Compliance Analysis Overview

Guidelines for how long an animal survey for State-listed species in Virginia is valid If a survey, however old, has a positive species occurrence, further coordination with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries will be required. This list provides a general guideline for how long a negative survey (a survey where no listed species was found) remains valid. These timeframes provide general recommendations; site-specific circumstances may require that these general guidelines be modified. For Federally-listed species, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife also must be contacted.

Taxon/Species # of years a negative survey is valid Mammals All listed bats 3 Other listed mammals 2 Birds Gull-billed tern (Sterna nilotica) 1 Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) 1 Wilson’s plover (Charadrius wilsonia) 1 Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) 1 Other listed birds 2 Fish All listed fish 2 Amphibians All listed amphibians 2 Reptiles All listed reptiles 2 All listed isopods and amphipods 3 All listed mollusks 2 All other listed invertebrates 2

• Last Updated: November 19, 2010 Prepared by Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources

Guidelines for how long an animal survey for State-listed species in Virginia is valid If a survey, however old, has a positive species occurrence, further coordination with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries will be required. This list provides a general guideline for how long a negative survey (a survey where no listed species was found) remains valid. These timeframes provide general recommendations; site-specific circumstances may require that these general guidelines be modified. For Federally-listed species, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife also must be contacted.

Taxon/Species: Negative survey validity (years): Mammals—All listed bats 3, Other listed mammals 2; Birds—Gull-billed tern 1, Peregrine falcon 1, Wilson’s plover 1, Bald eagle 1, Other listed birds 2; Fish—All listed fish 2; Amphibians—All listed amphibians 2; Reptiles—All listed reptiles 2; Isopods and amphipods—3; Mollusks—2; Other invertebrates—2.

• Last Updated: November 19, 2010 Prepared by Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources

Procedures for DEQ Staff – Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) Review Reissuances and Issuances

Department of Wildlife Resources Environmental Services

Reissuances: Per the 2006 MOU between DEQ, DCR, DWR, and the USFWS, DWR receives, at the beginning of each calendar year, a spreadsheet of all Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permits proposed for reissuance during the following calendar year. DWR, then, identifies which of the facilities are located on Threatened and Endangered Species Waters and provides that list to the USFWS and DEQ, indicating which reissuances we should be provided the opportunity to review.

However, in an effort to better address our review priorities, DWR will only review and comment on VPDES reissuances that meets one or more of the below:

• the location of the discharge is proposed to change;
• the discharging infrastructure needs maintenance or repair resulting in instream work;
• the composition of the discharge effluents is proposed to change; and/or
• a 316(a) or 316(b) assessment has been performed for the facility.

If the project meets one of the triggers above, please send it to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review.

If the project does not meet any of the above review triggers, DEQ does not need to send the reissuance to us for review and should consider the following as our recommendations:

• We recommend adherence to all approved water quality standards.
• In instances where pre-discharge treatment is necessary, we recommend UV disinfection to chlorine disinfection.
• We recommend adherence to all necessary water quality monitoring.

New Issuances: Per the 2006 MOU between DEQ, DCR, DWR [DGIF], and the USFWS, DEQ staff should send any newly proposed discharge that is located within two miles of a documented listed species location or within two miles and hydrologically connected to a DWR designated Threatened and Endangered Species Waters to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review.

Clean Water Act 316 (a) [thermal] and 316 (b) [Impingement and Entrainment] Assessments: DEQ should send any 316 (a) or 316 (b) assessment performed for any facility (whether located on a Threatened or Endangered Species Water or not) to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review and comment.

Procedures for DEQ Staff – VPDES Review Reissuances and Issuances

Department of Wildlife Resources Environmental Services

Reissuances: Under the 2006 MOU, DWR receives annually a spreadsheet of VPDES permits proposed for reissuance, identifies facilities on Threatened and Endangered Species Waters, and shares the list with USFWS and DEQ for review opportunities.

To prioritize reviews, DWR will only review and comment on VPDES reissuances meeting one or more of the below:

• the discharge location is proposed to change;
• discharging infrastructure requires maintenance or repair involving instream work;
• discharge effluent composition is proposed to change; and/or
• a 316(a) or 316(b) assessment has been performed for the facility.

If the project meets a trigger, send it to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review.

If the project does not meet review triggers, DEQ need not send it for review and should consider the following recommendations:

• We recommend adherence to all approved water quality standards.
• When pre-discharge treatment is needed, we recommend UV disinfection over chlorine.
• We recommend adherence to all necessary water quality monitoring.

New Issuances: Under the 2006 MOU, DEQ staff must send any new discharge within two miles of a listed species or connected to Threatened and Endangered Species Waters to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review.

CWA 316 (a) and (b) assessments: DEQ should send any such assessments for any facility to DWR’s Environmental Services Biologists for review.

ACOE Staff - Coordination with DWR Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Consistency Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides Army Corps of Engineer (ACOE) staff information about how to scope proposed projects for wildlife species and designated resources to ensure issued permits are consistent with Virginia’s enforceable policies administered by DWR under the Coastal Zone Management Program.

This document includes guidance for coordination with DWR to ensure the Corps-issued permits are consistent with Coastal Zone Management Act enforceable policies for which DWR has authority: VI. Wildlife and Inland Fisheries and VIII. Commonwealth Lands. The enforceable policies can be found here: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8605/638186363140970000

Assuming ACOE staff are appropriately coordinating with the USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries regarding potential impacts upon federal-listed species ACOE staff should only coordinate with DWR, per the below, if potential impacts upon state-listed species and/or DWR-designated resources have been described/documented by the NWP applicant.

When coordination with DWR is necessary: Aquatic Species: ONLY coordinate with DWR when one of the following listed aquatic species and/or waters designated as Threatened and Endangered Species Waters due to their presence have been documented from the project area IF the project includes instream work and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal / grubbing) within 300 ft of any stream bank.

Listed Aquatic Species Brook Floater

Green Floater

Blackbanded Sunfish Semi-aquatic species: ONLY coordinate with DWR when the following listed semi-aquatic species have been documented from the project area IF the project includes instream work, work in wetlands, and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal / grubbing) within 300 ft of a stream bank or wetland edge.

Listed Semi-Aquatic Reptiles Wood Turtle

Eastern Chicken Turtle

Birds: ONLY coordinate with DWR when the following listed birds have been documented from the project area IF the project includes 1) woody vegetation removal (trees, shrubs), ground clearing, grubbing or other significant habitat modifications, and/or 2) activities resulting in loud noises (dredging, drilling, construction, demolition) that may result in flushing nearby birds from active nests.

Listed Birds Henslow’s Sparrow

Loggerhead Shrike

Bachman’s Sparrow

Gull-Billed Tern*

Wilson’s Plover*

Peregrine Falcons^

 *Waterbirds, shorebirds - for these species, habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes should be considered in addition to the above.

 ^Peregrine Falcons - In the Coastal Zone, Peregrine Falcons are typically located on bridges and buildings in artificial nesting structures. However on the Eastern Shore, they are not only known to occupy artificial structures but also sometimes on beaches and upper dunes. ONLY coordinate with DWR when Peregrine Falcons have been documented from the project area IF the project is located on or immediately adjacent to the occupied bridge or building (within 600 ft) and/or is located on the Eastern Shore.

Bats: ONLY coordinate with DWR if one of the below listed bats has been documented within the project area as described below: Listed Bats Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats

Tri-colored Bat

Little Brown Bat

 Little Brown and Tri-color Bats: use this application to determine if roosts or hibernacula documented for these species are located within the project area: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/ . Coordinate with DWR if one of these bat features is located within the project area.

 Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR for projects including tree removal or timbering that are located within 2 miles of a documented record of this species.

Reptiles: ONLY coordinate with DWR when one of the following listed reptiles has been documented from the project area IF the project includes work within suitable habitats as described below: Reptiles Canebrake Rattlesnake

Eastern Glass Lizard  Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, associated shrublands and freshwater wetlands, particularly in Virginia Beach.  Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas:  Confirmed Anadromous Fish Use Areas – Coordinate with DWR anytime work in such waters or at sites within 1 mile upstream of such waters is proposed  Potential Anadromous Fish Use Areas – Coordinate with DWR anytime work in such waters is proposed.

ACOE coordination with DWR to confirm Coastal Zone Consistency: If it is determined that further review by DWR is necessary, compile and send ONLY the following project information to ESSProjects@DWR.virginia.gov to initiate coordination with DWR: a. Project Description b. Topographic map depicting the project boundaries; Lat/long coordinates for the project centroid. c. The VAFWIS IPA results depicting confirmed documentation(s) of listed species and/or DWR-designated resources within 2 miles of the project site.

DWR Environmental Services Response: Upon review of the project, DWR staff will respond to the requestor (ACOE) within 30 days of receipt of the project. Our response will either indicate that the project is consistent with the Wildlife and Inland Fisheries and Commonwealth Lands Enforceable Policies of the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program as proposed or we will provide measures that need to be taken regarding protection of listed wildlife and their habitats to ensure consistency with the CZMA. If DWR does not respond within 30 days, you may move forward with permitting.

ACOE Staff - Coordination with DWR Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Consistency Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides Army Corps of Engineer (ACOE) staff information about how to scope proposed projects for wildlife species and designated resources to ensure issued permits are consistent with Virginia’s enforceable policies administered by DWR under the Coastal Zone Management Program.

This guidance ensures Corps permits align with DWR’s enforceable policies under the Coastal Zone Management Act: VI. Wildlife and Inland Fisheries, VIII. Commonwealth Lands. Policies: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8605/638186363140970000

If ACOE coordinates with USFWS/NOAA for federal-listed species impacts, then coordinate with DWR only if impacts to state-listed species or DWR resources are documented by the NWP applicant.

When needed: ONLY coordinate with DWR for documented aquatic species or waters designated as Threatened and Endangered, if project involves instream or earth work within 300 ft of a stream bank.

Brook Floater

Green Floater

Blackbanded Sunfish: ONLY coordinate with DWR if documented in the project area and if project involves instream, wetland, or earth work within 300 ft of a stream or wetland edge.

Wood Turtle

Eastern Chicken Turtle

Birds: ONLY coordinate with DWR if documented and if project involves habitat modification (vegetation removal, ground clearing) or loud activities (dredging, drilling) that may flush birds from nests.

Henslow’s Sparrow

Loggerhead Shrike

Bachman’s Sparrow

Gull-Billed Tern*

Wilson’s Plover*

Peregrine Falcons^

Waterbirds, shorebirds: consider habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes in addition to above.

Peregrine Falcons: In the Coastal Zone, typically on bridges/buildings; on the Eastern Shore, also on beaches/dunes. Coordinate with DWR if documented within 600 ft of project or on the Eastern Shore.

Bats: ONLY coordinate with DWR if documented in the project area: Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats

Tri-colored Bat

Little Brown Bat

For Little Brown and Tri-colored Bats, use https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/... to check for roosts/hibernacula; coordinate with DWR if within project area.

Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR for tree removal/timbering within 2 miles of documented records.

Reptiles: ONLY coordinate with DWR if documented in the project area and if work occurs in suitable habitats: Canebrake Rattlesnake.

Eastern Glass Lizard: Work on beaches, dunes, shrublands, wetlands in Virginia Beach. Canebrake Rattlesnake: Work in mature forests in southeastern Virginia, Chesapeake, Suffolk, Virginia Beach.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas: Coordinate with DWR for work in confirmed areas or within 1 mile upstream of potential areas.

ACOE coordination with DWR to confirm Coastal Zone Consistency: If it is determined that further review by DWR is necessary, compile and send ONLY the following project information to ESSProjects@DWR.virginia.gov to initiate coordination with DWR: a. Project Description b. Topographic map depicting the project boundaries; Lat/long coordinates for the project centroid. c. The VAFWIS IPA results depicting confirmed documentation(s) of listed species and/or DWR-designated resources within 2 miles of the project site.

DWR Environmental Services Response: Upon review of the project, DWR staff will respond to the requestor (ACOE) within 30 days of receipt of the project. Our response will either indicate that the project is consistent with the Wildlife and Inland Fisheries and Commonwealth Lands Enforceable Policies of the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program as proposed or we will provide measures that need to be taken regarding protection of listed wildlife and their habitats to ensure consistency with the CZMA. If DWR does not respond within 30 days, you may move forward with permitting.

Fish Relocation Best Practices Wildlife Information and Environmental Services I. Purpose To guide persons performing instream work within the Commonwealth of Virginia to comply with regulatory requirements regarding protection of state Threatened or Endangered species, per The Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-563 through 29.1-570) and to protect other sensitive fish species from harm during instream construction, per Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-521.

Additional relocation efforts may be required if cofferdams are overtopped by high water events.

II. Permits and Certification Requirements

1. The Lead/Supervisor for a fish relocation project in any waters designated as Threatened/Endangered Species Waters due to the likely presence of a Threatened or Endangered species of fish must be authorized (certified) by: (1) successfully completing fish identification and collection techniques training approved by the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (), or (2) otherwise documenting competency in fish identification and collection techniques to the satisfaction of ; and (2) be authorized to lead/supervise fish relocations within Threatened/Endangered Species Waters on the applicable Threatened/Endangered Species Permit. Such authorizations and permits may be specific both with regard to fish species and to stream reaches or river basins.

1. The certified Lead/Supervisor must be present and directly supervise all fish relocation efforts in Threatened/Endangered Species Waters. The certified Lead/Supervisor also must be onsite during the cofferdam installation and dewatering process (or during enactment of other isolation procedures) to ensure these activities do not cause fish stress or injury. Non-certified assistants participating in the fish relocation project must be listed as sub-permittees on the appropriate Threatened/Endangered Species Permit.

Additional Threatened/Endangered Species Permit conditions may apply due to the likely presence of Threatened or Endangered species other than fish.

1. The Lead/Supervisor and all assistants participating in any fish relocation project in waters not designated as Threatened/Endangered Species Waters must be named as the permittee or as authorized sub-permittees on an appropriate Scientific Collection Permit. 1 III. Methods

Fish caught within coffer dammed areas must be removed within 24 hours after placement of the cofferdams. If water depth within the cofferdam is too deep to remove fish, and it has been determined that partial dewatering is necessary prior to removing fish, then the pump intakes must be screened to prevent fish and aquatic biota from entering the intake. Details of the fish relocation efforts will be documented, photographed, and summarized in a final report to be submitted to for state and federally listed species, and to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for federally listed species. Unless otherwise authorized by and USFWS, fish relocation efforts shall not be conducted during applicable Time-of-Year Restrictions (TOYR) for any protected fish species likely to be encountered at the project site, as determined during the pre-project assessment described in step 1a below.

1. Fish collection and identification: The method(s) used may depend on the stream characteristics or conditions such as depth, flow, substrate, water clarity, and size or area of the potential impact zone. Methods are also dependent upon the target fish.

For example, schooling fish like minnows may be more susceptible to seining, while benthic species such as darters may require electroshocking to capture. At some locations, it may be necessary to use a combination of these methods to ensure that all fish have been safely removed from the coffer dammed area. Because there is no flow within a cofferdam, one inherent problem in collection is the turbid conditions once the stream bottom is disturbed. Collection efforts may need to be adjusted to account for these conditions.

a. Pre-project assessment: Prior to collection, the Environmental Lead will determine listed aquatic species that may likely be collected at the project site by accessing an authorized database. Special emphasis will be placed on Threatened or Endangered species and visually similar species.

b. Seining and dip netting: The least-lethal fish removal techniques include seining and/or dip netting. These techniques minimize potential risks of distress or injury to the fish. Seining works most effectively when there are few if any instream obstacles such as large rocks, branches, and pilings or other structures.

Seining also requires water depth greater than 1 ft. to efficiently capture fish.

One advantage of seining over other techniques is that it does not rely on seeing the fish, so seining can be conducted in turbid water. Seines come in varying lengths and mesh sizes: a 10 ft. long by 3 ft. high seine with a mesh of 1/8” mesh is sufficient for most cofferdams. In many cases, three individuals are needed to operate a seine. One individual is positioned on each end holding the brail.

Brails are maintained at a 45-degree angle on the stream bottom as the individuals move parallel to one another from one end of the coffer dammed area to the other. During this time, the bottom of the seine (lead line) is kept close to the stream bottom, while the top of the seine (float line) is maintained on the water’s surface. While the seine is being pulled, the third individual frees it of any snags and assists in lifting the seine if necessary. Upon reaching the end 2 of the coffer dammed area, the lead line is lifted out of the water, ensuring that the float line is out of the water as well. Visual inspection or observation with view scopes or polarized sunglasses may be used to determine locations of fish concentrations and the effectiveness of this method. Dipnets may be used in conjunction with seine nets and, in shallow water, aquarium nets may be needed to remove fish.

c. Electroshocking: Electroshocking is most effective in clear water conditions or when obstacles prevent seining or dip netting. It is also useful on alert and active species such as smallmouth bass, which are effective at avoiding nets. The downside of electroshocking is that it is potentially dangerous for staff and target organisms. As with seining, electroshocking requires at least two individuals: one individual operates the shocker while the other dips for fish and holds the bucket. Both individuals should carry a dipnet. The shocker should be tested and controls set outside of the coffer dammed area. Shocking should occur in a sweeping motion from side-to-side, ensuring that the area in front of the shocker is covered before moving forward. Staff should keep ahead of any sediment plumes kicked up during collection. All fish should be netted and immediately transferred to clean, oxygenated water in the bucket. At no time should anyone touch the water unless they are assured the electroshocker is turned off. In the bucket, fish should quickly recover and begin swimming. If this is not the case, shocking unit controls must be adjusted and the voltage reduced. Fish numbers in the bucket must be monitored to ensure overcrowding does not occur. This is especially critical in summer when oxygen can be quickly depleted from warm water. Electrofishing will be conducted in a manner that minimizes harm to fish. The minimum effective voltage, pulse width, and pulse rates necessary to achieve the desired response (stunned fish) will be used. All efforts will be taken to ensure that fish do not come into contact with the electroshocker anode.

d. Collection effort: Efforts to capture fish within the coffer dammed area will be repeated until the surveyors are confident that all fish have been removed. This will require a minimum of three seine hauls with no fish collected. Capture or observation of any fish during a haul will precipitate three additional seine hauls (i.e., seining will continue until no fish are collected during three successive hauls). In situations where electroshocking is needed, the entire coffer dammed area should be covered with special emphasis on difficult to reach places (crevices, rocks, etc.). When electroshocking, three passes should be conducted with no additional fish collections. As with seining, three additional passes must be initiated if a fish is caught or observed. If conditions become turbid with low visibility, seining should be conducted after an initial electroshocking effort, using the above-described depletion protocols. 3 e. Fish Identification: All fish will be identified to species level when possible, and at least to the Family level. Photographs will be taken of each species found during the fish removal efforts. All individual fish identified as possibly representing a Threatened or Endangered species will be photographed. Total counts will be taken for all species found. Notes will be taken regarding any fish showing signs of distress, parasitism, anomalies, or injuries.

1. Fish handling and relocation: After workup, captured fish will be relocated to suitable habitat outside of the cofferdam, and away from the work area. Handling of the fish will be minimized to the greatest extent possible. Individuals handling the fish will do so with clean, wet hands that are free of chemicals and toxins such as insect repellent, sunscreen, or lotions.

If it has been determined that fish need to be relocated at least 100 meters upstream or downstream from the impact area, it may be necessary to place the fish in buckets of fresh streamwater so they can be released to suitable habitat. Fish held in the bucket will be checked often to ensure they are healthy and that water conditions are acceptable. Frequent water changes and a battery operated air pump may be necessary in certain situations. Except as stipulated below for incidentally killed fish, no individual fish will be kept or killed for scientific collection or other purposes.

Fish will be released in calm, shallow (<1 ft. deep) waters that facilitate their recovery and reorientation to river conditions. The fish will be monitored to ensure they remain upright and are able to actively swim. Any Threatened or Endangered species will be reported to within 24 hours of capture. Any Threatened or Endangered fish incidentally taken (killed) will be preserved and delivered to . Documentation of the fish removal operation will include project location, date, methods, personnel, water temperature, conductivity, flow conditions, water depth and clarity, substrate type, equipment settings, fish species, total numbers, fish condition, fish release location, and digital photographs. 4

Fish Relocation Best Practices Wildlife Information and Environmental Services I. Purpose To guide instream work in Virginia for compliance with regulations protecting Threatened or Endangered species under the Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1, §§29.1-563 to 29.1-570) and other sensitive fish during construction, per Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1, §§29.1-521.

Additional relocation efforts may be required if cofferdams are overtopped by high water events.

II. Permits and Certification Requirements

1. The Lead/Supervisor in Threatened/Endangered waters must be certified via approved training or competency documentation and authorized on the relevant permit. Permits may specify species or stream reach.

1. The certified Lead/Supervisor must oversee all fish relocation efforts and be present during cofferdam installation and dewatering. Non-certified assistants must be listed as sub-permittees.

Additional Threatened/Endangered Species Permit conditions may apply due to likely presence of non-fish Threatened or Endangered species.

1. The Lead/Supervisor and all assistants participating in any fish relocation project in waters not designated as Threatened/Endangered Species Waters must be named as the permittee or as authorized sub-permittees on an appropriate Scientific Collection Permit. 1 III. Methods

Fish in coffer dammed areas must be removed within 24 hours of dam placement. If water is too deep, partial dewatering with screened pump intakes is required. Relocation efforts will be documented, photographed, and summarized in a final report for state and federal agencies. Unless authorized, fish relocation must follow TOYR restrictions identified during pre-project assessment.

1. Fish collection and identification methods depend on stream conditions (depth, flow, substrate, clarity, impact zone size) and target species.

Schooling fish like minnows are more susceptible to seining, while benthic species like darters may need electroshocking. A combination of methods may be necessary. Turbidity from disturbed stream bottoms may require adjusting collection efforts.

a. Pre-project assessment: The Environmental Lead will identify likely listed aquatic species at the site via authorized database, emphasizing Threatened or Endangered species and similar species.

b. Seining and dip netting: Least-lethal removal techniques that minimize fish injury. Seining is most effective with few instream obstacles.

Seining requires water depth over 1 ft. for efficiency.

Seining can be done in turbid water and does not require sighting fish. Typical seine: 10 ft. x 3 ft., 1/8” mesh. Three operators, with one on each end holding brails.

Brails are kept at 45° angle, moving parallel along the stream bottom. The lead line stays close to the bottom, float line on surface. A third person clears snags and lifts the seine. Fish locations are checked visually. Dipnets or aquarium nets may assist in shallow water.

Electroshocking is effective in clear water or when obstacles prevent seining/dip netting, especially for active species. It is dangerous; requires two operators, careful controls, and immediate fish transfer to oxygenated water. Voltage and pulse settings will be minimized to reduce harm.

Fish capture efforts will continue until three consecutive hauls or passes yield no fish. Electroshocking covers the entire area, especially crevices. Additional passes are required if fish are caught or observed. Turbidity may delay seining after electroshocking. 3 All fish will be identified to species or family, photographed, and counted. Threatened or Endangered species will be specifically photographed. Notes on fish health and anomalies will be recorded.

1. Captured fish will be relocated outside the cofferdam to suitable habitat, with minimal handling using clean, wet hands free of chemicals or toxins.

Fish relocated at least 100 meters upstream or downstream may be held in buckets of fresh streamwater, checked regularly for health, with water changes and aeration as needed. No fish will be killed unless incidentally killed.

Fish will be released in calm, shallow (<1 ft. deep) waters that facilitate their recovery and reorientation to river conditions. The fish will be monitored to ensure they remain upright and are able to actively swim. Any Threatened or Endangered species will be reported to within 24 hours of capture. Any Threatened or Endangered fish incidentally taken (killed) will be preserved and delivered to . Documentation of the fish removal operation will include project location, date, methods, personnel, water temperature, conductivity, flow conditions, water depth and clarity, substrate type, equipment settings, fish species, total numbers, fish condition, fish release location, and digital photographs. 4

Wildlife Scoping Instructions and Resource Protection Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Purpose: This document provides information about scoping any project for wildlife species and designated resources and provides general recommendations for coordination with DWR’s Environmental Services Section based on those scoping results. This document also provides general recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts upon Virginia’s wildlife and their habitats.

Step 1: Access the VA Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS) from the DWR website at: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp . Also access the below bat data applications: Northern Long-eared Bat Regulatory Buffer Map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/ and the Little Brown and Tricolor Bat Hibernacula and Roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter- habitat-roosts-application/ Send an email to Support_VAFWIS@dwr.virginia.gov if you need to set up an account or need other assistance.

Step 2: Using the geographic search function, generate an Initial Project Assessment (IPA) report for the site using an at least 2 – mile buffer around project boundaries (action area). See the “help” section for instructions.

Step 3: Review the below information regarding data returned by VAFWIS and apply, as appropriate.

Please see the end of the document for contacts regarding common wildlife species, the location of which may not be accurately depicted by VAFWIS which is most heavily populated by imperiled species and designated resource data.

Any project with a federal nexus (e.g., the project entails any federal funding, permits, or federal agency action) must comport with consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. To ensure such compliance, the project applicant or proponent should access the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since listing of Atlantic Sturgeon, all hydraulic hopper dredging activities in the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries, regardless of time of year must be coordinated with NOAA Fisheries Service.

I. Listed Species and Designated Wildlife Resources Species Observations (SppObs) – The Species Observation dataset includes all verified species documentations maintained by DWR. If the IPA results indicate that a listed species has been documented from the project area, it is possible that the species is present on the project site, if suitable habitat exists. Coordinate with DWR Environmental Services Staff, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ , as conservation measures may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act

Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) – The Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) dataset includes the locations of waters from which listed species have been documented and which agency biologists have determined are currently occupied by such species. If work in the TEWater or its tributaries is proposed (ex: installation of crossings, soil borings, stream restoration, utility installation, etc.), we recommend coordination with DWR’s Environmental Services (ES) staff per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ as conservation measures may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of TEWaters:

a) If a waterbody is designated a TEWater due to the presence of listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, we recommend the following to best protect such listed aquatic species (and the resources upon which they depend) from harm that may result from nearby agriculture, silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

b) If a waterbody is designated a TE Water due to the presence of wood turtles, we recommend the following (in addition to the above), to best protect this listed semi-aquatic species (and the resources upon which it depends) from harm that may result from nearby silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development

• Because wood turtles must have access to freshwater streams during hibernation as well as access to adjacent uplands, where they forage, mate, and nest, we recommend coordination with us not only for instream work, but also for any work in uplands adjacent to (within 900 feet of) the designated water.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – The Anadromous Fish Use Areas (AnadFish Waters) dataset includes the locations of streams known to provide migratory and spawning habitats for anadromous fishes. We recommend coordination with DWR ES anytime work in designated AnadFish Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of AnadFish Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all designated waters.

Anadromous Fishes/Fish Passage Expert: Alan Weaver 804-367-6795 or Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov Bat Occurrence Data Applications – These datasets include documented occurrences of these bats and regulatory buffers around those features. If your project/activity falls within one of the regulatory buffers. we recommend coordination with DWR’s Environmental Services (ES) staff per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ as conservation measures may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

• Northern Long-eared Bats: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little brown and Tricolor Bat hibs and roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches*– This dataset includes stretches of beach/shoreline in Virginia known to support nesting of sea turtles, all of which are federally- and state-listed. We recommend coordination with DWR ES, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ as conservation measures may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

Wild Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset includes the locations of waters designated as cold water habitat. Many of these streams represent wild trout streams. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to support, we recommend coordination with DWR ESS per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ anytime work in designated Trout Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Stockable Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset also includes the locations of waters currently stocked with trout by DWR as well as those suitable for stocking, but perhaps not currently stocked. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to or capable of supporting, we recommend coordination with DWR ESS per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ anytime work in Stocked Trout Waters is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water;
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Colonial Waterbird (CWB) colonies – This DWR-maintained dataset includes documented locations of colonial waterbird colonies. To ensure protection of the colony and the species known to nest within it, we recommend coordination with DWR’s ES per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for any land development or timbering activities proposed to occur within 0.5 miles of a documented colony. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of colonial waterbird colonies:

• We recommend preserving, planting and/or enhancing an undisturbed natively vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around the waterbird colony. This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

DWR Lands (boat ramps, WMA’s, Fish Hatcheries, Lakes)* – The DWR Lands dataset includes locations of all DWR facilities. We support development of easement restrictions protective of our facilities and access to them by the public and our staff; and the watersheds/drainages upstream of our hatcheries and fishing lakes.

Bald Eagle Nests – This dataset includes the location of bald eagle nests, and their associated buffers, within Virginia.

While we periodically update nest status or add new nests based on curated observations from citizens and/or our staff, we no longer update bald eagle nest data annually per flyover survey data. To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.

Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts (BECAR) - This dataset includes bald eagle concentration areas (defined as 660 feet landward or channelward of the shoreline) and documented roosting sites documented by VDWR and/or our partners. Significant habitat alteration, location of water-dependent facilities or other recreational and commercial activities within certain distances of eagle nests, concentration zones, or roosts may result in adverse impacts upon eagles. Therefore, we recommend that land owners comply with the Virginia management guidelines for landowners; and that he or she coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit associated with activities on his or her property.

• coming to VAFWIS very soon!

II. Common Wildlife Species and Resources

Use the following table to identify the appropriate contact to answer any questions or provide information regarding common wildlife and/or wildlife-related recreation in your area. Link to DWR regional map: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/vDWR-region-map.pdf

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov Temporary 2023

Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@DWR.virginia.govIII: Species Special Status Table

Species Status and Type Responsible Agency in Virginia

Federal Endangered (FE) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Threatened (FT) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Candidate (FC) Animals USFWS

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Proposed (FP) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) Federal Species of Concern (FS) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) State Endangered (SE) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH

State Threatened (ST) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation DWR (at applicant’s discretion) Need (SGCN)^

Table Notes:

NOAA Fisheries Service has jurisdictional authority over protection of sea turtles in Virginia’s waters (non-nesting), Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon and marine mammals.

The VA Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) retains legal authority for the protection of all plants and listed insects. However, through a memorandum of agreement with VDCR-DNH, coordination regarding these resources should be initiated with VDCR-DNH.

See www.bewildvirginia.org for more information about the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

IV: DWR Environmental Services Contacts

Amy Martin, Program Manager 804-481-5296 Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov

Lee Brann 804-481-1934 Lee.Brann@dwr.virginia.gov

Tamara Doucette 804-659-3428 Tamara.Doucette@dwr.virginia.gov

V: Project Review Submission Emails*

ESSProjects@dwr.virginia.gov

ProjectReview@dwr.virginia.gov

• See information here to determine which email address to submit your project for review: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/

Wildlife Scoping Instructions and Resource Protection Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Purpose: This document provides information about scoping any project for wildlife species and designated resources and provides general recommendations for coordination with DWR’s Environmental Services Section based on those scoping results. This document also provides general recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts upon Virginia’s wildlife and their habitats.

Step 1: Access VAFWIS at https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp and bat data apps: Northern Long-eared Bat Map and Little Brown/Tricolor Bat Roosts. Email Support_VAFWIS@dwr.virginia.gov for assistance.

Step 2: Use geographic search to generate an IPA report with at least a 2-mile buffer around the project area. Refer to the help section for instructions.

Step 3: Review VAFWIS data and apply as appropriate.

See the document end for contacts on common wildlife species, which VAFWIS may not accurately depict, as it focuses on imperiled species and resources.

Projects with federal nexus must comply with Section 7 ESA. Use https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/ for review. Dredging in Chesapeake Bay and tributaries must coordinate with NOAA Fisheries after Atlantic Sturgeon listing.

I. Listed Species and Designated Wildlife Resources Species Observations (SppObs) – The Species Observation dataset includes verified species records. If IPA indicates documented species, coordinate with DWR ES staff per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for conservation measures to comply with ESA.

Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) – TEWaters dataset shows waters with documented and occupied listed species. For work in TEWaters or tributaries, coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/. General guidance follows.

a) For TEWaters with listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, follow recommended protections from nearby land use activities to prevent harm.

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

b) For TEWaters with wood turtles, follow additional protections to safeguard this semi-aquatic species from nearby land activities.

• Because wood turtles need access to streams during hibernation and uplands within 900 ft for foraging, mating, and nesting, coordinate with us for instream and upland work.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – AnadFish Waters dataset shows streams with migratory/spawning habitats. Coordinate with DWR ES for work in these areas. General guidance follows.

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all designated waters.

Anadromous Fishes/Fish Passage Expert: Contact Alan Weaver at 804-367-6795 or Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov for bat occurrence datasets and buffers. Coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for conservation measures.

• Northern Long-eared Bats: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little brown and Tricolor Bat hibs and roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches*– This dataset includes stretches of beach/shoreline in Virginia known to support nesting of sea turtles, all of which are federally- and state-listed. We recommend coordination with DWR ES, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ as conservation measures may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

Wild Trout Waters – Cold Water Streams dataset shows waters with cold habitat, including wild trout streams. Coordinate with DWR ESS per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for work in Trout Waters. General guidance follows.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Stockable Trout Waters – The dataset also shows waters stocked or suitable for stocking with trout. Coordinate with DWR ESS per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for work in Stocked Trout Waters. General guidance follows.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water;
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Colonial Waterbird (CWB) colonies – The colonial waterbird colonies dataset shows nesting sites. Coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for activities within 0.5 miles. General guidance follows.

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a native vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around the waterbird colony to protect nesting, habitat, and future nesting suitability.

DWR Lands (boat ramps, WMA’s, Fish Hatcheries, Lakes)* – DWR Lands dataset shows facilities. Support easements protecting facilities, access, and upstream watersheds of hatcheries and lakes.

Bald Eagle Nests – Dataset shows bald eagle nests and buffers in Virginia.

While we periodically update nest status or add new nests based on curated observations from citizens and/or our staff, we no longer update bald eagle nest data annually per flyover survey data. To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.

Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts (BECAR) - Bald eagle concentration areas and roosts are mapped. Activities near these sites may impact eagles. Landowners should follow Virginia guidelines and coordinate with USFWS for impacts or permits.

• coming to VAFWIS very soon!

II. Common Wildlife Species and Resources

Use the table to find contacts for common wildlife and recreation questions. Regional map: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/vDWR-region-map.pdf

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov Temporary 2023

Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@DWR.virginia.govIII: Species Special Status Table

Species Status and Type Responsible Agency in Virginia

Federal Endangered (FE) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Threatened (FT) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Candidate (FC) Animals USFWS

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Proposed (FP) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) Federal Species of Concern (FS) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) State Endangered (SE) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH

State Threatened (ST) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation DWR (at applicant’s discretion) Need (SGCN)^

Table Notes:

NOAA Fisheries Service has jurisdictional authority over protection of sea turtles in Virginia’s waters (non-nesting), Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon and marine mammals.

VDACS retains authority for all plants and listed insects; coordination with VDCR-DNH is recommended via MOA with VDCR-DNH.

See www.bewildvirginia.org for more information about the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

IV: DWR Environmental Services Contacts

Amy Martin, Program Manager 804-481-5296 Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov

Lee Brann 804-481-1934 Lee.Brann@dwr.virginia.gov

Tamara Doucette 804-659-3428 Tamara.Doucette@dwr.virginia.gov

V: Project Review Submission Emails*

ESSProjects@dwr.virginia.gov

ProjectReview@dwr.virginia.gov

• See https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ to determine project review email.

FRESHWATER MUSSEL GUIDELINES FOR

VIRGINIA

Virginia Field Office Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 90778 6669 Short Lane Henrico, VA 23228-0778 Gloucester, VA 23061 804-367-1000 804-693-6694 Last Updated: November 16, 2018

LIST OF ENCLOSURES

1 - Federal and State Project Review Process in Virginia 2 - Federally and State Listed Species in Virginia 3 - Mussel Survey and Relocation Guidelines in Virginia 4 - Surveyor List for Atlantic Slope Mussels in Virginia 5 - Surveyor List for Upper Tennessee River Basin Mussels in Virginia 6 - Time of Year Restrictions (See Freshwater Mollusks) 7 - Map of Federally Designated Critical Habitat for Mussels in Virginia

INTRODUCTION

These guidelines are for project applicants and consultants planning certain activities that will impact rivers, streams, creeks, or other waterways in Virginia. The guidelines provide recommendations for conducting freshwater mussel surveys and relocations for small construction projects of short duration involving non-point pollution sources and affecting no more than 100 linear feet of waterway. Larger projects that impact waters containing State or federally listed mussels may require additional coordination or permits from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Coordination with these agencies should always be initiated to ensure compliance with Federal and State laws. Enclosure 1 provides the web links to the project review process in Virginia for FWS and VDGIF.

FWS is responsible for the conservation and management of federally listed freshwater mussel species. VDGIF is responsible for the conservation and management of all freshwater mussel species throughout Virginia. If it is known that federally listed species or critical habitat (Enclosure 7) are not present within a two-mile radius of a given site, coordination with VDGIF, but not FWS, is still necessary.

Page 2

GENERAL LIFE HISTORY

Freshwater mussels are often prominent in benthic stream communities where, for the most part, they are sedentary filter-feeders consuming a major portion of the suspended particulate matter.

Therefore, mussel beds act as biological filters by removing inorganic and organic material from the water column while improving water quality downstream. Individuals are typically long-lived, with particular species living for more than 50 years, while some individuals may live for more than 130 years. Because these mussels are long-lived, sedentary filter-feeders, they are prominent indicators of water quality. Freshwater mussels also serve as an important dietary component to a variety of animals, including muskrats, otters, raccoons, and some fishes.

During spawning, male mussels release sperm into the water column that females take in through their gills. The resulting larvae (known as glochidia) may be released by the female into the water column or packaged to attract fish. These larvae must attach to a fish host to survive.

While attached to the gills of the fish host, development of the glochidia begins. Once metamorphosis is complete, the juvenile mussel drops off the fish host and continues to develop on the stream bottom.

Freshwater mussels are generally divided into two reproductive categories known as short-term (tachytictic) or long-term brooders (bradytictic). Short-term brooders usually spawn and release glochidia during May through July in Virginia. Long-term brooders usually spawn from August through September and release glochidia the following April through June.

SURVEYS AND RELOCATIONS

Enclosure 2 provides the web links to lists of federally endangered, threatened, and candidate mussels and State endangered and threatened mussels. If a project occurs in an area that may contain suitable habitat for one of these species, FWS and/or VDGIF may recommend a survey.

To determine which waterways may contain suitable habitat for State or federally listed species, contact VDGIF for guidance (804-367-2211 or 2733). Applicants should contact FWS and VDGIF early in the planning process to determine whether federally or State-listed species or critical habitat may be impacted by the project. Enclosure 1 provides the web links to the project review process in Virginia for FWS and VDGIF to assist with the planning process. The effects of a project may include direct impacts from construction activities as well as downstream impacts from sedimentation and effluent discharges. If mussels were found during any previous survey/s, however old, coordination with VDGIF and FWS (where applicable) will be required.

Surveys where mussels are not found (negative surveys) are typically valid for two years, after which another survey should be performed. Guidelines for freshwater mussel surveys and relocations are found in Enclosure 3. Web links to surveyor lists are included in Enclosures 4 and 5. If listed mussels are found in or downstream of a project area, VDGIF and/or FWS are likely to recommend time of year restrictions on when activities may occur or other restrictions to reduce impact to the mussels. A web link to time of year restrictions is provided in Enclosure

1. If the project “may affect” a federally listed species or critical habitat, consultation with FWS will be required.

Page 3

LAWS AND REGULATIONS PROTECTING MUSSELS

Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) (87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 50 CFR Part 17) Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any federally listed threatened or endangered species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The regulations implementing this Act (50 CFR 402) require the Federal agency to review its actions at the earliest possible time to determine whether its actions may affect listed species or critical habitat. If a Federal agency determines that its action “may affect” a listed threatened or endangered species or critical habitat, the agency is required to consult with FWS regarding the degree of impact and measures available to avoid or minimize the adverse effects.

Section 9 of the ESA makes it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to “take” any federally listed endangered or threatened species of fish or wildlife without a special exemption. “Person” is defined under the ESA to include individuals, corporations, partnerships, trusts, associations, or any other private entity; local, State, and Federal agencies; or any other entity subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Under the ESA, “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Harm is further defined to include significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing essential behavior 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.

Section 10 establishes an incidental take permit provision for private entities that includes the development of habitat conservation plans. This provision authorizes FWS, under some circumstances, to permit the taking of federally listed fish and wildlife if such taking is "incidental to, and not the purpose of carrying out otherwise lawful activities." This process is also intended to be used to reduce conflicts between listed species and private development and to provide a framework that would encourage "creative partnerships" between the private sector and local, state, and Federal agencies in the interest of endangered and threatened species and habitat conservation. When approved by FWS, this regulatory procedure results in the issuance of a permit authorizing incidental take, provided such take is mitigated by appropriate conservation measures for habitat maintenance, enhancement, and protection, coincident with development.

Virginia Endangered Species Act (29.1-563 - 29.1-570) - This law provides that VDGIF is the state regulatory authority over federally or state listed endangered or threatened fish and wildlife in the Commonwealth, defining fish or wildlife as “. . . any member of the animal kingdom, vertebrate or invertebrate, except for the class Insecta, and includes any part, products, egg, or the dead body or parts thereof.” It prohibits the taking, transportation, processing, sale, or offer for sale within the Commonwealth of any fish or wildlife listed as a federally endangered or threatened species, except as permitted by the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries for Page 4 zoological, educational, scientific, or captive propagation for preservation purposes. State-listed species are provided the same protection per VDGIF Regulation 4 VAC 15-20-130.

The law further authorizes the Board of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries to adopt the Federal list of endangered and threatened species, to declare by regulation that species not listed by the Federal government are endangered or threatened in Virginia, and to prohibit by regulation the taking, transportation, processing, sale, or offer for sale of those species.

Implementing regulations pursuant to this authority (4 VAC 15-20-130 through 140) further define “take” and other terms similarly to the Federal ESA.

Federal Endangered Species Act Cooperative Agreement - Federally listed species are also protected under VDGIF jurisdiction via a cooperative agreement signed in 1976 with FWS pursuant to Section 6 of the ESA. This Cooperative Agreement recognizes VDGIF as the Virginia agency with regulatory and management authority in Virginia over federally listed or threatened animals, excluding insects, and provides for Federal/State cooperation regarding the protection and management of those species.

Page 5 Enclosure 1: Federal and State Project Review Process in Virginia

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Online Project Review Process (https://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endangered/projectreviews.html)

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries: Project and Permit Review Process (https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section/) Enclosure 2: Federal and State Listed Mussel Species in Virginia

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) (http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/)

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries: Special Legal Status Faunal Species in Virginia (https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/virginia-threatened-endangered-species.pdf) Enclosure 3: Mussel Survey and Relocation Guidelines in Virginia

There are four general assessment/survey types including:

A.

Land-based review - land-based site visit used to determine whether a water-based survey (site assessment, abbreviated, or full survey) is warranted. During a land-based review, the surveyor should look for obvious signs that would negate the need for additional, water-based surveys. For example, if it can be determined that the water body is non-perennial and/or contains no potential mussel habitat, it is unlikely that additional surveys would be needed or recommended by VDGIF or FWS. If it is determined that suitable habitat is present, the appropriate survey will be recommended. Photographs of the project site clearly showing instream habitat conditions, as well as a thorough site description, should be sent to VDGIF and FWS for review in lieu of the site assessment.

If it is determined that suitable habitat is present, the appropriate survey will be recommended.

B.

Site assessment - 20 m upstream / 80 m downstream. A site assessment is recommended to determine if suitable habitat is present at a project location and may be recommended if the presence of a listed species is questionable. If suitable habitat is present, the appropriate survey will be recommended even in the absence of mussels, since the site assessment does not serve as a substitute for a mussel survey; however, the presence of freshwater mussels should be documented during the assessment.

C.

Abbreviated survey - 100 m upstream / 400 m downstream of project footprint.

D.

Full survey - 200 m upstream / 800 m downstream of project footprint.

Page 6 The assessment/survey type is based on the scope of the project, potential impacts, and known species distributions. Survey lengths are measured from the project footprint. Survey distances have primarily been developed for projects where physical alteration/disturbance of the stream is the primary impact (e.g., bridge repair/replacement, utility line crossings, etc.). Potential impacts from projects involving activities such as point and non-point source discharges, water intakes, and mining may require greater survey lengths and different methods.

Project applicants should contract with a qualified mussel surveyor. Enclosures 4 and 5 provide web links to lists of pre-approved mussel surveyors. If a pre-approved surveyor is not selected, please provide the proposed surveyor’s qualifications and proposed survey design to FWS and VDGIF a minimum of 30 days prior to survey initiation. Individuals who take federally listed threatened and endangered animals must obtain a permit from VDGIF, prior to surveying. Take is defined as to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Contact information follows:

Ms. Shirl Dressler Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries P.O. Box 90778 Henrico, VA 23228-0778 Phone: (804) 367-6913 CollectionPermits@dgif.virginia.gov

A plan for mussel relocations, including initial surveys, must be presented to VDGIF and FWS (where applicable) for comment and approval prior to initiation of construction. Failure to provide a mussel relocation and/or survey plan may affect review and permitting of the project by VDGIF and FWS.

The recommended time of year to conduct mussel surveys and relocations is April 1 through October 31. Surveying during the cooler months is discouraged because mussels tend to be located deeper in the substrate and a greater percentage of the population is subsurface, therefore making them more difficult to find, particularly rare species. A more specific time frame may be recommended depending on the target species. A survey conducted outside this time frame requires VDGIF and FWS (where applicable) approval.

Guidelines if federally listed mussels are not present

During the initial survey, mussel species within the direct project footprint or within imminent danger from project impacts may be relocated to suitable habitat unless otherwise directed by VDGIF. Suitable habitat typically includes an area upstream of project impacts and which also harbors freshwater mussels. If such an area cannot be found, the surveyor should determine the location of most suitable habitat. The direct project footprint shall be defined as the area of potentially disturbed substrate, any zone of heavy equipment operation, plus the distance downstream that may experience significant sedimentation from construction. If not determined prior to the relocation, the surveyor is responsible for determining the most suitable relocation area. All relocated mussels must be at least partially placed in the substrate, anterior end down.

Page 7 Project applicants may be required to monitor relocated mussels to determine relocation success/failure.

Standard mussel relocation protocols are outlined below. These protocols may vary based on factors such as the scope of the project and the results of the initial mussel survey. If the relocation protocols vary, VDGIF will clearly outline the appropriate protocols with the project applicant. It is the project applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the proper relocation protocols are used and that the contracted mussel surveyor is aware of any modifications to the standard protocols.

The reach from which mussels are to be relocated will be at least 100 m long including the project footprint. The standard protocol is as follows:

• The 1st relocation survey must occur within 30-45 days of instream construction activities and at least 7 days prior to the 2nd relocation survey.

• The 2nd relocation survey must occur within 30 days of instream construction activities and at least 7 days after the 1st relocation survey.

• All relocation surveys must include at a minimum, two passes. The target relocation percentage of the initial number of mussels collected is 80%. If on the 2nd pass, more than 20% of the initial number of mussels is collected, continued passes must be conducted until no more than 20% of the initial number of mussels is collected on the final pass. The target relocation percentage may be adjusted higher or lower depending on the species and numbers collected during the initial survey.

• If a state-listed species is found, continued passes must be conducted until no listed species are found on the final pass. If repeated passes result in continual collection of state-listed species, modification of the survey techniques may be required.

If relocation surveys are not possible due to natural conditions such as high water, contact VDGIF to arrange contingency plans.

The location of all relocated mussels must be accurately documented (preferably with geographic coordinates) and reported to VDGIF. All state-listed mussel species must be tagged and measured for potential future monitoring.

Project applicants may be required to adhere to time of year restrictions for mussel relocations as directed by VDGIF. If this is the case, for the long-term brooders, relocations can occur from June 16 through August 14 and October 1 through October 31. For short-term brooders, relocations can occur from April 1 through May 14 and August 1 through October 31.

All mussel survey and relocation results, including tag and measurement data, must be submitted to VDGIF for review, prior to instream construction activities. Reviews will be expedited due to Page 8 the potential short timeframe between surveys and/or relocations and the start of instream work.

Reports must contain, at a minimum, number of species found, number of individuals per species and their sizes, and number of individuals tagged.

Guidelines if federally listed mussel species are present

Federally listed mussels must not be relocated during the initial survey. If federally listed mussels are found, they must remain exactly where found and all specimens should be photo documented, if possible. Coordination with FWS and VDGIF must occur to determine future actions.

If it is determined that a project may affect a federally listed species, FWS will complete a consultation with the Federal action agency and prepare a biological opinion in accordance with the Federal Endangered Species Act. The relocation procedures for federally listed mussels will be specified in FWS’s biological opinion and will be determined on a project-specific basis.

If relocation surveys are not possible due to conditions such as high water, contact FWS and VDGIF to arrange contingency plans. All listed mussels must be moved to suitable habitat upstream of any potential project impacts. Mussels may be relocated downstream if habitat upstream is determined unsuitable by VDGIF and FWS. If not determined prior to the relocation, the surveyor is responsible for determining the most suitable relocation area. All relocated mussels must be at least partially placed in the substrate, anterior end down. Project applicants may be required to monitor relocated mussels to determine relocation success/failure.

The location of all relocated federally listed mussels must be accurately documented (preferably with geographic coordinates) and reported to FWS and VDGIF. All federally listed mussel species also must be tagged and measured for potential future monitoring.

All mussel survey and relocation results must be submitted to FWS and VDGIF for review, prior to instream construction activities. Every effort will be made to expedite reviews due to the potential short timeframe between surveys and/or relocations and the start of instream work.

Reports must contain, at a minimum: number of species found, number of individuals per species and their sizes, number of individuals tagged, etc.

Project applicants may be required to adhere to time of year restrictions (Enclosure 6) for mussel relocations as recommended by FWS and VDGIF. Time of year restrictions will be specified in a letter or in FWS’s biological opinion.

Page 9 Enclosure 4: Surveyor List for Atlantic Slope Mussels in Virginia

Approved Surveyors in Virginia for Atlantic Slope Freshwater Mussels (http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/pdf/endspecies/Surveyor_Lists/PDF%20Format/SU RVEYOR%20LIST%20-%20Atlantic%20Slope%20Mussels.pdf)

Enclosure 5: Surveyor List for Upper Tennessee River Basin Mussels in Virginia

Approved Surveyors in Virginia for Tennessee River Drainage Freshwater Mussels (http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/pdf/endspecies/Surveyor_Lists/PDF%20Format/SU RVEYOR%20LIST%20-%20TN%20Drainage%20Mussels.pdf )

Enclosure 6: Time of Year Restrictions

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Time of Year Restrictions (TOYR) Table (https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/VDGIF-Time-of-Year-Restrictions-Table.pdf)

Enclosure 7: Federally Designated Critical Habitat for Mussels in Virginia

Map of Federally Designated Critical Habitat in Virginia (http://fws.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=f6e84e675ba1461b8ae6a351adea14 29)

FRESHWATER MUSSEL GUIDELINES FOR

VIRGINIA

Virginia Field Office Virginia Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 90778 6669 Short Lane Henrico, VA 23228-0778 Gloucester, VA 23061 804-367-1000 804-693-6694 Last Updated: November 16, 2018

LIST OF ENCLOSURES

1 - Federal and State Project Review Process in Virginia 2 - Listed Species in Virginia 3 - Mussel Survey and Relocation Guidelines 4 - Surveyor List for Atlantic Slope Mussels 5 - Surveyor List for Upper Tennessee River Mussels 6 - Time of Year Restrictions (See Freshwater Mollusks) 7 - Map of Critical Mussel Habitat in Virginia

INTRODUCTION

These guidelines are for project applicants and consultants planning activities impacting Virginia waterways. They recommend freshwater mussel surveys and relocations for small projects affecting ≤100 ft of water. Larger projects impacting listed mussel waters may need additional permits from VDGIF and/or FWS. Always coordinate with these agencies to ensure legal compliance. Enclosure 1 links to Virginia project review processes for FWS and VDGIF.

FWS manages federally listed freshwater mussels; VDGIF manages all mussels in Virginia. If federally listed species or critical habitat (Enclosure 7) are absent within 2 miles, coordination with VDGIF alone is required.

Page 2

GENERAL LIFE HISTORY

Freshwater mussels are sedentary filter-feeders in benthic stream communities, consuming much suspended particulate matter.

Mussel beds filter inorganic and organic material, improving downstream water quality. Mussels are long-lived (50-130+ years), indicators of water quality, and prey for animals like muskrats, otters, raccoons, and fishes.

Male mussels release sperm during spawning; females produce glochidia larvae, which are released or packaged to attract fish. Glochidia must attach to a fish host to survive.

Glochidia develop on fish gills; after metamorphosis, juveniles drop off and grow on the stream bottom.

Mussels are short-term (May-July) or long-term (Aug-Sept) brooders, releasing glochidia in spring or summer accordingly.

SURVEYS AND RELOCATIONS

Enclosure 2 links to lists of federally and state endangered, threatened, and candidate mussels. Projects in potential habitat may require a survey.

Contact VDGIF (804-367-2211/2733) early to assess potential impacts on listed species or habitat. Enclosure 1 links to review processes. Past mussel surveys, regardless of age, require coordination with VDGIF and FWS if applicable. Project effects include direct impacts and downstream sedimentation or effluent impacts.

