DOCSLIB.ORG

Shorezone Imaging and Mapping Along the Alaska Peninsula

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shorezone Imaging and Mapping Along the Alaska Peninsula OCS Study BOEM 2018-037 ShoreZone Imaging and Mapping along the Alaska Peninsula US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Alaska OCS Region This page intentionally left blank. OCS Study BOEM 2018-037 ShoreZone Imaging and Mapping along the Alaska Peninsula August 2018 Authors: Sarah Cook, Sean Daley, Sue Saupe, Mandy Lindeberg, Mary Morris, Kalen Morrow, Rachel Myers and Ashley Park Prepared under BOEM Award No. M15PC00008 By Coastal and Ocean Resources 759A Vanalman Ave. Victoria, BC, Canada V8Z 3B8 US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Alaska OCS Region This page intentionally left blank. DISCLAIMER Study concept, oversight, and funding were provided by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Environmental Studies Program, Washington, DC, under Contract Number M15PC00008. This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM, and it has been approved for publication. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the US Government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. REPORT AVAILABILITY To download a PDF file of this report, go to the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Data and Information Systems webpage (http://www.boem.gov/Environmental- Studies-EnvData/), click on the link for the Environmental Studies Program Information System (ESPIS), and search on 2018-037. The report is also available at the National Technical Reports Library at https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/. CITATION Cook S, Daley S, Saupe S., Lindeberg M., Morris M., Morrow K., Myers R., Park A. 2018. ShoreZone Imaging and Mapping Along the Alaska Peninsula. Anchorage (AK): US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. OCS Study BOEM 2018-037, 301 p. ABOUT THE COVER M/V Natural Habitat Ursus anchored in Wide Bay, Alaska Peninsula. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for funding the imaging and mapping represented in this summary report. The ShoreZone program is a partnership of scientists, GIS specialists, web specialists, non-profit organizations and governmental agencies. We gratefully acknowledge the support of organizations working in partnership for the Alaska ShoreZone effort including: Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Archipelago Marine Research Ltd., Cook Inlet Regional Citizens’ Advisory Council, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, National Park Service, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Prince William Sound Regional Citizens’ Advisory Council, The Nature Conservancy, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the University of Alaska and the US Forest Service. Funding for the ShoreZone Shore Station survey was provided by Cook Inlet Regional Citizens Advisory Council (CIRCAC) with in-kind services provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Auke Bay Laboratories and the National Park Service (NPS). Benjamin Pister of NPS and Donna Aderhold of NOAA’s National Ocean Service and the Gulf Watch Alaska Program provided field support for biophysical data collections. Dr. Sandra Lindstrom conducted field sampling and provided taxonomic expertise for seaweed collections. We also thank the captain and crew of the R/V Natural Habitat Ursus for their efforts to get us safely on and off the beach in an area with particularly exposed and treacherous beaches. Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... ii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ vi Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Imaging Flight Report ........................................................................................................................... 4 3 Physical Attribute Data Summary ......................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Coastal Class ................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) ........................................................................................... 8 3.3 Oil Residence Index (ESI) ........................................................................................................... 11 3.4 ShoreZone Coastal Vulnerability................................................................................................. 13 3.4.1 Flood Zone Width ................................................................................................................ 13 3.4.2 Coastal Vulnerability Index .................................................................................................. 15 3.5 Anthropogenic Shore Modifications ............................................................................................ 17 4 Biological Attribute Data Summary ..................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Biobands ..................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2 Biological Wave Exposure .......................................................................................................... 26 4.3 Habitat Class ............................................................................................................................... 28 5 Ground Station Survey Report ........................................................................................................... 30 5.1 Introduction and Methods ............................................................................................................ 30 5.2 Results ........................................................................................................................................ 32 5.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 34 5.4 Expanded Bioband Table ............................................................................................................ 35 6 Aerial Imaging and Ground Station Data Comparison ....................................................................... 