Migratory Birds Convention Act: A Best Management Practice ... · It is my pleasure to introduce...

Migratory Birds Convention Act: A Best Management Practice for Pipelines DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION

SEPTEMBER 2013

PREPARED FOR: CANADIAN ENERGY PIPELINE

ASSOCIATION

PREPARED BY: STANTEC CONSULTING LTD.

PROJECT NUMBER 123510637

THIS DOCUMENT IS POSTED HERE AS A DRAFT FOR USE

AND FEEDBACK IS VALUED. PLEASE SEND COMMENTS TO

JOANNE WIDMER AT

. FEEDBACK WILL [email protected]

BE COLLECTED UNTIL JUNE 30TH, 2015 AT WHICH TIME

ANY FINAL REVISIONS WILL BE MADE BASED ON THE

FEEDBACK PRIOR TO THE DOCUMENT BEING FINALIZED.

mailto:[email protected]

Draft for Discussion i

Foreword

It is my pleasure to introduce “The Migratory Birds Convention Act: A Best Management

Practice for Pipelines”.

CEPA’s member companies construct and operate the major transmission pipelines that

safely transport 97% of the oil and natural gas produced in Canada to markets throughout

North America. This document has been developed by CEPA members based on their first-

hand experience of pipeline construction and operation across Canada. CEPA members are

committed to compliance with legislation and regulations that apply to our facilities,

including the Migratory Birds Convention Act. Our practices have evolved to meet those

requirements, but our commitments extend beyond legal compliance to environmental

responsibility, protection, and stewardship. The development and use of a Best

Management Practice is one tool by which we strive to continually improve our performance

through technical innovations and through engagement with other interested groups.

This document has been released as a ‘draft’; pending the finalization of relevant

informational components that are expected soon from the Canadian Wildlife Service, and it

will be updated as required. Development of this ‘draft’ has been supported by Environment

Canada and by Nature Canada – and we thank them for their time and effort to make this

Best Management Practice a product reflecting input from key groups active in the

conservation of birds in Canada. By publishing the Best Management Practice at this time,

CEPA is inviting expert agencies, interest groups and the public to comment and to work

with us to improve our practices and ultimately improve protection of migratory birds

throughout Canada.

A Best Management Practice document is the starting point for project-specific plans that

are founded on compliance and excellence but also reflect the unique circumstances and

conditions in a region. CEPA hopes that the Best Management Practice will encourage and

facilitate discussions about the pipeline industry’s commitment to environmental

performance. We invite you to learn more by contacting us directly or by visiting our

website aboutpipelines.com.

Brenda Kenny

President and CEO

Canadian Energy Pipeline Association

Draft for Discussion ii

Table of Contents

1 PIPELINES AND MIGRATORY BIRDS IN CANADA ..................................................... 1-1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT ........................................................................................................... 1-2

2 MIGRATORY BIRD-PIPELINE RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK ....................... 2-1

2.1 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 BIRD CONSERVATION REGIONS AND SPECIES AT RISK (TO BE UPDATED) ............... 2-2

2.3 TRANSMISSION PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS INTERACTIONS

MATRIX ...................................................................................................................................... 2-18

2.4 MIGRATORY BIRD – PIPELINE RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX .......................................... 2-32

3 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR TRANSMISSION PIPELINES ................... 3-1

3.1 ENVIRONMENT CANADA AVOIDANCE GUIDELINES .......................................................... 3-1

3.2 RECOMMENDED BEST PRACTICES FOR PIPELINES ........................................................... 3-1 3.2.1 Key Points ................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2.2 Pre-construction Planning ....................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.3 Construction ............................................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.4 Operation .................................................................................................................. 3-12

3.2.4.1 Emergency Response .......................................................................... 3-14 3.2.5 Decommissioning and Abandonment .................................................................. 3-14

4 MIGRATORY BIRD NEST SURVEY PROTOCOL ............................................................. 4-1

4.1 RATIONALE FOR USE OF NEST SURVEYS ............................................................................ 4-1

4.2 OBJECTIVE OF NEST SURVEYS .............................................................................................. 4-1

4.3 NEST SEARCH PROTOCOLS – GENERAL ............................................................................... 4-1 4.3.1 Non-forested Habitats .............................................................................................. 4-3 4.3.2 Forested Habitats ...................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.3 Wetlands ..................................................................................................................... 4-5

4.4 IDENTIFICATION AND PROTECTION OF ACTIVE NESTS .................................................. 4-6 4.4.1 SARA-listed Migratory Bird Nests Mitigations ..................................................... 4-7

5 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 5-1

6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 6-1

Draft for Discussion iii

List of Tables

Table 2-1 Summary of BCRs with Existing or Potential CEPA-Member Company Facilities .......................................................................................................................... 2-5

Table 2-2 SARA and COSEWIC Listed Migratory Bird Species by Bird

Conservation Region across Canada ........................................................................ 2-6 Table 2-4 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Construction with

Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................ 2-19 Table 2-5 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Operations with

Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................ 2-26 Table 2-6 Categories Used to Asses Migratory Bird Risk ..................................................... 2-33 Table 3-1 Key Nesting Periods for BCRs across Canada where CEPA Operates ............... 3-2 Table 3-2 Best Management Practices – Pre-construction Planning .................................... 3-4 Table 3-3 Best Management Practices – Construction ........................................................... 3-4 Table 3-4 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds

During Pipeline Construction ...................................................................................... 3-6 Table 3-6 Best Management Practices – Operation .............................................................. 3-12 Table 3-7 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds

During Pipeline Operations ....................................................................................... 3-13 Table 3-5 Best Management Practices –Emergency: Pipeline Spill ................................... 3-14 Table 4-1 Recommended Setback and Timing Windows for At Risk Migratory Bird

Species in Alberta and Saskatchewan ..................................................................... 4-8

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 CEPA Facilities across Canada Bird Conservation Region – Liquids Pipelines ......................................................................................................................... 2-3

Figure 2-2 CEPA Facilities across Canada Bird Conservation Regions – Gas Pipelines ......................................................................................................................... 2-4

Figure 2-3 Migratory Bird-Pipeline Risk Matrix ........................................................................ 2-34

Section 1: Pipelines and Migratory Birds in Canada

Draft for Discussion 1-1

1 PIPELINES AND MIGRATORY BIRDS IN CANADA

1.1 Introduction

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association

(CEPA) to develop best management practices (BMPs) to manage potential interactions of

the construction and operation of oil and gas transmission pipeline facilities with migratory

birds and to support compliance with the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA)

(Government of Canada 1994a). Although the focus of this document is migratory birds,

many of the practices may be beneficial to all birds. CEPA has been actively involved in

developing a risk management framework with Environment Canada for the incidental take

of migratory birds. This has included participating in national workshops and leading the

development of guidance documents to assist companies with managing risk in

consideration of non-compliance with the MBCA and its associated regulations.

In the absence of regulatory amendments that allow the issuance of a permit or exemption

for the incidental take of migratory birds, Environment Canada has focused its efforts on

developing guidelines and BMPs to avoid and lessen the risk of incidental take of migratory

birds. Environment Canada has developed an overview and position paper on the regulatory

triggers, effects assessment and risk characterization needed to develop a risk management

framework for the incidental take of migratory birds. Although there is currently no legal

mechanism to authorize (e.g., via a permit or exemptions) the incidental take of nests or

eggs of migratory birds in the course of industrial activities, Environment Canada has

recommended BMPs be developed and implemented to minimize risks and mitigate any

unavoidable effects on nests (Environment Canada 2011). The Environment Canada

approach looks at all industry sectors, whereas the CEPA approach focuses construction and

operation activities for oil and gas transmission pipelines.

The focus of this document is on activities associated with construction and operation of

transmission pipelines and related facilities (e.g., compressor or pump stations) that have

the potential to affect bird populations. This document does not include upstream oil and

gas developments such as wellsites, gathering pipelines and access roads. Generally,

pipelines are divided into small- and large-diameter pipelines. For large-diameter pipelines

(>508 mm; 20 in), preparatoryplanning is crucial to manage potential interactions with

migratory birds. Large pipelines require larger equipment and more space for construction,

emphasizing the need for detailed considerations during the planning stages. Construction

right-of-way (RoW) widths are typically narrower or small-diameter pipelines. Additionally,

there are more construction methods for small-diameter pipelines that may lessen

disturbance (e.g., plow-in installation). Operational activities on oil and gas transmission

pipeline rights-of-way is generally limited to maintenance and monitoring programs and as

such have fewer operational interactions with nesting migratory birds. Operational activities

are mostly related to integrity management, vegetation management and daily operational

activities at compressor or pump stations. These activities pose some risk to migratory birds

depending on the timing, extent and duration of work activities. Generally operational



activities are localized, and the risk of direct mortality, loss of nests and sensory disturbance

is much less than exists for construction-related activities.

The purpose of this document is to:

compile and build upon the existing BMPs being used by the CEPA-member companies to

manage potential interactions with migratory birds to conserve birds and their nests

promote compliance with the MBCA and regulations for the incidental take of migratory

birds during construction and operation of oil and gas transmission pipelines and related

facilities

Specific conservation priorities for individual Bird Conservation Regions (BCR) were

considered in developing BMPs. CEPA-member companies are committed to regularly

validating and updating existing practices to ensure they are reflecting current scientific

knowledge with respect to migratory birds. It is expected that this document will be

updated to reflect learnings gained through adaptive management and additional guidance

from regulatory authorities. Environment Canada’s initiative to develop BCR Strategies will

be important companion information to that contained in this document.

1.2 Regulatory Context

The purpose of the MBCA is to protect and conserve migratory bird populations and

individuals and their nests (Section 4; Government of Canada 1994a). Environment Canada

administers the MBCA and the Migratory Birds Regulations, 1994, through the regional

Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) offices. Migratory birds covered under the MBCA in Canada,

include (refer to Environment Canada 1991 for full list):

waterfowl (e.g., ducks and geese)

cranes (e.g., sandhill cranes)

shorebirds (e.g., plovers and sandpipers)

most songbirds (e.g., robins)

Birds not included under federal jurisdiction in Canada include upland game birds (e.g.,

grouse, quail, pheasants, and ptarmigan) birds of prey (e.g., hawks, owls, eagles, and

falcons), cormorants, pelicans, kingfishers, crows, jays and some blackbirds. Most birds

excluded from this list are protected under provincial and territorial law.

The possession of, purchasing, selling, exchanging or giving a migratory bird or nest are

prohibited without authorization, as stated in Section 5 of the MBCA. In 2005, the MBCA

was amended to expand the purpose of the Act to include conserving migratory birds;

specifically that birds are to be protected and conserved as populations and as individual

birds, in addition to incorporating habitat and ecosystem concepts(Government of Canada

2005).The MBCA is the enabling statute for the Migratory Birds Regulations, 1994.

In the Migratory Birds Regulations, 1994, Section 6 states that without the authorization of

a permit, the disturbance, destruction, taking of a nest, egg, nest shelter, eider duck shelter



or duck box of a migratory bird; possessing a migratory bird, carcass, skin, nest or egg of a

migratory bird are prohibited (Government of Canada 2011a). In addition, Section 35 (1) of

the Migratory Birds Regulations, 1994, has been repealed and replaced with Section 5(1) of

the MBCA which prohibits the deposition of substances harmful to migratory birds in waters

or areas frequented by migratory birds or in a place from which the substance may enter

such waters or such an area.

