Horicon National Wildlife Refuge Migratory Game Bird, Upland Game and Big Game Hunt Plan - Environmental Assessment

Environmental Assessment

   Horicon National Wildlife Refuge
Migratory Game Bird, Upland Game and
         Big Game Hunt Plan
                  January 10, 2020

                     Prepared by

                    Erin Railsback

           Horicon National Wildlife Refuge

                    Mayville, WI

Environmental Assessment for opening to common moorhen, American
woodcock, ruffed grouse, black bear, raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia
opossum, bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare and striped skunk hunting
This Environmental Assessment is being prepared to evaluate the effects associated with this
preferred action and complies with the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with
Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500-1509) and Department of the
Interior (43 CFR 46; 516 DM 8) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (550 FW 3) regulations and
policies. The National Environmental Policy Act requires examination of the effects of proposed
actions on the natural and human environment.

1.0 Introduction
Proposed Action
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing to open hunting opportunities for common
moorhen, American woodcock, ruffed grouse, black bear, raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia
opossum, bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare and striped skunk on the Horicon National Wildlife
Refuge in accordance with the refuge’s Migratory Game Bird, Upland Game and Big Game
Hunt Plan.
This proposed action is often iterative and evolves over time during the process as the agency
refines its proposal and learns more from the public, tribes and other agencies. Therefore, the
final proposed action may be different from the original. The final decision on the proposed
action will be made at the conclusion of the public comment period for the Environmental
Assessment and the 2020-2021 Refuge-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations. The
Service cannot open a refuge to hunting and/or fishing until a final rule has been published in the
Federal Register formally opening the refuge to hunting and/or fishing.
Background
Horicon National Wildlife Refuge was established:
“... for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.
16 U.S.C. § 715d (Migratory Bird Conservation Act)

"... suitable for— (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the
protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species
..." 16 U.S.C. § 460k-1

"... the Secretary ... may accept and use ... real ... property. Such acceptance may be
accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors ..." 16
U.S.C. § 460k-2 (Refuge Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. § 460k-460k-4), as amended).

"... conservation, management, and ... restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and
their habitats ... for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans..." 16 U.S.C. §
668dd(a)(2) (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act

The first tract of land was acquired on January 23, 1941 under the authority of the Migratory
Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (16 USC 715d).

                                                 2

The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System), as outlined by the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, as amended by the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), is to:

“…to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management and,
where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant resources and their habitats within
the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.”

The Refuge System Administration Act mandates the Secretary of the Interior in administering
the System to (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4):

   •   Provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife and plants, and their habitats within the
       Refuge System;
   •   Ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge
       System are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans;
   •   Ensure that the mission of the Refuge System described at 16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2) and the
       purposes of each refuge are carried out;
   •   Ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with owners of land adjoining
       refuges and the fish and wildlife agency of the States in which the units of the Refuge
       System are located;
   •   Assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity and water quality to fulfill the
       mission of the Refuge System and the purposes of each refuge;
   •   Recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general public
       uses of the Refuge System through which the American public can develop an
       appreciation for fish and wildlife;
   •   Ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for compatible wildlife-
       dependent recreational uses; and
   •   Monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge.

Therefore, it is a priority of the Service to provide for wildlife-dependent recreation
opportunities, including hunting and fishing, when those opportunities are compatible with the
purposes for which the refuge was established and the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge
System.

The refuge is located in southeastern Wisconsin in both Dodge and Fond du Lac counties.
Public hunting opportunities have been offered on the refuge since 1953. Current opportunities
include hunting for migratory game birds (ducks, geese and coots for special programs only),
hunting for upland game (squirrel, pheasant, rabbit, Hungarian partridge and turkey) and big
game (white-tailed deer) on approximately 21,616 acres of the refuge with 342 acres closed to
hunting.
Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
The purpose of this proposed action is to provide compatible wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities on Horicon National Wildlife Refuge. The need of the preferred action is to meet
the Service’s priorities and mandates as outlined by the Refuge System Administration Act to
“recognize compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses as the priority general uses of the
Refuge System” and “ensure that opportunities are provided within the Refuge System for

                                                3

compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses” (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)). The need of the
proposed action also meets the Service’s implementation of Secretarial Order (S.O.) 3347
Conservation Stewardship and Outdoor Recreation and S.O. 3356 Hunting, Fishing,
Recreational Shooting, and Wildlife Conservation Opportunities and Coordination with States,
Tribes, and Territories by expanding hunting opportunities and aligning Service regulations with
State regulations. The preferred action in the hunt plan includes modifications to provide new
hunting opportunities for common moorhen, American woodcock, ruffed grouse, black bear,
raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia opossum, bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare and striped skunk
to align with existing state laws and provide new hunting opportunities on the refuge.

2.0 Alternatives
Alternatives Considered
Alternative A – Continue Current Hunting Opportunities – No Action Alternative
This alternative would continue to offer hunting for migratory game birds (ducks, geese and
coots for special programs only), hunting for upland game (squirrel, pheasant, rabbit, Hungarian
partridge and turkey) and big game (white-tailed deer) on approximately 21,616 acres of the
Horicon National Wildlife Refuge with 342 acres closed to all hunting. However, this alternative
does not provide more alignment with state regulations as hunting of common moorhen,
American woodcock, ruffed grouse, black bear, raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia opossum,
bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare and striped skunk would not be allowed. Hunting opportunities
would be limited to those interested in only hunting species currently allowed for hunting on the
refuge.

