979) for criteria by which wetland types were
differentiated). NWI information was merged with present photointerpretation
results, which increased the total number of identifiable land cover types.
In most cases, NWI and photointerpretation results corresponded well, although
the interpretation generally increased areas of bottomland forest and revised
several tracts as pasture or cropland that previously were designated as
bottomland forest by the N~I. f. ",
Land cover type information were compiled, enlarged, when n~c~e,~ary, and
registered to 1:24,000 scale USGS quadrangle maps. The 742 elevation was
established from water levels of 5 April 1980 and 22 July 1984 photography and
linear interpolation of USGS elevation data from map quadrangles. The 755
contour corresponded to the USGS 756 contour designated on USGS quadrangles
maps. Lines denoting 1/4 mile from the lake zone were, derived, by measuring
1/4 mile distances from the 755 contour with a drafting compass._
r
Twelve land cover types were distinguished us~ng aerial photography
and/or National wetland Inventory maps, and were designated on cover type maps
by the corresponding symbols:
1) Upland Deciduous Forest: Ui
2) Upland coniferous (Pine) Forest: Ni
6
3) Bottomland (Floodplain) Forest: B·,
4) cropland: c (tilled fields);
5) Pasture: P (improved pasture, hay and alfalfa fields);
6) Grassland/Savannah: G (primarily native vegetation, grass and
trees, unimproved pasture);
7) Developed: D (houses, cities and industrial areas, golf courses,
infrastructures);
8) Mudflat (unconsolidated Shoreline): US (NWI definition);
9) Emergent Wetland: E (NWI definition);
10) Scrub/shrub Wetland: W (NWI definition);
11) Ponded Water: W (not including the lake or river); and
12) steep Rocky Sho~eline: using the NWI definitions, this cover type
should have been mapped as unconsolidated shore; however,because'of the
extremely narrow width of this feature, the mapping scale, and the
maximum width of drafting equipment, accurate identification and
location as a cover type on final maps was not feasible.
Acreage counts of land cover types were computed by quadrangle and
county for each elevation zone using a graphic digitizer. The lowest zone
(735-742) aid not exist for some quadrangles at the upper-elevation parts of
the lake.
7
Wildlife Hahitat Values
values of important terrestrial habitats to selected game and nongame
species were assessed using the Wildlife Habitat Appraisal Guide (WHAG), which
was developed for southcentral Missouri. standardized evaluation forms
(Appendix B) were used to quantify habitat characteristics of upland deciduous
forest, bottomland forest, rocky shoreline, cropland, and grassland/savannah,
and to generate indices that reflected habitat value for wildlife (excluding
waterfowl which will be discussed in another report). Three wildlife
biologists who participated in the vegetation assessment, and thus were
familiar with the Grand Lake area, were asked to evaluate habitats using WHAG.
Resulting means from the three appraisals were used to rate habitats from poor
to excellent for particular wildlife species.
8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vegclalion A<;socialions
A total of 21,982.1 acres lie below the top of the flood control pool at
Grand Lake (i.e., between 735-755), which includes 8,626.8 acres between
elevations 735-742 and 13,355.3 acres beween elevations 742-755 (Table 1).
summaries of habitat acreages by county and quadrangle (which are further
separated by terrestrial and wetland habitats) are provided in Appendices C,
D, and E. Fifty-eight woody species were encountered in these habitats during
our field study (Table 2); of these, 21 species were known mast producers and
therefore important to wildlife (Table 3). Abundance of mast species varied
among habitats. upland deciduous forest in the Grand Lake study area had a
mean of 4.9 mast trees/50 m transect; bottomland forests means ranged from 1.4
mast trees/transect adjacent to Grand Lake to 4.2 mast trees/transect near
Miami, oklahoma where forest tracts were relatively more mature.
upland deciduous forests comprised 1,411.0 ac and 2,786.8 ac in the two
lowest zones, respectively (Table 1), and were dominated by post oak (Quercus
stellata)-blackjack oak (2. marilandica), northern red oak (2. rubra)-white
oak (2. alba), and black oak/(2. velutina)-norther:n red oak complexes.
Understory of this land cover type was dominated by shrubs such as buckbrush
(symphoricarpos occidentalis), virginia creeper (parthenocissus guinguefolia),
trumpetcreeper (Campis radicans), greenbriars (smilax spp.), and grapes (vitis
spp.). Herbaceous cover was sparse; leaf litter dominated.
