Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 1: Alaska (2023)

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.

A-1 Appendix A Decision Support for Compliance with the Endangered Species Act: Listed Pollinators If there is a listed pollinator species in the area that will impact a project or general work, the questions below can help in developing proactive strategies as alternatives to the more traditional Section 7 consultation when dealing with listed species. Select as many questions as apply. Under the proposed project, is “take” (impact) of a listed species reasonably certain to occur, and is the project proponent a non-federal entity? If so, consider complying with the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) through Section 10, a voluntary process, and developing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in order to maintain more control of the outcome while investing a reasonable amount of time and resources upfront and overseeing the process through to the end. Go Further: The HCP is the applicant’s document, so the applicant can control its content and approach. In addition, the Section 10 permit process allows for coverage of non-listed species under an HCP and provides No Surprises assurances throughout the duration of the permit. This can be advantageous for long-term planning. Species likely to become listed over the permit duration, if covered by the HCP, require no new restrictions if the species becomes listed as long as the permittee is properly implementing the HCP and Incidental Take Permit. Is the potential presence of listed species in or adjacent to existing rights-of-way preventing investment in roadside vegetation management strategies that could otherwise improve roadside habitat for pollinators? If so, consider use of a Safe Harbor Agreement (SHA) to provide formal assurances that future land use restrictions would not result from investment in management activities that increase habitat value and/or the local abundance of the listed species covered under the permits. Go Further: Recognized conservation actions benefiting listed species under a SHA include development and testing of new habitat management techniques. Under this experimental component of the agreement, new management activities can be developed and inform conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under a Recovery Crediting System (RCS). Management actions undertaken through a SHA can be transferred to an RCS following termination of the SHA. For a specific geography or project, are there multiple listed species expected to be impacted, or a single listed species? If there are multiple listed species, consider investing in a compliance strategy, such as an HCP, wherein different conservation measures can be bundled together to provide regulatory coverage for take of a number of listed species under a single permit.

Appendix A. Decision Support for Compliance with the Endangered Species Act: Listed  Pollinators A-2 Go Further: HCPs are the most comprehensive compliance strategy available to non- federal parties to conserve the ecosystems and natural processes upon which listed species depend, ultimately contributing to their recovery. HCPs can apply to both listed and non-listed species, including those that are candidates or have been proposed for listing. Conservation measures implemented under other identified compliance strategies can be transferred or rolled-up to an HCP. Are there established recovery plans for the listed species of interest? If so, the conservation actions identified in the recovery plan provide a framework from which to build an appropriate and recognizable conservation strategy to be implemented under an RCS. Go Further: Conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under an approved RCS can be expanded in scope to address pollinator species proposed for listing or candidates for listing on non-federal land through development of a Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances (CCAA). Implementation of management activities identified under a CCAA that complements an existing RCS allows for provisioning of more comprehensive regulatory coverage from a multispecies context. Are some of the suggested changes to maintenance activities to benefit listed pollinators also viewed as potential cost-saving measures? If so, creation of a SHA allows for transportation agencies to invest in maintenance activities that may result in cost savings, such as shifting the timing and frequency of mowing, but also real benefits to pollinators without fear of retribution for attracting or increasing the amount or distribution of the listed species on managed lands. Go Further: Recognized conservation actions benefiting listed species under a SHA include development and testing of new habitat management techniques. Under this experimental component of the agreement, new management activities can be developed and inform conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under an RCS. Management actions undertaken through a SHA can be transferred to an RCS following termination of the SHA. Are the same listed or at-risk species likely to be impacted by reoccurring construction or management activities? If listed or at-risk species are likely to be continually impacted by future activities, investing early in development of an HCP, if there are multiple species deserving coverage, may be worth pursuing, or consider an RCS, to generate a bank of credits for both permanent and temporary impacts on listed species. Go Further: Conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under an approved RCS may be expanded in scope to address conservation actions identified by a state resource agency for at-risk species through development of a Prelisting Conservation Agreement (PCA). When working in concert, an RCS and PCA can lead to the generation of credits that can be “banked” and shared among agencies to address future impacts on multiple species. Are the conservation needs for a listed species poorly understood? If so, there may be value in exploring the opportunities presented by a SHA, which allows for experimentation and knowledge building while providing assurances that whether

Appendix A. Decision Support for Compliance with the Endangered Species Act: Listed  Pollinators A-3 agencies are successful or not in benefiting listed species through their actions, they will not be penalized. Go Further: Recognized conservation actions benefiting listed species under a SHA include development and testing of new habitat management techniques. Under this experimental component of the agreement, new management activities can be developed and inform conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under an RCS. Management actions undertaken through a SHA can be transferred to an RCS following termination of the SHA. Is the species endemic to a small area or does it occur at a single site? If so, an HCP may be most appropriate for addressing the range of conditions that need to be addressed to assure long-term protection and recovery of the species, recognizing that the potential for impacts on the species associated with road construction and maintenance activities is very localized and likely not to be repeated in other geographies, thus limiting the geographic extent of the value of conservation actions. Go Further: HCPs are the most comprehensive compliance strategy available to non- federal parties to conserve the ecosystems and natural processes upon which listed species depend, ultimately contributing to their recovery. HCPs can apply to both listed and non-listed species, including those that are candidates or have been proposed for listing. Conservation measures implemented under other identified compliance strategies can be transferred or rolled-up to an HCP. Is offsite mitigation an option? If so, the creation of mitigation and conservation banks on their own, or as part of an RCS or HCP, creates lasting credits for local impacts on listed species that can be transferred or sold to other agencies in time. Go Further: Conservation measures benefiting listed species implemented under an approved RCS may be expanded in scope to address conservation actions identified by a state resource agency for at-risk species through development of a PCA. When working in concert, an RCS and PCA can lead to the generation of credits that can be “banked” and shared among agencies to address future impacts on multiple species. Is the existing or future road network present in wildfire-prone landscapes? If so, explore opportunities to earn credits through an HCP or RCS by installing road- hardening measures, such as concrete pavement, in rights-of-ways (ROWs) to reduce ignition rates and protect high value pollinator habitat harboring listed species in the neighboring natural areas bordering the road network. Go Further: HCPs are the most comprehensive compliance strategy available to non- federal parties to conserve the ecosystems and natural processes upon which listed species depend, ultimately contributing to their recovery. HCPs can apply to both listed and non-listed species, including those that are candidates or have been proposed for listing. Conservation measures implemented under other identified compliance strategies can be transferred or rolled-up to an HCP. More about ESA compliance is included in Chapter 4, Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation, of this guide.