[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
BASELINE STUDY PROGRAM NORTH PUGET SOUND Iq 3-JOB -g- X- AN INTERim REPORT To THE 44TH LEGISLATURE STATE OF WASHINGTON QH 91.8 .04 W34 1975 January 1975 P 3: C" P <@'Z:Y Library U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON, SC 29405-24 13 Governor Daniel J. Evans and Stated Members of the 44th Legislative Session VVashington anment De c olfpaoiogy I am pleased to submit this interim report of the Oil Baseline Study-auth6rized under RCW 43.21A.405-420. This'report summarizes our work to January 1, 1975. The final report will be published approximately June 30, 1975. The program, as mandated by the Legislature, is very compre-. hensive and is providing valuable information at the very onset Of special note is the study covering the economic value of our marine resources. While the material enclosed are preliminary in nature., I am sure you will be amazed--as I have been--on the dollar .values brought out by this study. Our initial efforts during this first year of operation have been to: 1. Develop economic information on the commercial species of Washington. Initiate economic studies on sport species and human structures and activities. 2. Establish a project design and management system. 3. Review the exfstir@lg literature on the biology of selected marine animals and plants found in Northern'Puget Sound. 4. Review the literature on the impact of oil upon those organisms in Northern Puget Sound and-their associated habitats. 5., Map the marine habitat types of Northern Puget Sound., 6. Establish field survey teams and stations.and begin, year- long field inventories of the marine habitats of Northern Puget Sound. This study represents the first major step in p .roviding sound scien- tific information for use not only inoil impact related decisions, but also for the evaluation of other manmade and natural situations in our state's coastal zone. sincerely, ohn A. Biggs Director J1 A :vh Enclosure Daniel J@ Evans, Governor John A. Biggs, Director Olympia, Washington 98504 Telephone (206) 753-2800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary. Introduction P.1 an Philosophy 3, General Utility 5 Standardization of Techniques 5 Objectives 5 Implementation of Plan 6. Coordination .8 Results 14 Literature Review 14 Field Survey 16 Economic Assessment 19 Introduction 19 Commercial Fisheries. 24. Sport Harvested Fish and Birds 27. Nonhunted Birds 28 Other Recreation 31 SCUBA Diving 31, Boating 31 Parks on Puget Sound 31 Property Values 32 Summary of the Economic Assessments 33 Recommendations 35 SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE This"study is the result of RCW 43.21A.405-420 (Senate Bill 2978) in which the Department of Ecology was requested to establish a continuing, comprehensive program of systematic baseline .studies for the waters of the state that would aid in the maintenance of water quality standards, as well as address the specific problems associated with oil contamination of the marine ecosystem. APPROACH The Legislature had directed emphasis be given to: "Those waters (1) in which the greatest risk of damage from oil spills exists; (2) which contain marine and freshwater life that is par- ticularly sensitive to toxins contained in crude oil, oil products and oil wastes; and which are used or may be used for the harvest, gathering or production of food or food products." Therefore, the first study area chosen was the North Puget Sound area where there are existing petroleum refineries, crude and refined product transfer points, and tanker routes to the refineries. North Puget Sound is defined as the marine waters and submerged lands of Skagit, Whatcom and San Juan counties. Within this area, systematic inventories of the "Significant Biological Resources" are being conducted on the basis of their. occurrence in selected habitat types which will lead to an evalu- ation of the impact of oil pollution on their well-being. An economic assessment is being made of the value of these inventories as well as to human structures and activities that might be damaged by an oil spill. FINDINGS The economic worth of the North Puget Sound is unfolding as the inventories are made and values are determined for the land, the harvestable natural resources and from marine-related recre- ational experiences. The present water quality of this area suppo rts, a commercial fishing and tourist industry of considerable magnitude. These industries 'in turn@ provide expenditure streams which support other state commerce. Regional input/output analysis permits the estimation of commerce dependent upon these industries. The following table reports results of such an analysis and is based on the processed value of harvested fish of $109,000,000 and a recreation tourist industry of $130,000,000. INDUSTRY DEPENDENT ON PUGET SOUND FISHERIES AND TOURISM OUT OF STATE FISHERIES TOURISTS AGRICULTURE $ 13,800,000 $ 28,900,000 MANUFACTURING $ 27,400,000 $ 20,600,000 CONSTRUCTION $ 6,300,000 $ 6,800,000 SERVICES $ 27,200,000 $ 70,300,000 COMMUNICATION/UTILITIES $ 8,400,000 $ 11,000,000 TRADES $ 31,800,000 $ 65,400,000 FINANCE/INSURANCE/REAL ESTATE $ 9,900,000 $ 11,400,000 HOUSEHOLD INCOMES $121,000,000 $119,000,000 STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE $ 18,900.000 $ 19,700.000 -2- FISHERIES Nature fluctuates in its productivity and species composition between seasons as well as years. Therefore, a program of this type will always encounter problems in quantification relative to time and place. The amount of damage to commercial fisheries by an accidental oil spill would depend on the season and the place where the spill would occur. If the spill occurred during a fishing season, it is unlikely that either fishermen or those involved in fish processing could switch their efforts to alternate fish sites or production and a. direct economic result could be realized. In addition, an oil spill in specific places could directly endanger individuals of sensitive species. The commercial fishing effort in North Puget Sound could be directly damaged in terms of adult loss, or more likely, in terms of either loss of young fi sh or food items of both young and adults. The damage would be greater to young members of a species and their food items due to their sensitivity to oil toxicity and their utilization of the tidal and subtidal habitats so that lo.sses of their food items, or losses of substantial numbers of young, would lead to a reduction in the potential adult population which would reduce the gross value of the fishery. Losses to the young members of the species would not be fully realized for several years in the future. The total gross values (1973) of commercial catch of fish which may depend upon Puget Sound habitats is shown in the following table. -3- COMMERCIAL FIN FISH (INCLUDING CANADIAN) $141,100,890 MOLLUSC AND SHELLFISH $ 3,218,039 SALMON EGGS FROM CATCH $ 2832690 TOTAL $144,602,619 It is not possible to predetermine the value of a temporary ecological impact such as an accidental oil spill because of not knowing the time and place where this would happen. Such spills may be costly and can reduce the productivity of the affected area. There is usually a recovery of the ecosystem after varying lengths of time in the case of an accidental petroleum spill. However, the indirect permanent changes of chronic pollution of hazardous material, including petroleum, are subtle and broad i n nature and will cause the.greatest damage in the long run. In the case of the accidental,petroleum spill,-the salmon fisheries would be reduced and most of the shellfish in the contaminated area would be damaged or killed, whereas, a situation of chronic pollution could eventually eliminate the total fisheries of the area. An analysis of just the salmon fishery has been made of the North Puget Sound area. The table on the following page indicates the area in which the'salmo.n were caught, the catching method, and the species of the salmon. RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCES Sport fishing and hunting are evaluated through use.of field studies in which sportsmen were asked to indicate the value they placed on their hunting and fishing experiences. The physical -4- VALUE OF COMMERCIAL SALMON AT 1973 PRICES IN THE NORTH PUGET SOUND AREA, 1973 CATCH, SPECIES AND VALUE AREA AND METHOD OF COMMERCIAL SALMON- CATCH COHO PINK CHUM CHINOOK SOCKEYE TOTAL VALUE POINT ROBERTS: $ 9,910,549 Gill Not 5769074 264,521 --- 94,682 1,559,198 Indian Set Net 7,299 1,935,056 3,124 1,103 48,405 Purse Seine 503,220 4,271 538,083 486,166 3,887,193 Reef Net 83 569 --- 68 1,434 NOOKSAK RIVER: 1,122,119 Gill Net .86,294 279 5000163 7,257 .Indian Set Net 160,705 12,866 78,886 280,400 1,070 BELLINGHAM BAY: )24,562 Purse Seine 599 949 30 22,776 208 STUART ISLAND: 872,850 Gill Net 1,680 743 2,206 10 168 Purse Seine .196,460 . 