Pe VIH J
1 FRI UW 7729 September 1977
Lasered CEO 1
J THE NEARSHORE FISH AND CROINVERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGES ALONG J STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA INCLUDING FOOD HABITS OF NEARSHORE FISH 10 1 J
by J
1 Charles A Simenstad Bruce S Miller Jeffrey N Cross Kurt L Fresh S and Julianne C Fegley 1 Nancy Steinfort J
I J ANNUAL REPORT Contract No 03 6 022 35185 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION J J I FRI UW 7729 September 1977 I FISHERIES RESEARCH INSTITUTE College of Fisheries I University of Washington Seattle Washington 98195 I I
I ASSEMBLAGES ALONG THE NEARSHORE FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE
FISH I STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA INCLUDING FOOD HABITS OF NEARSHORE I by I
Miller I Charles A Simenstad Bruce S L Fresh Jeffry N Cross Kurt and Julianne C Fegley I S Nancy Steinfort I
I ANNUAL REPORT Contract No 03 6 022 35185 AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION I NATIONAL OCEANIC I
I Approved I 16 1977 Submitted September I RRobert L Burgner Dip7cctor I I I CONTENTS I Page 1 I INTRODUCTION
2 I II MATERIALS AND HETHODS
2 II A Study Sites and Sampling Frequency 2 I II B Sampling Techniques 2 II B l Beach Seine II B 2 To vnet 5 6 I Il B 3 Macroinvertebrate Cataloguing
7 II C Collection Information 7 I II D Biological Information 8 II E Processing the Catches 8 II F Sources of Sampling Error 10 II G Disposition of Data I 10 II H Trophic Diagrams
11 I III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 11 III A Oceanographic Conditions 11 I III B Species Richness 11 III B l Beach Seine 13 III B 2 Townet
I 16 III C Density
16 III C l Beach Seine 19 I III C 2 Townet
21 I III D Standing Crop 21 III D l Beach Seine 22 III D 2 Townet
I 25 III E Dominant Nearshore Fish Species
25 III E l Beach Seine 26 I III E 2 Townet
27 III F Assemblages Species 28 I III G Macroinvertebrates I
I ii I I
I Page 28 III G 1 Species Composition 28 III G l Species Composition 29 I III G 2 Species Richness 29 III G 3 Abundance and Standing Crop 29 III 4 Size of Dominant Species I G Frequencies III H Nearshore Fish Food Heb 29
III H 1 Overall Prey Composition 36 I 36 III H 2 Species Specific Prey Spectra
36 Squalus acanthias Spiny Dogfish I Raja binoculata Big Skate 36 Raja abyssicola 37 37 Raja stellulata Starry Skate I Clupea harengus pallasi Pacific Herring 37 Engraulis mordax Northern Anchovy 40 40 Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Pink Salmon Oncorhynchus keta Chum Salmon 42 I Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho Salmon 42 42 Oncqrhynchus tshcMytscha Chinook Salmon Salmo gairdneri Rainbow Stee1head Trout 43 3 I Hypomesus pretiosus Surf Smelt Spirinchus thaleichthys Longfin Smelt 43 46 Porichthys notatus P1ainfin Midshipman Gobiesox maeandricus Northern C1ingfish 46 I 46 Gadus macrocephalus Pacific Cod 46 Microgadus proximus Pacific Tomcod 47 Theragra chalcogramma Walleye Pollock 47 I Gasterosteus aculeatus Threespine Stickleback 51 Aulorhynchus flavidus Tube snout Pipefish 51 Syngnathus griseolineatus Bay Rockfish 51 I Sebastes sp Post1arva1 51 stelleri Whitespotted Greenling Hexagrammos 54 Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus 54 Artedius fenestralis Padded Sculpin I 54 rhodorus Rosy1ip Sculpin Ascelichthys 55 cirrhosus Si1verspotted Sculpin Blepsias 55 Clinocottus acuticeps Sharpnose Sculpin I Buffalo 55 Enophrys bison Sculpin Sculpin 57 Leptocottus armatus Staghorn Great Sculpin 59 MyoxocephaZus poZyacanthocephaZus 59 I marmoratus Cabezon Scorpaenichthys 59 Chitonotus pugettensis Roughback Sculpin Poacher 62 Ocella verrucosa Warty Poacher 62 PaZZasina barbata Tubenose I 62 Sturgeon Poacher Agonus acipenserinus 64 Spotted Snai1fish Liparis caZlyodon 64 Ribbon Snai1fish Liparis cyclopus 64 I Liparis florae Tidepoo1 Snai1fish Snai1fish 64 Liparis mucosus Slimy
I Hi I I
I Page
Liparis puZcheZZus Showy Snai1fish 64 65 I Cymatogaster aggregata Shiner Perch Embiotoca ZateraZis Striped Surfperch 65 RhacochiZus vacca Pile Perch 67 I Amphistichus rhodorus Redtai1 Surfperch 67 Trichodon trichodon Pacific Sandfish 69 69 Lumpenus sagitta Snake Prick1eback Apodichthys fZavidus Penpoint Gunnel 69 I PhoZis Zaeta Crescent Gunnel 71 PhoZis ornata Sadd1eback Gunnel 71 Ammodytes hexapterus Pacific Sand Lance 71 I Citharichthys stigmaeus Speckled Sanddab 72 72 Citharichthys sordidus Pacific Sanddab 72 Eopsetta jordani Petra1e Sole I Lepidopsetta biZineata Rock Sole 72 74 Parophrys vetuZus English Sole 74 PZatichthys stellatus Starry Flounder 78 PZeuronichthys coenosus c o Sole I 78 psettichthys meZanostictus Sand Sole
79 III H 3 Functional Feeding Groups 79 I III H 4 Habitat Site Differences
85 I IV CONCLUSIONS 85 IV A Nearshore Fish Assemblages 86 IV B Associated Hacroinvertebrates 87 IV C Nearshore Food Web Structure I 89 IV D Contributions to Knowledge 89 IV E Recommendations
91 I V REFERENCES
94 APPENDIX 1 o 109 I APPENDIX 2 113 APPENDIX 3 117 APPENDIX 4 121 APPENDIX 5 I 127 APPENDIX 6 131 APPENDIX 7 147 APPENDIX 8 152 I APPENDIX 9 I I
I iv I I
I LIST OF TABLES
Page I Numb er the Strait of 1 Characterization of study sites along 4 TN townet Juan de Fuca BS beach seine I 2 Total number of macroinvertebrate species collected according to general taxonomic grouping sites during nearshore fish sampling at seven I the Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 along 30 J anua ry 197 7
collected I 3 Number of macroinvertebrate species fish at seasonally during nearshore sampling of Juan de Fuca seven sites along the Strait beach seine May 1976 January 1977 BS I 31 TN townet NS no sampling
stomach contents 4 Nearshore fishes analyzed for 1977 32 I Strait of Juan de Fuca July 1976 January
of 5 Dominant prey items by seasons juvenile Strait of Pacific herring caught by townet in I 39 Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977
seasons of pink 6 Dominant prey items by juvenile I Juan de salmon townet in Strait of caught by 41 Fuca August and October 1976
surf smelt I 7 Dominant prey items of captured by Juan de Fuca townet and beach seine in Strait of 45 I May 1976 January 1977 Pacific tomcod 8 Dominant prey items of captured by Juan de Fuca beach seine and townet in Strait of 48 I May 1976 January 1977
season of Pacific tomcod 9 Dominant prey items by beach seine in Strait of Juan de captured by 49 1977 I Fuca October 1976 January
10 Dominant prey items of tubesnouts captured by Juan de Fuca townet and beach seine in Strait of I 53 May 1976 January 1977
season of 11 Dominant prey items by si1verspotted de I by beach seine in Strait of Juan sculpin caught 56 1977 Fuca August 1976 and January
season of Pacific I 12 Dominant prey items by staghorn beach seine in the Strait of sculpin caught by 60 1976 January 1977 I Juan de Fuca May v I I
I Page Number
beach 13 Dominant prey items of shiner perch caught by Juan Fuca I seine and townet in the Strait of de 66 May 1976 January 1977
season of redtail I 14 Dominant prey items by surfperch beach seine in the Strait of Juan de captured by 70 Fuca 1976 January 1977 I August season of sole 15 Dominant prey items by English in Strait captured by beach seine and townet the 75 I of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 season of sand sole 16 Dominant prey items by captured of Juan de Fuca by beach seine in the Strait c 80 I May 1976 January 1977
of nearshore 17 Feeding classifications of sixty species fish examined from collections in the Strait of I 81 Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I I I I I I I I I
I vi I I
I LIST OF FIGURES
Page I Number sites of used 1 Location map of sampling Type gear 3 indicates beach seine I indicates townet 0 of of nearshore 2 Species richness number species B fish for western sites A and eastern sites in the from beach seine collections I quarterly 12 Strait of Juan de Fuca
seine at Total number of caught by beach 3 species 14 I each site throughout the first sampling year
of of nearshore 4 Species richness number species sites B I fish for western sites A and eastern in Strait from to vnet collections the quarterly 15 of Juan de Fuca
I the townet 5 Total number of caught by species 17 the first year at each sit throughout sampling
fish for I 6 Mean density fish m2 of nearshore B from western sites A and eastern sites of beach seine collections in the Strait quarterly 18 I Juan de Fuca
of nearshore fish for 7 Mean density fish m3 B from western sites A and eastern sites I in the Strait of townet collections q arterly 20 Juan de Fuca
of nearshore I 8 Mean standing crop grams m2 sites B fish for western sites A and eastern in the from beach seine collections quarterly 23 I Strait of Juan de Fuca
of nearshore fish for 9 Mean standing crop grams m3 B from western sites A and eastern sites quar I in of townet collections the Strait terly 24 Juan de Fuca
for Pacific I 10 Composite I R I prey spectrum juvenile Fuca herring in Strait of Juan de May 1976 38 I January 1977 for juvenile pink 11 Composite I R I prey spectrum Fuca salmon in Strait of Juan de May 1976 38 I January 1977 I vii I I
Page I Number
for surf smelt 12 Composite I R I prey spectrum Fuca 1976 I in Strait of Juan de May 44 January 1977
for Pacific tomcod in 13 Composite I R I prey spectrum I 1977 44 Strait of Juan de Fuca illy 1976 January
for 14 Composite I R I prey spectrum juvenile Fuca I in Strait of Juan de walleye pollock 50 May 1976 January 1977
for tubesnout in I 15 Composite I R I prey spectrum 1977 52 Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
for sculpin 16 Composite I R I prey spectrum padded I 1977 52 in Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
of 17 Composite I R I prey spectra si1verspotted Fuca 1976 I in Strait of Juan de May sculpin 58 January 1977
of Pacific staghorn I 18 Composite I R I prey spectra 1976 in Strait of Juan de Fuca May sculpin 58 January 1977
I of in prey spectrum roughback sculpin 19 Composite 63 1976 January 1977 the Strait of Juan de Fuca May
in of sturgeon poacher I 20 Composite prey spectrum 1977 63 the Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
for redtai1 I 21 Composite I R I prey spectrum in Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 surfperch 68 I January 1977 of rock sole in Strait of 22 Composite prey spectrum 1977 73 Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
I of English sole in Strait of 23 Composite prey spectrum 73 1977 Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
of flounder in I 24 Composite prey spectrum starry 1977 77 Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January
of sand sole in Strait of 25 Composite prey spectrum I 1977 77 Juan de Fuca May 1976 January I
I viii I I I LIST OF APPENDICES
Page I Number
data from beach seine and 1 Oceanographic 94 I townet collections fishes collected beach 2 list of nearshore by Species 109 seine and townet
I 113 data 3 Summary of beach seine biological
117 data I 4 Summary of townet biological fish Seasonal abundance and biomass of dominant 5 121 collections I species in beach seine and to vnet collected 6 Macroinvertebrate species incidentally 127 collections I to beach seine and townet collected in Raw abundance data of macro invertebrates 7 131 the beach s eine
Cl 147 I 8 Macroinvertebrate length frequencies
A demersal and 9 Prey items consumed by nearshore 152 I B neritic fishes I I I I I I I
I ix I I I ABSTRACT
I of oil to or through the Strait In response to potential shipment
initiated to document the distribution Juan de Fuca a baseline study was
fish to determine the food I abundance and biomass of the pearshore
and the macroinvertebrates habits of the fish and to identify catalogue I collected incidentally with the fish
seine demersal fish were collected by beach I Seventy species of richness increased from fishes and townet neritic species Species
summer were most abundant during the I west to east Fish generally crop was greatest reduced abundances typified winter collections Standing least winter and spring I during summer and fall and during
were the sand sole The dominant nearshore demersal species English
The dominant nearshore neritic I sole and Pacific staghorn sculpin smelt walleye pollock and species were the Pacific herring longfin I shiner perch
of macroinvertebrates were collected I One hundred and fifteen species crustaceans were the most abundant with the fish Decapod and amphipod richness increased from west to organisms collected Species generally I and were recorded during the spring east The highest values usually I the lowest during the fall
of 61 nearshore fish The stomachs of more than 1 500 specimens demersal fish fed upon I species were examined Nearshore predominantly cumaceans tanaids epibenthic crustaceans harpacticoid copepods mysids and Nearshore neritic fishes most I isopods gammarid amphipods shrimp calanoid copepods euphasids frequently preyed upon pelagic invertebrates and fishes I larvaceans hyperiid and gammarid amphipods I
I x I I
I I INTRODUCTION
of Alaskan North Slope oil to proposed I The possibility of transport
in Strait of Juan de Fuca or Puget refinery and transshipment sites the oil in these waters I Sound raises the probability of increased pollution this oil could be transferred Under proposals presently being considered
facilities at one of a number of sites I to refinery holding or pipeline of Juan de Fuca or Cherry Point and such as Port Angeles on the Strait Rosario Strait I Anacortes on the eastern shore of
concerned with minimiz The State of vashington and federal agencies I have conducted a number ing the incidence and impact of oil pollution the detrimental effects of oil pollution of programs designed to evaluate these and economic resources of Puget Sound One of I on the biological
s DOE Northern Puget Sound the Washington State Department of Ecology in 1974 focused on documenting I Biological Baseline Study initiated habitats of northern Puget biological communities in the nearshore I Sound
Juan de Fuca has come under consideration Since the eastern Strait of
I terminal site the National Oceanic and as a possi le oil transshipment furine MESA Atmospheric Administration s NOAA Ecosystem Analysis similar baseline studies in the I Puget Sound Project initiated biological of the NOAA studies is an Strait of Juan de Fuca One important element and their food web I ecological survey of nearshore fish assemblages fishes because 1 relationships Emphasis was placed on nearshore
to for the transfer and accumulation of I They provide a direct link man and 2 are to be exposed petroleum hydrocarbon pollutants they likely and live in habitats most vulnerable I to these pollutants as they feed to oil spill impact and retention
I were to document 1 The The principal objectives of this study of nearshore fishes 2 food occurrence abundance and distribution
and 3 occurrence I habits of abuildant and economically important species with the and distribution of macroinvertebrates collected incidentally I fishes I I 2 I II MATERIALS AND METHODS
I Frequency II A Study Sites and Sampling
sites and I used to determine sampling One of the main considerations results of the nearshore fish the desire to make the sampling design wa the DOE Northern Sound to I section of the 1ESA Puget Project comparable would facilitate inter area al Baseline Study This puget Sound Biologi to determine Further considerations used sampling I comparisons by habitat of the Strait of Juan de to as much sites were 1 The desire sample on an east west sites were fairly evenly spaced Fuca as possible thus I the land based beach to be accessible to both gradient 2 sites needed 3 sites were based townet operation seine operation and the ship the Strait I of habitats encountered along chosen to reflect the variety I of Juan de Fuca those beach seine and townet were The sampling gear employed and Both of had proved reliable I utilized in the DOE study types gear the 2 year study had yielded consistent samples during I habitat and sampled by two were characterized by Sampling sites to seine and townet specifically designed sampling methods beach I 1 Table 1 Beach demersal and neritic fishes Fig capture nearshore during a low tide series to capture seining was conducted quarterly neritic I townet collections for species nearshore demersal species beach occurred within a week of seining I generally was made so that one collection Collection periods were scheduled winter seasons i e January May spring I in each of the four October fall August summer I II B Sampling Techniques
I II B l Beach Seine demersal fish seine was used to sample A 37 m 120 foot beach at low tide The shore during slack water I occurring within 30 m of I I 3 I I BRITISH I COLUMBIA I VANCOUVER I
ISLAND I I I I tO tlKl tI
g tdt d OH I Hr o Zr H H Z n O
tl I tl o o I WASHINGTON
o I
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT of ECOLOGYs I Baseline studies Program sites
sites I NOAA MESA study area Proposed additional study I sites of gear used 1 Location map of sampling Type Fig beach seine I indicates townet 0 indicates I I 4 I Juan Fuca Table 1 Characterization of study sites along the Strait of de BS beach seine TN townet I Site Habi tat Sampling method
BS TN I Kydaka Beach High gradient high energy direct exposure sand substrate no algae little detritus
I Pillar Point Moderate gradient moderate energy TN moderate exposure rocky kelp bed with I adjacent sand flats TN Twin Rivers Low gradient moderate energy moderate BS beach exposure sand and cobble I abundant algae and kelp BS TN Dungeness Spit High gradient high energy high exposure sand and gravel beach no algae little I detritus
moderate BS TN Morse Creek Low gradient moderate energy beach I exposure sand and cobble abundant algae and kelp
BS TN Jamestown Low gradient low exposure low energy mudflat with extensive eelgrass beds
TN Beckett Point Moderate gradient low exposure low BS beach abundant energy sand and gravel algae and eelgrass I I I I u I I u m 5 m to 0 6 m x with 3 cm mesh a beach seine consisted of two wings joined the seine 6 rom mesh A lead line kept 2 4 m x 2 3 m bag with weighted I to were made with seven floats attached on the bottom Floating sets
The net was set 30 m from shore the cork line at regular intervals I lines 30 m and 2 cm from the stern of a rowed skiff Polypropylene long
m the net Two teams situated 40 diameter were used to retrieve person
20 m of 10 m minute For the first hauling I apart hauled the net at about with the teams the final 10 m was hauled the teams remained 40 m apart beach sh and inverte en the net was entirely on the fi I 10 m apart and labeled for later brates were removed placed in plastic bags weather were made at each site except when I processing Replicate hauls taken so that the area swept conditions made that impossible Care was at in the Time between sets was by one set vas not included replicate I increased with catches At sites least 30 minutes this increasing sets were made was than 3 m sinking where he depth of water less only and 3 m two sites both floating sinking I Where water depth exceeded water at low was conducted during slack sets were made Beach seining
between October and March and I tide this involved sampling at night March and October during the day between I II B 2 Townet I townet was utilized to neritic A two boat surface trawl sample to m of the water column adjacent the fish occurring in the upper 3 5
I x 6 m 10 x 20 feet with mesh shoreline The townet measured 3 m
the brail to 6 rom 1 4 inch at sizes grading from 76 rom 3 inches at 800 about 3 7 km hour between the I the bag The net was towed at rpm seine vessel MALKA and a 3 7 m 12 foot purse l2 m 39 foot FRI research made One tow was made I skiff At each site two 10 minute tows were the shoreline while the other with the prevailing tidal current along
direction I tow was made in the opposite I I I I 6
and to I To reduce net avoidance by pelagic species optimize sampling
into shallow water nocturnally of those pelagic species which migrate We also to sample during periods I sampling was conducted at night sought
to reduce and standardize these of minimal tidal currents and moonlight
but this was not possible I sources of variation always
as to the shoreline as depth kelp growth and I The net was towed close feet of water flotsam would allow The net dragged bottom in 5 m 15
I consistent ransect over the same Seldom were we able to follow a
the townet sites conditions depth distance from shore and length at I varied because of tide flotsam weather during the collection periods be maneuverable allowing etc However the towing setup proved to quite
shoreline rather easily I us to work along the
I II B 3 lacroinvertebrate Cataloguing
were also collected by beach seine at I Epibenthic macroinvertebrates were collected by townet the six sites and pelagic macroinvertebrates of Juan de Fuca I collections at seven sites along the Strait
beach seine and were from the The macroinvertebrates handpicked except for large I 10 buffered formalin townet and placed in percent estimated which were measured or crabs and asteroids readily identifiable were the time of collection Samples on the site at I for size and released to and measured within 1 and identified weighed removed to the laboratory a dissecting micro were sorted using 5 months after collection Species I sub than 100 selected occurring in numbers greater scope For species of the sample was and measured the remainder I samples of 50 were weighed was taken counted and a total weight
nearest 0 01 and were measured I Weights were taken to the g lengths tip of rostrum to posterior to the nearest millimeter Carapace lengths crabs taken on the In the laboratory I edge of carapace vere shrimp I I I 7
