The Relationship Between Department of Defense Installations and the Priority Landscapes of the Great Plains of North America: A Great Plains Partnership Perspective by: Robert Edgerton

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Great Plains Partnership (GPP) was established in 1991 in order to foster cooperation between private landowners, public agencies and private entities in the conservation of natural resources in the Great Plains. Concurrent with this initiative, the notion that proper utilization of Plains resources leads to sustainable economies and viable rural communities was also initiated. By enlisting the support and effort of a broad range of individuals and organizations, it is the desire of the Partnership to conserve a portion of each landscape identified on the Plains by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for the environmental, social and economic benefit of present and future generations.

TNC provided the Western Governors' Association (WGA) with preliminary research concerning fourteen priority landscapes identified on the Plains. This information was screened against Department of Defense (DoD) installations on the Plains. Criteria for the identification of a representative group of installations included: overall size of the military reservation, proximity to a priority landscape, and completed biological assessment. Upon completion of this initial investigation, seven military reservations were determined to hold the best potential for GPP interests.

Initial contact with the Department of Defense concerning a joint effort between the GPP and the U.S. military proved positive. The DoD, as one of the largest public land management entities in the Plains, has come under increasing pressure from the public to determine what ecological elements are present on military installations. Moreover, the military usage and ecological conservation practices of these natural resources by the DoD has also come under increasing scrutiny by public and private entities alike. Looking at this situation in a positive light, the military natural resource managers at individual installations are in a position to contribute to the process of moving toward environmental and economic stability on the Plains while achieving the desired military mission. The DoD hopes to foster good relations with the general public by proving that they are effective land managers. By cooperating with and becoming a member of the GPP, the U.S. military stands to gain this respect and participate in valuable data dissemination at the same time.

The U.S. military did not intend to become land stewards, but have accepted this inadvertent responsibility none the less. A broad analysis of each reservation's management goals and objectives, biological inventory work and formalized cooperative agreements has shown that the military has attempted to implement sound natural resource techniques on most of their lands. Yet they are also the first to admit that there is much work to be initiated. By recognizing the proactive management schemes already in place on some of these installations, the GPP hopes to acknowledge the good works utilized by the military. Suggested strategies for the improved management of the military reservations includes: improved long-term planning of the relationship between military training and natural resources, clearly defined management objectives, implementation of more proactive management schemes, wider dissemination of ecological information and additional efforts focused on natural resource inventory and assessment.

2.0 INTRODUCTION

In his book, Sex, Economy, Freedom and Community, author Wendell Berry describes comments made by Wes Jackson concerning the multitudes of people that blindly charge across Kansas and eastern Colorado heading for "nature" located in the Rocky Mountains. "These nature lovers and sightseers are utterly oblivious to the rich natural and human history of the Plains" (Berry 1992). The core of Mr. Jackson's anxiety, Berry points out, is that the love of nature that limits itself to "outstandingly scenic" places is implicitly dangerous. When we are able to divorce ourselves from the inherent beauty of areas not considered "outstanding" we lose the respect that we accord to nature. In North America, no region of subtle beauty is more often ignored in this fashion than the Great Plains.

Historically, the Great Plains of North America were expansive regions of flowing prairie grasslands, savannahs and riparian/floodplain zones comprised of hardwood forests, supporting diverse ecosystems and numerous endemic as well as migratory species. However, with the heavy manipulation of these areas from early settlement times to the present, much of the natural beauty and biodiversity of the area has either been altered or placed under stress. It has been estimated that 98% of the Great Plains are privately owned with much of this land utilized for agricultural or range production. The remaining natural areas are mostly fragmented and are coming under increasing pressure to be utilized.

In recent years, the loss of biodiversity has been pinpointed as a major threat to the ecological integrity of the Plains. Approximately 138 threatened and endangered species utilize habitat in this region, with vast amounts of candidate species also present. Statistics indicate that a greater than 50% decline in endemic songbird populations and a 75% decline in endemic grassland nesting birds has been noted. With only 1% of the native tallgrass prairie remaining, a loss in contiguous natural landscapes has left habitat patches not large enough to support healthy populations of some native and migratory species (EPA's Great Plains Program 1995).

Statistics such as these have prompted action by ecological conservation groups like The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Realizing the lack of biological assessment conducted in these vanishing ecoregions, TNC has initiated action to compile the information necessary for biodiversity analysis and conservation planning. Supported by the efforts of the Western Governors' Association (WGA) and the Department of Defense (DoD), it is the hope of all three entities to coordinate endeavors in the assessment, conservation and sustainable use of the Plains natural resources located on military installations.

2.1 The Great Plains Partnership

The Great Plains encompass nearly one-fourth of America's forty-eight continental states and stretch from the Canadian provinces to the border states of northern Mexico. In response to the growing concern over natural resource consumption, economic viability and "quality of life" in the Plains, the Great Plains Partnership (GPP) was conceived by the WGA. By collaborating the conservation efforts of TNC, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA), the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Province of Manitoba and the State of Minnesota, an initial alliance was formed to address these issues. Realizing the proactive attitude of these core members, several public and private entities assured their support for the initiative so that the partnership presently boasts some 25 committed participants (Table 1). The WGA believes that the association between the thirteen Plains states, native American tribal nations, private landowners, government agencies and private entities will become essential for the proper management of the region's economic and environmental interests in the future.

In order to better understand the values and fears held by Great Plains residents, the GPP has convened focus groups throughout the region. Concerns about the future vitality of their communities and a fear of governmental control over their lives have been voiced. Yet these concerns are the foundation by which the GPP was contrived. Initiatives that provide for and stimulate participation by stakeholders in the region is critical in developing polices that have broad public support. By promoting cooperation through "bottom-up" partnerships rather than "top-down" regulations, it is the GPP's aspiration that the health of these communities will be maintained and fear of the government alleviated.

2.2 Goals and Objectives of the GPP

The primary goal of the GPP is to promote the health and vitality of the Great Plains by demonstrating that economic, social and environmental interests are best served by preventing the decline of natural communities. The objectives of the GPP are:

to encourage cooperation rather than conflict; to promote a viable and sustainable economic future compatible with healthy natural resources; to decrease future endangered species listings; to enhance certainty and predictability for planning and development for local and state governments, land owners and land users in relation to land use decisions, and; to build consensus among residents and mangers of Great Plains' resources in designing their own solutions to foreseen challenges to the health of Great Plains ecosystems.

The GPP believes that proper management strategies for Great Plains' natural resources can remain economically viable in the long run by embracing the concepts of sustainable resource utilization and sound conservation planning. By allocating appropriate time, financial resources and efforts for the propagation of both elements, social needs and environmental demands will be met and enhanced.

2.3 Methodology

Several challenges are to be faced with such broad-based objectives; in response the WGA has chosen to study the proactive management practices of land owners and mangers in the Plains region in order to determine effective administrative techniques and to disseminate the methodology of successful examples. The DoD is in a unique position to enhance the vitality of the entire region as they are one of the largest land stewards on the Plains. Moreover, the goals of the DoD's Legacy Resource Program are geared towards improving the stewardship and management of its natural and cultural resources. These goals are closely aligned with those of the GPP, and a cooperative agreement between the two provides an excellent point of inception.

A conservation planning design such as the one proposed by the GPP requires a broad-scale view of the resources. Consequently, TNC and the WGA have concentrated their efforts on a landscape scale (coarse filter paradigm) rather than individual species and habitats (fine filter). Landscapes, as defined by the U.S. Forest Service, are those areas composed of interacting ecosystems that are repeated due to geology, land form, soils, climate, biota and human influences (Kaufmann et al. 1994). Landscapes offer the functional conservation planning unit of a size large enough to encompass ecological processes and species within a mosaic of natural communities. By understanding these greater processes, long-term protection of the elements of biodiversity are ensured (Chaplin et al. 1995). Still, individual species are not ignored in this concept. Rather, the health and vitality of individual species are used as a gauge to determine the overall health of natural systems. The well-being of an indicator species is often the first warning sign to a natural resource manager that an ecosystem, or landscape, may be in decline.

TNC's operational goal in the conservation of Great Plains' biodiversity has been to "protect at least one viable example of each natural community and population of imperiled species within a naturally functioning landscape" (Chaplin et al. 1995). The first step of this process has been to identify all landscapes present in the Plains through a set of selection criteria (Table 2, Map 1). At present, 63 landscapes have been identified encompassing approximately 85,100 square miles, or about 10% of the Plains portion of the United States (Chaplin et al. 1995). From these known landscapes, 14 have been assigned a "priority" status for protection by TNC Plains scientists (Table 3, Map 2). This information was provided to the WGA, who in turn contacted the DoD to determine if any military installations on the Great Plains had representative ecosystems associated with the priority landscapes.

Initial screening of all DoD Great Plains installations resulted in numerous military facilities having potential biologically significant elements present. In order to narrow down this field of choice, WGA researchers determined several standards with which to measure a facility's biological importance. Military installations were reviewed for their proximity to identified priority landscapes, overall size, diversity of natural resources, completed biological assessments and occurrence of rare or sensitive species. Finally, it was determined essential to have as many priority landscapes represented as possible.

As a result, seven DoD installations were determined to offer the best opportunities to match the objectives and goals of the GPP (Map 3, Table 4). Initial questionnaires were sent to each of the natural resource managers on the installations in order to obtain an overview of the resources present and the management practices implemented on each site. Physical site visits to each of the installations were made in conjunction with informal gatherings of the military natural resource managers, TNC personnel, WGA staff and local public land managers. The site visits emphasized cooperative efforts between entities and allowed for an open forum discussion concerning natural resources, management techniques and goals of the individual military facilities.