380,316 126,167 14,564 69,582 Reef Net 14,937 42,571 2,430'@ 2,147 18,869 SALMON BANKS: 10,1635,114 Gill Net 467,401 386,415 377,965 44,030 2,953,213 Indian Set Net 482 1,360 --- 206 60,985 Purse Seine 650,387 1,893,406 399,711 136,453 3,249,142 Reef Net 1,.232 3,586 640 1,370 2,130 SAN JUAN CHANNEL: 219,383 Gill Net 611 540 240 21 287 Indian Set Net --- --- --- --- Purse Seine 11,381 45,000 6,138 2 984 671 Reef Net 13,881 65,301 3,831 2,3742 65,755 ROSARIO STRAITS: 1,278,876 Gill Net 112,639 76,025 84,648 39,337 Indian Set Net 1,070 2,702 21 461 --- Purse Seine 187,522 272,168 147,074 122,151 --- Reef Net 44,478 145,831 19,357 23,392 SKAGIT BAY: 451,820 Indian Drag Seine 7,259 53,156 15 28,732 247 Gil I Net 41,895 47,551 788 102,083 634 Indian Set Net 19,521 30,431 13,823 74,431 460 .Purse Seine 364 6,989 63 --- --- Reef Net --- --- --- --- Indian Trap 8,153 5 643 10,634 3,943 WEST BEACH: 453,434 Gill Net 36,035 23,001 6,061 38,776 68,173 Purse Seine 35,119 171,197 2,110 19,9412 53,020 Indian Set Net --- --- --- --- --- SAMISH BAY 150,637 Gi 1.1 Net 158 247 --- 146,196 91 @9 Indian Set Net 27 112 698 3,039 . 69 NORTH SOUND $25,119,344 evidence of the value of hunting or fishing is the "meat worth" of the duck or fish. The following table summarizes the value of sport harvested species in North Puget Sound for 1973. SPECIES AND CATEGORY MEAT VALUE NET BENEFITS Marine Caught Salmon $1,000,000 to $11,800,000 to $1,600,000 $14,600,000 Freshwater Salmon $ 54,000 to $ 574,000 to $1,980,000 $ 2,039,000 Shellfish $ 206,000 $ 719,000 Steelhead 27,000 to $ 56,000 to 29,000 $ 117,000 Ducks and Geese No commercial $ 711,000 to values for $ 791,000 wild fowl TOTAL $1,287,000 to $13,860,000 to $3,815,000 $18,266,000 There are other recreational experiences which are evaluated in terms of a utilization day or other values , although not necessarily based upon detailed field studies , appear to be reasonable. For example, it is difficult to assign a single set value which would describe what each individual would be willing to pay for the privi- lege of observing the nonhunted birds. A range of values could be somewhere between $2.50 and $20 per watching day. Considering the organized chapters of the Audubon Society, of which there are 7,000 members; the hikers and other/individuals; a conservative number of recreation day s would be in the order of 30,000 per year. This would give a value range of between $75,000 and $600,000. Another recreational experience is SCUBA diving, where the North Puget Sound is the preferred diving area. The 25,000 divers generate -6- approximately 750,000 "diving days" which has been,Valued at $10,250,000. The North Puget Sound offers one of*the most attractive areas in the world for boating. Boating activities during 1972 cost $125,477,000 which includes purchase of boats, engines, trailers, accessories, parts, storage, docking, and fuel. In addition, the average boat owner, of the 144,400 boats, consumed 28 "boating days" a year for a .total of 4,043,200 activity days. At an average of $32 per activity day, this is valued at $125,000,000. The public parks and beaches account for 177 miles of shoreline of Puget Sound. They were visited by 22,890,000 persons during 1970, which has been valued at $1 per person, per day. Including fees charged, a lower value for total public park recreation use is $24,899,000., PROPERTY VALUES Waterfront property was evalu ated through a survey of recent real estate transactions. In order to simplify value estimates, only unimproved lands with shoreline access were considered. Within the North Puget Sound region, there are 782 miles of shore- lines. The average depth was taken as 560 feet from mean high tide and the premium value'per@square foot was determined to be 33.8t. The capitalized premium would be about $781,529,500. Because access to unspoiled waterfront is a characteristic for which people are willing to pay a premium, any action which reduces the value of such property available implies a sacrifice by society of some of the,desirable commodities; namely the amenities, or expected future amenities, whichwere the reasons -7- of the premium in the first place. Pollution and threat of pollution of hazardous materials, including-accidental and chronic petroleum spills, will lower this premium value. A recapitulation of the annual range of values for the North Puget Sound area are listed in the following table. LOW HIGH SPORT HARVESTED FISH AND BIRDS $ 1,287,000 $ 3,815,000 (NET BENEFIT) NONHUNTED BIRDS $ 75,000 $ 600,000 (RECREATIONAL VALUE) RECREATION SCUBA DIVING DAYS $ 5,125,000 $ 10,250,000 BOATING ACTIVITY DAYS $ 62,738,500 $ 125,477,000 PARKS RECREATIONAL USE $ 12,449,500 $ 24,899,000 PROPERTY VALUE (1973) $781,529,500 $ 781,529,500 COMMERCIAL SALMON FISHERIES $ 25,119,344 $ 25,119,344 (1973) TOTAL $888,323,844 $ 971,688,844 The previous table included only the salmon fishery and the price the fisherman receives at the dockside for his fish. The following table is processed value of the 1973 commercial fishery harvest and the expenditures' of out-of-state tourist visiting Puget Sound region for recreational purposes and their respective incomes to households in the state as well as revenues for state and local governments. -8- 1973 EXPENDITURE STREAM VALUE INCOME REVENUE COMMERCIAL FISHERY $109,000,000 $121,000,000 $18,900,000 HARVEST OUT-OF-STATE $130,000,000 $119,000,000 $19,700,000 TOURISTS VISITING PUGET SOUND TOTAL $239,000,000 $240,000,000 $38,600,000 GOALS To date, the value assessment of the North Puget Sound area has not included an in-depth assessment of the marine biota. One .of the goals of the Baseline Program is to inventory systematical-ly the "Significant Biological Resources" based on their occurrence in selected general habitat types. This also includes an appreciation of the ecology of the habitat as well as' the "food web" analysis to relate between the amount and type of food available to feed each specie. Once the ecological relationship and food web is established, the economist can then place values on these lesser plants and animals which may suffer the greatest damage during either an ac- cidental or chronic petroleum spill. The data and information collected by the biological effort in the field is one of the essential parts of the Baseline Program. It is by necessity laborious and time consuming. Nature fluctuates in its productivity and species composition between seasons as well as years. There must be sufficient repetitive biological inventories .to establish averages. Also, these multiple inventories are neces- sary to establish a'more reliable ecological connection within the food web. -9- .Field surveys have produced a preliminary map of the distri- bution and data on relative abundance of general habitat types of North Puget Sound. Detailed, on-the-ground biological surveys at 21 locations are continuing in order to provide data on seasonal occurrence., A literature survey is almost complete and is being done by a number of groups who are dealing with either specialized topics, such as, Birds (Department of Game); Fishes (University of Washing- ton, Fisheries Research Institute); Oil Spills (Allen); or generalized reviews, such as, Historical Data (Beak Consultants, Inc.); Current Research (Oceanographic Institute of Washington). An innovative literature review has produced a set of species fact sheets on the biology of North Puget Sound, oil impact fact sheets, and an analysis of the impact of oil upon the resources .and habitat types represented in the North Puget Sound. RECOMMENDATIONS In view of the great val ue of the North Puget Sound area in natural resources, recreational opportunities and land values, it is recommended that: 1. Minimize the risk of either an accidental petroleum spill or of other hazardous material. 