DOCSLIB.ORG

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 2019–20 Harvest Specifications, Yelloweye Rebuilding Plan Revisions, and Management Measures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 2019–20 Harvest Specifications, Yelloweye Rebuilding Plan Revisions, and Management Measures Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 2019–20 Harvest Specifications, Yelloweye Rebuilding Plan Revisions, and Management Measures Environmental Assessment/Magnuson Stevens Act Analysis/Regulatory Impact Review/ Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis November 2018 Lead Agency: National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Responsible Official: Barry A. Thom, Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service For further information, contact Keeley Kent, National Marine Fisheries Service 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115 206-526-4655 [Intentionally blank] i 2019–20 Groundfish Harvest Specifications EA/MSA Analysis/RIR/RFAA November 2018 Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 15 1.1 Proposed Action, Purpose and Need ........................................................................................... 16 1.2 Tiered NEPA Analysis ................................................................................................................ 17 1.2.1 Tiered Analysis of Harvest Specifications .......................................................................... 17 1.2.2 Tiered Analysis of Management Measures ......................................................................... 18 1.3 Description of the Management Area ......................................................................................... 18 1.4 Scoping and Public Input ............................................................................................................ 19 1.5 Public Comments ........................................................................................................................ 20 Chapter 2 Alternatives ............................................................................................................................. 23 2.1 Harvest Specification Alternatives .............................................................................................. 23 2.1.1 Default Harvest Specifications (No Action) ....................................................................... 23 2.1.2 The Preferred Alternative .................................................................................................... 29 2.1.3 Alternative Harvest Specifications and Rebuilding Plan Parameters for Yelloweye Rockfish 37 2.1.4 Alternative Harvest Specifications for California Scorpionfish S. 34°27’ N. Lat. ............. 37 2.1.5 Alternative Harvest Specifications for Lingcod N. of 40°10’ N Lat. and Lingcod S. of 40°10’ N Lat. ...................................................................................................................................... 38 2.2 Management Measure Alternatives ............................................................................................ 38 2.2.1 Integrated Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 38 2.2.2 New Management Measures Analyzed in this EA ............................................................. 39 2.2.2.1 Salmon Mitigation Measures (Appendix C, Section C.1) ............................................... 39 2.2.2.2 Updates to Rockfish Conservation Area Coordinates in California (Appendix C, Section C.2) 41 2.2.2.3 Stock complex Composition Restructuring (Appendix C, Section C.3) ......................... 42 2.2.2.4 Remove Automatic Authority Established in Conjunction with Amendment 21-3 for Darkblotched Rockfish and Pacific Ocean Perch in the At-Sea Sector (Appendix C, Section C.4) 43 2.2.2.5 Lingcod and Sablefish Discard Mortality Rates in the Shorebased Individual Fishing Quota Program (Appendix C, Section C.5) .................................................................................... 44 2.2.2.6 Modify Commercial Fixed Gear Depths and Recreational Fisheries inside the Western Cowcod Conservation Area (Appendix C, sections C.6 and C.7) .................................................. 44 2.2.2.7 Removal of Daily Vessel Quota Pound (QP) Limits (Appendix C, Section C.8) ........... 44 2.2.2.8 Incidental Lingcod Retention Ratio in the Commercial Salmon Troll Fishery (Appendix C, Section C.9) ................................................................................................................................ 45 2.2.2.9 New Management Measures under Consideration by the Council but Not Further Analyzed in this EA ........................................................................................................................ 45 ii 2019–20 Groundfish Harvest Specifications EA/MSA Analysis/RIR/RFAA November 2018 2.2.2.10 Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed Further ..................................................... 46 2.2.2.11 Summary of the preferred alternative for management measures ............................... 47 Chapter 3 Affected Environment ............................................................................................................. 47 3.1 Environmental Components Affected by the Proposed Action .................................................. 47 3.2 Groundfish Stocks ....................................................................................................................... 48 3.2.1 Stocks with Proposed Changes to the Default Harvest Control Rule ................................. 48 3.2.1.1 California Scorpionfish S. 34°27' N. Lat. ....................................................................... 48 3.2.1.2 Lingcod North of 40º10' N lat. and South of 40º10' N lat. .............................................. 49 3.2.1.3 Yelloweye rockfish ......................................................................................................... 