Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plan Module for Columbia River Estuary Salmon and Steelhead, 8345-8349 [2011-3243]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices
Notification of Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding
the reimbursement of antidumping
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this POR. Failure
to comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
This administrative review and this
notice are in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19
CFR 351.213 and 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: February 7, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–3246 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
On page 7152, in the first column, in
the signature block, ‘‘Dated: January 31,
2010’’ should read ‘‘Dated: January 31,
2011’’.
[FR Doc. C1–2011–2884 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XA130
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Recovery Plan Module for Columbia
River Estuary Salmon and Steelhead
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; recovery
plan module for Columbia River estuary
salmon and steelhead.
AGENCY:
NMFS announces the
adoption of the Columbia River Estuary
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Recovery
International Trade Administration
Plan Module for Salmon and Steelhead
(Estuary Module). The Estuary Module
[A–570–836]
addresses the estuary recovery needs of
all ESA-listed salmon and steelhead in
Notice of Final Results of Expedited
the Columbia River Basin. All Columbia
Sunset Review of the Antidumping
Duty Order: Glycine From the People’s Basin salmon and steelhead ESA
recovery plans will incorporate the
Republic of China
Estuary Module by reference.
Correction
ADDRESSES: For additional information
about the Estuary Module, contact Patty
In notice document 2011–2883 on
Dornbusch, NMFS, 1201 NE Lloyd
page 7150 in the issue of Wednesday,
Boulevard, Suite 1100, Portland, OR
February 9, 2011, make the following
97232. Electronic copies of the Estuary
correction:
On page 7150, in the third column, in Module and a response to public
comments on the Proposed Estuary
the signature block, ‘‘Dated: January 31,
Module are available online at https://
2010’’ should read ‘‘Dated: January 31,
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery2011’’.
Planning/ESA–Recovery-Plans/Estuary[FR Doc. C1–2011–2883 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]
Module.cfm. For a CD–ROM of these
BILLING CODE 1504–01–D
documents, call Joanna Donnor at (503)
736–4721 or e-mail a request to
joanna.donnor@noaa.gov with the
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
subject line ‘‘CD–ROM Request for Final
Estuary Recovery Plan Module.’’
International Trade Administration
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[A–351–602, A–588–602, A–583–605, A–549–
Patty Dornbusch, (503) 230–5430.
807, A–570–814]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Certain Carbon Steel Butt-Weld Pipe
Background
Fittings From Brazil, Japan, Taiwan,
Thailand, and the People’s Republic of
The Endangered Species Act of 1973
China: Final Results of the Expedited
(ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. et seq.)
Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping
requires that a recovery plan be
Duty Orders
developed and implemented for species
listed as endangered or threatened
Correction
under the statute, unless such a plan
In notice document 2011–2884
would not promote the recovery of the
appearing on pages 7151–7152 in the
species. Recovery plans must contain (1)
issue of Wednesday, February 9, 2011,
objective, measurable criteria which,
make the following correction:
when met, would result in a
SUMMARY:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Feb 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8345
determination that the species is no
longer threatened or endangered; (2)
site-specific management actions
necessary to achieve the plan’s goals;
and (3) estimates of the time required
and costs to implement recovery
actions. NMFS is the agency responsible
for developing recovery plans for
salmon and steelhead, and we will use
the plans to guide efforts to restore
endangered and threatened Pacific
salmon and steelhead to the point that
they are again self-sustaining in their
ecosystems and no longer need the
protections of the ESA.
In the Columbia River basin, the
following salmon evolutionarily
significant units (ESUs) and steelhead
distinct population segments (DPSs) are
listed as threatened or endangered
under the ESA: Snake River Sockeye
salmon, Snake River spring/summer
Chinook salmon, Snake River fall
Chinook salmon, Snake River steelhead,
Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon, Upper Columbia River
steelhead, Middle Columbia River
steelhead, Lower Columbia River
Chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River
coho salmon, Columbia River chum
salmon, Lower Columbia River
steelhead, Upper Willamette River
spring Chinook salmon, and Upper
Willamette River steelhead. Recovery
plans are either complete or in
development for these 13 salmon ESUs
and steelhead DPSs.
Because we believe that local support
for recovery plans is essential, we have
approached recovery planning
collaboratively, with strong reliance on
existing state, regional, and tribal
planning processes. For instance, in the
Columbia Basin, recovery plans have
been or are being developed by regional
recovery boards convened by
Washington State, by the State of
Oregon in conjunction with stakeholder
teams, and by NMFS in Idaho with the
participation of local agencies. We
review locally developed recovery
plans, ensure that they satisfy ESA
requirements, and make them available
for public review and comment before
formally adopting them as ESA recovery
plans.
Recovery plans must consider the
factors affecting species survival
throughout the entire life cycle. The
salmonid life cycle includes spawning
and rearing in the tributaries, migrating
through the mainstem Columbia River
and estuary to the ocean, and returning
to the natal stream. In the estuary,
juvenile and adult salmon and steelhead
undergo physiological changes needed
to make the transition to and from
saltwater. They use the varying subhabitats of the estuary—the shallows,
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
8346
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices
side channels, deeper channels, and
plume of freshwater extending
offshore—at varying times of the year.
While local recovery planners
appropriately focus on the tributary
conditions within their jurisdictions
and domains, NMFS recognized the
need for consistent treatment of the
factors in the estuary that affect all of
the listed salmon and steelhead in the
Columbia Basin. The Estuary Module
addresses limiting factors, threats, and
needed actions in the Columbia River
estuary for the 13 ESUs and DPSs of
salmon and steelhead listed in the
basin. Each locally developed recovery
plan will incorporate by reference the
Estuary Module as its estuary
component.
This approach will ensure consistent
treatment across locally developed
recovery plans of the effects of the
Columbia River estuary as well as a
system-wide approach to evaluating and
implementing estuary recovery actions.