2. Maintain the marine water quality guarding against chronic pollution by petroleum or other hazardous material -10- INTRODUCTION As a result of RCW 43.21A.405-420'(Senate Bill 2978), the Legis- lature requested that the Department of Ecology establish a@ tontinuing,.comprehensive program of systematic baseline studies for the waters of the state . . . . that would aid in the maintenance of water quality standards, as well as address the specific problems associated with oil contamination of the marine ecosystem.. The law was approved-by the Governor on September 22, 1973 and became effective on December 15,.1973. The Department of Ecology held the.first organizational meeting on October 4, 1973 where it was agreed to form an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. This Advisory Committee consisted of representatives from the State Departments .of Ecology, Fisheries, and Natural Resources; the University of Washington; Western Washington State College; METRO: Sea Grant; and the Federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The role of this Advisory Committee was to review and analyze the methods and concepts necessary to answer the legislative intent of the law and to recommend.a framework for a baseline study. In view of the time constraints,and the magnitude of the program, the @Advisory Committee recommended that the above be accomplished by consultants who could devote full time to the project. Consultants from the,Oceanographic Institute and the University of Washington were hired in December when authorization to expend funds were received. A final document was prepared by the con- sultants in February 1974. This report contained both a.broad prospective and a comprehensive program to obtain baseline infor- mation. The staff-for the Baseline Program was hired in March by the De- partment of Ecology and consisted of Dr. David Jamison to supervise the program with one professional Assistant and one clerk-typist. A program plan was developed and initiated by April 15, '1974 using the consultants' reports as a reference. The effort was defined as: 1. A systematic inventory of the "Significant Biological Resources" of Northern Puget Sound based on their oc- currence in selected general habitat types. 2. An evaluation.of the impact of oil pollution.on their well-being. 3. An economic assessment of their value, as well as to human structures. and activities that might be damaged by an oil spi'l 1 The Legislature directed emphasis be given to: "Those waters (1) in which the greatest risk of damage from oil spi.lls exists; (2) which contain marine and freshwater life that is particularly .sensitive to toxins contained in crude oil, oil, products and oil wastes; and which are used.or may be used for the harvest, gathering or production of food or food products." Therefore, the first study area chosen was the North Puget Sound area where there are existing petroleum refineries, crude and refined product transfer points, and tanker routes to the refineries. North Puget Sound is defined as the marine waters and submerged lands of Skagit, Whatcom and San Juan counties. In May 1974, thirty-seven separate groups were sent a request for proposal to perform work on the Baseline Program. There were twelve -2- responses of which seven were awarded contracts with work commencing in July 1974. Although weekly and monthly contacts are maintained with each contractor, there was a formal interim progress report made for the period of July through October 1974.. Selected reports on the literature review and economics were received at the end of December. Second interim reports are due the end of February. Appendices to this report are: 1. The October interim reports @2. The December Economic report 3. The literature review final report Because,of the volume of these reports, they are being made available upon request only through the Department of Ecology Library. PLAN PHILOSOPHY A relatively novel approach to baseline studies was adopted to allow for an analysis of oil impacts, as well as other impacts as directed by the Legislature. This approach relies upon a basic principle of science called "energy" asa means of describing the different areas where marine organisms live and assigning dollar values to other organisms besides commercial species. Pushed by the moon's gravitation and the.heat-of the sun, tides, and winds translate their energy into currents and waves. This liquid energy has, over the past several thousand years, churned the glacial deposits and bed rock of the Puget Sound Basin to produce beaches and bay bottoms with a variety of materials,.from mud through-sand and gravel to rock. Each of these materials in turn support -3- different kinds and amounts of plants and animals. Generalized from these energy produced differences., nine different general habitat types common.to Puget Sound were chosen for study. (Attachment A) Data on the distribution and abundance of selected organisms from each of the representative habitats now being studied in the field will be used to (1) characterize the particular under study area and (2) characterize similar but unstu died areas closeby or in other parts of Puget Sound. The field data will also be used to refine the habitat type designations in the context of criteria contained in "Vertical Zonation and Substrate Characteristics of the Marine and Estuarine Lands and Waters of Washington." (Attach- ment B) In order to place a direct economic value on damaged resources, some basis for that value must be established. The economist can find either a value or values for commercial organisms because they are sold in the market each day, and with.some research, the economist can even place a valueor values on,the adult forms of recreationally important animals, such as, rockfish and Lingcod. However, those animals may not be directly damaged by an oi.1 spill. One or more of their food items might be harmed instead. Since there is a link between the amount of food available to feed each species and the amount of that species, there is an opportunity to attach dollar values to organisms other than commercial and recre- ational species by following the linkages in the food web. The same argument also is true for the predatorsof commercial and recreational species. Based on this concept, a list of the "Significant Biological Resources" has been prepared. (Attachment C) Besides commercial and -4- recreational species, known food items, competitors, and predators have been included. Field studies, the literature review, and the economic analysis are following this listas a means of prioritizing the research effort. GENERAL UTILITY The use of habitat types and the food web will permit use.of the information in other areas of Puget Sound, as well as for other impacts. Fo r example, the effect of any marina construction upon sensitive marine resources could be predicted from this information. The limitation to this approach lies in both the present scarcity of information on specific impacts and:recognition of regional differences in animal and plant composition of the representative habitat types. Such regional differences must be studied in the future to provide a firmer basis for data extrapolation. STANDARDIZATION OF TECHNIQUES In addition to care in selectingthe basic concepts of the plan, time was spent during plan development in evaluation of field sampling techniques. However, because such techniques are not yet standardized, work has continued on both refining acceptable methods and standardization within the program. OBJECTIVES The, Baseline Program relating to oil impact is composed of nine basic objectives, all of which, are related to the legislative di- rective and as developed from the scientific analysis of the problems through the Ad Hoc Advisory'Committee, the report from the con- sultants, and the development of the program by the Department of -5- Ecology's staff (as explained in the previous section). These objectives are to determine for the marine and estuarine waters of Washington: 1. The present and potential oil contamination.. 2. The economic value of man-made structures and man's activities that would be damaged by oil pollution. 3. The significant biological resources. 4. The economic value of significantbiological resources that would be affected by oil pollution. 5. The types, distribution and abundance of major habitats. 6. The distribution and abundance of biological resources in major.habitats. 7. The impact of oil pollution upon the significant biological resources. 