DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix 10 Endangered Species Act – Biological Opinion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix 10 Endangered Species Act – Biological Opinion Appendix 10 Endangered Species Act – Biological Opinion UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE GREATER ATLANTIC REGIONAL FISHERIES OFFICE 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930-2276 MAR 3 0 2018 Cheryl B. Martin Assistant Division Administrator Maine Division, Federal Highway Administration 40 Western A venue, Rm. 16 Augusta, ME. 04330 RE: Maine Department of Transportation Replacement of the Frank J. Wood Bridge Dear Ms. Martin, Enclosed is the biological opinion (Opinion), issued under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, for the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) replacement of the Frank J. Wood Bridge, which carries Route 201 over the Androscoggin River between Topsham and Brunswick, Maine. In this Opinion, we conclude that the proposed action is likely to adversely affect, but not likely to adversely modify or destroy critical habitat designated for the Gulf of Maine distinct population segment (DPS) of Atlantic sturgeon. We also conclude that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic sturgeon, endangered shortnose sturgeon, endangered Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic salmon, or critical habitat designated for the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic salmon. Since we have concluded that the action as proposed will not adversely affect any ESA-listed species in the action area we do not anticipate the take of any listed species. Therefore, our Opinion does not include an Incidental Take Statement (ITS) and no take is exempted. Incidental take is defined as "take of listed fish or wildlife species that results from, but is not the purpose of carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a Federal agency or applicant" [50 CFR §402.02]. "Otherwise lawful activities" are those actions that meet all State and Federal legal requirements, including any state endangered species laws or regulations, except for the prohibition against taking in ESA Section 9. This concludes formal consultation on the proposed action. As provided in 50 CFR §402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary federal agency involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) the amount or extent of taking specified in the incidental take statement is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the action that may not have been previously considered; (3) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to listed species; or (4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action. In instances where the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded, section 7 consultation must be reinitiated immediately. Once you have had an opportunity to review the Opinion, we hope to have a future conversation with you to discuss our two Conservation Recommendations. Section 7(a)(l) of the ESA places a responsibility on all federal agencies to "utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered species." Conservation Recommendations are discretionary agency activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or to develop information. As such, we suggest that you, consistent with your authorities, take implementation of our Conservation Recommendations under consideration. Thank you for working cooperatively with my staff throughout the consultation process. We look forward to continuing to work cooperatively with your office to minimize the effects of replacing the Frank J. Wood Bridge on listed species and critical habitat. Should you have any questions about this correspondence please contact Zach Jylkka at (978) 282-8467 or by e-mail ([email protected]). Our Habitat Conservation Division (HCD) is responsible for overseeing programs related to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other NOAA trust resources under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA). HCD is currently coordinating with MaineDOT on the EFH consultation. If you have any questions or comments regarding the EFH consultation process, please contact Mike Johnson at (978) 281-9130 or [email protected]. Sincerely, Julia E. Crocker Acting Assistant Regional Administrator For Protected Resources EC: Johnson, NMFS-HCD Jylkka, NMFS-PRD Buhyoff, NMFS-PRD Ham, MaineDOT Clement, USACE Fayyad, FERC Maloney, Brookfield Renewable File Code: H:\Section 7 Team\Section 7\Non-Fisheries\FHWA State DOTs\Formal\Frank J Wood Bridge Brunswick, ME PCTS: NER-2017-14574 NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT BIOLOGICAL OPINION Agency: Federal Highway Administration (FHW A), Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New England District Activity Considered: Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) Replacement of the Frank J. Wood Bridge NER-2017-14574 Conducted by: National Marine Fisheries Service Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office Date Issued: Approved by: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................. ·............................................................. 6 2.0 ESA Consultation History ............................................................................................ : ....... 7 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................... 8 3.1 Description of the Existing Bridge ................................................................................... 8 3 .2 Description of the Proposed Replacement Bridge ................................................................ 9 3.2.1 Project Design ........................................................................................................... 9 3.2.2 Construction ............................................................................................................ 10 3.3 In-Water Activity Descriptions and Related AMMs ...................................................... 12 3.3.l Implementation of SWEPCP Plan and Site Preparation ......................................... 12 3.3.2 In-water Work Window .......................................................................................... 12 3.3.3 Contaminant Releases .............................................................................................. 