50 CFR 80.121 - May an agency earn program income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.121 May...

50 CFR 86.94 - What crediting language should I use?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.94 What crediting...: (a) Example 1: The Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program funded this facility thanks to your...

50 CFR 86.94 - What crediting language should I use?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.94 What crediting...: (a) Example 1: The Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program funded this facility thanks to your...

50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.124 - How may an agency use unexpended program income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 86.91 - What are my program crediting responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.91 What are my program crediting responsibilities? You should give public credit to the Federal Aid in Sport Fish...

50 CFR 86.91 - What are my program crediting responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.91 What are my program crediting responsibilities? You should give public credit to the Federal Aid in Sport Fish...

50 CFR 86.91 - What are my program crediting responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.91 What are my program crediting responsibilities? You should give public credit to the Federal Aid in Sport Fish...

50 CFR 86.91 - What are my program crediting responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.91 What are my program crediting responsibilities? You should give public credit to the Federal Aid in Sport Fish...

50 CFR 86.91 - What are my program crediting responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.91 What are my program crediting responsibilities? You should give public credit to the Federal Aid in Sport Fish...

50 CFR 80.24 - Recreational boating access facilities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.24... the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act for recreational boating access facilities. However, a...

50 CFR 80.20 - What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.20 - What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.20 - What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.20 - What does revenue from hunting and fishing licenses include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.5 - Eligible undertakings.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.5 Eligible undertakings. The... necessary to be a responsible hunter or archer. (b) Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. (1) Projects...

50 CFR 80.1 - Definitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.1 Definitions. As used in this... administration and execution of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Acts. Project. One or more related...

50 CFR 80.26 - Symbols.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.26 Symbols. We have prescribed distinctive...-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act and items on which taxes and duties have been collected to support the...

50 CFR 80.27 - Information collection requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.27 Information... under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777-777n) and the Pittman-Robertson...

Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

St. Hilaire, Danny R.

This annual report is in fulfillment of contractual obligations with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which is the funding source for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's (ODFW), Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program (Program). The Program works cooperatively with private landowners to develop long-term restoration, under which, passive and active Habitat Improvement Projects are conducted. Historically, projects have included livestock exclusion fencing (passive restoration) to protect riparian habitats, along with the installation of instream structures (active restoration) to address erosion and improve fish habitat. In recent years, the focus of active restoration has shifted to bioengineering treatments and,more » more recently, to channel re-design and reconstruction aimed at improving fish habitat, by restoring stable channel function. This report provides a summary of Program activities for the 2004 calendar year (January 1 through December 31, 2004), within each of the four main project phases, including: (1) Implementation--Pre-Work, (2) Implementation--On Site Development, (3) Operation and Maintenance, and (4) Monitoring and Evaluation. This report also summarizes Program Administrative, Interagency Coordination, and Public Education activities.« less

50 CFR 80.22 - [Reserved

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.22 [Reserved] ...

50 CFR 80.19 - [Reserved

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.19 [Reserved] ...

50 CFR 80.99 - Are symbols available to identify projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General... follows: ER01AU11.031 (b) The symbol of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act follows: ER01AU11...

50 CFR 80.99 - Are symbols available to identify projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General... follows: ER01AU11.031 (b) The symbol of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act follows: ER01AU11...

50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this part do... the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport Fish...

50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this part do... the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport Fish...

California partners for fish and wildlife program: conserving birds through private partnerships

Treesearch

Debra Schlafmann; Philip Morrison

2005-01-01

The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) habitat restoration assistance program for private landowners, was created primarily to improve habitat for waterfowl. Since its inception in 1987, however, the program has grown to include the restoration of all types of habitat. The purpose of this paper is to explain how...

50 CFR 80.18 - Responsibilities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.18 Responsibilities. In the...

50 CFR 80.52 - May an activity be eligible for funding if it is not explicitly eligible in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.52 May an activity be eligible for... Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act or the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act; and (b) The...

50 CFR 80.52 - May an activity be eligible for funding if it is not explicitly eligible in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.52 May an activity be eligible for... Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act or the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act; and (b) The...

50 CFR 80.12 - Does an agency have to confirm that it wants to receive an annual apportionment of funds?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS State Fish and Wildlife Agency Eligibility § 80.12...

50 CFR 80.12 - Does an agency have to confirm that it wants to receive an annual apportionment of funds?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS State Fish and Wildlife Agency Eligibility § 80.12...

50 CFR 80.17 - Maintenance.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.17 Maintenance. The State is responsible for maintenance of all capital improvements acquired or constructed with Wildlife and Sport Fish...

50 CFR 80.90 - What are the grantee's responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.6 - Prohibited activities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.6 Prohibited activities. The...

50 CFR 80.12 - Cost sharing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.12 Cost sharing. Federal...

50 CFR 80.90 - What are the grantee's responsibilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.21 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.21 Assurances. The State must...

50 CFR 80.15 - Allowable costs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.15 Allowable costs. (a) What are... designed to include purposes other than those eligible under either the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish...

50 CFR 80.2 - Eligibility.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.2 Eligibility. Participation in...) Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration—Any of the States as defined in § 80.1. (b) Pittman-Robertson...

50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

50 CFR 80.32 - What is the certification period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Certification of...

50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

50 CFR 80.2 - What terms do I need to know?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.2 What terms do...), and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of August 9, 1950, as amended (16 U.S.C. 777-777n...

50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

50 CFR 80.54 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible...

50 CFR 80.8 - Availability of funds.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.8 Availability of funds. Funds...

50 CFR 80.13 - Substantiality in character and design.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.13...

50 CFR 80.16 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.16 Payments. Payments must be made for the...

50 CFR 80.134 - How must an agency use real property?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real...

50 CFR 80.7 - Appeals.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.7 Appeals. Any difference of opinion over the...

50 CFR 80.23 - Allocation of funds between marine and freshwater fishery projects.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH... apportionment of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration funds, between projects having recreational benefits...

50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...; and (2) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...; and (2) Designs the farming or grazing to advance the agency's fish and wildlife management objectives. ...

50 CFR 80.98 - How must an agency report barter transactions?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 86.90 - What are my responsibilities for information signs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.90...

50 CFR 86.90 - What are my responsibilities for information signs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.90...

50 CFR 80.35 - What additional requirements apply to multiyear licenses?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.151 - May an agency appeal a decision?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Revisions and Appeals § 80...

50 CFR 80.95 - How does an agency receive Federal grant funds?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.95 - How does an agency receive Federal grant funds?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.151 - May an agency appeal a decision?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Revisions and Appeals § 80...

50 CFR 80.10 - State certification of licenses.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.10 State certification... allows the licensee to hunt or fish for sport or recreation. The State may not count persons holding a...

75 FR 6058 - Federal Sport Fish Restoration; California Department of Fish and Game Fish Hatchery and Stocking...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-02-05

...] Federal Sport Fish Restoration; California Department of Fish and Game Fish Hatchery and Stocking Program...) announces the availability of the final EIR/EIS for the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) Fish.... This legislation called for the newly formed California State Fish and Game Commission to establish...

50 CFR 80.93 - When may an agency incur costs under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.96 - May an agency use Federal funds without using match?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.92 - How long are funds available for a Federal obligation?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.160 - What are the information collection requirements of this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.53 - Are costs of State central services eligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.160 - What are the information collection requirements of this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.92 - How long are funds available for a Federal obligation?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.96 - May an agency use Federal funds without using match?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.93 - When may an agency incur costs under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General...

50 CFR 80.53 - Are costs of State central services eligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.150 - How does an agency ask for revision of a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

77 FR 47864 - Proposed Information Collection; Application and Performance Reporting for Wildlife and Sport...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-10

... Reporting for Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Grants and Cooperative Agreements AGENCY: Fish and.... Abstract The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program (WSFR) administers the following financial... Sport Fish Restoration, 16 U.S.C. 777 et seq., 50 CFR 80 including subprograms M. except 777e-1 and g-1...

50 CFR 86.93 - Where should I use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.93 Where should I use the SFR...

50 CFR 86.92 - Who can use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.92 Who can use the SFR logo? The States...

50 CFR 86.93 - Where should I use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.93 Where should I use the SFR...

50 CFR 86.92 - Who can use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.92 Who can use the SFR logo...

50 CFR 86.92 - Who can use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.92 Who can use the SFR logo...

50 CFR 86.90 - What are my responsibilities for information signs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.90 What are my...

50 CFR 86.92 - Who can use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.92 Who can use the SFR logo? The States...

50 CFR 86.90 - What are my responsibilities for information signs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.90 What are my...

50 CFR 86.90 - What are my responsibilities for information signs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.90 What are my...

50 CFR 86.92 - Who can use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.92 Who can use the SFR logo? The States...

50 CFR 80.53 - Are costs of State central services eligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.53 - Are costs of State central services eligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.160 - What are the information collection requirements of this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.160 - What are the information collection requirements of this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.4 - Diversion of license fees.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.4 Diversion of license... charges imposed by the State to hunt or fish for sport or recreation. (2) Sale, lease, rental, or other...

50 CFR 80.10 - Who is eligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.10 - Who is eligible to receive the benefits of the Acts?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.34 - How does an agency calculate net revenue from a license?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.22 - What must a State do to resolve a declaration of diversion?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 86.93 - Where should I use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.93 Where should I use the SFR logo? You...

50 CFR 86.93 - Where should I use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.93 Where should I use the SFR logo? You...

50 CFR 86.93 - Where should I use the SFR logo?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM State Use of Signs and Sport Fish Restoration Symbols § 86.93 Where should I use the SFR logo? You...

50 CFR 80.91 - What is a Federal obligation of funds and how does it occur?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.91 - What is a Federal obligation of funds and how does it occur?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION...

50 CFR 80.36 - May an agency count license holders in the annual certification if the agency receives funds from...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Certification of...

Upper York Creek Dam Removal, Fish Passage, and Ecosystem Restoration

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

Information about the Upper York Creek Dam Removal, Fish Passage, and Ecosystem Restoration part of an EPA competitive grant program to improve SF Bay water quality focused on restoring impaired waters and enhancing aquatic resources.

50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this... apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport...

50 CFR 80.1 - What does this part do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.1 What does this... apportionments from the Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Fund (16 U.S.C. 669(b)), if authorized, and the Sport...

50 CFR 84.31 - An overview of the ranking criteria.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS... objective of the proposal will be to acquire, restore, enhance, or manage coastal wetlands to benefit coastal wetlands and the hydrology, water quality, and fish and wildlife dependent upon them. The Program...

50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation... National Office of the Fish and Wildlife Management and Habitat Restoration Program for distribution to a...

50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation... National Office of the Fish and Wildlife Management and Habitat Restoration Program for distribution to a...

50 CFR 80.132 - Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.132 Does an agency have to control the land...

50 CFR 80.33 - How does an agency decide who to count as paid license holders in the annual certification?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Certification of License Holders § 80.33 How does an...

50 CFR 80.37 - What must an agency do if it becomes aware of errors in its certified license data?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Certification of License Holders § 80.37 What must an agency...

50 CFR 80.132 - Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.132 Does an agency have to control...

50 CFR 80.132 - Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.132 Does an agency have to control the land...

50 CFR 80.135 - What if an agency allows a use of real property that interferes with its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.135 What if an agency allows a use of real...

50 CFR 80.135 - What if an agency allows a use of real property that interferes with its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.135 What if an agency allows a use...

50 CFR 80.135 - What if an agency allows a use of real property that interferes with its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.135 What if an agency allows a use...

50 CFR 80.3 - Assent legislation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.3 Assent legislation. A State may... against the diversion of license fees paid by hunters and sport fishermen to purposes other than...

50 CFR 80.135 - What if an agency allows a use of real property that interferes with its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.135 What if an agency allows a use of real...

50 CFR 80.80 - How does an agency apply for a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... Management and Budget for the grant application process; and (ii) Available on the Federal Web site for...

50 CFR 80.136 - Is it a diversion if an agency does not use grant-acquired real property for its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.136 Is it a... the grant; and (b) The unauthorized use is for a purpose other than management of the fish- and...

50 CFR 80.136 - Is it a diversion if an agency does not use grant-acquired real property for its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.136 Is it a diversion if an... (b) The unauthorized use is for a purpose other than management of the fish- and wildlife-related...

50 CFR 80.136 - Is it a diversion if an agency does not use grant-acquired real property for its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.136 Is it a... the grant; and (b) The unauthorized use is for a purpose other than management of the fish- and...

50 CFR 80.136 - Is it a diversion if an agency does not use grant-acquired real property for its authorized purpose?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real Property § 80.136 Is it a diversion if an...

50 CFR 80.80 - How does an agency apply for a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... Management and Budget for the grant application process; and (ii) Available on the Federal Web site for...

50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...) Proposal acceptance. (1) The Regional Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Offices decide whether a proposal... (acres enhanced, restored, or protected) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the...

50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...) Proposal acceptance. (1) The Regional Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Offices decide whether a proposal... (acres enhanced, restored, or protected) that help achieve the management goals and objectives of the...

50 CFR 80.134 - How must an agency use real property?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real... component. (c) If a grant funds management, operation, or maintenance of a parcel of land or water, or a...

50 CFR 80.80 - How does an agency apply for a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... Management and Budget for the grant application process; and (ii) Available on the Federal Web site for...

Proceedings of the Colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium, November 18-20, 2008, Scottsdale, Arizona

USGS Publications Warehouse

Melis, Theodore S.; Hamill, John F.; Bennett, Glenn E.; Coggins,, Lewis G.; Grams, Paul E.; Kennedy, Theodore A.; Kubly, Dennis M.; Ralston, Barbara E.

2010-01-01

Since the 1980s, four major science and restoration programs have been developed for the Colorado River Basin to address primarily the conservation of native fish and other wildlife pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (ESA): (1) Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin (commonly called the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program) (1988); (2) San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program (1992); (3) Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (1997); and (4) Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (2005). Today, these four programs, the efforts of which span the length of the Colorado River, have an increasingly important influence on water management and resource conservation in the basin. The four efforts involve scores of State, Federal, and local agencies; Native American Tribes; and diverse stakeholder representatives. The programs have many commonalities, including similar and overlapping goals and objectives; comparable resources and threats to those resources; and common monitoring, research, and restoration strategies. In spite of their commonalities, until recently there had been no formal opportunity for information exchange among the programs. To address this situation, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) worked in coordination with the four programs and numerous Federal and State agencies to organize the first Colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium, which took place in Scottsdale, AZ, in November 2008. The symposium's primary purpose was to promote an exchange of information on research and management activities related to the restoration and conservation of the Colorado River and its major tributaries. A total of 283 managers, scientists, and stakeholders attended the 3-day symposium, which included 87 presentations and 27 posters. The symposium featured plenary talks by experts on a variety of topics, including overviews of the four restoration programs, water-management actions aimed at restoring native fish habitat, climate change, assessments of the status of native and nonnative fish populations, and Native American perspectives. Intermixed with plenary talks were four concurrent technical sessions that addressed the following important topics: (1) effects of dam and reservoir operations on downstream physical and biological resources; (2) native fish propagation and genetic management and associated challenges in co-managing native and nonnative fish in the Colorado River; (3) monitoring program design, case studies, and links to management; and (4) riparian system restoration, monitoring, and exotic species control efforts.

50 CFR 80.150 - How does an agency ask for revision of a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... documents: (1) The standard form approved by the Office of Management and Budget as an application for...

50 CFR 80.134 - How must an agency use real property?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real... component. (c) If a grant funds management, operation, or maintenance of a parcel of land or water, or a...

50 CFR 80.150 - How does an agency ask for revision of a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... documents: (1) The standard form approved by the Office of Management and Budget as an application for...

50 CFR 80.134 - How must an agency use real property?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Real... component. (c) If a grant funds management, operation, or maintenance of a parcel of land or water, or a...

50 CFR 80.22 - What must a State do to resolve a declaration of diversion?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION..., personal, or intellectual property: (1) Regain management control of the property, which must be in about...

50 CFR 80.150 - How does an agency ask for revision of a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... documents: (1) The standard form approved by the Office of Management and Budget as an application for...

Monitoring habitat restoration projects: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Region Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program and Coastal Program Protocol

USGS Publications Warehouse

Woodward, Andrea; Hollar, Kathy

2011-01-01

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Pacific Region (Region 1) includes more than 158 million acres (almost 247,000 square miles) of land base in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Hawai`i, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Republic of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Region 1 is ecologically diverse with landscapes that range from coral reefs, broadleaf tropical forests, and tropical savannahs in the Pacific Islands, to glacial streams and lakes, lush old-growth rainforests, inland fjords, and coastal shoreline in the Pacific Northwest, to the forested mountains, shrub-steppe desert, and native grasslands in the Inland Northwest. Similarly, the people of the different landscapes perceive, value, and manage their natural resources in ways unique to their respective regions and cultures. The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (Partners Program) and Coastal Program work with a variety of partners in Region 1 including individual landowners, watershed councils, land trusts, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, non-governmental organizations, Tribal governments, Native Hawaiian organizations, and local, State, and Federal agencies. The Partners Program is the FWS's vanguard for working with private landowners to voluntarily restore and conserve fish and wildlife habitat. Using non-regulatory incentives, the Partners Program engages willing partners to conserve and protect valuable fish and wildlife habitat on their property and in their communities. This is accomplished by providing the funding support and technical and planning tools needed to make on-the-ground conservation affordable, feasible, and effective. The primary goals of the Pacific Region Partners Program are to: Promote citizen and community-based stewardship efforts for fish and wildlife conservation Contribute to the recovery of at-risk species, Protect the environmental integrity of the National Wildlife Refuges, Contribute to the implementation of the State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies, and Help achieve the objectives of the National Fish Habitat Partnerships and regionally based bird conservation plans (for example, North American Waterfowl Management Plan, U.S. Pacific Island Shorebird Conservation Plans, Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan, etc.). The Partners Program accomplishes these priorities by: Developing and maintaining strong partnerships, and delivering on-the-ground habitat restoration projects designed to reestablish habitat function and restore natural processes; Addressing key habitat limiting factors for declining species; Providing corridors for wildlife and decrease impediments to native fish and wildlife migration; and Enhancing native plant communities by reducing invasive species and improving native species composition. The Coastal Program is a voluntary fish and wildlife conservation program that focuses on watershed-scale, long-term collaborative resource planning and on-the-ground restoration projects in high-priority coastal areas. The Coastal Program conducts planning and restoration work on private, State, and Federal lands, and partnerships with other agencies-Native American Tribes, citizens, and organizations are emphasized. Coastal Program goals include restoring and protecting coastal habitat, providing technical and cost-sharing assistance where appropriate, supporting community-based restoration, collecting and developing information on the status of and threats to fish and wildlife, and using outreach to promote stewardship of coastal resources. The diversity of habitats and partners in Region 1 present many opportunities for conducting restoration projects. Faced with this abundance of opportunity, the Partners Program and Coastal Program must ensure that limited staffing and project dollars are allocated to benefit the highest priority resources and achieve the highest quality results for Federal trust species. In 2007, the Partners Program and Coastal Program developed a Strategic Plan to guide program operations and more efficiently conserve habitat by focusing partnership building and habitat improvement actions within 35 Partners Program Focus Areas and 9 Coastal Program Focus Areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010). The Strategic Plan also contains four other goals: broaden and strengthen partnerships; improve information sharing and communications; enhance workforce; and increase accountability to ensure that program resources are used efficiently and effectively. This protocol will help achieve all goals of the Strategic Plan.

50 CFR 80.131 - Does an agency have to hold an easement acquired under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.31 - How does an agency certify the number of paid license holders?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.131 - Does an agency have to hold an easement acquired under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.131 - Does an agency have to hold an easement acquired under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.31 - How does an agency certify the number of paid license holders?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.94 - May an agency incur costs before the beginning of the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.94 - May an agency incur costs before the beginning of the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.131 - Does an agency have to hold an easement acquired under a grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS... grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

50 CFR 80.22 - What must a State do to resolve a declaration of diversion?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION..., personal, or intellectual property: (1) Regain management control of the property, which must be in about...

50 CFR 80.22 - What must a State do to resolve a declaration of diversion?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION..., personal, or intellectual property: (1) Regain management control of the property, which must be in about...

50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.55 - May an agency receive a grant to carry out part of a larger project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH...

50 CFR 80.81 - What must an agency submit when applying for a comprehensive-management-system grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... for a comprehensive-management-system grant? 80.81 Section 80.81 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Application for a Grant § 80.81 What must an agency submit...

50 CFR 80.81 - What must an agency submit when applying for a comprehensive-management-system grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... for a comprehensive-management-system grant? 80.81 Section 80.81 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Application for a Grant § 80.81 What must an agency submit...

Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program, 1996-2003 Summary Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

St. Hilaire, Danny R.; Montgomery, Michael; Bailey, Timothy D.

This annual report is in fulfillment of contractual obligations with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which is the funding source for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's (ODFW), Umatilla River Subbasin Fish Habitat Improvement Program (Program). The last Annual Program Report was submitted in 1997, and described projects undertaken in 1995. This report describes Program activities carried out in 2003, along with a summary of projects undertaken during the years 1996 through 2002. The Program works cooperatively with private landowners to develop long-term restoration agreements, under which, passive and active Habitat Improvement Projects are conducted. Historically, projects have included livestockmore » exclusion fencing (passive restoration) to protect riparian habitats, along with the installation of instream structures (active restoration) to address erosion and improve fish habitat. In recent years, the focus of active restoration has shifted to bioengineering treatments and, more recently, to channel re-design and re-construction aimed at improving fish habitat, by restoring stable channel function. This report provides a summary table of past projects (1996-2002), along with a text description of more extensive habitat improvement projects, including: (1) Implementation of a four-phased project on the Lobato property (Birch Creek) beginning in 1996 and involving a demonstration bioengineering site and riparian improvements (fencing, planting), (2) Implementation of stable channel design/instream structure placement on the Houser property, East Birch Creek, beginning in 1998, an (3) Implementation of a joint, US Army Corps of Engineers/ODFW (cost share) project beginning in 2001 on the Brogoitti property, East Birch Creek, which involved implementation of stable channel design/construction and riparian improvement treatments.« less

50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...: (a) An agency may display the appropriate symbol(s) on: (1) Areas such as wildlife-management areas...

50 CFR 80.100 - Does an agency have to display one of the symbols in this part on a completed project?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General Grant Administration § 80.100 Does an agency have to...: (a) An agency may display the appropriate symbol(s) on: (1) Areas such as wildlife-management areas...

76 FR 793 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-01-06

...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects... 2011 priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA). As required by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act...

50 CFR 84.20 - What are the grant eligibility requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... restoration, enhancement, or management of coastal wetlands ecosystems, providing restoration, enhancement, or... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Applying for Grants § 84.20 What are the grant eligibility requirements...

78 FR 25093 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation Projects

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-29

... Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation Grant Program...-9410-0000] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation Projects... year 2013 priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish...

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Sather, Nichole K.; Borde, Amy B.; Diefenderfer, Heida L.

This Handbook of Data Reduction Procedures, Workbooks, and Exchange Templates is designed to support the Oncor geodatabase for the Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program (CEERP). The following data categories are covered: water-surface elevation and temperature, sediment accretion rate, photo points, herbaceous wetland vegetation cover, tree plots and site summaries, fish catch and density, fish size, fish diet, fish prey, and Chinook salmon genetic stock identification. The handbook is intended for use by scientists collecting monitoring and research data for the CEERP. The ultimate goal of Oncor is to provide quality, easily accessible, geospatial data for synthesis and evaluation of themore » collective performance of CEERP ecosystem restoration actions at a program scale.« less

50 CFR 86.51 - To whom must I apply?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How..., Fax: 303-236-8192 7 Alaska Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road...

50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of generating program...

Fish Passage Assessment: Big Canyon Creek Watershed, Technical Report 2004.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Christian, Richard

2004-02-01

This report presents the results of the fish passage assessment as outlined as part of the Protect and Restore the Big Canyon Creek Watershed project as detailed in the CY2003 Statement of Work (SOW). As part of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP), this project is one of Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) many efforts at off-site mitigation for damage to salmon and steelhead runs, their migration, and wildlife habitat caused by the construction and operation of federal hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The proposed restoration activities within the Big Canyonmore » Creek watershed follow the watershed restoration approach mandated by the Fisheries and Watershed Program. Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Program vision focuses on protecting, restoring, and enhancing watersheds and treaty resources within the ceded territory of the Nez Perce Tribe under the Treaty of 1855 with the United States Federal Government. The program uses a holistic approach, which encompasses entire watersheds, ridge top to ridge top, emphasizing all cultural aspects. We strive toward maximizing historic ecosystem productive health, for the restoration of anadromous and resident fish populations. The Nez Perce Tribal Fisheries/Watershed Program (NPTFWP) sponsors the Protect and Restore the Big Canyon Creek Watershed project. The NPTFWP has the authority to allocate funds under the provisions set forth in their contract with BPA. In the state of Idaho vast numbers of relatively small obstructions, such as road culverts, block thousands of miles of habitat suitable for a variety of fish species. To date, most agencies and land managers have not had sufficient, quantifiable data to adequately address these barrier sites. The ultimate objective of this comprehensive inventory and assessment was to identify all barrier crossings within the watershed. The barriers were then prioritized according to the amount of habitat blocked at each site and the fish life history stages impacted. This assessment protocol will hopefully prove useful to other agencies and become a model for use in other watersheds.« less

50 CFR 86.21 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... (4) Boating features for trailerable or “car-top” boats (boats less than 26 feet in length), such as... under subsection (b)(1) of section 8 of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950, as...

50 CFR 86.21 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE... (4) Boating features for trailerable or “car-top” boats (boats less than 26 feet in length), such as... under subsection (b)(1) of section 8 of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950, as...

50 CFR 86.21 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE... (4) Boating features for trailerable or “car-top” boats (boats less than 26 feet in length), such as... under subsection (b)(1) of section 8 of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950, as...

50 CFR 86.21 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... (4) Boating features for trailerable or “car-top” boats (boats less than 26 feet in length), such as... under subsection (b)(1) of section 8 of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950, as...

50 CFR 86.21 - What activities are ineligible for funding?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE... (4) Boating features for trailerable or “car-top” boats (boats less than 26 feet in length), such as... under subsection (b)(1) of section 8 of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950, as...

50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... costs of a grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

50 CFR 80.83 - What is the Federal share of allowable costs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION... costs of a grant-funded project in a program or subprogram authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... Mariana Islands and the territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. The Regional...

Assessment of interim flow water-quality data of the San Joaquin River restoration program and implications for fishes, California, 2009-11

USGS Publications Warehouse

Wulff, Marissa L.; Brown, Larry R.

2015-01-01

After more than 50 years of extensive water diversion for urban and agriculture use, a major settlement was reached among the U.S. Departments of the Interior and Commerce, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Friant Water Users Authority in an effort to restore the San Joaquin River. The settlement received Federal court approval in October 2006 and established the San Joaquin River Restoration Program, a multi-agency collaboration between State and Federal agencies to restore and maintain fish populations, including Chinook salmon, in the main stem of the river between Friant Dam and the confluence with the Merced River. This is to be done while avoiding or minimizing adverse water supply effects to all of the Friant Division contractors that could result from restoration flows required by the settlement. The settlement stipulates that water- and sediment-quality data be collected to help assess the restoration goals. This report summarizes and evaluates water-quality data collected in the main stem of the San Joaquin River between Friant Dam and the Merced River by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for the San Joaquin River Restoration Program during 2009-11. This summary and assessment consider sampling frequency for adequate characterization of variability, sampling locations for sufficient characterization of the San Joaquin River Restoration Program restoration reach, sampling methods for appropriate media (water and sediment), and constituent reporting limits. After reviewing the water- and sediment-quality results for the San Joaquin River Restoration Program, several suggestions were made to the Fisheries Management Work Group, a division of the San Joaquin River Restoration Program that focuses solely on the reintroduction strategies and health of salmon and other native fishes in the river. Water-quality results for lead and total organic carbon exceeded the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Basin Plan Objectives for the San Joaquin Basin, and results for copper exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs' aquatic-life chronic and acute benchmarks for invertebrates. One sediment sample contained detections of pyrethroid pesticides bifenthrin, lambda-cyhalothrin, and total permethrin at concentrations above published chronic toxicity thresholds.

