NOAA Restoration Center The National Fish Habitat Action Plan– A National Plan to Conserve Fish (and Shellfish) Habitat Kay A. McGraw, Ph.D. NOAA Restoration Center Silver Spring, MD.

Topics What is NFHAP? Why is it important? How does it work? Science and Data Team – Assessment Tool How you can be involved

What is NFHAP? Nationwide strategy Voluntary Science-based objectives Analyze data on fish (and shellfish) habitat (location and condition) Identify priority areas and actions Apply to both freshwater and marine fish (and shellfish) habitat The National Fish Habitat Action Plan, or NFHAP for short, is an unprecedented plan being developed to reverse declines of America’s fish and shellfish habitats. A growing number of fisheries professionals, state and federal agencies, tribes, foundations, conservation and angling groups, businesses, and industries have joined together in this effort. The plan is similar to that undertaken for waterfowl and their habitat in the 1980s through the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. NFHAP will use existing and emerging science-based tools to target priority areas and implement needed projects The plan funds and supports projects that are developed voluntarily by willing partners and stakeholders. These voluntary projects will supplement the existing foundation of regulatory programs that protect aquatic habitats from pollution and degradation. NFHAP also recognizes the need to evaluate and report each project’s performance and demonstrate overall results to Congress, partners, and the general public. The plan focuses on fish and their habitats as keystones for the full range of aquatic biodiversity and aquatic habitats in the United States. This includes freshwater and marine species, including shellfish. “…to protect, restore, and enhance the nation’s fish and aquatic communities through partnerships that foster fish habitat conservation and improve the quality of life for the American people.” The call to action came from the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council (a chartered Federal advisory group). The Council recognized the challenges in the way we were managing fish and fish habitat across the nation. To address these, they recommended taking a partnership-driven approach to conserving and restoring fish habitat. As their model, they used the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, which has made tremendous progress thanks to its strategic focus on critical habitat centers and leveraging partner resources and efforts. The Waterfowl Management Plan has proven that steady but limited government funds can be leveraged into hundreds of millions of private funding to restore waterfowl habitat on a broad scale. Additional Info: Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council members: Jim Anderson, Executive Director, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; Douglass Boyd, Board Member, Coastal Conservation Association; Kenneth Haddad, Executive Director, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; Larry Killien, Past President, States Organization for Boating Access; Michael Nussman, President and CEO, American Sportfishing Association; William Taylor, Professor and Chair, Michigan State Univ. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife; John Cooper (ex-officio), President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Monita Fontaine, Vice President Government Relations, National Marine Manufactures; Doug Hansen, Director Division of Wildlife, SD Department of Game, Fish and Parks; Ryck Lydecker, Assistant Vice President for government Affairs, Boat U.S.; Jim Range, Government Affairs Advocate, American Fly Fishing Trade Association Carl Wilgus, Administrator, Idaho Department of Commerce; Jeff Crane, President, Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation Sheri Griffith, Director, America Outdoors; Dean Kessel, Vice President of Operations, BASS; John Morris, Founder, Bass Pro Shops; John Sprague, Past President, Marine Industries Association of Florida; Dale hall (ex-officio), Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

NFHAP MISSION “…to protect, restore, and enhance the nation’s fish (and shellfish) and aquatic communities through partnerships that foster fish habitat conservation and improve the quality of life for the American people.”

The Plan And shellfish Signed on April 24, 2006 by: Carlos Gutierrez Secretary of Commerce Lynn Scarlett Acting Secretary of the Interior John Cooper President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies John Baughman Executive Vice President of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies http://www.fishhabitat.org

Why NFHAP? The Problem – Fisheries and Their Habitats are at a Crossroads Oyster reefs are the most impacted of any marine ecosystem in the world (85% loss globally)!! ~ 90% of native mussel species are endangered, threatened, or of special concern 51% of crayfish species are at risk 80% of freshwater gastropods are at risk (many extinct) 40% of our commercial and recreational fisheries are declining 37% of our freshwater fish species are in trouble High rate of aquatic habitat loss in U.S. and globally; Between 1986 – 1997 a net loss of 644,000 acres of wetlands ~50 – 60% of the U.S. population lives within 50 mi. of a coastline ~ 20% of inland species are imperiled; ~ additional 37% are at risk; PNW – 80% of known commercial fish stocks in decline

The Concept Local projects Regional strategies and priorities National attention and funding

Five important lessons Address real problems not symptoms Process oriented Provide increased and sustained investment for long term success Monitor and be accountable for scientifically sound and measurable results Share information and knowledge

Action Plan Objectives Conduct condition analysis of all fish (and shellfish ) habitats within the United States by 2010. Prepare a Status of Fish Habitats in the United States in 2010, and every five years thereafter. Establish 12 or more Fish Habitat Partnerships throughout United States by 2010. Protect all healthy and intact habitats by 2015. Improve the condition of 90 percent of priority habitats and species targeted by Fish Habitat Partnerships by 2020.

Developing and Implementing an Assessment Tool (NFHAP Science and Data Team)

Historic View of “Habitat”

Purpose of the Assessment Tool To characterize aquatic habitat condition… …so the information can be used to make good decisions ….. regarding the protection, restoration, or enhancement of aquatic habitats.