50 3.2.2 Stocks where the Default ACL is Outside the Range Analyzed in the 2015 EIS ............... 51 3.2.2.1 Bocaccio South of 40°10’ N lat. ..................................................................................... 52 3.2.2.2 Canary Rockfish .............................................................................................................. 54 3.2.2.3 Pacific Ocean Perch North of 40°10' N lat. .................................................................... 56 3.2.2.4 Widow Rockfish ............................................................................................................. 58 3.2.3 Stocks that may be affected by proposed new management measures ............................... 60 3.3 Essential Fish Habitat ................................................................................................................. 60 3.4 Protected Species ........................................................................................................................ 61 3.4.1 Eulachon ............................................................................................................................. 63 3.4.2 Humpback Whale ................................................................................................................ 63 3.4.3 Short-Tailed Albatross ........................................................................................................ 66 3.4.4 Salmon ................................................................................................................................ 67 3.5 Socioeconomic Environment ...................................................................................................... 70 3.5.1 Groundfish Fishery Sectors ................................................................................................. 70 3.5.2 Revenue Trends for Commercially Important Groundfish ................................................. 71 3.5.3 Landings and Revenue for Commercial Fishery Sector...................................................... 72 3.5.3.1 Non-whiting Fishery Sectors .......................................................................................... 72 3.5.3.2 Whiting Fishery Sectors .................................................................................................. 72 3.5.3.3 Midwater Trawl Fishery for Rockfish ............................................................................. 73 3.5.4 Tribal Fishery ...................................................................................................................... 74 3.5.5 Recreational Groundfish Fishery ........................................................................................ 75 3.5.6 Fishing Communities .......................................................................................................... 77 Chapter 4 Direct and Indirect Effects ...................................................................................................... 81 4.1 Methods used for the Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 81 4.2 Impacts of Harvest Specifications on Managed Groundfish Stocks ........................................... 81 4.2.1 Stocks with Alternative Harvest Control Rules under Consideration ................................. 82 iii 2019–20 Groundfish Harvest Specifications EA/MSA Analysis/RIR/RFAA November 2018 4.2.1.1 California Scorpionfish South of 34°27' N lat. ............................................................... 82 4.2.1.2 Lingcod North and South of 40°10' N lat. ...................................................................... 82 4.2.1.3 Yelloweye Rockfish
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FISH LIST WISH LIST: a Case for Updating the Canadian Government’S Guidance for Common Names on Seafood
    FISH LIST WISH LIST: A case for updating the Canadian government’s guidance for common names on seafood Authors: Christina Callegari, Scott Wallace, Sarah Foster and Liane Arness ISBN: 978-1-988424-60-6 © SeaChoice November 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS GLOSSARY . 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 4 Findings . 5 Recommendations . 6 INTRODUCTION . 7 APPROACH . 8 Identification of Canadian-caught species . 9 Data processing . 9 REPORT STRUCTURE . 10 SECTION A: COMMON AND OVERLAPPING NAMES . 10 Introduction . 10 Methodology . 10 Results . 11 Snapper/rockfish/Pacific snapper/rosefish/redfish . 12 Sole/flounder . 14 Shrimp/prawn . 15 Shark/dogfish . 15 Why it matters . 15 Recommendations . 16 SECTION B: CANADIAN-CAUGHT SPECIES OF HIGHEST CONCERN . 17 Introduction . 17 Methodology . 18 Results . 20 Commonly mislabelled species . 20 Species with sustainability concerns . 21 Species linked to human health concerns . 23 Species listed under the U .S . Seafood Import Monitoring Program . 25 Combined impact assessment . 26 Why it matters . 28 Recommendations . 28 SECTION C: MISSING SPECIES, MISSING ENGLISH AND FRENCH COMMON NAMES AND GENUS-LEVEL ENTRIES . 31 Introduction . 31 Missing species and outdated scientific names . 31 Scientific names without English or French CFIA common names . 32 Genus-level entries . 33 Why it matters . 34 Recommendations . 34 CONCLUSION . 35 REFERENCES . 36 APPENDIX . 39 Appendix A . 39 Appendix B . 39 FISH LIST WISH LIST: A case for updating the Canadian government’s guidance for common names on seafood 2 GLOSSARY The terms below are defined to aid in comprehension of this report. Common name — Although species are given a standard Scientific name — The taxonomic (Latin) name for a species. common name that is readily used by the scientific In nomenclature, every scientific name consists of two parts, community, industry has adopted other widely used names the genus and the specific epithet, which is used to identify for species sold in the marketplace.
