noaa fisheries service

Guide to Essential Fish Habitat Consultation

David O’BrienNOAA Fisheries Service

Habitat Conservation DivisionGloucester Point, VA

NOAA Fisheries ServiceNOAA Fisheries Service

Our Mission: Stewardship of living marine resources through science-based conservation and management and the promotion of healthy ecosystems

Habitat Conservation Division Conservation and enhancement of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

Protected Resources Division Conservation and protection of Marine Mammals and Endangered Species

• Habitat Conservation Division (HCD) staff perform field inspections, attend meetings and public

hearings, review documents (public notices, EA/EIS, etc.) and provide conservation recommendations under various authorities (e.g., Magnuson-Stevens Act, FWCA, Section 404 CWA, NEPA, etc.)

Habitat Conservation DivisionHabitat Conservation Division

• These recommendations are intended to avoid,

minimize, and offset adverse impacts (sequentially) to NOAA-trust resources.

What do we do?What do we do?

• Though HCD is identified with EFH consultation, we are responsible for conservation and protection of all living marine resources, including anadromous fish, shellfish, crustaceans, seagrass (e.g., striped bass, Am. shad, alewife, blueback herring, Atl. sturgeon, menhaden, Am. eel, oyster, hard clam, blue crab, SAV, wetlands).

Habitat Conservation DivisionHabitat Conservation Division

• In addition to EFH, consultation requirements must also be met for other authorities such as the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA).

Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)

• Laws and Regulations What is required?

• Define EFH What the heck is it?

• EFH Consultation How do we do this?

• Streamlining Tools to get the job done better

Key Points:

MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT

(MSA)(MSA)

amended 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act

Describe and identify EFH for each federally-managed fishery (through FMC’s) Consultation requirements for Federal

agencies; USACOE, USCG, BOEM, FHWA Encourage conservation and enhancement of EFH

Federal agencies are required to consult with NOAA Fisheries regarding any activities that may adversely affect essential fish habitat (EFH)

MSA EFH ProvisionsMSA EFH Provisions

Agency Consultation

““adversely affect”adversely affect”

“…any impact which reduces quality and/or quantity of EFH.”

1. Direct (e.g. contamination or physical disruption)

2. Indirect (e.g. loss of prey, reduction in fecundity)

3. Individual, cumulative, or synergistic

EFH Final Rules (2002)EFH Final Rules (2002)

NMFS Consultation Guidance50 CFR Part 600

Consultation required for activities proposed to be authorized, funded, or undertaken by Federal agencies (includes state and

federal waters)

MSA EFH Provisions MSA EFH Provisions [Section 305(b)][Section 305(b)]

NOAA (and in some cases, the FMC’s) must provide Conservation Recommendations (CRs) to federal and state agencies on actions that may adversely affect EFH

Federal agencies must respond in writing to NOAA Fisheries within 30 days after

receiving an EFH Conservation Recommendation

MSA EFH Provisions MSA EFH Provisions [Section 305(b)][Section 305(b)]

Conservation Recommendations must include measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, or otherwise offset adverse effects on EFH

General Concurrence: Specific types of federal actions that will likely result in no more than minimal adverse effects on EFH, and for which no further consultation is required (e.g. RP’s, LOP’s).

Types of EFH ConsultationTypes of EFH Consultation

Abbreviated Consultation: Actions that do not qualify for a General Concurrence but do not have the potential to

cause substantial adverse effects on EFH.

Expanded Consultation: Additional coordination required, used for actions that would result in substantial adverse effects on EFH.

Consultation may be completed at either a programmatic or project-specific level, as appropriate.

WHAT IS EFH ???WHAT IS EFH ???

?

EFH DEFINEDEFH DEFINEDMSA PL 104-297

Sec. 3. Definitions

“essential fish habitat” means those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity.


“Waters” include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological properties that are used by fish and aquatic areas historically used by fish, where appropriate (e.g. above spillways and dams)

NMFS Consultation Guidance50 CFR Part 600

1. provide important ecological functions;2. are sensitive to human-induced environmental

degradation; 3. are rare; and,4. development activities must represent a current

or potential stress to the habitat.

e.g.; HAPCs for summer flounder and sandbar shark

In addition to EFH, the FMP’s may also identify Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC).