I width amphipods were measured at their widest point carapace Mysids
the to the tip of the telson All and isopods were measured from eye
I other measurements were total lengths
of dichotomous I Species identifications were made using a variety and The principal references keys illustrated references descriptions Banner 1947 1948 1950 I used for taxonomic identification included 1955 Kozloff 1974 Barnard 1969 Barnes 1974 Johnson and Snook
and Smith and Carlton 1975 I Ricketts and Calvin 1968 Schultz 1969 and maintallled for the of A reference collection was organized purpose Amphipods were identified comparing prey organisms to verified specimens Laboratories I by Craig Staude of Friday Harbor
I II C Collection Information
data were recorded Loca I For all sampling methods the following conditions air tion date time tide stage and height weather tempera and cloud I ture wind speed and direction visibility precipitation and dissolved sea cover sea surface temperature salintty oxygen
area beach seine volume sampled I state and color bottom depth sampled townet distance fished sampling duration compass heading light
and All information was intensity and current direction velocity
I recorded on computer data forms
and dissolved I Water samples were obtained for salinity oxygen determined the measurements For beach seine samples salinity was by
Winkler titration During I potentiometric method and dissolved oxygen by townet collections salinity was measured with a Beckman salinity
dissolved was determined by Winkler I temperature probe while oxygen titration
I II D Biological Information
and I Catches from the beach seine and townet were bagged labeled
Fish retained for stomach analysis were placed on ice until processing I I I 8
I in 10 percent formalin immediately separated from the catch and preserved of macroinvertebrates was I after collection A representative sample collected and bagged separately
their entirety It became necessary I Generally catches were taken in too to the catch of one or more species was large to subsample when abundant within the available time The less I permit proper handling were the catch and saved The abundant species species were sorted from to 10 volume than or equal percent I thoroughly mixed and a known greater saved The volume of the remaining sample of the sample was removed and
the fish were discarded I was measured and
II E Processing the Catches I and individuals were counted Fish samples were sorted to species
to the nearest 0 1 g wet weight I measured total length and weighed information was taken for each in lividual here possible the following diseases parasites and other abnormal I Sex life history stage external of a in a sample exceeded ities When the number of individuals species fish were and measured the remaining 100 50 or more individuals weighed I was was taken All information were count d and an aggregate weight
Hart 1973 was used as a reference recorded on computer data forms
I fishes for identification of the
the were dissected stomach I Fish to be used for stomach analysis In those and in 10 percent formalin was removed tagged preserved intestine the first one third of the I fish without well defined stomachs
was removed and preserved I Error II F Sources of Sampling
I Each error was selectivity gear A major source of sampling gear be taken into account when Vll selectivity which must type possessed its o Sample variation also resulted I comparing results of different gear types I I I 9
I weather conditions intensity diurnal from bottom conditions light turbidity and sampling nocturnal sea conditions bioluminescence
I duration
of the townet and beach seine were not I Because the large mesh wings and small as the bag quantita as effective in retaining larvae juveniles
fish are to include underestimates I tive results concerning small likely were able to Certain fast swimming and fast reacting species probably I avoid the sampling gear
the of the The topography of the substrate affected performance
more than uneven I beach seine Smooth substrates were swept efficiently
of or reduced substrates Furthermore large quantities algae eelgrass
I sampling efficiency
obstacles to the beach I The Jamestown site presented significant 30 cm of At or minus tide less than seine sampling scheme a zero and summer sampling water covered the mud eelgrass flat During spring I skiff could two were made although the seine periods the customary sets of the water Consequently the not be rowed due to the shallow depth fall I member the water During a crew through skiff was towed by wading
due to the extreme shallowness of the and winter no sets were attempted
I water
of the crew the picking I Sample bias was also introduced by during small fish have been overlooked the net Transparent larvae and may
at in inclement weather I particularly when sampling was conducted night Inclement weather also affected gear performance I on tides of the sampling Beach seining was conducted the lowest occurred at night period During October through January sampling Comparison of I whereas in 11ay through August it occurred during day diel changes in these t o periods must take into consideration potential
I the fish fauna I I I 10 I macro invertebrates collected Bias also occurred in sampling the
and in the net the less with the fish The more fish algae present in I effort due to the difficulty efficient was the invertebrate sampling
and also to time constraints finding invertebrates among the algae
net I involved in setting and retrieving the
I II G Disposition of Data
on sheets formated I All data were initially recorded computer Codes utilized in data recording according to MESA EDS specification
The data were then checked for errors keypunched were developed by NODC I All data cards were systematically on SO column IBM cards and verified
transferred onto magnetic tape I organized and
II H Trophic Diagrams I food habit data a modification of In the presentation of the of Relative IRI has been I Pinkas et ale 1971 Index Importance its use n 25 This three way utilized where sample sizes justify of of occurrence that proportion I graphical method illustrates frequency on the horizontal stomachs containing a specific prey organism plotted and of total biomass axis and percentage of total abundance percentage
I item and belo the horizontal axis respec plotted for each prey above from left to right by decreasing tively The prey have been organized items of taxa with less than 5 percent frequency I frequency of occurrence total abundance or biomass were not graphed of occurrence or 1 percent of
in than 5 of the stomachs appear I Prey items that occurred more percent either the abundance or biomass of a particular on the graph but if Hence of the total a bar was not drawn I item was less than 1 percent above or below on the but no bars extend if a prey taxon appears graph
taxon was present in more than 5 the horizontal axis that particular I contributed less than 1 percent to abundance percent of the stomachs but below I above and biomass I I I 11
I III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
have been I To facilitate presentation of the results sites grouped
vin Rivers Morse into western sites Kydaka Beach Pillar Point Beckett Point I Creek and eastern sites Dungeness Spit Jamestown similar This division is artificial in that it arbitrarily relegates
other hand the data I sites to one of the two general regions on the exist between suggest that some oceanographic and faunal differences I these two regions
Conditions I III A Oceanographic
dissolved measured during Data on temperature salinity and oxygen
in I beach seine and townet collections are presented Appendix 1 Values
a role measured were not unl sual and did not appear to play determining I in fish distribution
I III B Species Richness
A total of 76 species was collected during the sampling period I 48 collected in beach seine and were Appendix 2 69 were collected the I in the townet
III B I Beach Seine I of collected Species richness defined as the total number species 1 2 3 a Minimum I was maximum during summer or fall Fig Appendix values occurred in winter and spring I
and lAPpendix 3 a shows the combined results of the floating sinking I the sets since sets at Beckett Point while Fig 2 shows only floating
sets were completed in spring and winter only I sinking I I 12
I A WESTERN SIITS
30 KYDAKA BEACH I TWIN RIVERS A 10RSE CREEK
25 I
20 I 18
It 15 ffi u I w lls 10 I IJ
5 I
o A r1 J J A S o Ii D J I MONTH I B EASTERN SITES
30 I X DUNGENESS SPIT FLOATING 1I DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING
JAMESTO N I 25 BECKETT POINT FLOATING
20 I re
It 15 w I w u W ll w I 10 I 5
OA r l J J A S o N D J I MONTH
Fig 2 Species richness number of species of nearshore fish for I western sites A and eastern sites B from quarterly beach seine collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I I
13 I at was comparable all sites except Species richness generally to Beckett Point in Discovery Bay were up Beckett Point Values at I the This may be than all other sites throughout year two times greater
as a nursery area by many species due to 1 The use of Discovery Bay sand the mud habitat to a steep I and 2 the close proximity of eelgrass 20m which drops off into deep water I slope increased from west to east Fig 3 Species richness generally Beckett at Spit and I Values for floating and sinking sets Dungeness sites facilitate with the remaining Point were combined to comparisons values is not to the The low value for Jamestown strictly comparable I of At low slack tide less than 30 cm recorded for the remaining sites work flat The beach seine did not water covered the mud eelgrass mud flat at I Also fish present on the properly at that depth large low slack water Cross moved out into deeper water by I high tide had personal observation
for the Strait of Juan de Fuca were generally I Species richness values et al 1977 in north Puget Sound Miller comparable to values recorded trends the highest value for both areas I in both magnitude and seasonal occurred at Beckett Point I III B 2 TO Vilet
4 and summarized I is season Fig Species richness plotted against richness generally occurred by site Appendix 4 a Maximum species minimum richness occurred in the winter I from spring through autumn while trends in Sound exhibited similar Sites collected by townet north Puget a1 1977 I in species richness Miller et
trends based on habitat exposure geographi I No consistent seasonal results were factors were evident Similar cal area or other physical
Miller et al 1977 I reported for north Puget Sound I I site tP 0 r1 II omon z I Il each at
Il J m f I 0E Z seine
tj C m z m f f beach enzoG I by year caught 3 mo il Il n 00 mV 0 sampling species of first I mz I 1J 0 0 f the number m tl 0 J I 1J tP JnJ r Total throughout 3
of Fig 10 5 35 ffi530 0 E325 w3520 15 I I BEACH KYDAKA
PILLAR POINT WESTERN SITES A TWIN RIVERS
10 SE CREEK I 30 I 1 2A
I 21 I 1818 i215 fi3 U ILl I 3112
9 I 6
I 3
0 S o N D A M J J A I 110NTH
I I DUNGENESS SPIT JAMESTO 1N B EASTERN SITES BECKETT POINT I 30
21 I 24
I 21
t018
I i215 J ILl iJ I 212
9 I 6
I 3
OA M J J A S o N D I10NTH I Fig 4 Speci s richness number of species of nearshore fish for western sites A and eastern sites B from quarterly tow Fuca I net collections in the Strait of Juan de I 16
I trend from Species richness clearly exhibited a general increasing
However further data is necessary before attempt west to east Fig 5
I ing to explain this trend
due to the occurrence of I Spring levels of richness were principally demersal adults Catches the larvae of a number of species which are as varied in I of these larvae were small usually 5 per tow and species composition from site to site I III C Density
I III C l Beach Seine
to values fish m2 I Raw abundance values were transformed density the beach seine Appendix 3 b by djyiding by 920 m2 the area swept by I of fish was maximum At all sites except Beckett Point the density
the rest of the Fig 6 I during the SUlmner and minimum throughout year obtained Maximum values for all sites and all collections were during
Beach This was due to the summer at Dungeness Spit and Kydaka large I and schools of Pacific sand lance Ammorodytes hexapterus at Dungeness
at Kydaka I Pacific herring Clupea harengus pallasi
in from to Beckett Point exhibited an increase fish density spring
I winter The high value in autumn was due to schools of shiner perch obtained in winter was Cymatogaster aggregata The highest value and shiner I due to schools of tube snout Aulorhynchus flavidus perch
winter most Minimum values were recorded during the at the exposed I the moder sites Kydaka Beach and Dungeness Spit during the spring at
and Morse Creek and at ately exposed sites Twin Rivers during spring
I the most protected site Beckett Point
fluctua I Both the densities of fish and seasonal trends in density
of Juan de Fuca and tions were generally comparable between the Strait I I I 17 I I I
BECKETT I POINT Q jJ OM I
I c CJ ed JAMESTOWN Q
jJ I ed jJ Q
DUNGENESS 0 I SPIT jJ Q c jJ 0 I oed I c Q 0 MORSE jJ c 00 CREEK OO l OM edi I CJ p 13 I ed Q I OM TWIN CJ jJ I Q I RIVERS p 1 I M 4 4 o Q c I I jJ ClI cjJ PILLAR 13 l l 0 POINT c I 00 i l ed 0 jJ I oc Et jJ I KYDA KA
BEACH If
0 00 I M
I I I I I I I I I t 0 I 0 IJ ca en co N oJ
3dS I SS3NH3I S3I I I I 18 WESTERN SITES I A 3 0 IJ KYDAKA BEACH
TWIN RIVERS
to MORSE CREEK
I 2 5
I 2 0
I 1 5 r en
I 1 0 I
en z lI I 5
I o A 1 J J A S o N D J
MONTH I
I B EASTERN SITES 0 3 IJ DUNGENESS SPIT FLOATING
DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING I t JAMESTO 1N 2 5 BECKETT POINT FLOATING
X BECKETT POINT S INKING I x 2 0 I 1 5 r en
lL I J 1 0
en I 5 I 0 A 1 J J A S 0 N D J
MONTH I
of nearshore fish for western sites A Fig 6 Mean density fish m2 and eastern sites B from quarterly beach seine collections I in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 19 I north Puget Sound 1iller et al 1977 In north Puget Sound a spring
peak in addition to a summer fall peak was noted this spring increase
I not in In the Sound the was evident the Strait collections Puget
highest densities were recorded in gravel habitat while the highest I densities in the Strait of Juan de Fuca were recorded at exposed sand
beaches I III C 2 Townet I Raw abundance values were converted to density by dividing by I 11 500 m3 the volume of water strained during an average 10 minute tow Appendix 4 b
I Maximum and minimum densities and seasonal trends indicate three
general patterns A though unrelated by habitat density trends at I Pillar Point Dungeness Spit and Beckett Point were similar Fig 7 Density increased from 3pring to summer and decreased from summer to I winter Maximum densities occurred in the summer primarily as a result of juvenile Pacific herring at Dungeness Spit and Beckett Point and I longfin smelt Spirinchus thaleichthys at Pillar Point Minimum densities cccurred during the winter The seasonal trend at Twin R vers
in was very similar to the preceding sites except the minimum occurred
I autumn The difference between autumn and winter values was small
enough 0 0019 fish m3 probably to be insignificant as a result this
with Pillar Point and I site probab y could be grouped Dungeness Spit
Beckett Point I Density at Morse Creek exhibited its own characteristic pattern I decreasing from the maximum level in the spring to values less than 0 01 fish m3 throughout the rest of the year Fig 7 High spring density I was due to larvae of several species notably Pacific herring and walleye pollock Theregra chalcogramma
I Densities at Jamestown and Kydaka Beach were low throughout the
in did at year Fig 7 Only on one occasion Jamestone spring values I I I 20 KYDAKA BEACH
PILLAR POINT WESTERN SITES A TWIN RIVERS
MORSE CREEK I 150
1oW I 130 120 I 110 100
090 1
I 080
E 070 I 060
050 I 040 030 I 020 0lD
0 A M J J A S 0 N D I t10N1lI
I SP IT DUNGENESS EASTERN srrrs B JAMESTOWN POINT 303 BECKETT I 150 140 I 130 120
110
I 100
090 I 080 E 070 I 060 050
040
I 030
020
I 0lD
o A M J J A S o N D HON1lI 3 I Mean fish m of nearshore for western sites A Fig 7 density fisht B from townet collections in and eastern sites t quarterly I the Strait of Juan de Fuca I 21
I fish The low densities at Kydaka these sites increase above 0 0068 m3
to direct to wave surge and an Beach are probably attributable exposure substantive data it seems I unstable sand substrate vhile lacking fluctua Jamesto vu were due to high daily likely that the low densities at and dissolved which probably I tions in temperature salinity oxygen of the choked occurred because of the extreme sha11o vuess eelgrass
would tend to exclude all but the most tolerant I water These fluctuations difference in density observed and adaptable speci s The substantial Point and Jamestown may also I between the two protected sites Beckett of the Jamestown site be a function of the shallowness
were the I in occurred at sites that The greatest variability density Beckett Point while the least variabil least physically stressed e g
sites were the most stressed I ity was characteristic of that physically
Beach 0nd Jamestown e g Kydaka I sites in the Densities of fish from townet samples at comparable
et a1 1977 were similar I Strait and north Puget Sound Miller very e Westcott Birch Protected north Puget Sound eelgrass sites g Bay 324 densities between 0 105 and 0 Bay and Lummi Bay had mean ranging I observed at one of our to the mean density fish m3 This was very close Beckett Point Jamestown as noted previously protected eelgrass sites
its extreme shallowness More exposed I was not comparable because of South Beach and Guemes Island south sites in north Puget Sound e g
Pillar Point were also very similar I and in the Strait Kydaka Beach and in both areas The greatest seasonal mean density 0 01 fish m3
in both areas at the most protected sites I variations were observed of the least while the least variation was characteristic protected I III D Standing Crop
I III D l Beach Seine
to crop m2 I Raw biomass values were transformed standing grams 2 of the catch 920 m Appendix 3 c by dividing the weight by I I I 22
I value at different times of the Standing crop reached its maximum Twin sites 8 At the more sites year at different Fig protected maximum values were recorded in I Rivers 1orse Creek and Beckett Point
T and Horse Creek were due primarily autumn High values at vin Rivers rhodoterus Shiner staghorn I to the redtail perch Amphisticus perch flounder stellatus sculpin Leptocottus armatus and starry Platichthys I accounted for the high value at Beckett Point Haximum standing crop to of sand lance occurred at Dungeness Spit in summer due the presence acanthias and adult chinook salmon I schools adult spiny dogfish Squalus Qncorhynchus tshawytscha Unfortunately data for Kydaka Beach for
to inclement weather so a correlation autumn were not gathered due
I between the most exposed sites cannot be made 1inimum standing crop Twin Rivers and values occurred in spring and winter at all sites except
I Beckett Point
Deviation in standing crop was apparent I Wide variation SD Standard in autumn and winter when was conspicuous in each quarter but particularly were an order of magnitude Twin Rivers and Beckett Point biomass values for I sites 3 c values for most of the other Appendix larger than biomass
I the Strait of Juan de Fuca were Standing crop values for exhibited similar fluctuations to generally comparable in magnitude and north Sound 1iller et al 1977 I standing crop values for the Puget in the north sound in The highest values for either area were recorded
the were recorded in mud I gravel habitat The highest values in Strait eelgrass and cobble sand habitats I III D 2 Townet I were divided 11 500 to Raw biomass values per 10 minute tow by m3
m3 was convert to standing crop Standing crop gram plotted against
I collection month Fig 9 and summarized quarterly and by site Appendix
4 c I I I I 23 I A WESTERN SITES
18 KYDAKA BEACH
I TWIN RIVERS
MORSE CREEK 16
I 14
12
I tJJ J 10
I 8
6 CL I 0 5 o 4 z 0 z e 2 I tJJ il
0 N D J A VI J J A S 0 I MONTH I
8 EASTERN SITES
SPIT FLOATING I 18 DUNGENESS DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING
JAt E STOWN 16 BECKETT POINT FLOATING
I X BECKETT POINT SINKING 14 X
I 12 tJJ J x 10 I 8
6 CL I 0 0 U
o 4 z
0 I z e 2 tJJ
0 N D I A t J J A S o MONTH
1m2 of nearshore fish for I Fig 8 Mean standing crop grams B from western sites A and eastern sites quarterly Strait of Juan de Fuca beach seine collections in the I 24 I KYDAKA BEACH PILLAR POINT A WESTERN SITES A TWIN RIVERS 110RSE CREEK I 20
18 I 16
I 14 x
12 I 1 1O
Z OS
I il ll
06 I 04
I 02
OA M J J A S 0 N D I MONTH
DUNGENESS SP IT
I JAMESTOWN B EASTERN SITES BECKETT POINT I 20 18
I 16
14
I x lI 12 I 1O I 5 2 i os l I ll 06
I 04
02 I
OA M J J A S o N MONl1i 3 I Fig 9 Mean standing crop grams m of nearshore fish for western sites A and eastern sites B from quarterly townet collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 25
I and Beach all sites With the exception of Morse Creek Kydaka increase in crop A substantial followed the same pattern standing decline from summer I followed a steady occurred from spring to summer by
summer These maxima were biomass occurred in the to winter Maximum Point Twin Rivers and Beckett longfin I to Pacific herring at due primarily at adult at Dungeness Spit smelt at Pillar Point and spiny dogfish
I Jamestown
to an autumn Creek increased from spring Standing crop at Morse due to The autumn maximum was to a winter low I maximum and then declined salmon gorbuscha and pink Oncorhynchus juvenile Pacific herring juvenile