41 7 References ......................................................................................................................................... 45 Appendix A: Imaging Survey Summary Maps and Video Logs .................................................................. 46 Appendix B: Illustrated Data Dictionary ...................................................................................................... 75 Appendix C: Ground Station Site Data ....................................................................................................... 92 Appendix D: Narrative Descriptions of Ground Survey Sites ................................................................... 204 Appendix E: Site Verification Classification and Scoring Data ................................................................. 297 i List of Figures Figure 1. Extent of ShoreZone imagery and mapping as of June 2018….............................................. 2 Figure 2. ShoreZone funding partners in the Alaska Peninsula survey area.......................................... 3 Figure 3. Proportion of Grouped Coastal Class categories by shoreline length…….............................. 5 Figure 4. Distribution of Coastal Class catgories.................................................................................... 6 Figure 5. Proportion of Grouped most sensitive ESI categories by shoreline length……..................... 8 Figure 6. Distribution of the grouped ESI categories from least to most sensitive to oiling.................... 9 Figure 7. Proportion of Oil Residence Index categories by shoreline length………................................ 11 Figure 8. Distribution of the Oil Residence Index categories……........................................................... 12 Figure 9. Proportion of Flood Zone Class categories by shoreline length……....................................... 13 Figure 10. Distribution of the Coastal Vulnerability Flood Zone Class.................................................... 14 Figure 11. Proportion of Coastal Vulnerability Index ranks by shoreline length……............................... 15 Figure 12. Distribution of the Coastal Vulnerability Index ranks..............................................................16 Figure 13. Proportion of Shore Modifications by estimated shoreline length……................................... 17 Figure 14. Distribution and examples of types of primary Shore Modification........................................ 18 Figure 15. Distribution of the Surfgrass bioband…................................................................................. 22 Figure 16. Distribution of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GASTROPOD CARE SOP# = Moll3 PURPOSE: to Describe Methods Of
    GASTROPOD CARE SOP# = Moll3 PURPOSE: To describe methods of care for gastropods. POLICY: To provide optimum care for all animals. RESPONSIBILITY: Collector and user of the animals. If these are not the same person, the user takes over responsibility of the animals as soon as the animals have arrived on station. IDENTIFICATION: Common Name Scientific Name Identifying Characteristics Blue topsnail Calliostoma - Whorls are sculptured spirally with alternating ligatum light ridges and pinkish-brown furrows - Height reaches a little more than 2cm and is a bit greater than the width -There is no opening in the base of the shell near its center (umbilicus) Purple-ringed Calliostoma - Alternating whorls of orange and fluorescent topsnail annulatum purple make for spectacular colouration - The apex is sharply pointed - The foot is bright orange - They are often found amongst hydroids which are one of their food sources - These snails are up to 4cm across Leafy Ceratostoma - Spiral ridges on shell hornmouth foliatum - Three lengthwise frills - Frills vary, but are generally discontinuous and look unfinished - They reach a length of about 8cm Rough keyhole Diodora aspera - Likely to be found in the intertidal region limpet - Have a single apical aperture to allow water to exit - Reach a length of about 5 cm Limpet Lottia sp - This genus covers quite a few species of limpets, at least 4 of them are commonly found near BMSC - Different Lottia species vary greatly in appearance - See Eugene N. Kozloff’s book, “Seashore Life of the Northern Pacific Coast” for in depth descriptions of individual species Limpet Tectura sp. - This genus covers quite a few species of limpets, at least 6 of them are commonly found near BMSC - Different Tectura species vary greatly in appearance - See Eugene N.
    [Show full text]
  • MARINE TANK GUIDE About the Marine Tank
    HOME EDITION MARINE TANK GUIDE About the Marine Tank With almost 34,000 miles of coastline, Alaska’s intertidal zones, the shore areas exposed and covered by ocean tides, are home to a variety of plants and animals. The Anchorage Museum’s marine tank is home to Alaskan animals which live in the intertidal zone. The plants and animals in the Museum’s marine tank are collected under an Alaska Department of Fish and Game Aquatic Resource Permit during low tide at various beaches in Southcentral and Southeast Alaska. Visitors are asked not to touch the marine animals. Touching is stressful for the animals. A full- time animal care technician maintains the marine tank. Since the tank is not located next to the ocean, ocean water cannot be constantly pumped through it. This means special salt water is mixed at the Museum. The tank is also cleaned regularly. Equipment which keeps the water moving, clean, chilled to 43°F and constantly monitored. Contamination from human hands would impact the cleanliness of the water and potentially hurt the animals. A second tank is home to the Museum’s king crab, named King Louie, and black rockfish, named Sebastian. King crab and black rockfish of Alaska live in deeper waters than the intertidal zone creatures. This guide shares information about some of the Museum’s marine animals. When known, the Dena’ina word for an animal is included, recognizing the thousands of years of stewardship and knowledge of Indigeneous people of the Anchorage area and their language. The Dena’ina & Marine Species The geographically diverse Dena’ina lands span both inland and coastal areas, including Anchorage.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Matters for Inorganic Carbon Acquisition in 38 Species Of
