DOCSLIB.ORG

Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria 2019 FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA 2019 37.2’ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region June 2019 Fish and Aquatic Conservation, Fish Passage Engineering Ecological Services, Conservation Planning Assistance United States Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA June 2019 This manual replaces all previous editions of the Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Suggested citation: USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2019. Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria. USFWS, Northeast Region R5, Hadley, Massachusetts. USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x List of Equations ............................................................................................................................ xi List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ xii 1 Scope of this Document ....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Role of the USFWS Region 5 Fish Passage Engineering ............................................. 1-1 1.2 Purpose of This Document............................................................................................ 1-1 1.3 Limitation of Criteria and Consultation ........................................................................ 1-1 1.4 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 1-2 2 Fishway Implementation and Performance ......................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Definition of a Fishway ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Zone of Passage ............................................................................................................ 2-1 2.3 Safe, Timely, and Effective .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.4 Performance Standards ................................................................................................. 2-2 2.5 Project Phases ............................................................................................................... 2-3 2.6 Trial Operation, Evaluation, and Commissioning of a New Fishway .......................... 2-4 2.7 Fishway Operations and Maintenance Plan .................................................................. 2-6 2.8 Fishway Inspections ...................................................................................................... 2-6 2.9 Data Collection and Reporting...................................................................................... 2-7 2.10 Vertical Geodetic Datums ............................................................................................. 2-7 2.11 Drawing Standards ........................................................................................................ 2-9 3 Populations ........................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Estimating Design Populations ..................................................................................... 3-1 4 Design Flows ....................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Streamflow Data ........................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Period of Record .................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.2 Streamflow Data Sources ....................................................................................... 4-3 4.2 Flow Duration Analysis ................................................................................................ 4-4 4.3 Operating Range ........................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3.1 Low Design Flow ................................................................................................... 4-4 i USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 4.3.2 High Design Flow .................................................................................................. 4-5 4.3.3 Constraints on Design Flows ................................................................................. 4-5 4.3.4 Alternate Methods .................................................................................................. 4-5 4.4 Flood Flow Considerations ........................................................................................... 4-6 5 Hydraulic Design Considerations ........................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Depth ............................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Width............................................................................................................................. 5-2 5.3 Velocity ......................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.3.1 Swimming Performance Model ............................................................................. 5-2 5.3.2 Fatigue.................................................................................................................... 5-4 5.4 Turbulence, Air Entrainment, and the Energy Dissipation Factor ................................ 5-5 5.5 Streaming and Plunging Flow ....................................................................................... 5-6 5.6 Water Temperature ....................................................................................................... 5-7 5.7 Other Considerations .................................................................................................... 5-8 6 General Upstream Fish Passage ........................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Site Considerations ....................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Zone of Passage for Upstream Migration ..................................................................... 6-1 6.3 Fishway Attraction ........................................................................................................ 6-2 6.3.1 Competing Flows ................................................................................................... 6-2 6.3.2 Attraction Flow ...................................................................................................... 6-2 6.4 Entrance ........................................................................................................................ 6-3 6.4.1 Location ................................................................................................................. 6-4 6.4.2 Orientation ............................................................................................................. 6-5 6.4.3 Entrance Width ...................................................................................................... 6-5 6.4.4 Entrance Depth....................................................................................................... 6-5 6.4.5 Entrance Jet Velocity ............................................................................................. 6-6 6.4.6 Entrance Channels ................................................................................................. 6-7 6.4.7 Collection Galleries ............................................................................................... 6-7 6.4.8 General Considerations .......................................................................................... 6-8 6.5 Exit ................................................................................................................................ 6-9 6.5.1 Location ............................................................................................................... 6-10 ii USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 6.5.2 Orientation ........................................................................................................... 6-10 6.5.3 Depth of Flow ...................................................................................................... 6-10 6.5.4 Velocity at Exit .................................................................................................... 6-10 6.5.5 Trash (Grizzly) Racks .......................................................................................... 6-10 6.5.6 Exit Gates ............................................................................................................. 6-11 6.6 Fishway Capacity ........................................................................................................ 6-11 6.6.1 Population and Loading ......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bay Shore Power Plant Cooling Water Intake Structure Information and I&E Sampling Data
    BAY SHORE POWER PLANT COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE INFORMATION AND I&E SAMPLING DATA Kinectrics Report: 112026-005-RA-0002-R00 January, 2008 Darlene Ager, Ph.D., David Marttila, Eng, Paul Patrick, Ph.D. Environmental and Aquatic Management Services PRIVATE INFORMATION Contents of this report shall not be disclosed without the consent of the Customer. Kinectrics has prepared this report in accordance with and subject to the contract Terms and Conditions between Kinectrics and FirstEnergy, dated October 7, 2004 © Kinectrics North America Inc., 2008 Kinectrics North America Inc., 800 Kipling Avenue Toronto, Ontario, Canada M8Z 6C4 BAY SHORE POWER PLANT COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE Kinectrics Report: 112026-005-RA-0002-R00 January, 2008 Darlene Ager, Ph.D., David Marttila, Eng. Paul Patrick, Ph.D. Environmental and Aquatic Management Services EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact to aquatic organisms that are impinged (being pinned against screens or outer part of a cooling water intake structure) or entrained (being drawn into and through cooling water systems). Phase II of the 316(b) rule for existing electric generating plants was designed to reduce impingement mortality by 80-95% and, if applicable, entrainment by 60-90%. In January 2007, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals remanded several provisions of the Phase II rule on various grounds. The provisions remanded included: • EPA’s determination of the Best Technology Available under Section 316(b); • The rule’s performance standard ranges; • The cost-cost and cost-benefit compliance alternatives; • The Technology Installation and Operation Plan provision; • The restoration provisions; and • The “independent supplier” provision.
