quality assurance project plan - nwifc...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Nisqually Usual and Accustomed Area Derelict Fishing Gear Removal
Date: March 27, 2015
Publication Information
Author and Contact Information
The Nisqually Indian Tribe Department of Natural Resources / Marine Services Division Dennis Lucia, Manager/Diving Superintendent 4820 She Nah Num Dr SE Olympia, WA 98513
Office Phone: (360) 438-8667 Office Fax: (360) 438-8742
Email: [email protected]
3
Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
Background ................................................................................................................................................ 8
Project Description .................................................................................................................................... 9
Project objectives ........................................................................................................................... 9
Information needed and sources ..................................................................................................... 9
Target population ......................................................................................................................... 10
Study boundaries .......................................................................................................................... 10
Tasks required .............................................................................................................................. 10
Practical constraints ..................................................................................................................... 11
Systematic planning process used ................................................................................................ 11
Organization and Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 12
Key individuals and their responsibilities .................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Organization chart ........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Project schedule ........................................................................................................................... 15
Limitations on schedule ............................................................................................................... 15
Budget and funding ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Quality Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 16
Decision Quality Objectives (DQOs) ........................................................................................... 16
Measurement Quality Objectives ................................................................................................. 16
Precision ....................................................................................................................................... 17
Bias 17
Sensitivity..................................................................................................................................... 17
Comparability ............................................................................................................................... 17
Representativeness ....................................................................................................................... 17
Completeness ............................................................................................................................... 17
Sampling Process Design (Experimental Design) ..................................................................................... 18
Study Design ................................................................................................................................ 18
Assumptions underlying design ................................................................................................... 18
Relation to objectives and site characteristics .............................................................................. 18
Sampling Procedures ............................................................................................................................... 19
Receiving and processing derelict fishing gear reports................................................................ 19
4
Locating Derelict Fishing Gear .................................................................................................... 20
Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Plan ............................................................................................ 20
Pre-Removal Notifications ........................................................................................................... 20
Removal Operations/Data Collection ........................................................................................... 21
Return/Disposal of Derelict Gear ................................................................................................. 22
Sample ID .................................................................................................................................... 23
Quality Control (QC) Procedures ............................................................................................................. 23
Corrective action processes .......................................................................................................... 23
Data Management Procedures ................................................................................................................ 24
Data recording/reporting requirements ........................................................................................ 24
Electronic transfer requirements .................................................................................................. 25
Acceptance criteria for existing data ............................................................................................ 25
EIM data upload procedures ........................................................................................................ 25
Audits and Reports ................................................................................................................................... 25
Number, frequency, type, and schedule of audits ........................................................................ 25
Responsible personnel .................................................................................................................. 25
Frequency and distribution of report ............................................................................................ 25
Content of report .......................................................................................................................... 26
Responsibility for reports ............................................................................................................. 27
Data Verification ....................................................................................................................................... 27
Field data verification, requirements, and responsibilities ........................................................... 27
Lab data verification .................................................................................................................... 27
Validation requirements, if necessary .......................................................................................... 27
Data Quality (Usability) Assessment ........................................................................................................ 27
Assessments and Response Actions ............................................................................................. 27
Process for determining whether project objectives have been met............................................. 28
Data analysis and presentation methods ...................................................................................... 28
Treatment of non-detects .............................................................................................................. 28
Sampling design evaluation ......................................................................................................... 28
Documentation of assessment ...................................................................................................... 28
References and Appendices ................................................................................................. 29 & attached
5
Appendix A – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Derelict Fishing Gear
Removal Guidelines..................................................................................................attached
Appendix B – An example of the derelict fishing gear survey and removal plan ..............attached
Appendix C - Data forms used in the NWSI derelict fishing gear project .....................attached
Derelict Gear Reporting Form: Gear Data (Net) .................................................................. attached
Derelict Gear Reporting Form: Gear Data (pot) .............................................................. attached
Derelict Gear Reporting Form: Impact Data ......................................................................... attached
Derelict Gear Reporting Form: Specimen Collection Form ................................................ attached
Appendix D – Data Fields in the Derelict Fishing Gear MySQL Database ........................attached
Gear Table ............................................................................................................................... attached
Impact Table ............................................................................................................................ attached
6
Distribution List
Name: David Troutt
Title: Director
Organization: Nisqually Indian Tribe, Department of Natural Resources
12501 Yelm Highway, Olympia WA 98513
Phone: (360) 438-8667 ext. 2134
Email: [email protected] Name: Dennis Lucia
Title: Nisqually Marine Services Manager
Organization: Nisqually Indian Tribe, Department of Natural Resources
12501 Yelm Highway, Olympia WA 98513
Phone: (360) 438-8667 ext. 2135
Email: [email protected]
Name: Lisa Chang
Title: Puget Sound Team
Organization: USEPA
1200 6th
Ave. Ste 900 Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 553-0226
Email: [email protected]
Name: Vacant
Title: Region 10 Quality Assurance Manager
Organization: USEPA
1200 6th
Ave. Ste 900 Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 553-1632
Email: [email protected]
Name: Tiffany Waters
Title: Puget Sound Recovery Projects Coordinator
Organization: NWIFC
6730 Martin Way East Olympia, WA 98516
Phone: (360) 528-4318
Email: [email protected]
Name: Lucy Yanez
Title: Contracts Specialist
Organization: NWIFC
6730 Martin Way East Olympia, WA 98516
Phone: (360) 528-4328
Email: [email protected]
7
Abstract
This project will locate, identify and remove derelict fishing gear in prioritized areas in South Puget Sound
utilizing methods prescribed by National Marine Fisheries Division of NOAA and WA State Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)(Appendix A). Derelict fishing gear including nets, crab and shrimp pots will be
located using empirical data and side scan sonar methods. Divers and remote operated vehicles (ROV’s)
will ground truth targets which will be added to the master database and shared with other recognized
organizations also involved in derelict gear removal. Located and verified targets will be removed and
disposed by specially equipped vessels and trained commercial divers.
