u I J
PLANNING AID REPORT Whittier Small Boat Harbor Study Shotgun Cove Whittier, Alaska
Prepared for
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Alaska District
u.s. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
a Q
0 Prepared by
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Western Alaska Ecological Services Anchorage, Alaska • September 1583
Libr Vices United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Hestern Alaska Ecological Servicesubrary 605 t.J'. 4th, Room G-81 U.S. F~~ _n Wilrlilfe Service Anchorage, Alaska 99501 101 1 r:: T - \.,,. Road An~ho;ag~,, Alaska 99503
Colonel Neil E. Saling District Engineer 2 9 SE:P 1983 Alaska District Corps of Engineers Pouch 898 Anchorage, Alaska 99506 Re: Whittier Small Boat Harbor Planning Aid Report Dear Colonel Saling: The enclosed correspondence transmits our Planning Aid Report, as it pertains to the environmental assessment of the proposed sma 11 bo.at harbor project at Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska. --~-- Fish and wildlife information presented in our report was obtained in coordination with the Alaska Department of Fish a~d Game, National Marine Fisheries Service and members of your environmental staff. The report was prepared in accordance ~ith the provi$ion of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), but does not constitute the report of the Secretary of the Interior within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Act, nor does it constitute consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended). 0 Please review our report and provide us written comments within 30 days. Sincerely,
Field Supervisor Enclosure cc: ROES Gary Liepitz, ADF&G, Anchorage Smith, NMFS, Anchorage Mayor, City of Whittier McAllister, ADOT, Anchorage / WHITTIER S~~LL BOAT HARBOR SHOTGUN COVE WHITTIER, ALASKA.
Feasibility Stage
PLANNING AID REPORT
. ., ------. Submitted to Alaska District ~ . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ~ Anchorage, Alaska~
I
Prepared by: Wayne ~1. Crayton(Project Bio loy i st Approved by: Robert G. Bowker, Field Supervisor
Western. Alaska Ecological Services Field Office u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service Anchorage, Alaska
September 1983 SUt ii _ _L~'L------ ... TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures...... iv I NTRODUCTI or~...... 1 FWS STUDY OBJECTIVES AND ~IETHODOLOGY •••.• ~ •••••••••••••.•.••••• STUDY AREA • •••••••••••• ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES...... 3 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES...... 7 Wildlife ...... •••...•.•...... ·...••...•.•....•....•....••. 7 Marine Flora and Fauna •••••.•••••••••.•••••••.••••••• ~..... 10 Site A (Mouth of the Cove) ••••••• ~...... 10 Site B (Head of the Cove)...... 11 DISCUSSION •••••••••••••••••••••..••••••••••••••••••••••• ~...... 13 Site A (Mouth of the Cove)...... 13 Site B (Head of the Cove).~ •.••• j·········~·········j······ 14 Project Impacts Associated with Shotgun Cove Road...... lG RECO~IJviENDATIONS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •.••.••••••• .tl! ••• ~.... 17 ~. _REEERE.NC E_S~!·--~L.• -~ .•• ·••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••••••••••••••• ·• • • • • • 19 Appendix A: Species list of marine organisms found at Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983;. August 15-20, 1983) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• A-1 Appendix B: Horizontal distribution of marine organisms and transect profiles for Site A (Mouth of the Cove); Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska •••••••••••••••..••• B-1 Appendix C: Horizontal distribution of marine organisms and transect profiles for Site B (Head of the Cove) Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska •••••••.•••••••••••• C-1 iii . 1 -. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Shotgun Cove and vicinity map...... 2 2. Locations of project alternatives and project related activities...... 4 3. · Shotgun Cove-Chugach Native Incorporated, land settlement selection sites •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ 6 4. Habitat map of the Shotyun Cove area and locations of biological sampling areas...... 9 -··· ----.------, iv INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Alaska District, Corps of Engineers• (CE) small boat harbor study is to survey the navigational needs of commercial fishermen and recreational activities in the vicinity of Whittier. A small boat harbor built at Shotgun Cove has been identified by the CE as the solution to the navigational needs of the area. · Initial Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) input regardin~ the proposed harbor was provided to the CE in a Planning Aid Letter dated 29 October 1979. In that letter we stated that, "We will evaluate all future projects in this pristine area to ensure that piecemeal development and resulting adverse impacts to the relatively limited amount of sloping intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat are prevented." Our concerns were repeated in a 18 July 1983 letter sent to the CE in response to their request for any information we may have concerning the resources of the area and to assist them in identifyin~ significant resources which should be discussed in detail. This fiscal year (1983), our two offices have finalized a Scope of Work designed to begin collecting environmental information from the Shotgun Cove area. This information will in turn be used by our respective offices to environmentally assess the project alternatives. FWS STUDY OBJECTIVES AND ~IETHODOLOGY The FWS•s field objective was to gather biological data from the following habitat types: 1) marine sub- and intertidal zones; and 2) coastal spruce-hemlock forests. Field investigations were performed from August 15 to 20, 1983. The nearshore work was performed by diving biologists whose primary goal was to document at each alternative site, the assembla~es of marine oryanisms and their associated substrate type. Fifteen, one hundred meter long transects were used bY the divers to document oryanisrn zonation. · Spot dives were made to: 1) choose transect locations; 2) to record habitat types and test diving conditions; and 3) to !•fill-in-the-gaps" Letween adjacent transects. Underwater photographs were taken to document bottom types and assemblages of organisms. Variable m~sh size gill nets set at the surface and at varying depths were used to sample nearshore fish populations. Bottom trawls were towed to sample benthic epifauna and subtidal fish populations. STUDY AREA Shotgun CoVE! is located five miles east of Whittier, on the southern shoreline of Passage Canal (Figure 1). The Cove measures one and a half miles long by one-half mile wide at its mouth and one-fifth mile wide at the head of the Cove. The majority of the Cove has depths greater than 10 fathoms. The shallowest portions of the Cove are limited to subtidal areas immediately adjacent to shore; however, the largest shallow areas are located at the head of the Cove. ' . 1 "2 t-:l:j f-'· ()Q ~~ ~ t'i I'D ( f-' ;\ L ]'I .( Cfl f. ::r' c 0 rt ()Q ~ ;:l I 0 0 ~ N I'D ~ ~ ;:l G 0.. ~ ~ s f-'• s r> f-'· ~ ;:l ~ f-'• rt ~ Sl ~ 'd f.'{ 13 ~~ 0 ?<\, (J+ 'Y IVhitlticr G/aciH 'Q "' 25 I The topography of the area generally rises abruptly from the shoreline at grades of 30% to 60%, to mountain altitudes ranging from 3500 to 4600 feet. Outcroppings of bedrock and rock faces are numerous throughout the area. The only relatively level areas are located at the head of the cove and along the southern shoreline. Tidal conditions in the Shotgun Cove area (Passage Canal) are similar to those of other areas recorded on Prince William Sound. The average diurnal tide range is 12.1 feet. The maximum elevations of low and high water occurs during January and July with tides ranging from approximately -3.0 feet to +15.0 feet. The wind pattern in the Passage Canal area is complex. The two strongest winds blow east and west. Winds range up to 60 miles per hour and may generate waves between four and six feet in the center of the Canal. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES The following project descriptions are the basis on which the FWS will make its environmental assessment of a small boat harbor at Shotgun Cove. Figure 2 is provided to illustrate the locations of the two alternatives currently under consideration by the Corps of Engineers. As. each alternative is refined and/or dropped from consideration by the CE, our environm~ntal assessments will become more site-specific. Two areas in Shotgun Cove have been selected as potential harbor sites. Each site would provide approximately 20 acres of protected mooring and manuevering space for an anticJpated 540 boats. Tt1e breakwater in either case would be a floating type constructed of concrete and expanded polystyrene foam units. The following summarizes the. important features of the proposed sites: Mouth of the Cove Head of the Cove Site A Site B 1 ! Protected Area 20 acres 20 acres Project Depth (Dredged Areas) 12 feet ~lLLW* 12 feet MLLW Maximum Depth in Mooring Area 40 feet MLLW 3G-40 feet MLLW Breakwater Length 1,200 feet 1,050 feet l ! Breakwater Width 21 feet 27 feet. Breakwater Mooring Depth 100 feet r:JLLW 80 feet l•lLLW Entrance Channel Dredging -0- -0- Interior Harbor Dredging 49,000 cubic yards 55,000 cubic yards Surrounding Land Area Relatively flat Relatively flat * MLLW - mean lower low water i • 3 ' lh ' ,_ I ,.9 //_; ' I I / • {?s "/.; lliiill potential dredging areas possible navigation hazard Shotgun Cove * --- ·Road Alignment breakwater stub & floating breakwater Figure 2. Locations of project alternatives and project related activities. The City of Whittier is planning to build a road into the Shotgun Cove area prior to any harbor construction. The CE specifically states that the usefulness and practicability of a harbor in Shotgun Cove depends heavily on construction of the access road. A road to Shotgun Cove from Whittier has been cursorily studied alony with a more detailed study on a road from Portage to Whittier, a~ presented in a report prepared for the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities {DMJM Forseen, 1981). Monies were not appropriated in the 1984 State budget to finance further studies of a road to Shotgun Cove; however, $800,000 has been appropriated by the State to study the feasibility of a small boat harbor project at Shotgun Cove. The CE stated in their reconnaissance report that in addition' to engineering and environmental considerations, their final site selection will depend heavily on the City of Whittier's future plans for development of the Shotgun Cove area. At the present ti~e, legal procedures between · the State of Alaska and the U.S. Department of Agriculture are in JJroyress to convey land in the Shotgun Cove area to the City of Whittier and to Chugach Natives Incorporated (CNI). The followin9 is a le9al sun1mary of the procedures and stipulations being initiated to dispose of the land; it was provided to us by the Chugach National Forest and is presented in this Planning Aid Report as pertinent information in helping the CE determine their small boat harbor site. · 1982 CNI SETTLEMENT AGREE~IENT Paragraph 13(8)(20) The State of Alaska has received approval from the Secretary of Agriculture for its National Forest Community.Grant Selection (No. AA-17588) containing approximately 5,205 acres of land in the vicinity of Shotgun Cove, and subject to specific provisi~ns, will relinquish its selection to 100 acres of this selection. ~ . , I The Secretary of the Interior will be suspendin9 adjudication of the following portion of the State's selection until the State fills an amendment to this selection with the Bureau of Land Management: {Figure 3). Township 8 ~lorth Range 5 East, Seward Section lO: s l/2 Section ll: W l/2 Section 14: NW l/4 NW l/4 Section 15: N 1/2, N l/2 SW 1/4, SW 1/4 SW l/4 Section 16: NE l/4 NW 1/4, S 1/2 NW 1/4, SE l/4 After the State files the amended selection application, the Secretary of the Interior will adju~icate all State selected 1ands not exc 1uded by the Amendment. · 5 3 h tgun Cov e·' Chugac . h Native Inc orP oration, land se ttlement Figure . Sselection o · s~'tes . ~6 o- / / _../ / ··--- / / ,,., .. ' LEGE~~Iopable lands ~ within which CNI N recetv. es 100 acres. State. Greenbelt I Reser:ves-200ft. from MHW -scale..· 4 in.= 1mile 6 Following a determination by the State on,the"' location of the proposed small boat harbor at Shotgun Cove~ the State~ in accordance with A.S. 38.05.315(a), shall identify in writiny and convey to the City of Whittier a parcel of land generally upland of the small boat harbor. The size of the parcel shall be determined by the State in its discretion. The Whittier conveyance sha 11 contain a covenant runniny with the land restricting the use of the land to public purposes associated with the small boat harbor. Following identification by the State of the lands to be conveyed to the City of Whittier, but no later than one year after the State determines the location of the small boat harbor, CNI can identify not more than two parcels of land from within the "development area" shown on Figure 3. The parcel or parcels shall total as nearly as practicable to 100 acres. If CNI elects to identify its selection prior to the State•s location of the small boat harbor, CNI must obtain the approval of the State and the City of Whittier. TW9 final points the CE discussed in their reconnaissance report related to wind conditions and dredging amounts. First, no wind data is currently available for Shotgun Cove. The proposed use of a floatiny breakwater is based on ·information provided by residents who say that the most severe waves do not exceed three to four feet. Second, estimates of dredging are based on the most current NOAA navigation chart, which does not include post 1964 earthquake corrections. Bottom subsidence of six ·feet has been recorded near the existing Whittier harbor and freight docks. A similar change in topography in Shotgun Cove could significantly reduce dredging estimates and also may cause problems on· designing slips and floats for a new harbor.· FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES Wildlife Terrestrial habitats in the vicinity ofr the proposed alternatives are typical of coastal spruce-hemlock forests in Prince William Sound. Vegetation is dominated by coastal spruce-hem1ock forest from sea 1eve1 to between 700 and 1000 feet mean sea level (MSL). 'Above 1000 feet NSL~ glaciers, alpine tundra and steep rocky slopes exist. 'Poorly drained areas at lower elevations, are more commonly found at Site B than at Site A and include open muskegs of low shrubs, sedges, grasses, and mosses. Common trees and shrubs in the Shotgun Cove area include the following: Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), western hemlock ~(Tsuga heterophylla)~ mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertens1ana)~ red alder ,_ (Alnus rubra), Sitka alder (Alnus sinuata}, rusty menz1esia (Henziesia ferruginea), devils-club (Oplopanax horridus), salmonberry (RuLus spectabi1is), and several species of willows, blueberry and cranberry. 7 Large mammals and furbearers common to the Shotgun Cove area include black bear (Ursus americanus), mountain goat (Oreamnos kennedyi), snowshoe hare (L~pJs americanus), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), beaver (Castor canadens1s , mink (Mustela vison), arid marten (Martes america). · The only wildlife signs we observed durtrig our field invest1gat1on were that of black bear. Bear feces, trails, and partially devoured pink and/or chum salmon were found along the banks of anadrohlous fish streams located at the head of the Cove near Site B. The State of Alaska has designated three streams in Shotyun Cove as important to anadromous fish, more specifically for pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). All three of the streams are located in or near Site B, at the head of the Cove (Figure 4). Clear Creek (Anadromous Stream #224-10-14440) was observed (August 16-19, 1983) as having spawning pink and chum salmon from its mouth and intertidal area upstream three-tenths of a mile (Figure 4). Clear Creek is a low sloping stream,. hectVi ly_ vegetated a long its banks with stream widths varying between ten'-tci.thre)~, feet. A tota 1 of 798 pink and 700 chum salmon were observed-~ither dead or alive in Clear Creek. Add it iona 11y, one-thousand 1ive pink salmon were observed near the stream•s.mouth and adjacent shoreline. Previous fish counts made by state biologists at Clear Creek recorded lesser numbers of fish: 1963, 210.chum salmon; 1980, 200 pink salmon OilcCurdy, personal communication). Stream discharge was estimated at five cubic feet per second (cfs). Fish counts made at Barge Creek (Anadromous Stream #224-10-14450) during our trip revealed 21 pink salmon and three chum salmon. spawning either in the creek or at its mouth (Figure 4). The stream•s topography and estimated flow was comparable to that of Clear Creek•s. A fish survey conducted by ADF&G in 1963 found no chum in the stream. Information was not available regarding previous pink salmon counts (NcCurdy,·personal communi-cation). • r· The third anadroroous fish stream located)!) S~9.tguri· Cove is l.o~ated at the very head of the cove, Shotgun Creek .