A biogeographic assessment of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary: a review of boundary expansion concepts for NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program

Item Type monograph

Publisher NOAA/National Ocean Service

Download date 04/10/2021 14:17:34

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/30473 tat Use Database (HUD), which is a compendium of life history information collected from scientific literature. scientific from collected information history life of compendium a is which (HUD), Database Use tat Habi a and (1977-2002) surveys trawl using developed were groundfish managed federally for HSP’s NMFS was usedtomapHSMresults. data MMS and NMFS combining map substrate the while results model HSP their map to used was NMFS by developed map substrate unaltered The 2.10). (Chapter type substrate soft or hard to attributed confidently be ter 2.9), information gathered from scientific literature was less resolved, and thus habitat preferences could only to 4,000 shoreline m. the Although there from were 35 extended classifications ofand habitat typeintervals associated withm the benthic10 substrate dataat (Chap mapped was Bathymetry 2004). (NMFS, groundfish modeling for HSP NMFS by used those as same the were type) substrate (bathymetry, data GIS framework The Data andMethods pelagic/highly migratoryspecies. managed federally three and fish managed non-federally of species four for developed els (HSM) as described in Chapter 3.1, were mod suitability habitat this Qualitative chapter. in used were juveniles and adults for NMFS by developed values HSP so aged and tope [soupfin shark]) are federally man shark, leopard lingcod, cowcod, (bocaccio, species these of Five region. south California ern the within importance recreational and/or ecological, commercial, have significant that species of representative be to determined were 4.1.1 Table in listed cies fish occur in southern California, the 12 spe of species many While species. given a for suitable is location given a at latitude and substrate, depth, of composite the that probability the as expressed are results Model latitude. and depth, habitat, benthic variables: three on based were (FMP) Plan Management Fisheries Groundfish the in stages life and species for values Suitability 2004). (NMFS, literature scientific and developed by NMFS for federally managed groundfish based on a combination of fishery-independent trawl data models expressed as habitat suitability probabilities (HSP), ranging from 0 (unsuitable) to 1 (most Statement suitable), were Impact Environmental suitability Habitat groundfish. an coast Pacific for (EFH) Habitat Fish Essential of designation the consider to (EIS) developing is (NMFS) Service Fisheries Marine National the Currently, mapped inageographicinformationsystem(GIS)toportrayareasofpotentialdistributionforgiven species. (Brown tion qualitative to quantitative, and is wholly dependent on the type of data being used to model the species in ques index of habitat quality as a function of one or more environmental variables. Model development can range from an provide to expression mathematical a as constructed are Models species. of assemblage or species given a As described in Section 3.1, habitat suitability modeling (HSM) is a tool for predicting the adequacy of habitat for 4.1 SinglepeciesHabitat Suitability surveys inkelphabitats.Finally, anassessmentoflarvalfishabundanceinsouthernCaliforniaisdescribed. are also included, which examine data collected from groundfish trawls, recreational fishing surveys, and scuba analyses structure Community importance. ecological or recreational, commercial, of species 10 for suitability habitat examine does it waters, California southern inhabit that species all address not does chapter this While range terminus of equatorial species occurs around Point Conception northern [see the Chapter as well 1.3] as (Eschmeyer fishes, high-latitude of many of diversity terminus range wide southern The fishes. a including organisms, to leads which masses water mixing of region dynamic a is Bight California Southern The Randy Clark,Wendy Morrison,M.James Allen, JohnChristensen,LarryClaflin,JenCasselle,DanPondella CHAPTER 4–BIOGEOGRAPHY OFMARINEFISHES et al et ., 2000; Wright 2000; ., et al et ., 2000; Clark 2000; ., - - - - Common andscientificnamesarefromNelson Table4.1.1. California halibut California sheephead giant seabass lingcod cowcod bocaccio northern anchovy Pacific sardine Pacific angelshark leopard shark tope (soupfinshark) thresher shark Common Name Models(HSM) et al et A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ., 2004). These mathematical expressions can then be then can expressions mathematical These 2004). ., Fish species of interest for the CINMS biogeographic assessment. biogeographic CINMS the for interest of species Fish Paralichthys californica Semicossyphus pulcher Stereolepis gigas Ophiodon elongatus Sebastes levis Sebastes paucispinis Engraulis mordax Sardinops sagax Squatina californica Triakis semifasciata Galeorhinus galeus Alopias vulpinus Scientific Name et al. , 2004. Management Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal et al State State State State ., 1983). - - - page 89 Chapter 4 page 90 Chapter 4 central coast andChannelIslandssanctuaries. vast a to relates This m. area 30 of high than suitability along the less west coast depths of the at U.S. (Figure low 4.1.1) with and considerable amounts m, found within 3,480 the than greater and m 30-70 between depths at moderate m, 70-3,480 between depths at high be to determined was suitability habitat shark thresher Adult Broad-scale Patterns pounds million 1.1 averaging during 1977-1989.However, catchesdeclined to0.4millionpoundsduring1990-1998(Leet landings with California, in shark commercial leading the is shark thresher The 2003). (PFMC, m 70-3,480 between depth in ranging waters in abundant most are sharks thresher adult ment, the U.S.-Mexico Exclusive Economic Zone north to Cape Flattery, Washington. South of the Mendocino Escarp tween 10-180 m. Adults (>66 cm fork length) also occupy oceanic waters off beaches and open coastal bays from U.S.-Mexico EEZ border north to 37°N. They occur over bottom depths between 10-750 m, most commonly be the within bays shallow in offand waters beaches oceanic in occur length) fork cm (<102 Juveniles distribution. California (Leet Bay,Baja Goose to from Columbia, found British is and distribution, circumglobal a exhibits shark thresher The net andtheNMFSfisheryobserverprogram. gill drift the from available are data scarce, is information history life shark thresher regarding information While they are most responsive to dynamic patterns of sea surface temperature, current patterns, and food as availability.distribution their in variability high exhibit FMP this by managed Species 2003). (PFMC, Plan Management The thresher shark is a large pelagic shark which is federally managed by the Highly Migratory Species Fisheries Thresher shark( California assess halibut modelperformance. to used were SCCWRP by collected data trawl Additionally,miles). square 100 represents block (a system block fishing CDFG’s within boats party commercial by collected data location and abundance of consist data These sheephead. California and halibut California for performance model assess to maps ity suitabil over superimposed and mapped were (CDFG) Game and Fish of Department California by provided VesselFishing Passenger Commercial herein. (CPFV) conducted data not was performance model result, a as al (Rubec results model validate to used are Typically, data monitoring independent fisheries tive tothatofthecurrentChannelIslandssanctuary. OAI calculations compared the ratio of highly suitable habitat area and total area for all boundary concepts rela substrates soft between 100-200 m. on Hard substrate suitability between 0-200 moderate m and and all substrates >200 m, m were 0-100 considered low between suitability. substrates soft to assigned was suitability high information, this on Based m. 0-100 at occurring abundances greater with m, 0-200 between depths at strates ( halibut California of distribution the example, low.or medium, of suitability-high, measure qualitative a using mapped and modeled was species for these For used to model northern anchovy, Pacific sardine, and thresher shark habitat suitability values. Habitat suitability were FMP’s Species Migratory Highly and Species Pelagic Coastal the from information history Life literature. ant seabass, and Pacific angel shark) were developed primarily from habitat associations described in scientific Suitability values for the remaining non-federally managed species (California halibut, California sheephead, gi concepts usingtheOptimal Area Index(OAI)describedinChapter1.4. was determined to possess the highest habitat suitability and patterns were analyzed in the context of boundary for the selected federally managed species and classifiying probability values by quintile (20%). The top quintile ability) to 0.999 (high habitat probability). Boundary analysis consited of taking a subset of the habitat information well as all juvenile stages were developed from the HUD. HSP model results range from 0.01 (low habitat prob as tope and sharks leopard adult for values suitability while data, survey NMFS from developed were latitude and bathymetry for values 2004). suitability (NMFS, lingcod species and all cowcod, for bocaccio, latitude Adult were poorly represented in NMFS trawl surveys and for developing suitability values for benthic habitat type and and latitude. Depth and latitude information from bathymetry the for HUD were values used suitability to develop develop suitability to values for used species were that surveys trawl NMFS adequate, was information Where A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ., 2004). The models developed by NMFS for federally managed groundfish are currently being reviewed and, et al Alopias vulpinus) ., 2001). Data from the management plan provide general descriptions of juvenile and adult Paralichthys californicus Paralichthys ) was reported to occur over soft sub soft over occur to reported was ) et al et et al .,1999; Clark .,1999; ., 2001). et ------shark habitat(Table 4.1.3). relative gains of highly suitable habit/total concept area indicate that Concept 2 was optimal for juvenile thresher the comparing results OAI 4.1.6). (Figure concepts boundary larger the within more contained were and gains significant 5 and 4 3, Concepts within observed were habitat suitable highly of amount the in increases Slight nile thresher sharks. These areas form a wide band encompassing the northern Channel Islands (Figure 4.1.5). Approximately 50% of the total area within the current CINMS boundary was considered highly suitable for juve that Concept4wasthemostfavorableofsixconceptsunderconsideration(T indicate results OAI 4.1.4), (Figure area habitat suitable highly most the contained 1a and 1 Concepts Although thresher adult for suitable highly considered was sharks (Figure 4.1.3). Highly CINMS suitable habitat comprised over 80% current of the total area the for all the boundary of concepts. area total the of 75% Approximately Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts NMS incentralCalifornia(Figure4.1.2). Bay Monterey the through California southern in shelf continental the of portion large a comprises habitat able suitability.low considered were m >550 depths while m, 180-550 suit between Highly depths in occur to mined from the U.S.-Mexico border north to 37°N at depths between 10-180 m. Moderately suitable habitat was deter extends habitat suitable highly adults; for that than shallower and extensive less was suitability habitat Juvenile and southernCalifornia. 4.1.1 Figure California. Figure 4.1.3

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° 1 1 W W 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W . Adult thresher shark habitat suitability off central off suitability habitat shark thresher Adult . . offsuitability habitat shark thresher Adult southern 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 P 0 P 9 9 ° ° a a W W c c i 2 i f f 0 5 i i c c H H F F T 5 T a i a i s 0 s h b h b h h 2 e r 5 i e r 1 1 i t 1 1 e t r e r K a y 8 8 a K y s s ° ° i A i A t l t W W M l o M o 2 h 2 h H M L 1 m H M L S m d S d 0 5 a 0 0 a e o 1 1 e o e i 0 0 e o 0 i n u 1 1 0 u g o n u u g w t r r w t 8 8 3 e a d 3 e a h d l i h l ° ° i r r g t s W W t g e t s s t e s a e a e h r h r a m b m a b a a 1 t t i e i e e 5 r e r l l n n 0 i k i k t t t t y y C C 1 0 o o 0 u u n 2 n 0 c c 0 i i l l

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary and southernCalifornia. Figure 4.1.2

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 2 2 4 4 cepts andNAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers and concepts. boundary current proposed the within area total and shark thresher 4.1.4 Figure ° ° W W Habitat Area (km2) 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 . Juvenile thresher shark habitat suitability off central 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W NAA . Regression of total habitat area for adult for area habitat total of Regression . 5 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 4 3 able 4.1.2). Total Area(km 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 2 2 ) 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W SA P 0 a c i f 2 i 5 c 1 1 H 1 1 F 9 9 T i 5 a ° ° s W W 0 h h b e r i r t J e y a K u s i M t l o 2 h v H M L 1 m S a 0 1, 1a 0 e e o i e n o 0 0 u g w n r t a 3 e d h i g r i s t e s l e a e h r m a b a 1 1 1 t e 1 1 i e 5 r l 8 8 n 0 i k ° ° t t W W y C o u - n 2 c 0 0 i l ,

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - - - page 91 Chapter 4 page 92 Chapter 4 mercial and recreational fisheries target the shark the target fisheries recreational and mercial com Currently, 1940s. the during collapsed which fishery,the on pressure heavy placed stock soup for fins and oil liver shark for demand high Historically, portant shark fisheries on the Pacific coast of the U.S. The tope has been one of the most economically im in southernCalifornia(McCain, 2003). abundant more are females whereas California ern dant in the northern part of their range through north Leet 1984; (Compagno, shore to closer occur females whereas waters, deeper favor generally Males sex. by regate seg females and Males m. at 2-471 habitats between depths benthic with associated often species, dian Ocean (Ebert, 2003). Tope are a coastal-pelagic In southwestern and Atlantic, South Atlantic, North and in temperate waters of the South Pacific, eastern bia to central Baja California and the Gulf of California Tope distribution ranges from northern British Colum Tope most favorableforjuveniles. the was 2 Concept NAC; the to relative gained area concept sharks/total thresher adult for habit suitable highly of gain optimal most the provides 4 Concept • between 10-180m. depths in occurs juveniles for habitat suitable Highly sharks thresher m. 70-3,480 between depths adult with waters of consists for habitat suitable Highly • commercial highest the landings ofallsharkspeciesinCalifornia. has shark thresher The • Summary A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ern California. Figure 4.1.5

33°N 34°N 35°N 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W (Galeorhinus galeus) . Juvenile thresher shark habitat suitability off south et al et 1 1 2 2 ., 2001). Males are also more abun more also are Males 2001). ., 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W P a 0 c i f i c H F T i a s 2 h h b 1 1 5 1 1 e r i 8 8 r t J e ° ° y K a W W u s i M t l o 2 h v H M L m S 5 a 0 e e o 0 e i n o 0 u g w t n r a 3 e d h i r g i s t e s l e a e h r m a b a t e i e r l n i k t t y C o 1 u 0 n 0 c i l , ------

- - 33°N 34°N 35°N mates shaded in gray represent maximum observed benefit. Delta benefit. observed maximum represent gray in shaded mates esti OAI (NAC). Concept Action No the to compared when timate es the in increase an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary Table 4.1.2. as apercentchangefromtheNAC. ( expressed asapercentchangefromtheNAC. ( Delta efit. ben observed maximum represent gray in shaded estimates (NAC). OAI Concept Action No the to compared increase when estimate an the indicate in bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within 4.1.3. Table Concept D Concept ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) NAC NAC SA SA 1a 1a 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 cepts andNAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed nile thresher shark and total area within the current and 4.1.6 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 1500 2500 3500 4500 5500 D 17093 22591 22613 13736 17093 22591 22613 13736 (km 9044 7981 4538 3475 Area (km Analysis of adult thresher shark habitat suitability within 9044 7981 4538 3475 ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) Area nlss f ueie hehr hr hbtt suitability habitat shark thresher juvenile of Analysis 0 2 2 ) ) NAC . Regression of total habitat area for juve for area habitat total of Regression . Area (km Area (km 5 Suitability Suitability 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 14554 18598 18576 12083 5060 5035 5060 3692 2446 2250 1971 1930 8061 7089 3648 2860 High High 4 3 2 2 ) ) Total Area(km 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 21.12 (%) (%) - - 2 2 ) SA Suitability Suitability Area(%) Area(%) 162.18 160.88 162.18 408.88 550.28 549.51 322.48 181.85 147.87 ∆ High ∆ High 91.30 26.74 16.58 27.55 2.12 - - 1, 1a (absolute) (absolute) 0.46 0.32 0.32 0.34 0.19 0.15 0.10 1.15 1.09 1.09 1.21 1.29 1.31 1.30 OAI OAI ------concept did not exceed that of the NAC. Absolute OAI Absolute NAC. the of that exceed not did concept each for suitability mean habitat, of amounts significant declined (Table probability 4.1.5). mean Although each NAC, concept contained the to relative 4.1.12), (Figure concepts larger the within increased area habitat ability sidered high probability (Figure 4.1.11). While high prob con was 25% only however, tope; juvenile for suitable Nearly 90% of the total area of the NAC was considered most favorable(Table 4.1.4). the was 5 Concept that suggest area, habitat on based are which results, OAI absolute however, NAC; the for values mean suitability of theconceptssurpassed none (Table 4.1.4). As such, relative OAI results indicated that increased size concept boundary as declined and NAC habitat probability the within highest was probability 4.1.10). Mean (Figure high of amount largest the taining con 1a and 1 Concepts with area, concept boundary increasing with increased area Habitat 4.1.9). (Figure km 541 approximately comprised habitats These Islands. Channel the around and mainland the to parallel situated area of band long a of consisted nia Califor southern in tope adult for values HSP Highest Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts suitability extendsfrom0-60mand380-480m. Low m. 60-100 between moderate to declined and m, 100-380 of depths at observed were values suitability Highest 4.1.8). (Figure California southern extend throughout habitats suitability moderate to high and Bay) Morro (to south further extends habitat suitable highly however, bathymetry; to regards in suitability habitat of Model results for juvenile tope exhibit similar distributions depths between60-480m. ward. Habitat suitability was low in southern California at shore and m 480 to deeper extends suitability Low ies. sanctuar Bay Monterey northern and Farallones, the of Gulf Bank, Cordell through southward extends which m, 180-330 of depths at occurs habitat suitable erately closer to shore (Figure 4.1.7). In central California, mod suitability moderate to decline and Mendocino Cape of north m 140-370 between depths at offshore exist tats habi suitable highly California, northern In California. southern throughout low and California, central in ate moder California, northern and Oregon Washington, of coast the off highest suitabil average, on Habitat was, adults for m). ity (60-480 water deeper to shifted habitat suitable California southern In m. 0-480 tween be depths at types for substrate all over occurs tope adult habitat suitable that indicate results model NMFS Broad-scale Patterns exists fortherecreationalfishery(Leet information Little 1990. since annually pounds 75,000 about averaged have landings commercial and food for et al 2 ., 2001). of the NAC the of A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ------southern California. 4.1.9 Figure central andsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.7 Figure off centralandsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.8 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 ° ° ° ° 1 1 W W W W 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W . Adult tope habitat suitability probability (HSP) off (HSP) probability suitability habitat tope Adult . . Adult tope habitat suitability probability (HSP) off (HSP) probability suitability habitat tope Adult . . Juvenile tope habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat tope Juvenile . 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ° ° ° ° W W W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ° ° ° ° W W W W 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° 1 1 W W W W 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 9 9 ° ° 0 ° ° W W W W 2 2 0 5 5 5 5 0 T 0 N N T 2 N T o 1 1 5 1 1 M o M o p 8 8 M ° ° K p p K e K W W F F i F H i l i H l e l o H - H M L e o o S H M L S 1 H M L m S J 1 1 1 m m 5 S o - 0 S - o i 0 1 1 1 1 S o o , i e 0 A g , 0 o e u e i A g 1 1 , w 0 o 8 8 g t P w t t w P d e 8 8 2 ° ° P h e d e 2 h v d 2 d W W h r ° d ° r r e s e W W s 0 s 0 e e 0 u u r r 0 r 0 a n 0 a l a l 4 t t 4 t t 4 i 1 t e 1 e l e 5 5 e 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N page 93 Chapter 4 page 94 Chapter 4 favorable forjuveniles. most was 2 Concept NAC. the to relative area concept tat/total habi tope adult of gain favorable most the provides 5 Concept considered, being concepts boundary six the Of size. concept boundary increasing with decreases suitability habitat Mean • fornia andincreaseswithincreasinglatitude. strates at depths ranging from 0-480 m. Suitability is low in Cali • Suitable habitat for adult and juvenile tope occurs over all sub Summary relative proportion ofsuitablehabitatforjuveniletope(Table optimal 4.1.5). the provides 2 Concept that indicated results A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary off southernCalifornia. 4.1.11Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N change fromtheNAC. maximum observed benefit. Delta ( crease in the estimate when compared to the No Action Concept (NAC). OAI estimates shaded in gray represent Table4.1.4. 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W Concept NAC . Juvenile tope habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat tope Juvenile . SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 Analysis of adult tope habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an in an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat tope adult of Analysis 1 1 2 2 0 0 Area (km ° ° W W 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 2 ) 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° Area (km Probability W W 2015 2008 2015 1565 High 945 750 642 541 D ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a percent 2 0 ) T 2 N 1 1 o 5 1 1 p 8 8 M ° ° W W e Probability K F i - l H o H M L S J m 5 S o 0 u i e , o g w t P 0.067 0.051 0.052 0.068 0.071 0.068 0.083 0.086 Mean e v 2 d h r s e e 0 r n 0 a 4 i t l e e 1 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - - - - cepts andNAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed area for adult tope and total area within the current and 4.1.10 Figure ocps n NCN Ato Cnet SA=Study Concept, Area. Action NAC=No and concepts indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and tope juvenile for area 4.1.12 Figure