75 FR 1651 - Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-01-12

...-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List for Conservation Projects... of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies...

50 CFR 80.51 - What activities are eligible for funding under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... program. (1) Restore and manage sport fish for the benefit of the public. (2) Conduct research on the..., also referred to as a “waste reception facility,” is specifically designed to receive waste from... of recreational boating access facilities. (2) Conduct surveys to determine the adequacy, number...

50 CFR 80.51 - What activities are eligible for funding under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... program. (1) Restore and manage sport fish for the benefit of the public. (2) Conduct research on the..., also referred to as a “waste reception facility,” is specifically designed to receive waste from... of recreational boating access facilities. (2) Conduct surveys to determine the adequacy, number...

50 CFR 86.117 - [Reserved

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false [Reserved] 86.117 Section 86.117 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

50 CFR 86.135 - [Reserved

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false [Reserved] 86.135 Section 86.135 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

50 CFR 81.8 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH... real property, subject to standards established by the Secretary as provided in Office of Management...

50 CFR 81.8 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH... real property, subject to standards established by the Secretary as provided in Office of Management...

The role of tidal marsh restoration in fish management in the San Francisco Estuary

USGS Publications Warehouse

Herbold, Bruce; Baltz, Donald; Brown, Larry R.; Grossinger, Robin; Kimmerer, Wim J.; Lehman, Peggy W.; Moyle, Peter B.; Nobriga, Matthew L.; Simenstad, Charles A.

2015-01-01

Tidal marsh restoration is an important management issue in the San Francisco Estuary (estuary). Restoration of large areas of tidal marsh is ongoing or planned in the lower estuary (up to 6,000 ha, Callaway et al. 2011). Large areas are proposed for restoration in the upper estuary under the Endangered Species Act biological opinions (3,237 ha) and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (26,305 ha). In the lower estuary, tidal marsh has proven its value to a wide array of species that live within it (Palaima 2012). In the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta), one important function ascribed to restoration of freshwater tidal marshes is that they make large contributions to the food web of fish in open waters (BDCP 2013). The Ecosystem Restoration Program ascribed a suite of ecological functions to tidal marsh restoration, including habitat and food web benefits to native fish (CDFW 2010). This background was the basis for a symposium, Tidal Marshes and Native Fishes in the Delta: Will Restoration Make a Difference? held at the University of California, Davis, on June 10, 2013. This paper summarizes conclusions the authors drew from the symposium.

77 FR 33764 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-06-07

... and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Wildlife and Sport Fish Grants and Cooperative Agreements AGENCY: Fish...: OMB Control Number: 1018-0109. Title: Wildlife and Sport Fish Grants and Cooperative Agreements, 80... Sport Fish Restoration Program (WSFR), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, administers financial assistance...

50 CFR 84.20 - What are the grant eligibility requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL... restoration, enhancement, or management of coastal wetlands ecosystems, providing restoration, enhancement, or management will be administered for long-term conservation. (b) Ineligible activities include but are not...

50 CFR 84.20 - What are the grant eligibility requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL... restoration, enhancement, or management of coastal wetlands ecosystems, providing restoration, enhancement, or management will be administered for long-term conservation. (b) Ineligible activities include but are not...

50 CFR 84.20 - What are the grant eligibility requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL... restoration, enhancement, or management of coastal wetlands ecosystems, providing restoration, enhancement, or management will be administered for long-term conservation. (b) Ineligible activities include but are not...

50 CFR 81.8 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH... States having a common interest in one or more endangered or threatened species, the conservation of...

50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of generating program...-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing research results as...

50 CFR 84.22 - What needs to be included in grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL... of other current coastal acquisition, restoration, enhancement, and management actions; agency(ies...

50 CFR 84.22 - What needs to be included in grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL... of other current coastal acquisition, restoration, enhancement, and management actions; agency(ies...

50 CFR 84.22 - What needs to be included in grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL... of other current coastal acquisition, restoration, enhancement, and management actions; agency(ies...

Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project : 2007 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McGowan, Vance R.; Morton, Winston H.

2008-12-30

On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an intergovernmental contract to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the contract, and in 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing opportunities for natural fish productionmore » within the basin. This project provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and partners is on private lands and therefore requires that considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance of, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. Both passive and active restoration treatment techniques are used. Passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing and alternate water sources are the primary method to restore degraded streams when restoration can be achieved primarily through changes in management. Active restoration techniques using plantings, bioengineering, site-specific instream structures, or whole stream channel alterations are utilized when streams are more severely degraded and not likely to recover in a reasonable timeframe. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and coordinated by the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program (Project. No.199202601). Work undertaken during 2007 included: (1) Starting 1 new fencing project in the NFJD subbasin that will protect an additional 1.82 miles of stream and 216.2 acres of habitat; (2) Constructing 0.47 miles of new channel on the Wallowa River to enhance habitat, restore natural channel dimensions, pattern and profile and reconnect approximately 18 acres of floodplain and wetland habitat; (3) Planting 22,100 plants along 3 streams totaling 3.6 stream miles; (4) Establishing 34 new photopoints on 5 projects and retaking 295 existing photopoint pictures; (5) Monitoring stream temperatures at 10 locations on 5 streams and conducting other monitoring activities; (6) Completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 116.8 miles of project fences; (7) Initiated writing of a comprehensive project summary report that will present a summary of conclusions of the benefits to focal species and management recommendations for the future. Since initiation of this program 56 individual projects have been implemented, monitored and maintained along 84.8 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams that protect and enhance 3,501 acres of riparian and instream habitat.« less

50 CFR 84.46 - What are the cost-sharing requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS... provide the value of land, including the land proposed for restoration, enhancement, or management as a...

50 CFR 84.46 - What are the cost-sharing requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.46 What are the cost-sharing... provide the value of land, including the land proposed for restoration, enhancement, or management as a...

50 CFR 85.31 - Grant selection.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Grant selection. 85.31 Section 85.31...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN VESSEL ACT GRANT PROGRAM Grant Selection § 85.31 Grant selection. The Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Aid, will convene a ranking...

50 CFR 86.10 - What does this regulation do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does this regulation do? 86.10... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... Boating Infrastructure Grant (BIG) Program. “We” and “us” refers to the Fish and Wildlife Service. This...

50 CFR 86.50 - When must I apply?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false When must I apply? 86.50 Section 86.50 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

50 CFR 86.131 - Must I do a plan?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Must I do a plan? 86.131 Section 86.131 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How...

A Multiple Watershed Approach to Assessing the Effects of Habitat Restoration Actions on Anadromous and Resident Fish Populations, Technical Report 2003-2004.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Marmorek, David

2004-03-01

Habitat protection and restoration is a cornerstone of current strategies to restore ecosystems, recover endangered fish species, and rebuild fish stocks within the Columbia River Basin. Strategies featuring habitat restoration include the 2000 Biological Opinion on operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS BiOp) developed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the 2000 Biological Opinion on Bull Trout developed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Sub-Basin Plans developed under the Fish and Wildlife Program of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NWPCC). There is however little quantitative information about the effectiveness of different habitatmore » restoration techniques. Such information is crucial for helping scientists and program managers allocate limited funds towards the greatest benefits for fish populations. Therefore, it is critical to systematically test the hypotheses underlying habitat restoration actions for both anadromous and resident fish populations. This pilot project was developed through a proposal to the Innovative Projects fund of the NWPCC (ESSA 2002). It was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) following reviews by the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP 2002), the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA 2002), the NWPCC and BPA. The study was designed to respond directly to the above described needs for information on the effectiveness of habitat restoration actions, including legal measures specified in the 2000 FCRPS BiOp (RPA 183, pg. 9-133, NMFS 2000). Due to the urgency of addressing these measures, the timeline of the project was accelerated from a duration of 18 months to 14 months. The purpose of this pilot project was to explore methods for evaluating past habitat restoration actions and their effects on fish populations. By doing so, the project will provide a foundation of retrospective analyses, on which to build prospective, multi-watershed designs for future habitat restoration actions. Such designs are being developed concurrently with this project by several other groups in the Columbia Basin (RME Workgroup 2003, NMFS 2003, Hillman and Paulsen 2002, Hillman 2003). By addressing questions about habitat restoration and monitoring (in coordination with other related efforts), we hope that this project will catalyze a shift in the Basin's paradigm of habitat restoration, moving from implementation of individual watershed projects towards rigorously designed and monitored, multiwatershed, adaptive management experiments. The project involved three phases of work, which were closely integrated with various related and ongoing efforts in the region: (1) Scoping - We met with a Core Group of habitat experts and managers to scope out a set of testable habitat restoration hypotheses, identify candidate watersheds and recommend participants for a data evaluation workshop. (2) Data Assembly - We contacted over 80 scientists and managers to help evaluate the suitability of each candidate watershed's historical data for assessing the effectiveness of past restoration actions. We eventually settled on the Yakima, Wenatchee, Clearwater, and Salmon subbasins, and began gathering relevant data for these watersheds at a workshop with habitat experts and managers. Data assembly continued for several months after the workshop. (3) Data Analysis and Synthesis - We explored statistical approaches towards retrospectively analyzing the effects of restoration 'treatments' at nested spatial scales across multiple watersheds (Chapters 2-5 of this report). These analyses provided a foundation for identifying existing constraints to testing restoration hypotheses, and opportunities to overcome these constraints through improved experimental designs, monitoring protocols and project selection strategies (Chapters 6 and 7 of this report). Finally, we developed a set of recommendations to improve the design, implementation, and monitoring of prospective habitat restoration programs in the Columbia River Basin (Chapter 8).« less

50 CFR 81.15 - Audits.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Audits. 81.15 Section 81.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH...

50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Assurances. 81.9 Section 81.9 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH...

IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION OF FUNDAMENTAL FISH ASSEMBLAGES IN THE MID-ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS

EPA Science Inventory

To predict fish community response to environmental restoration in the Highlands Region one must first have information on fish abundance and diversity. We used data collected by the US Environmental Protection Agency's EMAP (Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program) to i...

50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH... Management and Budget Circular A-102. [40 FR 47509, Oct. 9, 1975, as amended at 44 FR 31581, May 31, 1979] ...

50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF FISH... Management and Budget Circular A-102. [40 FR 47509, Oct. 9, 1975, as amended at 44 FR 31581, May 31, 1979] ...

50 CFR 84.21 - How do I apply for a National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... Wetlands Conservation Grant? 84.21 Section 84.21 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Applying for Grants § 84.21 How do I apply...

50 CFR 86.82 - What must be in the reports?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false What must be in the reports? 86.82 Section 86.82 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM Reporting Requirements for the...

Grand Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project, 2008 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McGowan, Vance R.; Morton, Winston H.

2009-07-01

On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an intergovernmental contract to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the contract, and in 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing the opportunities for natural fishmore » production within the basin. This project originally provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented under revisions of the Fish and Wild Program as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and partners is on private lands and therefore requires considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. Both passive and active restoration treatment techniques are used. Passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing and alternate water sources, is the primary method to restore degraded streams when restoration can be achieved primarily through changes in management. Active restoration techniques using plantings, bioengineering, site-specific instream structures, or whole stream channel alterations are utilized when streams are more severely degraded and not likely to recover in a reasonable timeframe. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and coordinated by the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program (Project. No. 199202601). Work undertaken during 2008 included: (1) completing 1 new fencing project in the North Fork John Day subbasin that protects 1.82 miles of stream and 216.2 acres of habitat, and 1 fencing project in the Wallowa subbasin that protects an additional 0.59 miles of stream and 42.5 acres of habitat; (2) constructing 0.47 miles of new channel on the Wallowa river to enhance habitat, restore natural channel dimensions, pattern and profile and reconnect approximately 18 acres of floodplain and wetland habitat; (3) planting 10,084 plants along 0.5 miles of the Wallowa Riverproject; (4) establishing 34 new photopoints on 5 projects and retaking 295 existing photopoint pictures; (5) monitoring stream temperatures at 10 locations on 5 streams and conducting other monitoring activities; (6) completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 116.8 miles of project fences; and (7) completed a comprehensive project summary report to the Independent Scientific Review panel (ISRP) that provided our conclusions regarding benefits to focal species, along with management recommendations for the future. Since initiation of this program 57 individual projects have been implemented, monitoring and maintained along 84.9 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams, that protect and enhance 3,564 acres of riparian and instream habitat.« less

Fisheries and aquatic resources--fish health

USGS Publications Warehouse

Panek, Frank

2008-01-01

Fish health research at Leetown had its origin in the 1930’s when the Leetown Fish Hatchery and Experiment Station was constructed. In 1978, the National Fish Health Research Laboratory, now a component of the Leetown Science Center, was established to solve emerging and known disease problems affecting fish and other aquatic organisms critical to species restoration programs. Center scientists develop methods for the isolation, detection, and identification of fish pathogens and for prevention and control of fish diseases.

50 CFR 85.22 - Grant proposals.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN VESSEL ACT GRANT PROGRAM Application for..., education, sensitive waters, public access, and estimated costs; (e) Amount and source of matching funds...

50 CFR 81.4 - Allocation of funds.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... proceed with a conservation program consistent with the objectives and purposes of the Act; (c) The number...

50 CFR 80.125 - How must an agency treat income that it earns after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.125 How must an agency treat income that it earns after...

50 CFR 80.125 - How must an agency treat income that it earns after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.125 How must an agency treat income that it earns after...

50 CFR 80.126 - How must an agency treat income earned by a subgrantee after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.126 How must an agency treat income earned by a...

50 CFR 80.125 - How must an agency treat income that it earns after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.125 How must an agency treat income that it earns after...

50 CFR 81.13 - Inspection.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Inspection. 81.13 Section 81.13 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Contracts. 81.12 Section 81.12 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 80.126 - How must an agency treat income earned by a subgrantee after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.126 How must an agency treat income earned by a...

50 CFR 80.125 - How must an agency treat income that it earns after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH... SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.125 How must an agency treat income that it earns after...

7 CFR 701.2 - Definitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM EMERGENCY CONSERVATION PROGRAM, EMERGENCY FOREST RESTORATION PROGRAM, AND...; fish or other animals raised by aquaculture; other livestock or fowl) for commercial production. Producers of animals raised for recreational uses only are not considered agricultural producers. Annual...

7 CFR 701.2 - Definitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM EMERGENCY CONSERVATION PROGRAM, EMERGENCY FOREST RESTORATION PROGRAM, AND...; fish or other animals raised by aquaculture; other livestock or fowl) for commercial production. Producers of animals raised for recreational uses only are not considered agricultural producers. Annual...

7 CFR 701.2 - Definitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM EMERGENCY CONSERVATION PROGRAM, EMERGENCY FOREST RESTORATION PROGRAM, AND...; fish or other animals raised by aquaculture; other livestock or fowl) for commercial production. Producers of animals raised for recreational uses only are not considered agricultural producers. Annual...

7 CFR 701.2 - Definitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM EMERGENCY CONSERVATION PROGRAM, EMERGENCY FOREST RESTORATION PROGRAM, AND...; fish or other animals raised by aquaculture; other livestock or fowl) for commercial production. Producers of animals raised for recreational uses only are not considered agricultural producers. Annual...

50 CFR 84.31 - An overview of the ranking criteria.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Project Selection § 84.31 An overview of the ranking criteria. (a) The primary...

50 CFR 84.45 - How do I amend a proposal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.45 How do I amend a proposal...

50 CFR 84.43 - How do States get the grant monies?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.43 How do States get the grant...

50 CFR 81.7 - Availability of funds.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Availability of funds. 81.7 Section 81.7 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 81.14 - Comprehensive plan alternative.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Comprehensive plan alternative. 81.14 Section 81.14 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

50 CFR 81.10 - Submission of documents.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Submission of documents. 81.10 Section 81.10 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

Red Wolf (Canis rufus) Recovery: A Review with Suggestions for Future Research

PubMed Central

Hinton, Joseph W.; Chamberlain, Michael J.; Rabon, David R.

2013-01-01

Simple Summary Once widespread in the Eastern United States, early 20th century predator-control programs reduced red wolves to a remnant population by the 1970s. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through the Red Wolf Recovery Program, restored red wolves to northeastern North Carolina in 1987. After 25 years of restoration efforts, issues of hybridization with coyotes, inbreeding, and human-caused mortality continue to hamper red wolf recovery. To understand how these issues influence recovery efforts, we examine the history of red wolf restoration and its challenges. We then formulate areas of research that are of direct relevance to the restoration of red wolves. Abstract By the 1970s, government-supported eradication campaigns reduced red wolves to a remnant population of less than 100 individuals on the southern border of Texas and Louisiana. Restoration efforts in the region were deemed unpromising because of predator-control programs and hybridization with coyotes. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) removed the last remaining red wolves from the wild and placed them in a captive-breeding program. In 1980, the USFWS declared red wolves extinct in the wild. During 1987, the USFWS, through the Red Wolf Recovery Program, reintroduced red wolves into northeastern North Carolina. Although restoration efforts have established a population of approximately 70–80 red wolves in the wild, issues of hybridization with coyotes, inbreeding, and human-caused mortality continue to hamper red wolf recovery. We explore these three challenges and, within each challenge, we illustrate how research can be used to resolve problems associated with red wolf-coyote interactions, effects of inbreeding, and demographic responses to human-caused mortality. We hope this illustrates the utility of research to advance restoration of red wolves. PMID:26479530

50 CFR 81.11 - Divergent opinions over project merits.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Divergent opinions over project merits. 81.11 Section 81.11 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF...

50 CFR 81.5 - Information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Information for the Secretary. 81.5 Section 81.5 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND...

50 CFR 84.44 - What is the timetable for the use of grant money?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.44 What is the...

50 CFR 84.40 - What conditions must I follow to accept Federal grant money?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.40 What...

50 CFR 84.41 - Who prepares a grant agreement? What needs to be included?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.41 Who...

50 CFR 84.44 - What is the timetable for the use of grant money?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.44 What is the...

50 CFR 84.41 - Who prepares a grant agreement? What needs to be included?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.41 Who...

50 CFR 84.40 - What conditions must I follow to accept Federal grant money?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.40 What...

50 CFR 84.42 - What if a grant agreement is not signed?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Conditions on Acceptance/Use of Federal Money § 84.42 What if a grant agreement is...

50 CFR 84.46 - What are the cost-sharing requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS... provide the value of land, including the land proposed for restoration, enhancement, or management as a..., if a State proposes to manage a contiguous wetland of 100 acres, and already owns 10 of the 100 acres...

RELATIONS OF FISH AND SHELLFISH DISTRIBUTIONS TO HABITAT AND WATER QUALITY IN THE MOBILE BAY ESTUARY, USA

EPA Science Inventory

The Mobile Bay estuary provides rich habitat for many fish and shellfish, including those identified as economically and ecologically important. The National Estuary Program has focused on restoration of degraded estuarine habitat on which these species depend. To support this ...

50 CFR 86.43 - May someone else supply the match?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false May someone else supply the match? 86.43 Section 86.43 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.133 - What are the plan standards?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are the plan standards? 86.133 Section 86.133 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.14 - Who may apply for these grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Who may apply for these grants? 86.14 Section 86.14 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.44 - What are my allowable costs?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are my allowable costs? 86.44 Section 86.44 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.110 - What does the State survey do?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What does the State survey do? 86.110 Section 86.110 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.82 - What must be in the reports?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What must be in the reports? 86.82 Section 86.82 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.42 - What are the match requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are the match requirements? 86.42 Section 86.42 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.15 - How does the grant process work?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How does the grant process work? 86.15 Section 86.15 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.71 - How will I be reimbursed?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false How will I be reimbursed? 86.71 Section 86.71 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 86.45 - When will I receive the funds?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false When will I receive the funds? 86.45 Section 86.45 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...

50 CFR 84.45 - How do I amend a proposal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false How do I amend a proposal? 84.45 Section 84.45 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.43 - How do States get the grant monies?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false How do States get the grant monies? 84.43 Section 84.43 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

Faunal community use of enhanced and natural oyster reefs in Delaware Bay: A field study and classroom inquiry

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Paterno, Jenny L.

In addition to its value as a fisheries resource, the eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica, is a reef building, cornerstone species that provides ecosystem services to the environment. Oysters provide habitat for associated resident and transient species. With widespread declines in oyster populations, restoration efforts have focused on improving oyster stocks and enhancing the ecosystem services they provide. Community-based oyster restoration programs engage the public and local community in planning, construction and/or monitoring of restoration projects. Since 2007, a K-12 student centered community-based restoration venture, Project PORTS, Promoting Oyster Restoration Through Schools, has been working to educate students, promote stewardship values, and enhance oyster habitat in the Delaware Bay. The overarching goals of the present study were to (1) assess fish and macroinvertebrate utilization on the Project PORTS community-created, subtidal, low-relief oyster restoration area in the Delaware Bay, and (2) convert the data collected into a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) activity that can be implemented in the classroom. I examined six subtidal natural oyster reefs of varying oyster densities and one community-based restoration reef as habitat for fishes and invertebrates. Sampling methods on these low-relief reefs consisted of otter trawl tows and benthic habitat tray collections. Results revealed that the enhancement area supported a diverse faunal community consistent with nearby, natural oyster habitats. Data collected during the field study were then transformed into an educational lesson plan, "One Fish, Two Fish-Assessing Habitat Value of Restored Oyster Reefs", that fulfilled national and state (NJ) curriculum standards. The lesson was piloted in a middle school classroom and student learning was evaluated through summative assessments pre and post-participation in the activity. Results of the assessments indicated that students made strong gains in knowledge of oyster ecology and improved analytical skills by graphing data. This dual interest study demonstrated that a novel education program with a local, real-world connection positively enhanced crucial estuarine habitat while expanding STEM knowledge and skills of participating students.

50 CFR 82.1 - Scope of regulations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... governments for research relevant to the protection and conservation of marine mammals. ...

Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program: Restoration Design Challenges for Topographic Mounds, Channel Outlets, and Reed Canarygrass

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Diefenderfer, Heida L.; Borde, Amy B.; Sinks, Ian A.

The purpose of this study was to provide science-based information to practitioners and managers of restoration projects in the Columbia Estuary Ecosystem Restoration Program (CEERP) regarding aspects of restoration techniques that currently pose known challenges and uncertainties. The CEERP is a program of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Portland District, in collaboration with the National Marine Fisheries Service and five estuary sponsors implementing restoration. The estuary sponsors are Columbia Land Trust, Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce, Cowlitz Tribe, Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The scope ofmore » the research conducted during federal fiscal year 2015 included three aspects of hydrologic reconnection that were selected based on available scientific information and feedback from restoration practitioners during project reviews: the design of mounds (also called hummocks, peninsulas, or berms); the control of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae); and aspects of channel network design related to habitat connectivity for juvenile salmonids.« less

Estimating the impact of oyster restoration scenarios on transient fish production

USGS Publications Warehouse

McCoy, Elizabeth; Borrett, Stuart R.; LaPeyre, Megan K.; Peterson, Bradley J.

2017-01-01

Oyster reef restoration projects are increasing in number both to enhance oyster density and to retain valuable ecosystem services provided by oyster reefs. Although some oyster restoration projects have demonstrated success by increasing density and biomass of transient fish, it still remains a challenge to quantify the effects of oyster restoration on transient fish communities. We developed a bioenergetics model to assess the impact of selected oyster reef restoration scenarios on associated transient fish species. We used the model to analyze the impact of changes in (1) oyster population carrying capacity; (2) oyster population growth rate; and (3) diet preference of transient fish on oyster reef development and associated transient fish species. Our model results indicate that resident fish biomass is directly affected by oyster restoration and oyster biomass, and oyster restoration can have cascading impacts on transient fish biomass. Furthermore, the results highlight the importance of a favorable oyster population growth rate during early restoration years, as it can lead to rapid increases in mean oyster biomass and biomass of transient fish species. The model also revealed that a transient fish's diet solely dependent on oyster reef-derived prey could limit the biomass of transient fish species, emphasizing the importance of habitat connectivity in estuarine areas to enhance transient fish species biomass. Simple bioenergetics models can be developed to understand the dynamics of a system and make qualitative predictions of management and restoration scenarios.

50 CFR 84.42 - What if a grant agreement is not signed?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false What if a grant agreement is not signed? 84.42 Section 84.42 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 85.47 - Program crediting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... identify projects funded by the Clean Vessel Act. The Sport Fish Restoration logo follows: ER27AU97.011 (b... accomplishments or education/information. Display the logo in the appropriate location, according to § 85.43(e... purchase of fishing equipment and motorboat fuels. (e) Logo colors. Option 1 in paragraph (e)(1) of this...

50 CFR 85.47 - Program crediting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... identify projects funded by the Clean Vessel Act. The Sport Fish Restoration logo follows: ER27AU97.011 (b... accomplishments or education/information. Display the logo in the appropriate location, according to § 85.43(e... purchase of fishing equipment and motorboat fuels. (e) Logo colors. Option 1 in paragraph (e)(1) of this...

Evidence-based evaluation of the cumulative effects of ecosystem restoration

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Diefenderfer, Heida L.; Johnson, Gary E.; Thom, Ronald M.

Evaluating the cumulative effects of large-scale ecological restoration programs is necessary to inform adaptive ecosystem management and provide society with resilient and sustainable services. However, complex linkages between restorative actions and ecosystem responses make evaluations problematic. Despite long-term federal investments in restoring aquatic ecosystems, no standard evaluation method has been adopted and most programs focus on monitoring and analysis, not synthesis and evaluation. In this paper, we demonstrate a new transdisciplinary approach integrating techniques from evidence-based medicine, critical thinking, and cumulative effects assessment. Tiered hypotheses are identified using an ecosystem conceptual model. The systematic literature review at the core ofmore » evidence-based assessment becomes one of many lines of evidence assessed collectively, using critical thinking strategies and causal criteria from a cumulative effects perspective. As a demonstration, we analyzed data from 166 locations on the Columbia River and estuary representing 12 indicators of habitat and fish response to floodplain restoration actions intended to benefit threatened and endangered salmon. Synthesis of seven lines of evidence showed that hydrologic reconnection promoted macrodetritis export, prey availability, and fish access and feeding. The evidence was sufficient to infer cross-boundary, indirect, compounding and delayed cumulative effects, and suggestive of nonlinear, landscape-scale, and spatial density effects. On the basis of causal inferences regarding food web functions, we concluded that the restoration program has a cumulative beneficial effect on juvenile salmon. As a result, this evidence-based approach will enable the evaluation of restoration in complex coastal and riverine ecosystems where data have accumulated without sufficient synthesis.« less

Evidence-based evaluation of the cumulative effects of ecosystem restoration

DOE PAGES

Diefenderfer, Heida L.; Johnson, Gary E.; Thom, Ronald M.; ...

2016-03-18

Evaluating the cumulative effects of large-scale ecological restoration programs is necessary to inform adaptive ecosystem management and provide society with resilient and sustainable services. However, complex linkages between restorative actions and ecosystem responses make evaluations problematic. Despite long-term federal investments in restoring aquatic ecosystems, no standard evaluation method has been adopted and most programs focus on monitoring and analysis, not synthesis and evaluation. In this paper, we demonstrate a new transdisciplinary approach integrating techniques from evidence-based medicine, critical thinking, and cumulative effects assessment. Tiered hypotheses are identified using an ecosystem conceptual model. The systematic literature review at the core ofmore » evidence-based assessment becomes one of many lines of evidence assessed collectively, using critical thinking strategies and causal criteria from a cumulative effects perspective. As a demonstration, we analyzed data from 166 locations on the Columbia River and estuary representing 12 indicators of habitat and fish response to floodplain restoration actions intended to benefit threatened and endangered salmon. Synthesis of seven lines of evidence showed that hydrologic reconnection promoted macrodetritis export, prey availability, and fish access and feeding. The evidence was sufficient to infer cross-boundary, indirect, compounding and delayed cumulative effects, and suggestive of nonlinear, landscape-scale, and spatial density effects. On the basis of causal inferences regarding food web functions, we concluded that the restoration program has a cumulative beneficial effect on juvenile salmon. As a result, this evidence-based approach will enable the evaluation of restoration in complex coastal and riverine ecosystems where data have accumulated without sufficient synthesis.« less

Restoring stream habitat connectivity: a proposed method for prioritizing the removal of resident fish passage barriers.

