DOCSLIB.ORG

Long Island Sound Habitat Restoration Initiative

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LONG ISLAND SOUND
HABITAT RESTORATION
INITIATIVE

Technical Support for
Coastal Habitat Restoration

FEBRUARY 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................i

GUIDING PRINCIPLES.................................................................................. ii PROJECT BOUNDARY.................................................................................. iv SITE IDENTIFICATION AND RANKING........................................................... iv LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................... vi ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS............................................................................... vi APPENDIX I-A: RANKING CRITERIA.....................................................................I-A-1

SECTION 1 : TIDAL W ETLANDS ................................................1 -1

DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 1 -1
Salt Marshes ....................................................................................................1-1 Brackish Marshes .............................................................................................1-3 Tidal Fresh Marshes .........................................................................................1-4
VALUES AND FUNCTIONS ........................................................................... 1 -4 STATUS AND TRENDS ................................................................................. 1 -7 DEGRADED MARSHES AND RESTORATION METHODS ................................... 1 -9
Grid-Ditched Marshes .......................................................................................1-10 Drained Marshes ..............................................................................................1-11 Impounded Marshes ........................................................................................1-14 Filled/Buried Marshes.......................................................................................1-14 Brackish Marshes Invaded by Common Reed ....................................................1-16 Stormw ater Impacted Marshes .........................................................................1-18 Marshes Impacted by Sea Level Rise……………………………………………………..1-19
SPECIFIC RESTORATION OBJECTIVES ........................................................... 1 -1 9
Restore Habitat For Federal and State Protected Species...................................1-20 Restore Biological Productivity and Biodiversity................................................1-20 Reduce Common Reed Coverage ......................................................................1-20 Eliminate Fire Hazards .....................................................................................1-20 Restore Water Quality Renovation Functions....................................................1-20 Eliminate Nonpoint Source Pollution ................................................................1-21
RESTORATION SUCCESS AND MONITORING ................................................. 1 -2 1 LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................... 1 -2 3

SECTION 2 : FRESHW ATER W ETLANDS ....................................2 -1

DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 2 -1
Palustrine Wetlands .........................................................................................2-2 Riverine Wetlands............................................................................................2-6
VALUES AND FUNCTIONS ........................................................................... 2 -7 STATUS AND TRENDS ................................................................................. 2 -9 DEGRADED W ETLANDS AND RESTORATION METHODS ................................ 2 -1 1
Drained Marshes ..............................................................................................2-12

HABITAT RESTORATION TECHNICAL MANUAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Filled Marshes ................................................................................................. 2-13 Impoundments................................................................................................ 2-13 Exotic Species Invasion .................................................................................... 2-13 Chemical Contamination ................................................................................. 2-14
SPECIFIC RESTORATION OBJECTIVES............................................................ 2 -1 5 RESTORATION SUCCESS AND MONITORING ................................................. 2 -1 6 LITERATURE CITED...................................................................................... 2 -1 8

SECTION 3 : SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION .................... 3 -1

DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 3 -1
Eelgrass .......................................................................................................... 3-2
VALUES AND FUNCTIONS............................................................................ 3 -3 STATUS AND TRENDS.................................................................................. 3 -4
Pre-1931 ......................................................................................................... 3-4 1931 - 1995 .................................................................................................... 3-5 Present Day Distribution .................................................................................. 3-7 Regulations Protecting SAVs ............................................................................ 3-8
DEGRADED EELGRASS BEDS AND RESTORATION METHODS .......................... 3 -8
Beds Impacted By Impaired Water Quality ....................................................... 3-8 Beds Impacted By Fishing- and Vessel-Related Activity ..................................... 3-14 Waterfow l and Storm-Related Damage to Beds ................................................ 3-14 Beds Impacted By Shoreline Erosion Control Structures.................................... 3-15 Shading of Beds .............................................................................................. 3-15 Beds Impacted by Dredge Activities ................................................................. 3-15 Beds Impacted by Fill ...................................................................................... 3-16
SPECIFIC RESTORATION OBJECTIVES............................................................ 3 -1 6
Improve Fish and Wildlife Habitat ................................................................... 3-16 Maintain/Improve Water Quality ..................................................................... 3-17 Increase Erosion Control and Sediment Stabilization ........................................ 3-17
RESTORATION SUCCESS AND MONITORING ................................................. 3 -1 7 LITERATURE CITED...................................................................................... 3 -1 8 APPENDIX 3 -A: HISTORICAL (PRIOR TO 1 9 3 1 ) EELGRASS DISTRIBUTION ......... 3 -A-1 APPENDIX 3 -B: EELGRASS LOCATIONS 1 9 3 1 -1 9 9 2 ........................................ 3 -B-1 APPENDIX 3 -C: GRAPHS OF W ATER QUALITY DATA FOR FIVE
OFFSHORE SAMPLING STATIONS .......................................... 3 -C-1