HAPC’s may be established for areas and/or habitat types that:


South AtlanticSouth Atlantic•Spiny Lobster*•Coastal Migratory Pelagics*•Snapper-Grouper•Red Drum•Coral, Live/Hard Bottom•Shrimp•Golden Crab

CaribbeanCaribbean•Queen Conch•Corals, Plants and Invertebrates•Spiny Lobster•Caribbean Reef Fish

* Joint Plans

Gulf of MexicoGulf of Mexico•Spiny Lobster*•Coastal Migratory Pelagics*•Coral & Coral Reefs•Stone Crab•Shrimp•Reef Fish Resources•Red Drum

New EnglandNew England•Monkfish•Multispecies•Sea Scallops•Atlantic Salmon•Atlantic Herring•Skates

Mid-AtlanticMid-Atlantic•Mackerel, Squid, Butterfish•Surf Clam & Ocean Quahog•Bluefish•Summer Flounder, Scup & Black Sea Bass•Tilefish•Spiny Dogfish

SecretarialSecretarial•Atlantic HMS (Tunas, Swordfish & Sharks)•Atlantic Billfish

Fishery Management Plans

Life History StageSpecies Egg Larvae Juvenile Adult Spawning Adult

New England FMP’sAmerican plaice X X X X X

Atlantic cod X X X X XAtlantic halibut X X X X XAtlantic herring X X X X XAtlantic salmon X X X X X

Atlantic sea scallops X X X X XHaddock X X X X XMonkfish X X X X X

Ocean pout X X X X XOffshore hake X X X X X

Pollock X X X X XRed hake X X X X XRedfish X X X X X

Skates (7 species) X XWhite hake X X X X X

Whiting X X X X XWindowpane flounder X X X X X

Winter flounder X X X X XWitch flounder X X X X X

Yellowtail flounder X X X X X Mid-Atlantic FMP’s

Atlantic mackerel X X X XBlack sea bass X X X X

Bluefish X X X XButterfish X X X XTilefish X X

Ocean quahog X XScup X X

Spiny dogfish X XSummer flounder X X X X

Illex & loligo squid1

Highly Migratory SpeciesTunas (5 species) X X X X X

Swordfish X X X X XBlue marlin X X X X X

White marlin X XSharks (15 species)2 X X

1Pre-recruits and recruits designations2Neonates/early juveniles, late juveniles/subadults, adults designations

EFH Designations for Greater Atlantic Region

1. The existing process provides NOAA Fisheries with timely notification of actions that may adversely affect EFH;

How do Federal agencies consult with How do Federal agencies consult with NOAA Fisheries?NOAA Fisheries?

2. Notification includes an assessment of impacts that meets the requirements for an EFH Assessment;

3. NOAA Fisheries must have made a finding that the existing process satisfies the EFH consultation process (N. Atlantic Division, findings letter dated 1-18-00)

(50 CFR 600.920)Can be consolidated with existing environmental review procedures if:

1. A description of the proposed action;2. An analysis of the effects of the action on EFH and

associated species;3. The federal agency’s determination regarding the

effects of the action on EFH; 4. A discussion of proposed mitigation, if applicable.

EFH AssessmentEFH Assessment

(50 CFR 600.920(e))

Federal agencies must prepare a written assessment of any action that requires consultation. The EFH Assessment must include:

The results of a site inspection to evaluate the habitat and effects of the project; The views of recognized experts on the habitats or

species that may be affected; A review of pertinent literature and related information; An analysis of alternatives to the proposed action,

including options that could avoid or minimize adverse effects on EFH.

EFH Assessment (continued)EFH Assessment (continued)

(50 CFR 600.920(e))If appropriate, the EFH Assessment should also include:

Within 30 days after receiving an EFH Conservation Recommendation from NOAA Fisheries the federal agency must respond in writing and describe measures proposed by the agency to avoid, minimize, or offset the impacts of the action on EFH.

Federal Agency Response to EFH Federal Agency Response to EFH Conservation RecommendationsConservation Recommendations

(50 CFR 600.920(k)(1))

If the response is inconsistent with the EFH Conservation Recommendations, the Federal

agency must explain its reasons for not following NOAA Fisheries’ recommendations.

Notification: The agency must notify NOAA Fisheries of actions that may adversely affect EFH (at least 60 days prior to final decision or at least 90 days prior to final decision for an action that would result in substantial adverse impact to EFH).