the I Beach did not vary greatly during year Standing crop at Kydaka of the extreme exposure I this was probably because trend in Beach the seasonal With the except on of Kydaka general to that observed in in the Strait was similar I standing crop observed while greater et al 1977 Maxima typically north Puget Sound liller summer and fall while occurred in both areas in the I in the north Sound amount of of and winter The greatest minima were characteristic spring sites occurred in the most protected seasonal variation in both areas I sites Mean occurred at the most exposed while the 1east variation 0 20 in both areas ranged from most sites standing crop at the protected it was less I at the most exposed sites typically to 0 69 fish m3 while
1 fish m3 I than 0 Fish III E Dominant Nearshore Species I
III E l Beach Seine I all or most sites in sufficient numbers at Three species occurred and abundance 5 of their distribution Appendix to allow for analysis I melanostictus occurred most abundantly at The sand sole psettichthys summer and at a Beach and Dungeness Spit in I exposed sites Kydaka I I I 26
I Twin in winter biomass at moderately exposed site Twin Rivers High size of adults winter was due to the large captured I Rivers in summer and
at exposed sites The English sole was most abundant moderately stown in and at a site Jam I Twin Rivers and 1orse Creek protected biomass was at sites in summer Maximum summer Biomass was high these of adults winter to the large number I recorded at Beckett Point in owing captured I the year at the most The staghorn sculpin was abundant throughout in two collections Point was also abundant the protected site Beckett it the I at Beckett Point throughout made at Jamestown It was abundant
in autumn biomass biomass occurred at Beckett Point High year Maximum Rivers in summer and winter and at I values were also recorded at Twin size of adults collected Beach in winter because of the large I Kydaka
III E 2 Townet I smelt walleye pollock and Four species Pacific herring longfin 91 8 of the fish caught dominated shiner perch accounting for percent I occurred herrin the most abundant the catches Appendix 5 Pacific
or 69 1 of the total in 26 out of 28 collections and acco percent
I total it was cle 1 the abundance and 35 0 percent of the biomass
in The relative abundance and dominant neritic species the collections
collection at all sites I biomass of Pacific herring were plotted by
and as as larvae in the spring I Herring occurred predominantly were rest of the No adult herring caught juveniles throughout the year
were most abundant at Twin Rivers I While occurring at all sites herring near to move out of the immediate and Beckett Point Herring appeared total winter less than 1 percent of the I shore surface waters during the numbers caught occurred in winter collections
was smelt I After herring the next most abundant species longfin total numbers of fish smelt accounted for 12 4 percent of the I Longfin I I 27 I in of 28 collec biomass but occurred only 11 and 5 percent of the total
in our catches of both larvae and ripe adults I tions The presence smelt in streams discharging indicated that the anadromous longfin spawned
Fuca I into the Strait of Juan de
of Port smelt were west As 99 8 percent of the longfin caught to the western to be largely limited I Angeles this species appears determined for this limitation cannot be Strait While the reason of a function of availability spawning I precisely it seems likely to be
streams I and and adult shiner Larval and juvenile walleye pollock juvenile were abundant Walleye pollock caught perch were the next most species I 1 1 of and accounted for 5 1 percent and percent in 12 of 28 collections occurred biomass Although pollock the total abundance dnd respectively in and summe I were almost exclusively spring at all sites they caught collections and accounted in seven of the 28 Shiner perch occUlTed only total biomass numbers and 1 7 percent of the I for 5 2 percent of the total at sites but over 99 percent were caught Shiner perch occurred at four more to indicate a for a protected I Beckett Point This seems preference
habitat I III F Species Assemblages
characteris I the was to determine whether A major objective of study nearshore fish assemblages occur in the pelagic tic habitat associated
in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I and der ersal environment
the nearshore neritic and demersal I From the limited data available of of Juan de Fuca exhibit a variety overlap fish fauna along the Strait location exposure to based habitat geographic I ping distributions upon Further data and other yet undetermined factors open coast conditions analysis can be a species assemblage I are required before quantitative observations on the commonly occurring undertaken but some preliminary I species are presented I I 28
the I were collected at all sites along Staghorn sculpin and herring occurred in the western of Strait of Juan de Fuca Longfin smelt part and I the Strait in all habitats Walleye pollock tomcod juvenile Strait in all habitats salmonids occurred in the eastern part of the Beach and common the more sites Kydaka Dungeness I Sand sole were at exposed sites Twin Rivers were common at moderately exposed Spit English sole occurred at Beckett I and Horse Creek Shiner perch abundantly only at Twin Rivers Point Redtail su fperch occurred abundantly only
I III G Hacroinvertebrates
I III G l Species Composition
were identified from the I A total of 115 macroinvertebrate species 6 and crustaceans nearshore fish colle tions Appendix Decapod amphipod collected followed by I constituted the most common most diverse taxa mollusca and other less mysids isopods euphausids polychaetes data for the macroinvertebrates cata I common organisms Raw abundance 7 logued are included in Appendix
townet 51 Beach seine I The beach seine collected 81 species the
shallow organisms collections were typically demersal and epibenthic invertebrates I while the townet included pelagic as well as epibenthic townet almost exclusively at Euphausids were collected only by the univalves echinoderms and I Pillar Point Nudibranchs bivalves beach seine The majority of caprellid amphipods were collected only by taken beach seine Two species of I the crab species 13 15 were only by net Often however species taken by Pugettia were taken by both types the same locations e Acanthomysis both net types were not collected at g I Rivers townet and at Horse Creek davisi was taken only at Twin by only
beach seine I by
beach seine and Errantiate polychaete worms were collected by
bicanaZicuZata was the only species taken I townet although PZatynereis
by both I I I 29
I was found parasitizing The parasitic isopod Argeia pugettensis I Crangon stylirostris
III G 2 Species Richness I increased from the western sites Total species richness generally showed minima Tables 2 and 3 Seasonal values I to the eastern sites in usually occurring i fall and maxima spring I III G 3 Abundance and Standing Crop
be considered quantitative they I Although the data should not
macroinvertebrates captured by suggest that the numbers of epibenthic and that the crop biomass I beach seine reach a peak in summer standing sites be in the more protected sampling per standard sample may higher macroinvertebrates tended to show the I Appendix 6 Similarly neritic winter and although the biomass typically highest densities in spring values in winter I increased from spring minima to higher I III G 4 Size Frequencies of Dominant Species
were for 18 common species Size frequency distributions plotted 8 As illustrated most of I pooled by season of collection Appendix our macroinvertebrates available to the common epibenthic and pelagic for 20 mm except crustaceans in the 4 to length range I sampling gear were The 150 mm in carapace width appearance Dungeness crabs which were of several including Crangon styliro I and growth of age classes species and tridens are also stris C nigricauda Eualus fabricii Atylus I suggested Appendix 8
III H Nearshore Fish Food Web I
of nearshore fishes collected Over 1 500 specimens of 61 species examined for stomach contents I along the Strait of Juan de Fuca were 25 individuals a species prey Table 4 For sample sizes exceeding I I I
30
to I Table 2 Total number of macroinvertebrate species according general nearshore fish at taxonomic grouping collected during sampling Fuca 1976 seven sites along the Strait of Juan de May I January 1977
Total I Isopods Mysids Misc no of Total Site Shrimps amphip ods euphausids groups species species
4 4 19 16 I Kydaka Point 3 8
0 10 6 16 13 I Pillar Point 0 4 35 30 Twin Rivers 11 9 11
8 7 39 34 I Morse Creek 10 14 10 48 41 Dungeness Spit 10 20 8
5 16 49 42 I Jamestown 17 11
0 30 55 47 I Beckett Point 14 11 I I I I I I I I I I I 31 I collected Table 3 Number of macroinvertebrate species seasonally at seven sites along the during nearshore fish sampling 1977 I Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January BS beach seine TN townet NS no sampling I Winter Spring Summer Fall Jan May August October Dec BS TN BS TN I Site BS TN BS TN
1 NS NS I Pillar Point 15 7 NS NS 6 12 Kydaka Point 3 NS 3 NS
NS 5 17 I Twin Rivers 7 5 10 8 1
NS 11 13 Morse Creek 15 11 10 4 6
I 13 17 9 NS 10 23 Dungeness Spit 12 11
8 10 NS 16 NS 8 I Jamestown 19 8 7 NS 22 NS Beckett Point 35 5 15 1 I at Pillar Point IB eac h selnlng was not conducted I I I I I I I I I 1976 1977 Table 4 Nearshore fishes analyzed for stomach contents Strait of Juan de Fuca July January
Total Shannon Weiner sample Fullness Digestion Prey Prey size Empty factor factor abundance biomass diversity index HI x t S D x t S D Abundance Biomass Species n stomachs xtS D x t S D
4 2 2 1 2 2 89 2 75 2 38 Squalus acanthias spiny dogfish 5 o 3 2t0 4 3 80 4 58 subadult 42 0 166 172 146 Raja binoculata big skate 1 o 4 0 5 0 juvenile 4 0 13 0 18 22 100 0 73 R abyssicola 1 o 5 0 adult 4 5t0 7 4 0t0 0 28 0 14 125 81 2 97 2 93 R stellulata starry skate 2 o 0 adult 6 81 H152 2 0 030 06 0 66 133 Clupea harengus pallasi Pacific 114 42 2 4t1 4 2 51 herring juvenile 3 O 0 14 114 171 Engraulis mordax northern anchovy 12 8 3 412 3 211 25 6 55 09 8 adults 4 juveniles 193 265 5 0 22t0 28 144 177 Oncorhynchus gorbuscha pink 48 25 3 31 2 914 5 4 salmon juvenile 54 9 0 0 7 184 2 33 O keta chum salmon juvs 17 o 5 3 11 4 60 7 431 04 43 32 6 0 2 3 101 0 66 O kisutch coho salmon 4 25 4 3 2 4 4 0 2 0 8 27 juvenile 3 0 8 42 100 9 0 0 42 199 2 38 O tshawytscha chinook salmon 11 o 4 00 9 6 4 44 juvenile 4 34 48 8 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 Salmo gairdneri rainbow steelhead 2 50 3 02 8 2 0t1 5 68 trout adult 66 51 2 15 2 3t1 5 84 8213 0 0 05t0 12 0 57 124 Hypomesus pretiosus surf smelt 3 39 adults 27 juveniles 7 20 64 0 0 0 10 2 13 2 89 Spirinchus thaleichthys longfin 46 58 2 014 2 2 1 5 04 smelt 33 adults 13 juveniles 2 0 2 75 100 0 99 Porichthys notatus plainfin mid 1 o 5 0 5 0 shipman adult O OHO O 0 0 0 0 Gobiesox maeandricus northern 2 o 1 O O 0 1 00 0 o clingfish post1arval 6 8 0 0 52 115 115 Gadus macrocephalus Pacific cod 2 o 4 02 8 3 52 1 5 7 46 juvenile 4 0 67 3 58 3 45 Microgadus proximus Pacific tomcod 80 3 3 71 3 3 8t1 3 17 632 30t0 18 adults 53 juveniles 1976 1977 stomach contents Strait of Juan de Fuca July January Table 4 Nearshore fishes analyzed for
Total Shannon Weiner Fullness Digestion Prey Prey sample index H abundance biomass diversity size Empty factor factor Biomass S D x S D Abundance stomachs xi S D x i S D x Species n
53 0 72 3 11 1 3 9i1l 4 0i 12 66 7t134 9 0 150 Theragra chalcogramma walleye 51 1 adult 50 pollock juvs 104 157 4 19 3 6i14 54 955 l 0 010 01 Gasterosteus aculeatus threespine 14 28 li stickleback adult 0 03 2 49 2 27 38 2 3i 16 2 7i2 0 l3 826 6 0 01 Aulorhynchus flavidus tube snout 63 40 adults 8 15 unstaged juvs 0 0 03 0 85 1 49 7 o 4 li15 3 3i1 7 5 46 2 03 Syngnathus griseolineatus bay pipe fish 5 adults 2 juveniles l o 0 42 0 0 0 0 2 o 2 5i 3 5 4 0i14 1 52 92 Sebastes sp rockfish species
post larval 54 2 77 l7 15 8 0 105 3 w 15 o 4 9i 10 3 6i0 8 7 76 Hexagrammos stelleri whitespotted w 1 adult 4 greenling juvs 67 0 0 0 0 o 4 0 4 0 10 0 Ophiodon elongatus lingcod 1 juvenile 2 80 3 05 4 HI 4 3 15 8 6 9 8 0 130 24 Artedius fenestralis padded sculpin 26 3 9 8 adult 13 juvs 5 unstaged rhodorus rosylip sculpin Ascelichthys 3 0 0 3l 2 46 3 23 o 4 HI 0 3 611 l7 422 27 5 adult 6 juv 6 17 unstaged 4 0 0 14 3 47 3 35 o 4 6i 12 3 910 13 5l7 15 Blepsias cirrhosus silverspotted 41 9 adult 15 1 16 unstaged sculpin juv postlarval 08 0 80 4 3 5 3 14 l40 5 195 9 O 90127 2 Clinocottus acuticeps sharpnose 2 o 5i 0 1 adult 1 juvenile sculpin 1 2 47 3 60 2 79 16 25 3 9i 2 3 3 82 l 11 5l6 9 54 Enophrys bison buffalo sculpin 4 adult 9 juv 3 unstaged Leptocottus armatus staghorn sculpin 4 3i 17 3 14 83 25l7 4 2 794 95 114 4 88 44 adult 26 juvs 22 unstaged 92 8 5
Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus 2 96 7 3 6i 1 7 3 51 7 26 l85 8 0 290 27 0 95 great sculpin 1 adult 14 12 1 juveniles unstaged 60 6 0i O 0 4 0 0 7 50 7 34 32 39 2 68 1 Scorpaenichthys marmoratus cabezon 2 o 0 adult 1977 contents Strait of Juan de Fuca July 1976 January Table 4 Nearshore fishes analyzed for stomach
Total Prey Shannon Weiner sample Fullness Digestion Prey biomass diversity index H size Empty factor factor abundance D Abundance Biomass S D x t S D x t S D x S n stomachs xi Species 8t7 4 0 13t0 28 3 99 3 12 35 17 3 4i 2 0 3 2i 18 3 Chiotonotus pugetensis roughback 18 adult 17 juveniles sculpin 0 05t0 06 0 59 0 10 2 o 2 5i 2 l 2 5t2 l 3 5t4 9 OcceZZa verrucosa warty poacher 1 adult 1 juvenile 02 2 18 2 14 16 3 0i 12 3 Ot11 7 0t9 5 0 02t0 PaZZasina barbata tubenose 12 poacher 1 adult 3 juvs 8 unstaged 29 3t55 0 0 15t0 14 3 59 4 05 30 6 3 8i 1 6 3 7t1 6 Agonus acipenserinus sturgeon poacher 20 adults 8 juvs 2 unstaged 22 O 71 121 1 36 snail 1 o 5 0 4 0 Liparis caZZyodon spotted adult fish 2 26 2 25 4 5i 10 6 9t6 7 0 09t0 05 oJ snailfish 12 o 4 3i 12 L cycZopus ribbon po 2 adults 2 juveniles 8 unstaged 22 0 13 0 90 0 84 1 o 5 0 5 0 L fZorae tidepool snailfish unstaged 3 0 40t0 26 180 1 22 13 o 5 2t1 l 2 9t 12 33 5t3l L mucosus slimy snailfish adult 8 0t4 2 0 05t0 03 0 55 0 91 5 o 3 6i 0 5 3 6t0 9 L puZcheZZus showy snailfish 4 juveniles 1 unstaged 2t35 0 04t0 l1 2 40 197 63 68 18i 13 1 7t 12 l2 5 Cymatogaster aggregata shiner perch 25 adult 34 juvs 4 unstaged 82t3 0l 114 2 45 33 3 5i 2 l 2 6i 1 6 60 4t178 7 1 Embiotoca ZateraZis striped sea 30 19 adult 11 juvenile perch 0 24t0 98 2 07 177 19 84 1 6i 15 1 4i 10 2 4t6 9 RhacochiZus vacca pile perch 11 adults 8 juveniles 2 0t3 27 2 92 3 85 78 o 3 5i 12 3 7t 14 42 4t70 4 Amphistichus rhodorus redtail surfperch 34 adults 36 juvs 8 unstaged 0 20t0 3l 0 62 0 86 3 33 3 Q 2 0 3 0 17 13 3t21 4 Trichodon trichodon Pacific sand fish 2 adult 11 juvs 135 3t115 8 0 16t0 12 2 95 2 25 snake 3 o 3 Q 10 3 3i 1 2 Lumpenus sagitta prickleback adult 1977 stomach contents Strait of Juan de Fuca 1976 January Table 4 Nearshore fishes analyzed for July
Total Shannon Heiner sample Fullness Digestion Prey Prey index H size Empty factor factor abundance biomass diversity x S D Abundance Biomass n stomnchs xtS D x S D x S D Species
Apodichthys flavidus penpoint gun 4 1 5 23 4 30 0 0 30 0 38 2 55 2 78 nel 7 adults 7 juveniles 14 14 3 3 15 3 4 10 5 14 1 0 06 0 07 162 146 Pholis laeta crescent gunnel 14 28 3 7 2 1 3 1 1 11 adults 3 juveniles 4 8 1 1 3 6 0 5 17 6 8 4 4 39 9 57 2 49 102 P ornata saddleback gunnel 5 o adults 9 15 209 1 262 9 0 08 0 20 0 01 0 94 Ammodytes hexapterus Pacific 17 29 2 6 13 2 sand lance 3 juveniles 14 unstaged 16 5 10 6 0 15 0 17 2 49 181 speckled 7 29 4 8 10 3 0 0 0 Citharichthys stigmaeus VJ sanddab 3 adults VI 3 juveniles 9 3 8 3 0 0 09 0 12 147 1 91 C sordidus Pacific sanddab 5 o 4 2 0 8 4 4 0 1 adult 4 juveniles 0 0 o 5 0 5 0 4 0 2 0 0 Eopsetta jordani petrale sole 1 juvenile o 6 0 0 8 5 0 0 8 30 7 19 6 0 56 0 23 127 2 29 Isopsetta isolepis butter sole 7 juvenile 4 4 0 0 9 34 2 22 7 2 21 3 24 3 22 3 62 Lepidopsetta bilineata rock sole 39 2 4 9 1 22 adult 17 juvenile 32 4 0 08 0 19 3 68 3 67 Parophrys vetulus English sole 145 13 3 8 15 3 6 13 19 7 10 adults 131 juveniles 2 postlarvae 2 unstaged 2 9 1 8 24 7 64 9 2 54 4 61 3 00 2 54 Platichthys stellatus starry 42 36 2 9 2 0 flounder 28 adult 14 juvs 27 8 21 4 3 94 6 12 186 152 Pleuronichthys coenosus c o sole 12 8 5 0 18 4 1 11 11 adult 1 juvenile 4 6 4 4 1 12 24 4 49 5 0 36 0 77 2 73 3 43 psettichthys melanostictus sand 131 6 1 sole 25 adult 106 juveniles
Total 1 509 I 36
I When the was divided among H was constructed sample spectrum see II tabulated by season was Comparison two or more seasons prey composition both beach seine I for of collected by of prey composition samples species either Remaining species analyzed were and townet was also tabulated for which little food or rare species I infrequently encountered predators idea of their the literature thus some habit information exists in Data for all nearshore food web was desirable species I trophic role in the HESA or the in data set available through can be found a separate
FRI I Fisheries Research Institute I III H l Overall Prey Composition
demersal fishes were dominated by Prey items consumed by nearshore
cuma I epibenthic crustaceans especially harpacticoid copepods mysids and shrimp which together ceans tanaids isop0ds gammarid amphipods
occurrences of items in the stomachs I formed over 50 percent of the prey of organisms Neritic fishes fed on a less diverse spectrum prey pelagic larvaceans I predominated including calanoid copepods euphausids and fishes 9 hyperiid and gammarid amphipods Appendix I III H 2 pecies Specific Prey Spectra I Squalus acanthias Spiny Dogfish
of the I The few spiny dogfish captured in the nearshore region
Strait of Juan de Fuca had frequently preyed upon gammarid amphipods
more abundant in the stomach I although crangonid shrimp were numerically mertensi unidentified fish contents the lithodid crab Haplogaster
to the total I and arenicolid polychaetes also contributed significantly prey biomass I Raja binoculata Big Skate
seine at Twin Rivers in I One juvenile big skate captured by beach and August 1976 had fed primarily upon gammarid amphipods mysids I I I
37
I of the over 90 and shrimp composed percent crangonid shrimp amphipods I total biomass
I Raja abyssicol a
in at Beckett Point January a beach seined An adult R abyssicol and Heptacarpus sp shrimp PandaZopsis dispar I 1977 had consumed only the contents biomass almost 80 of with the former composing percent I Skate Raja stel lulata Starry
I January 1977 had at Beckett Point in Two starry skates caught a The principal assortment than the R abyssicol consumed a more diverse pandal I Pandal us danae opsis were also shrimp specifically prey items which composed 46 t l tchensis and Crangon abyssorwn anrpl a Heptacarpus and 60 percent of the contents I the total number of prey percent of I biomass asi Pacific Herring Cl upea harengus paZl I fish in the nearshore the dominant neritic Juvenil Pacific herring a Fuca were characterized by high Strait of Juan de environs of the I stomach fullness and a stomachs and low incidence of empty generally The suggesting a diurnal feeding period high degree of digestion are I 10 indicates that herring juveniles overall prey spectrum Fig over with calanoid copepods composing almost exclusively p1anktivores of the total number of prey and 64 percent I 90 percent of the total of the total number made up only 1 3 percent contents biomass Mysids total 30 of the However they constituted percent I of prey organisms
biomass
I to are insufficient sizes for and winter While the sample spring in of seasonal variations there was evidence make a reliable comparison contribution I zoea the largest Table 5 with crab making prey composition I I I 38
I Clupea harenguA pallasi n 66 I I
n R L I II r I o 5000 10000
I cd d r cd 0 cd cd al J al al O r d J r jJ I I Jll cd d H cd cd r al P S Ul P llS Ca1anoida p cd lj I r r 0 Pacific Fig 10 Composite loR 1 prey spf ctrum for juvenile herring I in Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I Oncorhynchus gorbuscha n 36 I I
I 1J
Ul al al lj lj gg C al l H I H lj lj d r Ul lj1 1 cO tl 0 cd rl al al J lj l c lj cd 1j d d r al 0 jJ cd r Jd 0 r r jJ cd Cl J c c jJr 0 I r H J al jJ lj P J 0 c J jJ H Cl cd J J d 0 rl c cd Cl lj al P lj OJ or c alCl lJllS l P H S Ul Ul al jJ jJ P 0 Cl cd l c jJ Ulljal cll Larvacea I Calanoida r o r U H u OZ HH
salmon in I Fig 11 Composite I R I prey spectrum for juvenile pink Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I I I 39
seasons of Pacific Table 5 Dominant prey items by juvenile herring 1976 I caught by townet in Strait of Juan de Fuca May January 1977 I
Frequency of I occurrence Composition Abundance Biomass
I Spring May n 8 67 79 41 77 49 Crab zoea 33 2 94 7 46 Shrimp 5 88 0 29 I Harpacticoid copepods 33 4 41 7 31 Gammarid amphipods 17 2 4 39 Ca1anoid copepods 17 94 17 2 94 2 92 Gastropods I 17 147 0 15 Pelecypods H abundance 1 24 I H biomass 1 23 Summer August n 56 98 62 96 99 Ca1anoid copepods 78 123 1 30 I Crustacea 11 4 0 08 0 61 Harpacticoid copepods 4 0 03 155 Mysids 4 0 03 0 14 Hyperiid amphipods I 4 0 03 0 01 Crab larvae H abundance 0 45 I H biomass 0 41 Fall Octob r n 28 92 54 70 10 Ca1anoid copepods 65 35 125 145 I Hyperjid amphipods 29 102 26 30 Mysids 2 10 101 Gammarid amphipods 18 12 199 0 56 Harpacticoid copepods I 6 100 0 55 Cumaceans 6 0 08 0 01 Tunicates 0 03 0 01 Barnacle larvae 6 I H abundance 0 56 H biomass 111
I Winter December n 9 100 87 32 99 17 Uysids 25 12 68 0 83 Gastropods I H abundance 0 55 H biomass 0 07 I I I I 40