The planning area of the Estuary
Module overlaps to some extent with
the planning areas for locally developed
plans for lower Columbia River
tributaries. This overlap occurs in the
tidally influenced portions of the
tributaries, and in such instances the
local plans will reflect the Estuary
Module but may specify actions at a
higher level of detail.
The Estuary Module was developed
for NMFS by the Lower Columbia River
Estuary Partnership (Estuary
Partnership), contractor, and PC Trask &
Associates, Inc., sub-contractor. The
Estuary Partnership was established in
1995 as part of the Environmental
Protection Agency’s National Estuary
Program. The Estuary Partnership’s
major roles are to convene common
interests, help integrate conservation
efforts, increase public awareness and
involvement, and promote informationbased problem solving. The Estuary
Partnership is one of the primary
organizations focused on conserving
and improving the environment of the
Columbia River estuary. The
Partnership’s expertise in assessment,
planning, and stakeholder connections
made it uniquely suited to develop this
Estuary Module. PC Trask & Associates,
Inc., is an environmental planning and
project management firm with a focus
on projects related to the Columbia
River estuary. The firm also works with
Federal, state, and local project sponsors
to identify and implement ecosystemrelated restoration projects in the
estuary.
NMFS made the draft Estuary Module
available for public review as a
Proposed Estuary Recovery Plan
Module. A notice of availability
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Feb 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
soliciting public comments on the
Proposed Estuary Module was
published in the Federal Register on
January 8, 2008 (73 FR 161). We
conducted public meetings at the
following locations, dates, and times:
• Astoria, OR, January 29, 2008, at the
Columbia River Maritime Museum,
6:30–8:30 p.m.
• Vancouver, WA, January 31, 2008,
at the Water Resources Education
Center, 6:30–8:30 p.m.
We received nine comment letters by
mail, fax, or e-mail on the proposed
recovery plan module from a variety of
sources, including local, state, and
Federal Government entities, nonprofit
organizations, and interested
individuals. A summary of the
comments, responses, and changes
made in the Estuary Module is available
online at https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/
Salmon-Recovery-Planning/ESA–
Recovery-Plans/Estuary-Module.cfm.
The final Estuary Module is also
available online at https://www
nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-RecoveryPlanning/ESA–Recovery-Plans/EstuaryModule.cfm. This final version
constitutes the Columbia River Estuary
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Recovery
Plan Module for Salmon and Steelhead.
We are committed to implementing
the actions in the Estuary Module for
which we have the authority, to working
cooperatively on implementation of
other actions, and to encouraging other
Federal agencies to implement Estuary
Module actions for which they have
responsibility and authority. We will
also encourage the states of Washington
and Oregon to seek similar
implementation commitments from
state agencies and local governments.
We expect the Estuary Module to help
us and other Federal agencies take a
more consistent approach to future
section 7 consultations and other ESA
decisions. For example, the Estuary
Module will provide greater biological
context for the effects that a proposed
action may have on a listed ESU or DPS.
Science summarized in the Estuary
Module will become a component of the
‘‘best available information’’ for section
7 consultations as well as for section 10
habitat conservation plans and other
ESA decisions.
module first identifies and prioritizes
limiting factors by summarizing the
changes that have occurred in the
estuary since European settlement and
evaluating the potential of current
physical, biological, or chemical
conditions to affect salmon and
steelhead. The module next describes
the underlying causes of these limiting
factors. These causes are referred to as
threats and can be either human or
environmental in origin. For example,
the limiting factor of flow-related
estuary habitat changes is caused by a
combination of threats including water
withdrawals, flow regulation, natural
climate cycles, and human
contributions to global climate change.
The module prioritizes the threats based
on the significance of the limiting factor
to which they contribute and the
relative contribution of each threat to
one or more limiting factors. Finally, the
module identifies management actions
intended to reduce the threats and
increase the survival of salmon and
steelhead during estuarine rearing and
migration. Costs are included for each of
the actions.
The Estuary Module synthesizes
diverse scientific sources and
information provided by scientists who
were consulted by the author. Three key
documents informed the Estuary
Module: Mainstem Lower Columbia
River and Columbia River Estuary
Subbasin Plan and Supplement
(Northwest Power and Conservation
Council, 2004); Salmon at River’s End:
The Role of the Estuary in Decline and
Recovery of Columbia River Salmon
(Bottom et al., 2005); and Role of the
Estuary in the Recovery of Columbia
River Basin Salmon and Steelhead
(Fresh et al., 2005). Other sources,
including staff from the NMFS
Northwest Fisheries Science Center and
Northwest Regional Office, Estuary
Partnership, and the Washington Lower
Columbia Fish Recovery Board,
supplemented these key documents.
Additionally, interactions with the
Northwest Power and Conservation
Council, the Mid-Columbia Sounding
Board, the Upper Willamette
Stakeholder Team, and the Oregon
Lower Columbia River Stakeholder
Team influenced the module.
The Estuary Module
The purpose of the Estuary Module is
to identify and prioritize management
actions that, if implemented, would
reduce the impacts of limiting factors,
meaning the physical, biological, or
chemical conditions that impede
salmon and steelhead survival during
their migration through and rearing in
the estuary and plume ecosystems. The
Planning Area and ESUs and DPSs
Addressed
For the purposes of the Estuary
Module, the estuary includes the entire
continuum where tidal forces and river
flows interact, regardless of the extent of
saltwater intrusion (Fresh et al., 2005;
Northwest Power and Conservation
Council, 2004). The upstream boundary
of the planning area is Bonneville Dam,
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices
and the downstream boundary includes
the Columbia River plume.
During their life cycles, all listed
salmon and steelhead in the Columbia
River basin rely for some period on the
Columbia River estuary. The Estuary
Module is therefore intended to address
all eight listed ESUs and all five listed
DPSs.
Recovery Goals, Objectives, and
Criteria
Because the Estuary Module
addresses only a portion of the species’
life cycles and will be incorporated into
locally developed recovery plans that
NMFS will adopt as ESA recovery
plans, it does not contain recovery goals
and objectives or de-listing criteria. The
domain-specific recovery plans into
which this Estuary Module is
incorporated will contain those
elements.
