National Academies Press: OpenBook

Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California (2023)

Chapter: Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation

« Previous: Chapter 3: Imperiled Pollinator Profiles
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4: Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27060.
×
Page 122

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.

4-1 Chapter 4 Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for State Departments of Transportation 4.1 Introduction  Managing roadsides to support pollinators is an important sustainability responsibility for Departments of Transportation (DOTs); however, as more species of pollinators become listed or are being considered for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S. Code 1531 et seq.), DOTs also want regulatory certainty. There are several ESA compliance strategies and advance planning efforts that have been successful and are available to transportation agencies interested in implementing proactive measures to aid recovery and avert listings of native pollinators. While strict avoidance of impacts on listed species is often an option for ESA compliance, avoidance can create substantial limitations on DOT operations. This chapter describes the variety of ESA compliance strategies with guidance to identify which are appropriate in different environmental and DOT operations contexts. Consistent with ESA compliance, federal and state agencies, such as DOTs, can incorporate mitigating measures into their projects to reduce their overall negative impact on listed species and manage at-risk species that might become listed. For unavoidable impacts, a number of programs are available to project proponents, such as transportation agencies, that provide a clear regulatory pathway forward to address legal requirements of the ESA but also give them the means to be creative in the types of proactive measures put forth to recover imperiled pollinators and avert listings. Transportation planners and managers recognize compliance with the ESA can present logistical and operational challenges. For example, a species listing leads to regulatory constraints and can often slow down project approvals and constrain construction and operational activities. When responding to the survey described in Chapter 1 (see Conduct of Research Report for full questions and summarized answers), 45 percent of 47 transportation professionals indicated they need to consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or relevant state agency regarding federally or state-listed pollinator species at least once each year. In addition, over half of those individuals (51 percent) needed to consult five or more times a year. Furthermore, 75 percent of 48 St. Francis' satyr is one of many pollinator  species currently protected under the federal  ESA.  Photo Credit: Brian Hudgens ‐  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neonympha_ mitchellii_francisci_individual.jpg 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-2 respondents to another question recognize the possibility that if an imperiled pollinator species became legally protected under the ESA, it would cause barriers, such as altered project timelines, increased workloads, and higher costs to their agencies. There are a number of proactive, voluntary ESA compliance strategies from which to choose when planning transportation projects. See Figure 4-1 for assistance with understanding the relationships between identified strategies and opportunities for employing a phased approach to ESA compliance at a programmatic level. See the Evaluating ESA Compliance Approaches section for questions that can be helpful for planners and designers to ask when first evaluating different proactive approaches to addressing ESA compliance. Although often recognized as a challenge, it is important for transportation professionals to recognize ESA compliance also presents often-overlooked opportunities for their agencies. Focused attention and well-thought-out planning and design work by planners and designers on issues tied to endangered and threatened species allow agencies to address immediate regulatory needs within their respective service areas. Additionally, up- front planning by DOTs allows the agencies to take action that pays dividends with respect to time and cost savings as workflow is improved and the number of project redesigns and modifications to operations are reduced across their larger road network. Surveyed transportation professionals recognize the cost savings that come from advance planning efforts and 81 percent of 48 respondents acknowledge the possibility of an imperiled pollinator species becoming legally protected by the ESA would motivate their agency to proactively protect pollinators in order to avert a listing. Additionally, nine transportation professionals participating in the survey recognize early adoption of compliance strategies as being good for public relations and consistent with identified sustainability goals for their respective transportation agency.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-3 4.2 Introduction to the ESA  The ESA is one of the most far-reaching environmental laws in the United States. Because of the number and extent of both endangered and threatened species, state DOTs will inevitably need to address compliance issues tied to listed species for some of their projects and operations. DOTs may comply with the ESA by avoiding impacts on endangered species based on technical assistance from USFWS. If impacts on listed species (defined as take under the ESA) cannot be avoided, compliance commonly occurs using processes under Section 7 and Section 10 of the ESA. The Section 7 consultation process and the Section 10 permit process are the means by which take is approved under the ESA. Compliance is achieved under Section 7 when a federal nexus exists (i.e., the project requires a federal authorization apart from ESA compliance, license, or funding). In these cases, the lead federal agency is responsible for supporting consultation with USFWS. If no federal nexus exists, an incidental take permit under Section 10 is sought. Successfully complying with the ESA requires up-front investments of time and resources, and a thoughtful and deliberate strategy. In contrast, a poorly coordinated approach to ESA compliance can result in schedule delays, cost overruns, or project failure if permit conditions are infeasible. Careful planning and a good understanding of the ESA compliance process, for both Sections 7 and 10, will help avoid these pitfalls. 4.2.1 ESA Overview Congress enacted the ESA in 1973 with the intent of improving previous protective regulations by creating a more comprehensive approach that would protect not only individual species of threatened and endangered plants and animals but also their habitats and the ecosystems upon which they depend. USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS; also known as National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries) jointly administer the ESA. NMFS has jurisdiction over listed marine species and anadromous fish, while USFWS has jurisdiction over all other listed species. USFWS and NMFS (collectively known as the Services) maintain lists of threatened and endangered species for which the ESA provides substantial protections. In addition to administering the ESA, once a species is listed, the Services are responsible for determining whether there are areas that meet the definition of critical habitat. Critical habitat is habitat needed to support recovery of listed species; that is, specific areas within or outside of the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing that contain physical or biological features essential to conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection. It is important to note that, given the connection between plants and pollinating insects, unlike listed animals, listed plant species are not afforded the same level of protection from take on non-federal lands under the ESA unless there is a federal nexus. ESA Section 7: The section of the ESA,  as amended, outlining procedures for  interagency cooperation to conserve  federally listed species and  designated critical habitats.  Section 7(a)(1) requires federal  agencies  to  use  their  authorities  to  further  the  conservation of listed species.  Section 7(a)(2) requires federal  agencies  to  consult  with  the  Services  to  ensure  that  they  are  not  undertaking,  funding,  permitting,  or  authorizing  actions likely to jeopardize the  continued  existence  of  listed  species or destroy or adversely  modify critical habitat. ESA Section 10: The section of the  ESA, as amended, that provides  exceptions to the taking of  endangered species of fish and  wildlife.  Section  10(a)(1)(B)  authorizes  the  Services  to  issue  permits  that allow  the  taking of  listed  species  when  doing  so  is  incidental  to,  and  not  the  purpose of, the carrying out of  an otherwise lawful activity.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-4 Section 9 of the ESA and federal regulation pursuant to Section 4(d) of the act prohibit the taking of any endangered species. Recent changes in implementation of the ESA exclude threatened species from protection from take, unless a specific 4(d) rule is promulgated.  Take is defined as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect individuals of the species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.  Incidental take is defined as take of listed species that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a federal agency or applicant.  Harm is defined in the ESA to include significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns, such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering.  Harass is defined as actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns, which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] § 17.3). Exceptions to these prohibitions (i.e., take authorizations) are addressed in Section 7 (for federal actions) and Section 10 (for non-federal activities) of the ESA. Issuance of an incidental take permit under Section 10 of the ESA is a federal action subject to compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Note that some states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, and Utah as of February 2022) have NEPA Assignment where they assume federal responsibility for transportation projects for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). States with NEPA Assignment may use the Section 7 ESA compliance process even when no other federal nexus exists. Since the ESA was passed in 1973, the act has seen minor revisions in 1978, 1979, 1982, and 1988 (16 U.S. Code 1531 et seq). Over the last 47 years, in addition to the revisions, various documents have been issued to guide interpretation and implementation of the ESA. Such documents have taken the form of regulations and guidance from the Services and the Council on Environmental Quality, presidential memoranda, and Secretarial Orders. ESA policy continues to evolve, with multiple recent changes to guidance, proposed regulations, and direction for ESA implementation. 4.3 ESA Compliance Options  Given their large service areas that can intersect with the range of many protected species, DOTs are commonly confronted with ESA compliance needs. While this chapter is focused on introducing transportation agencies to proactive and voluntary ESA compliance strategies typically found under Section 10 (an applicant-led process), both Section 7 (a federal agency-led process) and Section 10 processes are summarized in order to provide information on the differences between the two strategies. To facilitate consideration of ESA compliance options throughout the rest of this chapter, the primary ESA compliance strategies are summarized in Table 4-1, with the key features of each. Threatened species: Any species  likely to become an endangered  species within the foreseeable  future throughout all or a  significant portion of its range.  Endangered species: Any species  in danger of extinction throughout  all or a significant portion of its  range.  

