EPA910-R-06-001
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Ecological Condition of the
Estuaries of Oregon and Washington
-------
(blank page)
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
Ecological Condition of the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington
an Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) Report
Authors:
Gretchen Hayslip1, Lorraine Edmond1, Valerie Partridge2, Walt Nelson3, Henry Lee3, Faith Cole3, Janet
Lamberson3, and Larry Caton4
March 2006
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, Washington
2 Washington State Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program, Olympia, Washington
3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Western Ecology
Division, Newport, Oregon
4 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Portland, Oregon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Publication Number: EPA 910-R-06-001
Suggested Citation:
Hayslip, G., L. Edmond, V. Partridge, W. Nelson, H. Lee, F. Cole, J. Lamberson, and L. Caton. 2006.
Ecological Condition of the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington. EPA 910-R-06-001. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Assessment, Region 10, Seattle, Washington.
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
(blank page)
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
Acknowledgments
Western Coastal EMAP relies on the cooperation of federal, state and local agencies. Special recognition
for their efforts is due the following participants:
Washington Department of Ecology
Casey Cliche Christina Ricci
Margaret Dutch Kathy Welch
Ken Dzinbal
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Mark Bautista Greg McMurray
Greg Coffeen Greg Pettit
Curtis Cude Chris Redmond
Paula D'Alfonso Crystal Sigmon
RaeAnn Haynes Daniel Sigmon
Dan Hickman Scott Sloane
Bob McCoy
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center
Bernie Anulacion Leslie Kubin
Jon Buzitis Dan Lomax
Tracy Collier Mark Myers
Alison Geiselbrecht Paul Olson
Andy Hall Sean Sol
Larry Hufnagle
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
Dave Terpening
Doc Thompson
Office of Research and Development
Tony Olsen
Steve Hale
John Macauley
Indus Corporation
Patrick Clinton
in
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
(blank page)
IV
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Background 1
B. Objectives 2
II. METHODS 3
A. Design 3
B. Indicators 5
1. Field Methods 7
2. Laboratory Methods 9
3. Data Analysis Methods 9
III. RESULTS 11
A. Water Physical/Chemical Parameters 11
1. Water Clarity 11
2. Dissolved Oxygen 11
3. Nutrients 12
4. TSS 13
B. Sediment Characteristics 14
1. Silt-Clay Content 14
2. Total Organic Carbon 15
3. Metals 15
4. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) 16
5. PCBs(PolychlorinatedBiphenyls) 16
6. Pesticides 17
C. Toxicity 18
1. Acute sediment toxicity tests 18
D. Chemicals in Fish Tissue 19
1. Metals 19
2. Pesticides 21
E. Benthic Invertebrates 22
1. Benthic abundance 22
2. Benthic species richness/diversity 22
F. Fish 24
G. Non-indigenous species 26
IV. CONCLUSIONS 27
A. Water Physical/Chemical Indicators 27
B. Sediment Characteristics 28
C. Chemicals in Fish Tissue 29
D. Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) 29
E. Summary 29
V. REFERENCES 31
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
VI. APPENDICES 34
Appendix 1. Site location information 34
Appendix 2. Chemicals measured in sediments and fish tissues 40
Appendix 3. Summary statistics for water chemistry and habitat indicators 41
Appendix 4. Summary statistics for sediment characteristics 42
Appendix 5. Summary statistics for contaminants in fish tissue 44
Appendix 6. Benthic invertebrate species from 1999-2000 46
Appendix?. Fish species from 1999-2000 69
VI
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
List of Figures
Figure 1. Example Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) 10
Figure 2. CDF of Water Clarity 11
Figures. CDF of Secchi Depth 11
Figure 4. CDF of Bottom Dissolved Oxygen 11
Figure 5. CDF of Surface Dissolved Oxygen 12
Figure 6. CDF of Total Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen 12
Figure?. CDF of Soluble Phosphorus 12
Figure 8. CDF of Mean Chlorophyll a 13
Figure 9. CDF of N:P Ratio 13
Figure 10. CDF of Total Suspended Solids 13
Figure 11. CDF of Percent Silt-Clay 14
Figure 12. CDF of Total Organic Carbon 15
Figure 13. CDF of Total PAHs 16
Figure 14. % of Estuarine Area with Pesticides Detected in the Sediments 17
Figure 15. CDF of Total DDT 18
Figure 16. CDF of Toxicity Testing 18
Figure 17. CDF of Inorganic Arsenic in Fish Tissue 19
Figure 18. CDF of Mercury in Fish Tissue 20
Figure 19. CDF of Zinc in Fish Tissue 20
Figure 20. CDF of DDT in Fish Tissue 21
Figure 21. CDF of Number of Benthic Organisms per 0.1 m2 (Abundance) 22
Figure 22. CDF of Number of Benthic Species 22
Figure 23. Most Common Benthic Invertebrates 23
Figure 24. Fish Species Found at all Sites 24
Figure 25. Most Commonly Found Fish at Marine, Freshwater and Intermediate Sites 25
Figure 26. Extent of NIS Invasion in the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington 26
Figure 27. Summary of Sediment Contamination 28
Figure 28. Summary of Chemicals in Fish Tissue 29
Figure 29. Overall Condition of the Estuarine Area of Oregon and Washington for Selected
Indicators 30
List of Tables
Table 1. Selected Coastal EMAP Indicators 6
Table 2. Station Total Depth and CTD Sampling Depths 7
Table 3. Station Depth and Discrete Water Sampling Depths 7
Table 4. Selected Metals in Sediments of the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington 15
Table 5. Selected Contaminants in Fish Tissue in the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington 19
Table 6. Criteria for Assessing Nutrients 28
List of Maps
Map 1. Coastal EMAP Sampling Locations, 1999-2000 4
Map 2. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria (TSC) for Mercury 20
Map 3. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria (TSC) for Zinc 21
Map 4. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria (TSC) for DDT 21
Vll
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
(blank page)
Vlll
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Photo: Harold W. Streeter, NOAA/NMFS vessel used by
Washington Department of Ecology in 2000.
I. INTRODUCTION
Estuaries are bodies of water that receive
freshwater and sediment from rivers and
saltwater from the oceans. They are transition
zones between the fresh water of a river and the
salty environment of the sea. This interaction
produces a unique environment that supports
wildlife and fisheries and contributes
substantially to the ecology and economy of
coastal areas.
Recent studies have shown that growth of the
human population is concentrated in the coastal
areas (Culliton, 1990). This population growth in
the coastal areas of the west is a principal driver
for many stresses to the ecosystem such as
habitat loss, pollution, and nutrient enhancement.
These stressors can affect the sustainability of
coastal ecological resources (Copping and
Bryant, 1993). Increased globalization of the
economy is a major influence in the introduction
of exotic species into port and harbors. Major
environmental policy decisions at local, state and
federal levels will determine the future for
estuarine conditions of the western U.S.
Information on the ecological condition of
estuaries is essential to these policy decisions.
The overall quality of estuaries in Oregon and
Washington is described in this report using data
collected as part of the Western Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP).
In EPA Region 10, Western EMAP is a
cooperative effort between the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and
Development (ORD), EPA Region 10, the
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology),
the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ), the National Oceanographic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and
others. Much of this report is based on work by
ODEQ (Sigmon, 2004), Ecology (Wilson and
Partridge, 2005) and EPA ORD (Nelson, 2005
and U.S. EPA, 2004).
A. Background
EMAP (Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program) was initiated by EPA's
Office of Research and Development (ORD) to
estimate the current status and trends in the
condition of nation's ecological resources.
EMAP also examines associations between these
indicators and natural and human caused
stressors. This information will assist the EPA
and States/Tribes as the Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs them to develop programs that evaluate,
restore and maintain the chemical, physical and
biological integrity of the Nation's waters. The
data collected during this survey can also be used
to examine the relationships between
environmental stressors and the condition of
ecological resources
The coastal component of Western EMAP
applies EMAP's monitoring and assessment
tools to create an integrated and comprehensive
coastal monitoring program along the west coast.
Water column measurements are combined with
information about sediment characteristics and
chemistry, benthic organisms, and fish to
describe the current estuarine condition.
Sampling began during the summer of 1999,
with small estuaries of Oregon and Washington.
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
In 2000, sampling continued with the larger
estuaries of Oregon and Washington (Puget
Sound and the Columbia River estuary). The
boundary for the Columbia River estuary was
head of tidal influence, so there were some
freshwater components of this sampling effort.
This report provides a summary of the data from
1999-2000 sampling for the small and large
estuarine systems of the states of Washington
and Oregon.
B. Objectives
The overall objectives of this project are:
to describe the current ecological
condition of estuaries in Washington and
Oregon based on a range of indicators of
environmental quality using a statistically
based survey design;
to establish a baseline for evaluating how
the conditions of the estuarine resources
change in the future;
to develop and validate improved
methods for use in future coastal
monitoring and assessment efforts in the
western coastal states;
to transfer the technical approaches and
methods for designing, conducting and
analyzing data from statistically based
environmental assessments to the states
and others;
to work with the states and others to build
a strong program of water monitoring
which will lead to better management and
protection of western estuaries.
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
II. METHODS
The Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology), and the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (ODEQ) conducted all
field sampling for this project in 1999-2000 with
assistance from EPA Region 10 and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
The goal of EMAP is to develop ecological
monitoring and assessment methods that advance
the science of measuring environmental
resources to determine if they are in an
acceptable or unacceptable condition. Two major
features of EMAP are:
the probability-based selection of sample
sites and
the use of ecological indicators.
A. Design - How to Select
Estuarine Sites to Sample
Environmental monitoring and assessments are
typically based on subjectively selected sampling
sites. EMAP provides an alternative method of
sample site selection for large scale monitoring.
Peterson (1998; 1999) compared subjectively
selected localized lake data with EMAP
probability-based sample selection and showed
the results for the same area to be substantially
different. The primary reason for these
differences was lack of regional sample
representativeness of subjectively selected sites.
Coastal studies have been plagued by the same
problem. A more objective approach is needed to
assess overall estuarine quality on a regional
scale.
In addition, it is generally impossible to
completely census an extensive resource, such as
the set of all estuaries on the west coast. A more
practical approach to evaluating resource
condition is to sample selected portions of the
resource using probability-based sampling.
Designing a probability-based survey begins
with creating a list of all units of the target
population from which to select the sample and
selecting a random sample of units (places to
collect data) from this list. The list or map that
identifies every unit within the population of
interest is termed the sampling frame.
Studies based on random samples of the resource
rather than on a complete census are termed
sample or probability-based surveys. Probability-
based surveys offer the advantages of being
affordable, and of allowing extrapolations to be
made of the overall condition of the resource
based on the random samples collected. These
methodologies are widely used in national
programs such as forest inventories, consumer
price index, labor surveys, and such activities as
voter opinion surveys.
A probability-based survey design provides the
approach to selecting samples in such a way that
they provide valid estimates for the entire
resource of interest, in this case the estuaries of
Oregon and Washington. Therefore, the results
in this document will be reported in terms of the
percent of estuarine area of Oregon and
Washington. The sampling frame for the EMAP
Western Coastal Program was developed from
USGS 1:100,000 scale digital line graphs and
stored as a GIS data layer in ARC/INFO
program. Additional details are described in
Diaz-Ramos (1996), Stevens (1997), and Stevens
and Olsen (1999).
The assessment of condition of small estuaries
conducted in 1999 was the first phase of a two-
year comprehensive assessment of all estuaries
of the states of Washington and Oregon. The
complete assessment requires the integrated
analysis of data collected from the small
estuarine systems in 1999 and the larger
estuarine systems in 2000 (Map 1). The intent of
the design is to be able to combine data from all
stations for analysis. The West Coast sampling
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Map 1. Coastal EMAP Sampling Locations, 1999-2000 (Washington and Oregon).
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
frame was constructed as a GIS coverage that
included the total area of the estuarine resource
of interest. The estuarine area of Oregon and
Washington represented by this report is 8670
square kilometers (or 3348 square miles).
For the state of Washington, the 1999 design
included only small estuaries along the coastline
outside of the Puget Sound system, and consisted
of a total of 50 sites (Appendix 1). Tributary
estuaries of the Columbia River located within
Washington state were included in the 1999
sampling effort, while the main channel area was
not sampled until 2000 (as part of the 2000
Oregon design).
The Washington 2000 sampling design included
only the large "estuary" of Puget Sound and its
tributaries. Site selection for this estuary used a
combined approach in order to allow
collaboration with a survey previously conducted
by National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) under the NOAA
National Status and Trends Program. The overall
design combined the existing NOAA probability
based monitoring design with the EMAP
Western Coastal study design. The EMAP grid
was extended to include Canadian waters at the
north end of Puget Sound, and then was overlaid
on the existing NOAA monitoring sites. There
were 41 stations selected based on the NOAA
sampling stations, in addition to 30 new EMAP
stations, of which 10 were associated with the
San Juan Islands (Appendix 1).
The Oregon 1999 design included only small
estuaries of the state and consisted of 50 sites
(Appendix 1). Tributary estuaries of the
Columbia River located within Oregon were
included in the 1999 sampling effort, while the
main channel area was not sampled until 2000.
An intensive sampling effort was designed for
Tillamook Bay, where 30 sites were selected
(Appendix 1).
The Oregon 2000 design included only the main
channel area of the Columbia River. The
Columbia River system was split into two
subpopulations: the lower, saline portion and
the upper, more freshwater portion, with a total
of 20 and 30 sites, respectively (Appendix 1).
All sites from both states and for both years were
combined for analysis in this report to represent
the entire 8670 square kilometers of estuaries in
Oregon and Washington. Of these, 710 square
kilometers are in Oregon and 7960 square
kilometers are in Washington.
B. Indicators - What to Assess at
Each Selected Site
The objective of the Clean Water Act is to
restore and maintain the chemical, physical and
biological integrity of the Nation's waters.
Therefore, in order to assess the nation's waters,
it is important to measure chemical (including
sediment chemistry and fish tissue
contaminants), physical (such as water clarity,
and silt-clay content) and biological condition
(fish and invertebrate communities, and toxicity
testing). Coastal EMAP uses ecological
indicators to quantify these conditions. Indicators
are measurable characteristics of the
environment, both abiotic and biotic, that can
provide information on ecological resources.
There is a great deal of information collected as
part of Coastal EMAP. Table 1 shows the
selected core EMAP coastal indicators. For a list
of the chemical analytes for sediment and tissue
samples, see Appendix 2. In the following
section, we will give an overview of the methods
for those indicators that we describe in the
results and discussion sections of this report.
Additional detailed information on field and
laboratory methods is available in U.S. EPA,
2001.
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Indicator
Rationale
Water Column Indicators
Water Clarity
Dissolved oxygen
Dissolved
nutrients
(Nitrogen and
Phosphorus)
Total Suspended
Solids
Clear waters are valued by society and contribute to the maintenance of healthy and productive
ecosystems. Light penetration into estuarine waters is important for submerged aquatic vegetation
which serves as food and habitat for the resident biota.
Dissolved oxygen (DO) in the water column is necessary for all estuarine life. Low levels of oxygen
(hypoxia) or lack of oxygen (anoxia) often accompany the onset of severe bacterial degradation,
sometimes resulting in the presence of algal scums and noxious odors. In severe cases, low DO can
lead to the death of large numbers of organisms.
Dissolved inorganic nitrogen and dissolved inorganic phosphorous are necessary and natural
nutrients required for the growth of phytoplankton. However, excessive dissolved nutrients can
result in large, undesirable phytoplankton blooms.
Total suspended solids (TSS) refers to the matter mat is suspended in water. TSS can be a useful
indicator of the effects of runoff from construction, agricultural practices, logging activity,
discharges, and other sources.
Sediment Indicators
Silt-Clay Content
Sediment
contaminants
Sediment toxicity
testing
The percentage of particles present in bottom sediments that are silt and clay is an important factor
determining the composition of the biological community. It is an important factor in the adsorption
of contaminants to sediment particles and therefore for the exposure of organisms to contaminants.
A wide variety of metals and organic substances are discharged into estuaries from urban,
agricultural, and industrial sources in the watershed. The contaminants adsorb onto suspended
particles that settle to the bottom, disrupt the benthic community and can concentrate in the tissue of
fish and other organisms.
A standard direct test of toxicity is to measure the survival of amphipods (commonly found, slirimp-
like benthic crustaceans) exposed to sediments for 10 days under laboratory conditions.
Biological Indicators
Benthic
organisms
Fish-tissue
contaminants
The organisms that inhabit the bottom substrates of estuaries are collectively called benthic
macroinvertebrates or benthos. These organisms are an important food source for bottom-feeding
fish, shrimp, ducks, and marsh birds. Benthic organisms are sensitive indicators of human-caused
disturbance and serve as reliable indicators of estuarine environmental quality. We also examine
which species are Non-Indigenous species (NIS).
Chemical contaminants may enter an organism in several ways: uptake from water, sediment, or
previously contaminated organisms. Once these contaminants enter an organism, they tend to build
up. When fish consume contaminated organisms, they may "inherit" the levels of contaminants in
the organisms they consume. This same "inheritance" of contaminants occurs when other biota
(such as birds) consume fish with contaminated tissues. The technical term for this is
bioaccumulation.