9
Table 1. Total land cover types (acres) by elevational zone at Grand Lake,
Oklahoma.
ZONESa (ACRES)
LAND COVER TYPE 735-742 --742-755 TOTALS
TERRESTRIAL HABITATS
UPLAND FORESTS 1411. 0 2786.8- 31920.2 36118.0
DECIDUOUS 1411.0 2784.2 31799.3 35994.5
CONIFEROUS 0.0 2.6 120.9 123.5
BOTTOMLAND FORESTS 1719.6 5555.0 4373.7 -11648.3
AGRICULTURE 19.8 1577.7 12830.2 14427.7
CROPLAND 0.0 439.6 4821. 8 5261. 4
PASTURE 19.8 -1138.1 8008.4 9166.3
GRASSLAND/SAVANNAH 151.7 1955.3 16712.1 18819.1
- . :
WETLANDS/DEEPWATER HABITATS -- - . ", - ........ '
EMERGENT WETLANDS 34.0 144.6 55.1- 233.7
SCRUB/sHRUB WETLANDS 193.8 -268.0 63.9 525.7
MUDFLATS 4993.9 645.Y 22.9 -5661.9 '
PONDED WATER 89.0 -.- 69.7 87.6 246.3- --
DEVELOPED AREAS- 13.4 353.1 5034.3 5400.8 -- ......
TOTALS 8626.8- f3355;3 71100.0 _ 93081. 5 -
STEEP ROCKY SHORELINE (MILESfc: 137.939
a Elevation zones (feet) agreed upon by GROA, ODWC; and USFWS; USGS
elevations.
b To 1/4 mile from 755 foot elevation.
c A linear measu£cment because the zone was too narrow to accurately
digitize.
10
Table 2. Woody species from Grand Lake, oklahoma.
SCIENTIFIC 'NAME COMMON NAME STUDY SITEa
M-B G-U G-B G-R
Acer negundo
Acer saccharinum
Acer saccharum
Amorpha fruticosa
Bumelia lanuginosa
campis radicans
carpinus caroliniana
Carya sp.
Carya cordiformis
carya texana
Carya illinoensis
Carya laciniosa
carya tomentosa
celti.occidentalis
cephalanthus occidentalis
cercis canadensis
cladrastis kentukea
Cornus drummondii
Cornua florida
Diospyros virginiana
Forestiera acuminata
Fraxinus americana
Fraxinua pennsylvanica
Gleditsia triacanthos
Gymnocladus dioica
Juglans nigra
Juniperus virginiana ~
Morus rubr e-
Parthenocissus quinque folia
Pinus echinata
Platanus occidentalis
Populus deltoides
Prunus sp.
Quercus alba
Quercus macrocarpa
Quercusmarilandica
Quercus muehlenbergii
Quercus palustris
Quercus rubra
I
I
J
I
J
Boxelder
silver Maple
sugar Maple
Dull-leaf Indigobush
chittamwood
Trumpetcreeper
Ironwood
Hickory
Bitternut Hickory
Black Hickory
Pecan
shellbark Hickory
Mockernut Hickory
American Hackberry
Buttonbush
Redbud
Yellowwood
Roughleaf DOgwood
Flowering Dogwood
Persimmon
Swamp Privet
White Ash
Green Ash
Honeylocust
Kentucky Coffee-tree
Black walnut
Eastern Red .cedar
Red Mulberry
virginia Creeper
shortleaf Pine
Sycamore
Eastern cottonwood
cherry
white oak
Bur oak
Blackjack Oak
chinquapin oak
Pin oak
Northern Red oak
x
x
x
xxx
x
xxx
x
x· x
x
x
x x
x'
x
x
x
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x xx
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xx x
x
x x
x x
x x
x'
x'
x·
x
x
x
x
x
x·
x
x
·x
x x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
I
I
11
Table 2. continued.
