DOCSLIB.ORG

Distribution and Abundance of Shrimp, Plankton, and Benthos in Suisun Marsh

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Distribution and Abundance of Shrimp, Plankton, and Benthos in Suisun Marsh Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species Project Information 1. Proposal Title: Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species 2. Proposal applicants: Peter B. Moyle, University of California, Davis 3. Corresponding Contact Person: Ahmad Hakim-Elahi Regents of University of California Office of Vice Chancelor of Research Sponsored Programs 118 Everson 1 Shields Avenue University of California Davis, CA 95616 530 752-2075 [email protected] 4. Project Keywords: Estuarine/Tidal Ecology Nonnative Invasive Species Trophic Dynamics and Food Webs 5. Type of project: Research 6. Does the project involve land acquisition, either in fee or through a conservation easement? No 7. Topic Area: Shallow Water, Tidal and Marsh Habitat 8. Type of applicant: University 9. Location - GIS coordinates: Latitude: 38.182 Longitude: -121.998 Datum: Describe project location using information such as water bodies, river miles, road intersections, landmarks, and size in acres. The project is located within Suisun Marsh, Solano County, California. Research activities will take place in numerous waterbodies of Suisun Marsh including Peytonia, Boynton, Suisun, Spring Branch (First Mallard Branch), Cutoff, Montezuma, Nurse, Denverton, Goodyear and Cordelia sloughs. The Suisun Marsh is located in the San Francisco Estuary and is approximately 60,000 acres in size. 10. Location - Ecozone: 2.1 Suisun Bay & Marsh 11. Location - County: Solano 12. Location - City: Does your project fall within a city jurisdiction? No 13. Location - Tribal Lands: Does your project fall on or adjacent to tribal lands? No 14. Location - Congressional District: 7 15. Location: California State Senate District Number: 4 California Assembly District Number: 8 16. How many years of funding are you requesting? 3 17. Requested Funds: a) Are your overhead rates different depending on whether funds are state or federal? Yes If yes, list the different overhead rates and total requested funds: State Overhead Rate: 10 Total State Funds: 271804 Federal Overhead Rate: 48.5 Total Federal Funds: 0 b) Do you have cost share partners already identified? No c) Do you have potential cost share partners? No d) Are you specifically seeking non-federal cost share funds through this solicitation? No If the total non-federal cost share funds requested above does not match the total state funds requested in 17a, please explain the difference: 18. Is this proposal for next-phase funding of an ongoing project funded by CALFED? No Have you previously received funding from CALFED for other projects not listed above? Yes If yes, identify project number(s), title(s) and CALFED program. Linked hydrogeomorphic-ecosystem models to Habitat Restoration: 99-B190 support adaptive management: Channels, Floodplains Cosumnes-Mokolumne Paired Basin Project, and Marshes Habitat Restoration: McCormack-Williamson Tract Restoration 99-B193 Channels, Floodplains and Planning Design and Monitoring Program: I Marshes 19. Is this proposal for next-phase funding of an ongoing project funded by CVPIA? No Have you previously received funding from CVPIA for other projects not listed above? No 20. Is this proposal for next-phase funding of an ongoing project funded by an entity other than CALFED or CVPIA? No Please list suggested reviewers for your proposal. (optional) Jim J. California Department of Fish and (209) [email protected] Orsi Game 951-3228 Anke Department of Water (916) [email protected] Mueller-Solger Resources 227-2194 Wimm Kimmerer 21. Comments: For #17 We are requesting state funds for the entire project cost of 271,804. This includes the University overhead rate of 10%. Environmental Compliance Checklist Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species 1. CEQA or NEPA Compliance a) Will this project require compliance with CEQA? No b) Will this project require compliance with NEPA? No c) If neither CEQA or NEPA compliance is required, please explain why compliance is not required for the actions in this proposal. The proposed project is a research project which monitors the aquatic invertebrate community within Suisun Marsh and will not in any way modify or degrade the existing physical or chemical conditions found there. 2. If the project will require CEQA and/or NEPA compliance, identify the lead agency(ies). If not applicable, put "None". CEQA Lead Agency: NEPA Lead Agency (or co-lead:) NEPA Co-Lead Agency (if applicable): 3. Please check which type of CEQA/NEPA documentation is anticipated. CEQA -Categorical Exemption -Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration -EIR Xnone NEPA -Categorical Exclusion -Environmental Assessment/FONSI -EIS Xnone If you anticipate relying on either the Categorical Exemption or Categorical Exclusion for this project, please specifically identify the exemption and/or exclusion that you believe covers this project. 