    [Show full text]
  • Forage Fishes of the Southeastern Bering Sea Conference Proceedings
    a OCS Study MMS 87-0017 Forage Fishes of the Southeastern Bering Sea Conference Proceedings 1-1 July 1987 Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region OCS Study MMS 87-0017 FORAGE FISHES OF THE SOUTHEASTERN BERING SEA Proceedings of a Conference 4-5 November 1986 Anchorage Hilton Hotel Anchorage, Alaska Prepared f br: U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region 949 East 36th Avenue, Room 110 Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4302 Under Contract No. 14-12-0001-30297 Logistical Support and Report Preparation By: MBC Applied Environmental Sciences 947 Newhall Street Costa Mesa, California 92627 July 1987 CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................. iv INTRODUCTION PAPERS Dynamics of the Southeastern Bering Sea Oceanographic Environment - H. Joseph Niebauer .................................. The Bering Sea Ecosystem as a Predation Controlled System - Taivo Laevastu .... Marine Mammals and Forage Fishes in the Southeastern Bering Sea - Kathryn J. Frost and Lloyd Lowry. ............................. Trophic Interactions Between Forage Fish and Seabirds in the Southeastern Bering Sea - Gerald A. Sanger ............................ Demersal Fish Predators of Pelagic Forage Fishes in the Southeastern Bering Sea - M. James Allen ................................ Dynamics of Coastal Salmon in the Southeastern Bering Sea - Donald E. Rogers . Forage Fish Use of Inshore Habitats North of the Alaska Peninsula - Jonathan P. Houghton ................................. Forage Fishes in the Shallow Waters of the North- leut ti an Shelf - Peter Craig ... Population Dynamics of Pacific Herring (Clupea pallasii), Capelin (Mallotus villosus), and Other Coastal Pelagic Fishes in the Eastern Bering Sea - Vidar G. Wespestad The History of Pacific Herring (Clupea pallasii) Fisheries in Alaska - Fritz Funk . Environmental-Dependent Stock-Recruitment Models for Pacific Herring (Clupea pallasii) - Max Stocker.
    [Show full text]
  • New and Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Fisheries: a Comprehensive Landscape Analysis
    Photo by Pablo Sanchez Quiza New and Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Fisheries: A Comprehensive Landscape Analysis Environmental Defense Fund | Oceans Technology Solutions | April 2021 New and Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Fisheries: A Comprehensive Landscape Analysis Authors: Christopher Cusack, Omisha Manglani, Shems Jud, Katie Westfall and Rod Fujita Environmental Defense Fund Nicole Sarto and Poppy Brittingham Nicole Sarto Consulting Huff McGonigal Fathom Consulting To contact the authors please submit a message through: edf.org/oceans/smart-boats edf.org | 2 Contents List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................7 2. Transformative Technologies......................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Sensors ........................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Satellite remote sensing ...........................................................................................................................12 2.3 Data Collection Platforms ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Full Text in Pdf Format
    Vol. 1: 117–132, 2015 SEXUALITY AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT IN AQUATIC ORGANISMS Published online June 11 doi: 10.3354/sedao00012 Sex Early Dev Aquat Org OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Sexual development and maturity scale for the angel shark Squatina squatina (Elasmobranchii: Squatinidae), with comments on the adequacy of general maturity scales Filip Osaer1,2,3,*, Krupskaya Narváez1,2,3, José G. Pajuelo2, José M. Lorenzo2 1ELASMOCAN, Asociación Canaria para la Investigación y Conservación de los Elasmobranquios, 35001 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain 2Departamento de Biología, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Edificio de Ciencias Básicas, Campus de Tafira, 35017 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain 3Fundación Colombiana para la Investigación y Conservación de Tiburones y Rayas, SQUALUS, Carrera 60A No 11−39, Cali, Colombia ABSTRACT: This paper contributes to the reproductive biology of the genus Squatina and aims to complement the criteria, uniformity and adaptable staging of sexual maturity scales for elasmo- branchs based on data from the angel shark S. squatina captured near the island of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands, Central-East Atlantic). Both sexes presented a paired reproductive tract with both sides active and asymmetric gonad development. Microscopic and macroscopic observations of the testes were consistent and indicated seasonality of spermatogenesis. The spermatocyst de - velopment pattern in mature individuals could not be assigned to any of the categories described in the literature. The ovaries−epigonal organ association was of the external type. Although all Squatinidae share a conservative morphology, they show differences across species in the func- tionality of the paired reproductive tract, seasonality of spermatogenesis, coiled spermatozoa and the presence of egg candles.
