DOCSLIB.ORG

SEASONAL ABUNDANCE, MOVEMENTS, and FOOD a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Stanislaus and Moss La

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SEASONAL ABUNDANCE, MOVEMENTS, and FOOD a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Stanislaus and Moss La SEASONAL ABUNDANCE, MOVEMENTS, AND FOOD HABITS OF HARBOR SEALS (PHOCA VITULINA RICHARDS!) INELKHORNSLOUGH,CAL~ORNIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Stanislaus and Moss Landing Marine Laboratories In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Marine Science By Dion Seth Oxman May, 1995 Copyright © 1995 by Dion Seth Oxman 11 ABSTRACT Harbor seals were counted at least twice per month at haul-out sites in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. Although there was no seasonal variation in abundance, numbers had increased three fold since 1984. Eight juvenile harbor seals (5 females and 3 males) were caught in Elkhorn Slough and fitted with radio transmitters to study movements and activity patterns. Radio­ tagged individuals were usually found resting ashore inside the slough during the day (mean = 94% of the time), and diving in Monterey Bay during nighttime (mean = 90% of the time). At night, tagged harbor seals moved as far north as Sunset Beach, but usually were found off Moss Landing. Dives in Monterey Bay (mean = 4.32 min, S.D. 2.35 min) were significantly greater in duration than those performed in Elkhorn Slough (mean = 1.80 min, S.D. = 1.50 min). Prey hard parts found in harbor seal feces collected from Elkhorn Slough indicated harbor seals consumed mostly benthic species, including octopus {Octopus sp. ), spotted cusk-eel (Chilara taylor£), and flatfishes, throughout the year. Rockfishes (Sebastes sp.), and other pelagic species were eaten when they became abundant during summer. There was no significant similarity (PSI's < 0.13) in species composition between seal diet and otter trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough, indicating seals fed mostly in the bay at night. \lV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special thanks to my advisory committee Dr. Jim Harvey, Dr. Gregor Cailliet, and Dr. Pamela Roe for their guidance, encouragement, and wisdom. Thanks also to the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories staff, especially the librarian Sheila Baldridge and assistant director Gail Johnston. This study could not have been conducted without all the help I received from fellow students at Moss Landing. Thanks to Rob Suryan, Kim Raum-Suryan, Patience Browne, John Mason, Meg Lamont, Michele Hester, Mike Torok, and Tony Bennett who donated their time and energy, at considerable risk to life and limb, to capture harbor seals. My deepest appreciation to Steve Trumble for his encouragement, enthusiasm, and friendship. He made this an extremely enjoyable experience. Thanks also to Tomoharu Eguchi for spending countless hours helping me monitor radio­ tagged seals. This study was generously supported by the Earl & Ethyl Meyers Oceanographic Trust, the Packard Foundation, the California Department of Fish & Game, and the Elkhorn Slough Foundation. Special thanks, of course, to my wife Jennifer and my family for their love, support, and patience. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page COPYRIGHT ...... ii CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL iii ABSTRACT . !V ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v LIST OF TABLES . viii LIST OF FIGURES X INTRODUCTION 1 OBJECTIVES 6 HYPOTHESES 7 MATERIALS AND METHODS 8 STUDY AREA. 8 SEASONAL ABUNDANCE OF HARBOR SEALS . 9 HARBOR SEAL MOVEMENTS AND ACTIVITY PATTERNS 10 ELKHORN SLOUGH ICHTHYOFAUNA: PREY AVAILABILITY. 12 FOOD HABIT ANALYSIS 13 RESULTS . · · · · · · · · 17 SEASONAL ABUNDANCE OF HARBOR SEALS . 17 HARBOR SEAL MOVEMENTS AND ACTIVITY PATTER.l\JS 17 PREY AVAILABILITY. 21 FOOD HABITS. 27 DISCUSSION . 33 SEASONAL ABUNDANCE . 33 MOVEMENT AND ACTIVITY 36 FOOD HABITS. 42 . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 62 vi LITERATURE CITED. 64 TABLES. 77 FIGURES 92 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Data on seals captured and radio-tagged in Elkhorn Slough 77 2. Mean, standard error (SE) and range of hrs/day ashore in 78 Elkhorn Slough (ES), duration of haul-out bout, hrs/day diving in ES, Total time spent in ES per day, hrs/ day diving in Monterey Bay (MB), and number of complete activity phases monitored (n) for eight harbor seals radio-tagged in Elkhorn Slough, CA, during September 1991. 