KEY PAGES
Site Index
Contact us / About Us
Bay & Watershed Info
Old CCMP|New CCMP
Links
Funding
Laws and Regulations
NEP Information
Reference
Status & Trends
Solutions
Take Action
Violations, Reporting
Weather and Tides
Action Plan 8:
Restoring Migratory Fish Passageways
October 17, 2011 draft finalAbout the new Buzzards Bay CCMP Action Plans
The Buzzards Bay NEP is now updating our 1991 landmark Buzzards Bay Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) to reflect the great progress achieved since that plan was finalized. It will include new or updated goals, objectives, and management solutions to meet the environmental needs for Buzzards Bay and its surrounding watershed throughout the next decade.
On this page is a draft action plan from the updated Buzzards Bay Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. The text on this page is a public draft provided to invite comment and discussion of the subject by residents and stakeholders. It may contain goals and recommendations that have not yet been endorsed or approved by the Buzzards Bay Steering Committee. The views or information contained here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or the US Environmental Protection Agency.
We want your feedback on this action plan. First, please read the entire action plan Restoring Migratory Fish Passageways. Then at the bottom of this page click the "Rate the Goals and Objectives now" button to provide comments on each goal, objective and defined management approach contained in this Action Plan. Based on your feedback, we will update and revise all the action plans in the new CCMP.
Restoring Migratory Fish Passageways
Problem
River herring and other diadromous fish have declined dramatically during the past 100 years. While there were some improvements in certain populations toward the end of the twentieth century, offshore fishing pressures and bycatch takings, coupled with continued river and pond habitat degradation, have resulted in dramatic declines in anadromous fish populations. Water diversion and pumping for agricultural purposes is one of the most significant causes of juvenile herring fatalities. Restoration of these fish populations will require rigorous controls of offshore catch of these species, continued efforts to improve water quality and anadromous fish spawning habitat, elimination of obstructions to migration, and improved water management practices to avoid placing adult and juvenile populations at risk.
In the Buzzards Bay watershed, more than 1,000 acres of pond habitat remains inaccessible due to dams without fish ladders, or other obstructions. In some cases, new fish ladder installations may be appropriate, in some cases dam removal may be the best option to restore smelt, bluebacks, and sea run brook trout.
Goals
Goal 8.1. Ensure that the migration of fish species between salt and fresh water is unimpeded.
Goal 8.2. To restore degraded stream habitat and stream functions to ensure the diversity and abundance of fish in Buzzards Bay streams.
Goal 8.3. To manage fishing pressures on anadromous fish to ensure the fish harvest and bycatch are sustainable.
Goal 8.4. Restore and improve access to spawning habitat.
Objectives
Objective 8.1. Ensure adequate funding of state fisheries restoration programs.
Objective 8.2. Ensure that local, state, and federal fisheries regulators better manage the catch and bycatch of river herring and other diadromous fish to promote their recovery and population sustainability.
Objective 8.3. Improve passageways and remove impediments and obstructions to fish migration.
Objective 8.4. Ensure adequate stream flow for fish migration.
Solutions
The National Marine Fisheries should take action to limit the catch and bycatch of river herring in offshore waters. At the same time, state and local managers must identify and restore priority fish habitat sites and remove obstructions to fish migration. Many smaller herring runs need to be elevated as a priority for restoration because of their cumulative benefits. A special focus of the state and towns should be a coordinated restoration of fish habitat on the Weweantic River.
DEP could require as a condition in all state water withdrawal permits that there is adequate flow in rivers during juvenile fall downstream migrations. Permittees should always be required to use appropriate screening of water withdrawal intakes to prevent stranding, mutilation, entrainment or impingement of young herring.
Costs and Financing
Regulatory solutions have negligible costs to gov-ernment. The installation of a fish counter on a particular stream may cost up to $40,000. Developing and implementing designs to eliminate or repair fish passageway structures and obstacles and dam removal can cost millions for the watershed. Federal grants can cover some of these costs but state and local government may need to provide additional funding for natural resource staff.
Measuring Success
The success of measures untaken under this action plan can be assessed by tracking the installation of ladders or removal of obstructions. Ultimately the abundance of anadromous fish traveling upstream will be the best measure. This count can be determined through automated fish counters and by volunteers to undertake field counts on representative dates and times.
To fully understand the basis of these goals and objectives, and possible management approaches, please read the complete Restoring Migratory Fish Passageways Action Plan (October 17, 2011 draft final, pdf file).