WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES •16130 GFI 06/71
    Potential Environmental  Effects
      of an Offshore Submerged
         Nuclear Power Plant
              Volume II
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY • WATER QUALITY OFFICE

-------
         WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
The Water Pollution Control Research Series describes
the results and progress in the control and abatement
of pollution in our Nation's waters.  They provide a
central source of information on the research , develop-
ment, and demonstration activities in the Water Quality
Office, Environmental Protection Agency, through inhouse
research and grants and contracts with Federal, State,
and local agencies, research institutions, and industrial
organizations.

Inquiries pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Head, Project Reports
System, Office of Research and Development, Water Quality
Office, Environmental Protection Agency, Room 1108,
Washington, D. C.  20242.

-------
     POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF AN
   OFFSHORE SUBMERGED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
                       VOLUME 2
                           by

                  GENERAL DYNAMICS
                  Electric Boat Division

               Groton, Connecticut, 06340


                         for the

          WATER QUALITY RESEARCH OFFICE
        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                   Program 16130 GFI
                   Contract 14-12-918
                       June 1971
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C. 20402 - Price $2.25
                     Stock Number 5601-0120

-------
            EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Water
Quality Office, EPA, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for
use.
                      11

-------
                            CONTENTS
        Note on Organization: Volume 1 presents the rationale,
        analyses, and results of the complete study.  Volume 2
        is a descriptive treatise and collation of data on the re-
        presentative offshore sites., which forms the basis for
        application of the analytical models to those sites, and
        for the assessment of the effects of power plant wastes
        on the marine biota.
                        Volume 1.  Analysis
                     (See Volume 1 for Details)
Section                                                        Page
 1      CONCLUSIONS                                           1
 2      RECOMMENDATIONS                                     5
 3      INTRODUCTION                                          7
 4      NUCLEAR POWER PLANT WASTES                        21
 5      THERMAL DIFFUSION ANALYSIS                         57
 6      POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF THERMAL DISCHARGES ON
        MARINE POPULATIONS                                 107
 7      RADIONUCLIDE DISTRIBUTION IN THE SEA               149
 8      EFFECT OF RADIONUCLIDES ON MAN AND MARINE
        BIOTA                                                181
 9      RESEARCH NEEDS                                      207
10      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                 210

             Volume 2.  Representative Site Descriptions
 1      GENERAL COMMENTARY ON SITE DESCRIPTIONS          1
            Physical Features                                     1
            Seismic Activity                                      1
            Biological Generalizations                             6
 2      SITE DESCRIPTION FOR THE GULF OF MAINE             11
            Physical Description (Wiscasset Area)                  11
               Water Circulation and Characteristics              11
               Bottom Characteristics                           21
               Bibliography                                    21
                                iii

-------
Section
            Biological Description (Wiscasset Area)                  22

                Ecology                                            22
                Phytoplankton                                      25
                Zooplankton                                        27
                Principal Fisheries                                 36
                Benthic Organisms                                  54
                Fouling                                            62
                Bibliography                                       65

        SITE DESCRIPTION FOR THE NEW YORK BIGHT             69
            Physical Description (Hudson Channel Off Sea Girt)        69
                Water Circulation and Characteristics                69
                Bpttpm Characteristics                              79
                Bibliography                                       79
            Biological Description (Long Island and Block Island
            Sounds)                                                80
                Ecology                                           80
                Phytoplankton                                      80
                Zooplankton                                        91
                Principal Fisheries                                102
                Benthic Organisms                                 114
                Fouling                                           121
                Bibliography                                      127

        SITE DESCRIPTION FOR WATERS OFF SOUTHEASTERN
        FLORIDA                                                 131
            Physical Description (Miami Area)                      131
                Water Circulation and Characteristics               131
                Bottom Characteristics                             139
                Bibliography                                      140
            Biological Description (Miami Area)                     141
                Ecology                                           141
                Phytoplankton                                     145
                Zooplankton                                       150
                Principal Fisheries                                161
                Benthic Organisms                                 168
                Fouling                                           176
                Bibliography                                      182

        SITE DESCRIPTION FOR WATERS OFF SOUTHERN
        CALIFORNIA                                              189
            Physical Description (San Onofre Area)
                Water Circulation and Characteristics
                Bottom Characteristics
                Bibliography
                                  IV

-------
Section
            Biological Description (San Onofre Area)                 199

                Ecology                                          199
                Phytoplankton                                     200
                Zooplankton                                      204
                Commercial Fisheries                             219
                Benthic Organisms                                243
                Fouling                                          268
                Bibliography                                      274
Appendix

A        NOTES ON ESTIMATING COASTAL CURRENTS             279

-------
                          ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
 1      Epicenters of Earthquakes Measured at Richter 3 or Greater,
        1934 to 1958 (Positions Accurate to Within 5 km)(Based on
        Emery, 1960)                                               3

 2      Fault Lines Estimated Chiefly from Sea Floor Topography
        (Solid Lines Indicate Long Primary Faults ; Broken Lines ,
        Secondary Faults)(Based on Emery, 1960)                     4

 3      Damaging Earthquakes Through 1968 (Origin Unknown, Ob-
        tained from Aetna Life Insurance Co. ,  1971) and Seismic Risk
        Zones (from Algermissen, 1969)                              5

 4      Soundings of Area off Wiscasset,  Gulf of Maine  (from Coast
        Geodetic Survey Charts 313 and 314)                         13
 5      Temperature Profiles of Water at the Gulf of Maine           1 5
 6      Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Winter (from Bumpus and
        Lauzier, 1965)                                             16

 7      Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Spring (from Bumpus and
        Lauzier, 1965)                                             16

 8      Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Summer (from Bumpus and
        Lauzier, 1965)                                             17

 9      Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Fall (Bumpus and Lauzier,
        1965)                                                     ^
10      Surface Transportation of Water Particles along the Maine
        Coast (adapted from Graham,  1970)                          20
11      Main Phases of Marine Food Cycle (from Mare, 1942).         23

12      Food of the Herring (from Hardy, 1924)                      24
13      Calculated Seasonal Cycle of Phytoplankton (from Riley, 1947)  26
14      Percentage Composition, over Different Months, of Phyto-
        plankton in Western Basin, Gulf of Maine (from Lillick,  1940
        - modified)                                                26

15      Seasonal Succession of Dominant Phytoplanktion Species in
        Gulf of Maine Areas (from Lillick, 1940 - modified)           27

16      Zooplankton Sampling Stations , Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
        (from Sherman, 1970)                                      28

17      Mean Annual Volumes of Zooplankton for Gulf of Maine
        Coastal Waters in Areas Investigated,  1967 and 1968 (from
        Sherman, 1970)                                            29
18      Mean Seasonal Volume of Zooplankton in Gulf of Maine
        Coastal Waters, 1967 and 1968 (from Sherman,  1970)          29

19      Mean Seasonal Volumes of Zooplankton in Gulf of Maine
        Coastal Waters, 1965 and 1966 (from Sherman,  1968)          29
                                 VI

-------
Figure                                                            Page

20      Percentage Composition of Zooplankton Groups in Gulf of
        Maine by Season in 1964 (from Sherman, 1966)                31
                                                            q
21      Mean Number of Dominant Zooplankton Groups per 100 m  of
        Water in Gulf of Maine by Season in 1964 - Western (W), Cen-
        tral (C), Eastern (E)(from Sherman, 1966)                    31

22      Mean Number of Cominant Copepod Species per m  of Water
        in Gulf of Maine Areas - Western (W), Central (C),  Eastern
        (E) - in 1965 and 1966 (from Sherman, 1968)                   37
23      Comparison of Diurnal Migration of Calanus at Two Stations
        in Gulf of Maine -- (A) Deep Station, (B) Bank Station (from
        Clarke, 1934)                                              39

24      Vertical Distribution of Other Zooplankton Groups              40
25      Inshore-Offshore and Vertical Distribution of Sagitta elegans
        in Three Gulf of Maine Estuaries, Winter  1966 (from Sherman
        and Schaner, 1968)                                          40

26      Spawning Areas of Three Important Fisheries  (from Edwards,
        BCF,Woods Hole, Mass.)                                    45
27      Periods of Settlement for Five Important Fouling Organisms
        (from DePalma, 1969)                                       65

28      Soundings in  Part of the New York Bight (from Coast and
        Geodetic Sruvey Chart 1108)                                 70
29      Bathymetric  Details of the Head of Hudson Channel (from
        Coast and Geodetic Survey Maps 0807N-54 and 080N-55)         71

30      Temperature Profiles of Water at the New York Bight          73
31      Temperature Profile Across the Hudson Channel in Summer
        (from Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory,  unpublished)             74

32      Temperature Profile Across the Hudson Channel in Winter
        (from Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory,  unpublished)             74

33      Surface Flow During  Winter Months — November through
        March                                                     78

34      Surface Flow During  Summer Months — April through October  78

3 5      Seasonal Variation of Phytoplankton in  Block Island Sound
        (from Riley,  1952)                                          84

36      Phytoplankton and Chlorophyll in Long  Island Sound -- Aver-
        age Surface Values for all Stations (from Conover,  1956)        84

37      Seasonal Variations of Phytoplankton in Long Island Sound by
        Area (from Riley and Conover, 1967)                          84
38      Distribution of Chlorophyll in Surface and  Bottom Waters of
        Long Island Sound --  Average Values for All Stations (from
        Conover, 1956)                                             84
                                   vn

-------
Figure                                                             page

39      Phytoplankton and Chlorophyll Distribution at Inshore and
        Offshore Stations (from Conover, 1956)                        85

40      Seasonal Variation in Mean Values of Representative Phyto-
        planktonic Species in Block Island Sound (from Riley, 1952)     85

41      Seasonal Variation of Representative Species of Phytoplankton
        in Long Island Sound (from Conover, 1956)                    86

42      Distribution of the Major Taxonomic Groups in Long Island
        Sound, Averaged for All Stations (from Conover, 1956)         87

43      Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton, Expressed as Plant
        Pigment Units, in Northern and Tropical Atlantic Waters
        (from Riley, 1939)                                           88

44      Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton in Block Island Sound
        (from Riley, 1952)                                           89

45      Displacement Volumes and Numerical Abundance of Zooplank-
        ton (from Grice and Hart, 1962)                               94

46      Mean Monthly Zooplankton Displacement Volumes and Total
        Numbers Recorded from Long Island Sound  and Georges Bank
         (from Deevey, 1956)                                        94

47      Major Groups of Zooplankton (Deevey, 1952)                   95

48      Numerical Abundance of Pseudocalanus minutus (from Deevey,
        1952)                                                      101

49      Numerical Abundance of Centropages typicus (from Deevey,
        1952)                                                      101

50      Numerical Abundances of Acartia clausi and A.  tonsa (from
        Deevey, 1956)                                             101

51      Distribution of Ocean Quahogs in the Middle Atlantic Bight
        and the Gulf of Maine (from Merrill and  Ropes,  1960)          112

52      Distribution of Surf Clams in the Middle Atlantic Bight and the
        Gulf of Maine (from Merrill and Ropes,  1960)                 113

53       Fouling at Woods Hole Site Showing Periods of Attachment of
        Fouling Organisms  (from Redfield and Deevy, 1952b)          124

54      Fouling at Chesapeake Bay Site -- Periods of Attachment,  of
        Maximum Attachment, and of Most Rapid Growth (from Daugh-
        erty, 1961)                                                125

55      Intensity of Fouling at Various Depths on Selected Buoys Where
        Fouling Extended to the Bottom                              126
56      Soundings off Turkey Point,  Typical of Southeastern Florida
        Coast (from Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1249)            132

57      Thermal Stratification of Miami Site                         134

58      Temperature Profile Showing Mixed Condition (from Lee,
        1969)                                                      135
                                  Vlll

-------
Figure                                                             Page

59      Temperature Profile Showing Stratified Condition (from Lee,
        1969)                                                      136

60      Circulation Pattern of Florida Current Waters                137

61      Shelf Profile Off Southeastern Florida                       139

62      Station  Locations in Straits of Florida: FL - Fowey Light,
        MC - Midchannel, CC - Cat Cay, RR -  Riding Rocks, SC-
        Santaren Channel, WC - West Channel, AR - Alligator Reef
        (from Vargo,  1968)                                         146

63      Typical Vertical Distribution of Nanoplankton as Dry Weight
        (from Bsharah,  1957)                                       147

64      Seasonal Vertical Distribution of Nanoplankton as Dry Weight
        in Florida Current (from Bsharah,  1957)                     147

65      Seasonal Variation in Phytoplankton Standing Crop during
        1964-1966 at Fowey  Light, Midchannel, and Cat Cay (from
        Vargo,  1968)                                               148

66      Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton at Fowey Light from
        October 1964 to June 1965  (from Vargo, 1968)                151

67      Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton at Fowey Light from
        July 1965 to January 1966 (from Vargo, 1968)                 151

68      Seasonal Variation in Abundance of: a. Sagitta enflata,
        b. S_. hexaptera, and c. _S_. lyra (from Owre, 1960)           155
69      Sagitta enflata:  a. Seasonal Variation in Vertical Distribu-
        tion at the NG Station; b. Diurnal Vertical Distribution at SL
        18 (from Owre,  1960)                                       156

70      Comparison of Depths of Mean Day levels at the NG Station
        with Depths of 50 Percent Levels at the SL Station (from
        Owre, 1960)                                               156

71      Seasonal Distribution of Siphonophores  (from Moore, 1953)    157

72      Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish per Cubic Centi-
        meter of Plankton at the  Forty-Mile Station:  Day, 12-16 hr;
        Night 20-04 hr (from Bsharah, 1957)                        159

73      Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish at the Forty-Mile
        Station (from Bsharah, 1957)                                160

74      Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish Per Mile Tow at
        the Forty-Mile Station: Day, 12-16 hr; Night, 20-08 hr (from
        Bsharah,  1957)                                             160
75      Species Variations on the Biological Life Cycle (from Knopf,
        1970)                                                      163

76      Life Cycle of Shrimp (from Knopf,  1970)                     163

77      Distribution of Taxa in the  Study Area (from dePalma,  1969)   180
                                                              2
78      Total Annual Biomass: Dry Weight of Biofouling in gm/m
        (from dePalma, 1969)                                      181


                                  ix

-------
Figure                                                            PajSe_

79      Soundings of Area off San Onofre, Southern California (from
        Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 5101)                      19°
80      Temperature Profiles of Water at the San Onofre Site        192

81      Annual Average Winds -- Velocity and Direction --of South-
        ern California Coastal Region (from the Allan Hancock Foun-
        dation,  1965)                                             194

82      Types of Sediment between Newport and Mexico (from the
        Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)                           iy '
83      Zooplankton Distribution for the Coastal Vicinity of Point
        Arguello (from USN Oceanographic Office, 1965)

84      Average Monthly Abundance  of Diatoms and Zooplankton
        (from Emery, 1960)                                       21°
85      Average Plankton Volumes — 1960 (from  Thrailkill, 1969)   211

86      Estimated Abundance of Calanus helgolandicus (from
        Fleminger, 1967)                                         214

87      Estimated Abundance of Doliolum denticulatum (from Berner,
        1967)	217

88      Estimated Abundance of Dolioletta gegenbauri (from Berner,
        1967)                                                    218

89      Percentage of Successful Hauls for Dolioletta gegenbauri
        during March, June, and September 1949-1952 (from Berner,
        1960)                                                    219

90      Percentage of Successful Hauls for Doliolum denticulatum
        during March, June, and September 1949-1952 (from Berner,
        1960)                                                    219
91      Total Catch and Composition Percentages of Twenth Most
        Frequently Recorded Fish Landed by Partyboats —  Crescent
        City to Avila, 1960 (from Miller and Gotshall, 1965)         233

92      Most Commonly Taken Fish  in Sandy Bottom and Pelagic
        Habitats -- Oregon to Point  Arguello (from Miller and Got-
        shall, 1965)                                              234

93      Most Commonly Taken Fish  in Rocky Bottom Habitats --
        Oregon  to Point Arguello (from Miller and Gotshall, 1965)    235

94      Approximate  Flow Chart of Organic Matter and Annual Pro-
        duction  of the Various Biozones of Southern California (from
        Emery, 1960)                                            236

95      Diagram Showing Total Marine Food Web  -- Dotted and
        Hatched Areas Indicate Relative Total Productivities at Each
        Step (from CalCOFI, 1967)                                 237

96      Food of the Jack Mackerel (from CalCOFI, 1953)             238

97      Competition for Food between the Sardine and Jack  Mackerel
        (from CalCOFI, 1953)                                     238

-------
Figure                                                           Page

98      Frequency of Occurrence and Weight of Major Categories of
        Food of Pacific Hake, for May-July and August-September
        — Data for 1965 and 1966 Combined (from Alton and Nelson.
        1970)                                                    242

99      Frequency of Occurrence andVolume of Food Organisms Found.
        in Yellowtail Stomachs (from Baxter et al, 1960)            244

100     Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
        (from Jones, 1969)                                       255

101     Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
        (from Jones, 1969)                                       256

102     Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
        (from Jones, 1969)                                       257

103     Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
        (from Jones, 1969)                                       258

104     Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the
        Mainland Shelf, Point Arguello (Point Conception to Santa
        Barbara (from Jones, 1969)                               259

105     Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the
        Mainland Shelf, Santa Barbara to Point Dume (from Jones,
        1969)                                                    260

106     Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the
        Mainland Shelf, Point Dume to Newport (from Jones,  1969)   261
107     The Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the
        Mainland Shelf, Newport to Mexico (from Jones, 1969)       262

108     Percentage of 316 Samples, in Various Depth Ranges, That
        Contain One or  More Specimens  of Siliceous Sponge, Ane-
        mone,  and Other Kinds of Animals (from Emery, 1960)      263

109     Populations  of Representative Species, and Biomass,  Rela-
        ted to Depth (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)      264

110     Populations  of Representative Species, and Biomass,  Related
        to Sediment  Grain Size (from the Allan Hancock Foundation,
        1965)                                                    265

111     Southern California  Region Showing Area of Kelp Beds Desig-
        nated by the Department of Fish and Game (from North and
        Schaeffer, 1964)                                         267
112     Ranges and Locations of Dominant Organisms, Transect A,
        South Side of Diablo Cove, November  12, 1966 (from North,
        1969)                                                    271

113     Ranges and Locations of Dominant Organisms, Transect B,
        Central Diablo Cove (the Approximate Likely Future Location
        of Discharge) November 12, 1966 (from North,  1969)         272

114     Current Velocity as  a Percentage of Wind Velocity           282
                                  XI

-------
                              TABLES
Table
 1     Physical Properties of Wiscasset Site                        *2
 2     Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed -- Annual Pe rcentage
       (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)               18
 3     Zooplankton Sample  Volumes (cc/100 m3) at Station 9
       (adapted from Sherman,  1966, 1968, 1970)                    30
 4     Percentage Composition of Dominant Holoplanktonic  Zoo-
       plankton Groups, Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters (from Sher-
       man,  1968, 1970)                                          32
 5     Percentage Composition of Dominant Meroplanktonic Zoo-
       plankton Groups, Gulf of Maina Coastal Waters (from Sher-
       man,  1968, 1970)                                          33
 6     Mean Numbers of Dominant Holoplanktonic Zooplankton Groups
       per 100 m3 of Water by Season, Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
       (from Sherman, 1968, 1970)                                34
 7     Mean Numbers of Dominant Meroplanktonic Groups per 100
       m3 of Water by Season, Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters  (from
       Sherman, 1968, 1970)                                      35
 8     Total Species Composition and Mean Number of Dominant
       Copepods per m3 of  Water in Gulf of Maine Areas — Western
       (W),  Central (C),  Eastern (E)(from Sherman,  1970)            38
 9     Summary of Landings at Maine Ports in 1969, Arranged by
       Dollar Value (from Maine Landings, 1969)                    39
10     Details on the Lobster Fishery                              42
11     Details on the Shrimp Fishery                               43
12     Details on the Sea Herring Fishery                           44
13     Details on the Redfish Fishery                               46
14     Details on the Silver Hake Fishery                           47
15     Details on the Haddock Fishery                              48
16     Details on the Atlantic Mackerel Fishery                      49
17     Details on the Cod Fishery                                  50
18     Details on the Gray Sole  Fishery                             51
19     Details on the Pollock Fishery                               52
20     Details on the Scup Fishery                                 53
21     Species in the Nephtys-Nucula Community Found at 10 or More
       Stations in the Ebencook  Harbor and Jewett Cove, Maine,
       Listed in Order of Abundance (from Hanks,  1964)              55
22     Common Aquatic Animals and Plants Collected or Recorded
       from Sheepscot Estuary, Arranged According to Habitat
       (adapted from Stickney, 1959)                                56
                                 xii

-------
Table                                                            Page

23     Local Abundance of Marine Fouling Organisms, 1960 to 1968
       (from DePalma, 1969)                                       63

24     Rate of Fouling Based on Dry Weight Accumulation per Unit
       Time (from DePalma, 1969)                                  64

25     Physical Properties of Water at the New York Bight Site        72

26     Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed -- Annual Percentage
       (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)               76

27     Dominant Species of Phytoplankton in Block Island Sound —
       1949 (from Riley, 1952)                                      81

28     Frequency of Occurrence of Phytoplanktonic Species in Long
       Island Sound (from Riley and Conover,  1967)                   82

29     Mean Cell Count  (thousands/L) of Phytoplankton in Different
       Parts of Long Island Sound and at Maximum and Minimum
       Limits of Variation (from Riley and Conover, 1967)            83

30     A) Growth Coefficients in Bottles of Surface Water for Several
       LIS Algae, B) Growth Coefficients as Function of Temperature
       (from Riley and Conover, 1967; Riley,  1961)                   91

31     Annual Rate  of Carbon Fixation (from Ryther and Yentsch,
       1958)                                                      91

32     Mean Monthly (Zooplankton) Total Numbers and Displacement
       Volumes in Long Island Sound,  1952-1953 -- Mean of All Sta-
       tions (from  Deevey, 1956)                                    92

33     Numerical • and Dry Weight Relationships Between Various
       Zooplankton Hauls (from Deevey, 1952)                       93

34     Percentage  of Zooplankton in Samplings (from Deevey,  1952)    96

3 5     Composition of the Zooplankton in Samples Taken  February
       17, 1951 (from Sanders, 1952)                                99

36     Numerically Important Copepod Species in Neritic, Slope,
       Gulf Stream, and Sargasso Sea Waters  (from Grice and Hart,
       1962)                                                    100

37     Names of Fishes Taken in Monthly One-Hour Hauls, and
       Additional Species Observed in Other Hauls on Collection
       Dates from  1943-1946 (from  Merriman and Warfel,1948)     103

38     Common Fish Species Found at Two Stations in Long Island
       Sound in July (from Richards, 1963a)                        104

39     Details on the Sea Scallop Fishery                          107

40     Details on thje Yellowtail Flounder Fishery                   108

41     Details on the Ocean Pout Fishery                          109

42     Details on the Sculpin Fishery                              110

43     Details on the Winter Flounder Fishery                     111
                                 Xlll

-------
Table
44     Listing of Benthic Invertebrates and Fishes Taken in Long
       Island Sound (from Richards and Riley, 1967)
45     Abundance of Epifaunal Species  (from Richards and Riley,
       1967)
46     Abundance of Benthic Animals for Transect Stations from
       Massachusetts to Bermuda (from Sanders et al, 1965)         iiy
47     Characteristics and Results of Marine Fouling (from A. D.
       Little, 1962)
48     Common Fouling Organisms (adopted from Ayers and Turner,
       1952)
49     Fouling in Relation to Distance from Shore (from Hutchins,
       1952)
50     Temperature, Salinity, and Density Data for the Miami Site    133
51     Current Meter Data (from Stewart et al, 1969)                138
52     List of Plankton Samples  Taken at the NG Station  (from Owre,
       1960)                                                     142
53     Zooplankton Standing Crop in Offshore Areas                 144
54     Rate of Production in Offshore Areas                        144
55     Species of Phytoplankton  (from Vargo, 1968)                  148
56     Phytoplankton Standing  Crop (from Vargo, 1968)              149
57     Percentages of Major Groups of Zooplankton Taken with No.  2
       Net (0.366 mm Porosity)  in Biscayne Bay (from McNulty et
       al,  1960)                                                  152
58     Vertical Distribution of Copepods (from Roehr and Moore,
       1965)                                                     153
59     Total Counts and Percentages of Chaetognaths at the NG
       Station and at SL 18 (from Owre, 1960)                      154
60     Diurnal Migration of Siphonophores (from Moore, 1953)       158
61     Mean Day Level of Siphonophores (from Moore, 1953)         158
62     Florida Landings, East Coast, 1969 (from Johnson,  1969)      161
63     Details on the Shrimp Fishery                               162
64     Details on the Spiny Lobster Fishery                         164
65     Details on the Spanish Mackerel Fishery                     165
66     List of Offshore Sport Fishes  (from Voss, 1967)              168
67     List of Benthic Organisms in Biscayne Bay (from McNultv
       1962)                                               "    169
68     Biofoulers Collected from Florida Straits and TOTO  (from
       DePalma, 1967)                                            176
                                  xiv

-------
                                                                 Page

       Temperature, Salinity, and Density Data for the San Onofre
       Site                                                       191

70     Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed -- Annual Percentage
       (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)              195

71     Diatoms of the Coastal Waters of Southern California (from
       the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)                         201

72     Monthly Variation of Microplankton in Southern California
       Marine Waters (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)     203

73     Zooplankton  of the Offshore California Waters (from Isaacs
       etal, 1969)                                                206

74     Biomass of Dominant Zooplankton in the San Onofre Region of
       California (adapted from Isaacs et al, 1969)                  207

75     Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Common Species of
       Copepods (Adults Only)(from Fleminger, 1967)               212

76     Calanoid Copepods in the California Current Region (from
       Fleminger, 1967)                                          215

77     Relative Abundance of Fish Larvae in California Current
       Region Based on Yearly Summaries of Larvae Obtained in
       Plankton Collection from CalCOFI Survey Cruises 1955-1958
       (from Ahlstrom, 1965)                                     221

78     Average Yearly Landings of Fish and Shellfish by California
       Fisherman in 1955-60 and  1961-65, and Landings in 1966
       (from Ahlstrom, 1968)                                     222

79     Important California Fisheries. Based on Landings in 1967
       (from Heimann and Frey, 1968)                             223

80     Important California Fisheries Ranked by Value,  1967 Land-
       ings  (from Lyles, 1969)                                    224

81     Catch (1967) of the Ten Most Valuable Californis Fisheries in
       the Southern California Region -- Santa Barbara, San Pedro,
       and San Diego (from Lyles, 1969)                            225
82     Details on the Anchovy Fishery                             226

83     Details on the Albacore Fishery                             227

84     Details on the Jack Mackerel  Fishery                        228

85     Details on the Pacific Hake Fishery                          229

86     Details on the Abalone Fishery                              230

87     Fifteen Most Important Sport  Fish in Southern California
       Marine Waters -- Representative Annual Catch, 1963-1966
       (from Pinkas et al, 1968)                                   231

88     Frequency of Occurrence of the Organisms Found in the
       Stomachs of  273 Sardines (from Hand and Berner,  1959)       232
                                  xv

-------
Table

89     Organic Matter -- Food Value of Common Items Found in Sar-
       dine Stomach (from Hand and Berner,  1959)                  239

90     Occurrence of Various Foods in Stomachs of Pacific Hake
       from Coastal Waters of Washington and Northern Oregon
       (from Alton and Nelson, 1970)
91     The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample Set, Ranked
       by Frequency of Occurrence (from Jones, 1969)
92     The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample Set, Ranked
       by Population Density --Specimens/Square Meter (from Jones
       1969)

93     The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample Set, Ranked by
       Number of Affinities with Other Species of the Sample Set
       (from Jones, 1969)                                        25°
94     Prevalent Species Common to Listings in Tables 91, 92, and
       93 -- Listed by Phyletic Categories and Ranked by Frequency
       of Occurrence (from Jones,  1969)                           252

95     Dominance of Benthic Communities on the Southern California
       Mainland Shelf, Spaced Statistically According to Area, Based
       on 150 Stations (from the Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965)     253

96     Biomass of Benthonic Animals (Wet Weights) (from Emery,
       1960)                                                     266

97     Rocky Inter tidal Plants and Animals -- San Elijo Lagoon,
       San Diego County (from Turner et al,  1965)                   269

98     Intertidal Algae:  Most Common Marine Plants  and Relative
       Abundance (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)         270
                                  xvi

-------
                              Section 1
          GENERAL COMMENTARY ON SITE DESCRIPTIONS

PHYSICAL FEATURES
The physical descriptions of the four representative sites are based on both
available data and, where data is lacking, the application of general oceano-
graphic principles.  The lack of detailed studies of most locations on the U.S.
continental shelves is noteworthy.  Most of the data on the physical proper-
                                                                       c
ties of the water column were obtained from U.S. National Oceanographic
Data Center (NODC) summaries.  These summaries apply to a 1° square
with a limiting depth of 900 feet, thus taking into account a relatively large
shelf area.  However, these summaries compare favorably with information
for the site areas from other data sources.  Where warranted, the  NODC
summaries were modified.
Descriptions of local  circulation patterns are particularly scarce.  Hence,
much dependence must be placed on a single set of observations or  one inves-
tigation of a given area.  Since the format and content of various investiga-
tions differ, rigorous format in the descriptions below was not attempted.
Indeed, the data-gathering phase of the study made it evident that a com-
pletely detailed site description could not be realized within the scope of the
study.  Consequently, attention was directed toward describing site conditions
to a reasonable approximation. With regard to currents, appendix  A sets
forth the basic precepts on which the expected currents are predicted, wherein-
sufficient field data existed for the purpose of modeling.

SEISMIC ACTIVITY
The magnitude of earthquakes can be measured  by ground-motion amplitude.
On the commonly used Richter scale,  the magnitude is the log of the largest
amplitude,  measured  in microns, at 100 kilometers from an  earthquake epi-
center. Relative earthquake magnitude and frequency of occurrence for the
earth are given in the table on  the next page (from Howe 11, 1959).
The total energy in ergs (ET) released by an earthquake can be estimated
from the relationship:
                     log ET  = 5.8+2.4 MB
where MB is the magnitude of the body wave of greatest amplitude.

-------

Great earthquakes
Major earthquakes
Destructive shocks
Damaging shocks (Bikini atom bomb tests )
Minor shocks
Generally felt
Potentially perceptible (ordinary quarry)
blast)
Magnitude
8 or more
7-7.9
6-6.9
5-5.9
4-4.9
3-3.9
2-2.9
Average Number
Per Year
1.1
18
120
800
6,200
49,000
300,000 +
The prediction of earthquakes has not been realized, but some general obser-
vations may provide insight.  One is that for certain areas the rate of energy
release is constant; this means that the longer the period without any shock,
the stronger the shock that ultimately may be expected.  However, present
knowledge is inadequate to apply this observation to quantitative prediction.
Another rule-of-thumb is  that the more frequently earthquakes  have occurred
in the past, the more frequently they may be expected to occur  in the future.
One means of  estimating the probability of earthquake occurrence might be
by comparison of insurance premium rates for different areas.  For the Cali-
fornia coastal area and Imperial Valley, the  insurance premium in units per
$100 in 1932 was $10, highest in the U.S.; the rate for  the Atlantic coast was
$1, lowest in the U.S. (Howell, 1959).  It should be noted, however, that the
absence of earthquakes is  no assurance that there will be none in the future.
For example,  Charleston, South Carolina had no record of earthquake activity
before or after 1886, but in that year a major temblor caused $50 million
damage.
On the U.S. east coast, seismic activity is generally mild, although damaging
earthquakes do occur. Of the east coast sites, the Gulf of Maine is an active
area,and buildings have been damaged or destroyed by earthquakes  (U.S. Navy,
1965).  The Nearby Boston area has experienced earthquakes up to Richter 4.
The New York Bight area  has a much lower probability  of earthquake damage:
earthquakes have been felt, but no building damage has  been recorded (U.S.
Navy,  1965).  There has been little  to no earthquake activity in the Miami
area,  which is aseismic (U.S. Navy, 1965).  However,  because the  Miami

-------
 site is on the continental slope, disturbance caused by submarine slides or
 slumping is a possibility.
 Southern California is a major seismic area.  In the areas shown by figure 1,
 404 earthquakes of magnitude Richter 3 or greater occurred between 1934
 and 1958 (Emery, 1960).  Of these,    five were Richter 5, and two were
                                      LOS ANGELES
                                                          SAN
                                                          ONOFRE
                                                          AREA
                                                           SAN
                                                           DIEGO
 Figure 1.  Epicenters of Earthquakes Measured at Richter 3 or Greater
 1934 to 1958 (Positions Accurate to Within 5 km) (Based on  Emery, I960)

Richter 6.  Two earthquakes have been recorded near Dana  Point, one a few
miles inland and one at about the 300-ft isobath, near the shelf edge.  Neither
of these was major. Earthquake epicenters often correlate with geologic faults
As seen in figure 2, a secondary fault crosses the continental shelf in the
Dana Point area (Emery, 1960). These faults, however,  are inferred  from
topographic relations and could be in error.

-------
                                      LOS ANGELES
                                                             SAN
                                                             ONOFRE
                                                             AREA
                                                             SAN
                                                             DIEGO
Figure 2.   Fault Lines Estimated Chiefly from Sea Floor Topography (Solid
Lines Indicate Long Primary Faults; Broken Lines, Secondary Faults)(Based
on Emery, 1960)

Figure 3 summarizes the occurrence of damaging earthquakes recorded
through 1968.  It is apparent that the  U.S.  coastal areas where seismic ac-
tivity is pronounced are Alaska, California, Hawaii, Washington,  and Massa-
chusetts Bay, with South Carolina being a questionable area.  The table below
gives quantitative probability of earthquake occurrence for the coastal areas
(except Alaska and Hawaii).  On the basis of the distribution of earthquake
intensities within recorded U.S. seismic history, strain release from earth-
quakes since 1900, and the relation of strain release to relevant tectonic

-------
                            Seismic Risk Zones (from Algermissen, 1969)

                            0  No damage
                            1  Minor damage; distant earthquakes may cause damage to structures
                                 with fundamental periods greater than 1.0 seconds
                            2  Moderate damage
                               Major damage
                                             •   25,000  Moderate to destructive
                                             •  150,000  Destructive to totally destructive of
                                                       weak structures
                                             •  500,000  Near total destruction, ground cracked
                                              1,000,000  Few buildings survive, acceleration
                                                       exceeds gravity
Figure 3.  Damaging Earthquakes Through 1968  (Origin Unknown, Obtained
from Aetna Life Insurance Co., 1971) and Seismic Risk Zones (from Alger-
missen,  1969)
areas, but without particular regard to earthquake frequency,  Algermissen

(1969) has divided the contiguous United States into four zones  of seismic

risk, also shown by figure 3.  It is  coincidental but interesting, that of  his

four risk zones,  there is one site area in each zone,  with California having
                      *
the highest risk and Florida being essentially aseismic.

-------
                  Summary of Earthquake Recurrence
                       (from Algermissen, 1969)
                             Earthquakes per 100 Years per 100,000
                            Generally    Minor    Moderate
California,
Nevada
Puget Sound
Washington
East Coast

3,2

3,2
3,2,1

300.0

68.0
12.8

84.6

16.3
3.4

23.8

3.9
0.9

6.7

0.9
0.2
References
1.    Howell,  B.F.,  Jr., Introduction to Geophysics.  McGraw-Hill Book
      Company, Inc., 1959,  399 pp.
2.    U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Qceanographic Atlas of the North
      Atlantic Ocean. Sec. V, Marine Geology, Pub. 700, 1965, 71 pp.
3.    Emery,  K.O., The Sea Off Southern California, J. Wiley and Sons,
      Inc., New York 1960, 366 pp.
4.    Algermissen, S.T., Seismic Risk Studies in the U.S.  Fourth World
      Conf. on Earthquake Eng'g,  Santiago,  Chile, Jan. 13-18, 1969, 10pp.
5.    Wallace, R.E., "Earthquake Recurrence Intervals on  the San Andreas
      Fault," Geological Society of American Bulletin, v 81, 1970, p 2875-
      2890, 8 figs.
BIOLOGICAL GENERALIZATIONS
In the biological descriptions the objectives were to:
      1.    Identify the species likely to be present.
           Identify the most abundant or dominant species.
2.
3.
           Indicate the distribution and quantities of dominant species in
           space and time.
     4.    Describe the interrelationships among species and environment.
     5.    Predict the fouling potentiality at water depths of about 75 meters.
If the distribution of organisms and a potential pollutant are known quantita-
tively in space and time, and the response or tolerance of the organisms to
                                   6

-------
the concentration of the pollutant with exposure over time are known, the po-
tential biological effect on specific organisms can be predicted.  Evaluation
of the ecological effects requires further knowledge of the quantitative inter-
relationships among the organisms present.
Review of a substantial sampling of the biological information available leads
to some generalizations that can be summarized as follows:
      1.     The biology of offshore areas has been only studied in very
           broad outline, because of the difficulties of doing scientific work
            at sea and, more especially, the limitations imposed by the ex-
            pensive equipment and manpower required for oceanographic re-
            search.  Of the four areas examined, offshore waters of southern
            California have been studied the most thoroughly followed by
            those of Maine, southeastern Florida, and the New York Bight.
      2.     The biology  of offshore waters is still essentially in a descrip-
            tive stage.  Although larger species occurring offshore have
            been listed, all species  have not been identified.  This is especi-
            ally true of microscopic forms, which are difficult to sample,
            handle, and identify; and obscure forms which have undergone  lit-
            tle taxonomic treatment.
      3.     The quantitative information on spatial or temporal distribution
            of organisms is difficult to compare or summarize, because of
            differences in samplingtechniques and devices used by various
            investigators.  Since sampling stations are often 40 nm or more
            apart, numbers must be applied with caution.
      4.     The relative importance of the various species to the economy of
            the sea is only known in the broadest outline.  For the purpcs e of
            this study, the simplifying assumption was made that the dominant
            species (largest standing crop) of various groups are the most
            important to the economy of the area.  Actually, less abundant
            species that multiply rapidly and are consumed rapidly might be
            ecologically more important, since they would induce more rapid
            turnover of energy even though their standing crop were low.
      5.     The foods and feeding habits of important species are only known
           for a few species, mostly those of commercial importance.  In

-------
     the case of fish, for example,  although various larval or juvenile
     stages of fish are selective in the foods they consume, many adult
     fish appear to be omnivorous in their feeding habits.  Insufficient
     attention  has been paid, it seems, to the role of benthic organisms
     in the food chain generally, and in supporting commercial and
     sport fisheries.
6.   Although  many species of marine organisms have been allocated
     to biogeographical provinces, little is known of total populations
     or the populations characteristic to a particular area.  Knowledge
     of total populations is important for assessing the ecological ef-
     fects of the offshore power plant.
7.   The four  areas have more similarities than dissimilarities in
     their biological characteristics.  Although the species playing
     basic roles differ, the groups involved are similar.  On the basis
     of abundance, diatoms (Chaetoceros) are the most abundant phyto-
     plankton at all sites except Florida.  The phytoplankton play the
     role of the first trophic level in the food webs of aquatic environ-
     ments --a role analogous to that of grasses and grains on land.
     At all four locations,  the zooplankton and the benthos are dominated
     by copepods and polychaete worms,  respectively.  The zooplank-
     ton largely make up the second trophic level in the food web, their
     role being analogous  to that of the grazing animals on land.  The
     benthic organisms play various roles, depending on the species,
     but the zooplankton together with the benthic organisms support
     the third  trophic level, which includes plankton, feeding forms,
     and foraging fish.  The southern California region is biologically
     unique in commonly having kelp beds, mammals such as seals
     and whales, and dinoflagellate blooms, although these are not
     necessarily characteristic of the hypothetical plant site.  The
     waters off southern Florida are the only ones adjacent to the con-
     tinental United States  where decidedly tropical conditions and
     coral reefs occur. The Maine region is notable for its productive
     commercial fisheries.
8.   The phytoplankton are most abundant in the spring,  in neritic
     (shelf) waters and at  depths of 10 to 50 meters, and least abun-

                             8

-------
      dant in the winter, in oceanic waters, and deeper than 50 meters.
      However, the euphotic zone (zone of net photosynthesis) is about
      100 meters deep in the Florida Current.
 9.    The  zooplankton are most abundant  in the late spring and early
      summer, and in neritic waters. Various groups occupy all
      zones of the water column, and some groups such as salps may
      occur in very large numbers locally at times.  Most groups ex-
      hibit diurnal vertical migration, and some species migrate as
      much as 80 meters.   Many species  of larval fish tend to occupy
      water near the surface, but larvae of almost all groups occupy
      a broad depth range.  In terms of economic interest to man,  car-
      nivorous, zooplanktonic predators such as chaetognaths,  siphono-
      phores,  and thaliacea (tunicates) are less desirable than herbi-
      vorous jcopepods and euphausids which serve as desirable fish
      food. Destruction of the former by entrainment through the power
      plant's condenser, if this occurs, might prove to be desirable.
10.    The  fish of commercial or sport value are generally found over
      the inner shelf or in favorable locations such as banks or ridges
      far offshore.  Fish are broadly classified into pelagic types,
      which occupy all depths of the  water column, and demersal types
      which tend to feed and remain  near  the bottom.  Most fish of com-
      mercial or sport value are highly mobile and exhibit schooling
      and  migration traits, except during egg and larval stages. Inshore-
      offshore migration is very common. Eggs and larval stages  of
      fish are most abundant in the water column during the late spring
      and  summer. The complex behavior of fish in the presence of
      structures and thermal or water current gradients is especially
      notable.
11.    Benthic organisms are associated with particular bottom sedi-
      ments which may be generally characterized as rocky,  sandy, or
      muddy.  Some species live attached to objects or crawl about on
      the seabed; other bury themselves in the sediments to depths of
      as much as 30 cm (epi- and infauna species). Muddy bottoms
      usually contain the largest biomass (amount of living matter) per
      unit  area,  while sandy bottoms have the least.  However, many

-------
     of the important shellfish and crustacean fisheries are found in
     rocky or sand regions.  Shrimp are found on muddy bottoms.
12.  Fouling of bottom structures decreases with distance from shore
     and depth. At depths of 75 meters, fouling by various algae will
     be absent except possibly off southeastern Florida.  Fouling should
     consist primarily of sessile attaching organisms belonging to such
     groups as hydroids, sea anemones, bryozoa, tunicates, and cal-
     careous polycheate worms.  If a fouling community is allowed to
     develop, mobile forms feeding on the sessile animals can be
     anticipated.
13.  Bacteria and other  fungi, which complete the transformation of
     organic compounds into inorganic compounds used as nutrients by
     plants,  can be ignored because of their ubiquity and generally high
     reproductive capacity.
                              10

-------
                              Section 2
        SITE DESCRIPTION FOR THE GULF OF MAINE REGION
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION (WISCASSET AREA)

Figure 4 shows soundings of the Wiscasset area, representative of a Gulf of
Maine site.  The Gulf of Maine is a more or less enclosed coastal sea, its
seaward edge contained by a series of shallow sills extending from Nantucket
to Cape Sable, with only three narrow passages breeching this sill boundary.
The waters of the Gulf of Maine are derived from several sources:  (1) high
salinity (~35 °/oo), cold (6-8°C) slope water flows intermittently into the
Gulf as  a bottom current; (2) in the spring, the Nova Scotian current of cold
low-salinity water flows into the Gulf at the surface from around Cape Sable
— this current slackens or increases at other times of the year; (3) a surface
drift into the Gulf, offshore from Cape Sable is made up of a mixture of cold
banks water, slope water, and tropic water; (4) although there is generally
no surface drift across Georges Bank into the Gulf, occasional overflows of
tropic water may occur; and (5) rainfall and river discharge contribute fresh
water from a watershed of roughly 64,000 sq mi.  It is not believed that the
Gulf of Maine receives water from the Labrador Current (Bigelow, 1928).
Water flows out of the Gulf as a surface current around Nantucket Island and,
to a lesser extent, around the eastern end of Georges Bank and the Eastern
Channel.

Temperature of Gulf of Maine water is due to the interaction of several fac-
tors , the principal ones being its location leeward of the continent and the
severe climate of the adjacent land; lesser influences being the influx of cur-
rents.  However, in spite of its latitude and the land climate, the Gulf waters
are not  abnormally cold and should not be described as "arctic" (Bigelow,
1928).  Solar warming is the chief source of heat for the surface waters.
In the coastal waters near the site area,  tidal stirring mixes the water fairly
well from surface to bottom.   In winter,  water temperature is nearly uniform
at all depths, surface water being slightly cooler than the deeper water (see
table 1 and figure 5).  In spring and summer the surface water warms only
slightly more rapidly than the  deeper water, so that the period of a strong
thermocline is only 2 or 3 months, instead of 5 to 6 months as in more sou-

                                   11

-------
                               Table 1.  Physical Properties of Wiscasset Site
IS9
Depth
(m)

0
10
20
30
50
75
100
125

0
10
20
30
50
75
100
125
Density ( p
Ave Max

25.68
25.74
25.77
25.79
25.83
25.92
26.04
26.12

23.48
24.09
24.74
25.10
25.41
25.68
25.91
26.11

26.16
26.16
26.15
26.15
26.17
26.20
26.22
26.22

24.52
24.87
15.41
25.62
25.99
26.29
26.42
26.58
t)
Min

25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.
25.

22.
22.
23.
23.
24.
25.
25.
25.

12
12
08
11
30
64
86
99

49
71
37
86
95
19
43
35
Temperature (°C)
Ave Max Min
Winter
5.92 8.33
6.06 8.68
6.16 8.86
6.22 8.84
6.34 8.48
6.26 8.45
6.11 8.19
5.92 6.56
Summer
14.22 18.80
11.91 17.77
9.49 15.00
7.77 12.93
6.44 11.75
5.72 10.27
5.28 8.80
5.24 7.90

2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3.
5.

10.
7.
5.
4.
3.
3.
3.
4.

20
70
80
80
9
90
23
19

00
31
61
82
95
55
42
40
Salinity (°/oo)
Ave Max Min

32.61
32.69
32.76
32.79
32.86
32.95
33.08
33.15

31.55
31.76
32.03
32.18
32.36
32.54
32.75
33.00

33.10
33.10
33.11
33.13
33.15
33.17
33.30
33.32

32.66
32.80
32.94
33.06
33.29
33.52
33.70
33.82

31.
31.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.
32.

30.
30.
31.
31.
31.

83
92
34
88
52
72
82
88

48
68
20
36
60
31.89
32.20
32
.10
         Temperature is given in degrees Celsius, salinity in parts per thousand (%>o), and density
          in sigma-t units (where, e.g.,  24.39 represents a specific gravity of 1.02439).

-------
                    fl
                            I Tt.,,.,. .... !,i;, "   0,  " , "'

                      n
      „'
                                                                          'i. T,
                                                                        2$'
                                                                     •ft'.
Figure 4.  Soundings  (ft) of Area off Wiscasset, Gulf of Maine (from Coast
and Geodetic Survey Charts 313 and 314)
                                      13

-------
   jE
   OL
   111
   O
     70-
                                9   10   11  12
                                TEMPERATURE (C)
      Figure 5.  Temperature Profiles of Water at the Gulf of Maine

therly locations (Bigelow, 1928).  The low surface temperature of the area is
thus due to local causes rather than to arctic waters.  Heat is also contributed
by warm winds, surface water drifting from over Browns Bank and the Cape
Sable area, and from periodic overflows of tropic water into the  Gulf.  Vernal
warming is opposed by the Nova Scotian current flowing in past Cape Sable,
and by river discharge in the early spring.  During periods of strong stratifi-
cation,  active vertical mixing associated with tidal stirring along the shore
and local weather can produce a zone of cool water (11-12°C) close to shore
(Hulburt, 1968).
Autumn and winter chilling is mainly due to heat loss by radiation as the air
temperature falls below the water temperature. Snowfall and ice melt also
contribute to cooling, as does evaporation throughout the year.
In general,  these interacting factors tend to maintain a relatively constant
thermal state in the Gulf from one year to another.  However, fluctuation of
any of these factors can result in a significant change in the Gulf tempera-
tures .
The salinity of the Gulf of Maine is  low (32-33 °/oo) in comparison with other
enclosed seas and with the Gulf Stream seaward of the Gulf (—35 %>o). Tidal
                                   14

-------
stirring minimizes the vertical range of salinity in the coastal waters (gene-
rally less than 1 °/oo).  Seasonal variations are typical of coastal areas with
coastal waters freshening with spring runoff, and then increasing in salinity
again slowly through the summer and fall.
In spite of its appearance of being open to the sea in the south and east, the
Gulf of Maine is actually a relatively enclosed basin due to the offshore banks.
Consequently, the nontidal circulation is essentially estuarine  — it is dyna-
mic, driven by regional density differences, and confined by the offshore
banks.  This containment develops an eddy pattern that dominates the Gulf
throughout the year, although it varies  in both velocity and extent from sea-
son to season.
The surface water circulation in the Gulf, as determined by drift bottle stu-
dies, has been described by Bumpus and Lauzier (1965) and is depicted in
figures 6 through  9.  Water enters across Browns Bank, passes through the
Bay of Fundy, flows southwest along the Maine coast, and leaves the Gulf
through  Great South Channel and across Georges Bank.
Eddies are  formed offshore between the indraft water and the southwesterly
flowing coastal water.  In winter there  are several irregular eddies present.
In spring, runoff from rivers activates a large cyclonic gyre that grows to
occupy the entire  Gulf.  This gyre slows down, persists through the summer
and, in the  autumn, decays northward.
Winds do not appear to have an important effect on the gross circulation of
the Gulf. In summer, the prevailing south and southwest winds tend  to re-
inforce the  cyclonic circulation.  The prevailing wind in winter is northwest,
aiding the southerly drift along the west side of the basin, but the northward
current along the  eastern part of the basin opposes this wind.  Close to shore,
the local effects of winds may be more  evident in the surface waters. The
frequency of wind direction, by speed,  is given in table 2.
During its southwesterly passage, the water of the coastal drift actually
flows along the coastline and enters  coastal estuaries.  Consequently, the
effluent waters from a power plant carried in this current can  be expected
to impinge upon the coast and to enter estuaries. As determined by seabed
drifters  (Graham, 1970), bottom water moves (1) shoreward and into bays
and estuaries, or (2) along the coast for varying distances.  This shoreward
drift is in compensation for the outflow of surface water from the estuaries.

                                    15

-------
Figure 6.  Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Winter
          (from Bumpus and Lauzier, 1965)
          —»      i
f   -—GEORGES BANK/S.
' \
    \    -   ,   —   Y-
Figure 7.   Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Spring
          (from Bumpus and Lauzier, 1965)
                         16

-------
Figure 8.  Circulation of the Gulf of Maine — Summer
          (from Bumpus and Lauzier, 1965)
  Figure 9.  Circulation of the Gulf of Maine -- Fall
          (from Bumpus and Lauzier, 1965)
                         17

-------
CO
                     Table 2.  Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed -- Annual Percentage
                              (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)
Wind Direction
N
NE
E
SE
S
SW
W
NW
Variable
Calm
Number of
Observations
Percentage
Wind Velocities
0-6 7-16
1.7 4.8
1.4 3.6
1.6 3.2
1.6 4.2
2.8 9.0
2.7 9.9
2.4 7.9
1.6 5.8
* *
2.7
5469 14348
18.5 48.5
17-27
2.8
1.8
1.3
1.7
4.1
4.4
4.9
4.4
0.0

7500
25.4
(knots)
28-40 41+
0.8 0.1
0.5 0.1
0.5 0.1
0.3 0.1
0.6 *
0.8 0.1
1.7 0.2
1.5 0.2
0.0 0.0

2020 242
6.8 0.8
Number of
Observations
3024
2169
1974
2375
4915
5269
5070
3990
9
784
29579
100.0
Percentage of
Frequency
10.2
7.3
6.7
8.0
16.6
17.8
17.1
13.5
*
2.7

Mean
Speed
15.1
14.4
13.5
13.0
13.4
13.8
15.9
16.8
2.9
0.0
14.2
100.0 (Mean Total)
        *Frequencies between 0.0% and 0.05%

-------
At the proposed site area, bottom water may enter Muscongus Bay, Johns
Bay, or the Damariscotta River -- or it may drift along the coast, perhaps
entering other bays and estuaries.  Through upwelling, this water will even-
tually be found  at the surface along the coast and in the estuaries.  The rate
of drift ranges  from 0.05 to 0.30 nm/day.  The observed ratio of bottom drift
to surface drift is 0.03 to 0.19 (Graham, 1970).
At the surface, the current trends to the southwest as described. However,
combinations of factors such as wind conditions, dynamic topography, bottom
topography, and the shoreline shape make surface coastal waters move shore-
ward.  Figure 10 shows the routes inferred from drift bottle studies along
coastal Maine.  This pattern appears to persist throughout the year except
in winter, when  surface drift is offshore due to a combination of wind condi-
tions and reduced outflow from the rivers.
Between the eddy-type circulation and the shore, a zone perhaps 14 nm wide,
is the coastal drift, a southwesterly current that persists throughout the
year.  Effluent water from the underwater power plant will be dumped in the
coastal drift water and can be expected to flow southwest along the coast at
an average rate of 1.62 nm/day, ranging from 0.54 to 9.72 nm/day (Graham,
1970). This water either passes out of the Gulf into the Atlantic by way of
Great South Channel or Georges Bank, or becoming entrained in an offshore
eddy, is transported into the Bay of Fundy and eventually back along the
Maine Coast.   The latter track is the more probable when the cyclonic gyre
is most developed, during spring and summer.
Tidal currents  on the bottom in the site area will be low (less than 0.2 knot)
due to the rapidly shoaling topography.  However, near the surface,tidal cur-
rents can average 0. 5 knot and reach 1.0 knot under extreme conditions,  de-
pending upon wind conditions.
Table 2 shows  the annual wind conditions in the Gulf of Maine. Winds from
the southwest to southeast tend to move surface waters offshore  and to the
northeast.  When winds are from the west and north,the surface  waters are
moved to the southwest and onshore.  (Note that surface currents are deflected
as much as 45° to the right of the wind direction by the coriolis force.)
                                   19

-------
CO
o
                  Figure 10. Surface Transportation of Water Particles along the Maine Coast
                                        (adapted from.Graham, 19 70)

-------
Bottom Characteristics
The coastal Gulf of Maine east of Cape Elizabeth has a continuously rocky
shoreline and deep bays following each other in close succession,  a typical
glacially eroded topography.  The near shore bottom is rocky and irregular,
bedrock being close to the surface.  Fluviatile processes subsequent to the
glacial period have tended to modify the original topography, shallow water
sediments being reworked so that the fine fraction is winnowed out by waves
and currents and deposited in deeper water.  In the general site area,  the
shallows or topographic highs are either bedrock and bedrock thinly covered
with sand,or gravel (Ostericher, 1965). The  depressions or deep areas,
where the proposed site would be, contain fine grained sediments, mixtures
of silt and clay. Samples taken by Ostericher in a similar area and in simi-
lar depths off the mouth of Penobscot Bay, about 20  nm east of the site area,
ranged from pebbly sands to silty muds.  Median diameters of the finer sedi-
ments ranged from 0.03 to 0.004 mm.  Subbottom profiling traverses over
these sample areas indicated that the thickness of the sediment accumulation
over bedrock in the deep areas is small, perhaps on the order of 20-30 ft.
Thus, from a foundation engineering viewpoint, although sediments may be
weak, pilings to bedrock should be feasible.