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STUDY SITEa
M-B G-U G-B G-R
Quercus shumardii Shumard oak x x
Quercus stellata Post oak x x x
Quercus velutina Black oak x x x
Rhus aromatica skunkbush x
Ribes grossularia Gooseberry X
Robinia pseudoacacia Black Locust x x
Rosa sp. Rose X
Rubus sp. Blackberry X X
salix nigra Black willow x x
sassafras albidum Sassafras x
smilax sp. Greenbriar x x x
symphoricarpos occidentalis Buckbrush x x x
Tilia americana American Basswood x x x x
Toxicodendron radicans Poison Ivy x x x x
Ulmus alata .winged Elm x x
ulmus americana American Elm x x x x
Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm x x x x
vaccinium sp. Blueberry x
vitis sp. Grape x x x x
a woody species were observed at the following study sites: M-B = Miami
bottomland forest; G-U = Grand Lake upland deciduous forest; G-B = Grand
Lake bottomland forest; G-R = Grand Lake steep rocky shoreline •
.12
Table 3. Mast values of woody species from Grand Lake, Oklahoma (adapted from
Hall 1977).
COMMON NAME8 MAST VALUE
Boxelder
Silver Maple
Sugar Maple
Dull-leaf Indigobush
chittamwood
Trumpetcreeper
Ironwood
Hickory
Bitternut Hickory
Black Hickory
Pecan
shellbark Hickory
Mockernut Hickory
American Hackberry
Buttonbush
Redbud
Yellowwood
Roughleaf Dogwood
Flowering Dogwood
Persimmon
Swamp Privet
White Ash
Green Ash
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
catkins,nut1ets, and buds eaten by birds; seeds,
bark, and wood are consumed by rabbits and beavers;
foliage eaten by deer; important understory species
for gray squirrels in bottomland hardwoods.
Nuts eaten by squirrels; nuts and flowers eaten by
wild turkey and some passerines;nutsand bark eaten
by black bears, foxes, rabbits, and raccoons; deer may
eat leaves, twigs, and nuts.
Usually not eaten by squirrels.
Not referenced' ' .
Not referenced
Not referenced
A preferred mast'food for squirrels.
Fruits are eaten by many species of birds and small
mammals; are a preferred fall and winter food for wild
turkey and a principle food for raccoons.
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
Fruit a preferred fbod of wild turkey, white-tailed
deer,'ruffed grouse, and quail; fruit also eaten by
pas'Serines, rabbits, black bears, foxes, wood ducks,
and chipmunks •
Fruits are eaten by opossum, raccoons, foxes, deer,
skunks/wild turkey, quail, crows, rabbits, squirrels,
feral hogs, cattle, and passerine; deer and cattle
browse sprouts.
Not referenced
Not referenced
Not referenced
13
Table 3. continued.
COMMON NAMEa MAST VALUE
Honeylocust
Kentucky Coffee-tree
Black Walnut
Eastern Red Cedar
Red Mulberry
virginia Creeper
shortleaf Pine
Sycamore
Eastern Cottonwood
cherry
white oak
Bur Oak
Blackjack Oak
Chinquapin oak
Pin Oak
Northern Red Oak
Shumard oak
Post oak
Fruit eaten by rabbits, squirrels, quail, and white-tailed
aeer; young plants are preferred forage for
rabbits; seed pods eaten by deer and cattle; flowers
area good source of bee food.
Not referenced
Most important native walnut for wildlife; nuts stored
by squirrels as a winter food source.
Fruit eaten by quail, grouse, wild turkey, rabbits,
foxes, 'raccoons, skunks, opossums, and coyotes;
provides good nesting habitat for birds and cover for
deer; also an emergency food for deer in times of
stress.
Fruit a preferred food of passerines, squirrels, and
grouse; a1so~aten by wild turkey, quail, small _
mammals such'as opossums and raccoons; ~foliage,browsed'
by deer';"rabbits 'feed on bark during winter~:" ' '
Not'referenced ": " '~,':eS ,,', ' , ,,,',, , ,
cones are ,a"food's'~urce'for,'s"quirrelsparti~ularly ~<~
during 'sfress'periods;'seeds:fromcones are eaten by
pasaer Lnes, quail,' grouse,' w1ldturkey , and'" ' ,,','
woodpeckers; seeds,-bark, and foliage are eaten by
black bears, beavers, and rabbits; foliage may be
Nbortowsreedferbeyncdeeder but'u'su'a-l-l'y ,"a.s,em.e.rge,nc,y,,' food.
