Turtle bayou Nature Preserve Management Plan

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Chambers County, Texas

Natural Resources Management and Public Access and Education Plan

March 2015

Prepared by: Galveston Bay Foundation Matt Singer, Land Stewardship Manager Anna Deichmann, Land Stewardship Coordinator

This publication is funded with qualified outer continental shelf oil and gas revenues by the Coastal Impact Assistance Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior.

Abstract This document provides general guidance to Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District (CLCND) staff and assigned contractors for the management and maintenance of the Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve (“Preserve”). The Preserve consists of 514 acres of mixed pine-hardwood forest, saline prairie, cypress swamps, and freshwater marsh situated north of Anahuac in Chambers County, adjacent to Lake Anahuac and Turtle Bayou. Guidance is outlined in this plan to direct future management of natural resources, public access and nature-based recreation, and maintenance of preserve infrastructure.

Acknowledgements The Turtle Bayou Natural Resources Management and Public Access and Education Plan was prepared by the Galveston Bay Foundation as part of the Turtle Bayou Protection Project – a project to acquire, protect, and develop management strategies for 500+ acres of coastal natural resource habitat and buffering uplands along Turtle Bayou.

Funding for the project is provided through grants from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Great appreciation is due to that program, administered by the Texas General Land Office, and to the applicants / recipients of those grants: Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District for land acquisition, protection, and management; and Chambers County for land acquisition. A special thank you also goes to Cynthia Pickett-Stevenson and George Pontikes for their financial contributions, which helped make the acquisition of the Preserve possible.

This resulting plan was prepared in collaboration with stakeholder groups comprised of federal and state government natural resource experts, local conservation groups, various recreation groups, and interested private citizens. These stakeholder groups provided direction for initial development of public access infrastructure and habitat restoration efforts, as well as strategies and concepts for long term management and maintenance of the property. The management and maintenance is to be implemented through the Management Agreement between the Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District and the Galveston Bay Foundation.

The mission of Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District (District) is to provide reliable and efficient service to the municipalities and agricultural producers that utilize the District’s raw water supply, to promote and protect the District’s valuable water asset for future use by constituents of Chambers and Liberty counties, and to provide local support to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the maintenance and development of the various navigation channels located within the District, all of which are vital to the growth and economic development of the District.

The vision of the District is to sustain the infrastructure system of canals and navigation channels and to develop additional facilities to better utilize the vast water resources that are under the authority of the District, including the ability to treat and market potable water to municipalities and industries as well as providing additional marine facilities in order to promote ecotourism and commercial marine development.

The Galveston Bay Foundation (GBF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization established in 1987 with a mission to preserve, protect, and enhance the natural resources of the Galveston Bay estuarine system and its tributaries for Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access and Education Plan

present users and for posterity. GBF has conserved over 5,260 acres of coastal habitat through property acquisitions and conservation easements and is working to substantially increase acreage conserved in the coming years.

GBF is a member of the National Land Trust Alliance (LTA) and has adopted and supports the Standards and Practices of LTA. GBF is also a participating member of the Texas Land Trust Council. The Galveston Bay Foundation is one of nine land trusts in Texas accredited by the Land Trust Accreditation Commission.

The Galveston Bay Foundation would like to thank all of those individuals and organizations who participated in the Technical Advisory Group and Public Access Advisory Group for the Preserve. Their involvement helped create this Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Natural Resources Management and Public Access and Education Plan.

Advisory Group members (with their affiliations at the time of participation) include: Scott Alford – USDA-NRCS, Coastal Conservationist Sarah Cerrone – Chambers County, Director of Economic Development Pete Deichmann – Houston Audubon Society, Conservation Specialist Tom Douglas – Houston Canoe Club Keith Godwin – ChambersWild, Director of Marketing Greg Green – Ducks Unlimited, Regional Biologist, Texas Gulf Coast Heather Hawthorne – Chambers County, County Clerk Dayna Haynes – Anahuac Municipal Development District, Secretary Mike Howlett –Spring Creek Greenway Project, Harris County Pct. 4, Project Manager Karla Klay – Artist Boat, Executive Director Richard K. Long – USACE, Supv. Natural Resources Manager Houston Project Officer Travis Lovelace – Anahuac Paddling David Manthei – USDA-NRCS, District Conservationist Stephanie Martinez – USFWS, Anahuac NWR Julie Mintzer –Student Conservation Association, Houston Programs Director Daryl Morris – Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District, Superintendent Brent Ortego – Texas Parks and Wildlife, Wildlife Diversity Biologist Marc Reid – Houston Wilderness, Director of Conservation, Projects and Partner Services Linda Shead – Shead Conservation Solutions Mary Beth Stengler – Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District, General Manager Amy Turner – Waterborne Education Center/ChambersWild Jacque White – Chambers Recovery Team (ChaRT), Nature Tourism Committee Chair Kristen Wickert – Texas A&M Forest Service, Water Resources Staff Forester Catherine Williams – Chambers Recovery Team (ChaRT), President & CEO Scott Williams – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Biologist

Galveston Bay Foundation

Table of Contents I. Introduction .................................................................................................. i Property Description .............................................................................. i Project Background ...................................................................... ii CIAP Purpose and Objectives .................................................................... iii Purpose and Objectives of Plan ................................................. iv II. Public Access and Education Plan ................................................................. 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................1 Early Public Access and Education Projects ............................................2 Parking ..................................................................................................

2 Trails ..................................................................................................3 Scenic Viewing Platforms .....................................................................

4 Non-motorized Boat Launch ...................................................................

4 Signs .................................................................................................. 5 Long-term Public Access and Education .....................................................

6 Parking and Property Access .............................................................

6 Trails .................................................................................................. 7 Scenic Viewing Platforms ......................................................................................

7 Non-motorized Boat Launch ..........................................................................

8 Education .................................................................................... 8 Signs ..................................................................................................8 III. Natural Resources Management Plan ..............................................................

11 Introduction ..................................................................................................11 Early Restoration Practices .............................................................................

12 Non-native and Invasive Species Management........................... 12 Upland Invasive Species Control ............................................................

12 Aquatic Invasive Species Control .............................................................

15 Feral Hogs ......................................................................................

17 Forest Openings ......................................................................................

17 Wetland Creation / Enhancement ........................................... 18 Tree Planting ..........................................................................................

18 Interior Access Roads ................................................................. 19 Oil and Gas Remediation ........................................................... 20 Long-term Management and Maintenance ..............................................20 Invasive Species Control ................................................................... 21 Forest Management ..............................................................................

24 Wetland Management ..........................................................................

25 Range Management / Livestock ................................................ 26 Access ........................................................................................... 28 IV. Exhibits ............................................................................................................ 30 A. Turtle Bayou Property Maps ................................................................

30 B. Property Site Plan ..........................................................................................

34 C. Potential Funding Sources .................................................... 36 D. Forest Resource Assessment ...................................................... 38 Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

Galveston Bay Foundation

I. Introduction Property Description The Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve (“Preserve�) is located in a transitional region of southeast Texas, where ecotypes blend to form ecologically diverse and productive natural communities. The Preserve displays towering pines representative of the East Texas Piney Woods, flat topography and expansive grasslands symbolic of the Gulf coastal plain, and the unique hydrology and geology of the Trinity River floodplain and delta. The presence of forest, prairie, and wetland habitats attracts a diverse collection of wildlife species to the Preserve. These distinct but complimentary habitats create an ideal opportunity to showcase the ecological diversity of the region at a single iconic destination.

Less than five miles north of Anahuac in Chambers County, the 514-acre Preserve is situated along the banks of Turtle Bayou immediately north of Lake Anahuac, a freshwater lake which supplies water for municipal and agricultural purposes in Chambers and Liberty Counties. The Preserve is divided into two tracts by FM 563 (see Exhibit A) and provides a scenic corridor for visitors traveling from Houston to Anahuac or other southern Chambers County destinations.

Approximately 70% of the property, and nearly the entire Preserve area east of FM 563 (East Tract), is characterized as mixed pine-hardwood forest dominated by loblolly pine and various hardwood tree species. This forest is classified as a flatwoods community based on vegetation, soils, and hydrology observed throughout the site. The Preserve’s plant community is comprised mostly of loblolly pine mixed with sweetgum, southern red oak, willow oak, post oak, yaupon, and deciduous holly. Logging and fire suppression have encouraged a thick canopy and midstory, while limiting the ground level herbaceous plant community and allowing encroachment of Chinese tallow along fringes and within disturbed areas.

Flatwoods communities are only observed in a relatively small region of southeast Texas, ranging from the Louisiana border toward Houston. The flatwoods ecoregion historically consisted of a mosaic of mixed pinehardwood forest types with a variety of well-drained and poorly drained soils and associated plant communities.

Prior to European settlement, flatwoods in this region would have consisted of pine savannahs and small prairies with a species-rich understory and intertwined savannah wetlands.

The Preserve area west of FM 563 (West Tract) displays a dramatic fall in elevation from the forested areas into an expansive coastal saline prairie. This prairie type is found throughout the Texas coast on nearly flat landscapes near the Gulf of Mexico and is regularly flooded by heavy rainfall, extreme high tides, and storm surge associated with major weather systems. This grassland type evolved under intense pressure from heavy grazing by native bison herds along with frequent flooding, drought, and fire. Natural tidal fluctuations are no longer influencing this site, however the soil structure and plant community remain consistent with a typical saline prairie.

The climax plant community for saline prairie consists of a grassland habitat dominated by gulf cordgrass mixed with multiple species of native mid- and tall grasses and a diverse assortment of forbs. This prairie has

Introduction

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

i

been continuously grazed in recent years and no longer contains the plant species diversity commonly seen in native prairies. Current vegetation consists of gulf cordgrass, knotroot bristlegrass, common bermudagrass, and encroaching stands of Chinese tallow.

Lake Anahuac, formerly Turtle Bay, contributes significantly to the ecology displayed on the West Tract of the Preserve. Beginning in 1902, multiple efforts have been made to isolate Turtle Bay from saltwater intrusion. The current dam and levee structure surrounding the lake shore prevents saltwater intrusion to the regional water supply and increases the water volume capacity of Lake Anahuac. In turn, this structure restricts rainwater runoff from exiting the Preserve into the marshes of the Trinity River delta. This hydrological manipulation has created a substantial wetland area that varies from permanently flooded to ephemeral. These wetland habitats result in enhanced biodiversity within the Preserve and attract many resident and migratory wildlife species. Invasive aquatic vegetation has been identified within some of the permanently flooded wetlands and ditches and will present a significant challenge to future wetland management or enhancement projects.

Evidence of historical oil and gas production is recognized by the presence of oil field roads leading to abandoned well heads, product storage tanks, and manmade ponds designed to capture wastewater and drilling fluids. Many of the existing, abandoned gas wells have been plugged with the assistance of the Texas Railroad Commission’s Brownfields Response Program. Additionally, extensive ecological site assessments were completed by professional contractors, and water monitoring wells have been installed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to monitor groundwater for potentially harmful contaminants.

Project Background The upper Texas coast has been historically utilized by Native American tribes, influenced by early European settlers, and holds significance in the establishment of the State of Texas. The resource-rich coastal environment and connectivity to the Gulf of Mexico has naturally attracted growth and industry to the region, reflected by the presence of Houston, one of the largest metropolitan cities in the nation. Industrial growth and associated suburban sprawl in the region have impacted many rural communities that have historically been sustained by agricultural practices, particularly rice and row crop farming and cattle production. These same factors currently threaten the quality of life, agricultural tradition, natural resources, and environmental quality of Chambers County.

In 2009, the Trust for Public Land completed the Chambers County Greenprint for Growth and Conservation1 (Greenprint) to marry the science of data on county natural resources with local conservation priorities based on stakeholder input. The results concluded that preserving natural habitat, protecting water quality, and targeting restorable native habitats were the highest conservation priorities for citizens and users of Chambers County.

Additional priority actions included protecting natural drainage, creating public access for nature-based tourism, and maintaining rural character. Acting on the results of the Greenprint, project partners focused on meeting the needs of Chambers County stakeholders by actively seeking funding for a conservation project aligned with priority conservation actions.

1

ii

The Trust for Public Land. Chambers County Greenprint for Growth and Conservation, 2009.

Galveston Bay Foundation

Introduction

1

Preserve Natural Habitat

2

Protect Water Quality

3

Target Restorable Habitats

4

Maintain Rural Characteristics

5

Protect and Restore Natural Drainage

6

Create More Public Access for Nature-Based Recreation

The Preserve was purchased in 2012 from a real estate development company with plans and permits to develop a 785-unit residential housing community. The development was also proposing to construct a wastewater treatment facility on Turtle Bayou, the primary source of water for Lake Anahuac, thus threatening the water quality of a critical source of freshwater for the residents of Chambers County. The Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District (CLCND), with Chambers County, took advantage of the opportunity to protect the water quality of Lake Anahuac by pursuing federal grant dollars to purchase the 514-acre tract for conservation and public access purposes.

The Galveston Bay Foundation (GBF) was contacted to be a project partner and assist with the planning, development, and implementation of habitat restoration and public access strategies. Additionally, GBF was asked to provide perpetual third-party protection for the Preserve by establishing a conservation easement. CLCND and GBF negotiated a mutually agreeable conservation easement document which was executed and recorded in Chambers County in September 2013. This document restricts the land use of the property to activities that are beneficial to wildlife habitat and natural plant communities, while allowing the development of low impact public access infrastructure to facilitate nature-based recreation and environmental education. CLCND also contracted with GBF to engage stakeholder groups, develop a habitat and water quality management plan and a public access/ education plan for the Preserve, implement grant-funded habitat restoration and public access projects, and provide long-term management (ten years, initially) for the Preserve.

CIAP Purpose and Objectives The Preserve was purchased with funding from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP). CIAP, a federal program administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, provides grant funds derived from federal offshore lease revenues to oil producing states for conservation, protection, or restoration of coastal areas. State and County CIAP funding was awarded for this conservation acquisition, demonstrating the importance of land conservation and public access to the local community. Private donations were used to finalize the transaction when the seller negotiated a last minute increase in purchase price.

The goals of the Preserve acquisition project were to: acquire and protect 514 acres of coastal habitat in perpetuity; develop long-term management plans for natural resources, public access, and education; and implement plans for initial habitat enhancement and public access projects.

Federal CIAP Program Authorized Uses: • Conservation, protection, or restoration of coastal areas, including wetlands

Introduction

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

iii

• • •

Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, or natural resources Implementation of a federally approved marine, coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan Mitigation of the impact of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities through funding of onshore infrastructure projects and public service needs

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve CIAP Project Goals: • Ensure long-term preservation of coastal natural resources and other habitats of concern located within the 514-acre Preserve and ensure protection and enhancement of woodlands that buffer the riparian and wetland habitats.

• Protect water quality by restoring and enhancing wetland habitats and eliminating the threat of a proposed residential development. Contribute to the protection of the source water for Lake Anahuac.

• Restore wetland and forest habitats through immediate removal of invasive plant species and develop a long-term Habitat and Water Quality Management Plan.

• Develop public access infrastructure for passive nature appreciation and education, in a manner that does not degrade the coastal natural resources, including interpretive signage to highlight the importance of coastal natural resources. Develop a Public Access and Education Plan.

Purpose and Objectives of Plan This Plan will coordinate initial and long-term natural resource management and public access activities at the Preserve. The Plan will also serve as the basis for future consultation with stakeholders and project partners to evaluate the success of completed projects and plan future improvements. Physical and biological characteristics of the Preserve are described, as well as specific challenges and implementation strategies.

The natural resources component of this plan will address initial habitat restoration and enhancement efforts and long-term habitat management objectives for wetland, grassland, and forested areas of the Preserve. Many of these principles, goals, and objectives are a result of feedback provided during Technical Advisory Group (TAG) stakeholder meetings.

The public access and education component will address appropriate public access improvements for coastal natural resource appreciation. Strategies, goals, and objectives for this plan were discussed and debated in the Public Access Advisory Group (PAAG) stakeholder meetings. Both short- and long-term projects are addressed.

Combining the two components into one Natural Resources Management and Public Access and Education Plan will help ensure that public access improvements do not impair the natural resources management efforts at the Preserve and the habitat restoration and enhancement efforts do not negatively impact planned or completed public access projects. This Plan may be updated as needed to allow for changes in management and maintenance strategies as identified through monitoring and evaluation of implemented natural resource management or public access projects at the Preserve.

iv

Galveston Bay Foundation

Introduction

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

v

II. Public Access and Education Plan Introduction Commercial fisheries, industrial distribution, and agriculture transformed Galveston Bay, and these industries remain major economic drivers for the Gulf Coast region. However, recreational hunting and fishing, boating, birdwatching, and various other forms of eco-tourism are more important to the economy now than ever before.

Nature-based recreation and eco-tourism are growing industries and contribute significantly to the regional economy. Many communities in the Galveston Bay watershed are investing in nature tourism for economic growth and stability in their communities.

Chambers County is well positioned to expand existing, and develop new, nature-based recreation opportunities for a wide range of outdoor interests. The presence of National Wildlife Refuges, abundant wildlife resources, and access to the waters of Trinity Bay, East Galveston Bay, and the Trinity River affords plenty of potential to provide the general public with quality outdoor recreational activities.

Although most of Chambers County remains rural and agriculture-centered, the western portion of the county is experiencing pressures from the suburban sprawl associated with a healthy and growing Houston economy. The potential for rapid population growth inspired the production of the Greenprint, a document designed to help identify conservation priorities that meet the needs of existing community stakeholders. Actions identified in the Greenprint would help ensure that future growth and development do not degrade the quality of life for Chambers County residents and promote a healthy natural environment for citizens, visitors, and native wildlife and fisheries.

The acquisition of the Preserve accomplishes multiple conservation priorities identified in the Greenprint. This conservation project permanently preserves natural wildlife habitats, allows for the restoration and enhancement of sensitive natural areas, protects the waters of Turtle Bayou and Lake Anahuac, and provides public access for nature-based recreation.

Following the acquisition, GBF established a stakeholder group of local, state, and federal resource protection agencies, non-profit conservation organizations, private citizens, and other interested project partners. This stakeholder committee, named the Public Access Advisory Group, was charged with providing input and guidance for two aspects of public access and education: early public access improvements and long-term access/education vision and goals for the Preserve. This Public Access and Education Plan will provide an overview of the early public access strategies and projects identified in stakeholder working groups and outline those long-term goals and vision for public access and education.

1

Galveston Bay Foundation

Public Access and Education Plan

Early Public Access and Education Projects Developing public access infrastructure for passive nature appreciation and education is a primary goal of the Preserve. Early public access projects were incorporated into initial budgets for anticipated public access improvements. These initial projects stemmed from the Greenprint’s conservation goal to provide nature-based recreation opportunities.