The notification should be included in the draft EA, draft EIS, or other EFH assessment document.

EFHEFH Consultations for civil works projects Consultations for civil works projects using the NEPA Processusing the NEPA Process

EFH Consultations for civil works projects EFH Consultations for civil works projects using the NEPA Processusing the NEPA Process

EFH Assessment: clearly marked in a separate chapter or section of the draft EIS or EA.Must contain all of the requirements of an EFH Assessment (see 50 CFR 600.920(e)).

when there is an existing NEPA document for civil works project, an EFH consultation should becompleted prior to any new action (e.g.,maintenance dredging of a federal navigation channel); may be accomplished through the development of a supplemental EIS or EA.


EFH Conservation Recommendations: NOAA Fisheries will provide these during the established comment period under NEPA.

Agency Response: Agency provides NOAA Fisheries with a written response to Conservation Recommendations within 30 days after receipt (preliminary response may be provided), and at least 10 days before the agency signs a FONSI or a Record of Decision.


Agency Response: If the agency accepts the EFH Conservation Recommendations in their entirety, the final EIS or EA should explain how these recommendations will be incorporated into the project design.


Inconsistent Decisions: If the decision is inconsistent with the EFH Conservation Recommendations, the agency must explain its reasons for not following those recommendations, including the scientific justification for any disagreements over the anticipated effects of the action and the measures needed to avoid, minimize, mitigate or offset such effects.


Dispute Resolution: if decision is inconsistent with NOAA Fisheries’ EFH CRs, the NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries may request a meeting with the head of the federal agency to discuss the proposed action and opportunities for resolving any disagreements.

NOAA Fisheries endeavors to resolve issues at the field level whenever possible, typically in a meeting between NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator and the action agency’s District staff.

Are there opportunities to further streamline the EFH Consultation process? YES!!!

Options for Streamlining EFH ConsultationsOptions for Streamlining EFH Consultations

Involve NOAA Fisheries as early as possible (e.g., project design or “scoping” meetings)

Provide all required and necessary EFH assessment information (level of detail commensurate with the potential degree of adverse impact)

Possible development of General Concurrence or Programmatic Consultation with NOAA

(50 CFR 600.920(g))

General ConcurrenceGeneral Concurrence

General Concurrence should meet these criteria:

Actions should be similar in nature (e.g., routine annual maintenance dredging); Actions that would cause “minimal adverse

effects on EFH when implemented individually”; Actions that do not “cause greater than minimal cumulative adverse effects on EFH”; and Actions must be tracked and reviewed periodically to ensure that their cumulative effects are no more than minimal.

Example of General ConcurrenceExample of General Concurrence

General Concurrence with USACE Norfolk District for Regional Permits (RP) 15, 17,18,19 and LOP-1 and 2 is “conditional” :

For actions having no more than minimal adverse affects (individually or cumulatively) on EFH,

separate EFH Assessments are not required for each individual action authorized under an RP;

However, coordination and review by NOAA Fisheries is still required for projects in or adjacent

to special aquatic resources (shellfish beds, SAV, anadromous fish use areas)

(Findings with NAO, 8/13/08)

Programmatic ConsultationProgrammatic Consultation (50 CFR 600.920(j)(1))

A Programmatic Consultation can be developed that takes a comprehensive approach to a program’s potential adverse effect on EFH.

A Programmatic Consultation may include all or some activities of a program and incorporate multiple individual actions that may adversely

effect EFH into one consultation;

The federal agency is not required to consult with NOAA Fisheries on each individual action, as long as those actions have been included in the Programmatic Consultation.

Programmatic ConsultationProgrammatic Consultation (50 CFR 600.920(j)(1))

Development of a Programmatic Consultation requires the following steps:

Federal agency prepares an EFH Assessment for all activities that it proposes to be included in the consultation;

The assessment should estimate the number of actions, describe the range and types of impacts on EFH (direct, indirect, and cumulative) and any proposed mitigation;

NOAA determines activities that may adversely affect EFH and provides Conservation Recommendations;

Periodically, actions must be tracked and reviewed to ensure that cumulative effects are no more than minimal.