I the less in calanoid copepods dominating to a diverse diet spring the only important prey fall diet and mysids being I diverse summer and during winter
I EngrauLis mordax Northern Anchovy
encountered in the neritic I Northern anchovies were infrequently copepods the principle St ait of Juan de Fuca Ca1anoid waters along the 83 of the samples they constituted items were found in 55 percent I prey of the total biomass total though only 6 percent percent of the prey but in of the fish stomachs were found 36 percent Harpacticoid copepods I and to the total number of prey Mysids only contributed 5 percent of the fish stomachs in only 6 percent phyl1odocid po1ychaetes appeared of the total I and 18 4 percent respectively but composed 62 5 percent I biomass Salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Pink I the encountered in the neritic waters at Juvenile pink salmon were incidence and October with the highest eastern sites during August I of stomachs in A high percentage empty occurring 3t Jamestown August cessation of and digestion factors suggest I low mean fullness high feeding at dark
Fig 11 indicates a general pelagic I The composite prey spectrum 1arvaceans hyperiid and gammarid feeding habit calanoid copepods cumaceans and harpacticoid copepods I amphipods insects ctenophores larvaceans consitit with ca1anoids and together were the principal prey and 88 1 of the the total number of prey percent I uting 91 8 percent of total content biomass
fall diets of I between the summer and Table 6 presents a comparison size of Bearing in mind the small sample neritic juvenile pink salmon especially I the data that pelagic organisms the fall collections imply between August and October became more important I calanoid copepods I I 41
seasons of salmon caught Table 6 Dominant prey items by juvenile pink I and October 1976 by tmvnet in Strait of Juan de Fuca August I Frequency of I occurrence Composition Abundance Biomass
I Summer August n 28 75 12 08 30 93 Ca1anoid copepods 71 81 71 61 25 I Larvaceans 21 2 04 2 06 Harpacticoid copepods 18 0 71 0 52 I Cumaceans 0 35 0 98 Gammarid amphipods 18 14 0 13 0 16 Hyperiid amphipods I 14 0 13 0 49 Osteichthys eggs 0 08 0 43 Insects 14
I HI abundance 1 02
HI biomass 149 I Fall October n 7
83 61 83 68 I Ca1anoid copepods 100 57 6 48 3 03 Hyperiid amphipods 57 2 07 1 82 Mysids I 0 78 0 61 Insects 43
2 98 2 75 Gammarid amphipods 29 I 29 0 91 5 74 Ctenophores 2 01 1 78 Shrimp 29 I HI abundance 1 07 HI biomass 105 I I I I I I 42
I a in may be seasonal patchily Larvaceans which dominated August from the diet explaining its disappearance I distributed prey organism
Salmon Onccl hynchus keta Chum I in at nearshore by beach seine May Juvenile chum salmon were caught The abundance was at Kydaka Beach I the two westernmost sites highest and mean indices of stomach fullness lack of empty stomachs and high diurnal feeders these salmonids are I digestion suggest that juvenile
items Harpacticoid Epibenthic organisms were the major prey I 88 percent and cumaceans copepods 94 percent gammarid amphipods and combined most 0ccurring items they 35 percent were the frequently of the number of and 75 4 percent I formed 89 8 percent of the total prey in calanoid copepods were also present total biumass Howeyer pelagic total number of and fhlJ and 7 6 percent of the prey I 82 percent of the 15 2 percent of the total biomass I Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho Salmon
beach seine and I salmon captured in certain Four juvenile coho 80 6 had fed upon gammarid amphipods to Vilet collections predominantly and cumaceans 14 3 I 90 0 total biomass percent total abundance percent biomass total abundance 5 3 percent total I percent Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chinook I encountered at the western Juvenile chinook salmon were primarily prey 36 were the most frequently occurring sites in August Insects I abundant 67 8 copepods comprised the most prey percent but calanoid 38 8 total biomass abundance and fish percent percent total juvenile most of the I 4 total biomass composed and syllid polychaetes 30 percent habit a feeding This suggests generally pelagic I prey biomass I I I 43 I Trout Salmo gairdner i Rainbmv Stee1head
beach at trout during seining I One adult anadromous rainboV captured stomach another caught at Twin lorse Creek in August had an empty mysids I Rivers in January had consumed only
Surf Smelt I Hypomesus pretiosus
surf smelt captured by the Like the juvenile Pacific herring I 66 and of empty stomachs percent townet at night had a high percentage for each Those and factors 1 9 low mean stomach fullness digestion different I in August exhibited a captured by beach seine during daylight 3 1 factor 3 2 stomach fullness and digestion I trend 19 percent empty ca1anoid copepods dominated In both townet and beach seine samples
12 Harpacticoid copepods I the low diversity prey spectrum Fig in the cumaceans also occurred frequently gammarid amphipods and to the overall did not contribute significantly stomachs but generally I constituted occurred in 9 of the stomachs diet Mysids which percent contents biomass I 23 6 percent of the total
smelt beach seine collected surf There Vas an indication that of the shallow subtidal I the organisms tended to prey more upon epibenthic contribution to the total prey biomass habitat mysids made a significant
I Table 7
Smelt I Spirinchus thaleichthys Longfin
Point sites were notable for the higher I The Twin Rivers and Pillar the summer As with Pacific catches of longfin smelt especially during that and indices suggest herring and surf smelt fullness digestion I the these fish feed primarily during day
rela and longfin smelt had a I Compared to the surf smelt herring Vere The most commonly encountered prey tively diverse prey spectrum I I I 44
I Hypomesus p1 etiosus n 32 I I I I u
CIl 1l OM I 0 ct C Q CIl CIl CIl OM C Q CIl c 1l 0 tC C Q OM 0 C I Q CIl C C C CIl C 1l CIl CIl CIl p f ct1 OM H H I H 0 lJ H f S Ul Calanoida CIl cJ CIlC r Cl U HH 0 I smelt in Strait of Fig 12 Composite I R I prey spectrum for surf Juan 1976 1977 I de Fuca May January Mic ogadus p oximus I n 77 I I 1 I I
0 0 Q o 500 1000 CIl
I H CIl Q Ul CIl C j CIl I co ct1 co c l CIl 1l OM CIl l C l H Clj OM Ul OM Clj C C ct1 CIl l oM o UQlCllc 1l c4J I OM CIl c C 1l OM OM U C CIl co Clj OM l cj CIl p Ul C I I CIl Clj Ul CIl 0 ct1 Cj ZU Z Gammaridea U OHP
I 1 I Fig 13 Composite loR 1 prey spectrum for Pacific tomcod in Strait I of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I I 45
and of smelt townet I Table 7 Dominant prey items surf captured by Fuca 1976 1977 beach seine in Strait of Juan de May January
I Frequency of
occurrence Composition I Abundance Biomass I Tow net n 15 73 92 57 90 40 Calanoid copepods 27 3 05 2 08 Cumaceans I 20 0 66 123 Gammarid amphipods 20 0 41 0 09 Barnacle larvae
13 0 50 0 02 I Harpacticoid copepods 7 0 41 3 01 Mysids I HI abundance 0 59 HI biomass 0 70 I Beach seine n 17
76 92 84 50 55 I Calanoid copepods 41 1 19 0 19 Harpacticoid copepods 29 2 99 4 37 I Gammarid amphipods 18 130 0 38 Larvactans
12 149 43 77 Mysids I 12 0 21 0 75 Cumaceans
HI abundance 0 52
I HI biomass 1 33 I I I I I I I 46
I gammarid amphipods cuma in order of frequency of occurrence mysids all but the latter being epipe1agic organ ceans and calanoid copepods
and shrimp zoea in declining I isms Calanoids gammarids mysids while mysids calanoids order comprised the more abundant organisms of the contents I and gammarids dominated the total biomass
I Porichthys notatus Plainfin Hidshipman
in August at Beckett I A single adult plainfin midshipman caught and one fish Point had consumed one polychaete I Gohiesox maeandricus Northern C1ingfish
during beach seine sampling I Two post larval northern clingfish caught
stomachs with no identifiable at Morse Creek in October had nearly empty
I prey
I Gadus macrocephalus Pacific Cod
collections cod were during the January vo juvenile Pacific caught I 76 9 most of the identifiable prey at Beckett Point Shrimp composed fish 45 1 total biomass with one percent total abundance percent I biomass comprising 52 7 percent of total
I Microgadus proximus Pacific Tomcod
collections made from I Juvenile and adult Pacific tomcod occurred in both beach seine and townet summer through winter collections by confined to the sites east of Port I catches were almost exclusively the more sizeable samples Angeles with Beckett Point providing
I of Pacific tomcod is extremely diverse The overall prey spectrum the more important prey with benthic and epibenthic organisms providing encountered were the prey most frequently I Fig 13 Gammarid amphipods shrimp crabs and euphausids were in stomachs but calanoid copepods I I I 47
I rical and biomass items on the basis of nUIT the more important prey I contributions of collection periods a comparison Bearing in mind differences in the beach seine and the of Pacific tomcod by I the prey spectra captured differences in food habits of fish townet Table 8 indicates possible Beach seine nearshore demersal habitats captured I in neritic versus biomass of calanoid copepods with high fish consumed a greater percentage hand fed townet fish on the other contributions by shrimp caught I calanoid amphipods euphausids and copepods predominantly upon gammarid dominated Pacific herring and polychaetes I while fish including juvenile the total content biomass
difference is evident between prey composi I One significant seasonal Pacific tomcod Table 9 ter beach seine tion for fall and wi caught
tanaids occur only in the inter sample I polychaetes and
Pollock I Theragra chalcogramm0 Walleye
was similar to that of The occurrence of juvenile walleye pollock I and Beckett sites Jamestown the Pacifi tomcod the eastern especially also tended numerous alleye pollock Point provided the more samples collections in I the beach seine to be more abundant during nighttime townet in was common in the catches only October and January while it
I August and October
as indicated by the for this species was diverse I The prey spectrum dominated by calanoid recorded but it was numerically 21 prey taxa however was more diverse with I copepods Fig 14 Biomass composition amphipods fish and mysids hippo1ytid ana pauda1id shrimp gammarid total biomass I also contributing to the
aculeatus Threespine Stickleback I Gasterosteus and were at Beckett Point Adult threespine stickleback caught were the October and Harpacticoid copepods I Dungeness Spit in January I I 48
beach seine items of Pacific tomcod by I Table 8 Dominant prey captured 1977 Juan de Fuca 1976 January and tmvnet in Strait of May I Frequency of
occurrence Composition I Abundance Biomass
I Beach seine n 40 30 12 71 5 21 Gammarid amphipods 13 4 04 1 91 polychaetes I 10 9 10 73 72 Shrimp 10 5 94 2 64 Mysids I 10 5 06 0 41 Tanaids 7 54 77 0 28 Ca1anoid copepods 03 7 0 72 0 I Cumaceans 5 0 29 15 43 Fish 5 2 02 0 15 I Clam siphons HI abundance 2 88 I HI biomass 2 48
Townet n 37 70 29 35 2 93 I Gammarid amphipods 27 19 05 4 95 Euphausids 24 13 49 0 49 I Ca1anoid copepods 19 15 17 36 06 Shrimp 14 181 0 25 I Isopods 14 1 67 0 13 Cumaceans 11 2 50 0 09 Tanaids I 8 0 56 41 27 Fish 8 2 78 0 72 Mysids I 8 5 15 11 27 Po1ychaetes 8 0 56 0 03 Capre11id amphipods 5 5 84 0 08 I Shrimp larvae 5 0 42 0 01 Crab larvae 5 0 42 0 01 I Harpacticoid copepods HI abundance 3 39 I HI biomass 3 46 I I 49
of Pacific tomcod Table 9 Dominant prey items by season captured de Fuca October 1976 and I by beach seine in Strait of Juan January 1977 I Frequency of
occurrence Composition I Abundance Biomass
I Fall October n 15 47 24 80 3 82 Gammarid amphi 0ds
69 27 42 15 75 I Shrimp
13 165 17 69 Fish I H abundance 3 63 I H biomass 2 07 Winter January n 19
32 24 35 15 10 I Gammarid amphipods
26 25 22 18 48 Po1ychaetes
I 21 23 47 2 73 Tanaids
11 10 44 60 03 I Shrimp H abundance 3 24
I H biomass 2 66 I I I I I I I I 50 I I I Theragra chalcogramma I n 50
II I I J o 5000 10000 I I r I Ca1anoida Gammaridea ro ro d ll OM Ul U 0 ro ro rouc I ll OM rod OM w ro U Ul MOw c ll j l wuuU M U d ro roro ll ro OM c rollP Ul P w Il w I g l ro Ul ro Ul u f z or o
I in fo pollock 14 I R I prey spectrum juvenile walleye Fig Composite 1977 Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January I I I I I I I I 51
I calanoid and in the stomachs followed by copepods most abundant prey biomass contributed 53 percent of the total I gammarid amphipods gammarids
Aulorhynchus flavidus Tube snout I Point in of tube snout occurred at Beckett The most abundant catches
orse Creek and in to vnet collections at I beach seine samples in January in October in Hay and at Beckett Point
I and shrimp larvae were Calanoid copepods harpacticoid copepods 15 shrimp larvae made the highest the most important organisms Fig townet I biomass Comparison between contribution to the total content to showed townet tube snouts be feeding and beach seine samples caught and calanoid copepods shrimp larvae juvenile I predominantly on pelagic tube snouts to feed more generally fishes while beach eine caught appeared Table 10 harpacticoid copepods and mysids I upon epibenthic organisms
I Syngnathus griseolineatus Bay Pipefish
the Beckett Point during January by Seven bay pipefish caught at I 81 6 percent total abun beach seine had fed upon gammarid amphipods total abundance biomass 13 2 percent dance 45 0 percent total mysids total abundance I biomass and tanaids 5 3 percent 37 8 percent total
2 total biomass I 17 percent Rockfish Sebastes sp Postlarval I during August by the townet at Two postlarval rockfish captured crustacean one unidentifiable I Beckett Point had consumed
Greenling I Hexagrammos stelleri Whitespotted
of greenling encountered The only significant numbers whitespotted Fuca our sampling were caught by I along the Strait of Juan de during I I I
52 I Aulorhynchus flavidus I n 39 I I n R I m 5000 1000 0 tIl o Q I M Ca1anoida Q rl CIl t Q CIl Cl I CIl tIl l 0 M CIl I eJ c CIl Q CIl w Q Cl CIl w c eJ rl rl eJ w eJ CIl I w CIl t rl Cl CIl t p CIl Q orlSCIl I w wtllSw I tIl CIl CIl CIl CIl r z O 0Z
Strait of Juan I R I spectrum for tube snout in I Fig 15 Composite prey de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I Artedius fenestralis I n 25 I I I
I iGammaridea i CIl CIl Q w CIl Q CIl Q CIl Orl eJ Cl 1j Cl w CIl orlc o t OtIlleJ I p CIl rl l o w tfJ eJ bCM tfJ CIl 0 C1j 0 HZP P P I for in Strait of Fig 16 Composite I R I prey spectrum paddeo sculpin 1976 1977 I Juan de Fuca May January I I
53
and I of tube snouts captured by townet Table 10 Dominant prey items Fuca 1976 1977 beach seine in Strait of Juan de May January I Frequency of
occurrence Composition I Abundance Biomass
I Tow net n 11 100 52 92 21 98 Ca1anoid copepods
64 42 98 53 29 I Shrimp larvae
36 130 19 20 Fish juveniles
I 9 1 08 3 72 Shrimp juveniles
9 0 22 157 I Mysids HI abundance 1 27
I HI biomass 171
Beach seine n 28
I 25 73 53 45 84 Harpacticoid copepods
7 13 90 4 17 I Ca1anoid copepods 7 11 23 41 67 Mysids
7 1 07 5 56 I Gammarid amphipods
4 0 27 2 78 I Crab zoea HI abundance 2 18 I HI biomass 2 19 I I I I I I
54 I 75 Point in winter Their stomachs averaged beach seine at Beckett of the contents identifiable with over 50 percent I percent full
a wide diver these specimens had fed upon Typical of hexagrammids by I fauna no prey taxon was represented sity of benthic and epibenthic occurred of the total sample Gammarid amphipods more than 50 percent and the I of stomachs examined composed most frequently 47 percent 38 4 but only of the total number of prey percent highest proportion biomass po1ychaetes 2 1 percent of the ingested I a small proportion gastropods 1eptostracans pagurid tanaids second most abundant prey Of the most of the other prey items I crabs and true crabs composed five was of juvenile brachyuran total biomass 48 3 percent composed in one stomach all of which occurred I crabs Pugettia gracilis
I Ophiodon elon9atus Lingcod Point in beach seine at Beckett One juvenile lingcod caught by fish I one unidentifiable January had consumed
I Artedius fenestralis Padded Sculpin
in beach seine collections was frequently present I This small sculpin at Twin Rivers Juan de Fuca the winter sample all along the Strait of I produced the largest sample
16 indicates a of A Fig The overall prey spectrum fenestralis crustaceans I based upon epibenthic primarily feeding habit generally shrimp mysids and isopods I gammarid amphipods
Ascelichthys rhodorus Rosy1ip Sculpin I throughout the year princi Rosylip sculpins were sampled generally in August was the most seine the Twin Rivers collection I pally by beach productive I I I 55
I benthic and epibenthic The diet of A rhodorus was predominantly
most in the were the common organism crustaceans Gammarid amphipods of I 54 8 percent of the total number prey sample 47 percent comprising almost as the total biomass Mysids were items and 25 1 percent of prey of the did not constitute as great a proportion I common 41 percent but 11 7 total biomass Isopods diet 14 2 percent total abundance percent accounted for 28 4 percent of I including Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis Other 30 4 of the prey biomass the total number of prey and percent and organic debris were shrimp juvenile scu1pins I prey items crangonid
I Blepsias cirrhosus Si1verspotted Sculpin
cottids of the nearshore demersal assemblage One of the more common The I Horse Creek was the si1verspotted sculpin at Twin Rivers and of 17 illustrates the general dominance overall prey spectrum Fig and mysids which comprised I epibenthic crustaceans gammarid amphipods and biomass the majority of the prey numbers I summer and winter Seasonal differences in diet composition between in the Table 11 Gammarid amphipods were more important I were slight summer more during the winter while mysids were somewhat important
I Clinocottus acuticeps Sharpnose Sculpin
beach seine in the spring and I Two sharpnose sculpinswere caught by
crustaceans amphipods summer collections Epibenthic mysids gammarid ca1anoid and organisms fish larvae I pnd harpacticoid copepods pelagic larvae were well represented in the copepods and gastropod ve1iger I diet
I Enophrys bison Buffalo Sculpin
not abundant in Twin Rivers and Buffalo sculpin were COIDDlon but the Twenty five I Beckett Point beach seine catches throughout year
the mean stomach fullness was percent of the stomachs were empty though I I I 56
season of si1verspotted sculpin caught I Dominant prey items by Table 11 1976 and in Strait of Juan de Fuca August by beach seine I January 1977
Frequency I of occurrence Composition Abundance Biomass I 11 Summer August n 56 22 73 73 88 I Mysids 73 10 83 8 51 Gammarid amphipods 18 I 18 1 91 2 Isopods
9 13 37 33 08 I Shrimps HI abundance 1 61
I H I biomass 2 15
n 21 Winter January 26 I 48 56 69 42 Mysids 54 36 38 40 88 I Gammarid amphipods 10 0 81 105 Isopods 33 10 0 81 2 I Algae I I I I I I I I 57 I is indicative of a macrophagous approximately 50 percent this usually
were the most encountered prey predator Gammarid amphipods frequently I 8 7 of the total number item 42 percent but contributed only percent
and 1 0 of the total biomass I of items percent in common item 25 percent the Oddly enough the second most prey ulvoid which constituted 28 3 percent I total sample was algae typically of the total biomass of the total number of items and 62 8 percent
fishes to consume I While it is not unusual for benthic feeding algae the bite sized character and the incidentally with epibenthic organisms that E bison be feeding upon high incidence of the algae suggest may I included polychaetes 12 5 percent algae Other representative prey fish 27 2 percent total abundance 1 1 percent total biomass eggs fish Sebastes I total abundance 0 2 percent total biomass juvenile
included and both astacuran and anomuran shrimp I Leptocottus armatus Staghorn Sculpin I armatus was The ubiquitous nearshore cottid Leptocottus prevalent the Strait of Juan de I in the nearshore demersal fish assemblages along more Fuca Beckett Point Twin Rivers and Jamesto yn sites produced
winter collections also tended to I staghorn sculpin than the other sites capture more of this species
for armatus included a I The overall prey spectrum Leptocottus 18 Gammarid variety of benthic and epibenthic organisms Fig amphipods in of common they occurred only 11 percent I were the most prey although nematodBs the stomachs sampled Polychaetes probably parasitic Pandalidae I shrimp including PandaZus danae and other Crangonidae fishes including Hippolytidae and Callianassidae Upogebia pugettensis and crabs Ammodytes hexapterus3 Cymatogaster aggregata pleuronectids I and TeZmessus including Cancer magister3 Hemigrapsus oregonensis the other principal prey taxa I cheiragonus and mysids composed I I I 58 I Blepsias cirrhosus I n 41 I
1 1l ltl I I I o 5000 10000
Gammaridea I co co jJ Q co Q U co 1 co co coO jJQ c OotUClJU 1 p co co co I OOOjJf3bOM oocolMO HZUp I
I of silverspotted sculpin in Fig 17 Composite I R prey spectra I 1977 Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January I Leptocottus armatus n 84 I I I I
00 gg 1 ClJ I H D 00 00 co co ClJ ClJ jJrj Ococ c 0 co GJ ClJ co 1jJ jJ 1 0 rj U 1 U jJ c c H oc co jJ M t U U I co jJ U C t t co M Q M f3 co M Cl rj jJ ClJ co Q S s OOjJ bJ p jJ bOoIJ coClJOcJHClJUJMUJ O O I 0ZpZO in R I of Pacific staghorn sculpin Fig 18 Composite I prey spectra Strait of Juan de Fuca 1ay 1976 January 1977 I I
59 I Table 12 While food habits are apparent Seasonal differences in dominated by fish were numerically fall stomach contents I summer and were nematodes from spring samples predominantly eggs prey organisms and in winter were mysids and copepods probably parasitic harpacticoid and crabs in I of clam siphons shrimp Prey biomass consisted primarily and in the summer crabs fish eggs shrimp the spring fish in the crabs in the winter I fall and shrimp fish and