2.4 The United States military as land conservationists

Ask any given individual to identify a public land agency in this nation and the Department of Defense is not likely to be on the top of their list. Yet this public agency manages more than 30 million acres of land in the United States and plays a major, inadvertent role in the conservation of hundreds of thousands of acres of land in the Great Plains region (Row 1992). Military commanders are not only responsible for the maintenance of military forces for our national defense, but have willingly assumed the capacity of land stewards as well. Attempting to harmonize these seemingly dichotomous concepts of environmental protection and combat training has resulted in some hard learned lessons. Understandably, a unified relationship between these two elements equates to a continuance of the military mission and sustainable, healthy natural communities. Retrospective analysis of these lessons may be of assistance to the DoD, private land owners and public land managers interested in Plains conservation and management (Rubenson et al. 1992).

2.5 Historical background of DoD natural resource management

Prior to and during World War II, land management on military installations consisted mostly of dust and erosion control. The term "Spartan simplicity" was used to explain the management objectives of maintaining adequate living conditions for military personnel and preventing the elements from interfering with training missions. Following the war years, natural resource management progressed from land stabilization efforts to fostering vegetational cover essential for military purposes. Timber production and agricultural leasing were promoted for their military uses as well as for financial gains. Techniques for controlling fire caused mostly by training exercises were also innovated and implemented (Arnold and Weiner 1989).

With the establishment of the Sikes Act of 1960, procedures for wildlife conservation and public outdoor recreation access on military lands were outlined. Cooperative agreements between public and private entities for the conservation of natural resources were also encouraged by the act. As scientific knowledge concerning natural communities and systems evolved, so too did the necessity to implement advanced management techniques on military lands. Consequently, the Spartan simplicity approach yielded to the multiple use and sustained yield concept becoming popular with managers of our national forests and public lands at the time.

Between the 1970's and the 1980's, intensified environmental legislation and growing public concern over military practices culminated in an overall reduction in resource production (as seen through a decline in timber sales and agricultural leasing). Yet the conservative management policy of benign neglect was still in use on the majority of military installations. This concept suggests that knowledge of the existence of a given natural element does not necessarily dictate immediate management action. Instead, the noted natural element, a specific species or ecosystem for instance, is afforded protection through "good-natured abstinence." Although this management scheme often allows for the physical preservation of a natural community, it most often offers little incentive for the maintenance and enhancement of a natural system's health and well-being.

Within the last decade, an integrated approach to natural resource management has begun to emerge on some military installations. Proactive management schemes, as seen through the DoD's Legacy Resource Program, the initiation of ecosystem management over single-species management, and the creation of the high-level position of a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security, emphasize innovative techniques in the maintenance of military lands' natural resources. Today, continued public scrutiny of military activities has resulted in the realization by military commanders that maintaining a healthy environment is not only essential to the success of their military mission, but to their continued utilization of public lands as well.

2.6 Military lands and the GPP

DoD installations, especially in the Plains states, have often become the last remaining natural areas in vast tracts of developed and/or cultivated lands. In the recent past, intense scrutiny by both the public and private sector has increased dramatically in order to determine what ecological processes are present and what role the military has played in conjunction the processes. The military, for the most part, appears to have reacted to this inquiry in one of two ways: either to accept the growing interest with marked enthusiasm or present a taciturn front to the attention in hopes that it will dissipate. Those military installations that react with the former approach appear to be the facilities with the most proactive management schemes and innovative natural resource staff. The personnel of such installations appear to view the non-military interest in military lands as being an opportunity to enlist outside entities in the management of their natural resources. Cooperative agreements and Memorandums of Understanding's (MOU's) between outside entities and the military are often the result of this interest. These military natural resource managers embrace the notion that increased public scrutiny concerning the use of military areas, coupled with good public relations through cooperative actions, may lead to needed support for the continuance of their military mission.

Military installations that recoil from this query appear to lack the foresight of possible favorable outcomes from such involvement. These installations tend to have the fewest cooperative agreements formalized and often manage their resources with a reactive rather than proactive approach. Fortunately, few of the military installations included within this report fall into this category. Still, several of the bases are clearly more advanced in their attitude towards managing natural resources than others, as seen through their interest in conducting biological inventory and enlisting the support of outside entities.

Throughout the Plains states, military installations not only harbor some of the last remaining portions of biologically significant landscapes, but perhaps more importantly support entire communities of American citizens. In a region of declining population levels due to human

migration to urbanized areas, economic disparity between metropolitan and rural areas of the Plains is acute. Several of the military installations summarized in this report are the life-blood of at least one, if not several surrounding communities. With constant pressure by the American public for a reduction in the federal deficit, it appears that a continued decrease in military spending is inevitable and that some installations will be realigned and closed. It is the GPP's belief that knowledge of the natural communities present on an installation and their ecological importance, as well as strong community support and cooperation for the presence of a military installation, will be essential for the continued existence of such a facility.

With this aspect in mind, this report is an attempt to conceptualize some of the good works conducted by military natural resource managers concerning environmentally and economically sustainable interests. Through an analysis of the completed biological assessments, management practices implemented and cooperative agreements formalized, it is possible to determine the proactive or reactive stance taken by an installation's natural resource personnel in the management of ecological resources. Whenever possible we have attempted to include recommendations for the improvement of management techniques used on the installations. As one of the goals of the GPP is to aid in the recognition and visibility of on-going, proactive management projects, it appears that a collaborative effort between the DoD, TNC and the WGA will be mutually beneficial to all parties.

3.0 FORT RILEY MILITARY RESERVATION, KANSAS

Natural Community Analysis

The Flint Hills landscape contains the largest remaining tract of native tallgrass prairie in North America. Located on the eastern edge of this landscape and at the junction of the Republican and Kansas Rivers, the Fort Riley Military Reservation (Riley) encompasses more than 100,000 acres of tallgrass prairie, mature oak/hickory gallery forests, eastern low prairie wetland and eastern floodplain wetland (Figure 1). Soil types vary with the nearly level to gently rolling topography of the region. Floodplain and lower bench soils are mostly alluvial and tend to be deep, commonly consisting of silty clay to silt loams to fine sand. Upland soils are mostly comprised of silt or silty clay loams of varied depths, with thinner soils typically found on steeper terrain. Limestone rock outcrops are commonly found near ridgetops and are usually surrounded by shallower soils (Busby et al. 1994, Lauver 1994).

Military Mission

Riley is the major training facility and home to the 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized), commonly referred to as the Big Red One. Intensive, year-round training is comprised of armored vehicular maneuvers along with ordinance impact. These forms of combined arms training are conducted on an area greater than 70,000 acres, the majority of which takes place on pristine and restored tallgrass prairie, with some forested tracts and riparian zones also being utilized.

Biological Inventories/Surveys

In recent years, Riley's biological resources have been extensively inventoried by the in-house natural resource staff, the Kansas Biological Survey (KBS), Kansas State University, the Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and the FWS. Completed surveys tend to be species specific in their scope. Recently completed surveys have studied the presence and/or populations of the American Burying Beetle, Loggerhead Shrike, Texas Horned Lizard, Henslow's Sparrow and the Western Prairie Fringed Orchid. Broader scale studies have also been initiated, like a natural community analysis of the installation, a herpetofauna survey, predator niche portioning and Land Condition-Trend Analysis (LCTA).

Surveys of Threatened and Endangered Species present on the installation, coupled with LCTA studies involved with soil, vegetation, birds and mammals, are on-going. Population inventories of game and non-game wildlife and fisheries are also continuous. Presently, the Kansas Biological Survey is in contact with the natural resource personnel at Riley, where it appears both parties hope to redirect survey efforts into broader scale botanical and community assessments.

Riley has contracted with the Argonne National Laboratories for a revised integrated management plan known as the "Dynamic Landscape Modeling System for Natural Resource Management" due for completion by the end of the 1995. This system will be broken down into two parts: a general overview of the resources present along with identification of the historical land use patterns, and management objectives defined in correlation with specific key elements unique to the installation. Possible key elements will be the military mission in comparison to the natural resources present, identification of the natural communities present, and any sensitive species. Management objectives implemented aspire to be harmonious with the resource base, while allowing for success of the military mission.

Management Practices

Several proactive management schemes have already been implemented to protect and restore the natural communities present at Riley. The most proactive management action has been in the area of prescribed fire. Realizing the significant role that fire played on prehistoric tallgrass prairie ecosystems, the natural resource manager has initiated a fire regime program that introduces light fire burns to nearly 30,000 acres annually. On a rotational pattern, the undeveloped portions of Riley are burned every one to five years. This management procedure has maintained the nearly pristine condition of thousands of acres of native tallgrass prairie by halting the encroachment of shrubs and woody vegetation while promoting reestablishment of prairie vegetation in disturbed areas (Busby et al. 1994). This strategy was introduced to the Riley natural resource personnel through the cooperative efforts of the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area, a research site located near to the installation and operated by The Nature Conservancy and Kansas State University.

Sustainable agricultural programs are also present on the installation. Summer hay harvests interspersed with periods of rest on nearly 5,000 acres of Riley allows for the maintenance of the tallgrass prairie (Lauver 1994). Haying production is conducted on an agricultural lease basis with local farmers, allowing for good public relations in the local community as well. Along with this limited crop production, selective timber harvesting occurs on some of the 12,000 acres of woodland present on the reservation. However, timber production from the woodlands appears to be kept at a minimum and is utilized mostly for fuelwood purposes. Several wildlife feed plots are also present, providing essential food reserves in winter months for birds, elk and deer.

Environmental education programs and pamphlets, financially reasonable to procure, have been generated in order to assist hunters, anglers, non-consumptive outdoor recreationists and fuelwood collectors in minimum impact recreation techniques. This practice has proven highly effective and financially appealing concerning natural resource utilization and conservation.

The natural resource branch, through the DoD Integrated Training Area Management (ITAM) program, has incorporated the Environmental Awareness (EA) and Training Requirements Integration (TRI) concepts into basic troop training. Military units and their commanders are encouraged to request maneuver damage prevention briefings as often as desired, and especially prior to any large-scale field exercises. During these briefings, off-limits areas and seasonal/climatic information is disseminated to the troops. In addition, handbooks are provided to unit commanders with specific training impact reduction guidelines, emphasizing the prevention or minimalization of damage to the resource base while allowing for the successful completion of the military mission.

