The Ecology of Tijuana Estuary, California: An Estuarine Profile

More documents

Recommendations

Info

GABLES Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 23 24 2 5 26 2 7 28 29 3 0 Weather stations within the Tijuana River watershed .............................. Water temperature and conductivity in Tijuana Estuary .......................... Areas of habitat types at Tijuana Estuary ....................................................... Species occurrences in the transition from wetland to upland ........... ilistory of changes In light-footed clapper rail densities ......................... Shorebirds that also used river and temporary pool habitats ................ Invertebrates recorded in recent censuses ................................................... Benthic invertebrates at Mugu Lagoon and Tijuana Estuary ................ Fishes and rays recorded at Tijuana Estuary ........................................... Shorebirds sampled by Boland (1981)...................................................... Principal foraging habitats of shorebirds ................................................. Seasonal occurrences of shorebirds .............................................................. Seasonal shorebird densities by habitat and sarnplir~g date ................. Historic dune vegetation at Silver Strand State Beach ............................. California least tern nesting data .................................................................. Water quality during nontidal and tidal conditions ...................................... Conceptual model of channel algal dynamics ......................................... Ep~benthic algal mat productivity compared to vascular plants ....... Salt marsh vascular plant productivity in 1976 and 1977 ...................... Standing crop of vascular plants ................................................................... August biomass in cordgrass marsh ................................................. Cordgrass and pickleweed with and without compet~tors ...................... Decomposition rates of selected plant material ....................................... Distribution of quadrat elevations .................................................... Changes In rnarsh elevations with flood~ng ............................................. Changes in p~ckleweed canopy cover In recent years ......................... Salt rnarsh species in 1974 and 1984 ................................ Effects of irrigating cordgrass .................................................... Monthly streamflows for the Tijuana River in 1983 .......................... Predicted effects of lowered estuarine salinity ............................. Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The California Sea Grant College Program, through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and with support from the California State Resource Agency, has provided the backbone funding for a variety of research projects at Tijuana Estuary from 1976 to the present. Sea Grant-sponsored research has in turn led to additional projects that have had specific application to a variety of management agencies. The Sanctuary Programs Division of NOAA's Office of Coastal Resources Management has helped to develop monitoring programs and support graduate research on several sanctuary management issues. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Navy both funded work on habitat characteristics for the endangered light-footed clapper rail. The California Water Resources Control Board, through funding from the Environmental Protection Agency's Water Quality Program, supported studies of the estuary's hydrological qualities and potential impacts of wastewater discharge. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service supported a community profile on regional salt marshes that provided background information for the current project. Paul Jorgensen, Estuar~ne Sanctuary Manager, and Gary Kramer, Refuge Manager. have facilitated the preparat~on of this profile and called our attention to many of the management problems at the estuary But to students and colleagues, who have done so much of the field work and prov~ded so many of the Ideas that contr~bute to our understanding of Tljuana Estuary, we owe the greatest debt in order of thes~s compiet~on date, we acknowledge the s~gn~flcant contr~but~ons of Ted Wlnf~eld, Phrl Wlll~ams, John Boland, Jordan Covrn, Pam Beare, Reg~na Rudn~ck~, and Peggy Fong The current thesis research of Abby White, John Beezley, L~sa Wood, Br~an F~nk, Ted Griswold, and M~ke Marsh has helped us understand the recent changes In estuar~ne structure and function, along w~th data gathered by Dennis Turner, Karoly Felfoldy. Pat Dunn, and