The goal of the Nisqually Usual and Accustomed Area Derelict Fishing Gear Removal project is to find and remove previously lost derelict nets and all newly lost nets in the Southern Puget Sound, reducing entanglements and mortality of marine animals and restoring important marine habitat. The project employs side-scan sonar, drop cameras, diver surveys and reports from fishers and the public to locate derelict fishing gear. Divers and trained onboard biologist will conduct diver removal operations off of the 70 foot dive support and recovery vessel, the Dive Support Vessel (DSV) Hickson for derelict fishing gear removal operations following the WDFW removal guidelines. Data will be collected on the nature of the derelict fishing gear (type, size, age, lethality, etc.) and marine animals and habitat impacted following standardized sampling and data recording protocols. All live and dead animals are returned to the sea. The data collected passes through a QA/QC process before being added to the NWSI derelict fishing gear database. Derelict fishing gear recovered is either returned to the owner, if identified, or recycled/discarded in an appropriate manner. Final reports will be prepared and submitted to funding entities on a timely basis.
8
Background
The waters of Southern Puget Sound have been the historic home of commercial salmon fisheries and to a lesser extent, commercial shrimp and crab fisheries. Prior to the final ruling in U.S. V Washington, the waters south of the Tacoma Narrows bridge was utilized by gill net operations targeting chum, coho, and Chinook salmon by non-treaty fishers. Since about the mid-1980’s, the nature of this important commercial fishery has changed to be nearly exclusively the domain of the Medicine Creek Treaty tribes and has slowly grown in the recent 8 years to include a valuable and important commercial crab fishery.
Although these inland waters are not as susceptible to the impacts of major storm events as some of the
more open waters of Puget Sound and the open ocean, storms approaching from the southwest have the
opportunity to create difficult and at times dangerous fishing conditions. Because most fishers in this area
have used smaller boats, they are at risk of gear loss resulting from these seemingly smaller storm events.
The consequence has been hundreds, if not thousands, of smaller gill nets and crab pots being lost and
abandoned in these marine waters over the past 60+ years. This gear continues to cause mortalities of all
marine life in South Sound, from salmon and rockfish to marine birds and mammals, and its removal is
critical to the health and recovery of the regions ecosystem.
The geographic area of this proposal is home to two Endangered Species Act listed salmon populations,
Nisqually Fall Chinook salmon and Nisqually steelhead, and listed rockfish populations. Research efforts
led by the Nisqually Indian Tribe has shown that over 25% of the juvenile salmon usage of the Nisqually
estuary is of salmon from outside the Nisqually River. Salmon from the Snohomish, Green, White, and
Puyallup rivers have been captured and identified utilizing the Nisqually delta as a nursery area. Derelict
gear located in waters less than 100 feet in the migratory path of these juvenile salmon expose well over
ten different ESA listed salmon populations to this unnecessary source of mortality.
9
Project Description
Project goals
The project goal is to help restore natural marine habitat functions and reduce entanglements
and mortality of marine animals in the South Puget Sound by finding and removing shallow
water (<100 ft) derelict fishing nets; and derelict crab pots in high priority locations.
Project objectives
1) Conduct side-scan sonar, drop camera and diver surveys of high density net
and pot fishing areas to locate derelict fishing gear for removal.
2) Conduct diver and ROV removal operations of all identified derelict fishing
gear in waters less than 99 feet sea water.
3) Collect data on derelict fishing gear impacts to marine animals and habitats
and for WDFW and northwest Straights commission.
4) Return derelict fishing gear to owners or dispose of and, when possible, recycle
derelict fishing gear in an environmentally acceptable manner.
5) Submission of the WDFW data forms to the WDFW database and/or NW Straits
Commission.
Information needed and sources
The proposed project will utilize information collected from local tribal and non-tribal fishers,
crabbers, and shrimpers regarding areas where gear is commonly fished. The project will
coordinate with federal, Tribal, and state entities in identifying previously and newly lost
fishing gear and identifying areas of high interest. Side -scan sonar surveys will be conducted
in areas where high net fishing effort has occurred with emphasis being placed in those areas
where fishing gear was reported lost. Counts and location of all derelict nets, crab pots,
woody debris and sunken vessels identified during the side-scan sonar surveys will be
recorded and areas of highest priority will be identified.
In areas where the side scan sonar is not an option, Nisqually Marine Services will conduct
underwater video camera surveys. The depth and position of any derelict fishing gear
encountered will be recorded in situ using onboard Global Positioning System (GPS), and
depth sounders.
The project will collect further information on the nature of derelict fishing gear and its
impacts on the marine environment using NWSI standardized methodology and data formats.
All data collected regarding identified derelict fishing gear locations, derelict gear type and
tonnage, and gear impacts will be made available to the Puget Sound Partnership and its
affiliates upon completion of the project.
10
Target datum is in World Geodedetic System (WGS) 84 and is recorded in decimal
degrees format without sexagesimal coordinates
Target population
The target population for the project is known and reported derelict fishing gear in the
Salish Sea located in Washington State.
Study boundaries
The project is located in the Southern Puget Sound, south of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and west into
Budd Inlet, including Carr Inlet.
Latitude / Longitude Coordinates:
North— 47.2721N 122.5562W / Tacoma Narrows
West— 47.2111N 23.0913W / Oakland Bay
East— 47.2004N 122.5833W / Steilacoom
South—47.0996N 122.9018W / Budd Inlet
Tasks required
1) Follow required operations notification process with USCG, Puget Sound vessel
11
traffic control, DOD, USFWS WDFW, WDNR, Tribal governments and county
and city marine patrols.