Probability 2 2

Area (%) Habitat Area (km ) Habitat Area (km ) 1350 1775 2200 2300 2800 1300 1800 162.18 160.88 162.18 500 925 800 ∆ High 91.30 26.74 16.58 2.12 0 0 - NAC NAC 5 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . 5 (absolute) 0.76 0.54 0.54 0.71 0.53 0.34 0.88 OAI - 4 4 3 3 Total Area(km Total Area(km (relative) 2 2 2 2 ) ) -0.06 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.12 -0.19 -0.17 OAI - SA SA - 1, 1a 1, 1a - rae wt icesn budr cnet ra OAI area. concept boundary increasing de with and creased NAC the within highest was suitability Mean Figure 4.1.15). greatest amount of high probability habitat. (Table 4.1.6, Study the and 1a, 1, Concepts land. the contained Area pand northward and include habitats closer to the main 4 and 5. Modest gains were observed as boundaries ex additional No habitat with high probability was moderate. gained within Concepts or low considered was 30% approximately and sharks leopard adult for habitat ity 1% of the total area of the NAC contained high probabil than Less 4.1.14). (Figure m 80 to out extends habitat suitable Less Diego. San through Conception Pt. from mainland the along m) (<10 habitats shallow in found In southern California, highest habitat probabilities were Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts aries andarenotconsideredintheseanalyses. Juvenile habitats predominantly occur in bays and estu 4.1.13). (Figure Islands Channel the around low to decreased but moderate, considered were California central in coastal bays and estuaries. Suitability of habitats associated with kelp beds located around to offshore islands in out shoreline and the nearshore found were values from higher while m 40 extends than greater depths at low sharks was Suitability m. 80 leopard of depths adult for habitat suitable U.S., the of coast west the Along Broad-scale Patterns by anglerssince1993(Leet taken sharks of 45,000 average estimated an catch with the commercial than greater are landings Recreational averaged about 31,000 pounds per year, with the majority of landings occurring south of Point Piedras Blancas. have landings commercial 1991, Since California. in fish game and food a both as taken is shark leopard The habitats withincoastalbaysandestuaries. 1984; Ferguson and Cailliet, 1990; Emmett mud bottoms with scattered rocks near rocky reefs, and shallow kelp beds (Eschmeyer (Leet shoreline the along and Kusher 1991; Emmett 1990; Abramson, and Smith 1986; Adams, 1984; Backus, and Lineaweaver 1984; Compagno, Talent,1975; Eschmeyer Russo, 1983; 1972; Castro, Lea, Ripley,1976; and and Miller edel 1950; Leopard sharks are found from southern Oregon to Baja California, Mexico, including the Gulf of California (Ro Leopard shark percent changefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum sent repre gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). Concept No Action the to compared when estimate the in increase Table4.1.5. Concept NAC et al et SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 (Triakis semifasciata) ., 1992; Love, 1996). The leopard shark is most abundant in California bays and estuaries and bays California in abundant most is shark leopard The 1996). Love, 1992; ., Analysis of juvenile tope habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat tope juvenile of Analysis Area (km 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 et al et al et 2 ) ., 2001). ., 2001). Preferred habitats for adults include: sand and mud flats, sand and sand flats, mud and sand include: adults for habitats Preferred 2001). ., Area (km Probability 2714 2700 2715 2213 1456 1228 High 935 842 2 ) et al D ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) Probability ., 1991; Love, 1996). Juvenile habitat is located in sand and mud 0.350 0.270 0.270 0.340 0.360 0.400 0.500 0.490 Mean A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary - - - - - (HSP) 4.1.13 Figure 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 1 1 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 21.12 2 2 4 4 (%) ° ° W W - off centraland southernCalifornia. 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W Probability . Adult leopard shark habitat suitability probability suitability habitat shark leopard Adult . Area (%) 222.24 220.54 222.38 162.74 ∆ High 72.88 45.85 11.10 - 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W (absolute) 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 0.62 0.44 0.44 0.61 0.52 0.41 0.53 OAI - et al 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W ., 1983; Compagno, (relative) -0.08 -0.09 -0.09 -0.19 -0.16 -0.11 0.10 OAI 1 1 0 1 1 9 9 - ° ° W W 2 L 5 e o 5 0 p et al et N a M r d K F i H l o H M L s S 1 m - S o 0 i h o e , g 0 w P t 1 1 d e a 2 h 1 1 r e s r 8 8 0 ., 1983; ., ° ° k r W W 0 a - 4 t A 1 e 5 et al et d 0 u l t 2 0 0 .,

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - page 95 Chapter 4 page 96 Chapter 4 NAC. the to relative area habitat/total shark leopard adult of gain favorable most the provided 2 Concept considered, • Mean habitatsuitabilitydecreases with increasing boundaryconceptsize. Of the six boundary conceptsbeing containing kelpbeds.Highsuitabilityoccursincoastal areasatdepthslessthan10m. • Suitable habitat for adult leopard sharks occurs in waters less than 80 m over sand and mud habitats and areas • The recreationalfisheryforleopardsharksiscenteredinsouthernCalifornia. Summary OAI whencomparingtotalhabitatareaamongtheboundaryconceptswithNAC(T gained area relative to the habitat/total NAC; however,shark this boundary leopard is not under of consideration. Therefore, Concept increase 2 yielded the optimal highest the provides Area Study the that indicated results A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary (HSP) off southernCalifornia. 4.1.14 Figure 1 1 2 2 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 1 ° ° W W percent changefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum resent rep gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). Concept No Action the to compared when estimate the in increase an Table 4.1.6. . Adult leopard shark habitat suitability probability suitability habitat shark leopard Adult . Concept 1 1 2 2 0 0 NAC ° ° W W SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 Analysis of adult leopard shark habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate Area (km 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 2 ) Area (km Probability High 0 104 104 104 76 31 12 12 12 L 1 1 e 1 1 o 8 8 ° ° 2 W W p N 5 a M r K d F i l 2 H o H M L s S m ) 5 S o h i 0 o , e g w P t d a 2 h e D e r r 0 s k r 0 a - ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) 4 t A e Probability d u l t 0.008 0.006 0.006 0.009 0.010 0.008 0.014 0.017 Mean 1 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) SA=Study Area. Alternative, Action NAC=No and alternatives indicate Numbers alternatives. boundary proposed and current the within area total and shark leopard adult for area 4.1.15 Figure - Habitat Area (km2) 100 110 120 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 NAC Probability Area (%) 715.39 715.39 715.39 495.31 148.28 ∆ High 0.00 0.00 5 5000 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . - 4 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 Total Area(km (absolute) 2.01 1.42 1.42 1.86 1.05 0.00 0.00 OAI - able 4.1.6). 2 2 ) SA (relative) -0.15 -0.13 -0.13 -0.18 -0.29 -0.47 -0.84 OAI - 1, 1a - soft substrates atdepthsrangingfrom 0-100m. over occur to considered was habitat suitable Highly • shark areinsignificantin Californiawaters. • Commercial and recreational fisheries for Pacific angel Summary with regardtoangelsharkhabitat. determined to be the most favorable boundary concepts were 1a and 1 Concepts Therefore, consideration. der the NAC (Table 4.1.7); however this boundary is not un to relative gained area total per sharks angel for habitat Area provided the most favorable gain of highly suitable Study the that indicated concepts six the for values OAI 4.1.18). (Figure concepts boundary larger the within observed km served within ob Concepts 4 and 5, and an increase of 200 were habitat suitable highly of (>1%) gains Small 4.1.17). (Figure suitable moderately was 14% sharks; angel Pacific for suitable highly considered was CINMS current the within area total the of 32% Approximately Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts formance. per model testing for available were data fisheries No and theCINMS(Figure4.1.16). California southern throughout and sanctuaries marine national Bay Monterey and Farallones the of Gulf the of areas significant comprising shelf, continental the of most on occurs sharks angel Pacific for habitat suitable highly California, of coast the Along m. 150-200 tween be suitability low and m, 100-150 between substrates soft over occurs suitability moderate m, >100 depths at substrates soft over occurs habitat suitable highly that The model developed for Pacific angel shark determined Broad-scale Patterns fishery existsforangelsharks(Leet provided by Mexican imports. No significant recreational demand for angel shark products are now almost wholly ed to a significant reduction in landings since 1986. The mum size limit and fishing area closures have contribut mini A 1985-1986. during pounds million one ceeded ex landings where fishermen net gill by targeted were the in species 1980s. the during Channel sharks Barbara Angel Santa shark commercial after sought highly (Leet al m 1-200 from ranging depths at reefs tween be channels sand in and bottoms sandy flat on usually found species benthic a are They California. of Gulf the to Alaska southeastern from Ocean Pacific inthe eastern occur only to are reported sharks angel Pacific Pacific angelshark ., 2001). Pacific angel sharks became one of the more 2 occurred in Concept 3. Significant gains were also were gains Significant 3. Concept in occurred (Squatina californica) et al ., 2001). A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary et ------California. Figure 4.1.17 and southernCalifornia. 4.1.16 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N cepts andNAC=No Action Concept, SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and shark angel cific 4.1.18 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 1 1 2 2 0 3 3 ° ° W W NAC . Pacific angel shark habitat suitability off southern . Pacific angel shark habitat suitability off central off suitability habitat shark angel Pacific . 1 1 2 2 5 0 0 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 ° ° . Regression of total habitat area for Pa for area habitat total of Regression . 1 1 W W 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 4 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 Total Area(km ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 2 2 1 1 2 2 ) 0 0 ° ° W W SA 1 1 1 1 0 9 9 0 ° ° W W 2 5 P P H H a 1 1 a 1 a 1 5 a 2 c c 8 8 0 5 b ° ° b i i W W f f i i i t i 1, 1a t c c a K a K i t l t a i o a l H M L o m H M L S 5 1 n S m n o 0 0 e o i 1 1 o i g e u o g 0 t w g 1 u 1 g e w t d 8 8 h e d r i h e i e s ° ° r e t s t e W W l a l a r r a s b a s b t h t i h e 1 i e l l 5 a i a i 0 t - - t r y r y k k 1 0 0 2 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N page 97 Chapter 4 page 98 Chapter 4 been documented (PFMC, 1998). and (PFMC, documented tern), been least and pelican brown have abundance anchovy and success (California breeding pelican brown birds between links explicit fish, Furthermore, mammals. including: predators, of variety wide a for sources food larvae important are adults and and Juveniles Eggs planktivores. vertebrate and structure. of invertebrate variety a for wide prey are trophic California southern the of component important an are anchovy Northern distribu larval anchovy northern of description tion. further a for 4.4 Chapter See EZZ. the of waters surface the in found are stages life All 1985). Smith, 1981; (Methot, population juvenile the of 70% least at support which m), <90 depths (at shore near found are typically are patterns Juveniles These 1989). (Methot, north. years the Nino El to during and accentuated offshore further individuals larger and older with size, and composition age in variation regional high is There 12°-21°C. from range that waters in found typically is stock central The maps ofhabitatsuitabilityforthisspecies. present not do variable. we highly such, are As which currents and temperature surface sea by more regulated is distribution bathymetry.anchovy and northern substrate Instead, to preference no or little display they cause be determine to difficult is suitability habitat pelagic, are anchovy northern Since Bight. California Southern the in located is stock this of majority The California. Baja Baja, Punta to Francisco, San from ranges and Mexico, ery Management Plan (PFMC, 1998). The central stock supports significant commercial fisheries in the U.S. and within Mexican waters, while the northern and central stocks are managed by the Coastal Pelagic Species Fish The overall population is divided into northern, central, and southern stocks. The southern stock is found entirely Bay,California. Magdalena Baja to Columbia, British Island, Charlotte Queen from distributed are anchovy ern Northern anchovy are a pelagic, schooling species that are typically found at the top of the water column. North Northern anchovy seabirds (pelicans,gulls,andcormorants),marinemammals(sealions,seals,porpoises, whales). and adults and planktivores, sharks), mackerel, tuna, barracuda, (yellowtail, fish including: predators, of variety a by consumed are juveniles vertebrate and invertebrate by consumed are larvae and Eggs system. Current California the of web trophic the of components important are anchovy, sardines northern Pacific the to Similar ture (PFMC,1998). As such,wepresentnomapsofsuitability. substrate and bathymetry and their spatial and seasonal distribution is highly influenced by sea surface tempera tailed discussion about larval distribution). Habitat suitability is difficult to determine due to their lack of affinity to de more a for 4.4 Chapter (see 15°C and 14°C between abundant most are and found are adults everywhere nearly occur larvae and Eggs California. northern and central in occur to determined been has ground feeding Spawning grounds have been identified 1998). to occur in southern California and northern (PFMC, Baja California and an adult Plan Management Fishery cies is federally managed by the Coastal Pelagic Spe fornia), and Gulf of California. The northern stock Baja California to Alaska), southern (off Baja Cali (northern northern stocks: distinct three has tion popula overall The coast. the along seasonally ment. Pacific sardine are highly mobile and move nearshore/offshoreenviron the in common most are but estuaries, in occur also They waters. ate temper and subtropical coastal inhabit that schooling fish pelagic, asmall are sardines Pacific Pacific Sardine shark/total areainrelationtotheNAC. angel Pacific for habitat suitable of change tional propor greatest the provide 1a and 1 Concepts • Of the six boundary concepts being considered, A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary (Sardinops sagax) (Engraulis mordax) ------calculation, andisalwaysexpressedasapercentchangefromtheNAC. represent maximum observed benefit. Delta ( compared to the No Action Concept (NAC). OAI estimates shaded in gray when estimate the in increase an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. ary Table 4.1.7. Concept NAC SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 Analysis of Pacific angel shark habitat suitability within bound 17093 22591 22613 13736 (km 9044 7981 4538 3475 Area 2 ) Area (km Suitability 3237 3234 3237 2157 1310 1201 1201 1194 High 2 ) 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - D ) indicates a rate of change Suitability Area (%) 170.85 171.11 171.11 ∆ High 80.65 9.72 0.59 0.59 - (absolute) 1.09 0.77 0.77 0.69 0.16 0.01 0.06 OAI ------(Table 4.1.8);however, onaverage, suitabilitywaslow throughoutsouthernCalifornia. NAC the for highest was probability habitat Mean 4.1.22). (Figure concepts larger the in probability observed were habitat high of gains probability.Modest low was which of most 5, and 4 Concepts in included was Island the southern portion of the sanctuary and around Anacapa Island. Additional habitat located south of Santa Rosa however,4.1.21); (Figure boundary km 225 only Approximately 1,700 km Analysis ofBoundary Concepts in OregonandWashington. soft substrates shallow over higher was suitability while waters, California in low were soft substrates for values Suitability 4.1.20). (Figure north the to those than lower were Conception Point of south substrates Hard tion. Concep Point to California northern from nearshore located was habitat suitable highly m). of 200 majority The (0- depths shallower at but substrates hard over highest were bocaccio juvenile for suitability Similarly,habitat substrates atdepthsbetween30-380mwerepredictedaslowsuitability Soft 4.1.19). (Figure NMS Islands Channel the and Bay) Monterey and Farallones, the of Gulf Bank, (Cordell sanctuaries California central the within located amounts considerable with habitats, bottom nia’soffshorehard Califor throughout dispersed widely were values suitability Moderate substrates. hard over higher being ability suit with m 30-380 between occurs bocaccio adult for habitat suitable that indicate results model HSP NMFS Broad-scale Patterns (Leet and pounds) have since million declined steadily (15 (0.5 million pounds 1983 in 1998). in Recreational catches have peaked shown similar Landings declines fisheries. California by annually landed were pounds million six Historically, bocaccio was the dominant rockfish in California’s longline and bottom trawl fisheries. Prior to 1970, sis ofbocacciolarvaldatacanbeseeninChapter4.4. in the Southern California Bight and areas offshore of Monterey Bay (Leet (Love eelgrass with areas sandy or cover algae with substrates rocky Yoklavich1980; (Wilkins, adults than waters shallower in occur typically bocaccio (Yoklavichsubstrates rocky among individuals solitary as or areas rocky over schools in middle shelf species occurring at depths between 50-300 m (Allen and Smith, 1988). Adults are generally found (Love California Baja northern and Oregon between abundant most Island, Kodiak to California Baja are central and from 1973) range Hart, Bocaccio 1972; Lea, and (Miller Alaska Bocaccio off centralandsouthernCalifornia. Figure 4.1.19

