The following have fish ladders with confirmed movement in areas with confirmed river herring spawning runs: (NJDEP 2000)

Transcription

1 APPENDIX L EXAMPLES OF RIVER HERRING FISHWAYS IN THE NORTHEAST CONNECTICUT: Connecticut River (USFWS Connecticut River Coordinator s Office 2003) From , river herring were observed using fish passage at the following locations: Rainbow Fishway in Poquonock (Farmington River tributary) Moulson Pond Fishway NW of Hartford (Eightmile River tributary) Mary Steube Fishway (Mill Brook tributary) Shetucket River (Connecticut Weekly Diadromous Fish Report 2003) In 2003, river herring were recorded passing over the Greeneville Fishway in Norwich. Naugatuck River (Connecticut Weekly Diadromous Fish Report 2003) In 2003, river herring were recorded passing over the Kinneytown Fishway in Seymour. NEW JERSEY: Deal Lake (Boriek pers. comm.) The flume that is the outlet to the ocean from Deal Lake in Asbury Park, Mammoth County has been passing river herring for years. The following have fish ladders with confirmed movement in areas with confirmed river herring spawning runs: (NJDEP 2000) Cooper River Drainage: Cooper River Tide Gate at Cooper River Park Lake in Collingswood. Crosswicks Creek Drainage: Back Brook at Gropp Lake Dam in White Horse. Maurice River: Both alewife and blueback have been documented passing through the fish ladder at Union Lake Dam in Millville. (also Boriek, pers. comm.) Metedeconk River: A fish ladder on the south branch of the river at Shenandoah Lake in Lakewood, Ocean County has documented river herring passing through it for years. (also Boriek pers. comm.) Raritan River: Island Farm Weir in Bridgewater.

2 RHODE ISLAND: (Cute 1999) 13 ladders have been built by RI DEM to restore historic herring runs. An Alaskan Steeppass on the Narrow River in Rhode Island electronically counts all the fish that pass, 100,000 herring in 1997 and 200,000 in MASSACHUSETTS: There are 150 active fish passageways in Massachusetts. (Brady and Reback 2003) Parker River 5 fishways were installed in the 1930 s and one in the 1960 s. Alewife runs were at healthy numbers for decades after fish passage was installed. Currently, all fishways have deteriorated, causing the runs to decline to 1/5 of those in Extensive repairs, including total rebuilding of some fish ladders is required. (Also dam notching for downstream passage). (NOAA 2003, Stevenson et al. 1998) Westport River Adamsville Pond Dam in Westport, MA has had at least two fish ladders built for river herring since 1675, which have deteriorated. In 1995 a wooden ladder was installed which was used by the herring until 2001 when it was washed away by a flood. An aluminum steeppass ladder was installed in 2002 to replace it. (Buzzard s Bay Project 2003) Charles River Most migrating fish enter the river through the locks in the Charles River Dam and use a series of fish ladders to navigate dams upstream of the Lower Basin. (Charles River Watershed 2003) Connecticut River (USFWS Connecticut River Coordinator s Office 2003) From , river herring were observed using fish passage at the following locations: Holyoke Dam in Holyoke DSI Dam in West Springfield (Westfield River tributary) Gatehouse Dam in Turner Falls

3 Ipswich River From , river herring were observed using the Sylvania Dam Fish Ladder. (Bowling and Morkeski 2002) Mattapoisett River The fishway at the dam restricted the upstream passage of alewives as it was both too steep and too turbulent. The new fish ladder is a denil-type structure and was installed at the dam in December (Buzzard s Bay Project 2002) MAINE: Great Salt Bay Millions of alewives are observed using the fish ladder over the dam into Damariscotta Lake each spring. The ladder was first constructed 200 years ago and restored only recently. (Undersea Landscapes 2003) Sebasticook River (Maine DMR 2001) In 2000 an Alaskan steeppass fishway was built at Pleasant Pond outlet dam in the town of Stetson for $57,370. (also USFWS Gulf of Maine Program 2002) In 2002 two Alaskan steeppass fishways were installed at the Plymouth Pond in Plymouth. The river is divided into two distinct channels so a passage was cut between them to allow fish to access the fishways. This project was completed for a total cost of $122,275. As of late March 2003, construction of a pool and chute fishway at the Sebasticook Lake Outlet Dam in Newport is ongoing. It is being built next to the town park so that the public will be able to view migrating species. The pool and chute design will also minimize the amount of water needed for effective upstream and downstream passage. Royal River Bridge St. Fishway into Sabbathday Lake has recorded thousands of alewives passing over it from 1975 to (ASMFC 1985) MARYLAND: Anacostia River The Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project plans to restore passage for migratory and resident fish at 23 locations (not all dams) on Rock Creek, Indian Creek, Little Paint Branch, Sligo

4 Creek, and the NW Branch of the Anacostia River. (Potomac Basin Reporter 2001 and Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project 2003) VERMONT: Connecticut River From , river herring were observed using fish passage over the following dams: Vernon Dam in Vernon. (USFWS Connecticut River Coordinator s Office 2003)