PubMed

O'Hanley, Jesse R; Wright, Jed; Diebel, Matthew; Fedora, Mark A; Soucy, Charles L

2013-08-15

Systematic methods for prioritizing the repair and removal of fish passage barriers, while growing of late, have hitherto focused almost exclusively on meeting the needs of migratory fish species (e.g., anadromous salmonids). An important but as of yet unaddressed issue is the development of new modeling approaches which are applicable to resident fish species habitat restoration programs. In this paper, we develop a budget constrained optimization model for deciding which barriers to repair or remove in order to maximize habitat availability for stream resident fish. Habitat availability at the local stream reach is determined based on the recently proposed C metric, which accounts for the amount, quality, distance and level of connectivity to different stream habitat types. We assess the computational performance of our model using geospatial barrier and stream data collected from the Pine-Popple Watershed, located in northeast Wisconsin (USA). The optimization model is found to be an efficient and practical decision support tool. Optimal solutions, which are useful in informing basin-wide restoration planning efforts, can be generated on average in only a few minutes. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

50 CFR 81.8 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF... Management and Budget Circular A-102. (c) Payments under the Endangered Species Act, including such...

50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... provided by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. The State is the responsible authority without...

50 CFR 81.8 - Payments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF... Management and Budget Circular A-102. (c) Payments under the Endangered Species Act, including such...

50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... provided by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. The State is the responsible authority without...

50 CFR 86.136 - What must be in the plan?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... problems. (e) Include information about the longevity of current tie-up facilities. ...

50 CFR 86.81 - When are the reports due?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...) The State must report certified percentage of completion data and other significant developments in...

50 CFR 86.81 - When are the reports due?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...) The State must report certified percentage of completion data and other significant developments in...

50 CFR 82.4 - Authority.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID (MARINE MAMMAL... grants or other forms of financial assistance for research relevant to the protection and conservation of...

50 CFR 86.81 - When are the reports due?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...) The State must report certified percentage of completion data and other significant developments in...

50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... provided by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. The State is the responsible authority without...

50 CFR 81.12 - Contracts.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... provided by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. The State is the responsible authority without...

50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project, Annual Report 2002-2003.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McGowan, Vance

On July 1, 1984 the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife entered into an agreement to initiate fish habitat enhancement work in the Joseph Creek subbasin of the Grande Ronde River Basin in northeast Oregon. In July of 1985 the Upper and Middle Grande Ronde River, and Catherine Creek subbasins were included in the intergovernmental contract, and on March 1, 1996 the Wallowa River subbasin was added. The primary goal of 'The Grande Ronde Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project' is to create, protect, and restore riparian and instream habitat for anadromous salmonids, thereby maximizing opportunitiesmore » for natural fish production within the basin. This project provided for implementation of Program Measure 703 (C)(1), Action Item 4.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC, 1987), and continues to be implemented as offsite mitigation for mainstem fishery losses caused by the Columbia River hydro-electric system. All work conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is on private lands and therefore requires that considerable time be spent developing rapport with landowners to gain acceptance of, and continued cooperation with this program throughout 10-15 year lease periods. This project calls for passive regeneration of habitat, using riparian exclosure fencing as the primary method to restore degraded streams to a normative condition. Active remediation techniques using plantings, off-site water developments, site-specific instream structures, or whole channel alterations are also utilized where applicable. Individual projects contribute to and complement ecosystem and basin-wide watershed restoration efforts that are underway by state, federal, and tribal agencies, and local watershed councils. Work undertaken during 2002 included: (1) Implementing 1 new fencing project in the Wallowa subbasin that will protect an additional 0.95 miles of stream and 22.9 acres of habitat; (2) Conducting instream work activities in 3 streams to enhance habitat and/or restore natural channel dimensions, patterns or profiles; (3) Planting 31,733 plants along 3.7 stream miles, (4) Establishing 71 new photopoints and retaking 254 existing photopoint pictures; (5) Monitoring stream temperatures at 12 locations on 6 streams; (6) Completing riparian fence, water gap and other maintenance on 100.5 miles of project fences. Since initiation of the project in 1984 over 68.7 miles of anadromous fish bearing streams and 1,933 acres of habitat have been protected, enhanced and maintained.« less

50 CFR 81.2 - Cooperation with the States.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND... maintains an adequate and active program for the conservation of various endangered and threatened species... Secretary to be endangered or threatened; (b) The State agency has established an acceptable conservation...

50 CFR 86.13 - What is boating infrastructure?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG...) Floating docks and fixed piers; (g) Floating and fixed breakwaters; (h) Dinghy docks (floating or fixed...

50 CFR 81.6 - Project Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED... Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-95 (as revised). (d) The Project Agreement will follow...

50 CFR 82.9 - General information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... used by the grantee for the financial management of grant funds, the state laws affecting marine...

50 CFR 82.9 - General information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... used by the grantee for the financial management of grant funds, the state laws affecting marine...

Linking hydrologic, physical and chemical habitat environments for the potential assessment of fish community rehabilitation in a developing city

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Zhao, C. S.; Yang, S. T.; Liu, C. M.; Dou, T. W.; Yang, Z. L.; Yang, Z. Y.; Liu, X. L.; Xiang, H.; Nie, S. Y.; Zhang, J. L.; Mitrovic, S. M.; Yu, Q.; Lim, R. P.

2015-04-01

Aquatic ecological rehabilitation is increasingly attracting considerable public and research attention. An effective method that requires less data and expertise would help in the assessment of rehabilitation potential and in the monitoring of rehabilitation activities as complicated theories and excessive data requirements on assemblage information make many current assessment models expensive and limit their wide use. This paper presents an assessment model for restoration potential which successfully links hydrologic, physical and chemical habitat factors to fish assemblage attributes drawn from monitoring datasets on hydrology, water quality and fish assemblages at a total of 144 sites, where 5084 fish were sampled and tested. In this model three newly developed sub-models, integrated habitat index (IHSI), integrated ecological niche breadth (INB) and integrated ecological niche overlap (INO), are established to study spatial heterogeneity of the restoration potential of fish assemblages based on gradient methods of habitat suitability index and ecological niche models. To reduce uncertainties in the model, as many fish species as possible, including important native fish, were selected as dominant species with monitoring occurring over several seasons to comprehensively select key habitat factors. Furthermore, a detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) was employed prior to a canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) of the data to avoid the "arc effect" in the selection of key habitat factors. Application of the model to data collected at Jinan City, China proved effective reveals that three lower potential regions that should be targeted in future aquatic ecosystem rehabilitation programs. They were well validated by the distribution of two habitat parameters: river width and transparency. River width positively influenced and transparency negatively influenced fish assemblages. The model can be applied for monitoring the effects of fish assemblage restoration. This has large ramifications for the restoration of aquatic ecosystems and spatial heterogeneity of fish assemblages all over the world.

77 FR 20408 - [FWS-R9-MB-2011-N215; 91400-5110-0000-7B; 91400-9410-0000-7B

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-04

... Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777 et seq.) and established the Multistate Conservation Grant...; 91400-9410-0000-7B] Multistate Conservation Grant Program; Priority List and Approval for Conservation... the fiscal year 2012, priority list of wildlife and sport fish conservation projects from the...

50 CFR 82.9 - General information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE... to be used by the grantee for the financial management of grant funds, the state laws affecting...

50 CFR 82.16 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... prescribed by FMC 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this...

50 CFR 82.9 - General information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE... to be used by the grantee for the financial management of grant funds, the state laws affecting...

50 CFR 82.16 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... prescribed by FMC 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this...

50 CFR 82.16 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... prescribed by FMC 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this...

50 CFR 86.16 - What are the information collection requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... Management and Budget, Department of Interior, Desk Officer, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. An...

50 CFR 86.16 - What are the information collection requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... Management and Budget, Department of Interior, Desk Officer, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. An...

50 CFR 84.10 - What is the purpose and scope of this rule?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...? The regulations in this part establish the requirements for coastal State participation in the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands...

50 CFR 84.10 - What is the purpose and scope of this rule?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL...? The regulations in this part establish the requirements for coastal State participation in the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands...

A resilience approach can improve anadromous fish restoration

USGS Publications Warehouse

Waldman, John R.; Wilson, Karen A.; Mather, Martha E.; Snyder, Noah P.

2016-01-01

Most anadromous fish populations remain at low levels or are in decline despite substantial investments in restoration. We explore whether a resilience perspective (i.e., a different paradigm for understanding populations, communities, and ecosystems) is a viable alternative framework for anadromous fish restoration. Many life history traits have allowed anadromous fish to thrive in unimpacted ecosystems but have become contemporary curses as anthropogenic effects increase. This contradiction creates a significant conservation challenge but also makes these fish excellent candidates for a resilience approach. A resilience approach recognizes the need to maintain life history, population, and habitat characteristics that increase the ability of a population to withstand and recover from multiple disturbances. To evaluate whether a resilience approach represents a viable strategy for anadromous fish restoration, we review four issues: (1) how resilience theory can inform anadromous fish restoration, (2) how a resilience-based approach is fundamentally different than extant anadromous fish restoration strategies, (3) ecological characteristics that historically benefited anadromous fish persistence, and (4) examples of how human impacts harm anadromous fish and how a resilience approach might produce more successful outcomes. We close by suggesting new research and restoration directions for implementation of a resilience-based approach.

50 CFR 86.100 - What is the National Framework?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG.... Through a State survey, you must conduct a boating access needs assessment or data collection to determine...

50 CFR 86.100 - What is the National Framework?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG.... Through a State survey, you must conduct a boating access needs assessment or data collection to determine...

50 CFR 86.100 - What is the National Framework?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG.... Through a State survey, you must conduct a boating access needs assessment or data collection to determine...

50 CFR 82.16 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... prescribed by FMC 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this...

50 CFR 86.16 - What are the information collection requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... Management and Budget, Department of Interior, Desk Officer, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. An...

50 CFR 82.16 - Reporting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... prescribed by FMC 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this...

50 CFR 84.46 - What are the cost-sharing requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL..., enhancement, or management as a noncash match, provided that the land is necessary and reasonable for...

50 CFR 86.137 - What variables should I consider?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... demand, (c) Cost of development, (d) Local support and commitment to maintenance, (e) Water-body size, (f...

50 CFR 84.10 - What is the purpose and scope of this rule?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... regulations in this part establish the requirements for coastal State participation in the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.10 - What is the purpose and scope of this rule?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... regulations in this part establish the requirements for coastal State participation in the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.10 - What is the purpose and scope of this rule?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... regulations in this part establish the requirements for coastal State participation in the National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program authorized by Section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.20 - What are the grant eligibility requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Applying for Grants § 84.20 What are the grant eligibility requirements... and conditions will ensure the real property will be administered for long-term conservation. (2) The...

50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF... with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. [40 FR 47509, Oct. 9, 1975, as amended at 44 FR...

50 CFR 81.9 - Assurances.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES OF... with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102. [40 FR 47509, Oct. 9, 1975, as amended at 44 FR...

50 CFR 86.54 - How must I submit proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... from Tier Two projects. (e) You must describe each project in Tier Two separately, so that the Service...

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Vitale, Angelo; Roberts, Frank; Peters, Ronald

Throughout the last century, the cumulative effects of anthropogenic disturbances have caused drastic watershed level landscape changes throughout the Reservation and surrounding areas (Coeur d'Alene Tribe 1998). Changes include stream channelization, wetland draining, forest and palouse prairie conversion for agricultural use, high road density, elimination of old growth timber stands, and denuding riparian communities. The significance of these changes is manifested in the degradation of habitats supporting native flora and fauna. Consequently, populations of native fish, wildlife, and plants, which the Tribe relies on as subsistence resources, have declined or in some instances been extirpated (Apperson et al. 1988; Coeurmore » d'Alene Tribe 1998; Lillengreen et al. 1996; Lillengreen et al. 1993; Gerry Green Coeur d'Alene Tribe wildlife Biologist, personal communication 2002). For example, bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) are not present at detectable levels in Reservation tributaries, westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi) are not present in numbers commensurate with maintaining harvestable fisheries (Lillengreen et al. 1993, 1996), and the Sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus) are not present at detectable levels on the Reservation (Gerry Green, Coeur d'Alene Tribe wildlife biologist, personal communication). The Coeur d'Alene Tribe added Fisheries and Wildlife Programs to their Natural Resources Department to address these losses and protect important cultural, and subsistence resources for future generations. The Tribal Council adopted by Resolution 89(94), the following mission statement for the Fisheries Program: 'restore, protect, expand and re-establish fish populations to sustainable levels to provide harvest opportunities'. This mission statement, focused on fisheries restoration and rehabilitation, is a response to native fish population declines throughout the Tribe's aboriginal territory, including the Coeur d'Alene Indian Reservation (Coeur d'Alene Tribe 1998). Implicit in this statement is a commitment to provide native subsistence resources in the present and near future as well as the long-term by employing all the mitigation and conservation measures available to them. The development of this Habitat Protection Plan is intended to provide additional planning level guidance as the implementation of conservation measures moves forward. The purpose of this plan is to develop a systematic approach to habitat restoration that will ultimately lead to self-perpetuating, harvestable populations of native fish, wildlife and botanical species. Specifically, it is our intention to apply the principles and analyses presented in this plan to prioritize future restoration efforts that receive funding under the Northwest Power Planning Council's Resident Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Programs. Using an ecosystem restoration approach based on landscape ecology concepts (Primack 1993), the basic premise of the plan is to (1) protect functioning habitat conditions and (2) restore degraded habitat conditions. This plan focuses on habitat conditions at the watershed scale (macrohabitat) rather than on the needs of single species and/or species guilds. By focusing restoration efforts at a macrohabitat level, restoration efforts target all native species inhabiting that area. This approach marks a paradigm shift that emphasizes ecological based restoration rather than species-specific restoration. Traditionally, fish managers and wildlife managers have approached restoration independently, often dedicating resources to a single species by focusing on specific habitat types on a small spatial scale (microhabitat) (Robinson and Bolen 1989, Marcot et al. 2002). This management technique has done little to curb declines despite large budgets (Pianka 1994). Restoration on a landscape level has shown promising results (Holling 1992) and many riparian and wetland restoration projects throughout the northwest have inadvertently improved habitats for non-targeted species. Landscape level restoration addresses the overall habitat condition of the regional area (macrohabitat), restoring the native species composition, density, and diversity by restoring the native ecosystem function. In the context of the development and implementation of this Habitat Protection Plan, it is important to understand that this is primarily a conservation tool, and is not intended to displace efforts that mitigate for lost resources. This plan is intended to primarily address long-term conservation needs and may not accommodate immediate short-term needs that address lost resources. Therefore, areas selected to address short-term mitigation needs may not be located in the high priority areas identified in this Plan. It needs to be clear that these projects and areas are no less important than those identified in this Plan.« less

Spokane Tribal Hatchery, 2002 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Peone, Tim L.

2003-03-01

The Spokane Tribal Hatchery (Galbraith Springs) project originated from the Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC) 1987 Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. The goal of this project is to aid in the restoration and enhancement of the Lake Roosevelt and Banks Lake fisheries adversely affected by the construction and operation of Grand Coulee Dam. The objective is to produce kokanee salmon and rainbow trout for release into Lake Roosevelt for maintaining a viable fishery. The goal and objective of this project adheres to the NPPC Resident Fish Substitution Policy and specifically to the biological objectives addressed in the NPPC Columbiamore » River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program to mitigate for hydropower related fish losses in the blocked area above Chief Joseph/Grand Coulee Dams.« less

50 CFR 85.47 - Program crediting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... Sport Fish Restoration logo. Grant recipients may us the crediting logo identified in 50 CFR 80.26 to... accomplishments or education/information. Display the logo in the appropriate location, according to § 85.43(e...

50 CFR 84.30 - How are projects selected for grants?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM Project Selection § 84.30 How are projects selected for grants? Project selection is...) Provides public conservation benefits that are cost effective and long-term, i.e., at least 20 years; and...

The Shad Story

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burk, Sandy

2006-01-01

Science trade books can spark real-life involvement in saving a threatened fish. A successful science program at the Westbrook Elementary School, in Bethesda, Maryland, does just that. The program--in which students participate in watershed restoration projects as part of a yearlong study of the local Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River…

76 FR 43697 - BOEMRE Information Collection Activity: Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP), Renewal of a...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-21

... conservation, protection, or restoration of coastal areas, including wetland. (B) Mitigation of damage to fish... ID No. BOEM-2011-0001] BOEMRE Information Collection Activity: Coastal Impact Assistance Program... (ICR) to renew approval of the paperwork requirements that address the BOEMRE's Coastal Impact...

50 CFR 86.52 - What information must I include in my grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM... Management and Budget. The SF 424 series consists of the Applications for Federal Assistance (SF 424), Budget...

50 CFR 86.52 - What information must I include in my grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM... Management and Budget. The SF 424 series consists of the Applications for Federal Assistance (SF 424), Budget...

50 CFR 86.41 - How long will the money be available?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE... obligation for a total of three fiscal years (e.g. FY 2000 funds will remain available through FY 2002) (16 U...

50 CFR 80.132 - Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Does an agency have to control the land or water where it completes capital improvements? 80.132 Section 80.132 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM...

Do management actions to restore rare habitat benefit native fish conservation? Distribution of juvenile native fish among shoreline habitats of the Colorado River

USGS Publications Warehouse

Dodrill, Michael J.; Yackulic, Charles B.; Gerig, Brandon; Pine, William E.; Korman, Josh; Finch, Colton

2015-01-01

Many management actions in aquatic ecosystems are directed at restoring or improving specific habitats to benefit fish populations. In the Grand Canyon reach of the Colorado River, experimental flow operations as part of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program have been designed to restore sandbars and associated backwater habitats. Backwaters can have warmer water temperatures than other habitats, and native fish, including the federally endangered humpback chub Gila cypha, are frequently observed in backwaters, leading to a common perception that this habitat is critical for juvenile native fish conservation. However, it is unknown how fish densities in backwaters compare with that in other habitats or what proportion of juvenile fish populations reside in backwaters. Here, we develop and fit multi-species hierarchical models to estimate habitat-specific abundances and densities of juvenile humpback chub, bluehead suckerCatostomus discobolus, flannelmouth sucker Catostomus latipinnis and speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus in a portion of the Colorado River. Densities of all four native fish were greatest in backwater habitats in 2009 and 2010. However, backwaters are rare and ephemeral habitats, so they contain only a small portion of the overall population. For example, the total abundance of juvenile humpback chub in this study was much higher in talus than in backwater habitats. Moreover, when we extrapolated relative densities based on estimates of backwater prevalence directly after a controlled flood, the majority of juvenile humpback chub were still found outside of backwaters. This suggests that the role of controlled floods in influencing native fish population trends may be limited in this section of the Colorado River. 

50 CFR 85.12 - Information collection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN... Management and Budget as required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., October 18, 1993, OMB No. 1018-0086, expiration...

50 CFR 86.52 - What information must I include in my grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... and Tier Two) (see § 86.53): (a) Standard Form 424 series as prescribed by the Office of Management...

50 CFR 85.12 - Information collection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN... Management and Budget as required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., October 18, 1993, OMB No. 1018-0086, expiration...

50 CFR 85.12 - Information collection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN... Management and Budget as required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., October 18, 1993, OMB No. 1018-0086, expiration...

50 CFR 85.12 - Information collection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN... Management and Budget as required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., October 18, 1993, OMB No. 1018-0086, expiration...

50 CFR 86.52 - What information must I include in my grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... and Tier Two) (see § 86.53): (a) Standard Form 424 series as prescribed by the Office of Management...

50 CFR 86.52 - What information must I include in my grant proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... and Tier Two) (see § 86.53): (a) Standard Form 424 series as prescribed by the Office of Management...

50 CFR 85.12 - Information collection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CLEAN... Management and Budget as required by 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., October 18, 1993, OMB No. 1018-0086, expiration...

50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of... to a grant-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing...

50 CFR 80.122 - May an agency deduct the costs of generating program income from gross income?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.122 May an agency deduct the costs of... to a grant-funded habitat-management or facilities-construction project. (2) Cost of publishing...

Walla Walla River Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project, 2002-2003 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Volkman, Jed

2005-12-01

In 2002 and 2003, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) Fisheries Habitat Program implemented stream habitat restoration and protection efforts on private properties in the Walla Walla River Basin with funding from Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). The objective of this effort is to protect and restore habitat critical to the recovery of weak or reintroduced populations of salmonid fish. The CTUIR has currently enrolled nine properties into this program: two on Couse Creek, two adjacent properties on Blue Creek, one on Patit Creek, and four properties on the mainstem Walla Walla River. Major accomplishments during the reportingmore » period include the following: (1) Secured approximately $229,000 in project cost share; (2) Purchase of 46 acres on the mainstem Walla Walla River to be protected perpetually for native fish and wildlife; (3) Developed three new 15 year conservation easements with private landowners; (4) Installed 3000 feet of weed barrier tarp with new plantings within project area on the mainstem Walla Walla River; (5) Expanded easement area on Couse Creek to include an additional 0.5 miles of stream corridor and 32 acres of upland habitat; (6) Restored 12 acres on the mainstem Walla Walla River and 32 acres on Couse Creek to native perennial grasses; and (7) Installed 50,000+ new native plants/cuttings within project areas.« less

Long Term Resource Monitoring Program procedures: fish monitoring

USGS Publications Warehouse

Ratcliff, Eric N.; Glittinger, Eric J.; O'Hara, T. Matt; Ickes, Brian S.

2014-01-01

This manual constitutes the second revision of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Upper Mississippi River Restoration-Environmental Management Program (UMRR-EMP) Long Term Resource Monitoring Program (LTRMP) element Fish Procedures Manual. The original (1988) manual merged and expanded on ideas and recommendations related to Upper Mississippi River fish sampling presented in several early documents. The first revision to the manual was made in 1995 reflecting important protocol changes, such as the adoption of a stratified random sampling design. The 1995 procedures manual has been an important document through the years and has been cited in many reports and scientific manuscripts. The resulting data collected by the LTRMP fish component represent the largest dataset on fish within the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) with more than 44,000 collections of approximately 5.7 million fish. The goal of this revision of the procedures manual is to document changes in LTRMP fish sampling procedures since 1995. Refinements to sampling methods become necessary as monitoring programs mature. Possible refinements are identified through field experiences (e.g., sampling techniques and safety protocols), data analysis (e.g., planned and studied gear efficiencies and reallocations of effort), and technological advances (e.g., electronic data entry). Other changes may be required because of financial necessity (i.e., unplanned effort reductions). This version of the LTRMP fish monitoring manual describes the most current (2014) procedures of the LTRMP fish component.

U.S. Geological Survey Science—Improving the value of the Chesapeake Bay watershed

USGS Publications Warehouse

Phillips, Scott W.; Hyer, Kenneth; Goldbaum, Elizabeth

2017-05-05

IntroductionCongress directed the Federal Government to work with States to restore the Nation’s largest estuary.Chesapeake Bay restoration provides important economic and ecological benefits:18 million people live and work in the Bay watershed and enjoy its benefits.3,600 types of fish, wildlife, and plants underpin the economic value of the Bay ecosystem.Poor water quality and habitat loss threaten restoration and negatively impact the economy.10 Goals to meet by 2025 through the Chesapeake Bay Program, a voluntary partnership.

33 CFR 203.46 - Restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... Flood Control Works Damaged by Flood or Coastal Storm: The Corps Rehabilitation and Inspection Program... constructed to have appreciable and dependable protection in preventing damage from irregular and unusual..., recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, land reclamation, habitat restoration, drainage, bank protection...

33 CFR 203.46 - Restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... Flood Control Works Damaged by Flood or Coastal Storm: The Corps Rehabilitation and Inspection Program... constructed to have appreciable and dependable protection in preventing damage from irregular and unusual..., recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, land reclamation, habitat restoration, drainage, bank protection...

33 CFR 203.46 - Restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... Flood Control Works Damaged by Flood or Coastal Storm: The Corps Rehabilitation and Inspection Program... constructed to have appreciable and dependable protection in preventing damage from irregular and unusual..., recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, land reclamation, habitat restoration, drainage, bank protection...

33 CFR 203.46 - Restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... Flood Control Works Damaged by Flood or Coastal Storm: The Corps Rehabilitation and Inspection Program... constructed to have appreciable and dependable protection in preventing damage from irregular and unusual..., recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, land reclamation, habitat restoration, drainage, bank protection...

33 CFR 203.46 - Restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... Flood Control Works Damaged by Flood or Coastal Storm: The Corps Rehabilitation and Inspection Program... constructed to have appreciable and dependable protection in preventing damage from irregular and unusual..., recreation, fish and wildlife enhancement, land reclamation, habitat restoration, drainage, bank protection...

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Johnson, Gary E.; Diefenderfer, Heida L.

The purpose of this document is to describe research, monitoring, and evaluation (RME) for the Federal Columbia River Estuary Program, hereafter called 'the Estuary Program'. The intent of this RME effort is to provide data and information to evaluate progress toward meeting program goals and objectives and support decision making in the Estuary Program. The goal of the Estuary Program is to understand, conserve, and restore the estuary ecosystem to improve the performance of listed salmonid populations. The Estuary Program has five general objectives, designed to fulfill the program goal, as follows: (1) Understand the primary stressors affecting ecosystem controllingmore » factors, such as ocean conditions and invasive species. (2) Conserve and restore factors controlling ecosystem structures and processes, such as hydrodynamics and water quality. (3) Increase the quantity and quality of ecosystem structures, i.e., habitats, juvenile salmonids use during migration through the estuary. (4) Maintain the food web to benefit salmonid performance. (5) Improve salmonid performance in terms of life history diversity, foraging success, growth, and survival. The goal of estuary RME is to provide pertinent and timely research and monitoring information to planners, implementers, and managers of the Estuary Program. The goal leads to three primary management questions pertaining to the main focus of the Estuary Program: estuary habitat conservation and restoration. (1) Are the estuary habitat actions achieving the expected biological and environmental performance targets? (2) Are the offsite habitat actions in the estuary improving juvenile salmonid performance and which actions are most effective at addressing the limiting factors preventing achievement of habitat, fish, or wildlife performance objectives? (3) What are the limiting factors or threats in the estuary/ocean preventing the achievement of desired habitat or fish performance objectives? Performance measures for the estuary are monitored indicators that reflect the status of habitat conditions and fish performance, e.g., habitat connectivity, survival, and life history diversity. Performance measures also pertain to implementation and compliance. Such measures are part of the monitoring, research, and action plans in this estuary RME document. Performance targets specific to the estuary were not included in the 2007 draft Biological Opinion.« less

Framework for Evaluating Habitat Restoration Success with Respect to Fish Habitat- and Population-related Beneficial Use Impairments

EPA Science Inventory

A major challenge of evaluating restoration progress is establishing a cause-effect relationship between observed changes in fish abundance and ongoing aquatic habitat restoration. Since 1979, fish populations within the St. Louis River Area of Concern, which were severely degrad...

Tidal Flushing Restores the Physiological Condition of Fish Residing in Degraded Salt Marshes

PubMed Central

Dibble, Kimberly L.; Meyerson, Laura A.