Additional Tools and Resources for EFHAdditional Tools and Resources for EFH

EFH Worksheet: assists Corps project managers and applicants preparing an EFH Assessment (may serve as the EFH Assessment for Abbreviated Consultations)

Greater Atlantic Region EFH website: provides important information regarding EFH (e.g., managed species, locations and descriptions of EFH, and consultation requirements and processes); www.nero.noaa.gov/habitat/EFH/efhoverview.htr

EFH WorksheetEFH WorksheetEFH ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (modified 10/02.)

PROJECT NAME: Flood Control and Ecosystem Restoration DATE: April 3, 2003

PROJECT NO.: XYZ-2003 LOCATION: South River, NJ

PREPARER: Joe Permitter

Step 1. Use the Habitat Conservation Division EFH webpage, Guide to Essential Fish Habitat Designations in the Northeastern United States togenerate the list of designated EFH for federally-managed species for the geographic area of interest (http://www.nero.noaa.gov/hcd/index2a.htm). Use the species list as part of the initial screening process to determine if EFH for those species occurs in the vicinity of the proposed action . Attach that list to the worksheet because it will be used in later steps. Make a preliminary determination on the need to conduct an EFHConsultation.

1. INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS

EFH Designations Y N

Is the action located in or adjacent to EFH designated for eggs? X

Is the action located in or adjacent to EFH designated for larvae? X

Is the action located in or adjacent to EFH designated for juveniles? X

Is the action located in or adjacent to EFH designated for adults? X

Is the action located in or adjacent to EFH designated for spawning adults? X

If you answered no to all questions above, then EFH consultation is not required -go to Section 5. If you answeredyes to any of the above questions proceed to Section 2 and complete remainder of the worksheet.

Step 2. In order to assess impacts, it is critical to know the habitat characteristics of the site before the activity is undertaken. Useexisting information, to the extent possible, in answering these questions. Please note that, there may be circumstances in whichnew information must be collected to appropriately characterize the site and assess impacts.

2. SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Site Characteristics Description

Is the site intertidal/sub-tidal/water column?

Storm gate: water column, sub-tidal

Levee: intertidal, water column

Restoration area: all three

What are the sedimentcharacteristics?

Storm gate: no information, but probably silt/clay

Levee: variable

Restoration area: silt/clay with organic matter

Is Habitat Area of ParticularConcern (HAPC) designated ator near the site? If so whattype, size, characteristics?

No HAPC at construction site or in marsh

Is there submerged aquaticvegetation (SAV) at or adjacentto project site? If so describeaerial extent.

No

What is typical salinity andtemperature regime/range?

Salinity variable by stage of tide, season, amount of freshwater runoff, and location in river;temperature varies by season.

Storm gate/levee: annual salinity range in river 0-18 ppt,; 0.3 ppt at low tide to 15.6 ppt at high tidein May and September, 2000. Temperatures range 5 – 28oC.

Restoration area: average salinity at several locations (various tides) was 1-4.1 ppt in April, 1.7-5.6in June, and 2.3-6.3 in September, 2000 (see attached figure); minimum and maximum values were0.1-8.1 in April, 0.1-12.4 in June, and 6.5-15.3 in September. Average temperatures ranged from11.5 – 12.1oC in April, 22.3 – 22.9 oC in June, and 20.6 – 22.7 oC in September, 2000.

What is the normal frequency ofsite disturbance, both naturaland man-made?

Storm gate/levee: infrequent flooding during storm surges.

Restoration area: infrequent flooding during storm surges.

What is the area of proposedimpact (work footprint & farafield)?

Storm gate: approximately 0.4 acres of river bed habitat and 0.04 acres of wetland and salt marshhabitat.

Levee: approximately 21.3 acres of upland and wetland habitat, 0.7 acres of salt marsh, 0.5 acres ofmud flat, and 0.3 acres of river bed habitat.

Restoration area: 50-300 acres of Phragmites-dominated wetland.

Step 3. This section is used to describe the anticipated impacts from the proposed action on thephysical/chemical/biological environment at the project site and areas adjacent to the site that may beaffected.

3. DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS

Impacts Y N Description

Nature and duration ofactivity(s)

Storm gate/levee: temporary, localized disturbance to bottom substrate duringconstruction (1 week); during operation, gate would be closed only duringflood tide during extreme storm surges when water level reaches +5 ft NGVD toprevent flooding above bridge; water will be pumped from upstream todownstream side of gate when it is closed.

