October 31, 2013Dawn York, Coastal Scientist

Restoring Access to Historic Migratory Fish Habitat in the Cape Fear River basin; Lock and Dam No. 2 and No. 3

“Restoring greater fish passage beyond these two barriers is critical to rebuilding migratory fish populations in the Cape Fear River and a

top priority of this Action Plan.” NOAA Final Action Plan 2013

Habitat Issue Limiting Recovery

Overfishing, declining water quality and habitat, and blockage of upstream spawning migrations have continued to limit once thriving populations of migratory fish.

In 1962, a program was implemented in which the lock at each of the three Lock and Dams was used for moving fish upstream to continue spawning runs.

Nichols and Louder (1970) estimated between 1962 and 1966, 9,770 American shad passed through Lock and Dam No. 1, and only 50 passed at Lock and Dam No.3.

Atlantic sturgeon on a dock in 1901.

Goal 1: Restore access to historic migratory fish habitat.

Problem Statement 1: Obstructions block or impede migratory fish access to historic spawning and nursery habitat.

Target 1: Anadromous fish access is restored to the approximately 40% of their remaining historic habitat that is currently disrupted or blocked by dams.

Recreational anglers took an estimated 12,765 trips in the Cape Fear River. 

On these trips, surveyed anglers traveled an average of 47 miles round trip and spent an average of $33.76 per trip.

$431,000 was spent on recreational fishing trips   economic impact of approximately $600,000 to the state economy. 

In 2013 commercial fishermen landed 24,888 pounds of American shad worth $27,807 economic impact of $45,000 to the state economy.

Overall, the estimated economic impact of the Cape Fear River American shad fishery (recreational and commercial) in 2013 is upwards of $645,000.

What is the economic impact to the State?

ProsL&D2 next in lineDetermination of effectiveness at L&D1 not completeL&D3 less expensiveGrant application for L&D3 previously submittedConsScour holeStructure stabilityMaintenance vs. RestorationExpensiveUSACE Authorizations

Section 408/Non-federal local sponsor

L&D 2 vs. L&D 3

Habitat restoration to help recover Listed Species, sustain or help rebuild Managed Species

Range of awards $500K - $10 millionThree-Year Cooperative Agreement

NOAA FY 2013 Habitat Restoration Grant

Category Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 TotalPersonnel $570,420 $384,657 $322,087 $1,277,164Equipment N/A $5,000 $5,000 $10,000Supplies/Travel $21,860 $5,863 $5,863 $33,586Subcontractor (Geotechnical)

$3,800 NA $12,000 $15,800

Construction N/A $3,999,375 $2,034,375 $6,033,750State Match (25%)

N/A $1,333,125 $678,125 $2,011,250

Annual Total Contractual Expense

$596,080 $4,394,895 $2,379,325 $9,381,550

Partnership Organization

Proposed Timeline and Milestones

Major Evaluation Criteria(Total = 100 points)

L&D2 Average Technical Scores

L&D3 Average Technical Scores

19 Recommended Proposals – Tech

Scores

Importance and Applicability 32.2 30.7

30.6

Technical/Scientific Merit 21.5 20.7 20.5

Applicant Qualifications 6.6 6.4 6.8

Project Costs 12.8 12.7 13.5

Outreach and Education 5.8 5.8 4.9

Total Average Technical Score

78.9 76.3 76.3

So close….and still in the running

Out of 150 proposals nationwide, Lock and Dam 2 proposal was #21 and Lock and Dam 3 proposal was #25. The top 19 proposals were funded.

Interim Solution

o Cape Fear River Watcho US Fish and Wildlife Serviceo National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration o Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership o National Marine Fisheries Service o Division of Marine Fisheries o Wildlife Resources Commission o Dial Cordy and Associates, Inc. o Maritech Dredging o US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Wilmington Division o Martin Marietta Aggregates

Partners

Awarded one of 10 “Waters to Watch” list for 2013

Proposed jointly by SARP and ACFHPLocally driven conservation project

prioritized by FHPShowcase success in conservation effortsNOAA paying attention – National Level

InterestCoastal Recreation Fishing License Fund