|
|
|
The Roles of Harvest and Hatcheries in Recovery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A briefing for the Ag. / Fish / Water group |
|
November 22, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
Defining the problem |
|
What is the Role of Harvest Management? |
|
What is the role of Hatcheries? |
|
Recovery Planning brings it all together |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defining the problem |
|
What is the Role of Harvest Management? |
|
What is the role of Hatcheries? |
|
Recovery Planning brings it all together |
|
|
|
|
Many stocks of wild salmon, steelhead and trout
have declined along the west coast of North America |
|
As a result, ESA listings affect nearly every
watershed in Washington State |
|
Habitat loss and degradation, overharvest, and
hatchery programs have each played a role in the decline of salmonids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington population is forecasted to increase
18% over the next 30 years (from 5.75 million today to 6.8 million in 2030;
double the 1970 population of 3.4 million) |
|
30% of wetlands have been lost statewide since
settlement (1.35 million acres before settlement, 938,000 acres today) |
|
90-95% of urban estuaries & wetlands have
been lost |
|
55% of Eastern Washington native grassland &
shrub steppe has been converted to other vegetation types and uses (14.6
million acreas before settlement, 6.5 million acres in 1991) |
|
|
|
|
Overharvest |
|
Blockages (dams, culverts) and lack of screens |
|
Low water: diversions |
|
High winter scouring flow: diking and bank
hardening, stormwater runoff, loss of stream complexity & riparian area |
|
Poor water quality: too warm, oxygen poor,
siltation, loss of riparian area reduces shade |
|
Loss of spawning & rearing habitat |
|
Interactions with hatchery fish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defining the problem |
|
What is the Role of Harvest Management? |
|
What is the role of Hatcheries? |
|
Recovery Planning brings it all together |
|
|
|
|
|
|
How is harvest controlled? |
|
How is harvest management contributing to
recovery? |
|
How do we know those actions are working? |
|
|
|
|
|
THEN: |
|
Fisheries established to take advantage of
abundance |
|
Account only for landed catch (dead fish
in-hand) |
|
Little interagency or international coordination |
|
NOW: |
|
Fisheries established on allowable impacts to
weakest stock |
|
All impacts are counted (landed catch,
"bycatch", release mortality) |
|
Coastwide coordination: |
|
Alaska to California |
|
Ocean to rivers |
|
Indians and non-Indians |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All fishing seasons must go through one of the
available ESA gateways: |
|
Section 10 consultation |
|
Section 7 consultation, federal nexus |
|
Section 4(d): Fishery Management and Evaluation
Plans (FMEPs) |
|
Fisheries not approved under ESA are not allowed
to go forward |
|
Incidental impacts only on listed fish |
|
Impacts taken by one fishery must be reduced in
another: “zero sum” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduced
fishing seasons and catch |
|
Fewer
commercial fishing licenses |
|
Mass
marking and selective fisheries |
|
RESULTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduced
fishing seasons and catch |
|
Fewer
commercial fishing licenses |
|
Mass
marking and selective fisheries |
|
RESULTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduced
fishing seasons and catch |
|
Fewer
commercial fishing licenses |
|
Mass
marking and selective fisheries |
|
RESULTS |
|
|
|
|
Timing of seasons and openings |
|
Area Closures |
|
Special area fisheries |
|
Size limits |
|
Gear restrictions (mesh size, bait, lures) |
|
Require release (species, marked fish) |
|
“New” gear types (beach seines, traps, fish
wheels, tangle nets, weirs) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduced
fishing seasons and catch |
|
Fewer
commercial fishing licenses |
|
Mass
marking and selective fisheries |
|
RESULTS
= How do we know those actions are working? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defining the problem |
|
What is the Role of Harvest Management? |
|
What is the role of Hatcheries? |
|
Recovery Planning brings it all together |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What are the roles for hatcheries in Washington? |
|
Restore and support wild fish populations |
|
Produce fish for harvest |
|
How do artificial production programs impact
wild fish? |
|
What are we doing to address those impacts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WDFW 90 facilities |
|
250 cooperative projects |
|
40 Reg. Fish. Enhance. Group projects |
|
Tribes 35 facilities |
|
USFWS 12 facilities |
|
|
|
|
Chinook, coho, chum, pink, sockeye |
|
Steelhead, trout |
|
Warmwater species |
|
|
|
|
WDFW 200-250 million fish |
|
Tribes 46 million fish |
|
USFWS 38 million fish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treaty trust obligations |
|
Coded-wire tag program and other evaluation
tools |
|
Artificial production mitigates for lost
freshwater production |
|
|
|
|
|
