WHY FISH (Mussel) HABITAT?

Transcription

1

2 WHY FISH (Mussel) HABITAT? There are approximately 1,200 recognized fish species that occur in inland waters of North America 40% are imperiled or presumed extinct (and that is increasing). ORB Fishes species (14 federally listed) ORB Mussels species (38 federally listed) Fresh water constitutes only about 1% of the Earth s surface area and less than 0.01% of its water by volume. (5 million people get their drinking water from the Ohio River) Areas recognized as very high risk of current aquatic habitat degradation include Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio

3 WHY FISH HABITAT? THE ECONOMICS OF FISH HABITAT (as of 2010) $125.0 billion and over 1 million jobs saltwater and freshwater recreational fishing. $116.2 billion and over 1 million jobs commercial fishing. 8.2 billion pounds of coastal and marine fish worth $4.5 billion were landed in $144.6 million in direct economic value and 1100 jobs on the $28 million invested by NFHP since $805.7 million and 19,300 jobs projected long-term value of the future benefits of habitat restored by NFHP to date. $1 billion annually in recreational fishing in the Ohio River Basin

4 Why Fish Habitat? More Americans fish than play basketball (24.0 million) and football (8.9 million) combined. If fishing were ranked as a corporation in the Fortune 500, it would outrank Sears, Pepsi, Apple and Intel. The number of jobs supported by anglers could employ all attendees of the last seven Super Bowls TWICE! Fishing as a leisure-time activity ranks higher than playing golf, target shooting, hunting with firearms, backpacking and wilderness camping, baseball, mountain biking and skiing. The economic activity generated by sportfishing is greater than the gross state product of 23 states

5 Oregon Chub Becomes First Fish Delisted Due to Recovery February 18, 2015 The small but significant Oregon chub has become the first fish ever to be removed from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Animals due to recovery. The chub, listed as endangered in 1993 and reclassified as threatened in 2010, is a minnow found only in the Willamette River Basin in floodplain habitats with little or no water flow. Threats to the chub have been reduced through restoration and acquisition of habitat, promotion of natural river flows, and the reintroduction of the fish into historical habitat.

6

7 The National Fish Habitat Partnership Works to conserve fish habitat nationwide leveraging federal, state and private funding sources to achieve the greatest impact on fish populations through priority conservation projects. The national partnership implements the National Fish Habitat Action Plan and supports 18 regional grassroots partner organizations.

8

9

10 What is a Fish Habitat Partnership? Voluntary, non-regulatory, science-based group whose goals are to protect, restore, and enhance America s aquatic systems. Anglers Conservation Groups Tribal Governments State, Territorial, and Federal Agencies Industry Leaders Scientists

11 Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership The ORBFHP was formed to protect, restore, and enhance priority habitat for fish and mussels in the watersheds of the Ohio River Basin. We pursue this mission for the benefit of the public, but what brings us to the table is as diverse as the basin itself. Whether it is sport fish, mussels, imperiled fish, water quality, or one of many other drivers, what bonds us is the Basin and our desire to work together to protect, restore, and enhance the aquatic resources More than 25 million people, almost 10 percent of the U.S. population, live in the Ohio River Basin Over 150,000 people with an annual payroll of $6.5 billion work for businesses that are directly or indirectly dependent on the Ohio River.

12 How Do We Begin? Modeling Approach INPUT Landscape Predictor Data o Natural and Human Induced o Local vs. US Network vs. DS Network vs. Regional Stream or Lake Response Data o Environmental Data o Fish Data Assemblage Abundance Presence-Absence Index of Biotic Integrity Community Metrics BOOSTED REGRESSION TREES OUTPUT Model Results o Response variable 1:100K SLW scale o Predictor variable importance weightings o Stressor-Response functions o Estimates of model uncertainty Post-Modeling Results o Cumulative Natural Habitat Quality Index (CHQI) o Cumulative Anthropogenic Stressor Index (CASI) o CHQI and CASI accumulated from 1:100K SLW up to HUC12.

13

14 Partnering with ORBFHP ~200 professionals, mostly senior level scientists, who can support the development of aquatic resource projects in the Ohio River Basin Project Support from Inception to Completion Identify Need/Projects Develop Partnerships Secure Resources Planning Design Implementation Permitting Bidding Oversight Monitoring NEPA basin-wide PEA Aquatic Invasive Species Evaluation Tool

15 Partnering with ORBFHP Outreach Highlight success We will make sure the support of our partners is recognized locally or regionally as appropriate. This would include identifying ecological, economic, and water quality benefits, improvements for recreational opportunities, etc. Endorsement The ORBFHP has a process to endorse projects that align with the mission and vision of protecting, restoring, and enhancing habitat for fish and mussels in the watersheds of the Ohio River Basin. Letters of endorsement or representation by ORBFHP members can be provided to bolster support for these important efforts.

