Terms of Reference

Recovery Potential Assessment of Atlantic Salmon (Lake Ontario Population)

Regional Peer Review Meeting – Central and Arctic Region

March 1st and 2nd, 2007
Canada Centre for Inland Waters, Burlington, ON

Chair: Larry Marshall

A. Background

In May 2006, the Committee on the Status of Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) designated the Lake Ontario Atlantic salmon as Extirpated. Assuming that an extended listing process needs to be undertaken for this taxon, the Minister will be required to decide whether or not to list it under the Species At Risk Act (SARA) by Fall 2007. In the interim, a Recovery Potential Analysis (RPA) and subsequent socio-economic and listing consultations need to be conducted.

The purposes of SARA are to protect wild species at risk and their habitats in Canada, and to promote their recovery. The Act stipulates that it is forbidden to kill individuals of a species listed under the Act as threatened, endangered or extirpated or to harm, harass, capture or take them. The SARA also prohibits damaging or destroying their residence or any part of their critical habitat. Furthermore, the SARA provides for the preparation of a recovery strategy for species listed as threatened, endangered or extirpated. The provisions of these recovery strategies must ensure that any possible threat to a given species and its habitat does not jeopardize its survival and recovery.

Section 73 (2) of the SARA provides the competent ministers with the authority to permit normally prohibited activities affecting a listed species, its critical habitat, or its residence, even though they are not part of a previously approved recovery plan. Such activities can only be approved if: 1) they are scientific research relating to the conservation of the species and conducted by qualified persons; 2) they will benefit the species and are required to enhance its chance of survival in the wild; or, 3) affecting the species is incidental to the carrying out of these activities.

The decision to permit allowable harm and the development of a recovery strategy must take into consideration the species’ current situation and its recovery potential, the impacts of human activities on the species and on its ability to recover, as well as the alternatives and measures to reduce these impacts to a level which will not jeopardize the survival and recovery of the species.

Therefore, a species recovery potential assessment (RPA) process was developed by DFO Science to provide the information and scientific advice required to meet the various requirements of the SARA, such as the authorization to carry out activities that would otherwise violate the SARA as well as the development of recovery strategies. In the case of a species that has not yet been added to Appendix 1 of the SARA, the scientific information also serves as advice to the DFO Minister regarding the listing of the species under SARA. Consequently, the information is used when analyzing the socio-economic impacts of adding the species to the list as well as during subsequent consultations, where applicable.

B. Objectives

The intent of this meeting is to assess the recovery potential of the Lake Ontario population of Atlantic salmon. It is a science-based peer review of the designatable unit assigned by COSEWIC and the 16 steps in the RPA framework outlined in the Appendix. The advice will be provided to the DFO Minister for his consideration in any listing decision under SARA for this population.

C. Products

The meeting will generate a proceedings report summarizing the deliberations of the participants. This will be published in the CSAS Proceedings Series. There may be a CSAS Research Document(s) produced in relation to the working paper(s) presented at the workshop. The advice from the meeting will be published in the form of a Science Advisory Report.

D. Participants

Participants will include representatives of DFO Science and Policy sectors from the NCR, Central and Arctic Region, and Maritimes Region; and, salmon specialists from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. Participants will not exceed a maximum of 20 people.

E. Timetable for FY 2007/08

Draft proceedings will be circulated to participants for comments in Spring 2007 and a final proceedings document is expected to be submitted to CSAS for publication by the end of Spring 2007.

Appendix: Topics that should usually be covered in a recovery potential assessment

The list below will be the subject soon to a review by a national working group with the objective of improving the actual framework for the provision of recovery potential assessments.

The topics (from the national framework) for which an assessment should be done for any species/designatable unit is as follows:

Phase I: Assess Current Species Status

1. Evaluate present species status for abundance and range
2. Evaluate recent species trajectory for abundance and range
3. Estimate amount of critical habitat currently available (using critical habitat descriptions defined in the pre-COSEWIC RAP, and considering information in COSEWIC Status Report).
4. Evaluate expected population and distribution targets for recovery, according to DFO Guidelines
5. Evaluate expected general time frame for recovery to the target, assuming only natural mortality, and estimate how time to recovery targets would increase at various levels of human-induced mortality
6. Evaluate Residence Requirements, if any.

Phase II: Scope for Human – Induced Mortality

7. Evaluate maximum human-induced mortality which the species can sustain without jeopardizing survival or achievement of recovery targets for the species.
8. Quantify to the extent possible the magnitude of each major potential source of mortality/harm identified in the pre-COSEWIC RAP, and considering information in COSEWIC Status Report.
9. Aggregate total mortality / harm attributable to all human causes and contrast with that determined in tasks 5 and 7.
10. Evaluate to the extent possible the likelihood that critical habitat is currently limiting to the species’ abundance or range, or would become limited before the recovery goals were reached.
11. Inventory to the extent possible the threats to critical habitat, and estimate their current levels of impact on habitat quantity and quality

Phase III: Scenarios for Mitigation and alternative to activities

To the extent possible with the information available,

12. Develop an inventory of all feasible measures to minimize the impacts of activities in task 8 and 11.
13. Develop an inventory of all reasonable alternatives to the activities in tasks 8 and 11, but with potential for less impact. (e.g. changing gear in fisheries causing bycatch mortality, relocation of activities harming critical habitat)
14. Document the expected harm after implementing mitigation measures as described in 12 and determine whether survival or recovery is in jeopardy after considering cumulative sources of impacts
15. Document the expected harm after implementing alternatives to the activities as described in 13 and determine whether survival or recovery is in jeopardy after considering cumulative sources of impacts
16. Recommend parameter values for population productivity and starting mortality rates, and where necessary, specialized features of population models that would be required to allow exploration of additional scenarios as part of the assessment of economic, social, and cultural impacts of listing the species.