DOCSLIB.ORG

Tropical Storm Irene

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tropical Storm Irene Monitoring and United States Evaluation Department of Agriculture Forest Report Service Eastern 2011 Region White Mountain National Forest Cover: Monitoring water quality in Meserve Brook. WMNF photo by Chris Mattrick. This document is available in large print. Contact the White Mountain National Forest Supervisor’s Office 603-536-6100 TTY 603-536-3665 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720- 5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Contents ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Forest Supervisor’s Note ............................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Required Monitoring ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Management Indicators Species (MIS) ..................................................................................................... 7 Outputs and Services ................................................................................................................................ 8 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................... 11 Sustainability ........................................................................................................................................... 11 Objective Attainment .................................................................................................................................. 12 Lands ....................................................................................................................................................... 12 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................... 13 Transportation ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Wildland Fire ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Standard and Guideline Implementation ................................................................................................... 17 Geologic and Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................ 17 Lands ....................................................................................................................................................... 19 Non-Native Invasive Species ................................................................................................................... 19 Rare and Unique Features ...................................................................................................................... 20 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................... 21 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 23 Wildland Fire ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................................... 25 Effects of Management Practices ............................................................................................................... 27 Heritage Resources ................................................................................................................................. 27 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 28 Project Reviews ........................................................................................................................................... 29 Loon Mountain Expansion ...................................................................................................................... 29 Snow’s Mountain Trail Drainage Improvement ...................................................................................... 29 Tropical Storm Irene ................................................................................................................................... 30 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 30 Initial Observations ................................................................................................................................. 31 Long-term Efforts .................................................................................................................................... 34 Other Monitoring ........................................................................................................................................ 34 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................... 34 Climate Change ....................................................................................................................................... 35 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................... 38 Riparian and Aquatic Habitats ................................................................................................................ 39 Socio-Economic Assessment ................................................................................................................... 42 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 42 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................... 43 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................................... 44 Annual Updates ....................................................................................................................................... 45 Monitoring and Research by Partners and Cooperators ............................................................................ 48 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 48 Forest Supervisor’s Note I am pleased to share with you the most recent White Mountain National Forest Monitoring Report, which summarizes many of our monitoring efforts in fiscal year 2011 (FY11). As always, this report considers how well we are implementing the management direction in the Forest Plan, what effects our management is having on natural, cultural, and social resources, and how those resources are being affected by other factors. We continue to be committed to identifying what is working well in our programs and what isn’t, sharing the results, and learning from all that we do. In August, 2011, Tropical Storm Irene swept through, dumping several inches of rain across the Forest in just a few hours. Fortunately no one was hurt on the Forest, but many of our roads, trails, and campgrounds sustained heavy damage. We spent the fall assessing the impacts, repairing high priority sites so they could reopen, and determining what additional repair work is needed in coming years. We have added a new section to this monitoring report on Tropical Storm Irene. In it we share some of our initial observations about the storm and its impact. In future years, we will examine long-term effects on resources and how the Forest recovers from the storm. Our monitoring shows that we are largely implementing the Forest Plan as written and intended. Working with our partners, we manage all the resources on the White Mountain National Forest in an integrated way, ensuring that meeting objectives in one area doesn’t adversely affect another. I am proud of our many successes and confident we will find solutions where monitoring shows a new approach is needed. I find that the monitoring we did in FY11
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scanned Using Book Scancenter Flexi
    Fiftk Annual Report OF THE -New Hampskire Timkerland Owners Association II NINETEEN HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN S«cretary-Treasurer’s Report Balance from 1914.................................... $ 255 33 Assessment (%c)..................................... 7,053 33 Sale Deer Mt. Lookout Station................ 238 00 OFFICERS W. R. Brown, President, Berlin Mills Co. $7,546 66 expenditures L. S. Tainter, Vice-President, Publishers Paper Co. Patrol........................................................ $6,059 27 Morrison, W. H. Secretary-Treasurer, Telephone Repairs.................. 101 04 Gorham, N. H. Exchange and Tolls................................. 86 23 Advertising............................................... 25 00 Salary September and October............... 200 00 DIRECTORS Traveling Expense................................... 92 23 Office Expense........................................ i07 55 W. R. Brown, Berlin Mills Co. Miscellaneous Expense........................... 27 75 L? S. Tainter, Publishers Paper Co. C. C. Wilson, Odell Manufacturing Co. $6,699 07 Balance...................................................... 847 59 E. E. Amey, International Paper Co. Due account unpaid assessments........... 5 25 H. G. Philbrook, Connecticut Valley Co. $852 84 The number of members belonging to the Association this season is thirty-two, and the total acreage owned by them is 930,540 acres. The weather conditions having been so unusu­ ally favorable the past season it has been possible' a to limit the total assessment to three-fourths cents per acre, as in 1914. The Conway Lumber Company and the Pub­ lishers Paper Company have paid assessments the The 1915 Fire Season past season on the lands purchased of them by the Owing to the very early spring, a number of Federal Government as the transaction had not the Patrolmen had to be employed much earlier been completed, thereby making the acreage of the than in 1914.
