DOC
EPA
United States
Department of
Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Environmental Research Laboratories
Seattle WA 98115
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Environmental
Engineering and Technology
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-6QO 7-80-027
January 1980
            Research and Development
            IMearshore Fish and
            Macroinvertebrate
            Assemblages
            Along the Strait of
            Juan  de Fuca
            Including  Food
            Habits of the
            Common  Nearshore
            Interagency
            Energy/Environment
            R&D Program
            Report

-------
                 RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

 Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
 gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
 vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
 planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
 The nine series are:

      1.  Environmental Health Effects Research
      2.  Environmental Protection Technology
      3.  Ecological Research
      4.  Environmental Monitoring
      5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7.  Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.  "Special" Reports
      9.  Miscellaneous Reports

 This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
 effort funded under the  17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
 Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
 health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
 tems. The goal of the  Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
 energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
 essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
 ses of the transport of  energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
 effects;  assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
 systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
 mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                 NEARSHORE FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE

             ASSEMBLAGES ALONG THE STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA

          INCLUDING FOOD HABITS OF THE COMMON NEARSHORE FISH


           Final Report of Three Years' Sampling, 1976-1979


                                  by


Bruce S. Miller (Principal Investigator),  Charles A. Simenstad (Project
   Leader, Fish Food Habits), Jeffrey N.  Cross (Research Associate,
     Nearshore Demersal and Intertidal Fishes), Kurt L. Fresh
               (Research Assistant,  Neritic Fishes), and
        S. Nancy Steinfort (Fish Biologist, Fish Food Habits)
                     Fisheries Research Institute
                         College of Fisheries
                       University of Washington
                      Seattle, Washington  98195
                             Prepared for
        MESA (Marine Ecosystems Analysis) Puget Sound Project,
            Seattle,  Washington, in partial fulfillment of

               EPA Interagency Agreement No,  D6-E693-EN
                     Program Element No. EHE 625-A
                        This  study was  conducted
                         as part  of  the Federal
                     Interagency  Energy/Environment
                    Research  and  Development  Program
                             Prepared  for
            OFFICE  OF  ENVIRONMENTAL  ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
                    OFFICE  OF  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
                   U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
                            January  1980

-------
                    Completion  Report  Submitted  to
              PUGET SOUND ENERGY-RELATED  RESEARCH PROJECT
                 OFFICE OF MARINE POLLUTION  ASSESSMENT
            NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION

                                  by

                      Fisheries Research  Institute
                          College of Fisheries
                        University of  Washington
                       Seattle, Washington  98195
                              DISCLAIMER
     This work is the result of research sponsored by the Environmental
Protection Agency and administered by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

     The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) does not
approve, recommend, or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary
material mentioned in this publication.  No reference shall be made to
NOAA or to this publication furnished by NOAA in any advertising or sales
promotion which endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material
mentioned herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly
or indirectly the advertised product to be used or purchased because of
this publication.
                                  ii

-------
                                  ABSTRACT
     A seasonal survey of nearshore fishes was made in the Strait of Juan
de Fuca from May 1976 to June 1979.  A beach seine was used for sampling
nearshore demersal fishes and a townet for nearshore pelagic fishes; inter-
tidal fishes were sampled with the use of anesthetic and a hand net.  During
1976 - 1978, the maeroinvertebrates caught incidentally in the beach seine
and townet were also recorded.  Data recorded for fish and maeroinvertebrates
were species present, life history stage (from size), abundance, biomass,
food habits and presence of external abnormalities or disease.

     The total number of nearshore demersal and pelagic fish species decreased
from east to west in the Strait of Juan de Fuca but the total number of inter-
tidal species increased — however, it was postulated that this opposite  trend
was due to the same habitat relationship:  species diversity increased as
habitat heterogeneity increased.  Nearshore demersal and pelagic fish catches
were dominated by juvenile and larval life history stages, while intertidal
collections were primarily adults and juveniles.  There is little overlap
between the nearshore demersal—pelagic fish assemblages and the intertidal
fish assemblages, and there is no evidence that the rocky intertidal is sig-
nificantly utilized by the common subtidal species as  a  spawning or nursery
area.

     Common nearshore demersal fishes were the flatfish and sculpins, while
herring clearly predominated in the nearshore pelagic zone although smelt and
Pacific sand lance were also important.  The common rocky intertidal fishes
were the sculpins and pricklebacks (i.e. "eel blennies").

     Seasonal trends were pronounced in the nearshore demersal and pelagic
fishes but largely absent in the rocky intertidal fishes.  Nearshore demersal
species were generally at their maximum (number of species, abundance, biomass)
in the summer and at their minimum in the winter, although at the protected
sites the maximum often extended from spring through fall.  Nearshore pelagic
species were at their maximum in the spring-summer and at a minimum in the
winter'.

     The common fish species found in this survey were categorized into nine
functional feeding groups based on their stomach contents.  The most impor-
tant food item found was epibenthic zooplankton for nearshore demersal fishes
while pelagic nearshore fishes fed primarily on pelagic zooplankton.  Size
selection was indicated by fish preying on zooplankton.

     This study was set up as a first time survey of the fishes of the Strait
of Juan de Fuca.  However, it also demonstrated that there is a great deal
of variation from year to year, season to season, from site to site, and
between hauls.  How much of this is sampling variation and how much is natural
biological variation was not determined, although we believe most is natural
biological variation.  To statistically use the data attained in this study
to assess the result of a perturbation on nearshore fishes in the Strait of
Juan de Fuca would require that the abundance of nearshore demersal fishes be
decreased by about 75% to be detected, and would require that the nearshore
pelagic fishes be decreased by about 95% to be detected.  We believe the in-
formation is better used to help in predicting the results of various man-
induced alterations proposed for the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

                                     iii

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract  ................................
List of Tables  .............................    v±
List of Figures  ............................    ix
List of Appendices ...........................     x
Acknowledgments  ............................   xii

1.  Introduction ............................     1

2.  Conclusions  ............................     2

3.  Materials and Methods  .......................     6
    3.1  Study Sites and Sampling Frequency  ..............     6
    3.2  Sampling Techniques ......................     6
    3.3  Collection Information  .....................    10
    3.4  Biological Information  ....................    10
    3.5  Processing the Catches  ....................    11
    3.6  Stomach Analyses  ......................  .    n
    3.7  Possible Sources of Error ......... ..........    11
    3.8  Definitions and Statistics  ..................    12
    3.9  Disposition of Data ......................    15
    3.10 Species Nomenclature  .....................    15

4.  Results and Discussion   ......................    16
    4.1  Oceanographic Conditions  ...................    16
    4.2  Nearshore Fish Species Composition  ..............    16
    4.3  Nearshore Fish Species Richness ................    30
    4.4  Nearshore Fish Density  ....................    39
    4.5  Nearshore Fish Standing Crop  .................    50
    4.6  Occurrence of Fin Rot, Lesions, Tumors,
           and Parasites ........................    56
    4.7  Detecting Changes in Fish Abundance and
           Biomass after a Perturbation  .....  ...........    62
    4.8  Macroinvertebrates  ......................    67
    4.9  Food Web Relationships  ....................    71
    4.10 Potential Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons on the
           Nearshore Fish Communities along the Strait of
           Juan de Fuca  ........................   105

5.  Literature Cited ..........................   HI

6.  Appendices .............................   116

-------
                               LIST OF TABLES

Number

   1.     Characterization of study sites along the Strait of Juan
          de Fuca	     8

   2.     IRI table	    14

   3.     Summary of stepwise multiple linear regression of log
          abundance and log weight against temperature,  salinity,
          and dissolved oxygen for beach seine catches   	    17

   4.     Summary of stepwise multiple linear regression of log
          abundance and log weight against temperature,  salinity,
          and dissolved oxygen for townet catches    	    18

   5.     Number  of species collected  by each sampling method 	    19

   6.     Nearshore fish species  collected by beach seine,  townet,
          and tidepool	    20

   7.      Rank order of the most  abundant fishes in beach seine
          collections	    22

   8.      Regularly  occurring  and  abundant species  in beach
          seine collections by  site and  by season for each  of
          the  study  years	    23

   9.      Rank order of  the most abundant  fishes in  townet
          collections	    27

 10.      Regularly  occurring and  abundant  species in townet collec-
          tions by site  and  by  season  for  each of the study years  ....    28

 11.      Rank order of  the most abundant  fishes in  intertidal
          collections    	    31

 12.     Regularly  occurring and abundant species in intertidal
         collections by site and by season for each of the
         study years	    32

 13.     Number of species  (yearly total and three-year total)
         collected by beach seine at the sampling sites  	   33

 14.     Number of species collected  (yearly total and three-year
         total)  by townet at the sampling sites	   36

 15.     Number of resident and transient species  collected at
         intertidal sampling sites 	   39
                                    vi

-------
Number                                                                     Page

  16.     Summary of parasitized fish caught by beach seine during
          the three years of study	60

  17.     Summary of parasitized fish from intertidal collections
          during 1977 and 1978	     62

  18.     The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis that
          there has been no decrease in numbers or biomass in
          beach seine collections when in fact the null hypothesis
          is false	     64

  19.     The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis that
          there has been no decrease in numbers or biomass in
          townet collections when in fact the null hypothesis
          is false	,	     65

  20a.    Number of macroinvertebrate species collected seasonally
          by beach seine during nearshore fish sampling along the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca and Whidbey Island, May 1976-
          February 1978	     68

  20b.    Number of macroinvertebrate species collected seasonally
          by townet during nearshore fish sampling along the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca and Whidbey Island, May 1976-
          February 1978	     69

  21.     Total number of macroinvertebrate species, according to
          general taxonomic group, collected during nearshore fish
          sampling, May 1976-February 1978, along the Strait of
          Juan de Fuca and Whidbey Island	     70

  22.     Functional feeding groups of 36 species prominent in
          the nearshore fish assemblages characterizing the
          Strait of Juan de Fuca	     72

  23.     Prey composition of juvenile Pacific herring during three
          years of MESA collections for August 1976, 1977, 1978  ....     74

  24.     Year-to-year overlap (Sanders' Index of Affinity) between
          the diet compositions (pooled over year) of 12 prominent
          nearshore fish species along the Strait of Juan de Fuca  ...     76

  25.     Geographical overlap (Sanders' Index of Affinity) between
          the diets of five nearshore fish species at sampling sites
          along the Strait of Juan de Fuca in August 1976, 1977, 1978. .     78

  26.     Prey composition of juvenile Chinook salmon during three
          years of MESA collections for August 1976, 1977, 1978  ....     81

  27.     Prey composition of juvenile Pacific tomcod during three
          years of MESA collections, August 1976, 1977, 1978	     82

                                     vii

-------
Number                                                                     Page

  28.     Prey composition of northern clingfish during three years
          of MESA collections, August 1976,  1977, 1978  	    83

  29.     Prey composition of rosylip sculpin during two years of
          MESA collections, August 1977,  1978 	    84

  30.     Prey composition of silverspotted  sculpin during two
          years of MESA collections,  August  1976, 1977	    86

  31.     Prey composition of sharpnose sculpin during two years
          of MESA collections, August 1977,  1978	    86

  32.     Prey composition of staghorn sculpin during three years
          of MESA collections, August 1976,  1977, 1978  	    87

  33.     Prey composition of tidepool sculpin during three years
          of MESA collections for  August  1976,  1977,  1978	    89

  34.      Prey composition of redtail surfperch during three years
          of MESA collection,  August  1976, 1977,  1978 	    90

  35.      Prey composition of high cockscomb  during  three  years of
          MESA collections, August 1976,  1977,  1978  	    91

  36.      Prey composition of juvenile English  sole  during three
          years of MESA collections,  August  1976,  1977,  1978	    93

  37.      Prey composition of starry  flounder  during  two years of
          MESA collections, August 1977,  1978  	    94

  38.      Prey composition of  sand sole during  three  years  of MESA
          collections, August  1976, 1977, 1978   	    95

  39.      Composition by abundance and biomass  of epibenthic
          zooplankton in various microhabitats  at six  sites  along
          the  Strait of Juan  de Fuca, August 1978	    98

  40.     Percent overlap  (Sanders' Index of Affinity) between
         epibenthic zooplankton and diet of nearshore fish at seven
         sites (17 distinct microhabitats) along the Strait of
         Juan de Fuca, August 1978	101

 41.     Gammarid amphipod species consumed by 12 common species of
         nearshore fish collected along Strait of Juan de Fuca,
         August 1978	;	104

 42.     Occurrence and relative  size of gammarid amphipods
         collected by epibenthic  plankton pump sampling in the
         Strait of Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	106
                                   viii

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES

Number                                                                     Page

   1.     Location map of sampling sites 	      7

   2.     Example of Index of Relative Importance (IRI) diagram  ....     14

   3.     Species richness of seasonal beach seine collections,
          1976-1979	     34

   4.     Species richness of townet collections, 1976-1979  	     37
                                   2
   5.     Density of fish (# fish/m ) of seasonal beach seine
          collections, 1976-1979 	     40
                           3
   6.     Density (# fish/m ) of fishes in seasonal townet
          collections, 1976-1979 	     44
                                                2
   7.     Density of fish in tidepools (# fish/m ) and beneath
          rocks (# fish/rock) in intertidal collections, 1977-
          1979	     47
                                 2
   8.     Standing crop (g fish/m ) of fishes in seasonal beach
          seine collections, 1976-1979 	     51
                                 •j
   9.     Standing crop (g fish/m ) of fish in seasonal townet
          collections, 1976-1979 	     54
                                                        2
  10.     Standing crop of fishes in tidepools (g fish/m ) and
          beneath rocks (g fish/rock) in intertidal collections,
          1977-1979	     57

  11.     Total abundance and total biomass of the epibenthic
          fauna at six sites in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
          sampled in August 1978	    100
                                      ix

-------
                              LIST OF APPENDICES


Number

 6.1       Dates of beach seine, townet, and intertidal sampling 	   117

 6.2       Oceanographic data from beach seine,  townet, and
           tidepool collections:
           a.   Beach seine temperature summary 	   119
           b.   Beach seine salinity summary  	   119
           c.   Beach seine dissolved oxygen summary  	   120
           d.   Townet surface temperature summary  	   120
           e.   Townet surface salinity summary 	   121
           f.   Townet dissolved oxygen summary 	   121

 6.3       Biological data from beach seine collections,  1976-1978:
           a.   Summary of species  richness 	   122
           b.   Summary of fish density	122
           c.   Summary of fish standing crop	123

 6.4       Biological data from townet collections,  1976-1978:
           a.   Summary of species  richness 	   124
           b.   Summary of fish density	124
           c.   Summary of fish standing crop	125

 6.5       Summary  of biological data from intertidal  collections,
           1977-1978:
           a.   Species of fish collected at each  site	126
           b.   Density of fish  	127
           c.   Standing crop  of  fish	128

 6.6       Summary  of  macroinvertebrates collected  incidentally
           to beach seine and townet  samples:
           a.   May  1976-January  1977	129
           b.   May  1977-February 1978	*   132

 6.7       Macroinvertebrate  abundance and  biomass  raw  data,
           May  1976-January 1977:
           a.   Beach seine samples  	   136
           b.   Townet  samples	143
           c.   Beach seine and townet  samples, 1977-1978  	   150

 6.8       Length frequencies  of common  macroinvertebrates
           collected incidentally to  combined beach seine and
           townet collections  	   165

 6.9        Fish stomach samples:
           a.  Sources and numbers of  stomach samples analyzed from
              nearshore  fish collections in the Strait of Juan
              de Fuca, 1978-1979	173

-------
Number                                                                     Page

 6.9       Fish stomach samples:
           b.  Fish stomach contents statistics for nearshore fish
               collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca,  1978-1979  .  .  .    175

 6.10      Diet spectra of nearshore fish collected during 1978 	    178

           10-1   IRI prey spectrum of juvenile Pacific herring
                  from Strait of  Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	    179

           10-2   IRI prey spectrum of northern clingfish  from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    181

           10-3   IRI prey spectrum of juvenile Pacific tomcod
                  from Strait of  Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	    182

           10-4   IRI prey spectrum of juvenile widow rockfish
                  from Strait of  Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	    183

           10-5   IRI prey spectrum of padded sculpins from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    185

           10-6   IRI prey spectrum of smoothhead sculpins from
                  the Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    186

           10-7   IRI prey spectrum of rosylip  sculpin from the
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    187

           10-8   IRI prey spectrum of silverspotted sculpin
                  from Strait of Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	    189

           10-9   IRI prey spectrum of sharpnose sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    190

           10-10  IRI prey spectrum of calico sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    191

           10-11  IRI prey spectrum of mosshead sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    192

           10-12  IRI prey spectrum of staghorn sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, August 1978	    193

           10-13  IRI prey spectrum of tidepool sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    195

           10-14  IRI prey spectrum of saddleback  sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	   196

           10-15  IRI prey spectrum of fluffy  sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	   197

                                      xi

-------
Number                                                                     Page

           10-16  IRI prey spectrum of tubenose poachers from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, August 1978	    199

           10-17  IRI prey spectrum of tidepool sculpin from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    200

           10-18  IRI prey spectrum of high cockscomb from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    202

           10-19  IRI prey spectrum of ribbon prickleback from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    203

           10-20  IRI prey spectrum of black prickleback from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    204

           10-21  IRI prey spectrum of rock prickleback from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    206

           10-22  IRI prey spectrum of crescent gunnel from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1978	    207

           10-23  IRI prey spectrum of speckled sanddab from
                  Strait of Juan de Fuca, August 1978	    208

           10-24  IRI prey spectrum of juvenile English sole
                  from Strait  of Juan de  Fuca, August 1978	    210

           10-25  IRI prey spectrum of sand sole from Strait
                  of  Juan de Fuca,  August 1978	    211
                                    xii

-------
                              ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
     It would be virtually impossible to acknowledge properly all the
individuals and organizations who contributed to FRI's nearshore fish
communities research in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.  To all we express our
sincere appreciation.  We specifically wish to recognize the following.

     Tony Roth made available the laboratory and living facilities of
Nautilus Bioresource Advisors during our land-based field operations along
the strait.  Walla Walla's Biological Station at Deception Pass, managed
by Mr. and Mrs. Frye, was also made available to our staff when they
sampled on Fidalgo and Whidbey Islands.

     Charles Gunnstone, Glen Wood, Dan Moriarity, the Four Seasons
Maintenance Commission, the Twin Rivers Investment Club, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service have all cooperated graciously in allowing us access
to sampling sites on or across their land.

     Andrew Palmer, Robert Waldron, David Strickland, John Balch, Larry
Moulton, Steven Borton, Steve Ralph, John Coffin, Allan Stayman, Julianne
Fegley, Paul Waterstrat, and many others provided invaluable assistance in
the field and laboratory.

     Marie Miller spent many long hours drawing the many histograms and
graphs used in the report.

     Finally, the patient assistance of the many FRI staff members and
support personnel who have provided the critical administrative services
is much appreciated.
                                    xiii

-------
                                  SECTION 1

                                INTRODUCTION

     The possibility of transport of Alaskan North Slope oil to proposed
refinery and transshipment sites in the Strait of Juan de Fuca or Puget
Sound has increased the probability of oil pollution in these waters.
Under proposals presently being considered, oil could be transferred to
refinery, holding, or pipeline facilities at one of a number of sites on the
Strait of Juan de Fuca or the eastern shore of Rosario Strait.

     The State of Washington and the federal government, concerned with
minimizing the incidence and impact of oil pollution, have conducted a number
of programs designed to evaluate the detrimental effects of oil pollution on
the biological and economic resources of Puget Sound.  One of these, the
Washington State Department of Ecology's (DOE) Northern Puget Sound Biologi-
cal Baseline Study (1974-76), focused on documenting biological communities
in the nearshore habitats of northern Puget Sound (Miller  et al.  1977).

     When the eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca came under consideration as a
possible oil transshipment terminal site, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) Marine Ecosystem Analysis (MESA) Puget Sound Project
initiated similar biological baseline studies in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
in spring 1976 and along the west coast of Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands in
spring 1977.   An important part of the NOAA studies is the ecological survey
of nearshore fishes and their food habits.   Nearshore, as opposed to offshore,
fishes were emphasized because:  (1) Nearshore habitats are more likely to be
adversely affected by spilled oil than offshore habitats, and (2) fish provide
a potential link to man for the transfer of hydrocarbons.

     The principal objectives of this study were to document:  (1) The
occurrence, abundance, and distribution of nearshore fishes; (2) food habits
of abundant and economically important species; and (3) occurrence and
distribution of macroinvertebrates collected incidentally with the fishes.

     Results of the first two years of investigation (May 1976 - June 1978)
were summarized in a previous progress report (Cross  et al.  1978).  The
present report summarizes the combined results of the three years of study
(May 1976 - June 1979).

-------
                                  SECTION 2

                                 CONCLUSIONS

     A total of 94 species of fish (more than 200,000 individuals)  was
collected by beach seine, townet, and intertidal sampling between May 1976
and June 1979.   The species richness of beach-seine and townet catches
decreased during the study largely because of the absence of rare species
and was not regarded as significant.  In general, the species richness of
beach-seine and townet catches decreased from east to west,  while species
richness of intertidal collections increased.  In beach-seine.and townet
collections, this trend was attributed to decreasing habitat heterogeneity
and relief, and increasing exposure to ocean storms.  The opposite  trend in
intertidal collections was attributed to increased habitat heterogeneity and
relief which provide suitable refugia from turbulence.

     The assemblage of nearshore fishes sampled with the beach seine was
quite diverse (81 species collected over three years) but consisted largely
of juvenile fishes, reflecting the extensive utilization of nearshore
habitats as nursery areas by many species inhabiting the region. Demersal
species accounted for 69% (56 species) of the species collected.  Sculpin
(32% of the demersal species, 18 species) and flatfish (16% of the  demersal
species, 9 species) predominated in frequency of occurrence, abundance, and
biomass.  Pelagic species accounted for 31%  (25 species) of the fishes
collected.  Pacific herring and Pacific sand lance often predominated in
abundance and biomass, while seaperch (20% of the pelagic species,  5 species)
and gadids (12% of the pelagic species, 3 species) occurred more frequently.

     Seasonal trends in species richness, density, and standing crop of
fishes in beach-seine collections were more pronounced at the exposed sites
(Kydaka Beach,  Dungeness Spit) than at the protected sites; maxima generally
occurred in summer and minima occurred in winter.  At the protected sites,
maxima occurred from spring through fall and minima occurred in winter.  The
abundance and biomass of fishes collected by beach seine were poorly predicted
when regressed against temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen measured
at the time of collection.

     The assemblage of neritic fishes sampled with the townet (60 species
collected over three years) was not as diverse as the assemblage sampled with
the beach seine and consisted largely of larvae and juveniles.  Demersal
species accounted for 62% (37 species) of the species collected.  Pelagic
species, while accounting for 38%  (23 species) of the species collected,
composed more than 95% of the total number and more than 90% of the total
biomass of fish collected.  Pacific herring, collected at all sites,
accounted for 76% of the total number and 75% of the total biomass of fish
caught.  Longfin smelt accounted for 16% of  the numbers and 11% of the biomass

-------
 of fish collected and occurred almost exclusively at Pillar Point and Twin
 Rivers (99% of all smelt caught).   The remaining 58 species composed 8% of
 the total number and 14% of the total biomass of fish caught.

      Seasonal trends in species richness,  density, and standing crop of
 fishes in townet collections were similar  across all sites—maxima occurred
 in spring and occasionally summer,  and minima occurred in winter.   The
 presence of Pacific herring exerted the largest influence on this trend:
 Less than one percent of all herring were  collected in fall and winter.   The
 abundance of fishes collected by townet was poorly predicted when regressed
 against temperature, salinity, and  dissolved oxygen measured at the time  of
 collection.   However, biomass was predicted fairly well by temperature
 (significant at six of the seven sites) but not by salinity or  dissolved
 oxygen.

      The assemblage of fishes collected in the rocky intertidal was composed
 solely of demersal species (26 species).   Sculpin predominated  in the
 assemblage (50% of the species,  13  species),  followed by prickleback (19%,
 5  species).   Seasonal trends in species richness,  density,  and  standing crop
 of intertidal fishes were  largely absent.   Unlike the nearshore and neritic
 fishes,  intertidal fishes  do not move into the subtidal during  fall and
 winter but remain  in the intertidal throughout the year.   Furthermore,  the
 fishes sampled by  beach seine and townet were primarily juveniles;  the
 adults of these species generally inhabit  deeper water than the juveniles.
 The majority of intertidal species  collected  inhabit  the intertidal as
 adults.   The only  evidence of seasonal  trends in the  intertidal species was
 the appearance of  recently metamorphosed juveniles  in late  winter  and spring,
 but their numbers  were not sufficient to produce seasonal peaks in density
 or standing  crop.

      Significantly,  the rocky intertidal is rarely  utilized as  a nursery
 area by  the  common subtidal species,  probably because the environmental
 fluctuations  experienced in the  intertidal  require  specialized  adaptations
 that would be  of limited value to later life  history  stages  spent  in
 subtidal  habitats.

     The  ability to  detect  decreases  in the abundance and biomass  of
 nearshore  fishes was  analyzed  using power  curves.   It was found  that  the
 beach-seine data were better  than the townet  data for  detecting  decreases.
 For  the beach-seine  data,  decreases must be in general  75% or more before
 they can be reliably detected; for the townet data  they must be  95% or more.
 Using  the beach-seine data, it is easier to detect  changes in numbers than
 changes in biomass, and changes  that occur in spring will be more difficult
 to detect than changes occurring in other seasons.

     The 36 nearshore fishes, composing the most common or abundant species
 encountered along the strait, were categorized into nine functional feeding
 groups.  The most prominent feeding mode was the obligate epibenthic
planktivore, accounting for 15 species (42%).  Facultative epibenthic
planktivores included another eight  species (22%).  Thus, epibenthic zooplank-
 ton appear to constitute the trophic base of the majority of the nearshore
 fishes of the region.  As most epibenthic zooplankton are either detritivores
or herbivores on macroalgae, the annual cycle of production of nearshore

-------
macrophytes and seagrasses and conversion into detritus is the most
important process determining nearshore food web structure and energy flow
in the region.

     Examination of variability in prey composition by year and habitat for
14 nearshore fish species indicated that although a limited number of prey
taxa may be important in the diet spectrum of a species, the proportional
contributions among the prey taxa vary considerably.  This suggests that prey
switching is probably a common occurrence but may be limited to a narrow
component of the available prey community.  In general, diet overlap was more
consistent between years than between habitats (sites) although overlap
values were equally variable in both cases.

     Coincident sampling of epibenthic zooplankton during the August 1978
beach-seine and tidepool fish collections indicated that, while harpacticoid
copepods predominated at virtually every site and microhabitat sampled,
nearshore fish tended to feed upon the larger prey of the assemblage
available to them.  Accordingly, overlap between the plankton composition
and prey composition of the co-occurring nearshore fishes was higher in
comparisons of biomass than in comparisons of numerical composition.  Even
within a prey taxon, such as gammarid amphipods, size-selective predation
upon the largest available amphipods was evident.

     Conclusions regarding the composition, abundance, and biomass of macro-
invertebrates collected incidentally during beach-seine and townet collections
must consider  that these collection methods were not designed to provide
quantitative data for the macroinvertebrate assemblages.  Accordingly,
comparisons between years, sites, and seasons can be considered as only
relative, qualitative differences in the macroinvertebrate assemblages.

     In both years, species richness, abundance, and biomass of collected
epibenthic  (beach seine caught) macroinvertebrates were generally highest at
the more protected sites, Beckett Point and Port Williams.  In many  cases
this was due to the abundance and diversity of crangonid  (especially Crangon
alaskensis), hippolytid  (especially Eualus sp. and Hippolyte clarki),  and
pandalid (especially Pandalus danae) shrimps and gammarid amphipods  at  these
two sites.  The two new sites located at  the eastern end of the strait,
Alexander's Beach and West Beach, had epibenthic macroinvertebrate  catches
similar to Dungeness Spit and Twin Rivers except that  gammarid amphipods
(especially Atylus tridens) were more abundant.  Over  the four quarters,
catches were lowest and least diverse in winter and generally highest  in
October; the high autumn catches, however, may be an artifact of  the
nighttime collections.

     Neritic macroinvertebrates captured  incidentally by townet indicated
fewer distinct trends and a patchier distribution than  the epibenthic  macro-
invertebrates.  Mysids  (specifically Archaeomysis grebnitzki and  Neomysis
rayi) were  the major cause of the high  fluctuations in  abundance  and standing
crop, occurring abundantly at all Strait  of Juan de Fuca sites at one  time  or
another and during all seasons except summer.  They were not, however,
significantly abundant in the catches from the two  sites at the eastern end
of the strait.  In several instances there was a slight increase  in the
contribution by mysids to the diet spectra of several  fish during periods  of

-------
high mysid abundance, but there were also several instances where no such
relationship was evident.

-------
                                  SECTION 3

                            MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1  STUDY SITES AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY

     A major consideration in determining sampling sites and sampling design
was the desire to make the results of the nearshore fish studies of the MESA
Puget Sound Project comparable to data generated during the DOE Northern
Puget Sound Biological Baseline Study (Miller  et al.  1977),.thus facilitat-
ing between-area comparisons.  Further considerations used to determine
sampling sites were:  (1) The desire to sample throughout the Strait of Juan
de Fuca and Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands; (2) sites had to be accessible to
both the land-based beach-seine operation and the ship-based townet operation;
(3) sites were chosen to reflect the variety of habitats encountered in the
Strait of Juan de Fuca.

     Six beach-seine sites and seven townet sites were established along the
Strait of Juan de Fuca in 1976.  An additional beach-seine and townet site
was established on Whidbey Island and on Fidalgo Island in 1977, and seven
tidepool sites were established along the Strait of Juan de Fuca in 1977.
Collections on Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands were made only during the sampling
year 1977-78; intertidal collections were made during 1977-78 and 1978-79.
The sampling dates are presented in Appendix 6.1.  Sampling sites were
characterized by habitat and sampled with three methods designed to capture
nearshore demersal  (beach seine), neritic  (townet), and intertidal  (tidepool)
fishes (Fig. 1, Table 1).  Collection periods were quarterly—winter
(December, January), spring  (May), summer  (August), and fall (October).

3.2  SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

3.2.1  Beach Seine

     A 37-m  (120-ft) beach seine was used  to sample demersal fish occurring
within 30 m of shore during  slack water at  low tide.  The beach seine
consisted of two wings with  3-cm mesh joined to a 0.6-ra x 2.4-m x 2.3-m bag
with 6-mm mesh (see Miller   et al.  1977,  for a diagram of the beach seine).
A  weighted lead line kept the seine on the bottom.  Floating sets were made
with seven floats attached to the cork line at regular intervals.  The net
was set 30 m from the stern  of a rowed skiff.  Polypropylene lines 30 m long
and 2 cm diameter were used  to retrieve the net.  Two-person teams situated
40 m apart hauled the net at about 10 m/min.  For the first 20 m of hauling
the teams remained  40 m  apart; the final 10 m was hauled with the teams 10 m
apart.  When the net was entirely on the beach,  fish and  invertebrates were
removed, placed in  plastic bags, and labeled for  later processing.  Replicate

-------
Olympic  Peninsula
Fig. 1.  Location map  of  sampling sites.

-------
           Table 1.  Characterization of study sites along the Strait of Juan de Fuca.   BS = beach seine,
                     TN = townet, TP = tidepool.
oo
                  Site
                 Habitat
Sampling Method
           1   Neah Bay
           2   Kydaka Beach
           3   Slip Point
           4   Pillar Point
           5   Twin Rivers
           6   Observatory Point
           7   Morse Creek
           8   Dungeness Spit
           9   Jamestown
           10  Port Williams
           11  Beckett Point
           12  North Beach
           13  West Beach
           14  Alexander's Beach
Moderate gradient, high energy, direct exposure,              TP
boulder beach, abundant algae
Moderate gradient, high energy, direct exposure,             BS, TN
sand substrate, no algae, little detritus
Moderate gradient, high energy, direct exposure,              TP
rock substrate, abundant algae
Moderate gradient, moderate energy, moderate exposure,        TN
rocky kelp bed with adjacent sandflats
Low gradient, moderate energy, moderate exposure,          BS, TN,  TP
sand and cobble beach, abundant algae and kelp
High gradient, high energy, direct exposure, rock             TP
substrate, abundant algae
Low gradient, moderate energy, moderate exposure,          BS, TN,  TP
sand and cobble beach, abundant algae and kelp
High gradient, high energy, high exposure, sand              BS, TN
and gravel beach, no algae, little detritus
Low gradient, low exposure, low energy, mudflat with         BS, TN
extensive eelgrass beds
Low gradient, low exposure, low energy, mudflat with         BS, TN
extensive eelgrass beds
Moderate gradient, low exposure, low energy, sand and        BS, TN
gravel beach, abundant algae and eelgrass
Low gradient, low energy, low exposure, sand and cobble       TP
beach, some algae
Moderate gradient, high energy, direct exposure, sand-       BS, TN
gravel substrate, little algae
Low gradient, low energy, low exposure, sand substrate,      BS, TN
little algae

-------
 hauls were made at  each site  except  when weather  conditions made  that
 impossible.   Care was  taken so  that  the  area swept  by  one  set was not
 included in the replicate.  Time  between sets was at least 30 minutes.
 At sites where the  depth of water was  less  than 3 m, only  sinking sets were
 made.   Where water  depth exceeded 3  m  (two  sites),  both  floating  and sinking
 sets  were made.   Beach seining  was conducted during slack  water at  low tide,
 which involved sampling at night  between October and March and during the day
 between March and October.

 3.2.2  Townet

      A two-boat  surface trawl  (townet) was  utilized to sample neritic fish
 occurring in the upper 3.5 m of the  water column adjacent  to the  shoreline.
 The townet measured 3  m x 6 m  (10 x  20 ft),  with mesh  sizes grading from
 76 mm (3 inches)  at the brail to  6 mm  (1/4  inch) at the  bag (see Miller
 et al.   1977,  for a diagram of  the townet).   The net was towed at 800 rpm
 (about  3.7 km/hr) between the 12-m (39-ft)  FRI research  vessel MALKA and
 a  3.7-m (12-ft)  purse  seine skiff.   At each site, two  10-minute tows were
 made.   One tow was  made with the  prevailing tidal current  along the shore-
 line  and the other  tow was made in the opposite direction.

      To  reduce net  avoidance by pelagic  species and to optimize sampling of
 those pelagic  species  which migrate  into shallow water nocturnally, sampling
 was conducted  at  night.   We also  sought  to  sample during periods of minimal
 tidal currents and  moonlight to reduce sampling variation, but this was not
 always possible.

      The net was  towed as close to the shoreline as depth, kelp growth, and
 flotsam  would  allow.   The net dragged bottom in 5 m (15  ft) of water.

      Seldom were we  able  to follow a consistent transect over the same depth,
 distance from  shore, and  length at the townet sites; conditions during the
 collection periods varied because of tide,  flotsam, weather, etc.  However,
 the towing setup proved  to be quite maneuverable, allowing us to work along
 the shoreline  rather easily.  Townet sampling was generally conducted within
 one week of beach seine  collections.

 3.2.3  Intertidal

     Two  types of intertidal habitat were sampled during low tide:  Tidepools
 and the  area beneath large rocks.   Both types of habitat were encountered at
 most intertidal sites.   The sites were categorized  as rocky headlands
 (Observatory Point,   Slip Point, Neah Bay) and cobble beaches (North Beach,
Morse Creek, Twin Rivers), according to their geomorphology.

     Tidepools were randomly selected at various heights to ensure sampling
over the entire vertical range of the fish.   Each tidepool was partly
drained  to concentrate fish into a small area;  a small  amount of quinaldine
 (10% solution  in ethyl alcohol) was  added to narcotize the fish,  facilitating
the collection of secretive and elusive species.   Rocks were also randomly
selected over  the vertical range of  the fish.  The rocks were rolled and the
fish beneath them were captured by hand.   Fish were preserved in 10%
buffered formalin immediately after  capture.

-------
3.2.4  Macroinvertebrate Cataloguing

     Epibenthic macroinvertebrates were collected at the eight beach seine
sites and pelagic macroinvertebrates were collected at the nine townet sites
during the first two years of the study.  The macroinvertebrates were hand-
picked from the beach seine and townet and placed in 10% buffered formalin,
except for large, readily identifiable crabs and asteroids which were
measured (or the size estimated) and released at the time of collection.
Preserved samples were brought to the laboratory and identified, weighed,
and measured.  Species were sorted using a dissecting microscope.  For
species occurring in numbers greater than 100, subsamples of 50 individuals
were weighed and measured, the remainder of the sample was counted and a
total weight taken.

     Weights were taken to the nearest 0.01 g and lengths were measured to
the nearest millimeter.  Carapace lengths, eye to posterior edge of carapace,
were taken on the shrimp.  In the laboratory, crabs were measured at their
widest point (carapace width).  The remainder of the invertebrates were not
measured.

     Species identifications were made using a variety of dichotomous keys,
illustrated references, descriptions, and an existing reference collection
of verified species.  The principal references used for taxonomic identifi-
cation were Banner  (1947, 1948, 1950), Barnard (1969), Barnes  (1974),
Johnson and Snook  (1955), Kozloff (1974), Ricketts and Calvin  (1968),
Schultz (1969), Smith and Carlton (1975), and Staude  et al.  (1977).  A
reference collection was organized and maintained for the purpose of compar-
ing prey organisms  to verified specimens.  Amphipods were identified by Craig
Staude at the Friday Harbor Laboratories.

3.3  COLLECTION INFORMATION

     The following  data were recorded for all sampling methods:  Location,
date, time, tide stage and height, weather conditions  (air  temperature, wind
speed and direction, visibility, precipitation,  and cloud cover), sea  surface
temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen, sea  state and color, bottom depth,
area sampled (beach seine), volume sampled  (townet),  distance fished,
sampling duration,  compass heading, light intensity,  and current direction
and velocity.  All  information was recorded on computer data  forms.

     Water samples  were  obtained for salinity and dissolved oxygen measure-
ments.  For beach  seine  samples, salinity was determined by the
potentiometric method and dissolved oxygen by Winkler titration.  During
townet collections, salinity was measured with a Beckman salinity-temperature
probe, and dissolved oxygen was determined by Winkler titration.

3.4  BIOLOGICAL  INFORMATION

     Catches from  the beach seine and townet were bagged, labeled, and placed
on ice until processing.  Fish  retained for stomach analysis  were separated
from the catch and preserved  in 10% formalin  immediately after collection.
                                       10

-------
      Generally,  catches  were  taken in  their entirety.   It  became necessary
 to subsample when the catch of  one or  more  species was  too large to  permit
 proper handling  within the available time.   The  less abundant  species were
 sorted from the  catch and  saved.   The  abundant species  were thoroughly mixed
 and a known volume greater than or equal  to 10%  of the  sample  was  removed
 and saved.   The  volume of  the remaining sample was measured and the  fish
 were discarded.

 3.5  PROCESSING  THE CATCHES

      Fish samples were sorted to  species  and  individuals were  counted,
 measured  (total  length), and  weighed (to  the  nearest 0.1 g wet weight).
 Where possible the following  information  was  taken for  an  individual:  Sex,
 life history stage,  external  diseases, parasites, and other abnormalities.
 When the number  of individuals  of a species in a sample exceeded 100, 50 or
 more individuals  were weighed and measured;  the  remaining  fish were  counted
 and an aggregate  weight was taken.  All information was recorded on  computer
 data forms.   Hart (1973) was  used as a reference for identification  of the
 fishes.

      Fish to  be used  for stomach  analysis were dissected;  the  stomach was
 removed, tagged,  and  preserved  in 10% formalin.  In those  fish without
 well-defined  stomachs, the  first  one-third  of the intestine was removed and
 preserved.

 3.6  STOMACH  ANALYSES

      Whole  fish specimens or  intact stomach samples of  economically  important
 fishes were examined  according  to  a systematic,  standard procedure (Terry
 1977) which identifies the  numerical and  gravimetric composition of  prey
 organisms,  the stage  of digestion  of the  contents, and  the degree of stomach
 fullness.   In the  laboratory, the  stomach samples were  removed from  the
 preservative, or  from the preserved whole fish,  and soaked in  cold water for
 at  least two  or three hours before examination.  The stomach was then
 identified  according  to information on the  label and then  processed.
 Processing  involved taking  a  total (damp) weight (to nearest 0.01 g),
 removing the  contents  from  the  stomach and  weighing each taxonomic category
 including unidentifiable material.  Subjective numerical evaluations of the
 stomach condition  or  degree fullness—scaled from 1 (empty)  to 7 (distended)—
 and  stage of digestion—scaled  from 1 (all  digested) to 5  (no  digestion)—were
 made  at this  time.  The stomach contents were then sorted  and  identified as
 far  as was practical, the sorted organisms were  counted, and a total (damp)
weight of each taxon was obtained  (to nearest 0.001 g).  If  a  sorted taxon
was  represented by too many individuals to  count, the number was estimated
using a random grid-counting procedure.

3.7  POSSIBLE SOURCES OF ERROR

     A major source of sampling error was gear selectivity.  Each gear type
possessed its own selectivity which must be taken into  account when comparing
results of different gear types.  Sample variation also resulted from bottom
conditions,  weather conditions,  light intensity  (diurnal-nocturnal), sea
conditions,  bioluminescence, turbidity, and sampling duration.

                                      11

-------
     Density and standing crop estimates for both beach seine and townet
were biased because we assumed 100% gear efficiency (e.g., all fish occurring
in the 11,500-m3 section sampled by the townet were assumed captured).   The
large-mesh wings of the townet and beach seine were not as effective in
retaining larvae and small juveniles as the bag, so that quantitative results
concerning small fish were likely to be underestimates.  Also, certain fast-
swimming and fast-reacting species probably were able to avoid the sampling
gear.

     The topography of the substrate affected the performance of the beach
seine.  Smooth substrates were swept more efficiently than uneven substrates.
Furthermore, large quantities of algae or eelgrass reduced sampling
efficiency.

     Sampling at Jamestown was discontinued after the first year of the study
because of insufficient water depth on zero or minus tides.  Port Williams,
east of Jamestown near the entrance to Sequim Bay, was added to the sampling
plan.

     Species identifications may constitute a source of error.  All adult
specimens and the vast majority of juvenile specimens were readily identifi-
able.  Some species of larval fish and macroinvertebrates presented
identification problems, so in some instances species richness (number of
species) may have been underestimated.

     Sample bias was also introduced by the crew during the picking of the
net.  Transparent larvae and small fish may have been overlooked,
particularly when sampling was conducted at night in inclement weather.

     Beach seining was conducted on the lowest tides of the sampling period.
During October through January, sampling occurred at night whereas in May
through August it occurred during the day.  Comparison of these two periods
must take into consideration potential diel changes in the fish fauna.

     Bias also occurred in sampling the macroinvertebrates collected with the
fish.  The more fish and algae present in the net, the less efficient the
invertebrate sampling effort because of the difficulty in finding inverte-
brates  among the algae and also because of time constraints involved in
setting and retrieving the net.

3.8  DEFINITIONS AND STATISTICS

3.8.1  Definitions

     Occurrence or % occurrence means the number or percentage of discrete
samples (e.g., stomachs or hauls) in which a species was present.  Abundance
means the total number of individual organisms caught.  Biomass means the
total wet weight of the organisms caught.

     Density means the ratio of the total number of organisms to the sampling
area (beach seine) or volume (townet and tidepool collections) in a discrete
sample and is expressed as number/m2 or number/m3.  In the special case of
                                      12

-------
 tidepool collections  made  beneath single  rocks,  it  is  expressed  as
 number/rock.

      Standing crop  is the  ratio  of the  total  biomass of  organisms to  the
 sampling area (beach  seine)  or volume  (townet and tidepool  collections)
 in a discrete sample  and is  expressed as  grams/m2 or grams/m3.   In  the
 special  case  of  tidepool collections made beneath single rocks,  it  is
 expressed as  grams/rock.

      Species  richness is the number of  species present in a sample  or group
 of samples.

 3.8.2 Statistics

      3.8.2.1   IRI trophic  diagrams.  A  modification of Pinkas  et al. (1971),
 "Index of Relative  Importance" (IRI) was  used to rank the importance  of prey
 organisms.  The  IRI values for prey taxa  are  displayed both graphically and
 in tabular form  where justified  by sample size (n > 25).  The three-axis IRI
 graphs illustrate frequency  of occurrence (the proportion of stomachs con-
 taining  a specific prey organism)  plotted sequentially on the horizontal
 axis,  and percentage  of total abundance and percentage of total biomass
 plotted  above  and below the  horizontal  axis,  respectively (Fig. 2).   All
 prey  groups,  including those assigned to  a broad taxonomic  level (family,
 order, class)  because of inability to assign  a more specific identification,
 have  been arranged from left to  right by  decreasing frequency of occurrence.
 Prey  taxa in  differing stages of digestion (e.g., partly digested shrimp,
 "Natantia-unidentified," as  opposed to  family, "Pandalidae," or species,
 ''Fandalus borealis")  are graphed separately.

      The  IRI value was computed  as  follows:


         IRI =  %  Frequency of   f~%  Numerical    + %  Gravimetric ~j
                 occurrence.    I    composition.      composition. I


 and is equivalent to  the area encompassed by  the bar for  each prey  category i
 composing the  IRI diagrams.  In order to  compare the IRI  values between prey
 spectra with different sample sizes, the  overall importance of general prey
 taxa  (e.g., all  shrimp, including  "unidentified Natantia" and those
 identified to  family and species,  added together) has been discussed  as a
percentage of  the total combined IRI (areas) of the different prey  taxa.
Table 2 illustrates an example of  the IRI values and percentages of total IRI
 generated from the data diagrammed in Fig. 2.   The advantage of the IRI value
is that the more representative prey are not dominated by numerically rare
but high biomass prey  (e.g.,  prey8, Fig.  2), by infrequently occurring but
abundant or high biomass (when eaten)  taxa,  nor by numerically abundant or
frequently occurring taxa which contribute little in the way of biomass
 (e.g., preylt  Fig.  2).

      3.8.2.2  Trophic  diversity and dietary overlap.  Four quantitative
 indices of the composition and overlap of predator diets were used to describe
 trophic diversity:

                                      13

-------
       aa
       i
       CO
       £
       00
       o
       a.
           100
            80
            60
            40
            20
                           PREDflTOR  8755010202 - ONCORHYNCHUS KETfl
                      (CHUM SflLMON         )   ROJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =
               LENGTH.MM  X=  50.0.              WT.GMS X=   5-00.
       £     20
             40
             SO
             80
            100
.H

PL.
CM
V
vi
PL,
n -» "•>
§? Sr iP
Vi Vi Vi
so r*» co
oT aT Hi
VI Vi Vi
• 	 i 	
*
«
ft.
                     20
                                                                             180
                      40     60     80     100    120

                        CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE

Fig.  2.   Example of  index  of  relative  importance  (I.R.I.)  diagram.
     Table 2.IHI table.
p*EY
Prey,
Prey'
Prey5
Prey?
Prey9
F*eo
n'cH __OCCUK __
33.33
il.il
Ii. 11
ii.ll
Li. 11
ii.ll
ii.ll
COM P.
70. 71
7.07
2.02
'..O't
2.02
5.05
2.02
S.05
2.02
tSh?:..
i . la ""
iG. 60
.oa»
.00
5.64
.12
10.90
5i. 72
Zi.S't
PKC'Y
i .K. I.
'3993.5
"it. 9
65". i
5 7. A
63c!|
26i.d
fcRCENI
.TCTAL IRi
iO.l^i
.76
_._ .77. _
1.12
.98
2 ."tfi
	 UJ.dl
"t.t?
   t"* TAXA Vllfi f-REO.  OCCOrK. "ut-SS THAN "5""ANO'NUrttftlCAL MNu GRAVIMETRIC
 CJilPOSlTiuN oulh LtSS IriAW 1 «Kt" tXt'LOlJtu  F*dh  Tnc TASlE AND PLiJT
"TVUT NOT FkON CALCUL61 iJN  UP JivE-iSITY INDICES)
                          17Y_
                                          .51"
                                         1.70
                                                                   .52
                                      14

-------
      (1)   Percent dominance index:   %  Dominance  =  £(p.)2

 where p.  is  the ratio  of  the number  (or  biomass) of  prey   to  the  total prey
 abundance (or biomass).

      (2)   Shannon-Wiener  diversity index:

                                     s
                             H'  =  -I   (P,  Ln  P  )
                                   1=1  1   Z 1

 where p.  is  the same as in  the percent dominance index  and s  is the  total
 number of species.  H' incorporates  both the number  of  prey taxa  present and
 the  evenness  of the distribution  (either numbers or  biomass)  among these
 taxa,  and is  relatively insensitive  to sample  size.

      (3)   Evenness index:   e = H'/Lns

 where  H'  is  the Shannon-Wiener index and s  is  the  total number of species.

      (4)   Dietary overlap:   Sanders  (1960)  Index of  Affinity  (similarity),

                             %S  =  I min p.


 was  used  as an  index of diet  overlap,  where p. is  the percentage  of  the total
 IRI  which each  prey taxon constituted.   Silver (1975) suggested that 80%
 similarity was  a reasonable  significance level.

      3.8.2.3  Linear regression.  The  relationship between abundance and
 biomass and the oceanographic parameters measured  at each  site was investi-
 gated with a stepwise linear  regression  model  and  analysis  of variance.
 Abundance  and biomass values were transformed  with logarithms (base  10) to
 normalize  the variance (Zar  1974).

 3.9  DISPOSITION OF DATA

     All  data were initially  recorded  on computer  sheets in format required
 by MESA specification.   Codes utilized in data recording were developed by
 the  National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC).  The data were checked for
 errors, keypunched on 80-colutnn IBM cards, and verified.  All data cards
were systematically organized, transferred onto magnetic tape, and submitted
 to NODC quarterly.

 3.10  SPECIES NOMENCLATURE

     Unless otherwise noted,  all names of fishes,  both  scientific and common,
 are  based on  the American Fisheries  Society list (1970).   The only change that
 has  appeared  subsequent to  that list is  for the bay  pipefish, which has been
 changed from  Syngnathus griseolineatus to ^. leptorhynchus, according to
 Miller and Lea  (1972).
                                      15

-------
                                  SECTION 4

                           RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1  OCEANOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS

     Temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen data are presented in
Appendix 6.2 for beach-seine, townet, and tidepool collections.

4.1.1  Beach Seine

     The relationship between abundance and biomass and the oceanographic
parameters measured at each site was investigated with stepwise linear.
regression and analysis of variance.  Log abundance and log biomass were
poorly predicted by the oceanographic parameters measured; only 10 out of
the possible 48 parameters (20.8%) were significant (Table 3).   The
conclusion is that while some of the oceanographic parameters may be locally
important in determining the abundance or biomass of nearshore fish (e.g.,
temperature at Dungeness Spit), there is no predictable relationship across
all sites.

4.1.2  Townet

     A regression analysis of variance was also performed on abundance and
biomass measurements from townet catches (Table 4).  Log abundance was poorly
predicted by the oceanographic parameters measured; log biomass was poorly
predicted by salinity and dissolved oxygen but was predicted fairly well by
temperature.  Temperature was significant at six of the seven sites and was
always positively related to biomass—i.e., an increase in temperature was
correlated with an increase in biomass.  The amount of variance in biomass
explained by the regression (r2) ranged from 17% to 48% (mean = 36%).

4.2  NEARSHORE FISH SPECIES COMPOSITION

     A total of 94 species was collected from May 1976 to June 1979 during
sampling operations (Tables 5, 6).  A decrease in the number of species
collected by beach seine and townet was observed as the study progressed.
This was largely a result of absence of rare species in the catches during
the second and third years of sampling.  Some species—e.g., rock greenling,
Pacific sandfish, plainfin midshipman, and kelp perch—were represented by
fewer than five specimens in a particular year and none in others.  The
presence or absence of rare species in the catches is stoichastic and not
regarded as significant.
                                      16

-------
Table 3.    Summary of stepwise multiple linear regression of log abundance
            and log weight against temperature, salinity, and dissolved
            oxygen for beach seine catches.  NS = not significant; the
            significance level is given where appropriate; the coefficient
            of determination (r2) is given in parentheses.  The equations
            are in the form
Y. = a+bX. + s
i i yx
where s x = standard error of the regression.
Log abundance
Site
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
sinking
Dungeness Spit
floating2
Port Williams3
Beckett Point
sinking4
Beckett Point
floating5
Temp.
NS
NS
NS
0.012
(0.33)
0.008
(0.38)
NS
NS
NS
Sal.
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.023
(0.30)
NS
0.030
(0.33)
DO
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.004
(0.33)
0.007
(0.50)
NS
Log weight
Temp.
NS
NS
NS
0.015
(0.14)
NS
NS
NS
NS
Sal.
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.002
(0.50)
DO
NS
NS
NS
0.049
(0.20)
NS
NS
NS
0.043
(0.16)
             ) = -0.137 -I-  0.194  (temp) + 0.5273
     Log  (wt.) = 1.603 + 0.288  (temp) -  0.165  (DO)  + 0.6197
    2Log  (nos.) = -2.393 + 0.407  (temp)  + 0.7918

    3Log  (nos.) = 9.129 -  0.463  (DO) - 0.936  (sal)  + 0.3715
    4Log  (nos.) = 3.737 -•  0.119  (DO) + 0.5109

    5Log  (nos.) = -12.508  + 0.479  (sal)  + 0.5254
     Log  (wt.)  = -19.647  + 0.772  (sal)  - 0.864 (DO)  + 0.5079
                                   17

-------
Table 4.    Summary of stepwise multiple linear regression of log abundance
            and log weight against temperature, salinity, and dissolved
            oxygen for townet catches.  NS = not significant; the signifi-
            cance level is given where appropriate; the coefficient of
            determination (r2) is given in parentheses.  The equations
            are in the form
where
Y. = a+bX. + s
x i — yx
s = standard error of the regression.
yx &
Log abundance
Site
Kydaka Beach1
Pillar Point2
Twin Rivers3
Morse Creek1*
Dungeness Spit5
Jamestown-
Port Williams
Beckett Point7
Temp.
NS
0.009
(0.30)
NS
NS
0.046
(0.19)
0.001
(0.13)
NS
Sal.
NS
NS
<0.001
(0.48)
NS
NS
<0.001
(0.14)
0.001
(0.44)
DO
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.001
(0.34)
NS
Log biomass
Temp.
0.002
(0.40)
<0.001
(0.48)
0.015
(0.17)
0.001
(0.33)
NS
<0.001
(0.46)
0.006
(0.32)
Sal.
NS
NS
0.002
(0.36)
NS
NS
0.022
(0.13)
NS
DO
NS
NS
NS
<0.001
(0.27)
NS
NS
NS
     *Log (wt) = -0.711 + 0.243  (temp  °C) +  0.5454

     2Log (nos.) = -2.268 + 0.477  (temp) + 0.8711
      Log (wt) = -4.181 + 0.697  (temp) + 0.8566

     3Log (nos.) = 37.640 - 1.089  (sal) + 0.9720
      Log (wt) = 22.437 - 0.726  (sal)  + 0.347  (temp) + 0.7667
     4Log (wt) = 3.542 - 0.725  (DO) +  0.521  (temp) + 0.8672

     5Log (nos.) = -1.288 + 0.377  (temp) + 0.9498

     6Log (nos.) = -37.657 + 0.541  (temp) +  0.923  (sal)  + 0.064  (DO)  + 0.6008
      Log (wt) = -13.246 + 0.594  (temp) + 0.315  (sal)  + 0.5762

     7Log (nos.) = 63.267 - 1.915  (sal) + 0.8360
      Log (wt) = -1.270 + 0.321  (temp) + 0.9958


                                      18

-------
         Table 5.  Number of species collected by each sampling method.


          Gear           1976-77     1977-78     1978-79     Total
Beach seine
Townet
Intertidal
69
48
—
59
42
24
60
34
25
81
60
26
             Total          76          76          69         94

 4.2.1  Dominant Species, Beach Seine

      The rank order of the most abundant species summed across all collec-
 tions at all sites is presented in Table 7.   The general consistency of
 rankings among years suggests that, at least for the abundant species,
 occupation of a particular habitat is fairly constant from year to year and
 that quarterly sampling with a beach seine is effective in documenting  major
 trends in the nearshore fish assemblages.

      Between-year differences in the rank order abundances were largely a
 result of the sporadic occurrence of a few large individuals—e.g.,  spiny
 dogfish and chinook salmon—which greatly influenced biomass  measurements,
 and schooling species—e.g.,  Pacific herring,  Pacific sand lance,  and
 Pacific tomcod—which because of their mobility were not collected
 consistently.   The presence  of the tidepool  sculpin in 1977-78 and 1978-79
 rankings is a result of substituting Port  Williams  for the Jamestown site.
 Tidepool sculpin  inhabit  a  large rock outcrop adjacent to the area  sampled
 with the beach seine at Port  Williams;  on  an ebbing tide the  sculpins move
 off the outcrop and into the  area sampled.

      Variations in the strength of year classes within a species can affect
 the rankings,  or even presence or absence, in  the table.   There is some
 evidence that  this is the  case for speckled  sanddab.   During  the first  two
 years of the study,  only a few speckled sanddab were  collected on  two beaches
 (Kydaka Beach,  Beckett Point);  during  the  last  year of the study,  sanddab
 were collected  at  every site  and  were  ten  times  as  abundant as in  previous
 years.