16 Partnering with ORBFHP FHP Funds USFWS annually distributes $3.5 million to support projects that address the priorities of the 18 Fish Habitat Partnerships Must be matched with other dollars or in-kind services, and other Federal funds can be used as match - RFP July - Proposals due October - Partnership Steering Committee scores and ranks proposals - FWS Project approval/decision early spring - Development of cooperative agreements by FWCO s Fund Development Engage local and regional individuals/entities Matching funds and in-kind services by our partners provide the backbone of a successful program

17 NFHAP Project Funding Allocation Method Starting in FY 2014, the Service implemented a competitive, performance-based process to allocate project funds. Each year the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will distribute project funds to FHPs in two categories: 1) stable operational support 2) competitive, performance-based funds to encourage strategic conservation delivery.

18 The ORBFHP was the only Tier III FHP in the Nation in 2014 Funding Request Matching 2012 $81,835 $87, $582,448 $1,108, $1,019,287 $3,691, $448,033 $2,989,965

19 ORBFHP Current Mussel Projects Eel/Tippecanoe Riffleshell and Clubshell Mussel Augmentation adult clubshell were relocated from the Allegheny River to 3-5 locations in the Tippecanoe/Eel Rivers. Following this initial pilot study year, an additional adult mussels will be relocated to these same initial locations Vermilion River Riffleshell/Clubshell Augmentation Monitoring Blue River, Indiana Wavyrayed Lampmussel Collect wavyrayed lampmussels to rear larval mussels in capacity. Grow the larval mussels for two growing seasons. Translocate the young mussels to the Blue River. Photo credit: B. Fisher INDNR

20 ORBFHP Mussel Projects Barrier Removals/Fish Passage In-stream restoration Riparian Restoration Feasibility Studies Invasive Species Programs Storm/Municipal water management Agricultural BMP s Reservoir dam reoperation Monitoring And others

21 ORBFHP Looking Ahead ORB Mussels (130 species - 38 federally listed) Basin-Wide Mussel Initiative Form a core group of key partners involved in the development and implementation of the BWMI objectives. Identify challenges, opportunities, and path forward for the protection and restoration of mussel populations in the ORB. Implement actions as defined in the Strategic Plan, and monitor measurable factors to effectiveness Have Multistate Conservation grant

22 ORBFHP Looking Ahead cont Using in-situ exposures to assess the suitability of streams for freshwater mussel restoration Evaluating environmental factors that limit mussel growth. Compare survival and growth between a nonimperiled species (Plain Pocketbook) and imperiled species (Northern Riffleshell and Clubshell). Working with Wendell Haag USFS

23 Water/Energy Management Big Creek Shawnee National Forest Streams throughout the US are plagued with bank erosion, channel incision, bedload shifting, inability to retain allochthonous matter, and sustain functional processes With a holistic approach, we are striving to restore stream processes throughout an entire watershed and use this as a model to work throughout our region and beyond. upland soil restoration, water management, and this is just the beginning..

24 The National Fish Passage Program

25 USFWS Regions

26 FWS Regions 2012 NFPP Funding Allocations (R3 averages 1.55 mil/yr $2.1 mil for FY14) R1 $248,750 $758,489 R2 $248,750 $757,242 R3 $248,750 $1,360,442 R4 $248,750 $1,289,600 R5 $248,750 $1,086,655 R6 $248,750 $1,009,010 R7 $248,750 $983,579 R8 $248,750 $812,763 HQ $348,250 $877,830 $0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 $1,800,000 Allocated Funding $

27 Region 3 FPP Projects Dam removal Fish passage retrofits Culvert replacements and renovations Opening new habitats/restoring hydrology Inventory and feasibility studies Monitoring and evaluation

28 Region 3 FPP Selection - Trusts resources (native species) - T & E species (federal and state) - Interjurisdictional fish - Species on federal lands or Tribal interest - (SHC and surrogate species)

29 Region 3 FPP Criteria Addresses FWS and partner priorities Benefits to larger watershed or restoration focus area Overall FWS cost of project (cost per mile) Contaminants, invasive species concerns NEPA, permitting

30 Region 3 FPP Species Niangua Darter Brook Trout Topeka Shiner Shorthead Redhorse Invasives related to fish passage, certain barrier projects may not be funded in R3

31 Region 3 Fish Passage Program Accomplishments Completed Projects: 1,345 Barriers Removed; 20,229 Stream Miles Reopened 155,454 Acres of Wetlands Reconnected Benefited over 90 species of fish and freshwater mussels

32 Total Investment $79 million invested in projects, engineering, and administration 70% of the funds applied on the ground 3:1 ratio of non-fed match to NFPP funding Projects supported 219,195 jobs $11 billion in economic value to local communities Worked with over 750 total partners since 1999

33 QUESTIONS??