2012-01-01

Roads, bridges, and dikes constructed across salt marshes can restrict tidal flow, degrade habitat quality for nekton, and facilitate invasion by non-native plants including Phragmites australis. Introduced P. australis contributes to marsh accretion and eliminates marsh surface pools thereby adversely affecting fish by reducing access to intertidal habitats essential for feeding, reproduction, and refuge. Our study assessed the condition of resident fish populations (Fundulus heteroclitus) at four tidally restricted and four tidally restored marshes in New England invaded by P. australis relative to adjacent reference salt marshes. We used physiological and morphological indicators of fish condition, including proximate body composition (% lipid, % lean dry, % water), recent daily growth rate, age class distributions, parasite prevalence, female gravidity status, length-weight regressions, and a common morphological indicator (Fulton’s K) to assess impacts to fish health. We detected a significant increase in the quantity of parasites infecting fish in tidally restricted marshes but not in those where tidal flow was restored to reduce P. australis cover. Using fish length as a covariate, we found that unparasitized, non-gravid F. heteroclitus in tidally restricted marshes had significantly reduced lipid reserves and increased lean dry (structural) mass relative to fish residing in reference marshes. Fish in tidally restored marshes were equivalent across all metrics relative to those in reference marshes indicating that habitat quality was restored via increased tidal flushing. Reference marshes adjacent to tidally restored sites contained the highest abundance of young fish (ages 0–1) while tidally restricted marshes contained the lowest. Results indicate that F. heteroclitus residing in physically and hydrologically altered marshes are at a disadvantage relative to fish in reference marshes but the effects can be reversed through ecological restoration. PMID:23029423

Tidal flushing restores the physiological condition of fish residing in degraded salt marshes.

PubMed

Dibble, Kimberly L; Meyerson, Laura A

2012-01-01

Roads, bridges, and dikes constructed across salt marshes can restrict tidal flow, degrade habitat quality for nekton, and facilitate invasion by non-native plants including Phragmites australis. Introduced P. australis contributes to marsh accretion and eliminates marsh surface pools thereby adversely affecting fish by reducing access to intertidal habitats essential for feeding, reproduction, and refuge. Our study assessed the condition of resident fish populations (Fundulus heteroclitus) at four tidally restricted and four tidally restored marshes in New England invaded by P. australis relative to adjacent reference salt marshes. We used physiological and morphological indicators of fish condition, including proximate body composition (% lipid, % lean dry, % water), recent daily growth rate, age class distributions, parasite prevalence, female gravidity status, length-weight regressions, and a common morphological indicator (Fulton's K) to assess impacts to fish health. We detected a significant increase in the quantity of parasites infecting fish in tidally restricted marshes but not in those where tidal flow was restored to reduce P. australis cover. Using fish length as a covariate, we found that unparasitized, non-gravid F. heteroclitus in tidally restricted marshes had significantly reduced lipid reserves and increased lean dry (structural) mass relative to fish residing in reference marshes. Fish in tidally restored marshes were equivalent across all metrics relative to those in reference marshes indicating that habitat quality was restored via increased tidal flushing. Reference marshes adjacent to tidally restored sites contained the highest abundance of young fish (ages 0-1) while tidally restricted marshes contained the lowest. Results indicate that F. heteroclitus residing in physically and hydrologically altered marshes are at a disadvantage relative to fish in reference marshes but the effects can be reversed through ecological restoration.

50 CFR 86.70 - What are my requirements to acquire, install, operate, and maintain real and personal property?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false What are my requirements to acquire, install, operate, and maintain real and personal property? 86.70 Section 86.70 Wildlife and Fisheries...-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Manage Grants...

The Importance of the Regional Species Pool, Ecological Species Traits and Local Habitat Conditions for the Colonization of Restored River Reaches by Fish

PubMed Central

Stoll, Stefan; Kail, Jochem; Lorenz, Armin W.; Sundermann, Andrea; Haase, Peter

2014-01-01

It is commonly assumed that the colonization of restored river reaches by fish depends on the regional species pools; however, quantifications of the relationship between the composition of the regional species pool and restoration outcome are lacking. We analyzed data from 18 German river restoration projects and adjacent river reaches constituting the regional species pools of the restored reaches. We found that the ability of statistical models to describe the fish assemblages established in the restored reaches was greater when these models were based on ‘biotic’ variables relating to the regional species pool and the ecological traits of species rather than on ‘abiotic’ variables relating to the hydromorphological habitat structure of the restored habitats and descriptors of the restoration projects. For species presence in restored reaches, ‘biotic’ variables explained 34% of variability, with the occurrence rate of a species in the regional species pool being the most important variable, while ’abiotic’ variables explained only the negligible amount of 2% of variability. For fish density in restored reaches, about twice the amount of variability was explained by ‘biotic’ (38%) compared to ‘abiotic’ (21%) variables, with species density in the regional species pool being most important. These results indicate that the colonization of restored river reaches by fish is largely determined by the assemblages in the surrounding species pool. Knowledge of species presence and abundance in the regional species pool can be used to estimate the likelihood of fish species becoming established in restored reaches. PMID:24404187

Stream ecosystem response to limestone treatment in acid impacted watersheds of the allegheny plateau

USGS Publications Warehouse

McClurg, S.E.; Petty, J.T.; Mazik, P.M.; Clayton, J.L.

2007-01-01

Restoration programs are expanding worldwide, but assessments of restoration effectiveness are rare. The objectives of our study were to assess current acid-precipitation remediation programs in streams of the Allegheny Plateau ecoregion of West Virginia (USA), identify specific attributes that could and could not be fully restored, and quantify temporal trends in ecosystem recovery. We sampled water chemistry, physical habitat, periphyton biomass, and benthic macroinvertebrate and fish community structure in three stream types: acidic (four streams), naturally circumneutral (eight streams), and acidic streams treated with limestone sand (eight streams). We observed no temporal trends in ecosystem recovery in treated streams despite sampling streams that ranged from 2 to 20 years since initial treatment. Our results indicated that the application of limestone sand to acidic streams was effective in fully recovering some characteristics, such as pH, alkalinity, Ca2+, Ca:H ratios, trout biomass and density, and trout reproductive success. However, recovery of many other characteristics was strongly dependent upon spatial proximity to treatment, and still others were never fully recovered. For example, limestone treatment did not restore dissolved aluminum concentrations, macroinvertebrate taxon richness, and total fish biomass to circumneutral reference conditions. Full recovery may not be occurring because treated streams continue to drain acidic watersheds and remain isolated in a network of acidic streams. We propose a revised stream restoration plan for the Allegheny Plateau that includes restoring stream ecosystems as connected networks rather than isolated reaches and recognizes that full recovery of acidified watersheds may not be possible. ?? 2007 by the Ecological Society of America.

Variable responses of fish assemblages, habitat, and stability to natural-channel-design restoration in Catskill Mountain streams

USGS Publications Warehouse

Baldigo, Barry P.; Ernst, Anne G.; Warren, Dana R.; Miller, Sarah J.

2010-01-01

Natural-channel-design (NCD) restorations were recently implemented within large segments of five first- and second-order streams in the Catskill Mountains of New York in an attempt to increase channel stability, reduce bed and bank erosion, and sustain water quality. In conjunction with these efforts, 54 fish and habitat surveys were done from 1999 to 2007 at six restored reaches and five stable control reaches to evaluate the effects of NCD restoration on fish assemblages, habitat, and bank stability. A before–after–control–impact study design and two-factor analysis of variance were used to quantify the net changes in habitat and fish population and community indices at treatment reaches relative to those at unaltered control reaches. The density and biomass of fish communities were often dominated by one or two small prey species and no or few predator species before restoration and by one or more trout (Salmonidae) species after restoration. Significant increases in community richness (30%), diversity (40%), species or biomass equitability (32%), and total biomass (up to 52%) in at least four of the six restored reaches demonstrate that NCD restorations can improve the health and sustainability of fish communities in geomorphically unstable Catskill Mountain streams over the short to marginally long term. Bank stability, stream habitat, and trout habitat suitability indices (HSIs) generally improved significantly at the restored reaches, but key habitat features and trout HSIs did not change or decreased at two of them. Fish communities and trout populations at these two reaches were not positively affected by NCD restorations. Though NCD restorations often had a positive effect on habitat and fish communities, our results show that the initial habitat conditions limit the relative improvements than can be achieved, habitat quality and stability do not necessarily respond in unison, and biotic and abiotic responses cannot always be generalized.

50 CFR 80.126 - How must an agency treat income earned by a subgrantee after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.126 How must an agency treat income earned...

50 CFR 80.126 - How must an agency treat income earned by a subgrantee after the grant period?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Program Income § 80.126 How must an agency treat income earned...

50 CFR 82.3 - Supplementary information and procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... governments these regulations are intended to implement and be read as consistent with Federal Management... standards and procedures set forth therein, and other referenced Federal management circulars, will, to the...

50 CFR 82.3 - Supplementary information and procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE... Federal Management Circular 74-7, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and... noted otherwise. The standards and procedures set forth therein, and other referenced Federal management...

50 CFR 82.3 - Supplementary information and procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE... Federal Management Circular 74-7, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and... noted otherwise. The standards and procedures set forth therein, and other referenced Federal management...

50 CFR 82.3 - Supplementary information and procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... governments these regulations are intended to implement and be read as consistent with Federal Management... standards and procedures set forth therein, and other referenced Federal management circulars, will, to the...

50 CFR 82.3 - Supplementary information and procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... governments these regulations are intended to implement and be read as consistent with Federal Management... standards and procedures set forth therein, and other referenced Federal management circulars, will, to the...

Community-level response of fishes and aquatic macroinvertebrates to stream restoration in a third-order tributary of the Potomac River, USA

USGS Publications Warehouse

Selego, S.M.; Rose, C.L.; Merovich, G.T.; Welsh, S.A.; Anderson, James T.

2012-01-01

Natural stream channel design principles and riparian restoration practices were applied during spring 2010 to an agriculturally impaired reach of the Cacapon River, a tributary of the Potomac River which flows into the Chesapeake Bay. Aquatic macroinvertebrates and fishes were sampled from the restoration reach, two degraded control, and two natural reference reaches prior to, concurrently with, and following restoration (2009 through 2010). Collector filterers and scrapers replaced collector gatherers as the dominant macroinvertebrate functional feeding groups in the restoration reach. Before restoration, based on indices of biotic integrity (IBI), the restoration reach fish and macroinvertebrate communities closely resembled those sampled from the control reaches, and after restoration more closely resembled those from the reference reaches. Although the macroinvertebrate community responded more favorably than the fish community, both communities recovered quickly from the temporary impairment caused by the disturbance of restoration procedures and suggest rapid improvement in local ecological conditions. Copyright ?? 2012 Stephen M. Selego et al.

Community-level response of fishes and aquatic macroinvertebrates to stream restoration in a third-order tributary of the Potomac River, USA

USGS Publications Warehouse

Selego, Stephen M.; Rose, Charnee L.; Merovich, George T.; Welsh, Stuart A.; Anderson, James T.

2012-01-01

Natural stream channel design principles and riparian restoration practices were applied during spring 2010 to an agriculturally impaired reach of the Cacapon River, a tributary of the Potomac River which flows into the Chesapeake Bay. Aquatic macroinvertebrates and fishes were sampled from the restoration reach, two degraded control, and two natural reference reaches prior to, concurrently with, and following restoration (2009 through 2010). Collector filterers and scrapers replaced collector gatherers as the dominant macroinvertebrate functional feeding groups in the restoration reach. Before restoration, based on indices of biotic integrity (IBI), the restoration reach fish and macroinvertebrate communities closely resembled those sampled from the control reaches, and after restoration more closely resembled those from the reference reaches. Although the macroinvertebrate community responded more favorably than the fish community, both communities recovered quickly from the temporary impairment caused by the disturbance of restoration procedures and suggest rapid improvement in local ecological conditions.

Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry

2005-06-01

''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine themore » biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) uses a combination of techniques to collect physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered and threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities designed to restore native fishes and their habitats.« less

Flow Restoration in the Columbia River Basin: An Evaluation of a Flow Restoration Accounting Framework

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

McCoy, Amy L.; Holmes, S. Rankin; Boisjolie, Brett A.

2018-03-01

Securing environmental flows in support of freshwater biodiversity is an evolving field of practice. An example of a large-scale program dedicated to restoring environmental flows is the Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program in the Pacific Northwest region of North America, which has been restoring flows in dewatered tributary habitats for imperiled salmon species over the past decade. This paper discusses a four-tiered flow restoration accounting framework for tracking the implementation and impacts of water transactions as an effective tool for adaptive management. The flow restoration accounting framework provides compliance and flow accounting information to monitor transaction efficacy. We review the implementation of the flow restoration accounting framework monitoring framework to demonstrate (a) the extent of water transactions that have been implemented over the past decade, (b) the volumes of restored flow in meeting flow targets for restoring habitat for anadromous fish species, and (c) an example of aquatic habitat enhancement that resulted from Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program investments. Project results show that from 2002 to 2015, the Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program has completed more than 450 water rights transactions, restoring approximately 1.59 million megaliters to date, with an additional 10.98 million megaliters of flow protected for use over the next 100 years. This has resulted in the watering of over 2414 stream kilometers within the Columbia Basin. We conclude with a discussion of the insights gained through the implementation of the flow restoration accounting framework. Understanding the approach and efficacy of a monitoring framework applied across a large river basin can be informative to emerging flow-restoration and adaptive management efforts in areas of conservation concern.

Flow Restoration in the Columbia River Basin: An Evaluation of a Flow Restoration Accounting Framework.

PubMed

McCoy, Amy L; Holmes, S Rankin; Boisjolie, Brett A

2018-03-01

Securing environmental flows in support of freshwater biodiversity is an evolving field of practice. An example of a large-scale program dedicated to restoring environmental flows is the Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program in the Pacific Northwest region of North America, which has been restoring flows in dewatered tributary habitats for imperiled salmon species over the past decade. This paper discusses a four-tiered flow restoration accounting framework for tracking the implementation and impacts of water transactions as an effective tool for adaptive management. The flow restoration accounting framework provides compliance and flow accounting information to monitor transaction efficacy. We review the implementation of the flow restoration accounting framework monitoring framework to demonstrate (a) the extent of water transactions that have been implemented over the past decade, (b) the volumes of restored flow in meeting flow targets for restoring habitat for anadromous fish species, and (c) an example of aquatic habitat enhancement that resulted from Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program investments. Project results show that from 2002 to 2015, the Columbia Basin Water Transactions Program has completed more than 450 water rights transactions, restoring approximately 1.59 million megaliters to date, with an additional 10.98 million megaliters of flow protected for use over the next 100 years. This has resulted in the watering of over 2414 stream kilometers within the Columbia Basin. We conclude with a discussion of the insights gained through the implementation of the flow restoration accounting framework. Understanding the approach and efficacy of a monitoring framework applied across a large river basin can be informative to emerging flow-restoration and adaptive management efforts in areas of conservation concern.

A scientific basis for restoring fish spawning habitat in the St. Clair and Detroit Rivers of the Laurentian Great Lakes

USGS Publications Warehouse

Manny, Bruce A.; Roseman, Edward F.; Kennedy, Gregory W.; Boase, James C.; Craig, Jaquelyn; Bennion, David H.; Read, Jennifer; Vaccaro, Lynn; Chiotti, Justin A.; Drouin, Richard; Ellison, Roseanne

2015-01-01

Loss of functional habitat in riverine systems is a global fisheries issue. Few studies, however, describe the decision-making approach taken to abate loss of fish spawning habitat. Numerous habitat restoration efforts are underway and documentation of successful restoration techniques for spawning habitat of desirable fish species in large rivers connecting the Laurentian Great Lakes are reported here. In 2003, to compensate for the loss of fish spawning habitat in the St. Clair and Detroit Rivers that connect the Great Lakes Huron and Erie, an international partnership of state, federal, and academic scientists began restoring fish spawning habitat in both of these rivers. Using an adaptive management approach, we created 1,100 m2 of productive fish spawning habitat near Belle Isle in the Detroit River in 2004; 3,300 m2 of fish spawning habitat near Fighting Island in the Detroit River in 2008; and 4,000 m2 of fish spawning habitat in the Middle Channel of the St. Clair River in 2012. Here, we describe the adaptive-feedback management approach that we used to guide our decision making during all phases of spawning habitat restoration, including problem identification, team building, hypothesis development, strategy development, prioritization of physical and biological imperatives, project implementation, habitat construction, monitoring of fish use of the constructed spawning habitats, and communication of research results. Numerous scientific and economic lessons learned from 10 years of planning, building, and assessing fish use of these three fish spawning habitat restoration projects are summarized in this article.

Habitat restoration as a means of controlling non-native fish in a Mojave desert Oasis

USGS Publications Warehouse

Scoppettone, G.G.; Rissler, P.H.; Gourley, C.; Martinez, C.

2005-01-01

Non-native fish generally cause native fish decline, and once non-natives are established, control or elimination is usually problematic. Because non-native fish colonization has been greatest in anthropogenically altered habitats, restoring habitat similar to predisturbance conditions may offer a viable means of non-native fish control. In this investigation we identified habitats favoring native over non-native fish in a Mojave Desert oasis (Ash Meadows) and used this information to restore one of its major warm water spring systems (Kings Pool Spring). Prior to restoration, native fishes predominated in warm water (25-32??C) stream and spring-pool habitat, whereas non-natives predominated in cool water (???23??C) spring-pool and marsh/slack water habitat. Native Amargosa pupfish (Cyprinodon nevadensis) and Ash Meadows speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus nevadensis) inhabited significantly faster mean water column velocities (MWCV) and greater total depth (TD) than non-native Sailfin molly (Poecilia latipinna) and Mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) in warm water stream habitat, and Ash Meadows speckled dace inhabited significantly faster water than non-natives in cool water stream habitat. Modification of the outflow of Kings Pool Spring from marsh to warm water stream, with MWCV, TD, and temperature favoring native fish, changed the fish composition from predominantly non-native Sailfin molly and Mosquitofish to predominantly Ash Meadows pupfish. This result supports the hypothesis that restoring spring systems to a semblance of predisturbance conditions would promote recolonization of native fishes and deter non-native fish invasion and proliferation. ?? 2005 Society for Ecological Restoration International.

50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 84.32 - What are the ranking criteria?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... improvements to the quality of the coastal wetland and associated waters through protection from contaminants... project proposal designed to leverage other ongoing coastal wetlands protection projects in the area, such... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM NATIONAL COASTAL WETLANDS...

50 CFR 82.13 - Ownership of property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... assignment of title and any compensations consistent with the terms of Federal Management Circular 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this part. ...

50 CFR 82.13 - Ownership of property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... assignment of title and any compensations consistent with the terms of Federal Management Circular 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this part. ...

50 CFR 82.13 - Ownership of property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... assignment of title and any compensations consistent with the terms of Federal Management Circular 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this part. ...

50 CFR 86.16 - What are the information collection requirements?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... of information Number ofrespondents* Average time required per response(minutes) Annual burden hours... Management and Budget, Department of Interior, Desk Officer, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. An...

50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 81.3 - Cooperative Agreement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... Project Agreement can be approved for endangered or threatened species projects. A cooperative agreement under § 81.2 must be reconfirmed annually to reflect new laws, species lists, rules and regulations, and...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM CONSERVATION OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED...

50 CFR 80.52 - May an activity be eligible for funding if it is not explicitly eligible in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.52 May an activity be eligible for... Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act or the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act; and (b) The...

50 CFR 80.52 - May an activity be eligible for funding if it is not explicitly eligible in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Eligible Activities § 80.52 May an activity be eligible for... Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act or the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act; and (b) The...

Expanded USGS science in the Chesapeake Bay restoration

USGS Publications Warehouse

Phillips, Scott

2010-01-01

In May 2009, the President issued Executive Order (EO) 13508 for Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration. For the first time since the creation of the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) in 1983, the full weight of the Federal Government will be used to address the challenges facing the Chesapeake Bay. The EO directs the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to expand its efforts and increase leadership to restore the Bay and its watershed. A Federal Leadership Committee (FLC) was established to ensure coordination of Federal activities and consult with states and stakeholders to align restoration efforts.

Assessing freshwater habitat of adult anadromous alewives using multiple approaches

USGS Publications Warehouse

Mather, Martha E.; Frank, Holly J.; Smith, Joseph M.; Cormier, Roxann D.; Muth, Robert M.; Finn, John T.

2012-01-01

After centuries of disturbance, environmental professionals now recognize the need to restore coastal watersheds for native fish and protect the larger ecosystems on which fish and other aquatic biota depend. Anadromous fish species are an important component of coastal ecosystems that are often adversely affected by human activities. Restoring native anadromous fish species is a common focus of both fish and coastal watershed restoration. Yet restoration efforts have met with uneven success, often due to lack of knowledge about habitat availability and use. Using habitat surveys and radio tracking of adult anadromous alewives Alosa pseudoharengus during their spring spawning migration, we illustrate a method for quantifying habitat using multiple approaches and for relating mobile fish distribution to habitat. In the Ipswich River, Massachusetts, measuring habitat units and physical conditions at transects (width, depth, and velocity) provided an ecological basis for the interpretation of landscape patterns of fish distribution. Mapping habitat units allowed us to efficiently census habitat relevant to alewives for the entire 20.6 river kilometers of interest. Our transect data reinforced the results of the habitat unit survey and provided useful, high‐resolution ecological data for restoration efforts. Tagged alewives spent little time in riffle–run habitats and substantial time in pools, although the locations of pool occupancy varied. The insights we provide here can be used to (1) identify preferred habitats into which anadromous fish can be reintroduced in order to maximize fish survival and reproduction and (2) pinpoint habitat types in urgent need of protection or restoration.

50 CFR 86.115 - How should I administer the survey?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... to collect data, which may include telephone, mail, fax, or other inventory means. We do not expect you to use automated, electronic, mechanical, or similar means of information collection. (d) Data...

50 CFR 86.115 - How should I administer the survey?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... to collect data, which may include telephone, mail, fax, or other inventory means. We do not expect you to use automated, electronic, mechanical, or similar means of information collection. (d) Data...

50 CFR 86.115 - How should I administer the survey?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG... to collect data, which may include telephone, mail, fax, or other inventory means. We do not expect you to use automated, electronic, mechanical, or similar means of information collection. (d) Data...

An Index of Ecological Condition Based on Great River Fish Assemblages

EPA Science Inventory

I will be presenting this talk at a workshop titled: Examining biological indicators for the Upper Mississippi River: Applications in Clean Water Act (CWA) and ecosystem restoration programs. This workshop is sponsored by the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association to frame th...

50 CFR 82.13 - Ownership of property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... assignment of title and any compensations consistent with the terms of Federal Management Circular 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this part. ...

50 CFR 82.13 - Ownership of property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR GRANTS-IN-AID... assignment of title and any compensations consistent with the terms of Federal Management Circular 74-7 or other appropriate referenced Federal Management Circulars cited in § 82.3 of this part. ...

50 CFR 82.9 - General information for the Secretary.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES... used by the grantee for the financial management of grant funds, the state laws affecting marine... legally authorized to commit the prospective grantee to expediture of funds. The Secretary may, from time...

Assessment of the White Salmon watershed using the ecosystem diagnosis and treatment model

USGS Publications Warehouse

Allen, Brady; Connolly, Patrick J.

2005-01-01

Salmon habitat models provide managers the ability to identify habitat limitations and prioritize restoration activities. Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment (EDT) has become a widely used tool for salmonid habitat analysis in the Pacific Northwest. The EDT model is a rule-based habitat rating system that provides reach-level diagnosis of habitat conditions for the major salmonid species of the Pacific Northwest. The EDT process itself is a complex modeling program with defined data needs. The program is a product developed by Mobrand Biometrics Incorporated (MBI) largely through funding by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC). The NPCC had provided a free version of the program accessible through a website that required user registration. The EDT model allows the user to rate the quality, quantity, and diversity of fish habitat along a waterway. The model uses diagnostic species such as steelhead and Chinook salmon to identify the most significant limiting factors in a river and to help identify reaches for protection and restoration. The model includes a set of tools to help organize environmental information and rate the habitat elements that pertain to specific life stages of the diagnostic species. A major benefit of EDT is that it can show the potential of a river under current conditions and possible future conditions. The result is a scientifically-based assessment of fish habitat and a prioritization of restoration needs.

77 FR 52344 - Proposed Information Collection; Annual Certification of Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-29

... Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice...-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.) and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration...--Summary of Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued) to certify the number and amount of hunting and...

Fish fauna recovery in a newly re-flooded Mediterranean coastal lagoon

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Koutrakis, Emmanuil; Sylaios, Georgios; Kamidis, Nikolaos; Markou, Dimitrios; Sapounidis, Argyris

2009-08-01

Drana Lagoon, located at the NW site of Evros River Delta, was drained in 1987 and re-flooded in 2004 within the framework of an integrated wetland restoration project. This study presents the results of a monitoring program of the lagoon's oceanographic, water quality and fish fauna characteristics, during the pre- and post-restoration period. Results depict the presence of high salinity water (up to 41) due to seawater intrusion, strong evaporation in its interior and inadequate freshwater inflows. Overall, nutrient levels were low depicting local changes. Tidal variability at the mouth was approximately 0.2 m, producing high velocity tidal currents (up to 0.75 m/s). Eleven fish fauna species were collected; seven species were caught in both the inlet channel and the lagoon during the pre-restoration period and nine species in the post-restoration period. Atherina boyeri (37.6%) and Pomatoschistus marmoratus (31.7%) dominated the lagoon during the post-restoration period. Most of the A. boyeri specimens (88.5%) were caught inside the lagoon, while P. marmoratus had an almost equal distribution in the inlet channel and the lagoon (56.3% and 43.7% respectively). The presence of species of the Mugilidae family (5.2% total average catches after lagoon re-flooding) was mainly in the inlet channel (12.6% of the average catches) and not inside the lagoon (only 1.3% of the average catches). The small number of fish species inhabiting the lagoon might be the result of the recent restoration or it could be related with the increased water flow observed at the lagoon mouth during the flood and ebb tidal phases, and also in the presence of a smooth bank in the concrete waterspout that connects the entrance channel with the lagoon. The limited presence of the Mugilidae juveniles inside the lagoon could be related to the prevailing tidal inlet dynamics (i.e. strong ebb flow at lagoon inlet), thus preventing the species to enter the lagoon. In order to restore the lagoon environment, careful and gradual steps should be undertaken under the basis of continuous monitoring of hydrologic, environmental and fisheries system's status.

Characterizing fish responses to a river restoration over 21 years based on species' traits.

PubMed

Höckendorff, Stefanie; Tonkin, Jonathan D; Haase, Peter; Bunzel-Drüke, Margret; Zimball, Olaf; Scharf, Matthias; Stoll, Stefan

2017-10-01

Understanding restoration effectiveness is often impaired by a lack of high-quality, long-term monitoring data and, to date, few researchers have used species' trait information to gain insight into the processes that drive the reaction of fish communities to restoration. We examined fish-community responses with a highly resolved data set from 21 consecutive years of electrofishing (4 years prerestoration and 17 years postrestoration) at multiple restored and unrestored reaches from a river restoration project on the Lippe River, Germany. Fish abundance peaked in the third year after the restoration; abundance was 6 times higher than before the restoration. After 5-7 years, species richness and abundance stabilized at 2 and 3.5 times higher levels relative to the prerestoration level, respectively. However, interannual variability of species richness and abundance remained considerable, illustrating the challenge of reliably assessing restoration outcomes based on data from individual samplings, especially in the first years following restoration. Life-history and reproduction-related traits best explained differences in species' responses to restoration. Opportunistic short-lived species with early female maturity and multiple spawning runs per year exhibited the strongest increase in abundance, which reflected their ability to rapidly colonize new habitats. These often small-bodied and fusiform fishes typically live in dynamic and ephemeral instream and floodplain areas that river-habitat restorations often aim to create, and in this case their increases in abundance indicated successful restoration. Our results suggest that a greater consideration of species' traits may enhance the causal understanding of community processes and the coupling of restoration to functional ecology. Trait-based assessments of restoration outcomes would furthermore allow for easier transfer of knowledge across biogeographic borders than studies based on taxonomy. © 2017 Society for Conservation Biology.

Columbia River food webs: Developing a broader scientific foundation for river restoration

USGS Publications Warehouse

Alldredge, J. Richard; Beauchamp, David; Bisson, Peter A.; Congleton, James; Henny, Charles; Huntly, Nancy; Lamberson, Roland; Levings, Colin; Naiman, Robert J.; Pearcy, William; Rieman, Bruce; Ruggerone, Greg; Scarnecchia, Dennis; Smouse, Peter; Wood, Chris C.