    [Show full text]
  • Zooplankton and Ichthyoplankton Distribution on the Southern Brazilian Shelf: an Overview
    sm70n2189-2006 25/5/06 15:15 Página 189 SCIENTIA MARINA 70 (2) June 2006, 189-202, Barcelona (Spain) ISSN: 0214-8358 Zooplankton and ichthyoplankton distribution on the southern Brazilian shelf: an overview RUBENS M. LOPES1, MARIO KATSURAGAWA1, JUNE F. DIAS1, MONICA A. MONTÚ2(†), JOSÉ H. MUELBERT2, CHARLES GORRI2 and FREDERICO P. BRANDINI3 1 Oceanographic Institute, Dept. of Biological Oceanography, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, 05508-900, Brazil. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Federal University of Rio Grande, Rio Grande, 96201-900, Brazil. 3 Center for Marine Studies, Federal University of Paraná, Pontal do Paraná, 83255-000, Brazil. (†) Deceased SUMMARY: The southern Brazilian coast is the major fishery ground for the Brazilian sardine (Sardinella brasiliensis), a species responsible for up to 40% of marine fish catches in the region. Fish spawning and recruitment are locally influenced by seasonal advection of nutrient-rich waters from both inshore and offshore sources. Plankton communities are otherwise controlled by regenerative processes related to the oligotrophic nature of the Tropical Water from the Brazil Current. As recorded in other continental margins, zooplankton species diversity increases towards outer shelf and open ocean waters. Peaks of zooplankton biomass and ichthyoplankton abundance are frequent on the inner shelf, either at upwelling sites or off large estuarine systems. However, meandering features of the Brazil Current provide an additional mechanism of upward motion of the cold and nutrient-rich South Atlantic Central Water, increasing phyto- and zooplankton biomass and produc- tion on mid- and outer shelves. Cold neritic waters originating off Argentina, and subtropical waters from the Subtropical Convergence exert a strong seasonal influence on zooplankton and ichthyoplankton distribution towards more southern areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Important Northeast Fish Provides Bait & Forage Needs
    Species Profile: Atlantic Herring Atlantic Herring Clupea harengus Important Northeast Fish Provides Bait & Forage Needs Introduction Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) is a member of the clupeid family, which are typically small, schooling marine fishes, such as menhaden, shad, and sardines. This species is also known as sea herring because it spends its entire life cycle in the ASMFC Management Area: ME - NJ ocean (unlike the anadromous river herring). Atlantic herring inhabits the coastal Common Names: Sea herring, sar- waters of the United States from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina through Labra- dine, herring dor, Canada, and also off the coasts of Europe. Herring form the base of the food web as a forage fish for marine mammals, seabirds, and many fish throughout the Interesting Facts: * Atlantic sea herring are often Mid-Atlantic and Northeast. They are an effective and affordable bait source for confused with river herring. Sea lobster, blue crab, and tuna fishermen, and were historically sold by fish canneries herring spend their entire life at as sardines. Whale watching/ecotourism and salt retailers are indirectly dependent sea, while river herring migrate on a steady supply of herring because whales migrate inshore in pursuit of schooling annually to freshwater to spawn. * Atlantic and Pacific herring have herring and fishermen buy salt to preserve their fish. Overseas, frozen and salted been found to produce a burst herring are a valued commodity. of sound, called a Fast Repetitive Tick, at night. Its believed that The Commission’s Atlantic Herring Section manages herring in state waters (0 - 3 this high-pitched click-like sound miles from shore), while the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is used by herring to signal their location, thereby making it easier regulates the stock in federal waters (3 - 200 miles from shore).