5 Bibliography ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission) Fishery Management Plan for the anadromous alosid stocks of the eastern unites states: American shad, hickory shad, alewife, and blueback herring. Phase II in interstate management planning for migratory alosids of the Atlantic coast. Fishery Management Report No. 6 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. October Bowling, A. and K. Morkeski Ipswich River Herring Count Results. Ipswich River Watershed Association. February Brady, P. and K. Reback Anadromous Fisheries. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. Buzzards Bay Project Restoring Herring Populations on the Mattapoisett & Weweantic Rivers. National Estuary Program. Buzzards Bay Project Restoring the Herring to Adamsville Pond Westport, MA. National Estuary Program. Charles River Watershed Preserving Massachusetts Water Resources. Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Connecticut Weekly Diadromous Fish Report CTDEP- Inland Fisheries Division- Diadromous Program. Cute K.R RI DEM protects herring population. The Source. The University of Rhode Island s Journalism Department. Maine DMR (Department of Marine Resources) Sebasticook River Fish Passage Projects. NJDEP Locations of anadromous American shad and river herring during their spawning period in New Jersey s freshwaters including known migratory impediments and fish ladders. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Bureau of Freshwater Fisheries. November NOAA Community-Based Restoration Program Parker River Anadromous Fish Restoration. Potomac Basin Reporter Stocking of River Herring Continues. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: (July/August) Vol 57, No. 4. Stevenson, R.D., D.C. Mountain, and B. Roolf Parker River Alewife Assessment based on Volunteer Fish Counts 1997 and Parker River Clean Water Association. Undersea Landscapes Alewives.

6 USFWS Connecticut River Coordinator s Office Restoring Migratory Fish to the Connecticut River Basin. and fish/old98.thml to fish/old01.html USFWS Gulf of Maine Program Pleasant Lake, Maine. Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Fish Passage Restoration. Neighborhood News. Environment and the Project Area. Personal communication Mark Boriek, Anadromous Fish Research and Management, Freshwater Fisheries, NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife.

7 APPENDIX M EXAMPLES OF RIVER HERRING STOCKING PROGRAMS IN THE NORTHEAST NEW YORK: Peconic River (Byron Young, pers. comm.) NYSDEC is currently using stocking as part of a low cost, low tech approach to improving an existing run of river herring. NEW JERSEY: Batsto River (Mark Boriek, pers. comm.) New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife is currently stocking Batsto Lake, currently inaccessible habitat, with river herring. There is a plan to build fish passage over the dam that is blocking access to the lake in the near future. Great Egg Harbor River (Mark Boriek, pers. comm.) New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife is currently stocking Lake Lenape, currently inaccessible habitat, with river herring. There is a plan to build fish passage over the dam that is blocking access to the lake in the near future. NEW HAMPSHIRE: Merrimack River (McKeon, pers. comm.) Alewives were stocked into Lake Winnisquam in Laconia, NH as a substitute forage for landlocked salmon because the smelt population they had foraged on had collapsed. Stocking of about 5,000 alewives annually resulted in large runs of herring in the Merrimack River in the late 1980 s. Stocking ceased in the 1980 s and the run that was generated from stocking in the Merrimack River began to collapse. In 1995 herring returns dropped to zero and USFWS began stocking inaccessible habitat where fish passage could be developed if the runs increase. Cocheco River (McKeon, personal communication) A coastal stream, managed by stocking herring in currently inaccessible habitat.

8 Fish may never reach headwater areas on their own in the near future due to natural barriers but management efforts maintain reasonable runs of 40 60,000 fish. Lamprey River A coastal stream, managed by stocking herring in currently inaccessible habitat. (McKeon, personal communication) The major elements of the program were construction of a fishway at the lowermost dam and a 5-year program of transplanting fish from below the dam to upstream areas. (ASMFC 1985 p V-37) Once substantial numbers of fish began passing through the fishway, trucking of fish was discontinued. (ASMFC 1985 p V-37) A run of 50,000 river herring was established by 1981, nine years after the initial stocking. (ASMFC 1985 p IV-67) Exeter River A run size of over 15,000 was established by stocking in 1981 but declined to less than one thousand in 1982 and (ASMFC 1985 p IV-67) MAINE: Kennebec River (Maine DMR and Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission 2002) Plan to restore and enhance anadromous fish resources: Phase I (January 1, 1986 through December 31, 2001) involved restoration by means of trap and truck of alewives for release into spawning and nursery habitat. Phase II (January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2010), which is currently ongoing, involves providing upstream and downstream fish passage at Phase I release sites, as well as trap and truck operations to Phase II lakes. Due to the increased number of adult alewife returns to the Kennebec River since 1994, DMR typically not only meets Phase I stocking goals, but also has additional alewives available for other restoration sites in Maine. 153,103 adult alewives were collected from the Kennebec and stocked throughout the state in Stocking took place in over 20 ponds in the Kennebec drainage and 24 ponds in 11 other drainages: the Androscoggin, Bagaduce, Eastern, Mill Brook, Pemaquid, Royal, St. George, Seal Cove MDI, Sebasticook, Sheepscot, and Union. DMR deferred stocking alewives into the whole Sevenmile Brook drainage for a number of years due to the ongoing work in water quality improvement. In early 1995, DMR, DEP, and MDIFW agreed that alewife restoration at six alewives acre -1 would have no negative

