Karner Blue Butterfly
Management Partners Workgroup

June 25, 2003
John Ball Zoo Boardroom
Grand Rapids, Michigan

Minutes

Present: Doug Powless (Land Conservancy of West Michigan), Steve Mueller (Kent ISD), Milton Rieback & Tom Funke (Binder Park Zoo), Pat Lederle (MDNR-Lansing), Rhoda deJonge (Land Conservancy of West Michigan), Larry Visser (MDNR - Cadillac), Jennifer Fettinger (MNFI-Lansing), Joe Kelly (USFWS - Baldwin), Mike DeCapita (USFWS-East Lansing), John Lerg (MDNR-Plainwell), Margaret Parker (Consumers Energy Co.), Dan Hemman (John Ball Zoo), Maria Albright (MDNR - Allegan)

This was the second meeting of the Karner Blue Butterfly (KBB) Management Partners Workgroup.

I. Welcome/Intro

John Lerg, KBB Habitat Conservation Plan Coordinator, Michigan DNR, began the meeting.

Are we on track? We are on track plus we are starting to expand the project and add members to the Workgroup (Allegan County Road Commission).

Need to start looking at objectives as they relate to the oak savanna; not just KBB.

II. Information on 2003 First-Flight Surveys

Presentation by Jennifer Fettinger, Associate Program Leader - Zoology, Michigan Natural Features Inventory.

Survey on private lands

• 181 private landowners were contacted
• 75 responded - 60 of which said yes; found lupine on most properties
• those that responded "no" did so without explanation
• will telephone those that did not respond

2003 first flight accomplishments and findings

• flight was late by one to one and a half weeks
• 60 sites visited
• documentation made of extensions of known sites and new sites where there were no previous records
• additional sites found in Ionia, Montcalm, Newaygo, Muskegon, and Oceana counties
• located KBB, dusted skipper, and great plains spittle bug along power lines that were previously unknown for KBB
• Habitat Model was tested

Since lupine was found on a majority of the private landowners' property, the question is raised as what to do to provide the owners with information instead of referring them to others.

Suggestions:

• have someone contact the landowner
• have paperwork readily available that provides information about having KBB on your property
• provide information about land management
• develop lupine-finder card

Discussion ensued with various questions brought up:

• KBB population increase within the state
• mechanisms to put in place for next year- what to focus on?
• utilizing volunteers to do the footwork and investigating i.e., "Master Gardeners" to identify sites with lupine
• website is not being used to its full potential, needs to be more current and invigorating
• a lot of lupine is found right along the roadway - how crucial are the roadsides to the ecosystem?
• ranking habitat areas and creating an attribute table

III. Certificate of Inclusion - Federal Aspect

Michael DeCapita, Endangered Species Coordinator, US Fish & Wildlife Service

In order to extend to Management Partners the benefits of an Incidental Take Permit, issued by the US Fish & Wildlife Service, a Certificate of Inclusion must be granted.

• Michigan DNR is the holder of the Permit - application to obtain a Certificate of Inclusion is to be made to the DNR
• Wisconsin Plan - landowners and land users - landowner (Management Partner) is to have the Certificate. Michigan plan - land user to have Certificate
• wide-range of possibilities for Permits and Certificates but, if there is take, there must be someone accountable for it
• if there is Federal action that overlaps on the same landscape, then the Federal entity will have to deal with it through Section 7 of the ESA

IV. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

Pat Lederle, PhD., Project Director, Michigan DNR

KBB - Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) results in Incidental Take Permit

• issuance of Permit is a Federal action
• Federal action requires us to comply with NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act of 1969)

US Fish & Wildlife Service will insist on Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

• scope of Impact is throughout range in state
• development of HCP and EIS can occur simultaneously
• will not have a FONSI (finding of no significant impact) as there will be impact but it will be positive

EIS Development

• notice of intent to develop an EIS
• environmental analysis
• public input solicitation

Draft EIS

• public scoping (required for EIS & HCP) - do not foresee this as being controversial - NEPA requires a range of alternatives and public input
• offered for public comments

Final EIS

• response to comments

Record of Decision (ROD)

• should be able to do this within 18 months
• US Fish & Wildlife Service will write a biological opinion

V. Group discussion

Protection, Enhancement, & Restoration

• by focusing on the ecosystem, the habitat and the KBB will come along
• by protecting, will be able to expand what we have now
• maintain oak savanna
• things change; if we set goals and objectives that are dynamic then they will flow with the changing times
• Wisconsin is finding that law enforcement is a little-used approach in addressing take of KBB. They place greater emphasis on Education and Outreach to afford protection to the species
• Consumer's Energy operates with the latitude to trim, remove, or destroy vegetation on their R-O-Ws

Making the Conversion for KBB

• recovery units may need expanded boundaries - will include in HCP

HCP and NEPA require public involvement and scoping of alternatives

• talk to stakeholders first before getting into a broader public comment phase
• perhaps involve those who have KBB on their property but do not have a large amount of property
• need to be talking to all property owners so they have a clear understanding
• provide education and outreach
• will have more information at our next meeting on how "scoping" will take place

VI. Education and Outreach Committee

Tom Funke, Binder Park Zoo

Applying for a grant with the Zoo & Aquarium Association

• hope to have general butterfly curriculum
• curriculum is being developed for grades K through 12, integrated with the State Curriculum
• local schools including those within KBB area

Next Meeting:

September 17, 2003
10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
DNR Plainwell Operations Service Center

Agenda for Next Meeting

• Oak Savanna objectives and their integration with KBB objectives
• Redrafting of Recovery Units and rationale for modifications
• EIS Development (Progress to date, Proposed Alternative, Scoping meetings)
• Second flight highlights

Handouts:

• Meeting Agenda
• Contingencies to address catastrophic adverse habitat disturbance and catastrophic population threats affecting KBB
• Glossary of terms & acronyms
• Prairie Plant Seed Mix/Establishing Prairie Plants in Michigan
• Definition of Karner Blue Butterfly Habitat for Purposes of Species Recovery in Michigan
• HCP Alternatives
• HCP Goal and Objectives
• Michigan Statewide Karner Blue Butterfly Habitat Conservation Plan Outline
• KBB Habitat Conservation Plan Vision
• Public Participation Plan
• Translocation Guidelines for KBB in Michigan
• Zoo Directions
• Karner Blue Butterfly Working Group
• KBB Michigan Recovery Implementation Plan Outline
• History of Wisconsin KBB HCP Partnership, Article of Partnership, and Partnership Anti-Trust Policy