3. Mean and standard error (SE) of dives and surface activity 79 (in sec) for eight harbor seals radio-tagged in Elkhorn Slough, CA, September 1991 to April 1992. 4. Mean number per 10-min tow (n), standard error (in 80 parentheses), and relative abundance (%)of fish species caught in 83 day-time otter trawls at three locations in Elkhorn Slough. 5. Summary of diversity, dominance, and abundance of fishes 81 captured with otter trawls at three stations in Elkhorn Slough from 1974- 1976 (from Yoklavich et al. 1991) and 1991- 1992. 6. Relative abundance (%)of dominant species totaling 80% or 82 greater of fishes collected by otter trawl at three stations in Elkhorn Slough from 1974 to 1976 (from Yoklavich et aL 1991) and 1991 to 1992. 7. Seasonal comparison of species composition at each station 83 from daytime otter trawls conducted during 1991 in Elkhorn Slough based on percent similarity index (PSI). 8. Mean number per 10-min tow (n), standard error (in 84 parentheses), and relative abundance (%)of fish species caught in night-time otter trawls at two locations in Elkhorn Slough. viii Table Page 9. Mean percent number (%n}, mean percent mass (%M), percent 85 frequency of occurrence (%FO}, and mean index of relative importance (llU} of prey items found in harbor seal feces collected in Elkhorn Slough, CA during winter (Nov. to Jan.; n=64) 1991. 10. Mean percent number (%n), mean percent mass (%M), percent 86 frequency of occurrence (%FO), and mean index of relative importance (llU} of prey items found in harbor seal feces collected in Elkhorn Slough, CA during spring (Feb. to April; n=70) 1991. 11. Mean percent number (%n}, mean percent mass (%M), percent 87 frequency of occurrence (%FO), and mean index of relative importance (llU) of prey items found in harbor seal feces collected in Elkhorn Slough, CA during sununer (May to July; n=86) 1991. 12. Mean percent number (%n), mean percent mass (%M), percent 88 frequency of occurrence (%FO), and mean index of relative importance (llU) of prey items found in harbor seal feces collected in Elkhorn Slough, CA during autumn (Aug. to Oct.; n=86) 1991. 13. Seasonal comparison of prey species composition from harbor 89 seal scats collected during 1991 in Elkhorn Slough based on percent similarity index (PSI). 14. Percent similarity indices (PSI) comparing species composition 90 of daytime and nighttime otter trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough during 1991 to prey species identified from harbor seal feces collected from Elkhorn Slough during 1991. 15. Commercial fishery landings and estimates of annual fish 91 consumption by Elkhorn Slough harbor seals, in kilograms, and by the entire harbor seal population of Monterey Bay, CA, during 1991. ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Location of three haul-out sites for harbor seals, and trawling 92 stations in Elkhorn Slough, CA 2. Monthly mean, standard error (delineated by box), and range 93 (vertical lines) of number of harbor seals at three haul-out sites in Elkhorn Slough from 38 counts made January 1991 through December 1991. 3. Maximum number of seals observed in Elkhorn Slough 94 during the past 16 years. 4. Proportion of times radio-tagged harbor seals were found in 95 Elkhorn Slough during surveys of the Monterey Bay area conducted during day (1000- 1400 h) and night (1800- 2100 h). 5. Foraging locations of harbor seals radio-tagged in Elkhorn 96 Slough, California between Sept. 1991 and Apri11992. 6a. Percent time harbor seals radio-tagged in Elkhorn Slough 97 spent swimming/diving (SD) and hauled-out (HO) in Monterey Bay (MB) and Elkhorn Slough (ES) between Sept. 1991 and January 1992. 6b. Percent time harbor seals radio-tagged in Elkhorn Slough 98 spent swimming/diving (SD) and hauled-out (HO) in Monterey Bay (MB) and Elkhorn Slough (ES) between Jan. and April, 1992. 7. Mean amount of time harbor seals spent ashore in Elkhorn 99 Slough (ES), swimming and diving (S/D) in ES, and S/D in Monterey Bay (MB). 8. Cumulative species curves for trawls conducted during the 100 day at the Kirby Park station in Elkhorn Slough. 