Conduct an initial assessment Develop an assessment framework Compile and evaluate existing data Conduct an initial assessment Develop an assessment framework Implementing the NFHAP Assessement Tool

Importance of Assessment to NFHAP Comprehensive, objective tool for nation-wide comparison Identification of healthy and degraded aquatic systems Identification of key disturbance factors Scientific information at hierarchical levels for different agencies, organizations

Three Geographic Subdivisions Inland Marine Coastal

Overall Habitat Assessment Tool Plan Classify all of the Nation’s Waters Score Their Condition – Using Series of Condition Variables Summed into an Index Grade Them By Best Theoretical Possible and Best Currently Available in Classified Group Apply Appropriate Habitat Measures to Remedy Problems or Apply Protective Measures to Maintain Condition

Why Classify? Allows for meaningful comparisons and condition assessment Provides a context for protection and improvement Allows for experiences and methodologies to be shared between similar systems

Examples—Inland Classification Variables Regional geology Landforms Regional drainage patterns Biota Climate

Examples—Coastal/Marine Classification Variables Depth contours Tidal height e.g.,intertidal,subtidal) Bottom type (e.g., mud, sand, cobble) Salinity regime Biota (coral reef, oyster reef, salt marsh, sea grass, mangrove, etc.)

Focus on Key Processes (Emergent Properties) Connectivity Hydrology Channel and Bottom Form Material Recruitment Water Quality Energy Flow in Aquatic Communities

Hierarchies of Classification and Assessment Freshwater (upland) Habitat -- (Cowardin??) Process level factors (6) Individual variables Coastal/Marine Habitat (CMECS– Coastal Marine Ecological Classification Standard) Process level factor (?)

Inland Assessment Framework: Built from basic, spatial aquatic unit Mapped for the Nation Physical, biological characteristics that can be associated with the unit or surrounding landscape (i.e., catchment) Part of spatial hierarchy, so information can be analyzed and reported at different spatial scales

WWF Freshwater Ecoregions

National Hydrography Dataset plus (NHD+) NFH Assessment Basic Unit National Hydrography Dataset plus (NHD+) Available nationwide Confluence to confluence stream segments Local and network catchment boundaries Catchment characteristics (i.e., area, slope, precipitation)

TNC Ecological Drainage Units (EDUs) (244) NFH Assessment Spatial Extents WWF Ecoregions (45) Catchments (2,595,196) TNC Ecological Drainage Units (EDUs) (244)

Urban Land Use Agricultural Land Use 0 - 20% 21 - 40% 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% No EDUs Agricultural Land Use 0 - 20% 21 - 40% 41 - 60% 61 - 80% 81 - 100% No EDUs

Anthropogenic Disturbances by EDU Cattle Mines Agriculture Population Road density Total P yield Imperviousness Very low Low Medium High Very High No EDUs

Results at Different Spatial Extents Watersheds in Cape Fear River - Piedmont EDU WWF Freshwater Ecoregions EDUs in Appalachian Piedmont

Ecological Region Layer

Coastal Assessment Framework

North Atlantic Coastal Watersheds

CAF Data Sets Shellfish Harvest Classification Physical and Hydrologic (P&H) Agricultural Census Agricultural Pesticides Use Fertilizer Use Land Use / Land Cover Socioeconomics Population and Population Density Eutrophication Estuarine Living Marine Resources (ELMR) Pollution Sources

Examples of coastal indicators Loss of habitat Shore line type (e.g., amt. of shore armoring) Dead zones and low D.O. Contamination of bottom sediments Harmful algae blooms (frequency and extent) Status and trends of commercial fish stocks Number of species at risk or extinct

CAF Data Examples Shellfish growing areas – Eutrophication Closures pollution sources Abundance Harvest data Eutrophication Loss of SAV Effects on fish/shellfish Impacts on human use (swimming, boating, etc) Coastal Population and Density

Middle Atlantic Watersheds Great South Bay

Land Use—Great South Bay Great South Bay Land use and population

Avg. Annual Nitrogen and Phosphorous loads in Chesapeake Bay Watershed (point source discharges—kg/yr)

Development Pressure Around the Chesapeake Bay (and a 40% increase projected for 2003 -2008

Condition Analysis Build a Habitat Index based on layered (hierarchal) Individual Habitat Variables that can be improved. Score each Classified Unit against others in the Classification. Two Scale Scores Series of sub-scores that can be improved on 100 Best Theoretical Possible Best Currently Available

Help – find your niche http://fishhabitat.org © fishhabitat.org "Candidate" Fish Habitat Partnerships Find your niche Partner profile Find your niche Help – find your niche http://fishhabitat.org © fishhabitat.org Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack

Acknowledgments Susan-Marie Stedman, NOAA OHC Gary Whelan, Michigan Dept. of Nat. Res. Dr. Dana Infante, Mich. St. Univ. Dr. Dayong Wu, Mich. St. Univ.,

Finis Oympia oysters by Cory and Catska Ench, Port Angeles, WA