2) Conduct mainly side-scan sonar surveys for derelict fishing gear in areas with
reported high net fishing effort where habitat features suggest a high probably of net
loss.
3) Conduct supplemental underwater video camera surveys for derelict fishing gear
in areas with reported high net fishing effort and side-scan sonar surveys are not
possible.
4) Conduct diver and or ROV gear removal operations
5) Provide a onboard biologist to assure WDFW removal guidelines are followed and
to collect derelict fishing and impact data using NWSI standardized methodology
and data formats. Biologist will also record any interactions with endangered or
protected species and record any impacts on critical or important habitats from
removal operations.
6) Follow Washington State abandoned property rights laws and attempt to return
fishing gear recovered during the project to its owner, otherwise recycle or dispose
of in an acceptable manner all derelict gear recovered.
7) Produce final report highlighting project accomplishments.
Practical constraints
Constraints to survey and removal of derelict fishing gear include WDFW removal
protocols, weather, tidal flow, water visibility, ambient light, water depth, marine mammal
interference, heavy vessel traffic, DOD and other activities and any other factors that create
an unsafe diving situation. Nisqually Marine Services commercial diving capabilities are
proven to be effective and safe. We authored the “Underwater Safe Practices Manual” for
Natural Resources Associates which were adopted for all dive operations in the 2009-2010
ARRA Puget Sound Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Project. All personnel are trained in
safety precautions detailed in the manual.
Systematic planning process used
Prior to commencing the project the Nisqually Marine Services will submit a derelict
fishing gear removal and disposal plan to the WDFW that addresses the systematic
planning requirements for approval and waiver of permits by the WDFW as outlined in
the draft Derelict Fishing Gear Removal and Disposal Protocol:
“Prior to undertaking any derelict fishing gear removal operation, the removal proponents must
develop a Derelict Fishing Gear Removal and Disposal Plan following the guidelines in this
protocol. The Plan must include information about who will be sponsoring and participating in
the gear removal operation and their qualifications/and experience, where the removal
12
operation will be conducted, what types of gear will be removed and how it will be identified
and located, the methods, procedures and equipment that will be employed, environmental
impacts of the removal operation, notification, permits, permit waivers sought and verification
of legal access from responsible parties, insurance and liability coverage, documenting and
reporting of activities and disposal/recycling options.”
WDFW coordinates approval of the plan with the Washington Department of Natural
Resources.
Organization and Schedule The Nisqually Indian Tribe’s Technical Lead and Project Coordinator for this project is
Dennis Lucia. Mr. Lucia is program manager for the Nisqually Indian Tribe’s Marine
Services, he is the responsible for the overall management and oversight of the project.
He will be the lead in developing and implementing this QAPP and will be responsible
for its submission to the EPA for review and approval. He will additionally be the main
contact for EPA QA and NWIFC requests, will prepare and submit grant reports and
deliverables to NWIFC and the Puget Sound Partnership and will ensure that the project
proceeds in a timely manner and within the approved budget.
The Nisqually Tribe Marine Services (NMS) program dive team has worked with Natural
Resources Consultants, NW Straits Foundation and NWSI as a subcontractor in 2009 during the
NOAA/ARRA Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Project. They are a team of trained and
professional commercial divers who operate dive projects all along the western United States.
From July 2009 to December 2010, NMS has logged over 150 days of WDFW approved
derelict fishing gear removal operations.
NMS has also completed the following related projects:
2013 - Jefferson Head Piling Stub and Marine Debris Removal Project
Owner: WA State Department of Natural Resources
Successful removal of over 66,000lbs of wooden/creosote, derelict fishing nets,
concrete and steel debris from Puget Sound at Jefferson Head near Kingston.
2014 - Pt. Gamble Bay Piling and Marine Debris Removal Project
Owner: Pt. Gamble S’Klallam Tribe and WDNR
Successful removal of;
o Wooden creosote pier at Pt. Julia
o 70’ steel landing craft from beach
o Numerous derelict autos and boats
o Boat launch ramp
o Total of over 500,000lbs of wood, metal and concrete debris
13
The NWIFC Grant Manager is Tiffany Waters and Contracts Specialist is Lucy Yanez. NWIFC
shall administer the EPA-sponsored sub-award grant and shall be responsible for the oversight
of the project, ensuring that the goals and objectives of the project are achieved. They will
ensure that project deliverables are complete and of necessary quality and that the project
completion dates are met. They will interface with the USEPA regarding the status of the
approved project.
The USEPA Quality Assurance Manager is currently vacant. Delegated QA staff will review
and approve the QAPP and subsequent addendums or amendments to the QAPP submitted to
the USEPA. The USEPA Project Officer for NWIFC is Lisa Chang. She will coordinate with
NWIFC to oversee that the grant conditions are met to the satisfaction of the USEPA.
The Nisqually Indian Tribe has subcontracted with Crayton Fenn of Fenn Enterprises to who
has completed Side scan sonar surveys of the areas around Nisqually Reach, Anderson Island,
McNiel Island and Steilacoom. All potential targets (derelict crab pots) have been listed by
GPS coordinates on a nautical chart compatible database.
Mr. Crayton Fenn, Fenn Enterprises, has conducted over 22 derelict fishing gear surveys using
side-scan sonar and divers. Crayton Fenn, has developed sonar equipment specifically for
locating derelict fishing nets and crab/shrimp pots. Mr. Fenn has a proven track record of
successfully locating pots and nets over many years throughout the Puget Sound and Alaska
waters. He has conducted 13derelict fishing gear removal operations involving divers and
remote operated vehicles. Mr. Fenn and his divers are experienced professionals who have
participated in the derelict fishing gear survey and removal project since its inception. Mr.
Fenn, has helped coordinate the expansion of the derelict fishing gear survey and removal
project from Puget Sound to other parts of the U.S., including North Carolina, Virginia and
California under funding by NOAA’s Marine Debris Program.Dennis Lucia or Jake Johnston
of the Nisqually Marine Services will manage/supervise the dive recovery operations.