9 impact on water quality and may, in fact, have a positive long-term impact through phosphorus export from the lakes. A conservative stocking program was initiated in Despite the endorsement of the stocking plan by regional fishery biologists, MDIFW decided not to grant DMR permission to stock the Phase II lakes in 2002 as a result of some concerns from members of the Lake Association. Subsequently, DMR will initiate the stocking of Phase II lakes in Royal River Fish passage facilities were constructed at two dams, and restoration was initiated by transplanting gravid adults from other systems. (ASMFC 1985 p V-37) Four years after the initial stocking of Sabbathday Lake, an estimated 50,000 alewives returned to the river in 1981, 24,160 returned in 1982, and 10,029 in (AMFC 1985 p IV-67) MASSACHUSETTS: At least 20 streams being stocked with gravid adult alewife in (ASMFC 1985 p IV-67) 36,000 fish transported in (ASMFC 1985 p IV-67) Stocked at least 16 different river systems in 1992 with Monument River alewife to reestablish runs or augment resident populations. (Cooper et al. 1994) Ipswich River Migrating blueback herring from the Charles River have been stocked into the Ipswich to boost river herring runs. (Doyle and Morrision 2003) Neponset River After a habitat feasibility study, the restoration project began stocking thousands of blueback herring from the Charles River in Stocking is ongoing and a study of fish passage alternatives was begun after stocking had already started. (Massachusetts DMF 2002) Weweantic River In conjunction with a project to build a fishladder over the dam to Horseshoe Pond, Massachusetts Department of Marine Fisheries will also stock Horseshoe Pond with 5,000 herring to boost the population. (Buzzard s Bay Project 2002)

10 MARYLAND: Potomac River The Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project includes restoring passage and a 5-year hatchery restocking program, through Approximately 2.7 million larval river herring have been released yearly since The stocking program hopes to accelerate the use of the opened upstream areas for future spawning and has also stocked herring fry in currently inaccessible habitat. (Potomac Basin Reporter 2001) Patapsco and Patuxent rivers River herring have been transported from the Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna and stocked into the Patapsco and Patuxent rivers. (ASMFC 1999 p41) PENNSYLVANIA: Susquehanna River River herring are being trapped and transported to spawning waters above dams. (Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission 2002) Over 12,000 bluebacks were stocked above dams and 9,400 were given to Maryland for stocking in upper Chesapeake Bay tributaries. (Cooper et al. 1994) RHODE ISLAND: Several inland streams were being stocked in 1992 with adult alewife from the Herring and Agawam rivers in Massachusetts. Narrow River Carr Pond was stocked with adult river herring from the Connecticut River and streams in Massachusetts. Fish are returning in the hundreds of thousands. (Cute 1999)

11 Bibliography: ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission) Fishery Management Plan for the anadromous alosid stocks of the eastern unites states: American shad, hickory shad, alewife, and blueback herring. Phase II in interstate management planning for migratory alosids of the Atlantic coast. Fishery Management Report No. 6 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. October ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission) Amendment 1 to the interstate fishery management plan for shad and river herring. Fisheries Management Report No. 35 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. April Buzzards Bay Project Restoring Herring Populations on the Mattapoisett & Weweantic Rivers. National Estuary Program. Cooper, J.E., R.T. Eades, R.J. Klauda, and J.G. Loesch, editors Anadromous Alosa Symposium. Tidewater Chapter, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. Cute K.R RI DEM protects herring population. The Source. The University of Rhode Island s Journalism Department. Doyle F. and J. Morrison Ipswich River Herring Count Results. Ipswich River Watershed Association. Maine DMR (Department of Marine Resources) and Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission Kennebec River anadromous fish restoration annual progress report Unpublished. Massachusetts DMF Neponset River Anadromous Fish Passage and Habitat Restoration Project. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Anadromous Fish Program. Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission Summary of 2001 shad restoration activities on the Susquehanna River. Potomac Basin Reporter Stocking of River Herring Continues. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: (July/August) Vol 57, No. 4. Personal communication Mark Boriek, Anadromous Fish Research and Management, Freshwater Fisheries, NJ Division of Fish and Wildlife. Joseph McKeon, Central New England Anadromous Fish Coordinator at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Byron Young, NYSDEC Bureau of Marine Resources

