National Oceanic & Atmospheric AdministrationNational Oceanic & Atmospheric AdministrationNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Marine Fisheries ServiceProtected Resources DivisionProtected Resources DivisionSouthwest RegionSouthwest Region
coho salmon parrOncorhynchus kisutch
Federal Recovery PlanningFederal Recovery PlanningNorth Central California Coast North Central California Coast
10 Populations:10 Populations:Four Recovery Four Recovery
DomainsDomainsSouthern Oregon/ Southern Oregon/
Northern CaliforniaNorthern CaliforniaCoordinator: Greg Coordinator: Greg
BryantBryant
Central ValleyCentral ValleyCoordinator: Diane Coordinator: Diane
WindhamWindham
South Central CoastSouth Central CoastCoordinator: Mark Coordinator: Mark
CapelliCapelli
North Central CoastNorth Central CoastCoordinator: Charlotte Coordinator: Charlotte
AmbroseAmbrose
Each Domain Assigned:Each Domain Assigned:1 or More Populations1 or More PopulationsScience Center led TRTScience Center led TRTRecovery CoordinatorRecovery Coordinator
RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE EVOLUTIONARILY SIGNIFICANT UNIT OF
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA COAST COHO SALMON
INTERNAL REVIEW DRAFTVersion: MARCH 31, 2008Southwest Regional Office
National Marine Fisheries ServiceSanta Rosa, CA
Salmonid Recovery: Salmonid Recovery: The Road MapThe Road MapESAESA,, Case Law & Policies Case Law & Policies
ESA §4(f)(1)ESA §4(f)(1)
– ……[NMFS] shall [NMFS] shall develop and implementdevelop and implement plans plans for the for the conservation and survivalconservation and survival of of endangered species and threatened species…endangered species and threatened species…
– ……in developing and implementing recovery in developing and implementing recovery plans [NMFS] shall, to the maximum extent plans [NMFS] shall, to the maximum extent practicable – practicable –
– Give Give prioritypriority to...species… to...species… most likely to most likely to benefitbenefit from such plans, particularly those from such plans, particularly those species that are, or may be, in conflict with species that are, or may be, in conflict with construction or other development projects or construction or other development projects or other forms of economic activity…other forms of economic activity…
Salmonid Recovery: Salmonid Recovery: The Road MapThe Road MapESA, ESA, Case LawCase Law & Policies & Policies
• Management Management actionsactions must be must be site specificsite specific wherever wherever feasiblefeasible
• Actions and criteria mustActions and criteria must link link to identified to identified threatsthreats including changes in threats including changes in threats since listing and be since listing and be organized by the 5 listing organized by the 5 listing factors of Federal Register factors of Federal Register Notice listing the speciesNotice listing the species
• Criteria mustCriteria must measuremeasure whether whether threatsthreats have been have been abated abated and address delisting and address delisting not just downlisting.not just downlisting.
• Fund for Animals v. Fund for Animals v. Babbitt (1995)Babbitt (1995)
• SWCBD v. Babbitt SWCBD v. Babbitt (1999)(1999)
• Defenders of Wildlife Defenders of Wildlife v. Babbit (2001)v. Babbit (2001)
• Southwest Center Southwest Center for Biological for Biological Diversity v. Babbit Diversity v. Babbit (1999)(1999)
• Cannot promise to Cannot promise to “develop criteria later” “develop criteria later” or use “future or use “future research” as means to research” as means to not address threatsnot address threats
Salmonid Recovery: The Road Map Salmonid Recovery: The Road Map ESA, Case Law & ESA, Case Law & PoliciesPoliciesA Few Examples:A Few Examples:• House Resources Committee Report on Recovery Plan House Resources Committee Report on Recovery Plan
Development (2006)Development (2006)
• NMFS Endangered and Threatened Species Interim NMFS Endangered and Threatened Species Interim Recovery Planning Guidance (Oct 2004 revised 2006)Recovery Planning Guidance (Oct 2004 revised 2006) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/recovery/http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/recovery/
• USFWS/NMFS Interagency Cooperative Policy for Peer USFWS/NMFS Interagency Cooperative Policy for Peer Review in Endangered Species Activities (1994)Review in Endangered Species Activities (1994)
• Interagency Cooperative Policy on Information Interagency Cooperative Policy on Information Standards under the ESA (1994)Standards under the ESA (1994)
• Interagency Cooperative Policy on Recovery Plan Interagency Cooperative Policy on Recovery Plan Implementation under the ESA (1994)Implementation under the ESA (1994)
Population Structure/ViabilityPopulation Structure/Viability(Science Center Technical Recovery (Science Center Technical Recovery
Team)Team)