Nisqually Global Information Systems (GIS) manager Jennifer Cutler will review all location
data and enter this information into the Nisqually GIS system for archiving. Magaret
Homerding or Chris Ellings from Nisqually Natural Resources or will act as on board biologist
and data collectors.
14
EPA Region 10
QA Manager
EPA Puget Sound
Team
Lisa Chang
NMS Manager
Dive Superintendent
Dennis Lucia
Underwater
Surveyor
Fenn Enterprises
Dive Supervisor
Jake Johnston
Diver
Tim McCarthyDiver
Robert Thomas
Diver
Keoni Kalama
Diver
Joseph Squally
Derelict Fishing Gear
Removal Project
Biologist
Margaret
Homerding
GIS Manager
Jennifer Cutler
NWIFC
Tiffany Waters
Figure 2. The organization chart for the project.
15
Project schedule The proposed project will begin on, January 2, 2013 and terminate on December 31, 2015.
The following is a schedule for completion of deliverables:
Task 1: Develop QAPP, Scope of Work and Deliverables (Mar.- Jun. 2013)
1.1: Develop and complete QAPP for onboard data collection using guidelines
provided by the USEPA National Estuary Program
1.2: Draft scope of work
Task 2: Determination and identification of prioritized areas (Jul. 2013)
2.1 collection and processing derelict fishing gear reports
Task 3: Survey of Prioritized areas and identification of all derelict gear in less than 100FSW
(Aug. 2013)
3.1 Derelict fishing gear side scan sonar survey
3.2 Supplemental underwater video camera surveys
3.3 Preparation and WDFW approval of the derelict fishing gear plan
Task 4: Removal of identified gear in prioritized areas in less than 100FWS (Apr - Jun. 2015)
4.1 Notification of derelict fishing gear removal activities
4.2 Derelict fishing gear identification and removal Dive operations
4.3 Collection of gear and impact data, QA/QC and incorporation in database
4.4 Return or disposal of retrieved derelict fishing gear
Task 5: Expansion of activities to secondary areas (Jul – Sep 2015)
5.1 Notification of derelict fishing gear removal activities
5.2 Derelict fishing gear identification and removal Dive operations
5.3 Collection of gear and impact data, QA/QC and incorporation in database
5.4 Return or disposal of retrieved derelict fishing gear
Task 6: Presentation of results to Puget Sound Partnership (Dec. 2015)
6.1 Final report on net response and retrieval
Limitations on schedule
Limitations on derelict gear survey and removal operations include weather, tidal flows,
water visibility, daylight, active net fishing seasons and DOD activities.
16
Quality Objectives
Decision Quality Objectives (DQOs)
Quantitative DQOs are not applicable for this project. The project problem, goal/objective of
the study and information related to inputs, boundaries, criteria, and plan for obtaining the
data (all aspects of the 7-step DQO process) are identified in sections throughout this QAPP
or in the attached documents. The WDFW Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Guidelines
provide a comprehensive list of project requirements that assures safe and environmentally
protective operations (WDFW, 2002) (Appendix A).
Measurement Quality Objectives
Data collected during the derelict fishing gear survey and removal project is a combination of
quantitative and qualitative data. The derelict gear survey data consists of diver surveys,
drop camera and side-scan sonar data. Diver and drop camera data typically provides
extremely accurate position (latitude and longitude) and water depth information at visually
verified derelict fishing gear target locations. However, this data is very limited in
geographical area coverage and expensive to obtain. Side-scan sonar data provides complete
coverage of large geographical areas are reasonable costs and can provide very accurate
geographic locations of suspected derelict gear targets but less accurate information on actual
water depth and less dependable verification of the targets as actual derelict fishing gear.
False targets in the side-scan sonar surveys include crab lines that are mistaken for derelict
nets, fissure in rock substrate, lines of kelp or seaweed and other natural objects that mimic
derelict fishing gear. Side-scan sonar probable derelict fishing gear targets must be
investigated by divers for positive gear verification.
Data collected from public reports of derelict fishing gear is also a combination of quantitative
and qualitative information. Some public reports of derelict fishing gear include precise latitude
and longitude, water depth, type of habitat, type of gear, size of gear, type of marine habitat and
observed entangled animals, sometimes with underwater photographs or video. Other reports
are generic in the general location with little information to verify whether the report is actually
of derelict fishing gear or some other object. Most public reports of derelict fishing gear must
be verified prior to scheduling removal operations.
Data collected during removal operations is also a combination of quantitative data and
subjective data using the best professional opinion of the divers and biologist involved. Divers
provide the best estimate of the length, effective width, suspensions and configuration of the
derelict fishing gear and the type of habitat it is affecting in the environment. Divers can also
observe and report the potential lethality of the derelict fishing gear including entangled
animals or evidence of entanglement and mortality in the vicinity of the derelict fishing gear.
The onboard biologist verifies the size of the net and entanglements during recovery of the net.
The biologist also inspects the net to determine the type of net, relative age and fishing
capacity of the net. Complete animal counts are conducted for marine mammals, seabirds and
fish. In many cases complete counts of entangled invertebrates can also be conducted. When
invertebrate entanglements or large numbers of live animals are found living on the nets
17
recovered, the biologists make their professional opinion of the number of animals represented.
These estimates can be inaccurate and vary depending upon the number of animals involved.
Precision
Precision is a measure of the variability in the results of replicate measurements due to random
error. Data collected during the project may not have a high degree of precision because many
of the data parameters are by nature subjective. For example, the length and width of the net is
typically estimated by the diver during removal operations or by the onboard biologist during
recovery on deck. The width of the net along the seabed can vary widely along the length of
the net and the divers use their best professional judgment on the “average” width of the net
along its length. Divers and biologists strive to use consistent methods for the subject
assessment of quantitative data collected during the project.