Funding awarded by CIAP to CLCND will support early strategies to develop public access amenities. These initial projects will be largely focused on the West Tract of the Preserve and will only expand to the East Tract as grant funding permits. Initial projects will be completed no later than April 30, 2016.

The following objectives were identified as early strategies to enhance opportunities for public access at the Preserve: • • • • •

Provide a safe, all-weather parking area for visitors Create a hiking trail system to showcase the Preserve’s biodiversity and scenic beauty Construct elevated viewing platforms in strategic locations Establish a launch area for canoes, kayaks, and other non-motorized boats Develop signage to identify the property and educate users

Parking Parking for Preserve visitors is a critical element of the Public Access and Education Plan. Ensuring patrons have an easily accessible and all-weather surface to park vehicles will encourage use of other public access improvements.

Due to an emphasis of early public access development on the West Tract of the Preserve, an initial parking area will be constructed on the West Tract near Turtle Bayou and will provide immediate access to the trail system and boat launch. This will also help alleviate current issues with boaters and fisherman utilizing the shoulder and right-ofway along the FM 563 bridge.

Additional parking may be added to the East Tract of the Preserve directly across FM 563 from the initially constructed parking area. This parking area would facilitate use of public access improvements on the East Tract and serve as overflow parking. Early public access funding will likely not be sufficient for the construction of this parking area, and additional funds may be sought to complete this project.

The parking areas will be the only approved public access points and will not be gated. Parking areas should provide signage to display Preserve rules, restrictions, and hours of operation. An “iron ranger” or similar structure may be considered as a method to collect donations for maintenance and upkeep costs associated with public access improvements.

Action item: Construct a parking lot on the West Tract of the Preserve Contractors should be hired to design and construct an approximately 18,000 ft2 parking area fabricated with crushed concrete or similar material. This parking area should be capable of Early Public Access and Education Projects

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

2

facilitating at least 25 vehicles. Installation of trash receptacles should be considered to reduce litter.

Trails A hiking trail system will be developed throughout the Preserve to guide visitors toward specific points of interest.

Trails will be developed to highlight scenic viewpoints, utilize existing roads or pathways, demonstrate habitat diversity and unique natural plant communities, provide opportunities to view wildlife, and showcase restoration efforts and habitat management infrastructure.

Specific location of trails in forested areas should be determined using the comprehensive forest inventory (see Exhibit D). This inventory will allow project managers to identify points of interest and unique natural areas throughout the Preserve. Wildlife openings created as part of the habitat enhancement goals for the Preserve should also be incorporated into the trail design. These small forest openings provide habitat diversity within the Preserve and increase visitors’ opportunity to view wildlife.

Action item: Create four miles of hiking trails on the Preserve Professional contractors should be retained to design and construct a trail system in a manner that avoids disturbance to natural plant communities and is minimally invasive to the biodiversity of the Preserve. An initial trail system should be completed on the Preserve and include a minimum four miles of natural-surface trail. The remainder of the trail should incorporate established roads and levees that will allow users to view forest, native prairie, freshwater marsh, and cypress swamp.

Portions of the existing roads and levees need to be cleared of existing unwanted vegetation and invasive species. Initial design may be modified during construction to account for any natural features that are currently unknown.

Location of viewing platform

Trails should be approximately 8 feet wide with a natural surface and meander through mixed pine-hardwood forests, near cypress swamps associated with Turtle Bayou, and around an extensive freshwater wetland complex.

Interpretative signage should be incorporated to educate visitors on the historical uses of the area, local flora and fauna, and geologic formations throughout the Preserve. A kiosk should be erected to clearly mark the trail head and provide information about the Preserve, a map of created trails, and the location of significant points of interest.

Additional trails may be constructed as funds allow.

Cattle production within the Preserve may cause concern for some visitors. In the event cattle and visitors are utilizing areas of the Preserve concurrently, signage should be produced to caution users of potential hazards. Policies and sign language from existing examples of functional multi-use parks that have successfully operated cattle grazing operations may be adopted by the Preserve as necessary.

3

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Public Access and Education Projects

Scenic Viewing Platforms Stakeholder groups identified elevated platforms as a means to provide Preserve visitors an opportunity to view wildlife and natural areas from a unique perspective. The construction of two viewing platforms will be completed as part of the initial public access improvements to the Preserve. Both structures will be constructed on the West Tract in high interest areas for wildlife observation and scenic viewpoints associated with prairie and freshwater wetland habitats.

Action item: Construct two elevated viewing platforms Professional contractors should be hired to construct two viewing platforms on the West Tract of the Preserve. Both viewing platforms should be constructed with high quality materials to withstand harsh coastal environmental conditions.

One viewing platform should be constructed near the entrance of the Preserve on a bluff that overlooks the prairie, wetlands, and Lake Anahuac. This location was specifically chosen for its proximity to the parking area.

This platform will take advantage of a distinct elevation change to provide unobstructed scenic views of over half a mile. This platform should allow visitors to enjoy the Preserve without having to traverse a trail system or stairs.

Another viewing platform should be constructed closer to the freshwater wetland areas on the West Tract. This location could utilize an abandoned well pad as a stable base for the structure. The viewing platform should be constructed near existing and planned wetland features. Freshwater wetlands attract many migratory and resident wildlife species and will offer users excellent opportunities to view native wildlife in natural habitats. Access to this platform will include less than a quarter-mile hike from the parking, parallel to the banks of Turtle Bayou.

The wetland platform should have stairs, ascend 12-15 feet above ground level, and provide benches, safety railing, and a level surface to facilitate the use of spotting scopes. The bluff platform should have a ramp or walkway to provide easy access for visitors.

Non-motorized Boat Launch Access to the waters of Turtle Bayou and Lake Anahuac provide recreational opportunities for users with diverse recreational interests. Paddling is an increasingly popular activity for exercise, fishing, and nature viewing. The goal of the boat launch will be to provide a safe and convenient access point for Turtle Bayou designed specifically for canoes, kayaks, and other non-motorized boats.

Action item: Develop a launch for non-motorized boats

Early Public Access and Education Projects

Location of non-motorized boat launch Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

4

A boat launch should be developed adjacent to Turtle Bayou on the West Tract of the Preserve near the parking area. An 18-foot wide all-weather access road, constructed with the same materials as the parking area, will allow users to drive down the slope near the boat launch and unload boats, gear, and other items. A roundabout or cul-de-sac should be constructed at the end of the road near the launch to allow vehicles with trailers ample space to turn around. An alternative option may be to design a one-way “U” shaped road that allows visitors to drive near the launch site and return to the parking area. This design was heavily favored by stakeholders, citing examples of arduous access to other launch sites in the region.

The non-motorized boat launch should be designed around an existing concrete boat ramp. The natural surface on both sides of the concrete ramp should be cleared of vegetation and debris and may be used as a natural surface launch. The concrete pad provides a solid base with a textured surface that will help prevent paddlers from slipping when preparing to enter the water. The concrete ramp is a durable, low maintenance structure that is able to withstand fluctuations of water level on the bayou.

Utilizing this existing structure will help reduce costs associated with this public access project.

The launch site will be designed in such a way to discourage motorized boat use. Consultation with local canoe and kayak clubs will help identify appropriate boat launch designs and materials for the conditions at the Preserve. Unwanted vegetation along the bayou may need to be removed to ensure unobstructed water access.

Signs Grant funds allocated for initial public access improvements include design and installation of various property signage. These signs will serve to identify the property as a publicly accessible nature preserve, recognize project partners, and contribute to efforts.

Action item: Design and install signs throughout the Preserve Property Identification Signage along FM 563 will serve to identify the Preserve as a public access destination, and recognize various project partners associated with the establishment, implementation, and maintenance of the Preserve, and include appropriate language from the CIAP grant requirements. Four large signs should be established along FM 563, one on each side of the road at both ends of the property, near existing access gates and planned parking areas.

Interpretive Signage Interpretive signage will be a critical education component of the trail system. Initial budgets allow for the fabrication of six 36”x48” interpretive signs and two 24”x36” interpretive signs. Content for the signs should include information on flora and fauna native to the Preserve, significant historical aspects of the area, and the importance of ecological management and restoration. These signs should be strategically placed to maximize visibility and user interest.

5

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Public Access and Education Projects

Informational Kiosk An information kiosk should be constructed near the parking area and property entrance to greet visitors and serve as a trail head. The kiosk should provide basic information about the property including maps, operational hours, rules, and places of interest.

Boundary Signs Boundary signage is important to distinguish the border with contiguous privately-owned properties.

Where possible, “No Access� signs should be installed along the property boundary to discourage illegal entry to the Preserve and adjacent private properties. Where signs are not appropriate, Texas Penal Code section 30.05, states that purple paint marks on trees or posts on the property are identifiers of private property. The paint marks must be vertical lines at least 8 inches long and 1 inch wide, placed between 3 feet and 5 feet from the ground, and their placement must be in locations that are easily visible to a person approaching the property and be no more than 100 feet apart on forested land or 1,000 feet apart on non-forested landscapes.2

Long-term Public Access and Education Projects The long-term Public Access and Education Plan for the Preserve includes providing opportunities for nature-based recreation and environmental education in an interactive and enjoyable setting for the general public. Maintaining and enhancing initial public access improvements and developing new visitor amenities will be critical to the longterm success of goals and objectives identified by stakeholder groups.

Funding for long-term maintenance and enhanced public access amenities will need to be raised, as current funding is solely dedicated to initial project development and will expire in 2016. Various state and federal funding agencies support public access and education programs. Utilizing public and private funds to enhance and maintain public access infrastructure will help ensure the Preserve provides quality outdoor recreation opportunities to public users for years to come. A table of potential funding sources is included as Exhibit D.

Parking and Property Access Parking areas will be designed to require minimal annual maintenance. Likely issues include development of potholes in the parking lot and erosion of base materials along the boat launch road. Additional material may need to be added to these areas to maintain a functional and safe parking lot for Preserve visitors. Vegetation control may also be an issue following construction. Application of a non-selective herbicide and annual mowing will help maintain an open parking area.

If additional parking areas are designed at future approved public access locations, precautions will be taken to ensure construction activities do not impact natural areas or water quality. Potential future public access points include using additional existing gates and access roads along FM 563 and an access road from the I-10 feeder road.

2

Texas Penal Code §30.05

Long-term Public Access and Education Projects

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

6

Each approved public access point should contain a pedestrian gate that allows single users to enter the property.

This style gate should allow the property to be open to the public, discourage use of unauthorized vehicles, and prevent any livestock from escaping. Pedestrian gates should not be locked.

Trails It is anticipated that hiking trails will be a significant attraction for visitors at the Preserve. The initial trails developed as part of the early public access strategy will provide several miles of trails for hiking through natural areas. However, the 514-acre Preserve is capable of providing a much more extensive trail system for users.

Additional funding will be needed to enhance the trail system beyond initial efforts. Public and private funds may be targeted for professional trail development, and volunteer trail building efforts can be coordinated with local stakeholder groups and conservation organizations like the Student Conservation Association.

Maintenance Trails in forested areas will continually have issues with encroachment of vegetation. Adjacent trees and shrubs will compete for open space created by the trail, and ground disturbance may encourage invasive plant species. Annual maintenance efforts should be coordinated with area volunteer groups to ensure the trails remain open and usable by the public.

Annual trail maintenance should include a combination of efforts to control vegetation and repair any trail surface issues. Trimming or pruning trees and shrubs with hand tools will be a primary annual control effort for trails in forested areas. Herbicide may be utilized along the trail edges to selectively target unwanted vegetation. Annual mowing should be conducted for any trails with grass surface. Also, all trails should be walked regularly to inspect for any issues with erosion, fallen trees, or other hazards.

Development Enhancing the trail system will largely include expanding trails on the heavily forested East Tract of the Preserve (see Exhibit B). Additional trail development will require careful planning to incorporate interesting natural features discovered over time. Major trail enhancement efforts should be coordinated with a professional trail development company to ensure proper design and construction. Additional small trail enhancement projects may be implemented to enhance access to specific natural areas and can be coordinated with volunteers and local stakeholders. Any new trail expansion project should be designed to minimize impacts to native wildlife, natural plant communities, and water quality.

Scenic Viewing Platforms Scenic viewing platforms should be constructed with quality materials to promote a long life expectancy and years of safe viewing opportunities for visitors. However, regular inspections should be conducted to identify any unsafe conditions associated with the platforms.

Additional viewing platforms may be constructed in other locations of the property to encourage additional wildlife viewing opportunities. An alternative long-term project may be to incorporate wildlife viewing blinds 7

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Public Access and Education Projects

strategically located in areas with heavy wildlife use. A viewing blind should provide a safe and structured area for nature enthusiasts to experience close encounters with native wildlife while minimizing disturbance and impact. Viewing blinds require concealed access to allow visitors to enter the blind without flushing nearby wildlife.

Non-motorized Boat Launch Regular inspection of the boat launch will be required to ensure the safety of users. Visual inspection should be conducted to identify any structural damage, debris, or unwanted vegetation that may impede water access. Flooding along Turtle Bayou will account for the largest threat to the integrity of the boat launch. Any heavy rainfall event should prompt an inspection.

Education The Preserve may offer future educational programming designed to highlight the important environmental features of the property. Any such programs should be evaluated and approved by CLCND and may include programs such as expert-led nature and wildlife viewing tours and citizenscientist biological and/or water quality monitoring. The Preserve provides community groups an opportunity to conduct volunteer maintenance, management, and restoration projects. Development of additional interpretative signage, benches associated with established trail systems, and additional projects that enhance public access to the Preserve may be considered. Other educational programming intended to improve community involvement may include installing and monitoring bird and squirrel nest boxes, bat boxes, or other wildlifemanagement-related structures.

Signs

Pavilion Constructing a pavilion in an easily accessible area of the property would provide an outdoor meeting area for local groups and Preserve users. A pavilion could also serve as an outdoor classroom for educational programs at the Preserve. Construction of any physical structure must comply with the terms of the conservation easement and should be designed to minimize maintenance costs and environmental impacts.

Over time, additional trails and public access amenities are planned to be developed. As infrastructure is increased, additional interpretive signage may need to be developed to facilitate educational opportunities for visitors.

Long-term Public Access and Education Projects

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

8

Increased interpretive signage and kiosks throughout the Preserve will help educate visitors on the natural resources, historical aspects, and other significant environmental issues.

Interpretive signage Additional interpretive signage should be incorporated into the costs for all new trail development projects associated with long-term goals at the Preserve.

Kiosks Kiosks provide a low cost and low maintenance opportunity to share information with Preserve visitors. Additional structures could be placed in strategic locations throughout the Preserve to enhance the visitor experience.

9

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Public Access and Education Projects

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

10

III. Natural Resources Management Plan Introduction Native coastal habitats are considered some of the richest ecological areas in the country, supporting diverse flora and fauna and providing extensive ecosystem services to coastal communities. However, many of these highly diverse natural communities have been altered by common agriculture and silviculture practices; destroyed by industrial, commercial, or residential development; or degraded by the invasion of non-native plant species. The Chambers County Greenprint for Growth and Conservation identifies preserving natural or restorable habitats and protecting water quality as the highest conservation priorities for Chambers County.

The acquisition of the Preserve perpetually conserves 514 acres in Chambers County with several ecologically sensitive and regionally significant habitats. Forest, grassland, wetland, and riparian habitats throughout the Preserve help meet the goals of several local and regional plans addressing conservation of coastal natural resources. Habitat restoration projects and long-term management practices will play an important role in maintaining viable habitat for wildlife and preserving local water quality.

Specifically important to Chambers County is habitat for waterfowl species and Neotropical migrant songbirds.

Wetlands on the Gulf Coast are the end destination for many waterfowl species and provide premier recreational hunting opportunities for duck and goose hunting enthusiasts.

Protecting and enhancing waterfowl habitat will provide resources for wintering waterfowl and help maintain waterfowl populations in the area. Annual concentrations of Neotropical migrant birds attract large numbers of visitors to Chambers County during spring and fall migrations. Habitat management efforts within a variety of habitats coupled with public access infrastructure at the Preserve will provide additional wildlife viewing opportunities for bird watchers traveling to the area.

GBF established a stakeholder group of local, state, and federal resource protection entities, non-profit conservation organizations, private citizens, and other interested project partners. This stakeholder group, named the Technical Advisory Group, was charged with providing guidance for early habitat restoration and enhancement projects and

11

Galveston Bay Foundation

Natural Resources Management Plan

developing concepts for long-term natural resource objectives and property maintenance requirements for the Preserve. This Natural Resources Management Plan will outline those long-term strategies and concepts for habitat management and maintenance and provide an overview of the early habitat enhancement and restoration strategies and projects identified by stakeholder working groups.

Early Restoration Practices During initial planning, prior to acquisition of the Preserve, certain restoration and habitat enhancement needs were identified by project partners. A list of early restoration projects was compiled, incorporated into the grant application, and eventually funded by CIAP. These projects were included in a project budget and listed as deliverables for the CIAP grant. Site visits, vegetation mapping efforts, and general exploration on the property has provided additional information and redirected some of the initial targets associated with grant-funded restoration projects. However, goals and objectives for early natural resource enhancement projects have remained the same.

The following objectives were identified as early strategies to enhance natural resources at the Preserve: • • • • • •

Remove invasive plant species throughout the preserve to enhance natural plant communities and improve wildlife habitats.

Create small openings in forested areas to increase plant diversity and edge habitat.

Enhance existing wetlands and create additional wetland areas.

Improve access throughout the Preserve by clearing vegetation from existing roadways and installing culverts to reduce erosion.

Plant native tree species to restore degraded forested areas, create rookery habitat, and increase property aesthetics.

Remediate abandoned oil and gas production sites.

Non-native and Invasive Species Management Project partners were aware of the existence of certain invasive species throughout the Preserve prior to acquisition.

Subsequently, other invasive plant species were discovered during monitoring and planning site visits to the property. Preliminary plans to initiate control efforts for invasive species were modified and expanded to target priority invasive aquatic and terrestrial plant species found throughout the Preserve. Invasive species control efforts may target native plant species that have aggressive tendencies and are contributing to poor habitat quality.

Upland Invasive Species Control The following upland species have been identified on the Preserve and will be targeted as part of the early habitat enhancement project: Chinese Tallow (Triadica sebifera) – Chinese tallow will readily invade a variety of habitats ranging from open wetlands to dense, dry forested areas. Along the upper Texas coast, tallow trees are often found growing along fence lines; within disturbed areas, cattle pastures, and fallow agricultural fields; and along waterways.

