HomeMy WebLinkAbout20243011.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
Applicant: Sunset Industrial, LLC
Case Number: USR24-0016
Submitted or Prepared
Prior to
Hearing
At
Hearing
1
Bliss
Produce
Company,
letter
received
August
1,
2024
X
2
Applicant
response
to SPO
concerns received
October
23, 2024
X
3
Returned
mail
X
4
FAA
November
comments
1,
2024
—
no concerns on
Part 139
certification,
received
X
5
FAA attachment
review
of
wildlife
1
- Advisory
hazard
site
Circular
visits
on
protocol
for
the
conduct
and
X
6
FAA attachment
or near
airports
2 - Advisory
Circular
on
hazardous
wildlife
attractants
on
X
I hereby certify that the six items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services
at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners' hearing.
Diana Aungst, Planner
07/30/24
Bliss Produce Co.
P.U. Box 816 Greeley, Co. 80632
2074 E. 8th St. Greeley, Co. 80631
Bliss Investments LLC
2438 E. 8th St. Greeley, co. 80631
970-302-7700
Weld County Planners
Sunset Industrial LLC
Case# USE24-0016
Diana Aungst
Comments / Concerns
Bliss Produce Co. Comments / Concerns:
1) First concern is we would like to know where the exact location for Ingress / Egress for
trucks and vehicles are proposed for the project. Due to the high traffic volume on east 8th St., we
are concerned for the Safety for the Public traffic, our commercial tenants, residential tenants, and
our Bliss Produce -Bliss Investments employees. The speed limit is 55 mph, and a slow moving, fully
loaded semi -trucks, pulling onto East 8th St. Could potentially result in accidents.
Other possible options might be to have the entrance be Cherry Ave or WCR 62. It looks like there
are farm roads on the Weld County property portal map going north-west to Cherry Ave and or north
to WCR 62 of the proposed mining site connecting the proposed project. Another option, reducing
the speed limit.
What is the volume of semi -trucks proposed being used per day, for hauling their product?
2) Second concern is the noise from the mobile generators, recycle crushers, mobile mining
equipment, etc. What type of noise levels will there be, and will it have any impact on our tenants
but especially our residential tenants as we provide a safe and quiet living environment for them.
What will be the hours and days of operation?
3) Third concern is the air pollution from their open pit mining operations. We are located to
the south of the proposed mining operation. What impact, if any, will it have on our property and
tenants.
4) Our Last concern is our residential water well potentially being dried up from the mining
operation. There have been instances in the past from sand and gravel open pit mining operations
taping into the underground aquifers resulting in residential wells going dry.
We appreciate your time and effort looking into these concerns and comments.
Thank you,
Michael D Bliss
Bliss Produce Co./ Bliss Investments LLC.
From: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2024 2:34 PM
To: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov>
Cc: Chris Leone <chrisleone@i2contracting.com>
Subject: Responses to Bliss Produce Comments/Concerns regarding USR24-0016 - Sunset Industrial Pit
Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Diana —
Per our phone conversations and the comments/concerns provided by Bliss Produce we have the
following responses:
1. The location of the entrance has been moved based on our conversations with the City of
Greeley and where they recommended it to go which is across from one of the existing box
culverts (east of the Andersons Auto Salvage access) on the Ogilvy Ditch where an access exists
to the Bliss Produce property (west side). Currently that box culvert crossing has jersey barriers
across it so it is not being used but is a future access to 8th street. I have also included a snapshot
map showing this location below.
The only access onto a public road for this property is 8th Street. The locations that Bliss Produce
mentions are crossing other private land owners. We agree with having the speed limit reduced
in this area and we requested that specific item from the City of Greeley. The City of Greeley
told us that they would not support a speed reduction at this time.
The number of trucks from the pit at maximum output is proposed to be 200 in/out for semi
truck and trailer, 50 in/out for tandem dump trucks, and 5 in/out for delivery trucks. There will
also be 20 in/out passenger vehicles for pit employees.
2. As currently designed, the worst case predicted sound levels per the noise study meet the Weld
County Industrial limit at the USR Boundary. The Residential limit is not met at all points on the
USR boundary but is met at the closest homes. As the pit is developed and the mining
equipment moves below the surface, the sound levels will be reduced further. These noise
levels are within the limits required by Weld County so there will not be an impact.
The standard operating hours will be during daylight hours for all facilities on the site Monday
through Saturday. Because federal highway paving projects are often required to conduct their
work activities at night to minimize the impacts to traffic flows, the aggregate processing
facilities may occasionally operate during night time hours if work on these types of projects are
done, but this would be requested by the applicant prior to operating at night to receive
approval to do so from Weld County. We are also planning to provide fencing along the south
property line to help screen and reduce impacts with an opaque solid fence as shown in the
snapshot details below:
I _
trt
t _
r
ant',.R = t.
• e y (.
•
•
t
•
•
•
METAL SCREENING FENCE DETAIL
METAL SCREE'NiNG FENCE
3. There will not be air pollution impacts from the mining activities. Air emission permits (APENs)
from the State is required and will address dust control for mining operations, haul roads,
and any sand and gravel processing equipment. Dust abatement will consist of utilizing a
water truck to wet down haul roads, stockpiles, etc. Mag Chloride may also be used on the
entrance road to the scale house to provide dust control.
4. The residential water well will not be impacted by dewatering from the mine site. The mine site
will begin mining above the existing groundwater level where dewatering will not be required.
Once the mining progresses to a point where mining can no longer occur above the
groundwater levels a slurry wall will be installed to seal off the proposed mine cell(s) where
groundwater cannot enter into the pit so it is isolated from the alluvial aquifer and any
dewatering inside the slurry wall will not impact anything outside the slurry wail. The slurry wall
will also be certified and approved by the Division of Water Resources after a 90 day leak test
has been passed to meet the States performance standard per the Division of Water Resources
requirements.
A groundwater model was also performed and accepted by the DRMS (Division of Reclamation
Mining and Safety) showing the impacts of the slurry wall on the groundwater table. The area
south of the proposed mine shows a decrease in the ground water table of one foot or less
(shown on the impact map snapshot below) which will not impact the performance of any wells
in the vicinity as the saturated thickness of the aquifer is greater than 40 feet (difference
between the groundwater level and bedrock). The groundwater levels fluctuate from 18 to 23
feet from the ground surface in this area during the seasonal changes from Summer, Fall,
Winter, and Spring,
1
•
223885-A
28174
4 '� k
620-WCB
1564-R
061
68387 -F -R 12678-R its`
r
1
105592 _���
27662YA _-.�
123793-
11582
13884-R
avic-msais
Let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional information.
Regards,
J.C.
J.C. York, P.E.
J&T Consulting, Inc.
305 Denver Avenue, Suite D
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
Office: (303) 857-6222
Mobile: (970) 222-9530
FAX: (303) 857-6224
'
If would like more Information regarding this
propeii` e d the conditions that must be met, the file is
public information and Is available for review at our
ifice. You may also view the file online at Accela
4 ten Access. Click on Permit Search, and under the
ling Tab, select "Search for Records & Permits",
art the case number in the Record Number box.
l‘if-ta or objections related to the request should be
\.tn writing to the Weld County Planning
so}% a 1402 N. 17th Avenue, P.O. Box 758, Greeley.
80632.
OS.
Casa a I Calmt USR24-0018 DENVER CO 802
Name I Nombre: Sunset Industrial, LLC
12 JUL 2024 PM 6
Proposed Project USR for Open Mining (sand mid gravel) and processing of minerals,
including the import and export of materials tolfrom other dee, recycle gushing area, dry
and wet screens, crushers, conveyers and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining
event parking and storage, employes and vendor parking, a mina office/scale house,
and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Ind vial) Zone District.
Pveyecto P tor: USR pare Mlneria Marts (arena y grays) y procesasniento de
minereies, induyendo Is imporlacion y exporladann de materlales hadaldeede otros sltlos,
ame de chanter de recicleje, comas sacs y hornedas, lrituradaras, transportadores y
apitadores, generadores portitlies, estaclonarnlento y atmacenamlenta de equipos m6viles
de mined* , eatacionamierb pars ernpieados y proveedores, una oficina mineratcase de
bascule y una bascule, en el disiri#o de la zone I-3 (Industrial Pesado).
Location: North of and adjacent to East 8tfi Street approximately 870 feet east of Cherry
Avenue (County Road 43).
UblcacIt n: Al node y adyacente a East 8th Streit; apraximadamente 870 pies al este de
Cheny Avenue (County Road 43).
Planner 1 Pianificadora: Diana Aungst
Comments due by: August 7, 2024
Commerical debidos por: 7 de agosto de 2024
- L
r
OIMISPLEY
It
BASMIPACen
Application Review Notification Card
�s
This is to notify you that the project
listed on the other side of this card is
within five -hundred (500) feet of your
property. You will be notified of any
future meetings regarding the proposed project on this
PhSrtica
a 61:
4
. a
a k tie
e‘i fl
%Settigte el
4�
.
Aar
Weld County Planning Services
1402 N. 17th Ave
P.O. Box 758
Gam', CO 80632
RECEIVED
JUL 2 2 mu
ENO
countelanning
Dip
PO BOX 544
DOUGLAS
WY 82633
44414111 1 I
s
Tarjeta de noiificacibn de revision de solicitud
Esto es para notificarle que el proyecto que figura en
el otro lado de este tarjeta se encuentra dentro de los
quinientos (500) pies de su propiedad. Be le
notiflcara de cualquier reunion futura con respecto al
proyecto propuesto en esta propiedad.
Si desea mils inforrnaciOn sobre este propuesta y las
condiclones que debe oumplir, el expedlente es de
inforrnadon publics y esti disponible pare su revision
en nuestra oficiria Tamblen puede ver el archivo en
I i nea en Accela Citizen Accesa. Maga clic en
Busqueda de perrnisos yr, en la pestaflaa Planificacien,
seleccione "Buscar registrar y perrrrlsos", luego inserte
el caso nUmero en el cuadro NOmero de registro. Los
c ornentar'os u objeciones relacionados con la solicitud
deben enviarse por escrito a Weld County Planning
Services, 1402 N. 17th Avenue, P.O. Caja 758
Greeley, CO 80632. .
Case # / Caso #: USR24-0016
Name / Nombre: Sunset Industrial, LLC
Proposed Project. USR for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including
the import and export of materials to/from other sites. recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens,
crushers. conveyors and stacker. portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and
storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy
Industrial) Zone District
Proyecto Propuesto: USR pars Mineria Abierta (arena y grava) y procesamiento de minerales,
incluyendo la importaciOn y exportacion de materiales hacia/desde otros sitios, area de chancado
de reciclaje, cribas secas y humedas, trituradoras, transportadores y apiladores, generadores
portatiles, estacionamiento y almacenamiento de equipos m6viles de mineria , estacionamiento
para empleados y proveedores, una oficina minera/casa de bascula y una bascula, en el distrito
de la zona 1-3 (Industrial Pesado)
Location: North of and adjacent to East 8th Street; approximately 670 feet east of Cherry Avenue
(County Road 43).
UbicaciOn: Al none y adyacente a East 8th Street; aproximadamente 670 pies al este de Cherry
Avenue (County Road 43).
Planner / Planificadora: Diana Aungst
PC Hearing Date: November 5, 2024 at 1:30 p m
PC Fecha de audiencia: 5 de noviembre de 2024 a las 13:30 horas
BOCC Hearing Date: November 20 at 10:00 a.m.
Fecha de audiencia de BOCC: 20 de noviembre de 2024 a las 10:00 horas
U
teat'
w
GREEL&Y
vie _OE IL a. garara
...
^• y• ��. _� i• iii; ►• -e �eai ter. y F)A�
• it M� + y. g. ,1
2>07 !'
US POSTAGEI" BOWES
(isk
ZIP 80631 $ 000396
�24w
0000335769 OCT 10 2024
Weld County Planning Services
1402 N. 17th Ave
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
E
Planning Department � tei
HORIZON A A 11._r LLC
1937 S LOGAN T
DENVER CO ESQ?
i! W in'ill W iuiisIliiiIuiuli • 474,
45
n.
'(``s {` ` •
� 4- 4)
0
;.it -.4
d F A
A SO
L Is *N
s.
4 • t'. 1
4-„ Q
case # / Caso #: USR24-0016
Mame / Nombre: Sunset Industrial, LLC
3roposed Project: USR for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including
he import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens,
;rushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and
.torage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy
ndustrial) Zone District.
'royecto Propuesto: USR pard Mineria Abierta (arena y grava) y procesamiento de minerales,
icluyendo la importacion y exportacion de materiales hacia/desde otros sitios, area de chancado
le reciclaje, cribas secas y hctmedas, trituradoras, transportadores y apiladores, generadores
'ortatires, estacionamiento y almacenamiento de equipos moviles de mineria , estacionamiento
oara empleados y proveedores, una oficina miners/rasa de bascula y una bascule, en el distrito
e la zona 1-3 (Industrial Pesado)
.ocation: North of and adjacent to East 8th Street; approximately 670 feet east of Cherry Avenue
County Road 43),
lbicacion: Al node y adyacente a East 8th Street, aproximadamente 670 pies al este de Cherry
1venue (County Road 43)
'tanner / Pianlficadora: Diana Aungst
.CHearing Date: November 5, 2024 at 1:30 p.m.
C Fecha de audiencia: 5 de noviembre de 2024 a las 13:30 horas
OCC Hearing Date: November 20 at 10:00 am.
echa de audiencia de BOCC: 20 de noviembre de 2024 a las 10:00 horas
Ii C St
i.- MrS j ilk
e +.
ita
riff-Wit'1.f- )'
5
coct 62
ln
wfrna
°
hi.
41 US POSTAGE
ra RTNEY BOWES
etrittr=rinimairatt-g
zip F3063 "I $ 000.636
02 n � aw
4VV
0000335760001 10 2024
Weld County Planning Services
1402 N. 17th Ave
OCT 3 1 2024
06c2
Weld County Planning Department
RLU HOLDINGS LLC
PO BOX 544
DOUGLAS WY 82633
r.
••
From: Krull, Kandice (FM) <Kandice.Krull@faa.gov>
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 8:15 AM
To: Diana Aungst <daungstpweld.gov>
Cc: Maxwell Nader <mnader@weld.gov>
Subject: RE: USR24-0016 gravel pit adjacent to the Weld -County airport
EXHIBIT
usge q•-601/10
4
Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good morning Diana,
I discussed the information you provided with my coworkers and we determined that the proximity of
the gravel pit should not prohibit the airport from obtaining their Part 139 certification. However, we
concur with the concerns raised by the airport in their August 8, 2024 email. Ponds that result from
mining activities often attract large numbers of potentially hazardous wildlife. Development of new
open water facilities within 10,000 feet of an airport should be avoided to prevent wildlife attractants. If
the water features are necessary, the gravel pit company should develop a wildlife hazard management
plan, in coordination with the airport, to ensure a safe airport environment. The FM recommends these
plans be developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist , to minimize hazardous
wildlife attractants. The USDA APHIS Wildlife Services has qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists that might
be able to help assist the gravel pit in developing the plan.
We would encourage the inclusion of stipulations to protect the airport in the permit, if possible. Such
as strict adherence to the dust abatement plan, inclusion of wildlife hazard management plan and
mitigation, and the ability to address any unforeseen negative impacts to the airport in the future.
I am not sure what the future reclamation plans include, but the FM has concerns with the area being
filled with water at the end of operations. A water feature of this size within 10,000 feet of the airport
could cause future wildlife hazards for the airport.
I have attached two of FM's wildlife hazard advisory circulars (ACs) that provides additional
information. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any additional questions.
Thanks so much for reaching out to the FM. We appreciate the opportunity to comment.
Kandice
Kandice Krull
Environmental Protection Specialist
FAA - Denver Airports District Office
303-342-1261
From: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 8:07 AM
To: Krull, Kandice (FM) <Kandice.Krull@faa.gov>
Cc: Maxwell Nader <mnader@weld.gov>
Subject: USR24-0016 gravel pit adjacent to the Weld -County airport
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Do not click on links or
open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Kandice,
Weld County has received a request to submit a permit (Use by Special Review) to allow a
gravel pit to commence operation adjacent to the Weld -Greeley airport. The understanding is
that the Weld -Greeley airport is under consideration to be 'converted' to a commercial airport
(Part 139 certification). Could you please let me know if the proximity of the gravel pit would
prohibit this conversion.
600 Airport Rd. #A, Greeley, CO 80631
-ftST
mast agti street_
Thanks,
Diana A angst
AICP, CFM
Principal Planner
WCR62
tummy ,t (.t
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1402 N 17th Ave, Greeley, CO 80631
D: 970-400-35241O: 970-400-6100
daungstaweld.gov I www.weld.gov
I
Weld County GIS I C QpenStreetM t win
Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received
this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying,
distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named
recipient is strictly prohibited.
EXHIBIT
tkS,'2b'/ /v
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Advisory
Circular
Subject: Protocol for the Conduct and Review
of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard
Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management
Plans
Date: 8/20/2018 AC No: 150/5200-38
Initiated By: AAS-300 Change:
1 Purpose.
For certificated airports, this Advisory Circular (AC) defines the minimum acceptable
standards for the conduct and preparation of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits (Site Visit),
Wildlife Hazard Assessments (Assessments) and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans
(Plans). This AC provides guidelines that discuss whether a Site Visit can be conducted
or whether an Assessment must be conducted under Part 139. In the case of airports
that are not Part 139 certificated, this AC provides guidelines as to when a Site Visit or
Assessment is recommended. The AC further defines and explains continual
monitoring programs. This AC also provides checklists to help people evaluate Site
Visits, Assessments and Plans.
2 Applicability.
This AC describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, for airports that hold
Airport Operating Certificates issued under 14 CFR part 139 subpart D ("Certificated
Airports"), to comply with the wildlife hazard management requirements in 14 CFR §
139.337. For non -certificated airports, the standards, practices, and recommendations
contained in this AC are recommended during the conduct and preparation of Site
Visits, Assessments and Plans. The FAA also recommends this guidance for all
Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists (QAWBs)1, land -use planners, and developers of
projects, facilities, and activities on or near airports. Finally, in accordance with AIP
Grant Assurance 34 and PFC Program Assurance B(9), if an airport uses Federal funds
or Passenger Facility Charge revenue for Site Visits or Assessments, then the protocols
The term "wildlife damage management biologist" is used in 14 CFR § 139.337. That term is outdated, and
"qualified airport wildlife biologist," which is used in this AC, has the same meaning for purposes of complying
with part 139.
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
in Chapter 1 (applicable to Site Visits) or Chapter 2 (for Assessments) must be used in
conducting those projects.
3 Background.
1. 14 CFR § 139.337, Wildlife Hazard Management, prescribes the specific reasons
why an Assessment must be conducted and what subject matter is minimally
required. While minimum standards for Assessments and Plans have existed in the
past, there have not previously been standards on preferred methodologies that
assess wildlife populations and wildlife hazard attractants. As a result, there have
been non standardized, wide ranging methodologies to obtain wildlife and habitat
data.
2. An Assessment is defined in § 139.337(c) as an ecological study, conducted by a
QAWB. The Assessment analyzes local and transient wildlife populations, habitat,
airport operations and strike data (if available) to establish a scientific basis for the
development, implementation, and refinement of a Plan. Section 139.337(e)
provides in part that a Plan must provide measures to alleviate or eliminate wildlife
hazards to air carrier operations and, as authorized by the Administrator, must
become a part of the Airport Certification Manual (ACM). While the Assessment
ultimately provides a risk analysis of wildlife hazards and gives suggestions on how
to mitigate wildlife attractants, the Plan details the agreed upon comprehensive
mitigation efforts the airport actually will take.
3. Though parts of the Assessment may be incorporated directly in the Plan, they are
two separate documents. Part of the Plan can be prepared by the QAWB who
conducts the Assessment. However, some parts can be prepared only by the airport.
For example, airport management assigns airport personnel responsibilities,
commits airport funds, and purchases equipment and supplies.
4. The intent of a Site Visit is to provide an abbreviated analysis of an airport's
wildlife hazards, determine if an Assessment is warranted, and if necessary, and
provide actionable information that allows the airport to expedite the mitigation of
these hazards. Accordingly, Site Visits should be conducted by a QAWB.
5. Available information about the risks posed to aircraft by certain wildlife species
has increased in recent years. Improved reporting, studies, documentation, and
statistics show that aircraft collisions with birds and other wildlife are a serious
economic and public safety problem. While many species of wildlife can pose a
threat to aircraft safety, they are not all equally hazardous. Appendix A provides a
composite ranking (1 most hazardous, 50 = least hazardous) and relative hazard
score of 50 wildlife species with at least 100 reported strikes of civil aircraft.2 We
based this ranking on three criteria: damage, major damage, and effect -on -flight.
Noticeably missing from this table are several hazardous species that had not been
struck with the minimum frequency to allow their inclusion within the analyses.
2 The data in this Appendix is taken from Table 19, Federal Aviation Administration National Wildlife Strike
Database Serial Report No. 19, Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United Slates, 1990-2012 (September 2013)
it
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Brown and white pelicans, black vultures, great egrets and other waders as well as
several species of waterfowl, raptors, gulls, and shorebirds present a significant
hazard to aircraft. Although these hazard rankings can help focus hazardous
wildlife management efforts on those species or groups that represent the greatest
threats to safe air operations in the airport environment, care should be given to
consider any hazardous species of significant mass, flocking or flight behavior, or
habitat preferences. Used with a site -specific Assessment to determine the relative
abundance and movements of wildlife species, these rankings can help airport
operators better understand the general threat level (and consequences) of certain
wildlife species and can assist with the creation of a "zero-tolerance"3 list of
hazardous species that warrant immediate attention.
4 Feedback on this AC.
If you have suggestions for improving this AC, you may use the Advisory Circular
Feedback form at the end of this AC.
n R. Derm5dy
Director of Airport Safety and Standards
3 Zero -tolerance designation in the airport environment means wildlife species that represent an unacceptable high
risk to safe aircraft operations. Their presence in the airport environment cannot be tolerated and warrants
immediate and reasonable management action to remove them from the Air Operations Area (AOA) using
appropriate techniques (i.e., harassment, lethal take, capture and relocate, etc.).
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
Chapter I. Protocol for the Conduct of a Wildlife Hazard Site Visit (Site Visit) 1-1
1.1 Introduction1-1
1.2 Applicable Airport Information. 1-1
1.3 Observations. 1-3
1.4 Site Visit Report 1-3
Chapter 2. Protocol for the Conduct of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (Assessment) 2-5
2.1 Introduction2-5
2.2 Requirements for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. 2-6
2.3 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment. 2-7
2.4 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report. 2-8
2.5 Minimum Number of Wildlife Surveys Required and Duration of Wildlife Hazard
Assessment 2-9
2.6 Basic Wildlife Survey Techniques for Wildlife Hazard Assessments 2-10
2.7 Basic Habitat Surveys for Wildlife Hazard Assessments2-16
2.8 Evaluation of Airport and Aircraft Operations. 2-19
Chapter 3. Protocol for the Preparation of a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (Plan) ..3-21
3.1 Introduction3-21
3.2 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Regulatory Requirements and Methodology. 3-21
3.3 Pertinent Laws and Regulations 3-28
Chapter 4. Protocol for Continual Monitoring 4-34
4.1 Introduction4-34
4.2 Continual Monitoring Protocol. 4-34
4.3 Continual Monitoring Annual Report4-35
Appendix A. Composite Ranking of Hazardous Wildlife Species A-1
Appendix B. Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit and Report Checklists B-1
Appendix C. Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment and Report Checklists C-1
Appendix D. Wildlife Survey Data Sheet Example D-1
iv
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
Appendix E. Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Checklist E-1
Appendix F. Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Review F-1
Appendix G. Letter of Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for
Airports G-1
Appendix H. Letter of Mixed Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for
Airports H-1
8/2O/2O18 AC 15O/52OO-38
CHAPTER 1. PROTOCOL FOR THE CONDUCT OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISIT
(SITE VISIT)
1.1 Introduction.
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
Wildlife Hazard Site Visits can be beneficial for any airport. A Site Visit has three
parts: (1) gathering airport information; (2) field observations; and (3) a final report
with recommendations. Airports can use a Site Visit to quickly evaluate and mitigate
potential hazards on and near airports. An airport can also use a Site Visit to determine
whether an Assessment is necessary. An exception to this occurs if the airport is
certificated and has had one of the events listed in § 139.337(b). Then the airport must
conduct an Assessment4.
If an airport already has a Plan, airport management can use a Site Visit to investigate
wildlife strikes to aircraft or see if the Plan needs to be updated. Airports can also use a
Site Visit to decide if a proposed land use in the vicinity of an airport will increase the
potential for wildlife hazards at the airport. For non -certificated airports that do not
have a Plan, a Site Visit can provide a suitable basis to develop a basic Plan.
