DOCSLIB.ORG

2019 Annual Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2019 Annual Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation Report 2019 ANNUAL MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station ANNUAL MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station July 2020 Page intentionally blank Report Preparation/Data Collection – Oceanography and Marine Biology MBC Aquatic Sciences 3000 Red Hill Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Page intentionally blank TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................................v LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. vii CHAPTER 1 STUDY INTRODUCTION AND GENERATING STATION DESCRIPTION 1-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1-1 PURPOSE OF SAMPLING ......................................................................................... 1-1 REPORT APPROACH AND ORGANIZATION ........................................................ 1-1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ................................................................... 1-1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ............................................................................................ 1-3 GENERATING STATION OPERATION - 2019 ........................................................ 1-3 2019 RECEIVING WATER MONITORING PROGRAM .................................................... 1-3 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................ 1-5 CHAPTER 2 OCEANOGRAPHIC PROCESSES AND WATER QUALITY .......................... 2-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 2-1 METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 2-1 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM............................................................................. 2-1 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 2-5 OCEAN TEMPERATURE ........................................................................................... 2-5 WATER QUALITY AT FIXED MONITORING STATIONS ................................. 2-20 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC SURVEYS ................................................................... 2-22 LITERATURE & SOURCES CITED ................................................................................... 2-27 CHAPTER 3 KELP DENSITY STUDY ........................................................................................ 3-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 3-1 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 3-1 STUDY APPROACH ................................................................................................... 3-2 METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 3-4 STUDY SITES.............................................................................................................. 3-4 SAMPLING .................................................................................................................. 3-4 DATA ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 3-6 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 3-6 BIOLOGICAL RESULTS ............................................................................................ 3-6 SUBSTRATE COMPOSITION ................................................................................. 3-13 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 3-16 GIANT KELP AT SOK .............................................................................................. 3-16 COMPARISON WITH GIANT KELP AT SMK ...................................................... 3-22 SUBSTRATE .............................................................................................................. 3-23 UNDERSTORY KELPS ............................................................................................ 3-26 LARGE INVERTEBRATE SPECIES ....................................................................... 3-27 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................... 3-31 LITERATURE CITED .......................................................................................................... 3-32 i CHAPTER 4 IN-PLANT FISH ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 4-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 4-1 CHAPTER 5 FISH POPULATION MONITORING .................................................................. 5-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 5-1 METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 5-1 STUDY SITES.............................................................................................................. 5-1 SAMPLING .................................................................................................................. 5-2 ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 5-3 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 5-3 2019 FISH CATCH ...................................................................................................... 5-3 LIFE HISTORY ANALYSIS ....................................................................................... 5-9 HISTORIC ABUNDANCES ...................................................................................... 5-11 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 5-15 LITERATURE CITED .......................................................................................................... 5-17 ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Location of Study Area. Isobaths in meters. .......................................................... 