Recommended publications
  • A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary

    A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary

    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 1972 A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary Raymond B. Marcin The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Raymond B. Marcin, A History of Connecticut's Long Island Sound Boundary, 46 CONN. B.J. 506 (1972). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 506 CONNECTICUT BAR JOURNAL [Vol. 46 A HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT'S LONG ISLAND SOUND BOUNDARY By RAYMOND B. MARciN* THE SCENEt Long before remembered time, ice fields blanketed central India, discharging floes into a sea covering the Plains of Punjab. The Argentine Pampas lay frozen and still beneath a crush of ice. Ice sheets were carving their presence into the highest mountains of Hawaii and New Guinea. On the western land mass, ice gutted what was, in pre-glacial time, a stream valley near the northeastern shore. In this alien epoch, when woolly mammoth and caribou roamed the North American tundra, the ice began to melt. Receding glaciers left an inland lake where the primeval stream valley had been. For a time the waters of the lake reposed in bo- real calm, until, with the melting of the polar cap, the level of the great salt ocean rose to the level of the lake.
  • Branta Bernicla) in HOOD CANAL and LOWER PUGET SOUND

    Branta Bernicla) in HOOD CANAL and LOWER PUGET SOUND

    Washington Birds 10:1-10 (2008) BREEDING ORIGINS AND POPULATIONS OF WINTERING AND SPRING MIGRANT BRANT (Branta bernicla) IN HOOD CANAL AND LOWER PUGET SOUND Bryan L. Murphie Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 48 Devonshire Road, Montesano, Washington 98563 [email protected] Greg A. Schirato Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 48 Devonshire Road, Montesano, Washington 98563 [email protected] Don K. Kraege Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 [email protected] Dave H. Ward U.S. Geological Service, Alaska Fish and Wildlife Research Center 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 [email protected] James C. Sedinger University of Nevada 1000 Valley Road Reno, Nevada 89557 [email protected] James E. Hines Canadian Wildlife Service Suite 301 - 5204, 50th Ave. Yellowknife, Northwest Territories X1A 1E2 [email protected] Karen S. Bollinger U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management 1412 Airport Way, Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 [email protected] Brant (Branta bernicla) migrate and winter along the west coast of North America (Reed et al. 1989). These geese originate from breeding colonies in Alaska, Northwest Territories, Yukon, and northeastern Russia (Einarsen 1965, Palmer 1976, Bellrose 1980, Reed et al. 1989). The population was recently estimated at approximately 130,000 birds (Trost 1998, Wahl et al. 2005). Mexico has been recognized as a major wintering area for 2 Murphie et al. Brant (Smith and Jensen 1970) and Washington, especially Puget Sound, supports the largest concentration of Brant north of Mexico in winter and >90% of the Brant during northward migration (Pacific Flyway Council 2002).
  • LIS Impervious Surface Final Report

    LIS Impervious Surface Final Report

    PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT Mapping and Monitoring Changes in Impervious Surfaces in the Long Island Sound Watershed March 2006 James D. Hurd, Research Associate Daniel L. Civco, Principal Investigator Sandy Prisloe, Co-Investigator Chester Arnold, Co-Investigator Center for Land use Education And Research (CLEAR) Department of Natural Resources Management & Engineering College of Agriculture and Natural Resources The University of Connecticut Storrs, CT 06269-4087 Table of Contents Introduction . 4 Study Area and Data . 5 Land Cover Classification . 7 Sub-pixel Classification Overview . 8 Initial Sub-pixel Classification . 10 Post-classification Processing . 10 Validation . 13 Reseults and Discussion. 15 References . 18 Appendix A: Per Pixel Comparison of Planimetric and Estimated Percent Impervious Surfaces .. 21 Appendix B: Comparison of Planimetric and Estimated Percent Impervious Surfaces Summarized Over Grid Cells of Various Sizes. 34 Appendix C: Summary of Impervious Surfaces per Sub-regional Watershed . 46 Appendix D: Table of Deliverables . 56 i List of Figures Figure 1. Hydrologic impact of urbanization flowchart . 5 Figure 2. Study area . 6 Figure 3. Examples of land cover for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 . 8 Figure 4. IMAGINE Sub-pixel Classifier process . 9 Figure 5. Examples of raw impervious surface estimates for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 11 Figure 6. Examples of final impervious surface estimates for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 14 Figure A-1. 1990 West Hartford validation data (area 1) and difference graph . 22 Figure A-2. 1990 West Hartford validation data (area 2) and difference graph . 23 Figure A-3. 1995 Marlborough validation data and difference graph . 24 Figure A-4. 1995 Waterford validation data (area 1) and difference graph .
  • New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan

    New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan

    NEW YORK CITY CoMPREHENSWE WATERFRONT PLAN Reclaiming the City's Edge For Public Discussion Summer 1992 DAVID N. DINKINS, Mayor City of New lVrk RICHARD L. SCHAFFER, Director Department of City Planning NYC DCP 92-27 NEW YORK CITY COMPREHENSIVE WATERFRONT PLAN CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMA RY 1 INTRODUCTION: SETTING THE COURSE 1 2 PLANNING FRA MEWORK 5 HISTORICAL CONTEXT 5 LEGAL CONTEXT 7 REGULATORY CONTEXT 10 3 THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 17 WATERFRONT RESOURCES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE 17 Wetlands 18 Significant Coastal Habitats 21 Beaches and Coastal Erosion Areas 22 Water Quality 26 THE PLAN FOR THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 33 Citywide Strategy 33 Special Natural Waterfront Areas 35 4 THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 51 THE EXISTING PUBLIC WATERFRONT 52 THE ACCESSIBLE WATERFRONT: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES 63 THE PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 70 Regulatory Strategy 70 Public Access Opportunities 71 5 THE WORKING WATERFRONT 83 HISTORY 83 THE WORKING WATERFRONT TODAY 85 WORKING WATERFRONT ISSUES 101 THE PLAN FOR THE WORKING WATERFRONT 106 Designation Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas 107 JFK and LaGuardia Airport Areas 114 Citywide Strategy fo r the Wo rking Waterfront 115 6 THE REDEVELOPING WATER FRONT 119 THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT TODAY 119 THE IMPORTANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT 122 WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES 125 REDEVELOPMENT CRITERIA 127 THE PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT 128 7 WATER FRONT ZONING PROPOSAL 145 WATERFRONT AREA 146 ZONING LOTS 147 CALCULATING FLOOR AREA ON WATERFRONTAGE loTS 148 DEFINITION OF WATER DEPENDENT & WATERFRONT ENHANCING USES
  • CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta)

    CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta)

    CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) YOU CAN FIND US DIRECTLY ON FACEBOOK. This page features a variety of information on fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching in Connecticut. The address is www.facebook.com/CTFishandWildlife. INLAND REPORT OPENING DAY – We had a short blast of warm air temperatures that gave anglers a comfortable Opening Day, however, water temperatures were very cold, possibly contributing to difficult catching for many. Fisheries staff were out at eight of the twelve Trout Parks were stocked on Opening Day and the many kids Connecticut’s Trout & Salmon Stamp: Connecticut present enjoyed helping us stock. Catch percentage has implemented a Trout and Salmon Stamp. 100% was from 60 to 80% at a number of the Trout Parks of the revenue from your investment comes to the including Stratton Brook, Black Rock, Kent Falls, DEEP Bureau of Natural Resources for Fisheries Chatfield Hollow, Valley Falls Park, Southford Falls, and programs. Great Hollow. Many other locations, both river and The Trout and Salmon Stamp is $5 for anyone age 18 stream as well as lake and pond did not give up their or older, including those 65 or older, and $3 for CT recently stocked trout so easily. residents age 16-17. The Stamp is required for the harvest (keeping) of Over 300,000 trout were stocked before Opening Day trout or salmon. into nearly 100 lakes and ponds and over 120 rivers The Stamp is required to FISH in one of these places: and streams located throughout Connecticut.
  • 2017 Bacteria Data