The Species at Risk Act, 2002 (SARA) provides additional protection to species listed under

its authority and includes many migratory bird species. The purpose of SARA is to prevent

the extirpation or extinction of wildlife species; to provide recovery strategies for species

that are extirpated, endangered and threatened due to human activity; and to manage

species of special concern so they do not become threatened or endangered (Section 6;

Government of Canada 2002).

As Environment Canada cannot provide authorizations or permits to allow for construction

and operations-related incidental take of migratory birds and their nests and eggs

(Environment Canada 2011), best management practices should be followed to prevent

contravention of the MBCA.

Section 2: Migratory Bird-Pipeline Risk Management Framework


2 MIGRATORY BIRD-PIPELINE RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

2.1 Objectives

In the absence of a process for authorizations to allow incidental take of migratory birds, it

is recommended that the oil and gas pipeline sector develop BMPs to promote compliance

with the MBCA and its regulations. Best management practices should be developed based

on an understanding of risks to migratory birds associated with pipeline and facility

construction and operations. With an understanding of these risks and their potential

consequences to migratory birds, BMPs can focus on the areas of highest risks. Risks can be

viewed from the perspective of consequences to migratory birds and project proponents.

This section describes interactions between construction and operation of pipelines and

related facilities, the consequences of these interactions to migratory birds, and the likely

significance of those interactions.

The purpose of the MBCA is to protect and conserve migratory bird populations, individuals

and their nests. From a pipeline and facility construction perspective, there is little risk of

affecting migratory bird populations; however, construction and some operational activities

can result in the loss of individual migratory birds and their nests. The objective to this BMP

is not to discuss the assessment of potential project and cumulative effects on migratory

bird populations that would normally be considered during an environmental assessment;

therefore any discussion of project effects or cumulative environmental effects on migratory

bird populations is beyond the scope of this document. CEPA recognizes that project effects

on migratory birds may occur and could act cumulatively with other developments in

migratory bird habitat and potentially affect migratory bird populations. However, this BMP

is focused on identifying measures to minimize or avoid the incidental take of migratory

birds during project life cycle stages where there is a greater risk of incidental take of

migratory birds. The measures provided in this BMP could be considered as mitigation

measures during an environmental assessment of a project, if there was a pathway of

concern related to migratory birds.

In preparation of this BMP, CEPA examined the life cycle phases of a pipeline and related

facilities to identify phases where the potential for the incidental take of migratory birds

could occur. The lifecycle stages included project design and planning, construction,

operations, and decommissioning and abandonment. This pathway analysis identified that

construction and operations phases have the greatest potential for the incidental take of

migratory birds to occur. The design and planning phase does not result in the potential for

incidental take to occur but is an important step in understanding the location of important

habitat and the potential pathways that could occur once a project goes to construction, and

therefore is a stage where project decisions can be made to avoid incidental take through

footprint planning and activity scheduling. Decommissioning and abandonment is not

considered in this BMP, as companies will determine project-specific plans that comply with

regulatory requirements once the pipeline reaches the end of its life. However, depending

on the scope of the activities involved in decommissioning and abandonment, many of the



BMP measures outlined in this document for construction and potentially operations could be

applied to decommissioning and abandonment activities.

To manage migratory birds, CWS has created a number of BCRs within Environment

Canada’s Operational units. It is these BCRs and their management plans that will

eventually shape the BMPs for the oil and gas pipeline sector. The development of BCR

Strategies and the implementation of best management practices by industry during all the

life cycle phases of a project will avoid and/or mitigate potential adverse effects related to

the incidental take of migratory birds. This BMP in combination with BCR Strategies can be

an effective way to manage potential incidental take of migratory birds. Individual BCR

Strategies are currently in development for all of Environment Canada’s operational regions,

with substantial work still remaining. In the absence of these Strategies CEPA has

developed BMPs that consider broad vegetation categories, seasonality of pipeline

construction, other project life cycle components, and geographic location of projects.

Unique to this BMP development is the inclusion of migratory bird species listed in

Schedules 1 to 3 under SARA, and species listed by the Committee on the Status of

Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) by BCR.

Important Bird Areas (IBAs)are also locations that merit attention as they support specific

groups of birds that may be threatened or be restricted by range or habitat. Information

about IBAs serves as an important tool to understand local conservation priorities. Nature

Canada and Bird Studies Canada can provide maps of Canada’s Important Bird Areas to

inform pipeline project planning, construction and operation.

2.2 Bird Conservation Regions and Species at Risk (TO BE

UPDATED)

For the CEPA-member companies, BMPs have been developed based on Environment

Canada’s operational regions and associated BCRs. As part of the North American Bird

Conservation Initiative (NABCI), BCRs were developed to “provide a common spatial

framework and a fundamental geographic unit on which to plan and deliver integrated all-

bird conservation initiatives across North America” (Canadian Prairie Partners in Flight

2004). The BCR boundaries align with ecoregions, which are areas of similar biotic

(vegetation and wildlife) and abiotic (soils, climate) characteristics and potentially similar

management issues. Environment Canada’s operational regions and associated BCRs are

shown in Figures 2-1 and 2-2. Table 2-1 identifies BCRs where CEPA-member companies

have existing or potential facilities.



Figure 2- 1 CEPA Facilities across Canada Bird

Conservation Region – Liquids

Pipelines



Figure 2-2 CEPA Facilities across Canada Bird Conservation Regions – Gas Pipelines



Table 2-1 Summary of BCRs with Existing or Potential CEPA-Member

Company Facilities Environment Canada Operational

Region

BCRs with Existing or Potential CEPA Company

Facilities

Pacific and Yukon Region PYR 4: Northwestern Interior Forest PYR 5:Northern Pacific Forest PYR 9: Great Basin PYR 10: Northern Rockies

Prairie and Northern Region PNR 6: Boreal Taiga Plains PNR 11:Prairie Pothole

Ontario Region ON 8: Boreal Softwood Shield ON 12: Boreal Hardwood Transition ON 13:Lower Great lakes / St. Lawrence Plain

Quebec Region QC12: Boreal Hardwood Transition QC 13: Lower Great lakes/St. Lawrence Plain QC 14: Atlantic Northern Forest

Atlantic Region NS 14: Atlantic Northern Forest

NB 14: Atlantic Northern Forest

Table 2-2 provides a summary of “at risk” migratory bird species by BCR that could be

potentially affected by CEPA-member company pipelines. The “at risk” category is based on

migratory bird species listed under Schedules 1 to 3 of SARA and those currently under

review by COSEWIC. Forty-four species are listed under SARA and four additional species

are currently under review by COSEWIC. Of this, a total of 31 species are listed as

threatened or endangered under SARA or by COSEWIC (SARA ranking takes priority), while

the remaining are listed as special concern (see Table 2-3). For the purposes of this

document, there is no distinction in the species “designation” status. Table 2-3 also includes

other federally and provincially listed migratory and non-migratory birds (e.g., gamebirds,

owls, hawks, and blackbirds) that could be found in the BCR Strategies, and which may

require special consideration during project planning.



Table 2-2 SARA and COSEWIC Listed Migratory Bird Species by Bird Conservation Region across Canada

Migratory Bird Species Bird Conservation Region

Common Name Scientific Name

Pacific & Yukon Region (PYR)

Prairie & Northern Region (PNR)

Ontario Region (ON)

Quebec Region (QC)

Atlantic Region (NS)

Atlantic Region (NB)

Species listed on the Species at Risk Act 4 5 9 10 6 11 8 12 13 12 13 14 14 14

Harlequin Duck (Eastern population)

Histrionicushistrionicus X

Barrow’s Goldeneye (Eastern population)

Bucephalaislandica X

Horned Grebe (Western population)

Podicepsauritus X X X X X X X

Least Bittern Ixobrychusexilis X X X X X X X

Great Blue Heron (fanninisubspecies)

Ardeaherodiasfannini X

Yellow Rail Coturnicopsnoveboracensis X X X X X X X X X

King Rail Ralluselegans X

Whooping Crane Grusamericana X

Piping Plover (circumcintussubspecies)

Charadriusmeloduscircumcinctus X X X

Piping Plover (melodussubspecies)

Charadriusmelodusmelodus X X X

Mountain Plover Charadriusmontanus X

Long-billed Curlew Numeniusamericanus X X X

Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii X

Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphusmarmoratus X

Ancient Murrelet Synthiliboramphusantiquus X



Table 2-2 SARA and COSEWIC Listed Migratory Bird Species by Bird Conservation Region across Canada (cont’d)





Ontario Region (ON)

Quebec Region (QC)



Species listed on the Species at Risk Act (cont’d) 4 5 9 10 6 11 8 12 13 12 13 14 14 14

Band-tailed Pigeon Patagioenasfasciata X

Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Eastern Whip-poor-will Caprimulgusvociferus X X X X X X X

Chimney Swift Chaeturapelagica X X X X X X X X X X

Lewis’s Woodpecker Melanerpeslewis X X

Red-headed Woodpecker

Melanerpeserythrocephalus X X X X X

Williamson’s Sapsucker Sphyrapicusthyroideus X X

White-headed Woodpecker

Picoidesalbolarvatus X X

Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopuscooperi X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Acadian Flycatcher Empidonaxvirescens X

Loggerhead Shrike

(excubitorides subspecies)

Laniusludovicianusexcubitorides X

Loggerhead Shrike

(migrans subspecies)

Laniusludovicianusmigrans X X X X

Horned Lark (strigata subspecies)

Eremophilaalpestrisstrigata X

Barn Swallow Hirundorustica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X



Bicknell’s Thrush Catharusbicknelli X X X X




Pacific & Yukon

Region (PYR)

Prairie &

Northern Region (PNR)

Ontario Region (ON)

Quebec Region (QC)

Atlantic

Region (NS)

Atlantic

Region (NB)

Species listed on the Species at Risk Act (cont’d) 4 5 9 10 6 11 8 12 13 12 13 14 14 14

Sage Thrasher Oreoscoptesmontanus X X

Sprague’s Pipit Anthusspragueii X X

Chestnut-collared Longspur

Calcariusornatus X

McCown’s Longspur Calcariusmccownii X

Louisiana Waterthrush Parkesiamotacilla X

Golden-winged Warbler Vermivorachrysoptera X X X X X

Prothonotary Warbler Protonotariacitrea X

Hooded Warbler Setophagacitrina X

Kirtland’s Warbler Setophagakirtlandii X

Cerulean Warbler Setophagacerulea X X

Canada Warbler Cardellinacanadensis X X X X X X X X X X

Yellow-breasted Chat (BC population)

Icteriavirensauricollis X

Yellow-breasted Chat Icteriavirensvirens X

Vesper Sparrow (affinis subspecies)

Pooecetesgramineusaffinis X

Henslow’s Sparrow Ammodramushenslowii X X X








Ontario Region (ON)

Quebec Region (QC)



Species listed or under review by COSEWIC 4 5 9 10 6 11 8 12 13 12 13 14 14 14

Bobolink Dolichonyxoryzivorus X X X X X X X X X X X X

Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna X X X X X X X

Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopusvirens X X X X X X X X X

Bank Swallow Ripariariparia X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Wood Thrush Hylocichlamustelina X X X X X X X

Baird’s Sparrow Ammodramusbairdii X



Table 2-3 Bird Species of Management Concern across Canada

Common Name SARA COSEWIC BC AB SK MB ON QC NB NS NL

Brant Blue

Canada Goose (occidentalis subspecies)

Red

Cackling Goose Blue

Trumpeter Swan TH

Tundra Swan Blue

Harlequin Duck (Eastern population)

SC (Schedule 1) SC EN EN EN VU

Harlequin Duck (Western population)