Negative surveys are valid for 2 years; re-survey after. Enclosure 3 details survey and relocation guidelines. Enclosures 4 and 5 list surveyors. If listed mussels are found, restrictions on timing or activities may be recommended. A web link to restrictions is in Enclosure.

1. If the project “may affect” a federally listed species or critical habitat, consultation with FWS will be required.

Page 3

LAWS AND REGULATIONS PROTECTING MUSSELS

ESA Section 7(a)(2) mandates Federal agencies ensure actions do not jeopardize listed species or critical habitat, requiring early review and consultation with FWS if impacts are possible.

ESA Section 9 prohibits “take” (harass, harm, pursue, etc.) of listed species without exemption. “Person” includes individuals, entities, and agencies. “Harm” includes habitat modification impairing behavior; “harass” disrupts normal activities.

Section 10 establishes an incidental take permit provision for private entities that includes the development of habitat conservation plans. This provision authorizes FWS, under some circumstances, to permit the taking of federally listed fish and wildlife if such taking is "incidental to, and not the purpose of carrying out otherwise lawful activities." This process is also intended to be used to reduce conflicts between listed species and private development and to provide a framework that would encourage "creative partnerships" between the private sector and local, state, and Federal agencies in the interest of endangered and threatened species and habitat conservation. When approved by FWS, this regulatory procedure results in the issuance of a permit authorizing incidental take, provided such take is mitigated by appropriate conservation measures for habitat maintenance, enhancement, and protection, coincident with development.

Virginia Endangered Species Act (29.1-563 to 570) designates VDGIF as the authority over listed species, prohibiting taking, transport, sale, or offer for sale of federally or state listed species, except for permitted purposes. Definitions include all animal parts except insects.

The Board can adopt the Federal list, declare unlisted species as endangered or threatened in Virginia, and prohibit their taking, transport, sale, or offer for sale.

Regulations (4 VAC 15-20-130 to 140) define “take” and related terms similarly to Federal ESA.

Since 1976, a cooperative agreement with FWS designates VDGIF as Virginia’s authority over federally listed species (excluding insects), enabling federal-state cooperation for their protection and management.

Page 5 Enclosure 1: Federal and State Project Review Process in Virginia

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Online Project Review Process (https://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endangered/projectreviews.html)

VDFIG: Project and Permit Review (https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section/) Enclosure 2: Listed Mussel Species in Virginia

FWS: Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) (http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/)

VDFIG: Special Legal Status Faunal Species (https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/virginia-threatened-endangered-species.pdf) Enclosure 3: Mussel Survey & Relocation Guidelines

There are four general assessment/survey types including:

A.

Land-based review assesses if water-based surveys are needed, based on signs like non-perennial water or absence of mussel habitat. If habitat is present, a survey is recommended. Photos and site descriptions should be sent to VDGIF and FWS for review instead of a site assessment.

If suitable habitat is present, the appropriate survey will be recommended.

B.

Site assessment (20 m upstream / 80 m downstream) determines habitat presence and is recommended if species presence is uncertain. If habitat exists, a survey is recommended; mussels should be documented, but the assessment isn't a substitute for a survey.

C.

Abbreviated survey - 100 m upstream / 400 m downstream of project footprint.

D.

Full survey - 200 m upstream / 800 m downstream of project footprint.

Page 6 Survey type depends on project scope, impacts, and species distribution. Lengths are from the footprint, mainly for projects with stream disturbance; other activities may need longer surveys and different methods.

Project applicants must hire a qualified mussel surveyor. Enclosures 4 and 5 list pre-approved surveyors. If not, submit qualifications and survey plan to FWS and VDGIF at least 30 days before starting. Permits are required for federally listed species; take includes harassment, harm, pursuit, etc. Contact info follows.

Ms. Shirl Dressler, Virginia DGIF, P.O. Box 90778, Henrico, VA 23228-0778, Phone: (804) 367-6913, CollectionPermits@dgif.virginia.gov

A mussel relocation and survey plan must be submitted to VDGIF and FWS for approval before construction. Failure to do so may impact review and permits.

Mussel surveys and relocations are recommended from April 1 to October 31. Cooler months are discouraged due to deeper, less accessible mussels. Outside this period, approval is needed.

Guidelines if federally listed mussels are not present

Initial survey mussels in the footprint or at risk may be relocated to suitable upstream habitat unless directed otherwise. The footprint includes disturbed substrate, heavy equipment zones, and downstream sedimentation zones. If not pre-determined, the surveyor must identify the best relocation site. Mussels must be partially placed in substrate, anterior end down.

Project applicants may need to monitor relocated mussels to assess success.

Standard mussel relocation protocols are outlined below. These protocols may vary based on factors such as the scope of the project and the results of the initial mussel survey. If the relocation protocols vary, VDGIF will clearly outline the appropriate protocols with the project applicant. It is the project applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the proper relocation protocols are used and that the contracted mussel surveyor is aware of any modifications to the standard protocols.

Relocation reach must be at least 100 m, including the footprint. Protocol follows:

• The 1st relocation survey must occur within 30-45 days of instream construction and at least 7 days before the 2nd survey.

• The 2nd survey must occur within 30 days of instream construction and at least 7 days after the 1st survey.

• All surveys must include at least two passes. The target is 80% of initial mussels relocated. If over 20% are collected on the 2nd pass, continue until no more than 20% are collected. Target percentage may be adjusted based on species and initial survey results.

• If a state-listed species is found, continue passes until none are on the final pass. If repeated collection occurs, survey techniques may need modification.

If relocation surveys are hindered by conditions like high water, contact VDGIF for contingency plans.

All relocated mussels must be accurately documented (preferably with coordinates) and reported to VDGIF. State-listed species must be tagged and measured for future monitoring.

Applicants may need to follow VDGIF time restrictions: long-term brooders from June 16–August 14 and October 1–31; short-term from April 1–May 14 and August 1–October 31.

All survey and relocation results, including tags and measurements, must be submitted to VDGIF before construction. Reviews will be expedited due to short timeframes.

Reports must include species count, individuals per species and sizes, and tagged individuals.

Guidelines if federally listed mussel species are present

Federally listed mussels must not be relocated during initial surveys. If found, they stay in place and should be photo documented. FWS and VDGIF coordination is required for future steps.

If a project may affect federally listed species, FWS will consult and prepare a biological opinion per the ESA. Relocation procedures will be specified in this opinion and tailored per project.

If relocation surveys are not possible due to conditions such as high water, contact FWS and VDGIF to arrange contingency plans. All listed mussels must be moved to suitable habitat upstream of any potential project impacts. Mussels may be relocated downstream if habitat upstream is determined unsuitable by VDGIF and FWS. If not determined prior to the relocation, the surveyor is responsible for determining the most suitable relocation area. All relocated mussels must be at least partially placed in the substrate, anterior end down. Project applicants may be required to monitor relocated mussels to determine relocation success/failure.

Relocated federally listed mussels must be accurately documented (preferably with coordinates), reported to FWS and VDGIF, and tagged and measured for future monitoring.

All survey and relocation results must be submitted to FWS and VDGIF before construction. Reviews will be expedited due to short timeframes.

Reports must include species count, individuals per species and sizes, and tagged individuals.

Applicants may need to follow time restrictions (Enclosure 6) for relocations as recommended by FWS and VDGIF, specified in a letter or biological opinion.

Page 9 Enclosure 4: Surveyor List for Atlantic Slope Mussels in Virginia

Approved Surveyors in Virginia for Atlantic Slope Freshwater Mussels (http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/pdf/endspecies/Surveyor_Lists/PDF%20Format/SU RVEYOR%20LIST%20-%20Atlantic%20Slope%20Mussels.pdf)

Enclosure 5: Surveyor List for Upper Tennessee River Basin Mussels in Virginia

Approved Surveyors in Virginia for Tennessee River Drainage Freshwater Mussels (http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/pdf/endspecies/Surveyor_Lists/PDF%20Format/SU RVEYOR%20LIST%20-%20TN%20Drainage%20Mussels.pdf )

Enclosure 6: Time of Year Restrictions

Virginia DGIF TOYR Table: https://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/VDGIF-Time-of-Year-Restrictions-Table.pdf

Enclosure 7: Federally Designated Critical Habitat for Mussels in Virginia

Map of Federally Designated Critical Habitat in Virginia (http://fws.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=f6e84e675ba1461b8ae6a351adea14 29)

DWR Staff Project Review Protocol Staff review of DWR projects Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Purpose: This document is to guide DWR staff who are performing on the ground projects resulting in natural habitat modifications about how to scope their projects for wildlife species and designated Adherence to this guidance ensures that any DWR project is consistent with state and federal Endangered Species acts and Virginia wildlife law and regulation.

Step 1: Access the VA Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS) from the VDWR website at: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp Log in using the username and password provided. Also access the below bat data applications: Northern Long-eared Bat Regulatory Buffer Map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/ and the Little Brown and Tricolor Bat Hibernacula and Roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter- habitat-roosts-application/

Step 2: Using the VAFWIS geographic search function, generate an Initial Project Assessment (IPA) report for the site using an at least 2 –mile buffer around project boundaries. See the “help” section for instructions.

Step 3: Review the below guidance regarding data returned by the VAFWIS and apply, as appropriate. Please contact your colleagues (list at end) regarding common wildlife species, the location of which may not be accurately depicted by VAFWIS which is most heavily populated by imperiled species and designated resource data.

I. Special Status Species and Designated Wildlife Resources Species Observations (SppObs) – The Species Observation dataset includes all verified species documentations maintained by DWR. If the IPA results indicate that a listed species has been documented from the project area, it is possible that the species is present on the project site, if suitable habitat exists. For those species for which DWR is listed as the Responsible Agency (see following table), contact the taxonomic expert listed below for information and guidance regarding protection of listed species as it relates to the proposed project.

DWR Nongame Taxonomic Experts: Reptiles/Amphibians: John (JD) Kleopfer 804-829-6703 John.Kleopfer@DWR.virginia.gov Birds: Jeff Cooper (raptors) 540-538-1021 Jeff.Cooper@DWR.virginia.gov Sergio Harding 804-367-0143 Sergio.Harding@DWR.virginia.gov Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates: Brian Watson 434-525-7522 Brian.Watson@DWR.virginia.gov Fishes: Mike Pinder (except Atlantic sturgeon) 540-961-8387 Mike.Pinder@DWR.virginia.gov Clinton Morgeson (Atlantic sturgeon) 804-829-6580 Clinton.Morgeson@DWR.virginia.gov Mammals/Terrestrial Invertebrates: Rick Reynolds 540-248-9360 Rick.Reynolds@DWR.virginia.gov Eastern Shore: (birds, sea turtles, sea mammals) Ruth Boettcher 757-709-0766 Ruth.Boettcher@DWR.virginia.gov Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) – The Threatened and Endangered Species Waters TEWaters) dataset includes the locations of waters from which listed species have been documented and which agency biologists have determined are currently occupied by such species. If work in the TEWater or its tributaries is proposed, we recommend coordination with the DWR taxonomic expert listed above for conservation recommendations.

Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of TEWaters:

a) If a waterbody is designated a TEWater due to the presence of listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, we recommend the following to best protect such listed aquatic species (and the resources upon which they depend) from harm that may result from nearby agriculture, silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development:

• We recommend protecting from impacts an undisturbed natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of all designated waters.

b) If a waterbody is designated a TE Water due to the presence of wood turtles, we recommend the following (in addition to the above), to best protect this listed semi-aquatic species (and the resources upon which it depends) from harm that may result from nearby silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development:

• Because wood turtles must have access to freshwater streams during hibernation as well as access to adjacent uplands, where they forage, mate, and nest, we recommend coordination with us not only for instream work, but also for any work in uplands adjacent to (within 900 feet of) the designated water.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – The Anadromous Fish Use Areas (AnadFish Waters) dataset includes the locations of streams known to provide migratory and spawning habitats for anadromous fishes. We recommend 1) adherence to recommended Time of Year Restrictions (TOYRs; see end of document for access information); and 2) coordination with Alan Weaver anytime work in designated AnadFish Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed.

Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of AnadFish Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a undisturbed natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Anadromous Fishes/Fish Passage Expert: Alan Weaver 804-367-6795 or Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) Regulatory Buffers - This dataset includes regulatory buffers on NLEB hibernacula, NLEB roost trees, NLEB acoustic captures, and NLEB mist-net captures. If your project is located within these buffers and proposes tree clearing, timbering, or prescribed fire, of suitable habitat, coordinate with Rick Reynolds to determine if you need to adhere to any conservation measures. To determine if your project site is located within one of the regulatory buffers, access those data here:

• Northern Long-eared Bat (NLEB) Regulatory Buffers: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/Little Brown and Tri-color Bat hibs and Roosts – This dataset includes documented bat hibernacula and roosts and regulatory buffers around those features. Any forestry activities (tree removal, timbering, prescribed fire) within a regulatory buffer on these features should be coordinated with Rick Reynolds.

• You must access these data at the following link: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches – This dataset includes stretches of beach/shoreline in Virginia known to support nesting of sea turtles, all of which are federally- and state-listed. We recommend coordination with Ruth Boettcher regarding any activities proposed on these designated beaches/shorelines. Otherwise, we support protection of these areas and adjacent shorelines from land development and/or incompatible activities.

Wild Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset includes the locations of waters designated as coldwater habitat.

Many of these streams represent wild trout streams. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to support, we recommend 1) adherence to the TOYR for instream work and 2) coordination with the Regional Aquatic Manager anytime work in designated Trout Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Stockable Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset also includes the locations of waters currently stocked with trout by DWR as well as those suitable for stocking, but perhaps not currently stocked. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to or capable of supporting, we recommend coordination with the Regional Aquatics Manager anytime work in Stockable Trout Waters is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Colonial Waterbird (CWB) colonies – This DWR-maintained dataset includes documented locations of colonial waterbird colonies. To ensure protection of the colony and the species known to nest within it, we recommend 1) adherence to TOYRs, and 2) coordination with Ruth Boettcher or Sergio Harding for any land development or timbering activities proposed to occur within 0.5 miles of a documented colony. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of colonial waterbird colonies:

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around the waterbird colony. This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts (BECAR) - This dataset includes bald eagle concentration areas (defined as 660 feet landward or channelward of the shoreline) and roosting sites documented by DWR and/or our partners. Significant habitat alteration, location of water-dependent facilities or other recreational and commercial activities within certain distances of eagle nests, concentration zones, or roosts may result in adverse impacts upon eagles. Therefore, we recommend that 1) you comply with the Virginia management guidelines for landowners; and 2) that you coordinate with Jeff Cooper and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit associated with your project.

DCRNH ConSites and EOs - These are data shared with us by DCRNH for our internal use only. It represents conservation sites and elemental occurrences of species and resources they track. If any listed plants or insects are known from the project area, please coordinate your project with DWR’s Environmental Services Section.

• Natural Heritage Data Explorer (NHDE) users: if your project site falls within an area called out by modeling of suitable habitat for a listed plant or insect, even if no EO or ConSite for such species is returned by VAFWIS or the NHDE, we encourage you to coordinate your project with DCRNH as indicated above, but such coordination is voluntary.

DWR Lands (boat ramps, WMA’s, Fish Hatcheries, lakes) – The DWR Lands dataset includes locations of all DWR facilities. We support development of easement restrictions protective of our facilities and access to them by the public and our staff; and the watersheds/drainages upstream of our hatcheries and fishing lakes. Please coordinate any projects at or near one of our facilities with the Regional Facilities Manager.

Additional Information

Additional information, documents, and protocols including the Time of Year Restriction (TOYR) table are available on our website at: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section/Common Wildlife Species and Resources: Use the contact list below to identify a contact to answer any questions or provide information regarding common wildlife and/or wildlife-related recreation in your area.

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 246-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-540-248-9360 540-248-9360 248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov

Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@DWR.virginia.gov

Species Special Status Table:

Species Status and Type Responsible Agency

Federal Endangered (FE) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS andVDCR-DNH

Federal Threatened (FT) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Candidate (FC) Animals USFWS

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Proposed (FP) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) Federal Species of Concern (FS) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) State Endangered (SE) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH

State Threatened (ST) Animals

Plants and insects DCR-DNH Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation DWR (at applicant’s discretion) Need (SGCN)^

Table Notes:

NOAA Fisheries Service has jurisdictional authority over protection of sea turtles in Virginia’s waters (not nesting sites) and for Atlantic sturgeon.

The VA Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) retains legal authority for the protection of all plants and listed insects. However, through a memorandum of agreement with VDCR-DNH, coordination regarding these resources should be initiated with VDCR-DNH

See www.bewildvirginia.org for more information about the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

Access TOYR table and other documents from https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/

DWR Staff Project Review Protocol guides staff performing habitat modification projects on how to scope for wildlife species, ensuring compliance with state and federal Endangered Species acts and Virginia law.

Step 1: Access VAFWIS at https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp with provided login. Also access bat data apps: Northern Long-eared Bat Buffer Map and Little Brown/Tricolor Bat Roosts.

Step 2: Use VAFWIS geographic search to generate an IPA report with at least a 2-mile buffer around project boundaries. Refer to the help section for instructions.

Step 3: Review guidance on VAFWIS data, contact colleagues about common wildlife species not accurately depicted, as VAFWIS mainly shows imperiled species and resources.

I. Special Status Species and Designated Resources – The SppObs dataset includes verified species documentation. If IPA indicates a listed species in the area, it may be present if habitat exists. For species with DWR as Responsible Agency, contact the listed taxonomic expert for guidance.

DWR Nongame Taxonomic Experts: Reptiles/Amphibians: JD Kleopfer, 804-829-6703, John.Kleopfer@DWR.virginia.gov; Birds: Jeff Cooper, 540-538-1021, Jeff.Cooper@DWR.virginia.gov; Sergio Harding, 804-367-0143, Sergio.Harding@DWR.virginia.gov; Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates: Brian Watson, 434-525-7522, Brian.Watson@DWR.virginia.gov; Fishes: Mike Pinder, 540-961-8387, Mike.Pinder@DWR.virginia.gov; Atlantic sturgeon: Clinton Morgeson, 804-829-6580, Clinton.Morgeson@DWR.virginia.gov; Mammals/Terrestrial Invertebrates: Rick Reynolds, 540-248-9360, Rick.Reynolds@DWR.virginia.gov; Eastern Shore (birds, sea turtles, mammals): Ruth Boettcher, 757-709-0766, Ruth.Boettcher@DWR.virginia.gov. TEWaters dataset shows waters with documented listed species and current occupancy. For work in these waters or tributaries, coordinate with the DWR expert for conservation advice.

We provide guidance on TEWaters protection:

a) For TEWater with listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, follow recommended protections to prevent harm from nearby land use activities.

• Protect a minimum 100 ft undisturbed native vegetated buffer on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• Protect a minimum 200 ft native vegetated buffer on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• Protect a minimum 300 ft native vegetated buffer on both sides of all designated waters.

b) For TEWater with wood turtles, follow additional protections to safeguard this semi-aquatic species from nearby land activities.

• Coordinate with us for instream and upland work (within 900 ft) near designated waters, as wood turtles need access for hibernation, foraging, mating, and nesting.

AnadFish Waters dataset shows streams with migratory/spawning habitats. Follow TOYRs and coordinate with Alan Weaver for work in these areas.

We provide guidance on AnadFish Waters protection:

• Protect a minimum 100 ft undisturbed native vegetated buffer on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• Protect a minimum 200 ft native vegetated buffer on both sides of designated waters.

Alan Weaver is the Fish Passage expert: 804-367-6795, Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov. NLEB buffers include hibernacula, roosts, acoustic/mist-net captures. If within buffers and planning tree work, coordinate with Rick Reynolds for conservation measures. Access buffer data here.

• Northern Long-eared Bat (NLEB) Regulatory Buffers: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/Little Brown and Tri-color Bat hibs and Roosts – This dataset includes documented bat hibernacula and roosts and regulatory buffers around those features. Any forestry activities (tree removal, timbering, prescribed fire) within a regulatory buffer on these features should be coordinated with Rick Reynolds.

• You must access these data at the following link: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches – This dataset includes stretches of beach/shoreline in Virginia known to support nesting of sea turtles, all of which are federally- and state-listed. We recommend coordination with Ruth Boettcher regarding any activities proposed on these designated beaches/shorelines. Otherwise, we support protection of these areas and adjacent shorelines from land development and/or incompatible activities.

Cold Water Streams dataset shows locations of designated wild trout waters.

To protect wild trout streams, follow TOYRs and coordinate with the Regional Aquatic Manager for work in Trout Waters or tributaries. General guidance follows.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

Stockable Trout Waters include stocked and suitable waters. Coordinate with the Regional Aquatics Manager for work; general protection guidance follows.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of designated waters.

CWB colonies dataset shows documented locations. To protect colonies, follow TOYRs and coordinate with Ruth Boettcher or Sergio Harding for activities within 0.5 miles. General guidance follows.

• Preserve, plant, or enhance a minimum 500 ft undisturbed natural vegetated buffer around waterbird colonies for nesting and habitat protection.

BECAR dataset shows bald eagle concentration zones and roosts. Avoid habitat alteration near these areas, comply with Virginia guidelines, and coordinate with Jeff Cooper or USFWS for impacts or permits.

DCRNH ConSites and EOs are internal data on conservation sites and species occurrences. If listed plants or insects are in the area, coordinate with DWR’s Environmental Services.

• NHDE users: if your site overlaps modeled habitat for listed plants or insects, coordinate with DCRNH; this is voluntary even if no EO or ConSite is returned.

DWR Lands dataset shows facilities. Coordinate projects near facilities with the Regional Facilities Manager to ensure protection and access.

Additional Information

Additional info, documents, and protocols, including TOYR table, are on our website: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section/. Use the contact list below for questions on wildlife and recreation.

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 246-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-540-248-9360 540-248-9360 248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov

Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@DWR.virginia.gov

Species Special Status Table:

Species Status and Type Responsible Agency

Federal Endangered (FE) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS andVDCR-DNH

Federal Threatened (FT) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Candidate (FC) Animals USFWS

Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH

Federal Proposed (FP) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) Federal Species of Concern (FS) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) State Endangered (SE) Animals DWR

Plants and insects DCR-DNH

State Threatened (ST) Animals

Plants and insects DCR-DNH Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation DWR (at applicant’s discretion) Need (SGCN)^

Table Notes:

NOAA Fisheries Service has jurisdiction over sea turtle protection in Virginia waters (not nesting sites) and Atlantic sturgeon.

VDACS retains authority for all plants and insects; coordination with VDCR-DNH is recommended via MOA.

See www.bewildvirginia.org for more information about the Virginia Wildlife Action Plan

Access TOYR table and other documents from https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND INLAND FISHERIES

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT ON

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR CONSERVATION OF LITTLE BROWN BATS AND TRI-COLORED BATS (Approved February 16, 2016)

Purpose: This guidance document specifies the bast management practices and processes to be utilized in conserving little brown and tri-colored bats and in determining whether a specific practice is eligible for incidental take of either of these species as endangered in the Commonwealth of Virginia (4VAC15-20-130) and per The Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-563 through 29.1-570).

Electronic Copy: An electronic copy of this guidance in PDF format is available online on the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) Web site at http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/LBBA_TCBA_Guidance.pdf.

Contact Information: Please contact the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries at Rick.Reynolds@dgif.virignia.gov or by calling 540-248-9360 with any questions regarding the application of this guidance.

Disclaimer: This document is provided as guidance and, as such, sets forth standard operating procedures of the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries that administers the program on behalf of the Board. This guidance provides a general interpretation of the applicable Code and Regulations but is not meant to be exhaustive in nature. Each situation may differ and may require additional interpretation of the Virginia Endangered Species Act and attendant regulations.

I.

Background: The Virginia Endangered Species Act, Article 6 of Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, specifies that the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries may allow the incidental take of state-designated endangered or threatened species under certain provisions. State endangered and threatened species are designated as such by regulation of the Board (4VAC15-20-130.B); the updated list may be found online at http://legl.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?OOO+reg+4VAC15-20-130.

The Act also clearly indicates that the taking of state endangered or threatened species is illegal unless specifically allowed by Code or regulation. The Code of Virginia specifies that any regulation adopted by the Board that allows the incidental take of state endangered or threatened species must describe the circumstances that must exist to allow for incidental take, include appropriate conservation actions that must be taken that enhance the survival of the species, and require the actual taking to be at a minimum.

This guidance document shall provide additional details on the circumstances under which the Board will allow the incidental take of little brown bats and tri-colored bats, consistent with the designation of these species as state endangered.

February 16, 2016 Page I

II.

Definitions (pursuant to Article 6, Title 29.1, Code of Virginia and 4VAC15-20-140): “Species" are defined as any subspecies of fish or wildlife and any distinct population segment of any species or vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreed when mature. "Take" is defined as harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, possessing, or collecting, or attempting to do any of these activities. "Incidental take" is defined as any taking of an endangered or threatened species of fish and wildlife, excluding those species appearing on the federal list of endangered and threatened species, that otherwise would be prohibited by law or regulation, if the taking is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity.

III.

Authority: The Endangered Species Act in the Code of Virginia contains the following authorities applicable to this guidance: § 29.1-564. Taking, transportation, sale, etc., of endangered species prohibited.

The taking, transportation, possession, sale, or offer for sale within the Commonwealth of any fish or wildlife appearing on any list of threatened or endangered species published by the United States Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-205), or any modifications or amendments thereto, is prohibited except as provided in § 29.1-568. §29.1-566. Regulations.

The Board is authorized to adopt the federal list, as well as modifications and amendments thereto by regulations; to declare by regulation, after consideration of recommendations from the Director of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and from other reliable data sources, that species not appearing on the federal lists are endangered or threatened species in Virginia; and to prohibit by regulation the taking, transportation, processing, sale, or offer for sale within the Commonwealth of any threatened or endangered species of fish or wildlife. § 29.1-568. When Board may permit taking of endangered or threatened species; designated experimental populations.

A. The Board may permit the taking, exportation, transportation, or possession of any fish or wildlife which is listed by the provisions of this article, for zoological, educational, or scientific purposes and for propagation of such fish or wildlife in captivity for preservation purposes. Any person may, in accordance with all applicable federal and state laws, possess, breed, sell, and transport any nonnative wildlife included on any list of threatened or endangered species published by the United States Secretary of the Interior pursuant to provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-205), as amended, when (i) the federal designation does not specifically prohibit such possession, breeding, selling, or transporting and (ii) the nonnative wildlife is not included on the list of predatory or undesirable animals specified by regulations of the Board adopted pursuant to § 29.1-542.

February 16, 2016 Page2 B. The Board may adopt regulations that:

1. Allow the taking, possession, exportation, transportation, or release of fish or wildlife within or among designated experimental populations of a specific species, within the context of an approved conservation plan for the species. Any regulation designating an experimental population shall (i) specify the circumstances under which taking of an individual member of an experimental population will be exempt from the prohibitions and penalties authorized under this article and (ii) describe the geographic extent of the experimental population, which shall be distinct from naturally occurring populations continuing to be subject to the prohibitions and penalties authorized under this article.
2. Allow incidental take provided such regulations shall (i) describe the allowable circumstances; (ii) include provisions that ensure offsets through the implementation of conservation actions specified by the Department to enhance the long-term survival of the species or population; and (iii) require any actual taking to be at a minimum.

IV.

Discussion and Interpretation: Little brown bats and tri-colored bats have experienced substantial declines across the Commonwealth since the discovery of white-nose syndrome (WNS) in2009. Recent monitoring surveys document that populations of both species have declined more than 95% across the state since then. The following best management practices are provided as guidance for maintaining and improving habitats for these species, minimizing purposeful or accidental take of these animals, and enhancing the long-term survival of these species in Virginia.

Hibernacula: Current Knowledge of Hibernacula and Conservation Measures The VDGIF knows about 132 hibernacula (places where these animals hibernate during the winter) with little brown and or tri-colored bats present. These hibernacula typically are located in western Virginia and are typically caves. Of the 132 hibernacula, 50 have combined little brown and tri-colored counts of 50 or more individuals and supported over 95% of the hibernating populations pre white-nose syndrome. Of the 50, 10 are on public lands, and an additional four have private landowner protections (e.g., easements). Our goal is to protect and manage these 50 hibernacula and surrounding fall swarm habitat (roost trees, open areas, riparian, and other habitats within a 0.25-mile radius of a hibernaculum used by bats for roosting or foraging before hibernating) that historically supported 97.5% of the hibernating populations of these two species.

While there is no literature guiding the decision to protect a specific number of hibernacula or percentage of a population to maintain these species in Virginia during hibernation, the VDGIF thinks that protecting and managing approximately one-third of the known hibernacula, that supported a majority of known pre-WNS hibernating populations, is appropriate. As new information is gathered through surveys, monitoring and modeling, sites may be added or removed from the list.

February I6, 20 I6 Page3

• Conservation Measures: For hibernacula containing over 50 individuals of little brown and/or tri-colored bats (documented between 1995 to present), a two-tiered buffer zone is recommended: o Between December 1 and April 30, implement a 250-foot radius buffer zone with the following restrictions: no tree removal, prescribed fire, or land disturbance impacting the entrance(s) to the hibernacula. This action will protect the immediate area around the hibernacula by reducing disturbance during fall swarm, hibernation, and spring emergence. Tree removal and prescribed fire are permitted outside of these dates.
• Incidental Take Protocol: If tree removal needs to occur due to public safety or property damage concerns, and there are no known roost trees, then no further action is necessary. If there are known tree roosts, follow the guidance under Roost Trees below. o Between September 1 and November 30, increase the buffer to a 0.25-mile radius, with the following conditions: for timber harvests greater than 20 acres, retain snags (dead, broken-off trees), "wolf' trees (large trees with wide spreading crowns that may have broken branches, cavities or sloughing bark) (if not presenting public safety or property risk) and small tree groups (1 per 20 acres harvested) of up to 15 trees of 3 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) or greater. Because of the significant decline (greater than 90%) documented for little brown and tri-colored bats, the VDGIF does not anticipate that fall swarm roost trees will be a limiting factor in the protection and conservation of these species. These timber harvest actions will retain and provide fall roost trees for these species near their winter hibernating areas. Tree removal and prescribed fire are permitted outside these dates.
• Incidental Take Protocol: If there are known tree roosts that need to be removed due to public safety or property damage concerns, follow the guidance under Roost Trees below.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

Roost Trees: Current Knowledge of Roost Trees and Conservation Measures The VDGIF has not tracked and is not aware of any little brown or tri-colored bat roost trees (places where the animals live when not hibernating) in Virginia. The VDGIF is in the process of surveying for roost trees and will provide updated guidance as new information becomes available. Typically, both species utilize human dwellings (barns, sheds, attics, buildings, etc.) as well as trees for maternity roosts. Our goal is to identify and protect as many of the remaining maternity colonies as possible

• Conservation Measures:

• Between June 1 and July 31, implement a 150-foot radius buffer zone with the following restrictions: no tree removal, prescribed fire, or land disturbance within the buffer zone. This will protect the known roost tree(s) and foraging habitat close to the roost tree during the maternity season. Tree removal and prescribed fire are permitted outside these dates.

February 16, 2016 Page 4

• If a little brown or tri-colored maternity roost needs to be excluded due to public safety or property damage concerns, then the following Incidental Take Protocol will apply: ♦ The exclusion will be performed by a Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator (NWCO) or individual that is certified in bat exclusion techniques through a program recognized by the VDGIF and is permitted by the VDGIF. ♦ Exclusion devices will be used to allow volant (capable of flight) individuals to escape. ♦ Individual animals incapable of sustaining themselves will be collected and transport to a willing and appropriate VDGIF-permitted wildlife rehabilitation facility.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

Human Structures: Current Knowledge of Human Structure Use and Conservation Measures Little brown and big brown bats are the two species most commonly found in human-occupied dwellings and the ones most likely to cause human conflicts. The VDGIF is currently aware of three structures that serve as roosts for little brown bats. Tri-colored bats utilize human structures as well, but are more commonly found in barns, sheds, and abandoned structures and less so in occupied dwellings. Currently, the VDGIF is not aware of any tri-colored bat roosts in Virginia. The VDGIF is in the process of surveying for roost trees and artificial roost structures and will provide updated guidance as new information becomes available.

• Conservation Measures: Between May 15 and August 31, no exclusion of bats from maternity colonies, except for human health concerns or property damage, as determined by the landowner.
• If a little brown or tri-colored maternity roost needs to be excluded due to human health or property damage concerns, then the following Incidental Take Protocol will apply: ♦ The exclusion will be performed by a Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator (NWCO) or individual that is certified in bat exclusion techniques through a program recognized by the VDGIF and is permitted by the VDGIF. ♦ Exclusion devices will be used to allow volant (capable of flight) individuals to escape. ♦ Individual animals incapable of sustaining themselves will be collected and transport to a willing and appropriate VDGIF-permitted wildlife rehabilitation facility.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

February 16, 2016 Page 5 Facility or Project Operations: Operation under a VDGIF-approved plan

The VDGIF understands and recognizes that white-nose syndrome is the primary cause for the rapid and significant decline of little brown and tri-colored bats in Virginia. However, additional losses that result from other activities may exacerbate these losses. Under certain approved circumstances, the VDGIF can allow facility operations that might otherwise result in taking of bats when those operations are conducted in a manner than implements measures to specifically minimize impacts to these species.

• Conservation Measures: Project or facility operations that might incidentally take little brown or tri-colored bats can be allowed when conducted in accordance with a plan developed by the project or facility operator and approved by the VDGIF. The plan must include, but is not limited to, the following information:
• the specific circumstance/operational activity or condition that may result in taking;
• the specific measures to be implemented that avoid, minimize and/or mitigate incidental take associated with an otherwise lawful activity;
• the expected incidental take;
• the implementation schedule; and
• an explicit point of contact for communications to and from the VDGIF.

The operator must acknowledge and implement practices to report bats taken, even in circumstances where specific measures have been approved and implemented. If project operations occur within areas described in other parts of this document (e.g., Hibernacula; Known Roosts), the operator is expected to abide by the conservation measures described in those sections.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

In any instance of allowable incidental take, it is the landowner's responsibility to document the circumstance, actions taken, and number of animals taken (if any), in making a determination that these species should be removed to address human health, public safety or property damage issues. The landowner is responsible for retaining this documentation.

V. Adoption, Amendments, and Repeal: This document will remain in effect until rescinded or superseded.

o2..

Date Executive Director, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries

February 16, 2016 Page 6

VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND INLAND FISHERIES

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT ON

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR CONSERVATION OF LITTLE BROWN BATS AND TRI-COLORED BATS (Approved February 16, 2016)

Purpose: This guidance details management practices for conserving little brown and tri-colored bats and determining incidental take eligibility as endangered in Virginia (4VAC15-20-130) and under the Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1, §§29.1-563-29.1-570).

Electronic Copy: This guidance PDF is available online at http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/wildlife/LBBA_TCBA_Guidance.pdf.

Contact: Reach the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries at Rick.Reynolds@dgif.virginia.gov or call 540-248-9360 for questions about this guidance.

Disclaimer: This guidance outlines standard procedures of the Board and Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, offering general interpretation of applicable laws but not exhaustive; situations may vary.

I.

Background: The Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Title 29.1) authorizes the Board to permit incidental take of state-endangered or threatened species, designated by regulation (4VAC15-20-130), with the updated list online at http://legl.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?OOO+reg+4VAC15-20-130.

The Act states that taking endangered or threatened species is illegal unless authorized by law, and regulations must specify conditions, conservation actions, and minimum take requirements.

This guidance details when the Board may permit incidental take of little brown and tri-colored bats, consistent with their endangered status.

February 16, 2016 Page I

II.

Definitions (Article 6, Title 29.1, Code of Virginia, 4VAC15-20-140): "Species" includes subspecies and distinct populations; "Take" includes harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, possessing, or collecting; "Incidental take" is the lawful incidental taking of non-federally listed endangered or threatened species during lawful activities.

III.

Authority: Virginia's Endangered Species Act (§ 29.1-564) prohibits taking, transporting, or selling endangered species.

The Commonwealth prohibits taking, transporting, possessing, or selling federally listed threatened or endangered species, except as authorized by § 29.1-568 and § 29.1-566.

The Board may adopt federal lists, declare non-federally listed species as endangered or threatened in Virginia, and prohibit or permit taking, transport, sale, or processing under § 29.1-568.

A. The Board may permit taking, export, transport, or possession of listed fish or wildlife for zoological, educational, scientific, or propagation purposes. Nonnative wildlife on the federal list may be possessed, bred, sold, or transported if not federally prohibited and not listed as undesirable under § 29.1-542, in accordance with laws.

February 16, 2016 Page2 B. The Board may adopt regulations that:

1. Allow taking, possession, export, transport, or release of fish or wildlife within designated experimental populations under an approved conservation plan. Regulations must specify exemption circumstances and geographic extent, distinct from natural populations.
2. Allow incidental take if regulations (i) specify circumstances; (ii) include conservation offsets to enhance survival; and (iii) minimize actual take.

IV.

Discussion: Since WNS was discovered in 2009, little brown and tri-colored bats declined over 95% in Virginia. These practices aim to conserve habitats, reduce take, and support long-term survival.

Hibernacula: VDGIF knows 132 hibernacula, mainly caves in western Virginia. Of these, 50 support over 95% of pre-WNS populations; 10 are on public lands, 4 with private protections. The goal is to protect these 50 sites and surrounding habitats within 0.25 miles that supported 97.5% of populations.

While no literature specifies a target number, VDGIF considers protecting about one-third of known hibernacula supporting most pre-WNS populations appropriate. Sites may change with new data.

February I6, 20 I6 Page3

• Conservation Measures: For hibernacula containing over 50 individuals of little brown and/or tri-colored bats (documented between 1995 to present), a two-tiered buffer zone is recommended: o Between December 1 and April 30, implement a 250-foot radius buffer zone with the following restrictions: no tree removal, prescribed fire, or land disturbance impacting the entrance(s) to the hibernacula. This action will protect the immediate area around the hibernacula by reducing disturbance during fall swarm, hibernation, and spring emergence. Tree removal and prescribed fire are permitted outside of these dates.
• Incidental Take Protocol: If tree removal needs to occur due to public safety or property damage concerns, and there are no known roost trees, then no further action is necessary. If there are known tree roosts, follow the guidance under Roost Trees below. o Between September 1 and November 30, increase the buffer to a 0.25-mile radius, with the following conditions: for timber harvests greater than 20 acres, retain snags (dead, broken-off trees), "wolf' trees (large trees with wide spreading crowns that may have broken branches, cavities or sloughing bark) (if not presenting public safety or property risk) and small tree groups (1 per 20 acres harvested) of up to 15 trees of 3 inches diameter at breast height (dbh) or greater. Because of the significant decline (greater than 90%) documented for little brown and tri-colored bats, the VDGIF does not anticipate that fall swarm roost trees will be a limiting factor in the protection and conservation of these species. These timber harvest actions will retain and provide fall roost trees for these species near their winter hibernating areas. Tree removal and prescribed fire are permitted outside these dates.
• If known roosts must be removed for safety or damage, follow Roost Trees guidance.

Under these conditions, little to no lethal take of little brown or tri-colored bats is expected.

Roost Trees: VDGIF has not identified any bat roost trees in Virginia but is surveying. Both species use human structures and trees for maternity roosts; the goal is to protect remaining colonies.

• Conservation Measures:

• June 1-July 31, 150-ft buffer: no tree removal, fire, or disturbance near roosts; outside dates, removal permitted.

February 16, 2016 Page 4

• If a little brown or tri-colored maternity roost needs to be excluded due to public safety or property damage concerns, then the following Incidental Take Protocol will apply: ♦ The exclusion will be performed by a Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator (NWCO) or individual that is certified in bat exclusion techniques through a program recognized by the VDGIF and is permitted by the VDGIF. ♦ Exclusion devices will be used to allow volant (capable of flight) individuals to escape. ♦ Individual animals incapable of sustaining themselves will be collected and transport to a willing and appropriate VDGIF-permitted wildlife rehabilitation facility.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

Human Structures: Little brown and big brown bats are common in human dwellings; VDGIF knows of 3 structures for little brown bats. Tri-colored bats use structures like barns and sheds; no known tri-colored roosts in Virginia. Surveys are ongoing.

• May 15-Aug 31, no bat exclusion from maternity colonies unless for health or property damage as determined by landowner.
• If a little brown or tri-colored maternity roost needs to be excluded due to human health or property damage concerns, then the following Incidental Take Protocol will apply: ♦ The exclusion will be performed by a Nuisance Wildlife Control Operator (NWCO) or individual that is certified in bat exclusion techniques through a program recognized by the VDGIF and is permitted by the VDGIF. ♦ Exclusion devices will be used to allow volant (capable of flight) individuals to escape. ♦ Individual animals incapable of sustaining themselves will be collected and transport to a willing and appropriate VDGIF-permitted wildlife rehabilitation facility.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

February 16, 2016 Page 5 Facility or Project Operations: Operation under a VDGIF-approved plan

VDGIF recognizes white-nose syndrome as the main cause of declines but may permit operations causing take if they minimize impacts under approved circumstances.

• Operations risking incidental take may proceed if in accordance with a VDGIF-approved plan including:
• the activity or condition that may cause take;
• measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate incidental take;
• the expected incidental take;
• the implementation schedule; and
• a designated contact for VDGIF communications.

Operators must report bats taken, even with approved measures, and follow conservation practices in relevant areas like hibernacula and roosts.

Under these circumstances and conditions, we anticipate little to no lethal take of little brown bats or tri-colored bats.

Landowners must document circumstances, actions, and animals taken during incidental take to address health, safety, or property issues and retain records.

V. Adoption, Amendments, and Repeal: This document will remain in effect until rescinded or superseded.

o2..

Date Executive Director, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries

February 16, 2016 Page 6

State Permit/Project Reviewers Department of Wildlife Resources Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides staff at state agencies who are issuing permits and/or otherwise reviewing projects that result in development of our landscape of use of our natural resources information about how to scope those projects for wildlife species and designated resources and how to coordinate with DWR Environmental Services Staff based on those results.

Scoping: To scope any project location to determine if listed wildlife and/or designated resources under our jurisdiction are known from the project area, access the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/ and perform a Geographic Search Initial Project Assessment (IPA) for the project location (site plus 2-mile boundary).

Data Results: If any listed species and/or designated resource is confirmed from the project area, coordinate the project/permit application with DWR according to the project activities described below:

Any project with a federal nexus (e.g., the project entails any federal funding, permits, or federal agency action) must comport with consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. To ensure such compliance, the project applicant or proponent should access the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since listing of Atlantic Sturgeon, all hydraulic hopper dredging activities in the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries, regardless of time of year must be coordinated with NOAA Fisheries Service.

A. Listed Species (federal* and/or state Threatened or Endangered wildlife)

1. Fishes: Coordinate with DWR when one or more listed fish and/or Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Water) is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities*:

• Instream work (defined as work within any channel experiencing flow) located in a designated TE Water.
• Instream work located at a site within 1 river mile upstream of a designated TE Water. *If the instream work time of year restriction (TOYR) for the listed fish or fishes (sometimes requiring more than one TOYR) is written into the permit/approval as a required condition of the permit/approval issued by your agency for the project, coordination with DWR regarding protection of the listed fish(es) is not necessary. TOYR for listed fishes, and other species are located online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf .

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend the following to protect the unique habitats necessary for Virginia’s listed fishes to persist in our environment:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

1. Mussels, Snails, and Crayfish: Coordinate with DWR anytime one or more listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish; and/or Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Water) is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), if the project proposes one or more of the following activities*:

• instream work located in a designated TE Water
• instream work located in perennial waters that drain to the designated TE Water

These species cannot move out of harm’s way like fish often can. As such, we need to ensure that any individuals of these species are either not present within the instream area of affect (instream work site plus some distance up and downstream, depending on the scope and type of work) or that any individuals of these species are relocated from the area of affect prior to instream work. The only way to do this is for a species survey to be performed within the area of affect. DWR must review the project in order to recommend the appropriate type and length of survey at the necessary locations. *If the only instream work proposed is within intermittent or ephemeral streams, a survey is not necessary. In this case, if the instream work time of year restriction (TOYR) for the listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish (sometimes requiring more than one TOYR) is written into the permit/approval as a required condition of the permit/approval issued by your agency for the project, coordination with DWR regarding protection of the listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish is not necessary. TOYR for listed species are located online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf .

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend the following to protect the unique habitats necessary for Virginia’s listed aquatic fauna to persist in our environment:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

3. Semi-Aquatic Species: amphibians, wood turtles, bog turtles, eastern chicken turtles:

Coordinate with DWR when one or more listed semi-aquatic species, or designated resource is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities:

• Wood Turtles: o instream work located in a designated TE Water o instream work located in perennial tributaries of the designated TE Water o Work in uplands located within 900 ft of designated TE Water
• Amphibians: o Impacts upon wetlands o Upland impacts located within 900 ft of wetlands
• Chicken Turtles: o Impacts upon open water features o Upland impacts located within 900 ft of open water features
• Bog Turtles: o Impacts upon emergent wetlands o Instream impacts o Upland impacts within 900 ft of a stream or emergent wetland

These species also cannot move out of harm’s way. In addition, the habitats that support them are unique, disappearing on the landscape, and their loss cannot be appropriately compensated. As such, in order to ensure protection of these listed species, we need to know if the species is likely present on site, as determined by habitat assessment and/or species surveys. DWR must review the project in order to recommend the appropriate type of habitat assessments and survey areas at the necessary locations.

1. Birds Coordinate with DWR when one or more listed bird, or designated resource is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities:

• Vegetation removal (trees, shrubs, grasses)
• Ground clearing, grubbing
• Habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes
• Use of loud machinery (dredges, construction equipment, cranes)
• Any activity located within 1000 ft of an active Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) cavity nest tree cluster.
• Bald Eagles: To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.
• Coordinate with DWR anytime activities of any kind are proposed within 1000 ft of Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) active nest tree cluster.

1. Bats: Coordinate with DWR when one or more listed bat or designated resource is confirmed from the project area per the VAFWIS IPA, and/or your site is located within a regulatory buffer as depicted in the two applications below:

• Northern Long Eared Bats: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little Brown and Tricolored Bats:Projects located within the regulatory buffer placed around a designated hibernaculum or roost site and/or VAFWIS confirms these bats from the project area, coordinate with DWR if the project proposes tree removal, timbering, prescribed burn, or any impacts upon a hibernaculum entrance or within 150 of a roost site. To determine if your site is located within one of these buffers, please refer to the applications found at the links below and refer to the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), as directed. https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter- habitat-roosts-application/

• Gray Bats: Coordinate with DWR when hits for Gray Bats are returned only IF your project is within 100 feet of a bridge, large culvert, or cave upon/in which this animal may roost.
• Indiana Bats: Coordinate with DWR anytime VAFWIS confirms Indiana Bats from the project area if the project proposes tree removal, timbering, prescribed burn, or any impacts within 0.5 mile of a documented hibernaculum entrance or within 150 of a roost site.

• Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR anytime VAFWIS confirms Rafinesque’s Easter Big-eared Bats from the project area IF your project includes tree removal, timbering, removal/modification of an abandoned human structure or work on large culverts.

1. Reptiles (other than those in “Semi-aquatic” section above): ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for listed reptiles are returned IF the project includes work within suitable habitats as described below:

• Sea Turtles: Work on Atlantic Ocean beaches, and Chesapeake Bay shorelines and/or work in the Chesapeake Bay and/or its tributaries.

• Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, associated shrublands, and freshwater wetlands particularly if located in Virginia Beach.

• Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach.

1. Terrestrial Invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR when hits for terrestrial invertebrates are returned ONLY if your project includes ground disturbance (at or below plow line).

1. Aquatic Cave invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR when hits for terrestrial invertebrates are returned ONLY if your project includes disturbance to karst habitat or the waters feeding that habitat.

B. Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) Only coordinate your project with DWR if If VAFWIS returns a “hit” (documentation within 2 miles of your project site) for a tiered species of freshwater mussel, IF the project includes instream work and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal / grubbing) within 300 ft of the stream bank.

Otherwise, applicants should reference the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan (available through www.bewildvirginia.gov) to determine what threats are known to the documented species, what suitable habitat for these species consists of and how to best protect them and their habitats from harm.

C. Additional Impact Minimization Recommendations: 1) Instream work:

We recommend conducting any in-stream activities during low or no-flow conditions, using non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains to isolate the construction area, blocking no more than 50% of the streamflow at any given time (minimal overlap of construction footprint notwithstanding), stockpiling excavated material in a manner that prevents reentry into the stream, restoring original streambed and streambank contours, revegetating barren areas with native vegetation, and implementing strict erosion and sediment control measures. We recommend that instream work be designed and performed in a manner that minimizes impacts upon natural streamflow and movement of resident aquatic species. If a dam and pump-around must be used, we recommend it be used for as limited a time as possible and that water returned to the stream be free of sediment and excess turbidity. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap. To minimize harm to the aquatic environment and its residents resulting from use of the Tremie method to install concrete, installation of grout bags, and traditional pouring of concrete, we recommend that such activities occur only in the dry, allowing all concrete to harden prior to contact with open water. Due to future maintenance costs associated with culverts, and the loss of riparian and aquatic habitat, we prefer stream crossings to be constructed via clear-span bridges. However, if this is not possible, we recommend countersinking any culverts below the streambed at least 6 inches, or the use of bottomless culverts, to allow passage of aquatic organisms. We also recommend the installation of floodplain culverts to carry bankfull discharges. 2) Land-based activities:

To minimize overall impacts to wildlife and our natural resources, we offer the following comments about development activities: we recommend that the applicant avoid and minimize impacts to undisturbed forest, wetlands, and streams to the fullest extent practicable. Avoidance and minimization of impact may include relocating stream channels as opposed to filling or channelizing as well as using, and incorporating into the development plan, a natural stream channel design and forested riparian buffers. We recommend maintaining undisturbed naturally vegetated buffers of at least 100 feet in width around all on-site wetlands and on both sides of all perennial and intermittent streams. We recommend maintaining wooded lots to the fullest extent possible. We generally do not support proposals to mitigate wetland impacts through the construction of stormwater management ponds, nor do we support the creation of in-stream stormwater management ponds.

We recommend that the stormwater controls for this project be designed to replicate and maintain the hydrographic condition of the site prior to the change in landscape.

This should include, but not be limited to, utilizing bioretention areas, and minimizing the use of curb and gutter in favor of grassed swales. Bioretention areas (also called rain gardens) and grass swales are components of Low Impact Development (LID).

They are designed to capture stormwater runoff as close to the source as possible and allow it to slowly infiltrate into the surrounding soil. They benefit natural resources by filtering pollutants and decreasing downstream runoff volumes.

We recommend that all tree removal and ground clearing adhere to a time of year restriction (TOYR) protective of resident and migratory songbird nesting from March 15 through August 15 of any year.

We recommend adherence to erosion and sediment controls during ground disturbance. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap. 3) Resource Protection Recommendations: Stream buffers:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent or perennial streams, including those known to support wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to waters known to support listed aquatic species.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters known to support listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on all sides of any wetland. We recommend avoiding or minimizing wetland impacts as much as possible.

• We recommend no impacts upon wetlands or vernal pools known to support any listed species. We also recommend protecting from impacts and preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 900 feet on all sides of any wetland known to support a listed species.

4) Colonial Waterbird Colony buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting or enhancing, an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around any identified waterbird colonies (rookeries). This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

State Permit/Project Reviewers Department of Wildlife Resources Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides staff at state agencies who are issuing permits and/or otherwise reviewing projects that result in development of our landscape of use of our natural resources information about how to scope those projects for wildlife species and designated resources and how to coordinate with DWR Environmental Services Staff based on those results.

Scoping: To determine if listed wildlife or resources are in the project area, access VAFWIS at https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/ and perform a Geographic Search IPA (site plus 2-mile boundary).

Data Results: If any listed species or resource is confirmed in the project area, coordinate the project/permit with DWR per the activities below:

Projects with federal nexus must comply with Section 7 ESA consultation. Applicants should use the USFWS IPaC site at https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since Atlantic Sturgeon listing, all hydraulic hopper dredging in Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries must coordinate with NOAA Fisheries.

A. Listed Species (federal* and/or state Threatened or Endangered wildlife)

1. Fishes: Coordinate with DWR if listed fish or TE Waters are confirmed (per VAFWIS IPA), only if the project involves the following activities*:

• Instream work within a designated TE Water.
• Instream work within 1 mile upstream of a TE Water. If TOYRs are in permits, DWR coordination isn't needed. TOYRs online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf.

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend measures to protect habitats vital for Virginia’s listed fishes:

• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the water; or
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to waters; or
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters.

1. Mussels, Snails, and Crayfish: Coordinate with DWR when listed species or TE Waters (per VAFWIS IPA) are confirmed in the project area if proposing listed activities*.

• instream work in designated TE Water
• instream work in perennial waters draining to designated TE Water

These species cannot move out of harm’s way. Ensure individuals are absent or relocated before instream work, via species surveys. DWR reviews to recommend survey types/areas. If work is only in intermittent streams and TOYRs are in permits, DWR coordination isn't needed. TOYRs online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf.