Bibliography
Bumpus, D.F., and Lauzier,  L.M.. Serial Atlas of the Marine Environment,
     "Surface circulation on the continental shelf off  eastern North America
    between Newfoundland and Florida," American Geographical Society,
     1965.
Graham, J.J., "Temperature, salinity, and transparency observations,
     coastal Gulf of Maine,  1962-65," U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Data
    Report 42, 43  pp,  1970.
Graham, J. J., "Coastal currents of the western Gulf of Maine," Bulletin of
    the Fisheries  Research Board of Canada,  in press,  1970.
Hulburt, E.M., "Stratification and mixing in  coastal waters of the western
    Gulf of Maine  during summer," J. Fish.  Res. Bd., Canada, 25,  1968,
    pp 2609-2621.
Ostericher, C., Bottom and Sub-bottom Investigation of Penobscot Bay,
    Maine, 1959,  U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Washington,  B.C., 177
    pp, 1965.
U.S. Naval Weather Service Command, "Summary of synoptic  meteorological
    observations, North American coastal marine areas," v 2  and v 7,  632 pp
    each, 1970.

                                  21

-------
BIOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION (Wiscasset Area)

Ecology
The Wiscassett, Maine region is distinguished by a highly irregular, rocky
coast, a wide continental shelf, and offshore banks (submerged plateaus) that
support some of the major commercial fisheries of the world. Water circu-
lation generally characterized by a huge counterclockwise eddy, and the bot-
tom topography of the Gulf of Maine, serves to contain the productive waters
within the Gulf for extended periods of time.  A euphotic zone of at most  50
meters in this region contrasts sharply with that of 100 meters or more in the
Florida Straits.  This history of oceanography in the Gulf of Maine is re-
viewed by Colton (1964).
Biologically, the waters are characterized by strong seasonal pulses in the
abundance of phytoplankton and zooplankton. Peak abundance of phytoplankton
occurs primarily in the spring and to a lesser extent in the late summer or
fall.  The phytoplankton are generally dominated by diatoms except during
the summer.  Peak abundances of phytoplankton are soon followed by peak
abundances  of grazing zooplankton, dominated by copepods, which persist
throughout the year.  However, during the spring or summer meroplanktonic
organisms often constitute a significant fraction of the zooplankton volume.
Food chain relationships in the Gulf are believed to be based on the photo-
synthetic capabilities of the diatoms and other phytoplankton (see figure 11).
It is reasonable to assume that inorganic nutrients to support growth of dia-
toms are generated locally in the region, where they occur with a significant
land and estuarine contribution by rivers discharging into the Gulf.  The pri-
mary herbivores feeding on the diatoms are copepods which, in turn, are
consumed by carnivores such as fish larvae and other carnivorous zooplank-
ton.  Other  animals that feed on the phytoplankton include forage fish, bottom
filter feeders, and attached organisms.   These,  in their turn, are preyed
upon by secondary carnivores. Some organisms attached to firm substrates,
or dwelling  in or on the bottom, specialize in consuming the energy-containing
residues resulting from the carnage occurring in the water column.  The net
effect is the production of nutrients available  to plants, which permits another
cycle.
                                   22

-------
                                                   (Metabolic by-products)
          Nutrient compounds
          in solution in the
          sea water
Bottom-feeding fish
and other carnivorous
epifauna (macrobenthos)
                                                            Scavenging epifauna
                                                          (macro- and meiobenthos)
                                                                           Littoral and
                                                                           terrigenous
                                                                           detritus
                                          Permanent deposit of biologically
                                            unavailable organic matter
Figure 11. Main Phases of Marine Food Cycle (from Mare,  1942).   Phases
occurring in the water are in upper part of diagram; in lower part are those
occurring at bottom surface and in bottom deposit.
                                          23

-------
From the brief discussion above, it is apparent that food chain relationships
in boreal and tropical waters are basically similar when reduced to the sim-
plest terms possible.  However,  the species of plants and animals  involved,
and the little understood dynamics of the processes, differ.
The  complexity of food chain relationships is readily visualized by  examining
the food relationships of just one  animal,  the herring, as a function of time
(figure 12). When one considers the vast number of species of plants and
animals that occur in the sea and their potential interactions, the situation
becomes practically incomprehensible except when treated in general terms
such as primary production and trophic levels.
                                                  ADULT HERRING)
7-I2MM) YOUNG (I2-42MM)HERRING(42-OOMM
**•••-.  _-**£       \^   _-XA     ^sr>+^    ^-*^
          Figure 12. Food of the Herring (from Hardy, 1924)
                                  24

-------
Phytoplankton
Other than the work of Stickney (1959), there has been little information pub-
lished on the phytoplankton in the immediate offshore region of Wiscassett,
Maine.  However, the seasonal and spatial distribution of phytoplankton in
the Gulf of Maine has  been studied by a number of workers for many years:
Bigelow (1926), Gran and Braarud (1935), Bigelow et al (1940), Lillick (1940),
Sears (1941), and Riley and Bumpus (1946). Although perhaps not applicable
in every detail, the above work should be generally indicative of the situation
in the region of Wiscassett.
A generalized scheme of the seasonal cycle of phytoplankton, based on ob-
served and calculated cycles, is given in figure 13. The figure shows that
phytoplankton reach a peak abundance in the spring, followed by a lower but
secondary peak abundance in the summer.  The euphotic zone can be consi-
dered to extend to a maximum depth of 50 meters as a first approximation.
According to Lillick (1940) the winter flora in the western basin of the  Gulf
of Maine  is  usually dominated by Coscinodiscus,  a diatom, and coccolitho-
phores (see  figure 14). Chaetoceros  convolutus, Ch. decipiens, Ch. atlan-
ticus, and Thalassiosira decipiens are most abundant during the spring dia-
tom outburst. During the summer,  the phytoplankton consist of a mixture of
peridinians,  especially Ceratium, coccolithophores, and a mixture of neritic
diatoms which may flower in later summer or early fall.  Finally,  the diverse
mixture of species in the early fall is succeeded by a much reduced flora  of
Coscinodiscus and peridinians in the late fall.  The actual succession of species
in various regions  of the Gulf differs somewhat as shown in figure 15. For exam-
ple, in the western coastal waters and Georges Bank, Skeletonema and Rhizo-
solenia are often prominent in addition to  Coscinodiscus.  Furthermore, neri-
tic diatoms are prominent in later spring  in addition to Chaetoceros species.
Stickney (1959) states that diatoms of several species, chiefly of the genera
Thalassiosira, Thalassiothrix,  and Chaetoceros appear in the spring at the
mouth of the Sheepscot Estuary.  Skeletonema, Asterionella, and Rhizoso-
lenia appear during the summer, and several species of Coscinodiscus are
present year round.  The dinoflagellates most abundant include Ceratium
tripos, C. longipes, and C_. fusus, with several species of Peridinium also
common.
                                   25

-------
             40-1
           in
           a.

           0 30-
           m
           CC

           O
             20-
           Z
           O


           Z
           < 10-
           Q-
           o
           I
           Q.
                        M
                               M
 Figure 13. Calculated Seasonal Cycle of Phytoplankton (from Riley, 1947).
 Values have been determined by approximate integration of the equation for
 rate of population change.  Dots indicate observed quantities of phytoplankton.
                          SPORES,
                         FLAGELLATES,
                             ETC.
                             13%

                             DIATOMS

                         21%

                      COCCOLITHS
                      SEPTEMBER
                                                       OCTOBER
Figure 14.  Percentage Composition, over Different Months, of Phvtoulankrrm
in Western Basin, Gulf of Maine (from Lillick, 1940 - modified)       ^"^on
                                   26

-------
    MOV


    DEC


    JAN



    FEB


    MAR


    APR



    MAY


    JUN



    JUL


    AUG



    SEP


    OCT
       WESTERN COASTAL WATERS
         AND GEORGES BANK
          COSCINODISCUS
      SKELETONEMA
      -COSCINODISCUS


      RHIZOSOLENIA
   •v  -COSCINODISCUS

THALASSIOSIRA DECIPIENS

TH. NORDENSKIOELDI

   CHAETOCE


CERATIUM
CEROS
      CHAETOCEROS
      -NERITIC DIATOMS
                    WESTERN BASIN
                 COSCINODISCUS
                     -CERATIUM
          RH. ALATA
              TH. DECIPIENS

           TH. NORDENSKIOELDI
                    CHAETOCEROS
RHIZOSOLENIA ALATA

SKELETONEMA-NERITIC
DIATOMS-PERIDINIA
           COSCINODISCUS
                 CERATIUM-COCCOLITHS
                  RH. ALATA
                         COSCINODISCUS-CERATIUM
                                     EASTERN BASIN
                                             CERATIUM
                           RH. ALATA
TH. DECI
      IENS
                           TH. NORDENSKIOELDI


                              CHAETOCEROS
                                      CERAT UM
                                                      WOODS HOLE
                                                              RH. ALATA
                                            SKELETONEMA
                                             -LEPTOCYLINDRUS
              MIXED NERITIC AND
               TYCHOPELAGIC DIATOMS
                                                  RH. HEBATATA
                                                  V. SEMISPINA
                                                             RH. CALCARAVIS
                                            RH. ALATA-SKELETONEMA
                                             -LEPTOCYLINDRUS
Figure 15.  Seasonal Succession of Dominant Phytoplankton Species in Gulf
of Maine Areas (from Lillick,  1940 - modified)
Margelef (1958) believes that the spring flowering of phytoplankton starts
with small diatoms capable of rapid division, which are then succeeded by
larger diatom species and finally dinoflagellates.  Succession is believed to
be controlled by nutrient concentration and external metabolites.  Water
temperature and light intensity also play an important role.

Zooplankton

Sherman of the Bureau of Commercial  Fisheries  (BCF) at Boothbay Harbor,
Maine has been studying the zooplankton of the coastal waters of the Gulf of
Maine since 1963 (Sherman, 1966a, 1966b,  1968,  1970). A map of his sampl-
ing stations is given in figure 16. The organisms  obtained at station 9 (depth
67 m) is  of particular interest to this study, but Sherman has generally treated
                                        27

-------
                         ;.fPenobscot\Mt. Desert (|7)£ASTERN AREA
                         ::•<-  Bay  \

                      v      (*)

                   '•(9)    (12) (13}

                         CENTRAL AREA
                                             CRUISE DATES

                                            1966
                                                       1967
                                                    JAN 25-FEB 8
                                                    MAR 28-APR 13
                                                    JUL 25-AUG 7
                                                    OCT 2-OCT 9
                                       1968
                                    JAN 17-FEB 2
                                    MAY 15-MAY 22
                                    JUL 17-AUG 6
                                    SEP 30-OCT 10
         1965
WINTER  JAN 31-FEB 7  JAN 5-FEB 6
SPRING  MAY 21-26   MAY 17-26
SUMMER  AUG 14-21
AUTUMN  OCT 20-28
• WESTERN AREA
(I)
                             JULY 27-AUG 7
                             OCT 9-17
             STATION NUMBERS IN PARENTHESES
      71°
69°
            68°
                                    67°   W.
 Figure 16,  Zooplankton Sampling Stations,  Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
 (from Sherman, 1970)
his data by regions shown.  One should also note that Sherman's data are
essentially surface samples derived from composite, 10-min, step-oblique
tows  (0.336-mm screening) taken during the daytime,  at the surface  10 m
and 20 m depths.
His data generally show that the mean annual volume of zooplankton is great-
est for the western region of the Gulf of Maine and least in the eastern region
as shown in figure 17.  Considerable variations in mean seasonal zooplankton
volumes occur from year to year and region to region as  shown in figures 18
and 19.  However, a compilation of mean volumes at station 9 over a 5-vr
period show peak abundances in spring and fall and minimum volumes in th
winter (table 3).
                                    28

-------
                  I2r
                  10
                o
                o
                                         1967
                                     H • 19.04 P, 
-------
          Table 3.  Zooplankton Sample Volumes (cc/100 m3)
         at Station 9 (adapted from Sherman, 1966, 1968, 1970)
Year
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
Mean
Winter
1.34
1.55
1.04
0.57
0.55
1.01
Spring
1.94
2.17
3.83
9.91
8.94
5.36
Summer
5.78
3.04
2.41
1.26
4.22
3.34
Fall
13-48
4.57
0.91
0-19
6.43
5.11
Riley (1947) performed a theoretical analysis of the zooplankton of Georges
Bank.  His mathematically derived population curve, calculated on the basis
of seasonal variation in environmental factors,  agrees very well with the
observed population curves based on measurements.
The copepods dominate the zooplankton during all seasons as  shown in figures
20 and 21 and tables 4  through 7. During the spring and summer, the holo-
planktonic Euphausiacea, Appendicularia, and Cladocera may constitute a
significant fraction of the zooplankton. This also applies for  meroplanktonic
fish and crustacean eggs.   Cirripedea larvae are prominent during the spring
only.
The vertical distribution of the various groups of zooplankton has  not been
studied in any detail.   Clarke (1934)  has worked with diurnal migration of
copepods, and Sherman and Schaner  (1968) with the vertical distribution of
chaetognaths.   For purposes of this study, it can be assumed that all groups
will be present at the depth under consideration and all holoplanktonic groups
will exhibit diurnal migrations.
                                   30

-------
      TO-
      •0-
*f nccNT OP
TOTAL    W-
tOOPLANKTOM M
                                       KMCCNT OF
                                       TOTAL
                                       ZOOM.ANKTON
KHCCNT OF
TOTAL
KOOIANXTON **
                   IB
                   SPRING I
                                                            CB
                                                            FALL
                   «.
               »  »*
              c»*  o*1
                                        ««««ror
                                        «"«.


                                                n
                                                            (Tr-
 Figure 20.  Percentage Composition of Zooplankton Groups in Gulf of Maine
 by Season in 1964 (from Sherman,  1966)

A - WINTER
• - SPRING 14,000-
C - SUMMER I3OOO
^\ f
11,000
10,000
9,000
6,000 •
7.OOO -
6,000-
5.OOO •
m
I 4,000
7jOOO
6.OOO
1
| SjOOO
•.
* 4,000
• SjOOO-
2 POO
ipoo
i 3,000
z
a 2000

ipoo
O • -
1 1,000
10,000
9,000
e.ooo
I 7,000
' 6,000
* 5,000
4,000
3pOO
2,000
1,000
O. -




r
L

1

E««OOI/(
'^

n
±u


WCE WCE
(——i -t> .«»•
|C|
-1

n I I
1 1 LlTn r
«r ,»«?
^" jS^



\ I-I <»> r-
"V*9





"ftfl
WCE
X


fl r
l\

[Al
r
\>»'S'tO'tv>*V\,«'S*\»*r>C*'**»f'<'Vo*k





t* t^^ %^^^^



< lOO/IOOm3
IK«X»07)Pl— i(R) r-,(IM4€> ' Ai
WCE WCE WCE WCE WCE
t*3$^



i r-nusai
WCE WCE WCE WCE WCE WCE
if] Ji n
1 | [-,(11 rl l»nrri"Sn»)ioii-i»i Mil ItaifltTli
\^ xV^^«£»^<£f&!; txS^ x'Vs>
-



^ «.o*w- ^


< 100/100*3
IM) 1-1 '_ - . • '
WCE WCE WCE
*»''^ »-**tV ^c.^*"''0 i*9*3* ****'*
-* *^ 6V^ ..»«•* v
" ^>
< 100/IOOm'
•1
' ^
.
_
T T -'
Figure 21.  Mean Number of Dominant Zooplankton Groups per 100 m  of
Water in Gulf of Maine by Season in 1964 - Western (W),  Central (C),
Eastern (E) (from Sherman, 1966)
                                     31

-------
Table 4.  Percentage Composition of Dominant Holoplanktonic
     Zooplankton Groups, Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
                (from Sherman, 1968, 1970)
Holoplankton
Copepoda


Euphausiacea



Chaetognatha



Appendicularia



Cladocera



Pteropoda



Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
Winter
96.9
97.3
73
98
1.3
P
10
0
1.3
1.9
3
<1
— »
—
7
0
P
P
2
0
P
P
<1
2
Spring
74.4
72.4
78
62
4.6
4.6
1
1
P
--
<1

-------
 Table 5. Percentage Composition of Dominant Meroplanktonic
       Zooplankton Groups,  Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
                 (from Sherman, 1968, 1970)
Meroplankton
Fish eggs



Crustacean eggs



Cirripedia larvae



Decapoda larvae



Brachyura larvae



Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
Winter
P
P
2
<1
__
P
0
0
P
P
<1
0
P
--
2
0
—
--
<1
0
Spring
1.1
1.7
<1
<1
P
13.3
<1
<1
12.3
13.3
14
5
P
P
4
5
P
P
<1

-------
 Table 6.  Mean Numbers of Dominant Holoplanktonic
Zooplankton Groups per 100 m^ of Water by Season, Gulf
 of Maine Coastal Waters (from Sherman, 1968, 1970)
Holoplankton
Copepoda


Mean
Euphausiacea



Mean
Chaetognatha



Mean
Appendi c ularia



Mean
Cladocera



Mean
Pteropoda



Mean
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968

1965
1966
1967
1968

1965
1966
1967
1968

1965
1966
1967
1968

1965
1966
1967
1968

1965
1966
1967
1968

Winter
2,496
1,233
322
3,710
1,940
31
3
42
0
19
34
24
14
11
21
_ _
—
30
0
15
1
2
7
0
3
5
1
<1
62
17
Spring
5,733
7,058
4,645
23,829
10,316
353
444
84
412
323
13
1
14
16
11
164
363
0
7,960
2,122
203
155
0
1,484
461
__
15
3
232
83
Summer
26,008
8,725
4,228
5,434
11,099
2,259
846
797
186
1,022
380
81
26
11
125
598
6,755
1,441
1,323
2,529
113
467
723
1,608
728
9
2
0
39
13
Fall
20,397
3,664
,802
3,306
7,542
45
nf>
72
47
32
49
157

81
3
78
15
67
90
30
51
157
579
411
617
441
66
1
0
37
26
                         34

-------
 Table 7. JMean Numbers of Dominant Meroplanktonic Groups
per 100 m1* of Water by Season, Gulf of Maine Coastal Waters
               (from Sherman, 1968, 1970)
Meroplankton
Fish eggs
Mean
Crustacea eggs
Mean
Cirripedia larvae
Mean
Decapoda larvae
Mean
Brachyura larvae
Mean
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
1965
1966
1967
1968
Winter
5
1
8
4
5
1
0
0
<1
1
3
0
1
2
9
0
3
<1
0
<1
Spring
146
163
18
298
156
1
84
32
145
66
949
1,295
842
2,026
1,278
41
61
211
1,856
542
19
55
47
19
35
Summer
2,210
1,993
1,928
479
1,653
4,004
3,717
576
1,023
2,330
31
129
29
226
104
201
1,184
49
318
438
543
452
186
149
333
Fall
25
7
17
104
38
25
166
755
6
238
4
0
1
35
21
25
57
35
107
60
149
53
92
                            35

-------
Copepods
The dominant Copepoda present in the Gulf of Maine are Calanus finmarchicus
and Centropages typicus as shown in figure 22 and table 8.  Other prominent
species include Pseudocalanus minutus, Centropages hamatus, and Temora
longicornis.
The diurnal  migration of Calanus finmarchicus is shown in figure 23.  This
copepod apparently can migrate about 80 m at locations with sufficient depth.
Sherman and Honey (1970) studied the diurnal distribution of zooplankton in
coastal waters at Boothbay Harbor having a depth of 33-35 m. They observed
that Pseudocalanus minutus was generally concentrated near the  bottom dur-
ing daylight, rose to the surface in late afternoon, and descended to 30 m
after sunset. Calanus  finmarchicus, by contrast, exhibited very complex
movements.

Other Zooplankton Groups
In addition to the copepods, Sherman and Honey (1970) observed the vertical
distribution  of the chaetognath (Sagitta elegans),  larval decapods, and larval
cirripeds.  At this 35-m deep station, Sagitta elegans essentially remained
at the bottom with some migration upward in the  evening (figure 24).  Larval
decapods were concentrated at 10 m during the day and moved to the surface
after sunset, while the distribution of larval cirripeds was highly variable.
In a winter study, Sherman and Schaner (1968) found Sagitta elegans to depths
of 60 m, the maximum depth at which tows were  made, with indications of
greatest numbers at a depth of 10 m (figure 25).

Principal Fisheries
The most important commercial fisheries to the  economy of Maine are given
in table 9.  Interestingly,  although the Gulf of Maine is world famous for  its
fisheries, the invertebrate fisheries account for  approximately 80% of the
dollar value of Maine landings.  Of the wide variety of fish available, only
ocean perch, sea herring, and whiting are brought into Maine ports in major
quantities.  In terms of international landings in  tons for 1968, recorded  by
International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic  Fisheries (ICNAF,  1970),
                                  36

-------
<

<
<
UJ
Z
        Acortia lonyirtmis
       WCE  WCE
                   WCE
80,000
70,000

60,000
90,000
40,000
30,000,
20.000
19.000
I8j000
17.000
I6.OOO
I3.0OO
14,000
I3fl00
I2.0OO
II.OOO
IO.OOO
9^OO
8,000
7.00O
6.0OO

9,000
4/500
3,000
2,000

1,000
O
Co/onus finmorchicut
1
1
•
-
-

i
•
•
.
•
•
» .
I
1
1
J I
t r
I !
1 i
II I i
. t I i
1 '
, 1 l
' '• M 1
• i\ ' - '
i i 1\ 1 ^
^1 \ ^
•*"*•* *1 * \
k k -»-\
      WCE  WCE  WCE  WCE
900

400
inge _ _ ^ . 	 3OO

100
o
•
Mttridia lucfns
A
* \
\
\
\
• *
IJ69 \
• t-t 1 - V^. *-»-.v
WCE WCE WCE WCE
900
6OO
700

600
900

400
300

200

100
2 °

Pt»u m
£ 8000
| *oo
z 6,000
S 900°
*
4pOO
S0oo
9tu\n.
»^/W\
900
BOO
700
600
900
40O
too
200
100
0
Ctntropogts typieia o S°°
i2 200
§ 100
5 0
us
^
.
M
ii
M
/ 1
i
4
•
•
.
Vi
x\

- r- » - I •"•
WCE WCE WCE WCE


1.000
900
600
700
6OO
9OO
4OO
300
200
100
O
Oithono similit






t
\ m
\ ~
I 1
•1965 U *t\ «

                               WCE  WCE  WCE  WCE
                                                      WCE  WCE  WCE  WCE
Figure 22. Mean Number of Dominant Copepod Species per m6 of Water in
Gulf of Maine Areas - Western (W), Central (C),  Eastern (E) - in 1965 and
1966 (from Sherman, 1968)
                                  37

-------
                        Table  8.  Total Species Composition and Mean Number  of Dominant Copepods
                                             per  m3 of Water in Gulf of Maine Areas --
                                  Western (W), Central (C),  Eastern  (E)  (from Sherman,  1970)
Year and Species
1967: .,
Common species (> 50/100 m0)*
Calanus finmarchicus
Centropages typicus
Pseudocalanus minutus
Temora longicornis
Qithona spp.
1968: ,
Common species ( >50/100 m1*)**
Calanus finmarchicus
Centropages typicus
Centropaees hamatus
Pseudocalanus minutus
Temora longicornis
Acartia loneiremis
Calanoid spp. (immature)
Qithona spp.
Eurytemora herdmani
Tortanus. dis caudatus
Mean
Number/
Station

2,010
500
94
85
50
7,127
3,832
1,468
763
644
153
152
134
-89
78
71
Winter
WC E

330 322 148
2 35 23
13 6 7
11 2 1
18 4 5
4,891 2,627 2,561
0 3 84
000
16 39 38
17 <1 0
006
000
14 0 0
000
000
000
Spring
W C E
Summer
W C E
___ - ____ 'MnmVua'" /1 AA »v>3
10,543 2,985 226
0 00
133 7 19
2 00
0 0 <1
59,295 5,207 152
91 0 <1
475 33 0
1,247 246 23
913 18 2
342 240 6
1,538 42 0
1,210 1 <1
0 0 1
89 00
244 56 0
5,528 1,565 1,309
62 105 0
1,616 395 178
400 324 4
137 40 7
2,256 1,069 2,274
2,413 79 72
144 596 64
1,114 504 1,451
635 763 625
0 351 80
0 154 9
0 33 5
0 93 13
5 760 42
14 22 181
Autumn
W C E

518 217 10
5,377 274 12
394 277 53
159 89 5
362 17 5
700 823 217
26,170 14,634 1,055
1,489 2,338 133+
21 77 51+
137 657 120+
15 18 25+
0 0 0
174 100 5
23 25 16+
009
117 106 160
CO
00
        *Less numerous species «50/100 m3) and number/lOOm3,  in 1967, were: Acartia longiremis,34; Metridla lucens. 29; Eurytemora herdmani. 21; Acartia
         clausi. 14; Centropages hamatus.  14; Tortanus dis caudatus. 6; Calanoid spp. (immature), 3; and Paracalanus parvus, 2. Species representing a mean of less
         than 1 per season in each area were Metridia longa, Acartia spp.(immature), Cyclopoid spp.,  Euchaeta norvegica, Harpacticold spp., and Anomalocera
         pattersoni.
                                      O                O
       **Less numerous species (<50/100 m0) and number/100 m , in 1968, were: Metridia lucens, 41; Acartia spp.  (immature), 11; Metridia longa. 3.  Species
         representing a mean of less than 1 per season in each area were Euchaeta norvegica and Harpacticoid spp.

        +Values adjusted to Gulf III equivalents for the smaller copepod species collected in the bongo samplers in autumn 1968.

-------
         July 14
        I7S  19  21
                   July 16
                    4R  6
       16   18 S20
Figure 23.  Comparison of Diurnal Migration of Calanus at Two Stations in
Gulf of Maine -- (A) Deep Station, (B) Bank Station (from Clarke, 1934).  „
Changes in intensity of blue component of daylight are presented  in /*W/cm -
sunset (S), sunrise (R).  Broken lines represent shortening of time scale:
observations are not discontinued.

    Table 9.  Summary of Landings at Maine Ports in 1969.  Arranged
             by Dollar Value  (from Maine landings, 1969)
    Species
   Weight (Ib)
   Value ($)
    Lobster
    Shrimp
    Ocean perch
    Clam meats (Mya)
    Blood worms
    Sea herring
    Whiting
    Sandworms
19,834,780
24,235,340
50,752,394
 4,134,918
   782,002
54,213,635
17,889,677
   672,860
16,046,829
 3,044,948
 2,151,758
 1,752,149
   999,787
   967,657
   801,872
   523,836
                                  39

-------
                         PERCENTAGE

                        10050 0 3OIOO
                                                                                    Ce STATION 4 C  46 4A
                                                                                    0,	•	•-•
   o
   10

   30
   0
   10


   30

   0
   10

   SO
   0
   10

   30


   0
   10

   30


I  ,°o

*  30
   30
r A
Chaelagntlhl

 March 6
       1019-30 1128-43 1228-43 1350-1405 1509-24  1607-22 1705-20  1830-45
  0935-1010 1105-20 1205-20 1249-1303 1343-58  1500-15 1605-21  1700-15 1830-45
                                           t
                                           A
 March?


Decapodlartat

 March 6


  b

 March 7


Cirriped larvae

 Morch 6

  C

 March 7
   0 -
   10 -
   301-
        ITITfIII
       1013-30   1128-43  1228-43 1330-14051509-24  1607-22 1705-20 1830-45
  0955-1010 1105-20  1205-20 1248-1303 1343-58  1500-15  1605-21 1700-15  1830-45
       I+AAAIIA
  At+tIt  I   II
                                                   Gastropod eggs
                                                     March 6
  March 7



 Coptpods

  March 6

   b

  March 7
                           4-
                         TOTALITY
  Figure 24.   Vertical Distribution of Other Zoo-
  plankton Groups.  A: percentage occurrence of
  chaetognaths (b); decapod larva (b),  and cirriped
  larvae (c) at three sampling depths (0, 10, and 30 m)
  on the pre-eclipse and eclipse days.  B: percen-
  tage occurrence of gastropod  eggs (a) and copepods
  (b) at three depths (0,  10, and 30 m) on pre-eclipse
  and elipse days.
                 NUMBERS/I0m3

                  1-50   -
                  51-100 	
                  101-200	
                                                                                CB STATION
                                                                                   70
                                20
                                30
                              X  40
                                                                                   50
                                80
                                                          Figure 25.  Inshore-Offshore and Vertical Distri-
                                                          bution of Sagitta elegans in Three Gulf of Maine
                                                          Estuaries, Winter 1966 (from Sherman and Schaner,
                                                          1968).   (A) Piscataqua, (B) Sheepscot, (C) Pleasant.
                                                          Dots  represent positions  of the tows; width of the
                                                          other symbols represent  the  number of S_.  elegans
                                                          per 10 m6 of water strained.

-------
for the Gulf of Maine area, the ten most important identifiable fish landed
are herring,  silver hake, cod, ocean perch, haddock, mackerel, pollock,
scup, and witch and yellow flounder.  Maps of the autumn distribution of 20
common ground fish species in the Gulf of Maine  can be found in Fritz (1965)
and a brief history of the New England offshore fisheries is given by Jensen
(1967).  Some characteristics of fisheries important to Maine fisherman, and
some of the more abundant fisheries, are presented in tables 10 through 20.
Characteristics of the soft shell clam, bloodworm,  and sandworm fisheries
are not considered because these animals are harvested in shallow estuarine
waters.
Graham and Edwards (1961) state that a definite relationship  exists between
fish catch and benthic biomass and, since the benthic biomass decreases
rapidly with depth,  one cannot expect any substantial population of fishes
on the bottom beyond the continental shelf.
                                   41

-------
                 Table 10. Details on the Lobster Fishery
                  Lobster
    Homarus americanus
                    Characteristics
                                     Data
                                     Source*
  Landings (Ibs)
    Economic importance ($)

  Geographical range
  Habitat preferences
    Water depth

    Temperature
    Type of bottom
  Food sources
    Adutts
  Growth
  Mobility migration
    Vertical
    Horizontal

  Spawning
  Natural mortality
24,766,000 (rank 6th in U.S.)
20,793,000

abundant:  Maine to Nova Scotia;
  small numbers: Labrador to
  Middle Atlantic
inshore:  1 to 30 fathoms               3
  offshore: 200 to 500 m, bottom      4
47 to 49°F                           2
inshore:  continental shelf, rocky
  under seaweed
nocturnal feeders; molluscs (living
  and dead), other invertebrates,
  plants

slow growing, long lived; min. size
  (3-3/16 in. carapace) in 4 yr
larva pelagic; no extensive migration   5
offshore - fall, inshore - spring

a. larval period: about 2 wk at       2,4,6
   68-70°F; about 2 mo at low
   temperatures
b. female (3 1/4 - 5 in. carapace)
   6,000-40,000 ova; smallest ob-
   served witji eggs 8.0 cm
c. mate in warm months; eggs hatch fol-
   lowing year,  10-11 mo later.
c. females moult every 2 yr in May
   or Sept; after moulting, inpreg-
   nation occurs

about 83 % for recruits                 7
* 1.  Lyles, 1969    2.  Dow, 1964.    3.  Document  No. 51, 1945
  4.  Skud and Perkins, 1969    5.  Commercial Fish.  Review  1964
  7.  Skerman and Lewis, 1967    7. Lewis, 1970
                                    42

-------
                 Table 11. Details on the Shrimp Fishery
                 Northern shrimp   Pandalus borealis
                        Characteristics
                                     Data
                                     Source*
 Maine landings  (Ib)
   Economic importance ($)

 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
   Salinity
   Type of bottom

   Other
 Food sources
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal

 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area

   Time of year
   Larval development time
24,335,340
 3,044,948                           1

Cape Cod to Nova Scotia               2
bottom, 10-300 m                     2
-20ctoll.5°C                       2
30-3 5 °/oo                           2
fine-grained sediment friud), high
  in organic carbon (70.5%)           2
fished at less than 60 m depth in
  winter and spring                   2
omnivorous: plant detritus, worms,
  crustaceans                        3

7.9 cm (mean) at 14 mo               2
diurnal migration, males especially    2
females inshore in fall-winter          2

distribution independent of tempera-
  ture and salinity                    2
protandic hermaphrodites spawn off-
  shore
eggs laid Aug-Nov, hatch Mar-Apr    2
1 mo approximately                  3
*1. Maine Landings, 1969
 3. Anderson, 1966
     2.  Haynes and Wigley, 1969
                                   43

-------
              Table  12.  Details on the Sea Herring Fishery
                Sea herring (sardine)    Clupea harengus
Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
54,213,635
967,657
Data
Source*
1
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Salinity
 Food sources
   Fry

   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling
   Temperature
   Light
   Other
 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larval
     in water column

   Larval development time
 Bibliography
                            New Jersey to Labrador
                            estuarine inshore spring to fall
                            adults >3 °/oo; below 10°C
                              juveniles prefer >29 °/oo
                            larval gastropods and crustaceans,
                              diatoms, peridinians
                            copepods, amphipods, pelagic
                              shrimp,  decapod crustaceans

                            first year: 3 1/2 - 5 in.
                            often school at surface
                            inshore-offshore, fry drift with
                               currents
                            travel in schools
                            active at temperature >40°F
                            attracted to artificial light
                            swimming speed: normal 6-8 m/min,
                               max (60-219 mm) 2.3-4.4 ft/sec;
                               endurance 1-115 min
                             Georges Banks and Nova Scotian coast
                               (see figure 26) 5-25 m offshore,
                               hard bottom (gravel), 2-30
                               fathoms
                             autumn - water 46-52°F
                             demersal,  attached to objects; hatch
                               in 10-15 days (eggs warmed to
                               do not hatch)
                             9 mo
 2,3
 2

 2

 2,3


 2

 2
 2
 2
 7
                                                                  2,8
 2
 2
 2
 9
10
*1. Maine Landings, 1969   2.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953    3.  Document -
 No. 51, 1945   4.  Graham and Boyar, 1965    5.  Scattergood and Lozier
                                                                      '
      ,                                        .
1964   6.  Sticknev, 1968    7. Stickney, 1969    8.  Bqyar,
                 9.' Skud, 1966    10.  geattergood,  1957
                                                           1961
                                   44

-------
Ol
               HADDOCK

               SILVER  HAKE

           H  HERRING
         SAMPLING PERIODS FOR  SPAWNING AND PRE-SPAWNING
         	FISH	

            Georges Bonk Hoddock-Jonuory  to April

            Browns Bonk Hoddock-February to May

            Offshore  Silver  Hoke-Moy to August

            Inshore Silver Hoke —July to September
            All Herring slocks — August  to November
                                    Figure 26-.  Spawning Areas of Three Important Fisheries
                                         (from Edwards, BCF, Woods Hole,  Mass.)

-------
                Table 13,  Details on the Redfish Fishery
                Redfish (ocean perch)
           Sebastes marinus


Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
Characteristics
50,752,394
2,151,758
Data
Source*
1
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
  Water depth
  Temperature
  Salinity
  Type of bottom

 Food sources
  Larvae
  Adults

 Growth

 Mobility - migr ation
  Vertical
  Horizontal
Cape Cod to Newfoundland
bottom, 50-125 fathoms
33-50°F
32 %o
rocky or hard
2
3
3
3
crustaceans,  mysids, euphausiids  3
shrimp, mollusc, small fish
first year: 1 to 2-1/2 in.
rise and scatter at night
considered extensive
2,3
2
2
 Spawning
   Time of year
June-Sept.,  bear live young;
  pelagic
                                                                2
                                                                2
*1.  Maine Landings, 1969  2.  Document No. 51,  1945
 3.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953
                                   46

-------
             Table 14.  Details on the Silver Hake Fishery
             Silver hake (whiting)    Merluccius bilinearis
Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
17,889,677
801,872
Data
Source*
1
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
   Type of bottom

 Food sources
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area

   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
North Carolina to Newfoundland
bottom, 0-300 ft; wanderers           2
40-60°F                             3
no preference
shrimp, small fish (herring, mac-
  kerel, menhaden, alewife)           3

first year: 6-1/2 in.                  3
occupy all depths at times             2
shoreward in spring, offshore in
  winter                             2

great numbers often swim together
  in early autumn; strong swimmers    2,3
Cape Cod to Bay of Fundy, inshore
  and offshore (see figure 26)          2
summer; water 45-55°F               2,3
eggs pelagic; larvae pelagic-migrate
  to bottom when about 1-1/2 in. long   2,4
*1. Maine Landings,  1969
 3. Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953
      2.  Fritz, 1962
      4.  Document No. 51, 1945
                                   47

-------
               Table 15.  Details on the Haddock Fishery
              Haddock
 Melanogrammus aeglefinus
Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib) 959,466
Economic importance ($) 137,041
Data
Source*
1
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
   Salinity
   Type of bottom
 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling

 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
   Larval development time
Grand Banks to Cape Cod
bottom, 30-60 fathoms
32-52°F
 > 32 %>o
broken ground, gravel, hard sand or
  clay away from rocks and kelp
3
2
2
zooplankton (copepods)                2,4
indescriminate feeders:  worms, crabs
  crabs, shrimp, clams, gastropods,
  starfish, sea urchins, sand dollars,
  sea cucumbers                     2,4
first year:  6-7-1/2 in.
2,4
seldom found near surface            2
not extensive; localized seasonal move-
  ment between deep and shoal water  2
Feb-May
Georges Bank (see figure 26)
spring
pelagic

4-5 mo, then bottom existence is
  begun
3,4
3
3
4
*1.  Maine Landings, 1969
 3.  Document No. 51, 1945
     2.  Bigelow and Schroder, 1953
     4.  Jensen, 1960
                                   48

-------
           Table 16.  Details on the Atlantic Mackerel Fishery
                Atlantic mackerel    Scomber scombrus
Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
248,598
11,658
Data
Source*
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults

 Growth

 Mobility migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
   Larval development time
Cape Hatteras to Gulf of St. Lawrence  2

pelagic:  0-100 fathoms; Gulf of Maine
  in summer                         3
small copepods                      3
Crustacea, squid, sand lance, worms  3

first year: 8-1/2 in.                 4
all depths                           3
extensive migration north in summer
  and south in fall; offshore in winter  3

good swimmers; dense schools at all
  times                             3
Chesapeake Bay to Cape Cod favored    2
Apr-June, water 46°F                 2,3
eggs pelagic within 10 m of surface     3

2 in. within 1-2 mo.                   3
*1. Maine Landings, 1969            2.  Document No.  51, 1945
 3.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953     4.  Hoy and Clark, 1967
                                   49

-------
                 Table 17.  Details on the Cod Fishery
                   Cod
       Gadus morhua

Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
4,616,694
237,848
Data
Source*
1
1
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
   Type of bottom

 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
 Position of eggs/larvae in
   water column
 Larval development time
New Jersey to Labrador
bottom, 1-250 fathoms                2
32-55°F                             2
gravel-sand                         2
small crustaceans
molluscs, clams, cockles, mussels
  crabs, shrimp, tunicates,  squid,
  small fish

first year;  7-1/2 in.
found off bottom occasionally          2
some seasonal movement SW to New   2
  York and New Jersey in winter;
  large  majority nonmigratory

often rise to mid depths while school-  2
  ing

Georges Bank: Feb-Apr
  Nautucket Shoals: Nov- Feb
  Massachusetts Bay: Dec-Feb       2
  32-47°F; 32-32.8 °/oo  salinity

eggs pelagic — hatch in 2-4 wks;

larvae pelagic 2-3 mo; seek bottom    2
  when 1-1/2 to 2 in.
*1.  Maine Landings, 1969
 3.  Document No. 51, 1945
2.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953
                                   50

-------
               Table 18. Details on the Gray Sole Fishery
         Gray sole (witch flounder)   Glyptocephalus cynoglossus
Characteristics
Maine landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)
446,782
35,898
Data
Source*
1
1
  Geographical range

  Habitat preferences
   Water depth

   Temperature
   Type of bottom

  Food sources
   Adults

  Growth

  Mobility- migration
   Horizontal
Chesapeake Bay to Nova Scotia
bottom, deep water fish:  15-700
  fathoms
35-48°F
fine muddy sand, clay
invertebrates

first year 2-1/2 to 4 in.


local movement
  Spawning
    Area
    Time of year
    Position of eggs/larvae in
      water column
    Larval development time    fry pelagic:  3-6 mo.
Gulf of Maine, water 45-55 F
late spring and summer
eggs buoyant
2

2


2

2
2
2
2
* 1.  Maine Landings, 1969
      2.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953
                                   51

-------
                Table 19.  Details on the Pollock Fishery
                 American pollock    Pollachius virens
                  Characteristics
                                     Data
                                     Source*
 Maine landings (Ib)
   Economic importance ($)

 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
1,212,238
   50,209

Nova Scotia to New Jersey
surface to 100 fathoms
cold water fish:  32-52°F
1
1
 Food Source

   Adult


 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal

 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area

   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
small fish, pelagic crustaceans
  (shrimp)                           2

first year: 5-7 in.                    2
distributed at all levels                2
some seasonal migration southward    2

often in schools, sometimes very
  large; active, ravenous fish         2
shoal waters, 10-50 fath, off Mass.
  Bay                                2
late fall and early winter              2
eggs buoyant; hatch 1-2 wk, fry near
  surface 3 mo.
*1. Maine Landings, 1969
 3. Document No. 51,  1945
2. Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953
                                   52

-------
                 Table 20. Details on the Scup Fishery
                 Scup (porgy)
     Stenotomus chrysops
                      Characteristics
                                    Data
                                    Source*
 Maine landings (Ib)
   Economic importance ($)

 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water depth

   Type of bottom

 Food sources
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
not identified
North Carolina to Cape Cod (casual
  in Gulf of Maine)
winter 20-70 fathoms, summer 2-20
  fathoms
smooth
bottom feeders; small crustaceans,
  worms, hydroids, squid, fish fry

first year: 4-1/4 in.
some seasonal inshore-offshore
  migration and some north-south
1
1
1

1
Schooling
Temperature
Spawning
Area

Time of year
Position of eggs/larvae in
water column
schooling fish
sensitive to low temperature

inshore waters from New Jersey to
Long Island
May-Aug
eggs buoyant, 2-3 day incubation at
50-75°F
1
1


2


1
*1. Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953     2. Document No. 51,  1945
                                   53

-------
Benthic Organisms
Studies of benthic animals in the Wiscasset region have been conducted by
Stickney (1959) and Hanks (1964). Merrill(1967) has described the offshore
distribution of the  hydroid, Hydractinia echinata, and Wigley (1968)  the ben-
thic invertebrates  of the New England fishing banks.
Hanks  studied two  areas in the Sheepscot River estuary having a silt-clay
bottom.  A summary of the species found and their abundance is given in
table 21.  This assemblage is termed a Nephtys-Nucula, community after its
dominant members.  It should be noted that hard bottoms and especially rocky
bottoms are extremely difficult to sample with conventional samplers.  Con-
sequently,  it is safe to assume that this  community is but a minor part of the
species living generally in or on the highly variable bottom in the Wiscassett
region.  This is shown by the list of common animals and plants recorded
by Stickney (1959)  in the Wiscassett estuary (table 22).
Wigley (1968) described the benthic invertebrates of the New England fishing
banks associated with types of bottom sediments prevalent in the Gulf of
Maine; i.e., sandy, silty-sand, gravel,  and mud.
Some common species occupying a sandy bottom included: Echinarachnius
parma (sand-do liar); Crangon septemspinosis (sand shrimp); Lunatia heros
and Nassarius trivitattus (gastropods); Spisula solidissima (surf clam);
Astarte castanea (bivalve); Leptocuma sp.(crustacean); Chridotea sp.(isopod);
Pagurus acadianus (hermit crab);Ophelia, Goniadella, and Clymenella sp.
(polycheate worms); Heterostigma and Molgula sp. (tunicates).
Some of the common inhabitants of silty-sand sediments were: Arctica
islandica (ocean quahog); Thyone scabra (sea cucumber); Ampelisca vadorum
and^A. compressa (amphipods); Dichelopandulus sp.(decapod shrimp);  Dla-
sty.'is sp. (cumacean); Edotea sp. (isopod), Scalibregma,  Nepthys, and Har-
mothoe sp.(polycheates); Cerianthus sp.(sea anemone), Amphioplus and
Amphilimna  sp. (brittle stars),  Colus pygmacus (gastropod); and Venericar-
dia, Nucula, and Crenella sp. (bivalves).
Some species occupying gravel bottoms included:  Polymastia, Clionia,  and
Myxilla sp.(sponges);  Balanus crenatus and B_.  hameri (barnacles); Tubularia,
Eudendrium, Sertularia, and Bouganvillia sp. (hydroids); Terebratulina sp.
                                  54

-------
           Table 21.  Species in the Nephtys-Nucula Community Found at 10 or More Stations in Ebencook
                Harbor and Jewett Cove, Maine, Listed in Order of Abundance (from Hanks,  1964)
en
en
Rank by
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Species
Nucula proxima
Cumacea sp. (4+species)
Stereobalanus canadensis
Thyasira gouldi
Phoxocephalus holbolli
Volsella modiolus
Corophium sp.
Nucula tenuis
Dulichia sp.
Scoloplos armiger
Aricidea sp.
Nephyts incisa
Orchomenella pinquis
Ampelisca spinipes
Diplocirrus hirsutus
Retusa obtusa
Sternaspis scutata
Hartmania moorei
Ampharete acutifrons
Nemertea sp.
Casco bigelowi
Nucula delphinodonta
Pholoe minuta
Cingula aculeus
Crenella decussata
Alucena vincta
Lumbrineris fragilis
Pherusa plumosa
Yoldia sapotilla
Aeginina longicornis
Ninoe nigripes
Ammotrypnae aulogaster
Aricidea quadrilobata
Cerastoderma pinnulatum
Tellina agilis
Lora scalaris
Leptocheirus pinquis
Trichobranchus roseus
Rhodine loveni
Yoldia limatula
Nassarius trivittatus
Phyllodoce groenlandica
Terebellides stroemi
Pitar morrhuana
Astarte undata
Priapulus caudatus
Edotea triloba
Sarsiella americana
Miscellaneous
Number
2,358
1,973
768
717
623
573
557
515
407
402
395
332
292
291
253
206
198
155
135
134
134
119
100
94
76
75
64
66
66
64
48
34
33
32
32
31
27
27
25
25
20
18
17
16
15
15
14
11
Number
of
Stations
59
55
34
46
39
68
22
46
39
47
43
70
28
28
19
48
31
39
42
49
16
11
40
18
24
31
40
28
20
20
27
12
14
17
19
20
15
14
16
15
16
12
14
11
11
11
11
10
Percentage
by Number
18.3
15.3
6.0
5.6
4.8
4.4
4.3
4.0
3.2
3.1
3.1
2.6
2.3
2.3
2.0
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
2.4
Cumulative
Percentage
18.3
33.6
39.6
45.2
50.0
54.4
58.7
62.7
65.9
69.0
72.1
74.7
79.3
77.0
81.3
82.9
84.4
85.6
86.6
87.6
88.6
89.5
90.3
91.0
91.6
92.2
92.8
93.3
93.8
94.3
94.7
95.0
95.3
95.5
95.7
95.9
96.1
96.3
96.5
96.7
96.9
97.0
97.1
97.2
97.3
97.4
97.5
97.6
100.0
Percentage
of Stations
75.6
70.5
43.6
59.0
50.0
87.2
28.2
59.0
50.0
60.3
55.1
89.7
35.9
35.9
24.4
61.5
39.7
50.0
53.8
62.8
20.5
14.1
51.3
23.1
30.8
39.7
51.3
35.9
25.6
25.6
34.6
15.4
17.9
21.8
24.4
25.6
19.2
17.9
20.5
19.2
20.5
15.4
17.9
14.1
14.1
14.1
14.1
12.8
Average
Number
perm*
399.6
358.7
225.8
155.8
159.7
84.2
253.1
111.9
104.3
85.5
91.8
47.4
104.2
103.9
133.1
42.9
63.8
39.7
32.1
27.3
83.7
108.1
25.0
52.2
31.6
24.1
18.5
23.5
33.0
32.0
17.7
28.3
23.5
18.8
16.8
15.5
18.0
19.2
15.6
16.6
12.5
15.0
12.1
14.5
13.6
13.6
12.7
11.0
Area*
E,J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
E , mostly J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
!••!
S:J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
J
E,J
E,J
E.J
E,J
mostly J
mostly J
Depth Range
in Survey (m)
4-30
4-14
3-31
4-31
1-9
1-31
0-8
4-31
5-14
14-4
1-14
1-31
4-14
1-14
6-13
2-31
5-31
5-31
4-31
5-8
3-8
4-13
4-14
4-31
4-31
4-31
4-13
8-31
6-14
4-31
1-31
1-14
3-31
1-31
4-14
4-13
8-31
4-13
5-10
5-31
4-13
5-14
5-31
4-31
6-14
1-13
1-13
          *E = Ebenecook Harbor, J = Jewett Cove

-------
      Table 22.  Common Aquatic Animals and Plants Collected or
       Recorded from Sheepscot Estuary, Arranged According to
                 Habitat (adapted from Stickney, 1959)
Common Aquatic Animals*

I.   High salinity, infauna of subtidal sediments
    Coelenterates
         Cereantheopsis americana Verrill                sea anemone
         Edwardsia elegans Verrill                       sea anemone
         Acaulis primarius Stimpson
    Polychaete worms:
         Pholoe minuta Fabricius
         Phyllodoce groenlandica Oersted
         Nereis virens Sars
         Nephtys incisa Malmgren
         Nephtys caeca Fabricius
         Lumbrinereis tenuis Verrill
         Ninoe nigripes Verrill
         Aricidea spp.
         Diplocirrus hirsutus Hans en
         Flabelligera affinis Sars
         Pherusa plumosa Muller
         Scalibregma  inflatum Rathke
         Ammotrypane aulogaster Rathke
         Maldane sarsi Malmgren
*This li st contains but a small fraction of the aquatic organisms in the
estuary .  The most interesting, conspicuous, or abundant species of fish
and invertebrates are listed according to the habitat in which they are most
likely to be found.  It does not follow,  however, that every situation where
these various conditions prevail will be inhabited by every species listed for
that habitat, nor that many  species so listed will not be found elsewhere.
Most of these animals have no common names, but where such a name is in
general usage  it  is included in the righthand column of the table as an aid to
those not familiar with the Latin names.  As a further aid, the species are
arranged in groups of more or less related members.
                                  56

-------
                      Table 22 (Cont'd)
     Praxillela spp.
     Rhodine loveni Malmgren
     Ampharete acutifrons Grube
     Sternaspis scutata Ranzani
     Hartmania moorei Pettibone
Molluscs:
    Yoldia limatula Say
    Yoldia sapotilla  Gould
    Nucula spp.
    Thyasira gouldii Phillip!
    Cerastoderma pinnatulum Conrad
    Clinocardium ciliatum Fabricius
    Crenella decussata Montagu
    Thracia myopsis Muller
    Tellina agilis Stimpson
    Astarte undata Gould
Crustaceans:
    Phoxoc epha lus holbolli Kroyer
    Orchomenella pinguis Boeck
    Leptocheirus pinguis Stimpson
    Corophium spp.
    Casco bigelowi Blake
    Ampeli sea spinipes Boeck
    Dulichia sp.
    Diastylis quadrispinosa  Sars
    Eudorella sp.
Echinoderms:
    Caudina arenata Gould
    Ophiura robusta Ayres
cockle
cockle
sea cucumber
brittle star
                             57

-------
                         Table  22 (Cont'd)
n.  High salinity,  subtidal epifauna,  solid substrate
    Sponges:
        Halichondria sp.
        Chalina oculata Pallas
    Coelenterates:
        Metridium dianthus  Ellis
        Urticina crassicornis Muller
        Obelia spp.
        Sertularia spp.
    Polychaete worms:
        Harmathoe imbricata Linnaeus
        Lepidonotus squamatus Linnaeus
        Spirorbis borealis Daudin
    MQllusca:
        Hiatella arctica Linnaeus
        Anomia simplex Qrbigny
        Anomia aculeata Gmelin
        Ischnochiton ruber Linnaeus
        Aeolidia papillosa Linnaeus
        Odostomia bisuturalis Say
    Crustaceans:
        Balanus crenatus Bruguiere
        Idothea baltica Pallas
        Idothea phosphorea Harger
        Aeginella longicornis Kroyer
        Gammarus marinus Leach
        Gammarus annul at us Smith
    Echinoderms:
        Asterias vulgaris Verrill
        Asterias forbesi Desor
        Henricia sanguinolenta O. F.  Muller
deadman's fingers

sea anemone
sea anemone
scailed worm
scailed worm
jingle shell
barnacle
beach flea
common starfish
purple starfish
blood starfish
                                  58

-------
                         Table 22 (Cont'd)
        Ophiopholis aculeata Linnaeus
        Gorganocephalus arcticus Leach
        Cucumaria frondos a Gunner us
        Strongylocentrotus droehbachiensis O0 F. Muller
    Pr otochordates:
        Boltenia echinata Linnaeus
        Amaroucium sp.
        Didemnum albidum Verrill
        Dendrodoa carnea Agassiz
brittle star
basket star
sea cucumber
sea urchin

sea squirt
in.  High salinity,  subtidal, soft bottom epifauna
    Molluscs:
        Placopecten magellanicus Gmelin
        Retuaa obtusa Montagu
        Lacuna vincta Turton
        Nassarius trivittatus Say
        Cingula aculeus Gould
        Cylichna alba Brown
        Colus sp.
    Crustaceans:
        Pandalus borealis Kroyer
        Crago septemspinosus Say
    Echinoderms:
        Echinarachnius parma Lamarck

IV.  High salinity,  miscellaneous bottom types, wanderers
    Crustaceans:
        Homarus americanus Milne-Edwards
        Cancer borealis Stimpson
        Cancer irroratus Say
        Carcinides moenas Linnaeus
        Hyas araneus Linnaeus
        Pagurus bernhardus  Linnaeus
sea scallop
mud snail
distaff shell

shrimp
mud shrimp

sand dollar
lobster
Jonah crab
rock crab
green crab
toad crab
hermit crab
                                 59

-------
                         Table 22 (Cont'd)
V.  Nekton, anadromous and catadromous, migratory
         Pomolobus pseudoharengus Wilson
         Pomolobus aestivalis Mitchill
         Alosa sapidissima Wilson
         Salmo salar salar Linnaeus
         Osmerus mordax Mitchill
         Roccus  saxatilis Walbaum
                                  alewife
                                  glut herring
                                  American shad
                                  Atlantic salmon
                                  American smelt
                                  striped bass
VI.  Plankton, high salinity coastal waters
    Coelenterates:
        Cyanea arctica Peron and Leseuer
        Aurelia aurita Linnaeus
    Ctenophores:
        Pleurobrachia
)ileus Fabricius
    Chaetognaths:
        Sagitta spp.
    Copepods:
        Calanus finmarchicus Gunner
        Pseudocalanus minutus Kroyer
        Centropages typicus Kroyer
        Centropages hamatus Lilljeborg
        Temora longicornis Muller
        Eurytemora herdmani Thompson and Scott
        Acartia longiremis Lilljeborg
        Tortanus discaudatus Thompson and Scott
        Microsetella norvegica Boeck
        Qithona similis Glaus
    Cladocerans:
        Evadne nordmanni Loven
        Pod on leukarti Sars
    Tintinnids:
        Tintinnopsis sp.
red jellyfish
white jellyfish

sea walnut

arrow worms
                                 60

-------
                          Table 22 (Cont'd)
Common Aquatic Plants*
I.  High salinity coastal waters
    Algae:
        Laminaria longicruoris De la Pylaie
        Laminaria digitata Linnaeus
        Fucus vesiculosus Linnaeus
        Fucus spiralis Linnaeus
        Fucus evanescens C.  Agardh
        Ascophyllum nodosum Linnaeus
        Chorda filum Linnaeus
        Desmarestia aculeata Linnaeus
        Chordaria flagelliformis Muller
        Chondrus cris pus Linnaeus
        Polysiphonia lanosa Linnaeus
        Polysiphonia flexicaulis Harvey
        Corallina officinalis Linnaeus
        Ulva latuca Linnaeus
        Enteromorpha compressa Linnaeus
    Seed Plants:
        Spartina alterniflora var. glabra Fernald
        Spartina patens Ait.
        Zoster a marina Linnaeus
kelp
kelp
rockweed
rockweed
rockweed
rockweed
irish moss
sea lettuce
marsh grass
marsh grass
eel grass
*None of these plants should occur at depths of 250 ft.
                                  61

-------
(lampshells); Gersemia and Paragorgia sp.(soft corals); Boltenia, Ascidia,
and Amaroucium sp.(tunicates); Modiolus, Placopecton, Anomia, and Mus-
culus (bivalves); Serpula, Chone, and Spirobis  (polychaetes); Solaster and
Crossaster (starfishes); Neptunea (gastropod);  Hyas (toadcrab); Doris and
Dendronotus sp.(nudibranchs); and Ophiopholis  and Ophiacantha sp-(brittle-
stars).
Finally,  species found associated with muddy bottom were:  Briaster fragilis
(heart urchin); Ophiura sarsi, O. robusta, and Amphiura otteri (brittle stars);
Cteniodiscus crispatus  (mud star); Modiolaria discors (bivalve); Scaphander
sp. (gastropod); Cadulus and Dentalium sp.(tusk shells); Hap loops tubicola
(amphipod); Munnopsis typica (isopod); Calocaris,  Geryon, and Pandalus sp.
(decapods); Polycarpa fibrosa (ascidian); and Sternaspis, Amphritrite,
Onuphis, and .Learnira sp. (polycheates)o
Wigley and Emery (1968) have also reported on the distribution patterns of
commercially important mollusks based on submarine photographs.  They
present distribution maps and report that the sea scallop (Placopecten magel-
lanicus), surf clam (Spisula solidissima), and ocean quahog  (Arctica islandica)
are restricted to the continental shelf.