Table 1. Selected Coastal EMAP Indicators
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
1. Field Methods
Detailed descriptions of the field methods are
available in the "Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program (EMAP): National Coastal
Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
2001-2004" (U.S. EPA, 2001). The discussion
below is a very brief summary of the methods
used for the indicators that will be evaluated in
this report.
Photo: Example of water sampler
Water Column
Water depth, salinity, conductivity, temperature,
pH and DO data were collected using an
electronic instrument called a Conductivity
Temperature Depth recorder (CTD), that takes
measurements from the surface to the bottom of
the water column. Photosythetically available
radiation (PAR) was measured with LiCorฎ
PAR sensors. The CTD and underwater PAR
sensor were mounted for water column profiling.
Water quality indicators were recorded with the
CTD at discrete depth intervals, depending on
the total station depth (Table 2).
Total Depth (m) Sample Depth Increment
< 2
> 2 and < 10
Mid-depth
Every 0.5m
0.5m,
Every 1m,
0.5 off bottom
0.5m,
Every 1m up to 10m,
Every 5m to 0.5m off bottom
Table 2. Station Total Depth and CTD Sampling Depths
Near-bottom measurements were taken after a
three minute delay in the event that the sediment
surface had been disturbed. Data were recorded
for descending and ascending profiles. Secchi
depth was recorded as the water depth at which a
standard 20cm diameter black-and-white Secchi
disc could be seen during ascent.
Discrete water samples were collected with
bottles at one to three depths, which
corresponded with the CTD and PAR
measurement depths (Table 3). Water grab
samples were analyzed for dissolved nutrients
[forms of Nitrogen (Nitrate, Nitrite,
Ammonium), and Phosphorus], Total Suspended
Solids and Chlorophyll a.
Total Depth (m)
<1.5
> 1.5 to < 2
>2
Discrete Sample depth
Mid-depth
0.5m
0.5m off bottom
0.5m
Mid-depth
0.5m off bottom
Table 3. Station Depth and Discrete Water Sampling
Depths
Sediment
Sediment samples were collected with a 0.1-m2
Van Veen grab sampler. All sediment sampling
gear was decontaminated and rinsed with site
water prior to sample collection. Acceptable
grabs were >_ 7 cm penetration, not canted, not
overflowing, not washed out, and had an
undisturbed sediment surface. Water overlying
the sediment grab, if present, was siphoned off
without disturbing the surface. The top 2-3 cm of
sediment were removed with a stainless steel
spoon and transferred to a decontaminated
container. Sediments from a minimum of three
grabs were composited to collect approximately
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
6 liters of sediment. Most sites required from 6
to 9 grabs. Once adequate sediment was
collected, it was homogenized and transferred to
clean jars, stored on wet ice and later refrigerated
or frozen until analysis.
Benthic Invertebrates
Sediment samples to enumerate the benthic
infauna were collected using a 0.1-m2 Van Veen
grab sampler. After collection, infauna were
sieved through nested 1.0-mm and 0.5-mm mesh
sieves using site water supplied by an adjustable
flow hose. Material caught on the screens was
fixed with 10% phosphate-buffered formalin.
Samples were re-screened and preserved with
70% ethanol within two weeks of field
collection. The 0.5 mm fraction was archived,
and the 1.0 mm fraction was shipped for sorting
and taxonomic identification.
Fish Trawls
Bottom trawls were conducted using a 16-foot
otter trawl with a 1.25-inch mesh net. Trawls
were intended to retrieve demersal fishes (fish
living on or near the bottom) and benthic
invertebrates. Trawling was performed after
water quality and sediment sampling were
completed. Fish were obtained by hook and line
techniques at sites where trawling was not
feasible due to safety and/or logistical concerns.
The catch was brought on board, put alive into
wells containing fresh site water and
immediately sorted and identified. Information
was recorded on species, fish length and number
of organisms. All fish not retained for tissue
chemistry or to study their diseased tissue
(histopathology) or were returned to the estuary.
March 2006
Photo: Ratfish, a commonly found fish in Puget Sound
Fish Tissue
From the fish caught, several species of flatfish
(demersal soles, flounders, and dabs) were
designated as target species for the analyses of
chemical contaminants in whole-body fish tissue.
These flatfish are common along the entire U.S.
Pacific Coast and are intimately associated with
the sediments. Where the target flatfish species
were not collected in sufficient numbers,
perchiform (see list below) species were
collected. These species live in the water column
but feed primarily or opportunistically on the
benthos. In cases where neither flatfish species
nor perches were collected, other species that
feed primarily or opportunistically on the
benthos were collected for tissue analysis. The
target species analyzed for tissue contaminants
were:
Pleuronectiformes (flatfish)
Citharichthys sordidus - Pacific sanddab
Citharichthys stigmaeus - speckled sanddab
Platichthys stellatus - starry flounder
Pleuronectes isolepis - butter sole
Pleuronectes vetulus - English sole
Psettichthys melanostictus - sand sole
Perciformes (perchiform fish)
Cymatogaster aggregate* - shiner perch
Embiotoca lateralis - striped sea perch
Other
Leptocottus armatus - Pacific staghorn sculpin
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Target species were used for whole-body tissue
contaminant analyses. Individuals of a single
species (ideally 5-10 fish) were combined for a
single composite sample. Approximately 200-
300 grams of tissue (wet weight) is needed to
complete all analysis, but a minimum of 50
grams of tissue is required for mercury analysis.
2. Laboratory Methods
The detailed quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) program and laboratory methods for
the Western Coastal EMAP program are outlined
in "Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP): National Coastal Assessment
Quality Assurance Project Plan 2001-2004"
(U.S. EPA, 2001). The methods are described
briefly below.
Water
Discrete water samples were analyzed by the
state environmental labs (Oregon DEQ and
Ecology/University of Washington).
Sediment Chemistry
Sediment samples for chemical analysis were
taken from the same sediment composite used
for the sediment toxicity tests. Approximately
250-300 ml of sediment was collected from each
station for analysis of the organic pollutants and
another 250-300 ml for analysis of the total
organic carbon (TOC) and metals (Appendix 2).
The analytical methods are those used in the
NOAA NS&T Program (Lauenstein, 1993) or
documented in the EMAP-E Laboratory
Methods Manual (U.S. EPA, 1994a).
Fish Tissue
Organic and metal contaminants were measured
in the whole-body tissues of the species offish
listed above (Section II.B.l). Chemical residues
in fish tissue (Appendix 5) were determined for
each of the composited tissue samples. Quality
control procedures for the tissue analysis were
similar to those described above for sediments
and followed the procedures detailed in U.S.
EPA (1994a and 2001), including the use of
certified reference materials, spikes, duplicates,
and blanks.
Sediment Physical Parameters
Sediment silt-clay and TOC were analyzed by
the State labs (Oregon and Washington). Grain
size analysis was by dry and wet sieving.
Sediment digestion for TOC analysis was by
acidification and combustion.
Amphipod Sediment Toxicity Tests
The 10-day, solid-phase toxicity test with the
marine amphipod Ampelisca abdita was used to
evaluate potential toxicity of sediments from all
sites. Mortality, and emergence from the
sediment during exposure were the exposure
criteria used. All bioassay tests were performed
within 28 days of field collection using the
benthic amphipod Ampelisca abdita. Amphipod
toxicity tests were performed with the species
Hyalella azteca, for the 30 freshwater sites in the
Columbia in 2000. Procedures followed the
general guidelines provided in ASTM Protocol
E-1367-92 (ASTM 1993) and the EMAP-E
Laboratory Methods Manual (U.S. EPA, 1994a).
Benthic Invertebrates
Benthic infauna data were processed according
to protocols described in the EMAP lab method
manual (U.S. EPA, 1994a). Both indigenous and
exotic organisms were identified to the lowest
practical taxonomic level (species where
possible).
3. Data Analysis Methods
In this report, the primary method for evaluating
indicators for sites selected using the EMAP
probability design is the cumulative distribution
function (CDF). A CDF is a graph that shows the
distribution of indicator or parameter data
accumulated over the entire "population" of
concern. The "population" in this report is
generally the total area of the estuaries of Oregon
and Washington.
The EMAP statistical designs allows for
extrapolation from data collected at specific sites
to the entire "population", in this case the
estuaries of Oregon and Washington. For
example, if an indicator value above 3 is
considered "impaired," then Figure 1 (CDF)
shows that approximately 60 percent of the area
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
of the estuaries of Oregon and Washington
exceed that threshold (and the other 40% of the
estuary area is below 3).
The EMAP design also allows for the calculation
of confidence intervals for CDFs. For example,
we could say that 60% of the area of the
estuaries of Oregon and Washington exceed
some threshold, plus or minus 8%. However, for
ease of reading the CDFs, we did not include the
confidence intervals for the graphs in this
document. The CDF below is just an
introductory example. The 50% line marked on
all of the CDFs in this report, including the one
below, is just a marker and not an ecologically
important criterion.
glOO
^J
01
es
3 50
SB
H
a
g
0
0
40
10 20 30
Example Indicator
Figure 1. Example Cumulative Distribution Function
(CDF).
10
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
III. RESULTS
In this section of the report we will describe the
overall condition of the estuaries of Oregon and
Washington based on analysis of data collected
from over 200 randomly selected sites (Map 1)
using the EMAP protocols (described in Section
II). We are able to present only a portion of the
indicators that were generated from the field data
due to the large volume of information that was
collected. Additional indicators are summarized
in the Appendices.
1.
A. Water Physical/Chemical
Parameters
Water Clarity
Light transmissivity
The extent of light transmittance or attenuation at
a given water depth is a function of the amount
of ambient light and water clarity, with the latter
affected by the amount of dissolved and
paniculate constituents in the water. Light
transmissivity, the percent of light transmitted at
1m, in the estuaries of Oregon and Washington
ranged from 0 to 87.6 percent (mean 17.7
percent) across the 224 stations where light
transmissivity was measured (Figure 2).
53
3 50
20 40 60 80
Light Transmission at 1 m (%)
100
Figure 2. CDF of Water Clarity.
Secchi Depth
Secchi depth in the estuaries of Oregon and
Washington ranged from 0.1 meters to 12.5
meters (mean 2.9 meters) across the 238 stations
where Secchi depth was measured (Figure 3).
0 5 W 15
Secchi Depth (m)
Figure 3. CDF of Secchi Depth.
2. Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen is necessary for all estuarine
life. Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in
the bottom water for the estuaries of Washington
and Oregon ranged from 0.12 mg/L to 11.5 mg/L
(mean 7.355), across the 242 stations of the total
estuarine where bottom dissolved oxygen
concentrations were measured (Figure 4).
100
0 5 10 15
Bottom Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l)
Figure 4. CDF of Bottom Dissolved Oxygen.
Surface dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in
the estuaries of Oregon and Washington ranged
from 3.4 mg/L to 11.5 mg/L (mean 8.2 mg/l)
across the 242 stations where surface dissolved
oxygen concentrations were measured (Figure
5).
11
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
100
3 50
g
0 5 10 15
Surface Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1)
Figure 5. CDF of Surface Dissolved Oxygen.
3. Nutrients
Nutrients are chemical substances used by
organisms for maintenance and growth, that are
critical for survival. Plants require a number of
nutrients. Of these, nitrogen and phosphorus are
of particular concern in estuaries for two reasons:
they are two of the most important nutrients
essential for the growth of aquatic plants, and the
amount of these nutrients being delivered to
estuaries is increased by many human activities.
Eutrophication is a condition in which high
nutrient concentrations stimulate excessive algal
blooms, which then deplete oxygen as they
decompose. Estuaries with insufficient mixing
may become hypoxic (low in oxygen) and under
the worst conditions, the bottom waters of an
estuary turn anoxic (without oxygen).
Nutrient concentrations were measured at the
surface, middle and bottom of the water column
at 243 stations. The following graphs represent
the mean of the three depths at each station.
The relationship between nitrogen and
phosphorus (N:P ratio) can provide insights into
which of these nutrients is limiting. Total
dissolved inorganic nitrogen concentrations
ranged from 0 to 2045 ug/L for the sites
sampled. The three depths showed a similar
distribution, but bottom and midwater samples
generally had higher total nitrogen
concentrations than did the surface samples.
About half of the estuary area had less than 238
ug/L total dissolved inorganic nitrogen (Figure
6) for the mean of the three depths at each
station.
0 100 200 300 400
Total Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (ug/1)
Figure 6. CDF of Total Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen.
Soluble phosphorus concentrations ranged from
0 to 106.5 ug/L (Figure 7). About half of the
estuarine area had soluble phosphorus
concentrations less than 51.3 ug/L for the mean
of the three depths at each station.
0 50 100
Soluble Phosphorous (ug/1)
Figure 7. CDF of Soluble Phosphorus.
150
Phytoplankton are microscopic plants common
to estuarine waters. Phytoplankton are primary
producers of organic carbon and form the base of
the estuary food chain. One procedure for
determining the abundance of phytoplankton is
to measure the amount of the photosynthetic
pigment chlorophyll a that is present in water
samples. Chlorophyll is a pigment common to all
12
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
photosynthetic algae, and its amount in the
water is in relation to the algal concentration.
Chlorophyll a concentrations ranged from 0 to
31.1 ug/L (Figure 8). About one-half of the
estuary area had less than 3.1 ug/L for the mean
of the three depths at each station.
100
SS
5 50
0
0 10 20 30 40
Mean Chlorophyll a (ug/1)
Figure 8. CDF of Mean Chlorophyll a.
Molar nitrogen to phosphorus ratios (N:P)
ranged from 0.16 to 179 (Figure 9) for the mean
of the three depths at each station. Essentially all
of the estuary area had N:P < 16, which may
indicate that production of phytoplankton at
these sites is nitrogen limited.
100
L.
I 50
o
0 50 100 150 200
N:P Ratio
Figure 9. CDF of N:P Ratio.
4. TSS
Suspended materials include soil particles (clay
and silt), algae, plankton, and other substances.
Total suspended solids (TSS) refer to the matter
that is suspended in water. The solids in water
have different attributes and sizes.
Total suspended solids often increase sharply
during and immediately following rainfall,
especially in developed watersheds, which
typically have relatively high proportions of
impervious surfaces such as rooftops, parking
lots, and roads. The flow of stormwater runoff
from impervious surfaces rapidly increases
stream velocity, which increases the erosion rates
of streambanks and channels (U.S. EPA, 1993b).
Some of the physical effects of above normal
suspended materials include:
clogged fish gills, inhibiting the exchange
of oxygen and carbon dioxide,
reduced resistance to disease in fish,
reduced growth rates,
altered egg and larval development,
fouled animal filter-feeding systems, and,
hindered ability of aquatic predators from
spotting and tracking down their prey.
Higher concentrations of suspended solids can
also serve as carriers of toxins, which readily
cling to suspended particles. Total Suspended
Solids in the estuaries of Oregon and
Washington ranged from 0 mg/L to 230 mg/L
(mean 10.3 mg/L) across the 244 stations where
TSS was measured (Figure 10).
>
I
100
50
0
0 100 200 300
Mean Total Suspended Solids (mg/1)
Figure 10. CDF of Total Suspended Solids.
13
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Photo: Sediment sampling by Oregon DEQ.
B. Sediment Characteristics
Sampling of sediment was conducted at 225
stations, representing 81% of the estuarine area
of Washington and Oregon. Silt-clay content and
total organic carbon (TOC) are descriptors of the
characteristics of the sediments. For
contaminants in the sediments, the section below
compares the concentrations of metals and
organic chemicals in those sediment samples to
state sediment standards, where available, and to
sediment quality guidelines. See Appendix 4 for
additional details.
The sediment quality guidelines used here are
concentrations that have shown adverse effects
on organisms in laboratory experiments. They
are divided into ERLs (Effects Range-Low) and
ERMs (Effects Range-Median) and are described
more completely in Long, 1995. ERM guidelines
were calculated as the 50 percentile
concentrations associated with toxicity or other
adverse biological effects in a database compiled
from saltwater studies conducted throughout
North America. The ERL guidelines were
calculated as the 10th percentile of that dataset.
In this section of the report we will be using the
ERLs and ERMs as descriptors, since a single
exceedance may or may not indicate poor
estuarine condition. In Section IV, we will
examine sites with multiple exceedances, which
may indicate poor estuarine condition.
Oregon does not have sediment quality
standards, but Washington has both sediment
quality standards, set at concentrations below
which adverse biological effects are not expected
to occur, and a higher concentration used as a
cleanup and screening limit, above which at least
moderate adverse biological effects are expected
to occur (Washington State Department of
Ecology, 1995). Both the Washington standards
and cleanup limits are based on Puget Sound
data. We will use these sediment quality
standards, along with the ERLs and ERMs, as
descriptors as a single exceedance may or may
not indicate poor estuarine condition. In the next
section (Section IV) we will examine sites with
multiple exceedances, which may indicate poor
estuarine condition.
1. Silt-Clay Content
The proportion of fine grained materials (silt and
clay) in the estuarine sediments ranged from 0 to
94%, with a mean of 63% fines, across the 226
stations where silt-clay content was measured
(Figure 11). If sediment samples with less than
20% fines are considered predominantly sand,
then sandy sediments make up 40% of the
estuarine area. If samples with more than 80%
fines are considered muddy, then muddy
sediments cover 15% of the estuarine area.