During the Site Visit, the QAWB collects and compiles information on the airport's
wildlife hazard history, documented and suspected wildlife hazards, habitat attractants,
control activities, airport operations and maintenance procedures, communications of
hazards through ATC and pilots, aircraft operations and scheduling. A Site Visit is
typically conducted over a period of one to three days. A QAWB evaluates the habitat
on and surrounding the airport, and records direct or indirect wildlife observations. The
QAWB also reviews the current Plan, current wildlife management activities, and
airport wildlife strike data. Appendix B has a checklist that airports can use to ensure a
complete and detailed Site Visit. The checklist can also be used to review the Site Visit
protocol and report.
It is recommended that a QAWB conduct Site Visits. Standards for becoming a QAWB
are found in AC 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife
Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculum for Airport Personnel Involved in
Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports.
1.2 Applicable Airport Information.
1.2.1
A QAWB may request the following information, if available, from the airport operator
to prepare for a site visit:
1. Personnel and departments responsible for airport operations
2. Number of aircraft operations per year
a If a certificated airport has already had an Assessment conducted and a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (Plan)
developed based on that Assessment, then the airport must evaluate the Plan following an event described in
§ 139.337(b)(1) -(3).
11
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
3. Type of operations (i.e., % private, civil, and military)
4. Recent airport construction or airfield changes
5. Past and present land management practices
6. Records of strikes and damage, flight delays, injuries, and fatalities due to strikes.
Wildlife strike data may help determine hazardous species on an airport. Data on
reported wildlife strikes are available through the FAA National Wildlife Strike
Database (available at http://wi ld l i fe.faa.gov). Airports may maintain their own
local database which can be compared with the National Database. It is
recommended that a Site Visit include an analysis of wildlife strike records. If
possible, include summaries of strike data by species, time of day, on and off -site
airport locations, and weather conditions. At minimum, it is recommended that a
wildlife strike analysis include, if available:
a. Bird and mammal species involved
b. Frequency distribution by month and year
c. Number per 10,000 aircraft movements
d. Location on the airfield
7. Any existing wildlife hazard management efforts and related maintenance
procedures, if applicable — Records of past management efforts may be helpful
during this initial consultation. It is recommended that attempts to exclude, deter, or
remove wildlife from the airport be noted. If not already in place, it is
recommended that a wildlife log be created and maintained by airport operations to
document all wildlife activity observed on the airport.
8. Description of current wildlife hazard threats or concerns
9. Presence / absence of perimeter fence, condition of fence and its effectiveness
10. Any current Federal and State depredation/ wildlife control permits and annual
permit reports
11. Current U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, airport maps, and/ or
aerial photographs
12. Other pertinent information present in airport records
1.2.2 Airport records may be incomplete or may not exist. Interviews with airport personnel
often yield useful information that is missing from written records. It is recommended
that the QAWB discuss the history of wildlife hazard problems at the airport with the
5 If an airport is non -certificated and does not have an effective or complete perimeter fence to exclude hazardous
wildlife, then the Site Visit report should include this recommendation. If the airport desires fencing it must follow
FAA procurement protocols and develop a condensed or short plan to mitigate wildlife hazards. This outline
demonstrates an airport's commitment to maintain the fence as part of a comprehensive wildlife mitigation program;
it is not required to incorporate all of the components of a full Wildlife Hazard Management Plan under I4 CFR
§ 139.337.
1-2
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
airport manager and staff. The control tower supervisor and chief of operations may
also give useful background information on the severity and frequency of the problem.
1.3 Observations.
FAA recommends that the QAWB make observations from a variety of locations to
ensure complete visual coverage of the airport. Minimum coverage shall include
observations of the airport's Air Operations Area (AOA).6 These observations maybe
brief; they are not as rigorous as a full Assessment. At a minimum, it is recommended
that the observations include:
1. Birds — Record bird species present and note abundance, activity, and location, type
of habitat used, time and date of observations. Note evidence of bird activity such
as fecal material and regurgitated pellets (boluses) under structures used for
perching.
2. Mammals — Document mammals observed and evidence of mammal activity such as
scats, tracks, runs, and burrows and include time and date of observations, activity,
location, and type of habitat used. Estimate relative abundance, activity, and habitat
use.
3. Habitat Attractants — Assess habitats and man-made attractants on and around
airport property. Note potential wildlife attractants. Review maps and aerial
photographs, noting waste management facilities, wildlife refuges, water bodies,
agriculture, stock yards, picnic areas, restaurants, and other features or habitats that
may attract wildlife within a five -mile radius around the airport. As noted in
AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 1.4,
Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace, the FAA recommends a
distance of 5 statute miles between the farthest edge of the airport's AOA and the
hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could cause hazardous wildlife
movement into or across the approach or departure airspace.
4. Wildlife/Habitat Relationship — Observe and record how the wildlife observed is
using the habitat on the airport.
5. Wildlife Interactions with Aircraft Operations — Assess the potential for wildlife
interactions with aircraft operations in the AOA, traffic patterns, approach and
departure airspace, and surrounding areas. Evaluate aircraft movements to see if
these operations increase the risk of wildlife strikes. Review airport hazard
advisories to see if they are specific to the hazards at the airport.
1.4 Site Visit Report.
It is recommended that the QAWB provide the airport manager with a letter report
summarizing field data and any management recommendations following the Site Visit.
b Any area of an airport used or intended to be used for landing, takeoff, or surface maneuvering of aircraft. An air
operations area includes such paved areas or unpaved areas that are used or intended to be used for the unobstructed
movement of aircraft in addition to its associated runway, taxiways, or apron.
1-3
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
It is recommended the FAA Regional office receive a copy of this report from the
Airport Manager. The findings in a Site Visit report could lead the FAA to require an
Assessment. See § 139.337(b)(4) ("wildlife of a size, or in numbers, capable of causing
an event" like a multiple wildlife strike, substantial damage from a strike, or engine
ingestion). The airport is advised to retain copies of the report. FAA recommends that
the Site Visit report contain:
1. List of wildlife species or wildlife signs, such as deer tracks observed during the
visit or identified as wildlife hazards by other sources
2. Federal and State status of the species observed
3. Habitat features that may encourage wildlife to use the airport
4. Natural and artificial wildlife attractants on or near the airport
5. Strike data analysis
6. Recommendations to:
a. Reduce wildlife hazards identified (if data is available to substantiate
conclusions)
b. Conduct an Assessment, if needed
c. Modify an existing Plan, if needed
d. Improve communications and hazard advisories between Air Traffic Control,
pilots, airlines, airport operations, and other airport users
e. Consider potential short-term alteration of aircraft operations, if feasible, to
avoid identified hazardous wildlife concentrations
f. No action required, if applicable
Reduce wildlife hazards through the use of habitat management, exclusion/repulsion techniques, active
harassment, population control, and operational considerations.
1-4
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
CHAPTER 2. PROTOCOL FOR THE CONDUCT OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENT
(ASSESSMENT)
2.1 Introduction.
2.1.1
The first step in preparing an airport Plan is to conduct an Assessment. A QAWB
conducts the Assessment, which gives the scientific basis for developing, implementing,
and refining a Plan. Though parts of the Assessment may be incorporated directly into
the Plan, they are two separate documents.
2.1.2 The objective of an Assessment is to provide a baseline of data and understanding of
wildlife species considered hazardous on or near an airport, and of attractants that
provide food, water, and shelter8. An Assessment typically takes a year to complete.
FAA recommends that assessment methodologies be reproducible. It is also
recommended that data collection procedures such as point counts, trapping indices and
vehicle routes be set up and used to allow future repetition for consistent, continued
monitoring or comparison to previous findings. The Assessment identifies wildlife
populations and trends at the airport, such as the location and seasonality of wildlife
hazards. It also identifies how these fluctuations in behavior and abundance may affect
aviation safety, with particular emphasis on wildlife strikes to aircraft. Assessments
promote an integrated approach for wildlife mitigation to effectively:
1. Modify the environment (e.g., changes in mowing and drainage clearance
procedures)
2. Exclude wildlife (e.g., installation of fences, netting and perch excluders)
3. Implement harassment procedures (e.g., pyrotechnics and propane cannons)
4. Remove wildlife (e.g., lethal and capture/relocate methodologies)
5. Communicate wildlife hazard advisories through Air Traffic Control voice
communications, Automatic Terminal 'Information Service (ATIS), Pilot Report
(PIREPS), Notices to Airmen (NOTAMS)
6. Direct pilot responses to identified hazards
7. Report strikes or hazardous situations
8. Potentially alter flight routes, traffic patterns, or schedules to avoid locations and
times of identified wildlife hazards.
2.l .3 A properly conducted Assessment can help a QAWB quantify wildlife hazards to
aviation and understand the risk presented by each species for a particular airport. In
this context, the most hazardous wildlife species are those which are most likely to
cause aircraft damage when struck. Risk is the product of hazard level and abundance
8 An Assessment identifies and describes wildlife hazards and attractants, whether known, suspected or otherwise
unknown, on and near an airport within the separation criteria recommended in Section 1-2 through 1-4 of
AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, to an extent that allows for the creation of a
sufficient basis for mitigation measures.
2-5
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
in the critical airspace, and is thus defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a
given species.
2.1.4
The Assessment provides baseline data for an airport to prepare a Plan, and evaluate the
efficacy of its existing wildlife hazard management program. For example, an
Assessment could help an airport with an existing Plan determine the recurrence of
species -specific wildlife hazards, monitor reduction of onsite damaging strikes, monitor
wildlife program communication and response efficiency, and improve the overall
wildlife program through annual review. Better information regarding wildlife hazards
and their attractants should result in better use of resources. Appendix C has a checklist
that QAWBs and airports can use to ensure the Assessment and report meet the
requirements within 14 CFR § 139.337.
2.2 Requirements for Wildlife Hazard Assessments.
Section 139.337(b) requires that, in a manner authorized by the Administrator, each
certificate holder must ensure that an Assessment is conducted when any of the
following events occurs on or near the airport:
1. An air carrier aircraft experiences multiple wildlife strikes
2. An air carrier aircraft experiences substantial damage from striking wildlife
3. An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine ingestion of wildlife
4. Wildlife of a size, or in numbers, capable of causing an event described in paragraph
(b)(1), (2), or (3) of 14 CFR § 139.337 is observed to have access to any airport
flight pattern or aircraft movement area.
Table 1: Additional guidance for 14 CFR § 139.337(b)
The following table provides additional guidance in complying with § 139.337(b).
14 CFR
§ 139.337
Guidance
(b)
each
Hazard
following
In
certificate
a manner
Assessment
events
authorized
holder
occurs
shall
is conducted
on
by
ensure
or
the
near
Administrator,
when
the
that
a
any
airport.
Wildlife
of
the
(b)(1)
wildlife
An
strike
air
carrier
aircraft
experiences
a
multiple
Aircraft
incident
strikes
(i.e.,
flock
of
during
a single
multiple
animals
birds).
(b)(2)
damage
paragraph,
structural
adversely
performance,
An
from
air
substantial
failure
affects
carrier
striking
or
incurred
the
aircraft
wildlife.
damage
by
experiences
an
As
aircraft
used
of
in
damage
that
the
substantial
this
aircraft
or
flight
means
strength,
structural
characteristics
2-6
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
L.4 CFR § 139.337 1
Guidance
that would
and
replacement
normally require major repair or
of the affected component;
(3) An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine
of wildlife; or
iu
stion.
damage
not
have
to result
from
tie
(b)
ingestion
engine
does
(b) (4)
causing
or (3) of
any airport
Wildlife
an
this
of a size, or in numbers, capable of
event described in paragraph (b 1 D, (2),
section is observed to have access to
flight pattern or aircraft movement area.
Ai
(NOTAM),
Terminal
comments
warning
airport
generic
airport
4
'
s with a standing Notice to Airmen
announcements on their Automatic
Information Service (ATIS), or
in Airport/Facility Directory (A/FD)
pilots of wildlife hazards on or near
meet this condition. Permanent or
advisories should not be issued without
conducting actionable mitigation
the
blanket
the
measures.
2.3 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Ase sment.
Section 139.337(c) sets forth the minimum content in a Wildlife Hazard Assessment.
Table 2: Guidance on 14 CFR § 139.337 (c)(1) -- (5).
The following provides guidance on the required elements in a Wildlife Hazard Assessment.
14 CFR 139337
(c) The Wildlife Hazard Assessment ... shall be
conducted by a wildlife damage management
biologist... having training or experience in
wildlife hazard management at airports or an
individual working under the direct supervision
of such an individual.
Guidance
An Assessment must be conducted by a QAWS.
Additional guidance on the training and
experience for a QAWB can be found in the
most recent version of AC 150/520046,
Qua!jflcalions fir Wildlify Biologist Conducting
MO Hazard Assessments and Training
Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in
Controlling Maw Harare on Airports.
(c)(conti) ... the Wildlife Hazard Assessment shall contain:
(CX 1) Analysis of the event or circumstances that
prompted the assessment.
(c) Identification of the wildlife species
observed and their numbers, locations, local
movements, and daily and seasonal OCCUITCTICCS.
Who, what, when, where, and why of the
situation prompting the Assessment.
What wildlife species have access to the airport?
What are their movement and seasonal patterns?
Data should cover 12 consecutive months. What
is the Federal and State protective status of
notable wildlife?
2-7
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
14
CFR
139.337
1 Guidance
(c)(3)
and
near
Identification
the
airport
and
that
location
attract
of
wildlife.
features
on
Wildlife
something
desire.
areas
feeding
vary
and
corridors,
others,
seasonally
provide
locations.
are
Wood
should
exists
such
attracted
lots
relatively
on
or
as
be
near
Food
or
to
an
near
the
safe
and
accessible
airport
the
AOA
loafing,
water
airport
These
and
because
sources
nesting
travel
large
that
attractants
they
can
open
and
temporarily.
easily
analyzed.
(c)(4)
carrier
A
operations.
description
of wildlife
hazards
to air
Consider
consider
database
and
the
wildlife
types
the
documented
severity
of
wildlife
of
damage
observed.
in
the
strike
they
Also
caused.
(c)(5)
identified
operations.
Recommended
wildlife
hazards
actions
to
for reducing
air carrier
Prioritize
hazardous
recommend
changes
airport
(ATC),
operations
air
recommendations
in
wildlife
operational
response
carriers,
and
to
personnel,
and
their
wildlife
and
pilots).
for
attractants.
mitigating
hazards
Also
(e.g.,
Control
maintenance
Air
Traffic
2.4 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report.
2.4.1
2.4.2
The final Assessment report must discuss elements within § 139.337(c). If there was no
triggering event or circumstance that prompted the Assessment, then the discussion of
triggering event (required under § 139.337(c)(1)) may be omitted. Although there are
many acceptable formats to present the findings of an Assessment, it must include those
key components listed in § 139.337(c). The required components include sections
summarizing methodologies, results, and any recommendations. The report should be
submitted to the FAA regional office within 90 days following completion of field work
and must contain the name of the QAWB who conducted the Assessment.
It is recommended that Assessment procedures such as point counts, trapping indices,
vehicle routes, and avian radar be described to allow duplication of procedures for
consistent, continued monitoring or comparison to previous findings. FAA
recommends that the report include any maps, imagery and/or detailed descriptions
whenever location information is necessary, such as assessment techniques, wildlife
hazard attractants, or airport layout. It is recommended the report cite the presence
or absence of Federal or State listed species identified during the Assessment. If
enough data is available, it is recommended that the discussion include whether the
species is resident on or near the airport or is considered transient to the location
observed. The FAA recommends the report contain an evaluation of all available
wildlife strike data for the airport. The National Wildlife Strike Database
(hup://wildlife.faa.gov) is available to the public and is the primary repository for
wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the U.S., although strike records may be available
from other sources such as the airport, airlines and engine manufacturers. FAA
2-8
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
recommends that when available, key strike data such as species, number struck, phase
of flight, altitude, time of day, time of year, and damage (if any) be summarized in the
report.
2.4.3 The analysis of strike data may include different methodologies that can provide a key
component for a comprehensive risk analysis and assessment. Beyond descriptive
statistics that summarize strike characteristics at an airport it is recommended that a
QAWB determine the number of overall strikes and damaging strikes per number of
operations.9 Another useful alternative for analysis may include determining the
amount of biomass struck equated to number of operations or strikes. These analyses
can provide a better understanding of risk and as a metric to evaluate the effectiveness
of an airport's wildlife program.
2.4.4 Recommended actions for reducing identified wildlife hazards may include detailed,
task -specific objectives or general measures. Pay attention to both proactive mitigation
such as habitat modification and exclusion techniques, and reactive measures that
involve harassment, dispersal and removal procedures. When applicable, airports are
encouraged to maintain Federal and State depredation permits. Guidance for acquiring
these permits is provided in FAA Certalert No. 13-01, Federal and State Depredation
Permit Assistance (January 30, 2013).
2.5 Minimum Number of Wildlife Surveys Required and Duration of Wildlife Hazard
Assessment.
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
Conducting an Assessment under § 139337(c)(2) requires the "identification of the
wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and
seasonal occurrences." The following protocols meet the requirements of §
139.337(c)(2). Alternative protocols may be proposed to the FAA and accepted if they
are comparable.
In most cases, conducting a 12 -month Assessment would meet this requirement so the
seasonal patterns of birds and other wildlife using the airport and surrounding area can
be documented. Most regions of the USA have dramatic seasonal differences in
numbers and species of migratory birds. Even for non -migratory wildlife, such as deer
and resident Canada geese, behavior and movement patterns can change significantly
throughout the seasons.
To adequately identify wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local
movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences, the QAWB may choose from several
objective standardized procedures. These standardized survey procedures ensure that
QAWBs consistently collect quality, representative data for hazardous wildlife species
in the airport environment. These procedures can then be repeated in future years for
comparison. Appendix D is an example of a Wildlife Survey Data Sheet.
9 Strikes per number of operations typically use a ratio of 10,000 or 100,000 operations.
2-9
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
2.5.4
Various wildlife species are active throughout all hours of the day and night. Inventory
and monitoring techniques should account for these movement dynamics. Daytime
surveys in the morning, midday, and evening should account for the daily patterns for
most birds, and nocturnal surveys or tracking indices should account for the daily
patterns of mammals.
2.5.4.1 Avian Surveys.
1. Minimum of twelve months data collection
2. Minimum of two data collection trips/month
3. Minimum of two survey samples/month for each of the survey points
during the diurnal periods of morning, midday and evening
4. Minimum of one sampling trip/quarter (four total sampling trips) for
off -site survey points to sample avian use of significant attractants out
to five miles, including general observations of sign (tracks, scat,
nests, etc.)1°
°
2.5.4.2 Mammalian Surveys.
1. Minimum of one sampling trip per quarter (four total over twelve
months), including general observations of sign such as tracks, scat,
etc.
2.5.4.3 Data from Other Sources.
1. Published data
2. University studies
3. Federal and State studies
4. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents
5. Radar studies
6. ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol,
monitoring logs
7. Other acceptable data sources
2.6 Basic Wildlife Survey Techniques for Wildlife Hazard Assessments.
Not all species are equally detectable. However, an Assessment should assess the
presence or absence of known or suspected hazardous species on or near the airport.
This is especially important for those species documented within the facility's strike
i° See AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 1-4, Protection of Approach,
Departure, and Circling Airspace. For all airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 statute miles between the
farthest edge of the airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could cause hazardous
wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace.
2-10
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
data. Hazardous avian species on or near airports are typically medium to large birds or
small birds that congregate in large flocks.
2.6.1 Avian Survey.
2.6.1.1
2.6.1.2
2.6.1.3
2.6.1.4
2.6.1.5
Any standardized survey may be used provided it is designed to
comprehensively identify wildlife on or near the airport. One objective
procedure for assessing bird populations, based on the North American
Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) methodology, is creating standardized survey
points about half a mile apart throughout the airport. The number of
observation points required to obtain adequate coverage of the sample area
will depend on the size, complexity, and physical features of the airport.
This is one example of a specific type of survey, however, and this
particular survey is not required.
Using a standardized survey methodology gives a baseline estimate of bird
species and numbers on the airport that can be compared with other
airports and the same airport in the future. Data on species and numbers
are collected from established observation points along a survey route. A
survey is defined as one visit to all observation points along a survey
route. A survey -day consists of one or more independent surveys
conducted during one day (i.e., morning, midday, evening).
Although forested areas can provide attractive perching or roosting
locations for hazardous avian species such as raptors and blackbirds,
woodland interior birds are usually of limited concern unless they frequent
open habitats which will be surveyed. In many cases, observation points
in forested areas are more important for the systematic or ancillary
identification of animals and less critical for identifying hazardous avian
species. Data relating to forested areas may also be collected by general
observations.
In addition, it is recommended that observation points also be considered
at selected areas within five miles of the airport's AOA if the attractant
could cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or
departure airspace. Examples of such attractants include, but are not
limited to large water impoundments, reservoirs, roosting sites, feedlots,
landfills, and agriculture such as sunflowers. The observation points at
these areas within the five miles do not need to be surveyed during every
data collection trip, but it is recommended that they be surveyed at least
quarterly.
One method used to conduct a survey would be to start at one end of the
survey route and stop the vehicle at each observation point. Record the
numbers and species of all birds heard at any distance and all birds
detected visually (with or without binoculars) within a quarter -mile radius
for 3-5 minutes. During the survey, significant birds (e.g., a flock of
2-11
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
geese; an endangered species) observed outside the quarter -mile radii
around observation points or outside the 3-5 minute periods (e.g., while
driving between stops) should be noted on a separate data form and
reported under general observations.
2.6.1.6
2.6.1.7
2.6.1.8
QAWBs may choose to develop a coding procedure to record birds
observed actually on or over a runway during the 3-5 minute observation
periods. By knowing the percent of total airport runway area covered by
the observation points, you can estimate the number of birds on or
crossing the runways per hour. For example, if ten observation points on
an airport survey route cover 25% of the runway area, and you recorded an
average of 1.5 birds per 3-5 minute observation on or over a runway, then
you would estimate that the airport averaged 120 birds on or crossing
runways per hour. Assigning each bird or bird flock observed during a
point count to a grid location can be useful in further refining spatial
distributions of birds on the airport.
For the area within a '/4 mi. radius of each avian observation point, make a
visual estimate of the proportion of each major habitat type [e.g.,
pavement, short (< 8 in.) grass, tall grass (>8 in.), water, shrub]. It may be
useful to analyze data for certain species by observation point to associate
that species with a certain habitat type or location on the airport. For
example, if waterfowl are consistently observed at one observation point
that has aquatic habitat, this should be stated in the analysis and
presentation of results.
Ultimately, the overall survey design (i.e., number and location of survey
points, frequency of survey counts per month, time between visits to
airport) and analysis of data will vary between airports and depend on the
individual airport's wishes. The focus of this AC is to provide minimum
standards for data collection and identify limited examples of acceptable
data collection techniques. Airports and QAWBs may choose to collect
additional data or use more rigorous data collection techniques.1 1
2.6.2 General Observations.
2.6.2.1
In addition to the standardized survey, it is important to make general
wildlife observations in areas outside the survey points. These
observations can provide important information on significant bird hazards
and/or zero tolerance species (e.g., Canada geese) and issues (e.g.,
endangered species) not fully covered by a standardized survey. Record
observations of wildlife use and movements around and within structures
" For further information on avian survey methodologies and analyses specific to airport environments can be found
in Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing Animal -Aircraft Collisions through Science -Based Management,
(De Vault et at, 2013).
2-12
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
and other unique areas of the airport environment not covered in the
standardized bird survey.
2.6.2.2 QAWBs may choose to perform additional analysis. Each airport is
different and may require special analysis to document bird activity. For
example, if a certain flocking species is present in large numbers, the
QAWB may want to present an analysis of mean flock size. If a large
number of birds migrate through the airport area over a two-week period,
a graphic presentation showing numbers at two-week intervals instead of
monthly or seasonal intervals might be appropriate. In addition, the
general bird observations made outside of the standardized survey should
be incorporated in the report. For example, tables might list the number of
goose flocks recorded on the airport by month, the mean number of gulls
seen per observation by month at a trash transfer facility within two miles
from the airport, or the mean number of pigeons seen in a hangar per
observation by season. The report may include descriptive summaries of
general observations about flight patterns of a certain species over the
airport or the habitat use by another species on the airport.
2.6.3 Data Recording.
Encoding data helps data analysis and database entry. Using bird species codes is
recommended. The American Ornithologists' Union (AOU) has established a standard
four letter alphabetic code for most bird species
(http://www.birdpop.org/alphacodes.htrn). Bird codes may need to be developed for
special situations. For example, in some situations a code for an unknown gull may be
"UNGU". Appendix D has an example of a form that QAWBs may use to record survey
data. This sample data form also has standardized codes for weather and time.
