United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035-9589 NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office Protected Resources Division 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930 Attn: Ms. Jennifer Anderson Re: Yachting Solutions - Maine Department of Transportation Dear Ms. Anderson, We are funding the proposed project as described below. This letter is to request Endangered Species Act (ESA) concurrence from your office for the Yachting Solutions- Maine Department of Transportation project. The project is receiving federal funds in the form of grant F19AP00238 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administered Boating Infrastructure Grant Program. In addition, the project is the subject of a Corps of Engineers permit (NAE-2021-01934). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been designated as the lead Federal agency for consultation for the project. We have made the determination that the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, any species listed as threatened or endangered by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Our supporting analysis is provided below. 1. Proposed Project The applicant proposes to make the following upgrades on the existing marina facility: • Install 2,625 linear feet (lf) of new floating docks at the facility, increasing total dockage by a factor of approximately 2.75. These docks will include a variety of timber and steel piles as identified in Section 5 • Design outer dock (Dock A) as a wave attenuator to protect inner docks • Install a new gangway access platform and 80’x4’ aluminum gangway meeting ADA requirements • Conduct 7,500 cubic yards (cy) of dredging to Dock A to a depth of -14’ below mean water (MLW) • Conduct 5,400 cubic yards (cy) of dredging around Dock D to increase access for mid-sized cruisers and sailboats Turbidity curtains, silt fence(s), and other environmental protection measures will be installed in accordance with all applicable environmental regulations, codes, and permit requirements. Dredge material will be excavated using a crane and deposited into a floating barge where the material will be partially dewatered. The dredged material will then be offloaded for further dewatering at an upland dewatering site (lined with geotextile and hay bales). Dewatered material will then be loaded onto trucks and delivered to an existing gravel pit (approximately 12 miles away) for final placement and grading in accordance with MDEP’s Beneficial Use of Dredge Material permit (S- 022546-W3-A-N). Floating dock anchor piles will be installed via bargemounted equipment utilizing diesel and/or hydraulic impact hammers. Pilings will be driven to required embedment depths using diesel and/or hydraulic impact hammers and the superstructure and decking will be installed. The floating docks will be fabricated in sections by the selected dock manufacturer and shipped to the site either via barge or truck. Dock sections will be offloaded, placed into position, and attached to the previously driven anchor piles. Once the floating docks are in place, the gangway will be installed, and the marina utilities will be routed to the new floating docks. The construction of existing pier shoreward extension will not directly affect the other works and may be conducted at any time over the course of the project. The project is anticipated to begin as soon as final approval is granted and is expected to be completed within 24 months. Dredging is prohibited from March 16th through November 7th to minimize adverse effects to spawning and migration of anadromous fish. 2. Special Conditions Turbidity barriers will be used during dredging operations. Prior to dredging, jersey barriers and silt fencing shall be erected around the perimeter of the dredged material dewatering area. Dredging is prohibited from March 16th through November 7th to minimize adverse effects to spawning and migration of anadromous fish. To mitigate the potential effects of underwater noise caused by pile installation, installation each day will begin with a slow start technique to allow mobile species to move away from the area. 3. Description of the Action Area As part of the maintenance of the marina and to accommodate larger vessels, (Highlight comment William.Barnhill 10/1/2021 12:39:08 PM Please define what SHM stands for) SHM has proposed dredging in two areas around the boat slips. The smaller area, identified as Area A, is expected to generate approximately 1,000 cubic yards of dredge material. The larger area, identified as Area B, is expected to generate approximately 11,000 cubic yards of dredge material. The dredge material will be partially dewatered on the dredge barge and again following off-loading at the Prock Marine Company yard located 1 mile from the dredge location via the barge haul route over water. Once dewatered, the dredge material will be transported to the gravel pit owned by John Barbour in Cushing and placed as subgrade fill to contour the excavated area of the gravel pit and then covered and seeded. 