Alternative B – Open the Refuge to Common moorhen, American woodcock, Ruffed grouse,
Black bear, Raccoon, Red fox, Gray fox, Virginia opossum, Bobcat, Coyote, Snowshoe hare and
Striped skunk Hunting, in Addition to the Current Hunting Opportunities – Preferred Alternative
The refuge has prepared a hunt plan, Horicon National Wildlife Refuge Migratory Game Bird,
Upland Game and Big Game Hunt Plan, which is presented in this document as the Preferred
Action Alternative.
Under the Preferred Action Alternative:
Twelve additional species - common moorhen, American woodcock, ruffed grouse, black bear,
raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia opossum, bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare and striped skunk
would open for hunting on 19,751 acres of the refuge.
Hunting season dates for these species would align with Wisconsin State seasons, with the
following exceptions:
   •   coyote, red fox, gray fox, and bobcat season would begin on the first day of the
       traditional nine day gun deer season and end on the last day of fox season (bobcat season
       runs concurrent with Period 1 and reopens for entirety of Period 2).
   •   Virginia opossum and skunk seasons would run concurrently with the State raccoon
       season.
   •   Snowshoe hare season would run concurrently with the State cottontail rabbit season.

                                                4

Hunting regulations for these species would align with the standard State hunting regulations,
with the following exceptions:
   •   Common moorhen would only be hunted by refuge participants in special programs
       (Learn to Hunt Waterfowl or disabled hunts). More detail about these hunts can be found
       in Appendix B, Attachments 2 and 3.
   •   Black bear, raccoon, red fox, gray fox, Virginia opossum, bobcat, coyote, and skunk
       would not be hunted with dogs, artificial lights, and/or at night.
   •   All other current, Horicon National Wildlife Refuge specific regulations, including non-
       toxic shot requirement, permanent blind prohibition, and the nightly removal of portable
       blinds would apply.

Mitigation Measures to Avoid Conflicts:
   •   Several measures will be undertaken to avoid conflicts with trust species. One measure
       would be delaying the opening dates for coyote, red fox, gray fox, bobcat, opossum,
       skunk and snowshoe hare until later in the season so as not to interfere with fall bird
       migration. The second measure would be implementing further restrictions (no use of
       dogs or artificial lights and no night hunting) for black bear, raccoon, red fox, gray fox,
       Virginia opossum, bobcat, and skunk.
This alternative offers increased opportunities for public hunting/fishing and fulfills the Service’s
mandate under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. The Service has
determined that the hunt plan is compatible with the purposes of the Horicon National Wildlife
Refuge and the mission of the Refuge System.

Alternative(s) Considered, But Dismissed from Further Consideration
No other alternatives were considered for further consideration.

3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
Affected Environment

The refuge consists of approximately 21,958 acres in both Dodge and Fond du Lac counties,
Wisconsin.
Horicon National Wildlife Refuge is primarily freshwater cattail marsh.The proposed action is
located in mainly in upland areas but some hunting may occur on dikes that bisect the wetland
portions of the refuge. See map of the general area and proposed project site on the refuge in
Appendix B, Attachment 1.
For more information regarding the affected environment, please see Chapter 3 of the refuge’s
Comprehensive Conservation Plan, which can be found at
https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/Reference/Profile/5985

Environmental Consequences of the Action
This section analyzes the environmental consequences of the action on each affected resource,
including direct and indirect effects. This Environmental Assessment only includes the written
analyses of the environmental consequences on a resource when the impacts on that resource
could be more than negligible and therefore considered an “affected resource.”

                                                 5

Impact Types:
   •   Direct effects are those that are caused by the action and occur at the same time and
       place.
   •   Indirect effects are those that are caused by the action and are later in time or farther
       removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable.
   •   Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other
       past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency
       (Federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions.

Affected Natural Resources and Anticipated Impacts of the Alternatives

Striped Skunk
Striped skunks live in a variety of habitats, but prefer forest edge. They prefer wooded areas, and
brushy areas along streams and ditches. They use abandoned woodchuck, muskrat, or fox
burrows, but often rest above ground during the warmer months. They also will use stumps,
buildings or rock/brush piles as den sites. Skunk are common in Wisconsin, and widely
distributed across the state in a variety of habitats. Skunks are omnivores (eat plant and animal
material), and will eat about anything. They prefer to eat insects, particularly grasshoppers,
beetles and crickets. They also eat grubs and other insect larvae, bees and wasps. When the
opportunity arises they will take mice, rats, voles, shrews, young ground squirrels and rabbits,
nesting birds, nestlings and bird/snake eggs. Due to their musk, they are not a preferred food
item by most predators, but great horned owls, coyote, badger, fox and bobcats take them when
other food resources are scarce. Skunks help control insect and small mammal populations. In
Wisconsin, striped skunks are classified as a furbearer, and an unprotected species under
Wisconsin state law. Unprotected species in Wisconsin can be hunted year-round, and there is no
daily limit or bag limit.

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to skunks on the refuge as there would be no
hunting of this species allowed. Impacts to the skunk population within the state of Wisconsin
would stay consistent with current impacts of hunting outside refuge boundary and is likely to be
not significant.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 5
Estimated Take: 2

Under this alternative, the general hunting area of the refuge (19,751 acres) would be opened to
striped skunk hunting. Trapping is not considered a method of take under this alternative. Many
accounts refer to skunk as a nuisance wildlife animal, so it may be that skunks are not highly
sought after for meat or pelts, but are more likely to be hunted and trapped because they are a
nuisance to private landowners. Regarding trapping, it can be surmised that most skunks are
trapped incidentally, while targeting species such as raccoon and fox. The Fur Trapper Survey
2018-2019 estimated that statewide, 691 or 9.7% of trappers were actively pursuing skunks and
harvested 5,205 skunks during the 2018-19 trapping season. Estimates for hunting were not
available (Dhuey and Rossler 2019). Skunks are not a popular species for hunting and therefore

                                                 6

harvest is likely to be low. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that opening up the refuge to skunk
hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional population as few individuals
will be removed on an annual basis.