1-2 Figure 2-1. Locations of continuous temperature monitoring Stations C2S, F2S, and C22S offshore San Onofre. .......................................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-2. Locations of temperature and water quality profiles offshore San Onofre. ........... 2-4 Figure 2-3. Coastal ocean mean sea surface temperature (SST °C) deviations from normal, January through June 2019. NOAA Coast Watch, MUR Analysis SST Anomalies. ........ 2-6 Figure 2-4. Coastal mean sea surface temperature (SST °C) deviations from normal, July through December 2019. NOAA Coast Watch, MUR Analysis SST Anomalies. ............. 2-7 Figure 2-5. Pacific Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies for October 2019 showing above average temperature conditions along the central-Pacific Equatorial Region while the nearshore temperatures along the southern California coast of the United States were slightly above normal. ........................................................................................................ 2-8 Figure 2-6. Daily mean surface and bottom water temperatures at Station C22S for 2019. Short-term temperature decreases are marked with arrows. ............................................ 2-10 Figure 2-7. Daily mean surface and bottom water temperatures at Station C2S for 2019. .... 2-10 Figure 2-8. Daily mean surface and bottom water temperatures at Station F2S for 2019. .... 2-10 Figure 2-9. Comparison of daily surface temperatures during 2019 at San Onofre with daily regional surface temperatures from the San Clemente area from 1955-2019 (SIO 2020). .............................................................................................................................. 2-13 Figure 2-10. Daily mean vertical temperature gradients at Stations C22S, C2S, and F2S for 2019. Note: scales vary slightly. ................................................................................. 2-15 Figure 2-11. Daily mean surface temperature differences between the reference Station (C22S) and the impact Stations (C2S and F2S) for 2019. (Note: vertical scale varies). 2-17 Figure 2-12. Daily mean bottom temperature differences between the reference Station (C22S) and the impact Stations (C2S and F2S) for 2019. (Note: vertical scale varies). 2-17 Figure 2-13. False-color surface water temperature contour plots recorded during quarterly water quality cruises in 2019. ..........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Ecology Progress Series 477:177
    Vol. 477: 177–188, 2013 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published March 12 doi: 10.3354/meps10144 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Larval exposure to shared oceanography does not cause spatially correlated recruitment in kelp forest fishes Jenna M. Krug*, Mark A. Steele Department of Biology, California State University, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, California 91330-8303, USA ABSTRACT: In organisms that have a life history phase whose dispersal is influenced by abiotic forcing, if individuals of different species are simultaneously exposed to the same forcing, spa- tially correlated settlement patterns may result. Such correlated recruitment patterns may affect population and community dynamics. The extent to which settlement or recruitment is spatially correlated among species, however, is not well known. We evaluated this phenomenon among 8 common kelp forest fishes at 8 large reefs spread over 30 km of the coast of Santa Catalina Island, California. In addition to testing for correlated recruitment, we also evaluated the influences of predation and habitat quality on spatial patterns of recruitment. Fish and habitat attributes were surveyed along transects 7 times during 2008. Using these repeated surveys, we also estimated the mortality rate of the prey species that settled most consistently (Oxyjulis californica) and evaluated if mortality was related to recruit density, predator density, or habitat attributes. Spatial patterns of recruitment of the 8 study species were seldom correlated. Recruitment of all species was related to one or more attributes of the habitat, with giant kelp abundance being the most widespread predictor of recruitment. Mortality of O. californica recruits was density-dependent and declined with increasing canopy cover of giant kelp, but was unrelated to predator density.
    [Show full text]
  • California Saltwater Sport Fishing Regulations
    2017–2018 CALIFORNIA SALTWATER SPORT FISHING REGULATIONS For Ocean Sport Fishing in California Effective March 1, 2017 through February 28, 2018 13 2017–2018 CALIFORNIA SALTWATER SPORT FISHING REGULATIONS Groundfish Regulation Tables Contents What’s New for 2017? ............................................................. 4 24 License Information ................................................................ 5 Sport Fishing License Fees ..................................................... 8 Keeping Up With In-Season Groundfish Regulation Changes .... 11 Map of Groundfish Management Areas ...................................12 Summaries of Recreational Groundfish Regulations ..................13 General Provisions and Definitions ......................................... 20 General Ocean Fishing Regulations ��������������������������������������� 24 Fin Fish — General ................................................................ 24 General Ocean Fishing Fin Fish — Minimum Size Limits, Bag and Possession Limits, and Seasons ......................................................... 24 Fin Fish—Gear Restrictions ................................................... 33 Invertebrates ........................................................................ 34 34 Mollusks ............................................................................34 Crustaceans .......................................................................36 Non-commercial Use of Marine Plants .................................... 38 Marine Protected Areas and Other
