Transcript Protected Resource Division Santa Rosa Field Office

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service
Protected Resources Division
Southwest Region
Federal Recovery Planning for California’s
Salmon and Steelhead Populations
North Bay Watershed Association
December 1, 2006
5 Steelhead
Populations
2 Coho
Populations
3 Chinook
Populations
10 Species of Salmon and Steelhead Listed as Federally
Threatened or Endangered in California
Salmon & Steelhead:
Anadromous Salmonids
A species that migrates from
salt water into
freshwater to spawn
National Marine Fisheries Service
Southwest Region
Salmon & Steelhead:
Life History
Recovering a Species on a Path
Towards Extinction
Recovering a Species on a Path
Towards Extinction: The Road Map
What Does Recovery Look Like?
Recovery is “…the process by which listed
species and their ecosystems are restored
and their future safeguarded to the point
that protections under the ESA are no
longer needed.”
NMFS October 2004 Interim Threatened and Endangered
Recovery Planning Guidance
Recovering a Species on a Path
Towards Extinction: The Road Map
What Guides the Recovery Process?
1. Endangered Species Act
2. Case Law
3. Policies
Coho salmon smolt in San Vicente
Creek, Santa Cruz County, June 2006
Photograph: Chris Berry
Recovering a Species on a Path
Towards Extinction: The Road Map
What Guides the Recovery Process?
ESA §4(f)
Recovery plans must contain:
1. Description of such site-specific management
actions as may be necessary to achieve the plan’s
goal for the conservation and survival of the species;
2. Objective, measurable criteria which, when met,
would result in the determination that the species be
removed from the list; and
3. Estimates of the time required and the cost to carry
out those measures needed to achieve the plan’s goal
and the intermediate steps toward that goal.
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
The Road Map and Case Law
• Management actions must be
site specific wherever feasible
• Actions and criteria must link to
identified threats including
changes in threats since listing
and be organized by the 5 listing
factors of Federal Register
Notice listing the species
• Criteria must measure whether
threats have been abated and
address delisting not just
downlisting.
• Fund for Animals v.
Babbitt (1995)
• SWCBD v. Babbitt (1999)
• Defenders of Wildlife v.
Babbit (2001)
• Southwest Center for
Biological Diversity v.
Babbit (1999)
• Cannot promise to
“develop criteria later” or
use “future research” as
means to not address
threats
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
The Road Map and Policy
A Few Examples:
• House Resources Committee Report on Recovery Plan
Development (2006)
• NMFS Endangered and Threatened Species Interim Recovery
Planning Guidance (October 2004)
• USFWS/NMFS Interagency Cooperative Policy for Peer Review
in Endangered Species Activities (1994)
• Interagency Cooperative Policy on Information Standards
under the ESA (1994)
• Interagency Cooperative Policy on Recovery Plan
Implementation under the ESA (1994)
Recovering a Species on a Path
Towards Extinction: The Road Map
Primary Functions of Recovery Plans and Achieving Recovery :
•
•
•
•
•
Describe biology and threats pertinent to endangerment and recovery
Outline and justify a scientifically sound strategy
Identify and prioritize necessary actions
Identify goals & criteria to measure success
Outline monitoring activities and action implementation overtime
Recovery plans serve secondary functions:
• Public outreach tool outlining why a species is endangered
• Clear and transparent rationale for recovery actions for cooperators
• Tool used for funding actions with clear priorities
• Recovery Plans are not regulatory documents. They are guidance
documents. Federal agencies have the greatest obligation to ensure their
actions are meeting recovery planning goals.
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
The Road Map and Case Law
Recovery plans must explicitly
identify all threats to a species
and track
(through objective measurable criteria)
how each threat
(through site-specific management actions)
will be reduced or eliminated.
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
What, When, Who and How
Taking the Bull by the Horns
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
When Are Plans To Be Completed?
Draft Plans Due June 2007
Final Plans Due December 2007
Who’s Working on the Plans?
NOAA/NMFS
Protected Resources Division (Lead)
Habitat Conservation Division (Experts/Specialists)
Sustainable Fisheries Division (Marine Experts)
NOAA Restoration Center (Restoration Specialists)
Science Center (Scientists)
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
Consulting Others on Plan Development
California Department of Fish and Game
Water Quality Control Board
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Counties and Cities
Water Agencies
Watershed Groups
Environmental Groups
Fishermen
THE PUBLIC!
Great Grandmother of Charlotte Ambrose (1954)
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
So What Are We Doing?
Four Recovery Planning Domains in California each with:
• Recovery Coordinator and Specific Species
• Team of scientists led
by NMFS Science
Center working on
population/species
viability for the
Domain species
(Technical Recovery
Teams)
Don Alley: San Lorenzo Coho and Steelhead
Principle Components
Required for Federal Recovery Plans:
Phase I
Abundance and Trends
Population Identification
Biological Viability Criteria
Phase II
Assessment of Threats
Conservation Measures
Recovery Criteria
Implementation Schedule
Redwood Creek Humboldt County
Domain Species:
Coho Salmon
Central California Coast (E)
Aptos Creek Santa Cruz County
Chinook Salmon
California Coastal (T)
Steelhead
Northern California (T)
Central California Coast (T)
North Central California Coast Recovery Domain
Phase I: Technical Recovery Team
Photograph: Don Alley
Dr. Brian Spence, NOAA Fisheries
Dr. Eric Bjorkstedt, NOAA Fisheries
Dr. Carlos Garza, NOAA Fisheries
Dr. David Hankin, Humboldt State University
Dr. Jerry Smith, San Jose State University
David Fuller, Bureau of Land Management
Rick Macedo, Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game
Weldon Jones, Calif. Dept. of Fish and Game (retired)
North Central California Coast Recovery Domain
Phase I: Technical Recovery Team Products
Reports
Population
Structure
Contents
Categorization of historical
populations
Development of diversity
strata
Population
Viability
Population-level viability
criteria
ESU-level viability criteria
Status
Available:
http://swfsc.noaa.gov/textblock
.aspx?Division=FED&id=2266
In TRT review.