Virginia Opossum
Virginia opossum live in wooded areas, although they can be found in a variety of adjacent
habitats. Most often they are observed along the road eating carrion or scavenging for food.
Opossum are the only native marsupial in Wisconsin, and the young will stay in the mother’s
pouch for the first 2-3 months of life. Opossum are omnivores (eat plant and animal material)
and will eat almost anything, including fruit, insects, and mice. Opossum are common in
Wisconsin and widely distributed across the southern part of the state. They help control insect
and small mammal populations. In Wisconsin, opossum are classified as a furbearer, and an
unprotected species under Wisconsin state law. Unprotected species in Wisconsin can be hunted
year-round, and there is no daily limit or bag limit. There was no Wisconsin hunting harvest data
available at the time of this writing.

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to opossum populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 5
Estimated Take: 3

Under this alternative, the general hunting area of the refuge (19,751 acres) would be opened to
opossum hunting. Trapping is not considered a method of take under this alternative. Many
accounts refer to opossum as a nuisance wildlife, so it may be that like skunks, opossums are not
highly sought after for meat or pelts, but are more likely to be hunted and trapped because they
are a nuisance to private landowners. It is estimated there will be few hunters visiting the refuge
on an annual basis harvesting on average three opossums a year. It seems unlikely that opening
up the refuge to hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional population.

Snowshoe Hare
The snowshoe hare range ends at the treeline in Northern Canada and Alaska and extends south
into the Rocky Mountains, Great Lakes Region and the Appalachian Mountains of the United
States (Murray 2000). The snowshoe mainly inhabits the more heavily forested areas of northern
Wisconsin, but does extend into the forested areas of Central Wisconsin. According to Buehler
and Keith, “the southern limit of the Snowshoe Hare distribution in Wisconsin, now and
historically has been established mainly by predator caused mortality which can be significantly
moderated by conifer cover and timely snowfalls” (Buehler and Keith 1982). The southern limit
is often established by low predation rates and the presence of low conifers which provide winter
food, protection from predators, and concealment from predators and inclement weather
(Buehler and Keith 1982). In Wisconsin, snowshoe hare are classified as a small game animal
that is an unprotected species. Unprotected species in Wisconsin can be hunted year-round, and
there is no daily limit or bag limit. The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019 Report estimated that
6,729 hare hunters harvested 14,070 (±7,129) hares (Dhuey 2019a). Small game harvest trends

                                                 7

for snowshoe have trended downward from highs of over 200,000 in 1989 to lows of under
20,000 in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to snowshoe hare populations on the refuge as
there would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 0
Estimated Take: 0
The range of snowshoe hare in Wisconsin is primarily limited to the northern and central part of
the state, other than some small isolated pockets. There have been no recorded snowshoe hare
observations on the refuge. There will be no impact on this species under this alternative.

Black Bear
Black bear are classified as a large carnivore in Wisconsin. There are over 16 subspecies of black
bear, and black bears in Wisconsin belong to the most common and widespread subspecies
ranging from Alaska, to the Atlantic and down to Texas (Hall, E.R. 1981). Bears are omnivores
and their diet ranges greatly to the time of year, geographic location and food availability. Bears
have traditionally been associated with the “big northwoods” areas in the northern part of the
Wisconsin. However, according to the harvest records from the Wisconsin Bear Management
Plan 2019 to 2029, the traditional range of bears has expanded south as the bear population has
increased in recent years (WDNR 2019a). Also noteworthy is that harvest records indicate that
only one bear has been harvested by hunting in Dodge County and zero in Fond du Lac County
(WDNR 2019a). The bear population in Wisconsin has expanded to just under 29,000 bears in
2019 from about 9,000 bears in 1989, and in Dodge and Fond du Lac counties bear are
considered “transient” (Roberts 2019a). The 2018 Wisconsin Black Bear Harvest Report
estimated that 3,717 bears were killed during the 2018 season, which was 81.7% of the state’s
quota of 4,550 bears. Only 661 bears were harvested in Zone C where the refuge lies. Zone C
covers approximately the southern 2/3rds of the state (Dhuey, Walter, Koele 2018).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to black bear populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 0
Estimated Take: 0
In 2018, there were no bears harvest in Dodge or Fond du Lac Counties, where the refuge is
located (Dhuey, Walter, Koele 2018). Wisconsin harvest records indicate that from 1977-2017
there has only been one bear harvested in Dodge County, and zero in Fond du Lac County
(WDNR 2019a). Due to the extremely low chance a hunter will observe a bear on the refuge, and
the fact that no hunting with dogs or baiting is allowed, it seems unlikely that opening up the
refuge to hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional bear population.