(Ana.d.romous Stream' #224-10-14460). Ten pink and 1~ chum salmon were observed in the creek during our investigation. ADF&(?. surveys in 1963 did not find pink or chum salmon in the creek. Shotgun Creek is the narrowest of the three creeks and is heavily snagged with vegetation and debris just upstream from its mouth. · Freshwater resources in the vicinity of Site A (Mouth of the Cove) are limited to small seeps which flow suballuvially from gravel beaches or over steep sloped, rocky segments of shoreline. Shallow coves in the vicinity of Site A also contained seeps which were located near wetland type vegetation. Anadromous fish were not seen with any of the seeps. The rugged shoreline and small number of wetlands in Shotgun Cove provides habitat for relatively few species of avifauna. Birds commonly found in the vicinity of Shotgun Cove are primarily seabirds and include waterfowl, alcids and gulls. The only concentrations of birds in the immediate area is a seabird colony located on cliffs on the north side of 8 Figure 4 Habitat map of Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska and locations of biological sampling stations. / / ··-··-...... _ . ·-- . ----. /'"-· KEY A Site A (Mouth of the Cove) Transect and B Site B (Head of the Cove) corresponding no. EG Eelgrass beds M Mussel beds • ' •• ill •• Trawling corridor p Pink salmon spawning habitat ········••···· c Chum salmon spawning habitat Depth in fathoms w Wetlands R Subtidal rocky reef 10 fathom isobath e Gill net set locations 20 fathom isobath 0 - Floating breakwater align. -·-·-···-30 fathom isobath MILES Passage Canal directly opposite the city of Whittier. This colony is utilized by an estimated 40 glaucous-winged gulls, 40 pigeon guillemots, and 5,560 black~legged kittiwakes (Sowls, et al., 1978). Avians observed directly in the Cove during our investigation include: greater scaup (Aythya mari1a), pigeon guillemot {Ce~phus calumba), black-legged kittiwake (Rlssa tridactyla), great b ue heron (Ardea herodias), king fisher (~legaceryle alcyon}, northern phalarope (Phalarotus lobatus), bald eagle (Ha llaeetus leucocephalus), glaucous-winged gull [arus glaucescens), mew gull (Larus canus), Steller•s jay (Cyanocltta, stelleri}, spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia) and northern shoveler (Anas clypeata). · Passage Canal and the vicinity of Shotgun Cov~ is used by sea otter (Enhydra lutris), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias~jubata), primarily in w1nter, and harbor seal (Phoca vitulina}. Pitcher (1975) reports six sightings of sea otter near Whitt1er 1n winter of 1969-70. No otters were observed during our trip. According to Sommerville and Bishop (1973) Shotgun Cove is a haulout area for harbor seals. Harbor seals were seen entering and exiting Cove throughout the duration of our field investigation. Porpoise and whales occur regularly in Prince William Sound but there are no recorded sightings within Shotgun.Cove. The most common cetaceans in the Sound are Oall porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli), harbor porpoise {Phocoena vomerina), Pacific white-sided porpo1se . (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), killer whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius glaucus), humpback whale (~legaptera novaeangliae), finback whale (Balaenoptera physalus), and minke whale {Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Marine Flora and Fauna Shotgun Cove•s assemblages of marine organisms were associated with.one or a combination of five habitat types: 1) inte~tidal shale-gravel and cobble beaches, 2) intertidal rock shores, 3) a sublittoral zone, 4) open water, and 5) estuarine-like areas near the mouths of creeks and at the head of smaller coves. D A comparative marine species list of organisms observed and/or collected from each alternative area is presented in Appendix A. Site A (Mouth of the Cove): The alternative located at the mouth of the Cove '(Site A) is characterized as having intertidal shale-gravel beaches, rocky-cliff segments of shore 1ine that periodically are pocketed with shallow coves, and subtidal bedrock reefs. The most diverse aggregations of inter- and subtidal organisms, adjacent to the aforementioned habitats are concentrated in water depths less than 60 feet. The most common organisms found between mean higher high water {MHHW) and (MSL) include barnacles (Balanus glandulosa, B. cariosus), several species of limpets, blue mussels (lvJytilus edulisT, and littorines. A unidentified filamentous green algae and rockweed {Fucus) were the dominate flora. Between MSL and MLLW blue mussels and barnacles are less numerous. Littorines and limpets persist abundantly in and around decomposing patches Fucus. 10 Substrate below MLLW, and extendiny subtidally, is generally a gravel base covered with silt and coarse sand deposited in the interstitices. Brown algae (Laminar ia and Agarum) are the dominate flora forms extendin~ beyond MSL i nto the subtidal zone. Commonly seen organisms seen in this area include sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis), hermit crabs, giant sea cucumber (Parastichopus californicus), scallop (Chalmys rubida), sunflower seastar (Pycnopodia helianthoides), horse crab (Telmessus cheira~onus), several spec1es of shrimp, and mottled seastar (Evasterlas trosc ell1). Located randomly at depths between 10 to 20 feet, eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds were con~only observed having the giant sea cucumber and Nutta11•s cockle (Clinocardium nuttallii) in its understory. Juvenile ~lytilus were abundantly found attached to the upper portions of eelgrass blades. · Marine organisms not commonly found in our transects include: sun starfish (Solaster dawsoni and S. stimpsoni), leather starfish (Dermasterias imbricata), jingle shell (Pododesmus macroschisma), blood starfish _(Henricia lev ifl~cula), sea squirts and white-pllj14iined anemone (Metri9Ajm senile). - The infaunal community at Site A appeared to Le sparse. Very few clam siphons were directly observed. Most commonly observed during our di ves however, were shell fragments and debris of Nuttail 1 s cockle, macoma, Pacific little neck clam, soft-shelled clam and butter clam. Additional collections and observations would facilitate the delineation of infaunal communities. Subtidal epifauna and fish sampliny, primarily conducted by SCUBA, was supplemented with bottom trawls (Figure 4). Trawls were made continuously over different substrates and through different marine flora types (eg. eelgrass, Laminaria). Depths ranged between 20 to 25 feet. Predomina~organisms collected included the giant cucumber and sunflower star. Fish· were not as readily caught trawling in Site A as they were in Site B. Yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera) and masked yreenliny (Hexagrammos octogrammus) were the most common fish cauyht. Several species of shnmp and lyre craiJ (Hyas lyratus) composed the majority of trawl collected invertebrates. -- Adjacent to the western most portions of Site A are subtidal bedrock reefs. It is anticipated that these reefs may be considered as navigational hazards and subsequently removed if Site A were chosen; therefore, a single transect was made on one of the reefs (Appendix B: page B-5). The reef was virtually devoid of marine algae and epifauna was sparse; sea urchins and limpets were the most abundant invertebrates. An infauna community was absent because of the iruprevious bedrock base. The only harbor seal sighted within Site A occurred at this transect prior to our conductiny a survey. Site B (Head of the Cove): The second alternative, located at the head of the Cove (Site B), is characterized as having intertidal shale-gravel beaches, rocky-cliff segments of shoreline, and estuarine-like areas near the mouths of creeks. The majority of water depths at Site B are shallower than those 11 at' Site A, and probably for this reason, the assemblages of marine organisms and their relative abundance differ. ·However, Site B transects conducted at rocky-cliff segments of shoreline revealed a inter- and subtidal community simi1ar to those communities found at comparable rocky-cliff segments located at Site A. The majority of subtidal habitats were located at depths of less than 20 feet. Substrate consisted of either clean ~ravel or gravel covered with silt and/or detritus (Appendix C: pages C-2 thru C-4, C-6, C-9, C-10, and C-11). Subtidal bedrock outcroppin~s were occassionally found nearest to rocky/cliff shorelines and generally, were devoid of marine algae and had few associated marine organisms. Barnacles, limpets, sea urchin, rockweed and giant sea cucumbers were the most abundant organisms seen along the transects. Transects run at several locations near the mouths of creeks and sloughs of Site B showed an intertidal zone dominated by mussels. The largest and most dense mussel beds (up to 100% cover) were concentrated along the southern shoreline. Smaller less dense beds were also common along the rocky/cliff, north shoreline of the site (Figure 4). · Transects which covered depths greater than 20 feet frequently recordea marine communities inhabiting a rocky substrate. Agarum was the only recurrin~ algae found a.t these greater depths. Commonly occurring organisms found at greater dept~s include the sunflower and mottled seastar, giant cucumber, caon-striped shrimp,, tritons, lined chiton, sea anemones and several species of hermit crabs. · Infaunal communities at Site B appeared to be SJJarse. Very few clam siphons were directly observed. Most commonly observed during our dives, however, were shell f~agments and debris of nuttall•s cockle, Macoma sp., . Pacific littleneckandbutter clam. Additional collections and.