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend measures to protect habitats for Virginia’s listed aquatic fauna:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water; and/or
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of perennial tributaries to designated waters.
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

3. Semi-Aquatic Species: amphibians, wood turtles, bog turtles, eastern chicken turtles:

Coordinate with DWR if listed semi-aquatic species or resources are confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA), only if the project involves the following activities:

• Wood Turtles: instream work in designated TE Water, in perennial tributaries, or uplands within 900 ft of designated TE Water.
• Amphibians: impacts on wetlands or upland impacts within 900 ft of wetlands.
• Chicken Turtles: impacts on open water features or upland impacts within 900 ft of open water.
• Bog Turtles: impacts on emergent wetlands, instream impacts, or upland impacts within 900 ft of streams or wetlands.

These species cannot move out of harm’s way, and their habitats are irreplaceable. DWR reviews habitat assessments and surveys to ensure protection if species are likely present.

1. Birds: Coordinate with DWR when listed birds or resources are confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA) if proposing listed activities.

• Vegetation removal (trees, shrubs, grasses)
• Ground clearing, grubbing
• Habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes
• Use of loud machinery (dredges, construction equipment, cranes)
• Activities within 1000 ft of an active RCW cavity nest cluster.
• Bald Eagles: Use CCB Eagle Nest Locator to check for active nests. If documented, follow state and federal guidelines and coordinate with USFWS for impacts or permits.
• Coordinate with DWR for activities within 1000 ft of RCW active nest clusters.

1. Bats: Coordinate with DWR when listed bats or resources are confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA) or within regulatory buffers shown in the applications.

• Northern Long Eared Bats: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little Brown and Tricolored Bats: Coordinate with DWR if within buffers around hibernacula or roosts (per VAFWIS) and proposing tree removal, timbering, prescribed burns, or impacts within 150 ft of a roost. Refer to the links below.

• Gray Bats: Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project is within 100 ft of a bridge, culvert, or cave where they may roost.
• Indiana Bats: Coordinate with DWR if confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS) and proposing tree removal, timbering, prescribed burns, or impacts within 0.5 mile of a hibernaculum or within 150 ft of a roost.

• Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR if confirmed (per VAFWIS) and project involves tree removal, timbering, structure removal/modification, or large culverts.

1. Reptiles (excluding semi-aquatic): Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project involves work in suitable habitats below.

• Sea Turtles: Work on Atlantic beaches, Chesapeake Bay shorelines, or in Chesapeake Bay and tributaries.

• Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, shrublands, or freshwater wetlands, especially in Virginia Beach.

• Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach.

1. Terrestrial Invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project involves ground disturbance at or below plow line.

1. Aquatic Cave invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project disturbs karst habitat or waters feeding it.

B. WAP SGCN: Coordinate with DWR if VAFWIS shows a hit within 2 miles for a tiered freshwater mussel, and the project involves instream or earth disturbance within 300 ft of stream bank.

Otherwise, refer to the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan at www.bewildvirginia.gov to identify threats, suitable habitats, and protection methods for documented species.

C. Additional Impact Minimization Recommendations: 1) Instream work:

Conduct instream activities during low/no flow, using non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains, limiting flow blockage to 50%, stockpiling materials properly, restoring stream contours, revegetating, and applying erosion controls. Minimize impacts on flow and aquatic life. Use minimal dam/pump-around time, ensure water is clear, prefer clear-span bridges; if not, sink culverts 6 inches or use bottomless culverts, and install floodplain culverts.

To minimize impacts, avoid and reduce disturbance to forests, wetlands, and streams. Use natural stream designs, maintain 100-ft buffers around wetlands and streams, preserve wooded lots, and avoid in-stream stormwater ponds.

Design stormwater controls to replicate and maintain pre-development hydrograph conditions.

Use bioretention areas and minimize curb/gutter, favoring grassed swales, as part of Low Impact Development (LID).

Designed to capture and infiltrate stormwater near source, filtering pollutants and reducing downstream runoff.

Tree removal and ground clearing should follow TOYR from March 15 to August 15 to protect nesting songbirds.

Use erosion and sediment controls during disturbance, preferring natural fiber mats like coir, jute, or burlap. Resource protection includes stream buffers.

• Protect a native vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent or perennial streams, including those supporting wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• We recommend protecting a natively vegetated 200 ft buffer on both sides of perennial tributaries supporting listed aquatic species.

• We recommend protecting a natively vegetated 300 ft buffer on both sides of waters supporting listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend protecting a naturally vegetated 100 ft buffer around wetlands and avoiding or minimizing impacts.

• We recommend no impacts on wetlands or vernal pools supporting listed species and protecting or enhancing a 900 ft undisturbed buffer around such wetlands.

4) Colonial Waterbird Colony buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a 500 ft undisturbed buffer around waterbird colonies (rookeries) for nesting and habitat protection.

Management of Bald Eagle Nests, Concentration Areas, and Communal Roosts in Virginia: A Guide for Landowners

2012

Ken Conger

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Richmond The Center for Conservation Biology The College of William and Mary Virginia Commonwealth UniversityManagement of Bald Eagle Nests, Concentration Areas, and Communal Roosts in Virginia: A Guide for Landowners This report may be cited as follows:

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, and the Center for Conservation Biology at the College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University. 2012. Management of bald eagle nests, concentration areas, and communal roosts in Virginia: A guide for landowners. Richmond, VA.

This report was completed with funds provided under the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, and State and Tribal Wildlife Grant programs.

• ii- PREFACE Few American wildlife success stories are as widely recognized as the recovery of bald eagle populations in the forty-eight coterminous states. Since first listed as a federally endangered species in 1967, cooperative actions to restore and protect eagles and their essential habitats by government agencies, university researchers, non-government conservation agencies and, most significantly, by private and public landowners, have fostered dramatic recovery of our nation’s wildlife icon. Having been ceremoniously removed from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Species in 2007, the bald eagle also is removed from the Virginia List of Endangered and Threatened Species effective January 1, 2013.

After delisting, bald eagles and their nests remain protected under Virginia law and pursuant to regulations of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF).

Eagles and their nests also remain under protection of the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Providing guidance to landowners wanting to protect eagles and their nests has been a major element of the cooperative programs to achieve this species’ recovery, and this publication is merely the most recent in a series of guidance documents released over the last several decades. It is intended to present recent changes in federal and state laws and regulations protecting eagles and their nests, and to recommend measures that landowners may take to protect bald eagles.

After January 1, 2013, applicable Virginia law and VDGIF regulations will no longer prohibit habitat alterations that do not result in taking of an eagle or its nest, or parts thereof.

Thus, compliance with these guidelines by landowners is voluntary from the state legal perspective. Federal regulations pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, however, prohibit “disturbance” of eagles, which may include certain human activities or alteration of habitat surrounding a nest. This guide presents the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines as released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and provides the Department’s recommendations for application of those guidelines in Virginia.

Readers who are familiar with the attendant laws and regulations, and with the National Guidelines, may wish to turn directly to Section VI of this document, which explains situations where VDGIF recommendations to protect eagles, based on our knowledge of Virginia’s eagles, are not identical to the USFWS nationwide guidelines. Similarly, readers who simply want to determine whether their project or land management plans may affect eagles can turn directly to Section VIII of this document, as a “quick start” to evaluating their project.

Virginia landowners who share their property with bald eagles have a unique opportunity to become stewards of a national treasure. Providing for the needs of bald eagles will help to ensure the security of other wildlife species, protect natural communities, and enhance the quality of the Commonwealth’s rivers and streams. The future of bald eagles in Virginia depends in large measure on proactive and conservation-oriented management of both public and private lands.

• iii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

Introduction and Background .........................................................................................1

II.

Bald Eagles in Virginia .....................................................................................................4

III.

Federal Laws and Regulations Protecting Bald Eagles .................................................5

IV.

Virginia Laws and Regulations Protecting Bald Eagles ................................................6

V.

National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (National Guidelines, NBEMG) .........7

VI.

Virginia Exceptions to the National Guidelines ...........................................................33 Chronology and seasonality of breeding and concentrated activity (p. 6 of NBEMG) ....33 Alternate nests guideline regarding consecutive years of inactivity (p. 11 of NBEMG) .33 The “1-mile” guideline (p. 12 of NBEMG) ......................................................................33 Timber operations and forestry practices; Category C (p. 13 of NBEMG) ......................34 Guideline applicability to seasonal concentration areas and communal roosts (p. 14 of NBEMG) ............................................................................................................35 “Latent” nest tree/site guideline (p. 15 of NBEMG) ........................................................35

VII.

Application and Effect of These Guidelines .................................................................36 VIII. Implementation of These Guidelines .............................................................................37

IX.

References ........................................................................................................................38

Acknowledgements: The authors of this revision of Virginia’s Bald Eagle guidance acknowledge and appreciate the contributions to and review of this document by Dr. Todd Katzner of the Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, West Virginia University at Morgantown.

• iv-

I.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Virginia landowners who share their property with bald eagles have a unique opportunity to become stewards of a national treasure. Not only are bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) a vital component of riverine and wetland ecosystems, but they also are a flagship indicator of ecosystem health. Providing for their needs will help to ensure the security of other wildlife species, protect natural communities, and enhance the quality of the Commonwealth’s rivers and streams. The future of bald eagles in Virginia depends in large measure on proactive and conservation-oriented management of both public and private lands.

As the federal and state agencies with responsibility for conservation and management of wildlife, respectively, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF, Department) are jointly responsible for protecting and managing bald eagles throughout Virginia. Indeed, many Virginia landowners, permitting agencies, academic researchers, non-governmental conservation organizations, and wildlife enthusiasts have cooperated with the VDGIF and USFWS to protect and restore the Commonwealth’s bald eagles and the habitats on which they depend. Over the last several decades the Department, the USFWS, the Center for Conservation Biology at The College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University (CCB), the National Wildlife Federation, and others have cooperated in a program of research, surveys, and interagency consultation to facilitate and monitor recovery of the Commonwealth’s bald eagle population.

These partners have produced numerous landowner guidelines and management plans for eagles, their nests, and concentration areas through the years, which served as templates for facilitating interagency consultation (Cline 1985, 1993; Cline and Byrd 1994; USFWS 1987, 2007; VFO-USFWS 2008; VFO-USFWS et al. 2001; Watts 2005; Watts et al. 1994).

The bald eagle first gained federal protection in 1940, under what was later named the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA, Eagle Act). That law curbed illegal hunting and shooting of eagles, but our national symbol soon was exposed to a new environmental threat.

Widespread use of the pesticide DDT after World War II caused eagle populations to plummet toward extirpation, to a Virginia low of 33 breeding pairs in the 1970’s (Watts 2005). In brief, when DDT washed into waterways, it was absorbed by aquatic plants and animals, transported up the food chain, and subsequently ingested by eagles when they ate contaminated fish. DDT interfered with accumulation of calcium in egg-producing females, and the resulting thinner eggshells cracked when adult birds incubated their own eggs. Widespread reproductive failure and a precipitous decline in eagle numbers followed: the USFWS first listed the bald eagle (south of 40 north latitude) as federally endangered under The Endangered Species Protection Act of 1966 on 11 March 1967 (32 FR 4001). In 1978 bald eagles were listed as endangered under The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) in 43 of the lower 48 states, and listed as threatened in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Washington (43 FR 6230). Bald eagles in Alaska never were listed under the ESA, and the species does not occur in Hawaii. The Virginia Endangered Species Act (§29.1-563 - 570) was adopted in 1972, and bald eagles were listed as a state endangered species pursuant to that Act.

Since the 1972 banning of DDT use in the United States, and under comprehensive eagle protection and management programs implemented by state and federal agencies, bald eagle

• 1-populations have increased dramatically across much of the lower 48 states, including Virginia.

In July 1995, bald eagles were downlisted to threatened under the ESA (60 FR 36000). Then, in anticipation of removal of bald eagles from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species, the USFWS published the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (National Guidelines) on June 5, 2007 (USFWS 2007), to provide landowners and project proponents guidance on how to ensure that actions they take on their property are consistent with the Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The National Guidelines may be found at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/BaldEagle/NationalBaldEag leManagementGuidelines.pdf, and they are included in their entirety as Section V of this publication. The National Guidelines address sensitive zones around eagle nests, communal roosts, and concentration areas. They also provide guidance and recommended protective measures to facilitate land use and development activities without causing harm to eagles, their nests, or certain essential habitats.

On August 8, 2007, following decades of documented population recovery, bald eagles were delisted from protection under the federal Endangered Species Act (72 FR 37345), though the species remained listed as a threatened species under the Virginia Endangered Species Act.

In August 2012, the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries delisted bald eagles from protection under the Virginia Endangered Species Act, effective January 1, 2013. As of that date, bald eagles are not protected under either federal or state endangered species laws. They remain, however, federally protected under the Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and also protected under Virginia law and VDGIF regulations regarding native wildlife species (see Sections III and IV).

While bald eagles were listed under the ESA, permits were available from USFWS to take bald eagles incidentally to otherwise lawful activities. There were, however, no such regulations or permit procedures to allow disturbance or incidental take of either bald eagles or golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) under the BGEPA. Thus, the USFWS developed two new regulations to address these issues (USFWS 2009). As discussed in the Q&A factsheet regarding the new regulations (USFWS 2010): (1) “The regulation set forth in section 50 CFR §22.26 provides for issuance of permits to take bald eagles and golden eagles where the taking is associated with but not the purpose of the activity and cannot practicably be avoided. Most take authorized under this section will be in the form of disturbance; however, permits may authorize non-purposeful take that may result in mortality.”

and, (2) “The regulation at 50 CFR §22.27 establishes permits for removing eagle nests where: (1) necessary to alleviate a safety emergency to people or eagles; (2) necessary to ensure public health and safety; (3) the nest prevents the use of a human-engineered structure; or (4) the activity or mitigation for the activity will provide a net benefit to eagles. Only inactive nests may be taken except in the case of safety emergencies. Inactive nests are defined by the continuous absence of any adult, egg, or dependent young at the nest for at least 10 consecutive days leading up to the time of take.”

• 2-Regional or state field offices of the USFWS currently do not deviate from the National Guidelines to accommodate regional or local differences in habitat use by eagles, nor in individual eagles’ responses to human intrusion or disturbance, and USFWS Implementation Guidelines for issuance of permits under the BGEPA are still under development. Draft guidance for development of Eagle Conservation Plans to support issuance of programmatic eagle take permits related to wind energy development has been released, however (USFWS 2011), and the USFWS stated (p. 8) that “Many of the concepts and approaches outlined in this module can be readily exported to other situations, and we expect to release other modules in the near future specifically addressing other forms of eagle take.” Pending such clarification of federal policy, and to address state-specific concerns, VDGIF has developed this guidance to promote conservation and protection of bald eagles in the Commonwealth. We sought consistency with the USFWS National Guidelines and BGEPA permitting regulations to the greatest extent possible, and deviated from them only when clearly warranted by our understanding of eagle behavior and demographics within the Commonwealth. Many definitions, schedules, categories of activities, buffer zone widths, and general recommendations have been revised from previous versions of our Virginia Guidelines, primarily to maximize consistency with the National Guidelines and to simplify interpretation of both documents by affected landowners and other interests. Similarly, most information regarding the biology and ecology of eagles, potential impacts of human activities on eagles, and specific recommendations for amelioration of those impacts has been deleted from the “Virginia-specific” narrative, as those topics are fully explored in the National Guidelines. Only issues where the Virginia Guidelines differ from the National Guidelines are explained in relative detail (Section VI of this document).

We encourage landowners and project proponents in Virginia to review their proposed actions using these guidelines. Generally, adherence to the National Guidelines is appropriate; but, in situations where there is some discrepancy between the Virginia Guidelines and the National Guidelines, Section VI provides guidance on how to ensure that a proposed project would be consistent with both. Proposed activities that may affect or result in take of a bald eagle in Virginia will be evaluated by the VDGIF and/or USFWS on a case-by-case basis, using site-specific information. The recommendations provided in these guidelines may be modified as appropriate to address project- and site-specific circumstances such as topography, existing forest canopy and habitat conditions, existing development or human activities proximal to the project site, and observed behavior of the particular eagles in question, including their reactions to specific disturbances or human activities.

It is important to recognize that these Virginia Guidelines are not regulatory in themselves, and they are not intended to supplant onsite review or consultation. VDGIF biologists are available to provide technical assistance or to consult with constituents who desire assistance in interpreting these guidelines, or in evaluation of the potential impacts of their proposed activities upon bald eagles.

• 3-

II.

BALD EAGLES IN VIRGINIA

History and Status - Prior to European settlement, the Chesapeake Bay region likely had the densest breeding population of bald eagles outside of Alaska, perhaps totaling 1,500 to 3,000 nesting pairs (Frasier et al. 1996, Watts 2005). As discussed above, eagle numbers in the Bay area declined precipitously in the early- to mid-1900s to approximately 150 breeding pairs in 1962, and to 80 to 90 pairs by the 1970s, including only 33 pairs in Virginia (Watts 2005). The population has since dramatically recovered, with 726 occupied territories and 646 active nests documented in Virginia in 2011 (Watts and Byrd 2011). This recovery has been expressed through (1) an increase in the number of breeding territories, (2) an increase in reproductive rate, and (3) an expansion in geographic distribution (Watts 2005; Watts et al. 2007, 2008). Most of Virginia’s bald eagles breed in the Coastal Plain, but we estimate that perhaps 20% of the population breeds in the Piedmont and mountains. Within the Coastal Plain, freshwater tidal sections of the Bay’s tributaries support three to four times higher breeding densities, higher reproductive rates, and greater chick growth rates compared to more saline portions of the Bay (Markham and Watts 2008, Watts et al. 2006).

Breeding - In Virginia, nest building and repair may occur during any month of the year, but these activities typically begin as early as November and peak in mid-winter. For management purposes, the breeding season in Virginia is generally considered to be from December 15 through July 15, though breeding activity may occur before or after these dates. Courtship flights and related mating behavior are most frequently observed during January and February, and eggs are usually laid between mid-January and late March. Most eggs hatch between early March and early May, and eaglets stay in the nest for 11 to 12 weeks after hatching. Most young are capable of sustained flight by mid-July, but remain dependent on the parents and stay in the general vicinity of the nest for several more weeks. Adult bald eagle pairs in Virginia typically remain on or near their breeding territories throughout the year. Eagles are most sensitive to disturbance during the breeding season as defined above.

Seasonal Concentration Areas and Communal Roosts - During the winter and summer months, migrant bald eagles from the Northeast and Southeast, respectively, converge with the local eagle population in predictable locations within the Chesapeake Bay region. These areas are referred to as bald eagle “concentration areas” and are defined as locations along waterways where eagles congregate in numbers much greater than can be accounted for by local breeding pairs and their offspring (Watts 2005, Watts et al. 2007). As applicable to these guidelines, the summer eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from May 15 through August 31, and the winter eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from December 15 through March 15.

Concentration areas are used by juveniles, sub-adults, non-breeding adult eagles, and breeding pairs of eagles for roosting, perching, and foraging. Typical eagle concentration areas have minimal shoreline development, and heavily forested shorelines with large canopy trees that provide extensive views of potential feeding areas, although the site conditions may vary along shoreline segments within concentration areas.

• 4-Virginia has major eagle concentration areas on portions of three major tidal rivers: the James River (Clark 1992, Scott 1971, Watts and Factor 1994, Watts and Whalen 1997), the Rappahannock River (Portlock 1994, VDGIF unpubl. data, Watts 1998), and the Potomac River (Wallin and Byrd 1984, VDGIF unpubl. data, Witt unpubl. data). Additional sites on the York and Chickahominy rivers support sporadic high concentrations of bald eagles that currently are not stable or predictable enough to warrant designation as concentration areas. As the eagle population expands, however, eagle concentration areas may develop on these or other rivers.

Maps and additional information regarding Virginia’s eagle concentration areas can be accessed on the VDGIF and USFWS websites at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html and http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/Project_Reviews_Step6b.html, respectively.

Eagle concentration areas often include one to several communal night roosts.

Communal roosts typically are located in sheltered forested areas that minimize exposure to inclement weather. Eagles numbering from just a few to over 100 individuals may gather at such roosts in canopy trees clustered within a relatively small area. Eagle roosts in Virginia are less well known than are seasonal concentration areas; the documented communal roosts are depicted at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html.

III.

FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDELINES

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BPEGA, Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668c; 50 CFR Part 22) – This 1940 Act, as amended several times since, prohibits taking bald or golden eagles or their nests, eggs, or parts without a federal permit. The Act provides criminal and civil penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” Under the Act, take is defined as “to pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb” an eagle or their parts, nest, or eggs; and disturb means “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: (1) injury to an eagle; (2) a decrease in productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior; or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” In addition to these immediate impacts, this definition of disturb also covers “impacts that result from human-induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle’s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or substantially interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment.” Clearly, the Eagle Act provides broad federal protection of eagles and their nests, eggs, and parts thereof.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 701 et seq.; 50 CFR Parts 10, 20, 21) – Enacted in 1918, the MBTA prohibits the taking of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or egg, except as permitted by regulation. Amendments of 1972 expanded the scope of this Act to include bald eagles and other raptors. The Act and its implementing regulations generally

• 5-prohibit actions or attempts to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess, or collect any migratory bird species, or their nests or eggs.

National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines - While considering removal of the bald eagle from the Federal List of Endangered or Threatened Wildlife, the USFWS recognized the need for guidelines to inform landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with bald eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Eagle Act may apply to their activities. To address this need, the USFWS developed the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007) to: “(1) publicize the provisions of the Eagle Act that continue to protect bald eagles, in order to reduce the possibility that people will violate the law; (2) advise landowners, land managers and the general public of the potential for various human activities to disturb bald eagles; and (3) encourage additional nonbinding land management practices that benefit bald eagles”. The National Guidelines (Section V) explain the nationwide standards for protection of bald eagles and their nests, and further provide recommendations for protection and management of eagle communal roosts, foraging areas, and concentration areas.

Regulations and Permitting Procedures for Incidental Take of Eagles, and for Intentional Take of Eagle Nests - In recognition of the need for standards and a mechanism to issue permits for “take” as envisioned in the Eagle Act and National Guidelines, the USFWS published on September 11, 2009 their final rule establishing regulations for “incidental take of bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act), where the take to be authorized is associated with otherwise lawful activities, and for intentional take of eagle nests under particular, limited circumstances” (74 FR 46836). Those regulations became effective on November 20, 2009.

IV.

VIRGINIA LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDELINES From initial passage of the Virginia Endangered Species Act (§29.1-563 - 570) in 1972 through December 31, 2012, bald eagles were protected under that Act. In recognition of their recovery over the last four decades, bald eagles were removed from the Virginia list of threatened and endangered species effective January 1, 2013, though they remain designated as a [non-regulatory] Tier 2 Species of Greatest Conservation Need under Virginia’s Wildlife Action Plan (VDGIF 2005). In addition, the Code of Virginia (§29.1-521) and VDGIF regulations (4 VAC 15-30-10) generally provide legal protection to all native birds and to their nests, eggs, and young. Thus, though eagles no longer receive the extended protections afforded to threatened or endangered species, they remain under the VDGIF’s protection and management. Further, VDGIF is authorized by USFWS to enforce federal wildlife laws, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.

As discussed above, new USFWS regulations for permitting incidental take of eagles and intentional take of eagle nests have been implemented. The new protocols adopt federal definitions for “Active” and “Inactive” nests that are not consistent with the nonregulatory definitions of those terms used by VDGIF and CCB for the last several decades. To avoid

• 6-confusion regarding nest/territory activity and occupancy, and to clarify when these Virginia guidelines should be applied, we provide the following parameters. (1) A “Recently Active” nest is one that was attended (built, maintained or used) by a pair of bald eagles, whether or not eggs were laid, within the last three breeding seasons. This is consistent with the current federal regulatory definition of an “active” nest, though it facilitates application of these Virginia Guidelines for three seasons of nest inactivity.

(2) These Virginia Guidelines apply to any nest considered “Recently Active.”

(3) All nests/territories documented as “Active” and/or “Occupied” in the 2011 CCB surveys (as determined from the survey report [Watts and Byrd 2011], the CCB “Nest Locator” website, or the VDGIF website, are considered “Recently Active” nests though the 2014 nesting season. After July 15, 2014, written or photographic documentation of nest disrepair or abandonment, at VDGIF discretion, may warrant release of a given nest from coverage under the Guidelines.

(4) All other nests/territories documented as “Active” and/or “Occupied” in VDGIF/CCB databases, or upon field inspection, will be considered “Recently Active” for 3 years after the last documented activity and/or occupancy. Written or photographic documentation of nest disrepair or abandonment, at VDGIF discretion, may warrant release of a given nest from coverage under the Guidelines.

V.

NATIONAL BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES (begins on next page) See http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html for additional USFWS regulations, permit information and applications, and guidance.

• 7-

NATIONAL BALD EAGLE

MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

May 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE BALD EAGLE............................................................. 2 The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act...........................................................2 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................3 State laws and regulations .....................................................................................3 Where do bald eagles nest? ...................................................................................4 When do bald eagles nest? ....................................................................................5 Chronology of typical reproductive activities of bald eagles in the United States........................................................................................................................6 How many chicks do bald eagles raise? ...............................................................7 What do bald eagles eat?........................................................................................7 The impact of human activity on nesting bald eagles..........................................7 The impact of human activity on foraging and roosting bald eagles .................8 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT NEST SITES................. 9 Existing Uses.........................................................................................................10 ACTIVITY-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES..................................................................................... 10 Alternate nests.......................................................................................................11 Temporary Impacts ...............................................................................................11

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT FORAGING AREAS

AND COMMUNAL ROOST SITES....................................................................................... 14

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO BENEFIT BALD EAGLES.......................... 15

CONTACTS.............................................................................................................................. 16

GLOSSARY.............................................................................................................................. 17 RELATED LITERATURE....................................................................................................... 19 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

INTRODUCTION

The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA and the Eagle Act protect bald eagles from a variety of harmful actions and impacts. The U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) developed these National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to advise landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with bald eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Eagle Act may apply to their activities. A variety of human activities can potentially interfere with bald eagles, affecting their ability to forage, nest, roost, breed, or raise young. The Guidelines are intended to help people minimize such impacts to bald eagles, particularly where they may constitute “disturbance,” which is prohibited by the Eagle Act.

The Guidelines are intended to:

(1) Publicize the provisions of the Eagle Act that continue to protect bald eagles, in order to reduce the possibility that people will violate the law,

(2) Advise landowners, land managers and the general public of the potential for various human activities to disturb bald eagles, and

(3) Encourage additional nonbinding land management practices that benefit bald eagles (see Additional Recommendations section).

While the Guidelines include general recommendations for land management practices that will benefit bald eagles, the document is intended primarily as a tool for landowners and planners who seek information and recommendations regarding how to avoid disturbing bald eagles. Many States and some tribal entities have developed state-specific management plans, regulations, and/or guidance for landowners and land managers to protect and enhance bald eagle habitat, and we encourage the continued development and use of these planning tools to benefit bald eagles.

Adherence to the Guidelines herein will benefit individuals, agencies, organizations, and companies by helping them avoid violations of the law. However, the Guidelines themselves are not law. Rather, they are recommendations based on several decades of behavioral observations, science, and conservation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to bald eagles.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service strongly encourages adherence to these guidelines to ensure that bald and golden eagle populations will continue to be sustained. The Service realizes there may be impacts to some birds even if all reasonable measures are taken to avoid such impacts. Although it is not possible to absolve individuals and entities from liability under the Eagle Act or the MBTA, the Service exercises enforcement discretion to focus on those individuals, companies, or agencies that take migratory birds without regard for the consequences of their actions and the law, especially when conservation measures, such as these Guidelines, are available, but have not been implemented. The Service will prioritize its enforcement efforts to focus on those individuals or entities who take bald eagles or their parts, eggs, or nests without implementing appropriate measures recommended by the Guidelines. 1 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 The Service intends to pursue the development of regulations that would authorize, under limited circumstances, the use of permits if “take” of an eagle is anticipated but unavoidable. Additionally, if the bald eagle is delisted, the Service intends to provide a regulatory mechanism to honor existing (take) authorizations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

During the interim period until the Service completes a rulemaking for permits under the Eagle Act, the Service does not intend to refer for prosecution the incidental “take” of any bald eagle under the MBTA or Eagle Act, if such take is in full compliance with the terms and conditions of an incidental take statement issued to the action agency or applicant under the authority of section 7(b)(4) of the ESA or a permit issued under the authority of section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA.

The Guidelines are applicable throughout the United States, including Alaska. The primary purpose of these Guidelines is to provide information that will minimize or prevent violations only of Federal laws governing bald eagles. In addition to Federal laws, many states and some smaller jurisdictions and tribes have additional laws and regulations protecting bald eagles. In some cases those laws and regulations may be more protective (restrictive) than these Federal guidelines. If you are planning activities that may affect bald eagles, we therefore recommend that you contact both your nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see the contact information on p.16) and your state wildlife agency for assistance.

LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE BALD EAGLE

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act The Eagle Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), enacted in 1940, and amended several times since then, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from “taking” bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal and civil penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” The Act defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.” “Disturb’’ means:

"Disturb means to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior."

In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from human-induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle=s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or substantially interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment. 2 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 A violation of the Act can result in a criminal fine of $100,000 ($200,000 for organizations), imprisonment for one year, or both, for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for additional offenses, and a second violation of this Act is a felony.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act The MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703-712), prohibits the taking of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or egg, except as permitted by regulation. The MBTA was enacted in 1918; a 1972 agreement supplementing one of the bilateral treaties underlying the MBTA had the effect of expanding the scope of the Act to cover bald eagles and other raptors. Implementing regulations define “take” under the MBTA as “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess, or collect.”

Copies of the Eagle Act and the MBTA are available at: http://permits.fws.gov/ltr/ltr.shtml.

State laws and regulations Most states have their own regulations and/or guidelines for bald eagle management.

Some states may continue to list the bald eagle as endangered, threatened, or of special concern. If you plan activities that may affect bald eagles, we urge you to familiarize yourself with the regulations and/or guidelines that apply to bald eagles in your state.

Your adherence to the Guidelines herein does not ensure that you are in compliance with state laws and regulations because state regulations can be more specific and/or restrictive than these Guidelines.

NATURAL HISTORY OF THE BALD EAGLE

Bald eagles are a North American species that historically occurred throughout the contiguous United States and Alaska. After severely declining in the lower 48 States between the 1870s and the 1970s, bald eagles have rebounded and re-established breeding territories in each of the lower 48 states. The largest North American breeding populations are in Alaska and Canada, but there are also significant bald eagle populations in Florida, the Pacific Northwest, the Greater Yellowstone area, the Great Lakes states, and the Chesapeake Bay region. Bald eagle distribution varies seasonally.

Bald eagles that nest in southern latitudes frequently move northward in late spring and early summer, often summering as far north as Canada. Most eagles that breed at northern latitudes migrate southward during winter, or to coastal areas where waters remain unfrozen. Migrants frequently concentrate in large numbers at sites where food is abundant and they often roost together communally. In some cases, concentration areas are used year-round: in summer by southern eagles and in winter by northern eagles.

Juvenile bald eagles have mottled brown and white plumage, gradually acquiring their dark brown body and distinctive white head and tail as they mature. Bald eagles generally attain adult plumage by 5 years of age. Most are capable of breeding at 4 or 5 years of age, but in healthy populations they may not start breeding until much older. Bald eagles may live 15 to 25 years in the wild. Adults weigh 8 to 14 pounds (occasionally reaching 16 pounds in Alaska) and have wingspans of 5 to 8 feet. Those in the northern range are larger than those in the south, and females are larger than males. 3 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Where do bald eagles nest?

Breeding bald eagles occupy “territories,” areas they will typically defend against intrusion by other eagles. In addition to the active nest, a territory may include one or more alternate nests (nests built or maintained by the eagles but not used for nesting in a given year). The Eagle Act prohibits removal or destruction of both active and alternate bald eagle nests. Bald eagles exhibit high nest site fidelity and nesting territories are often used year after year. Some territories are known to have been used continually for over half a century.

Bald eagles generally nest near coastlines, rivers, large lakes or streams that support an adequate food supply. They often nest in mature or old-growth trees; snags (dead trees); cliffs; rock promontories; rarely on the ground; and with increasing frequency on human-made structures such as power poles and communication towers. In forested areas, bald eagles often select the tallest trees with limbs strong enough to support a nest that can weigh more than 1,000 pounds. Nest sites typically include at least one perch with a clear view of the water where the eagles usually forage. Shoreline trees or snags located in reservoirs provide the visibility and accessibility needed to locate aquatic prey. Eagle nests are constructed with large sticks, and may be lined with moss, grass, plant stalks, lichens, seaweed, or sod. Nests are usually about 4-6 feet in diameter and 3 feet deep, although larger nests exist.

Copyright Birds of North America, 2000

The range of breeding bald eagles in 2000 (shaded areas). This map shows only the larger concentrations of nests; eagles have continued to expand into additional nesting territories in many states. The dotted line represents the bald eagle’s wintering range. 4 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 When do bald eagles nest?

Nesting activity begins several months before egg-laying. Egg-laying dates vary throughout the U.S., ranging from October in Florida, to late April or even early May in the northern United States. Incubation typically lasts 33-35 days, but can be as long as 40 days. Eaglets make their first unsteady flights about 10 to 12 weeks after hatching, and fledge (leave their nests) within a few days after that first flight. However, young birds usually remain in the vicinity of the nest for several weeks after fledging because they are almost completely dependent on their parents for food until they disperse from the nesting territory approximately 6 weeks later.

The bald eagle breeding season tends to be longer in the southern U.S., and re-nesting following an unsuccessful first nesting attempt is more common there as well. The following table shows the timing of bald eagle breeding seasons in different regions of the country. The table represents the range of time within which the majority of nesting activities occur in each region and does not apply to any specific nesting pair. Because the timing of nesting activities may vary within a given region, you should contact the nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16) and/or your state wildlife conservation agency for more specific information on nesting chronology in your area. 5 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Chronology of typical reproductive activities of bald eagles in the United States.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

March April May June

July Aug.

SOUTHEASTERN U.S. (FL, GA, SC, NC, AL, MS, LA, TN, KY, AR, eastern 2 of TX)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION (NC, VA, MD, DE, southern 2 of NJ, eastern 2 of PA, panhandle of WV)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ Fledging Young

NORTHERN U.S. (ME, NH, MA, RI, CT, NY, northern 2 of NJ, western 2 of PA, OH, WV exc. panhandle, IN, IL,

MI, WI, MN, IA, MO, ND, SD, NB, KS, CO, UT)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

PACIFIC REGION (WA, OR, CA, ID, MT, WY, NV)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟

Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

SOUTHWESTERN U.S. (AZ, NM, OK panhandle, western 2 of TX)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟ Fledging Young ⎟

ALASKA

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟

Ing Young Fledg-

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

March April May June

July Aug. 6 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 How many chicks do bald eagles raise?

The number of eagle eggs laid will vary from 1-3, with 1-2 eggs being the most common.

Only one eagle egg is laid per day, although not always on successive days. Hatching of young occurs on different days with the result that chicks in the same nest are sometimes of unequal size. The overall national fledging rate is approximately one chick per nest, annually, which results in a healthy expanding population.

What do bald eagles eat?

Bald eagles are opportunistic feeders. Fish comprise much of their diet, but they also eat waterfowl, shorebirds/colonial waterbirds, small mammals, turtles, and carrion. Because they are visual hunters, eagles typically locate their prey from a conspicuous perch, or soaring flight, then swoop down and strike. Wintering bald eagles often congregate in large numbers along streams to feed on spawning salmon or other fish species, and often gather in large numbers in areas below reservoirs, especially hydropower dams, where fish are abundant. Wintering eagles also take birds from rafts of ducks at reservoirs and rivers, and congregate on melting ice shelves to scavenge dead fish from the current or the soft melting ice. Bald eagles will also feed on carcasses along roads, in landfills, and at feedlots.

During the breeding season, adults carry prey to the nest to feed the young. Adults feed their chicks by tearing off pieces of food and holding them to the beaks of the eaglets.

After fledging, immature eagles are slow to develop hunting skills, and must learn to locate reliable food sources and master feeding techniques. Young eagles will congregate together, often feeding upon easily acquired food such as carrion and fish found in abundance at the mouths of streams and shallow bays and at landfills.

The impact of human activity on nesting bald eagles During the breeding season, bald eagles are sensitive to a variety of human activities.

However, not all bald eagle pairs react to human activities in the same way. Some pairs nest successfully just dozens of yards from human activity, while others abandon nest sites in response to activities much farther away. This variability may be related to a number of factors, including visibility, duration, noise levels, extent of the area affected by the activity, prior experiences with humans, and tolerance of the individual nesting pair.

The relative sensitivity of bald eagles during various stages of the breeding season is outlined in the following table. 7 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

Nesting Bald Eagle Sensitivity to Human Activities Sensitivity to Phase Activity Human Activity Comments

Most sensitive Most critical time period. Disturbance is manifested in nest Courtship and I period; likely to abandonment. Bald eagles in newly established territories are Nest Building respond negatively more prone to abandon nest sites.

Human activity of even limited duration may cause nest Very sensitive II Egg laying desertion and abandonment of territory for the breeding period season.

Incubation and Adults are less likely to abandon the nest near and after early nestling Very sensitive hatching. However, flushed adults leave eggs and young III period (up to 4 period unattended; eggs are susceptible to cooling, loss of moisture, weeks) overheating, and predation; young are vulnerable to elements.

Nestling Likelihood of nest abandonment and vulnerability of the IV period, 4 to 8 Moderately nestlings to elements somewhat decreases. However, sensitive period weeks nestlings may miss feedings, affecting their survival.

Nestlings 8 V weeks through Very sensitive Gaining flight capability, nestlings 8 weeks and older may flush period from the nest prematurely due to disruption and die. fledging

If agitated by human activities, eagles may inadequately construct or repair their nest, may expend energy defending the nest rather than tending to their young, or may abandon the nest altogether. Activities that cause prolonged absences of adults from their nests can jeopardize eggs or young. Depending on weather conditions, eggs may overheat or cool too much and fail to hatch. Unattended eggs and nestlings are subject to predation. Young nestlings are particularly vulnerable because they rely on their parents to provide warmth or shade, without which they may die as a result of hypothermia or heat stress. If food delivery schedules are interrupted, the young may not develop healthy plumage, which can affect their survival. In addition, adults startled while incubating or brooding young may damage eggs or injure their young as they abruptly leave the nest.

Older nestlings no longer require constant attention from the adults, but they may be startled by loud or intrusive human activities and prematurely jump from the nest before they are able to fly or care for themselves. Once fledged, juveniles range up to ¼ mile from the nest site, often to a site with minimal human activity. During this period, until about six weeks after departure from the nest, the juveniles still depend on the adults to feed them.

The impact of human activity on foraging and roosting bald eagles Disruption, destruction, or obstruction of roosting and foraging areas can also negatively affect bald eagles. Disruptive activities in or near eagle foraging areas can interfere with feeding, reducing chances of survival. Interference with feeding can also result in reduced productivity (number of young successfully fledged). Migrating and wintering bald eagles often congregate at specific sites for purposes of feeding and sheltering. Bald eagles rely on established roost sites because of their proximity to sufficient food sources. Roost sites are usually in mature trees where the eagles are somewhat sheltered from the wind and weather. Human activities near or within communal roost sites may prevent eagles 8National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 from feeding or taking shelter, especially if there are not other undisturbed and productive feeding and roosting sites available. Activities that permanently alter communal roost sites and important foraging areas can altogether eliminate the elements that are essential for feeding and sheltering eagles.

Where a human activity agitates or bothers roosting or foraging bald eagles to the degree that causes injury or substantially interferes with breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment, the conduct of the activity constitutes a violation of the Eagle Act’s prohibition against disturbing eagles. The circumstances that might result in such an outcome are difficult to predict without detailed site-specific information. If your activities may disturb roosting or foraging bald eagles, you should contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16) for advice and recommendations for how to avoid such disturbance.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT NEST SITES

In developing these Guidelines, we relied on existing state and regional bald eagle guidelines, scientific literature on bald eagle disturbance, and recommendations of state and Federal biologists who monitor the impacts of human activity on eagles. Despite these resources, uncertainties remain regarding the effects of many activities on eagles and how eagles in different situations may or may not respond to certain human activities.

The Service recognizes this uncertainty and views the collection of better biological data on the response of eagles to disturbance as a high priority. To the extent that resources allow, the Service will continue to collect data on responses of bald eagles to human activities conducted according to the recommendations within these Guidelines to ensure that adequate protection from disturbance is being afforded, and to identify circumstances where the Guidelines might be modified. These data will be used to make future adjustments to the Guidelines.

To avoid disturbing nesting bald eagles, we recommend (1) keeping a distance between the activity and the nest (distance buffers), (2) maintaining preferably forested (or natural) areas between the activity and around nest trees (landscape buffers), and (3) avoiding certain activities during the breeding season. The buffer areas serve to minimize visual and auditory impacts associated with human activities near nest sites. Ideally, buffers would be large enough to protect existing nest trees and provide for alternative or replacement nest trees.

The size and shape of effective buffers vary depending on the topography and other ecological characteristics surrounding the nest site. In open areas where there are little or no forested or topographical buffers, such as in many western states, distance alone must serve as the buffer. Consequently, in open areas, the distance between the activity and the nest may need to be larger than the distances recommended under Categories A and B of these guidelines (pg. 12) if no landscape buffers are present. The height of the nest above the ground may also ameliorate effects of human activities; eagles at higher nests may be less prone to disturbance.

In addition to the physical features of the landscape and nest site, the appropriate size for the distance buffer may vary according to the historical tolerances of eagles to human activities in particular localities, and may also depend on the location of the nest in relation 9 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 to feeding and roosting areas used by the eagles. Increased competition for nest sites may lead bald eagles to nest closer to human activity (and other eagles).

Seasonal restrictions can prevent the potential impacts of many shorter-term, obtrusive activities that do not entail landscape alterations (e.g. fireworks, outdoor concerts). In proximity to the nest, these kinds of activities should be conducted only outside the breeding season. For activities that entail both short-term, obtrusive characteristics and more permanent impacts (e.g., building construction), we recommend a combination of both approaches: retaining a landscape buffer and observing seasonal restrictions.

For assistance in determining the appropriate size and configuration of buffers or the timing of activities in the vicinity of a bald eagle nest, we encourage you to contact the nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16).

Existing Uses Eagles are unlikely to be disturbed by routine use of roads, homes, and other facilities where such use pre-dates the eagles’ successful nesting activity in a given area.

Therefore, in most cases ongoing existing uses may proceed with the same intensity with little risk of disturbing bald eagles. However, some intermittent, occasional, or irregular uses that pre-date eagle nesting in an area may disturb bald eagles. For example: a pair of eagles may begin nesting in an area and subsequently be disturbed by activities associated with an annual outdoor flea market, even though the flea market has been held annually at the same location. In such situations, human activity should be adjusted or relocated to minimize potential impacts on the nesting pair.

ACTIVITY-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES

The following section provides the Service=s management recommendations for avoiding bald eagle disturbance as a result of new or intermittent activities proposed in the vicinity of bald eagle nests. Activities are separated into 8 categories (A – H) based on the nature and magnitude of impacts to bald eagles that usually result from the type of activity.

Activities with similar or comparable impacts are grouped together.

In most cases, impacts will vary based on the visibility of the activity from the eagle nest and the degree to which similar activities are already occurring in proximity to the nest site. Visibility is a factor because, in general, eagles are more prone to disturbance when an activity occurs in full view. For this reason, we recommend that people locate activities farther from the nest structure in areas with open vistas, in contrast to areas where the view is shielded by rolling topography, trees, or other screening factors. The recommendations also take into account the existence of similar activities in the area because the continued presence of nesting bald eagles in the vicinity of the existing activities indicates that the eagles in that area can tolerate a greater degree of human activity than we can generally expect from eagles in areas that experience fewer human impacts. To illustrate how these factors affect the likelihood of disturbing eagles, we have incorporated the recommendations for some activities into a table (categories A and B).

First, determine which category your activity falls into (between categories A – H). If the activity you plan to undertake is not specifically addressed in these guidelines, follow the recommendations for the most similar activity represented. 10 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 If your activity is under A or B, our recommendations are in table form. The vertical axis shows the degree of visibility of the activity from the nest. The horizontal axis (header row) represents the degree to which similar activities are ongoing in the vicinity of the nest. Locate the row that best describes how visible your activity will be from the eagle nest. Then, choose the column that best describes the degree to which similar activities are ongoing in the vicinity of the eagle nest. The box where the column and row come together contains our management recommendations for how far you should locate your activity from the nest to avoid disturbing the eagles. The numerical distances shown in the tables are the closest the activity should be conducted relative to the nest. In some cases we have included additional recommendations (other than recommended distance from the nest) you should follow to help ensure that your activity will not disturb the eagles.

Alternate nests For activities that entail permanent landscape alterations that may result in bald eagle disturbance, these recommendations apply to both active and alternate bald eagle nests.

Disturbance becomes an issue with regard to alternate nests if eagles return for breeding purposes and react to land use changes that occurred while the nest was inactive. The likelihood that an alternate nest will again become active decreases the longer it goes unused. If you plan activities in the vicinity of an alternate bald eagle nest and have information to show that the nest has not been active during the preceding 5 breeding seasons, the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance around the nest site may no longer be warranted. The nest itself remains protected by other provisions of the Eagle Act, however, and may not be destroyed.

If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely an inactive nest will be reused before 5 years of disuse have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the nest site. Without sufficient documentation, you should continue to follow these guidelines when conducting activities around the nest site. If we are able to determine that it is unlikely the nest will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance are no longer necessary around that nest site.

This guidance is intended to minimize disturbance, as defined by Federal regulation. In addition to Federal laws, most states and some tribes and smaller jurisdictions have additional laws and regulations protecting bald eagles. In some cases those laws and regulations may be more protective (restrictive) than these Federal guidelines.

Temporary Impacts For activities that have temporary impacts, such as the use of loud machinery, fireworks displays, or summer boating activities, we recommend seasonal restrictions. These types of activities can generally be carried out outside of the breeding season without causing disturbance. The recommended restrictions for these types of activities can be lifted for alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched (depending on the distance between the alternate nest and the active nest). 11 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

In general, activities should be kept as far away from nest trees as possible; loud and disruptive activities should be conducted when eagles are not nesting; and activity between the nest and the nearest foraging area should be minimized. If the activity you plan to undertake is not specifically addressed in these guidelines, follow the recommendations for the most similar activity addressed, or contact your local U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office for additional guidance.

If you believe that special circumstances apply to your situation that increase or diminish the likelihood of bald eagle disturbance, or if it is not possible to adhere to the guidelines, you should contact your local Service Field Office for further guidance.

Category A: Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of ½ acre or less.

Construction of roads, trails, canals, power lines, and other linear utilities.

Agriculture and aquaculture – new or expanded operations.

Alteration of shorelines or wetlands.

Installation of docks or moorings.

Water impoundment.

Category B: Building construction, 3 or more stories.

Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of more than ½ acre.

Installation or expansion of marinas with a capacity of 6 or more boats.

Mining and associated activities.

Oil and natural gas drilling and refining and associated activities.

If there is no similar activity If there is similar activity closer within 1 mile of the nest than 1 mile from the nest

660 feet, or as close as existing If the activity 660 feet. Landscape buffers are tolerated activity of similar scope. will be visible recommended.

Landscape buffers are from the nest recommended.

Category A: 330 feet. Clearing, external construction, and landscaping 330 feet, or as close as existing If the activity between 330 feet and 660 feet tolerated activity of similar scope. will not be should be done outside breeding Clearing, external construction and visible from the season. landscaping within 660 feet should nest be done outside breeding season.

Category B: 660 feet.

The numerical distances shown in the table are the closest the activity should be conducted relative to the nest.

12National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Category C. Timber Operations and Forestry Practices

• Avoid clear cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet of the nest at any time.

• Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw and yarding operations, during the breeding season within 660 feet of the nest. The distance may be decreased to 330 feet around alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched.

• Selective thinning and other silviculture management practices designed to conserve or enhance habitat, including prescribed burning close to the nest tree, should be undertaken outside the breeding season. Precautions such as raking leaves and woody debris from around the nest tree should be taken to prevent crown fire or fire climbing the nest tree. If it is determined that a burn during the breeding season would be beneficial, then, to ensure that no take or disturbance will occur, these activities should be conducted only when neither adult eagles nor young are present at the nest tree (i.e., at the beginning of, or end of, the breeding season, either before the particular nest is active or after the young have fledged from that nest). Appropriate Federal and state biologists should be consulted before any prescribed burning is conducted during the breeding season.

• Avoid construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage areas within 330 feet of the nest.

Category D. Off-road vehicle use (including snowmobiles). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, do not operate off-road vehicles within 330 feet of the nest. In open areas, where there is increased visibility and exposure to noise, this distance should be extended to 660 feet.

Category E. Motorized Watercraft use (including jet skis/personal watercraft). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, within 330 feet of the nest, (1) do not operate jet skis (personal watercraft), and (2) avoid concentrations of noisy vessels (e.g., commercial fishing boats and tour boats), except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. Other motorized boat traffic passing within 330 feet of the nest should attempt to minimize trips and avoid stopping in the area where feasible, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to boat traffic. Buffers for airboats should be larger than 330 feet due to the increased noise they generate, combined with their speed, maneuverability, and visibility.

Category F. Non-motorized recreation and human entry (e.g., hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, birdwatching, kayaking, canoeing). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. If the activity will be visible or highly audible from the nest, maintain a 330-foot buffer during the breeding season, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to such activity. 13 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Category G. Helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.

Except for authorized biologists trained in survey techniques, avoid operating aircraft within 1,000 feet of the nest during the breeding season, except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity.

Category H. Blasting and other loud, intermittent noises.

Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 1/2 mile of active nests, unless greater tolerance to the activity (or similar activity) has been demonstrated by the eagles in the nesting area. This recommendation applies to the use of fireworks classified by the Federal Department of Transportation as Class B explosives, which includes the larger fireworks that are intended for licensed public display.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT FORAGING AREAS AND

COMMUNAL ROOST SITES

1. Minimize potentially disruptive activities and development in the eagles’ direct flight path between their nest and roost sites and important foraging areas.

1. Locate long-term and permanent water-dependent facilities, such as boat ramps and marinas, away from important eagle foraging areas.

1. Avoid recreational and commercial boating and fishing near critical eagle foraging areas during peak feeding times (usually early to mid-morning and late afternoon), except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance to such activity.

1. Do not use explosives within ½ mile (or within 1 mile in open areas) of communal roosts when eagles are congregating, without prior coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and your state wildlife agency.

1. Locate aircraft corridors no closer than 1,000 feet vertical or horizontal distance from communal roost sites. 14 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO BENEFIT BALD EAGLES

The following are additional management practices that landowners and planners can exercise for added benefit to bald eagles.

1. Protect and preserve potential roost and nest sites by retaining mature trees and old growth stands, particularly within ½ mile from water.

1. Where nests are blown from trees during storms or are otherwise destroyed by the elements, continue to protect the site in the absence of the nest for up to three (3) complete breeding seasons. Many eagles will rebuild the nest and reoccupy the site.

1. To avoid collisions, site wind turbines, communication towers, and high voltage transmission power lines away from nests, foraging areas, and communal roost sites.

1. Employ industry-accepted best management practices to prevent birds from colliding with or being electrocuted by utility lines, towers, and poles. If possible, bury utility lines in important eagle areas.

1. Where bald eagles are likely to nest in human-made structures (e.g., cell phone towers) and such use could impede operation or maintenance of the structures or jeopardize the safety of the eagles, equip the structures with either (1) devices engineered to discourage bald eagles from building nests, or (2) nesting platforms that will safely accommodate bald eagle nests without interfering with structure performance.

1. Immediately cover carcasses of euthanized animals at landfills to protect eagles from being poisoned.

1. Do not intentionally feed bald eagles. Artificially feeding bald eagles can disrupt their essential behavioral patterns and put them at increased risk from power lines, collision with windows and cars, and other mortality factors.

1. Use pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other chemicals only in accordance with Federal and state laws.

