Considerations for Establishing and Maintaining Successful Pollinator Programs on Airports (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

3   Over the past several decades, the public has become increasingly aware of the critical role that wild and managed bees play in the pollination of native plants and food crops. However, wild and managed bees are threatened by a number of interacting factors, including pests, pathogens, pesti- cide exposure, and habitat loss. Global reports of the decline of wild pollinator populations and loss of managed honeybee colonies have fueled strong public engagement. This has led to a number of local, national, and international policies and actions to conserve bee populations (Bryne and Fitzpatrick 2009; Hall and Steiner 2019). These actions include work to support wild species of bees (there are 4,000 species in the United States alone) through the restoration of habitat and reduction of pesticide use. Other programs can bring public awareness and appreciation to these fascinating insects by hosting managed hives of honeybees (Apis mellifera). Airports have been establishing pollinator-friendly practices and programs since 1999 and possibly earlier. Despite these long-standing efforts, there are few current sources of information that airport administrators and other interested parties can consult to understand how to develop and manage pollinator programs. Guidelines that review the costs and challenges of developing these programs at airports would be useful. This report synthesizes published literature and case examples of pollinator-friendly programs at select airports, including lessons in habitat man- agement learned by state departments of transportation (DOTs). The report was developed by compiling existing resources and conducting interviews with airport operators, beekeepers, and other land managers. It synthesizes the collected experiences and best management practices of pollinator-friendly programs designed to improve habitat and forage for native and managed pollinators and beekeeping programs that serve to engage the public. The report also discusses the unique challenges airports face in assuring that their programs do not create an attractant to hazardous wildlife. Throughout the report, readers will find specific case examples that highlight the achievements of and lessons learned by staff at airports in the following National Plan of Inte- grated Airport Systems (NPIAS) categories: medium hub, large hub, general aviation, reliever, and regional. Airports are represented within the following FAA regions: Great Lakes, Northwest Mountain, Southern, and Eastern. Two international airports in Canada are also represented. The intended audience of this synthesis includes the following: airport staff and stakeholders, beekeepers, conservationists, and other interested parties. Figure 1 shows beekeepers at work at Seattle–Tacoma International Airport. 1.1 Scope of Study This synthesis is divided into nine chapters and includes six appendices. Case examples are provided throughout the report to highlight specific programs that demonstrate the concepts presented in the chapters. C H A P T E R 1 Introduction

4 Considerations for Establishing and Maintaining Successful Pollinator Programs on Airports Chapter 1 gives an overview of pollinator-friendly programming at airports. The benefits of these programs and the types of programs adopted by airports are also briefly discussed. This chapter also provides definitions for some terms commonly used throughout the report (refer to the glossary for additional definitions). This chapter also outlines the methodologies used to develop this synthesis report. Chapter 2 provides details on the history of pollinator-friendly programs at airports, including their origins and an overview of current programs at the time of writing. This chapter also summa- rizes the common goals of these programs. Chapter 3 provides detailed information on the surveys conducted to develop this synthesis, including the participating airports, DOTs, and beekeepers as well as the common themes dis- covered through the surveys and follow-up discussions with these participants. Chapter 4 delves into the most common type of pollinator-friendly program implemented by airports: beekeeping. This chapter discusses how these programs can be developed, the typical relationship model established with beekeepers who manage the colonies, and important logistic and environmental considerations for establishing these types of programs. Chapter 5 discusses a less common but highly effective program employed by some airports and many other land managers: the establishment of pollinator habitat. This chapter describes the ways airports interact with their land holdings and provides examples of how some airports modify these practices to support pollinators. It also provides lessons learned from state DOTs that can be applied to airports. Chapter 6 discusses the operational issues, liabilities, and ways to mitigate potential hazards of pollinator-friendly programs at airports. This chapter also discusses wildlife hazard management. Recent literature suggests that hosting managed honeybee colonies may result in disease spillover or competition among pollinator populations. This chapter summarizes the research on this topic so airport staff can make informed decisions that fulfill the airport’s sustainability goals while mitigating possible negative consequences. Chapter 7 provides information on opportunities that can aid in the development or expansion of pollinator-friendly programs. Figure 1. Beekeepers (left to right) John Woodworth, David Feinberg, and Bob Redmond assess the potential honey harvest at the Flight Path Project at Seattle– Tacoma International Airport (Source: © Rod Hatfield for The Common Acre, used with permission).