8. Predict the movement ofspilled oil. 9. The populations of significant biological resources that serve as major sources of re cruitment for adjacent areas. The preceding objectives have been further broken down into tasks. These are listed in Attachment D., The relationship of one objective to another is shown by Fiqure IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN The objectives and tasks can be grouped into the following categories: Field Survey, Literature Review, and Economic Evaluation. The Field Survey portion involves five groups working out of the University of Washingtong Western Washington State Co.llegei and the Department of Ecology. -6- FIGUREJ RELATIONSHIP OF OBJECTIVES DOLLAR VALUE OF MAN'S USES (2) BASELINE DATA (6) ECONOMI(: VALUE. LIST HABITATS (5) FECTS OF OIL (7) DOLLAR VALUE OF BIOTA (4) CRITICAL AREAS (9) LIST IDENTIFICATIO14 OF WATER, -QUALITY PRESENT' BIOTA (3) STANDARDS STATE OF POTENTIAL OR SHORELINE AND AWARENESS PRESENT POTENTIAL OiL POLLUTION (1) COASTAL ZONE RISK, MANAGEMENT REDUCTICN Al _y (9)@L MOVEMENT OF OIL (8) bp OF RISK The Literature Review is being done by a number of gr 1 oups who are dealing with either specialized topics, such as, the Department of Game (Birds); University of Washington, Fisheries Research Insti- tute, (Fishes); Allen (Oil Spills): or generalized rev.iews,-such as, Beak Consultants, Inc., (Historical Information), and Ocea- nographic Institute of Washington, (Current Research). The Economic Evaluation is being done by the University' of Washington. Table 1 lists the objectives and tasks, together with the con- tractor and a completion date. Also shown is the type of work which categorizes the expertise of the respective.contractor. Table 2. is a recapitulation of monies spent to date relative to type of work and contractor.'and the remaining monies.left for their respective contracts. Because of limited funds.and work by other agencies, Objectives 8 and 9, as well as parts of other objectives,.a.re not funded at this time. COORDINATION The Baseline Program has been carefully coordinated with all interested activities, agencies-and departments of the local, state and federal governments, as well as the academic communities and industry. This coordination began with an organizational meeting in October 1973 of an ad hoc advisory committee, which provided recommendations for a baseline program. In September 1974, a Marine Analysis Program Advisory Committee was formed to advise the Department on all aspects of the Baseline Program, as well as other programs'of the Land and Marine Analysis Section. The membership TABLE 1: OBJECTIVE TASK CONTRACTOR COMPLETION DATE TYPE OF WORK_' A 'William Allen 9/30/74 Literature.Review, B If C 2 A DOE Staff 8/15/74 Literature Review,i B if C D E U of W, 12/30/74 and Economic Crutchfield F 6/15/75 G 3 A DOE Staff 8/15/74 Literature Review If B C U Of W, Miller 6/15/75 (Part) Field Survey D E DOE Staff 8/15/74 Literature Reviewi F DOE Staff 4 A U of W, 12/30/74 Economic Crqtchfield and if 6/15/75 C If If D It E Not funded F G H U of W, 12/30/74 Crutchfield If U of W, 6/15/75 Crutchfield U of W, If Crutchfield TABLE 1 (Continued) OBJECTIVE TASK CONTRACTOR. COMPLETION DATE TYPE OF WORK K U of W, 6/15/75 Economic Crutchfield L If 5 DOE Staff ..8/l/74 Field Survey B 9/30/74 C Not funded D DOE Staff 12/30/74 6 A Beak Consultants, 1/17/75 Literature Review Inc.; Game, Dept. of 6/15/75 Miller, U of W 10/30/74 Oceanographic.Inst 3/31/75 B English, U of W 6/15/75. Field. Survey Oceanography; Miller, U of W 6/15/75 Fisheries Research Institute; Nyblade , U of W 6/15/75 Zoology. Webber, W.W.S.C. Huxley; C Beak Consultants, 1/17/75 w Inc.; ite.rature Revie Game, Dept. of. D Not funded E F A Beak Consultants, 1/17/75 -iterature Review Inc. B If C NOAA (Federal I-aboratory Study funds) D If E F G If H WWSC 6/15/74 Field Survey -10- TABLE 1 (Continued) OBJECTIVE TASK CONTRACTOR COMPLETION DATE TYPE,OF WORK I Not funded Laboratory Study i DOE Staff Oil Spill Respons Team, K Not funded Analysis 8 Not funded 9 Not funded 'S@ TABLE 2. The following table indicates the type of work, the contractor, what monies have been sppnt,as of Janua ry 1, 19,75, and'what remains to be spent for completion of contract.' TYPE OF WORK AND CONTRACTOR BILLING AS OF JANUARY 1, 1975 REMAINING .Literature Review Miller $ 5,400.00 Beak Consul tants, Inc. 42,834.69 16,990.31 Oceanographic Institute 3,500.00 3,500.OG of Washington Department of Game -0- 5@,00O..00 Allen 2,195,00 -0- Economic Evaluation Crutchfield @15,652.52 44,347.48 Field Survey English 19,354.75 55,645.25 Nyblade 4,293.54 32,706.46 Miller 16,324.91 379675.09 Webber 10,147.72 58,552.28 DOE--MLM-73/74 7,593.98 -0- DOE--Boese 1,800.00 -0- Advisory Consultants Bauer 10,216.30 24,783.70 Planning Consultants University of Washington 9,924.91 -0- Oceanographic Commission of Washington 4,333.46 .-0- -12- TABLE 2 (Continued) TYPE OF WORK AND CONTRACTOR BILLING AS OF JANUARY 1, 1975 REMAINING Administration Salaries, etc. $ 40,000.00 $ 24,000.00 Field Orders 2,189.46 878.19 Flights 160.00 TOTAL $195,921.24 $303,200.57 TOTAL $500,000.00 14 of this Committee is shown in Attachment E andAncludes represen- tatives from resource managers of state government, representatives from local and federal government and specialists from the academic communities. The,plan of the Baseline Program provides,a framework whereby agencies and activities can both satisfy their requirements, as well as add to the Baseline Program. The responding federal agencies include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric.Administration (NOAA), withtheir Sea Grant and Marine Ecosystem Analysis (MESA) programs, as well as the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' dredge spoils study program.. METRO and their marine. survey program is an example of local government participation. There are also programs of other departments of,state government,. such as, Fisheries,, Game, and Natural Resources, which are contri- butions to the Baseline Program. RESULTS LITERATURE REVIEW Beak Consultants, Inc., was retained to 'Conduct a general review and analysis of the available literature on the ecology of the "Significant Biological Resources" of Puget Sound and on the pos- sible effects of spilled oils and petrochemical products on these biota. As part of the study, biological and oil impact fact sheets were to be prepared on each species along with an annotated bibli- ography and a written report on potential impacts by oil on the af- fected organisms. In addition to composited information, each-fact sheet includes information on.area distribution for each species, habitat ecology life history, economic value, predators', prey, and comments on the article made by the reviewer. Using qualified biologists reading within their field, data- type information for written materials was abstracted and stored in an integrated,retrievable data-base. This was organized to maximize the retrieval of information in such categories as organism groups, species, area of distribution, life stage, habitat, petrochemical type and impact. A total of nine general habitat types have been considered in this study and the 250 species designated for the literature search halve been assigned to@thirteen broad organism groupings. By identi- fy ing these habitat types and gathering data for input on selected species groups within these habitats, the number of impacts addressed were greatly.reduced. An example of Beak's results is shown in Attachment F. Other workers were retained to examine the unpublished,literature on the distribution of marine fish (Dr. Miller, Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington); thedistribultionand abundance of marine birds, (Department of Game); and to document the.current .marine re searchactivities (Oceanographic Institute of Washington). That portion of.the literature review.dealing.with the natural history of the "Significant Biological Resources" will. be updated and refined by the ongoing field surveys. The complete data base now synthesized from this literature will be uti lized along with the field data in the final report to define the seasonal composition of the different habitats and to provide a basis for assigning economic values. -15- FIELD SURVEY The data collected by the biological effort in the field and its subsequent analysis are essential parts of the Baseline Program. Only from an on the-ground accurate survey can a reasonable.idea of the species composition and abundance by habitat type be developed. Such data is necessary to confirm and extend information obtained through the literature review, provide up-to-date information onexisting habitat biology, and refine the definition of habitat types and Significant Biological Resources. Field studies-will not be completed until June 1975 because of the need,to gather at least a year's worth of data. Even then we may have been looking at.an unusual yearwhen.the air or water was colder or warmer than normal with resultant high natural mortalities or con- versely high natural survival. The. environment is constantly changing seasonally and between years. The concept of a baseline must recognize this variation. When these changes are averaged.and compared overa three- to five-year period, only then can we more effectively view these changes in relationship to man's impingement on the environment. So at a minimum, data must be gathered during one full year.to provide information on seasonal changes. The biology of representative habitats within three vertical zones are being studied in the field survey. 