                                                8

Bobcat
The bobcat is a furbearer, and the most common cat species in Wisconsin. They are smaller than
the more uncommon Canada lynx. Bobcat diets primarily consist of rabbit, hare, mice, rodents,
birds, and deer (USFWS 2003). According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,
bobcat populations in Wisconsin have expanded over the past decade and they are now statewide
in distribution (WDNRb). Wisconsin has a north zone and a south zone for bobcat
hunting/trapping. Trapping will not be evaluated in this plan. Bobcats have traditionally been
associated with northern Wisconsin. “In 2014, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
estimated the southern zone bobcat population was stable enough to re-open a bobcat
hunting/trapping season after a 20-year pause. That first year, a 50-cat quota was set for southern
Wisconsin. In 2015, it was doubled to 100. For both years, the quota was filled before the end of
the season, which runs from Oct. 18 to Jan. 31” (Kremer 2016). In 2019 after five seasons, the
southern zone harvest quota has increased to 500 bobcats (Roberts 2019b). Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources population models focus primarily on the northern zone. The
fall 2019 bobcat population prediction for the northern zone was 3800 bobcats, with a harvest
quota of 550 bobcats in the northern zone (Roberts 2019b). Population estimates for the southern
zone were not available. Long-range models predict that the fall bobcat population in northern
Wisconsin ranged from around 1,600 in the 1980s to approximately 3,800 in 2019 (Roberts
2019b).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to bobcat populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 0
Estimated Take: 0
The refuge is located in the southern bobcat zone. Some of the larger expanses of woody
shrubland and woodland on the western and southern portions of the refuge may be suitable for
bobcat, but no species specific management or surveys are conducted. According to the
Wisconsin 2019 Bobcat Population Analyses, bobcat harvest for the 2017 season was 506
animals (Roberts 2019b). Of this total, 77 were hunted and 44 were trapped in the southern zone
(total 121); and 225 were hunted and 81 were trapped in the northern zone (total of 306-two
unknown) (Roberts 2019b). The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources also reported in the
2017 Bobcat Harvest that no bobcats were harvested in either of the counties the refuge is
located in during the 2017-18 season (Dhuey and Rossler 2017). The Bobcat Harvest Survey
2017 reports that only about 3% of bobcats were harvested by means other than “shot over dogs”
or “trapped” (Dhuey and Rossler 2017). With the most common methods of take not being
allowed on the refuge and the low bobcat population numbers, it seems unlikely that opening up
the refuge to hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional population.

Raccoon
Raccoons are one of the most common and recognizable furbearers in Wisconsin. They live
almost anywhere and eat almost anything. Raccoons are most abundant in agricultural and sub-
urban areas. Regional population densities are highest in Wisconsin’s central and southern
farmland regions, as reported by deer hunters and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

                                                 9

field staff in the annual deer hunter observation survey, though localized populations can vary
(WDNR 2019b). In Wisconsin, they can be hunted or trapped, but this evaluation is only
considering the hunting of raccoon. Statewide or local population data was not able to be found,
however it is known that local populations can fluctuate with severe weather and/or disease
outbreaks, and all indications point to robust raccoon populations (WDNR 2019b). Raccoon
harvest generally follows pelt demand and both have been relatively low the past several seasons
(WDNR 2019b).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to bobcat populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 7
Estimated Take: 5

Long-term harvest trends follow pelt value. Resident hunters are required to have a small game
license to hunt raccoon. The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019 Report estimated that statewide,
the trend in small game license sales in Wisconsin have decreased from a high of almost 400,000
in 1983 to just under 250,000 in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a). The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019
Report also estimated that 6,006 or 2.7% of hunters hunted raccoons in the 2018-19 season, with
a harvest of 56,281 raccoons (±26,751). This info is based on the responses to the 2018-19
Wisconsin Small Game Hunting Questionnaire. Small game harvest trends for raccoon have
trended downward from approximately 200,000 animals in 2001 to approximately 50,000
raccoons in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a). Trapping does account for harvest and the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources estimated there were 3,363 trappers in 2018-19 who harvested
approximately 45,953 raccoons. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources also estimated,
using the Fur Trapper Survey, that trappers who also hunted, harvested an additional 6,477
raccoons for a total harvest of 52,392 (Dhuey and Rossler 2019). Finally, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources estimated in the Wisconsin Fur Buyers Report 2018-19, that in
2018-19, 44% of the 19,209 raccoons purchased by licensed Wisconsin fur buyers were
harvested by hunters in Wisconsin (Dhuey 2019b). The most effective means of hunting
raccoons is at night with dogs. Because the most effective means of hunting raccoons will not be
allowed on the refuge (dogs and night hunting not permitted), it seems unlikely that opening up
the refuge to hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional population.
There will be negligible impact on this species under this alternative.

Red Fox
Red fox are a common furbearer game species in Wisconsin. Red fox are a member of the canine
(dog) family, and have the largest world-wide distribution of any carnivore (WDNR 2014). Red
fox have adapted well to agricultural lands and edge habitat, in close proximity to humans. One
of their primary food sources is mice, but they readily eat rabbits, ducks and other small animals.
Red fox can be hunted or trapped in Wisconsin, however this analysis is only evaluating hunting.
Annual track surveys are one way to estimate general abundance, and the Winter Track Counts
1977-2018 showed an increase in the number of tracks from 2017 to 2018 (Dhuey 2018). It
should be noted the track survey routes are primarily located in the northern part of the state, are

                                                10

impacted by weather, and the red fox/gray fox are not differentiated in the track survey. Long
term averages for both percent present and tracks per transect have trended upward from 1977-78
to 2017-18 (Dhuey 2018).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to red fox populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 15
Estimated Take: 10
As with other furbearers, long-term harvest trends generally follow pelt value. Resident hunters
are required to have a small game license to hunt red fox. The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019
Report estimated that statewide, the trend in small game license sales in Wisconsin have
decreased from a high of almost 400,000 in 1983 to just under 250,000 in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a).
The Small Game Harvest Report 2018-2019 estimated that 4,735 or 2.2% of hunters hunted red
fox during the 2018-19 season, with an estimated harvest of 1,739 (± 1,384) red foxes harvested
(Dhuey 2019a). Dodge County is in the top three counties of red fox harvested, and small game
harvest trends for red fox have remained largely stable, although they have trended slightly
downward from 1983 to 2018 (red fox and gray fox species were not differentiated) (Dhuey
2019a). Trapping does account for harvest in the survey and the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources estimated there were approximately 1,069 trappers in 2018-19 who harvested
approximately 3,189 red fox (Dhuey 2019a). Using the Fur Trapper Survey, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources also estimated that trappers, who also hunted, harvested an
additional 346 red fox by hunting for a total harvest of 3,535 red fox (Dhuey and Rossler 2019).
Finally, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources estimated from the Wisconsin Fur Buyers
Report 2018-19, that in 2018-19 an average of 25% of the 1,026 red fox purchased from
Wisconsin furbearers were harvested by hunting (Dhuey 2019b). On the refuge, it is estimated
that annually approximately 15 red fox hunters will harvest on average ten red fox from hunting
activities. This would be an additional 1.5% red fox hunted based on 2018-2019 harvest data.
Due to the anticipated low hunter participation and low take, it seems unlikely that opening up
the refuge to hunting would make any significant impact on the local or regional population.