2.6.4 Data Analysis and Descriptive Statistics.
2.6.4.1
Appropriate data analysis and interpretation helps accurately assess
hazards and make management recommendations. Data also serves as a
baseline from which the effectiveness of management actions can be
measured.
2.6.4.2 For each survey, calculate the total and average number of birds observed
per species and the number of observation points recording the species
(frequency of sightings on the airport). The number of birds observed
gives a measure of species density on the airport. The frequency of
sightings at each location shows the distribution of the species on the
airport. Surveys can then be grouped to calculate mean number and
frequency of birds by species seen per survey by time of day, month, and
season.
2.6.4.3 If desired, statistical tests used to identify significant differences among
months or seasons can be conducted using analysis of variance (ANOVA)
and chi-square calculations.
2-13
8/2O/2O18 AC 15O/52OO-38
2.6.5 Seasonal Patterns.
Seasonal patterns or trends for species can be represented by graphing the mean number
of birds and mean frequency of sightings per month or season. The graph gives a visual
representation of obvious seasonal trends or patterns for each bird species observed in
all habitat types (i.e., the entire airport). In many cases it will be useful to simplify
presentations by combining species into groups/guilds (e.g., birds of prey, gulls,
waterfowl) in these summary graphs, presenting the detailed data for individual species
in a table or appendix.
2.6.6 Mammal Surveys.
2.6.6.1
2.6.6.2
The collection of data pertaining to mammal populations is often time
consuming and labor intensive. However, these data are an important and
necessary part of an Assessment and wildlife hazard analysis, and should
be collected to determine the presence or absence of large mammals and
predators. Whether to collect data for all or for selected mammal species
found on an airport depends on past and present wildlife hazards and the
initial observations of the QAWB. The QAWB should collect data related
to identified and suspected hazardous mammal species, including
ungulates (i.e., deer, elk), canids (i.e., coyotes, domestic dogs),
lagomorphs (i.e., rabbits, hares), and if necessary, rodents.
A number of survey designs developed for mammal species rely upon
trapping and marking animals (e.g., mark -recapture studies). Mark -
recapture studies are usually time consuming, labor intensive, and costly.
FAA recommends that the QAWB consider a combination of data
collection procedures that best identify a specific airport's hazardous
species. Systematic vehicle surveys, tracking indices, catch -per -unit -effort
survey, and spot mapping are commonly used techniques. Vehicle
surveys should provide adequate data on large mammals such as
ungulates, canids, and lagomorphs. Various tracking methods can be used
to assess relative abundance or to help identify mammals beyond the
scope of vehicle surveys which have varying degrees of success dependent
on method (e.g., spotlight, night vision or Forward -Looking Infra -Red
[FLIR]). Relative abundance data for small mammals are collected by
catch -per -unit -effort sampling (snap traps). Data related to miscellaneous
mammals can also be collected by spot mapping.
2.6.6.3 Vehicle Surveys.
2.6.6.3.1
Vehicle surveys at night using a spotlight, night vision equipment, or a
FLIR unit are performed along predetermined routes. The survey can be
one continuous route around the airport or several routes covering
different areas. FAA recommends that survey routes include areas near
runways, if feasible, and habitat types where ungulates, predators, or other
target species are suspected or known to occur. Satellite imagery, aerial
photographs, topographic maps, and maps that contain airport roadway
2-14
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
systems can help in establishing survey routes. Preliminary examinations
will be helpful to establish appropriate night time survey routes without
excessive obstructions that limit viewing. It is recommended that survey
routes be established carefully and remain constant throughout the study.
Coordination with Air Traffic Control is essential during spotlight surveys
to ensure no aircraft are in the AOA or traffic pattern in the line of
spotlight beams. Additionally, FAA recommends spotlight surveys ideally
be scheduled at times when aircraft operations are limited or not present.
Spotlights must not be pointed at aircraft, other vehicles, or the
airport tower. It is recommended that the survey be conducted at least
quarterly for the duration of the study.
2.6.6.3.2
2.6.6.4
2.6.6.4.1
2.6.6.4.2
2.6.6.5
Observations may be performed starting one half hour after sunset and
ending after two to three hours, or delayed, dependent on times of limited
scheduled aircraft operations. In general, the survey route(s) should be
run once per night, but multiple runs may be made if time permits. All
mammals and birds observed should be recorded by species and location.
It is recommended that the start and end time of each survey and total
distance driven be recorded so that numbers seen per hour and distance
can be calculated. FAA recommends that wildlife surveys be conducted in
most types of weather according to schedule, but it may sometimes be
necessary to postpone survey periods during severe weather. FAA further
recommends that surveys not be conducted in excessive wind or heavy
rain as mammal activity may be significantly affected by weather.
Catch -Per -Unit -Effort (small mammals).
Small mammal populations may be measured if birds of prey or
mammalian predators occur in the strike record or if direct observations or
alternative data suggest high predator densities. The number of transects
and traps will depend on the size of the habitat being surveyed. Traps are
generally set in daylight hours and checked within 24 hours. FAA
recommends that transects be run for two to four consecutive nights in
spring and again in autumn.
When checking traps, it is recommended that the following data be
collected for each trap: status of trap (sprung or unsprung) and species, if
any, captured. Trapping results are recorded, by species, as the number of
animals caught per 100 adjusted trap nights. Small mammal trapping is
not required. It is optional depending on the hazardous wildlife present at
t e airport.
Spot Mapping.
Spot mapping consists of plotting on a grid map the location, date, and
time of mammal observations and provides a general overview of mammal
activity on the airport. Often airport operations officers, who are required
to perform runway sweeps, can assist in collection of this data, as can
2-15
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
pilots or other airport personnel. Additionally, mammal observations
made while performing designated bird and mammal surveys can be
mapped and used to augment spot observations. Spot mapping is not
required. However, any general observations of mammals and/or their
sign should be reported and described in the Assessment report.
2.7 Basic Habitat Surveys for Wildlife Hazard Assessments.
2.7.1
2.7.2
2.7.3
Habitat evaluation is an essential part of an Assessment and is required under §
139.337(c)(3). Many natural and artificial habitats are attractive to wildlife, and
evaluation of these should provide the QAWB with information about the quantity,
quality, and seasonal nature of their use. Wildlife exploit these habitats for food, water
or cover, which may vary seasonally and/or throughout an animal's life cycle.
Although they may be considered either a direct or indirect attractant,12 it remains
essential for safe air traffic operations to fully understand their influence.
Land -use practices that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife populations on or near
airports, specifically those listed in AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants
On or Near Airports, Section 2, can significantly increase the potential for wildlife
strikes. FAA criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife onto,
into, or across the airport's approach or departure airspace or AOA.
The FAA recommends the minimum separation criteria defined in AC 150/5200-33
Section 1 for land -use practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports.
This separation criterion provides predetermined boundaries of concern around airports
to be considered while conducting comprehensive, detailed studies and evaluations of
wildlife populations and attractants.
2.7.3.1
Pre-existing Habitat Data.
Pre-existing habitat inventory and geospatial information can prove useful
regarding soils, vegetative species, topography, geography, habitat type,
location and size. This data may be found in various locations or with
various agencies such as:
1. Airport Layout Plan
2. Airport Master Plan
3. Airport Environmental Assessment
4. Airport Environmental Impact Statement
5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
12 Direct attractants (i.e., favorable vegetation for foraging) or indirect attractants (e.g., brushy vegetation may result
in increased rodent populations which attracts hazardous raptors) can create equally hazardous environment for safe
air operations.
2-16
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
6. U.S. Geological Survey
7. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
8. USDA — Natural Resources Conservation Service
9. State Departments of Natural Resources
10. State Departments of Transportation
2.7.3.2
Descriptive Habitat Data.
The Assessment should include a general description of the study area and
describe natural and artificial attractants both on -site and off -site within
the separation criteria recommended in AC 150/5200-33 Section 1.
2.7.3.2.1 Natural Habitat Data.'3
This may include characteristics such as geographic location, topography,
soils, climate, vegetation, agriculture, and wetlands/water features, such as
drainages, ponds, lakes, rivers, and water impoundments.
2.7.3.2.2 Artificial Environment Data.14
This may include items such as airport buildings, jet bridges, towers,
antennas, runways, taxiways, ramp, hangars, waste disposal operations
and waste containers.
2.7.3.3 Food.
2.7.3.3.1
2.7.3.3.2
Naturally occurring wildlife foods such as insect and other invertebrate
populations should be noted with descriptions, time of year, weather
conditions, and environmental factors such as soil type, vegetative cover,
and drainage conditions. in addition, FAA recommends that management
practices that enhance the production of these natural foods be
documented. An evaluation of small mammal populations as a food
source for predators can be addressed in the sampling strategy discussed
previously.
Plant seeds, fruits, and berries are other food attractants on airports for
birds and mammals. Seasonal wildlife hazards may develop when seeds
or fruits are abundant. Documentation of these food sources is an
important component of the habitat analysis.
2.7.3.3.3 Review environments within five miles from the airport's AOA and record
food sources that attract wildlife. Agricultural fields, grain elevators, food
13 Natural habitat is defined for this purpose as biotic habitats including vegetation (e.g., grass, forest, shrub scrub,
wetland, agriculture, or desert) and water features (e.g., ponds, rivers, lakes, marine, retention/detention ponds, or
drainages).
14 Artificial environment is defined for this purpose as man-made features (e.g., buildings, structures, towers,
paved/hard surfaces, waste disposal operations, or waste containers).
2-17
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
product industries, fast food restaurants, livestock operations, wildlife
refuges and sanctuaries, and waste handling facilities may attract
significant numbers of birds and/or mammals, increasing the hazard to
human safety and aircraft. It is recommended that a Wildlife Hazard
Assessment contain information relative to identified notable sites such as
the names and locations, and a description of the attractant and the
potential hazard.
2.7.3.4 Vegetation.
Vegetation and cover requirements vary by species and time of year.
Relationships between wildlife species and cover types provide
information necessary to develop appropriate wildlife management
strategies. In reviewing vegetative areas on an airport, it is important to
record observations of species, management practices, seasonal growth,
density, percent cover, and any noted wildlife associations. Use of
specific areas by animals in the airport environment may assist the
observer in identifying vegetative attractants.
2.7.3.5 Water.
Water sources are wildlife attractants, especially fresh water sources in
coastal areas. Reservoirs, streams, ponds, drainage basins, seep areas, and
ephemeral water sources should be identified and mapped. Gulls,
waterfowl, shorebirds, and marsh birds may be attracted to the airport
because of abundant food or drinking and resting sites available in existing
water resources.
2.7.3.6 Structures.
2.7.3.6.1
2.7.3.6.2
Buildings, areas adjacent to buildings, and equipment on airports are
readily used by some wildlife species, such as European starlings, pigeons,
gulls, sparrows, crows, raptors, mice, rats, skunks, and woodchucks.
Wildlife use of structures can present threats to human safety and aircraft,
and may cause unsanitary working conditions or damage to structures.
The reasons for use of most structural features by wildlife are usually
easily determined, while others are less obvious. For example, feral
pigeons may loaf on just one ledge of a particular building because it
provides shelter from the wind or protection from predators. The QAWB
should determine what features are attractive to problem species, and why.
A strategy can then be developed to reduce or eliminate the problem.
2.7.3.7 Soil.
2.7.3.7.1
The type(s) and fertility of soils present on an airport is a general indicator
of biological productivity. Habitat quality is directly related to soil
fertility and other soil conditions. The nutritive value, quantity, and
attractiveness of plant and animal food organisms varies widely with soil
2-18
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
types and conditions. For example, sandy, well -drained soils that dry
quickly after rainfall generally produce less biomass and are less likely to
harbor an abundant population of earthworms and other invertebrates.
2.7.3.7.2
It is recommended that identification and documentation of soil types and
conditions on the airport and vicinity be an integral part of an overall
assessment or study. In most states, information on soil types and
conditions can be acquired from soil survey publications available from
the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) or the
Cooperative Extension Service. These publications contain soil maps and
descriptions, formations, morphology and soil classifications. However,
on airports where large scale soil disturbance, such as grading, leveling,
and filling, have been conducted, soil maps may be of limited value.
2.7.3.8 Spot Mapping.
Because attractants may vary seasonally and following precipitation, spot
mapping the location and date of features such as fruit and seed bearing
vegetation, ephemeral pools and temporary ponding of water or puddles
throughout the AOA will help identify food sources, drainage problems
and grade deficiencies.
2.8 Evaluation of Airport and Aircraft Operations.
2.8.1 The assessment of airport and aircraft operational procedures is an essential part of an
Assessment. Hazardous wildlife only present a risk to aviation if aircraft and wildlife
occupy the airspace or movement areas at the same time and location. Persons
conducting Assessments should gather general observation data and other information
related to airport and aircraft operations regarding wildlife hazards. FAA recommends
that QAWBs monitor NOTAMs, ATIS advisories, and published Airport/Facilities
Directory information to ensure that specific information and not blanket advisories are
issued. It is recommended that QAWBs assess ATC's involvement in identifying
potential hazards or hazards relayed by pilots or airport operations personnel. FAA
recommends that the Assessment also include a determination that wildlife dispersal is
coordinated with ATC to insure hazards are not inadvertently increased by dispersing
wildlife into the path of aircraft movements. ATC permits wildlife control teams access
to movement areas of the airfield and communicates with them during the
implementation of mitigation measures to ensure dispersal paths are observed and de -
conflicted with aircraft movements.
2.8.2 QAWBs may also query users of the airport for their inputs on wildlife observed on and
around the airport. For example, pilots may be interviewed about their experience in
the local area as they have a perspective not available to ground -based personnel.
Congregations of towering raptors or gulls over off -airport facilities such as landfills
and food -processing plants are often detected this way as are major roost sites of
blackbirds, starlings, vultures, or crows. Fixed -base operators (FBOs) may also be
visited and personnel interviewed for their experience with hazardous wildlife in the
2-19
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
local area. Pilots, especially those operating non-commercial or private aircraft, must
be aware that they have the discretion to delay takeoffs or departures, ask for wildlife
dispersal action, or requests alternate runways, departure or approach paths to avoid
identified hazards.
2.8.3
Airline and private maintenance personnel may be interviewed for their perspective on
local hazardous wildlife and their reporting procedures when strikes are detected on
post -or pre-flight inspections of aircraft.
2.8.4 Other airport users may be interviewed and included in the Assessment process.
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) and Airport Security Personnel are always
present on airports during operations and have a unique view of the airfield. It is
recommended that they also be notified should major dispersal operations be conducted,
such as with pyrotechnics, where the slight chance for grass fires or security concerns
are present.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
CHAPTER 3. PROTOCOL FOR THE PREPARATION OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD
MANAGEMENT PLAN (PLAN)
3.1 Introduction.
3.1.1
3.1.2
When complete, the Assessment is submitted by the airport to the FAA for review and
approval. The FAA will also use it to determine if the airport must prepare and
implement a Plan. In reaching this decision, the FAA considers the Assessment, the
aeronautical activity at the airport, the views of the certificate holder and airport users,
and any other pertinent information. See § 139.337(d)(1)-(6).
The goal of an airport's Plan is to minimize the risk to aviation safety, airport structures
or equipment, or human health posed by populations of hazardous wildlife on and
around the airport. The Plan accomplishes this through the identification of hazardous
wildlife and their attractants, suitable proactive and reactive management techniques,
necessary resources and supplies to successfully implement a wildlife hazard
management program and personnel responsibilities and training requirements. The
Plan includes appropriate federal, state and possible local wildlife control permits and
describes a schedule and methodology to evaluate and update the Plan. If the FAA
determines that a Plan is needed to alleviate or eliminate wildlife hazards to air carrier
operations under § 139.337(e), the FAA will notify the airport to develop a Plan using
the Assessment as a basis. The FAA recommends that airports developing an initial
Plan submit the document to the FAA regional office within six months of this
notification, and that airports updating an existing Plan submit the modified document
to the FAA regional office within 60 days of notification.
3.2 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Regulatory Requirements and Methodology.
Section 139.337(0 provides specific guidance as to what must be addressed in a Plan.
A checklist is provided for clarification in Appendix E.
3.2.1
14 CFR 139.337(0(1). "A list of the individuals having authority and responsibility for
implementing each aspect of the plan."
This list assigns or delegates specific responsibilities for various sections of the Plan to
airport departments and other interested federal, state or local agencies, such as:
1. Airport Director
2. Operations Department
3. Maintenance Department
4. Security Department
5. Planning Department
6. Finance Department
7. Wildlife Coordinator
8. Wildlife Hazards Working Group
3-21
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
9. Air Traffic Control
10. Airlines
11. Pilots
12. Fixed -base operators
13. Air -side tenants
14. Land -side tenants
15. State wildlife agency
16. Local law enforcement authorities
17. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
3.2.2 14 CFR 139.337(0(2). "A list prioritizing the following actions identified in the
wildlife hazard assessment and target dates for their initiation and completion."
3.2.2.1
3.2.2.2
The Plan should provide a prioritized list of problem wildlife populations
and wildlife attractants (food, cover, and water) identified in the
Assessment, proposed mitigation actions, and target starting and
completion dates. A list of completed wildlife population management
projects and habitat modification projects designed to reduce the wildlife
strike potential can be included to provide a history of work already
accomplished. It is helpful to group attractants by areas and ownership.
AIRPORT
PROPERTY
NON
-AIRPORT
PROPERTY
Air Operations
Area (AOA)
Within
2 miles
of AOA
Within
2 miles
of AOA
Within
5 miles
of AOA
Airport
structures
wildlife mitigation techniques at commercial airports involve integrated
and systematic methodologies that typically progress (based on necessity)
from proactive measures to reactive measures. The reduction of wildlife
threats at an airport is often the unintended or secondary consequence of
ongoing habitat management such as mowing, tree removal, drainage
reparations, out -of -grade surface restoration and the establishment or
maintenance of perimeter fencing.
3.2.2.3 14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(i). "Wildlife population management."
3.2.2.3.1
This section includes species -specific population management plans (e.g.,
deer, gulls, geese, and coyotes). The progression of techniques employed
to mitigate hazardous species include:
1. Habitat Management (habitat modification and resource protection)
2. Exclusion (fencing, netting, anti -perch/ nesting devices)
3-22
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
3. Repellents (chemical, audio, visual)
4. Harassment (pyrotechnics, falconry, dogs, radio -controlled
5. models, etc.)
6. Capture (chemical, live traps, lethal traps)
7. Toxicants (oral and contact); Fumigants
8. Shooting
3.2.2.3.2
When applicable, it is recommended that airports identify resident or
seasonal "zero -tolerance" hazardous species based on historical strike
records or recognized threat posed by such species at the facility. It is
recommended that the ranking of hazard level for birds and terrestrial
mammals in Appendix A also be considered when an airport determines
zero -tolerance species and subsequent management protocols. The FAA
encourages airports to consider any hazardous species of significant mass,
flocking or flight behavior that were not included in the table because of
low strike frequency. Brown and white pelicans, black vultures, great
egrets and other waders as well as several species of waterfowl, raptors,
gulls, and shorebirds can represent a significant hazard to aircraft although
not found in Appendix A. Ungulates (e.g., deer or elk), canids (e.g.,
coyotes or domestic dogs) and certain avian species (e.g., Canada geese or
snow geese) are universal candidates for zero -tolerance management
protocols. Flocking birds such as European starlings and gulls pose a
significant and increasing hazard to aircraft as flock size increases.
Therefore, an airport may choose to require zero -tolerance management
protocol for these (or similar) species only after an unacceptable flock size
has been reached. Determination of action based on flock size is often
difficult and requires experienced consideration of variables such as
hazard relative to species, airport operation type, and current aircraft
activity.
3.2.2.4 14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(ii). "Habitat modification."
This section addresses natural and artificial habitats that may provide a
food, water or cover source to hazardous species to reduce their
attractiveness. Advisory Circular 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife
Attractants On or Near the Airports, provides in-depth discussion on
acceptable/unacceptable habitats and land -use practices on and near
airports. Management of the vegetative/prey food items for hazardous
species is often season or weather related and may include rodent control,
garbage storage, landscaping, and management of standing water. This
section should clearly identify the existing management and maintenance
techniques used, as background information. Only new techniques (or
changes to existing management and maintenance operations) should be
included in recommended actions.
1. Vegetative/prey food items for hazardous species
3-23
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
a. Prey items (rodents, earthworms, insects)
b. Vegetative food items (grain/seeds, fruit, desirable grasses)
c. Garbage (handling, storage)
d. Handouts (feeding wildlife)
2. Vegetation management may include:
a. AOA vegetation
b. Drainage ditch vegetation
c. Landscaping
d. Agriculture
3. Water management may include:
a. Permanent Water
b. Wetlands
c. Canals / ditches / streams
d. Holding ponds
e. Sewage (glycol) treatment ponds
f. Ephemeral water
g. Runways, taxiways, aprons
h. Other wet areas
4. Airport buildings may include:
a. Airfield structures
b. Abandoned structures
c. Terminal
d. Airport construction
e. Leased facilities
3.2.2.5
14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(iii). "Land use changes."
When feasible, the FAA recommends that off -site attractants within the
defined separation criteria such as agricultural activities, waste handling
facilities that are not fully enclosed, surface mining, urban development,
wildlife refuges and storm water management systems be eliminated or
modified to reduce the attractiveness to wildlife. Advisory Circular
150/5200-33 includes an in-depth discussion on acceptable and
unacceptable land use practices on and near airports.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
3.2.3 14 CFR 139.337(0(3). "Requirements for and, where applicable, copies of locals State,
and Federal wildlife control permits."
3.2.3.1
Certain species of wildlife are protected at all levels of government —
local, state, and federal. This section addresses the specific species
involved and their legal status in this section. It also describes the wildlife
management permitting requirements and procedures for all levels of
government having jurisdiction.
1. Federal (50 CFR parts 1-199)
2. State (Fish and Game Code, or its equivalent)
3. City and County ordinances
4. If pesticides are to be used, the following are also needed:
a. Pesticide use regulations and licensing requirements
b. Federal regulations and licensing: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
c. State regulations and licensing (varies by State)
3.2.3.2 For the purpose of the Plan, summaries are generally adequate. It is not
necessary to quote federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
3.2.4 14 CFR 139.337(0(4). "Identification of resources that the certificate holder will
provide to implement the plan."
This section provides information identifying what resources the airport will supply in
terms of personnel, time, equipment (e.g., radios, vehicles, guns, traps, or propane
cannons), supplies (e.g., pyrotechnics), pesticides (restricted and non -restricted use) and
application equipment, and supply sources for equipment and supplies.
3.2.5 14 CFR 139.337C0(5). "Procedures to be followed during air carrier operations that at a
minimum includes "
3.2.5.1
14 CFR 139.337(0(5)(1). "Designation of personnel responsible for
implementing the procedures."
This section complements the list of individuals required under
§ 139.337(0(1) and describes the personnel and duties for successful
mitigation of wildlife hazards in the airport environment.
1. Wildlife Control Personnel
2. Wildlife Coordinator
3. Operations Dept.
4. Maintenance Dept.
5. Security Dept.
6. Air Traffic Control
3-25
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
7. Pilots
8. Airlines
9. Fixed -base Operators
10. Airside/landside tenants
3.2.5.2
14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(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."
This section provides a description of known or anticipated locations that
should be monitored for successful mitigation of wildlife hazards in the
airport environment.
1. Runway, taxiway
2. AOA
3. Perimeter fence
4. Other areas attractive to wildlife
3.2.5.3 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(iii). "Wildlife hazard control measures."
This section complements the list of prioritized actions required under
§ 139.337(f)(2)(i) and details current or anticipated techniques that may be
implemented for successful mitigation of wildlife hazards in the airport
environment. It should clearly identify and explain how current
techniques already in use at the airport help alleviate some of the hazards,
and how anticipated techniques may complement those already in use.
Techniques discussed in this section typically represent an integrated
approach and include exclusion, repellent, harassment, capture, lethal
control or even relocation measures in specific instances. In addition,
operational control measures (such as scheduling of flights, air traffic
control advisories, Pilot Reports (PIREPS), UNICOM advisories,
avoidance procedures, delayed takeoffs and approaches and use of
alternate runways or traffic direction) must be considered.
3.2.5.4
14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(iv). "Ways to communicate effectively between
personnel conducting wildlife control or observing wildlife hazards
and the air traffic control tower."
This section provides a description of regulated and site -specific protocols
for the communication and/or notification of wildlife control activities,
identified and current wildlife hazards on or near the airport environment
or imminent wildlife threats to aircraft operations on or near the airport.