SC

Surf Scoter Blue

White-winged Scoter SC

Long-tailed Duck Blue

Barrow’s Goldeneye (Eastern population)

SC (Schedule 1) SC EN VU

Northern Bobwhite EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Greater Sage-Grouse EN (Schedule 1) EN Red EN EN

White-tailed Ptarmigan (saxatilis subspecies)

Blue

Sooty Grouse Blue

Sharp-tailed Grouse (columbianus subspecies)

Blue

Yellow-billed Loon Blue


SC SC

Horned Grebe (Magdalen Islands population)

EN (Schedule 1) EN TH



Table 2-3 Bird Species of Management Concern across Canada (cont'd)


Western Grebe Red SC

Clark’s Grebe Red

Laysan Albatross Red

Black-footed Albatross Blue

Short-tailed Albatross TH (Schedule 1) TH Red

Northern Fulmar Red

Pink-footed Shearwater TH (Schedule 1) TH Blue

Flesh-footed Shearwater Blue

Buller’s Shearwater Blue

Leach’s Storm-Petrel SC

Brandt’s Cormorant Red

Double-crested Cormorant Blue

Pelagic Cormorant (pelagicus subspecies)

Red

American White Pelican Red TH

Least Bittern TH (Schedule 1) TH TH EN

American Bittern Blue

Great Blue Heron (fanninisubspecies)

SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue

Great Blue Heron (herodiassubspecies)

Blue

Green Heron Blue

Black-crowned Night-Heron Red

Bald Eagle SC EN EN

Northern Goshawk (laingisubspecies)

TH (Schedule 1) TH Red





Broad-winged Hawk Blue

Swainson’s Hawk Red

Ferruginous Hawk TH (Schedule 1) TH EN TH

Rough-legged Hawk Blue

Golden Eagle EN EN

Gyrfalcon Blue

Peregrine Falcon (anatum/tundrius subspecies)

SC Red TH EN TH EN EN VU VU

Peregrine Falcon (pealei subspecies)


Prairie Falcon Red SC

Yellow Rail SC (Schedule 1) SC Red SC TH

King Rail EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Whooping Crane EN (Schedule 1) EN EN EN EN

American Golden-Plover Blue


EN (Schedule 1) EN EN EN EN EN

Piping Plover (melodussubspecies)

EN (Schedule 1) EN TH EN EN EN

Mountain Plover EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

American Avocet Red

Wandering Tattler Blue

Upland Sandpiper Red

Eskimo Curlew EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Long-billed Curlew SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue SC

Hudsonian Godwit Red





Red Knot (rufa subspecies)

EN EN SC EN EN

Red Knot (roselaari subspecies)

TH (Schedule 1) TH Red

Red Knot (islandica subspecies)

SC

Short-billed Dowitcher Blue

Red-necked Phalarope Blue

Ivory Gull EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Ross’s Gull TH (Schedule 1) TH EN

California Gull Blue

Black Tern SC

Caspian Tern Blue TH

Roseate Tern EN (Schedule 1) EN TH EN

Forster’s Tern Red

Common Murre Red

Thick-billed Murre Red

Marbled Murrelet TH (Schedule 1) TH Blue

Ancient Murrelet SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue

Cassin’s Auklet Blue

Horned Puffin Red

Tufted Puffin Blue

Band-tailed Pigeon SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue

Yellow-billed Cuckoo Red

Barn Owl (Western population)

SC (Schedule 1) TH Blue





Barn Owl (Eastern population)

EN (Schedule 1) EN EN SC

Flammulated Owl SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue

Western Screech-Owl (kennicottiisubspecies)


Western Screech-Owl (macfarlaneisubspecies)

EN (Schedule 1) EN Red

Snowy Owl Blue

Northern Pygmy-Owl (swarthisubspecies)

Blue

Burrowing Owl EN (Schedule 1) EN Red EN EN EN

Spotted Owl EN (Schedule 1) EN Red

Barred Owl SC

Short-eared Owl SC (Schedule 3) SC Blue SC SC VU

Northern Saw-whet Owl (brooksi subspecies)

TH (Schedule 1) TH Blue

Common Nighthawk TH (Schedule 1) TH SC SC TH TH

Eastern Whip-poor-will TH (Schedule 1) TH TH SC

Chimney Swift TH (Schedule 1) TH TH SC EN TH

Lewis’s Woodpecker SC (Schedule 1) TH Red

Red-headed Woodpecker TH (Schedule 1) TH SC TH

Williamson’s Sapsucker EN (Schedule 1) EN Red

Hairy Woodpecker (picoideus subspecies)

Blue

White-headed Woodpecker EN (Schedule 1) EN Red

Olive-sided Flycatcher TH (Schedule 1) TH Blue SC SC





Acadian Flycatcher EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Gray Flycatcher Blue

Loggerhead Shrike (excubitorides subspecies)

TH (Schedule 1) TH SC EN

Loggerhead Shrike (migrans subspecies)

EN (Schedule 1) EN EN TH

Steller’s Jay (carlottaesubspecies)

Blue

Horned Lark (merrillisubspecies)

Blue

Horned Lark (strigatasubspecies)


Purple Martin Blue

Barn Swallow TH Blue

Canyon Wren Blue

Sedge Wren SC

Western Bluebird (Georgia Depression pop’n)

Red

Gray-cheeked Thrush VU

Bicknell’s Thrush SC (Schedule 3) TH EN VU

Sage Thrasher EN (Schedule 1) EN Red

Sprague’s Pipit TH (Schedule 1) TH SC TH

Chestnut-collared Longspur TH

Smith’s Longspur Blue

McCown’s Longspur SC (Schedule 1) SC

Golden-winged Warbler TH (Schedule 1) TH SC SC

Cape May Warbler Red





Black-throated Green Warbler Blue SC

Kirtland’s Warbler EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Bay-breasted Warbler Red

Cerulean Warbler SC (Schedule 1) EN TH TH

Prothonotary Warbler EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Louisiana Waterthrush SC (Schedule 1) SC SC SC

Connecticut Warbler Red

Hooded Warbler TH (Schedule 1) TH SC

Canada Warbler TH (Schedule 1) TH Blue SC SC

Yellow-breasted Chat (BC population)


Yellow-breasted Chat (virens subspecies)

SC (Schedule 1) SC SC

Brewer’s Sparrow (breweri subspecies)

Red

Vesper Sparrow (affinis subspecies)


Lark Sparrow Red

Savannah Sparrow (“Ipswich” subspecies)

SC (Schedule 1) SC

Grasshopper Sparrow Red SC

Baird’s Sparrow EN

Henslow’s Sparrow EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Le Conte’s Sparrow Blue

Nelson’s Sparrow Red SC

Bobolink TH Blue TH





Eastern Meadowlark TH

Western Meadowlark (Georgia Depression pop’n)

Red

Rusty Blackbird SC (Schedule 1) SC Blue SC VU

Pine Grosbeak (carlottaesubspecies)

Blue

Red Crossbill (percna subspecies)

EN (Schedule 1) EN EN

Species under review by COSEWIC

Eastern Wood-Pewee

Bank Swallow

Wood Thrush

NOTE:

EN – Endangered; SC – Special Concern; TH – Threatened; VU - Vulnerable

LEGISLATION/SOURCES:

SARA Public Registry(updated 1 Jun 2011; Government of Canada 2011b)

COSEWIC: Canadian Wildlife Species at Risk (updated Oct 2010; COSEWIC 2010)

British Columbia: Red and Blue List, (accessed 15 Jun 2011; BC Conservation Data Centre 2011)

Alberta: Wildlife Act(updated 3 June 2010; ASRD 2010)

Saskatchewan: Wildlife Act (no update specified; SK ENV 2011)

Manitoba: Endangered Species Act(no update specified; Manitoba Wildlife and Ecosystem Protection 2011)

Ontario: Endangered Species Act(updated 8 Jun 2011; Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2011)

Quebec: Loisur les espèces menaces ouvulnérables(updated Apr 2011; Québec Ressources Naturelles et Faune 2011)

Note: classified as “vulnerable”, “menacée", and ”susceptibles d'être designees menaces ou vulnerable”; listed correspondingly as EN, TH, SC

New Brunswick: Endangered Species Act (no update specified; New Brunswick Natural Resources 2011)

Nova Scotia: Endangered Species Act (updated 30 Oct 2009; Nova Scotia Natural Resources 2007); uses Vulnerable instead of SC

Newfoundland and Labrador: Endangered Species Act (updated 26 Aug 2011; Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Environment and Conservation 2011)



2.3 Transmission Pipeline Construction and Operations

Interactions Matrix

This section describes the main pipeline and facility construction and operation activities and

the potential for these activities to result in the incidental take of migratory birds. Tables 2-

4 and 2-5 summarize potential interactions with migratory birds relative to the activities for

pipeline and facility construction and pipeline and facility operation, respectively. For the

purpose of this document, an interaction with migratory birds is defined as direct mortality,

loss of nests or sensory disturbance. Direct mortality refers to taking a bird’s life, or loss of

nestlings or eggs incidental to the pipeline activity. Loss of nests refers to destruction of the

nest or abandonment of an active nest resulting in unsuccessful hatching of eggs. Sensory

disturbance refers to disturbance to nesting activity resulting from the presence of workers

and equipment close to the nest or noise generated from construction or facility equipment

(e.g., compressor units).

The interactions matrix, as shown in Table 2-4, presents the main construction and

operation phases for both pipelines and facility sites, where there is likely a physical

disturbance. It does not include activities such as survey (construction and legal survey) or

biophysical data collection field programs. During facility construction, site preparation is the

primary pathway for incidental take of migratory birds, as once the site has been prepared

for construction, there is little potential for use by migratory birds due to the removal of

suitable nesting habitat. Following site preparation, facility construction may still affect

migratory birds through sensory disturbance. Ancillary facilities, such as permanent access

roads, have similar interactions with migratory birds as those associated with pipeline

construction, including direct mortality, loss of nests and sensory disturbance. Permanent

access roads may have long-term implications to direct mortality of migratory birds as a

result of interactions with vehicles using the access roads.

Potential effects on migratory birds for each of the identified activities described in the

interactions matrix are based on CEPA’s consultants’ field and environmental assessment

experience primarily from National Energy Board regulated oil and gas projects and a review

of scientific literature.

Risk of incidental take refers to the likelihood of either direct mortality, loss of nests or

sensory disturbance occurring as a result of a particular construction or operation phase or

activity. Where there is the likelihood of incidental take, the use of BMPs is recommended.



Table 2-4 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Construction with Migratory Birds

Stage

Activity

Summary Description Activity

Potential Effect on Migratory Birds

Risk of

Incidental Take? Comments

Pipeline Construction

Pre-

construction Activities

Preparation of

road crossings and foreign line crossings

clearing of vegetation,

topsoil conservation and grading

installation of approach ramps

loss of nests

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

yes

yes

potential (if nest abandonment)

timing dependent (i.e.,

when disturbance occurs during breeding season)

depending on disturbance, re-nesting may occur (i.e., early in breeding season vs. later in breeding season

some species may be more tolerant to disturbance than others. A SARA listed species would be considered a higher risk

and require more enhanced protection measures (avoid through timing, habitat restoration or avoidance through routing).

Right-of-way

Preparation Right-of-way

clearing of

vegetation

In forested areas - timber salvage

clearing of trees and

shrubs in forested landscape

creation timber decking areas

loss of nesting

habitat

loss of nests

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

temporary, may

yes

yes

yes


timing dependent (i.e.,

when disturbance occurs during breeding season)

depending on disturbance, re-nesting may occur (i.e., early in breeding season vs. later in breeding



Stage

Activity Summary

Description Activity Potential Effect on

Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments


In forested areas -mulching of shrubs and small trees as an alternate method to

clearing and grubbing of right-of-way

have some localized effect

season

some species may be more tolerant to disturbance

than others. A SARA listed species would be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures (avoid through

timing, habitat restoration or avoidance through routing).