Tallow is observed throughout the Preserver in every habitat type. Infestations in the freshwater marsh and

Early Restoration Practices

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

12

prairie areas are easily identified, while problem areas in forested habitats are more difficult to locate.

In some forested areas, native trees and vegetation will eventually outcompete most tallow trees for available sunlight and resources.

Within forested areas of the Preserve, chemical control efforts should be restricted to areas along roadways and trails, sensitive ecological areas, and dense infestations. Any mechanical treatment efforts for tallow should be aligned with public access infrastructure and forest opening creation.

Action item: Chemical control of Chinese tallow Chinese Tallow Tree During late summer or early fall months, prior to seed drop, conduct a foliar application of imazamox (Clearcast® or similar product) to targeted tallow infestations. A fall application will allow herbicide to be translocated downward with carbohydrates as trees begin to store resources for winter dormancy.

Clearcast® is labeled for aquatic use and has proven to be somewhat selective for tallow when applied in areas where other native tree species persist. Application method may be from fixed wing aircraft, helicopter, or UTV rigged with high volume foliar spray equipment.

Basal bark and cut stump herbicide application techniques can be performed at any time of year outside of active seed production, which is typically August and September. Triclopyr-ester (Garlon® 4 or similar product) mixed with a penetrating oil should be applied to the circumference of the target tree no greater than 15 inches above the ground or applied directly to the freshly cut stump of a target tree. For tallow trees at the Preserve, a solution of 10-15% chemical should be used for this technique.

Foliar application for chemical control should be utilized in open grassland and freshwater wetland areas of the West Tract as well as identified dense infestations within forested areas. Basal bark application should be conducted along roadways, transitional zones, and within sensitive ecological areas where foliar application is not appropriate. Specific treatments within forested areas should be coordinated with access road improvement, trail development, and forest openings. Specific management recommendations are included in Exhibit D. Huisache (Acacia farnesiana) – Huisache is a native plant commonly found on native rangeland and improved pasture in the eastern half of Texas. It is characterized as a small tree in the legume family and, although native to Texas, can be an aggressive and invasive plant that limits forage production for livestock and decreases wildlife habitat value. Huisache is observed on the West Tract of the Preserve within areas frequently used by cattle and near disturbed areas, man-made impoundments, and roads.

Action item: Chemical and mechanical control of huisache

13

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Restoration Practices

A basal bark application method should be used to apply a triclopyr-ester based chemical (Remedy Ultra® or similar product) mixed with a penetrating oil to the circumference of the base of live plants within target areas. Application can be any time of year, although greater success may be obtained during spring and early summer months as trees are actively growing. A 25% chemical and 75% oil mixture should attain high mortality rates.

Huisache in areas that affect scenic views or access roads should be mechanically cut and physically removed. Fresh cut stumps should be sprayed with the same herbicide mixture used to conduct basal bark chemical control efforts.

Trifoliate orange (Poncirus trifoliata) – Trifoliate orange is an introduced shrub that can grow over 25 feet tall and is characterized by green stems with long, sharp spines and small orange fruits. Often planted as an ornamental, this plant escaped cultivation and has become naturalized in the eastern region of Texas.

The plant is known to invade forested areas, fence rows, and pastures, and, if left untreated, populations can rapidly increase.

At the Preserve, most of the Trifoliate orange infestations are located on the West Tract, possibly a result of the disturbance caused by cattle and feral hogs. The severe infestations highlighted by the Forest Resource Assessment (Exhibit D) should be consdered a high priority for eradication.

Action item: Chemical and mechanical control of trifoliate orange A basal bark application method should be used to apply a triclopyr-ester based chemical (Remedy Ultra® or similar product) mixed with a penetrating oil to the circumference of the base of live plants within target areas. Application can be any time of year, although greater success may be obtained during spring and early summer months as trees are actively growing. A 25% chemical and 75% oil mixture should attain high mortality rates.

Trifoliate orange in areas that affect scenic views, public access areas, or access roads will be mechanically cut and physically removed. Fresh cut stumps should be sprayed with the same herbicide mixture used to conduct basal bark chemical control efforts.

Japanese Climbing Fern (Lygodium japonicum) – Japanese climbing fern is a perennial vine-type fern, reaching up to 90 feet in length with lacy and finely divided leaves. The vines often infest trees and shrubs forming dense mats of vegetation. Infestations can become so dense that native vegetation can be completely eliminated from the area.

Japanese climbing fern was identified in one isolated area along the banks of Turtle Bayou. Plants were found on cypress trees and small shrubs near a maintained pipeline easement. More plants may be located within the cypress swamp fringing Turtle Bayou. Further habitat assessment is recommended to locate any additional areas supporting this invasive species.

Early Restoration Practices

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

14

Action Item: Chemical control of Japanese climbing fern Japanese climbing fern is susceptible to many non-selective broadleaf herbicides. Plants reproduce sexually by spores and asexually by underground rhizomes, both of which should be targeted for herbicide applications for effective control. Foliar application of a 4% glyphosate based product (Roundup® or similar product) mixed with metsulfuron methyl is recommended for treatment. Best results are achieved during the late growing season months of August, September, and October, prior to peak spore release.

Aquatic Invasive Species Control Most treatment efforts for aquatic invasive plant species will include the use of herbicides. Any herbicides selected will be specifically approved and labeled for aquatic use. Herbicides will not affect the use of the water source for residential or irrigation purposes. These techniques and herbicides are commonly utilized in lakes and reservoirs with invasive species control issues. The following aquatic plant species will be targeted as part of the early habitat enhancement project: Giant Salvinia (Salvinia molesta) – Giant salvinia is a floating aquatic fern found in calm water of lakes, ponds, slow flowing streams, swamps, marshes, and irrigation ditches. Salvinia is able to rapidly proliferate and can quickly overgrow and replace native wetland plants and cover entire areas of open water. The formation of dense surface mats prevents light and atmospheric oxygen from entering the water.

Decomposing material falls to the bottom further depleting oxygen concentrations needed by fish and other aquatic life and increasing sedimentation of water bodies. Dense salvinia infestations result in decreased value of aquatic and wetland habitats for native wildlife and fisheries.

Salvinia also has the ability to clog water intakes, interfering with agricultural irrigation, municipal water delivery, and electrical generation. Within the Preserve, giant salvinia has been identified in ditches along existing roads, frequently ponded areas near the Lake Anahuac levee, and within the cypress swamps adjacent to Turtle Bayou.

Action item: Reduce existing populations of giant salvinia Chemical Treatment – Aquatic herbicides are most effective in controlling salvinia during periods of active plant growth. In general, water temperatures above 70 degrees will produce higher mortality rates for treated plants. Wetland areas at the Preserve do not provide significant fisheries habitat; therefore oxygen depletion in the water column will not be considered when planning treatment eff orts.

Broadcast application of a glyphosate product labeled for aquatic use (Rodeo® or similar product) should be used to treat salvinia. A 1% glyphosate solution mixed with a general surfactant and silicone surfactant is recommended for best mortality rates.

Biological Control – Biological control is the introduction of reproducing populations of foreign

15

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Restoration Practices

insects or diseases to impair growth or reproduction of invasive species. Salvinia weevil (Cyrtobagous salviniae) only develops and reproduces on giant salvinia plants and is a USDA-approved biological control of salvinia. Biological control using the salvinia weevil has been effective in reducing the biomass of salvinia by reducing growth potential of established infestations. However, weevils will not completely eradicate infestations of salvinia and do not tolerate cold temperatures.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department has considered donating 3,000-5,000 weevils as part of an experimental program in southeast Texas. Introduction of weevils should be coordinated with chemical control efforts to maximize control efforts.

Water Hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes) – Water hyacinth is a free-floating, invasive perennial plant documented extensively throughout water bodies in the southeastern United States. Water hyacinth thrives in calm freshwater systems such as lakes, creeks, bayous, and irrigation canals. Water hyacinth plants are identified by bright green, leathery leaves as large as six inches and reaching as much as three feet out of the water. Plants produce a lavender flower.

Infestations proliferate quickly, can become very dense, and eventually clog waterways, which can lead to excessive flooding and impede navigation. Water hyacinth is found throughout manmade ditches and other permanently ponded areas on the West Tract as well as the banks of Turtle Bayou.

Action item: Reduce populations of water hyacinth Broadcast application of a glyphosate-based product labeled for aquatic use (Rodeo® or similar product) will be used to treat water hyacinth infestations. A 1% glyphosate solution mixed with a general surfactant is recommended for best mortality rates.

Aquatic herbicides are most effective in controlling water hyacinth during periods of active plant growth. In general, water temperatures above 70 degrees will produce higher mortality rates for treated plants. Wetland areas at the Preserve do not provide significant fisheries habitat; therefore oxygen depletion in the water column will not be considered when planning treatment efforts.

Common Reed (Phragmites australis) – This hardy grass species is very similar to a native species of Phragmites, but displays highly invasive tendencies in freshwater and brackish wetland habitats throughout the United States. Individual plants can grow up to 16 feet tall and quickly produce clones from an extensive underground rhizome system. Formation of dense monoculture stands effectively displaces native marsh habitats.

Phragmites has little value to native wildlife and diminishes the biodiversity of coastal areas. It can persist in water several feet deep or along the shorelines of water bodies. Common reed has been identified on the West Tract adjacent to and within permanently flooded wetland habitats near the Lake Anahuac levee.

Early Restoration Practices

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

16

Action item: Prevent the spread of common reed to created or enhanced wetland areas Chemical treatment – The most effective method of chemical control is foliar applications of herbicides. It is best applied before the rhizomes develop in late summer or early fall, after flowering. Foliar application of a glyphosate-based product (RodeoŽ or similar product) is recommended to be used in conjunction with a general surfactant. Chemical application should be during late summer and early fall months.

Mechanical Treatment – Repeated mowing has proved to reduce infestations and even eradicate infestations of common reed. However many infestations are located in areas that are not conducive to the use of mechanical equipment. If conditions allow, mowing stands of common reed should be conducted to reduce biomass, allow sunlight to reach the ground, and encourage other native plant species.

Feral Hogs Feral hogs were identified as a nuisance species on the Preserve following the acquisition and initial planning efforts. Many areas throughout the Preserve display signs of hog damage to sensitive wildlife habitats. If funding permits, initial efforts to reduce the population of feral hogs within the preserve will be conducted.

Forest Openings Historic flatwoods forest ecosystems contained diverse savannah prairies maintained by regular fire events and specific soil conditions. The construction of small forest openings at the Preserve will help diversify densely forested areas by promoting prairie habitats with grasses, herbaceous plants, legumes, and wildflowers. Forest openings create edge habitat preferred by many wildlife and plant species and promote open, sunny areas important for insect populations, including butterflies and other pollinators. These openings will not only increase the biodiversity of the property, but will afford public users with a greater opportunity to experience wildlife in a natural setting.

Construction of openings should be coordinated with other forest management practices and public access strategies. Each opening should be created in an area of degraded forest habitat, likely where Chinese tallow infestations are currently outcompeting native vegetation. Also, each forest opening should be associated with the development of the hiking trail system or other public access and education component of the Preserve.

Action Item: Create 12 acres of forest openings Contractors hired to create forest openings should construct multiple clearings ranging in size from two to three acres and totaling no fewer than 12 acres. Skid steer machinery with mulching head attachments should be used to grind vegetation into mulch which will be left onsite to decay.

17

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Restoration Practices

Following construction, herbicide treatments may be applied to created openings, selectively targeting any regeneration of invasive species or unwanted vegetation.

Wetland Creation / Enhancement Freshwater wetland habitats continue to be lost at a rapid rate along the Texas Gulf Coast due to lack of protection from development, changing agricultural practices, and other environmental factors. Creating and enhancing wetland acres on the Preserve will help offset wetland losses in the region and provide habitat for resident and migratory wildlife.

There are many different strategies and structure designs used for controlling water depth on managed wetlands. A water control structure is a submerged or partially submerged manmade device used to interrupt the natural flow of water. Construction of a water control structure will help capture rainwater runoff onsite to increase wetland acreage on the West Tract of the Preserve. This will enhance the ability to manage wetlands and promote optimal conditions for target wildlife species.

Specific goals and objectives for wetland enhancement help identify appropriate methods and techniques used to hold water on the Preserve. The basic objective for this project is to increase the capacity for water retention on the West Tract. Existing levees along Turtle Bayou and Lake Anahuac were engineered to increase the water volume capacity in Lake Anahuac. These levees incidentally trap rainwater on the Preserve. A north-south road acts as another levee that retains water on-site. The prairie and wetlands area has very little change in elevation and currently retains 1-4 inches of water across most of the landscape following heavy rain events. However, most of the water is allowed to flow through the property and onto an adjacent property to the west through a break in the north-south road. Constructing a dam or levee and associated water control structure at the point where water exits the property will allow rainwater to be captured onsite. The initial goal is to retain an additional 8-10 inches of surface water to create increased foraging habitat for wading birds and waterfowl.

Action item: Construct a dam or levee with an associated water control structure to increase wetland acreage on the West Tract of the Preserve The location of this structure will be outside of the Preserve boundaries but will impact significant acreage within the West Tract. Design and engineering should be targeted to produce a simple structure to encourage low maintenance costs and management efforts. Planning efforts should utilize existing LIDAR data or an onsite elevation survey to identify anticipated water depths and acreage expected to be influenced by the control structure.

Prior to any hydrological manipulation, extensive consultation, planning, and design should be conducted to identify the most effective way to increase wetland habitat acreage. Many natural resource management agencies and organizations have extensive knowledge of local wetland creation and enhancement strategies. This project is funded by the USFWS Coastal Program.

Tree Planting Based on recommendations from a forest inventory conducted by a third party forestry consultant, supplemental planting within existing forestry stands may be necessary to restore a natural forest structure and composition.

Early Restoration Practices

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

18

In areas that have been depleted of native trees, efforts will be made to cultivate stands of native hardwoods and pines. Within the wetland portions of the Preserve, bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) will be planted to enhance existing water features, create wildlife habitat, and improve scenery along hiking trails.

Specific areas will be planted with native tree species to enhance degraded areas and increase Preserve aesthetics.

Action item: Plant native tree species to enhance forested areas and wildlife habitat Pine The primary indigenous species of pine is loblolly (Pinus taeda); however, shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) may also be suitable for environmental conditions at the Preserve. Areas suitable for reforestation or stand enhancement will be identified as part of a forest inventory and management plan. These areas should be planted using forestry methods that cause minimal ground disturbance to discourage further invasive plant species and minimize impacts to potential historical features known to be present on the Preserve.

Hardwoods Supplemental hardwood plantings should be targeted at increasing the abundance of tree species beneficial to resident and migratory wildlife species. Hard and soft mast-producing trees provide critical resources to native wildlife. Selected tree species should be planted at a ratio refl ective of natural mixed pine-hardwood forests in the region.

Cypress Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) is a common tree species in southern states and is often found along river bottoms, bayous, and swamps. Extensive stands of cypress are found on the Preserve along Turtle Bayou and associated drainages, and individual trees are scattered throughout freshwater wetlands near the Lake Anahuac levee.

Bald cypress should be planted along established roadways leading through the wetlands on the West Tract to increase aesthetics and attract wildlife. Additionally, cypress trees should be planted around manmade ponds created as part of oil and gas production activities. These ponds are currently a haven for invasive Chinese tallow trees and other less beneficial tree species. Cypress stands should be designed to encourage use by colonial nesting birds such as egrets, herons, and other wading birds, as appropriate.

Interior Access Roads Access roads throughout the Preserve facilitate property maintenance, access to restoration and enhancement projects, public recreation opportunities, access by emergency vehicles, and law enforcement presence. Many of these roads have been overtaken by unwanted vegetation that impedes access to portions of the Preserve. Existing 19

Galveston Bay Foundation

Early Restoration Practices

roads throughout the Preserve provide limited access to both East and West tracts. Roads on the West Tract provide access to the majority of the property from both entrances along 563, while roads throughout the East Tract provide only limited access to portions of the property.

Action Item: Improve vehicle access throughout the Preserve Unwanted vegetation obstructing existing roads on the Preserve should be mechanically removed to allow vehicular access throughout the property for improved habitat management, as well as potential public access routes. Creating new roads at this time is not recommended.

Vegetation may be removed by a variety of methods, but caution not to cause soil disturbance will minimize impacts to possible historical features and discourage invasive plant species. It is recommended that a brush hog be used to conduct maintenance on small vegetation and a grinder or small bull dozer be utilized to remove larger trees and shrubs.

Culverts should be installed in locations where water drainage is impeded by improved roads.

Culverts will improve access during wet periods and decrease the risk of erosion.

Oil and Gas Remediation Abandoned infrastructure from historical oil and gas production was well documented during initial environmental assessments associated with the Railroad Commission’s Brownfields Project. Each location has been identified as an Area of Concern, plotted on a map, and assessed by a team of environmental remediation specialists.

Many of the abandoned gas wells on the property at the time of acquisition have been properly plugged and the associated infrastructure has been removed.

Action Item: Remove abandoned petrochemical production infrastructure The Railroad Commission’s Brownfields Project has dedicated extensive resources to the remedation of abandoned oil and gas production infrastructure on the Preserve. The program has finite annual funds to conduct remediation efforts throughout Texas. It is recommended that participation with this program be continued annually until all Areas of Concern have been fully remediated and are considered environmentally safe.

Long-term Management and Maintenance The acquisition of property for conservation purposes meets a growing need for the protection of natural resources in Texas. An expanding urban population stresses our State’s water resources, wildlife habitats, and overall biodiversity. However, simply purchasing land and preventing future land conversion will not fully accomplish regional objectives of providing habitat for native wildlife species and maintaining water quality. Wildlife Long-term Management and Maintenance

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

20

management and property maintenance strategies have been developed to enhance wildlife value, restore native plant communities, and maintain functional infrastructure of the Preserve. This plan is intended to serve as a reference for future habitat management and property maintenance objectives. A table of potential funding sources is included as Exhibit D.

Invasive Species Control Invasive species threaten the survival of native plants and animals, interfere with ecosystem functions, reduce biodiversity of natural communities, and reduce the recreational value of streams, lakes, and natural areas. Invasive plant species can impede industry, threaten agriculture, and become difficult and costly to control. Aggressive growth, rapid rates of reproduction, and lack of natural controls allow many introduced species to outcompete native plants and animals for resources. If left uncontrolled, invasive species have the ability to change the ecological function of natural areas and dramatically decrease biodiversity and environmental quality of a landscape.