4. CEQA/NEPA Process a) Is the CEQA/NEPA process complete? Not Applicable b) If the CEQA/NEPA document has been completed, please list document name(s): 5. Environmental Permitting and Approvals (If a permit is not required, leave both Required? and Obtained? check boxes blank.) LOCAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS Conditional use permit Variance Subdivision Map Act Grading Permit General Plan Amendment Specific Plan Approval Rezone Williamson Act Contract Cancellation Other STATE PERMITS AND APPROVALS Scientific Collecting Permit Required CESA Compliance: 2081 CESA Compliance: NCCP 1601/03 CWA 401 certification Coastal Development Permit Reclamation Board Approval Notification of DPC or BCDC Other FEDERAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS ESA Compliance Section 7 Consultation ESA Compliance Section 10 Permit Required Rivers and Harbors Act CWA 404 Other PERMISSION TO ACCESS PROPERTY Permission to access city, county or other local agency land. Agency Name: Permission to access state land. Agency Name: Permission to access federal land. Agency Name: Permission to access private land. Landowner Name: 6. Comments. 5. Environmental Permitting and Approvals: This project will investigate the community composition of invertebrates living within Suisun Marsh, Solano County, California. It is unlikely that these activities will result in incidental take of ESA species. Any incidental take will likely be covered under our current IEP - Take limits for the UC Davis Suisun Marsh Fish Survey. Land Use Checklist Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species 1. Does the project involve land acquisition, either in fee or through a conservation easement? No 2. Will the applicant require access across public or private property that the applicant does not own to accomplish the activities in the proposal? Yes 3. Do the actions in the proposal involve physical changes in the land use? No If you answered no to #3, explain what type of actions are involved in the proposal (i.e., research only, planning only). Research Only 4. Comments. Conflict of Interest Checklist Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species Please list below the full names and organizations of all individuals in the following categories: Applicants listed in the proposal who wrote the proposal, will be performing the tasks listed in the proposal or who will benefit financially if the proposal is funded. Subcontractors listed in the proposal who will perform some tasks listed in the proposal and will benefit financially if the proposal is funded. Individuals not listed in the proposal who helped with proposal development, for example by reviewing drafts, or by providing critical suggestions or ideas contained within the proposal. The information provided on this form will be used to select appropriate and unbiased reviewers for your proposal. Applicant(s): Peter B. Moyle, University of California, Davis Subcontractor(s): Are specific subcontractors identified in this proposal? No Helped with proposal development: Are there persons who helped with proposal development? No Comments: None Budget Summary Distribution, and abundance of shrimp, plankton and benthos in Suisun Marsh: Tidal marsh as a refuge for native species Please provide a detailed budget for each year of requested funds, indicating on the form whether the indirect costs are based on the Federal overhead rate, State overhead rate, or are independent of fund source. State Funds Year 1 Direct Salary Benefits Other Total Task Task Supplies & Services or Indirect Total Labor (per (per Travel Equipment Direct Direct No. Description Expendables Consultants Costs Cost Hours year) year) Costs Costs Benthic 1 2865 35600 5796 2160 5346 13675 62577.0 4665 67242.00 Monitoring Mysid 2 1668 21792 3864 2880 2864 31400.0 3140 34540.00 Monitoring Zooplankton 3 1668 21792 3864 2880 2464 31000.0 3100 34100.00 Monitoring 6201 79184.00 13524.00 7920.00 10674.00 0.00 13675.00 0.00 124977.00 10905.00 135882.00 Year 2 Direct Salary Benefits Other Total Task Task Supplies & Services or Indirect Total Labor (per (per Travel Equipment Direct Direct No. Description Expendables Consultants Costs Cost Hours year) year) Costs Costs Benthic 1 2865 37068 6085 2160 2196 47509.0 4751 52260.00 Monitoring Mysid 2 1668 22732 4057 2880 2064 31733.0 3173 34906.00 Monitoring Zooplankton 3 1668 22732 4057 2880 2064 31733.0 3173 34906.00 Monitoring 6201 82532.00 14199.00 7920.00 6324.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110975.00 11097.00 122072.00 Year 3 Direct Salary Benefits Other Total Task Task Supplies & Services or Indirect Total Labor (per (per Travel Equipment Direct Direct No. Description Expendables Consultants Costs Cost Hours year) year) Costs Costs Final Report and 4 522 9261 2130 500 200 500 12591.0 1259 13850.00 Publication Preparation 522 9261.00 2130.00 500.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 12591.00 1259.00 13850.00 Grand Total=271804.00 Comments. To allow for increased wages in year2 and 3 of this project, Cost of living increases were calculated for tasks 1-3 for years 1 and 2 and Task 4 in year 3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suisun Marsh Fish Report 2011 Final.Pdf