Restoration: 6-12 months of site preparation and planting (tidal ditches, mudflat, wetland scrub-shrub and salt marsh); 3 years of monitoring.

Will benthic community bedisturbed?

X Storm gate/levee: minimal disturbance during construction; no lasting effects,except for the permanent loss of 32,000 sq ft of river bed and 31,300 sq ft oflow emergent marsh for base of storm gate and levee.

Restoration: short-term disturbance in areas selected for channel modificationor new channels; best management practices will be followed to ensure thatthere are no lasting effects.

Will SAV be impacted? X No SAV in South River.

Will sediments be altered and/orsedimentation rates change?

X

X Storm gate/levee: sediments may build up on either side of sill, but there will beno significant long-term impact. No change in sedimentation rate.

Restoration: limited on-site movement of tidal creek and/or river sediment;sedimentation rate in marsh could potentially increase when river flow throughmarsh increases/improves.

Will turbidity increase? X

X

Storm gate/levee: temporary, short-term increase in suspended sedimentsduring construction.

Restoration: increased turbidity during site preparation and/or until vegetationis established.

Will water depth change?

X

X Storm gate/levee: USACE hydrodynamic model indicates that the depth of theSouth River will not change significantly.Restoration area: the depth of water on the marsh will increase when the areais excavated to a lower elevation to promote the establishment of saltmarshvegetation.

Will contaminants be releasedinto sediments or watercolumn?

X Based on a HTRW report prepared by the USACE, sediments in the project areaand in the restoration area are free of contaminants.

Will tidal flow, currents or wavepatterns be altered?

X

X

Storm gate/levee: tidal/river flow will be interrupted at the gate during stormevents to prevent upstream flooding. No change in currents or wave patterns.

Restoration area: increased tidal flow throughout restoration area. No changein currents or wave patterns.

Will ambient salinity ortemperature regime change?

X

X

Storm gate/levee: possible reduction in salinity above bridge when gate isclosed during flood tide; no change in temperature.

Restoration area: increased salinity in the marsh during high tides; no changein temperature.

Will water quality be altered?

X

X Storm gate/levee: no.

Restoration area: unknown at this time, but increased tidal flow on the interiorof the marsh should increase DO, especially during low tide.

Step 4. This section is used to evaluate the consequences of the proposed action on the functions and values of EFH as well as the vulnerabilityof the EFH species and their life stages. Identify which species from the EFH species list (generated in Step 1) will be adversely impacted fromthe action. Assessment of EFH impacts should be based upon the site characteristics identified in Step 2 and the nature of the impacts describedwithin Step 3. The Guide to EFH Descriptions webpage (http://www.nero.noaa.gov/hcd/list.htm) should be used during this assessment todetermine the ecological parameters/preferences associated with each species listed and the potential impact to those parameters.

4. EFH ASSESSMENT

Functions and Values Y N Describe habitat type, species and life stages to be adversely impacted

Will functions and values ofEFH be impacted for:

Spawning

X

X

Only two EFH species could potentially spawn in South River: winter flounder and windowpane. OtherEFH species either require salinities >20 ppt to spawn or spawn offshore in deeper water.

Storm gate/levee: A few adult winter flounder may occupy project area near storm gate or restorationarea during high tide (if salinity >15 ppt) during spawning season and deposit eggs on bottom, buteggs exposed to salinities <5 ppt at low tide would not survive. Because spawning conditions in theSouth River are already very poor, storm gate construction and operation will not adversely affectspawning habitat. Adult windowpane tolerate salinities as low as 5 ppt and produce pelagic eggs, butdo not spawn at temperatures >15oC, thus any spawning in South River would be limited to spring andfall, but only during high tide. Closing of storm gate during flood tide would prevent adults fromoccupying upper portion of river and spawning there, but only during storm events.

Restoration area: Restoration will improve tidal flow into marsh habitat during high tide, but becausesalinity will remain <15 ppt most of the time and temperature will be >15oC during the summer, winterflounder will not spawn in the restored marsh any more than they do at present. Windowpanespawning in the spring and fall will not be affected.

Nursery

X

X

X

Storm gate: no significant negative impacts on EFH larvae or juveniles.