In addition to harming natural areas, invasive species also have serious implications to our economy. Invasive species can alter the habitats they invade to the point that control efforts become tremendously expensive for state and local governments, landowners, and businesses tied to land or water management. Aquatic invasive species like water hyacinth and giant Salvinia will often affect boaters and fisherman by diminishing fish habitat and clogging waterways. Invasive aquatic plants also have the potential to damage and increase maintenance costs for municipal and agricultural water supply systems. Terrestrial species like Chinese tallow decrease the quality and quantity of upland and wetland habitats, limiting the productivity of farming and ranching operations and reducing wildlife value.

While it is unlikely that many invasive species in the region can be fully extirpated from the Preserve, regular maintenance and control measures must be incorporated in land management planning efforts to prevent the spread of unwanted species into healthy or restored natural areas. These measures will help ensure productive habitats for wildlife species, provide quality recreational opportunities for visitors, and reduce costs for maintenance over time.

Upland Species Chinese Tallow (Triadica sebifera) – Long-term monitoring and maintenance of Chinese tallow is a necessary task for maintaining quality wildlife habitat throughout the Preserve. Lack of consistent control efforts could threaten habitat restoration efforts and public access improvements completed as part of the initial grant funded activities. Annual monitoring efforts should be utilized to identify new tallow infestations and previously treated infestations.

Chinese tallow infestations typically establish in open habitats, such as wetlands and pastures or within areas of soil disturbance. It is projected that Chinese tallow will be outcompeted over time by pine and hardwood tree species within densely forested areas of the Preserve. Due to lack of natural competition, it is probable that future tallow issues will arise in the wetland areas on the West Tract, along roadways and trails, and within forest openings. At a minimum, annual monitoring visits

21

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Management and Maintenance

should inspect these areas for new Chinese tallow growth as well as revisit previously treated areas.

Volunteer events could be planned to control minor infestations, while professional contractors should be used to control more severe Chinese tallow growth. Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 12.

Huisache (Acacia farnesiana) – Huisache infestations can limit forage production for livestock and decrease wildlife habitat value. Huisache was originally identified as a habitat management problem on the West Tract of the Preserve. When conducting annual monitoring efforts, closely inspect areas where cattle are fed or otherwise frequently congregate. Other areas that may potentially be impacted

by Huisache growth will be created forest openings, hiking trails, roadways, and levees.

Huisache is native shrub in Texas, and a few individual plants will not negatively impact the Preserve.

Control efforts will only be necessary if Huisache appears to be dominating and displacing another native plant community. Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 13.

Trifoliate Orange (Poncirus trifoliata) – Trifoliate orange is an introduced shrub that has naturalized in East Texas and is known to invade forested areas, fence rows, and pastures. Dense infestations have been located on the West Tract of the Preserve within forested areas and along roadways and levees. Disturbance caused by cattle and feral hogs may encourage the spread of Trifoliate orange.

Annual monitoring efforts should be targeted at previously treated areas and other known infestations.

Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 14 and in Exhibit D. Removing dense Trifoliate orange infestations may allow other invasive species such as Chinese tallow to become established. Regular monitoring following any large scale treatment will help ensure a successful eradication effort.

Japanese Climbing Fern (Lygodium japonicum) – Japanese climbing fern has severely impacted forests throughout the Southeastern US and poses a serious threat to the forest plant communities at the Preserve. Several individual plants were identified along Turtle Bayou on the East Tract of the Preserve, growing on cypress trees and small shrubs near a maintained pipeline easement. Annual monitoring should be conducted in this area to ensure any initial control efforts successfully eradicate infestations.

Additional infestations may be present throughout the Preserve in areas that have not been adequately inspected. Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 14.

Long-term Management and Maintenance

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

22

Aquatic Species Giant Salvinia (Salvinia molesta) – Giant salvinia was documented within the permanently ponded areas of the West Tract of the Preserve and along the banks of Turtle Bayou. As wetland acreage is expanded by the construction of a water control structure, salvinia may have the ability to infest newly flooded areas of the Preserve. Initial efforts to control existing infestations as part of the initial restoration and enhancement projects will help reduce the spread of salvinia to expanded wetland areas.

Monitoring efforts should target areas that continuously hold water such as deeper ponded areas and ditches along roadways and levees. Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 15.

Water Hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes) – Similar to infestations of salvinia, water hyacinth infestations are restricted to areas with permanent open water and will be targeted as part of the early habitat restoration projects to reduce the risk of infesting newly created wetland areas.

Chemical treatment will be the preferred method for control throughout the Preserve, but physical removal may be an option for small, isolated populations. If any material is physically removed from wetland habitats, special care should be taken not to affect other wetland habitats during disposal.

Additional treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 16.

Common Reed (Phragmites australis) – Common reed, a tall, robust grass species, has been identified on the West Tract of the Preserve along the fringes of permanently flooded areas near the Lake Anahuac levee. Colonies form dense stands up to 16 feet tall and displace competing vegetation.

It is known to be difficult and expensive to control Phragmites with herbicide, and mechanical treatments are preferable when environmental conditions allow mowing. Regular mowing, at least three times per growing season, is considered one of the most effective methods of reducing infestations; however, mowing within this area of the preserve will be a difficult task to complete regularly, due to inundation with water. Potential treatment options are discussed under Invasive Species Control of the Early Restoration Practices section of this plan on page 16.

Feral Hogs Feral hogs are known to cause significant damage to biologically diverse upland and wetland habitats, impact local water quality, and displace native wildlife species. Feral hog populations have expanded rapidly throughout the State of Texas, triggering efforts to control populations statewide. Trapping and removing feral hogs with the help of a qualified trapper or local volunteers would help reduce the number of individuals utilizing the Preserve.

Also, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is continuously looking for additional public hunting 23

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Management and Maintenance

opportunities. One long-term option for feral hog control may include coordinating with TPWD to establish a limited youth hunting opportunity for feral hogs.

A plan to address feral hog populations should be developed and may include trapping, hunting, and, potentially, sterilization efforts. Many federal, state, and local programs provide feral hog control resources to landowners. It is recommended that property managers coordinate with a feral hog specialist from the Agrilife Extension Service, USDA-APHIS, or other natural resource protection entity to help increase the success of longterm control efforts.

Feral Hog at Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Forest Management The evolution of southern pine flatwoods forests was heavily influenced by regular fire events sweeping across the landscape. Natural fire return intervals for the region likely ranged from 1 to 5 years due to the rapid regeneration of fuels encouraged by a favorable climate, long growing season, and high frequency of lightning strikes. Prescribed fires are often used by land managers throughout the southern United States to mimic historical fire regimes to promote healthy forest ecosystems.

When properly applied, native plants respond well to fire, and plant communities benefit from resetting the natural plant succession cycle. The presence of major roadways near the Preserve eliminates the use of fire as a forest management tool due to the likelihood of creating hazardous driving conditions from excess smoke. The risks of harm to human life and community outweigh the benefits of utilizing prescribed fire as a management tool.

As a result, alternative forest management techniques will be utilized to encourage a diverse natural plant community with the structure and composition of a healthy mixed pine-hardwood forest. These techniques are described in a report created by a third-party consultant, which includes an inventory of current forest resources and identifies appropriate restoration and long-term management practices for the forested areas of the Preserve.

The report is included in this plan as Exhibit D. Timber Resources Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), post oak (Quercus stellata), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), and willow oak (Quercus phellos) are dominant trees within the forest canopy. Management activities will be focused on improving age structure and species composition in forested areas of the Preserve.

Forest Openings and Transition Areas Multiple openings will be constructed within forested areas of the Preserve as part of early habitat restoration efforts to create edge habitat, enhance plant diversity, and increase wildlife viewing opportunities for visitors. These forest openings require annual mechanical maintenance to promote Long-term Management and Maintenance

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

24

herbaceous ground cover and control unwanted woody vegetation and invasive plants. Mowing outside of the bird nesting season is recommended. Annual herbicide applications to unwanted vegetation may also help maintain these open areas and promote ecological diversity.

On the West Tract, the transitional zone from forested habitats to grassland and wetland habitats is easily identified along a dramatic change in elevation. This transition provides edge habitat for wildlife species and scenic views for visitors. Cattle grazing may help prevent the encroachment of woody plants, but regular maintenance including mowing and herbicide application is recommended to maintain favorable conditions.

Wetland Management Utilizing water control structures to enhance the quantity and quality of wetlands on a property is common practice for coastal land managers. The ability to manipulate the water depth and length of hydroperiod enhances the ability to target a specific wetland vegetation response and produce forage for a suite of wetland dependent wildlife species.

Constructing a levee and associated water control structure to capture rainwater on the West Tract of the Preserve should meet the objective of enhancing habitat conditions for migratory waterfowl, wading birds, and shorebirds and creating additional wetland acres. Providing optimum water depths for roosting and foraging will help attract target species to the Preserve during annual migrations. Resident wildlife species will benefit from enhanced wetland habitats.

Water Management The timing of flooding and water drawdown plays a critical role in the species composition and forage production of a managed wetland. A reliable water source and ability to meticulously manage water levels is required to maintain optimal conditions for wildlife forage and control nuisance plant species.

Wetland management at the Preserve is dependent on capturing seasonal rainfall within the managed wetland area. This wetland unit will not be a completely controlled environment, and productivity will vary from year to year depending on environmental conditions. Pumping water from Lake Anahuac may be considered as an alternative water source during periods of drought or insufficient water.

Annual water management goals should include providing increased shallow water habitat acreage during fall, winter, and early spring months to accommodate migratory wetland dependent bird species. Removing water by opening the water control structure mechanism, mechanical pumping into Lake Anahuac, or simply allowing evaporation will encourage vegetation growth during the growing season prior to fall flooding.

25

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Management and Maintenance

Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Ducks Unlimited is recommended to develop an appropriate strategy for water management at the Preserve.

Any approved water management strategies should be incorporated as an exhibit to this plan.

Vegetation Management Managing aquatic vegetation will be critical to the success of wetland enhancement projects at the Preserve. Unwanted vegetation, both native and non-native, can decrease the value of wetlands for wildlife species. Initial efforts will be made to reduce populations of invasive species prior to expanding wetland acreage. Long-term, the need for control efforts will be assessed annually to identify problem areas and develop treatment strategies. Additional information relevant to invasive vegetation management is addressed (page 21) in the Invasive Species Control section of this plan.

Vegetation within a managed wetland unit can be controlled by manipulating water depth and hydroperiod, mechanical treatments such as disking and mowing, and chemical treatment with aquatic labeled herbicides. Many of these efforts will be dependent on management funding available to property managers.

When financial resources permit, mechanical soil disturbance within the managed wetland footprint can increase plant diversity and wildlife forage. Additionally, planting specific vegetation known to benefit target wildlife species may be considered as an annual project to enhance available wildlife resources.

Initial enhancement strategies include planting bald cypress in wetland areas to encourage wading bird rookery activity and enhance aesthetics for a public hiking trail system. Additional trees may be planted along trails or near established cypress stands as needed. Bald cypress is sensitive to many herbicides. Care must be taken to avoid impact to cypress trees during any invasive aquatic vegetation control efforts.

Range Management / Livestock Saline prairie plant communities evolved in dynamic equilibrium with harsh ecological stressors, including grazing by herds of large herbivores, fire, and cycles of drought and flooding. Proximity to the Gulf of Mexico allows for periodic inundation from both fresh and salt water, contributed to by high annual rainfall averages and storm surge from tropical storms and hurricanes. Bison herds influenced the prairie in a pattern of short, intensive graze periods Long-term Management and Maintenance

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

26

followed by total deferment until a herd migrated back through the region. Extended periods without grazing allowed tall and mid-level grasses to recover and set seed, and a short fire-return-interval historically controlled encroachment of woody plants.

Cattle grazing is common practice throughout the region, and the West Tract of the Preserve has been utilized as a cow-calf operation for many years. Historical stressors that reset the natural plant community, such as saltwater inundation, bison grazing, and fire are no longer a regular occurrence at the Preserve. Cattle grazing can be utilized as a tool for vegetation management and mimic the historical stressors to native rangeland, when properly applied. A proper stocking rate and grazing rotation is critical to the diversity and health of prairie habitats and their value to prairie dependent wildlife species.

In a continuous grazing scheme, cattle will selectively target more palatable tall and mid-level grasses causing these species to disappear from the plant community over time.

Gulf cordgrass, a much more persistent species, will become the dominant grass and limit the productivity of the native range for cattle. Overgrazing also decreases the overall plant diversity of native range and gives preference to certain undesirable plant species such as Chinese tallow, common bermudagrass, and other herbaceous plants with little nutritional value. Cattle production within the Preserve may cause concern for some visitors. In the event cattle and visitors are utilizing areas of the Preserve concurrently, signage should be produced to caution users of potential hazards.

Grazing Plan A conservative grazing strategy is recommended to encourage biodiversity and reduce impact to native wildlife and local ecosystem services. Efforts should be made to mimic historical low frequency, high intensity grazing patterns if possible. Extended grazing deferments can be accomplished by entirely removing cattle from the West Tract or creating multiple grazing pastures with the construction of cross-fencing.

It is recommended that the property manager coordinate with NRCS to establish an approved grazing plan. The plan should be able to identify critical forage resources, acceptable animal unit stocking rates, and a general grazing strategy for the West Tract. Preserve managers should incorporate this grazing plan with any subsequent cattle leases and enforce the recommended management practices.

Any approved grazing plan should also be incorporated to this management plan as an exhibit.

Fencing Boundary fencing is critical to minimizing the escape of livestock to adjacent properties or onto a public road. Maintaining fences will be the responsibility of the cattle lessee, explicitly outlined in the lease agreement, and strictly enforced. Cross-fencing for range management purposes may be 27

Galveston Bay Foundation

Long-term Management and Maintenance

developed to comply with an approved grazing plan.

Permanent Feeding Areas During times of low forage production, livestock will often be supplemented with baled hay until grazing conditions improve. Feeding areas typically experience high levels of disturbance and can contribute to the spread of invasive plant species or soil erosion. A designated location to store and feed hay or other dietary supplements will be identified and incorporated into the lease agreement.

This location should avoid high traffic public use areas as well as sensitive natural plant communities.

Access It is critical that land managers have reasonable access throughout the Preserve to assess habitat management and restoration projects, maintain public access infrastructure, control unauthorized activities, and respond to emergency situations. Passable roads also allow pipeline, oil and gas, and electrical transmission company workers with legal access to the Preserve an appropriate avenue to conduct business without causing unnecessary property damage.

Vegetation Management Annual mowing will be required to prohibit unwanted woody vegetation from encroaching upon access roads. The regular application of a non-selective herbicide will increase the effectiveness of an annual mowing program. Establishment of grasses on steeply sloped natural roads will help retain soil during rain events and reduce the impact of vehicle traffic in wet conditions. Culverts placed in low water crossings will provide increased access to the Preserve during wet periods and reduce erosion to drainage areas and stream banks.

Gates and locks There are currently 5 property access points for the property, including four along FM 563 and one along the Interstate 10 feeder road. These gates should be monitored on occasion to ensure proper function.

Uniform heavy duty chains and combination locks should be installed at each gate. Additional locks may be placed on the gates with CLCND approval. Various pipeline maintenance, oil and gas production, and electrical transmission companies may have deeded access to the property and should be accommodated.

The 5 existing access points should have gates and locks that are effective in discouraging unsanctioned public entry while allowing authorized personal access to the property.

Long-term Management and Maintenance

Pipeline eastment at Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

28

29

Galveston Bay Foundation

IV. Exhibit A Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Property Maps

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

30

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Property Boundary Map

Map Created by Matt Singer

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Topographic Property Map

Legend Turtle Bayou - 514 ac

31

Galveston Bay Foundation

0

375

750

1,500 Meters

Âą

Copyright:Š 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

East Tract

West Tract

Map Created by Matt Singer Copyright:© 2013 Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, icubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Legend Turtle Bayou - 514 ac

0

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Property Map 250

500

1,000 Meters

±

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

32

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Property Location Map

_ ^

Map Created by Matt Singer Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Legend

_ ^

33

Preserve Location

Galveston Bay Foundation

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Property Location Map 0

5

10

20 Miles

±

IV. Exhibit B Property Site Plan

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

34

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Site Plan Map

" S

\

" S " S

! >

0 0

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve Project Map 0

200

400

800 Meters

Âą

Map Created by Matt Singer Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

Long-Term Projects

Early Projects

" S

\

Viewing Platform

Forest Openings

Access Road Clearing

Hiking Trail

Parking Area

Wetland Enhancement

Kayak Launch

! >

Water Structure - Funded by USFWS Coastal Program

35

Galveston Bay Foundation

" S

Proposed Viewing Platform Proposed Hiking Trail

*Actual placement of projects may vary slightly from map depiction

IV. Exhibit C Potential Funding Sources

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

36

Due Date

Eligible Activities

Funding Limits

Match Requirement

1st Cycle

2nd Cycle

Min. Request

Max Request

Applicant: Grant

Feb 27, 2015

July 7, 2015

$75,001

$1,000,000

1:1

$75,000

1:1

$1,000,000

1:1 to 1:2

FWS Administered Funds

NAWCA - Standard

Conservation of wetlands and wetlanddependent fish & wildlife

NAWCA - Small Grants

Wetland acquisition, creation, enhancement, & restoration

CWPPRA - National Coastal Wetlands

Acquisition, restoration, or enhancement of coastal wetlands

Texas Coastal Program

Restoration & protection of coastal fish & wildlife habitat

Nov. 5, 2015 $200,000 None

Variable

None

EPA Funds

Wetlands Program Development Grant

Dev. and implementation of programs for wetland protection

up to

Due Date

Eligible Activities 1st Cycle

$250,000

Funding Limits 2nd Cycle

Min. Request

Max Request

1:3

Match Requirement Applicant: Grant

TPWD Funds

Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Small Community Grant Program Community Outdoor Outreach Program Recreational Trails Grant Program Texas Conservation License Plate Grants

Acquisition, dev., & renovation of public recreation areas & facilities

August 31

up to

$400,000

Recreational needs of small communities (<20,000)

August 31

up to

$75,000

1:1

Provide rec. parks and facilities to underserved constituents

Feb. 1 (Annually)

$5,000

$40,000

1:1

Construction and restoration of rec. trails and trail facilities

Feb. 1 (Annually)

$4,000

$200,000

1:4

September 8

$2,500

20,000

Conservation Related Projects

1:1

1:3

GLO Administered Funds

Coastal Management Program Coastal hazards, wetland protection, water quantity and â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 306A Small-scale Coastal Management Program â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 306A Large-scale

September 23, 2015

$100,000

1:1 or 1:3

quality, and shoreline access

Coastal hazards, wetland protection, water quantity and quality, and shoreline access