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N et al 1 1 2 2 ., 2001). 3 3 ° ° (Sebastes paucispinis) W W . Adult bocaccio habitat suitability probability (HSP) 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 ° ° of habitat was modeled as suitable for adult bocaccio within the current CINMS (NAC) W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 ° ° W W 2 5 B 5 0 o N c M a K F c H i l H M L o c S 1 m 1 1 S o 0 i i 1 1 o , g e o 0 w 8 8 P t d 2 h e ° ° - W W r e A 0 s r 0 a d 4 t u e 1 2 5 l 0 t were classified as high probability habitat and were located in located were and habitat probability high as classified were 2 0 0 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N (HSP) off centralandsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.20 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W Jvnl bcci hbtt utblt probability suitability habitat bocaccio Juvenile . et al et al et 1 1 2 2 . 2 2 ° ° W W et al ., 2002). Larvae are commonly found commonly are Larvae ., 2002). ., 2002). Bocaccio are considered a considered are Bocaccio 2002). ., ., 2001; Love 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W et al et 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W ., 2000) and settle over settle and 2000) ., et al et et al 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 ., 2000). Juvenile 2000). ., ° ° W W 2 5 B ., 2002). Analy o 5 0 c N a M c K c i F l o H i 1 H M L m 1 1 S o 0 1 1 S o e 0 i 8 8 , o - g t w e ° ° P J d W 2 W r h s u e 0 r v 0 a e 4 1 t 5 e n 0 i l e 2 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - - - - page 99 Chapter 4 page 100 Chapter 4 was highestfortheNAC forbothadultsandjuveniles. Concept 4 demonstrated the most optimal gain of habitat/total area relative to the NAC. Mean habitat probability gain of total habitat/total area gained relative to that for the NAC. OAI results for juvenile bocaccio indicated that proportional optimal the provides 2 Concept that indicate bocaccio juvenile and adult both for calculations OAI close tothemainlandandaroundSanClemente andSantaCatalinaIslands. south of Santa Rosa Island and around Anacapa Island. Additional areas of high probability habitat were located located were habitats (TableThese NAC 4.1.9). the for highest was probability mean comparison, however,in 2, 1, 1a, and the Study Area contained greater amounts of high probability habitat (Figure 4.1.24) than the NAC; km 28 Only 4.1.23). (Figure reduced significantly were habitats probability high however, bocaccio; juvenile for observed were distribution habitat of patterns Similar A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary (HSP) off southernCalifornia. 4.1.23 Figure off southernCalifornia. Figure 4.1.21 1 1 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ° ° ° ° W W W W . Adult bocaccio habitat suitability probability (HSP) Jvnl bcci hbtt utblt probability suitability habitat bocaccio Juvenile . 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 ° ° ° ° W W W W 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 B 8 B 8 8 ° ° ° ° 2 2 W W W W 5 o o 5 N N c c M M a a K K F c i F c i l l H o H o H M L H M L c c S m S m 5 5 S o S 0 o 0 e i e i i i o , o , g g o t o t w w e P e P d d 2 h 2 h r r - - s s e e A A 0 0 r r 0 0 a d a d 4 4 t t u u e e l l t t 1 1 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 2 of area was classifed as high quality habitat. Concepts Concepts habitat. quality high as classifed was area of Area. cate concepts and NAC=No Action Concept, SA=Study indi Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and rent area for juvenile bocaccio and total area within the cur 4.1.24 Figure ocps n NCN Ato Cnet SA=Study Concept, Area. Action NAC=No and concepts indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and area for adult bocaccio and total area within the current 4.1.22 Figure 2 Habitat Area (km ) 2 100 Habitat Area (km ) 20 40 60 80 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 0 0 NAC NAC 5 5000 5000 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . 5 4 4 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 Total Area(km Total Area(km 2 2 2 ) 2 ) SA SA 1, 1a 1, 1a - - 1986; Moser (MacGregor, m <2000 depths at Islands Channel northern the to adjacent shelf continental the over waters in (Love bottoms clay (Yoklavichmud by surrounded outcrops rock isolated of crevices (Love gate aggre solitary,may generally but are and 1982) (Allen, habitats rocky high-relief over found usually are Adults and juveniles are common at 20-100 m (Allen, 1982; Butler 1982; (Allen, m 20-100 at common are juveniles and (Butler m 366 to 21 from depths (Leet Bight California Southern the in occurs cowcod for habitat preferred the of majority The Oregon. central to north California Baja Island, Guadalupe and Bank Ranger from range Cowcod Cowcod • MeanhabitatprobabilitywashighestwithintheNAC. and juvenilebocaccio/totalarearelativetotheNAC. • Of the six boundary concepts being considered, Concept 2 provides the most favorable gain of habitat for adult ranging from 0-200m,forjuvenilesand30-380madults. depths at substrates hard over occurs California southern in bocaccio for habitat suitable most The • • Commercialandrecreationallandingsofbocacciohavedeclinedoverthepasttwentyyears. Summary a percentchangefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum resent an increase in the estimate when compared to the No Action Concept (NAC). OAI estimates shaded in gray rep Table4.1.9. percent changefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum sent repre gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). No Concept the Action to compared when estimate the in increase Table4.1.8. (Sebastes levis) Concept Concept et al et NAC NAC et al SA SA 1a 1a 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 ., 1990). Subadults have been found in association with ledges in submarine canyons and in and canyons submarine in ledges with association in found been have Subadults 1990). ., ., 2000). Analysis of juvenile bocaccio habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat bocaccio juvenile of Analysis Analysis of adult bocaccio habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat bocaccio adult of Analysis et al et Area (km Area (km 22613 13736 17093 22591 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 9044 7981 4538 3475 ., 2002; Butler 2002; ., 2 2 ) ) et al et Area (km Probability Area (km Probability High High 440 440 440 428 405 389 234 225 89 70 43 30 30 28 89 89 ., 2003; Miller and Lea, 1972); adults generally favor depths of 180-275 m 180-275 of depths favor generally adults 1972); Lea, and Miller 2003; ., et al et 2 2 ) ) D D ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) ., 2003). Larval cowcod are almost exclusive to southern California southern to exclusive almost are cowcod Larval 2003). ., ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) Probability Probability 0.057 0.043 0.043 0.051 0.048 0.048 0.081 0.096 Mean 0.017 0.021 0.023 0.028 0.030 0.016 0.012 0.012 Mean A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 266.78 141.50 356.42 503.23 503.82 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 21.12 (%) (%) - - et al et ., 1999; Love 1999; ., et al et Probability Probability Area (%) Area (%) ∆ High ∆ High 95.44 95.44 95.44 89.85 79.84 72.52 89.85 79.84 72.52 95.44 95.44 95.44 4.10 4.10 ., 2000). Juveniles occur over sandy and sandy over occur Juveniles 2000). ., - - et al et (absolute) (absolute) et al et 0.59 0.42 0.42 0.55 0.36 0.04 0.24 0.34 0.56 0.64 0.19 0.27 0.19 0.19 OAI OAI - - ., 2002; Butler 2002; ., ., 2001). Cowcod occur at occur Cowcod 2001). ., (relative) (relative) -0.18 -0.35 -0.44 -0.74 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.16 -0.21 -0.21 -0.32 -0.13 -0.12 -0.12 OAI OAI - - et al et - - ., 2003). ., - page 101 Chapter 4 page 102 Chapter 4 hne Ilns diinl ra wr lctd rud a Ceet ad at Ctln Ilns n near and Islands Catalina Santa Cortes Bank. The and amount of high probability habitat increased significantly within Clemente Concepts 3 and 4; small gains San around located were areas Additional Islands. Channel northern the of south located primarily were habitats cowcod adult bocaccio, to Similar 4.1.27). (Figure cowcod km (126 1% Approximately Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts through Point Conception (Figure 4.1.26). throughsouthern California and is highest over hard substrates along the mainland from the northern sanctuaries substratessoftandharddepths Suitablebetween at m.0-90 habitat juveniles for extends Pt.from Arena (40°N) found near Monterey Bay and the Channel Islands. Suitable habitat for juveniles was predicted to occur over both alongthecontinental shelfbetween 45°-32.5°N latitude (Figure 4.1.25). Largeconcentrations adultofhabitat are Suitablehabitats for adult cowcod occur over hard substrates between 70-360 andm are intermittently dispersed Broad-scale Patterns high and productive fishing grounds in the Southern California Bight are found far offshore (Leet 213 tons in 1976, which had declined to 14 tons by 1999. Exploitation of fishingCowcod groundsare nearimportant major portsto hasthe been commercial and recreational fisheries. Combined, these fisheriesA Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary amassed landings of off centralandsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.25 Figure off southern California. 4.1.27 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° 1 1 W W 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W . Adult cowcod habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat . cowcod Adult . Adult cowcod habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat . cowcod Adult 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 2 ) of the total area within the NAC was considered high probability habitat for adult for habitat probability high considered was NAC the within area total the of ) 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 9 9 ° ° W W ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 0 0 2

5 1 1 1 1 C 5 C 8 8 0 2 N N ° ° o 5 o W W M w M w K K c F c i F 1 1 l H i o H 1 1 l o H M L o o H M L S m S 8 8 5 1 m S o 0 S ° ° o e 0 d i d i , o W W , o g e g t 0 w w e P P t - d 2 - d h e 2 h r A A s r e e 0 s 0 r d r d 0 0 a a u 4 u t 4 t e 1 e l l 5 t t 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 7 7 0 ° ° W W

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N (HSP) off centralandsouthern California. 4.1.26 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N ocps n NCN Ato Cnet SA=Study Concept, Area. Action NAC=No and concepts indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and cowcod adult for area 4.1.28 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 120 160 200 240 280 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° 0 W W Jvnl cwo hbtt utblt probability suitability habitat cowcod Juvenile . NAC 1 1 2 2 5000 2 2 ° ° 5 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . W W 4 1 1 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W Total Area(km 2 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 ) ° ° W W SA 0 et al 1 1 1 1 9 9 2 ° ° 5 W W C 5 o 0 N w ., 2001). M c o K F i H l d o H M L S 1 1, 1a m S o 0 - i o e , 0 g J w t P e d 2 h u r e s 1 1 0 v 1 1 r 0 8 8 a e ° ° 4 W W t n e 1 5 i 0 l e 2 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N habitat occurredoverhard andsoftsubstratesbetween0-90m. juvenile m; 70-360 between substrates hard over occur to determined was cowcod adult for habitat Suitable • • Commercialandrecreational landingsofcowcodhavedeclinedsteadily since1976. Summary est OAIandwasconsideredtheoptimalboundaryconceptforjuvenilecowcodhabitat. greatest within the NAC (Table 4.1.11) and decreased with increasing concept size. Concept 2 yielded the high was probability Mean (4.1.30). concepts larger the within noted were gains considerable and 3 Concept within around Santa Catalina Island. and No additional gains were included within Concepts 4 and mainland 5; a modest gain was observed the to adjacent patches small in observed were probability high of areas Other 4.1.29). area within of the NAC was considered amount suitable; however,considerable Aonly California. 28 km southern within limited were cowcod juvenile for habitat probability High (Table 4.1.10). Concept 4 provided the most favorable gain of habitat for adult cowcod and total area gained relative to the NAC 4.1.28). (Figure 4 such, and As 3 Study Concepts the to and relative 2, Area 1a, 1, concepts for observed were (HSP) off southernCalifornia. 4.1.29 Figure 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W percent changefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum sent repre gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). Concept No Action the to compared when estimate the in increase Table4.1.10. Concept NAC SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 Jvnl cwo hbtt utblt probability suitability habitat cowcod Juvenile . 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W Analysis of adult cowcod habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat cowcod adult of Analysis Area (km 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 2 1 1 1 1 ) 9 9 ° ° W W Area (km Probability High 273 273 273 268 268 261 135 126 0 2 ) C D 1 1 o 1 1 2 8 8 N w ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) 5 ° ° W W M c K o F i Probability l H o d H M L S m 5 S o - i 0 o , e g J w P t d 2 h u e 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.007 Mean e r 0 v s r 0 a e 4 t n e i l e 1 0 0 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary

33°N 34°N 35°N 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - niae ocps n NCN Ato Alternative, Action SA=Study NAC=No Area. and concepts Numbers indicate concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and cowcod juvenile for area tat 4.1.30 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 100 20 40 60 80 0 2 was determined to be high probaility (Figure Probability NAC Area (%) 107.23 116.38 116.38 116.38 112.86 112.33 ∆ High 7.32 5 - 5000 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habi probability high of Regression . 4 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 (absolute) Total Area(km 0.33 0.23 0.23 0.42 0.79 0.95 0.35 OAI - 2 2 ) SA (relative) -0.16 -0.14 -0.14 -0.16 -0.10 -0.68 0.00 OAI - 1, 1a - - - page 103 Chapter 4 page 104 Chapter 4 additional 7 km an while 5, Concept within gained was habitat additional No islands. southern the among occurred probability Ap 4.1.33). (Figure Islands proximately Channel 73 km northern the around and mainland the along beds kelp and/or eelgrass with substrates soft or bottoms rocky among waters shallow in occurred lingcod adult for habitat suitable of ity major The m. >200 depths at low and m <200 depths at substrates hard on highest were probabilities Habitat Analysis ofBoundary Concepts 4.1.32). (Figure California of shelf continental the throughout low was Suitability latitudes. northern in higher was ability suit suitability; habitat lingcod juvenile influenced strongly Latitude m. 180 of depths to shelf continental coast 4.1.31). Suitable habitats for juveniles were predicted to occur on all substrate types over the majority (Figure of Islands the Channel west and Farallon the around and banks, offshore shelf, continental the of portions shallow the depths on found are Shallower habitats these lingcod. waters, California In adult probabilities. habitat for predicted greater provided types m) (<120 bottom suitable were m 0-430 between depths at substrates Hard Broad-scale Patterns et al from both the commercial and recreational fisheries occur predominantly in central and northern California (Leet Landings California. in fishery recreational the by annually landed are pounds 890,000 catches. Approximately 313,000 pounds by 1999. Recently there has been a shift away from the commercial fishery towards recreational to declined had and 1982-1989 between oscillated Landings 1972-1982. from California in pounds million three nearly averaged species this of landings and lines set and nets, set handlines, trawls, bottom by commercially caught are Lingcod range. their throughout fishery recreational and commercial important an support Lingcod (Emmett 1991). coast the along waters shallow and estuaries in settle juveniles small and areas nearshore in Emmett 1989; Hassler, and Shaw 1978; Schulz, and Fitch 1973; (Hart, estuaries in found frequently are and substrates, rocky and sandy over depths shallower at found usually are Congleton, 1984; Allen and Smith, 1988; Shaw and Hassler, 1989; NOAA, 1990; Emmett of slopes on common most are but submerged banks with m, kelp and eelgrass beds, or habitats of ridges and boulders at depths <100 475 m (Giorgi and of depths to zone intertidal the from found generally are Lingcod located abundance near British of Columbia. Lingcod center becomes less a common with toward the Alaska southern of end of Gulf their range the (Leet in Island Kodiak to California Baja from range Lingcod Lingcod nile cowcod. most favorable gain for adult cowcod habitat area relative to the NAC, while Concept 2 was the optimal for juve the provides 4 however,Concept size; concept boundary increasing with decreases probability habitat Mean • A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ., 2001). (Ophiodon elongatus) a percentchangefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum resent an increase in the estimate when compared to the No Action Concept (NAC). OAI estimates shaded in gray rep Table4.1.11. Concept NAC 2 SA 1a was gained within Concept 4. The remaining concepts gained habitat along the mainland, nearly 4 5 1 2 3 2 of the Channel Islands Sanctuary was considered high probability habitat; areas of moderate Analysis of juvenile cowcod habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat cowcod juvenile of Analysis Area (km 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 2 ) Area (km Probability High 91 91 91 72 38 22 22 22 2 ) D ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) Probability 0.042 0.032 0.032 0.036 0.031 0.031 0.055 0.066 Mean 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - Probability Area (%) 299.91 299.91 299.91 217.56 ∆ High 67.64 0.00 0.00 - et al et ., 1991). Eggs and larvae occur larvae and Eggs 1991). ., (absolute) 0.84 0.60 0.60 0.82 0.48 0.00 0.00 OAI - et al ., 1991). Juveniles (relative) -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -0.17 -0.37 -0.47 -0.79 OAI - et al - ., 2001). et al et ., - - - - 30 years. past the over declined have catches and California, northern and central in prevalent are lingcod for Fisheries • Summary (Tables 4.1.12and4.1.13). for adults and juveniles, Concept 2 provides the optimal increase of habitat/total area gained relative to the NAC and juveniles, on average, than the NAC. When comparing the total amount of high probability habitat available OAI results for mean habitat suitability indicate that none of the concepts contain higher quality habitat for adults ing boundaryconceptsize. cepts (Figure 4.1.36, Table 4.1.13). Mean habitat probability was highest for the NAC and declined with increas con larger the in observed were habitat probability. probability high high as of considered increases Significant km 500 and 4.1.35) (Figure lingcod juvenile for suitable considered is CINMS the within area total the of half adults. almost than such, lingcod As juvenile for suitable considered was habitat more significantly Overall, low foralltheconceptsandnonewerehigherthan theNAC(Table 4.1.12). was suitability habitat Mean 4.1.34). (Figure Study Area the and 1a, 1, Concepts within NAC the of that tripling off centralandsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.31 Figure off southernCalifornia. 4.1.33 Figure

1 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 2 2 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W . Adult lingcod habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat lingcod . Adult . Adult lingcod habitat suitability probability (HSP) probability suitability habitat lingcod . Adult 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 1 ° ° W W 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 0 1 1 1 1 0 9 9 ° ° W W 2 5 5 L L 1 1 0 2 1 1 N N 5 i i 8 8 n n ° ° M M W W g g K K c c F F i i l l o o H H o o S S 1 m H M L H M L m 5 0 d d S e S o o 0 , , 0 e i i o o t g g e w w t - - 2 1 1 2 P P e d d r A A h h 1 1 s r 0 0 8 8 e e s d ° ° d 0 0 r r W W a a u u 4 4 1 t t l l e e 5 t t 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary

33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N (HSP) off centralandsouthernCalifornia. 4.1.32 Figure

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N ocps n NCN Ato Cnet SA=Study Concept, Area. Action NAC=No and concepts indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and lingcod adult for area 4.1.34 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 200 130 165 60 95 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° 0 W W NAC Jvnl lncd aia siaiiy probability suitability habitat lingcod Juvenile . 1 1 2 2 5000 2 2 ° ° 5 W W Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . 4 1 1 2 2 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 1 1 ° ° W W Total Area(km 1 1 2 2 2 0 0 ° ° 2 W W ) SA 1 1 1 1 9 9 0 ° ° W W 2 5 L i 5 n 0 N g M c o K F i H d l o 1, 1a S H M L 1 m - S 1 0 1 o , i J e o 1 1 0 g w t P 8 8 2 e u d h ° ° r W W 0 s e v r 0 e a 4 n t 1 e 5 i l 0 e 2 were 2 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - - page 105 Chapter 4 page 106 Chapter 4 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary (HSP) off southernCalifornia. 4.1.35 Figure 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 1 2 2 1 1 a percentchangefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum resent No the to rep gray compared in when estimate shaded the estimates OAI in (NAC). increase Concept an Action Table4.1.13. percent changefromtheNAC. ( Delta benefit. observed maximum sent repre gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). Concept No Action the to compared when estimate the in increase Table4.1.12. ° ° W W Concept Concept NAC NAC SA SA 1a 1a 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 Jvnl lncd aia siaiiy probability suitability habitat lingcod Juvenile . 1 1 2 2 Analysis of adult lingcod habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat lingcod adult of Analysis 0 0 Analysis of juvenile lingcod habitat suitability within boundary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate bold in Numbers concepts. boundary within suitability habitat lingcod juvenile of Analysis ° ° W W Area (km Area (km 17093 22591 22613 13736 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 9044 7981 4538 3475 2 2 ) ) 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W Area (km Area (km Probability Probability 1867 1866 1867 1362 High High 635 531 531 531 190 190 190 159 105 80 73 73 2 2 0 ) ) D L i ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as a as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) n 1 1 N D 1 1 2 g 8 8 5 M ° ° c W W ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always expressed as expressed always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) Probability Probability o K F i l H d o S H M L m - 5 S o , i J o 0 g e 0.039 0.029 0.029 0.035 0.032 0.033 0.056 0.066 0.008 0.006 0.006 0.009 0.010 0.009 0.014 0.017 Mean Mean w P 2 u d t h e 0 e r v s r 0 e a 4 n t e i l e 1 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area ∆ Area 113.11 113.11 21.12 21.12 (%) (%) - - Area. cate concepts and NAC=No Action Concept, SA=Study indi Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and rent cur the within area total and lingcod juvenile for area 4.1.36 Figure

Habitat Area (km2) 1000 1500 2000 500 0 Probability Probability Area (%) Area (%) NAC 251.20 250.98 251.20 156.28 160.49 160.49 160.49 118.53 ∆ High ∆ High 19.59 44.49 0.00 0.00 9.49 0.00 - - 5 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 Rgeso o hg poaiiy habitat probability high of Regression . 4 (absolute) (absolute) 3 Total Area(km 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.59 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.32 0.32 0.44 0.31 0.08 0.00 OAI OAI - - 2 2 ) SA (relative) (relative) -0.18 -0.36 -0.44 -0.72 -0.15 -0.13 -0.13 -0.18 -0.29 -0.42 -0.84 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 OAI OAI - - - 1, 1a - - - 5. High and moderately suitable habitats located along and 4 Concepts within included were habitats suitable moderately or high No habitat. kelp had have that eas ar in particulary islands, northern the among shore to close located are suitability high of areas The 4.1.38). suitable, highly current considered while 50% was considered the moderately suitable (Figure was of area boundary total CINMS the of 5% Approximately Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts mance. perfor model test to available were data fisheries No tial trend. larger area of moderate suitability follows a similar spa much A4.1.37). (Figure banks offshore southern and from Islands, Channel the around Diego, mainland San to Bay Morro the along dispersed widely are bass sea giant for habitats suitable Highly Bay. Monterey 70-80 m. Suitability was ranked low from 35°N through from low and moderate considered were m 0-70 from ranging depths at substrates Soft m. 70-80 between 0-50 m, moderate between 50-70 m, and low from at depths ranging depths at habitats bed kelp and strates sub rocky for high as modeled was suitability Habitat Broad-scale Patterns in gillnetandtrammelnetfisheries(Leet mercial fishermen can keep two fish as incidental catch com that exception the with seabass giant of take the waters. This andCalifornia is due, in part, to a 1981 law that prohibits Mexican both in significantly declined have landings 1970 since however, Mexico; in active most were fisheries cally,recreational and commercial Histori overfishing. to susceptible thus are and age, old relatively a at mature slowly, grow seabass Giant or sandybottoms(Leet muddy soft over or kelp drifting among found typically be found foraging over sandy substrates. Juveniles are also may m. Adults 0-80 from ranging depths at beds, prefer nearshore Adults rocky reefs, Conception. especially those with Point kelp of north rare is it California Within California. of Gulf the of region northern the in occurs and Mexico, California, Baja of tip the to fornia Cali Bay, Humboldt from ranges seabass giant The Giant seabass relative totheNAC. area concept habitat/total lingcod juvenile and adult of gain favorable most the provides 2 Concept considered, • Mean habitat probability decreases with increasing boundary concept size. Of the six boundary concepts being creases towardsthesouth. soft and hard de both and northwest the in higher is juveniles and adults both for probability Habitat m. <180 depths at substrates of consists habitat lingcod Juvenile m. 0-120 between depths at occurs probability higher m; 0-430 between depths at substrates soft vegetated and hard over occurs lingcod adult for habitat Suitable • (Stereolipis gigas) et al ., 2001). et al ., 2001). A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ------California. 4.1.38 Figure southern California. 4.1.37 Figure 33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 4 1 1 ° ° W W ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W Gat ebs hbtt utblt of southern off suitability habitat seabass Giant . . Giant seabass habitat suitability off central and central off suitability habitat seabass Giant . 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° 1 1 W W 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 0 1 1 9 9 0 ° ° W W 2 5 H H 1 1 G G a a 1 1 5 0 8 8 b b 2 i ° ° i W W a 5 a i i t t n n a a K K t t i t t i l l o o H M L s H M L s 1 m S S m 0 5 o o e e i e i 0 o o 0 g g u u e t w 1 1 w a e a d d 1 1 t h h r i i e 8 8 s b b e t t e r ° ° a a s W W r a r a a a b b s s 1 t t i i 5 e e s s l l 0 i i t t y y 1 0 2 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - page 107 Chapter 4 page 108 Chapter 4 Highly suitable habitat is also located among the rocky habitats around the Channel Islands and some of the of southern offshore banks.Distribution of moderatelysuitablehabitat followsthesame pattern. some and Islands Channel the around habitats rocky the among located also is habitat suitable Highly distributed nearshore along the California mainland from Point Conception to Palos Verdes Point (Figure 4.1.40). m. 70-80 between depths Low at suitability was also substrates assigned to all habitats all north of 35.5°N. to As assigned such, the majority was of highly suitable suitability habitat is low while m, 60-70 between beds kelp and substrate hard over occur to determined was suitability Moderate m. 0-60 between beds kelp among and substrate hard over occurs habitat suitable highly that indicated sheephead California for developed model The Broad-scale Patterns et al 1990-1999. There is no evidence that the during sheephead population is year threatened by per existing fishery practicesfish (Leet 25,000 approximately averaged have boats, party by reported as sheephead, of landings sheephead landings (Leet averaged approximately 91,000 kg/year. During 1994-1999, the live fish fishery accounted for 73-87% of the total waters California fishery. in live-fish sheephead a of of landings development total recent 1990s, the the During to due increased recently have sheephead of landings Commercial 1996). (Love, m 3-60 between distributed (Leet m depths 90 to of beds kelp within and reefs rocky over occurs sheephead for habitat Preferred Conception. Point of north common not are however,they California; of Gulf the to Bay Monterey from range sheephead California California sheephead able habitatforgiantseabass/totalareainrelationtotheNAC. suit of change proportional greatest the provides 2 Concept considered, being concepts boundary six the Of • m. 0-50 between depths at beds kelp and substrates rocky over occur to determined was habitat suitable Highly • in commercialfisheries. • Giant seabass are protected by law prohibiting recreational catch and allowing 1-2 fish/day as incidental catch Summary habitat/total areagainedrelativetotheNAC(Table 4.1.14). suitable highly of increase optimal the displayed 2 Concept such, consideration. As under not is boundary this highest amount of highly suitable habitat (Figure 4.1.39). The Study Area yielded the highest OAI value; however the mainland were included within the larger concepts where Concepts 1, 1a, and the Study Area contained the A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary the NAC. from change percent a as expressed always is and calculation, change in ( Delta benefit. shaded observed maximum represent estimates gray OAI (NAC). Concept Action No the to compared ary concepts. Numbers in bold indicate an increase in the estimate when Table4.1.14. Concept ., 2001). NAC SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 17093 22591 22613 13736 Analysis of giant seabass habitat suitability within bound within suitability habitat seabass giant of Analysis (km 9044 7981 4538 3475 Area et al et 2 ) ., 2001). Juveniles are most abundant between 3-30 m, while adults are most commonly most are adults while m, 3-30 between abundant most are Juveniles 2001). ., Area (km Suitability (Semicossyphus pulcher) High 375 375 375 324 229 198 198 198 et al 2 ) ., 2001); most of these are captured by hook-and-line (Love, 1996). Recreational 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - Suitability Area (%) ∆ High 89.39 89.39 89.39 63.64 15.66 0.00 0.00 D ) indicates a rate of rate a indicates ) - (absolute) 0.27 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.12 0.00 0.00 OAI - - and NAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. posed boundary concepts. Numbers indicate concepts giant seabass and total area within the current and pro Figure 4.1.39

Habitat Area (km2) 290 345 400 180 235 0 NAC 5 5000 . Regression of high habitat suitability for 4 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 Total Area(km 2 2 ) SA 1, 1a - - NAC. the to relative area halibut/total for habitat suitable of considered, being change proportional greatest concepts the provides 2 boundary Concept six the Of • tistically significantcorrelationwithmodelresults. sta exhibited data CPFV from landings Sheephead • tween 0-60m. hard substrates and among kelp habitats at depths be over occur to determined was habitat suitable Highly • curs insouthernCalifornia. oc distribution sheephead California for center The • Summary concepts underconsideration(Table 4.1.15). six the for OAI highest the yielded NAC the to relative 2 Concept within contained area the habitat/total of habitat, amount suitable highly of amount highest the contained 1a and 1 Concepts and Area Study the Although 4.1.43). more of these habitats along the mainland were contained within Concepts 1, 1a, 2, and the Study Area (Figure Significantly Conception. Point around habitat nearshore of inclusion the with 3 Concept within observed were able habitat was gained as boundary sizes increased for Concepts 4 and 5. Small gains of highly suitable habitat km 68 sheephead; km (218 5% Only Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts (X significant statistically were results overlapped; block each value suitability habitat maximum the with block ing perfor model assess to used were 4.1.41). (Figure mance Afish by data catch mean ranked to compare used test was chi-square non-parametric CDFG by provided data (CPFV) Vessel Fishing Passenger Commercial 2002, superimposed overpredictedhabitatsuitability Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel (CPFV) database, 1998- Figure 4.1.41 2 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N <0.0001, r 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W . California sheephead landings data from CDFG’s 2 =0.26). 2 ) of the area within the current boundary of CINMS was considered highly suitable habitat for habitat suitable highly considered was CINMS of boundary current the within area the of ) 2 1 1 was considered moderately suitable (Figure 4.1.42). No additional high or moderately suit moderately or high additional No 4.1.42). (Figure suitable moderately considered was 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 9 9 ° ° W W C 0 C a D C l M i F f P 1 1 e o G 2 1 1 F L 8 8 5 a r M ° ° a n V n W W K b a i , i a 1 l r L H M L o i M n 9 m o 5 a i s o e g o 0 w 9 e n h d n h t R 8 e d e t e e r e - r s i e r 2 g a n e i p 0 t o y g e h n 0 s 2 e G a I S 1 d 0 0 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N - - - and southernCalifornia. Figure 4.1.40. southern California. 4.1.42 Figure 1 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 1 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 2 2 4 4 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 3 3 ° ° W W California sheephead habitat suitability off central Clfri seped aia siaiiy off suitability habitat sheephead California . 1 1 2 2 2 2 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 0 0 ° ° W W 1 1 2 2 1 1 ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 2 2 ° ° 0 0 W W ° ° W W 1 1 1 1 0 9 9 ° ° W W 0 2 C C 5 H a a H l l a 5 i a i 0 f 1 1 f b 1 2 1 o b o 5 8 8 i r i t ° ° r W t W n a n a K K t i i i i l t l a o a H M L o 1 S H M L m m S 5 0 o i 1 1 s 0 e o o e s 0 g u i 1 1 o w t g u t e d w h 8 8 e h h i d r h ° ° r i t e s s e W W e t e a r a e r e a b a b p t p 1 i t e i 5 l e h h l i 0 i t e t e y y a a 1 d d 0 0 2 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N - - - page 109 Chapter 4 page 110 Chapter 4 resultsusing a non-parametric chi-square test. Chi-square (Figureresults 4.1.46)from SCCWRP were usedtrawls toindicated assess modela significant performance. correHalibut Halibut captured data in SCCWRPfrom these trawl sources samples were (Figure compared 4.1.45) with and Commercialmodel Passenger Fishing Vessel (CPFV) dataBank, Gulf of the Farallones, Monterey Bay, andmoderately Channel Islandssuitable national habitat marine comprises sanctuaries. a large soft portionsubstrates of betweenthe continental 100-150 m,shelf and lowincluding suitabilityHighlysuitable considerable habitat occurs wasdetermined atareaoccur tosoftdepthson substrate within betweenbetween 0-100Cordellmoderatem, 150-200 suitability m Broad-scale(Figureoccurs on 4.1.44). Patterns High and ies using hook-and-line and spear fishing. Bodega Bay southward into Mexico waters (Leet Francisco Bay and southern California, geardue types: to otter trawltrawl, setrestrictions gill and trammel nets, in and statehook-and-line. waters.412,000Set nets kg,Theare withthe gearcommercial aof recentchoice, primarilypeak fishery in in1997 San is of 567,000centeredand kg. recreational fromHistorically, fisheries halibut of central have andbeen southern commercially California.foundin shallowharvested Sinceembayments 1932,by three(Leet average annual commercial catch commonlyhas been atdepths less than 100 m,but some adults have been reported to200 m.Juveniles mon fromBodegaare most commonly Bay southward (Love, 1996). Adultand juvenile Californiahalibut California distributedare halibutfromQuillayute inhabitRiver, Washington soft bottomsouthernto habitats BajaCalifornia, California mostmostareand com halibut A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary (Paralichthys californicus) pressed asapercentchangefromtheNAC. maximum ( represent Delta benefit. observed gray in shaded estimates OAI (NAC). Concept Action No the to compared when estimate the in increase an indicate bold in Numbers Concepts. 4.1.15. Table Concept NAC SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 cepts andNAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and sheephead fornia Figure 4.1.43

Analysis of California sheephead habitat suitability within boundary boundary within suitability habitat sheephead California of Analysis 2