Fouling
A list of fouling organisms found in Penobscot Bay, Maine, and Placentia
Sound, Newfoundland, is presented in table 23 (DePalma,  1969).  According
to DePalma, the fouling communities  can be classified as boreal.  Very little
fouling occurs during the winter months.
At depths greater than 50 ft, barnacles and other calcareous cementing ani-
mals such as tubeworms dominate the fouling community. The data in table
24 show that the mass of organisms that attach to surfaces decreases with
increasing depths.  Periods of settlement of five important fouling organisms
are given in figure 27.  The data show that the greatest settlement occurs
during the summer months.
The intertidal fouling community at Penobscott Bay, Maine, has been studied
by Rucker (1964).  Rucker lists some subtidal species that may occur at the
depth we are considering.
                                   62

-------
Table 23.  Local Abundance of Marine Fouling Organisms.  1960 to  1968
                               (from  DePalma,  1969)
Species
Algae
Ulva lactuca
Enteromorpha sp.
Laminaria sac char ina
L. dlgitata
Chordaria fragelliformis
Deamarestia viridis
Porphyra umbilicus
Ceramium rubrum
Polysiphonia sp.
Lithothamnium sp.
Agardhiella sp.
Searsport
25'

XX
XX





X



Port
Isesboro Clyde
20' 45'

XX
X XX
X






X

Brewster
45'

XX
XX
XXX
X
X
XX
X
XX
X

X
Mark
Island
50'

XX
XX
XX




X
XX


Mark Mark Mark Placentia
Island Island Island Sound
100' 150' 200' 50' 95'

yrv
J\.^±
XX

XX







 Porifera
    Leucosolenia sp.
    Sycon protectum
Coelenterata
Obelia sp. X
Tubularia crocea XXX
Sertularia sp.
Metricium dianthus X
Bryozoa
Hippothoa hyalina
Cribrilina annulata
Tegella unicornis X
Schizomevella auriculata
Ramphostomella radiatula
R. dostata
Dendrobeania murrayana
Cryptosula pallasiana
Smittina trispinosa
Gemellaria loricata
Electra pilosa
Hippodiplosa sp.
Paramittina sp.
Cylindroporella tubulosa
Tubulipora flabellaris
Crisia eburnea
C. cribraria
Bugula turrita
Disporella fimbriata
Lichenpora verrucaria XX
Manipea tenella
Annelida
Spirorbis borealis XX
S. granulatis
S. spirillum
Chitinopoma greenlandica
Hydroides sp. X
Arthropoda
Balanus crenatus XX
B. balancides
B. balanus
B. hameri
Isopoda
Lagnorla lignorum T
Mollusca
Mytilus edulis XXX
Histella arctica
Anomia simplex XX
A. aculeata
Acmaea testudinalis
Pectin vitreus
Modiolus modiolus
Teredo navalis T
Xylophaga atlantica
Chordata
Molgula sp.
Botryllus sp.

XX
XXX



X
X
X







X



X



X
XX


XX
X
X

X

XXX
X



T

XX
XX
XXX
X
X


T





X




X
X
X




X
X

X



X



X
XX


XX
XX
XX

X

XX
X



C

X
XX
XX
X
X


T





XX
XX

X



X
XX



X











XX
XX

XX
X


X

XXX
X
X


T

XX
XX
XXX
XX
X
X
X
T


X
X

XXX XX XX
X XX XX XX XX
XX XX XX
X



XX

XX



XX
X
XX XX XX XX XX
XX
X
X
XX XX XX XX
XX XX XX
XX
XX X XX
XX XX XX
XX
XX XX

XX XX XX
XX XX
XX XX XX
XX
X

XX XX XX
X

XX XX

T

XX XX
XX XX XX XX
XX XX XX XX
X X

X X X X


T T T

X
XX

XX






XX

XX
XX
X



XX



XX




XX


XX
XX
XX



XX
X



T


XX
XX





T



XXX = Occurs commonly on series I panels; sometimes covers more than 40% of panel surface.
  XX = Occurs commonly on series I panels; never covers more than 40% of panel surface.
   X = Occurs occasionally on series I panels or never exceeds 1% coverage of panel surface.
   T = Marine borer; less than 10% of wooden panel destroyed after 12 months exposure.
   C = Marine borer; 10 to 25% of wood destroyed after 12 months exposure.
                                            63

-------
Table 24. Rate of Fouling Based on Dry Weight Accumulation per Unit Time
                         (from DePalma, 1969)
Months of
Exposure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
24
36
48
n
Dry Weight in gm/m from Pane Is Exposed
1-2 Ft above Bottom in Depths Shown
50'
Brewster
Point
<50
<50
67
<50
67
79
<50
56
90
__
156
247
5,400
13,387
5,287
100'
Mark
Island











247


150'
Mark
Island











195


200'
Mark
Island











112


25'
Searsport











<50


20'
Isleboro











<50


20'
Port
Clyde











<50


100'
Placentia
Sound











<50
<50
•

-------
                 r.:.tvvv.''.'ggn PLACENTIA SOUND

                 I    '   =3 PENOBSCOT BAY
               OBELIA SP.


            SPIRORBIS SPP.

         BALANUS CRENATUS


          HIATELLA ARCTICA


           ANOMIA SIMPLEX
-•-•-• .- .- •- »-r
                      JAN  FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
Figure 27. Periods of Settlement for Five Important Fouling Organisms
                        (from DePalma,  1969)
Bibliography

Document No. 51,  Fishery Resources of the United States, U.S. Government
    Printing Office, Washington, B.C., 1945.

Commercial  Fisheries Review, 26, 1964, p43.

Maine Landings, U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service C.F.S.  No. 5252, 1969.

ICNAF, Statistical Bulletin  for the Year 1968, International Commission
    for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, Dartmouth,  N.S., Canada,  141 pp,
    1970.

Anderson, W., "The shrimp and shrimp fishing of the southern United States,"
    U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Leaflet 589, 9 pp, 1966.

Bigelow, H.  "Plankton of the offshore waters  of the Gulf of Maine," Docu-
    ment No. 968,  U.S. Government Printing Office,  Washington,  D.C.,
    509 pp, 1926.

Bigelow, H., et al,  "Phytoplankton and planktonic protozoa of the offshore
    waters of the Gulf of Maine,  I.  Numerical distribution," Trans. Am.
    Phil. Soc., 31, 1940, pp 149-191.

Bigelow, H., and Schroeder, W.. "Fishes of the Gulf of Maine," Fishery
    Bulletin  74, Fish and Wildlife Service, 53, 1953,  pp 1-577.
                                   65

-------
Boyar, H., "Swimming speed of immature Atlantic herring with reference to
    the Passamaqiindriy tidal project." Trans. Am.  Fish. Soc., 90, lyoi,
    pp 21-26.

Clarke, G., "Factors affecting the vertical distribution of copepods, " EcoL
    Mono., 4,  1934, pp 530-540.

Colton, J., Jr., "History of oceanography in the offshore waters of the Gulf
    of Maine," U.S. Fish and  Wildlife Service, Spec. Sci. Rept 496,  18 pp,
    1964.

DePalma, J., "Marine biofouling at Penobscot Bay, Maine and Placentia
    Sound, Newfoundland, 1960 to 1968," U.S. Naval Hydrographic Office,
    Informal Report 69-56, 14 pp, 1969.

Dow,  R.L., "Supply,sustained yield,and management of Maine lobster re-
    source, " C^mjn^rcj.alJlsteries_^eview,  26, 1964, pp 19-26.

Edwards, R., "Benthic fauna study of the Atlantic continental shelf and slope,"
    unpublished manuscript (mimeo), 6 pp.

Fritz, R.L., "Silver hake," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Leaf-
    let 538, 7pp,  1962.

Fritz, R.L., "Autumn distribution of ground fish species in the Gulf of Maine
    and adjacent waters, 1955-1961," Serial Atlas of the Marine Environment.
    American Geographical Society, N. Y., 1965

Graham, J.,  and Boyar,  H., "Ecology of herring larvae in the coastal waters
    of Maine," ICNAF Special Publication, 6,  1965, pp 625-634.

Graham, H.W., and Edwards, R.L.,  "The world biomass of marine fishes,"
    paper No. R/I.l, F.A.O. International Conference on Fish in Nutrition,
    Washington, B.C. 9 pp, 1961

Gran, H., and Braarud, T., "A quantitative study of the phytoplankton in the
    Bay of Fundy and the Gulf of Maine (including observations on hydrography,
    chemistry,  and turbidity)," J. Biol.. Bd.  Can..  1, 1935, pp 279-467.

Hanks, R., "A benthic community in the Sheepscot  River Estuary,  Maine,"
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fish. Bulletin, 63,  1964,  pp 343-353.

Hardy, A., "The herring in relation to its animate  environment, part I.
    The food and feeding habits of the herring, " Fish Invest. Lond. Ser. II ,
    7, 1924,  pp 1-53.                         ~~	

Haynes,  E.,  and Wigley, R.,  "Biology of the northern shrimp  Pandalus
    borealis, in the Gulf of Maine, "Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.. 98,  1969,  pp
    60-73.

Hoy,  D., and Clark, G., "Atlantic mackerel fishery, 1804-1965," U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service,  Fishery Leaflet 603,  9 pp, 1967.
                                  66

-------
Jensen, A., "Haddock," U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Leaflet 489,
    9 pp,  1960.

Jensen, A., "A brief history of the New England offshore fisheries," U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service, Fishery Leaflet 594,  14 pp, 1967.

Lillick, L., "Phytpplankton and plankton protozoa of the offshore waters of
    the Gulf of Maine,  part 2. Quantitative composition of the planktonic
    flora." Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., 31,  1940, pp 193-237.

Lyles, C.H.,  Fishery statistics of the United States, 1967,  Bureau of
    Commercial Fisheries, U.S. Department of the  Interior, 490 pp, 1969.

Mare, M., "A study of a marine benthic  community with special reference
    to the micro-organism,"  J. Mar. Biol. Assoc., 25, 1942, pp 517-554.

Margalef, R., "Temporal succession and spatial heterogeneity in phytoplank-
    ton." in Perspectives in Marine Biology, A.  Buzzati-Traverse (ed.),  U.
    of California Press, Berkeley, Cal., 1958,  pp 323-347.

Merrill, A.S., "Offshore distribution of  Hydractinia echinata, "  Fishery Bul-
    letin, Fish and Wildlife Service,  66,  1967, pp 281-283.

Riley, G., "A theoretical analysis of the zooplankton of Georges Bank," .J.
    Mar. Res. 6, 1947, pp 104-113.

Riley, G., and Bumpus, D.,  "Phytoplankton-zooplankton relationships on
    Georges Bank." J. Mar. Res.. 6, 1946, pp 33-47.

Rucker, J.,  "Intertidal fouling community at Penobscot Bay, Maine,"  U.S.
    Naval Oceanographic Office, Informal Report 0-2-64, 20 pp, 1964.

Sears, M., "Notes on  the phytoplankton on Georges Banks in 1940," J. Mar.
    Res., 4, 1941, pp 247-257.

Scattergood, L., "A bibliography of the herring," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
    vice, Dept. of Sea and Shore Fisheries, 1957.

Scattergood, L., and Lozier,  L., "Herring fishery of the U.S., Passama-
    quoddy region, "U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific
    Report,  Fisheries No. 476, 21 pp, 1964.

Sherman, K., "Seasonal and areal distribution of Gulf of Maine coastal zoo-
    plankton," 1963," ICNAF Special Publication 6,  1966(a), pp 611-612.

Sherman, K., "Seasonal and areal distribution of zooplankton in coastal wa-
    ters of the Gulf of Maine, 1964, "U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service,  Special
    Scientific Report,   Fisheries No. 530, 11 pp, 1966(b).

Sherman, K.  "Seasonal and areal distribution of zooplankton in coastal wa-
    ters of the Gulf of Maine, 1965 and 1966, " U.S.  Fish and Wildlife  Ser-
    vice, Special Scientific Report,  Fisheries No. 596, 11 pp,  1968.


                                   67

-------
Sherman,  K., "Seasonal and areal distribution of zooplankton in the coastal
    waters of the Gulf of Maine, 1967 and 1968, "  U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service, Special Scientific Report, Fisheries No. 594, 8 pp, 1970.

Sherman,  K., and Lewis, R.D., "Seasonal occurrence of larval lobsters in
    coastal waters of central Maine." 1966 Proceedings of the National Shell
    Fisheries Association, 57, 1967, pp 27-30.

Sherman,  K.,  and Honey, K..  "Vertical movements of zooplankton during a
    solar eclipse, "Nature, 227,  1970, pp 1156-1158.

Sherman,  K., and Schaner, E., "Observations on the distribution and breed-
    ing of Sagitta elegans (Chaetognatha) in coastal waters of the Gulf of Maine,"
    Limnol. Qceanogr.. 13,  1968, pp 618-625.

Skud, B., "U.S. herring fishery and research," Canadian Fisheries Report
    No. 8,  1966, pp 17-19.

Skud, B., and Perkins, H., "Size,  composition, sex ratio, and size at ma-
    turity of offshore northern lobsters," U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service,
    Spec. Sci. Rept.  598, 10 pp,  1969.

Stickney,  A., "Ecology of the Sheepscot River Estuary," U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service, Spec. Sci, Rept., Fisheries No. 309, 1959, 21pp.

Stickney,  A., "Orientation of juvenile Atlantic herring (Clupea hargengus
    harengus  L.) to temperature and salinity," mimeo report, no date.

Stickney,  A.,  "Factors  influencing the attraction of Atlantic herring, Clupea
    harengus harengus, to artificial lights," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
    Fish. Bulletin 68, 1969, pp 73-85.

Wigley, R., "Benthic invertebrates of the New England fishing banks," Under^
    water Naturalist, 5, 1968, pp 8-13.

Wigley, R., and Emery, K.O., "Submarine photos of commercial shellfish
    off northeastern United States, " Commercial Fisheries Review No. 810,
    1968, pp 43-49.
                                  68

-------
                              Section 3
           SITE DESCRIPTION FOR THE NEW YORK BIGHT


PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION (HUDSON CHANNEL OFF SEA GIRT)

Water Circulation and Characteristics
The Sea Girt site lies in the New York Bight, an area of open shelf consisting
of the waters between Montauk Point, Long Island, and Cape May, New Jersey
(see figure 28). The offshore portion is part of the "coastal drift, " a drift of
shelf waters, flowing south-west, that extends from Nantucket Shoals to Cape
Hatteras.  Inshore of this drift, hydrography becomes more complex due to
effects on circulation of the coastal corner formed where the shorelines of
Long Island and New Jersey converge,  and by the outflow of the rivers into
the  area.  The boundary between the inshore and offshore zones is uncertain
and probably variable. Consequently, the site location might at various times
be within the limits of either hydrographic situation.  The site location is
further complicated by the shallowness of the shelf near shore, which neces-
sitates putting the site in the Hudson Channel to obtain enough depth (see
figure 29).  This channel is a deep trough, cutting across the continental shelf,
that connected the Hudson River to the Hudson Canyon at some previous period
of lower sea level. The Channel provides a depth  of over 240 ft, roughly 120
ft below the surrounding shelf, within about 20 nm of shore.
The Hudson and other rivers discharge enough fresh water annually into the
area to replace about one-half of the Bight water volume.  However, the
salinity of the  Bight waters is close to that of adjacent coastal water, and
the  volume of river water in the area rarely amounts  to more than one per-
cent,  indicating an active circulation (Ketchum et al,  1951).  The  river dis-
charge leaves  the area through a net seaward flow of mixed (river water plus
entrained sea water) water, and there is also a counter drift toward shore
along the bottom that replaces the entrained sea water.  Complicating this
circulation pattern are tidal and wind-driven currents.
The physical structure of the waters of the New York  Bight is primarily de-
pendent upon two factors: season and the river discharge.  Table25 tabulates
the physical properties by the season, and figure30gives the temperature pro-
files of the water.  In winter the water is well mixed and nearly isothermal.
                                  69

-------
                                                        ^^»  i«-x
                                                           II.t.,!".« »
                                                        .-.,.. !^*£t_ . *
•r£^C> •

!&•;•:•••  *fe
  -•xV   .(' r« «
        _/   . Sl^,-:-.-  -••••  "
  ')               '•'' - •' ^
               -
    .1. •. -S.nH, Mnok ^OtaT ,. :, JVBBOSE   ,   ^^. -
       •Tfc " '".,.   ,.>-.lf. •»".. .n I'l -r •••••?'« HOBN  (I
        r\ ' •**». . *i.   I»*»;OB .»«-i—   .if
        1\.vt.J3/JLft« r',.„•""-'      ^*«:
   ""—'* "r •   "
        , •.
       •' I .*•:'•» .. /
         /,
       «•«« *.; • «'
-------
        Sandy Moo*


                    =
                                                                   i
Figure 29.  Bathymetric Details (Fathoms) of the Head of the Hudson Channel
(from Coast and Geodetic Survey Maps 0807N-54 and 0808N-55)
                                71

-------
                        Table 25.  Physical Properties of Water at the New York Bight Site
IS9
Depth
M
Density ( P t)
Avg Max Min
Temperature
Avg Max
(°C)
Min
Salinity (°/oo)
Avg Max Min
Winter
0
10
20
30
50
75
25.
25.
25.
25.


37
40
47
56


26.09
26.09
26.06
26.06


25.7
25.7
25.8
25.8
25.9
26.0
7.19
7.26
7.38
7.40


9.5
9.8
10.2
10.5
10.6
10.7
3.61
3.57
3.58
3.60
4.00

32.2
33.4
33.6
33.7
33.8
33.9
33.07
33.07
33.38
33.58
34.26

31.
31.
31.
32.
34.

55
59
74
20
26

Summer
0
10
20
30
50
75
21.
22.
24.
25.
25.

37
03
33
21
60

23.32
24.05
25.70
25.77
25.78

21.3
21.31
22.0
24.5
24.9
24.9
21.53
19.82
11.75
8.12
6.74

24.0
33.0
21.0
15.5
11.5
11.0
16.79
12.72
6.28
5.61
5.94

31.3
31.5
31.7
32.1
32.2
32.2
32.20
32.56
32.70
32.83
32.72

11.
18.
31.
31.
32.

57
89
44
52
30

           *Temperature is given in degrees Celsius, salinity in parts per thousand (°/oo), and density in
            sigma-t units (where, e.g., 24.39 represents a specific gravity of 1.02439).

-------
       WINTER WIN   I WINTER \,W|NTER MAX
                  j AVERAGE
                  \
   70 -
        4   5   6  7  8  9  10 11 12  13  14  t6  16  17  18  19  20 21 22 23 24
                                TEMPERATURE (C)
     Figure 30. Temperature Profiles of Water at the New York Bight

During the winter, river outflow is reduced and flows southward  close to the
New Jersey shoreline (Ketchum et  al, 1951) inside the site area. In summer
a well-stratified condition exists with a gradient of as much as 17°C.  During
this season, the river discharge spreads across the Bight area more or less
evenly (Ketchum, 1951).  Note the occurrance of low salinity values during
the summer (table 25). Storm conditions will cause mixing and destroy any
stratification, but observations  suggest that stratification will be reestab-
lished within about 2 days (Ketchum,  1951).
The conditions described apply to the Bight area in general; but in the Hudson
Channel site, water conditions may vary somewhat.  Figures 31 and 32 show
typical temperature cross-sections across the channel.  In summer the ob-
served "hump" of isotherms  over the channel  commonly appears, channel
water being slightly colder than the adjacent waters.  In winter the reverse
occurs, channel water being  slightly warmer.  Study of physical properties
profiles in Ketchum indicates that water in the Hudson Channel more closely
resembles water from further offshore than it does the adjacent shelf water.
From this it is suggested  that there may be up-channel drift of offshore water.
The structure  of the current  at this site is discussed here in a manner lead-
ing from a general picture to the specific conditions at the site.   The intent
is  to supply necessary background information and to explain the  rationale
behind certain estimates that must be made where raw data is lacking.

                                   73

-------
 74°00
                                                 Temperature Transect .1
                                                    August 19, 1970
Figure 31. Temperature^o^Acres,, the Hudson channel in Summer
 7*°00

-------
The characteristics of the nearshore, or coastal, current result from the
superposition of various effects; e.g., bottom friction, wind, runoff, density,
coriolis force,  etc.  The accurate prediction of coastal flow, then, depends
on a knowledge of the components.  It follows also that, if a component fac-
tor is subjected to an anomaly, the resultant coastal flow may differ from
that expected.  Some of these component factors, as applied to the northeast
shelf region, are described in the following paragraphs:
      1.    Lateral current shear on the landward side of the Gulf Stream
           tends to form a circulation pattern with southwesterly-directed
           trajectories nearshore.  This phenomenon is somewhat analogous
           to a turbulent boundary layer.
      2.    The southbound Labrador Current,  especially pronounced in the
           northern section of this region, tends to hug the coastline because
           of the coriolis force.
      3.    Fresh water runoff from rivers, sounds,and estuaries, piling up
           along the east coast in spring and early summer, tends to produce
           a seaward pressure gradient and a resultant flow to the south due
           to coriolis force.  Bumpus (1969) states:  'It is generally the case
           that coastal currents flow nearly parallel to the coast with land
           on the*right in the northern hemisphere, where there is adequate
           fresh water discharge from the adjacent watersheds."
      4.    In winter, prevailing winds from the northwest quadrant exert a
           stress on the sea surface over the shelf that tends to cause a mass
           transport southward.   In summer, prevailing winds from the south-
           west tend to transport water offshore, or to the east.  The fre-
           quency of wind  direction, by velocity,  is given in table 26.
      5.    The vertical structure of currents, in a region on the shelf that
           is affected by river flow, often exhibits a counter flow in the  bot-
           tom layers. This is due to entrainment or mixing of deep salty
           water into the upper,  out-flowing layer, and the replacement of
           this salty water. Thus,  although the surface layer moves in  one
           direction, the bottom layer moves in the opposite direction to
           maintain the steady state.
                                   75

-------
                Table 26. Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed — Annual Percentage
                          (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)
Wind Direction
N
NE
E
SE
S
SW
W
NW
Variable
Calm
Number of
Observations
Percentage
Wind
0-6 7-16
2.3 4.1
1.8 4.1
2.4 4.2
2.9 4.2
4.8 9.7
3.9 8.8
2.9 7.9
2.0 5.8
* 0.0
3.2
4243 7931
26.1 48.8
Velocity
17-27
2.0
2.2
1.3
1.0
2.7
2.8
4.5
3.7
0.0

3295
20.3
(knots)
28-40
0.5
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
1.3
0.9
0.0

712
4.4

41+
*
0.1
*
*
0.0
*
0.1
0.1
0.0

72
0.4
Number of
Observations
1450
1446
1342
1333
2850
2581
2717
2015
5
514
16253
100.0
Percentage of
Frequency
8.9
8.9
8.3
8.2
17.5
15.9
16.7
12.4
*
3.2

Mean
Speed
12.8
14.3
11.2
9.9
11.0
11.7
14.5
14.7
2.4
0.0
12.2
100.0 (mean total)
*frequencies between 0.0%and 0.05%

-------
     6.    Tidal currents in restricted areas, such as nearshore or in chan-
           nels,  exhibit rectilinear flow, flowing in one direction for half
           the tidal period and in the opposite direction for the remainder of
           the period.  In offshore areas, tidal currents are of a rotary na-
           ture in the form of an ellipse with the major axis in the flood-ebb
           direction.  Although there is not net transport due to  tidal cur-
           rents, there is a contribution to mixing from them.
The resulting current structure, or that which is measured, is the super-
position of these  component currents.  Some of the components are aperiodic
while others are periodic, with periods ranging from the semiannual to the
annual.
Data from Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Wood's Hole Oceanographic
Institute, and the U.S. Navy indicate that average surface drift in the Sea
Girt area is 0.3  knots,  or about 6 nm per day, and  the expected range of
surface drift speed is from 2 to 11 nm per day.  The lower part of the range
is associated with northbound flow, and the upper part with southbound flow.
From November through March, southbound flow is to be expected at the
surface (see figure 33).  From April through October, surface current rever-
sals (northbound flow) may occur if runoff has been low and southerly winds
have been prominent (see figure 34).
Bottom drift can be expected to be from 2 to 3nm per day.  If the  site is to
be located in the Hudson Channel, the flow will generally be oriented with the
channel axis.  If it is found that the site is within the area of influence of the
Hudson River outflow, the bottom, or replacement, flow will be directed toward
the estuary, or northward.  This will be especially apparent during high run-
off, or in the spring and early summer.  Offshore winds will cause upwelling
along the coast and, therefore, a bottom drift towards shore.   This onshore
bottom drift will be evident west of the Hudson Channel.  When these condi-
tions do not prevail, a southbound bottom drift in the channel is to be expected
in concert with the general drift of  coastal water.
Although tidal currents  will not produce any net drift, they will help the dif-
fusion process.  Tidal current speeds  can be expected to vary from 0.2 to
0.5 knots in the tidal period of 12.4 hours, averaging 0.3 knots.  A rotary
tide is  expected for an offshore site with its axis about parallel to the shore-
line.
                                   77

-------
                              WINTER  NOV-MAR
                                                                                              SUMMER APR-OCT
CO
                  74
                 P. iK-uiwr TIME- - VOLUME OF RIVER WATER
                 FLUSHING TIME -  AVERAGE OA|LY FLOW

                 SPEEDS: INSHORE  3-s MILES PER DAY
                      OFFSHORE 8-10 MILES PER DAY
                                                                                        FLUSHING

                                                                                       TIME 8-10DAYS



                                                                                          SITE\
                                                                                          r-k  \
                                                                                     -t '
                                                                                   74°
                                                                                                73"30'

                                                                                                              73°
           SPEEDS: INSHORE  2-4 MILES PER DAY
                 OFFSHORE 4-6 MILES PER DAY
                                                                                                                            40° 30'
                                                                                                                            4O°OO'
           Figure 33.  Surface Flow During Winter
           Months — November through March
Figure 34.  Surface  Flow During Summer Months
April through October

-------
Bottom Characteristics
The sediments on the continental shelf of the New York Bight are fluvially
deposited sands.  The absence of fine material is due to the fact that the sedi-
ments have been reworked, causing removal of the fine portions, and are in
equilibrium with the environment (Stetson, 1938).     The shelf of the Bight
presents an irregular surface of less than a 30-ft relief and an average slope
of 0° 03'.  An erosional feature  unique to this shelf is the Hudson Channel,
cut by the Hudson River during a period of lower sea level, that extends from
the mouth of the Hudson River to the head of the Hudson Canyon near the edge
of the shelf, a distance of about 85 nm (shown in profile by figure 3).  The
average gradient of the channel thalweg  (axis) is 0° 04'. The present day
channel appears as a series of troughs separated by low swells, the troughs
having a relief of up to 120 ft (Uchupi, 1968). Some of these troughs provide
deep water sites relatively close to the shore and are, therefore, potential
power plant sites. Shepard and Cohee (1936) suggest that the channel may be
a natural settling basin and, if so,  it is  expected that the sediments will be
finer grained than those on the adjacent  shelf.  Sediment samples taken by
Shepard and Cohee from the channel were analyzed as containing 3 5 percent
0.0312-mm sediment and 60 percent 0.0625-mm — very fine silty sand. No
engineering property measurements are available for channel sediments.
Bibliography
Bumpus, D.F., and Lauzier, L.M., Serial Atlas of the Marine Environment,
    "Surface circulation on the continental shelf off eastern North America
    between Newfoundland and Florida," American Geographical Society, 1965.
Ketchum,  Redfield, andAyers,  "Oceanography of the N.Y. Bight," Papers
    in Physical Oceanography and Meteorology,  Cont.  #549, MIT and WHOI,
    1951.
Shepard and Colee, Geol. Soc.  of Am.  Bull, 47, 1963, pp 441-458
Stetsons, H.C., "Sediments of the continental shelf off the eastern coast of
    the U.S.," v V, No. 4, Papers in Physical Oceanography and Meterology,
    July 1938.
Uchupi, E., "Sediments on the continental margin off eastern U.S.. "article
    94 in U.S. Geol.  Survey Prof.  Paper 475C,  1963, pp C132-C137.
U.S. Naval Weather Service Command, Summary of synoptic meteorological
    observations, North American coastal marine areas," v 2 and v  7,  632 pp
    each, 1970.

                                  79

-------
BIOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION (LONG ISLAND AND BLOCK ISLAND SOUNDS)

Ecology
The New York, Long Island Sound (LIS) and Block Island Sound (BIS) area is
adjacent to the large industrial and population center of New York-New Jersey,
with potentially large future power requirements.  The area is of interest bio-
logically because it experiences a wide range of temperature.  Consequently,
the biota present is influenced by conditions ranging from subtropic to sub-
arctic conditions, and its inhabitants are probably forms that are highly adapt-
able to changing environmental parameters.
The ecology is generally similar to that of the Gulf of Maine region.

Phytoplankton
The phytoplankton of the BIS and LIS  areas have been investigated by Riley
(1952), Riley and Conover (1967), and Conover (1956).  The dominant phyto-
planktonic species of the BIS area are given in table 27. The diatom, Skele-
tonema costatum, is the most dominant form, at times constituting 99 percent
of the population.  Thalassionema nitzschioides, Chaetocerus spp., and Lepto-
cylindricus spp. are also present at times in large numbers.
The phytoplankton of LIS are given in table 28. As in BIS, Skeletonema costa-
tum and Thalassionema nitzschioides are the dominant forms.  Table 28 segre-
gates the algae into three groups, those distributed throughout the sound
(Group 1) representative of more tolerant forms, those distributed in the
eastern end (Group 2) probably characteristic of oceanic species and species
tolerant of oceanic conditions, and those distributed in the western end
(Group 3) characteristic of inshore species and species tolerant of estuarine
conditions.
The mean cell count of phytoplankton in LIS is given in table 29..  Greatest
numbers  occur in the western and central portions of the sound, probably
due to the influences of increased nutrients from land runoff contributed by
rivers discharging into the sound.
                                   80

-------
Table 27. Dominant
 Block Island Sound
Species of Phytoplankton in
— 1949 (from Riley, 1952)
Species
Skeletonema costatum
Chaetoceros sp.
C. didymus
C. curvisetus
C. decipiens
C. compress us
Leptocylindricus sp.
L. danicus
L. minimus
Thalassiosira sp.
T. subtilis
Thalassionema
nitzschioides
Nitzchia sp .
N. closterium
N. seriata
Asterionella japonica
Rhizosolenia sp .
R. faeroense
Guinardia flaccida
Number
of Dates
Present
12
11
_ _
--
--
— —
8
_ _
--
11
--

12
11
_ _
--
10
12
__
9
Mean
Number
(cells/L)
270,500
19,700
_ _
—
--
--
6,900
__
__
5,800
--

5,400
5,300
_ _
--
1,700
1,500
--
1,000
Percentage
of Total
Population
83.5
6.1
_ _
—
--
—
2.1
_ _
--
1.8
--

1.7
1.6
_ _
--
0.5
0.5
--
0.3
Maximum
Percentage
of Population
99
80
80
10
12
13
45
40
5
41
41

92
39
39
23
7
11
10
20
                     81

-------
           Table 28. Frequency of Occurrence of Phytoplanktonic
      Species in Long Island Sound (from Riley and Conover, 1967)*
Species
Group 1
Chaetoceros compressum
C. didymum
C. radians- C. tortissimum
Corethron criophilum
Coscinodiscus perforatus
cellulosa
Leptocylindrus danicus
Par alia sulcata
Skeletonema costatum
Thalassiosira decipiens
T. gravida
Asterionella formosa
A. japonica
Thalassionema nitzschioides
Dinophysis acuminata
Peridinium trochoideum
Group 2
Chaetoceros affine
C. curvisetum
C. danicum
Coscinodiscus centralis
pacifica
C. radiatus
Ditylium brightwellii
Navicula distens
Nitzschia seriata
N. delicatissima
Pleurosigma normani
Thalassiothrix frauenfeldii
Group 3
Chaetoceros debile
C. constrictum
Lithodesmiura undulatum
Exuvella apora
E. baltica
Glenodinium pilula
Peridinium globulus
P. triquetum
Race

31
6
19
6

19
38
63
75
69
62
44
37
87
6
63

6
0
31

0
6
6
19
44
44
6
6

12
0
0
6
0
19
6
6
Eastern
Narrows

28
0
9
16

25
53
63
88
38
53
41
25
91
31
62

12
16
22

12
28
25
12
37
22
25
9

16
6
3
9
3
0
3
3
Central
Basin

27

20
19

17
38
60
76
41
64
27
40
80
31
55

4
5
11

6
18
8
6
22
11
11
5

16
6
7
15
5
19
7
14
Western
Basin

24

10
14

12
22
65
69
37
59
28
29
80
43
53

6
2
0

0
14
0
2
16
10
2
0

23
4
14
26
6
37
10
12
Western
Narrows

29

35
12

18
53
53
94
82
64
18
18
76
24
59

0
0
0

0
0
0
0
12
6
6
0

53
12
29
6
12
29
23
29
*Frequency expressed as a percentage of the number of samples containing the
 species in relation to the total number of samples taken in the given area.
                                  82

-------
      Table 29. Mean Cell Count (thousands/L) of Phytoplankton in
        Different Parts of Long Island Sound and at Maximum and
      Minimum  Limits of Variation (from Riley and Conover  1967)

Number of samples
Mean cell count
Minimum
Winter-spring maximum
May- June maximum
Autumn maximum
Race
16
220
31
720
230
--
Eastern
Narrows
32
308
46
750
1,230
550
Central
Basin
98
998
22
14,100
1,420
4,130
Western
Basin
49
1,787
17
11,300
2,150
4,490
Western
Narrows
17
1,729
87
7,320
2,980
3,920
The seasonal abundance of phytoplankton is bimodal as shown by figures 35,
36, and37 with winter and summer maxima, and the greater numbers in Feb-
ruary.  It is interesting to note that the peak abundance of phytoplankton at
Georges Bank occurs in April rather than February.
Conover (1956) has shown that the numerical abundance of phytoplankton in
LIS is greater inshore than offshore, but chlorophyll is uniformly distributed
throughout the water column when all stations are averaged (figures 38 and 39).
In addition to the seasonal variation of  total phytoplankton, there is a varia-
tion in the representative species in both BIS and LIS.  The species  variation
of BIS is given by figure 40 for five representative algae.  Skeletonema is pre-
sent throughout the year,  but peaks in  February and July.  Thalassiosira
occurs only in the  winter, while Leptocylindricus occurs largely during the
summer months.  Species variation of  representative algae of LIS is shown
by figure 41. Skeletonema and Thalassionema are present throughout the year
with maximum abundance in February and March.  Thalassiosira nordenskiol-
dii  and T. decipiens appear to be winter species,  and _T.  gravida a summer-
fall species.
The seasonal distribution of the major  taxonomic groups of phytoplankton for
LIS is shown in figure 42. Centrate diatoms constitute the bulk of the phyto-
plankton with maximal numbers in February. Small concentrations  of dino-
flagellates occur normally but are limited to the summer months only.  At
times, however, dinoflagellateblooms  occur and reach concentration far
greater  than the diatoms.

                                   83

-------
                            SURFACE

                        .-.-MEAN-UPPER 20 M
        Figure 35. Seasonal Variation of Phytoplankton
        in Block Island Sound (from Riley, 1952)
                               MILLIONS OF CELLS/L

                                 CHLOROPHYLL/L
                                                                M A M j j ASONDJFMAMJ'J'A'S'O'ND'J'F'M'
Figure 36. Phytoplankton and Chlorophyll in Long
Island Sound -- Average Surface Values for all
Stations  (from Conover, 1956).
00
         10
        o.oi-
           1954
                     O EASTERN NARROWS

                     • CENTRAL BASIN

                     ,1 WESTERN NARROWS
                                1955
        Figure 37. Seasonal Variations of Phytoplankton
        in Long Island Sound by Area (from Riley and
         Conover,  1967)
                                                                 30-
                                                                 20-
   .
  O
  a:
  3
                                                                 10-
T—r~n—i  i i

    1952
                                                                                                  I I  T
                                                                                            1953
                                          r
 n

1954
Figure 38. Distribution of Chlorophyll in Surface
and Bottom Waters of Long Island Sound — Aver-
age Values  for All Stations  (from Conover, 1956)

-------
                                                                                         SKELETONEMA COSTATUM
00
         40 -
         30 -
         20-
             — MILLIONS OF CELLS/L
             	MG CHLOROPHYLL/L
             M'A
 1,000,000 -
  100.000-
   10.000-
   1.00O-
    100
                                                                        100-
                                                                       10.000-
                                                                       1.000-
                                                                        100-
                                                                       10,000-
                                                                       1.000-
                                                                        100-
                                                                       10,000-
                                                                        1.000-
                                                                         100-
                                                                                   THALASSIONEMA NITZSCHIOIDES
                                                                                       ASTERIONELLA JAPONICA
                                                                                      LEPTOCYLINDRICUS DANICUS
                                                                                          THALASSIOSIRA NORDENSKIOLDII
                  1952
                                        1953
                                                      1954
                                                                            'J'F'M'A'M'J'J'AS'  O'N' o^^
        Figure 39. Phytoplankton and Chlorophyll Distri-
        bution at Inshore and Offshore Stations (from
        Conover, 1956)
Figure 40. Seasonal Variation in Mean Values of
Representative Phytoplanktonic Species in Block
Island Sound  (from Riley, 1952)

-------
                                         SKELETONEMA COSTATUM
                                         MILLIONS OF CELLS/L
                                                           A
                              THALASSIONEMA NITZSCHOIDES
                              THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
                   1952
                              N1 D|J'FlMlA'Ml'jTJ' A'S'o'NI'D | J ' F
                                    M
                                            1953
                                                             1954
         400-



         200-



           0


         200

         100

           0

           6




           4 -




           2-
       THALASSIOSIRA DECIPIENS
       THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
    THALASSIOSIRA GRAVIDA
    THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
THALASSIOSIRA NORDENSKIOLDII
MILLIONS OF CE.LLS/L
            'M'A'M'j'j'A'S'O'N'D|J
                    1952
                1 j'j'A'S'O'N'D| J'F'M
                 1953             1954
Figure 41.  Seasonal Variation of Representative Species of Phytoplankton in
Long Island Sound (from Conover, 1956)
                                        86

-------
            40-



            30-




            20-



            10-



             0

          1,000

           500

             0

           400



           200-
        CENTRATE DIATOMS
        MILLIONS OF CELLS/L
                 PENNATE DIATOMS
                 THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
                                               XN/V
 0-

60-

40-

20-

 0-
             DINOFLAGELLATES
             THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
                                SILICOFLAGELLATES
                                THOUSANDS OF CELLS/L
                         I A rVi/
                     'J1 JTA^SIOINID|JIFIMIA'MIJI J'A'S'ON'DJJ'F'M
                     1952                      1953            1954
Figure 42.  Distribution of the Major Taxonomic Groups in Long Island Sound,
Averaged for All Stations  (from Conover,  1956)
                                      87

-------
The vertical distribution of phytoplankton is limited to the photic zone of the
water column.  Light penetration in v^er varies with place, time, conditions,
and water transparency.  Riley (1939) gives the vertical distribution of plant
pigments for tropical and temperate waters (figure 43).  Vertical distribution
of plant pigment does not extend much beyond 50 meters except in tropical
waters.  Riley (1952) determined three phytoplankton  depth profiles for BIS
(figure 44).  During the February maxima of phytoplankton,  greatest concen-
trations occur just below the surface  at about the 10 meter mark.
                        PLANT PIGMENTS (HARVEY UNITS/M3)
               0   1000 2000  3000  4000 5000  6000 7000 8000 9000
          CO
          DC
          LU

          I
          IU
          a
100-
             200 -
             300-
            400-i
            MEAN OF STATIONS IN TROPICAL WATERS
        0—0 STATION 3528.
        0---0 STATION 3532.
Figure 43. Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton, Expressed as Plant Pig-
ment Units, in Northern and Tropical Atlantic Waters (from Riley, 1939)
       Station 3532 — southeast of Long Island  (North Atlantic slope water)
       Station 3528 — deeper water, transitional between slope and tropical
       water.
       Tropical Stations -- Sargasso Sea, Cuba, Florida Straits

-------
                       MILLIONS OF CELLS/L
                              1
                             J_
                                              24FEB
        30-1
 Figure 44.  Vertical Distribution of Phytoplankton in Block Island Sound
 (from Riley, 1952)
 The phytoplankton of LIS were compared with those found in other New Eng-

 land waters (Gulf of Maine, Woods Hole, BIS) by Riley and Conover (1967).

 Some of their comparisons are as follows:

 1.    Dominant species with peaks of abundance similar  to LIS.

           Skeletonema costatum*
           Thalassionema nitzschioides
           Paralia sulcata

 2.    Less dominant species with peaks of abundance similar to LIS.
           Cerataulina pelagicus
           Chaeto ceros radians
           Leptocylindrus canicus
           Nitzschia longissima
           Thalassiosira gravida
Thalassiosira rotula
Peridinium trochoideum
Distephanus speculum
Ebria tripartit
      Less dominant species with peaks of abundance which do not coincide
      with LIS.

           Chaeto ceros curvisetum
           C_. decipiens
           Prorocentrum scutellum
*Ranking species of LIS, BIS,  and inshore Gulf of Maine
                                  89

-------
4.    Spring and summer forms in deep open areas; when found in shallower
      areas the peak population occurred in early spring or late autumn.

            Chaetoceros compressum
            Guinardia flaccidia
            Lauderia bprealis
            Rhizosolenia delicatula
            R_. setigera

5.    Peak populations in the Gulf of Maine in summer; but in southern New
      England waters,  flowered in spring and early summer and again in
      September.  This group throught to have an upper limit of temperature
      tolerance which is exceeded in the southern areas.

            Asterionella japonica
            Chaetoceros debile
            Nitzschia seriata
            Rhizosolenia fragellissima
            Thalassiosira decipiens

6.    Forms with no autumn peak in the southern region.

            Thalassiosira nordenskioldii

7.    Species found in LIS only.

            Schroderella delicatula
            Euxuviella apora
            Goniauxlax minime
            Prorocentrum triestinum

Growth coefficients for several algal types found in the BIS-LIS region are
given in table 30A. The growth coefficient, k,for.S. costatum ranged from

1.230-0.15 during the period of February and March. Fogg (1965) gives a k

value for j3.  costatum of 0. 55. Highest growth coefficients for Thalassiosira

occur at low temperature, indicating that it is a cold water species (table SOB).

The primary production of the LIS and continental shelf waters off New York

has been reported by Ryther and Yentsch (1958).  Their summary is shown in

table 31. The rate of carbon fixed (gm C/m2) decreases with depth.  Daily

production ranged from 0.2-1.00 gm C/m2/day.
                                   90

-------
      Table 30. A) Growth Coefficients in Bottles of Surface Water
      ior Several LIS Algae, B) Growth Coefficients as Function of
        Temperature (from Riley and Conover, 1967; Riley, 1961)
(A) Feb 2-5
Skeletonema costatum 1.23
Thalassiosira nitzschiodes 0 „ 40
_T_. nordenskioldii 0.48
Asterionella japonica 0 . 86
Chaetocerus sp.
Leptocylindricus danicus

Temperature (°C)
(B) 1-7
1.7
5.0
8.0
Feb 24- Mar 3
0.15
0.003
-0.07
0.12
• 	
_ _

Skeletonema
-0.021
-0.025
0.144
Oo258
Mar 24-30
0.17
-0.20

__
-0.17
0.12

Thalassiosira
0.058
0.015
-0.133
-0.163
               Table 31. Annual Rate of Carbon Fixation
                   (from Ryther and Yentsch,  1958)

Long Island Sound
Continental Shelf


Depth (m)
25
25-^0
50-1000
1000-2000
gm C/m2
of Sea Surface
380
160
135
100
Zooplankton
The zooplankton of the New York-Long Island Sound area have been studied
by Deevey (1952a,  1952b, 1956) and Gricr and Hart (1962). As in the Maine
and Florida regions, copepods are the dominant zooplankton throughout the
year when measured either numerically or by displacement volume.  Chaeto-
gnaths constitute the second most abundant group according to Grice  and
                                  91

-------
Hart (1962). Salps, cladocerans, medusae, appendicularians, euphausiids,
amphipods, decapods, and ctenophores may also be seasonally prominent
(Grice and Hart, 1962; Deevey, 1952a). Grice and Hart (1962) found a thirty-
fold difference between the maximum mean volume during the warm months
(3. 71 cc/m3) as compared to the cold months (0.12 cc/m3) in neritic waters,
while Clarke (1940) and Deevey (1956) have reported differences of 20-40 and
13 fold, respectively.  (See table 32 for monthly determinations by Deevey.)

        Table 32. Mean Monthly (Zooplankton) Total Numbers and
        Displacement Volumes in Long Island Sound, 1952-1953 —
               Mean of All Stations (from Deevey, 1956)

Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Number
per mr
25,675
44,255
111,200
161,385
77,000
114,715
105,140
31,180
31,350
14,325
10,635
19,560
45,940
53,430
76,870
Volume
per m3
(mL)
1.21
1.26
1.92
1.12
1.00
3.37
2.70
0.23
0.24
0.21
0.26
0.37
--
0.80
0.39
The displacement volume and numerical abundance of zooplankton as a func-
tion of season at stations on a transect fr^m Montauk Point, New York to
Bermuda is given by figure 45.  The data show that regardless of season
there are generally larger quantities of zooplankton in shelf waters as com-
pared to slope,  Gulf Stream, or Sargasso Sea waters.  The mean zooplankton
                                  92

-------
displacement volume for Long Island neritic waters found by Deevey (1.07
mL/m  ) agrees very well with that of Grice and Hart, but differs numerically
by about 60 times.  The discrepancy apparently lies in the relative size of
the zooplankton caught as shown by Deevey's comparison of Georges Bank,
BIS,  and LIS zooplankton hauls (figure 46).  Many species of zooplankton on
Georges Bank are known to be very large.  Numerical and dry weight rela-
tionships of various zooplankton samples are given in table 33.
The percentage composition and numerical seasonal abundance of zooplankton
groups for BIS waters are shown by figure 47 and table 34. The data show
that copepods are the most abundant group and are present year-round, as  at
stations off Long Island Sound„ Cladocera are abundant in the  early summer
and doliolids, appendicularians,  coelenterates, and larvae of  various bottom
invertebrates are abundant during the summer months.
       Table 33. Numerical and Dry Weight Relationships Between
             Various Zooplankton Hauls (from Deevey, 1952)
Date
Jan 11
11
Feb3
24
Mar 24
Apr 9
May 7
June 2
July 21
Aug 9
Aug 28
Sept 17
Oct6
Dec 19
Net No.
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
2
Dry Weight
(mg/fct3)
74.6
29.6
3.6
44.6
8.6
0.7
0.0
10.2
31.8
39.7
34.8
24.0
62.9
4.5
Number/
(m3)
28,540
4,800
420
5,140
720
840
100
4,300
1,480
7,125
7,115
1,890
27,800
350
Ash
(mg/m3 )
10.4
2.2
0.8
3.2
2.5
0.1
--
1.4
11.3
5.9
4.6
5.9
18.8
2.2
                                  93

-------
 £
 t-
 Z
 UJ
 LU
 3
    ll
                    AUGUST
                     I960
   DISPLACEMENT VOLUME
 H NUMBER

I
!•••:.:.-•
              JULY
              1960
        k It M
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
                1600
                1400
                1200
                1000
                 800
                 600
                 400
                 200
          MARCH
          1960
                »i rfi
                             1400
                             1200
                             1000
    O
    X
    I
    t
    O
 800
    u.
 600 O
 40= I
 200 g
  o 5
                   DECEMBER
                     1959
                       .H .a JS

•
I
A ' 8



C
i

j
0
j3300
F

' ' E

SEPTEMBER
1959
F ' G 'HH! 1 1 i JJ 'KK' LU'NN
                1600
                1400
                1200
                1000
                 800
                 600
                 400
                 200
                  0
                             1600
                             1400
                             1200
                             1000
                             800
                             600
                             400
                             200
                                             150-
           S
           O
           t-
                                       u
                                       <
                                       <
                                       H
                                       O
                                        1
                                             100-
LONG ISLAND SOUND 1952-1953
  BLOCK ISLAND SOUND 1949
    GEORGES BANK 1939-1940
 *
/!
I   !
                                                     VOLUMES IN CC/M SEA SURFACE
                                        5
                                        IT
                                        Si
                                        cc
                                        %
                                              50-
                                              25-
                              2,300,000-1
                                          2,000,000-
                                          1,500,000 -
              1,000,000
                                        ?
                            I  500.000
                               100,000
                                     J'F'M'A'M'J'J'A'S'O'N'D'J'F'M-A'M-J
                     j  F ' M' r^M' j' j' A' s' o
                                                              F' M' A'M'J
Figure 45.  Displacement Volumes
and Numerical Abundance of Zoo-
plankton (from Grice and Hartj
1962)   In July, station JJ is in
slope water,  not Sargasso Sea,
                             Figure 46.  Mean Monthly Zooplankton
                             Displacement Volumes and Total Num-
                             bers Recorded from Long Island Sound,
                             and Georges Bank (from Deevey,  1956)
                                        94

-------
                        COPEPODS
                        CLADOCERA
                        DOLIOLIDS (TUNICATES)
                        APPENDICULARIA (TUNICATES)
                        COELENTERATES
   8000-1
|      |  LARVAE BOTTOM INVERTEBRATES
          J'FMAMJJAS   o   N   D
Figure 47.  Major Groups of Zooplankton (Deevey, 1952)
                              95

-------
                          Table 34. Percentage of Zooplanktoh in Samplings (from Deevey,  1952)
Species
Copepoda
Pseudocalanus minutus
Centropages typicus
C. hamatus
Temora longicornis
Acartia tonsa
Paracalanus eras sir os-
tris
Oithona similis
Microsetella norvegica
Copepod nauplii
Bivalve Larvae
Lamellibranch veligers
Tunicata
Oikopleura dioica
Doliolum nationalis


Jan
28.6
7.6
0
0
0
0
19.9
0
41.3
0
0
0

Feb
65.3
10.0
12.4
1.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
31.0
7.3
0
0
42.5
25.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
A. Percentage in No. 10 Net Samples
Mar
10.1
1.7
0
0
0
0
11.0
0
74.1
0
0
0
Apr
25.1
0
0
0
0
0
9.8
0
47.1
0
0
0
May
10.4
0
0
10.0
0
0
16.3
0
48.0
5.4
0
0
Jun
5.5
0
0
18.5
0
0
11.4
0
37.1
12.4
0
0
Jul
0
0
9.7
0
12.6
0
35.4
0
8.0
0
21.4
0
Aug
0
0
5.9
16.1
0
0
0
0
15.4
0
0
0
51.0
10.6
0
0
4.6
11.3
0
0
3.7
10.2
0
31.3
Sept
0
3.1
0
0
0
0
16.5
0
41.4
8.5
8.1
4.6
Oct
0
0
0
0
7.5
5.8
21.5
5.7
21.7
22.0
0
0
Dec
0
0
0
0
0
33.6
48.8
0
7.3
0
0
0
CO
Oi

-------
                                                  Table 34 (Cont'd)
Species
Doliolum gengenbauri
Miscellaneous
Copepoda
Pseudocalanus minutus
Centropages typicus
C. hamatus
Acartia tonsa
Temora longicornis
Oithona similis
Paracalanus parvus
Oncaea venustus
Corycaeus speciosus
C. venustus

Jan
0
2.6
Feb
0
0
4.1
1.3
Mar
0
3.1
Apr
0
18.0
May
0
9.9
Jun
0
15.1
Jul
0
12.9
Aug Sep
0
0
13.4
20.5
5.7
12.1
Oct
0
15.8
B. Percentage in No. 2 Net Samples
68.0
33.5
7.5
7.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
72.0
94.3
26.0
2.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73.5
4.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.9
3.0
5.4
0
7.8
9.2
0
0
0
0
28.4
0
0
0
19.3
5.0
0
0
0
0
5.2
0
0
0
19.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
17.0
35.0
12.4
2.5
0
0
0
0
0
3.2
1.0
6.3
6.3
0
0
47.2
19.7
0
0
0
0
13.3
4.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20.9
0
0
0
0
0
4.2
0
0
0
7.6
0
32.8
0
0
0
8.1
0
0
Dec
0
10.3

0
38.2
0
4.0
4.0
0
3.9
0
19.5
7.3
CD

-------
                                                 Table 34 (Cont'd)
Spe cies
Bryozoa
Cyphonautes larvae
Coelenterata
Hydra medusae

Tunicata
Fritillaria borealis

Oikopleura dioica
Doliolum nationalis

Dolioletta gengenbauri

Cladocera
Podon leuckarti
P. inter medi us
Evade nordmanni
Penilia aviroostris
Miscellaneous
Jan

0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
3.6
Feb

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.0
3.7
Mar

0
5.8

6.7
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
9.9
Apr

0
3.5

54.0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
10.2
May

7.2
14.3

0
0
0
0

6.9
0
0
0
18.9
Jun

0
0

0
0
0
0

20.3
0
45.0
0
10.3
Jul

0
0

0
11.4
0
0

0
11.0
0
0
10.7
Aug

0
0
4.4
0

0
0
0
0
0
45.7
0
3.7

0
0
11.6
0
0
0
0
9.1
14.0
10.3
Sept

0
0

0
4.4
18.9
14.5

0
0
0
20.3
16.8
Oct

0
0

0
0
0
0

0
6.4
0
9.1
36.0
Dec

0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
23.1
CO
oo

-------
Copepods

Pseudocalanus minutus and Centropages typicus are widely distributed and
generally dominant in Long Island waters as shown in tables 34, 35, and 36.
However, many different species may be locally prominent depending on the
season (figure 47) and water circulation.  The numerical abundance of .P.
minutus and C. typicus by month is shown in figures 48 and 49..  The data
show the P. minutus as least abundant in the fall while  C. typicus is least
abundant in the spring.  A similar relationship is shown for Acartia clausi
and A. tonsa by figure 50.  Such data indicate  that various species of zoo-
plankton apparently succeed one another seasonally, as do various species
of phytoplankton.
Sanders (1952) has found C!_. typicus to be more abundant in surface plankton
tows and JP. minutus in bottom tows.  Apparently, however, no studies have
been conducted on the vertical distribution of copepods or on their diurnal
migration in this area.

