technical memorandumportofpt.com/wp-content/uploads/jcia-environmental-memo...introduction the port...

Technical Memorandum, SWCA Project No. 43974 1

December 2017

Technical Memorandum

To: Reid Middleton, Inc. From: Sara Twitchell, Natural Resources Project Manager Date: 12/1/2017 – Updated 12/22/2017 Subject: Port of Port Townsend, Jefferson International Airport Runway Rehabilitation

Project Phase 1

INTRODUCTION

The Port of Port Townsend is proposing to rehabilitate the runway at the Jefferson County International

Airport (JCIA) in Jefferson County, Washington. The existing runway surface is designed as a shed-

slope, but the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standard for runways is a crowned surface. Both

surface types are being considered and evaluated for potential environmental impacts.

SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by Reid Middleton, Inc. to prepare an

existing conditions inventory to include a general review and site investigation of wetlands, floodplains,

and threatened and endangered species. Surveys were conducted on November 10, 2017 to document the

flora and fauna, particularly special status species, in the project’s study area and to document the

different vegetation types and habitat within the project’s study area. This memo summarizes the findings

of the biological resources survey and discusses potential impacts from two different design alternatives

and suggested mitigation measures.

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires each federal agency to ensure that any action authorized,

funded, or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any

endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such

species.

The majority of the study area is a paved runway surrounded by mowed grasses. The grass is maintained

as part of the Object Free Area (OFA), which is required by the FAA to remain clear of above ground

objects protruding above the runway safety area edge elevation. Outside of the OFA, habitat consisted of

upland shrubland with patches of low elevation forest dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra) and black

cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), with some Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) and Douglas fir

(Pseudotsuga menziesii). Shrub species included baldhip rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), trailing blackberry

(Rubus ursinus), Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), hardhack spirea (Spiraea douglasii), swordfern

(Polystichum munitum), and common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus). This habitat type makes up the

majority of the study area outside of the runway and mowed grasses, and is bordered to the south by

coniferous forest, located outside of the study area. Several wetlands, ditches, and detention ponds are

present throughout the study area. Photos of representative habitat types are included in Appendix B.

Jefferson County International Airport Wetlands and TE Memo


December 2017

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) query

(Appendix A) identified three federally listed threatened bird species, one threatened fish species, one

proposed threatened fish species, and one threatened plant species with the potential to be affected by

project activities. These species and their potential to occur in the project area based on a review of

documented species occurrences and available habitat are described in Table 1. No USFWS designated

critical habitat is present within the project area.

Table 1. ESA-listed Species Potentially Affected by Project Activities

Common

Name Scientific Name Status Habitat

Potential to

Occur in

Project Area

Comment

Birds

Marbled

Murrelet

Brachyramphus

marmoratus

Federal

Threatened Old-growth forest None Habitat is not present

Yellow-billed

Cuckoo

Coccyzus

americanus

Federal

Threatened

Wooded habitat

with dense cover

and water nearby

None Habitat is not present

Streaked-

horned lark

Eremophila

alpestris strigata

Federal

Threatened

Early successional

habitat, typically

maintained by

disturbance.

Unlikely

Habitat is present, but

nesting areas have not

been documented

within 100 miles of

the project

Fish

Bull trout Salvelinus

confluentus

Federal

Threatened

Cold, freshwater

streams. None Habitat is not present

Dolly Varden Salvelinus malma Federal Proposed

Threatened

Cold, freshwater

streams. None Habitat is not present

Plants

Golden

Paintbrush Castilleja levisecta

Federal

Threatened Upland prairies None Habitat is not present

Recorded Occurrences within 2 Miles

A review of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species

(PHS) data for rare, threatened and endangered plant and animal returned showed no recorded

occurrences of terrestrial species within 2 miles of the study area (WDFW 2017). A variety of fish and

shellfish species were documented in Discovery Bay, located approximately 0.75 miles southwest of the

study area, but the project will not impact this habitat because outside of the project footprint.

Additionally, concentrations of waterfowl have been documented approximately 0.5 miles west of the

study area at a large farm and wetland complex, but this area is outside of the project footprint and will

not be impacted.