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations August 2013 Habitat Matters for Inorganic Carbon Acquisition in 38 Species of Red Macroalgae (Rhodophyta) from Puget Sound, Washington, USA Maurizio Murru University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.uwm.edu/etd Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Murru, Maurizio, "Habitat Matters for Inorganic Carbon Acquisition in 38 Species of Red Macroalgae (Rhodophyta) from Puget Sound, Washington, USA" (2013). Theses and Dissertations. 259. https://dc.uwm.edu/etd/259 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by UWM Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UWM Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HABITAT MATTERS FOR INORGANIC CARBON ACQUISITION IN 38 SPECIES OF RED MACROALGAE (RHODOPHYTA) FROM PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON, USA1 by Maurizio Murru A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee August 2013 ABSTRACT HABITAT MATTERS FOR INORGANIC CARBON ACQUISITION IN 38 SPECIES OF RED MACROALGAE (RHODOPHYTA) FROM PUGET SOUND, WASHINGTON, USA1 by Maurizio Murru The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2013 Under the Supervision of Professor Craig D. Sandgren, and John A. Berges (Acting) The ability of macroalgae to photosynthetically raise the pH and deplete the inorganic carbon pool from the surrounding medium has been in the past correlated with habitat and growth conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Oystercatcher Diet and Provisioning 2014 Annual Report
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Black Oystercatcher Chick Diet and Provisioning 2014 Annual Report Natural Resource Data Series NPS/KEFJ/NRDS—2015/749 ON THIS PAGE Nest camera captures a black oystercatcher provisioning chick on Natoa Island. Photograph Courtesy: NPS/Kenai Fjords National Park ON THE COVER Black oystercatchers at nest in Aialik Bay, Kenai Fjords National Park Photograph by: NPS/Katie Thoresen Black Oystercatcher Diet and Provisioning 2014 Annual Report Natural Resource Data Series NPS/KEFJ/NRDS—2015/749 Sam Stark1, Brian Robinson2 and Laura M. Phillips1 1National Park Service Kenai Fjords National Park PO Box 1727 Seward, AK 99664 2 University of Alaska, Fairbanks Department of Biology and Wildlife PO Box 756100 Fairbanks, AK 99775 January 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Title the Intertidal Biota of Volcanic Yankich Island (Middle
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Kyoto University Research Information Repository The Intertidal Biota of Volcanic Yankich Island (Middle Kuril Title Islands) Author(s) Kussakin, Oleg G.; Kostina, Elena E. PUBLICATIONS OF THE SETO MARINE BIOLOGICAL Citation LABORATORY (1996), 37(3-6): 201-225 Issue Date 1996-12-25 URL http://hdl.handle.net/2433/176267 Right Type Departmental Bulletin Paper Textversion publisher Kyoto University Pub!. Seto Mar. Bioi. Lab., 37(3/6): 201-225, 1996 201 The Intertidal Biota of Volcanic Y ankich Island (Middle Kuril Islands) 0LEG G. KUSSAKIN and ELENA E. KOSTINA Institute of Marine Biology, Academy of Sciences of Russia, Vladivostok 690041, Russia Abstract A description of the intertidal biota of volcanic Yankich Island (Ushishir Islands, Kuril Islands) is given. The species composition and vertical distribution pattern of the intertidal communities at various localities are described in relation to environmental factors, such as nature of the substrate, surf conditions and volcanic vent water. The macrobenthos is poor in the areas directly influenced by high tempera­ ture (20-40°C) and high sulphur content. There are no marked changes in the intertidal communities in the areas of volcanic springs that are characterised by temperature below 10°C and by the absence of sulphur compounds. In general, the species composi­ tion and distribution of the intertidal biota are ordinary for the intertidal zone of the middle Kuril Islands. But there are departures from the typical zonation of the intertidal biota. Also, mass populations of Balanus crenatus appear.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomorphic Classification of Rivers
    9.36 Geomorphic Classification of Rivers JM Buffington, U.S. Forest Service, Boise, ID, USA DR Montgomery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Published by Elsevier Inc. 9.36.1 Introduction 730 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification 730 9.36.3 Types of Channel Classification 731 9.36.3.1 Stream Order 731 9.36.3.2 Process Domains 732 9.36.3.3 Channel Pattern 732 9.36.3.4 Channel–Floodplain Interactions 735 9.36.3.5 Bed Material and Mobility 737 9.36.3.6 Channel Units 739 9.36.3.7 Hierarchical Classifications 739 9.36.3.8 Statistical Classifications 745 9.36.4 Use and Compatibility of Channel Classifications 745 9.36.5 The Rise and Fall of Classifications: Why Are Some Channel Classifications More Used Than Others? 747 9.36.6 Future Needs and Directions 753 9.36.6.1 Standardization and Sample Size 753 9.36.6.2 Remote Sensing 754 9.36.7 Conclusion 755 Acknowledgements 756 References 756 Appendix 762 9.36.1 Introduction 9.36.2 Purpose of Classification Over the last several decades, environmental legislation and a A basic tenet in geomorphology is that ‘form implies process.’As growing awareness of historical human disturbance to rivers such, numerous geomorphic classifications have been de- worldwide (Schumm, 1977; Collins et al., 2003; Surian and veloped for landscapes (Davis, 1899), hillslopes (Varnes, 1958), Rinaldi, 2003; Nilsson et al., 2005; Chin, 2006; Walter and and rivers (Section 9.36.3). The form–process paradigm is a Merritts, 2008) have fostered unprecedented collaboration potentially powerful tool for conducting quantitative geo- among scientists, land managers, and stakeholders to better morphic investigations.