1. Monitor and minimize dispersal of contaminants associated with hazardous waste sites (legal or illegal), permitted releases, and runoff from agricultural areas, especially within watersheds where eagles have shown poor reproduction or where bioaccumulating contaminants have been documented. These factors present a risk of contamination to eagles and their food sources. 15 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

CONTACTS

The following U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Offices provide technical assistance on bald eagle management:

Alabama Daphne (251) 441-5181 New Hampshire Concord (603) 223-2541 Alaska Anchorage (907) 271-2888 New Jersey Pleasantville (609) 646-9310 Fairbanks (907) 456-0203 New Mexico Albuquerque (505) 346-2525 Juneau (907) 780-1160 New York Cortland (607) 753-9334 Arizona Phoenix (602) 242-0210 Long Island (631) 776-1401 Arkansas Conway (501) 513-4470 North Carolina Raleigh (919) 856-4520 California Arcata (707) 822-7201 Asheville (828) 258-3939 Barstow (760) 255-8852 North Dakota Bismarck (701) 250-4481 Carlsbad (760) 431-9440 Ohio Reynoldsburg (614) 469-6923 Red Bluff (530) 527-3043 Oklahoma Tulsa (918) 581-7458 Sacramento (916) 414-6000 Oregon Bend (541) 383-7146 Stockton (209) 946-6400 Klamath Falls (541) 885-8481 Ventura (805) 644-1766 La Grande (541) 962-8584 Yreka (530) 842-5763 Newport (541) 867-4558 Colorado Lakewood (303) 275-2370 Portland (503) 231-6179 Grand Junction (970) 243-2778 Roseburg (541) 957-3474 Connecticut (See New Hampshire) Pennsylvania State College (814) 234-4090 Delaware (See Maryland) Rhode Island (See New Hampshire) Florida Panama City (850) 769-0552 South Carolina Charleston (843) 727-4707 Vero Beach (772) 562-3909 South Dakota Pierre (605) 224-8693 Jacksonville (904) 232-2580 Tennessee Cookeville (931) 528-6481 Georgia Athens (706) 613-9493 Texas Clear Lake (281) 286-8282 Brunswick (912) 265-9336 Utah West Valley City (801) 975-3330 Columbus (706) 544-6428 Vermont (See New Hampshire) Idaho Boise (208) 378-5243 Virginia Gloucester (804) 693-6694 Chubbuck (208) 237-6975 Washington Lacey (306) 753-9440 Illinois/Iowa Rock Island (309) 757-5800 Spokane (509) 891-6839 Indiana Bloomington (812) 334-4261 Wenatchee (509) 665-3508 Kansas Manhattan (785) 539-3474 West Virginia Elkins (304) 636-6586 Kentucky Frankfort (502) 695-0468 Wisconsin New Franken (920) 866-1725 Louisiana Lafayette (337) 291-3100 Wyoming Cheyenne (307) 772-2374 Cody (307) 578-5939Maine Old Town (207) 827-5938 Maryland Annapolis (410) 573-4573 Massachusetts (See New Hampshire) National OfficeMichigan East Lansing (517) 351-2555 U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceMinnesota Bloomington (612) 725-3548 Division of Migratory Bird Management Mississippi Jackson (601) 965-4900 4401 North Fairfax Drive, MBSP-4107 Missouri Columbia (573) 234-2132 Arlington, VA 22203-1610 Montana Helena (405) 449-5225 (703) 358-1714 Nebraska Grand Island (308) 382-6468 http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds Nevada Las Vegas (702) 515-5230 Reno (775) 861-6300

State Agencies

To contact a state wildlife agency, visit the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies’ website at http://www.fishwildlife.org/where_us.html 16National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

GLOSSARY

The definitions below apply to these National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines:

Communal roost sites – Areas where bald eagles gather and perch overnight – and sometimes during the day in the event of inclement weather. Communal roost sites are usually in large trees (live or dead) that are relatively sheltered from wind and are generally in close proximity to foraging areas. These roosts may also serve a social purpose for pair bond formation and communication among eagles. Many roost sites are used year after year.

Disturb – To agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.

In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from human-caused alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle=s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or substantially interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment.

Fledge – To leave the nest and begin flying. For bald eagles, this normally occurs at 10-12 weeks of age.

Fledgling – A juvenile bald eagle that has taken the first flight from the nest but is not yet independent.

Foraging area – An area where eagles feed, typically near open water such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and bays where fish and waterfowl are abundant, or in areas with little or no water (i.e., rangelands, barren land, tundra, suburban areas, etc.) where other prey species (e.g., rabbit, rodents) or carrion (such as at landfills) are abundant.

Landscape buffer – A natural or human-made landscape feature that screens eagles from human activity (e.g., strip of trees, hill, cliff, berm, sound wall).

Nest – A structure built, maintained, or used by bald eagles for the purpose of reproduction.

An active nest is a nest that is attended (built, maintained or used) by a pair of bald eagles during a given breeding season, whether or not eggs are laid. An alternate nest is a nest that is not used for breeding by eagles during a given breeding season.

Nest abandonment – Nest abandonment occurs when adult eagles desert or stop attending a nest and do not subsequently return and successfully raise young in that nest for the duration of a breeding season. Nest abandonment can be caused by altering habitat near a nest, even if the alteration occurs prior to the breeding season. Whether the eagles migrate during the non-breeding season, or remain in the area throughout the non-breeding season, nest abandonment can occur at any point between the time the eagles return to the nesting site for the breeding season and the time when all progeny from the breeding season have 17 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 dispersed.

Project footprint – The area of land (and water) that will be permanently altered for a development project, including access roads.

Similar scope – In the vicinity of a bald eagle nest, an existing activity is of similar scope to a new activity where the types of impacts to bald eagles are similar in nature, and the impacts of the existing activity are of the same or greater magnitude than the impacts of the potential new activity. Examples: (1) An existing single-story home 200 feet from a nest is similar in scope to an additional single-story home 200 feet from the nest; (2) An existing multi-story, multi-family dwelling 150 feet from a nest has impacts of a greater magnitude than a potential new single-family home 200 feet from the nest; (3) One existing single-family home 200 feet from the nest has impacts of a lesser magnitude than three single-family homes 200 feet from the nest; (4) an existing single-family home 200 feet from a communal roost has impacts of a lesser magnitude than a single-family home 300 feet from the roost but 40 feet from the eagles’ foraging area. The existing activities in examples (1) and (2) are of similar scope, while the existing activities in example (3) and (4) are not.

Vegetative buffer – An area surrounding a bald eagle nest that is wholly or largely covered by forest, vegetation, or other natural ecological characteristics, and separates the nest from human activities. 18 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

RELATED LITERATURE

Andrew, J.M. and J.A. Mosher. 1981. Bald eagle nest site selection and nesting habitat in Maryland. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:382-390.

Anonymous. 1977. Bald Eagle Habitat Management Guidelines, Forest Service – California Region. U.S Forest Service, San Francisco, CA.

Anthony, R.G. 2001. Low productivity of bald eagles on Prince of Wales Island, southeast Alaska. Journal of Raptor Research 35:1-8.

Anthony, R.G., R.W. Frenzel, F.B. Isaacs, and M.G. Garrett. 1994. Probable causes of nesting failures in Oregon’s bald eagle population. Wildlife Society Bulletin 22:576-582.

Anthony, R.G. and F.B. Isaacs. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nest sites in Oregon.

Journal of Wildlife Management 53:148-158.

Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1999. Bald Eagle Conservation Assessment and Strategy (draft).

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 1996. Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1996. Edison Electric Institute, Raptor Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Bangs, E.E., T.N. Bailey and V.D. Berns. Ecology of nesting bald eagles on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. (USFWS staff)

Becker, J.M. 2002. Response of wintering bald eagles to industrial construction in southeastern Washington. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:875-878.

Brauning, D.W. and J.D. Hassinger. 2000. Pennsylvania Recovery and Management Plan for the Bald Eagle (draft). Pennsylvania Game Commission. Harrisburg, PA.

Brown, B.T., G.S. Mills, C. Powels, W.A. Russell, G.D. Therres and J.J. Pottie. 1999. The influence of weapons-testing noise on bald eagle behavior. Journal of Raptor Research 33:227-232.

Brown, B.T. and L.E. Stevens. 1997. Winter bald eagle distribution is inversely correlated with human activity along the Colorado River, Arizona. Journal of Raptor Research31:7-10.

Buehler, D.A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). In The Birds of North America, No. 506 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1991. Effects of human activity on bald eagle distribution on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:282-290.

Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1991. Nonbreeding bald eagle communal and solitary roosting behavior and roost habitat on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:273-281. 19 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Chandler, SK., J.D. Fraser, D.A. Buehler and J.K.D. Seegar. 1995. Perch trees and shoreline development as predictors of bald eagle distribution on the Chesapeake Bay.

Journal of Wildlife Management 59:325-332.

Cline, K. 1985. Bald Eagles in the Chesapeake: A Management Guide for Landowners.

National Wildlife Federation. Washington, D.C.

Dell, D.D. and P.J. Zwank. 1986. Impact of a high-voltage transmission line on a nesting pair of southern bald eagles in southeast Louisiana. Journal of Raptor Research 20(3/4):117-119.

Dunwiddie, P.W. and R.C. Kuntz. 2001. Long-term trends of bald eagles in winter on the Skagit River, Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management 65(2):290-299.

Fletcher, R.J. et. al. 1999. Effects of recreational trails on wintering diurnal raptors along riparian corridors in a Colorado grassland. Journal of Raptor Research 33(3):233-239.

Fraser, J.D. 1981. The breeding biology and status of the bald eagle on the Chippewa National Forest. PhD. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.

Fraser, J.D., LD. Frenzel and J.E. Mathisen. 1985. The impact of human activities on breeding bald eagles in north-central Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife Management 49(3):585-592.

Garrett, M.G., J.W. Watson, and R.G. Anthony. 1993. Bald eagle home range and habitat use in the Columbia River Estuary. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(1):19-27.

Gerrard J.M. and G.R. Bortolotti. 1988. The Bald Eagle: Haunts and Habits of a Wilderness Monarch. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.

Grier, J.W. 1969. Bald eagle behavior and productivity responses to climbing to nests.

Journal of Wildlife Management 33:961-966.

Grier, J.W. and J.E. Guinn. 2003. Bald eagle habitats and responses to human disturbance in Minnesota. Report to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Grubb, T.G. 1976. Survey and analysis of bald eagle nesting in western Washington. M.S. thesis, Univ. of Washington, Seattle.

Grubb, T.G. and R.M. King. 1991. Assessing human disturbance of breeding bald eagles with classification tree models. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:500-511.

Grubb, T.G., W.L. Robinson and W.W. Bowerman. 2002. Effects of watercraft on bald eagles nesting in Voyagers National Park, Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:156-161.

Grubb, T.G. and W.W. Bowerman. 1997. Variations in breeding bald eagle response to jets, light planes and helicopters. Journal of Raptor Research 31:213-222. 20 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Grubb, T.G., W.W. Bowerman, A.J. Bath, J.P. Giesy, D.V.C. Weseloh. 2003. Evaluating Great Lakes bald eagle nesting habitat with Bayesian inference. RMRS-RP-45. U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, 10 pp.

Hansen, J.A. 1977. Population dynamics and night roost requirements of bald eagles wintering in the Nooksack River Valley, WA. Huxley College of Environmental Studies, Western Washington State College, Bellingham, WA. (Problem Series)

Hansen, J.A., M.V. Stalmaster and J.R. Newman. 1980. Habitat characteristics, function, and destruction of bald eagle communal roosts in western Washington. Huxley college of Environmental Studies, Western Washington University.

Hunt, W.G., D.E. Driscoll, E.W. Bianchi, and R.E. Jackman. 1992. Ecology of bald eagles in Arizona. Report to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Contract 6-CS-30-04470. BioSystems Analysis Inc., Santa Cruz, California.

Isaacs, F.B and R.G. Anthony. 1987. Abundance, foraging, and roosting of bald eagles wintering in the Harney Basin, Oregon. Northwest Science 61(2), pp. 114-121.

Juenemann, B.G. 1973. Habitat evaluations of selected bald eagle nest sites on the Chippewa National Forest. M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Keister, G.P., R.G. Anthony and E.J. O’Neill. 1987. Use of communal roosts and foraging area by bald eagles wintering in the Klamath Basin. Journal of Wildlife Management 51(2):415-420.

Knight, R. and S.K. Knight. 1984. Responses of wintering bald eagles to boating activity.

Journal of Wildlife Management 48:999-1004.

Linscombe, J.T., T.J. Hess, Jr., and V.L. Wright. 1999. Effects of seismic operations on Louisiana’s nesting bald eagles. Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 54:235-242.

Maine (State of) Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Rules. Chapter 8.05 Essential Habitat for Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered.

Mathisen, J.E. 1968. Effects of human disturbance on nesting bald eagles. Journal of Wildlife Management 32(1): 1-6.

McGarigal, K., R.G. Anthony and F.B. Isaacs. 1991. Interactions of humans and bald eagles on the Columbia River estuary. Wildlife Monographs 115:1-47.

McKay, K.J., J.W. Stravers, B.R. Conklin, U. Konig, S. Hawks, C.J. Kohrt, J.S. Lundh and G.V. Swenson. 2001. Potential human impacts on bald eagle reproductive success along the Upper Mississippi River.

McKewan, L.C. and D.H. Hirth. 1979. Southern bald eagle productivity and nest site selection. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:585-594. 21 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Millsap, B.A. Status of wintering bald eagles in the conterminous 48 States. 1986. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14:433-440.

Millsap, B.A, T. Breen, E. McConnell, T. Steffer, L. Phillips, N. Douglass, and S. Taylor. In Press. Comparative fecundity and survival of bald eagles fledged from suburban and rural natal areas in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 68(4).

Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. 1986. Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan.

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. Billings, MT.

Nesbitt, S.A., M.J. Folk and D.A. Wood. 1993. Effectiveness of bald eagle habitat protection guidelines in Florida. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

Newman, J.R., W.H. Brennan and L.M. Smith. 1977. Twelve-year changes in nesting patterns of bald eagles on San Juan Island, Washington. The Murrelet 58(2)37-39.

Postapulsky, S. 1974. Raptor reproductive success: some problems with methods, criteria, and terminology. Pages 21-31 in F.N. Hammerstrom, Jr., B.E. Harrell, and R.R. Olendorff, eds. Management of raptors. Raptor Res. Found., Vermillion, S.D.

Rodgers, J.A. and Schwikert, S.T. 2003. Buffer zone distances to protect foraging and loafing waterbirds from disturbance by airboats in Florida. Waterbirds 26(4): 437-443.

Russell, D. 1980. Occurrence and human disturbance sensitivity of wintering bald eagles on the Sauk and Suiattle Rivers, Washington. In R.L. Knight, G.T. Allen, M.V. Stalmaster and C.W. Servheen [eds.]. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium. Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington, pp. 165-174.

Shapiro, A.E., F. Montalbano, and D. Mager. 1982. Implications of construction of a flood control project upon bald eagle nesting activity. Wilson Bulletin 94(1), pp. 55-63.

Skagen, S.K. 1980. Behavioral responses of wintering bald eagles to human activity on the Skagit River, Washington. In R.L.Knight, G.T. Allen, M.V. Stalmaster and C.W. Servheen [eds.]. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium. Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington, pp. 231-241.

Skagen, S.K., R.L. Knight and G.J.H. Orians. 1991. Human disturbance of an avian scavenging guild. Ecological Applications 1:215-225. (Internet)

Stalmaster, M.V. 1976 Winter ecology and effects of human activity on bald eagles in the Nooksack River Valley, Washington. MS Thesis, Western Washington State College, Bellingham.

Stalmaster, M.V. 1980. Management strategies for wintering bald eagles in the Pacific Northwest. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium, pp 49-67.

Stalmaster, M.V. and J.L. Kaiser. 1998. Effects of recreational activity on wintering bald eagles. Wildlife Monographs 137:1-46. 22 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Stalmaster, M.V. and J.L. Kaiser. 1997. Flushing responses of wintering bald eagles to military activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:1307-1313.

Stalmaster, M.V. and J.R. Newman. 1978. Behavioral responses of wintering bald eagles to human activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:506-513.

Steenhof, K. 1978. Management of Wintering Bald Eagles. FWS/OBS-78/79. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington D.C.

Steidl, R.J. and R.G. Anthony. 2000. Experimental Effects of Human Activity on Breeding Bald Eagles. Ecological Applications 10(1), pp. 258-268.

Therres, G.D., M.A. Byrd and D.S. Bradshaw. 1993. Effects of development on nesting bald eagles: case studies from Chesapeake Bay. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 58:62-69.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: Oregon – Washington. Portland. OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Northern States bald eagle recovery plan.

Appendices E, F, and G. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, Denver, CO.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4. Atlanta, GA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Bald Eagle Basics. Anchorage, AK.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Habitat Management Guidelines for Bald Eagles in Texas. Austin, TX.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2001.

Bald Eagle Protection Guidelines for Virginia. Gloucester and Richmond, VA.

Watson, J.W. 1993. Responses of nesting bald eagles to helicopter surveys. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21:171-178.

Watson, J.W. 2004. Responses of nesting bald eagles to experimental pedestrian activity.

Journal of Raptor Research 38:295-305.

Wood, P.B. 1999. Bald eagle response to boating activity in northcentral Florida. Journal of Raptor Research 33:97-101.

Wood, P.B., T.C. Edwards Jr. and M.W. Collopy. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nesting habitat in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 53(2):441-449.

Young, L.S. 1980. A quantitative evaluation of human disturbance impacts on breeding eagle ecology of bald eagles in the San Juan Islands, Washington. Washington Department of Game, Olympia. 23

VI.

VIRGINIA EXCEPTIONS TO THE NATIONAL BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES (NBEMG) As explained in the Preface, effective January 1, 2013, applicable Virginia law and VDGIF regulations will no longer prohibit habitat alterations or activities that do not result in taking of an eagle or its nest, or parts thereof. Federal regulations pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, however, prohibit “disturbance” of eagles, which may include certain human activities or alteration of habitat surrounding a nest, roost, or concentration area.

We urge project proponents, therefore, to confirm with USFWS that their proposed project or activities are consistent with applicable USFWS regulations and permit conditions.

Chronology and seasonality of breeding and concentrated activity (p. 6 of NBEMG) – As discussed in the National Guidelines, chronology of eagle breeding and concentration activity varies across the nation. For purposes of these guidelines, the Virginia bald eagle breeding season extends from December 15 – July 15, absent documented nesting activity at other times at a particular nest in a given year. Similarly, the summer eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from May 15 through August 31, and the winter eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from December 15 through March 15.

Alternate nests guidelines regarding consecutive years of inactivity (p. 11 of NBEMG) – As discussed in the National Guidelines, disturbance becomes an issue with regard to alternate nests if eagles return for breeding purposes and react to land use changes that occurred while the nest was inactive. Though the National Guidelines establish a 5-year period of nest inactivity as the generic standard for likely application of the guidelines, several decades of nest-activity records from Virginia reveal that the likelihood of an alternate nest being reactivated by eagles after three years of inactivity is very small (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript). Indeed, nearly 94% of such nest “reactivations” occur within the first two years, and a primary benefit of protecting alternate nests may be the resultant protection of nests that were not inactive in fact, but where nest monitoring simply did not detect occupancy during the breeding season(s) in question (Watts in prep.). In light of this, VDGIF considers three consecutive years of nest inactivity as an appropriate generic standard, subject to site and nest-specific considerations. Under either standard, however, the nest itself remains protected by other provisions of the Eagle Act and may not be destroyed. If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely an inactive nest will be reused before three years of inactivity have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the nest site. Without sufficient documentation, you should continue to follow these guidelines when conducting activities around the nest site. If we determine that it is unlikely the nest will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance are no longer necessary around that nest site.

The “1-mile” guideline (pp. 12 of NBEMG) – The USFWS, in recognition that eagles nesting in areas exhibiting significant human activity or development are likely to be more tolerant of human intrusion than eagles nesting in relatively remote and undeveloped areas, adopted a “1-mile” guideline regarding nest proximity to existing human activity. In essence, the “1-mile”

• 33-guideline provides for relaxation of the activity-specific guidelines “if there is similar activity closer than 1 mile from the nest”.

We do not concur with this generic guideline: while it is clear that patterns of habitat use by eagles and tolerance of eagles to various human activities vary regionally and even locally, such assessments of the relative tolerance of a particular pair of eagles to specific land use activities must be made on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, we will apply the following table as an appropriate generic standard with regard to activity-specific guidance, in lieu of the table presented on page 12 of the National Guidelines.

Nest Visibility Guidance for minimum distance for Category A and B activities near a nest

If the activity or completed project will 660 feet, or potentially as close as existing be visible from the nest tolerated activity of similar scope. Activities within 660 feet should not be undertaken without site-specific VDGIF consultation. Landscape buffers are recommended. Clearing, earthmoving, external construction, and landscaping closer than 660 feet should be conducted outside of the breeding season.

If the activity or completed project will Category A: 330 feet, or as close as existing not be visible from the nest tolerated activity of similar scope. Activities within 330 feet should not be undertaken without site-specific VDGIF consultation. Clearing, earthmoving, external construction, and landscaping closer than 660 feet should be conducted outside of the breeding season.

Category B: 660 feet, or potentially as close as existing tolerated activity of similar scope.

Activities within 660 feet should not be undertaken without site-specific VDGIF consultation. Landscape buffers are recommended. Clearing, earthmoving, external construction, and landscaping closer than 660 feet should be conducted outside of the breeding season.

Timber operations and forestry practices; Category C (p. 13 of NBEMG) – In addition to avoiding construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage areas within 330 feet of a nest at any time, construction of such facilities during the breeding season should be subject to the same generic standards as are other “timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw and yarding operations” (660 feet around active nests during the breeding season; 330 feet around alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that

• 34-were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched).

Guideline applicability to seasonal concentration areas and communal roosts (p. 14 of NBEMG) – As explained in Section III, human activity that disturbs feeding or roosting eagles to the degree that causes injury, or that substantially interferes with breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, constitutes a violation of the Eagle Act. Any major habitat modification including extensive land clearing, tree harvest or removal, or development of marinas, boat ramps, roads, or residential/commercial facilities may be detrimental to eagle use of seasonal concentration areas or communal roosts. Similarly, significant or chronic disruption of roosting and foraging behavior may reduce eagle survival or productivity. Seasonal use of a particular area by eagles varies with the specific roost, shoreline area, or river system, and the number of bald eagles using particular shoreline reaches within a concentration area can vary seasonally.

Thus, proposed disturbances normally must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. While we concur with the generic recommendations contained in the National Guidelines, the activity-specific guidelines are not consistently applicable to activities proposed within or near seasonal concentration areas or communal roosts. Thus, we recommend project-specific consultation with VDGIF and USFWS as appropriate, after consideration of the proximity of the proposed activity to a seasonal concentration area or communal roost (see Appendix), and the nature of the proposed activity (i.e., Categories A through H in the National Guidelines).

“Latent” nest site guidance (p. 15 of NBEMG) – As presented in the National Guidelines (item 2 of the Additional Recommendations to Benefit Bald Eagles), nests sometimes are blown from trees during storms or otherwise destroyed by the elements. The National Guidelines recommend up to three years of site protection to facilitate construction of a replacement nest within the protected site. Several decades of nest-activity records from Virginia, however, reveal that the likelihood of nest reconstruction in the former nest tree is only about 3% in the first year following nest destruction, and declines each year thereafter (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript).

Over a 10-year period, fewer than 10% of such “inactive” (i.e., latent) trees were reused for nesting, with over half of those reactivations occurring in the first two years (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript). The annual cost of site protection borne by the affected landowner, however, may be substantial, including both direct costs and reduced/forfeited opportunities to generate income throughout the period of site protection. Therefore, VDGIF considers two breeding seasons of documented nest tree latency (i.e., no nest activity documented) as an appropriate generic standard, subject to site and nest-specific considerations. If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely that a latent nest or site will be reused before two breeding seasons of inactivity have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the site. If we determine that it is unlikely the tree/site will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance to the site are no longer necessary.

• 35-

VII.

APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF THESE GUIDELINES As stated in the Preface, it is important to recognize that these Virginia Guidelines are not regulatory in themselves, and they are not intended to supplant onsite review or consultation.

Both the USFWS and VDGIF are available to provide technical assistance or to consult with landowners who desire assistance in interpreting their respective guidelines, or in evaluation of the potential impacts of their proposed activities upon bald eagles.

From the federal perspective, compliance with the National Guidelines (as interpreted and applied by USFWS on a case-by-case basis) establishes a likely presumption by the USFWS that no unauthorized “take” of bald eagles will occur as a result of the proposed project or human activities. To quote the National Guidelines (p. 1): “Although it is not possible to absolve individuals and entities from liability under the Eagle Act or the MBTA, the Service exercises enforcement discretion to focus on those individuals, companies, or agencies that take migratory birds without regard for the consequences of their actions and the law, especially when conservation measures, such as these Guidelines, are available, but have not been implemented. The Service will prioritize its enforcement efforts to focus on those individuals or entities who take bald eagles or their parts, eggs, or nests without implementing appropriate measures recommended by the Guidelines.”

If a proposed project would not be completed in accordance with the National Guidelines, the USFWS would determine what measures should be implemented to prevent or compensate for potential “take,” and those measures could be required as conditions of an Incidental Take Permit issued pursuant to the Eagle Act. Authorization of Incidental Take under a federal Incidental Take Permit would not absolutely insulate the permittee from prosecution under Virginia Law or VDGIF regulations. VDGIF and USFWS staff, however, work cooperatively to ensure that the final conditions of a federal Incidental Take Permit would be acceptable to VDGIF as evidence of the permittee’s intent and sufficient to deter state prosecution in the event of unauthorized and unintentional “take” during project construction or operation. Finally, if a project would be in accordance with the National Guidelines, but not in accordance with these Virginia Guidelines, the operator presumably would be insulated from federal prosecution for take under the Eagle Act and MBTA, but possibly subject to prosecution by VDGIF in the event of take of bald eagles, their nests, or young.

• 36- VIII. IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE GUIDELINES Following these procedures will help ensure that your proposed activity is in compliance with federal and Virginia law and regulations regarding protection of bald eagles:

First, determine whether there are any known eagle nests, concentration areas, or roosts in the vicinity of your project site. You can determine the presence of known nests by visiting the Center for Conservation Biology Virginia Eagle Nest Locator website at: http://ccb-wm.org/virginiaeagles/locator.php. Proximity of your project to known seasonal concentration areas can be determined by visiting the USFWS Virginia Field Office website at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/Project_Reviews_Step6b.html.

Finally, the proximity of your project to known eagle nests, concentration areas, and roosts can be determined by visiting the VDGIF online Fish and Wildlife Information Service website at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html. Please recognize that Virginia’s bald eagle population is dynamic and there may be new nests near your site that are not documented in existing databases.

Review your project in the context of these guidelines, and determine whether your proposed activity is compliant with the guidance for protection of bald eagles. Contact the VDGIF at 540-899-4169 or USFWS at 804-693-6694 for technical assistance if you need help applying the [state or federal, respectively] guidelines to your project. You also may visit the USFWS Northeast Region Bald Eagle Management Guidelines and Conservation Measures website at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/EcologicalServices/eagle.html to evaluate your project in context of the National Guidelines. If your project is being reviewed by the Corps of Engineers, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, or another state or federal agency with regard to issuance of an environmental permit, you may wish to review the Department’s Environmental Services Section webpage at: http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section.asp for further explanation of VDGIF’s role in reviewing such permit applications. Compliance with these guidelines is one issue considered by the Department’s Environmental Services Section during interagency permit review.

The most expedient way to ensure compliance with USFWS guidance regarding bald eagles is to utilize the USFWS Virginia Field Office’s Project Reviews in Virginia web-application available at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/project_reviews.html.

Through this step-by-step online review, you can evaluate your project’s potential impacts on known populations of federally listed threatened and endangered species, federal candidate species, federally designated critical habitat, and bald eagles and then either: (1) “self-certify” your compliance with USFWS coordination requirements, or (2) expedite additional review by the Service.

If your proposed activity clearly is in compliance with these guidelines there is no further need to contact the VDGIF, though we cannot absolve an affected landowner of liability for take based on such review.

• 37-

If your proposed activity potentially is not in compliance with the guidelines, if it is not possible to adhere to these guidelines, or if you believe that special circumstances apply to your situation that increase or diminish the likelihood of bald eagle disturbance, you should contact the VDGIF or USFWS for further technical assistance.

IX.

REFERENCES

Clark, K.H. 1992. Shoreline habitat selection by bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in a non-breeding eagle concentration area on the James River, Virginia. M.A. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 111pp.

Cline, K.W. 1985. Bald eagles in the Chesapeake Bay: a management guide for landowners.

National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C. 16 pp.

Cline, K.W. 1993. Virginia Bald Eagle Management Planning Document. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, VA. 56 pp.

Cline, K.W. and M.A. Byrd. 1994. Bald eagle management in Virginia: a comprehensive plan.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Richmond, VA. 95 pp.

Frasier, J.D., S.K. Chaldler, D.A. Buehler, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1996. The decline, recovery and future of the bald eagle population of the Chesapeake Bay, U.S.A. Pages 181-187 in B.U. Moyberg and R.D Chancellor, eds. Eagle Studies World Working Group of Birds of Prey. Berlin, London & Paris.

Markham, A. C. and B. D. Watts. 2008. The influence of salinity on provisioning rates and nestling growth in bald eagles in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Condor 110:183-187.

Millsap, B.A., K.W. Cline, and M.J. Gilroy. 1983. Distribution and movements of bald eagles on Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland. Report prepared for U.S. Dept. of the Army, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD.

Portlock, W.S. 1994. Rappahannock River bald eagles. The Raven 65:38-43.

Scott, F.R. 1971. News and Notes: Unusual eagle concentration. The Raven 42:54.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat management guidelines for the bald eagle in the southeast region. Atlanta, GA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National bald eagle management guidelines.

Washington, D.C. 25 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Eagle permits; take necessary to protect interests in particular localities. Federal Register 74(175):46836-46879.

• 38-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Migratory bird management information: eagle rule questions and answers. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Draft Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance Module 1: Wind Energy Development. Washington, D.C. 106 pp.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2005. Virginia’s comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy (aka Virginia Wildlife Action Plan). Richmond, VA.

Virginia Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Bald eagle management in Virginia. Gloucester, VA. 12 pp.

Virginia Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries; and Center for Conservation Biology. 2001. Bald eagle protection guidelines for Virginia. Gloucester, VA. 6 pp.

Wallin, D. O. and M. A. Byrd. 1984. Caledon State Park Bald Eagle Study: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, VA. 53pp.

Watts, B.D. 1998. Investigation of bald eagles within the Rappahannock River Concentration Area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report, CCBTR-98-02. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 65pp.

Watts, B.D. 2005. Virginia bald eagle conservation plan. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report Series, CCBTR-05-06. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 52 pp.

Watts, B.D. 2012. Estimating the residual value of inactive bald eagle nests: implications for nest protection standards. Submitted.

Watts B.D, A.C. Markham, and M.A. Byrd. 2006. Salinity and population parameters of Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Auk 123:393-404.

Watts, B. D. and D. M. Whalen. 1997. Interactions between Eagles and Humans in the James River Bald Eagle Concentration Area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report, CCBTR-97-02. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 81pp.

Watts, B.D. and M.A. Byrd. 2011. Virginia bald eagle nest and productivity survey: Year 2011 report. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report Series, CCBTR-11-11.

College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University, Williamsburg, VA. 42 pp.

Watts, B. D., K. W. Cline, and M. A. Byrd. 1994. The Bald Eagle in Virginia: An information booklet for land planners. Center for Conservation Biology Educational Document CCBED-94-02. College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 85pp.

• 39-Watts, B.D. and S. Factor. 1994. Bald eagle investigations within the James River concentration area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report CCBTR-94-01. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.

Watts, B. D., G. D. Therres, and M. A. Byrd. 2007. Status, distribution and the future of Bald Eagles in the Chesapeake Bay. Waterbirds 30:25-38.

Watts, B. D., G. D. Therres, and M. A. Byrd. 2008. Recovery of the Chesapeake Bay bald eagle nesting population. Journal of Wildlife Management 72:152-158.

• 40-

Management of Bald Eagle Nests, Concentration Areas, and Communal Roosts in Virginia: A Guide for Landowners

2012

Ken Conger

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, The Center for Conservation Biology at William and Mary, Virginia Commonwealth University. 2012. Management of bald eagle nests, concentration areas, and communal roosts in Virginia: A guide for landowners. Richmond, VA.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, and the Center for Conservation Biology at the College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University. 2012. Management of bald eagle nests, concentration areas, and communal roosts in Virginia: A guide for landowners. Richmond, VA.

This report was funded by the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration and State and Tribal Wildlife Grant programs.

• ii- PREFACE Few American wildlife success stories are as widely recognized as the recovery of bald eagle populations in the forty-eight coterminous states. Since first listed as a federally endangered species in 1967, cooperative actions to restore and protect eagles and their essential habitats by government agencies, university researchers, non-government conservation agencies and, most significantly, by private and public landowners, have fostered dramatic recovery of our nation’s wildlife icon. Having been ceremoniously removed from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Species in 2007, the bald eagle also is removed from the Virginia List of Endangered and Threatened Species effective January 1, 2013.

After delisting, bald eagles and nests remain protected under Virginia law and VDGIF regulations.

Eagles and nests also remain protected under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Providing guidance to landowners wanting to protect eagles and their nests has been a major element of the cooperative programs to achieve this species’ recovery, and this publication is merely the most recent in a series of guidance documents released over the last several decades. It is intended to present recent changes in federal and state laws and regulations protecting eagles and their nests, and to recommend measures that landowners may take to protect bald eagles.

After January 1, 2013, Virginia law and VDGIF regulations no longer prohibit habitat alterations that do not involve taking an eagle or nest parts.

Thus, compliance with these guidelines by landowners is voluntary from the state legal perspective. Federal regulations pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, however, prohibit “disturbance” of eagles, which may include certain human activities or alteration of habitat surrounding a nest. This guide presents the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines as released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and provides the Department’s recommendations for application of those guidelines in Virginia.

Readers who are familiar with the attendant laws and regulations, and with the National Guidelines, may wish to turn directly to Section VI of this document, which explains situations where VDGIF recommendations to protect eagles, based on our knowledge of Virginia’s eagles, are not identical to the USFWS nationwide guidelines. Similarly, readers who simply want to determine whether their project or land management plans may affect eagles can turn directly to Section VIII of this document, as a “quick start” to evaluating their project.

Virginia landowners who share their property with bald eagles have a unique opportunity to become stewards of a national treasure. Providing for the needs of bald eagles will help to ensure the security of other wildlife species, protect natural communities, and enhance the quality of the Commonwealth’s rivers and streams. The future of bald eagles in Virginia depends in large measure on proactive and conservation-oriented management of both public and private lands.

• iii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

Introduction and Background .........................................................................................1

II.

Bald Eagles in Virginia .....................................................................................................4

III.

Federal Laws and Regulations Protecting Bald Eagles .................................................5

IV.

Virginia Laws and Regulations Protecting Bald Eagles ................................................6

V.

National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (National Guidelines, NBEMG) .........7

VI.

Virginia Exceptions to the National Guidelines ...........................................................33 Chronology and seasonality of breeding and concentrated activity (p. 6 of NBEMG) ....33 Alternate nests guideline regarding consecutive years of inactivity (p. 11 of NBEMG) .33 The “1-mile” guideline (p. 12 of NBEMG) ......................................................................33 Timber operations and forestry practices; Category C (p. 13 of NBEMG) ......................34 Guideline applicability to seasonal concentration areas and communal roosts (p. 14 of NBEMG) ............................................................................................................35 “Latent” nest tree/site guideline (p. 15 of NBEMG) ........................................................35

VII.

Application and Effect of These Guidelines .................................................................36 VIII. Implementation of These Guidelines .............................................................................37

IX.

References ........................................................................................................................38

Acknowledgements: The authors thank Dr. Todd Katzner of West Virginia University’s Division of Forestry and Natural Resources for contributions and review.

• iv-

I.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Virginia landowners who share their property with bald eagles have a unique opportunity to become stewards of a national treasure. Not only are bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) a vital component of riverine and wetland ecosystems, but they also are a flagship indicator of ecosystem health. Providing for their needs will help to ensure the security of other wildlife species, protect natural communities, and enhance the quality of the Commonwealth’s rivers and streams. The future of bald eagles in Virginia depends in large measure on proactive and conservation-oriented management of both public and private lands.

As the federal and state agencies with responsibility for conservation and management of wildlife, respectively, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF, Department) are jointly responsible for protecting and managing bald eagles throughout Virginia. Indeed, many Virginia landowners, permitting agencies, academic researchers, non-governmental conservation organizations, and wildlife enthusiasts have cooperated with the VDGIF and USFWS to protect and restore the Commonwealth’s bald eagles and the habitats on which they depend. Over the last several decades the Department, the USFWS, the Center for Conservation Biology at The College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University (CCB), the National Wildlife Federation, and others have cooperated in a program of research, surveys, and interagency consultation to facilitate and monitor recovery of the Commonwealth’s bald eagle population.

Partners have developed landowner guidelines and management plans for eagles, nests, and concentration areas, serving as templates for interagency consultation (various citations).

The bald eagle first gained federal protection in 1940, under what was later named the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA, Eagle Act). That law curbed illegal hunting and shooting of eagles, but our national symbol soon was exposed to a new environmental threat.

Widespread use of the pesticide DDT after World War II caused eagle populations to plummet toward extirpation, to a Virginia low of 33 breeding pairs in the 1970’s (Watts 2005). In brief, when DDT washed into waterways, it was absorbed by aquatic plants and animals, transported up the food chain, and subsequently ingested by eagles when they ate contaminated fish. DDT interfered with accumulation of calcium in egg-producing females, and the resulting thinner eggshells cracked when adult birds incubated their own eggs. Widespread reproductive failure and a precipitous decline in eagle numbers followed: the USFWS first listed the bald eagle (south of 40 north latitude) as federally endangered under The Endangered Species Protection Act of 1966 on 11 March 1967 (32 FR 4001). In 1978 bald eagles were listed as endangered under The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) in 43 of the lower 48 states, and listed as threatened in Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Washington (43 FR 6230). Bald eagles in Alaska never were listed under the ESA, and the species does not occur in Hawaii. The Virginia Endangered Species Act (§29.1-563 - 570) was adopted in 1972, and bald eagles were listed as a state endangered species pursuant to that Act.

Since DDT was banned in 1972 and protection programs implemented, bald eagle

• 1-populations have increased dramatically across much of the lower 48 states, including Virginia.

In July 1995, bald eagles were downlisted to threatened under the ESA (60 FR 36000). Then, in anticipation of removal of bald eagles from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species, the USFWS published the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (National Guidelines) on June 5, 2007 (USFWS 2007), to provide landowners and project proponents guidance on how to ensure that actions they take on their property are consistent with the Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The National Guidelines may be found at: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/BaldEagle/NationalBaldEag leManagementGuidelines.pdf, and they are included in their entirety as Section V of this publication. The National Guidelines address sensitive zones around eagle nests, communal roosts, and concentration areas. They also provide guidance and recommended protective measures to facilitate land use and development activities without causing harm to eagles, their nests, or certain essential habitats.

On August 8, 2007, after recovery, bald eagles were delisted from the federal ESA but remained threatened under Virginia law.

In August 2012, the Board of Game and Inland Fisheries delisted bald eagles from protection under the Virginia Endangered Species Act, effective January 1, 2013. As of that date, bald eagles are not protected under either federal or state endangered species laws. They remain, however, federally protected under the Eagle Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and also protected under Virginia law and VDGIF regulations regarding native wildlife species (see Sections III and IV).

While bald eagles were listed under the ESA, permits were available from USFWS to take bald eagles incidentally to otherwise lawful activities. There were, however, no such regulations or permit procedures to allow disturbance or incidental take of either bald eagles or golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) under the BGEPA. Thus, the USFWS developed two new regulations to address these issues (USFWS 2009). As discussed in the Q&A factsheet regarding the new regulations (USFWS 2010): (1) “The regulation set forth in section 50 CFR §22.26 provides for issuance of permits to take bald eagles and golden eagles where the taking is associated with but not the purpose of the activity and cannot practicably be avoided. Most take authorized under this section will be in the form of disturbance; however, permits may authorize non-purposeful take that may result in mortality.”

and, (2) “The regulation at 50 CFR §22.27 establishes permits for removing eagle nests where: (1) necessary to alleviate a safety emergency to people or eagles; (2) necessary to ensure public health and safety; (3) the nest prevents the use of a human-engineered structure; or (4) the activity or mitigation for the activity will provide a net benefit to eagles. Only inactive nests may be taken except in the case of safety emergencies. Inactive nests are defined by the continuous absence of any adult, egg, or dependent young at the nest for at least 10 consecutive days leading up to the time of take.”

• 2-Regional or state field offices of the USFWS currently do not deviate from the National Guidelines to accommodate regional or local differences in habitat use by eagles, nor in individual eagles’ responses to human intrusion or disturbance, and USFWS Implementation Guidelines for issuance of permits under the BGEPA are still under development. Draft guidance for development of Eagle Conservation Plans to support issuance of programmatic eagle take permits related to wind energy development has been released, however (USFWS 2011), and the USFWS stated (p. 8) that “Many of the concepts and approaches outlined in this module can be readily exported to other situations, and we expect to release other modules in the near future specifically addressing other forms of eagle take.” Pending such clarification of federal policy, and to address state-specific concerns, VDGIF has developed this guidance to promote conservation and protection of bald eagles in the Commonwealth. We sought consistency with the USFWS National Guidelines and BGEPA permitting regulations to the greatest extent possible, and deviated from them only when clearly warranted by our understanding of eagle behavior and demographics within the Commonwealth. Many definitions, schedules, categories of activities, buffer zone widths, and general recommendations have been revised from previous versions of our Virginia Guidelines, primarily to maximize consistency with the National Guidelines and to simplify interpretation of both documents by affected landowners and other interests. Similarly, most information regarding the biology and ecology of eagles, potential impacts of human activities on eagles, and specific recommendations for amelioration of those impacts has been deleted from the “Virginia-specific” narrative, as those topics are fully explored in the National Guidelines. Only issues where the Virginia Guidelines differ from the National Guidelines are explained in relative detail (Section VI of this document).

We encourage landowners and project proponents in Virginia to review their proposed actions using these guidelines. Generally, adherence to the National Guidelines is appropriate; but, in situations where there is some discrepancy between the Virginia Guidelines and the National Guidelines, Section VI provides guidance on how to ensure that a proposed project would be consistent with both. Proposed activities that may affect or result in take of a bald eagle in Virginia will be evaluated by the VDGIF and/or USFWS on a case-by-case basis, using site-specific information. The recommendations provided in these guidelines may be modified as appropriate to address project- and site-specific circumstances such as topography, existing forest canopy and habitat conditions, existing development or human activities proximal to the project site, and observed behavior of the particular eagles in question, including their reactions to specific disturbances or human activities.

It is important to recognize that these Virginia Guidelines are not regulatory in themselves, and they are not intended to supplant onsite review or consultation. VDGIF biologists are available to provide technical assistance or to consult with constituents who desire assistance in interpreting these guidelines, or in evaluation of the potential impacts of their proposed activities upon bald eagles.

• 3-

II.

BALD EAGLES IN VIRGINIA

History and Status - Prior to European settlement, the Chesapeake Bay region likely had the densest breeding population of bald eagles outside of Alaska, perhaps totaling 1,500 to 3,000 nesting pairs (Frasier et al. 1996, Watts 2005). As discussed above, eagle numbers in the Bay area declined precipitously in the early- to mid-1900s to approximately 150 breeding pairs in 1962, and to 80 to 90 pairs by the 1970s, including only 33 pairs in Virginia (Watts 2005). The population has since dramatically recovered, with 726 occupied territories and 646 active nests documented in Virginia in 2011 (Watts and Byrd 2011). This recovery has been expressed through (1) an increase in the number of breeding territories, (2) an increase in reproductive rate, and (3) an expansion in geographic distribution (Watts 2005; Watts et al. 2007, 2008). Most of Virginia’s bald eagles breed in the Coastal Plain, but we estimate that perhaps 20% of the population breeds in the Piedmont and mountains. Within the Coastal Plain, freshwater tidal sections of the Bay’s tributaries support three to four times higher breeding densities, higher reproductive rates, and greater chick growth rates compared to more saline portions of the Bay (Markham and Watts 2008, Watts et al. 2006).

Breeding - In Virginia, nest building and repair may occur during any month of the year, but these activities typically begin as early as November and peak in mid-winter. For management purposes, the breeding season in Virginia is generally considered to be from December 15 through July 15, though breeding activity may occur before or after these dates. Courtship flights and related mating behavior are most frequently observed during January and February, and eggs are usually laid between mid-January and late March. Most eggs hatch between early March and early May, and eaglets stay in the nest for 11 to 12 weeks after hatching. Most young are capable of sustained flight by mid-July, but remain dependent on the parents and stay in the general vicinity of the nest for several more weeks. Adult bald eagle pairs in Virginia typically remain on or near their breeding territories throughout the year. Eagles are most sensitive to disturbance during the breeding season as defined above.

Seasonal Concentration Areas and Communal Roosts - During the winter and summer months, migrant bald eagles from the Northeast and Southeast, respectively, converge with the local eagle population in predictable locations within the Chesapeake Bay region. These areas are referred to as bald eagle “concentration areas” and are defined as locations along waterways where eagles congregate in numbers much greater than can be accounted for by local breeding pairs and their offspring (Watts 2005, Watts et al. 2007). As applicable to these guidelines, the summer eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from May 15 through August 31, and the winter eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from December 15 through March 15.

Concentration areas are used by juveniles, sub-adults, non-breeding adult eagles, and breeding pairs of eagles for roosting, perching, and foraging. Typical eagle concentration areas have minimal shoreline development, and heavily forested shorelines with large canopy trees that provide extensive views of potential feeding areas, although the site conditions may vary along shoreline segments within concentration areas.

• 4-Virginia has major eagle concentration areas on portions of three major tidal rivers: the James River (Clark 1992, Scott 1971, Watts and Factor 1994, Watts and Whalen 1997), the Rappahannock River (Portlock 1994, VDGIF unpubl. data, Watts 1998), and the Potomac River (Wallin and Byrd 1984, VDGIF unpubl. data, Witt unpubl. data). Additional sites on the York and Chickahominy rivers support sporadic high concentrations of bald eagles that currently are not stable or predictable enough to warrant designation as concentration areas. As the eagle population expands, however, eagle concentration areas may develop on these or other rivers.

Maps and info on Virginia’s eagle concentration areas are available at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html and http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/Project_Reviews_Step6b.html.

Eagle concentration areas often include one to several communal night roosts.

Communal roosts typically are located in sheltered forested areas that minimize exposure to inclement weather. Eagles numbering from just a few to over 100 individuals may gather at such roosts in canopy trees clustered within a relatively small area. Eagle roosts in Virginia are less well known than are seasonal concentration areas; the documented communal roosts are depicted at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html.

III.

FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDELINES

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BPEGA, Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668c; 50 CFR Part 22) – This 1940 Act, as amended several times since, prohibits taking bald or golden eagles or their nests, eggs, or parts without a federal permit. The Act provides criminal and civil penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” Under the Act, take is defined as “to pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb” an eagle or their parts, nest, or eggs; and disturb means “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available: (1) injury to an eagle; (2) a decrease in productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior; or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior.” In addition to these immediate impacts, this definition of disturb also covers “impacts that result from human-induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle’s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or substantially interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment.” Clearly, the Eagle Act provides broad federal protection of eagles and their nests, eggs, and parts thereof.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 701 et seq.; 50 CFR Parts 10, 20, 21) – Enacted in 1918, the MBTA prohibits the taking of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or egg, except as permitted by regulation. Amendments of 1972 expanded the scope of this Act to include bald eagles and other raptors. The Act and its implementing regulations generally

• Prohibit pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, possessing, or collecting migratory birds, nests, or eggs.

National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines - While considering removal of the bald eagle from the Federal List of Endangered or Threatened Wildlife, the USFWS recognized the need for guidelines to inform landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with bald eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Eagle Act may apply to their activities. To address this need, the USFWS developed the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007) to: “(1) publicize the provisions of the Eagle Act that continue to protect bald eagles, in order to reduce the possibility that people will violate the law; (2) advise landowners, land managers and the general public of the potential for various human activities to disturb bald eagles; and (3) encourage additional nonbinding land management practices that benefit bald eagles”. The National Guidelines (Section V) explain the nationwide standards for protection of bald eagles and their nests, and further provide recommendations for protection and management of eagle communal roosts, foraging areas, and concentration areas.

Regulations and Permitting Procedures for Incidental Take of Eagles, and for Intentional Take of Eagle Nests - In recognition of the need for standards and a mechanism to issue permits for “take” as envisioned in the Eagle Act and National Guidelines, the USFWS published on September 11, 2009 their final rule establishing regulations for “incidental take of bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act), where the take to be authorized is associated with otherwise lawful activities, and for intentional take of eagle nests under particular, limited circumstances” (74 FR 46836). Those regulations became effective on November 20, 2009.

IV.

VIRGINIA LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND GUIDELINES From initial passage of the Virginia Endangered Species Act (§29.1-563 - 570) in 1972 through December 31, 2012, bald eagles were protected under that Act. In recognition of their recovery over the last four decades, bald eagles were removed from the Virginia list of threatened and endangered species effective January 1, 2013, though they remain designated as a [non-regulatory] Tier 2 Species of Greatest Conservation Need under Virginia’s Wildlife Action Plan (VDGIF 2005). In addition, the Code of Virginia (§29.1-521) and VDGIF regulations (4 VAC 15-30-10) generally provide legal protection to all native birds and to their nests, eggs, and young. Thus, though eagles no longer receive the extended protections afforded to threatened or endangered species, they remain under the VDGIF’s protection and management. Further, VDGIF is authorized by USFWS to enforce federal wildlife laws, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.

As discussed above, new USFWS regulations for permitting incidental take of eagles and intentional take of eagle nests have been implemented. The new protocols adopt federal definitions for “Active” and “Inactive” nests that are not consistent with the nonregulatory definitions of those terms used by VDGIF and CCB for the last several decades. To avoid

• 6-confusion regarding nest/territory activity and occupancy, and to clarify when these Virginia guidelines should be applied, we provide the following parameters. (1) A “Recently Active” nest is one that was attended (built, maintained or used) by a pair of bald eagles, whether or not eggs were laid, within the last three breeding seasons. This is consistent with the current federal regulatory definition of an “active” nest, though it facilitates application of these Virginia Guidelines for three seasons of nest inactivity.

(2) These Virginia Guidelines apply to any nest considered “Recently Active.”

(3) All nests/territories documented as “Active” and/or “Occupied” in the 2011 CCB surveys (as determined from the survey report [Watts and Byrd 2011], the CCB “Nest Locator” website, or the VDGIF website, are considered “Recently Active” nests though the 2014 nesting season. After July 15, 2014, written or photographic documentation of nest disrepair or abandonment, at VDGIF discretion, may warrant release of a given nest from coverage under the Guidelines.

(4) All other nests/territories documented as “Active” and/or “Occupied” in VDGIF/CCB databases, or upon field inspection, will be considered “Recently Active” for 3 years after the last documented activity and/or occupancy. Written or photographic documentation of nest disrepair or abandonment, at VDGIF discretion, may warrant release of a given nest from coverage under the Guidelines.

V.

See http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html for USFWS regulations, permits, and guidance.

• 7-

NATIONAL BALD EAGLE

MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

May 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE BALD EAGLE............................................................. 2 The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act...........................................................2 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................3 State laws and regulations .....................................................................................3 Where do bald eagles nest? ...................................................................................4 When do bald eagles nest? ....................................................................................5 Chronology of typical reproductive activities of bald eagles in the United States........................................................................................................................6 How many chicks do bald eagles raise? ...............................................................7 What do bald eagles eat?........................................................................................7 The impact of human activity on nesting bald eagles..........................................7 The impact of human activity on foraging and roosting bald eagles .................8 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT NEST SITES................. 9 Existing Uses.........................................................................................................10 ACTIVITY-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES..................................................................................... 10 Alternate nests.......................................................................................................11 Temporary Impacts ...............................................................................................11

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT FORAGING AREAS

AND COMMUNAL ROOST SITES....................................................................................... 14

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO BENEFIT BALD EAGLES.......................... 15

CONTACTS.............................................................................................................................. 16

GLOSSARY.............................................................................................................................. 17 RELATED LITERATURE....................................................................................................... 19 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

INTRODUCTION

The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA and the Eagle Act protect bald eagles from a variety of harmful actions and impacts. The U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) developed these National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to advise landowners, land managers, and others who share public and private lands with bald eagles when and under what circumstances the protective provisions of the Eagle Act may apply to their activities. A variety of human activities can potentially interfere with bald eagles, affecting their ability to forage, nest, roost, breed, or raise young. The Guidelines are intended to help people minimize such impacts to bald eagles, particularly where they may constitute “disturbance,” which is prohibited by the Eagle Act.

The Guidelines are intended to:

Publicize the Eagle Act provisions protecting bald eagles to reduce violations,

Advise landowners, managers, and the public on activities that may disturb bald eagles,

(3) Encourage additional nonbinding land management practices benefiting bald eagles (see Additional Recommendations).

While the Guidelines include general recommendations for land management practices that will benefit bald eagles, the document is intended primarily as a tool for landowners and planners who seek information and recommendations regarding how to avoid disturbing bald eagles. Many States and some tribal entities have developed state-specific management plans, regulations, and/or guidance for landowners and land managers to protect and enhance bald eagle habitat, and we encourage the continued development and use of these planning tools to benefit bald eagles.

Adherence to the Guidelines herein will benefit individuals, agencies, organizations, and companies by helping them avoid violations of the law. However, the Guidelines themselves are not law. Rather, they are recommendations based on several decades of behavioral observations, science, and conservation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to bald eagles.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service strongly encourages adherence to these guidelines to ensure that bald and golden eagle populations will continue to be sustained. The Service realizes there may be impacts to some birds even if all reasonable measures are taken to avoid such impacts. Although it is not possible to absolve individuals and entities from liability under the Eagle Act or the MBTA, the Service exercises enforcement discretion to focus on those individuals, companies, or agencies that take migratory birds without regard for the consequences of their actions and the law, especially when conservation measures, such as these Guidelines, are available, but have not been implemented. The Service will prioritize its enforcement efforts to focus on those individuals or entities who take bald eagles or their parts, eggs, or nests without implementing appropriate measures recommended by the Guidelines. 1 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 The Service intends to pursue the development of regulations that would authorize, under limited circumstances, the use of permits if “take” of an eagle is anticipated but unavoidable. Additionally, if the bald eagle is delisted, the Service intends to provide a regulatory mechanism to honor existing (take) authorizations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Until permit rulemaking is complete, the Service will not prosecute incidental “take” of bald eagles under the MBTA or Eagle Act if fully compliant with ESA incidental take statements or permits.

