WHMP Informational Packet

Transcription

jackson hole airport wildlife hazard management plan
Located in the southern portion of the Grand Teton National Park and approximately 35 miles south of Yellowstone National Park in northwest Wyoming, Jackson Hole Airport (JAC) resides within one of our nation’s most
dramatic and treasured western landscapes. The nearby Town of Jackson is
a world famous resort community that serves as a principal gateway to both
national parks and, as a result, tourism is integral to the local economy. JAC
supports tourism through commercial airline, general aviation and air cargo
activity year-round and accommodates 70% of all passenger enplanements
in the State of Wyoming.
What is a Wildlife Strike?
Wildlife strikes occur as a result of a
collision between wildlife and any type
of vehicle. FAA records wildlife strikes
with aircraft on or near U.S. airports in
its Wildlife Strike Database. The FAA
includes a wildlife strike in the database
when one of the following incidents
occurs:
A pilot reports striking (colliding with)
one or more birds or another wildlife
species;
Aircraft maintenance identifies
aircraft damage that is caused by a
collision with wildlife;
Someone on the ground observes
and reports an aircraft strike with one
or more birds or other wildlife;
Wildlife remains are found within 200
feet of a runway centerline, unless
another reason for the animal’s death
is identified; or
© 2012 Mead & Hunt, Inc.
An animal’s presence on the airport
causes a significant negative affect
on a flight. Examples of a negative
effect include: an aborted takeoff or
landing, high-speed emergency stop,
or divergence from a pavement area
to avoid collision.
For more information, see the most
recent version of FAA Advisory Circular
150/5200-32, “Reporting Wildlife
Aircraft Strikes.”
JAC is distinguished as the only commercial airport in the United States that
is located entirely within the boundaries of a national park. The Airport occupies a 542-acre parcel that is leased from the U.S. Department of the Interior
by the Jackson Hole Airport Board (Airport Board). Historically, the Secretary
of the Interior has recognized the Airport Board as the sole proprietor of the
Airport and the airport’s important role in supporting the functions of the
Department of the Interior. Similarly, the Airport Board has acknowledged
its unique relationship with the National Park Service (NPS) and worked to
enhance the safety and efficiency of the Airport while safeguarding the special values of the residents of the Town of Jackson, Teton County, and the
National Park Service at Grand Teton National Park.
WILDLIFE STRIKES
Nationally, wildlife populations in the last decade have resulted in an increased number of conflicts between wildlife and humans. Many of these
conflicts result from wildlife collisions with automobiles, trains and airplanes.
NPS staff at Grand Teton National Park have been troubled in recent years
by an increased number of collisions involving autos with elk, deer, bison,
pronghorn, bears and wolves. They have successfully reduced the number
of conflicts that occurred in 2011 compared to earlier years through awareness campaigns that include literature at local destinations and road signs.
Similar conflicts between wildlife and aircraft have been ongoing since the
dawn of aviation, and every bird strike has the potential to result in aircraft
damage, affect flight, or cause fatalities. Small birds, such as sparrows,
can be ingested into aircraft engines to cause engine failures. In general,
the extent of aircraft damage and the effect of a bird strike on a flight are
closely correlated to kinetic energy as derived from the mass of a bird and
the speed at which a collision occurs. For example, a 12 lb. Canada goose
struck by an aircraft traveling at 150 mph can generate the same amount of
kinetic energy as a 1,000-pound weight dropped from a height of 10 feet.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) strike records show that wildlife strikes
1
\GenInfo\Graphic design resources\2011 proposal template\ Proposal template_sample pages.indd
wildlife hazard management plan
informational packet
The FAA’s wildlife strike database includes records for more than 140,000
wildlife strikes at US airports during the nearly 12-year period from January
1990 through October 2012. Documentation in FAA’s database demonstrates that the risk posed by conflicts between aircraft and wildlife is real
and increasing.
Wildlife Strikes at the Jackson Hole Airport
FAA records identify 60 wildlife strikes associated with JAC since 1994. Of
the 60 strikes reported at JAC, 30 have been attributed to the greater sage
grouse, 20 have been associated with unknown small birds, and four have
been associated with sparrows. One strike has been reported in association with the horned lark, American kestrel, mountain bluebird, mountain