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-5 Table 4-1. Permit, process, length of time to prepare, and assurances associated with voluntary ESA compliance strategies. ESA Compliance  Strategy  Permit  Process  Length of  Time to  Prepare*  Formal Assurances  Safe Harbor  Agreement  (SHA)  Enhancement‐ of‐Survival  Permit; Section  10(a)(1)(A)  SHA is  prepared by  the property  owner(s) with  the aid of  USFWS.  6 to 9 months  although  more complex  agreements  are expected  to take longer  Yes, property owners  receive assurances  they will not have to  change management  activities.  Recovery  Crediting  System (RCS)  Section 7;  generated  credits become  the mitigation  actions  required for  incidental take  RCS is  prepared by  the federal  applicant and  property  owner(s) with  USFWS  determining  whether a  system  provides a net  benefit to the  conservation  of covered  species.  Undefined  Yes, generated  credits may offset  either permanent or  temporary impacts.  Habitat  Conservation  Plan (HCP)  Section  10(a)(1)(B);  Incidental Take  Permit  HCP is  prepared by  the applicant.  Undefined;  typically 1 to 3  years,  depending on  scope of HCP  Yes, permit  authorizes incidental  take.  Candidate  Conservation  Agreement  (CCA)  No permit  CCA is  prepared by  the applicant.  Undefined;  subject to the  degree of  detail in CCA  No regulatory  assurance is provided  against the possibility  that additional  measures will be  imposed.  Candidate  Conservation  Agreements  with Assurances  (CCAA)  Enhancement‐ of‐Survival  Permit; Section  10(a)(1)(A)  CCAA is  prepared by  the non‐ federal  applicant.  6 to 9 months,  although  more complex  agreements  could take 1  to 3 years to  get approved  Yes, no new  restrictions or  conservation  obligations will be  imposed on the  landowner following  listing.  Prelisting  Conservation  Section 7 or  Section 10;  generated  PCA is  prepared by  the federal or  Undefined;  PCAs are  expected to  Yes, applicants are  given the opportunity  to have actions serve 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-6 ESA Compliance  Strategy  Permit  Process  Length of  Time to  Prepare*  Formal Assurances  Agreement  (PCA)  credits are  carried forward  and become  recognized  mitigation  actions to  offset impacts  from a  development  action following  species listing  non‐federal  applicant  working with  state agencies  with  assistance  from USFWS.  be processed  faster than  CCAAs, which  are subject to  more exacting  approval  requirements  as mitigation or a  compensatory  measure to offset  impacts in the event  the species is  eventually listed as  threatened or  endangered under  the ESA.  *Additional information provided by the USFWS Ecological Services Program regarding the policies and regulations for listed ESA compliance strategies, including estimates of the length of time to prepare, is available at http://www.fws.gov/endangered‐species. 4.3.1 Section 7 If a project has a federal nexus (again, meaning that the project requires a federal permit under some law other than the ESA, or a federal license or funding), the federal agency taking action (i.e., issuing the permit or license, or granting the contracts, leases, easements, rights-of-way [ROWs], or grants-in-aid) is required to comply with Section 7 of the ESA. For linear projects (like most transportation projects), examples of a federal nexus include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting process for impacts on waters of the United States (which include wetlands), a ROW authorization from the U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management, or administration of federal funds by FHWA. Section 7 requires the federal agency (sometimes referred to as the action agency), in consultation with the Services, to ensure its action (or, more specifically, the actions of the project sponsor, such as a DOT, directly or indirectly causing modifications to the land, water, or air [50 CFR § 402.02]) will not jeopardize the continued existence of a federally listed species or a species proposed for listing under the ESA. The federal agency also needs to ensure its action will not destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat for ESA-listed species. Furthermore, Section 7(a)(1) requires the federal action agency to carry out programs to benefit species and habitats protected under the ESA. Typically, at least a portion of this requirement is addressed via the non-federal partner’s actions that are funded or permitted by the lead federal agency. Complying with the ESA through a federal nexus requires that the Services use a defined timeline for formal consultation. In practice, this results in a much speedier process than the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) under Section 10. Formal consultation: A process  between the Services and a  federal agency or applicant that:  (1) determines whether a proposed federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat; (2) begins with a federal agency’s written request and submittal of a complete initiation package; and (3) concludes with the issuance of a biological opinion and incidental take statement by either of the two Services. Informal consultation: An  optional process that includes all  discussions and correspondence  between the Services and a  federal agency or designated  non‐federal representative, prior  to formal consultation, to  determine whether a proposed  federal action may affect listed  species or critical habitat. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-7 4.3.2 Section 7 Consultation Process The process for consultation under Section 7 is well defined in regulations and guidance. During the informal consultation process, after obtaining a species list from the Service(s) for the proposed Action Area, the federal action agency determines if its action has the potential to affect listed species or critical habitat. The Action Area is all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR § 402.02). If the action does not have the potential to affect listed species or critical habitat, the ESA compliance process is concluded. If the federal agency determines its action may affect a listed species or critical habitat, consultation with the Services is required. It is important to note that, unlike projects carried out under Section 10, the trigger for consultation under Section 7 is the potential to affect the species rather than take of the species being reasonably certain to occur. For projects with a federal nexus (when there is discretionary federal involvement or control over the action), the ESA requires action agencies to consult or confer with the Services if the project has the potential to affect the species, even when it is unknown whether take is reasonably certain to occur. For actions that may affect listed species, the federal agency (or often the project sponsor, following formal designation of the non-federal representative by the federal agency) prepares a biological evaluation or biological assessment to determine if the listed species and/or critical habitat would be adversely affected. Biological assessments are required for major construction activities, which include dams, buildings, pipelines, roads, water resource developments, channel improvements, and other such projects that modify the physical environment and that constitute major federal actions (50 CFR § 402.12; 50 CFR § 402.02). If the agency determines the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect the listed species and/or critical habitat (that is, the effects would be discountable, insignificant, or beneficial), and the Service(s) concurs with that determination, the ESA consultation process is concluded (this is referred to as informal consultation) and the action agency may proceed with the action as proposed. At the completion of informal consultation, an action agency may request written concurrence from the Services that the proposed action will have no effect on listed species or critical habitat. Although it is not required, a letter of concurrence is recognized as useful for the administrative record. Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Section 7(a)(2) Federal Project Review The rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) is the first bumble bee protected under the federal ESA. Photo Credit: Sarina Jepsen, The Xerces Society To help ensure compliance with the requirements under Section 7(a)(2) for federal actions that may affect listed species, the Midwest Region of USFWS developed a four- step approach as part of a voluntary guidance document to help federal action agencies and applicants carry out efficient and effective Section 7(a)(2) consultation relative to the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis).

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-8 Step 1 – Define the Action Area. Describe the Action Area, recognizing the Action Area is not only the immediate area involved in the action, but also all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the action (50 CFR § 402.02). Step 2 – Determine whether the rusty patched bumble bee is likely to be present in the Action Area. Consult the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation website (https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/) or an up-to-date map kept by USFWS with distribution data specifically for the rusty patched bumble bee (https://www.fws.gov/species/rusty-patched-bumble-bee-bombus-affinis). Determine whether the Action Area overlaps with a High Potential Zone for the rusty patched bumble bee. If the Action Area falls within a High Potential Zone and contains suitable habitat, follow the appropriate survey guidance provided by USFWS to confirm presence or absence. Step 3 – Review the action for potential direct or indirect effects. If the rusty patched bumble bee occurs in the Action Area, the action agency will need to determine whether its action may affect the species. The action agency will need to determine if the species will be exposed to one or more stressors associated with the action, and, if exposed, how the species will respond to the relevant stressor(s). When an action may affect the rusty patched bumble bee but is not likely to adversely affect the species, the action agency may request concurrence on that determination from USFWS. Consultation would conclude with the written concurrence of USFWS (50 CFR § 402.13(a)). Step 4 – Incorporate measures to avoid or minimize effects on the rusty patched bumble bee. If the action is likely to adversely affect the rusty patched bumble bee, the action agency is to incorporate conservation measures to remove adverse effects. The recovery plan and recovery implementation strategy, once completed for the rusty patched bumble bee, will provide primary reference for agencies to implement actions that will help it fulfill its Section 7(a)(1) mandate. Until then, USFWS recommends measures taken to address the major conservation needs of the species, as described in the status assessment for the rusty patched bumble bee (https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9383). Federal agencies are to initiate formal consultation with USFWS if the project’s conservation measures do not remove all adverse effects. If USFWS anticipates the action will result in incidental take of the species and is not likely to jeopardize the species’ continued existence, it will include an incidental take statement with the biological opinion. The incidental take statement will include terms and conditions that the agency must follow to ensure that any take is not a violation of the ESA’s Section 9 prohibitions. Link to Rusty Patched Bumble Bee Section 7(a)(2) Federal Project Review: https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Section%207%20guidance%20for %20rusty%20patched%20bumble%20bee%20%28Bombus%20affinis%29.pdf If the federal agency determines the proposed action or its interrelated or interdependent actions is likely to adversely affect listed species, the agency needs to request formal consultation with the Service(s). A written request from the action agency to the Service(s) marks the beginning of formal consultation. Note that the federal agency determines how