    SUISUN MARSH FISH STUDY Trends in Fish and Invertebrate Populations of Suisun Marsh January 2011 - December 2011 Annual Report for the California Department of Water Resources Sacramento, California Teejay A. O'Rear and Peter B. Moyle Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology University of California, Davis July 2012 SUMMARY Suisun Marsh, at the geographic center of the San Francisco Estuary, is important habitat for introduced and native fishes. With funding from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the University of California, Davis, Suisun Marsh Fish Study has systematically monitored the marsh's fish populations since 1980. The purpose of the study has been to determine the environmental factors affecting fish abundance and distribution within the context of evolving water management. In 2011, we conducted 259 otter trawls and 74 beach seines. Our catches of plankton- feeding macroinvertebrates and fishes were strongly influenced by the interaction of high Delta outflows, low salinities, and the cold winter and spring. The prolonged low salinities severely reduced the population of overbite clams (Potamocorbula amurensis) in the southwest marsh, in addition to delaying the appearance of Black Sea jellyfish (Maeotias marginata) medusae until very late in the year. Species that ultimately benefit from high flows for spawning, due to either increased floodplain inundation [e.g., Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys macrolepidotus)] or reduced salinities [e.g., white catfish (Ameiurus catus)], recruited to the marsh in high numbers. Additionally, delta smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) reached their highest abundance in the marsh since 2001, which was likely due to the combination of (1) high flows both reducing entrainment and promoting plankton blooms, (2) colder water during spring creating more favorable spawning conditions, and (3) appropriate temperatures and salinities occurring in the marsh during autumn.
    [Show full text]
  • Suisun Marsh Fish Report 2018 Final.Pdf
    Trends in Fish and Invertebrate Populations of Suisun Marsh January 2018 - December 2018 Annual Report for the California Department of Water Resources Sacramento, California Teejay A. O'Rear*, Peter B. Moyle, and John R. Durand Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Center for Watershed Sciences University of California, Davis October 2020 *Corresponding author: [email protected] SUMMARY Suisun Marsh, at the geographic center of the northern San Francisco Estuary, is important habitat for native and non-native fishes. The University of California, Davis, Suisun Marsh Fish Study, in partnership with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), has systematically monitored the marsh's fish populations since January 1980. The study’s main purpose has been to determine environmental and anthropogenic factors affecting fish distribution and abundance. Abiotic conditions in Suisun Marsh during calendar-year 2018 returned to fairly typical levels following the very wet year of 2017. Delta outflow was generally low, with higher-than- average outflows only occurring in April when Yolo Bypass flooded. Salinities in 2018 were about average, in part because of Suisun Marsh Salinity Control Gates operations in late summer. Water temperatures were mild, being higher than average in winter and autumn and slightly below average during summer. Water transparencies were typical in winter and spring but, as has become a pattern since the early 2000s, were higher than average in summer and autumn. Dissolved-oxygen concentrations were consistent throughout the year, with only two instances of low values being recorded, both in dead-end sloughs. Fish and invertebrate catches in Suisun Marsh in 2018 told two main stories: (1) many fishes benefit from higher flows and lower salinities in Suisun Marsh while some invasive invertebrates do not; and (2) Suisun Marsh is disproportionately valuable to fishes of conservation importance.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Fish and Invertebrate Populations of Suisun Marsh January 2017
    Trends in Fish and Invertebrate Populations of Suisun Marsh January 2017 - December 2017 Annual Report for the California Department of Water Resources Sacramento, California Teejay A. O'Rear, Peter B. Moyle, and John R. Durand Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Center for Watershed Sciences University of California, Davis January 2019 SUMMARY Suisun Marsh, at the geographic center of the northern San Francisco Estuary, is important habitat for native and non-native fishes. The University of California, Davis, Suisun Marsh Fish Study, in partnership with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), has systematically monitored the marsh's fish populations since January 1980. The study’s main purpose has been to determine environmental and anthropogenic factors affecting fish distribution and abundance. Calendar year 2017 was wet and warm. Very high Delta outflows resulted in nearly freshwater conditions throughout Suisun Marsh from January to July, with lower-than-average salinities persisting until November. Matching the local climate, water temperatures were generally warmer than usual. Unlike most of the last 10 years when water transparencies greatly increased relative to the average in summer and autumn, water transparencies stayed near or below average for the latter half of 2017. Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations were sufficient for marsh fishes except in March in upper Goodyear Slough, when DO concentrations dipped below 3 milligrams per liter (mg/L). The aquatic community of Suisun Marsh responded to the wet, warm conditions. Non- native overbite clams (Potamocorbula amurensis), which require a salinity of at least 2 parts per thousand (ppt) for successful reproduction, were never abundant in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Embryonic and Larval Development of Sacramento Splittail, Pogonichthys Macrolepidotus Xin Deng1*, Swee J