    [Show full text]
  • Algae & Marine Plants of Point Reyes
    Algae & Marine Plants of Point Reyes Green Algae or Chlorophyta Genus/Species Common Name Acrosiphonia coalita Green rope, Tangled weed Blidingia minima Blidingia minima var. vexata Dwarf sea hair Bryopsis corticulans Cladophora columbiana Green tuft alga Codium fragile subsp. californicum Sea staghorn Codium setchellii Smooth spongy cushion, Green spongy cushion Trentepohlia aurea Ulva californica Ulva fenestrata Sea lettuce Ulva intestinalis Sea hair, Sea lettuce, Gutweed, Grass kelp Ulva linza Ulva taeniata Urospora sp. Brown Algae or Ochrophyta Genus/Species Common Name Alaria marginata Ribbon kelp, Winged kelp Analipus japonicus Fir branch seaweed, Sea fir Coilodesme californica Dactylosiphon bullosus Desmarestia herbacea Desmarestia latifrons Egregia menziesii Feather boa Fucus distichus Bladderwrack, Rockweed Haplogloia andersonii Anderson's gooey brown Laminaria setchellii Southern stiff-stiped kelp Laminaria sinclairii Leathesia marina Sea cauliflower Melanosiphon intestinalis Twisted sea tubes Nereocystis luetkeana Bull kelp, Bullwhip kelp, Bladder wrack, Edible kelp, Ribbon kelp Pelvetiopsis limitata Petalonia fascia False kelp Petrospongium rugosum Phaeostrophion irregulare Sand-scoured false kelp Pterygophora californica Woody-stemmed kelp, Stalked kelp, Walking kelp Ralfsia sp. Silvetia compressa Rockweed Stephanocystis osmundacea Page 1 of 4 Red Algae or Rhodophyta Genus/Species Common Name Ahnfeltia fastigiata Bushy Ahnfelt's seaweed Ahnfeltiopsis linearis Anisocladella pacifica Bangia sp. Bossiella dichotoma Bossiella
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Invertebrate Field Guide
    Marine Invertebrate Field Guide Contents ANEMONES ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 AGGREGATING ANEMONE (ANTHOPLEURA ELEGANTISSIMA) ............................................................................................................................... 2 BROODING ANEMONE (EPIACTIS PROLIFERA) ................................................................................................................................................... 2 CHRISTMAS ANEMONE (URTICINA CRASSICORNIS) ............................................................................................................................................ 3 PLUMOSE ANEMONE (METRIDIUM SENILE) ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 BARNACLES ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 ACORN BARNACLE (BALANUS GLANDULA) ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 HAYSTACK BARNACLE (SEMIBALANUS CARIOSUS) .............................................................................................................................................. 4 CHITONS ...........................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1969 Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada. James Murl Mccloy Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Mccloy, James Murl, "Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Delta, Yukon Territory, Canada." (1969). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 1605. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/1605 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 70-252 McCLOY, James Murl, 1934- MORPHOLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BLOW RIVER DELTA, YUKON TERRITORY, CANADA. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1969 Geography University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Morphologic Characteristics of the Blow River Belta, Yukon Territory, Canada A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by James Murl McCloy B.A., State College at Los Angeles, 1961 May, 1969 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research culminating in this dissertation was conducted under the auspices of the Arctic Institute of North America. The major portion of the financial support was received from the United States Army under contract no. BA-ARO-D-3I-I2I4.-G832, "Arctic Environmental Studies." Additional financial assistance during part of the writing stage was received in the form of a research assistantship from the Coastal Studies Institute, Louisi­ ana State University.