    [Show full text]
  • WMNF Rec TH Disp Closure List
    4/28/2020 Closure of trailheads include 50 ft perimeter around identified recreation facility listed below. *means this facility is an AT facility (trailhead, shelter, or tentsite) ANDRO CLOSURES Trailheads: Albany Notch, Alpine Garden, Caribou West/Mud Brook, Direttissima, East Royce/Spruce Hill, Great Gulf Wilderness, Hastings, Imp, Kilkenny Ridge, Nelson Crag, Nineteen Mile Brook, Pine Mtn./Pine Link, Starr King, Thompson Falls, Unknown Pond South, Wild RiVer/Basin, York Pond East Day Use Area: Dolly Copp Picnic Area (including pavilion rental), Gilead Picnic Area, Glen Ellis Scenic Area, Great Gulf Parking Area Dispersed Sites: Gentian Pond Shelter*, Imp Shelter*, Mt. Cabot Cabin, Osgood Tent site*, Rattle River Shelter*, Rogers Ledge Tent site, Trident Col Tent site*, Unknown Pond Tent site, Valley Way Tent site PEMI CLOSURES Trailheads: Ammonoosuc RaVine, BeaVer Brook (Kinsman)*, Crawford Connector*, Smarts Mountain/Dorchester Rd (Lyme)*, Lincoln Woods, Osceola, Welch-Dickey, Zealand (Forest Rd. 16) Day Use Area: Zealand Picnic Area Dispersed Sites: Beaver Brook Shelter*, Coppermine Shelter, Eliza Brook Shelter*, Ethan Pond Shelter*, Garfield Ridge Shelter*, Guyot Shelter*, Hexacuba Shelter*, Jeffers Brook Shelter*, Kinsman Pond Shelter*, Liberty Springs Tentsite*, Moose Mountain Shelter*, Ore Hill Tentsite*, Smarts Mountain Cabin and Tentsite*, Three Ponds Shelter, Trapper John Shelter*, VelVet Rocks Shelter* SACO CLOSURES Trailheads: Albany CoVered Bridge, Basin, Boulder Loop, Champney Falls, Downes Brook, Liberty/Brook/Bolles,
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphic and Structural Traverse of Mount Moriah, New Hampshire
    B2-1 STRATIGRAPHIC AND STRUCTURAL TRAVERSE OF MOUNT MORIAH, NEW HAMPSHIRE. by Timothy T. Allen, Geology Department, Keene State College, Keene, NH 03435-2001 ([email protected]) INTRODUCTION East of Pinkham Notch and south of the Androscoggin River valley lies a large roadless area of the White Mountain National Forest containing the Carter–Moriah mountain range and the Wild River valley (Fig 1). Original mapping in this and adjacent areas was done by M. P. Billings and others in the 1940’s and 1950’s (1941, 1946, 1975, 1979), and Billings’ work lays the foundation upon which all subsequent work in this area is based. Since the time of Billings’ maps, however, further developments have been made in understanding the litho-stratigraphy of Siluro-Devonian metasedimentary rocks throughout New Hampshire and western Maine (Osberg et al., 1985; Moench & Pankiwskyj, 1988; Lyons et al., 1991). Attempts to apply the new lithostratigraphy to this region met with limited success, particularly in the migmatites that make up the Carter–Moriah and Wild River area (CM–WR; Hatch et al., 1983; Hatch & Moench, 1984; Hatch & Wall, 1986). The CM–WR area is shown on current maps as “undifferentiated sedimentary rocks in areas of extreme migmatization” (Osberg et al., 1985; Lyons et al., 1991). The rocks are indeed migmatized, although in general the line bounding these “undifferentiated” rocks does not necessarily represent a “migmatite front” but rather the limits of easily mappable terrain (Hatch & Wall, 1986, page 146). Locally, however, sharp “migmatite fronts” can be clearly defined, separating un-migmatized schists from intensely migmatized gneisses of the same parent lithology.
