DOCSLIB.ORG

Critical Habitat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Critical Habitat Biological valuation of Atlantic salmon habitat within the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment Biological assessment of specific areas currently occupied by the species; and determination of whether critical habitat in specific areas outside the currently occupied range is deemed essential to the conservation of the species NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Regional Office 1 Blackburn Drive Gloucester, MA. 01930 2009 Foreword: Atlantic salmon life history........................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: Methods and Procedures for Biological Valuation of Atlantic Salmon Habitat in the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment (GOM DPS).......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Identifying the Geographical Area Occupied by the Species and Specific Areas within the Geographical Area ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species essential to the conservation of the species .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Identify those “Physical and Biological Features” in freshwater and estuary specific areas that are essential to the conservation of the species .................................................................................................. 16 1.4.1 Conservation defined....................................................................................................................... 17 1.4.2 Physical and biological features needed by Atlantic salmon........................................................... 17 (A). Physical and Biological Features of the Spawning and Rearing PCE......................................... 18 (B). Physical and Biological Features of the Migration PCE ............................................................. 22 (C). Physical and biological features of marine sites and “Specific Areas” within the geographic range occupied by the species .............................................................................................................. 25 1.5 Identify special management considerations and protections................................................................. 25 1.5.1 Specific activities that may effect physical and biological features ................................................ 27 Agriculture............................................................................................................................................ 27 Forestry ................................................................................................................................................ 28 Changing land-use and development.................................................................................................... 29 Hatcheries and stocking ....................................................................................................................... 31 Roads and road crossings..................................................................................................................... 31 Mining .................................................................................................................................................. 32 Dams..................................................................................................................................................... 33 Dredging............................................................................................................................................... 33 Aquaculture .......................................................................................................................................... 34 1.6 Procedure used to determine biological value of habitat within specific areas ...................................... 37 1.6.1 Methods and procedures used to determine the biological value of HUC 10 watersheds ............... 37 Habitat units......................................................................................................................................... 37 Habitat quantity.................................................................................................................................... 37 Habitat quality...................................................................................................................................... 38 Final habitat value ............................................................................................................................... 40 Final Migration Value.......................................................................................................................... 40 Final Biological Value.......................................................................................................................... 40 Chapter 2: Downeast Coastal SHRU Biological Report.............................................................................. 41 2.1 Landscape and hydrologic features that shape the physical and Biological features within the Downeast Coastal SHRU .............................................................................................................................................. 41 2.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 41 2.1.2 Geology and climate........................................................................................................................ 41 2.1.3 Hydrology........................................................................................................................................ 42 2.1.4 Natural barriers................................................................................................................................ 43 2.2 Human influence on Downeast Coastal SHRU ...................................................................................... 