DOCSLIB.ORG

The La Jolla Shores Coastal Watershed Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The La Jolla Shores Coastal Watershed Management Plan TThhee LLaa JJoollllaa SShhoorreess CCooaassttaall WWaatteerrsshheedd MMaannaaggeemmeenntt PPllaann FFiinnaall RReeppoorrtt Submitted For: Proposition 50, Chapter 8 IRWM Planning Grant Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan January 31, 2008 The La Jolla Shores Coastal Watershed Management Plan Final Report Submitted by Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California, San Diego City of San Diego San Diego Coastkeeper Report Submitted for Proposition 50, Chapter 8 IRWM Planning Grant Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan January 31, 2008 January 31, 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for the project has been provided in part through a grant from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) pursuant to the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002 (Agreement No. 05-231-550-0). This Plan was prepared by the La Jolla Shores Watershed Management Group, consisting of Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the University of California, San Diego, the City of San Diego, and the San Diego Coastkeeper. The following individuals made major contributions to this Plan: Scripps Institution of Oceanography Tom Collins Lisa Hazard Dr. Bill Hodgkiss Suzanne Lawrence Dr. Ed Parnell Dr. Linda Rasmussen Dr. Eric Terrill Sandra Varond Nancy Wilson University of California, San Diego Anka Fabian Julie Hampel Kimberly O’Connell City of San Diego Ruth Kolb Beverly Morisako Jennifer Nichols-Kearns Chris Zirkle San Diego Coastkeeper Kate Hanley Bruce Reznik Meagan Wylie Consultant Team Meleah Ashford, Ashford Engineering, Inc. Mike Cairns, CValdo Bryn Evans, Weston Solutions Dr. David Pohl, Weston Solutions Nathan Schaedler, MACTEC Rolf Schottle, AMEC Richard Rusnak, MACTEC The La Jolla Shores Watershed Management Group would like to extend a special thanks to the SWRCB Grant Manager Jeff Albrecht. La Jolla Shores Coastal Watershed Management Plan i January 31, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose of Plan.....................................................................................................1 1.2 Background ...........................................................................................................3 1.3 Project Methodology and Participants...................................................................4 1.3.1 Scripps Institution of Oceanography..........................................................5 1.3.2 University of California, San Diego............................................................5 1.3.3 City of San Diego.......................................................................................6 1.3.4 San Diego Coastkeeper.............................................................................6 1.4 Other Relevant Studies/Projects ...........................................................................6 2.0 REGIONAL DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................8 2.1 Watershed Overview .............................................................................................8 2.2 Areas of Special Biological Significance Description.............................................9 2.2.1 San Diego-Scripps State Marine Conservation Area (ASBS No. 31) .............................................................................................................9 2.2.2 La Jolla State Marine Conservation Area (ASBS No. 29)........................10 2.3 History of the Watershed.....................................................................................10 2.4 Physical Resources.............................................................................................11 2.4.1 Ecological Processes and Environmental Resources .............................11 2.4.2 Major Land Use Divisions........................................................................11 2.4.3 Major Water Related Infrastructure..........................................................12 2.5 Hydrologic Resources .........................................................................................14 2.6 Biological Resources...........................................................................................15 2.7 Beneficial Uses....................................................................................................16 2.8 Critical Coastal Areas..........................................................................................16 2.9 UC Natural Reserve System - La Jolla Coastal Reserve ....................................17 2.10 Cultural Resources..............................................................................................17 2.10.1 Social and Cultural Makeup of the Regional Community ........................17 2.10.2 Cultural and Social Values.......................................................................18 2.10.3 Economic Conditions and Trends............................................................19 2.10.4 Population Growth Trends.......................................................................19 3.