    [Show full text]
  • Appalachian Trail Companion
    Appalachian Trail Thru-Hikers’ Companion Robert Sylvester Editor Harpers Ferry State iii Cover photograph: On Katahdin. © Valerie Long. Maps © 2009–2010 David Miller; revised in 2012 by Robert Sylvester © 2013 Appalachian Long Distance Hikers Association, Inc. All rights reserved Printed in the United States on recycled paper Twentieth edition Published by the Appalachian Trail Conservancy 799 Washington Street (P.O. Box 807) Harpers Ferry, West Virginia 25425-0807 <www.appalachiantrail.org> Except for the individual personal uses suggested on page vii, no part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording or by any information storage-and-retrieval system, without the written permission of the Appalachian Long Distance Hikers Association, 10 Benning Street, PMB 224, West Lebanon, NH 03784. World Wide Web site: <www.aldha.org>. ISBN 978-1-889386-84-3 Th e sunrise logo on the previous page and the back cover is a registered trademark of the Appalachian Trail Conservancy. Th e hiker logo on the cover and the previous page is a registered trademark of the Appalachian Long Distance Hikers Association. iv Appalachian Trail Th ru-Hikers’ Companion–201 Foreword ............................................................................................................................. iv About the Companion ....................................................................................................... v Using the Companion......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • White Mountain National Forest
    ,....... I munit<dSta... .~S Department r • ofAgriculture ! I Forest Service r ! i r ! r I , r I White Mountain ,....... I I National Forest r ~ .... I -. /. ", " -- .. ' ".­ n Monitoring I Report j 1993 ,....... 1 r : l l l FOREST SERVICE OFFICES l l I White Mountain National Forest EVANS NOTCH RANGER STATION PO Box 638 RFD #2, Box 2270 l Laconia, NH 03247 Bethel, ME 04217 (603) 528-8721 * TT (603) 528-8722 (207) 824-2134 '1 ! FAJ{(603) 528-8783 I AMMONOOSUC RANGER STATION PEMIGEWASSET RANGER STATION Box 239 RFD #3, Box 15, Route 175 Bethlehem, NH 03574 Plymouth, NH 03264 (603) 869-2626 603) 536-1310 ANDROSCOGGIN RANGER STATION SACO RANGER STATION 80 Glen Road RFD #1, Box 94 GorhaDl,NH 03581 Conway, NH 03818 (603) 466-2713 603) 447-5448 * TT (603)447-1989 "', This document available in large print upon request. n :I '1 I ~. "'I I I l. I Contents I. I Forest Supervisor's Assessment. iii I Recreation and Wilderness Programs ~ 1 I I Wildcat National Scenic and Recreation River 12 Cultural and Heritage Resources , 14 r Long Term Soil Productivity 16 I, I . Water Quality 20 i I [' Snowmaking Water Withdrawal : 25 I Air Quality 26 ! . Minerals ; 32 Lands 34 I Transportation 36 I 'Vegetation Management ..•....... ~ ...•....•..........•.... ~~ ~.• ;.;.. ~ ~ .. ~ ~ .•....... ".~ 41 Forest Health 48 I Visual Resource 52 (. Fisheries/Aquatic Resources Monitoring 55 I Program for Endangered and Threatened Species, Wildlife, and Plants 63 Costs 105 r Payments to Local Governments 110 It' List of Contacts 112 l ! [ ,ro--' I j i . i I I - I( ( t I l·· [, ii 1993 Land and Resource Management Plan ! Monitoring Report i .