Protocols may include training in airport communication and the
development of notification procedures for airport personnel and Air
Traffic Control when wildlife control procedures are implemented or in
response to immediate wildlife threats to safe air operations to ensure
dispersal activities do not inadvertently increase wildlife hazards.
3-26
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
Communication and/or notification procedures within the Plan should
recognize pilot reports, ATC advisories and NOTAMS and establish
responsibilities for reporting wildlife strikes. This section may also
provide equipment requirements that include radios, cellular phones, and
lights and an official call list with numbers.
3.2.6
14 CFR 1393370(6). "Procedures to review and evaluate the wildlife hazard
management plan every 12 consecutive months or following an event described in
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section, including:"
At a minimum, the Plan must be fully reviewed once annually. This review must be
documented and may be accomplished as a routinely scheduled event or following a
triggering incident as defined in § 139.337(b)(1)-(3). The airport should maintain
documentation of all triggering incidents and corresponding reviews of the Plan to
ensure its effectiveness mitigating the hazardous species involved in the triggering
incident. It is often helpful for the airport manager to appoint a Wildlife Hazards
Working Group to periodically review the Plan and the Plan's implementation to
recommend further refinements or modifications. Appendix F is an example of a Plan
review form.
3.2.6.1
14 CFR 139.337(f}(6)(i). "The plans effectiveness in dealing with
known wildlife hazards on and in the airport's vicinity and:"
Input should be provided from all airport departments, Air Traffic Control,
and the QAWB as to the effectiveness of the Plan. Good records are
necessary to properly evaluate the effectiveness of a program.
3.2.6.2 14 CFR 139.337(f)(6)(ii). "Aspects of the wildlife hazards described in
the wildlife hazard assessment that should be reevaluated."
3.2.6.2.1
3.2.6.2.2
The reevaluation, for example, should consider:
1. Number of times wildlife is seen on the AOA
2. Requests for wildlife dispersal from air traffic control, pilots, or others
3. Increased number of strikes
Section 139.337t0(6) cannot be effectively implemented or evaluated
without documentation of wildlife strikes. The effectiveness of a Plan to
reduce wildlife hazards both on and near an airport and the reevaluation of
all facets of damaging/nondamaging strikes from year to year require
accurate and consistent reporting. Therefore, every Plan should include a
commitment to document all wildlife strikes that occur within the
separation distances described in sections 1-2 and 1-3 of Advisory
Circular 150/5200-33 to better identify, understand and reduce threats to
safe aviation.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
3.2.7
14 CFR 139.3370(7) "A training program conducted by a 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
paragraph (d) of this section."
Initial and recurrent training conducted by a QAWB required under § 139.303 and
described in AC 150/5200-36 should equip personnel actively involved in an airport's
wildlife hazard management program with sufficient resources needed to comply with
the requirements in the Airport Certification Manual and the requirements of § 139.337.
Personnel identified in § 139.337()(5)(i) should be considered for inclusion within this
recurrent training. Pesticide user training and certification requires its own regulated
training and certification schedule and should be monitored.
3.3 Pertinent Laws and Regulations.
Under § 139.337(e), the FAA may direct an airport operator to develop a Plan or to
update an existing Plan. The FAA's action in approving a Wildlife Hazard
Management Plan submitted by an airport operator under part 139 is considered a
Federal action, as defined in the Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions, and Order 1050.1 F,
Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. However, that Order also stipulates
that "A grant to fund the preparation of a WHMP or the approval of that plan normally
qualifies for categorical exclusion...". The FAA may also have to delineate which
specific measures within the plan may be implemented without further review, versus
other measures that may require further interagency coordination and permitting. Such
delineation would normally involve measures that have independent utility from one
another. Below are some of the more common laws that may require coordination
and/or consultation. Note that violations of some of these laws can result in significant
fines and/or imprisonment, even for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for
additional offenses, and in some cases violations will be classified as felony criminal
offenses.
3.3.1 The Endangered Species Act (Federal and similar State laws).
3.3.1.1
This paragraph generally outlines procedures for complying with Section
7 of the ESA, the Magnuson -Stevens Act, and state laws protecting
wildlife. It also describes procedures for responding to requests by state
wildlife agencies to facilitate and encourage habitats for State -listed
threatened and endangered species or species of special concern that may
occur on airports and pose a threat to aviation safety. It is the FAA's
responsibility as the action agency to determine whether the proposed Plan
may affect federally protected species or habitat for such species on or
near the airport. To make this determination, the FAA should first consult
the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC) website
(https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/). This webpage will help FAA determine if a
particular measure within a Plan may affect any federally listed species or
critical habitat. If the FAA cannot determine the presence of federally
listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat
3-28
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
occurring on or near the airport, the FAA representative may contact the
local USFWS Ecological Services Field Office for additional assistance.
In cases of doubt, contact APP -400 and the FAA Environmental
Protection Specialists for further guidance about whether to seek
assistance from the USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
or relevant state and local wildlife agencies.
3.3.1.2
3.3.1.3
3.3.1.4
However, the airport's AOA is an artificial environment that has been
created and maintained for aircraft operations. Because an AOA can be
markedly different from the surrounding native landscapes, it may attract
wildlife species that do not normally occur, or that occur only in low
numbers in the area. Some of the grassland species attracted to an
airport's AOA are at the edge of their natural ranges, but are attracted to
habitat features found in the airport environment. Also, some wildlife
species may occur on the airport in higher numbers than occur naturally in
the region because the airport offers habitat features the species prefer.
Some of these wildlife species may be Federal or State -listed threatened
and endangered species or have been designated by State resource
agencies as species of special concern.
Many agencies have requested that airport operators facilitate and
encourage habitat on airports for state -listed threatened and endangered
species or species of special concern. State -Listed threatened and
endangered species and species of special interest are not afforded the
level of protection of federally listed species. These species, or the habitat
needed to support them should not be allowed on airport property if direct
or associated hazards are caused by their promotion in the airfield
environment. Managing the on -airport environment to facilitate or
encourage the presence of hazardous wildlife species can create conditions
that are incompatible with, or pose a threat to, aviation safety.
Airport sponsors should reevaluate existing and evaluate future
agreements with Federal, State, or local wildlife agencies where the terms
of the agreements are or may be contrary to federal obligations concerning
hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports and aviation safety.
Whenever practicable, wetland mitigation for Federal or State -listed
threatened and endangered species or species of special concern should be
sited off -airport and outside separation distances recommended in AC
150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports,
Section 1.
3.3.1.4.1 Procedures for Federal Threatened and Endangered Species on Airports.
1. The ESA directs all Federal agencies to work to conserve endangered
and threatened species, and to use their authorities to further the
purposes of the Act. Section 7 of the Act, called "Interagency
Cooperation," is the mechanism by which Federal agencies ensure the
actions they take, including those they fund or authorize, do not
3-29
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species. Section 7 of
the ESA, as amended, sets forth requirements for consultation that a
federal agency shall use if that agency believes a listed species or
critical habitat for such a species may be in the area affected by the
project. If the FAA determines that an action "may affect" a
threatened or endangered species, then Section 7(a)(2) requires the
FAA to consult with the USFWS or the NMFS, as appropriate, to
ensure that any action the agency authorizes, funds, or carries out is
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any Federally listed
endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. (The effects on fish, wildlife, and
plants include the destruction or alteration of habitat and the
disturbance or elimination of fish, wildlife, or plant populations). If the
Secretary of the Interior has developed a recovery plan for an affected
species pursuant to section 4(f) of the ESA, that plan should be
reviewed by FAA environmental protection specialists to ensure that
assessments of impacts from FAA actions consider the management
actions and criteria for measuring recovery identified in the plan. If a
species has been proposed for Federal listing as threatened or
endangered, or a critical habitat has been proposed, section 7(a)(4)
states that each agency shall confer with the Services. Refer to the
FWS and NMFS "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook:
Procedures for Conducting Consultation and Conference Activities
Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, " March 1998.
2. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits a Federal agency from taking, without
an incidental take permit, any listed species. Where a conservation
plan has been developed pursuant to a permit under ESA section 10
(incidental take permit), the FAA environmental protection specialists
should ensure that the impact analysis for the affected species
contained in the NEPA document is consistent with the predicted
impacts described in the conservation plan. Under the Magnuson -
Stevens Act, Federal agencies must consult with the NMFS with
regard to any action authorized, funded, or undertaken that may
adversely affect any essential fish habitat identified under the Act. The
consultation procedures are generally similar to ESA consultation
requirements.
a. No Consultation Required. If there are no federally listed or
proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat
occurring on or near the airport and the FAA has determined there
is no effect to a listed species, no further action is required to fulfill
the ESA.
b. Consultation May Be Required. If federally listed or proposed
species or designated or proposed critical habitat occur on or near
the airport, the following additional actions may need to be taken.
3-30
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
If the FAA determines that a particular measure proposed
within the Plan may affect Federally listed or proposed
species or designated or proposed critical habitat, then the
FAA Regional Coordinator must contact the local USFWS
Ecological Services Field Office/and or the NMFS Office
responsible for section 7 consultations and coordinate to
determine next steps. Depending on the nature of the
effects, the FAA may informally or formally consult with
the Services. Formal consultation occurs when the Federal
agency makes a determination of "may affect, likely to
adversely affect" a species. Informal consultation occurs if
a Federal agency determines, and the service supports, a
determination of "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect."
1. The airport operator may need to prepare a Biological
Assessment (50 CFR 402.13) assessing the effects of
the particular measure in the Plan on the federally listed
or proposed species or designated or proposed critical
habitat. The airport operator would submit the
Biological Assessment to the FAA along with the draft
Plan. Under the ESA, it is FAA's obligation to consult
with the USFWS or NMFS. Therefore, the FAA must
review the Biological Assessment and determine if it is
accurate and adequate for use in Section 7 consultation
with the appropriate Service.
11. FAA must complete the Section 7 consultation before the
FAA tells the airport sponsor they may implement the
particular measure(s) and the sponsor implements any
actions in the Plan that may affect federally listed or
proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat.
3.3.1.4.2
Procedures for State Listed Species and Species of Special Concern on
Airports.
If State -listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical
habitat occur on or near the airport, the airport operator shall take this
information into consideration when developing its Plan. Because each
State maintains requirements specific to its natural resources, it is
recommended the airport operator: (1) coordinate with the State
Department of Natural Resources to determine whether a Biological
Assessment or monitoring program is required; (2) determine whether
special permits are required to allow routine maintenance operations,
harassment or other management alternatives involving the species.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
3.3.2 The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.G. 668-668c), is another law that
must be considered when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed Plan. This law
was enacted in 1940, and amended several times since then, prohibits anyone, without a
permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from "taking" bald eagles, including their
parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal penalties for persons who "take,
possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or
import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or
dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof" The Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot
at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." For purposes of these
guidelines, "disturb" means: "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that
causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury
to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal
breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially
interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior." In addition to
immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from human -induced
alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not
present, if, upon the eagle's return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree
that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and
causes injury, death or nest abandonment.
3.3.2.1 50 CFR § 22.26.
The regulation set forth in 50 CFR § 22.26 provides for issuance of
permits to take bald eagles and golden eagles where the taking is
associated with but not the purpose of the activity and cannot practicably
be avoided. Most take authorized under this section will be in the form of
disturbance; however, permits may authorize non -purposeful take that
may result in mortality.
3.3.2.2 50 CFR § 22.27.
The regulation at 50 CFR § 22.27 establishes permits for removing eagle
nests where: (1) necessary to alleviate a safety emergency to people or
eagles; (2) necessary to ensure public health and safety; (3) the nest
prevents the use of a human -engineered structure; or (4) the activity or
mitigation for the activity will provide a net benefit to eagles. Only
inactive nests may be taken, except in the case of safety emergencies.
Inactive nests are defined by the continuous absence of any adult, egg, or
dependent young at the nest for at least 10 consecutive days leading up to
the time of take.
3.3.3 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA).
3.3.3.1
The MBTA (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712) implements the convention for the
protection of migratory birds between the United States and Great Britain
(acting on behalf of Canada). The statute makes it unlawful without a
waiver to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill or sell birds listed therein
3-32
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
("migratory birds"). The statute does not discriminate between live or
dead birds and also grants full protection to any bird parts including
feathers, eggs and nests.
3.3.3.2
The USFWS issues permits for otherwise prohibited activities under the
MBTA. These include permits for taxidermy, falconry, propagation,
scientific and educational use, and depredation 15, an example of the latter
being the killing of geese near an airport, where they pose a danger to
aircraft.
3.3.4 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review.
3.3.4.1
3.3.4.2
The FAA's approval of a Plan normally falls within the scope of a
categorical exclusion under NEPA, as implemented by FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures (July 16,
2015), paragraph 5-6.2.e, and FAA Order 5050.4B, National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport
Projects (April 28, 2006), paragraph 209b. To determine whether
approval of the Plan qualifies for categorical exclusion, the FAA must
determine whether the measures in the Plan involve extraordinary
circumstances (see FAA Order 1050.1 F, paragraphs 5-2 a and b, and FAA
Order 5050.4B, paragraph 209b). Extraordinary circumstances include
significant impacts on federally protected species, species of state concern,
or habitat for such species.
1. The FAA may categorically exclude approval of the Plan itself under
FAA Order 1050.1F.
2. In addition, however, the specific measures within the Plan must be
examined for extraordinary circumstances.
3. If specific measures within the Plan involve extraordinary
circumstances, the FAA may still approve the Plan as a whole, but
must clearly delineate which specific measures may be implemented
without further coordination or permitting from those that may need
additional review.
Once a draft Plan is approved, the Plan is returned to the airport sponsor
for inclusion in the airport's Airport Certification Manual and is
enforceable. Appendix G is a template for a Letter of Approval. Appendix
H is a template for a Letter of Mixed Approval.
15 For further information, see CertAlert No. 13-01, Federal and State Depredation Permit Assistance (01/30/2013).
This CertAlert assists airport operators with the acquisition of Federal or State depredation permits.
3-33
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
CHAPTER 4. PROTOCOL FOR CONTINUAL MONITORING
4.1 Introduction.
4.1.1
4.1.2
When an airport completes an Assessment and Plan, it should consider implementing a
continual monitoring program for wildlife hazards. A continual monitoring program is
a best management practice and not a requirement. Recurrent wildlife monitoring would
be outlined in the Plan. The goal of systematic, long-term wildlife hazard monitoring in
an airport environment is to identify changes to wildlife composition, numbers,
attractants, travel corridors and the general airport environment in a timely manner that
can affect the presence or behavior of wildlife. Continual monitoring enhances safety
because it allows the airport operator to regularly determine trends in wildlife, and
target mitigation practices to reduce the possibility of strikes. The airport can use this
information to quickly and efficiently implement mitigation techniques and evaluate the
efficacy of its mitigation program. Ultimately, the frequent hazard identification and
adaptable mitigation will reduce the likelihood of wildlife strikes. Additionally,
continual monitoring should decrease the time, effort, personnel hours, and money spent
on mitigation because hazards will be identified before they pose a high risk.
In contrast to an assessment or inventory of wildlife hazards in an airport environment,
a monitoring program over time assesses changes and trends of the resources. It is
recommended that consideration be given to data points and techniques tested and
incorporated into an airport's Assessment for use in its long term monitoring protocol.
Ultimately, the techniques used for long term monitoring may change over time
dependent on the airports goals or management objectives, personnel changes,
availability of improved methodologies or equipment, and recommendations based on
systematic evaluation of the monitoring program.
4.2 Continual Monitoring Protocol.
It is recommended that the monitoring consist of monthly wildlife surveys and
identification of significant changes to natural/ artificial habitats and other attractants.
4.2.1 Avian Surveys.
1. Twelve months data collection
2. Minimum one survey per month for each of the survey points during the diurnal
periods of morning, midday and evening; unless the Assessment, strike records or
monitoring data justifies the elimination of a survey time period (e.g., elimination of
midday surveys).
4.202 Mammalian Surveys.
1. It is recommended that airports that have documented hazardous terrestrial
mammals (e.g., deer or canids) conduct a minimum of one survey per quarter, and
that airports without recognized terrestrial mammal hazards consider a minimum of
2 to 4 surveys throughout the year.
4-34
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
4.2.3 Monitoring of Airport Procedures.
It is recommended that monitoring airport procedures include:
1. ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol, monitoring logs
2. Wildlife/aircraft strike reports
3. Federal/State Depredation Permit use or Special Permit use (e.g., Eagle Disturbance
or Nest Removal Permits)
4.3 Continual Monitoring Annual Report.
As part of a continual monitoring program, an airport should consider preparing an
annual report to best evaluate the efficacy of its wildlife mitigation program
summarizing:
1. Identification of the wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local
movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences
2. Identification and location of features on and near the airport that attract wildlife
3. Description of wildlife hazards to air carrier operations
4. Description of wildlife strikes during the year
5. Discussion of any significant modifications on or near the airport property
6. Summary of ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol,
monitoring logs
7. Summary of Federal/State Depredation Permit use; Special Permit use (e.g., Eagle
Disturbance or Nest Removal Permits)
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX A. COMPOSITE RANKING OF HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Composite ranking (1 = most hazardous, 50 = least hazardous) and relative hazard score of 50
wildlife species with at least 100 reported strikes with civil aircraft based on three criteria
(damage, major damage, and effect -on -flight). Data were derived from the FAA National Wildlife
Strike Database, 1990-2012.'
species
of strikes with:
Mean
hazard
levels
Composite
ranking
Relative
hazard
score6
wildlife
Damage2
Major
damage3
Effect
on
flight
White-tailed
deer
84
s
36
46
55
1
4
100
Snow goose
e
77
41
39
53
2
95
Turkey vulture
51
19
35
35
3
63
Canada
goose
50
17
28
31
4
57
Sandhi]] crane
41
13
27
5
48
27
Bald eagle
41
12
28
27
6
48
D. -crested cormorant
24
24
7
,
44
34
15
Mallard
23
9
13
15
8
27
Osprey
22
7
15
15
9
26
Great blue heron
21
6
16
15
10
26
American coot
24
7
11
14
11
25
Coyote
9
2
21
11
12
19
Red-tailed
hawk
15
5
11
10
13
19
Cattle
10
3
15
9
14
17
egret
Great horned
owl
15
3
6
8
15
14
Herring
10
5
9
8
16
14
gull
Rock
pigeon
10
4
10
8
17
14
Ring -billed gull
1
8
3
8
-
6
18
11
American crow
-
8
_
3
8
6
18
11
A-1
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Wildlife species
of strikes
with:
hazard
levels
Mean
Composite
ranking
Relative
hazard
score6
Damage2
Major
damage'
flight'
Effect
on
Peregrine
falcon
8
2
5
5
20
9
Laughing gull
5
2
7
5
21
8
American robin
7
1
4
4
22
7
Snow bunting
1
1
9
4
23
7
Red
fox
3
0
8
4
23
7
European starling
4
1
5
3
25
6
Amer. golden -plover
4
2
4
3
26
6
Barn owl
4
2
3
3
27
5
Upland
sandpiper
4
1
4
3
27
5
Purple martin
5
1
2
3
29
5
Mourning dove
3
1
r
4
3
30
5 '
Red -winged
blackbird
3
0
5
3
31
5
Woodchuck
2
0
4
2
32
4
Northern
harrier
2
1
2
2
33
3
Chimney swift
2
0
2
1
34
2
Killdeer
1
0
2
1
35
2
House sparrow
2
0
1
1
35
2
Black -tailed
jackrabbit
1
1
1
1
37
2
American
kestrel
1
<1
2
1
38
2
Eastern
meadowlark
1
<1
2
1
38
2
S. -tailed
flycatcher
0
0
2
1
40
1
Horned lark
1
<1
1
1
41
1
Pacific golden -plover
1
0
1
-
1
-
41
1
1
A-2
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Wildlife species
% of strikes with:
Mean
hazard
levels
Composite
ranking
I
Damage2
Major
damage3
Effect
on
flight4
Relative
hazard
score6
1
0
1
Barn swallow
1
I 43
1
Savannah sparrow
1
0
<1
1
43
1
Common nighthawk
1
0
1
1
45
1
Tree swallow
0
0
1
<1
46
1
Burrowing owl
1
0
0
<1
46
1
0
0
1
<1
48
0
Western kingbird
Virginia opossum
1
0
0
<1
48
0
Striped skunk
0
0
0
0
50
0
Notes:
I
2
3
4
5
6
Excerpted from Table 19 of Serial Report No. 19, "Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States, 1990-
2012. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Safety and
Standards, Washington, DC., USA. Refer to this report for additional explanations of criteria and method of
ranking.
Aircraft incurred at least some damage (destroyed, substantial, minor, or unknown) from strike.
Aircraft incurred damage or structural failure, which adversely affected the structure strength, performance, or
flight characteristics, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component,
or the damage sustained made it inadvisable to restore aircraft to airworthy condition.
Aborted takeoff, engine shutdown, precautionary landing, or other negative effect on flight.
Based on the mean value for percent of strikes with damage, major damage (substantial damage or destroyed), and
negative effect -on -flight.
Mean hazard level (see footnote 5) was scaled down from 100, with 100 as the score for the species with the
maximum mean hazard level and thus the greatest potential hazard to aircraft.
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX B. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISIT AND REPORT CHECKLISTS
Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit Checklist
Airport Name:
Date of Site Visit:
i Time:
Airport
Representative:
Qualified Airport
Wildlife Biologist:
FAA Reviewer:
Y or NA
Comments
I
1.2 Applicable
Airport Information
Personnel and departments
responsible
for airport
ops
Type of airport/annual
operations
Recent
construction
or upgrades
,
Strike records (in database and/or airport records)
Wildlife hazard
efforts
management
Description
of current wildlife concerns
Depredation
permits
Airport
maps/aerial
photographs
13 Observations
Birds (species,
time and date
and evidence
tracks, etc.)
activity,
of observations,
of activity,
location,
i.e.,
type
status if
fecal material,
of
listed
habitat
species,
nests,
used,
Mammals
used,
species,
time
(species,
and date
and evidence
etc.)
activity, location,
of observations,
of activity,
status
i.e.,
type
of
if
tracks,
habitat
listed
scat,
burrows,
Habitat attractants on movement and non -movement
areas (assess both natural and man-made attractants)
Habitat
5,000ft,
(assess
attractants
10,000
both
ft., 5
natural
within
the separation
as described
man-made
distances
in AC 33
attractants)
miles
and
B -I
st20/20111
Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit Report Checklist
AC 150/5200-38
1.4 Site Visit Report
ir or NA
Com i i ents
ne'rax airport information
Strike data analysis
List of
observadons
bird/mammal species observed and times of
status of species
State and federal
(natural and man-
within movement and
Description of
made) that may
non -movement
habitat features
attract wildlife
areas
Description of habitat features (natural and man-
made) that may attract wildlife within the separation
distances 5,000ft, 10,0 ft and 5 miles
Map of airport with location of wildlife
within the movement and non -movement
attractants
areas
Map of airport with
within the separation
3 miles with the separation
location of wildlifb attractants
distances 5,000,, 10.000ft. and
distances depicted
Recommended actions for reducing identified
hazards to air wrier operations
wildlife
Recommendation regarding whether a 12 -month
wildlife hazards assessment should be conducted or if
an existing Wildllfb Hazard Management Plan should
be modified
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX C. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND REPORT CHECKLISTS
Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment Checklist
Airport Name:
Airport
Representative:
Qualified Airport Wildlife
Biologist:
Assessment Dates (Initiation/Co
II pletion):
Assessment Report -- Date Completed:
Assessment
Report
— Date
Approved
by FAA:
FAA -Reviewer:
V or NA
Comments
Analysis of the
the assessment
event
or circumstances that prompted
Personnel
ops
and departments
responsible for airport
Type of airport/annual
operations
Recent construction or upgrades
Strike
records)
data analysis
(in database
and/or airport
Depredation
permits
Wildlife
hazard management plan (if applicable)
Review of current habitat
management
activities
Review of current wildlife
management
activities
Identification of wildlife
numbers, locations, local
seasonal occurrences
species observed
movements,
and their
and daily and
Assessment = Minimum of 12 consecutive months
a
Locate
(observation
adequately
standardized
points
observe
observation
off
wildlife
airport
points
are optional)
and their
on airport
to
movements
C-1
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
YorNA
Comments
Point count surveys conducted morning, midday and
evening
Avian surveys conducted a minimum of twice
monthly
Mammal surveys conducted a minimum of once per
quarter (4 total)
Record results of point count surveys and all general
wildlife observations. Include species, number of
individuals, specific location, activity, direction of
movement.
Record presence of state and/or federally listed
species
Small mammal trapping (optional)
Identification and location of features on airport that
attract wildlife
Identification and location of features near airport
(within 5 miles) that attract wildlife
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report Checklist
V or NA
Comments
Description
and qualifications of
biologist(s)
who
conducted the WHA.