Still, the problem of soil erosion is of concern on the installation. Although off-road vehicular training is an integral part of the military mission at Riley, intensive and repetitive use of sensitive areas can lead to soil compaction and erosion. Destruction of vegetational cover, compaction of soil and heavy vehicle track-scars combine to form channels and gullies allowing for top soil runoff. This damage, typically caused by excessive maneuvers in sensitive areas, not only causes a decline in the natural systems but also prevents the military from successfully completing training missions. Environmental damage can have far reaching impacts; losses in the installation's biodiversity as well as a marked decrease in suitable training acreage are typical results. Still, safety hazards to soldiers and equipment are also potential outcomes of extensively damaged training sites. Without the proper maintenance and restoration of the natural resources present on Riley, public support for the Army's mission and continued use of the installation may become jeopardized (Fort Riley Leader's Handbook 1994?).

At present, Riley has several MOU's in place with various public and private entities. The FWS assisted with the threatened and endangered species survey conducted on the installation. This agency, along with the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks and Riley, continue to assist with the management of the installation's fish and wildlife populations. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has been instrumental in the reintroduction and management of a herd of free ranging elk on the base. Quail Unlimited has played a partnership role by providing data and assistance concerning the management of resident quail populations and habitat on Riley. An informal agreement has been struck between the base and the Konza Prairie Research Natural Area allowing for the exchange of crucial information concerning natural communities, ecosystems and species between the two similar reserves.

Conclusions

The natural resource managers at Riley have taken a proactive approach toward environmental management on the installation. The implementation of an intensive fire regime of its size and nature is to be commended. Without this integral management directive, Riley would probably not be in the sound ecological condition it is in today. The light-intensity haying program appears to be ecologically beneficial and fosters community support for the Army's continued mission. Educational programs have incorporated low impact training techniques allowing for the effective completion of the military mission, while emphasizing environmental protection and restoration.

The habitat and populations of sensitive species that either reside or potentially exist on Riley have been well documented. Data derived from these studies have proven essential for the day-to-day management of the reservation. Moreover, these data allows for shared information agreements with other entities interested in the installation's management techniques.

In order for the resource managers at Riley to have a broader view of the natural systems present on the installation, additional community analysis should be conducted. Present management schemes tend to be species specific and may have a tendency to lose sight of the larger scale systems involved. Initiation of a more coarse-filter approach could provide additional clarification of the military mission and the natural resource management goals. Although a general conceptualization of natural resource utilization/conservation has been instigated, a clear understanding of where this lies in comparison to the military mission has yet to be determined. Without a explicit understanding of the limitations and advantages of both elements, a harmonious relationship between the two can not be fully realized.

It is our hope that the revised integrated management plan will clearly identify the importance of the riparian zones located on the facility, as well as the need for more a specific soil erosion control program. These additional practices will compliment the already proactive resource management design implemented on the installation.

4.0 FORT LEAVENWORTH MILITARY RESERVATION, KANSAS

Natural Community Analysis

Located in close proximity to the Flint Hills and Osage Cuestas tallgrass prairie landscapes, the Fort Leavenworth Military Reservation (Leavenworth) is comprised of characteristics of both regions. The installation encompasses approximately 6,600 acres and several diverse natural communities, including remnant tallgrass prairie, oak/hickory upland forest, riparian zones, and Missouri River floodplain (Figure 2). This last identified community may contain the only mostly mature bottomland hardwood forest (oak/sycamore/pecan) on the lower Missouri River. Approximately 1,400 acres in size, it appears that this rare community is the largest remaining contiguous tract of late successional floodplain forest of its type in Kansas (Busby and Freeman 1995).

Leavenworth lies completely within the glaciated plains; consequently, the major upland soil type consists of glacial drift and windblown loess, forming plains of rich sandy silt. Bottomland areas consist of alluvial deposits and range in texture from clay to sandy loam. Resistant limestone escarpments are exposed throughout the installation, creating picturesque bluffs and ridges that overlook the Missouri River and are characteristic of the reservation (Brumwell 1951).

Military Mission

Leavenworth is home to the Command and General Staff Officers College, within the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center, with the objective to "develop, implement and maintain a balanced strategy of integration between training and educational philosophies" (Fort Leavenworth Military Reservation Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 1990). Specifically, the Staff College plays host to international military personnel from more than seventy foreign nations. Since the program's inception in 1894, more than 5,600 commanders from 122 nations have been educated and trained at Leavenworth. The major military mission at the installation is one of education, including military training as well as interpretation of the area's natural resources. Consequently, the military mission and the conservation of the natural resources on Leavenworth are not viewed as autonomous, but complimentary.

Biological Inventories/Surveys

To date, no complete biological inventories have been conducted at Leavenworth. The natural resource manager at the installation has been in contact with the FWS and has initiated survey work through the Kansas Biological Survey (KBS). The base and KBS are currently monitoring rare flora and fauna species and hope to expand their efforts into broader scale surveys.

Integrated Management Plan

The Fort Leavenworth Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan was completed in-house by the natural resource manager in 1990. The current plan identifies the mature bottomland forest as a rare and important aspect of the installation and calls for its management under the policy of benign neglect. Indeed most of the identified communities, including the floodplains, upland hardwood forests, disturbed prairie systems, and riparian areas are managed under this technique.

A multiple-use concept appears to be another primary management strategy and seems to have maintained the health of the natural communities as a whole. (Please refer to comments concerning fire policy in the following section for a more complete description of the welfare of the natural systems). Currently, a revised management plan is being developed by the natural resource manager at Leavenworth. The new policy will clearly define a new management design of woodland conservation for wildlife habitat, watershed and soil protection, recreational pursuits and environmental education, over consumptive utilization.

Management Practices

The primary military mission of education at Leavenworth has been conceptualized into the management design of the natural resource branch. As recognized in the current management plan, the more than 200 species of avifauna provide an unparalleled opportunity for international visitors to view North American wildlife. As a result, educational field trips, lectures and interpretive bird watching tours have been initiated to assist personnel in their enjoyment of this non-consumptive activity. Also, local elementary and junior-high schools have been invited to participate in various environmental activities presented by the natural resources branch of the installation. Through these efforts, the primary goal of the military mission is realized, while maintaining excellent relations with the local community. The resource base is consequently utilized on a non-consumptive basis for present and future generations to enjoy.

Prescribed burning is another management tool implemented on the installation. Low intensity fires are introduced in the floodplain to clear brush and fallow croplands. Burning is usually carried out in early spring to encourage the maximum diversity of plant species, while averting the destruction of ground-nesting avifauna that reside there during other times of the year. Due to the maturity of the bottomland hardwood habitat, fire is not used to manage these stands. Upland forest stands are also not burned due to their proximity to residences and developed areas. Investigation into the historical fire regime of this community is warranted due to the excessive amount of understory growth noted in these areas. Heavy concentrations of thick understory decreases potential habitat for most species of wildlife and should be mitigated. Shrubs and woody growth have also encroached upon prairie grasslands throughout the installation. Should the introduction of light fire be regarded as a possible safety hazard, mechanical disturbance of these forest stands could become necessary for their health and maintenance.

In the recent past, much of the woodlands were open to fuelwood collection by military personnel and leased timber harvesting for financial benefit. However, these practices were judged unsustainable due to the limited size of the resource base and were abandoned. Whether or not these introduced disturbances were beneficial or harmful to the natural communities is presently unknown due to the lack of studies completed concerning this practices.

Additionally, Leavenworth manages agricultural plots for the use of the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks (USDB) located on the installation. These agricultural plots encompass approximately 2,000 acres of land located in the bottomlands and are protected from flooding by a system of levees. It appears that these areas were once similar in composition to that of the mostly mature hardwood community located adjacent to the plots, due to their similar soil types and historical pattern of periodic flooding. Originally, Missouri river floodplain vegetation consisted of tallgrass prairie and hardwood forest, most of it seasonally flooded, with a mix of successional stages due to disturbance from fire and floods. Large tracts now forested were once marshland with few trees.

Cooperative Agreements

At present, Leavenworth has no formal cooperative agreements in place with any other public or private entities. Still, the natural resource manager at the base has initiated contact with the FWS and the KBS and some survey work has begun. Cooperative agreements with local schools may also been initiated in order to possibly assist in the management of the numerous cultural resources present on the base. (Leavenworth was founded in 1827 and several structures dating back to this time are still utilized.)

Conclusions

The successful management of the natural resources at Leavenworth may be attributed to the military mission of education at the reservation. Without the pressure to supply land for training purposes, the natural communities present appear to have thrived with little introduced disturbance. Through benign neglect, the largest remaining tract of mostly mature bottomland hardwood forest on the lower Missouri River in Kansas has been conserved. Should the continued use of the agricultural area be considered unnecessary and the levees subsequently removed, this area would quickly return to a natural floodplain state and would eventually succeed to a similar stage of the present forest.

Still, educational programs aimed towards conservation through non-consumptive education has undoubtedly enriched the lives of numerous national and international visitors. For these aspects alone, the natural resource manager and base commanders should be commended for their efforts.

A few simple suggestions may improve the present management scheme on the installation. With a strong emphasis placed on the importance of education at Leavenworth, an informal interpretive walking/horse back riding trail located in the bottomland forest tract could assist in the maintenance and health of this invaluable community. The environmental awareness of this beautiful and unique area may lead to the desire to help protect its existence. With such a program in place, resource managers could be assured that the natural community would continue to thrive, while educating the public about its role and importance. This example of sound land stewardship could assist in the propagation of public relations, thereby assuring the continued use of Leavenworth by the U.S. Army in the future.

