Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the Final Rule Defining "Harm" in the Definition of "Take" in the ESA

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | October 1st, 1999

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is issuing a final rule defining the term "harm" contained in the definition of "take" under the Endangered Species Act of 19

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is issuing a final rule defining the term "harm" contained in the definition of "take" under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). This rulemaking will codify NMFS' interpretation of "harm" is that habitat modification can result in a take under the ESA. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. requires the preparation of an initial and final Regulatory Flexibility Analyses unless an agency determines that a rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In the May 1, 1998 Federal Register Notice for the proposed rule to define harm (63 FR 24148-24150), NMFS opined that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as described in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and that therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis would not be required for adoption of the final rule. However, numerous public comments were received in response to the Federal Register Notice and accompanying draft EA requesting that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be performed. This document constitutes NMFS' Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

Fish and Game Commission Twenty-Second Biennial Report for the Years 1910-1912

State of California | December 31st, 1912

Fish Bulletin 133. Ecological Studies of The Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary Part 1: Zooplankton, Zoobenthos, and Fishes of San Pablo and Suisun Bays, Zooplankton and Zoobenthos of the Delta

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | September 9th, 1965

The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers have a common estuary. These two streams meet in the center of California's central valley to form the Delta (Figure 1). A hundred y

The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers have a common estuary. These two streams meet in the center of California's central valley to form the Delta (Figure 1). A hundred years ago the Delta was an extensive tidal marsh, but it has been almost entirely reclaimed for agriculture. The Delta now includes about 738,000 acres of land and water, 700 miles of navigable channels, and 30 large, below sea level islands. About 39,000 acres are covered by water. Some Delta channels are edged with narrow stretches of intertidal marsh but most of them have steep banks of mud or are covered with large cobbles to prevent erosion. They vary in width from a few hundred feet to a mile and are seldom more than 30 to 40 feet deep. In some areas there are small "waste" islands that flood during high tides. These waste islands and levees that surround all Delta channels are covered with an assortment of emergent aquatic plants, grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees. Water heading toward the sea from the Delta passes through Suisun Bay, which is merely the wide combination of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers below the Delta. Thirty-six percent of Suisun Bay is flooded by less than 3 feet of water at mean lower-low tide, and at this stage about 3,000 acres of intertidal zone is exposed. Richard Painter (see p. 40) has included a map of the 6-foot contour. From Suisun Bay the water flows through the 6-mile long and up to 100 feet deep Carquinez Strait into San Pablo Bay. Almost 60 percent of San Pablo Bay's 73,000 acres is less than 6 feet deep at mean lower-low tide. San Pablo Bay has a much more extensive intertidal area than Suisun Bay. San Pablo Bay water flows into San Francisco Bay and then through the narrow Golden Gate into the Pacific Ocean. The investigations reported on in this bulletin were geographically limited to the upper and middle portions of the estuary—from the Delta through San Pablo Bay. We have not investigated below San Pablo Bay. McCarty et al (1962) described south San Francisco Bay, and Storrs, Selleck, and Pearson (1964) described north San Francisco Bay. Gillian (1957) wrote an interesting and useful popular account of the entire bay.

Fish Collections and Secondary Louver Efficiency at the Tracy Fish Collection Facility: October 1993 to September 1995

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | May 29th, 1998

Fish Restoration Program Agreement Implementation Strategy for Habitat Restoration and Other Actions for Listed Delta Fish

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | March 6th, 2012

The Fish Restoration Program Agreement (FRPA) (Appendix A), between the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Department of Water Resources (DWR), was signed on Octob

The Fish Restoration Program Agreement (FRPA) (Appendix A), between the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Department of Water Resources (DWR), was signed on October 18, 2010. FRPA addresses specific habitat restoration requirements of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) biological opinions (Biological Opinions) for State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) operations. FRPA is also intended to address the habitat requirements of the DFG Longfin Smelt Incidental Take Permit (ITP) for SWP Delta operations. The primary objective of the FRPA program is to implement the fish habitat restoration requirements and related actions of the Biological Opinions and the ITP in the Delta, Suisun Marsh, and Yolo Bypass and is focused on 8,000 acres of intertidal and associated subtidal habitat to benefit delta smelt, including 800 acres of mesohaline habitat to benefit longfin smelt, and a number of related actions for salmonids. DFG and DWR intend that habitat restoration actions implemented in compliance with the USFWS biological opinion that also meet the habitat restoration requirements of the ITP will operate to satisfy the acreage requirements of the ITP. The purpose of this Implementation Strategy is to describe the process by which DWR and DFG will implement the FRPA program, and to satisfy Section B of FRPA. Section B of FRPA requires DWR, with assistance from DFG, to develop an Implementation Schedule that will identify restoration actions, estimated costs, targeted acreage, and a timeline for DWR’s implementation of restoration actions to satisfy DWR’s obligations under the Biological Opinions and ITP. Appendix B lists the specific habitat restoration requirements of FRPA, the Biological Opinions, and the ITP that pertain to this program. This document lays out the strategy to address these requirements. In addition, DWR and DFG will complete the necessary environmental compliance documents to implement site specific habitat restoration projects; this may include tiering from existing programmatic documents where appropriate. Pursuant to FRPA, DFG will work cooperatively with and assist DWR in establishing the management and financial framework necessary to implement the FRPA program. DWR, with assistance from DFG, will begin a process to fund, plan, and implement actions, including aquatic habitat restoration to benefit delta smelt, longfin smelt, and winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon (hereafter referred to as Covered Fish Species) to mitigate impacts to these species caused by the SWP Delta operations. Specifically, these actions include: • Delta Smelt Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) Component 4; • NMFS Biological Opinion RPA Actions 1.2.6 and 1.6.2 in partnership with the US Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation); • NMFS Biological Opinion RPA Action Suite 1.6 and 1.7. FRPA will not be lead, but will provide funding and technical support assistance only; • ITP Condition 7. DWR’s obligations focus on delta smelt, longfin smelt, and winter-run and spring-run salmon, and may also benefit steelhead, sturgeon, and other native fish species.

