SEG Fisheries Committee;

Minutes of October 29, 1999 meeting

1. The meeting was held at the Corps of Engineers office in Savannah from 9:00 to 11:45 on Friday, October 29, 1999. Individuals who could not attend in person were able to participate through a teleconference capability.

2. The meeting was structured by first attempting to identify potential impacts to individual fishery resources from the proposed harbor deepening project, then identifying any information needs that would limit or prohibit an evaluation or analysis of the expected project impacts to that resource.

3. We began by discussing the various fisheries for which the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council has developed a management plan. A handout taken from "EFH Guidance for Federal Agencies" listed these plans. The first is the Shrimp Fishery. Participants identified that this was an important resource in the area. Potential project effects were from turbidity during construction and alterations of flow velocities. All agreed that the project was unlikely to have a large effect on this resource. Jim Music from GADNR-CRD was identified as a likely source of more information. The Red Drum/Snapper Fishery was then discussed. It was also identified as important in this area. Little is known about the location of juveniles and larvae (early life history) in the immediate project area. Further discussion on this lack of information was held over until later in the meeting. The next several fisheries were taken as a group since they all dealt with fish that primarily spent their lives offshore. This included the Coastal Migratory Pelagics Fishery, the Golden Crab Fishery, the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery, the Callico Scallop Fishery, and the Sargassum Habitat Fishery. All felt that the project was unlikely to have much impact on these resources. Weakfish were discussed. A management plan had recently been approved for them. This is primarily a recreational fishery. Flounder were also identified as a fishery of importance in the project area.

4. The committee next went through a second handout of fish species for which the NMFS has management plans. This handout was also taken from materials titled "EFH Guidance for Federal Agencies". This list included Billfish, Swordfish, Tuna, and Sharks. For the first three, the committee felt that the project would have no impact since these species were predominantly found offshore. For sharks, the committee felt that the potential project impact would not be substantial, since the project could only impact a small portion of the large expanse of habitat available to the species.

5. The committee then discussed a third handout from materials titled "EFH Guidance for Federal Agencies" that listed the habitats defined as being Essential Fish Habitat by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. The first grouping of habitats is titled "Estuarine Areas". The group first discussed Estuarine Emergent Wetlands. This habitat was identified as being very valuable to numerous fish species. Information is presently lacking on the use of this habitat by various species, particularly how species use changes with gradients in vegetation corresponding to salinity gradients. Juvenile and larval life stages in particular use this resource. The committee recommended a direct assessment of the habitat’s value to fisheries in the harbor. In theory, a habitat model could be used to predict project impacts to fisheries using this habitat, but these models typically require information that is presently unavailable for Savannah Harbor. The direct assessment would determine the species use of various emergent wetland habitats in the harbor. A range of wetland habitats would be assessed, corresponding to the range of salinities in the harbor; saline, brackish, to fresh. Sampling would need to be performed both spatially and temporally (all four seasons). Three sampling gears would be needed to evaluate fishery use of three different categories of habitats: a drop sampler for emergent marsh areas, a bloom (fyke) net for small tidal creeks on ebb tide, and trawls for open water. The field sampling would need to be correlated to site information (such as water depth and substrate type), as well as water chemistry information; salinity, D.O., flow rate, etc. Four to five sampling zones would be needed across the salinity range. Since there has been so much development in the harbor over time, a reference site would also be needed to better reflect conditions at an undeveloped (more natural) area. The Altamaha River was identified as a likely candidate for that purpose since it contains a large freshwater flow, in the same way that the Savannah River does. Ted Will and Tom Reinert agreed to prepare an initial Scope Of Work to better define this work. They will have something to present at the next committee meeting.

6. Estuarine Scrub/Shrub Mangroves was the next habitat on the list. It is not present in the harbor. Seagrass was the next habitat. It also is not present in the harbor. Oyster Reefs & Shell Banks was the next habitat listed. They would be affected by salinity changes, bank erosion, turbidity during construction, ship wakes, and increases in the number of ships using the harbor. They are present in the lower harbor; along the banks of the main river below Fields Cut and between the jetties, primarily in the intertidal zone. SCDNR may have some data on their occurrence in the harbor. Creation of this habitat was identified as a potential mitigation action. Intertidal Flats was the next habitat listed. This habitat is present in the harbor. Shrimp sometimes use these sites as overwintering areas. Fiddler crab use of these sites is important to fisheries and ecological processes in the estuary. Evaluation of the fishery use of these habitats would be included by proper selection of sampling sites in the wetland fishery assessment discussed previously.