Perhaps more importantly, biological assessment of the installation is essential before proper management plans can be successfully implemented. Cooperative agreements, like those presently being pursued by the natural resource branch, appear to be the best way to obtain such data. Additional agreements should be developed and formalized to foster long-term relationships to assist with the management of the resources. It is our hope that the KBS play an even greater role in this aspect, as their resources and manpower appear aptly suited for such inquiry and analysis.

5.0 FORT CARSON MILITARY RESERVATION, COLORADO

Natural Community Analysis

Situated near the Upper Cimarron Mesa priority landscape, as identified by the TNC, Fort Carson is inclusive of the properties of Fort Carson Military Reservation (Carson) and its adjacent training area known as the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site (Pinon Canyon). (For purposes of this report, the identification of Carson will also pertain to Pinon Canyon, except where noted.) Several natural communities are well represented in this semi-arid military installation, including shortgrass prairie, pinon/juniper woodland, ponderosa pine stands and wetland/riparian zones.

Soil coverage on the installation is diverse, ranging from loams to sandy loams to silty loams, along with alluvium and eolian deposition. Consequently, the plant communities at the base are also eclectic, with more than 26 plant communities and over 350 plant species identified (Shaw and Diersing 1989).

Military Mission

Carson is presently home to the U.S. Army's 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) and houses more than 17,000 troops and thousands of military vehicles. (It should be noted that the Division's flag may be moved to another installation in the near future. Consequences of this relocation to the natural communities and economic health of the local communities has yet to be determined.) The main mission at Carson is to maintain combat ready troops through maneuver training, using mostly heavy tracked vehicles. Prior to 1983, training was concentrated on the 137,000 acres of the main post of Fort Carson (Figure 3). More recent years have seen an increase in troops and a requirement for additional training space (Fort Carson encompasses only 55,000 usable maneuver acres suitable for heavy mechanized training.) Consequently, the U.S. Army purchased Pinon Canyon in 1983 from state, federal and private land owners in order to supplement their training acreage. Training currently takes place on both sites, with up to brigade-sized maneuvers occurring on the more than 236,000 acres at Pinon Canyon (Figure 4).

Biological Inventories/Surveys

Due to the proactive efforts of its natural resource managers, Carson's diverse biological elements have been extensively inventoried and studied. Studies completed at Carson are broken down into two categories: wildlife studies and soil/vegetation /water resources. Survey work involving wildlife studies are further divided into categories concerning general ecology of home range and species distribution/occurrence. General soil surveys, vegetational plot studies, noxious weed surveys and general resource inventories concerned with wetlands, erosion control and sedimentation have been completed. Several future inventories are in the planning stage, including work to be initiated on amphibian/reptilian populations and a mine/quarry inventory. Although many of these studies are species specific in content, the majority of the studies are concentrated on broader-based community issues. This aspect appears to be a direct result of the community/landscape management attitude undertaken by the natural resource managers at the installation. Much of these biological assessment studies have been completed with the assistance of outside entities through cooperative agreements. These aspects are but a few of the many exemplary natural resource management schemes being implemented at Carson.

Integrated Management Plan

An integrated natural resource management plan has been completed to the final draft stage by the natural resource managers at Carson. The draft is currently undergoing final editing with Greystone environmental consultants. (The management plan will be inclusive of both Carson and Pinon Canyon). According to the manager at the office of the Directorate of Environmental Compliance and Management (DECAM) at Carson, the plan will identify key ecosystems and communities, including shortgrass prairie and the pinon/juniper woodland. Management designs pertaining to specific sensitive species known to reside on or migrate through the installation will also be included. Several listed, candidate, and species of state/federal interest have been identified as utilizing portions of Carson for habitat purposes.

Management Practices

It appears that a coarse-filter approach towards the management of the natural communities present on Carson has been initiated. The enhancement of the natural systems through limited disturbance and restoration/rest periods are used, allowing for a pattern of ecological set-back, recovery and succession. As livestock grazing, agricultural production and prescribed fire are not utilized as primary management options, the main disturbance to these systems is introduced in the form of heavy vehicular maneuvers.

According to the natural resource manager, utilization, conservation and restoration of the natural resources are viewed as symbiotic concepts, and are not contradictory in status. This concept is highlighted through the utilization of the ITAM and Maneuver Damage Control Program, both implemented on Carson. Consequently, the natural resource personnel are not viewed as having antagonistic attitudes towards the military mission, but complimentary ones. The managers are afforded ample authority in the daily decision making processes concerning military training and use of the land. A "deferment plan" is in use for all training areas located on the Fort Carson site. Under this plan, heavily impacted areas are reseeded with native grasses and are allowed a minimum of three years to recover from training disturbance. Due to its large dimensions, Pinon Canyon has a "rest and rotate" pattern in effect that mandates closure of a half of its acreage to training for a two year period. During that time, nearly 120,000 acres are allowed to recover from vehicular disturbance, with no other anthropomorphic disruption permitted.

As the natural resource managers are seen as partners in the military mission, base and field commanders will often consult with them prior to training maneuvers, especially during sensitive periods or times of inclimate weather. Moreover, the resource managers educate all military field personnel prior to the use of any training site. During this discourse, personnel are informed that they may be assessed restoration costs for the unnecessary destruction of the environment while training. Not surprisingly, field commanders not only comply with this directive, but appear to instill its message in their troops. This aspect of control over training is not viewed as being counter-productive to the military mission. The less conspicuous an Army's maneuvers, the less information provided the enemy concerning their position, strength, etc. Military commanders view the excessive destruction of the environment as providing a detailed "road map" for one's adversaries concerning these essential military secrets, as well as eroding future training capabilities on any particular training area.

Cooperative Agreements

The natural resource managers at Carson have enacted more than a dozen MOU's with public and private entities concerning various management schemes. In one cooperative agreement for the study of a federally listed bird of prey present at Carson, seven agencies, including the FWS, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Colorado College have been contracted to assist in the surveying and monitoring of these avifauna. Agreements with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), the El Paso Soil Conservation District and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have also been realized for the construction of earthen dams to impede potential soil erosion. Mutually beneficial contracts with the National Park Service (NPS), the El Paso County Parks Department and the Pikes Peak Community College have been implemented in order to initiate and maintain a natural and cultural history program on the installation.

Conclusions

The natural resource staff at Carson are to be commended for their exemplary role as proactive land stewards. Through their efforts, the installation has become an asset to the U.S. Army for training purposes, as well as for the maintenance of natural resources. It is the WGA's opinion that Carson could prove a role model for less proactive military installations to follow. The excellent communication lines open between base/field commanders and the respect afforded the natural resource personnel should not be overlooked, and these aspects could easily be implemented at other bases.

The managers of the installation would enjoy seeing a more harmonious dissemination of information among resource mangers and scientists. It is unfortunate to hear that animosity exists between those that develop new resource management technology and those that implement it. Perhaps only with a better understanding of the essential roles both parties play will consensus and respect be generated.

6.0 PUEBLO DEPOT ACTIVITY, COLORADO

Natural Community Analysis

Encompassing nearly 23,000 acres of shortgrass prairie and several riparian and wetland zones, the U.S. Army's Pueblo Depot Activity (PDA) is located in the Southwest corner of the Colorado Piedmont physiographic province, in close proximity to the Upper Cimarron Mesa priority landscape. PDA consists of mostly flat to gently rolling high plains situated adjacent to the Arkansas River Valley. Located on the installation are several wetland/riparian zones, including the Chico, Boone and Haynes Creek systems, all flowing into the Arkansas River, approximately 3.5 miles south of the base (Figure 5). Also present on the reservation are man-made water catchments and naturally occurring springs, both essential to the migratory and resident wildlife that utilize PDA. An alluvial terrace aquifer underlies most of the installation which PDA relies upon for its potable water supply.

Soils throughout the military facility tend to run deep and appear well-drained. Sandy loams, silty clay loams and loamy sands are all represented, and have been ranked to be in poor to fair condition for wildlife and grazing purposes. According to the NRCS, wildlife habitat improvement could probably be accomplished through vegetation enhancement and additional water distribution (PDA Reuse Development Plan 1994).

Military Mission

Before 1988, the military mission at PDA was the storage and supply of strategic materials, conventional munitions and machinery for the U.S. Army. Proper store of these materials required the construction of more than 900 earth and concrete "igloos" on nearly 6,000 acres of land. In 1988, the Secretary of Defense's Base Realignment and Closure Committee targeted the installation for demilitarization and closure by the year 2004. Currently, all but one mission at PDA has been either relocated or discontinued. The remaining mission is the Chemical Demilitarization Program which will dispose of all remaining stockpiles of chemical weapons (mainly mustard gas) through incineration. An incineration plant has been cleared for construction on the installation, to be completed by the end of 1996, to facilitate the disposal of the weapons. In response to this situation, public and private entities have become interested in what is to become of the land, natural resources and facilities located at the depot. In order to determine the future of facility, the Colorado State Legislature has created the Pueblo Depot Activity Development Authority and assigned them the mandates of determining the future of the installation and implementing a reuse plan for PDA (PDA Reuse Development Plan 1994).

Biological Inventories/Surveys

No complete biological surveys have been made of PDA. The natural resource manager has contracted with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for surveys to be initiated concerning the flora/fauna and wetland/riparian communities. These scheduled inventories will most certainly confirm the existence of several sensitive species located on or near the installation. Bald eagles, whooping cranes and lesser prairie chickens are believed to occur on or near the base, while populations of the Arkansas darter, Southern redbelly dace and burrowing owl have been documented at PDA.

Integrated Management Plan

The FWS completed a fish and wildlife management plan for PDA in 1987. The plan appears limited in its integrated approach, however, as it only identifies those natural elements that directly concern wildlife. Although the plan does identify the existence of the natural communities present at PDA, it does not provide management strategies to be implemented in order to monitor and maintain the health of these systems. Due to its age, the current plan is not able to take into account the realignment and inevitable closure of the installation.