    2017 Bacteria Data

    2017 Bacteria Data - Western Coastal waters: Enterococci and fecal coliform Two groups of bacteria are are commonly monitored to indicate the presense of human sewage and associated pathogens, or disease causing organisms - fecal coliforms and enterococci. The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIHealth) uses a single- value enterococci standard for licensed swimming beaches. The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) and Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) use a geometric mean approach for contact recreation standards on all other waters (fresh and salt). In addition, as required by the National Shellfish Sanitation Program for shellfish waters and their tributaries and as an indicator of overall water quality, fecal coliform levels are also assessed. While URIWW's Analytical Laboratories are certified by the State of Rhode Island, Watershed Watch data is intended for screening purposes only. Our data are very valuable for targeting areas of concerns and for tracking potential sources of bacterial contamination. Samples may have been collected over a period of days for each collection period, so may reflect dry versus wet weather or rain event values. Please contact Watershed Watch for specific sample dates. Any result above the state standard is considered unsafe, and swimmers should refrain from swimming until results return to acceptable levels, or at least for several days after heavy rain. RI Department of Environmental Management and Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection fecal coliform standards: Shellfish Waters - Geometric mean not to exceed 14 fecal coliform per 100 mL. Clean Up Sound and Harbors Sites (arranged approximately west to east along the coast) Watershed MONITORING LOCATION MAY JUNE JULY AUG.
  • Programs and Field Trips

    Programs and Field Trips

    CONTENTS Welcome from Kathy Martin, NAOC-V Conference Chair ………………………….………………..…...…..………………..….…… 2 Conference Organizers & Committees …………………………………………………………………..…...…………..……………….. 3 - 6 NAOC-V General Information ……………………………………………………………………………………………….…..………….. 6 - 11 Registration & Information .. Council & Business Meetings ……………………………………….……………………..……….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………..…..……...….. 11 6 Workshops ……………………….………….……...………………………………………………………………………………..………..………... 12 Symposia ………………………………….……...……………………………………………………………………………………………………..... 13 Abstracts – Online login information …………………………..……...………….………………………………………….……..……... 13 Presentation Guidelines for Oral and Poster Presentations …...………...………………………………………...……….…... 14 Instructions for Session Chairs .. 15 Additional Social & Special Events…………… ……………………………..………………….………...………………………...…………………………………………………..…………………………………………………….……….……... 15 Student Travel Awards …………………………………………..………...……………….………………………………..…...………... 18 - 20 Postdoctoral Travel Awardees …………………………………..………...………………………………..……………………….………... 20 Student Presentation Award Information ……………………...………...……………………………………..……………………..... 20 Function Schedule …………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………..…………. 22 – 26 Sunday, 12 August Tuesday, 14 August .. .. .. 22 Wednesday, 15 August– ………………………………...…… ………………………………………… ……………..... Thursday, 16 August ……………………………………….…………..………………………………………………………………… …... 23 Friday, 17 August ………………………………………….…………...………………………………………………………………………..... 24 Saturday,
  • Impaired Waters Monitoring Requirements Table General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Industrial Activity, Effective October 1, 2011

    Impaired Waters Monitoring Requirements Table General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Industrial Activity, Effective October 1, 2011

    Impaired Waters Monitoring Requirements Table General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Industrial Activity, effective October 1, 2011 Approved Impaired Waters Waterbody ID Waterbody Name Impaired Designated Use Pollutant Frequency TMDL? Monitoring All Waterbodies All Waterbodies Fish consumption Mercury Yes complete check box for Mercury on see 'Note 1' below registration All Waterbodies All Waterbodies Aquatic Life Use Total Nitrogen Yes TKN & NO3 monitor for these parameters as already specified in the General Permit unless notified by CTDEP CT1000-00_01 Pawcatuck River-01 Recreation Bacteria No see 'Note 2' below Annually CT1001-00-1-L1_01 Wyassup Lake (North Recreation Non-Native Aquatic No None n/a Stonington) Plants CT1001-00-1-L1_01 Wyassup Lake (North Fish Consumption Mercury Yes complete check box for Mercury on see 'Note 1' below Stonington) registration CT2000-30_01 Fenger Brook-01 Habitat for Fish, Other Aquatic Life Cause Unknown No None n/a and Wildlife CT2000-30_01 Fenger Brook-01 Recreation Bacteria No see 'Note 2' below Annually CT2102-00_01 Copps Brook-01 Habitat for Fish, Other Aquatic Life Cause Unknown No None n/a and Wildlife CT2102-00_01 Copps Brook-01 Habitat for Fish, Other Aquatic Life Other flow regime No None n/a and Wildlife alterations CT2102-00-trib_01 Unnamed Trib to Copps Habitat for Fish, Other Aquatic Life Other flow regime No None n/a Brook-01 and Wildlife alterations CT2104-00_02a Whitford Brook-02a Habitat for Fish, Other Aquatic Life Other flow regime No None n/a and Wildlife
  • NEW THIS WEEK from MARVEL... Spider-Woman #1 Outlawed #1