0
50
100
Silt-Clay (%)
Figure 11. CDF of Percent Silt-Clay.
14
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
2. Total Organic Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) is the amount of
organic matter within the sediment. TOC can be
an important food source for deposit feeding
benthos. Fine-grained, organic-rich sediments
may be likely to become resuspended and
transported to distant locations. Silty sediments
high in total organic carbon (TOC) are more
likely than sandy sediments, or sediments low in
TOC, to have contaminants adsorbed to them.
TOC concentrations in the estuaries of Oregon
and Washington ranged from 0% to 4.48%
(Figure 12) across the 225 stations where TOC
was measured.
012345
Total Organic Carbon (%)
Figure 12. CDF of Total Organic Caibon.
3. Metals
Sediment samples were collected from 225 sites,
representing 81% of the estuarine area, and were
analyzed for metals. Table 4 describes the mean,
maximum and the percent of estuarine area
exceeding the ERMs, ERLs, and Washington
state sediment criteria.
Chromium, copper and nickel exceedances of the
ERL will not be included in any aggregate
sediment contaminant indicator. This is because
the ERL for chromium is less than the average
concentration found in the Earth's crust and in
marine shales (100 and 90 ppm, respectively,
Krauskopf and Bird, 1995.) The ERL for copper
is also less than the average concentration in the
Earth's crust and in shale (55 and 45 ppm,
respectively). Also, the ERL and ERM values for
nickel are not based on a strong correlation
between concentration and effect, according to
Long, 1995. Furthermore, both the ERL and
ERM concentrations for nickel are well within
the range of concentrations found in common
rock types that make up the earth's crust. Even
the highest concentration reported, from a
sample from the Rogue River in Oregon, is from
an area with naturally occurring "black sand"
deposits of heavy minerals, which may be
elevated in nickel. Therefore, we did not include
chromium, copper or nickel exceedences of the
ERL in the aggregate sediment contaminant
indicator.
Metal
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mean
(ppm)
6.6
0.2
70.6
24.5
12.9
0.1
29.6
0.2
73.6
Maximum
(ppm)
20.8
2.3
328
219
51
0.3
275
2.1
225
ERL
(ppm)
8.2
1.2
81
34
46.7
0.15
20.9
1
150
% of area that
exceeds ERL
18%
3%
33%
19%
<1%
8%
65%
<1%
<1%
% of area that
exceeds ERM
0
0
0
0
0
0
6% (ERM =5 1.6)
0
0
% of area that exceeds
Washington sediment
quality standards
0
0
<1%
0
0
0
Not applicable
0
0
Table 4. Selected Metals in Sediments of the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington.
15
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
4. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH)
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are
petroleum- or coal combustion by-products often
associated with elevated levels of tumors in fish.
The PAHs of low molecular weight are relatively
easy to degrade, whereas those with higher
molecular weights are resistant to
decomposition. The low molecular weight PAHs
are acutely toxic to aquatic organisms, whereas
the high molecular weight PAHs are not.
However, several high molecular weight PAHs
are known to be carcinogenic.
Total PAH
Total PAHs ranged in concentration from below
detection to 59,878 ppb (ng/g dry weight), and
were detected in 86% of the estuarine area
(Figure 13). The ERL of 4022 ppb was exceeded
in 3% of the area, and the ERM of 44792 ppb
was not exceeded. There are no State of
Washington sediment standards for total PAH.
uarine area^.
g i
Percent Esl
L
D C
r
20000 40000
Total PAHs (ppb)
60000
Figure 13. CDF of Total PAHs.
Low molecular weight PAH
Low molecular weight PAHs were detected in
83% of estuarine area at concentrations ranging
from <1 ppb to 8636 ppb. The ERL of 5520 ppb
was exceeded in 5% of the area, and the ERM of
3160 ppb was exceeded in <1% of the area. The
State of Washington sediment standards are 370
and 780 ppm, normalized to the total organic
carbon content. As a rule of thumb, samples
with less than 0.5% TOC are not used in this
comparison. One sample, representing well
under 1% of the estuarine area, exceeded the
sediment quality standard, and none exceeded
the cleanup/ screening concentration.
High molecular weight PAH
Concentrations of high molecular weight PAHs
were detected in 84% of the estuarine area at
concentrations ranging from <1 ppb to 8613 ppb.
The ERL of 1700 ppb was exceeded in 3% of the
area, and the ERM of 9600 ppb was not
exceeded. The State of Washington sediment
standards are 960 and 5300 ppm, normalized to
the total organic carbon content. No samples
exceeded either the Washington sediment quality
standard or the cleanup/screening concentration.
5. PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls)
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a group of
toxic, persistent chemicals formerly used in
electrical transformers and capacitors. They
often accumulate in sediments, fish, and wildlife,
and are detrimental to the health of these
organisms.
The sediment quality guidelines and standards
for PCBs are based on a different analytical
method than that used to analyze the EMAP
sediments* so the "total PCB" concentrations
using the two methods will not yield the same
result. This is also true of PAHs, because the
LPAH and HP AH totals for the Washington state
standards, for EMAP, and for ERL/ERM
benchmarks are based on slightly different lists
of compounds. The EMAP totals are of the 21
PCB congeners measured, so the concentrations
are biased low. The comparison is useful to
highlight areas that are impacted by PCBs, but it
is important to keep in mind that if identical
methodology was used, additional sites might
show exceedances of the Washington sediment
quality guidelines and standards.
EMAP total* PCB concentrations ranged from
below detection to 934 ppb. PCBs were detected
in 14% of the estuarine area. The ERL of 22.7
ppb was exceeded in 3% of the area, according
to the EMAP total PCBs. The ERM of 180 ppb
was exceeded in one sample, representing <1%
16
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
of the area, according to the EMAP total PCBs.
The station with the highest concentration is
located in the Duwamish River in an area of
known PCB contamination that is undergoing
investigation as a Superfund site.
*The EMAP PCB analyte list includes the most
common congeners, which are not necessarily
the most toxic. Because the EMAP total PCB
concentration is a sum of only the 11 congeners
that were measured, it is important to remember
that it is biased low. There are approximately
I 14 PCB congeners that are found in
commercial mixtures (Frame et al, 1996)
although some are found only rarely. In
addition, quality assurance review following
EMAP PCB analysis indicated low precision for
the results at the individual congener level due to
interferences. However, the review also
concluded that it was acceptable to use the
EMAP total PCBs as general indicators of
sediment contamination.
Washington has a sediment quality standard,
which normalizes total PCBs to the total organic
carbon content in the sample. The sediment
quality standard or "no effects level" is set at 12
mg total PCB/kg organic carbon. An additional
standard of 65 mg total PCB/kg organic carbon
is considered the "minor adverse effects level"
and is used as "an upper regulatory level for
source control and cleanup decision making."
When all Washington and Oregon data were
normalized to the organic carbon content, none
of the stations exceeded the higher adverse
effects level standard, but 1% of the area (12
stations) exceeded Washington's sediment
quality standard for total PCBs. Aside from the
Duwamish station, all the other stations that
exceeded this standard were in Oregon. The
Oregon stations had low to very low total
organic carbon, which can result in a high
normalized concentration, even with a low total
PCB concentration.
Normalization to total organic carbon content is
done because toxicity often depends on the
porewater concentration and samples with higher
concentrations of contaminants in the organic
fraction may be more bioavailable to organisms.
It is important to note, however, that the
relationship this conclusion is based on is not
strong at low concentrations of TOC, and at
TOC content of less than 0.5%, the relationship
may not be reliable.
The highest TOC content in the Oregon stations
exceeding the ERL was 0.67%, and all the rest
were below 0.5%. The low-TOC Oregon stations
represent very small areas, however, so whether
or not stations with less than 0.5% carbon are
excluded, less than 1% of the estuarine area in
both states combined exceeds the Washington
sediment quality standard.
6. Pesticides
None of the pesticides analyzed (Appendix 2)
have state sediment quality standards, and only
DDT and DDE have sediment quality guidelines.
Approximately 83% of the area had no detected
pesticides, 17% of the area had 1-3 detected, and
2% of the area had 3-5 pesticides detected
(Figure 14)
% of Estuarine Area with Pesticides Detected in the
Sediments
12%
83%
Figure 14. % of Estuarine Area with Pesticides Detected
in the Sediments.
17
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
DDT
Total DDT was detected in 10% of the estuarine
area, with concentrations ranging from below
detection to 12 ppb (Figure 15). The ERL of
1.58 ppb was exceeded in 4% of the area, but the
ERM was not exceeded.
100
& 50
CJ
I
468
Total DDT (ppb)
10
12
0 50 100 150
Percent Survival of Toxicity Test Organisms
Figure 16. CDF of Toxicity Testing.
Figure 15. CDF of Total DDT.
The DDT breakdown product 4,4'-DDE was
detected in 10% of the estuarine area with
concentrations ranging from below detection to
6.7 ppb. The ERL of 2.2 ppb was exceeded in
2% of the area, but the ERM was not exceeded.
C. Toxicity
1. Acute sediment toxicity tests
Toxicity testing uses biological organisms, in
this case either the marine amphipod Ampelisca
abdita or the freshwater amphipod Hyallela
azteca, to determine toxicity. Toxicity is a
measure of the degree to which a chemical or
mixture of chemicals in the sediments will harm
living things. Fifty percent of the estuarine area
had over 90% survival rate of the test organisms
(Ampelisca abdita or Hyallela azteca) when they
were exposed to sediments in the laboratory (i.e.,
50% of the area had less than 10% mortality of
test organisms in the lab) (Figure 16).
18
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
D. Chemicals in Fish Tissue
Tissue
Parameter
Toxic Tissue Screening Concentration (TSC)
in ppb (from Dyer et al, 2000 unless noted)
Mean
(DPb)
Minimum
(ppb)
Maximum
(ppb)
% of area
exceeding TSC
METALS
Inorganic
Arsenic
Cadmium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
1600
83 '
59 l
60
560
37
20,000
56
6
132
29
234
5
13,569
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
595
200
967
256
2,390
280
39,060
0%
4%
78%
2%
12%
2.3%
6.5%
PESTICIDES
DDT
54 2
14
0
494
4.8%
Table 5. Selected Contaminants in Fish Tissue in the Estuaries of Oregon and Washington (a/a = no toxicity threshold exists).
1 TSC is from Shephard, 2006. in press.
2 EMAP data are reported as total DDT; DDE is reported separately. TSCs are for 4,4'-DDD, 4,4'-DDE, 4,4'-DDT.
Because all the TSCs are the same concentration, the comparison was made with mat number.
Chemicals were measured in fish tissues in the
estuaries of Oregon and Washington. The values
in Table 5 were used to indicate if the levels
found in tissue indicate levels that may be
harmful to the fish. The Toxic Tissue Screening
Concentration (TSC) is a product of U.S. EPA's
water quality criterion (WQC) and
bioconcentration factor (BCF) per respective
chemical (TSC=WQC*BCF). The BCF are from
the U.S. EPA (1986). For chemicals not listed in
the EPA document, BCFs were calculated based
on Dyer, 2000, unless otherwise noted.
1. Metals
Inorganic Arsenic
Fish tissue was analyzed for total arsenic
(inorganic and organic). Since TSC is available
only for inorganic arsenic, an estimate of the
percentage of the total arsenic that is inorganic
arsenic in fish tissue (2%) was made based on
other studies of marine fish species.
Inorganic arsenic was detected in fish tissue in
85% of the estuarine area, with concentrations
ranging from below detection to 595 ppb
(Figure 17). The TSC of 1600 ppb not exceeded.
100
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Inorganic Arsenic in Fish Tissue (ug/g wet
weight)
Figure 17. CDF of Inorganic Arsenic in Fish Tissue.
Cadmium
Cadmium was detected in fish tissue in 9% of
the estuarine area, with concentrations ranging
from below detection to 200 ppb. The TSC of 83
ppb was exceeded in 4% of the area.
Lead
Lead was detected in fish tissue in 81% of the
estuarine area, with concentrations ranging from
below detection to 967 ppb. The TSC of 59 ppb
was exceeded in 78% of the area.
19
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Mercury
In most (94%) of the estuarine area, mercury was
detected in fish tissue. The concentrations ranged
from below detection to 256 ppb (Figure 18).
100
II
I
3
3
0 100 200 300
Mercury in Fish Tissue (ppb wet wt.)
Figure 18. CDF of Mercury in Fish Tissue.
The TSC of 60 ppb was exceeded in 2% of the
area. Sites with fish tissue levels exceeding the
TSC for mercury were all in the Columbia River
estuary (Map 2).
Sites that Exceed the
TSC for Mercury
Selenium
Selenium was detected in fish tissue in 22% of
the estuarine area, with concentrations ranging
from below detection to 2390 ppb. The TSC of
560 ppb was exceeded in 12% of the area.
Silver
Silver was detected in fish tissue in 17% of the
estuarine area, with concentrations ranging from
below detection to 280 ppb. The TSC of 37 ppb
was exceeded in 2.3% of the area.
Zinc
In most (>99%) of the estuarine area, zinc was
detected in fish tissue. The concentrations ranged
from below detection to 39,060 ppb (Figure 19).
100
0 10000 20000 30000 40000
Zinc in Fish Tissue (ppb wet wt.)
Figure 19. CDF of Zinc in Fish Tissue.
The TSC of 20,000 ppb was exceeded in 6.5% of
the area. Sites with fish tissue levels exceeding
the toxicity threshold were found scattered along
the outer coast and Columbia River estuary, but
were missing from Puget Sound (Map 3).
Map 2. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria
(TSC) for Mercury.
20
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Sites that Exceed
the TSC for Zinc
The TSC of 54 ppb was exceeded in 4.8% of the
area. Sites with fish tissue levels exceeding the
TSC for DDT were mostly in the Columbia
River estuary (Map 4). These results confirm the
findings of the Bi-State report (Tetra Tech, 1993)
which concluded that DDT was distributed in
fish tissue samples collected throughout the
lower Columbia River.
Map 3. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria
(TSC) for Zinc.
2. Pesticides
DDT
In most (97%) of the estuarine area, DDT was
found in the fish tissue analyzed. The
concentrations ranged from below detection to
493 ppb (Figure 20).
Sites that Exceed
the TSC for DDT
Map 4. Sites that Exceed the Toxic Screening Criteria
(TSC) for DDT.
100
8
5 50
m
H
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
E. Benthic Invertebrates
Benthic invertebrates were sampled at 223 sites,
representing 6988 square kilometers or 81% of
the estuarine area of Oregon and Washington.
Benthic invertebrate abundance and diversity are
good indicators of environmental health. See
Appendix 6 for additional information on the
benthic invertebrate community.
1. Benthic abundance
Benthic invertebrate abundance is the number of
organisms per unit area. It ranged from 0 to over
8000 organisms per 0.1m2 (Figure 21).
ซ 100
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Number of Benthic Organisms per 0.1 m2
Figure 21. CDF of Number of Benthic Organisms per 0.1
nr (Abundance).
2. Benthic species richness/diversity
There were 982 species found overall in 1999-
2000 (Figure 22). Of these, 338 were found at
only 1 site, while an additional 172 were found
at two sites. Seventy-two species were found at
20 or more sites.
100
0 50 100 150 200
Number of Benthic Species
Figure 22. CDF of Number of Benthic Species.
250
The salinity of the waters sampled was quite
varied. Since benthic invertebrates have varying
tolerances to salinity, we divided the sites into
three groups using the bottom salinity
measurements:
Marine, with > 25 psu (practical salinity
units),
Freshwater, with < 5psu, and
Intermediate, with > 5 and < 25 psu.
Ninety-one percent of the estuarine area with
benthos sampled fell into the marine category
(121 sites). Six percent of the area was
freshwater, and 3% was of intermediate salinity.
The Columbia River estuary sites were all either
freshwater or intermediate. Additional freshwater
and intermediate sites were found along the outer
coast of Oregon and Washington in smaller
estuaries. All sites in Puget Sound fell into the
marine category. It should be noted that while
some of the some of species may have been
found at very few sites, they can be extremely
abundant locally.
At the marine sites, 912 species were found. Of
these, 313 were found at only 1 site, and an
additional 164 were found at two sites. Thirty
eight species were found at 20 or more sites out
of the total 121 marine sites. Of the 912 species,
842 species (92%) were found only at marine
sites.
At the freshwater sites, 83 species were found.
Of these, 42 were found at only 1 site, and an
additional 11 were found at two sites. Four
species were found at 20 or more sites of the 64
freshwater sites. Of the 83 species, 44 species
(53%) were found only at freshwater sites.
At the intermediate sites, 93 species were found.
Of these, 42 were found at only 1 site, and an
additional 18 were found at two sites. Only one
species was found at 20 or more sites of the 35
intermediate sites. Of the 93 species, 10 species
(9%) were found only at intermediate sites.
22
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
There were an additional 12 species found at
both the freshwater and intermediate sites that
were not found at the marine sites at all. Figure
23 shows the most common species for each of
the three salinity categories: marine, freshwater
and intermediate. Even the most common
freshwater species (Corbicula fluminea) or
intermediate species (Americorophium salmonis)
are rare compared to many marine species. This
is because the freshwater/intermediate sites
represent only a small portion of the total
estuarine area sampled.