Right-of-way Preparation (cont’d)

Soil handling removal of vegetation through topsoil conservation (native

range, tame pasture, hayland)

use of temporary

workspace for soil and spoil (excavated ditch material) salvage

loss of nesting habitat

loss of nests

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

temporary, may have some localized effect

yes

yes

yes


timing dependent (i.e., when disturbance occurs during breeding season)

depending on disturbance, re-nesting may occur (i.e., early in breeding season

vs. later in breeding season

some species may be more tolerant to disturbance

than others. A SARA listed

species would be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures (avoid through

timing, habitat restoration



Stage

Activity Summary


Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments


or avoidance through routing).

Pipeline Installation

Stringing pipe,

welding,

trenching,

lowering-in, and

backfill

sequential staging of

pipeline activities culminating with installation of the pipe

involves equipment such as backhoes; side booms, pipe trucks, and welding equipment

(mechanized and non-mechanized

progresses quickly over

the length of the pipeline right-of-way (can average 3-4 km/day)

sensory disturbance

potential (if

nest abandonment)

Some species may be

more tolerant to disturbance than others. A SARA listed species would

be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures (avoid through timing, habitat restoration or avoidance through routing


(cont’d)

Hydro-static

testing

pressure testing of the pipeline prior to being

placed in-service

involves use of water over a 24-hour period

minimal activity along test section(s)

test sections vary in

none no N/A



Stage

Activity Summary


Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments


length

Post-

construction

reclamation

seeding of the pipeline right-of-way

ground application using all-terrain vehicles,

agricultural equipment, seed drills etc.

aerial application using helicopter and/or fixed wing aircraft

specialized reclamation in some areas (water crossings)should be done before growing season or early in spring

low human and equipment intensity

sensory disturbance

potential for

nest abandonment in adjoining

habitats

Considered very low risk and low

consequence to nesting birds because of limited amount of equipment and

people associated with this activity

timing of this activity could

likely avoid the sensitive migratory bird breeding window or will be at either

end of the window depending on geographic location.

Generally this is a low

intensity activity involving only a few pieces of equipment (tractor and seed drill on agricultural lands) or aircraft in areas where ground access is

poor during optimal seeding period

Seeding may be done following completion of

construction in areas where winter construction is planned (northern areas where ground conditions limit pipeline and facility



Stage

Activity Summary


Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments


construction to frozen conditions).



Table 2-4 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Construction with Migratory Birds (cont’d)

Stage

Activity


Potential Effect on Migratory Birds

Risk of


Construction of Above-ground Facilities

Site Preparation

Involves

removing of vegetation cover, soil conservation and grading

clearing of vegetation loss of nesting habitat

loss of nests

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

yes

yes

yes

potential on adjacent areas (if nest abandonment)

permanent loss of habitat within facility site topsoil conservation and

grading

Facility Construction

Construction of

compressor station / pump station/meter stations

involves construction of

foundations and buildings, installation of pumps, compressor units, or metering facilities

installation of yard piping

fencing of facility site

activity occurs over longer period but with

relatively low numbers of workers and heavy equipment

sensory disturbance

in surrounding area only as site has been cleared

potential on

adjacent areas (if nest abandonment)

Some species may be more

tolerant to disturbance than others. A SARA listed species would be considered a higher risk

and require more enhanced protection measures

Construction of

permanent access roads to facility

vegetation removal and

topsoil stripping, and grading to create road

loss of nesting habitat

loss of nests

yes

yes

yes

permanent loss of

vegetation used for nesting and rearing of migratory



Stage

Activity Summary


Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Construction of Above-ground Facilities

sites bed, and gravelling of access road

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

potential on adjacent areas (if nest abandonment)

birds

Some species may be more tolerant to disturbance

than others. A SARA listed species would be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures



Table 2-5 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Operations with Migratory Birds

Stage

Activity Summary

Description Activity

Effect on

Migratory Birds

Risk of


Pipeline Operations

Integrity Management

Companies conduct

both aerial and ground surveillance activities to:

identify any potential third- party incursions onto their ROWs

identify areas of ROWinstability that

could potentially affect the integrity of the pipeline

identify areas where there is potential surface erosion

comply with the requirements of permits and approvals (e.g., NEB certificate condition for post-

construction monitoring)

aerial line patrol – varies in frequency

walking/driving the pipeline ROW

sensory

disturbance to nesting migratory birds

disturbance of staging waterfowl species

potential (if

nest abandonment)

no

temporary disturbance and species will return to nest

temporary disturbance and

species will return to staging area

can be scheduled to avoid sensitive migratory bird

breeding window to reduce risk to migratory birds

Pipeline Maintenance

Similar to pipeline construction but site-

specific. Involves vegetation removal (topsoil conservation),

removing vegetation through topsoil conservation

trenching

pipe removal and

direct mortality

loss of nests

sensory disturbance

yes

yes

potential (if

nest abandonment)

very localized

Some species may be more tolerant to disturbance than others. A SARA listed species would



Stage Activity Summary

Description Activity Effect on

Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Pipeline Operations

trenching, replacing or repairing pipe, backfilling and reclamation.

replacement

backfilling

reclamation

be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures

Vegetation

Management – Pipeline ROW

This activity is focused

on maintaining the area over the pipe and adjoining area clear of tall trees and shrubs or

controlling weed infestations to allow for

visual inspection of the right-of-way.

vegetation control:

Involves use of powered machinery to clear woody vegetation over the maintained portion of the pipeline right-of-way.

alternatively, some companies may choose to use laborers with

chain saws to do the clearing. Generally speaking herbicides are no longer used for right-of-way woody vegetation control.

occurs on a regular basis depending on site-specific conditions

(potentially on 5-7 year schedule)

can be planned to avoid sensitive period

and thereby reduce risk to migratory birds

direct mortality

loss of nests

sensory disturbance

yes

yes


can be scheduled to avoid

sensitive migratory bird breeding window to reduce risk to migratory birds

very localized in nature and upland vegetation areas subject to regular

control may reduce risk to nesting birds by changing vegetation composition over time

higher risk in riparian areas because of vegetation composition

more localized disturbance than pipeline construction

clearing because width of vegetation control zone is

much narrower than the area required for pipeline construction

if scheduling cannot avoid migratory bird breeding window then effects are similar to pipeline





Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Pipeline Operations

vegetation clearing

Vegetation Management – Upland

combination of

mechanical and hand labor

in many situations can be scheduled to avoid sensitive migratory bird breeding window

may be situation

where clearing has to be done within sensitive window due to other external factors (water

crossings, landowners, urban setting

very localized

direct mortality

loss of nests

sensory disturbance

yes

yes


upland vegetation areas

subject to regular control may reduce risk to nesting birds by changing vegetation composition over time

if scheduling cannot avoid migratory bird breeding window, then effects are

similar to pipeline vegetation clearing

Vegetation Management - Riparian Areas

combination of

mechanical and hand labor

in many situations can

be scheduled to avoid sensitive migratory bird breeding window

direct mortality

loss of nests

sensory disturbance

yes

yes


higher risk in riparian

areas because of vegetation composition

if scheduling cannot avoid

migratory bird breeding window, then effects are similar to pipeline vegetation clearing

Weed Control – Pipeline

ROWand area

required on ROW to

meet appropriate

direct mortality

loss of nests

yes

yes

localized activity, with low

number of people and





Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Pipeline Operations

surrounding facility sites

provincial/territorial weed control acts

weed control is usually

done using a combination of mechanical and herbicide control

site-specific and localized

sensory disturbance


equipment

some species are resilient and will likely re-nest

(timing dependent) if suitable habitat is in the surrounding area

some species are resilient to sensory disturbance which may result in a disruption in breeding and nesting activity

Weed Control – Facility Sites

required to meet

appropriate provincial or territorial weed control act

weed control is usually done using a combination of mechanical and herbicide control

generally limited to facility site

limited human and equipment presence

no – sites are

typically graveled and general do not provide nesting

habitat except for Killdeer and Common Nighthawk

no none

Unplanned

Events (e.g., Emergency: Pipeline in case

See pipeline maintenance

includes product clean-up

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

loss of nests

yes

yes

potential (if nest

very localized

Some species may be more tolerant to disturbance than others. A





Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Pipeline Operations

of spill) abandonment) SARA listed species would be considered a higher risk and require more enhanced protection measures

Table 2-5 Interaction Matrix Summary of Pipeline and Facility Operations with Migratory Birds (cont’d)



Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Above-ground Facility Operations

General Regular operation personnel on site to monitor station function

minimal as site is developed

no none

Blow down (compressor stations)

scheduled with release to atmosphere

unscheduled with release to atmosphere

sensory disturbance

potential (if

nest abandonment)

species using the area are

likely adapted to operational noise

species nesting adjacent to facility should be resilient to short term nature of disturbance

Site maintenance gravelling of site

grading

building maintenance

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

yes


species specific, i.e.,

species which nest on exposed gravel or on yard piping or on facility builds (e.g., killdeer)

species using the area are





Migratory Birds

Risk of Incidental

Take? Comments

Above-ground Facility Operations

likely adapted to operational noise

species nesting adjacent to

facility should be resilient to short-term nature of disturbance

Site repairs or additions ground disturbance including grading and trenching

adding new yard piping or relocating existing

piping

direct mortality

sensory disturbance

yes


very species specific, i.e., species which nest on

exposed gravel or on yard piping or on facility builds (e.g., killdeer)

species using the area are likely adapted to operational noise

species nesting adjacent to

facility should be resilient to short-term nature of disturbance



The consequence of the potential effect on migratory birds is a qualitative assessment of the

consequences of direct mortality, loss of nests and sensory disturbance on migratory birds

and is based on professional judgment. Most migratory bird species exhibit some degree of

resiliency with respect to interruptions to nesting activity (i.e., sensory disturbance).

Depending on when a disturbance occurs during the breeding window (i.e., nesting,

fledging), many migratory bird species, particularly passerine species, will attempt to re-

nest and some species will attempt to nest more than once during the breeding season

(Bollinger et al. 1990; Faaborg et al. 1998; Nagy and Holmes 2004; Perlut et al. 2006).

Other migratory bird species, such as waterfowl, may attempt to re-nest only if the nest

was destroyed very early in the nesting period (Drilling et al. 2002, Rohwer et al. 2002).

Reference to species resilience is based on a limited review of the literature and professional

judgment. The reference to species resilience does not lessen the recommendation for the

application of BMPs to reduce or avoid effects on migratory birds.

As the responses to the various activities associated with construction and operation of both

pipelines and facility sites are species-specific (particularly differences in sensory

disturbance responses), dialogue with an avian specialist or Environment Canada regarding

mitigation is recommended, particularly in situations beyond the scope of this BMP.

However, once Environment Canada has developed and released information on key

breeding and nesting windows and nesting information for all birds protected under the

MBCA, it is anticipated that the need for further dialogue about BMPs would be minimal.