    NEW THIS WEEK from MARVEL... Spider-Woman #1 Outlawed #1

    NEW THIS WEEK FROM MARVEL... Spider-Woman #1 Outlawed #1 Star Wars #4 Guardians of the Galaxy #3 Fantastic Four #20 Captain Marvel #16 Captain America #20 Excalibur #9 X-Force #9 Deadpool #4 Morbius #5 Amazing Mary Jane #6 Marvels X #3 (of 6) 2020 Iron Age #1 Atlantis Attacks #3 (of 5) Conan the Barbarian #14 Ghost-Spider #8 Valkyrie Jane Foster #9 Runaways #31 2020 Machine Man #2 (of 2) Aero #9 Thor #3 (2nd print) Star Wars Rise of Kylo Ren #2 (3rd print) Star Wars Rise of Kylo Ren #3 (2nd print) "Dollar" Empyre Galactus "Dollar" Empyre Swordman Taskmaster the Right Price GN Immortal Hulk Vol. 6 GN King Thor GN Conan the Barbarian Vol. 2 GN X-Men Milestones Messiah Complex GN Into the Spider-Verse Casual Miles Morales Funko-Pop NEW THIS WEEK FROM DC... Robin 80th Anniversary 100-Page Super Spectacular #1 Batman #91 Dceased Unkillables #2 (of 3) Justice League #43 Nightwing #70 Year of the Villain Hell Arisen #4 (of 4) Brave and the Bold #28 Facsimile Edition Aquaman #58 Plunge #2 (of 6) Teen Titans #40 1 Titans Giant Low Low Woods #4 (of 6) Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen #9 (of 12) He Man and the Masters of the Multiverse #5 (of 6) Lucifer #18 Dollar Comics Justice League #1 (1987) Dollar Comics JLA #1 Superman Vol. 2 GN NEW THIS WEEK FROM IMAGE... 18 Undiscovered Country #5 Tartarus #2 Family Tree #5 Middlewest #16 Ascender #10 Die Die Die #9 Spawn #306 Bitter Root #7 Hardcore Reloaded #4 (of 5) Oblivion Song Vol.
  • Long Island Sound Ecologically Significant Areas

    Long Island Sound Ecologically Significant Areas

    Long Island Sound Ecologically Significant Areas LIS Blue Plan Webinar Speakers: Nathan Frohling Director of Coastal and Marine Initiatives, The Nature Conservancy of CT Blue Plan Advisory Committee member Chair, Ecological Characterization Work Team Emily Shumchenia, PhD. E & C Enviroscape Ecological Consultant to the Blue Plan Ecological Characterization process Presentation Outline: 1. Purpose of the meeting & Blue Plan overview 2. Ecologically Significant Areas (ESA): Basics 3. The ESA Development Process 4. DRAFT Ecologically Significant Areas 5. Ecologically Significant Areas and policy: example 6. Next Steps & Discussion Purpose of webinar: • Preview Draft LIS Ecologically Significant Areas • High level feedback • Encourage deeper review & feedback; March 1, 2019 LIS Blue Plan: Why do we need it? Increasing demands pose potential conflicts with human uses & marine life Insufficient mechanisms for managing use of the Sound as a whole Individual proposals and permit applications set the future course What is the Blue Plan? • 2015 legislation: Develop Blue Plan to guide new uses & “manage Sound as a whole” • Produce an Inventory of Human Uses and Natural Resources • Develop policies about where new things go – marine spatial planning - maps • Policies guide and direct how State permits and decision-making is to be carried out Organization • Led by CT DEEP • Guided by 16 member Advisory Committee • Coordinated with NY as much as possible Principal Goals: • Identify and protect places of ecological significance • Identify and protect
  • LISS 3.3.Qxd

