DOCSLIB.ORG

Omnibus Essential Fish Habitat (Efh) Amendment 2 Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Omnibus Essential Fish Habitat (Efh) Amendment 2 Draft Environmental Impact Statement New England Fishery Management Council 50 WATER STREET | NEWBURYPORT, MASSACHUSETTS 01950 | PHONE 978 465 0492 | FAX 978 465 3116 E.F. “Terry” Stockwell III, Chairman | Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director OMNIBUS ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH) AMENDMENT 2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Appendix D: The Swept Area Seabed Impact (SASI) approach: a tool for analyzing the effects of fishing on Essential Fish Habitat Appendix D: The Swept Area Seabed Impact Approach This document was prepared by the following members of the NEFMC Habitat Plan Development team, with feedback from the NEFMC Habitat Oversight Committee, NEFMC Habitat Advisory Panel, and interested members of the public. Michelle Bachman, NEFMC staff Peter Auster, University of Connecticut Chad Demarest, NOAA/Northeast Fisheries Science Center Steve Eayrs, Gulf of Maine Research Institute Kathyrn Ford, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries Jon Grabowski, Gulf of Maine Research Institute Brad Harris, University of Massachusetts School of Marine Science and Technology Tom Hoff, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council Mark Lazzari, Maine Department of Marine Resources Vincent Malkoski, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries Dave Packer, NOAA/ Northeast Fisheries Science Center David Stevenson, NOAA/Northeast Regional Office Page Valentine, U.S. Geological Survey January 2011 Page 2 of 257 Appendix D: The Swept Area Seabed Impact Approach Table of Contents 1.0 OVERVIEW OF THE SWEPT AREA SEABED IMPACT MODEL ........... 13 2.0 DEFINING HABITAT ....................................................................................... 18 2.1 Geological habitat component ................................................................................... 20 2.1.1 Sediments, surface and subsurface .................................................................... 20 2.1.2 Biogenic depressions and burrows .................................................................... 20 2.1.3 Bedforms ................................................................................................................ 21 2.1.4 Gravel and gravel pavements ............................................................................. 21 2.1.5 Cobble and boulder piles ..................................................................................... 22 2.1.6 Shell deposits ......................................................................................................... 22 2.2 Biological habitat component ..................................................................................... 22 2.2.1 Amphipods – tube-dwelling ............................................................................... 23 2.2.2 Anemones – actinarian and cerianthid .............................................................. 24 2.2.3 Ascidians ................................................................................................................ 26 2.2.4 Brachiopods ........................................................................................................... 27 2.2.5 Bryozoans ............................................................................................................... 28 2.2.6 Sea pens .................................................................................................................. 30 2.2.7 Hydroids ................................................................................................................ 31 2.2.8 Macroalgae ............................................................................................................. 34 2.2.9 Mollusks, epifaunal bivalve ................................................................................ 37 2.2.10 Polychaetes – tube-dwelling................................................................................ 38 2.2.11 Sponges .................................................................................................................. 40 3.0 FISHING GEARS EVALUTED ........................................................................ 43 3.1 Demersal otter trawls .................................................................................................. 52 3.1.1 Generic otter trawls (including groundfish and scallop trawls) .................... 53 3.1.2 Shrimp trawls ........................................................................................................ 54 3.1.3 Squid trawls ........................................................................................................... 55 3.1.4 Raised footrope trawls ......................................................................................... 55 3.2 New Bedford-style scallop dredges .......................................................................... 55 3.3 Hydraulic clam dredges .............................................................................................. 56 3.4 Demersal longlines ...................................................................................................... 56 3.5 Sink gill nets .................................................................................................................. 57 3.6 Traps .............................................................................................................................. 58 4.0 GEAR IMPACTS LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................... 