      A list  of  the regularly  occurring  and abundant species by season and  by
 site for  each year of  the  study is  presented in Table  8.   Beach-seine catches
 were dominated  by  juveniles of  three species:   Pacific  staghorn sculpin,
 English sole, and  sand  sole.   They were present  on  all  beaches during most
 of  the sampling periods.  The  similarity of substrates  among  the sampling
 sites accounts  for their widespread occurrence.  Sand sole were more  abundant
 on pure sand and coarse sand substrates with little vegetation or detritus
 (Kydaka Beach, Dungeness Spit), while English sole and Pacific staghorn
 sculpin were more abundant on mixed sand and mud substrates with more
vegetation and detritus.  All three species appeared on the beaches in the
 spring as metamorphosing larvae or as recently metamorphosed juveniles.
They remained on the beaches throughout the summer and fall.  By winter they
had largely disappeared—probably moving into deeper water in response to


                                      19

-------
Table 6.  Nearshore fish species collected by beach seine (BS),  townet (TN),
	and tidepool (TP) .	

Species                               Common name                    Gear
Squalus aaanfhias
Raja binoaulata
R. stellulata
Hydrolagus aolliei
Clupea harengus pallasi
Engraulis mordax
Onaorhynchus gorbusoha
0. keta
0. kisutch
0. tshxuytsaha
Salmo  olarki
S. gairdneri
Eypomesus pretiosus
Mallotus villosus
Spivinchus  thaleiohthys
Poviahthys  notatus
Gobiesox maeandricus
Gadus  macroaephalus
Microgadus  pracimus
Theragra  ahalcogpomma
Aulorhynohus flavidus
 Gasterosteus aculeatus
 Syngnathus  leptonhynehus
 Amphistiehus rhodoterus
 Cymatogaster aggvegata
 Brachyisticus frenatus
 Embiotoca lateralis
 Rhaeoehilus vaooa
 Tviehodon trichodon
 Anoplarchus purpuresoens
 ChJ-polophus nugator
  Lumpenus sagitta
  Phytiahthys ahivus
  Xiphister  atropurpureus
  X. imeosus
  Apodiehthys flavidus
  Pholis laeta
  P. ornata
  Anarvhichthys  ooellatus
 'Ammodytes  hexapterus
  Sebastes entanelas
  S. flavidus
  S. melanops
  Hexagrammos decagrammus
  H.  lagoaephalus
  H.  stelleri
'  'Ophiodcn  elongatus
  Avtedius fenestvalis
  A.  harringtoni
  A.  lateralis
spiny dogfish
big skate
starry skate
ratfish
Pacific herring
northern anchovy
pink salmon
chum salmon
coho salmon
chinook salmon
cutthroat trout
rainbow trout
surf smelt
capelin
longfin smelt
plainfin midshipman
northern clingfish
Pacific cod
Pacific tomcod
walleye pollock
tube-snout
threespine stickleback
bay pipefish
redtail surf perch
shiner perch
kelp perch
striped sea perch
pile perch
Pacific sandfish
high cockscomb
mosshead warbonnet
snake prickleback
ribbon prickleback
black prickleback
rock prickleback
penpoint gunnel
crescent gunnel
saddleback gunnel
wolf eel
Pacific sand lance
widow rockfish
yellowtail rockfish
black rockfish
kelp greenling
rock greenling
whitespotted greenling
lingcod
padded sculpin
scalyhead sculpin
smoothhead sculpin
  20
BS,TN
BS
BS
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
65
BS
BS,TN
TN
BS,TN
BS
BS,TN,TP
BS
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS,TN,TP
TP
BS,TN
TP
TP
TP
BS,TN,TP
BS,TN,TP
BS,TN,TP
TN
BS,TN
BS,TN
BS
TN
BS,TN
BS.TP
BS
BS.TN
BS,TN,TP
BS,TP
BS,TP

-------
Table 6.  (Contd.)
Species
Common name
Gear
Aseeliahthys rhodorus
Blepsias cirrhosus
Chi-tonotu. s pugetens-is
Clinooottus aauticeps
C. embryum
C. globioeps
Enophrys bison
Hemilepidotus hemilep-idotus
Leptooottus armatus
Myoxocephalus polyaoanthooephalus
Nautiahthys oeulofasc-iatus
Oligocottus maoulosus
0. rimens-is
0. snydeiri
Radulinus boleoides
Rhaonphooottus richardsoni
Scovpaeniehthys mcamoratus
Synahirus gilli
Gilbeptidia sigalutes
Psychvolutes paradoxus
Agcnopsis emmetccne
Agonus a.C'ipenseri.nus
Bathyagonus nigri-pinis
Oecella verruoosa
Odontopyxis trispinosa
Pallasina barbata
Xeneretmus latifrons
Ewniarotremus orbis
Lipap-Ls aoLlyodon
L. eyclopus
L. dennyi
L. florae
L. muoosus
L. pulahellus
L. vutteri
Citharichthys stigmaeus
C, sordidus
Isopsetta isolep-is
Lepidopsetta bit -ineata
Parophrys vetulus
Platichthys stellatus
Pleuronichthys coenosus
Psettiahthys melanostiotus
Miavostomus paci.fi.aus
rosylip sculpin                 BS,TN,TP
silverspotted sculpin           BS,TN,TP
roughback sculpin               BS
sharpnose sculpin               BS,TN,TP
calico sculpin                  TP
mosshead sculpin                TP
buffalo sculpin                 BS,TN,TP
red Irish lord                  BS,TN,TP
Pacific stagborn sculpin        BS,TN
great sculpin                   BS,TN
sailfin sculpin                 BS,TN
tidepool sculpin                BS,TP
saddleback sculpin              BS,TP
fluffy sculpin                  BS,TP
darter sculpin                  TN
grunt sculpin                   TN
cabezon                         BS
manacled sculpin                BS,TN
soft sculpin                    TN
tadpole sculpin                 BS,TN
northern spearnose poacher      BS
sturgeon poacher                BS,TN
blackfin poacher                TN
warty poacher                   BS
pygmy poacher                   BS
tubenose poacher                BS,TN
blacktip poacher                BS.TN
Pacific spiny lumpsucker        BS,TN
spotted snailfish               BS,TN
ribbon snailfish                BS,TP
marbled snailfish               BS
tidepool snailfish              BS,TN,TP
slimy snailfish                 BS
showy snailfish                 BS,TN
ringtail shailfish              BS,TN,TP
speckled sanddab                BS
Pacific sanddab                 BS
butter  sole                     BS
rock sole                       BS,TN
English sole                    BS,TN
starry  flounder                 BS,TN
C-0 sole                        BS
sand sole                       BS
Dover sole                      BS
                                     21

-------
             Table  7.   Rank order of the most abundant fishes in beach seine collections.
KS
10
Occurrence

Pacific staghorn sculpin
English sole
Sand sole
Starry flounder
Buffalo sculpin
Striped perch
Pacific tomcod
Padded sculpin
Redtail surfperch
Herring
Surf smelt
Tubesnout
Shiner perch
Rosy lip sculpin
Chinook salmon
Spiny dogfish
Sand lance
Tidepool sculpin
Silverspotted sculpin
Speckled sanddab
76/77
1.5
1.5
3
4
5
6
7.5
7.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5








77/78
1.5
1.5
2.5
5
6
9

2.5
9
9


7







78/79
1
2
2.5
3.5
7
10

3.5


10
10






8
5.5
Abundance
76/77
5
8
7



10


2
9
4
3
6


1



77/79
4
8
6



9

10


7
3
5


1
2


78/79
8
6
3


9


7

5
4
1




2

10
Biomass
76/77
5

8
2

7


1
9


4

3
6
10



77/78
2

7
3

9
10

6

5

4



1
8


78/79
3
7
4
5

6


1

8

2




9

10

-------
N>
CO
   Table 8.   Regularly  occurring  and  abundant  species  in  beach  seine collections  by  site  and by  season  for
              each  of  the  study  years;  F  =  few  (<  10  individuals),  C  = common  (10-25),  A = abundant  (26-100),
              AA =  very  abundant (> 100).   Data based upon two seine  hauls  at  each site in each season.

                                                                 KYDAKA BEACH
Species

Pacific herring
Redtail surfperch
Pacific sand lance
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Speckled sanddab
English sole
Starry flounder
Sand sole

Redtail surfperch
Striped seaperch
Penpoint gunnel
Crescent gunnel
Saddleback gunnel
Padded sculpin
Rosy lip sculpin
Silverspotted sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tubenose poacher
English sole
Starry flounder
Sand sole
1976-77
SP SU
AA
F
C


A
F C
A A

F A
AA
A
F A
A
F
F AA
F AA
F F
F
A
F AA
F
F C
F

§
•H
.| _i
o
0)
,H
t-1
O
0
O
C



AA
F



A
F
A
A
C
F
A
F
C
W

F
F

F

C

A




C
F
C
F
A

A
C
A
1977-78
SP

F


F
F
C
TWIN
F

F


F
F
F

F

F
F
C
SU
A
AA
F
A
C
F
A
RIVERS
AA
C
A
F
C
A
AA
C

F
F
A
F
A
F
F
C
F
A

F
F
A

C

F


A
AA
F

F
F
F
F
AA
W

§
-H
^j
o
0)
rH
iH
O
a
o
C



C
C



C

C

F
F
C
F
A
1978-79
SP

F
F
A
F
F
A

A
F
F
F

F
F

F
F

A
C
F
SU

F
F
C
AA
F
C
AA

AA
F
A
F
F

A
A
F
F
C
A
F
A
F






A

AA
F
F

F
F
F
C

F
C
A
F
AA
W

C

C




C
F



F

F
F
F


F
F

-------
Table  8 .  (Contd.)
MORSE CREEK
Species

Surf smelt
Pacific tomcod
Tube-snout

Striped seaperch
Silverspotted sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin

English sole
Starry flounder
§and sole

Spiny dogfish
Pacific herring
Surf smelt
Pacific tomcod

Pacific sand lance

Pacific staghorn sculpin

English sole
Sand sole 	
1976-77
SP SU
F AA
C
F

F F
F F
F

F A
F
C

F C
C AA
F
A

AA

F C

F A
AA
F W

F
F F

F
F
F F

F F
F F
F F

F
F
F
F

F

C F

F
A C
1977-78
SP SU
C
F
A

F F
F F
F C

F A
F F
F A
DUNGENESS

F





F F

C
F A
F
C
A
F


C
F

F
F
AA
SPIT


C
o
4-1
0

-------
               Table  8  .  (Contd.)
                                                           JAMESTOWN  - PORT WILLIAMS
ro
Oi
Species

Shiner perch
Padded sculpin

Sharpnose sculpin

Pacific staghorn sculpin

Tidepool sculpin

English sole

Starry flounder

Pacific tomcod
Tube- snout
Shiner perch
Striped seaperch
Padded sculpin
Roughback sculpin
Buffalo sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Great sculpin
English sole
Starry flounder
1976-77
SP





F



A


SU



F

A



A

C
F


C
o
•H
4-1
CJ
0)
i-l
rH
O
O
O
C

W


G
O
•H
4J
O
0)
H
r-i
0
o
o
c

SP
F
F



F

F

F

F
1977-78
SU
F
F

C

AA

AA

AA

C
F
AA
F

AA

AA

AA

F

A
BECKETT
F
F

F

F
F
AA
F
A
F
F

AA
C
F

F
A
A
C
F
A
C
AA
F
A

C
A
C

F
AA
AA
AA
F
F
A
F
A
F
A
F



F

F
F
C
F
C
F
F

AA
F
F

F
A
F
F
F
A
A
AA
A
A
F
A
A
F
C
F
W
A
F

F

F

AA

A

F
POINT
A
AA
AA
C
F
F
C
A
F
A
F
SP



F

A

A

A

F




F
F
F
C
A
C
C

1978-79
SU
F
F



A

AA

A

F

A
C
AA
F
C
F
F
A
F

F
F
F
A

A

A

AA

A

C

AA
F
AA
A
A
F
A
AA
F
AA
F
W
F


C

C

A

C

F


AA
A

F
F
A
A
F
A
F

-------
lowered temperatures and reduced food availability  in the nearshore
environment.

     The list of predominant species collected by beach seine in northern
Puget Sound (Miller  et al.   1977) is quite similar to the  list  compiled for
the Strait of Juan de Fuca.   Noticeably absent from northern Puget  Sound
collections,  but abundant in the strait collections, were  sand sole  and
redtail surfperch.  Small schooling species (e.g.,  Pacific  herring,  Pacific
sand lance, Pacific tomcod,  surf smelt, shiner perch, and  tube-snout)  were
ranked generally higher in northern Puget Sound collections than in Strait
of Juan de Fuca collections.

4.2.2  Dominant Species, Townet

     Pacific herring, and to a lesser extent longfin smelt, predominated  in
townet catches  (Tables 9, 10).  Pacific herring accounted  for 76% of all  fish
by number and 75% of the total biomass of fish caught.  Longfin smelt
accounted for 16% of all fish by number and 11% of  the total biomass.   The
remaining 58 species contributed only 8% to the number of  fish caught and
14% of the total biomass.  Caution is therefore recommended in attributing
significance to variations in the rank order of species beyond Pacific
herring and longfin smelt.

     Pacific herring were most abundant during the spring and summer when
they occurred as larvae and juveniles, respectively.  Less than one percent
of all herring were caught in the fall and winter,  reflecting their movement
out of the nearshore waters.  No adult herring were  captured during the
study, while juveniles occurred at all sites and in  the majority of
collections  (88%).  The size of catches at a particular site varied between
years  and no consistent pattern could be discerned.   This  is most likely  a
result of the schooling nature of Pacific herring  and the  fact  that the
schools are patchily distributed.  Thus, while it  is clear from the data
that Pacific herring are most abundant during  spring and summer, it is
difficult to separate  out variations in year  class strength and preference
for a  particular  area  from  the bias  introduced by  sampling patchily
distributed  fishes.

      More than 99% of  all longfin smelt collected  were captured at Pillar
 Point and Twin Rivers.  Summer and fall were the periods  of greatest abun-
 dance.  Most of the longfin smelt were young-of-the-year  but a few adults
 (some ripe)  were also  captured.  The restricted distribution of young-of-
 the-year smelt probably reflects the proximity of  suitable spawning grounds—
 the Pysht River and Twin Rivers.   Curiously, few longfin  smelt were captured
 during the 1978-79 sampling year.  Two possible reasons are offered:
 (1) There simply was a poor year class in 1978-79, and (2) sampling was  too
 limited to catch the patchily distributed longfin  smelt.

      Although  numerically not abundant,  catches  of juvenile salmonids deserve
 some  mention because of their economic importance.  A total of  117  juvenile
 salmonids from four species (49 chum,  33 chinook,  32 pink, 3 coho)  was
 collected;  55% came from collections at Beckett  Point and 27% from Jamestown-
 Port  Williams.   Eighty-nine percent of the salmonids occurred in summer
 collections.

                                       26

-------
Table   9.  Rank order of the most abundant fishes in townet collections.

Pacific herring
Surf smelt
Tadpole sculpin
Crescent gunnel
Occurrence
76/77 77/78
1 1
2 5
3 3.5
4 11
Pacific sand lance 5.5 2
Walleye pollock
Longfin smelt
Tubesnout
English sole
Shiner perch
Pink salmon
Northern anchovy
Manacled sculpin
Pacific tomcod
Spiny dogfish
Starry flounder
Coho salmon
Pile perch
Striped perch
Chinook salmon
Pacific staghorn
Wolf eel
Kelp greenling
5.5
7
8 5.5
9
11.5 5.5
11.5
11.5 7.5
11.5 7.5
3.5
11




11
sculpin



78/79
1
3
5
5.5
2


5.5



4







9




76/77
1
5
7

8
4
2
9
10
3



6









Abundance
77/78 78/79
1 1
4 3
9 5
10
3 2
8
2
6

5 8.5

7 4

6
9.5




9.5




76/77
1
9




4


2



7
3
5
6
8
10




Biomass
77/78
1
7


5

2
6

4



10.5
3




8
9
10.5


78/79
1






5





8
2
4



10


3
Threespine stickleback 9
Sailfin sculpin
Widow rockfish
Chum salmon
Bay pipefish
Pacific sandfish





9
6.5
9
6.5







7
8.5













7
6

9

-------
00
     Table  10.  Regularly occurring and abundant species in townet collections by site and by season for each
                 of the study years; F = few  (< 10), C = common  (10-25), A = abundant  (26-100), AA = very
                 abundant (> 100).  Data based upon two townet hauls at  each site in each season.

                                                           KYDAKA BEACH

Pacific
Species
herring
Surf smelt
Long fin
Pacific
smelt
sand lance

SP
A
F

C
1976-77
SU F
C C


F
1977-78
W
F
F
AA

SP
AA
AA

AA
SU
AA


F
F
F



W




1978-79
SP SU F W
AA A F
F

C F
PILLAR POINT
Pacific
herring
Surf smelt
Long fin

Pacific
smelt

herring
Surf smelt
Longf in
Pacific
smelt
sand lance
AA
F


AA
A
C
A
A AA
F F
AA

AA A
AA A
AA AA

F
F
A

F
F
AA

AA
C

TWIN
AA
AA

AA
AA

AA
F
F

RIVERS
A

A

A

AA



rt-
o
•H
- — ^ 	
U
0)
.-t
rH
0
0
O

AA AA F
C F


AA A
AA

AA
MORSE CREEK
Pacific
Pacific
herring
sand lance
AA
A
C AA
F


AA
AA
AA
AA
A
F
F

AA A
A F

-------
      Table  10.  (Contd.)
                                                           DUNGENESS SPIT
NJ


Pacific
Species

herring
Surf smelt
Pacific

Pacific
Pacific
sand lance

herring
sand lance
1976-77
SP
AA
A
A

A
C
SU
AA
F
F

A

F
C
F
F

F

W SP
AA

AA
JAMESTOWN
F AA
AA
1977-78
SU
AA

C
F
AA

C
W
F
F
F
1978-79
SP SU F W
AA A
AA
AA F
- PORT WILLIAMS
AA

A

C

AA C C
A
BECKETT POINT
Pacific
Shiner
Pacific
herring
perch
sand lance
AA
F
F
AA
AA

F
AA

F AA

C
F
F

AA
F

F
A

AA F
C F
AA F

-------
     As in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Pacific herring ranked first in
occurrence, abundance, and biomass in northern Puget Sound (Miller  et al.
1977).  Longfin smelt were more abundant in the strait, while threespine
stickleback were more abundant in northern Puget Sound.

4.2.3  Dominant Species, Intertidal

     Tidepool and beneath-rock collections were dominated by tidepool
sculpin, northern clingfish, and high cockscomb (Tables 11, 12).  They
occurred at all sites but composed a greater proportion of the collections
on the cobble beaches (Twin Rivers, Morse Creek, North Beach) than on the
rocky headlands (Neah Bay, Slip Point, Observatory Point); this was a
result of the greater number of species found on the rocky headlands.
Tidepool sculpin occurred almost exclusively in tidepools, while northern
clingfish and high cockscomb occurred beneath rocks both in and out of
tidepools.

     The year-to-year consistency in occurrence, abundance, and bi'omass
rankings (Table 11) is not altogether surprising.  The assemblage of inter-
tidal fishes consists of 16 species, a rather limited number compared to
nearshore areas accessible to a beach seine.  There are, therefore, a limited
number of combinations of the 10 most abundant species.  Additionally, inter-
tidal fish are microhabitat specialists, so their numbers are probably limited
by the amount of their proper habitat which varies little from year to year.
Finally, ranking fish by occurrence, abundance, or biomass obscures the
magnitude of the differences between them, which in some years may be great
and in others small, but the overall ranking remains the same.

4.3  NEARSHORE FISH SPECIES RICHNESS

4.3.1  Beach Seine

     A yearly summary of the species richness  (number of species) caught  at
each site is presented in Table 13 and Appendix 6.3.  Species richness
generally increased from west to east in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, includ-
ing sites at Whidbey and Fidalgo Islands.  Exposed sites yielded fewer
species than nearby, more protected sites.  For example, Twin Rivers yielded
more species than Kydaka Beach and Morse Creek yielded more species than
Dungeness Spit.  The causes of this trend are likely the interrelationships
between exposure and habitat complexity.  Homogeneous, low-relief beaches
(Kydaka Beach, Dungeness Spit) offer neither a wide variety of habitats
necessary to attract a wide array of species, nor abundant refuges from
turbulence generated by storms; consequently, few species coexist there.

     Between-year variations in the number of species captured were low
(less than 25%), with the exception of Dungeness Spit in 1977-78.  Low be-
tween-year variations are surprising if one considers that while some species
are present at a particular site every year (i.e., the predominant species),
rare species tend to occur erratically.  This is reflected in the total
number of species captured at a site over all three years which was always
greater than the number of species collected in any one year.
                                      30

-------
Table 11.  Rank order of the most abundant fishes in intertidal collections.
Occurrence
Species
Tidepool sculpin
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Black prickleback
Rosylip sculpin
Mosshead sculpin
Fluffy sculpin
Rock prickleback
Calico sculpin
Smoothhead sculpin
Tidepool snailfish
Sharpnose sculpin
Ribbon prickleback
77/78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
10
10


78/79
1
3
2
5
10
4
8
6
7
9



Abundance
77/78
1
3
2
4
6
5
7
9
8


10

IB/79
I
5
2
4

3
8
6
7
9


10
Biomass
77/78
1
5
4
2
6
7
8
3
9
10



78/79
2
6
4
3
10
5
9
1

8


7

-------
Table 12.  Regularly occurring and abundant species in intertidal collections
           by site and by season for each of the study years.  F=few (<10
           individuals), C=common (10-25), A=abundant (26-100).  Data based
           upon varying amounts of effort but regarded as typical for each
           session at each site.
1977-78
Species
NEAR BAY
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Black prickleback
Rock prickleback
Tidepool sculpin
Fluffy sculpin
SLIP POINT
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Black prickleback
Rock prickleback
Smoothhead sculpin
Sharpnose sculpin
Mosshead sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
TWIN RIVERS
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Black prickleback
Rock prickleback
Tidepool sculpin
OBSERVATORY POINT
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Black prickleback
Rock prickleback
Sharpnose sculpin
Mosshead sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
MORSE CREEK
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Tidepool sculpin
NORTH BEACH
Northern clingfish
High cockscomb
Tidepool sculpin
Sp

c
c
F
F
C
A

C
A
A
C
F
C
C
A

C
F
F
F
C

C
A
F
F
C
C
A

C
C
A

C
F
C
Su

F
C
F
F
C
C

C
A
C
F
F
C
C
A

C
F

F
C

C
A
F

C
F
A

C
C
C

F
F
F
F








F
A
C
F

C
C
A

F
C
F
F
C

C
A
F
F
C
C
A

F
C
A

F
F
F
W








C
A
F


C
C
A

F
F


C

C
A
F

F
F
A

C
C
A

F
F
C
Sp

C
C
F
F
A
C

F
A
C
F
F
C
C
A

C
C
F
F
C

C
A
F
F
C
F
A

C
C
A

C
F
C
1978-79
Su

C
C
F

C
C

F
A
F
F
F
C
C
A

F
F
F

C

C
A
F
F
F
C
A

C
A
A

C
F
F
F








C
A
F
F

F
C
A

F
F

F
C

C
A
F

F
F
A

C
C
A

F
F
F
W








F
A

F
F
C
C
A


F


C

C
A
F

F
F
A

C
C
A

F
F
C
                                     32

-------
 Table 13.   Number of species (yearly total and three-year total)
            collected by beach seine at the sampling sites.
 Site
1976-77
1977-78
1978-79
Total
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown-Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's Beach
17
23
28
24
11
51


14
21
29
14
35
46
32
35
14
20
29
27
28
42


25
28
42
33
41
65


      Species  richness  exhibited  similar  seasonal  trends  in all  years of  the
 study.  Maxima  occurred  in  the summer  and  sometimes  the  fall; minima were
 recorded  in the winter (Fig.  3).  The  most exposed sites  (Kydaka  Beach,
 Dungeness Spit) exhibited the greatest variations between seasons.  Seasonal
 patterns  in maximum and  minimum  species  richness  and  the  number of  species
 collected within a season were quite similar at these sites.  The most
 protected sites (Jamestown-Port  Williams,  Beckett Point,  Alexander's Beach)
 exhibited the least seasonal  variation in  species richness, but the number
 of species collected was not  comparable  among  the sites;  the shallower sites
 (Jamestown-Port Williams, Alexander's  Beach) yielded  fewer species  than  the
 deeper site (Beckett Point).  Sites of intermediate exposure (Twin  Rivers,
 Morse Creek) exhibited some seasonal variation—species richness  was lower
 in winter and spring than in  summer and  fall—and produced a comparable
 number of species.

     Species richness  values  recorded  in this  study were  similar  to species
 richness  values recorded in the  San Juan Islands by Miller et  al.  (1977),
 with the  exception of  Beckett Point.   The  number of species collected at
 Beckett Point was greater in  all seasons than  the number  of species collected
 in comparable habitats in northern Puget Sound, e.g., Deadman Bay.  The high
 values at  Beckett Point  may have been  the  result of one or more of  the
 following:  (1) High abundance,  diversity,  and availability of  food;
 (2) utilization of Discovery  Bay as a  nursery  area by many species; (3) the
 proximity of two dissimilar habitats—a  steep, sand slope and an  eelgrass-
 covered mudflat.

     Seasonal variation  in the number  of species collected in the San Juan
 Islands was similar to the variation observed  at all but  the most protected
 sites in  the Strait of Juan de Fuca—high  spring-summer values  and  low
 fall-winter values.

 4.3.2  Townet

     A yearly summary of the number of species caught at  each site  is
presented in Table 14 and Appendix 6.4.  Collections at sites in the eastern
 Strait of Juan de Fuca generally produced more species than sites in the
western strait.   Between-year variations in species richness at a particular

                                       33

-------
 -


 .
 -
 ,
-
    25-
    20-
    15-
    10-
     5 -
                         Kydaka


    25
    20
    15
    10.
     5-
        Winter    Spring   Summer     Fall
                        Morse Creek
1976-77



1977-78





1978-79
                             Twin Rivers
             Winter    Spring   Summer    Fall
                          Dungeness Spit

                (floating & sinking sets combined)
       Winter    Spring    Summer    Fall                      Winter   Spring




       Fig.  3.   Species richness of seasonal beach seine collections, 1976-1979,
                                Summer
Fall

-------
.
        25 .,
        20 _
        15 .
        10 _
         5_
     -
     i
     •H
     i
     .

     '

     -
     :

     -
     .
                      Jamestown-Port Williams

Winter    Spring    Summer
Fall
        30
        25-
            Beckett Pt.

(floating & sinking sets combined)
                                           Ulllj  1976-77



                                           LJ  1977-78



                                               1978-79
                                                                   West Beach
                                                                       Alexander's Beach
           Winter    Spring   Summer    Fall                      W Sp Su F         W  Sp  Su F


           Fig.  3.  (Contd.)   Species richness of seasonal beach seine collections, 1976-1979.

-------
       Table 14.   Number of species collected (yearly total and
                  three-year total) by townet at the sampling sites.

       Site                      1976-77   1977-78   1978-79  Total
Kydaka Beach
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown-Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's Beach
14
18
20
25
25
20
25


11
16
11
20
20
19
15
19
23
18
21
11
18
14
13
17


23
28
22
34
31
31
30


site were generally the result of capturing juvenile individuals of demersal
species, usually rare in townet catches.

     Seasonal trends in species richness  are evident (Fig.  4).   Maxima
usually occurred in the spring, and occasionally in the summer and fall;
minima occurred in the winter.  The occurrence of high values in the spring
and summer represented the influx of larvae and juveniles into nearshore
surface waters.

     Seasonal trends in species richness  in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
paralleled the seasonal trends observed in northern Puget Sound (Miller
et al.  1977).  The number of species collected in the strait was generally
higher than the number of species collected in the San Juan Islands but
comparable to the number of species collected around Cherry Point and
Anacortes (see Miller  et al.  1977, for locations of northern Puget Sound
sampling sites).

4.3.3 Intertidal

     Species richness was higher on the rocky headlands  (Neah Bay, Slip Point,
Observatory Point) than on the cobble beaches (Twin Rivers, Morse Creek,
North Beach)  (Table 15, Appendix 6.5).  This is probably a result of the
predictability of the habitat—e.g., tidepools on rocky  headlands are
discrete and  persist for long periods of time  (at least  three years and
probably much longer) while  tidepools on cobble beaches  are  less well
defined and may change in size and  shape (or disappear altogether) several
times a year  after storms  (Cross, unpubl. data).

     Table 15 also presents  the number of transient species  collected at
each site.  On the rocky headlands  they were primarily juveniles of subtidal
cottids  (e.g., red Irish lord, buffalo sculpin, scalyhead sculpin) while on
the cobble beaches they also included juvenile flatfish  (English sole,  rock
sole) and larvae of schooling  species  (Pacific sand lance, Pacific herring).
On all beaches the transient species were encountered only infrequently.
                                      36

-------
    -






w   to
~~J

   14-1
    -
-
   20 -
   15 -
   10 -
   25
   20 _
   15 -
   10 _
    5 _
    0
                        Kydaka
                                               Gill  1976-77



                                                   1977-78
                                               1978-79
Winter    Spring   Summer     Fall
                       Twin  Rivers
                                                                                Pillar Ft,
       Winter    Spring   Summer     Fall                     Winter


      Fig.  4.   Species richness of tovmet collections, 1976-1979.
                                                               Winter    Spring    Summer    Fall
                                                                               Morse Creek
                                                                             Spring
                                                                            Summer
                                                                                              Fall

-------
,
,
    -
    -
    •
    .
    -
    -
    .
    ,
    .•
       25-1
       20-
       15-
       10-
       25_
       20.
       15.
       10.
                      Dungeness  Spit
                         Beckett Pt.
[UD 1976-77
    1977-78
                                                   1978-79
          Winter    Spring     Summer    Fall
                                                                           Jamestown-Port Williams


                    Winter   Spring    Summer    Fall
                                                                   Alexander's Beach
                                                                                    West Beach
          Winter     Spring     Summer     Fall                      W Sp Su F



          Fig.  4.  (Contd.)   Species richness  of  townet collections, 1976-1979,
                                     W  Sp  Su F

-------
         Table 15.  Number of resident and  transient species collected
                    at intertidal sampling  sites.  Data based on
                    abundance (numbers) of  fish collected over two
                    years of sampling (1977-1978).


                                   Number of            Number of
         site                  resident species     transient species

         Neah Bay                     16                     3
         Slip Point                   16                     3
         Twin Rivers                  n                     3
         Observatory Point            16                     6
         Morse Creek                   9                     5
         North Beach                   6                     9
 4.4  NEARSHORE FISH DENSITY

 4.4.1  Beach Seine

      The density of fishes (number of fish per m2)  at the exposed and
 moderately exposed sites exhibited marked seasonal  trends while at the
 protected sites the trends were less distinct (Fig.  5,  Appendix 6.3).
 Maximum densities at the most exposed sites (Kydaka Beach, Dungeness Spit)
 were recorded in the summer;  low values (< 0.2 fish per m2) typified the
 remainder of the year.   Schooling species (juvenile Pacific herring, Pacific
 sand lance)  were responsible  for the high summer densities.  (Seasonal trends
 at  the  exposed Whidbey  Island site,  West  Beach,  were not evident probably
 because of the limited  amount of data collected.)

      Densities at the moderately exposed  sites (Twin Rivers,  Morse Creek)
 were generally highest  in the summer and  occasionally in the fall.  Species
 responsible  for the  high densities were most  frequently demersal (rosylip
 sculpin,  English sole,  sand sole)  or pelagic  but associated with the bottom
 (redtail  surfperch)  and less  frequently,  small schooling species (surf
 smelt,  tube-snout).

     Densities  at  the most  protected sites were  always  among  the highest
 recorded.  Maxima occurred  in summer and  fall, and occasionally  in some
 winter  and spring collections.   The  high  densities resulted from large
 catches of demersal  species (Pacific staghorn  sculpin,  tidepool  sculpin,
 English sole)  and  small  schooling  species  (tube-snout,  shiner perch,
 Pacific tomcod).

     The highest densities recorded  during the study occurred at the most
 exposed sites and were the result of pure catches of either Pacific herring
 or Pacific sand lance.  The fact that large numbers of  these species were
not captured every summer at  the exposed sites reflects the patchy distribu-
 tion of the small schooling species and suggests a low probability of
capture under a quarterly sampling scheme.  The high densities at Beckett
Point, second only to those recorded at the most exposed sites, were more

                                      39

-------
         .1)0
               W
     Su
        1.50-
    •

        0.00
                      Twin Rivers
        1.50-,

        1.25-

        1.00.
              I
Morse Creek
Fig. 5.  Density of fish  (#  fish/m )  of  seasonal beach
         seine collections,  1976-1979.

                        40

-------
1.50-
1.25-
1.00.
0.75-
0.50.
0.25.
0.00
Dungeness Spit Sinking! (JJJj] 1976-77
CD 1977-78
1978-79

	 gsa ,, PI | 	 	 	 __. 	
!!i! bs! Ill .
W Sp Su F
2.16
1.50 -
^ 1.25-
CN
5 i.oo.
co
£• 0.75-
£ 0.50_
c
n
0.25 -
1.50-
1.25
1.00-
0.75_
0.50,
j
Dungeness
Spit



Iff
j Floating
H
l!il
1
Illllil
i
IB
1!
if
:
H
W Sp Su F
1.81
Jamestown-Port Williams



"1
0.25J
0.00
TOR
H cH i i
W Sp Su F
Fig. 5. (Contd.)  Density of fish (# fish/m ) of seasonal
                  beach seine collections, 1976-1979.

                         41

-------
                  Beckett Ft.  Sinking
       1.50JIH- 1.70
1.81
   1976-77

   1977-78

!H  1978-79
                 Beckett  Pt.  Floating
  m
   c
   0)
   o
       1.50
       1.25J

          j West     West     Alexander's
       1-°l ! Beach    Beach       Beach
           'Floating  Sinking
           WSSF   WSSF  WSSF
Fig. 5. (Contd.)  Density of fish  (# fish/m  ) of  seasonal
                  beach seine collections, 1976-1979.
                       42

-------
varied in composition.   The mixed catches of pelagic and demersal fish at
Beckett Point reflect the variety, and perhaps the quality,  of habitats at
that site.

     Both the seasonal trends and the magnitude of fish densities in the
Strait of Juan de Fuca were comparable to the seasonal trends and magnitudes
in northern Puget Sound (Miller  et al.  1977), although densities at Beckett
Point tended to be greater in spring than densities from similar habitats  in
northern Puget Sound.  Utilization of nearshore habitats by  demersal and
schooling species was similar in the strait and northern Puget Sound.
Schooling species were primarily responsible for the highest densities at
the exposed sites while demersal species were of equal, and  in some
instances greater, importance at the more protected sites.
       \

4.4.2  Townet
                                  3
      Fish densities (number per m ) in townet collections were highest in
the spring and summer (Fig. 6, Appendix 6.4), although at every site there
was considerable within-season variation between years.  The high densities
at all sites were a result of large catches of post-larval and juvenile
Pacific herring, and to a lesser extent, Pacific sand lance  and longfin
smelt.  While Pacific herring and Pacific sand lance occurred at all sites,
over 99% of the longfin smelt were collected at Pillar Point and Twin Rivers.
The apparent proximity of spawnimg grounds (suspected to be  the Pysht River
and East and West Twin Rivers) to the sampling sites probably accounts for the
localized occurrence of the longfin smelt.  Interestingly, longfin smelt
were captured only during the first two years of sampling; their absence in
the third year cannot be explained.

     The marked within-season variation between years may have been caused
by the patchy distribution of the fish, resulting in a low probability of
capture, or by variations in year class strength between years.  It is
therefore difficult to attach significance to these variations.

     Minimum densities (< 0.6 fish per m3) were recorded at all sites in
fall and winter.  Larval fish, which appeared in the water column in spring
and had reached the juvenile stage by summer, had largely disappeared from
the nearshore surface waters by fall.

     Unlike beach-seine collections, obvious trends in townet collections
between sites were largely absent—i.e., exposed sites exhibited densities
equal to or greater than the protected sites.  With the exception of the
previously discussed longfin smelt, the conclusion is that Pacific herring
and Pacific sand lance are not associated with particular habitats, but
probably wander freely along the shoreline using it as a nursery area, and
perhaps as a refuge from predation, during the spring and summer of their
first year of life.

     Fish densities in the Strait of Juan de Fuca tended to be greater than
densities in the San Juan Islands and around Anacortes but comparable to
densities recorded in the vicinity of Cherry Point  (Miller  et al.  1977).
                                      43

-------
    0.500


    0.400-


    0.300-


    0.200-


    0.100-
<  0.000_
•£        Winter
•H
<4-i
 -
=.
    0.500-1
    0.400-
    0.300-
    0.200-
    0.100-
    o.ooa
    Kydaka
                    Spring   Summer
    0.718
•f Twin Rivers
                 Fall
      Pillar Pt.
Winter    Spring
      0.757JTT.
  Morse
  Creek

                                                                                            :_.66
             U  1976-77
                 1977-78
                                                                              1978-79
Summer    Fall

       5.28
          Winter    Spring     Summer     Fall
                                         Winter    Spring   Summer     Fall
         Fig.  6.   Density (# fish/m ) of fishes  in  seasonal  townet  collections,  1976-1979.

-------
    0.500-


    0.400-


    0.300-


    0.200-


    0.100-
u  0.500-1
1
   0.400-


   0.300-


   0.200-


   0.100-


   O.OOO-DUffl
         Winter
     Dungeness  Spit
      :: -:
                    Spring    Summer    Fall
                          Beckett Pt.
Spring
                              Summer
Fall
                                                   Jamestown-Port  Williams
                                                                                    1976-77

                                                                                    1977-78
                                                                                    1978-79
                                               Winter   Spring    Summer
                                                                                                Fall
                                               Alexander's
                                                  Beach
                                           West Beach
                                                                  W Sp Su F
                                                                W Sp Su F
         Fig. 6. (Contd.)  Density  (# fish/m  )  of  fishes  in  seasonal townet collections, 1976-1979,

-------
     A marked difference between the Strait of Juan de Fuca and northern
Puget Sound was the virtual absence of threespine stickleback from collec-
tions in the strait.  In northern Puget Sound townet catches, stickleback
ranked second in occurrence, second or third in abundance, and in the top
ten in biomass, and occurred in all habitats from exposed to protected.  The
reason for its absence from the strait is unknown.  With the exception of
threespine stickleback, the composition of townet catches in northern Puget
Sound was quite similar to townet catches in the strait.

4.4.3  Intertidal

     Two types of habitat were sampled in the intertidal during low slack
water:  Tidepools and the beneath-rock habitats.  Intertidal fish densities
are presented as number of fish per m2 (tidepools) and number of fish per
rock (beneath-rock habitats) (Fig. 7, Appendix 6.5).  Sculpin were generally
the most abundant group in tidepools, followed by prickleback and gunnel
("blennies") and clingfish and snailfish ("others").  Prickleback and gunnel
were generally the most abundant groups in the beneath-rock habitat,
followed by cottids and others.  The occasional high densities of cottids
beneath rocks from late winter to early spring may have been spawning
aggregations (Cross, unpubl. data).

     The density of sculpin in tidepools was generally comparable among
sites.  The densities of blennies and others were similar at all sites
except North Beach where densities were consistently lower.  This is probably
a result of the paucity of hiding places beneath or among rocks in the tide-
pools at North Beach.  The intertidal at North Beach is heavily sedimented
during late winter and spring.   The sand may remain on the beach for months,
filling holes and crevices otherwise used by blennies and others, reducing
the available habitat and resulting in lowered fish densities.  Sand is
present on the other cobble beaches (Morse Creek, Twin Rivers) but accumula-
tions are neither as great nor do they remain as long as on North Beach.

     Densities of fish beneath rocks varied between sites; densities on the
rocky headlands were generally greater than densities on the cobble beaches.
This was most pronounced at North Beach where fish densities beneath rocks
never exceeded one per rock.  The abundance of sand on North Beach was
undoubtedly the cause of the low densities.

     Distinct seasonal trends in the density of fish in tidepools and
beneath rocks were largely lacking, although a few generalizations can be
made.  Sculpin tended to be more abundant in tidepools from late winter to
early summer, primarily because of an influx of juvenile sculpin from the
plankton.  The abundance of blennies in tidepools paralleled that of sculpin
for the same reasons but to a lesser degree.  The density of blennies
beneath rocks generally exhibited an increase from late winter to early
summer, again for the same reasons.
                                      46

-------
CO
   40 -i


   35 -


   30 -


   25 -
         Neah Bay
                              Slip  Pt.
4-1

«  15
0)
p
   10
    5 ^
         i i i  i i  i i i  r i  i
        N  J  M H J  S
      1977
1978
ill  i i i  i i  i i i  i
N  J   MM  J  S N

         197*9
                                                   IT
                                                                    i  i i  i i
                                             8-, Slip Pt.
                                     o
                                     o
                                     co
                                     •rH
                                     •H
                                     CO

                                     CD
                               IT7 II  I I I  I I  III
                              N  J  M  M J  S  N  J

                             1977         1978
                                                                       M  M  J  S N
                                                                           1979
        Fig. 7.  Density of fish  in  tidepools (// fish/m ) and beneath rocks
                 (# fish/rock) in intertidal collections, 1977-1979.
                 A.  Prickleback  and gunnel; B.   sculpin;  C.  other.
                                         47

-------
       Twin Rivers
                                        Observatory Pt.
                                                                      IT I I  I I 1
o
O
co
•H
•H
CO
c
0)
    81
    6-
    4-
    2-
       Twin Rivers
 N  J M  M  J  S  N  J  M M J  S 'N

1977          1978          1979
                                        Observatory Pt.
  i i i ! ;  IT i

 N  J "M M'

1977
                                                           i  r i i  i i  i i i  i i  i i  i i i

                                                             S  N  J   M  M J   S  N

                                                           1978             1979
       Fig. 7. (Contd.)  Density of fish in tidepools (# fish/m ) and beneath rocks
                         (# fish/rock) in intertidal collections, 1977-1979.

                         A.  Prickleback and gunnel; B.  Sculpin;  C.  Other.
                                         48

-------
        Morse Creek
    35-



    30-
CN

 ,6


 ,G


 •H
£  20-
TH
w

§  15H
Q


    10-



     5-
     0
                                                North Beach


                                                B
               I  i i i  i  iii
o
o
CO
C
QJ
Q
     6-
     4-
     2-
        Morse Creek

        B
                                             - North Beach
        i i i i  i
               i  i i i

        N  J M  M  J

       1977
n i i  i 1  I i I  I I  I r I  I

S  N  J   M  M  J  S  N

1978           1979
                                               A —
                                                III! 1 (II


                                                N.TMMJSNJMMJSN

                                                1977           1978            1979
       Fig.  7.  (Contd.)  Density of fish in tidepools (# fish/m ) and beneath  rocks

                         (# fish/rock) in intertidal collections, 1977-1979.

                         A.  Prickleback and gunnel; B.  Sculpin; C.  Other.
                                         49

-------
4.5  NEARSHORE FISH STANDING CROP

4.5.1  Beach Seine

     Seasonal trends in standing crop, although apparent, were not dramatic
(Fig. 8, Appendix 6.3).  At the most exposed sites (Kydaka Beach,  Dungeness
Spit), maximum biomass values were recorded in summer and fall and were
highly influenced by the presence or absence of neritic species (Pacific
herring, Pacific sand lance), and to a lesser extent by large demersal
species (sand sole) and neritic species (spiny dogfish).  Minimum biomass
values at the exposed sites occurred in winter and spring.

     Trends at the moderately exposed and protected sites were more varied.
High values were recorded in all seasons; however, low values occurred in
the winter (Morse Creek, Jamestown-Port Williams) or spring (Twin Rivers,
Beckett Point).  Contrary to the situation at the exposed sites, Pacific
herring and Pacific sand lance contributed little to the standing crop at the
moderately exposed and protected sites.  High standing crop values at these
sites were the result of large catches of small demersal species (juvenile
Pacific staghorn sculpin, tidepool sculpin, rosylip sculpin), large demersal
species (adult Pacific staghorn sculpin, starry flounder) or loosely
aggregating, pelagic species (shiner perch, redtail surfperch, striped perch).

     The lowest standing crop values  (< 2 g per m2) occurred at the most
exposed sites.  Low standing crop values, particularly in winter and spring,
were probably the result of high turbulence generated by storms and tidal
currents, and the homogeneous, low-relief character of the substrate.  Food
abundance and availability may also be reduced at such sites.

     Standing crop values were greater at the moderately exposed and protected
sites.  Within-season variations between years were common.  The highest
standing crop values were recorded at a moderately exposed site (Twin Rivers);
redtail surfperch, and to a lesser extent starry  flounder, sand sole, and
Pacific staghorn sculpin, were responsible for the high values.

     Standing crop values recorded in the Strait  of Juan de Fuca were
comparable to values recorded in northern Puget Sound  (Miller  et al.
1977).

4.5.2  Townet

     The standing crop of neritic fishes was usually greatest in summer;
large catches were occasionally recorded in spring and  fall  (Fig. 9,
Appendix 6.4).  Pacific herring generally contributed the most to the
standing crop at all sites.  Spiny dogfish, because of  their large size,
contributed greatly to biomass estimates at three sites—Pillar Point,
Dungeness Spit, and Jamestown-Port Williams.   Some species were locally
abundant and  contributed significantly  to biomass estimates:  Longfin
smelt at Pillar Point and Twin Rivers;  surf smelt at West Beach and Alexan-
der's Beach;  and shiner perch, striped  seaperch,  and pile perch at Beckett
Point.
                                       50

-------
                  6.0 .



                  5.0 -


                  4.0 -


                  3.0 -


                  2.0 -


                  1.0
                                          r^
Kydaka
                  0.0
                 25.0
                  .07
                               1976-77
                            ]  1977-78
                               1978-79
                       Winter   Spring  Summer    Fall
                                  Twin Rivers
20.0 -
(X
o
15.0 -
00
c
•1-t
10.0 -
4-1
5.0 "









n n -Ml








„ 	 !:!_


rr^-l


























1

— i

i
il











II







                  6.0 -


                  5.0 -


                  4.0 -


                  3.0 -


                  2.0 -


                  0.0
                       Winter  Spring   Summer    Fall
     Morse Creek
                       Winter  Spring   Summer    Fall
Fig.  8.   Standing crop (g fish/m )  of fishes  in seasonal beach seine
         collections,  1976-1979.  Note different scale for Twin Rivers,
                                    51

-------
                e
                00
               I


               ;

                :

               , i
               r
                      6.0

                     5.0-

                     4.0-

                     3.0-


                     2.0-

                     1.0-
                     0.0
           Dungeness, sinking
            m—n
                        Winter  Spring  Summer  Fall
                                      HIIII  1976-77


                                      II  1977-78

                                      H  1978-79
 6.0-

 5.0-

 4.0-

 3.0-

 2.0-

 1.0-
                                       JSIJ.
                     O.OT
                           Dungeness,
                           floating
10.76
(Scale reduced
   10-fold)
                        Winter  Spring  Summer  Fall
6.0-,

5.0-

4.0-

3.0-

2.0-

I.Q]

o.o
                         Jamestown-Port Williams
                                                     8.93
                         Winter  Spring Summer   Fall
                                         Q
?ig.  8.  (Contd.)   Standing  crop (g fish/m )  of fishes in seasonal beach seine
                  collections,  1976-1979.
                                   52

-------
                             Beckett Pt.  Sinking
               00
               :
                  11.OB ~ a.Mm  12.16
                   5.0
                   4.0
                   3.0

6.0-,

9.
JCTIM,
31". w 19.22
Beckett Pt.
1 Floating
1
4.0^
ram
3.0-
2.0-
1.0-
0.0 -



i~







(IpTTTir
Hi





	
i — LI. i
1













n 1
i







•i



!! — i



! I
a IH Li!
                        w
     Sp
                                     Su
                  6.0

                  5.0  -

                  4.0  -

                  3.0  -

                  2.0  -

                  1.0

                  0.0
n
                      .  7.92

                      a  West Beach Floating

                      b  West Beach Sinking

                      c  Alexander's Beach











                      WSSF   WSSF   WSSF
Fig. 8. (Contd.)  Standing crop (g fish/m2) of fishes in seasonal
                  beach seine collections, 1976-1979.

                                 53

-------
                                                                                    2.29
                                0.035
bO

   0.025
   0.020-
   0.015-
   o.oio-
   0.005 -I
   0.000.
                       Kydaka
      Winter   Spring    Summer    Fall

°-25~|  Twin Rivers
    0.20-
    0.15-
    0.10-
    0.05
    0.00
                                                                                         0.40
                                                           0.25
                                                           0.20 -
                                                           0.15-
                                                           0.10 -
                                                       0.05 -
                                                           0.00
                                                               Pillar Pt.
1976-77

1977-78

1978-79
                                                                 Winter   Spring    Summer    Fall
                                                                                         12.31
                                                                  Morse Creek

          Winter   Spring    Summer    Fall                     Winter    Spring    Summer

         Fig. 9.  Standing crop (g fish/m3) of fish in seasonal townet collections, 1976-1979.  Note
                  different scale  for  Kydaka.

-------
                           0.32—  0.29

                               JMHli  J.

U. ZD-
0.20-
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
0.00-
Dungeness Spit





|




]






J
-
  -
  '
  -
  :

  :

  •H
  t
  c
  "
  *J
  K
     Winter    Spring     Summer


                        0.92
                                           Fall
0.25-1
      0.20-
      0.15-
      0.10-
      0.05 -
     0.00
       Beckett Pt.
           *^:n   =
                                   0.37

                                  JMiJ,
                                                                            Jamestown-Port  Williams
                                                                                                           1976-77




                                                                                                          I 1977-78
                                                                                                        lililil 1978-79
                                                          Winter   Spring    Summer
                                                                                                   Fall
                                                                 1.50
                                                                               0.93
                                                                        Alexander's

                                                                           Beach
                                                                                              West Beach
                                                                    W S S  F
                                                                               W  S  S  F
  Winter   Spring    Summer     Fall


Fig. 9. (Contd.)  Standing  crop  (g fish/m3)  of fish in seasonal townet collections,  1976-1979.

-------
     Because of the patchy distribution of neritic fishes, and consequently
their unpredictable occurrence in townet catches, some minimum standing crop
values occurred in all seasons.  The within-season variations between years
reflect this situation—e.g., standing crop values recorded in the summer
were often as low as, or lower than, values recorded in the winter.

     The other extreme is illustrated by the summer 1977-78 catch at Morse
Creek.  In two tows, more than 120,000 juvenile Pacific herring weighing
nearly 300 kg were captured, which obviously exerted a substantial influence
on standing crop estimates.

     Nevertheless, standing crop values recorded in the Strait of Juan de
Fuca were generally comparable to standing crop values recorded in northern
Puget Sound by Miller  et al.  (1977).  Standing crop values at the exposed
sites in northern Puget Sound were not as high as at the protected sites,
but this trend was not apparent in the Strait of Juan de Fuca.  In both areas
the sporadic occurrence of large individuals (e.g., spiny dogfish, starry
flounder, and Pacific staghorn sculpin) often contributed significantly to
standing crop estimates.

4.5.3  Intertidal

     Standing crop values in tidepools exhibited marked variations and no
consistent seasonal pattern  (Fig. 10, Appendix 6.5).  Sculpin and blennies
were responsible for maxima in standing crop, but at different times of the
year.  The others, usually lower in biomass than either sculpin or blennies,
occasionally exhibited high standing crop values.  There were no  apparent
differences in the magnitude of standing crop between the rocky headlands
and cobble beaches, although the composition of the fauna was often different.

     Standing crop beneath rocks was generally dominated by blennies; sculpin
and others contributed less to standing crop, but were usually equally repre-
sented.  There were no consistent seasonal patterns in standing crop.  Unlike
the tidepool situation, there were  differences in the magnitude of standing
crop between the rocky headlands and cobble beaches; standing crop values
were generally lower on the  cobble  beaches.  This is exemplified  by North
Beach which had the  lowest standing crop of any  site.  As previously men-
tioned,  the reason for the low beneath-rock values was the high sediment
accumulations which  reduced  the amount  of available habitat,  and  consequently
the standing crop of the  fishes.

4.6  OCCURRENCE OF FIN ROT, LESIONS, TUMORS, AND PARASITES

     No  fin rot, lesions,  or  tumors were observed on any  species  of fish
collected in the Strait of Juan de  Fuca during the  three  years of study.
Five English sole  (70-182 mm TL) from beach-seine collections and one  English
sole  (112 mm TL) from townet  collections at Alexander's Beach and West Beach
 (August  and October  1977) had  skin  tumors  (epidermal papillomas). The tumor
incidence, however,  was less  than one percent in collections  with tumored
fish.  No fin  rot or lesions were encountered on any species  collected on
Whidbey  or Fidalgo Islands  in  1977-78.
                                      56

-------
     Neah  Bay
                                                Slip Pt.
60
^x



O


o


60
C
70 -



60 -



50 -



40 -



30 -



20 -



10 .
 0 -I
     NJMMJ  S'NJMMJSN

   1977      1978              1979
                                        35 -,  glip Pt.
                                        30
                                     a  «,-  i
                                     o  25 -
                                     S-l
                                     o
                                     M
                                     o

                                     00
                                     c
                                     •H
                                     13
                                     CO
                                        20 -
                                          15 -
                                       10 -
                                        5 -
                                            NJMMJ   SNJMM   JSN

                                           1977      1978               1979
   Fig,  10,  Standing crop of fishes in  tidepools  (g fish/m ) and beneath

             rocks Cg fish/rock) in intertidal  collections, 1977-1979.

             A. Prickleback and gunnel;  B.  Sculpin;  C.  Other.
                                     57

-------
        Twin Rivers

        B
 O.
 o
 t-l
 o

 60

•H
•O
                             Observatory Pt.
35 -i

30 -
/-*x
•o 25 -
o
M
3 20-
p.
o
B 15 -
60
i io -
4J
m 5 -


0
Twin Rivers f^
\
\
| \
i
I
1
A !
M '
\
i \
i \ >
1 \ \ »
Al \ i ;\

B^- //v/ 'i \ 1 /A^" v*
C "* O~ •// .-\/ \ is | / ; v
^._^j" 	 ^r-^L^S^x' V
fli ii i i I i f i I 1 Til i i r i t i i TT
NJMMJSNJ M M J & H
                                             ~  Observatory Pt.
       1977
1978
1979
 i i I  I i i  i i  i—r i i 1 t—i • i i ii
MJ   SNJMMJSN
  1978            1979
     Fig. 10. (Contd.) Standing crop of  fishes  in tidepools  (g fish/m )  and
                       beneath rocks (g  fish/rock)  in intertidal collections,
                       1977-1979. A. Prickleback and gunnel;  B. Sculpin;
                       C. Other.
                                         58

-------
         Morse Creek
                                            North Beach
e
CO
P.
o
GO

•H
13
(3
cfl
70-


60-


50-


40'


30-


20-


10-


 0
          I I I  i i
                  IT
         Morse Creek
                                            North Beach

^^
ii
o
o

CO

o.
o
o

c
•H
C
n)






30-
25-


20-



15-


10-

5-

n



li
\
\
\
\

\
\
*

\
\
\ A
/A * c
v^\/-^i^>/)^r

(Iffi iiiii i i i i 1 11111 Illk
NJMMJSNJMMJS
1977 1978 1979 1













C
BSsu Ai /
A — '^>c-/5£^-

i i i i i i i i I i
N J M M J
977 19
                                                               SNJMMJS
                                                               8             1979
     Fig. 10.  (Contd.)  Standing crop of fishes in tidepools (g fish/m ) and
                        beneath rocks (g fish/rock) in intertidal collections,
                        1977-1979.   A.  Pricklebacfc and gunnel; B. Sculpin;
                        C.  Other.
                                         59

-------
             Table  16 .  Summary of parasitized  fish caught by beach  seine  during  the  three  years of  study.
ON
o
Life history Number
Species stage parasitized Station
Long fin smelt
Cutthroat trout
Chinook salmon
Pacific tomcod

Redtail surfperch

Striped seaperch




Penpoint gunnel
Padded sculpin
Silverspotted sculpin

Buffalo sculpin



juvenile
adult
adult
juvenile
juvenile
adult
adult
adult
adult
juvenile
adult
adult
adult
juvenile
juv /adult
adult
adult
juvenile
juv/ adult
juvenile
1
1
1
1
3
4
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
I
4
1
2
1
2
8
Dungeness Spit
Pt. Williams
Dungeness Spit
Beckett Pt.
Morse Ck.
Twin Rivers
Twin Rivers
Beckett Pt.
Morse Ck.
Twin Rivers
Dungeness Spit
Twin Rivers
Pt. Williams
Dungeness Spit
Twin Rivers
Pt. Williams
Jamestown
Beckett Pt.
Twin Rivers
Morse Ck.
Season
spring
spring
spring
winter
winter
winter
winter
spring
spring
winter
winter
winter
spring
winter
winter
spring
summer
winter
summer
winter
Year
76-77
77-78
76-77
77-78
78-79
76-77
78-79
76-77
76-77
76-77
77-78
78-79
77-78
77-78
76-77
77-78
76-77
77-78
78-79
78-79
Parasite
copepod
leech
cestode
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copppod
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
nematodes
copepod
leech
copepod
Location
external
external
intestine
external
gill chamber
external
external
external
external
external
external
external
external
external
external
external
intestine
external
external
gill chamber

-------
Table 16.  (Contdr>
Life history Number
Species stage parasitized Station
Sharpnose sculpin


Pacific staghorn
sculpin


Cabezon
Great sculpin
Tidepool snailfish
English sole
Sand sole
juvenile
adult
adult
juvenile
adult
adult
adult
adult
adult
adult
juvenile
juvenile
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
Pt. Williams
Pt. Williams
Morse Ck.
Twin Rivers
Twin Rivers
Beckett Pt.
Beckett Pt.
Beckett Pt.
Pt. Williams
Pt. Williams
Pt. Williams
Kydaka Beach
Season
summer
fall
winter
winter
spring
spring
fall
spring
spring
fall
summer
spring
Year
77-78
77-78
77-79
76-77
77-78
77-78
77-78
77-77
77-78
77-78
78-79
77-78
Parasite
copepod
copepod
copepod
nematode
copepod
copepod
nematode
copepod
leeches,
copepod
copepod
copepod
copepod
Location
gill chamber
external
gill chamber
intestine
external
external
intestine
external
external
gill chamber
external
external

-------
     The summary of parasitized fish caught by beach seine is  presented in
Table 16.  Nineteen species in eight families were found with  parasites;  the
incidence of parasitism exceeded one percent (in a sample) only once.   The
incidence of internal parasitism is not considered representative since only
a small proportion of each catch were dissected.  The incidence of external
parasites is probably also underestimated because only those individuals
having conspicuous parasites were discovered during processing.

