Home > Groundfish EFH EIS > Supplemental EFH EIS Figures (Maps)

Supplemental Figures: Output From the Comprehensive Risk Assessment

Maps Included with the Preliminary Groundfish EFH EIS Produced for the November 2004 Council Meeting

Maps of the Alternatives

EFH alternative 2: 100% HSP area plus depths to 3,500 m

EFH alternative 4: 100% HSP area, assessed species only

EFH alternative 5: 100% HSP area for overfished species, upper 90% HSP for precautionary zone species, upper 70% HSP for all others, and seamounts

EFH alternative 6: upper 90% HSP area for overfished species, upper 80% HSP for precautionary zone species, upper 60% HSP for all others, and seamounts

EFH alternative 7: upper 70% HSP area for all species

EFH alternative 8: upper 30% HSP area for all species

HAPC alternative 2: Designate estuaries

HAPC alternative 3: Designate canopy kelp

HAPC alternative 4: Designate seagrass beds

HAPC alternative 5: Designate core habitat

HAPC alternative 6: Designate nearshore rocky reefs

HAPC alternative 7: Designate areas of interest

Minimize impacts alternative 2: Depth-based gear restrictions for large footrope trawl gear and fixed gear. Option 1

Minimize impacts alternative 2: Depth-based gear restrictions for large footrope trawl gear and fixed gear. Option 2

Minimize impacts alternative 2: Depth-based gear restrictions for large footrope trawl gear and fixed gear. Option 3

Minimize impacts alternative 3: Control-rule based area closures using habitat sensitivity index values. Option 1

Minimize impacts alternative 3: Control-rule based area closures using habitat sensitivity index values. Option 2

Minimize impacts alternative 3: Control-rule based area closures using habitat sensitivity index values. Option 3

Minimize impacts alternative 3: Control-rule based area closures using habitat sensitivity index values. Option 4

Minimize impacts alternative 4: Minimize the expansion of commercial fisheries. Option 1

Minimize impacts alternative 4: Minimize the expansion of commercial fisheries. Option 2

Minimize impacts alternative 7: Prohibit bottom trawling in “hotspot” areas that also coincide with areas of high sensitivity and recovery index values.

Minimize impacts alternative 8: Limit fishing impacts in areas of interest.

Minimize impacts alternative 9: Zoning alternative.

Minimize impacts alternative 11: Designate a no-trawl zone on the central California coast

[Top]

Maps Used in the Impact Analysis

Occurrences of structure-forming megafaunal invertebrates (overlay/transparency)

Newly mapped rock substrate and areas of trawl obstructions (overlay/transparency)

Cumulative groundfish trawl effort 2000-2002 (overlay/transparency)

Cumulative groundfish trawl revenue 2000-2003 (overlay/transparency)

Count of species/lifestage combinations for top 100% of HSP area for all species

Spatial comparison of all EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 3: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 6: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 7: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 7 sub-areas 1, Cowcod Conservation Area, Davidson and Taney Seamounts: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 7 sub-areas 2, San Juan and President Jackson Seamounts, Monterey and Eel River and Mendocino Canyons, Gorda Escarpment: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

HAPC alternative 7 sub-areas 3, Rogue Canyon, Morro Ridge, Thomson, Gumdrop, Pioneer and Guide Seamounts: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 2, options 1 and 2, fixed gear: areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 2, option 1, large footrope trawl gear: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 2, options 2 and 3, large footrope trawl gear: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 2, option 3, fixed gear: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 3, option 1: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 3, option 2: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 3, option 3: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 3, option 4: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 4, option 1: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 4, option 2: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 8: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 9: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

Minimize impacts alternative 11: Areas excluded by EFH alternatives

[Top]

PFMC
10/22/04