10
^
^
&
Species
I Marine Freshwater D Intermediate
Figure 23. Most Common Benthic Invertebrates (for each of the three salinity categories: marine, freshwater and
intermediate).
23
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
F. Fish
Fish sampling was conducted at 226 sites,
representing 7666 square kilometers (88% of the
estuarine area of Oregon and Washington). At 27
sites, there were no fish captured. English sole
(Pleuronectes vetuhis) was the most commonly
occurring species; it was found in nearly 70% of
the estuarine area. Figure 24 shows the fish
species most commonly occurring. Twenty seven
fish species were found at only one site. It should
be noted that while some of the species may have
been found at very few sites, they can be
extremely abundant locally.
An additional 34 species were found at 5 or
fewer sites. Only 10 species were found at 25 or
more sites. Appendix 7 lists all of the fish
species found.
80 !
Due to the varying tolerances offish to salinity,
we divided the sites into three groups (the same
as for the benthic invertebrates) using the bottom
salinity measurements:
Marine, with > 25 psu,
Freshwater, with < 5psu, and
Intermediate, with > 5 and < 25 psu.
Ninety percent of the estuarine area sampled for
fish sites was in the marine category, 3% of the
area was intermediate, and 7% was freshwater.
The Columbia River estuary sites were all either
freshwater or intermediate. Additional freshwater
and intermediate sites were found along the outer
coast of Oregon and Washington in smaller
estuaries. All sites in Puget Sound fell into the
marine category.
40
30
20
10
xฐ^ ^
V V*
Figure 24. Fish Species Found at all Sites (showing the most commonly occurring species).
24
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Of the 93 fish species found overall in 1999-
2000, 81 were found in the marine sites, 18 in
freshwater sites and 17 in the intermediate sites
(Figure 25). See Appendix 7 for additional
details.
Marine sites had bottom salinities of greater than
25 psu and surface salinities between 13.0 psu
and 33.0 psu. Of the 81 species found at these
marine sites, 66 species were found only at
marine sites.
Freshwater sites had bottom salinities of less
than 5 psu and surface salinities between 0.01
psu and 3.4 psu. Of the 18 species found at
freshwater sites, 10 of these species were found
only at freshwater sites. Unique freshwater
species included Cutthroat trout, Crappies,
Northern Pikeminnow, Peamouth, Three-spine
stickleback, and Sand roller. The overall most
so
commonly found species in 1999-2000 study,
English sole, was not found at any of the
freshwater sites.
Intermediate sites had bottom salinities between
5 psu and 25 psu and surface salinities from 2.7
psu to 24.9 psu. No species found at the
intermediate sites were unique to those sites.
Figure 25 shows the most common species for
each of the three salinity categories: marine,
freshwater and intermediate. Even the most
common species found at freshwater locations
(Starry flounder) or at intermediate salinity
locations (Pacific staghorn sculpin) are rare,
based on percent area of occurrence compared to
those species that were dominant at marine
locations. This is because the freshwater/
intermediate sites represent only a small portion
of the total estuarine area sampled.
f
'
X
Species
I Marine Freshwater D Intermediate
Figure 25. Most Commonly Found Fish at Marine. Freshwater and Intermediate Sites.
25
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
G. Non-indigenous species
Invasive species are considered one of the most
important environmental stressors to coastal
ecosystems and represent a threat to both local and
regional economies and the fundamental
ecological integrity of aquatic ecosystems
throughout the U.S. (Lee and Thompson, 2003).
While some of these non-indigenous species (NIS)
have been purposefully introduced, such as the
Japanese oyster for aquaculture, others have
quietly hitch-hiked in to become invasive species,
such as the Zebra mussel and European green
crab. Coastal waters are particularly vulnerable to
foreign-species invasions because human activities
and practices associated with shipping and
transportation, such as ship ballast water exchange
and the aquaculture of non-indigenous species, are
major and effective transport mechanisms. The
United Nations recently stated that invasive
species are second only to habitat loss as the
greatest threat to decreasing global biodiversity.
Species were classified based on the "Pacific
Coast Ecosystem Information System" (PCEIS),
a joint project between EPA and the USGS to
develop a spatial database of the
marine/estuarine native and nonindigenous
species (NIS) in Oregon, Washington, and
California. The primary classifications and
groupings for invertebrates (not fish) used are:
Native: Indigenous to the Northeast Pacific.
Nonindigenous species (NIS): Species not
native to the Northeast Pacific.
Cryptogenic: Species of unknown origin so they
can not be classified as native or NIS. These
species should not be considered "de facto" NIS.
The relative abundance of nonindigenous species
(NIS) were calculated for all sites with salinity
>5 psu using the following metric:
Abundance Invasion Metric (ATM) =
(Abundance of NIS)/( Abundance of NIS
& Abundance of Natives) * 100
The cut-points of 0-10%, 10-50% and >50%
were suggested as "background," "moderately
invaded," and "highly invaded" for AIM. The
current analysis does not include the cryptogenic
species, which are both widespread and abundant
in many sites.
Oregon and Washington show low levels of
invasion, with approximately 37% of the area
containing no NIS and approximately 90% of the
area showing "background" levels (0-10%) of
invasion. Less than 4% of the area was classified
as highly invaded (Figure 26).
Extent of NIS invasion
Figure 26. Extent of NIS Invasion in the Estuaries of
Oregon and Washington
Puget Sound is much less invaded than the
coastal estuaries or the Columbia River. In
particular, the deeper (>30 m) samples from
Puget Sound were less invaded. Of the 26 deeper
samples in Puget Sound, 10 contained no NIS,
with an average ATM of 4.9%. The coastal
estuaries and the Columbia River were much
more invaded than Puget Sound, with about 75%
- 80% of the area invaded to some extent (i.e.,
NIS >0) and 12% - 25% highly invaded.
26
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Photo: English Sole, a target fish species.
Most historic assessments of estuary quality have
focused on describing the chemical quality of
estuaries and, occasionally, impacts to sport
fisheries. However, the goal of the Clean Water
Act is to maintain and restore the physical,
chemical and biological integrity of the nation's
waters. In this assessment we try to address this
issue by incorporating direct measurements of
physical, chemical and biological condition of
estuaries.
To assess whether or not a specific metric
indicates good or poor condition, a benchmark,
standard or target is needed for comparison. Not
all parameters or indicators have benchmarks
developed. Therefore, we will only interpret
those indicators that have benchmarks or targets
developed that are relevant to the estuaries of
Oregon and Washington.
A. Water Physical/Chemical
Indicators
Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) concentrations below
approximately 2 mg/L are thought to be stressful
to many estuarine organisms (Diaz and
Rosenberg, 1995; U.S. EPA, 2000a). These low
levels most often occur in bottom waters and
affect the organisms that live in the sediments.
Low levels of oxygen (hypoxia) or lack of
oxygen (anoxia) often accompany the onset of
severe bacterial degradation, sometimes resulting
in the presence of algal scums and noxious
odors. However, in some estuaries, low levels of
oxygen occur periodically or may be a part of the
natural ecology. Therefore, although it is easy to
show a snapshot of the conditions of the nation's
estuaries concerning oxygen concentrations, it is
difficult to interpret whether this snapshot is
representative of all summertime periods or the
result of natural physical processes.
Dissolved oxygen was rated good, fair, or poor
using the following criteria:
Good: > 5 mg/L
Fair: 2-5 mg/L
Poor: < 2 mg/L
Less than two percent of estuarine area was in
poor condition, having a bottom DO
concentration below 2 mg/L. The sites with low
27
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
bottom DO were in Hood Canal, an area in
Washington state with well known low DO
issues. Approximately 70% of the area of the
estuaries was in good condition, having bottom
DO concentrations above 5mg/L (Figure 29).
Nutrients
Some nutrient inputs (such as nitrogen and
phosphorus) to estuaries are necessary
for healthy, functioning estuarine ecosystems.
When nutrients from various sources, such as
sewage and fertilizers, are introduced into an
estuary, the concentration of nutrients will
increase beyond natural background levels.
Excess nutrients can lead to excess plant
production, and thus, to increased phytoplankton,
which can decrease water clarity and lower
concentrations of dissolved oxygen. To assess
whether a site was in good, fair or poor condition
(Table 6), we used the criteria developed for the
National Coastal Assessment (U.S. EPA, 2004).
Nitrogen
Chlorophyll a
Good
<0.5mg/L
<5ug/L
Fair
0.5 - 1.0
mg/L
5 - 20 ug/L
Poor
>1 mg/L
>20 ug/L
Table 6. Criteria for Assessing Nutrients
For nitrogen, none of the estuarine area was
considered in poor condition, and very little was
in fair condition. For Chlorophyll a, almost none
(0.1%) of the area was in poor condition, some
(19.9%) was in fair condition and the majority of
the area (80%) was in good condition.
B. Sediment Characteristics
Approximately 3 percent of the estuarine area
has total organic carbon (TOC) content greater
than 3.5%. The 3.5% level was found by Hyland,
2005, to be associated with decreased benthic
abundance and biomass. The National Coastal
Assessment Program (U.S. EPA, 2004) uses
concentrations above 2% and above 5% TOC to
indicate fair and poor habitat, respectively. Using
these values, 14.1% of the area is in fair
condition (above 2%) and none is in poor
condition (above 5%).
To assess the degree of sediment contamination,
the sediment concentrations of contaminants
were compared with both the ERM and ERL
guidelines (Long, 1995) and the Washington
State sediment quality standards. A station with a
concentration exceeding an ERM or a
Washington state sediment quality standard is
classified as being in poor condition.
For this comparison, nickel, copper, and
chromium exceedances that were within
background ranges were excluded. Samples with
less than 0.5% total organic carbon were
excluded when comparing results with
Washington standards that are based on
normalization to TOC content.
Using these criteria, less than 1% of the estuarine
area exceeded an ERM or a Washington
sediment quality standard, indicating a poor
sediment condition (Figure 27). In 5% of the
area, no ERMs were exceeded, but more than 3
ERLs were exceeded, indicating a fair rating for
sediment contamination (Figure 27).
5% 1%
94%
Figure 27. Summary of Sediment Contamination.
28
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
C. Chemicals in Fish Tissue
The Toxic tissue Screening Criteria (TSC) are
tissue residue levels that, when exceeded, may be
harmful to fish. We evaluated the TSC for
arsenic, cadmium, DDT, lead, mercury, selenium
and zinc. In the estuaries of Oregon and
Washington, 3.3% of the estuarine area had 4 of
these chemicals in tissues exceeding the TSC (at
the same site, which indicates a likely poor
condition), 11.1% had 3 chemicals above the
TSC, 38.9% had 2 and 46.7% have one or zero
above the TSC, indicating good conditions
(Figure 28)
4 chemicals above TSC
3 above TSC
D 2 above TSC
1 or zero above TSC
Figure 28. Summary of Chemicals in Fish Tissue.
D. Non-Indigenous Species
(MS)
When looking at NTS species, we will be
assessing only those species whose origin is
known with reasonable certainty. The estuaries
of Oregon and Washington show low levels of
invasion, with less than 4% of the area classified
as highly invaded (> 50% ATM) or poor
condition.
The coastal estuaries and the Columbia River
were much more invaded than Puget Sound, with
about 75% - 80% of the area invaded to some
extent (i.e., MS >0) and 12% - 25% highly
invaded. However, due to the large size of Puget
Sound, the overall estimates for Oregon and
Washington essentially reflect this low extent of
invasion in Puget Sound (the average AIM is
4.9%).
Photo: Corbicula fluminea, an NIS species.
Photo credit: Noel M. Burkhead, U.S. Geological Survey
E. Summary
This project was designed to evaluate the overall
condition of estuaries in Washington and
Oregon. In this assessment we used direct
measurements of the biota themselves as
indicators of ecological condition. Information
on the biota is supplemented by indicators of
stress, which are measurements of other
estuarine characteristics or factors that might
influence or affect ecological condition,
especially water chemistry and sediment
characteristics.
Very little (0-2%) of the estuarine area of
Oregon and Washington (Figure 29) is in "poor"
condition using bottom dissolved oxygen,
chlorophyll a and nitrogen as water chemistry
indicators. Sediment indicators (total organic
carbon and sediment contaminants) also showed
very little (<1% - 3%) of the estuarine area of
Oregon and Washington (Figure 29) in "poor"
condition. A slightly higher percentage (3.4% -
4%) of the estuarine area of Oregon and
Washington were in "poor" condition for
29
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
biological indicators (NIS and chemicals in fish
tissue). In conclusion, overall, very little of the
estuarine area of Oregon and Washington (0-
is in "poor" condition for any indicator that we
examined (Figure 29).
However, there were some geographic areas
where the results that indicate concerns. All of
the sites with low bottom DO were in Hood
Canal, an area in Washington state with well
known low DO issues. In contrast, sites with fish
NIS
Chemicals in Fish
Tissue
Sediment
C ontamination
Total Organic
Carbon
Dissolved Oxygen
(bottom)
Chlorophyll a
Nitrogen
tissue levels exceeding the TSC for mercury
were all in the Columbia River estuary.
Also, sites with fish tissue levels exceeding the
TSC for DDT were mostly in the Columbia
River estuary. Finally, the coastal estuaries and
the Columbia River were much more invaded by
NIS species than Puget Sound, with 12% - 25%
of the area in the highly invaded category.
TO]
0% 20% 40% 60%
% Estuarine Area
80%
100%
Figure 29. Overall Condition of Estuarine Area in Oregon and Washington for Selected Indicators.
30
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
V. REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1993. Guide for conducting 10-day
static sediment toxicity tests with marine and estuarine amphipods. ASTM Standard Methods Volume
11.04, Method Number E-1367-92. ASTM, Philadelphia, PA.
Copping, A. and B.C. Bryant. 1993. Pacific Northwest Regional Marine Research Program, Vol. 1.
Research Plan, 1992-1996. Office of Marine Environmental and Resource Programs, University of
Washington, Seattle.
Culliton, T.J., M.A. Warren, T.R. Goodspeed, D.G. Remeer, C.M. Blackwell, and J.J. McDonough, III.
1990. 50 Years of Population Change along the Nation's Coasts, 1960-2010. NOAA, Office of
Oceanography and Marine Assessment, National Ocean Service, Coastal Trends Series, Rockville, MD.
41pp.
Diaz, R. J. and R. Rosenberg. 1995. Marine benthic hypoxia: A review of its ecological effects and the
behavioral responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 33: 245-303.
Diaz-Ramos, S., D.L. Stevens, Jr., and A.R. Olsen. 1996. EMAP Statistics Methods Manual. EPA/620/R-
96/002. Corvallis, OR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory.
Dyer, S.C., C.E. White-Hull, and B.K. Shephard. 2000. Assessments of Chemical Mixtures via Toxicity
Reference Values Overpredict Hazard to Ohio Fish Communities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000(34):251-
2524.
Frame, G.M., J.W. Cochran, and S.S. Bowadt. 1996. Complete PCB congener distribution for 17 Aroclor
mixtures determined by 3 HRGC systems optimized for comprehensive, quantitative, congener-specific
analysis. J. HighResolut. Chromatogr. 19:657-668.
Hyland, J.L., L. Balthis, I. Karakassis, P. Magni, A.N. Petrov, J.P. Shine, O. Vestergaard, and R.M.
Warwick. 2005. Organic carbon content of sediments as an indicator of stress in the marine benthos.
Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser.
Hyland, J., I. Karakassis, P. Magni, A. Petrov, and J. Shine. 2000. Summary Report: Results of initial
planning meeting of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Benthic Indicator Group. 70pp.
Krauskopf, K.B., and D.K. Bird. 1995. Introduction to Geochemistry. New York: McGraw-Hill,
Appendix IV, Average Abundance of Elements in the Earth's Crust, Continental Crust, in Three Common
Rocks, and in Seawater.
Lauenstein, G.G. and A.Y. Cantillo, eds. 1993. Sampling and analytical methods of the NS&T Program
National Benthic Surveillance and Mussel Watch projects. Comprehensive descriptions of elemental
analytical methods. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Tech. Memorandum 71.
31
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
Lee II, H. and B. Thompson, 2003. How Invaded Is Invaded? U.S. EPA. Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions, La Jolla, California, March 16-19, 2003, p. 80.
Long, E.R., D. MacDonald, S. Smith, and F. Calder. 1995. Incidence of Adverse Biological Effects
Within Ranges of Chemical Concentrations in Marine and Estuarine Sediments. Environmental
Management 19(1): 81-97.
Nelson, W.G., H. Lee II, J.O. Lamberson, V. Engle, L. Harwell, and L.M. Smith. 2004. Condition of
estuaries of western United States for 1999: A statistical summary. Office of Research and Development,
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory. EPA/620/R-04/200.
Peterson, S.A., D.P. Larsen, S.G. Paulsen, andN.S. Urquhart. 1998. Regional lake trophic patterns in the
northeastern United States: three approaches. Environmental Management 22:789-801.
Peterson, S.A., N.S. Urquhart, and E.B. Welch. 1999. Sample representativeness: a must for reliable
regional lake condition estimates. Environmental Science and Technology 33:1559-1565.
Sigmon, C.L.T., L. Caton, G. Coffeen, and S. Miller. 2004. Draft - Coastal Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program. The Condition of Oregon Estuaries in 1999, A Statistical Summary. Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, Laboratory. Portland, Oregon. DEQ04-LAB-0046-TR.