2.4 Migratory Bird – Pipeline Risk Assessment Matrix

A risk assessment matrix was developed (see Figure 2-3) to represent biological risks to

migratory birds, and regulatory risks to the proposed or existing project. In this matrix, four

categories were chosen to represent risk:

1. SARA species with defined critical habitat

2. presence of SARA or provincially-listed species and their habitat

3. presence of BCR priority species and their habitat

4. other migratory birds and their habitat (see Table 2-6)

All migratory birds are protected under the MBCA and need to be considered in the

application of the MBCA. Certain species also require special consideration, due to other

legislation (e.g., SARA, provincial wildlife or endangered species acts), wildlife management

plans (e.g., BCR Strategies) or the existence of protected or important habitat areas (e.g.,

Important Bird Areas [IBAs]) close to a proposed project. During scoping for a proposed

project these categories should be considered during pipeline routing as they can have a

direct effect on project siting and timing of construction.



Table 2-6 Categories Used to Asses Migratory Bird Risk

Migratory Bird Risk Category Description

in

creased

Reg

ula

tory R

isk to

Mig

rato

ry B

ird

s

an

d th

e P

ro

ject

SARA species with defined critical habitat

Presence of defined (or proposed) critical habitat

for SARA-listed Schedule 1 endangered and threatened migratory bird species is found within the proposed right-of-way OR has been defined post-construction.

Presence of SARA or provincially

listed species and their habitat (breeding, staging)

SARA- or provincially listed migratory bird species

are known to breed on or within a distance to the proposed or existing project footprint that could create concern for adverse effect. Includes provincially and nationally recognized key bird areas (e.g., Warbler Habitat Areas in British Columbia, RAMSAR sites, Important Bird Areas).

Presence of BCR priority species and their habitat

Birds (migratory and non-migratory) listed as BCR priority species known to occur within vicinity of

proposed project, potentially creating the potential for adverse effect. May have species-specific management goals that need to be considered during planning.

Migratory birds (all species) and their habitat

Construction or activities during operations have the potential to affect migratory birds.



Figure 2-3 Migratory Bird-Pipeline Risk Matrix

Section 3: Best Management Practices for Transmission Pipelines

Error! No text of specified style in document.


3 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR TRANSMISSION PIPELINES

3.1 Environment Canada Avoidance Guidelines

Environment Canada (2011) recently released “Avoidance Guidelines ”as part of their

approach to managing incidental take under the MBCA. These guidelines provide guidance

to help minimize risk to migratory bird nests and eggs, as well as recommendations to help

individuals, governments and industries to be proactive in avoiding or mitigating activities

that may affect migratory birds. As part of this BMP development, CEPA has met with

Environment Canada to discuss the implications of these guidelines on pipeline projects.

Additional components of the avoidance guidelines are still being developed by Environment

Canada (B. van Havre 2011) and will include key breeding and nesting windows and nesting

information for all birds protected under the MBCA, including corroborating scientific

background information. See Table 3-1 for an example of how key nesting periods across

the BCRs where CEPA operates would be summarized for the BMP (TO BE COMPLETED

ONCE BCR STRATEGIES ISSUED).

3.2 Recommended Best Management Practices for Pipelines 3.2.1 Key Points The best management practices included in this document have been developed over many

years of cooperation with resource managers and specific regulatory authorities such as

Environment Canada and the implementation of an adaptive management approach by

CEPA member companies. Environment Canada recommends avoiding engaging in

potentially destructive activities during key risk periods in order to reduce the risk of

incidental take or harm resulting from accidental spills. According to the MBCA

(Section 5.1), it is prohibited to deposit a substance that is harmful to migratory birds, or

permit such a substance to be deposited in waters or an area frequented by migratory birds

or in a place from which the substance may enter such waters or such an area. Accidental

spills of such substances are not excluded from enforcement of the MBCA.

There are several key points mentioned in a document previously developed by the

Canadian Pipeline Environment Committee The Pipeline Industry and the Migratory Birds

Convention Act (2004) that should be repeated here before presenting the recommended

BMPs.

There are no industry exemptions under the Act to disturb or destroy migratory birds,

eggs or nests under any conditions, including during an emergency (e.g., fire, spills).

The pipeline industry is not legally obliged to report impacts to enforcement agencies.

However, it is recommended to immediately implement emergency procedures and

contact Environment Canada for advice on preventing any further damage to birds and to

address the potential need for permits for dealing with affected birds.



Table 3-1 Key Nesting Periods for BCRs across Canada where CEPA Operates1

Environment Canada Operational Region

Key Nesting Periods

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Pacific and Yukon Region

PYR 4: Northwestern Interior Forest

PYR 5: Northern Pacific Forest

PYR 9: Great Basin

PYR 10: Northern Rockies

Prairie and

Northern Region

PNR 6: Boreal Taiga Plains

PNR 11:Prairie Pothole

Ontario Region ON 8: Boreal Softwood Shield

ON 12: Boreal Hardwood Transition

ON 13: Lower Great lakes / St. Lawrence Plain

Quebec Region QC12: Boreal Hardwood Transition

QC 13: Lower Great lakes/St. Lawrence Plain

QC 14: Atlantic Northern Forest

Atlantic Region NS 14: Atlantic Northern Forest

1 Table to be updated as BCR Strategies are issued.



NB 14: Atlantic Northern Forest



3.2.2 Pre-construction Planning

Best management practices that should be considered during pre-construction planning to

minimize risk to migratory birds and their nests are listed in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2 Best Management Practices – Pre-construction Planning Scoping Determine whether a proposed pipeline activity will affect birds or bird habitat.

Determine whether these effects will occur in a government-recognized bird sanctuary or ecologically sensitive area (e.g., Important Bird Area, RAMSAR site) or Bird Conservation Region.

Regulatory Engagement

If proponent feels it is necessary, engage Environment Canada and/or provincial or territorial wildlife agencies early in the planning process when there is potential for

activities during the migratory bird breeding window.

Early Planning

If a proposed activity poses potential harm to birds or bird habitat, consider rescheduling the activity. Rescheduling the activity should be considered if there is high probability that the area contains active nests that cannot be otherwise avoided such as in areas of high value habitat or the probability of finding nests through

construction best management practices is low.

If a proposed pipeline route poses environmental risk to recognized migratory bird habitat (e.g., Important Bird Areas2, RAMSAR sites3, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) sites4, critical habitat for SARA-listed migratory bird), consider relocating or rerouting the pipeline.

3.2.3 Construction

Best management practices that should be considered during construction of pipelines and

facilities to minimize risk to migratory birds and their nests are listed in Table 3-3. Tables 3-

4 and 3-5 provide specific operational practices to reduce the risk of incidental take for each

stage of pipeline and facility construction, respectively.

Table 3-3 Best Management Practices – Construction Regulatory Engagement

If proponent feels it is necessary, engage Environment Canada and/or provincial or territorial wildlife agencies early in the planning process when there is potential for activities during the migratory bird breeding window.

Low impact activities may be allowable, but consult with the agencies to identify specific guidelines for addressing a project's potential effect on migratory birds.

Share the results of mitigation efforts with industry and regulatory agencies, and participate in research and monitoring programs that contribute to best practices for bird habitat protection and conservation.

Contractor/

Employee Education

As part of environmental procedures, identify specific measures to assist

employees and contractors in recognizing, protecting and conserving bird habitat.

Educate staff and contractors on migratory bird issues and correct protocols.

2 Information about Important Bird Areas can be found through Nature Canada and Bird Studies Canada websites

3 Information about RAMSAR sites can be found through the RAMSAR Sites Information Services website

4 Information about WHSRN sites can be found through the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network

website



Table 3-3 Best Management Practices – Construction (cont’d) Planning/ Schedule

Consider opportunities to reduce project footprint to reduce potential for effect on birds and bird habitat.

Schedule field activities, such as clearing, to avoid sensitive migratory bird periods such as breeding, nesting and staging (migration).When activities are conducted within the

migratory bird breeding window, migratory bird nest surveys will be conducted (see below).

Before the migratory bird nesting period, explore opportunities to clear and mow vegetation near a project to discourage nesting, reducing possible interaction between bird species and construction activities. Before undertaking this work, ensure all

necessary regulatory approvals are in place and consult with wildlife agencies and landowners to ensure that the action is appropriate.

Migratory Bird Nest Surveys

If construction during the nesting period cannot be avoided, commission nesting surveys by qualified individuals and implement appropriate mitigation measures. Keep records of surveys for regulatory filing if required as part of project approvals. In forested areas where vegetation clearing occurred prior to the nesting period (e.g., winter clearing) no

nest sweeps would be required for activities during the nesting period. However, in grassland areas, portions of the right-of-way that were mowed prior to the nesting period would still require migratory bird nest surveys if construction activities are scheduled to occur during the nesting period.

Develop contingency plans to modify project activities to address migratory bird issues.

Establishment of Buffers

Size the zones to suit the species and their sensitivity to human disturbance. Avoid disturbing nesting sites until after fledgling (when young birds can fly).

Reclamation Consider the needs of bird species and bird habitats when planning land reclamation (for

example, select native seed mixes or plant vegetation that enhances food supply and nesting cover).

Wildlife

Monitor

The need for a wildlife monitor will depend on regulatory direction, the abundance of

birds encountered along the RoW, the species of birds, the construction tactics that are employed and the recommendations made from the qualified individual conducting the pre‐construction survey.

The role of the wildlife monitor would be to work with the Environmental Inspector and the Environmental Lead to communicate any findings and observations, and provide advice during the construction program to the Project team.

It is expected that the wildlife monitor would provide information for inclusion into the Project’s as‐built report following completion of the Project. This would detail issues

encountered, actions taken, results observed, and recommendations for follow‐up.

Monitor status of active nest sites to determine whether occupants are still present or if they have abandoned or fledged from the nest.

Develop mitigation measures for new bird nesting sites identified in the Project footprint in conjunction with the Environmental Inspector and Environmental Lead; the

Environmental Inspector and Environmental Lead would then work with the Construction Manager to implement these measures with the Construction crews.

Monitor bird activity and behaviour as the construction crews advance towards buffers.

Produce Global Positioning System points and mapping information related to wildlife

data and interactions for the Project.

NOTE: Surveys methods for bird nest surveys and further details on setback buffers can be found in Section 4.



Table 3-4 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds During Pipeline

Construction

Pipeline

Activity


Effect on Migratory Birds

Best Management Practice to avoid incidental take of migratory Birds

Access Preparation

Preparation

of road crossings and foreign line crossings

Clearing of vegetation,

topsoil conservation and grading

Installation of approach ramps

Loss of nests

Sensory disturbance

Plan for this work to occur outside of migratory bird breeding window

Mow or clear vegetation in advance conducting work to discourage nesting by migratory birds. Note – depending on regulatory requirements pre-work may not be allowed in advance of project regulatory approval (Federal vs. provincial processes)

Once mowed maintain mowing to discourage nesting

Cultivate area to be disturbed to discourage

nesting

If activity occurs within migratory bird window, conduct nesting surveys as per BMP

Right-of-way Preparation

Preparation of the pipeline

right-of-way for installation of pipe

Clearing of trees in forested landscape

Creation Timber decking areas

Loss of nesting habitat

Loss of nests (direct mortality)

Sensory disturbance

Disruption to breeding and nesting activity


Pre-mow or clear vegetation in advance conducting work to discourage nesting by migratory birds. Note – depending on regulatory requirements

pre-work may not be allowed in advance of project regulatory approval (Federal vs. provincial processes)


Cultivate area to be disturbed to discourage nesting

If activity occurs within migratory bird window, conduct nesting surveys as per BMP. Note limitations of nest surveys within forested areas



Pipeline

Activity




Establish buffers on active nests as “no go” areas;

Monitor until fledging has occurred; remove vegetation and proceed with RoW preparation

Discuss additional measures with CWS as appropriate depending on construction location and on-stream dates.

