DOCSLIB.ORG

FINAL Amendment 10 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan: Essential Fish Habitat and Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FINAL Amendment 10 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan: Essential Fish Habitat and Environmental Assessment FINAL Amendment 10 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan: Essential Fish Habitat and Environmental Assessment Office of Sustainable Fisheries Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Management Division September 1, 2017 Abstract Proposed Action: Amendment 10 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan to Update Essential Fish Habitat Delineations and Life History Descriptions for Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Type of statement: Environmental Assessment (EA) Lead Agency: National Marine Fisheries Service: Office of Sustainable Fisheries For further information: Highly Migratory Species Management Division (F/SF1) 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Phone: (301)-427-8503; Fax: 301-713-1917 Abstract: The National Marine Fisheries Service is amending the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) based on a review of data and literature relevant to Atlantic HMS Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The purpose of the amendment is to update existing HMS EFH, designate new and update existing Habitat Areas of Particular Concern for some HMS, and analyze the adverse effects of fishing on EFH consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other relevant Federal laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires a review and updating of EFH FMP components based on new scientific or other relevant information at least once every five years and an update of the EFH designations accordingly. This final amendment presents the the results and underlying environmental impacts analysis of the statutorly required review and update of EFH for all federally managed Atlantic HMS. New information, including information on the biology, distribution, habitat requirements, life history characteristics, migratory patterns, spawning, pupping, and nursery areas of Atlantic HMS were considered when updating EFH in this final amendment. ii Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ..................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ......................................................................................................... viii List of Tables ............................................................................................................ix 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Background .................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Management History ...................................................................................... 10 1.3 Approach ........................................................................................................ 13 1.4 Purpose of and Need for Action ..................................................................... 14 1.4.1 Purpose ……………………………………………………………………15 1.4.2 Need……. .......................................................................................... 15 1.5 Scope of the NEPA Analysis .......................................................................... 15 2 SUMMARY OF THE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................... 18 2.1 Essential Fish Habitat Designations ............................................................... 19 Alternative 1: ........................................................................................................... 19 Alternative 2: ........................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Habitat Area of Particular Concern (HAPC) Designations .............................. 20 Alternative 3: Evaluate and, if warranted, modify current HAPCs for Bluefin Tuna 23 Alternative 3a: No action - Retain current HAPCs for Bluefin Tuna ...................... 23 Alternative 4: Evaluate and, if warranted, modify current HAPCs for sandbar sharks….. ....................................................................................................... 25 Alternative 4a: No action - Retain current HAPC sandbar shark ................. 25 Alternative 4b: (Preferred) Modify current HAPC for sandbar shark ........... 25 Alternative 5: Evaluate and, if warranted, establish new HAPCs for Lemon Sharks….. ...................................................................................................... 27 Alternative 5a: No action - Do not create a HAPC for lemon sharks ........... 27 Alternative 5b: (Preferred) Create a new HAPC for lemon sharks between Jupiter Inlet, Florida and Cape Canaveral, Florida ............................ 27 Alternative 5c: Create a new HAPC for lemon sharks in the vicinity of Cape Canaveral, Florida ............................................................................. 28 Alternative 5d: Create a new HAPC for lemon sharks in the vicinity of Jupiter Inlet, Florida ....................................................................................... 29 Alternative 6: Evaluate and, if warranted, establish new HAPCs for Sand Tiger Sharks…. ....................................................................................................... 31 Alternative 6a: No action - Do not create HAPCs for Sand Tiger Sharks .... 31 Alternative 6b: (Preferred) Create two HAPCs: (1) Delaware Bay for all life stages of sand tiger shark and (2) Plymouth, Kingston, Duxbury (PKD) bay system in coastal Massachusetts for neonates/YOY and juvenile sand tiger sharks ............................................................................... 31 2.3 Alternatives Considered but not Further Analyzed ......................................... 33 iii 2.3.1 HAPC for Larval Billfishes ................................................................. 33 2.3.2 HAPC for White Shark ....................................................................... 34 2.4 Literature Cited ............................................................................................... 35 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .......................................... 37 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 37 3.2 Atlantic Ocean ................................................................................................ 