Stevens, D.L., Jr. 1997. Variable density grid-based sampling designs for continuous spatial populations.
Environmetrics 8:167-195.
Stevens, D. L., Jr., and A.R. Olsen. 1999. Spatially restricted surveys overtime for aquatic resources. J. of
Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics 4:415-428.
Tetra Tech. 1993. Reconnaissance survey of the lower Columbia River. Task 7 conclusions and
recommendations. Prepared for Lower Columbia River Bi-State Committee. Tetra Tech, Inc., Redmond,
WA. 270 pp. + appendix (TC 8526-07).
U.S. EPA. 1986. Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual. EPA/540/1-86/060. Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response. Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA. 1993a. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): Laboratory method
manual - estuaries, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development. Environmental Monitoring and System Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/4-91/324.
U.S. EPA. 1993b. Volunteer estuary monitoring: A methods manual. US Environmental Protection
Agency Report EPA 842-B-93-004. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water. 176 pp.
U.S. EPA. 1994a. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): Laboratory method
manual - estuaries, Volume 1: Biological and physical analysis. United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development. Environmental Monitoring and System Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/4-91/024.
32
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment March 2006
U.S. EPA. 1994b. Methods for Assessing the Toxicity of Sediment-associated Contaminants with
Estuarine and Marine Amphipods. Office of Research and Development. Environmental Monitoring and
System Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/R-94/025.
U.S. EPA. 2000a. Clean Water Action Plan: National Coastal Condition Report. United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development/Office of Water.
Washington D.C. EPA620-R-00-004.
U.S. EPA. 2001. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): National
Coastal Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan 2001-2004. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health
and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL.
EPA/620/R-01/002.
U.S. EPA. 2004. National Coastal Condition Report II. United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development/Office of Water. Washington D.C. EPA620-R-03-002.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1995. Chapter 173-204 WAC, Sediment Management
Standards.
Wilson, S., and V. Partridge. 2005. Condition of Outer Coastal Estuaries of Washington State, 1999: A
Statistical Summary. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Publication No. 05-03-
032. www.ecv.wa.gov/biblio/0503032.html.
33
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
VI. APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Site location information (Note that some sites sampled by Washington Department of
Ecology were in Canadian Waters).
STATE
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
YEAR
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
ESTUARY NAME
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 51.4
COLUMBIA RIVERRIVER MILE 49.2
COLUMBIA RIVERRIVER MILE 53.2
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 45.9
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 59.2
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 61.5
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 62.9
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 66.2
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 69
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 72.5
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 80.2
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 82.8
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 83.6
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 85.1
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 99
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 99.7
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 109.4
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 1 12.6
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 1 19.9
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 1 19.9
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 138.8
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 136.6
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE130.8
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 123.1
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 125.3
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 131.6
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 3.8
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
EMAP
Station ID
OROO-0001
OROO-0002
OROO-0003
OROO-0004
OROO-0005
OROO-0006
OROO-0007
OROO-0008
OROO-0009
OROO-0010
OROO-0011
OROO-0012
OROO-0013
OROO-0014
OROO-0015
OROO-0016
OROO-0017
OROO-0018
OROO-0019
OROO-0020
OROO-0021
OROO-0022
OROO-0023
OROO-0024
OROO-0025
OROO-0026
OROO-0027
OROO-0028
OROO-0029
OROO-0030
OROO-0031
OROO-0032
OROO-0033
OROO-0034
OROO-0035
OROO-0036
OROO-0037
OROO-0038
OROO-0039
OROO-0040
OROO-0041
LATITUDE
46.18642
46.16893
46.18787
46.14234
46.14628
46.12905
46.1142
46.10204
46.0889
46.05742
46.01564
45.91205
45.87721
45.86531
45.84555
45.6517
45.64532
45.60626
45.59698
45.59403
45.5839
45.56827
45.56863
45.62269
45.605
45.55558
45.5745
45.54575
45.55037
45.58123
46.27134
46.2592
46.22675
46.24636
46.28297
46.23201
46.242
46.23394
46.23854
46.26919
46.20529
LONGITUDE
-123.181
-123.216
-123.141
-123.275
-123.036
-122.999
-122.978
-122.915
-122.923
-122.887
-122.858
-122.81
-122.793
-122.788
-122.786
-122.763
-122.751
-122.675
-122.569
-122.582
-122.502
-122.366
-122.363
-122.018
-122.053
-122.3
-122.165
-122.315
-122.271
-122.149
-124.045
-124.021
-123.978
-123.865
-123.793
-123.939
-123.859
-123.88
-123.79
-123.713
-123.882
34
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
STATE
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
YEAR
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
ESTUARY NAME
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 21.4
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 25.7
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 14.5
COLUMBIA RIVER
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 28.8
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 32.5
COLUMBIA RIVER, RIVER MILE 33.5
YOUNGS BAY, RIVER MILE 8.3
CATHLAMET BAY
YOUNGS BAY
CATHLAMET BAY
YOUNGS BAY
CATHLAMET BAY
YOUNGS BAY
MARSH ISLAND CREEK
CATHLAMET BAY
CATHLAMET BAY
CATHLAMET BAY
YOUNGS RIVER
KNAPPA SLOUGH
BRADBURY SLOUGH
WALLACE SLOUGH
CLATSKANIE RIVER
RINEARSON SLOUGH
NEHALEM RIVER
NET ARTS BAY
NESTUCCA RIVER
LITTLE NESTUCCA RIVER
SALMON RIVER
SILETZ BAY
YAQUINA BAY
YAQUINA RIVER
YAQUTNA RIVER
ALSEA RIVER
YACHATS RIVER
ROCK CREEK
SIUSLAW RIVER
SIUSLAW RIVER
UMPQUA RIVER
SMITH RIVER
UMPQUA RIVER
SMITH RIVER
UMPQUA RIVER
EMAP
Station ID
OROO-0042
OROO-0043
OROO-0044
OROO-0045
OROO-0046
OROO-0047
OROO-0048
OROO-0049
OROO-0050
OR99-0001
OR99-0002
OR99-0003
OR99-0004
OR99-0005
OR99-0006
OR99-0007
OR99-0008
OR99-0009
OR99-0010
OR99-0011
OR99-0012
OR99-0013
OR99-0014
OR99-0015
OR99-0016
OR99-0017
OR99-0018
OR99-0019
OR99-0020
OR99-0021
OR99-0022
OR99-0023
OR99-0024
OR99-0025
OR99-0026
OR99-0027
OR99-0028
OR99-0029
OR99-0030
OR99-0031
OR99-0032
OR99-0033
OR99-0034
OR99-0035
OR99-0036
LATITUDE
46.22234
46.24003
46.26385
46.25365
46.21268
46.22227
46.2683
46.24906
46.23561
46.113
46.12633
46.10801
46.13026
46.10038
46.12473
46.1014
46.13569
46.11381
46.11322
46.11171
46.08924
46.11229
46.10196
46.0805
46.07717
46.07408
45.41459
45.23627
45.118
45.09967
45.024
44.55499
44.37293
44.35913
44.34432
44.2485
44.1829
44.1125
44.00688
44.01321
44.44395
43.4574
43.43516
44.46317
43.43332
LONGITUDE
-123.797
-123.732
-123.658
-123.562
-123.781
-123.665
-123.502
-123.44
-123.427
-123.547
-123.434
-123.519
-123.403
-123.536
-123.413
-123.523
-123.353
-123.447
-123.448
-123.409
-123.49
-123.355
-123.086
-123.163
-123.136
-123.021
-123.54
-123.572
-123.577
-123.566
-123.597
-124.011
-124.021
-124.009
-123.578
-123.599
-124.069
-124.022
-124.076
-123.529
-124.082
-124.003
-124.087
-123.542
-124.074
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
STATE
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
OREGON
YEAR
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
ESTUARY NAME
SCHOLFIELD CREEK
UMPQUA RIVER
COOS BAY
COOS BAY
COOS BAY
COOS BAY
COOS BAY
COOS BAY
SOUTH SLOUGH
COOS RIVER
COOS RIVER
CATCHING SLOUGH
CATCHING SLOUGH
ROGUE RIVER
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK BAY
TILLAMOOK RIVER
EMAP
Station ID
OR99-0037
OR99-0038
OR99-0039
OR99-0040
OR99-0041
OR99-0042
OR99-0043
OR99-0044
OR99-0045
OR99-0046
OR99-0047
OR99-0048
OR99-0049
OR99-0050
OR99-0051
OR99-0052
OR99-0053
OR99-0054
OR99-0055
OR99-0056
OR99-0057
OR99-0058
OR99-0059
OR99-0060
OR99-0061
OR99-0062
OR99-0063
OR99-0064
OR99-0065
OR99-0066
OR99-0067
OR99-0068
OR99-0069
OR99-0070
OR99-0071
OR99-0072
OR99-0073
OR99-0074
OR99-0075
OR99-0076
OR99-0077
OR99-0078
OR99-0079
OR99-0080
LATITUDE
43.41587
43.41531
43.25364
43.24828
43.24386
43.23183
43.24243
43.22076
43.20486
43.22203
43.22624
43.20993
43.19278
42.25353
45.33106
45.32825
45.33083
45.32038
45.32322
45.32166
45.32279
45.31667
45.31864
45.31424
45.31049
45.31424
45.30644
45.31033
45.30551
45.30887
45.30181
45.30534
45.30684
45.29868
45.30365
45.29853
45.29827
45.29454
45.3003
45.29727
45.29464
45.28834
45.281
45.26483
LONGITUDE
-124.06
-124.039
-124.147
-124.124
-124.131
-124.175
-124.119
-124.182
-124.192
-124.089
-124.065
-124.101
-124.092
-124.251
-123.557
-123.561
-123.547
-123.561
-123.554
-123.559
-123.543
-123.558
-123.547
-123.557
-123.561
-123.547
-123.553
-123.535
-123.56
-123.541
-123.56
-123.547
-123.535
-123.532
-123.537
-123.545
-123.535
-123.537
-123.521
-123.536
-123.54
-123.54
-123.531
-123.526
36
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
STATE
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
CANADA
CANADA
CANADA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
YEAR
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
ESTUARY NAME
BOUNDARY BAY, WEST
BOUNDARY BAY, SOUTH
CHERRY POINT
BELLINGHAM BAY
SAMISH BAY/ BELLINGHAM
PADILLA BAY, INNER
FIDALGO BAY, INNER
FIDALGO BAY, INNER
SARATOGA PASSAGE, NORTH
OAK HARBOR
PENN COVE
SARATOGA PASSAGE, MIDDLE
POSSESSION SOUND
EVERETT HARBOR, MIDDLE
PORT TOWNSEND BAY. INNER
USELESS/OAK BAY
USELESS/OAK BAY
POSSESSION SOUND
PORT MADISON
LIBERTY BAY, OUTER
ELLIOT BAY. NORTHEAST
DUAMISH RIVER - EAST WATERWAY
PORT LUDLOW
HOOD CANAL (NORTH)
PORT GAMBLE BAY
DABOB BAY
DABOB BAY
HOOD CANAL (CENTRAL)
HOOD CANAL (SOUTH)
HOOD CANAL (SOUTH)
PORT OF SHELTON
BUDD INLET
PORT OF OLYMPIA
CASE INLET
EAST ANDERSON ISLAND
HALE PASSAGE
GIG HARBOR
COLVOS PASSAGE
COLVOS PASSAGE
S.E. COMMENCEMENT BAY
HYLEBOS WATERWAY
ROSARIO STRAIT
STRAIT OF GEORGIA
STUART CHANNEL (MIDDLE)
STRAIT OF GEORGIA
STRAIT OF GEORGIA
STRAIT OF GEORGIA
EMAP
Station ID
WAOO-0001
WAOO-0002
WAOO-0003
WAOO-0004
WAOO-0005
WAOO-0006
WAOO-0007
WAOO-0008
WAOO-0009
WAOO-0010
WAOO-0011
WAOO-0012
WAOO-0013
WAOO-0014
WAOO-0015
WAOO-0016
WAOO-0017
WAOO-0018
WAOO-0019
WAOO-0020
WAOO-0021
WAOO-0022
WAOO-0023
WAOO-0024
WAOO-0025
WAOO-0026
WAOO-0027
WAOO-0028
WAOO-0029
WAOO-0030
WAOO-0031
WAOO-0032
WAOO-0033
WAOO-0034
WAOO-0035
WAOO-0036
WAOO-0037
WAOO-0038
WAOO-0039
WAOO-0040
WAOO-0041
WAOO-0042
WAOO-0043
WAOO-0044
WAOO-0045
WAOO-0046
WAOO-0047
LATITUDE
48.98417
48.95498
48.81575
48.73828
48.62525
48.53133
48.49933
48.48667
48.24275
48.27445
48.2247
48.15833
48.03952
47.98223
47.98157
48.04018
48.1204
47.9075
47.72597
47.71493
47.6239
47.58417
47.99372
47.8363
47.92443
47.82138
47.73425
47.42163
47.8415
47.39667
47.20893
47.12948
47.05633
47.27117
47.14957
47.25463
47.33752
47.51067
47.47235
47.2846
47.27855
48.93723
48.9524
48.86519
48.93708
48.95555
48.90143
LONGITUDE
-122.993
-122.951
-122.719
-122.515
-122.526
-122.551
-122.6
-122.586
-122.622
-122.652
-122.711
-122.539
-122.318
-122.223
-122.503
-122.743
-122.622
-122.338
-122.531
-122.63
-122.374
-122.344
-122.678
-122.579
-122.68
-122.819
-122.844
-123.11
-122.646
-122.956
-123.081
-122.914
-123.896
-122.852
-122.659
-122.598
-122.584
-122.486
-122.507
-122.472
-122.398
-123.735
-123.363
-123.599
-123.201
-123.004
-122.925
37
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
STATE
CANADA
CANADA
WASHINGTON
CANADA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
CANADA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
CANADA
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
YEAR
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
ESTUARY NAME
SWANSON CHANNEL
STUART CHANNEL (SOUTH)
CHERRY POINT
BOUNDARY PASS
PRESIDENT CHANNEL
PRESIDENT CHANNEL
CORDOVA CHANNEL
WEST SOUND
DEER HARBOR
SAN JUAN CHANNEL
EAST SOUND
SAN JUAN CHANNEL
LOPEZ SOUND
SAN JUAN CHANNEL
GRIFFIN BAY
BAYNES CHANNEL
MIDDLE CHANNEL
STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA (EAST)
STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA (EAST)
STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA (EAST)
ADMIRALTY BAY
MUTINY BAY
ADMIRALTY INLET (SOUTH)
PUGET SOUND
MAKAH BAY
MAKAHBAY
MAKAH BAY
HOKO RIVER
OZETTE RIVER
FRESHWATER BAY
FRESHWATER BAY
FRESHWATER BAY
DUNGENESS BAY
DISCOVERY BAY
DISCOVERY BAY
DISCOVERY BAY
DISCOVERY BAY
DISCOVERY BAY
KALALOCH CREEK
RAFT RIVER
QUINAULT RIVER
QUINAULT RIVER
CONNER CREEK
GRAYS HARBOR
GRASS CREEK
GRAYS HARBOR
GRAYS HARBOR
EMAP
Station ID
WAOO-0048
WAOO-0049
WAOO-0050
WAOO-0051
WAOO-0052
WAOO-0053
WAOO-0054
WAOO-0055
WAOO-0056
WAOO-0057
WAOO-0058
WAOO-0059
WAOO-0060
WAOO-0061
WAOO-0062
WAOO-0063
WAOO-0064
WAOO-0065
WAOO-0066
WAOO-0067
WAOO-0068
WAOO-0069
WAOO-0070
WAOO-0071
WA99-0001
WA99-0002
WA99-0003
WA99-0004
WA99-0005
WA99-0006
WA99-0007
WA99-0008
WA99-0009
WA99-0010
WA99-0011
WA99-0012
WA99-0013
WA99-0014
WA99-0015
WA99-0016
WA99-0017
WA99-0018
WA99-0019
WA99-0020
WA99-0021
WA99-0022
WA99-0023
LATITUDE
48.80498
48.71188
48.82385
48.74782
48.71291
48.70131
48.57157
48.62548
48.61167
48.58917
48.61069
48.54453
48.52361
48.50041
48.48797
48.4262
48.38886
48.32328
48.3159
48.19263
48.11994
47.96587
47.86602
47.59016
48.19197
48.18824
48.183
48.17287
48.10873
48.08958
48.08878
48.08586
48.09579
48.04758
48.03478
48.01248
48.00182
47.59839
47.36379
47.27751
47.20816
-99.99
47.05356
47.00251
47.00318
46.57931
46.56396
LONGITUDE
-123.395
-123.528
-122.73
-123.092
-123
-122.995
-123.335
-122.961
-123
-123.019
-122.838
-122.98
-122.847
-122.957
-122.997
-123.288
-122.92
-123.055
-122.8
-123.024
-122.623
-122.554
-122.419
-122.428
-124.408
-124.402
-124.402
-124.219
-124.425
-123.38
-123.361
-123.37
-123.089
-122.54
-122.543
-122.516
-122.506
-122.524
-124.224
-124.203
-124.179
99.99
-124.106
-124.024
-123.6
-123.571
-124.062
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
STATE
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
YEAR
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
1999
ESTUARY NAME
GRAYS HARBOR
GRAYS HARBOR
GRAYS HARBOR
BEARDSLEE SLOUGH
BEARDSLEE SLOUGH
GRAYS HARBOR
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
WILLAPA BAY
BAKER BAY
BAKER BAY
BAKER BAY
GRAYS RIVER
BAKER BAY
GRAYS BAY
GRAYS BAY
GRAYS BAY
GRAYS BAY
GRAYS BAY
COWLITZ RIVER
CARROLLS CHANNEL
MARTIN SLOUGH
EMAP
Station ID
WA99-0024
WA99-0025
WA99-0026
WA99-0027
WA99-0028
WA99-0029
WA99-0030
WA99-0031
WA99-0032
WA99-0033
WA99-0034
WA99-0035
WA99-0036
WA99-0037
WA99-0038
WA99-0039
WA99-0040
WA99-0041
WA99-0042
WA99-0043
WA99-0044
WA99-0045
WA99-0046
WA99-0047
WA99-0048
WA99-0049
WA99-0050
LATITUDE
46.56105
46.57992
46.55256
46.52354
46.52216
46.50898
46.42902
46.42244
-99.99
46.38973
46.34047
46.32311
46.25063
-99.99
46.18577
46.18082
46.16402
-99.99
46.15784
46.181
46.17998
46.17716
46.17232
46.16495
46.05688
46.05073
45.56797
LONGITUDE
-124.017
-123.515
-124.04
-124.02
-124.013
-124.019
-124.027
-123.532
99.99
-124.007
-123.565
-123.554
-123.251
99.99
-124.006
-124.016
-123.584
99.99
-123.599
-123.426
-123.419
-123.422
-123.436
-123.43
-122.553
-122.528
-122.472
39
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 2. Chemicals measured in sediments and fish tissues.