Great Sculpin I 11yoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus
Beckett encountered most frequently at I Juvenile great sculpin were in summer Point in all seasons but especially
occur I dominated the prey composition Hippolytid shrimp completely of these the If the eggs epibenthic ring i 23 percent of specimens it accounted for 93 7 I included in this prey taxon shrimp are also biomass 37 8 of the prey total number of prey and percent percent of the the total prey and contributed 1 9 percent of I Other shrimp Crangonidae stichaeids biomass Fish including 12 9 percent of the total prey 35 6 of of the total prey but percent I accounted for only 1 4 percent
the total prey biomass I Scorpaenichthys marmoratus Cabezon
Point in had I beach seine at Beckett May Two cabezon captured by and Telmessus Cancer C productus consumed brachyuran crabs gracilis total and 98 4 I 73 3 percent of the prey cheiragonus which comprised
of the total content biomass I percent Sculpin Chitonotus pugettensis Roughback Point beach seine most numerous in Beckett I Roughback sculpin were
collections in January I sp but including crangonid Shrimp primarily hippolytid Heptaoarpus the most alata and pandalid species were I Crangon sp Sclerocrangon I I 60
season of Pacific I Table 12 Dominant prey items by staghorn sculpin Strait of Juan de Fuca 1976 caught by beach seine in the May 1977 I January
Frequency I of Composition occurrence Abundance Biomass
Spring Hay n 9 I 33 4 91 0 00 Harpacticoid copepods 33 0 45 1 18 Algae 33 2 23 0 07 Po1ychaetes 3 58 20 41 I Crabs 22 22 2 23 26 00 Shrimp 57 0 08 Gammarid amphipods 22 3 0 89 49 67 I Clam siphons 11 75 45 0 00 Nematodes 11 HI abundance 1 67 I HI biomass 1 96
Summer August n 19 16 101 0 65 Nysids 16 0 13 2 59 I Algae 0 20 63 88 Fish 11 0 49 146 Po1ychaetes 11 0 06 0 03 I Gammarid amphipods 11 0 12 14 32 Crabs 11 0 04 0 02 Clam juveniles 11 0 08 0 01 Tanaids 11 11 0 15 130 I Organic debris 5 97 47 8 47 Fish eggs 0 08 3 81 Shrimp 5 I HI abundance 0 27 HI biomass 3 32
I Fall October n 20 0 33 0 17 Gammarid amphipods 20 15 1 61 22 72 Shrimp 15 0 70 121 Organic debris 37 37 97 I Crabs 10 0 10 0 08 0 64 Mysids 0 53 1 50 Isopods 10 13 15 I Fish 10 0 19 5 95 01 22 79 Fish eggs HI abundance 0 50 I HI biomass 3 71 I I I I 61
I Table 12 cont d
I Frequency of Composition
occurrence Abundance Biomass I Winter January n 36 14 74 53 3 49 Hysids 14 3 96 31 67 Shrimp 0 51 I Nematodes 14 9 34 31 08 Fish 6 2 53 0 96 23 77 Crabs 6 64 0 03 I Tanaids 6 3 6 0 95 2 30 Po1ychaetes 190 0 07 Gammarid amphipods 6 6 0 79 0 77 Organic debris I I I H abundance 2 64
H biomass 3 71 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
62 I numerous 39 6 14 of sample and most frequently occurring percent of the total biomass they comprised 84 0 percent percent prey organisms I of the stomachs were found in 10 percent Fig 19 Gammarid amphipods and 1 5 of of the total prey numbers percent and comprised 11 2 percent included I Other prey items harpacticoid the total prey biomass prominent and algae I copepods mysids polychaetes
Poacher Occelta verrucosa Warty I at Spit during O verrucosa were Dungeness Two specimens of captured 85 7 One stomach contained six mysids October beach seine collections I of the total prey bio total abundance 98 7 percent percent of the prey contained one amphipod I mass the other
Poacher I Paltat Lna barbata Tubenose infrequently at Twin Rivers Morse These small poachers were caught and October beach seining I Creek and Dungeness Spit during August
were of the in the combined sample I Essentially all 81 of 84 prey mysids I Poacher Agonus acipenserinus Sturgeon
I encountered at Beckett Point Sturgeon poachers were commonly a large sample I December beach seining provided is relatively of A Fig 20 The prey spectrum acipenserinus items were cumaceans 33 5 I diverse Numerically the principal prey 13 0 20 6 percent harpacticoid copepods percent gammarid amphipods of their contribution to tanaids 11 2 percent In order percent and I 20 1 44 8 percent gammarid amphipods the total prey biomass shrimp icant 9 8 were the more signi prey I percent and polychaetes percent taxa I I I 63 Chitonotus pugettensis I n 29 I I I
I ft I I J J m o 5000 10000 I
C1 1j 1j 1j U I Cll 1j J Cll C1 C1 1j 0 l Cll U H l l J 1j 1j J U J H c O UJ C1 til 1j U l o 0 1j SJ C1 J C1 l J S p M P p OJ UJ I 1j C1 0 C1 M Z e p p E H
of roughback sculpin in the Fig 19 Composite prey spectrum I 1976 1977 Strait of Juan de Fuca May January
I Agonus acipenserinus n 28 I I I
I C1 0 C1 l H Cll 1j C1 0 J U C1 Cll C1l1 C1 Cll l l l 0 1j U l C1 C1 1j J UMJ I H J U C1M P 0 c C1 c l u U lO Cll co j co 1j c l 0 J J P E1 i H UJ Cj p i Cll 1j l j 1 0 t1j I e Z E U p 1 p
of I of on in the Strait Fig 20 Composite prey spectrum sturg poacher Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I I 64
I Liparis caLLyodon Spotted Snai1fish
a tlorse Creek townet sample in August I One spotted snai1fish from detritus a amount of organic had 12 capre11id amphipods among large I Liparis cycLopus Ribbon Snai1fish
I beach seine catches at Liparis cycLopus occurred infrequently in I vin Rivers and Morse Creek
stomach contained amphipods One third of the combined sample gammarid total numbers and 87 9 percent I accounting for 86 7 percent of the prey items were the isopod of the total prey biomass The remaining prey and rocks I Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis crangonid shrimp
I Liparis fLorae Tidepoo1 Snailfish
at Morse Creek in a January A single tidepool snai1fish captured I and seven beach seine collection contained 15 f1abe1liferan isopods I gammarid amphipods
Liparis mucosus Slimy Snai1fish I the beach seine collections This snailfish was most common in spring
Beach I at Twin Rivers and Kydaka
stomachs contained gammarid amphipods I Eighty five percent of the 80 5 total biomass other epiben 69 2 percent total abundance percent valviferan and flabelliferan isopods mysids thic organisms cumaceans I the items and capre11id amphipods composed remaining prey
Snai1fish I Liparis puLcheLLus Showy
were collected at two western I Like Liparis mucosus u puLcheLLus the October Juan de Fuca Five specimens from sites along the Strait of I I I 65
I amphipods 90 beach seine collections had fed mostly upon gammarid biomass abundance 71 7 percent of total tfysids percent of total prey I items and cumaceans were less important prey
Perch I Cymatogaster aggregata Shiner
seine in abundance during beach I Shiner perch were often captured townet and and during sampling collections at Beckett Point Dungeness Spit of these Port A percentage at the three sites east of Angeles high I and stomachs and the mean stomach fullness digestion specimens had empty and 13 This is for embiotocids factors were quite low Table typical I It does however function of a rate of digestion appears to be a high and make seasonal and habitat comparisons reduce the effective sample size
I difficult
the dominant consumed occur I Overall gammarid amphipods were prey for 49 5 of of the stomachs and accounting percent ring in 35 percent total biomass and 69 7 percent of the prey I the total prey abundance 20 were the next most common prey per Although harpacticoid copepods abundance 9 5 of the total prey cent they accounted for only percent I contributed biomass Calanoid copepods and 0 4 percent of the total prey of and 2 2 percent of the prey 27 8 percent of the total number prey the remainder of the prey in I biomass Epibenthic organisms provided these included mysids tanaids crangonid decreasing order of importance and copepods I shrimp polychaetes isopods cyclopoid
the townet tended to I Shiner perch caught in neritic habitats by calanoid copepods those captured in consume pelagic prey organisms of a wider diversity epibenthic I nearshore demersal habitats consumed harpacticoid copepods tanaids organisms gammarid amphipods mysids I and others Table 13 I Embiotoca lateralis Striped Surfperch
in beach seine catches at all sites Striped surfperch occurred in August Like the shiner I during all seasons thougb not abundantly I I 66
beach seine of shiner caught by I Table 13 Dominant prey items perch of Juan de Fuca May 1976 and townet in the Strait I January 1977
Frequency I of Composition
occurrence Abundance Biomass I Tow net n 6
81 71 21 53 I Ca1anoid copepods 17 17 17 51 1 96 Harpacticoid copepods
17 0 39 76 32 I Po1ychaeta
17 0 39 0 20 Gammarid amphipods I H abundance 0 74 I H biomass 0 90 Beach seine n 14
43 74 65 77 32 I Gammarid amphipods
21 6 59 8 42 Hysids
I 21 5 39 0 26 Harpacticoid copepods
21 5 59 155 I Tanaids 2 00 0 45 Nematodes 14
7 140 0 65 I Isopods
7 0 20 8 21 Shrimp
7 2 00 0 02 I Cyc1opoid copepods I H abundance 2 02 H biomass 1 57 I I I I I
67
I of ZateraZis contained a high percentage perch the sample of Embiotoca I empty stomachs
40 per Gammarid amphipods were the most commonly occurring prey of the 2 of all and 62 3 percent I cent accounting for 94 percent prey
Valviferan Idotea ochotensis and flabelliferan total prey biomass 25 7 9 of the prey but contributed I isopods composed only 1 percent included biomass Other incidental prey gastropods percent of the prey All were exclusively benthic or epibenthic I polychaetes and shrimp prey organisms I RhacochiZus vacca Pile Perch
collections at Beckett Point provided I The August and October townet 84 percent of the stomachs a sizable sample of pile perch Unfortunately nocturnal collection of a is a result of the I were empty perhaps this con stomachs three with prey organisms diurnally feeding fish The total abundance 9 1 percent I tained gammarid amphipods 42 2 percent 2 total abundance 60 8 total biomass valviferan isopods 22 percent
22 2 total abundance 0 1 I percent total biomass tanaids percent crabs 11 1 percent total abundance percent total biomass pagurid
and a The of the remaining I 28 4 percent total biomass shrimp prey fish were epibenthic organisms
I Amphistichus rhodorus Redtail Surfperch
in the beach seine catches at I Redtail surfperch commonly occurred Strait of Juan de Fuca were especially the western sites along the they
in October and January Unlike the I abundant at Twin Rivers August rhodorus had no empty stomachs other surfperches the Amphistichus sample than half to full and less digested I stomachs tended be almost half
21 illustrates a diverse feeding The overall prey spectrum Fig Gammarid amphipods and mysids I habit emphasizing epibenthic organisms total biomass was distributed predominated numerically while the prey I I I 68 I I
I Amphistichus rhodorus n 78 I I I
ft I I f J fl t o 5000 10000 I ell 00 Q Q ell ell ell 41 ell Jc tl Q OM Q J ell OM U M Q ell c OM I M 41 U J ell c ell Q tl Q OM U OM ell OM 0 Q ell 00 00 eIlM MJ J ell M M Cj 0 CIJ Cj I t P OZ
for redtail in Strait Figo 21 Composite IoR I prey spectrum surfperch 1977 I of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January I I I I I I I I 69
I shrimp Crangonidae f1abel among gammarids po1ychaetes G1yceridae fish Cottidae and 1iferan isopods Gnorunosphaerorna oregonensis resecata The va1viferan isopods were Pentidotea I mysids Neomysis sp
and P wosnesenski I are not extreme Table 14 Seasonal variations in food habits in the seasons when red tail I Gammarid amphipods were important prey in summer and winter were prey surfperch were caught mysids significant the flabe11iferan Gnorimosphaeroma The contribution by isopods especially
I in the fall than in the two other seasons oregonens s was much higher
I Trichodon trichodon Pacific Sandfish
both beach seine and townet had I Three Pacific sandfish captured by 92 5 percent total abundance eaten ysids Neomysis sp predominantly I 86 3 percent total biomass
I Lumpenus sagitta Snake prickleback
in included three A Beckett Point beach seine collection August of I had fed on a diverse epibenthic snake pricklebacks All assemblage 64 3 30 1 percent total abundance organisms principally po1ychaetes 13 1 percent total abundance I percent total biomass gammarid amphipods and tanaids 20 4 percent total abundance 16 6 percent total biomass Nematodes probably parasitic accounted I 16 6 percent total abundance items in the stomachs for 32 8 percent of the total I Apodichthys flavidus Penpoint Gunnel
I Morse and Twin at Jamestown Creek August beach seine collections
of seven adult and seven juvenile penpoint Rivers provided a sample I 41 9 percent total abundance 38 6 percent gunnels Va1viferan isopods total abundance 34 5 percent total total biomass mysids 30 0 percent
16 5 total abundance 8 8 I biomass and gammarid amphfpods percent the prey organisms percent total biomass constituted principal I I I 70
I of redtai1 captured Dominant prey items by season surfperch Table 14 1976 in the Strait of Juan de Fuca August by beach seine I January 1977
I Frequency of Composition
occurrence Abundance Biomass I Summer August n 10 71 27 81 15 Gammarid amphipods 80 60 24 03 14 33 Nysids I 60 2 75 2 84 Algae 20 0 34 0 21 F1abe11iferan isopods 10 1 49 0 71 Hyperiid amphipods I HI abundance 1 22 HI biomass 0 97
I Fall October n 22 45 7 96 3 34 Algae 41 24 42 9 24 G arid amphipods 28 68 28 30 Flabelliferan isopods 36 I 4 78 5 88 Valviferan isopods 32 14 1 24 30 07 Fish 9 106 0 99 Polychaetes 5 3 72 19 84 I Shrimp 22 12 0 07 Rocks 5 5 5 66 1 28 l1ysids I HI abundance 3 23 HI biomass 3 00
Winter January n 46 I 24 42 73 19 87 Gammarid amphipods 24 45 23 7 61 Mysids 11 160 47 46 Polychaetes 6 32 3 39 I Flabe11iferan isopods 9 9 3 11 5 38 Valviferan isopods 4 0 20 15 30 Shrimp I HI abundance 3 35 HI biomass 3 40 I I I I I I
71 I photis taeta Crescent Gunnel
Twin I encountered at Morse Creek and Crescent gunnels were commonly The in both beach seine and townet collections Rivers and appeared I in Photis taeta stomachs was gammarid most common 80 percent prey items of the total number of prey amphipods accounting for 75 5 percent Idotea biomass Isopods including I and 59 4 percent of the total prey contributed 13 6 percent of fewkesi and Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis The of the total prey biomass remaining I the total prey and 40 2 percent and other copepods cuma eans algae prey items included harpacticoid I organic debris I Photis ornata Saddleback Gunnel
Beckett from beach seine collections at P ve specimens of P ornata to P food habits somewhat similar I Point and Twin Rivers exhibited 80 were the most frequently utilized prey taeta Gammarid amphipods 5 6 45 5 of all prey items and percent I percent accounting for percent were present in 40 of the total biomass Gnorimosphaerom oregonensis of all and but contributed only 3 4 percent prey I percent of the sample biomass Gastropods and harpacticoid less than 1 percent of the total and tunicates 17 1 percent of the copepods each totaled 10 2 percent I more 1 these however contributed than total number of prey none of
content biomass Two fishes juvenile Parophrys percent to the total 3 4 of all prey I vetutus and Ammodytes hexapterus made up only percent
4 of the total content biomass but together composed 88 percent I Ammodytes hexapterus Pacific Sand Lance I and Morse beach seine at Dungeness Spit August and October samples stomachs lance seven of which had empty I Creek included 19 Pacific sand composing 99 9 percent Calanoid copepods were the only important prey The of the total prey contents of the total prey and 34 3 percent I Pacific sand lance and one gammarid other organisms included a juvenile I amphipod I I 72 I Citharichthys stigmaeus Speckled Sanddab
beach seine collection I were in the 1ay Four speckled sanddabs caught contributing 31 percent at Beckett Point Three contained polychaetes
of the total biomass Gammarid I of the total prey and 51 3 percent 47 0 of the prey two fish made another percent amphipods occurring in up biomass Other less commonly utilized prey I and 10 9 percent of the prey 7 9 9 1 total abundance included bivalves and their siphons percent
calanoid copepods one shrimp 28 2 percent I percent total biomass crab one ana total biomass an anomuran isopod algae I Citharichthys sordidus Pacific Sanddab
Beckett Point collections at Dungeness and I Winter beach seine Spit were common prey to Pacific sanddabs Gammarid amphipods producd of the 4 of the prey and 3 8 percent prey I three contributing 68 percent shrimp 61 2 percent total biomass biomass Mysids Neomysis sp items I and polychaetes were the other prey
Sole I Eopsetta jordani Petrale
beach seine collection at Dungeness A petrale sole caught in a January I in its stomach Spit had four gamma rid amphipods
I Lepidopsetta bilineata Rock Sole
occurred of rock sole was gammarid amphipods they I The dominant prey and 18 and 60 percent of all prey in 66 percent of the samples comprised of 22 Tanaids occurred in 48 percent I percent of prey biomass Fig to abundance and biomass the samples with only small contributions scissurata and whole of Yoldia Pelecypods including siphons specimens and I in 32 percent of the samples and Clinocardium nuttallii occurred biomass all and 39 percent of prey comprised 5 percent of prey species Telemessus cheiragonus I Crabs were represented by Cancer magister included and Fishes consumed Pinnixa sp pagurid pinnotherid species and O I PhoZis laeta Ammodytes hexapterus corhynchus sp I w
Ul N t II l w CXlC
c ideaOsteichthys debris ro hu t 10 Reptantia Organic GastropodaNatantiaNematodaOstracoda lIo rtiC 0 io Ul 0fro tIl Caprellideaen rtiIII rt H1 Pe1ecypoda S ji ro Ul ro Tanaidacea j N N 0Ul rt ro Po1ychaeta Cl Gamrnaridea Cl 1l Q l III i f0 c IIIl ro c III III f I0 cIII oH10 c p v OS
tj C Ul N Ul
l II fN w o en o o ooeft
deb Gamrnaridea Po1ychaeta Cumacea Tanaidacea Harpacticoida MysidaceaHo10thuroidea Natantia pe1ecypodaOsteichthys OrganicOligochaeta
en rt III rt o ccIIIl pro j ro Oi Ul ro rt ic S o H1 IlQf Ul Ul ofro l i H j OQ N W 0S1llCl0Ul Cl Cl t f 0 I cIII l cIII i f0 c v Iro 1M I 74
I Parophrys vetulus English Sole
in were the most abundant fish I English sole principally juveniles and sites beach seine collections at moderately exposed protected they
summer Their stomachs more abundant during the averaged I were noticeably full and the contents were half identifiable a little less than half I tanaids Gammarid amphipods polychaetes cumaceans harpacticoids consumed prey and I and mysids in that order were the most frequently contribution to numerical and percentage made the same general gravimetric items of were isopods composition Fig 23 Other prey importance I holothurians shrimp Synidotea nubulosa and sphaeromatid species and parts clam siphons spp and pelecypods pelecypod I Crangon
season were evident Table 15 Variation in prey composition by declined in from I Gammarid amphipods and cumaceans gradually importance declined from through autumn but spring to winter tanaids also spring taxon in winter Polychaetes I increased to the second most important prey to the diet but dominated in made a significant contribution generally in the diet as an the autumn and winter Holothurians appeared important
I in autumn and winter prey item only
I Platichthys stellatus Starry Flounder
all beach seine sites along the I Starry flounder were eneountered at abundant at Jamestown Twin Rivers Strait of Juan de Fuca but were more
one third of the stomach samples I and Beckett Point Approximately six of the total sample originated from juvenile fish Thirty percent 25 full and less than I had empty stomachs the remainder averaged percent were identifiable 50 percent of the stomach contents
in the prey spectrum I polychaetes were the most common prey organism to the biomass 24 of P stelZatus ane contributed the majority prey Fig individuals to the overall I Gammarid amphipods however provided more I I I 75
sole Table 15 Dominant prey items by season of English captured by 1976 I beach seine and townet in the Strait of Juan de Fuca May January 1977 I
frequency of Composition
I occurrence Abundance Biomass
Spring May n 21 I Gammarid amphipods 81 18 39 19 83 Tanaids 67 30 36 18 17 Cumaceans 52 19 22 20 52 36 24 56 Po1ychaetes 43 8 I 0 25 Harpacticoid copepods 38 10 86 6 69 9 55 Shrimp larvae 33 11 0 95 Shrimp 10 1 2 86 I Mysids 5 2 79 0 64 Clam siphons 5 0 28 HI abundance 2 95 I HI biomass 3 03
Summer August n 50 I Gammarid amphipods 68 40 89 44 39 Cumaceans 50 20 01 7 89 87 Po1ychaetes 30 10 51 19 18 5 99 15 45 Mysids I Tanaids 16 5 85 103 Harpacticoid copepods 14 12 83 0 24 Ostracods 10 0 40 0 26 I Clams 8 0 67 0 46 06 Clam siphons 6 0 20 0 Isopods 4 0 61 142 I Fish 2 0 07 4 24 HI abundance 2 84 HI biomass 2 87 I Fall October n 14 30 18 Polychaetes 50 25 22 Gammarid amphipods 21 3 97 2 55 38 33 04 I Mysids 14 22 Holothurians 14 13 36 29 62 Cumaceans 14 3 25 1 36 28 88 0 88 I Decapod eggs 7 Clam siphons 7 0 72 0 32 0 16 Isopods 7 0 72 Shrimp 7 0 36 0 72 I HI abundance 2 81 HI biomass 2 55 I I I I
76
I Table 15 cont d I Frequency of Composition I occurrence Abundance Biomass
Winter January n 35 51 52 69 51 41 Po1ychaetes I 26 11 09 2 50 Tanaids 18 11 8 58 Gammarid amphipods 17 17 7 18 8 14 Mysids 3 43 10 27 I Ho1othuroideans 11 6 114 0 15 Cumaceans 3 0 16 11 72 Shrimp 3 0 16 0 05 I Clam siphons 3 114 3 48 Oligochaetes H abundance 3 23 I H biomass 3 13 I I I I I I I I I I I 77
I PZatichthys steZlatus n 27 I I I
I I J I I o 5000 10000
tIl I o I c tIl 0 1 1 H tIl co 0 H tIl co co co III co III CO I u III III ddCO CO c dCO 1 III d tJ o III 1 H uo c u co 1 co tJo tJrllll o c H d 1 Cd I tJ I tJ co 1 I tJd III 1 III tIl 1 UCd co COIll 1o CO IlIIlIu I I 001 tIl Cdl be U ul 0 I o co Cd HIlI ICOlOtllllllll P t Et op p op