chickadee, sharp-tailed grouse and swallow. The greatest number of strikes
was recorded in 2010, when nine strikes were recorded in association with
the greater sage grouse.
Four of the 60 strikes recorded at JAC resulted in substantial damage to
aircraft: a business jet sustained $30,000 in damage following a 2005 strike
with sparrows, and three commercial B-737 aircraft sustained damage following strikes with small birds of unknown species. Repairs to one of the
commercial aircraft reached $225,000 following a strike in 2003. “Minor” or
“unknown minor damage” was associated with eight strikes, six of which
had resulted from collisions with greater sage grouse, and two of which had
resulted from collisions with small unknown birds.
Wildlife Strikes Since 1994 (60)
Greater Sage Grouse (30)
Unknown Small Birds (20)
Sparrows (4)
Single, Separate Incidents (6)
Single
Incidents
Sparrows
Greater Sage
Grouse
Unknown
What is a wildlife hazard?
A wildlife hazard is a circumstance
or situation that has the potential to
cause a damaging aircraft collision with
wildlife on or near an airport (14 Code
of Federal Regulations Part 139.3).
have killed more than 229 people and destroyed more than 210 aircraft
since 1988. Two recent wildlife strikes illustrate the potentially catastrophic
events of wildlife strikes: On September 22, 1995, an aircraft taking off from
Elmendorf Air Force Base near Anchorage, Alaska, struck a flock of Canada
geese during takeoff. Geese were ingested into two of the engines, and all
24 airmen were killed when the aircraft crashed approximately 1 mile from
the end of the runway. Most of us remember the 2008 “Miracle on the Hudson,” when US Airways Flight 1549 collided with a flock of Canada geese
just after takeoff.
WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENT EFFORTS
JAC is included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS),
and it is operated by the Airport Board in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), also known as Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs).
Since the Airport is included in the NPIAS, the City is eligible for FAA funding
to support airport operations and capital improvements.
The FAA addresses wildlife hazards under 14 CFR 139, “Certification of
Airports,” which addresses the safety of the traveling public. As the operator of a federally obligated airport, the Airport Board must adhere to FAA
regulations and guidance or risk loss of funding or potential limitations on its
operations. The FAA requires the operator of a certificated airport to conduct
2
a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA), and if necessary, prepare a Wildlife
Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) when a “triggering event”, as described
below, occurs on or near the airport:
An air carrier aircraft experiences multiple wildlife strikes;
An air carrier aircraft experiences substantial damage from striking wildlife;
An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine ingestion of wildlife; or
Wildlife of a size, or in numbers, capable of causing an event described
above is observed to have access to any airport flight pattern or aircraft
movement area.
A WHA is performed to develop a detailed understanding of site-specific
conditions on and near an airport. Each WHA must include 12 months of
ongoing wildlife monitoring to identify the presence of wildlife species, especially migratory birds and seasonal fluctuations in the behavior and abundance of individual species. Based on the results of the 12-month monitoring effort, the FAA determines whether a WHMP is necessary.
2011 Wildlife Hazard Assessment
The Board completed a WHA in 2011 and submitted the results to the FAA.
The WHA identified guilds (groups of species with similar characteristics)
and specific species that had the potential to pose hazards to aircraft operations as summarized in Table 1.
The results of the 2011 WHA identified special concerns associated with the
presence of the greater sage grouse on airport property. During the spring
breeding season, male sage grouse gather to perform courtship displays on
areas known as leks, which are relatively bare areas surrounded by shrub
steppe cover that can be used for escape, nesting and feeding. A known
lek is located within the Runway Safety Area (RSA) associated with Runway
1. Sage grouse hens breed at the lek, nest outside of the Airport grounds,
and return to the Airport with their chicks soon after the eggs hatch. Visual
observations made during the 2011 field studies indicate that the hens
return to the Airport because mowed areas associated with the runway and
adjacent to the perimeter road provide forbs that the sage grouse use as a
food source. Nearby sagebrush also provides food and cover.
Sage grouse populations have declined following loss and fragmentation of