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-9 applicants are to be involved in the consultation and may designate a non-federal representative, such as the project sponsor (e.g., DOT), to conduct informal consultation on behalf of the agency (50 CFR § 402.13). Throughout the consultation process, however, the ultimate responsibility for Section 7 compliance remains with the federal agency and the Services will not work directly with or take comments directly from the applicant without the knowledge or consent of the action agency (50 CFR § 402.14). A formal consultation includes:  a description of the action being considered,  a description of the specific area and any listed species or critical habitat that may be affected by the action,  description of the manner in which the action may affect any listed species or critical habitat, including analysis of any cumulative effects, and  relevant reports, such as environmental impact statements (EIS), environmental assessments (EA), biological assessment, and other relevant studies. In total, and without any allowable extensions, 135 days is the statutory guideline for completing Section 7 consultation.  Within 90 days of receipt of all information required to complete formal consultation, the Service(s) must complete consultation with the agency and provide a draft biological opinion to the agency for review. The draft biological opinion consists of a description of the proposed action, status of the species and/or critical habitat, environmental baselines, effects of the action(s), cumulative effects, conclusion, and alternatives, as appropriate.  The Services have 30 days from receipt of all information for the consultation process to determine if the information is complete enough to proceed.  Within the next 45 days, the federal agency or the designated project applicant has the opportunity to provide comments to the Service(s) on the draft biological opinion. Then, the Service(s) will issue the final biological opinion. The biological opinion will reflect the Service(s)’s determination of whether the action would jeopardize the continued existence of a species or adversely modify critical habitat (known as a jeopardy finding).  If a jeopardy finding is made, the Service(s) must recommend reasonable and prudent alternatives that would avoid jeopardy and that the federal agency must implement prior to taking action.  If no jeopardy finding is made, the Service(s) will issue an incidental take statement with the biological opinion. If incidental take is anticipated, the agency or the applicant must comply with the reasonable and prudent measures identified in the biological opinion and implement terms and conditions in the Services’ incidental take statement to avoid potential liability for any incidental take.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-10 4.3.3 Single Project versus Programmatic The formal and informal Section 7 consultation processes can be applied to either a single defined project or a suite of projects (i.e., a program). When applied to a program, the consultation is referred to as programmatic. If there are multiple projects within an area and they will all potentially affect a listed species, a programmatic consultation can achieve several objectives with positive administrative benefits for all parties. Equally, a programmatic consultation can be used to clear certain project types—such as sidewalk repair or construction, pavement milling, and resurfacing—that are recognized as minor projects implemented by transportation agencies that the Services can evaluate collectively for their likelihood to adversely affect a species. A programmatic approach streamlines the procedures and time involved in consultations for numerous similar activities with predictable effects on listed species and/or critical habitat in a particular geographic area, thus reducing the amount of time spent on individual project-by-project consultations and maximizing the flexibility to modify project designs early on in the project design phase. Although it may initially take more time to ensure early coordination among agencies and gather data for all the activity types that need to be included under the program, workloads are streamlined under a programmatic approach compared to consulting on each project separately. Under programmatic consultations, the effects analysis for a suite of activities exposed to a set of applicable stressors is completed up front in the biological evaluation or biological assessment and programmatic consultation response document, allowing for reduced project-specific review. Resulting programs guide implementation of future actions by establishing standards, guidelines, or governing criteria to which future actions must adhere. At the project-specific consultation stage, a proposed activity is reviewed to determine if it can be implemented in accordance with the programmatic consultation. From a conservation perspective, one of the great advantages of doing programmatic consultations is that consultations generally involve development of a conservation strategy or program defined in the biological opinion with design criteria based on the needs of the species rather than attempting to build the needs of the species into individual development projects. Establishing the conservation recommendations and terms and conditions written into the biological opinions typically requires ongoing communication and coordination between transportation agencies and the Services. Given many transportation projects involve a federal agency, the ability to develop a conservation strategy for a listed species or suite of species is typically a readily available route for DOTs, with the biological opinions often being referenced in future contract documents to ensure contractor compliance on development projects. 4.3.4 Section 10 In cases where no federal nexus exists, such as when a private landowner (or state agency) is planning an activity that will incidentally take a listed animal species and the landowner or state agency neither needs a federal permit under some law other than the ESA nor receives federal funding for that activity, species take tied to the proposed activity is permitted through the Section 10 process. Section 10 was created in 1982 after Congress, recognizing the need for a process to reduce conflicts between listed species and economic development, amended the ESA to add an exemption for incidental take of listed species that would result from non-federal activities (Section 10(a)(1)(B)). Incidental take is that incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. To obtain a

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-11 permit for such take under this provision, an applicant must develop a conservation plan that meets specific requirements identified in Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the ESA and its implementing regulations. These habitat conservation plans have become known as HCPs. The permits obtained through this process are known as incidental take permits and allow the permit holder to legally proceed with an activity that would otherwise result in the unlawful take of a listed species. 4.3.5 Habitat Conservation Plans HCPs are a means for non-federal entities to obtain a permit to incidentally take listed species by providing for actions that minimize and mitigate the impact. HCPs describe the anticipated effects of the proposed taking, how those impacts are to be minimized or mitigated, and how the HCP is to be funded. HCPs can apply to both listed and non-listed species, including those that are candidates or have been proposed for listing. HCPs are required to meet the permit issuance criteria of Section 10(a)(2)(B) of the ESA, such that, (1) taking will be incidental (that is, take of listed fish or wildlife species that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a federal agency or applicant [50 CFR § 402.02]), (2) the applicant will, to the maximum extent predictable, minimize and mitigate the impacts of the taking, (3) the applicant will ensure that adequate funding for the plan will be provided, (4) taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild, and (5) other measures, as required by the Secretary, will be met. An HCP can include plants and provide take authorization to a DOT. HCPs can be used by transportation administrators and planners to develop conservation strategies to address impacts on at-risk and listed pollinator species from transportation projects, such as new road construction, road widening, or road alignment activities, recognizing such activities may result in both permanent and temporary impacts. HCPs can vary in size, complexity, and duration. HCPs can be project specific with relatively short preparation times and permit durations (often less than 3 years), or they can be regional and programmatic (i.e., developed to cover multiple projects), typically taking more time to prepare but addressing a greater permit duration (30 years is typical) and scope. Project- specific HCPs can often qualify as low-effect HCPs (see Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Low-Effect HCP example). Low-effect HCPs must have minor or negligible effects on the species and their habitats covered under the HCP and qualify for a categorical exemption under NEPA. NEPA applies to all “major federal actions,” a term that has generally been determined to include both those actions that a federal agency directly undertakes and those actions proposed by non-federal entities that require federal funding or approval. Issuance of an incidental take permit under Section 10 of the ESA is a federal action subject HCPs can help to create conservation plans for  at‐risk pollinators that will be affected by DOT  activities such as construction projects.  Photo Credit: Washington DOT/Flickr CC 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-12 to compliance with NEPA. As a result, USFWS or NMFS need to conduct a NEPA review and prepare an EA or EIS as part of the process of issuing an incidental take permit. Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Low-Effect HCP (Yolo County, California) Valley elderberry longhorn beetle Photo Credit: Robin Agarwal, Flickr CC In Yolo County, California, the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District was issued a Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the incidental take of two species federally listed as threatened, the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) and giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas), from covered activities described in the sanitation district’s low-effect HCP. As described in the HCP, potential taking would occur incidental to construction of a new flood-protection levee and raised all-weather access road around an existing pump station within a 136.4-acre project site. The permit covers a period of 5 years and the HCP provides measures for avoiding and minimizing adverse effects on the valley elderberry longhorn beetle and giant garter snake for activities associated with construction of the new levee and road. The HCP summarizes information about the project and identifies responsibilities of USFWS and the sanitation district for implementing actions to benefit both threatened species. Proposed mitigation measures include purchase of valley elderberry longhorn beetle credits from a USFWS- approved conservation bank, transplanting of removed elderberry shrubs to the conservation bank, and restoration of temporarily affected upland giant garter snake habitat to pre-project conditions within the same calendar year of the impacts. It was determined by USFWS that the proposed project and mitigation measures would individually and cumulatively have a minor or negligible effect on the species covered in the HCP and therefore issuance of the incidental take permit qualifies as a categorical exclusion under NEPA. Link to proposed Low-Effect HCP information: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/06/20/2016-14567/proposed-low- effect-habitat-conservation-plan-for-the-valley-elderberry-longhorn-beetle-and-giant When it comes to developing HCPs, DOTs need to consider ESA compliance options relative to short- and long-term needs and goals. Different compliance options present distinct challenges, including intra-organization coordination, identification of appropriate decision makers, and management of contractors. Taking the necessary time at the beginning to thoroughly plan how the HCP will be developed and ultimately implemented is wise. A common understanding between the Services and the applicant needs to be developed with regard to the needs and goals of each, as well as their respective planning processes. Spending the time up front to develop a realistic schedule for development of the HCP and identifying key milestones goes a long way to eliminating misunderstanding and future conflicts during the planning process. Additionally, having a simple checklist of the specific information needs of the Services to complete the biological opinion, make findings, and issue permits is helpful when getting started on HCP development.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-13 An HCP is one of the most comprehensive tools available to transportation planners and provides partnering agencies with incidental take privileges for multiple covered species. HCPs can involve localized areas with only one or a few partners or cover large geographic areas (e.g., statewide or multistate HCP) and involve dozens of partners, including both public and private landowners, working across an extensive landscape. Under an HCP, conservation measures adopted for ROWs that lead to improved conditions for covered species and offset both the permanent and temporary impacts associated with road construction and maintenance could include the purposeful creation of habitat corridors through woodlands or shrub-dominated landscapes, increases in the use of native plants in managed areas, or maintenance of a shifting mosaic of suitable habitat through coordinated management of the greater regional landscape (see Karner Blue Butterfly Statewide HCP example). Karner Blue Butterfly Statewide HCP (Wisconsin) Activities covered under the Wisconsin HCP help to implement disturbance needed for conservation of the Karner blue butterfly. Photo Credit: Joel Trick, USFWS This HCP is the first statewide habitat conservation plan developed in the nation and ensures the continued existence of the Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) on more than 260,000 acres of land in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources led the effort to develop the HCP in cooperation with a diverse group of 26 partners, including major forestry stakeholders, conservation organizations, county forests, utility companies, private landowners, and the Wisconsin Departments of Agriculture and Transportation. The Karner blue butterfly requires its habitat to be disturbed periodically and, under the HCP, landowners can manage their activities by disturbing habitat in ways that benefit the species. In the absence of disturbance activities, such as fire, grazing, or mowing, shrubs and trees invade the open savanna and barrens and shade out the grass and herbaceous plants, including wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), which is the only plant the Karner caterpillar is recognized to feed on, and is thus critical to the butterfly’s survival. Lands supporting the Karner blue butterfly include ROWs, abandoned agricultural fields, managed forest lands, military training areas and bombing ranges, and managed and unmanaged barrens, savannas, and prairie areas that support wild lupine plants. Conservation measures described in the statewide HCP include changing the timing of mowing and herbicide applications to the fall to protect the plants used by the butterflies, creating habitat corridors linking Karner blue butterfly sites, and maintaining a shifting mosaic of suitable habitat for the butterfly throughout the landscape. Link to Karner Blue Butterfly Statewide HCP: https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/endangeredresources/karner/determine

