Evaluation by NEFMC's HAPC Plan Development Team of the Georges Bank/Northern Edge Habitat Area of Particular Concern Proposal
Overview.
The purpose of this HAPC proposal (Figure S) is to expand the existing HAPC designation
westward to encompass more gravel, cobble, and boulder-pile habitat features known to
improve the survival of juvenile cod and other species and to apply the HAPC to all species and
life stages with EFH designated in the area, not just juvenile cod. The unique oceanographic
characteristics and habitat features found in the area satisfy many of the HAPC designation
criteria, including importance of ecological function, sensitivity to human-induced
environmental degradation, and rarity of habitat type.
Step 1: Does the proposed HAPC meet the criteria established under the EFH Final Rule?
1(A) Importance of Historic Ecological Function:.
The Northern Edge of Georges Bank has been an important fishing ground for Atlantic cod,
haddock, and halibut, based on historical fishing records. Long-term historical records of
fishing activity by European and North American fishermen The Northern Edge was found to
hold Atlantic codfish year-round, as well as haddock and halibut during July and August. (Rich
1929).
1(B) - Importance of Current Ecological Function:
The Northern Edge is an area of high biological productivity supported by upwelling currents
from the Gulf of Maine and the Georges Bank tidal front. The gravel substrate provides
protection from predation for juvenile cod and haddock, increased food supply, spawning sites
for Atlantic herring, and settlement sites for sea scallops. Habitat features contained within the
proposed Northern Edge HAPC have been identified as EFH for juvenile and/or adult stages of
several groundfish species, including Atlantic cod, haddock, herring, American plaice, pollock,
white hake, winter flounder, witch flounder, yellowtail flounder, and halibut. A portion of the
Northern Bank have already been designated as juvenile cod HAPC
2 - Sensitivity to Anthropogenic Stresses:
The National Research Council (2002) found that trawling and dredging can change the
physical and biological structure of ecosystems. A Northeast Region EFH Steering Committee
workshop panel concluded mobile gear impacts to high energy gravels substrates were of great
concern. Gravel/cobble substrates not subject to regular/intense fishing pressure support thick
colonies of emergent epifauna (Collie et al. 1996; Collie et al. 1997). Emergent epifauna on the
gravel substrate are sensitive to bottom fishing disturbance. A large area (30 nmz) within the
proposed HAPC has been colonized by the invasive tunicate, Didemnum sp.
3 - Extent of Current or Future Development Stresses:
Concern over future fishing effort. Potential for oil/gas exploration and pipeline construction;
however there is not a specific development threat to the proposed HAPC. A similar habitat
area within MA state waters has been targeted for gravel mining.
4 - Rarity of the Habitat Type: Definitely rare habitat at the scale of New England Region. Areas of gravel/cobble habitat on northern Georges Bank are not a common feature of greater Georges Bank, which contains generally more sandy sediments.
Step 2: Does the supporting information justify the HAPC designation?
The supporting information is relevant to the area of the proposed HAPC and the EFH final
rule criteria with the possible exception of Criteria 4 (rare habitat) where the habitat type
may be more limited but not considered rare. No supporting information contradicts the
applicant's proposal and the material contains a good mix of historic and contemporary
literature, although some is not specific to the proposed HAPC area or George's Bank in
general.
Some additional recent publications are relevant to this HAPC proposal:
Collie J.S., G.S. Escanero, P.C. Valentine. 2000a. Photographic evaluation of the impacts of
bottom fishing on benthic epifauna. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57:987-1001.
Collie, J.S., S.J. Hall, M.J. Kaiser, and LR. Poiner. 2000b. A quantitative analysis of fishing
impacts on shelf-sea benthos. J. Anim. Ecol. 69:785-798.
Collie, J.S., J.M. Hermsen, P.C. Valentine, and F.P. Almeida. 2005. Effects of fishing on gravel
habitats: assessment and recovery of benthic megafauna on Georges Bank. In P. Bames
and J. Thomas [eds.] Benthic habitats and the effects of fishing. American Fisheries
Society, Bethesday, MD. In press.
Hermsen, J.M., J.S. Collie, and P.C. Valentine. 2003. Mobile fishing gear reduces benthic
megafaunal production on Georges Bank. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 260:97-108.
Step 3: How strongly does the information support the application?
Cited studies demonstrate the functions and values of gravel habitats for juvenile cod and
mobile gear impacts to gravel substrate have been documented. However, some of the data
may not have the resolution to support site-specific sediment characterizations. The sensitivity
of gravel habitats to the effects of bottom-fishing is supported by field studies conducted inside
the proposed HAPC and in other locations. The importance of gravel habitats to juvenile cod is
supported by specific studies on the northern edge of Georges Bank and general studies in New
England and Atlantic Canada. Additionally, lab experiments have documented the specific
importance of gravel substrates with epifauna to the survival of juvenile Atlantic cod, on time
scales of days (Lindholm et al. 1999). Lastly, computer models have projected the consequences
of habitat-mediated survival of cod juveniles to year-class size at age one (Lindholm et al. 2001).
b>Step 4: Evaluation of the HAPC based on the criteria and preferences set forth by the Council The proposal includes HAPC designation for more than one Council-managed species (Atlantic cod, haddock, herring, American plaice, pollock, white hake, winter flounder, witch flounder, yellowtail flounder, and Atlantic halibut), which will serve to maximize the benefit of the designation. It also includes designation of juvenile cod EFH, a Council-stated preference and it meets three out of the four HAPC criteria (1, 2, 3).
Management measures have not been recommended as part of this HAPC proposal. However, the proposers have requested that a full range of alternative measures, including area-specific closures, gear requirements, and effort reductions be considered at the appropriate point. Specifically, they request that the Council develop a range of alternatives for this HAPC proposal and that the analysis include evaluation of Level I, II, and III habitat closures (as defined in Amendment 13 to the Groundfish FMP) and that the impacts analysis specifically evaluate the potential benefits to habitat function, fish productivity, and overall ecosystem health. The PDT has not evaluated these requests at this point.
Step 5: A report of all proposal applications reviewed which would include: The grades and notes for each proposal that went through Step 1- Step 4, and a record/reason for any proposal received but not reviewed (incomplete, awaiting more information, etc.).
Management measures have not been recommended as part of this HAPC proposal. As proposed, it would not change fisheries management in the EEZ. Designation of a larger HAPC in this area could provide greater protection for juvenile cod from some fishing activities.
The proposed HAPC proposal includes EFH for several Council-managed species, including Atlantic cod, haddock, herring, American plaice, pollock, white hake, winter flounder, witch flounder, yellowtail flounder, and Atlantic halibut. The proposed HAPC includes juvenile cod EFH. The proposed HAPC would expand the existing HAPC for juvenile cod, which is a stated preference of the Council. The proposed HAPC meets 3 out of the 4 EFH Final Rule HAPC criteria.
The proposal includes excellent supporting information but in some cases the information is not specific enough. The proposal recommends expanding the current George's Bank cod HAPC to the west and applying it to a host of other species. The PDT noted that the supporting SMAST information for substrates was not generated with the intent to characterize habitats and has not been fully analyzed.
Step 6: Outcome
The PDT recommends this proposal as an HAPC management alternative to the Habitat
Committee with the recommendation that the boundaries should be reviewed based on the
SMAST gravel substrate data. Additionally, slightly more work needs to be done to verify the
species list with the EFH text descriptions.
END