4. NMFS Listed Species (and Critical Habitat) in the Action Area There are four species of sea turtles and three species of fish listed under the ESA that occur or have the potential to occur in the action area and may be affected by the proposed Action. There is no critical habitat for any species listed as threatened or endangered by NMFS under the ESA in the action area. Sea Turtles Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas) (81 FR 20057 April 6, 2016; NMFS & USFWS 1991) Kemp's Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) (35 FR 18319 Dec. 2, 1970; NMFS et al. 2011) Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) (35 FR 8491 June 2, 1970; NMFS & USFWS 1992) Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta caretta) (76 FR 58868 Sep. 22, 2011; NMFS & USFWS 2008) Fish Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) (77 FR 5880 & 77 FR 5914 Feb. 6, 2012; Recovery plan: none published) The five Atlantic sturgeon distinct population segments (DPS) are: Gulf of Maine, New York Bight, Chesapeake Bay, Carolina, and South Atlantic. Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) (32 FR 4001; March 11, 1967; NMFS 1998) Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) (74 FR 29344; July 20, 2009; NMFS & USFWS 2016) Sea Turtles Four species of federally listed threatened or endangered sea turtles may be seasonally found in coastal waters of Maine. These species include the threatened (Highlight comment roosevelt.mesa 10/1/2021 7:55:40 AM blank) North Atlantic Ocean DPS of Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta caretta) and North Atlantic DPS of Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the endangered Kemp's Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) and Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea). Sea turtles are generally distributed in coastal Atlantic waters from Florida to New England. As water temperatures of coastal Maine rise in the spring, turtles begin to migrate north to forage from their overwintering waters in the south. Sea turtles could potentially occur in the action area during the summer and fall months when the water temperatures are at least 59° F (Shoop and Kenney 1992). Sea turtles are generally found in relatively shallow waters in the northeast and typically occur at depths between 21 and 40 m, although they can also occur in water depths less than 21 m (Shoop and Kenney 1992). Thus, based on the best available information, we assume their preferred foraging depth is between 21 and 40 m. Given that the maximum depth of the action area is currently less than 5 ft (< 2 m), we expect that this site is not preferable for foraging and that sea turtles do not frequently occupy the action area. Atlantic Sturgeon There are four DPSs of Atlantic Sturgeon listed as endangered (New York Bight, Chesapeake Bay, Carolina, and South Atlantic) and one DPS listed as threatened (Gulf of Maine) under the ESA. The marine ranges for all five DPSs include marine waterways, coastal bays, and estuaries from the Labrador Inlet in Labrador, Canada to Cape Canaveral, Florida. Atlantic Sturgeon can occur over a variety of depths and substrates and their presence is strongly associated with the availability of prey (Stein et al. 2004; Guilbard et al. 2007). In rivers and estuaries, Atlantic Sturgeon typically use the deepest waters available; however, Atlantic Sturgeon also occur over shallow (2.5-5 m) inshore areas (Savoy and Pacileo 2003; Stein et al. 2004). Although Sturgeon can occur in relatively shallow waters, the action area is extremely shallow and likely unsuitable foraging habitat for Atlantic Sturgeon. Atlantic Sturgeon spawning and early life stages occur in freshwater rivers. Early life stages and young of the year have limited tolerance to salinity and remain in the freshwater reaches of their natal rivers until reaching the sub-adult stage when individuals have a higher tolerance for saline conditions. The action area is completely saline and highly unlikely to contain spawning or early life stages of Atlantic Sturgeon. Due to lack of ideal conditions for spawning and foraging habitat, it is unlikely that Atlantic Sturgeon frequently occupy the action area. Shortnose Sturgeon More recent research has demonstrated that shortnose sturgeon leave their natal estuaries, undergo coastal migrations, and use other river systems to a greater extent than previously thought. Within the Gulf of Maine, a portion of adults make seasonal migrations along the coast, traveling between the Penobscot, Kennebec and Merrimack rivers and making short stops in smaller coastal rivers along this route (Zydlewski et al. 2011, pp. 42-44). Outside the Gulf of Maine, marine migrations have only rarely been documented. Some shortnose sturgeon captured and/or tagged in the Connecticut River have been recaptured, detected, or were previously tagged in the Housatonic River (T. Savoy, CT DEP, pers. comm. 2015), the Hudson River (Savoy 2004), and the Merrimack River (M. Kieffer, USGS, pers. comm. 2015). The available