Fisheries Management Plan Idaho Department of Fish and Game

Transcription

1 Fisheries Management Plan Idaho Department of Fish and Game

2 Plan History Plan Separate anadromous plan Evolved from 5 to 6-year 6 plan Angler Opinion Survey

3 The Process Public-Agency scoping Angler Opinion Survey Commission Briefing Commission approval for public review Internal coordination Director s s Office briefing Second public review Commission action to approve

4 Public-Agency Comments 3 months of public comment Received via , IDFG website, letters, phone calls, opinion surveys, open houses, & public meetings Reviewed by IDFG staff Make needed changes to Plan Summarize for Commission

5 Purpose of Plan Comprehensive plan for managing public s fisheries resources Multi-year work plan for staff Establishes Department goals, objectives, and management direction Other agencies, Tribes, and interested parties take notice of Department s s Plan

6 Strategic Plan (Compass) Adopted by Commission in 2005 Management plans must align with strategic plan Fish Plan was first Added complexity

7 What s s In the Plan? Part 1 is statewide direction & management principles Issues and strategies 2006 AOS results Management programs Performance measures

8 Performance Measures Compass directs us to measure progress towards attaining goals Plan contains measures a a first! Makes us accountable to public, Commission, and elected officials Monitoring and evaluation result in self- correction, performance improvement, & accountability

9 Example Program: Protect and restore fish habitat Measure: Restore 5 or more miles of stream channel for native salmonids annually Metric: Miles of stream restored Each region maintains records Annually compile statewide for reporting in Directions document which is provided to multiple stakeholders

10 Metric 1: Miles of stream occupied by genetically pure YCT populations Metric 2: Number of genetically pure YCT populations Documented by long- term monitoring Example (from YCT Plan)

11 Plan Contents continued Part 2 represents drainage management Drainage description & overview Objectives and programs for each drainage Management direction by species for ALL important water bodies

12 Priest River Drainage Objective: Restore native fish populations in Upper Priest Lake Program: Continue yearly removal of lake trout with gill nets and other means to reduce lake trout numbers

13 Payette River Drainage Objective: Monitor the yellow perch fishery recovery in Cascade Reservoir. Program: Monitor yellow perch recruitment with otter trawl surveys, hydroacoustic surveys and creel catch rates Program: Monitor northern pikeminnow abundance, size and age structure, with bi-annual gill net surveys and annual hydroacoustic surveys

14 Statewide Programs Protect and Restore Habitat Most important program to public Increase involvement in habitat restoration efforts and collaborate with others Have hired a number of regional habitat biologists across state

15 Diverse Angling Idaho anglers want diversity Support special regulations but want harvest opportunity Department will address this need by using a mixture of regulations and species in a variety of settings

16 Protect Native Trout Maintain fishing opportunities Continue emphasis using special regulations, habitat protection, & education Increase restoration actions Seek balance between native and sport fisheries

17 Recruiting/Retaining Anglers Majority of anglers fished >20 years and 50 years old New angler recruitment and lapse in adult participation Continue clinics, classroom education Work with fishing clubs/organizations to address youth fishing Mentoring

18 Species Plans Species plans in development Establish goals, objectives, and strategies Emphasize persistence, habitat restoration, & sport fishing Reinforce Department ability to protect and manage native species

19 Species Management Plans In FMP, IDFG committed to completing a number of plans for individual subspecies and species Completed YCT, BCT, white sturgeon, BLR MWF, WCT in press Redband trout, non-game fishes, and alpine lakes pending Pacific lamprey plan

20 Management Plan for Conservation of Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout in Idaho

21 YCT Management Actions What IDFG Intends to Do Involves 3 IDFG regions Maintain fishing opportunities Expand range and persistence Collaborative & cooperative Involve private landowners Long-term effort

22 Management Plan for Conservation of Bonneville Cutthroat Trout in Idaho Prepared by Idaho Department of Fish and Game and USDA Forest Service

23 BCT Management Actions Maintain fishing opportunities on BCT and other compatible species Expand range; increase persistence IDFG-USFS will cooperate with others to enhance habitat Involve private landowners Long-term effort

24 Management Plan for Conservation of Snake River White Sturgeon in Idaho

25 White Sturgeon Involves 6 regions Due to fragmentation and lack of exchange, resigned to manage as 9 separate populations Management objectives for each reach Supplementation of reproduction limited sites Highly collaborative with adjoining states, Idaho Power, and Nez Perce Tribe (WSTAC)

26 Co-Management of fish and wildlife By statute (I.C. Section ), all wildlife, including all wild animals, wild birds, and fish, within the state of Idaho, is hereby declared to be the property of the state of Idaho. It shall be preserved, protected, perpetuated, and managed. It shall only be captured or taken at such times or places, under such conditions, or by such means, or in such manner, as will preserve, protect, and perpetuate such wildlife, and provide for the citizens of this state and, as by law permitted to others, continued supplies of such wildlife for hunting, fishing and trapping.

27 The State of Idaho does not recognize co- management of fish and wildlife resources: Except by adjacent state fish and wildlife agencies in boundary waters Except by FWS and NOAA with regards to federally listed species However: Management is complex and our responsibilities overlap those of other state and federal agencies, tribal governments, NGOs, private landowners, and business interests. This has increased the need to coordinate, collaborate, develop partnerships, AND in some cases share responsibilities for fish and wildlife management. We have to consider a greater diversity of views and interests when making management decisions We recognize the important role that tribal government has in shared responsibility for protecting and perpetuating fish and wildlife resources as per treaty right or court decisions

28 Relationship with Indian Tribes The State believes management authority is theirs except under special circumstances We support collaborative and creative partnerships that assist us in management decisions We have philosophical, cultural, and scientific differences of opinion but we generally figure out how to work together for the greater good IDFG and Tribes work together effectively in many venues

29 Cooperation with Tribes Salmon and steelhead population management Habitat restoration Recreational fishing Technical committees White sturgeon

30 Endangered Species Act and State Management Authority The ESA of 1973 most far reaching and powerful of federal laws It poses challenges and opportunities for IDFG Loss of state management authority Frustratingly process driven Recovery is excruciatingly slow Permits, reports, meetings, committees and agent status Ties the court system in knots and paralyzes agency progress on important issues

31 IDFG Views Listings largely fueled and propelled by petitions and litigation Our science is sometimes treated improperly or without due deference We are best equipped technically, logistically, and personnel wise to effectively manage fish and wildlife The federal government is not generally viewed favorably by hunters and anglers Recovery and reclassification is elusive

32 Bull Trout Example Listed in 1998 despite IDFG evidence that they are plentiful Our science was not considered robust enough Recovery Plan efforts faltered and must be revisited Critical habitat designation had to be reconsidered Reclassification effort faltered after IDFG and other agencies spent over a year working with FWS Efforts to recover BT populations and other native fishes are significant but money is tight Our management staff are spread thin We are not optimistic about collaborating on another recovery plan

33 IDFG Motivations Avoid listings where scientifically defensible (WCT, YCT, BCT, Big Lost MWF) Fuels management/research to collect best scientific information for FWS/NOAA The process is endless and frustrating with few rewards The courts are the wrong place to make sound management decisions We want to maintain our statutory authorities

34 Thank you Good luck in your careers!