Analysis of
the event or circumstances
that
prompted
the
study
Personnel
and departments
responsible
for airport
operations
Type of airport/annual
operations
Description of recent construction or upgrades, if any
.
Strike data analysis (in database
and/or airport records)
Depredation
permits
(do they have valid permit)
Wildlife hazard management plan (if applicable)
Description
of current
habitat management activities
Description
of current wildlife
management activities
Identification of wildlife
species observed and
their
numbers,
locations,
local movements, and daily
and
seasonal occurrences:
• Description of methodologies used
to collect
data
• Results
wildlife
individuals,
of
of
of
observations.
movement
Federal
point
or
specific
and
State
count
surveys
Include
location,
discuss
listed
and
species,
activity,
the presence
species identified
all
general
number
direction
/ absence
during
of
Assessment
• Results of mammal
number of individuals,
direction of movement
surveys.
Include
specific location,
species,
activity,
• Map of airport with location and description
observation points
of
Identification
and location of features on and near the
that
attract wildlife:
airport
•
Description
made) that
and non
of
may
-movement
habitat
attract
areas
features (natural and
wildlife on the movement
man-
C-3
8/2O/2O18
AC 15O/52OO-38
V or NA
Comments
•
Description
made)
10,000ft,
described
that
and
may
in
of
AC
5mile
habitat
attract
33
separation
features
wildlife
(natural
distances
within
the
and man-
5,000ft,
as
•
Map
on
of
movement
airport
with
and
location
non
of
-movement
wildlife
areas
attractants
•
Map
near
separation
separation
of
airport
airport
distances
distances
within
with location
5,000
(include
relative
ft,
10,000
of
the
to
the
wildlife
location
airport
ft,
attractants
and
5mile
of the
Description
of
the
wildlife
hazards
to air carrier operations
at
the
subject
airport
Recommended
actions
for reducing
identified
wildlife
hazards
to
air carrier operations:
•
List
unique
required
of
to
prioritized
this
based
airport
on
recommendations
these
(is a
recommendations?)
Section
7
that
Consultation
are
8/20/2018
APPENDIX D. WILDLIFE SURVEY DATA SHEET EXAMPLE
AIRPORT NAME OBSERVER
TIME TEMPERATURE
WIND DIR / SPEED
Airport Observation Sheet
SURVEY PERIOD
WEATHER
SUNRISE
DATE
AC 150/5200-38
SUNSET
TIME
PT
LOC
SPP
#
i
ACT
COV
DIR
COMMENTS
I
I
1
.
.
,
,
P
r
i
I
I
‘
r
NO
iv
,
r
L
_
SU - sunny FD - feeding
PS - partly sunny LF - loafing
CL - cloudy RS- roosting
RN - rain NS - nesting
SN - snow/sleet VO - vocalizing
FG - fog FL - flying local
PC - partly cloudy FP - flying passing SW- swimming
RN — running
BD - bedded
P — perched
ST -- standing
TW- towering
HW - hawking
RWY - runway
TWY - taxiway
RMP - ramp
ASP - asphalt
UNP - unpaved road
STR - structure
DTC - ditch
PND - pond
RES - reservoir
RIV - river
GSH grass, short
GLG - grass, long
SHB - shrubs
WDL — woodland GRV - gravel
MAR - marsh/wetland AGF - ag field
CRK - creek/stream SHR - shoreline
TSW - temp standing water
TR - single/sm group of trees
PAGE of
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX E. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST
Airport
Name:
Airport
Representative:
Plan
Preparation
Date:
Plan
FAA Review Date:
FAA
Reviewer:
o
V or NA
Comments/Observations
BRIEF
introduction
describing
hazards
identified
in
the Assessment and
the
wildlife
attractants
on
and
near the
airport
A list
of
individuals
having authority
and
responsibility
plan:
for implementing
each
aspect
of
the
• Decision
responsibilities
making
roles
including:
and
Airport
Director,
Operations
Wildlife
Supervisor,
Coordinator,
Maintenance
Supervisor,
Security Dept.,
Planning
Dept.,
Finance Dept.,
Wildlife
Hazard
Working
Group
• Other
A list
prioritizing the
following
actions
identified
in
the Assessment and
target
dates
for their
initiation and
completion:
• (i)
of
mitigation
Wildlife
problem
actions/target
population
wildlife
populations
management
dates)
and
(list
• (ii)
attractants
dates)
Habitat
modification
and
(list
mitigation
actions/target
of
wildlife
• (iii)
and
mitigation
Land
near
use
airport
actions/target
changes
that
(list
attract
dates)
of
wildlife
land
use on
and
• Ongoing
data collection
and
analysis
• Recordkeeping
• Do any proposed
review or Section
activities
7 Consultation
require
with
NEPA
USFWS?
E-1
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Y or NA
Comments/Observations
Requirements
for and, where applicable,
copies of
local, State, and Federal
wildlife
control
permits
(Copies of all valid permits must be included in
Plan)
Identification
of
resources that the certificate
holder will
provide to implement
the plan
•
Personnel
• Field identification
guides
• Pyrotechnics
• Vehicles
• Pesticide and application
equipment
• Other (binoculars,
etc.)
traps, guns, radios,
• Sources of supplies
Procedures
to be followed
during air carrier
operations that
at a minimum includes:
(i) Designation of personnel responsible
implementing the procedures (Wildlife
for
patrol
staffing and primary responsibilities,
hours of
availability,
etc.)
(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
• Documentation
observations
inspection
procedures,
of inspections and
• Runway/taxiway sweeps, perimeter
inspections
fence
(iii) Wildlife hazard control measures
• Monitoring
• Rccordkecping
• Dispersal/harassment
procedures
• Procedures
different
times
for wildlife control during
seasons and heavy air traffic
(iv) Ways to communicate
effectively
between
personnel conducting wildlife
control or observing
wildlife hazards and the air traffic
control tower
E-2
8/20/2018
AC 150/5200-38
Y or
NA
Comments/Observations
•
Training in communication
procedures
• Procedures
and
strikes
response
or observations
for immediate
to
pilot
-reported
coordination
wildlife
Other
Procedures
to review and
evaluate
the
wildlife
hazard
management
plan
every 12
consecutive
months
or
following
a triggering event
Include
a log
at
the
beginning of
the
plan
to record
dates
plan
is reviewed
and
reason
for review
(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
• One or more meetings
with
Wildlife
Hazard
Working Group
to
review Plan
• Procedures
observations
activities
for documentation
and
wildlife
of
control
wildlife
• Protocol
to meet
training requirements
A training
program conducted
by a qualified
airport
wildlife
biologist
to provide
airport
personnel
with
the
knowledge
and
skills
needed
to
successfully
carry out
the wildlife
hazard
management
plan
• Certification
requirements
that
in
AC
training
meets
150/5200-36
•
Training
participation
documentation
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX F. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW
Once a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan is in place, it must be evaluated every 12 consecutive
months or following a triggering event as per 14 CFR part 139.337(0(6). Those triggering events
are:
• 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
The foundation for these evaluations is not only the documentation of wildlife strikes but the
maintenance of consistent records of wildlife surveys and wildlife control activities. Based on the
annual evaluation the WHMP should be updated as needed to ensure the information adequately
addresses known wildlife hazards. As these changes are adopted, approved, and implemented at
the airport, it is of the utmost importance that all documentation is well prepared and available
during FAA inspections.
To assist airport operators in documenting this review, the following sample review forms are
provided. One form is for the "annual" review (every 12 consecutive months), and one for a
review following a triggering event. These forms represent examples and may be used as provided
or modified to suit specific needs to review a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
Subject: Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Annual Review Date:
Airport: Airport ID:
On we conducted the annual review of the Wildlife Hazard
Management Plan, as per the requirements of 139.337(f) (6). General Information/ Significant findings:
• Name of review coordinator- (Person facilitating discussions and writing plan updates; usually the
Wildlife Coordinator, Wildlife Biologist, or Airport Manager) & participating airport personnel and
representatives of other organizations (As listed in 139.337(f)(1); may include members of airport
management, the wildlife coordinator, airport operations/ wildlife staff, wildlife Biologist who
conducted Wildlife Hazard Assessment, members of the wildlife hazard working group*). Attach a sign -
in sheet.
• Summary of results of annual data analysis- Example: ranking of highest priority species based on the
analysis. (Per standardized continual monitoring procedures of 139.337(f)(b); data for analysis may include
logs of wildlife strikes, wildlife observations and control measures, standardized wildlife monitoring
surveys, and wildlife data from off -airport sites of concern.)
• Summary of progress and challenges in management of the most significant wildlife
attractants and/or habitats on or near the airport - (Review of habitat management priorities
listed in 139.337(f)(2))
• Summary of progress and challenges in direct wildlife hazard management (i.e., dispersals, strike
response) on the airfield - (Review of procedures to be followed during air carrier operations as listed in
139.337(f)(5))
• Changes to management strategies identified
• Changes to documentation identified
• Changes to Wildlife Hazard Working Group membership or objectives identified
• Changes to airport training program identified
• Changes/ updates to Wildlife Hazard Management Plan identified
(Submit any changes to the WHMP to the assigned FAA Airport Certification Safety Inspector)
Airport Manager/Director
*The wildlife hazard working group is made up of representatives that own and/or manage properties, attractants, and habitats for wildlife (both on -
and off airport property) that impact airport safety. The function of the wildlife hazard working group, or the airport's relationships with such
representatives, is to cooperatively address the airport's specific wildlife hazard issues. During the annual review of the Plan, the effectiveness in
addressing the issues should be evaluated, with any needed changes documented.
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
Subject: Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Review Following a Triggering Event
Date: Airport: Airport ID:
On we conducted a review of the Wildlife Hazard
Management Plan, as per the requirements of 139.337(0 (6).
Description of Triggering Event:
• Date/Time - Provide details of the event which triggered the review. Attach strike report, if
available and any pertinent information; runway used, airline, take -off, landing, species,
damage, etc.
General Information/ Significant findings:
• Name of review coordinator- (Person facilitating discussions and writing plan updates;
usually the Wildlife Coordinator, Wildlife Biologist, or Airport Manager) & participating
airport personnel and representatives of other organizations (As listed in 139.337(0(1);
may include members of airport management, the wildlife coordinator, airport operations/
wildlife staff, wildlife Biologist who conducted Wildlife Hazard Assessment, members of the
wildlife hazard working group*). Attach a sign -in sheet.
• The plan's effectiveness in dealing with known wildlife hazards on and in the airport's
vicinity- Example: Review the current wildlife control log and evaluate recent strike reports or
events. Make a determination as to whether the current program is working and what can be
improved.
• Aspects of the wildlife hazards described in the wildlife hazard assessment that should be
reevaluated - Review assessment to determine if everything is being addressed that was
previously identified as a hazard or if other species are now present. Note: If other/additional new
species are now present on or in the vicinity of the airport, another Wildlife Hazard Assessment
may be needed.
• Summary of progress and challenges in direct wildlife hazard management (i.e., dispersals,
strike response) on the airfield - (Review of procedures to be followed during air carrier
operations as listed in 139.337(0(5))
• Changes to management strategies identified
• Changes to airport training program identified
• Changes/ updates to Wildlife Hazard Management Plan identified
(Submit any changes to the WHMP to the assigned FAA Airport Certification Safety Inspector)
Airport Manager/Director
The wildlife hazard working group is made up of representatives that own and/or manage properties, attractants, and habitats for wildlife (both
on -and off- airport property) that impact airport safety. The function of the wildlife hazard working group, or of the airport's relationships with
such representatives, is to cooperatively address the airport's specific wildlife hazard issues. During the annual review of the Plan, the
effectiveness in addressing the issues should be evaluated, with any needed changes documented.
F-3
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
APPENDIX G. LETTER OF APPROVAL OF WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN
(WHMP) FOR AIRPORTS
8/2O/2O18 AC 15O/52OO-38
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Date
Name
Title
Airport
Address
City/State/Zip
Federal Aviation Administration Address
Regional Office City, State, Zip
Subject: Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for
[Insert name of airport]
Dear
•
•
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has completed its review and approved the above -
referenced Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP), as submitted to the FAA on [insert
date]. The FAA based this approval on the adequacy of the WHMP to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR §139.337(0. The WHMP is a required element of the Airport
Certification Manual (ACM) for your airport. Please insert this letter of approval and the
attached plan to the ACM. We will retain one copy of this plan for our official file copy of your
ACM.
The specific actions identified in the WHMP are categorically excluded from further National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F
("Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures"). The FAA's review included verification
that there was no evidence of extraordinary circumstances in connection with any of the specific
measures.
The FAA may have to reevaluate this environmental determination if environmental
circumstances change or if new information becomes available that could bear upon particular
actions. It is also important to note that the FAA has not evaluated the WHMP (or the specific
actions it identifies) with respect to state, county or local requirements.
Any additions or modifications to the WHMP may require additional documentation and
interagency coordination, particularly if resource categories of special concern (such as wetlands,
floodplains, threatened/endangered species, cultural resources, etc.) are likely to be impacted.
Such resources usually require permits or approvals from a Federal or State environmental
resource agency.
G-2
8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38
It is the airport's responsibility to initiate and complete required environmental coordination with
the appropriate FAA Airports District Office (or Regional Office), as well as any other relevant
Federal and State agencies prior to implementation of these actions.
However, nothing in this letter shall limit the legal authority or responsibility of the certificate
holder to undertake operational safety measures that would not, on their own, trigger a Federal
action for review and approval.
Approval of the WHMP does not constitute a commitment of Federal funds from the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) for any capital development projects. AIP funding requires
evidence of eligibility and justification when a funding request is ripe for consideration. Please
identify any such requests well in advance, typically as part of the periodic Capital Improvement
Plan process, in order to ensure that you address all statutory and regulatory requirements, and
technical and operational issues, in a timely manner.
Please include a copy of this letter when coordinating with FAA on any ALP changes or funding
requests.
If you have questions or need more information, please contact me at ( )
Sincerely,
Airport Certification/Safety Inspector
Enclosures
cc:
, Manager, [insert] Airports District Office
, Environmental Protection Specialist
, Planning/Programming Specialist
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Date
Name
Title
Airport
Address
City/State/Zip
Federal Aviation Administration Address
Regional Office City, State, Zip
Subject: Mixed Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for [insert
name of airport]
Dear
•
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has completed its review and approved the above -
referenced Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP), as submitted to the FAA on [insert
date]. The FAA based this approval on the adequacy of the WHMP to comply with the
requirements of 14 CFR §139.337(f). The WHMP is a required element of the Airport
Certification Manual (ACM) for your airport. Please insert this letter of approval and the
attached plan to the ACM. We will retain one copy of this plan for our official file copy of your
ACM.
Please note, however, that not all of the specific actions identified in the WHMP have full
clearance to proceed into implementation. Certain action items and components (identified
below) may require further review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and/or
other special purpose environmental laws or regulations. Future consideration of these action
items and components, and any additions or modifications to the WHMP, may require additional
documentation and interagency coordination, particularly if resource categories of special
concern (such as wetlands, floodplains, threatened/endangered species, cultural resources, etc.)
are likely to be impacted. Such resources usually require permits or approvals from a Federal or
State environmental resource agency.
The following items and components are categorically excluded from further NEPA review in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F ("Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures"). The
actions that may proceed to implementation without further environmental review are:
1. [insert]
2. [insert]
3. [insert]
1-1-2
8/20/2018 AC 15O/52OO-38
The FAA may have to reevaluate this environmental determination if environmental
circumstances change or if new information becomes available that could bear upon particular
actions. It is also important to note that the FAA has not evaluated the WHMP (or the specific
actions it identifies) with respect to state, county or local requirements.
Although the following actions are included in the approved WHMP, they may require further
review under NEPA and/or other special purpose environmental laws or regulations as discussed
above:
1. [insert]
2. [insert]
3. [insert]
It is the airport's responsibility to initiate and complete required environmental coordination with
the appropriate FAA Airports District Office (or Regional Office), as well as any other relevant
Federal and State agencies prior to implementation of these actions.
However, nothing in this letter shall limit the legal authority or responsibility of the certificate
holder to undertake operational safety measures that would not, on their own, trigger a Federal
action for review and approval.
Approval of the WHMP does not constitute a commitment of Federal funds from the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) for any capital development projects. ALP funding requires
evidence of eligibility and justification when a funding request is ripe for consideration. Please
identify any such requests well in advance, typically as part of the periodic Capital Improvement
Plan process, in order to ensure that you address all statutory and regulatory requirements, and
technical and operational issues, in a timely manner.
Please include a copy of this letter when coordinating with FAA on any ALP changes or funding
requests.
If you have questions or need more information, please contact me at ( )
Sincerely,
Airport Certification/Safety Inspector
Enclosures
cc: , Manager, [insert] Airports District Office
, Environmental Protection Specialist
, Planner
Advisory Circular Feedback
If you find an error in this AC, have recommendations for improving it, or have suggestions for
new items/subjects to be added, you may let us know by (1) mailing this form to Manager,
Airport Safety and Operations Division, Federal Aviation Administration ATTN: AAS-300, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington DC 20591 or (2) faxing it to the attention of AAS-300 at
(202) 267-8663.
Subject: AC 150/5200-38 Date:
Please check all appropriate line items:
D An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in paragraph on page
•
■
■
■
■
Recommend paragraph on page be changed as follows:
In a future change to this AC, please cover the following subject:
(Briefly describe what you want added)
other comments:
I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me at (phone number, email address).
Submitted by: Date:
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Advisory
Circular
Subject: Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Date: 02/21/2020
near Airports
AC No: 150/5200-33C
Initiated By: AAS-300 Change:
Purpose.
This Advisory Circular (AC) provides guidance on certain land uses that have the
potential to attract hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports. It also discusses
airport development projects (including airport construction, expansion, and
renovation) affecting aircraft movement near hazardous wildlife attractants. Appendix 1
provides definitions of terms used in this AC.
2 Cancellation.
This AC cancels AC 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near
Airports, dated August 28, 2007.
3 Application.
The Federal Aviation Administration recommends the guidance in this AC for land
uses that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports.
This AC does not constitute a regulation, is not mandatory, and is not legally binding in
its own right. It will not be relied upon as a separate basis by the FAA for affirmative
enforcement action or other administrative penalty. Conformity with this AC is
voluntary, and nonconformity will not affect rights and obligations under existing
statutes and regulations, except as follows:
1. Airports that hold Airport Operating Certificates issued under Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 139, Certification of Airports, Subpart D, may use
the standards, practices and recommendations contained in this AC as one, but not
the only, acceptable means of compliance with the wildlife hazard management
requirements of Part 139.
2. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for airports that receive funding
under Federal grant assistance programs, including the Airport Improvement
Program. See Grant Assurance #34.
2/21/2020 AC 15O/52OO-33C
3. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for projects funded by the Passenger
Facility Charge program. See PFC Assurance #9.
4. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for land -use planners and developers
of projects, facilities, and activities on or near airports.
4 Principal Changes.
Changes are marked with vertical bars in the margin. Change in this AC include:
1. Clarification by the FAA that non -certificated airports are recommended to conduct
a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (Assessment) or a Wildlife Hazard Site Visit (Site
Visit);
a
2. Table 1, Ranking of Hazardous Species, has been moved to Advisory Circular
150/5200-32, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes (5/31/2013);
3. Consolidation and reorganization of discussion on land uses of concern; and
updated procedures for evaluation and mitigation. Discussion addresses off -airport
hazardous wildlife attractants, followed by discussion of on -airport attractants. It
also clarifies language regarding the applicability of the AC.
5 Background.
I. Information about the risks posed to aircraft by certain wildlife species has
increased a great deal in recent years. Improved reporting, studies, documentation,
and statistics clearly show that aircraft collisions with birds and other wildlife are a
serious economic and public safety problem. While many species of wildlife can
pose a risks to aircraft safety, they are not equally hazardous2. These hazard
rankings can help focus hazardous wildlife management efforts on those species or
groups that represent the greatest risk to safe air and ground operations in the airport
environment. Used in conjunction with a site -specific Assessment that will
determine the relative abundance and use patterns of wildlife species, these rankings
combined with a systematic risk analysis can help airport operators better
understand the general threat level (and consequences) of certain wildlife species.
Also, the rankings can assist with the creation of a "high risk" list of hazardous
species that warrant immediate attention.
2. Most public -use airports have large tracts of open, undeveloped land that provide
added margins of safety and noise mitigation. These areas can also present potential
hazards to aviation if they encourage wildlife to enter an airport's approach or
departure airspace or aircraft operations area. Constructed or natural areas such as
Risk is the relationship between the severity and probability of a threat. It is the product of hazard level and
abundance in the critical airspace, and is thus defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a given species.
2 Hazardous wildlife are species of wildlife (birds, mammals, reptiles), including feral and domesticated animals, not
under control that may pose a direct hazard to aviation (i.e., strike risk to aircraft) or an indirect hazard such as an
attractant to other wildlife that pose a strike hazard or are causing structural damage to airport facilities (e.g.,
burrowing, nesting, perching).
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
poorly drained locations, detention/retention ponds, roosting habitats on buildings,
landscaping, odor -causing rotting organic matter (putrescible waste) disposal
operations, wastewater treatment plants, agricultural or aquaculture activities,
surface mining, wetlands, or some conservation -based land uses can provide
wildlife with ideal locations for feeding, loafing, reproduction, and escape. Even
small facilities, such as fast food restaurants, taxicab staging areas, rental car
facilities, aircraft viewing areas, and public parks, can produce substantial
attractions for hazardous wildlife.
3. During the past century, wildlife -aircraft strikes have resulted in the loss of
hundreds of lives worldwide, as well as billions of dollars in aircraft damage.
Hazardous wildlife attractants on and near airports can jeopardize future airport
expansion, making proper community land -use planning essential. This AC
provides airport operators and those parties with whom they cooperate with the
guidance they need to assess and address potentially hazardous wildlife attractants
when locating new facilities and implementing certain land -use practices on or near
public -use airports.
Memorandum of Agreement Between Federal Resource Agencies.
The FAA, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture - Wildlife Services signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) to acknowledge their respective missions in protecting aviation from wildlife
hazards. Through the MOA, the agencies established procedures necessary to
coordinate their missions to address more effectively existing and future environmental
conditions contributing to collisions between wildlife and aircraft (wildlife strikes)
throughout the United States. These efforts are intended to minimize wildlife risks to
aviation and human safety while protecting the Nation's valuable environmental
resources.
7 Feedback on this AC.
If you have suggestions for improving this AC, you may use the Advisory Circular
Feedback form at the end of this AC.
oohn R. Dermody
Director of Airport Safety and Standards
iii
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
CONTENTS
Paragraph Page
Chapter 1, General Separation Criteria for Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or
Near Airports 1-1
1.1 Introduction1-1
1.2 Airports Serving Piston -Powered Aircraft1-1
1.3 Airports Serving Turbine -Powered Aircraft1-2
1.4 Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace1-2
Chapter 2. Land -Use Practices on or Near Airports that Potentially Attract
Hazardous Wildlife 2-1
2.1 General2-1
2.2 Waste Disposal Operations. 2-2
2.3 Water Management Facilities2-4
2.4 Wetlands. 2-8
2.5 Dredge Spoil Containment Areas2-10
2.6 Agricultural Activities. 2-10
2.7 Aquaculture2-12
2.8 Golf Courses, Landscaping, Structures and Other Land -Use Considerations2-14
2.9 Habitat for State and Federally -Listed Species on Airports2-16
2.10 Synergistic Effects of Surrounding Land Uses2-17
Chapter 3. Procedures for Wildlife Hazard Management by Operators of Public -
Use Airports and Conditions for Non -Certificated Airports to Conduct Wildlife
Hazard Assessments and Wildlife Hazard Site Visits 3-1
3.1 Introduction3-1
3.2 Coordination with Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists3-1
3.3 Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A Manual For Airport Personnel3-1
3.4 Wildlife Hazard Site Visits and Wildlife Hazard Assessments3-2
3.5 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan3-2
3.6 Local Coordination3-3
3.7 Operational Notifications of Wildlife Hazards3-3
3.8 Federal and State Depredation Permits3-4
iv
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
Chapter 4. Recommended Procedures for the FAA, Airport Operators and Other
Government Entities Regarding Off -Airport Attractants 4-1
4.1 FAA Notification and Review of Proposed Land -Use Practice Changes in the
vicinity of Public -Use Airports4-1
4.2 Waste Management Facilities4-2
4.3 Other Land -Use Practice Changes4-3
4.4 Coordination to Prevent Creation of New Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife
Attractants. 4-4
4.5 Coordination on Existing Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. 4-5
4.6 Prompt Remedial Action4-5
4.7 FAA Assistance4-5
Appendix A. Definitions of Terms Used in this Advisory Circular A-1
Appendix B. Additional Resources B-1
v
2121/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
Page Intentionally Blank
vi
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL SEPARATION CRITERIA FOR HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE
ATTRACTANTS ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS
1.1 Introduction.
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.L4
Airport operators should maintain an appropriate environment for the safe and
efficient operation of aircraft, which entails mitigating wildlife strike hazards by
fencing, modifying the landscape in order to deter wildlife or by hazing or removing
wildlife hazardous to aircraft from congregating on airports. When considering
proposed land uses, operators and sponsors of airports certificated under Part 139,
local planners, and developers must take into account whether the proposed land uses,
including new development projects, will increase wildlife hazards. Land -use
practices that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife populations on or near airports,
specifically those listed in Chapter 2, can significantly increase the potential for
wildlife strikes.