tagging and tracking information is too limited to determine if Hudson River and Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon are making regular movements outside of their natal rivers and whether movement as far as the Merrimack River is a normal behavior. At this time, we do not expect shortnose sturgeon to make coastal migrations south of the Hudson River (i.e., Mid-Atlantic, DelMarVA). We expect shortnose sturgeon to overwinter in the rivers, so the time of year for coastal migrations would be roughly from April 1- November 30. These coastal migrations may occur within the 50-meter depth contour. Atlantic Salmon According to a 2009 Statement of Cooperation between NMFS and USFWS, NMFS has ESA Section 7 jurisdiction over Atlantic salmon in marine and estuarine waters. Developing adults spend approximately 1 to 3 years in the ocean, where they prefer cooler waters, 4° to 8°C (40° to 46°F). After only one winter at sea, some adult Atlantic salmon (referred to as "grilse") return to their natal stream in spring-summer and spawn in the fall at a smaller size and weight; 95 to 98% of the grilse that return to Maine rivers are male. Other adult Atlantic salmon return to their natal stream in spring-summer after 2 or more winters at sea and spawn in fall; 55 to 75% of the adult salmon that spend 2-3 winters at sea are female. Post-spawn salmon (kelts) can return to the ocean in the fall or can overwinter in the river and estuary often feeding on rainbow smelt. If a rejuvenated kelt survives another one to two years at sea, it will return to its natal river as a “repeat spawner." While documented captures of Atlantic salmon have occurred in the area represented by this polygon, we generally expect them to travel between the waters encompassed by Atlantic salmon critical habitat and the Gulf of St. Lawrence and Grand Bank, and the Labrador Sea. This polygon is made up of the NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Region Statistical Areas where salmon have been documented in data from the Northeast Fisheries Observer Program (NEFOP) and At-Sea Monitoring (ASM) Program (NEFSC FSB (Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Fisheries Sampling Branch) 2016); however, due to lack of recent captures, we have cropped the polygon at the Maine/NH border to better represent where we expect to include GOM Atlantic salmon in ESA section 7 consultations. 5. (Highlight comment William.Barnhill 10/1/2021 12:07:34 PM I recommend avoiding references to incidental take within this section and focus on hammering home how the effects are either insignificant (too small to be meaningfully measured, detected, or evaluated) or discountable (extremely unlikely). ) Effects Determination Dredge Entrapment Mechanical dredging entails lowering the open bucket or clamshell through the water column, closing the bucket after impact on the bottom, lifting the bucket up through the water column, and emptying the bucket into the staging area. The bucket operates without suction or hydraulic intake, moves relatively slowly through the water column and impacts only a small area of the aquatic bottom at any time. In order to be captured in a dredge bucket, an animal must be on the bottom directly below the dredge bucket as it impacts the substrate and remain stationary as the bucket closes. Species captured in dredge buckets can be injured or killed if entrapped in the bucket or buried in sediment during dredging and/or when sediment is deposited. Species captured and emptied out of the bucket can suffer stress or injury, which can lead to mortality. Sea Turtles Sea turtles are not known to be vulnerable to entrapment in mechanical dredges, presumably because they are able to avoid the dredge bucket. Thus, if a sea turtle were to be present at the dredge site, it would be extremely unlikely to be injured or killed as a result of dredging operations carried out by a mechanical dredge. Based on this information, effects to sea turtles from the mechanical dredge are discountable (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:58 PM blank) and incidental take is not expected to occur. Atlantic/Shortnose Sturgeon and Atlantic Salmon In 2012, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers provided NMFS with a list of all documented interactions between dredges and sturgeon reported along the U.S. East Coast; reports dated as far back as 1990. This list included four incidents of sturgeon captured in dredge buckets. These include the capture of a decomposed Atlantic sturgeon in Wilmington Harbor in 2001. The condition of this fish indicated it was not killed during the dredging operation and was likely dead on the bottom or in the water column and merely scooped up by the dredge bucket. Another record was of the capture of an Atlantic sturgeon in Wilmington Harbor in 1998; however, this record is not verified and not considered reliable. The report also listed the live capture of an Atlantic sturgeon at the Bath Iron Works (BIW) facility in the Kennebec River, Maine in 2001 as well as