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES............................................................................................21 3.1 Methodology for Determination ...........................................................................21 3.2 Key Management Issues.....................................................................................22 3.2.1 Key Issues and Findings from Each Component.....................................22 3.3 Goals and Objectives ..........................................................................................23 3.3.1 Plan Goals ...............................................................................................23 3.3.2 Plan Objectives........................................................................................23 4.0 WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES CONSIDERED................................................25 5.0 REGIONAL & STATE PLANNING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.....................................27 5.1 Regional Planning Objectives .............................................................................27 5.2 State Planning Objectives ...................................................................................27 5.3 Regional Conflicts ...............................................................................................28 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................30 6.1 ASBS Protection Model.......................................................................................30 La Jolla Shores Coastal Watershed Management Plan ii January 31, 2008 6.2 Triad Assessment Approach ...............................................................................32 6.3 Assessment.........................................................................................................35 6.3.1 ASBS Ecosystem Assessment Framework .............................................37 6.3.2 Adaptive Monitoring.................................................................................37 6.3.3 Ecosystem Linkages................................................................................37 6.3.4 Assessment Summary.............................................................................39 6.3.5 Information Management.........................................................................41 6.4 Planning ..............................................................................................................42 6.4.1 Project Identification Process ..................................................................42 6.4.1.1 BMP Integrated and Tiered Approach .........................................44 6.4.2 Project Prioritization Process...................................................................45 6.4.3 Management Measures: Short-term Implementation Program- Phase I ....................................................................................................46 6.4.4 Management Measures: Long-term BMP Implementation- Phase II...............................................................................................................46 6.4.5 Management Measures: Long-term BMP Implementation- Phase III..............................................................................................................47 6.4.6 Phased Approach - Summary..................................................................48 6.4.7 Adaptive Management Strategy ..............................................................48 6.4.8 Public Participation and Ocean Stewardship...........................................49 6.5 Plan Implementation............................................................................................49 6.5.1 Implementation Schedule ........................................................................49 6.5.2 Project Implementation............................................................................51 6.5.3 BMP Effectiveness Monitoring.................................................................52 6.5.4 Implementation Effectiveness Assessment/Measurement and Re- evaluation ................................................................................................53 6.5.5 Implementation Responsibilities ..............................................................53
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACY of the UC NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM This Page Intentionally Left Blank the Environmental Legacy of the Uc Natural Reserve System
    THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEGACY OF THE UC NATURAL RESERVE SYSTEM This page intentionally left blank the environmental legacy of the uc natural reserve system edited by peggy l. fiedler, susan gee rumsey, and kathleen m. wong university of california press Berkeley Los Angeles London The publisher gratefully acknowledges the generous contri- bution to this book provided by the University of California Natural Reserve System. University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The environmental legacy of the UC natural reserve system / edited by Peggy L. Fiedler, Susan Gee Rumsey, and Kathleen M. Wong. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-520-27200-2 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Natural areas—California. 2. University of California Natural Reserve System—History. 3. University of California (System)—Faculty. 4. Environmental protection—California. 5. Ecology—Study and teaching— California. 6. Natural history—Study and teaching—California. I. Fiedler, Peggy Lee. II. Rumsey, Susan Gee. III. Wong, Kathleen M. (Kathleen Michelle) QH76.5.C2E59 2013 333.73'1609794—dc23 2012014651 Manufactured in China 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R 2002) (Permanence of Paper).
