Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2005-0006-0015
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2005-12-14T05:00Z

Fish
and
Aquatic
Habitat
Fish
and
Aquatic
Habitat
A
Survey
of
Northeast
Residents
A
Survey
of
Northeast
Residents
Funded
by
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
The
purpose
of
this
survey
is
to
determine
The
purpose
of
this
survey
is
to
determine
whether
you
would
support
new
policies
to
whether
you
would
support
new
policies
to
protect
fish
stocks
in
Northeast
US
waters.

protect
fish
stocks
in
Northeast
US
waters.

Protecting
fish
is
only
one
of
many
important
Protecting
fish
is
only
one
of
many
important
issues
that
people
might
care
about.

issues
that
people
might
care
about.
This
presentation
provides
background
This
presentation
provides
background
information.

information.

$

This
information
highlights
both
the
pros
This
information
highlights
both
the
pros
and
cons
of
the
proposed
policy
options
and
cons
of
the
proposed
policy
options 
Northeast
fresh
and
salt
waters
support
billions
of
fish.
These
include
fish
that
are
used
for
recreational
and
commercial
fishing,
 
as
well
as
other
fish
that
are
not
used
by
humans,
but
are
part
of
the
larger
ecological
system.
Natural
factors
such
as
weather
have
always
Natural
factors
such
as
weather
have
always
influenced
fish
stocks.

influenced
fish
stocks.
In
recent
years,
human
activities
have
had
an
In
recent
years,
human
activities
have
had
an
increasing
effect
on
fish
stocks
increasing
effect
on
fish
stocks 

Commercial
&

Commercial
&

recreational
fishing
recreational
fishing

Pollution
Pollution

Development
of
Development
of
waterfront
areas
waterfront
areas

Loss
of
habitat
Loss
of
habitat

Use
of
cooling
water
Use
of
cooling
water
in
commercial
in
commercial
facilities
facilities
Many
fish
stocks
have
been
declining
in
recent
Many
fish
stocks
have
been
declining
in
recent
decades.

decades.

Declines
affect:

Declines
affect:

Natural
ecosystem
functions
Natural
ecosystem
functions

Human
uses
of
these
ecosystems
Human
uses
of
these
ecosystems
This
survey
concerns
proposed
policies
that
This
survey
concerns
proposed
policies
that
would
reduce
fish
losses
caused
by
one
type
of
would
reduce
fish
losses
caused
by
one
type
of
human
activity
human
activity 

the
use
of
cooling
water
by
commercial
facilities.

the
use
of
cooling
water
by
commercial
facilities.
Many
types
of
facilities
use
water
to
cool
Many
types
of
facilities
use
water
to
cool
equipment
and
machinery.

equipment
and
machinery.
These
facilities
produce
These
facilities
produce
products
and
services
products
and
services
that
we
use
every
day.

that
we
use
every
day.

The
largest
amount
of
cooling
The
largest
amount
of
cooling
water
is
used
by
power
plants
water
is
used
by
power
plants
that
produce
electricity.

that
produce
electricity.
Facilities
use
large
amounts
of
water
in
their
Facilities
use
large
amounts
of
water
in
their
cooling
systems.
This
water
is
usually
pumped
cooling
systems.
This
water
is
usually
pumped
from
coastal
waters,
rivers,
and
lakes.

from
coastal
waters,
rivers,
and
lakes.

The
equipment
that
The
equipment
that
pumps
the
water
kills
pumps
the
water
kills
small
fish
and
fish
eggs.

small
fish
and
fish
eggs.

Larger
aquatic
Larger
aquatic
organisms
may
be
organisms
may
be
pinned
against
screens
pinned
against
screens
or
filters,
and
either
or
filters,
and
either
injured
or
killed.

injured
or
killed.
Facilities
that
use
cooling
water
are
located
in
all
Facilities
that
use
cooling
water
are
located
in
all
Northeastern
states.

Northeastern
states.

(
CT,
DE,
MA,
ME,
MD,
NH,
NJ,
NY,
RI,
VT)

(
CT,
DE,
MA,
ME,
MD,
NH,
NJ,
NY,
RI,
VT)

Locations
of
major
facilities
in
Northeast
US
that
withdraw
Locations
of
major
facilities
in
Northeast
US
that
withdraw
cooling
water
in
ways
that
harm
fish.

cooling
water
in
ways
that
harm
fish.
Many
types
of
fresh
and
saltwater
fish
are
affected.
About
1/
3
are
types
caught
by
commercial
and
recreational
fishermen.

 
and
many
others
Flounder
Freshwater
bass
Atlantic
cod
Striped
bass
Weakfish
2/
3
are
fish
that
are
not
directly
used
by
humans.
Minnows
Killifish
 
and
many
others
Shiners
Sticklebacks
There
are
many
billions
of
fish
that
are
not
directly
There
are
many
billions
of
fish
that
are
not
directly
used
by
humans
in
Northeast
waters.
However,

used
by
humans
in
Northeast
waters.
However,

the
exact
size
of
total
fish
stocks
for
these
species
the
exact
size
of
total
fish
stocks
for
these
species
is
not
known.

is
not
known.