Bias Bias is the difference between the population mean and the true value. It is difficult to
estimate bias in the data collected during the project. Each derelict gear item is rather unique
in terms of in characteristics and impacts on marine animals and habitat. There really isn’t an
“average” derelict net or crab pot.
Sensitivity
Sensitivity is a measure of the capability of a method to detect an impact. The best indicators
of derelict gear impact are the amount of marine habitat affected and the number of animals
entangled/entrapped and killed by the gear. The sampling procedures implemented for the
derelict gear project strive to provide accurate measures of derelict gear impacts that are
sensitive to variations in the type and nature of derelict gear encountered.
Comparability
The WDFW has published guidelines for derelict gear survey and removal operations in
Washington State. All derelict gear removal projects are required to following these
guidelines providing comparable results. The NWSI maintains the derelict fishing gear
database. Prior to adding derelict fishing gear data to the database the database managers
assure consistency of the data with the standardized formats.
Representativeness
The WDFW derelict fishing gear survey and removal guidelines assure that data collected
during derelict fishing gear removal is representative of the impacts derelict fishing gear exerts
on the marine environment in Washington State.
Completeness
The derelict fishing gear survey and removal project strives to remove 100% of the known
shallow water (<105 ft) derelict nets in the target area.
18
Sampling Process Design (Experimental Design)
Study Design
Receiving and processing derelict fishing gear reports
Surveys for derelict fishing gear
Preparation and WDFW approval of the derelict fishing gear plan
Notification of derelict fishing gear removal activities
Dive removal operations, Collection of gear and impact data
Return or disposal of derelict fishing gear
QA/QC and incorporation in database
Reporting
Assumptions underlying design
The assumptions for this project are that derelict fishing gear encountered during the
proposed project will be similar in nature to the gear previously found and removed and that
the existing sampling plan will adequately document survey and removal activities and
impacts of the gear removed.
Relation to objectives and site characteristics
The NMS will follow derelict gear removal guidelines developed by the WDFW as outlined
in the draft Derelict Fishing Gear Removal and Disposal Protocol (Appendix A). The current
sampling design meets the objectives of the project to safely and environmentally effectively
remove derelict fishing gear and document its impacts on marine animals and habitat.
Characteristics of existing data
The NWSI’s derelict fishing gear program has developed a comprehensive data collection and
database system that allows easy access to scientists, managers, policy makers or interested
individuals. The existing data has passed through an extensive QA/QC process and is
believed
to be of the highest quality possible under the existing sampling program. A database manager
is available to discuss aspects of the data with those interested in using the data for their
purposes.
19
Figure 3. The location of the study area in the Washington waters of the Salish Sea.
Sampling Procedures
Receiving and processing derelict fishing gear reports
Since January of 2010 Nisqually Marine Services and Natural Resources personnel have
been collecting empirical information from local tribal and non-tribal fishermen, crabbers
and shrimpers regarding areas in Southern Puget Sound where they have fished.
Additionally Nisqually Tribe has inter-local agreements with Port of Olympia and WA State
Department of Natural Resources. NMS has been working closely with these two water
oriented State agencies and data and information is shared regarding potential or known sites
of derelict fishing gear with an eye toward removal of said gear.
Various ports and marinas throughout Southern Puget Sound report findings/sightings of
derelict fishing gear to NMS personnel as they are aware of our efforts to rid Puget Sound of
these objects.
NMS personnel maintain regular communications with local dive shops which are a source
of information gleaned from their diving customers regarding sighted derelict fishing gear.
20
Locating Derelict Fishing Gear
Directed surveys for gear will be conducted. These surveys will be directed to areas of high
commercial or sport fishing effort. In some cases, surveys will be directed to areas where
fishermen report snags or interactions with tug and barge operations that have resulted in
the loss of fishing gear in recent years. Side- scan sonar has proven effective for locating
derelict crab and shrimp pots. Side scan sonar will also locate other debris such as
shipwrecks, tires, refrigerators, etc. Side scan sonar offers the advantage of a cost effective
coverage of a large area with precise location of the gear. Approximately 2/3 of a square
kilometer of seabed can be surveyed each eight-hour day for derelict pots or traps using
side scan sonar. For each 8 hours of on water survey work, there is another 2 hours of post-
survey data processing effort required. The final product from a side scan sonar survey is a
list of probable derelict gear targets indicating precise latitude and longitude and water
depth, a GIS plot overlain on a chart of the area surveyed, a plot showing the location of
probable derelict gear targets and a calculation of the area surveyed and the derelict gear
density encountered.
In areas where side-scan sonar equipment cannot be towed due to bathymetry underwater
video camera surveys will be conducted. An underwater video camera, lighting system and
clump weight will be deployed over the side of the survey vessel and the vessel will either be
motored slowly (less than 1 knot) along a pre-determined transect line or allowed to drift.
The downward looking camera is maintained approximately 1 m (3 ft) off bottom. The time
and position of the vessel is continuously recorded on the video at the surface. The depth and
position of any derelict fishing gear encountered will be recorded insitu using the onboard
wide area augmented global positioning system (WAAS GPS).
Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Plan
In order to be exempt from acquiring state permits for derelict fishing gear removal, it is
necessary to submit and get approval for a derelict fishing gear removal plan. Specifics of
the plan are outlined in the WDFW Derelict Fishing Gear Guidelines (Appendix A). An
example of a completed plan is provided in Appendix B. The WDFW reviews the derelict
fishing gear removal plan and may consult with WDNR if the proposed removal operation
impacts WDNR aquatic lands. The plan identifies the derelict fishing gear to be removed,
the removal methods that will be employed, the type of habitat and any impacts that might
occur, who will participate, the information that will be recorded and submitted to WDFW
and what will be done with the derelict fishing gear once it is removed. The WDFW derelict
fishing gear removal guidelines spell out what information is required in the derelict fishing
gear removal plan. The product is a written plan for the removal operators to follow and a
letter from WDFW exempting the removal operation from permits. The derelict gear
removal plan and approval process typically takes three weeks to a month to complete.