All artificial production programs must go
through one of the available ESA gateways: |
|
Section 10 consultation |
|
Section 7 consultation, federal nexus |
|
Section 4(d): Hatchery Genetic and Management
Plans (HGMPs) |
|
Hatchery programs affecting listed stocks must
have ESA coverage |
|
HGMPs will be completed for all rearing programs & enhancement projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Physical aspects and operation of the hatchery, such as: |
|
Fish passage |
|
Screened intakes |
|
Water supply |
|
Pollution abatement |
|
Biological impacts of hatchery fish on wild
stocks … |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effects: |
|
Interbreeding with wild fish reduces
"fitness" |
|
Options: |
|
Use locally-adapted or wild broodstock |
|
High overall harvest rate (however, kills too
many wild fish) |
|
Selective harvest of marked hatchery fish |
|
Remove hatchery strays: |
|
Use for lake plants |
|
Use for nutrient enhancement & food banks |
|
Implement more natural rearing practices |
|
Final option: Reduce or eliminate rearing
component |
|
|
|
|
Evaluate the level of impact for each potential
risk factor at each facility |
|
Determine which impacts to address first |
|
Develop steps to minimize impacts, including
further research, if needed |
|
Coordinate with Hatchery Science Review Group
findings |
|
Incorporate into HGMPs |
|
|
|
|
Congressional appropriation through Senator
Slade Gorton |
|
Support State and Tribal efforts |
|
Provide for facilitation of a reform strategy through
Long Live the Kings |
|
Provide a competitive grants program for
hatchery research |
|
Establish an independent scientific panel (HSRG) |
|
|
|
|
Defining the problem |
|
What is the role of Harvest management? |
|
What is the role of Hatcheries? |
|
Recovery planning brings it all together |
|
|
|
|
What are our recovery planning goals? |
|
Components of recovery planning |
|
What more needs to be done? |
|
How are we going to get that done? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What? |
|
Actions that avoid/minimize "take" |
|
4(d) rule |
|
Section 7/10 "take" authorizations |
|
Address "take" liability for Hydraulic
Project Approvals & other permits issued by state agencies |
|
Who? |
|
Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife |
|
Other state agencies |
|
Tribes |
|
Local Governments |
|
Businesses |
|
Citizens |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What? |
|
Statewide Initiatives, such as: |
|
Shorelines guidelines |
|
Forests & Fish |
|
Agriculture, Fish, Water |
|
Stream corridor guidelines |
|
Growth Management Act provisions, such as: |
|
Comprehensive Land Use Plans |
|
Stormwater management rules |
|
Critical Areas Ordinances |
|
Shorelines development regs. |
|
ESHB 2514 watershed planning products |
|
|
|
|
|
What? |
|
Local Recovery Goals |
|
Limiting Factors |
|
What biological processes need to be fixed in
order to restore properly functioning habitat conditions? |
|
Who? |
|
Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife |
|
Tribes |
|
Conservation Comm. |
|
State & federal agencies |
|
Local technical expertise e.g., Lead Entities,
WRIA groups |
|
Businesses, landowners, citizens |
|
|
|
|
|
What? |
|
Lower Columbia Multi-Species Plan |
|
Puget Sound comprehensive coho & chinook
plans |
|
Lake Ozette Sockeye |
|
Hood Canal/Strait of Juan de Fuca Summer Chum
Plan |
|
Who? |
|
Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board |
|
Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Authority |
|
Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife |
|
Tribes |
|
local participants, such as Hood Canal
Coordinating Council |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What? |
|
|
|
Commitments for specific implementation measures |
|
What are we going to do? |
|
When are we going to do it? |
|
|
|
|
ESA compliance activities minimize
"take" |
|
Programmatic building blocks |
|
Specific local watershed & comanager plans |
|
Comanager comprehensive species plans |
|
Region-wide implementation plans |
|
a.k.a. NMFS Recovery Plans |
|
|
|
|
|
Harvest Managers are: |
|
setting
harvest protection goals that protect natural stocks |
|
implementing additional restrictions where appropriate |
|
developing comprehensive harvest plans |
|
developing rebuilding plans in concert with NMFS recovery
efforts |
|
Hatchery Managers are: |
|
evaluating hatchery program impacts on wild fish |
|
minimizing impacts to wild fish by modifying or eliminating
some programs |
|
correcting barriers, screens, water supply, pollution problems
at hatchery facilities |
|
|
|
|
Conduct watershed assessments to identify
factors limiting recovery |
|
Gov't, businesses, landowners will need to
secure ESA compliance |
|
Local ordinances modified to comply with Growth
Mgmt and Shorelines Mgmt Acts |
|
Write Recovery Plans & make commitments for
action |
|
Monitor & evaluate our progress toward
salmon recovery |
|
|
|
|
Ag, Fish, Water negotiations |
|
Puget Sound: "shared strategy" |
|
Lower Columbia "multi-species plan" |
|
Cooperative compliance programs |
|
others |
|
|
|