    [Show full text]
  • CHECKLIST and BIOGEOGRAPHY of FISHES from GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor Reyes-Bonilla, Arturo Ayala-Bocos, Luis E
    ReyeS-BONIllA eT Al: CheCklIST AND BIOgeOgRAphy Of fISheS fROm gUADAlUpe ISlAND CalCOfI Rep., Vol. 51, 2010 CHECKLIST AND BIOGEOGRAPHY OF FISHES FROM GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor REyES-BONILLA, Arturo AyALA-BOCOS, LUIS E. Calderon-AGUILERA SAúL GONzáLEz-Romero, ISRAEL SáNCHEz-ALCántara Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada AND MARIANA Walther MENDOzA Carretera Tijuana - Ensenada # 3918, zona Playitas, C.P. 22860 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur Ensenada, B.C., México Departamento de Biología Marina Tel: +52 646 1750500, ext. 25257; Fax: +52 646 Apartado postal 19-B, CP 23080 [email protected] La Paz, B.C.S., México. Tel: (612) 123-8800, ext. 4160; Fax: (612) 123-8819 NADIA C. Olivares-BAñUELOS [email protected] Reserva de la Biosfera Isla Guadalupe Comisión Nacional de áreas Naturales Protegidas yULIANA R. BEDOLLA-GUzMáN AND Avenida del Puerto 375, local 30 Arturo RAMíREz-VALDEz Fraccionamiento Playas de Ensenada, C.P. 22880 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Ensenada, B.C., México Facultad de Ciencias Marinas, Instituto de Investigaciones Oceanológicas Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Carr. Tijuana-Ensenada km. 107, Apartado postal 453, C.P. 22890 Ensenada, B.C., México ABSTRACT recognized the biological and ecological significance of Guadalupe Island, off Baja California, México, is Guadalupe Island, and declared it a Biosphere Reserve an important fishing area which also harbors high (SEMARNAT 2005). marine biodiversity. Based on field data, literature Guadalupe Island is isolated, far away from the main- reviews, and scientific collection records, we pres- land and has limited logistic facilities to conduct scien- ent a comprehensive checklist of the local fish fauna, tific studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Bulletin No. 109. the Barred Surfperch (Amphistichus Argenteus Agassiz) in Southern California
    UC San Diego Fish Bulletin Title Fish Bulletin No. 109. The Barred Surfperch (Amphistichus argenteus Agassiz) in Southern California Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9fh0623k Authors Carlisle, John G, Jr. Schott, Jack W Abramson, Norman J Publication Date 1960 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME MARINE RESOURCES OPERATIONS FISH BULLETIN No. 109 The Barred Surfperch (Amphistichus argenteus Agassiz) in Southern Califor- nia By JOHN G. CARLISLE, JR., JACK W. SCHOTT and NORMAN J. ABRAMSON 1960 1 2 3 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Surf Fishing Investigation received a great deal of help in the conduct of its field work. The arduous task of beach seining all year around was shared by many members of the California State Fisheries Laboratory staff; we are particularly grateful to Mr. Parke H. Young and Mr. John L. Baxter for their willing and continued help throughout the years. Mr. Frederick B. Hagerman was project leader for the first year of the investigation, until his recall into the Air Force, and he gave the project an excellent start. Many others gave help and advice, notably Mr. John E. Fitch, Mr. Phil M. Roedel, Mr. David C. Joseph, and Dr. F. N. Clark of this laboratory. Dr. Carl L. Hubbs of Scripps Institution of Oceanography at La Jolla gave valuable advice, and we are indebted to the late Mr. Conrad Limbaugh of the same institution for accounts of his observations on surf fishes, and for SCUBA diving instructions. The project was fortunate in securing able seasonal help, particularly from Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix E: Fish Species List
    Appendix F. Fish Species List Common Name Scientific Name American shad Alosa sapidissima arrow goby Clevelandia ios barred surfperch Amphistichus argenteus bat ray Myliobatis californica bay goby Lepidogobius lepidus bay pipefish Syngnathus leptorhynchus bearded goby Tridentiger barbatus big skate Raja binoculata black perch Embiotoca jacksoni black rockfish Sebastes melanops bonehead sculpin Artedius notospilotus brown rockfish Sebastes auriculatus brown smoothhound Mustelus henlei cabezon Scorpaenichthys marmoratus California halibut Paralichthys californicus California lizardfish Synodus lucioceps California tonguefish Symphurus atricauda chameleon goby Tridentiger trigonocephalus cheekspot goby Ilypnus gilberti chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha curlfin sole Pleuronichthys decurrens diamond turbot Hypsopsetta guttulata dwarf perch Micrometrus minimus English sole Pleuronectes vetulus green sturgeon* Acipenser medirostris inland silverside Menidia beryllina jacksmelt Atherinopsis californiensis leopard shark Triakis semifasciata lingcod Ophiodon elongatus longfin smelt Spirinchus thaleichthys night smelt Spirinchus starksi northern anchovy Engraulis mordax Pacific herring Clupea pallasi Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata Pacific pompano Peprilus simillimus Pacific sanddab Citharichthys sordidus Pacific sardine Sardinops sagax Pacific staghorn sculpin Leptocottus armatus Pacific tomcod Microgadus proximus pile perch Rhacochilus vacca F-1 plainfin midshipman Porichthys notatus rainwater killifish Lucania parva river lamprey Lampetra