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-14 Agreed-upon conservation measures implemented through an HCP could allow for both incidental take tied to construction activities and cover of management activities in ROWs affecting covered species. As a voluntary compliance strategy, HCPs allow for incidental take covering permanent impacts through offsite mitigation actions, such as the purchase of credits from an established mitigation bank, habitat acquisition, dedication of “excess land” for conservation to offset permanent impacts on listed species, or restoration of degraded lands on non-federal lands (see Fender’s Blue Butterfly HCP as an example of the use of offsite mitigation to address local impacts tied to ROWs). Through the creation and implementation of an adaptive management program paired with an identified funding source, HCPs offer the greatest flexibility and long-term assurances to be able to meet the changing needs of covered species in the dynamic landscape associated with road design and construction. Fender’s Blue Butterfly HCP (Yamhill County, Oregon) Fender’s blue butterfly Photo Credit: George Gentry, USFWS Fender’s blue butterfly (Icaricia icarioides fenderi) is federally listed as endangered and only occurs in the Willamette Valley of Oregon. The butterfly is dependent on the presence of its host plant, the federally listed as threatened Kincaid’s lupine (Lupinus oreganus). Fender’s blue butterflies lay eggs only on Kincaid’s lupine and the young caterpillars remain on the lupine to feed. Both Fender’s blue butterfly and Kincaid’s lupine are listed under the ESA and covered under the countywide Yamhill County HCP, as both the butterfly and lupine could be affected by the county’s road maintenance activities. The incidental take permit tied to the HCP allows the county to continue to perform its otherwise lawful road maintenance activities, which have the potential to affect the covered species. Specific conservation measures identified in the HCP to support the long-term viability of both species were designed to be compatible with needed county road maintenance activities; with implementation, they will reduce the potential adverse effects of covered activities on the two species and mitigate unavoidable adverse effects within the HCP area. Specific conservation measures include establishing special maintenance zones at locations within the county ROWs known to support Fender’s blue butterfly and Kincaid’s lupine; establishing procedures and protocols for maintenance activities occurring within special maintenance zones; implementing avoidance and minimization measures for road maintenance activities in the county ROWs to reduce potential effects on the covered species and their habitat; enhancing upland prairie habitat within no-impact zones in the county ROWs; and restoring and managing Fender’s blue butterfly habitat at offsite locations to promote restoration of upland prairie habitat. Link to Fender’s Blue Butterfly HCP: https://yamhillswcd.org/resources-information/habitat-conservation-plan/

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-15 Required Elements of an HCP To receive an incidental take permit, the applicant is required to submit an HCP that includes the following content:  an assessment of impacts likely to result from the proposed taking of the species for which permit coverage is requested,  measures that the permit applicant will undertake to monitor, minimize, and mitigate for such impacts,  funding available to implement such measures,  procedures to deal with unforeseen or extraordinary circumstances,  alternative actions considered that would not result in take and the reasons why the applicant did not adopt such alternatives, and  additional measures USFWS may require as necessary or appropriate for purposes of the plan. Although close coordination with the Services during HCP development is always a good idea, an HCP is an applicant’s document, and development of the HCP is the responsibility of the applicant and not the Services. Because issuance of the incidental take permit constitutes a federal action, it is subject to NEPA review (specifically, cumulative effects analyses that take into consideration not just the impacts associated with taking a covered species but also impacts on other aspects of the human environment). The NEPA document is the responsibility of the Services. The Services are also required to perform internal consultation (i.e., intra-agency Section 7 consultation) and prepare a biological opinion (that includes the opinion of the Services as to whether a federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat) and findings document that present the basis for the incidental take permit decision. 4.3.6 Assurances under Section 10 A key component of ESA compliance under Section 10 is the assurances afforded to the Section 10 permit holders. Called No Surprises, these assurances provide regulatory and financial certainty associated with implementing the terms and conditions of the HCP (50 CFR § 17.22(b)(5)). The No Surprises rule has two major components: changed circumstances and unforeseen circumstances.  Changed circumstances are defined as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by an HCP that can be reasonably anticipated and planned for during writing of the HCP (50 CFR § 17.3). If circumstances change during implementation of the HCP and additional conservation and mitigation measures are deemed necessary to respond to those changes, and such measures were provided for in the HCP, the permittee will be required to implement such measures.  Unforeseen circumstances are defined as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan that result in a substantial and adverse change in the status of the covered species that could not have reasonably been anticipated by the developers of the plan and the Services at the time of the negotiation