Area (km Habitat Area (km ) etal 100 150 200 50 17093 22591 22613 13736 9044 7981 4538 3475 0 .,2001). California halibut arean important species inboth thecommercial NAA D 2 ) ) indicates a rate of change calculation, and is always ex always is and calculation, change of rate a indicates ) 5 5000 . Regression of total habitat area for Cali Area (km Suitability et al High 403 403 403 353 253 218 218 218 4 ., 2001). Halibut are most commonly taken in recreational fisher 00 50 00 25000 20000 15000 10000 3 Total Area(km 2 ) 2 2 ) 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - SA Suitability Area (%) ∆ High 84.86 84.86 84.86 61.93 16.06 1, 1a 0.00 0.00 - - - (absolute) 0.61 0.43 0.43 0.60 0.29 0.00 0.00 OAI - - - - - southern California. • The commercial and recreational fisheries for CaliforniaSummary halibut extend over a wide range from Bodega Bay through provide the greatest increase of highly suitableeration habitat as relative a boundary to concept.the increase OAI results in total for boundarythe remainingWhile area theconceptsfrom theStudy (Table NAC. Area 4.1.16) includes indicate the that changeConceptslargest (%) 1 andrelative in 1a highly proportion suitable habitatof highly and totalwithinsuitable Conceptsarea 1a,1,and2,movingtheStudy habitat, Area from(Figure this4.1.48).the NACTheboundaryabsolute to OAIeachtakes into isaccountof thethenotproportional included conceptsunder as boundaryunderconsid consideration. size increased within Concepts 3, 4,An andadditional 5. Significant 521 km gains were included along the mainlandApproximately 30%ofthe area within thecurrent CINMS waspredicted highly suitable Analysishabitat forCalifornia of Boundaryhalibut. Concepts data showed a significant correlation (X spondencebetween halibut catch and predicted habitat suitability (X 2000, superimposed overpredictedhabitatsuitability. Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel (CPFV) database, 1998- 4.1.46 Figure southern California. Figure 4.1.44 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 ° ° ° ° W W W W . California halibut habitat suitability off central and Clfri hlbt adns aa rm CDFG’s from data landings halibut California . 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ° ° ° ° W W W W 2 was considered moderately suitable (Figure 4.1.47). Slight gains of highly suitable habitat were 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ° ° ° ° W W W W 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° W W W W 2 0 0 <0.0001, r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 9 9 9 9 5 5 ° ° ° ° W W W W C C S 5 H a 5 C a M 0 0 l a l C i 1 i e b f f a 9 o W o i t n 9 a r K r K L H M n R t i n 4 H M L L i l l o o o i S 1 a i , o m o 1 i m P g i a 0 o w a 0 g n u e 1 w d e 0 0 h d t t d h i e T e h 9 e h t r e r i a s s n 9 r r a a b r 1 1 1 1 a a g 8 1 l 1 a 1 1 l i i t 8 8 i w l s 8 8 t b i e b ° ° ° ° t e 1 W W 1 W W y l 2 u 5 u 5 s 0 0 t =0.17). t 2 2 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 37°N 38°N A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary California. 4.1.47 Figure CWRP trawlssuperimposed overpredictedhabitatsuitability. 4.1.45 Figure 33°N 34°N 35°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ° ° ° ° W W W W 2 <0.0001,r . California halibut habitat suitability off southern off suitability habitat halibut California . . Abundance of California halibut captured in SC in captured halibut California of Abundance . 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° W W W W 2 =0.11).Similarly, results using CPFV 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 ° ° ° ° W W W W 0 0 C C S H a a C 2 2 a l l 5 5 1 1 1 1 C i i 1 b 1 1 1 1 f f C 8 8 8 8 9 o o W i K K ° ° ° ° t a W W W W 9 a r r i i t l l H M L n n o o R H M L c t 4 m m o 5 5 h S o i i i , o P i g a a 0 o 0 e e w g u w 1 r d h t t d a e e h i T h h 9 e t r r n e a s s 9 r a a r k r b a a 8 l l a i i i t w l b b e t i e t l u u y s t t 1 1 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N - 33°N 34°N 35°N - page 111 Chapter 4 page 112 Chapter 4 assemblages or diversity. Shannon’s Diversity Index was calculated using 4,085 trip/location combinations which species about information limited provide therefore and species pelagic targeted they because analysis before removed were trips trolling The troll. anchor, and drift, stationary drift, free methods: fishing line and hook four on information provided RecFIN analyses. in unit sample a as used was and site unique a considered was tion m. Fishermen 0-2,200 targeted species from and visited ranging between 1 depths and 22 at locations during 2001 each trip. and Each trip/location 1999 combina during trips CPFV 680 for coordinates GPS containing set sub a is dataset efforts. This sampling fishery recreational marine federal and state integrates that database a Vessel(CPFV): Fishing Passenger Commercial (RecFIN) Network Information Fishery Recreational Data andMethods above. listed objectives the for conducted analyses the to repsect with concepts boundary assess and OAI Calculate • 2; and and 1 objectives from results combining by caught/identified being were assemblages species where Resolve • the results(i.e.,sitegroups); map to GIS a utilize and catches/sightings similar contained locations which determine to data trawl • Analyze • Determinewhichspeciesco-occur(i.e.,assemblages); • CalculateShannonindexofdiversityforeachdataset; analyses areasfollows: were combined to provide a region-wide assessment for fish community structure. Objectives for fish community information for 364 species. Although none of the data sets were spatially and temporally comprehensive, results California. ern (see sets data four using completed were Analyses Table abundance fish contained which 4.2.1) Community metrics and multivariate statistics were used to analyze marine fish species assemblages off south 4.2 Fish Assemblage Structre of suitablehabitatforhalibut/totalareainrelationtotheNAC. change proportional greatest the provide 1a and 1 Concepts considered, being concepts boundary six the Of • results. • Halibut catch data from SCCWRP trawls and CPFV data exhibited statistically significant correlation with model • HighlysuitablehabitatforCaliforniahalibutwasdeterminedtooccuroversoftsubstratesatdepths<100m. A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary calculation, andisalwaysexpressedasapercentchangefromtheNAC. represent maximum observed benefit. Delta ( compared to the No Action Concept (NAC). OAI estimates shaded in gray when estimate the in increase an indicate bold in Numbers concepts. ary Table 4.1.16. Concept NAC SA 1a 1 2 3 4 5 17093 22591 22613 13736 Analysis of California halibut habitat suitability within bound (km 9044 7981 4538 3475 Area 2 ) Area (km Suitability 3237 3234 3237 2157 1310 1201 1201 1194 High 2 ) 356.42 503.23 503.82 266.78 141.50 ∆ Area 113.11 21.12 (%) - D ) indicates a rate of change Suitability Area (%) 170.85 171.11 171.11 ∆ High 80.65 9.72 0.59 0.59 - (absolute) 1.09 0.77 0.77 0.69 0.16 0.01 0.06 OAI - - cepts andNAC=No Action Concept,SA=Study Area. con indicate Numbers concepts. boundary proposed and current the within area total and halibut California Figure 4.1.48

Habitat Area (km2) 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0 NAC 0010010020025000 20000 15000 10000 5000 . Regression of high habitat suitability for 5 4 3 Total Area(km 2 2 ) SA RecFIN is RecFIN 1, 1a - - - - by diversity anddivided intoquintiles (i.e.each quintile contains20% ofthesites). grids were created and mean diversity was calculated for each grid cell containing data. The results were sorted that may have been masked by the high variability present between individual sites. Using ArcGIS, 5 x 5 minute present were patterns spatial larger if determine to of provided also were distribution results diversity.Gridded site the and effort show to presented are method survey each for results Individual sample. the in individuals n where for each ofthefourdatasets,whichincludedabundance informationfor364species. independently calculated was 1949) Weaver, and (Shannon diversity) of index Shannon (H’ diversity Fish species. to a 2x60 m transect. Diversity analysis included 84 species of fish, while the assemblage analysis contained 45 standardized was catch differed,thus distance transect yet methods, similar used dataset Each forest. kelp the Visual transect surveys, recording fish abundance and size, were completedsites. by29 scubafor divers alongdata theprovided bottom(VRG) of Group VantunaResearch the while sites, 15 at collected data census visual Census: Visual Kelp (1998) andZimmermann Shaw See species. fish 59 on information contained dataset the species. species, fish rare 189 of contained removal After analysis diversity the for used set data final tom. The Zimmerman’s (2003) analysis of benthic species biomass was used to cull out the trawls that did not fish the bot mm stretched-mesh codend liner) with a rubber bobbin roller which was trawled for 15-30 minutes on the bottom. 2002. Gear included trawl a (127 nor’eastern mm stretched-mesh body; 89 mm stretched-mesh codend; and 32 1997- and 1995, 1992, 1989, 1977, in June-November collected were depth in m 55-1,200 from ranging trawls National Marine Fisheries Service Groundfish Survey Program (NMFS GSP): information onsamplingmethodology, referto more Allen For analysis. assemblage for species 48 trawls) of >5% in present species those of omission (after and 2-200 m (Allen from sampling areas, harbor and bay within and islands near trawls added survey 1998 the whereas m, 10-200 and station, each at isobaths along ranged in depth from coast) 2-215 m (Allen (on minutes 10 to bays) (in minutes 5 for towed mesh codend cm 1.25 with trawl otter semiballoon headrope m 7.6 a with collected were Samples 1998. and 1994 in September data obtained from SCCWRP consisted of 426 fisheries-independent trawl samples collected between June and (SCCWRP): Project Research Water Coastal California Southern which captured18fishspecies. (less than 5% of the total trip/locations) were omitted. As a captured result, infrequently the dataset were was reduced that to species 2,697 trip/locations assemblages, species evaluate to order In species. fish 130 captured Table 4.2.1. NMFS GSP SCCWRP Vantuna Dataset PISCO/ RecFIN i is the number of individuals belonging to the i the to belonging individuals of number the is Summaryofthedatasetsusedtoassessfishdiversityandspeciesassemblages. and-line survey Scuba et al Hook- visual Trawl Trawl Diver Gear . 1998, 2002). Catch information for 150 species was used for Shannon Diversity calculations The Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO) provided diver provided (PISCO) Oceans Coastal of Studies Interdisciplinary for Partnership The Geographic California California California California Southern Southern Southern et al Area . (2001)fordetailedinformationontrawlandsurveymethods. et al soft substrate/ soft substrate/ Habitat Type/ 55-1200 m Kelp bed/ 1-2200 m 2-215 m H Depth . 1998, 2002). In 1994, the survey targeted the mainland shelf between NA/ ’ NA = - Σ i =1 S [( N n et al Months A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary i ) June- June- June, Aug July Nov th All ln species (s) in the sample, and N is the total number of number total the is N and sample, the in (s) species . (1998)and Allen ( N n i )] 1992, 1995, 1977, 1989, 1994, 1998 1999, 2001 1999-2002 1997-2002 Years et al et Southern California Bight Regional Survey Regional Bight California Southern .(2000), Turk .(2000), # Sampling et al Sites 4085 Data from 477 fishery independent 477 425 44 . (2002). The formulaisexpressedas: et al et (diversity) # Species 189 150 130 84 . (2001), Wilkins (2001), . (assemblage) # Species 45 59 48 18 et al et - . page 113 Chapter 4 page 114 Chapter 4 parameters suchasdepth, latitude,oreffort weresignificantlydifferent betweensitegroups. if determine to dataset each on completed was GIS. analysis a Ain discriminant groups step-wise site the ping map by visualized was groups site the of distribution Spatial groups. site the forming in influential were blages assem species which determine to possible was it groups site in species for frequencies average analyzing By 1977). (Boesch, analysis nodal modified a is analysis group. This site each for calculated was species each for occurrence of frequency average the groups, site and assemblages species between Tointeraction determine 2002). were used to allow for comparisons with previously completed analyses of the groups SCCWRP data (Allen larger or smaller if metric dissimilarity Bray-Curtis the from (i.e. Results 1977). (Boesch, explanation) ecological better a provide would groupings ecological best the determine to analyzed was composition group (McGarigal occurred level similarity the in breaks where determine to used were dance data, and is therefore one of the most widely used cluster abun methods species in ecology with (Boesch, results 1977). meaningful Scree produces plots often metric dissimilarity Curtis Bray The 1984). (Romesburg, X where The Bray-Curtisdissimilaritycoefficient(b criteria. these met clustering), means average with paired (both Jaccard and Bray-Curtis methods, dissimilarity Two1977). (Boesch, groups smaller meaningful into data the divide to impossible it make and groups, new ing without results interpretable excessive chaining. When chaining occurs, entities fuse to a few nuclear groups one at a time rather than form provided consistently metric which determine to methods clustering and metrics resemblance multiple investigate to conducted were analyses Exploratory one). is deviation standard the and is zero such thatthemean was adjusted species for each (i.e., abundance abundance by species standardized (Field changes scale to invariant is it because applied was transformation utilized. This conform to assumptions of a normal distribution and homogeneity of variances, fourth root transformations were not did data abundance raw the Because analysis. for species of number adequate an keeping while present, impact results (Gauch, 1982; Boesch, 1977). The 5% cutoff was chosen because it reduced the number of zeros negatively therefore can and response, biological not and chance to due often is occurrence their because ses analy assemblage from removed were species Rare analyses). (assemblage trawls the of 5% than less in ent longitude, etc). Fish that were not identified to species were removed (diversity analyses), as well as those pres or latitude degree 0.01 than greater move that trips fishing stationed land, on them place that coordinates with sites (i.e., data incorrect or incomplete remove to filtered initially were sets Data groups. site and assemblages species distinguish to used was analyses Cluster groups. into etc) a species, short, (sites, variables in or,puts that 1977) method (Boesch, criteria given by entities expressed as of attributes grouping their optimal of resemblance for the technique to a according is Clustering co-occur. to tend species which investigate to also but present, species of diversity the analyze to just not structure community fish analyzing when important is It comprehensive dataset,standardizationwasconsideredareasonableproxy. However,locations. a all lacking at employed be should method sampling same the areas, compare accurately Tohomogenized. been have may sampling habitat selective Thus intertidal). rocky midwater,bay/estuary,and (nearshore low me and bottom), soft bottom), harbor/nearshore and reefs, soft rocky shallow offshore beaches, sandy and coast (open dium reefs rocky deep forests, (kelp high diversity: of levels three into habitats fish minimize differences between habitats. For example, Allen (1985) analyzed multiple datasets and characterized however,can methods; it collection variable from result that differences removes technique This cell. a for able the least diversity. Standardized diversity was then averaged where more than 1 one diversity estimate was avail and diversity greatest the denoting 5 with quintiles by classified were dataset each from results gridded ize, diversity.fish of map overall standard an To provide to combined were datasets four the form results Diversity A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ij is the ith attribute (column) measured on the j the on measured (column) attribute ith the is jk ) iscalculatedas: b jk = i Σ Σ i n =1 n - 1 ( X X th object (row), and X and (row), object ij ij +X - X ik ik ) ik is the ith attribute on the k the on attribute ith the is et al et et al et ., 2000). Subsequently, 2000). ., ., 1982). Data were Data 1982). ., et al th ., 1998, object ------due to limitedsamples. isuncertain diversity ofmean theaccuracy in thus confidence points, 3 sampling than less on based were tions calcula water.diversity brighter,deep mean is in of light not majority the but The where water shallow in trawls and depth could be attributed to gear avoidance. Fish species may be able to respond visually and escape from and depth, but variance explained was minimal (r diversity between relationship negative a and latitude, and diversity between relationship positive significant a Island. Catalina Santa was of There south and Islands, Cruz Santa and Miguel San of west found be can areas diversity Low 4.2.2). (Figure Carpinteria of south diversity high of area large a has Channel Barbara Santa The High fish diversity observed in the SCCWRP trawls appear to be randomly dispersed throughout the study area. along thecoastofsouthernCaliforniaalsoexhibited consistentmeasurementsofhighdiversity. Bay.Monterey of south directly and depth; m 300 approximately in of east cells addition, In and Island Anacapa Bay,Monterey of northwest Bank; Cordell and Farallones the of Gulf the around Francisco San of west found: and within found are points data 3 least at were on based were Bay.that Francisco diversity San offshoremean of just high with areas Cells diversity low Other collected. not was fish targeted the where areas depict they mean lower diversity. substantially In can this analysis, sites they with zero diversity because do not represent marine cells areas that lack grid fish species, but rather minute five the within diversity mean calculating before removed were (44%) zero of diversity species with combinations trip/location all Instead, captured. species of analysis in-depth an implementing without removed be not could species pelagic targeting trips fortunately,all recorded either no catch or only a few species, such as albacore or yellowtail, thus biasing diversity results. Un and species offshorepelagic California targeted 4.2.1). southern trips (Figure diversity environments low These in occurred that diversity low very with trips of number large the was data recreational the from pattern striking sions, these variables explained very little of the variance (r effort,and diversity between However,correlations longitude. and latitude, depth, regres linear individual using terey Bay) and southern California (south of Santa Barbara). Overall, there were statistically significant (P<0.05) Mon to Francisco (San California central in concentrated was effort of distribution however,the 4.2.1); (Figure The recreational hook and line data was the only dataset containing information for the entire coast of California last. discussed therefore is and datasets, individual the in found characteristics the of many displays map diversity to this convolution, diversity results for each of the four datasets will be discussed independently. The composite differences likely reflect the variety of methods used as well as true differences in diversity among habitats. Due datasets (1.4 ± 0.5 and 1.4 ± 0.4, respectively). The recreational data had the lowest diversity (0.6 ± 0.6). These Kelp diver surveys exhibited the highest mean diversity (1.8 ± 0.5), followed by both SCCWRP and NMFS trawl Diversity Broad-scale Patterns minute grids(right). 4.2.1. Figure Fish diverisity calculated for individual RecFIN hook and line trips (left) and mean diversity for trips within 5x5 within trips for diversity mean and (left) trips line and hook RecFIN individual for calculated diverisity Fish 2 =0.01 and 0.08, respectively). The relationship between catch A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary 2 =0.01, 0.03, 0.03, and 0.06, respectively). The most - - - - page 115 Chapter 4 page 116 Chapter 4 datasets. diversity map for fishes in southern California; muchenty-five of the percent coastal of andthe cellsmarine contained habitats information are covered from byone only one cellone of dataset. thethat four containedThe composite information dataset provides from an overallall Patternsfour datasets, of mean andstandardized 13 that diversitycontained forinformation the composite from ofthree all ofdatasets the four. are displayed Sev in Figuresupported 4.2.5. by theThere results was ofonly this study. whencompared colderto islands thetonorth (Santa Cruz, SanNicolas andSanta Barbara). This overalltrend. patternPondella is Clemente appear to have lower diversity sites south andtwo east on of San the Nicolas, islands, two while on Santa San Nicolas Catalina, exhibited and one the near opposite4.2.4). SanFour Clementetheof nine sites representing Island.thetop Santa20%(quintile) Cruz,werelocated Santa theoncoast Catalina northSanta of Barbara, andFish San diversity within kelp habitats was calculated using PISCO scuba transect data from 44 sampling stations (Figurewere categorized into the top quintile. served at approximately 200 m depth. High diversitywithinthe study trawlsarea (Figure were4.2.3). infrequentBetween Cape southSan Martin of and PointPointThe Sal, Conception;majorityaline of high diversity (85%)21 trawls trawls of (13%)were theob NMFS GSP trawls were found north of Point Conception, A Biogeographic allowingAssessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary for only minor comparisons Figure 4.2.3. Figure 4.2.2. Fish diverisityfor individualNMFSGSP trawls(left)andmeandiversity oftrawlswithin5x5minute grids(right). Fish diverisityforindividualSCCWRP trawls(left)andmeandiversityofwithin5x5minutegrids(right). etal .(2005) found lower overall diversity on warm water islands (Santa Catalina and San Clemente) - - and northernandspecies’ assemblages. the Twoof Acleardivision wasapparent between southern area. this in found fishes highlighting diversity of the groupssitefoundwerearound Anacapa Island, only located north of Monterey Bay. Fifteensouth (83%) of Santa Barbara, while one site group was the eighteen (33%) site groups were only locatedspecies one(Tableabsenceof or 4.2.3).of Six group was based almost entirely on site the Each set.presence data this individual species inof ment between methods highlights the importance results decreased substantially. The agreement ofstrong between Bray-Curtis Jaccard agree and reduce the number of site groups, site but the degree eighteen groups (Figures and 4.2.6-7). 4.2.2), There (Table was an attemptsemblages to species as six divided into were dataRecFIN the from recreational fish of speciesEighteen Assemblages (right). 4.2.4. Figure grids (right). Figure 4.2.5. Composite fish diversity (mean of standardized values across the four datasets) (left) and effort within 5x5 minute Fish diversity for individual kelp visual census surveys (left) and mean diversity of surveys within 5x5 minute grids minute 5x5 within surveys of diversity mean and (left) surveys census visual kelp individual for diversity Fish - - blages arenamedforthemostinfluentialspeciesineachgroup. Assem clustering. means average with metric dissimilarity Bray-Curtis the 4.2.2. Table assemblage gopher rockfish assemblage barred sandbass assemblage ocean whitefish assemblage yellowtail rockfish assemblage greenspotted rockfish assemblage vermilion rockfish Group A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Species assemblage results for the RecFIN CPFV data using data CPFV RecFIN the for results assemblage Species gopher rockfish Pacific barracuda Pacific chubmackerel California halibut kelp bass barred sandbass honeycomb rockfish California scorpionfish ocean whitefish blue rockfish lingcod yellowtail rockfish bocaccio greenspotted rockfish rosy rockfish starry rockfish copper rockfish vermilion rockfish Common Name Sebastes carnatus Sphyraena argentea Scomber japonicus Paralichthys californicus Paralabrax clathratus Paralabrax nebulifer Sebastes umbrosus Scopaena guttata Caulolatilus princeps Sebastes mystinus Ophiodon elongatus Sebastes flavidus Sebastes paucispinis Sebastes chlorostictus Sebastes rosaceus Sebastes constellatus Sebastes caurinus Sebastes miniatus Scientific Name - page 117 Chapter 4 page 118 Chapter 4 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Figure 4.2.6. Location ofsite groups,RecFINCPFVdata. Table 4.2.5). combinedinto 15species assemblages (Table 4.2.4) and sites were thedivided southerninto six distinctive Californiagroups bight(Figure 4.2.8;at depths to 215SCCWRP m, and trawls provided were information conducted onin 621994 fish and species. 1998, and These were fish combined species for were this analysis. Trawlsa stronger were influence concentrated on the insite groups. mination associated with the habitat parameters suchcompared as depth to andfishing latitude, effects but couldsuggests be based that onhabitat eithereffort passivecharacteristics(r or active havebehaviors. The higher coefficientsF=234, P<0.0001), of deter depth (r Step-wisediscriminant analysis (N=3,002) revealed significant differences among site groups for: latitude (r sand bass assemblages. The other assemblages containspecies species assemblages that are weremore commoncomprised north of of predominantlyPoint Conception. Southern California Bight species: ocean whitefish and barred groups inthatsite. Table 4.2.3. gopher rockfish Pacific barracuda Pacific chubmackerel California halibut kelp bass barred sandbass honeycomb rockfish California scorpionfish ocean whitefish blue rockfish lingcod yellowtail rockfish bocaccio greenspotted rockfish rosy rockfish starry rockfish copper rockfish vermilion rockfish Species land. 4.2.7. Figure 2 =0.09,F=16, P<0.0001). These results suggest that species’ distributions are influenced by habitat variables Mean frequencyof occurrence for each recreationalsite group. Shadedcellsrepresentspeciespresentinoverhalfof the