No formal agreements or contracts have been made for the development of a revised management plan. The Reuse Development Plan recently adopted by the reuse committee does acknowledge a few management concepts, such as land use planning and soil limitations, but does not identify specific ecological approaches necessary to manage PDA. Consequently, a conservative policy of benign neglect appears to be is the primary management design used on the installation.

Management Practices

Historically used for cattle grazing prior to the base's inception in 1942, this practice continues today on more than 7,000 acres of the facility. Through a single lease agreement with a local rancher, PDA estimates that 40 animal unit months are present on the open grazing grounds. Prescribed fire and most other typically introduced disturbances are not implemented, and it appears that grazing is the only continuous form of disturbance present on the installation. Monitoring of this activity is nonexistent and the exact condition and response of the prairie ecosystem to grazing remains undetermined at PDA.

The most important resource aspect of PDA may be identified as the riparian/wetland zones present throughout the installation. Several of these areas have been spared pressure from grazing by fencing, resulting in apparently healthy communities. In response to this situation, a few healthy water catchments have been introduced with rare or sensitive species of icthyofauna. The Southern redbellied dace was introduced in 1987 into one such pond and appears to have proliferated. The Arkansas darter, a category 1 Federal Candidate species, was also introduced into a small pond in 1990. However, after the introduction of the species by the FWS monitoring of the project was not initiated and it is unknown if the population has survived or not (Fish and Wildlife Plan 1987 and PDA Reuse Development Plan 1994).

The largest of the base's wetlands, Linda Ann Reservoir, supports a recreational fishery consisting of stocked rainbow trout and channel catfish open to anglers. As the reservoir is a refuge for winter migratory avifauna, the Colorado Division of Wildlife installed an aerator in the catchment to prevent freezeover of the water. In recent years this reservoir has attracted more than 8,000 Canadian geese in search of open water. Moreover, the aerators promote rooted aquatic plant growth through a reduction in turbidity, thereby improving the overall wetland habitat for both fish and wildlife alike (PDA Reuse Development Plan 1994).

Still, some of these riparian/wetland zones have suffered from uncontrolled access by livestock. The banks of the Chico Creek have deteriorated from soil erosion and have been invaded by noxious weeds. Little appears to have been done to mitigate this situation by either the installation's natural resources branch or the private rancher leasing the public land.

Cooperative Agreements

No formalized cooperative agreements are in place between PDA and outside entities. Several informal arrangements have been made with various agencies that appear to be beneficial to all parties involved. The FWS is presently utilizing several of PDA's existing facilities in their Black footed ferret (federally endangered species) reintroduction training center. The Service has created a protected habitat enclosure from existing storage structures in order to "educate" ferrets prior to their release in the wild. Studies indicate that individuals raised in such an environment have an improved survival rate over those reared in cages (Biggins 1995). The notion that PDA could be a possible site for the reintroduction of the ferret in Colorado, through an existing Black tailed prairie dog colony, has also been proposed. Due to the limited size of the prairie dog colony on the reservation (several thousand acres of prairie dog habitat are required), coupled with the plague epidemic present in many Colorado colonies, it is unknown if reintroduction plans will occur in the near future.

Conclusions

The lines of communication open between the military facility and the general public concerning the future of the land and resources of PDA are to be commended. The reuse committee is comprised of members from the local government, as well as concerned local citizens. With such interest and input emanating from the local community, it is appears as if a successful affiliation between the installation and the local community has been realized.

PDA lies adjacent to several large tracts of land owned by the State of Colorado and the BLM. It could prove beneficial to all agencies to pool their resources and conduct necessary biological inventories concurrently. This is perhaps the most crucial recommendation made for the reservation as biological assessment is necessary prior to the implementation of sound management practices. Furthermore, monitoring of known sensitive species occurring on the installation along with the effects of grazing would prove integral to any management design.

A few additional recommendations could perhaps help ease the transformation from realignment to closure while better conserving the resource base. A formalization of the present cooperative agreements in place concerning species reintroduction programs would document the current proactive practices at PDA. This documentation could be used to prove the positive stewardship role the U.S. Army has played while maintaining its presence at the reservation. Secondly, efforts to ensure proper reclamation of contaminated water supplies on the base would also foster strong community support. Not only should these efforts address those areas that have experienced damage caused by livestock, but also those areas contaminated by chemicals stored by the Army in the past. As the installation resides above an aquifer and several of the creek systems empty into the Arkansas River, this waste remediation takes on special significance.

7.0 FORT HOOD MILITARY RESERVATION, TEXAS

Natural Community Analysis

Containing over 219,000 acres, the Fort Hood Military Reservation (Hood) lies within the Lampasas Cut-Plain physiographic province. Due to the diverse components of the natural communities present at Hood and the intensive manipulation of the land resources surrounding the base, the installation has been likened to an "island of biodiversity" enveloped by a "sea of mono-culture." Perceived as being the most significant natural area remaining in this province, TNC has identified Hood as being a priority landscape located within the Great Plains. Natural communities present on the installation include mid to tallgrass prairie, ashe juniper/oak woodlands in various stages of succession and riparian zones (Figure 6).

Soils on the installation run from silty clays to sandy loams, with some areas of the reservation classified as alluvial flood plain. The relatively level to gently rolling terrain of the installation, coupled with the shallow soils, appears to allow for adequate drainage of these sites. Still, several deep valleys through which streams flow in narrow strips of alluvial bottomland also exist and appear to suffer from high rates of erosion due to slope and intensive military training.

Military Mission

Hood has been an active military reservation since its inception in 1942. Currently, the installation houses the headquarters of the U.S. Army III corps, along with two armored divisions, an air cavalry brigade, a corps support command and a combat aviation training brigade. Military training facilities at the reservation consist of tactical training and maneuver areas, an ordnance impact area, two airfields and various firing ranges, supporting more than 45,000 troops. The main military objective of the post is to maintain and train an active fighting force. Due to the semi-arid climate, location, variety of terrain, trafficability of the soils and facilities located on Hood, the Army Leadership has acclaimed the installation as the best armor training site managed by the DoD. The natural resource personnel on the reservation hope to serve as an instrument to accomplish the military mission through proper land stewardship (Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan 1992).

Biological Inventories/Surveys

Completed inventories on the reservation appear to have been focused on specific species. Population surveys of game species and furbearers have been performed with the support of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). The emphasis of the species-specific work has been concentrated on two federally endangered avifauna species that nest on the installation. The golden-cheeked warbler and black-capped vireo both have substantial populations present at Hood. Project status reports are prepared on an annual basis concerning these birds.

Intensive studies have been initiated to evaluate the effects of military activities on these sensitive populations. Study results indicate that impacts on the vireo and warbler populations through maneuver training may be minimized by controlling troop activities in the vicinity of the birds' habitat. Management practices implemented on the installation, like prescribed burning, vegetation manipulation and outdoor recreation, do not appear to adversely affect either population (Tazik 1991).

Hood was the first DoD installation to enlist the support of the LCTA, a program that provides a method for monitoring training impacts and other disturbances to natural resources over time. Through randomly placed plots, LCTA generates data concerning soils, vegetational cover and mammal/bird habitat areas. However, resources managers have stated that the LCTA is limited in its capacity to analyze the data generated. Not until an Ecological Carrying Capacity Model (ECCM) was constructed was the LCTA information formatted into a usable management tool for the resources personnel. The ECCM evaluates the ecological response to flora from both natural and human-induced disturbances. This model may prove especially important to the military concerning allowable use estimates for training purposes on the resource base. The ECCM studies concerning impacts and disturbances on Hood have been initiated with the full support of the natural resource branch and the model should provide usable management data in the near future. Outside of the LCTA and ECCM, most of the biological research conducted on the reservation appears to be fine-filtered in scope. With the full implementation of the carrying capacity model, a more broad-based landscape view of the installation will be realized.

Hood's natural resource managers are not alone in their interest of the natural communities present on the base. Presently, TNC has seven seasonal conservation specialists working at Hood through DoD funding. This team assists Hood natural resource personnel with all aspects of the projects concerning sensitive species, predator/prey relationships and habitat condition. Their relationship with the resource managers of the installation appears to be one of mutual interest and respect in concern with the resources present. This coordinated effort between a public land management agency and a private conservation entity proves that sound management studies and practices may be accomplished through cooperation and information dissemination.

Integrated Management Plan

Completed in 1992, the natural resource personnel of Hood authored their own Integrated Resource Management Plan in order to consolidate land resource information into one document. The plan identifies the existence and importance of several of the natural communities found on the installation as well as management attributes of specific species.

The plan calls for the proactive management of the mid to tallgrass prairie ecosystems through coordinated introduction of prescribed fire, vegetational control and reseeding of native species in disturbed areas. Moreover, it appears that identified habitat for the Black-capped vireo also benefits from this management design. The vireo is known to often prefer habitat resulting from fire within stands of mature oak/juniper (Tazik 1991). Vegetation manipulation appears necessary to control the encroachment of ashe juniper onto prairie areas. Without this management directive there would be a substantial decrease in available wildlife habitat. Additionally, uncontrolled stands of ashe juniper invades upon valuable training areas, thereby reducing the overall acreage available to military use. Manipulation is introduced in the forms of limited prescribed burning, manual cutting, chemical application and limited mechanized removal.

Management Practices

Aside from the military training activities on Hood, the most intensive managed land use is livestock grazing. Over 170,000 acres of the installation are under grazing leases, the largest of which is a coordinated effort concerning the DoD and a local grazing association. The association has no financial obligation to the DoD for the grazing use of the installation's land. Instead, a program of "pay in kind" has been initiated which stipulates that leasing ranchers provide services in lieu of payment. These services mostly consist of repairs to water catchments for cattle, fencing and mowing of improved grounds.