Pre-Removal Notifications
Once the derelict fishing gear removal plan is approved, the WDFW guidelines require
several events to occur prior to the start of actual removal operations. Three days
21
notification must be provided to the U.S. Coast Guard's Notice to Mariners system. This
assures that all mariners are aware of the location and schedule of operations. The local
WDFW fisheries enforcement office must also be notified three days in advance of
operations and provided an opportunity to observe the removal operations if desired. If the
removal operation occurs in an area with frequent Tribal subsistence or commercial fishing,
the appropriate Tribal fisheries departments must be provided prior notification of the
operations. If survey or removal operations are planned in the vicinity of U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service’s Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge, the director's office is contacted and
permission to work in the area is acquired. Due to homeland security concerns, city and
county marine police and vessel transit control systems are notified three days prior to any
survey or removal operations. If work is planned around security sensitive areas such oil or
natural gas terminals, the security offices for such facilities are contacted a week to ten days
prior to survey or removal operations. Finally, under the Washington State Abandoned
Property Law, the local county sheriff's office must be contacted and informed that derelict
fishing gear is going to be removed, stored in a secure location and the owners contacted if
they can be identified and allowed an opportunity to recover their lost gear.
Removal Operations/Data Collection
Once the derelict fishing gear removal plan is approved by WDFW and all prior notifications
are completed, the removal operation can be undertaken. NMS will manage and supervise
the dive recovery operations. Locations of known derelict fishing gear identified during the
surveys and previously reported to NMS will be targeted for removal. The derelict gillnets
identified located near important salmon, steelhead and bull trout migration corridors used by
species designated as threatened under the Endangered Species Act will be considered high
removal priority.
Typically the removal operation will be conducted off of the 70-foot dive support and gear
recovery vessel, the S/V Hickson. If derelict nets are being removed, the dive operation
usually entails two or more trained divers using surface supplied air, bailout bottles and a
two-way voice communication system. In some cases this system is augmented by a helmet
mounted underwater video camera. One diver will remove the gear (the work diver) while a
second diver stands by as a safety backup (backup diver) and a dive supervisor monitors all
aspects of the dive operation.
Prior to removal operations, the work diver surveys the length of the net and reports
entangled animals, impacts of the net on the habitat and provides estimates of the size of the
net and the amount and type of habitat impacted. In some cases, underwater video or still
photographs are taken to document these observations. The onboard biologist records
information about the derelict gear on standardized data forms and enters the information
into an electronic data entry form on a laptop computer. The data forms are included in
Appendix C. Nets are removed from the habitat by hand and, if necessary, cut loose where
buried or encrusted. A strap and airlift bag is attached to the bundled net and it is floated to
the surface where it is retrieved by the gear storage vessel. An onboard biologist further
inspects the gear for entangled animals and records the number and species of live and dead
animals observed along with the gear, animal and habitat impact information reported by the
22
work diver. A deck hose is used to wash as much of the biological growth off the nets as
possible. All dead and live animals are returned to the sea after identification and counting
unless specimens are requested by federal or state agencies.
If derelict crab pots are being removed, the recovery crew will deploy a clump weight,
line and surface buoy at the location of the derelict pot. A diver using surface supplied air,
is deployed and follows the line from the surface float to the weight on the seabed and
usually locates the pot within 10 to 15 ft of the clump weight location. The diver assesses
the condition of the pot and follows the WDFW guidelines in deciding whether to remove
the pot or disable it in place (pots more than 1/3 buried in the seabed are typically left in
place but disabled). The diver also counts and identifies the number of animals entrapped
in the pot and notes any impact on the habitat such as inhibiting eelgrass growth. The
diver hooks a recovery line to the pot and either floats it to the surface with a lift bag or
passes the line to the vessel crew that lifts the pot by hand off the seabed and then to the
vessel by hand or hydraulic pot hauler.
Once onboard the vessel, the pot is inspected for the use of rot cord (a legal requirement),
identified as to whether it is a sport or commercial pot and inspected for personal
identification tags. All organisms in the pot are identified, counted, recorded as dead or
alive, and for Dungeness crabs, the sex is determined. All of the information is recorded on
data forms and notes about the condition of the pot are recorded in the electronic chart
system, i.e., removed, disabled or remaining, etc. Pots are cleaned of as much vegetation
and sessile animals as possible and stored on deck. The onboard project manager/biologist
typically manages the removal operation, assures the guidelines are being followed, records
the data and is available to meet with the media or the project proponent and explain what
has been accomplished.
Typically about two to three derelict nets covering roughly 0.1 to 0.4 acres of habitat and
from 20 to 50 crab pots can be removed per operational day depending upon depth, water
clarity and distance between the gear locations. A typical removal operation includes 0.5
days of mobilization and transit to the work site, four to five days of diver removal
operations, 0.5 days of transit and demobilization and 0.5 days of offload and disposal.
Return/Disposal of Derelict Gear
Derelict fishing gear that can be identified as to the owner, such as gillnets with floats or crab
pot tags showing the permit number, will be set aside and stored in a secure area until the
owners can be contacted under the regulations of the Washington State Abandoned Property
Rights law. The NMS will arrange for a secure storage area and a truck to transport the
identified gear to storage. WDFW and Tribal fishery offices will be contacted for names and
phone numbers of the owners of the gear. NMS will contact the individuals, describe the
condition of the gear held and provide the owner an opportunity to recover the fishing gear.