Causes for Decline and Current Threats
The estuary and plume are
considerably degraded from their
historical condition. The Estuary
Module identifies these changes,
evaluates their potential effects on
salmon and steelhead, and discusses
their underlying causes (referred to as
threats). The threats that have caused
changes in the estuary can be broadly
classified as habitat-related threats,
threats related to the food web and
species interactions, and other threats.
Habitat: The estuary is about 20
percent smaller than it was historically
(Northwest Power and Conservation
Council, 2004). This reduction is due
mostly to diking and filling used to
convert the floodplain to agricultural,
industrial, commercial, and residential
uses. Flows entering the estuary also
have changed dramatically: spring
freshets have decreased and other
aspects of the historical hydrograph
have been altered. These changes are the
result of flow regulation by the
hydropower system, water withdrawal
for irrigation and water supplies, and
climate fluctuations.
Flow alterations and diking and
filling practices have affected salmon
and steelhead in several ways. Access to
and use of floodplain habitats by oceantype ESUs (salmonids that typically rear
for a shorter time in tributaries and a
longer time in the estuary) have been
severely compromised through
alterations in the presence and
availability of these important habitats.
Shifts in timing, magnitude, and
duration of flows have also changed
erosion and accretion processes,
resulting in changes to in-channel
habitat availability and connectivity.
Elevated temperatures of water
entering the estuary are also a threat to
salmon and steelhead. Degradation of
tributary riparian habitat by land-use
practices, in addition to reservoir
heating, has caused these increased
temperatures. Toxic contaminants in the
estuary and plume have also degraded
water quality. Contaminants found in
the estuary and plume include
agricultural pesticides, fertilizers, and
industrial chemicals. Contaminants can
kill salmon and steelhead immediately,
can alter their behavior in ways that
increase their mortality (such as making
them more susceptible to predation),
and can accumulate over time and cause
8347
increased mortality (for example by
suppressing the fishes’ immune system).
Food Web and Species Interactions:
Limiting factors related to the food web
and species interactions result from
many of the threats to salmon and
steelhead in the estuary. Examples
include relatively recent increases in
Caspian tern and pinniped predation on
salmonids, due at least in part to human
alterations of the ecosystem, as well as
the more complex and less understood
shift from macrodetritus-based primary
plant production to phytoplankton
production. The introduction of exotic
species is another ecosystem alteration
whose impacts are not clearly
understood.
Other Threats: The estuary also is
influenced by thousands of over-water
and instream structures, such as jetties,
pilings, pile dikes, rafts, docks,
breakwaters, bulkheads, revetments,
groins, and ramps. These structures alter
river circulation patterns, sediment
deposition, and light penetration, and
they form microhabitats that often
benefit predators. In some cases,
structures reduce juvenile access to lowvelocity habitats. Ship wake stranding is
an example of another threat to salmon
and steelhead in the estuary whose full
impact is not well understood.
Recovery Strategies and Actions
The Estuary Module identifies 23
management actions to improve the
survival of salmon and steelhead
migrating through and rearing in the
estuary and plume environments. Table
1 identifies these management actions
and shows their relationship to threats.
TABLE 1—MANAGEMENT ACTIONS TO ADDRESS THREATS
Threat
Flow-related threats ....................
Climate cycles
change 2.
and
Management action
global
climate
Water withdrawal ...................................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Flow regulation .......................................
Sediment-related threats .............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Feb 11, 2011
Entrapment of fine sediment in reservoirs.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
CRE1–1: Protect intact riparian areas in the estuary and restore riparian areas that are degraded.2
CRE–2: Operate the hydrosystem to reduce the effects of reservoir surface heating, or conduct mitigation measures.2
CRE–3: Protect and/or enhance estuary instream flows influenced
by Columbia River tributary/mainstem water withdrawals and
other water management actions in tributaries.2
CRE–3: Protect and/or enhance estuary instream flows influenced
by Columbia River tributary/mainstem water withdrawals and
other water management actions in tributaries.
CRE–4: Adjust the timing, magnitude, and frequency of
hydrosystem flows (especially spring freshets) entering the estuary and plume to better reflect the natural hydrologic cycle, improve access to habitats, and provide better transport of coarse
sediments and nutrients in the estuary and plume.
CRE–3: Protect and/or enhance estuary instream flows influenced
by Columbia River tributary/mainstem water withdrawals and
other water management actions in tributaries.
CRE–5: Study and mitigate the effects of entrapment of fine sediment in reservoirs, to improve nourishment of the estuary and
plume.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
8348
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices
TABLE 1—MANAGEMENT ACTIONS TO ADDRESS THREATS—Continued
Threat
Management action
Impaired transport of coarse sediment ..
CRE–6: Reduce the export of sand and gravels via dredge operations by using dredged materials beneficially.
CRE–8: Remove or modify pilings and pile dikes with low economic value when removal or modification would benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve ecosystem health.
CRE–4: Adjust the timing, magnitude, and frequency of
hydrosystem flows (especially spring freshets) entering the estuary and plume to better reflect the natural hydrologic cycle, improve access to habitats, and provide better transport of coarse
sediments and nutrients in the estuary and plume.
CRE–7: Reduce entrainment and habitat effects resulting from
main- and side-channel dredge activities and ship ballast intake
in the estuary.
CRE–8: Remove or modify pilings and pile dikes with low economic value when removal or modification would benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve ecosystem health.
CRE–9: Protect remaining high-quality off-channel habitat from
degradation and restore degraded areas with high intrinsic potential for high-quality habitat.
CRE–10: Breach, lower, or relocate dikes and levees to establish
or improve access to off-channel habitats.
CRE–2: Operate the hydrosystem to reduce the effects of reservoir surface heating, or conduct mitigation measures.
CRE–11: Reduce the square footage of over-water structures in
the estuary.
CRE–10: Breach, lower, or relocate dikes and levees to establish
or improve access to off-channel habitats.