     Parasitized fish occurred at all sites in all seasons but were most
frequently encountered in winter and spring.  External parasitic copepods
were observed most often because of their high visibility.  Copepods were
found on fishes possessing a variety of modes of life:  Schooling species
(longfin smelt, Pacific tomcod)', aggregating species (redtail surf perch,
striped seaperch), and a variety of demersal forms (sculpins and flatfish).

     Few parasites were observed in the intertidal fish collections (Table 17) .
The low incidence of external parasites may be a function of a small
surface area of the potential hosts (the two parasitic copepods observed
were in the gill chambers), or possibly the fact that intertidal fish, which
are highly thigmotactic, dislodge external parasites during their close
contact with the substrate.

Table 17.  Summary of parasitized fish from intertidal collections
           during 1977 and 1978.
Species
 Number
infested
Station
                                               Date
Parasite  Location
Rosylip sculpin,
  adult

Saddleback sculpin,
  juvenile

Ringtail snailfish,
  juvenile
          Observatory  Winter 1978  Copepod
             Point

          Slip Point   Winter 1978  Copepod
          Morse Creek  Winter 1978  Copepod
                                 Gill
                                 chamber

                                 Gill
                                 chamber

                                 Gill
                                 chamber
4.7  DETECTING CHANGES IN FISH ABUNDANCE AND BIOMASS AFTER A PERTURBATION

     One of  the primary objectives of most baseline surveys is  to provide
information  (composition, abundance, biomass, etc.) about a community  that
will enable  researchers to  detect alterations caused by subsequent perturba-
tion (e.g.,  an oil  spill).  The  first step toward  the  goal of providing
reliable pre-perturbation information is the assessment of the  variability
of the baseline data.  Our  approach in  this study  is based on statistical
hypothesis testing  of data  fitting a normal distribution.  For  example,  if
one is interested in testing  for differences between the means  of two  samples,
a null hypothesis is constructed  (expressing no  difference between means) as is
an alternative hypothesis  (expressing a difference between means).   Knowing
the variance of the two sample distributions allows a  comparison of  the  two means
statistically.  The objective criterion for rejecting  the null  hypothesis  in
                                       62

-------
a statistical test is the significance level (denoted by a),  which is
generally a probability of 0.05.   Occasionally, a true hypothesis will be
rejected; this is called Type I error and occurs with a frequency of a.
Alternatively, if the null hypothesis is actually false, the test may not
detect it and one accepts a false hypothesis, which is called Type II error
(denoted by B).   The power (1-B)  of a statistical test is the probability of
rejecting the null hypothesis when it is in fact false and should be rejected
(Zar 1974).  In this study, power was used to answer the following question:
After an oil spill, what is the probability of detecting a change in the
number or biomass of the fish at a particular site in a particular season?
Number and biomass were chosen because they are easily measurable with the
techniques employed in this study and because communities respond to
perturbations with changes in these parameters.

     The number and biomass of fish caught seasonally at a particular site
over the three years of the study represented the distribution of the catches.
The data were transformed by taking the logarithm to homogenize the variance.
Mean and standard deviations of the transformed data were calculated.  The
next step in computing power was to make two assumptions:  (1) The result of
an oil spill would be a decrease in the number and biomass of fish at the
affected site; and (2) the variance of the catches would not change before
and after the oil spill.  The first assumption is reasonable; the second is
more open to question.  Finally, a series of hypothesized post-perturbation
catches  (number and biomass) were constructed.  The hypothesized values
corresponded to decreases of 50%, 75%, 90%, and 95% of  the mean number and
biomass of catches at a particular site in a particular season recorded
during this study.  For example, if the mean number of  fish caught at Twin
Rivers in the winter for all three years was 100, the hypothesized mean
abundances after an oil spill were 50, 25, 10, and 5  (these values were
assumed to be the mean of several sets and were log transformed before
calculating power).  Recalling the assumption ojE equal_variances, this
results in two normal distributions with means Xi and X2 and variance  Si
(}il corresponds to the mean of the six sets completed during this study and
X2 corresponds to  the mean of several sets made after an oil spill).  The
null hypothesis was that there was no difference between Xj and X2;  the
alternative was that there was a difference.

     Power was calculated  (Sokal and Rolf 1969) for number and biomass at
every site in every season for the beach-seine and townet  data  (Tables 18,
19).  The  tidepool data were not amenable to  this operation because  the
sampling design did not permit estimates of number and  biomass for  the
intertidal collections as  a whole. _An  important point  to  bear in mind when
analyzing  the results is that when Xi and X2  are close,  the ability  to detect
differences,  i.e., power,  is reduced.

4.7.1  Beach  Seine

     The probability of detecting  decreases  of  75% or more in numbers  and
biomass  during any season  at a particular site was fairly  high.  For numbers
it was generally  high in summer,  fall,  and winter  collections;  for  biomass
it was high  in summer and  fall collections.   Spring was the most variable
 (greatest  range  of probabilities)  season for  both numbers  and biomass,
probably because  of  the  influx of  fish  into  shallow water.

                                      63

-------
 Table 18.   The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis  that  there  has  been
            no decrease in numbers or biomass in beach seine  collections when  in
            fact the null hypothesis is false,  i.e.,  there has  been a decrease.
            The decrease is percent decrease from the mean numbers and biomass
            of fish collected during the three years  of the study.   Blanks
            indicate insufficient data for the analysis.
Season
            Site
    Biomass (% decrease)
             S = sinking
             F = floating
                            50%
        75%
        90%
95%
  Numbers (% decrease)
50%    75%    90%    95%
Spring  Kydaka Beach
        Twin Rivers
        Morse  Creek
        Dungeness Spit (S)
        Dungeness Spit (F)
   Jamestown - Port Williams
        Beckett Point (S)
        Beckett Point (F)

Summer  Kydaka Beach
        Twin Rivers
        Morse  Creek
        Dungeness Spit (S)
        Dungeness Spit (F)
   Jamestown - Port Williams
        Beckett Point (S)
Fall
     Kydaka Beach
     Twin Rivers
     Morse  Creek
     Dungeness Spit (S)
     Dungeness Spit (F)
Jamestown - Port Williams
     Beckett Point (S)
     Beckett Point (F)
Winter  Kydaka Beach
        Twin Rivers
        Morse  Creek
        Dungeness Spit (S)
        Dungeness Spit (F)
   Jamestown- Port Williams
        Beckett Point (S)
        Beckett Point (F)
                          ,770
                          .064
                          .028
                          .040
                          .152
                          .023
                          .019
                          .056

                          .788
                          .363
                          .743
                          .468

                          .095
        .999    .999   .999
        .397    .919   .999
        .174    .636   .905
        .224    .712   .941
        .560    .956   .999
        .117    .456   .752
        .119    .512   .826
        .312    .832   .980

        .999    .999   .999
        .962    .999   .999
        .999    .999   .999
        .984    .999   .999
        .386
       .855  .981
         .405
         .722
         .038
         .026
         .038
         .397
         .026
         .670

         .012
         .999
         .883
         .227

         .417
      ,965   .989   .999
      ,913   .999   .999
      ,302   .867   .992
      ,215   .767   .970
      ,174   .564   .841
      ,851   .996   .999
      .251   .844   .989
      .999   .999   .999

      .109   .560   .883
      .999   .990   .999
      .999   .999   .999
      .883   .999   .999

      .946   .999   .999
.705
.979

.824
.212

.421

.433
.947
.000
.149
.009
.258
.176
.999   .999  .999
.999   .999  .999

.999   .999  .999
.699   .988  .999

.967   .999  .999

.966   .999  .999
.999   .999  .999
.000   .999  .999
.716   .997  .999
.066   .359  .695
.819   .999  .999
.791   .999  .999
                                                             .599
                                                             .295

                                                             .145
                                                             .127
                .997
                .875

                .595
                .472
             .999
             .999

             .974
             .908
.999
.999

.999
.999
                                                             .305   .898   .999   .999
                                                          .797   .999
                                                          .712   .999
                                                          .992   .999
                                                          .195   .552
                                                          .233   .871
                                                          .034   .508
                                                          .258   .900
                       .999   .999
                       .999   .999
                       .999   .999
                       .925   .999
                       .999   .999
                       .946   .999
                       .999   .999
                                       64

-------
Table  19 .   The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis that there has been
            no decrease in numbers or biomass in townet collections when in fact
            the null hypothesis is false,  i.e.,  there has been a decrease:  the
             decrease is percent decrease from the mean numbers and biomass of
            fish collected during the three years of the study.  Blanks indicate
            insufficient data for the analysis.
Season
Site
  Biomass (% decrease)
50%    75%    90%    95%
            Numbers  (% decrease)
         50%     75%    90%    95%
Spring




Kydaka Beach
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown- Port Williams

Beckett Point
.037
.044
.081
.176
.149
.047
.026
.309
.Ilk
.386
.684
.674
.425
.179
.887
.805
.883
.983
.992
.963
.666
.994
.976
.990
.999
.999
.999
.927
.006
.192
.079
.051
.082
.140
.149
.063
.595
.386
.184
.460
.614
.742
.401
.955
.883
.528
.946
.983
.998
.761
.998
.990
.791
.999
.999
.999
Summer    Kydaka Beach      .056
          Pillar Point      .024
          Twin Rivers       .003
          Morse  Creek      .001
          Dungeness Spit    .005
   Jamestown- Port Williams .367
          Beckett Point     .003

Fall      Kydaka Beach      .119
          Pillar Point      .015
          Twin Rivers       .011
          Morse  Creek      .017
          Dungeness Spit    .012
   Jamestown-- Port Williams .156
          Beckett Point     .000

Winter    Kydaka Beach      .032
          Pillar Point      .071
          Twin Rivers
          Morse  Creek        -
          Dungeness Spit
   Jamestown--Port Williams .047
          Beckett Point     .012
                      ,326   .853   .986
                      ,099   .352   .622
                      ,047   .371   .758
                      ,005   .026   .071
                      ,034   .212   .492
                      .948   .999   .999
                      .024   .218   .492

                      .618   .988   .999
                      .049   .305   .583
                      .038   .138   .284
                      .053   .164   .312
                      .102   .512   .844
                      .692   .994   .999
                      .001   .006   .021
                             .127   .618
                             .006   .036
                             .005   .050
                             .000   .001
                             .834   .999
                             .152   .742
                             .001   .003

                             .532   .993
                             .043   .274
                             .016   .062
                             .017   .061
                             .048   .413
                             .066   .367
                             .000   .003
                      ,145
                      ,198
                      .166
                      .051
             .448
             .484
             .488
             .203
.782
.719
.752
.413
.066
.156
.050
,057
.302
.375
.201
.076
,986   .999
.187   .421
.319   .666
.003   .009
.999   .999
.998   .999
.027   .095

.999   .999
.811   .978
.230   .444
.209   .401
.955   .999
.883   .991
.023   .081

.782   .962
.722   .900
.587  .849
.245  .444
                                        65

-------
     Decreases of 90% or greater in numbers and biomass should be  detectable
at virtually every site in summer, fall, and winter; spring again exhibited
the most variation but all probabilities exceeded 0.50.

     On the whole, changes in numbers would be easier to detect than changes
in biomass.  The rare occurrence of large Individuals in the catches,
although not greatly influencing numbers, drastically affects biomass.

     The most consistent site in terms of variability of numbers and biomass
of the catches between seasons was Twin Rivers.  This was reflected in the
consistently high probability of detecting changes in all seasons.  It is
somewhat surprising when one considers the high number of large fish
(primarily redtail surfperch and Pacific staghorn sculpin) that occurred in
the catches in every season.*  The most variable sites were Morse Creek and
Dungeness Spit, but their variability was only moderate and only in winter
and spring.

4.7.2  Townet

     Because of the great variability of numbers and biomass in the townet
catches, it would be difficult to detect a decrease of 90% or less in .any
season at any site.  In the most extreme case, over 120,000 Pacific herring
were caught in two tows during summer 1977 at Morse Creek, but in other
years less than 100 fish were caught per haul.  The probability of detecting
a change after an oil spill based upon catches of such great variability
is very small.

     Of all the seasons, spring catches were the most consistent in numbers
and biomass; therefore, the probability of detecting a decrease was greater
and more consistent than in other seasons.  Winter catches were relatively
consistent, primarily because of the low number and biomass of fish caught.  The
fact that many winter tows did not yield any fish resulted in the exclusion
of three sites from the analysis—interpretations based on limited data are
themselves of limited value.  Summer and fall catches were quite variable,
particularly at Morse Creek and Beckett Point.  Of all the sites, Jamestown-
Port Williams exhibited the most within-season consistency throughout the
year in both numbers and biomass.

     The overall conclusions of the power analysis are:   (1) The beach-seine
data are better than the townet data for detecting decreases in numbers and
biomass of the fish after an oil spill.  However, even the change in
beach-seine data (numbers or biomass) must in general be 75% or more.
(Townet data changes must in general be 95% or more.)  (2) With the
beach-seine data it is easier to detect changes in numbers than in biomass,
and decreases are more difficult to detect in the spring than in other
     *Twin Rivers is a very complex site.  The fishes collected there are
characteristic of the wide variety of habitats present (rocky intertidal,
kelp beds, sand flats) and probably move into the shallow lagoon (sampling
area) in search of  food and/or refuge.  The attractiveness of this
site to fishes in summer and fall may be related to the high densities of
Crustacea inhabiting the algal fragments and terrestrial plant detritus
that accumulate in the lagoon.
                                     66

-------
 seasons.  (However, for townet data, spring is the season when a change is
 most likely to be detected.)

 A.8  MACROINVERTEBRATES

      A total of 191 species of macroinvertebrates was identified from the
 1976-1978 nearshore fish collections (Appendix 6.6).  There was an increase
 in the number of species collected in 1977-78.  The 1976-77 collections took
 83 species by beach seine and 77 species by townet, whereas the beach seine
 yielded 92 species and the townet 95 species in 1977-78.  Decapod crustaceans,
 amphipods, and gastropod molluscs constituted the most diverse taxa collected,
 followed by isopods, mysids, polychaetes, euphausiids, and other less common
 taxa.   Abundance data for the macroinvertebrates are included in Appendix 6.7.

      Beach-seine samples consisted of demersal and shallow-water epibenthic
 species,  whereas townet samples contained pelagic as well as epibenthic
 invertebrates.   Asteroids,  an echinoid,  and the majority of the crab species
 were taken only by the beach seine.   Euphausiids, an ophiuroid, chaetognaths,
 bryozoans, and  the majority of the cephalopods were collected exclusively by
 the  townet.   Amphipods, isopods,  and shrimp were commonly collected by both
 net  types.

     Errantiate polychaete  worms  were collected by both  net types—five
 species by beach seine and  ten species by townet.  Two nereid species and an
 unidentified  polychaete species were collected by both.

     The  parasitic isopod Argeia  pugettensis was found parasitizing Crangon
 stylirostris.   Other bopyrid isopods were found parasitizing Crangon
 alaskensis, Heptacarpus pictus, _H.  taylori,  and Pagurus  granosimanus.
 However,  the  overall amount of parasitism was  low and  occurred mainly in
 spring.

     The  differences in species composition between 1976-77 and 1977-78
 (Tables 20a,b)  are difficult to interpret as no definite trends are apparent
 in the  data,  particularly since in many  instances it was not possible to
 obtain  invertebrate  samples.   In  addition,  species of  gammarid amphipods are
 not  comparable  between years  because in  1977  only the obvious gammarid
 amphipod  species were  recorded (the  rest  being identified only to family),
 whereas in 1976  they were more thoroughly identified.

     Some  of the species that  were found  both  years were not always  found at
 the  same  sites.  Other taxa were  much more widely distributed  in 1977-78 than
 in 1976-77, especially shrimp  and euphausiids.  For example,  euphausiids were
 found almost exclusively in  townet samples  from Pillar Point  in 1976-77  but
were found at several  locations in 1977-78  (Appendix 6.7).

     Species richness  in 1976-77  collections generally increased from west
 to east.  Data for 1977-78, however, indicate  comparable  species richness
values at all sites, except Beckett Point, Port Williams, and Whidbey Island
where richness was nearly twice that of the  other  sites  (Table  21).   These
comparisons should not be considered quantitative, however, because of the
grouping of the two  gear types and the effect of missing  data points,
especially with the  townet.   Seasonal species richness values for 1976-77

                                     67

-------
Table 20a. Number of macroinvertebrate species collected seasonally by beach seine during nearshore
           fish sampling along the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Whidbey Island,  May 1976 - February
           1978.   NS = not sampled.
Site
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
GO Dungeness Spit
Jamestown*
Port Williams*
Beckett Point
Alexander's Beach
West Beach
Spring
(May)
1976 1977
3
7
15
12
19
NS
35
NS
NS
2
5
3
3
NS
17
26
5
17
Summer
(August)
1976 1977
3
10
10
13
8
NS
15
NS
NS
9
8
8
7
NS
20
13
10
15
Autumn
(October)
1976 1977
NS
1
6
9
NS
NS
7
NS
NS
4
7
12
NS
NS
12
17
6
NS
Winter
(Dec. - Feb.)
76-77 77-78
6
5
13
11
NS
NS
22
NS
NS
NS
5
5
5
NS
15
15
9
3
     *As a result of sampling difficulties at Jamestown in 1977,
      operations were shifted to Port  Williams  in 1978.

-------
     Table 20b. Number of macroinvertebrate species collected seasonally by townet  during nearshore fish
                sampling along the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Whidbey Island, May 1976 - February 1978.
                NS = not sampled.
1C
Site
Kydaka Beach
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown*
Port Williams*
Beckett Point
Alexander's Beach
West Beach
Spring
(May)
1976 1977
NS
16
5
11
11
8
NS
6
NS
NS
11
24
11
19
16
NS
21
10
13
17
Summer
(August)
1976 1977
NS
7
8
4
17
10
NS
1
NS
NS
6
2
4
3
7
NS
9
1
10
6
Autumn
(October)
1976 1977
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
16
NS
NS
NS
NS
12
12
2
16
11
NS
11
5
14
11
Winter
(Dec. - Feb.)
76-77 77-78
12
NS
17
13
23
8
NS
NS
NS
NS
5
14
NS
NS
3
NS
9
NS
17
17
         *As a result of sampling difficulties at Jamestown in 1977,
          operations were shifted to  Port Williams in 197.8.

-------
Table 2J.. Total number of macroinvertebrate species, according to general taxonomic group, collected
          during nearshore fish sampling,  May 1976 - February 1978, along the Strait of Juan de Fuca
          and Whidbey Island.
Decapods
Site 76-77 77-78
Kydaka Beach 4
Pillar Point 5
Twin Rivers 13
Morse Creek 14
^, Dungeness Spit 14
0
Jamestown** 26
Point Williams** —
Beckett Point 29
Alexander Beach
West Beach
12
9
13
19
14
—
32
29
18
16
Gastropods
76-77 77-78
0 4
0 2
0 0
3 1
0 1
0
6
8 9
3
5
Amphipods,
isopods
76-77 77-78
8 6
5 11
9 8
14 11
20 8
13
13
12 5
11
12
My s ids,
euphausiids
76-77 77-78
4 4
11 5
11 5
8 4
10 4
6
8
0 5
6
13
Misc.
Groups
76-77 77-78
3 5
3 14
2 4
0 6
6 4
7
12
7 8
12
10
Total // of
species
76-77 77-78
19
24
35
39
50
52
—
56
—
""" "
31
41
30
41
31
—
71
56
50
56
% Total #
of species*
76-77 77-78
15
19
28
31
40
41
—
44
—
"
21
28
20
28
20
—
48
38
34
38
     *Total species, 1976-77, 126; total species, 1977-78, 148.
    **As a result of sampling difficulties at Jamestown in 1977,
      operations were shifted to Point Williams in 1978.

-------
 exhibited a minimum in fall and a maximum in spring.   Data for 1977-78
 exhibited a maximum in spring and similar numbers of  species  through the
 other seasons.   There were no consistent  seasonal trends  in species  richness
 based on habitat,  exposure, or geographical location.   The spring maximum
 may be a result of species moving inshore to reproduce, since the greatest
 number of gravid females was encountered  in spring samples.

      Although the  data are not quantitative, macroinvertebrate abundance
 and biomass for both beach-seine and  townet catches appear to peak in fall
 and winter.   Size  frequency distributions pooled  by season of collection
 were plotted for the most common species  (Appendix 6.8).

 4.9  FOOD WEB RELATIONSHIPS

      Stomach contents were analyzed from  specimens of  nearshore fish collected
 by  beach seine  and townet in August 1978  and from intertidal  collections
 during January  through August 1978.   Sixty-two  fish species were included in
 these analyses  (Appendix 6.9).   Of the  1,754 stomachs  examined,  304  (17.3%)
 were empty,  providing a sample size of  1,450 stomach samples  containing food
 material.

      A summary  of  the prey spectra for  fishes collected in 1978 is included
 in  Appendix  6.10;  prey spectra for fishes  collected in previous  years  were
 included in  Simenstad  et al.  (1977), for  1976-77 and  in  Cross   et al.  (1978),
 for 1976-1978.   The  following discussions  of trophic structure,  annual and
 seasonal variation,  and diet  overlap with  documented invertebrate communities
 are based on  the combined results of the  three  years of investigations.

 4.9.1  Functional  Feeding Groups of Predominant Nearshore  Fishes

      Thirty-six species  of  nearshore fish  occurred  commonly or  abundantly
 enough  along  the Strait  of  Juan  de Fuca to be categorized  into  functional
 feeding groups  (Table 22).  The  neritic assemblages (those characteristically
 caught  in the townet)  are evenly divided among  obligate planktivores  (i.e.,
 those which exclusively  exploit  pelagic prey organisms) and facultative
 planktivores  (i.e.,  those which  have prey  spectra including both  pelagic  and
 epibenthic prey organisms).  Although the  sampling  design  for fish collections
 could not verify such  an  interpretation, it  might be assumed  that the  obligate
 planktivores—Pacific  herring, Pacific sand  lance,  and pink salmon—tend  to
 feed  throughout the  surface waters, while  the facultative  planktivores—
 chinook  salmon, surf  smelt, and  longfin smelt—may be more concentrated in
 shallow water along  the shoreline where epibenthic organisms are more
 available.

     We were able  to distinguish several feeding  groups in the rocky and
 cobble intertidal, which  includes the tidepool habitats characteristic of the
rocky headlands  (Slip Point, Observatory Point, and Neah Bay)  and cobble
beaches  (Morse Creek, Twin Rivers, and North Beach).  In some cases the
results from the beach-seine collections made adjacent to cobble beaches
 (Twin Rivers and Morse Creek), when compared with sites without adjacent
cobble, indicate those species which probably originate from the cobble
habitat.  Fifteen species were evenly divided among obligate epibenthic
planktivore, facultative epibenthic planktivore,  and facultative benthivore

                                     71

-------
Table  22.    Functional  feeding groups  of  36 species  prominent  in  the near-
                shore  fish  assemblages characterizing  the  Strait  of  Juan de  Fuca
                (L = larvae,  J  = juvenile,  A  =  adult).
Habitat:
Neritic
Feeding
mode:
Obligate
planktivore
Predator
species:
(life history
stages)
Pacific herring L,J
Pacific sand lance
L,J,A; pink salmon J
Principal prey taxa:
Calanoid copepods,
larvaceans, crustacean
and fish larvae,
hyperiid amphipods
                              Facultative
                              planktivore
           Gravel, sand/
           eelgrass, and
           mud/eelgrass
           littoral and shallow
           sublittoral
Obligate
epibenthic
planktivore
           Rocky and
           cobble littoral
                             Facultative
                             epibenthic
                             planktivore
                             Facultative
                             benthivore
                             Omnivore
Obligate
epibenthic
planktivore
                             Facultative
                             epibenthic
                             planktivore
                             Facultative
                             benthivore
                   Chinook  salmon J;
                   surf smelt L,J,A;
                   longfin  smelt L,J
Chum salmon J; long-
fin smelt J,A; Pacific
tomcod J; walleye
pollock J; tube-snout
A; sturgeon poacher J,
A; shiner perch J,A;
striped seaperch J,A;
redtail surfperch J,A:
sand sole J

Padded sculpin J,A;
Pacific staghorn
sculpin J,A; rough-
back sculpin A
                      Calanoid copepods,
                      larvaceans, crustacean
                      and fish larvae,
                      hyperiid amphipods,
                      shrimp, drift insects,
                      ostracods, harpacti-
                      coid copepods, mysids

                      Harpacticoid copecods,
                      gammarid amphipods,
                      sphacromatid isopods,
                      mysids, cumaceans,
                      shrimp, calanoid
                      copepods, tanaids.
                   Rock  sole J; English
                   sole  J; starry
                   flounder A
                                                Buffalo  sculpin J,A
                      Harpacticoid copepods,
                      gammarid amphipods,
                      polychaete annelids,
                      gastropods, crabs,
                      shrimp, mysids

                      Polychaete annelids,
                      gammarid amphipods,
                      isopods, harpacticoid
                      copepods, holothur-
                      oideans

                      Algae, gammarid
                      amphipods, polychaete
                      annelids, sphaero-
                      natid  isopods

Sharpnose sculpin J,A; Harpacticoid copepods,
tidepool sculpin J,A;  gammarid amphipods,
saddleback sculpin     sphaeromatid isopods
J,A; fluffy sculpin J,
A; tidepool snailfish
J,A

Northern clingfish     Harpacticoid copepods,
J,A; smoothhead scul-  gammarid amphipods,
pin J,A; rosylip scul- polychaete annelids,
pin J,A, silverspotted isopods, gastropods,
sculpin J,A; mosshead  crabs, shrimp
sculpin J,A

High cockscomb J,A;    Polychaete annelids,
black prickleback J,A; gammarid amphipods,
.rock prickleback J,A;  isopods, harpacti-
penpoint gunnel J,A;
crescent gunnel J,A
                                                                      coid copepods, inci-
                                                                      dental algae
                                                    72

-------
feeding groups.  No obligate benthivores—i.e., fish preying exclusively on
benthic organisms—were identified.  In all cases, the utilization of
epibenthic crustaceans—harpacticoid copepods, gammarid amphipods, isopods—
was common to all feeding groups.  Taxonomically, the epibenthic planktivores
were sculpin (Cottidae), snailfish (Liparidae), and clingfish (Gobiesocidae),
whereas the benthivores were prickleback (Stichaeidae) and gunnel (Pholidae).

     Fishes characterizing intertidal and shallow subtidal gravel (sampled
by beach seine), sand, and mud habitats have been put in four feeding
categories; however, many of these species are found in more than one
habitat.  The majority (10 of 17) of these fishes can be described as
obligate epibenthic planktivores—i.e., those species that feed almost
exclusively on crustaceans inhabiting the water column immediately above the
bottom.  Three other species are also epibenthic planktivores but have more
catholic feeding modes which include benthic organisms in their  diet.   Only
three species, all flatfish (Pleuronectidae), were true benthivores and even
they fed facultatively since epibenthic crustaceans also appeared as important
components in their diets.  One species, buffalo sculpin, might be considered
an omnivore because of the importance of algae (especially Ulva) in its diet;
this phenomenon has been reported in too many other regions to be incidental
(Miller  et al.  1977; Fresh  et al.  1979).  As in the intertidal feeding
groups, no obligate benthivores were identified.

4.9.2  Variations in Diet Spectra of Predominant Nearshore Fish

     When considering the importance of various prey organisms to fishes or
when documenting the relative flow of organic carbon through a portion of the
marine food web, the researcher should give some thought to the variability
in trophic linkages.  Such variability involves temporal (seasonal and annual)
fluctuations in prey populations as well as spatial (habitat) differences in
the relative abundance or productivity of prey populations.  An assessment
of variability will also indicate the general predictability of prey in a
particular habitat.   Because of the sampling design used in the MESA baseline
studies, most.nearshore fish species were not consistently available for
stomach analyses over the three years of quarterly sampling.  Seasonal,
annual, and between-habitat variability in diet was described for some
species in Cross  et al.  (1978).  Stomach samples were not retained on a
seasonal basis in 1978.  Stomach samples from 14 species were retained from
August 1978 collections.   We have utilized the prey composition (frequency
of occurrence,  numerical composition, gravimetric composition, and percent-
age of total IRI) of these coinciding samples to provide indications of
variability in the diets of the nearshore fish communities in the Strait of
Juan de Fuca.  Because of the low sample sizes in some species and the bias
associated with a single "point sample" representing a three-month season,
these examples should be considered only as illustrations.

     The prey composition of the most abundant neritic fish—juvenile Pacific
herring—substantiates its grouping with the obligate planktivores (Table 23).
There was no instance over the three-year collection at five townet sites
in which calanoid copepods were not overwhelmingly the predominant prey
organism.  Only in one sample—1978, Port Williams—did the percentage of the
total IRI drop below 90%, and crustacean larvae became important.  Annual
dietary overlap, measured by Sanders' Index of Affinity, was over 95% in

                                     73

-------
 Table  23,   Prey composition  of  juvenile Pacific herring  during three years
             of MESA collections  for August 1976, 1977,  1978.   F,0. - freq-
             uency occurrence, N,C.  = numerical composition,  G.C,  = gravi-
             metric composition,  %  IRI - percent total Index  of Relative
             Importance.
Prey              % F.O. % N.C. % G.C. 7. IRI   % F.O. % N.C. % G.C. % IRI   % F.O. % N.C. Z G.C. I IRI
Jamestown/Port Williams
Calanoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Mysids
Gammarid amphipods
Crustacean larvae
Morse Creek
Calanoid copepods
Caridean shrimp
Hysids
Gammarid amphipods
Crustacean larvae
Polychaete annelids
Ostracods
Cumaceans
Hyperiid amphipods
Brachyuran crab larvae
Pillar Point
Calanoid copepods
Ostracods
Euphausiids
Hyperiid amphipods
Crustacean larvae
Twin Rivers
Calanoid copepods
Ostracods
Euphausiids
Hyperiid amphipods
Crustacean larvae
Kydaka Beach
Calanoid copepods
Ostracods
Euphausiids
Hyperiid amphipods
Unidentified detritus
1976 (n-3) 1977 (n
100.00 99.26 99.66 99.82 6.67
33.33 0.74 0.34 0.18 6.67
6.67
6.67

1976 (n=5) 1977 (n
100.00 99.90 99.89 99.98
20.00 0.10 0.11 0.02 (All
-15)
93.75 98.94 96.34
1.56 0.35 0.96
3.13 0.35 1.74
1.56 0.35 0.96

=20)

contents
unidentifiable)














1976 (n=4) 1977 (n=20)
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 60.00




1976 (n-8) 1977 in
100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
(All
100.00 100.00 100.00




-25)
197B
28.



14.
1978
100.

90.
70.
70.
10.
50.
50.
50.
10.
(n,
57



29
(n<
00

00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1978 (n
80.
70.
20.
10.
10.
00
00
00
00
00
= 7)
68.



31.
=10)
96.

1.
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
=10)
96.
3.
0.
0.
0.

63



37

00

05
43
85
37
62
37
16
16

27
56
10
02
05

60



39

94

1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0

99
0
0
0
0

.71



.29

.45

.13
.60
.17
.15
.03
.03
.03
.39

.48
.05
.46
.01
.01

78



21

97

1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

98
1
0
<0
<0

.55



.45

.73

.01
.37
.36
.18
.17
.10
.05
.08

.34
.58
.07
.00
.00
1978 (n-10)
90.00
contents
unidentifiable)


1977 (n
100.00






-30)
100.00 100.00 100.00




100.
10.
20.
10.
00
00
00
00
1978 (n
100.
100.
60.
40.
10.
00
00
00
00
00
95.
3.
0.
0.
0.
-10)
91.
8.
0.
0.
0.
38
95
52
13
02

19
30
33
16
02
95
0
4
0
0

99
0
0
0
0
.65
.24
.09
.02
.01

.48
.28
.18
.02
.04
97
2
0
0
<0

95
4
0
0
<0
.35
.37
.26
.02
.00

.51
.30
.15
.04
.00
                                      74

-------
 seven of nine comparisons and over 75% in the other two (Table 24).  Similarly,
 dietary overlap was very high in August collections at the five sampling sites*
 (Table 25).

      Juvenile chinook salmon was the only salmonid collected consistently at
 any site over the three years, and then only at Beckett Point.  In contrast
 to the Pacific herring, this facultative neritic planktivore indicated some
 variability among the prominent prey organisms composing its diet in the
 three years (Table 26).  Sample sizes in 1976 and 1978, however,  restrict the
 applicability of these comparisons.   Polychaete annelids and crustacean
 (brachyuran crab) larvae predominated in the prey spectrum in 1976; dipteran
 insects, shrimp, and ostracods predominated in 1977;  and insects  and nereid
 polychaetes predominated in 1978.   Dietary overlap was thus quite low during
 the three years (Table 24).   The surprising consistency in the contribution
 of drift insects suggests that these food items may be a much more predictable
 and abundant food resource than has  been thought.

      As  one of   many obligate epibenthic planktivores  occurring in several
 habitats along  the strait,  juvenile  Pacific tomcod illustrated considerable
 annual and  between-habitat  variability  in prey composition (Tables 24,  25,
 27).   Samples  from Morse Creek and Dungeness Spit  indicated that  mysids and
 gammarid amphipods were alternately  important  prey, but when available,
 calanoid copepods were also  preyed on.   Annual prey overlap values,  therefore,
 were  less than  50% and between-habitat  overlap values  were less than 15%.
 The August  1978  collections  at  these  two sites and at  Beckett Point indicated
 that  different  prey may constitute the  major dietary item in different
 habitats  at the  same time.   Despite  the importance of  mysids and  gammarid
 amphipods at Dungeness Spit  and  Morse Creek, respectively,  hippolytid shrimp
 completely  dominated the  prey spectrum  at  Beckett  Point.   As will be pointed
 out later,  hippolytid  shrimp,are one  of  the  most important  epibenthic organisms
 available to fish at Beckett  Point (Simenstad   et  al.  1980.).

      Northern clingfish were  one of the most common species  in the intertidal
 collections, especially  in cobble habitats.  Sample sizes  from August
 collections in specific habitats were not  large enough  to  provide between-
 habitat comparisons.   Prey spectra from  the  combined stomach samples  in each
 year  indicated some  variability  among the  three most important  prey  taxa—
 sphaeromatid isopods,  acmaeid limpets, and gammarid amphipods—which  resulted
 in  low indices of dietary overlap (Tables  24,  28).  Despite  the greater
 potential similarity between  the August intertidal samples as  opposed to
 combined annual samples,  the dietary overlap was actually  10%  lower between
 the August samples, reflecting the almost complete absence of  acmaeid
 limpets in the diet  in 1978.

     Rosylip sculpin were present in comparable collections  for the last
 two years of the study.  Unlike northern clingfish, rosylip  sculpin had very
 similar dietary compositions in the two years because of the apparent
 specificity toward gammarid amphipods (Table 29).  Although  the dietary
overlap was almost 85% in the two years' samples, the overlap in the August
collections was appreciably less (Table 24); the low sample size for August
1978 may have contributed to this difference.
                                     75

-------
Table 24.  Year-to-year overlap  (Sanders'  Index of Affinity)  between the diet
           compositions (pooled  over year) of twelve prominent nearshore fish
           species along the Strait of Juan de Fuca.  Unless  otherwise noted,
           all samples are from  August collections, 1976, 1977, 1978.
Pacific herrinp
Jamestown - Port Williams
Morse Creek
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Kydaka Beach
(x)
Chinook salmon
Beckett Point
Pacific tomcod
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
1976 vs 1977
96.52
—
100.00
—
(98.26)
6.90
15.80
—
1977 vs 1978
78.53
—
98.34
—
95.51
(90.79)
27.97
48.67
—
1976 vs 1978
78.53
97.73
98.34
97.35
(92.99)
4.93
41.59
9.73
 Northern clingfish
 All tidepool                          66.32
 August tidepool

 Rosylip sculpin
 All tidepool
 August tidepool                       —

 Silverspotted sculpin
 Twin Rivers                           84.61

 .Sharpnose sculpin
 All tidepool
 August tidepool

 Staghorn sculpin
 Beckett Point                         12.80
 Morse Creek                           37.64
 Jamestown - Port Williams             20.25
 Twin Rivers                           34.54
             (x)                       (26.06)
 Tidepool sculpin
 All tidepool                          82.39
 August tidepool                       —
 Jamestown - Port Williams ,  August
               (x)
 Redtail surfperch
 Twin Rivers                           78.73
 40.95
 33.71
 84.20
 63.89
 86.21
 45.98
 15.45
 40.59
 63.27
 16.34
(26.06)

 49.38
 24.96
 13.84
(29.39)

 67.02
41.69
 2.24
 4.25
13.48
14.61
(ff.65)

39.94
54.35
                                       76

-------
Table 24. (Contd.)
                                  1976 vs 1977   1977 vs 1978   1976 vs 1978
High cockscomb
All tidepool
August tidepool

English sole
Jamestown -  Port Williams
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Kydaka Beach
             (x)
Starry flounder
Kydaka Beach
 72.92
 47.34
 32.65
 27.53
 19.75
 55.49
(36.55)
 35.11
 23.20
 54.37
 74.42
 57.89
 40.59

(56.82)

  2.22
 34.79
 78.26
  7.13
 53.82
 19.96
(39.79)
Sand sole
Dungeness Spit
Morse Creek
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
(x)

20.40
—
59.23
83.92
(54.52)

11.12
31.63
2.24
92.84
	 [34.461

78.75
—
26.67
92.10
f 65. 841
                                     77

-------
Table 25.
Geographical Overlap (Sanders' Index of Affinity) between the diets
of five nearshore fish species at sampling sites along the Strait of
Juan de Fuca in August 1976, 1977, and 1978.
Pacific herring, juvenile


Jameptown -
Port Williams

Morse Creek

Pillar Point


Twin Rivers




1976
1977
1978
1976
1978
1976
1977
1978
—
1978
U)
Morse Pillar Twin
Creek Point Rivers
99.82 99.82 99.82
96.34
78.91 78.55 78.55
99.98 99.98
97.90 97.54
100.00

99.00


(89.37) (94.52) (95.82)
Kydaka
Beach

96.34
78.55
—
95.72
__
100.00
97.16

98.05
(94.30)
Pacific tomcod, juvenile


Beckett Point
Morse Creek




1978
1976
1978
(x)
Morse
Creek
0.31



Dungeness
Spit
0.85
11.86
13.66
(8.79)
                                     78

-------
Table 25.  (Contd.)
Staghorn sculpin
Beckett Point
Morse Creek
Jamestown -
Port Williams

James town -
Port Williams
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit

1976
1977
1978
1976
1977
1978
1976
1977
1978
U)

1976
1977
1978
1976
1977
1978
1976
1977
1978
1976
1977
1978
(x)
Morse
Creek
4.39
23.88
21.61

(.16.63)
English
Twin
Rivers
31.57
4.98
7.13



(14.56)
Jamestown
Point Williams
27.20
50.53
19.10
7.69
23.92
2.25
(21.78)
sole, juvenile
Morse Dungeness
Creek Spit
9.16 8.22
25.56 34.89
32.82 2.23
69.99 51.93
32.70 11.02
7.13 58.57
49.95
47.41
1.99

(29.561 f29.58)
Twin
Rivers
23.42
18.25
24.96
0.00
31.78
11.25
13.49
16.75
7.90
(16.42)

Kydaka
Beach
7.81
15.93
51.65
33.05
52.08
58.39
61.30
56.98
(42.15)
                                     79

-------
Table 25.  (Contd.)
                          Sand sole, juvenile
Dungeness Spit
Morse Creek
Twin Rivers
1976
1977
1978
1977
1978
1976
1977
197R
(x)
Morse
Creek
64.64
9.03

(36.84)
Twin
Rivers
73.13
24.64
86.84
44.63
50.17
(55.88)
Kydaka
Beach
40.40
10.68
21.36
17.64
53. -90
42.19
6.79
43.97
(29.62)
                                   80

-------
Table 26.  Prey composition of juvenile chinook salmon during three years
           of MESA collections  August 1976, 1977, 1978.  F.O. * frequency
           occurrence, N.C. = numerical composition, G.C, « gravimetric com-
           position, % IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey % F.O. 7. N.C. % G.C. % IRI
Beckett Point 1976 (n=4)
Syllid polychactes 25.00 46.91 70.54 53.98
Polychaete annelids 50.00 3.70 13.88 16.16
Brachyuran crab larvae 25.00 17.28 6.21 10.80
Larvaceans 25.00 16.05 0.18 7.46
Fish 25.00 8.64 4.63 6.10
Caridean shrimp 25.00 1.23 3.10 1.99
Insects 25.00 1.23 3.10 1.99
Nematodes 25.00 2.47 0.43 1.33
Cammarid amphipods 25.00 2.47 0.30 1.27
Dipteran insects
Natantian shrimp
Ostracods
Potamogetonaceae (plant)
Calanoid copepods
Hyperiid amphipods
Coleopteran insects
Mysids
Brachyrhynchan crab
larvae
Cumaceans
Hymenopterans
Nereid polychaetes
Chlorophyta (algae)
Hymenopteran insects
Arachnid insects
Unidentified algae
% F
.0.
1977 (n

66
5

11

11

66
88
83
77
16
27
11
5
5

5
5
5




5

.67
.56

.11

.11

.67
.89
.33
.78
.67
.78
.11
.56
.56

.56
.56
.56




.56
% N.C.
=18)

2.20
0.04

0.09

0.22

3.29
50.15
28.49
11.93
0.79
1.81
0.13
0.04
0.09

0.00
0.04
0.04




0.04
X G
.C.
y. IRI
X F.O.
X N.C.
X C
.C.
Z IRI
1978 (n-5)

5
0

24

0

9
22
21
10
3
0
0
0
0

<0
0
0




<0

.67
.15

.14

.46

.78
.94
.21
.91
.55
.44
.42
.25
.04

.00
.02
.02




.00

3.68
<0.01

1.89

0.05

6.34
45.54
29.03
12.45
0.51
0.44
0.04
<0.01
<0.01

<0.00
<0.00
0.00




<0.00

40.00
20.00



100.00


60.00





20.00





40.00
40.00
20.00
20.00


1.88
2.50



18.13


42.50





1.25





24.38
7.50
0.63
1.25


5
0



43


10





1





24
10
1
0


.59
.99



.45


.90





.53





.77
.36
.81
.60


2.38
0.56



49.06


25.53





0.44





15.66
5.69
0.39
0.30

                                   81

-------
Table 27.  Prey composition of juvenile Pacific tomcod during three years of
           MESA collections, August 1976,  1977, 1978,   F.O.  = frequency occur-
           rence, N.C. = numerical composition, G.C.  = gravimetric composition,
           % IRI - percent total Index of  Relative Importance.
Prey
Beckett Point
Hippolytid shrimp
Tanaids
Gammarid amphipods
Polychaete annelids
Crangonld shrimp
Morse Creek
Mysids
Calanoid copepods
Gammarid amphipods
Cumaceans
Hippolytid shrimp
Gammaridae
Harpacticoid copepods
Caridean shrimp
Atylldae
Eusiridae
Tanaids
Ostracods
Polychaete annelids
Insects
Brachyrhynchan crabs
Dungeness Spit
Gammarid amphipods
Sphaeromatid isopods
Cumaceans
Molluscs
Idoteid isopods
Mysids
Caprelllid amphipods
Ostracods
Caridean shrimp
Oedocerotldae
Brachyrhynchan crab larv.
Harpacticoid copepods
Unid. debris
Pleuronectidae
Hippolytid shrimp
Eusiridae
Phojiocephalidae
Calllanassid shrimp
Oedicerotidae
Valvlferan isopods
Cancrid crabs
% F.O.
X N.C.
% G.
c.
% IRI
% F.O. X N.C. % G.C. % IRI Z F.
0.
% N.C.
% G.C.
H IRI
1978 (n=19)
1976 (n-6)
66.67
50.00
66.67
16.67











9.65
83.11
6.58
0.66











75.
11.
13.
0.











10
28
23
39











48.
40.
11.
0.











26
31
28
15











1976 (n-15)
86.67
53.33
46.67
6.67
20.00
6.67
6.67
13.33
13.33
6.67
6.67
6.67
6.67








78.25
5.52
7.14
0.32
0.97
3.57
0.32
0.65
0.65
0.97
0.65
0.65
0.32








38.
8.
3.
39.
3.
4.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.








79
14
33
97
21
07
50
23
21
11
32
01
11








85.
6.
4.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.








81
16
14
27
71
43
10
10
10
06
05
04
02








100.00 67.42
5.26 0.76
5.26 0.76
5.26 30.30
5.26 0.76
1977 (n-7) 1978 (n-10)
14.29 3.85 18.83 4.52
30.
42.86 88.46 62.34 90.19 60.
40.
14.29 7.69 18.83 5.29
10.
20.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.

00
00
00

00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1978 fn
81.

9.


90.
9.






9.
9.
18.
18.
9.
9.
9.
9.
92

09


91
09






09
09
18
18
09
09
09
09

66.67
11.67
6.67

1.67
5.83
0.83
0.83
1.67
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
•11)
13.30

0.28


78.95
0.28






0.28
0.55
3.88
1.11
0.28
0.55
0.28
0.28
98.63
0.01
0.05
0.01
1.30

0.28
42.36
11.97

23.94
0.18
9.21
3.68
2.76
1.84
1.84
0.92
0.92
0.09

2.23

0.02


52.06
0.02






32.31
11.86
0.13
0.04
1.23
0.04
0.06
0.02
98.94
0.02
0.03
0.95
0.06

30.16
48.67
11.19

3.85
1.81
1.51
0.68
6.67
0.40
0.40
0.26
0.26
0.14

9.26

0.02


86.85
0.02






2.16
0.82
0.53
0.15
0.10
0.04
0.02
0.02
                                   82

-------
Table 28,  Prey composition of northern clingfish during three years of MESA
           collections, August 1976, 1977, 1978.  F,0, * frequency occurrence,
           N.C, = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimetric composition, % IRI
           = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
All tidepool
Sphaeromatid Isopods
Acm.icid limpets
Cammariil amphipods
Unid. gastropods
Idotcjd isopods
Unid. debris
Ostracods
Fishes
Ischnocliiconidae
Hippolytid shrimp
Unid. isopods

Harpacticoid copepods
Polychaece annelids
Crapsid crabs
Cancrid crabs
Sabellarid polychaetes
Littorine snails
Pagurid crabs
August tidepool
Acmaeid limpets
Sphaeromatid isopods
Gammarid amphipods
Barnacle cirri
Idoteid isopods
Bangiales
Mopaliidae
Crustacean larvae
Hesogastropoda
Polychaete annelids
Balanidae
Nemerteans
Harpacticoid copepods
Valviferan isopods
Ulotrichales
Pagurid crabs
X F.O. % N.C. % G.C. Z IRI X F
.0. 2 N.C. X G.
C.
Z IRI
1976 (n=U8) 1977 (n-102)
36.44 32.47 21.80 46.36 33
25.42 19.32 23.43 25.48 28
33.05 20.13 3.90 18.62 48
15.25 6.82 2.40 3.30 7
6.78 1.62 14.93 2.63 10
6.78 1.46 6.83 1.32 3
8.47 3.90 0.04 0.78 3
2.54 0.49 5.59 0.36 1
1.69 0.32 4.83 0.20 0
0.85 0.16 2.94 0.06
1.69 1.14 0.08 0.05
0.85 1.46 0.01 0.03 5
.33
.43
.04
.84
.78
.92
.92
.96
.98


.88
4.90
7.84
1.96
3
3
3
1
.92
.92
.92
.96
1977 (n=
53
30
46
30
15
7
7
15
7
7
7
7



.85
.77
.15
.77
.38
.69
.69
.38
.69
.69
.69
.69



16.08
11.54
37.76
2.27
2.62
1.22
1.22
0.35
0.17


1.75
11.36
1.40
0.35
0.70
2.27
1.40
0.35
-13)
23.75
30.00
20.00
8.75
3.75
1.25
1.25
2.50
2.50
1.25
1.25
1.25



12.
24.
5.
0.
17.
1.
0.
3.
1.


0.
0.
2.
9.
8.
0.
0.
1.
61.
12.
2.
0.
6.
10.
4.
0.
0.
0.
92
80
80
35
93
02
01
07
29


03
03
02
36
02
12
39
59
26
49
27
02
57
34
04
38
11
11
0.65
0.16






21.
22.
46.
0.
4.
0.
0.
0.
0.


0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
60.
17.
13.
3.
2.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.



32
79
16
45
89
19
11
15
03


23
23
59
42
38
21
15
08
38
25
56
56
09
18
54
29
26
26
19
14



X F.O. %
N.C. 2 G.C. * IRI
1978 (n-47)
25.53
40.43
40.43
4.26

6.38


2.13


14.89
2.13
2.13

10.64
8.51
6.38
197B (n=
12.50
25.00
37.50

12,50



12.50



37.50
12.50
12.50
12.50
2.07
5.89
3.26
0.24

0.56


0.08


1.83
79.62
0.08

3.11
0.40
0.32
10)
2.04
16.33
26.53

4.08



6.12



36.73
4.08
2.04
2.04

6.40
50.69
1.97
17.28

0.01


2.16


0.02
9.03
1.47

0.37
3.48
4.44
0.01
25.20
2.83

63.45



1.33



0.04
3.85
1.78
1.48

6.90
72.98
6.75
2.38

0.12


0.15
f

0.88
6.02
0.11

1.18
1.05
0.97
0.55
22.22
23.56

18.07



1.99



29.52
2.12
1.02
0.94
                                    83

-------
Table 29,  Prey composition of rosylip sculpin during two years of MESA
           collections, August 1977, 1978,  F,0, - frequency occurrence,
           N,C. = numerical composition, G,C. = gravimetric composition,
           % IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
All tldepool
Gammarid amphipods
Sphaeromatic Isopods
Idoteid Isopods
Polychaete annelids
Pagurid crabs
Unidentified decapods
Oxyrhynchan crabs
Carldean shrimp
Hippolytld shrimp
Mysids
Cumaceans
Nereid polychaetes
Hydroids
Pinnotherid crabs
Gnathostomata
Brachyrhynchan crabs
Unld. flabelliferan
isopods
Gammaridae
Fish larvae
August tidepool
Gammarid amphipods
Sphaeromatid isopods
Idoteid Isopods
Crustacean larvae
Cottldae
Carldean shrimp
Unidentified debris,
sand, and algae
Polychaete annelids
Crangonld shrimp
Canxnaridae
Myslds
Pagurid crabs
Fishes
Unidentified decapods
Oxyrhynchan crabs
% F.
1977
63.
32.
15.
15.
8.
2.
4.
3.
3.
0.
3.
1.
0.
0.
0.





0. %
(n=
79
76
52
52
62
59
31
45
45
86
45
72
86
86
86





N.C.
116)
65.27
11.98
3.14
2.84
1.65
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.60
4.34
1.20
0.30
0.15
0.15
0.15





% G

11
7
28
18
4
7
2
2
2
4
0
1
2
1
1





.C.

.71
.27
.53
.30
.71
.28
.40
.49
.52
.49
.02
.96
.78
.60
.68





% IRI

75.49
9.69
7.56
5.04
0.84
0.33
0.22
0.18
0.17
0.12
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.02





1977 (n=107)
65.
30.
5.
0.
2.
2.

3.
5.
1.
3.
42
84
61
93
80
80

74
61
87
74
2.80
1.
I.
1.
1.
87
87
87
87
16.73
7.85
0.60
69.70
0.14
0.14

0.19
0.37
0.09
0.37
0.93
0.09
0.28
0.09
0.09
14
21
13
0
10
9

4
2
5
1
6
2
1
1
1
.80
.70
.77
.43
.98
.77

.69
.06
.63
.12
.14
.34
.56
.55
.39
63.30
27.97
2.47
2.01
0.96
0.85

0.56
0.42
0.33
0.17
0.27
0.14
0.11
0.09
0.08
% F.O.
1978 (n
50.00
16.67
2.38
21.43





2.38





9.52

7.14
4.76
2.38
z N.C. :
-42)
55.86
11.72
0.69
14.48





3.45





2.76

2.07
1.38
3.45
Z G.

19.
12.
6.
20.





5.





27.

0.
0.
6.
C.

71
34
46
14





13





08

75
41
79
X IRI

71.17
7.55
0.32
13.98





0.38





5.35

0.38
0.16
0.46
1978 (n-12)
66.67







16.67

16.67





66.67







8.33

5.56





22.







00







6.75


1.09










70.77







3.01

1.33





Unidentified flabelliferan
Isopods
Brachyuran crab larvae
Tanalds


















16.67
8.33
8.33
5.56
2.78
2.78
0.44
1.09
0.02
1.20
0.39
0.28
                                    84

-------
     The single comparison available for silverspotted sculpin—August 1976
and 1977 samples from Twin Rivers—illustrated high dietary overlap (almost
85%) due to the relatively constant proportions of mysids and gammarid
amphipods  (Tables 24, 30).

     Variability in the prey composition documented for sharpnose sculpin in
intertidal collections showed a trend consistent with that shown by rosylip
sculpin—i.e., high dietary overlap (85%) for the combined annual samples
but considerably less for the August samples (Tables 24, 31) because the
principal prey taxa, gammarid amphipods and sphaeromatid isopods, were
reversed in importance.

     Staghorn sculpin is one of the most widely distributed and commonly
encountered nearshore fishes along the Strait of Juan de Fuca.  The important
prey taxa were seldom consistent either between years (Tables 24, 32) or
between habitats (Table 25) and dietary overlap values were generally less
than 50%.  The highest annual dietary overlap values, though not considered
significant, were in the 1977 and 1978 samples at Jamestown-Port Williams.
The opportunistic use of patchily distributed, large prey organisms—fishes
(seaperch, sand lance, flatfish), shrimp, crabs, and mysids—is probably the
reason for such high variability.  Low sample sizes may have biased the
estimate of this variability .

     Tidepool sculpin, a common sculpin in all intertidal and some beach-
seine collections, ate mostly epibenthic crustaceans.  Prey taxa often varied
between samples (Table 33); for example, while gammarid amphipods were
equally important in the combined tidepool samples for 1976 and 1977,
harpacticoid copepods contributed more to the total prey composition in 1978.
Whether this reflects a general increase in availability of harpacticoid
copepods over the three years or a bias of the sampling design cannot be
answered without quantitative samples of epibenthic zooplankton during these
years.  The importance of harpacticoid copepods is even more pronounced in
the August 1978 tidepool collections and 1978 Port Williams beach-seine
collection.  In both cases the increased importance of harpacticoid copepods
resulted in even lower diet overlap values (Table 24) than for the combined
annual tidepool collections.

     Redtail surfperch were consistently caught over the three years only at
Twin Rivers.  While gammarid amphipods dominated the prey composition in all
three years, their relative importance declined between 1976-77 and 1978
with increased contribution by flabelliferan isopods (Table 34).  It is
impossible to determine whether or not this increased utilization reflects
actual increased availability of flabelliferan isopods.

     High cockscomb were chosen as representative of the facultative benthi-
vores of the intertidal rocky headlands and cobble habitats.  While prey
compositions for combined intertidal collections in 1976 and 1977 were
similar (Tables 24, 35), 1978 collections were less so because of the
decreased representation of nemerteans and increased contribution of poly-
chaetes.  This was further examplified in the comparison between 1977 and
1978 August tidepool collections which had a dietary overlap value of 23.20%.
Similar to the diet of tidepool sculpin, harpacticoids were more important
in 1978 than in 1976 or 1977.

                                      85

-------
Table 30.  Prey composition of  silverspotted sculpin during two years of
           MESA collections, August  1976,  1977.   F.O, » frequency occur-
           rence, N.C. = numerical composition,  G,C, « gravimetric
           sition, % IRI = percent total  Index of Relative Importance.
Prey

X F.
0.
Twin Rivers 1976 (n
Mysids
Gammarid

amphipods
Idoteld Isopods
Caridean
Crangonid
shrimp
shrimp
80.
80.
20.
20.
10.
00
00
00
00
00
3! N
.C.
Z G
.C.
X IRI
-10)
68
13
1
14
1
.03
.93
.64
.75
.64
48
10
1
15
23
.57
.82
.67
.08
.87
76.
16.
0.
4.
2.
29
20
b4
88
09
Z F.O. Z N.C. Z C.C. Z IRI
1977 (n-7)
85.71 53.85 64.31 68.41
57.14 46.15 35.69 31.59



  Table 31.  Prey composition of sharpnose  sculpin  during two years of
             MESA collections, August 1977,  1978.   F.O.  = frequency occur-
             rence, N.C. = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimetric com-
             position, % IRI = percent total  Index  of Relative Importance.
            Prey              7. F.O. Z N.C. % C.C. Z IRI   Z F.O. Z N.C. % C.C. Z IRI
All tidepool
Canunarid amphipods
Sphacronatid isopods
Dlptcran insects
Harpaccicoid copepods
Idoteld Isopods
Cumaceaas
Asellotan Isopods
Polychaete annelids
Ostracods
Unidentified gastropods
August tidepool
Gammarid amphipods
Sphaeronatid isopods
Harpacelcoid copepods
Ostracods
Unidentified debris,
sand, and algae
1977
60.
52.
22.
16.
9.
6.
4.
3.
1.