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental DNA Reveals the Fine-Grained and Hierarchical
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Environmental DNA reveals the fne‑grained and hierarchical spatial structure of kelp forest fsh communities Thomas Lamy 1,2*, Kathleen J. Pitz 3, Francisco P. Chavez3, Christie E. Yorke1 & Robert J. Miller1 Biodiversity is changing at an accelerating rate at both local and regional scales. Beta diversity, which quantifes species turnover between these two scales, is emerging as a key driver of ecosystem function that can inform spatial conservation. Yet measuring biodiversity remains a major challenge, especially in aquatic ecosystems. Decoding environmental DNA (eDNA) left behind by organisms ofers the possibility of detecting species sans direct observation, a Rosetta Stone for biodiversity. While eDNA has proven useful to illuminate diversity in aquatic ecosystems, its utility for measuring beta diversity over spatial scales small enough to be relevant to conservation purposes is poorly known. Here we tested how eDNA performs relative to underwater visual census (UVC) to evaluate beta diversity of marine communities. We paired UVC with 12S eDNA metabarcoding and used a spatially structured hierarchical sampling design to assess key spatial metrics of fsh communities on temperate rocky reefs in southern California. eDNA provided a more‑detailed picture of the main sources of spatial variation in both taxonomic richness and community turnover, which primarily arose due to strong species fltering within and among rocky reefs. As expected, eDNA detected more taxa at the regional scale (69 vs. 38) which accumulated quickly with space and plateaued at only ~ 11 samples. Conversely, the discovery rate of new taxa was slower with no sign of saturation for UVC.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Cycle of Aplodinotus Grunniens Females (Rafinesque, 1819) in the Usumacinta River, Mexico
    Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research, 47(4Reproductive): 612-625, cycle2019 of Aplodinotus grunniens females 1 DOI: 10.3856/vol47-issue4-fulltext-4 Research Articles Reproductive cycle of Aplodinotus grunniens females (Rafinesque, 1819) in the Usumacinta River, Mexico Raúl E. Hernández-Gómez1, Wilfrido M. Contreras-Sánchez2, Arlette A. Hernández-Franyutti2 Martha A. Perera-García3 & Aarón Torres-Martínez2 1División Académica Multidisciplinaria de los Ríos, Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco Tabasco, México 2División Académica de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco Villahermosa-Cárdenas, Tabasco, México 3División Académica de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Tabasco, México Corresponding author: Wilfrido M. Contreras-Sánchez ([email protected]) ABSTRACT. The freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens is a species widely distributed in North America. In the Mexican southeast, this species occurs in the Usumacinta River, where it supports an artisanal fishery. In this regard, the present study was conducted to supply detailed information on the female reproductive cycle of this species. Calculations of gonadosomatic (GSI) and hepatosomatic (HSI) indexes, histological and visual staging of ovaries as well as the staging of oocyte development were applied together to determine the reproductive changes during an annual cycle. The histological analysis revealed the presence of spawning capable females throughout the year, and the distribution frequencies of oocyte diameters displayed the continuous occurrence of mature
    [Show full text]
  • ASSESSMENT of COASTAL WATER RESOURCES and WATERSHED CONDITIONS at CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK, CALIFORNIA Dr. Diana L. Engle
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Report NPS/NRWRD/NRTR-2006/354 Water Resources Division Natural Resource Program Centerent of the Interior ASSESSMENT OF COASTAL WATER RESOURCES AND WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK, CALIFORNIA Dr. Diana L. Engle The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, marine resource management, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top Left: Santa Cruz, Kristen Keteles Top Right: Brown Pelican, NPS photo Bottom Left: Red Abalone, NPS photo Bottom Left: Santa Rosa, Kristen Keteles Bottom Middle: Anacapa, Kristen Keteles Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Channel Islands National Park, California Dr. Diana L.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Fish for Your Health and the Sea's
    Nova In Vitro Fertilization Best Fish for Your Health and the Sea's By The Green Guide Editors (National Geographic) Fish provide essential nutrients and fatty acids—especially for developing bodies and brains and make a perfect protein-filled, lean meal whether grilled, baked, poached or served as sushi. Yet overfishing, habitat loss and declining water quality have wreaked havoc on many fish populations. Furthermore, many are contaminated with brain-damaging mercury and other toxic chemicals. If the pickings appear slim, check out our "Yes" fish where you'll find many options available. As for our "Sometimes" fish, these may be eaten occasionally, while "No" fish should be avoided entirely. Photograph Courtesy Shutterstock Images Warnings are based on populations of highest concern (children and women who are pregnant, nursing or of childbearing age). To learn which fish from local water bodies are safe to eat, call your state department of health, or see www.epa.gov/waterscience/fish. Besides mercury, toxins can include PCBs, dioxins and pesticides. In compiling this list, the Green Guide referred to resources at the web sites of the Food and Drug Administration, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Foundation and Oceana among others. YES Fish Low mercury (L), not overfished or farmed destructively Abalone (farmed) L Lobster, spiny/rock (U.S., Australia, Baja west coast) L Anchovies L Mackerel, Atlantic (purse seine caught) L Arctic char (farmed) L Mussels (U.S. farmed) L Barramundi (U.S. farmed) L Oysters (Pacific farmed) L Catfish (U.S. farmed) L Pollock (AK, wild caught) L Caviar (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • California Yellowtail, White Seabass California