                                               11

Gray Fox
Gray fox are another common furbearer game species in Wisconsin. The gray fox is the smallest
canine found in Wisconsin, and are unique because they have semi-retractable claws, which
allow them to climb trees, one of only two canine species in the world that can do this. They are
more common in southern Wisconsin (WDNR). The gray fox tend to inhabit woody areas, but
can be associated with a number of habitats. In Wisconsin, habitat preferences for gray fox
include brushy bluffs and hills intermingled with woodland and farmland areas (Crossley 1985).
Little is known about gray fox distribution in Wisconsin prior to 1900, and records indicate that
the gray fox has been relatively common in the southern part of the state, with the greatest
populations in the driftless area of southwestern Wisconsin (UWSP 2004). Winter track counts in
Wisconsin, although only conducted in primarily the northern part of the state, showed an
increase in the number of tracks from 2017 to 2018 (Dhuey 2018). Red fox and gray fox species
were not differentiated in the track survey. Long term averages for both % present and tracks per
transect have trended upward from 1977-78 to 1917-18 (Dhuey 2018).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to gray fox populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 2
Estimated Take: 0
As with other furbearers, long-term harvest trends generally follow pelt value. Resident hunters
are required to have a small game license to hunt gray fox. The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019
Report estimated that statewide, the trend in small game license sales in Wisconsin have
decreased from a high of almost 400,000 in 1983 to just under 250,000 in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a).
The Small Game Harvest Report 2018-2019 also estimated that 3,704 or 1.7% of hunters hunted
gray fox during the 2018-19 season, with an estimated harvest of 6,482 (± 4,860) gray foxes
harvested (Dhuey 2019a). Small game harvest trends for gray fox have remained largely stable,
although they have trended slightly downward from 1983 to 2018 (red fox and gray fox species
were not differentiated) (Dhuey 2019a). Trapping does account for harvest and in the Fur
Trapper Survey 2018-19, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources estimated there were
approximately 363 trappers who harvested approximately 315 gray fox (Dhuey and Rossler
2019). Using the Fur Trapper Survey 2018-2019, the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources also estimated that trappers, who also hunted, harvested an additional 19 gray fox by
hunting for a total harvest of 334 gray fox (Dhuey and Rossler 2019). Finally, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources estimates from the Wisconsin Fur Buyers Report 2018-19, that
and average of 33% of the 104 gray fox purchased from Wisconsin fur bearers were harvested by
hunting (Dhuey 2019b). It is estimated that there will be no additional take of gray fox by
opening the refuge to hunting as there is limited suitable habitat available for this species and
few gray fox found on the refuge. Opening to hunting will provide on average two additional
hunters an opportunity to hunt the refuge for this species, even though likelihood of success
defined as harvest of gray foxes is unlikely. Due to the anticipated low hunter participation and
low take, it seems unlikely that opening up the refuge to hunting would make any significant
impact on the local or regional population.

                                               12

Coyote
Coyote are another common furbearer game species in Wisconsin. Coyote are a medium-sized
canine distributed across the state and can be hunted year-round, though trapping season is
restricted. Coyotes are omnivores and will eat what is generally available, however they
generally pursue small rodents such as mice and voles, and rabbits. Coyotes are the expert
generalist, and have adapted to live in close proximity to humans, even in urban areas. “Coyotes
prefer woodland edges and brushy areas that provide adequate cover, however they readily use
farm fields, parkways, riverways, parks and other areas with natural vegetation in city and
residential developments” (Ryan 1999).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to coyote populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 25
Estimated Take: 10

As with other furbearers, long-term harvest trends generally follow pelt value. Although coyotes
can be hunted year round in Wisconsin, resident hunters are still required to have a small game
license, unless hunting on property they own. The Small Game Harvest 2018-2019 Report
estimated that statewide, the trend in small game license sales in Wisconsin have decreased from
a high of almost 400,000 in 1983 to just under 250,000 in 2018 (Dhuey 2019a). The Small Game
Harvest 2018-2019 report also estimated 23,958 or 10.9% of small game hunters hunted coyotes
during the 2018-19 season, with an estimated harvest of 35,729 (± 13,105) coyotes harvested
(Dhuey 2019a). According to the Small Game Harvest 2018-19 report, Small game harvest
trends for coyote have generally increased from 1983 to 2018, with lows around 15,000 in the
late 80’s to a highs around 60,000 in 2017 (Dhuey 2019a). In the Fur Trapper Survey 2018-19
which includes trapping in harvest reporting, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
estimated there were approximately 2,138 trappers who harvested approximately 10,811 coyotes
(Dhuey and Rossler 2019. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources estimated from the
Fur Trapper Survey that trappers who also hunted, harvested an additional 7,071 coyotes by
hunting for a total estimated harvest of 17,882 (Dhuey and Rossler 2019. Finally, Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources estimates from the Wisconsin Fur Buyers Report 2018-19, that
and average of 63% of the 6,886 coyotes purchased from Wisconsin fur bearers were harvested
by hunting (Dhuey 2019b). Coyote hunting on the refuge will increase the average annual take of
coyotes by approximately 10 coyotes. This additional take is only 0.2 % more than what was
reported for coyote hunting harvest in 2018-19 in the entire state of Wisconsin. It is expected
there will be negligible impact both locally and regionally on this species under this alternative.