CHEMICAL CATEGORY
CHEMICALS
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Biphenyl
Chrysene
Chrysene(Cl-C4)
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzothiophene
Dibenzothiophene(Cl -C3 )
2,6-dimethylnaphthalene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Fluorene(Cl-C3)
2 -methy Inaphthalene
1 -methy Inaphthalene
1 -methy Iphenanthrene
2,6-dimethylnaphtalene
Naphthalene
Naphtalene(Cl-C4)
Phenanthene
Pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Acenaphthylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Ideno( 1 ,2,3-c,d)py rene
2,3,5-trimethy Inaphthalene
PCB Congeners
PCB No. Compound Name
8 2,4'-dichlorobiphenyl
18 2,2',5-trichlorobiphenyl
28 2,4,4'-tricMorobiphenyl
44 2,2',3,5'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
52 2,2',5,5'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
66 2,3 ',4,4'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
101 2,2',4,5,5'-pentachlorobiphenyl
105 2,3,3',4,4'-pentachlorobiphenyl
1 10/77 2,3,3',4',6-pentaclilorobiphenyl
3 ,3 ',4,4'-tetrachlorobiphenyl
118 2,3,4,4',5-pentachlorobiphenyl
PCB No. Compound Name
126 3,3,4,4',5-pentachlorobiphenyl
128 2,2',3,3',4,4'-hexachlorobiphenvl
1382,2',3A4',5'-hexachlorobiphenvl
153 2,2',4,4',5,5'-hexachlorobiphenvl
1702,2',3,3',4,4',5-heptaclilorobiphenyl
1802,2',3,4,4',5,5'-heptaclilorobiphenyl
1872,2',3,4',5,5',6-heptaclilorobiphenyl
1952,2',3,3',4,4',5,6-octachlorobiphenyl
206 2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5',6-nonachlorobiphenyl
2092.2'3,3',4,4'.5,5'.6.6'-decachlorobiphenyl
DDT and its metabolites
2,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDD
2,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDE
2,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDT
Chlorinated pesticides other than DDT
Aldrin
Alpha-CUordane
Dieldrin
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan sulfate
Endrin
Heptaclilor
HeptacMor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Lindane (gamma-BHC)
Mirex
Toxaphene
Trans-Nonachlor
Trace Elements
Aluminum
Antimony (sediment only)
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese (sediment only)
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Tin
Zinc
Other Measurements
Total organic carbon (sediments)
40
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 3. Summary statistics for water chemistry and habitat indicators. Total estuarine area is 8670 square kilometers.
Indicator
Water Clarity - Light
transmissivity at 1m
Secchi Depth
Dissolved Oxygen -
Bottom
Dissolved Oxygen -
Surface
Chlorophyll a
Mean Orthophosphate
Phosphorus
Mean Total Dissolved
Nitrogen
Mean Nitrogen to
Phosphorus Ratio
Total Suspended Solids
Units
%
m
mg/1
mg/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ratio
mg/1
N
224
238
242
242
244
244
244
238
244
Mean
21.674
3.093
7.747
8.260
4.667
30.510
135.515
17.672
7.437
95%
Confidence
22.182
3.153
7.787
8.291
4.760
30.957
137.696
18.351
7.631
Median
16.800
2.000
8.000
8.100
3.600
24.625
118.510
11.507
6.000
Minimum
ND*
0.100
0.100
3.400
ND*
ND*
3.230
0.164
ND*
Range of
Detected
Results
0.1-
87.600
0.1-
12.500
0.1-
11.500
3.400-
11.500
0.2933 -
31.110
0.53-
106.537
3.230
640.770
0.164
178.455
0.5-
230.000
Variance
438.126
6.898
3.315
1.864
17.441
403.694
9615.794
929.692
76.322
Standard
Deviation
20.931
2.626
1.821
1.365
4.176
20.092
98.060
30.491
8.736
Standard
Error
0.259
0.030
0.021
0.016
0.047
0.228
1.113
0.347
0.099
*ND = not detected
Summary statistics were calculated with non-detects set to zero.
41
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 4. Summary statistics for sediment characteristics. Total estuarine area is 8670 square kilometers.
Indicator
Antimony
Aldrin
Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chlordane
Chromium
Copper
DDE
DDT - Total
Did drin
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Iron
Lead
Units
ug/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
N
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
223
225
225
225
225
Mean
0.356
0.0104
68771.64
6.601
0.191
0.019
70.570
24.431
0.159
0.296
0.005
0.0594
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.050
0.008
0.234
33701.05
12.858
95%
Confidence
0.371
0.013
69258.92
6.675
0.200
0.0225
71.285
25.029
0.176
0.328
0.007
0.074
0.007
0.003
0.004
0.058
0.013
0.284
33998.64
13.034
Median
0.24
ND*
75100
6.340
0.068
ND*
72.4
17.6
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
35700
11.6
Minimum
ND*
ND*
8750
ND*
ND*
ND*
12.3
2.060
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
6000
1.470
Detection
Frequency**
32%
3.5%
100%
>99%
44%
<1%
100 %
100 %
9.7%
11%
<1%
6%
<1%
<1%
<1%
10%
1.3%
5.7%
100%
100 %
Range of
Dectected
Results
0.14-
5.66
0.45-
2.9
8750-
95900
0.69-
20.800
0.012 -
2.310
1.0 - 1.4
12.3 -
328.0
2.06 -
219.0
0.27-6.7
0.27 - 12
1.5 - 1.8
1.05- 11.8
3.8-3.8
1.75 - 1.75
2.7-2.7
0.6-3.7
1.3-6.7
0.65-
33.05
6000-
126000
1.47-51.3
Variance
0.431
0.0155
4.31E+08
10.016
0.145
0.023
927.668
650.970
0.487
1.684
0.007
0.367
0.0145
0.003
0.006
0.114
0.048
4.473
1.61E+08
56.212
Standard
Deviation
0.657
0.125
20758.28
3.165
0.380
0.152
30.458
25.514
0.698
1.298
0.085
0.606
0.120
0.051
0.079
0.337
0.219
2.115
12677.48
7.497
Standard
Error
0.008
0.002
248.571
0.038
0.005
0.002
0.365
0.306
0.008
0.016
0.001
0.007
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.004
0.003
0.025
151.807
0.090
42
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Indicator
Lin dane
Manganese
Mercury
Mirex
Nickel
PAH - Total
PAH - High
Molecular Weight
PAH -Low
Molecular Weight
Selenium
Silt & clay -Percent
Silver
Tin
Total Organic
Carbon
Toxaphene
Trans Nonachlor
Zinc
Units
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
%
ug/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
%
ng/g dry wt
ng/g dry wt
ug/g dry wt
N
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
225
Mean
0.029
566.294
0.057
ND*
29.529
852.150
471.043
275.594
0.160
18.089
0.155
1.546
0.985
ND*
0.008
73.540
95%
Confidence
0.035
575.352
0.058
29.956
907.079
499.435
295.968
0.168
18.630
0.163
1.571
1.006257
0.010
74.240
Median
ND*
446
0.040
ND*
25.2
332.9
125.7
137.05
ND*
9.886
0.044
1.4
0.9
ND*
ND*
73.4
Minimum
ND*
84.8
< 0.001
MDL*
ND*
7.5
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
12.5
Detection
Frequency**
1.7%
100%
>99%
0%
100 %
59%
59%
45%
19%
94.6%
55 %
72%
97%
0%
<1%
100 %
Range of
Dectected
Results
1.0-2.7
84.8-
3330
0.0049 -
0.316
A11ND
7.5-275.5
1.0-
59878.2
0.75-8613
0.58-8636
0.13 - 1.75
0.05 -
94.31
0.013-
2.1
0.45 - 8.32
0.01-4.48
A11ND
0.74-1.1
12.5 - 225
Variance
0.064
148918.4
0.003
0
330.778
5475564
1462949
753305.8
0.105
545.190
0.116
1.138
0.830
0
0.007
889.167
Standard
Deviation
0.252
385.900
0.059
0
18.187
2339.992
1209.524
867.932
0.324
23.349
0.340
1.067
0.911
0
0.082
29.819
Standard
Error
0.003
4.621
0.001
0
0.218
28.020
14.484
10.393
0.004
0.276
0.004
0.013
0.011
0
0.001
0.357
*ND = not detected
**Detection frequency refers to the percent of individual samples analyzed, not to the percentage of the area.
Summary statistics were calculated with non-detects set to zero.
43
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 5. Summary statistics for contaminants in fish tissue. Total estuarine area is 8670 square kilometers.
Tissue Parameter
Aldrin
Aluminum
Inorganic Arsenic
Cadmium
Chlordane
Chromium
Copper
Dieldrin
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexaclilorobenzene
Iron
Lead
Units
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
N
188
179
179
179
188
179
179
188
188
188
188
188
188
188
188
179
179
Mean
0.003
108.894
.0564
0.006
0.073
0.300
0.308
0.066
0.024
0.126
0.056
0.120
0.018
0.009
0.290
100.112
0.132
95%
Confidence
0.005
110.848
.0577
0.006
0.081
0.317
0.331
0.080
0.029
0.160
0.073
0.147
0.025
0.013
0.361
102.754
0.135
Median
ND*
91.7
.0492
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
ND*
81
0.099
Detection
Frequency**
o
j
98
84
66
9
72
97
53
3
8
19
10
9
2
33
100
49
Range of
Detected
Results
1.6-
2.398
0.5313-
568.170
0.0905 -
.595
0.01001 -
0.2
0.125-
4.855
0.0671 -
5.313
0.2140-
7.771
0.48-
14.787
2.025 -
5.168
0.9-
40.223
2.633 -
21.4
0.788 -
27.063
0.985 -
9.8
1.044 -
4.464
0.43-32
5.2-
1090
0.09 -
0.967
Variance
0.005
6502.980
.003
0.001
0.100
0.461
0.853
0.369
0.059
1.988
0.497
1.286
0.079
0.027
8.554
11903.146
0.018
Standard
Deviation
0.074
80.641
.0517
0.023
0.317
0.679
0.923
0.607
0.242
1.410
0.705
1.134
0.282
0.165
2.925
109.102
0.136
Standard
Errror
0.001
0.996
0.001
0.000
0.004
0.008
0.011
0.007
0.003
0.017
0.009
0.014
0.003
0.002
0.036
1.348
0.002
44
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Tissue Parameter
Lindane
Mercury
Mirex
Nickel
PPDDE
Selenium
Silver
Tin
Total DDT
Total EMAP PCBs
Toxaphene
Trans nonachlor
Zinc
Units
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ng/g wet wt
ug/g wet wt
N
188
179
188
179
188
179
179
156
188
188
188
188
179
Mean
0.000
0.029
0.000
0.068
9.509
0.234
0.005
5.918
13.751
31.763
0.000
0.320
13.661
95%
Confidence
0.001
0.029
0.080
10.224
0.248
0.006
6.065
14.792
33.966
0.360
13.554
Median
ND*
0.027
ND*
ND*
3.6
ND*
ND*
5.37
4.5
8.06
ND*
ND*
12.9
Detection
Frequency**
0
87
0
30
78
96
25
45
81
82
0
26
100
Range of
Detected
Results
0.25 -
1.62
0.016-
0.257
A11ND
0.3-
13.169
0.34-
405.444
1-
2.39
0.01 -
0.28
0.13-56.5
0.34-
493.644
0.34-
769.7
A11ND
0.19-
46.066
7.59-
39.060
Variance
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.239
872.737
0.340
0.001
35.869
1843.961
8286.177
0.000
2.745
14.63
Standard
Deviation
0.020
0.021
0.000
0.488
29.542
0.583
0.024
5.989
42.941
91.028
0.000
1.657
3.824
Standard
Errror
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.365
0.007
0.000
0.075
0.531
1.124
0.000
0.020
0.047
* ND = Not Detected
**Detection frequency refers to the percent of individual samples analyzed, not to the percentage of the area.
Summary' statistics were calculated with non-detects set to zero.
45
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 6. Benthic invertebrate species from 1999-2000. Species are identified as Native (N) or Non-
Indigenous (NIS) species, or blank where it unknown. Freshwater sites have <5 psu bottom salinity,
Intermediate sites have >5 psu and < 25 psu bottom salinity, and Marine sites have >25psu bottom
salinity.
