1 / 16

River Herring (alewife and blueback herring) petition and NOAA Fisheries response

River Herring (alewife and blueback herring) petition and NOAA Fisheries response. Northeast Regional Office. Tara Trinko Lake Protected Resources Division. Where are we (NOAA Fisheries) in the decision making process?. Status Review Phase. Update on the Status Review Process.

wilbur
Download Presentation

River Herring (alewife and blueback herring) petition and NOAA Fisheries response

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. River Herring (alewife and blueback herring) petition and NOAA Fisheries response • Northeast Regional Office • Tara Trinko Lake • Protected Resources Division

  2. Where are we (NOAA Fisheries) in the decision making process? Status Review Phase

  3. Update on the Status Review Process • Compiled best available scientific and commercial information on the status, abundance and trends of both species (e.g. stock assessment, working group reports, and peer reviews) • Completing the five factor analysis • Conducted a threats assessment (qualitative) and completing an extinction risk analysis (quantitative) • Considering information on “significant portion of the species range” (e.g., are there areas where the species/DPS is no longer viable (self-sustaining), but once was?)

  4. 2012 Workshops • NOAA Fisheries held three workshops on alewife and blueback herring • Stock Structure Workshop June 22th in Gloucester, MA • Working Group meeting- June 20- 21th • Extinction Risk Workshop July 10th in Boston, MA • Working Group meeting- July 11-12th • Climate Change Workshop July 18-19th in Gloucester, MA • All reports from working group meetings were peer reviewed, and the reports and peer review reports are posted on our webpage: http://www.nero.noaa.gov/prot_res/CandidateSpeciesProgram/RiverHerringSOC.htm

  5. Alewife Stock Structure Palkovacs et al. 2012

  6. Blueback herring stock structure Palkovacs et al. 2012

  7. Notes about stock complexes • NOAA Fisheries will first consider both species throughout their entire range (Florida to Canada) • Stock complexes are not automatically assumed to be distinct population segments (DPS) • DPS must be both: • Discrete • Significant

  8. Extinction Risk Modeling • Extinction risk trajectories are being run for: • Entire range of alewife and blueback herring (Florida to Canada) • Each stock complex of alewife and blueback herring

  9. Possible outcomes • NOAA Fisheries proposes to list the species as endangered • NOAA Fisheries proposes to list the species as threatened • NOAA Fisheries determines that listing is not warranted

  10. What does this mean for harvest in 2013?What is the timeline for a listing decision?

  11. NOAA Funded Restoration Projects

  12. Questions?

  13. Possible outcomes • NMFS proposes to list the species as endangered • 60 to 90 day public comment period, public hearings • NMFS must make a final determination no later than one year after proposed rule • If final rule is endangered, all take is automatically prohibited • Take defined as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.”

  14. Possible outcomes continued • Take from bycatch or incidental catch in non-directed fisheries prohibited unless authorized through Section 7 or 10 of the ESA • NMFS must designate critical habitat at time of final listing (to maximum extent prudent) and initiate recovery planning

  15. Possible outcomes continued • NMFS proposes to list the species as threatened • Secretary of Commerce must promulgate protective regulations that are necessary and advisable for the conservation of the species (e.g., a 4(d) rule) • Directed take, bycatch, importation and exportation most likely prohibited (unless authorized through Section 7 or 10) • Critical habitat designated • Recovery planning initiated NMFS determines that listing is not warranted

More Related