44 2.2.1 Current population structure and land-use....................................................................................... 44 2.2.2 Dams and barriers to fish passage ................................................................................................... 44 2.2.3 Water Quality .................................................................................................................................. 45 2.2.4 Fisheries and fish introductions in the Downeast Coastal SHRU.................................................... 47 2.3 Atlantic salmon habitat........................................................................................................................... 49 Chapter 3: Penobscot Bay SHRU Biological Report................................................................................... 54 3.1 Landscape and hydrologic features that shape the physical and biological features within the Penobscot SHRU ........................................................................................................................................................... 54 3.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 54 3.1.2 Geology and climate........................................................................................................................ 54 3.1.3 Hydrology........................................................................................................................................ 54 3.1.4 Natural barriers................................................................................................................................ 56 3.2 Human Influence on the Penobscot SHRU............................................................................................. 57 1 3.2.1 Current population structure and land use ....................................................................................... 57 3.2.2 Dams and diversions........................................................................................................................ 57 Penobscot River restoration effort through dam removal .................................................................... 58 3.2.3 Fisheries and fish introductions in the Penobscot SHRU ................................................................ 60 3.3 Atlantic salmon habitat........................................................................................................................... 63 Chapter 4: Merrymeeting Bay SHRU Biological Report ............................................................................ 70 4.1 Landscape and hydrological features that shape the physical and biological features within the Merrymeeting Bay SHRU ............................................................................................................................ 70 4.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 70 4.1.2 Geology and climate.......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon
    0# North West Branch St John T11 R15 WELS T11 R17 WELS T11 R16 WELS T11 R14 WELS T11 R13 WELS T11 R12 WELS T11 R11 WELS T11 R10 WELS T11 R9 WELS T11 R8 WELS Aroostook River Oxbow Smith Farm DamXW St John River T11 R7 WELS Garfield Plt T11 R4 WELS Chapman Ashland Machias River Stream Carry Brook Chemquasabamticook Stream Squa Pan Stream XW Daaquam River XW Whitney Bk Dam Mars Hill Squa Pan Dam Burntland Stream DamXW Westfield Prestile Stream Presque Isle Stream FRESH WAY, INC Allagash River South Branch Machias River Big Ten Twp T10 R16 WELS T10 R15 WELS T10 R14 WELS T10 R13 WELS T10 R12 WELS T10 R11 WELS T10 R10 WELS T10 R9 WELS T10 R8 WELS 0# MARS HILL UTILITY DISTRICT T10 R3 WELS Water District Resevoir Dam T10 R7 WELS T10 R6 WELS Masardis Squapan Twp XW Mars Hill DamXW Mule Brook Penobscot RiverYosungs Lakeh DamXWed0# Southwest Branch St John Blackwater River West Branch Presque Isle Strea Allagash River North Branch Blackwater River East Branch Presque Isle Strea Blaine Churchill Lake DamXW Southwest Branch St John E Twp XW Robinson Dam Prestile Stream S Otter Brook L Saint Croix Stream Cox Patent E with Licensed Dischargers and W Snare Brook T9 R8 WELS 8 T9 R17 WELS T9 R16 WELS T9 R15 WELS T9 R14 WELS 1 T9 R12 WELS T9 R11 WELS T9 R10 WELS T9 R9 WELS Mooseleuk Stream Oxbow Plt R T9 R13 WELS Houlton Brook T9 R7 WELS Aroostook River T9 R4 WELS T9 R3 WELS 9 Chandler Stream Bridgewater T T9 R5 WELS TD R2 WELS Baker Branch Critical UmScolcus Stream lmon Habitat Overlay South Branch Russell Brook Aikens Brook West Branch Umcolcus Steam LaPomkeag Stream West Branch Umcolcus Stream Tie Camp Brook Soper Brook Beaver Brook Munsungan Stream S L T8 R18 WELS T8 R17 WELS T8 R16 WELS T8 R15 WELS T8 R14 WELS Eagle Lake Twp T8 R10 WELS East Branch Howe Brook E Soper Mountain Twp T8 R11 WELS T8 R9 WELS T8 R8 WELS Bloody Brook Saint Croix Stream North Branch Meduxnekeag River W 9 Turner Brook Allagash Stream Millinocket Stream T8 R7 WELS T8 R6 WELS T8 R5 WELS Saint Croix Twp T8 R3 WELS 1 Monticello R Desolation Brook 8 St Francis Brook TC R2 WELS MONTICELLO HOUSING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal
    A Research Paper by Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 <Year> Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 PUBLISHED ONLINE: http://headwaterseconomics.org/economic-development/local-studies/dam-removal-case-studies ABOUT HEADWATERS ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve community development and land management decisions in the West. CONTACT INFORMATION Megan Lawson, Ph.D.| [email protected] | 406-570-7475 P.O. Box 7059 Bozeman, MT 59771 http://headwaterseconomics.org Cover Photo: Whittenton Pond Dam, Mill River, Massachusetts. American Rivers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 MEASURING THE BENEFITS OF DAM REMOVAL ........................................................................................... 2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 5 CASE STUDIES WHITTENTON POND DAM, MILL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS ........................................................................ 11 ELWHA AND GLINES CANYON DAMS, ELWHA RIVER, WASHINGTON ........................................................ 14 EDWARDS DAM, KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rangeley Lake Fish Management