Historical StructureHistorical StructureAn Analysis of Historical Population Structure for ESUs An Analysis of Historical Population Structure for ESUs (Bjorkstedt, et al. 2005)(Bjorkstedt, et al. 2005)Finalized Oct 2005 Amended 2007Finalized Oct 2005 Amended 2007
Biological Viability CriteriaBiological Viability CriteriaA Framework for Assessing the Viability of Threatened and A Framework for Assessing the Viability of Threatened and Endangered Salmon and Steelhead in the NCCC DomainEndangered Salmon and Steelhead in the NCCC Domain(Spence et al. 2007)(Spence et al. 2007)June 2007 Draft ~ Final Expected in AprilJune 2007 Draft ~ Final Expected in April
Research & Monitoring RecommendationsResearch & Monitoring RecommendationsFinal Expected in AprilFinal Expected in April
Recovery Plan FoundationRecovery Plan Foundation
Historical Historical Population Population StructureStructure
Populations Populations Assigned Into Assigned Into
Diversity StrataDiversity Strata
Independent vs Independent vs DependentDependent
Independent: Focus of Independent: Focus of Recovery PlanRecovery Plan
CCC coho salmon CCC coho salmon analysis will include analysis will include
dependent populationsdependent populations
Napa
Ukiah
J enner
Hayward
Gualala
San J ose
Dos Rios
Petrolia
Santa Cruz
San Rafael
Santa Rosa
Fort Bragg
Walnut Creek
Half Moon Bay
San Francisco
Sacramento
Ca l i f o r n i a
0 37.5
Miles
City
River
State Highway
US Highway
Coho Diversity Strata
Lost Coast
Navarro Point-Gualala Point
Coastal Gualala Point
San Francisco Bay
Santa Cruz Mountains
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
Central California Coast Coho SalmonEvolutionarily Significant Unit
Coho Focus Populations
Areaof
Detail
1
Ten Mile River
Garcia River
Big River
Russian River
Lagunitas Creek Napa River
San Lorenzo River
Guadalupe River
Noyo River
Mattole River
101
Cottaneva Creek
Big Salmon Creek
Caspar Creek
Pudding Creek
Navarro River
Gualala River
Walker Creek
Pine Gulch
Redwood Creek
Pescadero Creek
Gazos Creek
Waddell CreekScott Creek
San Vicente Creek
Aptos Creek
Albion River
Marine Recover
yCoho Salmon
Chinook Salmon
Steelhead Napa
Ukiah
J enner
Hayward
Gualala
San J ose
Dos Rios
Petrolia
Santa Cruz
San Rafael
Santa Rosa
Fort Bragg
Walnut Creek
Half Moon Bay
San Francisco
Sacramento
Ca l i f o r n i a
0 25
Miles
City
River
State Highway
US Highway
CCC Coho Historical Extent
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
Central California Coast Coho SalmonHistorical Population Structure
Areaof
Detail
1
Ten Mile River
Garcia River
Big River
Russian River
Lagunitas CreekNapa River
San Lorenzo River
Guadalupe River
Mattole River
101
Navarro River
Gualala River
Pescadero Creek
Aptos Creek
Viability Criteria for Populations IN DRAFTViability Criteria for Populations IN DRAFT
• Minimum Threshold of Potential Habitat Minimum Threshold of Potential Habitat Available (IP km)Available (IP km)
• Spawner DensitySpawner Density
• Annual Run SizeAnnual Run Size
• Effective Population SizeEffective Population Size
• Total Population SizeTotal Population Size
• Population DeclinePopulation Decline
• CatastropheCatastrophe
• Hatchery InfluenceHatchery Influence
NMFS Science Center: NMFS Science Center: Population Viability CriteriaPopulation Viability Criteria
139 Total Populations & The Marine Environment139 Total Populations & The Marine Environment
Objectively narrowing the universe and prioritizing Objectively narrowing the universe and prioritizing populations…populations…
The Nature Conservancy Protocol: CAP… Not Just a Threats The Nature Conservancy Protocol: CAP… Not Just a Threats AssessmentAssessment
~ Current Population/Habitat Conditions ~ Current Population/Habitat Conditions (HAB8 & Others)(HAB8 & Others)~ Populations/Habitat Threats ~ Populations/Habitat Threats (State, local, stakeholder, public (State, local, stakeholder, public
data)data)~ Feasibility/Benefit/Cost of Threat Abatement ~ Feasibility/Benefit/Cost of Threat Abatement (TNC protocol)(TNC protocol)~ Strategies for poor conditions & high threats ~ Strategies for poor conditions & high threats (TNC protocol)(TNC protocol)~ Analyze across populations, Diversity Strata & ESU/DPS ~ Analyze across populations, Diversity Strata & ESU/DPS (PVC (PVC
& RT)& RT)
NCCC Recovery Planning
Inform
Improve Reduce
FUTURE THREATSFUTURE THREATSCURRENT CURRENT CONDITIONSCONDITIONS
STRATEGIES AND ACTIONSSTRATEGIES AND ACTIONS
Assessment of Target Viability CCC Coho ESU Independent Populations
Entry
assistance ON Bold =
Current Indicator Ratings Italics = Desired
Conservation Target Enter # of Target
Category Key Attribute Indicator Poor Fair Good Very Good
Current Rating
4 Summer Rearing
Condition Pool habitat area/ frequency/ availability
Pool habitat (% by length) across all IP-km (gradient < 5%)
<35 % 35-40 % 40-50 % >50
Poor
4 Summer Rearing
Condition Pool habitat complexity
Average shelter rating of 100 or greater for pools in the watershed.