Topsoil

conservation and grading

Removal of vegetation

through topsoil conservation (native range, tame pasture, hayland

Use of temporary workspace for soil and spoil salvage

Loss of nesting habitat

Loss of nests (direct mortality)

Sensory disturbance

Disruption to breeding and nesting activity


Mow or clear vegetation in advance conducting work to discourage nesting by migratory birds. Note – depending on regulatory requirements pre-work may not be allowed in advance of certain project regulatory approvals (Federal vs. provincial processes)



If activity occurs within migratory bird window, conduct nesting surveys as per BMP.


Monitor until fledging has occurred; remove vegetation and proceed with RoW preparation

Discuss additional measures with CWS as appropriate depending on construction location and pipeline on-stream dates.



Table 3-4 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds During Pipeline

Construction (cont’d)

Pipeline

Activity





Stringing

pipe, welding, trenching,

lowering-in, and backfill

Sequential staging of

pipeline activities cumulating with installation of the pipe

Involves heavy equipment such as tracked backhoes; side

booms, pipe trucks, welders (mechanized and non mechanized)

Progresses quickly over the length of the pipeline

right-of-way ( on average 3-4 km/day)

Sensory disturbance Plan to avoid taking additional RoW once RoW preparation has been completed

Stay within bounds of RoW

Follow BMP if additional Row space is required.

Reclamation Low vehicle and people intensity work

Seeding of the pipeline right–of-way

Ground application using all-terrain vehicles, agricultural equipment, seed drills etc.

Aerial application using

helicopter and/or fixed wing aircraft

Specialized reclamation in some areas (water crossings)

Should be done before

Sensory disturbance Low intensity activity people and equipment work

plan for this work to occur outside of the migratory bird breeding window

if occurring within migratory bird window, commence activity nearest to the edge of RoW and work towards center of RoW to minimize sensory disturbance

Keep people and equipment to a minimum to execute the on-site work.



Pipeline

Activity




growing season or early in spring.

Minimal people and

equipment on site



Table 3-5 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds During Compressor

Station/Pump Stations Construction

Activity

Activity




Site Preparation

Involves

removing of vegetation cover, topsoil

conservation and grading

Clear of vegetation Direct mortality

Loss of nests

Sensory disturbance


Mow or clear vegetation in advance conducting work to discourage nesting by migratory birds. Note – depending on regulatory requirements pre-work may not be allowed in advance of certain project regulatory approvals (Federal vs. provincial processes)


Cultivate area to be disturbed to discourage

nesting

If activity occurs within migratory bird window,

conduct nesting surveys as per BMP. Note – limitations of nest surveys within forested areas


Monitor until fledging has occurred; remove vegetation and proceed with site preparation

Discuss additional measures with CWS as

appropriate depending on construction location and on-stream dates

Topsoil conservation and grading

Facility Construction

Involves construction of

foundations and buildings, installation of pumps and or compressor units. Installation of yard piping. Fencing of

Sensory disturbance Plan to avoid taking additional temporary work space once site preparation has been completed

Stay within bounds of site

Follow BMP if additional work space is required.



Activity

Activity




facility site

Construction

of permanent

access roads

to facility sites

Vegetation removal and

topsoil conservation, and

grading to create road

bed, and gravelling of access road

Permanent loss of

vegetation used for nesting and rearing of migratory birds

Direct mortality

Loss of nests

Sensory disturbance


Mow or clear vegetation in advance conducting work to discourage nesting by migratory birds. Note – depending on regulatory requirements pre-work may not be allowed in advance of

certain project regulatory approvals (Federal vs. provincial processes)



If activity occurs within migratory bird window,

conduct nesting surveys as per BMP. Note – limitations of nest surveys within forested areas


Monitor until fledging has occurred; remove vegetation and proceed with site preparation

Discuss additional measures with CWS as appropriate depending on construction location and pipeline on-stream dates



3.2.4 Operation

The risk of incidental take of migratory birds, their eggs or nests during pipeline and facility

operation is significantly less than during construction but should not be overlooked. Best

management practices that should be considered during operation are listed in Table 3-6.

Table 3-7 provides specific operational practices to reduce the risk of incidental take for the

various activities that may occur during the life span of an active pipeline and its associated

facilities.

Table 3-6 Best Management Practices – Operation Regulatory Engagement

If proponent feels it is necessary, discuss operation activities with Environment Canada and/or provincial and territorial wildlife agencies when there is a significant risk to nesting migratory birds.

Share the results of mitigation efforts with industry and regulatory agencies,

and participate in research and monitoring programs that contribute to best practices for bird habitat protection and conservation.

Contractor/ Employee Education

As part of environmental procedures, identify specific measures to assist employees and contractors in recognizing, protecting and conserving bird habitat.

Educate staff and contractors on migratory bird issues and correct protocols.

Facilities No nest surveys should be conducted at facilities where construction takes place within the existing footprint. If an occupied nest is discovered by construction personnel on or adjacent to a facility during construction, activities within 30 m of the nest should stop until the Environmental Lead has been

notified. Once the Environmental Lead is notified a qualified individual should

be engaged to identify the occupant(s) and determine the appropriate mitigation.

Deterrents Physical deterrents, for example, owl decoys, could be installed at facilities. Facilities requiring deterrents would be identified based on site visits, local knowledge of the facilities and construction schedule. Facilities that had

potential habitat (i.e., wetlands or treed sloughs) within 100m of the proposed operation footprint would be assessed for mitigation measures.

Implementation and Monitoring of Deterrents

The physical deterrents (e.g., owl decoys) should be mounted on tripods or existing fence posts at the edge of the facilities that are closest to the potential habitat. The decoys used for the facility should be setup during the key nesting

period. Monitoring should be carried out by construction and environmental inspection resources to ensure that the decoys are operational as well as determine the effectiveness of the deterrent program.

Pipelines Vegetation control and management (e.g., mowing, tree trimming) along the RoW should be scheduled to occur outside of the key nesting period where possible. If activities cannot avoid the key nesting period, nest surveys should

be undertaken by a qualified individual along the ROW where vegetation management is planned. Follow survey protocols for pipeline construction as outlined in Section 4.

NOTE: Surveys methods for bird nest surveys and further details on setback buffers can be found in Section

4.



Table 3-7 Best Management Practices to Avoid Incidental Take of Migratory Birds During Pipeline Operations

Pipeline Operations

Activity Summary Description Activity

Effect on Migratory Birds Best Management Practices

Aerial and

Ground Surveillance - Line Patrol

Companies conduct both aerial

and ground surveillance activities to:

identify any potential 3rd party incursions onto their RoWs

identify areas of RoW instability that could potential affect the integrity of the pipeline

to identify areas where there

is potential surface erosion

to comply the requirements of permits and approvals (e.g.

NEB certificate condition for post construction monitoring)

Aerial line patrol –

varies in frequency depending on location

Walking/driving the pipeline RoW. Occurs typically at least once every 3 years.

Sensory disturbance

Disturbance of staging waterfowl species

Avoid flying below 500 m to

limit sensory disturbance to nesting migratory birds

Plan for on ground-based programs to occur outside of migratory bird window

When conducting ground-based programs (walking or driving)

stay near ditchline to limit disturbance to breeding birds

Depending on access plan as a single pass through vs. “in and out’ to limit potential disturbance to migratory birds

Pipeline repairs

Similar to pipeline construction

but on a very site specific basis. Involves vegetation removal (topsoil stripping), trenching, replacing/repairing pipe, backfill, and reclamation.

Removing vegetation

through topsoil stripping

Trenching

Pipe removal and replacement

Backfilling

Reclamation

Direct mortality

Loss of nests

Sensory disturbance

Very site specific

If feasible plan for repairs outside of migratory bird window

Implement BMP if repairs occur during breeding window



3.2.4.1 Emergency Response

Best management practices that should be considered during an emergency response to

minimize risk to migratory birds and their nests are listed in Table 3-5.

Table 3-5 Best Management Practices –Emergency: Pipeline Spill Emergency Response

In the case of an emergency, and in conjunction with carrying out normal emergency response procedures, it is important to report bird habitat impacts to appropriate agencies to ensure due diligence and reduce the risk of

enforcement actions.

Include procedures in a project's emergency response plans to address

migratory bird issues (for example, scare techniques to safely discourage birds from an area during spill cleanups).

3.2.5 Decommissioning and Abandonment

The following practices should be considered during decommissioning and abandonment of

the pipeline or associated facilities:

Before decommissioning or abandoning a pipeline or facility, consider potential effects to

migratory birds and bird habitat during the development of the decommissioning and

abandonment plan.

Schedule activities to avoid sensitive breeding and nesting activities, where possible.

If schedule does not allow for avoidance, follow BMP for construction if decommissioning

involves ground disturbance.

Section 4: Migratory Bird Nest Survey Protocol


4 MIGRATORY BIRD NEST SURVEY PROTOCOL

Variation exists in bird nest survey requirements among different regions in Canada. This

BMP proposes a standardized approach for migratory bird nest survey protocols for all

CEPA-member company projects in Canada. A standardized approach provides CEPA-

member companies and regulatory agencies with greater consistency and clarity about

survey protocols across Canada, particularly in instances where a project spans

jurisdictional boundaries.

4.1 Rationale for Use of Nest Surveys

Environment Canada recommends rescheduling activities and/or rerouting projects to

minimize risks to migratory birds and their habitats. Migratory bird nest surveys, although

not generally recommended by Environment Canada due to potential risk of disturbing

nesting birds, can be used in certain circumstances where nests are easily detectable (e.g.,

nests in open areas or on isolated trees). In such cases these surveys are used to

determine nesting activity within proposed development areas in order to meet regulatory

requirements with respect to migratory birds, including SARA-listed species and other

species of management concern,. Nest sites can be documented and suitable avoidance

buffers or restrictive timelines imposed during relevant development phases, where

applicable. In areas where there is high likelihood of encountering SARA-listed bird species,

surveys for such species should be extended to an appropriate setback distance unless

otherwise directed by the appropriate regulatory agency. Surveys depend on the suitable

habitat being present and land access being granted to complete surveys.

4.2 Objective of Nest Surveys

The specific objective of a migratory bird nest survey is to identify active migratory bird

nests within or near potential development or operational activity areas so that mitigations

can be implemented in order to reduce the risk of incidental take.

4.3 Nest Search Protocols – General

Nest surveys will be completed for all pipeline construction and operational activities

scheduled during key nesting periods (as defined by Environment Canada and specific to

each BCR [currently in development]). In most instances where construction cannot avoid

the key nesting period, a single pre-construction migratory bird nest survey would be

completed, typically a maximum of 7 days before the construction or operation activity, to

assess the presence of active or occupied nests in preferred habitat both within and

adjacent to the disturbance footprint. These surveys should be conducted in both forested

and non-forested habitats and wetlands, as well as any anthropogenic habitats that may be

affected. If deemed necessary by the Project Team, a wildlife monitor could be used during

RoW preparation to monitor active nests and assess any nests discovered during

construction.



The nest survey is a search for nests using systematic techniques assisted by cues from

birds (e.g., protective behaviour, scold calls, flushing). Methods used by qualified individuals

for nest surveys are:

walking, in a systematic manner, through the entire area proposed for clearing and/or

topsoil conservation

examining the ground, shrubs and trees for nests

scanning for unpredictable movement of vegetation, not related to the wind

responding (i.e., attempt to get a visual) to all singing males and calling females and

males

recording all bird sign and any sign of breeding evidence (i.e., singing males, female and

male together, copulation, birds carrying nesting material or food, presence of a nest or

nestlings, presence of fledglings)

While searching for nests, observers will be aware of a bird’s response to their presence.

