Progress report summarizing the reef fish sampling, PCB - Earthjustice

Recommendations

Info

eefs from fall of 1004 to summer of 2008. The point census methodology utilizes a fixed time and area approach that allows both total counts of the species present along with sizes estimates, using dual laser pointers set a fixed distance apart on the camera. From the video analysis it was possible to get both species abundance, size estimate for each species and biomass data. These data are taken from Table #4, on pages 25-26 in Patterson (2009). Table 5 and Table 6 (Appendix 1) list the 98 species of fish documented by the University of West Florida’s team for the four year period of the FWC funded EELLAARS refugia reef module evaluation project (Patterson 2009). Table 5 (Appendix 1) presents the fish species observed by Patterson sorted by percent number (the taxa-specific percentage of total individuals observed among all sampling events). Numerical ranking of individual species is only capable through the first 61 species listed since the biomass for the remainder of the last 37 species all had percent biomass values of
not considered target species for anglers, with the exception of lane snapper which was ranked 17th in biomass percent. Lane snapper are targeted by anglers and this species was a PCB sampling possibility. However no lane snapper were collected and none were observed during our sample rounds 1-8 on the Oriskany Reef. In addition to these two fish survey data sets, the Reef Environmental Education Foundation’s (REEF) fish census database was queried for the Oriskany Reef, REEF Geographic code 21010060 (REEF 2011). There were no expert rated observer fish census reports to REEF for the Oriskany Reef from the time of its May 17, 2006 creation through March 16, 2011. Reports submitted to REEF from the Oriskany Reef were by individuals rated as novice fish identification observers and their results were not used in this paper. Perhaps in the future, through outreach and education with the local dive shops, recreational diver awareness and fish identification could be improved for submittal of volunteer fish census reports to REEF for the Oriskany Reef. II (A) (3) (a) Comparison of the FWC and UWF Fish Census Data Sets Although the two data sets, the FWC scuba Roving Diver census data and the UWF Point Census by ROV data are not directly comparable due to different visual sampling methods, each data set can be sorted for selected parameters and a basic numerical rank can be assigned for each species based on that species’ contribution to the entire species lists. Table 7 lists the numerical rank for all nine species sampled for PCBs for each of the 4 parameters of the two sets of fish survey data For instance, gag grouper has a rank of #4 for Percent Biomass from the UWF data (due to a few large sized individuals), however it only has a rank #15 on the FWC %sighting frequency list, due to it being observed on fewer surveys on the Oriskany Reef. From a review of Table 7 below, it is clear that the first two species, red snapper and vermilion snapper, are the most common and abundant of these target species sampled for PCBs in the region. Both species are listed in the top five rankings across all four lists as indicated in Table 7 below. Another consistent observation between the two surveys is that the whitebone porgy is not a very common or abundant species observed in the region. Whitebone porgy was not observed on the Oriskany surveys and only observed at less than 0.01% of the surveys on the UWF modules. There are no obvious trends for the other six species of fish that have been sampled for PCBs during this project regarding abundance or density parameters. 49 | P age
Page 1 and 2: Progress report summarizing the ree
Page 3 and 4: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In compliance wit
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page No. 1.
Page 7 and 8: I (A) (1) EPA Oriskany Reef PCB Tie
Page 9 and 10: validate the Navy developed PCB fat
Page 11 and 12: that “the numbering standard for
Page 13 and 14: ship material leachate experiments
Page 15 and 16: solid PCB containing materials woul
Page 17 and 18: EPA review included: 1) a human hea
Page 19 and 20: I(C)(6) PCB Containing Materials On
Page 21 and 22: I(C) (8) Oriskany Reef Created In a
Page 23 and 24: fishes for the Monitoring Work Plan
Page 25 and 26: I (D) (2) Fishing Vessel Sampling P
Page 27 and 28: long from the top to the mouth of t
Page 29 and 30: During sample round #2 all four che
Page 31 and 32: The rod and reel manpower sampling
Page 33 and 34: was intentionally scheduled after t
Page 35 and 36: weren’t running after each fish w
Page 37 and 38: actually shipped to GERG on Februar
Page 39 and 40: samples during Sampling Rounds 1-8
Page 41 and 42: harvesting at least 15 legal size r
Page 43 and 44: attraction as expressed by an incre
Page 45 and 46: Of these 10 reef assessment dives,
Page 47: assessments which were limited to t
Page 51 and 52: have had any PAH levels approaching
Page 53 and 54: Oriskany, and one recapture at a
Page 55 and 56: ed snapper season commencement. The
Page 57 and 58: Table 8a. List of reef fish species
Page 59 and 60: Oriskany Reef during Sampling Round
Page 61 and 62: Species Composition of Oriskany Sam
Page 63 and 64: The GERG lab reported their receipt
Page 65 and 66: pectoral fins of the blackfin snapp
Page 67 and 68: Trophic level or position Trophic p
Page 69 and 70: that means after five years only 3%
Page 71 and 72: II (D) (1) (c) Red Snapper Discussi
Page 73 and 74: 1,000,000 ΣPCB (pg/g) a. Sample Da
Page 75 and 76: The PCB levels measured from red sn
Page 77 and 78: fins relatively short, not reaching
Page 79 and 80: Results of PCB analysis by sample d
Page 81 and 82: ody, these spots giving a yellow-st
Page 83 and 84: II (D) (3) (c) Red Porgy Discussion
Page 85 and 86: cheeks that are speckled with brigh
Page 87 and 88: II (D) (4) (c) Whitebone Porgy Disc
Page 89 and 90: (common) name. The first spine is l
Page 91 and 92: II (D) (5) (c) Gray Triggerfish Dis
Page 93 and 94: The Scamp inhabits continental shel
Page 95 and 96: Results of PCB analysis by sample d
Page 97 and 98: species was not among the first 30
Page 99 and 100:
elieved to be unlikely since most o
Page 101 and 102:
trip less than 15% of the time due
Page 103 and 104:
II F (6) (b) Current Florida Marine
Page 105 and 106:
assessment, technological feasibili
Page 107 and 108:
III Oriskany Reef Monitoring Projec
Page 109 and 110:
Fishbase.org (Internet site). 2011.
Page 111 and 112:
Ingram, G.W., Jr. and W.F. Patterso
Page 113 and 114:
Patterson, W. F., J. H. Cowan Jr, e
Page 115 and 116:
Thompson, M.J., W.W. Schroeder, and
Page 117 and 118:
Table 2. FWC Fish Census data taken
Page 119 and 120:
Table 4. Fish census data taken by
Page 121 and 122:
frogfish Antennarius sp.
Page 123 and 124:
eef butterflyfish Chaetodon sedenta
Page 125 and 126:
Vermilion snapper Rhomboplites auro
Page 127 and 128:
OR-RS-042 Red Snapper 4/12/2007 HnL
Page 129 and 130:
OR-RS-155 Red Snapper 11/18/2009 Hn
Page 131 and 132:
Table 14. Tissue sample characteris
Page 133 and 134:
Table 15. Percent composition of to
Page 135 and 136:
Table 16b. Percent composition of t
show all

Progress report summarizing the reef fish sampling, PCB - Earthjustice

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?