1977
56.
47.




(n-61)
66
46
95
39
84
56
92
28
64

(«
52
83




38.15
23.99
9.25
20.23
2.02
2.02
1.16
0.58
1.73

i-23)
68.50
30.71




41.30
45.53
3.78
0.84
5.20
0.09
0.50
1.13
0.02


79.98
19.60




52.
39.
3.
3.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.


77.
22.




29
57
24
75
77
15
09
06
03


68
27




1978 (n-26)
57.
42.
23.
15.
15.




3.
1978
22.
11.
11.
11.

11.
69
31
OS
38
38




85
(n
22
11
11
11

11
30.94
17.27
15.83
12.95
19.42




0.72
•9)
25.00
12.50
37.50
12.50

12.50
44.46
31.97
0.95
0.12
18.71




3.17

1.90
95.24
0.95
0.95

0.95
56.96
27.28
5.07
2.63
7.68




0.20

23.71
47.48
16.95
5.93

5.93
                                     86

-------
Table 32,  Prey composition of sta,ghorn sculpin during three years of MESA
           collections, August 1976, 1977, 1978.  F,0. - frequency occurrence,
           N.C. = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimetric composition,
           %IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
Beckett Point
Fishes
Atclccyclid crabs
Crangonid slirimp
Hippolytid shrimp
Pandalid shrimp
Pleocyemata
Grapsid crabs
Pcrciformes
Cancrid crabs
Carldean shrimp
Unid. detritus
Flabelliferan isopods
Nematodcs
Gammarid amphipods
Embiotoeid fishes
Brachyrliynchan crabs
Mysids
Tanaids
Potamogetonaceae
Bivalves
Majid crabs
Polychaete annelids
Pagurid crabs
Cadidae
Ulotrichales
Morse Creek
Crangonid shrimp
Flabelliferan isopods
Gammarid amphipods
Hippolytid shrimp
Mysids
Folychaete annelids
Valviferan isopods
Pleiironectidae
Fishes
% F.O.
1976 (n
30.00
30.00
30.00
30.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
20.00
10.00
10.00
10.00












1976 (n
40.00
40.00
40.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00


7. N.C.
= 10)
97.73
0.14
0.19
0.48
0.39
0.05
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.19
0.43
0.05
0.10












=5)
44.00
20.00
8.00
4.00
12.00
S.OO
4.00


X G.C.

33.34
15.42
4.17
2.41
13.04
11.89
6.94
5.05
4.73
1.21
1.20
0.57
0.02












% IRI

77.22
9.17
2.57
1.70
2.64
2.34
1.38
1.00
0.94
0.55
0.32
0.12
0.02












% F.O.
1977 
-------
Table 32.  (Contd.)
prey X F.O. 7, N.C. Z G.C. X IRI
Twin Rivers 1976 (n-3)
Unidentified detritus 66.67 50.00 0.77 33.73
Pleuronectiformes 66.67 20.00 30.30 33.41
Fishes 33.33 20.00 48,86 22.87
Brachyuran crabs 33.33 10.00 20.07 9.99
Brachyrhynchan crabs
Cottidae
Cancrid crabs
Polychaete annelids
Chlorophyta
Crangonld shrimp
Flabelltferan isopods
Emblotocidae
Potamogetonaceae
Cammarid amphipods
Unidentified algae
Idoteid Isopods
Cancrid crabs
Carldean shrlnp
Unidentified Isopods
Brachyuran crabs
Ulotrichales
Brachyrhynchan crabs
Potamogetonaceae
Pandalid shrimp
Majid crabs
Mysids
Wood
Bivalves
Jamestovm-Port Williams 1976 (n-6)
Polychaete annelids 50.00 55.26 13.61 52.15
Calllanassld shrimp 16.67 2.63 49.13 13.06
Unidentified decapods 33.33 5.26 14.24 9.84
Unidentified detritus 33.33 13.16 3.13 8.22
Fishes 16.67 2.63 18.26 5.27
Cammarid amphlpods 33.33 7.89 0.94 4.46
Tanaids 33.33 7.89 0.06 4.01
Bivalves 33.33 5.26 0.63 2.98
Mysids
Pandalid shrimp
Dlpterans
Hlppolytld shrimp
Crangonld shrimp
Cancrid crabs
Flabelllferan Isopods
Carldean shrimp
Plnnotherld crabs
Caprellld amphlpods
Ostracods
Brachyuran crabs
X F.O.
1977 (n
42.86

42.

28.
14.
14.
14.
28.
14.
14.



22.
22.
22.
11.
11.









1977
11.

5.
47.
17.
88.
29.
11.
76.
11.

17.
11.
5.
11.
5.
5.
5.



86

57
29
29
29
57
29
29



22
22
22
11
11









Z N.
-7)
20,

16,

12.
4.
8.
20.
8.
4,
4,



13.
10.
5.
2.
2.









,C.

,83

,67

50
17
33
,83
,33
,17
,17



51
81
41
70
70









% G.C.

5.12

33.77

4.98
28.97
18.32
4.42
1.95
2.44
0.03



1.72
3.87
5.18
0.49
0.12









% IRI


20.46


39.76


'/. F.O.
1978 (n
25.00

25.00

X N.C.
-4)
22.22

5.56

2 G.C.

0.56

16.82

Z IRI

7.37

7.24

9.18
8.71
7.00
6.64
5.40
1.73
50.00
11.11
1,62
• 8.24
1.10



7.
6.
5.
0.
0.












20
94
00
75
67









(n-17)
76

88
06
65
24
41
76
47
76

65
76
88
76
88
88
88


0.

0.
3.
0.
39.
20.
0.
30.
0.

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.


89

18
56
53
86
28
36
60
36

71
36
89
36
71
18
18


4.08

1.72
7.34
49.92
5.72
0.41
0.01
2.61
16.40

3.13
5.18
2.44
0.44
0.46
0.10
0.05


0.

0.
5.
9.
44.
6.
0.
28.
2.

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.


65

12
69
87
60
75
05
17
19

75
72
22
10
08
02
01


50.00
25.00
25.00


37.50


25.00
50.00
12.50
12.50
12.50
12.50
12.50
12.50
12.50
16.67
33.33
11.11


13.33


31.67
15.00
1.67
6.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
1.67
79.52
1.46
0.03


10.99


11.56
0.30
12.56
1.30
2.05
0.50
0.03
0.03
0.01
62.27
11.26
3.61


16.68


19.77
14.00
3.25
1.82
0.85
0.50
0.39
0.39
0.38
1978 (n-15)
20.00


33.33

73.33
46.67
13.33
80.00

6.67
26.67
6.67
6.67
20.00



13.33
6.67
0.86


9.77

18.39
24.71
0.57
39.94

0.29
2.30
0.29
0.29
1.15



0.57
0.86
4.28


2.11

12.63
6.04
0.45
22.13

0.25
25.35
6.04
13.73
4.07



O.SO
2.41
1.00


3.88

22.29
14.06
0.13
48.66

0.04
7.22
0.41
0.92
1.02



0.14
0.21

-------
Table 33.
Prey composition of tidepool sculpin during three years of MESA
collections for August 1976, 1977, 1978,  F,0, = frequency occur-
rence, N.C, = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimetric composi-
tion, %IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
All tidenool
Cair.mnrid amphipods
Sphaeromat id isopods
Barnacle cirri
Harpact icoid copepods
Polychaete annelids
Crustacean larvae
Idoteid isopods
Dipteran insects
Oscracods
Pagurid crabs
Unidentified insects
N'emerteans
Unidentified debris,
sand & algae
Acmaeld limpets
Cottidae
Tur bel lar ians
Caridean shrimp
Nudibranchs
Mysids
Grapsid crabs
Fishes
Cumaceans
Callianassid shrimp
Chitons
Glyceridae
Asselotan isopods
Coleop tora
Gamma r idae
Hyalidae
Bracliyrhynchan crab, juv.
Isaeidae
Hippolytid shrimp
Fishes
Archaeogastropods
Ampithodae
August tidepool
Sphaeroma t id isopods
Cammarid ampliipods
Pagurid crabs
Harpacticoid copepods
Barnacle cirri
Polychaete annelids
Callianassid shrimp
Terebellidae
Dipteran insects
Ostracods
Asselotan isopods
Gammaridae
Coleoptera
Hyalidae
Asselotan isopods
Isaeidae
Archaeogastropods
Brachyrhynchan crab, juv.
Brachyuran crab, juv.
Hippolytid shrimp
Acmaeid limpets
Ampithodae
Fishes
Unidentified debris,
sand & algae
Port Williams
Cammarid amphipods
Mysids
Polychaete annelids
Tanaids
Sphaeromatid isopods
Harpacticoid copepods
Hippolytid shrimp
Calanoid copepods
Unidentified debris
Valviferan isopods
Isaeidae

7. P.O. 7, N.C. 7. C.C. "/. IRI % F.O.
Z N.C.
Z G.C.
7. IRI
1976 (n=230) 1977 (n=223)
53.04 23.81 21.98 A3. 44 51.12
37.39 14.48 32.13 34.76 36.77
18.26 19.44 2.31 7.92 17.04
15.22 15.67 0.58 4.93 20.18
7.83 2.78 9.48 1.91 18.83
1.74 12.25 0.42 0.44 2.24
2.17 0.30 7.85 0.35
7.83 1.24 0.32 0.24 9.87
5.22 1.54 0.14 0.17
2.17 0.25 3.64 0.17 3.59
4.35 1.19 0.27 0.13 4.48
2.61 0.79 1.71 0.13

1.30 2.43 0.89 0.09 3.14
0.87 0.64 1.40 0.04
0.43 0.05 4.49 0.04
0.87 0.15 1.75 0.03
0.43 0.05 1.82 0.02
0.43 0.15 2.08 0.02
3.14
2.24
2.24
1.79
0.90
0.90
0.90










27.29
10.16
6.74
34.46
2.48
0.33
2.48

0.56
2.01


0.37





1.54
0.42
1.59
1.12
0.09
0.09
0.23










19.96
21.63
1.06
0.70
15.51
1.87
0.27


10.04
0.49




2.65





6
2
1
0
4
1
3















.66
.34
.12
.04
.10
.28
.05










48.95
23.69
2.69
14.37
6.87
0.10
0.55

0.77
0.23


0.19





0.52
0.13
0.12
0.04
0.08
0.02
0.06










1977 (n=39)
41.03
43.59
12.82
17.95
15.38
7.69
2.56
2.56

















1977 (n-
81.82
45.45
9.09
18.18
9.09


RQ
21.77
29.03
3.63
26.21
12.10
1.61
0.40
0.40

















11)
80.33
9.84
1.64
6.56
1.64



34.14
4.50
41.94
0.29
0.53
6.50
7.48
2.08


































44.83
28.56
11.42
9.29
3.79
1.22
0.39
0.12

















% F.O.
% N.C.
% G.C.
'/. IRI
1978 (n=137)
45.99
27.74
13.87
42.34
12.41
10.95
13.14
2.19
6.57


2.92






2.92





8.03
5.84
5.84
5.11
4.38
2.19
1.46
1.46
1.46
0.73
6.25
4.29
3.88
72.21
1.04
2.56
2.24
0.12
0.76


0.36






0.16





0.72
0.56
0.72
0.64
0.64
0.12
0.08
0.08
0.08
0.04
12.06
20.40
11.87
5.00
12.00
0.52
0
2
0


1






2





0
0
1
2
9
1
1
2
4
1
.12
.72
.17


.06






.45





.79
.83
.11
.77
.46
.61
.94
.77
.61
.06
15.62
12.71
4.05
60.66
3.00
0.63
0
0
0


0






0





0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.58
.12
.11


.08






.14





.23
.15
.20
.32
.82
.07
.05
.08
.13
.01
1978 (n=73)
10.96
45.21

41.10
17.81
4.11


16.44
13.70
12.33
10.96
10.96
9.59
5.48
4.11
2.74
4.11
5.48
1.37
1.37
1.37
1.37

1.37
0.89
5.40

74.90
3.21
0.21


4.10
2.67
1.03
1.23
0.96
1.09
0.96
0.21
0.14
0.27
0.27
0.07
0.14
0.07
0.07

0.07
4.36
8.01


3.09
23.83
2.91


1.
0.
1.
2.
1.
5.
0.
3.
9.
15.
1.
2.
1.
2.
2.

1.


06
10
37
32
74
81
97
39
68
49
36
90
94
23
71

55
1
10

.23
.38

68.40
10.28
0.27




1.81
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

0.
81
63
83
63
41
23
32
57
38
19
09
06
07
08

05
1978 (n=291
82.
3.
13.
0.
0.



43
74
25
05
53



93.72
4.34
0.95
0.85
0.14



37.93
20.69
10.34
10.34
3.45
44.83
3.45
6.90
6.90
3.45

3.45
4.00
2.19
0.39
0.39
0.13
86.19
0.13
4.65
0.77
0.13

0.13
12.
5.
10.
0.
2.
26.
30.
3.
4.
1.

1.
20
68
66
48
39
34
45
28
57
74

09
9.
2.
1.
0.
0.
81.
1.
0.
0.
0.

0.
96
64
85
15
14
78
71
89
60
10

07

-------
 Table 34.   Prey composition of redtail surfperch during three years of MESA
            collection, August 1976, 1977, 1978,   F,0.  = frequency occurrence,
            N.C. = numerical composition, G,C, =  gravimetric composition,  %IRI
            = percent total  Index of Relative Importance.
Prey              % F.O. X N.C. % G.C. X IRI   X P.O. X N.C. X G.C. X IRI  X F.O. Z N.C. X G.C. X IRI
Twin Rivers
Gammarid amphipods
Mysids
Hyperild amphipods
Flabelllferan isopods
Natantian shrimp
Fish
Idoceid isopods
Polychaete annelids
Talitridae
Dipteran insects
Ulotrichales
Atylidae
Unidentified algae
1976 (n=10)
90.00
90.00
10.00
30.00
10.00
10.00






60.00
71.27
24.04
1.49
0.34
0.06
0.06






2.75
81.15
14.33
0.71
0.21
0.68
0.08






2.84
78.15
19.67
0.13
0.09
0.04
0.01






1.91
1977 (n
50.00
10.00

40.00


20.00
10.00




10.00
-10)
75.32
1.30

16.88


2.60
1.30




2.60

86.81
0.65

11.10


0.72
0.65




0,07

86.63
0.21

11.96


0.71
0.21




0.28
1978 (n
84.62
7.69

69.23


30.77
7.69
7.69
23.08
7.69
7.69
7.69
-13)
42.73
0.91

29.09


6.36
0.91
10.00
2.73
1.82
0.91
4.55

39.55
1.37

48.15


4.66
0.76
4.04
1.07
0.01
0.08
0.31

53.83
0.14

41.35


2.62
0.10
0.84
0.68
0.11
0.06
0.29
                                    90

-------
Table 35.  Prey composition of high cockscomb during three years of MESA
           collections, August 1976, 1977, 1978,  F,0, = frequency occur-
           rence, N,C. = numerical composition, G.C, = gravimetric compo-
           sition, %IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
All tidfipool
Ncmor Leans
Polychaete annelids
Gamtriarid amphipods
Unidentified debris,
sand & algae
Rhodophyta
Sabellaridae
Gastropods
Harpac t icoid copepods
Sphaeromatid isopods
Sabellidae
Chlorophy ta
Dipteran insects
Cumaceans
Nereldae
Lumbr i ner idae
Crangonid shrimp
Echinoids
Ulotr icliales
Ostracods
Bangiales
Barnacle cirri
Tcrehellidac
Scy tosi phonacuae
Crustacean larvae
Aulacopoda
Di'omares t iaceae
Caridean shrimp
AselloLan isopods
Valviferan isopods
Bivalves
Camrnar idae
Hippolytid shrimp
August tiiiepool
NoniiM'teans
Ganmarid amphipods
Bangiales
Polychaete annelids
Harpacticoid copepods
Ulotr ichales
Barnacle cirri
Sphaeromatid isopods
Sabellidae
Asellotan isopods
Ostracods
Gastropods
Chlorophy ta
Terebellidae
Rhodophyta
Phaeophyta
Scytosiphonaceae
Bivalves
Ampharet idae
Bangiaceae
Hirudinea
Insects
Valviferan isopods
Unidentified debris.
sand i algae
Nema todes
Gammaridae
Hippolytid shrimp
•/. P.O. % N.C. :; G.C. % IRI % P.O. ;
'. N.
,C.
•/.
:r> n "!
O . L . /,
IRI
1976 (n=118) 1977 (n=155)
42.37 27.02 26.03 52.81 27.
22.88 10.62 27.64 20.57 21.
30.51 16.17 7.05 16.64 34.

11.86 5.31 3.99 2.59 3.
9.32 4.85 5.24 2.21
6.78 8.31 0.38 1.38 4.
6.78 2.31 4.39 1.07 3.
4.24 2.08 0.02 0.21 12.
4.24 3.00 2.55 0.55 6.
3.39 9.93 1.76 0.93 0.
3.39 0.92 3.56 0.36 5.
2.54 1.15 0.11 0.08
0.85 0.23 1.16 0.03
0.85 0.23 4.91 0.10
0.85 0.23 3.82 0.08
0.85 0.23 1.16 0.03 0.
0.85 0.23 1.09 0.03
5.
3.
3.
3.
3.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.





74
94
19

23

52
23
26
45
65
81




65

81
87
87
87
87
29
29
65
65
65





5.13
5.
16.

0.

1.
0.
5.
1.
1.
2.




0.

0.
1.
,34
,32

51

95
62
13
03
03
26




10

92
23



















0.62
1.
1.
0.
45.
1.
0.
0.





64
03
21
79
64
21
10

















25.18
16.91
6.52

1.14

0.18
4.34
0.12
1.29
0.26
2.73




A. 43

8.51
0.07
5.11
0.66
9.21
2.36
1.46
0.22
2.73
1.64





34.07
19.77
31.64

0.22

0.39
0.65
2.61
0.61
0.03
1.17




0.12

2.22
0.20
0.90
0.36
1.60
0.13
2.47
0.05
0.08
0.05





1976 1977 (n=29)
44.83
34.43
20.69
17.24
13.79
10.34
10.34
6.90
3.45
6.90
10.34
3.45
6.90
3.45
6.90
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45



14
15
6
5
10
3
7
2
10
4
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
1



.58
.63
.25
.21
.42
.13
.29
.08
.42
.17
.13
.08
.03
.04
.08
.04
.04
.13
.08
.04
.04
.04



33

2
21




















8
0
8
1
3
1
0
0
4
0
4
0
2
2
0
1
0
0,
0.



.15 50
.45 14
.85 13
.68 5
.04 3,
.68 2,
.12 2,
.74 0.
.12 0.
,84 0.
.20 0.
.67 0.
.76 0.
.58 0.
.10 0.
.99 0.
.99 0.
.19 0.
.03 0.
.56 0.
.19 0.
.09 0.



.62
.74
.75
,67
.41
,89
,06
.95
,84
82
81
55
46
46
36
33
33
27
25
13
10
09



% F.O. Z N.
1978 (n=53)
7.55 0.
32.08 10.
28.30 2.

15.09 1.


1.89 0.
16.98 17.





1.89 0.



3.77 0.


7.55 66.
1.89 0.





7.55 0.
5.66 0.
3.77 0.
3.77 0.
1.89 0.
1978 (n=29)
6.90 0.43
41.38 3.46

37.93 31.10
20.69 55.94
6.90 0.43
6.90 1.51

10.34 1.30







6.90 0.43




10.34 0.86
10.34 1.51
6.90 0.43
6.90 0.65
3.45 0.22
C. % C.

39 4.
11 31.
07 7.

10 19.


06 9.
30 0.





06 2.



13 2.


56 1.
06 6.





45 0.
26 0.
13 1.
19 1.
06 7.

7.54
9.40

37.37
0.38
5.01
0.05

0.75







3.26




0.30
18.05
0.05
2.26
n.28
C. '/. IRI

26
48
50

79


29
24





92



65


49
90





93
16
73
19
03

1
11

54
24
0
0

0







0





1.23
46.61
9.47

11.02


0.62
10.41





0.20



0.37


17.94
0.46





0.36
0.08
0.24
0.18
0.47

.16
.22

.77
.57
.79
.23

.45







.54




0.25
4,27
0.07
0,4?
ft
.1ft
                                  91

-------
     Juvenile English sole were classified as facultative benthivores.
This species is a good illustration of prey variability because of its broad
distribution over a number of shoreline habitats along the strait.  Samples
are available from August collections at five of the seven beach-seine sites
(excluding Beckett Point) over the three years (Table 36).  In general,
variability between habitats is greater than between years (Tables 24, 25),
although both show considerable differences in prey composition.  Tanaids
and polychaete annelids were most important in the mud/eelgrass habitat at
Jamestown-Port Williams, although gammarid amphipods predominated in 1977.
Polychaete annelids and gammarid amphipods were the main prey in the sand/
cobble habitat at Twin Rivers and Morse Creek except for the occurrence of
holothuroideans at Twin Rivers, and harpacticoid copepods at Morse Creek in
1977.  Except for the contribution by cumaceans, prey compositions from
Dungeness Spit were the least similar among the three years: gammarid amphi-
pods, mysids, and cumaceans predominated in 1976; cumaceans, gammarid amphi-
pods, and harpacticoid copepods in 1977; and holothuroideans and cumaceans
in 1978.  The principal difference between 1976 and 1977 prey compositions-
at Kydaka Beach was the appearance of polychaete annelids in the 1977
sample.  The relative contributions of the seven principal prey taxa varied
considerably among the 14 separate samples.

     Starry flounder, the only large adult flatfish captured in the near-
shore region along the Strait of Juan de Fuca, were not caught in high
enough numbers to warrant comparison of diet spectra.  Two beach-seine
samples, August 1977 and 1978, at Kydaka Beach indicated low dietary
overlap (Tables 24, 37).

     Sand sole were the only flatfish classified as obligate epibenthic
planktivores.  Except for the series from Twin Rivers, the diet spectra
from four sites differed between years (Tables 24, 38).  While mysids were
often predominant in the prey spectrum, they occurred so sporadically that
other prey organisms—fishes, gammarid amphipods, cumaceans, hippolytid
shrimp—assumed predominance.  Variability was equally extensive for most
between-habitat comparisons (Table 25).

     In conclusion, examination of the variability in prey compositions
among years and habitats for 14 representative nearshore fish species
indicated that although a few prey taxa may be important to the diet of a
species, the proportional contributions among the prey taxa vary considerably.
In general, diet overlap was more consistent between years than between
habitats, although the overlap values were equally variable.  Trends in
increasing contributions of several prey taxa over the three years of the
study were noted but could not be verified without corresponding indications
of trends in prey abundance at those sites over the three years.

4.9.4  Overlap Between Diet Spectra of Nearshore Fish and Documented
       Invertebrate Assemblages

     The basic problem associated with determining the relative importance
of a particular prey taxon to a predator (i.e., the selectivity of the
predator) is the measurement of actual prey availability.  The lack of
concurrent sampling of prey abundance and predator stomachs in the MESA
studies along the Strait of Juan de Fuca limits our ability to either

                                     92

-------
 Table  36.    Prey  composition of  juvenile  English sole during  three  years  of
                 MESA  collections,  August  1976,   1977,  1978.   P.O.   = frequency  occur-
                 rence,  N.C.  =  numerical composition,  G.C.  =  gravimetric composi-
                 tion,  %IRI  = percent total  Index of  Relative  Importance.
  Prey
                         % F.O.  %  N.C. % G.C.  I IRI
                                                     % F.O.  %  N.C. 7. G.C.  Z  IRI
                                                                                 Z F.O.  % N.C. X G.C.  Z  IRI
  Jamestown/Port Williams  1976 (n=10)
  Tanaids
  Polychaete annelids
  Bivalves
  Cumaceans
  Gammarid amphipods
  HarpacCicoid copepods
  Glycerid polychaetes
  Phoronids
  Oscracods
  80.00  44.97  38.83   54.33
  70.00  30.20  32.83   35.76
  40.00   4.70   1.62   2.05
  30.00  14.09   4.00   4.40
  20.00   2.68  11.36   2.28
  10.00   0.67   0.12   0.06
  10.00   2.68  11.24   1.13
  Twin Rivers
  Polychaete annelids
  Gammarid amphipods
  Harpncticoid eopepods
  Mysids
  Cumaceans
  Tanaids
  Flabelliferan isopods
  Valviferan isopods
  Bivalves
  Euphausiids
  Fish
  Holothuroidea
  Chlorophyta
  Potamogetonaceae
  !'orse Creek
  Cammarid amphipods
  Polychaete  annelids
  Cumaceans
  Tdoteid isopods
  Harpacticoid copepods
  Holothuroideans
  Ulotrichales
  Mysids
  Carldean shrimp
  Brachyuran  crabs
  Calanoid copepods
  Ampeliscidae
  Isaetdae
  Bivalves
 Dunfieness Spit
 Gammarid amphipods
 Mysids
 Cumaceans
 Polychaete annelids
 Holothuroidea
 Unidentified detritus,
  sand, and  algae
 Ostracods
 Harpacticoid copepods
 Tunicates

 Kydaka Beach
 Cammarid amphipods
 Cumaceans
 Harpacticoid copepods
 Polychaete annelids
 Ostracods
 Holothuroidea
 Bivalves
 Nemerteans
 Valviferan isopods
Decapods,  unid.
Kysids
Flabelliferan isopods
                         1976
60.
60.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
20.
1976
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
(n-
7.
70.
2.
8.
2.
4.
1.
0.
0.
2.
0.
4)
54
35
76
29
51
52
01
25
25
26
25

38,
38,
0.
6.
1.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
10.

.99
.28
,01
,67
43
22
08
86
65
14
68

27,
63,
0,
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.

.35
.86
.54
,93
,77
93
60
22
18
47
14

 100.00  84.71  88.96  91.68
 75.00   5.88   7.10   5.14
 50.00   4.71   1.89   1.74
 25,00   1.18   1.42   0.34
 50.00   3.53   0.63   1.10
1976  (n=15)
 80.00 49.34  21.90  46.69
 60.00 25.11  51.59  37.70
 60.00 15.42  11.48  13.22
 20.00  7.93   1.38   1.52
  6.67  0.44   4.59   0.27
6.67
6.67
6.67
6.67
1976 (n
90.00
90.00
30.00
30.00
40.00
10.00
20.00
10.00
10.00
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.44
-10)
28.54
49.02
17.43
2.83
1.09
0.22
0.44
0.22
0.22
8.94
0.11
0.01
0.01

56.96
29.24
0.71
2. 76
1.85
7.08
0.91
0.46
0.02
0.51
0.03
0.02
0.02

49.08
44.93
3.47
1.07
0.75
0.47
0.17
0.04
0.02
 1977 (n-9)
  55.56   57.69  20.80  40.11
  11.11   2.31   8.00  1.05

  55.56   5.38   2.24  3.90
  66.67   33.85  52.96  53.23
                              11.11   0.77  16.00   1.71


                             1977  (n=15)
                              46.67  48.69   9.56  25.79
                              33.33  14.66   6.82   6.79


                               6.67   0.52   0.01   0.03

                               6.67   0.52   0.14   0.04
  60.00  35.08  83.16  67.29
  6.67   0.52   0.29   0.05

 1977 (n-12)
  58.33  12.95  25.35  20.61
  66.67   7.38  60.52  41.86
  66.67   3.08   6.97   6.19

  41.67  76.26   A.46  31.10
  8.33   0.06   1.14   0.09
  8.33   0.06   0.73   0.06
  8.33   0.12   0.10   0.02
  8.33   0.06   0.10   0.01
  8.33   0.06   0.10   0.01
  8.33   0.06   0.52   0.04
1977  (n-12)
 33.33  15.75  17.49 21.72

 25.00  50.00  66.03 56.86
 16.67   3.94   6.21  3.31
  8.33   0.39   5.08  0.89
                             25.00  29.92   5.19  17.21
                            1977 (n-10)
                            60.00  15.09   6.52  12.03
                            70.00  48.11  15.23  41.15
                            10.00   0.94   0.02   0.09
                            80.-00  10.38  43.46  39.97
                            40.00   3.77   0.45   1.57
                            10.00   1.89   2.44   0.40
                            10.00   3.77  27.42   2.89
                            10.00  15.09   4.26   1.80
                            10.00   0.94   0.20   0.11
 1978 (n-21)
 90.48  69.17  40.25  66.80
 52.38  13.28  42.30  19.65
  9.52   0.23   0.04   0.02
 38.10   5.43   2.04   1.92
 71.43   8.55  14.88  11.29
 14.29   2.19   0.06   0.22
                              14.29   0.58   0.40   0.09

                             1978  (n=20)
                              40.00  18.05   9.43   7.13
 85.00  79.42  88.55   92.63

 10.00  1.08   1.55   0.17
1978  (n-21)
 71.43  25.08  48.26   46.83
 71.43  11.43  43.93   35.35
 42.86  2.93   1.97   1.88
  9.52   0.20   0.51   0.06

 28.57  57.63   1.94  15.22
 14.29   0.30   2.20   0.32
  9.52   1.72   1.01   0.23
 19.05   0.51   0.12   0.11
              3.98
              0.02
              5.49
              0.02
 6.22
 0.11
34.86
 0.11
                                                         55.56  13.86  90.47  58.46
                                                         11.11   0.99   0.02   0.22
                            1978
                                                 93

-------
Table 37.  Prey  composition of starry  flounder  during two years of MESA
             collections, August 1977, 1978,   F.O.  =  frequency  occurrence,
             N.C.  = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimentric  composition,
             %IRI  = percent  total Index  of Relative Importance,
               Prey
                                 Z F.O.  Z N.C. Z G.C.  Z IRI    Z F.O. Z N.C. Z C.C. Z IRI
Ammodytidae
Cancrid crabs
Unidentified detritus,
  sand and algae
Gammarid anphipods
Holothuroidea
Cumaceans
Flabelliferan iaopods
Polychaete annelids
1977 (n=6)
 66.67  89.47
 16.67   5.26
                                             93.88
                                              5.36
97.78
 1.42
                                                         1978 (n-7)
                                                          71.43  35.00  83.77  75.21
                                  16.67  5.26   0.76  0.80
                                                         42.86
                                                         42.86
                                                         28.57
                                                         28.57
                                                         28.57
                                                         14.29
                              15.00
                              17.50
                              15.00
                              10.00
                               5.00
                               2.50
                   2.23
                   1.14
                  10.29
                   0.68
                   1.86
                   0.02
6.55
7.08
6.41
  70
  74
                                                                           0.32
                                           94

-------
Table 38.
Prey composition of sand sole during three years of MESA col-
lections, August 1976, 1977, 1978.  P.O. <= frequency occurrence,
N.C. = numerical composition, G.C. = gravimetric composition,
%IRI = percent total Index of Relative Importance.
Prey
Dungeness Spit
Mysids
Caiiimarid aniphipods
Crangonid shrimp
Natantian shrimp
Idoteid isopods
Ho lothuroi deans
Ammody t idae
Cumaceans
Ciupeidae
Fish larv . , juv.
Unidentified detritus
tlorse Creek
Gammarid amphipods
Mysids
Ciupeidae
Ilippolytid shrimp
Fish larvae
Larvaceans
Pleuronectidae
Unidentified detritus
Polychaece annelids
Atylidae
Brachyrhynchan crab
larvae
Ulotrichales
Caritlean shrimp
Ens i r i dne
Twin Rivers
Mysidf
Fishes
Caridean shrimp
Unidentified detritus
Cransonid shrimp
Gammarid amphipods
Polychaete annelids
Ulotrichales
Atylidae
K^daka Beach
Fishes
Mysids
Gammarid amphipods
Crangonid shrimp
Caridean shrimp
Ammodyt Idae
Unidentified detritus
Ulotrichnles
Bivalves
Calliopiidae
EtisiridAe
Cammar idae
Flabelliferan isopods
Isaeidae
Cumaceans
Larvaceans
% F.O. 7. N
.C.
% G.C.
7. 1RI
1976 (n=12)
66.67 75
50.00 15
33.33 4
8.33 1
8.33 0
8.33 0
8.33 0




1976















1976 (n=5)
'80.00 98
80.00 0
20.00 0
40.00 0
20.00 0
20.00 0



1976 (n=7)
57.14 7.
28.57 62.
28.57 27.
14.29 1.
14.29 1.









.68
.32
.50
.80
.90
.90
.90





















.35
.51
.21
.51
.10
.31




50
50
50
25
25









33.7 i
4.20
40.73
5.78
0.43
0.18
14.94





















69.68
26.40
3.09
0.15
0.41
0.27




67.59
11.37
2.59
13.08
5.37









72.99
9.77
15.09
0.63
0.11
0.09
1.32





















85.57
13.71
0.42
0.17
0.07
0.07




56.75
27.92
11.37
2.71
1.25









7. F.O. '/. N.C.
1977 (n-14)
14.29 10.00
28.57 40.00
7.14 10.00




21.43 30.00
7.14 5.00
7.14 5.00

1977 (n=12)
50.00 40.54
33.33 32.43
8.33 2.70
25.00 24.32











1977 (n-20)
80.00 78.71
10.00 1.12
10.00 0.56

5.00 0.28
70.00 17.65
5.00 0.28
5.00 0.28

1977 (n=10)
60.00 50.00

10.00 8.33

10.00 8.33
10.00 25.00
10.00 8.33







7. G.C.

0.74
2.91
11.12




0.48
51.90
32.84


2.09
4.18
91.77
1.96











7. IRI

5.36
42.87
5.27




22.84
14.21
9.45


44.44
25.44
16.41
13.70











% F.O.
1978 (n
86.36
68.18





27.27

22.73
4.55
1978 (n
33.33
9.52


19.05
14.29
4.76
9.52
9.52
4.76

9.52
4.76
4.76
4.76
7. N.C.
= 22)
81.66
10.45





5.10

0.64
2.04
•=21)
26.42
0.94


2.36
50.47
0.94
6.13
0.94
3.77

1.89
0.47
1.B9
1.42
7. G.C.

76.02
2.30





0.98

18.07
2.44

6.24
0.24


70.04
0.30
14.16
1.33
1.58
1.09

0.26
3.34
0.47
0.04
% IRI

90.19
5.76





1.10

2.82
0.13

31.31
0.32


39.66
20.86
2.07
2.04
0.69
0.67

0.59
0.52
0.32
0.20
197H (n-16)
21.04
45.70
8.97

1.58
3.45
15.58
3.39


48.32

0.15

0.40
50.77
0.37







78.74
4.62
0.94

0.09
14.57
0.78
0.18


85.20

1.23

1.26
10.96
1.26







68.75
18.75


6.25
25.00


12.50
1978 (n=

20.00
40.00



10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
20.00
92.16
1.96


0.65
3.27


1.96
'10)

5.93
17.80



1.69
12.71
0.85
1.69
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
0.85
55.08
6.89
82.67


0.18
0.18


0.09


32.56
25.07



3.37
23.95
7.86
0.37
1.12
0.75
0.75
0.04
0.04
4.21
78.26
20.39


0.06
9.90


0.29


15.30
34.07



1.01
7.28
1 .73
0.41
0.39
0.32
0.32
0.18
0.17
23.53
                                  95

-------
 appraise the feeding  selectivity  of  the  fishes or  to establish the importance
 of different nearshore habitats to the fishes.  This latter problem, the
 need to evaluate  shoreline habitats  in the  context of the nearshore food web,
 is further  hindered by the lack of appropriate sampling methodology for
 effectively documenting  prey  organisms.

      In the case  of neritic plankton communities,  the MESA-sponsored investi-
 gations by  NOAA's Pacific Marine  Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) of the
 phytoplankton,  zooplankton, and ichthyoplankton community in the strait
 (Chester et al.   1977,  Chester   et  al.   1980) provide seasonal
 documentation of  zooplankton  composition and estimates of abundance for nine
 sites.   Unfortunately, these  sites'are in the deepwater regions of the strait
 and quite distant from the nearshore environs where the neritic (townet) fish
 collections were  made.   This  does not necessarily  preclude comparisons with
 the prey composition  of  obligate planktivores such as juvenile Pacific herring
 and Pacific sand  lance which  tend to feed exclusively on pelagic calanoid
 copepods.   If assumptions about advection of these zooplankters from deep
 water into  shallow water can  be made, then  the data from the PMEL study may
 be descriptive  of the prey community available to  these neritic fishes.

     The epibenthic plankton  assemblages  exploited by the facultative
 planktivores  have not been documented on a  seasonal basis by quantitative
 sampling and  were only crudely sampled (large forms only) during the townet
 collections of  neritic fish.  Since  epibenthic crustaceans such as mysids
 and shrimp  are  important, some quantitative documentation of their composi-
 tion and distribution in neritic waters will be necessary before evaluation
 of  the  available  prey resources in different nearshore habitats can be made.

     Other  MESA studies include quantitative surveys of the intertidal and
 shallow subtidal  benthos along the Strait of Juan  de Fuca (Nyblade 1979,
 Webber  1979) which have been  conducted concurrently with the nearshore fish
 collections since  1976.  These data  provide the best index of infaunal
 organisms available to nearshore fish in  the specific habitats surveyed.
 Polychaete  annelids, bivalve molluscs, gastropod molluscs, and a number of
 other organisms which typically remain within or upon the sediment were
 available for quadrat, core,  or Van  Veen  grab sampling at low tide when the
 surveys were  conducted.  Many organisms, however, were not adequately
 sampled either because they actively move with the tide or because they
were too small  to be retained by the 1-mm mesh sieve.  Some of these—e.g.,
 gammarid amphipods, cumaceans, mysids, harpacticoid copepods—were known to
be  important  components of the diets of many fish  (Cross  et al.   1978).
 Subtidal sampling with a Van Veen grab possesses many of the same biases
 inherent in intertidal surveys because of the avoidance capability of
epibenthic  zooplankton.

     An experiment was conducted under the sponsorship of MESA to attempt
quantitative documentation of epibenthic zooplankton in the intertidal and
shallow subtidal regions when the tide was in and the organisms were available
to predation by nearshore fish (Simenstad  et al.   1980).  Sampling of the
epibenthic zooplankton was coordinated with the sampling of nearshore fish
during August 1978 and was designed to provide data directly comparable with
the results  of the stomach analyses  conducted on the predominant nearshore
fish collected at that time.   Sampling of the epibenthos, described in

                                     96

-------
 Simenstad   et al.  (1980),  utilized  a suction  pump  and  sampling  cylinder
 designed to reduce zooplankton avoidance and  enable the sampling of micro-
 habitats within  the various sampling sites.   Sampling was conducted directly
 upon  the shallow subtidal  or intertidal area  sampled for nearshore fishes by
 beach seine or in  tidepool collections.  Discrete  samples were  taken, however,
 in  distinct microhabitats  found within these  areas.  Depths of  the sampled
 microhabitats varied between 0.1 and 3.0 m.

      The results of this survey, provided in  detail in Simenstad  et al.
 (1980),      are  summarized in Table  39 as the percentage composition of
 invertebrate taxa  by abundance and biomass, and in Fig. 11 , indicating the
 total abundance  and total  biomass (wet weight) of  the epibenthic fauna at
 the six sampling sites and the various microhabitats sampled therein.
 Comparable  prey  spectra  from concurrently sampled  nearshore fish were
 described previously for predominant  species  in Appendix 6.1.   Overlap of
 the numerical and  gravimetric composition of  the epibenthic fauna and the
 diet  of the prevalent nearshore fish  sampled  at the various sampling sites
 has been estimated  using Sanders' Index of Affinity (Table 40).

      The most impressive result of the epibenthic  survey is the abundance
 and numerical dominance by harpacticoid copepods at virtually every site and
 microhabitat sampled.  In  one sample—Port Williams, eelgrass—harpacticoids
 even  dominated the  fauna on the basis of total biomass.  Although seemingly
 too small (0.250-1.50 mm)  to constitute preferred  prey for most nearshore
 fishes, harpacticoids were important  in the diets  of sharpnose  sculpin,
 tidepool sculpin, high cockscomb, and juvenile English sole.  Harpacticoid
 copepods are probably important prey  of primary carnivores, including
 polychaete  annelids, shrimp, and crabs, which are  preyed on by  nearshore
 fishes (Simenstad   et al.  1979).       Differences in total epifauna density
 and biomass  among  the sites and microhabitats (Fig. 11 ) are primarily a
 function of  the abundance  and biomass of the  harpacticoid copepods.

      Overlap values in the stomach contents of the nearshore fish and the
 epibenthic  plankton samples were generally low for most species, principally
 because of  the discrepancies between  the presence  of harpacticoid copepods
 in  the microhabitat and their presence in the stomach contents  of the fishes.
 Several species, including tube-snout,  tidepool sculpin, tubenose poacher,
 juvenile English sole, and speckled  sanddab,  preyed heavily on  the harpacti-
 coids and therefore exhibited higher  overlap  in their diet spectra and the
 environment.  In general,  overlap values were appreciably higher in comparisons
 of biomass than in  comparisons of numerical composition of the prey organisms
 (Table40 ).   This may be a result of two related phenomena:   (1) The high
numerical contribution of  the harpacticoid copepods in the diet is not reflected
 in  the total biomass; thus, other prey organisms contribute higher percentages
 to the overlap value based on biomass.  (2)  Prey selection by the fish is most
 likely to be based on size of prey rather than density (Griffiths 1975,  Eggers
 1977); therefore, overlap  in larger prey organisms based on biomass tends to be
higher than overlap based on density.  This  suggests that within certain size
ranges, the standing crop  (weight/area or volume)  of particular prey organisms
may provide a more appropriate measure of the importance of a habitat to near-
shore fish than the density.
                                     97

-------
Table 39.   Composition by abundance  and biomass of epibenthic  zooplankton
            in various microhabitats  at six sites along  the  Strait of Juan
            de Fuca, August 1978.  Detailed descriptions of  microhabitats
            appear in Simenstad  et al.  (1980).



lara i
Abuadanca
Harpactlcold copcpoda 79.88
Calanold copapoda
Cyelopold copapoda
Blvalvaa
Camoarld aophlpoda
Aaallocan laopoda
Cuoacaana
Hlppolytld ahrlap
Naogaatropoda
Gaatropoda
Splonid polychaataa
Polychaaca annallda
Naaatodaa
Oftracoda
Haroaeticold ac.ga
Carldaaa ahrla?
Cruatacaaa agga
Taaalda
Shannon-Hlanar Dlvariltjr
iBdu (H1)
4.45
3.07
1.40
0.74
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.48
0.68
0.49
2.83
1.02
3.75


0.75

1.41

land
•lout a
6.31
9.16
6.01
6.31
13.51
0.15
0.15
6.01
12.01
10.66
.00
.90
.16
.01
.01


3.30

4.30
••ekttt
0.3-* Call
Abuadaoc*
72.93
2.09
3.52
0.41
0.36
0.59
—
0.60

1.30
0.01
6.39

1.44
4.44
1.31

2.34

1.88
talM
raaa
ItOMI*
20.69
1.18
1.47
0.32
2.06
0.30
—
51.55

12.40
0.01
1.09

0.60
0.39
0.29

0.62

2.65

l-» Ial|
Abundaoca
71.50
0.45
1.40
0.15
0.26
0.41
—
0.68

0.36
0.05
5.21
0.30
0.81
5.48
0.00
11.81
0.32

1.73

raaa
lloaiaaa
28.70
0.23
0.44
0.22
1.64
0.30
~
50.14

8.26
0.11
7.84
0.22
0.34
0.2Z
0.01
3.89
0.28

2.29




Harpacclcold copapoda
Cmacaana
Oitracod*
Hlppolytld ahrlmp
Blvalvta
Harpaetlcold i||i
Gaacropoda
Calaoald cop«poda
Tanaldi
Shunoa-Ulmar Dlvarilty Ind«













» (H1)
















Coaraa
Abundant*
68.23
20.84
2.88
0.03
0.12
5.27
0.02
0.43
0.37
1.49

Port U
(and
Bloaa.a
35.73
42.00
1.15
10.54
1.82
0.65
0.03
0.96
0.49
2.31

llllaaa

l-« Ealgraaa
Abundanca
84.07
3.23
3.70
0.00
0.16
1.88
0.30
1.45
0.59
1.27

Blonaaa
54.31
2.40
3.93
2.27
1.17
0.11
10.76
0.43
0.89
2.94

Dun(«a*l« Spit
Coara* uo^
Abundance
Rarpactlcold copcpodi
Cunacciaa
H«m»tod«i
Oatracoda
Harpactlcoid copcpod
Hydrolda
Caatropoda
Polyehaata aonallda
Caoaucld aaphlpoda
CaprtilU aaphlpoda
Calaoold eopapoda
Tanalda



•it»





























70.50
10.17
2.35
4.53
1.51
2.27
0.53
0.87
3.49
0.84
0.76
1.06
1, fraval
Slouaa
7.26
23.89
2.46
2.34
2.34
2.34
22.37
14.03
12.42
2.57
2.34
2.46














                   StunuK»-Wln«r Dl».r«lty lodcx (8')
                                                2.29  4.14
                                    98

-------
Table 39.   (Contd.)






























Harpacticoid copepoda
Copepod nauplil
Spionld polychaecea
Calanold copapoda
Barnacle larvaa
Crustacean aggs
Nematodca
Karpacticold agga
Cyclopold copapods
Zplcarldean laopoda
Gusurld up hi pod a

Shannon*Ulenar Dlvaralty




Hcnkaktui— til
•w



tL^rli'l^i^T*"
0*tr«c»d«
litrptctlceid •£§••
NftMtod*.
A*eh»«>i«.tropa4«
ftrlttliiura
OllfactactM
Sph*«c««tl4 iMfeda
MM|4airopo4»
Pafurld erafc*
ItaldMtlf lad «u«
140£«14 l»opodt
FolyclMCC* «HMlldi

•ilAcarld eltM
4a«llot«e lift pi it
••MtMCTOtesa
OM«C»*M
ClrolMliI iMpod*
lUffelftU •hrlaa
llnln«
CrtKUem •eti
••raw Crack
•eta sea* Cobkla Saatf aad cobbU

torpacttcold copepoda 53.35 16.19 92.28 6.28 32.62 14.19
Calanold copapoda 39.90 27.15 1.53 3.36 30.21 34.80
My'"' 0.24 15.92 0.04 0.15 0.24 10.14
Cyclopoid copepoda 1.84 10.44 — — 7.4J 13.65
Cuaaceena 0.05 0.26 0.25 3.21 — 	
Neaatodea 0.92 5.22 — —
Bivalvaa 0.92 5.22 — 	 —
Ouetognaths 0.92 5.22 — — 	
Camnarld anphlpoda 0.38 3.91 1.83 44.41 0.12 0.34
Pinnotharld craba 0.05 2.61 — — 0.12 0.34
Gastropods 0.18 0.52 0.41 21.00 0.12 0.34
Caprellld anphlpod • — — 3,04 4.59 —
Polychaato annelids — — 0.73 3.06 -- —
Barnacle larvaa — — 0.73 3.06 —
Cruataeau egga — — 0.73 3.06 —
Aaellotea laopoda — — O.M 1.68 — —
Idotald laopod* — — 0.04 1.51 	
Oatracoda — — _ _ 2.56 7.09
Harpacticoid copapoda — — — _ 2.687.09
Spionld polychaacee — — 0.84 3.21 2.44 6i7S
Taaalda 0.96 5.48 — — 	 	
Shaonon-Ulenar Diversity
Indu (H() 2.03 4.01 0.68 4.03 2.29 3.5C

Krtaka taawh
•are sand
Abundance lioaaaa
37.92 11.81 Harpactlcold copapoda
16.73 7.87 Copepod nauplll
16.74 11.81 Calanold copapods
7.15 12.60 Ollgochaataa
3.35 11.81 Pycnogoolda
5.58 7.87 Oatracoda
4.46 7.88 Cyclopold copepoda
2.23 3.94 iaraacla nauplll
3.35 7.88 rlysida
1.12 3.9* Cuucaau
0.40 10. OS Oaaiiarld ophlpod*
Unidentified eggs
Ind.x (B'> 3.26 4.4O Csldarlaw
Shaaaon-«Uaar Dlnralty Ia4u (I*)

ftllf tolJU «UMO*U
•t.l 1 1 1 4 5
pe a« Ce«t«rlu». give Cadlm. 41«rU, Corrillu*. Ikldut. broM, Ueldut. trine.
MLLa lav«ru. i 4 S»4Q»hTllu»i * tWopt&llvm Phtlo«p«dt» Myt tlu» viva. Hytjlua
VoloMi O.OaO e1 0.076 e* 0.111 «J 0.044 •' 0.174 e1
TUe Wl«btl 40.01 e 0.0 • 40.14 e 41.07> 41.01 •
A»ua4MC« lleeeM AbuadMkCi llown 4buadoac« •!<»••• Abund4ncc Bloeiti Abundioc* tlo«4«f

t.Ol 21.51 12. M 24.41 15.4) 20.75 4.44 M.I! 4.42 10.41
l.M l.M 0.0) O.M 2.41 O.tl 2.40 4.4) 1.11 OM
2.4) 0.51 5.45 1.25 — — — — J.47 a It
1.31 0.51 1.11 1.11 0.41 0.51 7.U 4.M t.)2 O.t4
0.07 41.71 0.14 4.17 1.41 5.54 — — 0.2) 2.27
— — - — 0.14 IS. 14 _ _ 0.42 12.14
O.U 4.51 0.4] 4.J7 0.02 0.01 0.14 0.1) 0.57 1 11
0.01 l.M 0.11 11.71 0.10 l.tl 0.11 0.21 0.17 t.ll
— — — — 0.04 4.11 — — — _
— — — — 0.03 1.47 — — —
0.01 0.51 0.54 1.21 — — — — O.OJ 0.04
— — - — O.Ot 2.21 - — 0.02 0.4S
1.74 17.51 1.47 44.41 l.M 12.12 0.24 1.41 11.57 21. M
0.0) t.Ol — — — — — — — _
0.12 0.5) O.M 1.25 2.11 O.!t — — l.M O.M
0.11 0.57 0.71 l.)7 I.U 5.04 0.11 0.2) 2.1! t.M
0.0) 1.0) O.M 1.15 0.07 I.t4 0.11 1.11 0.1) 1.11
O.M 0.15 0.01 O.Ot 0.11 1.11 0.24 0.21 0.11 O.M
— — — — 0.02 1.47 — — — —
— — 0-0) 0.42 — - 0.11 11.41 0.11 l.M
0.01 0.01 — — 0.01 0.21 1.40 4.4) 0.05 0.04
0.11 0.54 O.U 0.11 0.07 O.Ot — — 0.15 1.11
O.M 0.51 — — O.M t.M — — l.M O.M



























fwla Uvee-e
Bare aaad

42.63 .44
15.00 .55
.12 .69
.73 .91
.50 .77
.50 .77
.50 .77
.50 .77
.48 * .12
.50 .77
.11 1 .U
.74 .05
.17 .93
3.0) 4.14


t
Ha alfM» Mrtliue
0.047 .'
41.11 •
AbuodMct lloeefi

44.12 1.11
1.74 11.01
0.05 O.M
1.17 i.ai
4.70 l.tl
1.11 7.25
0.05 1.44
0.40 O.tl
0.05 O.Ot
0.15 10.17
0.05 4.M
0.0] O.Ot
0.05 0.11
5.50 12.42

«- «
5.41 4.A2
O.U 1.00
l.M l.tl

~- ^»
O.OS O.Ot
2.17 1.11
O.U O.M
                                             l.M  4.05
                                                                 l.M  4.07
                                                                           l.M  4.14
                                         99

-------
o
o
           13
           O
August. 1978
Epibcnthic Plankton
&--•>>»
&:-erohrt.l«

c:cobbU








J
&

.9 A

(

•A
"a
^

t
,-.,A


= 1
1 0 i 1-..A
* : ? i
i 1 i i
i




eA
i
*9
[

•/cA



W««t -^ 	
2 ••&



SI
t





i








j














J

1


M
0)
X
w
i
I i
.t-
i -
j ;

5 •"
H .9
•-,
? *



August, 1978
Epibentliic Plankton



A=microhabttat



e: cobble
C ;Banit


















^
E 'o
« 0.

i r
i
I J




i ^
1 * I
1 < ! 1
* .1 i s












<
	 ^- East West









(


)•
-^ 	









)•

(




A^

> A-.-
A.








i
AC
A>
>
A«c^|o»l




>•




CM«,
1








&•




	 ^- East
           Fig. 11.  Total abundance and total blomass of the epibenthic fauna at six sites in the

                     Strait of Juan de Fuca sampled in August 1978.

-------
Table 40.  Percent overlap (Sanders' Index o£ Affinity)  between epibenthic
           zooplankton and diet ot nearshore rish at seven sites (17 distinct
           microhabitats) along the Strait of Juan de Fuca, August 1978.

Beckett Point
Pacific comcod juv.
Tube-snout
Widow rockfish juv.
Padded sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
Tubenose poacher
Pile perch
Crescent gunnel
Speckled sanddab
James town-Port Williams
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
English sole juv.
Dungeness Spit
Pacific tomcod juv.
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Speckled sanddab
English sole juv.
Sand sole juv.
Morse Creek
Pacific tomcod juv.
Tube-snout
Widow rockfish juv.
Silverspot ted sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tubenose poacher
Speckled sanddab
Eng 1 ish sole juv.
Sand sole juv.
Twin Rivers
Padded sculpin
Rosylip sculpin
Si Iverspot ted sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tidepuol sculpin
Tubenosu poacher
Kedtail surTpcTcli
Striped senpercli
PenPoint gunnel
Speckled sanddab
English sole
Sam role. j'u
-------
Table 40.  (Contd.)
Morse Creek
Pacific tomcod juv.
Tube-snout
Widow rockfish juv.
Silverspo 1 1 eel sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tubenose poacher
Speckled sanddab
English sole Juv.
Sand sole juv.
Twin Rivers
Padded sculpin
Rosylip sculpin
Silverspotted sculpin
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
Tubenose poacher
Redtail surfperch
Striped seaperch
Penpoint gunnel
Speckled sanddab
English sole
Sand sole juv.
Kydaka Beach
Lingcod juv.
Pacific scagliorn sculpin
Redtail surfperch
Speckled sanddab
Starry flounder
Sand sole juv.
Slip Point \
Abund Biom
Tidepool sculpin 10.46 32.00
High cockscomb
Bare
46.99
79.38
0.67
0.62
1.16
53.73
0.38
40.84
0.62
Bare
6.11
8.59
8.59
6.11
42.80
8.59
7.02
8.38
8.59
8.59
0.00
7.71
Bare
0.00
1.52
1.72
1.54
4.02
1.25
2
Abund
13.32
13.29
sand
22.45
37.24
7.50
7.57
0.04
10.20
3.91
6.23
4.14
sand
1.18
15.46
53.24
0.03
18.56
46.35
11.49
10.16
10.20
34.73
0.00
7.46
sand
0.00
3.27
7.90
7.44
3.02
13.99

Biom Abund
26.40 28.39
25.78 35.97

10.
74.
2.
1.
0.
62.
2.
4.
2.



















Cobble
17 49.00
86 10'. 69
89 43.78
87 44.56
81 0.55
15 50.69
55 44.69
34 51.38
60 11.70



















Sand t.
36.99
78.65
0.36
0.36
0.24
52.74
0.12
30.33
0.36



















i cobble
2.64
35.24
4.77
4.00
0.13
6.63
0.34
2.28
0.57



















Tidepool Number
3
Biom
29.26
41.75
It
Abund Biom
80.20 13.66
0.24 9.49
5
Abund Biom
66.54 15.35
14.34 30.42
6
Abund Biom
39.85 10.51
16.73 22.22
                                  102

-------
     The epibenthic pump sampling appeared to be appropriate for the sampling of
several important prey organisms in addition to harpacticoid copepods.   The
best example is that of hippolytid shrimp which, due to their size, contributed
significantly to the prey spectra of juvenile Pacific tomcod, juvenile widow
rockfish, tubenose poachers, and several other species in certain habitats,
especially those at Beckett Point.  Other prey taxa which indicated relatively
high correlation with epibenthic fauna at different sites included tanaids,
cumaceans, calanoid copepods (especially at Morse Creek), and polychaete
annelids.

     Several taxa of epibenthic crustaceans, which are important in the prey
spectra of nearshore fishes, may not have been effectively sampled during the
survey.  The two most notable taxa are sphaeromatid isopods and mysids.
Although sampled by the suction pump, they did not represent the proportion
of the total epibenthos which was reflected by their occurrence in the stomach
contents of the predators.  This was especially true at the exposed sites of
Dungeness Spit and Kydaka Beach, where mysids formed an important component
of the prey spectra of such species as juvenile Pacific tomcod, juvenile
English sole, and sand sole, and yet were not sampled at all.  This suggests
(1) extensive selection of these taxa by nearshore fishes; (2) ineffective
sampling using the suction pump; or (3) differential occurrence of the organisms
in the water column between the time of the beach seining and the time of the
epibenthic pump sampling.  In the case of the mysids, it is suspected that
their patchy distribution and probable diel aggregation in the water column
also contribute to the lack of sample overlap.  Systematic diel sampling,
perhaps coordinated with nearshore epibenthic sled sampling or plankton net
sampling by SCUBA diver, would have to be conducted before the question of
mysid availability will be resolved.