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Appendix C: An Analysis of Three Shellfish Assemblages from Tsʼishaa, Site DfSi-16 (204T), Benson Island, Pacific Rim National Park Reserve of Canada by Ian D. Sumpter Cultural Resource Services, Western Canada Service Centre, Parks Canada Agency, Victoria, B.C. Introduction column sampling, plus a second shell data collect- ing method, hand-collection/screen sampling, were This report describes and analyzes marine shellfish used to recover seven shellfish data sets for investi- recovered from three archaeological excavation gating the siteʼs invertebrate materials. The analysis units at the Tseshaht village of Tsʼishaa (DfSi-16). reported here focuses on three column assemblages The mollusc materials were collected from two collected by the researcher during the 1999 (Unit different areas investigated in 1999 and 2001. The S14–16/W25–27) and 2001 (Units S56–57/W50– source areas are located within the village proper 52, S62–64/W62–64) excavations only. and on an elevated landform positioned behind the village. The two areas contain stratified cultural Procedures and Methods of Quantification and deposits dating to the late and middle Holocene Identification periods, respectively. With an emphasis on mollusc species identifica- The primary purpose of collecting and examining tion and quantification, this preliminary analysis the Tsʼishaa shellfish remains was to sample, iden- examines discarded shellfood remains that were tify, and quantify the marine invertebrate species collected and processed by the site occupants for each major stratigraphic layer. Sets of quantita- for approximately 5,000 years. The data, when tive information were compiled through out the reviewed together with the recovered vertebrate analysis in order to accomplish these objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Leptasterias (Echinodermata: Asteroidea) Species Complex: Variation in Reproductive Investment
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 109: 95-98, 1994 Published June 9 Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. NOTE The Leptasterias (Echinodermata: Asteroidea) species complex: variation in reproductive investment Sophie B. George' Friday Harbor Laboratories, University of Washington. Friday Harbor. Washington 98250, USA ABSTRACT: Egg diameter, the amount of protein per egg, Egg size, egg numbers, and the organic content of and the number of eggs per individual produced did not differ the eggs may vary within a single spawn of a single between 2 morphologically and genetically distinct species individual, among individuals from the same popula- of seastars, Leptastenas epichlora (Brandt) and L. hexactis (Stimpson). In these 2 closely related sympatric species, vari- tion, and among individuals from different populations abll~tyin egg quality mght be mostly attributed to environ- or species (Emlet et al. 1987, McEdward & Carson 1987, mental factors rather than genetic constraints. George et al. 1990, McEdward & Chia 1991). Closely KEY WORDS Egg size. Egg number. Protein content. Seastar related species can have slmilar egg sizes or a broad range of egg sizes (Emlet et al. 1987). The present paper investigates the use of these reproductive para- The systematics of small six-rayed seastars of the meters to clarify the Leptasterias species complex. genus Leptasterias in the Puget Sound region (Wash- L, epichlora and L. hexactis were used because they ington, USA) has been controversial (Bush 1918, Fisher were the most abundant species in the Puget Sound 1930, Chia 1966a, Kwast et al. 1990). Chia (1966a), region. Kwast et al. (1990). and Stickle et al. (1992) identified 3 Materials and methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20Th Century
    u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service Co l\Ietland Trends In the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century November 2004 A National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century Ralph W. Tiner1, Irene J. Huber2, Todd Nuerminger2, and Aimée L. Mandeville3 1U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Program Northeast Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035 2Natural Resources Assessment Group Department of Plant and Soil Sciences University of Massachusetts Stockbridge Hall Amherst, MA 01003 3Department of Natural Resources Science Environmental Data Center University of Rhode Island 1 Greenhouse Road, Room 105 Kingston, RI 02881 November 2004 National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report between U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of Rhode Island, and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management This report should be cited as: Tiner, R.W., I.J. Huber, T. Nuerminger, and A.L. Mandeville. 2004. Coastal Wetland Trends in the Narragansett Bay Estuary During the 20th Century. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region, Hadley, MA. In cooperation with the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and the University of Rhode Island. National Wetlands Inventory Cooperative Interagency Report. 37 pp. plus appendices. Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Study Area 1 Methods 5 Data Compilation 5 Geospatial Database Construction and GIS Analysis 8 Results 9 Baywide 1996 Status 9 Coastal Wetlands and Waters 9 500-foot Buffer Zone 9 Baywide Trends 1951/2 to 1996 15 Coastal Wetland Trends 15 500-foot Buffer Zone Around Coastal Wetlands 15 Trends for Pilot Study Areas 25 Conclusions 35 Acknowledgments 36 References 37 Appendices A.
    [Show full text]