External review expected
Jan 2007
Assessment of current
status
Research &
Monitoring
Basic research/monitoring
recommendations
In progress.
Expected in Early 2007
Coho Diversity Strata
Coastal
Lost Coast - Navarro Point
Ten Mile River
Noyo River
Big River
Navarro Point - Gualala Point
San Francisco Bay
Historical Structure
Santa Cruz Mountains
• Population Identification
Albion River
• Population Independence
Navarro River
- Can individual populations
persist without influence from
other populations;
Garcia River
Gualala River
- Independent or dependent
• Environmental Groupings
Russian River
- aka Diversity Strata
Walker Creek
Lagunitas Creek
Pacific Ocean
¯
0
25
Pescadero Creek
San Lorenzo River
Kilometers
50
100
Diversity Strata – Independent and Dependent
Central California Coast Coho Salmon ESU
Lost Coast –
Gualala Point
Lost Coast –
Navarro Point
Navarro Point–
Gualala Point
Jackass Creek
Usal Creek
Cottaneva Creek
Juan Creek
Howard Creek
DeHaven Creek
Wages Creek
Abalobadiah Cr.
Ten Mile River
Mill Creek
Pudding Creek
Noyo River
Hare Creek
Jug Handle Creek
Caspar Creek
Russian Gulch (Me)
Big River
Little River (Me)
Albion River
Big Salmon Creek
Navarro River
Greenwood Creek
Elk Creek
Mallo Pass Creek
Alder Creek
Brush Creek
Garcia River
Point Arena Creek
Schooner Gulch
Gualala River
Gualala Point –
Golden Gate
Coastal
Russian Gulch (S)
Russian River
Scotty Creek
Salmon Creek (S)
Bodega Harbor
Americano Creek
Stemple Creek
Walker Creek
Lagunitas Creek
Drakes Bay
Pine Gulch
Redwood Cr. (Ma)
San Francisco
Bay
Arroyo Corte Madera d. Presidio
Corte Madera Creek
Miller Creek
Novato Creek
Petaluma River
Sonoma Creek
Napa River
San Pablo Creek
Strawberry Creek
San Leandro Creek
San Lorenzo Creek
Alameda Creek
Coyote Creek
Guadalupe River
Stevens Creek
San Francisquito Creek
San Mateo Creek
Santa Cruz
Mountains
Pilarcitos Creek
Tunitas Creek
San Gregorio Creek
Pomponio Creek
Arroyo de los Frijoles
Pescadero Creek
Gazos Creek
Whitehouse Creek
Cascade Creek
Waddell Creek
Scott Creek
San Vicente Creek
Wilder Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek
Aptos Creek
Diversity Strata – Independent
Central California Coast Steelhead
North Coastal
Interior
Austim Creek
Salmon Creek
Americano Creek
Stemple Creek
Walker Creek
Lagunitas Creek
Mark West Creek
Dry Creek
Maacama Creek
Upper Russian
Santa Cruz Mountains
Pilarcitos Creek
San Gregorio
Pescadero
Waddell
Scott
Laguna
San Lorenzo
Soquel
Aptos
Coastal SF Bay
Arroyo Corte Madera
d. Presidio
Corte Madera Creek
Miller Creek
Novato Creek
Guadalupe River
Stevens Creek
San Francisquito Creek
San Mateo Creek
Interior SF Bay
Petaluma River
Sonoma Creek
Napa River
San Pablo Creek
San Leandro Creek
San Lorenzo Creek
Alameda Creek
Coyote Creek
North Central California Coast Domain:
Partnering on Recovery Planning – Phase II
North Central California Coast Domain:
Partnering on Recovery Planning – Phase II
SCWA Recovery Planning Support
- MOA process facilitated funding to NMFS
- Funding towards assessment of threats for coho, steelhead, Chinook
- Recovery Outlines completed or under development
- Excellent working relationship with SCWA
- Opportunity to understand limitations/priorities
Recovering a Species on an Extinction Path:
Potential of NBWA Participation
•
•
•
•
•
•
Work from common objectives
Build relationships
Understand issues, opportunities and constraints
Use process for data development and sharing
Move beyond paradigm of “everything everywhere”
Facilitate identification of most important watersheds and
highest priority threats
• Develop realistic expectations of what we can/cannot realize
Real Benefits to NBWA
• Build realistic expectations into recovery planning actions
• High priority actions attract funding options (Restoration
Center)
• Actions prevent further listing (e.g., assessing conservation)
• No single entity can recover our salmon and steelhead…it will
take all of us working together.
Highest Priority Populations
Most Important Threats
Most Feasible Restoration Actions
Greatest Success for Survival and Recovery
North Central California Coast Domain:
Understanding Each Other
Working Together towards Common Goals
Photographs: Chris Berry