38 3.2.1 Coastal and Estuarine Habitat ........................................................... 38 3.2.2 Continental Shelf and Slope Areas .................................................... 40 3.2.3 Pelagic Environment ......................................................................... 42 3.3 Gulf of Mexico ................................................................................................ 44 3.3.1 Coastal and Estuarine Habitats ......................................................... 44 3.3.2 Continental Shelf and Slope Areas .................................................... 45 3.3.3 Physical Oceanography..................................................................... 45 3.4 U.S. Caribbean ............................................................................................... 46 3.4.1 Coastal and Estuarine Habitats ......................................................... 47 3.4.2 Insular Shelf and Slope Areas ........................................................... 48 3.4.3 Physical Oceanography..................................................................... 48 3.5 References ..................................................................................................... 49 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALTERNATIVES ....................... 51 4.1 Essential Fish Habitat Designations ............................................................... 52 4.1.1 Summary and Comparison of EFH Delineation Alternatives ............. 53 4.2 Habitat Areas of Particular Concern ............................................................... 54 4.2.1 Summary and Comparison of HAPC Alternatives ............................. 55 4.3 Preferred Alternatives ..................................................................................... 76 4.4 Impacts on Essential Fish Habitat .................................................................. 76 4.5 Impacts on Protected Resources ................................................................... 77 4.6 Environmental Justice Concerns .................................................................... 77 4.7 Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) ........................................................ 77 4.8 Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................ 78 4.9 Literature Cited ............................................................................................... 78 5 ANALYSIS OF FISHING AND NON-FISHING EFFECTS ...................................... 80 5.1 Analysis of Fishing Effects ............................................................................. 80 5.1.1 HMS Fisheries Gear Effects .............................................................. 80 5.1.2 Forage Species ................................................................................. 83 5.1.3 Actions to Minimize the Adverse Effects of Fishing on EFH .............. 83
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fisheries Centre
    Fisheries Centre The University of British Columbia Working Paper Series Working Paper #2015 - 80 Reconstruction of Syria’s fisheries catches from 1950-2010: Signs of overexploitation Aylin Ulman, Adib Saad, Kyrstn Zylich, Daniel Pauly and Dirk Zeller Year: 2015 Email: [email protected] This working paper is made available by the Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. Reconstruction of Syria’s fisheries catches from 1950-2010: Signs of overexploitation Aylin Ulmana, Adib Saadb, Kyrstn Zylicha, Daniel Paulya, Dirk Zellera a Sea Around Us, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada b President of Syrian National Committee for Oceanography, Tishreen University, Faculty of Agriculture, P.O. BOX; 1408, Lattakia, Syria [email protected] (corresponding author); [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT Syria’s total marine fisheries catches were estimated for the 1950-2010 time period using a reconstruction approach which accounted for all fisheries removals, including unreported commercial landings, discards, and recreational and subsistence catches. All unreported estimates were added to the official data, as reported by the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Total reconstructed catch for 1950-2010 was around 170,000 t, which is 78% more than the amount reported by Syria to the FAO as their national catch. The unreported components added over 74,000 t of unreported catches, of which 38,600 t were artisanal landings, 16,000 t industrial landings, over 4,000 t recreational catches, 3,000 t subsistence catches and around 12,000 t were discards.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharks for the Aquarium and Considerations for Their Selection1 Alexis L
    FA179 Sharks for the Aquarium and Considerations for Their Selection1 Alexis L. Morris, Elisa J. Livengood, and Frank A. Chapman2 Introduction The Lore of the Shark Sharks are magnificent animals and an exciting group Though it has been some 35 years since the shark in Steven of fishes. As a group, sharks, rays, and skates belong to Spielberg’s Jaws bit into its first unsuspecting ocean swim- the biological taxonomic class called Chondrichthyes, or mer and despite the fact that the risk of shark-bite is very cartilaginous fishes (elasmobranchs). The entire supporting small, fear of sharks still makes some people afraid to swim structure of these fish is composed primarily of cartilage in the ocean. (The chance of being struck by lightning is rather than bone. There are some 400 described species of greater than the chance of shark attack.) The most en- sharks, which come in all different sizes from the 40-foot- grained shark image that comes to a person’s mind is a giant long whale shark (Rhincodon typus) to the 2-foot-long conical snout lined with multiple rows of teeth efficient at marble catshark (Atelomycterus macleayi). tearing, chomping, or crushing prey, and those lifeless and staring eyes. The very adaptations that make sharks such Although sharks have been kept in public aquariums successful predators also make some people unnecessarily since the 1860s, advances in marine aquarium systems frightened of them. This is unfortunate, since sharks are technology and increased understanding of shark biology interesting creatures and much more than ill-perceived and husbandry now allow hobbyists to maintain and enjoy mindless eating machines.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidopus Caudatus) Off West Coast South Island