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Fish Conservation Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions
    Marine Fish Conservation Global evidence for the effects of selected interventions Natasha Taylor, Leo J. Clarke, Khatija Alliji, Chris Barrett, Rosslyn McIntyre, Rebecca0 K. Smith & William J. Sutherland CONSERVATION EVIDENCE SERIES SYNOPSES Marine Fish Conservation Global evidence for the effects of selected interventions Natasha Taylor, Leo J. Clarke, Khatija Alliji, Chris Barrett, Rosslyn McIntyre, Rebecca K. Smith and William J. Sutherland Conservation Evidence Series Synopses 1 Copyright © 2021 William J. Sutherland This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). This license allows you to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work; to adapt the work and to make commercial use of the work providing attribution is made to the authors (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Attribution should include the following information: Taylor, N., Clarke, L.J., Alliji, K., Barrett, C., McIntyre, R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine Fish Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Further details about CC BY licenses are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Cover image: Circling fish in the waters of the Halmahera Sea (Pacific Ocean) off the Raja Ampat Islands, Indonesia, by Leslie Burkhalter. Digital material and resources associated with this synopsis are available at https://www.conservationevidence.com/
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Services Generated by Fish Populations
    AR-211 Ecological Economics 29 (1999) 253 –268 ANALYSIS Ecosystem services generated by fish populations Cecilia M. Holmlund *, Monica Hammer Natural Resources Management, Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, S-106 91, Stockholm, Sweden Abstract In this paper, we review the role of fish populations in generating ecosystem services based on documented ecological functions and human demands of fish. The ongoing overexploitation of global fish resources concerns our societies, not only in terms of decreasing fish populations important for consumption and recreational activities. Rather, a number of ecosystem services generated by fish populations are also at risk, with consequences for biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and ultimately human welfare. Examples are provided from marine and freshwater ecosystems, in various parts of the world, and include all life-stages of fish. Ecosystem services are here defined as fundamental services for maintaining ecosystem functioning and resilience, or demand-derived services based on human values. To secure the generation of ecosystem services from fish populations, management approaches need to address the fact that fish are embedded in ecosystems and that substitutions for declining populations and habitat losses, such as fish stocking and nature reserves, rarely replace losses of all services. © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Ecosystem services; Fish populations; Fisheries management; Biodiversity 1. Introduction 15 000 are marine and nearly 10 000 are freshwa­ ter (Nelson, 1994). Global capture fisheries har­ Fish constitute one of the major protein sources vested 101 million tonnes of fish including 27 for humans around the world. There are to date million tonnes of bycatch in 1995, and 11 million some 25 000 different known fish species of which tonnes were produced in aquaculture the same year (FAO, 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Alewives and Blueback Herring Juila Beaty University of Maine
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Maine Sea Grant Publications Maine Sea Grant 2014 Fisheries Then: Alewives and Blueback Herring Juila Beaty University of Maine Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/seagrant_pub Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons Repository Citation Beaty, Juila, "Fisheries Then: Alewives and Blueback Herring" (2014). Maine Sea Grant Publications. 71. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/seagrant_pub/71 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine Sea Grant Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. (http://www.downeastfisheriestrail.org) Alewives and Blueback Herring Fisheries Then: Alewives and Blueback Herring (i.e. River Herring) By Julia Beaty and Natalie Springuel Reviewed by Chris Bartlett, Dan Kircheis The term “river herring” collectively refers to two species: Alosa pseudoharengus, commonly known as alewife, and the closely related Alosa aestivalis, commonly known as blueback herring, or simply bluebacks. Records dating back to the early nineteenth century indicate that fishermen could tell the difference between alewives and bluebacks, which look very similar; however, historically they have been harvested together with little regard to the differences between the two (Collette and Klein­MacPhee 2002). Alewives are the more common of the two species in most rivers in Maine (Collette and Klien­ MacPhee 2002). Fishermen in Maine often use the word “alewife” to refer to both alewives and bluebacks. Both alewives and bluebacks are anadromous fish, meaning that they are born in fresh water, but spend the majority of their adult lives at sea.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Herring
    Species Profile: Atlantic Herring New Stock Assessment Could Lead to Species Snapshot Management Changes Introduction Atlantic Herring Until recently, the Atlantic herring stock had been considered healthy and fully rebuilt from a Clupea harengus collapsed stock in the 1980s. However, the results of the 2018 benchmark stock assessment have raised new concerns about the Atlantic herring resource. While the stock remains not Management Unit: Maine through New Jersey overfished and was not experiencing overfishing in the terminal year (2017) of the assess- ment, the assessment did show very low levels of recruitment over the past five years. These Common Names: Sea herring, sardine, sild, results will likely have management implications for the species as regulators work to prevent common herring, Labrador herring, sperling overfishing from occurring in the coming years. Diminished stock size and, in turn, lowered catch limits will also impact fisheries that rely on Atlantic herring as an important source of Interesting Facts: bait, such as American lobster, blue crab, tuna, and striped bass fisheries. • Atlantic herring and other clupeid fish have exceptional hearing. They can detect sound Life History frequencies up to 40 kilohertz, beyond the Atlantic sea herring is one of 200 species in the clupeid family, which includes menhaden, range of most fish. This allows schooling fish shad, and river herring. It inhabits coastal waters of the U.S. from Cape Hatteras, North Caro- to communicate while avoiding detection by lina through Labrador, Canada, and off the coast of Europe. Herring form the base of the food predatory fish. web as a forage species for many animals, from starfish and whelk to economically import- • While most members of the clupeid family are ant fish such as haddock, cod, and flounder.