9. Comparison among stations, using% number of species 101 collected from daytime trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. X Figure Page 10. Seasonal variation in mean catch, mean number of species, 102 and mean dominance index per 10-min tow of fish from otter trawls at each station in Elkhorn Slough, CA. 11. Seasonal variation in mean abundance per 10-min tow of 103 the most dominant fish species collected during 1991 in Elkhorn Slough, CA. 12. Cumulative species curves for trawls conducted at night at 104 the bridge station in Elkhorn Slough. 13. Comparison between stations using percent number of 105 species collected from night trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. 14. Species comparison using mean number per 10-min tow 106 between day and night trawls conducted at the bridge station in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. 15. Species comparison, using mean number per 10-min tow, 107 between day and night trawls conducted at the Dairy station in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. 16. Species comparison, using mean number per 10-min tow, 108 between trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough during 1975 (from Yoklavich et al. 1991) and 1991. 17. Species comparison, using mean number per 10-min tow, 109 between trawls conducted at the bridge station in Elkhorn Slough during 1975 (from Yoklavich et al.) and 1991. 18. Species comparison, using mean number per 10-min tow, 110 between trawls conducted at the Dairy station in Elkhorn Slough during 1975 (from Yoklavich et al. 1991) and 1991. 19. Species comparison, using mean number per 10-min tow, 111 between trawls conducted at Kirby Park in Elkhorn Slough during 1975 (from Yoklavich et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bay, Oregon, with Notes on Shehfish Temperature, and Physical
    COASTAL RIVERS I NFORMAT I ON Observations onon FishFish LiistributDistribution ion inin TillamookTillamook Bay, Oregon,Oregon, wi-f-h with NotesNotes on ShellfishSheHfish Temperature, and Physical Characteristics by T. Edwin Cummings Richard L. Berry Fish Commission of Oregon Management and Research Division This work was conducted in cooperation with -f-hethe NationaJ National Marine Fisheries Service under the AnadromousFish Act PL 89-304 April 19741974 4 CONTENTS Page No. I NTRODUCT I(ON ON DESCRIPTION OF ThETHE AREA. METHODS.......................................................... 4 Seining Sites. 4 Equipment . 5 Data Recorded 5 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 5 Coho. Chinook. Herr! ng. .................................................... 12 Smell-..ei I 2 Sole..So I e.. 13 StanyFyFlounder Flounder............................................................ 13 SurfPerch .................................................................................................... 13 Col-tids....................... .,....... ..................... 14 MiscellaneousMiscellaneousFish Fish SpeciesSpecies.................................. 14 Shellfish................................................... 14 Temperature ................................................. 17 DISCUSSION. 17 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 19 LITERATURE CITED. 19 APPEND IX 20 FIGURES fj9urefure No.No. Page No. I Map of Tillamook Bay,Bay, OregonOregon 3 2 Presence ofof FishesFishes inin thethe Ti
    [Show full text]
  • WDFW Washington State Status Report for the Bald Eagle
    STATE OF WASHINGTON October 2001 WashingtonWashington StateState StatusStatus ReportReport forfor thethe BaldBald EagleEagle by Derek W. Stinson, James W. Watson and Kelly R. McAllister Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Wildlife Program WDFW 759 The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains a list of endangered, threatened and sensitive species (Washington Administrative Codes 232-12-014 and 232-12-011, Appendix I). In 1990, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission adopted listing procedures developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies (Washington Administrative Code 232-12-297, Appendix I). The procedures include how species listing will be initiated, criteria for listing and delisting, public review and recovery and management of listed species. The first step in the process is to develop a preliminary species status report. The report includes a review of information relevant to the species’ status in Washington