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-16 and development of the plan (50 CFR § 17.3). Under the No Surprises rule, if unforeseen circumstances occur that adversely affect covered species, the Services will not require the commitment of additional land, water, or financial compensation or impose additional restrictions on the use of land, water, or other natural resources beyond the level otherwise agreed to in the HCP without the consent of the permit holder as long as the HCP and the incidental take permit are being properly implemented. 4.3.7 Benefits and Tradeoffs of Complying through Section 7 or Section 10 In many cases, the project proponent will have limited or no federal nexus and, therefore, no choice regarding whether to comply with the ESA through Section 7 or Section 10. However, in some cases, both compliance pathways are an option. In these cases, there are benefits and tradeoffs with each approach (summarized in Table 4-2). First, compliance through the Section 7 process is almost always faster, as it is a more systematic process driven by mandated schedules and guidelines, with responsibilities to see the process through to the end ultimately falling on the Services and the federal action agency. The Section 10 process with an HCP typically takes longer to complete than a Section 7 consultation, but it provides the applicant with more control of the outcome. 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 during the duration of the permit, if covered by the HCP, require no new restrictions if listing occurs, as long as the permittee is properly implementing the HCP and incidental take permit. No Surprises assurances are not available under Section 7. Also, the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (Section 6 of the ESA) is a tool that provides substantial grants to support HCP planning, which are available for Section 10 but not Section 7 processes. Table 4-2. Comparison of ESA compliance under Section 7 versus Section 10. Point of Comparison  Section 7  Section 10  Trigger for  engagement  Proposed project may affect a  listed species (consultation is  mandatory).  Under the proposed project, take  of a listed species is reasonably  certain to occur (process is  voluntary, although compliance  with the ESA is mandatory and  the Services may initiate an  enforcement action if they have  reason to believe that the ESA is  being violated).  Applicability  Federal action agencies, in  consultation with USFWS, must  ensure their actions would not  jeopardize the continued  existence of a federally listed  species or a species proposed for  listing under the ESA or destroy  Applies to non‐federal entities  conducting an otherwise lawful  activity through which take is  reasonably certain to occur. The  HCP can apply to non‐listed  species and includes assurances. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-17 Point of Comparison  Section 7  Section 10  or adversely modify critical  habitat.  Process  Informal or formal consultation  with USFWS is initiated by the  federal action agency and  typically follows a preparation of  a biological evaluation or  biological assessment by the  applicant for the action agency.  The HCP is prepared by the  applicant and follows the  applicant's timeline during the  pre‐application process and  development of the HCP.  Timeline  Undefined for informal  consultation, although typically  30–90 days, recognizing a 60‐day  timeline exists for concurrence  following receipt of an adequate  written request; defined timeline  once formal consultation is  initiated (up to 135 days).  Undefined. Typically, it takes 1 to  3 years depending on the scope  of the plan.  Permit and  Assurances  Incidental take statement does  not include regulatory  assurances; terms and conditions  determined by USFWS, in  consultation with the action  agency and applicant; reinitiation  of consultation is always possible.  Permit conditions negotiated  between the Services and the  permit applicant. No Surprises  assurances provided so USFWS  cannot require additional  resources (including additional  commitment of land, water, or  financial resources or additional  restrictions beyond the level  otherwise agreed on in the HCP)  of the applicant to address  unforeseen circumstances  without the consent of the  permittee.  ESA Section 6  Funding   No.  Yes, grants are available through  a competitive process to support  the development of HCPs and  acquire land associated with  approved HCPs.  NEPA  Triggered by the federal action  agency that is consulting with  USFWS; federal action agency  prepares the NEPA review  document (EIS or EA). Public  participation is an integral part of  procedural requirements.  Triggered by the Services’  consideration/issuance of an  incidental take permit. The  Services prepare the NEPA review  document. Public participation is  an integral part of procedural  requirements. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-18 4.4 Other Voluntary ESA Compliance Strategies  In addition to HCPs, other voluntary strategies exist to address ESA compliance (see Table 4-1 for a summary). An enhancement-of-survival permit is available under Section 10 of the ESA for entities whose activities will provide a net conservation benefit to listed species or species that are candidates for listing. Typically, these permits are pursued by landowners who may be otherwise reluctant to undertake activities that support or attract listed species to their properties, or entities planning a project with concerns about risk of taking a candidate species that may be listed during project implementation due to fear of future restrictions related to the ESA. To address these concerns, two agreements are available to transportation agencies to provide the needed assurances that future restrictions or property-use limitations will not occur without their consent: (1) a Safe Harbor Agreement (SHA) for species that are already listed, or (2) a Candidate Conservation Agreement (CCA) with Assurances (CCAA) for candidate species. These agreements are also considered by the Services when making listing decisions and may help to prevent a listing or encourage a delisting or down-listing. 4.4.1 Safe Harbor Agreement A SHA is a voluntary agreement involving private or other non-federal property owners whose actions taken under a SHA are recognized by USFWS to provide a net conservation benefit contributing to the recovery of species listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA. Under a SHA, property owners receive formal assurances from USFWS through an enhancement-of-survival permit issued under the authority of Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA that land use restrictions will not be required even if voluntary actions taken under the agreement attract particular listed species onto enrolled properties or increase the numbers or distribution of those listed species already present on those properties. The enhancement-of-survival permit authorizes incidental take of species that may result from actions undertaken by the landowner under the SHA, which would include returning the property to baseline conditions at the conclusion of the agreement. As SHAs do not require permanent conservation for enrolled properties but do provide opportunities for landowners to test and develop new habitat-management techniques, the SHA is a compliance strategy to be considered for application in ROWs by transportation agencies interested in adopting new management practices aimed at maintaining, restoring, or enhancing existing habitats; reducing habitat fragmentation; or increasing habitat connectivity on behalf of listed species found on or adjacent to their properties. The USFWS Ecological Services Program recognizes many SHAs can be developed within 6 to 9 months, although more complex agreements may take longer. When estimating the timeline for approval, a number of considerations need to be made, including the number and characteristics of the species involved, management activities being considered, number of parties to the agreement, and whether the SHA and permit decision may be eligible for categorical exclusion under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq).

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-19 Willamette Valley Native Prairie Habitat Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement for the Fender’s Blue Butterfly Fender’s blue butterfly Photo Credit: George Gentry, USFWS This programmatic SHA provides eligible landowners with a streamlined process for obtaining assurances that certain actions taken to benefit the federally listed Fender’s blue butterfly will not result in additional regulatory obligations under the ESA. The primary objective of this SHA is to encourage conservation and restoration actions by landowners designed to benefit Fender’s blue butterfly, the federally listed Kincaid’s lupine, and other native species occurring in open prairie habitat within Willamette Valley in Benton, Lane, Linn, Marion, Polk, and Yamhill Counties in Oregon. Activities anticipated to produce a net conservation benefit for the Fender’s blue butterfly to be undertaken by participating landowners include:  restoration activities that result in an open community structure,  promoting healthy populations of host and nectar plants unencumbered by overtopping shrubs, trees, or tall exotic grasses, and  management actions, such as the manual and mechanical removal of invasive exotic plants and woody vegetation, and, in certain circumstances, chemical applications and the use of prescribed fire, designed to maintain an open, prairie structure ensuring the vigor of obligate lupine host plants and other native nectar plants. Eligible properties for enrollment include non-federal lands where the butterfly occurs or could occur through colonization, translocation, or reintroduction. Non-federal landowners interested in participating are recognized as “Cooperators” through Certificates of Inclusion under the SHA. The SHA is administered and implemented by the USFWS Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (OFWO) and Willamette Valley National Wildlife Refuge Complex (WV Refuge Complex). The OFWO is the designated “Permittee” and the WV Refuge Complex is a signatory that works jointly with the OFWO in all aspects of the SHA. The OFWO, WV Refuge Complex, and participating landowners are all parties to the SHA. This SHA follows USFWS’s Safe Harbor Agreement policy (64 Federal Register 32717) and regulations (64 Federal Register 32706), both of which implement Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. Link to information on Willamette Valley Native Prairie Habitat Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement for the Fender’s Blue Butterfly: https://www.fws.gov/federal-register-document/proposed-willamette-valley-native- prairie-habitat-programmatic-safe

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-20 4.4.2 Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances Another compliance strategy for transportation planners to consider when planning for activities to be completed within ROWs is a CCAA addressing species proposed for listing or candidates for listing on non-federal land. A CCAA results in an enhancement-of- survival permit, issued under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA, which provides assurance to the applicant that if agreed-upon conservation actions for the covered species are implemented, USFWS will not require additional conservation measures beyond those in the CCAA should the species be listed. A CCAA can apply to a single species or multiple species and may vary in size, scope, structure, complexity, and activities addressed. Conservation measures transportation agencies agree to undertake on their lands to remove threats and otherwise improve the status of candidate and other at-risk pollinator species under a CCAA may include actions to:  protect and enhance existing populations and habitats,  restore degraded habitat,  create new habitat,  augment existing populations,  restore historic populations, or  not undertake a specific, potentially affecting/damaging activity, such as deciding not to move forward with planned construction of an approved road extension. The duration of a CCAA needs to be sufficient to enable USFWS to determine that the benefits of the conservation measures in the CCAA provide a net conservation benefit to the covered species and remove any need to list the species covered by the agreement, when combined with those benefits that would be achieved if it is assumed the conservation would also be implemented on other necessary properties. Similar to a SHA, a CCAA can be renewed for as long as the property landowner and USFWS both agree. Both existing SHAs and CCAAs are considered by the Services when making listing decisions and may help to prevent a listing or encourage a delisting or down-listing. 4.4.3 Candidate Conservation Agreement Although they do not lead to a permit, CCAs are formal, voluntary agreements between USFWS and one or more parties created to address the conservation needs of one or more candidate species or species likely to become candidates in the near future. Although CCAs are primarily developed by federal agencies to cover federal lands, USFWS often enters into CCAs with other federal agencies but recognizes the value of partnering on agreements with states, local governments, tribes, private property owners, and other entities. Agreements can apply to a single species or multiple species and may vary in size, scope, structure, complexity, and activities addressed. USFWS recognizes early conservation efforts for declining species can be greatly expanded through collaborative approaches that foster cooperation and exchange of ideas among multiple parties. For large-scale transportation projects wherein the effects of thoughtful roadside management practices benefiting native pollinators occurring on non-federal lands could be strengthened from similar actions taken on adjoining federal properties, such as a national forest, a CCA can be written to perform the function of an overarching