     Results from the epibenthic pumping of tidepools at Slip Point indicated
that sphaeromatid isopods were available to the pump, at least in the situa-
tion of a contained volume of water which was completely filtered.  Sphaero-
matid isopods are mainly associated with rocky nearshore habitats and are
preyed on by the fishes found in that habitat—prickleback, gunnel, and some
sculpins.

     The lack of overlap in epibenthic pump samples and stomach samples in
some instances was associated with the inability of the suction pump to
capture large epifauna such as crab's, true infauna such as bivalves, some
polychaete annelids, and fish.  Diets of predators utilizing these organisms,
such as staghorn sculpin, cannot be adequately assessed using only this
methodology even though they can be considered to be principally epibenthic
carnivores.  Similarly, sessile organisms such as barnacles often contribute
measurably to the diets of fish inhabiting rocky nearshore areas; overlap in
the epibenthic assemblage will also be low in these cases.

     Gammarid amphipods, although not always a prevalent group numerically,
usually contributed significantly to the total biomass of the stomach contents
of many nearshore fish species and were especially prominent in the tidepools
sampled in the rocky intertidal habitat at Slip Point.

     According to occurrence in the diets of predominant nearshore fish
collected at all nearshore sites along the strait (Table 41, Appendix  6.10),

                                      103

-------
Table  41.  Gairanarid amphipod  species  consumed  by 12 common species of
            nearshore  fish collected along Strait of Juan de Fuca,
            August 1978.   + =  occurrence,  t = abundant;  number  is mean
            wet  weight  in grams.
                                    Smooch-                Redtail       Ribbon   Black
                     Pacific Widow  Padded  head  Rosy lip  Tide poo I Fluffy  surf-   High   pricklt- prlckl*
Pray
Carr-Tiaridea
Amphithodac
Amphithoe simulans

Aoridac
Aoreidcs Columbia*

Atylidae

Cilliopitdac
Calliopiella pratti

Euceridae



Gamma rldae

Melita ealifornica

H. desdichata

Hyalellldae

Hyalidae
_*i-t *P"
H. rubra

Ptrallorchestes ochotensif

Iiaeldat
Phoci« ap.

_• "V P*S
Podoceropaig sp.

Ischyroccrlda*
^ichyrocerus IP.

Otdlcerotida*
Honocu lodes sp.

Synch*! id lun ghoemakeri

PhoKoe«ph*lld«t
Handibulophoxus gilcsi

PUusctda*

Talicrlda*
OrchescU sp.



+
0.0230

4. +
0.0008 0.0010
+ + 4- + +
0.004 0.0207 0.0070 0.0010 0.0310

+
0.0000
4.
0.0070
1 1
0.0006 0.0015
+
0.0190
-f +
0.0130 0.0180
4
0.0020
•<• • f •
0.0070 0.0025 0.0014 0.0030
+
0.0030
0.0018 0.0001
+ +
0.0075 0.0020
-*• t + .
0.0040 0.0024 0.0013
+ + + +
0.0020 0.0040 0.0100 0.0030

4.
0.0117
0.0013
+
0.0001

+
o.ooio

4.
0.001
+
0.0001

4-
0.0004



+






+
0.0010
4.
0.0137





0.0003











1
0.0014




















o.ooot


                                      104

-------
 the prevalent amphipods included Aoroides columbiae,  Atylus tridens,  Accedo-
 moera vagor,  Melita californica, M.  desdichata,  Hyale rubra,  and Parallor-
 chestes ochotensis.   There was considerable overlap in amphipods in  stomach con-
 tents and those in plankton pump samples, especially with Aoroides columbiae and
 Melita desdichata (both exclusively  collected in tidepools) and  Hyale rubra
 and Ischyrocerus sp.   There were more cases where the epibenthic pump sampled
 species were  not utilized by the nearshore fish  (Amphilocus littoralis,
 Gitanopsis  vilordes,  Amphithoe sp.,  A.  simulans,  A.  lacertosa, Calliopius  sp.,
 Corophium sp. ,  £.  baconi, Pontogeneia rostrata,  Maera simile, Megaluropus  sp.,
 Eohaustorius  washingtonianus,  Allorchestes angustus,  Jassa falcata, Lepide-
 pecreum gur j anovae,  Orchomene  sp., Paraphoxus sp. ,  and P_.  spinosus) .   To a
 lesser extent,  species  occurred in stomach contents which had not been
 sampled during  the epibenthic  survey (Melita californica,  Najna  consiliorium,
 and Orchestia sp.).   Although  we cannot verify the  actual availability of
 these amphipod  species  to the  fish predators,  it  would appear that (1) the
 pump quantified the majority of the  amphipods preyed  on by the fish and
 especially  the  more common prey species,  and (2)  the  fish used only a fraction
 of  the species  (and numbers) of amphipods  potentially available  to them.   By
 examining the characteristic habitat types of the species consumed by the
 fish,  we  see  that  the majority of the consumed species are algae-associated,
 as  compared with those which which are  not preyed on,  which are  typically
 sediment-associated  (Simenstad  et al.  1980).      There is also good
 evidence  for  selectivity  by the fish for  the larger species and  sizes (within
 species)  of amphipods available to them;  in almost all cases, the prevalent
 amphipods among the stomach contents had  a higher mean wet weight (Table 41)
 than those collected by the epibenthic  pump (Table 42).   If there are no
 size-related avoidance biases  by amphipods during pump sampling,  we can
 theorize  that the  fish are  optimizing their energy intake per prey organism
 by  selectively  feeding on the  large  species and groups available  in the
 environment (Griffiths 1975).   The implication of such selective  feeding is
 that  only a portion of the  available assemblage of prey organisms constitutes
 optimum food sources for  nearshore fish, and  that habitats where  the  abundance
 of  epibenthos has  been reduced by seasonal phenomena  or unnatural perturba-
 tions—or where  the prey  species or  size composition  has  been altered—may
 not  support an  equivalent density or composition  of nearshore fishes.

 4.10  POTENTIAL  EFFECTS OF  PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ON  THE NEARSHORE FISH
      COMMUNITIES ALONG THE STRAIT OF JUAN DE  FUCA

     There is little doubt  that major releases (greater than 42,000 gallons—
 1,000 barrels or 150 tons)  of  petroleum hydrocarbons  adversely affect marine
 environments.   Recent evidence has documented  the conditions under which
 petroleum is toxic to aquatic  organisms (Baker 1978,  Am. Inst. Biol.  Sci.
 1976, Wolfe 1977, Malins  1977,  Mclntyre and Whittle 1977,   Fish.  Res.  Board
 Can. 1978).   In most cases, acute toxicity has been stressed; problems of
 sublethal and chronic toxic effects  have only recently been addressed.
There is still considerable controversy about  the "significance"  of
petroleum-induced perturbations to biological communities—i.e.,  the
 longevity of the impact, the effect  of significant reduction of prey
populations of important consumer species, the transfer of hydrocarbons or
metabolites from prey to predator, and the rates of biological succession in
determining the recovery of a damaged ecosystem.   Furthermore, the ability  to
detect actual changes in density, productivity, or community structure which

                                      105

-------
Table 42.  Occurrence and relative size of ganunarid amphipods collected by
           epibenthic plankton pump sampling in the Strait of Juan de Fuca,
           August 1978.  Number below occurrence values is relative size in
           grams wet weight per individual.
(itmmarid anphlpod
fiarurtarldea

Aropeliscidae
A^.philocus littoralls

Citanopsis vilordes

Anphithodae
Anphithoe sp.

A. simulans

A. laccrtosa

Aoridae
Aoroides columblae

Atylidae
Atylus sp.

Calliopiidae
Callloptus sp.

Calllopiella pratti

Corophiidae
Corophium sp.

C. baconl

Euslrtdae

Accedomoera vaeor

Pontoseneia sp.

P. rostrata

Gaimnaridae

Kaera simile

Mccaluropus lonsimcrus

Mcllta desdlchata

Haustorlldae
Eohaustorius washinstonianus

Hyalellidat
Ilyalldat

Allorchestes angustus

Hyale sp.

H. rubra

Parallorchestes ochotensls

Isaiedae
Photis sp.

P. brevipss

PrctorcdoU •?.

Podoceropsls sp.

Ischyrocerldai

Ischyrocerus my.
Jassa filcatt

iecuctt
Point
l/m3 g/m3












0.8 0.010
0.0010

66.7 0.024
0.0009




0.8 0.010
0.0020
0.8 0.010
0.0020









0.8 0.001
0.0010
14.1 0.050
0.0011























66.7 0.005
0.0001








2.5 0.000
0.0001


Point
Williams
»/m3 g/r.3



2.5 0.000
0.0001
26.3 C.002
0.0001

7.5 0.005
0.0007
3.8 0.001
0.0003
298.8 0.053
0.0002









188.7 0.080
0.0004

127.5 0.037
0.0001
1.3 0.000
0.0001
76.3 0.005
0.0001
57.6 0.014
0.0002
28.9 0.003
0.0001
908.8 0.347
0.0004












75.0 0.002
0.0000


1.3 0.000
0.0001
1.3 0.000
0.0001



103.8 0.005
0.0001
2.5 0.008
0.0030
7.5 0.001
0.0902
525.1 0.057
0.0001
25.0 0.002
0.0001
508.8 0.042
0.0001


Spit Morse Creek Twin Rivers Slip Point
*/m3 g/m3 l/m3 g/m3 »/m3 g/m3 Ifm3 g/m3
105.3 0.010
0.0001






15.0 0.020
0.0011





1705.4 0.133
0.000}

0.8 0.000
0.0001

7.7 0.008
0.0010
5.0 0.001 0.8 0.000 3.8 0.000 3844.9 0.053
0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0000

78.8 0.008
0.0001




4.2 0.005
0.0012
5.0 0.000
0.0001
6,6 0.004 2.1 0.000
0.0004 0.0001
76.9 0.008 2.1 0.000
0.0001 0.0001


1.7 0.002
0.0010
344.3 0.458
0.0017

7.5 0.003
0.0003

6.3 0.000
0.0000
19.2 0.004
0.0002
76.9 0.008
0.0001
0.8 0.001 27.1 0.019
0.0010 0.0008
3.3 0.006
0.0018

50.0 0.005 139.6 0.010
0.0001 0.0001




2.3 0.000
0.0001


7.5 0.000 25.9 0.007 2.1 0,000
0.0003 0.0006 o.OOOl
3.3 0.000
0.0001
Beach
*/m3 g/m3























5.0 0.003
0.0002











5.0 0.003
0.0005


2.5 0.005
0.0020














2.5 D.005
0.0010
















                                    106

-------
  Table  42.   (Contd.)
Yslanassidae
 Lepidepecreum gurjanovae

 Orchotrone sp.

Edlcerocldae
 Monoculodes sp.

 S/nchelidium sp.

 S^  shocnakeri

Oxocephalldae
 1'araphoxus sp.
1.3  0.000
0.0001
1.3  0.000
0.0001
1.3   0.000
0.0001
                                            22.5  0.004
                                             0.0001
            115.0  0.008
              0.0002
Euscldae
 Paraplcustes nautilus
                                                          37.5  0.008
                                                           0.0002
3.3  0.001
0.0003
                           0.8  0.000
                           0.0001
                                                      23.7  0,007
                                                       0.0003
                                                                                                    2.1  0.000
                                                                                                    0.0001
                                         2.5 0.000
                                         0.0001
                                                            107

-------
  can be attributed to increased hydrocarbon concentrations in the environment
  is often lacking.

      A discussion of the potential effects of petroleum on the marine food
  webs and nearshore communities of northern Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan
  de Fuca is presented in Simenstad  et al.  (1980).      The following is a
  discussion of the results of the three years of nearshore fish surveys along
  the strait as they relate to the vulnerability of nearshore fish assemblages
  to the effects of petroleum.  A discussion of the quantitative usefulness of
  the nearshore fish data to detect measurable changes in fish density and
  biomass has been presented earlier in this report.

      The effect of petroleum on the neritic fish assemblage may vary with
  the species involved.   The juveniles and adults of the species (especially
  Pacific herring, Pacific sand lance, and longfin smelt) appear to be
  transient in the nearshore region.   Since they have the ability to detect
  low concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in the water, neritic fishes may
 be capable of seeking uncontaminated areas.   Certain species in the neritic
  fish assemblage, however,  are strongly associated with the nearshore region,
 particularly the juveniles of several species of Pacific salmon,  the most
 economically important food fish in the region.   The use of drift,  epibenthic,
 and pelagic prey organisms by those species ensures the transport of hydro-
 carbons to higher levels in the food web.

      Because of its  lack of mobility and high sensitivity to hydrocarbons in
 low concentrations,  the ichthyoplankton component of the neritic  fish
 assemblage may be especially vulnerable to oil spills.   It has been demon-
 strated that the success of neritic fish larvae  in locating and feeding on
 patchily distributed food  organisms determines their survival past  this
 critical life history  stage (Arthur 1976,  Hunter and Thomas 1974,  Lasker
 et al.   1970 , Laurence 1974 , May 1974 , O'Connell and Raymond 1970,  Rosenthal
 and Hempel  1973).  Disruption of the phytoplankton and  microzooplankton
 preyed  on by the larval fish during the first few weeks of their  pelagic
 life, even  though only local,  may result in significant larval mortalities.

      The nearshore demersal fish assemblages  may be vulnerable to the toxic
 effects  of  petroleum present  in intertidal and shallow  subtidal regions
 because  of  their restriction to these regions.   Although demersal fishes may
 have  the same capability as  neritic species  to detect, water contaminated by
 petroleum hydrocarbons,  they  may not be able  to  avoid contaminated  waters.
 Juveniles of  many species  (e.g.,  English sole, sand sole,  Pacific tomcod,
 chum  salmon)  use the nearshore environment as a  nursery ground.   In a sense
 they  are  ecologically  constrained to the nearshore environment.   If these
 fishes did  behaviorally avoid  contaminated areas by moving into deeper water
 they would  probably suffer  increased mortalities as a result  of increased
 predation and lack of appropriate food  resources.

     Among  the habitats  studied  during  the three years  of  nearshore fish
 surveys, the  protected bays, such as  Beckett  Point  and  Port Williams,  would
 seem to possess  the greatest potential  for damage to the biotic community.
 Not only were species richness,  density,  and  standing crop of  the nearshore
 fishes typically highest in these habitats, but  also the reduced  exposure to
vave action would prolong the period  required to weather spilled  petroleum

                                      108

-------
beyond a toxic state.  Investigators of the 1969 West Falmouth oil (No. 2
fuel) spill found that in fine sediment, saltmarsh habitats, petroleum became
incorporated into the sediments where it was preserved in a moderately toxic
state until recycled by benthic infaunal organisms or physically removed by
wave action and erosion (Blumer and Sass 1972a,b, Krebs and Burns 1977 , Teal
et al.  1978).  Although the water over oiled sediments may not reach toxic
levels through the leaching process, sublethal but deleterious levels may be
maintained for many years and the prey organisms used by the fish may
continue to act as transporters of petroleum hydrocarbons from the sediments
to the fish.

     The results of the food habits studies of the predominant nearshore fish
species described in this and other reports (Simenstad  et al.  1977,  Cross
et al.  1978,  Simenstad  et al.  1979)      document the importance of detri-
tivorous organisms, especially epibenthic crustaceans, to the nearshore fish
in the region.  Eelgrass (Zostera marina) may be one of the most important
sources of detritus in the nearshore ecosystem (McRoy and Herfferich 1977)
and may also act as sediment traps, serving to entrain detrital particles
where they can be utilized by the abundant detritivorous crustaceans in this
habitat (Kikuchi and Peres 1977).  The epibenthic plankton pump sampling in
August 1978 (this report; Simenstad  et al.   1980)     revealed that the
density and standing crop of epibenthic organisms were higher in eelgrass
beds than in other habitats.  From this evidence it appears that both as a
habitat for invertebrates and fishes and as a major organic carbon source
in nearshore areas, eelgrass is a key feature in the production and diver-
sity of nearshore  fishes. A substantial reduction of the eelgrass habitat or
decrease in productivity would alter the community structure and energy flow
in the nearshore zone.  Petroleum spills are likely to inhibit the rate
processes and structure of detritus-based food webs.  Adsorption of petroleum
hydrocarbons by detrital particles will introduce hydrocarbons directly into
the base of this food web.  High concentrations of unweathered petroleum
adsorbed by detritus may inhibit bacterial decomposition, although some
bacteria which can utilize petroleum will probably be enhanced.  But through
the combined processing of detritus and petroleum by bacteria, hydrocarbon
components or metabolites can be transferred to detritivorous epibenthic
organisms and ultimately to the nearshore fish that prey on them.  This
process of active pollutant transfer is, however, mediated, often in a very
short time, by depuration and metabolic losses of the toxic components.

     One of the more important contributions of the nearshore fish investiga-
tions along the strait has been the first comprehensive survey of the inter-
tidal (tidepool and beneath-rock) fish assemblages of rocky and cobble
habitats.  These habitats make up a large proportion of the shoreline in the
Strait of Juan de Fuca and northern Puget Sound region.  Although the rocky
intertidal may not be as vulnerable to the long-term effects of an oil spill
as the soft-sediment habitats, the fish assemblages and the prey resources
are extremely vulnerable to short-term effects because of their confinement
in pools and beneath rocks at low tide.  Unlike sand and gravel beaches where
the fish move up and down the beach with the tide, rocky intertidal fishes
would be constantly subjected to high concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons
as they accumulated in the intertidal zone with each tidal influx.  The prey
resources of the rocky intertidal fishes, mainly epibenthic crustaceans
associated with algae, would also suffer high mortalities during the initial

                                     109

-------
event.  Because of weathering of petroleum and lack of incorporation into
the substrate in rocky intertidal habitats, the long-term recovery would
probably be quicker than in the soft-bottom eelgrass habitats.

     Of all the habitats studied, the exposed sand-gravel beaches (e.g.,
Dungeness Spit, West Beach) are probably the least vulnerable to oil spills.
Because of wave action, most of the fish species which occur at these sites
are rather transient and are often virtually absent during winter.  The
weathering of petroleum would be more rapid in habitats exposed to wave
action than in the protected habitats.  However, juvenile salmon, principally
coho and chinook, may be abundant in the exposed habitats from spring through
late summer.  As mentioned previously, these neritic fishes may be able to
detect and avoid contaminated waters, but it is conceivable that an extensive
petroleum spill could reduce the populations of prey organisms important to
the juvenile salmon (especially mysids) and transfer petroleum hydrocarbons
to an economically important group of fish utilized by man.

     The time of year of an oil spill may determine the extent of its
effects on the nearshore fish assemblages.  Midwinter through late summer
appears to be critical from several standpoints.  Fish eggs and larvae are
most abundant in the neritic waters between February and May and the survival
rate of entire year classes could be affected by a petroleum spill at that
time.  This period is also an important time for the decomposition of
detritus in the nearshore zone and the corresponding increase in epibenthic
zooplankton; reduction of this detrital source, inhibition of the decomposi-
tion process, or reduction of the first reproductive generation of epibenthic
crustaceans would tend to depress or delay production of many important prey
resources for the nearshore fish.  Spring and summer represent the periods
of maximum density and standing crop of nearshore fish, and more important,
the period of recruitment of many species to nearshore habitats.  Their
dependence on these habitats for growth and protection from predation
emphasizes the potential for deleterious effects from the introduction of
petroleum into the nearshore ecosystem.
                                     110

-------
                                  SECTION 5

                              LITERATURE CITED

American Fisheries Society.  1970.  A list of common and scientific names
   of fishes from the United States and Canada.  Am. Fish. Soc. Spec.
   Pub. 6, 3rd ed., Washington, D.C., 150 pp.

American Institute Biological Sciences.  1976.  Sources, effects and sinks
   of hydrocarbons in the aquatic environment.  Proc. Symp., Amer. Univ.,
   Washington, B.C.

Arthur, D.K.  1976.  Food and feeding of larvae of three fishes occurring
   in the California Current, Sardinops sagax, Engraulis mordax and Trachurus
   symmetricus.  Fish. Bull. 74:517-530.

Baker, J.M.  1970.  The effects of oil on plants.  Environ. Pollut. 1:27-44.

Baker, J.M., ed.  1978.  Marine ecology and oil pollution.  Proc. Inst. of
   Petroleum/Field Studies Council Mtg, Avi'emore, Scotland.  Applied Sci.
   Pub. Ltd., Barking, Essex, U.K.

Banner, A.H.  1947.  A taxonomic study of the Mysidacea and Euphausiacea
   (Crustacea) of the Northeast Pacific.  Part I.  Family Lophogastridae
   through tribe Erythropini.  Trans. Roy. Canad. Inst. 26:345-414.

Banner, A.H.  1948.  A taxonomic study of the Mysidacea and Euphausiacea
   (Crustacea) of the Northeast Pacific.  Part II.  Tribe Mysini through
   subfamily Mysidellinae.  Trans. Roy. Canad. Inst. 27:65-125.

Banner, A.H.  1950.  A taxonomic study of the Mysidacea and Euphausiacea
   (Crustacea) of the Northeast Pacific.  Part III.  Euphausiacea.  Trans.
   Roy. Canad. Inst., pp.  1-55.

Barnard,  J.L.  1969.   The families and genera of marine gammaridean
   Amphipoda.  Bull.  271,  Smithsonian Inst., U.S. Nat. Museum, Washington, D.C.

Barnes, R.D.  1974.  Invertebrate zoology, 4th ed.  W.B. Saunders & Co.,
   Philadelphia,  870 pp.

Blumer, M.,  and J. Sass.   1972a.  Oil pollution:  Persistence and degradation
   of spilled fuel oil.  Science 176:112-1122.

Blumer, M.,  and J. Sass.   1972b.  Indigenous and petroleum-derived hydro-
   carbons in a polluted  sediment.  Mar. Pollut. Bull. 3:92-93.

                                     Ill

-------
 Chester, A.J., D.M. Damkaer, D.B. Dey, and J.D. Larrance.  1977.  Seasonal
    distributions of plankton in the  Strait of Juan de Fuca.  NOAA Tech.
    mem. ERL MESA-24,  71 pp.
Chester, A.J., D.M. Damkaer, D.B.  Dey, G.A.  Heron, J.D.  Larrance.  1980.
   Plankton of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, 1976-1977.  DOC/EPA Interagency
   Energy/Environment R&D Program Report EPA-600/7/80-032, U.S. Environmental
   Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.,  64pp.

 Cross,  J.N.,  K.L.  Fresh,  B.S. Miller,  C.A. Siraenstad, S.N. Steinfort, and
    J.C. Fegley.  1978.  Nearshore fish and macroinvertebrate assemblages
    along the  Strait of Juan de Fuca  including food habits of the common
    nearshore  fish:  Report  of two years  of sampling.  NOAA Tech. Mem. ERL
    MESA-32, 188 pp.

 Eggers, D.M.   1977.   The  nature of prey  selection by planktivorous  fish.
    Ecology 58(1):46-59.

 Fisheries Research Board  of Canada.   1978.   Symposium on  recovery potential
    of  oiled marine northern environments.  Proc.  Symp., Halifax, N.S.,
    October 1977.   J.  Fish.  Res. Board Can. 35.

 Fresh,  K.L.   1979.  Distribution and abundance  of fishes  occurring  in the
    nearshore  surface  waters of northern  Puget Sound, Washington. M.S. Thesis,
    Univ. Washington,  Seattle.  120 pp.

 Fresh,  K.L.,  D. Rabin, C. Simenstad, E.G. Sale, K. Garrison,  and L. Matheson.
    1979.  Fish ecology studies in the Nisqually Reach area  of  southern Puget
    Sound.  Final Rept., March 1977 - August  1978, to Weyerhaeuser  Company.
    Fish. Res.  Inst.,  Univ.  Washington, Seattle, FRI-UW-7904,  229 pp.

 Griffiths, D.  1975.  Prey  availability  and  the food of predators.
    Ecology 56:1209-1214.

 Hart,  J.L.   1973.  Pacific  fishes of Canada. Fish.  Res.  Board Can. Bull.  180.

 Hunter, J.R.,  and  G.L. Thomas.   1974.  Effect of  prey distribution and  density
    on the  searching  and  feeding  behavior of  larval  anchovy  Engraulis mordax
    Girard.   Pages  559-574 in  J.H.S.  Blaxter, ed., The early life history of
    fish.   Springer-Verlag,  New York.

 Johnson, M.E., and H.J.  Snook.   1955.  Seashore animals of  the Pacific  coast.
    Dover Publ.,  New  York, 659 pp.

 Kikuchi, T.,  and  J.M. Peres.   1977.   Consumer ecology of seagrass beds.
    Pages 147-193  in  C.P.  McRoy  and  C. Herfferich, eds., Seagrass ecosystems:
    A scientific  perspective.   Marcel Dekker, New York.

 Kozloff,  E.N.  1974.   Keys to the marine invertebrates of Puget Sound,  the
    San Juan archipelago,  and  adjacent regions.   Univ. Washington Press,
    Seattle,  226  pp.

 Krebs, C.T.,  and K.A. Burns.   1977.   Long-term effects of an oil spill on
    populations of the saltmarsh crab Uca pugnax.   Science 197(4302):484-487.

                                       112

-------
 Lasker,  R.,  H.M.  Feder,  G.H.  Theilacker,  and R.C. May.   1970.   Feeding,
    growth and survival of Engraulis mordax larvae reared in the laboratory.
    Mar.  Biol. 5:345-353.

 Laurence, G.C.   1974.   Growth and survival of haddock (Melanogrammus aegle-
    finus) larvae  in relation  to planktonic prey concentration.   J.  Fish.  Res.
    Board Can. 31:1415-1419.

 Malins,  D.C., ed.   1977.   Effects of petroleum on arctic and subarctic
    marine environments and organisms.   Vol.  II, Biological effects.
    Academic  Press,  New York,  500 pp.

 May,  R.C.  1974.  Larval  mortality in marine fishes  and  the critical period
    concept.   Pages  3-19 in J.H.S.  Blaxter,  ed., The  early life  history of
    fish.   Springer-Verlag,  New York.

 Mclntyre, A.D., and K.J.  Whittle,  eds.  1977.   Petroleum hydrocarbons in  the
    marine environment.  Rapp.  P.-v.  Reun.  Cons.  int.  Explor. Her 171.

 McRoy, C.P.,  and C.  Herfferich,  eds.   1977.   Seagrass ecosystems:  A
    scientific perspective.  Marcel Dekker,  New York.

 Miller,  B.S., C.A.  Simenstad,  L.L.  Moulton,  K.L.  Fresh,  W.A. Karp, F.C.
    Funk,  and  S.F. Borton.   1977.   Puget Sound  baseline program  nearshore
    fish  survey.  Final Rept.  to  Washington  State  Dept. Ecology,  July 1974 -
    June  1977.  Fish. Res.  Inst., Univ. Washington, Seattle,  FRI-UW-7710,  220 pp.

 Miller, D.J., and R.N. Lea 1972.   Guide to  the coastal marine fishes of
    California.  Calif. Fish and  Game,  Fish  Bull.  157, 235 pp.

 Nyblade,  C.F.  1978.  The  intertidal and shallow  subtidal benthos of the
    Strait of  Juan de Fuca, spring  1976 - winter 1977.  NOAA  Tech. Memo. ERL
    IIESA-26, Boulder, Colorado, 156  pp.

Nyblade, C.F.  1979.  The Strait of Juan de Fuca  intertidal and  subtidal
   benthos -  second annual report:  spring 1977 - winter  1978.   DOC/EPA
    Interagency Energy/Environment R&D Program  Report EPA-600/7-79-213,
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, B.C.,  129  pp.

O'Connell, C.P., and L.P.  Raymond.  1970.   The effect of  food density  on
   survival and growth of early post yolk-sac  larvae of  the northern anchovy
    (Engraulis mordax Girard) in  the laboratory.   J. Exp. Mar. Biol.  Ecol.
   5:187-197.

Pinkas, L., M.S. Oliphant, and I.L.K. Iverson.  1971.  Food habits of
   albacore,  bluefin tuna, and bonito in California waters.  Calif.  Fish
   Game, Fish. Bull. 152:1-105.

Ricketts, E.F., and J.  Calvin.  1968.  Between Pacific tides, 4th ed., rev.
   by J. Hedgpeth.   Stanford Univ. Press,  614  pp.

Rosenthal, H., and G. Hempel.   1970.  Experimental studies in feeding  and
   food requirements of herring larvae (Clupea harengus L.).  Pages  344-364
   in J.H. Steele,  ed., Marine food chains^Univ. California Press,
   Berkeley.

                                      113

-------
Sanders, H.L.   1960.   Benthic studies  in Buzzards  Bay.   III.  The structure
   of the soft-bottom community.   Limol.  Oceanogr.  5(2):138-153.

Schultz, G.A.   1969.   The marine  isopod crustaceans.  W.C.  Brown, Dubuque,
   Iowa, 359 pp.

Silver, M.W.  1975.  The habitat  of Salpa fusiformis  in the California
   Current as defined by indicator assemblages.  Limnol.  Oceanogr.   20(2):
   230-237.

Simenstad, C.A., B.S. Miller, J.N. Cross, K.L.  Fresh, S.N.  Steinfort, and
   J.C. Fegley.  1977.  Nearshore fish and macroinvertebrates assemblages
   along the Strait of Juan de Fuca including food habits of the nearshore
   fish.  MESA Puget Sound Project, Marine Ecosystem Analysis Program,
   Environmental Research Labs.  Progress Rept., May 1976 - May 1978.
   NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL MESA-20.

Simenstad, C.A., B.S. Miller, C.F. Nyblade, K.  Thornburgh, and L.J. Bledsoe.
   1979.  Food web relationships of northern Puget Sound and the Strait of
   Juan de Fuca:  A synthesis of available knowledge.  MESA Puget Sound Project,
   Narine Ecosystems Analysis Program, Environmental Research Labs.  DOC/EPA
   Interagency Energy/Environment R&D Program Report EPA-600/7-79-259:335 pp.

Simenstad, C.A., W.J. Kinney, and B.S. Miller.   1980.  Epibenthic plankton
   assemblages at  selected sites along  the Strait of Juan de Fuca, August
   1978.  NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL MESA-46.   73 pp.

 Smith,  R.I.,  and  J.T. Carlton.   1975.   Light's  manual:   Intertidal inverte-
   brates  of  the  central California coast,  3rd  ed.   Univ.  California Press,
    716 pp.

 Sokal,  R.R.,  and  F.J. Rolf.   1969.  Biometry.   W.H.  Freeman, San Francisco,
    776 pp.

 Staude, C.P., J.W. Armstrong, R.M.  Thorn, and K.K. Chew.   1977.  An illustrated
    key to the intertidal gammaridean  Amphipoda of central Puget Sound.  Coll.
    Fish. Univ.  Washington,  Seattle, Contrib. 466.

 Teal, J.M-, K.  Burns, and J. Farrington.  1978.  Analyses of aromatic  hydro-
    carbons in intertidal sediments resulting from two spills of No. 2  fuel
    oil in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts.  Pages  510-520 in Fish. Res. Board
    Can., Symp. on Recovery Pot.  of oiled mar.  northern environ.  Proc. Symp.,
    Halifax, N.S., October 1977.   J. Fish. Res.  Board Can. 35.

 Terry, C.  1977.   Stomach analysis methodology:  Still lots of questions.
    Pages 87-92 in C.A.  Simenstad and S.J. Lipovsky, eds., Proc. First Pacific
    NW Tech. Workshop, Fish Food Habits Studies, Wash. Sea Grant, Univ. Wash.,
    WSG-W077-2, 193 pp.

 Webber, H.H.  1979.  The intertidal and  shallow subtidal benthos  of the west
    coast of Whidbey Island, spring 1977  to winter 1978; first year report.
    NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL MESA-37, 108 pp.

                                       114

-------
Wolfe, D.A., ed.  1977.  Fate and effects of petroleum hydrocarbons in marine
   ecosystems and organisms.  Proc. Symp., Seattle, Washington, Pergamon,
   New York.

Zar, J.H.  1974.  Biostatistical analysis.  Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
   New Jersey, 620 pp.
                                     115

-------
 SECTION 6




APPENDICES
     116

-------
Appendix 6.1  Dates of beach seine, townet, and intertidal sampling.

Beach seine collection dates (month-day)  Townet collection dates (month-day)
   Kydaka Beach
   76-77:  5-17, 8-10, 1-15
   77-78:  5-7, 8-28, 10-14
   78-79:  5-8, 8-18, 1-12

   Twin Rivers
   76-77:  5-16, 8-9, 10-26, 1-18
   77-78:  5-5, 8-27, 10-16, 1-21
   78-79:  5-9, 8-19, 10-17, 1-13

   Morse Creek
   76-77:  5-15, 8-8, 10-25, 1-17
   77-78:  5-6, 8-26, 10-13, 1-22
   78-79:  5-6, 8-14, 10-16, 1-8

   Dungeness Spit
   76-77:  5-13, 8-6, 10-23, 1-14
   77-78:  5-3, 8-24, 1-20
   78-79:  5-7, 8-15, 10-18, 1-10

   Jamestown-Port Williams
   76-77:  5-12, 8-5
   77-78:  5-4, 8-25, 10-17, 1-24
   78-79:  5-11, 8-16, 10-15, 1-9

   Beckett Point
   76-77:  5-14, 8-7, 10-24, 1-19
   77-78:  5-8, 8-23, 10-15, 1-23
   78-79:  5-10, 8-17, 10-14, 1-11

   Alexander_'_s Beach
   77-78:  5-17, 8-26, 10-18, 2-22

   West Beach
   77-78:  5-18, 8-23, 10-17, 2-23
Kydaka Beach
76-77:  5-22, 8-13, 10-2, 12-30
77-78:  5-14, 8-31, 10-22, 12-29
78-79:  5-14, 8-26, 10-22

Pillar Point
76-77:  5-22, 8-13, 10-2, 12-30
77-78:  5-14, 8-31, 10-22, 12-29
78-79:  5-14, 8-26, 10-22

Twin Rivers
76-77:  5-23, 8-13, 10-2, 12-30
77-78:  5-13, 8-31, 10-22, 12-29
78-79:  5-14, 8-26, 10-22

Morse Creek
76-77:  5-23, 8-14, 10-3, 12-29
77-78:  5-15, 8-30, 10-21, 12-28
78-79:  5-15, 8-27, 10-21

Dungeness Spit
76-77:  5-24, 8-14, 10-3, 12-29
77-78:  5-15, 8-30, 10-21, 12-28
78-79:  5-15, 8-27, 10-21

Jamestown-Port Williams
76-77:  5-24, 8-14, 10-3, 12-29
77-78:  5-15, 8-30, 10-21, 12-28
78-79:  5-15, 8-27, 10-21

Beckett Point
76-77:  5-24, 8-14, 10-3, 12-29
77-78:  5-15, 8-30, 10-21, 12-28
78-79:  5-15, 8-27, 10-21

Alexander's Beach
77-78:  5-16, 9-1, 10-24, 12-30

West Beach
77-78:  5-16, 9-1, 10-24, 12-30
                                     117

-------
Appendix 6.1  (Contd.)

Tidepool collection dates (month-day)

   Neah Bay
   77-78:  6-2, 8-15
   78-79:  4-27, 6-7, 6-25, 8-19, 11-16

   Slip Point
   77-78:TI-19, 2-14, 4-8, 5-22, 7-31, 9-16, 11-14, 12-11
   78-79:  1-9, 2-6, 3-6, 4-26, 5-24, 6-22, 7-5, 8-18, 11-15

   Twin Rivers
   77-78:D721, 2-13, 4-9, 5-20, 6-1, 7-4, 7-29, 8-1, 8-16, 11-13, 12-10
   78-79:  1-8, 2-5, 3-5, 4-25, 5-26, 6-5, 6-21, 6-24, 8-17, 11-14

   Observatory Point
   77-78:2-12, 4-7, 5-21, 5-31, 7-3,  7-28, 8-14, 11-12, 12-9
   78-79:  1-7, 2-4, 3-4, 4-24, 4-28, 5-22, 6-4, 6-19, 8-15, 11-13

   Morse Creek
   77-78^2^Il, 4-10, 5-19, 5-30, 7-1, 7-26, 8-13,  11-11,  12-8
   78-79:  1-6, 2-3, 3-3, 4-29, 6-18

   North Beach
   77-78:  12-20, 4-6, 5-18, 6-30, 8-12,  11-10
   78-79:  4-23, 5-21
                                      118

-------
Appendix 6.2  Oceanographic data from beach seine, townet, and tidepool collections:
              a. Beach seine temperature ( C) summary.
Location
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown -
Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander ' s
Beach
X
SD
Appendix 6
Location
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown -
Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach
X
SD

Spring
76/77 77/78
11.
13.
11.
9.
10.
13.


11.
1.
.2

5 11.6
5 9.2
5 10.0
6 9.2
4 10.0
5 13.6
11.5
13.4
7 11.1
45 1.76
(Contd
Spring
76/77 77/78
31.
26.
31.
31.
_
30.


30.
1.
3 29.9
8 19.4
4 31.4
3 31.3
24.4
2 31.1
29.6
26.9
2 28.0
76 4.25
Summer
78/79
10.5
14.0
10.5
11.0
14.5
12.0


12.1
1.77
.) b
76/77 77/78
10.4 11.
12.2 11.
10.6 11.
10.4 11.
12.6 11.
13.8 5.
12,
13.
11.7 11.
1.29 0.
. Beach
0
5
3
2
5
9
0
6
7
88
78/79
12
12
12
12
13
14


12
0
.0
.5
.0
.5 .
.0
.0


.7
.75
seine
Summer
78/79
30.4
28.0
30.2
31.5
12.1
29.9


27.0
7.40
76/77 77/78
30.8 31.
29.6 31.
28.8 29.
30.4 31.
— 27.
30.7 29.
29.
29.
30.1 29.
0.76 1.
5
0
7
1
1
7
3
7
9
39
78/79
30
30
30
30
27
32


30
1
.9
.3
.1
.1
.3
.0


.1
.56
Autumn
76/77 77/78
9.3
7.7 9.0
8.3 10.0
8.4
10.0
9.8 10.1
10.0
9.1
8.6 9.6
0.77 0.49
salinity
Autumn
76/77 77/78
32.0
29.7 30.2
31.2 30.9
31.3
29.9
31.2 31.4
30.5
30.6
30.9 30.8
0.67 0.72

Winter 76/77
78/79 76/77 77/78 78/79 X SD
8.5 — 7.0 10.1 1.24
10.2 9.0 8.0 6.2 10.6 2.34
10.0 8.5 7.5 6.5 9.7 1.36
9.0 7.5 9.0 6.5 9.0 1.11
10.3 — 7.0 6.0 11.5 1.10
10.0 7.7 7.0 6.0 11.2 2.56
9.0
8.0
9.9 8,2 7.9 6.4
0.52 0.62 0.84 0.38
(ppt) summary.

Winter 76/77
78/79 76/77 77/78 78/79 X SD
30.2 — 31.1 30.8 0.45
23.2 14.3 29.2 27.3 2.65
30.7 27.2 31.3 30.5 1.03
30.9 29.7 32.2 31.0 0.37
— 23.3 31.3
30.8 30.1 31.9 30.7 0.36
28.6
24.2
29.6 25.3 31.2
2.99 5.52 1.05
Totals
77/78
X SD
10.6 1.19
9.4 1.48
9.7 1.59
9.8 1.22
9.6 1.89
10.2 3.30
10.6 1.38
11.0 2.89



Totals
77/78
X SD
31.3 1.10
23.7 8.21
29.8 1.87
30.7 0.87
26.2 2.95
30.6 0.81
29.5 0.79
27.9 2.90



78/79
~X SD
9.8 2,57
10.7 3.40
9.8 2.33
9.8 2.60
11.0 3.73
10.5 3.42






78/79
X SD
30.8 0.36
29.2 1.15
30.5 0.67
31.3 1.07
23.6 10.13
31.3 1.18





-------
Appendix 6.2 (Contd.) c. Beach seine dissolved oxygen (% saturation) summary.
Location
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown -
Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach
)C
SD
1— •
O
Appendix
Location
Kydaka Beach
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown-
Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach
X
SD

76/77
109.0
113.0
95.0
110.0

116.0
153.0



116.0
17.81
Spring
77/78
72.4
64.7
59.5
103.5

106.5
156.0
113.5

140.6
102.1
35.12
6.2 (Contd

76/77
9.4
8.6
8.9
8.4
9.5
9.3
12.4


9.5
1.34
Spring
77/78
8.2
8.4
8.5
8.8
8.5
8.9
10.2
8.8
8.9
8.8
0.58

78/79
76.4
128.7
140.5
154.1

128.6
144.6



128.8
27.47
.) d

78/79
9.0
8.6
8.8
9.8
9.4
8.9
9.4


9.1
0.42
Summer
76/77 77/78
87.1
71.9 54.9
84.9 45.7
107.2 112.2

93.8 76.2
104.1 66.5
94.0

131.9
92.4 83.6
12.92 28.98
. Townet
Summer
76/77 77/78
9.5 13.2
9.8 9.4
10.7 9.4
10.0 9.4
10.0 9.3
10.0 10.1
13.5 12.1
10.6
10.2
10.5 10.4
1.37 1.37

78/79
112.6
106.2
139.1
131.7

90.8
140.2



120.1
20.04

76/77
—
107.1
89.8
58.5

—
66.2



80.4
19.25
Autumn
77/78 78/79 76/77
94.0 — 101.3
109.2 -- 100.8
106.9 -- 94.5
98.0

78.8
91.1 — 82.6
—

—
96.0 — 95.4
Winter
77/78
—
98.0
106.7
117.1

95.4
63.0
101.1

101.1
97.5
12.42 — 6.86 16.78
surface temperature (

78/79
12.4
12.0
12.0
12. &
10.7
10.0
10.7


11.5
1.04

76/77
9.0
8.9
9.7
9.6
a. 3
8.9
10.8


9.5
0.68
Autumn
77/78 78/79 76/77
8.2 8.9 8.5
8.6 9.1 8.5
8.1 8.7 7.9
8.4 8.8 7.5
8.5 8.9 7.7
8.6 9.1 7.1
9.7 9.7 7.3
9.4
9.8
8.8 9.0 7.8
0.65 0.33 0.55

76/77
78/79 X SD
72.3 105.2 3.90
102.5 98.2 15.79
87.9 91.1 4.09
94.5 93.4 20.65

91.0 104.9 11.10
78.8 101.5 32.64



87.8
10.89
Total

77/78 78/79
X SD X
84.5 11.03 87.1
81.7 26.01 112.47
79.7 31.80 122.5
110.9 6.89 126.77

89.2 14.32 103.47
94.2 43.09 121.2
102.9 9.87

124.5 20.75


SD
22.18
14.18
29.97
30.10

21.77
36.79





C) summary.
Winter
77/78
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.0
6.2
6.7
6.1
7.1
6.8
6.8
0.44

76/77
78/79 X SD
5.8 9.1 0.45
5.9 8.9 0.59
5.2 9.3 1.19
5.9 8.9 1.14
9.1 0.99
5.8 8.8 1.23
5.8 11.0 2.70


5.7
0.27
Total
77/78 78/79
X SD X SD
9.2 2.73 9.0 2.70
8.4 0.91 8.9 2.50
8.4 0.83 8.7 2.78
8.4 1.02 9.3 2.85
8.1 1.34 917 0.93
8.6 1.41 8.5 1.83
9.5 2.51 8.9 2.14
8.9 1.46
8.9 1.52














-------
Appendix  6.2  (Contd.)  e.  Townet  surface  salinity  (ppt)  summary.
Total
Location
Kydaka Beach
Pillar Point
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit

76/77
32.6
32.5
31.9
28.1
31.0
Spring
77/78
33.1
32.6
33.1
31.6
32.4

78/79
31.6
32.9
32.8
30.9
32.1

76/77
32.4
32.2
31.9
31.8
32.2
Summer
77/78
33.1
33.4
33.4
33.4
33.3

78/79
32.2
32.4
32.5
32.2
32.3

76/77
32.6
32.7
32.6
32.2
32.5
Autumn
77/78
33.0
32.3
32.9
32.9
33.3

78/79
33.4
34.6
34.2
32.3
32.0

76/77
28.3
31.6
31.5
31.8
32.7
Winter
77/78
32.7
32.8
33.1
33.0
33.2
76/77
78/79
32.3
32.4
33.1
32.9
—
X
31.5
32.3
32.0
31.0
32.1
SD
2.12
0.48
0.46
1.93
0.76
77/78
X
33.0
32.8
33.1
32.7
33.1
SD
0.19
0.45
0.21
0.78
0.44
78/79
X
32.4
33.1
33.2
32.1
32.1
SD
0.75
1.04
0.74
0.84
0.15
Jamestown-
Port Williams   30.5   32.3   32.2   31.7   32.8   32.5   32.7   32.8   29.6   32.2   32.7   32.1   31.8  0.94  32.7  0.24  31.6  1.34

Beckett Point   31.3   32.2   32.0   31.6   32.4   32.3   32.0   32.5   32.2   33.1   32.6   32.1   31.7  0.32  32.4  0.17  32.2  0.13

West Beach            31.2                31.4       -         31.-*                30.9                    31.2  0.21

Alexander's
Beach                 31.1                31.4                31.3                31.0                    31.2  0.16

        X      31.1   32.2   32.1   32.0   32.7   32.3   32.5   32.5   32.6   31.6   32.6   32.5

        SD     1.54   0.76   0.69   0.30   0.89   0.13   0.27   0.71   1.67   1.57   0.97   0.42


Appendix 6.2  (Contd.)  f.  Townet  dissolved  oxygen  (% saturation)  summary.

                                                                                                                 —
               	Spring	  	Summer	 	Autumn	  	Winter	     76/77         77/78        78/79

Location	76/77  71/18   78/79  76/77  77/78  78/79 76/77  77/78  78/79  76/77  77/78  78/79     X   SD      X    SD     X     SD

Kydaka Beach     97.0   92.3   87.5   75.3  105.5  106.9  68.0   71.3  100.1  101.6   88.2   85.0   84.5  2.12   89.3  14.10  94.9  10.39

Pillar Point     84.0  100.6   90.9   82.2   74.5  102.1  64.9   71.5  100.0   96.3  86.3    71.0   81.9  0.48   83.2  13.23  91.0  14.19

Twin Rivers      90.0   88.6   93.6   84.8   74.1   65.2  75.9   63.2  100.0   95.5   83.3   29.0   86.6  0.46   77.3  11.15  72.0  32.38

Morse Creek      86.0   92.9   104.3   82.6   62.7  106.0  69.9   79.4  100.0   87.6   84.2   70.0   81.5  1.93   79.8  12.70  95.1  16.91

Dungeness  Spit   86.0   89.8   87.1   72.6   66.3   84."  74.6   60.6  100.0   80.3   81.3    —    75.9  0.76   82.0  11.28  90.4   8.49

Jamestown-
Port Williams    94.0   97.9   81.8   76.8   68.9   74.0  62.8   65.2  100.0   78.3   85.2   79.0   78.0  0.94   79.3  15.14  83.7  11.34

Beckett Point   136.0  137.0   95.0  116.0   92.6   81.8  92.3  104.3  102.2   81.9   89.6   84.0  106.6  0.32  105.9  21.7   90.8   9.57

West Beach             85.6                 —                 71.3                82.5                     79.8   7.52

Alexander'a
Beach                  92.7                68.9                80.2                86.0                     82.0  10.09

        X       96.1   97.5   91.5   84.3   76.7   88.6  71.3   74.1  100.3   88.8   85.2   69.7

        SD     18.19  15.50   7.19  14.64  14.73  16.57 10.27  13.13   0.83   9.10   2.68  20.90

-------
Appendix 6.3  Biological data from beach seine collections, 1976-1978:
              a. Summary of species richness (number of species).

Location 76/77
Kydaka Beach 7
Twin Rivers 10
Morse Creek 9
Dungeness Spit 8
Jamestown-
Port Williams 7
Beckett Point 19
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach
X 10.0
SD 4.6
Appendix 6.3

Location 76/77
Kydaka Beach 0.05
Twin Rivers 0.13
Morse Creek 0.01
Dungeness Spit 0.01
Jamestown-
Port Williams 0.04
Beckett Point 0.50
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach
X 0.12
SD 0.19
Spring
77/78 78/79
4 7
16 12
11 7
5 12
16 17
16 23
14
10
11.5 13.0
4.9 6.2
(Contd.)
Spring
77/78 78/79
0.01 0.05
0.02 0.07
0.02 0.05
0.01 0.13
0.07 0.12
0.03 0.06
0.02
0.73
0.11 0.08
0.25 0.04

Summer
76/77 77/78
13
18
15
13
6
30


15.8
8.0
b.

76/77
1.75
0.74
0.38
0.76
0.10
1.18


0.82
0.59
10
16
15
12
17
27
16
11
15.5
5.3

78/79
13
16
21
12
14
28


17.3
6.1
Summary of
Summer
77/78
18.36
0.58
0.13
0.11
0.64
1.74
0.07
0.33
2.75
6.33

78/79
0.14
0.48
0.02
0.12
0.49
0.98


0.37
0.36
Autumn
76/77 77/78 78/79
10
12 13 16
11 19 20
17 — 17
16 17
25 31 22
17
13
16.3 17.0 18.4
6.4 6.9 2.5
fish density
Autumn
76/77 77/78 78/79
0.05
0.19 0.64 0.20
0.03 0.15 0.24
0.08 — 0.17
1.81 0.47
1.66 0.30 1.12
0.17
0.75
0.49 0.55 0.44
0.78 0.61 0.40
Winter
76/77 77/78 78/79
7—4
12 14 8
12 7
5 5 11
18 9
30 17 22
13
10
13.2 12.0 10.8
9.9 4.9 6.8
(f ish/m2) .
Winter
76/77 77/78 78/79
0.02 — 0.04
0.14 0.12 0.04
0.02 0.03
0.01 0.01 0.02
0.40 0.06
2.03 0.34 0.44
0.54
0.12
0.44 0.22 0.12
0.89 0.20 0.18
Total
76/77 77/78 78/79
X SD X SD x SD
9.0 3.5 8.0 3.5 8.0 4.6
13.0 3.5 14.8 1.5 13.0 3.8
11.8 2.5 13.0 5.2 16.0 7.8
10.8 5.3 7.3 4.0 13.0 2.7
6.5 0.7 16.8 1.0 14.3 3.8
26.0 5.2 22.8 7.4 23.8 2.9
15.0 1.8
11.0 1.4



Total
76/77 77/78 78/79
X~ SD X SD X SD
0.61 0.99 6.14 10.58 0.08 0.06
0.30 0.29 0.34 0.32 0.20 0.20
0.11 0.18 0.08 0.07 0.10 0.12
0.22 0.36 0.04 0.06 0.11 0.06
0.07 0.04 0.73 0.76 0.29 0.23
1.34 0.66 0.60 0.77 0.65 0.49
0.20 0.2?
0.48 0.31



-------
                                                             2
Appendix 6.3  (Contd.)  c. Summary of fish standing crop  (g/m ).
Spring










1 — '
NJ
U)


Location
Kydaka Beach
Twin Rivers
Morse Creek
Dungeness Spit
Jamestown-
Port Williams
Beckett Point
West Beach
Alexander's
Beach

X
SD
76/77
0
0
1
0

0
10




2
4
.39
.32
.70
.33

.12
.35




.20
.03
77/78
0.
1.
3.
0.

4.
1.
4.

1.

2.
1.
35
49
18
08

09
61
78

29

11
72
78/79
1.28
4.32
0.27
0.43

0.20
0.48




1.16
1.59
76/77
6.39
7.06
2.03
2.89

0.38
6.36




4.19
2.78
Total
Summer
77/78
52.07
7.08
2.17
0.48

5.47
12.16
3.30

1.91

10.58
17.17
Autumn Winter
78/79 76/77
1.
17.
2.
0.

0.
0.




4.
6.
66
.92 17.85
83 4.09
12 1.52

95
98 17.00




08 10.12
84 8.51
77/78 78/79 76/77
1.49 — 1.23
5.67 6.65 12.61
1.95 3.86 0.36
3.36 0.11

8.93 2.58
3.78 10.36 13.25
4.38

7.92

4.87 5.36 5.51
2.82 3.19 6.79
77/78
—
9.31
0.20
0.04

1.01
2.31
1.74

1.43

2.29
3.20
76/77 77/78
78/79 X SD X
1.58 2.67 3.25 17.97
8.12 9.46 7.52 5.89
2.05 1.54 1.88
0.22 1.21 1.28 0.20

0.28 0.25 0.18 4.88
1.81 11.74 4.50 4.97
3.55

3.14

2.40
3.28

29
3
1
0

3
4
1

3



78/79
5P X
.54 1.51
.29 9.25
.24 2.32
.24 1.03

.28 1.00
.88 3.41
.36

.20



SD
0.20
5.99
1.85
1.56

1.10
4.67







-------
             Appendix 6.4  Biological data from townet collections,  1976-1978:
                           a.  Summary of species richness (number of species).
ro

Location 76/77
Kydaka Beach 5
Pillar Point 11
Twin Rivers 10
Morse Creek 19
Dungeness Spit 9
Jamestown-
Fort Williams 10
Beckett Point 9
West Beach
Alexander ' s
Beach
X 10. A
SD 4.2
Appendix 6.4

Location 76/77
Kydaka 0.01
Pillar Point 0.01
Twin Rivers 0.11
Morse Creek 0.09
Dungeness Spit 0.03
Jamestown-
Port Williams 0.02
Beckett Point 0.09
West Beach
Alexander ' s
Beach
X 0.05
SD 0.44
Spring
77/78
4
4
4
5
6
6
4
5
13
5.7
2.9

78/79
11
11
9
12
10
9
13


10.7
1.5
(Contd.)
Spring
77/78
0.32
0.01
O.?0
0.76
0.41
0.12
0,01
0.01
0.04
0.29
0.34

78/79
0.04
0.03
0.72
0.09
0.41
0.07
0.03


0.20
0.27
Summer
76/77 77/78
2 6
5 4
13 3
10 8
12 8
9 9
12 6
12
11
9.0 7.4
4.1 3.0
Autumn
78/79
7
9
2
6
8
6
7


6.4
2.2
b . Summary of
Summer
76/77 77/78
<0.01 0.01
0.03 1.66
0.20 0.01
<0.01 5.28
0.04 0.01
0.01 0.03
0.30 0.01
0.23
0.32
0.08 0.84
0.12 1.75
76/77
6
7
7
10
9
12
14


9.3
2.9
fish
77/78
3
6
6
11
12
4
9
4
9
7.1
3.3
78/79
6
7
1
3
3
4
1


3.6
2.3
density
Autumn
78/79
<0.01
0.13
<0.01
<0.01
0.1?.
<0.01
<0.01


0.02
0.05
76/77
0.01
0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.06


0.01
0.02
77/78
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.03
<0.01
<0.01
78/79
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01


<0.01
<0.01
Winter
76/77 77/78 78/79
312
420
600
523
640
533
451
6
6
4.7 3.2 1.3
1.1 2.2 1.4
(f ish/m3) .
Winter
76/77 77/78 78/79
0.01 <0.01 <0.0l
0.01 <0.01 0.0
<0.01 0.0 0.0
0.01 <0.01 <0.01

-------
                                                                                                            o
                  Appendix  6.4    (Contd.)  c.  Summary  of  fish  standing  crop  (g/m  ).
                                                                                                                                  Total
                                  	Spring	  	Summer	  _  . . . A^tunin	_  	U'inter	76/77        77/78         IS/19

                  Location	76/77  77/78  78/79  76/77  77/78   78/79  76/77  77/78  78/79  76/77  77/78  78/79    X      SD    X	SD     X     SD

                  Kydaka Beach    <0.01   0.02  <0.01  <0.01   0.02   0.04  <0.01  <0.01   0.01  <0.01  ^0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01  0,01  <0.01   0,01   0.02

                  Pillar Point     0.01  <0.01  <0.01   0.16   2.29   0.40   0.01  <0.01   0.04  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01   0.05   0.07  0.57   1.14   0.11   0.19

                  Twin Rivers      0.01   0.04  <0.01   0.27   0.01   0.02   0.02   0.03  <0.01   0.01   0.0    0.0    0.08   0.13  0.02   0.02  <0.01  <0,01

                  Morse Creek      0.01   0.03   0.01   0.01  12.31   0.01   0.04   0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01   0.02   0.01  3.09   6.15  <0.01  <0.01

                  Dungeness Spit  <0.01   0.02   0.01   0.29   0.32   0.01   0.08   0,04   0.01  <0.01  <0.01   0.0    0.09   0.14  0.09   0.15  <0.01  <0,01

                  Jamestown-
                  Port Williams    0.03   0.01  <0.01   0.17   0.13   0.18   0.01   0.02  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01   0.05   0.08  0.04   0.06   0.05   0.09

                  Beckett Point    0.04   0.01   0.02   0.92   0.03   0.02   0.38   0.03  <0.01  <0.01   0.01  <0.01   0.34   0.43  0.02   0.02   0.01   0.01

                  West Beach             <0.01                 0.93                 0.07                <0.01                      0.26   0.45
i—•
N5
l_n                Alexander's
                  Beach                   0.03                 1.50                 0.20                 0.02                      0.44   0.71

                          X        0.02   0.02  <0.01   0.26   2.06   0.10   0.08   0.05   0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.01

                          SD       0.01   0.01  <0.01   0.31   3.92   0.15   0.14   0.06   0.01  <0.01  <0.01  <0.0l

-------
Appendix 6.5  Summary of biological data from intertidal collections,
              1977-1978:  a.  Species of fish collected at each site;
              residents (o), transients (*).
Species
Gobiesox maeandriaus
Artedius fenestralis
A. harringtoni
A, iateralis
Ascelichthys rhodorus
Blepsias cirvhosus
Clinooottus acuticeps
C. embryum
C. globiceps
Enophrys bison
Kerriilepidoius hemilepidotus
Oligoaottus maculosus
0. T'imens'is
C. snyderi
Anoplarchus purpurescens
Phytiehthys chirus
Xiphister atropurpureus
X. muaosus
Apodiohthys flavidus
Pholis laeta
P. ornata
Liparis florae
L. cyclopus
L. rutteri
Neah
Bay
o


o
o

o
o
o

*
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
0

o


Slip
Point
o
*

o
0

0
o
o

*
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0

o
*

Twin Observatory
Rivers Point
0 0
*
*
o o
o o
A
O O
0
o
* *

o o
o
* 0
o o
o
O 0
O 0
0 0
0 0
*
o o
* *

Morse North
Creek Beach
o o
*

0 *
0 0

O 0
*
* *
*

o o
* *
*
0 0

* *
*
0 *
o o

0 *
*
*
                                     126

-------
N>
                                                                                              2
    Appendix 6.5  (Contd.)   b.  Density of fish.   Above, density of fish in tidepools (number/in );

                            below,  density of fish beneath rocks (number/rock).
Feb
Location
North Beach
Morse Creek
Observatory
Point
Twin Rivers
Slip Point
Neah Bay
77
__
20.0
1.0
28.0
12.0
23.2
1.1
13.0
1.6
—
78
__
11.8
1.3
28.5
4.7
20.4
0.6
51.0
2.5
—
Apr
77
2.9
14.9
2.1
27.5
6.8
51.1
2.1
15.2
1.6
—
78
10.3
0.4
15.4
0.7
21.4
1.6
15.3
1.4
17.4
1.9
11.3
May
77
3.0
0.9
7.5
2.2
23.3
2.6
43.3
0.9
11.9
2.1
65.8
78
18.8
0.6
—
78.9
1.8
32.2
2.7
10.4
37.8
Jul
77
14.1
0.1
34.4
1.4
18.8
2.5
21.1
2.5
17.8
3.5
—
78
_~.
25.3
2.3
26.1
3.3
—
28.4
3.7
—
AUR
77
7.2
0.6
35.0
4.6
47.8
5.7
23.3
27.9
1.7
1.3
78
	
—
23.3
32.0
43.3
22.9
Nov
77
20.3
0.5
10.7
1.8.
60.7
3.9
16.7
0.5
24.9
6.7
—
78
40.0
1.7
30.8
9.0
22.8
1.3
35.1
0.6
9.4
1.1
9.1

-------
NJ
00
                                                                                                  2
      Appendix 6.5 (Contd.) c. Standing crop of fish.  Above, standing crop of tidepool fish  (g/m );
                   below, standing crop of fish beneath rocks (g/rock).
Feb
Location
North Beach
Morse Creek
Observatory
Point
Twin Rivers
Slip Point
Neah Bay
77
—
32.1
2.9
31.9
28.8
33.7
3.6
29.4
10.9
—
78
—
22.8
3.1
22.6
12.8
19.5
0.6
57.9
15.0
—
Apr
77
9.4
25.9
10.5
48.6
17.1
60.8
12.7
21.9
12.4
—
78
18.7
0.6
18.8
5.6
37.0
1.5
10.4
47.1
30.2
14.3
33.0
May
77
10.4
3.7
11.3
12.8
41.5
10.2
62.9
5.6
31.5
12.4
107.0
78
30.1
4.5
—
114.0
2.4
37.3
41.0
50.9
90.7
Jul
77
30.0
0.4
98.2
2.2
44.0
10.0
25.8
29.2
80.9
16.0
—
78
__
78.8
10.3
22.5
25.2
—
33.3
18.5
—
Aug
77
4.4
3.0
92.2
33.8
73.5
19.2
6.8
47.2
8.2
1.5
78
	
—
52.1
33.0
98.1
73.7
Nov
77
64.6
0.9
11.9
5.0
66.1
9.3
29.4
2.5
79.5
10.7
—
78
126.7
9.2
53.2
12.3
48.4
28.9
64.7
5.7
18.7
11.3
21.4

-------
Appendix  6.6   Summary  of macroinvertebrates  collected incidentally to beach seine
               and  townet samples:   a.  May  1976-January 1977.   B = Beckett Point,
               D =  Dungeness  Spit,  J =  Jamestown,  K =  Kydaka  Beach, M = Morse
               Creek, P = Pillar  Point,  T = Twin Rivers.