    Age determination of frostfish (Lepidopus caudatus) off west coast South Island New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report 2013/21 P.L. Horn ISSN 1179-5352 (online) ISBN 978-0-478-40595-8 (online) April 2013 Requests for further copies should be directed to: Publications Logistics Officer Ministry for Primary Industries PO Box 2526 WELLINGTON 6140 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0800 00 83 33 Facsimile: 04-894 0300 This publication is also available on the Ministry for Primary Industries websites at: http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx http://fs.fish.govt.nz go to Document library/Research reports © Crown Copyright - Ministry for Primary Industries Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2 2. REVIEW OF AGE-RELATED STUDIES .................................................................................... 2 3. METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Analysis of length-frequency data .......................................................................... 6 3.2 Otolith-based ageing .............................................................................................. 6 3.3 Estimating catch-at-age .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean Volume
    ISBN 0-9689167-4-x Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean (Davis Strait, Southern Greenland and Flemish Cap to Cape Hatteras) Volume One Acipenseriformes through Syngnathiformes Michael P. Fahay ii Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean iii Dedication This monograph is dedicated to those highly skilled larval fish illustrators whose talents and efforts have greatly facilitated the study of fish ontogeny. The works of many of those fine illustrators grace these pages. iv Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean v Preface The contents of this monograph are a revision and update of an earlier atlas describing the eggs and larvae of western Atlantic marine fishes occurring between the Scotian Shelf and Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (Fahay, 1983). The three-fold increase in the total num- ber of species covered in the current compilation is the result of both a larger study area and a recent increase in published ontogenetic studies of fishes by many authors and students of the morphology of early stages of marine fishes. It is a tribute to the efforts of those authors that the ontogeny of greater than 70% of species known from the western North Atlantic Ocean is now well described. Michael Fahay 241 Sabino Road West Bath, Maine 04530 U.S.A. vi Acknowledgements I greatly appreciate the help provided by a number of very knowledgeable friends and colleagues dur- ing the preparation of this monograph. Jon Hare undertook a painstakingly critical review of the entire monograph, corrected omissions, inconsistencies, and errors of fact, and made suggestions which markedly improved its organization and presentation.
    [Show full text]
  • Scalloped Hammerhead Shark (Sphyrna Lewini) 2014-2019 Bibliography
    Scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini) 2014-2019 Bibliography Trevor Riley, Head of Public Services, NOAA Central Library NCRL subject guide 2019-09 https://doi.org/10.25923/79kf-v153 September 2019 U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research NOAA Central Library – Silver Spring, Maryland Table of Contents Background & Scope ................................................................................................................................. 3 Sources Reviewed ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Section I: Biology and Life History ............................................................................................................. 4 Section II: Genetics .................................................................................................................................. 17 Section III: Population Abundance .......................................................................................................... 20 Section IV: Threats .................................................................................................................................. 28 2 Background & Scope Scalloped hammerhead sharks are moderately large sharks with a global distribution. The most distinguishing characteristic of this shark is its "hammer-shaped" head. They are threatened by commercial fishing, mainly for the shark fin trade. Two distinct
    [Show full text]
  • Hairtail and Frostfish (Trichiuridae) Exploitation Status Undefined
    I & I NSW WILD FISHERIES RESEARCH PROGRAM Hairtail and Frostfish (Trichiuridae) EXPLOITATION STATUS UNDEFINED No local biological information available for either species in this group, but growth and maturity have been studied for Trichiurus lepturus from the East China Sea, where it supports a major fishery. SCIENTIFIC NAME STANDARD NAME COMMENT Trichiurus lepturus largehead hairtail Lepidopus caudatus frostfish Trichiurus lepturus Image © Bernard Yau Background The hairtail is commonly around 100 cm in length and about 2 kg in weight but reaches a The largehead hairtail (Trichiurus lepturus) maximum length of about 220 cm and weight belongs to the family Trichiuridae which, of 3.5 kg. worldwide, includes nine genera and about 30 species generally referred to as cutlassfishes or Overseas studies have observed that adults scabbardfishes. Off NSW, at least four species feed at the surface during the day, and retreat of trichiurids are found in deepwater, but the to deeper waters at night. In contrast, juveniles most well known member of the family to most and small adults tend to feed at night at the people is the hairtail, found in shallow coastal surface, and aggregate into schools at depths waters and estuaries. during the day. The adult hairtail diet consists mainly of fish with occasional squid and A cosmopolitan species, the largehead hairtail crustaceans, whereas juveniles mainly feed on is subject to significant fisheries off many planktonic crustaceans, euphausiids and small Asian countries, particularly China and Korea. fish. The world catch reportedly now exceeds 1.5 million t annually. In eastern Australia, Reported landings in NSW generally range hairtail occasionally school in coastal bays between 10 and 25 t with catches greatest and estuaries where they may be targeted during March-May.