1. The intertidal zone is being studied by Western Washington State College (Huxley College) and the University of Washing- ton.(Department of Zoology). Comparable samples, are obtained by the.field. crews from beaches ranging from mud to rock and comprising most of the.habitat types. Obtaining six samples throughout the period of July 1974 through May 1975, the -16- contractors will be able to document seasonal differences between areas and habitat types. 2. The shallow s ubtidal area from a extreme lower low water to a minus,five meters is being studied by Western Washington State College and the University of Washington (Fisheries Research Institute and Zoology). They are using SCUBA diving as well asbeach seines and bottom grabs. Examining similar habitat types as in the intertidal zone, and adding kelp and eelgrass beds, a seasonal picture of the represented habitat types.will emerge. 3. The subtidal area below a minus five meters to a minus twenty meters,is being inventoried by the University of:Washington (Department of Oceanography and.the Fisheries Research Institute). The Department of Oceanography is using a.bottom grabs, beam trawl, and plankton net to directly sample the living resources found in this area. Water samples are taken to look for nutrients and document temperature and salinity changes.. The Fisheries Research Institute is sampli.ng along roughly the minus five meter contour to gain information about the herring, smelt, and young salmon that inhabit the area. The sample.locations for all field surveys are listed in Table 3. -.Because of funding and the relatively low.probability of oil spill damage at depth, the Department of Oceanography effort has been re- stricted to only three stations. Unfortunately the data are insufficient as yet,to develop conclusions as to the abundance and distribution of Significant Biological Resources by habitat type. Preliminary data are available in the first interim -17- TABLE 3 SAMPLE LOCATIONS, HABITAT TYPES, AND VERTICAL ZONES BEING STUDIED BY OIL BASELINE STUDY CONTRACTORS IN NORTH PUGET SOUND SAMPLE LOCATION VERTICAL ZONE HABITAT TYPE INVESTIGATOR Allen Island Subtidal Kelp U.W. Miller Barnes Island Subtidal Kelp U.W. Miller Birch Bay Subtidal Sand W.W.S.C. Birch Bay Intertidal Sand W.W.S.C. Birch Bay Subtidal Sand U.W. Miller Cantilever Pier Intertidal Rock U.W. Nyblade Cherry Point Intertidal Mixed-Coarse W.W.S.C. Cherry Point Subtidal Eelgrass W.W.S.C Cherry Point Subtidal Mixed Fine U.W. English Cherry Point Subtidal Mixed Fine U.W. Miller Cherry Point Subtidal Open water U.W. English Deadmans Bay Intertidal Mixed-Coarse U.W. Nyblade Deadmans Bay Subtidal Mixed-Coarse U.W. Miller Drayton Harbor Intertidal Mud W.W.S.C. Eagle Cove Intertidal Sand U.W. Nyblade Eagle Cove Subtidal Eelgrass U.W. Miller East Sound Subtidal Mud U.W. English East Sound Subtidal Openwater U.W. English Fidalo Bay Intertidal Mud W.W.S.C. Fidalgo Bay Subtidal Mud W.W.S.C. Fidalgo Head Intertidal Rock W.W.S.C. Fidalgo Head Subtidal Sand W.W.S.C. Guemes Channel Subtidal Sand U.W. English Guemes Channel Subtidal Open water U.W English Guemes Ils. E. Subtidal Sand W.W.S.C. Guemes Ils. E. Intertidal Sand W.W.S.C. Guemes Ils. S. Intertidal Mixed-Fine W.W.S.C. Guemes Ils. S. Subtidal Eelgrass W.W.S.C. Legoe Bay Intertidal Mixed-Coarse W.W.S.C. Legoe Bay Subtidal Eelgrass W.W.S.C. Padilla Bay Intertidal mud W.W.S.C. Padilla Bay Subtidal Eelgrass W.W.S.C. Point George Subtidal Kelp U.W. Miller Point George Subtidal Rock U.W. Nyblade Point Migley Intertidal Rock W.W.S.C. Shannon Point Intertidal Mixed-Coarse W.W.S.C. Shannon Point Subtidal Sand W.W.S.C. South Beach Intertidal Mixed-Coarse U.W. Nyblade Webb Camp Intertidal Mixed-Fine U.W. Nyblade Westcott Bay Intertidal Mud U.W. Nyblade Westcott Bay Subtidal Eelgrass U.W. Miller -18- reports dated October 30, 1974. The distribution of general habitat types has been inventoried for the intertidal zone of Northern Puget Sound using aerial photo- graphy (see pages 20, 21 and 22). Area specific correlation with existing Shoreline Management Inventories and field checks will begin this spring. Based on a gross evaluation of line miles along beaches and around mud flats,and salt marshes, the abundance of the different habitat types other than open water are listed in Table 4 (see page 23). These data.are-crude.and subject to revision based on further analysis this spring. :ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION Dr. James Crutchfield and his staff from the Institute of Marine to conduct Studies.of the University of Washington were retained' the economic studies of the North Puget Sound.Baseline Program. The economic analysis center around species of fish, shellfish and birds which are;commerc1ally important. The marine biologist is determinin6,the important food items of these species and the eco- logical relationship in order that the economist can more precisely assign values@for the marine natural resources of the area, as well as the value for recreation and,land of the area. The economic worth of an area consists of many factors. There are the values of: natural, resources, such as commercial fisheries; the sport harvested fish andthe wild fowl which has a 11meat value" but also a much greater value in terms of what people are willing to pay to catch a fish or shoot a duck; the nonhunted birds who are observed by amateurnaturalists and hikers; of recre- ation activities, such as scuba diving, boating, shore side parks _19- CAP BOUNDARY. UNITED STATES BAY SEMIAHMOO BAY .4 Bellingham gAIT BELLINGHAM' CK.-C@l 800 BA Y Is. ORCAS ISLAND CO. SAMISH BAY Show Cypress a Is. 9 Blakely Is. is., Guemes SAN JUAN Is. % ISLAND Anacortes LOPEZ ISLAND C3 C.) WHIDBEY ISLAND Figure 2: DISTRIBUTION OF GENERAL HABITAT TYPES IN NORTHERN PUGET SOUND KELP. NADA 8OUNDARY UNITED. STATES SAY SEMIAHMOO 8AY %% Bellingham cb r SEWNGHAM HAIRO BAY Id Is. ORCAS ISLAND SA 8A Show ecypres'N I Is. Blakely Is. Guernes SAN JUAN Is. % ISLAND An rtes LOPEZ C3 @1/2//0" ISLAND c .4@ CO CO. \ % 4zp WHIDBEY ISLAND Figure 3: DISTRIBUTION OF GENERAL HABITAT TYPES IN NORTHERN PUGET SOUND - EELGRASS. -21- MAUA 8OUlVDARY !!r UNITED STATES BAY SE-MIAHMOO BAY Sion4si C S 11*11@1 S OA, c cc cC c c c c F F F Bellingham R F R%R F S . . . . . . . . . . . . . N RK m S Ab S R R fat R N LINGHAM Alf C AR S 8A Y R C R R S Id R S RR RR c R SSS C WR % R Is. R c R R R c RR R R R rV R R ORCAS ISLAND R R R R I R C R R R C CO. R R C C R R RR R SAMMY R C R K Show F RR RR 8A R As. R Cypress K R R Blakely Is. R R S. c R c M &Mae R F C C R ISLAND r R R ............ C R R SAN JUAN F R R K Ancowodes R R LOPEZ to R -po R R R ISLAND R Cccc R m m R K RRR R R R R F F S R S R S R S R R lo"O@g' -S Go S S WHIDBEY S ISLAND 1w M)" Figure 4: DISTRIBUTION OF GENERAL HABITAT TYPES IN NORTHERN PUGET SOUND -:;.,.-*:::-MUD, S-SAND, F-MIXED FINE,.C-MIXED COURSE , M-SALT MARSH , R-ROCK, OTHER AREAS. ARE OPENVATER. TABLE 4 ESTIMATED RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF GENERAL NONLIVING HABITAT TYPES IN-.NORTHERN PUGET SOUND HABITAT TYPES PERCENTAGE OF BEACHES Nonliving Rock 45 Mixed Course 20 Mud 15 Sand 11 Mixed Fine 9 TOTAL 100 Living ,Kelp 20 Eelgrass 31 Salt Marsh 4 TOTAL 55 -23- and recreation areas; and the real estate property value of the area. The economic costs of.an oil spillare not measured simply-by totaling the dollars spent on clean up and restoration. The costs must also be measured, in terms of opportunities which are eliminated by decreases in usefulness resulting from damage as-well as direct and indirect losses of harvestable natural resources. COMMERCIAL FISHERIES Nature fluctuates in its productivity and species composition between seasons as well as years. Therefore, a program of this type will always encounter problems of quantification relative.to both time and place. The amount of damage to commercial fisheries by a .n accidental oil spill would depend on the season and the place where the spil.1 would occur. If a spill occurred during a fishing season, it is unlikely that either fishermen or those involved in fish processing could switch their efforts to alternate fishing sites or production, therefore, a direct economic loss might be realized. In addition, an oil spill in specific places could directly en- .danger individuals of sens itive species. For example., the commercial fishery effort in the North Puget Sound.area and adjacent waters could be directly damaged in terms of adult loss or more likely in terms of either loss of young salmon or