12 APPENDIX N WCS-NOAA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP GRANT APPLICATION SUMMER 2003 PROPOSAL TITLE Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program PROJECT NARRATIVE Section I: Project Goals The goal of this project is to begin restoration of a river herring run in the Bronx River through a multi-year stocking and monitoring program. NOAA is currently funding NRG and Lehman College to evaluate the need for and feasibility of providing passage for anadromous fish along the river. During the past year we have evaluated the habitat suitability, measuring water quality, temperature, channel morphology, hydraulics, biota, and substrate. We have compared our data to habitat requirements published in the literature and consulted fisheries experts from Maine, New York, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Massachusetts to help us determine whether the conditions we see in the river will provide suitable habitat for herring and American shad. We have determined that the river probably lacks sufficient deep-water habitat for American shad 1. No single environmental factor, however, either downstream or upstream of the dams, would preclude river herring from potentially surviving in the Bronx River. The literature shows that alewife and blueback herring tend to partition the river when both are present, but that each can occupy a relatively wide range of habitat given the opportunity 2. Currently, the existence of three dams along the river, two in the Zoo and one in the Botanical Garden, prevents upstream migration of river herring. Dams have been in place on the river beginning in the 1600 s, which may partly explain why we have found no direct evidence in the historical literature that river herring occupied the freshwater reaches of the Bronx River. Likely due to the length of time that passage has prevented upstream migration for anadromous species, the only freshwater/marine migratory fish observed both upstream and downstream of the dams are the catadromous eels 3. Various herring species have been found in small numbers at the mouth of the river, however 4. The absence of large numbers of river herring at the mouth of the river suggests stocking them as the next logical step and eventually establishing fish passages to ameliorate the blockage to migration caused by the existing dams. Before an investment is made in fish passage it is essential to determine if stocked species will survive and successfully spawn in the river. Since river herring take 3-8 years to return to a river after spawning, stocking should begin even before passage is established. And although river herring have a lower fidelity to their birth stream than fish such as salmon, it is still commonly assumed by fisheries agencies that a run must become homed to a river through stocking 5. 1 Steve Shephard, personnal communication Stier, D.J., and J.H. Crance Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: American shad. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.88). 34 pp. 2 Loesch, Joseph G Overview of life history aspects of anadromous alewife and blueback herring in freshwater habitats. Amer. Fish. Soc. Symp. 1: Joe Rachlin Final Report, Population Dynamics in the Bronx River. Lehman College. 4 NYCDEP Use and Standards Attainment (USA) Project. 2002; Hydroqual. Joe Rachlin, personnal communication. 5 Steve Gephard, Connecticut DEP Inland Fisheries Division, Diadromous Fishes Supervising Fisheries Biologist, personnal communication. Steve Shephard, NEA, fisheries biologist, personnal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program 1 Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group

13 With complementary habitat restoration programs already in place, establishing an anadromous fish run in the Bronx River is a step toward the overall goal of ecological restoration. A fish run would benefit the natural community of the river, providing food for birds as well as larger marine and estuarine fish throughout the river system. The run will also provide a unique educational and recreational opportunity for the surrounding community enabling us to demonstrate the dramatic improvement in river health that has been achieved over the past decades, and the exciting potential that still remains. Section II: Project Design By stocking fish our goal is to establish a viable river herring population that will become selfsustaining when fish passage is achieved. Passage would not only be necessary for the anadromous fish but would also benefit the migration of the American eel and other fish species which migrate locally in the river, increasing the connection between the river s communities. Fish passage, however, is often constructed when there is already a run of fish waiting at the bottom of an impassable dam. Our intent is to create that run as we move towards construction. This stocking strategy has been used successfully by fisheries agencies in multiple states on the mid- and north-atlantic coast to increase the chances that anadromous fish will return to occupy the rivers where they were born. Successful stocking programs include the Kennebec River of Maine, the Merrimack River in New Hampshire, and the Latimers and Pequonnock River in Connecticut. We have been in contact with fisheries scientists heading these projects and have incorporated their suggestions into our proposed methods. Our objectives are to determine: (1) spawning success of stocked fish, (2) causes of mortality for juveniles and adults; and (3) whether river herring are returning to spawn after three years. Another important objective is to work with partners to educate the community about the program and increase community interest and commitment to restoring the river by demonstrating the potential of reestablishing a native species. These objectives are compatible with other freshwater and tidal habitat restoration projects along the river. There are three basic elements to the anadromous fish reintroduction program: acquisition of source fish for spawning from regional streams; transport and placement of fish in the Bronx River; and, monitoring. We intend to maximize effectiveness in each stage of this project by working with fisheries agencies with expertise in locating, transporting, and stocking fish, and by partnering with the Wildlife Conservation Society, with their management role along the river and expertise in conservation, environmental education and outreach. NRG will secure all permits required for the implementation of this program. Through our ongoing discussions with the NYSDEC about the logistics and feasibility of fish stocking, we have begun to gather information about the permitting requirements and have not learned of any regulatory impediments. FISH SOURCES AND TRANSPORT For the stocking program to have the highest likelihood of success the location of our fish source is important. The distance from the source to the Bronx River must be as short as possible due to increased risk of fish mortality with increased transport time. Also, fish from different regions have different tolerances, for example fish from the north may spawn in colder waters than their southern counterparts. Also, fish may home to different regions according to genetic cues, perhaps finding the Hudson Bay or Long Island Sound first and only then using the imprint of their home river to find their particular tributary 6. Therefore, we are considering source rivers that are as close as possible and empty into the Long Island Sound or Hudson Bay. In the Hudson system, alewife begin arriving in late March to early April and blueback from mid- to late- April into May. Since our source river will likely be north of the Bronx River, we will collect the fish early in the spawning season to account for optimal spawning temperatures possibly occurring earlier in the Bronx River. Sources of river herring will change yearly as the location, timing, and intensity of a spawning run is variable. Field naturalists will notify us in the 6 Andy Kanely, NYSDEC Department of Marine Resources, personal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 2