    [Show full text]
  • NPOA Sharks Booklet.Indd
    National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) November 2013 South Africa Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Private Bag X2, Rogge Bay, 8012 Tel: 021 402 3911 Fax: +27 21 402 3364 www.daff.gov.za Design and Layout: FNP Communications and Gerald van Tonder Photographs courtesy of: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), Craig Smith, Charlene da Silva, Rob Tarr Foreword South Africa’s Exclusive Economic Zone is endowed with a rich variety of marine living South Africa is signatory to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries – voluntarily agreed to by members of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) – and, as such, is committed to the development and implementation of National Plans of Action (NPOAs) as adopted by the twenty-third session of the FAO Committee on Fisheries in February 1999 and endorsed by the FAO Council in June 1999. Seabirds – aimed at reducing incidental catch and promoting the conservation of seabirds Fisheries and now regularly conducts Ecological Risk Assessments for all the commercial practices. Acknowledging the importance of maintaining a healthy marine ecosystem and the possibility of major detrimental effects due to the disappearance of large predators, South from the list of harvestable species. In accordance with international recommendations, South Africa subsequently banned the landing of a number of susceptible shark species, including oceanic whitetip, silky, thresher and hammerhead sharks. improves monitoring efforts for foreign vessels discharging shark products in its ports. To ensure long-term sustainability of valuable, but biologically limited, shark resources The NPOA-Sharks presented here formalises and streamlines ongoing efforts to improve conservation and management of sharks caught in South African waters.
    [Show full text]
  • © Iccat, 2007
    A5 By-catch Species APPENDIX 5: BY-CATCH SPECIES A.5 By-catch species By-catch is the unintentional/incidental capture of non-target species during fishing operations. Different types of fisheries have different types and levels of by-catch, depending on the gear used, the time, area and depth fished, etc. Article IV of the Convention states: "the Commission shall be responsible for the study of the population of tuna and tuna-like fishes (the Scombriformes with the exception of Trichiuridae and Gempylidae and the genus Scomber) and such other species of fishes exploited in tuna fishing in the Convention area as are not under investigation by another international fishery organization". The following is a list of by-catch species recorded as being ever caught by any major tuna fishery in the Atlantic/Mediterranean. Note that the lists are qualitative and are not indicative of quantity or mortality. Thus, the presence of a species in the lists does not imply that it is caught in significant quantities, or that individuals that are caught necessarily die. Skates and rays Scientific names Common name Code LL GILL PS BB HARP TRAP OTHER Dasyatis centroura Roughtail stingray RDC X Dasyatis violacea Pelagic stingray PLS X X X X Manta birostris Manta ray RMB X X X Mobula hypostoma RMH X Mobula lucasana X Mobula mobular Devil ray RMM X X X X X Myliobatis aquila Common eagle ray MYL X X Pteuromylaeus bovinus Bull ray MPO X X Raja fullonica Shagreen ray RJF X Raja straeleni Spotted skate RFL X Rhinoptera spp Cownose ray X Torpedo nobiliana Torpedo
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—House H8792
    H8792 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE December 21, 2010 The Shark Conservation Act would end the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The revolving loans, as determined by the Adminis- practice of shark finning in U.S. waters. question is on the motion offered by trator, on a competitive basis, to eligible entities, However, domestic protections alone will not the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. including through contracts entered into under save sharks. subsection (e) of this section,’’; and BORDALLO) that the House suspend the (B) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘tons of’’; We need further safeguards to keep marine rules and concur in the Senate amend- (3) in subsection (b)— ecosystems and top predator populations ment to the bill, H.R. 81. (A) by striking paragraph (2); healthy. The Shark Conservation Act will bol- The question was taken; and (two- (B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as para- ster the U.S.’s position when negotiating for thirds being in the affirmative) the graph (2); and increased international fishery protections. rules were suspended and the Senate (C) in paragraph (2) (as so redesignated)— (i) in subparagraph (A), in the matter pre- Healthy shark populations in our waters can amendment was concurred in. help drive our economy and make our seas ceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘90’’ and inserting A motion to reconsider was laid on ‘‘95’’; thrive. the table. This bill is not just about preserving a spe- (ii) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ‘‘10 f percent’’ and inserting ‘‘5 percent’’; and cies, but about preserving an ecosystem, an (iii) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ‘‘the economy, and a sustainable future.