Typically the gear will be held for 5 days after notification. If the owner chooses not to
recover their gear, the project manager will dispose of the gear. Unidentified or abandoned
gear that is dilapidated and no longer useful will either be sent to recyclers (if available) or
disposed of in a county landfill. Typically, gillnets and purse seine nets are not reusable,
cannot be recycled due to the vegetative material that remains on the meshes and they are
23
typically disposed of in the landfill. Crab pots that cannot be identified to the owner or are
unclaimed may be sold for salvage and the funds returned to the NMS for additional gear
removals. Unusable pots may be sent to metal recyclers or the pots can be crushed and land
filled.
Sample ID
The WDFW guidelines require that a final report be submitted outlining what was
accomplished during the removal operation, impacts observed, derelict fishing gear
remaining on the fishing grounds and the disposition of the derelict fishing gear removed.
The contents of the final report are provided in the removal guidelines. If a derelict fishing
gear survey is conducted as part of the project, the location and description of derelict fishing
gear found must be submitted to the WDFW in a format compatible with their derelict fishing
gear database. This report may include formatted tabular output of the locations and types of
derelict gear, a GIS chart of the area surveyed and charts showing the locations and types of
derelict fishing gear removed and remaining. Additionally, the entity funding the project
usually also desires a final report on the project and in some cases a media summary for press
releases. If the project is being conducted as part of a state or federal mitigation measure, the
permitting and consulting agencies may require a final report to assure that adequate
mitigation action has occurred. Finally, often the county sheriff's department requires a
report on the disposition of the derelict fishing gear removed with accounting for each gear
item. The NMS and their contractors are jointly responsible for reporting.
Quality Control (QC) Procedures
Corrective action processes
Quality control tools are provided to the onboard biologist in the MS Access data entry
interface after data has been transferred from datasheets to the MS Access. Upon clicking a
button labeled “QC Updated Data” the biologist has the opportunity to cross-check all
entered data with the original datasheets and inspect for errors. After this initial phase of QC,
the data is uploaded into the DGDB where it is then further analyzed by the QC Manager.
Quality monitoring of geographical coordinate documentation is conducted by displaying all
recently investigated/reported derelict gear targets in ArcGIS; where outliers can be
immediately identified. In the event that QC criteria are not met for any piece of data, the
Database Manager will perform an initial investigation using the corresponding data sheets
(hard copy) and records of DFG removal activity on the days in which the questionable data
was recorded. When these situations arise, there is typically an easily identifiable solution to
the problem. If finding a solution goes beyond the initial investigation stage, then the
Database Manager will discuss the problem with the Assistant Project Manager at which
point they will contact the biologist responsible for the data collection and possibly the
captain of the vessel who performed the operations. Upon explanations from the personnel
onsite during the vessel operations, a solution is found. This is followed by either the
Database Manager or the Assistant Project Manager correcting the error in the DGDB and
making note of the correction on the original datasheet.
24
They both proceed in discussing the circumstances that lead to the QC failure with the field
biologist, and together they conclude the best practices for future activity to avoid similar
errors.
Data Management Procedures
Data recording/reporting requirements
Prior to 2009 the derelict gear database (DGDB) was maintained in a Microsoft (MS) Excel
database. In 2009 the NRC and NWSI transferred the DGDB from MS Excel to MS Access.
The MySQL database has allowed for robust data entry and superior quality assurance. A
list of data fields in the DGDB is provide in Appendix D.
Prior to DFG removal operations, Nisqually Natural Resources biologist(s) will download a
copy of the most current version of the database contents from the DGDB website in MS
Access 2007 format. The standard navigation software used during derelict gear removal
operations is the Nobeltec VNS Max Pro®, a software system requiring a *.ONF text file in
order to display waypoints. The online DGDB provides field personnel the a *.ONF text
file associated with the user’s query (i.e., nets remaining, nets removed, nets remaining in
South Puget Sound, etc.). This file is downloaded from the DGDB and uploaded into the
biologist’s Nobeltec software to be used for planning, navigation and reference during
derelict gear removal operations.
All data collected is recorded by hand on data sheets that are kept at Nisqually Indian Tribe
Natural Resources as backup to the online finalized data. At the end of each week of derelict
gear removals the biologist enter their data into the Access database and, before committing
the data to the MySQL database, does a quality check of the data entered. The data manager
then verifies that the data is correct by comparing the data sheets to the data that was entered
into the database. If questions arise, the data manager and the biologist work through the
problem together. The data manager is also responsible for updating the status and
identifications of any specimens collected during removals.
Any user that is granted access to the online database can download the data in various
formats for data analysis. The user can download an Access database of all of the data in
the database at the time of querying. The user can also download all of the data to an Excel
spreadsheet for analysis or the user can filter the data based on a variety of criteria such as
location, gear type, the date that the gear was removed or reported, by species type, and
many more. The user can also download a number of standardized reports that NRC uses
for monthly reporting.
ESRI ArcGIS® software is used to fulfill common requests for geographical distribution of
derelict gear and impact data. Additionally, ArcGIS is used as a QC tool, to verify the
precision of latitude/longitude coordinates and geographical descriptions. For a variety of
reasons, data requests from the client often involve quantifying derelict gear and impacts
within specific political and regional boundaries (Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA)
25
and County), and Salmon Management and Catch Reporting Areas (SMCRA) are useful
boundaries when correlating DGDB data to fishery statistics. Examples of data requests
utilizing ArcGIS are as follows:
Number of removed and remaining derelict net targets
Number of mortal entanglements of animals, by species, per county in all removed derelict
gear to date
Electronic transfer requirements
As described in Section 11.1, updated MS Access databases are downloaded by biologists
through the online DGDB, and once data entry is complete, the updated database is
uploaded to the online DGDB where it remains in an ‘unverified’ folder until Database
Manager performs QC checks on the uploaded data followed by its commitment to the
existing data. Other electronic transfers are conducted in general ways such as emails,
thumb-drives and (rarely) faxes if needed. Such data and information is typically in the
form of MS Excel, Access, Word,*.jpg, or Acrobat .pdf.