         Table 35. Composition of the Zooplankton in Samples
            Taken February 17, 1951 (from Sanders, 1952)
                                         Plankton  (tows)
         Species                     Surface %   Bottom %
Copepoda
Pseudocalanus minutus
Centropages typicus
Oithona similis
Temora longicornis
Calanus finmarchicus
Acartia tonsa
Clytemnestra rostrata
Chaetognatha
Sagitta elegans
S. elegans (eggs)
Bryozoa
Cyphonautes larvae
Polychaeta
Polychaete larvae
Gastropoda
Gastropod larvae
Cirripedia
JB. balanoides (cyprids)
47.01
29.74
2.20
1.65
2.20
1.65
0.55
1.10
0.55
4.40
1.10
9.35
0.55
91.28
2.01
4.69
0.68
                                  99

-------
          Table 36. Numerically Important Copepod Species
        in Neritic, Slope, Gulf Stream, and Sargasso Sea Waters
                     (from Grice and Hart, 1962)
Species
                                                     Mean Number
Frequency   per m
                                                           i«5
                        Neritic
                        (14 samples)
Pseudocalanus minutus
Centropages typicus
Oithona similis
Temora longicornis
Paracalanus parvus
Calanus finmarchicus
Metridia lucens
Candacia armata
Centropages typicus
Pseudocalanus minutus
Oithona similis
Metridia lucens
Clausocalanus pergens
C. arcuicornis
Pleuromamma borealis
Oithona atlantica
Clausocalanus furcatus
Lucicutia flavicornis
Oithona plumifera
O. setigera
Calocalanus pavo
Faranula gracilis
Mecynocera clausi
Clausocalanus furcatus
Oithona setigera
Lucicutia flavicornis
Ctenocalanus vanus
Farranula gracilis
Mecynocera clausi
                        Slope
                        (15 samples)
                         Gulf Stream
                         (3 samples)
                        Sargasso Sea
                        (11 samples)
    13
    14
    13
     8
     8
    11
    12
     9
    11
     8
     6
    11
     6
     7
     8
    12
     3
     3
     3
     3
     2
     3
     3
     9
    11
    11
     6
     6
     9
559
450
151
 59
 39
 32
 16
  9
 76
 16
 14
 15
 19
 13
  6
  6
 27
  9
  9
  7
  9
  4
  2
  7
  6
  4
  3
  2
  2
                                 100

-------
  20,000 -


  10,000-


  5,000-
CO

 ffi
 m 1,000-


 1  500-
 o
    100-

    50-
NO. 10 NET

NO.2 NET
                M
                       M
   Fieure 48.  Numerical Abundance of Pseudo-
   calanus minutus (from Deevey,  1952)
                                              NO. 10 NET

                                              NO. 2 NET
            F '  M '  A  ' M  ' J '  J  ' A  ' S
     N ' D
   Figure 49.  Numerical Abundance of Centropages
   typicus  (from Deevey, 1952)
                                                             100,000-
                                                              75,000-
                                                            UJ
                                                            CO
                                                            i
                                                            z
                                                              50,000-
                                                              25,000^
                                 A. CLAUSI
                                                                   M'A'M'J'J'AS'O'N'DJF  wr
                                                                                  MONTH
                                                          A ' M
                                                           Figure 50.  Numerical Abundances of Acartia
                                                           clausi and A_. tons a (from Deevey,  1956)

-------
Chaetognaths
Grice and Hart (1962) found only three chaetognath species represented in
shelf collections, Sagitta elegans,  S.  enflata, andJL serratodentata.  _S_.  §!§;•
gans was most numerous and was present year-round. The  average abundance
was 25/m3, constituting 14.6% of the  mean zooplankton displacement volume.
Chaetognaths were most abundant in July and December,  and least abundant
in March.  Sanders (1952) found that JL  elegans constituted about 1% of the
zooplankton displacement volume in BIS during  February (table 35).
The vertical distribution and diurnal migration of Chaetognaths in the New
York-Long Island area have not been studied to our knowledge.

Other Zooplankton
Other groups of zooplankton, observed in significant numbers primarily dur-
ing the summer or fall months, include cladocerans, tunicates, coelenterates,
and larvae of other invertebrates that are meroplanktonic (Deevey, 1952a,
1952 b, 1956,  and Sanders,  1952),  Of the cladocerans, Podon intermedius
and JP. polyphemoides were common,  and also the tunicate Oikopleura dioica.

Principal Fisheries
The species of fish present in the BIS-LIS area have been reported by Merri-
man and Warfel (1948) and Richards (1963a).  Approximately 40 species of
fish were commonly found (tables 37 and 38), The most abundant fish of the
area reported by Merriman and Warfel (1948) are listed here:

                                                 % (weight)   % (number)
Pseudopleuronectes americanus (winter flounder)     36.5         41.8
Raja erinacea (little skate)                           17.9         11.2
Myoxocephalus octodecimspinosus  (sculpin)           13.3         20.8
Merluccius bilinearis (whiting)                        6.3         10.4
Raja diaphanes (bigskate)                             4.5          1.2
Lophosetta aquosa (windowpane flounder)               4,4          5.6

The three most abundant species reported by Richards (1963a) include P..
americanus (winter flounder); Scopthalmus aguesus  (windowpane flounder),
and Merluccius bilinearis (whiting).

                                  102

-------
The chief residents include all of the above, with the winter flounder forming

the most conspicous species present.  The common migrants found in the area

include Stenotomus chrysops (p'= gy), Ammodytes americanus (sand eel), and

Brevoortia tyrannus (menhaden).  The standing crop of demersal fish for LIS

is reported to be 0.76 gm/m2 (Richards, 1963a).  The Fishery Statistics (1969)

lists the winter flounder as an important fishery of the New England area, with

an annual catch of about 21 million pounds valued at about 2.2 million dollars.


      Table 37, Names of Fishes Taken in Monthly One-Hour Hauls,
       and Additional Species Observed in Other Hauls on Collection
        Dates from 1943-1946 (from Merriman and Warfel,  1948)


 From Monthly One-Hour Hauls
     1.  Mustelis canis:  smooth dogfish, gray fish
     2.  Squalus acanthias: spiny dogfish, gray fish, piked dogfish
     3.  Raja erinacea: little skate, common skate, hedgehog skate, summer
          skate
     4.  Raja diaphanes:  big skate, spotted skate, winter skate
     5.  Raja stabuliforis:  barn door skate, winter skate
     6.  Clupea harengus:  herring, sardine
     7.  Pomolobus pseudoharengus: alewife, gaspereau, sowbelly
     8.  Porontotus triacanthus: butterfish, dollar fish, harvest fish
     9-  Centropristes striatus: sea bass, black sea bass,  blackfish
    10.  Stenotomus chrys  ps:  scup, porgy
    11.  Menticirrhus saxatilis: king fish, king whiting, whiting
    12.  Tautogolabrus adspersus:  cunner, sea perch, bergall, nipper
    13.  Tautoga onitis:  tautog, blackfish
    14.  Stenphanolepis hispidus: common filefish,  fool fish, thread file fish
    15.  Spheroides maculatus: puffer,  swell fish, blowfish, globe fish
    16.  Myoxocephalus octodecimspinosus:  longhorn sculpin, gray sculpin,
          hacklehead, toadfish
    17.  Hemitripterus americanus:  sea raven, red sculpin
    18.  Prionotus carolinus:  common sea robin, green eye
    19.  Prionotus evolans: redwinged sea robin, stripped sea robin
    20.  Macrozoarces americanus:  ocean pout, eel pout, yowler, conger
          eel, ling
    21.  Merlucctus  bilinearis: whiting, silver hake, New England hake
    22.  Gadus morhua:  cod, rock cod
    23.  Melanogrammus aeglifinus: haddock, white-eye
    24.  Urophycis regius: spotted hake
    25.  Urophycis tenuis:  white hake, Boston hake, mud hake, ling
    26.  Urophycis chuss:  squirrel hake, snot-head hake
    27.  Paralichthys dentatus: summer flounder, fluke, plaice, turbot
    28.  Paralichthys oblongus:  four-spotted flounder, Baptist fish
    29.  Limandaferruglnea:  yellowtail, rusty dab, sand dab
    30.  Pseudopleuronectes americanus: winter flounder,  flat, blackback,
          flounder
                                  103

-------
                       Table 3 7 (Continued)
   31.  Glyptocephalus cynoglossus:  witch flounder,  sole, fluke
   32.  Lophopsettaaquosa: sand flounder, window pane, sundial
   33.  Lophius americanus:  goose fish, monk fish,  angler, mouth-all-
         mighty,  fishing frog
From Additional Hauls on Collection Dates

    1. Dasybatus marinus: stingray, stingaree.  clam cracker, IX-12-43
    2. Brevoortia tyrannus:  menhaden, pogy. DC-10-44
    3. Scomber scombrus: common mackerel.  VI-23-44
    4. Cynoscion regalis:  weakfish,  squeteague, sea trout. X-31-43,
         XI-19-44,  X-15-45
    5. Leiostomus  xanthurus: spot, goody, post croaker,  lafayette, porgy,
         yellowtail.  XI-19-44.
    6. Ceratacanthus schoepf:  orange filefish, fool fish, sunfish.   X-26-44
    7. Neoliparis atlanticus: sea snail, lumpsucker, New England sea snail.
         IV-16-45
    8. Liparis liparis:  sea snail,  striped sea snail, north Atlantic sea snail.
         K-14-46.
    9. Pholis gunnellus: rock eel, gunnel, butterfish. V-18-44, HI-24-46
   10. Pollachius virens: pollack, Boston bluefish,  coafish, green cod.
         VI-23-44
   11. Microgadus  torn cod:  tomcod, frost fish.  111-19-44
          Table 38.  Common Fish Species Found at Two Stations
            in Long Island Sound in July (from Richards,  1963a)
Species
Raja erinacea
Clupea harengus
Alosa pseudoharengus
Alosa aestivalis
Brevoortia tyrannus
Anchoa mitchill
Osmerus mordox
Conger oceanica
Merluccius bilinearis
Pollachuis virens
Enchelyopus cimbrius
Urophycis chuss
Urophycis regius
Apeltes quadracus
Syngnatus fuse us
Menidia menidia
Cynoscion regalis
Station
Total
Number
35
7
9
2
29
4
2
1
106
2
1
19
15
4
9
33
0
1, 1956
Total
Weight
(g)
11,




63


2,
7






-
430
4
73
4
116
-76
52
19
911
1
68
437
335
6
9
100
-
Station
Total
Number
12
24
0
1
1
23
1
0
310
0
18
99
23
0
3
3
48
2, 1957
Total
Weight
fe)
— —
163

4
11

51

13 , 519

1,031
8,552
V £ v v
792

4
12
107
                                 104

-------
                         Table 38 (Cont'd)
Stenotomus chrysops
Centropristes striatus
Gobiosoma ginsburgi
Tautogolabrus adspersus
Tautoga onitis
Ammodytes americanus
Pholis gunnellus
Poronotus triacanthus
Prionotus carolinus
Prionotus evolans
Myoxocephalus aeneus
M. octodecimspinosus
Paralichthus oblongus
Paralichthus dentatus
Scophthalmus aquosus
Etropus microstomus
Pseudopleuronectes a.mericanus
Trine ctes maculatus
Sphaeroides maculatus
Lophius americanus
313
25
1
44
16
320
3
3
143
3
20
4
8
3
132
12
965
2
40
2
1,976
17
4
4,642
3,556
1,373
13
5
1,104
549
606
705
218
1,500
15,296
76
105,232
—
241
6,800
24
0
0
45
5
0
0
5
23
1
0
1
19
2
15
0
796
0
0
1
1,029

__
6,045
3,530
7
mm mm
52
59
339

65
795
1,100
12,837
7
97,444
f
mm —
--
The Statistical Bulletin for 1968 (ICNAF, 1970) lists the nominal catch for
the winter flounder in an area from Long Island to Chesapeake Bay as 72 me-
tric tons. However, if an area up to Cape Cod is included, the catch would
be increased to some 3,886 metric tons. Therefore, the winter flounder
(P. americanus) of LIS-BIS is a fishery of some commercial importance.
In a study of the Connecticut commercial fisheries, a steady decline in the
fishing industry was  noted (Electric Boat, 1968).  However, factors other
than productivity of the fisheries are responsible.
The distribution of lobster larvae for the southern New England coast has
been reported by Lund and Steward (1970).  Their study indicated that lobster
larvae are widely distributed in offshore waters, but in Long Island Sound,
the largest concentrations were observed at the western end. They concluded
that surface current patterns peculiar to LIS were responsible for the in-
creased numbers at the western end, and the lower concentrations observed
in the eastern end  and at BIS were caused by a flushing phenomenon and sub-
sequent dilution in the offshore water.
                                 105

-------
               Important Fisheries of the LIS-BIS Area

Common Name
Sea scallop
Yellowtail flounder
Ocean pout
Sculpin
Winter flounder

Catch*
(metric tons)
16,727
10,410
8,719
6,687
3,958
New England Fishery**
Weight
(l,0001b)
7,025
52,387
1
not listed
21,252
Value
($1,000)
5,438
5,460
1

2,295
     *ICNAF, 1970 - for areas 6A and 5Zw (South Long Island,
      Block Island, and Cape Cod areas) based on 1968 catches.
    **Data from Fishery Statistics,  1967,  for new England Fishery
      Resources (Lyles, 1969)	

The important fisheries for area 6A and 5Zw (ICNAF, 1970) listed in order
of greatest catches are tabulated above.     Areas 6A and 5Zw include the in-
shore area from southern New Jersey to Cape Cod. The sea scallop and the
yellow-tail flounder are the most abundant species encountered and represent
a fishery valued at about 11 million dollars in the New England area.  The
winter flounder discussed earlier is also a species   important in this area,
as is the ocean pout.  The sculpin (a trash fish) is primarily used for pro-
cessing.  A description of each of these forms is given in tables 39  through
43.
The potential of a surf clam and an ocean quahog fishery in this area has been
reported by Merrill and Ropes (1969), and Merrill et al (1969). The area of
largest potential was found off the Long Island,  New York, and the New Jersey
coasts (figures 51 and 52).  The surf clam (Spisula solidissima) and the ocean
quahog (Artica islandica) were found in average depths of 29 and 42 m, re-
spectively.  Except for a small fishery off the coast of Rhode Island, the ocean
quahog has not been fished commercially.  The  surf clam is fished commer-
cially in waters off the coast of the Mid-Atlantic states.  Landings for the
New England fishery in 1967 were reported to be 45 and 16 thousand pounds,
respectively (Lyles,  1969).  The larger surf clam found at shallower depths
has been utilized more as a fishery than the ocean quahog.  The population of
black quahogs in the area could furnish catches  of substantial value if the
species were in demand commercially (Parker, 1966).
                                 106

-------
              Table 39. Details on the Sea Scallop Fishery
              Sea scallop
        Pie cope cten magellanicus
                      Characteristics
 Commercial landings and
   economic importance
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature range
   Type of bottom

 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults

 Growth
 Mobility migration
   Horizontal
     New England: 7,02 5,000 Ib
       ($5,438,000)
     New Bedford boats (25 trips/yr):
        250,000 Ib ($130,000)
     17,667 metric tons  (5Y-940, 5Zw-
        467, 6A-16,260)
     rank  is 1 in 6A, 4 on Atlantic coast,
        11 in U.S.

     from  north shores of Gulf of St.
        Lawrence to Cape Hatteras
     in north:  just below low-tide mark;
        south of Cape Cod: deeper, colder
        water,  20-50 fathoms
     optimum 46°F
     gravel, sand, sand-mud
     plankton
     plankton

     9 in.  max at 10 yr, average 6 in.
        1-1/2 yr 5-12 mm, 2-1/2 yr 2.2
        in., 4-1/2 yr 3.5 in.,  6-1/2 yr.
        4.4 in.
     no measurable migration; larger than
       4 in.  do not swim
 Behavioral characteristics    found largely in beds
 Spawning
   Time of year
     August to October
                                          Data
                                          Source*
1

2

3

1


2,4
2
4
4
   Position of eggs/larvae in  free swimming; attach to shells, rocks,
     water column
       bottom debris by byssus -- up to
       about 10 mm
     sexually mature in about 2 yr; form
       first discrete ring at 2-1/2 yr and
       spawn at end of that year   _ 5
*1.  Lyles, 1969
 4.  Dow, 1969
2. Posgay,  1957        3. ICNAF, 1970
5. Merrill and Posgay, 1967.
                                  107

-------
          Table 40,   Details on the Yellowtail Flounder Fishery
               Yellowtail flounder    Limanda ferruginea
                     Characteristics
                                   Data
                                   Source*
 Commercial landings and
   economic importance
New England:  52,387,000 Ib
  ($5,460,000)                     1
11,400 metric tons (5Y-990,  5Zw-
  9,735, 6A-675)                   2
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature range

   Type of bottom
 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults
 Growth

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical

   Horizontal

 Behavioral characteristics

 Spawning
   Area

   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
Gulf of St. Lawrence to Chesa-
  peake Bay
6 to 40 fathoms                     3
33 F to 54 F                        3

sand, sand-mud; shun rocky or
  mud bottoms                     3
small crustaceans, gastropods,
  bivalves, worms                  3

average 5 in. first year             3
larvae take to bottom when about
  14 mm long                      3
Seasonal inshore-off shore           3,4

temperature tolerance 27C
western and northwestern periphery
  of Gulf, 20-50 fathoms            3
March-August                      3
eggs pelagic                        3
*1.  Lyles, 1969                    2.  ICNAF, 1970
 3.  Bierelow and Schroeder, 1953.    4.  Jones, 1968
                        5.  deSylva,  1969
                                 108

-------
             Table 41.  Details on the Ocean Pout Fishery
             Ocean pout
 Macrozoarces americanus
                   Characteristics
                                  Data
                                  Source*
Commercial landings and
  economic importance
Geographical range


Habitat preferences
  Water depth
  Temperature range
  Salinity range
  Type of bottom

Food sources

  Adults


Growth

Mobility- migration
  Vertical
  Horizontal
New England:  1,000 Ib
8719 metric tons (5ZW-8355,
  6A-364)

New Jersey to Newfoundland,
  Gulf of St. Lawrence
bottom, 8-45 fathoms
32-62 F

hard; sandy mud, gravel
molluscs, crustaceans, echino-
  derms, invertebrates

1 yr: 4-5 in.
breed and live at bottom
autumnal shift to deeper water in
  northern regions
Behavioral characteristics      temperature tolerance 26.6-29 C
Spawning
  Area

  Time of year
  Position of eggs/larvae in
    water column
no particular region - - rocky
  bottom
Sept-Oct
eggs: 2-1/2 to 3 month incubation
  period; guarded by adults on
  bottom
1,2


3
3
3
3

3


3

3

4
3
3
*1.  ICNAF, 1970                   2.  Lyles, 1969
 3.  Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953    4.  deSylva, 1969
                                 109

-------
               Table 42.  Details on the Sculpin Fishery
         Longhorn sculpin    Myoxocephalus octodecimspinosus

                                                               Data
                                                               Source*
Characteristics
Commercial landings and
  economic importance
           6,687 metric tons (5Zw-6, 556; 1
             6A-121)
           no data on economic importance 2
Geographical range

Habitat preferences
  Water depth
  Temperature range
           Newfoundland to New Jersey
           5-50 fathoms
           32-66°F
3
3
Food sources

  Adults




Growth

Mobility- migration

  Horizontal



Behavioral characteristics

Spawning
  Area
  Time  of year
  Position of eggs/larvae in
    water column
           omnivorous scavenger:
             shrimps, crabs, amphipods,
             hydroids, molluscs, squids,
             fish fry                     3

           1  yr:  2 to  2-1/2 in.
           seasonal onshore-offshore
             moves; BIS: inshore Nov
             to Apr                      3

           temperature tolerance 28°C    4
           all along coast at all depths    3
           Nov to Jan                    3
           eggs sink -- adhesive demersal;
             adhesion disappears after
             incubation period            3
*1. ICNAF, 1969                   2.  Lyles, 1970
 3. Bigelow and Schroeder,  1953     4.  deSylva, 1969
                                 110

-------
           Table 43. Details on the Winter Flounder Fishery
           Winter flounder   IPs eudopleuronectes americanus
                 Characteristics
                                   Data
                                   Source*
 Commercial landings and
   economic importance
New England:  21,2 52,000 Ib
  ($2,295,000)                     1
4,858 metric tons (5Y-900,  5Zw-
  3,886, 6A-72)                     2
 Geographical range

 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature range
   Salinity range
   Type of bottom

 Food sources
   Fry
   Adults
 Growth:

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical

   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
   Larvae development time
Newfoundland to Chesapeake Bay
bottom fish, 10- 50 fathoms
30-70°F                            3
brackish
soft and hard                       3
diatoms, small crustaceans
smaller invertebrates, fish fry,
  crustaceans

2 yr: 5 to 7-1/2 in.  4 yr: 9 to 10 in.
essentially stationary, keep near
  bottom                           3
seasonal inshore-offshore below
  N. Y.; fry produced in estuaries
  work offshore with age            3
migrate to~20 fathom line in sum-
  mer^ 15 mile seaward           4

temperature tolerance 27^0;  found
  at upper and lower tide marks
New England
Jan-May
eggs sink to bottom

2 \ to 3 i months
*!•  Lyles, 1969
 3.  Bigelow and Schroeder,  1953.
           2. ICNAF, 1970.
           4. Jones, 1968.
                                  Ill

-------
Figure 51. Distribution of Ocean Quahogs in the Middle Atlantic Bight and
the Gulf of Maine (from Merrill and Ropes,  1960)
                                  112

-------
Figure 52.  Distribution, of Surf Clams in the Middle Atlantic Bight and the
Gulf of Maine (from Merrill and Ropes, 1960)
                                  113

-------
Benthic Organisms
The benthic epifauna population of LIS has been reported by Richards and
Riley (1967).     A list of invertebrates identified in their catches is shown
in table 44. A total of 144 species was  collected. The mean numerical
standing crop was 77.00/m2, and the mean biomass was 1.098 gm/m . The
dominant species for two stations in LIS are given in table 45 (Richards and
Riley 1967).  Cragon septemspinosus (shrimp), Asterias forbesi  (starfish)
hydroids,  Pagurus longicarpus (common hermit crab), Neomysis americana
and Ampelisca vadorum (amphipods), and Ampharete acutifrons (polychaete)
were the most abundant species collected.  Other forms collected of lesser
importance were Nassarius trivittatus (gastropod), Cancer irroratus and
Neopanope texana sayi (crabs), and Corophium sp. and caprellids (amphipods).
Sanders (1956) has reported on the soft-bottom community of LIS. Based on
36 samples over a two-year period, he found the mean number of organisms
varied from 5, 563 to 43,398/station, and a mean weight from 4.54 to 36.38
      o
gm/m .  He lists some 13 5 species,  most of which are  identified and are si-
milar to organisms found in adjacent New England areas. The  greatest bio-
mass was  found in bottom sediments containing 13-25% silt and clay.  Suspen-
sion feeders were the dominant types in coarse sediments,  while the selective
and nonselective deposit feeders dominated the finer sediments. The domin-
ant forms  found in sediments of 20-75% silt and clay, were Nepthys incisa
(polychaete),  Cistenoides gouldii(trumpet worm), amphipods (Ampelisca), and
the lamellibranchs (Yoldia limatula and Nucula proxima). Sanders (1956) has
described  the soft-bottom community of LIS, as a Nephthys incisa-Yoldia
limatula community, and it consists of a rather large population of organisms
relatively  small  in size.  The soft-bottom community structure of the Buzzards
Bay,  Massachusetts area was found to be very similar to the LIS area (Sanders
1960), consisting largely of Nephthys incisa and Nucula proxima (polychaete
and lamellibranch, respectively).  In a study of the deep-sea benthic popula-
tion along  a transect from Massachusetts to Bermuda, Sanders et al (1965)
reported a general trend of decreasing numbers with increasing depth and dis-
tance  from the continent (table 46).  The single most abundant group was the
Polychaeta. Polychaeta, together with the Crustacea, Pelecepoda and Sipun-
culoidea, comprise  from 85-100% of the bottom fauna for most of the stations
examined.  Since the dominant juvenile demersal fish of the region (flounder)
                                 114

-------
    Table 44.  Listing of Benthic Invertebrates and Fishes Taken in
          Long Island Sound (from Richards and Riley, 1967)
Protozoa:
    Foraminifera, unidentified
Porifera:
    Cliona sp.
    Microciona prolifera
Bryozoa:
    Alcyonidium polyoum
    Bowerbankia gracilis
    Membranopora sp.
Coelenterata:
    Thuiaria argentea
    Hydrallmania falcata
    Halecium halicinum
    Obelia gelatinosa
    Lafoea sp.
    Cerianthus sp.
    Astrangia danae
Turbellaria:
    Stylochus zebra
Nemertina:
    Cephalothrix linearis
    Cerebratulus luridus
    Amphiporus sp.
    Unidentified (2)
Polychaeta:
    Lepidonotus squamatus
    Polynoidae, unidentified
    Eteone lactea
    E_. longa
    Phyllodoce fragilis
    P. groenlandica
Polychaeta:
    Phyllodoce sp.
    Paranaitis speciosa
    Eumida sanguinea
    Exogone dispar
    Autolytus cornutus
    Neanthes succinea
    Nereis pelagica
    Nereis sp.
    Nepthys incisa
    N. caeca
    N. sp.
    Glycera dibranchiata
    G. americanus
    G. sp.
    Diopatra cuprea
    Onuphis nebulosa
    Ninoe  nigripes
    Arabella iricolor
    Polydora ciliata
    Streblospio benedicti
    Spionidae, unidentified (2)
    Flabelligera affinis
    Travisia carnea
    Capitallidae, unidentified
    Maldanid
    Maldane sp.
    Cistenides gouldii
    Melinna cristata
    Ampharete acutifrons
    Ajnage auricula
    Amphitrite sp.
    Lysilla alba
                                  115

-------
                           Table 44 (Cont'd)
Polychaeta:
    Polycirrus eximus
    Potamilla neglecta
    Sabella crassicornis
    S_o microphthalma
    Eupomatus dianthus
    Unidentified
Crustacea:
    Cytheridea americana
    Sarsiella zostericola
    Centropages sp.
    Temora longicornis
    Eurytemora sp.
    Labidocera aestiva
    Acartia clausi
    Balanus balanoides
    Neomysis americana
    Heteromysis formosa
    Diastylis polita
    Oxyurostylis smithi
    Edotea montosa.
    Bopyrid isopod
    Anonyx n.  sp.
    Orchomenella minuta
    Ampelisca vadorum
    Ampelisca abdita
    Stenothoe cypris
    Calliopius laeviusculus
    Carinogammarus mucronatus
    Gammarus annulatus
    Melita nitida
    Leptocheirus pinguis
Crustacea :
    Podoceropsis nitida
    Erichthonius brasiliensis
    Unciola irrorata
    Corophium sp.
    Caprella linearis
    Paracaprella tenuis
    Deutella incerta
    Caprellid
    Crangon septemspinosa
    Shrimp, unidentified
    Pagurus longicarpus
    p. pollicaris
    Pinnixia sayana
    Ovalipes o.  ocellatus
    Callinectes sapidus
    Cancer irroratus
    Panopeus herbstii
    Neopanope texana sayi
    Pelia mutica
    Libinia emarginata
Mollusca
    Nucula proxima
    Yoldia lima tula
    Anadora transversa
    Anomia simplex
    Pandora gouldiana
    Lyonsia hyalina
    Cerastoderma pinnulatum
    Gemma gemma
    Macoma  tenta
    Ensis directus
                                 116

-------
                           Table 44 (Cont'd)
Mollus ca :                             Chaetognatha :
    Mulinia lateralis                       Sagittasp.
    Saxicava ^^                   EcMnodermata :
    Polinices duplicatus                   Asterias forbesi
    Crepidula fornicata
    Crepidula plana                   Pisces :
    Limpet,  unidentified                          mitchmi
    Cerithiopsis subulata                  Auguilla rostrate
    Siela adamsii                          Syngnathus |uccus
    Bittium alternatum                    Ammodytes hexapterus
    Eupleura caudata                      Prionotus carolinus
    Mitrella lunata                        Myoxocephalus aeneus
    Nassarius trivittatus                   Scopthalmus a^uosug
    Retusca  canaliculata                   Pseudopleuronectes americanus
    Cylichna alba
    Aeolidia papillosa
    Snail,  unidentified
               Table 45.  Abundance of Epifaunal Species
                    (from Richards and Riley, 1967)
Species
Station 1 :
Asteria forbesi
Crangon septemspinosa
Cancer irroratus
Libinia emarginata
Hydroids
Pagurus longi carpus
P. ppllicaris
Nassarius trivittatus
Mean
Number/nor
2.25(4)*
6.62(3)
0.06(11)
0.01(13)
0.93(7)
0.04(12)
0.94(6)
Values
Dry Weight/m3
0.770(1)*
0.135(2)
0.116(3)
0.072(4)
0.064(5)
0.047(6)
0.045(7)
0.031(8)
                                  117

-------
              Table 45 (Continued)
Species
      Mean Values
Number/m3    Dry Weight/m3
Neopanope texana sayi
Neomysis americana
Crepidula plana
Lepidonotus squamatus
Caprellids
Unciola irrorata
Station 3 A :
Asterias forbesi
Crangon septemspinosa
Cancer irroratus
Libinia emarginata
Hydroids
Pagurus longi carpus
P.. pollicaris
Nassarius trivittatus
Neopanope texana sayi
Neomysis americana
Crepidula plana
Lepidonotus squamatus
Caprellids
Unciola irrorata
0.60(8)
0.31(2)
0.49(9)
0.046(10)
4.19(1)
1.14(5)
0.24(5)
0.44(2)
+ (11)
0
0.01(7)
0
0.34(3)
0.01(9)
2.57(1)
0.04(6)
0.01(10)
0.29(4)
0.01(8)
0.018(9)
0.006(10)
0.003(11)
0.002(12)
0.001(13)
+ (14)
0.124(1)
0.006(2)
+ (8)
0
0.002(5)
0.001(6)
0
0.006(3)
+ (?)
0.002(4)
+ (10)
+ (11)
+ 0)
+ (12)
                   118

-------
       Table 46.  Abundance of Benthic Animals for Transect
               Stations from Massachusetts to Bermuda
                      (from Sanders et al, 1965)
Station
55
C#l
SI. 2
SI. 3
SI. 4
D#l
E#3
mi
Gil
GH#1
GH#4
HH#3
II#1
II#2
JJ#1
JJ#3
KK#1
LL#1
MM#1
NN#1
OO#2
Ber. 7
Ber. 5
Ber. 4
Ber. 3
Ber. 2
Ber. 6
Ber. 8
Ber. 1
Depth
(m)
75
97
200
300
400
487
823
1500
2086
2500
2469
2870
3742
3752
4436
4540
4850
4977
5001
4950
4667
2500
2000
1700
1700
1700
1500
1000
1000
Latitude
40° 2 7. 2 'N
40°20.5'N
40°01.8f
39° 58.4'
39° 56.5'
39° 54.5'
39° 50.5'
39° 47'
39° 42'
39° 25. 5'
39° 29'
38° 47'
37° 59'
38° 05'
37° 27'
3 7° 13.1'
36° 23 .5'
35° 35'
34° 45'
33° 56 .5'
33° 07'
32° i5»
32° 11.4'
32° 17'
32° 16.6'
32° 16.6'
32014.3'
32021.3'
32° 16. 5'
Longitude
70° 47. 5'W
70° 47'W
70° 42'
70° 40. 3'
70° 39. 9'
70° 3 5'
70°- 3 5'
70° 45'
70° 39'
70° 3 5'
70° 34'
70° 08'
69° 32'
69° 36'
68° 41'
68° 39. 6'
68° 04. 5'
67° 25'
66° 30'
65° 50^7'
65° 02. 2'
64° 32. 6'
64° 41. 6'
64° 3 5'
64°36'3'
64° 36 3'
64° 42'
64° 33'
64° 42. 5'
Number of
Animals in
Sample
3,791
3,082
6,455
11,907
4,439
5,115
3,008
997
1,120
365
299
636
__*
391
264
101
113
67
27
51
58
91
89
217
126
189
208
326
243
Number of „
Animals/m^
13,073
5,314
12,910
21,263
6,081
8,669
2,979
1,719
2,154
521
467
748
^m ^ J^
1,003
264
158
92
55
33
38
126
120
189
271
274
215
178
729
528
*Sample  excluded from quantitative analysis because of small size
                                119

-------
prefers species of Neomysis, Cragon, and copepods in its diet, competition
for bottom forms as food is apparently minimal due to the abundance of copepods
and amphipods in the area (Richards and Riley,  1967).
The food habits of juvenile and larval winter flounder have been studied by
Pearcy (1962).  Larval forms feed primarily on nauplii,  polychaetes, inver-
tebrate  eggs, and small protozoa.  Juvenile fish feed primarily on calanoid
copepods.  The young flounder feed primarily on amphipods and polychaetes.
The two most important species preyed upon are Ampelisca (amphipod) and
Neanthes(polychaete).  Pearcy (1962) indicates that the flounder feeds pri-
marily at night and is euryphagous, having identified 77 food  organisms from
7 different phyla in the stomach analyses of juvenile flounder.  The important
food species for juvenile fish of LIS found by Richards (1963b and 1963c) were:

      Hydroids (unidentified)
      Neanthes succinia
      Ampharete acutifrons
      Pseudodeaplomus coronatus
      Temora longicornis
      Acartia spp.
      Neomysis americana
      Leptocheirus pinquis
      Ampelisca spp.
      Caprella spp.
      Cragon septemspinosus
      B_. balanoides larvae
      Nephthys incisa
      Labidocera aestiva
Crustaceans were by far  the most important food organisms; and of these
Neomysis americana was preferred by the greater number of fish.  Sanders
(1952), studying the food  and feeding habits of the  herring in BIS, reported
that the copepod Pseudocalanus minutus was the most abundant form found in
stomach analysis of herring. Sanders (1952) also lists Centropages typicus,
Temora longicornus, B. balanoides larvae, Qithona similis, Acartia tonsa,
and Sagitta elegans as important planktonic food forms, and Cragon septem-
spinosus (shrimp), Mechtheimysis stenotepsis (mysid), Diastyles spp.  (cum-
acid),  Dulichia monocantha and Monoculodes edwardsi (amphipods), and
Nereis  (polychaete)as important benthic food forms.
                                 120

-------
Fouling
Fouling of engineered structures and equipment can be expected generally
at any marine site.  Unless careful considerations and precautions are taken,
accumulations and growth on submerged objects can be enormous.  Character-
istics and results of fouling are summarized in table 47 (A. D.  Little,  1962).
A list of the common organisms associated with the fouling community is
given in table 48. Of the 17 recognized animal phyla, only four are not gen-
erally associated with the fouling community:  Ctenophora, Chaetognatha,
Nematoda, and Phoronidea (Redfield and Deevey, 1952a).  The predominant
foulers are generally sessile organisms and include barnacles, bryozoans,
hydroids,calcareous tubeworms,  tunicates, mussels,  jingle shells, oysters
amphipod tubes, and seaweeds.  Because of the host of biological,physical,
and chemical parameters affecting fouling, the composition of the fouling
community is highly variable.  The fouling organisms and periods of attach-
ment at two sites (Woods Hole, Mass, and in the approaches to Chesapeake
Bay, Md.) are shown in figures 53 and 54.   Fouling is largely seasonal, oc-
curring predominately in the warm months of spring, summer and early fall.
The colder months of December, January, and February are  months of least
fouling activity.  Fouling is maximum near shore and as  the distance from
shore is increased less  fouling is encountered.  Fouling in relation to dis-
tance from shore, for a location in the approaches to Chesapeake Bay, is pre-
sented in table 49 (Hutchins,  1952).  Fouling at 30 miles  from shore was mo-
derate; at 60 miles from shore fouling was least.  Note that the predominant
fouling forms at depths greater than 30 ft were hydroids, goose barnacles,
and sponges. Intensive  fouling activity does not occur at depths below 150 ft.
The fouling intensity at various depths in the New England area water is given
in figure  55 (Hutchins, 1952).  Fouling intensity was greatest at depths less
than 100 ft and, at best, was about 5 lb/ft2.  At the Narragansett Bay site
                                                          c\
(VI) fouling intensity was more severe, ranging from 15-30 lb/ft .  At depths
greater than 150 ft, fouling intensity was in every case less than 1  lb/ft .
The 12-month cumulative fouling obtained for curved stainless steel test
panels, immersed at two sites (38 ft and 68 ft depths)  in the approaches to
Chesapeake Bay,  was from 31 to 38 oz/ft2 (Daugherty, 1961).  The intensity
of fouling  in general offshore New England waters can be expected to range
from approximately 2-30 lb/ft2.
                                  121

-------
        Table 47.  Characteristics and Results of Marine Fouling
                       (from A.  D. Little,  1962)

Factors Affecting the Type and Rate of Marine Fouling
      1.  Temperature                    6 - Oxygen content
      2.  Geographical location            7. Currents
      3.  Depth                           8. Salinity
      4.  Land masses                    9- Organic  nutrients
      5.  Light
Principal Types of Marine Fouling Processes
      1.    Erosion and solution of surfaces by organisms and their metabolic
           end-products.
      2.    Silting,  deposition of mud,  debris and organisms.
      3.    Accumulation of organisms and deposition of materials by them.

Results of Fouling on Submerged Objects
      1.    Moving parts may be rendered inoperable.
      2.    Inlets and outlets may be clogged.
      3.    Overall buoyancy of the device may be altered.
      4.    Deposits may alter transmitter and receiver characteristics.
      5.    Resistance to fluid flow changes.
      6.    Heat transfer characteristics  may be altered.
      7.    Chemical composition of surface may change, thus changing
           redox-potentials.
      8.    Corrosion rates may be altered.
                                 122

-------
           Table 48.  Common Fouling Organisms (adopted
                   from Ayers and Turner, 1952)
I.   Plants
    a.   Diatoms — bacteria (numerous types)
    b.   Chlorophyta (green algae)
            Ulva
            Enteromorpha
            Cladopho'ra
            Codium
    c.   Phaeophyta (brown algae)
            Ectocarpus
            Fucus
            Ascophylum
            Laminar ia
    d.   Rhodophyta (red algae)
            Ceramium
            Porphyra
            Polys iphonia
            Chondrus

    Animals
    a.  Protozoa (numerous types)
    b.  Porifera (sponges)
    c.  Coelenterata (anemones, hydroids, corals)
            Metridium
            Plumularia
            Eudendrium
            Obelia
    d.  Bryozoa (encrusting and/or tufted-like)
            Membranipora
            Crisia
            Bugula
    e.  Annelida
            Nereis
            Hydroides
            Spirorbis
    f.   Arthropoda (crustaceans, cirripedians)
            Amphipods
            Limnoria
            Barnacles
    g.  Mollusca
            Anomia
            Mytilus
            Pododesmus
            Hiatella
            Bankia
            Xylophaga
    h.  Chordata (tunicates)
            Ciona
            Styela
            Ascidia
            Botryllus
                                123

-------
 •5
                                      ALGAE
                                      HYDROIDS
                                      BUGULA
                 PEDICELLINA
                                         MEMBRANIPORA
                                           TUNICATES

                                             TUBEWORMS
                                                    BARNACLES
                                                                        60-
 20
 -15
 -10
                                                                        70-
                                                                        50-
                                                                        40-
                   CAMPANULARIDAE
          BALANUS BALANOIDES
                                  BUGULA FLABELLATA
                                       BOTRYLLUS GOULDII

                                        HYDROIDES HEXAGONAS
                                       BALANUS EBURNEUS
               M
                           M
Figure 53.   Fouling at Woods Hole Site Showing Periods of Attachment of Foul-
ing Organisms  (from Redfield and Deevy, 1952b)
                                    124

-------
                                                                 LEGEND
                                                                 Months in which
                                                                 attachment (set)
                                                                 occurs


                                                                 Periods in which
                                                                 most intense set
                                                                 occurs


                                                                 Periods in which
                                                                 most rapid growth
                                                                 occurs
Figure 54.  Fouling at Chesapeake Bay Site -- Periods of Attachment, of
Maximum Attachment, and of Most Rapid Growth (from Daugherty,  1961)
                                     125

-------
        0.  .2
   450
                 WEIGHT (LB/SQ FT)
0.  ,2   0,   ,2,  ,4,     Oi  |2,  .4,  .6,  ,8,
                 rB-M
                                   III
                                                     M
                                                           IV
    50-
    100-
                             10
                        15
                                                    20
                                                               25
 I
30
         I. BARNACLES AND HYDROIDS, MAINE, JUNE '43-OCTOBER '44
         II. GOOSE BARNACLES AND HYDROIDS, BLOCK ISLAND, NOVEMBER '42-DECEMBER '43
        III. BARNACLES, MUSSELS AND HYDROIDS, MAINE, MARCH '44-OCTOBER '44
        IV. MUSSELS AND HYDROIDS, MAINE, JUNE '43-AUGUST '44
         V. MUSSELS AND HYDROIDS, NEW YORK, AUGUST '42-NOVEMBER '43
        VI. MUSSELS, NARRAGANSETT BAY, JUNE '42-JUNE '44
         B, BARNACLES; G, GOOSE BARNACLES; H, HYDROIDS; M, MUSSELS.
Figure 55.  Intensity of Fouling at Various Depths on Selected Buoys Where
Fouling Extended to the Bottom
                                       126

-------
         Table 49,  Fouling in Relation to Distance from Shore
                        (from Hutchins,  1952)
Distance
from Shore
(mi)
20
30
60
Water
Depth
(ft)
70
90
186
Degree of
Fouling
severe
moderate
(patchy)
moderate to
poor
Comments
heavy accumulations; large number of
mussels.
heavy accumulations of mussels to about
30-ft depth; below this, hydroids and
sponges -- but less severe than near
shore
few mussels; largely goose barnacles,
algae, hydroids, and sponges.
Bibliography

A.D. Little, Inc., Marine Corrosion and Fouling, TRNo. 1240762,  U.S.
    Dept.of Navy,  Bureau of Ships,  1962.

Ayers, J., and Turner, HL , "The principal fouling organisms," in Marine
    Fouling and Its Prevention, United States Naval Institute, Annapolis,
    Maryland,  1952, pp 118-164.

Bigelow, H.,  and Schroeder,  W., "Fishes of the Gulf of Maine," Fish and
    Wildlife Service, Fish. Bull., 53, 1953,  pp 1-577.

Clarke, G., "Comparative richness of zooplankton in coastal and offshore
    areas of the Atlantic." Biol. Bull.. 78, 1940, pp 226-255.

Conover, S.,  "Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. IV. Phyto-
    plankton," Bull.  Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 15, 1956, pp 63-111.
Daugherty, F., Jr.,  "Marine biological fouling in the approaches to Chesa-
       1 ** *—^  ' _. __  l  .  1 *>%    • *^ <»  —— « •» »    •••••• 1   - -  1 •  ^\.t*t»' - -  TTT	
    peake Bay," Technical R<
    ington, D.C.,  40 pp, 196
peake Bay," Technical Report 96,  U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office, Wash-
Deevey, G., "A survey of the zooplankton of Block Island Sound,  1943-1946,"
    Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 13, 1952(a),  pp 65-119.

Deevey, G., "Quantity and composition of the zooplankton of Block Island Sound,
    1949, "Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll.. 13,  1952(b), pp 120-164.

Deevey, G., "Oceanography of Long Island  Sound,  1952-1954. V. Zooplank-
    ton, " BuHJ_^ingh^n_p^eanogr._ColL ,  15, 1956, pp 113-154.
                                 127

-------
deSylva,  D. ,  "Theoretical considerations of the effects of heated effluents
    on marine fishes, " Mimeo Rept. ,  Institute of Marine Sciences, U. of
    Miami, 56 pp, 1969.

Dow, R. , "Sea scallop fishery, " in Encyclopedia of Marine Resources,
    Frank E. Firth (ed), Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1969, pp 016-623.

Electric Boat division/General Dynamics Corp. , "Study of means to revitalize
    the Connecticut fisheries industry, " prepared for the Connecticut Re-
    search Commission under Contract No. RSA-66-8, 1968.

Fogg, G. ,  Algal Cultures and Phytoplankton Ecology, U- Wisconsin Press,
    120 pp, 1965.

Grice, G. , and Hart, A. ,  "The  abundance, seasonal occurrence, and distri-
    bution of the epizooplankton between New York and Bermuda, " Ecol.
    Monog. .  32, 1962, pp 287-307.

Hutchins, L. , "Relations to local environments, " in Marine Fouling and Its
    Prevention. U.S. Naval Institute,  Annapolis, Maryland, 1952, pp 102-117.

ICNAF, Statistical Bulletion No. 18 for 1968, International Commission for
    Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, Dartmouth, N.S.,  Canada,  141 pp, 1970.

Jones, F.R. Harden,  Fish Migration,  Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd,
    London, 325 pp,
Lund, W.A. , and Steward,  L.L. , "Abundance and distribution of larval
    lobsters, Homarus americanus , off the coast of Southern New England,"
    Proc. Nat. Shell Fisheries Assoc. , 60,  1970, pp 40-49.

Lyles, C. , "Fishery Statistics of the United States - 1967J' U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, 490 pp, 1969.

Merrill, A. , and Posgay, J.,  "Juvenile growth of the sea scallop; Placopec-
    ten magellanicus , " Annual Reports for the American Malacolog'ical Union,
    1967, pp 51-52.

Merrill, A. , and Ropes, J. ,  "The general distribution of  the surf clam and
    ocean quahogs, " Proceedings of the National Shellfish Association, 59,
    1969, pp 40-45.

Merrill, A., Chamberlin, J. , and Ropes, J. , "Ocean quahog fishery," in
    Encyclopedia of Marine Resources,  Frank E.  Firth (ed), Van Nostrand
    Reinhold Company, 1969, pp 125-129.

Merriman, D. , and Warfel, H., "Studies on the marine resources of southern
    New England. VII. Analysis of a fish population, " Bull. Bingham Oceanogr.
    Coll. . 11, 1948, pp 131-168.                   - B -

Parker,  P. , "Ccean clam survey off U.S. middle Atlantic coast - 1963,"
    Commercial  Fisheries  Review.  28,  1966, pp 1-9.

Richards, S. , "The demersal  fish population of Long Island  Sound. III. Food
    of the juveniles from a mud locality (station  3 A)," Bull. Bingham Oceanogr^
    Coll. .  18, 1963(c), pp  73-101.


                                  128

-------
Pearcy, W.,  "Ecology of an estuarine population of wilier flounder  Pseudo-
    pleuronectes americanus (Walbaum). IV. Food habits of larvae and juve-
    niles V Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll.. 18, 1962, pp 65-78.

Posgay, J., "Sea scallop boats and  gear, "U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
    Fish.  Leaflet 442, 1957.                                          '

Redfield, A., and Deevy, E.,  Jr.,  "The fouling community," in Marine
    Fouling and Its Prevention. U.S. Naval Institute, Annapolis, Md.,  1952(a)
Redfield, A., and Deevy, E., Jr., "The seasonal sequence in marine fouling
    and its prevention, " U.S. Naval Institute, Annapolis, 1952(b), pp 48-76.

Richards, S.,  "The demersal fish population of Long Island Sound. I. Species
    composition and relative abundance in two localities, 1956-1957,"
    Bull. Bingham Qceanogr. Coll, 18, 1963(a), pp 5-31.

Richards, S.,  "The demersal fish population of Long Island Sound. II. Food
    of the juveniles from a sand-she 11 locality (station I)," Bull.  Bingham
    Oceanogr. Coll., 18,  1963(b), pp32-72.

Richards, S., and Riley, G., "The benthic epifauna of Long Island Sound,"
    Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll.,  19, 1967, pp 89-135.

Riley,  G., "Plankton studies. II.  The western North Atlantic, May-June
    1939." J. Mar. Res.. 2, 1939, pp 145-162.

Riley,  G., "Phytoplankton of Block Island  Sound, 1949," Bull. Bingham
    Oceanogr. Coll., 13,  1952, pp 40-64.

Riley,  G., "Review of the  oceanography of Long Island Sound," in Marine
    Biology and Oceanography Deep Sea Research, supplement to v 3, 1961,
    pp 224-238.

Riley,  G., and Conover, A.,  "Aspects  of oceanography of Long Island Sound.
    I.  Phytoplankton of Long Island Sound, 1954-1955," Bull. Bingham
    Oceanogr. Coll., 19,  1967, pp 5-34.

Ryther, J., and Yentsch, C., "Primary production of continential shelf wa-
    ters off New York, " Limnol.  Oceanogr., 3,  1958, pp 327-33 5.

Sanders, H., "The herring (Clupea harengus) of Block Island Sound, " Bull.
    Bingham Oceanogr.  Coll., 13, 1952, pp 220-237.

Sanders, H., "Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. X. The biology
    of the marine bottom communities, " Bull.  Bingham Qceanogr. Coll., 11,
    1956, pp 346-383.

Sanders, H., "Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay.  III. The structure of the
    soft-bottom community," Limnol Oceanogr.  5, 1960, pp 138-153.
                                129

-------
Sanders, H.,  Hessler, R., and Hampson, G., "An introduction to the study
    of deep-sea benthic faunal assemblages along the Gay Head - Bermuda
    transect," Deep-Sea Research, 12, 1965, pp 845-867.

Wilson,  C.B., "The copepods of the Woods Hole Region, Massachusetts,"
    Smithsonian Institution, United States National  Museum Bulletin 185,
    635pp, 1932.
                               130

-------
                              Section 4
  SITE DESCRIPTION FOE WATERS OFF SOUTHEASTERN FLORIDA

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION (MIAMI AREA)

Water Circulation and Characteristics
The coastal waters along eastern Florida in the vicinity of the Miami site are
dominated by two environmental influences, the shallow and narrow continen-
tal shelf, and the Florida Current (commonly called the Gulf Stream).  The
continental shelf off Miami is only 5 nm wide, narrowing to as little as 1 nm
wide to the north with a shelf break at about the 90-ft depth (see figure 56).
The site location is actually on the continental slope.  The narrow shelf lets
the western edge of the Florida Current approach to within a few miles of
shore. As a result,  waters "spun-off" from the Florida Current and shear
from this high velocity current (5-7 knots) dominate the circulation of coastal
waters, reducing to  little consequence the usually important parameters of
wind and tide.
Florida Current waters along the coast are visually distinguishable from high
turbidity discharge from coastal inlets by their clear, blue appearance.
Table 50 summarizes the  coastal water properties without distinction as to
Florida Current water or inlet discharge.  Because these data are based on
less than 10 stations, although apparently concordant with data from other
sources (Lee, 1969 and University of Miami, 1963), it is possible that greater
variations could occur.   Nevertheless, these values are  considered properly
representative.
Figure 57presents the thermal structure  envelopes for winter and summer in
the Miami area. In winter the water column seems to be well mixed. How-
ever, figures 58 and 59 show that, within a few days, the conditions in 250 ft of
water can change from mixed to stratified.  Summer conditions are more
strongly stratified.
Circulation of the coastal water is controlled by the Florida Current.  The
area is one of lateral shear between the Florida Current and the coast, with
current velocity decreasing as the water shoals and eddies of Florida Current
water are  spun off into this transition zone. Currents observed from a point
                                 131

-------
/  /
Turkey Pt
li  .\  Y


                                                          .•  i

                                                                            .' I.*in.
                                                       fo

                                                  "   h
                                            '''tnT,, /;••••'
          Figure 56.  Soundings (ft) off Turkey Point, Typical of Southeastern
              Florida Coast  (from Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart 1249)

-------
                      Table 50.  Temperature, Salinity and Density Data* for the Miami Site
Depth
(M)

0
10
20
30
50
75
100
125

0
10
20
30
50
75
100
125
D
Ave

24.39
24.51
24.55
24.63
24.78
25.37
28.01
26.63

22.85
22.95
23.09
23.37
24.39
25.60
26.25
26.64
ensity (crt)
Max

25.38
25.48
25.59
25.72
26.02
26.43
26.87
27.11

23.24
23.51
23.85
24.24
25.65
26.89
27.03
27.29
Min

23.45
23.53
23.59
23.62
23.61
24.43
25.03
28.27

22.31
22.43
22.56
22.68
23.06
24.42
25.27
25.89
Temperature
Ave Max

24.23
24.05
23.92
23.62
23.20
21.76
18.15
15.15

28.94
28.69
28.43
27.75
24.90
20.13
17.22
14.72
Winter
26.90
26.65
26.46
26.35
26.40
25.75
22.55
17.70
Summer
29.70
29.63
29.65
29.30
28.85
24.89
22.86
20.12
Min

21.71
21.12
20.52
19.92
18.69
17.09
14.14
11.66

28.19
27.40
26.31
24.98
19.60
12.41
12.63
10.09
Sali
Ave

36.06
36.16
36.16
36.16
36.20
36.21
35.90
35.67

36.01
36.03
36.08
36.14
36.20
3fi.ll
36.09
35.80
nity (%o)
Max

36.40
36.32
36.26
36.34
36.47
36.26
36.25
38.19

36.21
36.20
36.27
36.52
36.43
36.36
36.55
36.50
Min

35.22
35.90
35.90
35.90
35.90
36.18
35.61
35.57

35.57
35.69
35.81
35.93
36.00
35.46
35.16
34.97
CO
CO
     ^Temperature is given in degrees Celsius, salinity in parts per thousand (°/oo), and density in sigma-t
      units (where, e.g., 24.39 represents a specific gravity of 1.02439).

