Gulf of Maine Council

Resources

Identification of Important Habitats in Coastal New Hampshire

Review of the Analysis

We requested many of the same persons who provided the information for our analysis to review our graphic interpretations and model outputs. Review was at two levels. Local experts were asked to review both the models or interpretations and the resulting habitat maps. Species experts outside of New Hampshire were asked only to review the narratives. The information was sent to: Fred Short, Richard Langan (Jackson Estuarine Research Laboratory); Michael Burt (Huntsman Marine Centre); Joe McKeon (USFWS); John Moring (University of Maine, Orono); Steve Jury, Hunting Howell (University of New Hampshire, Durham); Lew Flagg, Linda Mercer (Maine DMR); Steve Brown (NOAA - SEA Division); Douglas Grout, Bruce Smith (New Hampshire Fish and Game Department); Peter Auster (University of Connecticut, NURC). Comments were incorporated into the models, which were rerun to produce final versions of the maps.

Discussion

The Great Bay pilot study was initiated to: (1) develop methods for selection of evaluation species, (2) develop methods for assessing habitat suitability and mapping habitat of selected species, (3) identify regionally important habitats using this information, and (4) facilitate protection of mapped habitats.

We found that the selection of study area boundaries and selection of evaluation species are closely related. The methods used in this study were successful in assembling information about Great Bay. However, the study area boundary cut across habitats of a number of species, reducing the potential scope of use of the information for management. For some migratory species (e.g., great blue heron) this cannot be avoided even with a Gulf of Maine perspective. As a practical matter, we suggest that future investigations use watersheds as biological units of study. This would insure the inclusion of upstream spawning habitats of anadromous fishes. The importance of these fishes within the GOM is reflected in the GOMC species rankings; Atlantic salmon GOMC ranking = 5, American shad 21, alewife 31, and striped bass 36. Among migratory birds, black duck hens may use streams and rivers as travel corridors, connecting nesting habitat with productive foraging areas in the estuary. Using the watershed as the "biological unit" to define a study area may thus include the diversity of habitats required by all life stages of a species, and also display threats to those habitats from non-point source pollution.

The selection of species from the GOMC list and addition of species of local interest made for too long a list. Inclusion of only GOMC species would not have been acceptable since the local partners had little interest in conserving habitats solely because they were of regional significance. If the Council is to rely on local conservation initiatives it will be necessary to either educate local interests of the value of the regional perspective (think regionally, act locally), or to focus on areas where regionally important species are prominent and are locally appreciated. The Council might support a screening pilot project to identify the general localities of sites where habitats of the top ranked species are likely to overlap, then promote identification of important habitats at those places.

We mapped the distribution of habitats for various life stages for 25 species. General habitat models were necessary given the number of species, number of life stages, and time constraints for completion of the pilot study. It is apparent that standards need to be established for assessing habitat suitability and mapping habitat of the GOMC species. Points to consider in drafting these standards should include; (1) the number of species for which habitat will be mapped, (2) the life stages to be mapped, and (3) the type of model or use of occurrence data for portraying habitat of each species, including the level of accuracy, variables to use, seasons, and how to combine seasonal and life stage information. We suggest forming habitat committees or workshops, to include biologists, modelers, and fishermen or naturalists familiar with habitat requirements of the species. These committees should investigate the feasibility of developing more rigorous, statistical models, including regional habitat requirements of migratory species. For example, a regional model might find black duck winter habitat the priority in the States and breeding and brood-rearing habitat the priority in the Provinces.

The habitat models require testing or validation. While the review undertaken during this pilot is helpful in bringing the models up to the 'state of the art', publication of the models and meetings of habitat committees or workshops would encourage further development. Publication would allow the model data needs to be used as justification for survey work.