0-25% of all pools in watershed have >100 rating
25-50% of all pools in watershed have >100 rating
50-75% of all pools in watershed have >100 rating
>75%
Fair
4 Summer Rearing
Condition Pool habitat quality
% of pools that are > 3 ft (at deepest point) across all IP-km [all primary pools in potential rearing habitat]
<50 50-80 80-100 100%
Poor
4 Summer Rearing
Condition Summer water temperature
MWAT in all potential summer rearing habitat (IP-km)
>17 15-17 <15 <14
Fair
Example CAP Viability Table… Example CAP Viability Table…
CURRENT CONDITIONSCURRENT CONDITIONSBY LIFE STAGEBY LIFE STAGE
Data LimitationsData Limitations
Structured Decision ProcessStructured Decision Process– Expert panel to rate flow conditionsExpert panel to rate flow conditions– Decision matrix for toxicityDecision matrix for toxicity– A posterioriA posteriori ratings for others once ratings for others once
distribution of data can be observeddistribution of data can be observed
NCCC Recovery Planning
Inform
Improve Reduce
FUTURE THREATSFUTURE THREATSCURRENT CURRENT
CONDITIONSCONDITIONS
STRATEGIES AND ACTIONSSTRATEGIES AND ACTIONS
Rank Overall Threat Levels by Life Stage
Identify Highest Priorities for Strategy Development
Life Stages
Spawners EggEmergent Fry
Summer Rearing
Winter Rearing Smolts
Mulitiple Life Stages
Overall Threat Rank
Th
rea
ts
Roads & Railroads Medium High High High High Medium High High
Wood Harvesting Low Medium MediumVery High Medium High High Very High
Storms & Flooding Medium Medium High High High Medium . Medium
Droughts Low Medium Medium High Medium Medium Low High
Effluents Low Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low
1.Roads and Railroads2.Droughts3.Logging and Wood Harvesting4.Channel Modification5.Water Diversion and
Impoundment
6.Climate Change7.Agricultural Practices8.Residential and Commercial
Development9.Disease, Predation, and
Competition
Top Ranked Threats for CCC coho salmon
Freshwater• Fire and Fuel Management • Fishing and Collecting • Hatcheries & Aquaculture • Livestock farming and ranching • Mining • Recreational Areas and
Activities • Storms and Flooding
Marine• Reduced genetic variability• Commercial and Recreational
Bycatch
Additional Threats Evaluated
NCCC Recovery Planning
Inform
Improve Reduce
FUTURE THREATSFUTURE THREATSCURRENT CURRENT
CONDITIONSCONDITIONS
STRATEGIES AND ACTIONSSTRATEGIES AND ACTIONS
Strategies for Recovery
For Example: Our analysis ranks Climate Change as a high or very high threat particularly in the southern ESU and the marine environment
To address this threat:• protect cool water refugia• prevent lost or conversion of forest lands• manage forests for older stages• operate existing reservoirs to maintain cool flows• fund and implement coordinated coast-wide monitoring• develop partnerships for implementation
Strategic PartnershipsStrategic PartnershipsState AgenciesState Agencies
California Department of Fish and GameCalifornia Department of Fish and GameWater Quality Control BoardWater Quality Control Board
California Department of Forestry ~ Jackson Demonstration California Department of Forestry ~ Jackson Demonstration State ForestState Forest
ScientistsScientists Southwest Fisheries Science CenterSouthwest Fisheries Science Center
TNC Facilitated Scientific Review WorkshopTNC Facilitated Scientific Review WorkshopFlow Panel WorkshopFlow Panel Workshop
Collaboration with UC Berkeley, Lawrence Lab & MicrosoftCollaboration with UC Berkeley, Lawrence Lab & Microsoft
NGO’sNGO’sThe Nature ConservancyThe Nature ConservancySonoma Ecology CenterSonoma Ecology Center
StakeholdersStakeholdersWater AgenciesWater Agencies
Timber CompaniesTimber CompaniesConsultantsConsultants
Santa Rosa Office: PRD, HCD, RCSanta Rosa Office: PRD, HCD, RC
Moving ForwardMoving ForwardSingle Species plan for coho, Single Species plan for coho, Multi-Species for other Multi-Species for other speciesspecies
Sequence: CCC coho Sequence: CCC coho salmon, CCC steelhead, CC salmon, CCC steelhead, CC Chinook, NC steelhead Chinook, NC steelhead (2009)(2009)
CCC Coho Salmon Internal DraftCCC Coho Salmon Internal Draft
In Internal Review April 2008In Internal Review April 2008
North Central California Coast DomainNorth Central California Coast DomainStrategy for CompletionStrategy for Completion