Ruffed Grouse
Ruffed grouse are a resident game bird species and one of the most popular game birds to hunt in
Wisconsin. According to the Draft Wisconsin Ruffed Grouse Management Plan 2020-2030,
ruffed grouse are one of the most widely distributed non-migratory game birds in North
America, and Wisconsin (Michigan and Minnesota included) is a top destination for hunters
from throughout the Unites States (WDNR 2019c). Ruffed grouse are considered a habitat

                                                13

specialist because they rely on young forest habitat, typically young mixed-deciduous forests
containing aspen (WDNR 2019c). Since settlement, ruffed grouse distribution in Wisconsin
increased because of logging and fire disturbances, but this greater range has been decreasing
over the last half-century because of land use changes in Wisconsin (WDNR 2019c). Drumming
surveys are the most important survey for measuring grouse abundance in Wisconsin’s primary
range, which includes the central and northern forest regions of the state. At a statewide level,
there has been a general decline in ruffed grouse distribution and abundance since the surveys
inception in 1954 (WDNR 2019c). Survey transects were updated in 1994 and survey starting
points were randomly located to better understand ruffed grouse distribution across the entire
state. Since 1994, none of the three transects in Dodge County (where most of the refuge is
located) have recorded a drumming male (B. Dhuey, personal communication, 12-13-19).

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to ruffed grouse populations on the refuge as
there would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 0
Estimated Take: 0
According to the Wisconsin Upland Birds 2019 Fall Forecast, during the 2018-19 season, 69,090
hunters harvested approximately 173,347 birds (WDNR 2019d). In addition, between 2018 and
2019, the forecast reported statewide ruffed grouse drumming activity increases 41% based on
drumming surveys--following a year where survey results showed a 34% drop. The general trend
is that Ruffed grouse populations rise and fall over a nine to 11-year cycle (WDNR 2019d).
Based on Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources transect data and refuge staff personal
observation, it is not likely a hunter will observe a grouse on the refuge. There will be no impact
on this species under this alternative as it is highly unlikely any take will occur.

American Woodcock
The American woodcock is also a popular game bird throughout eastern North America and in
Wisconsin. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), the primary agency for accessing
woodcock populations, has a primary management objective to stabilize woodcock populations
with a goal of returning to a level that occurred in the early 1970s (Kelley et al. 2008). The
Service Migratory bird hunting activity and harvest report estimated that nationally woodcock
hunters numbered about 103,300 in 2017 and harvested 203,500 (±17%) birds (USFWS 2019).
According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Migratory Game Birds 2019-20
Fall Forecast, singing-ground surveys from 2009 to 2019 indicate a stable population in
Wisconsin, consistent with the 50 year trend (WDNR 2019e). The forecast also stated that
Wisconsin surveys showed an 11.76 percent increase in woodcock heard during the 2019 survey,
and that the 50-year trend shows a -0.26 percent population trend from 1968-2019 (WDNR
2019e). Wisconsin is very important contributor to the annual woodcock population with about
11,000 square miles of woodcock habitat (contributing over 750,000 birds). Over 80 percent of
this prime habitat is found in the northern third of the state (WDNR 2019e). In addition, the
annual fall flights through Wisconsin total at least 1,500,000 birds (WDNR 2019e).

                                                14

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to woodcock populations on the refuge as there
would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 20
Estimated Take: 15
During the 2018-19 season, about 15,000 hunters harvested approximately 40,000 birds in
Wisconsin (WDNR 2019e). Although the refuge is not located in the most productive woodcock
habitat in the northern part of the state, there are small pockets of available habitat, this coupled
with the influx of migrating birds will provide some woodcock hunting opportunity to hunters.
There will be negligible impact on this species under this alternative.

Common Moorhen
Now referred to as the common gallinule, the moorhen is in the rail family and resembles the
American coot, although not nearly as abundant in numbers. The gallinule is also more secretive
and rarely seen where it lives in the cattails. According to preliminary data in the Wisconsin
Breeding Bird Atlas II (eBird 2019), the Horicon Marsh is near the top of the gallinules known
breeding range in Wisconsin and gallinule have been confirmed to nest on the Horicon Marsh,
where transects were located. According to the Atlas, most confirmed breeding activity is taking
place in the southeast area of Wisconsin, where birds appear to be closely associate with Lake
Michigan in the northern range of their breeding. Common gallinule data was not included in the
Waterfowl Breeding Population Survey for Wisconsin, 1973-2019 or the Service Waterfowl
Population Status, 2018.

Alternative A – No Action
Under this alternative there would be no impact to common gallinule populations on the refuge
as there would be no hunting of this species allowed.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Estimated Hunter numbers: 30
Estimated Take: 1

According to the Service Migratory bird hunting activity and harvest report 2017-18 and ,
preliminary estimates of gallinule harvest and hunter activity during the 2017-18 and 2018-19
hunting seasons indicated there was no harvest of common gallinule or gallinule hunters in
Wisconsin during the 2017 and 2018 seasons (USFWS 2019). The report also estimated the
United States total gallinule harvest was 12,600, plus-minus 108% in 2017 and 2,400 plus-minus
138% in 2018. Active gallinule hunters were 5,400 and 2,100 respectively. According to harvest
data, gallinule hunting is more popular in the southern part of the United States (USFWS 2019)
where it is more abundant. The common gallinule will be added to the species allowed to be
hunted during the refuge’s Learn to Hunt Waterfowl program. Due to the low refuge abundance
and the Learn the Hunt Waterfowl program generally targeting traditional duck and goose
species, it is estimated take of moorhen will be very low on an annual basis. In some years there
may be no take of this species as it is expected the novice hunters will harvest this species
opportunistically. There will be negligible impacts to this species under this alternative.