Location of site groups for the RecFIN CPFV data within southern California (left) and around Anacapa Is Anacapa around and (left) California southern within data CPFV RecFIN the for groups site of Location N=179 100 25 43 25 19 22 1 1 6 0 0 1 0 2 4 2 4 7 2 100 N=94 2 16 19 39 14 16 13 39 =0.40,F=110, P<0.0001), fishing type (anchored vs. drift: r 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 5 6 5 N=145 100 32 10 10 28 30 28 32 20 35 1 0 4 0 0 0 9 7 1 N=168 31 36 55 25 98 52 26 25 16 5 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 4 6 100 N=99 15 25 10 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 2 6 3 6 N=135 100 33 50 59 15 13 18 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 N=64 31 48 98 17 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 6 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary 100 N=89 14 11 11 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 2 2 Site Groups N=111 100 39 24 22 17 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 5 2 N=154 100 19 10 12 25 12 11 5 1 2 5 5 7 8 3 5 1 7 8 N=226 100 20 33 15 11 11 11 4 3 0 4 5 1 0 7 2 3 4 3 N=160 10 99 31 46 18 34 31 13 11 4 1 1 4 8 1 9 0 9 9 N=299 100 26 33 19 37 1 7 2 4 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 7 2 =0.20,F=42, P<0.0001), and N=316 100 27 28 21 16 17 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 4 N=237 100 20 40 21 0 1 8 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 N=193 74 18 10 11 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 4 1 2 3 0 1 2 4 N=165 100 1 5 5 1 0 1 7 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 - =0.59, N=183 100 41 39 14 30 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 7 2 0 3 5 8 - page 119 Chapter 4 page 120 Chapter 4 Again, the break-out of species from this data-set fell into known species-depth associations.variation, The Pacificwhich cansanddab, be visualizedthe of in 87%explained FigureDepthvariance. the4.2.9; of the 9% four foraccounted groupsstilleffort partitionbuteffort, for themselvesmade Correctionswere into obvious depth contours. F=1.4,P=0.24), andlongitude wasexcluded from theanalysis because itwasconfounded with latitude (r (r Only two of the parameters investigated with the discriminant analysis (N=466) were found to be significant: depth site group provides information on the interaction between species assemblages and site groups (Table 4.2.7). solimited information was available for the southern bight area. Frequency ofoccurrence for fish species in each blages arenamedforthemostinfluentialspeciesineachgroup. Assem clustering. means average with metric dissimilarity Bray-Curtis the Table4.2.4. A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Gulf sanddab assemblage spotted cusk-eel assemblage greenstriped rockfish rex soleassemblage assemblage pygmy poacher California skate assemblage Pacific sanddab assemblage longspine combfish assemblage Pacific argentine assemblage longfin sanddab ssemblage hornyhead turbota assemblage white seaperch specklefin midshipman assemblage California halibut assemblage white croaker Group 2 =0.87, F=1035, P<0.0001) and effort (r Species assemblage results for the SSCWRD trawl data using data trawl SSCWRD the for results assemblage Species white croaker Common Name Gulf sanddab halfbanded rockfish greenspotted rockfish spotfin sculpin spotted cusk-eel greenblotched rockfish pink rockfish greenstriped rockfish blacktip poacher splitnose rockfish Pacific hake blackbelly eelpout rex sole roughback sculpin pygmy poacher Californa skate shortspine combfish plainfin midshipman Dover sole slender sole stripetail rockfish Pacific sanddab pink seaperch English sole longspine combfish bay goby Pacific argentine yellowchin sculpin bigmouth sole longfin sanddab fantail sole California tonguefish California scorpionfish California lizardfish speckled sanddab hornyhead turbot shiner perch white seaperch specklefin midshipman thornback diamond turbot spotted turbot barred sandbass California halibut queenfish Pacific sardine northern anchovy 2 Genyonemus lineatus Species Name Citharichthys fragilis Sebastes semicinctus Sebastes chlorostictus Icelinus tenuis Chilara taylori Sebastes rosenblatti Sebastes eos Sebastes elongatus Xeneretmus latifrons Sebastes diploproa Merluccius productus Lycodes pacifica Glyptocephalus zachirus Chitonotus pugetensis Odontopyxis trispinosa Raja inornata Zaniolepis frenata Porichthys notatus Microstomus pacificus Lyopsetta exilis Sebastes saxicola Citharichthys sordidus Zalembius rosaceus Parophrys vetulus Zaniolepis latipinnis Lepidogobius lepidus Aregentina sialis Icelinus quadriseriatus Hippoglossina stomata Citharichthys xanthostigma Xystreurys liolepis Symphurus atricauda Scorpaena guttata Synodus lucioceps Citharichthys stigmaeus Pleuronichthys verticalis Cymatogaster aggregata Phanerodon furcatus Porichthys myriaster Patyrhinoidis trisenata Plueronichthys guttulata Pleuronichthys ritteri Paralabrax nebulifer Paralichthys californicus Seriphus politus Sardinops sagax Engraulis mordax =0.09, F=16, P<0.0001). Latitude did not have a significant effect (r - parameters investigated: depth (r differencescant betweenfourallgroupssite in Discriminaterevealedsignifianalysis(N=413) and stripetail rockfish assemblages consist of a combfish longspine The distribution. southern sanddab), but the latter has species with a more shelf species (the hornyhead turbot and longfin Similarly,bays. assemblagestwocontainmid- istic of the inner shelf and the outer limits of the characterassemblagecontainsmorespecies Californiahalibutthe and bays, insidepresent often species schooling includesassemblage anchovy northern the but species, shallow of andtheCalifornia halibut assemblages consist from shallow ordered to been deep. have Both groups the site northern Table where anchovy 4.2.5, in visualized be can relationship This was observed. betweenshipspecies assemblages depthand (r (r year (r effort P<0.0001), rm h NF bnhc rws Ms o the of Conception,Pointlocatedtrawlswereofnorth Most trawls. benthic NMFS the from identified were 4.2.9) (Figure groups site four Sevenspeciesassemblages (Table 4.2.6)and from 1998 alone (Allen results previous with closely align 1998) and (1994yearsboth on based sentedwhilehere, pre results cluster The normal. than warmer much temperatures water with year, Niño El eas during 1998. In addition, 1998 was a strong while trawl effort focused on islands and bay ar In1994, nearshore ecosystems were targeted, affectedhaveobserved speciesassemblages. large-scaleweather/temperature maypatterns fort. Changes in areas targeted for trawling and ef and groupssite relationshipbetween icant and bay habitats, which could explain the offshoresignif between varied Effort species. water assemblagesdeepercusk-eelcontainspotted and rockfish greenstriped sole, rex the while combinationofmiddle andouter-shelf species, 2 =0.07, F=6, P<0.0001). Also, a clear relation 2 01, =, <.01, n latitude and P<0.0001), F=9, =0.10, 2 03, =8 P<0.0001), F=48, =0.37, et al ., 1998, 2002). 2 =0.88, F=597, 2 =0.83). 2 <0.01, ------Figure 4.2.9. Figure 4.2.8. surveys. 4.2.10. Figure Location ofsitegroups,NMFSGSP. Location ofsitegroups,SCCWRP. oain f ie rus kl vsa census visual kelp groups, site of Location A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary rus Sae cls ersn seis rsn i mr than 50% ofthe more in present species represent cells Shaded groups. 4.2.5. Table California tonguefish California scorpionfish California lizardfish speckled turbot hornyhead turbot shiner perch white seaperch specklefin midshipman thornback diamond turbot spotted turbot barred sandbass California halibut queenfish Pacific sardine white croaker northern anchovy gulf sanddab halfbanded rockfish greenspotted rockfish spotfin sculpin spotted cusk-eel greenblotched rockfish pink rockfish greenstriped rockfish blacktip poacher splitnose rockfish Pacific hake blackbelly eelpout rex sole roughback sculpin pygmy poacher California skate shortspine combfish plainfin midshipman Dover sole slender sole Pacific sanddab stripetail rockfish pink seaperch English sole longspine combfish bay goby Pacific argentine yellowchin sculpin bigmouth sole longfin sanddab fantail sole groups inthatsite. en rqec o ocrec fr CWP site SCCWRP for occurrence of frequency Mean N=73 49 47 19 19 33 44 32 15 10 30 33 63 75 22 90 42 10 21 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 3 N=33 12 15 45 39 94 73 24 12 3 6 0 6 0 9 3 3 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=64 100 Site Groups 39 13 73 63 13 30 16 56 14 30 13 17 36 42 11 3 9 8 2 5 0 9 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 2 5 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 N=63 86 52 92 40 75 22 41 16 29 37 21 19 10 60 92 97 37 11 3 0 0 0 2 8 5 3 3 5 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 2 0 2 6 0 N=75 17 23 25 28 75 52 12 87 57 81 55 77 63 25 91 84 80 17 81 27 77 25 64 23 11 11 11 3 5 5 7 9 8 5 0 1 0 5 0 7 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 N=106 19 28 18 21 34 29 16 25 36 22 27 33 35 79 74 95 75 93 70 45 47 39 26 17 35 13 10 18 15 12 6 4 7 9 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 5 page 121 Chapter 4 page 122 Chapter 4 uts ismlrt mti wt aeae en cutrn. sebae are Assemblages clustering. means named forthemostinfluentialspeciesineachgroup. average with metric dissimilarity Curtis 4.2.6. Table A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary threadfin slickhead assemblage longspine thornyhead assemblage Dover sole assemblage bocaccio assemblage Pacific sanddab assemblage blackbelly eelpout assemblage greenspotted rockfish Group Species assemblage results for the NMFS GSP data using Bray- using data GSP NMFS the for results assemblage Species Common Name blacktail snailfish brown catshark bank rockfish blackgill rockfish splitnose rockfish aurora rockfish longnose skate filetalk catshark Pacific hake black eelpout bigfin eelpout spotted ratfish rex sole sandpaper skate sablefish Dover sole spiny dogfish northern anchovy Pacific electricray stripetail rockfish shortbelly rockfish chilipepper rockfish slender sole Pacific argentine bocaccio longspine combfish pink seaperch halfbanded rockfish plainfin midshipman curlfin sole Pacific pompano English sole lingcod white croaker petrale sole Pacific sanddab spotted cusk-eel blackbelly eelpout widow rockfish greenstriped rockfis greenspotted rockfish threadfin slickhead longnose catshark black hagfish snakehead eelpout deepsea sole Pacific grenadier Pacific viperfish twoline eelpout black skate Pacific flatnose California slickhead giant grenadier longspine thornyhead darkblotched rockfish shortspine thornyhead California grenadier Talismania bifurcata Apristurus kampae Eptatretus deani Embryx crotalinus Embassichthys bathybius Coryphaenoides acrolepis Chauliodus macouni Bothrocara brunneum Bathyraja trachura Antimora microlepis Alepocephalus tenebrosus Albatrossia pectoralis Sebastolobus altivelis Sebastes crameri Sebastolobus alascanus Nezumia stelgidolepis Careproctus melanurus Apristurus brunneus Sebastes rufus Sebastes melanostomus Sebastes diploproa Sebastes aurora Raja rhina Parmaturus xaniurus Merluccius productus Lycodes diapterus Lycodes cortezianus Hydrolagus colliei Glyptocephalus zachirus Bathyraja interrupta Anoplopoma fimbria Microstomus pacificus Squalus acanthias Engraulis mordax Torpedo californica Sebastes saxicola Sebastes jordani Sebastes goodei Lyopsetta exilis Argentina sialis Sebastes paucispinis Zaniolepis latipinnis Zalembius roaceus Sebastes semicinctus Porichthys notatus Pleuronichthys decurrens Peprilus simillimus Parophrys vetulus Ophiodon elongatus Genyonemus lineatus Eopsetta jordani Citharichthys sordidus Chilara taylori Lycodes pacificus Sebastes entomelas Sebastes elongatus Sebastes chlorostictus Species Name species respectively. bathypelagicdeep andmesopelagic, shelf, headassemblages contain mid-shelf, outer- bocaccio, Dover sole, and longspine thorny Anacapa,and Santa Cruz (eastern side) Is Barbara, Santa Catalina, Santa Clemente, (Groups5-6), andwarmwater sitesSan on Cruz (western side) and San Nicolas Islands Santa intermediateon 7-10),sites(Groups Conception Point around sites water cold groups: large three into segregate blages assem The 4.2.9). Table 4.2.10; (Figure islandsbetweengroups site the titioningof par obvious an was ThereTable 4.2.8. in southeast to northwest from arranged are and identified, were assemblages species (N=39,depthr r (N=39, tude lati in groups site among differences cant site ten signifiDiscriminantfoundanalysisgroups. into clustered were 44 which at sites, available only were surveys Diver ape. h kl vsa sres yielded surveys visual kelp The sampled. tasetduetothe methods used andhabitats da each withvaried diversityspecies Fish bution: lingcod and walleye surfperch. speciesassemblages northernwitha distri two were Theregroups. site northern than groups site southern and intermediate at habitats. These species were more common posed of many fish species common to kelp groups.assemblagebasskelpcomThe is meaningful into divide also assemblages species kelp species. The fish sixcontains only andgroups, site other all fromdistinct wasCojo.Alegria andAlegria at each, site one onlycontain 10 and 9ception. Groups Con Point around located are groups site termediatesitesGroupin 6. Thecold water inlingcodotherassemblage)(i.e.the than species fish northern the of occurrence er San Nicolas Island. These sites have a low on found sites the of separation definite a island. Within the intermediate sites, there is northwestsoutheasternand sectionsthe of the between partitioning definite a shows Island by Clemente San species.water warm characterized were which San Clemente, and Catalina Santa on located only is 2 Group islands. the of all on sites with wide-spread most the was 1 Group sites, water warm theWithin 1-4).(Groups lands 2 =0.67, F=11, P<0.0001) and P<0.0001)F=11,=0.67, 2 =0.43, F=4, P=0.005).=0.43,F=4,Eight ------in thatsite. groups the of %50 than more in present species represent cells Shaded groups. site GSP NMFS 4.2.7. Table snakehead eelpout deepsea sole Pacific grenadier Pacific viperfish twoline eelpout black skate Pacific flatnose California slickhead giant grenadier longspine thornyhead darkblotched rockfish shortspine thornyhead California grenadier blacktail snailfish brown catshark bank rockfish blackgill rockfish splitnose rockfish aurora rockfish longnose skate filetail catshark Pacific hake black eelpout bigfin eelpout spotted ratfish rex sole sandpaper skate sablefish Dover sole spiny dogfish northern anchovy Pacific electricray stripetail rockfish shortbelly rockfish chilipepper rockfish slender sole Pacific argentine bocaccio longspine combfish pink seaperch halfbanded rockfish plainfin midshipman curlfin sole Pacific pompano English sole lingcod white croaker petrale sole Pacific sanddab spotted cusk-eel blackbelly eelpout widow rockfish greenspotted rockfish greensplotched rockfish threadfin slickhead longnose catshark black hagfish en rqec o ocrec for occurrence of frequency Mean N=89 15 47 13 61 62 38 61 75 29 37 52 53 63 36 29 38 34 84 56 91 47 52 82 63 63 75 96 15 13 13 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 6 6 0 6 0 3 1 0 7 5 N=109 Site Groups 16 86 40 10 94 12 52 74 92 31 78 95 55 38 94 58 76 83 27 54 19 38 30 32 27 23 19 12 17 21 15 30 17 12 3 4 4 3 4 6 3 3 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 N=159 100 13 31 87 12 22 42 25 52 74 78 57 60 99 58 72 58 91 49 97 35 25 11 2 0 3 0 2 2 4 1 1 0 0 1 1 8 9 4 9 2 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 7 0 2 4 1 1 1 N=109 100 49 24 32 68 55 21 68 37 70 90 69 99 15 50 73 20 25 34 13 92 79 5 0 0 1 1 8 6 2 3 5 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 named forthemostinfluentialspeciesineachgroup. Bray-Curtis dissimilarity metric with average means clustering. Assemblages are 4.2.8. Table walleye surfperch assemblage lingcod Group assemblage kelp bass assemblage jack mackerel spotted kelpfish assemblage sargo shiner surfperch assemblage bocaccio assemblage A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Species assemblage results for kelp visual census surveys using surveys census visual kelp for results assemblage Species walleye surfperch olive rockfish grass rockfish blue rockfish yellowtail rockfish black-and-yellow rockfish copper rockfish gopher rockfish brown rockfish cabezon rainbow seaperch kelp greenling spotfin surfperch tubesnout lingcod Common Name kelp rockfish treefish California sheephead rubberlip seaperch senorita bat ray halfmoon rock wrasse garibaldi giant kelpfish opaleye black perch pile perch blacksmith ocean whitefish kelp perch island kelpfish kelp bass Pacific barracuda jack mackerel spotted kelpfish horn shark barred sandbass sargo shiner surfperch striped seaperch bocaccio jacksmelt white seaperch Hyperprosopon argenteum Sebastes serraniodes Sebastes rastrelliger Sebastes mystinus Sebastes flavidus Sebastes chrysomelas Sebastes caurinus Sebastes carnatus Sebastes auriculatus Scopaenichthys marmoratus Hypsurus caryi Hexagrammos decagrammus Hyperprosopon anale Aulo rhynchusflavidus Ophiodon elongatus Species Name Sebastes atrovirens Sebastes serriceps Semicossyphus pulcher Rhacochilus toxotes Oxyjulis californica Myliobatis californica Medialuna californiensis Halichoeres semicinctus Hypsypops rubicundus Heterostichus rostratus Girella nigricans Embiotoca jacksoni Rhacochilus vacca Chromis punctipinnis Caulolatilus princeps Brachyistius frenatus Alloclinus holderi Paralabrax clathratus Sphyraena argentea Trachurus symmetricus Gibbonsia elegans Heterodontus francisci Paralabrax nebulifer Anisotremus davidsonii Cymatogaster aggregata Embiotoca lateralis Sebastes paucispinis Atherinopsis californiensis Phanerodon furcatus page 123 Chapter 4 page 124 Chapter 4 diversity. differentin the recreational and SCCWRP datasets, but in both cases, explained less than 10% of the variance in and west contained slightly higher diversity than those located the farthest south and east. Depth was significantly highestcoefficient determination of dataset,observedkelp was the sites located where farthestfor the the north betweenislandsthecoast,theand areaswithall showing mixture high diversitya of diversity lowand sites. The Gridded mean diversity did not reveal obvious spatial patterns. In all datasets, there do not appear to be any trends methods could account for much of the variability. differencesinThe line. recreationaland hookthe then andtrawls,benthic diversity,highestthe the followedby A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary species presentinmorethan50%ofthegroupsthatsite. 4.2.9. Table black perch bat ray kelp bass Pacific barracuda jack mackerel spotted kelpfish horn shark barred sandbass sargo shiner surfperch striped seaperch bocaccio white seaperch jacksmelt walleye surfperch yellowtail rockfish tubesnout spotfin surfperch rainbow seaperch kelp greenling grass rockfish gopher rockfish copper rockfish cabezon brown rockfish blue rockfish black-and-yellow rockfish olive rockfish lingcod treefish senorita rubberlip seaperch rock wrasse pile perch opaleye ocean whitefish kelp perch kelp rockfish island kelpfish halfmoon giant kelpfish garibaldi California sheephead blacksmith Mean frequency of occurrence for kelp visual census site groups. Shaded cells represent cells Shaded groups. site census visual kelp for occurrence of frequency Mean N=3 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 67 67 33 67 33 33 67 67 67 67 33 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 N=2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 N=1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=1 100 100 100 100 100 100 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=4 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 75 25 50 25 25 75 50 75 50 50 50 50 50 75 75 75 50 75 50 25 25 SIte Groups 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 40 20 40 40 20 40 60 40 80 60 40 80 20 80 40 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 20 40 20 20 20 20 60 60 60 40 80 20 60 40 60 20 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 N=1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N=16 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 19 13 19 25 13 13 13 56 56 75 38 63 56 88 38 25 25 44 13 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 1 6 6 0 N=5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 20 60 20 40 20 20 40 20 60 80 40 60 20 20 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 represents a unique partnership of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), the NOAA Fisher NOAA the (CDFG), Game and Fish of Department California the of partnership unique a represents CalCOFI consortium. from (CalCOFI) Investigations werederived Fisheries Oceanic Cooperative here California the by provided presented data distribution larvae) fish (planktonic ichthyoplankton regional of maps The Data andMethods 4.3 Ichthyoplankton cantly different in three of the four data sets. effortsignifi significantlylatitude while were sets, and wasdata Depth four differentall • groups in between site (1.4±0.5 and 1.4±0.4, respectively). The recreational data had the lowest diversity (0.6±0.6). datasetkelp(1.8±0.5),datasetstrawldiversitytheSCCWRPNMFShighestFish bothforfollowedand was by• Summary spatial and temporal data is recommended. type is critical for west coast rockfish species. In order to fullycontrast, quantifywe were unable diveristyto provide comprehensive andfish assemblage data captured over patterns, hard substrates, additionalalthough this habitat occurwithinregiontheinterest, of e.g.kelpspecies, shelfsoftbottom species, slopeandsoftbottom species. In continental shelf and slope (Figure 4.2.11). Several ecologically important species assemblages were identified to agreement.in analysesareAdditionally, benthichabitatsbottomthediversityexhibitednumerous softoverhigh our and fish invertebratesand ofcommunities diversesupporting as documented well been have forests Kelp results from these analyses provide some understanding of highly diverse fish habitats and species assemblages. attemptedtheduedisparateto nature thefishof datasets (unequal effort, different sampling methods). However, Evaluating the potential impacts of fish diversity and species assemblagesAnalysis in ofrelation Boundary Concepts to boundary concepts was not the segregations detailed above. targeted benthic species, they may be less influenced by surface currents and temperature and less likelyThe toNMFS andshow SCCWRP trawls did not differentiate site groups among islands. Because both of these data sets tion zone between provinces. Overall, the recreational patterns are not easily discerned. Santa Rosa Islands were also present on other islands, demonstrating that and thiscontain region warm-watercould bespecies: considered Groups a 3, transi4, 7, 11, 12, and Thereare13.six recreational groups Allthat canbeconsidered sevensouthern astheysite arelocated south groupsofPoint Conception present on San Miguel and/or Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands, but Group 1 is found on all of the islands in the San Diegan province. gonian. These results show limited support for further division of the San southernDiegan siteprovince. groups Group(Groups 21-4) is are onlySan Diegan,found whileon the intermediateOregonianprovinces.andDieganThe San and the separate intonorthernpresentedhere datasurvey kelp site the fromResultsgroups (5-10) are Ore group. studies placed Santa Catalina and San Clemente into one group and Santa Barbara and Santasmaller Cruz groups into (Murray a second two provinceintoDiegan San separatedfurther forests thekelp intertidal and areas Researchonbiota.Diegan whileSanta Cruz (eastern part) Anacapa,Santa Barbara, Santa Catalina andSan Clemente Islands contain San the cold-temperate Oregonian. San Miguel, Santa Rosa, and San Nicolas ChannelTheIslandsIslandsdividedbiogeographicalmain aretwointo provinces:typicallywarm-temperate the DieganSanand contain Oregonian biota, (r and/orlongitude were significantly different between site groups in all datasets, but explained little of the variance 1988; Matthews and Richards, 1991; Sullivan, 1995; Allen Theseresults agree with previous investigations (Horn and Allen,1978; Gabriel and Tyler,1980; Allenand Smith, groupssitedatasets,withinfourall latitude and significant was recreational, the in SCCWRP, datasets.kelp and Thereweresimilarities assemblagethein results fromfourthedatasets. Depthsignificantlywas different among 2 =0.01-0.22). et al ., 1980; Murray and Littler, 1981; Littler A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary et al . 