    California yellowtail, White seabass Seriola lalandi, Atractoscion nobilis ©Monterey Bay Aquarium California Bottom gillnet, Drift gillnet, Hook and Line February 13, 2014 Kelsey James, Consulting researcher Disclaimer Seafood Watch® strives to ensure all our Seafood Reports and the recommendations contained therein are accurate and reflect the most up-to-date evidence available at time of publication. All our reports are peer- reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science or aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. We always welcome additional or updated data that can be used for the next revision. Seafood Watch and Seafood Reports are made possible through a grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. 2 Final Seafood Recommendation Stock / Fishery Impacts on Impacts on Management Habitat and Overall the Stock other Spp. Ecosystem Recommendation White seabass Green (3.32) Red (1.82) Yellow (3.00) Green (3.87) Good Alternative California: Southern (2.894) Northeast Pacific - Gillnet, Drift White seabass Green (3.32) Red (1.82) Yellow (3.00) Yellow (3.12) Good Alternative California: Southern (2.743) Northeast Pacific - Gillnet, Bottom White seabass Green (3.32) Green (4.07) Yellow (3.00) Green (3.46) Best Choice (3.442) California: Central Northeast Pacific - Hook/line
    [Show full text]
  • Sciaenidae 3117
    click for previous page Perciformes: Percoidei: Sciaenidae 3117 SCIAENIDAE Croakers (drums) by K. Sasaki iagnostic characters: Moderately elongate, moderately compressed, small to large (to 200 cm Dstandard length) perciform fishes. Head and body (occasionally also fins) completely scaly, except tip of snout. Sensory pores often conspicuous on tip of snout (upper rostral pores), on lower edge of snout (marginal rostral pores), and on chin (mental pores), usually 3 or 5 upper rostral pores, 5 marginal rostral pores, and 3 pairs of mental pores; these pores usually distinct in bottom feeders with inferior to subterminal mouth, whereas indistinct in midwater feeders with terminal to oblique mouth. A barbel sometimes present on chin. Position and size of mouth variable from strongly inferior to oblique, larger in species with oblique mouth, smaller in species with inferior mouth. Teeth differentiated into large and small in both jaws or in upper jaw only; enlarged teeth always form outer series in upper jaw, inner series in lower jaw; well-developed canines (more than twice as large as other teeth) may be present at front of one or both jaws; vomer and palatine without teeth. Dorsal fin continuous, with deep notch between anterior (spinous) and posterior (soft) portions; anterior portion with VIII to X slender spines (usually X), and posterior portion with I spine and 21 to 44 soft rays; base of posterior portion elongate, much longer than anal-fin base; anal fin with II spines and 6 to 12 (usually 7) soft rays; caudal fin emarginate to pointed, never deeply forked, usually pointed in juveniles, rhomboidal in adults; pelvic fins with I spine and 5 soft rays, the first soft ray occasionally with a short filament.
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States And
    t a AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY QL 614 .A43 V.2 .A 4-3 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY Special Publication No. 2 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes -^ ru from the United States m CD and Canada (SECOND EDITION) A/^Ssrf>* '-^\ —---^ Report of the Committee on Names of Fishes, Presented at the Ei^ty-ninth Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Florida, September 16-18, 1959 Reeve M. Bailey, Chairman Ernest A. Lachner, C. C. Lindsey, C. Richard Robins Phil M. Roedel, W. B. Scott, Loren P. Woods Ann Arbor, Michigan • 1960 Copies of this publication may be purchased for $1.00 each (paper cover) or $2.00 (cloth cover). Orders, accompanied by remittance payable to the American Fisheries Society, should be addressed to E. A. Seaman, Secretary-Treasurer, American Fisheries Society, Box 483, McLean, Virginia. Copyright 1960 American Fisheries Society Printed by Waverly Press, Inc. Baltimore, Maryland lutroduction This second list of the names of fishes of The shore fishes from Greenland, eastern the United States and Canada is not sim- Canada and the United States, and the ply a reprinting with corrections, but con- northern Gulf of Mexico to the mouth of stitutes a major revision and enlargement. the Rio Grande are included, but those The earlier list, published in 1948 as Special from Iceland, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Cuba Publication No. 1 of the American Fisheries and the other West Indian islands, and Society, has been widely used and has Mexico are excluded unless they occur also contributed substantially toward its goal of in the region covered. In the Pacific, the achieving uniformity and avoiding confusion area treated includes that part of the conti- in nomenclature.
    [Show full text]