13 3.3.4 Construction of Temporary Work Trestle ............................................................... 13 3.3.5 Cofferdam Construction .......................................................................................... 15 3.3.6 Pier Construction and Cofferdam Removal.. .......................................................... 18 3.3.7 Abutment Construction ........................................................................................... 18 3 .3 .8 Bridge Superstructure Construction ........................................................................ 19 3.3.9 Demolition of Existing Bridge ................................................................................ 19 3.3.10 Post-Project Restoration .......................................................................................... 20 3.2.11 Removal of Temporary Work Trestle ..................................................................... 20 3.3.12 Vessel Use ............................................................................................................... 20 3.3.13 SummaryofAMMs .............................................................................................. .'.21 3 .4 Action Area .................................................................................................................... 23 3.4.1 Defining the Action Area ............................................................................................. 23 3.4.2 Habitat in the Action Area ...................................................................................... 25 4.0 STATUS OF LISTED SPECIES and CRITICAL HABIT AT IN THE ACTION AREA 27 4.1 Atlantic Salmon (Gulf of Maine DPS) ........................................................................... 28 4.1.1 Life History ............................................................................................................. 28 4.1.2 Reproduction, Distribution, and Abundance of Atlantic salmon ............................ 31 4.1.3 Salmon Habitat Recovery Units .............................................................................. 33 4.1.4 Survival and Recovery of the GOM DPS ............................................................... 35 4.1.5 Summary ofRangewide Status of Atlantic salmon ................................................ 36 4.2 Critical Habitat Designated for the GOM DPS of Atlantic salmon ............................... 36 4.2.1 Essential Features of Atlantic Salmon Critical Habitat .......................................... 37 2 4.2.2 Factors Affecting Atlantic salmon and Critical Habitat ......................................... 43 4.3 Shortnose Sturgeon ........................................................................................................ 44 4.3.1 Life History and General Habitat Use .................................................................... 44 4.3.2 Listing History .......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Do Some Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Skip Spawning?
    SCRS/2006/088 Col. Vol. Sci. Pap. ICCAT, 60(4): 1141-1153 (2007) DO SOME ATLANTIC BLUEFIN TUNA SKIP SPAWNING? David H. Secor1 SUMMARY During the spawning season for Atlantic bluefin tuna, some adults occur outside known spawning centers, suggesting either unknown spawning regions, or fundamental errors in our current understanding of bluefin tuna reproductive schedules. Based upon recent scientific perspectives, skipped spawning (delayed maturation and non-annual spawning) is possibly prevalent in moderately long-lived marine species like bluefin tuna. In principle, skipped spawning represents a trade-off between current and future reproduction. By foregoing reproduction, an individual can incur survival and growth benefits that accrue in deferred reproduction. Across a range of species, skipped reproduction was positively correlated with longevity, but for non-sturgeon species, adults spawned at intervals at least once every two years. A range of types of skipped spawning (constant, younger, older, event skipping; and delays in first maturation) was modeled for the western Atlantic bluefin tuna population to test for their effects on the egg-production-per-recruit biological reference point (stipulated at 20% and 40%). With the exception of extreme delays in maturation, skipped spawning had relatively small effect in depressing fishing mortality (F) threshold values. This was particularly true in comparison to scenarios of a juvenile fishery (ages 4-7), which substantially depressed threshold F values. Indeed, recent F estimates for 1990-2002 western Atlantic bluefin tuna stock assessments were in excess of threshold F values when juvenile size classes were exploited. If western bluefin tuna are currently maturing at an older age than is currently assessed (i.e., 10 v.
    [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]
  • A Preliminary Study on the Stomach Content of Southern Bluefin Tuna Thunnus Maccoyii Caught by Taiwanese Longliner in the Central Indian Ocean
    CCSBT-ESC/0509/35 A preliminary study on the stomach content of southern bluefin tuna Thunnus maccoyii caught by Taiwanese longliner in the central Indian Ocean Kwang-Ming Liu1, Wei-Ke Chen2, Shoou-Jeng Joung2, and Sui-Kai Chang3 1. Institute of Marine Resource Management, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Environmental Biology and Fisheries Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung, Taiwan. 3. Fisheries Agency, Council of Agriculture, Taipei, Taiwan. Abstract The stomach contents of 63 southern bluefin tuna captured by Taiwanese longliners in central Indian Ocean in August 2004 were examined. The size of tunas ranged from 84-187 cm FL (12-115 kg GG). The length and weight frequency distributions indicated that most specimens were in the range of 100-130 cm FL with a body weight between 10 and 30 kg for both sexes. The sexes- combined relationship between dressed weight and fork length can be described by W = 6.975× 10-6× FL3.1765 (n=56, r2=0.967, p < 0.05). The subjective index of fullness of specimens was estimated as: 1 = empty (38.6%), 2 = <half full (47.37%), 3 = half full (3.51%), 4 = >half full (5.26%), and 5 = full (5.26%). For the stomachs with prey items, almost all the preys are pisces and the proportion of each prey groups are fishes (95.6%), cephalopods (2.05%), and crustaceans (0.02%). In total, 6 prey taxa were identified – 4 species of fish, 1 unidentified pisces, 1 unidentified crustacean, and 1 unidentified squid. The 4 fish species fall in the family of Carangidae, Clupeidae, Emmelichthyidae, and Hemiramphidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Governance of the Great Ocean Road Region Issues Paper