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-21 conservation plan for a single or multiple at-risk species. The implemented conservation plan would formally serve to link a CCA for federal property together with preventative measures taken under a CCAA implemented on non-federal lands (see Monarch Butterfly Nationwide CCAA with CCA example). Working collaboratively, federal and non-federal participants could voluntarily commit to implement specific actions designed to remove or reduce threats to a covered species across a region characterized by a patchwork of land ownership so that listing may not be necessary. The degree of detail in CCAs can vary widely, and there are no specific permits or assurances associated with them. State involvement is highly desirable, as species that are not listed or proposed for listing are under the jurisdiction of the states. Monarch Butterfly Nationwide CCAA with CCA Monarch butterflies on swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata) Photo Credit: Stephanie McKnight, The Xerces Society In 2020, USFWS approved a programmatic CCAA with an integrated CCA for the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus). The agreement is a collaborative effort among USFWS and representatives of more than 45 non-federal companies and agencies in the energy and transportation sectors, including those who collectively manage several millions of acres of ROWs and associated lands across the lower 48 states for electric power generation, transmission, and distribution (including solar and wind); oil and gas transport; and transportation (including both roads and railways). Together with approving the agreement, USFWS issued an enhancement-of-survival permit. Through a certificate of inclusion, the partners enrolled in the agreement will create, enhance, and maintain habitat for monarch butterflies, as well as continue their general operations, vegetation management, and maintenance and modernization activities within existing ROWs. If the monarch becomes federally listed and protected under the ESA, the enhancement-of-survival permit will authorize incidental take of monarch butterflies that may result from otherwise lawful activities within ROWs on enrolled lands. By integrating a CCAA and CCA together in the agreement, partners are able to seamlessly implement conservation measures for monarchs on non-federal and federal lands. Conservation measures expected to create, maintain, and enhance monarch habitat include the reduction or removal of threats to the monarch butterfly caused by ongoing operations, maintenance, and modernization activities on ROWs. The agreement allows partners flexibility to strategically place habitat when considering both the conservation needs of the species and the constraints that exist that may limit their ability to apply conservation measures in a given area. To maintain a net conservation

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-22 benefit, each partner must implement selected conservation measures to create and maintain a proportion of their enrolled lands as monarch habitat each year. Link to Monarch Butterfly Nationwide CCAA with CCA: https://www.fws.gov/media/nationwide-candidate-conservation-agreement-monarch- butterfly 4.4.4 Recovery Crediting System A Recovery Crediting System (RCS) is a tool that allows federal agencies to use their authorities to benefit species already listed as threatened or endangered on non-federal lands. Subject to Section 7 consultation, an RCS creates a process through which federal agencies create a “bank” of recovery credits providing for the conservation of listed species while being able to compensate for future impacts of their actions. As Section 7 applies to management of federal lands as well as other federal actions that may affect listed species (for example, federal approval of private activities through issuance of federal permits, licenses, or other actions such as funding), an RCS is a tool available to state transportation agencies through interagency cooperation. Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA establishes the process whereby federal action agencies, such as the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, or FHWA, and their applicants (e.g., state DOTs) and USFWS work together to ensure appropriate conservation measures are in place so that proposed actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or loss of critical habitat. Because of the importance of private lands to the recovery of listed species, the RCS is designed to encourage federal partnerships with non-federal landowners. The process of creating an RCS produces a net conservation benefit for the listed target species that advances its recovery, increases the flexibility of federal agencies to accomplish their missions while meeting their requirements under the ESA, and promotes effective partnership between federal and non-federal entities. The basic unit of measure established by an RCS is a recovery credit. The credit quantifies the contribution an agency’s action makes toward recovery of a federally listed species. Credits are based on, and tied to, implementation of specific conservation measures or actions identified in a species’ approved recovery plan. Criteria used to establish recovery credit values and priorities include long-term habitat preservation or restoration, reduction or elimination of specific threats, support for controlled propagation and reintroduction efforts, benefits to multiple species, and establishment of dispersal corridors. Available to transportation planners and administrators, an RCS sets forth a process that allows either permanent or temporary impacts of road construction or maintenance activities to be offset by the creation of credits. Importantly, conservation efforts tied to recovery credits are not site specific, allowing conservation measures to be applied over a large service area. Operating through an RCS, a transportation agency may develop and store a “bank” of conservation credits that can be used by the agency at a later time to offset negative impacts on listed species due to road construction and operation across a road network covering a large geographic region where a listed species is known or considered to be present. In addition to addressing permanent impacts, an RCS may also offset temporary impacts through the creation of temporary recovery credits. Temporary credits are generated

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-23 through implementation of habitat-management activities identified in the recovery plan of a listed species, but which are discrete or short term in nature. Consistent with identified best management practices for pollinators, a transportation agency could accrue credits for the restoration and temporary protection of degraded habitat along roadsides to mitigate for habitat that will be temporarily affected elsewhere. Because temporary credits offset adverse effects that are also limited in duration, conservation measures associated with the temporary credits must remain in effect for some period of time after the adverse effects of the impacts have been reversed. As transportation projects often require temporary workspaces for construction, which are later returned to pre-construction conditions, earned temporary credits can be applied to address impacts under this scenario, streamlining approval processes for future construction activities associated with a road network. Consultation with USFWS in an RCS occurs largely in two ways: first as an overall programmatic consultation to define and establish credits and debits, and second as individual activities are accounted for at the project level. A primary source of information to establish criteria for an RCS is the species’ recovery plan. If no final approved recovery plan exists, an RCS may employ an equivalent USFWS-approved document describing specific measures that will contribute toward the down-listing or delisting goals of a listed species. When considering whether employment of an RCS is a strategy worth pursuing, it is important to note that not all listed species are appropriate for a credit system. Examples of species that would not be suited for an RCS are those whose conservation needs are poorly understood, and species that occur as single-site endemics. 4.4.5 Prelisting Conservation Agreement A Prelisting Conservation Agreement (PCA) allows for the creation and banking of credits providing for the conservation of non-listed species. Anyone (e.g., federal agency or private entity) who wants to participate in the process can undertake a voluntary prelisting conservation action, earning credits to be carried forward as long as the action occurs in a participating state within the framework of an established conservation strategy for the species.  Transportation agencies participating in a qualifying state-administered species- conservation program can obtain conservation credits for efforts benefiting a species recognized to be in decline.  Credits can later be redeemed to offset or mitigate actions detrimental to the same species should it subsequently be listed under the ESA.  Earned credits in excess of an agency’s immediate or projected needs may be traded or sold to other agencies. Conservation actions implemented under a PCA are to be based largely on a conservation strategy for a species developed by the state that principally guides all conservation efforts for the at-risk unlisted species whether conservation actions are implemented by federal, state, tribal, or private organizations. A strategy can be authored by any one of these entities, but ideally it is a collaborative effort, with states playing a primary role and the public participating in the process. Voluntary prelisting conservation actions give a landowner, whether federal or non-federal, the opportunity to have actions taken to benefit at-risk species serve as mitigation or a compensatory measure for the detrimental impact