September 23, 2015

$400,000

1:1 or 1:3

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

CRP Five-Star Restoration Grant Program

Wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat restoration

March

$5,000

$20,000

1:1

Pulling Together Initiative

Management of invasive and noxious plants

July 1, 2014 (preproposal)

$25,000

$75,000

1:1

Other Funds

37

GBEP

Restore and protect coastal habitat; control water pollution

Coastal Nonpoint Source Management Program

Control of pollution sources threatening coastal waters

Galveston Bay Foundation

August 22, 2014

Variable

1:1

IV. Exhibit D Forest Resource Assessment

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

38

Forest Resource Assessment & Management Plan

Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project

Chambers County, Texas

Prepared For

Galveston Bay Foundation 17330 Highway 3 Webster, Texas 77598

Prepared By

Advanced Ecology January 2015 Corporate Office 2557 State Hwy. 7 East Center, TX 75935 936.598.9588 1.800.780.9105

www.advancedecology.com

Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Synopsis .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Forest Assessment .................................................................................................................................... 4 Forest Characterization ............................................................................................................................. 5 Flatwoods .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Terrace .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Bottomland ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Management Activities ............................................................................................................................. 6 Priority 1 – Trifoliate Orange Thicket Control ....................................................................................... 7 Priority 2 & 2A – Invasive Control / Tree Planting in High Visibility Areas ........................................... 7 Priority 3 – Invasive Control (Yaupon)/ Tree Planting .......................................................................... 7 Priority 4 – Timber Harvesting .............................................................................................................. 7 Forest Assessment Methods ......................................................................................................................... 8 Property Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 9 General Property Attributes ..................................................................................................................... 9 Historical Review ..................................................................................................................................... 10 Soil Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 11 Hydrological and Topographic Conditions .............................................................................................. 11 Forest Characterization ............................................................................................................................... 12 Flatwoods ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Flatwoods Mixed Forest ...................................................................................................................... 12 Flatwoods Pine .................................................................................................................................... 13 Flatwoods Hardwood .......................................................................................................................... 13 Terrace Forest ......................................................................................................................................... 13 This ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Terrace Mixed Pine Hardwood ........................................................................................................... 13 Terrace Hardwood .............................................................................................................................. 13 Terrace Hardwood/Tallow .................................................................................................................. 13 Terrace Drains ..................................................................................................................................... 13 Turtle Bayou Bottomlands ...................................................................................................................... 13 Bottomlands ........................................................................................................................................ 13

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 1 of 36

Levee Areas ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Flatwoods ................................................................................................................................................ 14 Terrace Forest ......................................................................................................................................... 14 Turtle Bayou Bottomlands ...................................................................................................................... 15 Roads and Trails .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Forest Management Recommendations .................................................................................................... 17 Invasive Species Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 17 Tallowtree ........................................................................................................................................... 17 Yaupon ................................................................................................................................................ 18 Trifoliate Orange ................................................................................................................................. 18 Recommended Management Activities .................................................................................................. 18 Prescribed Fire .................................................................................................................................... 18 Management Priorities ....................................................................................................................... 18 Priority 1 – Trifoliate Orange Thicket Control – Approximately 31 Acres .......................................... 19 Priority 2 & 2A – Invasive Control / Tree Planting in High Visibility Areas – Approximately 63 Acres 20 Priority 3 – Invasive Control (Yaupon)/ Tree Planting ‐ Approximately 24 Acres .............................. 21 Priority 4 – Timber Harvesting – Approximately 126 Acres ................................................................ 22 Average Current Treatment Cost Estimates ........................................................................................... 23 Contractor Information ....................................................................................................................... 24 Management Activity/Treatment Implementation Summary .................................................................... 25 Mulching ................................................................................................................................................. 25 Foliar Herbicide Application .................................................................................................................... 26 Tree Planting ........................................................................................................................................... 27 Basal Bark Treatment .............................................................................................................................. 28 Hand Felling & Cut Surface Treatment ................................................................................................... 30 Illustrations of Forest Management Techniques .................................................................................... 32 Citations ...................................................................................................................................................... 36

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 2 of 36

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – PROJECT FIGURES Figure A Figure B Figure C Figure C‐1 Figure D Figure E Figure F Figure G Figure H Figure I‐1 Figure I‐2 Figure J

Figure K1‐K11

APPENDIX B – TABLES Table 1 Table 2

Location Map Tract Boundary Map Stand Map Map of Visited Plots Management Recommendations Map Roads Map Map of Old Well Sites and Logging Set Locations Map of Right‐of‐Ways Noted Infrastructure Map Topographic Map Topographic Map: Drains Soils Map Historical Aerial Maps (1941 – 2012)

Forest Assessment Plot Level Data Forest Assessment Stand Level Data

APPENDIX C – HERBICIDE LABELS Label 1 Label 2

Garlon 4 Garlon 3A

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 3 of 36

Executive Summary

Introduction Advanced Ecology, Ltd (AEL) has been tasked by the Galveston Bay Foundation (GBF) to conduct a Forest Assessment on the Turtle Bayou Conservation Property (TB) and prepare a forest management strategy that will protect the health of the native pine and hardwood forest while enhancing wildlife habitat diversity, educational opportunities and visitor experiences. The goals of the Forest Assessment were to determine existing forest conditions, identify and prioritize problem areas needing invasive vegetation control, and develop recommendations for management strategies and techniques.

Synopsis The forests in TB pose are dynamic and in some cases, pose challenges to insure their health and survival. Past activities have altered some of the hydrological characteristics of the site, increased opportunity for invasives to exist. However, in spite of this, the site has been able to produce a healthy midstory and understory component of pine and hardwood species. This Plan outlines a strategy for creating and maintaining a diverse, uneven aged forest of mixed pines and hardwoods while preserving the potential beauty of the site and improving future conditions and the quality of the wildlife habitat.

The regeneration and sustainability of these forests is a viable and attainable goal, given a sustained, long‐term commitment to executing the forest management strategies as presented in this Plan.

Forest Assessment AEL investigated current forest conditions, identified and prioritized areas in need of invasive plant control, and formulated plans to provide for forest regeneration and species composition improvement.

The initial forest assessment was broken down into a three‐phase process in order to better utilize time and funds, while still collecting pertinent data for the development of the forest management strategy.

Phase One – Preliminary Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of the Park to formulate the basis of the forest stand types present and potential species composition, determine historical activities that have had effects on the current forest conditions and to determine strategies to maximize the field observations and data collection.

Phase Two ‐ AEL foresters assessed, identified and prioritized areas of the forest concerning invasive plant species, forest canopy type, understory density and composition, and the presence or lack of forest tree regeneration.

Phase Three ‐ consolidation of the field‐derived data and preliminary mapping to produce a report of final forest conditions, management recommendations and detailed mapping. The plan will describe activities to bring about desired forest conditions and prepare a prioritized strategy to achieve these objectives.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 4 of 36

Forest Characterization

The composition of the forests on this Property is heavily influenced by past disturbance events, as well as, the hydrology and soils of the site. The forest assessment resulted in the determination of three primary forest classifications being present. These classifications are based on soil type and landform position, and have been further identified using several sub‐types of these three.

Flatwoods

The Flatwoods component comprises the majority of the forested acreage and is basically a mix of Pine‐ Hardwood and Hardwood forest. These areas generally have fairly uniform midstory and understory conditions consisting of loblolly pine, oaks, sweetgum, elm and tallowtree. The primary variable is found in the density of larger, taller overstory trees, as previously discussed. It is obvious that past harvesting activities have affected the species composition and hydrology due to the heavy rutting,

The Flatwoods component of the TB property is considered to be a well‐established, healthy pine and hardwood forest that, while in need of some management action, is not in immediate threat of becoming an unhealthy forest. The forested component is considered to be unevenaged.

The flatwood components were determined to be Mixed (heavy, moderate and low pine overstory), Pine and Hardwood. There were sub categories of hardwood that take into account the heavy component of tallowtree within the previously open or heavily disturbed (rutted) areas.

Terrace

There are three components of the Terrace classification: Mixed Pine Hardwood, Hardwood and Drainage.

This forest is located along the stream terrace slopes associated with creeks, ephemeral drains and adjacent to the Turtle Bayou bottomlands. The primary species in these areas are very similar in composition to the Flatwoods, but differ in the presence of more winged elm, post oak, and in having a much heavier, consistent midstory of yaupon.

The Terrace Forest also comprises much of the area to the southwest that lies between Highway 563 and the marsh. While there is a good mix of pine and hardwood species present within this area, trifoliate orange has become very well established, especially within the western portions of this area as the site slopes into the Marsh areas.

Like the flatwoods, the majority of this acreage was heavily harvested in the past. However, due to better drainage afforded by the sloping terrain, the area was not affected as heavily by the rutting.

This area is also considered to be dominated by Hardwood in the overstory at this time, however, overall the site would be considered a Hardwood – Pine mix. The substantial levels of loblolly pine saplings in these areas will, over the next decade or so, see an increase in pine trees in the overstory.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 5 of 36

Bottomland

There are two distinct bottomland areas associated with this classification; riparian bottomland and leveed bottomland.

The Levee area has dominate overstory of redcedar, sugarberry and tallowtree, with a heavy midstory and understory of huisache, honeylocust and trifoliate orange. Most of these species are a result of decreased disturbance (i.e. mowing) of previously non‐forested areas utilized for cattle and/or utility infrastructure and roads. The majority of the trees, invasive and desirable, are primarily above the normal water line of the marsh. While there is a heavy component of tallowtree throughout the marsh, the more dense areas lie along the edges.

The Bottomlands riparian area is a naturally‐occurring mix of primarily native species, with some tallowtree present. The baldcypress ranges in size from small to medium sized along the river bank itself, with larger, more mature specimens located in the backwater areas. The southernmost section adjacent to the Levee area has more of the mature baldcypress. It was noted during the fieldwork that there is baldcypress regeneration present within this stand classification, primarily located at the outflow point of the drainages leading into the Bottomlands. The occurrence of baldcypress regeneration was minimal, and is present along with tallowtree regeneration. Our experience has been that the baldcypress will outgrow this tallowtree over time.

Management Activities

At first glance, the entire forested acreage appears to be inundated with an invasive species issue, especially in regard to tallowtree. Just making an assessment from the roads would prove this to be true. While all three of the primary invasive species are prevalent, once you peel back that initial layer off of the roads, the overall species composition was determined to be much better than expected. In fact, the majority of the forested areas are dominated by a loblolly pine overstory, midstory and/or understory component, with a mix of desirable oaks, sweetgum, elm, sugarberry and scattered pockets of baldcypress. In short, the majority of the acreage is considered to be a healthy uneven aged forest, with a mix of desirable species in need of only limited immediate management intervention as a whole.

Due to the variable nature of this forest in general, AEL believes it is best to provide management recommendations on a priority basis. This will focus on immediate needs to improve the current conditions for the various stand classifications and the identified sub‐sets. These recommendations are meant to provide guidance for need, possible techniques and timelines by area and are intended to be flexible based on changes in priority or site conditions. The priority classes and proposed treatment methods are detailed by Priority Area as follows, and are shown on the Management Recommendations Map attached as Figure D. A more detailed discussion of each technique is provided in the” Management Activity/Treatment Implementation Summary”.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 6 of 36

Priority 1 – Trifoliate Orange Thicket Control

The goals for Priority 1 would be to eliminate as much of the trifoliate orange vegetation as is possible and to implement a planting strategy to introduce more desirable species. Recommended treatment activities include mechanical mulching, chemical herbicide and tree planting.

Priority 2 & 2A – Invasive Control / Tree Planting in High Visibility Areas

As mentioned previously, the priority areas associated with this recommendation are primarily situated along existing roads, well sites and larger logging sets as well as transition points from the Terrace and Bottomland areas. The primary goal of this treatment would be to reduce the invasive stems per acre associated with these areas and establish desirable species through tree plantings.

Priority 3 – Invasive Control (Yaupon)/ Tree Planting

These areas primarily situated along Turtle Bayou, north of Highway 563. The yaupon component was determined to be more intrusive within this area and a potential threat to the desired species. The goal for this recommendation will be to reduce all invasive species component using chemical treatments, focusing on yaupon, to a level that provides a healthier forest for the remaining, more desirable species and promote increased regeneration and or opportunity for supplemental tree plantings along Turtle Bayou.

Priority 4 – Timber Harvesting

GBF expressed interest in exploring the use of targeted timber harvests as a management tool to promote the health of forest stands. Currently, the available merchantable timber is primarily limited to the “Heavy Overstory Pine” stands associated with the Flatwoods classification.

A selective thinning of the merchantable stems per acre could be conducted and would enhance forest health as well as retain the integrity of the existing forest. It would be recommended that a detailed assessment of the timber volumes in these areas be conducted to serve as an aid in harvest planning.

This planning would assist in determining specific harvest criteria.

It is important for the managers of this forest to realize that the natural tree regeneration found throughout much of this property will be growing and maturing into a dense forest. There will be a need for planned selective harvesting in order to maintain forest health in the near future. Our estimation would be that within a decade, considerations will have to be made about initiating thinning harvests.

AEL foresters believe that this property is going to grow into an excellent mixed pine‐hardwood forest over the next fifteen to twenty years.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 7 of 36

Forest Assessment Methods

AEL foresters and biologists conducted a forest assessment of TB starting with preliminary aerial photography reconnaissance. This was followed by detailed field work being completed in January 2015. The forest assessment was designed to be a broad visual review of the conditions coupled with sample inventory plots placed in the various stand types. The goal of the assessment was to determine general tree species occurrence, to identify areas of problematic and/or high density invasive species (i.e. Chinese tallow, yaupon, trifoliate), assess overall forest health and to identify potential site enhancements. AEL prepared a logistical assessment plan that would allow for data collection in a three phase process.

Phase One focused on preparing detailed Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of the site using publicly available aerial photography that ranged in dates from 1941‐2013. The purpose of this process was to formulate the basis of the forest stand types present and potential species composition, determine historical activities that have had effects on the current forest conditions and to determine strategies to maximize the field observations and data collection.

All forested areas of TB were classified into various preliminary forest stand types: Pine, Hardwood, Pine – Hardwood, Hardwood – Pine and noteworthy Forest Openings. The three primary land types determined were the Flatwoods, Terraces and Bottomland sites. This preliminary mapping was based on limited prior knowledge of the forest conditions and the aerial, topographic and soils maps.

This data was then uploaded to field computers running a combination of GPS and GIS software. In addition, bound hard copy maps geographically divided into assessment areas covering the entire TB property were also taken to the field. Upon commencement of the fieldwork, each AEL forester/biologist was provided all of this preliminary information to be used in making in‐the‐field assessments of each portion of the TB. Field maps outlining the pre‐determined forest types, proposed sample plot locations, roads and other notable infrastructure were also prepared for use.

Phase Two of the forest assessment was the implementation of the field work, where AEL foresters assessed, identified and prioritized areas of the forest concerning invasive/exotic plant species, forest canopy type, understory density and composition, and the presence or lack of forest tree regeneration.

Preliminary mapping assessments were verified and/or updated based on the in the field findings. A Stand Classification Map detailing the various forested stand types is attached to this report as Figure C‐ 1.

The tactics of this effort involved AEL foresters/biologists walking all of the forested areas throughout the Property, making very detailed on‐the‐ground determinations and mapping the various forest conditions on the field computers and maps. Concurrently during the field work phase, twenty‐one 1/20th acre fixed radius sample plots were established. Plot locations were determined in the field by the individual forester and were based on changes in stand conditions as warranted by the initial assessments in the office and through on‐the‐ground observations. The following data was collected at each plot:

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 8 of 36

Stand Level 1. GPS Plot Location 2. Dominate Species Present 3. Stand Type (Flatwoods Mixed, Flatwoods Pine, etc.)

4. Stand Level Notes

Plot Level 1. % Midstory Cover (ocular estimate) 2. % Understory Cover (ocular estimate) 3. Invasive Status ‐ Percent Composition (Chinese tallowtree, yaupon and trifoliate orange) a. High (50%) b. Medium (20%‐50%) c. Low (0%‐20%)

Tree Level 1. Species 2. Stem Count 3. Average Total Height (Overstory)

In addition, AEL made notes regarding the existing structures, access points, existing roads, proposed roads and special use areas, well sites and utility easements. All of the Stand, Plot and Tree Level data can be found in Attachment ?? A map detailing each plots location (latitude and longitude) is attached as Figure C‐2.

Phase 3 was the consolidation of the field‐derived data and preliminary mapping to produce a report of final forest conditions, management recommendations and detailed mapping. At this point, AEL, using all of the compiled data, began to investigate the primary issues present within the various areas, prepare plans to determine what activities would be required to obtain desired forest conditions throughout the Property, and to prepare a prioritized strategy to achieve these objectives. The preparation of this written report is the culmination of these efforts, along with the Arcview‐based mapping. A final Management Recommendations Map detailing the various priority areas is attached as Figure D.

Property Overview

General Property Attributes

This Property is located on the north shore of Lake Anahuac, at the mouth of Turtle Bayou. Lake Anahuac forms the southern boundary; Turtle Bayou the eastern boundary; the northern boundary is private land which abuts the south side of Interstate 10; and private land is to the west. State Farm Road 563 runs through the Property from northwest to southeast. There is one point of access on the south I‐10 frontage road on a 125‐foot wide strip of the Property, which has a graveled oil‐well site road leading into an old well site.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 9 of 36

A large (165‐foot wide) utility right‐of‐way containing two transmission powerlines and at least three underground pipelines transects the Property from north to south. A multi‐pipeline 50‐foot wide right‐ of‐way runs from east to west across this land. There are old grown‐up woods and trails located around the property, with some of these being associated with the old oil field activity.

The vegetation conditions of the Property are dictated by a combination of soils and the landforms. The majority of the northern section of the tract is in the Flatwoods landform, which has poor drainage on flat terrain. This landform is dominated by a loblolly pine ‐ sweetgum ‐ oak forest. The sloping land abutting the streams offers another landform referred to as Terraces, which is better drained due to the steeper terrain. This area has similar species as the Flatwoods, but with a heavier component of competing species, and with some live oak being present.

The following are the primary species that were identified during the field assessment work:

Sweetgum Loblolly Pine Tallowtree Baldcypress Cherrybark Red Oak

Southern Red Oak Yaupon Laurel Oak Sugarberry Honeylocust

Water Oak Post Oak Live Oak Huisache Sesbania spp.

Magnolia Palmetto Trifoliate Orange Cedar Elm Winged Elm

Blackgum Redcedar

The southern portion of the Property lies in the nearly‐level Salty Marsh dominated by heavy soils of varying salinity. This marsh is basically cut off from Lake Anahuac by a levee, so it is assumed that now only storm events such as Hurricane Ike in 2008 introduce very much salinity into that system.