The FAA urges regulatory agencies and planning and zoning agencies to evaluate
proposed new land uses within the separation criteria and prevent the creation of land
uses that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife within the separation distances.
The FAA recommends the use of minimum separation criteria outlined below for
land -use practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports. Please
note that FAA criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife
onto, into, or across the airport's approach or departure airspace or aircraft operations
area. (See the discussion of the synergistic effects of surrounding land uses in
Paragraph 2.8 of this AC.). For the purpose of evaluating distance criteria, the
delineation of the aircraft operations area may also consider future airport
development plans depicted on the Airport Layout Plan (e.g., planned runway
extension).
The separation distances are based on (1) flight patterns and performance criteria of
piston -powered aircraft and turbine -powered aircraft, (2) the altitude at which most
strikes happen (78 percent occur under 1,000 feet and 90 percent occur under 3,000
feet above ground level), and (3) National Transportation Safety Board
recommendations.
1.2 Airports Serving Piston -Powered Aircraft.
Airports that do not sell Jet -A fuel normally serve piston -powered aircraft.
Notwithstanding more stringent requirements for specific land uses, the FAA
recommends a separation distance of 5,000 feet from these airports for any of the
hazardous wildlife attractants discussed in Chapter 2 or for new airport development
projects meant to accommodate aircraft movement. This distance is to be maintained
between the closest point of the airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous
wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts an example of the 5,000 -foot separation distance
measured from the nearest aircraft operations area.
2/21/2O2O AC 15O/52OO-33C
1.3 Airports Serving Turbine -Powered Aircraft.
For airports serving turbine -powered aircraft, the FAA recommends a separation
distance of 10,000 feet from these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants
discussed in Chapter 2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate
aircraft movement. This distance is to be maintained between the closest point of the
airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts
an example of the 10,000 -foot separation distance from the nearest aircraft movement
areas.
1.4 Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace.
For all airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 miles between the closest point of
the airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous wildlife attractant. Special
attention should be given to hazardous wildlife attractants that could cause hazardous
wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. Figure 1 depicts
an example of the 5 -mile separation distance measured from the nearest aircraft
operations area.
2/21/2020
♦
•
♦
AC 150/5200-33C
Figure 1. Example of recommended separation distances described in Chapter 1
within which hazardous wildlife attractants should be avoided, eliminated, or
mitigated.
4
4
4
♦ ♦ • • ♦ • • •
• 4 4 4 4 4 {4
4
♦ • • • • • ♦ • • ♦ • ♦ • • • • ♦ •
• • • • + • • • • • • • ♦ • • ♦ $ ♦ ♦ • •
• • • ♦ • • • • ♦ •
♦
•
•
♦
•
•
•
♦
•
•
•
•
4
•
•
•
•
•
♦ • i • • i • ♦ • ♦ •
♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ 4 i • + • • • • i ♦ ♦ ♦ • i • •
• . • • • . ♦ ♦ • • ♦ • • 440`•04* ♦ N • + • • ♦ ♦ ♦ •
r
• ♦ • • ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ • e• • ♦ • No. • • • 4 4 •
GOO 'a.
• • • + + 4 i ♦ . saj•o se + + ♦ i + • `b♦ • • i • • +
+r`.
♦ 4 4 4 4 a4" ► • 4 4 • se-' 4s. 4 4 ‘. 4 4 4 • 4 4
r � .r N.
• • ♦ * • *iv, "' + • ♦ • • . •••".A "r • ♦ • • •�' IS*♦ •♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ • • •
.r
• • • to' 00„ .r • • • •
♦ ♦ ♦ 40 • • • • • Os • i • + •\ la• • ♦ • • •
•
• r -s''''. • • + • ,,i •'' • •• • • • • • •'``♦ • •`�• • • + ♦ • •
ti
.. r � • s N.
• ♦
i
r •
i + • I •
+ • 4♦ •
4 4 4 41 4
• 'a ♦ 1+ *
♦ • I ♦ • •
• 1 • I. •
• • S + •I •
• ' • I+ •
. . I ♦ .1 •
+ •+ I. +
• I• •I •
• 1 • is 4
I• • I •
• 1 • It •
I• • k •
• ♦` . ♦\
•• .
; • k
• ♦ ♦ \
• • • .,+ ♦
+ • • \•
• • • •
+ + +
• •
t
•
• •
* •
`t
•
+
•
• +
• •
• i`► • • i • • ♦ ♦ •
N. 4 ♦ + 4
• •` .
• t
N
+ •
•
•
{
•
•
♦
♦ I•
• \ se. • • • • \ • • • • + • r a
* • •\`` • • \• • ♦ ♦ • • • ♦I •
4 • i`` i 4 \1+ 4 • + 4 4 4 •4 ♦ ♦ ♦ + 4 4 + + 4 •# 4 +
• • ♦ \ • ♦ ` . ♦ • ♦ • • • • • • • •♦ • • + • i + J I. •♦ r
Mile
•
♦ • • ♦ N. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ • • • i ♦ • • • • ♦ • • • ♦ ♦ ••
r .
•4 I•
• • • • . i i • ♦ • ♦ • • • • • • • • ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1. •
•
�=Win�.01•••.I�
• ♦ ♦ • • i t �♦ �i 1 "Pr '* r T --s WIMP • T
♦ • ♦ • it + . ♦ • ♦
•
.
.
•
♦
• •
• • •
•
. +
• k •
• • 4
••
• •
•
.
S.
•
•
•`
+ i + 4 .
4
4 • ♦ + • • i • ♦ ♦ + • • + • • • • + . . • • • 4 i 4 11 4 4 4 1 4 a a 4 .a 1 4 4 4 4 4 t 4
•
♦ 0'
•
•
•
•
+
+
•
•
• •
•
•
• ♦
+ + • i•
4 ♦ • ♦ .
• •
•
♦ • • ♦ • • ♦ • ♦ ♦ + • • ♦ ♦ ♦ • + ♦
♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • ♦ • • • ♦ •
• ♦ • • ♦ • • • ♦ • • ♦
S.
♦ • • ♦ +
► • • ♦ ♦ ♦ •
• •
PERIMETER A: For airports serving piston -powered aircraft, it is recommended hazardous
wildlife attractants be 5,000 feet from the nearest aircraft operations area.
PERIMETER B: For airports serving turbine -powered aircraft, it is recommended hazardous
wildlife attractants be 10,000 feet from the nearest aircraft operations area.
PERIMETER C: Recommended for all airports, 5 -mile range to protect approach, departure and
circling airspace.
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
Page Intentionally Blank
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
CHAPTER 2. LAND -USE PRACTICES ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS THAT POTENTIALLY
ATTRACT HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE
2.1 General.
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
Many types of vegetation, habitats and land use practices can provide an attractant to
animals that pose a risk to aviation safety. Hazardous wildlife use the natural or
artificial habitats on or near an airport for food, water or cover. The wildlife species
and the size of the populations attracted to the airport environment vary considerably,
depending on several factors, including land -use practices on or near the airport. In
addition to the specific considerations outlined below, airport operators should refer
to Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports manual, prepared by FAA and U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) staff. (This manual is available in English,
Spanish, and French). This manual, as well as other helpful resources can be viewed
and downloaded free of charge from the Wildlife Strike Resources section of the
FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web site:
http://www.FAA.gov/airports/airport_ safety/wildlife).
2.1.1.1 The USDA / Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) /
Wildlife Services developed a new publication series on wildlife damage
management and is available online. The Wildlife Damage Management
Technical Series highlights wildlife species or groups of wildlife species
that cause damage to agriculture, property and natural resources, and/or
impact aviation and human health and safety. The publications can be
found at:
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wild1ifedamage/sareports/ct
wildlife+damage+management+technical+series.
2.1.1.2
Additional resources have been provided by the USDA / APHIS / Wildlife
Services National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) at:
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wi Idlifedamage/programs/nwr
c/sa_publications/ct_research _gateway. The NWRC Research Gateway
contains research articles, reports, factsheets, technical notes, data and
other materials on wildlife hazard mitigation, risk reduction, animal
ecology, habitats, and advanced technologies and methodologies.
This section discusses land -use practices having the potential to attract hazardous
wildlife and threaten aviation safety. The FAA has determined that the land uses
listed below are generally not compatible with safe airport operations when they are
located within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4.
As a reminder, these types of land uses or facilities often require permits from the
appropriate permitting agency. The FAA may work with the permitting agency to
include conditions for monitoring and mitigation measures, if necessary. Ultimately,
the permittee is responsible for compliance to these conditions and the permitting
agency is responsible for tracking compliance.
2-1
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.2 Waste Disposal Operations.
Municipal solid waste landfills (municipal landfills) are known to attract large numbers
of hazardous wildlife, particularly birds. Because of this, these operations, when located
within the separations identified in the siting criteria in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4, are
considered incompatible with safe airport operations.
2.2.1 Siting for New Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Subject to AIR 21.
2.2.1.1
2.2.1.2
2.2.1.3
2.2.1.4
Section 503 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act
for the 21st Century (P. L. 106-181) (AIR 21), 49 U.S.C. § 44718(d),
prohibits the construction or establishment of a new municipal landfill
within 6 miles of certain public -use airports. Before these prohibitions
apply, both the airport and the landfill must meet the very specific
conditions described below. These restrictions do not apply to airports or
landfills located within the state of Alaska.
The airport must (1) have received a Federal grant(s) under 49 U.S.C. §
47101, et. seq.; (2) be under control of a public agency; (3) serve some
scheduled air carrier operations conducted in aircraft with less than 60
seats; and (4) have total annual enplanements consisting of at least 51
percent of scheduled air carrier enplanements conducted in aircraft with
less than 60 passenger seats.
The proposed municipal landfill must (1) be within 6 miles of the airport,
as measured from airport property line to the landfill property line, and (2)
have started construction or establishment on or after April 5, 2001.
Section 44718(d) only limits the construction or establishment of some
new landfills. It does not limit the expansion, either vertical or horizontal,
of existing landfills.
Regarding existing municipal landfills and lateral expansions of landfills,
40 CFR § 258.10 requires owners or operators of a landfill units located
within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 to
demonstrate that the unit is designed and operated so that it does not pose
a bird hazard to aircraft. To accomplish this, follow the instructions
provided in Paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3, document the wildlife monitoring and
mitigation procedures that are cooperatively developed, and place this
documentation in the operating permit of the facility.
2.2.2 Siting for New Municipal Landfills Not Subject to AIR 21.
If an airport and a municipal landfill do not meet the criteria of § 44718(d), then FAA
recommends against locating the landfill within the separation distances identified in
Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. In determining this distance separation, measurements
should be made from the closest point of the airport property boundary to the closest
point of the landfill property boundary.
2-2
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.2.3 Considerations for Existing Waste Disposal Facilities Within the Limits of Separation
Criteria.
The FAA recommends against airport development projects that would increase the
number of aircraft operations or accommodate larger or faster aircraft near landfill
operations located within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. In
addition, in accordance with 40 CFR § 258.10, owners or operators of existing landfill
units that are located within the separations listed in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 must
demonstrate that the unit is designed and operated so it does not pose a bird hazard to
aircraft. (See Paragraph 4.3.2 of this AC for a discussion of this demonstration
requirement.)
2.2.4
2.2.5
2.2.6
Enclosed Trash Transfer Stations.
Enclosed waste -handling facilities that receive garbage behind closed doors; process it
via compaction, incineration, or similar manner; and remove all residue by enclosed
vehicles generally are compatible with safe airport operations, provided they are
constructed and operated properly and are not located on airport property or within the
Runway Protection Zone. These facilities should not handle or store putrescible waste
outside or in a partially enclosed structure accessible to hazardous wildlife. Trash
transfer facilities that are open on one or more sides; or store uncovered quantities of
municipal solid waste outside, even if only for a short time; or use semi -trailers that
leak or have trash clinging to the outside; or do not control odors by ventilation and
filtration systems (odor masking is not acceptable) do not meet the FAA's definition of
fully enclosed trash transfer stations. The FAA considers fully enclosed waste -handling
facilities constructed or operated incorrectly incompatible with safe airport operations if
they are located closer than the separation distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through
1A.
Composting Operations on or near Airport Property.
Composting operations that accept only yard waste (e.g., leaves, lawn clippings, or
branches) generally do not attract hazardous wildlife. Sewage sludge, woodchips, and
similar material are not municipal solid wastes and may be used as compost bulking
agents. The compost, however, must never include food or other municipal solid waste.
Composting operations should not be located on airport property unless effective, risk -
reducing mitigations are in place. Off -airport property composting operations should be
located no closer than the greater of the following distances: 1,200 feet from any
aircraft operations area or the distance called for by airport design requirements (see
AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design). This spacing should prevent material, personnel, or
equipment from penetrating any Object Free Area, Obstacle Free Zone, Threshold
Siting Surface, or Clearway. Airport operators should monitor composting operations
located in proximity to the airport to ensure that steam or thermal rise does not
adversely affect air traffic.
Underwater Waste Discharges.
The FAA recommends against the underwater discharge of any food waste (e.g., fish
processing offal) within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4
because it could attract scavenging hazardous wildlife.
2-3
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.2.7 Recycling Centers.
Recycling centers that accept previously sorted non-food items, such as glass,
newspaper, cardboard, aluminum, electronic, and household wastes such as paint,
batteries, and oil, are, in most cases, not attractive to hazardous wildlife and are
acceptable.
2.2.8 Construction and Demolition Debris Facilities.
2.2.8.1
2.2.8.2
2.2.8.3
Construction and demolition landfills generally do not attract hazardous
wildlife and are acceptable if maintained in an orderly manner, admit no
putrescible waste, and are not co -located with other waste disposal
operations. However, construction and demolition landfills have similar
visual and operational characteristics to putrescible waste disposal sites.
When co -located with putrescible waste disposal operations, construction
and demolition landfills are more likely to attract hazardous wildlife
because of the similarities between these disposal facilities.
Therefore, a construction and demolition landfill co -located with another
waste disposal operation should be located outside of the separations
identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4.
Airport operators should be aware that on -site storage of construction and
maintenance debris, as well as out -of -service aircraft or aircraft
components, may provide an attractant for hazardous species (e.g., nesting
or perching locations). The FAA recommends these on -site areas be
monitored and/or mitigated, if necessary.
2.2.9 Fly Ash Disposal.
2.2.9.1
2.2.9.2
The incinerated residue from resource recovery power/heat-generating
facilities that are fired by municipal solid waste, coal, or wood is generally
not a wildlife attractant because it no longer contains putrescible matter.
Landfills accepting only fly ash are generally not considered to be wildlife
attractants and are acceptable as long as they admit no putrescible waste of
any kind, and are not co -located with other disposal operations that attract
hazardous wildlife.
Since varying degrees of waste consumption are associated with general
incineration (not resource recovery power/heat-generating facilities), the
FAA considers the ash from general incinerators a regular waste disposal
by-product and, therefore, a hazardous wildlife attractant if disposed of
within the separation criteria outlined in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4.
2.3 Water Management Facilities.
Drinking water intake and treatment facilities, storm water and wastewater treatment
facilities, associated retention and settling ponds, ponds built for recreational use, ponds
2-4
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
and fountains for ornamental purposes, and ponds that result from mining activities
often attract large numbers of potentially hazardous wildlife. Development of new open
water facilities within the separation criteria identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4
should be avoided to prevent wildlife attractants. If necessary, land -use developers and
airport operators may need to develop management plans, in compliance with local and
state regulations, to support the operation of storm water management facilities on or
near all public -use airports to ensure a safe airport environment. The FAA
recommends these plans be developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife
Biologist3, to minimize hazardous wildlife attractants.
2.3.1 Existing Stormwater Management Facilities.
2.3.1.1
2.3.1.2
On -airport stormwater management facilities allow the quick removal of
surface water, including discharges related to aircraft deicing, from
impervious surfaces, such as pavement and terminal/hangar building roofs.
Existing on -airport detention ponds collect stormwater, protect water
quality, and control runoff. Because they slowly release water after
storms, they may create standing bodies of water that can attract hazardous
wildlife. Where the airport has developed a Wildlife Hazard Management
Plan, Part 139 regulations require the immediate correction of any wildlife
hazards arising from existing stormwater facilities located on or near
airports using appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Airport
operators should develop measures to minimize hazardous wildlife
attraction in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist.
Where possible, airport operators should modify stormwater detention
ponds to allow a maximum 48 -hour detention period for the design storm.
The combination of open water and vegetation is particularly attractive to
waterfowl and other hazardous wildlife. Water management facilities
holding water longer than 48 hours should be maintained in a manner that
keeps them free of both emergent and submergent vegetation. The FAA
recommends that airport operators avoid or remove retention ponds and
detention ponds featuring dead storage to eliminate standing water.
Detention basins should remain totally dry between rainfalls. Where
constant flow of water is anticipated through the basin, or where any
portion of the basin bottom may remain wet, the detention facility should
include a concrete or paved pad and/or ditch/swale in the bottom to
prevent vegetation that may provide nesting habitat. Drainage basins with
a concrete or paved pad should be maintained to prevent or remove any
sediment build-up to prevent vegetation growth.
2.3.1.3 When it is not possible to drain a large detention pond completely, airport
operators may use physical barriers, such as bird balls, wire grids, pillows,
3 See Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments
and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports.
2-5
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
or netting, to deter birds and other hazardous wildlife. When physical
barriers are proposed, airport operators must evaluate their use,
effectiveness and maintenance requirements. Airport operators must also
ensure physical barriers will not adversely affect water rescue. Before
installing any physical barriers over detention ponds on Part 139 airports,
airport operators must get approval from the appropriate FAA Regional
Airports Division Office.
2.3.1.4
The FAA recommends that airport operators encourage off -airport
stormwater treatment facility operators to incorporate appropriate wildlife
hazard mitigation techniques into stormwater treatment facility operating
practices when their facility is located within the separation criteria
specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4.
2.3.2 New Stormwater Management Facilities.
The FAA recommends that storm water management systems located within the
separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 be designed and operated so as not
to create above -ground standing water. Stormwater detention ponds should be
designed, engineered, constructed, and maintained for a maximum 48 —hour detention
period after the design storm and to remain completely dry between storms. To
facilitate the control of hazardous wildlife, the FAA recommends the use of steep -
sided, rip -rap or concrete lined, narrow, linear -shaped water detention basins. When it
is not possible to place these ponds away from an airport's aircraft operations area (but
still on airport property), airport operators may use physical barriers, such as bird balls,
wire grids, floating covers, vegetation barriers (bottom liners), or netting, to prevent
access of hazardous wildlife to open water and minimize aircraft -wildlife interactions.
Caution is advised when nets or wire grids are used for deterring birds from attractants.
Mesh size should be < 5 cm (2") to avoid entangling and killing birds and should not be
made of a monofilament material. Grids installed above and across water to deter
hazardous birds (e.g., waterfowl, cormorants, etc.) are different than using a small mesh
covering but also provides an effective deterrent. Grid material, size, pattern and height
above water may differ on a case -by -case basis. When physical barriers are used,
airport operators must evaluate their use and ensure they will not adversely affect water
rescue. Before installing any physical barriers over detention ponds on Part 139
airports, a review by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should be conducted, prior
to approval from the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office. All
vegetation in or around detention basins that provide food or cover for hazardous
wildlife should be eliminated. If soil conditions and other requirements allow, the FAA
encourages the use of underground storm water infiltration systems because they are
less attractive to wildlife.
2.3.3 Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities.
2.3.3.1
The FAA recommends that airport operators immediately correct any
wildlife hazards arising from existing wastewater treatment facilities
located on or near the airport.
2-6
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.3.3.2
Where required, a wildlife management plan will outline appropriate
wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators
should encourage wastewater treatment facility operators to incorporate
measures, developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife
Biologist, to minimize hazardous wildlife attractants. Airport operators
should also encourage those wastewater treatment facility operators to
incorporate these mitigation techniques into their standard operating
practices. In addition, airport operators should consider the existence of
wastewater treatment facilities when evaluating proposed sites for new
airport development projects and avoid such sites when practicable.
2.3.4 New Wastewater Treatment Facilities.
The FAA recommends against the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities
or associated settling ponds within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through
1.4. Appendix 1 defines wastewater treatment facility as "any devices and/or systems
used to store, treat, recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes."
The definition includes any pretreatment involving the reduction or elimination of
pollutants prior to introducing such pollutants into a treatment facility. When a
wastewater treatment facility is proposed within the separation criteria, the airport
operator, project proponent, and local jurisdiction should discuss the proposed project
location with regard to its location near the airport and the separation distances
identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. If possible, a more suitable location for the
proposed facility should be identified. If no other suitable location exists, FAA
recommends that the proposed facility plans be reviewed by a Qualified Airport
Wildlife Biologist to identify measures to avoid or reduce the facility's potential to
attract hazardous wildlife. If appropriate measures cannot be incorporated to reduce
potential wildlife hazards, airport operators should document their opposition in a letter
to the local jurisdiction.
2.3.5
Artificial Marshes.
In warmer climates, wastewater treatment facilities sometimes employ artificial
marshes and use submergent and emergent aquatic vegetation as natural filters. These
artificial marshes may be used by some species of flocking birds, such as blackbirds
and waterfowl, for breeding or roosting activities. The FAA recommends against
establishing artificial marshes within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4.
2.3.6 Wastewater Discharge and Sludge Disposal.
The FAA recommends careful consideration regarding the discharge of wastewater or
biosolids (i.e., secondarily treated sewage sludge) on airport property. Such discharges
might improve soil moisture and quality on unpaved areas and lead to improved turf
growth. Depending on the airfield plant communities and habitats present, this can be
an attractive food source for many species of animals or, conversely, could result in
limited attractiveness to hazardous wildlife. Also, improved turf requires more frequent
mowing and could attract geese. Airports should improve their turf with the goal of a
monoculture of turf that is least attractive to wildlife. Wastewater or biosolids
2-7
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
applications might assist in achieving this goal. Caution should be exercised when
discharges saturate airfield areas adjacent to paved surfaces. The resultant soft, muddy
conditions could restrict or prevent emergency vehicles from reaching accident sites in
a timely manner.
2.4 Wetlands.
Wetlands provide a variety of functions and can be regulated by local, state, and
Federal laws. Wetlands can be attractive to many types of wildlife, including many
which rank high on the list of hazardous wildlife species (Table 1 - AC 150/5200-32).
Some types of wetlands are not as attractive to wildlife as others and they should be
reviewed on a case -by -case basis to determine the likelihood of proposed wetlands
increasing the numbers of hazardous wildlife at the airport. Factors such as size, shape,
location, canopy cover and vegetative composition among other things should be
considered when determining compatibility.
Note: If questions exist as to whether an area qualifies as a wetland, contact the District
Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, or a wetland consultant qualified to delineate wetlands.
2.4.1 Existing Wetlands on or near Airport Property.
If wetlands are located on or near airport property, airport operators should be alert to
any wildlife use or habitat changes in these areas that could affect safe aircraft
operations. At public -use airports, the FAA recommends immediately correcting, in
cooperation with local, state, and Federal regulatory agencies, any wildlife hazards
arising from existing wetlands located on or near airports within 5 miles of the aircraft
operations area. Where required, a wildlife management plan will outline appropriate
wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators should develop
measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation with a FAA
Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist.
2.4.2 New Airport Development.
Whenever possible, the FAA recommends locating new airports using the separations
from wetlands identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Where alternative sites are not
practicable, or when airport operators are expanding an existing airport into or near
wetlands, a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the state wildlife management
agency should evaluate the wildlife hazards and prepare a wildlife management plan
that indicates methods of minimizing the hazards.
2.4.3 Mitigation for Wetland Impacts from Airport Projects.
Wetland mitigation may be necessary when unavoidable wetland disturbances result
from new airport development projects or projects required to correct wildlife hazards
from wetlands. Wetland mitigation must be designed so it does not create a wildlife
hazard. The FAA recommends that wetland mitigation projects that may attract
hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4.