2011-01-01

The objectives of this report are to provide a fundamental understanding of aquatic food webs in the Columbia River Basin and to illustrate and summarize their influences on native fish restoration efforts. The spatial scope addresses tributaries, impoundments, the free-flowing Columbia and Snake rivers, as well as the estuary and plume. Achieving the Council's vision for the Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Program (NPCC 2009-09) of sustaining a "productive and diverse community" that provides "abundant" harvest, is best accomplished through a time-prioritized action plan, one that complements other approaches while addressing important challenges and uncertainties related to the Basin's food webs. Note that the oceanic food webs, although of immense importance in sustaining fish populations, are not considered beyond the plume since they involve an additional set of complex and rapidly evolving issues. An analysis of oceanic food webs of relevance to the Columbia River requires a separately focused effort (e.g., Hoegh- Guldberg and Bruno 2010).

50 CFR 86.114 - Do I need to conduct a survey if I already have a plan for installing tie-up facilities?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Do I need to conduct a survey if I already have a plan for installing tie-up facilities? 86.114 Section 86.114 Wildlife and Fisheries UNITED... SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT (BIG) PROGRAM How States Will Complete...

Installation Restoration Program. Phase 1: Records Search, Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC), Tennessee

DTIC Science & Technology

1984-10-01

Investigations DET 816 (AFOSI) Volunteer Girl Scouts Boy Scouts, Elk River District U.S. Department of Agriculture Tennessee State Game & Fish Commission...FIGURE 34 oa LU a U. ww COOI w LU z 000 Z00 0 z 3-2. ES NGIEERIG-SCENC S° drain AEDC. Hunt and Huckleberry Creeks drain northward toward the Little ...Investigations DET 816 (AFOSI) Volunteer Girl Scouts Boy Scouts, Elk River District U.S. Department of Agricultrue Tennessee State Game & Fish Commission

Installation Restoration Program Records Search for Mather Air Force Base, California.

DTIC Science & Technology

1982-06-01

Board, Central Valley Region Sacramento, California Mr. Stan Phillippe, Mr. Tom Pinkos, Mr. Bob Matteoli, Ms. Liese Schadt, Mr. Gregory Vaughn 916/ 322 ...Grant Ardell 916/ 322 -7166 7. California Department of Fish and Game Sacramento, California Mr. Jack Linn 916/355-7030 8. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service...34 " A23 " Fire bluea sar.d ... ." ".......443 " S gra vel If additional space is :equired, continue on DWR Form No. 246-Soppement. -ind attach to zesp :sive

South Fork Salmon River Watershed Restoration, 2008-2009 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Reaney, Mark D.

2009-04-15

The watershed restoration work elements within the project area, the South Fork Salmon River Watershed, follow the watershed restoration approach adopted by the Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resource Management (DFRM) - Watershed Division. The vision of the Nez Perce Tribe DFRM-Watershed Division focuses on protecting, restoring, and enhancing watersheds and treaty resources within the ceded territory of the Nez Perce Tribe under the Treaty of 1855 with the United States Federal Government. The program uses a holistic approach, which encompasses entire watersheds, ridge top to ridge top, emphasizing all cultural aspects and strategies that rely on natural fishmore » production and healthy river ecosystems. The Nez Perce Tribe DFRM-Watershed Division strives towards maximizing historic ecosystem productivity and health for the restoration of anadromous and resident fish populations and the habitat on which all depend on for future generations Originally, this project was funded to create a step/pool stream channel that was appropriate to restore fish passage where the 'Glory Hole Cascade' is currently located at the Stibnite Mine. Due to unforeseen circumstances at the time, the project is unable to move forward as planned and a request for a change in scope of the project and an expansion of the geographic area in which to complete project work was submitted. No additional funds were being requested. The ultimate goal of this project is to work with the holistic, ridge top to ridge top approach to protect and restore the ecological and biological functions of the South Fork Salmon River Watershed to assist in the recovery of threatened and endangered anadromous and resident fish species. FY 2008 Work Elements included two aquatic organism passage (AOP) projects to restore habitat connectivity to two fish-bearing tributaries to the East Fork South Fork Salmon River, Salt and Profile Creeks. The Work Elements also included road survey and assessment activities that move toward road decommissioning to reduce sediment delivery to spawning gravels and rearing habitats by reducing sedimentation from road related, man-made sources. For FY08, the project included the design and implementation of two fish barrier replacement structures mentioned above, the Salt and Profile Creek Bridges. These work elements were to be implemented on Valley County easements within the Payette National Forest. The existing culverts are full or partial barriers to most aquatic life species and all juvenile anadromous and resident fish species. Implementation will reconnect 9.34 miles of habitat, and provide natural stream channels to facilitate complete passage for all aquatic life forms. All designs were completed and a construction subcontract was awarded to construct free span, pre-cast concrete bridges. For 2008, the project statement of work also included all the necessary work elements to manage, coordinate, plan, and develop continuing strategies for restoration and protection activities.« less

Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2003-2004 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry

2004-06-01

''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating for damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determinemore » the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana FWP uses a combination of diverse techniques to collect a variety of physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered, threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities intended to restore native fishes and their habitats.« less

Restoring the Great Lakes: DOI stories of success and partnership in implementing the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

USGS Publications Warehouse

,; ,; ,; ,; ,

2013-01-01

The Great Lakes are a monumentally unique national treasure containing nearly ninety-five percent of the United States' fresh surface water. Formed by receding glaciers, the Great Lakes support a thriving, resilient ecosystem rich with fish, wildlife, and abundant natural resources. The Great Lakes also support an array of commercial uses, including shipping, and provide a source of recreation, drinking water, and other critical services that drive the economy of the region and the Nation. Regrettably, activities such as clear cutting of mature forests, over-harvesting of fish populations, industrial pollution, invasive species, and agricultural runoffs have degraded these treasured lakes over the decades creating long-term impacts to the surrounding watershed. Fortunately, the people who live, work, and recreate in the region recognize the critical importance of a healthy Great Lakes ecosystem, and have come together to support comprehensive restoration. To stimulate and promote the goal of a healthy Great Lakes region, President Obama and Congress created the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) in 2009. This program provides the seed money to clean up legacy pollution, restore habitats, protect wildlife, combat invasive species, and address agricultural runoff in the Great Lakes watershed. At the same time GLRI promotes public outreach, education, accountability, and partnerships.

50 CFR 86.118 - What does this survey instrument include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... boat owners. Part B is for trailerable or “car-top” boat owners. Part C is for State agency and non... and non-State providers of access sites for trailerable or “car-top” boats. (b) Follow these...

50 CFR 86.118 - What does this survey instrument include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... boat owners. Part B is for trailerable or “car-top” boat owners. Part C is for State agency and non... and non-State providers of access sites for trailerable or “car-top” boats. (b) Follow these...

50 CFR 86.118 - What does this survey instrument include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... boat owners. Part B is for trailerable or “car-top” boat owners. Part C is for State agency and non... and non-State providers of access sites for trailerable or “car-top” boats. (b) Follow these...

78 FR 29321 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-20

... submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection... Wildlife Service (FWS) and the U.S. Census Bureau conducted (under separate Office of Management and Budget... of 1956 and the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000. The Census...

HABITAT AND WATER QUALITY PROTECTION THROUGH GULLY RESTORATION MX974885

EPA Science Inventory

Weeks Bay is a sub-estuary of Mobile Bay, a Gulf of Mexico Program priority area. Fish River is the main tributary of Weeks Bay and in this watershed gullies have formed due to a combination of soil types, heavy rain events and agricultural practices. This project was completed...

Sustainable exploitation and management of autogenic ecosystem engineers: application to oysters in Chesapeake Bay.

PubMed

Wilberg, Michael J; Wiedenmann, John R; Robinson, Jason M

2013-06-01

Autogenic ecosystem engineers are critically important parts of many marine and estuarine systems because of their substantial effect on ecosystem services. Oysters are of particular importance because of their capacity to modify coastal and estuarine habitats and the highly degraded status of their habitats worldwide. However, models to predict dynamics of ecosystem engineers have not previously included the effects of exploitation. We developed a linked population and habitat model for autogenic ecosystem engineers undergoing exploitation. We parameterized the model to represent eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) in upper Chesapeake Bay by selecting sets of parameter values that matched observed rates of change in abundance and habitat. We used the model to evaluate the effects of a range of management and restoration options including sustainability of historical fishing pressure, effectiveness of a newly enacted sanctuary program, and relative performance of two restoration approaches. In general, autogenic ecosystem engineers are expected to be substantially less resilient to fishing than an equivalent species that does not rely on itself for habitat. Historical fishing mortality rates in upper Chesapeake Bay for oysters were above the levels that would lead to extirpation. Reductions in fishing or closure of the fishery were projected to lead to long-term increases in abundance and habitat. For fisheries to become sustainable outside of sanctuaries, a substantial larval subsidy would be required from oysters within sanctuaries. Restoration efforts using high-relief reefs were predicted to allow recovery within a shorter period of time than low-relief reefs. Models such as ours, that allow for feedbacks between population and habitat dynamics, can be effective tools for guiding management and restoration of autogenic ecosystem engineers.

Identifying Preservation and Restoration Priority Areas for Desert Fishes in an Increasingly Invaded World

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Pool, Thomas K.; Strecker, Angela L.; Olden, Julian D.

2013-03-01

A commonly overlooked aspect of conservation planning assessments is that wildlife managers are increasingly focused on habitats that contain non-native species. We examine this management challenge in the Gila River basin (150,730 km2), and present a new planning strategy for fish conservation. By applying a hierarchical prioritization algorithm to >850,000 fish records in 27,181 sub-watersheds we first identified high priority areas (PAs) termed "preservation PAs" with high native fish richness and low non-native richness; these represent traditional conservation targets. Second, we identified "restoration PAs" with high native fish richness that also contained high numbers of non-native species; these represent less traditional conservation targets. The top 10 % of preservation and restoration PAs contained common native species (e.g., Catostomus clarkii, desert sucker; Catostomus insignis, Sonora sucker) in addition to native species with limited distributions (i.e., Xyrauchen texanus, razorback sucker; Oncorhynchus gilae apache, Apache trout). The top preservation and restoration PAs overlapped by 42 %, indicating areas with high native fish richness range from minimally to highly invaded. Areas exclusively identified as restoration PAs also encompassed a greater percentage of native species ranges than would be expected by the random addition of an equivalent basin area. Restoration PAs identified an additional 19.0 and 26.6 % of the total ranges of two federally endangered species— Meda fulgida (spikedace) and Gila intermedia (Gila chub), respectively, compared to top preservation PAs alone—despite adding only 5.8 % of basin area. We contend that in addition to preservation PAs, restoration PAs are well suited for complementary management activities benefiting native fishes.

Fish movement ecology in high gradient headwater streams: Its relevance to fish passage restoration through stream culvert barriers

USGS Publications Warehouse

Hoffman, Robert L.; Dunham, Jason B.

2007-01-01

Restoration of fish passage through culvert barriers has emerged as a major issue in the Pacific Northwest and nationwide, in part, because of their potential influence on fish movement. Movement is an essential mechanism by which mobile animals acquire the resources necessary for the successful completion of their life-cycles. In this report, we provide a brief review of some essential characteristics of animal movement and examples from a focal group of fishes in Washington State: salmon, trout, and char. We begin by outlining some basic characteristics of animal movement and then apply that foundation to the case of salmonid fishes. Next we consider the consequences of disrupting fish movement with human-constructed barriers, such as culverts. Finally, this body of evidence is summarized, and we propose a short list of what we view as high priority information needs to support more effective restoration of fish passage through culverts.

Cooperative science to inform Lake Ontario management: Research from the 2013 Lake Ontario CSMI program

USGS Publications Warehouse

Watkins, James M.; Weidel, Brian C.; Fisk, Aaron T.; Rudstam, Lars G.

2017-01-01

Since the mid-1970s, successful Lake Ontario management actions including nutrient load and pollution reductions, habitat restoration, and fish stocking have improved Lake Ontario. However, several new obstacles to maintenance and restoration have emerged. This special issue presents management-relevant research from multiple agency surveys in 2011 and 2012 and the 2013 Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative (CSMI), that span diverse lake habitats, species, and trophic levels. This research focused on themes of nutrient loading and fate; vertical dynamics of primary and secondary production; fish abundance and behavior; and food web structure. Together these papers identify the status of many of the key drivers of the Lake Ontario ecosystem and contribute to addressing lake-scale questions and management information needs in Lake Ontario and the other Great Lakes and connecting water bodies.

Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program, 2002-2003 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Myra, D.; Ready, C.

2003-12-01

The Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program (YTAHP) was organized to restore salmonid passage to Yakima tributaries that historically supported salmonids and to improve habitat in areas where access is restored. This program intends to (a) screen unscreened diversion structures to prevent fish entrainment into artificial waterways; (b) provide for fish passage at man-made barriers, such as diversion dams, culverts, siphons and bridges; and (c) provide information and assistance to landowners interested in to contributing to the improvement of water quality, water reliability and stream habitat. The YTAHP developed from a number of groups actively engaged in watershed management, and/ormore » habitat restoration within the Yakima River Basin. These groups include the Washington State Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Kittitas County Conservation District (KCCD), North Yakima Conservation District (NYCD), Kittitas County Water Purveyors (KCWP), and Ahtanum Irrigation District (AID). The US Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and Yakama Nation (YN) both participated in the development of the objectives of YTAHP. Other entities that will be involved during permitting or project review may include the YN, the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and US Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The objectives of YTAHP are listed below and also include subtasks detailed in the report: (1) Conduct Early Action Projects; (2) Review Strategic Plan; (3) Restore Access, including stream inventory, prioritization, implementation; and (4) Provide opportunities to improve habitat and conserve resources. The BPA YTAHP funding supported activities of the program which are described in this report. These activities are primarily related to objective 1 (conduct early action projects) and parts of objectives 2-4. The work supported by YTAHP funding will support a series of scheduled projects and be made larger by complementary funding through NRSC EQIP, Irrigation Efficiencies, WA State Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other local, state and federal programs. Projects completed FY-03: The Cooke Creek siphon and screen/bypass was completed on time and within budget. The Rosbach Farms project was completed in cooperation with the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the KCCD's Irrigation Efficiencies Program. Tributary survey teams were trained and surveys of tributaries in Yakima and Kittitas counties commenced in December of 2002. By the end of September 2003 Cowiche Creek in Yakima County was completed as well as Coleman, Reecer, Currier, Dry, Cabin, Indian, and Jack Creeks in Kittitas County. A screen was installed on the Hernandez/Ringer diversion in cooperation with the NRCS office in Kittitas County. YTAHP submitted six applications to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and three were selected and funded. Another Salmon Recovery Funding Board project awarded in 2000 to the Yakama Nation was transferred to the KCCD. Two miles of fencing of riparian zones on the north fork Ahtanum was completed by the North Yakima Conservation District in cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources and the Ahtanum Irrigation District and funded by US fish and Wildlife as part of YTAHP's outreach partnering. Completion of this year's effort has provided significant inroads to working on the private lands in two counties which will be vital to future efforts by YTAHP and others to protect and enhance Yakima River Basin habitat. 2003 saw the migration of the WEB site from MWH to the Kittitas County Conservation District and can be accessed at www.kccd.net.« less

Identifying preservation and restoration priority areas for desert fishes in an increasingly invaded world.

PubMed

Pool, Thomas K; Strecker, Angela L; Olden, Julian D

2013-03-01

A commonly overlooked aspect of conservation planning assessments is that wildlife managers are increasingly focused on habitats that contain non-native species. We examine this management challenge in the Gila River basin (150,730 km(2)), and present a new planning strategy for fish conservation. By applying a hierarchical prioritization algorithm to >850,000 fish records in 27,181 sub-watersheds we first identified high priority areas (PAs) termed "preservation PAs" with high native fish richness and low non-native richness; these represent traditional conservation targets. Second, we identified "restoration PAs" with high native fish richness that also contained high numbers of non-native species; these represent less traditional conservation targets. The top 10 % of preservation and restoration PAs contained common native species (e.g., Catostomus clarkii, desert sucker; Catostomus insignis, Sonora sucker) in addition to native species with limited distributions (i.e., Xyrauchen texanus, razorback sucker; Oncorhynchus gilae apache, Apache trout). The top preservation and restoration PAs overlapped by 42 %, indicating areas with high native fish richness range from minimally to highly invaded. Areas exclusively identified as restoration PAs also encompassed a greater percentage of native species ranges than would be expected by the random addition of an equivalent basin area. Restoration PAs identified an additional 19.0 and 26.6 % of the total ranges of two federally endangered species-Meda fulgida (spikedace) and Gila intermedia (Gila chub), respectively, compared to top preservation PAs alone-despite adding only 5.8 % of basin area. We contend that in addition to preservation PAs, restoration PAs are well suited for complementary management activities benefiting native fishes.

50 CFR 80.20 - Land control.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Land control. 80.20 Section 80.20 Wildlife... WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS § 80.20 Land control. The State must control lands or waters on which capital improvements are made with Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration...

Coupling systematic planning and expert judgement enhances the efficiency of river restoration.

PubMed

Langhans, Simone D; Gessner, Jörn; Hermoso, Virgilio; Wolter, Christian

2016-08-01

Ineffectiveness of current river restoration practices hinders the achievement of ecological quality targets set by country-specific regulations. Recent advances in river restoration help planning efforts more systematically to reach ecological targets at the least costs. However, such approaches are often desktop-based and overlook real-world constraints. We argue that combining two techniques commonly used in the conservation arena - expert judgement and systematic planning - will deliver cost-effective restoration plans with a high potential for implementation. We tested this idea targeting the restoration of spawning habitat, i.e. gravel bars, for 11 rheophilic fish species along a river system in Germany (Havel-Spree rivers). With a group of local fish experts, we identified the location and extent of potential gravel bars along the rivers and necessary improvements to migration barriers to ensure fish passage. Restoration cost of each gravel bar included the cost of the action itself plus a fraction of the cost necessary to ensure longitudinal connectivity by upgrading or building fish passages located downstream. We set restoration targets according to the EU Water Framework Directive, i.e. relative abundance of 11 fish species in the reference community and optimised a restoration plan by prioritising a subset of restoration sites from the full set of identified sites, using the conservation planning software Marxan. Out of the 66 potential gravel bars, 36 sites which were mainly located in the downstream section of the system were selected, reflecting their cost-effectiveness given that fewer barriers needed intervention. Due to the limited overall number of sites that experts identified as being suitable for restoring spawning habitat, reaching abundance-targets was challenged. We conclude that coupling systematic river restoration planning with expert judgement produces optimised restoration plans that account for on-the-ground implementation constraints. If applied, this approach has a high potential to enhance overall efficiency of future restoration efforts. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

7 CFR 636.8 - The WHIP plan of operations (WPO).

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE LONG TERM CONTRACTING WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVES PROGRAM § 636.8 The WHIP plan of... habitat will be established, improved, protected, enhanced, or restored. The WPO shall be approved by NRCS and address at least one of the following: (1) Fish and wildlife habitat conditions that are of...

50 CFR 86.118 - What does this survey instrument include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... boat owners. Part B is for trailerable or “car-top” boat owners. Part C is for State agency and non... and non-State providers of access sites for trailerable or “car-top” boats. (b) Follow these...

50 CFR 86.118 - What does this survey instrument include?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... THE INTERIOR (CONTINUED) FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM BOATING... boat owners. Part B is for trailerable or “car-top” boat owners. Part C is for State agency and non... and non-State providers of access sites for trailerable or “car-top” boats. (b) Follow these...

Library of Habitat Models to Evaluate Benefits of Aquatic Restoration Projects on Fishes

DTIC Science & Technology

2008-08-01

Memphis ( MVM ) Districts. Particular assistance was provided by Gary Young, Dave Johnson, and Kent Parrish with MVK, and Edward Lambert and Mark Smith...with MVM . POINTS OF CONTACT: For additional information, contact Dr. K. Jack Killgore (601-634- 3397, Jack.Killgore@usace.army.mil) or the Program

Albeni Falls Wildlife Mitigation Project; Idaho Department of Fish and Game 2007 Final Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Cousins, Katherine

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game maintained a total of about 2,743 acres of wildlife mitigation habitat in 2007, and protected another 921 acres. The total wildlife habitat mitigation debt has been reduced by approximately two percent (598.22 HU) through the Department's mitigation activities in 2007. Implementation of the vegetative monitoring and evaluation program continued across protected lands. For the next funding cycle, the IDFG is considering a package of restoration projects and habitat improvements, conservation easements, and land acquisitions in the project area.

Assessment of general health of fishes collected at selected sites in the Great Lakes Basin In 2012

USGS Publications Warehouse

Mazik, Patricia M.; Braham, Ryan P.; Hahn, Cassidy M.; Blazer, Vicki

2015-01-01

The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service received funding through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) for an Early Warning Program to detect and identify emerging contaminants and to evaluate the effects of these contaminants on fish and wildlife. The U.S. Geological Survey (WV Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and National Fish Health Research Laboratory, Leetown Science Center) developed and implemented a biological effects monitoring protocol to assist in this program. Fish collections and measurements of biomarkers of exposure in Fall 2010 and Spring 2011 occurred at individual sites within select Areas of Concern (AOCs). They provided an assessment of the utility of the suite of biomarkers and also identified sites for more in-depth analyses. Selected areas are characterized as areas with known emerging contaminants, sensitive or listed species, areas downstream from municipal wastewater discharges or receiving waters for industrial facilities, and/or areas susceptible to agricultural or urban contamination, or harbors or ports. The results of the 2010- 2011 studies were summarized in Blazer et al. 2014 a, b, c; Braham et al. in review and Blazer et al. in review.

Importance of floodplain connectivity to fish populations in the Apalachicola River, Florida

USGS Publications Warehouse

Burgess, O.T.; Pine, William E.; Walsh, S.J.

2013-01-01

Floodplain habitats provide critical spawning and rearing habitats for many large-river fishes. The paradigm that floodplains are essential habitats is often a key reason for restoring altered rivers to natural flow regimes. However, few studies have documented spatial and temporal utilization of floodplain habitats by adult fish of sport or commercial management interest or assessed obligatory access to floodplain habitats for species' persistence. In this study, we applied telemetry techniques to examine adult fish movements between floodplain and mainstem habitats, paired with intensive light trap sampling of larval fish in these same habitats, to assess the relationships between riverine flows and fish movement and spawning patterns in restored and unmodified floodplain distributaries of the Apalachicola River, Florida. Our intent is to inform resource managers on the relationships between the timing, magnitude and duration of flow events and fish spawning as part of river management actions. Our results demonstrate spawning by all study species in floodplain and mainstem river habitat types, apparent migratory movements of some species between these habitats, and distinct spawning events for each study species on the basis of fish movement patterns and light trap catches. Additionally, Micropterus spp., Lepomis spp. and, to a lesser degree, Minytrema melanops used floodplain channel habitat that was experimentally reconnected to the mainstem within a few weeks of completing the restoration. This result is of interest to managers assessing restoration activities to reconnect these habitats as part of riverine restoration programmes globally.

Information to support to monitoring and habitat restoration on Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge

USGS Publications Warehouse

Scoppettone, G. Gary

2013-01-01

The Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge staff focuses on improving habitat for the highest incidence of endemic species for an area of its size in the continental United States. Attempts are being made to restore habitat to some semblance of its pre-anthropogenic undisturbed condition, and to provide habitat conditions to which native plant and animal species have evolved. Unfortunately, restoring the Ash Meadows’ Oases to its pre-anthropogenic undisturbed condition is almost impossible. First, there are constraints on water manipulation because there are private holdings within the refuge boundary; second, there has been at least one species extinction—the Ash Meadows pool fish (Empetrichthys merriami). It is also quite possible that thermal endemic invertebrate species were lost before ever being described. Perhaps the primary obstacle to restoring Ash Meadows to its pre-anthropogenic undisturbed conditions is the presence of invasive species. However, invasive species, such as red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarki) and western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), are a primary driving force in restoring Ash Meadows’ spring systems, because under certain habitat conditions they can all but replace native species. Returning Ash Meadows’ physical landscape to some semblance of its pre-anthropogenic undisturbed condition through natural processes may take decades. Meanwhile, the natural dissolution of concrete and earthen irrigation channels threatens to allow cattail marshes to flourish instead of spring-brooks immediately downstream of spring discharge. This successional stage favors non-native crayfish and mosquitofish over the native Amargosa pupfish (Cyprinodon nevadensis). Thus, restoration is needed to control non-natives and to promote native species, and without such intervention the probability of native fish reduction or loss, is anticipated. The four studies in this report are intended to provide information for restoring native fish habitat and for monitoring native fish populations in relation to restoration efforts on the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge. There are no precise records on conditions of each of the spring systems prior to anthropogenic alteration; however, fostering conditions that favor native over non-natives will be key to habitat restoration. Information regarding native species carbon source is needed to create habitat that favors native species, thus habitat restoration fostering food stuff consumed by native species should be considered in restoration efforts. In compiling data for the first part of this report, we tracked carbon source for native and non-native species at four stations along the Jackrabbit Spring system. Thus, we were able to contrast carbon source in warm- and cool-water habitats. Habitat in Jackrabbit Spring was improved for native fishes in 2007. The second paper in this report focuses on native fish populations in Jackrabbit Spring system pre- and post-restoration. Much of the Ash Meadows Oases is marsh habitat where non-native red swamp crayfish and western mosquitofish are often abundant, to the detriment of non-natives. Because marsh habitat is broadly represented in the Ash Meadows landscape, establishing marsh habitat most conducive to the native fishes is important to the restoration effort, and the third paper addresses marsh habitat type with the relative abundance of fishes and crayfish. There are previous years of monitoring Ash Meadows’ native fish populations, but not all monitoring occurred at the same time of year. Desert-fish populations sometimes undergo seasonal fluctuation, so it might not be valid to compare population trends using difference seasons. For report four, we tracked a closed population of Amargosa pupfish (Cyprinodon nevadensis) year round to track seasonal trends. Knowledge of seasonal trends is important in tracking changes of populations pre- and post-restoration.

Response of fish populations to natural channel design restoration in streams of the Catskill Mountains, New York

USGS Publications Warehouse

Baldigo, Barry P.; Warren, D.R.; Ernst, A.G.; Mulvihill, C.I.

2008-01-01

Many streams and rivers throughout North America have been extensively straightened, widened, and hardened since the middle 1800s, but related effects on aquatic ecosystems have seldom been monitored, described, or published. Beginning in the early 1990s, reach-level restoration efforts began to base projects on natural channel design (NCD) techniques and Rosgen's (1994b, 1996) river classification system in an effort to duplicate or mimic stable reference reach geomorphology. Four reaches in three streams of the Catskill Mountains, New York, were restored from 2000 to 2002 using NCD techniques to decrease bed and bank erosion rates, decrease sediment loads, and improve water quality. The effects of restoration on the health of fish assemblages were assessed through a before-after, control-impact (BACI) study design to quantify the net changes in population and community indices at treatment reaches relative to index changes at unaltered reference reaches from 1999 to 2004. After restoration, community richness and biomass at treatment reaches increased by more than one-third. Changes in fish communities were caused mainly by shifts in dominant species populations; fish community biomass and total fish abundance were generally dominated by daces or daces and sculpins before restoration and by one or more salmonid species after restoration. Density and biomass of eastern blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus, longnose dace R. cataractae, and slimy sculpin Cottus cognatus did not change appreciably, whereas net salmonid density and biomass increased substantially after restoration. These changes were driven primarily by large increases in populations of brown trout Salmo trutta. The findings demonstrate that the structure, function, and ultimately the health of resident fish populations and communities can be improved, at least over the short term, through NCD restoration in perturbed streams of the Catskill Mountains. ?? Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2008.