,Not"re.ferep_c,~dc,':- ; -- " .. -- ,; "::, "", " --. , .. , ' ," ",
Fruitsare eaten by wild turkey,' squirrels; zaccoons ;
passer'ines; ducks, grouse,'and quail;' fruits, twigs,',
and foliage" eaten by deer ~nd rabbits. '
Ac-orns from'the white oak group are considered most'
palatable;, nuts 'eaten by mallards, ,:woodducks" :~' ,
squir,rels,quail,' wild turkey; ~:grouse,:woodpeckers,:"
black 'bears, raccoons ,.-anddeer';'deer' also ~browse "on -.
foliage .and twigs.,.'__" ':---;':;,J", " ':"
Not r'eferenced ' ., ,,~'" " "
squirrels'prefer these~corns overthose;of most other red oaks".' ".-_--
Not referenced
Not referenced
Acorns are bitter and do not appear to be used by
wildlife as much as other oak species~' -::", ~,
Not referenced'
Acorns eaten by many bird~"andmamma1s ~'
14
Table 3. continued.
COMMON NAMEa MAST VALUE
, ..:;-'
Black oak
Skunkbush
Gooseberry
Black Locust
Rose
Blackberry
Black willow
sassafras
Greenbriar
Buckbrush
American Basswood
Poison Ivy
winged Elm
American Elm
slippery Elm
Blueberry
Grape
Not referenced
.Not referenced
Not referenced
seeds are eaten to
squirrels; foliage
tailed deer.
Not referenced . . ~',: Fruits eaten by deer, turkey, quail, raccoons,
chipmunks, grouse, squirrels, passerines, and
woodcocks; dried fruits that persist are eaten in
autumn and winter.
Not referenced
Fruit eaten by passerines, wild turkey, grouse, quail,
raccoons, squirrels, black bear, and other mammals;'
white-tailed deer browse twigs in winter and new,
growth in spring and summer.
Fruit eaten by grouse, wild turkeYi quail"passerines,
whi te-tailed deer, black bear, opossum, raccccn, '.
squirrels, and rats .', '.<'.r «: " . ,
Not rE!ferenced
Not referenced... '
Fruit eaten by wood ducks, grouse, quail,' wild"turkey;'
also eaten by squirrels when other mast is sparse;
deer eat fruit and browse leaves and twigs. ...
Not referenced,_
Not referenced
Not referenced
Fruit eaten by passerines, quail, grouse, wild turkey,
black bear, deer, .chipmunks, rabbits, foxes r i: and- ..-. .
raccoons; buds and foliage also are eaten by grou~e.:
Fruit eaten by passerines, grouse, black bear,. deer,
raccoons, wild turkey, quail, wood duc~s, 'squirrelsi
and red foxes; young canes and dried leaves
occasionally eaten by deer; shredded bark' provides' .
nesting material for many species; foliage provides
cover for many species.
a limited extent by quail and
of seedlings is browsed by white-
. "'.
a Common names corre'spond to scientific' names given in Table 2.
. lS . -'~
The delineation of 1,411.0 ac of upland forests in the lowest zone
(i.e., 735-742 elevation) from photointerpretation deserves further
discussion. of the total, 74.5% of those acres occurred in the Bernice (440.3
acj, Grove (495.3 ac j , and chloeta (115.8 ac ) guadrangles(AppendixD)-. Under
the old rule curve between 1960-81, all areas below 742 were inundated for an
average of 23, 27, and 27 days in May, June, and July, respectively. It is
unlikely that truly upland species could survive such inundation; the oak
complexes measured in the upland areas are largely intolerant of flooding
(Teskey and Hinckley 1978). On the ot~erhand, bottomland species such as
willow (salix spp.), bur oak (Q. macrocarpa), box elder, and some elms (ulmus
spp.) can survive such inundation even during the latter part of the growing
season (Teskey and Hinckl~y 1978), as was occurring on Grand Lake.-upland and
bottomland forests around Grand Lake-have-many woody, species' in common (Table
2), and we believe that those forest stands delineated by photointerpretation
and NWI_ maps as upland in the lowest zone are, dominated by species with
bottomland affinity (i.e., able to persist given the pattern of_ s~asonal"
inundation under the old rule curve) .'~-Field reconnaissance verified this
contention.