60 4.1 Methods: database and coding .................................................................................. 60 4.2 Tabular summary of literature ................................................................................... 65 5.0 ESTIMATING SUSCEPTIBILITY AND RECOVERY FOR BIOLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL FEATURES ............................................................................. 91 5.1 Methods: S-R matrices ................................................................................................. 91 5.2 Results: S-R matrices.................................................................................................... 95 5.2.1 Demersal otter trawls ........................................................................................... 95 5.2.2 New Bedford-style scallop dredge ................................................................... 102 January 2011 Page 3 of 257 Appendix D: The Swept Area Seabed Impact Approach 5.2.3 Hydraulic clam dredges ..................................................................................... 107 5.2.4 Fixed gears ........................................................................................................... 110 5.2.4.1 Demersal longline and sink gillnet .......................................................... 110 5.2.4.2 Lobster and deep-sea red crab traps ....................................................... 112 5.2.4.3 Fixed gear susceptibility summary .......................................................... 115 5.2.5 Recovery– all gear types .................................................................................... 117 5.2.6 Summary of vulnerability assessment results ................................................ 125 5.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................... 133 5.3.1 Literature review ................................................................................................ 134 5.3.2 Susceptibility ....................................................................................................... 135 5.3.3 Recovery ............................................................................................................... 136 5.3.4 Potential sources of bias in the Vulnerability Assessment ........................... 136 6.0 ESTIMATING CONTACT-ADJUSTED AREA SWEPT ........................... 138 6.1 Area swept model specification ............................................................................... 138 6.1.1 Demersal otter trawl ........................................................................................... 139 6.1.2 New Bedford-style scallop dredge ................................................................... 141 6.1.3 Hydraulic clam dredge ...................................................................................... 141 6.1.4 Demersal longline and sink gillnet ................................................................... 142 6.1.5 Lobster and deep-sea red crab traps ................................................................ 143 6.2 Data and parameterization ....................................................................................... 144 6.2.1 Demersal otter trawl ........................................................................................... 144 6.2.2 New Bedford-style scallop dredge ................................................................... 149 6.2.3 Hydraulic clam dredge ...................................................................................... 150 6.2.4 Demersal longline ............................................................................................... 151 6.2.5 Sink gillnet ........................................................................................................... 151 6.2.6 Traps ..................................................................................................................... 151 7.0 DEFINING HABITATS SPATIALLY ........................................................... 152 7.1 Substrate data and unstructured grid ....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download PDF Version
    MarLIN Marine Information Network Information on the species and habitats around the coasts and sea of the British Isles Fireworks anemone (Pachycerianthus multiplicatus) MarLIN – Marine Life Information Network Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Review Catherine Wilding & Emily Wilson 2008-04-24 A report from: The Marine Life Information Network, Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Please note. This MarESA report is a dated version of the online review. Please refer to the website for the most up-to-date version [https://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/detail/1272]. All terms and the MarESA methodology are outlined on the website (https://www.marlin.ac.uk) This review can be cited as: Wilding, C. & Wilson, E. 2008. Pachycerianthus multiplicatus Fireworks anemone. In Tyler-Walters H. and Hiscock K. (eds) Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on- line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.17031/marlinsp.1272.2 The information (TEXT ONLY) provided by the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Note that images and other media featured on this page are each governed by their own terms and conditions and they may or may not be available for reuse. Permissions beyond the scope of this license are available here. Based on a work at www.marlin.ac.uk (page left blank) Date: 2008-04-24 Fireworks anemone (Pachycerianthus multiplicatus) - Marine Life Information Network See online review for distribution map Individual with out-stretched tentacles.