Levee: Loss of low emergent marsh along river bank would cause loss of nursery habitat for juvenilesof EFH species that occupy project area, i.e., winter flounder, windowpane, bluefish, butterfish, andsummer flounder (Table 1). No affect on larvae.

Restoration area: long-term benefits for juvenile bluefish due to creation of new and improved habitatfor forage fish; temporary displacement of EFH species (e.g. juvenile bluefish) and their prey fromconstruction area to nearby unaffected areas during initial restoration activities. No affect on larvae. Construction impacts will be minimized by using best management practices.

Forage

X

X

X

Storm gate: no significant negative impacts.

Levee: loss of low emergent marsh along river bank wouldcause forage fish that are prey for juvenile bluefish andjuvenile and adult summer flounder to permanently re-locateto other areas. Loss of benthic invertebrate food resourceswould have same effect on juvenile and adult winter flounderand windowpane. Butterfish are planktivores and would notbe affected.

Restoration area: long-term benefits for juvenile bluefish dueto creation of new and improved habitat for forage fish.

Shelter

X

X

X

Storm gate: no negative impacts since river bottom does notcurrently provide shelter for EFH species. Gate may actuallycreate a small amount of new shelter.

Levee: loss of low emergent marsh along river bank couldcause loss of shelter for juvenile EFH species in project area.

Restoration area: long-term creation of additional shelter(emergent marsh vegetation) for forage fish and EFH species;short-term displacement of EFH species and forage fish fromconstruction area to nearby unaffected areas during initialrestoration activities. Construction impacts will be minimizedby using best management practices.

Will impacts be temporary orpermanent?

Storm gate: temporary impacts during construction (increasedturbidity, disturbance of benthic community) and operation(reduced salinity on up-stream side of gate, interrupted riverflow); some permanent loss of bottom habitat as a result ofconstruction.

Levee: some permanent loss of bottom habitat and marsh as aresult of construction, with possible negative impacts onnursery, forage, and shelter for EFH species.

Restoration area: temporary construction impacts duringconstruction, but long-term beneficial impacts.

Will compensatory mitigation beused?

X Replacement of wildlife habitat value (HU’s) and wetlandfunctions and values (FCU’s); in addition, best managementpractices will help minimize impact.

Step 5. This section provides the Federal agency=s determination on the degree of impact to EFHfrom the proposed action. The EFH determination also dictates the type of EFH consultation thatwill be required with NOAA Fisheries.

5. DETERMINATION OF IMPACT

Federal Agency=s EFH Determination

There is no adverse effect on EFH

EFH Consultation is not required

X The adverse effect on EFH is not substantial.

This is a request for an abbreviated EFH consultation. This worksheet isbeing submitted to NMFS to satisfy the EFH Assessment requirement.

Overall degree ofadverse effects on EFH(not includingcompensatorymitigation) will be:

(check the appropriatestatement) The adverse effect on EFH is substantial.

This is a request for an expanded EFH consultation. A detailed writtenEFH assessment will be submitted to NMFS expanding upon theimpacts revealed in this worksheet.

Step 6. Consultation with NOAA Fisheries may also be required if the proposed action results in adverse impacts to other NOAA-trustresources, such as anadromous fish, shellfish, crustaceans, or their habitats. Some examples of other NOAA-trust resources are listedbelow. Inquiries regarding potential impacts to marine mammals or threatened/endangered species should be directed to NOAA Fisheries’Protected Resources Division.

6. OTHER NOAA-TRUST RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Species known to occur at site (list others thatmay apply)

Describe habitat impact type (i.e., physical, chemical, or biological disruption of spawningand/or egg development habitat, juvenile nursery and/or adult feeding or migrationhabitat).

alewife

blueback herring

rainbow smelt

Atlantic sturgeon

Atlantic menhaden

American shad

American eel

American lobster

blue mussels

soft-shell clams

quahog

Other species:

GARFO EFH ContactsGARFO EFH Contacts

Assist. Regional Admin. Lou Chiarella 978-281-9277 [email protected]

EFH Coordinator Karen Greene [email protected]

Field Office Supervisor Chris Boelke [email protected]

Virginia Field Office David O’Brien 804-684-7828David.L.O’[email protected]

noaa fisheries service

Documents

b conservation recommendations

efh general concurrence

sciencebased conservation

quality andor quantity

federal agencies usacoe

fmcs consultation requirements

sustainable fisheries

anadromous fish