sagebrush habitats across their range. Efforts to protect the greater sage
grouse and its habitat are ongoing by federal and state agencies. Any efforts
by the Airport Board to address the wildlife hazards posed by the presence
of the greater sage grouse must be carefully coordinated with the appropriate agencies to minimize potential impacts to the local grouse population.
WHA Conclusions
Based on the results of the 2011 WHA and the location of JAC within a
resource-rich area that supports abundant and diverse wildlife, including
several species that are hazardous to aircraft, FAA determined that a Wildlife
Hazard Management Plan is necessary.
3
Guild
Species
Observations and Comments
Waterfowl
Canada geese
Swans
Mallards, and
Other duck species
Observed flying parallel to the Snake River and over Airport
property.
Waterfowl were attracted to Airport locations containing ponded
snowmelt.
Corvidsds
Ravens (primarily)
Black-billed magpies
American crows
Observed in nearby residential areas west of the Airport.
Observed on the Airport in deciduous trees, in buildings and on
paved areas.
Ravens frequently observed on or flying over the runway.
Shorebirds
Killdeer
Attracted to gravel and open areas.
Flocking Passerines
Blackbirds
Horned larks
Concentrations were heaviest during the spring migration.
Killdeer observed year round.
Horned larks observed adjacent to the runway and crossing
aircraft movement areas.
Large flocks of horned larks observed in tight flocks near the
ground on and around runway.
Horned larks observed to frequently occur on or over the runway.
Raptors
Red-tailed hawks
Kestrels
Bald eagles
Osprey
Observed perching on airfield structures, perimeter fence and in
trees.
Soaring behavior observed.
Eagles observed near the Snake River and passing over the
Airport.
Pigeons and
Doves
Mourning doves
Attracted to open ground.
Observed in greatest numbers in July.
Upland Games
Birds
Sage grouse
Attracted to forbs and insects during the spring and into the fall.
Attracted to sagebrush during the winter.
Observed within JAC boundaries from March through
November.
All national strike records involving sage grouse are associated
with JAC.
Observed frequently on or over the runway.
Rodents
Ground squirrels
Pocket gophers
Attractive to raptors observed at the Airport, such as red-tailed
hawks.
Large Mammals
Coyotes
Red fox
Dogs
Moose
Elk
Mule deer
Bison
Coyotes, red fox and dogs observed to access the Airport between gaps in manual gates.
Coyotes observed at the south end of Runway 19 hunting sage
grouse.
Foxes observed traveling across the Airport to reach the residential area to the west.
Moose, elk, mule deer and bison were observed outside the
perimeter, but were reported to enter the Airport through open
gates on rare occasions.
AVIAN SPECIES
Table 1.
Summary of Species and Observations
2011 Wildlife Hazard Assessment
MAMMALS
4
WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN
Based on the results of the 2011 WHA and wildlife strike records, the FAA
is requiring the Airport Board to prepare a WHMP in an effort to reduce the
risks posed by the observed species.
The data, observations and recommendations provided by the 2011 WHA
will be used to inform the forthcoming WHMP, but supplemental data will
be developed and incorporated. The goal of the Airport Board is to develop
a WHMP that serves as an overall program to reduce the risk to both the
traveling public and the region’s valuable environmental resources.
Supplemental Project Data
Project biologists will examine
date pertaining to the greater
sage grouse including, but not
limited to:
Upper Snake River Basin
Sage Grouse Conservation
Plan (NPS, 2007)
Sage Grouse Project
Report and associated documents (Beringia
South, 2007 to 2009)
Objectives, Draft Report
(USFWS, 2012)
Plan (WGF, 2003)
Jackson Hole Airport
Agreement Extension,
Final Environmental Impact
Statement (NPS, 2010)
Observations of sage
grouse activity by the JAC
Air Traffic Control Tower
and wildlife surveillance
logs.
Plan Contents
FAA specifies the overall format and contents of a WHMP at 14 CFR
139.337. The Airport Board will oversee the Plan development to ensure that
it meets FAA’s requirements as summarized in Table 2.
Project Team Members
The development of a WHMP is usually based on the results of the WHA
and its recommendations. However, the Airport Board recognized that the
additional research, including supplemental field studies, would be required
to provide a comprehensive WHMP. The presence of the on-site sage
grouse lek would require species-specific expertise as well as the help of
biologists trained in aviation wildlife hazards. To support the development of
a comprehensive WHMP, the Airport Board has assembled a consultant-led
team that will work closely with the Wildlife Hazard Working Group and the
Steering Committee.
Consultant Team
