INTERAGENCY COORDINATION TOOL (ICT) HANDBOOK A handbook for implementation of the ICT and compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act for West Virginia NRCS employees. June 2012 ICT Version 1.0 The ICT Handbook – 1 2 – The ICT Handbook IN COOPERATION WITH: United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service West Virginia Division of Natural Resources WV GIS Technical Center, WVU Department of Geology & Geography June 2012 DEVELOPED BY: Barbara Douglas, Endangered Species Biologist, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Elkins, WV Evan Fedorko, Research Assistant, WV GIS Technical Center, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV Walter Kordek, Assistant Chief, Wildlife Diversity and Technical Support Units, EOC, Elkins, WV Frank Lafone, Senior Internet Developer, WV GIS Technical Center, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV Casey Shrader, State Biologist, USDA, NRCS, Morgantown, WV Veeru Talreja, Research Assistant, WV GIS Technical Center, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV The ICT Handbook – 3 Acknowledgements: Sincere gratitude is expressed to the following individuals for various support roles in development of the Interagency Coordination Tool: Michael Daugherty, former GIS Programmer Analyst, WV Division of Natural Resources, Elkins, WV for assisting with the initial conception and specification of the tool. Special acknowledgement to Patrick Bowen, State Resource Conservationist, USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Morgantown, WV for assisting with securing funding mechanisms to support development and testing. Testing and quality assurance protocols were carried out by joint WVDNR and NRCS positions by Lee Haggerty, NRCS/WV Division of Natural Resources, Moorefield, WV, Matt Ware, NRCS/WV Division of Natural Resources, Huntington, WV and Noah McCoard, NRCS/WV Division of Natural Resources, McMechen, WV. Special thanks to Kristin Smith of the NRCS East National Technology Support Center for review and assistance with development of programmatic consultation and NEPA compliance; and Richard Gooch of the US Fish and Wildlife Service for programmatic and ICT support. Also special thanks to the Golden-winged Warbler Working Group (2011) for providing data. 4 – The ICT Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 I. INTRODUCTION 7 II. RELEVANT STATUTES AND NRCS POLICY 9 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Endangered Species Act (ESA) Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) Information Concerning Privacy III. GETTING STARTED WITH INTERAGENCY COORDINATION TOOL (ICT) 11 How the ICT Functions 11 How to Register a User Account in the ICT 12 Performing a Query in the ICT 15 Report Format 18 General Information Section of the ICT Report Section I – Potential Impacts Section II – Required Strategies & Effect Determination Section III – Management Recommendations Section IV – Benefits Viewing Reports 25 Administrative Privileges 26 IV. INTERPRETING THE RESULTS OF ICT 27 Potential Species and Impact Information 27 Avoidance Measures and Required Conditions 29 Required Consultation 32 Inspection for Existing Mussel or Darter Populations 33 Indiana Bat Maternity Colony Protocol 34 Working with Eagles 35 Final Effect Determination 36 Management Considerations 40 Multiple Species Findings and Determinations 40 Benefits 40 Coordinating Beneficial Impacts Report Decision Process Step-by-Step Narrative 45 ICT Report Decision Diagram 47 The ICT Handbook – 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE V. ICT ASSISTANCE 49 Additional Sources of Information 49 Agency Contacts 51 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s) 53 VI. GLOSSARY 59 VII. EXHIBITS 68 Sample ICT Report 69 NRCS CPA-052 Worksheet 73 NRCS WV CPA-052b Form 79 ICT Review Request (excel spreadsheet form) 81 WV Streams Containing Mussel Species 83 WV Endangered Species List 85 Species of Concern & Federal Listed Species Fact Sheets 89 6 – The ICT Handbook I. INTRODUCTION NRCS has the distinction of providing technical and financial assistance to landowners through voluntary participation in various programs. NRCS also has a responsibility, as an agency of the federal government, to uphold the laws and regulations of the government and to protect the interests of the public. With the assistance of NRCS, landowners can apply conservation alternatives that avoid adversely affecting protected species or their habitats, or proactively create or enhance habitat. An awareness of habitat locations and an understanding of the impacts of conservation practices, including the long and short-term effects on habitat, are key to NRCS being able to fulfill its responsibilities under the ESA. This handbook outlines the standard operating procedures for use and application of the Interagency Coordination Tool (ICT). The ICT is a web-based geospatial computer application located on the internet at: http://www.mapwv.gov/ict. The tool is used to determine the probability of presence of designated habitat for federal listed species and impact avoidance based on predetermined avoidance measures approved through a programmatic consultation agreement. The concept of the ICT was born out of the need to streamline and simplify the compliance process for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) field offices. Compliance with the Endangered Species Act was difficult in the field for many reasons including the lack of a cohesive process, the lack of species information, knowledge of the habitat and life history and reluctance by State and Federal agencies to share location or other information concerning their status. Programmatic agreements with the U.S .Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) throughout the country paved the way for expedited methods to be developed that allowing field planners the ability to obtain a recipe for avoidance; thus aiding the recovery of species without having to consult with the USFWS on each occurrence. Most States that developed programmatic agreements also developed a conservation practice-species matrix that outlined necessary protocols when a particular practice affected the habitat of that species. Most programmatic agreements relied on the conservation planners to have access to location information, population and other data that was not readily available in West Virginia. These included maps or GIS layers that required staff time and personnel to maintain, update and manage. The agencies in West Virginia responsible for safeguarding the natural heritage information were very concerned about dispensing locations of species of concern or otherwise listed species. There were concerns that the dispersal of this information could lead to people misusing the data thorough unauthorized specimen collection, development or project obstruction, eradicating the species from private property and so forth. On the other hand, this made it extremely difficult for resource agencies including NRCS to aid in the recovery efforts or even track potential benefits to these species or habitats as outlined in the NRCS mission. Conversely, NRCS had some concerns regarding the transfer of landowner information relevant to a client’s conservation plan. Client’s information concerning the decisions they make on their land is private information and must not be released except with written consent from the landowner. Through partnership with the USFWS West Virginia Field Office and the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources (WVDNR), a programmatic consultation for the federal-listed species that could be encountered during planning and other non-project activities was developed. During this process, all conservation practices in West Virginia were reviewed for their potential effects on all current federal-listed species in the State. Determinations were made as to whether the practices were likely to have no effect, an adverse affect, or a beneficial effect, and in the cases of potential adverse effects, how those effects could be avoided. However, this programmatic agreement did not fully solve the problem regarding the release of “sensitive” information by either agency nor did NRCS staff have access to location or habitat information. The idea of a The ICT Handbook – 7 “black box” method where only minimal information may be offered from the inquiring to the receiving agency was developed. This method would allow only nominal non-sensitive information within a predetermined area to be entered into a website. In return, the website would generate strategies to avoid and minimize impacts to species or designated habitat without identifying the exact location or other sensitive information about the species. The resulting information would be based on the programmatic agreement. Above all, this method would allow agencies to identify specific instances where conservation practices would or could potentially benefit a listed species and move it toward delisting. This method not only solved the privacy and sensitive species information issues, but also saved time and maintenance requirements by allowing one agency to maintain a single copy of geospatial maps and security needs within house. It avoided maintenance problems with maps and polygon layers and CEC compatibility issues for computer software. In addition, this method lends itself well to other applications including Cultural Resources and the Clean Water Act. Additional modules of this sort could be added to the ICT in relatively quick timeframes. The ICT was designed to provide reports based on a number of criteria. First, the user identifies an area of interest and inputs