of flounder in Strait of Juan de Fig 24 Composite prey spectrum starry I Fuca May 1976 January 1977
psettichthys melanostictus I n 122 I I I I
tIl I co Cd co III c u III d u co ai Cd U 1 co c 1 COd Cd H III u c 0 d co U 1 I U u I 1 CO III Cd Cd tIl u l co l tIl Cd 0 III t uOZPZ I of sand sole in Strait of Juan de Fuca Fig 25 Composite prey spectrum 1977 I May 1976 January II I
78 I included fish Pho1idae Gobiesocidae diet Other important prey mysids nuttallii and clam siphons isopods I Hexagrammidae clams Clinocardium Pinnotheridae and anomuran crabs Pagurus hirsutiusculus I Pleuronichthys coenosus c o Sole
I Point in and January Beach seine collections at Beckett May provided
sole were by far the the stomach samples of adult C O Po1ychaetes
in 83 of the stomachs and composing I dominant prey occurring percent 5 of the total biomass 78 5 percent of the total prey and 79 percent in 58 of the I Gammarid amphipods and clam siphons both occurred percent abundance and 2 8 of the total prey sample providing 6 2 percent percent the biomass respectively I and 1 7 percent and 4 5 percent of prey also occurred frequently in the Tanaids intact clams and gastropods A saddleback stomach but contributed little to the prey composition
I stomach constituted 8 8 percent of the gunnel Pholis ornata in one of eelgrass total contents biomass Organic detritus including pieces
I in of the stomach samples Zostera also occurred 25 percent
I psettichthys melanostictus Sand Sole
of which were were present in I Sand sole over 80 percent juveniles the They occurred at all the beach seine collections throughout year
but tended to be most abundant at the Dungeness Spit I sampling locations of the total contained and Twin Rivers sites Only 6 percent sample close to 75 percent full and just I empty stomachs the others averaged were identifiable over 50 percent of the contents
25 shows sp to I The overall prey spectrum Fig mysids Neomysis
were taken almost as be the primary prey organism gammarid amphipods contribution to either the total I frequently but did not make as large a and or biomass Fish Ammodytes hexapterus prey numbers including and other of Panda1idae I caridean shrimp including Pandalus danae species contributed to the Crangonidae and Hippo1ytidae also significantly I total prey biomass I I
79 I the four samples Table 16 Sand sole prey spectra from quarterly food organisms mysids and I indicate shifts between the two primary in diversity Winter gammarid amphipods and changes general spectrum and than summer and and spring diets contained more mysids gammarids I was diversified by more frequent autumn diets Summer prey composition
Autumn diets exhibited an even more diverse prey predation upon fish because of increased predation upon I spectrum especially by biomass
shrimp and several uther prey organisms I III H 3 Functional Feeding Groups I examined for stomach contents were The 60 nearshore fish species Table 17 Forty two categorized into eight functional feeding groups I with diets 25 were facultative planktivores percent of these species and to a lesser extent benthic prey based on epibenthic organisms which were planktivores prey solely I Twenty seven percent 16 obligate In both of these feeding categories gammarid upon epibenthic organisms taxa Five species con I amphipods and mysids were the principal prey fed upon benthic sidered facultative benthic feeders predominantly crabs clams and clam siphons and I prey principally polychaetes Five of faculta ive secondarily consumed epibenthic organisms species and accord in the neritic fish assemblages planktivores were present I almost exclu made of neritic plankton ingly their diet was up mostly
and some epibenthic organisms I sively calanoid copepods and obligate Obligate planktivores in the neritic assemblages nearshore demersal fishes included only two I benthic feeders among the fed on epibenthic plankton species each One facultative planktivore One was a high level I and secondarily upon neritic plankton species which fed solely upon fishes predator an obligate piscivore I III H 4 Habitat Site Differences
I the seven sites are Differences in food habits of fishes between
any based on this initial survey Generally I difficult to interpret I I 80
sole beach Table 16 Dominant prey items by season of sand captured by I seine in the Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I
Frequency of Composition I Biomass occurrence Abundance
25 Spring Jvfay n I 56 05 38 22 Gammarid amphipods 100 88 28 10 44 56 Mysids 48 8 22 2 67 Cumaceans 1 49 0 27 I Tanaids 12 0 75 144 Fish 12 8 0 60 0 37 Po1ychaetes 4 0 30 11 61 I Shrimp H abundance 1 84 I H biomass 189 Summer August n 28 29 93 86 49 08 Mysids 3 48 139 Gammarid amphipods 29 I 25 107 36 12 Fish 14 0 98 13 25 Shrimp H abundance 118 I H biomass 2 79
Fall October n 27 56 66 74 48 35 Mysids I 62 7 58 Gammarid amphipods 15 3 0 04 Tunicates 7 136 4 3 85 37 30 Shrimp I 0 23 6 00 Fish 4 15 61 0 09 Nematodes 4 181 0 22 Ca1anoid copepods 4 136 0 14 I Tanaids 4 H abundance 2 62 H 2 90 I biomass Winter January n 42 36 95 65 98 48 Mysids 10 195 0 33 I Gammarid amphipods H abundance 2 60 H biomass 2 33 I I I I Table 17 Feeding classifications of sixty species of nearshore fish examined from collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977
Feeding Principal Functional group realm Predators prey organisms
Neritic Fish Assemblage tow net
Neritic Obligate planktivore Clupea harengus pallasi juvs Calanoid copepods Ammodytes hexapterus Crab zoea Mysids Larvaceans Hyperiid amphipods Insects Ctenophores
Facultative Neritic planktivore Engraulis mordax Calanoid copepods Epibenthic Oncorhynchus gorbuscha juvs Harpacticoid copepods 00 o tshawytscha juvs Mysids Hypomesus pretiosus Gammarid amphipods Spirinchus thaleichthys Cumaceans
Nearshore Demersal Fish Assemblage beach seine
Obligate benthic feeder Benthic Porichthys notatus Polychaebes Scorpaenichthys marmoratus Crabs Clams Clam siphons Fish
Obligate planktivore Epibenthic Raja binoculata Gammarid amphipods R abyssicola Caridean shrimp R steUuZata Mysids Oncorhynchus keta juvs Harpacticoid copepods o kisutch juvs Cumaceans Salmo gairdneri juvs Tanaids Syngnathus gt iseoZineatus Leptostracans BZepsias cirrhosus Caprellid amphipods
Species with significant sample sizes r Table 17 cont d
Feeding Principal Functional group realm Predators prey organisms
MyoxocephaZus poZyacanthocephaZus juvs OcceZZa verrucosa PaZlasina barbata Agonus acipenserinus Liparis caZZyodon L pulcheUus Trichodon trichodon Eopsetta jordani
Facultative benthic feeder Benthic Lepidopsetta bilineata Polychaetes Epibenthic Parophrys vetuZus juvs Crabs PZatichthys stellatus Clam siphons 00 PZeuronichthys coenosus Clams N Lumpenus sagitta Gastropods Gammarid amphipods Mysids Tanaids Fishes Harpacticoid copepods
Facultative planktivore Epibenthic Squalus acanthias Gammarid amphipods Benthic Gadus macrocephalus juvs Caridean shrimp Microgadus proximus Mysids Theragra chalcogrammus juvs Harpacticoid copepods AuZorhynchus fZavidus Cumaceans Hexagrammos stelleri Tanaids Artedius fenestraZis Polychaetes Ascelichthys rhodorus Crabs CZinocottus acuticeps Fish Enophrys bison Calanoid copepods
Species with significant sample sizes Table 17 cont d
Feeding Principal realm Predators prey organisms Functional group
Leptocottus armatus Chitonotus pugetensis Liparis cyclopus L florae L mucosus Cymatogaster aggregata Embiotoca laterali Rhacochilus vacca Amphistichus rhodoterus Apodichthys flavidus PhoUs laeta P ornata
Citharichthys stigmaeus 00 C sordidus psettichthys melanostictus juvs
Gasterosteus aculeatus Harpacticoid copepods Facultative Epibenthic planktivore Gammarid Neritic amphipods Calanoid copepods
Fish Obligate piscivore Benthic Ophiodon elongatus Epibenthic
Species with significant sample sizes I
84 I was not abundant at more than particular nearshore demersal fish species
the other hand were one or two sites the major neritic species on
I rather ubiquitous There were associations between certain prey taxa
For and the sites where fish were found to have utilized them example
Twin Rivers I mysids were prevalent in nearshore demersal fish species at and shrimp and crabs were common food items for species at Beckett Point I Morse Creek and polychaetes and clams including clam siphons were the Jamestown Gammarid most frequently utilized prey organisms at amphipods calanoid I were prevalent in fish prey spectra from all sites Similarly in the diets of neritic species copepods were well represented captured
food items were I at all seven to vuet sites Other less important neritic at Twin Rivers and unique to certain sites such as euphausiids shrimp
larvae at Beckett Point I and crab
Without knowing the relative distributions and abundances of near I shore invertebrates characterizing these sites we cannot suggest that of certain species are necessarily inhabiting an area because specific
information available was the of I prey organisms The only catalogue macroinvertebrates compiled from beac seine data Although the seine
the 0 6 I is not designed to quantitatively sample fish food items cm mesh in the bag retained only the larger epibenthic organisms the data
indicate the invertebrate species richness and character of the sites
I of for the which may be indicative of the availability prey organisms
nearshore fish The best example is Beckett Point where caridean shrimp
in collec I isopods and brachyuran crabs were most abundant beach seine
tions All lifehistory stages of these organisms also appeared in the inhabit I stomachs of many of the dominant nearshore demersal fish species ing Beckett Point i e juvenile Pacific tomcod juvenile walleye I pollock tubesnout staghorn sculpin roughback sculpin great sculpin cabezon rock c o sole and starry flounder I I I I I 85
I IV CONCLUSIONS
I IV A Nearshore Fish Assemblages
collected the first I The data compiled in this report were during The conclusions here are based year of a multi year effort presented from site during each of the I upon one set of replicate samples every until further data are four seasons they may be regarded as preliminary
more conclusions I available With succeeding years of data collection here can be verified or altered can be formulated and those presented
of de Fuca I The nearshore demersal fish fauna of the Strait Juan
based habitat exhibits a variety of overlapping distributions upon
undetermined factors assem I exposure geography and other Specific
or are thus difficult blages e g habitat specific exposure specific
fauna is not as rich as the demersal I to define The neritic fish species herrin The fauna and is dominated by one species Pacific remaining I neritic species are distributed in a variety of overlapping patterns similar to those observed in the demersal fauna
I demersal and neritic The effect of an oil spill on the nearshore
fish fauna is unlikely to be clear cut Neritic species e g herring the I smelt salmonids which regularly range over large areas possess
water but as capabilities as adults of leaving or avoiding polluted
to the nearshore area and I juveniles or spawning adults may be restricted sole sand unable to avoid olluted water Demersal fish e g English
in their movements all life I sole greenling are more limited during from a area history stages and may not be able to move away polluted I are also The severity of the effects of pollution dependent upon
i different habitats will be affected the area where the oil occurs e
I to remain in areas with rates of differently Oil is less likely high beaches than in flushing e g exposed sandy protected embayments
macro invertebrates and fishes I Exposed areas possess fewer species of be affected than protected areas and are thus less likely to severely I I I 86 I The impact of an oil spill will also be determined by the time of
in nearshore environment year in which it occurs Oil spills the during
I the winter when most fish have moved into deeper water will produce
fewer adverse effects than those occurring during the summer when fish
I have moved back into shallow water This is further complicated by the
are fact that for many demersal species nearshore areas nursery grounds I for recently settled larvae e g English sole sand sole All beach seine sites along the Strait of Juan de Fuca were utilized by juvenile I fishes I The specific effects of hydrocarbons on individual fish have not been cited as for the most part they are unknown Various fractions
of unrefined oil have been shown to be more or less toxic to marine
the I organisms in laboratory experiments e g Powell et al 1970 but
to in situ effects are little known Straughan 1976 In addition being
I directly toxic to an organism hydrocarbons may affect any of a number
to continued existence of its For of processes vital the genes example
of fish to locate the I hydrocarbons may affect the ability migrating area be it feeding territory spawning ground etc which they seek I Hydrocarbons could also affect the ability of sexual pheremone perception shown to be a necessary component of successful reproduction in some
fishes They could also affect the feeding ability of some fish if
I reduced in numbers their prey were adversely affected the prey could be
if the effects were lethal or if the prey accumulated oil residues
I they could be potentially toxic to the predator although results to
date are equivical Straugha 1976 I IV B Associated Macroinvertebrates I Neither the beach seine nor the townet was designed to sample I macroinvertebrates quantitatively therefore the conclusions which can be drawn from the cataloguing of macroinvertebrates are limited In
add tion the efficiency of recovering the invertebrates from the net
I varied according to the quantity of fish and algae in the catch Given
the high abundance of fish captured at sites such as Beckett Point I I I
87
I consistent invertebrate collections were often difficult to obtain in a
occurrence of common manner Thus other than an indication of the
is available and I species Appendix 6 little quantitative information and number of estimates of densities standing cropt sex ratios gravid
nearshore macro invertebrate I females are not reliable measures of the
assemblages I site Few species were found consistently year round at anyone
but could also be attributed to a seasonal I This ay be a sampling bias inshore offshore movement or patchy distributions of the organisms I As in the case of the nearshore fish assemblages a decrease in
and individuals to be macro invertebrates number of species appears
I correlated with increasing exposure Beckett Point the most protected
and macroinverte sitet was characterized by a species rich algal eelgrass the other hand I brate community Dungeness Spit and Kydaka Beach on unstable sand beaches and are exposed to high wave action have clean I support a comparatively species poor community
I IV C Nearshore Food Web Structure
nearshore fish When relating the food spectra of the various species into nearshore I to the possible effects of pollutant influx the region
the fish and its life it is important to evaluate the status of species Most I history stage during its residence in the nearshore environs of
the dominant neritic species juvenile Pacific herringt Pacific sand
as I lance surf and longfin smelt depend upon pelagic plankton principal to of food organisms which are both less available toxic elements Nearshore demersal I petroleum hydrocarbons and less widely distributed species on the other hand are typically more dependent upon epibenthic
to I and truly benthic organismst which are confined certain nearshore habitats Fish associated with a particular nearshore habita may occur
For th re because of the types or sizes of prey organisms example
salmon and flatfish I juvenile salmonids specifically chum English I I I 88 I in sole spend a high percentage of their early marine life history the
shallow sublittoral zone feeding upon epibenthic plankton harpacticoid I And copepods gammarid amphipods cumaceans tanaids and polychaetes
while the fish themselves may be relatively insensitive to the pollutant
invertebrates I or actually avoid it Rice 1973 infauna1 and epifaunal
and do not have the to move away from a may be more sensitive ability I pollutant
an oil I Not only are these prey organisms limited to an area where Sanders et al 1971 spill would impose an immediate acute effect
Chan 1972 Hann 1975 and others but the littoral and shallow sublit
I Teal 1971 toral sediments tend to retain and accumulate oil Burns and
for providing a continuous chronic source of petroleum hydrocarbons
I transfer into the food web Blumer et al 1970 Krebs and Burns 1977 or
disruption of the community structure through sublethal effects I
It is not known whether the reduction or elimination of a primary
in the to another less I prey organism will result predator switching because it preferred prey Fish prey upon a particular organism provides
an alternative I them with a net energy gain over energy expended prey alternate are more may not provide a net energy gain Assuming prey
costly to the predator e g because they are harder to locate there I the fish suffer are fewer of them or they yield less energy may
to lowered higher mortalitites e g more susceptible predators have I reproductive success lowered growth rates etc Unfortunately we involved in such no quantitative evidence of the thresholds and costs I switching
I Of the principal nearshore fish species inhabiting the Strait of Juan de Fuca shoreline 42 percent were classed as obligate planktivores
facultative benthivores or facultative p1anktivores dependent upon
I sublittoral benthic and or epibenthic prey organisms of the shallow
stee1head zone Many of these juvenile chum and coho salmon juvenile
I rock sole juvenile English sole c o sole PZeuroniehthys eoensus
starry flounders juvenile Pacific cod juvenile walleye pollock I I I 89 I or are themselves greenling lingcod are economically important prey for economically important species The influx of significant amounts
I result in a of hydrocarbon whether short term or long term could which the nearshore disruption of the populations of prey organisms tissues to I fishes utilize and the transfer of the pollutant from prey
predator tissues I IV D Contributions To Knowledge I to This study is the first systematic sampling effort designed
the Strait of Juan de Fuca Data I survey the nearshore fish fauna along and macro invertebrates on distribution abundance and biomass of fish
to the of are a unique and significant contribution biological knowledge
of Juan de Fuca This I the nearshore fish community of the Strait study the nearshore fish also represents an important extension of the data on
and the San Juan The I fauna of Puget Sound Rosario Strait archipelago is nearshore fish section of the MESA Puget Sound Project the most
to the food habits I comprehensive effort in this area to date determine of the nearshore fish and to identify the macro invertebrates collected I with the fish I IV E Recommendations
1 Data should be gathered over a period of several years to
inter I properly assess seasonal trends and year variations
conducted in I 2 Scuba surveys and or trammel netting could be but not rocky kelp bed areas to determine species present there suscep I tible to the beach seine or townet
I 3 Purse seining could be conducted to sample adult pegalic fish capable of avoiding the townet
I to 24 hour 4 Diel sampling could be conducted determine the
variation in composition of the fish fauna at specific sites I I I 90
I life stages of 5 Bioassays could be conducted on specific history
to determine sensitivity to abundant or economically important species
I hydrocarbon pollution
could be conducted to deter I 6 Nearshore ichthyoplankton sampling waters as a to the mine larval species present in nearshore supplement I offshore ichythyoplankton work I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 91
I v REFERENCES
I Banner A H 1947 A taxonomic study of the Mysidacea and Euphausiacea
Crustacea of the Northeast Pacific Part I Family Lophogastridae
Inst 26 345 414 I through tribe Erythropini Trans Roy Canad
and I Banner A H 1948 A taxonomic study of the lysidacea Euphausiacea Crustacea of the Northeast Pacific Part II Tribe Mysini I through Subfamily Myside11inae Trans Roy Canad Inst 27 65 125
Banner A H 1950 A taxonomic study of the lysidacea and Euphausiacea
I Crustacea of the Northeast Pacific Part III Euphausiacea
Trans Canad lnst Pp 1 55 I Roy
Barnard J L 1969 The families and genera of marine gammaridean I amphipoda Bull 271 Smithsonian Inst U S Nat Museum Washing ton D C I Barnes R D 1974 Invertebrate zoology 4th ed W B Saunders Co I Philadelphia 870 pp
Blumer M J Sass G Souza H Sanders and F Grass1e 1970 The
I West Falmouth Oil Spill Woods Hole Oceanogr lnst Tech Rep
vffiOI REF 70 41 59 pp I Burns K A and J M Teal 1971 Hydrocarbon incorporation into the I salt marsh ecosystem from the West Falmouth Oil Spill Woods Hole Oceanogr Inst Tech Rep VHOI REF 71 69 28 pp I Chan G L 1972 A study of the effects of the San Francisco oil spill
84 I on marine organisms Part I NOAA Rep 72090817 pp
Hart J L 1973 Pacific fishes of Canada Fish Res Board Can
I Bull 180 I I I 92
I Hann R W Jr 1975 Follow up field survey of the oil pollution from
the Tanker Metula Texas A M Res Found College Station I Final Rep to USCG 59 pp
I Johnson 1 E and H J Snook 1955 Seashore animals of the Pacific coast Dover Publications Inc New York 659 pp I Kozloff E N 1974 Keys to the marine invertebrates of Puget Sound
the San Juan archipelago and adjacent regions Univ Washington
I Press Seattle 226 pp