CRE–13: Manage pikeminnow and other piscivorous fish, including
introduced species, to reduce predation on salmonids.
CRE–14: Identify and implement actions to reduce salmonid predation by pinnipeds.
CRE–15: Implement education and monitoring projects and enforce existing laws to reduce the introduction and spread of
invasive plants.
CRE–16: Implement projects to redistribute part of the Caspian
tern colony currently nesting on East Sand Island.
CRE–17: Implement projects to reduce double-crested cormorant
habitats and encourage dispersal to other locations.
CRE–18: Reduce the abundance of shad in the estuary.
CRE–8: Remove or modify pilings and pile dikes with low economic value when removal or modification would benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve ecosystem health.
CRE–19: Prevent new introductions of aquatic invertebrates and
reduce the effects of existing infestations.
CRE–7: Reduce entrainment and habitat effects resulting from
main- and side-channel dredge activities and ship ballast intake
in the estuary.
CRE–20: Implement pesticide and fertilizer best management
practices to reduce estuarine and upstream sources of nutrients
and toxic contaminants entering the estuary.3
CRE–1: Protect intact riparian areas in the estuary and restore riparian areas that are degraded.
CRE–9: Protect remaining high-quality off-channel habitat from
degradation and restore degraded areas with high intrinsic potential for high-quality habitat.
CRE–21: Identify and reduce terrestrially and marine-based industrial, commercial, and public sources of pollutants.
CRE–22: Restore or mitigate contaminated sites.
CRE–23: Implement stormwater best management practices in cities and towns.3
CRE–1: Protect intact riparian areas in the estuary and restore riparian areas that are degraded.
CRE–9: Protect remaining high-quality off-channel habitat from
degradation and restore degraded areas with high intrinsic potential for high-quality habitat.
CRE–1: Protect intact riparian areas in the estuary and restore riparian areas that are degraded.
CRE–12: Reduce the effects of vessel wake stranding in the estuary.
Dredging .................................................
Structural threats .........................
Pilings and pile dike structures ..............
Dikes and filling ......................................
Reservoir-related temperature changes
Over-water structures ............................
Increased phytoplankton production ......
Food web-related threats ............
Altered predator/prey relationships ........
Ship ballast practices .............................
Water quality-related threats .......
Agricultural practices ..............................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Urban and industrial practices ...............
Other threats ...............................
Riparian practices ..................................
Ship wakes .............................................
1 CRE
= Columbia River estuary.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Feb 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 30 / Monday, February 14, 2011 / Notices
8349
2 Study of the impacts of global climate change is an evolving field, and additional research is needed to understand the phenomenon’s likely
effects on estuarine habitats and processes with specificity. At this time, the Independent Scientific Advisory Board of the Northwest Power and
Conservation Council expects that the regional effects of global climate change in the next century will include more precipitation falling as rain
rather than snow, reduced snow pack, and late-summer/early-fall stream flows, and associated rises in stream temperature (Independent Scientific Advisory Board 2007). The climate-related management actions in Table 1 reflect these expected impacts. Although the management actions clearly would not change the threat of global climate change itself, they have the potential to lessen its impact on salmonids in the estuary.
Even if climate cycles and global climate change have effects different from those assumed in this document, the management actions that
Table 1 associates with climate would provide benefits to salmonids by addressing other threats, such as water withdrawal, urban and industrial
practices, and reservoir heating. All three of the management actions associated with climate in Table 1 are associated with other threats listed
in Table 1.
3 Unless otherwise noted, the term best management practices is used in the Estuary Module to indicate general methods or techniques found
to be most effective in achieving an objective. NMFS envisions that in implementation, specific best management practices would be developed
or recommended.
Note: Italics indicate an action’s second occurrence in the table, in connection with a different threat.
Identifying management actions that
could reduce threats to salmon and
steelhead as they rear in or migrate
through the estuary is an important step
toward improving conditions for
salmonids during a critical stage in their
life cycles. However, actual
implementation of management actions
is constrained by a variety of factors,
such as technical, economic, and private
property considerations. In some cases,
it will be impossible to realize an
action’s full potential because its
implementation is constrained by past
societal decisions that are functionally
irreversible. An important assumption
of the Estuary Module is that the
implementation of each of the 23
management actions is constrained in
some manner.
The Estuary Module makes another
important assumption about
implementation: although
implementation of actions is
constrained, even constrained
implementation can make important
contributions to the survival of
salmonids in the estuary and plume.
Within the context of these two
fundamental assumptions, the Estuary
Module evaluates the costs and
potential benefits of recovery actions.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Potential Survival Benefits
To help characterize potential
survival improvements, the Estuary
Module uses a planning exercise that
involves distributing a plausible
survival improvement target of 20
percent across the actions to
hypothesize the portion of that total
survival improvement target that might
result from each action. The primary
purpose of the survival improvement
target is to help compare the relative
potential benefits of different
management actions. The survival
improvement target does not account for
variation at the ESU, population, and
subpopulation scales, and is not
intended for use in life cycle modeling,
except as a starting point in the absence
of more rigorous data.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Feb 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
Time and Cost Estimates
Each action in the Estuary Module is
broken down into a number of specific
projects or units, and per-unit costs for
each project are identified. The costs
reflect assumptions about the
constraints to implementation and the
degree to which it is possible to reduce
those constraints.
Given those constraints, the Estuary
Module estimates that the cost of
implementing all 23 actions and
associated research and monitoring over
a 25-year time period is $592.15 million.
Costs of tributary actions and the total
estimated time and cost of recovery for
each affected ESU or DPS will be
provided in ESU- and DPS-level
recovery plans.
Monitoring and Adaptive Management
Research, monitoring, and evaluation
(RME) within an adaptive management
framework is a critical element of
recovery planning for ESA-listed
species. Monitoring for the Estuary
Module will build on ongoing efforts. In
particular, the Federal Columbia River
Estuary Research, Monitoring, and
Evaluation Program (Johnson et al.,
2008) is an appropriate monitoring plan
on which to base RME for the Estuary
Module, particularly because it links
Estuary Module RME to RME for the
2008 Federal Columbia River Power
System Biological Opinion and its 2010
Supplement (NMFS, 2008 and 2010).