Species
Abarenicola pacifica
Abietinaria sp
Acanthoptilum gracile
Acarina
Achelia alaskensis
Achelia echinata
Acila castrensis
Acteocina culcitella
Acteocina eximia
Acteocina harpa
Actiniaria
Actiniidae
Adontorhina cyclia
Aglaja ocelligera
Aglaophenia sp
Agraylea sp
Alcyonidium sp
Alia carinata
A lienacanthomysis macropsis
A /van i a compacta
Amaeana occidentalis
Amage anops
Arnerichelidium mil/si
Americhelidium rectipalmum
Arnerichelidium shoemaker}
Arnerichelidium variabilum
Americorophium salmonis
Americorophium sp
Americorophium spinicorne
Arnpelisca agassizi
Ampelisca brachycladus
Ampelisca brevisimulata
Arnpelisca careyi
Arnpelisca hancocki Cmplx
Ampelisca lobata
Arnpelisca pugetica
Ampelisca sp
Ampharete acutifrons
Ampharete cfcrassiseta
Ampharete finmarchica
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
7
1
5
2
3
26
9
1
2
1
3
11
2
1
2
3
3
1
33
1
2
3
1
6
2
75
20
26
3
1
4
16
3
3
9
11
10
8
13
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
46
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Ampharete labrops
Ampharete sp
Ampharetidae
Amphicteis glabra
Amphicteis mucronata
Amphicteis scaph abranchiate/
Amphilochus neap olitanus
Cmplx
Amphiodia occidentalis
Amphiodia periercta
Amphiodia sp
Amphiodia urtica
Amphipholis pugetana
Amphipholis sp
Amphipholis sqiiamata
Amphipoda
Amphiporus sp
Amphissa columbiana
Arnphitrite edwardsi
Am phi 'trite robusta
Amphiura sp
Amphiuridae
Ampithoe lacertosa
Ampithoe sp
Ampithoe valida
A nch ico lurus occiden talis
Anisogammarus pugettensis
Anobothms gracilis
Anonyx cflilljeborgi
An onyx sp
An op I a
Anoplodactyhisviridintestinalis
Antropora tincta
Aoroides columbiae
Aoroides exilis
Aoroides intermedius
Aoroides sp
Aoroides spinosa
Aphelochaeta glandaria
Aphelochaeta monilaris
Aphelochaeta sp
Aphelochaeta tigrina
Aphrodi ta japon ica
Aphrodita negligens
Aphrodita sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
NIS
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
7
5
6
1
1
1
1
1
4
28
12
3
4
6
1
5
5
2
2
1
18
1
4
4
1
1
7
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
8
4
29
19
15
3
1
1
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
47
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Apistobranchiis ornatus
Araphura breviaria
Araphura cuspirostris
Archaeomysis grebnitzkii
Archidistoma sp
Arcteobia cfanticostiensis
Argissa hamatipes
Aricidea (Acmira) catherinae
Aricidea (Acmira) lopezi
Aricidea (Alii a) rarnosa
Aricidea sp
Armandia brevis
Artacarna coniferi
Asabellides lineata
Asabellides sibirica
Ascidia sp
Ascidiacea
Asclerocheilus beringianus
Astarte esquimalti
Asteroidea
Astyris gausapata
Atylus levidensus
Autolytus sp
Axinopsida serricata
Axiothella rubrocincta
Balanomorpha
Balanophyllia elegans
Balamis crenatus
Balanus glandula
Balamis sp
Balds sp
Bankia setacea
Barantolla nr americana
Barentsia benedeni
Barents'! a parva
Bathyleberis sp
Bathymedon pumilus
Bispira elegans
Bittium sp
Bivalvia
Bivalvia sp 1
Boccardia pugettensis
Boccardiella harnata
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
5
2
1
18
1
2
1
2
23
8
3
26
4
5
3
1
1
1
2
1
25
1
2
55
5
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
17
2
3
6
2
1
4
6
3
5
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
48
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Boccardiella ligerica
Boltenia villosa
Bonelliidae
Bougainvilliidae
Bowerbankia gracilis
Brada sachalina
Brada villosa
Brisaster latifrons
Bugula pacified
Bugula sp
Byblis millsi
Bylgides macrolepidus
Caberea ellisi
Caecidotea racovitzai
Caecum occidentals
Caecum sp
Calanoida
Caligidae
Calliostoma ligatum
Callipallene pacifica
Calocarides sp
Calocarides spinulicauda
Calycella syringa
Calyptraea fastigiata
Campanulariidae
Campylaspis hartae
Cancer gracilis
Cancer magister
Cancer oregonensis
Cancer productus
Cancer sp
Capitella capitata Cmplx
Capitellidae
Caprella californica
Caprella drepanochir
Caprella laeviiiscula
Caprella mendax
Caprella pilidigitata
Caprella sp
Cardiomya pectinata
Carinoma mutabilis
Carinomella lactea
Caulibugula californica
Caulibugula ciliata
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
NTS
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
2
2
1
2
8
4
1
2
1
1
7
2
2
3
2
1
11
1
1
1
2
1
1
4
3
1
4
4
5
1
1
54
2
2
2
9
3
1
3
5
10
1
1
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
49
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Caulleriella pacifica
Cellaria mandibulata
Cellaria sp
Celleporella hyalina
Cephalothricidae
Ceradocus spinicaudus
Ceratopogonidae
Cerebratulus californiensis
Cerebratulus montgomeryi
Cerebratulus sp
Chaetoderma sp
Chaetognatha
Chaetozone acuta
Chaetozone hansel
Chaetozone commonalis
Chaetozone nr setosa
Chaetozone sp
Chaetozone sp Nl
Chaetozone sp N2
Chapperiopsis patula
Cheilopora praelonga
Cheirimedeia sp
Cheirimedeia zotea
Chirimia nr biceps
Chirimia similis
Chironomidae
Chironomus sp
Chlarnys hastata
Chlamys rubida
Chone duneri
Chone ecaudata
Chone rnagna
Chone rninuta
Circeis armoricana
Circeis spirillum
Cirratulidae
Cirratulus multioculatus
Cirratulus sp
Cirratulus spectab His
Cirrophorus branchiatus
Cladopelma sp
Cladotanytarsus sp
Clausidium vancouverense
Clavidae
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
# of total
sites
11
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
9
7
9
1
9
1
2
17
11
2
3
2
1
2
1
2
1
26
3
3
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
18
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
50
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Clinocardium blandum
Clinocardium nuttallii
Clinocardium sp
Clunio sp
Clynienura gracilis
Clytia sp
Coenagrionidae
Compsomyax subdiaphana
Copidozoum adamantum
Copidozoum protectum
Corbiculafluminea
Corixidae
Corophiidae
Corymorpha sp A
Corynidae
Cossura bansei
Cossum pygodactylata
Cossura sp
Coullana canadensis
Crangon alaskensis
Crangon franciscorum
Crangon sp
Crangonyx floridanus subgroup
Cranopsis sp
Crepidula nummaria
Crepipatella dorsata
Cricotopus sp
Crisia serrulata
Crisia sp
Crossaster papposus
Crucigera zygophora
Cryptochironomus sp
Crypto my a calif arnica
Cucumaria piper Ma
Cumacea
Cumella vulgaris
Cyclocardia ventricosa
Cyclopidae
Cyclostomata
CychstremeHa cfconcordia
Cylichna attonsa
Cytindroleberididae
Cyphocaris challenger!
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
NIS
NIS
N
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
38
12
1
1
2
1
21
1
1
64
1
13
1
1
6
26
5
1
16
17
12
1
1
1
6
2
1
2
2
1
6
32
1
1
4
8
1
1
3
10
1
3
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
51
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Cytherideidae
Decamastus gracilis
Deflexilodes enigmaticus
Deflexilodes similis
Delectopecten vancouverensis
Demicryptochironornus sp
Demonax riigosus
Demonax sp
Demospongiae
Dendraster excentricus
Dendrobeania lichenoides
Dendrochirotida
Desdirnelita desdichada
Deutella californica
Diaperoecia sp
Diaphana californica
Diastylis alaskensis
Diastylis bidentata
Diastylis pellucida
Diastylis santamariensis
Diastylis sentosa
Diastylis sp
Diastylopsis dawsoni
Diastylopsis tennis
Dichonemertes hartmanae
Dicrotendipes sp
Diopatra ornata
Diopatra sp
Dipolydora bidentata
Di poly dor a cardalia
Dipolydora caidleryi
Dipolydora quadrilobata
Dipolydora socialis
Diptera
Discorsopagurus schrnitti
Di spore 11 a fimbriata
Distaplia occidentalis
Dolichopodidae
Doridacea
Donnllea (Schistomeringos)
annulata
Drilonereis longa
Drilonereis sp
Dubiraphia sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
N
N
# of total
sites
1
8
2
2
1
1
3
2
4
7
3
3
7
1
2
6
3
3
6
10
3
1
3
1
1
3
7
3
3
9
8
1
30
2
1
1
2
1
1
5
9
1
1
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intel-mediate sites
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
52
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Dulichia sp
Dyopedos arcticus
Dyopedos sp
Echiurus echiurus alaskanus
Ectinosoma sp
Ectopleura sp
Edwardsia sipunculoides
Echvardsia sp G
Electro crustulenta arctica
Ennucula tennis
Enopla
Enteropneusta
Eobrolgus chumashi
Eobrotgus sp
Eochelidium sp
Eogammarus confenncolus
CMPLX
Eogammarus sp
Eohaustorius estuarius
Eohaustorius washingtonianus
Ephydridae
Epoicocladius sp
Eranno bicirrata
Ericthonius brasiliensis
Eteone columbiensis
Eteone fauchaldi
Eteone light/
Eteone pacifica
Eteone sp
Eteone spilotus
Eualus subtilis
Euchone incolor
Euchone limnicola
Euclymene sp
Euclyrneninae
Euclymeninae spA
Eudistylia catharinae
Eudistylia polyrnorpha
Eudistylia sp
Eudorella pacifica
Eudorellopsis Integra
Eudorellopsis longirostris
Eugyra arenosa
Eulalia californiensis
Eulalia quadrioculata
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NTS)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
2
2
2
2
1
1
4
4
1
24
1
2
7
1
1
14
3
39
1
1
1
6
1
14
3
9
1
22
1
2
7
1
3
25
9
3
1
4
35
3
2
1
3
3
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
53
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Eulalia sp Nl
Eumida longicornuta
Euin ida sp
Eunoe sp
Euphausia pacifica
Euphausia sp
Euphilomedes carcharodonta
Euphilomedes producta
Euphilomedes sp
Euphysa ruthae
Euphysa sp A
Eupolymnia heterobranchia
Eurystomella bilabiata
Eusarsiella zostericola
Eusirus columbianus
Euspira pallida
Eusyllis blomstrandi
Eusyllis habei
Eusyllis magnified
Euzonus mucronata
Exogone dwisula
Exogone lourei
Exogone molesta
Exogone sp
Eyakia robusta
Filicrisia sp
Flabelligera qffinis
Flabellina sp
Fluminicolavirens
Foxiphalus similis
Foxiphalus xiximeus
Galatheidae
Galathowenia oculata
Gamrnaridea
Gammaropsis ellisi
Gamrnaropsis thornpsoni
Gastropoda
Gastropoda sp 3
Gastropoda sp 4
Gastropteron pacificurn
Gattyana cirrosa
Gattyana treadwelli
Geminosyllis ohma
Glycera americana
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NTS)
N
NIS
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
9
2
1
1
1
25
23
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
6
1
2
8
17
3
1
2
1
1
2
2
5
1
1
25
2
1
3
5
1
3
5
5
4
2
16
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
54
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Glycera macrobranchia
Glycera nana
Glycera sp
Glycera tenuis
Glycinde armigera
Gtycinde polygnatha
Glycinde sp
Gnathopleustes sp
Gnorimosphaeroma
oregonense
Golfmgia vulgaris
Gomphidae
Goniada brunnea
Goniada maculata
Grandidierella japonica
Grandifoxus grandis
Grantiidae
Guernea reduncans
Gyptis sp
Halcampa decemtentaculata
Halcampa sp
Haleciurn sp
Haliophasma geminatum
Halocynthia igaboja
Haminaea vesicula
Haplosyllis spongiphila
Harmothoe extenuata
Harmothoe imbricata
Harmothoe mil I tise tosa
Harmothoinae
Harpacticoida
Harpacticus sp
Harpiniopsisfulgens
Hebella pocillum
Helisoma sp
Hernicyclops subadhaerens
Hemilamprops californicus
Hemipodia borealis
Heptacarpus kincaidi
Herrnissenda crassicornis
Hesperonoe complanata
Hesperonoe sp
Heteromastusfiliformis
Heterornastus filobranchus
Heterornastus sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NTS)
N
N
N
N
N
NTS
N
N
N
N
MIS
N
# of total
sites
10
32
2
1
24
59
11
1
7
2
4
1
3
25
13
1
1
1
3
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
7
3
6
2
1
4
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
5
1
6
18
9
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
55
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Heteronemertea
Heterophoxus qffinis
Heterophoxus conlanae
Heterophoxus ellisi
Heterophoxus oculatus group
Heterophoxus sp
Heteropodarke heteromorpha
Heteropora pacifica
Hexagenia sp
Hiatella arctica
Hippolytidae
Hirudinea
Hob son i a florida
Homalopoma luridum
Hoplonemertea
Humilaria kennerlyi
Huntemannia jadensis
Hyalella azteca
Hyas lyratus
Hydrobiidae
Hyper ii da e
Idanthyrsus saxicm'us
Idotea fewkesi
Idotea sp
Imagine exiguus
Inusitatomysis inso/ita
Iphimedia rickettsi
Lschnochiton trijidus
Ischyrocerus sp
Jaeropsis dubia
Juga plicifera
Juga sp
Kellia suborbicularis
Kurtzia arteaga
Kiirtziella crebricostata
Kurtzie/la plumbea
Lacuna sp
Lacuna vincta
Lafoea sp
Lafoeidae
Lagenice/la neosocialis
Lagenipora socialis
Lamprops carinatus
Lamprops quadriplicatus
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NTS)
N
N
MIS
N
N
# of total
sites
1
19
12
5
1
4
5
1
5
6
4
6
17
1
9
2
2
1
1
10
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
7
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
15
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
56
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Lanassa nordenskioeldi
Lanassa venusta
Laonice cirrata
Laonice pugettensis
Laonome kroeyeri
Lasaeidae
Laticorophium baconi
Leitoscoloplos pugettensis
Lepidasthenia berkeleyae
Lepidasthenia longicirrata
Lepidepecreum garthi
Lepidochitona dent/ens
Lepidochitona flectens
Lepidonotus sp
Lepidonotus spiculus
Lepidonotus squamatus
Leptasterias hexactis
Leptochelia d Libia
Leptochiton rugatus
Leptoplanidae
Leptosynapta sp
Leucon sp
Leucon subnasica
Levinsenia gracilis
Levinsenia oculata
Limnoria lignorum
Lineidae
Lineus sp
Lirobittium sp
Lirularia lirulata
Littorina sp
Longipedia sp
Lophopanopeus bellus
Luc'moma annul atum
Lumbrineridae
Lumbrineris californiensis
Lumbrineris cruzensis
Lumbrineris latreilli
Lumbrineris limicola
Lumbrineris sp
Lyonsia californica
Lysippe labiata
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NTS)
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
13
17
2
3
1
1
40
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
28
2
1
6
1
6
35
6
2
32
3
5
6
1
1
5
12
15
19
13
1
2
9
17
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
57
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Macoma balthica
Macorna calcarea
Macoma carlottensis
Macorna elimata
Macoma golikovi
Macorna inquinata
Macoma moesta
Macoma nasuta
Macoma secta
Macoma sp
Macorna yoldiformis
Mactridae
A lactrorneris polynyma
Magelona longicornis
Magelona pite/kai
Magelona sacculata
Magelona sp
Majidae
Majoxiphalus major
Maldane sarsi
Maldanidae
Malmgreniella bansei
Malmgreniella liei
Malmgreniella macginitiei
Malmgreniella nigralba
Malmgreniella sp
Manayunkia aestuarina
Manayunkia speciosa
Mandibulophoxus gilesi
Mandib iilophoxus mayi
A 'fargarites pupil 'his
Margarites sp
Mayerella banksia
Mediomastus ambiseta
A lediomastus californiensis
Mediomastus sp
Megalomma splendida
Megamoera denlata
Megayoldia thraciaeformis
Melanochlamys diomedea
Melinna oculata
Melita nitida
A lernbranipora membranacea
Membranipora sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
# of total
sites
29
5
31
20
16
9
1
22
1
48
16
1
2
21
5
10
3
2
2
11
5
5
2
2
5
2
1
4
1
2
5
1
2
5
41
78
3
1
1
6
4
2
2
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
58
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
A 'lesochaetopterus taylori
Metacaprella anomala
Metacaprella kennerlyi
Metaphoxusfrequens
Metopa daw son i
Metridium sp
Microclymene caudata
Microjassa sp
Microphthalrnus sczelkowii
Micropodarke dubia
Micropora coriacea
Micrura alaskensis
Micrura sp
Modiolus rectus
Modiolus sp
Afolgiila pugetiensis
Molpadia intermedia
Monocorophium acherusicum
Monocorophium californianurn
Monocorophium carlottensis
Monocorophium cfuenoi
Monocorophium insidiosum
Monoporeia affmis
Monostylifera
Monticellina secunda
Monticellina serratiseta
Monticellina sp
Monticellina sp Nl
Monticellina tesselata
Mopalia sinuata
Mopalia sp
Munna sp
Munnogonium tillerae
Musculus discors
Mya arenaria
Myidae
Myosoma spinosa
Myriochele heeri
Myrlozoum tenue
Mysidacea
Mytilidae
Mytiius sp
A lyxicola infundibulum
Myxilla incrustans
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
NIS
NIS
NIS
N
N
NIS
# of total
sites
4
2
2
1
1
1
7
1
2
4
2
18
23
1
6
2
4
15
1
2
1
1
6
2
1
5
3
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
29
1
2
4
2
1
17
1
1
1
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
59
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Nacellina
Naineris quadricuspida
Naineris uncinata
Narpus sp
Nassarius mendicus
Natica clausa
Neanthes limnicola
Neanthes sp
Neanthes virens
Nebalia pugettensis Crnp/x