    MARCH 2012 Embryonic and Larval Development of Sacramento Splittail, Pogonichthys macrolepidotus Xin Deng1*, Swee J. Teh2, Serge I. Doroshov,1 and Silas S. O. Hung1 ABSTRACT KEY WORDS Embryonic and larval development of Sacramento splittail, embryo, larva, development splittail (Pogonichthys macrolepidotus) was char- acterized from zygote to metamorphosis in labora- INTRODUCTION tory conditions. Fertilized eggs were obtained from induced and natural tank spawning of adults caught Sacramento splittail is a cyprinid endemic to in the Yolo Bypass of the Sacramento River. Splittail California’s Central Valley and the San Francisco produced transparent adhesive eggs with a moder- Estuary (Meng and Moyle 1995; Moyle 2002). It is ate perivitelline space. Duration of embryonic devel- the only extant species in genus Pogonichthys, after opment from fertilization to hatching was 100 h the extinction of the congeneric Clear Lake splittail at 18 ± 0.5 °C. Newly hatched larvae were 5.2 to P. ­ciscoides in the 1970s (Moyle 2002). Splittail has 6.0 mm total length with no mouth opening. Yolk- been listed as a species of special concern by the sac larvae were demersal and absorbed the yolk California Department of Fish and Game since 1989, within 10 days post-hatch. Exogenous feeding started then as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife at 6 days post-hatch, concomitant with swim bladder Service in 1999, primarily due to low population inflation and swim-up movement. Fin differentia- abundance during drought years in 1987 to 1992 tion began at approximately 10 d post-hatch (ca. 8.3 (Meng and Moyle 1994, 1995; Sommer and others to 8.85 mm total length) and was completed at 50 d 1997, 2007, 2008; Moyle and others 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Sonoma Creek Watershed Enhancement Plan
    DRAFT Sonoma Creek Watershed Enhancement Plan An owner’s manual for the residents & landowners of the Sonoma Creek Watershed. Prepared by: The Sonoma Resource Conservation District in conjunction with the people of the Sonoma Creek Watershed and collaboration with the Sonoma Ecology Center. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................. 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................. 8 SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND.............................................................. 9 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 10 PURPOSE OF THE SONOMA CREEK WATERSHED ENHANCEMENT PLAN....................................... 10 PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING THE PLAN ........................................................................................ 10 STAKEHOLDER GROUPS ............................................................................................................. 11 ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN ..................................................................................................... 14 WATERSHED GOALS ................................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2: WATERSHED DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY ............................................... 18 WATERSHED BOUNDARY OVERVIEW ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Change in Suisun Marsh AMBER DAWN MANFREE
    Landscape Change in Suisun Marsh By AMBER DAWN MANFREE B.A. (Sonoma State University) 1995 M.A. (University of California, Davis) 2012 DISSERTATION Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Geography in the OFFICE OF GRADUATE STUDIES of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS Approved: _____________________________________ Peter B. Moyle, Chair _____________________________________ Deborah L. Elliott-Fisk _____________________________________ Jay R. Lund Committee in Charge 2014 i UMI Number: 3646341 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3646341 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 Amber Dawn Manfree September 2014 Geography Landscape Change in Suisun Marsh Abstract Suisun Marsh is a 470 km2 wetland situated between the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Pablo Bay in the San Francisco Estuary. Today, about 80 percent of the marsh plain is privately owned by duck hunting clubs and managed in accordance with conservation agreements. A complex network of sloughs weaves through the Marsh, providing habitat for numerous aquatic species. Together the waterways and marsh plain support a stunning array of species, provide exurban open space, and are increasingly called upon to meet regional conservation objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 95/Monday, May 18, 1998