The Estuary Module also identifies
other applicable monitoring plans and
guidance documents as well as
additional monitoring needs,
particularly in the area of action
effectiveness monitoring.
Conclusion
The Estuary Module contributes to all
the Columbia Basin salmon and
steelhead recovery plans by analyzing
limiting factors and threats related to
survival of listed salmon and steelhead
in the Columbia River estuary,
identifying site-specific management
actions related to those limiting factors
and threats, and estimating the cost and
time to implement those actions. NMFS
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will incorporate the Estuary Module by
reference into all Columbia Basin
salmon and steelhead recovery plans.
We conclude that the Estuary Module
provides information that helps to meet
the requirements for recovery plans
under ESA section 4(f), and adopt it as
a component of Columbia Basin ESA
recovery plans.
References
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available upon request (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: February 9, 2011.
Therese Conant,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–3243 Filed 2–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID DoD–2011–OS–0016]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs,
DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In compliance with Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Health Affairs announces a proposed
new public information collection and
seeks public comment on the provisions
thereof. Comments are invited on: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed
information collection; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14FEN1.SGM
14FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 30 (Monday, February 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8345-8349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3243]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XA130
Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plan Module for
Columbia River Estuary Salmon and Steelhead
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; recovery plan module for Columbia River
estuary salmon and steelhead.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces the adoption of the Columbia River Estuary
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Recovery Plan Module for Salmon and
Steelhead (Estuary Module). The Estuary Module addresses the estuary
recovery needs of all ESA-listed salmon and steelhead in the Columbia
River Basin. All Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead ESA recovery plans
will incorporate the Estuary Module by reference.
ADDRESSES: For additional information about the Estuary Module, contact
Patty Dornbusch, NMFS, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100, Portland,
OR 97232. Electronic copies of the Estuary Module and a response to
public comments on the Proposed Estuary Module are available online at
https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/ESA-Recovery-Plans/Estuary-Module.cfm. For a CD-ROM of these documents, call Joanna Donnor
at (503) 736-4721 or e-mail a request to joanna.donnor@noaa.gov with
the subject line ``CD-ROM Request for Final Estuary Recovery Plan
Module.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patty Dornbusch, (503) 230-5430.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. et
seq.) requires that a recovery plan be developed and implemented for
species listed as endangered or threatened under the statute, unless
such a plan would not promote the recovery of the species. Recovery
plans must contain (1) objective, measurable criteria which, when met,
would result in a determination that the species is no longer
threatened or endangered; (2) site-specific management actions
necessary to achieve the plan's goals; and (3) estimates of the time
required and costs to implement recovery actions. NMFS is the agency
responsible for developing recovery plans for salmon and steelhead, and
we will use the plans to guide efforts to restore endangered and
threatened Pacific salmon and steelhead to the point that they are
again self-sustaining in their ecosystems and no longer need the
protections of the ESA.
In the Columbia River basin, the following salmon evolutionarily
significant units (ESUs) and steelhead distinct population segments
(DPSs) are listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA: Snake
River Sockeye salmon, Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, Snake
River fall Chinook salmon, Snake River steelhead, Upper Columbia River
spring Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia River steelhead, Middle Columbia
River steelhead, Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon, Lower Columbia
River coho salmon, Columbia River chum salmon, Lower Columbia River
steelhead, Upper Willamette River spring Chinook salmon, and Upper
Willamette River steelhead. Recovery plans are either complete or in
development for these 13 salmon ESUs and steelhead DPSs.
Because we believe that local support for recovery plans is
essential, we have approached recovery planning collaboratively, with
strong reliance on existing state, regional, and tribal planning
processes. For instance, in the Columbia Basin, recovery plans have
been or are being developed by regional recovery boards convened by
Washington State, by the State of Oregon in conjunction with
stakeholder teams, and by NMFS in Idaho with the participation of local
agencies. We review locally developed recovery plans, ensure that they
satisfy ESA requirements, and make them available for public review and
comment before formally adopting them as ESA recovery plans.
Recovery plans must consider the factors affecting species survival
throughout the entire life cycle. The salmonid life cycle includes
spawning and rearing in the tributaries, migrating through the mainstem
Columbia River and estuary to the ocean, and returning to the natal
stream. In the estuary, juvenile and adult salmon and steelhead undergo
physiological changes needed to make the transition to and from
saltwater. They use the varying sub-habitats of the estuary--the
shallows,
[[Page 8346]]
side channels, deeper channels, and plume of freshwater extending
offshore--at varying times of the year.
While local recovery planners appropriately focus on the tributary
conditions within their jurisdictions and domains, NMFS recognized the
need for consistent treatment of the factors in the estuary that affect
all of the listed salmon and steelhead in the Columbia Basin. The
Estuary Module addresses limiting factors, threats, and needed actions
in the Columbia River estuary for the 13 ESUs and DPSs of salmon and
steelhead listed in the basin. Each locally developed recovery plan
will incorporate by reference the Estuary Module as its estuary
component.
This approach will ensure consistent treatment across locally
developed recovery plans of the effects of the Columbia River estuary
as well as a system-wide approach to evaluating and implementing
estuary recovery actions. The planning area of the Estuary Module
overlaps to some extent with the planning areas for locally developed
plans for lower Columbia River tributaries. This overlap occurs in the
tidally influenced portions of the tributaries, and in such instances
the local plans will reflect the Estuary Module but may specify actions
at a higher level of detail.
