28.05.2014 Views

appendix b final 2008 biological surveys of los angeles and long ...

appendix b final 2008 biological surveys of los angeles and long ...

appendix b final 2008 biological surveys of los angeles and long ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Executive Summary<br />

Van Veen) <strong>and</strong> analysis <strong>of</strong> samples that differ between 0.06 m 2 <strong>and</strong> 0.1 m 2 in surface area.<br />

Results <strong>of</strong> this comparison found no statistical differences in abundance or number <strong>of</strong> species<br />

between gear types.<br />

For macroinvertebrates collected during trawl <strong>surveys</strong>, invertebrate catch varied among<br />

stations, <strong>and</strong> no distinct spatial patterns in species distribution or abundance was observed.<br />

Substantially more macroinvertebrates were collected at night than during the day <strong>and</strong> in winter<br />

<strong>and</strong> spring <strong>surveys</strong> compared to the summer survey. The most common species included<br />

black-spotted shrimp (Crangon nigromaculata), ridgeback prawn (Sicyonia ingentis), black-tailed<br />

bay shrimp (Crangon nigricauda), Xantus’ swimming crab (Portunus xantusii), <strong>and</strong> Heptacarpus<br />

shrimps.<br />

RIPRAP ASSOCIATED ORGANISMS<br />

A total <strong>of</strong> 334 species <strong>of</strong> invertebrates were identified from three tidal zones within the riprap<br />

community. Distinct tidal zonation was observed with increasing numbers <strong>of</strong> species with<br />

increasing depth. Mean total abundance was highest in the lower intertidal, lowest in the upper<br />

intertidal, <strong>and</strong> intermediate in the subtidal zone. Across all tidal zones, crustaceans were<br />

numerically dominant, followed by polychaetes, echinoderms, molluscs, <strong>and</strong> other phyla.<br />

Historical studies have noted relatively greater community development in outer harbor<br />

compared to inner harbor areas (MEC 1988, MEC 2002). However, the present study noted<br />

general similarities in these communities throughout the harbors. Exceptions were for diversity,<br />

which was somewhat greater at outer harbor breakwater stations compared to inner harbor<br />

locations, but these differences were mainly associated with the upper intertidal zone.<br />

Community summary measures did not show distinct trends among inner <strong>and</strong> outer harbor<br />

stations for the lower intertidal <strong>and</strong> subtidal zones, suggesting some improvement in<br />

environmental quality at inner harbor stations since the 2000 study.<br />

KELP AND MACROALGAE<br />

Within the Ports, the majority <strong>of</strong> kelp <strong>and</strong> macroalgae surface canopy is c<strong>los</strong>ely associated with<br />

the outer breakwaters <strong>and</strong> with riprap structures in the outer harbor <strong>and</strong> in locations facing the<br />

harbor entrances. While algal diversity in the Ports is considered relatively low, there is a<br />

general pattern <strong>of</strong> decreasing algal diversity from outer to inner harbor locations. In addition,<br />

seasonal patterns in the surface kelp canopy were evident during the present study, similar to<br />

those noted during the 2000 baseline study.<br />

The previous baseline study in 2000 was the first systematic effort to quantify kelp surface<br />

canopy coverage throughout the Ports. Total mapped canopy cover <strong>of</strong> Macrocystis in the spring<br />

was 24.8 acres, decreasing to 14.2 acres in fall (43% decrease). During the present baseline<br />

study, Macrocystis canopy totaled 77.8 acres in spring <strong>and</strong> decreased to 50.4 acres in the fall<br />

(35% decrease). Seasonal declines in kelp canopy cover for both studies are likely due to<br />

natural die-<strong>of</strong>fs between winter <strong>and</strong> fall. Overall, the Macrocystis canopy extended greater<br />

distances a<strong>long</strong> outer breakwaters <strong>and</strong> the kelp beds appeared broader <strong>and</strong> more contiguous<br />

during the present study compared to the 2000 survey.<br />

Dominant macroalgal communities in the present study were similar to those described in MEC<br />

(2002) <strong>and</strong> included Sargassum, Ulva, Colpomenia, Chondracnathus, <strong>and</strong> Halymenia. Outer<br />

harbor stations had from 4 to 11 dominant groups during the present study compared to 2 to 11<br />

groups during the 2000 survey. The present study reported substantially more species per<br />

station than the 2000 <strong>surveys</strong> (5 to 11 species in <strong>2008</strong>, one to six species in 2000). The<br />

reasons for these inner harbor differences between <strong>surveys</strong> are unknown, but could be related<br />

to improved habitat conditions in the Ports.<br />

ES–4<br />

<strong>2008</strong> Biological Surveys <strong>of</strong> Los Angeles <strong>and</strong> Long Beach Harbors<br />

April 2010

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!