Fish-Habitat Relationships Along the Estuarine Gradient of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California: Implications for Habitat Restoration

Estuaries and Coasts (Springer) | June 6th, 2018

Estuaries are highly variable environments where fish are subjected to a diverse suite of habitat features (e.g., water quality gradients, physical structure) that filt

Estuaries are highly variable environments where fish are subjected to a diverse suite of habitat features (e.g., water quality gradients, physical structure) that filter local assemblages from a broader, regional species pool. Tidal, climatological, and oceanographic phenomena drive water quality gradients and, ultimately, expose individuals to other habitat features (e.g., stationary physical or biological elements, such as bathymetry or vegetation). Relationships between fish abundances, water quality gradients, and other habitat features in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta were examined as a case example to learn how habitat features serve as filters to structure local assemblages in large river-dominated estuaries. Fish communities were sampled in four tidal lakes along the estuarine gradient during summer-fall 2010 and 2011 and relationships with habitat features explored using ordination and generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). Based on ordination results, landscape-level gradients in salinity, turbidity, and elevation were associated with distinct fish assemblages among tidal lakes. Native fishes were associated with increased salinity and turbidity, and decreased elevation. Within tidal lakes, GLMM results demonstrated that submersed aquatic vegetation density was the dominant driver of individual fish species densities. Both native and non-native species were associated with submersed aquatic vegetation, although native and non-native fish populations only minimally overlapped. These results help to provide a framework for predicting fish species assemblages in novel or changing habitats as they indicate that species assemblages are driven by a combination of location within the estuarine gradient and site-specific habitat features.

Fishes, Hydrology, and Ecology of the Klamath River Basin

National Academy of Sciences (NAS) | February 11th, 2008

The Klamath River basin in southern Oregon and northern California is the focus of a prominent conflict over competing uses for water in the American West. Management mea

The Klamath River basin in southern Oregon and northern California is the focus of a prominent conflict over competing uses for water in the American West. Management measures for the protection of threatened and endangered fish species in the basin that have left less water available for irrigation have increased tensions among farmers and other stakeholders and brought into question the scientific justification of these measures. Two National Research Council studies evaluate a series of federal scientific assessments and recommend scientifically justified approaches to the problem.

Flow Recommendations to the State Water Resources Control Board

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | May 22nd, 2008

Pursuant to Public Resouces Code (PRC) Section 10001, in the early 1980s, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) in coordination with all regional DFG offices, identified

Pursuant to Public Resouces Code (PRC) Section 10001, in the early 1980s, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) in coordination with all regional DFG offices, identified 21 streams and watercourses for which minimum flow levels needed to be established in order to assure the continued viability of stream-related fish and wildlife resources. Over approximately 20 years, DFG investigated the instream flow needs of these listed streams and watercourses.  The investigations included field studies, data analyses, and consultations with local, state, and federal agencies and interested individuals and organizations.  As a result of the investigations, DFG prepared instream flow recommendations for the listed streams. The attached transmittal summarizes the flow recommendations prepared by DFG pursuant to PRC 10000.  Submission of these recommendations to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) complies with PRC Section 10002. As will be evident upon review, the attached flow recommendations are intended to supplement, but not replace, current administrative records.  The attached flow recommendations should not be implemented by the SWRCB without further investigation and consideration of supporting information that would identify constraints or limitations that qualify each recommendation. In addition, as noted on each recommendation, some studies were done many years ago using early methods.  DFG has established an administrative file in the Water Branch that contains the resource documents cited in the flow recommendations.

Flows and Fishes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Research Needs in Support of Adaptive Management

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | August 15th, 2015

Food Web Fuel Differs Across Habitats and Seasons of a Tidal Freshwater Estuary

Estuaries and Coasts (Springer) | July 11th, 2020

Estuarine food webs are fueled by multiple different primary producers. However, identifying the relative importance of each producer to consumers is difficult, particula

Estuarine food webs are fueled by multiple different primary producers. However, identifying the relative importance of each producer to consumers is difficult, particularly for fishes that utilize multiple food sources due to both their mobility and their generally high trophic levels. Previous studies have documented broad spatial differences in the importance of primary producers to fishes within the Upper San Francisco Estuary, California, including separation between pelagic and littoral food webs. In this study, we evaluated the importance of primary producers to adult fishes in three closely spaced subregions that represented disparate habitat types (a tidal wetland channel, a turbid backwater channel, and a deep open-water channel), each a potential outcome of local restoration projects. Using stable isotope analysis coupled with a Bayesian mixing model, we identified significant differences in primary-producer contribution to fishes and invertebrates across habitats and seasons, especially in the relative contribution of submersed aquatic vegetation and phytoplankton. Most fishes utilized multiple primary producers and showed little segregation between pelagic and littoral food webs among habitats. Availability of primary producers differs seasonally and across multiple spatial scales, helping to buffer environmental variability and thus enhancing food web resilience. Ecosystem restoration may improve with emphasis on restoring a wide variety of primary producers to support consumers.