14 spring when the fish are running of the best location to collect them. The closest most reliable run of bluebacks is the Mohawk system in upstate New York, a drive of about four hours 7, at a series of five locks called the Waterford flight by Cohos Falls. Blueback congregate there and are relatively easy to capture using a dip net 8. When closer sources of blueback are available they will be utilized to minimize fish mortality due to transport. Alewife are reliably found in closer Hudson tributaries including the Croton system, about 60 miles from the City 9. If a natural congregation point does not present itself from which the fish can be caught by dip net, then they will be corralled or trapped into a small area using seine nets. Steve Gephard, in charge of trucking and trapping operations in Connecticut, has volunteered to work directly with the people who will be capturing the fish. He will provide expertise on how to most efficiently trap and handle the fish. During capture, fish will be screened in order to determine their sex ratio. Previous stocking efforts have had reduced success due to highly male-biased sex ratios 10. By screening we will make sure that females are stocked in equal or greater numbers than the males. To minimize handling stress we will only screen a subset of the fish caught and may use a mild sedative such as MS Due to fluctuating sex ratios we may need to trap and truck from our source rivers several times over the course of a run. With the help of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service we will truck the river herring using a circular tank with an aerator and special salt solution. Circular tanks are highly recommended over rectangular ones as river herring tend to get stuck in corners and die 12. The salt solution reduces stress and mortality during transport 13. Mortality also increases at higher temperatures. Since blueback spawn later in the season when it is warmer and since their transport distance will be relatively long, temperature may become an issue. To alleviate the problem we may trap in the evening and truck during the night to take advantage of cooler temperatures 14. FISH PLACEMENT IN THE BRONX RIVER We will stock the fish at a density of 10 fish/acre at minimum and 50 fish/acre at maximum. This is a relatively high stocking density compared to stocking projects conducted over thousands of acres. However, keeping in mind that we have only fifty acres of available stocking habitat and an assumed percentage of fish mortality, to increase our chances of success we are over-estimating the amount of fish/acre we will need. There are twelve acres of spawnable habitat between the first and second dam, 3.4 acres between the second and third dam, and approximately 35 acres between the third and fourth dam. This is the potential river area to be enhanced. If unloading is feasible, a minimum of 120, 34, and 350 of each fish species will be stocked in each section respectively. The number of fish we are able to stock (over the minimum) will be limited by how many we can capture and successfully transport. Before unloading, water temperatures between the tank and river will be equalized. Exact locations where the truck can be backed in and the fish unloaded will be located prior to the spawning season. In the first year, we expect to propose two locations in the Bronx Zoo: upstream and downstream of the Bronx Zoo Dam from the northern and southern of the Bronx Zoo parking lots. At these sites, the rear wheels of a truck can get within nine feet of water that is four feet deep, with a drop from the truck no more than ten feet. Some trucks have a 35- foot hose extension that might be available. A water depth 7 Andy Kanely, personal communication. Steve Shephard, NEA, fisheries Biologist, personal communication. 8 Quentin Ross, personal communication. 9 Tom Lake, personal communication. 10 Steve Minkkinen, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, personal communication. 11 Steve Minkkinen, personal communication. 12 Steve Gephard, personal communication. Steve Minkkinen, personal communication. 13 Steve Gephard, personal communication. 14 Steve Gephard, personal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 3

