Presentation for 2013 MPA Annual Meeting in Billings, MT August 27, 2013. Jana White, Ph.D., Ecologist

1. Surface Disturbances and Ecological
Resources Associated with Oil & Gas
Development
Jana White, PhD Ecologist
Aaron Maier, Certified Ecologist
August 27, 2013

2. Presentation Outline:
1. Current status and
future challenges
 Key regulations
 Case studies
2. Future industry
directions and
potential hurdles
 Using ecosystem services
metrics for development
prioritization

3. Ecological Resources
What do operators encounter when an area is
proposed for development?
 Vegetation
 Wetlands
 Sensitive habitats
 T&E Species
 Raptors
 Sage Grouse

4. Regulations – The Big Ones
 Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA)
 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
 Endangered Species Act (1973)
 Clean Water Act (1977)
 State of Montana Sage-Grouse Executive
Order (in development)
 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918)
 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (1940)
 MDEQ Rules and Statutes
 BLM, Forest Service, State, Local Statutes

5.  Agency-specific
 Based on mineral
rights ownership
 State and private
mineral rights –
MBOGC
 Federal mineral rights –
BLM
Reclamation plan required as part of POD, APD, or
master development plan
Vegetation Management and Revegetation

6. Sustainable Development
 Interim reclamation 
minimize impacts of
development on other
resources and uses
 Final reclamation 
character and
productivity of the land
and water are restored
BLM photo, BMP Guide
Vegetation Management and Revegetation

7. Pre-development
Planning
 Data for cover and
species prior to
development
 Assist in setting
reclamation goals
Vegetation Management and Revegetation

8.  Regulatory inspection processes and
considerations
 Invasive species management and control
Vegetation Management and Revegetation

9. Canada Lynx, Photo USFWS, Montana Field Office
Wildlife Regulations – T&E Species

10.  1973 Endangered Species Act
 Affects all sites – public and private
 Initial T&E Species Evaluation Required on
Proposed Oil and Gas Permits
Montana: 12 listed species (9 animals, 3 plants)
Piping Plover, NE Game and Parks photo Ute Ladies’ Tresses, USFWS photo
Wildlife Regulations

11.  State-listed species, species of concern
Mountain Plover, FWS
photo/Fritz Knopf
Greater Short-Horned Lizard,
MT Natural Heritage Program
/ Bryce Maxell
Pygmy Rabbit, H.
Ulmschneider (BLM) / R.
Dixon (IDFG)
Hierarchy of Evaluation
Federally listed T&E
SpeciesBLM Sensitive Species
State-listed
Wildlife Regulations

12.  Migratory Bird Treaty Act
 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
 Protects birds, eggs, and nests
Wildlife Regulations – Raptors

13. Raptors of Conservation Concern
Common Name Spatial buffer (miles) Seasonal buffer
Golden Eagle 0.5 January 15 - July 31
Ferruginous Hawk 1 March 15 - July 31
Swainson's Hawk 0.25 April 1 - August 31
Bald Eagle Variable (0.5 to 1)
Prairie Falcon 0.5 March 1 - August 15
Peregrine Falcon 0.5 March 1 - August 15
Short-eared Owl 0.25 March15- August 1
Burrowing Owl 0.25 April 1 – September 15
Northern Goshawk 0.5 April 1 - August 15
Seasonal noise limitations, buffers, and timing restrictions to
reduce the impacts of construction, operations, and noise.
Wildlife Regulations – Raptors (BLM)

14.  What do we do if a raptor nest is present?
Raptor Case Study

15. Wildlife Regulations – Sage Grouse
 February 2, 2013 –
Habitat Conservation
Advisory Council
established by Executive
Order
 January 31, 2014 –
Council to provide
recommendations on
policies and actions for
state-wide strategy to
preclude the need for ESA
listing
Sage Grouse, FWS photo