I Krebs C T and K A Burns 1977 Long term effects of an oil spill on populations of the salt marsh crab Vca pugnax Science 197 4302 I 484 486
Miller B S C A Simenstad L L Moulton W A Karp K L Fresh F C
I Funk and S F Borton 1977 Puget Sound Baseline Program Uear shore
Fish Survey Final Rep July 1974 June 1977 Fish Res Inst
I ColI Fish Seattle
I Pinkas L M S Oliphant and I L K Iverson 1971 Food habits of
albacore bluefin tuna and bonito in California water Calif I Fish Game Fish Bull 152 1 105
I Powell N A C S Sayee and D F Tufts 1970 Hyperplasia in an estuarine bryozoan attributable to coal tar derivatives J Fish I Res Board Can 27 11 3
Rice S D 1973 Toxicity and avoidance tests with Prudhoe Bay oil and I pink salmon fry Pages 667 670 in Proc Joint Conf Prevent and Control of Oil Spills Washington D C I Ricketts E F and J Calvin 1968 Between Pacific tides 4th I ed revised by J Hedgpeth Stanford Univ Press 614 pp I I I 93
I 1972 The West Falmouth Sanders H L J F Grassle and G R Hampson
Inst Tech I Oil Spill 1 Biology Hoods Hole Oceanogr Rep WUOI 72 20 51 pp
crustaceans W C Brown Co I Schultz G A 1969 The marine isopod
Publ Dubuque Iowa 359 pp I manual Intertidal inverte Smith R I and J T Carlton 1975 Light s 3rd ed Univ California I brates of the central California coast Press 716 pp
I effects of natural chronic exposure to Straughan D 1976 Sublethal Amer Petrol Inst Pub1 petroleum in the marine environment
I 4280 I I I I I I I I I I I I 94 I I I I
I APPENDIX 1 OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA FROM
I BEACH SEINE AND TOWNET
COLLECTIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I I 95 I A WESTERN SITES
I 15 I KYDAKA BEACH 14 TWIN RIVERS
t MORSE CREEK 13
I 12
11
u10 f I ILl ILl 9
e a
7 I l
6 ILl I 5 4
3
I 2 1
OA M J J A S o N D J I MONTH I
B EASTERN SITES
15 I DUNGENESS I SPIT
14 JAMESTOWN
a BECKETT PO I NT I 13 12
11
u10 I f ILl ILl 9 I ea 7 i a 6 ffi I 5 4
3
I 2
0 I A 1 J J A S 0 N D J
10NTH
I Appendix I a Nearshore surface water temperature OC for western sites A and eastern sites B as recorded during quarterly beach seine collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 96 A WESTERN SITES
I 35 IJ KYDAKA BEACH T14IN RIVERS
34 A MORSE CREEK
I 33
32 I 31 Q Q
30 I z cf29
I 28
27
I 26 23 2
J A S o N o 25A 11 J J I 10NTH I
B EASTERN SITES
I 35 IJ DUNGENESS SPIT A BECKETT POINT 34 I 33 I 32 31 Q Q I 30 ffi29
I 28 I 27 26
I I 25 J I A fo J J A S o N o 110NTH
for western sites A and Appendix l b Nearshore surface water salinity ppt beach seine I eastern sites B ai recorded during quarterly collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I I 97 I A WESTERN SITES 120 l KYDAKA BEACH TWIN RIVERS I A MORSE CREEK 110
z I 100 a D l
a en I 90 z
80 0
0 I lIJ
J 70 en I 0
60 I SO 0 N D J A M J J A S MONTH I
I B EASTERN SITES
120 153 0 l DUNGENESS SPIT
JAMESTOWN
I A POINT BECKETT 110
I z 100 a D l
a en I 90
80 I 0 0 lIJ
J 70 en I 0
60 I SO D J A M J J A S 0 II I MONTH dissolved saturation for Appendix I c Nearshore surface water oxygen B as recorded during western sites A and eastern sites de Fuca beach seine collections in the Strait of Juan I qu terly I I 98
I Appendix 1 d Beach seine temperature summary I S D Location Spring Summer Autumn llinter x
8 5 10 1 124 I Kydaka Beach 11 5 10 4
9 0 10 6 2 34 Twin Rivers 13 5 12 2 7 7
I 8 5 9 7 1 36 Morse Creek 11 5 10 6 8 3
8 4 7 5 9 0 1 11 I Dungeness Spit 9 6 10 4 11 5 110 Jamestown 10 4 12 6
11 2 2 56 I Beckett Point 13 5 13 8 9 8 7 7
I 8 2 x 11 7 11 7 8 6
56 I SD 145 1 29 0 77 0 I I I I I I I I I I I 99
I Appendix l e Beach seine salinity summary I Location Spring Summer Autumn Winter x S D
30 2 30 8 0 45 I Kydaka Beach 31 3 30 8
Twin Rivers 26 8 29 6 29 7 23 2 27 3 2 65 I Morse Creek 31 4 28 8 31 2 30 7 30 5 103
31 0 0 37 I Dungeness Spit 31 3 30 4 31 3 30 9 Beckett Point 30 2 30 7 31 2 30 8 30 7 0 36 I
30 2 30 1 30 9 29 6 I x SD 1 76 0 76 0 67 2 99 I I I I I I I I I I I I 100
I Appendix I f Beach seine dissolved oxygen summary I Location Spring Summer Autumn Winter x SD
101 3 105 2 3 90 I Kydaka Beach 109 0
2 15 79 I Twin Rivers 113 0 71 9 107 1 100 8 98 4 09 Horse Creek 95 0 84 9 89 8 94 5 91 1
93 4 20 65 I Dungeness Spit 110 0 107 2 58 5 98 0
104 11 10 Jamestown 116 0 93 8 9
64 I Beckett Point 153 0 104 1 66 2 82 6 101 5 32 I x 116 0 92 4 80 4 95 4
I SD 17 81 12 92 19 25 6 86 I I I I I I I I I I I
101 I
Appendix I g Comparison of the means over all beach seine collections of oceanographic data between I eastern and western sites I Western sites Eastern sites I 4 Temperature x 10 2 10
I oC SD 19 2 3
Nin Hax 7 7 13 5 7 5 13 5
I Range 5 8 6 0 I Salinity x 29 4 30 9
2 5 0 4 I ppt SD
Hin Max 23 2 31 4 30 2 31 3
I Range 8 2 1 1 I 96 7 98 4 Dissolved oxygen x
I SD 12 4 26 7
Nin Hax 71 9 58 5 153 0
I Range 41 1 94 5 I I I I I I I 102
lJ KYDAKA BEACH
E ILLAR POINT A WESTERN 51 TES I IA TWIN RIVERS t10RSE CREEK 15 I
12 I
U 9 I o
li I ffi t 6 I I
3 I
o N D I OA M J J A S t1DNTH I lJ DUNGENESS SPIT B EASTERN sms JAMESTOWN IA BECKETT POINT I 15 I 12 I
U 9 I o
I a ffi a
i5 6 I I I 3 I
OA M J J A S o N D I t1DNTH Appendix I h Nearshore surface water temperature OC for western sites A and eastern sites B as recorded during quarterly tow I net collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I 103 tl KYDAKA BEACH
PILLAR POINT WESTERN SITES A 4 TWIN RIVERS I MORSE CREEK 35
I 34
33 I lj 32
3t g I a
30 z
I Z9
I 28
27
I 26
1 1 25A M J J A S o N D I t1DNlli I tl DUNGENESS SP IT B ERS1ERN SHES JAMESTOWN 4 BECKETT PO I NT I 35
34 I 33
I 32
3t g I o 30 Z I i29
2B I zJ
I 26
25 A M J J A SON D t1DNTH I o Appendix 1 i Nearshore surface water sa1inity Oo for western sites A and eastern sites B as recorded during quarterly townet I collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I 104 lI KYDAKA BEACH PILLAR POINT WESTERN SIrES A A HIlN RIVERS
NORSE CREEK I 150 I 140
130
I 120
110 I 1JS
100 d
I 90 a l2 I 080
70
I 60
50A 1 J J A S 0 N 0 I tlDNni
I lI DUNGENESS SP IT B EASTERN SHES JAMESTOWN A BECKETT POINT I 150
140 I 130
120 I S
110
I
I 100 rS
90 I 6 l2 c80
I 70 I BO
50A M J J A S o N D tlONTH Nearshore I Appendix iJ surface water dissolved oxygen saturation for western sites A and eastern sites B as recorded during townet collections in I quarterly the Strait of Juan de Fuca I 105 I
Appendix 1 k Summary of nearshore surface water temperature OC collections I as recorded during townet
I Location Spring Sum11ler Fall Unter Hean SD
I 0 45 Kydaka Beach 9 4 9 5 9 0 8 5 9 1
0 59 I Pillar Point 8 6 9 8 8 9 8 5 8 9 Twin Rivers 8 9 10 7 9 7 7 9 9 3 119
I Horse Creek 8 4 10 0 9 6 7 5 8 9 1 14
Dungeness Spit 9 5 10 0 9 3 7 7 9 1 99
I 8 23 Jamestown 9 3 10 0 8 9 7 1 8 1 I Beckett Point 12 4 13 5 10 8 7 3 11 0 2 70 Mean 9 5 10 5 9 5 7 8 I SD 134 1 37 0 68 0 55 I I I I I I I I I I 106 I
0 Appendix 1 t Summary of nearshore surface water salinity 00 I as recorded during townet collections
I Location Spring Summer Fall Winter Hean SD
6 28 3 31 5 2 12 I Kydaka Beach 32 6 32 4 32 0 48 Pillar Point 32 5 32 2 32 7 31 6 32 3
0 0 46 I Tvin Rivers 31 9 31 9 32 6 31 5 32
193 Horse Creek 28 1 31 8 32 2 31 8 31 0 I 32 7 32 1 0 76 Dungeness Spit 31 0 32 2 32 5
32 2 31 8 0 94 I James tmvn 30 5 31 7 32 7 31 7 0 32 Beckett Point 31 3 31 6 32 0 33 1
31 6 I Mean 31 1 32 0 32 5 0 27 1 57 SD 154 0 30 I I I I I I I I I I I 107 I
surface water dissolved oxygen Appendix 1 m Summary of nearshore I saturation as recorded during townet co11ecti ns I Fall Winter l1ean SD Location Spring Summer I 2 12 75 3 68 0 101 6 84 5 Kydaka Beach 97 0 0 48 64 9 96 3 81 9 I Pillar Point 84 0 82 2 0 46 75 9 95 5 86 6 Twin Rivers 90 0 84 8
193 I 87 6 81 5 Horse Creek 86 0 82 6 69 9
0 76 6 64 6 80 3 75 9 I Dungeness Spit 86 0 72 0 94 76 8 62 8 78 3 78 0 Jamestown 94 0
0 32 81 9 106 6 I Beckett Point 136 0 116 0 92 3
84 3 71 3 88 8 Mean 96 1 9 10 I SD 18 19 14 64 10 27 I I I I I I I I I I 108
I Appendix 1 n Comparison of the means over all townet collections of oceanographic data for eastern and western sites I
I Western sites Eastern sites
9 65 I Temperature OC x 9 06
SD 0 83 192
I 1 13 5 l1in max 7 5 10 7 7 I Range 3 2 6 4
31 86 I Salinity ppt x 31 67
SD 141 0 68 I Min max 28 1 32 7 30 5 32 7 I Range 4 6 2 2
86 8 I Dissolved oxygen x 83 85
SD 10 89 21 03
I 62 8 136 0 Hin max 64 9 101 6 I Range 36 7 73 2 I I I I I I I 109 I I I I I I APPENDIX 2
I SPECIES LIST OF NEARSHORE FISHES
COLLECTED BY BEACH SEINE AND TOWNET I I I I I I I I I I I I 110
and in which I Appendix 2 List of all species collected gear types they occurred BS beach seine TN townet I Scientific name Common name Gear
I Squalus acanthias spiny dogfish BS TN Raja binocuZata big skate BS I R steUulata starry skate BS Hydrolagus coZZiei ratfish TN I Clupea 7mrengus paZlasi Pacific herring BS TN Engraulis mordax northern anchovy BS TN I Oncorhynchus gorbuscha pink salmon BS TN o kisutch coho salmon BS TN I o tshClltJytscha chinook salmon BS TN SaZmo gairdneri steelhead trout BS TN Hypomesus pretiosus surf smelt BS I Spirinchus thaleichthys longfin smelt BS TN porichthys notatus plainfin midshipman BS I Gobiesox maeandricus northern clingfish BS TN Gadus macrocephalus Pac ific cod BS I Microgadus proximus Pacific tomcod BS TN Theragra chalcogramma walleye pol ock BS TN I Aulorhynchus flavidus tubesnout BS TN Gasterosteus aculeatus threespine stickleback BS TN Syngnathus griseoZineatus bay pipefish BS TN I Amphistichus rhodoterus redtail surfperch BS
Cymatogaster aggregata shiner perch BS TN I Embiotoca Zateralis striped seaperch BS TN
Rhacochilus vacca pile perch BS TN I Trichodon trichodon Pacific sandfish BS TN Anoplarchus purpurescens high cocks omb TN I Lumpenus sagitta snake prickleback BS TN I I I I I
BS poacher pygmy trispinosa Odontopyxis I verrucosa BS poacher warty OcceZZa
BS gunnel penpoint fZavidus Apodichthys
TN poacher blackfin nigripinnis Bathyagonus I Agonus TN BS poacher sturgeon acipenserinus
BS poacher spearnose northern emmeZane Agonopsis I
TN sculpin manacled li Z gi Synchirus BS cabezon marmoratus Scorpaenichthys I TN sculpin grunt richardsoni Rhamphocottus TN BS sculpin tadpole paradoxus PsychroZutes I BS sculpin tidepool macuZosus OZigocottus TN BS sculpin sailfin ocuZofasciatus Nautichthys I TN BS sculpin great poZyacanthocephaZus MyoxocephaZus
TN BS sculpin staghorn Pacific armatus Leptocottus
TN BS lord Irish red hemiZepidotus HemiZepidotus I
TN BS sculpin buffalo bison Enophrys TN BS sculpin sharpnose acuticeps CZinocottus I BS sculpin roughback pugetensis Chitonotus TN BS sculpin silverspotted cirrhosus BZepsias I TN BS sculpin rosylip rhodorus AsceZichthys BS sculpin smoothhead lisZatera A I BS sculpin padded fenestraZis Artedius
BS lingcod eZongatus Ophiodon s I BS greenling whitespotted ZZeri te H
BS ng greenl kelp decagrammus Hexagrqftmos
TN rockfish black meZanops S I
BS rockfish yellowtail fZavidus Sebastes TN BS lance sand Pacific hexapterus Ammodytes I TN BS gunnel saddleback ornata P TN BS gunnel crescent Zaeta Pholis I
Gear name Conunon name Scientific I d cont 2 Appendix I 111 I I 112 I Appendix 2 cont d
Scientific name Common name Gear I Pallasina barbata tubenose poacher BS TN
Xeneretmus latifrons b1acktip poacher BS TN I Eumierotremus orbis Pacific spiny lump sucker BS TN
Liparis eallyodon spotted snailfish BS TN I ribbon snailfish BS L eye lopus BS L dennyi marbled snailfish T I L florae tidepool snailfish BS 13S L mueosus slimy snailfish
snailfish BS TN I L puleheUus showy snailfish BS TN L rutteri ringtail BS I Cithariehthys stigmaeus speckled sand dab sanddab BS C sordidus Pacific sole BS Eopsetta jordani petrale I butter sole BS Isopsetta isolepis rock sole BS TN Lepidopsetta bilineata sole BS TN I Parophrys vetulus English BS TN Platiehthys stellatus starry flounder c o sole BS I Pleuroniehthys eoenosus sole BS Psettiehthys melanostietus sand I I I I I I I I I 113 I I I I I
I APPENDIX 3 I SUMMARY OF BEACH SEINE BIOLOGICAL DATA I I I I I I I I I I I I 114 I Appendix 3a Beach seine summary of species richness I Winter SD Location Spring Summer Autumn x
7 9 0 2 83 I Kydaka Beach 7 13
13 0 3 00 I Twin Rivers 10 18 12 12 11 8 2 17 Morse Creek 9 15 11 12
1 18 5 10 8 4 87 I Dungeness Spit 8 12 6 5 0 50 Jamestown 7 6
1 30 26 3 3 56 I Beckett Point 21 29 25 I x 10 3 15 5 16 5 13 2
8 84 I SD 4 89 7 04 5 59 I indicates no sample obtained I 1Combined results of floating and sinking sets I I I I I I I I I 115 fish m2 I Appendix 3b Beach seine summary for density
I Summer Winter x SD Location Spring Autumn
0 02 0 61 0 81 I Kydaka Beach 0 05 175
28 0 74 0 19 0 14 0 27 0 Twin Rivers 0 01
I 0 02 0 11 0 16 Morse Creek 0 01 0 38 0 03
0 06 0 01 0 44 0 71 I Dungeness Spit 0 01 167 0 10 0 07 0 03 Jamestown 0 04
2 04 1 30 0 65 I Beckett Point 0 31 118 1 67 I 0 0 48 0 44 x 0 07 77
0 68 0 80 I SD 0 11 0 62
I Average of sinking and floating hquls I I I I I I I I I I 116
m2 I Appendix 3c Beach seine summary for standing crop grams
I SD Autumn Winter x Location Spr ing Summer
2 65 6 39 123 2 67 I Kydaka Beach 0 39 17 85 12 61 9 46 6 51 Twin Rivers 0 32 7 06
4 0 36 2 04 134 I Morse Creek 170 2 03 09
3 22 7 88 106 0 06 2 33 Dungeness Spit 0 32
I 0 25 0 13 Jamestown 0 12 0 38
84 36 17 01 13 25 10 49 4 I Beckett Point 5 33 6
5 50 I 136 5 02 10 00 x
7 6 08 I SD 1 85 2 78 51
sets I Average of floating and sinking I I I I I I I I I I
117 I I I I I I APPENDIX 4
DATA I SUMMARY OF TOWNET BIOLOGICAL I I I I I I I I I I I I 118 I
nearshore fish richness from townet Appendix 4 a Summary of species I collections
I Autumn Winter x SD Location Spring Sumraer
3 30 I 2 9 4 5 7 Kydaka Beach 8
5 7 7 3 77 I Pillar Point 13 5 8 94 18 7 10 0 2 Twin Rivers 12 13
7 04 10 11 7 12 7 I Morse Creek 23
2 21 12 10 8 10 7 Dungeness Spit 13
3 77 I 10 13 5 10 2 Jaraestown 13
4 04 14 5 10 5 I Beckett Point 10 13 X 13 1 9 3 11 9 5 9
44 1 46 I SD 4 74 4 23 3 I I I I I I I I I I 119 I
fish densities fish m3 from townet Appendix 4 b Summary of nearshore I collections
SD I Location Spring Summer Fall linter Hean
0 01 0 01 0 01 0 01 I Kydaka Beach 0 01 0 01
01 0 01 0 01 0 01 I Pillar Point 0 01 0 03 0 0 01 0 09 0 10 Twin Rivers 0 11 0 20 0 01
0 01 0 01 0 02 0 04 I Morse Creek 0 09 0 01
04 0 01 0 01 0 02 0 02 Dungeness Spit 0 03 0
0 01 0 01 I Jamestown 0 02 0 01 0 01 0 01
0 01 0 12 0 0127 I Beckett Point 0 09 0 30 0 06 0 01 Mean 0 05 0 08 0 01
01 I SD 0 44 0 12 0 02 0 I I I I I I I I I I 120 I Appendix 4 c Summary of nearshore fish standing crop grams m3 from I townet collections
Bean SD I Location Spring Summer Fall Hnter
01 0 01 0 01 0 01 I Kydaka Beach 0 01 0 01 0 0 07 Pillar Point 0 01 0 16 0 01 0 01 0 05
0 0 13 I Twin Rivers 0 01 0 27 0 02 0 01 08
01 0 0 01 I Horse Creek 0 01 0 01 0 04 0 02 08 0 01 0 09 0 14 Dungeness Spit 0 01 0 29 0
01 0 05 0 08 I Jamestown 0 03 0 17 0 01 0 0 43 Beckett Point 0 04 0 92 0 38 0 01 0 34
01 I Hean 0 02 0 26 0 08 0
0 14 0 01 SD 0 01 0 31
I I I I I I I I I I 121 I I I I I I
APPENDIX 5
I SEASONAL ABUNDANCE AND BIO SS OF I OOMINANT FISH SPECIES IN BEACH SEINE AND TOWNET COLLECTIONS I I I I I I I I I I I 122
I 70 1I KYDAKA BEACH TWIN RiVERS
MCRSE CREEK I 60 DUNGENESS SPIT FLOATING X DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING
50 I CI o 40 it r I E wSO u z g z I i20
I 10
o I A n J J A S o N D J MONTH
beach seine Appendix 5 a Abundance numbers of sand sole from quarterly I collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I
1300 2182 1I KYDAKA BEACH
TWIN RIVERS 1200 I MORSE CREEK
1100 DUNGENESS SPIT FLOATING
X DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING I 1000 900
U 800 r I a 700
600 a
I Q 500
400
I 300
200 I 100 0 J A r1 J J A S 0 N D I MONTH seine Appendix 5 b Biomass gms of sand sole from quarterly beach collections of Juan de Fuca I in the Strait I I 123
100 I KYDAKA BEACH TWIN RIVERS 90 A MORSE CREEK I DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING 80 X JAMESTOWN
BECKETT POINT FLOATING 70 I II 60 ffi m I 50
40 z a 0 z I 1530 a I 20 10
0 I A M J J A S 0 N D J MONTH
5 Appendix c Abundance numbers of English sole from quarterly beach seine I collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I
1000 KYDAKA BEACH
TWIN RIVERS
I 900 A 110RSE CREEK
DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING
800 X JAMESTOWN I BECKETT POINT FLOATING 700
I 600
500
In a S400 I CD
300 I 200 I 100 0 A 1 J J A S o N D J I 10NTH Appendix 5 d BioNass gms of English sole from quarterly beach seine I collectioqs in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 124
I 80 l TWIN RIVERS
t10RSE CREEK
70 A DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING I 1At1ESTOIIN X BECKETT POINT FLOATING 60
z
I IL 50
m I 40
30 I 2i j 20 I 10
0 I A M J J A S 0 N D J
MONTH
I Appendix 5 e Abundance numbers of staghorn sculpin from quarterly beach seine collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca
I l TWIN RIVERS
MORSE CREEK 1500 A DUNGENESS SPIT SINKING I JAMESTOWN 1350 X BECKETT POINT FLOATING I I 1200 1050
I I 900
en7S0 en a l5 I 600 i lD
450 I 300
I 150
0 A M J J A S 0 N D J I MONTH seine Appendix 5 f Biomass gms of staghorn sculpin from quarterly beach I collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 125 1I KYDAKA BEACH PILLAR POINT A WESTERN SITES I TWIN RIVERS 1500 t ORSE CREEK
1400
I 1300
1200
I 1100
llXXl I i OOJ
iii700
I 600
5OO
I 400
300 I 200 100
0 A M J J A S o N D I tIOHtli
I 1I DUNGENESS SPIT
JAMESTOWN B EASTERN SITES BECKETT POINT I 1500 6410
1400 I lSOD 1200 I 1100 1000 1900 I i 800 iD 700 I 600 500 I 400 SOD
200
I 100
OA M J J A S o N D I rtONTH endix App 5 g Mean biomass grams of herring at western sites A and eastern sites B from quarterly townet collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I II 126 I I KYDAKA BEACH PILLAR POINT A enRN 51rrs TWI N RIVERS MORSE CREEK I 1500 1400 I 1300 1200
1100
I 1000 I 2700 I 600 500 I 400 300
200
I 100
OA M J J A S o N D I I10NTH
lJ DUNGENESS SP IT I JAMESTOWN B EJlSTERN 5HE5 BECKETT POINT 3317 1500
I 1400
1300
I 1200
1100 I 1000 isoo I 800 2700
600
I 500
400 I SOO
200 I 100 o A M J J A S 0 N D
Appendix 5 h Mean number of herring caught at western sites A and eastern I sites B during quarterly townet collections in the Strait of Juan de Fuca I I 127 I I I I I I APPENDIX 6
I MACROINVERTEBRATE SPECIES COLLECTED INCIDENTALLY
TO BEACH SEINE AND TOWNET COLLECTIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I 128 Appendix 6 Macroinvertebrates collected coincidentally with nearshore fish surveys in the Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 I Sites are indicated by B Beckett Pt D Dungeness Spit J Jamestown K KydakaBeach M Morse Creek P Pillar Pt T I and Twin Rivers Beach s ine Townet Phylum Cnidaria Class Hydrozoa I x ea ea J Aequol aequol x sp P D J B Hydromedusae x Medusa K D I Class Anthozoa x Anthopleuzoa elegantissima B
Phylum Ctenophora x I Bero spp D Phylum Platyhelminthes Class Turbe11aria x I Turbe11aria sp B Nemertea Phylum x Nemertea sp J Phylum Mollusca I Class Gastropoda x Amphissa colwrrbiana B x Uttolina seutulata M B x I L sitkrma B x B Margazoites pupillus x Nassazoius mendicus B x PoUinices leJr1isi B I x Henmissenda crassico1 nus M B x MeUbe leonina M B Class Bivalvia x I Clinocardium nuttalli B x Cryptomya califo1nica J Class Cephalopoda x x I Octopus sp B O dofleini K Phylum Annelida Class Polychaeta I x a J Glycel capitata x x eis biaanaZ culata P J B Platynel x Po sp K T lychaeta x I Po sp J lynoidea x Tomoptelis septentlionalis P D Phylum Arthropoda I Class Crustacea Order Mysidacea x x davisi T M Acanthomysis x A K P T D M J I macropsia x A P D M nephrophthalma x x A D M J seulpta x x A val nuda D M J seulpta x x I Archaeomysis grebnitzki K P T D M J x Bol eomysis microps T I I I 129 Appendix 6 cont d I Beach seine Townet
x ocuZata T D Mysis x sp P D I Neomysis x N kadiakensis K P T x N mercedis T x x N K P T D M J Myii x x I iZesi T D J Froneomysis x Mysid sp K D Ord er Cumacea x I Diastyis sp T Order Isopoda x K T D Argeia pugettensis x B I Bopyroides hippoZytes x GnorimosphaelOT11a sp J x x G K T D M J oregonensis x IdOtea kesi D M J B f x I I rufescens D x M Ligia paZZasi x PentidOtea K M montereyensis x x I P resecata P T D M J B x x P 7J1osensenskii K T D M x x RocineZa K T D M J betZiceps x anguZata J I SynidOtea x S K P D J B bicuspida x Tecticeps pugettensis D Order Amphipoda x I D AmpheZisca agassizi x A D pugetica x sp P Amphithoe x x I A humeraZis D J B x x A Zacertosa T D J B x T Anisogarrmarus confervicoZus x A J M I pugettensis x x Zaticoxae K D M J B Anonyz x T AtyZus coZZingi x x A tridens K P T D M J B x I ZeviuscuZa D CapreZZa x COlOphium brevis M x Gammaridae ap P B x I B HyaZe pZumuZosa x Melita dendata J B x B MetacaprelZa kennerZyi x Orchestoidea D I pugettensis x x ivanovi D M Fbntogenia x P lOstrata D M x Wes oodeZZa caecuZa D M I Order Euphausiacea x d T M Euphausi ap x P Euphausia pacifica x I inermis P Thysanoessa x T P Zongipes x T Mschi P x I T spinifera P I I 130 Appendix 6 cont d I Beach seine Townet
Order Decapoda x Cat tianassa catiforniensis J I x x Czoangon sp J T x C alaskensis K P T D H J B x C cormrunis B x I C flanciscorum T D H J x x C nigl icauda T D H J B x x x C stylirost1is K T D H J x x I Eualus avinus H J x E fablicii T D H J x E pusiolus T B x x E suckleyi T I E tOlJnsendi J x x Heptacarpus bl evirostlis T D J B x H kincaidi M x I H paludicota J x H sitchensis J B x H stimpsoni B x I H stylus H J B x x H taylol i J x H tenuissimus K P T M B x x Pandalus danae D B x x I x P montagui tPidens B P stenolepis T D H J x x Scleroclangon atata D J I Spirontocalis arcuata B x S snydeli B x Upogebia pugettensis D J x x I Cancel magistel K T D M J B x x C olegonensis M B x C ploductus D B x Fabia subquadzoata P D J I x Lophopanopeus bellus B x Megalops J B x x Oregonia graacilis J B x I Pagurus cmnatus B x P belinganus J B P ganosimanus B x x I P hilsutiuscutus B x Petro Usthes eliome1us B Pugettia gracitis P H J B x x I P producta P J B x P lichii M B x x Telmessus cheilagonus J B x Zoea T D J B I Phylum Echinodermata Class Asteroidea EVaste1ias troscheli x I Henraicia ZeviuscuZa x Class Echinoidea Dendlastel excentlicus x I I I 131 I I I I I I APPENDIX 7 MACROINVERTEBRATE CATALOGUE RAW
