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.

16 This chapter provides an overview of the airports, DOTs, and beekeeping operations that host or maintain pollinator-friendly programs and responded to the Pollinator Programs at Airports and DOTs Survey (referred to herein as the “survey” and included as Appendix B), as well as those airports, DOTs, and beekeeping operations that subsequently participated in a virtual interview to collect more information regarding their survey responses. This chapter also summarizes common themes from the surveys and interviews related to pollinator programs and their operations. 3.1 Airports, Departments of Transportation, and Beekeeping Operations Surveyed Table 4 lists the airports, DOTs, and beekeeping operations that completed the survey and those that also participated in a subsequent interview. 3.2 Common Themes from Participants’ Survey Responses and Interviews The results of the survey and interviews provided a substantial amount of information regarding the initiation and implementation of pollinator-friendly programs. This section summarizes common themes from the survey responses and interviews. Case studies throughout the report highlight specific programs, achievements, and lessons learned. 1. Productive partnerships between airports and beekeeping operations enhance airport sustainability programs without burdening airport staff. Ten of the 13 participating air- ports had hosted beekeeping operations on or near airport property, but none of the airport respondents indicated that the program had required new airport staff or placed a substantial amount of additional work on existing staff in order to maintain it. According to the airport respondents, the key to this had been to partner with a beekeeping operation or beekeeper who was experienced, trustworthy, and could communicate effectively. This common theme, along with case examples, is further described in Chapter 4. 2. Beekeeping programs can reduce swarms and wildlife hazards at airports. There are several potential liabilities related to hosting honeybees on or near airport property. The threat of bee swarms landing on airplanes or elsewhere on airfields is a particular safety concern for both passengers and airport staff; this could deter some airports from implementing on-site beekeeping operations. However, of the airport respondents with beekeeping programs that participated in this study, the vast majority reported that their beekeeping programs had reduced issues with swarms. Respondents believed that this was primarily because having a connection with a beekeeper through an airport’s beekeeping program provided a new C H A P T E R 3 Survey Responses

Survey Responses 17   resource to airports that enabled the removal of swarms in a faster, more responsible way. In several instances, beekeepers had set up swarm traps near the airfields and had subsequently relocated captured swarms into the beekeeping program’s apiaries. This common theme, along with case examples, is further described in Chapter 4. 3. Reduced mowing practices decrease maintenance costs and improve the quality and avail- ability of pollinator habitat. All of the DOTs and several of the airports that participated in this study had altered their land management and mowing practices to increase pollinator forage availability on otherwise underutilized land. All reported that reducing the frequency of mowing the grass in and around a designated pollinator habitat provided an easy and effective strategy to improve the quality of forage and had the potential to decrease associated landscaping and maintenance costs. In addition, protecting or enhancing pollinator habitat resulted in increased pollinator diversity and increased forage for managed honeybee hives. This common theme is further described along with case examples in Chapter 5. 4. Public engagement opportunities associated with pollinator-friendly programs can improve public relations for airports and DOTs. Nearly all of the airport and DOT respon- dents who participated in the study indicated that their pollinator-friendly programs, whether a beekeeping operation or a pollinator habitat, had contributed toward improved public relations between the airport or DOT and its surrounding communities through new Entity Participated in Survey Participated in Interview Airports Austin–Bergstrom International Airport (AUS) - X* Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD) X X Centennial Airport (APA) X X Dayton International Airport (DAY) - X* Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW) X X Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) - X* Indianapolis International Airport (IND) X X Minneapolis–Saint Paul International Airport (MSP) X X Montréal–Mirabel International Airport (YMX) X X Olympia Regional Airport (OLM) X X Orlando International Airport (MCO) X X Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT) X X Seattle–Tacoma International Airport (SEA) X X Departments of Transportation Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) X X Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) X X Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) X - Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) X X Beekeeping Operations Happy Busy Bees (Denver, CO) X X Meadow Sweet Apiaries (Pittsburgh, PA) X Olympia Beekeepers Association (Olympia, WA) X The Common Acre (Seattle, WA) X University of Minnesota Bee Squad (Minneapolis, MN) X White Lick Beekeepers Association (Mooresville, IN) X X X X - X *Supplemental interviews conducted. Table 4. Airports, DOTs, and beekeeping operations surveyed and interviewed.

18 Considerations for Establishing and Maintaining Successful Pollinator Programs on Airports opportunities for public engagement. The airports and DOTs leveraged a variety of public engagement opportunities, including full-day events, art exhibitions, new environmental programs, educational tours, public outreach through news stories and social media, and the sale, auctioning, and sampling of honey generated by on-site beekeeping operations. This common theme, along with case examples, is further described in Chapter 7. 5. Pollinator-friendly programs are possible with a wide variety of budgets and funding models. The budgets and funding models for pollinator-friendly programs at airports and DOTs varied greatly, depending on the size of the program, stakeholders involved, and goals. In the case of beekeeping programs, collaboration with commercial beekeepers or volunteer groups resulted in several programs in which no money was exchanged. These programs also tended to result in a small amount of revenue for the airport through the leasing of land. Some programs opted to hire beekeepers to manage hives and provide educational opportunities to staff and the public. For programs focused on habitat restoration, funding was required for trialing and establishing pollinator-friendly seed mixes or plantings. Funding sources could include operating budgets, grants, commercial sales, or the provision of pollinator-friendly programs in association with larger state- or federally funded environmental remediation projects. This common theme, along with case examples, is further described in Chapter 8.