· obse.rvations would help to further delineate infaunal communities. Eelgrass beds were not found to be ascommon off the rocky-cliff segments of !shoreline at Site B as they were off Site A; however, beds were found at the heads of coves, the largest, (1000 ft. long by 100-150 ft. wide), occurring at the upper most cove near Shotyun Creek (Fiyure 4). The coves located near Clean Creek and Barge Creek also had eelgrass beds but not as large as those adjacent to Shotgun Greek. SCUBA samplin~ within the beds was not possible because their canopy was too difficult to penetrate. Therefore, our sampling procedures were limited to using a bottom trawl. The most predominate fish collected were juvenile Pacific tomcod (Nicrogadus roximus), great sculpin (Nyoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus and Pacific staghorn sculpin (Leptocottus armatus). Severa1 species of hermit crabs, shrimp and littorines were the most common invertebrates collected. Bottom trawls conducted outside of the eelgrass beds in depths of 20 to 25 feet and on a silty/gravel bottom were dominated by a different assemblage of organisms including: Sea urchins, yellowfin sole, masked greenling and coon stripe,d" shrimp (Pandalus danae). /Appendix A should be referred to for a complete list of trawled spec1es. I ! I I, 12 DISCUSSION. The environmental impacts associated with the construction of a small boat harbor in Shotgun Cove at either Site A or Site B are similar although the extent and magnitude of impacts vary between them. The greatest potentials for causing environmental damage are related to: l)dredging, 2) disposal of dredge material and its subsequent use to construct parking and access facilities immediately adjacent to the harbor site, and 3) project induced secondary development impacts. Based on current project design and available environmental information, we have classified Site A, located at the mouth of the cove, as the more environmentally acceptable alternative and Site B, located at the head of the cove, as the less environmentally acceptable alternative; the reasoning for which follow. Site A (Mouth of the Cove) Because depths greater than 10 fathoms are common in Site A little . dredging is expected to occur. The subtidal areas possibly subjected to dredging have a rocky substrate that is covered with silt and mud, and have associated Laminaria and eelgrass beds. Eelgrass beds occur randomly between 10 to 20 feet MLLW with most situated just on the ·:, beginning edge of a steep subtidal slope. Because of the CE's shallow project depth (12 feet MLLW) .minimal direct impacts are expected to occur. Those beds destroyed by dredging will displace juvenile tomcod and sculpin. Those non motile epi- and infaunal organisms within the· eelgrass beds, such as ~'{?T~ starfish, sea cucumber, juvenile mussels and horse crab, would be destroyed. Dredging Laminaria beds will destroy habitat presently used by several specie~ of shrimp, sc~llops and sea. stars~ \ Dispos~l ~f dredge material in intertidal areas immediately adjacent to the projec1~site are not expected to cause major environmental dama!je if the dis~o~material is confined to the gravel/cobble beach areas dnly. Small, shallow water coves that pocket Site A's shoreline should be avoided as dredge disposal areas. At the head of these shallow coves are seeps and estuarine-like conditions. Several species of marine tolerant grass species have established themselves between the MHHW and MHLW levels. Shallow water areas like these, that are one of many forces supporting the lower trophic levels of marine organisms, are not common in the Whittier area, and should remain unimpacted. Because this alternative is designed to use a floating breakwater, subtidal disturbances would be kept to a minimum; However, constructing breakwater stubs, which are used to anchor the floating breakwater, would destroy benthic assemblages within their alignment. Epi- and infauna marine organisms, associated with locally occurring Laminaria and eelgrass beds within the stubs' alignment, would be destroyed permanently. In its place, the breakwater rubble would become a point of attachment for new assemblage of organisms, the composition of which may include anemones, sea urchins, hermit crabs and starfish. Studies are currently being conducted by the CE and FWS in Southeast Alaska to document the types of marine organisms that will recolonize rubblemound breakwaters. 13 It is anticipated that many of the bedrock subtidal reefs in the vicinity of Site A would be removed because of their navigational hazard to recreation boats. It appears that blastiny and/or dredging the reefs may cause only minim~l damage to locally occurring subtidal organisms; however, more information is needed to substantiate this statement. Based on a single reconnaissance dive on a single reef, those organisms to be destroyed include sea urchin, several species of starfish and sea anemone. Normally, subtidal reefs can act as a place for numerous fish and invertebrate species.to aggregate; ho~ever, neither groups were abundantly obs~rved, possibly because of 'tnadequafe marine flora cover on the reef. Site B (Head of the Cove) The construction of a small boat harbor at the head of Shotgun Cove would cause adverse environmental impacts to locally occurring marine and freshwater fish and wildlife resources. Impacts revolve around the following direct and indirect project related activities: 1) dredging, 2) dredge disposal, 3) floating breakwater and stub breakwater construction, and 4) secondary development. Those physical and biological components impacted by the aforementioned activities include: 1) sub- and intertidal zones, 2) eelgrass beds, 3) anadromous fish and ·their habitat, 4) black bear, 5) estuarine - like habitat and, 6) water ·quality. · Dredging activities .a~ Site B would be confined to those areas with depths less than 15 feet. The most productive areas in terms of species \diversity and relative abundance at Site B are within the depth limits to be dredged. Intertidar·and. subtidal organisms destroyed or displaced include mussel beds, sea cucumber, sea urchin, hermit crabs and · starfish. Non-motile organisms and infaunal clam populations did not appear to be abundant;· therefore, dredginy impacts would expect to be minimal. However, more information is needed to conclude without a doubt· that impacts would be minimal. Of particular concern are the impacts associated with dredging eelgrass beds. Dredging will destroy the beds permanently and along with it, the diverse communities of fish and invertebrates associated with the beds {juvenile tomcod, sculpin, several species of shrimp, hermit crabs and crabs). Although not regularly seen durin~ our field investigation, the d~ngeness crab {Cancer magister) can be found at low tides in sandy and muddy regions where there 1s good growth of eelgrass. Dungeness crab molts were found along the shoreline adjacent to the large eelgrass bed ·near Shotgun Creek and also near the eelgrass beds near Clean Creek. Common, but not seen on our trip, commercial species dependent on eelgrass beds are the Pacific herrin~ and silver salmon. These fishes not only feed in the grass meadows on epifauna and crustaceans, but also use the beds as nursery areas. The Pacific herring enters the eelgrass areas in winter and spring to spawn and its eggs become attached to the grass blades. The fingerling stage of the silver salmon feeds on the animals living on and among eelgrass blades. 