As specified in the management plan, proper grazing does tend to improve the vegetational composition of the prairie by allowing dominant perennial species to become established, thus reducing annuals and other undesired flora. Moreover, the reduction of litter from livestock grazing reduces potential fuel for wildfires. Unprescribed fires on the installation are not only a hazard to troops in the field, but to habitat of sensitive species as well (Integrated Resource Management Plan 1992). However, along with the presence of the cattle another, less desirable aspect is also encountered; that of the Brown-headed cowbird.

Known as a brood parasite, the cowbird does not construct its own nest, but opts instead to lay its eggs in the nests of host species. The Black-capped vireo and the Golden-cheeked warbler appear to be highly susceptible to the cowbird's parasitism, and thus favorite hosts for its eggs (Tazik 1991). The natural resource managers at Hood have initiated a strict cowbird control program, as seen through their trapping and monitoring of the cowbird population. Successful in their efforts, cowbird parasitism has dropped dramatically in just a few years; from 91% in 1987 to 13% in 1994 (Weinberg, Bolsinger and Hayden 1995). Hood's efforts are so notable that they are perceived as the authority on cowbird parasitism control.

Resulting from maneuvers by heavy vehicles and coupled with the effects of prolonged grazing, soil erosion on Hood has exceeded the tolerance limits established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for soil types found on the installation. Soil compaction and excessive loss of vegetational cover by tracked vehicles forms rills and gullies, resulting in intensive topsoil loss. In 1986, the erosion status for Hood estimated that nearly 50% of the installation's training areas were losing soil at 100% of the tolerance limit (Integrated Resource Management Plan 1992). In an attempt to halt the depletion of this invaluable resource, the natural resource staff have enacted several land reclamation programs.

Through cooperative efforts with the NRCS, Hood has constructed several erosion control structures in the form of earthen check dams and rock "rip-rap" to line gullies in areas where runoff volume is greater than vegetation can withstand (Integrated Resource Management Plan 1992). Secondly, restorative work has been implemented on areas deemed most likely to recover with proactive management. Sites selected are graded and reseeded with native grasses. Finally, areas restored are assigned a "rest and rotation" status whereby the effects of training are restricted until the site has a chance to recover.

Cooperative Agreements

As noted through much of the report, Hood has formalized several cooperative agreements with federal, state and local entities. The FWS, TNC and the TPWD have played the most pertinent roles in these agreements, assisting in the biological inventory and monitoring of numerous essential ecological elements. A watershed planning and erosion control program has been implemented on the installation through cooperative efforts with the NRCS. Through accords with local water authorities, Hood has been able to share information concerning the riparian systems that run through the installation.

The natural resource staff at Hood are to be applauded for their continuous, proactive approach to resource management on the installation. Due mostly to their coordinated efforts, two federally endangered species have not only survived on an active military installation, but have prospered. The results of the intensive surveys and on-going monitoring of these sensitive species have proven the resource managers at Hood as the authors of their effective management.

Few military facilities outside of Hood have seen the intensive restorative work initiated on disturbed lands. Soil erosion, although still a serious obstacle to the sustainable health of the reservation as a whole, has been actively contested for several years. Early results show that the installations efforts have proven promising. Only with continued effort and additional funding/man-power will the imminent success of this program be realized.

Those in the natural resource branch of Hood feel that they are effecting sufficient progress in the active management of the installation. Still, personnel speculate that additional support is warranted in order to effectively pursue their efforts. A need for a more coordinated effort in the integration of various data sets was voiced. As the reservation has been intensively inventoried and studied, reams of raw information are left uncorrelated and in an unusable format. Data that are usable and of vital interest to the facility are housed in distant locations where those that need it most, the natural resource managers at the site, are unable to readily obtain the information. It appears that lines of communication in these areas are fragmented and uncoordinated, often resulting in requests for data being delayed. Attention brought to this predicament through this report may assist in alleviating this unnecessary and frustrating situation.

8.0 FORT SAM HOUSTON MILITARY RESERVATION, TEXAS

Natural Community Analysis

Centered approximately 30 miles northwest of the Fort Sam Houston Military Reservation (Fort Sam), the Camp Bullis Military Reservation (Bullis) is a supplemental facility managed by the main post for training purposes. As Fort Sam Houston itself is comprised almost entirely of improved areas, efforts for this report were concentrated on the mostly undeveloped 28,880 acres at Bullis (Figure 7). Both installations are located in the Edward's Plateau region of the Texas Hill Country landscape, characterized by the communities of mid to tallgrass prairie, ashe juniper/oak woodlands and riparian/wetland zones. Moreover, Bullis has been identified as a recharge zone for both the Glen Rose and Edward's aquifers, of which the Edward's aquifer is utilized by the City of San Antonio, Texas for its sole source of water.

Soils on the reservation are primarily shallow clay and clay loams overlying limestone bedrock. The terrain appears to be gently rolling with several outcrops of limestone and numerous low-lying hills and ridgelines present.

Military Mission

Bullis was established as a training subinstallation of Fort Sam in 1890. Large scale maneuvers were conducted at the installation during national military mobilizations associated with World Wars I and II. During the interim period, the sub-post supported field training, ordnance impact sites and firing range areas for troops assigned to Fort Sam. Acreage at Bullis proved to be too limiting for these purposes, however, and the military mission of the installation was realigned. Concurrent with this adjustment, Fort Sam discontinued its role as a garrison for a combat division, and became a center for medical training for the U.S. Army. Today, Bullis continues its mission as the primary field training area for the Army Medical Department Center and School, although limited light vehicle and infantry training continue to exist. Several specialized training areas, including an assault landing strip, medical drop zones and helicopter flight training pads are incorporated into the maneuver sites. Impact areas are also utilized on the grounds, mostly in the form of firing ranges for the training of both public and private agencies. The installation also plays the role as a logistical support facility for U.S. Army communications (A Pocket Guide to Camp Bullis 1993).

Biological Inventories/Surveys

Biological inventory efforts appear to have been concentrated in the area of endangered species known to exist on the installation. The Black-capped vireo and Golden-cheeked warbler are known to utilize portions of the ashe juniper/oak woodland community for habitat. Past and present surveys concerning their populations are conducted with the LCTA program. Several of the sensitive species surveys have been conducted with the assistance of TNC and the TPWD.

Several archeological sites of cultural significance have been identified on the reservation, and these areas have been extensively inventoried. Studies concerning these resources are on-going, as additional sites have recently been unearthed.

At present, no complete biological inventory concerning the natural communities located on the reservation has been conducted. Efforts are being made to develop a remote-sensing project to determine the extent of the vegetative communities present. Together with TNC, the DoD hopes to initiate such studies in the near future using much of the surveillance and monitoring technologies developed at the Fort Hood Military Reservation.

Integrated Management Plan

Presently in the drafting stage, an integrated resource management plan is being developed for Bullis by an outside firm. According to the natural resource managers of the installation, the plan will address the following management categories: wildlife, endangered species, forestry, land and grounds, cultural sites, community relations and outdoor recreation. Major points of the plan will call for the strict management and monitoring of sensitive species, the establishment and maintenance of wildlife feed plots and water catchments, and the improvement of wildlife habitat through vegetation manipulation (Cooperative Plan Agreement 1993).

Much of the plan's emphasis will be in the area of natural community restoration and maintenance. Currently, the vast majority of the reservation is identified as ashe juniper/oak woodland (78%), and it appears that proactive management of this element has been deferred in the past. As ashe juniper is known as an invader species, without the natural control caused by periodic wildfire and native animal grazing, it invades and ultimately replaces other plant communities (Cooperative Plan Agreement 1993). To date, several thousand acres of mid to tallgrass prairie have been inundated and succeeded by encroaching ashe juniper trees due to the lack of natural or introduced disturbance.

Management Practices

Conservative management policies, including the practice of benign neglect, appear to have been utilized on the reservation for several decades. This reactive routine has inadvertently caused the unnatural propagation of one natural community (ashe juniper), only to the detriment of several others. Realizing this situation, the natural resource managers at Bullis have recently attempted to manipulate the ashe juniper woodland in order to restore the system to a natural balance.

Prescribed burning has been initiated with limited success on the installation. However, it is not the nature of the management tool that is limiting, but the man-power and political thrust necessary to implement it. Currently, one individual is responsible for the management of prescribed burn areas. Under present management practices, approximately 200 acres of ashe juniper are burned annually. In a military facility the size Bullis, it will take several decades to effectively introduce fire to its 28,000 acres.

Moreover, intensive development in the form of single-family residences has taken place on the land surrounding the reservation. In the last few years alone several thousand homes have been constructed. Along with the marked increase in residential development, an increase in apprehension towards the light burns initiated on the installation has also been noted by the natural resource personnel. Yet implementation of this management strategy is essential to the restoration and maintenance of the health of all the natural communities present. Through local community involvement and public awareness of proper land management policies, the resource managers hope to educate local communities and government officials that fire is a natural and necessary disturbance.

Due to the limited utilization of prescribed burning at Bullis, resource personnel implemented a program of vegetation manipulation through more conventional means. Mechanized disturbance, as seen through minor bulldozing operations, coupled with small scale hand clearing operations, have been initiated. With the restraints of limited available man-power and hopes of building community awareness towards the situation, the resource managers requested that local volunteers be mobilized to aid in the restorative work. One such event, known as a "cedar chop" (ashe junipers are often referred to as cedars) recruited eighteen volunteers, three of which were from the local TNC chapter (Byrne 1995). However, these small scale operations are only able to clear four or five acres at a time. Due to the extensive encroachment of the ashe juniper woodland over the last several decades, these operations do more for public relations rather than environmental benefit. Perhaps through continued public education and involvement the resource personnel will be able to overcome the political and social obstacles in place and initiate proper manage actions.

Cooperative Agreements

As previously stated, the natural resource branch of Fort Sam/Bullis have formalized several agreements with TNC and the TPWD. A contractual agreement with the FWS appears to be drafted and should be authorized with the final draft of the integrated resource management plan. The volunteer program launched by the resource managers, although not a formal agreement, has been of great assistance to the installation and deserves to be recognized as a cooperative effort.