The Estuary Module was developed for NMFS by the Lower Columbia
River Estuary Partnership (Estuary Partnership), contractor, and PC
Trask & Associates, Inc., sub-contractor. The Estuary Partnership was
established in 1995 as part of the Environmental Protection Agency's
National Estuary Program. The Estuary Partnership's major roles are to
convene common interests, help integrate conservation efforts, increase
public awareness and involvement, and promote information-based problem
solving. The Estuary Partnership is one of the primary organizations
focused on conserving and improving the environment of the Columbia
River estuary. The Partnership's expertise in assessment, planning, and
stakeholder connections made it uniquely suited to develop this Estuary
Module. PC Trask & Associates, Inc., is an environmental planning and
project management firm with a focus on projects related to the
Columbia River estuary. The firm also works with Federal, state, and
local project sponsors to identify and implement ecosystem-related
restoration projects in the estuary.
NMFS made the draft Estuary Module available for public review as a
Proposed Estuary Recovery Plan Module. A notice of availability
soliciting public comments on the Proposed Estuary Module was published
in the Federal Register on January 8, 2008 (73 FR 161). We conducted
public meetings at the following locations, dates, and times:
Astoria, OR, January 29, 2008, at the Columbia River
Maritime Museum, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
Vancouver, WA, January 31, 2008, at the Water Resources
Education Center, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
We received nine comment letters by mail, fax, or e-mail on the
proposed recovery plan module from a variety of sources, including
local, state, and Federal Government entities, nonprofit organizations,
and interested individuals. A summary of the comments, responses, and
changes made in the Estuary Module is available online at https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/ESA-Recovery-Plans/Estuary-Module.cfm. The final Estuary Module is also available online at http:/
/www nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/ESA-Recovery-Plans/Estuary-Module.cfm. This final version constitutes the Columbia River Estuary
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Recovery Plan Module for Salmon and
Steelhead.
We are committed to implementing the actions in the Estuary Module
for which we have the authority, to working cooperatively on
implementation of other actions, and to encouraging other Federal
agencies to implement Estuary Module actions for which they have
responsibility and authority. We will also encourage the states of
Washington and Oregon to seek similar implementation commitments from
state agencies and local governments.
We expect the Estuary Module to help us and other Federal agencies
take a more consistent approach to future section 7 consultations and
other ESA decisions. For example, the Estuary Module will provide
greater biological context for the effects that a proposed action may
have on a listed ESU or DPS. Science summarized in the Estuary Module
will become a component of the ``best available information'' for
section 7 consultations as well as for section 10 habitat conservation
plans and other ESA decisions.
The Estuary Module
The purpose of the Estuary Module is to identify and prioritize
management actions that, if implemented, would reduce the impacts of
limiting factors, meaning the physical, biological, or chemical
conditions that impede salmon and steelhead survival during their
migration through and rearing in the estuary and plume ecosystems. The
module first identifies and prioritizes limiting factors by summarizing
the changes that have occurred in the estuary since European settlement
and evaluating the potential of current physical, biological, or
chemical conditions to affect salmon and steelhead. The module next
describes the underlying causes of these limiting factors. These causes
are referred to as threats and can be either human or environmental in
origin. For example, the limiting factor of flow-related estuary
habitat changes is caused by a combination of threats including water
withdrawals, flow regulation, natural climate cycles, and human
contributions to global climate change. The module prioritizes the
threats based on the significance of the limiting factor to which they
contribute and the relative contribution of each threat to one or more
limiting factors. Finally, the module identifies management actions
intended to reduce the threats and increase the survival of salmon and
steelhead during estuarine rearing and migration. Costs are included
for each of the actions.
The Estuary Module synthesizes diverse scientific sources and
information provided by scientists who were consulted by the author.
Three key documents informed the Estuary Module: Mainstem Lower
Columbia River and Columbia River Estuary Subbasin Plan and Supplement
(Northwest Power and Conservation Council, 2004); Salmon at River's
End: The Role of the Estuary in Decline and Recovery of Columbia River
Salmon (Bottom et al., 2005); and Role of the Estuary in the Recovery
of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead (Fresh et al., 2005).
Other sources, including staff from the NMFS Northwest Fisheries
Science Center and Northwest Regional Office, Estuary Partnership, and
the Washington Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board, supplemented these
key documents. Additionally, interactions with the Northwest Power and
Conservation Council, the Mid-Columbia Sounding Board, the Upper
Willamette Stakeholder Team, and the Oregon Lower Columbia River
Stakeholder Team influenced the module.
Planning Area and ESUs and DPSs Addressed
For the purposes of the Estuary Module, the estuary includes the
entire continuum where tidal forces and river flows interact,
regardless of the extent of saltwater intrusion (Fresh et al., 2005;
Northwest Power and Conservation Council, 2004). The upstream boundary
of the planning area is Bonneville Dam,
[[Page 8347]]
and the downstream boundary includes the Columbia River plume.
During their life cycles, all listed salmon and steelhead in the
Columbia River basin rely for some period on the Columbia River
estuary. The Estuary Module is therefore intended to address all eight
listed ESUs and all five listed DPSs.
Recovery Goals, Objectives, and Criteria
Because the Estuary Module addresses only a portion of the species'
life cycles and will be incorporated into locally developed recovery
plans that NMFS will adopt as ESA recovery plans, it does not contain
recovery goals and objectives or de-listing criteria. The domain-
specific recovery plans into which this Estuary Module is incorporated
will contain those elements.
Causes for Decline and Current Threats
The estuary and plume are considerably degraded from their
historical condition. The Estuary Module identifies these changes,
evaluates their potential effects on salmon and steelhead, and
discusses their underlying causes (referred to as threats). The threats
that have caused changes in the estuary can be broadly classified as
habitat-related threats, threats related to the food web and species
interactions, and other threats.
Habitat: The estuary is about 20 percent smaller than it was
historically (Northwest Power and Conservation Council, 2004). This
reduction is due mostly to diking and filling used to convert the
floodplain to agricultural, industrial, commercial, and residential
uses. Flows entering the estuary also have changed dramatically: spring
freshets have decreased and other aspects of the historical hydrograph
have been altered. These changes are the result of flow regulation by
the hydropower system, water withdrawal for irrigation and water
supplies, and climate fluctuations.