The Airport Board has engaged a consultant team led by Mead & Hunt, Inc.,
an aviation consulting firm whose project team will include the expertise of
Mr. Dan Hirchert, an FAA-qualified wildlife biologist, who will manage WHMP
development, as well as biologists from Wyoming Wildlife Consultant, LLC,
who are known for their substantial expertise regarding the greater sage
grouse and its habitat. The Mead & Hunt team will perform a species-specific habitat assessment to verify and supplement the WHA data, identify
habitat and other factors that may increase the risk of wildlife hazards, and
formulate recommendations and alternatives for reducing those risks. The
project team will also review existing research pertaining to the presence of
the greater sage grouse in the vicinity of Jackson Hole.
Wildlife Hazard Working Group
The consultant team will work closely with a Wildlife Hazard Working Group
(Working Group) composed of staff members from the Airport, Grand Teton
National Park, FAA, Wyoming Game and Fish and Beringia South. Working
Group members will review and provide input on proposed tools and techniques for reducing wildlife hazards during a series of three meetings:
5
TABLE 2: WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Requirement set forth at 14 CFR
139.337 (f), (1-7)
“(1) A list of the individuals having authority and responsibility for implementing each aspect of the plan.”
Implementation in WHMP
Decision-making roles and responsibilities for implementing the wildlife hazard management plan including:
Airport Director
Wildlife Biologist and/or Wildlife Coordinator
Operations Department
Maintenance Department
Security Department
Planning Department
Designation of responsibility for determining and responding to wildlife hazard conditions, for all hours of airport operation. [Ref 139.337 (a),
immediate actions, and 139.339c 7, condition reporting, and see 139.337 (f)(5)(iii)]
Reference to any mutual agreements on hazardous wildlife attractant coordination such as:
Wildlife Hazard Working Group membership and mission
Agreements with planning and zoning organizations and/or cooperating organizations
Cooperative programs with public agencies.
“(2) A list prioritizing the following
actions identified in the wildlife hazard
assessment and target dates for their
initiation and completion:”
Wildlife population management;
Habitat modification; and
Land use changes.
“(3) Requirements for and, where applicable, copies of local, State, and Federal
wildlife control permits.”
If lethal control or use of pesticides is part of this Plan, identify applicable regulations and any permits that may be needed. If wildlife control
permits are in place, copies of all permits must be included in ACM and must be current.
“(4) Identification of resources that the
certificate holder will provide to implement the plan.”
Lists identifying what the airport will supply in terms of:
Personnel and time;
Equipment, supplies, and vehicles;
Sources for obtaining supplies
“(5) Procedures to be followed during
air carrier operations that at a minimum
includes:”
“(i) Designation of personnel responsible for implementing the procedures;”
Wildlife patrol staffing
Position titles and hours of availability
Hours of airport operation.
“(ii) Provisions to conduct physical inspections of the aircraft movement areas and other areas critical to successfully manage known wildlife
hazards before air carrier operations begin;”
Routine inspection procedures including documentation
“(iii) Wildlife hazard control measures; procedures for continuous monitoring of wildlife conditions on the airfield during times, seasons, and conditions with potential for wildlife activity as identified in the WHA.” Such items include:
Specific actions and/or criteria for alternate courses of action for unusually heavy wildlife activity, such as due to weather or migration, and for
at-large animals such as loose dogs, livestock, or deer on AOA) [Ref 139.337 “(a), immediate actions.”]
Any special procedures for wildlife control during periods of heavy air traffic.
“(iv) Ways to communicate effectively between personnel conducting wildlife control or observing wildlife hazards and the air traffic control tower.”
Training in communication procedures and airfield familiarization [Ref 139.303]:
Equipment needed, such as radios, cellular phones, lights
Reference to mutually agreed-upon procedures for wildlife dispersal that may require runway access or may impact air traffic.
Procedures for immediate coordination and response to pilot-reported wildlife strikes or observations
Procedures for short-term heavy wildlife activity requiring air carrier notification. [Ref 139.339c 7, condition reporting]
“(6) Procedures to review and evalu-
One or more meetings to formally review progress and challenges in implementing the Plan, as documented on the attached worksheet or