Conclusions

As realized through the recent vegetation manipulation efforts of the resource staff, immediate proactive management strategies are in need of implementation if the viability of the resource base is to be maintained. Still, several political obstacles appear to be hindering these efforts and placing the resources in further jeopardy. Not only is it of the resource managers' concerns, but of the military commanders of the reservation as well. Uncontrolled encroachment of the ashe juniper community onto prairie land means an overall reduction in the quality as well as quantity of the available training space.

With a qualified understanding of their ashe juniper situation, Bruce Flinn of the WGA has recommended a low-risk selective herbicide application for the undesirable shrublands. When applied at reduced application rates, this soil-active herbicide, known as Tebuthiuron, results in selective thinning of unwanted shrubs by inhibiting photosynthetic activity (Whitson and Alley 1984). After application, skeleton trees are easily felled by mechanized means and may be piled to create wildlife cover.

With the MOU's in place between the TNC and Fort Sam/Bullis, additional biological inventory work needs to be initiated. Outside of the endangered species known to exist on the reservation, little appears to be known about the role of the aquifers and riparian/wetland zones present. Knowledge of these systems is essential due to the marked increase in community growth and human populations in the surrounding area.

Due to its close proximity and overall similarity in the natural communities present, perhaps the resource personnel at Fort Hood would agree to information dissemination between the two installations. Such an agreement could be used to keep biological inventory costs at Bullis to a minimum, while providing the natural resource managers with data pertinent to their management needs.

9.0 VANCE AIR FORCE BASE, OKLAHOMA

Natural Community Analysis

The Central Plains Wetlands landscape, identified as vital habitat for numerous species of resident and migratory avifauna, incorporates a string of biologically significant wetland ecosystems stretching from Nebraska's Rainwater Basin, through the Cheyenne Bottoms and Quivira refuge of Kansas and into the Great Salt Plains of northern Oklahoma. Vance Air Force Base's (Vance) nearby training facility known as Kegelman Auxiliary Airfield (KAA) (Figure 8) contains wetland habitat just east of the Great Salt Plains (Figure 9).

The military installation known as Vance is inclusive of the properties of Vance AFB (main base) and KAA (sub-base). Of the approximate 1,800 acres present at Vance, the vast majority has been improved to some degree. KAA has an estimated 1,000 acres, 600 of which are undeveloped and relatively undisturbed. Located within this 600 acre tract are 33 acres of wetlands. Although arguably insignificant in dimension, KAA's wetlands lie in close proximity to the Salt Plains National Wildlife Refuge (SPNWR) and directly adjacent to the Great Salt Plains State Park (GSPSP), both of which encompass approximately 34,000 acres of pertinent habitat for avifauna. Assuming that the overall area size of the installation is of secondary importance to that of cooperative management capability, one can see the true significance of KAA's situation concerning the GPP.

Military Mission

Vance is home to the 71st Flying Training Wing and is responsible for the pilot training of several hundred Air Force personnel from around the nation annually. As Vance is the main base and the larger of the two facilities, the majority of the training takes place on and around its grounds. KAA is located approximately 45 miles northwest of Vance and is utilized mostly for pilot "touch and go's" and fly-overs. Outside of the airstrip, fire station and on-site personnel offices, little improvement has been made to KAA's natural communities.

Biological Inventories/Surveys

Through the Oklahoma Biological Survey (OBS), Vance and KAA have been extensively surveyed. Completed surveys concerning vegetational cover, large and small mammals, avifauna, icthyofauna, reptile/amphibian populations and a species of burying beetle have all been completed. To date, neither state nor federally protected, threatened or endangered flora species have been identified at either installation. Although no sensitive avifauna species reside permanently on Vance, some threatened and endangered species occur within the region of influence and the installation has been identified as a potential stop-over site for migratory birds and waterfowl.

The U. S. Air Force has contracted with the FWS and GEONEX North America Operations, Incorporated to complete wetland surveys on all Air Force installations. Such work has yet to be initiated at Vance and KAA, but is scheduled to begin in the near future.

Integrated Management Plan

A two volume Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan has been drafted by the natural resource personnel at Vance. The plan contains specific chapters that suggest management strategies for land use, fish and wildlife, outdoor recreation, bird/aircraft strike hazards and wetlands. In attempts to properly implement sound management practices in their plan, the natural resource manager at Vance made drafts of the plan available to several local, state and federal agencies. In response, several recommendations were produced that would help clarify the management strategies and goals of the installation. The recommendations were taken under advisement by the natural resource personnel and have recently been incorporated into the integrated management plan.

Realizing the importance of biological diversity, the resource managers have clearly identified the wetlands in their management plan. The wetlands at KAA "are located within an unimproved area that has not been altered and will not be modified to any degree by human activities in the future" (Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan, Volume Two 1994). Moreover, the plan calls for the maintenance of the wetlands in their present condition to support wildlife and migratory waterfowl and shall not be drained or artificially altered. Although these strides have been made in the name of sound management, the design may call for too extreme of an avoidance of disturbance. Per the plan, alteration (or disturbance) is termed as any manipulation of the environment, including the removal or alteration of vegetation. This conservative management design may allow for the rapid growth of vegetation to encroach on the wetlands, rendering them inhospitable to some forms of potential migratory waterfowl. Maintenance of the health of the wetlands in the future has yet to be determined. It appears that a thorough review of the management plan for the wetland areas will be necessary upon the completion the FWS/GEONEX wetland surveys scheduled in the near future.

Management Practices

Due to the mostly improved nature of the grounds present on the main post of Vance, the majority of land management there has been in the way of landscape maintenance. An intensive mowing program has been implemented in order to control vegetational growth of the grassy areas surrounding the airstrips on the installation. Control of the vegetation has had a marked influence on the presence of ground nesting avifauna in these areas. Bird strikes are considered highly hazardous to pilots and aircraft, and strict control of this condition is necessary. With the implementation of this management practice, bird strikes with aircraft have been kept to a minimum. Moreover, the wetlands present at KAA have not been altered to attract waterfowl species to the area. To do so would prove imprudent, as an increase in avifauna numbers at the site would probably equate to an increase in bird/aircraft strikes.

Pest management is an identified practice at Vance. Pesticide applications for the population control of general household/nuisance pests to ornamental plant and turf pests takes place on the main base. Application of the chemicals are kept to the semi-improved and improved grounds, runways and buildings of the main base. Due to the mostly natural condition of the sub-base and the presence of the wetlands and potentially sensitive species, pesticides are not used at KAA. Pest management at the sub-base include a rodent trapping program, herbicide spraying of fence lines, runways and roadways, and general pest control of the buildings.

The main human-induced disturbance at KAA appears to be in the form of noise created by aircraft fly-overs during training periods. It is not known how this disturbance affects the presence or absence of waterfowl or other fauna species surrounding the wetlands.

Prescribed burns have not been practiced at Vance or KAA. The Oklahoma State Department of Wildlife Conservation (OSDWC) has recommended the use of prescribed fire to control the growth of sand plume thickets at KAA. This practice would improve the habitat area for resident and migratory wildlife. Due to the close proximity of the wetlands to the airstrips at the sub-base, attempts to attract additional wildlife, especially avifauna, are not encouraged. This policy would not prove prudent, as an increase in aircraft-bird strikes would probably result.

Cooperative Agreements

Cooperative agreements have recently been finalized between the FWS, OSDWC and Vance concerning the fish and wildlife management program at the installation. Other cooperative contracts have been formulated by the Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department concerning the outdoor recreation opportunities available at Vance. The U.S. Air Force had hoped that the NPS could have played a role in this agreement. However, due to a lack of federal funding their possible portion of the agreement was not realized. The natural resource managers at Vance are currently investigating the possibility of entering into a MOU with an outside entity concerning the monitoring of migratory waterfowl in the region. As part of the Partners in Flights initiative, Vance hopes to join the Next Generation Radar program (NEXRAD). By using the NEXRAD system currently in place at KAA, Vance natural resource managers could play a role in the on-going studies which monitor neotropical migratory waterfowl. Data collected by these studies include the quantity, general direction and altitudinal distribution of birds aloft.

Conclusions

The natural resource managers at Vance should be commended for their efforts in producing an innovative integrated management plan. Even with a natural community of limited size, they have had the insight to validate its biological significance and protect its existence. Still, it appears that the current draft could be improved upon through a few additional concepts. The need of additional biological inventory concerning the wetlands is clear. Without additional information concerning the present condition and significance of this habitat, proactive management planning cannot be realized. Once this data is obtained, however, the wetlands may be properly classified and a proactive management design may be implemented.

As KAA could be considered part of a widely dispersed wetland ecosystem rather than as a small separate entity, it may prove prudent to discover the management practices implemented at other public land areas in the region. Specifically, the SPNWR and the GSPSP could prove to be allies to Vance in the management of its natural resources. Through information dissemination, coordinated management efforts could be made between agencies on a variety of issues; from prescribed burns to biological inventories/surveys.

As is the case with all management designs, implementation is the key to effectiveness. The initialization of such cooperative efforts could make the difference between a good management plan in theory, and a good management plan in reality.

10.0 CONCLUSION

With so few natural areas remaining in the Great Plains, it has become essential to document the presence of the rare/natural elements remaining in this region. As one of the largest land management agencies in the Plains, the DoD is an important contribution to Plains conservation. The purpose of the GPP and this report has been to investigate if sound land management policies can be integrated with sustainable economic/social interests. Upon conclusion of this report it appears that the DoD has attempted to integrate these elements through proper natural resource conservation, utilization and restoration practices.

General observation and analysis of the management plans implemented on the military reservations documented in this report indicate that the DoD has attempted to initiate sound land management policies and recognizes the importance of natural communities on most of its installations. Although reactive and conservative management designs remain in effect on several reservations, a general thrust towards proactive and innovative management schemes appears to emerging. Several of the installations considered in this report, especially Fort Carson and Fort Hood, appear to be among the most advanced military installations in natural resource conservation. By recognizing and commending their efforts, it is the GPP's hope that additional military installations will follow in their footsteps.