Bald eagle eagles were observed within 2 miles of the project during field surveys, but no nests have been

documented and none were observed during surveys.



December 2017

WETLANDS

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) defines wetlands to be areas that are inundated or saturated by

surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances

do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated soil conditions. Section 404 of

the Clean Water Act requires a permit before dredged or fill material may be discharged into a waters of

the United States, unless the activity is exempt from Section 404 regulation. The premise is that no

discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if: a practical alternative exists that is less

damaging to the environment or the nation’s waters would be significantly degraded. The Revised Code

of Washington Chapter 90.48.030 gives the Department of Ecology (Ecology) the jurisdiction to regulate

waters of the State.

A pre-field review was conducted that included United States Geological Survey (USGS) topography

(topo), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Natural Resources

Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (WSS), and USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)

maps. The USGS topo and the NWI depict two riverine features flowing across the property (USGS

2017a; USFWS 2017). The WSS does not map hydric soils (NRCS 2017), and the NHD does not map

any aquatic features (USGS 2017b) within or adjacent to the site. Historic aerial photos were reviewed in

Google Earth, and a wetland signature appears west of the runway in the 1990 photo (Google 2017).

Results of the field investigation determined that there is one large wetland and several smaller potentially

jurisdictional wetlands within and adjacent to the site (Figure 1). The wetlands are described below in

detail.

Potentially Jurisdictional Wetlands

Wetland A (approximately 8.5 acres)

Wetland A is a relatively large feature that is classified as slope/depressional using the Hydrogeomorphic

(HGM) wetland classification (NRCS 2008), and as palustrine emergent (PEM)/palustrine scrub-shrub

(PSS) using the Classification of Deepwater Habitats of the United States (referred to as Cowardin)

(Cowardin et. al. 1979). The wetland is bounded by Highway 20 to the west, a gravel access road to the

north, airport infrastructure to the east, and a fill pad to the south. Hydrophytic vegetation is dominated by

reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), hardhack spiraea, and Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana). The wetland

is in a valley bottom and receives hydrology from surface runoff, groundwater, and direct precipitation.

The 1990 aerial photo depicts a hydrology signature in this vicinity.

Wetland B (approximately 0.25 acre)

Wetland B is a small feature, located between the toe of slope and the fill pad mentioned above. The

wetland is classified as slope/depressional using HGM, and PEM using Cowardin. The wetland boundary

appears to be formed by natural topography. Hydrophytic vegetation is dominated by reed canarygrass

and hardhack spiraea. The wetland is in a valley bottom and receives hydrology from surface runoff,

groundwater, and direct precipitation.

Wetland C (approximately 0.5 acre)

Wetland C is a hillside seep that flows downhill into a ditch south of the runway. The wetland is

classified as slope using HGM and palustrine forested (PFO)/PSS using Cowardin. The wetland is

bounded by a fill pad associated with a Jefferson County pump house to the south and by fill associated

with the runway to the north. Hydrophytic vegetation is dominated by red alder, hardhack spiraea, Nootka

rose, and reed canarygrass. Hydrology appears to be provided mainly by groundwater.



December 2017

Potentially Non-jurisdictional Features

Runway Swales A (approximately 5.75 acres) and B (approximately 5.60 acres)

There is a grassy swale between the runway and the taxiway that possesses wetland characteristics, but is

likely non-jurisdictional because it was created from upland in an area that is mapped as non-hydric soils.

The swale contains 4 catch basins that convey runoff from the runway to Wetland A and Ditch A.

Ditch A (approximately 1.40 acres)

Ditch A is located north of the taxiway, and flows across the site from west to east. The ditch is likely

non-jurisdictional because it is was artificially created from upland. The ditch receives water from

Runaway Swales A and B, and several ditches that drain the northern section of the airport. Ditch A

conveys water to Detention Pond A. The ditch is dominated by broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia),

hardstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), and willows (Salix spp).

Detention Pond A (approximately 2.25 acres)

Detention Pond A is located at the east end of the runway. Ditch A flows into the detention pond in its

northwest corner. A culvert at the southern end of the pond drains into Detention Pond B, beneath a

gravel road. The 1990 aerial photo shows an excavated ditch around the perimeter of what is now

Detention Pond A. It appears that this feature was created entirely from upland with the express purpose

of collecting stormwater. The detention pond is dominated by cattail, hardstem bulrush, and willows.