Endangered river fish: factors hindering conservation and restoration

USGS Publications Warehouse

Cooke, Steven J.; Paukert, Craig P.; Hogan, Zeb

2012-01-01

Globally, riverine fish face many anthropogenic threats including riparian and flood plain habitat degradation, altered hydrology, migration barriers, fisheries exploitation, environmental (climate) change, and introduction of invasive species. Collectively, these threats have made riverine fishes some of the most threatened taxa on the planet. Although much effort has been devoted to identifying the threats faced by river fish, there has been less effort devoted to identifying the factors that may hinder our ability to conserve and restore river fish populations and their watersheds. Therefore, we focus our efforts on identifying and discussing 10 general factors (can also be viewed as research and implementation needs) that constrain or hinder effective conservation action for endangered river fish: (1) limited basic natural history information; (2) limited appreciation for the scale/extent of migrations and the level of connectivity needed to sustain populations; (3) limited understanding of fish/river-flow relationships; (4) limited understanding of the seasonal aspects of river fish biology, particularly during winter and/or wet seasons; (5) challenges in predicting the response of river fish and river ecosystems to both environmental change and various restoration or management actions; (6) limited understanding of the ecosystem services provided by river fish; (7) the inherent difficulty in studying river fish; (8) limited understanding of the human dimension of river fish conservation and management; (9) limitations of single species approaches that often fail to address the broader-scale problems; and (10) limited effectiveness of governance structures that address endangered river fish populations and rivers that cross multiple jurisdictions. We suggest that these issues may need to be addressed to help protect, restore, or conserve river fish globally, particularly those that are endangered.

CTUIR Grande Ronde River Watershed Restoration Program McCoy Creek/McIntyre Creek Road Crossing, 1995-1999 Progress Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Childs, Allen B.

2000-08-01

The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) entered into a contract agreement beginning in 1996 to fund watershed restoration and enhancement actions and contribute to recovery of fish and wildlife resources and water quality in the Grande Ronde River Basin. The CTUIR's habitat program is closely coordinated with the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program and multiple agencies and organizations within the basin. The CTUIR has focused during the past 4 years in the upper portions of the Grande Ronde Subbasin (upstream of LaGrande, Oregon) on several major project areas in the Meadow, McCoy,more » and McIntyre Creek watersheds and along the mainstem Grande Ronde River. This Annual Report provides an overview of individual projects and accomplishments.« less

50 CFR 80.2 - What terms do I need to know?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

..., PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.2 What...-669k), and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of August 9, 1950, as amended (16 U.S.C. 777... United States, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the territories of...

50 CFR 80.2 - What terms do I need to know?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

..., PITTMAN-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.2 What...-669k), and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of August 9, 1950, as amended (16 U.S.C. 777... United States, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the territories of...

50 CFR 80.2 - What terms do I need to know?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...-ROBERTSON WILDLIFE RESTORATION AND DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS General § 80.2 What terms do...), and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of August 9, 1950, as amended (16 U.S.C. 777-777n... United States, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, and the territories of...

Egg deposition by lithophilic-spawning fishes in the Detroit and Saint Clair Rivers, 2005–14

USGS Publications Warehouse

Prichard, Carson G.; Craig, Jaquelyn M.; Roseman, Edward F.; Fischer, Jason L.; Manny, Bruce A.; Kennedy, Gregory W.

2017-03-14

A long-term, multiseason, fish egg sampling program conducted annually on the Detroit (2005–14) and Saint Clair (2010–14) Rivers was summarized to identify where productive fish spawning habitat currently exists. Egg mats were placed on the river bottom during the spring and fall at historic spawning areas and candidate fish spawning habitat restoration sites throughout both rivers. Widespread evidence was found of lithophilic spawning by numerous native fish species, including walleye (Sander vitreus), lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis), lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens), suckers (Catostomidae spp.), and trout-perch (Percopsis omiscomaycus). Walleye, lake whitefish, and suckers spp. spawned in nearly every region of each river in all years on both reef and nonreef substrates. Lake sturgeon eggs were collected almost exclusively over constructed reefs. Catch-per-unit effort of walleye, lake whitefish, and sucker eggs was much greater in the Detroit River than in the Saint Clair River, while Saint Clair River sites supported the greatest collections of lake sturgeon eggs. Collections during this study of lake sturgeon eggs on man-made spawning reefs suggest that artificial reefs may be an effective tool for restoring fish populations in the Detroit and Saint Clair Rivers; however, the quick response of lake sturgeon to spawn on newly constructed reefs and the fact that walleye, lake whitefish, and sucker eggs were often collected over substrate with little interstitial space to protect eggs from siltation and predators suggests that lack of suitable spawning habitat may continue to limit reproduction of lithophilic-spawning fish species in the Saint Clair-Detroit River System.

Response of fish population dynamics to mitigation activities in a large regulated river

USGS Publications Warehouse

Watkins, Carson J.; Ross, Tyler J.; Quist, Michael C.; Hardy, Ryan S.

2017-01-01

Extensive water development in large rivers has precipitated many negative ecological effects on native fish populations. Mitigation for such development often focuses on restoring biological integrity through remediation of the physical and chemical properties of regulated rivers. However, evaluating and defining the success of those programs can be difficult. We modeled the influence of mitigation-related environmental factors on growth and recruitment of two ecologically important native fish species (Largescale Sucker Catostomus macrocheilus and Mountain Whitefish Prosopium williamsoni) in the Kootenai River, Idaho. Artificial nutrient (phosphorus) addition best predicted the variability in annual growth of both species. Nutrient addition was positively related to Largescale Sucker growth but negatively related to Mountain Whitefish growth. The best model explained 82% of the annual variability in incremental growth for Largescale Suckers and 61% of the annual variability for Mountain Whitefish. Year-class strength of Largescale Suckers was not closely related to any of the environmental variables evaluated; however, year-class strength of Mountain Whitefish was closely associated with nutrient addition, discharge, and temperature. Most research has focused on biotic assemblages to evaluate the effects of mitigation activities on fishes, but there is an increased need to identify the influence of rehabilitation activities on fish population dynamics within those assemblages. Here, we demonstrate how fish growth can serve as an indicator of rehabilitation success in a highly regulated large river. Future fish restoration projects can likely benefit from a change in scope and from consideration of an evaluation framework involving the response of population rate functions to mitigation.

76 FR 22724 - Draft Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (PEIS/R) and Public...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-22

... (Restoration Goal); and (2) to reduce or avoid adverse water supply impacts to all of the Friant Division long... populations of salmon and other fish. Water Management Goal--To reduce or avoid adverse water supply impacts... Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) have prepared a joint Draft...

2010-2015 Juvenile fish ecology in the Nisqually River Delta and Nisqually Reach Aquatic Reserve

USGS Publications Warehouse

Hodgson, Sayre; Ellings, Christopher S.; Rubin, Steve P.; Hayes, Michael C.; Duval, Walker; Grossman, Eric E.

2017-01-01

The return of tidal inundation to over 750 acres of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Billy Frank Jr. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge (NNWR) in fall of 2009 was the crowning moment in the effort to protect and restore the Nisqually Delta. The Nisqually NWR project complemented three earlier restoration projects completed by the Nisqually Indian Tribe (Tribe) on tribal property to restore over 900 acres of the estuary, representing the largest estuary restoration project in the Pacific Northwest and one of the most significant advances to date towards the recovery of Puget Sound (USFWS 2005). In 2011 the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WADNR established the over 14000 acre Nisqually Reach Aquatic Reserve (Reserve), complementing the protection and restoration successes in the Nisqually Delta. The Reserve includes all state-owned aquatic lands around Anderson, Ketron and Eagle islands and part of McNeil Island (Figure 1, WDNR 2011). The Reserve also includes a diverse assemblage of nearshore and offshore habitats important to resident and migratory fish including federal endangered species act listed fish like Chinook salmon (Oncorynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead (O. mykiss). Studies in the Nisqually Estuary (Ellings and Hodgson 2007, David et al. 2014, Ellings et al. 2016) and South Puget Sound (Duffy 2003) have summarized fish use of the area. However, the fish ecology of the reserve had not been systematically surveyed. The Tribe, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NNWR, Nisqually River Foundation (NRF), and others are currently conducting a multi-year, interdisciplinary, hypothesis-based research and monitoring study investigating the impact of delta restoration on estuarine processes, habitat structures, and functions. Our interdisciplinary monitoring framework enables us to link key estuarine processes with habitat development and biological response at multiple scales across the restored footprint, reference marshes, and throughout the Nisqually Reach. Key research components include hydrology and sediment regime, channel and marsh topography and development, vegetation colonization, and invertebrate, bird, and fish abundance, habitat use, and foraging ecology. After the Reserve was established, the WDNR and the research partnership led by the Tribe expanded the existing delta fish ecology assessment to include sampling stations throughout the Reserve. The results of the Reserve fish ecology assessment provide a unique regional analysis of fish ecology from the Nisqually River to McNeil Island.

Assessing Potential Conservation and Restoration Areas of Freshwater Fish Fauna in the Indian River Basins

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Bhatt, Jay P.; Manish, Kumar; Mehta, Rajender; Pandit, Maharaj K.

2016-05-01

Conservation efforts globally are skewed toward terrestrial ecosystems. To date, conservation of aquatic ecosystems, in particular fish fauna, is largely neglected. We provide a country-wide assessment of Indian river ecosystems in order to identify and prioritize areas for protection and restoration of freshwater fish fauna. Using various biodiversity and anthropogenic attributes, coupled with tools of ecological modeling, we delineated areas for fish fauna conservation and restoration in the 20 major river basins of India. To do this, we used prioritization analyses and reserve selection algorithms to derive conservation value index (CVI) and vulnerability index (VI) of the river basins. CVI was estimated using endemicity, rarity, conservation value, and taxonomic singularity, while VI was estimated using a disturbance index derived from percent geographic area of the basin under human settlements, human population density, predominant land use, and total number of exotic fish species in each basin. The two indices, CVI and VI, were converted into geo-referenced maps, and each map was super-imposed onto species richness and forest cover maps, respectively. After superimposition, areas with high CVI and low VI shade intensities were delineated for conservation, while areas with high CVI and high VI shade intensities were demarcated for restoration. In view of the importance of freshwater fish for human livelihoods and consumption, and ecosystems of India's rivers, we call for urgent attention to the conservation of their fish fauna along with restoration of their degraded habitats.

Assessing Potential Conservation and Restoration Areas of Freshwater Fish Fauna in the Indian River Basins.

PubMed

Bhatt, Jay P; Manish, Kumar; Mehta, Rajender; Pandit, Maharaj K

2016-05-01

Conservation efforts globally are skewed toward terrestrial ecosystems. To date, conservation of aquatic ecosystems, in particular fish fauna, is largely neglected. We provide a country-wide assessment of Indian river ecosystems in order to identify and prioritize areas for protection and restoration of freshwater fish fauna. Using various biodiversity and anthropogenic attributes, coupled with tools of ecological modeling, we delineated areas for fish fauna conservation and restoration in the 20 major river basins of India. To do this, we used prioritization analyses and reserve selection algorithms to derive conservation value index (CVI) and vulnerability index (VI) of the river basins. CVI was estimated using endemicity, rarity, conservation value, and taxonomic singularity, while VI was estimated using a disturbance index derived from percent geographic area of the basin under human settlements, human population density, predominant land use, and total number of exotic fish species in each basin. The two indices, CVI and VI, were converted into geo-referenced maps, and each map was super-imposed onto species richness and forest cover maps, respectively. After superimposition, areas with high CVI and low VI shade intensities were delineated for conservation, while areas with high CVI and high VI shade intensities were demarcated for restoration. In view of the importance of freshwater fish for human livelihoods and consumption, and ecosystems of India's rivers, we call for urgent attention to the conservation of their fish fauna along with restoration of their degraded habitats.

Possibilities of the fish pass restoration

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Čubanová, Lea

2018-03-01

According to the new elaborated methodology of the Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic: Identification of the appropriate fish pass types according to water body typology (2015) each barrier on the river must be passable. On the barriers or structures without fish passes new ones should be design and built and on some water structures with existed but nonfunctional fish passes must be realized reconstruction or restoration of such objects. Assessment should be done in terms of the existing migratory fish fauna and hydraulic conditions. Fish fauna requirements resulting from the ichthyological research of the river section with barrier. Hydraulic conditions must than fulfil these requirements inside the fish pass body.

50 CFR 80.65 - Does an agency have to allocate funds between marine and freshwater fisheries projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Allocation of Funds by an Agency § 80.65 Does an agency have... and wildlife agency must equitably allocate the funds apportioned under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... fisheries. (a) The subprograms authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act do not have to...

50 CFR 80.65 - Does an agency have to allocate funds between marine and freshwater fisheries projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Allocation of Funds by an Agency § 80.65 Does an agency have... and wildlife agency must equitably allocate the funds apportioned under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... fisheries. (a) The subprograms authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act do not have to...

50 CFR 80.65 - Does an agency have to allocate funds between marine and freshwater fisheries projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Allocation of Funds by an Agency § 80.65 Does an agency have... and wildlife agency must equitably allocate the funds apportioned under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... fisheries. (a) The subprograms authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act do not have to...

50 CFR 80.65 - Does an agency have to allocate funds between marine and freshwater fisheries projects?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACTS Allocation of Funds by an Agency § 80.65 Does an agency have... and wildlife agency must equitably allocate the funds apportioned under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish... fisheries. (a) The subprograms authorized by the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act do not have to...

78 FR 755 - Information Collection Request Sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-04

... and Budget (OMB) for Approval; Annual Certification of Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued... Hunting and Sport Fishing Licenses Issued, 50 CFR 80, Subpart D. Service Form Number(s): 3-154a and 3-154b...-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 669 et seq.) and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration...

Restoration of fillet n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid is improved by a modified fish oil finishing diet strategy for atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) smolts fed palm fatty acid distillate.

PubMed

Codabaccus, Mohamed B; Bridle, Andrew R; Nichols, Peter D; Carter, Chris G

2012-01-11

Reducing the lipid content in fish prior to feeding a fish oil finishing diet (FOFD) has the potential to improve n-3 long-chain (≥ C(20)) polyunsaturated fatty acid (LC-PUFA) restoration. This study had two main objectives: (1) determine whether feeding Atlantic salmon smolt a 75% palm fatty acid distillate diet (75PFAD) improves the apparent digestibility (AD) of saturated fatty acids (SFA) and (2) examine whether a food deprivation period after growth on 75PFAD leads to higher n-3 LC-PUFA restoration in the fillet when applying a FOFD. The AD of SFA was higher for 75PFAD compared to that of a fish oil (FO) diet. The relative level (as % total fatty acids (FA)) of n-3 LC-PUFA was higher in unfed fish compared to that in continuously fed fish after 21 and 28 day FOFD periods, respectively. Our results suggest that a food deprivation period prior to feeding a FOFD improves the efficiency of n-3 LC-PUFA restoration in the fillet of Atlantic salmon smolt.

The Influence of Angler Values, Involvement, Catch Orientation, Satisfaction, Agency Trust, and Demographics on Support for Habitat Protection and Restoration Versus Stocking in Publicly Managed Waters.

PubMed

Schroeder, Susan A; Fulton, David C; Altena, Eric; Baird, Heather; Dieterman, Douglas; Jennings, Martin

2018-05-23

Resource managers benefit from knowledge of angler support for fisheries management strategies. Factors including angler values (protection, utilitarian, and dominance), involvement (attraction, centrality, social, identity affirmation, and expression), catch-related motivations (catching some, many, and big fish, and keeping fish), satisfaction, agency trust, and demographics may relate to fisheries management preferences. Using results from a mail survey of Minnesota resident anglers, we explored how these factors were related to budget support for fish stocking relative to habitat protection/restoration. Results suggest that values, angler involvement, catch orientation, satisfaction, total and recent years fishing, age, and education influence relative support for stocking versus habitat protection/restoration. Utilitarian values, angling centrality, an orientation to catch many fish, satisfaction with the number of fish caught, number of recent years fishing, and age positively related to support for stocking over habitat management, while protection values, attraction to angling, total years fishing, and education level were negatively related to relative support for stocking.

Detecting the response of fish assemblages to stream restoration: Effects of different sampling designsf

USGS Publications Warehouse

Baldigo, Barry P.; Warren, D.R.

2008-01-01

Increased trout production within limited stream reaches is a popular goal for restoration projects, yet investigators seldom monitor, assess, or publish the associated effects on fish assemblages. Fish community data from a total of 40 surveys at restored and reference reaches in three streams of the Catskill Mountains, New York, were analyzed a posteriori to determine how the ability to detect significant changes in biomass of brown trout Salmo trutta, all salmonids, or the entire fish community differs with effect size, number of streams assessed, process used to quantify the index response, and number of replicates collected before and after restoration. Analyses of statistical power (probability of detecting a meaningful difference or effect) and integrated power (average power over all possible ??-values) were combined with before-after, control-impact analyses to assess the effectiveness of alternate sampling and analysis designs. In general, the more robust analyses indicated that biomass of brown trout and salmonid populations increased significantly in restored reaches but that the net increases (relative to the reference reach) were significant only at two of four restored reaches. Restoration alone could not account for the net increases in total biomass of fish communities. Power analyses generally showed that integrated power was greater than 0.95 when (1) biomass increases were larger than 5.0 g/m2, (2) the total number of replicates ranged from 4 to 8, and (3) coefficients of variation (CVs) for responses were less than 40%. Integrated power was often greater than 0.95 for responses as low as 1.0 g/m2 if the response CVs were less than 30%. Considering that brown trout, salmonid, and community biomass increased by 2.99 g/m2 on average (SD= 1.17 g/m2) in the four restored reaches, use of two to three replicates both before and after restoration would have an integrated power of about 0.95 and would help detect significant changes in fish biomass under similar situations. ?? Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2008.

Evaluating the effectiveness of restoring longitudinal connectivity for stream fish communities: towards a more holistic approach.

PubMed

Tummers, Jeroen S; Hudson, Steve; Lucas, Martyn C

2016-11-01

A more holistic approach towards testing longitudinal connectivity restoration is needed in order to establish that intended ecological functions of such restoration are achieved. We illustrate the use of a multi-method scheme to evaluate the effectiveness of 'nature-like' connectivity restoration for stream fish communities in the River Deerness, NE England. Electric-fishing, capture-mark-recapture, PIT telemetry and radio-telemetry were used to measure fish community composition, dispersal, fishway efficiency and upstream migration respectively. For measuring passage and dispersal, our rationale was to evaluate a wide size range of strong swimmers (exemplified by brown trout Salmo trutta) and weak swimmers (exemplified by bullhead Cottus perifretum) in situ in the stream ecosystem. Radio-tracking of adult trout during the spawning migration showed that passage efficiency at each of five connectivity-restored sites was 81.3-100%. Unaltered (experimental control) structures on the migration route had a bottle-neck effect on upstream migration, especially during low flows. However, even during low flows, displaced PIT tagged juvenile trout (total n=153) exhibited a passage efficiency of 70.1-93.1% at two nature-like passes. In mark-recapture experiments juvenile brown trout and bullhead tagged (total n=5303) succeeded in dispersing upstream more often at most structures following obstacle modification, but not at the two control sites, based on a Laplace kernel modelling approach of observed dispersal distance and barrier traverses. Medium-term post-restoration data (2-3years) showed that the fish assemblage remained similar at five of six connectivity-restored sites and two control sites, but at one connectivity-restored headwater site previously inhabited by trout only, three native non-salmonid species colonized. We conclude that stream habitat reconnection should support free movement of a wide range of species and life stages, wherever retention of such obstacles is not needed to manage non-native invasive species. Evaluation of the effectiveness of fish community restoration in degraded streams benefits from a similarly holistic approach. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Protocols for long-term monitoring of seabird ecology in the Gulf of Alaska

USGS Publications Warehouse

Piatt, John F.; Byrd, G. Vernon; Harding, Ann M.A.; Kettle, Arthur B.; Kitaysky, Sasha; Litzow, Michael A.; Roseneau, David G.; Shultz, Michael T.; van Pelt, Thomas I.

2003-01-01

Seabird populations will need to be monitored for many years to assess both recovery and ecological conditions affecting recovery. Detailed studies of individual seabird colonies and marine ecosystems in the Gulf of Alaska have been conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the auspices of damage assessment and restoration programs of the Trustee Council. Much has been learned about factors influencing seabird populations and their capacity to recover from the spill in the Gulf of Alaska. As the restoration program moves toward long-term monitoring of populations, however, protocols and long-term monitoring strategies that focus on key parameters of interest and that are inexpensive, practical, and applicable over a large geographic area need to be developed.

The Adopt-a-Herring program as a fisheries conservation tool

USGS Publications Warehouse

Frank, Holly J.; Mather, Martha E.; Muth, Robert M.; Pautzke, Sarah M.; Smith, Joseph M.; Finn, John T.

2009-01-01

Successful conservation depends on a scientifically literate public. We developed the adopt-a-Herring program to educate nonscientists about fisheries and watershed restoration. this interactive educational and outreach project encouraged coastal residents to be involved in local watershed restoration. In the northeastern United States, river herring (Alosa spp.) are an important component of many coastal watersheds and often are the object of conservation efforts. In order to understand river herring spawning behavior and to improve the effectiveness of restoration efforts, our research tracked these fish via radiotelemetry in the Ipswich River, Massachusetts. In our adopt-a-Herring Program, participating stakeholder organizations adopted and named individual tagged river herring and followed their movements online. We also made information available to our adopters on our larger research goals, the mission and activities of other research and management agencies, examples of human actions that adversely affect watersheds, and opportunities for proactive conservation. Research results were communicated to adopters through our project web page and end-of-the-season summary presentations. Both tools cultivated a personal interest in river herring, stimulated discussion about fisheries and watershed restoration, educated participants about the goals and methods of scientists in general, and initiated critical thinking about human activities that advance or impede sustainability.

Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program : Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery

1996-06-01

Bonneville Power Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Nez Perce Tribe propose a supplementation program to restore chinook salmon to the Clearwater River Subbasin in Idaho. The Clearwater River is a tributary to the Snake River, which empties into the Columbia River. The Nez Perce Tribe would build and operate two central incubation and rearing hatcheries and six satellite facilities. Spring, summer and fall chinook salmon would be reared and acclimated to different areas in the Subbasin and released at the hatchery and satellite sites or in other watercourses throughout the Subbasin. The supplementation program differs from other hatcherymore » programs because the fish would be released at different sizes and would return to reproduce naturally in the areas where they are released. Several environmental issues were identified during scoping: the possibility that the project would fail if mainstem Columbia River juvenile and adult passage problems are not solved; genetic risks to fish listed as endangered or threatened; potential impacts to wild and resident fish stocks because of increase competition for food and space; and water quality. The Proposed Action would affect several important aspects of Nez Perce tribal life, primarily salmon harvest, employment, and fisheries management.« less

Landscape ecology of the Upper Mississippi River System: Lessons learned, challenges and opportunities

USGS Publications Warehouse

DeJager, Nathan R.

2016-03-22

The Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) is a mosaic of river channels, backwater lakes, floodplain forests, and emergent marshes. This complex mosaic supports diverse aquatic and terrestrial plant communities, over 150 fish species; 40 freshwater mussel species; 50 amphibian and reptile species; and over 360 bird species, many of which use the UMRS as a critical migratory route. The river and floodplain are also hotspots for biogeochemical activity as the river-floodplain collects and processes nutrients derived from the UMR basin. These features qualify the UMRS as a Ramsar wetland of international significance.Two centuries of land-use change, including construction for navigation and conversion of large areas to agriculture, has altered the broad-scale structure of the river and changed local environmental conditions in many areas. Such changes have affected rates of nutrient processing and transport, as well as the abundance of various fish, mussel, plant, and bird species. However, the magnitude and spatial scale of these effects are not well quantified, especially in regards to the best methods and locations for restoring various aspects of the river ecosystem.The U.S. Congress declared the navigable portions of the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) a “nationally significant ecosystem and nationally significant commercial navigation system” in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662) and launched the Upper Mississippi River Restoration (UMRR) Program, the first comprehensive program for ecosystem restoration, monitoring, and research on a large river system. This fact sheet focuses on landscape ecological studies conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey to support decision making by the UMRR with respect to ecosystem restoration.

Application of restoration scenarios to basin-scale demographics of coho salmon inferred from pit-tags

EPA Science Inventory

Effective habitat restoration planning requires correctly anticipating demographic responses to altered habitats. New applications of Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tag technology to fish-habitat research have provided critical insights into fish movement, growth, and surv...

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery, 1996 Technical Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Steward, Cleveland R.

1996-08-01

The Nez Perce Tribe has proposed to build and operate the Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery (NPTH) in the Clearwater River subbasin of Idaho for the purpose of restoring self-sustaining populations of spring, summer, and fall chinook salmon to their native habitats. The project comprises a combination of incubation and rearing facilities, satellite rearing facilities, juvenile and adult collection sites, and associated production and harvest management activities. As currently conceived, the NPTH program will produce approximately 768,000 spring chinook parr, 800,000 summer chinook fry, and 2,000,000 fall chinook fry on an annual basis. Hatchery fish would be spawned, reared, and releasedmore » under conditions that promote wild-type characteristics, minimize genetic changes in both hatchery and wild chinook populations, and minimize undesirable ecological interactions. The primary objective is to enable hatchery-produced fish to return to reproduce naturally in the streams in which they are released. These and other characteristics of the project are described in further detail in the Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Master Plan (Larson and Mobrand 1992), the 1995 Supplement to the Master Plan (Johnson et al. 1995), and the Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program Environmental Impact Statement (Bonneville Power Administration et al. 1996). The report in hand is referred to in project literature as the NPTH Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan. This report describes monitoring and evaluation activities that will help NPTH managers determine. whether they were successful in restoring chinook salmon populations and avoiding adverse ecological impacts. Program success will be gauged primarily by changes in the abundance and distribution of supplemented chinook populations. The evaluation of project-related impacts will focus on the biological effects of constructing and operating NPTH hatchery facilities, introducing hatchery fish into the natural environment, and removing or displacing wild fish, including targeted chinook, non-targeted chinook, and resident species.« less

Heritage strain and diet of wild young of year and yearling lake trout in the main basin of Lake Huron

USGS Publications Warehouse

Roseman, E.F.; Stott, W.; O'Brien, T. P.; Riley, S.C.; Schaeffer, J.S.

2009-01-01

Restoration of lake trout Salvelinus namaycush stocks in Lake Huron is a fish community objective developed to promote sustainable fish communities in the lake. Between 1985 and 2004, 12.65 million lake trout were stocked into Lake Huron representing eight different genetic strains. Collections of bona fide wild fish in USGS surveys have increased in recent years and this study examined the ancestry and diet of fish collected between 2004 and 2006 to explore the ecological role they occupy in Lake Huron. Analysis of microsatellite DNA revealed that both pure strain and inter-strain hybrids were observed, and the majority of fish were classified as Seneca Lake strain or Seneca Lake hybrids. Diets of 50 wild age-0 lake trout were examined. Mysis, chironomids, and zooplankton were common prey items of wild age-0 lake trout. These results indicate that stocked fish are successfully reproducing in Lake Huron indicating a level of restoration success. However, continued changes to the benthic macroinvertebrate community, particularly declines of Mysis, may limit growth and survival of wild fish and hinder restoration efforts.

Use of Fish Telemetry in Rehabilitation Planning, Management, and Monitoring in Areas of Concern in the Laurentian Great Lakes

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Brooks, J. L.; Boston, C.; Doka, S.; Gorsky, D.; Gustavson, K.; Hondorp, D.; Isermann, D.; Midwood, J. D.; Pratt, T. C.; Rous, A. M.; Withers, J. L.; Krueger, C. C.; Cooke, S. J.

2017-12-01

Freshwater ecosystems provide many ecosystem services; however, they are often degraded as a result of human activity. To address ecosystem degradation in the Laurentian Great Lakes, Canada and the United States of America established the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). In 1987, 43 highly polluted and impacted areas were identified under the GLWQA as having one or more of 14 Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) to the physical and chemical habitat for fish, wildlife and humans, and were designated as Areas of Concern (AOC). Subnational jurisdictions combined with local stakeholders, with support from federal governments, developed plans to remediate and restore these sites. Biotelemetry (the tracking of animals using electronic tags) provides information on the spatial ecology of fish in the wild relevant to habitat management and stock assessment. Here, seven case studies are presented where biotelemetry data were directly incorporated within the AOC Remedial Action Plan (RAP) process. Specific applications include determining seasonal fish-habitat associations to inform habitat restoration plans, identifying the distribution of pollutant-indicator species to identify exposure risk to contamination sources, informing the development of fish passage facilities to enable fish to access fragmented upstream habitats, and assessing fish use of created or restored habitats. With growing capacity for fish biotelemetry research in the Great Lakes, we discuss the strengths and weaknesses of incorporating biotelemetry into AOC RAP processes to improve the science and practice of restoration and to facilitate the delisting of AOCs.