It is no simple task to manage a military installation and their related natural elements on a landscape-scale approach, especially when that area is comprised of lands with specific military purposes. Single species issues, habitat protection, and natural system processes can easily conflict with the completion of the military mission. Still, outside elements also play an essential role in the sound management of such areas. Quality of life, social values, communications and economic policies cannot be divorced from the equation. Yet even as inadvertent natural resource managers the DoD has successfully implemented management practices on many reservations that allow for resource utilization as well as conservation.

For GPP's purposes, several general recommendations concerning the management of military installations presented themselves. A few of these recommendations appear to be materializing in some of the integrated management plans being implemented on many of the installations, while other recommendations have yet to be identified. From a GPP view, the DoD could become even more efficient as land stewards by:

assuming a more coarse-filtered approach to natural resource management over a fine-filtered method. Several DoD installations appear to be managing on a species-specific level, effectively ignoring the larger natural processes present. By managing at a natural community level, all elements of the natural systems are considered and the roles of sensitive as well as stable species are acknowledged. placing a priority on proactive management practices vs. reactive/conservative management policies of the past.

increasing emphasis on ecological assessment and biological inventory as a tool to help determine proper management goals and objectives. identifying the interrelationship of long-term objectives and goals of the military mission and natural resource conservation through proper land use planning. Long-term planning can aid in the successful completion of military training needs by addressing the desired condition of natural communities and proper training limits on the land. documentation and communication of the "good works" conducted on DoD lands concerning natural resource management. Recognition may lead to healthy public relations, assisting in public support for the continuance of the military mission. realization that the natural resource branch of each installation is an integral part of the successful completion of each reservation's military mission. Effective communication between military commanders and natural resource managers may prove to be the link between combat-ready troops and healthy, sustainable natural systems.

Through a general analysis of the management goals and techniques of each of the military installation reviewed in this document it becomes apparent there is a need for the DoD to more fully comprehend the ecological elements and processes present on many of its facilities. Much of the lands that comprise these installations are heavily utilized for military training. Yet without proper mitigation of the damage caused by intensive training activities the land degrades, becoming more of a resource hindrance than an asset to the DoD. The natural resource managers of the installations documented in this report often stressed the fact that degraded military lands not only means a reduction in ecological health and biodiversity, but a marked decrease in land suitable for military training as well. A clear understanding of the disturbance limit of the natural communities present on an installation along with a working knowledge of the ecological resiliency rates of each is essential before proper management schemes may be implemented. Finally, those military reservations that allowed the natural resource personnel to mitigate damage through restoration of training areas and deferment of use for extended periods were often the installations with the healthiest natural communities.

A general lack of long-term objectives and measurable management standards were noted in several of the management plans reviewed. The policy of benign neglect, for example, while allowing for the mostly undisturbed conservation of some natural communities, is an overly conservative and out-dated management concept that should be acknowledged as such. On some of the military installations visited this concept allows for the unnatural propagation of one component of the natural system to the detriment of other elements. Moreover, this management technique is of little use for future planning designs as it imposes reactionary management practices. Proactive approaches towards the management and planning of DoD's installations will ensure the successful completion of the military mission and sustainable use of natural resources.

Moreover, reactive approaches to natural resource conservation typically allows for only a "myopic" view of the natural systems present. By concentrating on a single element one may easily lose sight of "the big picture." The ultimate big picture for the Plains region will be to ensure for future generations that a portion of all the major ecological resources have been conserved. The GPP realizes that the military mission is one of preparedness, not preservation. At the same time, DoD, by protecting resources, practicing good land stewardship, working as partners with others, preserving vital natural areas, and other "good neighbor" practices, may find itself gaining the gratitude of future generations as much for its foresighted natural resource management as for its military prowess. The GPP would welcome the opportunity to work with the Great Plains military reservations to help draw the big picture.

11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND LITERATURE CITED

A Pocket Guide to Camp Bullis and the Leon Springs Military Reservation. 1993. Historic Neighborhood Awareness Program. The Fort Sam Houston Museum. Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

Arnold, James R. and Roberta Weiner. 1989, The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Natural

Resources Management on Army Installations: 1941-1987. Engineering and Housing Support Center and Office of History. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

Berry, Wendell. 1992. Sex, Economy, Freedom and Community. Pantheon Books. New York.

Biggins, Dean., Godbey, Jerry and Astrid Vargas. 1993. Influence of Pre-release Experience on

Reintroduced Black-footed Ferrets (Mustel nigripes). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

National Ecology Research Center. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Brumwell, Malcolm J. 1951. An Ecological Survey of the Fort Leavenworth Military Reservation.

The American Midland Naturalist. Volume 45.

Busby, William H. and Craig Freeman. May 24, 1995. Personal interview at the Kansas Biological Survey. University of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas.

Busby, William H. et al. 1994. A Survey of the Herpetofauna on the Fort Riley Military Reservation, Kansas. Kansas Biological Survey and the Museum of Natural History.

University of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas.

Byrne, Linda. April 30, 1995? "Cedar Chop Aids Local Ecosystem". Northeast Sun.

Chaplin, S.J., W.R. Ostlie, R.E. Schneider, and J.S. Kenney. 1996. A multiple scale approach to

conservation planning in the Great Plains in F.B. Samson and F.L. Knopf, eds., Prairie

Conservation: Preserving North America's Most Endangered Ecosystem. Island Press,

Covello, California. In press.

Chaplin, S.J., W.R. Ostlie, R.E. Schneider, and J.S. Kenney. 1995. Conservation Planning Within

the Great Plains. The Nature Conservancy. Midwestern Regional Office. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Cooperative Plan Agreement for the Protection, Preservation, Enhancement and Management of

Environmental and Natural Resources (Fish and Wildlife) of the Fort Sam Houston

Military Reservation. 1993. A cooperative management agreement between Fort Sam

Houston, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Diersing, V.E., R.B. Shaw and D. J. Tazik. 1992. U.S. Army Land Condition-Trend Analysis (LCTA) Program. Environmental Management. Volume 16, Number 3.

Environmental Protection Agency's Great Plains Program. 1995. An unpublished memorandum introducing the Great Plains Partnership and the EPA's role within the initiative.

Fish and Wildlife Plan: U.S. Army Pueblo Depot Activity. 1987. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Colorado Fish and Wildlife Assistance Office. Golden, Colorado.

Fort Leavenworth Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan. 1990. Facilities Maintenance

Division. Directorate of Engineering and Housing. Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Fort Riley Leader's Handbook. 1994? Natural Resources Branch. Environmental and Natural

Resources Division. Directorate of Engineering and Housing. Fort Riley, Kansas., and the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. Construction Engineering Research Laboratories. Champaign, Illinois.

Fort Riley Soldier's Handbook on the Environment. 1994? Natural Resources Branch. Environmental and Natural Resources Division. Directorate of Engineering and Housing.

Fort Riley, Kansas., and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Construction Engineering

Research Laboratories. Champaign, Illinois.

Freeman, Craig C. and Sara M. Hall. 1991. Status Survey for Western Prairie Fringed Orchid

(Plantanhera praeclara Sheviak & Bowles) on the Fort Riley Military Reservation, Kansas.

Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory. Kansas Biological Survey. University of Kansas.

Lawrence, Kansas.

Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan. 1992. Fort Hood Military Reservation, Texas.

Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan, Volume Two. 1995. Vance Air Force Base, Oklahoma.

Johnson, Kenneth W. 1994. An Ecological Assessment of the Icthyofauna of Selected Stream

Systems on Fort Hood, Texas. University of Mary Hardin-Baylor.

Kaufmann, Merrill R., et al. 1994. An Ecological Basis for Ecosystem Management. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-246.

Lauver, Chris L. 1994. Natural Community Analysis of Fort Riley Military Reservation. State Biological Survey of Kansas. University of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas.

Maenius-Mosley, Carrie. 1988. Estimates of Allowable Training Levels on Fort Carson, Colorado. Master's Thesis, Colorado State University. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Pueblo Depot Activity Reuse Development Plan. 1994. Prepared for the Pueblo Area Council of Governments and the Office of Economic Adjustment, Department of Defense. EDAW, Inc. Hammer, Siler, George Wilson & Company.

Row, Clark., et al. 1992. Enhancing Management of Forest and Vegetation on Department of

Defense Lands. Prepared for the U.S. EPA by the American Forestry Association.

Rubenson, David., Aroesty, Jerry and Charles Thompsen. 1992. Two Shades of Green: Environmental Protection and Combat Training. RAND. Santa Monica, California.

Savory, Allan. 1988. Holistic Resource Management. Island Press. Washington D.C.

Shaw, R.B. and V.E. Diersing. 1989. Allowable Use Estimates for Tracked Vehicular Training on

Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, Colorado, USA. Environmental Management. Volume 16,

Number 6.

Shaw, R B. and V.E. Diersing. 1990. Tracked Vehicle Impacts on Vegetation at the Pinon Canyon

Maneuver Site, Colorado. Journal of Environmental Quality. Volume 19, April-June 1990.

Tazik, David J. 1991. Biological Assessment of the Effects of Military Associated Activities on

Endangered Species at Fort Hood, Texas. U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research

Laboratory. Champaign, Illinois.

Weinberg, Howard J., Bolsinger, Jerry S. and Timothy J. Hayden. 1995. Project Status Report:

1994 Field Studies of Two Endangered Species (The Black-capped Vireo and the Golden- cheeked Warbler) and the Cowbird Control Program on Fort Hood, Texas. Natural Resource Division. U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory. Champaign, Illinois.

Whitson, T.D. and H.P. Alley. 1984. Tebuthiuron Effects on Arternisia spp. and Associated Grasses. Weed Science. Volume 32.

Page last updated 10/10/1999