    [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]
  • High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project
    High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project AEA Technology, Environment Contract: W/35/00632/00/00 For: The Department of Trade and Industry New & Renewable Energy Programme Report issued 30 August 2002 (Version with minor corrections 16 September 2002) Keith Hiscock, Harvey Tyler-Walters and Hugh Jones Reference: Hiscock, K., Tyler-Walters, H. & Jones, H. 2002. High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project. Report from the Marine Biological Association to The Department of Trade and Industry New & Renewable Energy Programme. (AEA Technology, Environment Contract: W/35/00632/00/00.) Correspondence: Dr. K. Hiscock, The Laboratory, Citadel Hill, Plymouth, PL1 2PB. [email protected] High level environmental screening study for offshore wind farm developments – marine habitats and species ii High level environmental screening study for offshore wind farm developments – marine habitats and species Title: High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project. Contract Report: W/35/00632/00/00. Client: Department of Trade and Industry (New & Renewable Energy Programme) Contract management: AEA Technology, Environment. Date of contract issue: 22/07/2002 Level of report issue: Final Confidentiality: Distribution at discretion of DTI before Consultation report published then no restriction. Distribution: Two copies and electronic file to DTI (Mr S. Payne, Offshore Renewables Planning). One copy to MBA library. Prepared by: Dr. K. Hiscock, Dr. H. Tyler-Walters & Hugh Jones Authorization: Project Director: Dr. Keith Hiscock Date: Signature: MBA Director: Prof. S. Hawkins Date: Signature: This report can be referred to as follows: Hiscock, K., Tyler-Walters, H.
    [Show full text]
  • Microplastics in Beaches of the Baja California Peninsula
    UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE BAJA CALIFORNIA Chemical Sciences and Engineering Department MICROPLASTICS IN BEACHES OF THE BAJA CALIFORNIA PENINSULA TERESITA DE JESUS PIÑON COLIN FERNANDO WAKIDA KUSUNOKI Sixth International Marine Debris Conference SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES 7 DE MARZO DEL 2018 OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS CONCLUSIONS OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence and distribution of microplastics in sandy beaches located in the Baja California peninsula. STUDY AREA 1200 km long and around 3000 km of seashore METHODOLOGY SAMPLED BEACHES IN THE BAJA CALIFORNIA PENINSULA • . • 21 sampling sites. • 12 sites located in the Pacific ocean coast. • 9 sites located the Gulf of California coast. • 9 sites classified as urban beaches (U). • 12 sites classified as rural beaches (R). SAMPLING EXTRACTION METHOD BY DENSITY. RESULTS Bahía de los Angeles. MICROPLASTICS ABUNDANCE (R) rural. (U) urban. COMPARISON WITH OTHER PUBLISHED STUDIES Area CONCENTRATIÓN UNIT REFERENCE West coast USA 39-140 (85) Partícles kg-1 Whitmire et al. (2017) (National Parks) United Kigdom 86 Partícles kg-1 Thompson et al. (2004) Mediterranean Sea 76 – 1512 (291) Partícles kg-1 Lots et al. (2017) North Sea 88-164 (190) Particles Kg-1 Lots et al. (2017) Baja California Ocean Pacific 37-312 (179) Particles kg-1 This study Gulf of 16-230 (76) Particles kg-1 This study California MORPHOLOGY OF MICROPLASTICS FOUND 2% 3% 4% 91% Fibres Granules spheres films Fiber color percentages blue Purple black Red green 7% 2% 25% 7% 59% Examples of shapes and colors of the microplastics found PINK FILM CABO SAN LUCAS BEACH POSIBLE POLYAMIDE NYLON TYPE Polyamide nylon type reference (Browne et al., 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
    Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptions of New Serpulid Polychaetes from the Kimberleys Of
    © The Author, 2009. Journal compilation © Australian Museum, Sydney, 2009 Records of the Australian Museum (2009) Vol. 61: 93–199. ISSN 0067-1975 doi:10.3853/j.0067-1975.61.2009.1489 Descriptions of New Serpulid Polychaetes from the Kimberleys of Australia and Discussion of Australian and Indo-West Pacific Species of Spirobranchus and Superficially Similar Taxa T. Gottfried Pillai Zoology Department, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom absTracT. In 1988 Pat Hutchings of the Australian Museum, Sydney, undertook an extensive polychaete collection trip off the Kimberley coast of Western Australia, where such a survey had not been conducted since Augener’s (1914) description of some polychaetes from the region. Serpulids were well represented in the collection, and their present study revealed the existence of two new genera, and new species belonging to the genera Protula, Vermiliopsis, Hydroides, Serpula and Spirobranchus. The synonymy of the difficult genera Spirobranchus, Pomatoceros and Pomatoleios is also dealt with. Certain difficult taxa currently referred to as “species complexes” or “species groups” are discussed. For this purpose it was considered necessary to undertake a comparison of apparently similar species, especially of Spirobranchus, from other locations in Australia and the Indo-West Pacific region. It revealed the existence of many more new species, which are also described and discussed below. Pillai, T. Gottfried, 2009. Descriptions of new serpulid polychaetes from the Kimberleys of Australia and discussion of Australian and Indo-West Pacific species ofSpirobranchus and superficially similar taxa.Records of the Australian Museum 61(2): 93–199. Table of contents Introduction ................................................................................................................... 95 Material and methods ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Basalts and Glacier Floods—Roadside Geology