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Proposed Rules 27255 We invite comment on all aspects of has been a substantial, measurable DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR this proposal. Any person that wishes to deterioration in rail service provided by participate as a party of record in this the incumbent carrier. Fish and Wildlife Service matter must notify us of this intent by (b)(1) Petition for Relief. Parties may May 28, 1998. In order to be designated seek relief described in paragraph (a) of 50 CFR Part 17 a party of record, a person must satisfy this section by filing an appropriate Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the filing requirements outlined in the petition containing: and Plants, Notice of Reopening of ADDRESSES section. We will then (i) A full explanation, together with Comment Period on the Proposed compile and issue a service list. Copies all supporting evidence, to demonstrate Threatened Status of the Sacramento of comments and replies must be served that the standard for relief contained in Splittail on all persons designated on the list as paragraph (a) of this section is met; a party of record. Comments on the (ii) A summary of the petitioner's AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, proposal are due June 15, 1998; replies discussions with the incumbent carrier Interior. of the service problems and the reasons are due July 15, 1998. ACTION: Proposed rule, notice of why the incumbent carrier is unlikely to A copy of this decision is being reopening of comment period. served on all parties on the service list restore adequate rail service consistent in Ex Parte No.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0013] [MO 92210-0-0008-B2] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-month Finding on a Petition to list the Sacramento Splittail as Endangered or Threatened AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list the Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys macrolepidotus) as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. After review of all available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing the Sacramento splittail is not warranted at this time. However, we ask the public to submit to us any new information that becomes available concerning the threats to the Sacramento splittail 1 or its habitat at any time. DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on October 7, 2010. ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R8-ES-2010-0013. Supporting documentation we used in preparing this finding is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay Delta Fish and Wildlife Office, 650 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA 95814. Please submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this finding to the above street address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Castelberry, San Francisco Bay Delta Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES); by telephone at 916-930-5632; or by facsimile at 916-930-5654.
    [Show full text]
  • Sonoma Creek Baylands Strategy Final Report – May 2020
    Sonoma Creek Baylands Strategy Final Report – May 2020 Sonoma Creek Baylands Strategy 1 May 2020 Acknowledgements Project Team Kendall Webster, Sonoma Land Trust Julian Meisler, Sonoma Land Trust Wendy Eliot, Sonoma Land Trust Jeremy Lowe, San Francisco Estuary Institute Ellen Plane, San Francisco Estuary Institute Scott Dusterhoff, San Francisco Estuary Institute Sam Veloz, Point Blue Conservation Science Michelle Orr, ESA James Gregory, ESA Stephanie Bishop, ESA Renee Spenst, Ducks Unlimited Steve Carroll, Ducks Unlimited Anne Morkill, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Meg Marriott, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Melissa Amato, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Science Advisory Panel Susan Haydon, Sonoma Water Carlos Diaz, Sonoma Water Larry Wyckoff, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Karen Taylor, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jessica Davenport, San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Peter Baye Stuart Seigel, San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Joy Albertson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service John Klochak, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jessica Pollitz, Sonoma Resource Conservation District Laurel Collins, Watershed Sciences Steve Lee, Sonoma Ecology Center Funded By San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resources Legacy Fund Dolby Family Fund Sonoma Creek Baylands Strategy 2 May 2020 Table of Contents Chapter 1 .......................................................................................................................................................7 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model