    [Show full text]
  • UC San Diego Capstone Papers
    UC San Diego Capstone Papers Title Developing a Draft Management Plan for the Dike Rock Intertidal Area Scripps Coastal Reserve, La Jolla, California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4c57b1bc Author Som, Marina Publication Date 2015-04-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California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
    [Show full text]
  • UC Natural Reserve System Transect Publication 18:1
    University of California TransectS u m m e r 2 0 0 0 • Volume 18, No.1 A few words from the NRS systemwide office oday the NRS’s 33 reserve sites,* encompassing roughly T 130,000 acres, are protected and managed in support of teaching, research, and outreach activities. The only people who live there now are a handful of reserve personnel — mostly resident managers and stewards — who care for these wildlands, their resources and facilities, and who enable the teaching and research to continue across California. But this was not always the case. Long before even the concept of Cali- fornia, other people lived out their lives on these lands. Hundreds and thou- sands of years ago, other people were finding ways to feed, clothe, shelter, Photo by Susan Gee Rumsey and protect themselves, trying their The past is nonrenewable: Continued on page 32 Natural reserves protect rich cultural resources 4 Firsthand impressions of a Santa Cruz Island dig ’ve done research at the UC Natural Reserve System’s site on Santa Cruz Island for over 20 years, including archaeological field schools (10 summers) 7 Archaeology sheds light on and National Science Foundation-supported research (6 years) since 1985. I Big Creek mussel mystery I also did my Ph.D. on the island (1980-83) and recorded the major chert quar- 17 Of mammoths and men ries of El Montañon and the microblade production industries in the China Harbor area. 20 Picturing the past in the East Mojave Desert Santa Cruz Island is a remarkable place, and its pre-European cultural resources 25 And a useful glossary of are among the most important and exceptionally well-preserved in the United anthropology terms, too! States.
    [Show full text]
  • Point Loma Ocean Outfall
    APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF NPDES CA0107409 and 301(h) MODIFIED SECONDARY TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS Point Loma Ocean Outfall VOLUMEV APPENDICES G thru I City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department November 2007 Application for Renewal of NPDES CA0107409 & 301(h) Modified Secondary Treatment Requirements for Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Total Suspended Solids POINT LOMA OCEAN OUTFALL & POINT LOMA WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT Submitted under provisions of Section 301(h) of the Clean Water Act City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department 9192 Topaz Way San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 292-6401 November 2007 (updated) APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF NPDES CA0107409 & 301(h) MODIFIEDSECONDARY TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS CITY OF SAN DIEGO POINT LOMA OCEAN OUTFALL November 2007 VOLUME V TECHNICAL APPENDICES G through I Appendix G Beneficial Uses Assessment Appendix H Endangered Species Appendix I Proposed Monitoring Program LIST OF VOLUMES Volume I Executive Summary Volume II Part 1 - Basis of Application Part 2 - NPDES Application Forms Part 3 - Antidegradation Analysis Volume III Large Applicant Questionnaire Volume IV Appendix A Metro System Facilities and Operations Appendix B Point Loma Ocean Outfall Appendix C Compliance with Water Contact Standards Appendix D Effluent Disinfection Evaluation Appendix E Benthic Sediments and Organisms Appendix F Bioaccumulation Assessment Volume V Appendix G Beneficial Use Assessment Appendix H Endangered Species Appendix I Proposed Monitoring Program Volume VI Appendix J 2006 Annual Biosolids Report Volume
    [Show full text]
  • Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog Comments
    The Center for Biological Diversity submits the following information for the status review of the foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) (Docket #FWS-R8-ES-2015-0050), including substantial new information regarding the species' biology, population structure (including potential Distinct Population Segments of the species), historical and recent distribution and status, population trends, documented range contraction, habitat requirements, threats to the species and its habitat, disease, and the potential effects of climate change on the species and its habitat. The foothill yellow-legged frog has experienced extensive population declines throughout its range and a significant range contraction. Multiple threats continue unabated throughout much of the species’ remaining range, including impacts from dams, water development, water diversions, timber harvest, mining, marijuana cultivation, livestock grazing, roads and urbanization, recreation, climate change and UV-radiation, pollution, invasive species and disease. The species warrants listing as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Contact: Jeff Miller, [email protected] Contents: NATURAL HISTORY, BIOLOGY AND STATUS . .. 2 Biology. .2 Habitat . .. .4 Range and Documented Range Contraction . 4 Taxonomy . 9 Population Structure . 9 Historical and Recent Distribution and Status . 15 Central Oregon . .15 Southern Oregon . 18 Coastal Oregon . .20 Northern Coastal California . 25 Upper Sacramento River . 40 Marin/Sonoma . 45 Northern/Central Sierra Nevada . .47 Southern Sierra Nevada . .67 Central Coast/Bay Area . 77 South Coast. 91 Southern California . .. 94 Baja California, Mexico . .98 Unknown Population Affiliation. .99 Population Trends . .. .103 THREATS. .108 Habitat Alteration and Destruction . .. 108 Dams, Water Development and Diversions . .. .109 Logging . .. .111 Marijuana Cultivation . .. .112 Livestock Grazing . .. .112 Mining . .. .. .113 Roads and Urbanization .