The Guidelines are applicable throughout the United States, including Alaska. The primary purpose of these Guidelines is to provide information that will minimize or prevent violations only of Federal laws governing bald eagles. In addition to Federal laws, many states and some smaller jurisdictions and tribes have additional laws and regulations protecting bald eagles. In some cases those laws and regulations may be more protective (restrictive) than these Federal guidelines. If you are planning activities that may affect bald eagles, we therefore recommend that you contact both your nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see the contact information on p.16) and your state wildlife agency for assistance.

LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE BALD EAGLE

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act The Eagle Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), enacted in 1940, and amended several times since then, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from “taking” bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal and civil penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.” The Act defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb.” “Disturb’’ means:

“Disturb” means to agitate or bother an eagle enough to cause injury, reduce productivity by interfering with breeding, feeding, or sheltering, or cause nest abandonment.

This definition also includes impacts from human alterations near inactive nests that, upon eagle return, cause injury, interfere with breeding, or lead to nest abandonment or reduced productivity.

May 2007 A violation of the Act can result in a criminal fine of $100,000 ($200,000 for organizations), imprisonment for one year, or both, for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for additional offenses, and a second violation of this Act is a felony.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act The MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703-712), prohibits the taking of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or egg, except as permitted by regulation. The MBTA was enacted in 1918; a 1972 agreement supplementing one of the bilateral treaties underlying the MBTA had the effect of expanding the scope of the Act to cover bald eagles and other raptors. Implementing regulations define “take” under the MBTA as “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess, or collect.”

Copies of the Eagle Act and the MBTA are available at: http://permits.fws.gov/ltr/ltr.shtml.

State laws and regulations Most states have their own bald eagle regulations and guidelines.

Some states may continue to list the bald eagle as endangered, threatened, or of special concern. If you plan activities that may affect bald eagles, we urge you to familiarize yourself with the regulations and/or guidelines that apply to bald eagles in your state.

Following these Guidelines does not guarantee compliance with state laws, which may be more restrictive.

NATURAL HISTORY OF THE BALD EAGLE

Bald eagles are a North American species that historically occurred throughout the contiguous United States and Alaska. After severely declining in the lower 48 States between the 1870s and the 1970s, bald eagles have rebounded and re-established breeding territories in each of the lower 48 states. The largest North American breeding populations are in Alaska and Canada, but there are also significant bald eagle populations in Florida, the Pacific Northwest, the Greater Yellowstone area, the Great Lakes states, and the Chesapeake Bay region. Bald eagle distribution varies seasonally.

Bald eagles that nest in southern latitudes frequently move northward in late spring and early summer, often summering as far north as Canada. Most eagles that breed at northern latitudes migrate southward during winter, or to coastal areas where waters remain unfrozen. Migrants frequently concentrate in large numbers at sites where food is abundant and they often roost together communally. In some cases, concentration areas are used year-round: in summer by southern eagles and in winter by northern eagles.

Juvenile bald eagles have mottled brown and white plumage, gradually acquiring their dark brown body and distinctive white head and tail as they mature. Bald eagles generally attain adult plumage by 5 years of age. Most are capable of breeding at 4 or 5 years of age, but in healthy populations they may not start breeding until much older. Bald eagles may live 15 to 25 years in the wild. Adults weigh 8 to 14 pounds (occasionally reaching 16 pounds in Alaska) and have wingspans of 5 to 8 feet. Those in the northern range are larger than those in the south, and females are larger than males. 3 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Where do bald eagles nest?

Breeding bald eagles occupy “territories,” areas they will typically defend against intrusion by other eagles. In addition to the active nest, a territory may include one or more alternate nests (nests built or maintained by the eagles but not used for nesting in a given year). The Eagle Act prohibits removal or destruction of both active and alternate bald eagle nests. Bald eagles exhibit high nest site fidelity and nesting territories are often used year after year. Some territories are known to have been used continually for over half a century.

Bald eagles generally nest near coastlines, rivers, large lakes or streams that support an adequate food supply. They often nest in mature or old-growth trees; snags (dead trees); cliffs; rock promontories; rarely on the ground; and with increasing frequency on human-made structures such as power poles and communication towers. In forested areas, bald eagles often select the tallest trees with limbs strong enough to support a nest that can weigh more than 1,000 pounds. Nest sites typically include at least one perch with a clear view of the water where the eagles usually forage. Shoreline trees or snags located in reservoirs provide the visibility and accessibility needed to locate aquatic prey. Eagle nests are constructed with large sticks, and may be lined with moss, grass, plant stalks, lichens, seaweed, or sod. Nests are usually about 4-6 feet in diameter and 3 feet deep, although larger nests exist.

Copyright Birds of North America, 2000

The range of breeding bald eagles in 2000 (shaded areas). This map shows only the larger concentrations of nests; eagles have continued to expand into additional nesting territories in many states. The dotted line represents the bald eagle’s wintering range. 4 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 When do bald eagles nest?

Nesting activity begins several months before egg-laying. Egg-laying dates vary throughout the U.S., ranging from October in Florida, to late April or even early May in the northern United States. Incubation typically lasts 33-35 days, but can be as long as 40 days. Eaglets make their first unsteady flights about 10 to 12 weeks after hatching, and fledge (leave their nests) within a few days after that first flight. However, young birds usually remain in the vicinity of the nest for several weeks after fledging because they are almost completely dependent on their parents for food until they disperse from the nesting territory approximately 6 weeks later.

The bald eagle breeding season tends to be longer in the southern U.S., and re-nesting following an unsuccessful first nesting attempt is more common there as well. The following table shows the timing of bald eagle breeding seasons in different regions of the country. The table represents the range of time within which the majority of nesting activities occur in each region and does not apply to any specific nesting pair. Because the timing of nesting activities may vary within a given region, you should contact the nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16) and/or your state wildlife conservation agency for more specific information on nesting chronology in your area. 5 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007: Typical bald eagle reproductive chronology in the U.S.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

March April May June

July Aug.

SOUTHEASTERN U.S. (FL, GA, SC, NC, AL, MS, LA, TN, KY, AR, eastern 2 of TX)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION (NC, VA, MD, DE, southern 2 of NJ, eastern 2 of PA, panhandle of WV)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ Fledging Young

NORTHERN U.S. (ME, NH, MA, RI, CT, NY, northern 2 of NJ, western 2 of PA, OH, WV exc. panhandle, IN, IL,

MI, WI, MN, IA, MO, ND, SD, NB, KS, CO, UT)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

PACIFIC REGION (WA, OR, CA, ID, MT, WY, NV)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟

Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟

Fledging Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟

SOUTHWESTERN U.S. (AZ, NM, OK panhandle, western 2 of TX)

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟ Fledging Young ⎟

ALASKA

Nest Building ⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎟

Egg Laying/Incubation ⎟ Hatching/Rearing Young ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟⎟

Ing Young Fledg-

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

March April May June

July Aug. 6 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 How many chicks do bald eagles raise?

The number of eagle eggs laid varies from 1-3, with 1-2 most common.

Only one eagle egg is laid per day, although not always on successive days. Hatching of young occurs on different days with the result that chicks in the same nest are sometimes of unequal size. The overall national fledging rate is approximately one chick per nest, annually, which results in a healthy expanding population.

What do bald eagles eat?

Bald eagles are opportunistic feeders. Fish comprise much of their diet, but they also eat waterfowl, shorebirds/colonial waterbirds, small mammals, turtles, and carrion. Because they are visual hunters, eagles typically locate their prey from a conspicuous perch, or soaring flight, then swoop down and strike. Wintering bald eagles often congregate in large numbers along streams to feed on spawning salmon or other fish species, and often gather in large numbers in areas below reservoirs, especially hydropower dams, where fish are abundant. Wintering eagles also take birds from rafts of ducks at reservoirs and rivers, and congregate on melting ice shelves to scavenge dead fish from the current or the soft melting ice. Bald eagles will also feed on carcasses along roads, in landfills, and at feedlots.

During the breeding season, adults carry prey to the nest to feed the young. Adults feed their chicks by tearing off pieces of food and holding them to the beaks of the eaglets.

After fledging, immature eagles are slow to develop hunting skills, and must learn to locate reliable food sources and master feeding techniques. Young eagles will congregate together, often feeding upon easily acquired food such as carrion and fish found in abundance at the mouths of streams and shallow bays and at landfills.

Human activity impacts nesting bald eagles; they are sensitive during the breeding season.

However, not all bald eagle pairs react to human activities in the same way. Some pairs nest successfully just dozens of yards from human activity, while others abandon nest sites in response to activities much farther away. This variability may be related to a number of factors, including visibility, duration, noise levels, extent of the area affected by the activity, prior experiences with humans, and tolerance of the individual nesting pair.

The relative sensitivity of bald eagles during various stages of the breeding season is outlined in the following table. 7 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

Nesting Bald Eagle Sensitivity to Human Activities Sensitivity to Phase Activity Human Activity Comments

Most sensitive Most critical time period. Disturbance is manifested in nest Courtship and I period; likely to abandonment. Bald eagles in newly established territories are Nest Building respond negatively more prone to abandon nest sites.

Human activity of even limited duration may cause nest Very sensitive II Egg laying desertion and abandonment of territory for the breeding period season.

Incubation and Adults are less likely to abandon the nest near and after early nestling Very sensitive hatching. However, flushed adults leave eggs and young III period (up to 4 period unattended; eggs are susceptible to cooling, loss of moisture, weeks) overheating, and predation; young are vulnerable to elements.

Nestling Likelihood of nest abandonment and vulnerability of the IV period, 4 to 8 Moderately nestlings to elements somewhat decreases. However, sensitive period weeks nestlings may miss feedings, affecting their survival.

Nestlings 8 V weeks through Very sensitive Gaining flight capability, nestlings 8 weeks and older may flush period from the nest prematurely due to disruption and die. fledging

If agitated by human activities, eagles may inadequately construct or repair their nest, may expend energy defending the nest rather than tending to their young, or may abandon the nest altogether. Activities that cause prolonged absences of adults from their nests can jeopardize eggs or young. Depending on weather conditions, eggs may overheat or cool too much and fail to hatch. Unattended eggs and nestlings are subject to predation. Young nestlings are particularly vulnerable because they rely on their parents to provide warmth or shade, without which they may die as a result of hypothermia or heat stress. If food delivery schedules are interrupted, the young may not develop healthy plumage, which can affect their survival. In addition, adults startled while incubating or brooding young may damage eggs or injure their young as they abruptly leave the nest.

Older nestlings no longer require constant attention from the adults, but they may be startled by loud or intrusive human activities and prematurely jump from the nest before they are able to fly or care for themselves. Once fledged, juveniles range up to ¼ mile from the nest site, often to a site with minimal human activity. During this period, until about six weeks after departure from the nest, the juveniles still depend on the adults to feed them.

Disruption of roosting and foraging areas hampers feeding, reduces survival and fledging success. Eagles depend on established, sheltered roosts near food sources; human disturbance can prevent feeding and sheltering.

May 2007 from feeding or taking shelter, especially if there are not other undisturbed and productive feeding and roosting sites available. Activities that permanently alter communal roost sites and important foraging areas can altogether eliminate the elements that are essential for feeding and sheltering eagles.

Where a human activity agitates or bothers roosting or foraging bald eagles to the degree that causes injury or substantially interferes with breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment, the conduct of the activity constitutes a violation of the Eagle Act’s prohibition against disturbing eagles. The circumstances that might result in such an outcome are difficult to predict without detailed site-specific information. If your activities may disturb roosting or foraging bald eagles, you should contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16) for advice and recommendations for how to avoid such disturbance.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT NEST SITES

In developing these Guidelines, we relied on existing state and regional bald eagle guidelines, scientific literature on bald eagle disturbance, and recommendations of state and Federal biologists who monitor the impacts of human activity on eagles. Despite these resources, uncertainties remain regarding the effects of many activities on eagles and how eagles in different situations may or may not respond to certain human activities.

The Service recognizes this uncertainty and views the collection of better biological data on the response of eagles to disturbance as a high priority. To the extent that resources allow, the Service will continue to collect data on responses of bald eagles to human activities conducted according to the recommendations within these Guidelines to ensure that adequate protection from disturbance is being afforded, and to identify circumstances where the Guidelines might be modified. These data will be used to make future adjustments to the Guidelines.

To avoid disturbing nesting bald eagles, we recommend (1) keeping a distance between the activity and the nest (distance buffers), (2) maintaining preferably forested (or natural) areas between the activity and around nest trees (landscape buffers), and (3) avoiding certain activities during the breeding season. The buffer areas serve to minimize visual and auditory impacts associated with human activities near nest sites. Ideally, buffers would be large enough to protect existing nest trees and provide for alternative or replacement nest trees.

The size and shape of effective buffers vary depending on the topography and other ecological characteristics surrounding the nest site. In open areas where there are little or no forested or topographical buffers, such as in many western states, distance alone must serve as the buffer. Consequently, in open areas, the distance between the activity and the nest may need to be larger than the distances recommended under Categories A and B of these guidelines (pg. 12) if no landscape buffers are present. The height of the nest above the ground may also ameliorate effects of human activities; eagles at higher nests may be less prone to disturbance.

Buffer size varies with local eagle tolerance and nest location.

May 2007 to feeding and roosting areas used by the eagles. Increased competition for nest sites may lead bald eagles to nest closer to human activity (and other eagles).

Seasonal restrictions can prevent the potential impacts of many shorter-term, obtrusive activities that do not entail landscape alterations (e.g. fireworks, outdoor concerts). In proximity to the nest, these kinds of activities should be conducted only outside the breeding season. For activities that entail both short-term, obtrusive characteristics and more permanent impacts (e.g., building construction), we recommend a combination of both approaches: retaining a landscape buffer and observing seasonal restrictions.

For assistance in determining the appropriate size and configuration of buffers or the timing of activities in the vicinity of a bald eagle nest, we encourage you to contact the nearest U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office (see page 16).

Existing Uses Eagles are unlikely to be disturbed by routine use of roads, homes, and other facilities where such use pre-dates the eagles’ successful nesting activity in a given area.

Therefore, in most cases ongoing existing uses may proceed with the same intensity with little risk of disturbing bald eagles. However, some intermittent, occasional, or irregular uses that pre-date eagle nesting in an area may disturb bald eagles. For example: a pair of eagles may begin nesting in an area and subsequently be disturbed by activities associated with an annual outdoor flea market, even though the flea market has been held annually at the same location. In such situations, human activity should be adjusted or relocated to minimize potential impacts on the nesting pair.

ACTIVITY-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES

The following section provides the Service=s management recommendations for avoiding bald eagle disturbance as a result of new or intermittent activities proposed in the vicinity of bald eagle nests. Activities are separated into 8 categories (A – H) based on the nature and magnitude of impacts to bald eagles that usually result from the type of activity.

Activities with similar or comparable impacts are grouped together.

In most cases, impacts will vary based on the visibility of the activity from the eagle nest and the degree to which similar activities are already occurring in proximity to the nest site. Visibility is a factor because, in general, eagles are more prone to disturbance when an activity occurs in full view. For this reason, we recommend that people locate activities farther from the nest structure in areas with open vistas, in contrast to areas where the view is shielded by rolling topography, trees, or other screening factors. The recommendations also take into account the existence of similar activities in the area because the continued presence of nesting bald eagles in the vicinity of the existing activities indicates that the eagles in that area can tolerate a greater degree of human activity than we can generally expect from eagles in areas that experience fewer human impacts. To illustrate how these factors affect the likelihood of disturbing eagles, we have incorporated the recommendations for some activities into a table (categories A and B).

First, determine which category your activity falls into (between categories A – H). If the activity you plan to undertake is not specifically addressed in these guidelines, follow the recommendations for the most similar activity represented. 10 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 If your activity is under A or B, our recommendations are in table form. The vertical axis shows the degree of visibility of the activity from the nest. The horizontal axis (header row) represents the degree to which similar activities are ongoing in the vicinity of the nest. Locate the row that best describes how visible your activity will be from the eagle nest. Then, choose the column that best describes the degree to which similar activities are ongoing in the vicinity of the eagle nest. The box where the column and row come together contains our management recommendations for how far you should locate your activity from the nest to avoid disturbing the eagles. The numerical distances shown in the tables are the closest the activity should be conducted relative to the nest. In some cases we have included additional recommendations (other than recommended distance from the nest) you should follow to help ensure that your activity will not disturb the eagles.

For activities causing permanent landscape changes that may disturb bald eagles, these recommendations apply to both active and alternate nests.

Disturbance becomes an issue with regard to alternate nests if eagles return for breeding purposes and react to land use changes that occurred while the nest was inactive. The likelihood that an alternate nest will again become active decreases the longer it goes unused. If you plan activities in the vicinity of an alternate bald eagle nest and have information to show that the nest has not been active during the preceding 5 breeding seasons, the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance around the nest site may no longer be warranted. The nest itself remains protected by other provisions of the Eagle Act, however, and may not be destroyed.

If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely an inactive nest will be reused before 5 years of disuse have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the nest site. Without sufficient documentation, you should continue to follow these guidelines when conducting activities around the nest site. If we are able to determine that it is unlikely the nest will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance are no longer necessary around that nest site.

This guidance is intended to minimize disturbance, as defined by Federal regulation. In addition to Federal laws, most states and some tribes and smaller jurisdictions have additional laws and regulations protecting bald eagles. In some cases those laws and regulations may be more protective (restrictive) than these Federal guidelines.

Temporary Impacts For activities that have temporary impacts, such as the use of loud machinery, fireworks displays, or summer boating activities, we recommend seasonal restrictions. These types of activities can generally be carried out outside of the breeding season without causing disturbance. The recommended restrictions for these types of activities can be lifted for alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched (depending on the distance between the alternate nest and the active nest). 11 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

In general, activities should be kept as far away from nest trees as possible; loud and disruptive activities should be conducted when eagles are not nesting; and activity between the nest and the nearest foraging area should be minimized. If the activity you plan to undertake is not specifically addressed in these guidelines, follow the recommendations for the most similar activity addressed, or contact your local U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office for additional guidance.

If special circumstances affect disturbance risk or adherence, contact your local Service Field Office for guidance.

Category A: Building construction, 1–2 stories, with a footprint of ½ acre or less.

Construction of roads, trails, canals, power lines, and other linear utilities.

Agriculture and aquaculture—new or expanded operations.

Alteration of shorelines or wetlands.

Installation of docks or moorings.

Water impoundment.

Category B: Building construction, 3+ stories.

Building construction, 1–2 stories, with footprint over ½ acre.

Installation or expansion of marinas with 6+ boats capacity.

Mining and associated activities.

Oil and natural gas drilling and refining and associated activities.

If there is no similar activity If there is similar activity closer within 1 mile of the nest than 1 mile from the nest

660 feet, or as close as existing If the activity 660 feet. Landscape buffers are tolerated activity of similar scope. will be visible recommended.

Landscape buffers are from the nest recommended.

Category A: 330 feet. Clearing, external construction, and landscaping 330 feet, or as close as existing If the activity between 330 feet and 660 feet tolerated activity of similar scope. will not be should be done outside breeding Clearing, external construction and visible from the season. landscaping within 660 feet should nest be done outside breeding season.

Category B: 660 feet.

Distances in the table are the minimum closest to the nest.

12National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Category C. Timber Operations and Forestry Practices

• Avoid clear cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet of the nest at any time.

• Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw and yarding operations, during the breeding season within 660 feet of the nest. The distance may be decreased to 330 feet around alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched.

• Selective thinning and other silviculture management practices designed to conserve or enhance habitat, including prescribed burning close to the nest tree, should be undertaken outside the breeding season. Precautions such as raking leaves and woody debris from around the nest tree should be taken to prevent crown fire or fire climbing the nest tree. If it is determined that a burn during the breeding season would be beneficial, then, to ensure that no take or disturbance will occur, these activities should be conducted only when neither adult eagles nor young are present at the nest tree (i.e., at the beginning of, or end of, the breeding season, either before the particular nest is active or after the young have fledged from that nest). Appropriate Federal and state biologists should be consulted before any prescribed burning is conducted during the breeding season.

• Avoid constructing log transfer facilities and in-water log storage within 330 feet of the nest.

Category D. Off-road vehicle use (including snowmobiles). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, do not operate off-road vehicles within 330 feet of the nest. In open areas, where there is increased visibility and exposure to noise, this distance should be extended to 660 feet.

Category E. Motorized Watercraft use (including jet skis/personal watercraft). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, within 330 feet of the nest, (1) do not operate jet skis (personal watercraft), and (2) avoid concentrations of noisy vessels (e.g., commercial fishing boats and tour boats), except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. Other motorized boat traffic passing within 330 feet of the nest should attempt to minimize trips and avoid stopping in the area where feasible, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to boat traffic. Buffers for airboats should be larger than 330 feet due to the increased noise they generate, combined with their speed, maneuverability, and visibility.

Category F. Non-motorized recreation and human entry (e.g., hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, birdwatching, kayaking, canoeing). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. If the activity will be visible or highly audible from the nest, maintain a 330-foot buffer during the breeding season, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to such activity. 13 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Category G. Helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.

Avoid operating aircraft within 1,000 feet of nests during breeding season, unless authorized biologists trained in survey techniques or eagles tolerate such activity.

Category H. Blasting and other loud, intermittent noises.

Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 1/2 mile of active nests, unless greater tolerance to the activity (or similar activity) has been demonstrated by the eagles in the nesting area. This recommendation applies to the use of fireworks classified by the Federal Department of Transportation as Class B explosives, which includes the larger fireworks that are intended for licensed public display.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING DISTURBANCE AT FORAGING AREAS AND

COMMUNAL ROOST SITES

1. Minimize disruptive activities and development along eagles’ flight path between nest, roost, and key foraging areas.

1. Locate long-term water-dependent facilities, like boat ramps and marinas, away from key eagle foraging areas.

1. Avoid boating and fishing near critical eagle foraging areas during peak feeding times (early to mid-morning, late afternoon), unless eagles tolerate such activity.

1. Do not use explosives within ½ mile (or 1 mile in open areas) of communal roosts when eagles are congregating, without prior coordination with USFWS and state wildlife agencies.

1. Locate aircraft corridors at least 1,000 feet away vertically or horizontally from communal roosts. 14 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO BENEFIT BALD EAGLES

Landowners and planners can exercise additional management practices for bald eagle benefits.

1. Protect and preserve potential roost and nest sites by retaining mature and old-growth trees, especially within ½ mile of water.

1. Where nests are blown from trees during storms or are otherwise destroyed by the elements, continue to protect the site in the absence of the nest for up to three (3) complete breeding seasons. Many eagles will rebuild the nest and reoccupy the site.

1. Site wind turbines, communication towers, and high-voltage lines away from nests, foraging areas, and roosts to prevent collisions.

1. Employ industry-accepted best management practices to prevent birds from colliding with or being electrocuted by utility lines, towers, and poles. If possible, bury utility lines in important eagle areas.

1. Where bald eagles may nest on human-made structures (e.g., cell towers) risking operation or safety, equip with (1) devices discouraging nesting or (2) nesting platforms that do not interfere with performance.

1. Immediately cover carcasses of euthanized animals at landfills to prevent eagle poisoning.

1. Do not intentionally feed bald eagles. Artificially feeding bald eagles can disrupt their essential behavioral patterns and put them at increased risk from power lines, collision with windows and cars, and other mortality factors.

1. Use pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and chemicals only per Federal and state laws.

1. Monitor and minimize dispersal of contaminants associated with hazardous waste sites (legal or illegal), permitted releases, and runoff from agricultural areas, especially within watersheds where eagles have shown poor reproduction or where bioaccumulating contaminants have been documented. These factors present a risk of contamination to eagles and their food sources. 15 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines May 2007

CONTACTS

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Offices provide technical assistance on bald eagle management:

Alabama Daphne (251) 441-5181 New Hampshire Concord (603) 223-2541 Alaska Anchorage (907) 271-2888 New Jersey Pleasantville (609) 646-9310 Fairbanks (907) 456-0203 New Mexico Albuquerque (505) 346-2525 Juneau (907) 780-1160 New York Cortland (607) 753-9334 Arizona Phoenix (602) 242-0210 Long Island (631) 776-1401 Arkansas Conway (501) 513-4470 North Carolina Raleigh (919) 856-4520 California Arcata (707) 822-7201 Asheville (828) 258-3939 Barstow (760) 255-8852 North Dakota Bismarck (701) 250-4481 Carlsbad (760) 431-9440 Ohio Reynoldsburg (614) 469-6923 Red Bluff (530) 527-3043 Oklahoma Tulsa (918) 581-7458 Sacramento (916) 414-6000 Oregon Bend (541) 383-7146 Stockton (209) 946-6400 Klamath Falls (541) 885-8481 Ventura (805) 644-1766 La Grande (541) 962-8584 Yreka (530) 842-5763 Newport (541) 867-4558 Colorado Lakewood (303) 275-2370 Portland (503) 231-6179 Grand Junction (970) 243-2778 Roseburg (541) 957-3474 Connecticut (See New Hampshire) Pennsylvania State College (814) 234-4090 Delaware (See Maryland) Rhode Island (See New Hampshire) Florida Panama City (850) 769-0552 South Carolina Charleston (843) 727-4707 Vero Beach (772) 562-3909 South Dakota Pierre (605) 224-8693 Jacksonville (904) 232-2580 Tennessee Cookeville (931) 528-6481 Georgia Athens (706) 613-9493 Texas Clear Lake (281) 286-8282 Brunswick (912) 265-9336 Utah West Valley City (801) 975-3330 Columbus (706) 544-6428 Vermont (See New Hampshire) Idaho Boise (208) 378-5243 Virginia Gloucester (804) 693-6694 Chubbuck (208) 237-6975 Washington Lacey (306) 753-9440 Illinois/Iowa Rock Island (309) 757-5800 Spokane (509) 891-6839 Indiana Bloomington (812) 334-4261 Wenatchee (509) 665-3508 Kansas Manhattan (785) 539-3474 West Virginia Elkins (304) 636-6586 Kentucky Frankfort (502) 695-0468 Wisconsin New Franken (920) 866-1725 Louisiana Lafayette (337) 291-3100 Wyoming Cheyenne (307) 772-2374 Cody (307) 578-5939Maine Old Town (207) 827-5938 Maryland Annapolis (410) 573-4573 Massachusetts (See New Hampshire) National OfficeMichigan East Lansing (517) 351-2555 U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceMinnesota Bloomington (612) 725-3548 Division of Migratory Bird Management Mississippi Jackson (601) 965-4900 4401 North Fairfax Drive, MBSP-4107 Missouri Columbia (573) 234-2132 Arlington, VA 22203-1610 Montana Helena (405) 449-5225 (703) 358-1714 Nebraska Grand Island (308) 382-6468 http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds Nevada Las Vegas (702) 515-5230 Reno (775) 861-6300

State Agencies

To contact a state wildlife agency, visit the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies’ website at http://www.fishwildlife.org/where_us.html 16National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

GLOSSARY

The definitions below apply to these National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines:

Communal roost sites – Areas where bald eagles gather and perch overnight – and sometimes during the day in the event of inclement weather. Communal roost sites are usually in large trees (live or dead) that are relatively sheltered from wind and are generally in close proximity to foraging areas. These roosts may also serve a social purpose for pair bond formation and communication among eagles. Many roost sites are used year after year.

Disturb means to bother a bald or golden eagle enough to cause injury, reduce productivity, or lead to nest abandonment by interfering with normal behavior.

In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from human-caused alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle=s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that injures an eagle or substantially interferes with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits and causes, or is likely to cause, a loss of productivity or nest abandonment.

Fledge – To leave the nest and begin flying. For bald eagles, this normally occurs at 10-12 weeks of age.

Fledgling is a juvenile bald eagle that has fledged but is not yet independent.

Foraging area is where eagles feed, near water bodies with fish and waterfowl or in dry areas with prey like rabbits, rodents, or carrion.

Landscape buffer is a natural or artificial feature (e.g., trees, hill, cliff, berm, sound wall) that screens eagles from human activity.

Nest is a structure used by bald eagles for reproduction.

An active nest is a nest that is attended (built, maintained or used) by a pair of bald eagles during a given breeding season, whether or not eggs are laid. An alternate nest is a nest that is not used for breeding by eagles during a given breeding season.

Nest abandonment – Nest abandonment occurs when adult eagles desert or stop attending a nest and do not subsequently return and successfully raise young in that nest for the duration of a breeding season. Nest abandonment can be caused by altering habitat near a nest, even if the alteration occurs prior to the breeding season. Whether the eagles migrate during the non-breeding season, or remain in the area throughout the non-breeding season, nest abandonment can occur at any point between the time the eagles return to the nesting site for the breeding season and the time when all progeny from the breeding season have 17 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 dispersed.

Project footprint is the land and water area permanently altered by a development, including access roads.

Similar scope – In the vicinity of a bald eagle nest, an existing activity is of similar scope to a new activity where the types of impacts to bald eagles are similar in nature, and the impacts of the existing activity are of the same or greater magnitude than the impacts of the potential new activity. Examples: (1) An existing single-story home 200 feet from a nest is similar in scope to an additional single-story home 200 feet from the nest; (2) An existing multi-story, multi-family dwelling 150 feet from a nest has impacts of a greater magnitude than a potential new single-family home 200 feet from the nest; (3) One existing single-family home 200 feet from the nest has impacts of a lesser magnitude than three single-family homes 200 feet from the nest; (4) an existing single-family home 200 feet from a communal roost has impacts of a lesser magnitude than a single-family home 300 feet from the roost but 40 feet from the eagles’ foraging area. The existing activities in examples (1) and (2) are of similar scope, while the existing activities in example (3) and (4) are not.

Vegetative buffer is a natural or planted area around a nest, mainly forest or vegetation, separating it from human activities. 18 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007

RELATED LITERATURE

Andrew, J.M. and J.A. Mosher. 1981. Bald eagle nest site selection and nesting habitat in Maryland. Journal of Wildlife Management 46:382-390.

Anonymous. 1977. Bald Eagle Habitat Management Guidelines, Forest Service – California Region. U.S Forest Service, San Francisco, CA.

Anthony, R.G. 2001. Low productivity of bald eagles on Prince of Wales Island, southeast Alaska. Journal of Raptor Research 35:1-8.

Anthony, R.G., R.W. Frenzel, F.B. Isaacs, and M.G. Garrett. 1994. Probable causes of nesting failures in Oregon’s bald eagle population. Wildlife Society Bulletin 22:576-582.

Anthony, R.G. and F.B. Isaacs. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nest sites in Oregon.

Journal of Wildlife Management 53:148-158.

Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1999. Bald Eagle Conservation Assessment and Strategy (draft).

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 1996. Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power Lines: The State of the Art in 1996. Edison Electric Institute, Raptor Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Bangs, E.E., T.N. Bailey and V.D. Berns. Ecology of nesting bald eagles on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. (USFWS staff)

Becker, J.M. 2002. Response of wintering bald eagles to industrial construction in southeastern Washington. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:875-878.

Brauning, D.W. and J.D. Hassinger. 2000. Pennsylvania Recovery and Management Plan for the Bald Eagle (draft). Pennsylvania Game Commission. Harrisburg, PA.

Brown, B.T., G.S. Mills, C. Powels, W.A. Russell, G.D. Therres and J.J. Pottie. 1999. The influence of weapons-testing noise on bald eagle behavior. Journal of Raptor Research 33:227-232.

Brown, B.T. and L.E. Stevens. 1997. Winter bald eagle distribution is inversely correlated with human activity along the Colorado River, Arizona. Journal of Raptor Research31:7-10.

Buehler, D.A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). In The Birds of North America, No. 506 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1991. Effects of human activity on bald eagle distribution on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:282-290.

Buehler, D.A., T.J. Mersmann, J.D. Fraser, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1991. Nonbreeding bald eagle communal and solitary roosting behavior and roost habitat on the northern Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:273-281. 19 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Chandler, SK., J.D. Fraser, D.A. Buehler and J.K.D. Seegar. 1995. Perch trees and shoreline development as predictors of bald eagle distribution on the Chesapeake Bay.

Journal of Wildlife Management 59:325-332.

Cline, K. 1985. Bald Eagles in the Chesapeake: A Management Guide for Landowners.

National Wildlife Federation. Washington, D.C.

Dell, D.D. and P.J. Zwank. 1986. Impact of a high-voltage transmission line on a nesting pair of southern bald eagles in southeast Louisiana. Journal of Raptor Research 20(3/4):117-119.

Dunwiddie, P.W. and R.C. Kuntz. 2001. Long-term trends of bald eagles in winter on the Skagit River, Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management 65(2):290-299.

Fletcher, R.J. et. al. 1999. Effects of recreational trails on wintering diurnal raptors along riparian corridors in a Colorado grassland. Journal of Raptor Research 33(3):233-239.

Fraser, J.D. 1981. The breeding biology and status of the bald eagle on the Chippewa National Forest. PhD. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.

Fraser, J.D., LD. Frenzel and J.E. Mathisen. 1985. The impact of human activities on breeding bald eagles in north-central Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife Management 49(3):585-592.

Garrett, M.G., J.W. Watson, and R.G. Anthony. 1993. Bald eagle home range and habitat use in the Columbia River Estuary. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(1):19-27.

Gerrard J.M. and G.R. Bortolotti. 1988. The Bald Eagle: Haunts and Habits of a Wilderness Monarch. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.

Grier, J.W. 1969. Bald eagle behavior and productivity responses to climbing to nests.

Journal of Wildlife Management 33:961-966.

Grier, J.W. and J.E. Guinn. 2003. Bald eagle habitats and responses to human disturbance in Minnesota. Report to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Grubb, T.G. 1976. Survey and analysis of bald eagle nesting in western Washington. M.S. thesis, Univ. of Washington, Seattle.

Grubb, T.G. and R.M. King. 1991. Assessing human disturbance of breeding bald eagles with classification tree models. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:500-511.

Grubb, T.G., W.L. Robinson and W.W. Bowerman. 2002. Effects of watercraft on bald eagles nesting in Voyagers National Park, Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:156-161.

Grubb, T.G. and W.W. Bowerman. 1997. Variations in breeding bald eagle response to jets, light planes and helicopters. Journal of Raptor Research 31:213-222. 20 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Grubb, T.G., W.W. Bowerman, A.J. Bath, J.P. Giesy, D.V.C. Weseloh. 2003. Evaluating Great Lakes bald eagle nesting habitat with Bayesian inference. RMRS-RP-45. U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, 10 pp.

Hansen, J.A. 1977. Population dynamics and night roost requirements of bald eagles wintering in the Nooksack River Valley, WA. Huxley College of Environmental Studies, Western Washington State College, Bellingham, WA. (Problem Series)

Hansen, J.A., M.V. Stalmaster and J.R. Newman. 1980. Habitat characteristics, function, and destruction of bald eagle communal roosts in western Washington. Huxley college of Environmental Studies, Western Washington University.

Hunt, W.G., D.E. Driscoll, E.W. Bianchi, and R.E. Jackman. 1992. Ecology of bald eagles in Arizona. Report to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Contract 6-CS-30-04470. BioSystems Analysis Inc., Santa Cruz, California.

Isaacs, F.B and R.G. Anthony. 1987. Abundance, foraging, and roosting of bald eagles wintering in the Harney Basin, Oregon. Northwest Science 61(2), pp. 114-121.

Juenemann, B.G. 1973. Habitat evaluations of selected bald eagle nest sites on the Chippewa National Forest. M.S. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Keister, G.P., R.G. Anthony and E.J. O’Neill. 1987. Use of communal roosts and foraging area by bald eagles wintering in the Klamath Basin. Journal of Wildlife Management 51(2):415-420.

Knight, R. and S.K. Knight. 1984. Responses of wintering bald eagles to boating activity.

Journal of Wildlife Management 48:999-1004.

Linscombe, J.T., T.J. Hess, Jr., and V.L. Wright. 1999. Effects of seismic operations on Louisiana’s nesting bald eagles. Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 54:235-242.

Maine (State of) Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Rules. Chapter 8.05 Essential Habitat for Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered.

Mathisen, J.E. 1968. Effects of human disturbance on nesting bald eagles. Journal of Wildlife Management 32(1): 1-6.

McGarigal, K., R.G. Anthony and F.B. Isaacs. 1991. Interactions of humans and bald eagles on the Columbia River estuary. Wildlife Monographs 115:1-47.

McKay, K.J., J.W. Stravers, B.R. Conklin, U. Konig, S. Hawks, C.J. Kohrt, J.S. Lundh and G.V. Swenson. 2001. Potential human impacts on bald eagle reproductive success along the Upper Mississippi River.

McKewan, L.C. and D.H. Hirth. 1979. Southern bald eagle productivity and nest site selection. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:585-594. 21 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Millsap, B.A. Status of wintering bald eagles in the conterminous 48 States. 1986. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14:433-440.

Millsap, B.A, T. Breen, E. McConnell, T. Steffer, L. Phillips, N. Douglass, and S. Taylor. In Press. Comparative fecundity and survival of bald eagles fledged from suburban and rural natal areas in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 68(4).

Montana Bald Eagle Working Group. 1986. Montana Bald Eagle Management Plan.

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. Billings, MT.

Nesbitt, S.A., M.J. Folk and D.A. Wood. 1993. Effectiveness of bald eagle habitat protection guidelines in Florida. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

Newman, J.R., W.H. Brennan and L.M. Smith. 1977. Twelve-year changes in nesting patterns of bald eagles on San Juan Island, Washington. The Murrelet 58(2)37-39.

Postapulsky, S. 1974. Raptor reproductive success: some problems with methods, criteria, and terminology. Pages 21-31 in F.N. Hammerstrom, Jr., B.E. Harrell, and R.R. Olendorff, eds. Management of raptors. Raptor Res. Found., Vermillion, S.D.

Rodgers, J.A. and Schwikert, S.T. 2003. Buffer zone distances to protect foraging and loafing waterbirds from disturbance by airboats in Florida. Waterbirds 26(4): 437-443.

Russell, D. 1980. Occurrence and human disturbance sensitivity of wintering bald eagles on the Sauk and Suiattle Rivers, Washington. In R.L. Knight, G.T. Allen, M.V. Stalmaster and C.W. Servheen [eds.]. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium. Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington, pp. 165-174.

Shapiro, A.E., F. Montalbano, and D. Mager. 1982. Implications of construction of a flood control project upon bald eagle nesting activity. Wilson Bulletin 94(1), pp. 55-63.

Skagen, S.K. 1980. Behavioral responses of wintering bald eagles to human activity on the Skagit River, Washington. In R.L.Knight, G.T. Allen, M.V. Stalmaster and C.W. Servheen [eds.]. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium. Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington, pp. 231-241.

Skagen, S.K., R.L. Knight and G.J.H. Orians. 1991. Human disturbance of an avian scavenging guild. Ecological Applications 1:215-225. (Internet)

Stalmaster, M.V. 1976 Winter ecology and effects of human activity on bald eagles in the Nooksack River Valley, Washington. MS Thesis, Western Washington State College, Bellingham.

Stalmaster, M.V. 1980. Management strategies for wintering bald eagles in the Pacific Northwest. Proceedings of the Washington Bald Eagle Symposium, pp 49-67.

Stalmaster, M.V. and J.L. Kaiser. 1998. Effects of recreational activity on wintering bald eagles. Wildlife Monographs 137:1-46. 22 National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines

May 2007 Stalmaster, M.V. and J.L. Kaiser. 1997. Flushing responses of wintering bald eagles to military activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:1307-1313.

Stalmaster, M.V. and J.R. Newman. 1978. Behavioral responses of wintering bald eagles to human activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:506-513.

Steenhof, K. 1978. Management of Wintering Bald Eagles. FWS/OBS-78/79. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington D.C.

Steidl, R.J. and R.G. Anthony. 2000. Experimental Effects of Human Activity on Breeding Bald Eagles. Ecological Applications 10(1), pp. 258-268.

Therres, G.D., M.A. Byrd and D.S. Bradshaw. 1993. Effects of development on nesting bald eagles: case studies from Chesapeake Bay. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 58:62-69.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Bald Eagle Management Guidelines: Oregon – Washington. Portland. OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Northern States bald eagle recovery plan.

Appendices E, F, and G. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6, Denver, CO.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4. Atlanta, GA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Bald Eagle Basics. Anchorage, AK.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Habitat Management Guidelines for Bald Eagles in Texas. Austin, TX.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2001.

Bald Eagle Protection Guidelines for Virginia. Gloucester and Richmond, VA.

Watson, J.W. 1993. Responses of nesting bald eagles to helicopter surveys. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21:171-178.

Watson, J.W. 2004. Responses of nesting bald eagles to experimental pedestrian activity.

Journal of Raptor Research 38:295-305.

Wood, P.B. 1999. Bald eagle response to boating activity in northcentral Florida. Journal of Raptor Research 33:97-101.

Wood, P.B., T.C. Edwards Jr. and M.W. Collopy. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nesting habitat in Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 53(2):441-449.

Young, L.S. 1980. A quantitative evaluation of human disturbance impacts on breeding eagle ecology of bald eagles in the San Juan Islands, Washington. Washington Department of Game, Olympia. 23

VI.

VIRGINIA EXCEPTIONS TO THE NATIONAL BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES (NBEMG) As explained in the Preface, effective January 1, 2013, applicable Virginia law and VDGIF regulations will no longer prohibit habitat alterations or activities that do not result in taking of an eagle or its nest, or parts thereof. Federal regulations pursuant to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, however, prohibit “disturbance” of eagles, which may include certain human activities or alteration of habitat surrounding a nest, roost, or concentration area.

We urge project proponents to confirm with USFWS that their activities comply with applicable regulations and permit conditions.

Chronology and seasonality of breeding and concentrated activity (p. 6 of NBEMG) – As discussed in the National Guidelines, chronology of eagle breeding and concentration activity varies across the nation. For purposes of these guidelines, the Virginia bald eagle breeding season extends from December 15 – July 15, absent documented nesting activity at other times at a particular nest in a given year. Similarly, the summer eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from May 15 through August 31, and the winter eagle concentration season in Virginia extends from December 15 through March 15.

Alternate nests guidelines regarding consecutive years of inactivity (p. 11 of NBEMG) – As discussed in the National Guidelines, disturbance becomes an issue with regard to alternate nests if eagles return for breeding purposes and react to land use changes that occurred while the nest was inactive. Though the National Guidelines establish a 5-year period of nest inactivity as the generic standard for likely application of the guidelines, several decades of nest-activity records from Virginia reveal that the likelihood of an alternate nest being reactivated by eagles after three years of inactivity is very small (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript). Indeed, nearly 94% of such nest “reactivations” occur within the first two years, and a primary benefit of protecting alternate nests may be the resultant protection of nests that were not inactive in fact, but where nest monitoring simply did not detect occupancy during the breeding season(s) in question (Watts in prep.). In light of this, VDGIF considers three consecutive years of nest inactivity as an appropriate generic standard, subject to site and nest-specific considerations. Under either standard, however, the nest itself remains protected by other provisions of the Eagle Act and may not be destroyed. If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely an inactive nest will be reused before three years of inactivity have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the nest site. Without sufficient documentation, you should continue to follow these guidelines when conducting activities around the nest site. If we determine that it is unlikely the nest will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance are no longer necessary around that nest site.

The “1-mile” guideline (pp. 12 of NBEMG) – The USFWS, in recognition that eagles nesting in areas exhibiting significant human activity or development are likely to be more tolerant of human intrusion than eagles nesting in relatively remote and undeveloped areas, adopted a “1-mile” guideline regarding nest proximity to existing human activity. In essence, the “1-mile”

• Guideline 33 allows relaxation if a similar activity occurs within 1 mile of the nest.

We do not agree with this generic guideline: eagle tolerance varies regionally and locally, requiring case-by-case assessment. We will use a specific table instead of the one on page 12 of NBEMG.

Nest Visibility Guidance for minimum distance for Category A and B activities near a nest

If the activity or completed project will 660 feet, or potentially as close as existing be visible from the nest tolerated activity of similar scope. Activities within 660 feet require VDGIF consultation. Use buffers. Clearing closer than 660 feet should be outside breeding season.

If the activity or completed project will Category A: 330 feet, or as close as existing not be visible from the nest tolerated activity of similar scope. Activities within 330 feet should not be undertaken without site-specific VDGIF consultation. Clearing, earthmoving, external construction, and landscaping closer than 660 feet should be conducted outside of the breeding season.

Category B: 660 feet or as close as tolerated activity.

Activities within 660 feet should not be undertaken without site-specific VDGIF consultation. Landscape buffers are recommended. Clearing, earthmoving, external construction, and landscaping closer than 660 feet should be conducted outside of the breeding season.

Timber operations; Category C (p. 13 of NBEMG) – Besides avoiding log transfer and in-water storage within 330 feet of nests, construction during breeding season must follow standards for timber harvesting, including road, chain saw, and yarding operations (660 feet around active nests during breeding season; 330 feet around alternate nests within a territory).

• Nests attended during the current season but not used for raising young, after eggs in another nest have hatched.

Guideline applicability to seasonal concentration areas and communal roosts (p. 14 of NBEMG) – As explained in Section III, human activity that disturbs feeding or roosting eagles to the degree that causes injury, or that substantially interferes with breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, constitutes a violation of the Eagle Act. Any major habitat modification including extensive land clearing, tree harvest or removal, or development of marinas, boat ramps, roads, or residential/commercial facilities may be detrimental to eagle use of seasonal concentration areas or communal roosts. Similarly, significant or chronic disruption of roosting and foraging behavior may reduce eagle survival or productivity. Seasonal use of a particular area by eagles varies with the specific roost, shoreline area, or river system, and the number of bald eagles using particular shoreline reaches within a concentration area can vary seasonally.

Thus, proposed disturbances normally must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. While we concur with the generic recommendations contained in the National Guidelines, the activity-specific guidelines are not consistently applicable to activities proposed within or near seasonal concentration areas or communal roosts. Thus, we recommend project-specific consultation with VDGIF and USFWS as appropriate, after consideration of the proximity of the proposed activity to a seasonal concentration area or communal roost (see Appendix), and the nature of the proposed activity (i.e., Categories A through H in the National Guidelines).

“Latent” nest site guidance (p. 15 of NBEMG) – As presented in the National Guidelines (item 2 of the Additional Recommendations to Benefit Bald Eagles), nests sometimes are blown from trees during storms or otherwise destroyed by the elements. The National Guidelines recommend up to three years of site protection to facilitate construction of a replacement nest within the protected site. Several decades of nest-activity records from Virginia, however, reveal that the likelihood of nest reconstruction in the former nest tree is only about 3% in the first year following nest destruction, and declines each year thereafter (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript).

Over a 10-year period, fewer than 10% of such “inactive” (i.e., latent) trees were reused for nesting, with over half of those reactivations occurring in the first two years (Watts 2012, submitted manuscript). The annual cost of site protection borne by the affected landowner, however, may be substantial, including both direct costs and reduced/forfeited opportunities to generate income throughout the period of site protection. Therefore, VDGIF considers two breeding seasons of documented nest tree latency (i.e., no nest activity documented) as an appropriate generic standard, subject to site and nest-specific considerations. If special circumstances exist that make it unlikely that a latent nest or site will be reused before two breeding seasons of inactivity have passed, and you believe that the probability of reuse is low enough to warrant disregarding the recommendations for avoiding disturbance, you should be prepared to provide all the reasons for your conclusion, including information regarding past use of the site. If we determine that it is unlikely the tree/site will be reused, we may advise you that the recommendations provided in these guidelines for avoiding disturbance to the site are no longer necessary.

• 35-

VII.

APPLICATION AND EFFECT OF THESE GUIDELINES – These Virginia Guidelines are non-regulatory and do not replace onsite review or consultation.

USFWS and VDGIF offer technical assistance and consultation to landowners on guidelines and potential eagle impacts.

Federal compliance with the National Guidelines (interpreted case-by-case) creates a presumption that no unauthorized eagle “take” occurs. The USFWS prioritizes enforcement against those who take eagles or their parts without implementing recommended measures.

If a proposed project would not be completed in accordance with the National Guidelines, the USFWS would determine what measures should be implemented to prevent or compensate for potential “take,” and those measures could be required as conditions of an Incidental Take Permit issued pursuant to the Eagle Act. Authorization of Incidental Take under a federal Incidental Take Permit would not absolutely insulate the permittee from prosecution under Virginia Law or VDGIF regulations. VDGIF and USFWS staff, however, work cooperatively to ensure that the final conditions of a federal Incidental Take Permit would be acceptable to VDGIF as evidence of the permittee’s intent and sufficient to deter state prosecution in the event of unauthorized and unintentional “take” during project construction or operation. Finally, if a project would be in accordance with the National Guidelines, but not in accordance with these Virginia Guidelines, the operator presumably would be insulated from federal prosecution for take under the Eagle Act and MBTA, but possibly subject to prosecution by VDGIF in the event of take of bald eagles, their nests, or young.

• VIII. IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE GUIDELINES: Following these procedures ensures compliance with federal and Virginia laws protecting bald eagles.

First, determine whether there are any known eagle nests, concentration areas, or roosts in the vicinity of your project site. You can determine the presence of known nests by visiting the Center for Conservation Biology Virginia Eagle Nest Locator website at: http://ccb-wm.org/virginiaeagles/locator.php. Proximity of your project to known seasonal concentration areas can be determined by visiting the USFWS Virginia Field Office website at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/Project_Reviews_Step6b.html.

Finally, the proximity of your project to known eagle nests, concentration areas, and roosts can be determined by visiting the VDGIF online Fish and Wildlife Information Service website at: http://vafwis.org/fwis/BaldEagleSearchMap.html. Please recognize that Virginia’s bald eagle population is dynamic and there may be new nests near your site that are not documented in existing databases.

Review your project in the context of these guidelines, and determine whether your proposed activity is compliant with the guidance for protection of bald eagles. Contact the VDGIF at 540-899-4169 or USFWS at 804-693-6694 for technical assistance if you need help applying the [state or federal, respectively] guidelines to your project. You also may visit the USFWS Northeast Region Bald Eagle Management Guidelines and Conservation Measures website at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/EcologicalServices/eagle.html to evaluate your project in context of the National Guidelines. If your project is being reviewed by the Corps of Engineers, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, or another state or federal agency with regard to issuance of an environmental permit, you may wish to review the Department’s Environmental Services Section webpage at: http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/environmental-programs/environmental-services-section.asp for further explanation of VDGIF’s role in reviewing such permit applications. Compliance with these guidelines is one issue considered by the Department’s Environmental Services Section during interagency permit review.

To ensure compliance with USFWS guidance, use the Virginia Field Office’s Project Reviews at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/endspecies/project_reviews.html.

This online review allows you to assess impacts on threatened, endangered, candidate species, critical habitat, and bald eagles, and either self-certify compliance or request expedited review.

If your activity complies with these guidelines, no further contact with VDGIF is needed, but liability for take remains if violations occur.

• 37-

If activity may not comply, cannot adhere, or has special circumstances affecting eagle disturbance, contact VDGIF or USFWS for assistance.

IX.

REFERENCES

Clark, K.H. 1992. Shoreline habitat selection by bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in a non-breeding eagle concentration area on the James River, Virginia. M.A. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 111pp.

Cline, K.W. 1985. Bald eagles in the Chesapeake Bay: a management guide for landowners.

National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C. 16 pp.

Cline, K.W. 1993. Virginia Bald Eagle Management Planning Document. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, VA. 56 pp.

Cline, K.W. and M.A. Byrd. 1994. Bald eagle management in Virginia: a comprehensive plan.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Richmond, VA. 95 pp.

Frasier, J.D., S.K. Chaldler, D.A. Buehler, and J.K.D. Seegar. 1996. The decline, recovery and future of the bald eagle population of the Chesapeake Bay, U.S.A. Pages 181-187 in B.U. Moyberg and R.D Chancellor, eds. Eagle Studies World Working Group of Birds of Prey. Berlin, London & Paris.

Markham, A. C. and B. D. Watts. 2008. The influence of salinity on provisioning rates and nestling growth in bald eagles in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Condor 110:183-187.

Millsap, B.A., K.W. Cline, and M.J. Gilroy. 1983. Distribution and movements of bald eagles on Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland. Report prepared for U.S. Dept. of the Army, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD.

Portlock, W.S. 1994. Rappahannock River bald eagles. The Raven 65:38-43.

Scott, F.R. 1971. News and Notes: Unusual eagle concentration. The Raven 42:54.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat management guidelines for the bald eagle in the southeast region. Atlanta, GA.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National bald eagle management guidelines.

Washington, D.C. 25 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Eagle permits; take necessary to protect interests in particular localities. Federal Register 74(175):46836-46879.

• 38-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Migratory bird management information: eagle rule questions and answers. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Draft Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance Module 1: Wind Energy Development. Washington, D.C. 106 pp.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2005. Virginia’s comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy (aka Virginia Wildlife Action Plan). Richmond, VA.

Virginia Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Bald eagle management in Virginia. Gloucester, VA. 12 pp.

Virginia Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries; and Center for Conservation Biology. 2001. Bald eagle protection guidelines for Virginia. Gloucester, VA. 6 pp.