2-8
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.4.11 onsite Mitigation of Wetland Functions.
Wetland mitigation/conservation easements must not inhibit the airport
operator's ability to effectively control hazardous wildlife on or near the
mitigation site or effectively maintain other aspects of safe airport
operations. Enhancing such mitigation areas to attract hazardous wildlife
must be avoided. The FAA will review any onsite mitigation proposals to
determine compatibility with safe airport operations and grant assurance
compliance. Early coordination with the FAA is encouraged for any
proposal to use airport land for wetland mitigation. A Qualified Airport
Wildlife Biologist should evaluate any wetland mitigation projects that are
needed to protect unique wetland functions and that must be located in the
separation criteria in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 before the mitigation is
implemented. A wildlife management plan should be developed to reduce
the wildlife hazards.
2.4.3.2 Offsite Mitigation of Wetland Functions.
2.4.3.2.1
2.4.12.2
2.4.3.2.3
2.4.3.2.4
The FAA recommends that wetland mitigation projects that may attract
hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the separations identified in
Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 unless they provide unique functions that must
remain onsite (see 2.4.3.1). Agencies that regulate impacts to or around
wetlands recognize that it may be necessary to split wetland functions in
mitigation schemes. Therefore, regulatory agencies may, under certain
circumstances, allow portions of mitigation to take place in different
locations.
The FAA encourages landowners or communities supporting the
restoration or enhancement of wetlands to do so only after critically
analyzing how those activities would affect aviation safety. To do so,
landowners or communities should contact the affected airport sponsor,
FAA, and/or a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist.
Those parties should work cooperatively to develop restoration or
enhancement plans that would not worsen existing wildlife hazards or
create such hazards. See Paragraphs 4.1.1 — 4.1.3 for land -use
modifications evaluation criteria.
If parties develop a mutually acceptable restoration or enhancement plan,
the landowner or community proposing the restoration or enhancement
must monitor the restored or enhanced site. This monitoring must verify
that efforts have not worsened or created hazardous wildlife attraction or
activity. If such attraction or activity occurs, the landowner or community
should work with the airport sponsor, or a Qualified Airport Wildlife
Biologist to reduce the hazard to aviation.
2-9
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.4.3.3
Mitigation Banking.
Wetland mitigation banking is the creation or restoration of wetlands in
order to provide mitigation credits that can be used to offset permitted
wetland losses. Mitigation banking benefits wetland resources by
providing advance replacement for permitted wetland losses;
consolidating small projects into larger, better -designed and managed
units; and encouraging integration of wetland mitigation projects with
watershed planning. This last benefit is most helpful for airport projects,
as wetland impacts mitigated outside of the separations identified in
Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 can still be located within the same watershed.
Wetland mitigation banks meeting the separation criteria offer an
ecologically sound approach to mitigation in these situations. Airport
operators should work with local watershed management agencies or
organizations to develop mitigation banking for wetland impacts on
airport property.
2.5 Dredge Spoil Containment Areas.
The FAA recommends against locating dredge spoil containment areas (also known as
Confined Disposal Facilities) within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4 if the containment area or the spoils contain material that would attract
hazardous wildlife. Proposals for new dredge spoil containment areas located within the
separation distances should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis to determine the
likelihood of resulting in an increase in hazardous wildlife. The FAA recommends that
airport sponsors work with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist and/or the FAA to
review proposals for dredge spoil containment areas located within separation criteria.
2.6 Agricultural Activities.
Many agricultural crops can attract hazardous wildlife and should not be planted within
the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Corn, wheat, and other small
grains in particular should be avoided. If the airport has no financial alternative to
agricultural crops to produce the income necessary to maintain the viability of the
airport, then the airport should consider growing crops that hold little food value for
hazardous wildlife, such as grass hay. Attractiveness to hazardous wildlife species
during all phases of production, from planting through harvest and fallow periods,
should be considered when contemplating the use of airport property for agricultural
production. Where agriculture is present, crop residue (e.g., waste grain) should not be
left in the field following harvest. Also, airports should consult AC 150/5300-13,
Airport Design, to ensure that agricultural crops do not create airfield obstructions or
other safety hazards. Before planning or initiating any agricultural practices on airport
property, operators should get approval from the appropriate FAA regional Airports
Division Office and demonstrate that the additional cost of wildlife control and
potential accidents is offset by revenue generated by agricultural leases. Annual review
of the Airport Certification Manual by the Certification Inspector does not constitute
approval and is insufficient to meet this requirement.
2-10
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.6.1 Livestock Production.
Confined livestock operations (i.e., feedlots, dairy operations, hog or chicken
production facilities, or egg laying operations) often attract flocking birds, such as
blackbirds, starlings, or pigeons that pose a hazard to aviation. Therefore, the FAA
recommends against such facilities within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4. The airport operator should be aware of any wildlife hazards that appear to
be attracted to off -site livestock operations and consider working with a Qualified
Airport Wildlife Biologist to identify reasonable and feasible measures that may be
proposed to landowners to reduce the attractiveness of the site to the potentially
hazardous wildlife species.
2.6.1.1
In exceptional circumstances, and following FAA review and approval,
livestock may be grazed on airport property as long as they are off the
airfield and separated behind fencing where they cannot pose a hazard to
aircraft. The livestock should be fed and watered as far away from the
airfield and approach/departure space as possible because the feed and
water may attract birds. The wildlife management plan should include
monitoring and wildlife mitigation for any areas where the livestock and
their feed/water is located in case a wildlife hazard is detected. Airports
without wildlife management plans should equally consider monitoring
and mitigation protocols to identify and address any wildlife hazards
associated with livestock and their feeding operations.
2.6.2 Alternative Uses of Agricultural Land.
2.6.2.1
Habitat modification both on and surrounding an airfield is one of the best
and most economical long term mitigation strategies to decrease risk that
wildlife pose to flight safety. Alternative land uses (e.g., solar and
biofuel) at airports could help mitigate many of the challenges for the
airport operator, developers, and conservationists. However, careful
planning must first determine that proposed alternative energy production
at airports does not create wildlife attractants or other hazards.
2.6.2.2 Some airports are surrounded by vast areas of farmed land within the
distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Seasonal uses of
agricultural land for activities such as hunting can create a hazardous
wildlife situation. In some areas, farmers will rent their land for hunting
purposes. Rice farmers, among others, flood their land to attract waterfowl
or for conservation efforts. This is often done during waterfowl hunting
season to obtain additional revenue by renting out duck blinds.
2.6.2.3 The waterfowl hunters then use decoys and call in hundreds, if not
thousands, of birds, creating a threat to aircraft safety. It is recommended
that a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist review, in coordination with
local farmers and producers, these types of seasonal land uses and
incorporate mitigating measures into the wildlife management plan, when
possible.
2-11
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.7 Aquaculture.
Aquaculture is the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of fish, shellfish, and plants in all
types of water environments including ponds, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. Aquaculture
is used to produce food fish, sport fish, bait fish, ornamental fish, and to support
restoration activities. Aquacultured species are grown in a range of facilities including
tanks, cages, ponds, and raceways. When an aquaculture facility is proposed within the
separation criteria, the airport operator, project proponent, and local jurisdiction should
discuss the proposed project location with regard to its attraction to hazardous species,
location near the airport and the separation distances identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4. If a facility is identified as a possible significant attraction, a more suitable
location for the proposed facility should be identified. If no other suitable location
exists, it is recommended that the proposed facility plans be reviewed by a Qualified
Airport Wildlife Biologist to identify measures to avoid or reduce the facility's
potential to attract hazardous wildlife.
2.7.1 Freshwater Aquaculture.
2.7.1.1
Freshwater aquaculture activities (e.g., catfish, tilapia, trout or bass
production) are typically conducted outside of fully enclosed buildings in
constructed ponds or tanks and are inherently attractive to a wide variety
of birds and therefore pose a significant risk to airport safety when within
the separation distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4.
Freshwater aquaculture should only be considered if extensive mitigation
measures have been incorporated to eliminate attraction to hazardous
birds. Examples of such mitigation include:
1. Netting or other material to exclude hazardous birds (e.g., eagles,
osprey, gulls, cormorants);
2. Acoustic hazing including pyrotechnics, propane cannons, directional
sonic/hailing devices and other similar technologies;
3. Feeding procedure cleanliness, exclusion techniques prohibiting birds
from perching or accessing food; efficiency of feeding operation
procedures that reduce fish food attraction to hazardous birds;
4. Operation procedure efficiency transferring live fish to and from
enclosures or removal of dead fish; maintenance and upkeep of
facility;
5. Monitoring, mitigation and communication protocols with nearby
airports as a proactive safety feature in response to specific hazardous
species in the event they are identified at the facility in unacceptable
numbers.
2.7.2 Marine Aquaculture.
Marine aquaculture (Mariculture) refers to the culturing of species that live in the
ocean. When appropriately managed and mitigated as necessary, mariculture facilities
do not pose a significant risk to airport safety.
2-12
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.7.2.1 Finfish Mariculture.
2.7.211
2.7.2.1.2
U.S. finfish mariculture primarily produces salmon and steelhead trout as
well as lesser amounts of cod, moi, yellowtail, barramundi, seabass, and
seabream. Maricultures use rigid and non -rigid enclosures (e.g., cages) at
the surface or submerged in the water column. These enclosures may be
fully enclosed, or be open at the top or covered with netted material to
negate losses from depredation by birds or other predators. Different
facilities employ different designs and operational protocols.
While mariculture operations typically do not pose a significant attractant
to hazardous birds, design and operational features can be incorporated as
permit conditions to mitigate attraction and effectively reduce this risk.
Examples of such mitigation include:
1. Fully enclosed cages using netting or other material to exclude
hazardous birds (e.g., gulls, cormorants, pelicans) and to insure
retention of fish;
2. Submerged enclosures to reduce attraction to hazardous birds;
3. Feed barge cleanliness, exclusion techniques prohibiting birds from
perching or accessing food; efficiency of feeding operation procedures
that reduce fish food attraction to hazardous birds;
4. Operation procedure efficiency transferring live fish to and from
enclosures or removal of dead fish; maintenance and upkeep of
facility;
5. Monitoring, mitigation and communication protocols with nearby
airports as a proactive safety feature in response to specific hazardous
species in the event they are identified at the facility in unacceptable
numbers.
2.7.2.2 Shellfish Mariculture.
U.S. shellfish mariculture primarily produces oysters, clams, mussels,
lobster and shrimp. Shellfish may be grown directly on the bottom, in
submerged cages or bags, or on suspended lines. These types of
mariculture operations do not typically present a significant attractant to
hazardous birds. For those operations that are found to pose a significant
risk, design and operation features that diminish possible attraction to
hazardous bird species (e.g., reducing areas for perching or feeding) can
effectively reduce this risk.
2.7.2.3 Plant Mariculture.
2.7.2.3.1
Microalgae, also referred to as phytoplankton, microphytes, or planktonic
algae constitute the majority of cultivated algae. Macroalgae, commonly
known as seaweed, also have many commercial and industrial uses.
2-13
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.7.2.3.2
While few commercial seaweed farms exist, the sector is growing. These
types of mariculture operations do not typically present an attractant to
hazardous birds.
2.8 Golf Courses, Landscaping, Structures and Other Land -Use Considerations.
2.8.1 Golf Courses.
The large grassy areas and open water found on most golf courses are attractive to
hazardous wildlife, particularly Canada geese and some species of gulls. These species
can pose a threat to aviation safety. If golf courses are located on or near airport
property, airport operators should be alert to any wildlife use or habitat changes in these
areas that could affect safe aircraft operations. Accordingly, airport operators should
develop, at a minimum, onsite measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in
consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Existing golf courses located
within these separations that have been documented to attract hazardous wildlife are
encouraged to develop a program to reduce the attractiveness of the sites to species that
are hazardous to aviation safety. The FAA recommends against construction of new
golf courses within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 if
determined that the new facility would create a significant wildlife hazard attractant by
a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Airport operators should ensure these golf
courses are monitored on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If
hazardous wildlife is detected, corrective actions should be immediately implemented.
2.8.2 Landscaping and Landscape Maintenance.
2.8.2.1
2.8.2.2
Depending on its geographic location, landscaping can attract hazardous
wildlife. The FAA recommends that airport operators approach
landscaping with caution and confine it to airport areas not associated with
aircraft movements. Vegetation that produces seeds, fruits, or berries, or
that provides dense roosting or nesting cover should not be used. Airports
should develop a landscape plan to include approved and prohibited
plants. The landscape plan should consider the watering needs of mature
plants. A Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should review all
landscaping plans. Airport operators should also monitor all landscaped
areas on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If
hazardous wildlife is detected, corrective actions should be immediately
implemented.
Turf grass areas on airports have the potential to be highly attractive to a
variety of hazardous wildlife species. Research conducted by the USDA
Wildlife Services' National Wildlife Research Center has shown that no
one airfield vegetation management regimen will deter all species of
hazardous wildlife in all situations. The composition and height of airfield
grasslands should be properly managed to reduce their attractiveness to
hazardous wildlife. In many situations, an intermediate height,
monoculture turf grass might be most favorable. In cooperation with a
2-14
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, airport operators should develop
airport turf grass management plans on a prescription basis, including
cultivar selection during reseeding efforts, that is specific to the airport's
geographic location, climatic conditions, and the type of hazardous
wildlife likely to frequent the airport.
2.8.2.3
2.8.3 Structures.
2.8.3.1
2.8.3.2
Airport operators should ensure that plant varieties attractive to hazardous
wildlife are not used on the airport. Disturbed areas or areas in need of re -
vegetating should not be planted with seed mixtures containing millet or
any other large -seed producing grass. For airport property already planted
with seed mixtures containing millet, rye grass, or other large -seed
producing grasses, the FAA recommends disking, plowing, or another
suitable agricultural practice to prevent plant maturation and seed head
production. Plantings should follow the specific recommendations for
grass management and seed and plant selection made by the State
University Cooperative Extension Service, the local office of Wildlife
Services, or a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Airport operators
should also consider developing and implementing a preferred/prohibited
plant species list, reviewed by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist,
which has been designed for the geographic location to reduce the
attractiveness to hazardous wildlife for landscaping airport property.
Certain structures attract birds for loafing and nesting. Flat rooftops can be
attractive to many species of gulls for nesting, hangars provide roosting /
nesting opportunities for rock doves, towers, light posts and navigation
aids can provide loafing / hunting perches for raptors and aircraft can
provide loafing / nesting sites for European starlings, blackbirds and other
species. These structures should be monitored and mitigated, if located on -
site. Off -site structural attractions may require additional coordination to
effectively mitigate their use by hazardous species.
Cellular communications towers are becoming increasingly more
attractive to large birds (e.g., osprey, eagles, herons, vultures) for nesting
and rearing their young. This problem is a growing concern because once
the young fledge from nests built on manmade structures they are more
likely to return to these kinds of sites to reproduce in future years.
2.8.4 Other Hazardous Wildlife Attractants.
Other land uses (e.g., conservation easements, parks, wildlife management areas) or
activities not addressed in this AC may have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife.
Regardless of the source of the attraction, when hazardous wildlife is noted on a public -
use airport, each certificate holder must take prompt remedial action(s) to protect
aviation safety and all non -certificated airports should take prompt remedial action(s) to
protect aviation safety.
2-15
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
2.9 Habitat for State and Federally Listed Species on Airports.
An airport's air operations area is an artificial environment that has been created and
maintained for aircraft operations. Because an aircraft operations area can be markedly
different from the surrounding native landscapes, it may attract wildlife species that do
not normally occur, or that occur only in low numbers in the area. Some of the
grassland species attracted to an airport's aircraft operations area are at the edge of their
natural ranges, but are attracted to habitat features found in the airport environment.
Also, some wildlife species may occur on the airport in higher numbers than occur
naturally in the region because the airport offers habitat features the species prefer.
Some of these wildlife species are Federal or state -listed threatened and endangered
species or have been designated by state resource agencies as species of special
concern.
2.9.1 State -Listed Species Habitat Concerns.
2.9.1.1
2.9.1.2
Many state wildlife agencies have requested that airport operators
facilitate and encourage habitat on airports for state -listed threatened and
endangered species or species of special concern. Airport operators should
exercise caution in adopting new management techniques because they
may increase wildlife hazards and be inconsistent with safe airport
operations. Managing the on -airport environment to facilitate or encourage
the presence of hazardous wildlife species can create conditions that are
incompatible with, or pose a threat to, aviation safety.
Not all state -listed threatened and endangered species or species of
concern pose a direct threat to aviation safety. However, these species may
pose an indirect threat and be hazardous because they attract other wildlife
species or support prey species attractive to other species that are directly
hazardous. Also, the habitat management practices that benefit these state -
listed threatened and endangered species and species of special concern
may attract other hazardous wildlife species. On -airport habitat and
wildlife management practices designed to benefit wildlife that directly or
indirectly create safety hazard where none existed before are incompatible
with safe airport operations.
2.9.2 Federally Listed Species Habitat Concerns.
2.9.2.1
The FAA supports efforts to protect threatened and endangered species, as
a matter of principle and consistent with the Endangered Species Act of
1973. The FAA must balance these requirements with our requirements
and mission to maintain a safe and efficient airport system. Requests to
enhance or create habitat for threatened and endangered species often
conflict with the safety of the traveling public and may place the protected
species at risk of mortality by aircraft collisions. The FAA does not
support the creation, conservation or enhancement of habitat or refuges to
attract endangered species on airports. If endangered species are present
on an airport, specific obligations may apply under the Endangered
2-16
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. and the airport operator should
contact the Airports District Office Environmental Protection Specialist.
2.9.2.2 The designation of critical habitat for listed species under the Endangered
Species Act on airport lands may be an incompatible land use in conflict
with the intended and dedicated purpose of airport lands and may limit or
preclude the ability of the airport to develop new infrastructure and growth
capacity to meet future air carrier service demand. In addition, depending
on the listed species (primarily but not limited to avian species), the
designation of critical habitat within the separation distances provided in
paragraphs 1.2 - 1.4 can represent a hazardous wildlife attractant in
conflict with 14 CFR Part 139.337.
2.10
Synergistic Effects of Surrounding Land Uses.
There may be circumstances where two or more different land uses would not, by
themselves, be considered hazardous wildlife attractants or are located outside of the
separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 but collectively may create a
wildlife corridor directly through the airport and/or surrounding airspace. An example
involves a lake located outside of the separation criteria on the east side of an airport
and a large hayfield on the west side of an airport. These two land uses, taken together,
could create a flyway for Canada geese directly across the airspace of the airport.
Airport operators must consider the entire surrounding landscape and community when
developing the wildlife management plan.
212112020 AC 150/5200-33C
CHAPTER 3. PROCEDURES FOR WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT BY OPERATORS
OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS AND CONDITIONS FOR NON -CERTIFICATED AIRPORTS TO
CONDUCT WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENTS AND WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISITS
3.1 Introduction.
In recognition of the increased risk of serious aircraft damage or the loss of human life
that can result from a wildlife strike, the FAA recommends all airports conduct a
Wildlife Hazard Site Visit or Wildlife Hazard Assessment unless otherwise mandated
after an initial triggering events defined in Part 139 Section 139.337. After the airport
has completed the site visit or assessment and implemented a wildlife management
plan, investigations should be conducted following subsequent triggering events to
determine if the original assessment and plan adequately address the situation or if
conditions have changed that would warrant an update to the plan. In this section,
airports that are certificated under 14 C.F.R. § 139.337 are referred to as "certificated
airports" and all others are referred to as "non -certificated airports." When a statement
refers to both certificated and non -certificated airports, "airport" or "all airports" is
used.
3.2 Coordination with Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists.
Hazardous wildlife management is a complex discipline and conditions vary widely
across the United States. Therefore, only airport wildlife biologists meeting the
qualification requirements in Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for
Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums
for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports, can
conduct Site Visits and Assessments. Airports must maintain documentation that the
Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist meets the qualification requirements in Advisory
Circular 150/5200-36.
3.3 Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A Manual For Airport Personnel.
3.3.1 The Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports manual, prepared by FAA and USDA
Wildlife Services staff, contains a compilation of information to assist airport
personnel in the development, implementation, and evaluation of wildlife
management plans at airports. The manual includes specific information on the nature
of wildlife strikes, legal authority, regulations, wildlife management techniques,
Assessments, Plans, and sources of help and information. The manual is available in
three languages: English, Spanish, and French. It can be viewed and downloaded free
of charge from the FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web site:
https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/wildlitt. This manual only provides a
starting point for addressing wildlife hazard issues at airports. FAA recommends that
airports consult with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists to assist with
development of a wildlife management plan and the implementation of management
actions by airport personnel.
3-1
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
3.3.2
There are many other resources complementary to this manual for use in developing
and implementing wildlife management plans. Several are listed in the manual's
bibliography or on the FAA Wildlife Mitigation website:
hops://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/wildlife
3.4 Wildlife Hazard Site Visits and Wildlife Hazard Assessments.
3.4.1 Operators of certificated airports are encouraged to conduct an initial assessment
regardless of whether the airport has experienced one of the triggering events. Doing
so would allow the airport to take proactive action and mitigate the wildlife risk
before experiencing an incident. All other airports are encouraged to conduct an
assessment or site visit (as defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-38)
conducted by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist (as defined in FAA Advisory
Circular 150/5200-36). Part 139 certificated airports are currently required to ensure
that an assessment is conducted consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 139.337.
3.4.2 The intent of a site visit is to provide an abbreviated analysis of an airport's wildlife
hazards and to provide timely information that allows the airport to expedite the
mitigation of these hazards. The FAA also recommends that airports conduct an
assessment or site visit as soon as practicable in order to identify any immediate
wildlife hazards and/or mitigation measures.
3.4.3 Non -certificated airports should submit the results of the site visit or assessment to the
FAA for review. The FAA will review the submitted site visit or assessment and
make a recommendation regarding the development of a wildlife management plan. A
wildlife management plan can be developed based on a site visit and will be required
if the non -certificated airport is going to request federal grants for the purpose of
mitigating wildlife hazards.
3.5 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan.
3.5.1
3.5.2
The FAA will consider the results of the assessment, along with the aeronautical
activity at the airport and the views of the airport operator and airport users, in
determining whether a wildlife management plan is needed for certificated airports, or
recommended for non -certificated airports.
If the FAA determines that a wildlife management plan is needed for a certificated
airport, the airport operator must formulate a plan, using the assessment as its basis
and submit to the FAA for approval. If the FAA recommends that a non -certificated
airport develop a plan, either an assessment or a site visit can be used as the basis for
the wildlife management plan. Airports should consult AC 150/5200-38, Protocol for
the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments,
and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans, for further information on preparation and
implementation requirements for their wildlife management plan.
3-2
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
3.5.3
3.5.4
The goal of an airport's wildlife management plan is to minimize the risk to aviation
safety, airport structures or equipment, or human health posed by populations of
hazardous wildlife on and around the airport. For wildlife management plans to
effectively reduce wildlife hazards on and near airports, accurate and consistent
wildlife strike reporting is essential. Airports should consult AC 150/5200-32,
Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes, for further information on responsibilities and
recommendations concerning wildlife strikes.
The wildlife management plan must identify hazardous wildlife attractants on or near
the airport and the appropriate wildlife management techniques to minimize the
wildlife hazard. It must also prioritize the management measures.
3.6 Local Coordination.
The FAA recommends establishing a Wildlife Hazards Working Group to facilitate the
communication, cooperation, and coordination of the airport and its surrounding
community necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the wildlife management plan. The
cooperation of the airport community is essential to prevent incompatible development
in the airport vicinity. Whether on or off the airport, input from all involved parties
must be considered when a potentially hazardous wildlife attractant is being proposed.
Based on available resources, airport operators should undertake public education
activities with the local planning agencies because some activities in the vicinity of an
airport, while harmless under normal conditions, can attract wildlife and present a
danger to aircraft (see Paragraphs 4.5 to 4.8). For example, if public trails are planned
near wetlands or in parks adjoining airport property, the public should know that
feeding birds and other wildlife in the area may pose a risk to aircraft.
3.7 Operational Notifications of Wildlife Hazards.
3.7.1
3.7.2
Operational notifications include active correspondence addressing wildlife issues on
or near an airport, notifications and alerts. If an existing land -use practice creates a
wildlife hazard and the land -use practice or wildlife hazard cannot be immediately
eliminated, airport operators must issue a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) and encourage
the land owner or manager to take steps to control the wildlife hazard and minimize
further attraction. Permanent attractions that cannot be eliminated or mitigated may
be noted in the Airport/Facility Directory. NOTAMS and Airport/Facility Directory
notifications are not appropriate for short-term or immediate advisories that can be
relayed via Pilot Reports, direct air traffic control voice communications, or
temporary Automated Terminal Advisory System alerts. Care should be given to
avoid the continual broadcast of general warnings for extended periods of time.