15 of at least four feet is important to reduce impact on the fish when they are dumped 15. Possible unloading locations that we will evaluate are shown on the attached map. We propose partnering with the Bronx Zoo/WCS to manage access to the water for stocking and monitoring, help determine appropriate outreach and publicity surrounding the event, and volunteer monitoring after the stocking. DOWNSTREAM PASSAGE We will survey for problems with downstream passage, such as checking for dead fish below the dam. Later this year, an engineer will evaluate whether Dam 1 at 182 nd Street meets state and federal dam safety criteria as a part of Phase II of our current NOAA grant on Fish Passage feasibility. If the dam passes the inspection and fish mortality is a problem we will develop a design for notching the dam. The notch will cause a stream of water to shoot out further from the edge of the dam, bypassing the rocks at the bottom, and delivering the adult and juvenile herring safely into a pool. MONITORING We will monitor the success of the spawning, survival, downstream recruitment of juveniles, and return of adult fish. Monitoring will begin immediately after stocking in each year of the program. As the fish are stocked we will measure adult mortality due to trucking as an indicator for improving our transport techniques. Lehman College will use seine nets throughout the river and fyke nets at strategic locations to determine location and survivorship of the adults. If we later find no juveniles, this will help determine if the adults immediately dropped out of the system, if the adults did not survive to spawn, or if the young themselves had high mortality. A combination of drift nets, plankton nets, and paired bongo nets of appropriate mesh size ( micron mesh) will be installed at strategic locations to evaluate spawning success by sampling the ichthyoplankton for herring eggs and larvae. These nets will be set with their mouths facing upstream, and will be set for discrete time intervals of five to ten minutes; time will be adjusted as a function of the silt and sediment loading. Sampling will be done during the day, and where feasible and safe, we will also set these nets in the early evening. This sampling will be performed at minimum on a weekly basis in the river reaches starting above the first dam. It will commence following the introduction of adult spawners into the system and continue until one month after the last stocking event. It is clear from the literature that by one month all surviving spawn should have developed into juveniles 16. Monitoring for juvenile activity in upstream areas will involve observations for evening popping behavior 17 and seining for juveniles in appropriate pond and run areas downstream of the stocking locations. Seining for juveniles will continue through October. As an alternative sampling method we will employ electrofishing in areas where seining is precluded by the stream conditions. The length and weight of juveniles will be measured and stomach content analysis will be performed to assess their growth rate, diet, and condition as compared to other river-herring run systems. During the course of this program we will also monitor, using trawl nets and traps, the tidal reaches of the river for the presence and condition of river-herring as currently conducted for our NOAA fish passage study. We will also sample this zone using plankton and paired bongo nets to search for the presence of herring larvae. Sampling in the tidal portion of the Bronx River Estuary will begin in March 2004, as this was when Lehman College first collected herring larvae from the mouth of the Bronx River in the 2003 collecting season, and will continue through the summer. When the water temperature reaches that typical for alewife (13-15 o C) and blueback herring (15-23 o C) runs, usually late spring and early summer, we will sample the stretch of the river below the first dam (River Park south to Starlight) to see if any adult spawners are entering the system. If our stocking program is successful we should see 15 Steve Gephard, personal communication. 16 Able K.W., Fahay M.P The First Year in the Life of Estuarine Fishes in the Middle Atlantic Bight. Rutgers University Press. New Brunswick, NJ. pp. xiii Steve Gephard, personal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 4

16 increases in the presence of these adult spawners beginning in the third year after initial stocking. Monitoring will consist of seining, basket traps, and daily observation of the water below the first dam We hope that volunteers will become an integral part of the project, especially by helping us monitor for the juvenile and adult river herring. Community groups will also be invited to stocking events. As we will publicize, organize, and encourage volunteers we expect to have groups of five to twenty working with us for three to six hours a day at least once a month during the monitoring season. We hope to organize some long-term volunteers in a continual monitoring program with the Bronx Zoo/WCS and will also work on getting the local fishermen involved in the project. DURATION Fisheries experts generally agree that in an effective stocking program the river is re-stocked every year for five to seven years. It takes a minimum of three years for river herring to mature and return from the ocean to a river. To see an upturn in numbers of returning fish usually takes five to seven years, when several age classes are returning together. Stocking is generally continued until the fish ladder is built in order to maintain the run 18. For a minimum of five years and as funding permits, we will continue to stock and monitor the river until fish passage has been constructed and monitoring has provided evidence of a fish run comparable in success to others in the area. If the fish are waiting at the bottom of our first dam in significant numbers before fish passage construction is complete we will capture and transport them upriver. The anadromous fish run could become a living demonstration for the potential of urban restoration. Section III: Sustainability If all goes well, within seven years the fish run will be self-supporting, requiring no further intervention. The benefits of a fish run for both anadromous fish and freshwater species will long outlive the life of the stocking project. Through partnerships between governmental and non-governmental organizations in the Bronx and in Westchester, including the Army Corps of Engineers through its Bronx River study, there is a solid network of institutions undertaking and acquiring funds to maintain river restoration programs. We believe that, if successful, an anadromous fish run in the Bronx River will motivate organizations to continue to work together to fund maintenance needs. In particular, we will be working with the WCS/Bronx Zoo and the New York Botanical Garden to assure that the stocking program will be compatible with on-going maintenance and volunteer programs that they can support. NRG has been designing, managing, and overseeing the construction of multi-million dollar restoration projects in natural areas in New York City for years. We have built on-going relationships with community groups and other state and local agencies based on our commitment to building sustainable, well-managed projects that meet wildlife and local cultural needs. Section IV: Community Partnerships NRG and Lehman College have been working in with community groups implementing projects to study and restore the Bronx River for many years, and will continue this work during the stocking project. The excitement of stocking itself will draw many interested groups, and the monitoring can involve a range of groups. We hope that outreach to local fishermen will provide us with important information on the presence and location of river herring. We also expect to partner with the Bronx Zoo/WCS to develop appropriate monitoring and informational programs. Three years and more after stocking, we will try to organize a Bronx River volunteer program to monitoring the river downstream of the first dam daily during the spawning season for waiting fish. In the long run, if upstream fish passage is constructed, there may be additional viewing and educational opportunities in the Bronx Zoo. Section V: Budget Justification In the attached budget, salaries are requested for the additional staff NRG will require to complete the tasks described in the grant. Existing NRG staff, with years of project experience along the river, will 18 Steve Gephard, personal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 5