-------
                                               / WINTER
                                                AVERAGE  /
                           WINTER MIN /
                                                          SUMMER
                                                          AVERAGE
                                                       /WINTER
                                                       i MAX
                                                           SUMMER
                                                           MAX
           SUMMER MIN.
       13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21   22  23   24  25   26  27  28  29  30
                                TEMPERATURE (C)
             Figure 57. Thermal Stratification of Miami Site

in the coastal area will show extreme variability in velocity and direction,
currents of up to 2 knots being observed heading south, opposite to the Florida
Current direction.   Lee (1969) has made  the only comprehensive study of
coastal circulation (along the eastern Florida coast 30 nm north of the Miami
area).  It is reasonable to assume that Lee-data will generally describe the
type of circulation in the site area off Miami.
Figure 60 is an approximation of the coastal circulation as constructed by Lee.
The northbound Florida Current velocity decreases as the water shoals, with
maximum normal velocities of 2.0 knots close  to shore.  However, vagaries
in the Florida Current could result in 4.0-knot velocities at the site location
(Lee, telephone communication, 1970). The meandering of the western edge
of the Florida Current causes the formation of eddies  of fluctuating velocity
and direction, as shown in the center of figure 60. This  reconstruction depicts
an average eddy containing a substantial amount of southbound as well as east-
bound and westbound water.  The eddies measure roughly 6-8 nm from east
to west and 10-12 nm from north to south; they have cyclonic  (counterclock-
wise) circulation. The typical eddy migrates northward at an average speed
of 0.6 knots, giving a 20.5-hr period of passage.  An  estimated 4 eddies a
                                  134

-------
CO
Ul
        20
        40

        60
        80

        100
        120
        140
        160
-180

•200
•220

•240
•260
•280

•300
-320

-340
             H
             (ft)
POMPANO
TEMPERATURE  PROFILE
DATE  81 TIME   December 6,  1968
TEMPERATURE   °F
0  SOUTH  CURRENT
(?)  NORTH  CURRENT
                                                   - 1000 Hr.
                  1000
      2000
                         3000
4000
 DISTANCE  (ft)
5000   6000   7000
8000
9000   10000   11000
                    Figure 58. Temperature Profile Showing Mixed Condition (from Lee, 1969)

-------
CO
03
                 BOCA RATON TEMPERATURE PROFILE
                 DATE  8 TIME-  December 23, 1968 - 1000 Hr
                 TEMPERATURE   °F
                 0  SOUTH  CURRENT
                     NORTH  CURRENT
                                             DISTANCE  (ft)
                                            5000  6000   7000
                                              I	1	1
                  Figure 59. Temperature Profile Showing Stratified Condition (from Lee, 1969)

-------
              N-*-
                                                      'KT
                   w
                                                      I NM
                                                                                     PERIOD
                                                                                     DIRECTION
                                                                                     SPEED
                                                                                               EDDY
                                              20.5 HR
                                              NORTH
                                              0.6 K
CO
-q
                  -600FT
        -80°
                                                                                                 --IOOFT-—tzrr: _
                           26°25
20
26°IO'
                                Figure 60.  Circulation Pattern of Florida Current Waters

-------
week can pass through an area, and the residence time of an eddy on the shelf
is estimated at 1 wk (Lee, telephone communication, 1970) before reentering
the  Florida Current.
The water in an eddy is  clear, we 11-mixed Florida Current water that is
nearly uniform in its sectional temperature gradient.  Discharge water from
coastal inlets mixes with the northbound water behind the eddies and is re-
cognized by its more turbid appearance.
Currents measured over a 29-day period in September and October off the
Florida coast are summarized in table 51.

        Table  51. Current Meter Data (from Stewart et al, 1969)
Quadrant
316-45° (NW-NE)
46-135° (NE-SE)
136-225° (SE-SW)
226-315° (SW-NW)
Current
Direction
north
east
south
west
Percentage of
Occurrence
59.1
5.9
27.9
7.0
Mean
Velocity (kt)
0.44
0.34
0.46
0.23
Mean
Std. Dev.
0.22
0.12
0.20
0.12
Measurements were made in relatively shallow water (i.e.,  less than 100-ft
depth), and slightly higher velocities might be expected at a  250-ft depth.
However, because of steep bottom slopes in the area, the 250-ft depth will
only be a short distance from the 100-ft depth, and the current velocities
should not differ materially.  Comparison of the data in table 2 with other
measurements taken by Lee  indicates no seasonal trends in the current pat-
terns.
From all of Lee's measurements, the northerly (270°-90°) current direction
was observed 73 percent of the time.  Southbound water may persist from a
few hours to as long as 60 hours. The westbound current carrying offshore
water in  to the coast,  lasts more than 2 hr and, at an average velocity of 0.2
kt, the water parcel would be carried only about 3000 ft shoreward.
Of the current velocities measured, Lee has calculated that  a maximum of
0.21 kt  could  be caused by the tide under ideal conditions, although normally
the tidal  component will be considerably less. The flood-ebb direction is
north and south since the area is at  the node of a tidal standing wave going
                                  138

-------
from the Atlantic Ocean into the Gulf of Mexico.  The tidal effect along the
coast is most noticeable when the axis of the Florida Current is farthest off-
shore .

Bottom Characteristics
The continental shelf in the Miami area is a reef tract, and is shallow and
narrow, the shelf break occurring at about the 90-ft depth, within 5 nm of
shore.  Consequently,  the Miami plant site actually lies on the continental
slope, the slope gradient averaging 3 to 4°. Figure 61 depicts the transition
from an irregular  (due to reefs) shallow shelf with thin sediment cover, to
the steeply dipping, smooth continental slope with a thick accumulation of
sediment.  These sediments are composed of reef detritus which has been
washed off the shelf and shore locally.  Samples  of these sediments have not
been located in the literature, but it is most probable that they are composed
of carbonate silts and clay (Uchupi,  1963).  The finer sediments predominate
on the continental slopes (Shepard, 1963).  Because of the declivity of the
bottom off Miami (3-4°), and since sediment accumulation may be rapid,  sub-
aqueous sediment sliding could be an important factor  in site determination.
There is at present no known documentation of sediment instability on the
slope off Miami, but the possibility must be considered.
   400'
            Figure 61.Shelf Profile Off Southeastern Florida
                                  139

-------
Bibliography

Duane, D.B., and Meisburger, E.P., "Geomorphology and sediments of the
    nearshore continental shelf, Miami to Palm Beach, Florida," Tech. Memo
    29, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Coastal Engineering Research Cen-
    ter, 47 pp,  1969.

Gorsline, D.S.,  "Environments of carbonate deposition in Florida Bay and
    the Florida Straits," a symposium, Four Corners Geological Society,
    1963, pp 130-143,

Malloy, R.J., and Hurley, R.J., "Geomorphology and geologic structure:
    Straits of. Florida," Geol. Soc. of Am. Bull.,  81, 1970, pp 1947-1972.

McAllister, R.F.,  "Demonstration of the limitations and effects of waste dis-
    posal on an ocean shelf," second annual project report, No. AR69-2,
    Florida Ocean Sciences Institute, Inc.,  1969.

Shepard, F.P., Submarine Geology, second edition, Harper and Row, New
    York, N.Y.,  557 pp,  1963.

Steward, R.E., et al, "Diffusion of sewage effluent from an ocean outfall,"
    Ocean Engineering Conference, 7pp, Dec 10-12,  1969.
                               140

-------
BIOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION (MIAMI AREA)

Ecology
The ecology of offshore waters in the Miami region of Florida has been stu-
died in very broad outline, mainly with regard to the fisheries and plankton.
The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Laboratory at Woods Hole, with other
government agencies, is  making a benthic survey along the Atlantic coast,"
which includes this region.  Visual observations of the bottom and life in a
transect off West Palm Beach are presented by Emery et al  (1970).
The unique environmental features of the Miami region are the presence of
tropical blue water within a few miles of shore with relatively uniform tem-
perature year-round, a euphotic  zone of some 100 meters, and the presence
of coral reefs,  especially south of Miami.  Biologically, these waters are
generally  characterized by (1) the great variety of plant and  animal species
present, each constituting only a  small percentage of the total biomass,
(2) low standing crops of plankton and the absence of marked seasonal pulses
in abundance, and (3) a high proportion of small phytoplankton and zooplank-
ton species with low regeneration times, presumably resulting in rapid cyc-
ling of available nutrients.
The energy to drive the offshore biological system is believed to be produced
offshore by the photosynthetic activities of pelagic phytoplankton growing in
the euphotic zone. Nutrient contributions from land run-off  are believed to
be minimal, although this has not been studied and a considerable offshore-
inshore migration of mobile animals occurs. The herbivorous copepods are
considered to be the most important consumers of the phytoplankton.  They,
in turn, are preyed upon by carnivorous  zooplankton such as siphonophores,
chaetognaths,  and fish larvae.  Secondary and tertiary carnivores, such as
various fish species, prey on the primary and secondary carnivores. It
should be  emphasized that the food-web described represents the simplest
model possible.  It is safer to assume that complex food-chain relationships
exist involving both biota and environment.  The rudiments of these relation-
ships are  now just being  learned.
                                 141

-------
Measurement  of the total population of a particular animal or plant species
in offshore waters has not been attempted, to our knowledge, because of
technical difficulties and cost.  Gross estimates of the population of some
species can be made, however, based on standing crop,  geographical range,
and additional simplifying assumptions.
What is found by sampling organisms in  the field constitutes the standing crop
of that area which, of course,  reflects the balance between the rates of re-
production-growth and predation,  and  is influenced by the sampling method.
Generally, the standing  crop fluctuates seasonally and yearly about a mean
value.  Depth and times of day may also be important considerations in its
estimation,  depending upon the organisms considered.  This is well illustrated
in table 52 by a list of plankton samples given by Owre (1960).  The NG station
is about 10 mi east of Miami.
             Table 52. List of Plankton Samples Taken at the
                     NG Station (from Owre, 1960)
Sample
14A
14B
14C
14D
14E
14G
25F
26A
26B
26C
26D
26E
26F
27B
27C
27D
27E
28A
29A
29B
29C
29D
29E
29F
Date
1/12/51





5/25/51
6/5/51





6/19/51



7/3/51
7/13/51





Time
1106
1157
1242
9
1416
1550
1420
1020
1110
1110
1240
1240
1320
1128
1205
1240
1330
0925
0900
0955
0955
1040
1040
1140
Depth
(m)
0-10
9-27
40-64
82-91
192
182
183-229
0-50
50-100
100-150
280-320
320-350
300-350
0-45
55-75
70-100
70-85
0-80
0-60
50-95
95-140
165-210
210-255
210-300
Wet Volume+
(cc)
<1
<1
14
10
18
3
4
1
<1
7
2
3
5
14
9
1
<1
27
39
3
6
2
2
3
Towing Distance
(mi)
2.0
2.0
1.6
1.5
0.95
0.8
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.6
1.1
1.15
0.90
1.15
1.05
1.70
2.0
0.5
0.5
0.85
0.85
0.85
                                 142

-------
                           Table 52 (Continued)
Sample
30A
SOB
30C
SOD
30E
30F
31
32-1
32-2
32-3
32-4
32-5
32-6
37A
37B
37C
37D
37E
38A
38B
38C
38D
38F
39A
39B
39D
39E
39F
39G
Date
8/2/51





8/7/51
8/28/51





12/10/51




1/14/52




2/4/52





Time
0945
1135
1135
1150
1150
1350
1107
1100
1100
1235
1235
1140
1140
1136
1310
1310
1400
1400
1010
1055
1055
1145
1248
1015
1105
1153
1153
1240
1240
Depth
(m)
0-50
105-145
145-185
160-185
185-200
225-275
surface
55
115
151
185
167
242
9-46
69-115
119-165
151-179
201-229
surface
59
110
110
46
surface
50
96
146
96
146
Wet Volume +
(cc)
12
3
9
5
5
20
11
9
7
1.5
4
5
4
22
2
4
3
5
47
3
11
11
9
20
13
15
8
37
13
Towing Distance
(mi)
1 5
^L • ^J
0.6
\f m ^J
0.6
1.2
1.2
1.5
* • */
1.2
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
2.0
0.45
0.45
1.1
1.1
1.7
0.3
0.3
0.3
1.1
3.1
1.2
2.1
2.1
2.4
2.4
                                                             q
+Mean density by wet plankton displacement volume =-~0.03 cc/m  or 1 mg
 dry wt/m^ using conversion factors of Bsharah,  1957.

 To place plankton standing crop and production of this region in rough per-
 spective,  the data in tables 53 and 54 should be examined. It appears that both
 standing crop and rate of production of phytoplankton are less in this  region
 than in major fishery areas.
 In constrast with offshore waters, a considerable amount of information is avail-
 able on the ecology of inshore waters.  Extensive lists  of species have been
 compiled, and plant-animal communities have been described and related to
 physical-chemical-geological characteristics of inshore regions.  A major
                                  143

-------
         Table 53.. Zooplankton Standing Crop in Offshore Areas   	
              Dry Weight/m
Number/m3       (mg)          Location           Reference
    12            --           Florida Current    Bsharah, 1957
   239            --           Sargasso Sea       Fish, 1956
   690            --           Labrador Sea       Fish, 1956
                  0.5          Florida Current    Bsharah, 1957
                  5            Gulf of Maine       Redfield, 1941
                  13           Long Island Sound  Deevey,  1956
                  9            Georges Bank      Riley and Bumpus, 1946
            Table 54. Rate of Production in Offshore Areas
Location
Rate of Production
   gC/m2/yr
Type of
Production
Reference
Florida Current

Caribbean

Long Island Sound
Georges Bank
New York Coastal
  Water
    67-182.5

    51-70

    470
    309
    160
net-gross   Corcoran and Alexan-
              der, 1963
net-gross   Steeman-Neilson and
               Jensen, 1957
gross       Riley, 1956
gross       Riley et al, 1949
gross       Ryther and Yentsch,
              1958
report synthesizing information on the marine ecology of the Biscayne National
Monument (between 25°31T N and 24°17.5' N to the 10-fathom curve) was sub-
mitted to the National Park Service by Voss et al (1969). Similarly,  Morril
and Olsen (1955) made a literature study of the Biscayne area for the U.S.
Hydrographic Office. Other major studies have  also been made.  Voss and
Voss (1955)  surveyed the ecology of Soldier Key. Smith et al (1950) made an
ecological survey of inshore waters adjacent to Miami.  Moore et al  (1968)
have studied the fauna,  epifauna, and infauna of the tidal flats in Biscayne
Bay.  O'Gower and Wacasey (1967) studied animal communities associated
with sea grasses (Thalassia, Diplanthera) and sand beds in Biscayne Bay.
Stephenson and Stephenson (1950) have described intertidal life in the Florida
                                 144

-------
Keys. McNulty et al (1960,  1962a,  1962b) and McNulty (1961) have reported
on the ecological effects of sewage pollution in Biscayne Bay.  Rosseler et al
(1970) and Zieman (1970) have reported on the effects of thermal discharges
in the same region.
The biology of molluscs in the region  has been studied by Penzias (1969),
Frazer (1967), Moore and Lopez (1969),  and Owre (1964).  Polycheates have
been studied by McNulty and Lopez (1969),  and sea urchins by Moore et al
(1963a, 1963b), Moore and McPhearson (1965), Moore and Lopez (1966),
McPhearson (1965,  1968a, 1968b, 1969), Moore and Frue (1959), and Quinn
(1965). Milliman (1969),  Jones (1963), and Smith (1948) have studied corals,
while crabs and lobsters have been studied by Provenzano (1959, 1962,  1968,
1969), and Rice and Provenzano (1966).

Phytoplankton
The phytoplankton of tropical waters consist in large part of nanoplankton,
including crysomonads, cryptomonads, naked flagellates and small diatoms
(Vargo,  1968).  These tiny algae are not held by conventional plankton nets
and are difficult to sample.  The systematics and physiology of the nanoplank-
ton have not been investigated in detail because a method for handling these
small organisms is  not well developed.   Nanoplankton have the reputation
of being very delicate; that is, difficult to keep alive for laboratory study and
to preserve for systematic study.
A map of the region and stations sampled by Vargo (1968) and others of the
University of Miami is given by figure 62. The Fowey Light station (25° 40'
N, 80° 00' W) is about 10 miles east of Miami and is on the eastern border
of the Florida Current,in water about 300 meters deep. The biota of this sta-
tion is considered representative for "shelf" and  Florida Current waters.

The quantity of  nanoplankton found by Bsharah (1957) in terms of dry weight
by depth and season, is given by figure 63. The data show that the greatest
abundance of nanoplankton  occurs in  the summer and in the upper 60 meters
of water column.  During March the abundance is least and the distribution
is uniform from the surface to 160 meters.  Bsharah states that between 85
and 90 percent of the nanoplankton are found in the euphotic zone which ex-
tends to  100 meters.  He found that a  bloom of nanoplankton occurs during
                                 145

-------
           MEAN AXIS OF
           FLORIDA CURRENT
Figure 62. Station Locations in Straits of Florida: FL - Fowey Light, MC
Midchannel, CC - Cat Cay, RR - Riding Rocks, SC - Santaren Channel,
WC - West Channel, AR - Alligator Reef (from Vargo, 1968)
the summer months, as shown in figure 64,the increase at the height of the
bloom being about seven-fold in the upper 35 meters of water.  The overall
effect of this summer bloom reaches slightly below the lower limit of the
euphotic zone and, throughout the autumn months, occupies  the upper 40
meters of water.
                                 146

-------
0

IS
30
45

60
C *
1 "
s
X 1 01
H
a
0 120
135
ISO
165
l II ' I 1 ' 1 1 ...-T 1 1 1 1 _L.. -» J
\ •**"" ^ "^
\ ••••'' ^ •*'"*"
\ X" ^•"'" ^-
1 ...•'' ^"^ ^, 	 """""
1 /'' ''' ** •""" """"
I *' s' •'"'
' / / xX'
/ / i /'
II i'
l i • t
• 1 * /
1 1 /,/
- \F
: 	 »= 	 <' / V 	 L 	 U 	 U 	 L 	 L 	 L 	 L 	 U 	 L. 	 U 	 U 	 L


-
x

"

_



—
-
-

              2  _4_   •   •   IO   12  14  16  16   20  22
                 DRY WEIGHT of NANOPLANKTON (ill mlHgramf  p«r ZOO Illirl)
                                                                    MAR 25, 1954
                                                                    JUL l\ 1934
                                                                    AUG II, IB54
                                                                 •-	Stf 14, 1954
Figure 63.  Typical Vertical Distribution of Nanbplankton as Dry Weight
(from Bsharah, 1957)
      I 65
         DEC  JAN   FEB   MAR  APR   MAY  JUN   JUL   AUG   SEP  OCT   NOV
Figure 64. Seasonal Vertical Distribution of Nanoplankton as Dry Weight in
Florida Current (from Bsharah,  1957)
                                      147

-------
Some of the more prominent and more easily identifiable species of phyto-
plankton are given in table 55.

          Table 55. Species  of Phytoplankton (from Vargo, 1968)
                                                Size
           Groups                              (microns)
           Unarmored dinoflagellates             9-70
               Gymnodinium simplex
               Gymnodinium rotundatum
               Amphidinium acutissimum
           Coccolithophores
               Deutschlandia stenophylla
               Syracosphaera pulchra
               Coccolithus  leptoporus
           Diatoms                             200 max
               Rhizosolenia styliformis
               Navicula membranacea
               Melosira moniliformis
               Cosinodiscus excentricus
               Rhizosolenia stolterforthii

 Vargo, using a smaller water sample (ILvs 200L)but a concentration proce-
dure identical to that of Bsharah,  found that peak abundances of phytoplankton
generally occurred at Fowey Light during spring and winter as well as sum-
mer over a three-year period.  This is shown by figure 65. The numbers of
phytoplankton found at Fowey Light and his other stations are given by table 56.
Vargo further found that phytoplankton maxima occurred over a wide  range
of depths  coincident with micropyncnal surfaces.  The distributions observed
by depth and  month are given by figures 66 and 67. The distributions shown do
not agree with Bsharah's data in that the number of phytoplankton does not
drop off markedly until the depth exceeds 100 meters.
                                 148

-------
       Table 56. Phytoplankton Standing Crop (from Vargo, 1968)
1
Fowey
Rocks
25°40'N
Month 80°00TW
1964
Jan 9.62
Feb 12.02
Mar 9.98
Apr 2.73
May 9.56
June
July 0.95
Aug 3.09
Sept 2.25
Oct 5.65
Nov 3.77
Dec 3.50
Average 5. 75
1965-66
Jan 2.60
Feb
Mar 9.89
Apr 4.90
May 11.69
June 3.45
July 2.42
Aug 10.78
Sept 3 . 61
Oct 3.52
Nov 2.60
Dec 9.50
Jan 3.70
Average 5.67
2
Mid-
channel
25°33'N
79°40'W

2.98
6.55
2.72
2.02
3.75
--
1.48
2.45
2.70
2.80
3.15
4.16
3.15

2.50
--
16.02
3.58
11.81
2.33
6.52
8.71
2.48
2.82
1.80
13.99
2.91
6.29
3
Cat Cay
25°35TN
79°25'W

2.08
2.15
1.66
1.20
4.98
--
3.60
2.31
3.50
5.33
5.57
4.26
3.42

2.21
--
16.25
3-49
17.45
2.00
3.33
5.51
1.95
1.32
2.24
5.53
2.00
5.27
4
Santaren
Channel
24°05'N
79°35'W

2.20
—
4.50
5.55
6.94
--
2.61
1.57
2.31
2.34
3.92
2.45
3.44

2.30
21.31
15.57
6.01
9.64
2.24
4.50
--
2.65
1.65
3.27
6.15
2.31
6.47
5
West
Channel
24°30fN
80°30'W

— —
_ —
1.44
5.77
6.42
__
3.54
2.34
2.19
3.18
1.82
3.25
3.21

2.55
8.96
15.92
10.88
15.05
4.22
2.50
— —
1.90
—
2.50
6.21
1.65
6.57
6
Alligator
Reef
24°50'N
80°30'W

«•> «*
3.28
3.21
8.00
3.09
—
1.95
2.45
2.54
2.98
3.30
5.40
3.62

2.43
5.75
8.40
14.40
5.57
1.31
2.35
~ —
1.52
—
1.92
3.26
1.45
5.31
Number of cells = tabular value x 1012 cells/m2
                                 149

-------
                             FOWEY LIGHT
                   _J.... _L__ -4  I  - I -- -I	 I
                            MID CHANNEL
                       i	1   i   i   i   i   i	1	1   i
             JFMAMJJASONOJ
            4.0-
 Figure 65. Seasonal Variation in Phytoplankton Standing Crop during 1964-
 1966 at Fowey Light, Midchannel, and Cat Cay (from Vargo, 1968)
Zooplankton
In terms of number per tow-mile or number per cubic centimeter of plankton
sample,  copepods are the most abundant zooplankton offshore.  The next
most abundant groups are the chaetognaths and the siphonophores (Bsharah,
1957).  Inshore, as shown in table 57, decapod larvae, nauplii, and veliger
larvae of various benthic animals constitute a substantial fraction of the
zooplankton.
                                 150

-------
                 FOWEY LIGHT - 1964
TEMP "C 5  10  15  20  25  5  10  15 20  25 5  10 15 20  25
                                            5  10  15 20  25  5 10 . 15 20 25  5  IO  15 SO 25
                      1965
             _..U	h	I c . . ! ..J_J_  il
   340  350  360  370  340  350  360  370 300  350  360 370    34.0  350  360  370  340  350  360  370 340 350 360  37.0
  Figure 66. Vertical Distribution
  of Phytoplankton at  Fowey Light
  from October 1964 to June 1965
  (from Vargo, 1968)
Figure 67. Vertical Distribution of
Phytoplankton at Fowey Light from
July 1965 to January 1966
(from Vargo,  1968)
                                       151

-------
         Table 57. Percentages of Major Groups of Zooplankton
              Taken with No.  2 Net (0.366 mm Porosity)
              in Biscayne Bay (from McNulty et al, 1960)
     Group
Percent
     Copepods
         Calanoid
         Cyclopoid
         Herpacticoid
             Copepods
     Decapods
         Anomura
         Brachyura
         Other
             Decapods
     Others
         Nauplii
         Veligers
         Chaetognatha
         Leptomedusae
         Mosquito larvae
         Plutei
         Larvacea
         Pteropoda
         Stomatopod larvae
         Polychaete larvae
         Fish larvae
         Forminifera
         Cladocera
         Cumacea
62.8
 3.3
 0.4
66.5

13.5
 1.8
 5.0
20.3

 5.9
 3.7
 1.1
 0.7
 0.5
 0.3
 0.2
 0.2
 0.
 0.
 0.
 0.
 0
 1
,1
,1
,1
,1
 0.1
           Paracalanus parvus
           Acartia tonsa
           Labidocera sp.
Copepods
Owre and Foyo (1967) have prepared an excellent monograph on the systema-
tics of 216 copepods species found in the Florida Current.  Tables of common
species are also presented. The species of copepods common throughout the
year and their vertical distribution during the day and night are given in
table 58 (Roehr and Moore, 1965).  It is safe to assume that seasonal varia-
tion in abundance of copepods as a group is not large,or this aspect
                                152

-------
certainly would have been mentioned by the Miami scientists. The data show
that the upward migration at night is greatest for  Pleuromamma xiphias. a
deep-living copepod.  Shallower-living copepods migrate less or not at all,
and a number of them reverse the normal pattern and move upward in the
daytime  and downwards at night.  The extreme case is Corycaeus  lautus,
which migrates downward 41 meters.  Graphs by  Moore and Foyo  (1963) in-
dicate "shallow" and "deep" species as those found at day-depths of 40-380
meters and 160-400 meters, respectively.
             Table 58. Vertical Distribution of Copepods
                    (from Roehr and Moore, 1965)
Species
Calocalanus pavo (Dana)
Corycaeus lautus Dana
Copilia mirabilis Dana
Corycaeus speciosus Dana
Pontellina plumata (Dana)
Temora stylifera (Dana)
Undinula vulgaris (Dana)
Eucalanus attenuatus (Dana)
Macrosetella gracilis (Dana)
Euchaeta marina (Prestandrea)
Haloptilus longicornis (Glaus)
Lucicutia flavicornis (Glaus)
Euaetidius giesbrechti (Cleve)
Pleuromamma gracilis (Glaus )
P. abdominalis (Lubbock)
Rhincalanus cornutus (Dana)
Pleuromamma xiphias (Giesbrecht)
30 Percent Level*(m)
Day **
37
102
107
111
120
132
134
143
143
154
175
185
205
244
246
246
350
26
11
21
19
6
20
32
29
28
33
12
19
2
19
30
30
15
Night **
62
143
105
100
143
110
85
144
153
104
184
141
153
158
155
186
164
21
5
19
17
8
17
26
26
23
29
8
19
4
19
29
27
19
Range
-25
-41
2
11
-23
22
49
-1
-10
50
-9
44
52
86
91
60
186
   *30% level = modal depth of population
 **Figures in these columns show number of stations from which mean values
   were obtained.
                                153

-------
The control of vertical distribution and diurnal migration of copepods and
other zooplankton is attributed to at least three environmental factors:  tem-
perature, light,  and pressure (Moore and Corwin,  1956).  Effects of environ-
mental stimuli on vertical distribution are elaborated in additional papers by
Moore and Bauer (1960), and Moore and Roehr (1966).  Moore (1967) states
that deeper living species generally prefer less illumination,  higher pressure
and, surprisingly, higher temperature.
At night, the greatest concentration of copepods, measured by displacement
volume,  is in the upper 100 meters of the water column while, in terms of
numbers, the maximum night concentration is between 100 and 200 meters.
This difference is explained by Moore and O'Berry (1957) by the fact that
most of those copepods close to the surface in the daytime are small species
while the larger ones,  in general,  live deeper.  Owre and Foyo (1967) also
note that deeper living species of copepods tend to  be larger.

Chaetognaths
The chaetognaths in the Florida Cur rent have been  studied by Owre (1960,
1963). A list of species and their relative abudance is presented in table
59. Sagitta enflata, £5. serratodentata, and Pterosagitta draco account for
about 7 5 per cent of ehaetognaths.

           Table 59. Total Counts and Percentages  of Chaetognaths
             at the NG Station and at  SL 18 (from Owre,  1960)
Species
Sagitta enflata
S. hexaptera
S. lyra
S. bipunctata
S. hispida
S. helenae
S. serratodentata
S. minima
S. decipiens
S. planctonis
S. macrocephala
Pterosagitta draco
Krohnitta subtilis
K. pacifica
Eukrohnia hamata
E. fowleri
NG Total
Numbers
34,398
484
427
2,980
857
318
12,598
3,956
1,160
1
1
3,907
468
1,518
1
0
Percent
of Total
54.5
0.8
0.7
4.7
1.4
0.5
19.9
6.3
1.8
< 0.1
< 0.1
6.2
0.7
2.4
< 0.1
0.0
SL 18 Total
Numbers
467
145
67
52
12
0
1,714
4
208
1
1
233
97
166
0
2
Percent
of Total
14.7
4.5
2.1
1.6
0.4
0.0
54.0
0.1
6.5
< 0.1
< 0.1
7.3
3.1
5.2
0.0
<0.1
 NG:  250 43' to 26° 08' N, 79°  56'W.  SL18: about 40  mi east of Miami
                                  154

-------
Species collected in adequate numbers are at peak abundance in the summer,
generally coinciding with their breeding period according to Owre,  as shown
by figure 68. Owre found that the vertical distribution of the chaetognaths varied
greatly with season at the two stations studied.  She believes this was caused
principally by reaction to temperature (see also Moore, 1955).
The three most abundant species were found to migrate diurnally.  The sea-
sonal variation and vertical distribution of Sagitta enflata,  the most abundant
species, is shown by figure 69. Comparison of the chaetognaths from the NG
station with those from the SL station (a distance of about 30 mi) showed slight
differences in species composition but marked differences in relative abun-
dance and,  especially, in vertical distribution as shown by figure 70.
         1000
         800
         600
         400
         200
           ID-
                                       I   I  I
                                                         I  I  I
           " i  ' J ' A '"F1 6 ' N r D ' J ' F '' M '~A ' M ' J  ' J ' A ' S ' 0 ' N ' D ' J 'F '
                   1950                     I 9SI              l952
 Figure 68. Seasonal Variation in Abundance of:  a. Sagitta enflata, b. S. hexa-
 ptera, and c. £L lyra  (from Owre, 1960)
Siphonophores
The Siphonophores in the plankton have been studied by Moore (1953). The
species commonly found include Abylopsis tetrogona, A.  eschscholtzii,
Bassia bassensis, Chelophyes appendiculata, Diphes bojani, D. dispar,
Eudoiodes spiralis, and K. mitra.  These  eight species make up about 90
percent of the siphonophore population.
                                   155

-------
       0-

      50-

      100-

      150-

      200-

      2'50-

      300
                                       SA6ITTA ENFCATA
     ?3SO
T
        NGI4-I2 JAN5I NG25-2SMAf NG26-5JUNE NG 27-19 JUNE NG29-I3 JULY NG30-2AUG NG37-IODEC  NG38-I4JAN52
    LU    u
    5    b
       Ol
      100-

      200-

      300-

      400-

      500-

      600-

      700-

      800-
                                                   PER CENT

                                                   0    50

                                                  .il%»;NONE
          2200-0110   0220-0440   0600-0920    1030-1355
                              SL 18 A - F
                                               1505-1810
                                                        1925-2030
  Figure 69. Sagitta enflata:  a. Seasonal Variation in Vertical Distribution at
  the NG Station; b. Diurnal Vertical Distribution at SL 18 (from Owre, 1960)
                    50-

                   100-


                   150-


                   200-


                   250-


                   300-


                   350-


                   400-


                   450-


                   500-


                   550


                   600


                   650


                   700-
                   750
              :xl
   K.PACIFICA
   S.ENFLATA

SSERRATODENTATA'
   S.HEXAPTERA-^f
       P. D RACO-""
   K.SUBTILIS-
   S.DECIPIENS
   S.LYRA	
                                   K.SUBTILIS


                                   S.ENFLATA
                                   S.SERRATODENTATA
                                   S.HEXAPTERA,P.DRACO
                                   K.PACIFICA
                                   S.DECIPIENS
                                   S. LYRA
                                     NG             SL
                               MEAN DAY-LEVELS   50 °/o LEVELS

Figure 70. Comparison of Depths of Mean Day-Levels at the NG Station with
Depths of 50 Percent Levels at the SL Station (from Owre,  1960)
                                       156

-------
The seasonal distribution of some of the more abundant species is given in
figure 71.  The vertical distribution and diurnal migration are given in
tables60and61.  Moore (1955) states  that light, temperature and,  perhaps,
pressure are responsible for the distributions observed.
           80
                                  A. TETRAGONA
                                 A.ESCHSCHOLT2U
                I—i—ri—i—i—i—I—i  i—i—T
                               AN iFEalMAHlAPLlMArljUNljUtliUOlSEP'OCTlNOVlOEC |J4
                     1950
  Figure 71.  Seasonal Distribution of Siphonophores (from Moore, 1953)
                                  157

-------
        Table 60. Diurnal Migration of Siphonophores
                     (from Moore,  1953)


Species

Diphyes bojani
D. dispar
Eudoxoides spiralis
E. mitra
Chelophyes appendiculata
Lensia cossack
L. campanella
L. fowleri
Abyla leuckartii
Abylopsis eschscholtzii
A. tetragona
Bassia bassensis
Enneagonum hyalinum
Amphicaryon acaule
Hippopodius hippopus
Day-Night Range (m)
Florida
NG
16
-59
-38
-33
-50
-48
-
-
-32
-92
- 6
-70
-28
-19
-
-50
NG
32
-16
+49
-30
-44
- 5
-
-
-
-
-48
-80
-41
-
-
-
Bermuda


__
-
-
-
-87
-
-
-
-
-
-89
-
-
-77
-
Table 61.  Mean Day Level of Siphonophores (from Moore, 1953)



Species
Diphyes bojani
D. dispar
Eudoxoides spiralis
E. mitra
Chelophyes appendiculata
Lensia cossack
L. campanella
L. subtilis
L. fowleri
Galetta australis
Abyla leuckartii
Abylopsis eschscholtzii
A. tetragona
Bassia bassensis
Enneagonum hyalinum
Amphicaryon acaule
Hippopodius hippopus
Mean Day Level (m)
Florida
Method
I II
72 29
59 40
75 50
134 68
74 48
35
17
32
— 100
58
-- 102
58 12
104 85
59 13
-- 100
92
— 110
Bermuda


40
ca.10
65
125
75
--
60
140
165
—
—
ca.40
55
50
__
80
140
Spread (m)
Florida
Method
I
43
76
45
65
81
—
—
- -
__
__
_—
51
63
29
__
__
***. P"*
II
88
104
69
134
100
43
25
30
102
84
105
78
122
75
28
100
92
Bermuda


25
10
65
105
130
__
25
150
70
_ _
— —
80
25
40
— . —
75
75
                           158

-------
 Larval Fish


 Although not abundant in plankton hauls (perhaps because of the difficulty in

 capturing them with plankton nets)  older stages of larval fish have rather

 extensive diurnal migrations as shown by figures 72, 73, and 74.  Sund and

 Richards (1965) describe sea trials of a high-speed neuston net off Miami,

 but provide no data on the relative  efficiency of the net in capturing fish larvae

 near the surface.
             100 -
            200
           in
           ac
           ui
           i-
           w
           2
            300
            400
            500
            600
                               NUMBER  /cc
Figure 72.  Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish per Cubic Centimeter
of Plankton at the Forty-Mile Station: Day, 12-16 hr;  Night 20-04 hr  (from
Bsharah,  1957)
                                   159

-------
                    10200
,0600
                                       1000
                                             .1400
                    ,1800
                                                            ,2200
                   20  0  20
Figure 73. Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish at the Forty-Mile Sta-
tion (from Bsharah, 1957)
        100
       u>
       DC
       £
      LLJ
       !400
        5OO -
        600
                                   1     1
           f
                                           \
                                   1
         1
5     10
  DAY
  19 0     9     10

NUMBER per mile
                                              19     20
                                               NIGHT
                                 3O
                                      39
Figure 74.  Vertical Distribution of Post-Larval Fish per Mile Tow at the
Forty-Mile Station: Day, 12-16 hr;  Night, 20-08 hr  (from Bsharah, 1957)
                                    160

-------
Several people have studied the life histories of various groups of fish in this
region. Further information on fish larvae can be found in Voss (1954),
Clancey (1956), Legaspi (1956), and Voss (1953)0  The University of Miami
Marine Library has on file many unpublished theses on the marine fish of the
Miami region.
Other less abundant groups of zooplankton offshore have been studied.  The
euphausiids have been the subject of study by Lewis (1954), the pteropods by
Wormelle (1962), and the  cephalopods by Voss (1955,  1956).

Principal Fisheries
The principal commercial fisheries on the east coast of Florida are given in
table  62,  In  terms of landings and dollar value, the shrimp, spiny lobster,
and king mackerel fisheries are the three most important.  Details on the
shrimp fishery are given in table 63 and in figures 75 and 76.  Details on the
spiny lobster and Spanish mackerel fisheries are presented in tables 64 and
65. Of the fish listed in table 62, only the snapper and grouper are demer-
sal.

             Table 62.  Florida Landings, East Coast, 1969
                         (from Johnson, 1969)
           Fishery                Pounds      Value
           Fish
                King mackerel      2,942,841   $  598,539
                Black mullet        2,384,343      189,302
                Spanish mackerel   2,358,874      253,336
                Bluefish            2,080,292      232,919
                Spot                  874,647      158,404
                Spotted sea trout      679,697      229,509
                Red snapper          634,772      366,837
                Grouper              522,243      110,885
                Pompano             332,838      324,094
           Crustaceans
                Spiny lobster        2,928,569    1,932,852
                Shrimp             5,188,108    3,297,913
                                 161

-------
                Table 63.  Details on the Shrimp Fishery
                   Pink shrimp
      Penaeus duorarun
                   Brown shrimp   P. aztecus
                   White shrimp    .P. setiferus
                        Characteristics
                                    Data
                                    Source*
Commercial landings (Ib)
  Economic importance ($)

Geographical range

Habitat preferences
  Water depth
  Temperature range
  Salinity range
  Type of bottom
  Food sources
   Larvae
   Adults
 Growth first year

 Mobility- migration
   Vertical

   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Area

   Time of year

   Position of eggs/larvae in
     water column
   Larvae development time
                              5,188,108
                              3,297,915
6 to 20 fathoms
Oto37°/oo
firm bottom; mud- sand containing
  mollusc shell
                            unicellular algae
                            bottom nocturnal feeder; omini-
                              vorous; algae and plant detritus
                            postlarvae and beyond active
                              swimmers
                            move from shallow to deep water
                              during winter

                            larvae near surface at night, post-
                              larvae active day and night, juve
                              niles and adults nocturnal
                            adults offshore; post larvae trans-
                              ported inshore to nursery grounds
                            spring,  summer, fall,  copulation
                              no specific time
                            eggs demersal, larvae  pelagic

                            15 to 25 days
                                    1
                                    1
                              Chesapeake Bay to Gulf of Mexico     2,3
                                                                 3 , 4
                                                                 3
                                                                 3
                                                                 3
                                    5
                                   3
                                   6

                                   3 , 7
                                   3,5
*1. Johnson, 1969           2. Heald, 1968
 4. Anderson,  1970          5. Ewald,  1965
 7. Costello and Allen, 1966
                   3.  Farfante, 1969
                   6.  Knopf, 1970
                                  162

-------
ffi
                       5
                       I
o
01
o
m
u.
                                                                o
WHITE
SHRIMP
BROWN
SHRIMP
•PINK
SHRIMP




f SPAWNING |




ON NURSERY^










ON NURSERY GROUND'





[LEAVE NURSERY

1

| LEAVE NURSERY j
1






GROUND]
j i i
1 1
S


LARGEST CATCH ]
1 r
PAWN!

LARGEST CATCH



| SPAWNING ALL YEAR WITH PEAKS


[PEAK NURSERY. ENTRANCE



| LARGEST CATCH
*BASI
> OF
i 	



NG

1






IN SPRING, SUMMER, AND FALL



PEAK NURSERY, EXITJ
THE B
i 	
AIT S
HRIMP FISHI
ERY 11
I BISC
i 	 1
SlYNE
BAY.
            i	—	•  — ' —	i  onoio wr i nc DMI I  onmivir noncn i  nn DI»JWI i me .-ors i.
   	I'     I     I     1    f 	 '	'    '	1	1	i	1	1	1	1	;—

Figure  75.  Species Variations on the Biological Life  Cycle (from Knopf,
                                                                    1970)
   A-adult female spawning in open sea
   B - egg (magnified)
   C - larva (nauplius-magnified)          <•
   D — larva (prolozceal-magnified)        i,
   E - larva (mysis-magnified)          .' /
   F - postlarva entering bay (magnified)
   G - juvenile in bay nursery grounds  (
   H - adult migrating to sea          '
               /
            Figure 76.   Life Cycle of Shrimp  (from Knopf,  1970)
                                           163

-------
             Table 64. Details on the Spiny Lobster Fishery
                 Spiny lobster
Panulirus argus
Characteristics
Florida commercial landings (Ib)
Economic importance ($)

2,928,569
1,932,852
Data
Source*
1
1
     Geographical range
     Habitat preferences
         Water depth
         Type of bottom

     Food sources
         Larvae
         Adults
     Growth

     Mobility-migration
         Vertical

         Horizontal
     Behavioral characteristics
         Light

         Currents
     Spawning
         Area

         Time of year
         Position of eggs/larvae in
           water column

         Larvae development time
 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil    2,3
   to Beaufort, N.C.
 30 to 180 ft               2,4
 rocky-grassy bars        2
 scavengers, small mol-   2
   luscs

 10 in. in 4 yr             2
 larvae exhibit diurnal    2
   migration
 up to 100 mi but gene-    2
   rally 5 mi, inshore
   Apr-June,  offshore     2
   Dec-Jan

 larvae attracted by       2
   light, adults avoid it
 adults dislike strong      2
   currents and mud
   bottom
 mate inshore Feb to      2
   Apr
 June                    2
 eggs attached to female;  2,3
 pelagic to water depths
   of 130 ft
 3 to 6 mo                5
*1.  Johnson,, 1969                  2.
 3. Robinson and Dimitriou, 1963    4.
 Smith,  1958
 Heald,  1968     5.  Sims,  1966
                                  164

-------
         Table 65.  Details on the Spanish Mackerel Fishery
             Spanish mackerel    Scomberomorus maculatus
                    Characterise cs
                            Data
                            Source*
    Commercial landings (Ibs)
        Ecomonic importance ($)

    Geographical range

    Habitat preferences
        Water depth
        Temperature range
        Salinity range
        Type of bottom
        Other

    Food sources
        Fry
        Adults

    Growth first year

    Mobility- m igration
        Vertical
        Horizontal


    Behavioral characteristics
        Schooling
    Spawning
        Area
        Time of year
        Position of eggs/larvae
          in water column
        Larvae development time
2,358,874                   1
  253,336                   1

Chesapeake Bay to Brazil     2,4
12 to 40 fathoms             2,3
within 68° isotherm          3
estuarine to oceanic          4
no preference                4
occur out to slope            4
copepod larvae and eggs,      4
  pelagic Crustacea, fish
  larvae
herring-like fish             3

50 cm; 8-9 in.               3,4
20-30 fathoms               4
offshore in winter, inshore    4
  in spring
dense near surface; good
  swimmers
Cape Hatteras to Cape Cod    4
spring and early summer     4

pelagic
1.  Johnson, 1970             2.  Heald, 1968
4.  Bigelow and Schroeder,  1953
               3.  Klima, 1959
                                 165

-------
Sport Fishing

Sport fishing is extremely important to the tourist economy of southeastern

Florida (Ellis et al, 1958; Voss et al,  1969).  It was best summarized by Dr.

Donald de Sylva, a specialist at the Institute of Marine and Atmospheric

Sciences, University of Miami, in the report by Voss et al (1969). An excerpt

follows:

      The Rickenbacker Causeway study (Biscayne Bay) was done over a
      period of 21 months between July 1960 and October 1962 by Dr.
      Richard A. Wade and, in part, by Dr. Henry A. Feddern.  During
      this time, 2,148 specimens belonging to 98 species of marine fish-
      es were measured and examined in detail.  The species, in order
      of abundance, were  as follows:

          1. Spanish mackerel, Scomberomorus  maculatus
          2. White grunt, Haemulon plumieri
          3. Crevalle jack, Caranx hippos
          4. Gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus
          5. Lane snapper, JL. synagris
          6. King mackerel,  Scomberomorus cavalla
          7. Bluestriped grunt, Haemulon scrurus
          8. Bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix
          9. Sailor's  choice,  Haemulon parrai
          10. Pigfish,  Orthopristis chrysopterus
          11. Mutton snapper,  Lutjanus analis
          12. Leather jacket, Oligoplites saurus
          13. Sand perch, Diplectrum formosum,  and tomtate, Haemulon
             aurolineatum
          14. Planehead filefish, Monacanthus hispidus, and ladyfish,
             Elops saurus
          15. Porkfish, Anisotremus virginicus
          16. Atlantic  mponfish, Vpmer setapinnis
          17. Spotfin mojarra, Eucinostomus argenteus
          18. Pinfish,  Lagodpn rhomboides
          19. Inshore lizardfish, Synodus fpetens
          20. Yellowfin mojarra, Gerres cinereus
          21. Pompano, Trachinotus carolinus, and black  grouper,
             Mycteroperca bonaci
          22. Snook, Centropomus undecimalis

      Ten species comprised 65 percent of the sport catch on Rickenbacker
      Causeway, while 25 of the 98 species constituted 87 percent of the
      catch.

      Spanish mackerel are a  mainstay of the sport and commercial fishery
      of Biscayne Bay  and Florida as a whole.  Their abundance and future
      will probably depend upon suitable estuarine or coastal habitat for the
      juveniles.  This migratory species spawns in the coastal waters off
      Biscayne Bay, and the young subsequently utilize the shallow,  grassy
      parts of the Bay  as nursery grounds.  The adults roam freely through-
      out the grass beds and channels of the Bay,  primarily in fall, winter
      and spring,  feeding upon herring, anchovies, and shrimp.


                                  166

-------
     Grunts (family Pomadasyidae) are an extremely important part of the
     sport fisherman's catch. The importance of these fishes in the south-
     east is reflected in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Hunting and
     Fishing Survey for 1960, in which it was found that this group was the
     most abundantly represented in angler catches in the southeastern
     United States.

     Crevalle jack,  primarily a sport fish, is also an important predator
     in the food web of south Florida and common throughout Biscayne Bay.
     Because of their large size and strong fighting qualities they are much
     sought by anglers.

     Snappers,  especially the gray snapper, are widespread throughout
     Biscayne Bay,  especially in the deeper channels and about reefs or
     other protective habitats.  They are important both to sport and com-
     mercial fisherman.

     Equally sought after by the angler who desires Spanish mackerel are
     the king mackerel and bluefish.  They occur in large schools during
     spring and fall and are much in demand by everyone because of their
     delicate flavor and excellent fighting qualities. Both species spawn
     offshore, but the young utilize the coastal waters east of Biscayne Bay.
     The adults probably use Biscayne Bay primarily as a source of food.

     All of the above species utilize the Bay as a feeding or nursery ground
     or both at some state of their life histories. They are sought after
     near bridges, jetties, pilings, in the deep channels, in and about the
     deeper mangrove bayous, and in the passes between the islands fring-
     ing Biscayne Bay.

     Not taken by anglers during the Rickenbacker  Causeway survey is the
     spotted seatrout, Cynoscrion nebulosus. This species is common to
     abundant along the western edge of the Bay over grassy bottom, and is
     heavily fished for about Featherbed Banks.  In the deep cuts between
     the islands and on ocean side of the islands  of Biscayne Bay are num-
     erous barracuda, Sphyraena barracuda, from 3 to 20 pounds, which
     afford excellent sport to the angler.  Groupers, Epinephelus and
     Mycteroperca, as well as mutton snapper, Lutjanus  analis. and yellow-
     tail snapper  Ocyttrus chrysurus, are taken over the coastal reefs
     bordering EUiott, Sands, and Old Rhodes Keys. Permit,  Trachinotus
     falcatus. are sought after about the deep, sandy holes between grass
     beds,  while bonefish Albula vulpes, of near-record size abound between
     Cape Florida and Sands Key,  making this region one of the top areas
     in the world  for bonefish angling.  Snook and tarpon, Megalops atlantica
     are caught virtually beneath the branches of mangrove trees ringing
     Biscayne Bay's islands. All species  occur  within  the Biscayne National
     Monument, and are occasionally the subject of heavy fishing pressure,
     especially on weekends.

Also important are the large gamefish sought offshore.  A list of these spe-

cies is  presented in table 66.  These fish spawn and migrate over such vast

areas of ocean that they can be ignored for purposes of this study.