a shortnose sturgeon captured at BIW in 2003 that was observed to have suffered death recently at the time of capture. One report of a live shortnose sturgeon captured in a dredge bucket at BIW in 2009 was not included in the report. Observer coverage at dredging operations at the BIW facility has been 100% for approximately 15 years, with dredging occurring every one to two years. Hundreds of mechanical dredging projects occur along the U.S. Atlantic coast each year and we are not aware of any other captures of sturgeon in mechanical dredges anywhere in the U.S prior to or after 2012. The risk of interactions between sturgeon, salmon, and mechanical dredges is thought to be highest in areas where large numbers of these species are known to aggregate. The risk of capture may also be related to the behavior of the species in the area. While foraging, sturgeon and salmon are at the bottom of the river interacting with the sediment. This behavior may increase the susceptibility of capture with a dredge bucket. We also expect the risk of capture to be higher in areas where these species are overwintering in dense aggregations as overwintering sturgeon and salmon may be less responsive to stimuli which could reduce the potential for them to avoid an oncoming dredge bucket. Mechanical dredging for this project is unlikely to result in take of Atlantic Sturgeon, Shortnose Sturgeon, or Atlantic Salmon because they should presumably be able to avoid the dredge bucket in the unlikely scenario that they are present at the time of dredging. The action area is very shallow, small, and is an existing marina nearby other marinas with high amounts of surrounding boat traffic. The action area is not likely to support high densities of these species or adequate foraging conditions, and therefore, the risk of one being captured in a mechanical dredge is extremely low. Based on this information, any effects on Atlantic Sturgeon, Shortnose Sturgeon, and Atlantic Salmon from the proposed dredging activities are discountable (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:48 PM blank) and incidental take is not expected to occur. Turbidity from Dredging Dredging will disturb sediments and cause a temporary increase in suspended sediment within the action area. Re-suspended sediment is expected to settle out of the water column within a few hours. Suspended sediment levels from conventional mechanical bucket dredging operations have been shown to range from 105 mg/L in the middle of the water column to 445 mg/L near the bottom (ACOE 2001). Furthermore, a study by Burton (1993) indicated that turbidity levels between 15 mg/L and 191 mg/L were detectable up to 2,000 ft from the dredge site. The installation of piles will disturb bottom sediments and may cause a temporary increase in suspended sediment in the action area. Based on these analyses, elevated suspended sediment levels of up to 445 mg/L may be present in the immediate vicinity of the bucket, and suspended sediment levels of up to 191 mg/L could be present within a 2,000 ft radius from the location of the dredge within the action area. Sea Turtles No information is available on the effects of suspended sediment on juvenile and adult sea turtles but it is possible that suspended sediments could alter turtle behavior. However, sea turtles are highly unlikely to be present in the action area during dredging and the dredge area will be encompassed by turbidity barriers that will limit the amount of suspended sediment outside of the action area. Thus, any affect from turbidity during dredging or pile installation on sea turtles is likely to be immeasurable and therefore insignificant. (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:38 PM blank) No incidental take is expected to occur. Atlantic/Shortnose Sturgeon and Atlantic Salmon The life stages of sturgeon and salmon most vulnerable to increased sediment are eggs and non-mobile larvae, which are subject to burial and suffocation. As noted above, no sturgeon or salmon eggs or larvae will be present in the action area. In the highly unlikely event that adult species are present in the action area during dredging, the expected suspended sediment levels are below those shown to have an adverse effect on fish (580.0 mg/L-1,000 mg/L (Burton 1993)). Based on this information, the effects of suspended sediment resulting from dredging activities on Atlantic Sturgeon, Shortnose Sturgeon, and Atlantic Salmon are expected to be insignificant (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:33 PM blank) and no incidental take is expected to occur. (Highlight comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:34:41 PM Add "from Pile Driving" to section title) Noise Impacts To mitigate the potential effects of underwater noise caused by pile installation, piles will be driven using an impact hammer and installation each day will begin with a slow start technique to allow mobile species to move away from the area. We have included estimates for noise levels for three types of piles that are planned