                                                 15

Other Wildlife and Aquatic Species
Horicon Refuge is well known for outstanding wildlife values within an intensive agricultural
landscape. Waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, raptors, songbirds, reptiles, amphibians,
furbearers and other mammals utilize the area. The refuge is especially important for migratory
birds, both during the migrating and nesting seasons. Over 300 species of resident and migratory
bird species use the refuge throughout the year. Migration counts can number in the tens of
thousands including ducks, geese, shorebirds, wading birds and countless other avian species.
Some of the resident bird or year-round species include: wild turkey, northern harrier, downy
woodpecker, and great horned owl. Wide arrays of other avian species use the refuge due to the
scarcity of native habitats within the surrounding area.

The refuge has been recognized as the largest nesting area for redhead ducks east of the
Mississippi River. Trumpeter swans were reintroduced to Wisconsin in the late 1980’s and are
now regular nesters on the refuge. Hundreds of American white pelican and double-crested
cormorants nest colonially on small islands made from dredged spoil material in the marsh. The
bald eagle, a recently delisted species from the federal threatened and endangered list, is a
common resident and at least four nests have been documented on the refuge in recent years.
State listed endangered species which nest on the refuge include the black tern and Forster’s tern.
Other nesting water birds such as the black-crowned night heron, sandhill crane and black-
necked stilt also nest on the refuge.

The refuge is home to 34 known mammal species. Common species include white-tailed deer,
mink, muskrat, raccoon, opossum, striped skunk, red fox, coyote, eastern cottontail, meadow
vole, thirteen-lined ground squirrel and little and big brown bats. River otters are also common
residents on the refuge. In addition, there are 15 reptile and amphibian species known to occur on
the refuge. The most common species include painted turtle, snapping turtle, eastern garter
snake, western fox snake, northern leopard frog, western chorus frog, green frog, eastern gray
tree frog and American toad.
Alternative A – No Action
This alternative would have no additional effect on other wildlife populations and aquatic
species. Current hunting opportunities result in negligible impacts to other wildlife and aquatic
species. Typically impacts are limited to temporary disturbance of these species. As there is
adequate habitat available hunting activities have minimal impact. Most hunting activity happens
after most species have migrated or are dormant. Animal populations would be managed using
the current hunting seasons and locations.

Alternative B – Preferred Action Alternative
Increased hunting may result in additional short-term disturbance to wildlife since the refuge
would be open for additional opportunities for hunting of new species. This disturbance may
include temporary displacement of migratory and resident wildlife from foot traffic moving
through the area. Under both alternatives approximately 98% of the refuge would be open to
hunting during the specified seasons. The only difference between the alternatives is the addition
of new species. Although added opportunities exist under Alternative B, the refuge does not
anticipate a major change in levels of use historically seen on the refuge as most new species
would be hunted concurrently with current hunting seasons.

                                                16

Disturbance to other non- hunted wildlife under either alternative is minimal. Direct impacts to
non-hunted migratory birds such as woodpeckers, raptors and some songbirds including red-
winged blackbirds, nuthatches, finches and chickadees are negligible. Indirect impacts to this
group of species are also minimal and do not appreciably reduce their numbers at the population
level. Shorebirds and wading birds would not be impacted by hunting since, in most cases, they
have already migrated through the area prior to the fall hunting season. Disturbance by hunting
to non-hunted migratory birds would not have substantial negative indirect impacts because the
majority of hunting does not coincide with the nesting season. Other disturbance to these species
by hunters afield would be temporary in nature.

Migratory birds of prey (eagles, hawks, etc.) are on the refuge during most hunting seasons but
disturbance is minimal. Disturbance to the daily wintering activities, such as feeding and resting,
of residential birds might occur but are likely insignificant because such interactions are
infrequent and of short duration when they do occur. Areas around eagle nests are generally
inaccessible to hunting, so there would be neutral impact. Additionally, there is a possibility of
conflict with birds of prey feeding on gut piles that may contain lead fragments. Research has
indicated that lead is present in gut piles. As a way to mitigate this the refuge has a voluntary
non-lead ammunition outreach program to encourage all hunters to use non-toxic ammunition
and a mandatory non-toxic shot requirement for turkey, upland and waterfowl hunting on the
refuge.

Small mammals such as muskrat, voles and mice are generally nocturnal or secretive. Both of
these qualities make hunter interactions with small mammals very rare. Hibernation, or torpor, of
cold-blooded reptiles and amphibians also limits their activity during most of the hunting season
when temperatures are low. Hunters would rarely encounter reptiles and amphibians during most
of the hunting season. Some species of butterflies and moths are migratory and will not be
present for most of the refuge hunting season. Resident invertebrates are not active during cold
weather and would have few interactions with hunters during the hunting season. Impacts to
these species due to habitat disturbance related to hunting are negligible at the local and flyway
levels.

Overall, hunting impacts to other wildlife and their habitats and impacts to the biological
diversity of the refuge will likely be insignificant and negligible.