    [Show full text]
  • Sturgeons of the Caspian Sea and Ural River
    Photo and image credits: Front Cover: Top left, beluga sturgeon (Huso huso); Top Right: Russian sturgeon (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii); Bottom: stellate sturgeon (Acipenser stellatus); Todd Stailey, Tennessee Aquarium. Back Cover: “FISH IS OUR TREASURE”, Phaedra Doukakis, Ph. D. IOCS; Page 1: Shannon Crownover, The Nature Conservancy; Page 6, 9, 10, 11: Phaedra Doukakis, Ph. D., IOCS; Page 4, 5, 7 designed by Grace Lewis. Brochure content was developed by Alison Ormsby, Ph.D. and Phaedra Doukakis, Ph. D. with editorial review by Yael Wyner, Ph. D. Layout was designed by Grace Lewis. The brochure was developed under a generous grant from Agip KCO. Agip KCO Tel.: international line: 1, K. Smagulov Street +39 02 9138 3300 Atyrau, 06002 Tel: local lines: Republic of Kazakhstan (+7) 7122 92 3300 Fax: (+7) 7122 92 3310 Designed and printed in Kazakhstan www.agipkco.com Sturgeons of the Caspian Sea and Ural River www.oceanconservationscience.org A Unique and Precious Resource What are Sturgeon? River, other rivers off the Caspian Sea are used by sturgeons for With bony plates called scutes on their bodies and ancestors that reproduction, including the Volga River in Russia and the Kura date to the time of dinosaurs, sturgeons are unusual fish. Unlike River in Azerbaijan. However, dams on the Volga and Kura have other types of fish, sturgeons have scutes instead of scales. blocked sturgeons from being able to migrate upriver, and have changed the quality of the rivers so they are no longer able to support sturgeon reproduction. Reproduction: For sturgeon, the process of mixing female eggs and male sperm to create a fertilized egg that hatches into a baby sturgeon.
    [Show full text]
  • Sport-Fish-Identification.Pdf
    Walleye Walleye have two distinct fins on their back, the first with large spines. Lake Sturgeon They have a yellow-olive back, brassy, silvery sides with yellow spots, a white underside, and white on the lower lobe of the tail. Dusky vertical Lake Sturgeon are a Threatened Species due to population size and bars are often found on the body as well. concerns with viability. Lake Sturgeon have a large brown or grey body covered with tough, leather- like tissue and five rows of bony plates. They have a shark-like, upturned tail and a pointed snout with four barbels. Sauger Lake Whitefish are olive-green to blue on the back, with silvery sides.They Sauger are a Threatened Species due to hybridization, habitat Lakehave a small Whitefish mouth below a rounded snout, and a deeply forked tail. degradation and overharvest. Sauger are golden olive on the back with silver-yellow sides and a white underside. They also have a large spiny dorsal fin, distinct rows of spots on the dorsal fins and three or four dusky vertical bars on the body. Mountain Whitefish have large scales, no spots and small mouths with no Burbot Mountainteeth. Their general Whitefish body colour is a bronze-white or greenish white. Burbot have a slim, brownish black body with smooth skin, a flattened head, and a fin that stretches along the back half of the body. Distinctive barbels hang from the lower jaw and nostrils. Goldeye Northern Pike Goldeye have prominent eyes with bright yellow pupils, a blunt head, and Northern Pike are a long, slender fish with duck-like jaws and a long, flat a deep, compressed body.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 1. Predators with Krill in Their Diet (>50
    Table 1. Predators with krill in their diet (>50% and >10% of the diet as assessed by % mass, % volume or % # at any time; adapted from Szoboszlai et al., 2015). Class Scientific Name Common Name >50% >10% Bony Fishes Anoplopoma fimbria sablefish x Bony Fishes Merluccius productus Pacific hake x Bony Fishes Oncorhynchus gorbuscha pink salmon x Bony Fishes Oncorhynchus kisutch coho salmon x Bony Fishes Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chinook salmon x Bony Fishes Scomber japonicus Pacific mackerel x Bony Fishes Sebastes alutus Pacific ocean perch x Bony Fishes Sebastes caurinus copper rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes crameri darkblotched rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes diploproa splitnose rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes elongatus greenstriped rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes entomelas widow rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes flavidus yellowtail rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes jordani shortbelly rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes melanops black rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes pinniger canary rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes wilsoni pygmy rockfish x Bony Fishes Sebastes zacentrus sharpchin rockfish x Bony Fishes Thunnus alalunga albacore x Bony Fishes Trachurus symmetricus jack mackerel x Cartilaginous Fishes Prionace glauca blue shark x Cartilaginous Fishes Raja rhina longnose skate x Cartilaginous Fishes Squalus acanthias spiny dogfish x Mammals Balaenoptera borealis sei whale x Mammals Balaenoptera musculus blue whale x Mammals Balaenoptera physalus fin whale x Mammals Megaptera novaeangliae humpback whale x Seabirds Brachyramphus marmoratus marbled murrelet x Seabirds Cerorhinca monocerata rhinoceros auklet x Seabirds Larus occidentalis western gull x Seabirds Ptychoramphus aleuticus Cassin's auklet x Seabirds Puffinus griseus sooty shearwater x Seabirds Puffinus tenuirostris short-tailed shearwater x Seabirds Synthliboramphus antiquus ancient murrelet x Seabirds Uria aalge common murre x .