    u 0 by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher - Commissioner of Public Lands Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor FLOOD BASALTS AND GLACIER FLOODS: Roadside Geology of Parts of Walla Walla, Franklin, and Columbia Counties, Washington by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor Division of Geology and Earth Resources WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Jennifer M. Belcher-Commissio11er of Public Lands Kaleeo Cottingham-Supervisor DMSION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Raymond Lasmanis-State Geologist J. Eric Schuster-Assistant State Geologist William S. Lingley, Jr.-Assistant State Geologist This report is available from: Publications Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources P.O. Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Price $ 3.24 Tax (WA residents only) ~ Total $ 3.50 Mail orders must be prepaid: please add $1.00 to each order for postage and handling. Make checks payable to the Department of Natural Resources. Front Cover: Palouse Falls (56 m high) in the canyon of the Palouse River. Printed oo recycled paper Printed io the United States of America Contents 1 General geology of southeastern Washington 1 Magnetic polarity 2 Geologic time 2 Columbia River Basalt Group 2 Tectonic features 5 Quaternary sedimentation 6 Road log 7 Further reading 7 Acknowledgments 8 Part 1 - Walla Walla to Palouse Falls (69.0 miles) 21 Part 2 - Palouse Falls to Lower Monumental Dam (27.0 miles) 26 Part 3 - Lower Monumental Dam to Ice Harbor Dam (38.7 miles) 33 Part 4 - Ice Harbor Dam to Wallula Gap (26.7 mi les) 38 Part 5 - Wallula Gap to Walla Walla (42.0 miles) 44 References cited ILLUSTRATIONS I Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (2012)
    FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard Marine and Coastal Spatial Data Subcommittee Federal Geographic Data Committee June, 2012 Federal Geographic Data Committee FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard, June 2012 ______________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS PAGE 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Need ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Application ............................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Relationship to Previous FGDC Standards .............................................................. 4 1.6 Development Procedures ......................................................................................... 5 1.7 Guiding Principles ................................................................................................... 7 1.7.1 Build a Scientifically Sound Ecological Classification .................................... 7 1.7.2 Meet the Needs of a Wide Range of Users ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships of Serpulidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) Based on 18S Rdna Sequence Data, and Implications for Opercular Evolution Janina Lehrkea,Ã, Harry A
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Organisms, Diversity & Evolution 7 (2007) 195–206 www.elsevier.de/ode Phylogenetic relationships of Serpulidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) based on 18S rDNA sequence data, and implications for opercular evolution Janina Lehrkea,Ã, Harry A. ten Hoveb, Tara A. Macdonaldc, Thomas Bartolomaeusa, Christoph Bleidorna,1 aInstitute for Zoology, Animal Systematics and Evolution, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Koenigin-Luise-Street 1-3, 14195 Berlin, Germany bZoological Museum, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 94766, 1090 GT Amsterdam, The Netherlands cBamfield Marine Sciences Centre, Bamfield, British Columbia, Canada, V0R 1B0 Received 19 December 2005; accepted 2 June 2006 Abstract Phylogenetic relationships of (19) serpulid taxa (including Spirorbinae) were reconstructed based on 18S rRNA gene sequence data. Maximum likelihood, Bayesian inference, and maximum parsimony methods were used in phylogenetic reconstruction. Regardless of the method used, monophyly of Serpulidae is confirmed and four monophyletic, well- supported major clades are recovered: the Spirorbinae and three groups hitherto referred to as the Protula-, Serpula-, and Pomatoceros-group. Contrary to the taxonomic literature and the hypothesis of opercular evolution, the Protula- clade contains non-operculate (Protula, Salmacina) and operculate taxa both with pinnulate and non-pinnulate peduncle (Filograna vs. Vermiliopsis), and most likely is the sister group to Spirorbinae. Operculate Serpulinae and poorly or non-operculate Filograninae are paraphyletic. It is likely that lack of opercula in some serpulid genera is not a plesiomorphic character state, but reflects a special adaptation. r 2007 Gesellschaft fu¨r Biologische Systematik. Published by Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved. Keywords: Serpulidae; Phylogeny; Operculum; 18S rRNA gene; Annelida; Polychaeta Introduction distinctive calcareous tubes and bilobed tentacular crowns, each with numerous radioles that bear shorter Serpulids are common members of marine hard- secondary branches (pinnules) on the inner side.