The higher sections of the levee are dominated by sugarberry, elm and redcedar.

Historical Review

This area was first settled in 1827 by James White, with the town site being located near the extreme northeast corner of the Property, at present‐day Chambers County‐owned White's Park. Another short‐ lived settlement at the mouth of Turtle Bayou named New Boston never came to fruition. The local population remained low until the discovery of the Turtle Bay Oil Field in 1935, followed by the Simon sawmill in 1939. The establishment of the oil field had a direct impact on the Property due to the oil well pads and access roads which were built, with some activity as recent as the mid‐to‐late 1990's. (1)

The southern end of the TB property was impacted by the conversion of Turtle Bay into Lake Anahuac, a process which began with the bay's entrance being closed off in 1936 over issues of saltwater intrusion.

The bay had the levee built around it in 1954, converting it into Lake Anahuac, which is used as a freshwater reservoir. (2)

An examination of 1970 aerial photography of the Property shows some open fields and areas beginning to grow back into trees. It appears in that aerial that some timber harvesting had been done in the recent past. The most recent timber harvest on the Property appears to have been done between

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 10 of 36

August 2002 and June 2005, with bare soil in log‐loading areas appearing fairly fresh in the 2005 aerial photograph. This coincides with the state of tree and vegetation regrowth on this Property.

This harvest was conducted during a time of wet soil conditions, and was most likely done from the early fall through the early spring. We base this estimation on the severe soil rutting from logging machinery and the success of the loblolly pine regeneration on the Property. The success of the autumn seed fall of loblolly pine seeds is greatly enhanced if harvesting occurs from late summer through the first warm days of early spring, when the seeds germinate. Harvesting before the late summer allows for grass and other understory re‐sprouting, which suppresses the pine seed growth. If the harvesting occurred after germination, the seedlings would most likely have been destroyed by the logging machinery.

Soil Conditions

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soils information indicates three primary soil types on the Property; Vamont Clay, Dylan Clay and Harris Clay. NRCS soil series are generalized descriptions of the soils in a given area, being a grouping of majority‐occurrence soils types, and have inclusions of less‐extensive soils within the general soil series.

The majority of the soil on the non‐marsh portion is Vamont clay, an extremely acidic, poorly‐drained, mounded soil on a classic Flatwoods landform. This soil type comprises approximately 50% of the total acreage and over 75% of the forested acreage.

The Terraces along Turtle Bayou and its associated drains have the Dylan clay soils, which are moderately well drained, neutral to moderately alkaline pH soils. This soil type accounts for approximately 20% of the total acreage.

The southern Marsh and Bottomland soils are classed as the neutral to slightly alkaline Harris clays, formed from coastal sediments. This soil type covers the remaining 30% of the property acreage.

The soils play a very important role in the vegetative composition of the property. Especially in terms of the invasive species, specifically the trifoliate orange, which has formed a very dense thicket south of Highway 565.

A map detailing each of the soil types and their approximate locations within the property can be found in Figure J along with the descriptions as provided by NRCS for Chambers County, Texas.

Hydrological and Topographic Conditions

In general, the northern and western sections of this Property are on the higher ground, gently sloping to the south and east towards Turtle Bayou and the Lake Anahuac marshes. There is a fair‐sized creek channel along the western side of the site, flowing south to the marsh area. The side drains that run into Turtle Bayou drain to the southeast out of the Flatwoods areas.

The Flatwoods areas are somewhat poorly drained since they have 0 to 1 percent slopes. While ponding on the surface is usually limited to less than two weeks, the water table is about 14 to 37 inches below

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 11 of 36

the surface. These mounded soils exhibit varying levels of saturation during wet periods, with the micro lows (which are classed as Bevil soils) exhibiting very wet conditions. The tops of the mounds are better drained.

The Terraces have 3 to 5 percent slopes, so they are moderately well drained. The water table is deep in these areas, so these areas are much drier than the adjacent Flatwoods. Of course, the Marsh area stays saturated, with a water table from 0 to 30 inches, and with little or no drainage capability due to the levee. The levee land itself is well drained due to being mounded, and because of this and its relatively high pH, it exhibits vegetation often associated with central Texas.

A topographic and drainage map is attached as Figure I and I‐2.

Forest Characterization

The composition of the forests on this Property is heavily influenced by past disturbance events, as well as, the hydrology and soils of the site. The forest assessment resulted in the determination of three primary forest classifications being present:

1. Flatwoods 2. Terrace 3. Bottomland

These classifications are based on soil type and landform position, and have been further identified using several sub‐types of these three and are discussed below.

Flatwoods

Flatwoods Mixed Forest ‐ these forests are dominated by loblolly pine, but contain significant numbers of sweetgum, laurel oak, cherrybark oak and post oak, with varying levels of tallowtree and yaupon. The levels of overstory (larger, taller) loblolly pines vary throughout these forests, and are more fully described in this section. These larger, taller trees were left uncut during the most recent harvest, due to being too small or not making the end‐user specifications under which the harvest was conducted, or were inaccessible due to local topographic conditions, or for other unknown reasons.

Heavy Pine Overstory ‐ areas where the loblolly pine overstory is heaviest, and the midstory is loblolly pine, sweetgum and oaks. The overstory pines are generally at an average density of fifteen trees per acre or more.

Moderate Pine Overstory ‐ areas where there is a moderate level of overstory pines, being generally about five to fifteen overstory trees per acre.

Low Pine Overstory ‐ where the occurrence of overstory pine is very low to non‐existent, being generally less than five trees per acre.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 12 of 36

Flatwoods Pine ‐ these areas are dominated by a pine overstory. They are, in large part, a result of clearing activities around the old oil well sites, as well as a few old fields. However, the majority of these stands were not harvested in the last cutting, probably being too small in diameter to meet the required harvesting specifications.

Flatwoods Hardwood – these areas are dominated by a mix of water oak, laurel oak, winged elm and sweetgum, but have mix of loblolly pine and tallow present. There is little to no dominate overstory present within these areas, except in scattered pockets. Additional breakouts of this sub‐classification included areas of heavier tallowtree adjacent to previously opened sites and within the more heavily rutted areas.

Terrace Forest

This forest is located along the stream terrace slopes associated with creeks, ephemeral drains and adjacent to the Turtle Bayou bottomlands. The primary species in these areas are very similar in composition to the Flatwoods, but differ in the presence of more winged elm, post oak, and in having a much heavier, consistent midstory of yaupon.

The Terrace Forest also comprises much of the area to the southwest that lies between Highway 563 and the marsh. While there is a good mix of pine and hardwood species present within this area, trifoliate orange has become very well established, especially within the western portions of this area as the site slopes into the Marsh areas.

Terrace Mixed Pine Hardwood ‐ these contain loblolly pine, yaupon, sweetgum, winged elm, post oak, and cherrybark oak.

Terrace Hardwood ‐ dominated by laurel oak, sweetgum, cherrybark oak, post oak, trifoliate and tallowtree

Terrace Hardwood/Tallow‐ most likely an old logging set, the species mix is primarily tallowtree with a mixture of huisache

Terrace Drains‐ primarily situated within the drain in the northeast, the species are a mix of loblolly pine, yaupon, sweetgum and water oak, with a mix of mature baldcypress in or on the actual drainage

Turtle Bayou Bottomlands

Bottomlands ‐ this section is a narrow band of primarily baldcypress trees along the margins of the western bank of Turtle Bayou. Cedar elm, laurel oak and water oak are also components of this forest type, along with generally low levels of tallowtree.

Levee Areas ‐ this area has dominated overstory of redcedar, sugarberry and tallowtree, with a heavy midstory of huisache, honeylocust and trifoliate orange. There are significant levels of palmetto present in these areas, as well.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 13 of 36

A map outlining these Forest Classifications and sub‐classes is attached to this report as Figure C‐ 1.Forest Dynamics Discussion

Flatwoods

The Flatwoods component comprises the majority of the forested acreage and is basically a mix of Pine‐ Hardwood and Hardwood forest. These areas generally have fairly uniform midstory and understory conditions consisting of loblolly pine, oaks, sweetgum, elm and tallowtree. The primary variable is found in the density of larger, taller overstory trees, as previously discussed. It is obvious that past harvesting activities have affected the species composition and hydrology due to the heavy rutting, as described in the previous section.

Due to this, suitable conditions were established to promote an excessive influx of tallowtree. Along with those ideal conditions came the opportunity for desirable species such as sweetgum, oak and loblolly to become established and ultimately comprising approximately 86% of the stems per acre with loblolly pine regeneration averaging 35% of those trees. This is not surprising, considering the time of year the past harvesting activities occurred.

Overall the invasive species, tallowtree and yaupon, comprised 32% of the stems within the Flatwoods areas. While this may seem high, the pine and desirable hardwood species have, for the most part, been able to out compete both of them. The exceptions lie within the lower lying ground such as roadside ditches and more heavily rutted areas or old sets and well pad edges that were previously maintained openings, of which primarily consist of tallowtree.

It should be noted that these averages are just that, averages. The species composition varies by density, height and size depending on the localized conditions of soil, drainage, and harvesting rutting.

The Flatwoods component of the TB property is considered to be a well‐established, healthy pine and hardwood forest that, while in need of some management action, is not in immediate threat of becoming an unhealthy forest. The forested component is considered to be uneven aged.

Terrace Forest

Like the flatwoods, the majority of this acreage was heavily harvested in the past. However, due to better drainage afforded by the sloping terrain, the area was not affected as heavily by the rutting.

This area is also considered to be dominated by Hardwood in the overstory at this time, however, overall the site would be considered a Hardwood – Pine mix. The substantial levels of loblolly pine saplings in these areas will, over the next decade or so, see an increase in pine trees in the overstory.

Historical aerials dictate that the majority of the southeast areas (south of Highway 563) were dominated by loblolly pine, which is evident in the density of pine regeneration found throughout.

While all the invasive species (yaupon, trifoliate and tallow) are present, the loblolly regeneration has

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 14 of 36

greatly outcompeted them, comprising over 50% of the stems per acre. Yaupon is the primary competition, but most of the regeneration has grown to heights well above competitive levels.

A very noticeable invasive issue lies within the impenetrable hedges of trifoliate orange present throughout the remainder of the acreage, primarily situated in the northwest sections of the areas south of Highway 563. While there is some desirable pine and hardwood regeneration present, the trifoliate has dominated the midstory and understory component, comprising more than 37% of the total stems per acre.

In fact, the three primary invasive species addressed in this plan comprise over 60% of the stems present in these areas. However, trifoliate orange is the primary threat for this area and thrives due to the complimentary soil conditions and past harvesting activities. Management of this invasive species will be required, or it will continue to affect the health and overall desirable composition of the forest.

An important note for this area was the increased number of Live Oaks present, especially along the western boundary line. However, as with all of the other trees, the trifoliate is slowly overtaking them as well.

As mentioned earlier, yaupon is a noted issue within the areas adjacent to the Turtle Bayou corridor and accounts for 35%‐45% of the stems per acre. There are desirable hardwood and pine present, but they are at a stage that they are actively competing with yaupon.

The primary drainage areas found as part of the Terrace class differed greatly depending on their location. The larger drain associated with the northeastern end of the property that feeds into Turtle Bayou had a very healthy mix of Loblolly Pine, Oaks, Sweetgum and baldcypress. While there was yaupon present, it did not appear to be a threat to the midstory or understory component at this time.

The primary drainage system that lies south of Highway 563 that feeds into the Bottomland acreage was heavily harvested in the past, leaving only a small buffer on the drain. That coupled with increased mortality has left this area susceptible to increased invasive species establishment. The trifoliate orange, yaupon and tallowtree component has out competed most of the desirable pine and hardwood species. This is more prevalent in the northern portions of the drain, but is an issue throughout. There is a dominate hardwood component in the overstory that is primarily poorer quality water oaks.

Turtle Bayou Bottomlands

As stated in the classification descriptions, the Levee area has dominate overstory of redcedar, sugarberry and tallowtree, with a heavy midstory and understory of huisache, honeylocust and trifoliate orange. Most of these species are a result of decreased disturbance (i.e. mowing) of previously non‐ forested areas utilized for cattle and/or utility infrastructure and roads. The majority of the trees, invasive and desirable, are primarily above the normal water line of the marsh. While there is a heavy component of tallowtree throughout the marsh, the more dense areas lie along the edges.

The Bottomlands riparian area is a naturally‐occurring mix of primarily native species, with some tallowtree present. The baldcypress ranges in size from small to medium sized along the river bank itself, with larger, more mature specimens located in the backwater areas. The southernmost section adjacent to the Levee area has more of the mature baldcypress. It was noted during the fieldwork that

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 15 of 36

there is baldcypress regeneration present within this stand classification, primarily located at the outflow point of the drainages leading into the Bottomlands. The occurrence of baldcypress regeneration was minimal, and is present along with tallowtree regeneration. Our experience has been that the baldcypress will outgrow this tallowtree over time.

Roads and Trails

While not a primary focus of the forest assessment, AEL did make notes of existing access and potential opportunities for improvement and expansion of the existing roads and trails. A map is attached as Figure E that outlines the roads/trails that are currently existing and open, existing that need to be re‐ opened and proposed by AEL for additional access. Basically, there are five (5) primary access points into the property. All are currently gated and are in various conditions, from the standpoint of actual use.

The two access points on the south side of Highway 563 are on the northwest and southwest portions of the property and have been maintained at various levels due to the current cattle lease. These access points are connected by a loop road that is at the transition from the Terrace and Bottomland areas.

They also provide access to the old well site roads along the levee and to the rip rap areas. While the majority of the roads are open, additional maintenance and improvements would be needed to provide all weather access. Overtime, the cattle have heavily rutted the bottomland portions of the roads, making them difficult to easily navigate.

The north side of Highway 563 has 3 access points; two right off of the highway at the northwest and south east corners and one off of the I‐10 feeder road. The southeast access is currently limited to a short distance and them becomes impassable. The northwest and I‐10 access points are good, partially rocked roads that lead to old abandoned well site locations and pipeline easements. Outside of those, there is very limited open access to the remainder of the property. To improve the current situation, AEL has outlined a loop road system based on our visual interpretations that would utilize, to a large degree, existing roads and/or old skid trails that would require being re‐opened. Most of the roads have had the same amount and levels of vegetation re‐growth as the remainder of the forested areas, but they are still visible and could, with effort, become re‐usable. Most of these were originally used for access to the well locations and meant for larger vehicle traffic. It is assumed that the footprint could be reduced.

In addition, AEL has proposed a rough outline of additional trails that could be used for access internally to the forested areas as well along Turtle Bayou and into the northeast portions of the property.

Currently, there is little to no access penetrable or visible on the ground, but remnants of some old trails were identified using the aerial photography. During our in the field observations, we determined it would be feasible to find and re‐open for use.

A fire lane road is also proposed along the highway and boundaries to provided additional walking and /or vehicle access for recreation and emergency purposes. This could be established using a mechanical mulcher and in conjunction with the mulching activities detailed below. This would allow for a more efficient means of clearing the lane and reducing the stump heights for future mowing and maintenance. An alternative method would be the use of a bulldozer and a qualified contractor that is

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 16 of 36

familiar with firelane establishment. The bulldozer alternative would remove the stump and tree as a whole, but the stem would be left on site unless disposed/removed by the contractor or with a separate operation. Based on the existing vegetation, mulching is recommended.

Note was also made for potential parking access. These are noted on the map with a “P”, and were based on use of old well site locations. Road access exists to most of these locations and the base is generally still present. In particular, on the southside of the Highway, there was a location noted as P1 on the map, due to it being fairly open and various larger live oaks being present.

AEL makes not guarantee that these locations are suitable and highly recommends additional guidance, especially in regards to determined future use and need. However, AEL felt these recommendations and visual observations would provide value for future planning.

Forest Management Recommendations

At first glance, the entire forested acreage appears to be inundated with an invasive species issue, especially in regard to tallowtree. Just making an assessment from the roads would prove this to be true. While all three of the primary invasive species are prevalent, once you peel back that initial layer off of the roads, the overall species composition was determined to be much better than expected. In fact, the majority of the forested areas are dominated by a loblolly pine overstory, midstory and/or understory component, with a mix of desirable oaks, sweetgum, elm, sugarberry and scattered pockets of baldcypress. In short, the majority of the acreage is considered to be a healthy uneven aged forest, with a mix of desirable species in need of only limited immediate management intervention as a whole.

That being said, there are specific areas on the TB property where invasive species are an issue, and should be addressed through targeted management activities. To gain a better understanding of the primary invasive species as pertaining to this property, the following discussions are provided:

Invasive Species Discussion

Tallowtree ‐ We believe that it is important for managers to adopt a management strategy concerning tallowtree that recognizes its status in the ecosystem. Tallowtree has long been a naturalized species, and as such, it needs to be taken into account in forest management strategies just as yaupon is. It may be an exotic species, but that nomenclature has no realistic effect in forest management.

The reality of tallowtree in a forest ecosystem is that it is an early seral stage invader. It cannot compete long term with native species such as are found on this property. The only caveat to that is in the wettest areas that naturally preclude all but a few native species. Tallowtree will occupy wet sites that have enough inundation to supplant loblolly pine, sweetgum and all but a few species of oak. In those areas, often associated with road ditches, barrow pits, and skidder ruts, tallowtree will dominate. It is important, therefore, to plan ahead in tallowtree control strategies to plant water‐tolerant species such as tupelo, baldcypress and overcup oak to replace the tallowtree.

On this site, tallowtree has established itself throughout much of the Property, especially in the heavily‐ rutted areas, road ditches, and in the southern sections of the Property adjacent to the Marsh area.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 17 of 36

Yaupon ‐ A native member of the holly family, provides good cover and wildlife food in the form of its bright red berries. It does regenerate in shaded conditions and becomes invasive when all control mechanisms are absent. Historically both grazing and fire controlled the spread of this species, and with these having been eliminated for some time on this site, it has formed a very heavy thickets that has become a primary competitor for the more desirable hardwood species. This coupled with the past harvesting activities, provided excellent opportunity for the yaupon to occupy the site.

Unlike tallowtree, the yaupon will continue to compete with the native species over time and in some situations funnel water and nutrients away from the desirable stems as a whole due to their expansive root system.