Flow alterations and diking and filling practices have affected
salmon and steelhead in several ways. Access to and use of floodplain
habitats by ocean-type ESUs (salmonids that typically rear for a
shorter time in tributaries and a longer time in the estuary) have been
severely compromised through alterations in the presence and
availability of these important habitats. Shifts in timing, magnitude,
and duration of flows have also changed erosion and accretion
processes, resulting in changes to in-channel habitat availability and
connectivity.
Elevated temperatures of water entering the estuary are also a
threat to salmon and steelhead. Degradation of tributary riparian
habitat by land-use practices, in addition to reservoir heating, has
caused these increased temperatures. Toxic contaminants in the estuary
and plume have also degraded water quality. Contaminants found in the
estuary and plume include agricultural pesticides, fertilizers, and
industrial chemicals. Contaminants can kill salmon and steelhead
immediately, can alter their behavior in ways that increase their
mortality (such as making them more susceptible to predation), and can
accumulate over time and cause increased mortality (for example by
suppressing the fishes' immune system).
Food Web and Species Interactions: Limiting factors related to the
food web and species interactions result from many of the threats to
salmon and steelhead in the estuary. Examples include relatively recent
increases in Caspian tern and pinniped predation on salmonids, due at
least in part to human alterations of the ecosystem, as well as the
more complex and less understood shift from macrodetritus-based primary
plant production to phytoplankton production. The introduction of
exotic species is another ecosystem alteration whose impacts are not
clearly understood.
Other Threats: The estuary also is influenced by thousands of over-
water and instream structures, such as jetties, pilings, pile dikes,
rafts, docks, breakwaters, bulkheads, revetments, groins, and ramps.
These structures alter river circulation patterns, sediment deposition,
and light penetration, and they form microhabitats that often benefit
predators. In some cases, structures reduce juvenile access to low-
velocity habitats. Ship wake stranding is an example of another threat
to salmon and steelhead in the estuary whose full impact is not well
understood.
Recovery Strategies and Actions
The Estuary Module identifies 23 management actions to improve the
survival of salmon and steelhead migrating through and rearing in the
estuary and plume environments. Table 1 identifies these management
actions and shows their relationship to threats.
Table 1--Management Actions To Address Threats
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Threat Management action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flow-related threats........ Climate cycles CRE\1\-1: Protect intact
and global riparian areas in the
climate change estuary and restore
\2\. riparian areas that are
degraded.\2\
CRE-2: Operate the
hydrosystem to reduce
the effects of reservoir
surface heating, or
conduct mitigation
measures.\2\
CRE-3: Protect and/or
enhance estuary instream
flows influenced by
Columbia River tributary/
mainstem water
withdrawals and other
water management actions
in tributaries.\2\
Water CRE-3: Protect and/or
withdrawal. enhance estuary instream
flows influenced by
Columbia River tributary/
mainstem water
withdrawals and other
water management actions
in tributaries.
Flow regulation CRE-4: Adjust the timing,
magnitude, and frequency
of hydrosystem flows
(especially spring
freshets) entering the
estuary and plume to
better reflect the
natural hydrologic
cycle, improve access to
habitats, and provide
better transport of
coarse sediments and
nutrients in the estuary
and plume.
CRE-3: Protect and/or
enhance estuary instream
flows influenced by
Columbia River tributary/
mainstem water
withdrawals and other
water management actions
in tributaries.
Sediment-related threats.... Entrapment of CRE-5: Study and mitigate
fine sediment the effects of
in reservoirs. entrapment of fine
sediment in reservoirs,
to improve nourishment
of the estuary and
plume.
[[Page 8348]]
Impaired CRE-6: Reduce the export
transport of of sand and gravels via
coarse dredge operations by
sediment. using dredged materials
beneficially.
CRE-8: Remove or modify
pilings and pile dikes
with low economic value
when removal or
modification would
benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve
ecosystem health.
CRE-4: Adjust the timing,
magnitude, and frequency
of hydrosystem flows
(especially spring
freshets) entering the
estuary and plume to
better reflect the
natural hydrologic
cycle, improve access to
habitats, and provide
better transport of
coarse sediments and
nutrients in the estuary
and plume.
Dredging....... CRE-7: Reduce entrainment
and habitat effects
resulting from main- and
side-channel dredge
activities and ship
ballast intake in the
estuary.
Structural threats.......... Pilings and CRE-8: Remove or modify
pile dike pilings and pile dikes
structures. with low economic value
when removal or
modification would
benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve
ecosystem health.
Dikes and CRE-9: Protect remaining
filling. high-quality off-channel
habitat from degradation
and restore degraded
areas with high
intrinsic potential for
high-quality habitat.
CRE-10: Breach, lower, or
relocate dikes and
levees to establish or
improve access to off-
channel habitats.
Reservoir- CRE-2: Operate the
related hydrosystem to reduce
temperature the effects of reservoir
changes. surface heating, or
conduct mitigation
measures.
Over-water CRE-11: Reduce the square
structures. footage of over-water
structures in the
estuary.
Increased CRE-10: Breach, lower, or
phytoplankton relocate dikes and
production. levees to establish or
improve access to off-
channel habitats.
Food web-related threats.... Altered CRE-13: Manage pikeminnow
predator/prey and other piscivorous
relationships. fish, including
introduced species, to
reduce predation on
salmonids.
CRE-14: Identify and
implement actions to
reduce salmonid
predation by pinnipeds.
CRE-15: Implement
education and monitoring
projects and enforce
existing laws to reduce
the introduction and
spread of invasive
plants.
CRE-16: Implement
projects to redistribute
part of the Caspian tern
colony currently nesting
on East Sand Island.
CRE-17: Implement
projects to reduce
double-crested cormorant
habitats and encourage
dispersal to other
locations.
CRE-18: Reduce the
abundance of shad in the
estuary.
CRE-8: Remove or modify
pilings and pile dikes
with low economic value
when removal or
modification would
benefit juvenile
salmonids and improve
ecosystem health.