    Governance of the Great Ocean Road Region Issues Paper Governance of the GREAT OCEAN ROAD REGION Issues Paper i Dormant Tower Hill Volcano Over Moyjil - Point Ritchie 14 public entities Aboriginal site possibly up to 2/3 80,000 journeys are years old day trips Nearly 170,000 hectares of Crown land Up to 11,000 visitors Over a day to the 12 Apostles 200 shipwrecks 5.4m visitors spent $1.3b 2cm/yr generating the rate at which the cliffs are being eroded Traditional 2 Owner groups From 1846, the 12 Apostles were once known as limestone Traditional lands of “The Sow and Piglets” 7 stacks (out of Eastern Maar (western and the original 9), middle stretches) and the known as the Wadawurrung (eastern end) 12 Apostles B100 The Great Ocean Road 8.1m is the world’s visitors projected largest war Infographic In in the next memorial 2011 decade Added to the National Heritage List Rip Curl Pro at Bells Beach is the world’s longest running 2 surfing competition National Parks 24,000 Number of people in Lorne during the Pier to Pub (up from normal population of 1,000) 9,200 jobs 2 in the year 1983 Ash Wednesday bushfires destroyed Marine National ending June 2017 Parks 42,000 and 729 hectares houses 3 2015 Wye River bushfire destroyed Marine National Sanctuaries and Rare polar dinosaur 2,260 115 fossil sites hectares houses The Great Ocean Road Taskforce proudly acknowledges the Eastern Maar and Wadawurrung people as the traditional custodians of the Great Ocean Road Region1.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • P a Rk N O Te S
    Great Otway National Park and Otway Forest Park Torquay to Kennett River Angahook Visitor Guide “Rugged coastlines, dramatic cliff faces, sandy beaches and rock platforms, steep forested ridges and deep valleys of tall forest and fern clad gullies embracing spectacular waterfalls all feature here. Angahook comes from the language of the Wauthaurung people, whose ancestors lived for thousands of years off the lands in the eastern areas of the Otway Ranges. Wauthaurung people continue their spiritual and physical connection here today.” -Ranger In Charge, Dale Antonysen A daily bus service between Geelong, Lorne and Wedge-tailed Apollo Bay connects with train services to Eagle. Melbourne. For timetable details call V/Line Country Information on 13 2232. The Parks provide n o t evital s homes, food and shelter for Picnicking and Camping Eagles and a Picnic opportunities abound with lovely settings huge variety of at Blanket Leaf, Sheoak, Distillery Creek, Grey other species, including 43 River and Moggs Creek, to name a few. There species only found are many beautiful places to picnic, be sure to in the Parks and plan your visit to get the most out of your day! nowhere else in There are excellent camping opportunities the world! throughout the Parks. Whether you are looking Getting out and about for a family friendly place to park your caravan or a solitary night under the stars there’s something The Parks provide a multitude of activities for to cater to every need. Please refer to the Park visitors to enjoy. Camping, fishing, horse riding, Camping Guide overleaf for further information.
    [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]
  • Monitoring Endangered Atlantic Sturgeon and Commercial Finfish Habitat Use in the New York Lease Area
    OCS Study BOEM 2019-074 Monitoring Endangered Atlantic Sturgeon and Commercial Finfish Habitat Use in the New York Lease Area US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Renewable Energy Programs OCS Study BOEM 2019-074 Monitoring Endangered Atlantic Sturgeon and Commercial Finfish Habitat Use in the New York Lease Area June 2019 Authors: Michael G. Frisk, Professor School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794. Evan C. Ingram, Graduate Student School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794. Keith Dunton, Assistant Professor Department of Biology, Monmouth University, 400 Cedar Avenue, West Long Branch, New Jersey 07764. Prepared under Cooperative Agreement M16AC00003 US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Renewable Energy Programs DISCLAIMER Study collaboration and funding were provided by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Environmental Studies Program, Washington, DC, under Agreement Number M16AC00003. This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM, and it has been approved for publication. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the US Government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This project was funded by both BOEM and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). REPORT AVAILABILITY To download a PDF file of this report, go to the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Data and Information Systems webpage (http://www.boem.gov/Environmental-Studies- EnvData/), click on the link for the Environmental Studies Program Information System (ESPIS), and search on 2019-074.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-53 Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units June 2002 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the Na­ tional Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible due to time constraints. Documents published in this series may be referenced in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS-F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now being used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be cited as follows: Waknitz, F.W., T.J. Tynan, C.E. Nash, R.N. Iwamoto, and L.G. Rutter. 2002. Review of potential impacts of Atlantic salmon culture on Puget Sound chinook salmon and Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon evolutionarily significant units. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-53, 83 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-53 Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units F.
    [Show full text]