Introduction 5   Chapter 8 identifies the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders as well as critical resources needed to establish pollinator-friendly programs at airports. The chapter also outlines the various financing models and demonstrates the wide range of funding sources available to airports at all budget levels. Chapter 9 briefly summarizes the major conclusions of this synthesis and identifies areas in which further research is needed. The following appendices can be found at the end of this report: • Appendix A contains a list of participating airports that have agreed to be listed by name. • Appendix B is the questionnaire given to the participating airports, DOTs, and beekeepers surveyed for this report. • Appendix C provides a checklist and list of resources for beginning a beekeeping program. • Appendix D provides sample beekeeping agreements. • Appendix E presents a list of resources as well as a checklist for adopting programs that involve land management changes to support pollinators. • Appendix F provides information on funding sources that support pollinator-related programs and projects. 1.2 Definitions Apiary – A collection of managed honeybee colonies. Beekeeper – A person who manages honeybee colonies. A beekeeper’s activities include (but are not limited to) controlling the population to prevent swarming, ensuring that bee colonies have a healthy queen and a sufficient supply of eggs and larvae, assessing and treating for pests and disease, harvesting honey, and preparing colonies for overwintering. Colony – A social group of bees consisting of a single queen, hundreds of male drones, and 20,000 to 80,000 female worker bees. Honeybee colonies also include developing eggs, larvae, and pupae. Hive – The domicile of a honeybee colony. Langstroth is the most common type of managed hive. These are typically made of wood and consist of human-made boxes with removable frames that contain the comb, eggs, larvae, pollen, and nectar or honey. Honeybee – A species of domesticated bee (European or Western honeybee, scientific name Apis mellifera) introduced to North America in the 18th century for honey production. Upon introduction, the honeybee escaped domestication and become widely naturalized throughout the environment. Naturalized or wild honeybees are far less prevalent today as a result of the impacts of pests and disease. Today, the honeybee is the most environmentally important managed bee in the world. The vast majority of honeybees in North America now exist as agri- cultural livestock managed for crop pollination and honey. Preventing and treating for pests and disease is among the top challenges for managing today’s domesticated honeybees. Pollinator – Anything that helps carry pollen from the male part of the flower to the female part of the same or different flower—including wind, water, and animals. The movement of pollen is required for a plant to become fertilized and produce fruits, seeds, and offspring. Animal pollination, particularly by insect species, is considered the most effective and efficient way to achieve plant reproduction. Wild and native bees – There are 4,000 species of native bees in the United States, most of which are solitary and nest in the ground or in cavities. Unlike wasps or hornets, which feed meat to their developing offspring, bees are vegan throughout their lives and feed their young a combination

6 Considerations for Establishing and Maintaining Successful Pollinator Programs on Airports of pollen and nectar from flowering plants. Most native bees are plant specialists and require just one or a few plant species for sustenance. In North America, honeybees are an introduced (not native) bee species. Hazardous Wildlife – This category includes birds, mammals, and reptiles (including domes- ticated animals that are feral or not under control) that may pose a direct hazard to aviation (e.g., strike risk to aircraft), an indirect hazard (e.g., attracting other wildlife that poses a strike hazard), or cause structural damage to airport facilities (e.g., burrowing, nesting, perching). [FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33] Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) – This assessment identifies and describes wildlife hazards and attractants (whether known, suspected, or previously unknown) on or near an airport to determine if mitigation measures are needed. [FAA AC 150/5200-38] Wildlife Hazard Management Plan – This plan is developed after a WHA is reviewed by the FAA and is intended to minimize the risk to aviation safety, airport structures, equipment, or human health posed by populations of hazardous wildlife on and around an airport. Such plans identify the management techniques, resources, supplies, and training of appropriate personnel needed. [FAA AC 150/5200-38] Figure 2 shows beehives that are part of the beekeeping program at Sea-Tac Airport. 1.3 Background Through their pollination services, native and managed bees are responsible for one in every three bites of food people eat and are critical to the reproduction and survival of over 75% of all plant species in North America (Committee on the Status of Pollinators in North America 2007; Ollerton et al. 2011). Global reports of managed and wild pollinator declines have underlined the need for programs and actions that will protect these important insects and improve public awareness (Potts et al. 2010; Zattara and Aizen 2021). For airports that elect to establish pollinator- friendly programs, these actions may serve to improve public relations, provide community engagement opportunities, expand sustainability profiles, and establish the airport as an environ- mentally responsible land manager. There are two primary types of pollinator-friendly programs employed by airports: beekeeping programs and pollinator habitat programs. Figure 2. A row of honeybee hives in one of the apiaries located at Sea-Tac Airport, Washington state (Source: © Rod Hatfield for The Common Acre, used with permission).