food items of young or adults. The damage would be greater to young members of a species and, their food items due to their sensitivity to.oil toxicity and their utilization of the tidal and subtidal habitats so that losses of their food items, or losses of substantial numbers of young, would lead to a reduction in the potential adult population which would -24 - reduce the gross value of the fishery. Losses to the young members of the species would not be fully realized for several years in the future. The total gross value (1973) of the commercial fisheries catch of species which may depend upon Puget Sound is $144,602,619, as shown ,in the following table: COMMERCIAL FIN FISH (INCLUDING CANADIAN) $141,100,M MOLLUSC AND SHELLFISH $ 3,218,03.9 SALMON EGGS FROM CATCH $ 283,690 TOTAL $144,602,619 It is not possible to predetermine the value of a temporary, ecological impact such as an accidental oil spill because of not knowing the time and place where this would happen. Such spills may be costly and can reduce the productivity of the affected area. There is usually a recovery of the ecosystem after varying lengths of time in the case of an accidental petroleum spill. However, the indirect permanent changes of chronic pollution of hazardous material, including petroleum, are subtle and broad in nature and will cause the greatest damage in the long run. In the case of the accidental petroleum spill, the salmon fisheries would be reduced and most of the shellfish in,the contaminated area would be damaged or killed, whereas, asituation of chronic pollution could eventually eliminate the total fisheries of the area. The North Puget Sound area salmon fishery had a gross annual value of $25,119,344, as shown by Table 5. This table indicates the area in which the salmon were caught, the method used in catching the fish, and the species of the salmon. -25- TABLE 5 VALUE OF COMMERCIAL SALMON AT 1973 PRICES IN THE NORTH PUGET SOUND AREA, 1973 CATCH, SPECIES AND VALUE -THOD OF MMERCIAL SALMON CATCH COHO PINK CHUM CHINOOK SOCKEYE @TOTAL VALUE POINT ROBERTS: $ 9,910,549 Gill Net 576,074 264,521 --- 94,682 1,559,198 Indian Set Net 7,299 1,935,056 3 124 1,103 48,405 Purse Seine 503,220 4,271 539:083 486,166 3,887,193 Reef Net 83 569 --- 68 1,434 NOOKSAK RIVER: 1,122,119 Gill Net 4,199 86,294 279 500,163 7,257 Indian Set Net 160,705 2,866@ 78,886 280,400 1,070 BELLINGHAM BAY: 24,562 Purse Seine 5.99 949 30 22,776 208 STUART ISLAND: 872,850 Gill Net 1,680 743 2,206 10 168 Purse Seine 196,460 380,316 126,167 14,564 69,582 Reef Net 14,937 42,571 2,430 2,147 .18,869 SALMON BANKS: 10,635,114 Gill Net 467,401 386,415 377,965 44,030 2,958,213 Indian Set Net 482 1,360 --- 206 60,985 Purse Seine 650,387 1,893,406 399,711 136,453 3,249,142 Reef Net 1,232 3,586 640 1,370 2,130 SAN JUAN CHANNEL: 219,383 Gill Net 6.11 .540 240 .21, 287 Indian Set Net --- --- --- Purse Seine .11,381 45,000 6,138 2,984 671 Reef Net 13,881 65,301 3,831 2,742 65,755 ROSARIO STRAITS: 1,278,876 Gill Net 112,639 76,025 84,648 39,337 --- Indian Set Net 1,070 2,702 21 461 Purse Seine 187,522 272,168 147,'074 122,151 --- Reef Net 44,478 145,831 19,357 23,392 SKAGIT BAY: 451,820 Indian Drag Seine 7,259- 53,156 15 28,732 247 Gill Net 41,895 47,551 788 102,083 634 Indian Set Net 19,521 30,431 13,823 74,431 460 Purse Seine 364 6,989 63 --- --- Reef Net --- --- --- --- Indian Trap 8,153 5 643 10,634 3,943 WEST BEACH: 453,434 Gill Net 36,035 23,001 6,061 38,776 68,173 Purse Seine 35,119 171,197 2,110 19,942 53,020 Indian Set Net --- --- --- --- SAMISH BAY 150,637 Gill Net .158 247 --- 146,196 911 Indian Set Net 27 112 698 3,039 69 NORTH SOUND $25,119,344 -26- Out of the price they receive at the dock, the commercial fishermen pay their costs of catch. This will reduce the values received.from commercial harvest to a net benefit basis. There are certain fixed costs but the variable cost of component of the total. cost changes with changes in productivity of the fishing effort. Thus, if the cost of fishing becomes greater than realized from the sale of fish, it is obvious that commercial fishing will eventually halt. This can be directly related to loss of productivity in the fishing areas. SPORT HARVESTED FISH AND BIRDS Sport harvested species in North Puget Sound area Which generally .depend upon the environment afforded them are the anadromous, pelagic, and bottom-dwelling finfishes, shellfishes and game birds. The physical evidence of the value of hunting or fishing is the "meat worth" of the duck or salmon. Also, there is a value for the recreational experience over and above the meat value. This is an amount people are willing to pay to shoot ducks or catch Salmon. The summary of these annual approximations, based on 1973 prices, for the highest and lowest figures for the last three years for North Puget Sound Are from $1,287,000 to $3,815,000 for "meat, worth" and from $13,860,000 to $18,266,000 for net benefit value, which is the recreational benefit plus the "meat worth." Thefollowing table givesacomparison of "meat values" to "net benefits" for North Puget Sound for the species and categories, indicated. The system of arriving at these values has been developed in the economic appendix. -27- SPECIES AND CATEGORY MEAT VALUE NET BENEFITS MARINE CAUGHT SALMON $1,000,000 to $11,800,000 to $1,600,000 $14,600,000 FRESHWATER SALMON $ 54,000 to $ 574,000 to $1,980,000 $ 2,039,000 SHELLFISH $ 206,000 719,000 STEELHEAD $ 27,000 to 56,000 to $ 29,000 117,000 .DUCKS AND GEESE No commercial $ 711,000 to values for $ 7919@000 wild fowl TOTAL $1,287,000 to $13,860,000 to $3,815,000 $18,266,000 NONHUNTED BIRDS Thereare atleast two ways of establishing values for nonhunted birds. One way would be to consider the recreational value that is afforded to amateur naturalists and hikers in the area for water- reTated birds. It is difficult to assign a single set.value which would describe what each individual would be willing to pay for the privilege of observing the nonhunted birds. A range of values could be somewhere between $2.50 and $20 per Watching day as shown in the appendix on economics. Considering organized chapters of Audubon Society, of which there are over 7,000 members, hikers and other individuals, A con- servative number of recreation days would be in the order of 30,000 per year which would give a range of values from $75,000 to $600,000. The recreation days per year for all those belonging to organized. amateur naturalist groups or As an individual hiker who enjoys the sight of water-related nonhunted birds is c,onsiderable. -28- Another way to consider thevalue of nonhunted birds is to evaluate the cost of protecting or salvaging the bird on the theory that if pollution takes place, resources will be spent for their restoration. Even if the expenditures occur, there is, no guarantee that the birds hit by oil spills willsurvive. From data developed in the Guemes Island 1971 spill and the Manchester Beach spill, the cost,of treatment per bird was relatively high and averaged about $3,00 per bird. There is an additional cost of post cleaning care and feeding which will add to basic cost. There is no guarantee that 100 percent survival can be achieved and this factor would.also increase the cost.per bird. 'At a ten percent,survival, the cost is estimated to be $30.00 per bird. Past,experience in the North Puget Sound area has documented that nonhunted birds will be involved in oil spills., There will be a loss in numbers of these birds and there will be many dollars spent in their clean-up. If chronic pollution is involved, the wa.ter-orie,nted non- hunted birds may.be affected in that their source of food may diminish and they would no longer locafe in the area. In both cases of pollution, there is risk of reducing the numbers as well as diversity of birds which will result in reduction in the value of the area. A list of species which would be affected and their numbers as reported by the Christmas bird counts of the local Audubon chapters are shown.in Table 6 (see page .30). This indicates the extent of the potentially endangered population in the areas counted. In addition, because rare birds are valued highly, those which are less.common i,n these counts may be especially valuable and worth protecting. -29- TABLE 6 WATER-RELATED BIRD POPULATIONS FOR SELECTED PUGET SOUNDAREAS9 1973, CHRISTMAS-BIRD COUNT, AUDUBON SOCIETY PADILLA BAY- SAN JUAN BELLING- GUEMES ISL.- ISLAND- HAM, WASH. DECEPTION B. C. SPECIES GROUP AREA PASS (BOAT) LOONS 275 238 @18 GREBES 8,051 4,083 .383 CORMORANTS 231 667 345 EGRETS AND HERONS @55 104 6 SWANS 30 0 GEESE AND BRANTS 226 0 DUCKS 10,494 7,898 772 EAGLES 9 16 .8 OSPREYS, HAWKS, AND FALCONS 14 12 1 RAILS, COOTS, OYSTER CATCHERS, 913 123 PLOVERS9 SURFBIRDS9 TURNSTONES- 145 40 YELLOWLEGS, SNIPES,.SANDPIPERS 5,790 11,487 0 GULLS AND TERNS 4.,650 3,270 lo625. MURRES 244 640 1,259@ GUILLAMOTS 6 66 77 MURRELETS. 