?
How
Many
Fish
Are
Lost
to
Impingement
and
How
Many
Fish
Are
Lost
to
Impingement
and
Entrainment
Each
Year?

Entrainment
Each
Year?

After
accounting
for
the
number
of
eggs
and
larvae
After
accounting
for
the
number
of
eggs
and
larvae
that
would
be
expected
to
survive
to
adulthood,

that
would
be
expected
to
survive
to
adulthood,

scientists
estimate
that
the
equivalent
of
about
1.8
scientists
estimate
that
the
equivalent
of
about
1.8
billion
young
adult
fish
is
lost
each
year.

billion
young
adult
fish
is
lost
each
year.
Impingement
and
entrainment
(
I&
E)
effects
on
fish
Impingement
and
entrainment
(
I&
E)
effects
on
fish
species
species
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
17,000
17,000
Cod
Cod
Unknown
Unknown
TBD
TBD
632
million
632
million
Other
Commercial
Other
Commercial
and
Recreational
and
Recreational
Species
Species
0
1,182
million
1,182
million
Forage
Species
Forage
Species
TBD
TBD
1,824
million
1,824
million
Total
Total
TBD
TBD
42
million
42
million
12.8
million
12.8
million
8.6
million
8.6
million
Winter
Flounder
Winter
Flounder
TBD
TBD
44
million
44
million
12.7
million
12.7
million
1.8
million
1.8
million
Striped
Bass
Striped
Bass
Estimated
Estimated
Increase
in
Increase
in
Stock
Size
from
Stock
Size
from
Eliminating
I&
E
Eliminating
I&
E
(%)

(%)

Size
of
Size
of
Stocks
Stocks
(#
of
Adult
(#
of
Adult
Fish)

Fish)

Annual
Annual
Commercial
and
Commercial
and
Recreational
Recreational
Harvest
Harvest
(#
of
Adult
Fish)

(#
of
Adult
Fish)

Lost
to
I&
E
Lost
to
I&
E
(#
of
Young
(#
of
Young
Fish)

Fish)

Fish
Species
Fish
Species
[
NOTE:
cells
marked
"
To
Be
Determined"
will
be
completed
when
modeling
data
is
available.]

The
effects
of
fish
losses
from
cooling
water
use
The
effects
of
fish
losses
from
cooling
water
use
are
usually
are
usually
smaller
smaller
than
the
effects
of
than
the
effects
of
commercial
fishing.

commercial
fishing.

Cooling
water
use
has
contributed
to
a
Cooling
water
use
has
contributed
to
a
measurable
decline
in
some
fish
stocks.

measurable
decline
in
some
fish
stocks.

It
is
important
to
recognize
that
It
is
important
to
recognize
that 
The
government
is
considering
new
policies
The
government
is
considering
new
policies
that
would
reduce
fish
losses
that
would
reduce
fish
losses 

 
by
requiring
new
technologies
in
facilities
by
requiring
new
technologies
in
facilities
that
use
water
for
cooling.

that
use
water
for
cooling.
Total
Fish
Losses
(
1,800
Million
Fish)

Different
levels
of
technology
could
be
Different
levels
of
technology
could
be
required,
ranging
from
advanced
filters
to
required,
ranging
from
advanced
filters
to
closed
closed­
cycle
cooling.

cycle
cooling.
Less
expensive
technologies
can
block
many
fish
from
Less
expensive
technologies
can
block
many
fish
from
entering
cooling
water
facilities.
Requiring
such
entering
cooling
water
facilities.
Requiring
such
technologies
can
reduce
fish
losses
about
25%.

technologies
can
reduce
fish
losses
about
25%.

Annual
Losses
Reduced
by
25%

450
Million
Fish
Saved
Per
Year
X
Annual
Losses
Reduced
by
98%

1.7
Billion
Fish
Saved
Per
Year
Technologies
such
as
closed
cycle
cooling
towers
Technologies
such
as
closed
cycle
cooling
towers
can
almost
eliminate
the
need
for
outside
cooling
can
almost
eliminate
the
need
for
outside
cooling
water.
Requiring
such
technologies
could
reduce
water.
Requiring
such
technologies
could
reduce
fish
losses
up
to
98%.

fish
losses
up
to
98%.