    [Show full text]
  • Shark Catch Trends and Effort Reduction in the Beach Protection Program, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa (Elasmobranch Fisheries - Oral)
    NOT TO BE CITED WITHOUT PRIOR REFERENCE TO THE AUTHOR(S) Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization Serial No. N4746 NAFO SCR Doc. 02/124 SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL MEETING – SEPTEMBER 2002 Shark Catch Trends and Effort Reduction in the Beach Protection Program, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (Elasmobranch Fisheries - Oral) S.F.J. Dudley Natal Sharks Board, P. Bag 2, Umhlanga Rocks, 4320, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Shark nets have been set off the beaches of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, since 1952, to minimise risk of shark attack. Reliable catch data for each of the 14 shark species commonly caught are available from 1978 only. The nets fish in fixed localities very close to shore and there is an absence of fisheries independent data for most species. There is uncertainty about factors such as localised stock depletion and philopatry. Catch rates of seven species show a significant decline, but this figure drops to four with the exclusion of the confounding effects of the annual sardine run. Of the four, two are caught in very low numbers (Java Carcharhinus amboinensis and great hammerhead Sphyrna mokarran) and it is probable that any decline in population size reflects either local depletion or additional exploitation elsewhere. The other two species (blacktip C. limbatus and scalloped hammerhead S. lewini) are caught in greater numbers. C. limbatus appears to have been subject to local depletion. Newborn S. lewini are captured by prawn trawlers and discarded, mostly dead, adding to pressure on this species. As a precautionary measure, and in the absence of clarity on the question of stock depletion, in September 1999 a process of reducing the number of nets per installation was begun, with a view to reducing catches.
    [Show full text]
  • Order LAMNIFORMES ODONTASPIDIDAE Sand Tiger Sharks Iagnostic Characters: Large Sharks
    click for previous page Lamniformes: Odontaspididae 419 Order LAMNIFORMES ODONTASPIDIDAE Sand tiger sharks iagnostic characters: Large sharks. Head with 5 medium-sized gill slits, all in front of pectoral-fin bases, Dtheir upper ends not extending onto dorsal surface of head; eyes small or moderately large, with- out nictitating eyelids; no nasal barbels or nasoral grooves; snout conical or moderately depressed, not blade-like;mouth very long and angular, extending well behind eyes when jaws are not protruded;lower labial furrows present at mouth corners; anterior teeth enlarged, with long, narrow, sharp-edged but unserrated cusps and small basal cusplets (absent in young of at least 1 species), the upper anteriors separated from the laterals by a gap and tiny intermediate teeth; gill arches without rakers; spiracles present but very small. Two moderately large high dorsal fins, the first dorsal fin originating well in advance of the pelvic fins, the second dorsal fin as large as or somewhat smaller than the first dorsal fin;anal fin as large as second dorsal fin or slightly smaller; caudal fin short, asymmetrical, with a strong subterminal notch and a short but well marked ventral lobe. Caudal peduncle not depressed, without keels; a deep upper precaudal pit present but no lower pit. Intestinal valve of ring type, with turns closely packed like a stack of washers. Colour: grey or grey-brown to blackish above, blackish to light grey or white, with round or oval dark spots and blotches vari- ably present on 2 species. high dorsal fins upper precaudal eyes without pit present nictitating eyelids intestinal valve of ring type Habitat, biology, and fisheries: Wide-ranging, tropical to cool-temperate sharks, found inshore and down to moderate depths on the edge of the continental shelves and around some oceanic islands, and in the open ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Fishing Year
    ATLANTIC STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION REVIEW OF THE INTERSTATE FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR COASTAL SHARKS 2014 FISHING YEAR Prepared by the Plan Review Team Approved by the Spiny Dogfish & Coastal Sharks Management Board August 2016 Table of Contents I. Status of the Fishery Management Plan .......................................................................... 2 II. Status of the Stock and Assessment Advice ..................................................................... 4 III. Status of the Fishery ....................................................................................................... 6 VI. Implementation of FMP Compliance Requirements for 2014 ..................................... 27 VII. PRT Recommendations ................................................................................................. 29 1 I. Status of the Fishery Management Plan Date of FMP Approval: August 2008 Amendments None Addenda Addendum I (September 2009) Addendum II (May 2013) Addendum III (October 2013) Management Unit: Entire coastwide distribution of the resource from the estuaries eastward to the inshore boundary of the EEZ States With Declared Interest: Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida Active Boards/Committees: Coastal Shark Management Board, Advisory Panel, Technical Committee, and Plan Review Team a) Goals and Objectives The Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Coastal Sharks (FMP) established the following
    [Show full text]