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Reserve System Map Flyer
    Natural Reserve System Natural Reserve System UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA university of california 1111 Franklin St., 6th Floor Oakland, CA 94607-5200 The UC Natural Reserve System provides a nrs.ucop.edu library of ecosystems throughout California. Reserves offer outdoor laboratories to field scientists, classrooms without walls for students, and nature’s inspiration to all. Founded in 1965 to provide a network of wildland sites available for scientific study, the NRS has grown to include more than 40 locations encompassing more than 756,000 acres across the state. The NRS is the world’s largest university- Reserves are listed by administering campus operated system of natural reserves; no Berkeley Los Angeles San Diego other network of field sites can match its 1 Angelo Coast Range Reserve 15 Stunt Ranch Santa Monica 25 Dawson Los Monos LOBSANG WANGDU size, scope, and ecological diversity. 2 Blue Oak Ranch Reserve Mountains Reserve Canyon Reserve 3 Chickering American River Reserve 16 White Mountain Research Center 26 Elliott Chaparral Reserve 4 Hastings Natural History Merced 27 Kendall-Frost Mission Bay Reservation Marsh Reserve Sierra Nevada Research Stations: 5 Jenny Pygmy Forest Reserve 28 Scripps Coastal Reserve 17 Merced Vernal Pools and 6 Sagehen Creek Field Station Grassland Reserve Santa Barbara 29 Carpinteria Salt Marsh Reserve Davis 18 Yosemite Field Station 30 Coal Oil Point Natural Reserve 7 Bodega Marine Reserve Riverside 31 Kenneth S. Norris Rancho 8 Jepson Prairie Reserve 19 Box Springs Reserve Marino Reserve 9 McLaughlin
    [Show full text]
  • Grasslands-Vernal Pool Natural Reserve
    GRASSLANDS-VERNAL POOL NATURAL RESERVE CAMPUS EVALUATION University of California, Merced 2012 WORKING DRAFT University of California, Merced 5200 N. Lake Road Merced, California 95343 www.ucmerced.edu This document was prepared for use by the UC Natural Reserve System. Questions regarding data, management structure and budget should be directed to UC Merced’s Sierra Nevada Research Institute, http://snri.ucmerced.edu. Published 2012 UC Merced Physical Planning, Design and Construciton GRASSLANDS-VERNAL POOL NATURAL RESERVE CAMPUS EVALUATION University of California, Merced 2012 WORKING DRAFT CONTENTS 4 I. PROPOSED NAME 6 II. REGIONAL SETTING 8 III. LOCATION, SIZE AND OWNERSHIP 10 IV. SITE EVALUATION 12 V. CAMPUS COMMITTMENT 24 VI. RECOMMENDATION 26 5 I PROPOSED NAME: GRASSLANDS-VERNAL POOL NATURAL RESERVE In 1965, the University of California Natural Reserve System (NRS) began to assemble a system of protected sites for scientific study that would broadly represent California’s rich ecological diversity. By creating this system of “outdoor classrooms” and laboratories and making it available specifically for long-term study, the NRS supports a variety of disciplines that require fieldwork in wildland ecosystems. Natural Reserve System Today: Largest University Natural Reserve System in the World The mission of the Natural Reserve System Today, the NRS network includes 38 sites encompassing more than 750,000 acres across twelve ecological regions is to contribute to the in one of the most physiographically diverse regions in the understanding and wise United States. stewardship of the Earth and its natural systems by The reserves vary in size, remoteness, degree of human supporting university-level impact, and ability to support use.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast Region Report
    CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH CLIMATE CHANGE ASSESSMENT Central Coast Region Report Coordinating Agencies: CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH CLIMATE CHANGE ASSESSMENT Introduction to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment alifornia is a global leader in using, investing in, and advancing research to set proactive climate change policy, and its Climate Change Assessments provide the scientifc foundation for understanding climate- related vulnerability at the local scale and informing resilience actions. The Climate Change Assessments directly inform State policies, plans, programs, and guidance to promote effective and integrated action to Csafeguard California from climate change. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment (Fourth Assessment) advances actionable science that serves the growing needs of state and local-level decision-makers from a variety of sectors. Tis cutting-edge research initiative is comprised of a wide-ranging body of technical reports, including rigorous, comprehensive climate change scenarios at a scale suitable for illuminating regional vulnerabilities and localized adaptation strategies in California; datasets and tools that improve integration of observed and projected knowledge about climate change into decision- making; and recommendations and information to directly inform vulnerability assessments and adaptation strategies for California’s energy sector, water resources and management, oceans and coasts, forests, wildfres, agriculture, biodiversity and habitat, and public health. In addition, these technical reports have been distilled into summary reports and a brochure, allowing the public and decision-makers to easily access relevant fndings from the Fourth Assessment. • A concise summary of the Fourth Assessment’s most important fndings and conclusions. • An in-depth report on how California’s people, built KEY FINDINGS environment, and ecosystems will be impacted by climate change and how we can proactively adapt, based on the Fourth Assessment’s fndings.
    [Show full text]
  • NRS Personnel Directory Paul Aigner James M. Andre Feynner Arias
    NRS Personnel Directory As of September 17, 2015 Paul Aigner Campus: UC Davis Title: Resident Co-Director Email: [email protected] Work phone: 707 995-9005 Reserve: McLaughlin Natural Reserve Fax phone: 707 995-9005 (call first) Cell phone: Other phone: Mail: McLaughlin Natural Reserve FedEx: 26775 Morgan Valley Road Lower Lake, CA 95457 James M. Andre Campus: UC Riverside Title: Reserve Director Email: [email protected] Work phone: 760 733-4222 Reserve: Sweeney Granite Mountains Desert Research Center Fax phone: 760 733-9931 Cell phone: 951 312-3556 Other phone: Mail: Sweeney Granite Mtns Desert Research Ctr. FedEx: 909 Armory Road #118 HC1 Box 101 Barstow, CA 92311-5460 Kelso, CA 92351-0101 Feynner Arias Campus: UC Santa Cruz Title: Reserve Steward Email: [email protected] Work phone: 831 667-2543 Reserve: Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve Fax phone: 831 667-2543 (call first) Cell phone: Other phone: Mail: Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve FedEx: 58801 Highway 1 Big Sur, CA 93920 Anne Barrett Campus: UC Santa Barbara Title: Education Coordinator Email: [email protected] Work phone: 805-893-5655 Reserve: Valentine Eastern Sierra Reserve SNARL Fax phone: Cell phone: 760-937-4155 Other phone: Mail: 1016 Mount Morrison Road FedEx: Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546 Virginia Boucher Campus: UC Davis Title: Associate Director UCD NRS Email: [email protected] Work phone: 530 752-6949 Reserve: Jepson Prairie Reserve Fax phone: 530 754-9141 Quail Ridge Reserve Stebbins Cold Canyon Reserve Cell phone: 530 574-3782 Other phone: Mail: NRS/JMIE, The Barn FedEx: One Shields Avenue University of California Davis, CA 95616 Please send additions, deletions or changes to [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Areas of Washington, Oregon, and California Compiled
    Marine Protected Areas of Washington, Oregon, and California compiled by Al J. Didier, Jr. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission 45 SE 82nd Drive, Suite 100 Gladstone, OR 97027-2522 December 1998 Conducted under Contract No. 98-08 from the Pacific Fishery Management Council LIST OF TABLES Table 1. National marine sanctuaries of California, Oregon, and Washington. .............................6 Table 2. National Wildlife Refuges and Wilderness Areas of coastal California, Oregon, and Washington. ....................................................................................................................7 Table 3. National parks and monuments of coastal California, Oregon, and Washington. ............8 Table 4. Marine protected areas designated by state and local governments in California ..........10 Table 5. Marine protected areas designated by state and local governments in Oregon..............19 Table 6. Marine protected areas designated by state and local governments in Washington. ......21 Table 7. National Estuarine Research Reserves of coastal California, Oregon, and Washington. 