similar documentation
ate the wildlife hazard management
plan every 12 consecutive months or
following an event described in of FAR
139.337 paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)
(3), including:
(i) The plan’s effectiveness in dealing
with known wildlife hazards on and in
the airport’s vicinity and
(ii) Aspects of the wildlife hazards
described in the wildlife hazard assessment that should be reevaluated.”
“(7) A training program conducted by a
qualified wildlife damage management
biologist to provide airport personnel
with the knowledge and skills needed
to successfully carry out the wildlife
hazard management plan required by
FAR 139.337 paragraph (d).”
Any standardized monitoring procedures (i.e., wildlife surveys)
Procedures for documenting communication, coordination, and prevention of off-airport attractants.
Procedures for reviewing and analyzing data (strikes, observations and control actions, and standardized surveys) frequently and long-term,
such as for annual review.
Certification that the training curriculum and instructor meet the requirements of Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Appendix C
Procedures to document training participation [Ref 139.303 (c)]
Training and documentation procedures to meet any additional training requirements, listed in (f)(3), such as species identification, firearms
safety or pesticide application
6
Meeting No. 1 - Identify Issues, Goals and Objectives. The Working Group
will participate in an initial meeting to identify stakeholder and regulatory
concerns and to help establish a policy framework for the WHMP.
Meeting No. 2 - Prepare Policy Framework. The Working Group will review
the overall approach and strategies that will be central to the WHMP including habitat modification strategies, indirect and direct wildlife management strategies and liability and risk management concerns.
Meeting No. 3 - Review Preliminary Draft WHMP. The Working Group will
review the administrative draft of the WHMP before it is presented to the
Wildlife Steering Committee and Airport Board for review.
Wildlife Hazard Management Steering Committee
The Mead & Hunt team will also collaborate with the JAC Wildlife Hazard
Management Steering Committee to gain additional input on the WHMP.
Members of the Steering Committee will include the manager of FAA’s
Denver Airports District Office (ADO), Airport Director, Park Director and
two members of the Airport Board. The Steering Committee will review and
provide input throughout document development and approve the document
prior to submission to the FAA.
Public Involvement
Transparency is an important component of social responsibility. The Airport
Board will maintain an ongoing dialogue with the community during the
development of the WHMP.
Following each set of Wildlife Hazard Working Group and Steering
Committee meetings, the Steering Committee will present a summary of
project progress for the Airport Board. The public is invited to attend Airport
Board meetings. Notice of the meetings and other pertinent information will
be provided on the Airport website.
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
The Airport Board proposes to complete a Draft WHMP for submission to
FAA within six months as shown on the project schedule (Table 3).
Federal and State Statutes, Regulations and Policies
A WHMP can be approved by the FAA prior to obtaining environmental
approvals, but the Airport Board cannot implement specific management
measures presented in the WHMP until it obtains appropriate environmental
authorizations or permit approvals.
7
days
TASK DESCRIPTON
1a, b
Project Managemet, Scoping, Coordination
and Communication
2a
Project Kickoff Meeting
2b, c
Perform Research
3a, b
Perform Supplental Biological Studies
4a, b, c
Convene Wildlife Hazard Working Group
(3 meetings)
5a, b, c
Convene JAC Wildlife Steering Committee
(3 meetings)
6a, b
Prepare Wildlife Hazard Management Plan for
Airport Board
6c
Present and Submit Draft Wildlife Hazard
Management Plan
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
TABLE 3.
Tentative Wildlife Hazard Management Plan PROJECT SCHEDULE
8
Common wildlife management measures that require permit approvals
include:
Habitat modification measures, such as the removal of jurisdictional
wetlands;
Wildlife dispersion methods, such as the use of bioacoustics or pyrotechnics; and
The application of certain herbicides and pesticides.
The WHMP will identify measures that would be subject to such regulations and include copies of pertinent permits and approvals upon receipt.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
As federal agencies, both the FAA and the NPS must consider the potential effects of proposed projects on the natural and human environment.