Wallin, D. O. and M. A. Byrd. 1984. Caledon State Park Bald Eagle Study: Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, VA. 53pp.

Watts, B.D. 1998. Investigation of bald eagles within the Rappahannock River Concentration Area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report, CCBTR-98-02. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 65pp.

Watts, B.D. 2005. Virginia bald eagle conservation plan. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report Series, CCBTR-05-06. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 52 pp.

Watts, B.D. 2012. Estimating the residual value of inactive bald eagle nests: implications for nest protection standards. Submitted.

Watts B.D, A.C. Markham, and M.A. Byrd. 2006. Salinity and population parameters of Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Auk 123:393-404.

Watts, B. D. and D. M. Whalen. 1997. Interactions between Eagles and Humans in the James River Bald Eagle Concentration Area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report, CCBTR-97-02. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 81pp.

Watts, B.D. and M.A. Byrd. 2011. Virginia bald eagle nest and productivity survey: Year 2011 report. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report Series, CCBTR-11-11.

College of William and Mary and Virginia Commonwealth University, Williamsburg, VA. 42 pp.

Watts, B. D., K. W. Cline, and M. A. Byrd. 1994. The Bald Eagle in Virginia: An information booklet for land planners. Center for Conservation Biology Educational Document CCBED-94-02. College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 85pp.

• 39-Watts, B.D. and S. Factor. 1994. Bald eagle investigations within the James River concentration area. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report CCBTR-94-01. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA.

Watts, B. D., G. D. Therres, and M. A. Byrd. 2007. Status, distribution and the future of Bald Eagles in the Chesapeake Bay. Waterbirds 30:25-38.

Watts, B. D., G. D. Therres, and M. A. Byrd. 2008. Recovery of the Chesapeake Bay bald eagle nesting population. Journal of Wildlife Management 72:152-158.

• 40-

DWR Henslow’s Sparrow Acoustic Survey Protocols Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Henslow’s Sparrows (Centronyx henslowii) are listed Threatened in Virginia. Anyone proposing to band or otherwise handle one of these animals must be issued a Scientific Collections Permit by DWR. Please see www.dwr.virginia.gov/permits for additional information. Permits are not necessary for acoustic-only surveys.

Henslow’s Sparrow is a cryptic species most often detected by its vocalizations. During the breeding season, territorial birds give a short, simple high-pitched song. This inconspicuous vocalization can be easily overlooked when it is masked by ambient noise or otherwise missed if distances between the observer and the singing bird are too great.

Surveyor Qualifications: Documentation of the following qualifications by any proposed surveyor should be provided to DWR for review and approval ahead of performing surveys: 1) able to identify the species by sight and by sound 2) have prior field experience with the species 3) able to hear high frequencies in order to detect high-pitched calls Survey Window: Henslow’s Sparrow surveys should be conduced between May 15 and June 30.

Survey Protocols: Surveys should be performed at least twice during the survey window to increase the probability of detecting birds that are present. Surveys at each site should be conducted 7-21 days apart. Surveys should not be conducted during rain or when wind speeds are greater than 7 mph. Surveys should take place between sunrise and 10 a.m. on a given day. Although males may sing at night, diurnal surveys ensure that observers can look for visual cues of the species’ presence, rather than conducting surveys solely by ear.

The survey area should encompass all suitable habitats for the species at a site. It is estimated that an appropriate detection radius (by ear) for singing Henslow’s Sparrow is less than 100 meters. Therefore, surveys should take place along parallel transects placed no more than 200 meters apart, with points placed along the transects at no greater than 200 meter intervals. At each of these points, the surveyor(s) should stop for duration of 5 minutes. All Henslow’s Sparrows detected by sight and/or sound during this time should be recorded. Call playback should be used in order to improve the probability of detection.

Playback should consist of periods of the male’s primary advertising song alternating with silent periods. A recommended sequence is a one minute silent period, and four alternating 30-sec song and 30-sec silent periods. Observers should also look for and listen for Henslow’s Sparrows while traveling between points and transects and record any individuals detected.

An mp3 playback file is available upon request.

DWR Henslow’s Sparrow Acoustic Survey Protocols Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Henslow’s Sparrows (Centronyx henslowii) are listed Threatened in Virginia. Anyone proposing to band or otherwise handle one of these animals must be issued a Scientific Collections Permit by DWR. Please see www.dwr.virginia.gov/permits for additional information. Permits are not necessary for acoustic-only surveys.

Henslow’s Sparrow is a cryptic species most often detected by its vocalizations. During the breeding season, territorial birds give a short, simple high-pitched song. This inconspicuous vocalization can be easily overlooked when it is masked by ambient noise or otherwise missed if distances between the observer and the singing bird are too great.

Surveyor Qualifications: Provide documentation to DWR showing ability to identify the species by sight and sound, prior experience, and high-frequency hearing before surveys. Survey window: May 15–June 30.

Survey Protocols: Surveys should be performed at least twice during the survey window to increase the probability of detecting birds that are present. Surveys at each site should be conducted 7-21 days apart. Surveys should not be conducted during rain or when wind speeds are greater than 7 mph. Surveys should take place between sunrise and 10 a.m. on a given day. Although males may sing at night, diurnal surveys ensure that observers can look for visual cues of the species’ presence, rather than conducting surveys solely by ear.

The survey area should encompass all suitable habitats for the species at a site. It is estimated that an appropriate detection radius (by ear) for singing Henslow’s Sparrow is less than 100 meters. Therefore, surveys should take place along parallel transects placed no more than 200 meters apart, with points placed along the transects at no greater than 200 meter intervals. At each of these points, the surveyor(s) should stop for duration of 5 minutes. All Henslow’s Sparrows detected by sight and/or sound during this time should be recorded. Call playback should be used in order to improve the probability of detection.

Playback should consist of periods of the male’s primary advertising song alternating with silent periods. A recommended sequence is a one minute silent period, and four alternating 30-sec song and 30-sec silent periods. Observers should also look for and listen for Henslow’s Sparrows while traveling between points and transects and record any individuals detected.

An mp3 playback file is available upon request.

DWR Loggerhead Shrike Acoustic Survey Protocols Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Loggerhead Shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus) are listed Threatened in Virginia. Anyone proposing to band or otherwise handle one of these animals must be issued a Scientific Collections Permit by DWR. Please see www.dwr.virginia.gov/permits for additional information. Permits are not necessary for acoustic-only surveys.

Surveyor Qualifications: Documentation of the following qualifications by any proposed surveyor should be provided to DWR for review and approval ahead of performing surveys: 1) ability to identify the species by sight and by sound 2) good hearing in order to detect the species by its vocalizations 3) prior field experience with the species preferred Survey Timing: Loggerhead Shrike surveys should be conducted between April 1 and July 31. In case of multiple surveys, we strongly recommend that a minimum of two surveys are completed prior to July. We are not supportive of surveying for this species ONLY during the month of July.

Weather conditions during the survey should be dry with a wind of less than 10 mph. Depending on the time of year during which surveys are conducted, they should be completed between dawn and 11 am and/or between 4 pm and dusk, which corresponds to the time of day when shrikes are most active. Shrikes usually have a period of inactivity during the heat of the day in the summer months, but surveys may be conducted throughout the day when the weather is cooler. Areas that provide suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat for the species should be surveyed. This includes any open/early successional habitats both on the target site and adjacent sites which can be surveyed without trespass.

Survey Protocols: Loggerhead shrikes vocalize infrequently relative to other songbirds, such that its presence is most often confirmed by sight rather than by ear. It is therefore imperative that the surveyor be thorough in visually searching the site. During the surveys, the biologist should traverse the entire area slowly on foot, paying particular attention to perching structures and investigating potential sightings or vocalizations of loggerhead shrikes where detected. All potential perches (utility lines, fence lines, dead branches of live trees, stalks of robust herbaceous plants [ex.

Mullein], brush piles, shrubs and saplings) should be scanned with binoculars or a spotting scope for perched shrikes. Shrikes may also be visible while flying between perches or while hunting on the ground. In addition to stopping periodically to scan, listen and watch for shrikes, the biologist should use vocalization playback (see below) to increase the probability of detecting shrikes at occupied sites. All potential nesting trees and shrubs should be inspected for shrike presence. The location of any shrikes encountered should be recorded on a map of the area. In addition, fences and thorny trees and shrubs at the site should be examined for the presence of impaled prey items, which may include insects and small vertebrates.

Vocalization Playback: We recommend using a portable device with connected external speakers to broadcast playback. Playback should be delivered at a volume where a human observer could recognize the call at >250 meters under windless conditions. This should be tested in advance to determine appropriate volume but generally will mean that playback should be broadcast as loudly as possible without distortion. If possible, volume should be increased if survey conditions are windy. During playback, the speaker should be rotated so that sound would be broadcast towards all possible nesting or perching habitat. Shrikes may respond to playback by vocalizing or by investigating playback without vocalizing or may not respond at all. We recommend that playback be broadcast at least once at every site during the “scanning” period described above, and that the surveyor continue to visually search for shrike during playback. It may be necessary to use playback more than one time over larger sites, roughly every 250 meters.

A playback sound file consisting of 20 seconds each of song, begging and alarm vocalizations, each separated by one minute of silence, is available upon request.

DWR Loggerhead Shrike Acoustic Survey Protocols: Loggerhead Shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus) are Threatened in Virginia. Handling requires a Scientific Collections Permit from DWR; see www.dwr.virginia.gov/permits. Permits are not needed for acoustic-only surveys.

Surveyor Qualifications: Provide DWR with documentation of ability to identify the species visually and by sound, good hearing, and preferred prior experience before surveys. Survey Timing: Conduct Loggerhead Shrike surveys from April 1 to July 31, with at least two before July; surveys only in July are discouraged.

Survey weather must be dry with wind under 10 mph. Conduct surveys between dawn-11 am and/or 4 pm-dusk when shrikes are active. Suitable nesting/foraging habitats, including open/early successional areas on and near the site, should be surveyed without trespass.

Survey Protocols: Loggerhead shrikes vocalize infrequently relative to other songbirds, such that its presence is most often confirmed by sight rather than by ear. It is therefore imperative that the surveyor be thorough in visually searching the site. During the surveys, the biologist should traverse the entire area slowly on foot, paying particular attention to perching structures and investigating potential sightings or vocalizations of loggerhead shrikes where detected. All potential perches (utility lines, fence lines, dead branches of live trees, stalks of robust herbaceous plants [ex.

Scan potential perches with binoculars or scopes; shrikes may fly or hunt on ground. Use vocalization playback to enhance detection. Record shrike locations, and check fences and thorny plants for impaled prey.

Vocalization Playback: We recommend using a portable device with connected external speakers to broadcast playback. Playback should be delivered at a volume where a human observer could recognize the call at >250 meters under windless conditions. This should be tested in advance to determine appropriate volume but generally will mean that playback should be broadcast as loudly as possible without distortion. If possible, volume should be increased if survey conditions are windy. During playback, the speaker should be rotated so that sound would be broadcast towards all possible nesting or perching habitat. Shrikes may respond to playback by vocalizing or by investigating playback without vocalizing or may not respond at all. We recommend that playback be broadcast at least once at every site during the “scanning” period described above, and that the surveyor continue to visually search for shrike during playback. It may be necessary to use playback more than one time over larger sites, roughly every 250 meters.

A 20-second playback file of song, begging, and alarm calls, separated by one minute silence, is available upon request.

Survey Protocol for Mabee’s Salamander (Ambystoma mabeei) and Tiger Salamander (A. tigrinum) In Virginia - 2021 Mabee’s Salamander (Photo: J.D. Kleopfer) Tiger Salamander (Photo: J.D. Kleopfer)

By John (J.D.) Kleopfer The Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources

In cooperation with: Alan Savitzky (Old Dominion University); Joseph Mitchell (Mitchell Ecological Research Service, LLC); Chris Hobson (Virginia Natural Heritage Program) Purpose: This document provides DWR’s approved survey protocols for Mabee’s Salamanders and Eastern Tiger Salamanders in Virginia. Any person proposing to survey a site for presence of these species should follow these protocols, unless otherwise approved by DWR.

These species often do not breed on an annual basis; therefore surveys should be conducted for 2 consecutive years. Adults have been reported moving as early as December and as late as March. Although the fossorial nature of the adults makes them hard to find, searching under logs around the edges of the wetland during this time period should still be conducted. Be aware that searching for the adults can result in a false-negative determination of presence/absence. A more successful methodology is surveying for the larvae. The larvae of both species occupy the pools from February through May.

Each site should survey at least 4 times per year, with each survey period at least one week apart. Fifty percent of the site should be surveyed during each survey period.

Adults Although both species typically are found moving to breeding sites during February and March, adult Tiger Salamander (A. tigrinum) have been found as early as January. When surveying for adults, search both in the water and under cover objects around the area.

Surveys are best done at night after "warmish" winter rains. Egg masses are similar in appearance to Spotted Salamander egg masses (Photo E), but are “looser” and not as well organized (Photo F).

Larvae Spring (late-March-May) – You can perform dip net survey for larvae during the day or night. If you survey during the day, be sure to dip net the leaf-litter where the larvae seek refuge. At night, the larvae can be found in the water column. Use a fine mesh dip net or seine net (1.5-7mm). A seine net can cover a large area quickly and is very effective for night surveys. Mabee’s Salamander (Ambystoma mabeei) larvae (picture A) have a distinctive longitudinal white-stripe. Although larvae maybe present as early as February, in April and May the larvae are larger and more easily identified. Ambystoma tigrinum larvae (Photo B) can often be found late in the summer.

Special Note Marbled Salamanders (A. opacum) and Spotted Salamanders (A. maculatum) are common throughout the Coastal Plain of Virginia and are sometimes found in the same pools as Mabee’s salamanders. Marbled Salamander larvae are distinguished by a series of longitudinal, very small golden dots on their sides (Photo C). Spotted Salamander (Photo D) larvae are rather drab and lack any distinguishing markings of other sympatric Ambystomids.

For additional information: www.virginiaherpetological society.com A) Mabee’s Salamander larvae B) Tiger Salamander larvae Photo: Scott Bolick

C) Marbled Salamander larvae D) Spotted Salamander larvae E) Spotted Salamander egg masses F) Tiger Salamander egg masses

Survey Protocol for Mabee’s Salamander (Ambystoma mabeei) and Tiger Salamander (A. tigrinum) In Virginia - 2021 Mabee’s Salamander (Photo: J.D. Kleopfer) Tiger Salamander (Photo: J.D. Kleopfer)

By John (J.D.) Kleopfer The Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources

In cooperation with: Alan Savitzky (Old Dominion University); Joseph Mitchell (Mitchell Ecological Research Service, LLC); Chris Hobson (Virginia Natural Heritage Program) Purpose: This document provides DWR’s approved survey protocols for Mabee’s Salamanders and Eastern Tiger Salamanders in Virginia. Any person proposing to survey a site for presence of these species should follow these protocols, unless otherwise approved by DWR.

These species often do not breed annually; therefore, surveys should be conducted for 2 consecutive years. Adults have been reported moving as early as December and as late as March. Although fossorial adults are hard to find, searching under logs around wetland edges during this period should be done. Be aware that searching for adults can result in false negatives. A more effective method is surveying larvae, which occupy pools from February through May.

Each site should be surveyed at least 4 times annually, with each survey at least one week apart. Fifty percent of the site should be surveyed each time.

Adults: Although both species typically move to breeding sites in February and March, Tiger Salamanders (A. tigrinum) have been found as early as January. When surveying adults, search in water and under cover objects.

Surveys are best at night after "warmish" winter rains. Egg masses resemble Spotted Salamander egg masses (Photo E), but are looser and less organized (Photo F).

Larvae: Spring (late March–May) – Dip net for larvae during day or night. During the day, dip net leaf-litter; at night, larvae are in water. Use fine mesh dip or seine net (1.5–7mm). Seine nets cover large areas and are effective at night. Mabee’s Salamander (Ambystoma mabeei) larvae (Photo A) have a distinctive white stripe. Larvae may be present as early as February; in April–May, they are larger and easier to identify. Ambystoma tigrinum larvae (Photo B) are often found late summer.

Special Note: Marbled Salamanders (A. opacum) and Spotted Salamanders (A. maculatum) are common throughout Virginia’s Coastal Plain and may share pools with Mabee’s salamanders. Marbled Salamander larvae have small golden dots along their sides (Photo C). Spotted Salamander (Photo D) larvae are drab and lack distinctive markings of other Ambystomids.

For additional information: www.virginiaherpetological society.com A) Mabee’s Salamander larvae B) Tiger Salamander larvae Photo: Scott Bolick

C) Marbled Salamander larvae D) Spotted Salamander larvae E) Spotted Salamander egg masses F) Tiger Salamander egg masses

ACOE Permit Applicants Scoping for Wildlife Impacts Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Purpose: This document provides those applying for Army Corps of Engineer (ACOE) permits information about how to scope projects for wildlife species and designated resources.

We assume ACOE staff are appropriately coordinating with the USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries regarding potential impacts upon federal-listed species. As such, this document is written to address concerns for wildlife that are only state-listed.

Coordination with DWR ESS: Due to staffing limitations, we are unable to review and provide comments on your Corps permit application at this time. To ensure compliance with Virginia’s Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-563 through 29.1-570), we recommend adherence to the following procedures.

1. Conduct a preliminary desktop analysis to evaluate your project’s potential impacts upon the Commonwealth’s wildlife resources by accessing our online information system, the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS) and using the Geographic Search function to generate an Initial Project Assessment (IPA) report.

a. Access VAFWIS at this link: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp If you are not already a VAFWIS subscriber, you should request to become one by emailing a request to VAFWIS_support@DWR.virginia.gov. VAFWIS Subscriptions are free of charge. As a subscriber, one is able to generate an IPA for the project area (project site plus a minimum 2-mile buffer) which generates a list of imperiled wildlife and designated wildlife resources known from the project area.

Alternatively, you may contact our Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Program Manager, Alicia Motz, at Alicia.Motz@dwr.virginia.gov to request access to the Wildlife Mapping and Environmental Review Map Service (WERMS) which allows you to download GIS data into your own system.

b. Access information about the location of state-listed bat hibernacula and roosts from the following locations:

Little Brown Bats and Tricolored Bats: https://www.dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

c. Access up to date information about the location and status of bald eagle nests in Virginia by accessing the Center for Conservation Biology’s Eagle Nest Locator at https://ccbbirds.org/what-we-do/research/species-of-concern/virginia-eagles/nest-locator/

1. Make a determination about what, if any, impacts upon state-listed-only species and/or their habitats and any DWR designated resources may result from the work proposed based on the results of step #1 above. If any adverse impacts are likely to result, use the information and guidance available at the link below to determine how to avoid and minimize such impacts to ensure consistency with the Wildlife and Inland Fisheries and Commonwealth Lands Enforceable Policies of the Virginia Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program. If the project for which you are applying will also / has also received a VA Water Protection (VWP) or Va Pollution Discharge Elimination System (VPDES) permit from VA DEQ, a permit from VA’s Marine Resources Commission, and/or other permits or processes requiring DWR review, the results of that review should be included in your analysis.

DWR additional information: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/wies-additional-resources/

Map of VA’s Coastal Zone: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4078/637461463603670 000

Virginia CZM Program Enforceable Policies: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8605/637556326054300 000

1. Include the following information in the NWP application and supporting documents that you send to the Corps in satisfaction of Regional Condition #14. The Corps will coordinate with DWR, as needed, to ensure Coastal Zone Consistency:

a. The VAFWIS IPA results depicting confirmed documentation(s) of state-listed listed species and/or DWR-designated resources within 2 miles of the project site. b. Your analysis of potential adverse impacts upon these species and/or resources. c. Any necessary avoidance and/or minimization measures to ensure compliance with the Virginia CZM Program Enforceable Policies.

DWR review and determination: Upon coordination with the Corps including review of the NWP application and impact analysis, as necessary, DWR will either concur with the consistency determination or recommend to the Corps additional measures necessary to ensure issuance of the NWP is consistent with the CZMA.

ACOE Permit Applicants Scoping for Wildlife Impacts Wildlife Information and Environmental Services Purpose: This document provides ACOE permit applicants guidance on scoping projects for wildlife species and designated resources.

We assume ACOE staff coordinate with USFWS and NOAA Fisheries on federal-listed species; this document addresses only state-listed wildlife concerns.

Coordination with DWR ESS: Due to staffing limits, we cannot review your Corps permit now. To comply with Virginia’s Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-563–29.1-570), follow these procedures.

1. Conduct a desktop analysis using VAFWIS and Geographic Search to generate an Initial Project Assessment (IPA) report on potential impacts to wildlife resources.

a. Access VAFWIS at this link: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp If you are not already a VAFWIS subscriber, you should request to become one by emailing a request to VAFWIS_support@DWR.virginia.gov. VAFWIS Subscriptions are free of charge. As a subscriber, one is able to generate an IPA for the project area (project site plus a minimum 2-mile buffer) which generates a list of imperiled wildlife and designated wildlife resources known from the project area.

Alternatively, contact GIS Program Manager Alicia Motz at Alicia.Motz@dwr.virginia.gov to access the Wildlife Mapping and Environmental Review Map Service (WERMS) for GIS data download.

b. Access locations of state-listed bat hibernacula and roosts at:

Little Brown Bats and Tricolored Bats: https://www.dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

c. Access current bald eagle nest locations and status via the Center for Conservation Biology’s Eagle Nest Locator at https://ccbbirds.org/what-we-do/research/species-of-concern/virginia-eagles/nest-locator/

1. Determine potential impacts on state-listed species/habitats and DWR resources from step #1. If impacts are likely, use provided guidance to avoid/minimize impacts for CZM consistency. Include results of other relevant permits in your analysis.

DWR additional information: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/wies-additional-resources/

Map of VA’s Coastal Zone: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4078/637461463603670 000

Virginia CZM Enforceable Policies: https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8605/637556326054300000

1. Include this info in the NWP application and supporting docs for Regional Condition #14. The Corps will coordinate with DWR to ensure Coastal Zone Consistency:

a. VAFWIS IPA results showing confirmed documentation of state-listed species and DWR resources within 2 miles. b. Your analysis of potential impacts. c. Necessary avoidance/minimization measures for CZM compliance.

DWR review: After coordinating with the Corps and reviewing the NWP application and impacts, DWR will concur or recommend additional measures for CZMA consistency.

ACOE Staff Wildlife Scoping Department of Wildlife Resources Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides Army Corps of Engineer (ACOE) staff information about how to scope proposed projects for wildlife species and designated resources.

This document includes guidance for coordination with DWR to ensure the Corps-issued permits are consistent with the Virginia State Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of the Code of Virginia, §§29.1-563 through 29.1-570).

Assuming ACOE staff are appropriately coordinating with the USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries regarding potential impacts upon federal-listed species ACOE staff should only coordinate with DWR, per the below, if potential impacts upon state-listed species and/or DWR-designated resources have been described/documented from the project area.

Scoping: To scope any project location (2 mile radius from project boundaries) to determine if listed wildlife and/or designated resources under our jurisdiction are known from the project area, access the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/ and perform a Geographic Search Initial Project Assessment (IPA) for the project location.

Data Results: If any listed species and/or designated resource is confirmed from the project area, coordinate the project/permit application with DWR according to the project activities described below: A. State-Listed Species (state Threatened or Endangered wildlife)

1. Fishes: Coordinate with DWR when one or more state-listed fish and/or Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Water) is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities*:

• Instream work (defined as work within any channel experiencing flow) located in a designated TE Water.
• Instream work located at a site within 1 river mile upstream of a designated TE Water.

• If the instream work time of year restriction (TOYR) for the listed fish or fishes (sometimes requiring more than one TOYR) is written into the permit/approval as a required condition of the permit/approval issued by your agency for the project, coordination with DWR regarding protection of the listed fish(es) is not necessary. TOYR for listed fishes, and other species are located online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf .

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend the following to protect the unique habitats necessary for Virginia’s listed fishes to persist in our environment:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

1. Mussels, Snails, and Crayfish: Coordinate with DWR anytime one or more state- listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish; and/or Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Water) is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), if the project proposes one or more of the following activities*:

• instream work located in a designated TE Water
• instream work located in perennial waters that drain to the designated TE Water

These species cannot move out of harm’s way like fish often can. As such, we need to ensure that any individuals of these species are either not present within the instream area of affect (instream work site plus some distance up and downstream, depending on the scope and type of work) or that any individuals of these species are relocated from the area of affect prior to instream work. The only way to do this is for a species survey to be performed within the area of affect. DWR must review the project in order to recommend the appropriate type and length of survey at the necessary locations. *If the only instream work proposed is within intermittent or ephemeral streams, a survey is not necessary. In this case, if the instream work time of year restriction (TOYR) for the listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish (sometimes requiring more than one TOYR) is written into the permit/approval as a required condition of the permit/approval issued by your agency for the project, coordination with DWR regarding protection of the listed mussel, snail, and/or crayfish is not necessary. TOYR for listed species are located online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf .

In addition to the TOYR for instream work, we recommend the following to protect the unique habitats necessary for Virginia’s listed aquatic fauna to persist in our environment:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

1. Semi-Aquatic Species: amphibians, wood turtles, bog turtles, eastern chicken turtles: Coordinate with DWR when one or more state-listed semi-aquatic species, or designated resource is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities:

• Wood Turtles: o instream work located in a designated TE Water o instream work located in perennial tributaries of the designated TE Water o Work in uplands located within 900 ft of designated TE Water
• Amphibians: o Impacts upon wetlands o Upland impacts located within 900 ft of wetlands
• Chicken Turtles: o Impacts upon open water features o Upland impacts located within 900 ft of open water features
• Bog Turtles: o Impacts upon emergent wetlands o Instream impacts o Upland impacts within 900 ft of a stream or emergent wetland

These species also cannot move out of harm’s way. In addition, the habitats that support them are unique, disappearing on the landscape, and their loss cannot be appropriately mitigated.

As such, to ensure protection of these listed species, we need to know if the species is likely present on site, as determined by habitat assessment and/or species surveys.

DWR must review the project in order to recommend the appropriate type of habitat assessments and survey areas at the necessary locations.

1. Birds: Coordinate with DWR when one or more state-listed bird, or designated resource is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities:

• Vegetation removal (trees, shrubs, grasses)
• Ground clearing, grubbing
• Habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes
• Use of loud machinery (dredges, construction equipment, cranes)
• Bald Eagles: To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.

1. Bats: Coordinate with DWR when one or more state-listed bat or designated resource is confirmed from the project area (per the VAFWIS IPA), only if the project proposes one or more of the following activities:

To determine if your site is located within one of these buffers, please refer to the applications found at the links below and refer to the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), as directed.

• Little Brown and Tricolored Bats: Projects located within the regulatory buffer placed around a designated hibernaculum or roost site and/or VAFWIS confirms these bats from the project area, coordinate with DWR if the project proposes tree removal, timbering, prescribed burn, or any impacts upon a hibernaculum entrance or within 150 of a roost site. To determine if your site is located within one of these buffers, please refer to the applications found at the links below and refer to the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), as directed. https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

• Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR anytime VAFWIS confirms Rafinesque’s Easter Big-eared Bats from the project area IF your project includes tree removal, timbering, removal/modification of an abandoned human structure or work on large culverts.

1. Reptiles (other than those in “Semi-aquatic” section above): ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for state-listed reptiles are returned IF the project includes work within suitable habitats as described below:

• Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, associated shrublands, and freshwater wetlands particularly if located in Virginia Beach.

• Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach.

1. Terrestrial Invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR when hits for terrestrial invertebrates are returned ONLY if your project includes ground disturbance (at or below plow line).

1. Aquatic Cave invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR when hits for terrestrial invertebrates are returned ONLY if your project includes disturbance to karst habitat or the waters feeding that habitat.

B. Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) Only coordinate your project with DWR if VAFWIS returns a “hit” (documentation within 2 miles of your project site) for a tiered species of freshwater mussel, IF the project includes instream work and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal / grubbing) within 300 ft of the stream bank.

Otherwise, applicants should reference the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan (available through www.bewildvirginia.gov) to determine what threats are known to the documented species, what suitable habitat for these species consists of and how to best protect them and their habitats from harm.

C. Additional Impact Minimization Recommendations: 1) Instream work:

We recommend conducting any in-stream activities during low or no-flow conditions, using non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains to isolate the construction area, blocking no more than 50% of the streamflow at any given time (minimal overlap of construction footprint notwithstanding), stockpiling excavated material in a manner that prevents reentry into the stream, restoring original streambed and streambank contours, revegetating barren areas with native vegetation, and implementing strict erosion and sediment control measures. We recommend that instream work be designed and performed in a manner that minimizes impacts upon natural streamflow and movement of resident aquatic species. If a dam and pump-around must be used, we recommend it be used for as limited a time as possible and that water returned to the stream be free of sediment and excess turbidity. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap.

To minimize harm to the aquatic environment and its residents resulting from use of the Tremie method to install concrete, installation of grout bags, and traditional pouring of concrete, we recommend that such activities occur only in the dry, allowing all concrete to harden prior to contact with open water. Due to future maintenance costs associated with culverts, and the loss of riparian and aquatic habitat, we prefer stream crossings to be constructed via clear-span bridges. However, if this is not possible, we recommend countersinking any culverts below the streambed at least 6 inches, or the use of bottomless culverts, to allow passage of aquatic organisms. We also recommend the installation of floodplain culverts to carry bankfull discharges.

2) Land-based activities:

To minimize overall impacts to wildlife and our natural resources, we offer the following comments about development activities: we recommend that the applicant avoid and minimize impacts to undisturbed forest, wetlands, and streams to the fullest extent practicable. Avoidance and minimization of impact may include relocating stream channels as opposed to filling or channelizing as well as using, and incorporating into the development plan, a natural stream channel design and forested riparian buffers.

We recommend maintaining undisturbed naturally vegetated buffers of at least 100 feet in width around all on-site wetlands and on both sides of all perennial and intermittent streams. We recommend maintaining wooded lots to the fullest extent possible. We generally do not support proposals to mitigate wetland impacts through the construction of stormwater management ponds, nor do we support the creation of in-stream stormwater management ponds.

We recommend that the stormwater controls for this project be designed to replicate and maintain the hydrographic condition of the site prior to the change in landscape. This should include, but not be limited to, utilizing bioretention areas, and minimizing the use of curb and gutter in favor of grassed swales.

Bioretention areas (also called rain gardens) and grass swales are components of Low Impact Development (LID).

They are designed to capture stormwater runoff as close to the source as possible and allow it to slowly infiltrate into the surrounding soil. They benefit natural resources by filtering pollutants and decreasing downstream runoff volumes.

We recommend that all tree removal and ground clearing adhere to a time of year restriction (TOYR) protective of resident and migratory songbird nesting from March 15 through August 15 of any year.

We recommend adherence to erosion and sediment controls during ground disturbance. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap. 3) Resource Protection Recommendations: Stream buffers:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent or perennial streams, including those known to support wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to waters known to support listed aquatic species.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters known to support listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on all sides of any wetland. We recommend avoiding or minimizing wetland impacts as much as possible.

• We recommend no impacts upon wetlands or vernal pools known to support any listed species. We also recommend protecting from impacts and preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 900 feet on all sides of any wetland known to support a listed species.

Colonial Waterbird Colony buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting or enhancing, an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around any identified waterbird colonies (rookeries).

This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

ACOE Staff Wildlife Scoping Department of Wildlife Resources Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document provides Army Corps of Engineer (ACOE) staff information about how to scope proposed projects for wildlife species and designated resources.

Includes guidance for coordinating with DWR to ensure permits align with Virginia Endangered Species Act (Article 6, Chapter 5, Title 29.1 of Virginia Code, §§29.1-563 to 29.1-570).

If ACOE coordinates with USFWS/NOAA regarding federal species impacts, coordination with DWR is only needed if impacts to state-listed species or DWR resources are documented in the project area.

To scope a project (within 2 miles), access VAFWIS at https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/ and perform an IPA for the site.

If listed species or resources are confirmed, coordinate with DWR per project activities: A. State-Listed Species (threatened or endangered wildlife).

1. Fishes: Coordinate with DWR if state-listed fish or TE Waters are confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA), and if the project involves specified activities.

• Instream work within any flowing channel in a designated TE Water.
• Instream work within 1 mile upstream of a designated TE Water.

• If the project permit includes the instream work TOYR for listed fish(es), coordination with DWR is unnecessary. TOYRs are online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf.

Beyond the TOYR for instream work, we recommend measures to protect habitats vital for Virginia’s listed fishes.

• Protect a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;

• Protect a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or

• Protect a native vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

1. Coordinate with DWR when state-listed mussels, snails, crayfish, or TE Water are confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA) and the project proposes listed activities*:

• instream work located in a designated TE Water
• Instream work in perennial waters draining to the designated TE Water

Listed species cannot move away from harm; surveys are needed within the affected area unless work is only in intermittent/ephemeral streams and TOYRs are included in permits. DWR reviews to recommend survey types and locations. TOYRs are online at https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/Time-of-Year-Restrictions.pdf.

Beyond the TOYR, we recommend measures to protect habitats for Virginia’s listed aquatic fauna.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

1. Coordinate with DWR for semi-aquatic species (amphibians, wood, bog, chicken turtles) confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA) if the project proposes listed activities:

• Wood Turtles: instream work in designated TE Water, perennial tributaries, or uplands within 900 ft of TE Water
• Amphibians: impacts on wetlands or uplands within 900 ft of wetlands
• Chicken Turtles: impacts on open water or uplands within 900 ft of open water
• Bog Turtles: impacts on emergent wetlands, instream, or uplands within 900 ft of streams or wetlands

These species cannot escape harm; their habitats are unique, disappearing, and cannot be adequately mitigated.

To protect these species, determine their likely presence via habitat assessments or surveys.

DWR reviews projects to recommend habitat assessments and survey locations.

1. Coordinate with DWR for listed birds or resources confirmed in the project area (per VAFWIS IPA) if proposing listed activities:

• Vegetation removal (trees, shrubs, grasses)
• Ground clearing, grubbing
• Habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes
• Use of loud machinery (dredges, construction equipment, cranes)
• To protect bald eagles per the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, use CCB Eagle Nest Locator to check for active nests. If present, follow guidelines and coordinate with USFWS for impacts or permits.

1. Coordinate with DWR for listed bats (per VAFWIS IPA) if proposing activities listed below in the project area:

Check buffers using the links below and VAFWIS as directed.

• Coordinate with DWR for Little Brown and Tricolored Bats if within buffer zones around hibernacula or roosts (per VAFWIS), especially for tree removal, timbering, burns, or impacts within 150 ft of roosts. See https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/.

• Coordinate with DWR for Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats confirmed by VAFWIS if the project involves tree removal, timbering, structures, or large culverts.

1. Coordinate with DWR for state-listed reptiles only if hits are returned and the project involves suitable habitats below:

• Eastern Glass Lizards: work on beaches, dunes, shrublands, or freshwater wetlands, especially in Virginia Beach.

• Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach.

1. Coordinate with DWR for terrestrial invertebrates only if hits are returned and the project involves ground disturbance (at or below plow line).

1. Coordinate with DWR for aquatic cave invertebrates if hits are returned and the project disturbs karst habitat or feeding waters.

For WAP SGCN, coordinate with DWR if VAFWIS shows a hit within 2 miles and project involves instream or earth disturbance within 300 ft of stream.

If no hit, consult the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan at www.bewildvirginia.gov for threats, habitat, and protection measures.

C. Additional Impact Minimization Recommendations: 1) Instream work:

Conduct instream work during low/no-flow, using non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains, limiting flow blockage to 50%, stockpiling excavated material to prevent reentry, restoring stream contours, revegetating with native plants, and applying erosion controls. Use natural fiber mats to reduce wildlife entanglement.

To minimize harm to the aquatic environment and its residents resulting from use of the Tremie method to install concrete, installation of grout bags, and traditional pouring of concrete, we recommend that such activities occur only in the dry, allowing all concrete to harden prior to contact with open water. Due to future maintenance costs associated with culverts, and the loss of riparian and aquatic habitat, we prefer stream crossings to be constructed via clear-span bridges. However, if this is not possible, we recommend countersinking any culverts below the streambed at least 6 inches, or the use of bottomless culverts, to allow passage of aquatic organisms. We also recommend the installation of floodplain culverts to carry bankfull discharges.

2) Land-based activities:

To minimize impacts, avoid and reduce disturbance to forests, wetlands, and streams, including relocating streams, using natural channel designs, and maintaining riparian buffers.

Maintain at least 100-foot vegetated buffers around wetlands and streams. Avoid mitigation via stormwater ponds or in-stream stormwater management ponds.

Design stormwater controls to replicate pre-development hydrograph, including bioretention and minimizing curb/gutter in favor of grassed swales.

Bioretention and grass swales are LID components.

They capture and infiltrate stormwater, filtering pollutants and reducing downstream runoff.

Tree removal and clearing should follow TOYRs from March 15 to August 15 to protect nesting songbirds.

Use erosion controls during disturbance, with natural fiber mats (coir, jute, burlap) to reduce wildlife entanglement. Stream buffers are recommended.

• Protect a native vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all streams, including those supporting wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• Protect a native vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of perennial tributaries to waters supporting listed aquatic species.

• We recommend protecting a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters supporting listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend protecting a naturally vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on all sides of any wetland. We also recommend avoiding or minimizing wetland impacts.

• We recommend no impacts on wetlands or vernal pools supporting listed species. We also recommend protecting, preserving, planting, or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 900 ft around wetlands supporting listed species.

Colonial Waterbird Colony buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting or enhancing, an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around any identified waterbird colonies (rookeries).

Maintains sightlines and habitat buffers for nesting and future habitat suitability.

Inter-agency Coordination Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

(WIES)

Purpose: This document depicts which state and federal agencies have authority for the management and protection of listed plants and animals in Virginia.

Species Status and Responsible Agency: Species Status and Type Responsible Agency in Virginia Federal Endangered (FE) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH Federal Threatened (FT) Animals USFWS (or NOAA) and DWR Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH Federal Candidate (FC) Animals USFWS Plants and insects USFWS and DCR-DNH Federal Proposed (FP) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) Federal Species of Concern (FS) USFWS (at applicant’s discretion) State Endangered (SE) Animals DWR Plants and insects DCR-DNH State Threatened (ST) Animals DWR Plants and insects DCR-DNH Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)^ DWR (at applicant’s discretion) * the VA Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) retains legal authority for the protection of all plants and listed insects. However, through a memorandum of agreement with DCR-DNH, coordination regarding these resources should be initiated with DCR-DNH.

Coordination Recommendations If DWR data accessed through VAFWIS or WERMS returns a documented record of a listed species* or designated resource within 2 miles of your project, refer to the information below, organized by data type, to determine IF you need to coordinate with DWR. Coordination with DWR should be initiated by submission to ESSProjects@dwr.virginia.gov or ProjectReview@DWR.virginia.gov, to determine which is best please see here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ .

DWR will need at least 30 days to review the submission.

Species Observations (SppObs) – The Species Observation dataset includes all verified species documentations maintained by DWR. This dataset is mostly populated with information about nongame species. Follow the above guidelines (coordination recommendations by species status) for coordination if a species is documented by SppObs within the search area.

Bald Eagle Nests (BAEANests) – The Bald Eagle Nests dataset includes bald eagle nest locations maintained by DWR. Contact the USFWS for recommendations regarding bald eagle protection.

Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts (BECAR) – The Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts dataset includes the locations of bald eagle concentration areas, defined as 660 feet landward or channelward of the shoreline, and documented roosting sites maintained by DWR. Contact the USFWS for recommendations regarding bald eagle protection.

Bat Hibernacula and Roosts (Winter Habitat and Roosts) – This dataset includes documented roost sites and major hibernacula for Northern Long-eared Bats, Tricolored Bats, and Little Brown Bats. These sites are ascribed a regulatory buffer which indicates the need for agency coordination, either with DWR, the USFWS or both. Please coordinate with DWR and/or the USFWS if your project site is overlayed by one of these regulatory buffers. We recommend adherence to the 4 (d) Rule for NLEBs.

Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) – The Threatened and Endangered Species Waters dataset includes the location of waters in which a listed species has been documented and which agency biologists have determined are currently occupied by such species. Coordinate with DWR any time a TEWater is documented from your project area and it or waters upstream of it are proposed for impacts.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – The Anadromous Fish Use Areas dataset includes the locations of streams known to provide migratory and spawning habitats for anadromous fish.

Coordinate with DWR any time an Anadromous Fish Use Area is documented within your project area and it or waters upstream of it are proposed for impacts.

Cold Water Streams – The Cold Water Streams dataset includes the locations of waters designated as cold water habitat. Many of these streams represent designated wild trout streams. Coordinate with DWR any time a Cold Water Stream is documented within your project area and it or waters upstream of it are proposed for impacts.

Stocked Trout Waters – The Stocked Trout Waters dataset includes the locations of waters currently stocked with trout by DWR and those suitable for stocking. Coordinate with DWR any time a Stocked Trout Water is documented within your project area and proposed for impacts.

Colonial Waterbird (CWB) – This dataset includes all documented locations of colonial waterbird colonies maintained by DWR. Coordinate with DWR any time a colonial waterbird colony has been documented within your search area and project activities are proposed to occur with 0.5 mile of the colony.

DWR Lands (boat ramps, WMA’s, Fish Hatcheries) – The DWR Lands dataset includes locations of all DWR facilities. Coordinate with DWR any time your project is located adjacent to or will impact DWR property identified by the DWR Lands dataset.

Predicted Habitat, Aquatic and Terrestrial – The Predicted Habitat dataset includes the locations of habitats that, through agency modeling efforts, have been identified as potential habitat for listed or WAP tiered species. Coordination with DWR is NOT necessary if a species is only documented by this dataset.

Impediments to Fish Passage – The Impediments dataset includes the locations of known impediments to aquatic species passage. Coordination with DWR is not necessary based on documentations only from this dataset.

Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) – NO coordination necessary if species only documented by this dataset.

Breeding Bird Atlas (BBA) - No coordination necessary if species only documented by this dataset.

Christmas Bird Count (CBC) - No coordination Necessary if species only documented by this dataset.

• Time sensitivity: Any data 30 years old or older is considered historic and does not need to be evaluated when making coordination decisions

DWR Contacts DWR Nongame Taxonomic Expert Contact List: Use the table below to identify the appropriate contact to answer questions or provide information regarding nongame species, including listed and tiered species. This is for consultation only. DWR official comments should be provided by the WIES program.

Reptiles/Amphibians: John (JD) Kleopfer 804-829-6703 John.Kleopfer@dwr.virginia.gov Birds: Jeff Cooper(raptors) Sergio Harding (other nongame birds) 540-538-1021 804-367-0143 Jeff.Cooper@dwr.virginia.gov Sergio.Harding@dwr.virginia.gov

Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates/Terrestrial Invertebrates: Brian Watson 434-525-7522 Brian.Watson@dwr.virginia.gov Fishes: Mike Pinder(except Atlantic sturgeon) Clint Morgeson (Atlantic sturgeon) 540-961-8387 804-829-6580 Mike.Pinder@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Mammals: Rick Reynolds 540-248-9360 Rick.Reynolds@dwr.virginia.gov

Eastern Shore: (birds, sea turtles, sea mammals) Ruth Boettcher 757-709-0766 Ruth.Boettcher@dwr.virginia.gov

DWR Common Wildlife Species and Resources Contact List: Use the table below to identify the appropriate contact to answer any questions or provide information regarding common wildlife and/or wildlife-related recreation in your area. Link to DWR regional map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/DWR-Region-Map.pdf

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov

Inter-agency Coordination Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

(WIES)

Purpose: This document depicts which state and federal agencies have authority for the management and protection of listed plants and animals in Virginia.

Species Status and Responsible Agency: FE Animals USFWS/NOAA, DWR; FT Animals USFWS/NOAA, DWR; FC Animals USFWS; FP USFWS (discretion); FS USFWS (discretion); SE Animals DWR; ST Animals DWR; WAP SGCN DWR (discretion). VDACS retains legal authority for all plants/insects but coordinates with DCR-DNH.

Coordination Recommendations: If DWR data via VAFWIS or WERMS shows a listed species/resource within 2 miles of your project, determine if coordination is needed. Submit to ESSProjects@dwr.virginia.gov or ProjectReview@dwr.virginia.gov; see https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for guidance.

DWR requires at least 30 days to review submissions.

Species Observations (SppObs): Contains verified species data, mainly nongame species. Follow guidelines for coordination if documented within the search area.

BAEANests: Contains bald eagle nest locations maintained by DWR. Contact USFWS for protection recommendations.

BECAR: Includes bald eagle concentration areas (660 ft from shoreline) and roosts maintained by DWR. Contact USFWS for protection advice.

Bat Hibernacula/Roosts: Includes sites for NLEBs, Tricolored, Little Brown Bats with buffers requiring coordination with DWR/USFWS. Follow 4(d) Rule for NLEBs.

TEWaters: Includes waters occupied by listed species. Coordinate with DWR if impacted waters or upstream waters are involved.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas: Includes streams used for migration and spawning of anadromous fish.

Coordinate with DWR if an Anadromous Fish Use Area within your project or upstream waters is impacted.

Cold Water Streams: Includes waters designated as cold habitat, often wild trout streams. Coordinate if impacted within or upstream.

Stocked Trout Waters: Includes waters stocked or suitable for stocking. Coordinate if impacted within your project area.

CWB: Contains colonial waterbird colonies. Coordinate if within 0.5 mile of your project area.

DWR Lands: Includes DWR facilities. Coordinate if your project impacts or is near DWR property.

Predicted Habitat: Shows potential habitats from modeling. No coordination needed if only documented here.

Impediments: Locations of known fish passage barriers. No coordination needed if only documented here.

BBS: No coordination needed if species only documented here.

BBA: No coordination needed if only documented here.

CBC: No coordination needed if only documented here.

• Time sensitivity: Data over 30 years old is historic and not required for coordination decisions.

DWR Nongame Contacts: Use the table below for nongame species questions; official comments via WIES.

Reptiles/Amphibians: John (JD) Kleopfer 804-829-6703 John.Kleopfer@dwr.virginia.gov Birds: Jeff Cooper(raptors) Sergio Harding (other nongame birds) 540-538-1021 804-367-0143 Jeff.Cooper@dwr.virginia.gov Sergio.Harding@dwr.virginia.gov

Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates/Terrestrial Invertebrates: Brian Watson 434-525-7522 Brian.Watson@dwr.virginia.gov Fishes: Mike Pinder(except Atlantic sturgeon) Clint Morgeson (Atlantic sturgeon) 540-961-8387 804-829-6580 Mike.Pinder@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Mammals: Rick Reynolds 540-248-9360 Rick.Reynolds@dwr.virginia.gov

Eastern Shore: (birds, sea turtles, sea mammals) Ruth Boettcher 757-709-0766 Ruth.Boettcher@dwr.virginia.gov

DWR Common Wildlife Contacts: Use the table below for questions; regional map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/media/DWR-Region-Map.pdf.

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-367-1000 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia.gov Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV Jaime Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov

Canebrake Rattlesnake Mitigation DWR Internal Protocols Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document is to guide DWR staff in the development of mitigation recommendations for projects that may impact the State Endangered Canebrake Rattlesnakes and/or their habitats. DWR’s mitigation recommendations will be developed using the procedures included within and DWR will provide those recommendations to permitting agencies during typical project and permit review processes.

Taxonomy: Canebrake (=Timber) Rattlesnake [Crotalus horridus (Coastal Plain population)] Based on genetic analysis, the Canebrake Rattlesnake is no longer considered a subspecies of the timber rattlesnake. However there are morphological and ecological differences between the Coastal Plain and mountain populations. Because of these differences, the Department recognizes the Coastal Plain population as a unique population.

Characteristics: In Virginia, this large, venomous snake reaches a maximum length of about 182 cm. (72 inches). It is the only species of rattlesnake native to southeastern Virginia.

The body color is usually pinkish, gray, yellow or light brown with brown to black chevrons and a black tail. A rust-colored mid-dorsal stripe is usually present as is a yellow-gold to brown stripe from the eye to the back of the jaw.

Food habits: This species feeds primarily on gray squirrels and typically only feeds once or twice per year. This snake also may capture and eat other rodents, rabbits and birds.

Range and Status: In Virginia, the Canebrake Rattlesnake primarily occurs on the lower York- James Peninsula and east of the Suffolk Escarpment. The southeastern Virginia population is designated as State Endangered.

Preferred Habitat: Canebrake Rattlesnakes prefer mature hardwood forests, mixed hardwood- pine forests, cane thickets, and in the ridges and glades of swampy areas. Areas with numerous logs, significant leaf litter and humus also provide suitable habitat. This species overwinters in the bases of hollow trees and stumps, and in the underground tunnels resulting from stump and root decomposition. . This species has also been known to occupy disturbed areas, such as farm fields and cut-overs.

Reproduction: Canebrake Rattlesnakes mature at 4-6 years of age and reproduce every 2-3 years. Mating occurs primarily in late summer and litters of 7-18 young are born the following August or September.

Permit Review Process JPA Review (project with stream/wetland impacts): For project sites in York County, Hampton, and Newport News, only those projects located within the boundaries of the designated Canebrake Rattlesnake Peninsula Core Habitat Area (see attached map) should be evaluated for the potential of Canebrake Rattlesnakes to occur onsite.

For projects south of the James River (i.e., Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach), projects impacting blocks of habitat 50 acres or more in size (i.e., suitable habitat being impacted on the project site is greater or equal to 50 acres or the impacted habitat on the project site plus contiguous habitat equals 50 acres or more) should be evaluated for potential Canebrake Rattlesnake occurrence.

If a proposed project being reviewed falls within the known range of the Canebrake Rattlesnake (using parameters described above) and is within 3.2 kilometers (2 miles) of a documented occurrence of the species, the following mitigation recommendation guidance should be followed in the absence of performing a survey on site (i.e., applicant prefers to assume presence). This guidance also may apply in situations where the applicant has had a habitat assessment performed and we have reviewed that assessment.

A. Recommend additional compensation for wetland impacts at a ratio from 1:1 to 3:1. This range of compensation ratios should be used when some combination of the following descriptors applies to the site/review:

• the project area (not only water impact area) is relatively small (<10 acres in total);
• the area is contiguous with other areas of suitable habitat, but there is some impediment to movement between the project site and other areas of suitable habitat (roads, water bodies, etc.) or contiguous habitat does not surround the project site
• the Canebrake Rattlesnake documentation is old (>20 years) and/or located greater than 1 mile from the project site;
• the habitat is suitable, but not ideal

B. Recommend additional compensation for wetland impacts at a ratio from 4:1 to 6:1. This range of compensation ratios should be used when some combination of the following descriptors applies to the site/review:

• the project area (not only water impact area) is of medium size (10-25 acres in total);
• the project site is contiguous to other areas of suitable habitat with movement corridors between them, but perhaps not on all sides;
• the Canebrake Rattlesnake documentation is recent (<20 years) and/or is located within 1 mile of the project site;
• the habitat appears to be suitable and of good quality leading one to believe that although there are no survey records for the site, it is highly likely the species would be found there

C. Recommend additional compensation for wetland impacts at a ratio from 7:1 to 10:1. This range of compensation ratios should be used when some combination of the following descriptors applies to the site/review: a. the project area (not only water impact area) is large (>25 acres in total); b. the impact area is contiguous with other areas of suitable habitat – especially if these areas are already preserved/protected/public lands; c. the Canebrake Rattlesnake documentation is recent and within 0.5 mile of the project area (in the contiguous habitat areas) and/or we have survey records for the project area itself that document the existence of Canebrake Rattlesnakes onsite. the habitat is considered of high quality

Other project reviews: If the project does not fall under any water impact permitting requirements, rather than recommend mitigation ratios based on wetland/stream impacts, it is more appropriate to recommend that areas of like habitat be preserved to compensate for lost habitat. Projects impacting habitat blocks of less than one acre do not require mitigation.

Mitigation Options (in order of preference)

A. Preservation of suitable habitat adjacent to already preserved, occupied habitat. Preservation should be in perpetuity through a third party conservation easement/agreement. Such agreement should preserve the land in its current state or an enhanced state. No building/timbering/trail development should be allowed in such areas, unless first reviewed by our agency to address possible impacts upon canebrake rattlesnakes or the overall health of the preservation area. Future vegetation management of the site should be to the benefit of Canebrake Rattlesnakes. Contacts for canebrake rattlesnake habitat mitigation at sites located within Chesapeake: Davis Environmental Consulting, Inc. at 757-456-9331;

Mike Lane, SWB Associates, at 757-641-4292 or lanewmike@gmail.com; Resource Environmental Solutions, Dover Farm, at vacreditsales@res.us.

B. Purchase of credits at a wetland mitigation bank that falls within the natural range of Canebrake Rattlesnakes and is known to include suitable habitat for the species. This should include the purchase of a combination of upland and wetland credits, if available. Banks known to support canebrake rattlesnakes include: Lewis Farm and Edge Farm mitigation banks (Great Dismal Swamp Restoration Bank – 757-487-3441); and Dover Farm Mitigation Bank (RES, vacreditsales@res.us ).

C. We recommend in lieu payment into the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund.

Species Surveys Because this species is highly cryptic, making detection very difficult even for the mostly highly trained biologist, we do not consider species surveys a viable option for determining presence or absence of Canebrake Rattlesnakes at any particular project site.