27 145 28 AUKLETS 0 0 9 (SNOWY) OWLS 32 79 0 KINGFISHERS 1.,7 0 2 RAVENS AND CROWS 0 0 12 BLACKBIRDS AND COWBIRDS 1,694 1,750 4 CROSSBILLS AND SONG SPARROWS 717 750 0 TOTAL 339620 409208 4,696 -30- OTHER RECREATION SCUBA DIVING SCUBA,diving in Puget Sound has been increasing. Diver certification has increased an average of 30 percent per year since 1968. The 25,000 divers in the Puget Sound area generate approxi- mately 750,000"diving days" which has been valued at $10,250,000. The preferred diving areas are in the San Juan Islands. Accidental oil spills would curtail this activity until it was cleaned up and safe to dive again. However, if a chronic condition caused a reduction in productivity of the biology, the use of the area would dwindle to the point where the area would not-be pre- ferred or utilized. BOATING The North Puget Sound offers one of the most attractive a reas. in the world for boating. Eliminating rowboats, canoes, rubber- rafts, etc., there are 144,400 boats. in Puget Sound. Boating activity during 1972 cost $125,477,000 which,includes purchase of boats, engines., trailers, acce.ssorjes,.parts, storage., docking, and fuel-, The average boat-owner consumed 28 "boating days" a year with a total of 4,043,200 activity days, at a cost of $32 per day, which would be valued at over $125 million.. Half of this could be accounted for in North Puget Sound area. PARKS-ON PUGET SOUND There are at least 206 public recreation sites on Puget Sound which contain 177 miles, of shoreline. These aresites a,dminis- tered by all levels of government, and were visited by 22,899,000 persons during 1970, which has been valued at $1 per person, per day. In addition, camping and moorage fees at these parks were -31- over $2,000,000. A lower value for total public park1recreational use of Puget Sound is $24,899,000. Since many of the park si:tes are located in the North Puget Sound area and are frequented on the basis of their shorelines, if these shorelines were damaged by pollution, there would be a percentage reduction depending on the usefulness of the area. PROPERTY VALUES Land values are determined by a multitude of characteristics. In order to simplify value estimates, only unimproved land wi th shoreline access were considered. There are approximately 1,746 miles of shoreline in Puget Sound that are unimproved. The average foot frontage per parcel in the sample is 325 feet., The average parcel size was 18,953.32 square feet, or slightly over four acres, and the average depth was 560 feet from mean high tide. The premium value per square foot of land was determined to be 33.8@, therefore, the capitalized premium would be about $1,744,949,600, and at an annualrate of 5 percent rate of interest, this is equi.va- lent to an annual rental premium of $87,247,480. Within the North Puget Sound region, there are, 782 miles of-shore lines, which would account for a capitalized premium.of $781,529,5.00, or an annual rental premium of $39,076,475. Because access to unspoiled waterfront is a characteristic for which people are willing to pay a premium,.any action,whidh reduces the value of such property available implies a sacrifice by society of some of the desirable commodity; namely the amenities, or expected future amenities, which were the reasons of the premium in the first place. Pollution and threat of pollution of hazardous materials, including accidental and,chro.nic petroleum spills, Will reduce the -32- value of the associated property. Considering the calculated values to be a conservative estimate since improved properties were not considered, and would run higher, the percentage degradation may be very small but will represent a very substantial sum in terms of reduction of the premium value and resultant rental worth.. SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENTS 'As the.biological inventories in the North Puget Sound area are more.complete and the relationship,of the food web and general ecology are better understood, economic values can be refined and additional values developed. The economist can then relate more precise values for each area and species. Much of the economic worth of the Puget Sound is found in the value derived from marine-related recreational experience. Sport fishing and hunting are evaluate'd'through use of field studies in which sportsmen were asked to indicate the value they. placed on their hunti ng and fishing experience. Waterfront property is evaluated through a survey of recent real estate transactions. Other recreational experiences are evaluated-in terms of utilization day or other values which although not necessarily based on detailed field studies appear reasonable to the authors. The present water .quality of Puget Sound supports a commercial fishing and tourist, industry of considerable magnitude. These industries in turn provide expenditure streams which support other state.commerce. Regional input/output analysis permits the estimation of.commerce dependent upon these industries. The following table reports results of such, an analysis: -33- FISHERIES OUT-OF-STATE TOURISTS AGRICULTURE $ 13,800,000 $ 28,900jO00 MANUFACTURING 27,400,000 20,60010000 CONSTRUCTION 6,300,000 6,800,000 SERVICES $ 27,200,000 $ 70,30d,000 COMMUNICATIONS/UTILITIES $ 8,400,000 $ 111000,000 TRADES $ 319800,000 $ 65,400,000 FINANCE/INSURANCE/REAL ESTATE $ 9,900,000 $ 11,400,000 HOUSEHOLD INCOMES $121,000,000 $119,000,0m STATE & LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE $ 18,.900,000 $@19,7009-000 The processed value of the Puget Sound commercial fisheries harvest was $109 million in 1973. This industry and those dependent on its expenditures in the Washington economy provided incomes of $121,million to Washington households and $18.9 million to state and local govern- ment. Expenditures by out-of-state tourists visiting the Puget Sound region for recreational purposes were $130 million in 1973. This expenditure stream and the commerce it supported provided incomes Of $119 million to Washington households and $19.7 million in state and local government revenues. The North Puget Sound,area value is.conservatively estimated to be between $888 and $972 mil lion as shown in the following table:. -34- LOW - HIGH SPORT HARVESTED FISH AND BIRDS $ 1,287,000 39815,000 (NET BENEFIT) NONHUNTED BIRDS 75,000 600,000 (RECREATIONAL VALUE) RECREATION SCUBA DIVING DAYS 5,125,000 10,250,000 BOATING ACTIVITY DAYS $ 62,738,500 $125,477,000 PARKS RECREATIONAL USE $ 12,449,500 $ 24,899,000 PROPERTY VALUE (1973) $781,529,500 .$781,529,500 COMMERCIAL SALMON FISHERIES $ 25,119,344 $ 25,119,344 (1973) TOTAL $888,323,844 $971,688,844 This represents only a part of the unprocessed marine resources, a conservative estimate of the land values, and recreational value of the area. If these values were reduced,by only 10 percent by accidental or chronic pollution, the first year's depreciation would amount to between $88.8 and $97.1 million. RECOMMENDATIONS In view of the great value of the North Puget Sound area in .natural resources, recreational opportunities*and land va lues,@"it is recommended that: 1. Minimize the risk of either an accidental petroleum spill or of other hazardous material. 