    [Show full text]
  • Rockfish Populations Around Galiano Island Freedom to Swim: Research Component for Rockfish Recovery Project
    GALIANO CONSERVANCY ASSOCIATION Rockfish populations around Galiano Island Freedom to Swim: Research Component for Rockfish Recovery Project 2013 Rockfish populations around Galiano Island Page 2 of 18 Executive Summary Rockfish (Sebastes), of the Scorpionfish family, are unique to the Pacific Northwest. As of 2012 there are 8 species listed as threatened or of special concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). Canary, Quillback and Yellowmouth rockfish are listed as ‘threatened’; Rougheye Type I, Rougheye Type II, Darkblotched, Longspine Thornyhead, and Yelloweye (outside waters and inside waters populations) rockfish are listed as ‘special concern’. Both species of Rougheye and both populations of Yelloweye rockfish are also listed under the Species At Risk Act as ‘special concern’. These predatory fish can live at great depths, and tend to live very long lives of 80 or more years (Lamb and Edgell, 2010). These factors, when combined with their primarily territorial lifestyles, have made them particularly susceptible to overharvest. There is a strong need to protect these species with enforced no‐take marine protected areas, and we can only hope that recent conservation efforts will be enough to recover some of the most depleted populations (Lamb and Edgell, 2010; McConnell and Dinnel, 2002). In the late 1980s the commercial rockfish fishery boomed, which led to a series of management responses in the 1990s to attempt to recover the rapidly depleting stocks in BC (Yamanaka and Logan, 2010). This also occurred in the US as a direct result of pressure on the salmon stocks ‐ fishermen were urged to divert their attentions to bottom fish (McConnell and Dinnel, 2002).
    [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]
  • Preliminary Mass-Balance Food Web Model of the Eastern Chukchi Sea
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-AFSC-262 Preliminary Mass-balance Food Web Model of the Eastern Chukchi Sea by G. A. Whitehouse U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Alaska Fisheries Science Center December 2013 NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS The National Marine Fisheries Service's Alaska Fisheries Science Center uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible. Documents within this series reflect sound professional work and may be referenced in the formal scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Alaska Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS-F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest Fisheries Center. The NMFS-NWFSC series is currently used by the Northwest Fisheries Science Center. This document should be cited as follows: Whitehouse, G. A. 2013. A preliminary mass-balance food web model of the eastern Chukchi Sea. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-AFSC-262, 162 p. Reference in this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-AFSC-262 Preliminary Mass-balance Food Web Model of the Eastern Chukchi Sea by G. A. Whitehouse1,2 1Alaska Fisheries Science Center 7600 Sand Point Way N.E. Seattle WA 98115 2Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean University of Washington Box 354925 Seattle WA 98195 www.afsc.noaa.gov U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Penny. S. Pritzker, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn D.
    [Show full text]