When Your Project Warrants Consultation Introduction Purpose To provide a consistent framework for designated NRCS field and State office staff to successfully consult with the US Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS ID: 697702
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Threatened and Endangered Species" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Threatened and Endangered Species
When Your Project Warrants ConsultationSlide2
Introduction
Purpose
To
provide a consistent framework
for designated NRCS
field and State office staff to
successfully
consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS
).
Objectives
To fulfill our our legal obligations to conserve protected species as directed by regulation and NRCS policy.
To facilitate an efficient process for
conserving protected
species.
To establish successful criteria for consulting with the USFWS.
To
ensure our decisions are sound, well documented, and communicated throughout the organization.Slide3
Laws and Regs
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Umbrella
policy established to ensure federal agencies thoroughly evaluate impacts to the human environment.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Our legal driver for protecting species—”Special Environmental Concerns.”Slide4
Policy Refresher
NRCS Policy
General Manual sets forth guidelines for how NRCS will comply with NEPA (e.g.,
190-GM, Part 410, Subpart B, Section 410.22E
)
NECH, 190-NECH, Part 610, Subpart C, Section 610.26: Overview of NRCS “Special Environmental Concerns,” and NRCS Policy:
Endangered & Threatened Species (ESA) and Species of Concern
.
CPA-52
is our tool to evaluate and document environmental affects associated with our actions.Slide5
NRCS Policy
Protected Species and State’s Responsibilities:
190-GM, Subpart
B, Section
410.22F(6)(vi)
directs the State Conservationist to “[w]
ork
with the appropriate regulatory entities to establish streamlined regulatory processes and minimize the need for site-specific consultation.”
For example, develop a Section 7, Programmatic Consultation (PC) with the ServicesSlide6
Section 7, Programmatic Consultation
Streamlined NRCS environmental evaluations (EE) by programmatically evaluating and determining effects for many species under a suite of disturbance categories.
Pre-determined
“No Effect”, and some “May Effect” decisions that would otherwise prompt consultation with the USFWS.
State participation in the process also allowed for some streamlining of State-listed species; however, most were not evaluated.Slide7
Section 7, Programmatic Consultation
So, the PC is an efficient and appropriate decision-making tool.
Nevertheless, the PC was no developed to cover all situations or all species.
Future consultations inevitableSlide8
Need For Action
Land uses have changed, often involving greater quantities of land.
For example, forested areas in Iowa are being manipulated at greater rates than were anticipated during the development of the PC.
A number of proposed actions exceed effects determinations (thresholds).Slide9
Need For Action
Ironically, changes in scientific knowledge and capabilities suggest that the current effects determinations may prematurely trigger consultation.
For example, sinkhole and
algific
slopes, and brush and tree management related to grazing.
Perceived or actual workflow bottlenecks more likely.
The field has requested authority to become more directly involved, as was the case prior to the PCSlide10
RecapSlide11
How to Proceed?
FIRST
:
Be willing to
d
ecentralize the processSlide12
How to Proceed?
Second:
Establish a sound protocol
Competent Practitioners
Training and experience
Consistent Decision-Making
Planning guides, NRCS handbooks, decision trees, templates.
Communicate
Develop a “consultation library” to transmit knowledge throughout the organization.Slide13
How to Proceed?
Third:
Designate and Collaborate
Designated field staff
ARCs, Area Biologists, Private-lands Biologists, people that “know stuff” or are willing to learn.
Notification to the State Office
State Conservationist is still on the hook and holds the State Biologist accountable for the overall program.
Notification on all correspondence facilitates communication.
Collaborate on big stuff
State Biologist is in a position to assist when things get complicated.Slide14
Case Study
ESA Section 7
Programmatic ConsultationSlide15
Scenario
A
USDA Program participant (Landowner) in
Mahaska
County wants to
increase his forage capacity and quality for livestock grazing under an EQIP agreement.
The
subject land consists of
30
acres of
mature forest, pasture,
and
old–field that have been overcome by trees and brush.
The
Landowner intends to
conduct “woody habitat manipulation” to open the canopy during the Summer when has less constraints on his time. (MA, LAA)
In addition to avoiding all habitat trees (hickories and snags), he proposes to retain all trees >12” DBH. (Conservation Measure/Mitigation).
NRCS field staff conducted a site visit to assess habitat potential for the endangered Indiana bat. A second site visit was conducted after the initial assessment indicated a number of factors that could mitigate impacts currently viewed as May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect the Indiana bat.
Heterogeneous forest composition and structure
Clustering of habitat treesSlide16Slide17
Challenges
The extent and timing of the proposal kicks this project out of consideration under the PC.
Field
: Consult State Biologist—Oh No!!!
State Biologist
: Work with field staff and landowner to reduce impacts OR consult with USFWS—Oh No!!!
Landowner—Must do the work in the Summer.
USFWS—Ok, but let’s conduct a survey to assist in determining presence/possible absence.
Landowner—liability?
USFWS—Ah Ha: Old forests are core habitat!Slide18
PC Evolves
The PC
catagorically
declaires
all forests containing snags and hickories; and which have >
35% canopy
cover, are not isolated, and proximate to water as protected habitat—nearly all wooded areas in Indiana bat counties?
The literature casts doubt on this interpretation.
Informal consultation between NRCS and USFWS results in greater clarification.Slide19Slide20Slide21Slide22Slide23Slide24Slide25Slide26Slide27
Elements of a Successful Proposal
Complete Project Description
Complete List of Affected Protected Species
What’s affected and How
Clear Depiction of Avoidance and Minimization
Substantiate Your Determination
Use of Species-Specific
InformationSlide28
Consultation Resources
PC Switchboard
Species lists
Links to a number of reference sites
Consultation Library (state-wide shared drive)
Previous decisions are useful in future cases.
Planning guides (
NatureServe
)
Meta-analysis of what is known about a species.
NRCS handbooks
GM
NECH
NPPHSlide29Slide30Slide31
NatureServe
Meta-Analysis of research conducted on several thousand species.
Describes a number of factors critical the understanding and management of species.
Ecology and Life History
Management Consideration
Separation Distances
Ongoing effort as not all is known, yet.
Primary basis for “
Planning Guides
.”
Fact sheets are informational, but often too simplistic for NRCS purposes.Slide32
Thank You!
httpkrittergirlkorner.blogspot.com201007extinct-critters-dodo.html