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-24 of an action undertaken after the species is listed as threatened or endangered. A PCA provides states with an additional tool and incentive to engage landowners, government agencies, and others in carrying out voluntary conservation actions for species not listed under the ESA. USFWS treats voluntary prelisting conservation actions as (1) an intended compensatory measure of a proposed federal agency subject to the consultation requirements of Section 7(a)(2) or 7(a)(3) of the ESA, or (2) a measure to minimize and mitigate the impact of the taking of an endangered or threatened species pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. To be treated as a voluntary prelisting conservation action under an agreement, the action need only be beneficial to a particular species. No specific magnitude of benefit needs to be identified. Credits are to be used within a “service area” based on the biological needs of the species. A “service area” may include more than one state. A PCA is a tool available for DOTs to generate credits prior to a species being listed. Following listing, the opportunity to create additional conservation credits can be pursued through actions undertaken under an RCS or HCP. 4.4.6 Conservation Banks Conservation banks are worth mentioning, as they serve to address the effects of multiple activities on species and provide an opportunity for transportation agencies to take advantage of “excess land” that consists of real property rights, title to which is vested in the state DOT and that is determined and certified to be not required for ROWs or other operational purposes of the department. Conservation banks are permanently protected privately or publicly owned lands managed for endangered, threatened, and other at-risk species (see Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Conservation Bank example). Banks compensate for adverse impacts on a listed species in advance of the impact based on the establishment of a permanent benefit (i.e., conserving the species’ habitat) typically accomplished through offsite land set-asides, which leads to the creation of credits for use or sale. Both HCPs and RCS can be strengthened by the creation of banks for listed species. Equally, the effectiveness of CCAAs and PCAs could be improved by land set-asides for at- risk species. Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Conservation Bank (Colton, California) Delhi sands flower-loving fly Photo Credit: Moose Peterson, USFWS A 150-acre conservation bank in Colton, California, aids in the recovery of the federally listed as endangered Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis). This unique species, native to the Inland Empire of Southern California, is the first and only fly to be listed under the ESA. Scientists petitioned the species in 1990 and USFWS listed it as endangered in 1993. The Delhi Sands habitats are highly unusual and are not found anywhere else on Earth. Protection of the fly is important, in part, because it will protect many other species also living in the dunes. The dunes

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-25 support birds like the western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) and the burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), mammals like the Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), insects such as a subspecies of the Mormon metalmark butterfly (Apodemia mormo nigrescens), and numerous reptiles and plants. Owned by Vulcan Materials Company, the conservation bank protects the largest remaining contiguous block of habitat for Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. Land in the conservation bank will be conserved and managed in perpetuity through the placement of a conservation easement. Lands enrolled in a conservation bank can be used to offset impacts on species or habitats in areas outside of the bank’s boundaries. The establishment of this 150-acre conservation bank represents one of the most significant steps in securing the future of the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly since it was listed under the ESA. Link to information about the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1540 4.4.7 In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Often referenced when considering voluntary options for addressing mitigation needs associated with aquatic resources, the in-lieu fee mitigation framework can provide an alternative to onsite mitigation that streamlines the process of mitigation, allowing for faster, more efficient project delivery for transportation agencies while still maintaining compliance with the requirements of the ESA for protecting the habitat of listed species. In accordance with Section 7(a)(1) of the ESA, transportation agencies working with the Services can use the in-lieu fee mitigation framework to create a mitigation strategy giving them the ability to create and contribute to a fund as their mitigation for unavoidable impacts on listed species. The amount of the contribution, or fee, is tied to the type and severity of the impact the development or maintenance project would be expected to have on the species. Money deposited into the fund is used to improve upon the conservation effort for the species above and beyond what is otherwise possible if funds were being restricted to a specific project location or to a lesser mitigation type. An in-lieu fee program typically combines fees collected from one or more impact projects to finance the mitigation benefiting the listed species. Funds can also be leveraged, and partnering is encouraged to maximize the value of the in-lieu fee mitigation. It is important to recognize this option is not available as part of most onsite mitigation plans and has not been readily applied outside of being used to offset unavoidable impacts on aquatic resources. For this reason, use of this option may require creation of a Memorandum of Understanding between transportation agencies and USFWS or NMFS to better define the overarching mitigation strategy and particulars of contributing to and managing the created mitigation fund. 4.5 Which Compliance Strategy to Use?  Early on in the decision-making process, it is important to recognize that rare and endangered pollinators often have specific habitat requirements, unique life history traits, and other traits that require knowledge of the individual species when making management decisions and evaluating which compliance strategy may ultimately be best suited for the situation. Furthermore, the types of challenges, as well as opportunities, to address ESA

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-26 compliance issues vary by region, major land cover types, type of ROW operations, and types of design, planning, and construction activities. For these reasons and others, recommended strategies and associated management practices or prescriptions usually need to be geographically and condition specific. This guide is intended to provide options for how DOTs can support conservation of at-risk and listed pollinator species through thoughtful management and design. The greatest value in taking a proactive approach to ESA compliance comes when specific management actions and design decisions are paired with discussed compliance strategies. Adoption of practices can lead to cost savings in the form of streamlining of permitting, planning, and design workflow with regard to listed species. Comparison of various levels of effort and certainty gained through development of each approach is of value for transportation agencies to consider when deciding which strategy is best to pursue. Permit, process, duration of time to process, and formal regulatory assurances tied to each strategy (see Table 4-1), together with staff responsibilities and financial costs, are valuable for transportation professionals to understand when making decisions. Other considerations for transportation agencies include risks and potential barriers, with regard to internal challenges tied to staff training; financial constraints; incompatibility with other goals; staff resources; and permit or legal limitations to successful implementation. One of the best recognized sources of information on internal challenges is the transportation professionals most familiar with and with expertise in applying the identified ESA compliance strategies in their own work and region. With regard to their familiarity and experience with the ESA compliance strategies, a number of transportation professionals responding to survey questions (see National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 25-59 final report for full questions and summarized responses) were familiar with identified strategies (see Table 4-3). However, a smaller percentage had experience actually applying the strategies in their own work. Additionally, only one respondent considered themselves as an expert in design or planning, the two groups of transportation professionals most likely to benefit from being educated about the different compliance strategies available to transportation agencies. Table 4-3. Familiarity and experience of transportation professionals1 with voluntary ESA compliance strategies. ESA Compliance Strategy  Percentage of  Respondents Familiar  with the Strategy  Percentage of Respondents  Who Have Applied the  Strategy to Their Work  Safe Harbor Agreements  60% (24 of 40)  4% (1 of 27)  Recovery Crediting System  32% (12 of 38)  21% (5 of 24)  Habitat Conservation Plans  90% (37 of 41)  42% (14 of 33)  Candidate Conservation Agreements  78% (31 of 40)  27% (8 of 30)  Candidate Conservation Agreements  with Assurances  79% (34 of 43)  36% (12 of 33) 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-27 ESA Compliance Strategy  Percentage of  Respondents Familiar  with the Strategy  Percentage of Respondents  Who Have Applied the  Strategy to Their Work  Prelisting Conservation Agreements   54% (21 of 39)  14% (4 of 28)  1 Forty‐seven percent of respondents identified their area of expertise within their agency as  “Environmental,” 27% as “Maintenance,” 13% as “Landscape Architecture,” 3% as “Construction,” 1% as  “Planning,” and 9% as “Other.” None of the received responses were from professionals who identify their  area of expertise as “Design.”  4.5.1 Evaluating ESA Compliance Approaches To inform the process of identifying a preferred strategy, the questions below can be used by planners and designers when first evaluating different proactive approaches to addressing ESA compliance. Specifically, questions are designed to (1) prompt readers to think through proactive strategies that are alternatives to the more traditional Section 7 consultation when dealing with listed species that may be affected by an action such as a building a road, and (2) help inform readers about voluntary strategies to mitigate present- day and future risks to at-risk species. An expanded version of these questions can be found in Appendix A (for listed pollinator species) and Appendix B (for imperiled pollinator species). Questions to Consider  Answers to Help Guide Decisions  For a specific geography or  project, are there multiple listed  species expected to be affected  or a single listed species?  If there are multiple listed species, it is of value to  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.  Are at‐risk pollinator species  present in the planning area?   If so, a CCAA provides assurances to transportation  agencies who invest early in the application of recognized  conservation actions, such as the abandonment of an  otherwise once‐planned road extension, within a planning  area encompassing a larger road network that benefit  single or multiple pollinator species considered to be at  risk for future listing.  Will at‐risk species possibly be  harmed by future activities?   If so, by working with state and federal agencies, a  transportation agency can create credits under a PCA by  implementing conservation measures benefiting a state‐ recognized at‐risk species at select locations across its  service area, providing assurances the agency will have  the ability to mitigate for future impacts on the species  following a federally listing.  Are listed species present in or  adjacent to existing ROWs?  If so, consider use of a SHA to provide formal assurances  that future land use restrictions will not result from  investment in management activities that increase  habitat value and/or the local abundance of the listed  species covered under the permits. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-28 Questions to Consider  Answers to Help Guide Decisions  Are some of the suggested  changes to maintenance  activities to benefit listed  pollinators also viewed as  potential cost‐saving measures?   If so, creation of 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 penalty for attracting or increasing the amount or  distribution of the listed species on managed lands.  Are the same listed or at‐risk  species likely to be affected by  recurring construction or  management activities?  If listed or at‐risk species are likely to be continually  affected by future activities, investing early in  development of an HCP, if there are multiple species  deserving coverage, or an RCS or PCA, to generate a bank  of credits for both permanent and temporary impacts on  listed or at‐risk species, respectively, may be worth  pursuing.  Is offsite mitigation an option?  If offsite mitigation is an option, 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.  Are there established recovery  plans for 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.  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  agencies will not be penalized regardless of whether they  are successful in benefiting listed species through their  actions.  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 needed to ensure long‐term  protection and recovery of the species, recognizing the  potential for impacts on the species associated with road  construction and maintenance activities.  Are there established state‐ sponsored conservation plans for  at‐risk species of interest?   If so, the conservation plans are to serve as the preferred  source for identifying the conservation strategies to be  implemented under a PCA to receive credits for future  impacts on at‐risk species following federal listing.  Are there federal lands  neighboring present‐day ROWs  or future project areas  containing recognized habitat for  at‐risk species of interest?  If so, consider reaching out to neighboring federal  agencies to explore the possibility of linking a CCAA with a  CCA to establish a comprehensive conservation plan for  at‐risk species, allowing for greater consistency in  management actions, and thus effectiveness, across a  larger regional landscape consisting of both federal and  non‐federal properties. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-29 Questions to Consider  Answers to Help Guide Decisions  Is the existing or future road  network present in wildfire‐ prone landscapes?  If so, explore opportunities to earn credits through an  HCP, RCS, or PCA by installing road‐hardening measures,  such as concrete pavement, in ROWs to reduce ignition  rates and protect high‐value pollinator habitat harboring  either listed or at‐risk species in the neighboring natural  areas bordering the road network.  Is the existing or future road  network in lands largely  dominated by agricultural  activities?  If so, consider the recognized value of investing in use of  native plants in ROWs to promote pollinator activity and  dispersal throughout the larger landscape when  discussing conservation measures that may generate  credits under an RCS or PCA, or are recognized as a  beneficial action taken under a CCAA or HCP, providing  value to natural and agricultural systems.  4.6 Programmatic Agreements and the Value of  Participating in Multiple Strategies  An HCP, CCAA, CCA, RCS, or SHA can be developed by transportation agencies into a programmatic agreement allowing for an individual compliance strategy to be applied to a suite of projects or a program involving similar activities in a particular geographic area associated with roadside maintenance or construction. Additionally, as activities associated with expansion or maintenance of a larger road network are likely to involve multiple parties and agencies, a programmatic agreement allows for such parties to come together under a single compliance framework to achieve several objectives with positive administrative benefits for all parties. As an example, a programmatic CCAA and its associated permits authorize state, local, and tribal governments and other entities to enter into an agreement and hold the associated permit. A programmatic CCAA allows for individual property owners within a specific area or region to become enrolled and conveys the permit authorization and assurances to them through a “certificate of inclusion.” When addressing listed species, whether through an HCP, RCS, or SHA, a programmatic approach streamlines the procedures and time involved in consultations for numerous similar activities with predictable effects on listed species and/or critical habitat. Collaboration among multiple parties allows for creation of compliance strategies that address listed and at-risk species issues at a regional level, increasing the overall effectiveness of individual conservation measures. Just as there is value in establishing collaborative agreements among multiple parties and agencies, there are also benefits to exploring the relationships among identified compliance strategies (see Figure 4-1). When moving forward with planning, transportation agencies need to consider the possibility of implementing multiple strategies in a phased approach to meeting long-term programmatic needs for ESA compliance. The value of phasing or engaging in multiple strategies becomes clear when agencies are looking at longer-term time horizons associated with project work and recognize the suite of activities that may need to be permitted will take place across an expansive geography.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-30 Additionally, depending on the geographic and temporal scope of planned activities, agencies need to consider the value of participating in multiple programs concurrently if actions undertaken for the benefit of listed and at-risk species under otherwise separate programs are mutually exclusive. In coupling strategies that address the immediate compliance needs of listed species together with implementation of proactive conservation efforts designed to aid species before they become listed, DOTs position themselves to maximize the full value of available strategies and increase opportunities to discover ways to successfully streamline regulatory processes and incorporate simpler, more cost- effective conservation measures in roadside design and management. Figure 4-1. Relationships among voluntary ESA compliance strategies and opportunities for a phased approach.