Trifoliate Orange – Totally different than the other primary invasives, trifoliate orange will typically form an impenetrable hedge that typically suffocates any competing vegetation

Recommended Management Activities

Prescribed Fire

Most ecosystems, in general, are the product of disturbance inputs, be they human or natural. Fire, hurricanes, wind, drought, insects and diseases all play a role, as well as harvesting, clearing of the forest for rights‐of‐ways and other human factors. Fire, drought and wind tend to be the most dramatic and wide‐ranging of the natural elements influencing forests. Without these disturbances, most of the common forest tree species are not able to successfully regenerate. The cessation of forest fire, either intentional woods burning or wildfires, has especially contributed to heavy understory concentrations of species such as yaupon and, in the case of this property, trifoliate orange.

Management activities are planned disturbances which assist in controlling these species and allow for successful regeneration of the primary forest canopy trees. Fire is often not an option due to human infrastructure, especially in terms of smoke management. The proximity of the state highway transecting this property, as well as Interstate 10, makes the use of fire on a meaningful level very problematic in this location. The residual smoke generation following a prescribed fire in the forest would be high on the list of potential problems. Burning of grassy areas, such as the marsh on the south side of the property, tend to generate smoke primarily during the active phase of the burning project.

Given these restraints, AEL is making recommendations for forest vegetation management which do not include fire. This is not to say that prescribed burning should be excluded from consideration, but it would require a very precise set of meteorological circumstances to mitigate potential problems with off‐site smoke complications. Simply stated, prescribed fire is difficult to apply in a sustainable fashion, which renders it as an unreliable methodology for forest management under such circumstances.

Management Priorities

Due to the variable nature of this forest in general, AEL believes it is best to provide management recommendations on a priority basis. This will focus on immediate needs to improve the current conditions for the various stand classifications and the identified sub‐sets. These recommendations are

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 18 of 36

meant to provide guidance for need, possible techniques and timelines by area and are intended to be flexible based on changes in priority or site conditions. The priority classes and proposed treatment methods are detailed by Priority Area as follows, and are shown on the Management Recommendations Map attached as Figure D.

A more detailed discussion of each technique is provided in the” Management Activity/Treatment Implementation Summary”.

Priority 1 – Trifoliate Orange Thicket Control – Approximately 31 Acres

Based on the forest assessment, this is the most intrusive issue identified on the property. This treatment area is completely situated south of Highway 563 and encompasses approximately 31 acres.

This acreage estimate could vary depending on GBF’s desired coverage, but AEL feels that it takes into account the bulk of the problematic areas.

The goals for Priority 1 would be to eliminate as much of the trifoliate orange vegetation as is possible and to implement a planting strategy to introduce more desirable species.

Proposed Treatment Methods Mechanical Mulching

This is a “must do” operation in order to reduce the trifoliate orange levels down to a more manageable level. Currently the hedge is too tall and thick to expect an individual laborer to be effective in manually cutting these thick hedges by hand and or removing the vegetation at its current levels; in regards to both stems per acre and total acreage to be covered.

It should be understood that mulching will not be selective of the midstory and understory component, but it is not intended to be. The goal is to eliminate as much of the trifoliate orange as possible, preparing the site for effective management through chemical application control and reforestation. In addition, these areas could be mechanically maintained as permanent open areas within the forested areas of the Preserve.

Chemical Control (Herbicide) Application

Following the mulching activities and after a reasonable time for the mulched vegetation to fully resprout, a foliar herbicide application will need to be conducted. The vegetation level should be low enough post‐mulching to easily accomplish this task. But, if after review of the mulching operations it is determined that a basal bark application is needed due to the size of the stems, adjustments should be made or a mix of both methods be considered.

It would also be at this time that a determination is made as to the benefits of including other invasive species present be treated. As mentioned, all of the vegetation would be at a manageable level and could easily be incorporated into the process.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 19 of 36

It should be expected that follow up inspections will need to be made and that subsequent foliar applications may be required to continue control of new growth. This may require multiple treatments to acquire desired results. It is noted that in this instance, broadcast application of the herbicide may be more economical and effective as opposed to manual backpack‐style spraying, due to the size of the treatment parcel, and the very dense nature of the vegetation needing control.

AEL recommends the use of Garlon 3A or Garlon 4 be considered as part of this application method and to be applied at the specified labeled rates and at the direction of a certified/licensed applicator.

Tree Planting

Following the control efforts, a thorough review of the treated sites will need to be conducted to determine areas that would benefit from tree plantings. The sites will be open and prepared for this process following the mechanical and chemical treatments. Since the overall soil conditions and topographic features included in this priority area differs slightly, adjustments may be needed when determining species to be planted.

AEL recommends planting species that are native to the site, and can be either bareroot or containerized seedlings. Recommended species include Loblolly Pine, Sweetgum, Water Oak, Live Oak, Southern Red Oak, Post Oak, Elm and Baldcypress. Other species may be considered based on GBF goals, but these can serve as a base starting point.

Priority 2 & 2A – Invasive Control / Tree Planting in High Visibility Areas – Approximately 63 Acres

As mentioned previously, the priority areas associated with this recommendation are primarily situated along existing roads, well sites and larger logging sets as well as transition points from the Terrace and Bottomland areas. The primary goal of this treatment would be to reduce the invasive stems per acre associated with these areas and establish desirable species through tree plantings.

While reducing the invasive species within these locations is important, AEL felt it did not warrant the urgency of Priority 1, due to the ability of these species to co‐exist with less long term negative influence on the desirable species present. However, if the management budget allows, Priority 2 could be conducted in conjunction with Priority 1 to potentially reduce contractor expenses.

Proposed Treatment Methods Chemical Control (Herbicide) Application

Due to the variance in size of the target species considered as part of Priority 2, a cut stump/injection or basal bark herbicide applications should be considered. A basal bark treatment would be less labor intensive, but there would be dead standing trees remaining over several years. This basal bark treatment would be more conducive within the areas where there are sufficient desirable species present, as it would be expected that future tree planting needs would be minimized.

Cut stump treatments require felling of the target tree and immediate application of herbicide to the stump. If dead standing snags are desired in certain areas, injection of herbicide directly into the tree is a viable option. This is generally done on trees larger than 2 to 3 inches in diameter at about 4 feet from

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 20 of 36

the ground level. Smaller stems and/or clumps of stems are generally more effectively treated using the basal bark method. The herbicide is applied with a manual sprayer to the bark using specific surfactants/penetrant chemicals to allow the herbicide to be absorbed into the vascular system of the target plant.

It should be expected that follow up inspections will need to be made and that subsequent foliar applications may be required to continue control of new growth. This may require multiple treatments to acquire desired results. It should be noted that in areas requiring additional tree seedling planting, the presence of many larger, taller target trees can result in seedling damage as the dead standing trees begin to decay and fall.

AEL recommends the use of Garlon 3A or Garlon 4 be considered as part of this application method and to be applied at the specified labeled rates and at the direction of a certified/licensed applicator.

Tree Planting

Following the control efforts, a thorough review of the treated sites will need to be conducted to determine areas that would benefit from tree plantings. While the overall soil conditions and topographic features included in the priority area differs slightly, adjustments may be needed when determining species to be planted.

Special consideration would need to be made as to species within the more heavily rutted sites. These are outlined as Priority 2A on the management map. Recommended species in these wettest areas would include willow oak, overcup oak, water hickory, and cedar elm.

AEL recommends planting species that are native to the site, and can be either bareroot or containerized seedlings. Recommended species include loblolly pine, sweetgum, water oak, live oak, southern red oak, cherrybark oak, post oak, elm and baldcypress. Other species may be considered based on GBF goals, but these can serve as the base starting point.

Mowing

Following the initial chemical vegetation control along the transition areas and roadsides, annual brush control could be implemented through mowing activities. This method would assist in controlling future re‐sprout and re‐growth with the ditches and roadsides, and promote grasses while keeping these areas more accessible over time. This method would need to be determined and prioritized based GBF preferences.

Priority 3 – Invasive Control (Yaupon)/ Tree Planting ‐ Approximately 24 Acres

These areas primarily situated along Turtle Bayou, north of Highway 563. The yaupon component was determined to be more intrusive within this area and a potential threat to the desired species. The goal for this recommendation will be to reduce all invasive species component, focusing on yaupon, to a level that provides a healthier forest for the remaining, more desirable species and promote increased regeneration and or opportunity for supplemental tree plantings along Turtle Bayou.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 21 of 36

Proposed Treatment Methods Chemical Control (Herbicide) Application

A basal bark herbicide application should be implemented as part of this Priority. Access for the contractor should not be a problem and using this technique would leave no threat from the dead stems.

It should be expected that follow up inspections will need to be made and that subsequent foliar applications may be required to continue control of new growth. This may require multiple treatments to acquire desired results.

AEL recommends the use of Garlon 3A or Garlon 4 be considered as part of this application method and to be applied at the specified labeled rates and at the direction of a certified/licensed applicator.

Tree Planting

Following the control efforts, a thorough review of the treated sites will need to be conducted to determine areas that would benefit from tree plantings. It assumed that a number of openings will be created as a result of this process. These areas will need to be the focus for maximizing the value of the tree plantings. Recommended species include loblolly pine, sweetgum, water oak, live oak, southern red oak, cherrybark oak, post oak, and elm.

Priority 4 – Timber Harvesting – Approximately 126 Acres

Currently, the available merchantable timber is primarily limited to the “Heavy Overstory Pine” stands associated with the Flatwoods classification.

A selective thinning of the merchantable stems per acre could be conducted and would enhance forest health as well as retain the integrity of the existing forest. It would be recommended that a detailed assessment of the timber volumes in these areas be conducted to serve as an aid in harvest planning.

This planning would assist in determining specific harvest criteria.

Based on the intricacy of this project, marking and inventorying each tree for removal would also be recommended. This would greatly help with more accurately marketing the timber for sale and assuring that the right trees are being harvested.

Existing logging sets could be re‐opened and with proper coordination, use this process to assist in establishing proposed trails/roads and re‐open existing roads that are within the proposed thinning areas. Use of the existing logging sets would greatly help in reducing the invasive species that have occupied those sites, and if cleaned properly, make control applications easier for potential reforestation contractors.

No effort was made by AEL to determine the timber value or estimated thinning volumes associated with Priority 4 areas, but notes were made as to the feasibility for timber harvesting. We are considering these sites as a whole, but it should be understood that every acre may not be conducive to thinning operations at this time.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 22 of 36

It should also be noted that to avoid additional soil rutting issues, all harvesting operations should be limited to summer months and only when ground conditions are acceptable for harvesting equipment.

This is especially important on the Flatwoods areas, as the existing rutting has left this site in a condition that holds more water than would normally be seen in non‐rutted flatwoods forests.

It is important for the managers of this forest to realize that the natural tree regeneration found throughout much of this property will be growing and maturing into a dense forest. There will be a need for planned selective harvesting in order to maintain forest health in the near future. Our estimation would be that within a decade, considerations will have to be made about initiating thinning harvests.

AEL foresters believe that this property is going to grow into an excellent mixed pine‐hardwood forest over the next fifteen to twenty years.

Average Current Treatment Cost Estimates

The following are average costs that could be expected to implement the aforementioned treatment techniques. It should be noted, that due/to a lack of available precedence for a specialty project of this size, a 50% increase in pricing has been applied by AEL above the conventional costs. These costs will most likely vary either direction depending on the contractor.

Backpack spraying labor cost ‐ $200 per acre – (foliar, cut treatment, basal bark)

Herbicide cost (No percent increase in cost is applied) Garlon 4 ‐ $68 per gallon Garlon 3A ‐ $58 per gallon Average Cost ‐ $63 per acre (assuming a one‐gallon per acre application rate, herbicide application rates will vary greatly depending upon the density of treated stems) Planting Labor Costs / Acre o Loblolly Pine – Approximately $230 (average of 435 trees / acre) o All Recommended Hardwood Species – Approximately $375 (average of 435 trees / acre) o Average Cost – Approximately $303 / Acre

Bareroot Seedling Costs / 1,000 Seedlings o Loblolly Pine (2nd Generation) – Approximately $55 o All Recommended Hardwood Species (Average Cost) – Approximately $375 o *Average Cost / 1,000 Seedlings – Approximately $215 o *Average Seedling Cost / Acre @ 435 Seedlings / Acre ‐ Approximately $108

Average Total Costs / Acre (Seedlings and Labor) o Bareroot Seedlings – Approximately $108 o Labor – Approximately $303 o Total Estimated Costs – Approximately $411 / Acre *Average costs are based on a 50‐50 split between pine and hardwood species being planted. Costs per acre will vary depending on the species mix identified for any one acre planted and should be taken into account when determining final costs.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 23 of 36

Mulching ‐ $225 Per Acre (Some contractors may require their services be paid on a per hour basis. This could alter the overall per acre costs depending on the vegetation conditions and average production per hour)

Contractor Information AEL makes no particular recommendations; however, an outlet for determining an adequate contractor to complete any of these activities can be researched at the following websites:

Texas Forest Service Vendors List http://tfsfrd.tamu.edu/Vendors/Default.htm

Association of Consulting Foresters (ACF) http://www.acf‐foresters.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 24 of 36

Management Activity/Treatment Implementation Summary

The following bulleted items are a review of the techniques described above and are intended to serve as a quick reference guide for the implementation of each treatment/technique.

Mulching

Timing:

 Operations should be conducted in Late Spring to Early Summer to allow for adequate re‐ sprout time (adequate ground conditions to support equipment are important)

Equipment Needed:

 Medium‐sized tracked machines are recommended but a review of available contractors should be conducted to determine the best fit for the size and location of each mulching operation.

Implementation Parameters:

 Do not mulch vegetation to a ground level but rather at a level of 1 foot above the ground (allows for needed planting access but greatly reduces cost). Mulching into the upper soil layers will provide a seedbed for invasives. There may be locations where loblolly pine regeneration is desired and this condition may be suspended, as mulching low can encourage natural pine seedling establishment  Operations should not be conducted during periods of extremely wet weather to avoid excessive ground rutting and soil disturbance. These adverse impacts could produce issues with planting and tree survival through ground compaction when the soil is saturated.

Recommended Treatment Areas:



 

This vegetation control method is best suited for the larger area removals, site preparation of existing forest openings and creation of new forest openings where desirable forest conditions do not currently exist. Smaller acreage spot treatments may be more economically beneficial to be conducted by hand Focus on Priority 1 Areas, however, this method is conducive for re‐opening trails or other goals that may benefit from this treatment Almost as a hard and fast rule, mulching alone without follow up herbicide treatment will result in a reflush of many more stems per acre than existed prior to mulching.

Estimated Costs:

 $225 per hour, with production rates varying according to vegetation density and the size of the machine, usually being an acre per hour or less. A half‐acre per hour would be more common on most of the thick areas in the Park.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 25 of 36

Foliar Herbicide Application

Timing:



Operations should be conducted Late Summer to Early Fall, or at a scheduled timeframe that allows the site to have adequately re‐sprouted following mechanical mulching or manual brush cutting operations

Equipment:

 Backpack sprayer or possibly a tank mounted on a small motorized vehicle such as an ATV.

Implementation Parameters:



   

A review of the site for desirable species should be conducted prior to any herbicide application to insure proper re‐sprout has occurred and/or to determine if adequate desirable species are already present. This will determine to what intensity and at what rates the herbicide application should be performed Adequate coverage of the entire area targeted for vegetation control should be made with the desired herbicide. Reduce as much as is possible overlap of the herbicide in order to reduce wasted motion, time and herbicide output Contract with a licensed applicator familiar with forestry herbicide applications to conduct the treatment Herbicide labels should be reviewed to insure targeted species are controlled and that proper rates are applied Annual re‐inspections of the treated sites should be conducted to determine that re‐ invasion of the unwanted vegetation has not occurred.

Recommended Treatment Areas:



This technique should be limited to areas where mulching has been conducted in order to obtain adequate coverage and control. This method is not selective therefore; lower priority areas or sites with low intensity management need to be excluded.

Focus on Priority 1 Area or as needed/feasible throughout the property.



Recommended Herbicide:

 Garlon 4 mixed at the specified rates outlined on the label (Attached in Appendix “C”)

Estimated Costs:

Herbicide Costs o Garlon 4 – Approximately $68 per acre (assuming a one‐gallon per acre application rate, herbicide application rates will vary greatly depending upon the density of treated stems)

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 26 of 36

Application Costs o Approximately $200 per acre

Tree Planting

Timing:

 Tree plantings should be conducted in the winter months (December – Early March)

Equipment:

 A reputable Hand Planting contractor should be contacted to conduct this treatment. The needed equipment should be a pre‐requisite in making this selection. A website link to a vendor’s list compiled by the Texas Forest Service is listed above.

Implementation Parameters:



   

 



Bareroot or containerized seedlings are recommended to be hand planted by experienced forestry‐experienced planting vendors obtained from consulting foresters and/or the Texas Forest Service.

Tree orders should be made no less than 6 months prior to planting to insure the species desired are available and delivered as needed Work with the planting contractor prior to planting to lay out how the trees should be planted with species mix and trees per acre being determined before the contract is finalized.

Choose tree species to be ordered from the list shown in above in Species Planting Recommendations Seedlings should not be planted in rows; the planting should be done in a randomized manner yet cover most of the site prepared area to provide tree cover in a more natural manner Establishment of approximately 400‐435 trees per acre (10 foot by 10 foot spacing) is recommended for all species Monitoring of seedling storage and handling prior to planting is a requirement for successful reforestation efforts. Seedlings should be kept in cold storage and should not be taken to the site until the morning of the day they are to be planted. Exposure to sunlight and/or warm temperatures should be avoided at all costs. Seedlings will not survive if they have been exposed to hot and/or dry conditions – they will appear viable as they are planted but will die within a few months. A good contractor will monitor these seedlings themselves, but there should always be a Park representative on site to assure proper handling.

Supervision of the tree planting operation must be conducted by a Park representative to insure the seedlings are properly handled, are planted at the proper depth, that planting holes are closed properly, that the roots are not J‐rooted and that the proper spacing is being achieved with the correct number of trees per acre. Post‐planting checks are useless and do not prevent improper planting techniques. Many detrimental actions can be taken

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 27 of 36

 

before and during a planting operation that can only be prevented and/or detected by contemporaneous observation and supervision.

Volunteers can be implemented as part of this treatment, but again, on a large scale planting scenario, it is recommended a planting vendor is contracted.

If volunteers are used it is important that they are properly trained prior to commencement and that each planted seedling is checked to insure planting quality is achieved. All planting necessities discussed above should also be monitored closely.

Recommended Treatment Areas:



 

This technique should be limited, as much as possible, to areas where tree removals and/or mulching and as herbicide application has occurred. However, exceptions can be made as determined from a site evaluation.

Planting conducted in areas where no immediate vegetation control has been conducted is not recommended and could lower the survival success rates.

Focus on Priority Areas 1, 2, and 3 or Forest Openings not utilized for access.