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Ocean Perch (Sebastes Alutus) Stock Assessment for the North and West Coasts of Haida Gwaii, British Columbia
    Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) Research Document 2013/092 Pacific Region Pacific Ocean Perch (Sebastes alutus) stock assessment for the north and west coasts of Haida Gwaii, British Columbia Andrew M. Edwards1, Rowan Haigh1 and Paul J. Starr2 1Pacific Biological Station, Science Branch, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 3190 Hammond Bay Road, Nanaimo, British Columbia, V9T 6N7, Canada. 2Canadian Groundfish Research and Conservation Society, 1406 Rose Ann Drive, Nanaimo, British Columbia, V9T 4K8, Canada. March 2014 Foreword This series documents the scientific basis for the evaluation of aquatic resources and ecosystems in Canada. As such, it addresses the issues of the day in the time frames required and the documents it contains are not intended as definitive statements on the subjects addressed but rather as progress reports on ongoing investigations. Research documents are produced in the official language in which they are provided to the Secretariat. Published by: Fisheries and Oceans Canada Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat 200 Kent Street Ottawa ON K1A 0E6 http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/ [email protected] © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2014 ISSN 1919-5044 Correct citation for this publication: Edwards, A.M., Haigh, R., and Starr, P.J. 2014. Pacific Ocean Perch (Sebastes alutus) stock assessment for the north and west coasts of Haida Gwaii, British Columbia. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2013/092. vi + 126 p. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Superior Food Web MENT of C
    ATMOSPH ND ER A I C C I A N D A M E I C N O I S L T A R N A T O I I O T N A N U E .S C .D R E E PA M RT OM Lake Superior Food Web MENT OF C Sea Lamprey Walleye Burbot Lake Trout Chinook Salmon Brook Trout Rainbow Trout Lake Whitefish Bloater Yellow Perch Lake herring Rainbow Smelt Deepwater Sculpin Kiyi Ruffe Lake Sturgeon Mayfly nymphs Opossum Shrimp Raptorial waterflea Mollusks Amphipods Invasive waterflea Chironomids Zebra/Quagga mussels Native waterflea Calanoids Cyclopoids Diatoms Green algae Blue-green algae Flagellates Rotifers Foodweb based on “Impact of exotic invertebrate invaders on food web structure and function in the Great Lakes: NOAA, Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, 4840 S. State Road, Ann Arbor, MI A network analysis approach” by Mason, Krause, and Ulanowicz, 2002 - Modifications for Lake Superior, 2009. 734-741-2235 - www.glerl.noaa.gov Lake Superior Food Web Sea Lamprey Macroinvertebrates Sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus). An aggressive, non-native parasite that Chironomids/Oligochaetes. Larval insects and worms that live on the lake fastens onto its prey and rasps out a hole with its rough tongue. bottom. Feed on detritus. Species present are a good indicator of water quality. Piscivores (Fish Eaters) Amphipods (Diporeia). The most common species of amphipod found in fish diets that began declining in the late 1990’s. Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Pacific salmon species stocked as a trophy fish and to control alewife. Opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta). An omnivore that feeds on algae and small cladocerans.