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-31 Figure 4-1 (continued) 1 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 an SHA  can be transferred to an RCS following termination of the SHA.  2 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 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.  6 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.  3 Primarily developed to cover activities on federal lands, a CCA can be written to  perform the function of an overarching conservation plan for a single or multiple  species. A conservation plan can serve to link a CCA for federal property together  with preventative measures taken under a CCAA implemented on adjoining non‐ federal lands allowing enrollees to seamlessly implement conservation measures to  address the needs of at‐risk species.  4 If conservation measures implemented under a CCAA are consistent with a  conservation strategy for a species established by a state resource agency, the CCAA  can be terminated and management actions transferred to a PCA. Transference  would lead to the generation of credits for use as mitigation or as a compensatory  measure for the detrimental impact of an action undertaken within a specified  "service area" after the species is listed as threatened or endangered.  5 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 amongst agencies to address future impacts to multiple species. 

Chapter 4. Native Pollinators and the Federal Endangered Species Act: Compliance Strategies for  State Departments of Transportation  4-32 4.7 Summary  State DOTs can contribute to the recovery of imperiled pollinator species and potentially help to avert listings by considering pollinators in the planning process. Undertaking proactive voluntary conservation measures can help transportation agencies secure reasonable assurances regarding their future regulatory responsibilities under the ESA through a variety of mechanisms. HCPs and associated incidental take permits have continually proven themselves to be a versatile tool for reconciling development and conservation objectives in a wide variety of contexts. Similarly, SHAs, CCAAs, CCAs, RCS, and PCAs offer transportation agencies useful strategies to be collaborative and innovative in their approach to ESA compliance. The flexibility and ingenuity tied to thoughtful, advanced planning efforts are key to developing effective compliance strategies and resolving complex and controversial issues that may arise as a transportation project or program moves from planning to implementation. Investing in time up front to identify opportunities can allow transportation agencies to take a comprehensive approach to planning and implementing conservation measures across a larger service area or road network. With an opportunity to take a landscape-scale approach and think broadly about future impacts likely to occur across space and time, planners and designers can consider adopting compliance strategies that are programmatic in nature and take advantage of multi-agency partnerships. In particular, transportation agencies can seek out opportunities to form multi-agency partnerships across regions where similar construction and management activities have the potential to affect, but equally improve, the long-term conservation status of imperiled pollinators. For a number of infrastructure agencies, such partnerships have proven to ultimately lead to greater efficiencies in the design and build process (see Chapter 5) and long-term maintenance (see Chapter 6), saving time and resources. Furthermore, implemented measures have resulted in higher-profile conservation actions for the agencies and often greater public support and recognition. 4.8 Additional Resources  • NCHRP Legal Research Digest 75: Legal Requirements for State Departments of Transportation Agency Participation in Conservation Plans: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24901/legal-requirements-for-state-departments-of- transportation-agency-participation-in-conservation-plans. • USFWS’s Pollinators Library: https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/pollinators. • USFWS’s Endangered Species Program: https://www.fws.gov/program/endangered- species.

Next: Chapter 5: Considering Imperiled Pollinators in Transportation Planning, Design, and Construction »
Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Transportation agencies can make a difference for imperiled pollinators by managing existing roadside vegetation and designing new revegetation plantings with habitat needs in mind. This can generate public support for the agency and help to mitigate the negative ecological effects of roads.

NCHRP Web-Only Document 362: Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 2: California, from TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program, is part of a 16-volume series, with each volume focused on a specific region of the United States, and is intended to provide relevant guidance to rights-of-way owners and operators for roadside vegetation management practices that support pollinators, as well as strategies that are compliant with the federal Endangered Species Act.

Supplemental to the document are a Dataset of California Accessory Materials, a Communications Toolbox, a Conduct of Research Report, and a Video.

All the other volumes are available on the webpage for NCHRP Web-Only Document 362: Pollinator Habitat Conservation Along Roadways, Volume 1: Alaska.

The other volumes are:

Volume 1: Alaska

Volume 3: Florida

Volume 4: Great Basin

Volume 5: Great Lakes

Volume 6: Hawaii

Volume 7: Inland Northwest

Volume 8: Maritime Northwest

Volume 9: Mid-Atlantic

Volume 10: Midwest

Volume 11: Northeast

Volume 12: Northern Plains

Volume 13: Rocky Mountains

Volume 14: Southeast

Volume 15: Southern Plains

Volume 16: Southwest

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!