Detention Pond B (approximately 2.40 acres)

Detention Pond B is located south of Detention Pond A, and was created from upland with the express

purpose of collecting stormwater. A culvert conveys water from Detention Pond A, beneath a gravel

access road, and into a water quality cell that outfalls into the main detention pond. The 1990 aerial photo

shows a ditch draining Detention Pond A, which flowed offsite beneath the highway. The ditch appears to

have been artificially created from upland. The water quality swale is dominated by red alder and willow,

and the detention pond is mostly gravel with several volunteer willows.

Features A and B (less than 0.01 acre)

Features A and B are small depressions that were incidentally created from upland during runway

construction. These features were created entirely from upland but now possess wetland vegetation and

hydrology. A full delineation would determine if hydric soils are present. The small size of these features

and their artificial nature may preclude their jurisdictionality.

CONCLUSIONS

The Port of Port Townsend is considering both a shed-slope and crowned-slope alternative for

rehabilitating the JCIA runway. Alternative 1 would maintain the current shed-slope design and would

not require additional grading or stormwater design, and Alternative 2 would propose a crowned-slope

design with additional grading and increased stormwater capacity.

Five federally listed threatened and one proposed threatened species were identified as potentially

occurring in the project area. Based on a review of documented species occurrences and available habitat

in the project area, none of these species are likely to be impacted by the project. While potential habitat

for streaked-horned lark is present within the study area, it is unlikely that this species currently occupies

habitat in the area, as no nesting areas have been documented within 100 miles of the project in recent

history.



December 2017

There are three jurisdictional wetlands within the study area, and several features that are likely non-

jurisdictional. These determinations are preliminary and a full wetland delineation must be reviewed by

regulatory agencies for an approved Jurisdictional Determination.

Alternative 1 – Shed-slope Runway

Alternative 1 has potential to impact vegetation and habitat during resurfacing of the runway, and would

require additional ground-disturbance to install a new sub-base, a new stormwater detention pond, and

other stormwater features.

Equipment used during construction could crush or disturb vegetation in the vicinity of the project, but

impacts would likely be limited to the maintained grass in the OFA. Limiting construction staging areas

to the OFA, the use of appropriate sediment and erosion control measures, and revegetating any disturbed

areas following construction would minimize and avoid these impacts. Ground disturbing activities

associated with Alternative 1 would likely result in permanent fill in Wetlands A and C related to the

stormwater facilities that would require Section 401/404 permits from the Corps and Ecology.

Alternative 2 – Crown-slope Runway

Implementation of Alternative 2 would result in potential impacts similar to those described for

Alternative 1, related to crushing and disturbance of vegetation and ground disturbance for grading and

construction of a new stormwater detention pond and other stormwater features. Limiting construction

staging area, the use of appropriate sediment and erosion control measures, and revegetation would

minimize and avoid impacts to vegetation and habitat, but ground disturbing activities and construction of

stormwater facilities would likely result in permanent fill in Wetlands A and C. As a result, Section

401/404 permits from the Corps and Ecology would be required.

REFERENCES

Cowardin, Lewis, Virginia Carter, Francis Golet, and Edward LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and

Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. December 1979.

Google Earth. 2017b. Aerial photographs in the vicinity of 48.054122, -122.810435. Available at:

http://earth.google.com. Accessed November 1, 2017.

NRCS. 2017. Web Soil Survey 3.2. Available at:

https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed November 1, 2017.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2017. Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) on the

Web. Available at:http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/. Accessed 11/28/2017.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. National Wetlands Mapper.

https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Accessed November 1, 2017.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2017. Port Townsend South, WA. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle.

1:24,000. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey.

———.2017b. USGS. National Hydrologic Dataset. Available at:

https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=nhd&title=NHD%20View. Accessed

November 1, 2017.

Figure 1. Wetland Determination Results.