1998, 2002; Williams and Ralston, 2002). Latitude et al ., 1991; Pondella et al ., 2005). All of these - - - - page 125 Chapter 4 page 126 Chapter 4 A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Figure 4.2.11. 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N Boundary Concept1 Boundary Concept3 Boundary Concept5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Composite fishdiversitywithin boundaryconcepts. ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 0 0 0 F F F I I I n n n i i i s s s d d d v v v K K K h h h e e e i i i i i i v v v l l l o o o r r r d d d e e e m m m t t t 5 5 5 H M L H M L H M L e e e 0 0 0 r r r o o o e e e i i i i i i o o o v v v s s s g g g b b b t t t w w w e e e 1 1 1 1 1 1 d d d e e e h h h i i i r r r r r r 1 1 1 1 1 1 t t t s s s e e e 8 8 8 8 8 8 a a a r r r y y y ° ° ° ° ° ° r r r s s s W W W W W W t t t a a a e e e i i i t t t t t t e e e y y y 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N Boundary Concept4 Study Area 1 1 1 1 1 1 Boundary Concept2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 ° ° ° ° ° ° W W W W W W 0 0 0 F F F I I I n n n i i i s s s d d d v v v K K K h h h e e e i i i i i i v v v l l l o o o r r r d d d e e e m m m t t t 5 5 5 L H M L H M L H M e e e 0 0 0 r r r o o o e e e i i i i i i o o o v v v s s s g g g b b b t t t w w w e e e 1 1 1 1 1 1 d d d e e e h h h i i i r r r r r r 1 1 1 1 1 1 t t t s s s e e e 8 8 8 8 8 8 a a a r r r y y y ° ° ° ° ° ° r r r s s s W W W W W W t t t a a a e e e i i i t t t t t t e e e y y y 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N 33°N 34°N 35°N 36°N period(s) and spatial domain of focus. Most agreestudying that signalsthe effects relatedof ocean to climate ocean climateon larval distribution, can be seena spatially-articulatedinand thethe results abundancehave necessarily analysisvaried of totalbased ichthyoplanktonon the time cillation abundance (ENSO) cycle, trends and is not2-3 presented. periods in theMany longer scientistsBecause term ocean have these been climatology data span of many the Pacificyears representativeDecadal Oscillation of both (PDO), warm and cool water events in the Elorg/newhome/cruises/equip/nets.htm>. Niño-Southern Os . found be can institutions member its More information about CalCOFI and resources. living its of management the to and California of coast the off environment marine the of study al gener more a to shifted has focus its recently however, California; off sar Pacific ( dine the of collapse the of 1949 to study the ecological aspects in formed was partnership CalCOFI The Diego). San California, of sity Institution of Oceanography (Univer Scripps the and (NMFS) Service ies Sardinops sagax Sardinops ) populations ) ------Figure 4.3.1 Figure 4.3.2 . CalCOFIbongoneteffort data. . GeographicextentofCalCOFIbongonetdata. A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary - page 127 Chapter 4 page 128 Chapter 4 itr hog srn, ih ek i Fbur. n oten aiona te ro rlae s oe protracted, more is release brood (Leet January in July, the peaking through October from California, ranging southern In February. in peaks with spring, through winter late from occurs release brood California, northern and central Off fish. (viviparous) live-bearing are Bocaccio Bocaccio sampled less frequently, exhibited few larval cases ofabundance high high halibut (e.g., larval of1 and density. 1a). areas Monterey include Bay, likely Gulf of the Farallones, will mainland and the Cordell to nearshore Bank easnational marine sanctuaries, while conceptcapturesmore,anythatar abundancespecies.thisforFurther arycapture boundlarge areas sanctuaryofhigh larval current the and Assuch, the Santa Barbara Channel terizedhighhalibutby larval density. and San Clemente Islands, is charac areasMiguel,aroundSan Anacapa, California Bight, including nearshore Southern the along coastlineentire general, (mean=0.02). theontory In Conception (mean=0.005) Pt. than ofsouth of norththe prom DF=376) significantly lower (P<0.003, F=8.92, gested that mean larval abundance sug variance of is analysis an Bight, California Southern the in effort to compared reduced is Bay Morro of north effort sampling though Even adjacent to the shore. val abundance are found in hexagons classified in the top 20% of halibut lar timatedabundance values. areasAll generally fall in the lowest 40% of es (Figure4.3.3).Incidences halibutfew, shorefromwherearepresent,ofbongoandlarvaebeyondnetskm in6.5 of egg and larval densities are found in waters occurringless than in waters100 m, shallower and within than 30 6.5 m. Spawning km from also shore Adultgenerally halibut (Leet occurs are reported in shallowto prefer coastalsoft bottom waters,habitats accordinglyin coastal California peakwaters of halibut100 m or less, with greatest abundances Broad-scale Patterns interpreted with care, as they represent a compositefor that of 46species. years of Becausesampling. of the natural variability20th percentiles in larval (quintiles). abundance, Whiteestimated hexagons patternseach indicatehexagon of represent larval areas abundancethe whereaverage bongolog-transformed must towsbe wereabundance assignedperformed,of all totows the butin hexagonthe hexagon,resulted in whichand itinwere fell.classified no Hexagonscatch into are 25nal km spatial wide (east-west) framework. by The 37 total km long standardized (north-south). number Values ofDistribution individuals in and perabundance tow was log-transformedpatterns for these four (log10[Nstd+1]) species were mapped and by sampling all bongo tows into ahexago sardine and northern anchovy). four individual species representative of botha species-level groundfishes analysis (California of ichthyoplankton halibut and is beyondbocaccio)degree the scope ofspatialand ofpelagicand thistemporal report, variability,fishes we’ve (Pacific chosen grouping to focusallyears ourandall analysesspecies teraction,obscures on distribution and arepatterns. thus Althoughdifficult to isolatedata (Loeb and quantify. In analyzing the CalCOFI data,A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary we found that because of the high P. californicus ( et al Sebastes paucispinis ., 1983; Moser larval data presented here corroborate these reports, with a clear nearshore trend in peak abundance ( Paralichthys californicus et al ) . 1993; Sakuma and Ralston, 1995); however, these effects are confounded by in ------tows. Dataareclassifiedintoquintiles(maprange:32 4.3.3 Figure ) . Estimated mean larval abundance for California halibut in CalCOFI bongo CalCOFI in halibut California for abundance larval mean Estimated . et al et ., 2001, Love 2001, ., et al et ° to42 ., 2002). Female bocaccio Female 2002). ., ° N). et al ., 2001). Analysis - - that ranges from San Francisco in the north to Punta Baja in the south. The center of this population is reported subpopulation central a with North America, of coast Pacific the along distributed widely are anchovy Northern Northern anchovy (2001) asrangingbetween 15°-16°C(59°-61°F). Leet by reported is which temperature spawning optimum the bounding (62.6°F), 17°C to (57.2°F) 14°C indicates that mean spring and summer sea surface temperatures in 2) areas of (Chapter peak larval 2.5.1 abundance range Figure from 2). Chapter 2.4.6, (Figure fishes larval entrain and months these during region the in of optimum spawning temperatures south of the point, coupled with mesocale circulation patterns that dominate preponderance the to due likely is (mean=0.063). This promontory the of south than (mean=0.013) Conception Pt. of north DF=376) F=21.27, (P<0.003, lower significantly is abundance larval mean that indicated variance of analysis 4.3.5). An (Figure California central in Bay Monterey of west km 300 and Conception, Point of west south km 450 to out Bight California Southern the of waters coastal from ranging abundances observed mum maxi with variable, highly are distributions that suggest here presented sardines Pacific larval of analyses The 2001). (Leet climate ocean driven ENSO on based widely vary can spawning of centers and temperature, water by significantly influenced is activity spawning Sardine km. 560 to out reports with shore, from km 250 mately the in summer.through spring early approxi California) from occur peaks to with believed south, is activity spawning the of Most (Baja, Bay Magdalena to north the in Conception Pt. between California. year-round southern occurs and Spawning central off located is density of center subpopulation’s northern the that thought is It study area are part of the northern subpopulation which ranges from Baja California to Alaska (Leet a southern population off Baja California, and 3) a northern subpopulation. Most of the sardines occurring in the 2) California, of Gulf the 1) subpopulations: three of comprised be to believed is population sardine Pacific The Pacific sardine (mean=0.049). promontory the of south than (mean=0.038) Conception Pt. of north DF=376) F=1.13, (P<0.29, different no are from resulted larval catches in areas early spring. Overall, an analysis of These variance suggested that offshore.mean bocaccio larval abundances farther and Bay, Monterey of north the to seen be can abundance larval bocaccio high of area diffuse more A months. winter late the in average, appear on that, abundances val This is an expression of the high lar abundance. larval bocaccio average high of area large a capture to ured Action Concept,NAC)iswellconfig No (or boundary CINMS current the such, As 4.3.4). Cali (Figure Bight fornia Southern the in Island Rosa Santa of south just centered is area largest and first the – seen be can areas of relatively high larval density distinct Two literature. reported the with agrees here presented tribution dis bocaccio larval of analysis The (Leet waters nearshore in habitats grass eel and/or rocky to recruit juveniles year the of young and rapidly, grow bocaccio Larval shore. from km 480 as far as observed been have vae (Leet north the in uncommon more is This season. a in broods multiple produce to ported re been have California southern in et al ., 2001, Love ( Sardinops sagax ( et al et Engraulis mordax ., 2001). Lar 2001). ., et al ., 2002). ) ------) Data areclassifiedintoquintiles(maprange:32 4.3.4 Figure . Estimated mean larval abundance for bocaccio in CalCOFI bongo tows. bongo CalCOFI in bocaccio for abundance larval mean Estimated . A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary ° to42 ° N). et al ., 2001). et al et et al et ., - - - . page 129 Chapter 4 page 130 Chapter 4 • California halibut didnotexhibit differences inmean larvalabundance north vs.south ofPointConception. Pacific sardine, andbocaccio). Conception anchovy,(northern north the to Point than of south dance abun larval higher exhibited three • Of the four species presented here, spatially andtemporally. America can be highly variable, both distribu North of coast Pacific the and along tion abundance Larval • Summary among boundaryconcepts. differences “manageable” potential of estimate confident and robust a develop to 4.3.2) (Figure resolution alyzed here are insufficient in spatial val fishes of the region. The data an ation, capture areas important to lar consider under boundaries all CINMS and the including Bight, fornia here suggest that the Southern Cali presented species four the of each for Data (OAI). Index Area Optimal an develop to effort an in concepts into each of the Sanctuary boundary patterns broad-scale described the gram, we have chosen not to sample through pro CalCOFI the of history long the efforts sampling variable tions as a whole, coupled with highly distribu larval in variation temporal Due to the high degree of spatial and Analysis ofBoundaryConcepts species. eas of high larvalabundancefor this ar large captures boundary CINMS current the such, north As (mean=0.18). the to than (mean=1.0) tion nitude higher south of Point Concep mag of order an are anchovy larval of abundances mean that suggest DF=376) F=101.84, (P<0.001, ance (Figure 4.3.6). Results of an analysis of vari Bight California entire Southern the throughout abundance observed maximum of area pansive Leet by ed here corroborate the results present presented anchovy northern larval spring through (Leet winter late in curs oc spawning peak Anchovy California Bight. Southern the occupy to A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary et al et ., 2001). The analyses of analyses The 2001). ., et al et . (2001), with an ex an with (2001), . ------tows. Dataareclassifiedintoquintiles(maprange:32 4.3.5 Figure tows. Dataareclassifiedinto quintiles(maprange:32 Figure 4.3.5 . Estimated mean larval abundance for northern anchovy in CalCOFI bongo . Estimated mean larval abundance for Pacific sardine in CalCOFI bongo CalCOFI in sardine Pacific for abundance larval mean Estimated . ° ° to42 to42 ° ° N). N). sion. Rockville, Maryland.EstuarineLiving MarineResourcesReport No.8.329pp. Divi Assessments Environmental Strategic NOAA/NOS summaries. history life Species II: Volume estuaries, coast west in invertebrates and fishes of abundance and Distribution 1991. Monaco. M.E. and Hinton, S.A. Stone, S.L. R.L., Emmett, Ebert, D.A.2003.Sharks, rays, andchimaerasofCalifornia.UniversityCalifornia Press,Berkelely Fisheries Synopsis125:251-655. Nations) United the of Organization Agricultural and (Food FAO Carcharhiniformes. 2. Part of date. to catalogue known illustrated species shark and annotated An world. the of Sharks 4. Vol. catalogue. Species FAO 1984. L.J.V. Compagno, Bulletin 102:264-277. ( shrimp brown juvenile for habitat fish essential determine P.A.Monaco, M.E. Christensen, J.D. C., and R. T.J.Matthews, Clark, G.A. Caldwell, 2004. Minello. Ato model habitat-use Castro, J.I.1983. The sharksofNorth American waters. Texas A&M UniversityPress.180pp. in thesouthernCaliforniaBight.FisheriesBulletin101:260-280. Butler, J.L., L.D. Jacobson, J.T. Barnes and H.G. Moser. 2003. Biology and population dynamics of cowcod ( evaluation. (Available fromPFMC,2130S.W. Fifth Ave., Suite224,Portland,OR97220-1384.) Management Council. Fishery Appendix: Pacific Status of the cowcod. Pacific Coast groundfishof fishery through 1998:assessment stock assessmentStock and fishery 1999. Collins. R. and Moser H.G. J.T.Barnes, Jacobson, L.D. J.L., Butler, vertebrate speciesinCascoandSheepscotBays,Maine.North American JournalofFisheriesManagement20:408-435. Brown, S.K., K.R. Buja, S.H. Jury, M.E. Monaco, and A. Banner. 2000. Habitat suitability index models for eight fish and in Report No.77,EPA-600/3-77-033. Virginia InstituteofMarineScience,Williamsburg,VA. 114 pp. Scientific Special pollution. water of investigations ecological in classification numerical D.F.of Boesch, 1977. Application Research Project,Westminster, CA.572pp. 1998 Regional Monitoring Program: V. Demersal fishes and megabenthic invertebrates. Southern California Coastal Water V.T.Jarvis, E. Diehl, D. Bight California T.Moore, and Weisberg,Southern B. 2002. S. Mikel. S. Cadien, Y.Thomas, D. C. Gartman, Raco-Rands, Noblet, R. Ralph, A. J. Deets, G. Steinert, A. S. Brown, J. Diener, D. Groce, K. A. J., M. Allen, Coastal Water ResearchProject,Westminster, CA.365pp. Project: V.Pilot 1994 Bight California Southern 1998. California Southern invertebrates. megabenthic and fishes Demersal Allen, M. J., S.L. Moore, K.C. Schiff, S.B. Weisberg, D. Diener, J.K. Stull, A. Groce, J. Mubarak, C.L. Tang, and R. Gartman. NOAA Technical Report.NMFS66.151pp. Allen, M. J., and G. B. Smith. 1988. Atlas and zoogeography of common fishes in the Bering Sea and northeastern Pacific. fornia Academy ofSciences84(3):133-155. 1985. G. L. Allen, Cali Southern the A of Bulletin California. Southern from fishes marine nearshore the of analysis habitat sity ofCalifornia,SanDiego.577pp. Allen, M.J. 1982. Functional structure of soft-bottom fish communities of the southern California shelf. Ph.D. Thesis. Univer Management Council.Portland,Oregon.60pp. Fishery Pacific 1987. for catches biological recommended and 1986 through fishery groundfish Coast Pacific the of Status ( lingcod of Status P.1986. Adams, Literature Cited • Conceptswhichincludemorenearshorehabitatarelikelytohalibutlarvae. ture areasimportanttolarvalfishesoftheregion. • In general, the Southern CaliforniaBight, including the current and proposedCINMS boundary concepts, cap Ophiodon elongatus Ophiodon ) stocks off the coast of Washington, Oregon and California. In: California. and Oregon Washington, of coast the off stocks ) A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Farfantepenaeus aztecus Farfantepenaeus ) in Galveston Bay,Texas.Fisheries Galveston in ) , CA.284pp. Sebastes levis - - ) - - - page 131 Chapter 4 page 132 Chapter 4 New York. 130pp. McGarigal, K., S. Cushman, and S. Stafford. 2000. Multivariate statistics for wildlife and ecology research. Springer-Verlag, vice, Seattle,WA. 241pp. Ser Fisheries Marine Center,National Science Fisheries Team.Northwest Core EFH Service Fisheries Marine National McCain, B. 2003. Essential Fish Habitat West Coast Groundfish Draft Revised Appendix. (Prepared initially in June 1998) erative ofOceanicFisheriesInvestigativeReports27: 121-135. of species four MacGregor,of abundance Relative 1986. J.S. Vancouver Island,BritishColumbia.North American JournalofFisheriesManagement11:312-318. off habitats untrawlable and trawlable of assemblages (Scorpaenidae) Rockfish 1991. Richards. L.J. and K.R. Matthews, Berkeley andLos Angeles, CA.404pp. Love, M.S., M. Yoklavich, and L. Thorsteinson. 2002. The Rockfishes of the Northeast Pacific. University of California Press. from thesouthernCaliforniabight.NOAA,NMFS Technical Report87.38pp. Love, M.S., P. Morris, M. McCrae, and R. Collins. 1990. Life history aspects of 19 rockfish species (Scorpaenidae: bara, California.215pp. Bar Santa Press, Big Really coast. Pacific the of fishes the about know to want you than more Probably 1996. M.S. Love, California Currentarea,1975.CalifroniaCooperativeofOceanicFisheriesInvestigativeReports24:132-151. the in structure species fish larval of patterns seasonal and Geographical 1983. Moser. H.G. V.J.,and P.E.Loeb, Smith, In: A. C.MathiesonandP. H.Nienhuis(Eds.),Intertidalandlittoralecosystems.Elsevier, New York. Littler, M. M, D. S. Littler, S. N. Murray, and R. R. Seapy. 1991.Southern California rocky intertidal ecosystems. pp. 273-296. Lineaweaver, T.H. andR.H.Backus.1984. The naturalhistoryofsharks. SchockenBooks,New York. 256pp. pp. SG01-11.Report Resources Natural California 592 and of Agriculture University Game. and Fish of Department California Report. Resources: AStatus Marine Living California 2001. Eds. Larson. E.J. and Klingbeil, R. Dewees, W.S.,C.M. Leet, ments onreproduction.EnvironmentalBiologyofFishes35:187-203. Kusher, D.I., S.E. Smith, and G.M. Cailliet. 1992. Validated age and growth of leopard shark, 23-42. 5: Biogeography of Journal fishes. marine coastal California of analysis distributional A1978. Allen. L.G. and M.H. Horn, Hart, J.L.1973.PacificFishesofCanada.BulletintheFisheriesResourcesBoardCanada180.730pp. lingcod, of survival elongatus and development the on velocity current of Effects 1984. Congleton. J.L. and A.E. Giorgi, Gauch, H.G.Jr. 1982.Multivariateanalysisincommunityecology. CambridgeUniv. Press,New York. view 42(3-4):83-88. W.L.Gabriel, and A.V. Re Fisheries Marine assemblages. Tyler. fish demersal Coast Pacific of analysis Preliminary 1980. Department ofFishandGame64:74-92. Fitch, J.E. and S.A. Schultz. 1978. Some rare and unusual occurrences of fishes off California and Baja California. California patterns. distribution multispecies Marine EcologyProgressSeries8:37-52. analysing for strategy practical A1982. Warwick. M. R. and Clarke, R. K. G., J. Field, pp. Bay Monterey coast. Monterey,Pacific Aquarium, the of rays 64 and California. Sharks 1990. Ferguson, Cailliet. G. and A. Mifflin, Boston,Massachussetts.336pp. Houghton America. of North fishes Coast Pacific to guide field A1983. Hammon. H. and Herald, E.S. W.N.,Eschmeyer, A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary , embryos.EnvironmentalBiologyofFishes10:15-27. Sebastes off California and Baja California. Califronia Coop Califronia California. Baja and off California Triakis semifasciata , with com Sebastes Ophiodon - - - - -

