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.

3.0 Adult <strong>and</strong> Juvenile Fishes<br />

samples (Figure 3.3-2). The significantly higher biomass during the summer was primarily due<br />

to large catches <strong>of</strong> northern anchovy <strong>and</strong> large-sized species such as bat rays.<br />

Similar to the patterns for abundance <strong>and</strong> biomass, the number <strong>of</strong> species collected was greater<br />

at night (19 species) than during the day (12 species; Table 3.3-1). In addition, the number <strong>of</strong><br />

species generally increased from fewer species collected in winter to the greatest number <strong>of</strong><br />

species collected in spring <strong>and</strong> summer. More species were collected at Station LA7 (15) for<br />

day <strong>and</strong> night sampling combined than at any other station (Table 3.3-2). The fewest number <strong>of</strong><br />

species (3) was collected at Stations LA1, LA4, <strong>and</strong> LB4. In general, more species were<br />

collected at the shallow-water stations than at the other stations.<br />

3.3.4 Historical Comparisons<br />

Although gear differences can account for differences in sampling results from study to study,<br />

overall patterns in common <strong>and</strong> abundant species collected in the harbors have remained<br />

similar. Fish studies in the 1970s primarily used gill nets, rather than lampara nets, to<br />

characterize pelagic fish communities. However, historic gill net catches were dominated by<br />

both pelagic <strong>and</strong> demersal species, including white croaker, northern anchovy, shiner surfperch,<br />

queenfish, white surfperch, <strong>and</strong> walleye surfperch (Horn <strong>and</strong> Allen 1981). Since the late 1980s,<br />

pelagic fish populations have been sampled occasionally using lampara nets, with periodic<br />

<strong>surveys</strong> in Los Angeles (MEC 1988, 1999) <strong>and</strong> Long Beach (MBC 1990; SAIC <strong>and</strong> MEC 1996)<br />

Harbors <strong>and</strong> Queensway Bay (MBC 1990).<br />

Northern anchovy, Pacific sardine, white croaker, queenfish, <strong>and</strong> California grunion were most<br />

abundant in lampara samples during 1986-1987 (MEC 1988). Similarly, northern anchovy,<br />

Pacific sardine, white croaker, queenfish, <strong>and</strong> topsmelt or Pacific butterfish were most abundant<br />

in lampara samples during the 1990s (MBC 1990; SAIC <strong>and</strong> MEC 1996). The same fish<br />

species were most abundant in lampara samples during the previous baseline study in 2000<br />

(MEC 2002), with lower abundances <strong>of</strong> Pacific sardine compared to the 1980s <strong>and</strong> 1990s.<br />

In contrast to seasonal trends observed in previous studies (MEC 1988; SAIC <strong>and</strong> MEC 1996),<br />

specifically for abundance <strong>and</strong> number <strong>of</strong> species, no clear seasonal patterns in the pelagic fish<br />

community were evident during the current study. This is likely due to highly variable catches <strong>of</strong><br />

the most dominant pelagic fishes during each survey <strong>and</strong> may also have been influenced by<br />

sampling conducted over three quarters compared to four.<br />

Temporal patterns in biomass were observed. Similar to abundance <strong>and</strong> number <strong>of</strong> species,<br />

biomass values varied but were higher during the summer (July) survey. While some previous<br />

studies indicated shallow-water stations had generally lower abundances, but higher biomass<br />

<strong>and</strong> number <strong>of</strong> species compared to deepwater stations (MEC 2002), the current study found<br />

that shallow-water stations such as LA7 in the outer harbor had some <strong>of</strong> the highest<br />

abundances <strong>of</strong> any station sampled in <strong>2008</strong>. As was the case in previous studies in which day<br />

<strong>and</strong> night samples were collected (MEC 1996; SAIC <strong>and</strong> MEC 1996; MEC 2002), more species<br />

in greater numbers were collected at night in the current study. Day/night differences in catch<br />

are likely due to a combination <strong>of</strong> fish behavior (decreased ability to detect <strong>and</strong> avoid sampling<br />

gear at night), increased dispersal <strong>of</strong> schooling species, <strong>and</strong> increased foraging activity at night<br />

(Horn <strong>and</strong> Allen 1981).<br />

Inner <strong>and</strong> outer harbor differences in species composition <strong>of</strong> pelagic fish were documented<br />

during an earlier study <strong>of</strong> Los Angeles Harbor by MEC (1988). The MEC (2002) study also<br />

found outer harbor assemblages generally had relatively higher abundances that were<br />

distributed among more species (higher diversity) than those in the middle <strong>and</strong> inner harbor<br />

areas. In contrast, the current study did not find similar habitat associations or distributions <strong>of</strong><br />

pelagic species. Most pelagic fish species in this study had more “harbor-wide” distributions<br />

<strong>2008</strong> Biological Surveys <strong>of</strong> Los Angeles <strong>and</strong> Long Beach Harbors 3–7<br />

April 2010

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!