Threatened and Endangered species and Other Special Status Species
The refuge follows recovery plan guidelines for the management of federally threatened and
endangered species found on the refuge. Species that occur on the refuge or critical habitat in
Dodge and Fond du lac County, Wisconsin includes:

   •   Federally threatened Northern long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and
       mines, called hibernacula. They use areas in various sized caves or mines with constant
       temperatures, high humidity and no air currents. During the summer, northern long-eared
       bats roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities or in crevices of both live
       trees and snags (dead trees).
   •   Endangered Whooping cranes (Non-essential Experimental Population) from the
       reintroduced eastern migratory population have spent all or part of the summer and/or fall

                                                17

on or near the refuge since 2002. They use the refuge wetland and upland habitat for
       roosting and foraging. Beginning in 2011, efforts to release whooping cranes on the
       refuge through these reintroduction efforts were undertaken and young whooping crane
       chicks have been released on the refuge almost every year since 2011. Only one
       whooping crane has successfully nested on the refuge; however, this was the result of a
       successful pairing between a whooping crane and a sandhill crane.
   •   Endangered Rusty patched bumblebee is known to occur on the refuge in suitable
       habitat and in the county(s) where refuge is located. An area of high potential zone
       containing critical habitat exists on the refuge and the dispersal zone (low potential) for
       the rusty patched bumblebee encompasses the entire refuge.

Alternative A and B
A consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act was formerly conducted as
part of this Environmental Assessment and the updated Hunt Plan. It was determined that both
alternatives are not likely to conflict with recovery and/or protection of these species. A
determination of “No Effect” was made for the northern long-eared bat, as the bat is not known
to occur on the refuge therefore, not directly or indirectly affecting (neither negatively nor
beneficially) individuals or designated critical habitat. While a determination of “may affect but
not likely to adversely affect” was made for the whooping crane and rusty patched bumble bee,
the proposed plan is not likely to adversely affect individuals and/or designated critical habitat.
See Appendix C for full analysis (Section 7). At this time, no impacts are anticipated for any
state listed species.

Vegetation
Refuge lands consist of approximately 15,500 acres of marsh, 2,000 acres of woodlands and
3,600 acres of grasslands. More specifically, land use within refuge boundaries is primarily
perennial marsh habitat with some wet meadow areas, especially in the west. Fragmented upland
forest and grasslands surround the wetland portions of the refuge. The majority of the marsh
basin is cattail marsh, dominated by hybrid cattail, or shallow marsh and wet meadow,
dominated by reed canary grass. About half of the wetland areas consist of slightly deeper open
water areas and ditches in which stands of submersed aquatics are found. Lowland woodlands of
willow and ash occur on islands in the marsh and surrounding lands along with shrub swamps.

Upland grasslands as well as woods of oaks and hickory make up the bulk of the upland area.
Grassland units are broken up and described as being either cool-season or warm-season. Cool-
season units are typically dominated by non-native invasive grasses. Warm season units are
typically seeded and managed for native prairie mixes. Oak savanna, a historically abundant
community type in this region, is being actively restored in few areas of the refuge where open
grown bur oak typically occur at low densities with an understory that resembles typical upland
prairie.

Alternative A and B
Under both alternatives approximately 98% of the refuge would be open to hunting during the
specified seasons. The only difference between the alternatives is addition of new species.
Although added opportunities exist under Alternative B, the refuge does not anticipate a major
change in levels of use historically seen on the refuge. At its highest levels of use, under current

                                                 18

management the refuge will experience up to approximately 1200 hunter use days annually
under Alternative B, the refuge is generally expected to experience an increase of approximately
200 hunter use days annually.

Off trail use for hunting is allowed on the refuge. This use is typically spread across the refuge
and its various access points near locations open to hunting. Depending on the site conditions
and extent of access, this could potentially result in higher levels of vegetation trampling, soil
disturbance, and erosion, which in turn could potentially affect refuge habitat quality by
inhibiting local plant growth and increasing potential for erosion. This added access is expected
to still be localized, infrequent and primarily at a time of year when impacts to habitat are
minimized. Negligible effect to vegetation from trampling of hunters is expected because of the
low number of users and days of use expected. With the increase of off trail use there is a
potential for the spread of invasive species, specifically in the upland areas from spring and late
fall hunting activities. The refuge monitors and actively manages for invasive species and any
spread of invasives from the increase of hunting is expected to be negligible.

Wetlands
Emergent marsh is the most abundant community type on the refuge at approximately 15,600
acres. The refuge contains a large wetland complex separated into eighteen management pools.
Water levels fluctuate in the impoundments both naturally and through the use of water control
structures between the impoundments and, less often, with the help of pumping stations.

Horicon marsh is known for being the largest freshwater cattail marsh in the United States.
However, the prevalence of the invasive cattails dominate many marsh areas. Horicon Marsh,
was designated a “Wetland of International Importance” by the Ramsar Convention on
December 4, 1991. It was also recognized as a Globally Important Bird Area in the American
Bird Conservancy’s United States Important Bird Areas program in 1997 and as a State
Important Bird Area in 2004 because it provides valuable migration habitat for Canada geese,
ducks, and other migratory birds. Over 50% of the Mississippi Flyway Canada Geese migrate
through the Marsh during the fall, as does 2% of the biogeographic population of Mallards
(USFWS 2007). It also provides an expansive wetland complex in a region that has seen close to
90% of its wetlands converted for purposes such as agriculture or development.

Alternative A and B
Negligible impacts to wetlands are expected to occur. Impacts would be associated with the use
of habitat for hunting and as stated in the vegetation analysis this is not expected to have positive
or negative impacts on the wetland ecosystem. Take of species associated with wetlands would
result in negligible impacts as hunting take limits are monitored and set for long term viability of
species which includes consideration of the impact on habitat. Impacts in both alternatives is
estimated to be similar as most of the new hunted species do not occur in this habitat type. In
both instances impacts are likely to be insignificant. Neither alternative will result in wetland
protection or restoration thus not triggering, Executive Order 11990 with regards to Wetland
Protection.

Floodplains

                                                 19