    [Show full text]
  • Groundfish Harvest from Parallel Seasons in the Bering Sea-Aleutian Islands Area
    Fishery Management Report No. 08-43 Bering Sea-Aleutian Islands Area State-Waters Groundfish Fisheries and Groundfish Harvest from Parallel Seasons in 2007 by Krista Milani August 2008 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries Symbols and Abbreviations The following symbols and abbreviations, and others approved for the Système International d'Unités (SI), are used without definition in the following reports by the Divisions of Sport Fish and of Commercial Fisheries: Fishery Manuscripts, Fishery Data Series Reports, Fishery Management Reports, and Special Publications. All others, including deviations from definitions listed below, are noted in the text at first mention, as well as in the titles or footnotes of tables, and in figure or figure captions. Weights and measures (metric) General Measures (fisheries) centimeter cm Alaska Administrative fork length FL deciliter dL Code AAC mideye to fork MEF gram g all commonly accepted mideye to tail fork METF hectare ha abbreviations e.g., Mr., Mrs., standard length SL kilogram kg AM, PM, etc. total length TL kilometer km all commonly accepted liter L professional titles e.g., Dr., Ph.D., Mathematics, statistics meter m R.N., etc. all standard mathematical milliliter mL at @ signs, symbols and millimeter mm compass directions: abbreviations east E alternate hypothesis HA Weights and measures (English) north N base of natural logarithm e cubic feet per second ft3/s south S catch per unit effort CPUE foot ft west W coefficient of variation CV gallon gal copyright © common test statistics (F, t, χ2, etc.) inch in corporate suffixes: confidence interval CI mile mi Company Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Shortnose Sturgeon in the Potomac River
    Final Report Status of Shortnose Sturgeon in the Potomac River PART I – FIELD STUDIES Report prepared by: Boyd Kynard (Principal Investigator) Matthew Breece and Megan Atcheson (Project Leaders) Micah Kieffer (Co-Investigator) U. S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division Leetown Science Center S. O. Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center Turners Falls, Massachusetts 01376 and Mike Mangold (Assistant Project Leader) U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Maryland Fishery Resources Office 177 Admiral Cochrane Drive Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Report prepared for: National Park Service National Capital Region Washington, D.C USGS Natural Resources Preservation Project E 2002-7 NPS Project Coordinator – Jim Sherald BRD Project Coordinator – Ed Pendelton July 20, 2007 Gravid shortnose sturgeon female captured at river kilometer 63 on the Potomac River. Project leader, Matthew Breece (USGS), is shown with the fish on March 23, 2006. Summary Field studies during more than 3 years (March 2004–July 2007) collected data on life history of Potomac River shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum to understand their biological status in the river. We sampled intensively for adults using gill nets, but captured only one adult in 2005. Another adult was captured in 2006 by a commercial fisher. Both fish were females with excellent body and fin condition, both had mature eggs, and both were telemetry- tagged to track their movements. The lack of capturing adults, even when intensive netting was guided by movements of tracked fish, indicated abundance of the species was less than in any river known with a sustaining population of the species. Telemetry tracking of the two females (one during September 2005–July 2007, one during March 2006–February 2007) found they remained in the river for all the year, not for just a few months like sturgeons on a coastal migration.
    [Show full text]
  • Variability in Trawl Survey Catches of Pacific Ocean Perch, Shortraker Rockfish, and Rougheye Rockfish in the Gulf of Alaska David M
    Biology, Assessment, and Management of North Pacific Rockfishes 411 Alaska Sea Grant College Program • AK-SG-07-01, 2007 Variability in Trawl Survey Catches of Pacific Ocean Perch, Shortraker Rockfish, and Rougheye Rockfish in the Gulf of Alaska David M. Clausen and Jeffrey T. Fujioka National Marine Fisheries Service, Auke Bay Laboratory, Juneau, Alaska Abstract Little information is available on the comparative variability of Pacific ocean perch, shortraker rockfish, and rougheye rockfish catches in Alaska trawl surveys. In this study, data were first examined for these three species from three localized experimental bottom trawl surveys in the Gulf of Alaska in 1993, 1998, and 1999 to compare the variability of catch rates for each species. When catch rates were analyzed within favorable fishing areas for each species, the coefficients of variation for Pacific ocean perch were approximately 2.5 to 3 times greater than those of shortraker or rougheye rockfish, indicating that the latter two species are much more even in their distribution. To provide a broader comparison of variability, catch rates of the three species were also examined from seven large-scale bottom trawl surveys conducted in the Gulf of Alaska from 1984 to 2001. Using geographic information systems software, subsets of the hauls in these surveys were selected in what were determined to be favorable fishing areas for either Pacific ocean perch or for shortraker and rougheye rockfish. Analysis of the species’ catch rates in these hauls indicated results that were very simi- lar to those of the experimental trawl surveys; the variability of Pacific ocean perch was 2.1-2.3 times greater than that for either shortraker or rougheye rockfish.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries, Midwest Region Conserving America's Fisheries