Ship ballast CRE-19: Prevent new
practices. introductions of aquatic
invertebrates and reduce
the effects of existing
infestations.
CRE-7: Reduce entrainment
and habitat effects
resulting from main- and
side-channel dredge
activities and ship
ballast intake in the
estuary.
Water quality-related Agricultural CRE-20: Implement
threats. practices. pesticide and fertilizer
best management
practices to reduce
estuarine and upstream
sources of nutrients and
toxic contaminants
entering the estuary.\3\
CRE-1: Protect intact
riparian areas in the
estuary and restore
riparian areas that are
degraded.
CRE-9: Protect remaining
high-quality off-channel
habitat from degradation
and restore degraded
areas with high
intrinsic potential for
high-quality habitat.
Urban and CRE-21: Identify and
industrial reduce terrestrially and
practices. marine-based industrial,
commercial, and public
sources of pollutants.
CRE-22: Restore or
mitigate contaminated
sites.
CRE-23: Implement
stormwater best
management practices in
cities and towns.\3\
CRE-1: Protect intact
riparian areas in the
estuary and restore
riparian areas that are
degraded.
CRE-9: Protect remaining
high-quality off-channel
habitat from degradation
and restore degraded
areas with high
intrinsic potential for
high-quality habitat.
Other threats............... Riparian CRE-1: Protect intact
practices. riparian areas in the
estuary and restore
riparian areas that are
degraded.
Ship wakes..... CRE-12: Reduce the
effects of vessel wake
stranding in the
estuary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CRE = Columbia River estuary.
[[Page 8349]]
\2\ Study of the impacts of global climate change is an evolving field,
and additional research is needed to understand the phenomenon's
likely effects on estuarine habitats and processes with specificity.
At this time, the Independent Scientific Advisory Board of the
Northwest Power and Conservation Council expects that the regional
effects of global climate change in the next century will include more
precipitation falling as rain rather than snow, reduced snow pack, and
late-summer/early-fall stream flows, and associated rises in stream
temperature (Independent Scientific Advisory Board 2007). The climate-
related management actions in Table 1 reflect these expected impacts.
Although the management actions clearly would not change the threat of
global climate change itself, they have the potential to lessen its
impact on salmonids in the estuary. Even if climate cycles and global
climate change have effects different from those assumed in this
document, the management actions that Table 1 associates with climate
would provide benefits to salmonids by addressing other threats, such
as water withdrawal, urban and industrial practices, and reservoir
heating. All three of the management actions associated with climate
in Table 1 are associated with other threats listed in Table 1.
\3\ Unless otherwise noted, the term best management practices is used
in the Estuary Module to indicate general methods or techniques found
to be most effective in achieving an objective. NMFS envisions that in
implementation, specific best management practices would be developed
or recommended.
Note: Italics indicate an action's second occurrence in the table, in
connection with a different threat.
Identifying management actions that could reduce threats to salmon
and steelhead as they rear in or migrate through the estuary is an
important step toward improving conditions for salmonids during a
critical stage in their life cycles. However, actual implementation of
management actions is constrained by a variety of factors, such as
technical, economic, and private property considerations. In some
cases, it will be impossible to realize an action's full potential
because its implementation is constrained by past societal decisions
that are functionally irreversible. An important assumption of the
Estuary Module is that the implementation of each of the 23 management
actions is constrained in some manner.
The Estuary Module makes another important assumption about
implementation: although implementation of actions is constrained, even
constrained implementation can make important contributions to the
survival of salmonids in the estuary and plume.
Within the context of these two fundamental assumptions, the
Estuary Module evaluates the costs and potential benefits of recovery
actions.
Potential Survival Benefits
To help characterize potential survival improvements, the Estuary
Module uses a planning exercise that involves distributing a plausible
survival improvement target of 20 percent across the actions to
hypothesize the portion of that total survival improvement target that
might result from each action. The primary purpose of the survival
improvement target is to help compare the relative potential benefits
of different management actions. The survival improvement target does
not account for variation at the ESU, population, and subpopulation
scales, and is not intended for use in life cycle modeling, except as a
starting point in the absence of more rigorous data.
Time and Cost Estimates
Each action in the Estuary Module is broken down into a number of
specific projects or units, and per-unit costs for each project are
identified. The costs reflect assumptions about the constraints to
implementation and the degree to which it is possible to reduce those
constraints.
Given those constraints, the Estuary Module estimates that the cost
of implementing all 23 actions and associated research and monitoring
over a 25-year time period is $592.15 million. Costs of tributary
actions and the total estimated time and cost of recovery for each
affected ESU or DPS will be provided in ESU- and DPS-level recovery
plans.
Monitoring and Adaptive Management
Research, monitoring, and evaluation (RME) within an adaptive
management framework is a critical element of recovery planning for
ESA-listed species. Monitoring for the Estuary Module will build on
ongoing efforts. In particular, the Federal Columbia River Estuary
Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Program (Johnson et al., 2008) is
an appropriate monitoring plan on which to base RME for the Estuary
Module, particularly because it links Estuary Module RME to RME for the
2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion and its
2010 Supplement (NMFS, 2008 and 2010). The Estuary Module also
identifies other applicable monitoring plans and guidance documents as
well as additional monitoring needs, particularly in the area of action
effectiveness monitoring.
Conclusion
The Estuary Module contributes to all the Columbia Basin salmon and
steelhead recovery plans by analyzing limiting factors and threats
related to survival of listed salmon and steelhead in the Columbia
River estuary, identifying site-specific management actions related to
those limiting factors and threats, and estimating the cost and time to
implement those actions. NMFS will incorporate the Estuary Module by
reference into all Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead recovery plans.
We conclude that the Estuary Module provides information that helps to
meet the requirements for recovery plans under ESA section 4(f), and
adopt it as a component of Columbia Basin ESA recovery plans.
References
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: February 9, 2011.
Therese Conant,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-3243 Filed 2-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