X
°
Technologies
such
as
these
are
already
in
use
at
52%
of
facilities
that
use
cooling
water
in
the
US.

°
Scientists
have
estimated
effects
of
the
proposed
policies
based
on
measurements
at
these
facilities.

°
The
proposed
policies
would
require
similar
technologies
at
all
facilities
that
use
cooling
water.

X
X
Effects
of
Government
Policies
to
Effects
of
Government
Policies
to
Reduce
Fish
Losses
Reduce
Fish
Losses

Reduce
fish
losses
Reduce
fish
losses
in
Northeast
waters.

in
Northeast
waters.

Increase
production
costs
Increase
production
costs
of
commercial
facilities.

of
commercial
facilities.

Some
costs
would
unavoidably
be
Some
costs
would
unavoidably
be
passed
on
to
passed
on
to
consumers
consumers..

This
would
This
would
increase
the
cost
of
living
increase
the
cost
of
living
for
all
for
all
Northeast
households,
including
yours.

Northeast
households,
including
yours.
Why
you
have
received
this
survey:

Why
you
have
received
this
survey:

The
government
must
decide
whether
to
require
The
government
must
decide
whether
to
require
new
technology
to
protect
fish.

new
technology
to
protect
fish.

EPA
needs
to
know
whether
US
households
are
EPA
needs
to
know
whether
US
households
are
willing
to
pay
the
costs
that
would
be
required
to
willing
to
pay
the
costs
that
would
be
required
to
reduce
fish
losses.

reduce
fish
losses.
By
answering
this
survey,
you
will
help
the
By
answering
this
survey,
you
will
help
the
government
decide
which
policies
will
be
government
decide
which
policies
will
be
enacted,
if
any.

enacted,
if
any.
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote 

It
asks
you
to
compare
policies
with
different
effects
It
asks
you
to
compare
policies
with
different
effects
on
fish
and
different
costs
to
your
household.

on
fish
and
different
costs
to
your
household.

You
are
asked
to
vote
for
the
policy
options
you
You
are
asked
to
vote
for
the
policy
options
you
prefer,
if
any.

prefer,
if
any.
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote 

You
will
be
shown
different
policy
options
You
will
be
shown
different
policy
options 
each
each
with
different
effects
on
fish.

with
different
effects
on
fish.

It
is
important
to
know
how
you
would
react
to
a
It
is
important
to
know
how
you
would
react
to
a
wide
range
of
possible
outcomes.

wide
range
of
possible
outcomes.

Common
sense
indicates
that
preventing
the
loss
of
Common
sense
indicates
that
preventing
the
loss
of
fish
eggs
and
young
fish
will
mean
more
adult
fish
in
fish
eggs
and
young
fish
will
mean
more
adult
fish
in
future
years,
but
at
this
point
there
is
still
significant
future
years,
but
at
this
point
there
is
still
significant
uncertainty
regarding
the
exact
size
of
these
future
uncertainty
regarding
the
exact
size
of
these
future
effects.

effects.
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote
This
survey
is
similar
to
a
public
vote 

You
may
choose
policies
that
are
more
expensive,

You
may
choose
policies
that
are
more
expensive,

but
save
more
fish
but
save
more
fish 
or
policies
that
save
fewer
fish,

or
policies
that
save
fewer
fish,

but
are
less
expensive.

but
are
less
expensive.

You
may
also
choose
to
reject
all
the
proposed
You
may
also
choose
to
reject
all
the
proposed
policies
policies 
and
maintain
the
status
quo.

and
maintain
the
status
quo.
There
are
no
wrong
answers.

There
are
no
wrong
answers.

It
all
comes
down
to
the
tradeoffs
YOU
are
It
all
comes
down
to
the
tradeoffs
YOU
are
willing
to
make
willing
to
make 
$
0%
60%
100%

Effect
on
Long­

Term
Fish
Populations
(
After
3­
5
Years)
0%
60%
100%

Effect
on
Long­

Term
Fish
Populations
(
After
3­
5
Years)
100
%
=
maximum
historical
fish
levels
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)
0%
60%
100%

Effect
on
Long­

Term
Fish
Populations
(
After
3­
5
Years)
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)

0%
=
ecosystem
with
no
fish
at
all
0%
60%
100%

Effect
on
Long­

Term
Fish
Populations
(
After
3­
5
Years)
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)

60%
=
current
fish
populations
0%
60%
100%

Effect
on
Long­

Term
Fish
Populations
(
After
3­
5
Years)
Policies
may
increase
stocks
to
between
60
and
75%.
75%

60%

Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
Long
Term
Population
Effect
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)
0%
50%
100%

Effect
on
Annual
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
(
After
3­
5
Years)
0%
50%
100%

Effect
on
Annual
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
(
After
3­
5
Years)
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
Scale
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)

100
%
=
catch
in
1950
0%
=
zero
catch
50%
=
current
catch
0%
50%
100%

Effect
on
Annual
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
(
After
3­
5
Years)
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
Scale
Recreational
and
Commercial
Catch
Scale
(
average
across
all
species)

(
average
across
all
species)

65%

50%

Policies
may
increase
catch
to
between
50
and
65%.
Please
keep
in
mind
that
Please
keep
in
mind
that 

Some
types
of
policies
may
protect
more
total
fish.