and addresses factors affecting its status including, but not limited to: historic, current, and future species population trends, natural history including ecological relationships, historic and current habitat trends, population demographics and their relationship to long term sustainability, and historic and current species management activities. The procedures then provide for a 90-day public review opportunity for interested parties to submit new scientific data relevant to the draft status report and classification recommendation. During the 90-day review period, the Department held three public meetings to take comments and answer questions. The Department has now completed the final status report, listing recommendation and State Environmental Policy Act findings for presentation to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Selected California Fisheries for 2013
    FISHERIES REVIEW CalCOFI Rep., Vol. 55, 2014 REVIEW OF SELECTED CALIFORNIA FISHERIES FOR 2013: COASTAL PELAGIC FINFISH, MARKET SQUID, GROUNDFISH, HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES, DUNGENESS CRAB, BASSES, SURFPERCH, ABALONE, KELP AND EDIBLE ALGAE, AND MARINE AQUACULTURE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Marine Region 4665 Lampson Ave. Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 [email protected] SUMMARY ings of northern anchovy were 6,005 t with an ex-vessel In 2013, commercial fisheries landed an estimated revenue of greater than $1.0 million. When compared 165,072 metric tons (t) of fish and invertebrates from to landings in 2012, this represents a 141% and 191% California ocean waters (fig. 1). This represents an increase in volume and value, respectively. Nearly all increase of almost 2% from the 162,290 t landed in 2012, (93.6%; 5,621.5 t) of California’s 2013 northern anchovy but still an 11% decrease from the 184,825 t landed catch was landed in the Monterey port area. Landings of in 2011, and a 35% decline from the peak landings of jack mackerel remained relatively low with 892 t landed; 252,568 t observed in 2000. The preliminary ex-vessel however, this represents a 515% increase over 2012 land- economic value of commercial landings in 2013 was ings of 145 t. $254.7 million, increasing once again from the $236 mil- Dungeness crab ranked as California’s second largest lion generated in 2012 (8%), and the $198 million in volume fishery with 14,066 t landed, an increase from 2011 (29%). 11,696 t landed in 2012, and it continued to dominate as Coastal pelagic species (CPS) made up four of the the highest valued fishery in the state with an ex-vessel top five volume fisheries in 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exchange of Water Between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska Recommended
    The exchange of water between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors Schmidt, George Michael Download date 27/09/2021 18:58:15 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/5284 THE EXCHANGE OF WATER BETWEEN PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND AND THE GULF OF ALASKA RECOMMENDED: THE EXCHANGE OF WATER BETWEEN PRIMCE WILLIAM SOUND AND THE GULF OF ALASKA A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE by George Michael Schmidt III, B.E.S. Fairbanks, Alaska May 197 7 ABSTRACT Prince William Sound is a complex fjord-type estuarine system bordering the northern Gulf of Alaska. This study is an analysis of exchange between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska. Warm, high salinity deep water appears outside the Sound during summer and early autumn. Exchange between this ocean water and fjord water is a combination of deep and intermediate advective intrusions plus deep diffusive mixing. Intermediate exchange appears to be an annual phen­ omenon occurring throughout the summer. During this season, medium scale parcels of ocean water centered on temperature and NO maxima appear in the intermediate depth fjord water. Deep advective exchange also occurs as a regular annual event through the late summer and early autumn. Deep diffusive exchange probably occurs throughout the year, being more evident during the winter in the absence of advective intrusions. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Appreciation is extended to Dr. T. C. Royer, Dr. J. M. Colonell, Dr. R. T. Cooney, Dr. R.