                                  167

-------
                Table 66.  List of Offshore Sport Fishes
                          (from Voss, 1967)	
                Acanthocybium solanderi (wahoo)
                Alectis ciliaris (African pompano)
                Auxis thazard (frigate mackerel)
                Caranx hippos  (jack crevalle)
                Coryphaena equisetis (dolphin)
                £.  hippuris (dolphin)
                Elegatis bipinnulatus (rainbow runner)
                Euthynnus pelamis (oceanic bonito)
                Istipophorus platypterus (sailfish)
                Makaira nigricans (blue marlin)
                Thunnus alalunga (albacore)
                T\  haynnus  (bluefish tuna)
                Xiphias gladius (swordfish)
Benthic Organisms
Papers on benthic studies of plants and animals offshore were not discovered.
Moore (1963) has studied Thalassia testudum, but this plant should not be
found at the depth we are considering. Nevertheless,  because of its impor-
tance it will be discussed briefly.  Moore studied the distribution of Thalassia
in the United States.  The results of his studies indicate that it occurs in tro-
pical or subtropical waters and occasionally in the warmer part of temperate
waters.  It does not grow in areas where salinities are more than 45 °/oo or
less than 20 °/oo.  Water clarity limits its growth at depth, but even in the
most transparent waters it does not occur at depths exceeding 11 meters.
The presence of grass beds in offshore waters depends on reduced wave ac-
tion.  Where present,  Thalassia beds support very abundant animal life.
Molluscs of commercial significance apparently do not occur either offshore
or inshore in the Miami region.  There is a calico scallop fishery farther
north off the east coast of Florida, and it should be noted that Emery et al
(1970) observed scallops in their dive off West Palm Springs. A list of mol-
luscs and other benthic organisms found in Biscayne Bay is  presented in
table 67.
                                  168

-------
                             Table 67.  List of Benthic Organisms in Biscayne Bay
                                            (from McNulty, 1962)
                                                                      o
      Summary, for all stations, of the mean numbers of individuals per m , in relation to median grain size.
      x indicates species considered to be epifauna, ° species considered to be cryptic fauna, using the sedi-
      ment for shelter but not for food. Unmarked species are considered to be true infauna.
                  Species                             <0.2 mm    0.2-0.4 mm   0.4-0.6 mm  >0.6 mm
      Porifera
          Chondrilla nuculax (Schmidt)                  --         0.12            --             0.22
          Haliclona viridisx (Duchassaing & Michelotti)   --          --            0.17
          JH. sp.x                                      _.          _.             _.             o.22
          Higginsia strigilatax (Lamarck)                --          --            0.17
^         Ircinia fasciculatax (Pallas)                   --          --            0.17
50         Pellina carbonariax (Lamack)                  --         0.24            --            0.22
          Tethya diplodermax Schmidt                   --         0.12
          Verongia  longissimax (Carter)                 —         0.24
          Teles to sanguineax Deichmann                 --          —            0.17
Alcyonaria
    Teles t
Madreporaria
    Cladocora arbusculax (Le Sueur)               --          0.48           0.17
    Porites poritesx (Pallas)                      --          0.12            --            0.22
Echinoidea
    Encope michelini Agassiz                     —           -_            0.17
    Lytechinus variegatusx (Leske)              0.63         0.12
    Mellita quinquiesperforata (Leske)             --          0.12

-------
Table 67 (Cont'd)
Species
Echinoidea
Moira atropos (Lamarck)
Asteroidea
Asterina foliumx (Lutken)
Astropecten duplicates Gray
Ohpiuroidea
Amphiodia pulchella (Lyman)
A. trychna H. L. Clark
A_. sp.
Amphioplus abditus Verrill
A. coniortodes H. L. Clark
Ophiactis sp.x
Ophiocoma echinatax (Lamarck)
Ophioderma breyispinax (Say)
Ophiolepis paucispinax (Say)
Ophiomyxa flaccidax (Say)
Ophionephthys liraicola Lutken
Ophionereis reticulatax (Say)
Ophiophragmus pulcher H. L. Clark
O. sp.
Ophiopsila riiseix Lutken
O. sp.x
Ophiostigma isacanthun (Say)
<0.2 mm

» —•

mm mm
--

0.94
_ _
--
0.31
6.88
__
__
1.88
--
--
3.75
0.31
0.31
—
1.25
--
--
0.2-0.4 mm

2.18

•~ «•
0.12

0.61
__
--
0.97
4.00
—
0.12
0.85
« mm
0.12
2.55
2.30
0.12
—
3.15
—
0.36
0.4-0.6 mm

_ __

0.17
--

—
0.17
__
__
1.16
0.17
*•• •
0.99
--
--
0.17

--
0.17
2.15
0.17
0.17
>0.6 mm

^ •>

__
—

0.44
__
0.44
_ _
mf mt
0.22
__
0.89
0.44
— _

mm m*
0.67
^ .„
mm mm
mm mm
0.22

-------
Table 67 (Cont'd)
Species
Ohpiuroidea
Ophiothrix oerstediix Luken)
OL- sp.x
Holothuroidea
Euapta lappax (Muller)
Holothuria floridanax Pourtales
Polychaeta
Ammotrypane sp.
Arabella iricolor (Montagu)
Chloeia viridisx Schmarda
Cistenides gouldi Verrill
Eunice rubra° Grube
Glycera sp.
Hesione pictax Muller
Loimia medusax (Savigny)
Lumbrineris maculata (Treadwell)
Nainereis sp.
Pista cristata (Muller)
P. sp.
Scoloplos rubra (Weteter)
Sthenelais boa (Johnston)
Terebellides sp.
<0.2 mm

--
3.13

0.31
-_

--
0.63
_ _
_ _
__
—
— _
__
0.63
_ mm
1.25
0.31
--
1.25
0.31
0.2-0.4 mm

1.21
1.21

0.36
--

0.24
—
__
0.12
mmmm
__
0.12
0.73
0.61
0.12
__
—
—
0.85
--
0.4-0.6 mm >0.6mm

__
—

__
0.22

0.17
__
0.17
_ _ mm mm
0.22
0.22
— •- mm mm
mmmm mm _
mm mm _ _
mm mm ^ mm
mm mm _ M
_- __
0.22
0.17
-- __

-------
                                                Table 67 (Cont'd)
CO
Species
Sipunculoidea
Phascolion sp.
Scaphopoda
Dentalium antillarum (d'Orbignv)
Gastropoda
Astraea tecta americanax (Gmelin)
A. phoebiax Roding
Atys sandersoni Dall
Bulla striatax Bruguiere
Calliostoma jujubinumx Gmelin
CeritMum algicolax C. B. Adams
Columbella mercatoriax Linne
C. rusticoidesx Heilprin
Conus jaspideusx Gmelin
C. stearnsix Conrad
Haminoea sp.x
Hyalina avenaceax (Deshayes)
Leucozonia nassax (Gmelin)
Modulus modulusx (Linne)
Murex recurvirostris rubidusx F. C.
Nassarius ambiguusx (Montagu)
Natica canrenax (Linne)
Nitidella nitidulax (Sowerby)
<0.2 mm
0.94
0.31
1.56
0.31
0.31
Baker
0.94
0.2-0.4 mm
0.24
0.36
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.48
0.12
0.85
0.24
0.4-0.6 mm >0.6 mm
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.17
0.22
0.33
0.33
0.44

-------
                                                Table 67 (Cont'd)
CO
Species
Gastropoda
Nitidella ocellata (Gmelin)
Prunum api cinum^Menke )
P. carneumx (Storer)
Tegula fasciatax (Born)
Turbo castaneusx (Gmelin)
Vermicularia spiratax Philippi
Lamellibranchia
Anodontia alba Link
Antigona listeri (Gray)
Arcopsis adamsix (Smith)
Barbatia cancellariax (Lamarck)
B. domingensisx (Lamarck)
Chione cancellata (Linne)
Codakia orbicularis (Linne)
C. portoricana (Dall)
Cyclinella tenuis (Recluz)
Dosinia elegans Conrad
Glycymeris pectinata (Gmelin)
Laevicardium laevigatum (Linne)
L. mortoni (Conrad)
Lima pellucidax C. B. Adams)
Lucinia multilineata (Tuomey and Holmes)
<0.2 mm
0.31
0.31
0.94
0.31
0.31
0.94
0.31
1.25
1.25
0.2-0.4 mm
0.48
0.24
« M
0.24
0.12
0.24
0.36
0.12
0.12
0.36
0.24
1.21
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.48
1.82
0.36
0.4-0.6 mm >0.6 mm
0.33
0.22
0.17 0.22
0.50
0.17
0.83
0.17
0.83 0.67
0.66 0.22
0.33

-------
                                       Table 67 (Cont'd)
Species
Lamellibranchia
Lucinia pensylvanica (Linne)
Modiolus americanusx (Leach)
Nucula proxima Say
Pecten antillarumx Recluz
P. nucleusx (Born)
Pinctada radiatax (Leach)
Pitar fulminata (Menke)
Quadrans lintea (Conrad)
Semele purpurascens (Gmelin)
Tagelus divisus (Spengler)
Trachycardium muricatum (Linne)
Tellina alternata Say
T. martinicensis d'Orbigny
T. similis Sowerby
T. versicolor Cozzens
tsopoda
Cilicaea caudatax (Say)
Roeinela signatax Schioedte and Meinhart
<0.2 mm
0.31
1.56
0.31
0.31
1.88
5.94
0.2-0.4 mm
1.58
0.12
0.36
1.21
1.21
0.24
1.58
0.61
1.09
1.45
0.12
0.4-0.6 mm
1.65
0.17
0.17
0.33
0.83
0.17
>0.6 mm
0.22
0.44
0.22
0.22
0.22
Penaeidea
    Penaeus duorarumx Burkenroad              0.31        0.24

-------
Table 67 (Cont'd)
Species
Caridea
Alpheus armillatusx Milne Edwards
Anomura
Paguristes tortugae x Schmitt
Thalassinid sp.
Brachyura
Callinectes sapidus0 Rathbun
Eucratopsis crassimanus0 (Dana)
Mithrax sp.x
Microphrys bicornutusx (Latreille)
Stomatopoda
Gonodactylus oerstedix Bansen
Pseudosquilla ciliata°(Fabricius)
<0.2mm 0.2-0. 4 mm 0.4-0.6 mm >0.6 mm
0.48
0.61
0.12
0.12
0.94 0.48 0.33
0.63 — 0.17 0.22
0.22
0.12
0.33 0.22

-------
Fouling
Ocean fouling in the Straits of Florida and Tongue of the Ocean (TOTO) has
been studied by DePalma (1963,  1969).  In a transect extending out to water
depths  of 150 meters  at Ft.  Lauderdale, DePalma found that diversity of spe-
cies and mass of fouling diminished with depth and increasing  distance from
shore.  (See figures 77 and  78, and table 68).  The biofouling community off
Ft  Lauderdale is dominated by barnacles and the oysters, Pinclada radiata
and Ostrea frons, which attach and grow rapidly throughout the year. Other
groups found at depths we are considering include the tunicates, bryozoans,
and tubeworms (see table  68). If wood is to be used,  the severe crustacean
and molluscan borer activity in this region must be taken into  account.
Information on fouling in Biscayne Bay can be found in Joseph  and Nichy (1955),
Moore  and Frue (1959), Isham et al (1951), and Werner (1967).  Additional in-
formation on the biology of Tongue of the Ocean is given by Krai (1962).

     Table 68. Biofoulers Collected from Florida Straits and TOTO
                        (from DePalma, 1967)
Species
Site and Panel Number"1"
Algae
    Dilophus ahernans
    Heterosiphonia sp.
    Spyridia sp.
    Sargassum filipendula
    Cladophora sp.
    Zonaria variegata
    Jania sp.
    Gracilaria sp.
    Padina vickersiae
    Ulva sp.
    Chrysonephos  lewisii
Protozoa
    Trachammina  compacta
    Homotrema rubrum
B2,C2,E2,E3
C2,D2,E2,F2,F3,G2,G3
C2,D2,E2,E3
B2,D2,E2,G2
B2,C2,D2,E2,E3,F2,F3,G2
C2,D2,E2
B2,D2,E2
B2,C2,D2,E2
B2,C2,C3,D2,D3,G2,G3
B2,C2,C3,D2,D3,E2,E3
B2,B3,C2,D2,E2,F2,F3,G3

F11,G14,G15
G5
+See figures 77 and 78.
                                176

-------
                         Table 68 (Cont'd)
Species
Site and Panel Number
porifera
    Spongia officinalis
    Grantia sp.
Coelenterata
    Tubulariidae
    Sertu-lariidae

    Oculina diffusa
    Acropora sp.
    Porites sp.
    Gorgoniidae
    Companulariidae *

Bryozoa
    Microporella trispinosa
    Harmerella dichotoma
    Schizoporella unicornis
    Parellisina latirostris
    Celleporella vagans
    Paras mittina spatularia
    Biflustra tennis
    Bugula sp.
Annelida
    Hydroides parvus

    E. norvegica
    Pomatoceros sp.
    Vermiliopsis infundibulum
    Pomatostegus latiscapus
B2,B3,C2,D2
B2,B3,C2,C3,D2,D3,D4,E2


D5,E4,E5,E6,E7,F11,G14,G15
D5,F2,F3,F4,F5,F6,F7,G2,G3,G4,
  G5,G6,G7
C3,F3,F5,G3,G4,G5
C3,F3,F4,G3,G4
D3,F3,F4,F5,G3,G4,G5
B2,C2,D2,D3,F2,G2
A1,B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,D4,D5,E2
  E3,E4,E5,F2,F3,F4

B3
B3
A1,D4,D5
D5
D5
D5
E2
B3
A1,B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D4,D5,E3,E4,
  E5
B3,C4,F2,F3,F4,F5,G2,G3,G4,G5
B3,C4,D4,D5,E4,F2,G2,G4
A1,F3,G3
B3,E7,F3,F5,G3,G5
*See figures 77 and 78.
^Dominant species, i.e., occupied more than 50 percent of surface on one
 or more test panels.
                                177

-------
                         Table 68 (Cont'd)
Species                          Site and Panel Number

Annelida
    Serpula vermicular is          C2
    Salmacina incrustans          A1,B2,B3,C4,D5,F4,G4
    Serpulidae                   G14,G15
    Sabellidae                   G14,G15
Arthropoda
    Balanus improvisus*          A1,B2,B3,C3,D3,D4
    B_. triganus*                 A1,B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,D4,D5
    B. tintinnabulum              B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D3
    B. eburneus                  A1,B3,D2,D3
    B. calidus                   B3,C4,D3,D4
    B. venustus nivens            A1,B3,C4
    B. sp.                       E3,E4,E5,F2
    Heteralepas cornuta           C4,D4,D5
    Conchoderma virgatum        D2,F2,F3,F4,G2,G3,G4
    Scalpellum portoricanum       E7
    Paecilasma inaequilaterals     E7
    Lepas anatifera               D2,E2, F2,F3,F4,F5,F6,F7,G2,G3,G4,
                                  G5,G6,G7
Mollusca (Foulers)
    Ostrea Irons*                B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,E2,E3. F2. F3,
                                  F4,F5,G2,G3,G4,G5
    O. equestris*                B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,D4,E2,E3,F2,
                                  F3,F4,G2,G3,G4
    Pinctada radiata*             A1,B2,B3,C2,C3,C4.D2,E2,F2,F3,F4,
                                  G2,G3,G4
    Pycnodonta thomasi*           B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D4,D5,E3,E4,E5,
                                  F3,F4,F5,G4,G5
    Pteria colymbus               B2,C3,C4,D3,D4,D5,E2,E3,E4,E5,F2,
                                  G2,G4
+See figures 77 and 78.
*Dominant species, i.e., occupied more than 50 percent of surface on one
 or more test panels.
                               178

-------
                         Table 68 (Cont'd)
Species
 Site and Panel Number
Mollusca (Foulers)
   Anomia simplex*

   Pinna carnea
   Crassostrea rhizophorae*
   Chama macrophylla*

   Area zebra
   Musculus lateralis
   Spondylus americanus*
   Aequipecten muscosus
   Brevimalleus condeanus
   Hiatella arctica
Mollusca (Borers)
   Lyrodus pedicellatus
   Teredo bartschi
   T. clappi
   1\ fulcifera
   T. Mleri
   J\ navalis
   T. sp.
   Teredothyra matocotana
   Teredora malleolus
   Nototeredo knoxi
   Bankia gouldi
   B. fosteri
   B. carinata
A1,B2,B3,D2,E2,E3,F2,F3,F4,F5,G2,
  G3 , G4,G5
B2,B3,C2,D2,F2,F3,F4,G3,G4
Al
B2,B3,C2,C3,D2,E2,F2,F3,F4,G2.G3
  G4,G5
B2,D2,E2,F3,G2,G3
B2,C2,C3,C4,D2,E2,E3
B2,B3,D5,F2,F3,F4,F5,G2,G3,G4
B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,F2,F3,F4,G3,G4
B2
E2
B2,B3,C2,C3,D2,D3
B2,B3,C2,C3
B3
E2,E3,E4
E4
E3
F2
B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,D4
D2,D3,D4,E2,E3,E4
D3
B2,D2
C2,C4,D2,D4,E2,E4
B2,B3,C2,C3,C4,D2,D3,D4,D5,E2,
  E3,E4,E5,E6,E7
+See figures 77 and 78.
*Dominant species, i.e., occupied more than 50 percent of surface on one
 or more test panels.
                              179

-------
                            Table 68 (Cont'd)
Species
Site and Panel Number
Mollusca (Borers)(Cont'd)
     Xylophaga a
     X± b
     X^ c
     Xyloredo noli, Turner
Chordata (Tunicata)
     Botryllus sp.
     Styela sp.

     Ciona intestinalis
     Ascidia nigra
     Ascidiidae
C3,C4,D3,D4,D5
E6,E7
E7
G15

B2,B3,C2,C3,D2,D3,D4
A1,B2,B3,C2,C3,D2,D3,E3,F2,F4,
   G2,G3
A1,B2
B2
C2
+See figures 77 and 78.
*Dominant species, i.e., occupied more than 50 percent of surface on one or
 more test panels.
*A new genus, presently being described by Dr. Ruth D. Turner.
     STRAITS OF FLORIDA
              TOTO
         * Value adjusted to include estimated
          number of borers (wood destroyed
          after six months).

         ( ) Panel No.
                                                             6 DEPTH (M)
                                                                  •O"
                                                               (1)  3
                            (10) 900
                            (11) 969
                            (12) 1,200


                            (13) 1,500

                            (14)1,722
                            (15) 1,737
                                                                ^~*»_
 Figure 77. Distribution of Taxa in the Study Area (from de Palma,  1969)
                                  180

-------
   STRAITS OF FLORIDA
           * Values have been adjusted to
            represent twelve-months of
            exposure.
           ( ) Panel No.
                                                                  8  DEPTH (M)
                                                                         0—
(10) 900

(11) 969

(12) 1,200
Figure  78.   Total Annual Biomass: Dry Weight of Biofouling in gm/m2
(from dePalma, 1969)
                                     181

-------
Bibliography

Anderson, W., "Contributions to the life histories of several penaeid shrimps
    (Penaeidae) along the South Atlantic Coast of the United States, "U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report — Fisheries 605,
    24 pp,  1970.

Bigelow, H., and Schroeder, W., "Fishes of the Gulf of Maine, " U.S.  Fish
    and Wildlife Service, Fish.Bull., 74, 1953, pp 1-577.

Bsharah, L.,  "Plankton of the Florida Current. V.Environmental conditions,
    standing crop, seasonal and diurnal changes at a station forty miles east
    of Miami," Bull. Mar. Sci.  and Carib.,  7, 1957, pp 489-512.

Clancy, J., "A contribution  to the life history of the fish, Bregnaceros atlan-
    ticus (Goode and Bean),  from the Florida Current," Bull. Mar. Sci.  Gulf
    and Carib.. 1956, pp 233-260.

Corcoran, E.,  and Alexander, J., "Nutrient, chlorophyll, and primary pro-
    duction studies in the Florida Current," Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.,
    13, 1963, pp 527-541.

Costello, T., and Allen,  D., "Migrations and geographic distribution of pink
    shrimp Peneaus  duorarum, of the Tortugas and Sanibel grounds,  Florida,"
    Fish. Bull, 65, 1966, pp 449-459.

Deevey, G., "Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954.  V.  Zooplank-
    ton,"Bull. Bing. Oceanogr. Coll., XV, 1956, pp 113-154.

DePalma, J., "Marine fouling and boring organisms off Fort Lauderdale,
    Florida," U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office IMR 0-70-62,  1963.

 DePalma,  J.,  "A study of deep ocean fouling in straits of Florida and Tongue
    of the  Ocean, 1961 to 1968," U»S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Informal
    Report 69-22, 1969.

 Ellis, R.,  et al,  "A survey  of the number of anglers and of their fishing  effort
    and expenditures in the  coastal recreational fishery of Florida," Fla. Bd.
    Conserv. Tech. Series  24, 48 pp, 1958.

 Emery, K., et al, "A dive aboard 'Ben  Franklin'  off West Palm Beach,
    Florida,"Mar.  Tech. Soc.  J..  4, 1970, pp 7-16.

 Eward, J., "The laboratory rearing of pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum (Bur-
    kenroad)." Bull. Mar. Sci.. 15, 1965, pp 436-439.

 Farfante, I.,  "Western Atlantic shrimps of the genus Penaeus," U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service, Fish.  Bull., 67,  1969,  pp 461-591.
                                 182

-------
Fish, C., "Preliminary observations of the biology of boreo-artic and sub-
    tropical oceanic zooplankton populations," Mimeo Report 55-7  Narra-
    gansett  Marine Lab., U. of Rhode Island, 1956.            '

Fraser, T., "Contributions to the biology of Tagelus divisus (Tellinacea
    Pelecypoda) in Biscayne Bay, Florida," Bull. Mar. Sci..  17  1967  '
    pp  111-132.                                                    '

Heald,  E., "Atlas of the principal fishery resources on the continental shelf
    from New York to Florida," prepared for the E.I. Dupont de Nemours
    Company by Inst. of Mar.  Science, U. of Miami, Miami,  Florida, 1968.

Isham, L., et al,  "Growth rate measurements of shipworms, " Bull. Mar.
    Sci.  Gulf and Carib.. 1, 1951, pp 136-147.               	

Johnson, L.E., "Florida landings, 1969, "U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service,
    C.F.S. No. 5269, 19 pp, 1970.

Jones,  J.A., "Ecological studies of the southeastern Florida patch reefs.
    Part I.  Diurnal and seasonal changes in the environment," Bull. Mar.
    Sci.. 13,  1963, pp 282-307.

Joseph, E., and Nichy, F., "Literature survey of the Biscayne Bay area.
    Part n.  Algae,  marine fouling and boring organisms, "U.S. Navy Hydro-
    graphic Office, Contract N23065-287, Mimeo Report,  33 pp, 1955.

Klima, E. F., "Aspects of the biology and the fishery for Spanish mackerel,
    Scomberomorus maculatus (Mitchell), of southern Florida," Fla. Bd.
    Conserv.  Tech.  Report, 27, 39 pp, 1959.

Knopf,  G.M., "Opportunities in the shrimp fishing industry of the southeas-
    tern United States, " Sea Grant Information Bull. 3, U. of Miami, Sea
    Grant Inst. Program, 28 pp,  1970.

Krai, A., "Literature survey, biology in the Tongue of the Ocean," Marine
    Sciences Dept.,  U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Informal Manuscript
    Report 0-45-62, 46 pp,  1962.

Legaspi, V.A., "A contribution to the life history of the nomeid fish Psenes
    cyanophrys (Cuvia and Valenciennes)," Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.,
    1956, pp 179-199.

Lewis, J.B.,  "The occurrence and vertical distribution of the Euphausiacea
    of  the Florida Current." Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib., 4,  1954, pp
    265-301.

McNulty, J., et al, "Ecological effects of sewage pollution in Biscayne Bay,
    Florida.  Distribution of coliform bacteria, chemical nutrients, and
    volumes of zooplankton," Biological Problems in Water Pollution, U.S.
    Public Health Service, Tech. Report W60-3, 1960, pp 189-202.
                                  183

-------
McNulty, J., "Ecological effects of sewage pollution in Biscayne Bay,  Florida.
    Sediments and the distribution of benthic and fouling micro-organisms,
    Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.,  11,  1961, pp 394-447.

McNulty, J. et al, "Level sea bottom  communities in Biscayne Bay and neigh-
    boring   areas," Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib., 12, 1962(a), pp 204-
    233.

McNulty, J., et al, "Some relationships between the infauna of the level bot-
    tom and the sediment in South  Florida," Bull. Mar. Sci.  Gulf and Carib..
    12, 1962(b), pp 322-332.

McNulty, J., and Lopez, N.,  "Year-round production of ripe egametes by
    benthic polychaetes in Biscayne Bay,  Florida." Bull. Mar. Sci. , 19,
    1969, pp 945-954.

McPherson, B., "Contributions to the biology of the sea urchin Tripneustes
    ventricosus."Bull. Mar. Sci.. 15, 1965,  pp 228-244.

McPherson, B., "Feeding and oxygen uptake of the tropical sea urchin
    Eucidaris tribuloides (Lamarck)." Biol. Bull., 135,  1968(a), pp 308-
    3~2T

McPherson, B., "Contributions to the biology  of the sea urchin Eucidaris
    tribuloides (Lamarck)." Bull.  Mar. Sci.,  18, 1968(b), pp 400-443.

McPherson, B., "Studies on the biology of tropical sea urchins Echinometra
    lucunter and Echinometra viridis," Bull. Mar. Sci., 19, 1969, pp  194-
    213.

Milliman, J., "Four Southwestern Caribbean atolls:  Courtown Cays, Albur-
    querque Cays, Roncador Bank, and Serrama Bank.  Atoll research,"
    Bull.  129, Smithsonian Inst., Washington, B.C., 1969.

Moore, D., "Distribution of the sea grass Thalassia, in the United States,"
    Bull.  Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. ,  13,  1963, pp 329-542.

Moore, H., "Plankton of the Florida Current.  II.  Siphonophora," Bull. Mar.
    Sci. Gulf and Carib., 2, 1953, pp 559-573.

Moore, H., "Variations in temperature and light response within a plankton
    population." Biol. Bull..  108, 1955, pp 175-181.

Moore, H., "Intra- and inter-specific relations of the factors and nuls  which
    regulate the vertical distribution of zooplankton, " Bull. Mar. Sci.   17
    1967, pp 914-934.

Moore, H., et al,  "A contribution  to the biology of Tripneustes esculentus."
    Bull.  Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.,  13,  1963(a), pp 267-281.

Moore, H., et al,  "The biology of  Lytechinus variegatus," Bull. Mar.  Sci.
    Gulf and Carib.,  13, 1963(b),  pp 267-281.         "   	
                                 184

-------
Moore, H. , et al, "Some biomass figures from a tidal flat in Biscayne Bay
    Florida, "Bull. Mar. Sci.. 18, 1968, pp 261-279.

Moore, H. , and Bauer,  J. , "An analysis of the relation of the vertical dis-
    tribution of three copepods to environmental conditions , " Bull. Mar.
    Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 10, 1960, pp 430-443.

Moore, H., and Corwin, E.,  "The effects of temperature, illumination, and
    pressure on the vertical distribution of zooplankton, " Bull. Mar.  Sci.
    Gulf and Carib. , 6, 1956, pp 273-287.

Moore, H. ,  and Foyo,  M. , "A study of the temperature factor in twelve
    species of oceanic copepods, " Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. ,  13 ,
    1963, pp 503-515.

Moore, H.,  and Frue,  A.,  "The settlement and growth of Balanus improvisus
    B_. eburneus and B_. amhitrite in the Miami area, " Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf
    and Carib. . 9,  1959, pp 421-440.

Moore, H. ,  and Lopez, N. , "The ecology and productivity of Moira atropos
    (Lamarck). "Bull. Mar.  ScL , 16, 1966, pp 648-667.

Moore, H. , and Lopez,  N. , "The ecology of Chione cancellata. " Bull.  Mar.
      L,  19,  1969, pp 13 1-148.
Moore, H. ,  and McPherson, B. ,  "A contribution to the study of the produc-
    tivity of the urchins Tripneustes esculentus and Lytechinus variegatus , "
    Bull. Mar. Sci..  15, 1965, pp
Moore, H., and O' Berry, D. , "Plankton of the Florida Current. IV.  Factors
    influencing the vertical distribution of some common copepods,  Calanoida,
    Harpacticoida,  Cyclopoida," Bull.  Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 7, 1957,
    pp 297-315.

Moore, H., and Roehr, M. , "Nul values of temperature , illumination, and
    pressure for a series of oceanic copepods, " Bull. Mar. Sci. ,  16, 1966,
    pp 259-272.

Morril, J. , Jr. , and Olson, F. , "Literature survey of the Biscayne Bay
    area," U.S. Hydrographic Office,  Contract N623 6-S-287, Mimeo Re-
    port,  134 pp, 1955.

O'Gower,  A., and Wacasey, J., "Animal communities associated with
    Thalassia,  Diplanthera, and sand beds in Biscayne Bay. I. Analysis of
    communities in relation to water movements, " Bull. Mar. Sci. , 17,
    1967, pp 175-210.

Owre,  H. , "Plankton of the Florida Current, part VI. The Chaetognatha,"
    Bull.  Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib. , 10,  1960, pp 255-322.

Owre,  H. , "The genus  Spadella (Chaetognatha) in the western North Atlantic
    Ocean, with descriptions of two new species."  Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and
    Carib. . 13, 1963,  pp 3 78-390.
                                 185

-------
Owre,  H.,  "Observations on development of the heteropod molluscs Ptero-
    trachea  hippocampus  and Firoloida desmaresti." null.  Mar. Sci. Gulf
    and Carib. .14, 1964, pp 529-538.

Owre,  H.,  and Foyo, M.,  Copepods of the Florida Current - Fauna Caribea
    No.  1. Crustacea. Part 1:  Copepods,  U. of Miami Press, Miami,
    Florida, 137pp.  1967.

Penzias, L., "Tellina martinicensis (Mollusca, Bivalvia): biology and pro-
    ductivity," BulLJ\flar._Sci._, 19, 1969, pp 568-579.

Provenzano, A., Jr., "The shallow-water hermit crabs of Florida," Bull.
    Mar. Sci. Gulf and  Carib.. 9, 1959.

Provenzano, A., Jr., "The larval development of Calcinus tibicen (Herbst)
    (Crustacea, Anomura) in the laboratory." Biol. Bull. 123, 1962, pp
    179-202.

Provenzano, A., Jr., "The complete larval development of the West Indian
    crab Petrochirus diogenes (L.)(Decapoda, Diogenidae) reared in the
    laboratory,"Bull. Mar. Sci., 18, 1968,  pp 143-181.

Provenzano, A., Jr., "Recent experiments on the laboratory rearing of tro-
    pical lobster larvae," Proc. Gulf and Carib. Fish. Inst., 21, 1969 (inpress).

Quinn, B.,  "Predation in sea urchins, " Bull. Mar.  Sci., 15,  1965, pp 259-
    264.

Rice,  A., and Provenzano, A., Jr., "The larval development of the West
    Indian sponge crab Dromidia antillensis (Decapoda, Dromiidae), £.  Zool.
    Lond.. 149,  1966, pp 297-319.

Redfield, A., "The effects of the circulation of water on the distribution of
    the  calanoid community in the  Gulf of Maine," Biol. Bull, 80, 1941, pp
    86-100.

Riley, G., "Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-54. IX: Production
    and utilization of organic matter," Bull.  Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 15,
    1956, pp 324-344.

Riley, G., and Bumpus, D., "Phytoplankton-zooplankton relationships on
    Georges Bank." J.  Mar. Res.. 6, 1946,  pp 33-47.

Riley, G., et al, "Quantitative ecology of the plankton in the western North
    Atlantic," Bull. Bingham. Oceanogr.  Coll., 12, 1949, pp 1-169.

Robinson, R., and Dimitriou, D.,  "The status of the Florida  spiny lobster
    fishery, 1962-63,"  Fla. Bd. Conserv. Tech. Series 42, 30 pp, 1963.

Roehr, M., and Moore,  H., "The  vertical distribution of some  common
    copepods in the straits of Florida," Bull. Mar. Sci. ,15, 1965, pp 565-
    0 lU.
                                 186

-------
Roessler,  M., et al, "An ecological study of Biscayne Bay in the vicinity of
    Turkey Point (progress report)," U. of Miami, Miami,  Florida, 81 pp,
    1<7 IV.

Ryther,  J., and Yentsch, C.,  "Primary production of continental shelf waters
    off New York," Limnol. Oceanogr.. 3,  1958, pp 327-335.

Sims, H., Jr., "An annotated bibliography of the spiny lobster," Fla.  Bd.
    Conserv. Tech Series 48, 84 pp,  1966.

Smith, F.G.. Atlantic Reef Corals. U. of Miami Press, Miami, Florida
    112 pp, 1918:                                                    '

Smith, F.G., "The spiny lobster industry of Florida," Fla.  Bd. Conserv.
    Educational  Series  11, 34 pp, 1958.

Smith, F.G., et al, "An ecological survey of the subtropical inshore waters
    adjacent to Miami, " Ecology, 31,  1950, pp 119-146.

Steeman-Niels en, E., and Jensen, E., "Primary oceanic production:  the
    autotropic production of organic matter in  the oceans," Galathea Rep.,
    1, 1957, pp 49-137.                                  	

Stephenson, T., and Stephenson, A.,  "Life between tide-marks in North
    America. I.   The Florida Keys. "  J. Ecol.. 38, 1950,  pp 354-402.

Sund,  P.,  and Richards, W., "Results of trials with a neuston net in the
    Gulf of Guinea," Ocean Sci.  and Engr. Trans., Joint Conf., Mar.  Tech.
    Soc. and Limnol o  and Oceanogr.,  Washington, D.C.,  1965.

Vargo, Go, "Studies of phytoplankton ecology in tropical and subtropical en-
    vironments of the Atlantic Ocean.  Part 2.  Quantitative studies of phyto-
    plankton distribution in the straits of Florida and its relation to physical
    factors." Bull. Mar. Sci.. 18,  1968, pp 5-60.

Voss, G., "A contribution of the life history and biology of the sailfish,
    Istiophorus americanus (Cuvia and Valenciennes) in  Florida waters,"
    Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.,  3,  1953, pp 206-204.

Voss, G., "The Cephalopoda obtained by the Harvard Havana Expedition off
    the  coast of Cuba in 1938-39," Bull. Mar.  Sci.  Gulf and Carib., 5, 1955,
    pp 1-115.

Voss, G., "A checklist of the Cephalopods of Florida." Quart. J. Fla.
    Acad. Sci.,  19, 1956, pp 274-282.

Voss, G., "Bioenvironmental and radiological  safety feasibility studies,
    Atlantic-Pacific interoceanic canal. Marine resources, and ecology,
    phase 1, final report, Contract AT(26-1)-171 C.F.S.T.I, for Battelle
    Mem. Inst., 143 pp.  1967.
                                187

-------
Voss, G., et al, "A report to the National Park Service on the marine eco-
    logy of the Biscayne National Momument," Mimeo Report, 128 pp, 1969.

Voss, G., and Voss, N., "An ecological survey of Soldier Key,  Biscayne
    Bay, Florida, " Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib.. 5,  1955, pp 203-229.

Voss, N., "The post larval development of fishes of the family Gempylidae
    from the Florida Current. I. Nesiarchus (Johnson) and Gempylus  (Cuvia
    and Valencienes)," Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib..4, 1954, pp 120-
Werner, W., Jr.,  "The distribution and ecology of the barnacle Balanus
    trigonus,"Bull.  Mar. Sci.. 17, 1967, pp 64-94.

Wormelle,  R.,  "A  survey of the standing crop of plankton of the Florida
    Current. VI.  A study of the distribution of the pteropods of the Florida
    Current,"Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf and Carib..  12, 1962, pp 95-136.

Zieman, J., Jr., "The effects of a thermal effluent stress on the sea grasses
    and macroalgae in the vicinity of Turkey Point, Biscayne Bay, Florida,"
    Ph.D.  thesis,  U. of Miami, Miami, Florida,  129 pp, 1970.
                                188

-------
                              Section 5
   SITE DESCRIPTION FOR WATERS OFF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA


PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION (SAN ONOFRE AREA)

Water Circulation and Characteristics
The sea off southern California (figure 79) lies in a "Mediterranean" climatic
area of basically two seasons: summer is a warm, dry season, and winter
is a mild, short season.  The  southern California shelf waters are subject
to considerable mixing by wave action and currents.  However, in summer
the water column is well stratified, with the surface 8 to 11°C warmer than
the 200-ft depth.  In winter the stability of the water column is less (average
gradient in the upper 200 ft about 3°C) and occasional high winds may result
in nearly complete mixing with the gradient in the upper 200 ft as little as
1/2 to 1°C (The Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965).
Table 69 summarizes the means and extremes  of temperature, salinity, and
density for the site area, by season. Figure 80 shows the temperature enve-
lopes for the area for winter and summer.  It is evident that the major sea-
sonal change in the water column occurs in the upper 60 ft. Salinity increases
with depth over a narrow range and a salinity  inversion may occur in summer
near the surface due to evaporation (The Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965).
A feature of the mainland shelf thermal structure is the development and
movement of "cold spots." These  features are  a product of vertical stirring
in an area of highly stratified waters (the summer condition) as a result of
raising cold subsurface Water to the surface or  near it.  Tidal stirring can
occur in areas of favorable bottom contours and as a consequence of the more
intensive  mixing that accompanies  spring tides.  The cold spots have a dome-
like shape and may have diameters up to 4 or  5  nm (The Allan Hancock Foun-
dation, 1965).  These  cold spots appear to move either in response to tidal
currents or as a result of fluctuating eddy intensity in  response to variation
in tidal amplitude.
In either case,   movement occurs within a tidal period (Emery,  1960).  On
the basis  of available data,  it is uncertain whether cold spots are likely to
occur in the San Onofre area.
                                 189

-------

                                                .l,i«ll 4 •lllHtmno
                                                                     D
                                                                CAUTION
                                         I '/.    MC '   Th' •"«'*»«  to
                                        I»«i>» Pmnl' *»  '  Oceans.de Harbor and Camp P.-nrtl*tt».-i Boat
                                               •l**n°  Basin are subject to frequont shoaling Marine's
                                                     should obta.n latal knowledge b«
-------
               Table 69.  Temperature,  Salinity and Density Data  for the San Onofre Site
Depth
(m)

0
10
20
30
50
75

0
10
20
30
50
75
Density (pt)
Ave Max

24.70
24.73
24.81
24.91
25.21
27.51

23.83
24.24
24087
25.24
25.50
25.85

25.39
25.44
25.52
25.61
25.83
26.04

24.69
25.19
25.60
25.83
26.03
26.18
Min

23.64
23.73
23.75
23.81
24.28
24.75

23.21
23.22
23.95
24.35
24.64
24.98
Temperature (°C)
Ave Max

15.55
15.33
14.92
14.36
12.89
11.72

19.41
17.62
17.84
13.04
11.47
10, 39
Winter
19.02
18.64
18.60
18.38
16.59
15.98
Summer
25.00
22.50
18.12
17.06
15.86
14.35
Min

12.90
12.74
12.10
11.38
10.32
9.50

15.94
13.47
11.92
10.32
9.72
9.29
Salinity (%o)
Ave Max

33.45
33.46
33.46
33.45
33.44
33.53

33.57
33.53
33.49
33.47
33.52
33.64

33.73
33.96
33.27
33.71
33.69
33.81

33.89
33.54
33.77
33.81
33.75
33.87
Min

32.99
33.04
33.17
33.18
33.12
33.21

33.28
33.22
33.18
33.11
33.18
33.27
*Temperature is given in degrees Celsius, salinity in parts per thousand (°/oo), and density in sigma-t
units (where, e. g., 24.39 represents a specific gravity of 1.02439).

-------
 Q_
 111
 Q
                    12  13  14   15   16  17  18   19   20   21  22  23  24   25
   50 -
   60
   70 -
     Figure 80. Temperature Profiles of Water at the San Onofre Site

The California Current is an extension of the Japanese Current that has
been cooled and has had arctic water added during its passage across the
North Pacific, past the Aleutians.  This  current flows southeasterly just
off the coast of Washington,  Oregon, and northern California.  Due to the
indentation of the southern California coastline,  and to the Santa Rosa-
Cortez ridge that extends southeast from Point Conception, the California
current flows about 150 nm offshore of the southern California coast.
East of the California Current off southern California is a large cyclonic eddy
with a period of 20 to 40  days (The Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965).  This
eddy circulation is complex,  smaller eddys having been observed within the
large gyre (Schwarzlose, 1963).  The eddy apparently weakens in spring and,
in some years, does not exist during that season. At such times a south-
easterly drift occurs.
The waters of this eddy pattern are derived primarily from the California
Current, but they become noticeably heated during their long residence in
the eddy as well as by the entrainment of southern water.  Shoreward of this
eddy, on the continental shelf, the current flows to the southeast following
the coast.  On the  southern California shelf,  wind is the most dominant influ-

                                  192

-------
ence over the shelf currents (The Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965), and wide
variations in shelf current directions and velocity are common.  The net flow,
however, is to the southeast.
Surface currents have velocities ranging from 0.1 to 0.4 kt, with rare exam-
ples of velocities up  to 0.7 kt.  Maximum velocity can occur at any depth,
but most often at the surface,  with the current speed at 50 ft averaging about
one-half that at the surface.  Current direction  can change with depth and
differ from the direction at the surface by as much as 180° (The Allan Han-
cock Foundation,  1965).
The relationship between wind and ocean currents has been previously dis-
cussed -- current velocity is about 2 to 3 percent of the wind velocity after
steady state conditions are reached, in a direction more or less directly
downwind,  on an open shelf.   Figure81 shows the average annual  winds off
California.  South of Santa Barbara Channel,the  winds are  from the west and
northwest 64 percent of the time on an annual average (USN Weather Service
Command, 1970),  more or less parallel to the coast.  The surface currents
are generally to the southeast and flow with the  wind.  When the wind blows
onshore, boundary effects  cause the current to continue flowing southeast
(Emery,  1960).  Average wind velocities are 6-8 kt, resulting in predicted
current velocities due to wind of 0.1-0.3 kt. Table 70 presents the annual
frequency of wind  directions and velocity.  Wind velocities up to 27 kt occur
nearly 12 percent  of the time and could produce  currents up to 0.8 kt, depend-
ing upon  wind persistence. Because data in this table apply to an area extend-
ing as far as  120 nm offshore,  mainland shelf conditions may be somewhat
below the average given.  In general, the drift of the surface water is offshore,
resulting in cooler subsurface water rising next to the coast (The Allan Han-
cock Foundation, 1965).
The tidal wave off southern California moves from southeast to northwest,
with tidal currents rarely exceeding 0.4 kt  (Emery, 1960). For depths on
the open  shelf at the site location, current velocities would theoretically be
less than 0.1 kt.   Tidal currents close  to shore  parallel the shore and bottom
contours, while rotary currents occur on the open shelf.   The  net flow is to
the southeast.
                                  193

-------
                                                                        118°
CD
                                                                                 - ISO-VELOCITY (Knots)

                                                                                 *- WIND STREAM    ~
                                                                                      LINES
34°
                     120°                       119*
      Figure 81. Annual Average Winds -- Velocity and Direction --of Southern California Coastal Region
                                    (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)

-------
                       Table 70.  Frequency of Wind Direction by Speed — Annual Percentage
                                 (from U.S.N. Weather Service Command, 1970)

-------
Bottom Characteristics
The width of the continental shelf off the San Onofre area averages between
2 and 4 nm.  Sediments near shore are fine sands, becoming finer with in-
creasing distance from shore, sediments on the outer shelf being silts.  At
the depth of the site area, sediments are silt with a typical median diameter
of 0.04 mm (The Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965).  Figure82 describes sedi-
ment characteristics along the continental shelf between Newport and Mexico.
The shelf sediments are primarily detritus derived from the land and brought
to the shore by rivers, and from shoreline erosion.  Rock outcropping is
common,  particularly where the topography is irregular (Emery, 1970).
Sediment is mainly composed of quartz and feldspar.  Submarine topography,
waves, and currents are responsible for the  subsequent distribution of ma-
terial on the shelf.  Off the San Onofre area, the sediments have a moderate
organic content, indicated by a nitrogen content of 0. 5-1.0 percent, and a low
shell content of about 2.0 percent calcium carbonate  (The Allan Hancock
Foundation, 1965).
Engineering property measurements are not  available for the San Onofre
area. However, five samples taken on the open shelf off San Diego in sedi-
ments composed of silts and sandy silts gave vane shear strength values of
0.057-0.201 psi and bearing capacities of 0.45 and 0.859 psi (only two bear-
ing capacities  were  calculated) for square footings at the sediment surface
(Moore,  1962). Mainland shelf silts from further north on the  California
shelf showed bearing capacities as high as 2.0 psi.
                                196

-------
CO
                                                      511TUT.E MILE
                                Figure 82. Types of Sediment between Newport and Mexico
                                       (from the Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965)

-------
Bibliography

Allan Hancock Foundation, The,  "An oceanographic and biological survey of
    the southern California Mainland shelf," State of California, State Water
    Quality Control Board, Pub. 27, 232 pp, 1965.

Emery, K.O.,  The Sea Off Southern California, J.  Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
    New York, N. Y., 366 pp, 1960.

Jones, G. F.,  "The benthic macrofauna of the mainland shelf of southern
    California, " No. 4, The Allan Hancock Foundation, 219 pp,  1969.

Krause, D.C., "Tetonics, bathymetry, and geomagnetism of the southern
    continental borderland west of Baja California, Mexico, " Geol. Soc. of
    Am. Bull. , 76,  1965, pp 617-650.

Moore, D.G., "Bearing strength and other physical properties of some shal-
    low and deep-sea sediments, "Geol. Soc. of Am. Bull.,   73, 1962, pp
    1163-1166.

State  of California, "California cooperative oceanic fisheries investigation,"
    Dept. of Fish and Game,  Marine Research committee, v IX, 73 pp,  1963.

U.S.  Naval Weather Service Command, "Summary of synoptic meteorologi-
    cal observations, North American coastal marine areas," v 2  and v 7,
    632 pp  each, 1970.
                               198

-------
BIOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION (SAN ONOFRE AREA)


Ecology
The ecology of the offshore waters in the San Onofre region of California has
been systematically studied in broad outline for a great number of years.   It
is our impression that more is known about these offshore waters than about
any coastal area in the United States, except perhaps the Gulf of Maine.  This
knowledge has been gained largely through the efforts of the Allan Hancock
Foundation of the University of California, the  California  Cooperative Oceanic
Fisheries Investigations (CalCOFI) organization,  the Scripps Institute of
Oceanography, and various California state agencies.  The bibliography of
Terry (1955) on marine geology and oceanography of the California coast is
a useful introduction to the earlier literature, and Emery (1960) presents a
fine systhesis of this information.
The unique and biologically important environmental features in this region
are the relatively  uniform moderate year-round water temperatures; the
California current water circulation system and upwelling of nutrient-rich
waters; the narrow shelf with deep water close to shore; a euphotic zone of
about 50 meters; the frequent occurrence of dinoflagellate blooms termed
"red tides;" and the presence of kelp beds.  Biologically,  these waters can
be  characterized generally by: (I) biota commonly composed of different
biogeographic provinces, (2) high standing crops of plankton with the absence
of the extreme seasonal pulses observed in the Gulf of Maine, and (3) high
biological productivity.
As at the other locations surveyed, the energy to support the offshore system
is believed to be mainly generated offshore through the photosynthetic activities
of pelagic phytoplankton (~500 gm/m2/yr dry weight, Emery,  1960).  The
barren land and low rainfall of southern California suggest that nutrient con-
tributions from land runoff  is minimal, but major cities  along the coast
discharge large quantities of waste waters  directly into the sea.  Plankton
productivity near these outfalls does not appear to be much greater than in
areas distant from them. Except that different species play similar roles,
this site appears to have no major differences from the other three sites in
basic food relationships.
                                  199

-------
Phytoplankton
The species of phytoplankton found are independent of latitude from Point
Conception to the Mexican border, due probably to the water circulation com-
mon to this general region (the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965). Allen (1936)
identified 100 species of phytoplankton representing 41 genera from daily
samples collected over a 10-year period near Port Hueneme and La Jolla.
The Allan Hancock Foundation (1965) identified 60 species of diatoms, repre-
senting  more than 27 genera, and 11 species of dinoflageHates belonging to
12 genera, in 2,036 samples of shelf and oceanic waters.  The species of
diatoms most frequently observed by the foundation workers belonged to the
genus Chaetoceros (also see Gunnerson and Emery, 1962);the most common
dinoflagellate was Prorocentrum mi cans  (also see Davis, 1955). Of the total
plankton count, diatoms accounted for 54 percent, dinoflagellates 41 percent,
and ciliates 2.6 percent.  Miscellaneous groups made up the remainder.
A list of the diatoms found in the Allan Hancock Foundation studies, with
their characteristic environments (as reported by Cupp, 1943) is given in
table 71. The list shows that diatoms characteristic of many biogeographical
provinces of the Pacific coast are represented at this site.  No formal list of
the dinoflagellates was presented, but data on all species sampled can be ob-
tained from the foundation,  if required.  Other investigators list common
dinoflagellates belonging to the genera Prorocentrum, Ceratium, and Gonyau-
lax in the southern California region (Gunnerson and Emery, 1962; Balech,  1960).
Seasonal abundance of phytoplankton is shown in table 72. The findings agree
with those of such other workers as Bolin and Abbott (1963), and Abbott and
Albee (1967) from studies further up the coast.  The data show a peak abun-
dance of diatoms in the late spring or early summer (~2000/L) and minimal
abundance in the winter (~200/L).  The actual numbers found varied widely,
from sample to sample, both within a species and between different species.
The abundance of dinoflagellates (table 72) depends less on the season, but
there is also some indication of greatest abundance during the summer.
Numbers commonly ranged from 100/L to 700/L,  and occasional samples
contained as many as 2 x 10 /L.
                                 200

-------
          Table 71. Diatoms of the Coastal Waters of Southern
          California (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)
Species
Envir onment
Climate
Asterionella japonica               neritic
Asteromphalus heptactis            oceanic
Bacteriastrum delicatulum          oceanic
B. hyalinum                        neritic
Biddulphia longicruris              neritic

B. mobiliensis                     neritic

Ceratulina bergonii                 neritic
Chaetoceros affinis                 neritic
C. compressus                     neritic

C. concavicornis                   oceanic
C. convolutus                      oceanic
C. costatus                         neritic
C. curvisetus                      neritic
C. debilis                          neritic
C. decipiens                        oceanic
C. didymus                         neritic
C. gracilis                         neritic
C. laciniosus                       neritic
C. pendulus                        oceanic
C. peruvianus                      oceanic

C. socialis                         neritic
C. vanheurcki                      neritic
Coscinodiscus centralis pacifica     oceanic

C. oculus iridis                    oceanic
Coscinosira polychorda             neritic
Dactyliosolen mediterraneus        neritic
Ditylum brightwellii                neritic
Eucampia zoodiacus                neritic
                  south temperate
                  temperate
                  temperate
                  widespread
                  temperate - subtropi-
                    cal
                  temperate - south
                    temperate
                  south temperate
                  south temperate
                  boreal - south tem-
                    perate
                  boreal - arctic
                  arctic - boreal
                  tropical
                  south temperate
                  north temperate
                  arctic - boreal
                  south temperate
                  widespread
                  south temperate

                  south temperate -
                    tropical
                  north temperate

                  temperate - north
                    temperate
                  widespread
                  north temperate
                  widespread
                  south temperate
                  south temperate
                                 201

-------
                          Table 71 (Continued)
Species
Environment
 Climate
 Fragillaria crotenensis

 Guinardia flaccida
 Hemiaulus hauckii

 H.  sinensis

 Heptocylindrus danicus
 Licmophora abbreviata
 Lithodesmium undulatum
 Navicula distans
 Nitzschia closterium
 N.  pungens var. atlantica
 Pseudoeunotia doliolus

 Rhizosolenia alata
 R.  castracanei
 R.  delicatula
 R.  robusta
 R.  stolterfothii
 R.  styliformis
 Schroderella delicatula
 Skeletonema costatum
 Stephanophyxis turris

 Thalassionema nitzochiodes
 Thalassiosira aestivalis
 T. decipiens
T. rotula

Thalassiothrix mediterranea

Tropidoneis antarctica polyplasta
neritic

neritic
neritic and
   oceanic
neritic

neritic
littoral
neritic
littoral
littoral
neritic
neritic and
   littoral
oceanic
oceanic
neritic
oceanic
neritic
oceanic
neritic
neritic
neritic

neritic
neritic
neritic
neritic

neritic

littoral and
  neritic
north temperate
  boreal
south temperate
temperate tropical

south temperate -
  subtropical
north temperate
widespread
south temperate

widespread
temperate
warm seas

temperate
tropical
temperate
warm seas
widespread
north temperate

widespread
temperate and
  subtropical
north temperate

north temperate
temperate and south
  temperate
temperate and south
  temperate
                                 202

-------
Table 72. Monthly Variation of Microplankton in
      Southern California Marine Waters
  (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Bacillariophyceae (Diatoms)
Medium Number
per Liter
265
1650
590
1080
870
2550
1850
650
480
186
930
165
Percentage
of Samples
over 5000/L
0
0
2
26
19
21
15
3
21
2
2
1
Mastigophora (Dinoflagellates)
Medium Number
per Liter
110
245
145
85
670
386
190
195
210
125
220
245
Percentage
of Samples
over 2000/L
0
13
1
2
28
8
42
9
1
5
4
3
                      203

-------
When dinoflagellates, such as species of Gonyaulax, attain abundance levels
higher than about 50,000/L, "bloom" conditions are said to exist and a pheno-
menon termed "red tide" develops.  Although these organisms are not visible
to the naked eye, the light absorption of large numbers of dinoflagellates make
the water appear reddish.  The causes of red tide are not well understood,
but are thought to be associated with the appearance of nutrients, normally
deficient, in amounts large enough to produce the bloom conditions.  Fish
kills have been observed in Florida under such  conditions. Edible shellfish
often become toxic to humans after feeding on certain dinoflagellates, although
the shellfish themselves suffer no apparent harm. Red tides occur more often
as you go south from Point Conception to the Mexican border.
When averaged over long periods of time, the number of phytoplankton in
oceanic (~100 miles offshore) and shelf waters off southern California are
comparable (Allen, 1945a).  Neritic waters, however, often contain larger
numbers of phytoplankton than oceanic waters.
The diatom samples taken at about 2 5-ft depth intervals were examined and
compared in the Allan Hancock Foundation studies.   Counts at 0- 50 ft were
similar to but greater than those at 100-150 ft.   Counts at depths greater than
100-150 ft were  less than those at 100-150 ft.  In contrast to the diatoms,
dinoflagellates were most abundant at depths of 0-25 ft, while at 50 ft counts
were about half as large. Allen  (1928) observed the greatest numbers of
phytoplankton at 30-60 ft in shallow water and at 60-90 ft in deeper, coastal
waters.  Dinoflagellates are motile and exhibit diurnal vertical movement,
according to foundation  investigators.
Under oceanic conditions, the maximum numbers of phytoplankton were ob-
served at depths of 100-200 ft  (Allen, 1945b).  This difference is  attributed
to the greater clarity of oceanic waters as compared with coastal waters (the
Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965; Emery, 1960).

Zooplankton
The zooplankton off California have been monitored by the CalCOFI organiza-
tion in a series of oceanographic cruises begun  in 1949.  Results  of these
cruises are published in a series of reports and comprehensive atlases (Cal-
COFI Atlas No. 2,3,  5, 6, 7, 8, and 10  ; these publications listed in biblio-
graphy by author).
                                   204

-------
The zooplankton found in 140-m oblique tows (0. 5-mm mesh mets) were divi-
ded into about 17 functional groups by Isaacs et al (1969). Over the entire
area that was sampled during these cruises, the following five groups made
up more than 75 percent of the  zooplankton population:
      1.    Copepoda
      2.    Thaliacea
      3.    Euphausiacea
      4.    Siphonophora
      5.    Chaetognatha
Euphausiacea, Siphonophora, and Chaetognatha generally made up less than
20 percent of the zooplankton;  Copepoda and Thaliacea were the dominant
groups.  A list of the 17 functional groups of zooplankton and representative
quantities from a few cruises are given in table 73 (Isaacs et al, 1969).
Data on abundance and seasonal occurrence of dominant zooplankton in the
immediate vicinity of the San Onofre region are presented in table 74, listed
in relative order of abundance in the spring. Although winter and summer
cruises were also made, the data have not yet been published.  The data show
that zooplankton in general are more abundant in the spring than in the fall.
Copepoda and Siphonophora appear to be more abundant in the spring and
Euphausiacea in the fall.  Chaetognatha and Thaliacea appear equally abun-
dant in the spring and fall. The biomass of all zooplankton taxa ranged (in
                                    o
wet weight) from 16 to 256 gm/1000 m  in the spring and from 4 to 64 gm/
1000 m^ in the fall.  When the San Onofre data are compared with the total
area, sampled, the Chaetognatha replace the Thaliacea in order of abundance;
otherwise, the dominant groups are identical.
In an oceanographic survey of the northeast Pacific, Owens (1963) reported
that Thaliacea, Chaetognatha, and Copepoda were the dominant zooplankton
observed in plankton hauls.  The seasonal distribution of zooplankton north
and south of Point Conception is given in figure 83.  Point Conception is
accepted as marking the division between the two large biological provinces
along the California coast. The solid line in the figure represents the separa-
tion of the productive inshore waters from those less productive offshore.
                                 205

-------
         Table 73.  Zooplankton of the Offshore California Waters
                        (from Isaacs et al, 1969)
Cruise No.*
Amphipoda
Chaetognatha
Cladocera
Copepoda
Crustacean
larvae
Ctenophora
Decapoda
Euphausiacea
Heteropoda
Larvacea
Medusae
Mysidacea
Ostracoda
Pteropoda
Radiolaria
Spinonophora
Thaliacea
Percentage of
5504
0.7
4.0
<0.1
42.0
0.4
0.6
3.0
8.0
0.1
0.1
2.0
<0.1
0.2
<0.1
0.3
4.0
34.0
5510
2.0
10.0
0.0
39.0
0.6
5.0
0.6
6.0
0.1
0.1
2.0
<0.1
0.2
2.0
5.0
7.0
21.0
Total
5604
0.4
4.0
<0.1
26.0
0.1
0.7
4.0
8.0
0.1
0.1
3.0
0.1
0.1
<0.1
0.6
7.0
45.0
Weight (gm/1000 m3)
5504
98
575
0.6
5,297
52
88
440
1,010
15
14
200
0.7
28
10
51
563
4,357
5510
210
1,180
0.03
4,799
75
653
72
698
15
17
210
0.7
29
228
663
895
2,598
5604
133
1,267
0.1
8,330
36
225
1,271
2,588
45
37
819
37
45
25
202
2,342
14,260
Accumulated
Weight
441
3,022
0.73
18,426
163
966
1,783
4,296
75
68
1,229
38.4
102
263
916
3,800
21,215
*5504 = April 1955; 5510 = October 1955; 5604 = April 1956
                                  206

-------
      Table 74. Biomass of Dominant Zooplankton in the San Onofre
         Region of California (adapted from Isaacs et al,  1969)
Mean
Weight* „
g/1000 md

0
1
4
16
64
256

0
1
4
16
64

0
0.25
1
4
16
64

0
0.25
1
4
16
Spring Cruises
5504 5604 5704 5804 5904
A11T!