Specific measures presented in the WHMP may cause potential environmental effects and require an evaluation under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The level of environmental analysis required
by each federal agency will be determined upon completion of the Draft
WHMP, and an appropriate analysis will be performed prior to plan implementation. The public is invited to review the Draft WHMP and Draft NEPA
document.
The proposed project schedule does not include a timeframe associated
with NEPA compliance or other necessary approvals.
SUMMARY
The residents of the Town of Jackson and Teton County prize their environmental resources, and the recent Jackson/Teton Comprehensive Plan
documents their strong commitment to conservation and environmental
protection. The policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan seek to
develop a sustainable, vibrant, stable and diversified local economy that
measures prosperity in terms of both economic and natural capital (Comprehensive Plan, Section 6).
During the next six months, the Airport Board will undertake a wildlife
hazard management project that will enhance safety at JAC to support
tourism and the local economy, and to prevent conflicts between the
traveling public and wildlife. The forthcoming WHMP will advance the
goals of the region by supporting the tourism industry and by recognizing both the economic and natural capital that are associated with the
region’s economy. Moreover, the proposed WHMP will further the local
policies that strive to ensure that future economic development happens
in a way “that is sustainable and allows future generations to benefit from
the same assets.”
9
Providing new wildlife management strategies that will contribute
to the region’s tourism-based economy. Considering wildlife hazard
management routinely will help to prevent circumstances or incidents
that result in interrupted service and costly repairs to aircraft or aviation
equipment.
Underscoring the communities’ natural resource conservation.
Preventing wildlife strikes is advantageous to people and wildlife alike!
Demonstrating Social Responsibility. Wildlife hazard management is
risk management. As a public agency, the Airport Board is required by
the FAA to provide a safe environment for the traveling public. By reducing the risk of wildlife strikes, the Airport Board will further this goal.
As the data indicate, the risks associated with wildlife conflicts are real and
increasing, and we all must work together to manage and reduce these risks
in a manner that is transparent, sustainable and cooperative. This Wildlife
Hazard Management Plan is an important step in enhancing the safety of
our community, the traveling public and resources we all value.
The proposed WHMP will promote the local communities’ ongoing sustainability efforts by:
10
Wildlife Hazard Steering Committee Members
Jackson Hole Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan
Name
Jim Waldrop
Jerry Blann
Jack Larimer
Ray Bishop
Mary Gibson Scott
John Bauer
Title and Organization
President-elect, Jackson Hole Airport Board
Jackson Hole Airport Board
Jackson Hole Airport Board
Manager, Jackson Hole Airport
Superintendent, Grand Teton National Park
Manager, Denver Airports District Office
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Wildlife Hazard Working Group Members
Jackson Hole Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan
Name
Peter Hahn
Kevin Schneider
Gary Pollack
Steve Cain
John Stephenson
Mike Pipas
Joe Bohne
Bryan Bedrosian
John Dahlke
Matt Holloran
Eli Rodemaker
John Faucher
Lisa Harmon
Daniel Hirchert
Craig Logan
Organization
Lead Certification Safety Inspector,
FAA Northwest Mountain Region
Deputy Superintendent, Grand Teton National Park
Management Assistant, Grand Teton National Park
Senior Wildlife Biologist, Grand Teton National Park
Wildlife Biologist, Grand Teton National Park
Wildlife Damage Biologist,
United States Department of Agriculture
Wildlife Biologist, Wyoming Game and Fish
Research Biologist, Beringia South
Research Biologist, Wyoming Wildlife Consultants, LLC
Research Biologist , Wyoming Wildlife Consultants, LLC
GIS Analyst, Wyoming Wildlife Consultants, LLC
Aviation Engineer, Mead & Hunt, Inc.
Environmental Planner, Mead & Hunt, Inc.
FAA-qualified Biologist, Mead & Hunt, Inc.
Operations Manager, Jackson Hole Airport
For more information, please contact:
Ray Bishop, Airport Manager
Jackson Hole Airport
Raybishop@jacksonholeairport.com
(307) 733-7682

WHMP Informational Packet

Transcription

Similar documents

Salato Wildlife Education Center Nov. 1, 2014

Pre-Natural Resources

To this: Davidsonville Wildlife Sanctuary Wetland Restoration Best

GATORLAND FLORIDA

^ Sand Creek Wildlife Management Area

RSPB/ Kingsbrook presentation

So, you want to be a wildlife biologist?

Fire-bellied Toads

A Decade of Dune Restoration at the Lanphere Dunes - Cal-IPC

Gardening For Wildlife PDF file