17 continue to manage the project and train new staff working on the NOAA grants. A project coordinator will be hired to help organize collection, transport, stocking and monitoring of the river herring as well as to assist with permit applications, material procurement, access issues, and activity coordination with partner and volunteer organizations. Two field technicians will be hired to assist the project manager and coordinator with these tasks. They will also assist with all the applicable fieldwork inside and, when possible, outside the City. This fieldwork will include helping in the capture of source fish from the river, accompanying the tank truck driver, unloading the fish at the river, and all aspects of monitoring. The summer intern will be hired to help with the organization of volunteers, creation of educational opportunities associated with the stocking, and fieldwork. The project coordinator, field technicians and summer intern will work jointly on the Freshwater Habitat Enhancement Project, Habitat Structures Project, and Fish Stocking Project. The consulting scientist described in the grant will have experience in fish trucking, stocking, and monitoring. The consultant will advise us throughout the first year of the project at each phase to help us meet the standards of current functional stocking programs. In particular, he or she will advise us in our choice of source location and timing, collection and screening methods, reduction of mortality during transport, efficient stocking practices, and monitoring procedures. Two experienced field technicians will be hired seasonally to notify us of the optimal location to collect alewife and blueback in that year 19. They will capture and collect the fish, and they will screen the fish for a sufficient proportion of females. A truck with a circular tank and driver is necessary for river herring to survive transport that lasts over half an hour 20. The truck cost and mileage estimate was based on discussions with contractors and assumes ten trips to two sites four hours away. The funds requested for the Lehman College team, Professor Joseph Rachlin (team leader), Dr. Barbara E. Warkentine (senior scientist), Dr. Antonios Pappantoniou (senior field technician), and one graduate field technician, will permit these four consultants to perform all necessary field operations, in both the freshwater and marine reaches of the river, in order to fully monitor and assess the success of this fish introduction program. These funds will permit the team to be available from the initiation of stocking through the end of October in each year of the study. This will permit sampling at a minimum frequency of twice weekly during the spring and fall and allow the team to devote full time to the various sampling, stomach content and data analysis activities, during the summer. The request of $7,000 per year for the SUNY Maritime Vessel permits the team to sample the estuarine reaches and mouth of the river and contiguous waters for a minimum of ten days for each of the three years of the study. The request of $2,000 per year for the Lehman Field vehicle is needed to transport the team and gear to the various sampling locations. As a match, the Lehman College team is providing much of the field sampling and monitoring gear. Lehman College and the Research Foundation of CUNY (RF-CUNY) require ten percent of personnel funds and fringe benefits as overhead to administer this portion of the grant. If the NYSDEC permits dam modification, and fish mortality during downstream passage over the first dam is high, we will notch the dam. The cost of notch construction will include the diversion of the river with a coffer dam, masonry work to notch the dam, wages of the construction crew over several days, and insertion of a board. This board would serve as an extended lip that increases the distance of the water stream that shoots out from the face of the dam. The cost of equipment was estimated from supply catalogues, personal contacts, and past project experience. Section VI: Personnel and Management Plan Established in 1984, The City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group is responsible for the acquisition, protection, restoration, and management of the City s historic and restored natural areas. NRG develops natural area management and restoration programs and serves as a clearinghouse for technical research that aids in the protection and restoration of the City s natural resources. Since its inception, NRG has conducted vegetation and wildlife surveys of 10,000 acres of 19 Bob Schmidt of Hudsonia for example. 20 Doug Grout, personal communication. Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 6

18 wetlands, woodlands, and meadows, secured more than $165 million for acquisition and restoration projects, and restored more than 2,000 acres of salt marsh, grassland, freshwater wetland, and forest. NRG employs a full time staff of 30 members with a wide range of expertise and experience including wildlife and plant ecologists, ecological restoration specialists, naturalists, landscape architects, geomorphologists, hydrologists, foresters, and GIS/mapping specialists. NRG has a record of working with the community, overseeing contractors and labor crews, maintaining sites to a high performance level, adhering to safety standards and meeting project goals on budget. For this project, NRG s grants coordinator (Hadas Kushnir) will work with NRG s project manager (Marit Larson) and the NYC Parks Director of Gants (Dawn Byfield) to manage the budget and submit reports. PROJECT SCHEDULE PROJECT PHASE START DATE COMPLETION DATE COST Evaluation and finalization of truck October 2003 November 2003 $6,150 (NRG staff match) access sites Acquire all necessary permits, property October 2003 February 2004 $6,150 (NRG staff match) owner approval and access Finalize tank truck acquisition October 2003 February 2004 $6,150 (NRG staff match) Advertise and hire project coordinator November January $134,947 and field technicians (annually) (annually) Civil Engineer Dam Inspection December 2003 January 2003 $6,150 (NRG match) Hire fish capture field technicians December February $36,000 (annually) (annually) Hire consultant December 2003 February 2004 $12,000 Determine most optimal fish source location with consultant(first year) and fish capture field technicians Notch 182 nd Street Dam (if applicable and approved by WCS) Trap and Screen Fish Transport and unload fish Monitoring Hire summer intern February (annually) May (annually) $0 (Included in hiring price above) March 2003 April 2003 $10,000 March (annually) March (annually) March (annually) April (annually) May (annually) May (annually) October (annually) September (annually) $140 $98,770 $224,940 $18,720 Anadromous Fish Reintroduction Program Proposal for WCS-NOAA Regional Partnership Grant, August 8, 2003 City of New York Parks & Recreation, Natural Resources Group 7