    [Show full text]
  • Redacted for Privacy Ivan Pratt
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarsArchive@OSU AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Alfred Warren Hanson for the Doctor of Philosophy (Name) (Degree) in Zoology presented on/8 1q72 (Major) /71date Title:LIFE CYCLE AND HOST SPECIFICITY OF DICLIDOPHORA sp. (MONOGENEA-DICLIDOPHORIDAE),A PARASITE OF EMBIOTOCID FISHES Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy Ivan Pratt The life cycle of a monogenean, Diclidophora sp. , was studied with special attention to the time required for developmental stages to occur.Eggs are produced by adult worms at the rate of one every 13. 5 minutes and require 32 days tohatchwhen incubated at 12. 5°C and 30.90/00salinity.Rate of development and hatching success are strongly dependent on incubation temperature and salinity. Growth and development of the larval stages are similar to other known species of the family 1T)c1idophoridae.The presence in the oncomiracidium of a precocious set of attachment clampsand the premature loss of larval hooks distinguish it from related species. Oncorniracidia survive approximately 36 hours if no host fish is reached. Larvae attach to the inner lateral borders of primary lamellae of the host fish gill.A second set of clamps is added before the 36th day, the third set soon after the 44th day, and the last pair by the 58th day.Sexual maturity is reached by the 153rd day after hatching. Experimental infections were maintained on redtail surfperch for 203 days. Naturally infected redtail surfperch, silver surfperch and walleye surfperch were collected.Rates of infection with Di clidoph- ora were 38.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing in the Cordova Area
    Southcentral Region Department of Fish and Game Fishing in the Cordova Area About Cordova Cordova is a small commercial fishing town (pop. 2,500) on the southeastern side of Prince William Sound, 52 air miles southeast of Valdez and 150 air miles southeast of Anchorage. The town can be reached only by air or by ferries. Check the Alaska Marine Highway website for more informa- tion about the ferries: www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs Alaska Natives originally settled the area around the Copper River Delta. The town of Cordova changed its name from Puerto Cordova in 1906 when the railroad was built to move copper ore. Commercial fishing has been a major industry The Scott River for Cordova since the 1940s, so please be careful around their boats and nets. The Division of Commercial Hotels, fishing charters, camping Fisheries offers a wealth of information on their website, For information about fishing charters, accommoda- including in-season harvest information at www.adfg. tions and other services in Cordova, contact the Chamber alaska.gov . of Commerce and Visitor’s Center at P.O. Box 99, Cordova, Bears are numerous in the Cordova area and anglers Alaska, 99574, (907) 424-7260 or cordovachamber.com. The should use caution when fishing salmon spawning areas. City of Cordova also runs an excellent website at www. Check the ADF&G website for the “Bear Facts” brochure, cityofcordova.net . or request one from the ADF&G Anchorage regional of- fice. Anglers who fillet fish along a river are encouraged to chop up the fish carcass and throw the pieces into fast Management of Alaska’s flowing water.
    [Show full text]
  • (J3+5Q I-’ /Fq.057 I I SENSITIVITY of COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS and WILDLIFE to SPILLED OIL ALAS KA - SHELIKOF STRAIT REGION