    Suisun Marsh Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model Chapter 4: Species FINAL REVIEW DRAFT 1 July 2010 Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, Restoration and Preservation Plan Authors: Andrew Raabe, USFWS Rachael Wadsworth, NMFS Jini Scammell-Tinling, SRCD Steve Rodriguez, DFG Laura Cholodenko, DFG Carie Battistone, DFG Matthew Nobriga, DFG Cassandra Enos, DWR FINAL REVIEW DRAFT Chapter 4: Species / Suisun Marsh Plan Tidal Marsh and Aquatic Habitats Conceptual Model Table of Contents 4 SPECIES ........................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 SPECIES OF CONCERN FOR SUISUN MARSH TIDAL MARSHES AND AQUATIC OPEN WATER ENVIRONMENTS 4-1 4.2 SENSITIVE SPECIES .......................................................................................................................... 4-6 4.2.1 California Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) (FWS) ............................................... 4-6 4.2.2 California Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) (DFG) ........................................ 4-8 4.2.3 Suisun Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia maxillaris) (DFG) .............................................. 4-10 4.2.4 Salt Marsh Common Yellowthroat (Geothylpis trichas sinuosa) (FWS) .............................. 4-12 4.2.5 Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris) (FWS) ....................................... 4-13 4.2.6 Suisun Shrew (Sorex ornatus sinuosus) (DFG) .................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biology, History, Status and Conservation of Sacramento Perch, Archoplites Interruptus
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Biology, History, Status and Conservation of Sacramento Perch, Archoplites interruptus Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8st5g6df Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 9(1) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Crain, Patrick K Moyle, Peter B Publication Date 2011 DOI https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2011v9iss1art5 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California april 2011 Biology, History, Status, and Conservation of Sacramento Perch, Archoplites interruptus: A Review Patrick K. Crain1 and Peter B. Moyle Center for Watershed Sciences and Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis CA 95616 USA ABSTRACT mon enough in the 19th century to be fished com- mercially in large numbers. By the late 1800s their This paper is a review of the biology of Sacramento decline was evident and by the early 1900s they perch (Archoplites interruptus) based mainly on were rare in fish surveys. Their historic habitats were recent studies of their distribution, ecology, physiol- apparently sloughs, slow-moving rivers, and large ogy, and genetics. The Sacramento perch is the only lakes, including floodplain lakes. Sacramento perch member of the family Centrarchidae that is endemic are adapted to withstand high alkalinities (10.6 to to California. It is most closely related to the rock 11.0 pH), are eurythermal—with 16 to 23 °C being basses (Ambloplites spp.) and is thought to have split their optimal thermal range—and can persist within a from its eastern cousins during the Middle Miocene wider salinity range (mean 24 to 28 parts per thou- Period (15.5 to 5.2 million years ago, MYA).
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns in the Use of a Restored California
    draft 26 Nov 05 1 PATTERNS IN THE USE OF A RESTORED CALIFORNIA FLOODPLAIN BY NATIVE AND ALIEN FISHES PETER B. MOYLEa, PATRICK K. CRAINa, AND KEITH WHITENERb aCenter for Watershed Sciences and Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology, University of California, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis CA 95616 USA bThe Nature Conservancy, Cosumnes River Preserve, 13501 Franklin Blvd, Galt, CA 96532 USA ABSTRACT Fishes were sampled on the restored floodplain of the Cosumnes River in Central California for seven years (1998-2002. 2004-2005) during the winter-spring flooding season. 33 species of fish were captured in the flood waters, the river, and an intersecting slough. 18 species were present all years in all three habitats. The fishes fell into five groups according to how they used the floodplain: (1) floodplain spawners, (2) river spawners, (3) floodplain foragers, (4) floodplain pond fishes, and (5) inadvertent users. Eight of the abundant species were natives, while the rest were aliens. There was a consistent pattern of floodplain use, although it was modified annually by the timing and extent of flooding. The first fish to appear on the floodplain were floodplain foragers, inadvertent users, and juvenile Chinook salmon (river spawners). The next fish to appear were adult floodplain spawners, principally Sacramento splittail and common carp, although small numbers of foragers and inadvertent users from were also present. Juvenile splittail and common carp quickly grew large enough to dominate floodplain fish samples, along with juvenile Sacramento sucker and pikeminnow (river spawners). draft 26 Nov 05 2 Adult floodplain spawners left when inflow decreased; their juveniles persisted only as long as new flood pulses kept water levels up and temperatures low.
    [Show full text]