Introduction 7   1.3.1 Beekeeping Programs The most common type of pollinator-friendly program employed by the airports surveyed and researched for this report is the beekeeping program. These programs involve the active manage- ment of honeybee colonies by a local beekeeper contracted to maintain them on airport lands. These programs benefit airports by enhancing community outreach, providing educational oppor- tunities for staff members and the public, and providing positive public relations opportunities. 1.3.2 Pollinator Habitat Programs By establishing pollinator habitat programs, airports preserve and enhance the landscape around the airport to provide food and habitat for pollinators such as bees. This type of program benefits airports by providing positive public relations opportunities as well as establishing the airport as an environmentally responsible land manager. These programs also have the potential to reduce maintenance costs. These types of programs complement beekeeping programs since improving habitat and forage benefits both wild pollinator species and managed honeybee hives. Figure 3 shows a pollinator habitat at Austin–Bergstrom International Airport in Texas. 1.4 Study Methodology This synthesis report was compiled through an extensive review of existing published litera- ture as well as interviews with airport operations staff, beekeepers, and DOTs. The interviews consisted of: • Participant identification; • Online questionnaires to collect preliminary information about the programs; and • Follow-up virtual interviews, each lasting approximately 50 minutes. 1.4.1 Literature Review Research for this project began with traditional literature searches through the Transportation Research Board’s Transport Research International Documentation (TRID) database (https:// Figure 3. Wildflower fields located at Austin– Bergstrom International Airport (Source: AUS, used with permission).

8 Considerations for Establishing and Maintaining Successful Pollinator Programs on Airports trid.trb.org), publications databases, university libraries, and online. Database and online searches resulted in a large number of resources and peer-reviewed articles focused on establishing pollinator habitat. Unfortunately, very few of these focused directly on airports and the unique challenges they face in balancing land stewardship with safety and wildlife hazard mitigation. However, many of the principles developed by managers of large tracts of land (e.g., DOTs, utility companies) can be applied to airports. No peer-reviewed articles focusing specifically on beekeeping programs at airports were found, but there were numerous online magazine and news articles as well as press releases about airport beekeeping programs. These articles were largely public relations pieces highlighting the achievements of individual airports and the histories of specific programs. They did not discuss the limitations, challenges, and considerations involved in developing the programs. For the unique challenges facing airports in managing land for pollina- tors and developing beekeeping programs, this synthesis report relies on data gathered through an online questionnaire and in-person, telephone, and virtual interviews with study participants. 1.4.2 Survey Since the literature search revealed limited useful information, this study relied on outreach to airports and DOTs for empirical information. Participant Identification Participants were identified through the collective industry knowledge of the ACRP project panel and project team members who work closely with airports. An online research effort was also conducted to identify airports with pollinator-friendly programs. Participants in the online survey included 10 airports, five beekeeping operations at five participating airports, and four DOTs. In addition to these core participants, short phone interviews were conducted with two additional airports and several FAA officials. Online Survey To collect baseline data on pollinator-friendly programs at airports, an online survey was devel- oped and distributed via email to participants; these included airport staff, beekeepers coordi- nating with airports, and staff at DOTs with pollinator-friendly objectives. The questionnaire consisted of up to 34 questions; the participants responded to those relevant to the type of program represented and their role in it (see Appendix B). The survey was shared with 21 participants. Nine- teen participant responses (90.5%) were received. Virtual Interviews After reviewing responses to the survey, a list of follow-up questions was compiled for each participating entity to learn additional details about their pollinator-friendly programs. A 50- to 60-minute virtual interview was scheduled with participants; each was provided a list of follow-up questions prior to the interview to help with preparation. Participants were asked to invite other organizational members and stakeholders who would be helpful in answering follow-up ques- tions to the interview. For airports that collaborated with external beekeepers, beekeepers were also invited to join the interviews. Virtual interviews were conducted via Zoom and recorded with the participants’ consent for the purposes of notetaking. After each call, the project team followed up with participants and asked for photographs, data, reports, documents, and any other informa- tion that would help describe and illustrate the workings of their programs. Permission was received from participants for any documents and photographs published in this report. A total of 13 virtual interviews were conducted with representatives from 10 airports (five of which were also attended by collaborating beekeepers) and three DOTs. Three shorter supplemental inter- views were conducted with representatives of three additional airports. Interviews at airports were attended by a variety of staff, including senior airport planners, wildlife biologists, public affairs and communications staff, program managers, and administrators.