    [Show full text]
  • Harold E. Langley Bridge Engineer, New Hampshire Highway Department
    Harold E. Langley Bridge Engineer, New Hampshire Highway Department Designer – 1922 to 1934 Assistant Bridge Engineer – 1935 to 1941 Bridge Engineer - 1942 to 1961 Annotated Bibliography of Published Works List of Attributed Bridge Plans Prepared for New Hampshire Department of Transportation, Bureau of Environment Concord, NH By Richard M. Casella Historic Documentation Company, Inc. Portsmouth RI July 2012 Summary This project was undertaken to fulfill, in part, the project mitigation requirements stipulated in the Memorandum of Agreement pertaining to the removal and replacement of the Redington Street or Apthorp Bridge over the Ammonoosuc River in Littleton, New Hampshire, a National Register eligible historic resource. Harold Edward Langley was born in January 8, 1896 in Durham, New Hampshire and died August 6, 1991, in Concord.1 He attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, graduating in 1917. His WWI draft registration card, dated June 2, 1917, states his present trade as a farmer, in the employ of his father Edward Langley. He apparently did not serve in WWI. In 1919 he began his career with the New Hampshire Highway Department as a resident engineer. He was promoted and served the Department as a Designer from 1922 to 1934, as Assistant Bridge Engineer from 1935 to 1941, and as Bridge Engineer from 1942 to 1961. Langley designed at least 368 bridges and structures for the Department during his tenure, as listed in the following table, not counting design drawings that do not bear his initials or no longer exist. As would be expected of his early designs during the 1920s, the majority are for relatively simple short-span bridges including concrete slab bridges, I-beam stringer bridges with flat concrete decks as well as so-called jack arch bridges with multi-arched concrete decks, and concrete T-beam bridges.
    [Show full text]
  • White Mountain National Forest Figure 1 (Cover)
    Monitoring and United States Department of Agriculture Evaluation Report Forest Service Eastern 2009 Region White Mountain National Forest Figure 1 (Cover). Plant monitoring in Tuckerman Ravine. Photo courtesy of Diane Allen. This document is available in large print. Contact the Forest Supervisor’s Office 603 536-6100 TTY 603 536-3665 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program infor- mation (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on Recycled Paper Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2009 Contents From the Forest Supervisor . 4 Introduction . 6 Required Monitoring . 7 Objective Attainment . 14 Standard and Guideline Implementation . 22 Effects of Management Practices . 35 Project Reviews . 38 Other Monitoring . 42 Literature Cited . 53 3 White Mountain National Forest From the Forest Supervisor I am pleased to share with you the most recent White Mountain National Forest Monitoring Report, which summarizes many of our monitoring efforts in fiscal year 2009 (FY09). As in the past, this report considers how well we are imple- menting the management direction in the Forest Plan and what effects our management is having on natural, cultural, and social resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Peabody Vegetation Management Project EA - Summary
    United States Department of PEABODY VEGETATION Agriculture MANAGEMENT PROJECT Forest Towns of Gorham, Shelburne, and Martin’s Location Service Coos County, New Hampshire December 2003 Environmental Assessment Prepared By Androscoggin Ranger District, White Mountain National Forest For Information Contact: Pat Nasta Androscoggin Ranger District White Mountain National Forest 300 Glen Road Gorham, NH 03581 603-466-2713 www.fs.fed.us/r9/white This document is available in large print. Contact the White Mountain National Forest Supervisor’s Office 1-603-528-8721 TTY 1-603-528-8722 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political affiliation, sexual orientation, and marital or familial status (not all prohibited bases apply to all programs). Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication or program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA's TARGET Center at 202/720-2600 (voice or TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write the USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, Washington, DC, 20250-9410 or call 202/720-5964 (voice or TDD). The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on Recycled Paper Peabody Vegetation Management Project EA - Summary The Androscoggin Ranger District of the White Mountain National Forest is proposing the following management activities for the Peabody Project (Alternative 3): • Timber harvest of 4.6 million board feet on 1,248 acres of National Forest land within Habitat Management Units (HMU) 213 and 214, utilizing both even-aged and uneven- aged management techniques; • Perform restoration maintenance on 4.8 miles of existing Forest Service roads (Forest Roads 72, 207, 224, 263, 615 and 615A), and re-establish 17 log landings.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Research on Glaciation in the White Mountains, New Hampshire (U.S.A.)