    Fisheries | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Midwest Region Fisheries, Midwest Region Conserving America's Fisheries Subscribe Now! May 21, 2016 - World Fish Migration Day! Field Focus Neosho National Fish Hatchery Study Reveals Patterns of Lake Trout Things at the Neosho National Fish Hatchery (NFH) have been heating up Spring Loaded! lately, in more ways than one. We’ve been busy with our sturgeon, mussels...Read More Lake Sturgeon...They’re Doing Well! Current Edition PDF May 21, 2016 - World Fish Migration Day! Removing Barriers in the Marengo River Have fun while learning and creating awareness about some of the United States’ cool migratory fishes...Read More Fish Tails Field Notes "Fish Tails” refers to articles that are submitted by "Field Notes” is an online searchable database that field staff that do not appear as a feature in the current showcases hundreds of employee-written summaries edition of Fish Lines. These articles provide examples of field activities and accomplishments of the U.S. Fish of the diverse work that the Service's Midwest Fisheries and Wildlife Service from across the nation. Program and partners perform on behalf of our aquatic resources and for the benefit of the American public. Archive 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Editorial Staff Tim Smigielski, Editor Karla Bartelt, Webmaster Last updated: May 19, 2016 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home Page | Department of the Interior | USA.gov | About the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service | Accessibility | Privacy | Notices | Disclaimer | FOIA http://www.fws.gov/midwest/fisheries/fishlines/index.html[5/19/2016 12:11:31 PM] Fisheries | U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser Medirostris) AS an ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER the ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
    PETITION TO LIST THE NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser medirostris) AS AN ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CENTER CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PETITIONERS JUNE 2001 NOTICE OF PETITION Environmental Protection Information Center P.O. Box 397 Garberville, CA 95542 (707) 923-2931 Contact: Cynthia Elkins Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 40090 Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 841-0812 Contact: Jeff Miller WaterKeepers Northern California Presidio Building 1004 San Francisco, CA 94129 (415) 561.2299 ext. 14 Contact: Jonathan Kaplan Petitioners Environmental Protection Information Center (“EPIC”), Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”), and WaterKeepers Northern California (“WaterKeepers”) formally request that the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) list the North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. In the alternative, petitioners formally request that NMFS list the North American green sturgeon as a threatened species under the ESA. In either case, petitioners request that green sturgeon critical habitat be designated concurrent with the listing designation. This petition is filed under §553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA” - 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559), §1533(b)(3) of the ESA, and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b). This petition sets in motion a specific administrative process as defined by §1533(b)(3) and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b), placing mandatory response requirements on NMFS. Because A. medirostris is an anadromous fish, NMFS has jurisdiction over this petition. A Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between NMFS and the U.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration College Park, MD
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration College Park, MD Date: April 2012 – July 2012 Project: FY12—CFSAN Sampling for Seafood Species Labeling in Wholesale Seafood BACKGROUND All FDA regulated products are required to be labeled in a manner that is truthful and not misleading. One aspect of truthful labeling is identifying seafood species by their acceptable market names. The Seafood List - FDA's Guide to Acceptable Market Names for Seafood Sold in Interstate Commerce was developed to provide guidance to industry about what FDA considers to be acceptable market names for seafood sold in interstate commerce and to assist manufacturers in labeling seafood products. Incorrect use of an established acceptable market name, which causes the labeling to be false and/or misleading, can result in the product being misbranded under section 403(a)(1) of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act (21 U.S.C. 343(a)(1)). OBJECTIVES The goal of this project was to determine the accuracy of seafood species labeling at the level of wholesale distribution for select products with a known history of mislabeling. This effort was conducted from April 2012 through July 2012. All samples were analyzed for species identification using the DNA Based Fish Identification (Barcoding) Method. FDA inspectors were instructed to conduct this sampling at the level of wholesale distribution (i.e. any level after import/primary processing and prior to retail sale). Both previously imported and domestic samples were suitable for collection. SAMPLE COLLECTION For this sampling effort, 100 product lots were targeted for sampling with 96 lots ultimately tested.
    [Show full text]