7. The next habitat discussed was Palustrine Emergent Wetlands (tidal freshwater marsh). The group agreed that this habitat was important, could be impacted by the project, and would be evaluated as part of the wetland fishery assessment discussed previously. The next habitat discussed was Palustrine Forested Wetlands. The group agreed that this habitat was important, could be impacted by project-induced changes to salinity or water levels. The group agreed that this habitat should be evaluated by adding another sampling zone to the wetland fishery assessment discussed previously.

8. Aquatic Beds was the next habitat discussed. Although there are some beds in the upper portion of Back River, the group felt that the beds were not of sufficient size or frequency to warrant special study.

9. The Estuarine Water Column was the final habitat listed and discussed in the Estuarine Areas group. The committee recognized that the project may result in the lower portion of the navigation channel being less suitable for fishery resources. Dissolved Oxygen was the particular parameter of concern. Juvenile life stages were of concern because of their inability to avoid areas of low D.O.. The discussion centered around whether there is sufficient information to determine whether certain species use only portions of the water column. The species of concern were identified as American shad, Hickory shad, and Blueback herring. Of particular interest was the time when the juveniles moved downriver through the harbor to the ocean. These species are known to use sandbars, but the water depth they use when they move through the harbor in later summer and fall was unknown to committee members. The committee agreed to recommend the following action to the SEG: GPA contact regional experts and conduct a literature review to attempt to determine the expected depth of passage that juvenile American shad, Hickory shad, and Blueback herring use as they migrate downstream through the harbor. NOTE: The SEG approved this recommendation at the November 9 meeting with the following addition: The Committee chair – in consultation with the Committee – will provide GPA with the names of the regional experts to be consulted." If sufficient information cannot be obtained, field studies may be needed this fall. SCDNR performed fish sampling during June/July/August/September 1999. They are scheduled to issue a final report in December 1999. Information from their sampling should be of benefit to quantify variations in the harbor in fishery use in the water column. The UGA Coop Unit also has trawl data over the past years that may be useful for this purpose. Other than the issue concerning outmigrating shad, the existing data should provide sufficient information so that no additional sampling is needed for analysis of fishery impacts to this habitat.

10. The second group of EFH habitats listed in the handout from materials titled "EFH Guidance for Federal Agencies" is titled "Marine Areas". This group included the following habitats: Live/Hard Bottoms, Coral & Coral Reefs, Artificial/Manmade Reefs, Sargassum, and Water Column. These habitats are generally offshore areas and the committee felt that these would not be greatly affected by the proposed project. In the area of the bar channel extension, a sidescan survey had already been performed. It did not indicate any hardbottoms.

11. The committee then discussed sturgeon. It was stated that Atlantic sturgeon are present in the Savannah River estuary about 10 months out of the year. Shortnose sturgeon are caught in nets by shad fishermen. Frank Mathews stated that from his experience as a manager of commercial fishermen that it appears that the population of adults has doubled over the past 5 years. Other quantitative data seem to indicate that the number of adults are roughly the same as in 1992, and that a substantial percentage is made up of stocked fish. Mark Collins gave a brief overview of the investigation he was conducting. The group could not reach agreement on whether additional field studies would add additional information for use on this project. Until a concise study objective can be determined, the committee will not recommend any additional field studies for this species. Bill Bailey stated he would contact EPA’s Gulf Breeze Laboratory and make a report on the status of their recent work on this species on dissolved oxygen.

12. It was mentioned that the project could have an impact on the Blue Crab fishery. John Pafford stated he would check with other GADNR-CRD staff for information on this fishery.

13. It was mentioned that the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council has a study on red bass that may be helpful.

14. This concluded the group’s discussions. The committee agreed to meet again in about a month.

William Bailey

Chairman