1 The importance of eelgrass systems does not necessarily lie in their direct food value to organisms but in their multivarible functions. Two · · functions are that they provide a habitat for the growth of both 14 , I commercial and non-commercial, but ecologically, important, fish and invertebrates, and that because of their normally dense growth, they provide small organisms a significant degree of protection from predators. Less obvious but nevertheless equally significant are the facts that: 1) eelgrass leaves have a high rate of growth and although few organisms feed directly on the leaves, the major food ch.ains are based on detritus derived from the leaves; 2) detritus exported from these beds support food chains in adjacent waters; 3) the blades support many small epiphytic organisms which are used as food sources by many higher tropic levels; 4) the roots bind the sediment protecting the bottom from erosion, while the leaves slow currents and increase the rate of deposition of fine sediments and organic matter; and 5) the plant roots remove nutrients from the substrate and transfer them to the leaves and then to the surrounding water, thus providing nutrients for other plants. The animal components of Shotgun Cove•s eelgrass beds are not all identified at this time. In order to fully delineate the magnitude and extent (long and/or short-term) of the impacts expected to occur, all the animal components should be identifi'ed and described by trophic relationships. All three anadromous fish streams could be impacted by constructing a small boat harbor at Site B•. The physical presence of a floating breakwater would not impede pink and chum salmon from reaching their streams to spawn. However, th'e construction of rubblemound stub breakwaters which are used to anchor the floating breakwaters, could impair-outmigrating salmonid fish movements. Juvenile salmonids typically migrate along the shallow nearshore waters and seek cover from predators in vegetation beds· or other types of cover. Placing a. breakwater stub across their path will force the juveniles to swim out into deeper waters in order to get around the structure and because of inadequate cover subject themselves to predation from larger fish. The impacts to anadromous fish movement as dredging is occuring are not know; however, it is anticipated that fish seekiny to spawn in their native waters could be detered from the area as a result of increased turbidity during dredging.· Fish spawning i11tertidally could have their eggs smothered and killed from settling particulates originating from dredging operations. The CE stated that they prefer to dispose of their dredye material, if suitable, immediately adjacent to the harbor site. Any fill in or near the mouths of anadromous fish streams could destroy spawning habitat and/or ~revent fish from reaching their spawning grounds. Fill placed intertidally or subtidally.at the very head of the cove, near Shotgun Creek, will destroy saltwater tolerant grass meadows, subtidal mudflats and local1y occuring eelgrass beds and associa~ed dun!:Jeness crab habitat. Locally occuring black bear appear to depend on Clean, Barge and Shotgun Creeks for feeding on salmon. If the anadromous fish streams were adversely impacted black bear population could be destroyed. The nearest documented anadromous fish streams include two streams (Anadromous Fish Stream Nos. 224-10-14465; 224-10-14470) that are located three miles 15 east of Shotgun Cove. It is most likely that the carryin~ capacity for black bear, considering all life requisites, has already been reached at the nearby streams; therefore the bears would not be s.ucc:e-s·s-tu+·l-y displaced. The increased numbers of boats using the head of the cove will undoubtedly impact water quality. Proportional increases of fuel spills, accidents, and discharge into waters of the boat harbor will be significant elements contributing to decreased water quality. To compound the problem, dredging greater depths, the physical presence of stub and floating breakwaters, and inter- and subtidal dredge disposal could influence the c1rculation and flushing rate at the head of the bay. Deteriorating water quality conditions will result in contaminating bottom sediments which in turn will effect organisms of lower trophic levels. Ultimately, contaminants will work their way through the food chain into those organisms of recreational and commercial importance to the Prince Williams Sound area (blue mussels, pink and chum salmon, and several species of clam, shrimp, and dungeness crab}. Locally·occuring eelgrass beds are very sensitive to water pollution. Studies have shown that heavy metals, bio-accumulated in eelgrass plants, can obtain high levels (Harris et al.,. 1979}. High ·heavy metal levels in eelgrass beds could impair the nutrient source that supports locally occuring juvenile fish and invertebrates. ~1ethodologies exist to monitor water quality and to study its impacts on various assemblages of organisms. The objectives of water quality monitoring are: 1) the detection of violations of water quality standards, or 2} the determination of long-term trends in water quality. Additional methods and procedures exist to trace the effects of poor water quality on locally occurring fishery resources •. Blue mussels and eelgrass have been used to monitor the bio-accumulation of heavy metals in their tissues (Harris et-a1., 1979). Establishing a water quality monitoring program at Sirte B will help to identify the lony-term detrimental effects of poor water quality on locally occcurring marine resources. Project Impacts Assotiated with Shotgun Cove Road Primary and secondary impacts at both small boat harbor sites are anticipated with the construction of the Shotgun Cove Road in conjunction with _the CE's navigation project. Minimal secondary impacts would occur at Site A while major adverse impacts would occur at Site B. If the road were built to the mouth of the cove (Site A) and in fact the CE chose to build their harbor there, minimal impacts to the adjourniny area would be expected as a result of secondary development along the road and near the boat harbor. Anadromous fish streams do not exist at the mouth of the cove, so no salmonid habitat will be destroyed locally by building a road or building harbor support facilities; however, segments of the road alignment would sti11 have to cross Clean, Barge, and Shotgun Creeks in order to reach Site A. ~ligratory birds and waterfowl do not appear to use the area heavily therefore-no adverse impacts will occur to their habitat. 16 Major impacts are expected to occur if Shotgun Cove Road were constructed to Site B in conjunction with the CE chasing that site for its small boat harbor. As stated earlier, the placement of a boat harbor at this site could 1) impact spawning pink and chum salmon habitat and their movements in and out of their spawning grounds, 2) degrade water quality and water circulation, 3) destroy subtidal and intertidal habitat and assemblages, 4) destr6y eelgrass beds, 5) impact feeding habitats of local occurring black bear, and 6) potentially destroy estuarine conditions at the head of the cove. Placing a road in the general vicinity of the harbor would compound many of the aforementioned impacts. Anadromous fish streams will be subjected to impacts resulting from · residential and business construction. Increased runoff could destroy spawning beds due to increased turbidity and water quality deterioration. Estuarine like conditions at the head of the cove and near anadromous fish stream mouths could be adversely impacted by improperly placed fill material. Locally occurring eelgrass and mussel beds could be severely impacted by degrading water quality from waste water discharges related to residential and business developments. The destruction of the anadromous fishery in Shotgun Cove will destroy feeding grounds for locally occurring black bear. Even if the salmon fishery were only minimally impacted, black bear may avoid the streams because of persistent human presence in the area. Until such time that the CE planning proces~ and associated environmental studies become more detailed the FWS can not suggest a comprehensive plan to mitigate for the impacts expected to occur. However, as defined and discussed in the National Environmental Protection Act and the Fish and Wildlife Service mitigation policy, the best form of mitigation is avoidance. Based on currently available information about the fish and wildlife resources of Shotgun Cove, the Fish and Wildlife Service has tentatively identified the following species and habitat types to assess the adverse environmental impacts of the project, and develop mitiyation goals and a mitigation plan: 1) pink salmon, 2) chum salmon, 3) Zosteria (eelgrass) beds, 4) ~Jytilus edu1is (blue mussel) beds, 5) inter- and subtidal zones, 6) black bear, and 7) harbor seal. Criteria to be used to determine habitat value include existing water quality and littoral diversity, relative abundance and productivity. RECOMNENDATIONS On the basis of a single reconnaissance level investigation of the project area, we make the following recommendations: 1. The Corps of Engineers should focus their planning activities on developing a small boat harbor at Site A (Mouth of Shotgun Cove), the alternative with the least associated amount of environmental damage.The impacts expected to occur at Site B (Head of the Cove) are considerably greater and therefore would require more mitigation for unavoidable losses of fish and wildlife habitat. 