Organism	     Beach seine	Townet	
Phylum Cnidaria
   Class Hydrozoa
         Aequorea aequorea                                         ^
         Hydromedusae  sp.                                          P,J,D,B
         Medusa                                 K»D
   Class Anthozoa
         Anfhopleura elegantiasima              B
Phylum Ctenophora
         Bero'& spp.                                                D
Phylum Platyhelminthes
   Class Turbellaria
         Turbellaria sp.                        B
Phylum Nemertea
         Nemertea sp.                           •*
Phylum Mollusca
   Class Gastropoda
         Amphissa colwnbiana                    B
         Llttorina ecutulata                    M,B
         L. e-ifhxna                             B
         Margaritea pupillus                    B
         Nassar-ius mendicus                     B
         Pollinicea letfisi                      B
         Heimissenda crassicornus               M>B
         Melibe leonina                         M»B
   Class Bivalvia
         Clinocax-di-wn nuttalli.                  B
         Cryptomya californica                  J
   Class Cephalopoda                            g
         Octopus sp.                            £
         0. doflein-i
Phylum Annelida
   Class Polychaeta
         Glyaera capitata                                          J
         Platynereis btcanal-iculata            J»B                P
         Polychaeta sp.                                            K,T
         Polynoidea sp.                                            J
         Tomopteria Beptentrionalie                                P,D
Phylum Arthropoda
   Class Crustacea
      Order Mysidacea
         Aaanthomyeis davisi                    M                  T
         A. maaropsis                                              K,P,T,D,M,J
         A. nephpophfhdlma                                         PtD»M
         A. sculpta                             T,D,M              T,D,M,J
         A. eaulpta var nuda                    D»M                D,J
         Arohaeomysis grebni.txki-i-               D»M                K,P,T,D,M,J
         Boreomysia micropa                                        T

                                     129

-------
Appendix 6.6   (Contd.) a. May 1976-January 1977.
Organism _ Beach seine _ Townet _
         Myaia oaulata                                           T,D
         Neomyaia sp.                                            P,D
         N. kadiakena-ia                                          K , P , T
         N. mercedia                                             T
         N. rayU                              D,M               K,P,T,D,M
         Pfoneomyeie vtaileai                   D                 T,D,J
         Myaid sp.                             K,D
      Order Cumacea
         Diastyis sp.                                            T
      Order I so pod a
         Argeia pugettenaio                    K,D,T
         Bopyroides hippolytea                 B
         Gnorvnosphaeroma sp.                                    J
         G. oregonensia                        K,D,M             J,D,M,T
         Ida tea fewkeai                        D,M,J,B
         J. rufeaoena                                            D
         Ligia pallaai                         M
         Pentidoteo. montereyenaia              K,M
         P. reaecata                           D,J,B             J,P,D,M,T
         P. Hosnesenskii.                       K,T,M             D
         Pocinela bellioepa                    T,M               J,D,K,M,T
         Synidotea angulata                    J
         S. bicuspida                                            K,P,D,J,B
         Teotioepa pugettenaia                                   D
      Order Amphipoda
         Ampheliaca agaaaizi                                     D
         A. pugeti-ea                           D
         Amphithoe sp.                                           p
         A. humeralis                          B                 J,D
         A, lacertoaa                          T,J,B
         Anieogarnnarua canfervicolue           T
         A. pugettensie                        J,M
         Anonyx latiooxae                      D,M,B             J,D,K,M
         Atylus collingi                                         T
         A. tridene                            T,D,M,B           M,J,D,K,P,B,T
         Caprella leviuecula                   D
         Corophium breoia                                        M
         Gammaridae ap.                        p,B
         Hyole plumiloaa                       B
         Mel-ita dendata                        J,B
         Metacaprella kennerlyi                B
         Orcheatoidea pugettenaia              D
         ftmtogenta -ti>a?ioui                    M                 D,M
         P. roatrata                                             D,M
      Order Euphausiacea
         Eupkausia  sp.                                           T,M
         Euphauaia paeifica                                       P
         Thyaanoeaea inermia                                      P
         7.  longipes                                              p
         21.  raaehi                                                p
         T.  apinifera                                             p
                                     130

-------
  Appendix 6.6  (Contd.)  a.  May 1976-January 1977.
 Organism	Beach seine	Townet	
      Order Decapoda
         Callianasoa oalifoimiensia                              J
         Crangon sp.                         T                   J
         C. alaskenaia                       T,D,M,J,B           J,D,K,P,B,M,T
         C. comrtunia                         B
         C, fronc-iacoriffn                     D,M                J,D,M,T
         C. nigricauda                       T,D,M,J,B           D
         C. etylirostrie                     K,T,D,M            J
         Eualus avinus                       M                   J
         E. fabricii                                             T,D,M,J
         E. pusiolus                         T,B
         E. suckleyi                                             T
         E. towisendi                                            J
         Heptacarpus breoirostTis            T,J,B               D
         H. kineaidi                                             M
         H. paludicola                       J
         H. aitchenais                       J, B
         H. stimpsoni                        B
         H. stylus                           M,B                J,M
         ff. taylovi                                              J
         tf. tenuiasimts                      M,B                K,P,M,x
         PandaZus darwe                      D,B                D,B
         P. montogui tridens                 B
         P. etenolepia                                           T,D,M,J
         Sclerocrongon alata                                     D,J
         Spirowtocariff arcuata               B
         5. snyderi         ^                 B
         Upogebia pugettenais                J                   D
         Cancer mxgiater                     K,T,D,M,J,B
         C1. oregonensia                      M, B
         C". prcductus                        D,B
         Fafcia aubquadrata                                       P,D,J
         Laphopanopeua bellus                B
         Megalops                                                j^g
         Oregonia gracilia                   j,B
         Pagurus armatus                     B
         P. beringanue                       J,B
         P. gr«nosimamis                     B
         P. hirautiuaculue                   B
         PetroHathes eriemerua              B
         Pugettia graeilis                   P,M,J,B
         P. prc^«cta                         J,B                p
         P. richit                           M,B
         Telmeasua cheirogonus               J,B
         Zoea                                                    T.D.J.B
Phylum Echinodermata
   Class Asteroidea                          .
         Fuaaterios "	*--*"
         Henricia leviuacula
   Class Echinoldea
         Dendraater excentricua
                                     131

-------
Appendix 6.6 (Contd.)  b.  May  1977-February  1978.  A - Alexander's Beach,
                B = Beckett  Point, D  = Dungeness  Spit,  J =  Jamestown,
                K = Kydaka Beach,  M = Morse Creek,  P =  Pillar  Point, PW =
                Port Williams, T = Twin Rivers, W = West Beach.    (Note:
                Jamestown and Port Williams are equivalent  sites.)
                  SPECIES (U8 total)  	BEACH SEINE (92 spp)   TOWNET (95 spp)

                  Phylum Cnidaria
                    Class Hydrozoa
                       Aequorea aequorea         D                    D,PW,P
                       Awelia mrita            M
                       Cyanea capillata.          K                    M
                       Gonionenrue vertens        J                    P
                       Poluorahis penicillatua                         P
                       Unidentified jellyfish     T                    M.B.A.W
                       Unidentified hydroids                           P
                  Phylum Ctenophora
                       Berve spp.                                     P»M
                       Pleurobronchia spp.        B                    B,KtA,W
                       Unidentified ctenophore                         T,A
                  Phylum Nenertinea
                       Unidentified nemertean                          PW
                  Phylum Mollusca
                    Class Gastropoda
                       Aglaja diomedia           B
                       Callioetona  ligatum                            K
                       Collisella inatabilis                           P
                       Collisella pelta          B
                       Eanrinoea spp.             B
                       Haminoea vireseeno                             K,M,A,W
                       Hermissenda  crassicornie   B
                       Littorina  spp.            J,W
                       L. plemaxis               JfB
                       L. 8cu.tula.ta             B
                       L. sitkana                                     A
                       Meli-be leonina            B                    D
                       Hotoacmaea pereona        JfW
                       Notoacnaea scutm         J
                       Nudibranch spp.           B,K
                       Pkiline spp.                                   Pw
                       Polliniaee  leuiei         K,B
                       Pteropod spp.                                  PH,W
                       Thais lamelloaa           A,W
                       Unidentified snail                             P
                    Class Bivalvla
                        Clinocardiwa nuttalli     J,W                  P
                       Mytilua edvlie             B
                        Trestie capox              B
                                               132

-------
Appendix 6.6   (Contd.)  b.  May  1977-February  1978.
                     Class Cephalopoda
                         Gonatus fabr-iaii                                 P.PW.A.W
                         Loliao opaleacene                                 P,PW,A,W
                         Oatcpus spp.                                      *
                   Phylum Annelida
                     Class Polychaeta
                         Flobelligera infundibularis                       A
                         Ua.losya.YM breuieetasa                             P
                         Lepidasthenia  interrupta                          K-
                         Nereis vexillosa          A
                         Nereid spp.                B,J                    K,A
                         Nothr-uz elegans                                  pw
                         Phyllodocid  spp.          B
                         Polychaeta spp.           B,A,W
                         Tomopteris septentrionalie                        P,M,D,W
                     Class Hirudinea
                         Unidentified  leech        B
                   Phylum Arthropoda
                     Class Crustacea
                       Order Mysidacea
                         Asantkomyeis columbiae                           W
                         Aaanthomysis daviai.                              T,M,PW
                         A. macropsta                                      K,P,PW,B,W
                         A. nepfafopht'nalma                                T,PW,B
                         A. pseudonacropsia        W
                         A. eculpto.    '           A,W                   K,D
                         Ara'naeomusis  grebnitzkii  W                      K,P,M,D,PW,A,W
                         A. maaulata                                      D,W,M
                         Hysid spp.                W
                         Mysis oaulata                                     PW
                         NeovysiB auatschenensis                          W
                         N. Xadiaker.sis                                   W
                         N. rayii                                         K,P,T,M,PW,B,A,W,»
                       Order Cumacea
                         Unidentified  spp.         J                      P,T,D,PW,A,W
                       Order Isopoda
                         Dyncanenella glabra                               P
                         Dunamenella shear-i                               P
                         Gnorirnosp na eromx
                            oreaoneneis            M,W                   K,M,D,W
                         Jdotea  spp.                 W
                         Ida tea feukesi             T,w
                         Pent-idotea aculeata        H
                         P, montereyensia           M,J,A,W               A
                         P. reaecata                J,B                   K,P,T.M,D,PW,A,W
                         P. uosneser.skii            T.M.J                 P
                         Rooinela bellicepe         M.D.A                 K,P,M,PW,B,A,W
                         Rocinela propodialia                             T,D,A
                         Sur.idotea ancrulata                               P,PW,B
                         Synidotea bicuepida        W                     A,W
                         Tecticepe pugettensie                            M
                                                 133

-------
Appendix 6.6   (Contd.)  b.  May 1977-February
                   Order Amphipoda
                     Amphithoe spp.             W                     M
                     Amphitlvye foimeralis                              K,P
                     A. laaertosa               J.B.A
                     Anortyx latiooxae           K,M,D,J               K,P,M,D,PW,A
                     AtyluB eo'ilingi.            T
                     Atylue tridena             T,M,J,A,W             K,P,M,D,PW,B,A,W
                     Calliopi.ua spp.            V
                     Caprello. penontia                                T
                     Gamnaridae spp.            K,T,M,J,A,W           K,P,T,M,D,PW,B,A,W
                     Hyperildae spp.                                  D,A
                     Westwoodilla caecula       W                     P,A,W
                   Order Euphausiacea
                     Euphausid spp.                                   A
                     EuphiUB-ia pacifica.                               PW,A,W
                     Thysanoessa rasa'ni-i                              P,D,B,W
                     T. epini-fera                                     P,T,B,A,W
                   Order Decapoda
                     Callianassa californiensia                       PW
                     C, gigas                                         PW
                     Cancer gracilia            B,A,W
                     Cancer magister            K.T.M.D.J.B.A.W
                     C. oregcnensis             D,B
                     C, productua               T.J.B
                     Crangonidae spp.                                  PW
                     Cronaon alaskensie         K,T,M,D,J,B,A,H        K,P,M,D,PW,A,W
                     Crangon niariaauda         K,T,M,J,B
                     Crangon etylipostfia       K,T»M,D
                     EuatitS spp.                B
                     EvaT.ua avinus              J,A,U
                     Dualus fabriaii            W                      K,M,PW
                     Dualua pusiolua                                   PM
                     Eualus toonsendi           B
                     Henrigrapsue oreganensis    T
                     Heptacarpus breviroetris   K,T,M,D,J,A            A,W
                     H. flexua                  M,B                    K,P,T,M,D,PW.B,A.U
                     H. kincaidi                B                      P.M.PW.A
                     H. paludioola              J
                     H. piotus                  J
                     K. et'imvBoni               B                      A
                     ff. stylus                  B                      T,M
                     B. taylori                 T.J.B.A                T.PW
                     H. tenuisaimua             W
                     ff. tvidena                 M                      M
                     H-ippolyte  alarki          J, B
                     Hippolytidae  spp.          B                      K,P,M,D,PW,B
                     LebbeitB grandimanua        B                      P
                     Kegalopa                                          K,M,D,W
                     Oregonia araeilia          J,B
                     fagurua berinricmua         B
                     P. eop-illatua             J,B
                                                  134

-------
Appendix 6.6   (Contd.) b. May  1977-February 1978.
                        P.  'hi.psuti.ssul.us           J,B,A,W
                        P.  granos-inanus            J,B,A,W
                        Kzanfus spp.               M
                        Pandalidae  spf,            B                     K,P,M,D,PW
                        Pandalus danae             T,M,D,J,B,A           K,M,D,PW,B,W
                        P.  goniurus                                      K,M,D,A,W
                        P.  montagui tridens        A                     P,M,PW,B,A
                        P.  platyaeTOB              B                     B
                        P.  stenoiepis                                    M
                        Pinnotheres pugettensis                          P,D
                        P.  toy IOTT,                                       D
                        Pugettia gracilia          M,J,B,A               D
                        P.  product a                J, B
                        P. ria'nii                  B,A,W
                        Sclepoaranson aiata                              P,W
                        Spirontocaris sp.                                 A
                        Tel^eaeus ckeiragonua      T,J,B
                        Upoaebia pugettenais       J
                        Zoea                                             T,A,W
                  Phylum Echinodenaata
                    Class Asteroldea
                        Ker.ricia leviusaula        D
                        Leptasterras hezxzctus      J
                    Class Echinoldea
                        Dendraster excentricus     W
                    Class Ophluroidea
                        Ophiopholis aauleata                             f
                  Phylum Chaetognatha
                        Unidentified chaetognaths                        P,T,M,PW,A,W
                  Phylum Bryozoa
                        Unidentified bryozoans                           K(P
                                                 135

-------
               Appendix  6.7 Macroinvertebrate  abundance and  biomass raw  data,  May  1976-January  1977:
                                 a.  Beach  seine samples  (biomass  in g,  size in mm).
u>
Site;  Jamestown
Crangon alaak.en.sia
C.  nigricoitda
Septaaarpus brevirostris
H.  paludiaola
S.  sitchensis
Upogebia pugettensie
Amphithof Taaeftoea
Anisogamxpua pugettensis
Melita dendata
Idotea feakeei
Pentidotea reseaata
Synidotea angiilata
Nemertean sp.
Polynoldae sp.
Platynereis bieandliculata
Canaer magiater
Oregcnia gracilis
Pugettia gracilia
Pugettio. products
Telmeeaua che-iragonus
Cryptonya oaHfomiaa
     Total
                                   No.
                                            ttay 1976
                                          Biomass
                                           (gr)
                                                    Stze
                                                          BEACH   SEINES
                                                         	August 1976
October 1976
                                                      Range
                                                           Biomass
                                                       Ho.  (er)
                                                                                Size
                                                                                                                                  January 1977
                                                                               x  Range
                                                                                                   Bioroass
                                                                                                              Size
                                                                                                                        Biomass
                                                                                                                                            Size
                                                                                            No.
                                                                                                        Range
17
10
9
9
15
3
9
1
3
1
6
2
1
10
8

1
7
2
19(1*)-

.37
5.0 6.4 5.0-9.0
5.7 8.3 5.0-10.0 25 23.0 7.3 2.0-13.0
6.5 7.3 A. 0-11.0 2 O.L 3.0 3.0
1.5 4.5 3.0-4.5
1.7 3.1 2.0-1.5
0.4 2 2.8
1.0 16 1.2
0
0
0
1.6
0
0
0.7
0.4
2 — 5.1
2.1 14.0
15.2 12.2 8.0-29.0 2 2.8 13.0 10.0-16.0
9.5 21.0 18,0-24,0
84.3 22.1 15.0-35.0 7 — 6.0 2.0-7.6
1 0.2
135.6 57 30.1
                                                                                             SITE NOT SAMPLED
                                                                                                                            SITE NOT SAMPLED
             The first number indicates  the total number of individuals collected; the number In parentheses indicates  the number of Individuals used to calculate
              the average size or weight.

-------
           Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  a.  Beach seine samples.
00
                                                 BEACH  SEINES


Species
Site: Dungeness Spic (10X
Cranaon alaekcnsis
C. franoisaorum
C. nigricauda
C. stylirostris
Pandalus danae
Amphelisaa pugetisa
Anonyx laticoxae
Atylus tridens
Caprella leviussula
Orchestoidea pugettensis
Argeia pugettensis
Gnorirnosphaeroma creg.
Pentidotea reeecctta
Cancer minister
C. productus
Pagurus beringanus
Acanthomysis sculpta
A. sculpta var. nuda
Archaeomysis grebnitskii
Neomysis rayii
Proneomysie uailesi
My aid sp.
Evasteriaa troscheli
Henricia leviussula
Meduea SP-
Total


Mo.
sample
13

1
48

1

1
1
2
3
2
1
1








1


75
May 1976
Size
D1OH13SS -"" ~ 	
(gr) x Rnnge
size)
6.7 8.0 6.0-10.0

0.3 10.5 --
91.4 10.4 6.0-14.0

0

0
0
0
0
0
0
8.7 37








21.6


128.7


No.

18
1
10
18
6


16



38

5
1
1
126


16



2

258
August 1976 October 1976 January 1977
.,. . , Size „,•„,„__ Size n,-nm,cc size
DiOTnsss 	 u loniass oiorruiss 	
(gr) X Range No. (gr) x Range No. (gr) x Range

15.9 8.6 4.5-13.0
0 8.0 11 18.6 12.1 8.0-15.0
10.6 10.1 8.0-15.0 21 43.4 12.5 8.0-17.0
'32.3 10.1 5.0-15.0 27 40.6 12.7 9.0-17.0 12 28.8 14.3 9.0-22.0
6.5 9.6 8.0-16.0 2 6.6 33.5 32-35

6 1.6 20.5 1 0.2 20
0.7 2 0.1 15.0


3 0.2 2
3.2

6.3 2.5-14.0 24(16) 18.7 17.08 10.2-25.0 4 12.0 26 21.0-32.0
10.16
5-8 57 i.o 11.72 10-13
2.5 49 0.7 13.14 10-15
1 0 11
1 0
0 1 0.1 22
1 0 17
1 0

38.6
1 0.1 21
116.1 93 86.4 150 86.3

-------
                 Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  a.  Beach  seine samples.
                                                                     BEACH   SEINES
LO
00
Species
Site:  Horse Creek
Ceangon ala.eken.eie
C.  francisconm
C.  nigricaudo.
C.  etyliroetrie
Eualus minus
Heptasarpua stylus
H.  tenuiaaimua
Anisogomarus pugettensia
Anonyx latisoxae
Atylua  tndens
Argeia pugettensis
Pontogenia ivanavi
Gnorimoapbaeronn ofeg.
Idotea feukeei
f.  oosnesenskii
ligia pallaei
Pentidotea mntereycnsie
Kocinela bellicepe
Conner magiater
C,  oregoneneie
Pugettia graailia
P.


no.
2

3
5

1

3

37



5

May 19'76 August 1976
Size ,, Size
(gr) x Range No. (gr) x Range
2.6 9.0 9.0 8 1.9 5.3 S.0-6.5

7.6 10.7 9.0-12.0 6 6.7 8.1 5.0-12.0
9.2 9.7 8.0-15.0 5 6.5 9.1 6.5-13.0

0 4.5

.0.1

1.3 1 0.1


1 0
1.1 1 0.1
6 2.1
October 1976 January
Size
No. (gr) x Range No. (gr)

6 10.5 12.8 9.0-16.0 4 3.3 10

13 16.4 12.2 9.0-17.0 7 13.6 13
4 5.6 11

7 4.3 17

1 0.2
1 0,2 1 0.1
1 0
1 0.1


3 2.0 27.7 23.0-31.0
1977
Size
x Range

.8 9.0-12.0

.1 10.0-15.0
.0 10.0-14.0

.0 15.0-19.0








                                             0.1
                                                                                                        4.5   23
                                             0.1   6.5
 1      0.5
 1      0.5
 1      0.3
10(3)   12.6+ 12.7 7.62-40.0
                                                                                                                                       0.7   10.0

-------
                Appendix 6.7   (Contd.)  a.  Beach  seine  samples.
co
vo
Littorina  ecutulata
Acanthomysis davisi
A. sculpta
A. sculpta var. nuda
Arohaeomysie grebn-itzkii
Neorrtye'La fayii
Hermissenda crassicornis
Melibe leon-ina
     Total
Site:  Beckett Pt.
Cvangon alaskensis
C. commmis
C. nigricauda
Eualue pusiolus
Heptacarpus brevirostrie
H. sitahensis
H. Btimpsani
H. stylus
Heptaoarpus tenuissimus
Pandalus danae
P. montagwi tridena
Spirontocaris arcuata
S. enydern.
Amphithoe humeralia
A, laaertosa
                                     29
                                     179
                                                                      BEACH   SEINES


Mo.
1
1

29
20
May 1976
Size
(gr) x Range
0
0

0.5
0.4
August 1976
Size
No. (gr) x Range


293 8.4


October 1976 January 1977
Size „. Size
No. (gr) x Range No. (gr) x Range




4 0.3 19.5 17.0-23.0
                                            •23.0
                                                                    5    0
                                                                   328   25.8
                                                                                                  25      33.8
13
6
30
42
41
9
198
7
1
1
• 1
2
7.1
0.7
10.3
6.3
2.7
1.3
18.6
7.1
0.1
0.1
0
0
7.6
3.5
4.7
3.9
3.4
5.0
4.2
11.3
3.0
4.0


3.0-13.0
2.5-4.5
2.5-8.5
2.5-5.0
2.0-5.0
3,0-7.5
2.0-6.0
3.0-14.0 14 36.7 29.6 22.0-38.0
1 0.2 13.0



                                                                                                  13
                                                                                                          32.5   32.2  24.0-40.0
                                                                                                                                  42     41.4
                                                                                                                                   15
                                                                                                                                   13
18
1.9"
9
1
       8.0
       4.5
4.3
18
0.6
      10.5 5.0-15.0
      12,9 6.0-11.0
10.8 5.0-17.0
21.8 15.0-35.0
9.3  8.0-11.0
                                                                                                                                         0.6   12.0

-------
Appendix 6.7 (Contd.) a. Beach seine samples.
                                    BEACH  S E I N E S


Species
Anonyx latieoxae
AtyluB tridene
Gamm. amphlpod sp.
Hyale pluntulosa
Melita dendata
Metacaprella kennerlyi
Bopyroidea hippolytea
Idotea feakesi
Pentidotea resecata
Platynereie • biaanaliculata
Turbellaria sp.
Cancer magister
C. oregonensia
C. productus
Lophopmopeus bellus
Oregonia graailie
Pagurue atmatue
P. beringanus
P. granosimanus
P. hirsutiuBculus
Petrolisthee eriomerus
Pugettia graailis
P. producta
P. riohii


Me.

5
2
1
1
3
1
1
20
6


1

1
24
3


3

10


May 1976 August 1976
Size . Size
oiomass 	 Biomass 	 	
(gr) x Range No., (gr) x Range No.

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.7 2
0.1

3 — 6.8 6.4-7.6 4
0.2 16.0
1
0.2 11.0
25.5 10.2 7.0-14.0 2 0.3 5.0 4.0-6.0
0.9


0.2 1 1.3

6.0 10.5 6.5-17.0
2 13.4 23.0 22.0-24.0 3
3 20.0 22.3 22.0-23.0 1
October 1976
n. m,qt Size
(gr) x Range No.
1







1.1 37 32.0-42.0 9

6
14.6 10.2-17.8 3(1)

3

2

9
5
19'
1

54.8 32.3 28.0-40.0 4
0.8 11.0 5
January 1977
n. „„„ Size
Biomass — ~— ~™ — ~_ —
(gr) x Range
0.2







3.1 30.7 25.0-40.0

0.4
1.9 15.04 8.89-21

2.2 12.3 9.0-15.0

0.9 8.0 8.0

56.3
1.1
12.7
0.4 8

21.4 16.8 8-29
6.0 12.4 11-14

-------
         Appendix  6.7   (Contd.)   a.  Beach  seine  samples.
                                                              BEACH   SEINES
Species
 Telmessua  cheiragonus
 Hcmissenda  crass.
 Helibe leonina
 Amphissa colimbi-ana
 ClinoetXKlium nuttalli
 Littorina  saulata
 L. sitkana
 Margarites pupillus
 Sassarius  mendicus
 PolliniaeB 'leuisi
 Dendraeter exaentricus
 Anthopleura  elegant.
 Octopus sp.
      Total
 Site:  Twin  Ri-ver3
 Cfffngon sp.
 C. alasksnsis
 C. nigriaauda
 C. atyliostris
 Eualue pusiolus
 Ueptaaar-pits brev.
AmpJiithoZ lacertosa
Anieogaat. aenferviaolua
Atylus tridens

Ho.
29
37
2
I
1
32
4
May 1976
CJ y'o
Biomass 	 2^-== 	
(gr) x Range
0
0.1
0.1
3.8
0.2

No,
6
20
1
1
1
August 1976
Biomass 	 _Size — • —
(gr) x Range
2.7 S.O 2.5-13.0
0.6
October 1976 January 1977
Bioraass 	 ^ 	 Biomass - -Size
No- («r) x Haiipe No. (gr5 x Range
7 78.1 26.3 20.0-49.0 1 7.7 23
2 6.8
 2
 2
11
 7

 5
 1
0.1
99.4
                       1    0.9
                      58    76.1
                                                    31
                                                            167.3
1.4   0
3.8   10.0 10.0
11.9  8.5  7.0-12.0    47    54.4  8.7   4.0-14.0
10.2  10.3 8.5-12.0     2    1.4   7.5   5.0-10.0
3.9   7.1  6.0-7.5
0
                            5.2    5.8   3.0-8.0
                                                                                      1
                                                                                    147
                                                                                    10
                                                                                     3
                                                                                     4'
                                                                                            160.7
                                                                                             18.1  13.3  12-17
                                                                                             6.6   14.7  13-18
                                                                                             2.4   7.3   5.0-8.0
                       1     0
                      15     0

-------
                Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  a.  Beach  seine samples.
                                                                  n n A c 11   s  i:  i N K s
ro
Species

Argeia pugettensis
Idotea feukeai
t. uosncsenskii.
Rocinela belliceps
Cancer magister
Asanthomysis eculpta
     Total
Site: Kydaka Ft.
Cnmgon etyliroetrie
Avgeia pugettenaie
Gnofimoephaeforna oreg.
t. votenstnskii
Pentidotea montereyensis
Cancer magister
Medusa sp.
Dnident. mysld
     Total

Mo.






30
28
5



2


35
Hay 1976

(gr) x Range No.
1
1
1

86
.9
31.2 170
65.0 20
0
1
2

5.3 5.0-5.5


65.0 23
August 1976
BJ Size
(fir) x R.-inj',c
0
0.3
0.1

10.9 5.1-17.8
0.1
71.5
34.4 10.0 5.5-15.0

0.1
0.4




34.9
October 1976
Hi,,....- Size
No. (cr) ~^ Rancc- No.



1
40 0 12.4 7.6-17.8 4

40 0 22
36
2
SITE NOT SAMPLED

1
1
2
7
49
January 1977
... Size
E i oma ;: s 	 	 —



0.4 22
15.56 7.62-15.24

27.5
64.7 14.1 10-20
—


0.2 25
2.3 23
3.9
0.2 14.1
71.3

-------
Appendix 6.7   Macroinvertebrate abundance  and biomass  raw data,  1976:
                   b. Townet  samples  (biomass  in  g,  size in mm).
                                                 T 0 WN E T  SAMP L E S
 Species
 Site:  Jamestown
 Callianasaa calif orniensis
 Cnoigon sp.
 C. alaekensis
 C. ffansiesorum
 C. Btylirostris
 EuaZ.ua avinus
 E.  fabrioii
 E. tounaendi
.Beptooorpus stylus
 B. taylori
 Pandalue otenolepis
 Sclerocrcngon alata
 Amphithoe himeralis
 Anonyx latiooxae
 Atylua tfidens
 Onorimoephaeroma sp.
 G. oregonensie
 Pentidotea reseoata
 Kosinela bellicepa
 Synidotea bicuspids
 Glyaera oapitata
 Fabia aubquadrata
 Crab negalops
May 1976- AuRust 1976
n- SIzr- i;i,n
niomnss Biomass 	 	 	
K°- __(nr)_ x R.mr,e No. fnr^ » IM,,.,.. Fn
1 4.7 67
1 0.1 5.5 —
S5 16.8 5.4 2.5-7.0 52
13 3.6 6.8 5-12
1 0 5.3 —

35 6.0 10.7 7-18 7

18

2
7 0.9 22.1 19-30
3 0.3 17.3 17-18 94
79 5.1 — — 17 1.0 17.7 11-22 6

109 —
1 0.1 — —

1 0.1 11
14 5.9 — —
December 1976 October 1976
Biom.iss 	 S-i« 	 Biomnss - - Sizo


5.7 6.5 4-13
49 18.9 7.0 3-13

2 0.8
2-° — ~ 60 21.9 14.6 8-20
7 0.9 10.9 9-15
2.3 —
7 7.3 24.7 20-30
0.1 18 16-20
4 0.7 23.5 20-27
17.3 22.4 19-25 4 0.8 19 18-20
6.2 20.2 18-22 40 3.7 16.2 12-23
3 0.2 8.7 7-10


1 0.7 37


                                                                                   2.8   115
                           0.1   3.7  3.0-4.0
                                                3    o.l

-------
    Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  b.  Townet  samples.
Species
Crab zoea
Aequorea aequorea
ttydpomeduaa sp.
Asanthomy sis maazvpeie
A. aaulpta
A. aculpta veer,  nuda
Arohaeomygia grebnitakii
Proneonyeie uaileei
     Totals
Site:  Dungeness Spit
Crangon alaakensie
C. francieeorwn
C. nigricauda
Sualua  fobricii
Beptoeorpua breviroetris
Pondalua danae
P. atenolepia
Selerocrvmgcn alata
Ifpogebia pugeiteneie
Amph-il-isea agaseisi
AmpMthoe humemlia
Anonyx laticoxae
Atylue tridene
                                                            T 0 W H E T   SAMPLES

No.
200



464
7







1



24
Hay 1976 Aunust 1976
Blomnss S1-- - 	 Bioraass Si7c~
(gr) x Range- No. (gr) x Ranjjc No.
2 0.5 24 23-25 1
0.3 — —



28.4 83 17.2 181
2.7 6.8 5.0-8.0 50
13 1.5 5.6 3-8
1
12 2.1 10.2 6-21 71
3
1
1 0.5 18
1 0.3 6
0.1 — —
10 —
207 4-10 3
1 0.1 15 — 1
1.1 — — 184 15.6 16.4 4-21 39
December 1976
Rir,m,_.. Size
(Er) x Rnnp.e No.
2.7 55 — 4
6
1
3
6
39.1 197
16.0 7.8 7-11

0.2 7
18.1 13.7 9-19
0.5 5 4-7
0.9 22




0.4 20 19-21
0.2 21
4.9 18.6 11-23
October 1976
Size
Biotnnss — - — — 	
(fir) x R.inRe
3.0 48.5 38-55
0.1 11.8 10-13
0
0.2 17.7 17-18
0.4 15.5 13-21
59.6














-------
     Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  b.  Townet  samples.


Mo.

A


2
Hay 1976

(gr) x Ran

0.1


0 — ,—
August J976
S i z e
£6 No. (gr) x Ra







i-nyu No.
1


3
1
TVcember 1976
i> > S j ?. e
(f.r) x RanKt
0.1 17


0.1 13
07 —
October

No. (gr)
SITE

S A M P L


1976
Size
x RanfiC
NOT

E D


                                                        ' 0 W S E T  SAMPLE S
                            	May 1976	
                                   Bioniass	*—	
 Species

 Pontogenia ivanofi
 P.  rostrata
 Hestuoodilla caeoula
 Onorimospftaeroira oreganensis 2
 Idot-ea rufescens                                           ±    0.1   15
 Pentidotea reseeata                                                                      ^        0 1   22
 P.  •oo&enaenski.                                             2    0.2   13     8-18
 Rocinela bellicepa                                         1    o_j   14
 Synidotea bicuspids          10     —   —                                        1012-
 Teatieeps pugettensis                                     59    5.5   11.9   g_ig
 Tomopterie aeptentrianalie   6      0     —   —
 Fabia eubquadrata            4      0.1   3.3  2.5-4.0
 Crab zoea                                                  5    0-1   __                 10
 Uydromedusa                 31      —
 BeroS sp<                                                                                2        0.4   21    19-23
 Thysanoeeaa -inermis
 AaanthomyBie macpopsie                                     5    18.o  5.8    15-22        6        o.l   16.2  13-18
 A.  nephrophthalma            20     —                                             1        0     17    —
 A.  eeulpta                                                u,    0.4   14.1   13-15       124       2.0   9.5   9-12
 A.  eaulpta var. nuda                                                                     1        0     17    __
 Afohaeomfsis grebnitrtii    34      2.3                                                 121       6.8   18    13-20
Myait oculata                                             22    1.0   15.5   13-22
Seomyaia sp.                                                                              1        0     —    —
Heomyais rayii                                             1    Q_!   24     	

Pfoneomyeis uaileei                                                                       4        0.1   15.5  13-18
My aid, unidentified                                                                       5        Q     12.4  12-13
     Total                   118     6.4                    325   46.6                    442        50.9

-------
           Appendix  6.7  (Contd.)  b.  Tovmet samples.
                                                       TOHMET  SAMPLES  1976
a\
Species
Pugett-ia graoilis
P. producta
Hydromedusa
Euphauaia pacifica
Thyeanoessa langipea
T. raschii
T. spinifera
Aoanthomyais. maeropsia
A. nephrophtholma
Avchaeomyeia grebnitzkii
Neomysia sp.
N. kod-iakenaia
N. royii
Total
Site: Beckett Point
Crongon alaakensis
Pondalua donae
Atylua tridens
Synidotea bicuspida
Crab megalops
Crab zoea
Hydromedusae
Total
Ho.


71
6
16
22
7
3
1
1

2
3
139

11

3
5
1
26
• 112
158
May August December
Tllonwqfl Sl2S n-tnmaqa -...Size Size
(g) -x Bange No. (g) x Range No. ($5) x Range
2 12.5 19.5 11-28
1 14.8 31
— ~L
0.1 ~
1.3
0.3+
0 ~~ "•"
0
A — ^ «
o
4 0.2 20.8 15-24
0 ~
0 — — —
1.8 12 29.7

0.9 4.3 2.0-5.0 NOT SAMPLED
4 5.3 21.0 18-25
0
0
0
0
0
0.9 4 5.3

-------
Appendix 6.7 (Contd.) b. Townet samples.
                                            TOWNET SAMPLES   1976
May
Species No. (g) x ' Range
Site: Kydaka
Crangan alaskensie
Heptaaarpus tenuiseimua
Anonyx laticoxae
Atylus tvidens
Roeinela bellicepa KOT SA'MPLED
Synidotea bicuspida
Polychaeta
AcanthoKTysis macropaie
Arahaeomysis grabnitzkii
Keomysis kadiakensis
Neomysis rayii
Octopus dofleini
Total
Site: Pillar Point
Crangon alaekensis 1 0.1 7.0 —
Heptaoarpus tenuiesimua
Amphithoe sp.
Atylus tridena 20 — —
Can. amphipod ap.
Pentidotea reeeoata
Synidotea bicuspida 10
Platynereis bioanaliaulata 10
Tomopteria septentrionalia 10
Pabia subquadrata 1 0 1.5
August
No. (g) x Range No.
9
6
1
7
NOT SAMPLED 1
1
1
60
9
10
10
1
116


2 1.1 16.5 12-21
1 0.5 34

10 4 —
1 0.6 39




Bece
Biomass
1.9
0.4
0.2
0.5
0.2
0
0
2.3
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.7
7.1









KOT S

mber
Size
x
6.3
8.3
20
19.7
16
7
—
17 . 5
14.6
17.1
19.3
12










A M P L

Range
2-18
5-11
—
12-21
~
—
—
12-21
11-16
14-22
14-22
—










E D


-------
           Appendix 6.7 (Contd.) b. Townet samples.
                                                       T 0 W N E T  SAMPLES  1 976
00
Species
Site: Morse Creek
Crangon alaokenaia
C. fronciacorun
Eualua fobricii
Heptacorpue kinaaidi
B. stylus
R. tenuisaimue
Pondalus atenolepia
Anonyx laticoxae
Atylus tridens
Copophium brevis
Pontogenia rostrata
Weetuoodilla aaeeula
Gnorimosphaeroma oregonenoie
Pentidotea. reaecata
Rocinela bell-ioeps
Euphausid (unldent.)
Aoanthomyaia maoropsia
A. nephrophthalma
A. sculpta
Arohaecmysis grebnitzkii
Neorryaie royii
Bero'e sp.
Total
Mo.

3



40



6

1

4
3
1


1
6
159
3

227
May
(g) x Range No.

0 6.9 6.5-7.0
3

19
6.6 5.10 4-8

2

0 ~ — 3

0 __ —

0.1
0.1
0 —


0
0 ™ ™~
6.4
0

13.2 27
August
lUnr-Ann Sl2C
(g) x Range IJo.

80
0.5 5.3 3-8

1.4 8.5 6-10 1

13
1.8 24
6
0.2 16.3 16-17 23
1

7


1
1
4


317
214
2
3.9 670
Decent
Qiomass
(a)

24.4


0.5

1.9

1.2
2.3
0

0.2


0.1
0.1
0


16.6
5.8
0.5
53.6
her
Size
x Range

10.2 2-14


8

5.7 4-8

22.3 20-24
19.2 15-23
15

12 11-13


15 —
18
14.5 12-17




25 20-30


-------
          Appendix 6.7 (Contd.)  b.  Townet samples.
                                                     TOWNET   SAMP L E S  1976
vo
May
Biomass 	
Species 	 No. 	 (g) x
Site: Twin Rivers
Cfangon alaskensie
C. ffanoisaonm
Eualua fabricii
E. auckleyi
Heptacarpus tennis swrrus
PandaluB stenolepie
Atylus collingi
A. tiridens m 13 0.2
Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis
Pentidotea reaecata
Rocinela belliceps
Polychaeta sp.
Crab zoea
Euphausld sp.
Aeanthomysis daviei ^ 0-1
• / f\ "I Q
A. maeropsts *° i'°
A, sculpta
Archaeomysia grebnitzkii
Boreornysia micrope
My sis oculata
Neomysis Tdadiakensie 19 0.1
N. mercedis
N. rayii 2555 91.9
Proneomyais uaileai
Diaatylue sp.
Tr,hai 2634 94.1
August
Size .. Size
Range No. (g) x Range No.

5
2 0.3 5.5 4-7
237
39

3 0.2 14.1 12-18 4
3 0.1 8 — 1
2 0.3 18.5 12-25 6
1 0.2 18
2
1f\
0
2

52
8
4
3

4
30 4.8 22.4 20-25 1856
57 3.4 18.9 11-25

99 9.3 2229
Decemb
Blomase
(K)

1.3
41.0
8.7
n
U
0.2
0.8
0.2

0.2

1.4
0.1
0.2
0.1
0 1
V • J.
0.2
61.6

116.1
er
Size
x

6.6
12.8
6.2

17.3
19


21.5

15.8
11.1
22
19.3
20.5

18.3
6.3


Range

2-11
10-19
5-11

10-20
13-29
—

19-24

10-22
10-12
14-30
18-21
20-21

15-20
5-9



-------
            Appendix  6.7 Macroinvertebrate abundance  and biomass raw data  (biomass in g):

                           c. Beach seine and  townet samples,  1977-1978.
Ul
o
Site: Kydaka May
i Beach Seine
Species I No. Biomass
Cyanea
Plewobremchia spp.
Catliootoma liaatvm
Haminoea vireeaens
Nudlbranch spp.
Itillinicea leoiai
Lepidasthenia
interrupta
Nereid spp.
Acanthomyaia macro fais
A. acutpta
Archaeomysis grebni.ts.kii
Heomyais rayii.
Gnor imysphaeroma
oregoneneie
Pentidotea resecata
Rocinela bellieeps
Amphithoe faneralia
Anonyx tatieoxae
Atylue tridens
Gamnaridae spp. '
Cancer magieter 1 . 60
Crangon alaakenaia
C. nigricauda
C. etylirostrie 7 10.35
Eualue fabrioii
Heptacarpua breviroetria
H. flexus
Hlppolytldae
Mcgalops
Pandalldae
Pandalue danae
P. ganiurus
Unidentified bryozoans
Total 8 10.95
"immature C, magieter filled the
1977
Townet


August
Beach Seine
No. Biomass


1




3

3
1
3.


2




6







+
2
2


1
24 -1.
wings, too
Cyanea bell measured 200 imn; not weighed.


04




28

03
01
10


95




07







+
06
03


77
78
No.
1
•*•


1












14


33a
9
1
5

1







65
numerous
measured
Biomass
_b
+


.56












1.09


55.99
3.45
.30
6.81

.32







68.52
to count
in field
1977 October 1977

Townet Beach Seine Tovnet
No. Biomass No. Biomass No.



1

1 b





6
4

1
2
2 .28
3 .08 17
2
2 .04 12
3 1.16
39° 174.28
5 1.28 116 177.08 2


97 21.09

15

11 .27

1
1

120 23.04 15.9 352.52 64
, size approximately 20-25 mm.
(RoZHnicee).
Biomass



.07







.21
.08

.01
.16

3.11
.16
.60


.03




3.34



1.42
1.78

10.97


D«. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Townet
No. Biomass No. Biomass








2 .08


856 36.66





11 .28



1 .05



2*> 1
.23






- - 872 37.38


             C62 C,  magieter were measured but only 39 weighed; 23 vcre measured  In field and released.
             +Pre8ent, but not enumerated or weighed.

-------
Appendix 6.7   (Contd.) c. Beach seine and  townet samples,  1977-1978.
Site: West Beach May 1977
Beach Seine ' Townet
Species No. Biomass No. Biomass
Jellyfish + +
Pleurobranehia sp.
Haminoea vireeseene 1 .24
Littorina spp. 107 .04
Notoaanaea persona
Pteropod
Thaie lamelloea
Clinoeardiim nitttalli
Gonatua fabricii
Loligo opaleeaena
Polychaeta 1
Tcmopteria
eeptentrionalie
Acanthonysie colwribiae
A. maeropaia 8 .44
. A. peeudomaaropai.s
A. aculpta 10 .19
Archaeomyeis
grebnitzki-i 1 .06
A, maculata 102 2.64
Mysld 33 . 18
Neomyaia oucrtechenaia
H. kodiakeneia 120 5.08
N. rayii 32 1.00
Cumacean + +
Gnorimaphaeroma
oregoneneie 1 .15
Ida tea sp. 3 .01
Ida tea feukesi 1 .02
Pentidotea montereyene-ia
P. reaecata \ . 13
Kocinela belliaepe
August 1977 October 1977 Dec. 1977 - Feb. 1978
Beach Seine Townet Beach Solne Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass

2 .56
2 .45

1 .15
1 .15
3 34.07
1 5.85
1 1.16
6 18.89 1 3.72


1 .02
1 .06

1 .02
35 .66

1 .03 43 1.78


7 .43

24 1.31 70 2.92


2 .06


1 .50

1 .46 3 1.38 3 .78

-------
            Appendix 6.7  (Contd.)  c.  Beach seine  and townet  samples,  1977-1978.
Ul
K>
Site: West Beach
Hay 1977
Beach Seine Townet
Species No. Blonass No. Blomass
Synidotea bicuspida
Amphithoe spp. +
Atylue trideno
Calliopiua spp.
Cammarldae 1230
Veotuoodilla caecula +
Euphaueia pacifica
Thyeanoeeoa raechii
T. epinifera
Cancer gracilis
C. magioter 10
Crangon alaskensis 16
Svalus aoinue 10
E, fabrieii 1
Beptacarpua breviroetris
H. flexuB
H. tenuieeimua 1
Megalops
Pagurus hirentiuaculrtt
P. granoeimanue
Pandalue danae
P. goniiania
Pugettia riehii
Sclerocrangon alata
Zoea
Dendraeter excentricue 1
Chaetognath
Total 1402
1 .04
+
280 11.76

7.19 8 .12
+

20 1.35
104 8.60

13.37
8.92 7 3.08
6.26
.61


.21
+ +






+ +
53.55
+ +
90.76 684 34.48

August 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Biomase No. Blomass


12
1





1
1
23





6

1


2




90


.09 13 .90
.01




1 .08
10.50
.68
10.29





.14

1.54


4.10




68.57 19 3.22
October 1977 Dec. 1977 - Feb.
1978
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Bio mass No. Blomass
2

15 1.08 117

4 .08 23
10
25

1 .07 15

3 46.75
16 13.15 68


16
14


1 .61

1
1 - 1

2



77 23.39 20 60.51 401
.04

7.33

.69
.32
.73

.96


7.85


.74






1.86

.08



30.54
          •(•Present but not quantified.

-------
 Appendix 6.7   (Contd.)  c.  Beach  seine and  townet  samples,  1977-1978.
Site:  Alexander Beach
        May 1977
                                                        August  1977
                                                           October 1977
                                                                                                        Dec. 1977 - Feb.  1978
Species
Beach Seine

No. Biomass
  Townet

No. Bioraass
Beach Seine

No. Blomass
  Townet

No.  Blomass
Beach Seine

No. Blomass
                                                                                            Townet

                                                                                          No. Blomass
Beach Seine

No. Blomass
  Tovmet

No. Blomass
 Jellyfish
 Pleurobranchia sp.
 Ctenophora
 Haminoea vireocene
 Littorina eitkana.
 Thais lamillosa
 Gonatue fabriaii
 Loligo opaleaaena
 Octopua spp.
 Flobelligera infundibularis
 Nereis vexillosa
 Nereid
 Polychaeta
 Acanthormjaia aculpta     1
 ArehaeomysiB grebnitakii
 Neomyeia rayii
 Cumaceans
 Pentidotea montereyeneie
 P. reeeaata
 Rooinela belliceps
 K. propodialis
 Synidotea bicuspida
 VeetDoodilla oaecula
 Amphithoe lacertosa
Anonyx latiaoxae
 Atylus tridene
 Gammaridae               1
 Hyperlldae
 Euphausld
 Euphausia pacifiaa
 Thysanoeesa epinifefa
                                     7     .88

                                     1   29.61
               1
                                           .32
                                     2     .06



                                     3    1.05

                                     5     .16
                                  1560   81.80
                              .02    25     .31
                            4   63.11
                                 2.24
                                                   5     .40
                                                              100   23.73
                                                                1    9.79
                                               ,10
                                               .75
                                               .66
                                                                                   .26
                                         11     .95    17
                                              1.22
                                         1
                                        56
                                         4
                                         1
                                         2
                                                            .07
                                                            .12
                                                            .02
                                  .04
                                3.80
                                  .04
                                  .02
                                  .02
                                                                                                             2.68
                                                                          .08
                                  .08
                                                                   12
                                                                    9

                                                                    2
                                                                    1
                                                                    1
            155
             41
              2
              1

             41
              3
                                                                                                                            .42
                                                                                                                            .29
                                                                                                                            .26
                                                             .31
                                                             .35

                                                             .08
                                                             .31
                                                             .03
       .06

     14.53
      9.13
       .32
       .04

      1.11
       .15

-------
             Appendix 6.7  (Contd.)  c.  Beach seine and townet samples,  1977-1978.
Ul
Site: Alexander Beach
Species
Cancer gracilia
C. nagiater
Cfongon alaakeneia
Kualua ouinus
Heptacorpus brevirostris
B. flexus
H. kinaaidi
H. etimpeoni
H. • taylori
Paguna hirsutiuBoulus
P. granoeimanuB
PandaluB danae
P. goniwniB
P. nontagui tridena
Pugettia graoilio
P. richii
Spirontocaria spp.
Zoea
ChaetoRnaths
Total
May 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass


3 1.16 21 15.33






3 27.70
2 2.35


2 1.98



+ +
•f +
10 31.23 1627 131.50

August 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blonass No. Blomass
2
6
70
5






1
2



3



103
9.93
11.70
25.56 3 .79
1.10






.31
.94
ft 3.84
1 .46

.18
1 .05


115.47 130 41.12
October
Beach Seine
No. Blomass


30 12.41





5 2.00




4 18.33
1 .47




58 34.69
1977

Townet
No. Blomass


1


2
1
1





11





89


.23


.96
.52
.11





18.58





24.53
Dec
. 1977 -
Beach Seine
No. Blonass

2
28

46



2
2
4








87

19.14
14.88

19.24



2.61
1.75
10.77








71.23
Feb. 1978
Townet
No. Blomass


7 1.11

2 .17














283 28.67
           ^Present but not enunerated

-------
           Appendix 6.7  (Contd.) c. Beach seine and townet samples, 1977-1978.
Oi
Site: Beckett Point
Species
Jellyfish
Pleurobwmahia sp.
Aglaja diomedia
Collieella pelta
Haminoea spp.
Uermieaenda
craee-icornia
littorina plmaxis
L. ecutulata
Melibe leoni.no.
Nudlbranch
Pollinicea leuiei
Mytilua edulia
Treaua capox
Nereid
Phyllodocld
Polychaeta
Leech
Acanthomyeia tnacropeie
A. nephrophthalma
Neony sis rayii
Pentidotea resecata
Rooinela bellicepe
Synidotea angulata
Amphithoe laaertoea
Atylus tridene
Cammarldae
Thysanoesea raeehii
Thysanoesea spinifera
Cancer gracilio
Cancer magieter

May 1977 August 1977 October 1977 Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blontass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass

15
2
1
3

2
10
1
1


1

2
1
2
1



8





i

10

50 3.18
6.89 50 2.04
.56
.06
.29

2.91
.18
.05
19.67
1 2.16
«
.02
2 92.61
.11
.02
.03
.02
5 .06
1 .02
9440 768.40
3.75 3 1.26 3 .46
1 .36
1 .03
2 .13
10 .64
7 .10
20 .44
5 .24
9.75 3 1.79 2 136.60
8 20.19 4 2 43.13

-------
              Appendix 6.7  (Contd.) c.  Beach seine and  townet  samples,  1977-1978.
Ul
CM
Site: Beckett Point
Species
Cancer oregoneneie
C. producing
Crangon ataakena-io
C. nigricauda
Elialus spp.
E. tcunaend-C
Ueptacarpus flexus
H. kinoaidi
B. etimpsani
H. stylus
H. taylori
H-ippolyte clavki
Hippolytidae
Lebbeuo grandimanuo
Oregonia gracilia
Pagurua beringonus
P. copillatue
P. hirsutiusculuB
P. granoeirnanue
Fandalldae
PandaluB danae
P. nontagui tridens
P. platyceroo
Pugettia gracilis
P. produota
P. riohii
Telmeaeue oheiraqonua
Total

May
Beach Seine
No. Blomass

1
14
3
14
1

9



150

1



10
7





4


274

1977
August 1977
Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Biomass
3
_
9 (3)* 78. 73
23.95
1.78
6.98
.24

.81



11.98

.01



3.21
.98





18.45


112.70
1





8



2 .01

9


1
2

66




3
55(52)*
151 6.77 110
1.16





.87





.94


.21
1.80

77.70




.21
135.12
318.85 1 .36

October 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass

2
13




2


8

+
1



1

+
182

59
4
1

25
308

140.20
12.75



41 12.60
.31


5.76

+
.14



1.44

+
580.86 7 9.38
11 23.20
220.80 2 9.81
8.10
3.50

306.00
1419.88 9501 823.39
Dec. 1977 -
Beach Seine
No. Blomass


42



3
1

1
7




3
1
14


2


1
8


94


40.33



1.26
.08

.22
1.27




97.20
.11
6.96


7.60


1.02
22.68


314.93
Jan. 1978
Townet
No. Blomass




























            *Telnessus:  55 caught but only 52 weighed - 135.12g.  C.  productus:  9 caught but only 3 weighed.
            •4-Present but not enumerated.