    i (J3+5q i-’ /fq.057 I I SENSITIVITY OF COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS AND WILDLIFE TO SPILLED OIL ALAS KA - SHELIKOF STRAIT REGION - Daniel D. Domeracki, Larry C. Thebeau, Charles D. Getter, James L. Sadd, and Christopher H. Ruby Research Planning Institute, Inc. Miles O. Hayes, President 925 Gervais Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 - with contributions from - Dave Maiero Science Applications, Inc. and Dennis Lees - Dames and Moore PREPARED FOR: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Outer Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program Juneau, Alaska RPI/R/81/2/10-4 Contract No. NA80RACO0154 February 1981 .i i . i ~hou~d read: 11; Caption !s Page 26, Figure four distinct biO1~~~cal rocky shore show~ng algae 2oner and P Exposed (1) barnacle (Balanus glandula) zone, zones: (3) -and ~~~e. blue mussel zone, ~ar-OSUsJ (4) barnacle ~B_ - . 27 -.--d. 29 ..-.A =~na beaches . 31 fixposed tidal flats (low biomass) . 33 Mixed sand and gravel beaches . 35 Gravel beaches . 37 Exposed tidal flats (moderate biomass) . 39 Sheltered rocky shores . ...*.. 41 Sheltered tidal flats . 43 Marshes ● =*...*. 45 Critical Species and Habitats . 47 Marine Mammals . ...*. 48 Coastal Marine Birds. 50 Finish . ...*.. 54 Shellfish . ...**.. ● *...... ...*.. ..* 56 Critical Intertidal Habitats . 58 Salt Marshes . 58 Sheltered Tidal Flats. 59 Sheltered Rocky Shores . 59 Critical Subtidal Habitats . 60 Nearshore Subtidal Habitats . ...*.. 60 Seagrass Beds . ...* ● . 62 Kelp Beds ● . ...**. ● .*...*. ...* . 63 ● . TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE Discussion of Habitats with Variable to Slight Sensitivity. ...*..... 65 Introduction . 65 Exposed Rocky Shores. 65 Beaches . ● . 66 Exposed Tidal Flats.. 67 Areas of Socioeconomic Importance . 68 Mining Claims . 68 Private Property ● . 69 Public Property . ...*.. 69 Archaeological Sites.
    [Show full text]
  • CASCADE HEAD: Fish Species Present Within Evaluation Area
    CASCADE HEAD: Fish species present within evaluation area EXTENT OF USE: C = Common, M = Minor, R = Rare or incidential use HABITAT: S = Sand, G = Gravel, R = Rock, P = Pelagic, I = Rocky intertidal HARVEST: C = Commercial, R = Recreational NAME USE HABITAT HARVEST Black Rockfish C R C, R Blue Rockfish CR Canary Rockfish CR China Rockfish CR Copper Rockfish CR Juvenile Rockfish spp. C R Quillback Rockfish CR Vermilion Rockfish R Yelloweye Rockfish (juveniles) CR Cabezon CR Red Irish Lord R Sculpin spp. C R, I Chinook Salmon P C, R Coho Salmon P C, R Steelhead P Green Sturgeon P White Sturgeon P Kelp Greenling CR Lingcod CR Rock Greenling R Monkeyface Prickleback R, I Prickleback spp. Sanddab S Pacific Halibut Starry Flounder Poacher spp. Redtail Surfperch S Shiner Surfperch S Striped Surfperch R Walleye Surfperch S Surfperch spp. Gunnel spp. Smelts spp. P Topsmelt Tubesnout Wolf Eel R Cascade Head: Fish Page 1 of 4 NAME USE HABITAT HARVEST Spiny Dogfish P Salmon Shark P White Shark P Leopard Shark Blue Shark P Pacific Angel Shark Big Skate Cascade Head: Fish Page 2 of 4 CASCADE HEAD: Invertebrate & algal species present within evaluation area EXTENT OF USE: C = Common, M = Minor, R = Rare or incidential use HABITAT: S = Sand, G = Gravel, R = Rock, P = Pelagic, I = Rocky intertidal HARVEST: C = Commercial, R = Recreational NAME USE HABITAT HARVEST Coonstripe Shrimp Brown Rock Crab Dungeness Crab C S, GC Mole Crab S Red Rock Crab S Striped Shore Crab Gooseneck Barnacle I Barnacle spp. California Mussel IR Cockle Clam S Scallop spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Mammals of the Columbia River Estuary
    Marine mammals of the Columbia River estuary Item Type monograph Authors Jeffries, Steven Publisher Washington Department of Game Download date 01/10/2021 09:29:55 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/40552 NOAA LISD SEA LE MARINE MAMMALS OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY I QH 541.5 ==============:::!J • E8 M35 cop.2 [I D 0 [] Final Report on the Marine Mammals Work Unit of the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program tl MARINE MAMMALS n OF THE u COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY ] [] D Contractor: Washington Department of Game 600 N. Capitol Way Olympia, Washington 98504 Principal Investigator: [l Steven Jeffries Washington Department of Game Marine Mammal Investigations ] 53 Portway Street Astoria, Oregon 97103 (503) 325-8241 [l n i . Lj January 1984 ] D ] 7 ~I ,----- • __ J ,----- ,----- D D 0 D WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF GAME □ MARINE MAMMAL INVESTIGATIONS D PROJECT LEADER ~ Steven J. Jeffries □ WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST RESEARCH ANALYST Stephen D. Treacy Anne C. Geiger TYPIST Lynda Stansberry WORD PROCESSING Elizabeth Rummell [] lJ u [] iii J J J J J J ] J ] ] J J J J .J .J □ D D PREFACE The Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program This document is one of a set of publications and other materials [1 produced by the Columbia River Estuary, Data Development Program (CREDDP). CREDDP has two purposes: to increase understanding of the ecology of the Columbia River Estuary and to provide information useful J in making land and water use decisions. The program was initiated by local governments and citizens who saw a need for a better information base for use in managing natural resources and in planning for development.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt Bay Fishes
    Humboldt Bay Fishes ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> ·´¯`·._.·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> Acknowledgements The Humboldt Bay Harbor District would like to offer our sincere thanks and appreciation to the authors and photographers who have allowed us to use their work in this report. Photography and Illustrations We would like to thank the photographers and illustrators who have so graciously donated the use of their images for this publication. Andrey Dolgor Dan Gotshall Polar Research Institute of Marine Sea Challengers, Inc. Fisheries And Oceanography [email protected] [email protected] Michael Lanboeuf Milton Love [email protected] Marine Science Institute [email protected] Stephen Metherell Jacques Moreau [email protected] [email protected] Bernd Ueberschaer Clinton Bauder [email protected] [email protected] Fish descriptions contained in this report are from: Froese, R. and Pauly, D. Editors. 2003 FishBase. Worldwide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org/ 13 August 2003 Photographer Fish Photographer Bauder, Clinton wolf-eel Gotshall, Daniel W scalyhead sculpin Bauder, Clinton blackeye goby Gotshall, Daniel W speckled sanddab Bauder, Clinton spotted cusk-eel Gotshall, Daniel W. bocaccio Bauder, Clinton tube-snout Gotshall, Daniel W. brown rockfish Gotshall, Daniel W. yellowtail rockfish Flescher, Don american shad Gotshall, Daniel W. dover sole Flescher, Don stripped bass Gotshall, Daniel W. pacific sanddab Gotshall, Daniel W. kelp greenling Garcia-Franco, Mauricio louvar
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Bulletin 161. California Marine Fish Landings for 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California
    UC San Diego Fish Bulletin Title Fish Bulletin 161. California Marine Fish Landings For 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/93g734v0 Authors Pinkas, Leo Gates, Doyle E Frey, Herbert W Publication Date 1974 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FISH BULLETIN 161 California Marine Fish Landings For 1972 and Designated Common Names of Certain Marine Organisms of California By Leo Pinkas Marine Resources Region and By Doyle E. Gates and Herbert W. Frey > Marine Resources Region 1974 1 Figure 1. Geographical areas used to summarize California Fisheries statistics. 2 3 1. CALIFORNIA MARINE FISH LANDINGS FOR 1972 LEO PINKAS Marine Resources Region 1.1. INTRODUCTION The protection, propagation, and wise utilization of California's living marine resources (established as common property by statute, Section 1600, Fish and Game Code) is dependent upon the welding of biological, environment- al, economic, and sociological factors. Fundamental to each of these factors, as well as the entire management pro- cess, are harvest records. The California Department of Fish and Game began gathering commercial fisheries land- ing data in 1916. Commercial fish catches were first published in 1929 for the years 1926 and 1927. This report, the 32nd in the landing series, is for the calendar year 1972. It summarizes commercial fishing activities in marine as well as fresh waters and includes the catches of the sportfishing partyboat fleet. Preliminary landing data are published annually in the circular series which also enumerates certain fishery products produced from the catch.
    [Show full text]