During nest-building periods, observers will not get too close to the suspected nest, and will

verify only when the female is absent, to prevent abandonment. During incubation, if a

female is behaving as if there is a nest in the area but does not appear to be going to it, the

observer will leave the area so that the female can return to her nest.

Data recorded for located nests are:

species

UTM coordinates, distance to the applicable Project component (e.g., RoW or facility

boundary), date and time of day

photos

site description (i.e., tree or shrub species, height of nest, type of nest, direction cavity

faces)

stage of nesting (i.e., construction stage; eggs, including number; hatchlings; almost

fledged)

additional information about adult bird presence/absence or behavior

If vegetation clearing, soil handling and grading has occurred, but pipeline installation is

planned during the breeding season, no further migratory bird nest surveys are required.

If clean-up or reclamation occurs during the breeding bird window, the soil piles and direct

area of disturbance will be checked by the environmental inspectors and any active nests

that are found will be marked and the appropriate buffers established to reduce the risk of

disturbance to the nest. No searches will be done in the surrounding undisturbed areas

during reclamation. Reclamation practices are not expected to cause significant disturbance

to birds nesting adjacent to the disturbance footprint because the reclamation process from

soil replacement to seeding is of short duration and is a low-magnitude disturbance.



Vegetation management activities that may occur during the migratory bird breeding period

should be assessed by a qualified individual to determine the potential risk to breeding

migratory birds. Based on this assessment, if there is potential for an incidental take of

migratory birds (e.g., mowing), conduct migratory bird nest surveys in the affected area

before starting vegetation control.

The following measures may also be undertaken or considered during migratory bird nest

surveys:

Depending on the region, migratory bird nest surveys are conducted anywhere between

April 1 and August 31 in most instances (see Table 3-1). This timeframe accounts for the

laying, incubation, hatchling and fledgling stages of several bird guilds including

passerines, upland nesting shorebirds and waterfowl.

In areas of suitable habitat during the migratory bird breeding window, nest searches

should be conducted in the disturbance footprint and a suitable buffer on either side of

the footprint (e.g., 30 m in forested habitat, 50 m in grassland habitat, and wetlands

within 100 m of the RoW), in addition to point count surveys (for SARA-listed migratory

birds). The nest search buffer for breeding waterfowl or waterbirds will depend on the

recommended nest buffer; consult with appropriate regulator(s) prior to nest searches.

Individuals completing the migratory bird nest surveys must be aware of both provincially

or territorially listed and SARA-listed species at risk that may be found in the project area

(on and off the disturbance footprint).

4.3.1 Non-forested Habitats

Procedures for conducting a migratory bird nest survey in regions dominated by native

grasslands and tame pasture or haylands are described below (note – surveys in cultivated

lands are not recommended), including required site information, the detail of information

expected and the rationale for specific methods (where applicable).

Nest searches will be completed from sunrise until 1800 hours and should be

discontinued during high winds or any precipitation. Searches can be continued until

approximately 1800 hours as most nesting birds can still be flushed off their nests

throughout the day. Some exceptions exist, particularly for certain species. For Sprague’s

Pipit, for instance, nest searches (generally undertaken after a territorial display has been

observed) should be done between sunrise and 1000 hours or from 1700 hours until

dusk. Pre-construction migratory bird nest surveys should be completed a maximum of 7

days before the construction or operation activity.

For tree or shrub nesting migratory birds, transects will be walked through treed and

shrub areas looking for nests, to confirm if any nests found are active. The number of

qualified individuals required will depend on the amount of cover present; for example,

shelterbelts and small riparian area may require only one qualified individual.



The following measures apply specifically to ground nesting birds:

The entire length of the disturbance footprint and buffers through suitable habitat will be

surveyed for active migratory bird nests using a line transect method (i.e., slowly walking

transects parallel to the RoW, approximately 5 to 10 m apart). If the disturbance

footprint is greater than 30 m wide, the boundary of the disturbance footprint can be

marked to facilitate transects.

When a bird is flushed, efforts should be made to attempt to identify the bird species

(e.g., using identifying behaviour and distinguishing characteristics [e.g., tail shape, tail

bars, colours] and, if necessary, following the flushed bird to obtain a better observation

point),after which searching for the nest would begin.

Visually mark the location of a flushing bird (i.e., using changes in vegetation, presence

of sagebrush or other shrubs, micro-relief).This is especially important when searching

for birds that flush at greater distances..

When searching for the nest, attempt to minimize effects by limiting the search effort to

five minutes, taking care to study the ground surface and vegetation before each step to

prevent stepping on the nest. If the nest is not located, assume a nest location from the

approximate location the bird flushed from as well as the species and behaviour of the

flushed bird.

Some shorebirds (e.g., killdeer, American avocet, and yellowlegs) secretly leave their

nests and may display a “broken wing” behaviour in an attempt to lure intruders from the

nest area. To confirm the location of the nest, observers can move 50 to 100m away to

sit and wait until the bird returns to its nest.

If a previously identified active nest of any migratory bird is determined to be currently

inactive (i.e., fledging has occurred), compliance with the Act is still required. A resurvey

for other migratory birds may be required, depending on whether the last nest search

was conducted within the last 7 days and whether activities are still planned during the

migratory bird breeding window.

4.3.2 Forested Habitats

Procedures for conducting a migratory bird nest survey in forested regions are described

below, including required site information, the detail of information expected and the

rationale for specific methods (where applicable).

Nest searches will be completed from sunrise until 1000 hours or from 1700 until dusk

and should be discontinued during high winds or any precipitation. In forested habitat,

nests are extremely difficult to find, so detection of birds exhibiting breeding behaviour is

the main objective.



The entire length of the disturbance footprint and buffers through suitable habitat will be

surveyed for active migratory bird nests using a line transect method (i.e., qualified

individuals slowly walking transects parallel to the RoW, 5 to 10 m apart; distance

between transects will depend on vegetation cover). If the disturbance footprint is

greater than 30 m wide, the boundary of the disturbance footprint can be marked to

facilitate transects.

Non-intrusive searching methods are recommended in forested habitats. Qualified

individuals will primarily search for breeding behaviour (indicating the potential presence

of an active nest) using point counts placed along transects, as detectability of nests in

forested habitat is very low.

4.3.3 Wetlands

In the Prairie and Northern Region, Environment Canada has recommended that (P.

Gregoire, CWS, pers. comm. May 9, 2012):

“[w]etlands attractive to breeding migratory birds (e.g. those containing water)

should not be cleared/destroyed at minimum between April 1 and August 31. Canada

geese and Mallards may nest early and broods of waterfowl and waterbird species are

dependent upon wetlands throughout August and beyond. An effort should be made

to protect wetlands from habitat destruction, irrespective of whether they are wet or

dry. Wetlands should be avoided with a 100m buffer where possible.”

Nest surveys for waterfowl and waterbirds will depend on the presence of semi-permanent

and permanent wetlands. For most waterbird species, birds generally nest in or adjacent to

semi-permanent and permanent wetlands or waterbodies (e.g., creeks). As such, all semi-

permanent and permanent wetlands and waterbodies within the recommended nest buffer

(consult with appropriate regulator(s) of the disturbance footprint should be searched for

breeding waterfowl and waterbirds.

For some species of waterfowl, nesting occurs upland, away from wetlands. The nest search

buffer for breeding waterfowl or waterbirds will depend on the recommended nest buffer;

consult with appropriate regulator(s) prior to conducting nest searches (generally wetlands

within 100 m of the RoW should be searched as per recent guidance from Environment

Canada; see above). In order to survey for upland nesting waterfowl, aerial photographs

should be reviewed for the presence of semi-permanent and permanent wetlands within and

surrounding the disturbance footprint (distance outside the disturbance footprint will depend

on recommended nest buffer). Where these wetlands occur, a search buffer (based on the

recommended nest buffer; e.g., 100 m) beyond the disturbance footprint should be

established. The length of the search buffer along the disturbance footprint will depend on

how close the wetland is to the footprint.

Nest searches should be completed from sunrise until 1800 hours and should be

discontinued during high winds or any precipitation. Searches can be continued until

approximately 1800 hours as most nesting birds can still be flushed off their nests

throughout the day.



4.4 Identification and Protection of Active Nests

The disturbance footprint for most projects will likely include potential nesting habitat for

many migratory bird species (both ground and tree or shrub nesters). The presence of

natural upland and wetland habitat in the disturbance footprint increases the chances of

having nesting migratory bird species onsite.

Nests could be located in trees or shrubs or on the ground. An active nest can be identified

by:

the presence of birds or eggs in a nest

adult birds carrying food or nesting materials to a specific location

adult birds defending territory, through singing, screeching or diving (i.e., Sprague’s pipit

territorial display)

When one or more of these indicators are noted, measures should be undertaken to identify

if the potential location of the nest is in the disturbance footprint and disturbance buffer.

If a potentially active nest has been identified during pre-construction surveys, a buffer

needs to be established around the nest site to ensure no further disturbance of the nesting

migratory species. The size of the buffer is based on the nest location, the sensitivity of the

bird species to disturbances during nesting, the type of construction activity that will be

undertaken in the vicinity of the nest, and the status of the bird species (i.e., rare or

protected under provincial/territorial or federal legislation). For instance, the recommended

buffer for most passerines is 30 m in the boreal forest and 50 m in grasslands , and 100 m

for most waterfowl and waterbird species; professional judgment can be used when

modifying the setback buffer. However, this would be allowed only for construction-related

activities that are less intensive (i.e., no heavy equipment). Buffers of less than 10 m would

likely not be large enough to protect the nest’s viability.

Marking of active nests with flagging tape or a painted lathe may cause increased predation

of the nest. It is recommended to mark the location of the nest site on a GPS unit and/or

recording bearing and distance from an established marker on the landscape in order to re-

check the nest activity status at a later date.

If an occupied nest is discovered on or adjacent to the RoW during construction, activities

within the recommended setback of the nest (i.e., depending on region, habitat, and

species) should be stopped until the Environmental Inspector has been notified. Once the

Environmental Inspector is notified, a wildlife monitor will be dispatched to the site (if not

already present) to identify the occupant(s) and determine the appropriate mitigation.

Setback buffers for provincially listed and SARA-listed bird species are discussed further in

Section 4.4.1.

If a nest is found adjacent to a trail, vehicles will be allowed to continue using the trail but

will be prohibited from stopping in the recommended setback.



If no construction work is allowed in a setback buffer, it should be noted that larger

equipment (e.g., graders and side booms) would likely have to be marshaled through the

buffer along the RoW; more mobile equipment could go around if necessary. If this is to

occur, monitoring by a qualified individual or properly trained employee may be required.

And it is recommended that larger equipment only pass through the setback buffer once

while the nest is active.

In order to reduce the potential for nest abandonment or failure, monitoring or rechecking

of an identified active nest should be timed to occur after the fledging period (or when the

young have left the nest) for migratory birds designated as species at risk or at minimum 7

days for other migratory birds. Depending on the nesting stage (i.e., incubating or fledging)

observed during the nest search, the timing of follow-up nest checks will be determined

using literature-based estimates of the species-specific incubation and fledging periods (i.e.,

approximate number days for incubation and/or fledging to be completed).