members of the Estuar~ne Ecology class of 1984 We thank Dra Silvia lbarra and students from CICESE in Ensenada, Baja Callforn~a, for showlng us less d~sturbed wetlands In Baja California and providing comparat~ve data on Mex~can salt marshes. Two postdoctoral research associates, B~ll Magdych and Mary Kentula, and several colleagues at San Diego State University (SDSU), Philip Williams, George Cox, Charles Cooper, Jack Conway, Deborah Dexter, Stuart Hurlbert, Phil Kern. Phil Pryde, and Doug Stowe, all contributed the~r spectal expertise to the information reported here Our revrewers were an enormous resource We thank Wayne Ferren. Paul Jorgensen. Mary Kenlula. Gary Kramer. Sharon Lockhart, Chrls Onuf, Ed Pendleton, and M~llicent Quammen for helplng to Improve the content of the profile Special thanks to Pam Beare for asststance with graph~cs, to Pr~scilla Morton for helplng to produce the rnanuscr~pt, to Bonn~e Boynton for ed~ting, and to Rosemary Amtde~, Marlene Ebert, and Sue Lauritzen for helping prepare the camera-ready copy Thls profile is a team effort that drew both praise and crit~c~srn from the family onlookers, Em~ly, Sarah. and Paul Zedler The drawings by Donovan Mclntire lend unlque quallty to thls publ~cat~on, we acknowledge with deep gratitude hls technical and artistlc contrrbutions to the project Thts work IS a result of research sponsored in part by NOAA, Nat~onal Sea Grant College Program, Department of Commerce, under grant number NA80AA-500120. project numbers R/CZ-73 and R/NP-1-138, through the Cal~forn~a Sea Grant College Program, and in part by the Californ~a State Resources Agency
Page 1 and 2: June 1986 I THE ECOLOGY OF TIJUANA
Page 3 and 4: The findings in this report are not
Page 5 and 6: CONVERSION TABLE Metric to U.S. Cus
Page 7 and 8: Page 4.5 Energy Flow ..............
Page 9: Number Page The channel fish cornrn
Page 13 and 14: Figure 1. Lacatlcrn of 71juana Estu
Page 15 and 16: Figure 3. Map6 of Tijuana Estuary s
Page 17 and 18: FI(I(uPc$ 4. Wei&rahOt@ patt@rns of
Page 19 and 20: also limitrng Hot, dry desert winds
Page 21 and 22: 2.3 LAND USE HlSPQWV Through exami!
Page 23 and 24: The nearby bridge remained, and ext
Page 25 and 26: flushing until mid-December 1984. E
Page 27 and 28: with seawater. Even in years with s
Page 29 and 30: flats ~n winter but not in midsumme
Page 31 and 32: Each "island" of higher topography
Page 33 and 34: The vegetation and soils of the upp
Page 35 and 36: populations (Massey 1979) The brrds
Page 37 and 38: c~n~entrations of insects, especial
Page 39 and 40: Frgufe 29. The Ifght-footed clapper
Page 41 and 42: Figure 30. During winter (above) th
Page 43 and 44: anlmal footprints, In the hardpan f
Page 45 and 46: Tijuana Estuary salt marsh Such exp
Page 47 and 48: Frgura 36 The etraracrel an& tidal
Page 49 and 50: ^_ _I __"___I _-a_. -- fable 7. Inv
Page 51 and 52: Pre- 1980 (excluding Hosrner Rehse
Page 53 and 54: Table 8. Average density (number/m2
Page 55 and 56: changes in envlronment has not been
Page 57 and 58: was dominated by goby species, Cali
Page 59 and 60: compared the ,chthyoplankton commun
Page 61 and 62:
Figure 43, Birds of the intertidal
Page 63 and 64:
-" and that the community was compo
Page 65 and 66:
Willet (1 73) i - Water Depth (cm)
Page 67 and 68:
Table 14. Early information on dune
Page 69 and 70:
Figure 48. Birds that nest on the s
Page 71 and 72:
CHAPTER 4 ECOSYSTEM FldNCTlONlNG St
Page 73 and 74:
were no? irght-saturated untri expo
Page 75 and 76:
Table 17. Conceptual model of chann
Page 77 and 78:
Table 19. Net aboveground productiv
Page 79 and 80:
_I___ I__-~--- 4.4.1 Nitragen Fluxe
Page 81 and 82:
i i t 1 1 I Table 22. Standing crop
Page 83 and 84:
calculated from chlorophyll a measu
Page 85 and 86:
Dissolved Organic Biomass Carbon De
Page 87 and 88:
CHAPTER 5 THE ROLE OF DISTURBANCES
Page 89 and 90:
Table 25. Changes in elevation in t
Page 91 and 92:
Table 26. Change in pickleweed cano
Page 93 and 94:
Table 27. Occurrence (in circular 0
Page 95 and 96:
perennials can survive long periods
Page 97 and 98:
An experiment was designed to deter
Page 99 and 100:
CHAPTER 6 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Page 101 and 102:
Closely associated with the researc
Page 103 and 104:
c. Dredging at Tijuana Estuary will
Page 105 and 106:
Table 30. Predicted impacts of redu
Page 107 and 108:
footed clapper rails; the picklewee
Page 109 and 110:
overwashas, and slabiiizatran rs rl
Page 112 and 113:
REFERENCES Allen, L.G. 1980. Struct
Page 114 and 115:
Minsky, D. 1984. California least t
Page 116:
30272 -101 REPORT WUMENTATION 1. RE
show all

The Ecology of Tijuana Estuary, California: An Estuarine Profile

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

Delete template?

Save as template?