    Géographie physique et Quaternaire, 1999, vol. 53, n° 1, p. 7-24, 6 fig. HISTORY OF RESEARCH ON GLACIATION IN THE WHITE MOUNTAINS, NEW HAMPSHIRE (U.S.A.) Woodrow B. THOMPSON*, Maine Geological Survey, 22 State House Station, Augusta, Maine 04333-0022 U.S.A. ABSTRACT, 1999, vol. 53, n° 1, 6 fig., 53(1), 1999W. B. THOMPSON The glacial geology of the RÉSUMÉ Histoire de la recherche sur les ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Geschichte der For- White Mountains in New Hampshire has been glaciations dans les White Mountains du New schung über die Vergletscherungen in den Whi- the subject of many investigations since the Hampshire (É.-U.A.). La géologie glaciaire des te Mountains, New Hampshire. Die glaziale 1840’s. A series of controversies evolved dur- White Mountains au New Hampshire a fait l’ob- Geologie der White Mountains in New ing this period. First was the question of what jet de nombreuses études de 1840 à 1940. Les Hampshire ist seit 1840 Thema vieler Studien geologic processes were responsible for erod- recherches ont donné lieu à différentes con- gewesen. In dieser Zeit entstand eine Reihe ing the bedrock and depositing the cover of troverses au cours de cette période. Il y a von Kontroversen. Die erste Frage war, welche surficial sediments. By the 1860’s, the concept d’abord eu la question des processus géolo- geologischen Prozesse für die Erosion des an- of glaciation replaced earlier theories invoking giques responsables de l’érosion du substra- stehenden Gesteins und die Ablagerung der floods and icebergs. Research in the late tum et de la mise en place des sédiments de Decke von Oberflächensedimenten verant- 1800’s concerned the relative impact of conti- surface.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rescue Time for Each Shelter Was Calculated by Network Analysis, Add- Ing the Time It Would Take Medical Resources to Get To
    Safety on the Trail Search and Rescue Accessibility to the Appalachian Trail The Appalachian Trail (AT) stretches 2,178 miles from Georgia to Maine, in New Hampshire crossing twelve other states in be‐ tween. Founded in 1937, approxi‐ mately 10,000 people have com‐ Purpose Methods pleted the trek. About 200‐300 hik‐ The purpose of this study was to asses the accessi‐ The rescue time for each shelter was calculated by Network Analysis, add‐ ers complete it per year. bility of shelters along the Appalachian Trail in the ing the time it would take medical resources to get to the shelter, to the state of New Hampshire. time it would take to transport a patient from the shelter to the nearest The 161 miles of the AT that fall medical facility. The “golden hour” refers to the ability to get a patient to within the borders emergency care within an hour, increasing survival rates. The networks of New Hamp‐ Results used were New Hampshire public roads, United States Forest Service shire are in‐ Table 1: Shelters within the “golden hour.” (USFS) roads, and USFS trails. Each network was assigned a speed (mph) famously according to surface type and size. Environmental costs such as slope and Rescue Time some Shelter Name (Hours:Minutes) water crossings were not taken into account. Velvet Rocks Shelter 0:39 of the Crawford Notch Hostel 0:41 most Jeffers Brook Shelter 0:42 Moose Mountain Shelter 0:54 treacher‐ Trapper John Shelter 0:57 ous. This in‐ Table 2: Shelters outside the Further Research cludes White “golden hour.” Mountain National The next step of this project Forest, home to Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Army Programmatic General Permit State of New Hampshire