for the project. The analysis that follows uses the piles with the highest level of impact although the number of piles of that type will be much lower than the other two types that have even lower effects distances and thresholds. For each type, we have included the maximum number of piles that would be used and anticipate that the number will be lower. The estimated sound levels associated with the proposed project are presented in Tables 1-3. Estimates were derived with the GARFO acoustic tool, version last updated 14-September-2020. Table 1. Proxy-Based Estimates for Underwater Noise Type of Pile Number Hammer Type Water Depth (m) Estimated Peak Noise Level (dBreak) Estimated Pressure Level (dBRMs) Estimated Single Strike Sound Exposure Level (dBssEL) 20" Steel Pipe 20 Impact 3-4 208 187 176 16” Steel Pipe 110 Impact 3 182 167 158 12-14” Timber 46 Impact 2-4 180 170 160 Table 2. Estimated Distance to Sea Turtle Injury and Behavioral Thresholds Type of Pile Hammer Type Distance (m) to 180 dBRMs (injury) Distance (m) to 166 dBRMs (behavior) 20" Steel Pipe Impact NA 63.1 16” Steel Pipe Impact NA NA 12-14” Timber Impact NA NA Table 3. Estimated Distance to Sturgeon Injury and Behavioral Thresholds Type of Pile Hammer Type Distance (m) to 206dBreak(injury) Distance (m) to sSEL of 150 dB (surrogate for 187 dBcsEL injury) Distance (m) to Behavioral Disturbance Threshold (150 dBRMS) 20" Steel Pipe Impact 16.7 96.7 133.3 16” Steel Pipe Impact NA 26.0 44.0 12-14” Timber Impact NA 30.0 50.0 Sea Turtles Underwater noise levels of 180 dBRMS, which can result in injury to sea turtles, are not expected to occur as a result of this project. Behavioral effects, such as avoidance or disruption of foraging activities, may occur in sea turtles exposed to noise at 166 dBRMS. We expect underwater noise levels to be below 166 dBRMS at distances beyond approximately 63.1 m. In the unlikely event that a sea turtle moves into the action area where the 166 dBRMS isopleth extends, we assume that they will detect the noise and modify their course of movement away from the area, and therefore away from the project site. Overall, effects of increased noise levels will be temporary and only occupy small areas of the waterbody where proposed work is being undertaken. Based on this information, effects of noise levels resulting from pile driving operations should be insignificant (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:21 PM blank) and no incidental take is expected to occur. Atlantic/Shortnose Sturgeon and Atlantic Salmon Exposure to underwater noise levels of 206 dBreak and 187 dBcsEL can result in injury to sturgeon and salmon. Exposure to peak pressure levels that may result in injury is not anticipated to occur during this project. At some distance from the pile, a fish is far enough away that, regardless of the number of strikes it is exposed to, the energy accumulated is low enough (150 dbssEL) that there is no potential for injury. For this project, the distance to the 150 dBssEL isopleth is 96.7m. In order to be exposed to potentially injurious levels of noise during installation of the piles, a sturgeon or salmon would need to be within 96.7 m of the pile being driven to be exposed to this noise for any prolonged time period. This is extremely unlikely to occur as we do not expect these species to occur in the action area. We also expect that these species would move away from the noise in the event that they encounter it. Given that sturgeon or salmon would be exposed to levels of noise that cause behavioral modification (at 133.3 m) before being exposed to injurious levels of noise (at 96.7 m), we expect these species would move away from the sound source before cumulative exposure results in injury. If any of above-mentioned species are within 96.7 m of the pile at the time pile driving commences, we expect them to leave the area in a matter of seconds once pile driving commences. The additional utilization of a soft start technique should also give any sturgeon in the area time to move out of the range of any potential injury causing noise; therefore, no injury is anticipated. Behavioral effects, such as avoidance or disruption of foraging activities, may occur in sturgeon and salmon exposed to noise above 150 dBRMS· We expect underwater noise levels to be below 150 dBRMS at distances beyond approximately 96.7 m from the pile being installed. It is possible that a sturgeon or salmon moves into the action area where the 150 dBRMs extends but we think this unlikely because they are not expected to be in the action area. Should these species move into the action area where the 150 dBRMS isopleth extends, as described above, it is reasonable to assume that a sturgeon or salmon would move away from the ensonified area and therefore, away from the project site. Overall, effects of increased noise levels will be temporary and only occupy small areas of the waterbody where proposed work is being undertaken. Based on this information, effects of noise levels resulting from pile driving operations should