Acceptance criteria for existing data
All data collected during the project passes through a QA/QC process before being entered
into the derelict fishing gear database. The SQL database structure identifies values out of
range for nearly all data parameters. Species identifications in the field and from specimen
data is compared to typical species range information to assure proper species
identifications.
EIM data upload procedures
All data collected will be maintained in the joint NWSI/WDFW Derelict Fishing Gear
Database.
Audits and Reports
Number, frequency, type, and schedule of audits
There are no audits required for the project.
Responsible personnel
There are no responsible personnel for audits for this project.
Frequency and distribution of report
Progress and a final project report are required for the project. Progress and final reports
will be distributed to the NWSF, WDFW, DOE, EPA, NOAA and any other agency or
26
Tribal government participating in the project.
Content of report The following describes the elements of a typical derelict fishing gear survey and removal
report.
1. Participation (organizations and individuals involved in the project)
2. What organization conducted the survey and removal operations)
3. List of participants
4. Sponsoring organization
5. Disposal entity
6. Cost of survey, removal and disposal (provide as much detail as possible)
7. Dates of operations
Dates of surveys and
removals Hours of effort
expended Disposal dates
8. Location
Latitude and longitude to the nearest second of survey targets found
and gear removed
Amount of area surveyed (square kilometers for
example) General description of locations where
operations occurred. Depth ranges of gear found and
removed
Habitat types surveyed and at gear removal locations
9. Nature of derelict gear removed
DGDB gear ID
Type of gear (gillnet, purse seine, crab pots,
etc.) Number of gear targets found during
survey
Number, volume, weight and size (area) of gear removed
Condition of gear (frayed, brittle, etc.)
Shape of gear (balled up, tubed up, spread
out) Estimate age of gear
10. Survey and removal methods employed
Type of survey employed (side-scan sonar, diver, camera,
etc), Type of removal procedure (describe in detail),
Equipment used Problems encountered ,
Suggestions for improvements
11. Environmental consequences
List of entrapped or entangled animals (species and number of live
and dead) Degree of incorporation of gear into the habitat
Threat of gear to humans, surface craft, animals)
Type of extent of habitat impacted
Endangered or protected species encountered during survey or
removal operations Critical or habitats of concern impacted by
removal operations
12. Type, volume, condition and location of any derelict fishing gear that was
27
encountered but not removed
13. Disposition of gear removed Returned (to
whom)
Recycled (where and how)
Disposed (where, how and weight or volume)
Responsibility for reports
NMS and it’s subcontractors will be responsible for generating the progress and final reports.
Data Verification
Field data verification, requirements, and responsibilities
As described in Section 11, the field data verification is completed by a data manager by
comparing the field data sheets with the data that was committed to the database by the
biologist. All of the field sheets are verified and signed off by the data manager and archived
for easy access.
Lab data verification
No lab verification of species identifications is required by the project. Nisqually Natural
Resources biologist are solely responsible for specimen identification using standardized
reference collection comparative methods.
Validation requirements, if necessary
There are no validation requirements for this project.
Data Quality (Usability) Assessment
Assessments and Response Actions
NMS will monitor project progress through regular communication and discussion of any
problems with Tiffany Waters (NWIFC) and actions taken will be based on best professional
judgment. NMS will be responsible for any internal QA review of field activities, instrument
reliability, chain-of-custody protocol, and data management. If an external QA review is
conducted, the USEPA RQAM or designee and Tiffany Waters will be responsible for
observing and evaluating project procedures and project documentation to ensure the data is
28
collected conscientiously, carefully, and in compliance with these written protocols.
Accompanied by the NMS project team, Tiffany Waters shall have the option to observe and
evaluate sample collection procedures and documentation during one of the schedule
sampling events.
Process for determining whether project objectives have been met
The ultimate determination of whether project objectives have been met is whether the
goals for the number of known and reported shallow water derelict fishing gear items have
been removed and data on their impacts collected. It is assumed that the data collected
during the project following the standardized sampling methodology is generally
representative of the impacts of derelict fishing gear on the environment. Although some
elements of the data are subjective, generally the data is useful for both quantitative and
qualitative analyses of derelict fishing gear impacts.
Data analysis and presentation methods
Written and personal communications regarding project status will occur on a regular basis
between NMS and Tiffany Waters (NWIFC) and QA concerns between NMS, Tiffany
Waters, and Gina Grepo-Grove (USEPA). Project status will be documented in writing on a
semi-annual basis in reporting to NWIFC. Problems encountered will be discussed with the
parties above as necessary and appropriate actions taken.
The NWSI in coordination with WDFW and NOAA has developed standardized analysis
and reporting presentation formats for the derelict fishing gear data collected during the
project. The SQL database software generates many of these standardized reports. The
reports include milestone performance criteria, reported and removed derelict fishing gear
and encountered species distribution charts, lists of species impacts, interactions with
endangered or protected species, impacts of critical and important habitats and a detailed
record of operational activities and expenses.
Treatment of non-detects
Treatment of non-detects is not appropriate for this project.
Sampling design evaluation
The sampling methodology is evaluated for the project on a regular basis during
preparation of progress and final reports for the project. Recommendations on
improvements in sampling and QA/QC are highlighted in the reports to the project
sponsors and implemented if approved.
Documentation of assessment
A complete assessment of the efficacy of the project will be performed in the final project
29
report.
References
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2002. Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Guidelines
List of Figures
Figure 1. The location of known shallow water (<100 ft) (red) and deepwater
(>100 ft) derelict fishing net targets remaining in Washington’s Salish Sea.
Figure 2. The organization chart for the project.
Figure 3 The location of the study area in the Washington marine waters of the Salish
Sea.