    RANGELEY LAKE FISH MANAGEMENT Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Fisheries Research Bulletin No. 10 Rangeley Village with City Cove shown to the left. RANGELEY LAKE FISHERY MANAGEMENT By Raymond A. Dt'Sandre Regional Fishery Biologist, Region D Charles F. Ritzi Environmental Coordinator and William L. Woodward Assistant Regional Fishery Biologist, Region D Maynard F. Marsh, Commissioner 1977 Published Under Appropriation 4550 TABLE OF CONTENTS RANGELEY LAKE FISHERY MANAGEMENT INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF RANGELEY LAKE ................................................ 3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SALMON POPULATION Introduction........................................................................................ 6 Growth and Longevity..................................................................... 6 Natural Reproduction....................................................................... 7 Dodge Pond Stream ................................................................ 7 Long Pond Stream (Greenvale Stream ).............................. 8 Rangeley Lake O u tle t............................................................ 11 Evaluation of Salmon Stocking ..................................................... 12 Stocking history and study methods......................................12 Representation of hatchery salmon in the lake population . 14 Stocking assessment and conclusions ................................ 14 a) Effects of
    [Show full text]
  • Maine Rivers Study
    MAINE RIVERS STUDY Final Report State of Maine Department of Conservation U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Mid-Atlantic Regional Office May 1982 Electronic Edition August 2011 DEPLW-1214 i Table of Contents Study Participants i Acknowledgments iii Section I - Major Findings 1 Section II - Introduction 7 Section III - Study Method and Process 8 Step 1 Identification and Definition of Unique River Values 8 Step 2 Identification of Significant River Resource Values 8 Step 3 River Category Evaluation 9 Step 4 River Category Synthesis 9 Step 5 Comparative River Evaluation 9 Section IV - River Resource Categories 11 Unique Natural Rivers - Overview 11 A. Geologic / Hydrologic Features 11 B. River Related Critical / Ecologic Resources 14 C. Undeveloped River Areas 20 D. Scenic River Resources 22 E. Historical River Resources 26 Unique Recreational Rivers - Overview 27 A. Anadromous Fisheries 28 B. River Related Inland Fisheries 30 C. River Related Recreational Boating 32 Section V - Final List of Rivers 35 Section VI - Documentation of Significant River Related 46 (Maps to be linked to GIS) Natural and Recreational Values Key to Documentation Maps 46 Section VII – Options for Conservation of Rivers 127 River Conservation – Energy Development Coordination 127 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Consistency 127 State Agency Consistency 128 Federal Coordination Using the National Wild & Scenic Rivers Act 129 Federal Consistency on Coastal Rivers 129 Designation into National River System 130 ii State River Conservation Legislation
    [Show full text]
  • Penobscot River 2007 Data Report July 2008
    Penobscot River 2007 Data Report July 2008 Prepared by Donald Albert, P. E. Bureau of Land and Water Quality Division of Environmental Assessment DEPLW-0882 Table of Contents Introduction ...........................................................................................................................1 Technical Design of Study ....................................................................................................1 Hydrologic Data ....................................................................................................................4 Ambient Chemical Data ........................................................................................................4 -DO, Temperature and Salinity .............................................................................................5 -Ultimate BOD ......................................................................................................................8 -Phosphorus Series ................................................................................................................11 -Nitrogen Series.....................................................................................................................13 -Chlorophyll-a .......................................................................................................................15 -Secchi disk transparency......................................................................................................17 Effluent Chemical Data .........................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Miscellaneous Rule Revisions and New Marijuana Standards
    MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION AND FORESTRY MAINE LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAPTER 10, LAND USE DISTRICTS AND STANDARDS Adopted Rule Revisions: 2020 Miscellaneous Rule Revisions and New Marijuana Standards July 15, 2020 The following amendments propose changes to Chapter 10, Land Use Districts and Standards for Areas Served by the Maine Land Use Planning Commission. This document only includes relevant sections of Chapter 10. Revisions in Sections 10.21,I Planned Recreation Facility Development Subdistrict; 10.26,D, Minimum Setbacks; 10.27,G Recreational Gold Prospecting; and 10.27,S Commercial Businesses propose to repeal and replace the existing rule language in its entirety. Therefore, the revisions are not shown in strikeout and underline format. However, in some cases, sections intended to be repealed and replaced, the revisions are illustrated only to facilitate public review. Otherwise, proposed changes to other sections of Chapter 10 are shown in strikeout and underline format with additions in underlined text, deletions as strikethroughs, and relocations as double underline and double strikethroughs. Many of the proposed revisions can be described as clerical corrections and generally include: factual corrections; improving the structure of citations or the consistency of use listings; and simple clarifications that do not change the meaning of the applicable standard. Of the substantive revisions, many are self-explanatory. Where necessary, further explanations of some changes have been included in [brackets]. These explanatory notes will not be included in the final rule. A generalized summary of the revisions is provided on the next page. 01-672 CHAPTER 10 10.02 Generalized Summary of Proposed Revisions by Topic Marijuana: The proposed revisions include standards to address odors produced by indoor and outdoor growing operations; protect against light pollution from the lighting within greenhouses; and address now conflicting restrictions for signs advertising activities that are illegal under state or federal laws or regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Ice-Out Dates for 29 Lakes in New England, 1807–2008
    Historical Ice-Out Dates for 29 Lakes in New England, 1807–2008 Open-File Report 2010–1214 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Photograph shows ice-out on Jordan Bay, Sebago Lake, Maine, Spring 1985. Historical Ice-Out Dates for 29 Lakes in New England, 1807–2008 By Glenn A. Hodgkins Open-File Report 2010–1214 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2010 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Hodgkins, G.A., 2010, Historical ice-out dates for 29 lakes in New England, 1807–2008: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–1214, 32 p., at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1214/. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. ii Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • High Peaks Region Recreation Plan
    High Peaks Region Recreation Plan An overview and analysis of the recreation, possibilities, and issues facing the High Peaks Region of Maine Chris Colin, Jacob Deslauriers, Dr. Chris Beach Fall 2008 Maine Appalachian Trail Land Trust – High Peaks Initiative: The Maine Appalachian Trail Land Trust (MATLT) was formed in June 2002 by a group of Mainers dedicated to the preservation of the natural qualities of the lands surrounding the Appalachian Trail in Maine. Following its campaign to acquire Mount Abraham and a portion of Saddleback Mountain, MATLT is embarking on a new initiative to research and document the ecological qualities of the entire Western Maine High Peaks Region. The MATLT website describes the region as follows: “The Western Maine High Peaks Region is the 203,400 acres roughly bounded by the communities of Rangeley, Phillips, Kingfield and Stratton. In this region, there are about 21,000 acres above 2700 feet. It is one of only three areas in Maine where the mountains rise above 4000 feet. The other two are the Mahoosuc Range and Baxter Park. Eight (8) of the fourteen (14) highest mountains in Maine are in this region (Sugarloaf, Crocker, South Crocker, Saddleback, Abraham, The Horn, Spaulding and Redington Peak.) These are all above 4000 feet. If one adds the Bigelow Range, across Route 27/16 from Sugarloaf, the region hosts ten (10) of the highest mountains (Avery Peak and West Peak added)). This area is comparable in size to Baxter Park but has 40% more area above 2700 feet.” Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 A. Purpose and Need for High Peaks Area Recreation Plan ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Stillwater Recertification Attachments 2015
    Stillwater Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2712) Project Description Black Bear Hydro Partners, LLC’s Stillwater Hydroelectric Project is a run-of-river hydroelectric generating facility located on the Stillwater Branch of the Penobscot River in Old Town, Maine with a gross nameplate generating capacity of 4.18 MW. The Stillwater Project Powerhouse A commenced initial commercial operations in 1913. The Licensee applied for an amendment to increase capacity at the Stillwater Project via the construction of an additional powerhouse (Powerhouse B). The Project consists of an existing 1,720-foot-long dam consisting of 13 sections of various height, creating an impoundment with a normal full pond elevation of 94.65 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum. The Project has two powerhouses. Powerhouse A consists of four generating units a total installed capacity of 1,950 kW and a maximum hydraulic capacity of 1,700 cfs. Powerhouse B consists of three generating units with a total installed capacity of 2,229 kW and a maximum hydraulic capacity of 1,758 cfs. Powerhouse A has 50 ft long aerial transmission lines installed from the powerhouse’s GSU to the existing substation. Powerhouse B has 300 ft long aerial transmission lines installed from the powerhouse’s generating step-up unit (GSU) to the existing, adjacent 12.5 kV distribution system located adjacent to the existing project boundary and along the south side of Stillwater Avenue. The Stillwater Powerhouse B commenced initial commercial operation September, 2013. The Stillwater Project generates clean, renewable electricity while providing recreational opportunities (portage trail, parking areas for river access and hand-carried boat launch), fish passage measures, consistent water levels that enhance habitats for waterfowl, etc., and substantial support of the local community through stable property tax payments, reliable voltage support of the electrical distribution system, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Column a Publication of the Maine Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program