Nemertea
Nemocardium centifilosum
Neom ysis kadiakensis
Neomysis mercedis
Neosabellaria cementarium
Neotrypaea californiensis
Neotrypaea gigas
Neotrypaea sp
Nephasoma diaphanes
Nephasoma sp
Nephtys caeca
Nephtys caecoides
Nephtys californiensis
Nephtys cornuta
Nephtys ferruginea
Nephtys punctata
Nephtys sp
Nereididae
Nereis procera
Nereis sp
Nereis zonata
Nicomache lumbricalis
Nicornache personata
Ninoe gemmea
Nippoleucon hinumetisis
Nolella sp
Nolella stipata
Notomastus hemipodus
Notomastus latericeus
Notomastus sp
Notoplana sp
Notoproctus pacificus
Nuculana rninuta
Nudibranchia
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
# of total
sites
2
1
7
1
9
1
47
19
1
5
3
5
2
4
4
12
1
2
2
2
7
22
5
33
34
4
5
3
22
1
1
2
3
2
14
1
1
22
6
1
2
1
16
1
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
60
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Nutricola lordi
Nutricola tan till a
Obelia dichotoma
Obelia longissima
Obelia sp
Odontosyllis phosphorea
Odostomia sp
Oenopota sp
Oligochaeta
Olivella baetica
Olivella biplicata
Olivella pycna
Onuphidae
Onuphis elegans
Onuphis iridescens
Onuphis sp
Ophelia assimilis
Opheliidae
Ophelina acuminata
Ophiodermella incisa
Ophiodromus pugettensis
Ophiura leptoctenia
Ophiura luetkenii
Ophiurida
Ophiuridae
Ophiuroidea
Ophryotrocha sp
Oplorhiza gracilis
Orchomene obtusa
Orchomene pacificus
Orchomene pinguis
Oregonia gracilis
Ostracoda
Oweniafusiformis
Oweniidae
Pachycerianthus fimbriatus
Pachynus cfbarnardi
Pacifoculodes zernovi
Paguridae
Pagurus armatus
Pagurus ochotensis
Pagurus setosus
Pagurus sp
Palaeonemertea
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
32
4
2
1
2
5
32
3
91
6
1
3
6
5
13
4
7
1
16
1
7
1
2
7
3
1
2
1
2
5
3
8
2
26
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
7
3
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
61
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Paleanotus bellis
Pandora bilirata
Pandora sp
Panomya ampla
Paralauterborniella sp
Parandalia fauveli
Parandalia ocularis
Paranemertes californica
Paraonella platybranchia
Paraphoxus cfgracilis
Paraphoxus oculatus
Parapleust.es americanus
Parapleustinae
Paraprionospio pinnata
Par atom 'tarsus sp
Parathemisto pacifica
Parvapliistrum spA
Pan'ilucina tenuisculpta
Pectinaria californiensis
Pectinaria granulata
Pectinatella magnifica
Pentamera lissoplaca
Pentarnera populifera
Pentamera pseudocalcigera
Pentamera sp
Pentidotea resecata
Perigonimus repens
Perigonimus sp
Petaloproctus borealis
Phaenopsectra sp
Pherusa plumosa
Pherusa sp
Phlebobranchiata
Pholoe glabra
Pholoe minuta
Pholoe sp Ctnplx
Pholoe sp Nl
Pholoides asperus
Phoronida
Phoronidae
Phoronis sp
Phoronopsis harmeri
Phoronopsis sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
10
7
2
1
1
1
1
10
3
1
3
2
3
37
1
2
1
40
11
15
1
5
1
1
3
1
1
1
5
2
2
1
1
2
1
32
1
12
1
3
10
7
1
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
62
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Photis bifurcata
Photis brevipes
Photis pan'idons
Photis sp
Phoxichilidiumfemoratum
Phoxocephalidae
Phyllaplysia taylori
Phyllochaetopterus pottsi
Phyllochaetoptenis prolifica
Phyllodoce citrina
Phyllodoce cusp/data
Phyllodoce groenlandica
Phyllodoce hartmanae
Phyllodoce longipes
Phyllodoce mucosa
Phyllodoce sp
Phyllophondae
Phylofelix
Physella sp
Pilargis maculata
Pinnixa occidentals
Pinnixa schmitti
Pinnixa sp
Pinnixa tubicola
Pinnotheridae
Pisaster sp
Pista brevibranchiata
Pista elongata
Pista moorei
Pista sp
Pista witi
Platynereis bicanaliculata
Pleurogonium rubicundum
Pleusymtes coquilla
Pliimularia comigata
Podarkeopsis glabrus
Podarkeopsis perkinsi
Podoceridae
Podocerus cnstatus
Podocopida
Pododesmus macrochisma
Poecilosclerida
Polycirrus californicus
Polycirrus sp
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
13
6
14
2
1
1
2
11
1
3
4
7
3
1
7
1
5
4
12
5
30
19
1
14
1
7
3
2
1
8
18
1
2
1
20
1
1
1
3
2
2
9
15
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
63
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Polycirrus sp I
Polycirrus sp V
Polydora cornuta
Polydora limicola
Polydora sp
Polydora websteri
Polynoidae
Polypedilum sp
Polyplacophora
Pontogeneia rostrata
Pontoporeia fernorata
Potamopyrgus antipodarum
Praxillella gracilis
Praxillella pacifica
Praxillella sp
Prionospio (Minuspio) lighti
Prionospio (Minuspio)
multibranchiata
Prionospio (Prionospio) jubata
Prionospio (Prionospio)
steenstrupi
Prionospio sp
Proceraea cornuta
Procladius sp
Proclea graffi
Protodorvillea gracilis
Protolaeospira eximia
Protomedeia grandirnana
Protomedeia prudens
Protomedeia sp
Protothaca starninea
Psammonyx longirnerus
Pseudochironomus sp
Pseudochitinopoma
occidentalis
Pseudodiaptomus forbesi
Pseudomma truncatum
Pseudopolydora kempi
Pseudopolydora
paucibranchiata
Pseudopolydora sp
Pseudopotamilla occelata
Pseudopotamilla sp
Ptilosarcus gurneyi
Pulsellum salishorum
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
NIS
N
NIS
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
NIS
NIS
# of total
sites
7
1
16
6
1
1
2
1
1
4
1
10
7
13
4
51
9
7
44
3
15
4
3
5
1
10
11
11
13
1
2
2
2
1
26
6
2
2
1
4
13
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
64
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Puncturella cucullata
Pygospio elegans
Ramellogammarus oregonensis
Raricirrus maculatus
Rhabdocoela
Rhabdus rectius
Rhachotropis oculata
Rhepoxynius abronius
Rhepoxynius barnardi
Rhepoxynius boreovariatus
Rhepoxynius daboius
Rhepoxynius sp
Rhepoxynius stenodes
Rhizocaulusverticillatus
Rhodine bitorquata
Rhynchospio glutaea
Rictaxis punctocaelatus
Rochefortia compressa
Rochefortia turnida
Rocinela belliceps
Rocinela propodialis
Rutiderma lornae
Sabaco elongatus
Sabellidae
Sabelhphilidae
Saccocirridae
Saccoglossus sp
Saduria entomon
Sagitta sp
Sagittidae
Saxidomus giganteus
Scalibregma californicum
Scalibregma inflatum
Scaphander sp
Scintillona bellerophon
Scionella japonica
Scleroplax granulata
Scolelepis nr yamaguchii
Scolelepis sp
Scolelepis squamata
Scoletoma luti
Seal op las acmeceps
Scoloplos anniger alaskensis
Scoloplos armiger anniger
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
NIS
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
26
1
1
3
2
1
5
4
4
2
1
5
1
8
11
1
1
53
1
2
6
2
6
1
1
2
6
2
1
8
4
1
1
2
2
3
2
1
7
36
4
4
16
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
65
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Scoloplos sp
Scyphozoa
Selaginopsistriserialis
Sernele rubmpicta
Serpulidae
Sialis sp
Sigalion spinosus
Sigambra bassi
Sige bifoliata
Siliqua sp
Sinelobus Stanford!
Sipuncula
Skeiiea sp
Smittina sp
So/amen columbianum
Solariella sp
So/en sicarius
Solidobalanus hesperius
Sphaeriidae
Sphaerodoropsis sphaerulifer
Sphaerosyllis californiensis
Sphaerosyllis ranunculus
Sphaerosyllis sp Nl
Spio butleri
Spio cirri/era
Spiofilicomis
Spiochaetopterus costarum
Spionidae
Spiophanes berkeleyorum
Spiophanes bombyx
Spirontocaris arctuatus
Spirontocaris ochotensis
Spirontocaris prionota
Spirontocaris sica
Stenothoidae
Stenothoides sp
Sternaspis cffossor
Sthenelais berkeleyi
Sthenelais tertiaglabra
Stictochironomus sp
Stolidobranchiata
Streblosoma bairdi
Streblosoma sp B
Streblospio benedicti
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
NIS
N
N
N
N
N
N
NIS
# of total
sites
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
16
1
14
1
1
2
1
7
3
5
1
1
10
10
2
3
8
6
2
25
3
29
15
1
2
1
1
1
2
22
1
1
3
2
2
1
12
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
66
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Stye/a coriacea
Styela gihbsii
Stye/a sp
Stylatula sp A
Syllidae
Symplectoscyphus sp
Synidotea consolidate!
Synidotea sp
Tabanidae
Tany tarsus sp
Tecticeps pugettensis
Tellina bodegensis
Tellina carpenter!
Tellina modesta
Tellina nuculoides
Tellina sp
Tenonia priops
Terebellidae
Terebellides californica
Terebellides horikoshii
Terebellides kobei
Terebellides reishi
Terebellides sp
Terebellides stroemi
Terebratalia transversa
Terebratulida
Tetrastemma candidum
Tetrasternma nigrifrons
Tetrastemma sp
Tetrastemmatidae
Tharyx parvus
Tharyx sp Nl
Thelepus setosus
Themiste pyroides
Tliracia challisiana
Thracia trapezoides
Thyasira flexuosa
Thysanocardia nigra
Travisiaforbesi i
Travisia pupa
Tresus sp
Trichobranchus glacialis
Trichoptera
Trichotropis cancellata
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
N
N
# of total
sites
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
17
6
4
10
9
12
3
1
3
12
6
3
1
17
3
23
5
12
3
1
2
1
2
11
12
2
1
9
1
2
2
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Yes
Yes
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
67
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Species
Trite/la pilimana
Trochochaeta multisetosa
Tubulanus cingulatus
Tubulanus polymorphus
Tubulanus sp
Tubulariidae
Tubulipora sp
Turbonilla sp
Typhloplanoidea
Typosyllis alternate!
Typosyllis arrni Hans
Typosyllis caeca
Typosyllis cornuta
Typosyllis elongata
Typosyllis heterochaeta
Typosyllis sp
Upogebia pugettensis
Velutina plicatilis
I 'enerupis philippinarum
Virgularia agassizi
Westwoodilla caecula
Weshvoodilla sp
Yoldia hyperborea
Yoldia sernimida
Yoldia sp
Zygonemertes virescens
Native (N)/Non-
Indigenous (NIS)
N
N
NIS
# of total
sites
8
13
2
22
14
1
3
20
1
1
1
8
5
2
7
3
1
1
1
2
12
4
10
10
13
7
Found at
Freshwater sites
Yes
Found at
Intermediate sites
Found at
Marine Sites
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
68
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
Appendix 7. Fish species from 1999-2000.
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
# of SITES
% ESTUARINE
AREA
SALINTY FOUND
Class Actinopterygii
Order Batrachoidiformes
Family Batrachoididae
Porichthys notatus
Plaiiifin midshipman
24
26
Marine
Order Clupeiformes
Family Clupeidae
Clupeidae sp
Alosa sapidissima
Clupea pallasii
Herrings, shads,
sardines, sardinellas,
sprats, etc.
American Shad
Pacific herring
1
7
25
<1
1
24
Freshwater
Freshwater
All
Family Engraulidae
Engraulis rnordax
California!! anchovy
2
1
Marine,
Intermediate
Order Cypriniformes
Family Cyprinidae
Mylocheilns caurinus
Ptychocheilus oregonensis
Peamouth
Northern
pikeminnow
2
2
<1
<1
Freshwater
Freshwater
Order Gadiformes
Family Gadidae
Gadus macrocephalus
Microgadus proximus
Theragra chalcogramma
Pacific Cod
Pacific tomcod
Alaska (walleye)
pollock
9
44
12
14
46
19
Marine
Marine,
Intermediate
Marine
Family Merlucciidae
Merluccius productus
Pacific hake
17
22
Marine
Order Gasterosteiformes
Family Syngnathidae
Syngnathus leptorhynchus
Bay pipefish
2
1
Marine,
Intermediate
Family Gasterosteidae
Gasterosteus aculeatus
Three-spine
15
1
Freshwater
69
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
stickleback
# of SITES
% ESTUARINE
AREA
SALINTY FOUND
Order Osmeriformes
Family Osmeridae
Spirinchns thaleichthys
Longfin smelt
10
3
Marine
Order Perciformes
Family Centrarchidae
Pomoxis annularis
Pom axis sp
Wliite Crappie
Crappie
1
1
<1
<1
Freshwater
Freshwater
Family Gobiidae
Gobiidae sp.
Gobies
1
<1
Marine
Family Pholidae
Apodichthys flavidus
Pholis ornate
Penpoint gimnel
Saddleback gunnel
1
15
3
2
Marine
All
Family Embiotocidae
Cymatogaster aggregate/
Embiotoca lateralis
Hyperprosopon anale
Hyperprosopon argenteum
Shiner perch
Stripped sea perch
Spotfin surfperch
Walleye surfperch
56
4
1
1
23
<1
<1
<1
All
Marine,
Intermediate
Marine
Marine
Family Embiotocidae (continued)
Hypsuriis caryi
Phanerodon furcatus
Rhacochilus vacca
Rainbow seaperch
Wliite seaperch
Pile Surfperch
1
3
6
1
1
2
Marine
Marine.
Intermediate
Marine
Family Stichaeidae
Lumpenus sagitta
Snake prickleback
3
1
Marine
Family Trichodontidae
Trichodon trichodon
Pacific sandfish
3
2
Marine
Family Zoarcidae
Lycodes cortezianus
Lycodes diapterus
Lycodes palearis
Lycodopsis pacifica
Bigfin eelpout
Black eelpout
Wattled eelpout
Blackbelly Eelpout
2
4
10
4
6
5
12
o
j
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Order Percopsiformes
70
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
# of SITES
% ESTUARINE
AREA
SALINTY FOUND
Family Percopsidae
Percopsis transrnontana
Sand roller
1
<1
Freshwater
Order Pleuronectiformes
Family Paralichthyidae
Citharichthys sordidus
Citharichthys stigmaeits
Pacific sanddab
Speckled sanddab
27
34
35
6
Marine
Marine,
Intermediate
Family Pleuronectidae
Eopsetta exilis
Errex zachirus
Hippoglossoides elassodon
Microstomus pacificus
Platichthys stellatus
Pleuronectes bilineatus
Pleuronectes isolepis
Pleuronectes vetulus
Pleuronichthys coenosus
Pleuronichthys decurrens
Psettichthys rnelanostictus
Reinhardtius stomias
Slender sole
Rex sole
Flathead sole
Dover Sole
Starry flounder
Rock sole
Butter sole
English sole
C-O sole
Curlfin sole
Sand sole
Arrowtooth flounder
23
9
14
19
83
24
6
110
2
2
21
1
32
13
20
2
31
29
8
70
1
1
11
1
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
All
Marine
Marine
Marine.
Intermediate
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Order Salmoniformes
Family Salmonidae
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Salmo clarkia
Chinook salmon
Cutthroat trout
6
1
<1
<1
All
Freshwater
Order Scorpaeniformes
Family Agonidae
Agonopsis vulsa
Bathyagonus alascanus
Ba thy agon us n igripinn is
Bathyagonus pentacanthus
Podothecus acipenserinus
Sarritor frenatus
Northern spearnose
poacher
Gray starsnout
Blackfin poacher
Bigeye poacher
Sturgeon poacher
Sawback poacher
2
1
5
1
5
1
6
<1
4
1
8
<1
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
71
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Xeneretmus triacanthus
COMMON NAME
Bluespotted poacher
# of SITES
1
% ESTUARINE
AREA
3
SALINTY FOUND
Marine
Family Cottidae
Artedius fenestralis
Chitonotus pugetensis
Clinocottus embryum
Cottus asper
Enophrys bison
Gymnocanthiis galeatus
Hemilepidotus hemilepidotus
Hemilepidotus spinosus
Icelus spiniger
Leptocottus armatus
Myoxocephalus
polyacanthocephalus
Oligocottus maculosus
Radulinus asprellus
Triglops macellus
Trig/ops pingeli
Padded sculpin
Roughback sculpin
Calico sculpin
Prickly sculpin
Buffalo Sculpin
Armorhead sculpin
Red Irish lord
Brown Irish Lord
Thorny sculpin
Pacific staghorn
sculpin
Great sculpin
Tidepool sculpin
Slim sculpin
Roughspine sculpin
Ribbed sculpin
2
5
1
4
6
4
2
1
3
49
4
2
1
1
1
<1
7
1
<1
1
3
4
<1
4
13
4
<1
3
1
1
Freshwater
Marine
Marine
Freshwater.
Intermediate
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
All
Marine
Freshwater
Marine
Marine
Marine
Family Hemitripteridae
Nautichthys oculofasciatus
Sailfin sculpin
3
5
Marine
Family Hexagrammidae
Hexagrammos decagrammus
Hexagrammos stelleri
Ophiodon elongates
Kelp greenling
Whitespotted
greenling
Lingcod
3
5
5
2
1
3
Marine
Marine.
Intermediate
Marine
Family Liparidae
Liparis callyodon
Li parts dennyi
Liparis fucensis
Liparis sp.
Spotted snailfish
Marbled snailfish
Slipskin snailfish
Snailfish
1
2
1
1
<1
3
<1
3
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Family Psychrolutidae
Malacocottus kincaidi
Blackfin sculpin
4
3
Marine
72
-------
EPA Region 10
Office of Environmental Assessment
March 2006
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
# of SITES
% ESTUARINE
AREA
SALINTY FOUND
Family Scorpaenidae
Sebastes auriculatus
Se bastes da I Hi
Sebastes diploproa
Sebastes caurinus
Sebastes emphaeus
Sebastes maliger
Sebastolobus alascamis
Brown Rockfish
Calico Rockfish
Splitnose rockfish
Copper Rockfish
Puget Sound rockfish
Quillback Rockfish
Shortspine
thorny head
4
1
2
3
1
9
1
5
<1
1
7
3
11
3
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Marine
Class Chondrichthyes
Order Rajiformes
Family Arhynchobatidae
Bathyraja intemipta
Raja binoculata
Raja rhina
Bering skate
Big Skate
Longnose Skate
1
6
16
3
8
18
Marine
Marine
Marine
Order Carcharhiniformes
Family Triakidae
Mustelus henlei
Brown Smooth-
hound Shark
4
5
Marine
Order Chimaeriformes
Family Chimaeridae
Hydrolagus colliei
Spotted ratfish
30
44
Marine
Order Squaliformes
Family Squalidae
Squahts acanthias
Spiny Dogfish
31
43
Marine
73
------- |