19 NRG/Lehman College Phase 1 Draft Report Responses Date: March 19, 2004 To: Jan Kaderly, WCS Cc: Jim Turek, CeCe Linder, From: Marit Larson Re: Responses to Comment on Phase 1 Draft Report: Fish Passage Needs and Feasibility Assessment- Comment Below are the comments excerpted from the letters we received from the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), and the New York Botanical Garden (NYBG) at the end of December Our responses were (with a few exceptions) incorporated into the text of the Draft Final Report (Phase I), and are listed here in blue, with the location in the report indicated. Comments from NYBG begin on pg. 6 and from WCS on pg.8. NOAA Comments (Jim Turek, Assistant Northeast Team Leader) PRESENT EXTENT OF FISH: (Pg.2)- How did Lehman College sample? What sampling methods did they employ and how often did they sample? More detail should be provided on sampling methodology for both fish and prey items. RESPONSE (see pg. 3 and Appendices A, B, and C Final Draft): Inserted by Prof. Joe Rachlin HISTORIC AND PRESENT FISH COMMUNITIES (Pg. 4) Correct spelling = Etheostoma olmstedi, Morone saxatilis (text) Corrected Table 2 (Pg. 5)- Where is Station 1? Map 2 depicts Lafayette Avenue station as lowest station. RESPONSE (see Table 2 and Map 2 Final Draft): Map 2 was corrected and Soundview station added. Figure 1 (Pg. 8)- Where in the water column were samples collected? RESPONSE (see Fig. 1 Final Draft): Data from one foot below the surface was used but only when depths were specified. Written in figure captions. 1

20 NRG/Lehman College Phase 1 Draft Report Responses Contaminants Discussion (Pg. 10)- This section seems rather weak. There are several good reference papers that address sediment contaminant levels to aquatic life toxicity, including Long and Morgan 1991, and MacDonald et al, A better write-up on this issue should be included in the report. RESPONSE (see pg. 11 Final Draft): This section was rewritten. Section on Flows (Pgs and figures)- Seems like the average daily flows for April and May should be discussed first. Then discuss the peak discharges and explain how they might adversely affect adult migration, egg, larvae and juvenile stress and mortality, and juvenile out-migration. See Flows text. Figures 4 and 5- Why does the regression analyses only include the USGS data and not the NRG datafigure 6b- How were flows estimated? What was the method, employing a staff gage? Figure 7 should follow pg. 13. RESPONSE (see pg. 4, 12, Fig. 4, 5 Final Draft): This section was rewritten to try to more clearly discuss the implications of the average and peak flow conditions. For this particular discharge-stage analysis, only USGS was used to avoid introducing the variation introduced by two different instruments used to collect velocity measurements. The flow estimation technique is described in the Approach section. The order of figures was corrected. Section: Dunne-riffle (C- or D-type) reaches: (Pg. 12)- More detail needs to be provided to address the issue of stream flow velocities and spawning habitat during spring (i.e., velocities exceed Pardues (1983) suggested range for spawning (especially since it states that pools for refuge are sparse). (Pg. 13, top of page)- How was the conclusion that with greater than 200 cfs, there is little channel habitat with velocities of less than 1 fps? How was this conclusion determined by reviewing the results in Figure 7? RESPONSE (see pg. 14, 23, Fig. 7, Appendix I Final Draft): More field velocity measurements are needed on the variation in flow velocity both temporally, with variation in flow magnitude, and spatially, within a reach and across reaches. In particular, more readings are needed at the potential refuge sites, at channel edges under cover, and in pools. The frequency of this refuge and potential spawning habitat will be identified and mapped this spring and summer, in part to help refine the monitoring strategy if stocking occurs. The conclusion that with greater than 200 cfs, there is little channel habitat with velocities of less than 1 ft/s applies just to the modeled Forest Park reach. Figure 7 shows average XS velocity at each station in this reach plotted for 200 cfs and other flows. Figures 8a and 9a relate the reach numbers to Table 3 that addresses fish sampling data. Corrected Section: CONCLUSIONS (Pg. 15)- What structures would NRG plan on implementing to provide cover and resting habitat? 2