Bottomland hardwood forests constituted ~,719.6 ac between elevations .~,/
735-742 ahd the largest area between elevations 742~755 (5,555.0 a6)~(Table
1). Bottomlands of Grand Lake typically contained few mast species ,:with most
areas dominated by green ash associations. pioneer,black willow (Salix
nigra)-eastern cottonwood complexes were secondary associations often' found in
drainage areas of the lake. In contrast, older bottomland hardwood forests
found near Miami, Oklahoma were dominated by mast associations of bur oak-pin '
16
oak and pecan; non-mast associations such as box elder and slippery elm~(Ulmus . "::;",' .
rubra) occurred secondarily. Understory of bottomland hardwoods was more lush
than in upland tracts. Shrubs dominated understory in this cover type;
typical species included buckbrush, trumpetcreeper, greenbriars, grapes, and
poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). wetland herbaceous species such as
smartweeds (Polygonum spp.), uniola (uniola latifolia), jewelweeds (Impatiens
app.), and bedatraws (Gallium spp.) also were abundant in the understory.
steep rocky shorelines measured 137.9 miles (Table 1); linear
measurements were made because the cover type was too narrow to accurately
digitize. steep rocky shorelines composed approximately 22% of the total
shoreline of 624 miles. Dominant species included sycamore (platanus
occidenta1is) and slippery elm associations, with white ash (Fraxinus -.- - .
,
americana) associations occurring secondarily. Sparse grasses ,and, ,,," ;:.',!- .' ���•.••• J'
trumpetcreeper dominated understory in this cover type.
Grassland/savannah comprised 151. 7 ac of the)ower zone and',1,955.3 ac
of the upper zone., Vegetation associations in grassland/savannah habitats
were typified by legume-graminoid interspersions. No croplands occurred
within the lower zone, but 439.6 acoccurred in the upper zone. At the time
of our study, croplands most often were planted in sorghum or were fallow.
Mudflats comprised thef,greatest acreage (4,993.9 ac)" in the Grand Lake
lower zone (Table 1), and typically were dominated" by, smartweeds, (polygonum
spp.) and sedges (~ spp. and Cyperus spp.), with secondary occurrences of
reed canary grass (phalaris arundinacea) and other graminoids.Woody
seedlings, such as black willow, eastern cottonwood, and silver maple, also
were observed • Emergent wetlands also were, dominated by~dges,# ,;smartweeds,
17
"reed canarygrass,-an~ w60dy s~edlings; this habitat was
C, .• > _' ", ~:'"
~:~':.'-;';.::,~..~-,;.~'::.:~:
" ..", - ..
in the Grand Lake area (178.6 ac).
-.'.
Wildlife Habitat Values
'. . , r-: '~;_:-F~~.~:-::?:0,;-':-"~:
shore~ine ofG.rand''I.ake, -. ,~'". ~.;':;,:~:
Riparian areas, such as those around the are
extremely important habitats for wildlife (Brabander et a1.·1985) :'and such
areas typically are used by various wildlife species disproportionately
......-
compared to other more upland habitats (Thomas et ale 1979). Riparian areas
'.: .' "" -,,--' ..
tend to provide wildlife with food, water, and cover in suitableprop~rtions,
whereas other habitat types may lack one or more of the three~These
important habitats also can encourage other uses; e. g., cattle grazing and
recreational developments • • such activities can degrade riparianh~bitatsto . .., ." ...
.•... . ' ~.., '.~ ...- .'
'. .:
, ~: "r ".' .
the point that they are unaui t abLe for some wildlife species, (Thoina~" .';..
1979).
Riparian wildlife species can be influenced more by
characteristics than by plant species composition within a habitat "(Rice
a1. 1984); generally, type, size, and ~r~:ng~m-en~'Of can~~/:t:~":~~~:.<!~~
et
\ , ' j(", •• - -!-.; ••.... "'<:;~"":..: :.;;,;,
", - .",'" -< '. '~.', ':- /.:;~~'. ; ;:".' ;;., ':~'7'<'.'~'~~;:.'
herbaceous vegetation determine wildlife suitability of a site (Brinson et a1.
1981).
~::~: ::~~~!-::..:
Elevation also can influence wildlife use of'riparian" habitat.s. For.
"'-' ', :- -
'../" , .' ..."..... ...!.,... ,.).;::~.~-:.
example, birds use riparian areas at low elevat-i"o- n, s .m, ore extensively than high .: :~::~~'- -: .....:~..~:.::~.;. ~
.elevations; similar trends may exist among other"vertebrate~ as.well '(Burkhard'
... '"
'.'. ~.