Appendix A: IPaC Resource List

11/9/2017 IPaC: Explore Location

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/R7R7HN4ZORHP3OKCHJFLDUEGNE/resources 1/6

IPaC resource listThis report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources)under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below.The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly a�ected byactivities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of e�ects a project may have on trust resources typically requiresgathering additional site-speci�c (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-speci�c (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities)information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS o�ce(s) with jurisdiction in the de�nedproject area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWIWetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

LocationJe�erson County, Washington

Local o�ceWashington Fish And Wildlife O�ce

(360) 753-9440 (360) 753-9405

510 Desmond Drive Se, Suite 102Lacey, WA 98503-1263

http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/

U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceIPaC

http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/



Endangered speciesThis resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of in�uence (AOI) forspecies are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly a�ected by activities in thatarea (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a �sh population, even if that �sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species byreducing or eliminating water �ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are notguaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential e�ects to species, additional site-speci�c and project-speci�c information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listedor proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensedby any Federal agency. A letter from the local o�ce and a species list which ful�lls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting ano�cial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local �eld o�ce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an o�cial species list by doingthe following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.3. Log in (if directed to do so).4. Provide a name and description for your project.5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed,for listing. See the listing status page for more information.

The following species are potentially a�ected by activities in this location:

Birds

Fishes

Flowering Plants

1

NAME STATUS

Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratusThere is �nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4467

Threatened

Streaked Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris strigataThere is �nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.


Threatened

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanusThere is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.


Threatened

NAME STATUS

Bull Trout Salvelinus con�uentusThere is �nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.


Threatened

Dolly Varden Salvelinus malmaNo critical habitat has been designated for this species.


PSAT

NAME STATUS

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/

https://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/esa.html

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/status/list








Critical habitatsPotential e�ects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.

Migratory birds

The birds listed below are USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern that might be a�ected by activities in this location. The list does not containevery bird you may �nd in this location, nor is it guaranteed that all of the birds on the list will be found on or near this location. To get a betteridea of the speci�c locations where certain species have been reported and their level of occurrence, please refer to resources such as the E-bird data mapping tool (year-round bird sightings by birders and the general public) and Breeding Bird Survey (relative abundance maps forbreeding birds). Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, special attention should be given to the birds on thelist below. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, visit the E-bird Explore Data Tool.

Golden Paintbrush Castilleja levisectaNo critical habitat has been designated for this species.


Threatened

Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .

Any activity that results in the take (to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in anysuch conduct) of migratory birds or eagles is prohibited unless authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service . There are no provisions forallowing the take of migratory birds that are unintentionally killed or injured. Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities thatmay result in the take of migratory birds is responsible for complying with the appropriate regulations and implementing appropriateconservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.phpMeasures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.phpNationwide conservation measures for birdshttp://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

1 2

3

NAME BREEDING SEASON

Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmanihttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591

Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31

Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala Breeds elsewhere

Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii Breeds Jan 1 to Dec 31

Great Blue Heron Ardea herodiashttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2170

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 15

Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa �avipeshttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679

Breeds elsewhere

Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoahttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481

Breeds elsewhere

Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperihttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914

Breeds May 20 to Aug 31

Red Knot Calidris canutus ssp. roselaarihttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8880

Breeds elsewhere

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/birds-of-conservation-concern.php

http://ebird.org/ebird/map/

https://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/

http://ebird.org/ebird/GuideMe?cmd=changeLocation


https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/migratory-bird-treaty-act.php

https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/laws-legislations/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act.php

http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/birds-of-conservation-concern.php

http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/conservation-measures.php

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf









no data survey e�ort breeding season probability of presence

Probability of Presence SummaryThe graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This informationcan be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds.

Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in your project's counties during a particular week of the year. (A year isrepresented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey e�ort (see below) can be used toestablish a level of con�dence in the presence score. One can have higher con�dence in the presence score if the corresponding survey e�ortis also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected dividedby the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee wasfound in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability ofpresence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relativeprobability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fallbetween 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( )Yellow bars denote when the bird breeds in the Bird Conservation Region(s) in which your project lies. If there are no yellow bars shown for abird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey E�ort ( )Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the counties ofyour project area. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey e�ort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey TimeframeSurveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Black Oystercatcher

Black Turnstone

Clark's Grebe

Red-throated Loon Gavia stellata Breeds elsewhere

Rock Sandpiper Calidris ptilocnemis ptilocnemis Breeds elsewhere

Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufushttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002

Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 15

Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla Breeds elsewhere

Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseushttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480

Breeds elsewhere

Western Screech-owl Megascops kennicottii kennicottii Breeds Mar 1 to Jun 30

Whimbrel Numenius phaeopushttps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9483

Breeds elsewhere






Great Blue Heron

Lesser Yellowlegs

Marbled Godwit

Olive-sided Flycatcher

Red Knot

Red-throated Loon

Rock Sandpiper

Rufous Hummingbird

Semipalmated Sandpiper

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Short-billed Dowitcher

Western Screech-owl

Whimbrel

Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Such measures areparticularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. To see when birds are most likely to occur in your project area, view the Probability ofPresence Summary. Special attention should be made to look for nests and avoid nest destruction during the breeding season. The best information about whenbirds are breeding can be found in Birds of North America (BNA) Online under the "Breeding Phenology" section of each species pro�le. Note that accessing thisinformation may require a subscription. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type ofinfrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci�ed location?

The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that might be a�ected by activities in your project location. Thesebirds are of priority concern because it has been determined that without additional conservation actions, they are likely to become candidates for listing under theEndangered Species Act (ESA).

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growingcollection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets. The AKN list represents all birds reported to be occurring at some level throughout the year in thecounties in which your project lies. That list is then narrowed to only the Birds of Conservation Concern for your project area.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list only includes species of particular priority concern, and is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area.Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, special attention should be made to avoid and minimize impacts to birds of priorityconcern. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the E-bird Explore Data Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci�ed location?

The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derivedfrom a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?

To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the followingresources: The The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab ofOrnithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird entry on your migratory bird species list indicates a breeding season, it is probable the bird breeds in your project'scounties at some point within the time-frame speci�ed. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

Facilities

National Wildlife Refuge lands

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/home

https://birdsna.org/Species-Account/bna/support/subscribeind

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/conservation-measures.php

https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/permits.php

https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/birds-of-conservation-concern.php

https://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/

http://www.avianknowledge.net/

https://data.pointblue.org/api/v3/annual-summaries-about-data-types.html

http://ebird.org/ebird/GuideMe?cmd=changeLocation

http://www.avianknowledge.net/

https://data.pointblue.org/api/v3/annual-summaries-about-data-types.html

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/search/

https://neotropical.birds.cornell.edu/Species-Account/nb/home



Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted bythe Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

Fish hatcheries

THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands InventoryImpacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or otherState/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

THERE ARE NO KNOWN WETLANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

Data limitations

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of theseresources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identi�ed based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. Amargin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries orclassi�cation established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data andthe amount of ground truth veri�cation work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mappingproblems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or �eld work. There may be occasional di�erences in polygon boundaries orclassi�cations between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detectwetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastalwaters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuber�cid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, goundetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may de�ne and describe wetlands in a di�erent manner than that used in this inventory.There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to de�ne the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or toestablish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modi�cations within oradjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning speci�ed agency regulatory programs and proprietaryjurisdictions that may a�ect such activities.

http://www.fws.gov/refuges/

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/

http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx

Appendix B: Photos

Jefferson County International Airport Wetland Determination

SWCA Project No. 43974

2

Overview of habitat from taxiway looking southwest.

Habitat showing mowed grass, upland shrubland, and low elevation forest in study area looking southwest.



3

Upland shrubland habitat looking southeast toward conifer forest outside study area.

Upland shrubland habitat looking east.



4

Wetland A looking west.

Runway Swale A looking northwest toward Wetland A.



5

Feature B looking southwest.

Runway Swale A looking west.



6

Runway Swale B looking east.

Runway Swale B looking west.



7

Ditch A looking west.

Wetland C looking southeast.



8

Detention Pond A looking southeast.

Detention Pond B looking southeast.

technical memorandumportofpt.com/wp-content/uploads/jcia-environmental-memo...introduction the port...

Documents