-------
 Appendix 6.7  (Contd.) c.  Beach  seine and townet samples,  1977-1978.
Site: Point Williams

Species
Aequorea aeqvorea
Gonionenie vert ens
Nemertean
Littorina spp.
L. planaxia
Notoacmaea persona
May 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Biomass

1 .40
1 .02

Beach
August 1977
Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Biomass
3

1
2
2.15

.03
.07
October 1977 Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass
21 16.34


N. ecutim
Philine spp.
Pteropod
Clinoaardiim nuttalli •
Gonatus fdbricii
Loligo opaleecena
Nereid
Nothria elegane
Aaanthamysia daaiei
A. maaropeia
A. nephrophthalma
A. paeudomacropsis
Arohaeomyaia grebnitzkii
My sis oculata
Neomyeie ray-ii
Cumaceans
Penttdotea montereyensie
P. feeecata
P. uoeneeenakii
Roeinela belliaepa
Synidotea angulata
Amphithoe lacertoaa
Anonyx latiooxae
Afylue tridene
Gammaridae
                                                                   .17
                                                2     .60
         1   65.88
11.48
                      2    1.23
                                         .28
                                                                                .T?
1
1
5
1

5
1
1
+
6.03 1

1



.11 52
.04 116
.11
.01
.06
.01

.19
.03
.04
1
.14
3
.07

2

3.05 6
2.02 3


2 .02

2 .10


I .03
.19 1 .13 2 .20
* .st
.80
1 .54
3 .12
.05
i .20 51 12.55
.24 1 .05 1 .13 3 .41
.02 3 .41 2 .13 5 .57 1 .04 1 .17

-------
             Appendix 6.7  (Contd.)  c. Beach seine and townet samples, 1977-1978.
Ul
00
Site:
Point Williams
Species
Euphausia pacifiaa

May 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. BiomasB No. Blomass



August 1977
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Binmass


Callianaeea aaliforniensio
C. gigae
Cancer magiater
C. produotue
CranRonidae
Crongon alaekenais
C. nigrioauda
EualitB aoinus
E. fdbriaii
E. puaioTuB
Heptacorpus breoiroBtvie
H. flexue
H. kincaidi
H. paludicola
H. piotuo •
H. taylori
aippolyte clarki
Hlppolytldae
Oregonia graoilie
Pagicmo capillatus
P. hireutiuscttluB
Pagurua granosimanue
Pandalldae
Pcmddlue danae
P. montagui tridena
Pugettia graoilis
P. products
TelmeeouB cheiragonus
Upogebia pugettenais
Leptaateriaa hexaatite
Chaetognaths
Total


1

1
1
27






2

10

1

1
1



23
1
9



93
S 2.62

-
+ +
.57 10 3.93
4.23
16.36






.22
1 .19
1.14
+ +
.44

1.95
.14
+ +


26.77
23.73
U5.77


+ +
227.52 207 31.94

2
1

3







1

47


4

4


64

14
1
1


164

2.65
-

1.51


1 .11
1 .04



.24

14.88

3 .58
1.01

21.02


58.80
1 1.20
17.37
13.78
1.04


201.73 15 3.67
October 1977 Dec
. 1977 -
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine
No. Blomass No. Biomass No. Blomass

1 2.05

37 289.44 16
3 - 1

67 101.92 1 1.53 66




30 25.09 30
82 45.62 2
3 1.71


3 1.76



1
5 8.13 5


2 6.40 37 72.27
25 49.36
1 2.53 7
16(2)a 6.18 1

1

"T66 440.36 183 192.22 137



14.97
4.22

50.38




18.60
.31







2.04
6.76




3.88
8.60

2.01

112.38
Jan. 1978
Tovnet
No. Biomass
4 .17





2 1.25
























70 lt.23
            •(•Present but not quantified.
            fl!6 were measured but only 2 weighed.
The two weighed 6.18.

-------
            Appendix 6.7  (Contd.)  c.  Beach  seine  and townet samples,  1977-1978.
Ui
vo
Site: Dungeness Splc May
Beach Seine
Species No. Rtomass
Kequorea aequorea
Melibe leonina
Tomopteria eeptentrionalia
Aaonthomyeia eaulpta
Archaeomysia grebnitzkii
A. maculata
Cumaceans
Cnorimoephaeroma
aregonensie
Pentidotea reaecata
Koainela belliceps
K. propodialio
Anonyx latieoxae
A tying trident}
Gammarldae
Hyperlldae
Thyeanoeaea raechii
Cancer magister
C. oregonenais
Crangon alaakeneia 8 12. A 9
C. aiyliroatrie 5 11.29
Heptaearpua breoiroetrie
H. flexue
Hlppolytldae
Mega lops
Fandalldae
Pandalue danae 3 3.79
P. goniurue
Pinnotheree pugetteneio
P. taylori
Pugettia graailie
Venriaia leviuacula 	
Total 16 39.06
1977
August 1977
Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomasa No. Riomasa No. Rlomans


1
60
A5
398
3

10


2
1
43
12

7
13


+
•f
+



6


541
1

.03
.83
3.33 1 .06
13.54
.03

.37 3 .24
1 .25

.09
.04
1.85 1 .09
.21

.17
42(29) 41.10*
1 .04
6.64 68 127.4 11 5.07
3 .75

+
+ 8 .13
+
51 169.2

3 .18
.17

4 16.97
27.30 170 355.46 28 6.02
October 1977

Beach Seine Townet
No. BlomaRS No. Blom.iss
26
1


202








32
51
1

45

337



74
2


1

Tn~
16.02
1.79


9.90








6.18
4.36
.01

21.23

29.97



153.24
3.80


10.12

256.62
Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Tovnet
No. Biomass No. Blomass










1 .31

15 5.31 4 .99



33 156.87
120 184.29 12. t.U

3 2.77
8 Z.Z1









172 349.55 Z/» 7.5f
           *29/41 were weighed, therefore, 29 weighed 41.10g.

           •(•Present but not quantified.

-------
Appendix 6.7  (Contd.) c. Beach seine and townet samples, 1977-1978.
Site: Horse Creek May
Beach Seine
Species No. Blomass
Aurelia aurita
Cyanea capillata
Jellyfish
Beroe spp.
Haminoea oireecena
Tomopteria eeptentrionalia
Aconthomyaia doviai
Archaeomyaia grebnitzkii
A. maculata
Keomyaie rayii
Gnorimoephaeroma
oregonenaia
Pentidotea aauleata
P. monteyensis
P. reaeeata
P. uoeneaenakii
Rooinela bellioepa
Tectecepe pugettenaia
Anphlthoe spp.
Anonyx taticoxae
Atylua tridene
Gamraarldae
Cancer magieter 4 16.50
Crangon alaakenaie
C. nigricouda 4 2.25
C. etyliroetrie '- 4 9.06
Eualue fabricii
Heptacarpue brevirostrie
H. flexua
H. kincaidi
H. Btylus
n. tridena
1977
No

1
J
4

3
4
71
17


1


7


1

1
51
38








1


Townet
. Blomass

.62
' /
.28

.08
.05
2.94
.39


.02


1.75


.03

.11
1.38
.47








.13

August 1977 October
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine
No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass
4 2.03










6 .88
4 2.65


1 .66
1 .05 2 .60


2 .27
4 .22
i .02 1 .27
5 * 37(31) 49.95+
1 1.23 54 52.61

9 *
50 8.22
1 1.12
2 .63 1 .57



1977
Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass




1


52

29




12

2

1
43
27
12

25




110
47

14




.72


1.46

.50



2 .37
3.40

.73

.02
5.97
.98
1.10
51(45) 175.79+
20.44 123 157.24




28.70 4 2.53
16.05

2.99 1 .79

-------
   Appendix  6.7   (Contd.)  c.  Beach seine  and  townet samples,  1977-1978.
Site: Morse Creek
May 1977

Beach Seine Townet
Species
Hlppolytldae
Megalops
Pagurus spp.
Pandalldae
Pandalua danae
P. goniianta
P. montagui tridene
P. etenolepi.8
Pugettia gracilie
Chaetognaths
No. Blomass -No.
1
2

J



10

14
Blomass
.04
.10

/



.20

1.46
August 1977
Beach Seine Townet Beach
October
Seine
No. Blomass No. Blonass No. Blomass


1

4



1 1.68 1



.10

31.98



3.79

1977
Townet
No. Blomass




11 28.46
4 3.96
22 39.08



Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blomass










Total
16   27.81   227
                                       10.05
27
4.71
52
8.29   114  144.19   412  139.50  181  336.72
/Present but not quantified.
*Measured in field  and released, not weighed.
+31/37 were weighed.  31 weighed 49.95g.; 45/5'  weighed, 45 weighed 175.79.

-------
            Appendix 6.7   (Contd.)  c. Beach  seine and  townet samples,  1977-1978.
N>
Site: Tuln Rivers
Species
Jellyfish
Ctenophore
Acantliomyeie daoiei
A. nephrophfhalma
A. paeudomacfopeia
Neomyeie rayii
Cuoaceans
Idotea fcukeai
Pentidotea reaecata
P. uoeneeenskii
Rocinela propodialis
Atyltte collingi
Atylus tridene
Caprella penantis
Canmarldae
Thysanoeesa epinifera
Cancer magieter
C. produatua
Crangan alaskeneia
C. nirjrieauda
C, etyliroatria
HendgrapBus
aregoneneis
Heptoearpue
breoirostria
S. flexue '"
H. stylus
H. taylori
PandaluB demae
Telmeeeus cheiragonue
Zoea
ChaetoRnaths
Total
Hay 1977 August J977 October 1977 Dec. 1977 - Jan. 1978
Beach Seine Townet' Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blomass No. Blonass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blomass No. Blonass No. Blomass No. Biomass
2 137.20
+ +
1 .01
7 .22
2 .04
7 .28 8640 521.44
+ +
1 .19
1 .04
1 .35
2 .03
14 .25
2 .21
1 .03
9 .14 1 .41
1 .09
4 * 52 * 21 * 2 *
1 *
24 31.41 9 4.98 163 198.37 51 128.80
107 69.39
10 16.56 10 2.81

1 5.46

1 .21 31 *
3 1.04 36 15.24
4 1.49
1 .70 5 20.17 1 .87
11 20.60
3 29.02
+ +
•f +
41 48.88 32 23.29 195 77.99 11 .39 231 253.86 8676 536.68 57 267.06
          * Measured and released, not weighed.

-------
           Appendix 6.7  (Contd.)  c.  Beach seine and townet samples, 1977-1978.
CO
Site: Pillar Point May
Beach Seine
Species No. Blomass
Aequorea aequorea
Conionemua vevtena
Polyorchia peneoillatve
Hydro Id s
Beroe spp.
Colliaella instabilis
Unidentified snail
ClinOcardium nuttalli
GcmatuB fabricii
Loligo opaleecens
Halosydna brewieetoea
Tomopteria eeptentrionalia
Acanthomysia macropsia
Arehaeomya-io grebnitskii
Neomys-ia rayii
Cumaceans
Dynamenella glabra
D. sheari
Tentidotea resecata
P. uoGnesenakii
Rocinela bellicepe
Synidotea angulata
Vcatuoodilla caecula
Amphithoe himeralia
Anonyx laticoxae
Atylus tridene
Cammarldae
Thyeanoeesa raachi
Thysanoeaea epinifera
Cvangon alaakenaie
Heptaaorpua flexua
1977

Townet
No. Blomass


1
la
12
1
1
2


13
3
13

53
+
1

1







27
16
2
1
1


.18
.55
1.15
.22
.04
.07


1.94
.05
.12

1.63
+
.01

.08







.46
.43
.22
.26
.45
August 1977 October 1977

Beach Seine Tovmet Beach Seine Townet
No. Blonass No. Biomass No. Blomass No. Blomass








10 44.47
1



4
1 . 08 22


1
3
1



9

10



17
5









1.11



.07
1.21


.06
.09
.09



.41

.03



.61
.59
Dec. 1977

Beach Seine Tovnet
No. Blomass No. Blomass
5
191












248



1

2
1
6

2

12

6
1
82
21.50
29.95












17.70



.03

.21
.03
.17

.04

5.25

.16
.04
17.93

-------
  Appendix 6.7  (Contd.) c. Beach seine and townet samples,  1977-1978.
Site: Pillar Point May
Beach Seine
Species No. Blonass
H. kincaidi
Hlppolytidae
Lebbeue grandimmus
Pandalldae
Pandalua montagui tridena
Pinnotheres pugettensis
Soleroerangon alata
Ophiopholie aeuleata
Chaetognaths
Bryo zoans
1977

Tovmet
No.

1

4

3

1
+
la
Biomass

.02

.07

.11

.84
+
2.88
August 1977 October 1977 Dec. 1977
Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet Beach Seine Townet
No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass No. Biomass
4 1.67

1 .28

1 1.78

1 .03



Total
144   11.78
11   44.82
78   7.72
559   85.32
•••Present but not quantified.
•A clunp of organisms was counted as 1.

-------
   40
 
o
M 30
20
10




5

J
1
•
5




	 I
                                                  Crangon stylivostvis

                                                  Spring
                                                  n = 26
                                                  X = 14.9 mm
                                                   10
                                               Summer
                                               n = 27
                                                       15
20
25
                                                                  8.5 mm
                                                               10    15
                                                              Length, mm
                                                                   25
       1   5    10    15    20    25
               Length, mm
 Appendix  6.8 Length  frequencies of common macroinvertebrates collected
               incidentally to combined beach seine and townet collections.
                                        165

-------
   80
   70
   60
   50

 >v
 o
 c
 0)
 g.40
   30
   20
   10
       Etutlua fabriffi.


       Summer

       n = 102


       X = 6.3  ram
                                                10
             Heptaoarpus tridens


            Fall

             n = 15


             X = 6.3 mm
           5     10     15     20    25

               Length, mm
                                               5     10     15    20    25


                                                     Length,  mm
   60
   50
 u


 § 40
 0*
 (U
 I-J
   30
   20
   10
Pandalus montagui tridens


      Fall

      n = 73


      X = 14 . 5 mm
                10    15    20

                 Length,  mm
                        25
                                                 60
                                                 50
a
c

340
cr
at
                                                  20
                                                  10
Pandalus platyoepos



Fall

n = 61


X = 18.3 mm
                                                5     10    15    20    25

                                                     Length, mm
Appendix 6.8  (Contd.)
                                       166

-------
   60
   50
 a


 § 40
 cr
 (U
   30
   20
   10
   60
   50
 o


 §40
 cr
30




20




10
Hepta.ca.vpus flexus


Fall

n = 628


X = 6.3 mm
           5      10    15
  Winter

  n = 96


  X. = 5.4
          mm
          5     10    15    20     25
                Length, mm
                                                 60
                                                 50
                                            o

                                            § 40
                                            cr
                                                 20
                                                 10
                                              50

                                             >,
                                             a
                                             c
                                             
-------
   80
   70
   60
   50
u


1  40
cr
   30
   20
   10
Eualus avinus



Spring

n = 37


X = 9.9 mm
                                                  80
                                                  70
                                                  60
                                                  50
                                               a


                                               § 40
                                               cr
                                               
-------
  80
  70
  60
  50
§ 40
Ol
i-i
u.
  30
  20
  10
   70
   50
   40
   30
   20
   10
Pandalus danae

Summer
n = 183

X = 12.4 mm
                 10     15     20     25
 Fall
 n = 310

 X = 13.9  mm
           5    10    15    20    25
                Length,  mm
                                                   80
                                                   70
                                                   60
                                                   50
u

I 40
cr
0)
                                                   30
                                                   20
                                                   10
                                                   70
                                                   60
                                                   50
 § 40
 cr
 01
                                                    30
                                                    20
                                                    10
Pugettia grac-ilis

Spring
n = 33

X = 11.3 mm
                                              5    10    15    20    25
                                                    Summer
                                                    n = 14

                                                    X = 12.1 mm
                                             5     10     15     20    25
                                                   Length, mm
 Appendix 6.8   (Contd.)
                                         169

-------
   60
    50
  2.40
    30
    20
    10
   50
  CJ
  £ 40
  cr
  O)
   20
    10
   o
   CU
   0)
   M
  fa
  B-S  3C
Heptaaarpus taylori
Summer
n = 47
X = 5.4 mm
  10     15    20     25

   Fall
   n = 16
   X = 8.1 mm
 10
 Winter
 n = 10
 X = 7.5 mm
                        15     20     25
             5    10    15    20
                  Length,  mm
                    25
                                                     60
                                                     50
CJ
§40
cr
Q)
                                                     ,30
                                                     20
                                                     10
                                                     60
                                                     10
                                                  Crangon nigricauda
                                                  Summer
                                                  n = 108
                                                  X = 8.8 mm
                                              5    10    15    20    25
                                                   Length,  mm
                                                 Hippolyte  alarki
                                                 Spring
                                                  n = 60
                                                  X = 10.0 mm
               10     15     20
              Length, mm
Appendix 6.8  (Contd.)
                                         170

-------
        50
      a
      § 40
      cr
      0)
        30
        20
        10
Telmessus eheivagonus
Summer
n = 53
X = 21.1 mm
                     10    15    20    25    30    35    40    45    50
        50
      o
      §40
      cr
      0)
        30
        20
        10
Fall
n = 29
X = 32.6 mm
                     10     15     20
                     Length, mm
                   25     30     35     40     45     50     55     60    65
70
Appendix 6.8  (Contd.)

-------
  20       Cancer magister

          Winter; n = 106; X = 36.0 mm
  10
  30
  20
 10
o
aj
cr
o>
£30
 20
 10
 30
 20
 10
Fall; n = 155; X = 63.9 mm
 JuJl
Summer; n = 1A4; X = 66.6 mm
Spring; n = 20; X = 60.7 mm
          I
  J.L
— 1
                                                                      JLJiiLjL
                J	I
       10   20    30   40
          Length,  mm
Appendix  6.8  (Contd.)
                 50    60    70   80   90  100   110   120   130  140  150   160   170   180

-------
  Appendix  6.9   Fish  stomach samples:    a.  Sources  and  numbers of  stomach
                      samples  analyzed  from nearshore fish collections  in  the
                      Strait  of  Juan de Fuca,  1978-1979.
                                         Beach seine                Tounet                   Intertidal
Species
Spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias
Big skate. Raja blnoeulata
Kydaka Beach

(Q
U
s
1-1
G

Morse Creek
Dungeness Sp
1
4-1
CL>
4-1
cd
OJ^Q QJ QJ CO 01 U 
-------
Appendix 6.9  (Contd.) a. Sources and numbers of stomach samples analyzed..
Tldepool sculpin,
Oligocottus maculosus
Saddleback sculpin, 0. rlnensis
Fluffy sculpin, (>• snyderl
Manacled sculpin, Synchirus gilli 1
Cabezon juv.,
Scorpaenichthys marmoratus
Roughback sculpin,
Chitonotls pugetensis
Tadpole sculpin,
Psychrolutes paradoxus
Warty poacher, Ocella verrucosa 1
Tubenose poacher, Pallaslna barbata 11 10
Ribbon snailfish, lilparis cyclopus
Tldepool snailfish, L. florae
Ribbon snailfish, L. rutterl 1
Kelp perch, Brachylstius frenatus
Shiner perch, Cymatogaster aggregate
Striped seaperch juv.,
Embiotoca lateralis 8 2
Pile perch, Rhacochilus vacca 1
Redtall surfperch,
Amphisticus rhodoterus 24
Pacific sandfish, Trichodon trlchodon 1
High cockscomb,
Anoplarchus purpurescens
Ribbon prickleback,
Phyttchthys chirus
Black prickleback,
Xiphlster atropurpureus
Rock prickleback, X. mucosus
Penpolnt gunnel, Apodlchthys flavidus 15 9
Crescent gunnel, Pholis laeta 4 2
Saddleback gunnel, P. ornata 1
Pacific sand lance juv.,
Ammodytes hexapterus 2 4
Speckled sanddab,
Cithartchthvs atigmaeug 20 9 12
English sole juv. ,
Parophrys vetulus i 15
Starry flounder,
Platichthys atellatus 11 3 2
C-0 sole, Pleuronlchthys coenosus
Sand sojLe juv.,
Psettlchthya roelanostlctua 18 17 ia
Total number of species, 62
Subtotal gj u-] 14J
Total ?|
29 10 78 29 20 12 9
2 13 12 1
17 56 6 15 2
1
1
1
4
2 6
1
1 1 20 6 5
1
10
1 15
3
20
43 . 12 16 6
9 87 7
4 39 12
16 6 6 8
2 6 16 1 4 1
21' 5 16 11 5 5 3
2
11 3
9 25 20
1 1
2
23
89 82 214 12 22 10 11 15 19 24 56 434 161 103 109 7
61 89 904
   *No identifiable organisms.
                                      174

-------
  Appendix  6.9  (Contd.) b. Fish stomach  contents statistics  for  nearshore  fish  collections
                   in  the  Strait of Juan  de  Fuca,   1978-1979.   See Methods  and  Materials  for a
                   description of  condition  and  digestion  factors.   Statistics were generated
                   from samples  itemized  in  previous table.
Spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias
Big Skate, Raja binoculata
Pacific herring juv.,
   Clupea harengus pallasi
Chura salmon juv., Oncorhynchus keta
Coho salmon juv., 0. kisutch
Chinook salmon juv., 0. tshawytscha
Rainbow trout fsteelheaJ)
   Salmo gairdneri
Night smelt, Spirinchus starksi
Plainfin midshipman,
   Porlchthys notatus
Northern clingfish
   Gobiesox maeandrieus
Pacific toracod juv.,
   Microgadus paeificus
   Threespine stickleback,
     Casterosteus aculeatus
   Tube-snout, Aulorhynchus flavidus
   Bay pipefish,
     Syngnathus grisealineatus
   Widow rockfish juv.,
     Sebastes entomelas
   Kelp greenling juv.,
     Hexagramaos decagraanus
   Rock greenling juv., H. lagocephalus
   Nhitespotted greenling, H. stelteri
   Lingcod juv.,  Ophiodon elongatus
   Padded sculpin, Artedius fenestralis
   Scalyhead sculpin, A. harringtoni
   Sooothhead sculpin, A.  lateral is
Total
sample
size
n
5
1
67
13
1
12
1
10
1
58
43
1
24
7
34
6
2
2
9
31
8
66
Number
empty
stomachs
1(20.0)
0(0)
4(6.0)
10(76.9)
0(0)
1(8.3)
0(0)
7(70.0)
1(100.0)
9(15.5)
0(0)
1(100.0)
6(25.0)
6(85.7)
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
1(50.0)
3(33.3)
6(19.4)
2(25.0)
9(13.6)
Adjust.
sample Condition
size factor
n1 X 1 SD
4
1
63
3
1
11
1
3
0
49
43
0
18
1
34
6
2
1
6
25
6
57
2.0 0
4.0
5.2 2
4.3 1
4.0
5.5 1
7.0
3.3 1

.0

.0
.5

.4

.5

4.2 1.4
5.3 1

4.1+2.
4.0
5.3*1.
4.8+1.
6.0+1.
5.0
3.7+1.
5.2+1.
4.5±0.
4.9+1.
.7

0

7
7
4

,0
.4
8
,7
Digestion
factor
X 1
4.5 0
5.0
3.4 1
2.7 2
3.0
4.5 0
5.0
2.7 2

3.7 1
4.4 1

4.4+1.
4.0
4.6+0.
3.7±1.
2.0+0.
3.0
3.5+0.
4. Oil.
3.8+0.
4.2+1.
SD
.6

.6
.1

.7

.1

.1
.0

2

6
5
0

8
4
8
1
c
X
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
0

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Total
ontents
"eight
1 SD
.70 0.86
.17
.12 0.10
.37 0.30
.25
.41 0.34
.90
.02 0.02

.10 0.17
.22 0.53

02+0.02
02
11+0.10
35+0.26
12+.0.10
14
23±0.16
15+0.21
02+0.03
18*0.41
Total
contents
abundance
X 1 SD
39.5 53.7
2.0
298.2 274.
140.7 241.
7.0
39.5 27.1
5.0
1.7 2.1

27.1 142.1
14.3 19.1

6.9±7.3
2.0
70.6+149:7
11.3±7.0
1.0+0.0
10.0
1.2+0.4
3.2+2.5
6.5±3.9
3.3*4.1
Diet diversity
Shannon-Wiener
Index
Numbers
1.39
—
6 0.48
0 0.15
0.99
2.97
1.37
1.92
—
1.81
3.12

1.68
0.00
0.57
3.11
1.00
0.00
2.24
4.15
1.95
3.78
Rioraass
2.23
—
0.29
0.15
0.99
2.78
0.16
1.61
—
3. 71.
2.27

0.32
0.00
1.68
2.62
0.44
0.00
2.03
3,52
1.64
3.40

-------
Appendix 6.9  (Contd.) b. Fish stomach  contents  statistics for nearshore fish...
Rosy lip sculpin.
Ascclichthys rhodorus
Silverspotted sculpin,
Blepsias cirrhosus
Sharpnose sculpin,
Clinocottus acuticeps
Calico sculpin, C. embryua
Mosshead sculpin, C. globiceps
Buffalo sculpin, Enophr/s bison
Red Irish lord, juv..
Hemilepictotus hemilepidotus
Pacific staghorn sculpin
Leptocottus armatus
Great sculpin
Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus
Tidepool sculpin
Oligocottus maculosus
Saddleback sculpin, 0. rimensis
Fluffy sculpin, 0. snyderi
Manacled sculpin. Synch irus gilli
Cabezon Juv. ,
Scorpaenichthys marmoratus
Roughback sculpin,
Chitonotis pugetensis
Tadpole sculpin,
Psychrolutes paradoxus
Warty poacher. Ocella verrucosa
Tubenose poacher, Pallasina barbata
Ribbon snailfish,' Liparis cyclopus
Tidepool snailfish, L. florae
Ribbon snailfish, L. rutteri
Kelp perch, Brachyistius frenatus
Shiner perch , Cymatogaster aggregata
Striped seaperch juv.,
Enbiotoca lateralis
Pile perch, Rhacochilus vacca
Redtail surfperch,
Anphisticus rhodoterus
Pacific sandfish, Trichodon trichodon

83

32

30
30
72
12

1

65

4

187
28
96
1

1

1

1
5
29
1
33
2
10
16
13
21

24
1

19(22.9)

0(0)

2(6.7)
0(0)
9(12.5)
4(36.4)

0(0)

1(1.5)

2(50.0)

7(3.7)
2(7.1)
3(3.1)
0(0)

0(0)

0(0)

0(0)
0(0)
4(13.8
0(0)
0(0)
0(0)
6(60)
11(68.8)
3(23.1)
7(33.3)

4(16.7)
0(0)

64

32

28
30
63
7

1

64

1

180
26
93
1

1

1

1
5
25
1
33
2
4
5
10
14

20
1

4.6+1.6

6.2+1.0

4.4+1.6
5.7+1.2
5.3+1.4
5.6+1.9

5.0

5.6 1.4

5.0 1.4

5.4+1.3
4.5H.2
4.9±1.5
3.0

6.0

6.0

6.0
6.2+0.8
4.2±2.0
6.0
5.2+1.4
6.5+0.7
2.5±0.6
4.6U.1
3.4+1.3
3.6*1-0

3.3+1.6
3.0

3.3+1.5

3.8±1,5

3.6+1.4
4.3+1.2
3.9+1.4
4.6±0.8

5.0

4.3+1.1

5.0+0.0

3.9±1.2
4.1+0.9
3.5+1.5
5.0

3.0

5.0

5.0
5.0+0.0
3.611.4
4.0
4.1+0.9
5.040.0
2. 0±1. 4
2.641.5
4.2+1.2
2.811.3

4.6±0.7
1.0

0.

0.

0.
0.
0.
1.

0.

2.

0.

0.
0.
0.
<

0.

0.

0.

07±0

10±0,


.10

.07

01+0.02
01+0.01
02+0.03
75±2. Sfl

18

30±3.

35*0.




97

34

04i0.05
01+0.01
0340.05
0.0

20

.18

,04
0.0510
0.0110







.05
.01
0.15
0.10+0
0.17+0
0
0
0
0

0
0
.01+0
.11+0
.04*0
.05+0

.48±0
.06
.9
.18
.01
.07
.03
.03

.74


3.2+3.3

8 3+8 4

5.0+6.2
11.5±12.8
9.6+14.9
9.0+10.1

5.0

41.8+81.5

7.5+3.5

18. 3+26. 2
9.3±8.1
12.6+29.5
13.0

12.0

4.0

3.0
14.448.3
3.8±7.6
23.0
17. OU8. 8
38.0i43.8
10.748.2
109.2±104.0
12.1±9.1
50.4±70.5

13.0±12.3
0.0*

3.82

2.62

3.30
3.24
3.56
1.91

1.92

2.13

0.91

2,72
2.18
2.37
0.00

1.04

0.81

0.92
1.74
2.37
0.77
2.01
0.73
0.00
1.17
0.92
1.18

3.08
0.00

4.25

2.99

2.84
3.09
2.55
0.81

0.91

4.19

0.53

5.06
1.78
3.44
0.00

0.25

0.79
,
0.32
1.44
2.09
1.46
2.31
0.93
0.00
1.14
0.24
1.66

2.90
0.00

-------
 Appendix 6.9 (Contd.) b. Fish stomach contents  statistics for nearshore fish...
High cockscomb,
Anoplarchus purpurescens
Ribbon prickleback,
Phytichthys chirus
Black prickleback,
Xiphister atropurpureus
Rock prickleback, X. mucosus
Penpoint gunnel, Apodichthys flavidus
Crescent gunnel, Pholis laeta
Saddleback gunnel, P. ornata
Pacific sand lance juv.,
Amnodytes hexapterus
Speckled sanddab.
Citharichthys stigmaeus
English sole juv.,
Parophrys vetulus
Starry flounder,
Platichthys stellatus
C-0 sole, Pleuronichthys coenosus
Sand sole juv. ,
Psettichthys melanostictus
77

31

55
\f*
JO
54
70
3

6

55

71

18
2

76
21(27.3)

2(6.5)

27(49.1)
11(306)
33(61.1)
22(314)
0(0)

2(33.3)

14(25.5)

4(5.6)

5(27.8)
3(0)

12(15.8)
56

29

28
25
21
48
3

4

41

67

13
2

64
4.611.6

4.6+1.5

4.011.4
5.411.7
3.5+1.3
4.6+1.8
4.3+1.5

6.3+0.5

5.112.0

5.0+1.6

4.6+1.6
6.5±0.7

4.7+1.8
3.5H.4

4.5H.O

3.5*1.1
4.4H.O
4.211.2
4.441.3
5.010.0

2.311.3

4.511.1

4.4+1.2

4.5+0.9
5.010.0

4.5+0.9
0.02+0.02

0.0410.04

0.1410.39
0.82+1.46
0.0110.02
0.02+0.02
0.02+0.02

0.0210.01

0.15+0.15

0.09+0.10

1.71+2.71
3.58+4.39

0.4810.99
27.61133.7

6.H5.4

5.818.6
18.4135.2
15.4+36.4
19.7135.7
10.3+11.4

7.5111.7

18.0129.9

33.3+47.2

16.6126.5
7.5+6.4

19.8+30.1
2.04

3.58

3.42
2.52
1.62
2.99
1.22

0.47

3.65

3.02

1.95
0.91

2.74






2.
3.
1

0

3

3

1
0

2
4

3

2
1
,19
.06
.28

.08

.51

.03

.89
.29

.68
.00

.60

.62
.24














  Total
                               1754  304(17.3)  1450

-------
APPENDIX 6.10  DIET SPECTRA OF NEARSHORE FISH COLLECTED DURING 1978

     Similar information from 1976 and 1977 was contained in Simenstad  et al.
1977 and Cross  et al.  1978, respectively.

     Spiny dogfish, Squalus acanthias.  Four of the five captured in a Port
Townsend townet haul contained food items, including hyperiid amphipods,
ctenophores, nereid polychaetes, crab (Porcellanidae) larvae and pieces of
algae (Chlorophyta).

     Big skate, Raja binoculata.  One specimen captured in a Dungeness Spit
beach-seine sample had consumed two crangonid shrimp, Crang'on stylirostris.

     Pacific herring, Clupea harengus pallasi (juvenile).  This species was
captured, in abundance at five of the seven townet sites (not Beckett Point
and Dungeness Spit) and in two of the beach-seine collections (Morse Creek
and Dungeness Spit).  Their prey composition was essentially identical to
that reported in previous years.  Of the total FRI, calanoid copepods made
up 97.86%, and the only other prey organism of any consequence was pelagic
ostracods  (Fig.10-1).

     Chum salmon, Oncorhynchus keta (juvenile).  This species was collected
principally during two townet collections at Beckett Point and Morse Creek.
Ten of the thirteen, however, had empty stomachs.  The three specimens with
identifiable stomach contents had consumed mainly calanoid copepods and just
a few larval mysids.

     Coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch  (juvenile).  One specimen from  the
Beckett Point townet collections had three polychaete annelids and pieces of
unidentified algae in its stomach.

     Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha  (juvenile).  Samples originated
from both beach-seine and townet collections at Beckett Point and Kydaka
Beach.  The total prey spectrum was rather evenly proportioned between drift
insects (Diptera, Coleoptera, Hymenoptera) and brachyuran crab larvae
(me galops).

     Rainbow  (steelhead) trout, Salmo gairdneri  (juvenile).  One specimen
from the Morse Creek beach-seine collections had consumed three juvenile
fishes  (98.03% of the total  identifiable biomass), one insect, and one isopod,
Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis.

     Night smelt, Spirinchus  starksi  (juvenile).  Caught for the first time
during  the MESA nearshore fish collections in  the Strait of Juan de Fuca,
this species was found in the townet  collections in August.  A sample  of  ten

                                      178

-------
                u
                Q_
                        INDEX OF RELflTIVE IHPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OlftORflM

                        FROM Ftt.E IDENT. HESfl78. STflTlON flLSTfl
                     lOOr
                      80





                      60





                      .40





                      20
                S    20




                i    4°


                o    60

                8

                ni    so
                    -100
                                 PREOHTOR  8747010201 - CLUPEfl HflRENOUS PflLLfiSI

                               (PflCIFIC HERRIND    )   flDJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE = 63
                                                                   33S
                                  50
100
150
                                                                     200
                                      CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FPFO NUM.
=i = Fv jr;., I)CC'.I» CPMP.
CftlAMOtOft ^B.?S 93. *><>
'>c",TO9Cnr>4 S0.7Q A.?7
avBrilPOOS-HYOi." v»J JijCfl j<3.f)S .1'
C51.CT4CF/S 17. 4S .7?
^*v^T*^ACr^fl l£»PQ ?A
P*HC*iAli^tAC^^ lft«^^ •?*>
r-4->MA»!nEi 11.11 .10
cuwacfA 7.0^ .0^
M«np4CTtC"I04 A.T5 .p*,
CC«P.
Oft.fl? 1
.1*.
.0?
.PS
• ?5
.40
.11
.01
.0]
i!SIi.
1ft06.7
??5.?
2.7
?7.S
7.1
If .T
?.A
.7
.4
PfPCEMT
TOTAL IB!
97.8*
1.69
.0?
«?1
.OS
.1?
.0?
.01
.00
                  ; «OTH
                                                rooM
                                                                   PLOT
                                   250
                                              .1'
Fig.  10-1.   IRI  prey  spectrum of  juvenile  Pacific  herring  from Strait  of Juan

              de Fuca,  August  1978.
                                            179

-------
from Pillar Point had only three with identifiable stomach contents.   These
three had fed on gammarid amphipods (57.14% of the total identifiable biomass),
calanoid copepods, euphausiids,  and mysids.

     Plainfin midshipman, Porichthys notatus.   One adult from Beckett Point
had an empty stomach.

     Northern clingfish, Gobiesox maeandricus.  This fish was commonly found
in intertidal collections in both rocky tidepool and cobble intertidal
habitats.  Acmaeid limpets (Notoacmaea persona, 1J. scutum, Collisella pelta)
at 70.92% of the total IRI dominated the prey spectrum (Fig. 10-2).  Supple-
mental contributions were also made by gammarid amphipods, sphaeromatid
isopods (mainly Exosphaeroma amplicauda, but also Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis
and Dynamenella sheareri), polychaete annelids (sabellarids), and harpacticoid
copepods.

     Pacific tomcod, Microgadus proximus (juvenile).  Three eastern Strait of
Juan de Fuca sites—Beckett Point, Port Williams, and Morse Creek—produced
high catches.  Total IRI prey spectrum was rather evenly split between
hippolytid shrimp and mysids (Fig. 10-3); secondary prey was gammarid amphipods
(14 Accedomoera vagor, four Mandibulophoxus^ gilesi, one Monoculodes sp., and
one Synchelidium shoemakeri).  One juvenile sand sole made up 23.47% of the
total identifiable biomass.

     Threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus.  The stomach of one
specimen collected in a Port Williams beach-seine collection was empty.

     Tube-snout, Aulorhynchus flayidus.  This species was fairly restricted
to the collections in the eastern end of the  strait, especially at Beckett
Point and Morse Creek.  Juvenile hippolytid shrimp, 65.21%  of the total IRI,
and harpacticoid copepods, 33.20%, were the only prey of  consequence.

     Bay pipefish, Syngnathus leptorhynchus.  Of seven  captured  in the Beckett
Point beach-seine collections, all had empty  stomachs but one, which  contained
two juvenile hippolytid  shrimp.

     Widow rockfish, Sebastes entomelas  (juvenile).  In the three years of
MESA collections  in  the  strait,  the  only time this  species  was captured in any
abundance was August 1978.  They were especially  common in  beach-seine
collections at Morse Creek and Beckett  Point  and  townet collections  at Kydaka
Beach.  The composite IRI prey spectrum (Fig. 10-4)  is dominated  by both
epibenthic hippolytid shrimp and calanoid  copepods,  60.96%  and 36.53% of  the
total IRI, respectively.  The gammarid  amphipods, which constituted  only  1.21%
of the  total  IRI, were mainly Accedomoera  vagor but also Anisogatnmarus puget-
tensis, Melita desdichata. Najna consiliorimn, Hyale rubra, Parallorchestes
ochotensis, and  Podoceropsis sp.   However, examination  of the prey composition
of samples from  specific sites shows that  the diet  becomes  more  specific  and
typically  less diverse.   The specimens  from the Kydaka  Beach townet  collections
had consumed  calanoid copepods almost exclusively while the Beckett  Point
beach-seine sample had  a prey spectrum  almost completely dominated by
hippolytid shrimp.   The  Morse Creek sample had the  most diverse  prey
composition,  including most  of  the gammarid amphipods.


                                      180

-------
                          INDEX OF RELATIVE IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OlflGRflH
                          FROM FILE IDENT. HESR78. STRTION RLSTfl

                                    PREDfiTOR  8784010101 - OOBIESOX MEflNDRICUS
                                (N. aiNOFISH       )  flDJUSTEO SflMPLE SIZE =
49
100
1 80
J 60
o
§
£ 40
i— i
a.
8 20
£
0
1 2°
* 40
O
1— 1
t— »
(O
1 so

s

^ 80
(J
Q_
inn
1(JU


"f.Y ITF"
4cva-I|.ar
GA-o'APIOFA
^OtvAFRO-'flT 111*:
•-iootr y icojli
^iGFiLAOf 1C if
i. I TTO2 INI OAF
f^T^ACO^A
OA^IIPIOAE
TO^TFJ.". ££
PO( Y C ^ 1 F T S
^ICO.ILVI l^.AF
r-SAJcIPAt
BOfY ^4yi 'vlT^-l F
ro«an-;I T Ifi.-.i «0TLJ
HnT NOT rJn" fi
OF^CTMT OnMFM
SHAf!nrj»!-uF IMF
f«EVNEs«i I^HF
h
'
.


•


1 I— • LJ -
T

'
u
CO « 0>
T3 •adu o
•H -H *O CO (Q
0) U O -H 13 CO *D
 .3« J.4H 31. S 1.0?
f>.l? .S3 .01 3.3 .11
*..)? .30 4.44 79. ^ .94
4.n« ,?3 17.2* 71.4 p.32
?.04 7s;. 3f> 9.03 17?. 3 5.60
?.04~^ ,fl<5 2.1* 4.*. .IS
?.04 .OP 1.47 3.? .10
?FQ. OCC1I&. LF^S THAN S AND MIMEPICAL AMD GOAVIMETRlC
Lt^S TMAN 1 flPF FxCLl'OEP FOOM THE TARLF ANO PLOT
.CUL'TI^tM OF !">I\/FO<;ITY INDICES)
tNCC INnpn ,5ft .30 .52
"• OIVFPt;iTY 1.57 2.45 1.71
* .34 .53 .37
Fig.10-2.   IRI prey spectrum of  northern  clingfish  from Strait of  Juan de
             Fuca,  1978.
                                          181

-------
                           INDEX OF RELflTIVE IHPORTBNCE tl.R.I.) OIBGRWI
                           FROI1 FILE IDENT. HESR78. STflTlON flLSTfi
                                      PREOflTOR  6791030601 - MICROGRQUS PROXIMUS
                                  CPRCIFIC TOMCOD      )   flDJUSTEO SflWLE SIZE = 40
                        too
                         80
                         40
                         20
                    §    20
 S    60


 fc    *°


     100




OPF.Y I
            pory
                                                                                -n
                                    X
                                    r-t
                                    o
                                                     m
                                                     o
                                                        ^-i-
                                                        q) a) O' •— (
                                                        u'w P. a.
                                  20     40      60     60     100     120     140

                                          CUttULfiTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
                                                 MI.M.   GPAV.   PO£Y      °l
                                          OCCUR  COMP.  COMP.   I.B.I.   TOTAL  I«I
                                                               160
IOPOLVTIII 4P Sn.oo
4w«4PlOE"A 40.00
v^nacPA p^.oo
H'.'iCEA 17. SO
IJ^lotOAE 7. SO
4l"4Mf»tf)A 7.<50
ftoojCT7COIPA 5.00
ni.VCHAETA =.00
L^HPflNif CT ID IP ?.SO
14. P5
10.28
4*1.49
1.47
2.61
13.05
1.14
*>.69
.1ft
34.14
2.25
37.83
.f
.13
.00
.00
.01
23.47
P6.49.4
501.?
?1 08.1
20.7
?o.*s
97.9
5.7
33. S
S9.1
46.12
9.44
39.69
.39
.39
1.84
.11
• M
1. 11
L.ITH F»EO.  OCCii-5
N PriTH LESS THIN 1  AOF ExCLUDPD  FoOH  THE  T^BLF
CIW cfti.cuL*Tion or  OI\/F:PSITV
                                 INOEX
                        IHOEX
                                                   .55
                                                          .3?
                                                         l.»7
                                                          .41
                                                                         PLOT
                                                   1.70
                                                    .37
Fig.10-3.   IRI prey  spectrum of  juvenile Pacific tomeod from Strait of Juan
              de  Fuca,  August 1978.
                                             182

-------
                           INDEX OF RELflTIVE IHPCRTRNCE  (I.R.I.) DIRGRWl
                           FROM FILE IDENT. HESfi78. STflTION flLSTfl

                                      PREDflTOR  8826010114 - SEBHSTES ENTOMELAS
                                 (WIDOW ROCKFISH      )   flDJUSTED SRMPLE SIZE = 32
100
PCT. COMPOSITION BY RBUNDflNCE
3 8 6 § §
^-
§ 20
UJ
3
ffi
s 40
| 60
§
£ 80
100
0
Av^flQTt"%p'j*
A 1 ft *')C t P M
•
•
	 '• [_j i— a
v n
•H 3
h X
3 -5
3 S - 3 « »S J
r ' 2 ^ 0) -H -o 01 aj E S « 41
4? TJ ^ Ui-ia^olBu-OTJal
i i g •5'3S!33-g5>T:g.3
O. | ^ *mnJei'H>lO"Hfl]'H
S 3 3 4- 3 3 3 ISa!!!1
	 1 	 1 	 i- i 1.1 . , 	 ,
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FPEO NUM. r,R4y. "PEV PE9CENT
OCCUR COMP. COMP. I.R.I. TOTAL IRI
S«J.W 2.5S 7?. 03 4430. n 60. 9S
?^.'10 l.SO 2.0? R7.9 1.21
2=.no P3.4f> 12.7? ?iS54.7 36.53
*•?* .1? .7? 7.9 .11
"•38 .17 .65 7.6 .11
•>.•»* .46 ,^S ^.ft .12
ft.?S .Ofl .81 S.f. .OS
ft. ?5 .17 .63 5. •» .07
ft. '5 .0« 4.45 ?8.-> .39
s 6.7S ,0« .3? ?.-; .04
^•?c; .37 .4? ?.o .07
•i.'5 ,2S l.ft? 12. g .is
?«H .1? 2.01 6.7 .09
           (Hi!T «,OT f^
                           Cti|..ATI
                    I-V-" I MFD H !
                                  J 7 y
                                                .1?    .36
                                                               F AMI! PLOT
                                                                      1.17
Fig.10-4.   IRI prey spectrum of juvenile widowrockfish from  Strait of  Juan
              de Fuca, August 1978.
                                          183

-------
     Kelp greenllng, Hexagrammos decagrammus (-juvenile).  This fish was
collected in both beach-seine and intertidal collections.  Despite the low
sample size, the diet composition was spread over pandalid and hippolytid
shrimp, gammarid and caprellid amphipods, bivalves, and oxyrhynchan,
brachyuran, and brachyrhynchan crabs.  Pandalid crabs, at 13.24% of the
total number of prey organisms and 50.17% of the prey biomass, were the
single most important prey taxon.

     Rock greenling, Hexagrammos lagocephalus (juvenile).  Two were collected
during intertidal sampling along the western end of the strait.  One had
consumed a gammarid amphipod and the other a caprellid amphipod.

     Whitespotted greenling, Hexagrammos stelleri.  An adult from Beckett
Point had only pieces of plant material (probably eelgrass) in its stomach.

     Lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus (juvenile).  Captured during the beach-seine
sampling at Kydaka Beach, six of the nine specimens had identifiable stomach
contents.  The majority of the contents—71.93% of total number of prey,
75.47% of the total prey biomass—was remains of fish; a mysid and a
crangonid shrimp had also been eaten,

     Padded sculpin, Artedius fenestralis.  This species was most common in
the beach-seine collections, especially at Beckett Point, Port Williams, and
Twin Rivers.  The prey spectrum (Fig. 10-5) was one of the most diverse; it
had the highest value of the Shannon-Wiener diversity index based on prey
numbers, and it was the seventh highest based on prey biomass.
Polychaete annelids (26.72% of total IRI); gammarid amphipods (18.67%); wood,
rock, and other debris (16.16%); cancrid crabs (12.79% of the total IRI
combined and including Cancer magister); and hippolytid shrimp (8."27%)
constituted the prevalent prey taxa.

     Scalyhead sculpin, Artedius harringtoni.  Specimens from Slip Point
tidepool collections had fed mainly on gammarid amphipods (79.49% of total
number of prey, 59.96% of total prey biomass), although one caridean shrimp
contributed over 30% of the total prey  biomass.

     Smoothhead sculpin, Artedius lateralis.  Collections at rocky tidepool
sites at Slip Point, Observatory Point, and Neah Bay provided the highest
number of samples.  Gammarid amphipods, the most common prey, made up almost
70% of the total IRI (FigJ.0-6).  The gammarid Atylus tridens was the only
identifiable species.  Hippolytid shrimp (Heptacarpus breviorstris). 9.61%
of the total IRI, and larval fish, 8.45%, constituted the prey of secondary
importance.

     Rosylip sculpin, Ascelichthys rhodorus.  Twin Rivers was the only beach-
seine site which produced considerable numbers of this species; however, they
were common at a number of intertidal sites, including Slip Point, Twin
Rivers, Morse Creek, and Neah Bay.  Gammarid amphipods, 69.11% of the total
IRI (Melita desdichata. Pontogeneia ivanovi. Hyale sp., Parallorchestes
ochotensis. Ischyrocerus sp., Orchestia sp.) and sphaeromatid isopods,
13.30%,  (Gnorimoaphaeroma oregonensis and Exosphaeroma amplicauda) were the
primary prey taxa.  Polychaete annelids (7.45%), idoteid isopods  (3.57%,
Synidotea pettiboneae, Idotea sp.)» mysids  (2.54%), and juvenile brachyrhynchan
crabs (2.70%) constituted secondary prey organisms (Fig.10-7).
                                     184

-------
                           INDEX OF RELATIVE IMPORTANCE (I.R.I.) DIAGRAM
                           FROM FILE IDENT. MESA78. STATION ALSTA

                                     PREDATOR 8831020401 - ARTEOIUS FENESTRALIS
                                 (PADDED SCULPIN     )   ADJUSTED SAMPLE SIZE = 25
100
1 80
f- &
CD
-z.
o
£ 40
CO
§ 20
CJ
°- n
u
1 20
ix
CD
§

I 60


4 80
a
100









	 1 1 	 1
	 1 1 	 1



0
•o
•H
&
 d>
•Q  PLOT
(OUT NIT FPOM CALCULATION r>F DIVERSITY IMOICESI
PForf,NT no"lM4NCF IMOF, .11 .21 .16
<^t
-------
                          INDEX OF RELATIVE IHPORTRNCE (I-R.I.) OIRORflH
                          FROM FILE IDENT. MESfl78. STflTION flLSTfl
                                      PREOflTOR 8831020403 - RRTEOIUS LftTERflLIS
                                 (SMOOTHHERO SCULPIN  )   ADJUSTED SBHPLE SIZE =  57
                   a
                   I
                   £
                       100
80
60
COMPOSITI
3 S
.
1—
U
Q. _
0
1 20
uj
COMPOSITION BY H
g £
B M
ion

	 1 	 1 	
EF-

CD
•o
•H
t-i
CO
0 V
Cd T3 4J
» CU *->
(0 O O U i-H
E  0> 0)
CO 0) «H t-H CD

X 	 1 | | — , , „ r-i_n
E=C]^[J^-J
.c
u
c
U F
(0 I
« f
I CL
CQ O
O O
O. <1> ^
tfl (0 (8 ft
O*O*O Q "O
(U i-t -H 1 O
Q 4J O OJ CO -r»
Oil s CO 4J T3
O 0 .C I-i 00 ^iH C *J -H
                                 20     40      60      80     100

                                         CUMJLflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
                                                             160
P»FV'TTEM
AWM4RIOEA
^t.EO^TEI
i °POL YT i o AE
LF^CYFMATA— CADIOEft
^FLLOTA

IICAOIQA-OECAPODA-RPACHYRHY
PhAF.POMATlQAF
AOPfiCTICOIOA
APijalOAF
TYLIDAE
'OI.-YCWAFTA
'Ah . fl lOACEA-OIXONnPHOPA

INTT.F.NTIFIEO
FPEO
• OCCUP
ft3
14.04
!?.?&
R.77
^.77
fl.77
NCH 7.0?
7.02
5.?6
5.?6
3.^1
1.51
7. SI
3.51
3.51
NUM.
COMP.
43.6*
16.3?
4.74
3.68
4.21
2.63
3.16
3.6fi
2.11
l.SR
1.05
1.05
2.11
1.05
2.63
COMP.
7.03
6.69
25.15
4.49
.1?
1.53
2.86
.36
.00
6.67
.14
.12
.03
40.55
.40
oof v
T.O.I.
?*>«.?. 9
322.9
367.n
71.7
38. n
36.5
42.?
?P.4
11. 1
43.4
4.?
4.1
7.5
146.0
t 10. «•
OF.PCENT
TOTAL I»I
69.R6
8.45
9.61
l.RR
1.00
.96
1.11
.74
• 29
1.14
• 11
.11
.20
3.fl2
.29
           C3FY  TAXA  *1TH KPF.C. OCCUR. LFSS TH4N 5 AND NUMERICAL AND
           r.^MpoMTION  ROTH \_F.^  TH«W  1  4PF EXCLUDED FDOM THE TABLF ANP> PLOT
           (=I|IT  NOT FKOM CALCULATION OF  OI'/EOSITY  INDICES)
              °Ft>CF-jT
                             C^  INOfX
                             DIVERSITY
                          .23
                         3.15
                       IMOF*
                               2.64
                                 .56
 .51
1.74
 .37
Fig.10-6.   IRI prey  spectrum of  smoothhead  sculpins from  the  Strait  of  Juan
              de  Fuca,  1978.
                                            186

-------
                    §
                            INDEX OF RELATIVE IMPORTANCE (I.R.I.) DIAGRAM
                            FROM FILE IDENT. MESA78. STATION flLSTA
                                      PREDATOR  8831020501 - ASCELICHTHYS RHOOORUS
                                   (ROSYLIP SCULPIN     )   ADJUSTED SAMPLE SIZE = 61
                         100
                         80
                         60
                         40
                    S    20
                    o
                    Q-
                    2    20
                         40
                         60
                         90
                        100
                                                                  o
                                                                •a a
                                                                u B
                                                                •H o o)
                                     o
                                   a a
                                   o -a
                                                                        O)EjO-H*O
                                                                        U§a)(DTf
                                                                        3d»H3C
                                   20
                             40
    60
     80
       100
                                                                              120
                                          CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE

                                         OCCUR   COMP.   COHP
                                                          PFOCEMT
                                                 I.9.!.   TOTAL  IR!
                                                                         140
           T a *.") c-r T r; .-j 4 c F a K
                                          14. 75
                                             94
                                             =;*>
                                             92
                                             9?
                                           1 .64
47.29
13.79
10.34
 3.94
 6.40
 1.97

 1.48
  .99
 1.97
 1.4*
  .49
  .49
  .49
17.33
14. 08

12.41

16.56
  .41
  .46
 1.01
  .61
 1.11
 5.17
 5.47
 2.OR
 4.IS
3096
 594
 334
 160

 121
   9
   9
   6

   4
   9
                                                                   .0
                                                                    0
.5
.3
 c
 6

.?
 3
                                                                  4.?
                                                           (SB.75
                                                           13.19
                                                            7.43
                                                            3.57
                                                            2.54
                                                            2.70
                                                             .21
                                                             .21
                                                             .15
                                                             .19
                                                             .09
                                                             .?!
                                                             .2?
                                                             .09
                Tflx* i,,JTh ^PFO. 1CCII9. LFS":  THAN  S  «MD MUME»IC*I. Awn OPAVI«ET»IC
                '-.ITIO\ SOTH LESS THAN  1  4QK  exCLl.'OFO  FoO*< THE TARLE AMO "LOT
                MOT FOOM CAl_CUt4Tnt! OF  OIvFO^ITY
                                    .2A
                                   S.fiS
                                                          .12
                                                         3.3S
                                                          .73
                           .50
                          1.65
                           .36
Fig.10-7.
IRI prey  spectrum of rosyllp  sculpin from  the  Strait of  Juan de
Fuca,  1978.
                                              187

-------
     Silverspotted sculpin, Blepsis cirrhosus.  Specimens originated mainly
in beach-seine collections at Morse Creek and Twin Rivers.  Gammarid amphipods
and mysids, with combined contributions of 55.60% and 39.36% of the total IRI,
respectively, and sphaeromatid isopods, 4.05% (Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis).
Were the only other prey of significance (Fig.10-8).

     Sharpnose sculpin, Clinocottus acuticeps.  This fish was typically found
in the cobble intertidal 'habitats at Morse Creek and Twin Rivers.  Epibenthic
crustaceans composed the majority of the diet (Fig.10-9).  Gammarid amphipods,
sphaeromatid isopods (Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis, Exosphaeroma amplicauda,
Dynamenella sheareri), dipteran insects, harpacticoid copepods, and idoteid
isopods made up approximately the same proportions of the total number of
prey, but gammarid amphipods (56.50% of the total IRI) and sphaeromatid
isopods (27.07%) would have to be considered more important by biomass.

     Calico sculpin, Clinocottus embryum.  While C_. acuticeps were found mainly
in the cobble intertidal habitats, C^. embryum were typically collected in the
rocky  tidepool habitats at Slip Point and Observatory Point.  Specimens were
also collected at Morse Creek.   Accordingly, barnacle cirri were prominent
components of the prey spectrum (60.46% of the total IRI).  Gammarid amphipods
(17.79%), harpacticoid copepods (9.79%), insect larvae (4.81%), and sphaero-
matid isopods (3.77%, Exosphaeroma amplicauda) followed in importance as prey
(Fig.10-10).

     Mosshead sculpin, Clinocottus globiceps.  Intertidal collections at Morse
Creek, Slip Point, and Observatory Point produced substantial numbers of
specimens.  Like £. embryum, £. globiceps appears to be most common in rocky
tidepool habitats.  Prey includes harpacticoid copepods, barnacle cirri, and
gammarid amphipods.  The alga Ulotrichales, which includes Ulva sp., composed
the greatest proportion of the total IRI (69.94%), mostly because of high
biomass contribution (74.23%).   It is not known whether algae are utilizable
food for the sculpin, or whether they are consumed incidentally with other
prey (Fig. 10-11).

     Buffalo sculpin, Enophrys bison.  Juveniles were captured by beach seine
at Morse Creek, Port Williams,  and Twin Rivers, and in intertidal collections
at Slip Point and Observatory Point.  Algae (Ulotrichales) accounted for
76.19% of the number of prey items and 97.45% of the total prey biomass, and,
according to other documentation of buffalo sculpin's prey spectrum (Miller
et al.  1977, Cross  et al.  1978, Fresh  et al.  1979), may actually be a
food resource.  The only other food items of consequence were gammarid amphi-
pods, 17.46% of the total number of prey.

     Red Irish lord, Hemilepidotus hemilepidotus.  One juvenile collected in
a Slip Point tidepool had consumed one crab, Lophopanopeus•bellus (79.26% of
total prey biomass), two sphaeromatid isopods, Exosphaeroma amplicauda (17.02%
of total prey biomass), and incidental pieces of wood and algae.