    LISS 3.3.Qxd

    RestoringRestoring LongLong CONNECTICUT Connecticut Quinnipiac River River IslandIsland Thames Sound’s River Sound’s Housatonic River Stonington HabitatsHabitats Old Saybrook COMPLETED RESTORATION SITES IN PROGRESS RESTORATION SITES POTENTIAL RESTORATION SITES PROJECT BOUNDARY RIVER LONG ISLAND SOUND Greenwich 2002 RESTORATION SITES Southold BLUE INDICATES COMPLETED SITE – CONSTRUCTION ON THE PROJECT IS FINISHED, BUT MONITORING MAY BE ON-GOING GREEN INDICATES IN PROGRESS SITE– SOME PHASE OF THE PROJECT IS UNDERWAY, E.G. APPLYING FOR FUNDING, DESIGN, OR CONSTRUCTION BLACK INDICATES POTENTIAL SITE – A RESTORATION PROJECT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, NO ACTION TAKEN YET MOUNT VERNON RYE BOLDFACE IN ALL COLORS INDICATES HIGH-RANKED SITES Rye Glover Field (FW) Beaver Swamp Brook (FW) Beaver Swamp Brook/Cowperwood site (FW) Brookhaven NEW ROCHELLE Blind Brook (FW) Echo Bay (TW/SR/IF/RI) Edith G. Read Wildlife Sanctuary (TW/F/EE/FW) CONNECTICUT Former Dickerman’s Pond (FW) Marshlands Conservancy (TW/F/IF) Farm River (TW) EW ORK Nature Study Woods (F/FW) Farm River tributary/Edgemere Rd. (TW) N Y Pryer Manor Marsh (TW) SMITHTOWN BRANFORD Morris Creek/Sibley Lane (TW) Callahan’s Beach (CB) Branford River STP (TW) New Haven Airport (TW) Bronx BRONX NORTH HEMPSTEAD Fresh Pond (FW/F/BD) Branford R./Christopher Rd. (TW) Nissequogue Bronx Oyster Reefs (SR) Baxter Estates Pond (FW) Harrison Pond Town Park (FW/RMC/TW/F) Branford R./St. Agnes Cemetery (TW) EAST LYME NEW YORK Bronx River mouth (TW/F/RMC) Hempstead Harbor (EE/IF/TW) Landing Avenue Town Park (TW) Branford R./Hickory Rd. (TW) Brides Brook Culvert (RMC/TW) River Bronx River Trailway (TW/FW/F/RMC) Lake Success (FW) Long Beach (BD) Branford R.
  • Shallow Water As a Refuge Habitat for Fish and Crustaceans in Non-Vegetated Estuaries: an Example from Chesapeake Bay

    Shallow Water As a Refuge Habitat for Fish and Crustaceans in Non-Vegetated Estuaries: an Example from Chesapeake Bay

    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 99: 1-16, 1993 Published September 2 Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. l Shallow water as a refuge habitat for fish and crustaceans in non-vegetated estuaries: an example from Chesapeake Bay Gregory M. Ruiz l, Anson H. Hines l, Martin H. posey2 'Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, PO Box 28, Edgewater, Maryland 21037, USA 'Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403. USA ABSTRACT. Abundances and size-frequency distributions of common epibenth~cflsh and crustaceans were compared among 3 depth zones (1-35, 35-70, 71-95 cm) of the Rhode River, a subestuary of Chesapeake Bay, USA. In the absence of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV),inter- and intraspccific size segregation occurred by depth from May to October, 1989-1992. Small species (Palaemonetes pugjo, Crangon septernspjnosa, Fundulus heteroclitus, F majaljs, Rhithropanope~lsharrisii, Apeltes quadracus, Gobiosorna boscj) were most abundant at water depths <70 cm. Furthermore, the propor- tion of small individuals decreased significantly with depth for 7 of 8 species, with C. septemsp~nosa being the exception, exhibiting no size change with increasing depth. These distributional patterns were related to depth-dependent predalion risk. Large species (Callinectes sap~dus,Leiostomus xan- thurus, and Micropogonias undulatus), known predators of some of the small species, were often most abundant in deep water (>70 cm). In field experiments, mortality of tethered P pugio (30 to 35 mm), small E heteroclitus (40 to 50 mm), and small C. sapjdus (30 to 70 mm) increased significantly with depth. Wc hypothesize that predation risk was size-dependent, creating the observed intra- and inter- specific size differences among depth zones.