be insignificant (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:32:02 PM blank) and no incidental take is expected to occur. Benthic Habitat Dredging and dock construction will cause disturbance to the sea floor in the action area that can potentially affect sea turtles and sturgeon by altering prey availability and/or other aspects of benthic habitat such as shading from docks and associated pilings. The effects of dredging and construction on prey availability is expected to be negligible because the area is small (< 0.9 acre) and any potential prey resources for listed species would presumably become naturally re- established and colonize the project area from similar adjacent areas after project completion. Studies reviewed by Wilbur and Clarke (2007) demonstrate that benthic communities in temperate regions occupying shallow waters on similar substrates reported recovery times between 1-11 months after dredging. Shading can reduce photosynthesis in the area, which forms the basis of benthic food chains, and may reduce forage base in the shaded area. As this is an upgrade to an existing marina, the seafloor of the action area is already shaded by piers and pilings and is not expected to be significantly altered in this regard. Given this information, the effects of this project on benthic habitat within the project area is expected to have an insignificant effect on sea turtles and Atlantic (Cross-Out comment William.Barnhill 9/29/2021 12:31:45 PM blank) Sturgeon, and no incidental take is expected to occur. Vessel Traffic Collisions with vessels are a source of anthropogenic mortality and injury for sea turtles and sturgeon as a result of being struck by boat hulls or propellers. Since sturgeon and sea turtles may occur in the action area, we have considered the likelihood that an increase in vessel traffic related to the activities associated with the proposed project would generally increase the risk of interactions between ESA-listed species and vessels in the action area, in addition to baseline conditions. The proposed project may lead to a small, permanent increase in vessel traffic, as more vessels will be able to access the marina. However, the action area is nearby many existing private marinas at Somers Point and the area is already a subject to frequent recreational vessel traffic. Although the baseline risk of vessel interaction is unknown, any increases in vessel capacity may not directly correlate to more vessels in the action area since active vessels in the action area may move elsewhere or be retired from use. At this time, we assume there will only be a slight increase in risk from the small number of additional vessels added to baseline activity in the action area. Given the small increase in vessel traffic above existing levels in the action area, there will be no measurable or detectable increase in the risk of vessel strike, and effects to sea turtle and Atlantic sturgeon are insignificant. 6. Conclusions Based on the analysis that all effects of the proposed action will be insignificant and/or discountable, we have determined that the proposed Yachting Solutions upgrade is not likely to adversely affect any listed species or critical habitat under NMFS' jurisdiction. We certify that we have used the best scientific and commercial data available to complete this analysis. We request your concurrence with this determination. Sincerely, Bill Perry Biologist/Grant Specialist Division of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 7. Literature Cited Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). 2001. Monitoring of Boston Harbor confined aquatic disposal cells. Compiled by L.Z. Hales, ACOE Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory. ERDC/CHL TR-01-27. Burton, W.H. 1993. Effects of bucket dredging on water quality in the Delaware River and the potential for effects on fisheries resources. Versar, Inc., 9200 Rumsey Road, Columbia, Maryland 21045. Guilbard, F., Munro, J., Dumont, P., Hatin, D., and R. Fortin. 2007. Feeding ecology of Atlantic sturgeon and lake sturgeon co-occurring in the St. Lawrence estuarine transition zone. In American Fisheries Society Symposium 56: 85. American Fisheries Society. Savoy, T. and D. Pacileo. 2003. Movements and important habitats of subadult Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) in Connecticut waters. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 132: 1-8. Shoop, C.R. and R.D. Kenney. 1992. Seasonal distributions and abundances of loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles in waters of the northeastern United States. Herpetological Monographs 6: 43-67. Stein, A.B., Friedland, K.D., and M. Sutherland. 2004. Atlantic sturgeon marine bycatch and mortality on the continental shelf of the Northeastern United States. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 24: 171-183. Wilber, D.H. and D.G. Clarke. 2007. Defining and assessing benthic recovery following dredging and dredged material disposal. Proceedings XXVII World Dredging Congress 2007: 603-618.