     Staghorn sculpin, Leptocottus armatus.  This species was common at all
beach-seine sites.  Sixty-eight percent of samples were juveniles.  Mysids
(Archaeomysis grebnitzki) dominated the diverse prey spectrum (Fig.10-12)
because of high contribution (80.85%) to the total number of food items.
Cancrid crabs (Cancer magister) and fishes (Microgadus proximus, Psettichthys

                                     188

-------
                           INDEX OF RELflTIVE IttPORTHNCE (I.R.I.) DlflGRWI
                           FROM FILE 1DENT. MESR78. STRTION flLSTfl
                                      PREDRTOR  8831020602 - BLEPSIRS CIRRHOSUS
                                 (SILVERSPOTTED SCULP )   flDJUSTEO SRMPLE SIZE =  32
                        100
                         8°
                         60
to
1
1
§ 20
S
0
1 .
S.
^
£
g 4°
CO
£ 60

§
^ 80
^







••

•
Q
v a
3 S
14 CQ
OJ "O
e -H
CJ S
0 50 100








01
Q)
•O
•H
*; v
e TI
O tH
VJ h
tu m
a §
M-I O
S 2 il l£ o a. o*
lalaaaS
200 250
CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FOFO "-'I."*.
psfY IT1:" OCCUR COMP.
6«.7S 31.70
•.•YCinaCRA 40.63 3S.a7
cpi-AFP1"AT IOAf 1*>.75 4.91
f-AM'«APTOAF l^.^S 5.?^
C"t!c;Iu)If)AP 1^.63 3.77
ATvl ITAF 9.1R 2.26
°' A3C 1^1
' fl. ic-.a(r 6.?5 l.(?9
fanop/i tpri 6.?5 1.P9
4JDlTnr6lF 3.13' 1.13
i^r'-tvPooF WIIAF; "'.i1 1.13
pi t.~/-vFvJAT A-CAPI^FA 3.13 .75
Hlcs/M.vTinAr 3.13 1.51
f3'. \.r.O>i!P.i»C 3.13 .31?
COFY TAY* ,'ITn FPFg. -ICCl'S. L^SS T«»N «? ANO
ORAV. PPfY DpSCEWT
COMP.
?2.55
I.R.I.
W?9.fl
34^31 ?972.9
11.40
11.61
.66
1.52
.15
2.23
.66
1.27
• 2^
4.21
2.53
5.07

C'lupn^ITI-OM cnTH l>cc THAN'I i"7 EXCLHOFO FDPM THE
305. B
316.7
69.3
35.5
10.4
25.7
>5.9
7.S
4.3
15.^
1?.6
17.0
AL AMO
TOTAL IRI
49. 3<*
39.36
4.05
4.19
.9?
.47
.14
.34
.21
.10
.06
.21
.17
.23
GOAVIWETOIC
TABLE ANO PLOT
(AijT MOT F"OM CAI CUL^TIONi OF DIVFOSITY INDICES)
PFPCf'lT OOMI^JANCiT I^.DFC .2*1
SH^MNI^^I-WF JMPo OIVFPSITY ?.67
i"ve'i'-'ec:;= I^DPV .60
.20
2.44
.64



.40
1.66
.37
Fig.10-8.   IRI prey spcetrum of  s±lverspotted  sculpin  from  Strait of  Juan
             de Fuca, August  1978.
                                           189

-------
                     a
                            INDEX OF RELflTIVE IMPORTRNCE U.R.I.) DlfiGRflH
                            FROM FILE IDENT. MESH78. STflTION RLSTfl
                                      PREOflTOR  8831020701 - CLINOCOTTUS flCUTICEPS
                                   (SHflRPNOSE SCULPIN   )   RDJUSTED SflflPLE SIZE = 28
                         100
                          80
                     CD
                     S
                          60
                          40-
O
£
I
§
p
i
0-
20
0
20
40
60






1)
-H







                          80-
                          10QL
20      40      60     80      100     120

        CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
                                                                                140
                                      160
                        ITEM
                                                 MJM.
                                                        COMP.   I.O.I.   TOTAL IPI
       S3.
       39.
30.71
17.14
1S.71
13.S7

  .71
                                                        31
                                                          .95
                                                        18.70
?7.07
 5.01
 3.44
 7.IS1
                                                                 13. Q
                 TA»A WITH r»Eo. ncr.i'-. L^SS T^IN 5 ANO NUMERICAL ANH GD»VIMFTPIC
                      M ROTH LE"=S THAM 1  4RF ExCL'lDEO FonM THE T4HLF ANO PLOT
                 JOT FPO^ C4LCIJLATIOM OF  •MyF^lTY INDICES)
                                 INDEX
                              OTVEP1ITV
                                                   .75
                                                          .34
                                                          .54
                                        .40
                                       1.68
                                        .51
Fig, 10-9.   IRI prey  spectrunv of sharpnose sculpin from Strait  of  Juan de
              Fuca,  1978.
                                            190

-------
                               INDEX OF RELATIVE IHPORTRNCE (I.R.I.) DIRORflH

                               FROM FILE IDENT. M£Sfl78. STfiTION flLSTfl

                                         PREOflTOR 8831020702 - CLINOCOTTUS OlBRYUfl
                                      (CflLICO SCULPIN     )   flDJUSTEO SRMPLE SIZE =  30
                            lOOr
                            80
                            60
E 40
|

i—
o
0
£
* 40
0
>-1
t—
S 60
& 80
a.
100
iuuo
apTy IJFM
GAM'tAQt?)?*
jMcFTT.i
FLflRFLLtPT^A
CPH/\F90UAT1'.1AF_
PIP TF^? A
MFcnf^A9TJ»ot*oQA
W A I \/ 1 FFo A






OJ
•H
•o
*H
U
;
3 AC^VP^YNC^1
HP A




— — ' CLp-1
1
>»
o a
a b
"£ 2
r -g.
a o
•§ §
« S 5 & 5
•O « -D QUO
•H U *H Di G) 1
a o Q> 4-> o a a
V«tAh-H(Op.
E l-i to aj2a.coyrHco
<5 19 B tHa*HO)3(oaco
U- £ M ibtnoz;u>HM
50 100 150 200 250
CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FOFO l^IIM. GPAV. DPFY PERCENT
ncc-iR COMP. COMP. i.R.r. TOTAL IP!
40.0" 4.65 25.29 llT s.er 13.23 ?S3.9 3.77
13.13 2.6? 1.50 S4.n .81
10.no 1.16 .35 15.1 .23
6.67 .58 3.52 37.-, .41
6.67 ISP Is9 7|« !l?
                  TA*A <»ITH FDFO. ocriiR. LE^<; THAM
                 oqITn\ POTh Lrs? T'-SM 1 ASF.
                  -JIT FOOM CA| CUI.iTIOM OF DIVERSITY
AND NUMERICAL ANP> e»*vlMETOlr
   pn>« TriF. TAflLF ANin PLOT
                                                           .27
                         !MOF<
                                                                            .47
Fig. 10-10.   IR1 prey  spectrum of  calico  sculpin from Strait of Juan de Fuca,
               1978.
                                             191

-------
                            INDEX OF RELBTIVE  IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OIHORfiM
                            FROM FILE 1DENT. MESF)78. STHT10N flLSTR
                                      PREOflTOR  8831020703 - aiNOCOTTUS GLOBICEPS
                                   (MOSSHEflO  6CULPIN   )   RDJUSTEO SflnPLE SIZE = 66
                         lOOr
                     S
                          BO-
                          60'
i- 4U
§ 20
t—
n
1 20
g 4°
t~t
1—
1 BO
o

i-l 80
CJ
Q_

100






CO
0>
a
-c



1 	 1 	 P



CO
•o -o
•H to at
O CO CO 4J «H CO OJ

" -w o -ri p. w o a o
7* o a. * o. e a f f
w CO vHrg^icDcouu

D EB (J O U S O CU ^
— 	 1 	 1 	 1 	 --1 	 1 	 j 	 ,
                                    20
  40       60       80       100

CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF  OCCURRENCE
                                                                              120
                                         rpfo   MUM.    GPAV.
                                         OCCUR  COMP.  C0«o.  I.P.I.  TOTAL IPI
in-rToIC-ALES
HtBPACTICOIDfl
Clcpjorni A
r,Awut\o[0£A
CHLO'JOPHYTA
ilMIDFNSTIFItO
CSTP ACnOA
PAt_ YC^AF. T ft
AMDIT-^DAE
39
21
\ ^
11
1?
10
fi
4
1
.19
.?7
.15
.64
.1?
.61
.n*.
.55
.5?
70
41
11
7>
4
4
1


.78
.63
.54
.44
.55
.55
.46
.65
.16
74,
1
3,
?,
3,
10,

2.
1,
.23
.17
.67
.31
.93
.83
.04
.10
,6"
4ft5p
•
1
1145. A
?in
64
102
163
9
12
?
•
•
9
,
•
•
•
S
n
A
1
1
5
7
69
19
3
1
1
?



.94
.74
.97
.1?
.77
•81
.16
.2?
.05
           cocy TAXft fcilTn FoER.  OfCllP.  Le^^ TH4N, S AND NU«EPICAL  AMD
           CI'-'SOSITION BOTH LESS T-UN 1 AOF EnCLUDEn FaQM T*E TARLF. ftNO ' PLOT
           ("iiT MOT  racju CAI CiiL 4TI1M nF P
              PFPCF.NT
                                IMDFH
       .27    .57
      2.41   1.4*
       .57    .35
                                                                          .53
                                                                         1.39
                                                                          .11
Fig. 10-11.    IRI prey spectrum of mosshead aculpin from  Strait  of Juan de
                Fuca,  1978,
                                              192

-------
                       INDEX OF RELflTIVE IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OIBORRH
                       FROM FILE IOENT. HESB78. STflTION flLSTfl
                                 PREOflTOR  8831021801 - LEPTOCOTTUS RRMflTUS
                              CPflC. STflBHORN SCULPW)   flDJUSTED SRMPLE SIZE = 64

w
u
1
1
CD
t— *
t—
i— i
8
|
3
,_
Z
»—
t— •
8
u.
i
•
t
O_

100


80
60

40
20
0
20


40

60
80
'j nn








' 	 '


a
|
1
|

a i
ScQ Q
T) a) m
oj -a *H u Q
U -H C B» *O
ffl k. O -O -H
' TJ ed bo *H ^
*£ 1 S § c
^ 5 U E- O
0 50 100













•o
«
•H
«+J
•c
•H
1§
150
CUHULRTIVE FREQUENCY

313»{ Y
FSFO MUM. t
-,PAV.
|TF" OCCUR COMp. COMP.








U



Q>
5 «
•H CD
4J T3 Cj
vH rt iH U
i-i O 0) O 'O
a) tu « a >.
« EH WS 33 &
200








I
"5
U
fjj
u
* ffl
is R
a. v « js

-"CT 1'IA
ri r in'via-H^ir
v A j 1 A A F
f M c 1 ("i T ^ C 1 D A F
f-APlnAr'
50FY T;\»A l|
ronPOSTTIT
C?!iT NOT F3
pFaC^T
c;'^irjMO>i-
rwe-Mk'F <;c
20.13 2.69
?6.S6 .97
-\jnp,tJnDA ?T.4» S.76
.32
5.07
.11
?3.44 l.?7 22.19
?3.44 ?.02
10.94 .60
in.q4 ,?6
r 10.94 .71
7.81 .37
7.81 .34
7.01 ' .??
<,. '5 .34
jnna-JRArHYi'wv''1JCH 4. ^9 .37
FiF 4.«.9 1 .OS
'• 4.69 .26
^vljQft 4.*.9 .t?
1.13 .07
1.13 .11
1.56 .04
[Tr( F^FO. OCCM9. LFSS THAN S *NO
"OT't LF = S T'^iM t A-5F ExCLIlOFO F =
.30
.03
7.66
.37
.40
.14
1.08
.09
3.79
4.59
14.91
3.49
1.54
16. 16
3.36
MtfMPa
A4.J
160.5
137.6
549.9
54.5
6.9
«6.7
ll.o
6.P
3.0
10.9
2.7
19. S
26.4
71.1
20.?
5.0"
SO. 9
5.3
fCAL ANT
0« THF. TABLF. A
PFPCENT
TOTAL IPI
74.34
1.65
3.12
?.6«
10.70
1.06
.13
1.69
.23
.1?
.07
.20
.OS
.38
.51
1.3H
.39
.10
.99
.10
RPAVIMETRIC
MO °LOT
nw cat CULATlr^; r.f nivFPSlTY l^OICFSI
OOMTMBNCK I*"1(:X .66
»iFjNf.'o litvFWSITY 1.40
TMOF> .2^
.13
. 3.34
.67



.57
1.59
.3?
Fig.10-12.   IRI  prey  spectrum  of staghorn sculpin from Strait of Juan de
               Fiica,  August  1978.
                                           193

-------
melanostic tus, Embiotocidae, Pleuronectidae) made up a large proportion
(15.55%) of the remaining IRI as a result of their high biomass contributions.
Mysids, gammarid amphipods, and crangonid shrimp were the three most frequently
occurring prey in the sample.

     Great sculpin. Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus.  Hippolytid shrimp
constituted the primary prey item (80.00% of total number, 90.78% of total
biomass) in the stomachs of two of four specimens collected by beach seine at
Beckett Point; several caprellid amphipods and fish bones also occurred in
the stomach contents.

     Tidepool sculpin. Oligocottus maculosus.  The most common and widely
distributed cottid in the intertidal habitats along the strait, this fish was
collected at all the intertidal sites; it also occurred in abundance at
Beckett Point and Port Williams.  Epibenthic crustaceans composed the bulk
(91% of total IRI combined) of the prey spectrum  (Fig.10-13).  Harpacticoid
copepods because of their numbers accounted for over 66% of the total IRI,
while gammarid amphipods and sphaeromatid isopods contributed more to the
gravimetric composition.  Species of gammarid amphipods, in order of
decreasing numerical importance, were Melita desdichata, Hyale rubra,
Aoroides columbiae, Parallorchestes ochotensis, Calliopiella pratti, and
Photis sp.  Sphaeromatid isopods were mainly Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis
(62% of those identified), Dynamenella sheareri (20%), and Exosphaeroma
amplicauda (18%).  Hippolytid shrimp, brachyrhynchan crabs  (Hemigrapsus
nudus, H. oregonensis), barnacles, archaeogastropods  (acmaeid limpets), fish,
and pagurid crabs also made considerable contributions to the total prey
biomass but were otherwise unimportant.

     Saddleback sculpin. Oligocottus rimensis.  This species was captured in
rocky intertidal habitats at Slip Point, Observatory Point, and Neah Bay.
Epibenthic crustaceans predominated in its  rather simple prey spectrum
(Fig. 10-14); gammarid  amphipods  (70.8% of the total IRI) and harpacticoid
copepods  (21.27%) were most important, and  sphaeromatid isopods  (Dynamenella
sheareri) were less important.

     Fluffy sculpin, Oligocottus snyderi.   This fish  occurred in greater
abundance than saddleback sculpin but was generally confined to the same rocky
intertidal habitats at  Slip Point, Observatory Point, and Neah Bay; the cobble
intertidal habitat at  Twin  Rivers also produced quite a few specimens.  The
overall prey spectrum  of £.  snyderi  (Fig. 10-15) was markedly similar to that
of 0. rimensis  (Fig.10-14).  Only the greater proportional  numerical
contribution by harpacticoid copepods altered the relative  importance of the
principal prey, gammarid amphipods, harpacticoid  copepods,  and sphaeromatid
isopods.  The species  Hyale rubra was the only identifiable gammarid amphi-
pod.   Sphaeromatid isopods  included Gnorimosphaeroma  oregonensis,  Exosphaeroma
amplicauda, and Dynamenella sheareri.  Algae (Ulotrichales), chitons
 (Polyplacophora), and  valviferan isopods  (Idoteidae)  were also somewhat
important because of their  gravimetric contribution.

     Manacled sculpin.  Synchirus gilli.  An adult captured  during  the Morse
Creek beach-seine collections had consumed  13 harpacticoid  copepods.

     Cabezon, Scorpaenichthys marmoratus.   A juvenile caught during beach
seining at Port Williams had eaten nine  caridean  shrimp  (75.00% of total
number of prey, 96.52% of  total biomass), two gammarid  amphipods,  and  one
caprellid amphipod.              "     ..„,

-------
                           INDEX OF RELRTIVE IHPORTRNCE (I.R.I.I OlflGRWI

                           FROM FILE IDENT. MESR78. STflTION flLSTft

                                    PREDflTOR  8831022401 - OLIOOCOTTU8 rlflCULOSUS
                                 (TIOEPOOL SCULPIN   )   flOJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE = 174

a

1
. 00
i
t—

CO
Jp
i

•
id

X
3
*— i
X-
ffi
§
»— •
l_
§
^
8

•
£


100

80
60


40



20



0 	 r-

20 •


40


60 • -S
t-i
0) O
•H 4J
Rfl • IS S
OU QJ ™
O X
0 20 40 60 80





















H
O c
4)
M j= a
j: IH u
(X O Tl
en a. o
100
120




01
o
&
a £
U 3 S -H

•H TJ >, O W
§T-t rH 01 CO
I- O « O
p-t 00 &. CJ iH
U IX I < H

~irV
.c
u
1
£
CO U
h CO
Jc n
c •§
5 £
1-4 eg
Q •O U
o -rf n
n u «M i o

0 h TlOWTJC-rt-H-O
uo. coimcgfiuaco
CD ^ vf^lPTi
rT~oiocr)ji
-<;T-3^rnnA
n : o T c j ^
T;» A ITiarc A-!J 1*
.".TLI IT*
T •• = -«- T »
«!• Il.TPftF
I ,i T"lF>:Tir IFD
F'i,- 10 j'-)i-n£rap
ocioiinaF
T - ,\ r T -. 1 f
r;i i'"" i .v
r 4 r 1 1 o 1 : 1 1 F.
i-tr:onl.vTtn«F.
jur-'A^ (%'?^CT jo"
T '' i r -1 •; T r T
V 3 f Y T .• V _ . f
roMp.isITJT'
,^,,r ..0T FOO
jpyrfnr r.
ci.i\:j()'j--v
F\/FNM£<;<;
FOF-) N.UIM.
TTF'i OCC'io COMP.
4S.40 S.P4
40.^0 75.13
?'••*! 3-^ri
13.07 .<<1
n.»9 3.04
1". 3* 1.7D
t,..iS .49
?.->n .1?
^>.^n .1?
3.10 1.2'
1.7? .09
1 .7? .09 .
(.0« 1.15 .06
'..IS .06
--. >---F^. nrr'iiri. i. FSS T,'\!>I s, A MO
U.-,TH i f.r.c THdM t »ot *xCU'l.!en f
" C.Z\ Cl;l.**ln«i OF OIVFOSITY IM)I(
O"I\ift»i'CF JN'JEX •e>7
FIMF:O i:ivFPS[Tv 1.80
INOH. . 1?
GR»V.
COMP.
12.55
fl.66
17.11
11 .«?
9.7?
.10
.4?
.3?
.6S
.14
?.26
1.66
7.74
?. 00
1.S1
.5fl
?.?T
6.97
3.77
?.a6
•MiMtPtr
JOM THF,

.09
3.96
.71
PoEY
I.P.I.
FH4.Q
341Q.1
4S7.n
1S3.7
146.6
IP. 7
?0.4
5.'
7.6
3.7
11.1
P. 7
?".'»
4.0
3."
4.1
• 4.0
13.0
4.4
3.7
AL 4t-in
TSfll.F




PERCENT
TOTAL 191
16.13
66-04
8.P3
?.97
?.83
.36
.39
.10
.15
.07
«?1
.17
.SS
.09
.07
.on
• O1*
.23
.09
.OS
r.uAvIMETDlC
4Nf> PLOT

i47
1.72
•31
Fig,10-13.   IRI  prey  spectrum  of tidepool sculpin from Strait  of Juan de
             '  Fuca,  1978.
                                          195

-------
                            INOEX OF RELflTIVE IWORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OlflGRRM
                            FROM FILE IOENT. MESflTS. STflTION flLSTfl

                                      PREOflTOR  8831022402 - OLIOOCOTTUS RIMENSIS
                                   CSflDDLEBHCK SCULPIN  )   RDJUSTED SflttPLE SIZE =  26

                         lOOr
                          80
                          60
z
o
H^
1—
n_
g
*
1—
o_
s
t-^
£
&
i
1—
H*
T3
Q
&
•
H-
tJ
Q_






DCFY
t«,4PIOM
AC'-ACTICOI0*
SPflF'i.-i«ATf Oiif
•cfTCTi

40

20

0
20


40
60



80





100




























D





%
•D T3
S O 4J
•s • 5 g
^ •" o «
a % S 2
S « ' 0> u
1 CU 0) (U
E t-i .c en
,9  NUM. GPAV. OPF.Y PFPCENT
ITFM OCCi'O COMP. COMP. I.P.I. TOTAL IRI
"5?.ll -?3.47 65.37 9i?3.4 70.10
4^.15 54.55 4.84 P741.0 ?1.?7
"JP.77 o.?^ 33.7? 9»4.o 7.64
3.^5 l.'iS ^.45 ?3.5 .13
                     ,TT-  rot.-;.  OCCMP. LESS  TK4M s AND NUftRICftL Ann C,»A V I*ET*1C
                       i-oTH  i ..-;«;  THtM  1  flof  F^CL'JOFO FDO* THE TSBLF ANO °LOT
                      0" CA|.CI.'LATI."I>' OF                 '
                          ^ =>  Oivrac j
                                                 .4?
                                                       1.4?
 .55
1.14
 .36
Fig.10-14.   IRI prey  spectrxnn of  saddleback  sculpin from Strait of Juan de
               Fuca,  1978.
                                            196

-------
                            INDEX OF RELRTIVE IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OIRORRM
                            FROM FILE IDENT. MESR78. STRTION RLSTR
                                      PREORTOR  8831022403 - OLIGOCOTTUS SNYDERI
                                  (FLUFFY SCULPIN      J   ROJUSTEO SRMPLE SIZE =  93

a
2
1
£
g
1—
*n
£
§
.
£
5
1-4
2
O
h-
§
JC
O
•
fe?



100

80
60


40


20


20
60


80


100
•

.



•







CO
•a
•H
i

"
0 20 40













a
•o
•H
O
%
u
u
a
14


60
CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY

ajrv
r.l«.-aoin..-a
"iroiCTK.OT")*;
cpu^f or-i. vr.-i.-ft t
T A fi fil^ACfA-")!
i '(_r TO I ruA) tf^
VAI l^TFtOA _
I nr> T F r •" fl F
riooj jf-iiia
« 1 1 i •> ; 1 1 .". a E
"•>l.voL.--COP-T->
sje'r TAxi .„
F3EO
ITCk> OCCua
4A.?<,
?4. ^3
K 17.9(1
7. S3
7. S3
KfM"C3>iOPa 7. S3
"1«-33
?.15
'.15
?. \S
l.OH
A 1.08
ITC FCEO. OCCnR. LF.S? THAf,
Nir*. OWAV.
COMP. COMP.
9.76 39.67
7fl.Sl .63
2.31 13.51
ff,-i ?. ^
a -H
•o a o
•H M 1
o >2 2 S
e ^4 o u
h fH X *O
a ja >, o
f 1 -H C
a. IH o a

80 100
OF OCCURRENCE
DOFY PERCEMT
T.P.I. TOTAL IPI
?294.A 49. SI
'.957.1 4?. 23
'04.' 4;41
?6.q ,5A
34,0 ,7e;
5.S .1?
58.4 l.?ft
Ifl.o. .41
4.1 .09
4.0 .10
!.-> .03
8.7 .10
fCAt AND TiBAvlMETPK





z
J "
V P.
31
II
•H O
CU f*i

D"
GO
01
•-* A
B) (0  U h
,3 rt ° **

C3 > *-* O
120
















CivfrlTlON r«OT- Lt.<«; T«AN 1 APE F.XCLllOtO F POM THE TABLE ANO PLOT
l".i:f NOT F*
DFOfFMT
SHAtjvO")-
F»ITVMt.^>j
i" r
-------
     Roughback  sculpin, Chitonotis pugetensis  (.juvenile).  One juvenile from
 the Beckett Point beach-seine collections had  eaten three hippolytid shrimp
 (76.25% of total prey biomass) and one cancrid crab.

     Tadpole sculpin, Psychrolutes paradoscus.  An adult from the Port Williams
 beach-seine collections had consumed two gammarid amphipods and one pandalid
 shrimp (94.12%  of total prey biomass).

     Warty poacher, Ocella verrucosa (juvenile).  Mysids (50.00% of total prey
 numbers, 81.14% of total prey biomass) and gammarid amphipods (45.83% of
 total prey numbers, 17.98% of total prey biomass) were the most important
 component of the stomach contents of five juveniles caught in beach-seine
 collections at  Dungeness Spit and Twin Rivers.

     Tubenose poacher, Pallasina barbata.  This diminutive poacher appeared
 commonly in the beach-seine collections at Morse Creek, Port Williams,
 Beckett Point,  and Twin Rivers.  The prey spectrum from this sample (Fig.10
 -16) is composed almost entirely of epibenthic organisms, principally
 gammarid amphipods (48.23% of total IRI) and mysids (37.38%), and secondarily
 caridean shrimp and harpacticoid copepods.

     Ribbon sjiailfish, Liparis cyclopus.  The  stomach contents of an adult
 from an Observatory Point tidepool collection  contained 20 gammarid amphipods
 (86.96% of total prey numbers, 19.43% of total prey biomass), but the
 majority of the prey biomass was contributed by a polychaete annelid (53.65%)
 and an unidentified decapod crustacean (26.83%).

     Tidepool snailfish, Liparis florae.  Intertidal collections at Morse
 Creek, Slip Point, and Observatory Point provided most of the specimens.
 Gammarid amphipods, 92.62% of the total IRI (Fig.10-17), appear to be a
 highly preferred prey.  Harpacticoid copepods  provided 30.54% of the total
 number of prey, but they and idoteid isopods (Idotea fewkesi) were less
 important.

     Ringtail snailfish, Liparis rutteri.  Two specimens were collected, one
 by beach seine  at Twin Rivers and one from an  intertidal collection at
 Observatory Point.  One had fed upon mysids, and the other idoteid isopods.
 Both had consumed gammarid amphipods.

     Kelp perch, Brachyistius frenatus (juvenile).  Only beach-seine collec-
 tions at Beckett Point provided specimens for  stomach analysis.  Only
 cyclopoid copepods were identifiable from the  contents of the four fish with
 food in their stomachs.

     Shiner perch, Cymatogaster aggregata.  Of the 16 fish retained for
 stomach analyses, 15 originated from the Beckett Point beach-seine collections;
 68.8% had empty stomachs.   Tanaids were by far the prevalent food item in the
 stomach contents (96.15% of the total number of prey, 97.52% of the total
prey biomass) and gammarid amphipods and several.hippolytid shrimp provided
 only incidental contributions.

     Striped seaperch, Embiotoca lateralis (juvenile).  Juveniles were caught
during beach seining at Morse Creek, Beckett Point, and Twin Rivers.   Gammarid

                                     198

-------
                    CO
                    o
                            INDEX OF RELRTIVE IMPORTANCE (I.R.I.) DIflORflM
                            FROM FILE IDENT. MESH78, STflTION flLSTfl
                         loop


                          80


                          60


                          40
                         20
                    •S    20
                    UJ
                         40
                         60
                         80
                        100
                                        PREDflTOR  8831081101 - PflLLflSINfl BflRBflTfl
                                   (TUBENOSE POfiCHER    )   flOJUSTED SfiMPLE.SIZE =  25
                                                                            •a.
                                                                            •H
                                                                            O
                                    20
40
                                                         60
                    80
                                                                             100
                                          CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
-Jt-'T • 1 !>•>
K' y c r -^ a r K. }
C | r O .** y F .' i y A — (^ A i^ T O r A
ICfiip COM°.
=?.on i?.63
PA.no 17. »9
I*. 01 6.32
f,PAu. pofY
CDMP. I.P.I.
15. P9 'S?3.A
17. 7« 3B5.S
TOTAL IP I
37. 3*
7.37
                                         s.no  40.no.   1.13    T?9.i
                                         -.00    3.1^    1.6?     38.?
                                                                          .73
          CBI.-Y TAxi -TTM Fu^n. OCCI =. Lrt;^ THAN S  A^C NUHE9ICAL  Awn  GRAVIMETRIC
          ^.^^AJ'^qIT 10", ariJH L*-'^^ THA«j  1 SOF F XCL'inf.n ROOM  THF  TA8LF ANO PLOT
                         '                         INOICES)
             <;:•«/.ri-lM-.vf i».p o
   .30
  1.91
                                                        1.4.S
                                                         .6?
                                                                          .70
                                        120
Fig. 10-16,    IRI  prey spectrum of  tubenose poachers from  Strait  of  Juan de
                Fuca, August  1978.
                                             199

-------
                            INDEX OF RELflTIVE IMPORTRNCE (I.R.I.) DIRORflM
                            FROM FILE IDENT. NESR78. STflTION fiLSTfl
                                         PREDRTOR 8831090810 - LIPRRIS FLORRE
                                   (TIOEPOOL SNRILFISH  )   ROJUSTED SflUPLE SIZE =  33

I
£
§
t-*
t—
1
»—
u
a_
HK
§
5
?
3=



tl







P-^EY
i«MADIC<£»
O^TF [niE
ioo«CT icf1 ins
Pt-»FDr)M4T jrji
iooF.IJ, ;f;F6
JoshLvT IOJE
iotniF
=OFV T»>4 «
roupn<;i T Invi
MrT -POT F3
3F/JCF-IT
CM4-.H.OM-
r'^NJiESS
100
80
60
40
20

n
U
20
40

60




80



100














	 	 1
	 i F^ f=


OJ
•o -c o
03 O W (U T3
 O "^
g " O. « t-t C.*H
E O I- ^ CL O.M-,
<0 "O CD O. CO -H ffl
0 i-t X W W 3S £
'•••..•
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
fPifl Ml". f-RAV. ^OFY PFOCENT
1TF« OCCNR COMP. COMP. I.P.I. TOTAL IPl
«1.^? M.07 5^.75 <>i OF nivE^siTv INDITES)
Or-wl«;A>iCE ^:f)EX .47 . .41 ,SA
JFlMhD OIVKSCITY 1.4<> l.f>0 .51
!-lDF> .41 ,4C .14
Fig. $0-17,   IRI  prey  spectrum  of ttdepool sculpin from Strait  of Juan  de
               Fuca,  1978.
                                            200

-------
 amphipods  (76.86% of the total number of prey, 96.53% of the total prey
 biomass) were the most important prey organism, followed by cyclopoid
 copepods (20.66% of the total numbers of prey), sphaeromatid isopods (3.05%
 of the total prey biomass), and raysids (1.65% of the total numbers of prey).

      Pile perch. Rhacochilus vacca (.juvenile).  Like most of the embiotocids,
 this species was captured by beach seine at Beckett Point; all those examined
 were juveniles.  Gastropod molluscs, perhaps littorine snails, completely
 dominated the contents of the seven stomachs which were examined; 71.43% of
 the stomachs contained them, 98.72% of the total number of prey were gastropods,
 and they composed 95.77% of the total prey biomass.  Tanaids, gammarid amphi-
 pods, and pagurid crabs constituted the incidental prey items.

      Redtail surfperch. Amphisticus rhodoterus.   The majority (96%) were
 juveniles and appeared to be restricted to the western strait, where they
 were collected by beach seine at Kydaka Beach and Twin Rivers.  The prey
 spectrum was dominated by two epibenthic crustacean taxa—sphaeromatid
 isopods (Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis).  which accounted for 70.33% of the
 total IRI,  and gammarid amphipods (Atylus tridens). which accounted for 25.12%.
 Cancrid crabs (juvenile Cancer magister)  provided 17.7% of the total prey
 biomass and bivalves  5.5%,  but they were not common prey items.

      Pacific sandfish,  Trichodon trichodon (.juvenile).   One juvenile from a
 beach-seine collection  at  Kydaka Beach had an empty stomach.

      High cockscomb,  Anoplarchus  purpurescens.  This species  was  commonly
 collected at all intertidal collections  sites.  Numerically,  barnacle larvae
 dominated the prey spectrum (Fig.10-18)  at  66.56% of the total number of  prey
 items,  but  overall accounted for  only 17.94% of the total IRI.  Polychaete
 annelids  were consistently  the most important  prey  taxon,  providing 46.61% of
 the total IRI.   Other important prey were harpacticoid  copepods and gammarid
 amphipods (Melita desdichata,  Aoroides columbiae, Parallorchestes^ ochotensis).

     Ribbon  prickleback. Phytichthys chirus.   This  species  occurred in  inter-
 tidal collections at  Slip Point,  Observatory Point,  Morse  Creek,  and  Tatoosh
 Island.   The diet spectrum  (Fig.10-19) was  rather diverse  considering the
 sample  size,  the fifth highest in prey abundance and the  fifth highest  in
 prey biomass.                Gammarid amphipods (Atylus tridens) were  the  only
 prey which stood out as a dominant  food item,  78.79% of  the total  IRI.  The
 remaining prey composed less than  10%         of the total  IRI; important
 taxa in decreasing order of  percent total IRI were polychaete annelids,
 algae (Ulotrichales and Rhodophyta), asellotan isopods, and plant material
 (Potamogetonaceae).

     Black prickleback, Xiphister atropurpureus.  Black prickleback have
approximately the same distribution as ribbon prickleback.  The prey  spectrum
 (Fig.10-20)   is similarly diverse, and in fact is the second most diverse
spectrum based on percent total IRI (H1  = 2.54 as compared with H' =  3.06
for padded sculpln).   Sphaeromatid isopods  (both Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis
and Dynamenella sheareri), 40.04% of the total IRI;   gammarid amphipods
 (Atylus tridens), 25.66%; and sabellarid polychaetes, 10.18%, were the prey
taxa of primary importance.  Other polychaetes, harpacticoid copepods, and
serpulid polychaetes  were of secondary importance.

                                     201

-------
                          INDEX OF RELflTIVE IHPORTflNCE 11.R.I.) OlfiGRRH
                          FROM FILE KENT. MESR78. STflTION flLSTfi

                                   PREOHTOR 8842120402 - HNOPLflRCHUS PURPURESCENS
                                 (HIGH COCKSCOMB     )  flOJUSTEO SflMPLE SIZE =  S3
IUU
a
o= 80
& "
§
P 40
o
8 20
.
^
"" 0
1 m
i 4°
H-
9-^
s
S 80
100






=T:





a
a
•o
01 -H
||
Z H
-J-1 ~ll^
5 T3 00)
•H H 4-1 -U tlOjaJD-HOfHO.^
S u (j C O*">G.*->-HHprH
| <5 S 1 1 1 3 5 S335S
3 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FPF.O KMIM. GRAV. UPF. Y
PERCENT
OOFY IT'* OCC')t> COMP. COMP. T.-P.I. TOTAL IPl
pni_>r»-iFTA 3?. 09 10.11 31.43 1333.9
fiit»Mi<»|(pie 4 ?a.30 ?.07 7.51 ?70.9
*-A = "ACT ICnIOA IfS.^fl 17.30 ,?4 ?97.Q
ph TOFkjTIF TEO IS.no 1.10 19.79 315.3
iSFULOTl 7.55 ,45 .93 10.4
*fui.-bTF.» 7.55 .39 4.26 35.1
("IcoiOf-pjA 7.55 66.56 1.49 513.=;
Vil VIrfDS 5.66 .?6 .16 2.4
BI"»t.VI» 3.77 .13 1.73 7.0
lit.^Tolc-ALE's 3.77 .13 2.65 10. 5
P»'.-M*aj-5AF 1.77 .19 1.19 5.?
r.AcronpdQA 1.^9 .06 ^.29 17. <•
KTaooLYTiOAF l.flQ ,(!6 7.03 13.4
••f"FI..3»F l.ag .06 2.9? 5.«>
Tr--FB-;LI-rn-F 1.39 .06 6.90 13.1
46.61
9.47
1ft. 41
11.02
.36
1.23
17.94
.0<)
.24
.37
. 1«
.62
.47
.20
.46
= st:' TJVA «ITH f"FT. OCCi'S. l.r^S THAN 5 AND '-'' l"*t"P 1 C *t ANO GP A V IME TP I C
COMon^iTT.Vj POTH Lt^S THAN 1 4DF ExCLnDF.O FDQM TMF TAflLF A»)O °LOT
(HIIT NiOT F«0« CALCUL*TIOf4 Qf" fllvtO^ITV 1NOITF?)
PFDCFNT flf>MT»!»HCF IMJFX .4fl .17
•;M»>-^nM-wr!SFp OIVtPSlTV l.fl 3.17
FvF»t»jF<;<; TNOF.x .35 .69
.?R
2.33
.51
Flg.KV-18,   IRI  prey  spectrum of htgh  cockscomb  from Strait  of Juan de Fuca,
               1978.
                                           202

-------
                           INDEX OF RELflTIVE IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OlflGRfirt
                           FROM FILE IOENT. MESR78. STflTION BLSTfi
                                      PREDflTOR  8842121001 - PHYTICHTHYS CHIRUS
                                  (RIBBON PRICKLEBflCK )   fiOJUSTEO SRMPLE SIZE =  29
                         100
1 80
I
I 60
z
T. COMPOSITIC
8 S
a?
0

§ 20
UJ
CO
z 40
o
£ en








0)
a a
•a u
•H S
•u .C
^ a
rH O
0 kl
a o
a 1-1
•H X
B= 0
I . 	 1 	 '— | 	 1_^
	 	 	 1 1 l-l^""1


AF 13.79 5.68 1.04
3ri| YCH4FT4 1T.79 2.?7 12.61
<;oi-aFO^Wi\T in^f 10.34 2.B4 2.29
PhC^oPi-iYTA 11.34 ?^84 Il.5fl
!!LrT3!O4L(:s 10.34 7.95 11.35
r-lcTsncriDA 10.34 1.70 .3A
fNI^^TrFIE-) 10. ->4 7.3<3 6.54
i-icpsCTICOI^i *..'-»n 4.55 .0?
POfSi-or^TONftC^ai-" h.?0 2.P4 8.03
rnpTFiaaE 3.45 ,1.70 .23
ox-t r. rarraf T.45 'l.l* 3.56
""" 1''.'4F 3.45 .57 3.56
uTco.-vi.YTIDiF -3.^5 .57 1.15.
r^, ^OOMYTA -,.45 U14 .gp
4318.0
116.3
93.O
?05.3
- 53.1
149.?
199.7
21.3
144.0
31.5
75. n
6.7
16.5
14.?
5.9
7.1
78.79
2.1?
1.69
3.75
.97
2.7?
3.64
.39
?.63
.57
1.37
.12
.30
.26
.11
.13
r-opY TAX* uITH FCF.O. OCCi'Q. Lf^S THAN ^ ANf> MUMEPICAL ANO fiDAVH
-------
                            INDEX OF RELHTIVE IMPORTRNCE (I.R.I.) DlftGRRM

                            FROM FILE IDENT. MESfl78. STflTION HLSTfl

                                     PREOflTOR  8842121401  - XIPHISTER flTROPURPUREUS
                                   (BUCK PRICKLEBRCK  )   flDJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =  28
                         100
§
£ ^
g
E *°
10
I
§ 20

£
0
| 20
£
2 40
o
»-*
i—
1 60
Q_



4 80
£
« fw-|
1UU


OPFY m-«
ilUMJD I l)f 4
OI-SFPIVJIATIOAI-:
OI.YC^AFTA
A — F.I LADIILJA.E
1 n T o I ("i-1 -l_F*i
A3PACTIC<">IOa
MTDFNTTFIEO
41 V.' T F**3 A
rifjc [oaE
TVI. TOAE
A ^ 1 1 3 1 f) ft F
F£5 3Mi_ JOAE









1 	 1 1 —






(0 0) 03
•H T3 0) «H 0)
OJ U <0*Hi-HOfl V
QJ eg 4J iH (t O UH 03 Q; QJ «8
•g E V U X i^ IH M «0 OJ 03 TJ
i-l O flj 01 (JiJ4JO'O(0'O*H
)M h j: rH -rt U C »w ft *0 -H iH
CO U U t-< 1- 03 0)*3
1 JT iH ^ O VJ ft »H O >> OO ki
3 & S, 5 3S5.>S 5.84
in. 71 3.09 3.02 65. S 1.97
3.57 2.47 6.45 39.0 1.17
3.S7 1.23 11. 7« 46. S 1.40
3.57 l.SS 2.10 14.1 .42
3.57 .6? 1.13 6.P .19
3.S7 ?3,46 .77 36. "5 2.60
CPFV TA»I
CnMonslTI
(«HT NOT TOO*
                                     . Lfs<; ''TH«N c AMP MUMEPIC»I.  AND
                                      1 t»F FvCLUHFO roQM THF
                                     nr DrvE>";iTY iNn.irF.si
                                 INOFX
                              DIVERSITY
                                     3.11
                                      .77
                                                         .56
                                                                          .62
Fig.10-20.   IRI prey spectrum of black  prickleback  from Strait  of Juan  de
               Fuca,  1978.
                                           204

-------
       Rock prickleback.  Xiphister mucosus.   Rock prickleback had  a general
  distribution among the  intertidal collections similar to  that  of the  black
  prickleback.   Algae (Ulotrichales and  unidentified)  dominated  the prey
  spectrum (Fig.10-21), primarily  because of  the high  biomass contribution
  (97.43%).   Harpacticoid copepods and gammarid amphipods were the most
  abundant prey in  the stomach  contents  whereas sphaeromatid  isopods, important
  in  the  other  stichaeids, was  relatively insignificant.

       Penpoint gunnel, Apodichthys  flavidus.   Beach-seine  collections  in
  gravel-cobble habitats  at Twin Rivers  and Morse Creek and the  sand-eelgrass
  habitat  at  Beckett  Point and  intertidal collections  in rocky and  cobble
  habitats yielded  specimens.   Gammarid  amphipods were  the most  common  prey
  (47.83^  frequency of occurrence) and provided  the highest proportion  (45.05%)
  of the total  prey biomass.  Although not as common in the sample  (26.09%
  frequency of  occurrence), harpacticoid  copepods were  extremely abundant
  composing 87.62% of the total prey abundance.   Sphaeromatid  isopods
  (including only identifiable Gnorimosphaeroma  oregonensis) were less  common
 but composed over 31% of the total prey biomass.

 .    Crescent gunnel,  Pholis laeta.  Crescent gunnel appeared to be even more
 broadly distributed than penpoint gunnel; they were captured during both
 beach-seine and intertidal collections  and were most common at Beckett Point
 Slip Point, Morse Creek, and Twin Rivers.  Because of their high contribution
 to the total number of  prey items (61.16%),  harpacticoid copepods provided the
 highest proportion of  the total IRI,  51.04% (Fig.10-22).   Gammarid amphipods,
 however, occurred more  often in the sample and made the second highest
 contribution to the prey biomass, thus  accounting for almost 31% of the total
 IRI.   Species of gammarid amphipods were, in order of numerical importance
 H^ale  rubra, Parapleustes nautilus. Accedomoera vagor, and Aoroides columbiae.
 Calanoid copepods, because of  their abundance, and hippolytid shrimp~a^d
 polychaete annelids, because of their high biomass,  constituted secondary
 prey items.   Sphaeromatid isopods (Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis and Dyna-
 menella  sheareri)  and caprellid amphipods were also important.

     Saddleback gunnel.  Pholis ornata.   Three  specimens were taken, two at
 Beckett  Point  and  one at Twin  Rivers, during beach-seine collections.   Bivalves
 composed  70.97%  of the total number of  prey  and 71.43% of  the total prey
 biomass;  several polychaetes,  gammarid  amphipods,  and pieces of algae  formed
 the  remaining  stomach contents.

     Pacific sand  lance, Ammodytes  hexapterus  (.juvenile).  Calanoid copepods
 were the  only  prey organisms found  in the stomachs of  four fish from Morse
 Creek  and Kydaka Beach beach-seine  collections.
         I
     Speckled  sanddab, Citharichthvs stigmaeus.  These small  flatfish  were
 common in the beach-seine collections at Morse  Creek,  Dungeness Spit,  Beckett
Point,  Kydaka Beach, and Twin Rivers.    The relatively  diverse prey  spectrum
 (Fig. 10-23) was  composed of epibenthic  crustaceans—mysids (Archaeomysis
grebnitzki)  47.53% of total IRI, gammarid amphipods,  22.67%, and cumaceans,
3.4y/.—and benthic holothuroideans  (sea cucumbers), 14.63% of total IRI, and
polychaete annelids, 1.79%.  The "unidentified"  category was primarily sand
grains.
                                     205

-------
                             INDEX OF RELflTIVE IHPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) OlflGRflU
                             FROM FILE IOENT. MESR78. STflTION flLSTfl
                                         PREOflTOR  8842121402  -  XIPHISTER MUCOSUS
                                    (ROCK PRICKLEBflCK    >   flOJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =  25
                          100
                           80
          HiCDiCTICOlOA
          riBPIPE'OIA
          POT4MOOF.TONACESE
u.
§
1— 1
i
£
i
*— »
§
"
g




i—


60

ATI
*w
20

0
20
40

60



OP
DC

inn








03
V
,— I
CO


•H

W
o
H





0
Q* Q>
a) oi y
•o -o *o ta
H) ^H ^ c
^1 tij U O 0) O
14-1 0) « U -H U
-( o a, o
4) A 4) ffl -H S
•a s ca o. h d
q al CL a -H o
5 o w sc o o-

                                    20     40

                                            CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE

                                          FPF3   MIM
                                          OCC'JP  COM
                             PFBCENT
             CO"P.  T.P.I.  TOTAL IPI
      3-J.4S  P5.97
      12.5"  11.56
       3.47    .41
o.OO
4.00
4.00
1.05
1.74
 .01
 .01
1.45
                                                                869.1
              "(05.5
                7.*
11.0ft

  .11
 3.90
  .10
                           FPFO.
             KUMERIC«L
                                                                      GPAVIMETPIC
                      M >=OTM Lf<;<:  THAU  i  »PE FxCLUOEO FDQM THE TA>1LF AMD PLOT
             Mill NOT FSOM CALCULATION OF  niVFPSITY  IMOICFS)
                               F.  INDEX
                         TMOF»
        .32
       ?.0?
        .55
                                                           .75
                                                           .73
                         .70
                         .90
                                                                                        160
Fig. 10-21.    IRI  prey spectrum  of rock  prlckleback from  Strait  of Juan  de
                Fuca,  1978.
                                             206

-------
                            INDEX OF RELflTIVE IKPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) DlflGRflM
                            FROM FILE  IDENT. MESflTS. STftTION ULSTH
                                           PREDflTOR
                                    (CRESCENT GUNNEL
6842130205 - PHOLIS LflETfl
   )   RDJUSTEO SAMPLE SIZE
49
                         100
                          80

03
Z
O
i-
5
O
8

|
CO

t—
CO
o
fe
s
60


40


20
0
20

-40
60
80
« An




























^1 	 M l
I 	 1 |__| —


0)
.? -g a oj
•H *H u< ta o)
SO « JJ 0) Q> T)







BP



41
rt
0 03 W i-i nj e-HO>Tl4-l«flJO
Ji jj .,-t -a tooiHaji-i>1'a*H03
T] U O *H JMrH-OtHf-H-H^g
Jn 03 C O OCJ>«3X)i-)^ei.3«iJ
E* ^ o rtj:njRj&a.oo>«
*B CO fd "O OO-i-t^OJ-^O-H-H
5 as o H fcwfcxoxft-eao
IUU0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 16
                                            CUMULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
D^FY ITFM OCCUR
iMMAOTrirA 40.92
aoosCTtcolOA 30.61
AI_ifjOtTA 14. ?9
OfTFirt&f 1P.34
n|_vr^AFTA 1?.^4
OH AF3OU AT I OAF 10. ?0
L«3FLI IFFP4 'S.I?
VALTOAF *>.!?
nnDFLLjnFa 6.1?
icpOLvTjniE 4.08
Ar-!lr->If)4F 4.0ft
TvAI_V[A ?.04
liTOMACF.lE ?.04
"IIJM.
B.04
f>l . Ift
15.97
1.80
.63
1.16
1.50
?.T-
.42
.4?
.74
.11
1.59
GPAV.
COMP.
21.3fi
5. 0«
.17
.79
7.71
5.34
1.01
p. a*
fi.*6
1ft. 07
1 »4f
1.20
.0?
OOF.Y
UOfr.O
?O?7.7
??9.2
31.7
10?. S
66. 4
15.0
71.1
42.?
157.1
9.0
2.7
3.1
PEPCENT
TOTAL IPI
10.10
51.04
5.77
.80
?.5*
l.ftT
.40
1.79
1.06
3.95
• 21
.07
.on
             cory  rixA  w!rn FoEO.  OCCnP.  LF.S<; TriiM 5 AND NUMEPICAL ANO RpAvIMETPlC
             roMpr.^iTI^N  pOTr Li.<;= T-I6N I  A9F £xCLi)0!:'0 FPO" TH£ TAHLE AND °LOT
             MMT  MOT FOO'J  C»I.CliL^TinM OF  OIVfclTY INDICES)
                                                          2.8?
                         I'-lOFx
                                                    .47
                        .3ft
                       2.02
                        .44
Fig.10-22.   IRI  prey spectrran  of  crescent gunnel from  Strait  of  Juan de Fuca,
               1978.
                                             207

-------
                        INDEX OF RELfiTIVE IHPORTfiNCE (I.R.I.) DIBGRRM
                        FROM FILE IOENT. MESR78.  STflTION flLSTfl
                                 PREDflTOR  8857030102 - CITHflRICHTHYS STIGHflEUS
                               (SPECKLED SflNDDflB   ) ' flDJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =  45
100
u
I 80
* 60
£
I
5 40
8 20
£
— 1
i—
% 20
^
2 40-
&
)_.
co „ -
p 60 • 3


g oj en o -w
•H U ffl 3 «
* on ^ ^ >

°" 3 1 112







]
°^
cd
•o
Tt-
« 3
•o T) a i
a) eg i-t eg a) ca

(flU-ITSBJ-r^ *O (8CB
•0 *JrHOW'H
V4 oJoajr-i-Ht>oaiu*H
u •otjc!!Oja>c>oiH
c *H cuf c. n (0 h v o
ca ecaa.i=u]ijc0f-i.£:
0 50 100 150 200 250
CUttULflTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
FP£0 NUM. GRAV. PPEY PERCENT
°5F.Y IfFM OCCU« CO"P. COMP. I.
R.I. TOTAL IPI
r,flwEA 4ft. 89 13.53 9.87 1144.' ??.67
Mvclnac^A 44.44 ?3.55 30.44 ?3
99.? 47.53
CU>'ACtA ??.?? 10.83 1.64 376.9 5.49
*OI.1T*1IJ°OIUFA ?n.OO 12.31 24.6? 738.7 14.61
POLVCH'F.TA 15.56 1.35 4.47
CANCPIOE* Q.39 ?.30 1.83
IINIOFNTIFIEO o.BQ 21.11 1.27 1
^•DO^LLIOFA 6.67 .54 .1?
cpuJFQnMATlOAF. 6.67 .41 .26
SMOF) isCFOAF 6.67 1.35 2.66
!<;^FIOAF 6.67 .54 .06
C°ANGONJDAE 4.44 ..?7 1.39
LAT'/ACEA 4.44 5.«2 .00
c( FOCYf VATA-C4PIOFA 4.44 1.76 7.86
PMOLtOIDAF ?.?? .14 10. 43
not-y TAxA WITH Fopo. OCCll«..LFS5 THAN 5 AND NUMERICAL
90.6 1.79
36.7 .73
9R.q 3.94
4.4 .09
4.4 .09
?6.» .53
4.n .OR
7.4 .15
25.9 .51
42. R .85
23.* .47
AND GRAVIMETRIC
COMPOSITION BOTH LE-^S THAN 1 ARF EXCLUDED FoOM THE TAflLE" Afin PLOT
(BllT NOT FROM CAiCULATIOM OF DIVERSITY INDICES)
PF°CF.NT 0^MT\io^CF INOFK .15 .1?
SHINNON-^ IMEP UIVER5ITY 3.21 2.97
F.vf>'NESS INDFX .65 .60

.30
?.?3
.45
Fig.  10-23.   IRI  prey  spectrum  of speckled sanddab from Strait  of Juan de
               Fuca,  August  1978.
                                          208

-------
      English  sole,  Parophrys  vetulus  (juvenile).  Although more abundant  than
 speckled  sanddab, juvenile  English  sole were distributed  similarly, maximum
 abundances occurring at Port  Williams, Morse Creek, and Twin Rivers.  The
 prey  spectrum (Fig.10-24) was rather  evenly composed of epibenthic crustaceans—
 gammarid  amphipods, 25.28%  of the total IRI, tanaids, 12.49%, and cumaceans,
 3.66%—and benthic  polychaetes, 27.04%, and holothuroideans, 27.30%.  Calanoid
 copepods  appeared in only 9.7% of the stomachs but made up over 25% of the
 total number  of prey items.

      Starry flounder, Platichthys stellatus.  This fairly large flatfish  was
 most  common at the western beach-seine sites along the strait, most of the
 specimens coming from Kydaka  Beach  and Twin Rivers.  Holothuroideans, 55.26%
 of the total  IRI, were the most important prey organism and accounted for
 71.7% of  the  total numbers of prey.   Cancrid crabs (Cancer magister) because
 of their  large contribution (58.92%)  to the total prey biomass were also
 important, with 36.57% of the total IRI.  Polychaete annelids (2.49%),
 cumaceans (1.62%),  gammarid amphipods (1.07%), and callianassid shrimp (1.14%)
were secondary.

     C-0 sole, Pleuronichthys coenosus.   Two fish from a beach-seine collection
at Beckett Point had consumed mainly bivalves (80.0% of the total prey
abundance, 95.85% of the total prey biomass), in addition to several polychaete
annelids and a nemertean.

     Sand sole, Psettichthys melanostictus (juvenile).  This species was  a
prevalent component of the beach-seine catches at Morse Creek, Dungeness
Spit,  Twin Rivers, and Kydaka Beach.  Mysids (Archaeomysis grebnitzki)
constituted the main prey in the diet (Fig. 10-25), being well represented in
the sample and providing high .contributions to the total number of prey items
and prey biomass (70.94% of the total IRI).  Juvenile fishes, including
juvenile flatfish, were the second most  important prey,  by contribution to
the total prey biomass (59.11%).   Gammarid amphipods,  9.84% of the total  IRI,
and larvaceans, 1.55%,  were of secondary importance.
                                     209

-------
                              INDEX OFRELPTIVE IHPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) DIflCRflM
                              FROM FILE IDENT. HESfl78. STflTION flLSTR

                                          PREOflTOR  8857041301 - PflROPHRYS VETULUS
                                     (ENGLISH SOLE        )   flDJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =
                                                          72
                      g
                      s
                      z
                      o
                      I—
                      s
                                                                           -8-S
                                                                           o s
                                                                           SS
                         iTK"
                                        50          100         150         200

                                            CUMULRTIVE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE
                                                  PFPCEMT
                                         I.O.I.   TOTAL  IPI
                                                                250
       WIJM.    fiPAV.
OCCnP  Cpvp.   COMO.
POL^CHAFTA
C-AWMAPIOEA
'•'OLITHiiPOIOEA
CM»ACEA
*n v 4 1_ v 1 4
CALAMOIOA
ncTOACnnA
40
30
?9
g
9
S
• M
.Sf-
.'.7
I 72
.7?
.Sf,
14
10
6
?6
25

. 9o
.4"!
.67
i36
.6?
.31
?4
19
48
1
4


*
•
*
•
•
•
00
IS
14
55
19
69
04
1774.
IfSfl.
1791.
'39.
P10.
?55.
2.
0
1
0
q
\
7
0
27-
?7i
3.
12.
•
3.
•
04
30
66
49
90
03
             («MT
*'TH FPEOt  r)CC"iJ-
V «OTH Lt<^? T-4N 1
=0'' CA|.
                                             THAN c AMD MUMEPICAI  AW
                                             PXCL'IOEO FPQM THE TAHLF ANO PLOT
                                                   .19
                                                          .33
                                                         1.97
                                                          .49
                                                                           .57
Fig. 10-24.   IRi prey  spectrum of  juvenile English sole from  Strait  of Juan
               de  Fuca,  August 1978.
                                             210

-------
                             INDEX OF RELRTIVE IMPORTflNCE (I.R.I.) D1RGRRM
                             FROM FILE IDENT. MESR78. STflTION RLSTR

                                    PREDflTOR  8857041701 - PSETTICHTHYS MELflNOSTICTUS
                                   (SflNO SOLE          )   flDJUSTED SflMPLE SIZE =  69
100
Id
o
i so
m
v 60
m
g
E 40
§ 20
u
*• n
U
1—
§ 20
UJ
3
m
z 40
o
>—
£ 60
§
£ 80

d_


100
-

•
















-^- 1




 -H
at -H ** *j
•H tfl *4-l ffl U
w s o ? ? ^ i
So o] a] a) u u
2 rt P w ^
QJ 3 tO § B «H fH
E-< O cJ O D D flu
1111
100 120 140 160
OF OCCURRENCE
POFY PFPCENT
t.P.I. TOTAL IPI
4530.4 70.94
6?8.6 9.84.
1045. P 16. 3«
36.7 .S7
98.? 1.55
.1.9 .06
21.1 .33
5.9 .09
3.6 .06
r.ory T4^4 .[TI^ PofQ. oCCil^. L^^S THAN S ANO NUMERICAL AMD r,e>AVIME TP1C
rn"Doi;l T TON ^(JTH LfT^S THAN 1 ARE FKCLHOFO FoOf* THE
i^iiT >;rT F»fi • C4|. CiJI^T lO'J OF rilvFOSITY HJOTCESt
nrar.F'jT nnMr«MNCF IMDF.X .4? , .46
''•AMn-lM-^f [VIK.O OtVP^SITY 1.95 l.SO
iiVFM^'h^S IMO^X .44 .34
TABLE AND PLOT

.54
1.31
• 2*»
Fig.10-25.   IRI  prey spectrum of  sand  sole from Strait  of Juan de Fuca,
               August  1978.
                                           211
                                                                      * GPO 797 -840 198T

-------