I ABUNDANCE OF MACRO INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED BY
THE A BEACH SEINE AND B TOWNET I I I I I I I I I I I in in mMo of macroinvertebrates collected in the beach seine biomass 8 size Appendix 7 a Raw abundance data B E A C H LLNJL 1976 January 1977 May 1 76 August 1976 October Size Size Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass No x Range No x No gr x Range gr Species No gr x Range gr Range
Site Jamestown
17 5 0 6 4 5 0 9 0 C gon aLaskensis 13 0 3 0 10 0 25 23 0 7 3 2 0 C nigricauda 10 5 7 8 5 3 0 3 0 6 7 34 0 11 0 2 0 1 Heptacarpus brevirostris 9 5 15 4 5 3 0 4 5 H paZudicoZa 9 1 3 1 2 0 4 5 H sitchensis 15 7 NOT SITE NOT SAMPLED SITE SAMPLED 0 4 2 2 8 Upogebia pugettensis 3 10 16 12 A hithoe Zacertosa 9
o Anisogammarus pugettensis 1 o MeZita denddta 3
Idotea 1 o IJ feuJkesi N 1 Pentidotea resecata 6 6 o Synidotea anguZata 2 1 o Nemertean sp 0 7 Polynoidae sp 10 4 PLatynereis bicanaZicuZata 8 0 2 5 1 Cancer magister Oregonia graciZis 1 2 1 14 0 2 2 0 29 0 2 2 8 13 0 10 0 16 0 Pugettia graciZis 7 15 12 8 24 0 Pugettia producta 2 9 5 21 0 18 0 0 6 0 2 0 7 6 TeZmes8us cheiragonus 19 14t 84 3 22 1 15 0 35 7 1 0 2 Cryptomya caZifornica
1 Total 137 135 6 57 30
number of individuals used to calculate of collected the number in indicates the lThe first number indicates the total number individuals parentheses the average size or weight 3 86 150 4 86 93 1 116 258 7 128 75 Total
21 1 0 1 sp Medusa
6 38 2 ta Zevius Henricia
6 21 1 troscheZi Evasterias sp 0 1 Mysid
17 0 1 aiZe8i Proneomysis Neorrysis 22 1 0 1 0 16 rayii
0 1 grebnitzkii Archaeomysis var A 11 0 1 nuda scuZpta
15 10 14 13 7 0 49 5 2 126 scutpta Acanthomysis 57 1310 72 11 0 1 8 5 1 beringanus Pagu1Us
16 10 1 productus C
8 1 Cancer 0 320 21 26 0 12 4 0 25 2 10 08 17 7 18 16 24 0 14 5 2 3 6 5 37 7 magister
0 1 resecata Pentidotea
2 3 38 0 2 oreg Gnorimosphaeroma
3 2 2 0 3 0 pugettensis Argeia w 0 2 pugettensis Orchestoidea w 0 1 ta usZevi ZZa Capre
0 15 1 0 2 7 0 16 0 1 tridens AtyZus Allonyx 20 2 0 1 5 20 61 6 taticoxae 0 1 pugetica AmpheZisca
35 32 5 33 6 6 2 0 16 0 8 6 9 5 6 6 danae Pandatus
32 i4 6 10 4 91 48 styZirostris C 0 22 0 9 3 14 8 28 12 0 17 0 9 7 12 6 40 27 0 15 0 5 1 10 3 18 0 0 4 5 10 3 0 1 nigricauda C 0 17 0 8 5 12 4 43 21 0 15 0 8 1 10 6 10 10 C 0 15 0 8 1 12 6 18 11 0 8 0 1 frandscorUlll Crangon 0 13 5 4 6 8 9 15 18 0 10 0 6 0 8 7 6 13 ataskensis size sample 10 Spit Dungeness Site
Range x gr No Range x gr No Range x gr No Range x gr o o Species Biomass Biomass Biomass iomass Size Size Size Size 1977 January 1976 October 1976 August 1976 May SEINES H C A E B d cont a 7 Appendix Appendix 7 a cont d BEACH S E I N E S
May 1 76 August 1976 October 1976 January 1977 Size Size Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass
Species No x No x gr Range gr Range No gr x Range No gr x Range
Site Morse Creek
Crangon aZaskensis 2 2 6 9 0 9 0 8 19 5 3 5 0 6 5
C rancisco1Wfl 6 10 5 12 8 9 0 16 0 4 3 3 10 8 9 0 12 0 C nigricauda 3 7 6 10 7 9 0 12 0 6 6 7 8 1 5 0 12 0
C stylirostris 5 9 2 9 7 8 0 i5 0 5 6 5 9 1 6 5 13 0 13 16 4 12 2 9 0 17 0 7 13 6 13 1 10 0 15 0
Eualus avinus 4 5 6 11 0 10 0 lA 0 Heptacarpus stylUB 1 0 4 5
H tenuissimus 7 4 3 17 0 15 0 19 0 Anisogammarus pugettensis 3 0 1
laticoxae hnonyx 1 0 2 w
A ty lus tridens 37 13 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 Argeia pugettensis 1 0
Pontogenia ivanovi 1 0 1
Gnorimosphaeroma oreg 1 0 Idotea fewkesi 5 1 1 1 0 1
I wosnesenskii 6 2 1 3 2 0 27 7 23 0 310
Ligia paZZasi 1 0 1 1 0 5
Pentidotea montereyensis 1 0 5
Pocinela beZZiceps 2 0 1 0 3
Cancer magister 10 3 12 6 12 7 7 62 40 0
C oregonensis 1 4 5 23 Pugettia gracilis 1 0 1 6 5 P richii 1 0 7 10 0 7 a cont d ppendix BEACH S E I N E S
May 1 76 August 1976 October 1976 January 1977 Size Size Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass No x No x Range Species No gr x Range No gr x Range gr Range gr
Li ttorina scutuZata 1 0 Acantho dsis davisi 1 0 4 A souLpta 293 8 0 A soul pta ual nuda 29 5 0 3 19 5 17 0 23 0 0 4 4 Alohaeomysis glebnitakii 20 5 0 Neomysis l ayii
Hermissenda classioornis 29
MeZibe Zeonina 41
25 25 33 8 42 414 Total 179 23 0 328 8
Site Beckett Pt
w Cl aLaskensis 13 7 1 7 6 3 0 13 0 angon Jl 4 C oommunis 6 0 7 3 5 2 5 5 15 8 0 10 5 5 0 15 0 C nigl icauda 1 13 4 5 12 9 6 0 11 0 EuaZus pusioLus 4 8 5 Heptacalpus bl evilOstris 30 10 3 7 2 5
H sitchensis 42 6 3 3 9 2 5 5 0
H stimpsoni 41 2 7 3 4 2 0 5 0 H styZus 9 1 3 5 0 3 0 7 5 17 0 18 4 2 0 18 4 3 10 8 5 0 Heptaca1pus tenuissimus 198 6 2 6 0 1 18 21 8 15 035 0 PaniaZus danae 7 7 1 11 3 3 0 14 0 14 36 7 29 6 22 038 0 13 32 5 32 2 24 0 40 0 0 1 0 2 13 0 9 0 6 9 3 8 11 0 P mon tagui tlidens 1 0 1 3 0 1 0 6 12 0 Spil ontocaris a1cuata s snyderi 1 0 1 4 0 Amphithoe humelaZis 1 0 A Lacertosa 2 0 Appendix 7 a cont d B E A C H SEINES
May 1976 August 1976 October 1976 January 1977 Size Size Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass No Species 110 gr x Range No gr x Range No gr x Range gr x Range
1 0 2 Anonyx Zaticoxae AtyZus tridens S 0
Gamrn amphipod sp 2 0 HyaZe pZumuZosa 1 0
MeZita dendata 1 0 MetacapreZZa kennerZyi 3 0 Bopyroides hippoZytes 1 0 Idotea fewkesi 1 0 2 1 37 32 0 42 0 9 3 1 30 7 25 040 0 Pentidotea resecata 20 7 7 1 w 0 PZatynereis bioanalicuZata 6 0 1 6 0 4 TUl beUaria sp 8 4 14 6 10 2 17 8 3 1 1 9 15 04 8 89 21 Cancer magister 3 6 6 4 7 6 1 0 2 0 C oregon ensis 16 2 2 12 3 9 015 0 C productus 1 3 Lophopanopeus bellus 1 0 2 11 0 2 0 9 8 0 8 0 Oregonia gracilis 24 25 5 10 2 7 0 14 0 2 0 3 5 0 4 0 6 0
3 0 PagUlus armatus 9 9 56 3 P beringanus 5 1 1 P fp anosimanus 19 12 7 P hirsutiuscuZus 3 0 2 1 1 3 1 0 4 8 PetroZisthes eriomerus Pugettia graciZis 10 6 0 10 5 6 5 17 0 28 0 40 0 I 214 16 8 8 29 P producta 2 13 4 23 0 22 0 24 0 3 54 8 32 3 1 0 5 6 0 12 4 11 14 P ichii 3 20 0 22 3 22 0 23 0 0 8 11 Appendix 7 8 cont d B E A C H SEINES
May 1 76 August 1976 October 1976 January 1971 Size Size Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass No Species No gr x Range No gr x Range No gr x Range gr x Range
1 20 0 49 1 7 7 23 TeZmessus aheircgonus 6 2 7 8 0 2 5 13 0 7 78 26 3 0
Hermissenda arass 29 20 2 6 8 MeZibe Zeonina 37 1
Amphissa aoZumbiana 2 0 CZinoaardium nuttaZZi 1
Littorina sauZata 1 0 1
L sitkana 1 0 1
Mxrgarites pupiZZus 32 3 8 Nassarius mendiaus 4 0 2 1 0 6 1 PoZZinices Zewisi 1 lJ Dendraster excentriaus 2 0 1
AnthopZeura eZegant 1 0 9 1 Oatopus sp
Total 541 99 4 58 76 1 31 167 3 147 160 7
Site Twin Rivers
2 14 0 Crangon 5 p
C aZaskensis 2 3 8 10 0 10 0
10 18 1 13 3 12 17 C nigricauda 11 11 9 8 5 7 0 12 0 47 64 4 8 7 4 0 14 0 0 3 6 6 14 7 13 18 C styZiostris 7 10 2 10 3 8 5 12 0 2 14 7 5 5 0 10 4 2 4 7 3 5 0 8 0 EuaZus pusioZus 8 0 8 Heptacarpus breve 5 3 9 7 1 6 0 7 5 7 5 2 5 3 0 Amphitho ZaaertoSQ 1 0 Anisogam aonferviaoZus 1 0 AtyZus tridens 2 0 15 0 w 00
24 e 15 20 62 Size 7 10 x 1977 56 1 1 22 15 14 25 23 14
5 7 3 4 2 3 9 2 gr January Biomass 0 27 64 0 2 3 0 71
No 1 4 2 1 1 2 7 22 36 49
8 17 Range 6 Size 7 x 1976 4 12
gr October Biomass 0 0 SAMPLED NOT
No 40 40 SITE
8 0 lI1ge 17 15 1 5 Size 5 5 x UINES 1976 9 0 H 10 10
C 5 4 9 A August 3 1 1 1 4 gr E 0 0 0 0 71 34 0 0 34 B Biomass
No 1 1 1 9 1 2 86 170 20 23
5
5 Range 0 Size 5 x 3 1976 5
2 0 0 llay gr Biomass 31 65 0 65
5 2 No 30 28 35
d oreg cont scutpta Pt a mysid 7 montereyensis beZZiceps sp pugettensis fewkesi magister Total Kydaka styZirostris pugettensis wosnesenskii magister Total
wosnesenskiiI Appendix Species Argeia ldotea Rocineta Cancer Acanthomysis Site Crangon Argeia Gnorimosphaeroma Idotea Pentidotea Cancer Medusa Unident fIUJ0
30 27 20 23 Range 13 20 15 10 7 8 9 20 20 18 12 Size 3 x 2 6 9 7 5 7 1976 0 16 8 37 7 14 10 24 23 19
9 9 7 8 7 2 7 8 9 3
gr 3 0 October Biomass 18 0 21 0 7 0 0 0
4 3 1 No 2 7 7 4 49 60 40
20 25 22 13 Range 16 19 18 Size 4 x 4 2
5 1976 22 20 115 6 18
3 8 3 1 2 7 0 6 2 2 2 0 17 mm gr 5 in December Biomass
6 1 2 94 size No 52 7 18
8 in
30 18 22 Range 12 18 19 17 11 Size 5 7 biomass x 3 7 1976 7 1 8 9 11 SAMPLES 6 10 22 17 17 67 townet s Bioma 1 1 3 6 0 9 0 August 7 gr 0 0 the 6 0 0 1 0 4 3 in
1 3 7 3 1 No 1 TOWNET 13 35 17
0 0 4 collected 7 0 5 Range 3 Size 2 x 7 5 4 3 3 1976 5 5 5
8 1 1 9 1 Hay 1 0 gr 5 0 5 Biomass 0 16 0 of
macroinvertebrates 1 1 3 No 1 data 85 79 94
sp abundance alis ata Raw is alata oma anciscolWTl stylus esecatal i humel b idens bicuspida californiensis sp ostl tl belliceps 7 angon iaii stenolepis capitataa Jamestown avinus ocl laticoxae subquadl fabl egonensisol mega10ps fl styZil taylol Umosphael angon toumsendi G alaskensis C C E E H Crab C Gnol Fabia Appendix Species Site Callianassa Cl Eualus Heptacarpus Pandalus Sclel Anphithoe Anonyx Atylus Pentidotea Rocinela Synidotea Glycel 0
Range 55 13 18 21 Size 38 10 17 13 x 1976 5 8 7 5 48 11 17 15
6 0 1 2 4 gr October Biomass 3 0 0 0 0 59
No 4 6 1 3 6 197
e 21 23 11 19 7 Size 7 9 4 19 11 x 1 6 1976 8 55 7 7 13 5 22 20 21 18
1 0 1 4 2 9 7 2 5 9 r 4 December Biomass 2 39 16 0 18 0 0 0 0
1 3 1 3 No 1 181 50 71 1 39
e
25 Ran 8 21 10 21 SizE 23 3 6 4 4 x 1976 2 4 SAMPLES 6 ust 24 5 10 18 6 7 15 16
2 6 5 3 1 Au 5 5 1
gr 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 15 Biomass 0 17
1 1 1 2 1 TOWNET No 2 83 13 12 184
0
8 Range 0 Size 5 x 8 1976 6
4 1 1 3 7 Hay gr 2 1 Biomass 0 28 0
No 7 1 200 464 24
is d Spit nuda aLata cont Bp macropsis var grEbnitzkii waiZesi agassizi b brevirostris danae humeral 7 aequorea pugettensis zoea Totals Dungeness aZaskensis fabricii Zaticoxae tridens ics scuZpta scuZpta nigricauda stenoZepis C C S A A franciscorwn P Appendix Crab Aequorea Hydroomedusa Acanthomysi Archaeomysis Proneomysis Site Crangon EuaZus Heptacarpus PandaZus ScZerocrangon Upogebia AmphiZisca Amphithoe Anonyx AtyZus 24 1 0 1 rayii Neomysis 0 1 sp Neomysis 22 13 5 15 0 1 22 ocuZata Mysis
20 13 18 8 6 121 3 2 34 grebnitskii dsis chaeoAl
17 0 1 nuda val 8cuZpta A
12 9 5 9 0 2 124 15 13 1 14 4 0 14 scuZpta A
17 0 1 0 2 nephrophthaZma A
18 13 2 16 1 0 6 22 15 8 5 0 18 5 macropsis Acanthomyeie inermie Thysanoessa
23 19 21 4 0 2 sp Beroe
31 Hydromedusa
0 I 1 0 5 zoea Crab
0 4 5 2 3 3 1 0 4 atasubquadr Fabia
0 6 septentrionaZie Tomopteris
18 8 9 11 5 6 59 pugettensie Tecticeps
12 0 I 0 1 bicuspida Synidotea
14 1 0 1 beZZicepe RocineZa
18 8 13 2 0 2 LJosensenski P
22 1 0 1 resecata Pentidotea
15 1 0 1 rufescens Idotea
7 0 I 0 2 egoneneie ol eroma imosp Gnol
13 1 0 3 caecuZa WestwoodiZZa
SAMPLED 1 0 6 ataostll P
NOT E SIT 17 1 0 1 ivanovi Pontogenia
gr gr es Range x gr No Range x gr No Range x No Range x No Sped Biomass Biomass Biomass Biomass Size Size Size Size 1976 October 1976 cember flp 1976 August 1976 May
SAMPLES TOWNET d tnco b 7 Appen41x Appendix 7 b cont d
TOWNET SAM P L Po S May 1976 1976 August December 1916 October 1916 Size Size Biomass Size Size Biomass Biomass Biomass ecies No gr x Range No x No gr Range gr x Range No gr x Range
aiZesi 4 FToneomysis 0 1 15 5 13 18 unidentified Mysid 5 0 12 4 12 13 Total 118 6 4 325 46 6 442 50 9
fl J N 5 1 0 1 subquadrata Fabia SAMPLED NOT 0 1 septentrionaZis is Tomopte
0 1 bicanaZicntZata PZatyrzereis
0 1 bicuspida Syrzidotea
39 6 0 1 resecata Perztidotea
4 0 1 sp amphipod Gam
0 2 tridens AtyZus
34 5 0 1 sp thOfAmphi
21 12 5 16 1 1 2 tenuissimus Heptacarpu
0 7 1 0 1 aZaskensis angon
Point Pillar Site
1 7 116 Total
12 7 0 1 dofZeini Octopus w 22 14 3 19 4 0 10 rayii Neomysis
22 14 1 17 3 0 10 kadiakensis ysis Neo
16 11 6 14 2 0 9 ebnit3kii g chaeomysis A 21 12 5 17 3 2 60 macropsis Acanthomysis 0 1 Po1ychaeta
7 0 1 bicuspida Synidotea
16 2 0 1 SAMPLED NOT LED P M A S NOT beZZiceps RocineZa
21 12 7 19 5 0 7 idens t AtyZus
20 2 0 1 Zaticoxae Anonyx
11 5 3 8 4 0 6 tenuissimus Heptacarpus
18 2 3 6 9 1 9 aZaskensis angon C Kydaka Site Range x g No Range x g No e Ra x g No Species Biomass Biomass Biomass Size Size Size December August May
6 197 SAMPLES TOWNET d cont b 7 Appendix Range Size
i
December iomass g SAMPLED NOT No
28 24 25 Range 11 15 18
1976 Size 5 8 0
i 19 31 20 21
5 8 7 August 2 3 3 g Biomass 12 14 0 29 5 5
SAMPLES 2 1 4 4 4 No 12
0
5
0 TOWNET Range 2 Size 3
i 4 May
1 3 3 8 9 9 iomass 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 7 3 1 1 2 3 3 5 1 71 16 22 11 26 No 139 112 158
Point d longipes macropsis grebnitzkii gracilis pacifica sp danae bicuspida cont usia Beckett alaskensis tus tridens zoea Total ayii2 Total tus mega10ps 7b producta rascH spinifera ty T T A kadiakensisN A Species Pugettia P Hydromedusa Eupr Thysanoessa Acanthomysisnephrophthatma Archaeomysis Neomysis N Site Crangon Panda Synidotea Crab Crab Hydromedusae Appendix 227 Total 6 53 670 9 3 27 2 13 sp oe Be 30 20 25 5 0 2 3 rayii Neomysis 8 5 214 0 grebnitzkii dsischaeolll AI 6 16 317 4 6 159 0 6 scuZpta A
0 1 nephrophthaZma A macropsis Acanthomysis 17 12 5 14 0 4 unident Euphausiid 18 1 0 1 0 1 beZticeps Rocineta 15 1 0 1 1 0 3 resecata Pentidotea
o 1 0 4 egonen8is Gnorimosphaeroma
caecuZa Westwooditza 13 11 12 2 0 7 0 1 rostrata Pontogenia brevis Corophium 15 0 1 V1 0 6 tridens Atytus 23 15 2 19 3 2 23 17 16 3 16 2 0 3 laticoxae Anonyx 24 20 3 22 2 1 6 PandaZus 24 8 1 2 stenoZepis tenuissimus H 8 4 7 5 9 1 13 H 8 4 10 5 6 6 40 styZus kincaidi pus Heptaca 8 5 0 1 10 6 5 8 4 1 19 icii fab Euatus ancisco1Ul7f f C 8 3 3 5 5 0 3 angon C 0 5 9 6 0 3 alaskensis 14 2 2 10 4 24 80 7 6 Creek Morse Site Species g Range x g No Range x g No Range x No Biomass Biomass aiomas8 Size Size Size y necember August
6 7 9 1 SAMPLES TOWNET d cont b 7 Appendix t0
19 20 29 24 22 12 30 21 21 20 11 11 9 5 2 5 10 13 19 10 10 14 18 20 15 Size Range 10 3 8 3 5 8 1 35 6 2 3
6 x 6 12 6 11 17 719 21 15 11 22 19 20 18
1 0 6 3 7 2 8 2 2 41 21 1 2 g ecember 8 o 0 o 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 o Biomass 1 41 61 116
3 5 1 4 1 6 2 2 8 432 4 237 39 52 No 1856 2229
6 18 25 25 25 7 7 20 11 9 Range 4 12 12 1
Size 1 5 49 5 S x 5 14 8 18 18 22 18 E
L
P 4 3 August 3 2 1 32 8 g 0 o 4 3 9 SAM Biomass 0 0 0 0
3 3 2 1 1 No 2 30 57 99
TOWNET Size Range
x May
9 1 2 1 8 1 g Biomass 0 0 1 0 91 94 7 13 40 19 No 2555 2634
oregonensis davisi franaisaolWTl sp d Rivers grebnitzkii waiZesi sp tenuissimus resecata sp microps Twin stenolepis belliaeps kadiakensis cont alaskensis fabriaii suakleyi aoZlingi zoea ocuZata Total jsis 2ayii 7b tridens macropsissaulpta eo mercedis Species Site Crangon C EuaZus E HeptaaarpusPandalus Atylus A GnorimosphaeromaPentidoteaRocinelaPolychaetaCrab EuphausidAcanthomysis A A ArcnaeomysisBoreomysisMysis N N ProneomysisDiastylus Appendix I 147 I I I I I I I
APPENDIX 8 I MACRO INVERTEBRATE LENGTH
I FREQUENCIES I I I I I I I I I I 148
aZaskensis CI Crangon zngon fIanciscoI Um CI angon ostIis styZiI 8 Spring Appendix I n 154 n 89 Macroinverte May 1 0 x 5 0 it 9 5 brate length 30 frequencies I 20 10
o Summer I 40 Aug n 26 n 32 n 44 x 64 it 5 2 30 i 9 0 I 20 10
o Fall 40 I Oct n 66 n 40 it 7 6 30 x 11 5 I 20 10
0 Winter Dec 40 I n 185 n 57 Jan x 6 2 30 x 3 1
20
NJ 1 C O
I CI angon nigIicauda lfeptacaIpus bI evil ostI s Spring 40 1 Hay n 25 n lf4 30 x 8 0 x 4 7
20 1 10 o Summer 40 n 88 n 66 Aug x 7 4 I 30 it 9 3
20 I 10 o Fall 40 60 Oct n I 30 x 13 4 20 1 10 o Winter 40 n 47 308 x 11 0 I 30 12 0 20
10
o I I I I o 4 8 12 16 20 4 8 12 16 20 4 8 12 16 18 I LENGTH mm I I 149
Appendix 8 cont d Heptacarpus tenuissimus A can is macropsis I Heptacarpus stytus thomys Spring 40 n 50 n 205 Hay 30 If 3 2 x 3 5 I 20
10 I o Summer 40
Aug 30 I 20 10
o
I Fall 40
Oct 30 I o 10
o
82 n 12 I Winter 40 n x 15 x 16 4 Dec 30 Jan 20 I t 10 o g 0 Acanthomysis sculpta Ore gonia gracilis Atylus tridens I Spring 40 n 25 Hay 30 x 9 4
20
I 10
o
n 206 Summer 40 I x 15 4 Aug 30
20
I 10
o
n 43 Fall 40 x 15 3 I Oct 30
2 I 10
Winter n 80 40 Dec x 17 6 I Jan 30
20 I 10 I I I I rI r 16 20 22 o 4 8 12 16 20 4 8 12 16 20 4 8 12 I LENGTH mm I I 150 I 8 d Anonyx laticoxae Panda lUB danae Appendix cont
Spring 40 I May 30
20 I 10 0
Summer 40 n 24 Aug I 30 x 22 2
20 I 10 0
40 Fall n 16 Oct I 30 x 18 5 20 I 10 0
Winter 40 n 97 n 20 Uee 20 9 30 x 21 3 I Jan iJ 20 z 10 Ct n n n I 0 ILl Y u AY s JY l bni tzkii Neomysis at Spring 40 chaeOmjS7 Hay I 30 20
10 I 0
Summer 40 11 31 Aug x 21 4 30
I 20
10 I 0 Fall 40 Oct 30
I 20
10 I 0 Winter 110 n 702 n 436 Dec 30 x 3 2 x 13 5 Jan I 20 10
0 I I 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 I 8 16 20 24 28 LENGTmOl I I 151 I Appendix 8 cont d
Pugettia gpacitis Cancer magister I Spring 40 n 18 lIay 30 x 10 4 I 20 10
o I Surmner 40 n 96 Aug 30
tJ 20 I z N 10 CY w p Ix Fall I n 66 Oct I
inter n 20 I Dec Jan I
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
I LENGTH mm I I I I I I I I I 152 I I I I I I
I APPENDIX 9
ITEMS CONSUMED BY NEARSHORE A I PREY DEMERSAL AND B NERITIC FISHES I I I I I I I I I I I 153
I Appendix 9 a Prey items consumed by nearshore demersal fishes Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 and percentage that taxon composes of total consumed items I
Prey item Composition I Algae 14 Division Chlorophyta 0 8
I Division Rhodoph ta 0 4
Division Anthophyta I PhyZZospadix scouZeri 0 1 Zostera marina 0 3 I Phylum Cnidaria Class Hydrozoa 0 1
Phylum Platyhelminthes
I Class Turbellaria 0 1
Class Trematoda 0 3
I Phylum Nemertea Rhynchocoela 0 1 Phylum Nematoda 1 1 0 1 I Phylum Annelida Class Po1ychaeta 9 2 Family Nereidae 0 1 I I Fam1ly Glyceridae 0 1 Family Goniadidae 0 1 I Family Arenicolidae 0 1 Class Oligochaeta 0 3
Class Hirudinea 0 1
I Phylum Mollusca 0 1
Class Gastropoda 1 1 I Class Pelecypoda 3 0 YoZdia scissurata 0 1 CZinocardium nuttaZZi 0 2 I CZinocardium spp 0 1 Family Myti1idae 0 1 I Phylum Arthropoda Class Pycnogonida 0 1 I Class Arachnida 0 1 Class Crustacea 0 5 I I I 154
I Appendix 9 a cont d
I Prey item Composition
Subclass Ostracoda 0 3
I Subclass Copepoda Order Harpacticoida 3 7 I Order Calanoida 3 1 Order Cyclopoida 0 3 I Subclass Branchiura 0 1 Subclass Cirripedia I Order Thoracica 0 3 Subclass Malacostraca
Order Leptostraca
I Nebaliacea 0 7
4 Order Hysidacea 11 I Family Mysidae 0 6 0 1 Acanthomysis sp I Neomysis sp 0 9 Order Cumacea 3 9
4 5 I Order Tanaidacea LeptocheUa sp 0 1 Order lsopoda 0 3 I Suborder Valifera 15 Family ldoteidae 0 4 I Pentidotea spp 0 1 P resecata 0 1 P wosnesenskii 0 1 Synidotea nebulosa 0 1 I Idotea fewkesi 0 1 Idotea sp 0 1 I Suborder Flabellifera 17 Family Sphaeromatidae 0 6 I Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis 0 9 Suborder Epicardia 0 1
Suborder Anthuridea 0 2
I Suborder Microcerberidea 0 1
Order Amphipoda I I I 155 I Appendix 9 a cont d
I Prey item Composition
Suborder Hyperiidea 0 1 I Suborder Gammaridae 22 3 Atylus tridens 0 1 I Family Corophidae 0 1 Suborder Capre11idae 0 5 I Order Euphausiacea 0 1 0 1 Order Decapoda I Suborder Natantia 3 4 Family Panda1idae 0 7
Pandalus spp 0 1 I P danae 0 1 Pandalopsis ampla 0 1 P dispar 0 1 I Family Hippo1ytidae 1 4 Heptacarpus spp 0 1 H kincaidi 0 1 I H sitchensis 0 1 0 1 Heptacarpus sp I Family Crangonidae 2 0 0 Crangon spp 3 C alaskensis 0 1 I C abyssorum 0 1 Sclerocrangon alata 0 1 Suborder Reptantia 1 3
I Section Astacura Family Ca11ianassidae 0 1 I Ubogebia pugettensis 0 1 Section Anomura 0 2 I Family Paguridae 0 4 Pagurus hirsutiusculus 0 1 Haplogaster mertensi 0 1 I Section Brachyura 0 1 0 1 Cancer spp C productus 0 1 I C magister 0 2 C gracilis 0 1 I I I 156
t I Appendix 9a cont d
I Prey item Composition
Hemigrapsus oregonensis 0 1 0 1 I Pugettia spp P graci lis 0 1 Telmessus cheiragonus 0 3 I Family Xanthidae 0 1 0 1 pinnixa spp I Class Insecta 0 2 0 1 Order Diptera I Phylum Echinodermata Class Echinoidea 0 1
Dendraster excentricus 0 1
I Class Ho1othuroidea 0 7
Parastichopus califomicus 0 1
I Phylum Chordata Subphylum Urochordata 0 4 I Class Larvacea 0 1 Fritillaria borealis 0 1 I Class Ascidiacea 0 1 Subphylum Vertebrata I Class Osteichthys 2 6 Family Sa1monidae 0 1
Family Gobiesocidae 0 1 I Family Gasterosteidae Aulorhynchus flavidus 0 1 I Order Perciformes 0 1 Family Scorpaenidae 0 1 I Family Hexagrammidae 0 1 Family Embiotocidae 0 2 I Cymatogaster aggregata 0 1 Family Stichaeidae 0 1
Family Pho1idae 0 1
I Pho lis ornata 0 1
Family Ammodytidae 0 2 I ami1y Cottidae I I
157
I Appendix 9 a cont d I
Prey item Composition I Family P1euronectidae 0 1 Parophrys vetuZus 0 1
I Rocks 0 5
Detritus 2 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 158
I Appendix 9 b Prey items consumed by neritic fishes Strait of Juan de Fuca May 1976 January 1977 and percent that taxon com of total consumed items I poses
Prey item Composition I 0 7 Phylum Ctenophora 0 6 I Phylum Nematoda Phylum Annelida 15 Class Polychaeta 0 2 I Family Phyllodocidae 0 2 Family Syllidae 0 2 I Family Nereidae Phylum Mollusca 0 2 I Class Gastropoda 0 2 Class Pelecypoda I Phylum Arthropoda 2 1 Class Crustacea 1 9 I Subclass Ostracoda Subclass Copepoda
Order Harpacticoida 4 5
I Order Calanoida 22 4 0 4 Order Cyclopoida 0 2 I Order Caligoida Subclass Cirripedia 1 7 I Order Thoracica Subclass Malacostraca 6 7 Order Mysidacea I 6 2 Order Cumacea 1 3 Order Tanaidacea
I Order Isopoda
Suborder Anthuridea 0 2
5 I Suborder Valvifera 1 Order Amphipoda I Sucorder Hyperiidea 3 5 Suborder Gammaridea 13 6 I Suborder Caprellidea 0 9 I I
159 I Appendix 9 b cont d
I Prey item Composition
9 I Order Euphausiacea 3 Order Decapoda 11
Suborder Natantia
I Family Panda1idae 0 6 PandaZus pZatyceras 0 2 I P danae 0 2 Family Hippo1ytidae 0 9
Family Crangonidae 0 6 I 3 9 Suborder Reptantia
Class Insecta 19
I Phylum Chordata 6 Subphylum Urochordata 0 I Class Larvacea 4 3 3 0 Subphylum Te1eostei I Family C1upeidae 0 2 Section Brachy ra 0 2 I Detritus 0 6 I I I I I I I I