Contact Information Amy Martin, Program Manager Wildlife Information and Environmental Services 804-481-5296 Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov Canebrake Rattlesnake Peninsula Core Habitat Area

Canebrake Rattlesnake Mitigation DWR Internal Protocols Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document is to guide DWR staff in the development of mitigation recommendations for projects that may impact the State Endangered Canebrake Rattlesnakes and/or their habitats. DWR’s mitigation recommendations will be developed using the procedures included within and DWR will provide those recommendations to permitting agencies during typical project and permit review processes.

Taxonomy: Canebrake (=Timber) Rattlesnake [Crotalus horridus (Coastal Plain)] is no longer a subspecies; morphological and ecological differences lead the Department to recognize it as a unique population.

Characteristics: In Virginia, this large, venomous snake reaches about 182 cm (72 inches) and is the only rattlesnake native to southeastern Virginia.

Body color is typically pinkish, gray, yellow, or light brown with chevrons, a black tail, a rust-colored mid-dorsal stripe, and a yellow-gold to brown stripe from eye to jaw.

Food habits: Primarily feeds on gray squirrels once or twice annually, and may eat other rodents, rabbits, and birds.

Range and Status: Mainly on the lower York-James Peninsula and east of the Suffolk Escarpment; the southeastern Virginia population is State Endangered.

Preferred Habitat: Prefers mature hardwood, mixed hardwood-pine forests, cane thickets, swamp ridges, glades, logs, leaf litter, humus, overwintering in hollow trees, stumps, tunnels, and disturbed areas like farms and cut-overs.

Reproduction: Mature at 4-6 years, reproduce every 2-3 years, mate in late summer, and give birth to 7-18 young in August or September.

Permit Review: For York County, Hampton, and Newport News projects within the Canebrake Rattlesnake Peninsula Core Habitat Area, evaluate potential presence.

South of James River (Suffolk, Chesapeake, Virginia Beach), projects impacting ≥50 acres of habitat or contiguous habitat should be evaluated for Canebrake Rattlesnake presence.

If within the species' range and 3.2 km (2 miles) of documented occurrence, follow mitigation guidance without onsite survey, applicable if habitat assessment exists.

A. Recommend additional compensation for wetland impacts at a ratio from 1:1 to 3:1. This range of compensation ratios should be used when some combination of the following descriptors applies to the site/review:

• Project area (not only water impact) is small (<10 acres).
• Area is contiguous with suitable habitat but movement is impeded (roads, water) or habitat does not surround the site.
• Documentation is over 20 years old and/or more than 1 mile from the site.
• the habitat is suitable, but not ideal

B. Recommend ratios of 4:1 to 6:1 for wetland impacts when certain descriptors apply.

• Project area (not only water impact) is medium-sized (10-25 acres).
• Site is contiguous with suitable habitat and movement corridors, but not on all sides.
• Documentation is recent (<20 years) and within 1 mile of the site.
• The habitat appears suitable and of good quality, suggesting that despite no survey records, the species is likely present there.

C. Recommend additional compensation for wetland impacts at a ratio from 7:1 to 10:1. This range of compensation ratios should be used when some combination of the following descriptors applies to the site/review: a. the project area (not only water impact area) is large (>25 acres in total); b. the impact area is contiguous with other areas of suitable habitat – especially if these areas are already preserved/protected/public lands; c. the Canebrake Rattlesnake documentation is recent and within 0.5 mile of the project area (in the contiguous habitat areas) and/or we have survey records for the project area itself that document the existence of Canebrake Rattlesnakes onsite. the habitat is considered of high quality

Other reviews: For projects without water impact permits, recommend habitat preservation; impacts under one acre require no mitigation.

Mitigation Options (preferred order)

A. Preserve suitable habitat adjacent to existing occupied habitat via a perpetual third-party easement, in current or enhanced condition, with no development unless reviewed; vegetation management should benefit Canebrake Rattlesnakes. Contacts in Chesapeake: Davis Environmental Consulting, 757-456-9331.

Contacts: Mike Lane (SWB Associates, 757-641-4292, lanewmike@gmail.com); RES Dover Farm (vacreditsales@res.us).

B. Purchase credits at a wetland mitigation bank within the species' range that includes suitable habitat, including upland and wetland credits if available. Known banks: Lewis Farm, Edge Farm (757-487-3441), and Dover Farm (RES, vacreditsales@res.us).

C. We recommend in lieu payment into the Aquatic Resources Trust Fund.

Species Surveys: Due to the cryptic nature of Canebrake Rattlesnakes, surveys are not reliable for confirming presence or absence at any site.

Contact Information Amy Martin, Program Manager Wildlife Information and Environmental Services 804-481-5296 Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov Canebrake Rattlesnake Peninsula Core Habitat Area

Instructions for DCR Soil and Water Conservation District Staff DCR Conservation Planner

Purpose: This document provides Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) Soil and Water Conservation Staff with guidance about how to scope proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) for wildlife species and designated resources and how to coordinate with DWR staff based on the results of that scoping.

Step 1: Design your BMP in the DCR Conservation Application Suite.

Step 2: Review the Resource Query returns.

Step 3: Based on the type of DWR data returned; coordinate per the below. See contact list at end of document.

Step 4: Review the resource protection recommendations at the end of this document and implement them as appropriate.

Any project with a federal nexus (e.g., the project entails any federal funding, permits, or federal agency action) must comport with consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. To ensure such compliance, the project applicant or proponent should access the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since listing of Atlantic Sturgeon, all hydraulic hopper dredging activities in the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries, regardless of time of year must be coordinated with NOAA Fisheries Service.

A. Listed Species (federal* and/or state Threatened or Endangered wildlife) If the DCR Resource Query returns a “hit” (documented record of species within 2 miles of your project site) for a listed wildlife species, refer to the list below to determine IF you need to coordinate with DWR and if so, with whom (contact info at end): Aquatic Species: ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for listed aquatic species are returned IF your project includes instream work and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal /grubbing) within 300 ft of the stream bank. o Crayfish, mussels, snails: Contact Brian Watson. o Fishes (not including Atlantic sturgeon): Contact Mike Pinder. o Atlantic Sturgeon: Contact Clinton Morgeson.

Semi-aquatic species: ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for listed semi-aquatic species are returned IF your project includes instream work, and/or work in wetlands, and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal / grubbing) within 300 ft of the stream bank or wetland edge. o Amphibians, wood turtles, bog turtles, eastern chicken turtles: Contact JD Kleopfer.

Birds: ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for listed birds are returned IF your project includes woody vegetation removal (trees, shrubs), ground clearing, grubbing or other significant habitat modifications. Coordinate with DWR anytime activities of any kind are proposed within 1000 ft of Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) active nest tree cluster. If habitat modification will be performed outside of Virginia’s resident and migratory songbird nesting season (nesting season: March 15 – August 31 of any year), coordination with DWR is not necessary. o Loggerhead Shrikes, Peregrine Falcons, RCWs, other listed birds: Contact Sergio Harding.

o Waterbirds, shorebirds (*for these species, habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, and shell rakes should be considered in addition to the above): Contact Ruth Boettcher.

o Birds of prey (other than peregrine falcons): Contact Jeff Cooper.

o Bald Eagles: To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.

Bats: IF VAFWIS returns a hit for a listed cave-hibernating bat coordinate with DWR per the below:

Projects located within the regulatory buffer placed around a designated hibernaculum or roost site for any listed bat: ALWAYS coordinate with DWR for any project type. To determine if your site is located within one of these buffers, please refer to the applications found at the links below and refer to the Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS), as directed.

o Northern Long-eared Bats: Contact Rick Reynolds https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/o Little Brown and Tricolored Bats: Contact Rick Reynolds. https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

• Best Management Practices for Conservation of Little Brown Bats and Tri-colored Bats: Contact Rick Reynolds to develop a conservation plan to cover take associated with projects located within hibernacula buffers or within 150 ft of designated roost trees. https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/LBBA_TCBA_Guidance.pdf

o Gray Bats: In addition to the above, also coordinate with DWR when hits for Gray Bats are returned IF your project is located within the Tennessee River drainage AND within 100 feet of a bridge or large culvert upon which this animal may roost. Contact Rick Reynolds. o Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-eared Bats: Coordinate with DWR for projects including tree removal or timbering that are located within 2 miles of a documented record of this species. Contact JD Kleopfer or Rick Reynolds

Reptiles (other than those in “Semi-aquatic” section above): ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for reptiles are returned IF your project includes work within suitable habitats as described below: o Sea Turtles: Work on Atlantic Ocean beaches, and Chesapeake Bay shorelines, work in Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Contact Ruth Boettcher.

o Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, associated shrublands and freshwater wetlands, particularly in Virginia Beach. Contact JD Kleopfer.

o Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach. Contact JD Kleopfer.

Terrestrial Invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR when hits for terrestrial invertebrates are returned ONLY if your project includes ground disturbance (at or below plow line). Contact Brian Watson.

B. Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) If the DCR Resource Query returns a “hit” (documented record of species within 2 miles of your project site) for a tiered species, follow the below for freshwater mussels. Otherwise, planners should reference the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan (available through www.bewildvirginia.gov) to determine what threats are known to the documented species, what suitable habitat for these species consists of and how to best protect them and their habitats from harm.

o Freshwater mussels: coordination with DWR is ONLY necessary if your project includes instream work and/or earth disturbing work (including tree removal /grubbing) within 300 ft of the stream bank. Contact Brian Watson.

C. DWR Coordination and Responses: If you need to coordinate your project with DWR staff, please send an email to identified biologist and include the following:

• Lat/Long Coordinates of project centroid
• Boundary, shapefile, polygon of project site
• Project Description
• Map of BMPs propose for installation
• Pictures of areas proposed for BMPs
• Your contact information If a response from DWR is not received within 30 days of submittal, you may document such and move forward as needed. No response from DWR does not constitute support of the project or clearance regarding potential impacts upon wildlife under DWR’s jurisdiction, it simply indicates a lack of time or staff to perform the review. Any response received from DWR staff will include necessary next steps.

D. Resource Protection Recommendations: Stream buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent or perennial streams including those known to support wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• We recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to waters known to support listed aquatic species.

• We recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters known to support listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on all sides of any wetland or vernal pool.

• We recommend no impacts upon wetlands or vernal pools known to support any listed species. We also recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 900 feet on all sides of any wetland known to support a listed species.

Colonial Waterbird Colonies:

• We recommend preserving, planting or enhancing, an undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around any identified waterbird colonies (rookeries). This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

E. DWR Contacts DWR Nongame Taxonomic Expert Contact List Use the table below to identify the appropriate contact to answer questions or provide information regarding nongame species, including listed and tiered species.

Reptiles/Amphibians:

John (JD) Kleopfer 804-829-6703 John.Kleopfer@dwr.virginia.gov

Birds:

Jeff Cooper (raptors) Sergio Harding (other nongame birds) 540-538-1021 804-367-0143 Jeff.Cooper@dwr.virginia.gov Sergio.Harding@dwr.virginia.gov Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates/Terrestrial Invertebrates:

Brian Watson 434-525-7522 Brian.Watson@dwr.virginia.gov Fishes:

Mike Pinder (except Atlantic sturgeon) Clint Morgeson (Atlantic sturgeon) 540-961-8387 804-829-6580 Mike.Pinder@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Mammals:

Rick Reynolds 540-248-9360 Rick.Reynolds@dwr.virginia.gov Eastern Shore: (birds, sea turtles, sea mammals) Ruth Boettcher 757-709-0766 Ruth.Boettcher@dwr.virginia.gov

DWR Common Wildlife Species and Resources Contact List

Use the table below to identify a contact to answer any questions or provide information regarding common wildlife and/or wildlife-related recreation in your area. Link to DWR regional map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/vDWR-region-map.pdf

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia. Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV gJaoivme Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov Temporary 2023Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@dwr.virginia.gov

Instructions for DCR Soil and Water Conservation District Staff DCR Conservation Planner

Purpose: This document provides Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) Soil and Water Conservation Staff with guidance about how to scope proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) for wildlife species and designated resources and how to coordinate with DWR staff based on the results of that scoping.

Step 1: Design your BMP in the DCR Conservation Application Suite.

Step 2: Review the Resource Query returns.

Step 3: Based on DWR data type, coordinate as below. See contact list at end.

Step 4: Review and implement resource protection recommendations at document end.

Projects with federal nexus must comply with Section 7 ESA. Access USFWS Virginia IPaC at https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. All hydraulic hopper dredging in Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and tributaries must coordinate with NOAA Fisheries.

A. Listed Species (federally or state Threatened/Endangered). If DCR Resource Query shows a species within 2 miles, determine if coordination with DWR is needed: Aquatic species require DWR contact only if project involves instream or earth work within 300 ft of stream bank: Crayfish, mussels, snails: Brian Watson; Fishes (excluding Atlantic sturgeon): Mike Pinder; Atlantic Sturgeon: Clinton Morgeson.

Semi-aquatic species: Coordinate with DWR only if species are hit and project involves instream, wetlands, or earth work within 300 ft of stream or wetland edge. Amphibians, turtles: JD Kleopfer.

Birds: Coordinate with DWR if listed birds are hit and project involves habitat modifications (woody removal, ground clearing). For activities within 1000 ft of RCW nests, coordinate regardless of season. Outside nesting season, no coordination needed. Contact: Sergio Harding.

Waterbirds, shorebirds: For habitat modifications to beaches, dunes, shell rakes, contact Ruth Boettcher.

Birds of prey (excluding peregrine falcons): Contact Jeff Cooper.

Bald Eagles: Use CCB Eagle Nest Locator to check for active nests. If present, proceed per guidelines and coordinate with USFWS on impacts or permits.

Bats: If VAFWIS indicates a listed cave-hibernating bat, coordinate with DWR as below:

Projects within bat hibernaculum or roost buffers must always coordinate with DWR. Check buffers via provided applications and VAFWIS.

Northern Long-eared, Little Brown, Tricolored Bats: Contact Rick Reynolds via provided links.

• Best Management Practices for Little Brown and Tri-colored Bats: Contact Rick Reynolds to develop a conservation plan for projects within hibernacula buffers or 150 ft of roost trees. https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/LBBA_TCBA_Guidance.pdf

Gray Bats: Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project is in Tennessee River drainage within 100 ft of a bridge or culvert. Rafinesque’s Big-eared Bats: Coordinate for tree removal/timbering within 2 miles of records. Contact JD Kleopfer or Rick Reynolds.

Reptiles (other than those in “Semi-aquatic” section above): ONLY coordinate with DWR when hits for reptiles are returned IF your project includes work within suitable habitats as described below: o Sea Turtles: Work on Atlantic Ocean beaches, and Chesapeake Bay shorelines, work in Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Contact Ruth Boettcher.

o Eastern Glass Lizards: Work on beaches, dunes, associated shrublands and freshwater wetlands, particularly in Virginia Beach. Contact JD Kleopfer.

o Canebrake Rattlesnakes: Work in mature forested habitats in southeastern Virginia, particularly Chesapeake, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach. Contact JD Kleopfer.

Terrestrial Invertebrates: Coordinate with DWR if hits are returned and project involves ground disturbance at or below plow line. Contact Brian Watson.

B. WAP SGCN: If a tiered species is hit within 2 miles, follow specific guidance for freshwater mussels; otherwise, consult the 2015 Wildlife Action Plan for threats and habitat info.

Freshwater mussels: Coordinate with DWR only if project involves instream or earth work within 300 ft of stream bank. Contact Brian Watson.

C. DWR Coordination: To coordinate, email the identified biologist with required info.

• Lat/Long Coordinates of project centroid
• Boundary, shapefile, polygon of project site
• Project Description
• Map of BMPs propose for installation
• Pictures of areas proposed for BMPs
• Your contact info: If no DWR response within 30 days, document and proceed. No response does not imply support or clearance; it indicates review capacity. DWR response will include next steps.

D. Resource Protection Recommendations: Stream buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a natural vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent or perennial streams, including those supporting wild trout or anadromous fishes.

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a natural vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of perennial tributaries supporting listed aquatic species.

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a natural vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of waters supporting listed aquatic species.

Wetland buffers:

• We recommend preserving, planting, or enhancing a natural vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft around wetlands or vernal pools.

• Avoid impacts on wetlands or vernal pools supporting listed species; preserve, plant, or enhance a natural buffer of at least 900 ft around such wetlands.

Colonial Waterbird Colonies:

• Preserve, plant, or enhance a natural buffer of at least 500 ft around waterbird colonies (rookeries) to protect nesting and habitat for future seasons.

E. DWR Contacts DWR Nongame Taxonomic Expert Contact List Use the table below to identify the appropriate contact to answer questions or provide information regarding nongame species, including listed and tiered species.

Reptiles/Amphibians:

John (JD) Kleopfer 804-829-6703 John.Kleopfer@dwr.virginia.gov

Birds:

Jeff Cooper (raptors) Sergio Harding (other nongame birds) 540-538-1021 804-367-0143 Jeff.Cooper@dwr.virginia.gov Sergio.Harding@dwr.virginia.gov Mollusks/Aquatic Invertebrates/Terrestrial Invertebrates:

Brian Watson 434-525-7522 Brian.Watson@dwr.virginia.gov Fishes:

Mike Pinder (except Atlantic sturgeon) Clint Morgeson (Atlantic sturgeon) 540-961-8387 804-829-6580 Mike.Pinder@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Mammals:

Rick Reynolds 540-248-9360 Rick.Reynolds@dwr.virginia.gov Eastern Shore: (birds, sea turtles, sea mammals) Ruth Boettcher 757-709-0766 Ruth.Boettcher@dwr.virginia.gov

DWR Common Wildlife Species and Resources Contact List

Use the table below to identify a contact to answer any questions or provide information regarding common wildlife and/or wildlife-related recreation in your area. Link to DWR regional map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wp-content/uploads/vDWR-region-map.pdf

DWR Terrestrial Species Aquatic Species Lands/Facilities Region I David Norris Clinton Morgeson Jennifer Allen 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 804-829-6580 David.Norris@dwr.virginia.gov Clinton.Morgeson@dwr.virginia.gov Jenn.Allen@dwr.virginia.gov II Matthew Overstreet Scott Smith Pete Schula 434-525-7522 434-525-7522 434-252-7522 Matthew.Overstreet@dwr.virginia.gov Scott.Smith@dwr.virginia.gov Pete.Schula@dwr.virginia.gov III Lisa Sztukowski Jeff Williams Tom Hampton 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 276-783-4860 Lisa.Sztukowski@dwr.virginia. Jeff.Williams@dwr.virginia.gov Tom.Hampton@dwr.virginia.gov IV gJaoivme Sajecki Stephen Reeser Matt Kline 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 540-248-9360 Jaime.Sajecki@dwr.virginia.gov Steve.Reeser@dwr.virginia.gov Matt.Kline@dwr.virginia.gov Temporary 2023Private Lands Wildlife Biologist Point of Contact: Marc Puckett 434-392-8328 Marc.Puckett@dwr.virginia.gov

Solar Energy Facility Construction and Operation Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document is to provide solar project proponents with information about how to scope solar projects for wildlife species and resources, to provide general recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts upon wildlife and their habitats during siting and facility development, and also offers recommendations for wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with site design.

I. Scoping for Wildlife Impact Assessment: A. DWR data and resources Step 1: Access the VA Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS) from the DWR website at: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp . Send an email to Support_VAFWIS@dwr.virginia.gov if you need to set up an account or need other assistance.

Step 2: Using the geographic search function, generate an Initial Project Assessment (IPA) report for the site using an at least 2 – mile buffer around project boundaries (action area), OR use the PBR (permit by rule) reporting feature. See the “help” section for instructions.

Step 3: Review the below information regarding data returned by VAFWIS and apply, as appropriate. Please see the end of the document for contacts regarding common wildlife species, the location of which may not be accurately depicted by VAFWIS which is most heavily populated by imperiled species and designated resource data.

Any project with a federal nexus (e.g., the project entails any federal funding, permits, or federal agency action) must comport with consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. To ensure such compliance, the project applicant or proponent should access the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since listing of Atlantic Sturgeon, all hydraulic hopper dredging activities in the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries, regardless of time of year must be coordinated with NOAA Fisheries Service.

Data Returned by VAFWIS:

Species Observations (SppObs) – The Species Observation dataset includes all verified species documentations maintained by DWR. If the IPA results indicate that a listed species has been documented from the project area, it is possible that the species is present on the project site, if suitable habitat exists.

Coordinate with DWR Environmental Services Staff, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ , as we may recommend conservation measures necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TEWaters) – The Threatened and Endangered Species Page 1 Waters (TEWaters) dataset includes the locations of waters from which listed species have been documented and which agency biologists have determined are currently occupied by such species. If work in the TEWater or its tributaries is proposed (ex: installation of crossings, soil borings, stream restoration, utility installation, etc.), we recommend coordination with DWR’s Environmental Services (ES) staff , per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ , as we may recommend conservation measures necessary to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of TEWaters:

a) If a waterbody is designated a TEWater due to the presence of listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, we recommend the following to best protect such listed aquatic species (and the resources upon which they depend) from harm that may result from nearby agriculture, silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

b) If a waterbody is designated a TE Water due to the presence of wood turtles, we recommend the following (in addition to the above), to best protect this listed semi-aquatic species (and the resources upon which it depends) from harm that may result from nearby silviculture, habitat management or restoration, and/or land development:

• Because wood turtles must have access to freshwater streams during hibernation as well as access to adjacent uplands, where they forage, mate, and nest, we recommend coordination with us not only for instream work, but also for any work in uplands adjacent to (within 900 feet of) the designated water.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – The Anadromous Fish Use Areas (AnadFish Waters) dataset includes the locations of streams known to provide migratory and/or spawning habitats for anadromous fishes. We recommend coordination with DWR ES per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ anytime work in designated AnadFish Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of AnadFish Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Anadromous Fishes/Fish Passage Expert: Alan Weaver 804-367-6795 or Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov Page 2 Bat Occurrence Data Applications – These datasets depict regulatory buffers around those documented occurrences and landscpape features that support listed bats. Any land development or forestry activities (habitat modifications) within a regulatory buffer should be coordinated with DWR ES, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/. For the species below, use the indicated applications to determine the location of hibernacula and roosts.

• Northern Long-eared Bat Regulatory Buffer Map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little Brown and Tricolor Bat Hibernacula and Roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches* – This dataset includes stretches of beach/shoreline in Virginia known to support nesting of sea turtles, all of which are federally- and state-listed. We recommend coordination with DWR ES, the USFWS and NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service regarding any activities proposed on these designated beaches/shorelines. Otherwise, we support protection of these areas and adjacent shorelines from incompatible activities.

Wild Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset includes the locations of waters designated as cold water habitat. Many of these streams support wild trout populations. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to support, we recommend coordination with DWR ESS per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ anytime work in designated Trout Waters and/or their tributaries is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Stockable Trout Waters – The Cold Water Streams dataset also includes the locations of waters currently stocked with trout by DWR as well as those suitable for stocking, but perhaps not currently stocked. To best protect these waters and the species they are known to or capable of supporting, we recommend coordination with DWR ESS per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ anytime work in Stocked Trout Waters is proposed. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of Trout Waters:

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Trout/Trout Stream Expert: Steve Reeser 540-248-9360 or Steve.Reeser@DWR.virginia.gov

Colonial Waterbird (CWB) colonies – This DWR-maintained dataset includes documented locations of Page 3 colonial waterbird colonies. To ensure protection of the colony and the species known to nest within it, we recommend coordination with DWR’s ES per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for any land development or timbering activities proposed to occur within 0.5 miles of a documented colony. Otherwise, we offer the below general guidance regarding protection of colonial waterbird colonies:

• We recommend preserving, planting and/or enhancing an undisturbed natively vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around the waterbird colony. This provides the colony with a line of sight and habitat buffer, providing nesting activity protection as well as habitat protection to ensure suitability for future nesting seasons.

Bald Eagle Nests – This dataset includes the location of bald eagle nests, and their associated buffers, within Virginia. While we periodically update nest status or add new nests based on curated observations from citizens and/or our staff, we no longer update bald eagle nest data annually per flyover survey data. To ensure protection of bald eagles in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, we recommend using the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) Eagle Nest Locator to determine if any active eagle nests are known from the project area. If active bald eagle nests have been documented from the project area, we recommend that the project move forward in a manner consistent with state and federal guidelines for protection of bald eagles; and coordination, as indicated, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit.

Bald Eagle Concentration Area and Roosts (BECAR) - This dataset includes bald eagle concentration areas (defined as 660 feet landward or channelward of the shoreline) and documented roosting sites documented by VDWR and/or our partners. Significant habitat alteration, location of water-dependent facilities or other recreational and commercial activities within certain distances of eagle nests, concentration zones, or roosts may result in adverse impacts upon eagles. Therefore, we recommend that land owners comply with the Virginia management guidelines for landowners; and that he or she coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding possible impacts upon bald eagles or the need for a federal bald eagle take permit associated with activities on his or her property.

DWR Lands (boat ramps, WMA’s, Fish Hatcheries, lakes)* – The DWR Lands dataset includes locations of all DWR facilities. We support development of easement restrictions protective of our facilities and access to them by the public and our staff; and the watersheds/drainages upstream of our hatcheries and fishing lakes.

• coming to VAFWIS very soon!

B. DEQ Data and Resources

Coastal Avian Protection Zones: Permit-By-Rule (PBR) applicants need to identify whether the proposed site is located within a Coastal Avian Protection Zone (CAPZ; 9VAC15-60-60 et seq.). See https://www.deq.virginia.gov/permits-regulations/laws-regulations/renewable-energy to access DEQ’s Coastal GEMS Online Application at: https://gaia.vcu.edu/GemsMap/.

II. Additional Wildlife Considerations

Wildlife passage and fencing: Solar facilities typically incorporate perimeter fencing that may act as a barrier to ground-based wildlife movement. We recommend documenting wildlife travel corridors and observed passage prior to Page 4 construction activities, and encourage the consultant/applicant to coordinate with DWR regarding wildlife fencing that would allow ingress and egress through the enclosure, as well as the development of wildlife corridors. Adaptive strategies may include lower fence height in wildlife corridors; dividing large sites into smaller fenced sub-parcels (approximately 40 acres maximum) to establish unfenced wildlife corridors; use of larger mesh fence at ground level (i.e., “wildlife-permeable fencing”); and facilitating wildlife passage via ground-level openings or pipes (approximately 8-inch diameter) through the fence.

General fencing recommendations: We recommend that the fences enclosing solar facilities either be 61 inches or less in height, so that deer will have easy ingress and egress to/from the enclosure; or that the fences (including barbed wire if desired) be at least 96 inches in height, so that deer would not normally enter the site.

Fence design recommendations for deer management: Under certain conditions deer may seek refuge or become entrapped within fenced enclosures. To address this concern, perimeter fences around solar facilities should either be no more than 61" high OR greater than or equal to 96" (8') high. Fences lower than 61" should provide free ingress and egress of deer. Fences of heights between 61" and 8' are likely to entrap deer that are motivated to enter but not leave the enclosure. Fences over 8', if properly maintained, should exclude deer so that they do not become entrapped. Maintenance along the bottom of an exclusionary fence is critical to prevent deer incursions; fences should be erected tight to the ground and any gaps should be filled with rip rap or other barriers (except at purposeful wildlife crossings).

Hunting prohibition: Hunting deer is prohibited within any enclosure having fences higher than 61" (with certain exceptions not applicable to solar facilities). This prohibition is documented and explained in the Code of Virginia (29.1-525.1)and DWR regulations (4VAC15-90-291). Other than this prohibition, DWR does not regulate fencing of projects such as solar energy facilities

Lake effect: It has been reported that contiguous aggregates of panels could result in an avian impact known as “lake effect,” in which birds may mistake the reflective solar panels for a waterbody and attempt to land on or near the panel array. Waterbirds are especially at risk because some species require a running start on the water surface and cannot take off from the ground. Further research and study of available scientific literature is recommended. Post-construction monitoring may be recommended, if warranted by site- specific conditions.

Thermal-island effect: It has been reported that “thermal island” impacts may result from large solar facilities, similar to thermal islands resulting from large paved parking areas. To date, there has been little scientific investigation of this potential effect. Further research and study of available scientific literature is recommended. Post-construction monitoring may be recommended, if warranted by site-specific conditions.

Wetland and stream impacts: If the project entails instream work or wetland impacts, we anticipate that a Joint Permit Application (JPA) will be distributed for interagency review. We will review and provide additional comments on that application, as appropriate.

Page 5

III.

Vegetation Management:

Native species: We recommend that the applicant utilize native plants and seed mixes for vegetative ground cover, to the greatest extent possible. We recommend the consultant or applicant contact DWR and DCR-DNH for guidance regarding native plantings and pollinator seed mixes.

Invasive species: We recommend that invasive species control be incorporated into the facility operation and mitigation plan(s). Post-construction monitoring for invasive species is recommended as warranted by site-specific conditions.

IV. Standard Site Development Recommendations:

To minimize overall impacts to wildlife and our natural resources, we offer the following comments about development activities:

We recommend that the applicant avoid and minimize impacts to undisturbed forest, wetlands, and streams to the fullest extent practicable. Avoidance and minimization of impact may include relocating stream channels as opposed to filling or channelizing as well as using, and incorporating into the development plan, a natural stream channel design and forested riparian buffers. We recommend maintaining undisturbed naturally vegetated buffers of at least 100 feet in width around all on-site wetlands and on both sides of all perennial and intermittent streams. We recommend maintaining wooded lots to the fullest extent possible. We generally do not support proposals to mitigate wetland impacts through the construction of stormwater management ponds, nor do we support the creation of in- stream stormwater management ponds.

We recommend conducting any in-stream activities during low or no-flow conditions, using non-erodible cofferdams or turbidity curtains to isolate the construction area, blocking no more than 50% of the streamflow at any given time (minimal overlap of construction footprint notwithstanding), stockpiling excavated material in a manner that prevents reentry into the stream, restoring original streambed and streambank contours, revegetating barren areas with native vegetation, and implementing strict erosion and sediment control measures. We recommend that instream work be designed and performed in a manner that minimizes impacts upon natural streamflow and movement of resident aquatic species. If a dam and pump-around must be used, we recommend it be used for as limited a time as possible and that water returned to the stream be free of sediment and excess turbidity. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap. To minimize harm to the aquatic environment and its residents resulting from use of the Tremie method to install concrete, installation of grout bags, and traditional pouring of concrete, we recommend that such activities occur only in the dry, allowing all concrete to harden prior to contact with open water. Due to future maintenance costs associated with culverts, and the loss of riparian and aquatic habitat, we prefer stream crossings to be constructed via clear-span bridges. However, if this is not possible, we recommend countersinking any culverts below the streambed at least 6 inches, or the use of bottomless culverts, to allow passage of aquatic organisms. We also recommend the installation of floodplain culverts to carry bankfull discharges.

Page 6 We recommend that the stormwater controls for this project be designed to replicate and maintain the hydrographic condition of the site prior to the change in landscape. This should include, but not be limited to, utilizing bioretention areas, and minimizing the use of curb and gutter in favor of grassed swales.

Bioretention areas (also called rain gardens) and grass swales are components of Low Impact Development (LID). They are designed to capture stormwater runoff as close to the source as possible and allow it to slowly infiltrate into the surrounding soil. They benefit natural resources by filtering pollutants and decreasing downstream runoff volumes.

We recommend that all tree removal and ground clearing adhere to a time of year restriction (TOYR) protective of resident and migratory songbird nesting from March 15 through August 15 of any year.

We recommend adherence to erosion and sediment controls during ground disturbance. To minimize potential wildlife entanglements resulting from use of synthetic/plastic erosion and sediment control matting, we recommend use of matting made from natural/organic materials such as coir fiber, jute, and/or burlap.

V. Additional Agency Coordination:

VDCR-DNH: The applicant should conduct a preconstruction desktop survey of natural heritage resources within the disturbance zone, and coordinate with VDCR-DNH regarding protection of these resources, as needed.

USFWS: If a proposed facility may involve impacts to federally-listed Threatened or Endangered species; or to other federally protected wildlife resources, the applicant should contact Troy Andersen, USFWS – Virginia Field Office, at troy.andersen@fws.gov or (804) 693-6694 ext. 2428 for guidance regarding completion of an online IPaC (Information Planning and Consultation) project assessment.

VI. Contacts:

DWR Environmental Services DEQ Renewable Energy Program Amy Martin, Manager Susan Tripp Wildlife Info. and Env. Services (WIES) Renewable Energy PBR Coordinator Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov susan.tripp@deq.virginia.gov 804-367-2211 804-664-3470

Page 7

Solar Energy Facility Construction and Operation Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document is to provide solar project proponents with information about how to scope solar projects for wildlife species and resources, to provide general recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts upon wildlife and their habitats during siting and facility development, and also offers recommendations for wildlife Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with site design.

I. Wildlife Impact Scoping: A. DWR data and resources Step 1: Access VA Fish and Wildlife Information Service (VAFWIS) at: https://services.dwr.virginia.gov/fwis/index.asp. Email Support_VAFWIS@dwr.virginia.gov for account setup or assistance.

Step 2: Use geographic search to generate an IPA report with at least a 2-mile buffer around project boundaries or use the PBR reporting feature. See help for instructions.

Step 3: Review VAFWIS data and apply as appropriate. See the end for contacts on common species, as VAFWIS may not accurately depict all habitats.

Projects with federal nexus must comply with Section 7 ESA consultation. Access USFWS Virginia Field Office IPaC at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. All hydraulic hopper dredging in Chesapeake Bay and major tributaries must coordinate with NOAA Fisheries after Atlantic Sturgeon listing.

Data Returned by VAFWIS:

Species Observations (SppObs) dataset includes verified species documented by DWR. If IPA indicates a listed species in the area, it may be present if suitable habitat exists.

Coordinate with DWR Environmental Services per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for conservation measures to ensure ESA compliance.

TEWaters dataset shows waters with documented listed species and current occupancy. For work in TEWaters or tributaries, coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for conservation measures and ESA compliance.

Otherwise, we offer guidance on TEWaters protection:

a) For TEWater with listed fishes, mussels, snails, or crayfish, follow recommended protections to prevent harm from nearby land use activities.

• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all intermittent tributaries to the designated water;
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to designated waters; and/or
• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 300 ft on both sides of designated waters.

b) For TEWater with wood turtles, follow additional protections to safeguard this semi-aquatic species from nearby land activities.

• Wood turtles need access to streams during hibernation and uplands within 900 ft for foraging, mating, and nesting. Coordinate with us for instream and adjacent upland work.

Anadromous Fish Use Areas – Anadromous Fish Use Areas (AnadFish Waters) dataset shows streams with migratory/spawning habitats. Coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for work in these waters; otherwise, follow general protection guidance.

• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• Protect a native riparian buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Anadromous Fishes/Fish Passage Expert: Alan Weaver 804-367-6795 or Alan.Weaver@DWR.virginia.gov Page 2 Bat Occurrence Data Applications – These datasets depict regulatory buffers around those documented occurrences and landscpape features that support listed bats. Any land development or forestry activities (habitat modifications) within a regulatory buffer should be coordinated with DWR ES, per the protocols provided here: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/. For the species below, use the indicated applications to determine the location of hibernacula and roosts.

• Northern Long-eared Bat Regulatory Buffer Map: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/northern-long-eared-bat-application/
• Little Brown and Tricolor Bat Hibernacula and Roosts: https://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winter-habitat-roosts-application/

Sea Turtle Nesting Beaches dataset shows Virginia beaches supporting listed sea turtles. Coordinate with DWR ES, USFWS, and NOAA Fisheries for proposed activities; otherwise, protect these areas from incompatible activities.

Cold Water Streams dataset shows waters designated as trout habitat. Coordinate with DWR ESS per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for work in Trout Waters; otherwise, follow protection guidance.

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water;

• We recommend protecting a native vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Stockable Trout Waters dataset shows waters stocked or suitable for stocking. Coordinate with DWR ESS per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for work; otherwise, follow protection guidance.

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 100 ft on both sides of all perennial tributaries to the designated water; and/or

• We recommend protecting from impacts a natively vegetated buffer of at least 200 ft on both sides of the designated water.

Trout Expert: Steve Reeser 540-248-9360, Steve.Reeser@DWR.virginia.gov

CWB colonies dataset shows documented colonies. Coordinate with DWR ES per https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/environmental-services/ for activities within 0.5 miles; otherwise, follow protection guidance.

• We recommend preserving, planting, and/or enhancing an undisturbed native vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around the waterbird colony to provide nesting protection and habitat buffer for future nesting.

Bald Eagle Nests dataset shows nest locations; data is not updated annually. Use CCB Eagle Nest Locator to identify active nests. If active, follow guidelines and coordinate with USFWS for protections and permits.

BECAR dataset shows bald eagle concentration zones and roosts. Significant habitat changes near these may impact eagles. Landowners should follow Virginia guidelines and coordinate with USFWS for impacts or permits.

DWR Lands dataset shows facilities; support easements protecting facilities, access, and upstream watersheds of hatcheries and lakes.

• coming to VAFWIS very soon!

B. DEQ Data and Resources

PBR applicants must identify if the site is within a Coastal Avian Protection Zone (CAPZ; 9VAC15-60-60). Access DEQ’s Coastal GEMS at https://gaia.vcu.edu/GemsMap/.

II. Additional Wildlife Considerations

Wildlife passage and fencing: Document wildlife corridors and passage before construction. Coordinate with DWR on wildlife-permeable fencing, lower fences in corridors, subdivide sites, and include ground-level openings or pipes for passage.

Fencing recommendations: Enclosures should be no more than 61 inches high for deer access or at least 96 inches to exclude deer.

Deer management fencing: Fences should be no more than 61" high or at least 8'. Fences below 61" allow deer egress; between 61" and 8' may trap deer. Over 8', with maintenance, exclude deer. Keep fences tight to ground, fill gaps with rip rap or barriers, except at crossings.

Hunting deer is prohibited within enclosures over 61" high (exceptions not applicable to solar). This is in Virginia Code 29.1-525.1 and DWR regulations (4VAC15-90-291). DWR does not regulate solar fencing otherwise.

Lake effect: Birds may mistake reflective panels for water, risking landings, especially waterbirds needing a running start. Further research and post-construction monitoring are recommended if needed.

Thermal-island effect: Large solar facilities may create localized heat islands, similar to paved areas. Scientific research is limited; further study and monitoring may be needed if warranted.

Wetland and stream impacts: Projects involving instream work or wetland impacts will likely require a Joint Permit Application (JPA) for interagency review. We will review and comment as appropriate.

Page 5

III.

Vegetation Management:

Native species: We recommend using native plants and seed mixes for ground cover. Contact DWR and DCR-DNH for guidance on native plantings and pollinator mixes.

Invasive species: Incorporate invasive control into operation and mitigation plans. Post-construction monitoring is recommended as needed.

IV. Standard Site Development Recommendations:

To minimize impacts to wildlife and resources, we offer these comments on development activities:

We recommend avoiding and minimizing impacts to undisturbed forest, wetlands, and streams. This includes relocating streams instead of filling, using natural stream designs, and maintaining at least 100 ft buffers around wetlands and streams. We do not support wetland mitigation via stormwater ponds or in-stream ponds.

Conduct in-stream activities during low/no-flow, using cofferdams or turbidity curtains, blocking no more than 50% flow, stockpiling excavated material properly, restoring stream contours, revegetating with native plants, and applying strict erosion controls. Minimize impacts on flow and aquatic species. Use dam and pump-around briefly, with sediment-free water. Use natural/organic erosion mats. Install concrete only when dry. Prefer clear-span bridges; if not, countersink culverts at least 6 inches or use bottomless culverts, and install floodplain culverts for bankfull discharges.

Page 6: Stormwater controls should replicate pre-development hydrograph, including bioretention and minimizing curb and gutter in favor of grassed swales.

Bioretention areas (rain gardens) and grass swales are LID components that capture stormwater near source, filter pollutants, and reduce downstream runoff.

Tree removal and ground clearing should follow a TOYR protecting nesting from March 15 to August 15.

Erosion and sediment controls should be maintained during disturbance. Use natural/organic mats like coir, jute, or burlap to reduce wildlife entanglement risks.

V. Additional Agency Coordination:

VDCR-DNH: Conduct preconstruction desktop survey of natural heritage resources and coordinate for protection as needed.

USFWS: For impacts to federally-listed species or protected wildlife, contact Troy Andersen at troy.andersen@fws.gov or (804) 693-6694 ext. 2428 for IPaC guidance.

VI. Contacts:

DWR Environmental Services DEQ Renewable Energy Program Amy Martin, Manager Susan Tripp Wildlife Info. and Env. Services (WIES) Renewable Energy PBR Coordinator Amy.Martin@dwr.virginia.gov susan.tripp@deq.virginia.gov 804-367-2211 804-664-3470

Page 7

Time of Year Restrictions and Other Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document, which provides general guidance for the protection of selected wildlife resources, has been developed as guidance for project planning and scheduling of construction activities that may impact the identified wildlife species. The time of years (TOYR; when work is not to be performed) and other information included in this document depict times of year during which certain species may be most sensitive to human activities such as construction and land clearing. It does not constitute a list of best management practices to protect imperiled or sensitive wildlife species or their habitats; nor is adherence to these restrictions essential for every project. Environmental documents and permit applications are reviewed individually, and modification or waiver of these time of year standards will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Furthermore, any project with a federal nexus (e.g., the project entails any federal funding, permits, or federal agency action) must comport with consultation requirements pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. To ensure such compliance, the project applicant or proponent should access the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. Since listing of Atlantic Sturgeon, all hydraulic hopper dredging activities in the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean, and major tributaries, regardless of time of year must be coordinated with NOAA Fisheries Service.

Designated Waters TOYR (no instream work to occur) Wild Trout Streams and tributaries

Brook and Brown Trout waters October 1 through March 31 Rainbow Trout waters March 15 through May 15 Stocked/Stockable Trout Streams and tributaries No TOYR; contact Aquatic Regional Area Manager for guidance Anadromous Fish Use Areas and tributaries* February 15 through June 30 (see exceptions below) Exceptions in James River*:

• Below Rt. 17 crossing No TOYR necessary unless project spans width of river, significantly impeding fish passage
• Bosher’s Dam upstream, including Rivanna River and tribs March 15 through June 30 Exception in Rappahannock River:

• Rappahannock River and tribs below Rt. 360 crossing February 15 through June 15 Exception in York River:

• York River and tribs below Rt 33 crossing February 15 through June 15 Exception in Elizabeth River:
• Elizabeth River and tribs No TOYR necessary unless project spans width of river, significantly impeding fish passage Exception in Nansemond River:

• Nansemond River and tribs February 15 through June 15 Threatened and Endangered Species Waters and tributaries TOYR dependent upon species known to inhabit the stream/river, see species information below. * we understand that federal navigation channel dredging may require modification from the standard TOYR recommended for protection of anadromous fishes in the James River due to funding and project scheduling timeframes.

Fishes TOYR (no instream work to occur) General Warm Water Species spawning April 15 through July 15 General Cold Water Species spawning March 1 through June 30 Landlocked white bass/striped bass/sunfish (Lake Anna, Dan River) March 15 through June 30 Smith Mountain Lake Fish Assemblage February 15 through June 15 Atlantic Sturgeon (FESE) TOYR and/or other protective recommendations are applicable for work in the segments of designated Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Waters) indicated below. However, in addition to these waters, Atlantic Sturgeon are known from tributaries to designated TE Waters, the Chesapeake Bay, Chesapeake Bay embayments, small tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay (including on the eastern Shore), and the Piankatank River. Impacts upon Atlantic sturgeon may be considered for projects impacting such waters, on a case-by-case basis.

Spring spawning/migration March 15 through June 15

• James River from Wilcox Wharf downstream to the Rt. 17 crossing Fall spawning/migration August 1 through November 15
• James River from upper extent of designated water (Bosher’s Dam) downstream to the Rt. 17 crossing
• Appomattox River from Lake Chesdin Dam downstream to confluence with James River
• Chickahominy River from Walker’s Dam downstream to confluence with James River
• Pamunkey River from upper extent of designated water (Ashland Mill Dam) downstream to White House Landing/Pamunkey Indian Reservation
• Mattaponi River from upper extent of designated waters (Matta & Po rivers at I95) downstream to King and Queen Courthouse Landing
• Rappahannock River from the fall line downstream to the Rt. 360 bridge Larval and Juvenile life stages Upon review by DWR biologist
• Within designated TE Waters year-round in shallow habitats, often near-shore Congregation areas Upon review by DWR biologist
• Rappahannock River from Rt 360 crossing downstream to Rt 3 bridge at White Stone
• James River from Hog Point (Hog Island WMA) downstream to the Rt 17crossing Blackbanded Sunfish (SE) May 1 through June 30 Blackside Dace (FTST) April 1 through July 31; not in Clinch Drainage, where the species was introduced Bridle Shiner (Tier Ia) May 15 through July 31 Candy Darter (FECC) March 15 through June 30 Carolina Darter (ST) March 15 through June 30 Clinch Dace (Tier Ia) April 1 through July 31 Duskytail Darter (FESE) April 1 through July 15 Golden Darter (ST) May 1 through August 31 Greenfin Darter (ST) May 1 through June 30 Orangefin Madtom (ST) March 15 through May 31; not in James River drainage, where the species was introduced Roanoke Bass (Tier Ia) March 15 through July 15Roanoke Hogsucker (Tier IVc) March 15 through July 15 Roanoke Logperch (FESE) March 15 through June 30 Roughead Shiner (Tier Ib) March 15 through June 30 Sharphead Darter (SE) June 15 through August 31 Sickle Darter (ST) February 1 through April 30 Slender Chub (FTST) April 1 through May 31 Spotfin Chub (FTST) May 1 through August 31 Steelcolor Shiner (ST) May 1 through August 31 Tennessee Dace (SE) April 1 through July 31 Variegate Darter (SE) March 15 through July 31 Western Sand Darter (ST) April 1 through June 30 Whitemouth Shiner (ST) March 15 through June 30 Yellowfin Madtom (FTST) April 1 through August 31 Crayfish TOYR (no instream work to occur) Big Sandy Crayfish (FTST) July 1 through October 31 (females brooding young) Freshwater Mollusks TOYR (no instream work to occur) Long-term brooders (see list at end of document) April 15 through June 15 (glochidia release); and August 15 through September 30 (spawning) Short-term brooders (see list at end of document) May 15 through July 31 Exceptions:

• Dwarf Wedgemussel (FESE) March 15 through May 31; and August 15 through October 15
• Tennessee Bean (FESE; previously Purple Bean, Cumberland Bean) February 15 through June 15; and August 15 through September 30
• Spiny Riversnail (ST) April 1 through June 15
• Spider Elimia (SE) April 1 through June 15 Birds TOYR (certain activities not to occur) Bachman’s Sparrow (ST) April 1 through August 15 Bald Eagle nest sites December 15 through July 15 Bald Eagle concentration areas and roost sites (BECAR) Summer:May 15 through August 31; Winter: December 15 through March 15 Bewick’s Wren (SE) April 1 through June 30 Black Skimmer (Tier IIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Black Rail (SE) April 1 through August 31 Common Tern (Tier IIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges through determined during most recent monitoring activity Henslow’s Sparrow (ST) April 1 through August 31 Least Tern ( Tier IIIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Loggerhead Shrike(ST) April 1 through July 31 Peregrine Falcon (ST) February 15 through July 15 for activities w/in 600 ft of nest/box Piping Plover (FTST) March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Wilson’s Plover (SE) March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Red-cockaded Woodpecker (FESE) A. Time of Year Restriction: April 1 - July 31 of any year for activities* within 1,000 ft of an active cavity tree cluster; Time of Day Restriction from 2 hours before to 2 hours after sunrise and from 2 hours before to 2 hours after sunset for activities* within 1,000 ft of an active cavity tree cluster. *Activities to which these are applied:
• Use of motorized or unmotorized vehicles should occur only on existing road
• Tree removal, tree trimming, hardwood midstory control
• Military training activities, unless approved by USFWS and/or DWR
• Construction activities, use of mechanized machinery

B. Activities Prohibited at any time:

• Impacts (construction, development, tree removal) upon an active or inactive (but still suitable) cavity tree cluster should be avoided, unless performed to enhance RCW habitat and in coordination with USFWS and/or DWR.
• Specifically, the following activities are prohibited unless a permit is obtained from the USFWS. a) Removing any red-cockaded woodpecker cavity tree, through cutting, bulldozing, or any other activity. b) Damaging an active cavity tree which results in the death of that tree. Damage includes, but is not limited to, injury to the bole or root system (generally due to heavy equipment use), exposure to herbicides, and fire scorch to the crown due to inadequate protective measures during prescribed burning. c) Using insecticides on any standing pine tree.

Prevention and control of disease and insect infestations is encouraged through silvicultural BMPs. d) Constructing roads and utility rights-of-way within a cluster. e) Construction of facilities including, but not limited to, buildings, campgrounds, recreational developments, residential dwellings, and industrial or business complexes f) Planting of shrubs and/or ornamental plants that will exceed 2.1 m (7 ft) in height within 15.24 m (50 ft) of active and inactive cavity trees. Construction equipment and construction material cannot be stored within 61 m (200 ft) of cavity trees. Landscaping within clusters should be accomplished with hand tools or lightweight power equipment rather than tractor mounted equipment

General beach-nesting birds March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity

General migratory and resident songbirds March 15 through August 15

Colonial Waterbird Colonies TOYR (certain activities not to occur)

Great Egret, Green Heron (Tier IVb), Yellow-Crowned April 1 through August 15 for activities w/in 0.25 mile of Night Heron, etc. rookery (site with more than one nesting pair); maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around rookery. Great Blue Heron February 15 through July 31 for activities w/in 0.25 mile of rookery or high intensity activity w/in 0.5 mile of rookery; maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around rookery.

Mammals TOYR (certain activities not to occur)

Bat data layers: Unless otherwise indicated, all hibernacula locations are randomly offset, and then circumscribed by 2 buffers; a 0.5 mile radius buffer (small), and a 5.5 mile radius buffer (large). These two buffers were developed to assist in compliance with established bat protection measures. Other species records including summer roosts, maternity colonies, and bachelor colonies, and acoustic captures are not offset, but may be circumscribed by buffers to facilitate state or federal guidelines during project reviews. Physical captures are offset prior to buffering. Typically, acoustic and physical captures are circumscribed by a 3.0 mile buffer and roost trees are buffered by 1.5 miles, including a 150 ft no tree clearing buffer.

Cave-hibernating bats: Gray Bat (FESE) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula or bachelor and maternity roosts: NO disturbance Currently, SppObs records for Gray Bats that are of bats and/or physical modification of the cave/roost located within karst/cave habitat indicate the presence entrance/structure. of a hibernaculum. Spp Obs may also indicate an occupied roost on bridges or large culverts within the Tennessee River drainage, to which the recommendations to the right also apply.

Indiana Bat (FESE) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula, roosts and maternity colonies and for projects Currently, SppObs records for Indiana Bats that are located outside of these buffers, but within suitable habitat: located within karst/cave habitat indicate the presence TOYR for tree removal, tree timbering, and/or prescribed of a hibernaculum. burns from April 1 – November 14.

Little Brown Bat (SE) and/or Tri-Colored Bat (SE) 1) Regarding removal (exclusion) of individual animals from human habited structures to reduce human health risk: Hibernacula records are offset and circumscribed Provided the “Required Conservation Measures” described in as described above. In addition, the online application 4VAC15-20 are implemented, we do not anticipate take of this depicts a 150-foot-radius circle around documented species, and any incidental take is not prohibited. We refer roost trees (there are no known roosts as of this date). interested parties to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance. 2) Regarding tree removal, prescribed fire, or other land management actions proposed to enhance public safety or to reduce risk of property damage: Provided the “Required Conservation Measures” described in 4VAC15-20 are implemented, we do not anticipate take of this species, and any incidental take is not prohibited. We refer interested parties to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance. 3) Regarding any other tree removal or harvest, prescribed fire, or other land management actions: If the activity would occur within 0.25 miles of a “major” hibernaculum (i.e., a hibernaculum documented to support at least 50 individual little brown bats and/or Tri-Colored bats in any year since December 31, 1994) or within 150 feet of a known roost tree, the applicant should refer to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance regarding development of a Conservation Plan for these species, if authorization of incidental take is desired. Lacking such plan approval by the Department, the applicant may proceed with the proposed activities at their own discretion, but is not provided any authorization of purposeful or incidental take of these species.

To initiate review of such a project, and consultation with DWR regarding development of a project-specific Conservation Plan, the project proponent should access the Department’s online application for these species at: http://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winte-habitat-roosts-application/ to determine whether the project footprint intersects with the application-specific buffers. If the 0.5 mile radius inner buffer and the project footprint overlap, the project proponent should contact Mr. Rick Reynolds at Rick.Reynolds@DWR.virginia.gov, or at 540-248-9360, for further guidance.

Northern Long-Eared Bat (FTST) Coordinate with the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-Hibernacula, roost tree, and capture records are offset services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. and circumscribed as described above.

Virginia Big-Eared Bats (FTST) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula or bachelor and maternity roosts: NO disturbance Currently, SppObs records for Virginia Big-eared Bats of bats and/or physical modification of the cave/roost that are located within karst/cave habitat indicate the entrance. Coordinate with the USFWS for all projects that presence of a hibernaculum. may affect Virginia Big-eared Bats.