General warnings such as "birds in the vicinity of the aerodrome" offer little timely
information to aid pilots and eventually may be ignored if not updated.
The Automated Terminal Advisory System (ATIS) is a continuous broadcast of
recorded aeronautical information for aerodromes and their immediate surroundings.
ATIS broadcasts contain essential information, such as current weather information,
3-3
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
active runways, available approaches, wildlife hazards and any other information
required by the pilots. They indicate significant (moderate or severe) wildlife activity,
as reported by an approved agency that presents temporary hazards on the ATIS
broadcast. Pilots take notice of available ATIS broadcasts before contacting the local
control unit, which reduces the controllers' workload and relieves frequency
congestion. The recording is updated in fixed intervals or when there is a significant
change in the information. Although ATIS broadcasts involving wildlife should be
timely and specific, pilots do not need to know species -specific information. General
descriptive information detailing size and number of animals, locations and timing of
occurrence provides useful, actionable information for pilots.
3.7.3
A pilot report (PIREP) is reported by a pilot to indicate encounters of hazardous
weather (e.g., icing or turbulence) and hazardous wildlife. Pilot reports are short-lived
warnings providing immediate information on pilot observations that are transmitted
in real-time to air traffic control. Large animals near active surfaces, soaring vultures
and raptors within approach/ departure corridors and waterfowl such as geese feeding
in grassy areas next to runways are all examples of pilot reports generated by pilots.
3.8 Federal and State Depredation Permits.
The FAA recommends that airports maintain federal and state depredation permits to
allow mitigation and/ or removal of hazardous species. All protected species require
special permits for lethal mitigation or capture and relocation procedures. Similarly,
endangered or threatened species mitigation also requires special permits. The FAA
recommends that airports work closely with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist
during the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service consultation and permitting process. The
following Orders can help airports reduce risks from hazardous species by allowing
private citizens to control hazardous species off airport properties without the need for a
Federal depredation permit.
3.8.1 Standing Depredation Orders.
3.8.1.1
3.8.1.2
Federal law allows people to protect themselves and their property from
damage caused by migratory birds. Provided no effort is made to kill or
capture the birds, a depredation permit is not required to merely scare or
herd depredating migratory birds other than endangered or threatened
species or bald or golden eagles (50 CFR 21.41).
In addition, certain species of migratory birds may be mitigated without a
federal permit under specific circumstances, many of which relate to
agricultural situations. The following Standing Depredation Orders have
applicability near airports:
• 50 CFR § 21.49- Control Order for Resident Canada Geese at Airports
and Military Airfields.
• 50 CFR § 21.50- Depredation Order for Resident Canada Geese Nests
and Eggs.
3-4
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
• 50 CFR § 21.43 - Depredation Order for Blackbirds, Cowbirds, Crows,
Grackles, and Magpies.
• 50 CFR § 21.54 - Control Order for Muscovy Ducks in the United
States.
• 50 CFR § 21.55 - Control Order for Invasive Migratory Birds in
Hawaii.
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
CHAPTER 4. RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR THE FAA, AIRPORT OPERATORS
AND OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITIES REGARDING OFF -AIRPORT ATTRACTANTS
4.1 FAA Notification and Review of Proposed Land -Use Practice Changes in the
Vicinity of Public -Use Airports.
4.1.1
412
4.1.3
4.1.4
For projects that are located within 5 miles of the airport's aircraft operations area, the
FAA may review development plans, proposed land -use changes, operational
changes, major federal actions or wetland mitigation plans to determine if such
changes increase risk to airport safety by attracting hazardous wildlife on and around
airports. The FAA is not a permitting agency for land use modifications that occur off
airport properties, therefore, such reviews are typically initiated by state or federal
permitting agencies seeking FAA input on new or revised permits. Each of the land
uses listed in Chapter 2 of this AC has the potential to pose a risk to airport operations
when they are located within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4.
Off -site land use modifications near airports may include an assessment of risk for
facilities and land -use changes and, if necessary, mitigation strategies that may reduce
risk to an acceptable level. However, the FAA recognizes that individual facilities or
land -use modifications may present a range of attractants to different species,
resulting in varying levels of risk. Therefore, the FAA considers each proposal on a
case -by -case basis
The FAA analyzes each land -use modification or new facility proposal prior to its
establishment or any significant planned changes to design or operations that may
increase the risk level. As part of a review, the FAA considers several factors that
include, but are not limited to:
1. Type of attractant;
2. Size of attractant;
3. Location/distance of attractant from airport;
4. Design (e.g., construction, material, mitigation techniques employed into design);
5. Operation (e.g., cleanliness, constancy/ volume of use, seasonality, time of day);
6. Monitoring protocols (e.g., frequency, documentation, evaluation, species
identification and number thresholds that trigger actions of communication or
mitigation, baseline wildlife data);
7. Mitigation protocols (e.g., responsibilities, methods, intensity, pre -determined
objectives, documentation, evaluation); and
8. Communication protocols to airport and/ or air traffic control tower;
The review of these factors may result in FAA recommended additions or
modifications to a conditional use permit that allows the permitting agency to track
compliance with the permittee obligations. Such conditions placed within a permit
4-1
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
may involve a comprehensive outline and recognition of individuals responsible for
monitoring, communication, and mitigation measures if certain action thresholds are
met. Action thresholds are defined in this instance as those pre -determined parameters
(e.g., number, location, behavior, time of day) of specific hazardous species that
would trigger a mitigation response. Additionally, baseline data should be used to
determine the effect, if any, on wildlife populations at the proposed off -site location
and/or at the airport.
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7
Baseline data may need to be collected, depending on the existence of useful data and
timeline for site modification. If, after taking into account the factors above, FAA
determines that a facility poses a significant risk to airport safety, FAA will object to
its establishment or renewal.
For projects that are located within 5 miles of the airport's aircraft operations area, the
FAA Airport District Office may review development plans, proposed land -use
changes, operational changes, major federal actions or wetland mitigation plans to
determine if such changes present potential wildlife hazards to aircraft operations.
The FAA considers sensitive airport areas as those that lie under or next to approach
or departure airspace. This brief examination should indicate if further investigation is
warranted.
Where a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist has conducted a further study to
evaluate a site's compatibility with airport operations, the FAA may use the study
results to make a determination.
4.2 Waste Management Facilities.
4.2.1 Notification of New/Expanded Project Proposal.
4.2.1.1
4.2.1.2
49 U.S.C. § 44718(d), prohibits the construction or establishment of new
municipal landfills within 6 miles of certain public -use airports, when both
the airport and the landfill meet specific conditions. See Paragraph 2.2 of
this guidance for a more detailed discussion of these restrictions.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires any landfill
operator proposing a new or expanded waste disposal operation within 5
miles of a runway end to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports
Division Office and the airport operator of the proposal. See 40 CFR §
258, Criteria ffor Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Section 258.10, Airport
Safety. The EPA also requires owners or operators of new landfill units, or
lateral expansions of existing MSWLF landfill units, that are located
within 10,000 feet of any airport runway end used by turbine -powered
aircraft, or within 5,000 feet of any airport runway end used only by
piston -type aircraft, to demonstrate successfully that such units are not
hazards to aircraft. (See 4.3.2 below.)
4-2
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.4
When new or expanded municipal landfills are being proposed near
airports, landfill operators must notify the airport operator and the FAA of
the proposal as early as possible pursuant to 40 CFR § 258.
The FAA discourages the development of waste disposal and other
facilities, discussed in Chapter 2, located within the separation criteria
specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. To show that a waste -handling
facility sited within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through
1.4 does not attract hazardous wildlife and does not threaten aviation, the
developer must establish the facility will not handle putrescible material
other than that as outlined in 2.2.4. The FAA recommends against any
facility other than those outlined in 2.2.4 (enclosed transfer stations). The
FAA will use this information to determine if the facility will be a hazard
to aviation.
4.3 Other Land -Use Practice Changes.
4.3.1 The FAA encourages operators of public -use airports who become aware of proposed
land use practice changes that may attract hazardous wildlife within 5 miles of their
airports to notify their assigned Airport Certification Safety Inspector or Airports
District Office Program Manager. The FAA also encourages proponents of such land
use changes to notify the FAA as early in the planning process as possible. Advanced
notice affords the FAA an opportunity (1) to evaluate the effect of a particular land -
use change on aviation safety and (2) to support efforts by the airport sponsor to
restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses that are compatible with the
airport.
4.3.2
4.3.3
The airport operator, project proponent, or land -use operator may use FAA Form
7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, or other suitable documents
similar to FAA Form 7460-1 to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports
Division Office. Project proponents can contact the appropriate FAA Regional
Airports Division Office for assistance with the notification process prior to
submitting Form 7460-1.
It is helpful if the notification includes a 15 -minute quadrangle map of the area
identifying the location of the proposed activity. The land -use operator or project
proponent should also forward specific details of the proposed land -use change or
operational change or expansion. In the case of solid waste landfills, the information
should include the type of waste to be handled, how the waste will be processed, and
final disposal methods.
4.3.4 Airports that have Received Federal Assistance.
Airports that have received Federal assistance are required under their grant assurances
to take appropriate actions to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses
that are compatible with normal airport operations. See Grant Assurance 21. The FAA
recommends that airport operators oppose off -airport land -use changes or practices, to
4-3
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
the extent practicable, within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4,
which may attract hazardous wildlife. Failure to do so may lead to noncompliance with
applicable grant assurances. The FAA will not approve the placement of airport
development projects pertaining to aircraft movement in the vicinity of hazardous
wildlife attractants without appropriate mitigating measures. Increasing the intensity of
wildlife control efforts is not a substitute for preventing, eliminating or reducing a
proposed wildlife hazard. Airport operators should identify hazardous wildlife
attractants and any associated wildlife hazards during any planning process for airport
development projects.
4.4 Coordination to Prevent Creation of New Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife
Attractants.
Airport operators should work with local and regional planning and zoning boards to be
aware of proposed land -use changes, or modification of existing land uses, that could
create hazardous wildlife attractants within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2
through 1.4. Pay particular attention to proposed land uses involving creation or
expansion of wastewater treatment facilities, development of wetland mitigation sites,
or development or expansion of dredge spoil containment areas. At the very least, it is
recommended that airport operators are on the notification list of the local planning
board or equivalent review entity for all communities located within 5 miles of the
airport, so they will receive notification of any proposed project and have the
opportunity to review it for attractiveness to hazardous wildlife. This may be
accomplished through one or more of the following:
4.4.1 Site -specific Criteria.
The airport should establish site -specific criteria for assessment of land uses attractive
to hazardous wildlife and locations that would be of concern based on wildlife strikes
and on wildlife abundance and activity at the airport and in the local area. These criteria
may be more selective, but should not be less restrictive than this guidance.
4.4.2 Outreach.
Airports should actively seek to provide educational information and/ or provide input
regarding local development, natural resource modification or wildlife -related concerns
that affect wildlife hazards and safe air travel.
4.4.2.1
External Outreach.
Airport operators and a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should
consider outreach to local planning and zoning organizations on land uses
of concern or to local organizations responsible for natural resource
management (including wildlife, wetlands, and parks.) Airports should
also consider developing and distributing position letters and educational
materials on airport -specific concerns regarding wildlife hazards, wildlife
activity and attraction. Finally, airports should provide formal comments
on local procedures, laws, ordinances, plans, and regulatory actions such
as permits related to land uses of concern.
4-4
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
4.4.2.2
Internal Outreach.
Airports should consider developing and distributing position letters and
educational materials on airport -specific concerns regarding species
identification and mitigation procedures, wildlife hazards, wildlife activity
and attraction to employees and personnel with access to the aircraft
operations area.
4.5 Coordination on Existing Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants.
Airports are encouraged to work with landowners and managers to cooperatively
develop procedures to monitor and manage hazardous wildlife attraction. If applicable,
these procedures may include:
1.. Conducting a wildlife hazard site visit by a wildlife biologist meeting the
qualification requirements of Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for
Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training
Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on
Airports
2. Conducting regular, standardized, wildlife monitoring surveys;4
3. Establishing threshold numbers of wildlife which would trigger certain actions
and/or communications;
4. Establishment of procedures to deter or remove hazardous wildlife.
4.6 Prompt Remedial Action.
For attractants found on and off airport property, and with landowner or manager
cooperation, Part 139 certificated airports must take immediate action in accordance
with their Airport Certification Manual and the requirements of Part 139.337, to
alleviate wildlife hazards whenever they are detected. It is also recommended that non -
certificated airports take immediate action to alleviate wildlife hazards whenever they
are detected. In addition, airports should take prompt action to identify the source of
attraction and cooperatively develop procedures to mitigate and monitor the attractant.
For Part 139 Certificated airports, immediate actions are required in accordance
with 139.337(a).
4.7 FAA Assistance.
If there is a question on the implementation of any of the guidance in this section,
contact the FAA Regional Airports Division for assistance.
4 Recommended survey protocols can be found in AC 150/5200-38, Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife
Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans, and DeVault, T.L., B.F.
Blackwell, and J.L. Belant, eds. 2013. Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing Animal —Aircraft Collisions
through Science -Based Management Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA. 181 pp.
4-5
2/21/2020 AC 15O/52OO-33C
4.7.1 Airport Documentation Procedures.
Airports should document on -site and off -site wildlife attractants as part of their
"Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Annual Review," "Wildlife Hazard Management
Plan Review Following a Triggering Event," and the airport's Continual Monitoring
Annual Report (as outlined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-38). As a best
management practice, airports may choose to keep a log to track contacts from
landowners or managers, permitting agencies, or other entities concerning land uses
near the airport.
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
APPENDIX A. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS ADVISORY CIRCULAR
A.1 General.
This appendix provides definitions of terms used throughout this AC.
1. Air operations area. Any area of an airport used or intended to be used for
landing, takeoff, or surface maneuvering of aircraft. An air operations area includes
such paved areas or unpaved areas that are used or intended to be used for the
unobstructed movement of aircraft in addition to its associated runway, taxiways, or
apron.
2. Airport operator. The operator (private or public) or sponsor of a public -use
airport.
3. Approach or departure airspace. The airspace, within 5 statute miles of an
airport, through which aircraft move during landing or takeoff.
4. Bird balls. High -density plastic floating balls that can be used to cover ponds and
prevent birds from using the sites.
5. Certificate holder. The holder of an Airport Operating Certificate issued under 14
C.F.R. Part 139.
6. Construct a new municipal landfill. To begin to excavate, grade land, or raise
structures to prepare a municipal solid waste landfill as permitted by the appropriate
regulatory or permitting agency.
7. Detention ponds. Stot iii water management ponds that hold storm water for short
periods of time, a few hours to a few days.
8. Establish a new municipal landfill. When the first load of putrescible waste is
received on -site for placement in a prepared municipal solid waste landfill.
9. Fly ash. The fine, sand -like residue resulting from the complete incineration of an
organic fuel source. Fly ash typically results from the combustion of coal or waste
used to operate a power generating plant.
10. General aviation aircraft. Any civil aviation aircraft operating under 14 CFR Part
91
11. Hazardous wildlife. Species of wildlife (birds, mammals, reptiles), including feral
and domesticated animals, not under control that may pose a direct hazard to
aviation (i.e., strike risk to aircraft) or an indirect hazard such as an attractant to
other wildlife that pose a strike hazard or are causing structural damage to airport
facilities (e.g., burrowing, nesting, perching).
12. Municipal Landfill. A publicly or privately owned discrete area of land or an
excavation that receives household waste and that is not a land application unit,
surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile, as those terms are defined under
40 CFR § 257.2. A municipal landfill may receive other types wastes, such as
commercial solid waste, non -hazardous sludge, small -quantity generator waste, and
A-1
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
industrial solid waste, as defined under 40 CFR § 258.2. A municipal landfill can
consist of either a stand-alone unit or several cells that receive household waste.
13. New municipal landfill. A municipal solid waste landfill that was established or
constructed after April 5, 2001.
14. Piston -powered aircraft. Fixed -wing aircraft powered by piston engines.
15. Piston -use airport. Any airport that does not sell Jet -A fuel for fixed -wing turbine -
powered aircraft, and primarily serves fixed -wing, piston -powered aircraft.
Incidental use of the airport by turbine -powered, fixed -wing aircraft would not
affect this designation. However, such aircraft should not be based at the airport.
16. Public agency. A state or political subdivision of a state, a tax -supported
organization, or an Indian tribe or pueblo (49 U.S.C. § 47102(19)).
17. Public airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes that is
under the control of a public agency; and of which the area used or intended to be
used for landing, taking off, or surface maneuvering of aircraft is publicly owned
(49 U.S.C. § 47102(20)).
18. Public -use airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes
where the area used or intended to be used for landing, taking off, or surface
maneuvering of aircraft may be under the control of a public agency or privately
owned and used for public purposes (49 U.S.C. § 47102(21)).
19. Putrescible waste. Solid waste that contains organic matter capable of being
decomposed by micro-organisms and of such a character and proportion as to be
capable of attracting or providing food for birds (40 CFR §257.3-8).
20. Putrescible-waste disposal operation. Landfills, garbage dumps, underwater waste
discharges, or similar facilities where activities include processing, burying, storing,
or otherwise disposing of putrescible material, trash, and refuse.
21. Retention ponds. Storm water management ponds that hold water for more than 48
hours.
22. Risk. Risk is the relationship between the severity and probability of a threat. It is
the product of hazard level and abundance in the critical airspace, and is thus
defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a given species.
23. Runway protection zone. An area off the runway end to enhance the protection of
people and property on the ground (see AC 150/5300-13). The dimensions of this
zone vary with the airport design, aircraft, type of operation, and visibility
minimum.
24. Scheduled air carrier operation. Any common carriage passenger -carrying
operation for compensation or hire conducted by an air carrier or commercial
operator for which the air carrier, commercial operator, or their representative offers
in advance the departure location, departure time, and arrival location. It does not
include any operation that is conducted as a supplemental operation under 14 CFR
Part 119 or as a public charter operation under 14 CFR Part 380 (14 CFR § 119.3).
A-2
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
25. Sewage sludge. Any solid, semi -solid, or liquid residue generated during the
treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Sewage sludge includes, but is
not limited to, domestic septage; scum or solids removed in primary, secondary, or
advanced wastewater treatment process; and a material derived from sewage sludge.
Sewage does not include ash generated during the firing of sewage sludge in a
sewage sludge incinerator or grit and screenings generated during preliminary
treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. (40 CFR § 257.2)
26. Sludge. Any solid, semi -solid, or liquid waste generated form a municipal,
commercial or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant,
or air pollution control facility or any other such waste having similar characteristics
and effect. (40 CFR § 257.2).
27. Solid waste. Any garbage, refuse, sludge, from a waste treatment plant, water
supply treatment plant or air pollution control facility and other discarded material,
including, solid liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from
industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community
activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage, or
solid or dissolved material in irrigation return flows or industrial discharges which
are point sources subject to permits under section 402 of the Clean Water Act, or
source, special nuclear, or by product material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954.(40 CFR § 257.2).
28. Turbine -powered aircraft. Aircraft powered by turbine engines including turbojets
and turboprops but excluding turbo -shaft rotary -wing aircraft.
29. Turbine -use airport. Any airport that sells fuel for fixed -wing turbine -powered
aircraft.
30. Wastewater treatment facility. Any devices and/or systems used to store, treat,
recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes, including publicly
owned treatment works, as defined by Section 212 of the Clean Water Act. This
definition includes any pretreatment involving the reduction of the amount of
pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant
properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing
such pollutants into a publicly owned treatment system. (See 40 CFR § 403.3 (q),
(r), & (s)).
31 Wildlife. Any wild animal, including without limitation any wild mammal, bird,
reptile, fish, amphibian, mollusk, crustacean, arthropod, coelenterate, or other
invertebrate, including any part, product, egg, or offspring thereof. 50 CFR § 10.12.
As used in this AC, wildlife includes feral animals and domestic animals out of the
control of their owners (14 CFR Part 139, Certification of Airports).
32. Wildlife attractants. Any human -made structure, land -use practice, or human -
made or natural geographic feature that can attract or sustain hazardous wildlife
within the landing or departure airspace or the airport's aircraft operations area.
These attractants can include architectural features, landscaping, waste disposal
sites, wastewater treatment facilities, agricultural or aquaculture activities, surface
mining, or wetlands.
A-3
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
33. Wildlife hazard. A potential for a damaging aircraft collision with wildlife on or
near an airport.
34. Wildlife strike. A wildlife strike is deemed to have occurred when:
a. A strike between wildlife and aircraft has been witnessed;
b. Evidence or damage from a strike has been identified on an aircraft;
c. Bird or other wildlife remains, whether in whole or in part, are found:
i, Within 250 feet of a runway centerline or within 1,000 feet of a runway end
unless another reason for the animal's death is identified or suspected,
unless another reason for the animal's death is identified or;
ii. On a taxiway or anywhere else on or off airport that there is reason to
believe was the result of a strike with an aircraft.
d. The presence of birds or other wildlife on or off the airport had a significant
negative effect on a flight (i.e., aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high-speed
emergency stop, aircraft left pavement area to avoid collision with animal).
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
APPENDIX B. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
B.1 Regulations
• 14 CFR § 139.337, Wildlife Hazard Management
• 40 CFR § 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
B.2 Advisory Circulars
• AC 150/5200-32, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes
• AC 150/5200-33, Hazard Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports
• AC 150/5200-34, Construction or Establishment of New Landfills Near Public
Airports
• AC 150/5200-36, Qual ( ications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard
Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in
Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports
• AC 150/5200-38, Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site
Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans
• AC 150/5220-25, Airport Avian Radar Systems
• AC 150/5210-24, Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Management
B.3 Certification Alerts
• Certalert No. 97-09, Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Outline (11/17/1997)
• Certalert No. 98-05, Grasses Attractive To Hazardous Wildlife (9/2]/1998)
• Certalert No. 06-07, Requests by State Wildlife Agencies to Facilitate and
Encourage Habitat for State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and
Species of Special Concern on Airports (11/21/2006)
• Certalert No. 13-01, Federal and State Depredation Permit Assistance (1/30/2013)
• Certalert No.14-01, Seasonal Mitigation of Hazardous Species at Airports:
Attention to Snowy Owls (2/26/2014)
• Certalert No. 16-03, Recommended Wildlife Exclusion Fencing (8/2016)
2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C
B.4 Airport Cooperative Research Program Reports
These, and other wildlife / aviation reports, are available from the Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies (TRB) at
http://www.trb.org/Publications/Publications.aspx.
• ACRP Research Report 198: Wetland Mitigation, Volume 2, A Guidebook for
Airports (2019)
• ACRP Synthesis 92: Airport Waste Management and Recycling Practices (2018)
• ACRP Research Report 174: Guidebook and Primer (2018)
• ACRP Report 122: Innovative Airport Responses to Threatened / Endangered
Species (2015)
• ACRP Report 125: Balancing Airport Stormwater and Bird Hazard Management
(2015)
• ACRP Report 145: Applying an SMS Approach to Wildlife Hazard Management
(2015)
• ACRP Synthesis 39 Report; Airport Wildlife Population Management (2013)
• ACRP Synthesis 52 Report: Habitat Management to Deter Wildlife at Airports
(2014)
• ACRP Synthesis 23 Report: Bird Harassment, Repellent, and Deterrent Techniques
for Use on and Near Airports (2011)
• ACRP Report 32: Guidebook for Addressing Aircraft/Wildlife Hazards at General
Aviation Airports (2010)
B.5 Manuals
• Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports - A Manual for Airport Personnel (2005)
B.6 Orders
• 50 CFR § 21.49, Control Order for Resident Canada Geese at Airports and Military
Airfields
• 50 CFR § 21.50, Depredation Order for Resident Canada Geese Nests and Eggs
• 50 CFR § 21.43, Depredation Order for Blackbirds, Cowbirds, Crows, Grackles,
and Magpies
• 50 CFR § 21.54, Control Order for Muscovy Ducks in the United States
• 50 CFR § 21.55, Control Order for Invasive Migratory Birds in Hawaii
Advisory Circular Feedback
If you find an error in this AC, have recommendations for improving it, or have suggestions for
new items/subjects to be added, you may let us know by (1) mailing this form to Manager,
Airport Safety and Operations Division, Federal Aviation Administration ATTN: AAS-300, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington DC 20591 or (2) faxing it to the attention of AAS-300 at
(202) 267-5257.
Subject: AC 150/5200-33C Date:
Please check all appropriate line items:
■
■
■
■
■
An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in paragraph on page
.
Recommend paragraph on page be changed as follows:
In a future change to this AC, please cover the following subject:
(Briefly describe what you want added.)
Other comments:
I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me at (phone number, email address).
Submitted by: Date:
Hello