--,-' .:
.: .
1978). Effects of hydrology on wildlife also have been docu~ented';:'e~hemeral
streams are'of lesser value to wildlife because they do not regularly support
."-'~" ";"'::"~ ...:~).:.... ~~.~~,:
fish, an important food base for riparian wildlife, whereas periodic" floods --
often disperse aquatic and terrestrial species (Brinson et a1. '1981)~;:,
.- ' ..
18
Agriculture adjacent to riparian zones can favor white-tailed deer (Glasgow
and Noble 1974) and many bird species (carothers et a1. 1974), although such
land use practices historically have been responsible for eliminating riparian
areas and causing pernicious impacts to sensitive species of wildlife.
Based on museum records from oklahoma state University and the
university of Oklahoma for the counties around Grand Lake and consultations
with individuals with faunal expertise, 27 amphibians, 55 reptiles, 176 birds,
and 39 mammals potentially occur within the Grand Lake study area (Appendices
F, G, H, and I, respectively). Five amphibians, 2 reptiles, 3 birds, and 3
mammals are considered endangered or threatened in oklahoma (Rare and
Endangered species of Oklahoma committee 1975); aside from the bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), the status of populations of these species
'.~ .:: ,. i
occurring in the immediate vicinity of Grand Lake is not known. However,~o. ", ,.,..~.
species is so restricted geographically as to be impacted.singularly ~ythe ..
continued hydropower operation of Grand Lake.
values from WHAG analyses indicated that most major habitats .(e. g.,'
upland deciduous forests,' bottomland ~'hardwood forest~, r~'~ky ~horeli~es,' .and
grassland/savannahs) comprised "good~ habitat for.the,wildlife~p~cies j
~ "~
, .
examined (Table 4). Although most ratings for white-tailed deer were good,
they approached "excellent" Ifor most.habitats d...e.,. 0.6,4-0.74). : That',
pattern, although not as strong (i. e., O.6l-0.72),·~iso:was evident for
~- .•...
eastern wild turkey. Nevertheless, turkey populations in northeastern
Oklahoma are sparse. Habitat values for northern bobwhite (colinus
virginianus) and eastern cottontails were good but approached fair in most ....
cases (1. e., 0.54-0.61). Pileated wood~eckers (Drycopu~.p.~i. lea,Atus) were " ....•..... .... "":'
':.:
-, -:
,.,
HABITATS
Table 4. wildlife Habitat Appraisal Guide (WHAG) valuesa for selected terrestrial game and
nongame species from important habitats in the Grand Lake area. values range from 1.0 (ideal habitat)
to 0.0 (unacceptable habitat).
UPLAND DECIDUOUS BOTTOMLAND STEEP ROCKY GRASSLAND! CROPLAND
FOREST FOREST SHORELINE SAVANNAH
SPECIES X SE Rb X SE R X SE R X SE R X SE R ',<:
White-tailed Deer 0.74 0.042 G 0.67 0.070 G 0.64 0.072 G 0.80 0.009 E 0.72 0.049 G
Eastern wild Turkey 0.76 0.052 E 0.69 0.055 G 0.61 0.078 G 0.67 0.012 G 0.72 0.018 G
Northern Bobwhite 0.57 0.010 G 0.61 0.011 G 0.56 0.015 G 0.56 0.045 G 0.46 0.050 F
Eastern Cottontail 0.55 0.024 G 0.60 0.027 G 0.56 0.003 G 0.54 0.085 G 0.44 0.052 F
Fox squirrel 0.63 0.084 G 0.73 0.043 G 0.61 0.100 G
Gray squirrel 0.68 0.075 G 0.70 0.081 G 0.59 0.082 G
pileated woodpecker 0.71 0.034 G 0.61 0.078 G 0.57 0.026 G
Mourning Dove -- 0.41 0.014 F 0.55 .0.023 G
a Means (X) ± standard Error (SE) calculated from three independent evaluations by individuals
involved in vegetation assessment in the Grand Lake area.
b R = Habitat Ratings; E = excellent (1.0-0.75),G ,;;go~d (0.74-0.50), and F = fair (0.49-0.25).
observed on several occasions during our vegetation surveys and likely find
good to excellent habitats in older stands in the upland forest. We expected
higher wildlife ratings for bottomland forests (Brabander et ale 1985) than
were observed using WHAG (i. e., 0.60-0.73); apparently, the low density of
mast-producing species relative to the presence of green ash limited the
wildlife value of these areas.