X X
X XX
Cope;




X X X X X
Fall Cruises
5510 5610 5710 5810 5910
axa



X
XXX X

joda


X X
XXX

Chaetognatha


X
X X
X
X

X
X
X X

X
Euphausiacea


X
X X
X X



X
XX XX
*wet weight
                                207

-------
                         Table 74 (Continued)
Mean
Weight*
g/1000 m3

0
0.25
1
4
16

0
1
4
16
Spring Cruises
5504 5604 5704 5804 5904
Siphono


X
XX X
X
ThaliJ

X XX
X
X
Fall Cruises
5510 5610 5710 5810 5910
phora

X X
X X
X

icea

XX XX
X

*wet weight
                                 208

-------
35°
        THIS CHART GIVES AN ESTIMATE Of THE MONTHLY DIS-
      TRIBUTION OF ZOOPLANKTON IN THE LAYER 0-150 METERS
      (0-490 FEET).  SOME DIVERGENCES FROM THIS ESTIMATE
      MAY OCCUR  IN ANY SEASON, OR FROM YEAR TO YEAR.
      THE DASHfl  LINE IS A ROUGH APPROXIMATION OF THE
      ECOLOGICAL  DIVISION  BETWEEN  TWO  GEOGRAPHIC
      FAUNA. IN GENERAL, ZOOPLANKTON CONCENTRATIONS
      ARE SOMEWHAT HIGHER NORTH OF THIS LINE.  SIMILARLY,
      THE SOLID LINE SEPARATES MORE PRODUCTIVE INSHORE
      WATERS FROM LESS PRODUCTIVE OCEANIC  WATERS.  IN-
      CREASED PRODUCTIVITY OCCURS IN REGIONS OF UPWELL-
      ING AND CURRENTS.
 34
                                                                                         OUTER CIRCLE
                                                                                MOST ABUNDANT PLANKTON FORMS
                                                                                (OFTEN IN DENSE CONCENTRATIONS)
                                                                                   C-CRUSTACEANS
                                                                                      (EUPHAUSIIDS COPEPODS)
                                                                                   E-FISH EGGS, LARVAL FORMS
                                                                                   J-JELLYFISHES
                                                                                   S-SALPS
        INNER CIRCLE
ZOOPLANKTON CONCENTRATION
 I    | MINIMUM

 [~.3 MINIMUM TO MODERATE

 EgH MODERATE

 ^H MODERATE TO MAXIMUM
                                                                                                        MAR.
                                                                                                               35°
  122"
                                      121°
                                                                         120°
                                                                                                             119°
        Figure 33. Zooplankton Distribution for the Coastal Vicinity of Point Arguello
                                (from  USN Oceanographic Office,  1965)

-------
As at the Maine and New York sites,  the winter months appear to be the least
productive periods. The zooplankton seasonal peak abundance occurs in June
(also see figure 84, Emery,  1960) following the phytoplankton peak of early
spring.
                      DIATOMS-OFFSHORE (1938-41)
                            ZOOPLANKTON-OFFSHORE (1952-55)
                         DIATOMS-SHELF-1957-58
                                         •^
                       A  '   M '   J  '   J  ' ~A
                                                                 -700"-
                                                                 -600
                                                                 -500
                                                                     UJ
                                                                    O

                                                                 -400 '£
                                                                    UJ
                                                                    UJ
                                                                 -300 <
                                                                    O.
                                                                    CO
                                                                 -200
                                                                 -100
    Figure 84. Average Monthly Abundance of Diatoms and Zooplankton
                          (from Emery, 1960)

The average plankton volumes in 1960 for the southern California region are
given in figure 85 (Thrailkill, 1969).  The data show that the largest produc-
tive area occurred off San Francisco, and a smaller productive area occurred
off San Diego, with plankton volumes exceeding 900 cc/1000 m^ of water.
The plankton volume of the San Onofre region ranged from 100 to 300 cc/
1000 m3.

Copepods
The common copepods and their relative abundance found in CalCOFI cruises
are listed in table 75 (Fleminger,  1967).  Calanus tenuicornis and Ctenocalunus
                                  210

-------
                         125"
                                          120'
                                                            US'
                                                                            IIO'W.
                                              AVERAGE PLANKTON VOLUMES
                                                           I960
       CC. OF PLANKTON PER IPOO M
         OF WATER STRAINED
           1-33
           34-100

           101-300
       _••_  301-900

       2  OVER 900
       o   STATIONS OCCUPIED
      130'
                        t25°
                                         120°
                                                                           110°
Figure85.  Average Plankton Volumes -- 1960 (from Thrailkill,  1969)
                                    211

-------
                          Table 75.  Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Common Species
                                  of Copepods (Adults Only) (from Fleminger, 1967)
Cruise
Species
Calanus tenuicornis
Ctenocalanus vanus*
Calanus minor
Acartia danae*
Clausocalanus furcatus*
Heterorhabdus papilliger
Pleuromamma gracilis
Candacia bipinnata
Pleuromamma abdominalis
Pleuromamma borealis
Mecynocera clausi*
Calanus helgolandicus
Paracalanus parvus *
Candacia curta
Clausocalanus pergens 1*
Lucicutia flavicornis
Clausocalanus far rani 1*
Clausocalanus arcuicornis 1*
Scolecithrix danae
Clausocalanus arcuicornis 2*
Temora discaudata
Metridia lucens
Rhincalanus nasutus
Eucalanus bungii calif ornicus
All
%Occ.
(154)#
94
92
78
78
77
74
74
71
70
70
68
67
67
66
64
62
62
59
58
57
50
49
46
43
5804
%Occ. Abundance
(43) f Median Range
100 210 1-1048
95 137 0-1170
88 135 0-1761
86 68 0-2419
81 264 0-3797
84 71 0-390
74 107 0-1605
84 84 0-595
65 141 0-1156
74 279 0-8404
72 48 0-428
70 388 0-29891
56 68 0-1599
67 54 0-1476
81 107 0-1558
84 54 0-378
51 252 0-4249
72 123 0-5400
58 23 0- 520
79 115 0-916
46 72 0-7335
51 277 0-3600
74 95 0-11436
63 137 0-6246
5807
% Occ . Abundance
(35)# Median Range
94 200 0-1289
97 170 0-2469
54 124 0-1656
74 201 0-899
54 304 0-2506
63 43 0-394
49 115 0-686
66 22 0-602
54 194 0-1723
63 399 0-3780
49 17 0-245
63 206 0-97483
74 485 0-17260
46 38 0-1642
71 118 0-2991
51 42 0-309
46 458 0-7551
31 259 0-825
40 1 0-176
63 105 0-570
37 93 0-530
54 276 0-33499
43 135 0-838
54 416 0-6381
5810
%Occ. Abundance
(3 7) f Median Range
92 62 0-815
89 79 0-677
92 365 0-1279
84 61 0-582
81 348 0-1289
73 62 0-512
89 77 0-627
78 63 0-368
76 245 0-1721
62 360 0-3733
76 69 0-262
62 161 0-4209
60 68 0-1504
76 36 0-1351
57 44 0-1053
54 62 0-247
73 603 0-9025
65 191 0-1463
78 42 0-990
43 82 0-191
54 269 0-8903
54 285 0-44659
27 21 0-486
19 121 0-1389
5901
%Occ. Abundance
(39) # Median Range
87 53 0-491
85 105 0-1792
77 224 0-3362
67 27 0-135
87 319 0-1646
74 75 0-268
82 102 0-528
54 1 0-213
85 72 0-2354
77 421 0-10164
74 58 0-216
72 349 0-5552
80 192 0-2361
74 36 0-376
46 40 0-1419
56 39 0-162
80 619 0-5510
64 151 0-3920
56 28 0-248
41 75 0-752
62 45 0-1490
38 523 0-15136
36 19 0-554
33 41 0-587
to
H*
CO
     *Abundance likely to be underestimated because size small relative to mesh size of net.

     # %Occ. = percent occurrence; ( ) = number of stations

-------
vanus were the most common, and were found at nearly all of the stations
sampled.  Examination of CalCOFI Atlas No. 2 reveals that Calanus helgo-
landicus, Pleuromamma borealis, and Metridia lucens were the most abun-
dant forms in the vicinity of San Onofre, ranging in number  from 500 to
5000/1000 m  of water.  As an example, the distribution of  Calanus helgo-
landicus in the spring of 1958 is shown in figure 86.
The biogeographic habitat of copepods found in the California Current re-
gion are shown in table 76 (Fleminger, 1967). The table emphasizes the
heterogeneity of the zooplankton in the region.  The species  making up the
population are diverse, coming from inshore, offshore, arctic, and equa-
torial influences.  The most abundance species in the vicinity of San Onofre,
however, are  classified as transitional species.
Esterly (1912,  1928) has studied the vertical distribution of  copepods in
southern California.
Chaetognaths
The distribution of Chaetognatha (Alvarino,  1965) in the California Current
region can be found in CalCOFI Atlas No. 3. We were unable to review this
study in time for this report; however, studies on Chaetognatha in northern
California waters are discussed. Some overlap with southern California wa-
ters probably exists. Six species of Chaetognatha were identified: Sagitta
euneritica, _S_. scrippsae, S_. decipiens, S_. bierii, Eukrohnia hamata, and
Krohnitta subtilis  (Allen,  1964).  S.  euneritica was  the predominate species,
making up approximately 85 percent of the worms collected.  Allen (1964)
indicated that arrow worms were highly stratified.  The greatest concentra-
tions were found at a 20-meter depth.  Above and below this depth, densities
were less.  The distribution of arrow worms ranged from 0.6 to 0.8/m3 (sur-
face),  14.7 to 24.2/m3  (20 meters), and 0.8 to 2.1/m3 (30 meters).   Summer,
fall, and early winter samples contained the largest mean counts, while the
least mean counts  were obtained in late winter and early spring.
                                  213

-------
                125°
                                   120°
                                                      115"
                                                              -I	T
                                                                         110°
35°
30°
25"
                                           Calanus helgolandicus


                                             CALCOFI  CRUISE  5804

                                                30 MARCH-27 APRIL 1958
                                           ESTIMATED ABUNDANCE PER 1000/m3 WATER
                                                        STATIONS


                                                        1-49


                                                        50-499,


                                                        500-4,999


                                                        5,000-49,999


                                                        50,000-499,999
                                           40°
                                                                              35°
                                                                              30°
                                                                              25°
         I    '
                                       J	1	'    l
                       J	L
                125°
120°
                                                      115°
                                                                         110°
           Figure 86. Estimated Abundance of Calanus helgolandicus
                            (from  Fleminger, 1967)
                                       214

-------
Table 76. Calanoid Copepods in the California Current
           Region (from Fleminger, 1967)
     Subarctic Species
            Calanus cristatus
            C. plumchrus
            Scolecithricella minor

     Transitional Species
            Calanus helgolandicus
            Eucalanus bungii californicus
            Candacia bipinnata
            Rhincalanus nasutus
            Pleuromamma borealis
            Metridia lucens
            Clausocalanus pergens 2
            Heterorhabdus tanneri
            Racovitzanus antarcticus
            S cole cithri cella ovata

     Central Species
            Calanus gracilis
            Clausocalanus arcuicornis 2
            C_. farrani 2
            C. paululus
            Euchaeta media
            Mecynocera clausi
            Centropages violaceus
            C. elegans
            C. elongatus
            Pleuromamma xiphias
            Paracandacia bispinosa
            P. simplex
            Eucalanus elongatus hyalinus

      Equatorial Oceanic Species
            Scolecithricella abvssalis
            Euchaeta acuta
            E. longicornis
            TTlausocalanus ininor
            Eucalanus inermis
             Centropjges ^racilis
             Paracandacia truncata
             Candacia pofi

      Coastal-Neritic Species
             Endemics
                    Labidocera trispinosa
                    Lu jollae
                    Pontellopsis occidentalis
                          215

-------
                        Table 76 (Continued)
                    Non-endemics  (boreal-temperate)
                           Acartia clausi
                           Tortanus discaudatus
                           Epilabidocera longipedata
                    Non-endemics  (temperate-subtropical)
                           Acartia tons a
                           Paracalanus parvus
                           Temora discaudata
                           Clausocalanus farrani 1
                           Candacia curta
                    Non-endemics  (tropical)
                           Acartia lilljeborgi
                           Euchaeta wolfendini
                           Centropages furcatus
                           Candacia catula
                           Eucalanus pileatus
                           Labidocera  actua
Thaliacea

The abundance and distribution of two species of pelagic tunicates, Doliolum
denticulatum and Dolioletta gegenbauri,  are shown in figures 8 7 and 88 (Berner,
1967). The former species appears to be more southerly oriented than the
latter.  These two species have been used as indicators of water masses (fi-

gures 89 and 90), Dolioletta gegenbauri representing cool, sub-arctic or Cali-
fornia Current waters while Doliolum denticulatum represents the warm cen-

tral or subtropical waters (Berner, 196).  The Thaliacea occur in the upper

100 m of water;  highest concentrations are found in the upper 50 m0
                                 216

-------
                125°	120'
                  h I    I    I	1	T
              115°
                                110°
T	1	T
                                                         "I	1	1	T
40°
 30°
                                        Doliolum denticulatum
    CALCOFI  CRUISE 5804

       30 MARCH-27 APRIL 1958

  ESTIMATED ABUNDANCE PER 1000 m3 WATER
                                                     STATIONS  o DAY  • NIGHT


                                                     1-49



                                                     50-499


                                                     500-4,999


                                                     5,000-49,999


                                                    - 50,000-499,999
                                                                            30°
                                                                             25°
                                    120°
                                                      115°
           Figure 87. Estimated Abundance of Doliolum denticulatum
                             (from Berner, 1967)
                                                                        110°
                                      217

-------
40°
35°
30"
25°
         T—T
                125°
I    I   I    I
                                   120°
                                                     115°
                                                                 1	T
                                                                        110°
                   Dolioletta gegenbauri



                      CALCOFI  CRUISE  5804

                         30 MARCH-27 APRIL 1958

                    ESTIMATED ABUNDANCE PER 1000 tn3 WATER

                                 STATIONS o DAY • NIGHT

                                 1-49


                                 50-499


                                 500-4,999


                                 5,000-49,999


                                 50,000-499,999
                                                                             40"
                                                                             35°
                                                                             30°
                                                        25°
     J	L
                        I    1    i
                                           1    l   l
                125"
                                   120°
                                                     115°
                                                                        110°
          Figure 88.  Estimated Abundance of Dolioletta gegenbauri
                            (from Berner, 1967)
                                     218

-------
                  Oo/io/effa gegenbauri
                 PERCENT OF SUCCESSFUL HAULS
                       1949 - 52
                            I - 20%
                            21 - 40%
                            41 - 60%
                            61 - 80%
                            81 - 100%
 Figure 89. Percentage of Successful
 Hauls  for Dolioletta gege-nbauri
 during March, June, and September
 1949-1952 (from Berner, 1960)
                  Dolio/um denticu/atum
                 PERCENT OF SUCCESSFUL HAULS
                       1949 - 52
                           1-20%
                           21 • 40%
                           41 -60%
                           6I-BO%
                           81 - 100%
Figure 90. Percentage of Successful
Hauls for Doliolum denticulatum
during March, June, and September
1949-1952 (from Berner,  1960)
 Commercial Fisheries
 The abundant life in California waters, unlike off the East Coast, is not re-
 stricted primarily to the continental shelf but extends into the deep waters
 offshore.  These plankton-rich waters support  a variety of fish in relatively
 large numbers.  A summary of the fishes collected in eight cruises (1961-
1968) in the southern California region by Berry and Perkins (1966), included
some 52,000 specimens,  representing 189 species, belonging to 71 families
and 16  orders.   Most species collected belonged to the Orders Isospondyli
(herring and anchovy), Iniomi (lizard fish,  lantern fish), and Percomphi (sea
bass, sun fish).  The Order Isospondyli constituted 56 percent of all
specimens,  and the most abundant species was  the northern anchovy (Engrau-
lis mordax). The most abundant species collected in a single tow  consisted of:
     Engraulis mordax (northern anchovy)
     Lampanyctus mexicanus (lantern fish)
     Ceratos copetus townsendi
           9000 specimens
           3000
            944
                                   219

-------
     Stenobrachius leucopsaurus                  735
     Vinciguerra lucetia (lantern fish)             537
     Merluccinus productus (Pacific hake)         495
     Leuroglossus  stilbrius (sea smelt)            396


The abundance and kinds of larval fishes present in California Current waters
have been reported byAhlstrom (1965). The fish larvae were collected in the
CalCOFI surveys of 1955-1958 and are listed  in table 77.  Anchovy and hake
consistently outranked all other kinds during the study period.  Ahlstrom re-
ports that during the four years of study, 12 kinds  of larvae made up over 90
percent of the fish larvae observed.  Of these 12 most abundant types,  six
were of no commercial value.  However, he concluded that all must be impor-
tant in food web  relationships.
The important fish and shellfish contributing to the California fishery for the
period 1955-1966 are given intable78 (Ahlstrom, 1968).   Tuna, anchovy,
mackerel,  squid, rockfish, and crabs were the large contributors in the
1966 catch. The total catch exhibits a declining trend, due largely to the
smaller catches  of albacore, Pacific mackerel, sardines, and oysters  dur-
ing the time periods indicated.  However,  increased landings were noted in
the bonito, anchovy, and crab fisheries.  The 15-important California fish-
eries, based on the 1967  landings reported by the California Department of
Fish Game, are given in table 79 (Heimann and  Frey, 1968) „  The important
California fisheries, based on value and landings as taken from the Fisheries
Statistics of U.S. 1967 (Lyles, 1969), are given in table 80.  The lists are
comparable, with tuna,  salmon,  and crab fisheries appearing as the  most
valuable; and anchovy, mackerel, and squid ranking high in terms of volume
of fish caught.  Table 81 contains the ten important fisheries of the southern
California region — Santa Barbara, San Pedro, and San Diego -- Lyles (1969).
This region is a large contributor to the California fisheries; eight of the im-
portant species are landed primarily in this region.  The landings reported
for the southern region  (Santa Barbara, San Pedro, and San Diego) are approxi-
mately four times that reported for the northern region (Monterey to the Ore-
gon border). The fish landings for the San Pedro region  (Point Dume to San
Onofre) represent about 60 percent of the landings  for the entire California
region (Lyles, 1969). Descriptions of some of the commercially important
fisheries are presented  in tables 82 through 86.

                                  220

-------
to
CO
              Table 77.  Relative Abundance of Fish Larvae in California Current Region Based on
              Yearly Summaries of Larvae Obtained in Plankton Collection from CalCOFI Survey
                                  Cruises 1955-1958 (from Ahlstrom,  1965)
1955
Number Percentage
Taken of Total
Engraulis mordax (anchovy)
Merluccius productus (fluke)
Sebastodes spp. (rockfish)
Citharichthys spp. (sanddab)
Leuroglossus stilbius (sea smelt)
Sardinops caerulea (sardine)
Trachurus svmmetricus (mackerel)
Lampanyctus mexicanus (lantern fish)
Vinciguerria lucetia (lantern fish)
Lampanyctus leucopsarus (lantern fish)
Diogenichthys laternatus (lantern fish)
Bathylagus wesethi (deep sea smelt)
Lampanyctus ritterl (lantern fish)
Pneumatophorus dlego (mackerel)
Electrona spp.~
Bathylagus ochotensis
Melamphaes spp.
Cyclothone spp.
Tarletonbeania crenularis
Argentina slalis
Prionotus spp.
Synodus spp.
Pleuronichthys spp.
Diaphus theta
Cynoscion spp.
Symphurus atricauda
Ceratoscopelus townsendi
Symbolophorus californiense
Icichlhvs lockingtoni
Palometa similiima
Tetragonurus spp.
Stomias atriventer
Hygophum spp.
All others
TOTAL
140,183
60,090
29,344
20,411
15,111
14,121
13,246
13,165
12,654
7,454
4,771
3,245
1,988
1,950
1,823
1,301
775
1,532
999
832

641
1,038
1.022
860
73
446
653
1,385
933
490
411
400
5,808
359,155
39.03
16.73
8.17
5.68
4.21
3.93
3.69
3.67
3.52
2.08
1.33
0.90
0.55
0.54
0.51
0.36
0.22
0.43
0.28
0.23

0.18
0.29
0.28
0.24
0.02
0.12
0.18
0.39
0.26
0.14
0.11
0.11
1.62
100.00
Rank*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
18
25
16
21
24


19
20
23



17
22





Number
Taken
134,931
94,277
29,144
23,635
18,620
15,523
8,027
10,802
9,832
15,125
3,158
2,146
1,924
1,520
1,852
2,231
1,051
814
3,352
1,288
2,470
958
1,118
3,562
104
1,373
222
462
898
611
2,154
81
223
14,652
408,140
1956
Percentage
of Total
33.05
23.10
7.14
5.79
4.56
3.80
1.97
2.65
2.41
3.71
0.77
0.52
0.47
0.37
0.45
0.55
0.26
0.20
0.82
0.32
0.60
0.23
0.27
0.87
0.02
0.34
0.05
0.11
0.22
0.15
0.53
0.02
0.05
3.60
100.00
Rank*
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
8
9
7
13
17
18
20
19
15
24

12
22
14
25
23
11
21




16




Number
Taken
146,631
78,283
36,473
15,813
29,506
9,833
20,006
16,207
55,114
16,808
11,603
6,347
2,789
1,865
1,415
1,078
1,328
2,880
1,570
1,400
2,731
2,338
579
713
31
1,603
2,598
1,645
768
797
708
271
795
21,023
493,549
1957
Percentage
of Total
29.70
15.86
7.39
3.20
5.98
1.99
4.05
3.28
11.17
3.40
2.35
1.29
0.56
0.38
0.29
0.22
0.27
0.58
0.32
0.28
0.55
0.47
0.12
0.14
0.06
0.32
0.53
0.33
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.05
0.16
4.26
100.01
Number
Rank* Taken
1
2
4
9
5
11
6
8
3
7
10
12
14
18
22
25
24
13
21
23
15
17


20
16
19







205,457
58,368
23,931
6,655
4,859
11,423
6,409
16,514
55, 756
11,892
7,061
7,021
3,091
1,273
1,775
1,550
1,255
2,795
526
276
1,307
1,219
164
588
1,350
222
1,409
1,236
438
114
60
1,188
993
16,280
454,455
1958
Percentage
of Total
45.21
12.84
5.27
1.46
1.07
2.51
1.41
3.63
12.27
2.62
1.55
1.54
0.68
0.28
0.39
0.34
0.28
0.62
0.12
0.06
0.29
0.27
0.04
0.13
0.30
0.05
0.31
0.27
0.10
0.02
0.01
0.26
0.22
3.58
100.00
Rank*
1
2
4
11
12
7
10
5
3
6
8
9
13
20
15
16
21
14


19
23

18

17
22



24
25


       *Rank includes first 25 only

-------
Table 78. Average Yearly Landings of Fish and Shellfish
   by California Fishermen in 1955-60 and 1961-65,
     and Landings in 1966 (from Ahlstrom, 1968)
Fish and Shellfish
Tuna and tuna- like fishes:
Albacore
Bluefin tuna
Skipjack
Yellowfin tuna
Bonito
Yellowtail
Pelagic wetfishes :
Anchovy
Jack mackerel
Pacific herring
Pacific mackerel
Pacific sardine
Squid
Bottom fishes :
Flatfish
Hake
Lingcod
Rockfish
Sablefish
Miscellaneous animal food
Other finfishes :
Barracuda
White croaker
Salmon
White seabass
Shad
Shark and skate
Smelt and whitebait
Swordfish
Other
Crustaceans and molluscs:
Crabs
Spiny lobster
Shrimp
Abalone
Clam (including mussel)
Octopus
Oyster
Total fish and shellfish
Average Yearly
Catch 1955-60

35,124
18,182
95,651
141,467
2,031
306

24,261
58,458
1,770
42,821
90,952
12,321

19,050
1,017
1,377
15,574
2,232
--

947
962
6,712
2,019
176
903
702
379
1,685

16,698
575
1,817
4,551
18
14
10,336
611,088
Average Yearly Catch
Catch 1961-65 in 1966

36,075
24,307
81,009
146,206
4,584
175

5,151
87,877
840
33,362
16,145
13,254

20,417
91
1,067
9,984
2,154
2,261

506
821
8,478
996
0
882
597
203
1,429

4,938
489
1,687
4,347
' 7
30
4,997
515,366

18,189
34,820
51,089
132,595
19,148
245

62,280
40,976
242
4,515
878
19,026

22,145
69
798
10,058
3,216
2,380

319
790
9,445
1,338
0
796
684
469
1,662

12,674
487
1,228
4,917
2
18
801
458,299
222

-------
Table79. Important California Fisheries, Based on
  Landings in 1967 (from Heimann and Frey, 1968)
  Rank by Weight Caught    Rank by Dollar Value
   1.  Yellowfin tuna
   2.  Skipjack tuna
   3.  Albacore tuna
   4.  Anchovy
   5.  Jack mackerel
   6.  Pacific bonito
   7.  Squid
   8.  Bluefin tuna
   9.  Market crab
   10.  Rockfish
   11.  Salmon
   12.  Dover sole
   13.  English sole
   14.  Abalone
   15.  Sable fish
Yellowfin tuna
Albacore tuna
Skipjack tuna
Salmon
Market  crab
Bluefin  tuna
Jack mackerel
Pacific  bonito
Abalone
Anchovy
Rockfish
English sole
Dover sole
Squid
Sable fish
                        223

-------
  Table 80.  Important California Fisheries  Ranked by
        Value, 1967 Landings (from Lyles, 1969)
                     Value ($)     Weight (Ib)
 1.  Tuna
    (albacore)        3,352,578    17,572,400    (5)*
 2.  Salmon
    (chinook-king)    2,325,714     3,951,500    (10)
 3.  Crab
    (dungeness)      2,032,967    11,716,600    (6)
 4.  Salmon
    (silver coho)     1,619,478     3,450,200
 5.  Jack mackerel    1,447,132    38,193,900    (2)
 6.  Abalone            859,824       884,500
 7.  Bonito             713,660    17,841,500    (4)
 8.  Anchovies          701,365    69,609,400    (1)
 9.  Rockfish           669,650     9,647,500    (7)
10.  Sole
    (English)          510,331     5,821,900    (8)

 Others:
   Squid                437,766    19,601,900    (3)
   Sole (dover)          466,234     7,215,000    (9)

*Numbers in parentheses indicate rank by weight of catch.
                          224

-------
      Table 81.  Catch (1967) of the Ten Most Valuable
   California Fisheries in the Southern California Region--
Santa Barbara, San Pedro and San Diego (from Lyles, 1969)

Tuna, albacore
Tuna, yellowfin
Salmon (king)
Crab (dungeness)
Salmon (silver coho)
Jack mackerel
Abalone
Bonita
Anchovy
Rockfish
Sole (English)
Value ($)
2,006,068
19,404,938
36,826
2,240
17,934
1,410,543
855,422
890,935
551,354
315,952
28,439
Weight (Ib)
10,295,900
141,490,500
67,600
5,600
41,800
37,258,400
879,700
21,212,800
52,929,300
3,967,100
379,000
                            225

-------
               Table 82. Details on the Anchovy Fishery
                 Northern anchovy   Engraulis mordax
                          Characteristics
                                     Data
                                     Source*
 Landings and economic
   importance
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water
   Temperature

 Food sources
   Adults
 Growth


 Mobility- migration

   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling
   Temperature
   Salinity
   Other
 Spawning
   Area
   Time of Year

   Other
 N. CaL  16,800,000 Ib ($166,709)
 S. Cal.   52,900,OOP Ib ($551,354)

 Total    69, 700,000 Ib ($718,063)

 canning industry
 bait industry
1
1
                                                                    2
                                                                    3
 Pacific coast from British Columbia to
   to lower tip of Baja California --
   major fishing area S. California
   from San Francisco to Magdalena      3
   Bay
 coastal waters (20 mi)                  2
 14.5-20.OC                            4
 indiscriminate daytime filter feeders
 chiefly crustaceans (copepods)           4

 short lived: 4 yr, rarely to 7 yr; 5.6
   in. at 2 yr,  7.0 in. at 4 yr            4
 fish tagged at San Francisco -»
   Monterey Bay,
   at Monterey Bay-»S. California,
   at S.  California-> Monterey Bay
 coastal pelagic schooling
 10-25°C summer,  5-2Q°C winter         6
 >32.5,   <34.5%0                     6
 preyed upon by nearly all predators
   — major item in food web             2
 within 60 mi of shore
 female spawns 2-3 times per year,
   20-30,000 eggs
 sexual maturity reached by end of first
 year
*1.  Lyles, 1969
 4.  Baxter, 1967
2. Miller, 1956            3.  CalCOFI,  1953
5. Messermith et al, 1969  6.  Reid, 1967
                                  226

-------
               Table 83.  Details on the Albacore Fishery
                    Albacore
       Thunnus germo
                      Characteristics
                                   Data
                                   Source*
 Landings and economic
   importance
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Temperature
   Other
 Food sources
   Fry

   Adults

 Growth
 Mobility- migration
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling
   Temperature

 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
N. Cal.    7,572,000 Ib ($1,400,755)
S. CaL   10,285,900 Ib ($2,006,068)

Total     17,857,900 Ib ($3,406,823)

Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja
  California -- richest grounds:
  Columbia River to central Baja
  California
160-325 ft (along 50-68°F isotherm)
60-65% (never below 53°F)
offshore deep waters — temperature
  oriented
pelagic surface organisms or diurnal
  migrants from depths
small fish, crabs

rate: average 7 Ib/yr; young 4 cm/
  month
transpacific migration between Ameri-
  can coast, Hawaiian Islands,  and
  Japan (to important feeding grounds)
schools follow isotherms
     isotherm
ripe fish only in Hawaiian waters
January to June -- by 4 to 5 yr old
  females
*1.  Lyles, 1969
 2.  Clements, 1955
                                  227

-------
             Table 84.  Details on the Jack Mackerel Fishery
                Jack mackerel    Trachurus symmetricus
                         Characteristics
                                     Data
                                     Source*
 Landings and economic
   importance (1967)
 N. CaL      935,5001b($   36,589)    1
 S. Cal.   37,258,400 Ib ($1,410,543)    1
 Total     38,193,900 Ib ($1,447,132)    1
 Geographical range




 Habitat preferences

   Temperature

 Food sources
   Adults



 Growth



 Mobility- migration

 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling

 Spawning
 Gulf of Alaska to Baja California        2
 max  density Pt. Conception to cen-
   tral Baja California, 80-240 mi
   offshore                            3
 above
 feed at any time of day: small crus-
   taceans, copepods, euphausiids,
   and pteropods

 rate: 2 yr 250 mm, 3 yr 350 mm;
   most fish taken under 6 yrs ~
   20-38 cm

 not known
 tend to school by size                   3

 52,600 eggs; fish mature at 2 yr         3
*1. Lyles, 1969
 4. Ahlstrom,  1968
2. Blunt, 1969
5. CalCOFI, 1953
3. MacGregor, 1966
                                 228

-------
             Table 85.  Details on the Pacific Hake Fishery
                 Pacific hake
      Merluccinus productus
                         Characteristics
                                    Data
                                    Source*
 Landings and economic
  importance  (1967)
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
  Water depth

  Temperature
  Other

 Food sources
  Juveniles
   Adults
 Growth
 Mobility- migration
   Vertical
   Horizontal
 Behavioral characteristics
   Schooling

 Spawning
   Area
   Time of year
   Other
California  14,440 Ib ($309)
considered trash fish -- unused re-
  source; interest increased due to
  world market for fish meal and FPC+

Gulf of Alaska to Gulf of California;
  major concentration between Van-
  couver Island and Baja California
50-500 m (over continental shelf),
  generally within 10 ft of bottom        2
47.5-65.3 F                           2
semi-pelagic
primarily euphausiids - 2 species ex-
  clusively:  E uphaus ia pacif i ca,
  Thysanoessa spinifera               3
fish and pandelids, squid, nocturnal
  feeders

males grow slower (usually smaller)
  than females; 4 yr 18 in.  1. 5 Ib,
  7 yr 22 in.   2 Ib.                    4
diel vertical movement                 2
winter: S. Cal-,  summer: Washin-
  ton andN. Cal.
long, narrow band (180 m)
southern part of range                  2
winter                                 2
spawn once a year; produce up to
  496,000 eggs                         4
*1.  Lyles  1969      2.  Alverson and Larkins,  1969    3. Alton and Nelson,  1970
 4.  Nelson and Larkins, 1970     +Fish Protein Concentrate
                                   229

-------
                Table 86.  Details on the Abalone Fishery
                 Red abalone
      Haliotis rufescens
                   Characteristics
                                    Data
                                    Source*
 Landings and economic
   importance
 Geographical range
 Habitat preferences
   Water depth
   Type of bottom

 Food sources
 Growth

 Mobility- migration

 Behavioral characteristics
 Spawning
   Time of year
N. Cal.     4,8001b ($  4,402)
S. Cal.   879,700 Ib ($855,422)

Total     884,500 Ib ($859,824)

Alaska to Cape San Lucas, Baja
  California
coastal band including kelp beds
  normally in low water ~ 100 ft

rocky near shore, and kelp beds

larvae:  pelagic, plankton feeders,
  young feed on benthic diatoms and
  corraline algae
adults:  selective plant feeders --
  Macrocystis, Nerocystis, and other
  macro algal forms

reach 11-in. diameter; 3-4 in. 5 yr

limited crawling movement

tend to segregate in depth by species;
chief predators: otter, eel,  cabezon,
  crab, octopuses, and starfish
Spring and summer,  depending on
  temperature (20°C)
mature when 4 in.
2
2
2


2


2

2

2
*1.  Lyles, 1969
 2. Cox,  1962
                                  230

-------
Sport Fisheries
Sport fishing is an activity of increasing effort and interest.  Pinkas et al
(1968) estimated private boat sport fishing for 1964 in southern California at
2.8 million man hours, about 440,000 man days and 142,000 boat days (total
time a private boat is engaged in a fishery activity). This effort yielded a
catch of almost one million fish, consisting mostly 6f bonito, halibut, white
croaker, sand bass,  and kelp bass.  As shown in table 87,  the Pacific bonito,
kelp bass, and sand bass are the most popular sport fish of this region (Pin-
kas et al, 1968). The average annual catch of sport fish for the years 1963-
1966 in southern California was over seven million fish. For comparison,
the total catch of sport fish for the northern California region (Oregon to Point
Arguello) was estimated at about 800,000 specimens, roughly equivalent to 1.8
million pounds (Miller and Gotshall, 1965).  The species composition of the
northern California sport fishery is given in figure 91.  The rockfish and sal-
mon are the important sport fish of this area making up more than 75 percent
of the total catch.  The habitat and depth characteristics of the  sport fish found
in the northern California region, applicable in many instances to the situation
in southern California, are shown by figures 92 and 93. The data illustrate
that species vary with water depth and type of bottom.

Food Chains
The food chains or food webs associated with the marine environment are far
more complex than those associated with the land environment.  The latter
generally contain a few trophic levels (producers, herbivores, carnivores)
with primary production dependent almost entirely on spermatophytic plants.
The ocean food webs  are made up of six or more trophic levels  and primary
production is dependent almost entirely on the microscopic  phytoplankton
population, which is restricted to the relatively shallow depths of the eupho-
tic zone-
A generalized production budget estimate in terms of organic matter for the
marine  environment of southern California is given by figure 94 (Emery,
1960).  The figure shows that the efficiency of the conversion of solar energy
into plant tissue is about 0.18, similar to that on good farm land.  About 7.5
percent of the annual  production of plants is converted to zooplankton tissue
                                  231

-------
 Table 87.  Fifteen Most Important Sport Fish
in Southern California Marine Waters -- Representative
              Annual Catch, 1963-1966
              (from Pinkas et al, 1968)
                                  Numbers
      Pacific bonito                1,579,171
      Kelp and sand bass           1,390,958
      Rockfish species               661,220
      California barrac uda           56 5,166
      White  croaker                 545,012
      Queenfish                     426,592
      California halibut               280,3 69
      Pacific halibut                 231,708
      Sculpin                        220,129
      Walleye surfperch              159,089
      Shiner perch                   133,386
      Black  perch                    122,482
      Barred surfperch               113,599
      Albacore                       109,650
      Smelt, jack and  top              96,809
                                  6,635,340
      Other                          690,663
      Total                        7,326,003
      Private boat (1963-1966)      3,997,839
      Piers and jetties (1963)       1,844,970
      Private boats  (1964)            981,460
      Shoreline (1965-1966)           501,734
      Total                        7,326,003
                         232

-------
        SPECIES
   BLUE ROCKFISH
   YELLOW/TAIL ROCKFISH
   OLIVE ROCKFISH
   BOCACCIO
   KING SALMON
   CANARY ROCKFISH
   STRIPED BASS
   VERMILION ROCKFISH
   LINGCOD
   COPPER ROCKFISH
   ROSY ROCKFISH
   WIDOW ROCKFISH
   BLACK  ROCKFISH
   GOPHER ROCKFISH
   STARRY ROCKFISH
   GREENSPOTTED ROCKFISH
   JACK MACKEREL
   BROWN ROCKFISH
   PACIFIC MACKEREL
   SPECKLED ROCKFISH
         CATCH BY NUMBERS

tiitiiii;;;;;;;.



EZ]2^

jjjipl i -s
iff .2
Of 1.1
HFo.5
-:| 4.4
J4.3
3.8

3.8
3.2
3.2
_ MAJOR GROUPS
o
6 ROCKFISH
I SALMON
BASS
LINGCOD-GREENLING
MACKEREL
FLATFISH
SHARK, SKATE, RAY
ALL OTHERS
	 I
:::::;;!:;;i!;:::;) 26.9%
PERCENTAGE
OF TOTAL
85.3
4.7
3.8
3.3
1.7
0.6
TRACE
0.6
                                  —I	1	1	1
                                   50,000       100,000      150,000     200,000
                                                   NUMBERS
        SPECIES
   KING SALMON
   YELLOWTAIL ROCKFISH
   BLUE ROCKFISH
   LINGCOD
   STRIPED BASS
   BOCACCIO
   VERMILION ROCKFISH
   OLIVE ROCKFISH
   COPPER ROCKFISH
   CANARY ROCKFISH
   BLACK  ROCKFISH
   WIDOW  ROCKFISH
   JACK MACKEREL
   STARRY ROCKFISH
   BROWN  ROCKFISH
   GOPHER ROCKFISH
   GREENSPOTTED  ROCKFISH
   SILVER SALMON
   ROSY ROCKFISH
   CABEZON
        CATCH BY WEIGHT
           ::l6.4
:::! 3.6
                                50,000
       MAJOR GROUPS
       ROCKFISH
       SALMON
       LINGCOD-GREENLING
       BASS
       MACKEREL
       FLATFISH
       ALL OTHERS
PERCENTAGE
 OF TOTAL
  62.6
  16.2
   9.9
   8.6
   1.4
   0.3
   1.0
      100,000    150,000    200,000    250,000
          POUNDS
Figure 91. Total Catch and Composition Percentages of Twenty Most Fre-
quently Recorded Fish Landed by Partyboats — Crescent City to Avila,  1960
(from Miller and Gotshall,  1965)
                                         233

-------
                      SURF AREA
                 BARRED SURFPERCH
                 REDTAIL SURFPERCH
                 STRIPED BASS
                 JACKSMELT
                 SURF SMELT
                 NIGHT SMELT
                 WALLEYE SURFPERCH
                 SILVER SURFPERCH
                 WHITE CROAKER
                 SAND SOLE
                 STARRY FLOUNDER
                 CALIFORNIA HALIBUT
     PIER AREA
WALLEYE SURFPERCH
SHINER PERCH
JACKSMELT
SILVER SURFPERCH
WHITE CROAKER
STARRY FLOUNDER
SAND SOLE
TOPSMELT
NORTHERN  ANCHOVY
BARRED SURFPERCH
BLACK PERCH
CABEZON
LINGCOD (JUV)
SKATES AND RAYS
PILE PERCH
CALIFORNIA HALIBUT
KELP GREENLING
QUEENFISH
PACIFIC HERRING
SHALLOW SAND  BOTTOM

PACIFIC SANDDAB
ROCK SOLE
PETRALE SOLE
WHITE CROAKER
SAND SOLE
STARRY FLOUNDER
SABLEFISH
CALIFORNIA HALIBUT
             I DEPTH
               (FT)
CO
DEEP SAND BOTTOM
PETRALE SOLE
SABLEFISH
ENGLISH SOLE
PACIFIC SANDDAB
STARRY FLOUNDER
                      SURF 1 CASTERS

                       SURF\NETS
                                                                   PARTY/BOAT
                                                         PACIFIC BONITO - WHITE SEABASS - KING SALMON - SILVER SALMON
                                                           PACIFIC ALBACORE — CALIFORNIA BARRACUDA - JACKSMELT -
                                                   SPECIES \  JACK MACKEREL - PACIFIC MACKEREL  —  PACIFIC SARDINE -
                                                               PACIFIC HAKE
                                                                                    SOMETIMES IN MID DEPTH OVER SAND
                                                                                    BOCACCIO, CHILIPEPPER, YELLOWTAIL,
                                                                                    ROCKFISH, AND WIDOW ROCKFISH
                         Figure 92.   Most Commonly Taken Fish in Sandy Bottom and Pelagic Habitats
                         -- Oregon to Point Arguello  (from Miller  and Gotshall,  1965)

-------
to

-------
                      ORGANIC BUDGET - ANNUAL PRODUCTION
                        MILLIONS OF TONS - DRY WEIGHT
                                 SUNLIGHT
                                 25,000
               SEA SURFACE

                       PHYTOPLANKTON + ATTACHED PLANTS
                            42             1.7
                                ZOOPLANKTON         	*"
                                   3.4               42.3
                                                        p
                                                        z
                                                        LJJ
                            FISHES	»-MAMMALS      	»~
                             0.1        0.0003              I
                                                        IK
                                                        O

                           BATHYPELAGIC ORGANISMS     	*-  CC
                                < 0.02                    "J
                                 M   M
                                 LAGIC ORGANISI\
                                 <0.02
                             I  U M  t I
                                                        O
                                                        ID
                                 BENTHOS
              SEDIMENT SURFACE        1.5              	"-1.0?
                      ORGANIC MATTER - TOP OF SEDIMENT  	*- 0.1
                           0.4
                      ORGANIC MATTER - LOST
                           0.27


Figure 94. Approximate Flow Chart of Organic Matter and Annual Production
of the Various Biozones of Southern Californa (from Emery,   1960)
and about 3 percent of the annual production of zooplankton is converted to
fish tissue (about 0.2 percent of the annual production of plant tissue).  The
benthic production  is approximately 3.4 percent of the annual production of
plants.
The productivity and general food web of the marine environment is given by
figure 95 (CalCOFI, 1967).  Zooplankton, bottom filter feeders, grazers,
and some small fish comprise the second trophic level (herbivores); small
plankton feeding fish and  carnivorous crustaceans constitute the third trophic
level; the larger carnivorous fish, molluscs, and mammals make up the
fourth and fifth levels.  The production of 3.6 x  1016 grams of primary food
ultimately could produce  only 1.8 x 1013 grams of carnivores through a five-
level food chain. The food  chain of some large plankton feeding vertebrates
(whales, sharks) is considerably shorter and more efficient.  However, these
food chains are highly specialized, involving a small number of species in
the system (e.g., krill-whale food chain).
                                   236

-------
TROPHIC LEVEL
              PRODUCTIVITY
ENERGY CONTENT          ~ DRY WEIGHT
(gm  cal/yr)                  (gm/yr)
                                                                             PROTEIN
                                                                             (gm/yr)
              *••***••>«••*....••••.	«......***..•..	4. ............. .4.11.....
  PRODUCERS ::::>•:••::•::•:::::::::: 1.8 x 10'
                                  ,20
  (2000)
  HERBIVORES
 (300)
  1ST CARNIVORES
                           3.6 x 10
                            2.7  x 10
                                   19
                           5.4 x 1015
     4.5 xlO18
8.1 x1014
                        3.2 x  10
                                                                                    15

5.7 x1014
ro
2ND CARNIVORES 6.0x1017 1.2x1014
1 / 1 V* &i *^9 01 tfi 9^*^ V^*^*jl
3RD CARNIVORES 9.0x1016 1.8 x1013
1 t \ ...... ^n
1965 HARVEST 75x1016 15x1Ql3
(1/2 OF CATCH) /.&X1U 1.5 x TO
(0.8) =
9.0 x1013
1.4x1013
1.0x1013
                                                    SOME PRINCIPAL
                                                    ORGANISMS
                                                                                                        ALGAE
                                                                                                        DIATOMS
                                                                                                        SEAWEED
                                                                                                        FLAGELLATES
                                                                                                        COCCOLITHOPHORES
                        icOPEPODS, EUPHAUSIDS,
                        SHRIMPS,  OYSTERS, MUSSELS,
                        SEA URCHINS, ANNELID WORMS,
                        MENHADEN, PARROT  FISH,
                        MILK FISH, ANGEL FISH
( HERRING, ANCHOVY, MACKEREL,
\ ROSEFISH, JELLYFISH, FLYING
J FISHES, BALEEN WHALES,
} FLOUNDERS, CRABS, LOBSTER,
f SEA-STARS, FISH LARVAE AND FRY

1  SQUID, SALMON, TUNA, COD,
<  HAKE, PORPOISE,  SKATES AND
I RAYS, SEA BIRDS


/  SEALS, SHARKS, TOOTHED
)  WHALES, MARLIN


  HERRING, ANCHOVY, MENHADEN,
  COD, HAKE, HADDOCK, ROCKFISH,
  MULLET, TUNA, MACKEREL,
  SALMON, FLOUNDERS, SQUID,
  OYSTER, CRABS
          ACTUAL  HUMAN CONSUMPTION (0.4).
   NOTES: 1. ASSUMED ECOLOGICAL EFFICIENCY IS 15 PERCENT.
          2. MOST ORGANISMS FEED ON MORE THAN ONE TROPHIC LEVEL, CHANGING DIET WITH AGE
             (ESPECIALLY WHEN YOUNG) AND AVAILABILITY OF FOOD.
          3. FIGURES IN PARENTHESES REPRESENT AREAL  INDEX.
          Figure 95.   Diagram Showing Total Marine Food Web -- Dotted  and Hatched Areas  Indicate
                         Relative Total Productivities  at Each Step (from  CalCOFI,  1967)

-------
Food utilized by the Pacific sardine (Sardinops caerulea), determined by
stomach analyses, consists primarily of crustaceans.  Small copepods  occur
most frequently as shown in table 88 (Hand and Berner,  1959).  Sardines are
omnivorous filter feeders,  particulate feeders, and partially selective feeders.
A determination of the food value of some of the common food forms found in
the stomachs of sardines is presented in table 89; small copepods contribute
74 percent of the total organic food matter consumed by sardines.
The jack mackerel (Trachurus symmetricus), unlike the sardine,  captures its
food.  Consequently, stomach analyses of these fish indicate only a small list
of the possible planktonic food forms available (figure 96,  CalCOFI, 1953).
The sardine and jack mackerel are often found in the same schools; yet, the
competition for food between them is insignificant (figure 97).  Jack mackerel
are primarily selective feeders, eating the larger planktonic forms.  Over
90 percent of the food items consisted of only three types:  euphausiids, large
copepods, and pteropods (small molluscs). On the other hand,  the sardine's
food consisted of many types including particulates, diatoms, and small  copepods.
                                        80 -< ::::
                        COPEPODA
                   H PTEROPODA
                 •I SCHIZOPODA
  4 AMPHIPODA
  4 FISH LARVAE
H FORAMINIFERA

  DECAPOD LARVAE

| ANNELID LARVAE

I ISOPODA
I MISCELLANEOUS - OSTRACODA, INVERTEBRATE
 EGGS, SCAPHOPODA. TINTINNIDEAE, CLADOCERA,
 CUMACEAE, DIATOMS. LAMELLIBRANCH POST-
 LARVAE. SQUID LARVAE. STOMATOPOD LARVAE
      10
             20      30
             PERCENTAGE
                          40
                                 50
Figure 96,  Food of the Jack
Mackerel (from CalCOFI, 1953)
4
H

[C
UJ
t-
H
5
o
I
o
DC
O
ul
O
Z
UJ
O
DC
Ul
0.
                                        70 -
                                        60-
                                        50-
   40-
   30-
   20-
    10-
       SMALL  I LARGE  I
      COPEPODS CAPEPODS
                                                        PTEROPODS

                                                               EUPHAUSIIDS
  Figure 97.  Competition for Food
  between the Sardine and Jack Mac-
  kerel (from CalCOFI, 1953)
                                  238

-------
         Table 88.  Frequency of Occurrence of the Organisms
                 Found in the Stomachs of 273 Sardines
                     (from Hand and Berner, 1959)


Organism                                   Percentage of Occurrence

Small copepods                                     JQQ
Larva ceans                                         93
Fish eggs                                           79
Diatoms                                             75
Chaetognaths                                        73
Dinoflagellates                                      71
Large copepods                                     70
Cladocerans                                         65
Cyphonautes larvae                                  64
Euphausiid furcilia and calyptopsis larvae             50
Gastropods (adult and larvae)                         49
Lamellibranch larvae                                48
Copepod  nauplii                                     47
Radiolarians and silicoflagellates                     46
Euphasiid nauplii                                    40
Annelid larvae                                      36
Euphasiid eggs                                      32
Zoea larvae                                         29
Euphasiid adults                                     24
Amphipods                                          19
Barnacle nauplii                                     18
Fish larvae                                         17
Barnacle cyprids                                    16
Siphonophores                                       15
Salps                                               15
Mysids                                              13
Copepod eggs                                        10
Shrimp larvae                                        8
Brachiopod larvae                                    4
Ostracpd                                             4
Foraminiferans                                      3
Doliolids                                             2
Cumaceans                                           1
Isopods                                              1
                                 239

-------
          Table 89.  Organic Matter -- Food Value of Common
     Items Found in Sardine Stomach (from Hand and Berner, 1959)
Organism
Average Organic
Size Matter per Number of
(mm) Specimen (mg) Specimens Ashed
Small copepods 0.9
Large copepods 1.8
Euphausiids
Anchovy eggs
Chaetognaths
Organism
Diatoms
Dinoflagellates
Small copepods
Large copepods
Euphausiids
Chaetognaths
Fish eggs
10.0
0.9
13.0
Average Number
in 571 Stomachs
(Sardine)
1.14xl06
33,000
666
20
2
9
7
0.04
0.07
0.90
0.10
0.10
Total Organic
Matter (mg)
1.77
0.70
26.64
3.40
1.80
0.90
0.70
100
100
10
100
10
Percentage
of Total
4.9
1.9
74.2
9.5
5.0
2.5
1.9
 Food of the Pacific hake (Merluccius productus) consists primarily of eup-
 hausiids,shrimp, and small fish (table 90, Alton and Nelson, 1970).   The
 contribution of various food types to the total food intake of hake is presented
 in figure 98,   Best (1963) has indicated that juvenile hake prefer pelagic red
 crab (Pleuroncodes planipes),  euphausiids, and squid; adults prefer anchovy
and other small fish, euphausiids, and  the small clam (Solemya).  Young
hake are preyed upon by rockfish, albacore, larger hake, flounder,  and sole
while large hake are preyed upon by lancet fish, bluefin tuna, lingcod, rays,
sharks, and sea mammals (seals, porpoises).  The pacific hake are relatively
abundart along the Pacific coast, estimated at about 200 million pounds (Lyles,
                                 240

-------
Table 90.  Occurrence of Various Foods in Stomachs of
 Pacific Hake from Coastal Waters of Washington and
    Northern Oregon (from Alton and Nelson, 1970)
Types of Food
Crustaceans
Euphausiids
Thysanoessa spinifera
Euphausia pacifica
Pandalids
Pandalus jordani
Sergestes similis
Cragonids
Crab larvae
Mysids
Crustacean remains
Fish
Smelt
Thaleichthys pacificus
Engraulis mordax
Ammodytes hexapterus
Anoplopoma fimbria
Clupea harengus pallasi
Fish remains
Squid
Stomachs containing; food
Stomachs
in Detail
Examined
Number %
137
126
98
58
12
8
7
3
5
1
12
35
6
7
5
2
1
14
1
140
97.9
90.0
70.0
41.4
8.6
5.7
5.0
2.1
3.6
0.7
8.6
25.0
4.3
5.0
3.6
1.4
0.7
10.0
0.7
Stomachs
Cursorily
Examined
Number %
274
268
__
_ _
6
1
--
--
--
7



1

289
94.8
92.7


2.1
0.3



2.4



0.3


                         241

-------
                FREQUENCY OF
                OCCURRENCE (PERCENTAGE)
                       WEIGHT (PERCENTAGE)
            100-


             80-


             60-


             40-
             20-
M AY-JULY
N = 64
                   100-.  MAY-JULY
N = 64
TOTAL WEIGHT = 582 gm
            100-1
                        AUG-SEPT
                        N = 76
                                           100-1
                                            80-
                                            60-
                                            40-
                                            20-
                       AUG-SEPT
                       N = 76
                       TOTAL WEIGHT = 520 gm
                                                       PAN DA LIDS
                                                       OTHER FOOD
                                                   RELATIVE AMOUNTS
                                                       OF FOOD
                                                      (BY WEIGHT)
                                  —•^•"••MM""^™—
Figure 98.   Frequency of Occurrence and Weight of Major Categories of Food
of Pacific Hake, for May-July and August-September -- Data for 1965 and
1966 Combined (from Alton and Nelson, 1970)
                                    242

-------
1969).  However, little use is made of this fishery except for animal food
(Best, 1963).  The food of the yellowtail,  a popular sport fish, is shown in
figure 99 (Baxter et al, 1960), the red crab,  sardine, and anchovy occurring
most frequently in stomach analyses.
From this brief examination, it appears that copepods,  euphausiids, pteropods,
red crabs, and forage fish (sardine, herring, anchovy) are important items
in the food web of the California fishery*

Benthic Organisms
The type of substrate found in any locale influences the benthic population and
the community structure of the area.   Muds, silts, sands, and rocky, gravel,
shell bottoms  characteristically describe the bottom substrates found on the
southern California shelf.  The soft muds and silts predominate in off-shelf
deep waters; sands dominate the inshore bottom; and rocky shell material
characteristically appears near shore and follows the coastline contours. Silt
bottoms rich in organic material are  generally the more productive areas.  In
a study of the  inshore bottom environment near San Elijo Lagoon, of some 200
or more plant and animal types identified only 16 were  observed in sand bot-
tom areas (Turner et al, 1965).  In the survey of the southern California shelf,
the Allan Hancock Foundation (1965) estimates the population of benthic organ-
                                                                 n
isms in or on  fine silts and coarse sands to be on the order to  5000/m  and
2500/m , respectively.
A comprehensive study of the benthic forms of the southern California shelf
has been reported by Jones (1969). This study reports observations of 1,473
different animal types of which 523 (35%) were polychaetes, 419 (28%) were
crustaceans, 408 (28%) were molluscs, and 64 (4%) were echmoderms.  Jones
was able to identify only  60 percent of the organisms to the species level,
indicating that identification of many of the benthic forms is still difficult or
impossible. In addition to these forms, echiuroids and  brachipods are some-
time included  in lists describing the dominant groups of organisms occupying
the shelf area (the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965).
Echiuroids are annelid worms showing a lack of segmentation and reduced
pairs of setae. Listriolobus pelodes, the tongue worm, is the common species
of the area. Brachipods  are marine sessile forms which resemble  molluscs,
live in burrows, and frequently dominate bottom samples.  The typical species