17 2. The limited amount of fish and wildlife data should be supplemented in order to assess the engineering designs of various project features as they become available. The followiny kinds of seasonal fish ~nd wildlife information are still needed: a. identificaton of pink and chum salmon rearing areas within Shotgun Cove. Standard sampliny methods such as beach seines and trawls should be used; b. refine estimates of pink and chum salmon populations occurring at Clean, Barge and Shotgun Creeks; c. quantify and compare the assemblages of marine organisms occurring in eelgrass beds at Site A and Site B; d. document the extent of Dungeness crab use at Site B. 3. Measures to reduc~ the potential deyradation of water quality in Shotgun Cove as a result of increased recreational boating activities and secondary harbor developments must be developed. Possible measures could include: a. A water quality monitoring program to record and assess the impacts of deteriorating water conditions in Shotgun Cove, especially if Site A were chosen as the Corp•s preferred alternative. _ b. Water circulation studies to determine harbor flushing ______ch_gf_iiS~~r i st i c s. 4. Because the State of Alaska is also studing the feasibility of a small harbor at Shotgun Cove, we recommend that the Corps, FWS and State Department of Transportation regularly coordinate the results of their engineering and/or environmental studies. A coordination meeting should be conducted as soon as possible to set up procedures for the exchange of informat1on. 5. The most current engineering design information must be forwa~ded to our office prior to initiating seeping and field studies in fiscal year 1984. It is imperative that the scheduling and phasing of the small boat harbor project reflect the time required to obtain and assess adequate environmental information. 18 REFERENCES Abbott, R.T. 1968. A Guide in Field Identification, Seashe11s of North America. Golden Press, Racine, Wisconsin. 280pp. 1974. American Seashells. Van Nostrand Reinhold Ltd., New York, New York. 663 pp. Alaska Coastal Research 1978. An. investigation of the herriny egg on seaweed fishery in Prince William Sound, Alaska: Estimates of standing crop, growth rates of kelps and patterns of .recolonization in harvested areas. Prepared for State of Alaska, Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries. Job. No. Ocean-04-78. December. 45 pp. Barr, L. and N. 1983. Under Alaskan Seas. Alaska Northwest Publishing Company, Anchorage, Alaska. 208 pp. Braun, E. and V. Brown 1966. Exploring Pacific Coast Tide Pools. Naturegraph Company. 56 pp. Carl, G.C. 1971. Some Common f•larine Fishes of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Museum. Handbook No. 23. 86 PP•. Coan, E.V., 1971. The Northwest American Tellinidae. The Veliger. Vol. 14, July. 63 pp. Dawson, E. Y. 195G. The Seaweeds-How to Know. Wm. E. Brown' Company Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa. 197 pp. DMJt~, For s sen 1981. Whittier Transportation Options Study: Fina1 Report, System Alternatives and Recommendations. Prepared for State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities... ~larch. 261 pp. Emerson, W.K. and M.K. Jacobson . 1976. The American ~luseum of Natura 1 History Guide to Shells. Knopf, Inc. New York, New York. 482 pp. Farrington, J.W. 1983. U.S. "Mussel Watch" 1976-1978: An overview of the ,· trace-metal, DOE, PCB, hydrocarbon, and artificial ladionuclide data. Environ. Sci. Tech. 17, p. 490-496 •. Faucha ld, K. 1977. The Polychaete Worms: Definitions and Keys to the Orders, Families and Genera. Science Series 28: 'February. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. 188 pp. 19 Flora, C.J. and E. Fairbanks' 1977. The Sound and the Sea. The Washington State Department of Printing, Olympia, Washington. 474 pp. Furlong, M. and V. Pill 1973. Starfish: Guides to Identification and Methods of Preserving. ERGO, Inc., Tacoma, Washington. 104 pp. George, D. and J. George . 1979. ·Marine Life: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invertebrates in the Sea. Wiley-Interscience, New York, New York. 288 pp. Guberlet, ~l.L. 1962. Animals of the Seashore. Binfords and Mort, Publishers, Portland, ·Oregon. 450 pp. _ 1974. Seaweeds at Ebb Tide. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. 182 pp. Harris, J.E., G.J. Fabris, P.J. Statham and F. Tawfik 1979. Bio-geochemistry of selected heavy metals in Western Port, Victoria, and use of inverteurates as indi.cators with emphasis on ~tytilius edu1is planulatus. Aust. J. ~Jar. Freshwater Res., 19751, 30, 159-78. Hart, J .L. · 1973. Pacific Fi,shes of Canada Fisheries Research .Board of Canada. Bulletin 180. Ottawa, Canada. · 740 pp. Hedgpeth, J.W. and S. Hinton 1961. Common Seashore Life of Southern California. Nature~raph Company, Publishers. 65 pp. Johnson, t~.L and H. J. Snook 1955. Seashore Animals of the Pacific Coast. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, New York. 659 pp. Keen, A.M. and E. Coan 1974. t~arine ~Jol1uscan Genera of Western North America, An Illustrated Key. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 208 pp. Keep, J. 1935. West Coast Shells. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 350 pp. Kozloff, E.M. 1974. Keys to the Narine Invertebrates of Puget Sound, The San Juan Archipelago, and Adjacent Regions. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. 226 pp. 20 ~lacintosh, R.A. 1976. A Guide to the Identification of Some Common Eastern Beriny Sea Snails. Northwest Fisheries Center Processed Report. National Marine Fisheries, Kodiak, Alaska. March. 27 pp. tilcCurdy, t•l. L. 1983. Personnal Communication, Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Cordova, Alaska. McLaughlin, P.A. 1974. The Hermit Crabs (Crustacea, Decapoda, Paguridea) of Northwestern North America. Zoologische Verhandelingen. No. 130. January. 396 pp. Miller, D.J. and R.N. Lea 1972. Guide to the Coastal ~Iarine Fishes of California. Departr11ent of Fish and Game. Fish Bulletin 157. 235 pp. Morris, P.A. 1966 •. A Field guide to Shells of the Pacific Coast and Hawaii. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, Massachusetts. 297 pp. Newe 11, R. C. 1979. Biology of Intertidal Animals !•Iarine Ecological Surveys LTD., Faversham, Kent, U.K. 781. pp. Paul, A.J. and H.M. Feder J976 . ____ Clam, Musse 1, and Oyster Resources of A1 aska. Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska, Fairbanks. IMS Report No. 76-4. - April. 41 pp. Pavlovskii, I.N., editor 1966. Atlas of the Invertebrates of the Far Eastern Seas of the USSR, Akademiya Nauk SSSR. Zoologicheskii Institut. Available from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Viryinia. 457 pp. Pitcher, K.W. 1975. Distribution and abundance of sea otters, Steller sea lions and harbor seals in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Unpublished Report, A1 aska ·Department of Fi s.h and Game. Quayle, D.B. 1970. Intertidal Bivalves of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Muieum, Department of Education. Handbook No. 17. Printed by A. Sutton, British Columbia. 104 pp~ Rehder, H. A. 1981. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Seashells. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York. 894 pp. Ricketts, E.F. and J. Calvin 1965. Between Pacific Tides. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 516 pp. 21 Rice, T. 1973. ~Iarine Shells of the Pacific Coq.st. ERCO, Inc., Tacoma, Washington. 102 pp. Robinson, G. 1974. Beach Animals. ERCO, Inc., Tacoma, Washinyton. 27 pp. Scagel, R.F. · 1973. Guide to Common Seaweeds of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Museum. Handbciok No. 27. 330 pp. Smith, L. S. 1976. Living Shores of the Pacific Northwest. Pacific Search Books, Seattle, Washington. 159 pp. Smith, R.I. and J.T. Carlton 1975. Light's Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates of the Central California Coast. University of California Press. Los Angeles, California. 