Estimated Planting Costs:

Labor Costs / Acre o Loblolly Pine – Approximately $230 (average of 435 trees / acre) o All Recommended Hardwood Species – Approximately $375 (average of 435 trees / acre) o Average Cost – Approximately $303 / Acre

Bareroot Seedling Costs / 1,000 Seedlings o Loblolly Pine (2nd Generation) – Approximately $55 o All Recommended Hardwood Species (Average Cost) – Approximately $375 o Average Cost / 1,000 Seedlings – Approximately $250 o Average Seedling Cost / Acre @ 302 Seedlings / Acre ‐ Approximately $100

Average Total Costs / Acre (Seedlings and Labor) o Bareroot Seedlings – Approximately $108 o Labor – Approximately $303 o Total Estimated Costs – Approximately $411 / Acre

Basal Bark Treatment

Timing:



According to the herbicide label, application can occur anytime, including winter months except when snow or water prevents spraying to ground line. However, as stated previously, it is recommended that applications occur in the Spring, Summer or early Fall months. Regardless, refer to the label before application.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 28 of 36

Equipment:

 Backpack sprayer or ATV mounted sprayer fitted with a shut off at the wand and an adjustable nozzle. Spray pressure should not exceed 20‐40 psi.

Implementation Parameters:

 This technique is to be used as a single stem selection method  Apply the herbicide to the lower 12‐15 inches of the bark around the entire stem to the ground level. The herbicide should be sprayed to the point that the bark is wet, but not so much that there is excessive runoff.  DO NOT APPLY when snow or water prevent spraying to ground line.  Herbicide should only be applied to the base of an individual tree targeted for control or elimination.  Trees selected for treatment should not exceed 6 to 8 inches in diameter  Additional herbicide may be required on stems with rough bark than those with smooth.  Contract with a licensed applicator familiar with forestry herbicide applications to conduct the treatment  Herbicide labels should be reviewed to insure targeted species are controlled and that proper rates are applied  Annual re‐inspections of the treated sites should be conducted to determine re‐invasion of the unwanted vegetation has not occurred. If reinvasion has occurred, proper steps should be taken to maintain the sites.  If desired, volunteer help can be used for this process, but only in terms of making a tree selection. Again, it is stressed that volunteers be trained to identify the target species to insure quality control and that residual desirable species are not inadvertently eliminated.

Recommended Treatment Areas:

 Focus this technique on Priority Areas 1, 2, 3

Recommended Herbicide:



Garlon 4 mixed at the specified rates outlined on the label (Attached in Appendix “G”).

Estimated Application Costs:

Herbicide Costs o Garlon 4 – Approximately $68 per acre (assuming a one‐gallon per acre application rate, herbicide application rates will vary greatly depending upon the density of treated stems)

Application Costs o Approximately $200 per acre

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 29 of 36

Hand Felling & Cut Surface Treatment

Timing:

 According to herbicide label, application can occur anytime, including winter months.

However, it is extremely important that each stump is treated immediately following cutting. Although it is not always necessary with each herbicide type as explained below, it is a good practice to commit to and a normal rule of thumb to achieve maximum control

Equipment:

 Heavy‐Duty Tree/Brush Cutters, Backpack sprayer, squirt bottle or even a large brush by painting it on.

Implementation Parameters:

 This technique is to be used as a single stem selection method  Water based (Garlon 3A) herbicide is recommended for this treatment; however, each may require a different application method depending on the herbicide used.

Oil Based (Garlon 4) – Treat the exposed cambium (surface) around the circumference of the tree and the exposed bark on the side of the stump down to the soil line. On larger trees it is recommended that the exposed roots around the stump are treated as well.

Application of the herbicide to the stump can be made any time after cutting, however, not in a situation that might prevent spraying to ground level.

Water Based (Garlon 3A) – Treat only the exposed cambium (surface) next to the bark and around the circumference of the tree stump. It is important that the stump be treated within one hour after cutting. If this is not an option, the oil based herbicide should be used.  Contract with a licensed applicator familiar with forestry herbicide applications to conduct the treatment.  Herbicide labels should be reviewed to insure targeted species are controlled and that proper rates are applied  Annual re‐inspections of the treated sites should be conducted to determine re‐invasion of the unwanted vegetation has not occurred. If reinvasion has occurred, proper steps should be taken to maintain the sites.  If desired, volunteer help can be used for this process, but only in terms of making a tree selection and the actual cutting. Again, it is stressed that volunteers be trained to identify the target species to insure quality control and that residual desirable species are not inadvertently eliminated.  Any and all cutting and felling activities should be treated with the utmost priority in regards to safety and proper measures should be made to educate all individuals who may assist with this process.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 30 of 36

Recommended Treatment Areas:

 Focus this technique on Priority Area 2 or Forest Openings.

Recommended Herbicide:

 Garlon 4 or Garlon 3A mixed at the specified rates outlined on the individual labels (Attached in Appendix 4). Depending on availability, Garlon 3A is recommended over the Garlon 4 due to the water based herbicide infiltrating the cut surface at a more aggressive rate than that of the oil based.

Estimated Application Costs:

Herbicide Costs o Garlon 3A – Approximately $58 per gallon o Garlon 4 – Approximately $68 per gallon Average Cost ‐ $63 per acre (assuming a one‐gallon per acre application rate, herbicide application rates will vary greatly depending upon the density of treated stems)

Application Costs Approximately $200 per acre

NOTE: ALL RATES OUTLINED IN THIS PLAN ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. THESE ARE ONLY ESTIMATES BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH AEL CONTRACTOR CONTACTS AND WERE MADE IN GENERAL TERMS

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 31 of 36

Illustrations of Forest Management Techniques

Mulching Machines

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 32 of 36

Basal Bark Application of Herbicide to Tree Trunk

Cut Surface Treatment of Herbicide to Stump

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 33 of 36

Backpack Sprayer Operation

Mulched Area

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 34 of 36

Hand Planting in Riparian Area on Sand Bars

Hand Planting of Seedlings Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 35 of 36

Citations 1. Jewel Horace Harry, A History of Chambers County (M.A. thesis, University of Texas, 1940; rpt., Dallas: Taylor, 1981). Miriam Partlow, Liberty, Liberty County, and the Atascosito District (Austin: Pemberton, 1974).

2. "LAKE ANAHUAC," Handbook of Texas Online (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/rolaf), accessed February 06, 2015. Uploaded on June 15, 2010. Published by the Texas State Historical Association.

Galveston Bay Foundation – Turtle Bayou Conservation Project – Forest Resource Management Plan Page 36 of 36

Appedix A ‐ Project Figures Figure A Figure B Figure C Figure C‐1 Figure D Figure E Figure F Figure G Figure H Figure I‐1 Figure I‐2 Figure J

Figure K1‐K11

Location Map Tract Boundary Map Stand Map Map of Visited Plots Management Recommendations Map Roads Map Map of Old Well Sites and Logging Set Locations Map of Right‐of‐Ways Noted Infrastructure Map Topographic Map Topographic Map: Drains Soils Map Historical Aerial Maps (1941 – 2012)

5 56

FM

FM 5 56

Cove

80 31

Lost Lake

Old River Lake

10

§ ¨¦ Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project

Lake Charlotte

4

6

FM 563 10

Anahuac

Lake Anahuac

§ ¨¦

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Location Map

Trinity Bay

61

«

8

3 56

2

FM

Cotton Lake

Dutton Lake

0

61

«

61

«

FM 562

61

«

65

«¬

FM 2354

10 Miles

61

«

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the map’s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

65

10

§ ¨¦

«

FM 1724

Old River-Winfree

10

¦¨§ FM

Beach City

2/3/2015

Map Figure A

FM 1724

Mont Belvieu

µ

www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

FM 563

FM 3 180

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Tract Boundary Map

1,000

Map Figure B www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/6/2015

0

d d d d d d

d d d d d d

d d d d d d

d d d d d d

d d d d d d

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

4,000

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

d d d d d d d

Approximate Tract Boundary

Flatwoods Mixed Forest - Heavy Pine Overstory: +/- 22 acres

Flatwoods Forest: +/- 222 acres

Flatwoods Mixed Forest - Moderate Pine Overstory: +/- 96 acres

Flatwoods Mixed Forest - Low Pine Overstory: +/- 69 acres

Flatwoods Pine: +/- 6 acres

Flatwoods Hardwood: +/- 11 acres

Flatwoods Hardwood/Tallow: +/- 6 acres

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

5,000 Feet

Non-Forested: +/- 44 acres

Non-Forested: +/- 44 acres

Invasive: +/- 2 acres

Levee Areas: +/- 137 acres

Turtle Bayou: +/- 19 acres

Turtle Bayou Bottomlands: +/- 158 acres

Terrace Drains: +/- 18 acres

Terrace Hardwood/Tallow: +/- 1 acres

Terrace Hardwood: +/- 4 acres

Terrace Mixed Pine Hardwood: +/- 64 acres

Terrace Forest: +/- 87 acres

d d d d d d d d Flatwoods Hardwood/Tallow (Heavily Rutted): +/- 12 acres

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Stand Map

1,000

Map Figure C-1 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

MN

Âľ

2/6/2015

(!

Plot: 47 29.831773, -94.676009

Plot: 33 29.834204, -94.680909

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

Plot: 20 29.837077, -94.673913

!(

Plot: 54 29.830746, -94.674015

0

(!

!(

!(

Plot: 16 29.837371, -94.671970

!(

!(

Plot: 5 29.838921, -94.668336

!(

(! !(

Plot: 22 29.836333, -94.668516

3,000

Plot: 46 29.831997, -94.671298

Plot: 53 29.830817, -94.670922

1 inch = 1,000 feet

Plot: 68 29.825250, -94.672014

Plot: 39 29.833222, -94.669113

!(

!( Plot: 52 29.830952, -94.673030

!(

2,000

!(

!(

4,000

Plot: 43 29.832557, -94.665907

Plot: 41 29.833019, -94.666105

Plot: 30 29.834932, -94.666251

!(

Plot: 1 29.839054, -94.662094

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Map of Visited Plots

!(

Plot: 45 29.832015, -94.672557

!(

1,000

Map Figure C-2 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

!(

!( !(

Plot: 4 29.838925, -94.661460

!(

Plot: 10 29.838533, -94.660633

Plot: 7 29.838809, -94.658377

Plots Visited During Field Inspection

Approximate Tract Boundary

Plot: 21 29.836637, -94.663120

Plot: 14 29.837758, -94.664110

!( 5,000 Feet

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

µ

2/6/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Management Recommendations Map

1,000

Map Figure D www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

Priority 1 – Trifoliate Orange Thicket Control (Mechanical Mulching, Herbicide Application, Tree Planting): +/- 31 acres

Priority 2/2A – Invasive Control / Tree Planting in High Visibility Areas (Herbicide Application, Tree Planting): +/- 63 acres

Priority 3 – Invasive Control (Yaupon)/ Tree Planting (Herbicide Application, Tree Planting): +/- 24 acres

Priority 4 – Timber Harvesting: +/- 126 acres

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the map’s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/6/2015

0

e

d Gra n s

Propo

o

a il

and L

oo p

Pr op e os

dG

Tra il 2,000

3,000

www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

Map Figure E

1 inch = 1,000 feet

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Roads Map

dL

1,000

op Tr

NE Old

Trail

Approximate Tract Boundary

Road (existing, open)

Road (existing but needs to be reopened)

Trail (existing but needs to be reopened)

Trail (proposed)

Fire Lane Road (proposed)

Streams/Drainage 5,000 Feet

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

r

µ

2/4/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Map of Old Well Sites and Logging Set Locations

1,000

Map Figure F www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

Old Logging Set

Old Well Site

Old Well/Tank Site

Th is map wa s g en era te d by Bi rd For estry u sing G IS (G eo gra ph ical Informa tion Syste m) software . No cla ims are m ade to th e accura cy o r comp leten ess of the data d ep icte d in this ma p or to the ma p’s suitab ility fo r a par ti cu lar u se.

Th e in fo rmatio n de picted m ay co ntai n ina ccu ra ci es and is p rovid ed "as is".

MN

µ

2/4/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Map of Right-of-Ways

1,000

Map Figure G www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

Power Line/Pipeline ROW

Pipeline ROW

Power Line ROW

Th is map wa s g en era te d by Bi rd For estry u sing G IS (G eo gra ph ical Informa tion Syste m) software . No cla ims are m ade to th e accura cy o r comp leten ess of the data d ep icte d in this ma p or to the ma p’s suitab ility fo r a par ti cu lar u se.

Th e in fo rmatio n de picted m ay co ntai n ina ccu ra ci es and is p rovid ed "as is".

MN

µ

2/4/2015

0

_[

d [ d [

2,000

")

1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Noted Infrastructure Map

û ûû 1,000

Map Figure H www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

")

d [ _[

û

Approximate Tract Boundary

Road (existing, open)

Road (existing but needs to be reopened)

Drainage Ditch

Old Building

Old Boat Landing

Deer Stand Rip Rap 5,000 Feet

Th is map wa s g en era te d by Bi rd For estry u sing G IS (G eo gra ph ical Informa tion Syste m) software . No cla ims are m ade to th e accura cy o r comp leten ess of the data d ep icte d in this ma p or to the ma p’s suitab ility fo r a par ti cu lar u se.

Th e in fo rmatio n de picted m ay co ntai n ina ccu ra ci es and is p rovid ed "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/6/2015

Base Map: USGS

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Topographic Map

1,000

Map Figure I-1 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/6/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Topographic Map: Drains

1,000

Map Figure I-2 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

Streams/Drainage

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

W

µ

HarA

Approximate Tract Boundary Soil Divisions

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2014 NAIP Soils: USDA NRCS

0

DylC

2,000

EvdA

W

VamA

DylC

3,000

4,000

5,000 Feet

EvdA

VamA

VamA

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the map’s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

SovA

TelB

DylC

KanA

DylC

TelB

MN

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI EvdA DylC Dylan clay, 3 to 5 percent slopes 107.2 HarA Harris clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, frequently flooded, tidal 156.6 TelB KanA Kaman clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, frequently flooded 0 VamA Vamont clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes 250.2VamA W Water (greater than 40 acres in size) 1.5 Totals for Area of Interest 515.5

1 inch = 1,000 feet

HarA

VamA

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres Soils Map

1,000

Map Figure J www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2012 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2012 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-1 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2010 HGAC

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2010 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-2 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2009 TOP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2009 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-3 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2008 TOP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2008 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-4 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2006 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2006 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-5 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2005 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2005 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-6 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 2004 NAIP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 2004 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-7 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 1996 TOP

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 1996 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-8 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 1970 USDA (TNRIS CIAP)

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 1970 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-9 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

USDA, TNRIS

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 1960 USGS

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 1960 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-10 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Âľ

2/3/2015

Imagery: 1941 USDA (TNRIS CIAP)

0

2,000 1 inch = 1,000 feet

3,000

4,000

Galveston Bay Foundation Turtle Bayou Land Conservation Project: +/- 511 acres 1941 Aerial Map

1,000

Map Figure K-11 www.birdforestry.com (936) 598-3053

5,000 Feet

USDA, TNRIS

Approximate Tract Boundary

This map was generated by Bird Forestry using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the data depicted in this map or to the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s suitability for a particular use.

The information depicted may contain inaccuracies and is provided "as is".

MN

Appedix B ‐ Tables APPENDIX B – TABLES Table 1 Table 2

Forest Assessment Plot Level Data Forest Assessment Stand Level Data

Stand Description

Flatwoods Terrace Terrace Terrace Terrace Flatwoods Flatwoods Terrace Terrace Flatwoods Terrace Flatwoods Flatwoods Flatwoods Flatwoods Bottomland Heavy Rutting Flatwoods Flatwoods Flatwoods Terrace Bottomland

Plot #

14 1 4 10 7 16 20 33 47 54 52 39A 46 53 45 68 21 5 22 30 41 43

Sweetgum Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Water Oak Trifoliate Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Sugarberry Tallow Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Loblolly Baldcypress

Dom. Species

% Understory

Visual Observations 90% 100% 30% 10% 50% 50% 30% 80% 90% 90% 30% 60% 40% 40% 40% 90% 20% 90% 90% 90% 20% 60% 70% 90% 10% 100% 90% 30% 80% 60% 50% 20% 90% 75% 80% 80% 30% 50% 75% 70% 40% 90% 40% 30%

% Midstory

Low

Low Low Low High Low Low Medium Low Medium High Medium Low Low

Low Low

Tallow Medium Low Low

Low Low Medium Medium High Low

High Medium Low Low High Low Medium

Yaupon Low Medium Medium Medium Low Low

High

High High Low Low

Trifoliate

Occurrence

Low

Privet 30 70 70 60 30 60 60 55 30 25 40 15 60 15 40 35 18 65 50 65 60 55

Dominate Height (ft)

Table 1. Galveston Bay Foundation - Turtle Bayou Conservation Project - Forest Assessment Plot Level Data

89

14 41 17 20 1 6 4

41

2 28

1

2

8

10

4

4 2 8 5

1 20 6 1

76

1 5

28

10 3 39

87

2 10

1

8 25

7 5 28 8

63

2 3

8

16 9 29 12

65

1 4

14

20 4 38 4

43

1 30

1

3

4 4

33

64

50 1

2

7

4

47

74

6

2

26

54 1 35 4

45

4

4 2

52 1 21 13

Plot

56

1

9 5

39A 12 18 11

67

30 1

46 14 19 3

67

1

2

53 11 32 21

85

8

1 5

15 9

45 2 34 11

1 34

7 14 1

1

10

68

91

13 72 1 2 3

21

36

1

5 1 15 10 1 2 6

45

1

1 1

6 7

22 5 16 8

Table 2. Galveston Bay Foundation - Turtle Bayou Conservation Project - Forest Assessment Stem Level Data

21 1/20 th Acre

*Exhibit C has been withheld from this document and can be made available upon request.

Sweetgum Loblolly Pine Tallowtree Southern Red Oak Yaupon Laurel Oak Baldcypress Red Oak Water Oak Post Oak Magnolia Palmetto Live Oak Trifoliate Sugarberry Cherrybark Oak Honeylocust Mesquite Sesbania Cedar Elm Blackgum Red Cedar TOTAL TREES PER PLOT

Species

Plots Taken: Plot Size:

44

1

1

13 10

30 1 16 2

69

10

1

3

7 30

41 13 5

40

9

1

12 7 11

43

1

Galveston Bay Foundation

Turtle Bayou Nature Preserve

Natural Resources Management and Public Access Plan

1

Galveston Bay Foundation 17330 Highway 3 Webster, TX 77598

1

Galveston Bay Foundation