    [Show full text]
  • "Evaluation of Submerged Weir to Reduce Fish Impingement at Indian Point." May 25-Jul 29,1977
    wilveveaI, PDR ADOCK 05' p 0 -v EVALUATION OF A SUBMERGED WEIR TO REDUCE FISH IMPINGEMENT AT INDIAN POINT. FOR THE PERIOD 25 MAY - 29 JULY 1977 March 1978 Prepared for CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. 4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003 .Prepared by TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED Science Services Division P.O. Box 5621 Dallas, Texas 75222 Copyright March 1978 by Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. science Services division TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page I INTRODUCTION I-i Ii METHODS AND MATERIALS 'I-i A. INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR PLANT 'I-i B. STUDY DESIGN 11-1 III RESULTS 111-1 IV DISCUSSION IV-l V LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX Appendix Title A IMPINGEMENT DATA COLLECTED AT INDIAN POINT UNIT 1 DURING THE COURSE OF WEIR STUDY, 25 MAY-29 JULY 1977 TABLES Table Title Page 111-1 Taxon List of Fish Collected during Submerged 111-2 Weir Study 111-2 Results of Two-tailed Mann-Whitney U-Tests Comparing 111-3 Number of Fish Collected Daily from Traveling Screens at Indian Point Unit 1 during Periods of Weir and Fixed Screen Operation ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Title Page 11-1 Indian Point Plant Layout 11-2 11-2 Cross Section of Unit 1 Forebay with Submerged Weir and 11-4 Back-up Fine N~esh Screen 11-3 Details of Submerged Weir Construction 11-4 science services division SECTION I INTRODUCTION Impingement of fish at power plant intakes is often an unavoidable consequence of withdrawals of large volumes of water from cooling water sources. Frequently, the magnitude of the impingement problem can be re duced by careful design of intake structures and judicious selection of intake location (USEPA, 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic "Pelagic" Fish Underwater World
    QL DFO - Library / MPO - Bibliothèque 626 U5313 no.3 12064521 c.2 - 1 Atlantic "Pelagic" Fish Underwater World Fish that range the open sea are Pelagic species are generally very Atlantic known as " pelagic" species, to dif­ streamlined. They are blue or blue­ ferentiate them from "groundfish" gray over their backs and silvery­ "Pelagic" Fish which feed and dwell near the bot­ white underneath - a form of tom . Feeding mainly in surface or camouflage when in the open sea. middle depth waters, pelagic fish They are caught bath in inshore travel mostly in large schools, tu. n­ and offshore waters, principally with ing and manoeuvring in close forma­ mid-water trawls, purse seines, gill tion with split-second timing in their nets, traps and weirs. quest for plankton and other small species. Best known of the pelagic popula­ tions of Canada's Atlantic coast are herring, but others in order of economic importance include sal­ mon, mackerel , swordfish, bluefin tuna, eels, smelt, gaspereau and capelin. Sorne pelagic fish, notably salmon and gaspereau, migrate from freshwater to the sea and back again for spawning. Eels migrate in the opposite direction, spawning in sait water but entering freshwater to feed . Underwater World Herring comprise more than one­ Herring are processed and mar­ Atlantic Herring keted in various forms. About half of (Ctupea harengus) fifth of Atlantic Canada's annual fisheries catch. They are found all the catch is marketed fresh or as along the northwest Atlantic coast frozen whole dressed fish and fillets, from Cape Hatteras to Hudson one-quarter is cured , including Strait.
    [Show full text]