4.4.1 SARA-listed Migratory Bird Nests Mitigations

As part of regulatory compliance, avoidance buffers are recommended for nest sites of

provincially listed and SARA-listed bird species (buffers vary in size). If during nest surveys,

an observation is made of an active, or potential, nest site (i.e., a bird calling, attending a

nest, displaying aggressive behaviour) inside or outside the disturbance footprint for a

particular at risk bird species, a GPS waypoint will be obtained to mark an avoidance buffer

for the potential nest site. Table 4-1 provides an example of both federally and provincially

recommended setback buffers for activities in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Table 4-1 will be

expanded as information for other provinces and territories becomes available. In some

instances, a site-specific mitigation plan may be developed and discussed with regulators

that may or may not include the use of setback buffers.



Table 4-1 Recommended Setback and Timing Windows for At Risk Migratory Bird Species in Alberta and Saskatchewan

Species

Recommended Setback and Timing Window

Environment Canada (2009) ASRD (2011a) EAP ASRD (2011b) SK ENV (Arsenault 2009)

Trumpeter Swan 800 m (Apr 1 – Sep 30)

High – 800 m Medium – 800 m Low – 500 m (May 1 – Aug 31)


High – 500 m

Medium – 500 m Low – 200 m (Apr 15 – Jul 31)

High – 200 m

Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (May 15 – Jul 15)

Western Grebe High – 1,000 m Medium – 1,000 m

Low – 500 m (Apr 1 – Jul 31)

Pied-billed Grebe High – 500 m


American Bittern High – 200 m


Least Bittern High – 400 m Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (May 1 – Jul 31)

Great Blue Heron High – 1,000 m

Medium – 1,000 m Low – 1,000 m (Apr 1 – Aug 15)



Table 4-1 Recommended Setback and Timing Windows for At Risk Migratory Bird Species in Alberta and Saskatchewan (cont’d)

Species



Yellow Rail High – 350 m Medium – 150 m Low – 100 m (May 1 – Jul 15)

High – 300 m Medium – 150 m Low – 100 m (May 1 – Jul 15)

Whooping Crane High – 1,000 m

Medium – 1,000 m Low – 500 m (May 1 – Nov 1)

High – 1,000 m

Medium – 1,000 m Low – 500 m May 1 – Aug 15


Breeding


Migration

High – 200 m Medium – 100 m Low – 50 m (Aug 1 – Sep 31)

High – 200 m Medium – 200 m

Low – 100 m (Apr 15 – Jul 31)


Low – 200 m (May 1 – Jul 31)

Mountain Plover High – 500 m Medium – 400 m Low – 200 m (May 1 – Jul 31)

High – 100 m Medium – 100 m Low – 100 m (Apr 1 – Jul 15)

Eskimo Curlew High – 500 m

Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (Apr 1 – May 15)




Species



Long-billed Curlew High – 200 m Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (Apr 15 – Jul 15)



Upland Sandpiper High – 100 m


Red Knot High – 1,000 m Medium – 500 m

Low – 500 m May 15 – Jun 30 & (Aug 1 – Aug 30)

Forster’s Tern High – 200 m


High – 400 m

Medium – 400 m Low – 200 m (May 1 – Jul 15) (Caspian, Forster’s, Black and Franklin’s, Bonaparte’s, Mew, Herring gull colonies)

Black Tern High – 1,000 m


Common Nighthawk High – 200 m Medium – 100 m Low – 50 m (May 1 – Aug 31)


Whip-poor-will High – 50 m





Species



Chimney Swift High – 100 m Medium – 100 m Low – 0 m (May 15 – Jun 30)

Red-headed Woodpecker High – 200 m


High – 100 m

Medium – 100 m Low – 0 m (Apr 15 – Jun 30)

Pleated Woodpecker High – 100 m Medium – 100 m

Low – 0 m (Apr 1 – Jul 15)

Olive-sided Flycatcher High – 300 m

Medium – 150 m Low – 50 m (May 1 – Aug 31)

High – 50 m


Loggerhead Shrike (excubitorides subspecies)

High – 400 m


High – 400 m


Sage Thrasher High – 250 m Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (May 15 – Jun 30)

High – 200 m Medium – 200 m Low – 100 m (May 15 – Jun 30)

Sprague’s Pipit High – 350 m


High – 100 m


High – 200 m





Species



Chestnut-collared Longspur High – 50 m Medium – 50 m Low – 0 m (May 15 – Jul 15)

McCown’s Longspur High – 200 m


High – 200 m


Canada Warbler High – 300 m Medium – 150 m

Low – 50 m (May 1 – Jul 31)


Low – 0 m (May 15 – Jul 15)

NOTES:

General description of disturbance impact categories (low, medium, high) (from ASRD 2011a, Arsenault 2009):

Low disturbances are often infrequent, low-impact (e.g., land surveying, foot traffic, monitoring, ATVs, small vehicles), habitat is not being modified by the activities, and the duration of the activity is relatively short (e.g., hours)

Medium disturbances are usually high in frequency, may use vehicles and other equipment, and may involve small habitat modifications (e.g., pipelines - <20 cm diameter) and the duration is relatively long (i.e., days)

High disturbances are high in frequency, involve vehicles and machinery, permanently modify the habitat by altering vegetation, soils and perhaps hydrology (e.g., pipelines - >20 cm diameter, roads, wetland drainage) and the impact is long term (i.e., more than 10 years)

Section 5: Summary


5 SUMMARY

The objective of this report is to provide CEPA-member companies with BMPs to reduce and

manage potential effects to migratory birds during construction and operation of oil and gas

transmission pipelines. Two main tools were developed to assist CEPA-member companies:

(1) a risk management framework and (2) BMPs for each project phase, including a

recommended migratory bird nest survey protocol.

The first component of the overall BMP is the risk management framework, which was

designed to help CEPA-member companies identify where risk to migratory birds occurs,

and where it is the greatest, during project development. The recommended BMPs provide

guidelines for minimizing risk to migratory birds, their nests and eggs during pre-

construction planning, construction, operation and decommissioning and abandonment.

Emphasis is placed on preventing incidental take of migratory birds, through early project

planning (i.e., identifying risk to migratory bird habitat and seasonality of migratory bird

activity), establishing protective buffer zones around migratory bird nests, and maintaining

communications with regulatory agencies (e.g., Environment Canada). The nest survey

protocol outlined in this report addresses most environments where CEPA-member

companies operate and provides a standardized approach for conducting nest surveys

across Canada.

It should be noted that Environment Canada is compiling avoidance guidelines and guidance

documents for the BMP development that, upon completion, may influence or change the

BMPs outlined in this report.

Section 6: References


6 REFERENCES

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2010. Alberta Species at Risk – Species

assessed by Alberta’s Endangered Species Conservation Committee. Available at:

http://srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/SpeciesAtRisk/SpeciesSummaries/documents/Speci

esAssessed-EndangeredSpeciesConservationCommittee-ShortList-Jun03-2010.pdf.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2011a. Recommended land use

guidelines for protection of selected wildlife species and habitat within grassland and

parkland natural regions of Alberta.Available at:

http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/WildlifeLandUseGuidelines/documents/Wildlife

LandUse-SpeciesHabitatGrasslandParkland-Apr28-2011.pdf.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2011b. Best management guidelines

enhanced approval process.Available at:

http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FormsOnlineServices/EnhancedApprovalProcess/EAPManu

alsGuides/documents/EAP-BestManagementGuidelines-May30-2011.pdf.

B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2011. BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer. B.C. Ministryof

Environment. Victoria, BC. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/

Bollinger, E. K., P. B. Bollinger, and T. A. Gavin. 1990. Effects of hay-cropping of eastern

populations of the Bobolink. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18:143–150.

Canadian Pipeline Environment Committee (CPEC). 2004. The Pipeline Industry and the

Migratory Birds Convention Act. 22 p.

Canadian Prairie Partners in Flight.2004. Landbird Conservation Plan for Prairie Pothole Bird

Conservation Region 11 in Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonton, AB.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2010. Canadian

Wildlife Species at Risk. Available at:

http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct0/rpt/rpt_csar_e.pdf.

Drilling, N., R. Titman and F. Mckinney. 2002. Mallard (Anasplatyrhynchos), The Birds of

North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Available

at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/658/

Environment Canada. 1991. Birds protected in Canada under the Migratory Birds Convention

Act. Occasional Paper 1.Available



at:http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=97AC4B68-69E6-

4E12-A85D-509F5B571564.

Environment Canada. 2009. Petroleum Industry Activity Guidelines for Wildlife Species at

Risk in the Prairie and Northern Region. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment

Canada, Prairie and Northern Region, Edmonton Alberta.64p.

Environment Canada.2011. Incidental Take of Migratory Birds in Canada. Available at:

http://ec.gc.ca/paom-itmb/default.asp?lang=En&n=FA4AC736-1.

Faaborg, J., F.R. Thompson III, S.K. Robinson, T.M. Donovan, D.R. Whitehead, and J.D.

Brawn. 1998. Understanding fragmented Midwestern landscapes: the future.

InMarzluff, J.M., and R. Sallabanks (eds). Avian Conservation: Research and

Management. Island Press, Washington D.C. 563 pp.

Government of Canada.1994a.Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994.Available at:

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-7.01/

Government of Canada. 2002. Species at Risk Act. Available at: http://laws-

lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/S-15.3/index.html.

Government of Canada. 2005. Bill C-15: An Act to Amend the Migratory Birds Convention

Act, 1994 and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. Available at:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?ls=C15&

Parl=38&Ses=1.

Government of Canada.2011a. Migratory Birds Regulations. Available at: http://laws-

lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._1035/

Government of Canada.2011b. SARA Public Registry. Available at:

http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm.

Gregoire, P. 2012. Personal Communication with Paul Gregoire, Canadian Wildlife Service,

Environment Canada, Edmonton on May 9, 2012.

Manitoba Wildlife and Ecosystem Protection.2011. Species Listed Under the Manitoba

Endangered Species Act. Available at:

http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/wildlife/sar/sarlist.html.

Nagy, L.R., and R.T. Holmes. 2004. Factors influencing fecundity in migratory songbirds: is

nest predation the most important? Journal of Avian Biology 35:487-491.

http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm



New Brunswick Natural Resources.2011.Wildlife Species at Risk. Available at:

http://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/natural_resources/Wildlife/content

/SpeciesAtRisk.html.

Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Environment and Conservation. 2011. Species

at Risk. Available

at:http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/wildlife/endangeredspecies/index.html.

Nova Scotia Natural Resources.2007.Species at Risk List. Available

at:http://www.gov.ns.ca/natr/wildlife/biodiversity/species-list.asp.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011. Species at Risk in Ontario. Available at:

http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Species/2ColumnSubPage/276722.html.

Perlut, N.G., A.M. Strong, T.M. Donovan, and N.J. Buckley. 2006. Grassland songbirds in a

dynamic management landscape: behavioural responses and management

strategies. Ecological Applications 16:2235-2247.

Québec RessourcesNaturellesetFaune. 2011. Loisur les espècesmenacéesouvulnérables.

Available at: http://www3.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/faune/especes/menacees/liste.asp.

Rohwer, F.C., W.P. Johnson and E.R. Loos. 2002. Blue-winged Teal (Anasdiscors), The Birds

of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Available

at: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/625/

Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment. 2011. Species at Risk in Saskatchewan. Available

at: http://www.biodiversity.sk.ca/Docs/SpeciesAtRiskinSK.pdf.

van Havre, B. 2011. Managing the Incidental Take of Migratory Birds. Presentation to the

Canadian Wildlife Directors Committee, Charlottetown, PEI, May 5 2011.

Date post:	19-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	9 times
Download:	3 times

Migratory Birds Convention Act: A Best Management Practice ... · It is my pleasure to introduce...

Documents