    General Permit No: NAE-R-2012-00339 Effective Date: August 3, 2012 Applicant: General Public in New Hampshire Expiration Date: August 3, 2017 Department of the Army Programmatic General Permit State of New Hampshire The New England District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) hereby issues this Programmatic General Permit (PGP) that expedites review of minimal impact work in coastal and inland waters and wetlands within the State of New Hampshire. This New Hampshire PGP minimizes duplication between New Hampshire’s Regulatory Program governing work within coastal and inland waters and wetlands and the Corps Regulatory program. Subject to certain exclusions and conditions, the PGP eliminates the need to apply for separate approval from the Corps for most minor, non-controversial work in New Hampshire when that work is authorized by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) Wetlands Bureau. The Corps will review projects according to the State of New Hampshire classification of Minimum, Minor and Major impact projects per the State of New Hampshire Wetland Rules Env-Wt 100 - 900. The Corps review thresholds (see Appendix A) are typically the same as the State’s thresholds, but may differ. For example, the wetland fill thresholds for a Minimum are <3,000 square feet (SF) (State and Corps), Minor [≥3,000 to <20,000 SF (State and Corps)] and Major [≥20,000 SF (State); ≥20,000 SF to <3 acres (Corps)]. I. GENERAL CRITERIA: Activities with minimal impacts, as specified by this PGP’s terms (Pages 1 – 7), general conditions (Pages 8 – 17), and Appendix A - Definition of Categories, qualify for authorization under this PGP as either a Minimum Impact Project, or Minor or Major Impact Project.
    [Show full text]
  • CORRESPONDENCE New England Fishery Management Council 50 WATER STREET I NEWBURYPORT, MASSACHUSETTS 01950 I PHONE 978 465 0492 I FAX 978 465 3116 John F
    7. HABITAT (Apr. 18-20, 2017) M #4 CORRESPONDENCE New England Fishery Management Council 50 WATER STREET I NEWBURYPORT, MASSACHUSETTS 01950 I PHONE 978 465 0492 I FAX 978 465 3116 John F. Quiim, J.D., Ph.D., Chairman I Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director March 27, 2017 Mr. John Bullard Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930 Dear John: In accordance with provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, I have reviewed the draft regulatory text for Omnibus Essential Fish Habitat Amendment 2 in order to deem whether it is consistent with the amendment text and the Council's intent. The draft regulatory text was originally provided to the Council staff by email on January 23, 2017. We revised the draft regulations in collaboration with your staff, and the enclosure reflects the agreed upon revisions. Our revisions are limited to those regulations implementing the Omnibus Habitat Amendment. I am not commenting on portions of §648.81 (NE multispecies year-round and seasonal closed areas) that are unaffected by the amendment. I have concluded that the proposed regulatory text implementing the amendment measures is consistent with Council intent. Please feel free to call me with any concerns. Sincerely, qJ-rrjl~-, John F. Quinn, J.D., Ph.D. Council Chairman Enclosure: OHA2 Draft regulations •I Notes: Subpart A §648.2 Defmitions Bottom-tending mobile gear, means gear in contact with the ocean bottom, and towed from a vessel, which is moved through the water during fishing in order to capture fish, and includes otter trawls, beam trawls, hydraulic dredges, non-hydraulic dredges, and seines (with the exception of a purse seine).
    [Show full text]