27 Table 8. National Estuary Program sites of coastal California, Oregon, and Washington. ..........28 Table 9. UNESCO MAB Biosphere Reserve sites of coastal California, Oregon, and Washington.29 Table 10. Nearshore submarine cable segments off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. ..................................................................................................................30 Table 11. Coordinates (decimal degrees)
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Beach Sand Project Year 2
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................. 3 MARINE RESOURCES MONITORING......................................................................................... 4 LIST OF REPORTS 3DJH ROCKY INTERTIDAL MONITORING REPORT ........................................................... RI-1 SHALLOW SUBTIDAL MONITORING REPORT .......................................................... SS-1 KELP FOREST MONITORING REPORT........................................................................ KF-1 LOBSTER MONITORING REPORT................................................................................. LB-1 Page i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the Regional Beach Sand Project (RBSP) was to dredge up to two million cubic yards (cy) of sand from up to six offshore borrow sites and replenish 12 beaches along the coast of San Diego County from Oceanside to the north to Imperial Beach to the south. Construction started on April 6, 2001 and was completed on September 23, 2001. During the environmental review process, sediment transport modeling was conducted to determine the eventual fate of the sand to avoid any potential impacts to marine resources. These resources include rocky intertidal platforms, shallow subtidal reefs, and kelp beds. Despite the results of the modeling, concern from commercial fisherman and the
    [Show full text]
  • Large Interannual Variability of Spawning in San Diego's Marine
    1 Large interannual variability of spawning in San Diego’s marine protected areas captured by 2 molecular identification of fish eggs 3 4 Elena Maria Duke*, Alice E. Harada, Ronald S. Burton 5 Marine Biology Research Division 6 Scripps Institution of Oceanography 7 8 University of California, San Diego 9 10 La Jolla, CA 92093-0202 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1*Corresponding author: [email protected] 2 Interannual variability of fish spawning 27Abstract 28 Long-term monitoring of marine ecosystems is critical to assessing how global processes 29such as natural environmental variation and climate change affect marine populations. 30Ichthyoplankton surveys provide one approach to such monitoring. We conducted weekly fish 31egg collections off the Scripps Institution of Oceanography Pier (La Jolla, CA, USA) for three 32years (2014-2017) and added a second sampling site near the La Jolla kelp forest for one year 33(2017). Fish eggs were identified using DNA barcoding and data were compared to previous 34work from Pier surveys from 2012-2014. We documented large interannual variability in fish egg 35abundance associated with climatic fluctuations, including an El Niño event captured during our 36sampling years. Overall egg abundance was reduced by > 50% during periods of anomalously 37warm water in 2014-2016. Fish egg abundance rebounded in 2017 and was accompanied by a 38phenological shift of peak spawning activity. We found interannual fish egg abundance may be 39linked with upwelling regimes and winter temperatures. Across the period of joint sampling, we 40found no distinct differences in community composition between the Pier (soft bottom) and kelp 41forest habitat we sampled (2 km distant).
    [Show full text]