Army National Guard Breakout Session NMFWA ’19

1. Army National Guard Breakout Session NMFWA ’19 (I’m not an NGB PM, but I play one on TV)

2. Topics for Discussion • Conservation Committee & Sub-committee Activities • FY14-18 T&E data • USFWS’s FY18 & 19 listing schedules • Listing issues of concern • MBTA Issues • Waters of the US proposed rule • ARNG-IEN stuff • Discussion items

3. Conservation Committee and Sub-committees Activities • EAC update – Bryan Hall • Conservation Committee update – Michele Richards, natural resource team lead/deputy chair • Climate Change Working Group – Charlie Baun • Wildland Fire Working Group – Valerie Arkell

4. FY14-18 T&E Data

5. USFWS Listing Schedule FY18

6. USFWS Listing Schedule FY19

7. Listing Issues of Concern - Discussion • What could be some potential impacts to land maintenance programs from listing of bees and butterflies? • Ideas how to continue implementing prescribed fire, invasive species control, hay leases, mowing…? • Conferencing with USFWS if species is proposed for listing. • Seek partnerships to implement conservation to help avoid listing

8. DoD/MBTA RULE and EO 13186 • FY19 Updated Guidance & Requirements • 22 Dec 17 DOI Solicitor’s opinion MBTA. The opinion basically states that unintentional/ incidental take is not a violation of MBTA (not all states agree though). • However, the rule and EO with associated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) are still in play. DoD sent out memo supporting this fact (6 Feb 18). No change in how we address MBs. • The rule addresses the need for DoD to implement conservation measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts of military readiness activities on MBs. • The EO (revised 2014) has not been rescinded. Defines “Take” to include “…both ‘unintentional’ and ‘intentional’ take.”

9. Situations where a MBTA take permit is advisable: • Cleaning the outside of a building where there are active swallow nests. Cleaning the building is the action but you are targeting the nests. You are "intentionally" removing the nests. • Knowingly and intentionally removing, destroying, or moving an active nest, eggs, and/or chicks, then a permit is warranted. • Cutting down a  tree or mowing a field, while there may be nests, you don't know exactly where such nests are and you wouldn't be intentionally destroying such nest. • Removing a tree in a parking lot with an active nest and the birds are pooping all over cars, would need a permit. • You could claim that you are only removing a tree, but it's the nest that is the target.

10. Proposed Rule – Waters of the US • Propose rule came out 7 Feb 19. Redefining, or clarifying, what WOTUS are. • Some significant issues: • proposes to eliminate the case-by-case application ofJustice Kennedy's significant nexus test.  • ephemeral water flows would not be considered WOTUS -  surface water flowing or pooling only in direct response to precipitation, such as rain or snow fall • defines when a ditch would be considered a WOTUS • To be jurisdictional, a lake or pond that is otherwise physically separated from a WOTUS would need to be flooded by a jurisdictional water during a typical year • Groundwater and subsurface water flow cannot be used as "connectors" to identify a physically separated water body (stream, pond, lake, etc) as a WOTUS.

11. ARNG-IEN, Changes, Support, etc • Yes. Lots of changes. We are a dysfunctional family and darned proud of it. • Revised Sikes Act policy/guidance awaiting signature. • Revising ESA Section 7 policy. Will include section on 7(a)(1) – carrying out programs for the conservation of T&Es. • STEP. Still the same. Currently updating catalogs and P&G. Lots of new AMSCOs • File sharing. Documents you believe may be of value to other States, please send to US. We’re the gov’t; we’re here to help • Please send SOWs to us so we can share them

12. ARNG-IEN Sikes Act Policy • Annual Reviews must be submitted to NGB by the end of each year, includes: • Meeting minutes, including attendees • Updated INRMP Project Implementation Table • If an Update/Revision is required • Five Year Review for Operation And Effect must be submitted to NGB • Meeting minutes, including attendees • If an Update/Revision is required • Operational INRMP requirements: • Signatures over 5 years old • Schedule for Update/Revision agreed to in writing by partners (State ARNG, USFWS, NGB, State Fish & Game) • STEP Projects • All Natural Resources projects must be in your INRMP • Failure to update INRMPs will result in non-validation of projects in STEP

13. INRMP Outline Main Document Signature Page Executive Summary Purpose, Scope, and Authorities Overview, General Information, Management Philosophy Implementation, Effectiveness, Roles and Responsibilities, Funding Appendices Natural Resources Goals and Objectives Project Implementation Table Site Overview (Military Mission, History, Acreage, etc.) Physical Environment (Climate, Geology, Waters, etc.) Flora and Fauna Mission Impacts on Natural Resources Land Management Fish and Wildlife Management Habitat Management Wetlands/Water Management Forest Management Wildland Fire Management Endangered Species Management Resource Protection Guidelines Hunting and Fishing Programs Invasive Species Management Agricultural Outlease Annual Review Summaries, and 5 year Reviews for Operation and Effect • States with multiple INRMP sites are encouraged to combine those into a single INRMP • The following outline is encouraged for all INRMPs, a template is forthcoming FY19 ARNG-IE Program Guidance Course

14. Example Project Table • Included in INRMP Appendix • Submitted annually to ARNG I&E FY19 ARNG-IE Program Guidance Course

15. Items for Discussion • How are installations organized…how are they setup to handle compliance laws (Section 7 etc.,)  versus natural resources (game & nongame, RX fire, forestry etc.)? • Pros and cons of iSPORTSMAN • Any installations manage game species differently than their states?  For example quality deer management principles such as antler/age class restrictions. • Are any States dictating how to manage wildlife and habitat on federal land? Must follow State hunting regs (citation for this?), but must we comply with State management of resources?

16. Items for Discussion cont’d • Incorporating climate adaption into master plans/real property development plans and who's supposed to pay for the climate adaption analysis task. • PGC – comments/feedback/rotten tomatoes? • Using the Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU): • Who has used them and how did you engage them? • Pros and cons • Recommendations

17. Questions? Jay Rubinoff Natural Resources Program Manager 703-601-7973 jay.m.rubinoff.civ@mail.mil