Some
types
of
policies
may
protect
more
total
fish.

Others
may
be
better
at
protecting
types
of
fish
Others
may
be
better
at
protecting
types
of
fish
harvested
by
fishermen.

harvested
by
fishermen.

or
or
These
are
the
effects
on
population
and
harvest
that
are
possible
given
current
water
quality
in
the
Northeast.
Vote
for
the
policy
you
prefer,
if
any 



You
will
be
shown
three
different
questions,

You
will
be
shown
three
different
questions,

each
with
a
different
set
of
policies
to
each
with
a
different
set
of
policies
to
compare.

compare.
When
making
your
choice,
remember
that
:

When
making
your
choice,
remember
that
:

Protecting
fish
from
cooling
water
intakes
is
only
one
Protecting
fish
from
cooling
water
intakes
is
only
one
of
many
environmental
problems.

of
many
environmental
problems.

You
would
actually
have
to
pay
the
indicated
amounts
You
would
actually
have
to
pay
the
indicated
amounts
if
regulations
are
enacted.

if
regulations
are
enacted.

This
money
will
no
longer
be
available
for
household
This
money
will
no
longer
be
available
for
household
expenses
or
for
any
other
use.

expenses
or
for
any
other
use.

Only
consider
effects
on
fish
and
the
cost
to
your
household.

Scientists
expect
no
other
significant
environmental
or
economic
impacts.

These
policies
will
have
no
effect
on
taxes
paid
by
US
households.
Some
information
is
not
known
to
scientists.

Some
information
is
not
known
to
scientists.

There
is
no
way
to
know
the
exact
effect
of
these
There
is
no
way
to
know
the
exact
effect
of
these
new
policies
on
the
fishing
industry.

new
policies
on
the
fishing
industry.

Even
so,
the
government
will
be
making
its
final
Even
so,
the
government
will
be
making
its
final
decision
by
June
2006.

decision
by
June
2006.

The
results
of
this
study
will
be
used
by
EPA
to
The
results
of
this
study
will
be
used
by
EPA
to
assess
the
value
of
the
proposed
policies
to
the
assess
the
value
of
the
proposed
policies
to
the
public,
and
will
also
be
posted
on
EPA
public,
and
will
also
be
posted
on
EPA''
s
website.

s
website.

Your
responses
to
this
survey
Your
responses
to
this
survey
will
will
make
a
make
a
difference.

difference.
Because
your
answers
will
influence
real
policy
changes,
it
is
important
that
you
answer
all
questions
the
same
way
you
would
if
this
were
a
real,
binding
vote.

Your
opinion
is
important,
whether
you
support
or
oppose
the
proposed
policy
changes.
Please
consider
each
pair
of
policy
options
separately.
Do
not
add
up
or
compare
policies
across
different
pages.

There
are
no
wrong
answers!
All
your
responses
are
anonymous
and
confidential.
A
few
important
things:

A
few
important
things:

The
only
significant
The
only
significant
environmental
effect
of
these
environmental
effect
of
these
regulations
is
on
the
quantity
of
regulations
is
on
the
quantity
of
fish
in
the
water.
There
are
no
fish
in
the
water.
There
are
no
other
significant
effects
on
the
other
significant
effects
on
the
environment.

environment.
A
few
important
things:

A
few
important
things:

There
are
no
hidden
agendas
or
There
are
no
hidden
agendas
or
tricks
to
these
questions.
EPA
tricks
to
these
questions.
EPA
really
does
want
to
know
your
really
does
want
to
know
your
values
for
these
types
of
policies.

values
for
these
types
of
policies.
A
few
important
things:

A
few
important
things:

If
these
policies
are
enacted,

If
these
policies
are
enacted,

costs
will
be
passed
on
to
you
by
costs
will
be
passed
on
to
you
by
facilities.
However,
these
are
facilities.
However,
these
are
NOT
new
taxes
NOT
new
taxes 
and
we
are
NOT
and
we
are
NOT
talking
about
funding
a
new
talking
about
funding
a
new
government
program.

government
program.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
participation
in
this
important
participation
in
this
important
survey.

survey.