Tree-hibernating bats:

Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-Eared Bat (SE) Perform habitat assessment if the site: (1) is forested and proposed for timbering and/or tree removal; and/or (2) One should rely upon SppObs to indicate presence or includes abandoned structures (e.g., barns, houses), bridges, potential presence. and/or culverts which are proposed for impacts. DWR recommendations will be based on results of the habitat suitability assessment and anticipated project impacts.

Amphibians Protective Recommendations

Mabee’s Salamander (ST) Avoid impacts upon suitable/occupied habitat. To preserve a natural breeding pond and adjacent upland habitat used by this species, we recommend preservation of a 900-foot-wide naturally forested buffer around the breeding pond: to protect more opportunistic or temporary breeding sites, or where such a wide buffer is infeasible, the buffer width/location may be modified upon review and approval by DWR.

Eastern Tiger Salamander (SE) Avoid impacts upon suitable/occupied habitat. To preserve a natural breeding pond and adjacent upland habitat used by this species, we recommend preservation of a 900-foot-wide naturally forested buffer around the breeding pond: to protect more opportunistic or temporary breeding sites, or where such a wide buffer is infeasible, the buffer width/location may be modified upon review and approval by DWR. Reptiles TOYR (certain activities may not occur)

Bog Turtle (FESE) Avoid impacts upon suitable or occupied habitat. If impacts are unavoidable, consult with DWR.

Wood Turtle (ST) Instream work: October 1 through March 31; Work within 900 ft of stream: April 1 through September 30. Maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft (preferably larger) on stream. sea turtles (federal and state-listed) For activities on beaches: May 1 through November 15. Nest searches are conducted from May 1 through August 31.

TOYR ends when last nest hatches as determined during most recent monitoring activity. For dredging: April 1 through November 30 for hydraulic hopper dredging in the Bay, ocean and major tributaries. Efforts to waive the TOYR must be coordinated through NOAA Fisheries Service.

Additional Information

Freshwater Mollusks: long-term brooders Freshwater Mollusks: short-term brooders TOYR: April 15 through June 15 (glochidia release); TOYR: May 15 through July 31 and August 15 through September 30 (spawning) Birdwing Pearlymussel (FESE) Appalachian Monkeyface (FESE) Black Sandshell (ST) Atlantic Pigtoe (FPST) Brook Floater (SE) Cracking Pearlymussel (FESE) Cumberlandian Combshell (FESE) Cumberland Monkeyface (FESE) Dromedary Pearlymussel (FESE) Fine-rayed Pigtoe (FESE) Elktoe (Tier IIc) James Spinymussel (FESE) Fluted Kidneyshell (FESE) Pistolgrip (ST) Fragile Papershell (ST) Pyramid Pigtoe (SE) Green Floater (ST) Rough Pigtoe (FESE) Green Blossom (FESE) Rough Rabbitsfoot (FESE) Littlewing Pearlymussel (FESE) Sheepnose Mussel (FESE) Oyster Mussel (FESE) Shiny Pigtoe (FESE) Pink Mucket (FESE) Slabside Pearlymussel (FESE) Purple Lilliput (SE) Tennessee Clubshell (Tier IIa) Rayed Bean (FESE) Yellow Lance (FT) Slippershell Mussel (SE) Snuffbox (FESE) Spectaclecase (FESE) Tan Riffleshell (FESE) Tennessee Heelsplitter (SE) Yellow Lampmussel (Tier IIa)

Status Definitions

FE = federal endangered SE = state endangered FT = federal threatened ST = state threatened Tier/Rank = Virginia Wildlife Action Plan Species of Greatest Conservation Need; see www.bewildvirginia.org

Avian Species Nesting Dates (for informational purposes only) Raptors (including hawks, owls, falcons) January 1 through May 31 Woodpeckers April 1 through July 31 Resident passerines and non-passerines March 1 through July 31Migrant passerines and non-passerines May 1 through July 31 American goldfinch July 15 through September 15 Examples: resident passerines and non-passerines - Mourning Dove, Carolina Chickadee, White-breasted Nuthatch, Carolina Wren, American Robin, Northern Mockingbird, Common Grackle, Northern Cardinal, Song Sparrow Examples: migrant passerines and non-passerines - cuckoos, nightjars, swifts, hummingbirds, swallow, warblers, vireos, tanagers

Additional resources available through the Environmental Services page on DWR’s website at: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/

Time of Year Restrictions and Other Recommendations Wildlife Information and Environmental Services

Purpose: This document, which provides general guidance for the protection of selected wildlife resources, has been developed as guidance for project planning and scheduling of construction activities that may impact the identified wildlife species. The time of years (TOYR; when work is not to be performed) and other information included in this document depict times of year during which certain species may be most sensitive to human activities such as construction and land clearing. It does not constitute a list of best management practices to protect imperiled or sensitive wildlife species or their habitats; nor is adherence to these restrictions essential for every project. Environmental documents and permit applications are reviewed individually, and modification or waiver of these time of year standards will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Projects with federal nexus must comply with Section 7 ESA; consult USFWS IPaC. All hydraulic hopper dredging in Chesapeake Bay and tributaries must coordinate with NOAA Fisheries.

Designated Waters TOYR (no instream work) Wild Trout Streams and tributaries

Brook and Brown Trout waters October 1–March 31; Rainbow Trout waters March 15–May 15; Stocked/Stockable Trout Streams: no TOYR; contact Regional Manager; Anadromous Fish Areas: Feb 15–June 30; James River exceptions:

• Below Rt. 17 crossing No TOYR necessary unless project spans width of river, significantly impeding fish passage
• Bosher’s Dam upstream, including Rivanna River and tribs March 15 through June 30 Exception in Rappahannock River:

• Rappahannock River and tribs below Rt. 360 crossing February 15 through June 15 Exception in York River:

• York River and tribs below Rt 33 crossing February 15 through June 15 Exception in Elizabeth River:
• Elizabeth River and tribs No TOYR necessary unless project spans width of river, significantly impeding fish passage Exception in Nansemond River:

• Nansemond River and tribs February 15 through June 15 Threatened and Endangered Species Waters and tributaries TOYR dependent upon species known to inhabit the stream/river, see species information below. * we understand that federal navigation channel dredging may require modification from the standard TOYR recommended for protection of anadromous fishes in the James River due to funding and project scheduling timeframes.

Fishes TOYR (no instream work to occur) General Warm Water Species spawning April 15 through July 15 General Cold Water Species spawning March 1 through June 30 Landlocked white bass/striped bass/sunfish (Lake Anna, Dan River) March 15 through June 30 Smith Mountain Lake Fish Assemblage February 15 through June 15 Atlantic Sturgeon (FESE) TOYR and/or other protective recommendations are applicable for work in the segments of designated Threatened and Endangered Species Waters (TE Waters) indicated below. However, in addition to these waters, Atlantic Sturgeon are known from tributaries to designated TE Waters, the Chesapeake Bay, Chesapeake Bay embayments, small tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay (including on the eastern Shore), and the Piankatank River. Impacts upon Atlantic sturgeon may be considered for projects impacting such waters, on a case-by-case basis.

Spring spawning/migration March 15 through June 15

• James River from Wilcox Wharf downstream to the Rt. 17 crossing Fall spawning/migration August 1 through November 15
• James River from upper extent of designated water (Bosher’s Dam) downstream to the Rt. 17 crossing
• Appomattox River from Lake Chesdin Dam downstream to confluence with James River
• Chickahominy River from Walker’s Dam downstream to confluence with James River
• Pamunkey River from upper extent of designated water (Ashland Mill Dam) downstream to White House Landing/Pamunkey Indian Reservation
• Mattaponi River from upper extent of designated waters (Matta & Po rivers at I95) downstream to King and Queen Courthouse Landing
• Rappahannock River from the fall line downstream to the Rt. 360 bridge Larval and Juvenile life stages Upon review by DWR biologist
• Within designated TE Waters year-round in shallow habitats, often near-shore Congregation areas Upon review by DWR biologist
• Rappahannock River from Rt 360 crossing downstream to Rt 3 bridge at White Stone
• James River from Hog Point (Hog Island WMA) downstream to the Rt 17crossing Blackbanded Sunfish (SE) May 1 through June 30 Blackside Dace (FTST) April 1 through July 31; not in Clinch Drainage, where the species was introduced Bridle Shiner (Tier Ia) May 15 through July 31 Candy Darter (FECC) March 15 through June 30 Carolina Darter (ST) March 15 through June 30 Clinch Dace (Tier Ia) April 1 through July 31 Duskytail Darter (FESE) April 1 through July 15 Golden Darter (ST) May 1 through August 31 Greenfin Darter (ST) May 1 through June 30 Orangefin Madtom (ST) March 15 through May 31; not in James River drainage, where the species was introduced Roanoke Bass (Tier Ia) March 15 through July 15Roanoke Hogsucker (Tier IVc) March 15 through July 15 Roanoke Logperch (FESE) March 15 through June 30 Roughead Shiner (Tier Ib) March 15 through June 30 Sharphead Darter (SE) June 15 through August 31 Sickle Darter (ST) February 1 through April 30 Slender Chub (FTST) April 1 through May 31 Spotfin Chub (FTST) May 1 through August 31 Steelcolor Shiner (ST) May 1 through August 31 Tennessee Dace (SE) April 1 through July 31 Variegate Darter (SE) March 15 through July 31 Western Sand Darter (ST) April 1 through June 30 Whitemouth Shiner (ST) March 15 through June 30 Yellowfin Madtom (FTST) April 1 through August 31 Crayfish TOYR (no instream work to occur) Big Sandy Crayfish (FTST) July 1 through October 31 (females brooding young) Freshwater Mollusks TOYR (no instream work to occur) Long-term brooders (see list at end of document) April 15 through June 15 (glochidia release); and August 15 through September 30 (spawning) Short-term brooders (see list at end of document) May 15 through July 31 Exceptions:

• Dwarf Wedgemussel (FESE) March 15 through May 31; and August 15 through October 15
• Tennessee Bean (FESE; previously Purple Bean, Cumberland Bean) February 15 through June 15; and August 15 through September 30
• Spiny Riversnail (ST) April 1 through June 15
• Spider Elimia (SE) April 1 through June 15 Birds TOYR (certain activities not to occur) Bachman’s Sparrow (ST) April 1 through August 15 Bald Eagle nest sites December 15 through July 15 Bald Eagle concentration areas and roost sites (BECAR) Summer:May 15 through August 31; Winter: December 15 through March 15 Bewick’s Wren (SE) April 1 through June 30 Black Skimmer (Tier IIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Black Rail (SE) April 1 through August 31 Common Tern (Tier IIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges through determined during most recent monitoring activity Henslow’s Sparrow (ST) April 1 through August 31 Least Tern ( Tier IIIa) April 1 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Loggerhead Shrike(ST) April 1 through July 31 Peregrine Falcon (ST) February 15 through July 15 for activities w/in 600 ft of nest/box Piping Plover (FTST) March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Wilson’s Plover (SE) March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity Red-cockaded Woodpecker (FESE) A. Time of Year Restriction: April 1 - July 31 of any year for activities* within 1,000 ft of an active cavity tree cluster; Time of Day Restriction from 2 hours before to 2 hours after sunrise and from 2 hours before to 2 hours after sunset for activities* within 1,000 ft of an active cavity tree cluster. *Activities to which these are applied:
• Use of motorized or unmotorized vehicles should occur only on existing road
• Tree removal, tree trimming, hardwood midstory control
• Military training activities, unless approved by USFWS and/or DWR
• Construction activities, use of mechanized machinery

B. Activities Prohibited at any time:

• Impacts (construction, development, tree removal) upon an active or inactive (but still suitable) cavity tree cluster should be avoided, unless performed to enhance RCW habitat and in coordination with USFWS and/or DWR.
• Specifically, the following activities are prohibited unless a permit is obtained from the USFWS. a) Removing any red-cockaded woodpecker cavity tree, through cutting, bulldozing, or any other activity. b) Damaging an active cavity tree which results in the death of that tree. Damage includes, but is not limited to, injury to the bole or root system (generally due to heavy equipment use), exposure to herbicides, and fire scorch to the crown due to inadequate protective measures during prescribed burning. c) Using insecticides on any standing pine tree.

Prevention and control of disease and insect infestations is encouraged through silvicultural BMPs. d) Constructing roads and utility rights-of-way within a cluster. e) Construction of facilities including, but not limited to, buildings, campgrounds, recreational developments, residential dwellings, and industrial or business complexes f) Planting of shrubs and/or ornamental plants that will exceed 2.1 m (7 ft) in height within 15.24 m (50 ft) of active and inactive cavity trees. Construction equipment and construction material cannot be stored within 61 m (200 ft) of cavity trees. Landscaping within clusters should be accomplished with hand tools or lightweight power equipment rather than tractor mounted equipment

General beach-nesting birds March 15 through August 31; TOYR ends when last brood fledges as determined during most recent monitoring activity

General migratory and resident songbirds March 15 through August 15

Colonial Waterbird Colonies TOYR (certain activities not to occur)

Great Egret, Green Heron (Tier IVb), Yellow-Crowned April 1 through August 15 for activities w/in 0.25 mile of Night Heron, etc. rookery (site with more than one nesting pair); maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around rookery. Great Blue Heron February 15 through July 31 for activities w/in 0.25 mile of rookery or high intensity activity w/in 0.5 mile of rookery; maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 500 ft around rookery.

Mammals TOYR (certain activities not to occur)

Bat data layers: Hibernacula are offset and circumscribed by 0.5 and 5.5 mile buffers. Other records (roosts, colonies, acoustics) are not offset but may be buffered (3.0 miles for captures, 1.5 miles for roosts, plus 150 ft no-clear zone).

Cave-hibernating bats: Gray Bat (FESE) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula or bachelor and maternity roosts: NO disturbance Currently, SppObs records for Gray Bats that are of bats and/or physical modification of the cave/roost located within karst/cave habitat indicate the presence entrance/structure. of a hibernaculum. Spp Obs may also indicate an occupied roost on bridges or large culverts within the Tennessee River drainage, to which the recommendations to the right also apply.

Indiana Bat (FESE) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula, roosts and maternity colonies and for projects Currently, SppObs records for Indiana Bats that are located outside of these buffers, but within suitable habitat: located within karst/cave habitat indicate the presence TOYR for tree removal, tree timbering, and/or prescribed of a hibernaculum. burns from April 1 – November 14.

Little Brown Bat (SE) and/or Tri-Colored Bat (SE) 1) Regarding removal (exclusion) of individual animals from human habited structures to reduce human health risk: Hibernacula records are offset and circumscribed Provided the “Required Conservation Measures” described in as described above. In addition, the online application 4VAC15-20 are implemented, we do not anticipate take of this depicts a 150-foot-radius circle around documented species, and any incidental take is not prohibited. We refer roost trees (there are no known roosts as of this date). interested parties to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance. 2) Regarding tree removal, prescribed fire, or other land management actions proposed to enhance public safety or to reduce risk of property damage: Provided the “Required Conservation Measures” described in 4VAC15-20 are implemented, we do not anticipate take of this species, and any incidental take is not prohibited. We refer interested parties to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance. 3) Regarding any other tree removal or harvest, prescribed fire, or other land management actions: If the activity would occur within 0.25 miles of a “major” hibernaculum (i.e., a hibernaculum documented to support at least 50 individual little brown bats and/or Tri-Colored bats in any year since December 31, 1994) or within 150 feet of a known roost tree, the applicant should refer to the Department’s “Best management practices for conservation of little brown bats and tri-colored bats” for additional guidance regarding development of a Conservation Plan for these species, if authorization of incidental take is desired. Lacking such plan approval by the Department, the applicant may proceed with the proposed activities at their own discretion, but is not provided any authorization of purposeful or incidental take of these species.

To initiate review of such a project, and consultation with DWR regarding development of a project-specific Conservation Plan, the project proponent should access the Department’s online application for these species at: http://www.DWR.virginia.gov/wildlife/bats/little-brown-bat-tri-colored-bat-winte-habitat-roosts-application/ to determine whether the project footprint intersects with the application-specific buffers. If the 0.5 mile radius inner buffer and the project footprint overlap, the project proponent should contact Mr. Rick Reynolds at Rick.Reynolds@DWR.virginia.gov, or at 540-248-9360, for further guidance.

Northern Long-Eared Bat (FTST) Coordinate with the USFWS Virginia Field Office Project Review (IPaC) website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/virginia-ecological-Hibernacula, roost tree, and capture records are offset services/virginia-field-office-online-review-process. and circumscribed as described above.

Virginia Big-Eared Bats (FTST) For projects located within buffers around documented hibernacula or bachelor and maternity roosts: NO disturbance Currently, SppObs records for Virginia Big-eared Bats of bats and/or physical modification of the cave/roost that are located within karst/cave habitat indicate the entrance. Coordinate with the USFWS for all projects that presence of a hibernaculum. may affect Virginia Big-eared Bats.

Tree-hibernating bats:

Rafinesque’s Eastern Big-Eared Bat (SE) Perform habitat assessment if the site: (1) is forested and proposed for timbering and/or tree removal; and/or (2) One should rely upon SppObs to indicate presence or includes abandoned structures (e.g., barns, houses), bridges, potential presence. and/or culverts which are proposed for impacts. DWR recommendations will be based on results of the habitat suitability assessment and anticipated project impacts.

Amphibians Protective Recommendations

Mabee’s Salamander (ST) Avoid impacts upon suitable/occupied habitat. To preserve a natural breeding pond and adjacent upland habitat used by this species, we recommend preservation of a 900-foot-wide naturally forested buffer around the breeding pond: to protect more opportunistic or temporary breeding sites, or where such a wide buffer is infeasible, the buffer width/location may be modified upon review and approval by DWR.

Eastern Tiger Salamander (SE) Avoid impacts upon suitable/occupied habitat. To preserve a natural breeding pond and adjacent upland habitat used by this species, we recommend preservation of a 900-foot-wide naturally forested buffer around the breeding pond: to protect more opportunistic or temporary breeding sites, or where such a wide buffer is infeasible, the buffer width/location may be modified upon review and approval by DWR. Reptiles TOYR (certain activities may not occur)

Bog Turtle (FESE) Avoid impacts upon suitable or occupied habitat. If impacts are unavoidable, consult with DWR.

Wood Turtle (ST) Instream work: October 1 through March 31; Work within 900 ft of stream: April 1 through September 30. Maintain undisturbed naturally vegetated buffer of at least 300 ft (preferably larger) on stream. sea turtles (federal and state-listed) For activities on beaches: May 1 through November 15. Nest searches are conducted from May 1 through August 31.

TOYR ends when last nest hatches. Dredging: April 1–Nov 30 in Bay, ocean, tributaries. Waivers require NOAA coordination.

Additional Information

Freshwater Mollusks: long-term brooders Freshwater Mollusks: short-term brooders TOYR: April 15 through June 15 (glochidia release); TOYR: May 15 through July 31 and August 15 through September 30 (spawning) Birdwing Pearlymussel (FESE) Appalachian Monkeyface (FESE) Black Sandshell (ST) Atlantic Pigtoe (FPST) Brook Floater (SE) Cracking Pearlymussel (FESE) Cumberlandian Combshell (FESE) Cumberland Monkeyface (FESE) Dromedary Pearlymussel (FESE) Fine-rayed Pigtoe (FESE) Elktoe (Tier IIc) James Spinymussel (FESE) Fluted Kidneyshell (FESE) Pistolgrip (ST) Fragile Papershell (ST) Pyramid Pigtoe (SE) Green Floater (ST) Rough Pigtoe (FESE) Green Blossom (FESE) Rough Rabbitsfoot (FESE) Littlewing Pearlymussel (FESE) Sheepnose Mussel (FESE) Oyster Mussel (FESE) Shiny Pigtoe (FESE) Pink Mucket (FESE) Slabside Pearlymussel (FESE) Purple Lilliput (SE) Tennessee Clubshell (Tier IIa) Rayed Bean (FESE) Yellow Lance (FT) Slippershell Mussel (SE) Snuffbox (FESE) Spectaclecase (FESE) Tan Riffleshell (FESE) Tennessee Heelsplitter (SE) Yellow Lampmussel (Tier IIa)

Status Definitions

FE = federal endangered SE = state endangered FT = federal threatened ST = state threatened Tier/Rank = Virginia Wildlife Action Plan Species of Greatest Conservation Need; see www.bewildvirginia.org

Avian Species Nesting Dates (for informational purposes only) Raptors (including hawks, owls, falcons) January 1 through May 31 Woodpeckers April 1 through July 31 Resident passerines and non-passerines March 1 through July 31Migrant passerines and non-passerines May 1 through July 31 American goldfinch July 15 through September 15 Examples: resident passerines and non-passerines - Mourning Dove, Carolina Chickadee, White-breasted Nuthatch, Carolina Wren, American Robin, Northern Mockingbird, Common Grackle, Northern Cardinal, Song Sparrow Examples: migrant passerines and non-passerines - cuckoos, nightjars, swifts, hummingbirds, swallow, warblers, vireos, tanagers

Additional resources available through the Environmental Services page on DWR’s website at: https://dwr.virginia.gov/wies/

Osprey Nest Management in Virginia:

A Guideline for Landowners

March 2021

Osprey Nestlings by Vincent Slabe

Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources Wildlife Division He nrico, VA 23228-0778Osprey Nest Management in Virginia: A Guideline for Landowners April 2021 This report may be cited as follows: Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources. 2021. Osprey nest management in Virginia: A guideline for landowners. Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources, Wildlife Division.

Henrico, VA. 10 pp.

This report was completed with funds provided under the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program

• 2 -Osprey Nest Management in Virginia: A Guideline for Landowners Introduction The Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR or Department) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), respectively, exercise state and federal authority over conservation and management of Ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) in Virginia. The DWR, in consultation with USFWS and the Virginia Wildlife Services office of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA/WS), has developed the following guidance to ensure that problematic Osprey nests are managed in a consistent and lawful manner in Virginia. These guidelines address laws that pertain to protection of Ospreys and their nests, Osprey nest removal, and construction and placement of alternative nest platforms. It is important to point out that these guidelines are intended to inform landowners and land managers of relevant wildlife regulations and to recommend voluntary protocols (see page 5 ‘Osprey Nest Removal – Inactive Nests’ and page 6 ‘Replacement Nesting Platforms’ and page 6 ‘Working Near Osprey Nests’) for addressing problematic Osprey nest situations.

They are not regulatory and do not supplant reviews and/or consultations required of projects undertaken by federal agencies under the National Environmental Policy Act or for regional issues such as Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) management.

The great majority of Virginia’s Ospreys are migratory, arriving from their winter haunts in the West Indies, Central America and South America in March and April, and then departing in August and September (Watts and Paxton 2007). Males typically arrive on their breeding territories one to two weeks before females, with mating activity commencing immediately after arrival of the female. Eggs are typically laid in April and are incubated by the female for 35-37 days. The young remain in the nest for approximately 8 weeks after hatching.

Most young are capable of sustained flight by late June or early July; yet, after fledging from the nest, the young remain dependent on the parents for up to 2 months.

The Chesapeake Bay historically has been recognized as supporting one of the largest populations of Ospreys in the world (Henny et al. 1974, Watts and Paxton 2007, Glass and Watts 2009). Habitat loss, egg collection, persecution, and shooting contributed to population declines from the mid-1800s through the 1930s, however (Henny et al. 1977, Watts and Paxton 2007); and during the post-World War II era, the Bay population (as elsewhere) declined dramatically due to pesticide-induced reproductive suppression (Henny et al. 1977, Watts and Paxton 2007). The population reached an estimated low of about 1,450 pairs in the early 1970’s (Henny et al. 1974) then began to recover after the banning of DDT and other related pesticides.

Surveys during the mid-1990s in Maryland and Virginia indicated significant recovery; the Chesapeake Bay regional population estimate rose to nearly 3,500 breeding pairs (Watts et al. 2004, Watts and Paxton 2007). More recent data suggest a current Chesapeake Bay population of 10,000-12,000 pairs (B.Watts, pers. comm. August 2019). The recovery has not been consistent geographically throughout the Bay. Low-salinity and tidal-fresh reaches have exhibited much larger population increases than higher salinity reaches over the last 40 years, evidently in response to the availability of high-quality food resources (Watts et al. 2004, Watts and Paxton

• 3 -2007, Glass and Watts 2009).

As elsewhere, Ospreys in Virginia have benefited from the availability of artificial nest supports (e.g., channel markers, nest platforms, duck blinds, dock pilings, communication towers). Prior to 1950, virtually all Osprey nests were reported as being built in living or dead trees, but by the 1990’s over 90% of all nests in Chesapeake Bay were built on human-made structures (Watts and Paxton 2007). Aside from the banning of DDT and similar compounds, the availability of artificial nesting substrates may be the most significant contributing factor in the recovery of the Chesapeake Bay Osprey population (Watts and Paxton 2007).

Laws Protecting Ospreys Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712): This federal law (MBTA), first adopted in 1918, generally prohibits taking or attempting to take any migratory bird, nest, egg, or parts thereof, except as permitted by the USFWS. To Take is broadly defined as to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess, or collect any migratory bird species, their nests, or their eggs. In April 2003, however, the USFWS provided clarification (USFWS 2003) asserting that the destruction of inactive migratory bird nests not otherwise protected under another statute such as the Endangered Species Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act is not prohibited under the MBTA, provided that no possession occurs during the destruction of said nest. Nest destruction that entails possession of the nest or results in the unpermitted take of migratory birds or their eggs, remains illegal and fully prosecutable under the MBTA. On December 22, 2017, the Office of the Solicitor of the US Department of the Interior (DOI) reinterpreted the scope of the MBTA (hereafter referred to as the M-Opinion) by stating that the statute only prohibits purposeful (or intentional) take of migratory birds (Office of the Solicitor 2017). However, in March 2021, the DOI rescinded the M-Opinion, and is in the process of developing new language to clarify the protections provided to migratory birds under the

MBTA.

Under a federal Migratory Bird Special Purpose / Depredation Permit issued by the USFWS, the DWR may capture Ospreys for rehabilitation purposes as well as salvage inactive nests and infertile eggs, and euthanize sick, injured, or orphaned Ospreys. Department employees also may trap and relocate Ospreys and move active nests or eggs, including in nuisance bird situations.

The USDA/WS also has authority from the USFWS to take migratory birds and their nests and young, specifically with regard to minimization or avoidance of aircraft strike hazards, and management of wildlife damage and threats to human health and safety. Regarding Ospreys, the USDA/WS staff in Virginia focuses on airport/aircraft safety issues in close consultation with DWR and USFWS, and attend to “nuisance” Osprey nests often for a fee charged to the affected landowner.

The Code of Virginia (§29.1-521): This statute and DWR regulation 4 VAC 15-30-10 generally protect all native birds and their nests, eggs, and young, except those subject to legal hunting or harvest under prescribed conditions. There is no provision in Virginia law or in the DWR regulations for legal hunting or harvest of Ospreys, active Osprey nests, eggs, or young (other than take of adults or young for falconry purposes). Though Virginia Code §29.1-100 defines a “nuisance species” to include a species ". . . concentrated in numbers and manners as to

• 4 -constitute a health hazard or other nuisance" and §29.1-511 then provides for year-round take of such “nuisance” animals, §29.1-100 specifically excludes any species protected by state or federal law (e.g., the federal MBTA) from the definition of a “nuisance species.” DWR regulation 4 VAC 15-30-50 provides authorization for Department employees, certain U.S. Government employees (whose responsibility includes fisheries and wildlife management), and certain local government animal control officers to capture, temporarily hold or possess, transport, release, or euthanize wildlife (including problematic or nuisance species) in the performance of their official duties. Under this authority, though, such activities may only be conducted in accordance with the MBTA as discussed above.

It is also worth noting that under the authority of Virginia Code §29.1-103, §29.1-501, and DWR Regulation 4 VAC 15-30-50, the Department may issue Commercial Nuisance Animal Permits to qualified individuals for capture, possession, transport, release, and euthanasia of wildlife that are causing property damage or refuse problems, or posing a risk to human health or safety. Ospreys, however, are protected under the MBTA and therefore are specifically excluded (General Condition 5(B)iii) from the authorities granted by these permits.

Thus, it is unlawful for Commercial Nuisance Animal Permit holders to remove or relocate Ospreys, or their active nests or young.

Osprey Nest Removal

Inactive Nests: An inactive Osprey nest is defined as a nest without any eggs or dependent (flightless) young and includes nests under construction. Inactive nests may be removed or relocated at any time without authorization or consultation. However, affected landowners may call the DWR or the USDA/WS to informally consult on pending removals or relocations if they so desire. It can be very difficult to discern the status of a nest from below, but the majority of Osprey nests in Virginia are active from 1 April through September 15. Vigilance and continued removal of sticks is strongly recommended in the weeks that follow removal of an inactive Osprey nest, given the strong probability that the same Osprey pair will continue attempting to nest at the site from which the nest was removed. If an egg is laid during the course of nest removal activities, the nest is considered active and nest removal activities must cease immediately.

Active Nests: An active Osprey nest is defined as a nest containing one or more eggs or occupied by dependent (flightless) young. Active nests should not be removed until the young are able to fly (fledge). Only when a nest poses a direct threat to human health or safety or when the birds, nest, or eggs themselves are threatened should the removal of an active nest be considered. In rare situations, removal of an active nest that merely constitutes a nuisance may be authorized if it interferes with the operation or intended use of a structure.

Anyone seeking to have an active nest removed must contact the DWR, the USFWS, or the USDA/WS. To comply with federal regulations, active nest removal may only be undertaken by an individual authorized by USFWS for the nest removal. Individuals interested in applying for a USFWS permit to remove an active nest may do so at: https://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-13.pdf (see also Frequently Asked Questions at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/policies-and-regulations/3-200-13FAQ.pdf). If the nest is on a utility structure, use the following form: https://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-81.pdf.

• 5 -Relocation of active Osprey nests is a time- and resource-intensive endeavor, requiring identification of a suitable relocation site, acquisition of special equipment and/or machinery, and post-relocation monitoring to ensure that the adults continue to tend the nest. Because of this, the DWR, the USFWS and the USDA/WS do not have the capacity to oversee active nest relocation, and strongly discourage this activity. Relocations conducted by qualified and experienced environmental consultants or natural resource professionals may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Relocation of active Osprey nests should follow the same process as active Osprey nest removal.

Replacement Nesting Platforms: We recommend that a replacement (new) nesting platform be erected any time an active or inactive Osprey nest is removed. Replacement platforms ensure that a preferred nest site is not “lost” to the regional population and may also reduce the likelihood of the resident pair re-nesting on the original platform or structure. The following guidance applies to siting and construction of replacement nest structures (see Fig. 1 for details regarding platform shape, dimensions and construction):

1. If possible, the replacement platform should be as tall as or taller than the original nest support, but not less than 15 feet above the ground or normal water elevation (above high tide stage in tidal waters).
2. The replacement platform should be located as close as possible to the original nest site; preferably within 150 feet, and not beyond 300 feet.
3. The replacement platform should be in an exposed location (i.e., not under or within the canopy of a tree or other shelter).
4. The platform support should be strong enough to support a 200-pound nest.
5. If feasible, old nests should be relocated intact onto the new platform. When this is not feasible, sticks from the old nest should be roughly arranged on the platform in the shape of a nest to help draw the nesting pair to the new location.
6. The original nest support or substrate should be modified to discourage Ospreys from rebuilding a nest at the site. We recommend contacting USDA/WS for guidance.

Working near Osprey Nests General Guidance

There are situations that require maintenance or repair work be done on a structure with an active Osprey nest. In these situations, we recommend adherence to the following guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to minimize threats to Osprey, workers, and property.

In order to minimize disturbance to nesting Ospreys we strongly recommend that work at or near nests occur before nests become active in a given year (April 1, although egg laying may occur beginning in the last week of March) or after the young fledge from the nest (usually in late June through July). If work is urgent, we generally recommend waiting

• 6 -until the adults are no longer incubating eggs and nestlings are past the stage of being actively brooded or shaded by the parents (typically greater than 4 weeks old). If delaying work is not a viable option, we recommend the following: (1) work should take place during daylight hours in order to avoid risk of injury under low light conditions to an Osprey flushing from the nest; (2) work near the nest should be avoided during cool (<75° F), wet and cloudy days as well as hot days (>90° F) to reduce the risk of egg failure and nestling mortality; (3) incubating/brooding adults should not be kept from the nest for more than 60 consecutive minutes; and (4) if the adult birds remain off the nest for longer than 60 consecutive minutes, all work should cease immediately and workers must move off the structure to allow the birds to return and tend the nest for a minimum of 60 minutes before work resumes.

Nest site conditions, nest substrate, and the nature and duration of the work near Osprey nests can vary greatly. Moreover, the behavior of breeding adults is often unpredictable making it difficult to establish failsafe criteria under which work can be performed. It is for these reasons we strongly recommend coordination with the DWR prior to conducting work on a structure with an active nest or a nest whose status is unknown in order to comply with Virginia law and DWR regulations.

Best Management Practices

Utilities

Ospreys routinely select electric distribution poles and transmission towers as nest sites, which exposes them to potential electrocutions or collisions with wires. Conversely, Osprey nest materials may catch on fire or otherwise compromise critical utility components thereby damaging equipment and causing interruptions in electrical service (Washburn 2014). Ideally, Osprey should be discouraged from nesting on utility structures when logistically feasible. This may be accomplished by erecting an alternate nesting platform near the problematic nest site. Other practices include: (1) installing avian perch deterrents, (2) pole caps, (3) thermoplastic coatings, and (4) bushing covers, (5) using line marking and bird deterrent devices, and (6) separating phase to phase ground wires (Washburn 2014, Avian Power Line Interaction Committee 2006). The Avian Power Line Interaction Committee manual at the following website (https://www.aplic.org/documents.php) gives more detailed descriptions of the above mentioned techniques.

If an active nest needs to be removed from an electric utility structure to avoid harm to the birds or nest or to prevent potential damage to equipment, the procedures in the ‘Osprey Nest Removal - Active Nests’ section must be followed.

Cell Towers

Osprey/cell tower interactions have increased significantly in Virginia due to the increase in the number of cell towers across the landscape coupled with the large Osprey population. Currently, no consistently reliable method exists to prevent Osprey from nesting on cell towers. We recommend that cell tower owners, cellular carriers or their contractors plan maintenance activities and/or nest removal outside of the nesting season on towers frequently used by Osprey for nesting. If this is not feasible, cell tower personnel should coordinate with DWR or the USDA/WS to discuss management options.

• 7 -Transportation (Aids to Navigation)

Osprey frequently nest on channel markers found in navigable waters. Nests on channel markers poses a serious safety hazard to boat traffic by blocking navigation lights and signage. Navigation signs, markers and lights can be modified in areas of high Osprey abundance. This can be accomplished by repositioning a sign on a marker (ex. if it is helping to support a nest), installing perch deterrent to deter nesting, or constructing a nest platform above makers signs (Washburn 2014).

Collision with Aircraft

Osprey collisions with aircraft, particularly in the coastal plain of Virginia, pose a serious human safety issue. Integrated Wildlife Damage Management Programs, implemented by USDA/WS, are the best option in reducing strike risk at airports and air stations. The USDA/WS use multiple methods and tools to abate air-strike. Some of the common methods include non-lethal hazing/harassment, perch deterrents, infrasound and noise deterrents, pyrotechnics, translocation/removal of problematic individuals, and elimination of nest structures (Washburn 2014). USDA/WS should be contacted if Osprey pose a potential threat to aircraft safety at or near an airport.

Other Human-built Structures

Osprey frequently nest on homes, docks, boat houses and occasionally on boat covers or on boats themselves. Osprey that nest on these structures may be encouraged to nest on nesting platforms constructed adjacent to these human structures (see Figure 1 for guidance on nest platform construction). We recommend removing nesting material before nests become active. In situations where nests are active we recommend removal of the nest after the young are able to fly. If this is not feasible, the landowner should coordinate with DWR or the USDA/WS to discuss management options.

Contact Information Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources Wildlife Division 7870 Villa Park Drive P.O. Box 90778 Henrico, VA 23228-0778 Phone: 804-367-1000 FAX: 804-367-2427 www.dwr.virginia.gov United States Department of Agriculture APHIS / Wildlife Services P.O. Box 130 Moseley, VA 23120 Phone: 804-739-7739

FAX: 804-739-7738

• 8 -https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/SA_Program_Overview/SA_Contact United States Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Migratory Birds, North Atlantic-Appalachian Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 (413)253-8577 phone (413)253-8424 fax Literature Cited Avian Power Line Interaction Committee. 2012. Reducing avian collisions with powerlines: the state of the art in 2012. Edison Electric Institute and Avian Powerline Interaction Committee

(APLIC).

Glass, K.A. and Brian D. Watts. 2009. Osprey diet composition and quality in high-and low-salinity areas of lower Chesapeake Bay. J. Raptor Res. 43(1):27-36.

Henny, C.J., M.M. Smith, and V.D. Stotts, 1974. The 1973 distribution and abundance of breeding ospreys in the Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Sci. 15:125-133.

Henny, C.J., M.A. Byrd, J.A. Jacobs, P.D., McLain, M.R. Todd, and B.F. Halla. 1977. Mid-Atlantic coast osprey population: present numbers, productivity, pollutant contamination, and status. J. Wildl. Manage. 41(2):254-265 National Wildlife Federation. 1987. Raptor Management Techniques Manual. National Wildlife Federation Scientific and Technical Series No. 10. 420 pp.

Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2017. Solicitor’s Opinion M-37050. U.S.

Department of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor, Washington, D.C. 41 pp.

Spitzer, P.R. 1977. Osprey egg and nestling transfers: their value as ecological experiments and as management procedures, p. 171-182. In S.A. Temple (ed.), Endangered birds: management techniques for preserving threatened species. Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Migratory Bird Permit Memorandum MBPM-2. U.S.

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 2 pp.

Washburn, B.E. 2014. Human osprey conflicts: industry, utilities, communication, and transportation. J. Raptor Res. 48 (4): 387-395.

Watts, B., M.A. Byrd, and M.U. Watts. 2004. Status and distribution of breeding ospreys in the Chesapeake Bay: 1995-1996. Journal of Raptor Research 38:47-54.

Watts, B.D. and B.J. Paxton. 2007. Ospreys of the Chesapeake Bay: population recovery, ecological requirements, and current threats. Waterbirds 30(Special Publication 1):39-49.

• 9 -Fig. 1. Diagram for an Osprey nest platform. To construct the platform, the following materials are required: (1) 2” x 6” x 12’ cedar board; (1) 2” x 6” x 8’ cedar board; (1) 12” x 12” x ½” exterior plywood; (1) 45” X 45” piece of heavy duty wire mesh; (20) galvanized 40D nails; (4) ⅛” x 1” x 30” steel strapping; (8) 2 ½" x ½" bolts with washers and nuts; (8) 4” x ½" lag screws; (1) 6” or 8” diameter cedar post, 20’ to 30’ long; and wood preservative and stain. To prevent splitting, pre-drill all nail and bolt holes. Treat the entire structure with wood preservative and stain brown. To encourage use by Ospreys, wire several sticks into the platform (National Wildlife Federation 1987; used with permission).
• 10

Osprey Nest Management in Virginia:

A Guideline for Landowners

March 2021

Osprey Nestlings by Vincent Slabe

Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources Wildlife Division He nrico, VA 23228-0778Osprey Nest Management in Virginia: A Guideline for Landowners April 2021 This report may be cited as follows: Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources. 2021. Osprey nest management in Virginia: A guideline for landowners. Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources, Wildlife Division.

Henrico, VA. 10 pp.

This report was funded by the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program

• Virginia DWR and USFWS oversee osprey conservation. This guidance, developed with USDA/WS, addresses laws, nest removal, and platform construction, advising landowners on lawful management and voluntary protocols.

They are non-regulatory and do not replace reviews or consultations required by federal agencies under NEPA or regional issues like BASH management.

Most Virginia Ospreys migrate from the West Indies, Central, and South America in March-April, departing August-September (Watts & Paxton 2007). Males arrive 1-2 weeks before females; eggs are laid in April, incubated 35-37 days, and young stay ~8 weeks post-hatch.

Most young can fly by late June or early July but remain dependent on parents for up to 2 months afterward.

Chesapeake Bay has supported one of the largest Osprey populations (Henny et al. 1974, Watts & Paxton 2007). Declines from habitat loss, egg collection, persecution, and pesticides occurred from the 1800s to 1930s, reaching about 1,450 pairs in the early 1970s, then recovered after banning DDT.

Mid-1990s surveys in Maryland and Virginia showed recovery to ~3,500 pairs; recent data (2019) estimate 10,000-12,000 pairs. Recovery varies geographically, with larger increases in low-salinity areas due to better food resources.

• 3 -2007, Glass and Watts 2009).

Virginia Ospreys benefit from artificial nest supports (e.g., platforms, towers). Before 1950, nests were mostly in trees; by the 1990s, over 90% were on human-made structures. Artificial nesting sites significantly aided recovery.

Laws Protecting Ospreys Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712): This federal law (MBTA), first adopted in 1918, generally prohibits taking or attempting to take any migratory bird, nest, egg, or parts thereof, except as permitted by the USFWS. To Take is broadly defined as to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, possess, or collect any migratory bird species, their nests, or their eggs. In April 2003, however, the USFWS provided clarification (USFWS 2003) asserting that the destruction of inactive migratory bird nests not otherwise protected under another statute such as the Endangered Species Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act is not prohibited under the MBTA, provided that no possession occurs during the destruction of said nest. Nest destruction that entails possession of the nest or results in the unpermitted take of migratory birds or their eggs, remains illegal and fully prosecutable under the MBTA. On December 22, 2017, the Office of the Solicitor of the US Department of the Interior (DOI) reinterpreted the scope of the MBTA (hereafter referred to as the M-Opinion) by stating that the statute only prohibits purposeful (or intentional) take of migratory birds (Office of the Solicitor 2017). However, in March 2021, the DOI rescinded the M-Opinion, and is in the process of developing new language to clarify the protections provided to migratory birds under the

MBTA.

Under a USFWS Migratory Bird Depredation Permit, DWR can capture Ospreys for rehab, salvage inactive nests and infertile eggs, euthanize injured or orphaned Ospreys, and relocate or move nests or eggs, including nuisance situations.

USDA/WS, with USFWS authority, manages migratory birds for aircraft safety, wildlife damage, and health threats. In Virginia, USDA/WS focuses on airport safety and nuisance nest removal for a fee, in coordination with DWR and USFWS.

The Code of Virginia (§29.1-521): This statute and DWR regulation 4 VAC 15-30-10 generally protect all native birds and their nests, eggs, and young, except those subject to legal hunting or harvest under prescribed conditions. There is no provision in Virginia law or in the DWR regulations for legal hunting or harvest of Ospreys, active Osprey nests, eggs, or young (other than take of adults or young for falconry purposes). Though Virginia Code §29.1-100 defines a “nuisance species” to include a species ". . . concentrated in numbers and manners as to

• Nuisance animals posing health hazards can be taken year-round under §29.1-511 and §29.1-100, excluding protected species like the MBTA. DWR regulation 4 VAC 15-30-50 authorizes officials to handle wildlife, only per MBTA rules.

It is also worth noting that under the authority of Virginia Code §29.1-103, §29.1-501, and DWR Regulation 4 VAC 15-30-50, the Department may issue Commercial Nuisance Animal Permits to qualified individuals for capture, possession, transport, release, and euthanasia of wildlife that are causing property damage or refuse problems, or posing a risk to human health or safety. Ospreys, however, are protected under the MBTA and therefore are specifically excluded (General Condition 5(B)iii) from the authorities granted by these permits.

Permit holders cannot remove or relocate Ospreys, nests, or young.

Osprey Nest Removal

Inactive Nests: An inactive Osprey nest is defined as a nest without any eggs or dependent (flightless) young and includes nests under construction. Inactive nests may be removed or relocated at any time without authorization or consultation. However, affected landowners may call the DWR or the USDA/WS to informally consult on pending removals or relocations if they so desire. It can be very difficult to discern the status of a nest from below, but the majority of Osprey nests in Virginia are active from 1 April through September 15. Vigilance and continued removal of sticks is strongly recommended in the weeks that follow removal of an inactive Osprey nest, given the strong probability that the same Osprey pair will continue attempting to nest at the site from which the nest was removed. If an egg is laid during the course of nest removal activities, the nest is considered active and nest removal activities must cease immediately.

Active nests contain eggs or dependent young and should not be removed until fledging unless they threaten health, safety, or the structure. Nuisance removal may be authorized in rare cases.

Anyone seeking to have an active nest removed must contact the DWR, the USFWS, or the USDA/WS. To comply with federal regulations, active nest removal may only be undertaken by an individual authorized by USFWS for the nest removal. Individuals interested in applying for a USFWS permit to remove an active nest may do so at: https://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-13.pdf (see also Frequently Asked Questions at https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/policies-and-regulations/3-200-13FAQ.pdf). If the nest is on a utility structure, use the following form: https://www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-81.pdf.

• 5 -Relocation of active Osprey nests is a time- and resource-intensive endeavor, requiring identification of a suitable relocation site, acquisition of special equipment and/or machinery, and post-relocation monitoring to ensure that the adults continue to tend the nest. Because of this, the DWR, the USFWS and the USDA/WS do not have the capacity to oversee active nest relocation, and strongly discourage this activity. Relocations conducted by qualified and experienced environmental consultants or natural resource professionals may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Relocation of active Osprey nests should follow the same process as active Osprey nest removal.

A replacement nesting platform is recommended whenever an active or inactive nest is removed to prevent loss of the site and reduce re-nesting on the original. Guidance on siting and construction applies (see Fig. 1).

1. If possible, the replacement platform should be as tall as or taller than the original nest support, but not less than 15 feet above the ground or normal water elevation (above high tide stage in tidal waters).
2. The replacement platform should be located as close as possible to the original nest site; preferably within 150 feet, and not beyond 300 feet.
3. The replacement platform should be in an exposed location, not under or within a tree canopy or shelter.
4. The platform support must support a 200-pound nest.
5. If feasible, relocate old nests intact onto the new platform; if not, arrange sticks in a nest shape on the platform to attract nesting pairs.
6. The original nest support or substrate should be modified to discourage Ospreys from rebuilding a nest at the site. We recommend contacting USDA/WS for guidance.

Working Near Osprey Nests

There are situations that require maintenance or repair work be done on a structure with an active Osprey nest. In these situations, we recommend adherence to the following guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to minimize threats to Osprey, workers, and property.

In order to minimize disturbance to nesting Ospreys we strongly recommend that work at or near nests occur before nests become active in a given year (April 1, although egg laying may occur beginning in the last week of March) or after the young fledge from the nest (usually in late June through July). If work is urgent, we generally recommend waiting

• 6 -until the adults are no longer incubating eggs and nestlings are past the stage of being actively brooded or shaded by the parents (typically greater than 4 weeks old). If delaying work is not a viable option, we recommend the following: (1) work should take place during daylight hours in order to avoid risk of injury under low light conditions to an Osprey flushing from the nest; (2) work near the nest should be avoided during cool (<75° F), wet and cloudy days as well as hot days (>90° F) to reduce the risk of egg failure and nestling mortality; (3) incubating/brooding adults should not be kept from the nest for more than 60 consecutive minutes; and (4) if the adult birds remain off the nest for longer than 60 consecutive minutes, all work should cease immediately and workers must move off the structure to allow the birds to return and tend the nest for a minimum of 60 minutes before work resumes.

Nest conditions, substrate, and work duration vary; adult behavior is unpredictable. Coordination with DWR before work on active or unknown nests is strongly recommended to ensure compliance.

Best Management Practices

Utilities

Ospreys routinely select electric distribution poles and transmission towers as nest sites, which exposes them to potential electrocutions or collisions with wires. Conversely, Osprey nest materials may catch on fire or otherwise compromise critical utility components thereby damaging equipment and causing interruptions in electrical service (Washburn 2014). Ideally, Osprey should be discouraged from nesting on utility structures when logistically feasible. This may be accomplished by erecting an alternate nesting platform near the problematic nest site. Other practices include: (1) installing avian perch deterrents, (2) pole caps, (3) thermoplastic coatings, and (4) bushing covers, (5) using line marking and bird deterrent devices, and (6) separating phase to phase ground wires (Washburn 2014, Avian Power Line Interaction Committee 2006). The Avian Power Line Interaction Committee manual at the following website (https://www.aplic.org/documents.php) gives more detailed descriptions of the above mentioned techniques.

If an active nest needs to be removed from an electric utility structure to avoid harm to the birds or nest or to prevent potential damage to equipment, the procedures in the ‘Osprey Nest Removal - Active Nests’ section must be followed.

Cell Towers

Osprey/cell tower interactions have increased significantly in Virginia due to the increase in the number of cell towers across the landscape coupled with the large Osprey population. Currently, no consistently reliable method exists to prevent Osprey from nesting on cell towers. We recommend that cell tower owners, cellular carriers or their contractors plan maintenance activities and/or nest removal outside of the nesting season on towers frequently used by Osprey for nesting. If this is not feasible, cell tower personnel should coordinate with DWR or the USDA/WS to discuss management options.

• 7 -Transportation (Aids to Navigation)

Osprey frequently nest on channel markers found in navigable waters. Nests on channel markers poses a serious safety hazard to boat traffic by blocking navigation lights and signage. Navigation signs, markers and lights can be modified in areas of high Osprey abundance. This can be accomplished by repositioning a sign on a marker (ex. if it is helping to support a nest), installing perch deterrent to deter nesting, or constructing a nest platform above makers signs (Washburn 2014).

Collision with Aircraft

Osprey collisions with aircraft, particularly in the coastal plain of Virginia, pose a serious human safety issue. Integrated Wildlife Damage Management Programs, implemented by USDA/WS, are the best option in reducing strike risk at airports and air stations. The USDA/WS use multiple methods and tools to abate air-strike. Some of the common methods include non-lethal hazing/harassment, perch deterrents, infrasound and noise deterrents, pyrotechnics, translocation/removal of problematic individuals, and elimination of nest structures (Washburn 2014). USDA/WS should be contacted if Osprey pose a potential threat to aircraft safety at or near an airport.

Other Human-built Structures

Osprey frequently nest on homes, docks, boat houses and occasionally on boat covers or on boats themselves. Osprey that nest on these structures may be encouraged to nest on nesting platforms constructed adjacent to these human structures (see Figure 1 for guidance on nest platform construction). We recommend removing nesting material before nests become active. In situations where nests are active we recommend removal of the nest after the young are able to fly. If this is not feasible, the landowner should coordinate with DWR or the USDA/WS to discuss management options.

Contact: Virginia DWR, 7870 Villa Park Dr., Henrico, VA 23228-0778, 804-367-1000, www.dwr.virginia.gov; USDA/WS, P.O. Box 130, Moseley, VA 23120, 804-739-7739.

FAX: 804-739-7738

• 8 -https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/SA_Program_Overview/SA_Contact United States Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Migratory Birds, North Atlantic-Appalachian Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 (413)253-8577 phone (413)253-8424 fax Literature Cited Avian Power Line Interaction Committee. 2012. Reducing avian collisions with powerlines: the state of the art in 2012. Edison Electric Institute and Avian Powerline Interaction Committee

(APLIC).

Glass and Watts 2009. Osprey diet in high- and low-salinity Chesapeake Bay. J. Raptor Res. 43(1):27-36.

Henny, Smith, Stotts 1974. 1973 breeding osprey distribution in Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Sci. 15:125-133.

Henny et al. 1977. Mid-Atlantic osprey population, productivity, contaminants, status. J. Wildl. Manage. 41(2):254-265; NWF 1987. Raptor Management Techniques Manual, 420 pp.

U.S. Dept. of Interior, Office of the Solicitor 2017. Solicitor’s Opinion M-37050.

Interior Office of the Solicitor, Washington, D.C., 41 pp.

Spitzer 1977. Osprey egg/nestling transfers as management and experiments, pp. 171-182, in Temple (ed.), Endangered Birds, Univ. Wisconsin Press.

USFWS 2003. Migratory Bird Permit Memorandum MBPM-2.

Interior FWS, Washington, D.C., 2 pp.

Washburn, B.E. 2014. Human osprey conflicts: industry, utilities, communication, and transportation. J. Raptor Res. 48 (4): 387-395.

Watts, Byrd, Watts 2004. Breeding osprey status/distribution in Chesapeake Bay, 1995-96. J. Raptor Res. 38:47-54.

Watts and Paxton 2007. Chesapeake Bay ospreys: recovery, ecology, threats. Waterbirds 30(Suppl 1):39-49.

• 9 -Fig. 1. Diagram for an Osprey nest platform. Materials: (1) 2”x6”x12’ cedar; (1) 2”x6”x8’ cedar; (1) 12”x12”x½” exterior plywood; (1) 45”x45” heavy-duty wire mesh; 20 galvanized 40D nails; 4 ⅛”x1”x30” steel strapping; 8 2½”x½” bolts with washers/nuts; 8 4”x½” lag screws; cedar post 20-30’ long; wood preservative and stain. Pre-drill holes, treat with preservative, stain brown, wire sticks into platform to attract Ospreys." x ½" bolts with washers and nuts; (8) 4” x ½" lag screws; (1) 6” or 8” diameter cedar post, 20’ to 30’ long; and wood preservative and stain. To prevent splitting, pre-drill all nail and bolt holes. Treat the entire structure with wood preservative and stain brown. To encourage use by Ospreys, wire several sticks into the platform (National Wildlife Federation 1987; used with permission).
• 10