Synthesis of the effects to fish species of two management scenarios for the secretarial determination on removal of the lower four dams on the Klamath

USGS Publications Warehouse

Hamilton,; Rondorf, Dennis W.; Hampton,; Quinones,; Simondet,; Smith,

2011-01-01

For decades the long-standing conflict in the Klamath River Basin over water and fish resources has persisted. In an effort to resolve these disputes, PacifiCorp and interested parties negotiated, wrote, and signed the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) in 2010, calling for the potential removal of the four lower dams on the Klamath River mainstem. The KHSA established a process known as the Secretarial Determination, which includes 1) conducting new scientific studies and a re-evaluation of existing studies found in the FERC record and from other sources, and 2) evaluating the potential environmental and human effects of such an action pursuant to National Environmental Policy Act, California Environmental Quality Act, and other applicable laws.  In March 2012, the Secretary of the Interior will decide whether removal of these dams on the Klamath River: 1) will advance salmonid fisheries, and 2) is in the public interest. In this report, we summarize anticipated effects to fish resources under two management scenarios: 1) current conditions with dams in place and without the programs and actions in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA), and 2) removal of the lower four dams plus programs and actions called for in the KBRA and KHSA. This information will aid the Secretary of the Interior in determining whether dam removal and implementation of KBRA will advance restoration of salmonid (salmon and trout) fisheries.

The importance of fluvial hydraulics to fish-habitat restoration in low-gradient alluvial streams

USGS Publications Warehouse

Rabeni, Charles F.; Jacobson, Robert B.

1993-01-01

1. A major cause of degradation and loss of stream fish is alteration of physical habitat within and adjacent to the channel. We describe a potentially efficient approach to fish restoration based upon the relationship between fluvial hydraulics, geomorphology, and those habitats important to fish.2. The aquatic habitat in a low-gradient, alluvial stream in the Ozark Plateaus physiographical province was classified according to location in the channel, patterns of water flow, and structures that control flow. The resulting habitat types were ranked in terms of their temporal stability and ability to be manipulated.3. Delineation and quantification of discrete physical spaces in a stream, termed hydraulic habitat units, are shown to be useful in stream restoration programmes if the ecological importance of each habitat unit is known, and if habitats are defined by fluvial dynamics so that restoration is aided by natural forces.4. Examples, using different taxa, are given to illustrate management options.

Developing a broader scientific foundation for river restoration: Columbia River food webs

USGS Publications Warehouse

Naiman, Robert J.; Alldredge, Richard; Beauchamp, David A.; Bisson, Peter A.; Congleton, James; Henny, Charles J.; Huntly, Nancy; Lamberson, Roland; Levings, Colin; Merrill, Erik N.; Pearcy, William G.; Rieman, Bruce E.; Ruggerone, Gregory T.; Scarnecchia, Dennis; Smouse, Peter E.; Wood, Chris C.

2012-01-01

Well-functioning food webs are fundamental for sustaining rivers as ecosystems and maintaining associated aquatic and terrestrial communities. The current emphasis on restoring habitat structure—without explicitly considering food webs—has been less successful than hoped in terms of enhancing the status of targeted species and often overlooks important constraints on ecologically effective restoration. We identify three priority food web-related issues that potentially impede successful river restoration: uncertainty about habitat carrying capacity, proliferation of chemicals and contaminants, and emergence of hybrid food webs containing a mixture of native and invasive species. Additionally, there is the need to place these food web considerations in a broad temporal and spatial framework by understanding the consequences of altered nutrient, organic matter (energy), water, and thermal sources and flows, reconnecting critical habitats and their food webs, and restoring for changing environments. As an illustration, we discuss how the Columbia River Basin, site of one of the largest aquatic/riparian restoration programs in the United States, would benefit from implementing a food web perspective. A food web perspective for the Columbia River would complement ongoing approaches and enhance the ability to meet the vision and legal obligations of the US Endangered Species Act, the Northwest Power Act (Fish and Wildlife Program), and federal treaties with Northwest Indian Tribes while meeting fundamental needs for improved river management.

Developing a broader scientific foundation for river restoration: Columbia River food webs

PubMed Central

Naiman, Robert J.; Alldredge, J. Richard; Beauchamp, David A.; Bisson, Peter A.; Congleton, James; Henny, Charles J.; Huntly, Nancy; Lamberson, Roland; Levings, Colin; Merrill, Erik N.; Pearcy, William G.; Rieman, Bruce E.; Ruggerone, Gregory T.; Scarnecchia, Dennis; Smouse, Peter E.; Wood, Chris C.

2012-01-01

Well-functioning food webs are fundamental for sustaining rivers as ecosystems and maintaining associated aquatic and terrestrial communities. The current emphasis on restoring habitat structure—without explicitly considering food webs—has been less successful than hoped in terms of enhancing the status of targeted species and often overlooks important constraints on ecologically effective restoration. We identify three priority food web-related issues that potentially impede successful river restoration: uncertainty about habitat carrying capacity, proliferation of chemicals and contaminants, and emergence of hybrid food webs containing a mixture of native and invasive species. Additionally, there is the need to place these food web considerations in a broad temporal and spatial framework by understanding the consequences of altered nutrient, organic matter (energy), water, and thermal sources and flows, reconnecting critical habitats and their food webs, and restoring for changing environments. As an illustration, we discuss how the Columbia River Basin, site of one of the largest aquatic/riparian restoration programs in the United States, would benefit from implementing a food web perspective. A food web perspective for the Columbia River would complement ongoing approaches and enhance the ability to meet the vision and legal obligations of the US Endangered Species Act, the Northwest Power Act (Fish and Wildlife Program), and federal treaties with Northwest Indian Tribes while meeting fundamental needs for improved river management. PMID:23197837

Public perceptions of natural resource damages and the resources that require restoration.

PubMed

Burger, Joanna

2010-01-01

The public and health professionals are interested in restoring degraded ecosystem to provide goods and services. This study examined public perceptions in coastal New York and New Jersey about who is responsible for restoration of resources, which resources should be restored, by whom, and do they know the meaning of natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). More than 98% felt that resources should be restored; more (40%) thought the government should restore them, rather than the responsible party (23%). The highest rated resources were endangered wildlife, fish, mammals, and clams/crabs. Only 2% of respondents knew what NRDA meant. These data indicate that people felt strongly that resources should be restored and varied in who should restore them, suggesting that governmental agencies must clarify the relationship between chemical discharges, resource injury, NRDA, and restoration of those resources to produce clean air and water, fish and wildlife, and recreational opportunities.

PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES AND THE RESOURCES THAT REQUIRE RESTORATION

PubMed Central

Burger, Joanna

2014-01-01

The public and health professionals are interested in restoring degraded ecosystem to provide goods and services. This study examined public perceptions in coastal New York and New Jersey about who is responsible for restoration of resources, which resources should be restored, by whom, and do they know the meaning of natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). More than 98% felt that resources should be restored; more (40%) thought the government should restore them, rather than the responsible party (23%). The highest rated resources were endangered wildlife, fish, mammals, and clams/crabs. Only 2% of respondents knew what NRDA meant. These data indicate that people felt strongly that resources should be restored and varied in who should restore them, suggesting that governmental agencies must clarify the relationship between chemical discharges, resource injury, NRDA, and restoration of those resources to produce clean air and water, fish and wildlife, and recreational opportunities. PMID:20711934

Palila restoration research, 1996−2012

USGS Publications Warehouse

Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris; Atkinson, Carter T.; Brinck, Kevin W.; Camp, Richad; Cole, Colleen; Canner, Raymond; Dougill, Steve; Goltz, Daniel; Gray, Elizabeth; Hess, Steven C.; Higashino, Jennifer; Jarvi, Susan I.; Johnson, Luanne; Laniawe, Leona; Laut, Megan; Miller, Linda; Murray, Christopher J.; Nelson, Daniel; Leonard, David L.; Oboyshi, Peter; Patch-Highfill, Leanne; Pollock, David D.; Rapozo, Kalei; Schwarzfeld, Marla; Slotterback, John; Stephens, Robert M.; Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris

2014-01-01

The Palila Restoration Project was initiated in 1996 by the U.S. Geological Survey to assist government agencies mitigate the effects of realigning Saddle Road (Highway 200) through Palila Critical Habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998, Federal Highway Administration 1999). Ecological research on the palila (Loxioides bailleui), an endangered Hawaiian forest bird, carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey (formerly organized as the Research Division of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) since 1987 and research conducted by the Palila Restoration Project provided the scientific bases for developing a recovery strategy (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2006) and its adaptive implementation. The main objectives of the Palila Restoration Project were to develop techniques for reintroducing the palila to a portion of its former range, investigate the biological threats to the palila and its habitat, and synthesize the existing body of ecological knowledge concerning the palila. Five broad study themes formed the research framework: 1. Population reintroduction and restoration 2. Demography and breeding ecology 3. Habitat use and food ecology 4. Vegetation ecology 5. Predator ecology and management An element that was not included in the research program of the project was the ecology and management of introduced ungulates, which has historically constituted the single greatest threat to Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009). The absence of ungulate studies should not be interpreted to mean that we believe ungulates no longer damage palila habitat. Other research has already established that removing alien browsers and grazers from Mauna Kea is essential for the recovery of the subalpine forest on which palila now depend (Scowcroft and Giffin 1983; Scowcroft and Sakai 1983; Scowcroft and Conrad 1988, 1992; Hess et al. 1999). Moreover, the Federal District Court of Hawai‘i has ordered the state of Hawai‘i to remove browsing ungulates from Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009, Hess and Banko 2011). This final report summarizes results of Palila Restoration Project research from December 1996 to December 2012. Even though some results contained in this report have been published in scientific journals and other technical reports (Appendix I), they are included here to provide a comprehensive chronicle of all project activities. 

Palila Restoration Research, 1996−2012. Summary and management implications

USGS Publications Warehouse

Banko, Paul C.; Farmer, Chris; Dougill, Steve; Johnson, Luanne

2015-01-01

The Palila Restoration Project was initiated in 1996 by the U.S. Geological Survey to assist government agencies mitigate the effects of realigning Saddle Road (Highway 200) through Palila Critical Habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998, Federal Highway Administration 1999). Ecological research on the palila (Loxioides bailleui), an endangered Hawaiian forest bird, carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey (formerly organized as the Research Division of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) since 1987 and research conducted by the Palila Restoration Project provided the scientific bases for developing a recovery strategy (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2006) and its adaptive implementation. The main objectives of the Palila Restoration Project were to develop techniques for reintroducing the palila to a portion of its former range, investigate the biological threats to the palila and its habitat, and synthesize the existing body of ecological knowledge concerning the palila. Five broad study themes formed the research framework: 1. Population reintroduction and restoration 2. Demography and breeding ecology 3. Habitat use and food ecology 4. Vegetation ecology 5. Predator ecology and management An element that was not included in the research program of the project was the ecology and management of introduced ungulates, which has historically constituted the single greatest threat to Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009). The absence of ungulate studies should not be interpreted to mean that we believe ungulates no longer damage palila habitat. Other research has already established that removing alien browsers and grazers from Mauna Kea is essential for the recovery of the subalpine forest on which palila now depend (Scowcroft and Giffin 1983; Scowcroft and Sakai 1983; Scowcroft and Conrad 1988, 1992; Hess et al. 1999). Moreover, the Federal District Court of Hawai‘i has ordered the State of Hawai‘i to remove browsing ungulates from Palila Critical Habitat (Banko et al. 2009, Hess and Banko 2011). This final report summarizes results of Palila Restoration Project research from December 1996 to December 2012. Even though some results contained in this report have been published in scientific journals and other technical reports (Appendix I), they are included here to provide a comprehensive chronicle of all project activities.

Predicting wading bird and aquatic faunal responses to ecosystem restoration scenarios

USGS Publications Warehouse

Beerens, James M.; Trexler, Joel C.; Catano, Christopher P.

2017-01-01

In large-scale conservation decisions, scenario planning identifies key uncertainties of ecosystem function linked to ecological drivers affected by management, incorporates ecological feedbacks, and scales up to answer questions robust to alternative futures. Wetland restoration planning requires an understanding of how proposed changes in surface hydrology, water storage, and landscape connectivity affect aquatic animal composition, productivity, and food-web function. In the Florida Everglades, reintroduction of historical hydrologic patterns is expected to increase productivity of all trophic levels. Highly mobile indicator species such as wading birds integrate secondary productivity from aquatic prey (small fishes and crayfish) over the landscape. To evaluate how fish, crayfish, and wading birds may respond to alternative hydrologic restoration plans, we compared predicted small fish density, crayfish density and biomass, and wading bird occurrence for existing conditions to four restoration scenarios that varied water storage and removal of levees and canals (i.e. decompartmentalization). Densities of small fish and occurrence of wading birds are predicted to increase throughout most of the Everglades under all restoration options because of increased flows and connectivity. Full decompartmentalization goes furthest toward recreating hypothesized historical patterns of fish density by draining excess water ponded by levees and hydrating areas that are currently drier than in the past. In contrast, crayfish density declined and species composition shifted under all restoration options because of lengthened hydroperiods (i.e. time of inundation). Under full decompartmentalization, the distribution of increased prey available for wading birds shifted south, closer to historical locations of nesting activity in Everglades National Park.

Use of sibling relationship reconstruction to complement traditional monitoring in fisheries management and conservation of brown trout.

PubMed

Ozerov, Mikhail; Jürgenstein, Tauno; Aykanat, Tutku; Vasemägi, Anti

2015-08-01

Declining trends in the abundance of many fish urgently call for more efficient and informative monitoring methods that would provide necessary demographic data for the evaluation of existing conservation, restoration, and management actions. We investigated how genetic sibship reconstruction from young-of-the-year brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) juveniles provides valuable, complementary demographic information that allowed us to disentangle the effects of habitat quality and number of breeders on juvenile density. We studied restored (n = 15) and control (n = 15) spawning and nursery habitats in 16 brown trout rivers and streams over 2 consecutive years to evaluate the effectiveness of habitat restoration activities. Similar juvenile densities both in restored and control spawning and nursery grounds were observed. Similarly, no differences in the effective number of breeders, Nb(SA) , were detected between habitats, indicating that brown trout readily used recently restored spawning grounds. Only a weak relationship between the Nb(SA) and juvenile density was observed, suggesting that multiple factors affect juvenile abundance. In some areas, very low estimates of Nb(SA) were found at sites with high juvenile density, indicating that a small number of breeders can produce a high number of progeny in favorable conditions. In other sites, high Nb(SA) estimates were associated with low juvenile density, suggesting low habitat quality or lack of suitable spawning substrate in relation to available breeders. Based on these results, we recommend the incorporation of genetic sibship reconstruction to ongoing and future fish evaluation and monitoring programs to gain novel insights into local demographic and evolutionary processes relevant for fisheries management, habitat restoration, and conservation. © 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Duck Valley Resident Fish Stocking Program, 2000 Final Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Dodson, Guy; Pero, Vincent

The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes fish-stocking program was begun in 1988 and is intended to provide a subsistence fishery for the tribal members. The program stocks catchable and fingerling size trout in Mt. View and Sheep Creek Reservoirs. Rainbow trout are purchased from only certified disease-free facilities to be stocked in our reservoirs. This project will help restore a fishery for tribal members that historically depended on wild salmon and steelhead in the Owyhee and Bruneau Rivers and their tributaries for their culture as well as for subsistence. This project is partial substitution for loss of anadromous fish production due to constructionmore » and operation of hydroelectric dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Until anadromous fish can be returned to the Owyhee and Bruneau Rivers this project will continue indefinitely. As part of this project the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes will also receive income in the form of fees from non-tribal members who come to fish these reservoirs. Regular monitoring and evaluation of the fishery will include sampling for length/weight/condition and for signs of disease. A detailed Monitoring and evaluation plan has been put in place for this project. However due to budget limitations on this project only the fishery surveys and limited water quality work can be completed. A creel survey was initiated in 1998 and we are following the monitoring and evaluation schedule for this program (as budget allows) as well as managing the budget and personnel. This program has been very successful in the past decade and has provided enjoyment and sustenance for both tribal and non-tribal members. All biological data and stocking rates will be including in the Annual reports to Bonneville Power Administration (BPA).« less

Relative abundance and distribution of fishes and crayfish at Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nye County, Nevada, 2010-11

USGS Publications Warehouse

Scoppettone, G.G.; Johnson, D.M.; Hereford, M.E.; Rissler, Peter; Fabes, Mark; Salgado, Antonio; Shea, Sean

2012-01-01

Habitat restoration that favors native species can help control non-native species (McShane and others, 2004; Scoppettone and others, 2005; Kennedy and others, 2006). Restoration of Carson Slough and its tributaries present an opportunity to promote habitat types that favor native species over non-natives. Historically, the majority of Ash Meadows spring systems were tributaries to Carson Slough. In 2007 and 2008, a survey of Ash Meadows spring systems was conducted to generate baseline information on the distribution of fishes throughout AMNWR (Scoppettone and others, 2011b). In this study, we conducted a follow-up survey with emphasis on upper Carson Slough. This permitted us to gauge the early effects of spring system restoration on fish populations and to generate further baseline data relevant to future restoration efforts. 

Linking Landscape-Scale Disturbances to Stress and Condition of Fish: Implications for Restoration and Conservation.

PubMed

Jeffrey, Jennifer D; Hasler, Caleb T; Chapman, Jacqueline M; Cooke, Steven J; Suski, Cory D

2015-10-01

Humans have dramatically altered landscapes as a result of urban and agricultural development, which has led to decreases in the quality and quantity of habitats for animals. This is particularly the case for freshwater fish that reside in fluvial systems, given that changes to adjacent lands have direct impacts on the structure and function of watersheds. Because choices of habitat have physiological consequences for organisms, animals that occupy sub-optimal habitats may experience increased expenditure of energy or homeostatic overload that can cause negative outcomes for individuals and populations. With the imperiled and threatened status of many freshwater fish, there is a critical need to define relationships between land use, quality of the habitat, and physiological performance for resident fish as an aid to restoration and management. Here, we synthesize existing literature to relate variation in land use at the scale of watersheds to the physiological status of resident fish. This examination revealed that landscape-level disturbances can influence a host of physiological properties of resident fishes, ranging from cellular and genomic levels to the hormonal and whole-animal levels. More importantly, these physiological responses have been integrated into traditional field-based monitoring protocols to provide a mechanistic understanding of how organisms interact with their environment, and to enhance restoration. We also generated a conceptual model that provides a basis for relating landscape-level changes to physiological responses in fish. We conclude that physiological sampling of resident fish has the potential to assess the effects of landscape-scale disturbances on freshwater fish and to enhance restoration and conservation. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology. All rights reserved. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Scale-dependent geomorphic responses to active restoration and implications for cutthroat trout

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Salant, N.; Miller, S. W.

2009-12-01

The predominant goal of instream habitat restoration is to increase the diversity, density and/or biomass of aquatic organisms through enhanced physical heterogeneity and increased food availability. In physically homogenized systems, habitat restoration is most commonly achieved at the reach-scale through the addition of structures or channel reconfiguration. Despite the completion of over 6,000 restoration projects in the United States, studies of fish responses to habitat restoration have largely produced equivocal results. Paradoxically, restoration monitoring overwhelmingly focuses on fish response without understanding how these responses link to the physical variables being altered and the scale at which geomorphic changes occur. Our study investigates whether instream habitat restoration affects geomorphic conditions at spatial scales relevant to the organism of interest (i.e. the spatial scale of the variables limiting to that organism). We measure the effects of active restoration on geomorphic metrics at three spatial scales (local, unit, and reach) using a before-after-control-impact design in a historically disturbed and heavily managed cutthroat trout stream. Observed trout habitat preferences (for spawning and juvenile/adult residence) are used to identify the limiting physical variables and are compared to the scale of spatially explicit geomorphic responses. Four reaches representing three different stages of restoration (before, one month and one year after) are surveyed for local-scale physical conditions, unit- and reach-scale morphology, resident fish use, and redd locations. Local-scale physical metrics include depth, nearbed and average velocity, overhead cover, particle size, and water quality metrics. Point measurements stratified by morphological unit are used to determine physical variability among unit types. Habitat complexity and availability are assessed at the reach-scale from topographic surveys and unit maps. Our multi-scale, process-based approach evaluates whether a commonly used restoration strategy creates geomorphic heterogeneity at scales relevant to fish diversity and microhabitat utilization, an understanding that will improve the efficiency and success of future restoration projects.

Use of fish telemetry in rehabilitation planning, management, and monitoring in Areas of Concern in the Laurentian Great Lakes

USGS Publications Warehouse

Brooks, J.L.; Boston, C.; Doka, Susan E.; Gorsky, Dimitry; Gustavson, K.; Hondorp, Darryl W.; Isermann, Daniel A.; Midwood, Jonathan D.; Pratt, T.C.; Rous, Andrew M.; Withers, J. L.; Krueger, C.C.; Cooke, S.J.

2017-01-01

Freshwater ecosystems provide many ecosystem services; however, they are often degraded as a result of human activity. To address ecosystem degradation in the Laurentian Great Lakes, Canada and the United States of America established the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). In 1987, 43 highly polluted and impacted areas were identified under the GLWQA as having one or more of 14 Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) to the physical and chemical habitat for fish, wildlife and humans, and were designated as Areas of Concern (AOC). Subnational jurisdictions combined with local stakeholders, with support from federal governments, developed plans to remediate and restore these sites. Biotelemetry (the tracking of animals using electronic tags) provides information on the spatial ecology of fish in the wild relevant to habitat management and stock assessment. Here, seven case studies are presented where biotelemetry data were directly incorporated within the AOC Remedial Action Plan (RAP) process. Specific applications include determining seasonal fish–habitat associations to inform habitat restoration plans, identifying the distribution of pollutant-indicator species to identify exposure risk to contamination sources, informing the development of fish passage facilities to enable fish to access fragmented upstream habitats, and assessing fish use of created or restored habitats. With growing capacity for fish biotelemetry research in the Great Lakes, we discuss the strengths and weaknesses of incorporating biotelemetry into AOC RAP processes to improve the science and practice of restoration and to facilitate the delisting of AOCs.

Joint Ecosystem Modeling (JEM) ecological model documentation volume 1: Estuarine prey fish biomass availability v1.0.0

USGS Publications Warehouse

Romañach, Stephanie S.; Conzelmann, Craig; Daugherty, Adam; Lorenz, Jerome L.; Hunnicutt, Christina; Mazzotti, Frank J.

2011-01-01

Estuarine fish serve as an important prey base in the Greater Everglades ecosystem for key fauna such as wading birds, crocodiles, alligators, and piscivorous fishes. Human-made changes to freshwater flow across the Greater Everglades have resulted in less freshwater flow into the fringing estuaries and coasts. These changes in freshwater input have altered salinity patterns and negatively affected primary production of the estuarine fish prey base. Planned restoration projects should affect salinity and water depth both spatially and temporally and result in an increase in appropriate water conditions in areas occupied by estuarine fish. To assist in restoration planning, an ecological model of estuarine prey fish biomass availability was developed as an evaluation tool to aid in the determination of acceptable ranges of salinity and water depth. Comparisons of model output to field data indicate that the model accurately predicts prey biomass in the estuarine regions of the model domain. This model can be used to compare alternative restoration plans and select those that provide suitable conditions.

Lake trout restoration in the Great Lakes: stock-size criteria for natural reproduction

USGS Publications Warehouse

Selgeby, James H.; Bronte, Charles R.; Brown, Edward H.; Hansen, Michael J.; Holey, Mark E.; VanAmberg, Jan P.; Muth, Kenneth M.; Makauskas, Daniel B.; Mckee, Patrick; Anderson, David M.; Ferreri, C. Paola; Schram, Stephen T.

1995-01-01

We examined the question of whether the lake trout restoration program in the Great Lakes has developed brood stocks of adequate size to sustain natural reproduction. Stock size criteria were developed from areas of the Great Lakes where natural reproduction has been successful (defined as detection of age-1 or older recruits by assessment fishing). We contrasted them with stocks in areas with no natural reproduction. Based on the relative abundance of spawners measured in the fall and the presence or absence of natural reproduction in 24 areas of the Great Lakes, we found three distinct sets of lake trout populations. In seven areas of successful natural reproduction, the catch-per-unit-effort (CPE) of spawners ranged from 17 to 135 fish/305 m of gillnet. Stock sizes in these areas were used as a gauge against which stocks in other areas were contrasted. We conclude that stock densities of 17-135 fish/305 m of gill net are adequate for natural reproduction, provided that all other requirements are met. No natural reproduction has been detected in seven other areas, where CPEs of spawners ranged from only 3 to 5 fish/305 m. We conclude that spawning stocks of only 3-5 fish/305 m of net are inadequate to develop measurable natural reproduction. Natural reproduction has also not been detected in ten areas where CPEs of spawners ranged from 43 to 195 fish/305 m of net. We conclude that spawning stocks in these ten areas were adequate to sustain natural reproduction, but that some factor other than parental stock size prevented recruitment of wild lake trout.

75 FR 26226 - Executive Order 13508 Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration Section 203 Final Coordinated...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-11

... quality, stream restoration, agriculture conservation, wetland restoration, forest buffers, fish passage... Bay Protection and Restoration Section 203 Final Coordinated Implementation Strategy AGENCY... availability of a final strategy for restoration and protection of the Chesapeake Bay that was prepared...

River Continuity Restoration and Diadromous Fishes: Much More than an Ecological Issue.

PubMed

Drouineau, H; Carter, C; Rambonilaza, M; Beaufaron, G; Bouleau, G; Gassiat, A; Lambert, P; le Floch, S; Tétard, S; de Oliveira, E

2018-04-01

Ecosystem fragmentation is a serious threat to biodiversity and one of the main challenges in ecosystem restoration. River continuity restoration (RCR) has often targeted diadromous fishes, a group of species supporting strong cultural and economic values and especially sensitive to river fragmentation. Yet it has frequently produced mixed results and diadromous fishes remain at very low levels of abundance. Against this background, this paper presents the main challenges for defining, evaluating and achieving effective RCR. We first identify challenges specific to disciplines. In ecology, there is a need to develop quantitative and mechanistic models to support decision making, accounting for both direct and indirect impacts of river obstacles and working at the river catchment scale. In a context of dwindling abundances and reduced market value, cultural services provided by diadromous fishes are becoming increasingly prominent. Methods for carrying out economic quantification of non-market values of diadromous fishes become ever more urgent. Given current challenges for rivers to meet all needs sustainably, conflicts arise over the legitimate use of water resources for human purposes. Concepts and methods from political science and geography are needed to develop understandings on how the political work of public authorities and stakeholders can influence the legitimacy of restoration projects. Finally, the most exciting challenge is to combine disciplinary outcomes to achieve a multidisciplinary approach to RCR. Accordingly, the co-construction of intermediary objects and diagrams of flows of knowledge among disciplines can be first steps towards new frameworks supporting restoration design and planning.

River Continuity Restoration and Diadromous Fishes: Much More than an Ecological Issue

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Drouineau, H.; Carter, C.; Rambonilaza, M.; Beaufaron, G.; Bouleau, G.; Gassiat, A.; Lambert, P.; le Floch, S.; Tétard, S.; de Oliveira, E.

2018-04-01

Ecosystem fragmentation is a serious threat to biodiversity and one of the main challenges in ecosystem restoration. River continuity restoration (RCR) has often targeted diadromous fishes, a group of species supporting strong cultural and economic values and especially sensitive to river fragmentation. Yet it has frequently produced mixed results and diadromous fishes remain at very low levels of abundance. Against this background, this paper presents the main challenges for defining, evaluating and achieving effective RCR. We first identify challenges specific to disciplines. In ecology, there is a need to develop quantitative and mechanistic models to support decision making, accounting for both direct and indirect impacts of river obstacles and working at the river catchment scale. In a context of dwindling abundances and reduced market value, cultural services provided by diadromous fishes are becoming increasingly prominent. Methods for carrying out economic quantification of non-market values of diadromous fishes become ever more urgent. Given current challenges for rivers to meet all needs sustainably, conflicts arise over the legitimate use of water resources for human purposes. Concepts and methods from political science and geography are needed to develop understandings on how the political work of public authorities and stakeholders can influence the legitimacy of restoration projects. Finally, the most exciting challenge is to combine disciplinary outcomes to achieve a multidisciplinary approach to RCR. Accordingly, the co-construction of intermediary objects and diagrams of flows of knowledge among disciplines can be first steps towards new frameworks supporting restoration design and planning.