graphic features during1992and1993. CaliforniaCooperativeof Oceanic InvestigativeReports 36:179-192. Sakuma, K.M, and S. Ralston. 1995. Distributional patterns of late larval groundfish off central California in relation to hydro telus henlei Russo, R.A. 1975. Observations on the food habits of leopard sharks ( delineate habitatessential to sustainablefisheries. AmericanFisheries SocietySymposium22:108-133. to modeling Suitability 1999. J.S. Ault. and Smith, S.G. Monaco, M.E. Coyne, P.J.,M.S. Rubec, Norris, J.C.W.Bexley,H. Romesburg, H.C.1984.Clusteranalysisforresearchers. LifetimeLearningPublications,Belmont,California.334pp. 75: 1-85. Roedel, P.M. and W.E. Ripley. 1950. California sharks and rays. California Department of Fish and Game, Fisheries Bulletin the at fishes rocky-reef nearshore the of Biogeography southern andBajaCaliforniaislands.JournalofBiogeography 32:187-201. 2005 Allen. G. L. and Cobb, R. J. Gintert, E. B. J., D. Pondella, Management Council,Portland,OR,andNationalMarine FisheriesService,SouthwestRegion,LongBeach,CA. Fisheries Pacific by Prepared Plan. Management Fishery To:Species Change Pelagic Name Coastal a The Incorporating Plan) Management Fishery (To Northern Anchovy 8 the 1998. Amendment (PFMC). Council Management Fishery Pacific and NationalMarineFisheriesService,SouthwestRegion,LongBeach,CA. OR Portland, Council, Management Fishery Pacific by Prepared Species. Migratory Highly for Fisheries Coast West U.S. for Statement Impact Environmental and Plan Management Fishery 2003. (PFMC). Council Management Fishery Pacific 29. Bethesda,MD.386pp. and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. American Fisheries Society,Common 2004. Special Publication Williams. D. J. and Lea, L.T.R.N. Espinosa-Perez, Gilbert, Findley,H. C.R. Crossman, E.J. J.S., Nelson, gic Assessment Branch.InvertebrateandFishVolume. strategic assessment: Data atlas. U.S. Department of Commerce NOAA. OMA/NOS, Ocean Assessments Division, Strate zones ocean and coastal America North of coast West 1990. (NOAA). Administration Atmospheric and Oceanic National fice, Seattle, Washington. Of Regional Northwest NMFS Washington;and Seattle, Division, Center,FRAM Science Fisheries Northwest NMFS ton; Tampa,WashingInc. Stanwood, MRAG TerraLogicAmericas, Florida; Inc., by GIS, Commission Fisheries Marine States National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2004. Risk Assessment for the Pacific Groundfish FMP. Prepared for the Pacific Santa BarbaraMuseumofNaturalHistory, SantaBarbara,California. California Islands. pp: 325-338. In: D.M. Power (Ed.), The California Islands: Proceedings of a multi-disciplinary symposium. Murray, S. N., M. M. Littler, and I. A. Abbott. 1980. Biogeograpy of the California marine algae with emphasis on the southern of Biogeography89:339-351. Murray, S.N. and M.M. Littler. 1981 .Biogeographical analysis of intertidal macrophyte floras of southern California. Journal exploitation. ReportsofCaliforniaCooperativeOceanicFisheriesInvestigations41:132-147. distribution of rockfish ( Moser, H.G., R.L. Charter, W. Watson, D.A. Ambrose, J.L. Butler, S.R. Charter, and E.M. Sandknop. 2000. Abundance and California CooperativeofFisheriesInvestigativeReports Atlas 31.233pp. 1951-1984. larvae, total more or region: 100 current with California Taxa the in eggs and larvae fish of atlas Distributional 1993. Watson.W. and Sandknop, E.M. Meyer, C.A. Charter, S.R. Ambrose, D.A. P.E.Charter,Smith, R.L. H.G., Moser, Fisheries Bulletin157.249pp. Game. and Fish of Department California California. of fishes marine coastal the to Guide 1972. Lea. Miller,R.N. and D.J. Fisheries anchovy.American northern Society SymposiumSeries6:66-82. for mortality and abundance historical of estimates Synthetic 1989. R.D. Methot, ences onlarvalsurvival.Ph.D.thesis,UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego,CA. Methot, R.D. 1981. Growth rates and age distributions of larval and juvenile northern anchovy, ). CaliforniaDepartmentof FishandGame61:95-103. Sebastes ) larvae in the Southern California Bight in relation to environmental conditions and fishery A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary Triakis semifasciata ) and brown smoothhounds ( Engraulis mordax , with infer Mus ------page 133 Chapter 4 page 134 Chapter 4 Center ProcessedReport,2001-3. Anchorage, AK. 135pp. suspiciously of analysis small catches in Retrospective the National Marine 2001. Fisheries F.R.Shaw.Service West Coast and Triennial Lauth, Bottom Trawl R.R. Survey.Weinberg, K.L. Alaska Fisheries Science Wilkins, M.E. M., Zimmerman, of Fisheriesand Aquatic Science60:657-669. survey.trawl bottom Journal a Canadian of boundaries the within areas untrawlable of Calculations 2003. M. Zimmerman, water rockfishesinasubmarinecanyon:andexample ofanaturalrefuge.FisheriesBulletin98:625-641. deep- of associations Habitat 2000. Love. M.S. and Lea, R.N. Sullivan, D.E. Cailliet, G.M. Greene, Yoklavich,G. H. M.M., 1. CaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame,MarineRegionGISLaboratory Wright, N., J. Kum, C. King, E. Knaggs, B. Leos, and C. Perez. 2000. Marine fishery profiles. Volume 1; Nearshore-Version California andsouthernOregon.FisheriesBulletin100:836-855. Williams, E.H. and S. Ralston. 2002. Distribution and co-occurrence of rockfishes over trawlable shelf and slope habitats of Seattle, WA. 138pp. NMFS-AFSC-89. Tech.Memo NOAA composition. age and length and abundance, distribution, of groundfish Estimates of resources: survey trawl bottom coast west Pacific 1995 The 1998. Weinberg. K.L. and Zimmerman, M. M.E., Wilkins, cispinis chilipepper,of growth and composition, age composition, Size 1980. Wilkins,M.E. NWFSC-50. Seattle,WA. 122pp. of distribution, abundance, and length composition. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS- west coast upper continental slope trawl survey of groundfish resources off Washington, Oregon, and California: Estimates Pacific Center Science Fisheries Northwest W.W. 1998 and The 2001. Wakefield. Sanborn, Piner, H.R. K. Hormess, B.H. Turk, T.A., T. Builder, C.W. West, D.J. Kamikawa, J.R. Wallace, R.D. Methot, A.R. Bailey, K.L. Bosley, A.J. Cook, E.L. Fruh, fornia DepartmentofFishandGame62:286-298. Talent, L.G. 1976. Food habits of the leopard shark, cal ReportNo.59.Monterey, CA.37pp. mercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Fishery, 1987-1992. California Department of Fish and Game, Marine Resources Techni Sullivan, C.M. 1995. Grouping of fishing locations using similarities in species composition for the Monterey Bay area Com ishment estimatesbasedonataggingstudyinSanFranciscoBay. FisheriesBulletin88:371-381. Smith, S.E. and N.L. Abramson. 1990. Leopard shark ence 42(1):69-82. Sci and Aquatic Fisheries of Journal Canadian clupeioids. O-group of survival P.E.and Year-classSmith, 1985. strength Commerce, NOAA Technical MemorandumNMFS-AFSC-114. SilverSpring,MD.138pp. survey of groundfish resources: estimates of distribution, abundance, and length and age composition. U.S. Department of Shaw, F.R., M.E. Wilkins, K.L. Weinberg, M. Zimmermann and R.R. Lauth. 2000. The 1998 Pacific west coast bottom trawl TR EL-82-4.10pp. R(11.119), (USFWS) Service Wildlife and Engineers. Fish of U.S. Corps lingcod. Army -- Northwest) (Pacific invertebrates and fishes coastal of requirements environmental and histories Life profiles: T.J.Species Shaw,W.N.and Hassler.1989. 125 p. Il. Urbana, Press, Illinois of University W.communication. and of Weaver.E., theory C. mathematical Shannon, The 1949. A Biogeographic Assessment oftheChannelIslandsNationalMarineSanctuary , fromthe1977rockfishsurvey. MarineFisheriesReview42:48-53. Triakis semifasciata Triakis semifasciata , in Elkhorn Slough, Monterey Bay, California. Cali distribution, mortality rate, yield, and stock replen , Monterery, CA. Sebastes goodei Sebastes , and bocaccio, and , S. pau S. ------