716 pp. Somerton, D. and c. Murray 1980. Field Guide to the Fish of Puyet Sound and the Northwest Coast. Washington Sea Giant Publication, University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. 70 pp. · Sommerville, R.I. ·and R.H. Bishop 1973. Alaska's Wildlife and Habitat. Alaska Department of Fish and Game , Vo 1. 1, 144 pp • Sowls, A.L., S.A. Hatch, and C.J. Lensink . 1978. Catalog of Alaskan Seabird Colonies FWS/OBS - 78/78. October. Stevens, B.A. 1925. Hermit Crabs of Friday Harbor., Washin~ton. Publ. Puget Sound Biol. Sta. Vol. 3, No. 68. pp. 273-309 Thayer, G.W. and R.C. Phillips 1977. Importance of eelgrass beds in Puget Sound. Marine Fisheries Review. MFR Paper 1271. November. pp. 18-22 Waaland, J.R. 1977. Common Seaweeds. Pacific Search Press, Seattle, Washington. 120 pp. Wilimovsky, N.J. 1958. Provisional Keys to the Fishes of Alaska. Fisheries Research Laboratory. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Juneau, Alaska. 113 pp. Wu, R.S.S. 1981. Differences in the toxicities of an oil dispersant and a surface active agent to some marine animals, and their implications in the choice of species in toxicity testing. ~Iarine Environ. Res. 0141-1136/81/0005-0157. pp. 157-163 22 ,. Appendix A: Comparative species list of marine organisms found at Shotgun Cove, . . Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983; August 15-20, 1983)1 TE CLASSIFICATION CONNON NANE HEAD OF THE COVE DIVISION: CHLOROPHYTA Ul va/frlonostroma sea lettuce X X Filamentous green DIVISION: PHAEOPHYTA Agarum cribrosum sea colander X X Costaria costata seersucker X Fucus sp. rock weed X X Lam1naria saccharina sugarwrack X X f" DIVISION: RHODOPHYTA 1-' Lithothamnium sp. encrusting red X X DIVISION: ANTHOPHYTA Zostera marina eelgrass X X PHYLUN: PORIFERA Halichondria panicea X X Scypha sp •. X X PHYLUM: CNIDARIA CLASS: HYDROZOA Aequorea aequorea water jellyfish X X Gon1onemus vertens orange stripe~ jellyfish X X CLASS: SCYPHOZOA Cyanea capillata X X f CLASS: ANTHOZOA I ~Jetridium senile white plumed anemone X X Ptilosarcus gurneyi sea pen X Appendix A: Comparative species list of marine organisms found at Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983; August 15-20, 1983)1 (Continued) SITE A SITE B CL-ASSIFICATION CON~ION NA~lE NOUTH OF THE COVE HEAD OF THE COVE PHYLUM: CTENOPHORA Pleurobrachia sp. X X PHYLU~I: MOLLUSCA / I CLASS: ANPHINEURA Q tvlopalia ciliata hairy chiton X Tonicella 1ns1gnis X X Tonicella lineata red lined chiton X X CLASS: GASTROPODA Acmaea sp. X Acmaea scutum patina plate limpet X X Acmaea pelta shield limpet X X Anisodoris nobilis sea lemon X Chioraea leon1na hooded nudibranch X X Fusitriton oregonensis Oregon triton X X Hermassenda crass1cornis long horned hermissenda X X L1ttor1na sitkana Sitka periwinkle X X Margarites helicinus he 1 icina maryarite X X Margarites sp. X Neptunea sp. X X Nucella attenuata X X Olivella baetica beatic dwarf olive X Triopha carpenteri carpenter's Doris X CLASS: BIVALVIA Chlamys rubida smooth pecten _ X X Clinocard1um nuttallii Nuttall's cockle X X Hiatella striata saxicave X X Ke 11 ia 1aperous i LaPerouse's .lepton X [acuna v1ncata common northern lacuna X X ------.~~-.------~------~------~------, I --- -- (' ------. --- --. . ~ Appendix A: Comparativelspecies list of marine organisms found at Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983; August 15-20, 1983)1 (Continued) ITEA CLASSIFICATION CONI•ION NAI•IE MOUTH OF THE COVE ~lacoma bathica X X Nacoma obliqua uncongrous macoma X t4acoma sp. X fvlytllus edulis blue mussel X X Pododesmus macros~hisma jingle shell X Prototheca stam1nea ·Pacific littleneck X X Sax1domus g1gantea butterclam X Serrlpes·groenlandicus Greenland cockle X Yoldia sp. X CLASS: CEPHALOPODA ~ Rossia pacifica Pacific bob-tailed squid xt w PHYLUM: ANNELIDA CLASS: POLYCHAETE Harmothoe imbricata X X · Pect1nar1a granulata X X Serpula vermicularis X X Spirorbis sp. X X PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA CLASS: CRUSTACEA Balanus cariosus barnacle X X Balanus glandula barnacle X X Cancer oregonensis _hairy cancer crau X Evalus sp. hippolytid shrimp X Evalus suckleyi hippolytid shrim~ X Hyas lyratus decorator or lyre crab X X pagurus tenuimanus thin-handed herrllit crau X X Pagurus brandti sponge hermit X X Pandalus danae coon-stripe shrimp 1 X X - --,------. -- -- _____ k Appendix A: Comparative species list of marine organisms found at Shot~un Cove, Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983;- August 15-20, 19U3)1 (Continued) SITE A SITE B CLASSIFICATION HOUTH OF THE COVE HEAD OF THE COVE Sclerocragon salebrosa sculptured shrimp xt Telmessus che1ragonus horse crab X X PHYLU~I: ECHINODERMATA CLASS: ASTEROIDEA I· Crossaster papposus rose starfish X Evaster1as troschelii mottled starfish X X Dermaster1as imbricata leather st~rfish X Henricia leviuscula blood start'ish X Leptasterias hexactis six-rayed starfish X X Ophiopholis sp. brittle starfish X Pycnopodia helianthoides sunflower ~tarfish X X Solaster dawsoni morning su~ starfish X Solaster st1mpsoni sun starfish X j CLASS: ECHINOIDEA I Strongylocentrotus I droebach1ensis green sea urchin X X ' CLASS: HOLOTHUROIDEA I Leptosynapta sp. burrowin~ Jea cucumber X X Stichopus californicus giant cucunjber X X PHYLUM: CHORDATA CLASS: ASCIDIACEA Corella willmeriana sea squirt X X Halocynthia aurantium sea squirt X X CLASS: OSTEICHTHYES I Artedius fenestralis padded scuipin xt Clupea harengus pallasi herring ! X I ' .> ,)-_, : ,:· . ~ ' ' ' .' ------_____ k Appendix A: Comparative species list of marine organisms found at Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska (June 16, 1983; August 15-20, 1983)1 (Continued) SITE A SITE B CLASSIFICATION CONNON NANE -MOUTH OF THE COVE HEAD OF THE COVE Gasterosteus aculeatus threespine stickleback xt Hexagrammos octoyrammus masked yreenliny xt xt Leptocottus armatus Pacific stayllorn sculpin xt xt Limanda aspera yellowfin sole xt M1crogadus proximus Pacific torncod xt xt Nyoxocephalus Rolyacanthoce~halus great sculpin xt Oh11odon elonga us ljnycod -·· X9 P olis laeta crescent yunnel xt Ronquilus jordani northern ronquil xt Stichaeus punctatus arctic shanny xt Synynathus griseolineatus bay pipefish xt xt Theragra chalcogramma wa 11 eye po 11 ock xg 11 Includes those organisms collected and/or identified-from SCUBA transects yill netting or bottom trawls; - taxonomic references included in ReferenGes. t = organism collected by bottom trawl only · 9 = organism collected by gill net only APPENDIX B: Horizontal distribution of marine organisms and transect profiles for Site A (Mouth of the Cove); Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska. SUBSTRATE CODES CLEAN GRAVEL AND SHALE MIX SILT COVERED GRAVEL SILT AND MUD COVERED GRAVEL ,·o··:o·:. . . • 0 ... SILT AND MUD COVERED GRAVEL WITH ·i:~~·.•. ·u=t. •.• '~·. SCATTERED BOULDERS BEDROCK BEDROCK COVERED WITH COBBLE/BOULDERS B-1 __l~lL------~------ 1 i I I' Mouth of the Cove: Transect A-1 ORGANISMS * DISTRIBUTTON ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus Mytilus Strongylo- centrotus Pagurus Littorines Parastichopus Pycnopodia Chlamys '' Lamina ria Crossaster Telmessus • Zostera Shrimp Evasterias ft. m. WATER SURFACE 0 ----~------~------~~~~--~~~~~--~~~------~~ r.·~... .·c:;;-~.~ ••. !!~r"'i. i!;\;~;1;":.:9="':u,...,.·-~-. .1".• • • • •' • .o... ·,...-nv:.. .Q:~ ·... ~··.·. -~- ~o·-· ·o ·::o:·o. ·...:.··~·-·.-. ~···· /0 ~-Crt.ct· if'.· ·-~!"-9;<::;:~~-'j,~~:·: _::_\·: f:~ . . ·-·.·9e'~:q~;O.·o ··•·· ... • .. ,.,.;. ...P., ~ ...:I 20 ...:I ::<::: I C"') Ul . 001-!+J f- 3 0 0'\..C:~ 0... r-1 w 0'\ N 0 +J~ . UJC""'ll"\ 40 :::lr-1+ n::: b!J ::::3 •••• w <: Q) Q) f- 13"0 <{50 15 Mya truncata 00 •r-l ·r-l and Saxidomus r-IE-IE-1 5 fragments ··::-·;·· 0 ·.:. 60 20 70 10 20 30 40 50 --so 70 80 90 lOOm. 40 80 120 160 200 240 320ft. DISTANCE OF TRANSECT *· Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. I •• e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of transect. B-2 _ _ll...... !_ ___~------;------ 1 I Mouth of the Cove: Transect A-2 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALUNG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus Filamentous green algae Mytilus Strongylo- centrotus Acmaea Dermasterias Lamina ria • Henricia Shrimp • Zostera Parastichopus Hermassenda Evasterias • Pagurus Chlamys Pycnopodia Agarum ft m. : -w.f~~'l'!'~;~,:,;;;:::~l~.....i·r-.~~~.._(_.::'::~:~_.--- . ....__ _ __..___..._____,~ WATER SURFACE~ 1 . , '.":': ~ ::::·< ;:·::,o>. 5 . ····){:\~: .. ;3: H 20 H :::<:: C""l Cll . I IXl!-I+J r- 30 '<:Itt:':_ iJ.;,;z,5~~::H:~::i;i:::\~:t;:) I\'.':.. ;: .. C"',.C:4-I ,..., 0... 