Most of the species that we examined in the WHAG analyses are not
affected appreciably by lake-level fluctuations. Volant (e. g., turkey,
woodpecker, and mourning dove [Zenaida macroura) and arboreal (e. g., gray
and fox squirrels [sciurus niger) species can avoid inundated areas, although
temporary disturbances may force them into secondary or undesirable habitats,
which subsequently could ~ffect population demography. Highly mobile species
that typically inhabit large home ranges (e. g., white-tailed deer and turkey)
also could easily avoid inundated areas. small mammals and reptiles, however,
are less able to avoid areas that are temporarily inundated, and we would
expect greater impacts to populations of those species.
LITERATURE CITED
Bailey, R. G. 1976. Ecoregions of the united states. u. S. Forest Serv,
Intermountain Region, Washington, D.C.
Brabander, J. J., R. E. Hasters, and R. H. short. 1985. Bottomland hardwoods
of eatern Oklahoma: a special study of their status, trends, and values.
u.s. Fish and wildl. Servo Ecol. Serv., Tulsa Oklahoma. 147pp.
Brinson, H. H., B. L. Swift, R. c. Plantico, and J. S. Barclay. 1981.
Riparian ecosystems: their ecology and management. u.s. Fish and wildl.
Servo Eastern Energy and Land Use Team, Kearneysville, Virgo 155pp.
Burkhard, W. T. 1978. vertebarte associateions in lowland versus high
elevation river and stream habitat in colorado. pages 52-55 in W. D.
Grauland, and S. J. Bissell, eds. Lowland river and strQam habitat in
colorado: a symposium. colorado wildl. Soc. and colorado Audubon
Counc., Denver, Colo.
Carothers, S. w., R. R. Johnson, and S. W. Aitchison. 1974. Population and
social organization of southwestern riparian birds. Am. zool. 14:97-
108.
Cowardin, L. H., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe.
Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of
u.S. Fish and wildl. Servo FWS/OBS-79/31. 103pp.
1979.
the united States.
Glasgow, L. L., and R. E. Noble. 1971. The importance of bott~omland
hardwoods to wildlife. Pages 30-43 in proceedings of tht) symposium on
southeastern hardwoods. Louisiana State univ., Baton Rouge.
Oklahoma Water Resources Board. 1984. oklahoma's water atlas. Oklahoma
Water Resour. Board, Pub. No. 120. 186pp.
Rare and Endangered species 6cf Oklahoma comrni, ttee.
vertebrates and plants of Oklahoma. Rare and
Oklahoma Comm., stillwater. 44pp.
1975. Rare and endangered
Endangered ~pecies of
Rice J., B. W. Anderson, and R. D. ohmart. 1984. comparison 0f the
importance of different habitat attributes to avian community
organization. J. wildl. Hanage. 48:895-911.
Teskey, R. 0., and T. H. Hinckley. 1977a. Impact of water Lev e I changes on
woody riaprian and wetland vegetation communities. vol. III: The central
Forest Region. u.s. Fish and wild!. Serv., Nat. stream Alter. Team,
FWS/OBS-77/60. 36pp.
22
Teskey, R. 0., and T. M. Hinckley. 1977b. Impact of water level changes on
woody riparian and wetland communities. vol. I: plant and soil responses
to flooding. u.s. Fish and wildl. Serv., Nat. strea, Alter. Team,
FWS/OBS-77/58. 30pp.
Teskey, R. 0., and T. M. Hinckley. 1978. Impact of water level changes on
woody riparian and wetland communities. vol. VI: Plains grassland
region. u.s. Fish and wildl. Serv., Nat. stream Alter. Team, FWS/OBS-
78/89. 30pp.
Thomas, J. W., C. Maser, and J. E. Rodiek. 1979. Riparian zones in managed
rangelands--their importance to wildlife. Pages 21-31 in O.B. Cope, ed.
Forum--grazing and riparian/stream ecosystems. Trout unlimited, Inc.,
Denver, colo.
23