Matching watershed and otolith chemistry to establish natal origin of an endangered desert lake sucker

USGS Publications Warehouse

Strohm, Deanna D.; Budy, Phaedra; Crowl, Todd A.

2017-01-01

Stream habitat restoration and supplemental stocking of hatchery-reared fish have increasingly become key components of recovery plans for imperiled freshwater fish; however, determining when to discontinue stocking efforts, prioritizing restoration areas, and evaluating restoration success present a conservation challenge. In this study, we demonstrate that otolith microchemistry is an effective tool for establishing natal origin of the June Sucker Chasmistes liorus, an imperiled potamodromous fish. This approach allows us to determine whether a fish is of wild or hatchery origin in order to assess whether habitat restoration enhances recruitment and to further identify areas of critical habitat. Our specific objectives were to (1) quantify and characterize chemical variation among three main spawning tributaries; (2) understand the relationship between otolith microchemistry and tributary chemistry; and (3) develop and validate a classification model to identify stream origin using otolith microchemistry data. We quantified molar ratios of Sr:Ca, Ba:Ca, and Mg:Ca for water and otolith chemistry from three main tributaries to Utah Lake, Utah, during the summer of 2013. Water chemistry (loge transformed Sr:Ca, Ba:Ca, and Mg:Ca ratios) differed significantly across all three spawning tributaries. We determined that Ba:Ca and Sr:Ca ratios were the most important variables driving our classification models, and we observed a strong linear relationship between water and otolith values for Sr:Ca and Ba:Ca but not for Mg:Ca. Classification models derived from otolith element : Ca signatures accurately sorted individuals to their experimental tributary of origin (classification tree: 89% accuracy; random forest model: 91% accuracy) and determined wild versus hatchery origin with 100% accuracy. Overall, this study aids in evaluating the effectiveness of restoration, tracking progress toward recovery, and prioritizing future restoration plans for fishes of conservation concern. Our results have further application, such as identifying subpopulations that provide the greatest reproductive contribution to a metapopulation or finding the reproductive area and origin of invasive fishes.

Distribution and abundance of stream fishes in relation to barriers: implications for monitoring stream recovery after barrier removal

USGS Publications Warehouse

Zydlewski, Joseph D.; Coghlan, Stephen M.; Gardner, C.; Saunders, R.

2011-01-01

Dams are ubiquitous in coastal regions and have altered stream habitats and the distribution and abundance of stream fishes in those habitats by disrupting hydrology, temperature regime and habitat connectivity. Dam removal is a common restoration tool, but often the response of the fish assemblage is not monitored rigorously. Sedgeunkedunk Stream, a small tributary to the Penobscot River (Maine, USA), has been the focus of a restoration effort that includes the removal of two low-head dams. In this study, we quantified fish assemblage metrics along a longitudinal gradient in Sedgeunkedunk Stream and also in a nearby reference stream. By establishing pre-removal baseline conditions and associated variability and the conditions and variability immediately following removal, we can characterize future changes in the system associated with dam removal. Over 2 years prior to dam removal, species richness and abundance in Sedgeunkedunk Stream were highest downstream of the lowest dam, lowest immediately upstream of that dam and intermediate farther upstream; patterns were similar in the reference stream. Although seasonal and annual variation in metrics within each site was substantial, the overall upstream-to-downstream pattern along the stream gradient was remarkably consistent prior to dam removal. Immediately after dam removal, we saw significant decreases in richness and abundance downstream of the former dam site and a corresponding increase in fish abundance upstream of the former dam site. No such changes occurred in reference sites. Our results show that by quantifying baseline conditions in a small stream before restoration, the effects of stream restoration efforts on fish assemblages can be monitored successfully. These data set the stage for the long-term assessment of Sedgeunkedunk Stream and provide a simple methodology for assessment in other restoration projects.

Effects of enhanced hydrological connectivity on Mediterranean salt marsh fish assemblages with emphasis on the endangered Spanish toothcarp (Aphanius iberus).

PubMed

Prado, Patricia; Alcaraz, Carles; Jornet, Lluis; Caiola, Nuno; Ibáñez, Carles

2017-01-01

The hydrological connectivity between the salt marsh and the sea was partially restored in a Mediterranean wetland containing isolated ponds resulting from former salt extraction and aquaculture activities. A preliminary assessment provided evidence that ponds farther from the sea hosted very large numbers of the endangered Spanish toothcarp, Aphanius iberus , suggesting that individuals had been trapped and consequently reach unnaturally high densities. In order to achieve both habitat rehabilitation and toothcarp conservation, efforts were made to create a gradient of hydrologically connected areas, including isolated fish reservoirs, semi-isolated, and connected salt marsh-sea areas that could allow migratory movements of fish and provide some protection for A. iberus . The fish community was monitored prior to, and for three years after rehabilitation. Results showed an increase in the number of fish species within semi-isolated areas (Zone A), whereas areas adjacent to the sea (Zone B) increased the number of marine species and decreased that of estuarine species (ES). Yet overall differences in fish assemblages were much higher between zones than among study years. Generalized linear models (GLMs) evidenced that distance to the sea was the most important variable explaining the local diversity of the fish community after restoration, with occasional influence of other factors such as temperature, and depth. The abundance of A. iberus was consistently higher in semi-isolated areas at greater distances from the sea, but a decline occurred in both zones and in isolated reservoir ponds after restoration efforts, which may be attributable to interannual differences in recruitment success and, to a lesser extent, to dispersal into adjacent habitats. A negative effect of restoration works on fish population cannot be excluded, but the final outcome of the intervention likely needs a longer period.

Water quality and fish dynamics in forested wetlands associated with an oxbow lake

USGS Publications Warehouse

Andrews, Caroline S.; Miranda, Leandro E.; Kroger, Robert

2015-01-01

Forested wetlands represent some of the most distinct environments in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Depending on season, water in forested wetlands can be warm, stagnant, and oxygen-depleted, yet may support high fish diversity. Fish assemblages in forested wetlands are not well studied because of difficulties in sampling heavily structured environments. During the April–July period, we surveyed and compared the water quality and assemblages of small fish in a margin wetland (forested fringe along a lake shore), contiguous wetland (forested wetland adjacent to a lake), and the open water of an oxbow lake. Dissolved-oxygen levels measured hourly 0.5 m below the surface were higher in the open water than in either of the forested wetlands. Despite reduced water quality, fish-species richness and catch rates estimated with light traps were greater in the forested wetlands than in the open water. The forested wetlands supported large numbers of fish and unique fish assemblages that included some rare species, likely because of their structural complexity. Programs developed to refine agricultural practices, preserve riparian zones, and restore lakes should include guidance to protect and reestablish forested wetlands.

Methow River Studies, Washington: abundance estimates from Beaver Creek and the Chewuch River screw trap, methodology testing in the Whitefish Island side channel, and survival and detection estimates from hatchery fish releases, 2013

USGS Publications Warehouse

Martens, Kyle D.; Fish, Teresa M.; Watson, Grace A.; Connolly, Patrick J.

2014-01-01

Salmon and steelhead populations have been severely depleted in the Columbia River from factors such as the presence of tributary dams, unscreened irrigation diversions, and habitat degradation from logging, mining, grazing, and others (Raymond, 1988). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been funded by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to provide evaluation of on-going Reclamation funded efforts to recover Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed anadromous salmonid populations in the Methow River watershed, a watershed of the Columbia River in the Upper Columbia River Basin, in north-central Washington State (fig. 1). This monitoring and evaluation program was funded to document Reclamation’s effort to partially fulfill the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion (BiOp) (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries Division 2003). This Biological Opinion includes Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA) to protect listed salmon and steelhead across their life cycle. Species of concern in the Methow River include Upper Columbia River (UCR) spring Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), UCR summer steelhead (O. mykiss), and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), which are all listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The work done by the USGS since 2004 has encompassed three phases of work. The first phase started in 2004 and continued through 2012. This first phase involved the evaluation of stream colonization and fish production in Beaver Creek following the modification of several water diversions (2000–2006) that were acting as barriers to upstream fish movement. Products to date from this work include: Ruttenburg (2007), Connolly and others (2008), Martens and Connolly (2008), Connolly (2010), Connolly and others (2010), Martens and Connolly (2010), Benjamin and others (2012), Romine and others (2013a), Weigel and others (2013a, 2013b, 2013c), and Martens and others (2014). The second phase, initiated in 2008, focuses on the evaluation of the M2 reach (rkm 66– 80) of the mainstem Methow River prior to restoration actions planned by Reclamation and Yakama Nation. The M2 study was designed to help understand the inter-relationships between stream habitat and the life history of various fish species to explain potential success or limitations in response to restoration actions. To help document changes derived by restoration, two reference reaches (Upper Methow between rkm 85 and 90, and Chewuch River between rkm 4 and 11) were identified based on relative lack of disturbance, proximity to the restoration reach, and relative unconfined geomorphology. A control reach (Lower Methow between rkm 57 and 64, also referred to as “Silver Reach”) was 2 identified based on its similar disturbance as the reference reach, proximity to the restoration reach, and relatively unconfined geomorphology. Products to date include Barber and others (2011), Bellmore (2011), Tibbits and others (2012), Bellmore and others (2013), Benjamin and others (2013), Romine and others (2013b), Bellmore and other (2014), Martens and others (2014), and Martens and Connolly (2014). The third phase of work has been to help with the development and to provide data for modeling efforts. Most of the planned M2 reach restoration is focused on the creation or improvement of offchannel habitat, especially side channels. The pre-restoration portion of this study has been documented by Martens and Connolly (2014). Side channel restoration actions were initiated in 2012 (Whitefish Island side channel, also referred to as SC3; rkm 76) and are planned to continue over the next several years. The Whitefish Island side channel was modified to maintain hydrological connection with the mainstem throughout the year. In addition, several log structures were installed and pools were deepened to create fish habitat. Prior to restoration, this side channel would lose hydrological connection with the mainstem Methow River, leaving one large pool near the bottom of the side channel and several shallow isolated pools that may or may not go dry. In seasonally connected side channels, juvenile salmonid survival in pools less than 100 cm average depth was lower than in pools greater than 100 cm average depth (Martens and Connolly, 2014). In this report, we document our field work and analysis completed in 2013. During 2013, USGS sampling efforts were focused on resampling of three reaches in Beaver Creek, testing methodology in the Whitefish Island side channel, conducting hatchery survival estimates, and operating a screw trap on the Chewuch River (funded by Yakama Nation; fig. 1). The Beaver Creek sampling effort was a revisit of three index sites sampled continuously from 2004 to 2007 to look at the fish response to barrier removal. Methodology testing in Whitefish Island side channel was done to determine the best method for evaluating fish populations after restoration efforts in side channels (previous sampling methods were determined to be ineffective after pools were deepened). Hatchery survival estimates were completed to monitor fish survival in the Methow and Columbia Rivers, while the screw trap was operated to estimate migrating fish populations in the Chewuch River and track passive integrated transponder (PIT)-tagged fish. In addition, we maintained a network of PIT-tag interrogation systems (PTIS), assisted Reclamation with fish removal events associated with stream restoration (two people for 9 days; 14 percent of summer field season), and conducted a stream metabolism study designed to help parameterize and calibrate the stream productivity model (Bellmore and others, 2014) with model validation.

An evaluation of restoration efforts in fishless lakes stocked with exotic trout

USGS Publications Warehouse

Drake, D.C.; Naiman, R.J.

2000-01-01

Detrimental effects of introduced fishes on native amphibian populations have prompted removal of introduced cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki), rainbow (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) from naturally fishless lakes at Mt. Rainier National Park, Washington (U.S.A.). Using paleolimnological indicators (diatoms, invertebrates, and sediment characteristics) in eight 480-year-old sediment cores from eight lakes, we (1) derived estimates of baseline environmental conditions and natural variation, (2) assessed the effects of stocking naturally fishless lakes, and (3) determined whether lakes returned to predisturbance conditions after fish removal (restoration). Diatom floras were relatively stable between 315 and 90 years before present in all lakes; we used this time period to define lake-specific "baseline" conditions. Dissimilarity analyses of diatoms revealed sustained, dramatic changes in diatom floras that occurred approximately 80 years ago (when fish were introduced) in four of five stocked lakes, whereas the diatom floras in two unstocked lakes had not changed significantly in the last 315 years. Diatoms were not preserved in an eighth lake. State changes also occurred in two lakes over 200 years before European settlement of the Pacific Northwest. Preserved invertebrate densities fluctuated dramatically over time in all cores, providing a poor reference for assessing the effects of fishes. Nevertheless, fish-invertebrate interactions have been demonstrated in other paleolimnological studies and may be useful for lower-elevation or more productive lakes. Because diatom communities have not returned to predisturbance assemblages in restored lakes, even 20-30 years after fish removal, we conclude that Mt. Rainier lakes were not successfully restored by the removal of fishes.

Sherman Creek Hatchery; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Program, 2001 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Combs, Mitch

2002-01-01

Sherman Creek Hatchery's primary objective is the restoration and enhancement of the recreational and subsistence fishery in Lake Roosevelt and Banks Lake. The Sherman Creek Hatchery (SCH) was designed to rear 1.7 million kokanee fry for acclimation and imprinting during the spring and early summer. Additionally, it was designed to trap all available returning adult kokanee during the fall for broodstock operations and evaluations. Since the start of this program, the operations on Lake Roosevelt have been modified to better achieve program goals. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Spokane Tribe of Indians and the Colville Confederated Tribe formmore » the interagency Lake Roosevelt Hatcheries Coordination Team (LRHCT) which sets goals and objectives for both Sherman Creek and the Spokane Tribal Hatchery and serves to coordinate enhancement efforts on Lake Roosevelt and Banks Lake. The primary changes have been to replace the kokanee fingerling program with a yearling (post smolt) program of up to 1,000,000 fish. To construct and operate twenty net pens to handle the increased production. The second significant change was to rear up to 300,000 rainbow trout fingerling at SCH from July through October, for stocking into the volunteer net pens. This enables the Spokane Tribal Hatchery (STH) to rear additional kokanee to further the enhancement efforts on Lake Roosevelt. Current objectives include increased use of native/indigenous stocks where available for propagation into Upper Columbia River Basin Waters. Monitoring and evaluation is preformed by the Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program. From 1988 to 1998, the principle sport fishery on Lake Roosevelt has shifted from walleye to include rainbow trout and kokanee salmon (Underwood et al. 1997, Tilson and Scholz 1997). The angler use, harvest rates for rainbow and kokanee and the economic value of the fishery has increased substantially during this 10-year period. The most recent information from the monitoring program also suggests that the hatchery and net pen rearing programs have been beneficial to enhancing the Lake Roosevelt fishery while not negatively impacting wild and native stocks within the lake. The 2001 fishing season has been especially successful with great fishing for both rainbow and kokanee throughout Lake Roosevelt. The results of the Two Rivers Fishing Derby identified 100 percent of the rainbow and 47 percent of the kokanee caught were of hatchery origin.« less

Relative abundance and distribution of fishes and crayfish at Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nye County, Nevada, 2007-08

USGS Publications Warehouse

Scoppettone, G. Gary; Rissler, Peter; Johnson, Danielle; Hereford, Mark

2011-01-01

This study provides baseline data of native and non-native fish populations in Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Nye County, Nevada, that can serve as a gauge in native fish enhancement efforts. In support of Carson Slough restoration, comprehensive surveys of Ash Meadows NWR fishes were conducted seasonally from fall 2007 through summer 2008. A total of 853 sampling stations were created using Geographic Information Systems and National Agricultural Imagery Program. In four seasons of sampling, Amargosa pupfish (genus Cyprinodon) was captured at 388 of 659 stations. The number of captured Amargosa pupfish ranged from 5,815 (winter 2008) to 8,346 (summer 2008). The greatest success in capturing Amargosa pupfish was in warm water spring-pools with temperature greater than 25 degrees C, headwaters of warm water spring systems, and shallow (depths less than 10 centimeters) grassy marshes. In four seasons of sampling, Ash Meadows speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus nevadesis) was captured at 96 of 659 stations. The number of captured Ash Meadows speckled dace ranged from 1,009 (summer 2008) to 1,552 (winter 2008). The greatest success in capturing Ash Meadows speckled dace was in cool water spring-pools with temperature less than 20 degrees C and in the high flowing water outflows. Among 659 sampling stations within the range of Amargosa pupfish, red swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) was collected at 458 stations, western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) at 374 stations, and sailfin molly (Poecilia latipinna) at 128 stations. School Springs was restored during the course of this study. Prior to restoration of School Springs, maximum Warm Springs Amargosa pupfish (Cyprinodon nevadensis pectoralis) captured from the six springs of the Warm Springs Complex was 765 (fall 2007). In four seasons of sampling, Warm Springs Amargosa pupfish were captured at 85 of 177 stations. The greatest success in capturing Warm Springs Amargosa pupfish when co-occurring with red swamp crayfish and western mosquitofish was in water with temperature greater than 26 degrees C near the springhead, and in shallow (depths less than 10 centimeters) grassy marshes. Among 177 sampling stations within the range of Warm Springs Amargosa pupfish, red swamp crayfish were collected at 96 stations and western mosquitofish were collected at 49 stations. Removal of convict cichlid (Amatitlania nigrofasciata) from Fairbanks Spring was followed by a substantial increase in Ash Meadows Amargosa pupfish (Cyprinodon nevadensis mionectes) captures from 910 pre-removal to 3,056 post-removal. Red swamp crayfish was continually removed from Bradford 1 Spring, which seemed to cause an increase in the speckled dace population. Restoration of Kings Pool and Jackrabbit Springs promoted the success of native fishes with the greatest densities in restored reaches. Ongoing restoration of Carson Slough and its tributaries, as well as control and elimination of invasive species, is expected to increase abundance and distribution of Ash Meadows' native fish populations. Further analysis of data from this study will help determine the habitat characteristic(s) that promote native species and curtail non-native species.

50 CFR 80.51 - What activities are eligible for funding under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...) Restore and manage sport fish for the benefit of the public. (2) Conduct research on the problems of..., also referred to as a “waste reception facility,” is specifically designed to receive waste from... of recreational boating access facilities. (2) Conduct surveys to determine the adequacy, number...

50 CFR 80.51 - What activities are eligible for funding under the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...) Restore and manage sport fish for the benefit of the public. (2) Conduct research on the problems of..., also referred to as a “waste reception facility,” is specifically designed to receive waste from... of recreational boating access facilities. (2) Conduct surveys to determine the adequacy, number...

Restoring Anadromous Fish Habitat in Big Canyon Creek Watershed, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Rasmussen, Lynn

2006-07-01

The ''Restoring Anadromous Fish Habitat in the Big Canyon Creek Watershed'' is a multi-phase project to enhance steelhead trout in the Big Canyon Creek watershed by improving salmonid spawning and rearing habitat. Habitat is limited by extreme high runoff events, low summer flows, high water temperatures, poor instream cover, spawning gravel siltation, and sediment, nutrient and bacteria loading. Funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as part of the Northwest Power Planning Council's Fish and Wildlife Program, the project assists in mitigating damage to steelhead runs caused by the Columbia River hydroelectric dams. The project is sponsored by the Nezmore » Perce Soil and Water Conservation District. Target fish species include steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Steelhead trout within the Snake River Basin were listed in 1997 as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Accomplishments for the contract period September 1, 2004 through October 31, 2005 include; 2.7 riparian miles treated, 3.0 wetland acres treated, 5,263.3 upland acres treated, 106.5 riparian acres treated, 76,285 general public reached, 3,000 students reached, 40 teachers reached, 18 maintenance plans completed, temperature data collected at 6 sites, 8 landowner applications received and processed, 14 land inventories completed, 58 habitat improvement project designs completed, 5 newsletters published, 6 habitat plans completed, 34 projects installed, 2 educational workshops, 6 displays, 1 television segment, 2 public service announcements, a noxious weed GIS coverage, and completion of NEPA, ESA, and cultural resources requirements.« less

78 FR 76317 - Llano Seco Riparian Sanctuary Unit Restoration and Pumping Plant/Fish Screen Facility Protection...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-12-17

...We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), announce that the record of decision (ROD) for the Llano Seco Riparian Sanctuary Unit Restoration and Princeton, Codora, Glenn & Provident Irrigation Districts (PCGID-PID) Pumping Plan/Fish Screen Facility Protection Project is now available. The ROD includes a statement of the decisions made, the basis for the decisions, a description of the alternative considered, a description of the environmentally preferable alternative, an overview of the measures to minimize environmental impacts, and a summary of public involvement in the decision-making process.

Conservation Effects Assessment Project-Wetlands assessment in California's Central Valley and Upper Klamath River Basin

USGS Publications Warehouse

Duffy, Walter G.; Kahara, Sharon N.; Records, Rosemary M.

2011-01-01

Executive Summary-Ecosystem Services Derived from Wetlands Reserve Program Conservation Practices in California's Central Valley and Oregon's Upper Klamath River Basin. The Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) is one of several programs implemented by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Since the WRP's inception in 1990, it has resulted in the restoration of approximately 29,000 hectares in California's Central Valley (CCV) and roughly 12,300 hectares in Oregon's Upper Klamath River Basin (UKRB). Both the CCV and UKRB are agricultural dominated landscapes that have experienced extensive wetland losses and hydrological alteration. Restored habitats in the CCV and UKRB are thought to provide a variety of ecosystem services, but little is known about the actual benefits afforded. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) California Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Unit in collaboration with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service surveyed 70 WRP sites and 12 National Wildlife Refuge sites in the CCV, and 11 sites in the UKRB to estimate ecosystem services provided. In the CCV, sites were selected along three primary gradients; (1) restoration age, (2) management intensity, and (3) latitude (climate). Sites in the UKRB were assessed along restoration age and management intensity gradients where possible. The management intensity gradient included information about the type and frequency of conservation practices applied at each site, which was then ranked into three categories that differentiated sites primarily along a hydrological gradient. Information collected was used to estimate the following ecosystem services: Soil and vegetation nutrient content, soil loss reduction, floodwater storage as well as avian, amphibian, fish, and pollinator use and habitat availability. Prior to this study, very little was known about WRP habitat morphology in the CCV and UKRB. Therefore in this study, we described these habitats and related them to ecosystem services provided. Our results indicate that although WRP in the CCV and UKRB provide a number of benefits, there may be management mediated trade-offs among ecosystem services. In this report, we considered ecosystem services at the site-specific scale; however, future work will extend to include effects of WRP relative to surrounding cropland.

The Paradox of Restoring Native River Landscapes and Restoring Native Ecosystems in the Colorado River System

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Schmidt, J. C.

2014-12-01

Throughout the Colorado River basin (CRb), scientists and river managers collaborate to improve native ecosystems. Native ecosystems have deteriorated due to construction of dams and diversions that alter natural flow, sediment supply, and temperature regimes, trans-basin diversions that extract large amounts of water from some segments of the channel network, and invasion of non-native animals and plants. These scientist/manager collaborations occur in large, multi-stakeholder, adaptive management programs that include the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program, the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program, and the Upper Colorado River Endangered Species Recovery Program. Although a fundamental premise of native species recovery is that restoration of predam flow regimes inevitably leads to native species recovery, such is not the case in many parts of the CRb. For example, populations of the endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha) are largest in the sediment deficit, thermally altered conditions of the Colorado River downstream from Glen Canyon Dam, but these species occur in much smaller numbers in the upper CRb even though the flow regime, sediment supply, and sediment mass balance are less perturbed. Similar contrasts in the physical and biological response of restoration of predam flow regimes occurs in floodplains dominated by nonnative tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) where reestablishment of floods has the potential to exacerbate vertical accretion processes that disconnect the floodplain from the modern flow regime. A significant challenge in restoring segments of the CRb is to describe this paradox of physical and biological response to reestablishment of pre-dam flow regimes, and to clearly identify objectives of environmentally oriented river management. In many cases, understanding the nature of the perturbation to sediment mass balance caused by dams and diversions and understanding the constraints imposed by societal commitments to provide assured water supplies and hydroelectricity constrains the opportunities for rehabilitation and limits the management objectives to focus either on restoring predam physical processes or recovering native fish fauna and/or recovering native plant communities.

Application of the ELOHA Framework to Regulated Rivers in the Upper Tennessee River Basin: A Case Study

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

McManamay, Ryan A; Orth, Dr. Donald J; Dolloff, Dr. Charles A

2013-01-01

In order for habitat restoration in regulated rivers to be effective at large scales, broadly applicable frameworks are needed that provide measurable objectives and contexts for management. The Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) framework was created as a template to assess hydrologic alterations, develop relationships between altered streamflow and ecology, and establish environmental flow standards. We tested the utility of ELOHA in informing flow restoration applications for fish and riparian communities in regulated rivers in the Upper Tennessee River Basin (UTRB). We followed the steps of ELOHA to generate flow alteration-ecological response relationships and then determined whether those relationshipsmore » could predict fish and riparian responses to flow restoration in the Cheoah River, a regulated system within the UTRB. Although ELOHA provided a robust template to construct hydrologic information and predict hydrology for ungaged locations, our results do not support the assertion that over-generalized univariate relationships between flow and ecology can produce results sufficient to guide management in regulated rivers. After constructing multivariate models, we successfully developed predictive relationships between flow alterations and fish/riparian responses. In accordance with model predictions, riparian encroachment displayed consistent decreases with increases in flow magnitude in the Cheoah River; however, fish richness did not increase as predicted four years post- restoration. Our results suggest that altered temperature and substrate and the current disturbance regime may have reduced opportunities for fish species colonization. Our case study highlights the need for interdisciplinary science in defining environmental flows for regulated rivers and the need for adaptive management approaches once flows are restored.« less

A long-term study of ecological impacts of river channelization on the population of an endangered fish: Lessons learned for assessment and restoration

USGS Publications Warehouse

Roberts, James H.; Anderson, Gregory B.; Angermeier, Paul

2016-01-01

Projects to assess environmental impact or restoration success in rivers focus on project-specific questions but can also provide valuable insights for future projects. Both restoration actions and impact assessments can become “adaptive” by using the knowledge gained from long-term monitoring and analysis to revise the actions, monitoring, conceptual model, or interpretation of findings so that subsequent actions or assessments are better informed. Assessments of impact or restoration success are especially challenging when the indicators of interest are imperiled species and/or the impacts being addressed are complex. From 1997 to 2015, we worked closely with two federal agencies to monitor habitat availability for and population density of Roanoke logperch (Percina rex), an endangered fish, in a 24-km-long segment of the upper Roanoke River, VA. We primarily used a Before-After-Control-Impact analytical framework to assess potential impacts of a river channelization project on the P. rex population. In this paper, we summarize how our extensive monitoring facilitated the evolution of our (a) conceptual understanding of the ecosystem and fish population dynamics; (b) choices of ecological indicators and analytical tools; and (c) conclusions regarding the magnitude, mechanisms, and significance of observed impacts. Our experience with this case study taught us important lessons about how to adaptively develop and conduct a monitoring program, which we believe are broadly applicable to assessments of environmental impact and restoration success in other rivers. In particular, we learned that (a) pre-treatment planning can enhance monitoring effectiveness, help avoid unforeseen pitfalls, and lead to more robust conclusions; (b) developing adaptable conceptual and analytical models early was crucial to organizing our knowledge, guiding our study design, and analyzing our data; (c) catchment-wide processes that we did not monitor, or initially consider, had profound implications for interpreting our findings; and (d) using multiple analytical frameworks, with varying assumptions, led to clearer interpretation of findings than the use of a single framework alone. Broader integration of these guiding principles into monitoring studies, though potentially challenging, could lead to more scientifically defensible assessments of project effects.