                                  243

-------
                FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
to
                                               ROUND HERRING
                                               THREAD HERRING
                                               FLYINGFISH
                                               JACK SMELT
                                               JACK MACKEREL
                                               FRIGATE MACKEREL
                                               HALFMOON
                                               ROCKFISH
                                                                               TOTAL VOLUME
EACH ITEM
IS LESS THAN
2% OF TOTAL
                                               CLUPEIDAE
                                               ROUND HERRING
                                               THREAD HERRING
                                               JACKSMELT
                                               JACK MACKEREL
                                               HALFMOON
                                               ROCKFISH
                                               UNIDENTIFIED FISH
                                               AMORPHOUS MATERIAL
                                               MISCELLANEOUS
                Figure 99.   Frequency of Occurrence and Volume of Food Organisms  Found
                               in Yellowtail Stomachs (from Baxter et al,  I960)

-------
of the area is Glottidea albida.  The 50 top-ranked species observed in the
study area are ranked according to frequency of occurrence (table 91), by
population density (specimen/m2,   table 92), and an index of affinities (joint
occurrences with other species in table 93, Jones (1969).  Prionospio pinnata
(a polychaete) was ranked first by frequency of occurrences, while Amphiodia
urtica (a small red brittle star) was ranked first by density and affinity index.
A list of the 28 prevalent species common to all three lists is presented in
table 94.  Amphiodia urtica obviously is the dominant species of the mainland
shelf.  However, the polychaetes comprise the most important single group,
occurring at all depths,  and in all kinds of sediments.
At least 10 bottom biological communities have been described (the Allan
Hancock Foundation, 1965).  Some of these associations are described here:
      1.   Listriolobus. Found off the Santa Barbara shelf.  A biomass of
           some 100,000 tons is estimated for this community.
      2.   Amphiodia.  Dominates soft bottoms and found generally at depths
           between 120  and 300 ft.
      3.   Amphiodia - Cardita.   Also found off the Santa Barbara shelf but
           at depths below the Listriolobus community (180-300 ft).
      4.   Chaetopterus.  A community found near shore in black muds at
           depths of 36-120 ft.
      5.   Pista-Nothria.  Occurs at moderate depths and especially in the
           submarine canyons.
Amphiodia communities  by far dominate the benthic communities of the shelf,
occupying about 23 percent of the total shelf area (table 95).  Jones (1969)
considers three communities of major importance:
      1.   the  Nothria-Tellina assemblage, which is restricted to the
           shallow portion of the shelf (10-35m);
      2-   the Listriolobus association, which is found in the intermediate
           depths of the shelf £5-70 m); and
      3.   the Amphiodia-Cardita community, which is confined to the outer
           portion of the shelf (50-105 m).
                                  245

-------
  Table 91.  The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample Set,
     Ranked by Frequency of Occurrence (from Jones, 1969)
Species
nemerteans unknown (O)
Prionospio pinnata (P)
Amphiodia urtica (E)
Prionospio malmgreni (P)
Amphipholis squamata (E)
Pectinaria californiensis (P)
Pholoe glabra (P)
Goniada brunnea (P)
ostracods unknown (C)
Paraonis gracilis (P)
Spiophanes missionensis (P)
Tharyx tesselata (P)
Haploscoloplos elongatus (P)
tanaids unknown (O)
Terebellides stroemi (P)
Ampelisca brevisimulata (C)
Heterophoxus oculatus (C)
Laonice cirrata (P)
Sternaspis fossor (P)
Glycera capitata (P)
Haliophasma geminata (C)
Lumbrineris cruzenis (P)
Axinopsida serricata (M)
Gnathia crenulatifrons (C)
Cossura Candida (P)
nematode unknown (O)
Glottidia albida (O)
Nepthys sp. (P)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
13
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
23
23
26
26
26
28
Frequency
176
159
153
149
136
131
124
114
109
108
107
105
105
105
103
101
97
96
95
94
93
92
92
92
91
91
91
90
Percent
100.0
90.4
87.0
84.5
77.3
74.5
71.1
64.8
61.9
61.3
60.8
59.7
59.7
59.7
58.5
57.4
55.0
54.6
54.0
53.3
52.8
52.3
52.3
52.3
51.7
51.7
51.7
51.2
C = crustaceans, E = echinoderm, M= mollusc, O = other taxa
P = polychaete

                             246

-------
Table 91 (Cont'd)
Species
Ampelisca cristata (C)
Telepsavus costarum (P)
Axiothella rubrocincta (P)
Sthenelanella uniformis (P)
Aricidea suecica (P)
Nereis procera (P)
Aricidea lopezi (P)
Nephtys ferruginea (P)
pelecypods unknown (M)
Paraphoxus bicuspidatus (C)
Cadulus sp. (M)
Paraphoxus similus (C)
Ampelisca pacifica (C)
Westwoodilla caecula (P)
Metaphoxus frequens (C)
Oxydromus arenicolus (P)
Nuculana taphria (M)
Pinnixa sp. (C)
Diastylidae unknown (C)
Chaetodermatina unknown (M)
Ampelisca pugetica (P)
Leptosynapta albicans (E)
Rank
29
30-5
30.5
32.5
32.5
34
35
37
37
37
40
40
40
42
43
44
45.5
45.5
47
49
49
49
Frequency
89
87
87
84
84
83
80
77
77
77
76
76
76
74
73
72
71
71
70
69
69
69
Percent
50.5
49.4
49.4
47.7
47.7
47.2
45.5
43.8
43.8
43.8
43.2
43.2
43.2
42.0
41.5
40.8
40.3
40.3
39.8
39.2
39.2
39.2
          247

-------
Table 92.  The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample
    Set, Ranked by Population Density -- Specimens/
           Square Meter (from Jones, 1969)
Species
Amphiodia urtica (E)
ostracods unknown (C)
Amphicteis scaphobranchiata (P)
Prionospio malmgreni (P)
brown ostracod (C)
Tharyx multifilis (P)
Axinopsida serricata (M)
Tharyx tesselata (P)
Paraphoxus bicuspidatus (C)
Pectinaria californiensis (P)
Prionospio pinnata (P)
Amphipholis squamata (E)
Pholoe glabra (P)
Lumbrineris cruzensis (P)
Ampelisca brevisimulata (C)
Haploscoloplos elongatus (P)
Tellina button! (M)
Aricidea lopezi (P)
Paraonis gracilis (P)
nemerteans unknown (O)
Chloeia pinnata (P)
Paraphoxus abronius (C)
nematodes unknown (O)
tanaids unknown (C)
Dorvillea articulata (P)
Mediomastus californiensis (P)
Bittium subplanatum (M)
Glottidia albida (O)
Heterophoxus oculatus (C)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Density
359.1
272.9
93.8
92.8
61.7
61.6
54.7
53.6
47.6
45.3
44.5
39.5
36.1
35.9
35.7
31.7
30.5
28.7
28.6
28.0
27.4
27.3
27.2
26.3
25.7
25.1
24.3
24.2
23.8
  C = crustacean, E = echinoderm,M - mollusc, O - other taxa
  P = polychaete

                         248

-------
Table 92 (Cont'd)
Species
Cossura Candida (P)
Ampelisca cristata (C)
Spiophanes missionensis (P)
Nephtys sp. (P)
polychaete unknown (P)
Photis brevipes (C)
Rochefortia aleutica (C)
Magelona sacculata (P)
Chaetozone corona (P)
Cardita ventricosa (M)
Tharyx sp. (P)
Adontorhina cyclia (M)
Metaphoxus frequens (C)
calanoid copepod (C)
Glycera capitata (P)
Paraphoxus similis (C)
Paraphoxus epistomus (C)
Ampelisca macro cephala (C)
Sternaspis fossor (P)
Diastylopsis tenuis (C)
Psephidia lordi (M)
Rank
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Density
23.7
22.9
22.8
22.7
22.5
21.4
19.7
19.6
19.4
18.8
18.5
18.3
18.0
17.7
17.6^
17.4
16.6
15.8
15.7
15.3
15.1
          249

-------
Table 93.  The 50 Top-Ranked Species in the 176-Sample
 Set,  Ranked by Number of Affinities with Other Species
         of the Sample Set (from Jones, 1969)
Species
Amphiodia urtica (E)
Prionospio pinnata (P)
nemerteans unknown (O)
Prionospio malmgreni (P)
Pectinaria californiensis (P)
Amphipholis squamata (E)
Pholoe glabra (P)
tanaids unknown (C)
Ampelisca brevisimulata (C)
Terebellides stroemi (P)
Gnathia crenulatifrons (C)
Heterophoxus oculatus (C)
Goniada brunnea (P)
ostracods unknown (C)
Paraphoxus similis (C)
Axinopsida serricata (M)
Ampelisca pacifica (C)
Paraonis gracilis (P)
Spiophanes missionensis (P)
Paraphoxus bicuspidatus (C)
Haliophasma geminata (C)
Glycera capitata (P)
Metaphoxus frequens (C)
Sternaspis fossor (P)
Haploscoloplos elongatus (P)
Diastylidae unknown (C)
Cossura Candida (P)
Tharyx tesselata (P)
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.5
11.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
17.5
17.5
19.5
19.5
21 5
21.5
23
24
25
27
27
27
Affinities
88
79
75
73
71
69
65
56
55
51
50
50
48
48
48
48
47
47
46
46
45
45
42
41
40
39
39
39
  C = crustacean, E = eehinoderm, M = mollusc,
  O = other  taxa, P = polychaete
                         250

-------
Table 93 (Cont'd)
Species
Lumbrineris cruzensis (P)
Ampelisca pugetica (C)
Sthenelanella uniformis (P)
Glottidia albida (O)
Westwoodilla caecula (C)
Nephtys ferruginea (P)
Ampelisca cristata (C)
Laonice cirrata (P)
Ampelisca macrocephala (C)
Eudorella A (C)
Nicippe tumida (C)
Leptosynapta albicans (E)
Chaetodermatina unknown (M)
Nemocardium centifilosum (M)
Adontorhina cyclia (M)
Chloeia pinnata (P)
Telepsavus costarum (P)
Nephtys sp. (P)
nematode unknown (O)
Aricidea lopezi (P)
Compsomyax subdiaphana (M)
Tellina button! (M)
Hank
29
29
31
32
33
34
37
37
37
37
41
41
41
41
41
44
46
46
46
48
49
50
Affinities
38
38
37
36
34
32
29
29
29
29
28
28
28
28
28
26
25
25
25
23
21
20
          251

-------
Table 94.  Prevalent Species Common to Listings in Tables
91, 92, and 93 -- Listed by Phyletic Categories and Ranked
      by Frequency of Occurrence (from Jones, 1969)
Species
Polychaetes :
Prionospio pinnata
Prionospio malmgreni
Pectinaria californiensis
Pholoe glabra
Paraonis gracilis
Spiophanes missionensis
Tharyx tesselata
Haploscoloplos elongatus
Sternaspis fossor
Glycera capitata
Lumbrineris cruzensis
Cossura Candida
Nephtys sp.
Aricidea lopezi
Crustaceans :
ostracods unknown
tanaids unknown
Ampelisca brevismulata
Heterophoxus oculatus
Ampelisca cristata
Paraphoxus bicuspidatus
Paraphoxus similis
Metaphoxus frequens
Echinoderms :
Amphiodia urtica
Amphipholis squamata
Molluscs:
Axinopsida serricata
Frequency

90.4
84.5
74.5
71.1
61.3
60.8
59.7
59.7
54.0
53.3
52.3
51.7
51.2
45.5

61.9
59.7
57.4
55.0
50.5
43.8
43.2
41.5

87.0
77.3

52.3
Affinities

79
73
71
65
47
46
39
40
41
45
38
39
25
23

48
56
55
50
29
46
48
42

88
69

48
Density

28.0
92.8
45.3
51.1
48.3
22.8
53.6
31.7
15.7
17.6
35.9
45.8
24.2
28.7

279.9
26.3
35.7
23.8
22.9
47.6
17.4
18.0

359.1
39.5

54.7
                           252

-------
Table 94 (Cont'd)
Species
Other Taxa:
nemerteans unknown
nematodes unknown
Glottidia albida
Frequency

100.0
51.7
51.7
Affinities

75
25
36
Density

28.0
27.2
24.2
Table 95.  Dominance of Benthic Communities on the Southern California
   Mainland Shelf, Spaced Statistically According  to Area, Based on
      150 Stations (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)
                                 Percentage of Total Shelf Area
        Amphiodia                             23
        Listriolobus                             7
        Onuphis                                 6
        Amphiodia/Pectinaria                    5
        Nothria sp.                              5
        Amphiodia/Cardita                       4
        Diopatra                                 4
        Cardita                                 3
        Astropecten                             1
        Chloeia                                 1
        Chaetopterus/Lima                      1
        Sternaspis                               1
        Amphiodia/Onuphis                      1
        Lytechinus                               1
        Tharyx                              	^_
                                              67
        Diversified and unclassified            33
        Total                                100
                                 253

-------
Population densities of species making up these associations are plotted by
depth and are shown by figures 100 through 103. The distribution of the major
benthic communities of the southern California shelf from Point Conception
to San Diego is shown by figures 104, 105, 106, and 107 (only the major, widely
distributed, associates are mapped).  The general distribution by depth of
some important benthic groups is shown by figure 108.
Sponges, polychaetes, ophiuroids, crustaceans,  and pelecypods are found at
all depths from less than 10 meters to over 900 meters (Emery, 1960).  The
greatest  biomass is found at about the 50-meter depth. The distribution of
several representative species, with depth and sediment type, is shown by
figures 109 and 110. Maximum populations of Amphiodia occur at depths of
200 ft and in silty, clay substrates. Cardita occurs at a similar depth, but
in mud bottom.  Listriolobus population peaks at about 120 ft and prefers bot-
toms of mud to silty clay.  Maximum populations of Prionospia and Glottidia
occur at  depths less than 100 ft, and in silty to very fine sand bottoms.
The  biomass of the benthic animals from the mainland shelf to the continental
slope are compared in table 96 (Emery, 1960). Shelf areas are the most pro-
ductive areas, while the basin and trough floors are the least productive.  Al-
though the benthos of the  California coast appears to support a wide range of
animals and plant forms, areas are known that are nearly devoid of life.  The
Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, and San Pedro Basins  are impoverished areas
containing only empty polychaete tubes or empty  tests of forams and occa-
sional shells of molluscs (Emery, 1960).
Large kelp beds can also be found in areas along the  southern California
coast (figure 111). The beds are restricted to depths  of less than 100 ft and
to areas  of suitably rocky substrate (North and Schaeffer,  1964).  In the past
these beds encompassed a total area of 100 sq mi (260 km ), but now the size
of kelp beds is decreasing (North and Hubbs, 1968).  Kelp beds are of inter-
est because of the harvestable economic crop they represent and because of
the animals that are associated with them (abalone,  lobster, commercial and
sport fish).  Kelp yields several products  of commercial value: animal  and
human food additives, fertilizers, and alginic acid.   The annual harvest is
over 100,000 wet tons, worth over a million dollars (North and Hubbs, 1968).
The kelp  bed habitat  encourages and enhances the development of other animal

                                  254

-------
    in
    o:
    UJ
    O
    
-------
                                     GLYCERA AMERICANA
5



Ul
  UJ
  a>
  z
  <
  UJ
                                    CALLIANASA CAL1FORNIENSIS
                                                          SPIOPHANES MISSIONENSIS








                                                          LISTRIOLOBUS PELODES











                                                             STERNASPIS  FOSSOR











                                                 • --- PHORONIDS




                                                     COMPSOMYAX  SUBDIAPHANA
                                                             AMPHIPHOLIS SQUAMATA
                                                          LISTRIELLA  GOLETA
                                                             TEREBELLIDES STROEMI
                                               SAXICAVELLA  PACIFICA
                     -NOTHRIA-TELLINA
                                         •LISTRIOLOBUS
                                                             CERATOCEPHALA C. AMERICANA
                                                            -AMPHIODIA- CAROITA
         I   I   I   I   I  I   I   I  !   I   I   I  I   I   I   I  I   I   I  I   |

         10  15 20 25 30  35 40 45 50 55 60 65  70 75 80 85  90 95 100 105 110

                         DEPTH    IN    METERS
Figure 101.  Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
                              (from Jones, 1969)
                                        256

-------
                                                           AMPHIOD1A URTICA
                                                          AMPELISCA  PACIFICA
                                                          MALOANE  SARSl-
                    •NOTHRIA-TELLINA
                                      •LISTRIOLOBUS
                                                          CHLOEIA PINNATA
                                                          ADONTORHINA  CYCUA
                                                        •AMPHIODIA-CARDITA
        I
        10
i   i   (  r  i   i  t   i  i   i   i  i   i  i   i   i  i   i  i   i
15  30 25 30  35 40 45 50 55 60 65  70 75 60 85 90 95 100 105 110
             DEPTH    IN    METERS
Figure 102.  Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
                            (from Jones,  1969)
                                     257

-------
                                                           PRIONOSPIO  PINNATA
                                                           PECTINARIA CALIFORIMIENSIS
                                                           CARDITA VENTRICOSA
                                                           NUCULA  SPP.
                                                            AXINOPSIDA SERRICATA
                                                 PSEPHIDIA LORDI
                     •NOTHRIA-TELLINA
                                        •LISTRIOLOBUS
                                                           BITTIUM R. SUBPLftNATUM
                                                          -AMPHIODIA- CAR01TA
         I   I   I  I   I   I  I   I   I  I   I   I  I   I  I   I   I  I   I   I  I

         10  15  20 25 30 35 40  45 50  55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110
                         DEPTH    IN    METERS
Figure 103. Mean Number of Benthic Organisms Sampled, by Depth
                             (from Jones,  1969)
                                      258

-------
Ol

CO
                   AMPHIODIA-CARDITA*" \
                  -iJ               »
                   NORTHRIA-TELLIIA


                   LISTRIOLOBUS
           20'.
            40'
                       Figure 104. Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the Mainland

                       Shelf, Point Arguello (Point  Conception) to Santa Barbara (from Jones, 1969)

-------
CO
OJ
o
                 ty WOTHRIA-TELLINA

                   JAMPHIODIA

                 |  ICHLOEIA-PECTINARIA
                        Figure 105.  Distribution of BenthicMacrofaunalAssociations on the Mainland
                        Shelf, Santa Barbara to Point Dum e (from Jones, 1969)

-------
EC
O5
                      HjAKPHIODIA

                      |  ICHLOEIA-PECTINARIA

                      [•^NOTHRIA-TELLINA

                      lliAMPHIOPLUS
STATUTE MILES
                         Figure 106. Distribution of Benthic Macrofaunal Associations on the Mainland
                         Shelf, Point Dume to Newport (from  Jones, 1969)

-------
to
Oi
to
                         AMPHIOOA


                         SPIOPHANES BOM8YX S NOTHRIA STIGMATIS


                         NOTHRIA-TEIUNA


                         DIOPAIRA
                     Figure 107. The Distribution of Benthic MacrofaunalAssociations on the
                     Mainland Shelf, Newport to Mexico (from Jones, 1969)

-------
      i//i/if////I!iii/
                                              rf> O a?
     200
   or
   u
   i-
   u
   •5.
     400
   I
   I-
   o.
   UI
   O
     600
    600
                                        HEGLECTING FLOODS OF
                                         SAN PEDRO AND

                                        SANTA MONICA BASINS
Figure 108. Percentage of 316 Samples, in Various Depth Ranges, That Con-
tain One or More Specimens of Siliceous Sponge, Anemone, and Other Kinds
of Animals (from Emery, 1960)

    At right is depth distribution of average biomass (exclusive of algal
    bottoms), average number of species, and average bioindex of sam-
    ples from all areas except the impoverished bottoms of the San Pedro
    and Santa Monica Basins.
                         263

-------
       TEMPERATURE
       OF BOTTOM
       SEDIMENTS
               rvCOTLJ   MCTtW5-O-
               DEPTH   FEET	0-
                             DEPTHS
              100   20O   3OO   400  SCO  600
IN
                                         cr.
                                         ui
                                         o
                                         V)
FEET
                                                «60
                                                                    urficg
                                                      100   200   3OO  400  500
                                  1000

                                  900

                                  800

                                  700

                                  600

                                  500

                                  4OO

                                  300

                                  200

                                  100

                                  0
          0   IOO   200   300  400  500  600
                                         O
                                         CO
                                         c>
                                         rr
                                         UJ
                                         o.
a:
UJ
m
s
13
z
                                                     KX)   2OO  300  40O  500   60C
              100  200  300   400   500
                                                     no  200  300   400   500   soo
Figure 109. Populations of Represoitative Species, and Biomass, Related
to Depth (from the Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)
                                         264

-------
     TO
      50
      30
                    D    E
                                      DC.
                                      UJ
                                      I-
                                      UJ
                                      UJ
                                      a:
                                      O
                                      CO
                                      oc
                                      UJ
                                      Q.
                                      (O
                                      a:
                                      UJ
                                      CD
                                      CO
                                      UJ
                                      O
                                      UJ
                                      Q.
                                      CO
                                SEDIMENT TYPE
       A MUD CLAY
       B SILT CLAY
       C SILTY SAND, VERY FINE SAND
D FINE SAND
E MEDIUM SAND
F COARSE SAND
G COARSE RED
  SAND, GRAVELLY
  SAND
Figure 110. Populations of Representative Species, and Biomass, Related to
Sediment Grain Size  (from the Allan Hancock Foundation,  1965)
                                     265

-------
Table 96.  Biomass   of Benthonic Animals (Wet Weights)
                (from Emery, 1960)
Estimated
Average Standing
Area Biomass Crop
(sq miles) (sq km) (gm/sq meter) (tons x 10")
Mainland shelf
Island shelves
Bank tops
Basin and trough slopes,
and o.hor deep irregular
areas
to
02 Basin and trough floors
Continental slope
Total
1,890
1,390
2 ,420
15,350
8,980
1,960
31 ,990
4,900
3,600
6,260
39,700
23,200
5,070
82,730
300
50
50
80
8
20
1.5
0.2
0.3
3.2
0.2
0.1
5.5
Estimated
Turnover
(percent)
200
200
200
100
50
50
Annual
Production
(tons x 10°)
3.0
0.4
0.6
3.2
0.1
0.05
7.3

-------
SAN MIGUEL I.
    '£>  <
     SANTA ROSA I.
                                          SANTA MONICA

                                              LOS ANGELES
                        SANTA BARBARA I.
                              *        P.SANTA

                                        ***
                     SAN NICOLAS I.
                    50
                                        SAN CLEMENTE I.
        STATUTE MILES
Figure 111. Southern California Region Showing Area of Kelp Beds Designated
by the Department of Fish and Game (from North and Schaeffer, 1964)
resources within its boundaries.  Commercial fish such as sea bass, sculpin,
lobster, andabalone are harvested within this habitat.  Sport fishing, a very
popular activity, is also practiced within these boundaries.  Animals forms ob-
served grazing in kelp beds include:
      a.    sea urchin
      b.     isopod
      c.     abalone

      d.     snail
      e.
opaleye
                 Strongylocentrotus purpuratus
                 JL franciscanus
                 Lytechinus anamesus
                 Idothea resecata
                 Haliotis rufescens
Astrea undosa
Norrisia norrisii
Girella nigricans
                                  267

-------
The California kelp bed typically consists of Macrocystis pyrifera, Egregia
laevigata, Gigartina armata, and algae belonging to the following genera:
Laminaria,  Eisenia, Pterygophora, and Pelagophycus.  This last form, the
bull kelp, is found at the outer edge; Egregia is found on the near-shore boun-
dary in the shallows; and the other forms are intermingled within the bed
(Daws on,  1966).
Macrocystis, the most conspicuous algal form, attains great heights with
parts of the plant that float near the surface forming a kind of sheltering canopy
for the many organisms within the  water column. The life cycle of Macrocystis
is rather complex,  displaying a heteromorphic and alteration of generation
type of history which is widespread among brown seaweeds.  About 12-14
months is the estimated period for Macrocystis to complete its life cycle
under natural conditions.  In laboratory culture, the gametophytic stage is
reached in less than one month (Neusal and Haxo, 1968).   Large temperature
fluctuations are known to occur in kelp beds,  and apparently temperature
changes of 11°F are not considered extreme (Quast, 1968).

Fouling
Fouling is produced by organisms that attach, grow, and accumulate on al-
most any substrate -- natural or man made -- that is in contact with the ma-
rine environment.  The communities found on vertical surfaces or rocky sur-
faces are, in most  cases, descriptive of the potential fouling community to
depths of about 150 ft.  A list  of the plants and animals common in the rocky
intertidal area of the  San Diego region is given in table 97.  Algae are the
most conspicuous fouling forms of the intertidal area.  A list of the more
common intertidal algae forms of the California shelf and their relative abun-
dance  is presented  in table 98. Corallina (a green alga), Egregia (the feather
boa kelp),  Gigartina (a red alga), and Phyllospadix (the surf grass), are the
most common intertidal plants listed.
The  dominant intertidal organisms found in two transects of Diablo Cove,
California,  are shown by figures 112 and 113 (North, 1969). The common or-
ganisms found at -1.0 ft to +6. 5  (mean low water) are given.  Encrusting or
small  bushy types plants (Ralphsia, Corallina, Lithothamnion, Endocladia)
predominate; littorines, barnacles, and limpets are the predominant animals
                                  268

-------
  Table 97.  Rocky Intertidal Plants and Animals -- San
Elijo Lagoon, San Diego County (from Turner et al,  1965)

            Algae
               Ulva sp.
               Gelidium purpurascens
               Corallina officinalis
               CL- vancouverensis
               Zonaria farlowii
               Bossiella orbigniana

             Invertebrata
               Annelida
                  Serpulidae
                  Cirratulidae
               Cnidaria
                  Anthoploeura elegantissima
               Arthropoda
                  Cirolana harfordi
               Mollusca
                  Olivella biplicata
                  Mytilus californianus
                  Chama. pellacida
                  Nuttallina californica
                  Epitonium sp
                  Turbonium kelseyi
                  Acmaea pelta
               Bryozoa
                  Membranipora tuberculata
                           269

-------
           Table 98. Intertidal Algae:  Most Common Marine
             Plants and Relative Abundance (from the Allan
                      Hancock Foundation, 1965)

Corallina vancouveriensis                                          617
Egregia laevegata                                                  559
Gigartina canaliculata                                              534
Phyllospadix sp                                                    514
Gigartina leptrohynchos                                            426
Gastroclonium coulteri                                             314
Bossiella gardneri-dichotoma conplex                               277
Pterosiphonia dendroidea                                           258
Gelidium coulteri                                                  238
Rhodoglossum affine                                               234
Gigartina spinosa-armata conplex                                   220
Chondria nidifica                                                  213
Plocamium pacificum                                              201
Gilidium cartilaginium v.  robustum                                 195
Porphyra fastigiata                                                179
Pterocladia pyramidale                                            172
Ulva californica                                                   167
Corallina officinalis v. chelensis                                   162
Chaetomorpha areae                                               160
Centroceras clavulatum                                            156
Prionitis lanceolata                                               155
Porphyra perforata                                                145
Lithothrix aspergilbum                                             142
Melobesia mediocris                                              134
Enteromorpha compressa                                          129
Gracilariopsis sjoestedtii                                          128
Gelidium purpurasceno                                             125
Laurencia pacifica                                                 116
Pachydictyon coriaceum                                            115
Gymnogongrus leptophyllus                                         112
Ceramium eatonianum                                             109
Chondria decipiens                                                 109

                                  270

-------
                         Table 98 (Cont'd)
Gracilariopsis andersonii
Gigartina volans
Gelidium crinale v.luxurians
Nienburgia andersoniana
Gracillaria cunninghamii
Eisenia arborea
Cryptopleura violacea
Spermothamnion synderae
Polysiphonia collinsii
Pterosiphonia baileyi
Heldenbrandia protoypus
Jania natalensis
Rhodymenia palmettiformis
GC
m LOCATIONS AND IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS OF QUADRATS £
x| 8 765 4321 §
i.i » I .1 i i
0
H
<
u
o
t

1-
o
Si




CO
UJ
O
z
<
I





< J o — ^ ^<5^
— 5 ^ o5^~zpz UJ^ — -l

i.u 108 105 102 99 98 94 94 85 85 83 76 70 62 ' i in IS 20 25 30 35 40 45 DISTANCE FROM CLIFF (M) Figure 112. Ranges and Locations of Dominant Organisms Transect A, South Side of Diablo Cove, November 12, 1966 (from North, 1969) 271


-------
                            LOCATIONS AND IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS OF QUADRATS
                            9
                                           10
                                                     11
                                                          12
\/ >
LITTORINA PLA
ACMAEA PELTA
CLADOPHORA
ACMAEA SCABR
CHTHAMALUS
S ANTHOPLEURA
° ELEGANTISSIM
31
3 ANTHOPLEURA
5 XANTHOGRAM
t>
LITTORINA SCUTULATA,
PORPHYRA
^^•••i^
" i™
$ < fsi
H S z 5 > &
< ?. 0 J 1- 3
w X < < O <
t ° -1 O 0) J
GIGARTINA CORYMBIFER
TEGULA BRUNNEA
PAPILLATA GASTROCIONIUM, CORALLINA
LITHOTHAMNION
PHYLLOSPADIX
CHILENSIS


IRIDOPHYCUS, STRONGYLOCENTROTUS PURPURATUS

+6.5 +4.5 +2.5
O

s


CORALLINA GRACILIS
RALFSIA, TEGULA FUNEBRALIS
ENDOCLADIA
APPROXIMATE ELEVATION, REFERRED TO MLW (FT)
0 +1.0 +0.5
POOL 1O
15 POOL 20 25 30 35
0-1.0
40
                              DISTANCE FROM CLIFF (M)
Figure 113. Ranges and Locations of Dominant Organisms, Transect B,
Central Diablo Cove (the Approximate Likely Future Location of Discharge)
November 12, 1966 (from North, 1969)

found.  Species are located at particular levels  of the intertidal zone.  Their
niche depends on the physiological tolerances of the organisms to the many
parameters of exposure and submergence during the tidal cycle (e.g., respira-
tion, salinity, temperature).
In a series of panel tests in Monterey Harbor, in both short-term (1 month)
and long-term (3-12 month) exposure tests, about 75 species of animals and
plants were recorded (Haderlie, 1968).  The dominant fouling organisms were
erect and encrusting bryozoans (Hippothoa hyalina, Lyrula hippocrepis.  Cri-
sulipora occidentalas).  Balanus crenatus was the dominant barnacle and Spi-
rorbis spirillum, the dominant fouling serpulid. In long-term exposure tests,
wood borers  (Bankia setacea and Limnoria quadripuntata) were prevalent.
No correlation was found among  temperature,  salinity, and rate of fouling,
except that increased fouling occurred in summer during late June and early
July.  Examination of the fouling on mooring buoys exposed in San Diego Bay
for an extended period (4-1/2 years)  revealed that barnacles and algae were
the dominant forms in the splash zone, while tunicates and barnacles were
                                  272

-------
the most conspicuous on the submerged surfaces, with mussels, bryozoans,
hydroids, and tube worms also present but to a lesser extent (Drisko, 1967).
In deep ocean fouling tests off San Miguel Island, Muraoka (1965, 1966) re-
ported that hydroids, sea anemones, amphipods, and borers were the common
fouling organisms.   Buoys at about  240 and 940 ft below the surface were
fouled heavily with a pink colored sea anemone.  Typical fouling organisms,
such as barnacles and encrusting bryozoa, are not dominant forms of the
deep water fouling community, although fouling is judged to be continuous
up to a depth of 462  ft (Hutchins, 1952).  At the depths we are considering,
fouling by sea anemones, hydroids, and perhaps tubeworms  can be assumed.
Algae should be absent.
In studies concerned with heat transfer and material selection for deep ocean
applications, surfaces of cupronickel, naval brass, silicon bronze, beryllium
 copper,  HC  copper, HH brass, and titanium were materials that inhibited
 fouling growth (C.  F. Braun and Co., 1965).  This report also indicated that
 metal surfaces maintained at 100°F were free of fouling growths.
                                   273

-------
Bibliography

Abbott, D.P., and Albee, R., "Summary of thermal conditions and phyto-
    plankton volumes measured in Monterey Bay, California 1961-1966,"
    CalCOFI Reports, XI, 1967, pp 155-156.

Ahlstrom,  E.H., "Kinds and abundance of fishes in the California Current
    region based on egg and larval surveys, " CalCOFI Reports,  X, 1965,
    pp 31-52.

Ahlstrom,  E.H., "An evaluation of the fishery resources available to Cali-
    fornia fisherman" in The Future of the Fishing Industry of the  United
    States. University of WashingtorTpublication in Fisheries, New Series,
    IV, 1968, pp 65-80.

Allan Hancock Foundation, The, University of Southern California, "An
    oceanographic and biological survey of the southern California mainland
    shelf." State of California, State Water Quality  Control Board, Publica-
    tion No. 24, 232 pp, 1965.

Allen, G. (project leader), "An oceanographic study  between the points of
    Trinidad Head and the Eel River, " State of California, State Water
    Quality Control Board, Publication No.  25, 135pp,  1964.

Allen, W.,  "Review of five years of studies  on phytoplankton at southern
    California piers," Bull. Scripps Inst. Oceanogr., 1, 1928,pp 357-401.

Allen, W.,  "Occurrence of marine plankton  diatoms  in a ten-year series of
    daily catches in southern California, "Am. J. Bot., 23, 1936, pp 60-63.

Allen, W.,  "Seasonal occurrence of marine  plankton diatoms off southern
    California in 1938," Bull. Scripps Inst.  Oceanogr., 5,  1945(a), pp 293-
    334.

Allen, W.,  "Vernal distribution of marine plankton diatoms offshore in sou-
    thern California in 1940."Bull. Scripps Inst. Oceanogr.,  5, 1945(b),
    pp 335-369.                         	

Alton, M.S., and Nelson, M.O-, "Food of Pacific hake, Merluccius produc-
    tus, in Washington and northern Oregon coastal waters," U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service Circular 332, 1970, pp 35-42.

Alvarino, A., "Distributional atlas of Chaetognatha in the California Current
    region," CalCOFI Atlas No. 3, State of  California Marine Research
    Committee, 291 pp,  1965.

Alverson, D.L., and Larkins, H.A., "Status of knowledge of the Pacific hake
    resource,"  CalCOFI Reports, XIII, 1969,  pp 24-31.

Balech, E., "The changes in the phytoplankton population off the California
    Coast," CalCOFI Reports,  VII, 1960, pp 127-132.
                                  274

-------
       ' J-L. et al, "A study of the yellowtail Seriola dorsalis  (Gill)," State
    of California Department of Fish and GameTFSE Boll., 110, 96 pp, 1960.

Baxter, J.L    "Summer of biological information on the northern anchovy
    Engrauhs "lordax (Girard), " CalCOFI Reports, XI, 1967,  pp 110-116.
           H iQ        ™   oin thf distribution of pelagic tunicates in
         and 1958," CalCOFI Reports, VII, 1960, pp 133-135.
Berner,  L. ,  "Distributional atlas of Thaliacea in the California Current re-
    gl?£'  Coaof OFI AJ£,S No' 8' State of California Marine Research Com-
    mittee, 322 pp, 1967.

Berry, F., and Perkins, H.C. , "Survey of pelagic fishes of the California
    area," U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service,  Fish Bull., 65, 1966, pp 625-682.

Best, E.A.   "Contribution to the biology of the Pacific hake Merluccius pro-
    ductus (Ayres)," CalCOFI Reports, DC,  1963, pp 51-56.

Blunt, C.E. , Jr. ,  "The jack mackerel (Trachurus symmetricus) resource of
    the eastern North Pacific, " CalCOFI Reports, XIII, I9T5$7 pp 45-52.

Bolin, R.O. , and Abbott, D.P. , "Studies on the marine climate and phyto-
    plankton of the central coastal area of California, 1954-1960, " CalCOFI
    Reports, K, 1963, pp 23-45.

Braun, C.F. , and Company, "Study of heat transfer and fouling of heat trans-
    fer surfaces in the  deep ocean, " U.S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory,
    Port Hueneme, California, 252 pp, 1965.

Brinton, E. ,  "Distributional atlas of Euphausiacea (Crustacea) in the Cali-
    fornia Current region, part I," CalCOFI Atlas No. 5, State of California
    Marine Research Committee,  275 pp, 1967.

CalCOFI, "Sardines and substitute sardines, " CalCOFI Progress Report,
    July 1952-June 1953, 1953,  pp 31-44.

CalCOFI, "Review  of activities," CalCOFI Reports, XI, 1967, pp 5-21.

Clemens, H.B. , "Catch localities for Pacific albacore (Thunnus germo)
    landed in California,  1951 through 1953, " State of California Department
    of Fish and Game,  Fish Bull., 100,  28pp.  1955.

Plemens  H  B   "The migration, age, and growth of the Pacific albacore
    (Thunnus germo), 1958-1958, " State of California Department of Fish
    and Game, Fish Bull. , 115, 128 pp, 1961.

Cox  K W    "California abalones, family Haliotidae, " California Department
    'of Fish' and Game,  Fish.  Bull., 118,  133 pp, 1962.

Cupp, E., "Marine plankton diatoms of the west  coast of North America, "
    Bull. Scrips Tnst.  Oceanogr.,  5, 1943, pp 335-369.


                                   275

-------
Davis, C.C.,  The Marine and Fresh-Water Plankton, Michigan State Univer-
    sity Press,  562 pp, 1955.

Dawson, E. Y., Marine Botany. Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, Inc., New
    York,  N.Y., 371 pp,  1966.

Drisko, R.W., "Protection of mooring buoys, part IX. Results of eighth
    rating inspection," Technical Report 531, Naval Civil Engineering Labo-
    ratory, Port Hueneme,  California, 39 pp, 1967.

Emery,  K.O., The Sea off Southern California, John Wiley and Sons,  Inc.,
    New York, N. Y., 365 pp, 1960.

Esterly, C.,  "The occurrence and vertical distribution of the copepods of
    the San Orego region, with particular reference to ninteen species, " U.
    of California (Berkeley),  Publs. in Zool., 9, 1912, pp 253-340.

Esterly, C.,  "The periodic  occurrence of Copepoda in the marine plankton
     of two successive years at LaJolla, California," Bull. Scripps Inst.
     Oceanogr., 1, 1928,  pp 247-345.

 Fleminger, A., "Distributional atlas of calanoid copepods in the California
     Current region, part I," CalCOFI Atlas No. 2,  State of California Ma-
     rine Research Committee, 313 pp, 1964.

 Fleminger, A., "Distributional atlas of calanoid copepods in the California
     Current region, part II," CalCOFI Atlas No. 7, State of California Ma-
     rine Research Committee, 213 pp, 1967.

 Gunner son, C.G., and Emery, K.O.,  "Suspended sediment and plankton
     over San Pedro Basin,  California," Limnol.  Qceanogr., 7,  1962, pp
     14-20.

 Haderlie,  E.G., "Marine fouling organisms in  Monterey Harbor," Veliger,
     10, 1968, pp 327-341.

 Hand,  C.H.. and Berner, L., Jr.,  "Food of the Pacific  sardine (Sardinopa
     caerule), "U.S.  Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service,
     Fish. Bull.,  164, 1959,  pp 175-184.

 Heimann, R.F.G, and Frey,  H.W., "The California marine fish catch for
     1967," State of California Department of Fish and Game, Fish. Bull.,
     144,  47 pp, 1968.

 Hutchins, L.W.,  Marine Fouling and Its Prevention,  U.S. Naval Institute,
     Annapolis,  Md.,  1952, pp 102-117.

 Isaacs, J.O-, Fleminger, A., and Miller, J.K., "Distributional atlas of
     zooplankton biomass in the California Current region: spring and fall
     1955-1959,"  CalCOFI Atlas No. 10, State of California Marine Research
     Committee, 252 pp,  1969.
                                  276

-------
Jones, G.F. , "The benthic macrofauna of the mainland shelf of southern
    California,  Allan Hancock Monographs in Marine Biology No. 4, The
    Allan Hancock Foundation, University of Southern California, 219 pp,
     "
Lyles| C.H., Fishery Statistics of the United States,  1967, U.S. Department
    of the Interior, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, 490 pp, 1969.

MacGregor   J.S.  "Synopsis on the biology of the jack mackerel (Trachurus
    symmetricus), "U.S. Fish and Wildlife  Service, Special Scientific Re-
    port, Fisheries No. 526, 16 pp, 1966.

McGowan, J.A.  "Distributional atlas of pelagic molluscs in the California
    Current region, " CalCOFI Atlas No. 6, State of California, Marine Re-
    search  Committee, 218 pp, 1967.

Messersmith, J.D.,  Baxter, J.L., and Roedel, P.M.,  "The anchovy re-
    sources of the California Current region off California and Baja  Cali-
    fornia,  " CalCOFI Reports, XHI,  1969, pp 32-38.

Miller, D.J. , "Anchovy," CalCOFI Progress Report, 1 April 1955 to 30
    June 1956, 1956, pp 20-36.

Miller, D. J. , and Gotshall, D., "Ocean sportfish catch and effort from
    Oregon to Point Arguello, California, " State of California Department
    of Fish and Game, Fish Bull., 130, 145  pp, 1965.

Muraoka, J.S. , "Deep-ocean biodeterioration of materials -- part II.  Six
    months at 2,340 feet," U.S. Naval Civil  Engineering Laboratory,  Port
    Hueneme, California, Technical Report 393 , 42 pp, 1965.

Muraoka, J.S. , "Deep-ocean biodeterioration of materials -- part III. Three
    years at 5,300 ft," U.S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port
    Hueneme, California, Technical Report 428, 47 pp, 1966.

Nelson,  M.O., and Larkins, H.A., "Distribution and biology of the Pacific
    hake: a synopsis," U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 332, 1970,
    pp 23-34.

Neushul   M. , and Haxo, F. , "The life history of Macrocystis in the sea, "
    State of California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bull. , 139, 1969,
    pp 13-16.

North  W J   "An evaluation of the marine fauna and flora in the vicinity of
    Diablo Cove, California." Hearings before the subcommittee on air and
    water pollution of the committee on public works, U.S. Senate, thermal
    pollution - 1968 (part 4),  U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
    D.C., 1969, pp 1097-1128.

North  W J.  and Schaefner, M.B., "An investigation of the effects of dis-
    charged wastes on kelp, " State of California Water Quality Control Board
    Publication No.  26, 124 pp, 1964.
                                  277

-------
North, W.J., and Hubbs, C.L. (eds), "Utilization of kelp bed resources in
    southern California," State of California Department of Fish and Game,
    Fish Bull.,  139, 264 pp, 1968.

Owen, R.W., Jr., "Northeast Pacific albacore oceanography survey, 1961,"
    U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report,  Fisheries No.
    444, 35 pp,  1963.

Pinkas, L., Oliphant, M.S., and Haugen, C.W., "Southern California ma-
    rine sport fishing survey: private boats,  1964:  shoreline, 1965-66,"
    State of California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bull., 143, 42 pp,
    1968.

Quast, J.C., "Some physical aspects of the inshore environment, particularly
    as it affects kelp-bed fishes, in utilization of kelp-bed resources in sou-
    thern California, " North,  W. J., and Hubbs, C.L. (eds), State of Cali-
    fornia Department, Fish Bull., 139, 1968,  pp 25-33.

Reid, J.S., "Oceanic environments of the genus Engraulis around the world,"
    CalCOFI Reports, XI,  1967, pp 29-33.

Terry, R., "Bibliography of marine geology and oceanography, California
    coast," Calif Div. Mines, Spec. Rpt. 44, 131 pp, 1955.

ThrailMll, J.R.  "Zooplankton volumes off the  Pacific coast, 1960," U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report, Fisheries No. 581,
    50 pp, 1969.

Turner,  C.,  Ebert, E.E., and Given, R.P.,  "Survey of the marine environ-
    ment offshore of San Elijo Lagoon, San Diego County," State of California
    Department of Fish and Game, 51, 1965,  pp 81-112.

U.S.  Naval Oceanpgraphic Office, "Oceanographic environment for the coastal
    vicinity of Point Arguello," Oceanograph Analysis Division,  U.S. Naval
    Oceanographic Office,  Washington, D.C., 87 pp,  1965.
                                 278

-------
                               Appendix  A
             NOTES ON ESTIMATING COASTAL CURRENTS

Coastal currents at many places on the continental shelf have not been mea-
sured.  Data may be available on certain components of the current profile,
but might have to be estimated for others.  This appendix explains the method
for such estimates in this report.  The following vector equation expresses
the composition of coastal currents :

                     V(z)  = Vt (z) + Vc(z) + vw(z) + E(z)

      where    V(z)  is the vertical current profile at any time,
               Vt(z) is the tidal current,
               Vc(z) is the coastal drift,
               Vw(z) is the wind drift, and
                W
               E(z)  is a residual current component assumed to approximate
               zero for the present purpose.
These components and synthetic values for them, which may be used in lieu
of actual measurement,  are discussed below.

Tidal Currents:  Vt(z)
At a location on the open shelf away from the effects of the shoreline, one
can expect to find rotary tidal currents. The current vectors will generally
describe an ellipse with the major axis in the direction of maximal ebb and
flood current.  The ellipticity of the ellipse (ratio of the minor to major axes),
or the ratio of minimal to maximal tidal current velocities (r) may be estima-
ted to be 0. 5, although in theory the ellipticity depends on latitude, being the
ratio of the inertial to tidal angular frequency,  or:
r =
                              sin >=  !.o33sin0             (Defant, p 494)
                              TT
                             T
      where   o> = angular velocity of earth's rotation
              cf> = latitude
              T = tidal period
                                   279

-------
Where influenced by shore or seabed, tidal flow will tend to align with that
boundary.  Consequently, near-shore locations will exhibit rectilinear flow,
or reversing currents, while near-bottom flow along slopes or in ravines
will tend to be parallel with the isobaths or along the ravine axis respectively.
Approaching  the coast, the tidal ellipse will decay into a reversing flow along-
shore, so that the ellipticity will approach 0.

We assume that the vertical structure of the tidal current will be affected only
by bottom friction.  This assumption is based on the driving force being con-
stant throughout the water column. Over a relatively smooth bottom, the bot-
tom effect may become noticeable at 20 to 30 feet above the bottom, with cur-
rent speed decreasing exponentially to 60 percent of its near-surface value
at 15 feet above the bottom.  These relationships are based on the work of
Hellend Hansen and  Fjelstad (Sverdrup, p 578-9).

If available data shows only maximal ebb and flood  speeds, with directions,
and we can assume a rotary tidal current,  then the current's ellipticity can
be synthesized by assuming the minor axes to be 50 percent of the major and
90 degrees to the  right.  Each hour during a semidiurnal tidal period, the
direction of flow will turn clockwise 29° /360°   \.
                                      \12.4 hr/

 The further assumptions may be made that during springs and neaps (full and
new moon) the speeds will be increased by 20 percent, and during quadrature
they will be reduced by 20 percent (Marnier, 1926).

Expected tidal current speeds in open coastal areas will range from 0.10 to
 1.0 knots, with most likely speeds in the mid-range (0.4-0.6 knots) (Emery,
 Bumpus).

 Coastal Drift: V.(z)
 _   _  	  ^^_  ^
 Generally, the coastal drift will range from 0.1 to  0.5 knots (2.4  to 12 nm
per day) with the flow parallel to the coast. However, in regions  near
 major current systems, such as the Gulf Stream and California Current,
 eddies or vortices may be produced by  the lateral shear between the

                                   280

-------
offshore current and inshore waters.  These vortices will become entrained
in the coastal current pattern. This phenomenon is especially apparent
from Cape Hatteras to the tip of Florida.  The nearshore circulation under-
goes a seasonal reversal off California.  For part of the year, the southbound
California Current predominates; at other times,  the northbound Davison
Current develops inshore of the California Current.

The vertical velocity gradient of the coastal drift in 250-ft depths is assumed
to decrease linearly to 50% of the surface layer speed down to the bottom
friction layer (20 to 30 ft off the bottom), and then decay in a manner similar
to the tidal current (30% of surface velocity at 15 ft off bottom).  This assump-
tion is based on the coastal drift being the result of gradient flow, and that the
slope of the isobars relative to geopotential surfaces, decreases as one pro-
ceeds from the surface to the bottom.

Near the mouth of estuaries a bottom drift into the estuary can be expected.
This is a replacement flow that compensates  for the entrainment and mixing
of deep salty water with the outflowing river water. In general,  the greater
the outflow the greater the replacement or bottom flow.
Wind Drift; Vw(z)

Surface currents caused by local winds and transport from waves are as-
sumed to be 2.0 to 3.0% of the wind speed and in approximately the same
direction as the wind (Weigel R., p 319-320)(see figure 114). Theoretical
work (Ekman) shows surface drift to be 45 degrees to the right of the wind
in the northern hemisphere, for a boundless ocean, and to exhibit a somewhat
smaller angular displacement in shallow water. Some shallow water mea-
surements have shown surface drift to be about 20 degrees to the right of the
wind, but these measurements are highly variable (Doebler).

The vertical profile of currents caused by wind stress  is a function of eddy
viscosity,  density stratification,  and depth. Ekman's theoretical work
                                  281

-------
   10
   20
Q.
Id
Q
    30H
    40
STEWART(I956)
                 HUGHES
                  (1956)
                                              TIBBY
                                              (1957)
             O  CARRUTHERS,ETAL,(I950)
                            O  SVERDRUP,(I927)-(USC,I956)
STEWART,(I956)
       STEWART,(I956)
           U.S.C. ,(1956)
                          PERCENTAGE

Fieure 114.  Current Velocity as Percentage of Wind Velocity (from State
                          of California, 1965)
                                282

-------
defined the layer of frictional influence,  D, as
D =  n
                                          (Neuman & Pier son, p 217-220)
                   i p (a  sin 0

     where A  = eddy viscosity coefficient (cm"1  sec -1)
            w = angular velocity of earth rotation (7.29 X 105 sec"1)
            4> = latitude
            P = density (1.02±)

If one assumes eddy viscosity to be a constant between 200 and 500
(Neuman & Pierson, p 210-11), the density to approximate unity, and
latitudes between 30 and 40 degrees, then D is between 65 and 100 meters,
roughly the site depth.
                                                            - n Z/D
The vertical profile of current speed decays  exponentially as e
so that when z = D, V = 4% of the surface; when z = D/3, V = 35% of the
surface; and z = D/2, V = 20% of the surface velocity.  This model applies
to homogeneous ocean.

When a thermocline develops, and a two-layer model is assumed with a
linear density gradient in the surface layer,  and homogeneous lower layer
(Neuman and Pierson p 219,  figure 8),  the vertical profile decays rapidly
in the top layer, reaching about 50% of the surface value at the thermocline,
in the case where thermocline depth is 20% of the total depth.

However, for an initial estimate, the wind-driven current profile for a
site whose depth approximates D,  can be arrived at by using 2% of the  wind
speed for the surface layer speed,  then applying  a  damping factor
                          - n z/D    -z/80
                         e        or e

where z  is in feet below the sea surface.
                                 283

-------
Summary

The following synthetic components may be used when data are insufficient.

Tidal Current (Vt)

      1.  Greatest velocity in surface layer :0.4 knots.
      2.  Vertical velocity gradient:  constant down to 30 feet off the bottom,
         then an exponential decrease to 50% of surface velocity (0.2 knots)
         at 15 feet off the bottom.
      3.  Horizontal pattern:  ellipse with minor axis 50% of major.

Coastal Drift (Vc)
      1.  Velocity in surface layer: 0.3 knots.
      2.  Vertical velocity gradient:  linear decrease to  50% of surface speed
         (0.15 knots) 30 feet off the bottom, then an exponential decrease to
         25% (0.08 knots) at 15 feet off the bottom.
      3.  Horizontal pattern:  parallel to isobaths.

Wind Drift (Vw)

      1.  Velocity in surface layer:  2% of wind velocity.
      2.  Vertical velocity gradient:                    -z/80
         Weak thermocline:  damped exponentially by e         where  z is
         in feet, so at 100 feet V   = 28% of surface and at 200 feet Vm = 8%
                               w                                  vv
         of surface velocity.  Strong shallow thermocline,  damped exponent-
         ially by  e'^z' d  where d  = depth of thermocline. As a result, 50%
         of the velocity will be damped bythe thermocline (z = d),  and from
         there to the bottom damping will be  similar to  the weak thermocline
         case, namely, e ~2'     damping (but use z = 0 at the thermocline
         where velocity is 50% of sea surface velocity!
                                 284

-------
References

1.    Defant, A., Physical Oceanography, Vol.  I, Pergamon Press, New
      York, 1961,  729pp.

2.    Emery, K.O., The Sea Off Southern California, J. Wiley and Sons,
      Inc., New York, 1960,  366 pp.

3.    Bumpus,  D.F., and L.M. Lauzier, Serial Atlas of the Marine Environ-
      ment -- Surface Circulation on the Continental Shelf off Eastern North
      America Between Newfoundland and Florida, Am. Geographical Soc.,
      1965.

4.    Doebler,  H. J., A Study of Shallow Water Wind Drift Currents at Two
      Stations Off the East Coast of the U.S.  --  USL Report 755, 1966,  78 pp.

5.    Allan Hancock Foundation, An Oceanographic and Biological Survey of
      the Southern California Mainland Shelf.  State of California, State Water
      Quality Control Board,  Pub. 27, 1965, 232 pp.

6.    Neumann, Gerhard, and Pierson, Principles of Physical Oceanography,
      Prentice Hall Inc., N.J., 1966,  545pp.
                                 285

-------

w
2

Subject Field & Group
SELECTED WATER RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM

                   General Dynamics   Electric Boat Division
                Grotonr Connecticut  66340	
                Potential Environmental Effects of an Offshore Submerged Nuclear Power
                Plant,  Volume II.
JO,-,
R.W. Marble
L.V. Mowell
J5 I Project J>M|0Mfloo
21 Note
 OO I Citation
 •**J            Water Pollution Control Research, Series, 16130GFI06/71, 303p.,
                June, 1971, 114 Fig., 98 tab., 6 ref.
 23
Descriptors (Starred First)
                Thermal Pollution, Offshore Power Plant, Nuclear Power Plant
                Environmental Effects
 25
Identifiers (Starred First)
           Nuclear Power Plant
                Potential environmental effects of wastes from an 1190-Mwe pressurized-
                water nuclear power plant, submerged 250-ft deep at four representative
                sites off the U.S. mainland, were studied.  The thermal field of the plant's
                cooling water discharge, and the distribution of radionuclides in the  sea, were
                analyzed.  In every case, the thermal "mixing zone" (by the most stringent
                present standards) was found to end before either a surface or subsurface
                field was established, and to be much smaller than for a plant in shallower
                waters.  Fewer organisms would be killed by entrainment in the cooling
                water than at a coastal plant.  A "batch" release of radionuclides, after the
                hypothetical nuclear accident, would harm life, requiring suspension,  of local
                fishing for about 10 weeks.  No potential ecological damage was predictable
                from the ordinary minute release of radionuclides, the thermal discharge,
                or other wastes.

                This report was submitted in fulfillment of program 16130 GFI, Department
                of Interior Contract 14-12-918, under sponsorship of the Federal Water
                Quality Administration (subsequently the Water Quality Research Office
                of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Abstractor
                          Ifitilitution
 WR:ID2 (REV. JULY 1969)
 WRSIC
                        SEND, WITH COPY OF DOCUMENT, TO: WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                  WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240
                                                                          GPO: 1970 - 4O7 -691

-------