    the Water Column A Publication of the Maine Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program Vol. 18, No. 1 Fall 2013 CITIZEN LAKE SCIENTISTS Their Vital Role in Monitoring & Protecting Maine Lakes What’s Inside President's Message . 2 President’s Lakeside Notes: Citizen Lake Scientists . 3 Littorally Speaking: Moosehead Survey . 4 Quality Counts: Certification & Data Credibility . 6 Chinese Mystery Snails . 7 Message Is The Secchi Disk Becoming Obsolete? . 8 Bill Monagle IPP Season in Review . 9 President, VLMP Board of Directors The VLMP Lake Monitoring Advantage . 10 Thank You Donors! . 12 2013 VLMP Annual Conference . 14 In The Wake of Thoreau... Welcome New Monitors! . 16 n a recent sunny and calm autumn what he could not see. An interesting Camp Kawanhee Braves High Winds . 17 afternoon while sipping tea with a perspective, wouldn’t you agree? VLMP Advisory Board Welcomes New Members . 18 O friend (well, one of us was sipping tea) How Do You Monitor Ice-Out? . 19 I am sharing this with you because on the dock of her lakeside home on 2013 Interns . .20 & 22 while my friend and I were enjoying Cobbossee Lake, and marveling at the Passings . 21 our refreshments and conversation, splendor before us, my friend remarked, Notices . 22 my thoughts went directly to the many ‘as a limnologist, I gather you see things volunteer lake monitors and invasive that the average observer cannot when plant patrollers of the Maine VLMP, looking out over a lake.' Well, that may and how essential your contributions be partly true. Having been involved are to more fully documenting and in lake science for over thirty years, I understanding the condition of many can speculate about what is occurring of Maine’s lakes and ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • Penobscot River Restoration Great Works & Veazie Dam Removals Sedgeunkedunk Steam Restoration
    Sponsored by Ecological Landscaping Association Society for Ecological Restoration - New England Chapter Penobscot River Restoration Great Works & Veazie Dam Removals Sedgeunkedunk Steam Restoration Thursday, August 8, 2013 10:00 AM – 4:00 PM $35.00 ELA & SER Members - $40 Non-Member The Penobscot River Restoration Project (Penobscot Project) is an unprecedented collaborative effort that will rebalance fisheries restoration with hydropower production in the largest watershed within Maine and result in the ecological restoration on the Penobscot River. Major partners in the project include hydropower companies; federal, state, and tribal governments; the Penobscot River Restoration Trust (Penobscot Trust); and conservation groups. After several years and considerable work, the Penobscot Trust purchased three dams from the PPL Corporation (the hydropower company) in order to remove the two most seaward dams—Great Works and Veazie and to pursue a fish bypass around the Howland dam. As part of the arrangement, PPL Corporation received approval to increase generation at six existing dams and will improve fish passage at four additional dams. The largest river in Maine, the Penobscot River and its tributaries flow from near Mount Katahdin in the North Woods through the heart of Maine to Penobscot Bay. As a model for cooperative conservation, the Penobscot Project provides numerous benefits while maintaining hydropower generation. The Penobscot Project: Provides access to habitat for Atlantic and Shortnose sturgeon as well as striped bass. Improves access to nearly 1,000 miles of habitat for endangered Atlantic salmon and other species. Restores ecological functions to benefit native plant and animals in the river, estuary, and Gulf of Maine.
    [Show full text]
  • Mooselookmeguntic Lake Fishery Management 2014
    Fishery Progress Report Series No. 14-05 MOOSELOOKMEGUNTIC LAKE FISHERY MANAGEMENT By: David Howatt and Jason Seiders December 2014 Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife Fisheries and Hatcheries Division MOOSELOOKMEGUNTIC LAKE FISHERY MANAGEMENT JOB NO. F-014 INTERIM SUMMARY REPORT NO. 8 (2011-2014) SUMMARY Mooselookmeguntic Lake is the largest of the Rangeley Chain of Lakes and supports sport fisheries for wild landlocked salmon and brook trout. These fisheries have been monitored by periodic creel surveys and season-long aerial angler counts since 1981. Growth rates for salmon declined considerably beginning in the late 1990’s; brook trout growth also declined during that period but not as dramatically. The decline in fish quality for both species was attributed to a decline in harvest rates resulting from reduced fishing pressure and increased release rates of legal fish by anglers. Salmon regulations were liberalized slightly in 2000 to encourage harvest of smaller fish and improve fish quality. Salmon quality continued to deteriorate, so harvest regulations were further liberalized in 2006 (three salmon daily bag limit; minimum length limit 12 inches; only one may exceed 16 inches). Additional salmon harvest was also encouraged through an educational program involving signage, oral presentations, and written articles. Salmon growth has been steadily poor over recent years, but is now showing some signs of improvement. High salmon densities in a large waterbody, such as Mooselookmeguntic Lake, have required a long-term effort to improve growth. The more liberal salmon rules, combined with the education effort, have not resulted in the dramatically increased salmon harvest that must be sustained for a number of years to realize any improvements in growth rates and size quality.
    [Show full text]