16. Date Topic
May 21-23 Establish Need, Objectives, Background
June 11-12 Transmission, Infrastructure, Wind
June 25-26 Oil, Gas, Mining
July 16-17 Surface Disturbance, Fire, Invasive Species
July 30-31 Agricultural Conversion, Working Lands
August 13-14 Mitigation
September 4-5 Adaptive Management, Implementation, Compliance
Monitoring, Reporting
September 24-25 Review Draft Recommendations
October 8-9 Finalize Draft Recommendations for Public Comment
January 7-8, 2014 Final Recommendations
Wildlife Regulations – Sage Grouse

17. What is being proposed?
 Core area recommendations and General Habitat
Recommendations
 Core areas to delineate areas of highest conservation
priority.
 Goal is maintenance of both distribution and abundance for the
species.
 Core areas should be avoidance areas for new energy
development.
Key Core area stipulations:
 Surface Disturbance
 Surface Occupancy
 Seasonal Use
Wildlife Regulations – Sage Grouse

18. Key Core Area Stipulations:
Surface Disturbance
 Limited to 3% of suitable sage-grouse habitat per section
averaged across the entire project area
 Sections where previously development > 3% of
sagebrush habitat, further development is precluded or
on-site mitigation for disturbance impacts must be
implemented
 Offset multipliers may be implemented in select cases
 incentives to develop within unsuitable habitat outside 3.8 mile
lek buffers
 acres of development in unsuitable habitat are not considered
disturbance acres
Sage Grouse – MT Core Area Proposal

19. Key Core Area Stipulations:
Surface Occupancy
 Minimum No Surface Occupancy (NSO) zone around
active leks of 3.8 miles
 NSO means no surface facilities or roads
 Alternative to NSO is establishing master development
plans
 Comply with strict development stipulations (avoidance and
target areas)
 Phased development and maximum disturbance limitations
Sage Grouse – MT Core Area Proposal

20. Key Core Area Stipulations:
Seasonal Use
 Permissible period of activity outside the 3.8
mile perimeter of an active lek in core areas
where breeding, nesting, and early brood-
rearing is present: June 16 – February 29
 Production and maintenance activity is
exempted
 Activities may be allowed during seasonal closure periods on a
case-by-case basis
 Activities in unsuitable habitat also may be approved year round on
a case-by-case basis
Sage Grouse – MT Core Area Proposal

21. What is being proposed?
General Habitat Recommendations – areas where sage-grouse
occur but have not been identified as core or connectivity areas
 Surface Disturbance – limited to 5% of suitable sage-grouse
habitat within a sage-grouse population or sub-population
 Surface Occupancy – minimum NSO zone around active leks of
1 mile, preferably 1.8 miles. NSO means no surface facilities
and no roads
 Seasonal Use – Minimize activity (development and
production) within 3.8 miles of an active lek between March 1
and June 15 in breeding, nesting and brood-rearing habitat
 Transportation – new road construction should be minimized
Sage Grouse – General Habitat
Recommendations

22. The Challenge: What is a wetland? Is it jurisdictional?
Wetlands & Waters of the U.S.

23. The Challenge: What is a wetland? Is it jurisdictional?
Intermittent & Ephemeral Wetlands and Streams
Wetlands & Waters of the U.S.

24. Regulatory Jurisdiction:
 Section 10 Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
 Section 404 Clean Water Act of 1977
Wetlands & Waters of the U.S.

25. Wetlands & Waters of the U.S.
Types of Permits:
1. Individual Permits
 wetland removal
2. General/Nationwide
Permits
 minor road projects, utility
line installation, dam
reconstruction activities

26. Wetland Case Study

27. Future Industry Direction in MT?

28. What is the business
case for protecting and
enhancing biodiversity
and ecosystem
services?
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

29. Future Industry Directions
BES Categories:
Source: www.ipieca.org

30. Future Industry Directions
Future development prioritization based on ecological
resource and ecosystem services assessments
Example – Pipeline Construction
 Proper pipeline location can significantly reduce or
eliminate impacts to cultural, scenic, biological, and
other environmental factors
 Right of Way should be selected by considering 4
BES categories (Regulating, Provisioning, Cultural,
and Supporting)

31. Contact Information:
Jana White, PhD
Ecologist
jwhite@trihydro.com
307/745-7474