10 ...... C""l w +Jr--l . 0 .. '?~ ·:~:·.~:~~; ... Cll~ll"l 40 ...... • 0. ::lr--l+ Pododesmus, 00 n::: ··,·:-.::;·:.!.:.:·:<·:c... ::::=' •••• w Proto theca, and ···a,.· •. • ..::t: Q) Q) r- Clinocardium fragmen~·~:,":::{-.;, S'O <(50 15 IX) •r-1 •r-1 ~ .. r--lE- 20 ?0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft D I STANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of transect. B-3 Mouth of the Cove: Transect A-3 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus Filamentous green algae Strongylo- · centrotus Acmaea Zostera Lamina ria Agarum Parastichopus Pycnopodia Dermasterias Pagurus Telmessus Shrimp Chlamys Tunicates m. WATER SURFACE 10 I • ~ ...:I 20 :z...:I I C"'l (Jl . 00 $-l .j.J f- J 0 0'\,.i::::l.l-l 0.. ..-l· 000 w .j.JC"') . 0 CJl\0\0 40 ;::l..-l+ 0::: OJ) ;::l .... w .:X: Q) Q) f- S"C <(_50 00 •.-i •.-i Clinocardium ..-lHE-1 5 fragments 60 20 70 10 20 JO 40 60 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft. DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. B-4 Mouth of the Cove: Transect A-4 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Mytilus - Fucus Filamentous green algae Evasterias Strongylo- • centrotus Acmaea Dermasterias Pycnopodia Metridium Lamina ria • Crossaster WATER SURFACE ft. m. 0 -- 10 ~ ...:I 20 Clinocardium, Macoma, ...:I ~ Hiatella and Prototheca I fragments C""l en . 001-1~ 1-30 0'\,.C~ CL r-i w 00 00 0 ~..;t . cntntn 40 ~r-i+ 0:: ClO ::J •• •• w < QJ QJ 1- S't:l 50 7 0 20 30 40 50 50 70 90 l OOm. 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft 0 IS T ANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of transect. B-5 Mouth of the Cove: Transect A-5 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus Filamentous green algae Dermasterias Strongylo- centrotus Pycnopodia Agarum Parastichopus Lamina ria Littorines Microporina Membrainipora ft. m. WATER SURFACE 10 ! - 20 C") CIJ • I O'J 1-l .1-J r- 3 0 0'\,.C::I.I-l 0... """" 00 w .1-J"""" • 0 CIJC")I.f) 40 ::l'"""+00 rl a:: ;::l •••• w <: 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 90 160m. 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft. DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each sit~ B-6 __L;_JI ------,------ APPENDIX C: Horizontal distribution of marine organisms and transect profiles for Site B (Head of the Cove); Shotgun Cove, Whittier, Alaska. SUBSTRATE CODES CLEAN·GRAVEL AND BEDROCK SHALE MIX II CLEAN COBBLE, GRAVEL, BOULDERS AND BEDROCK SAND MIX SLABS ------ .' b23l SILT COVERED GRAVEL .. BEDROCK SLABS AND ~ . SILT COVERED GRAVEL SILT AND MUD COVERED SAND AND SHALE GRAVEL II BEDROCK COVERED WITH COBBLE/BOULDERS I • C-1 ,_l,_l.!_------ Head of the Cove: Transect B-1 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT ' I" Fucus Filamentous green algae Balanus •• I Mytilus Acmaea Strongylo- centrotus Pagurus Parastichopus Metridium Evasterias Leptasterias • ft. m. WATER SURFACE 0 I 0 .::S: ...::! 20 ...::! ::<:: ('f') I:J) . I COH+J !- 30 0\.C~ 0.. .-1 10 oco w Prototheca, Macoma and +JN . 0 I:J)C"'l-:1" 40 Clinocardium fragments. :::l.-1+ b[) 0::: ;::l .. .. w <(J QJ QJ !- =~ 20 70 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species·at each site e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of transect. C-2 , r Head of the Cove: B;.-2 * ORGANISMS · DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Acmaea Fucus Mytilus Filamentous green algae Pagurus Littorines S-trongylo- centrotus Evasterias Metridium Fusitriton Margarites Pycnopodia P a r a s t i chop tfs Anisodoris • ft m. WATER SURFACE 0 /0 ~ ...... 20 ...... ·. ::0:: I C"') en . Prototheca, Macoma, and 001--1.1-J 1- J 0 0\,.C::I.i-1 0... Clinocardium fragments ~ w ON 0 .UN . (f.l'"""\0 40 ~~+ D.':: 00 w ~ .. .. < O.l O.l 1- S"':: <(50 \0 •rl •rl ~e- 70 10 20 JO 40 50 60 70 80 90 room. 80 40 80 120 /60 zoo 240 280 DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed org~nisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list. of species at each site. e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of transect. C-3 Head of the Cove: B-3 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Mytilus Fucus Filamentous green algae Pagurus - - - Acmaea ------Evasterias Strongylo------centrotus Metridium Fusitriton ft m. WATER SURFACE 0 10 ::::: 'l• ....:l 20 ....:l :::E: Prototheca ~nd Clino~ardium co . I fragments 1-4 .!J 1-30 C'i..C:'H a.. 00 10 0'10\0 w ...-IN . 0 l.f"\00 40 Qj...-j+ n::: ::ss:::l •• •• w t-::1 Qj Qj 1- El"' <{50 15 \0 •r-l ..-! ...-11:-iE-i 5 60 20 70 I 0 20 :;o 40 50 60 70 90 lOOm. 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft 0 IS T ANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. C-4 I . I Head of the Cove: Transect B-4 ORGANISMS * DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Mytilus Pagurus 1' Acmaea Cancer Fucus • Filamentous green algae Metridium Strongylo centrotus Parastichopus Agart1m ft m. WATER SURFACE 0 10 :::: ...:I ...:I 20 ::0:: ('t") (/J . I 001-!4-l 30 0"\,.C~ t- ...-! a.. N \0 w 4-l...-1 . 0 (/)1/if"- :::l...-1+ 40 00 n:: ;:l •• .. w < Q) Q) !=i'"d t- \.0 ..-l •r-1 <(50 ...-~~~ 5 60 70 lOOm. 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 Tt. DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. e Only a single individual seen in the vicinity of the transect. C-5 Head of the Cove: Transect B-5 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUT~ON ALONG TRANSECT amentous green algae Evasterias Parastichopus Zostera Pagurus Margarites Strongylo- centrotus Mopalia - ft; m. WATER SURFACE 0 from 10 ::s: t-1 20 t-1 I - :a: Chum salmon carcass, I Dungeness crab parts, truncata M (/) . 00. !-1 -1-1 I- 3 0 H-i-a tel'la, Mac oma, and C linocardi um O\,!:l4-1 0.. r-1 w fragments 00 0 -1-1 r-1, . (/)\00\ 40 :::Jr-1+ a:: 00 w :::J •• .. < 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 lOOm. 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320-Ft. D I STANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. C-6 _L~'L______ Head of the Cove: Transect B-6 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus I Mytilus I . Acmaea Pagurus Littorines Evasterias Shrimp Tonic ella Parastichopus Fusitriton Pycnopodia Sea pen Chlamys ft. m. 0 I 0 :::;: 20 H H ;:.:: I C"") til . 1-30 001-l-1-1 a.. ,...,0\,.C:~ w 00 \0 0 -1-1-.:t . CIJ,...,U") 40 ::l,...,+ 0::: 00 w ;::l •••• 1- 70 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft. DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should b~ referred to for complete list of species at each site. C-7 Head of the Cove: Transect B-7 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Balanus Fucus Mytilus Littorines Acmaea Strongylo- centrotus ·Parastichopus Agarum Hyas Chlamys Solaster Pycnopodia Evasterias ft. m. 0 ~--'-~--~--~~---W_A~T_E__ R-4SURFA~~ 10 ::s: H 20 H ::<::: C"") 1:/l . I CXi 1-1 -1-1 I- 30 O'I.C4-l n.. M O'IM w -1-10 . 0 l:l.lM\0 40 ::lM+ bO a::: ;:::l .... w < Q) Q) I- S"d 70 /0 20 30 50 60 70 80 90 lOOm. 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. C-8 __ _L;_IL_------~ Head of the Cove: Transect B-8 * 'ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Pagurus Fucus l(fytilus fragments Balanus Littorines Acmaea Strongylo- centrotus Evasterias Pycnopodia Dermasterias •Agarum ft m. WATER SURFACE 0 10 ::: t...:l 20 :a:t...:l i . C""l Cll . I CX)~.j..J f- 30 0'\,..C:~ a.. r-1 ON w +.Jr-1 . 0 til Or--. 40 ::::lr-1+ bO n::: ;::l .. .. w 70 '· 80 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site. C-9 Head of the Cove: Transect B-9. * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT centrotus Metridium Pycnopodia Evasterias Tonisella Parastichopus WATER SURFACE f+. m.· 0 --~~~--~~--~~~~--~-'-~~~~ 10 :s: 20 t-:t t-:t ;:El I (""') rJ) . 1- JO CO!-l-1-1 a.. O'\,.C::4-1 r-1 w 00 0 +Jr-1 . 40 rJ)C"')Uj 0:: :::lr-1+ 00 w :::l •• • • 1- < Q) Q) <(50 S"t:! r-- •r-i •r-i r-IE-tE-1 s 60 70 lOOm•. 80 40 80 120 {60 200 240 280 320 T1: . DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to for complete list of species at each site • .. ' C-10 Head of the Cove: Transect B-10 * ORGANISMS DISTRIBUTION ALONG TRANSECT Fucus '. Filamentous green algae Balanus Mytilus Strongylo- centrotus Pycnopodia Pagurus Tunicates Parastichopus m. WATER SURFACE 10 20 I 1-30 a_ w 10 ON 0 +J. 0 • l)l.qU") 40 ::l.--i+ a:: bl) ::l •• .. w < (J) (J) 1- S"CC <{50 15 1'- •..; •..; .--iE- 20 70 10 20 30 40 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320ft DISTANCE OF TRANSECT * Listed organisms are those most visually abundant. Appendix A should be referred to f~r complete list of species at each site. Library .. C-11 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Servrm 1011 E. Tudor 'Road 1\ t'lr1'1.nr,:'JG~.. A'...,,.',~tn ... :<.c.. 9GS0~