2. Maintain the marine water quality,guarding -against chronic pollution by petroleum or other.hazardous material. -35- THE MARINE AND ESTUARINE HABITATS OF WASHINGTON Baseline Studies Program Department.of Ecology August 1974 ATTACHMENT A INTRODUCTION The marine and estuarine lands and waters of Washington Contain a diverse assemblage of habitats. These habitats are composed of a variety of sub- stra.te types, occur at various depths, and are bathed by waters.of varying physical and chemical make up. Because of this habitat diversity, the biological components'.of Washington's marine and estuarine environment are also diverse. Certain organisms are found exclusively within one habitat type, while others can live in several habitats either as an adul-t or sequentially during.their life.history. However, habitat types are not i,nfinite in variety, rather they can be defined on the basis of a few general types and their associated organisms.likewise identified. As a general rule then', to study a representative number of'specific areas containing common habitat'types would 'provide data useful in describing all such habitat types. Therefore, because of time, money, and en'vironmental damage, proh-ibit sampling of every beach and.subtidal area in Washingtonj we can use the habitat concept in meeting the survey nee 'ds of the Baseline Study Program. This means that at the outset of the study we@chose several representative habitat types that seemed, from past experience, to belcommon. We then chose specific areas that appeared to be representative of each type. Each area will then be sampled in enough detail that a statisticaI statement can be made,about that.beach as (1) a separate ecological unit on its own, and (2) a representative of.like habitat types in.other comparable.areas around the sound. This method will work to a limited degree.based on a literature review and this year's''field data; but to put';statistical bounds upon the variation between areas, more spatially diverse data is needed than a one year study can generate. We then hope to inventory these habitats that are in the intertidal zone throughout the study area and the State using aerial photography. Subtidal.areas.must,await the development and employment of .an underwater.camera system for rapidly acquiring bottom data over large areas. The.result of this activity would be a series of maps and text on the distribution and abundance of habitat types and discussion of the species composition,.bf abundance, seasonal use, etc., of each,habitat type. HABITAT TYPES The following general habitat types, based mainly on substrate charac- teristics,has been adopted by the Baseline Studies Program. Rock Sand Mud Mixed Coarse Boul der, gravel , sand Mixed Fine Gra vel, sand, mud Eelgrass bed Kelp bed Salt Marsh Open water, The vertical zonation and specific substrate characteristics associated with each habitat are detailed.in the Baseline Studies Program publication entitled, "Vertical Zonation and Substrate Characteristics ofthe Marine and Estuarine Lands and Waters of Washington." ROCK Therock habitat consists of a solid substrate that can occur at any water depth, have any slope, or occur under any hydrological energy conditions. Large boulders usually can be considered representative of the same habitat. The habitat surface is stable. This habitat is abundant in North Puget Sound and occurs with low frequency els6where. SAND This habitat occurs from moderate to high energy situations. The surface can be@essentially flat in small.patches or where it is more extensive, the surface is not stable. The slopes are always shallow. San can occur at any depth. This habitat.occurs in a,number of areas either as large expanses of sand'or as small patches. MUD Mud occurs in low energy situations, at any.water depth and has a shallow slope. Clay, representative of a very fine consolidated mud, occurs rarely. Generally mud is characteristic of protected bays and deeper water with low currents. This habitat is common. MIXED COARSE: (BOULDER, GRAVEL AND SAND) This compl,ex habitat is found in high to moderate energy situations, medium to shallow depths, and has a medium to shallow slope4 The large boulders represent a sand habitat. The size fractions in between contain a variety of surfaces for organisms to attach to, crawl under, or hide behind.or in. Such a habitat is often diverse in its faunal and floral components. This habitat is of common occurrence. -2- MIXED FINE: (GRAVEL2 SAND, AND MUD) This, is another complex habitat which seems to have a characteristic and diverse biota. This h .abitat occurs in moderate to low energy situations, moderate to shallow slope$, and probably at all depths. This habitat is' of moderate occurrence-in North Puget Sound. It is common in other areas Of Puget Sound and is characteristic of the good little neck clam beds of Washington. EELGRASS BED This habitat is characterized bya bioloyical substrate rather than a physical substrate. Zostera marina and ostera nana occur either in strips or in wide beds from three to To-ur feet above mean lower low,water (M.L.L.W.) to eight to twelve feet below M.L.L.W. -They occur in moderate to low energy situations and from medium to shallow slope. The physical substrate in which the plants are rooted ranges from sand to@mud, but usually a sandy mud. This. habitat is common in most of the marine waters of Washington. KELP BED Kelp attaches to rocky substrates whether gravel or solid rock. Therefore, this biological habitat occurs-in association with either a rocky or mixed coarse habitat. The energy conditions range from high to low. The depth ranges from approximately thirty to fifty feet below M.L.L.W. ' to two feet above M.L.L.W. This habitat is common. Slopes range from shallow to steep. SALT-MARSH Another.biological habitat, salt marshes, Occur-mainly above mean.high water and are composed of a number of plants. The physical substrate ranges from mud to mixed fine. Energy conditions Are low and slope is shallow. This habitat is rare. OPEN WATER This habitat is physically characterized by a lack of a solid substrate. The organisms are adapted for constant swimming or floating and rarely spend much, time:in other habitats except to feed or as they change to another stage in their life history.. This habitat occurs in all of the mari,ne and estuarine waters of Washington. -3- VERTICALZONATION AND SUBSTRATE CHARACTERISTICS OFTHE MARINE AND ESTUARINE LANDS AND WATERS OF WASHINGTON Baseline Studies Program Department of Ecology August 1974 ATTACHMENT B INTRODUCTION A division of the marine*and estuarine lands and waters of Washington into general habitat,types has been made by the Baseline Studies Program (BSP) of the Department of Ecology. This classification is as crude as the data upon which it was based, but sufficient to direct the field study portion of BSP to specific areas needing attention., However, in order that future field surveys be undertaken with more ef- ficiency and an increase in scientific productivity, a refined classification system has been developedb All data being gathered by BSP scientists is being analyzed on the basis of this system. The result will be a more accurate-de- scription of the.habitat types of Washington. ,Field data,gathered by'sc.ientfsts, educators, and interested laymencold be of value to BSP. However, in order to-permit rapid and accurate incorporation of the data into the BSP data files, the exact tidal height (or water depth) (relative to M.L.L.W) and substrate characteristics, as shown in table two, should be provided, where possible, -for each sample. TABLE 1 VERTICAL ZONATION OF THE MARINE AND ESTUARINE LANDS OF WASHINGTON* Uppermost Horizon Extreme high water to mean high water High Intertidal Mean high water to mean sea level Middle Intertidal Mean sea level to mean lower low water Low Intertidal Mean. lower low water to extreme low water Subtidal Photosynthetic Extreme low water to lower limit of photosynthetic zone (approximately -15 meters at M.L.L.W.) Subtidal Non photosynthetic Lower limit of photosynthetic zone,,to bed of marine waters ,*Modified from Ricketts Calvin, and Hedgpeth. Between Pacific tides. Fourth Edition. 196@ -2- TABLE 2 SUBSTRATE CLASSIFICAT ION OF THE MARINE AND ESTUARI NE LANDS OF WASHINGTON* TYPE CHARACTERISTICS Inorganic .Solid Rock Continous or repeated strata Boulder Greater than 256mm in diameter Cobble 64 to 256mm' Pebble-Gravel 4 to 64m Sand Verytoarse 1 to 4mm Coarse 0.5mm to lmm Medium 0.25mm to 0.5mm Gritty in texture Fine 12mm to O.,25mm Very fine 0.06mm to 0.12mm Silt 0.06mm to 0.004mm Clay Less than 0.004mm smooth and..slick Organic Shell fragments Calcium carbonate; often contains fragments of mollusc shells. Detritus Accumulated wood, sticks, and other undecayed coarse plant materials. Fibrous peat -Partially decomposed plant remains; parts of Plants..readily distinguishable. Pulpy peat Very finely d *ivided.plan remains; parts of plants not distinguishable; varies in color from green to brown; varies greatly in consistence, often being semi-fluid. Muck Black, finely'divided organic matter; com- pletely decomposed Eelgrass Kelp NOTE: Data on beach geology and wave hydrodynamics indicates that beach slope and substrate characteristics are generally related to wave and/or current action. Therefore, in most cases (except for rocky areas) charoc7 terization of beaches and subtidal, areas'by substrate type will be providing -on the beach slope information and wave and/or current energy history. *As modified by Langer and Roelufs, 1944 and the Wentworth..scale as modified by Udden. -3- TABLE 3 ZONATION OF THE MARINE AND ESTUARINE WATERS OF WASHINGTON Surface Surface to -1.0 meters Midwater-photosynthetic -I.Om to lower limit of photosynthetic zone (approximately :..1:5m from M.L.L.W). Midwater-nonphotosynthetic Lower limit of photosynthetic zone (approximately -15m from M.L.L.W.) to within l.'.O of-the bottom. Bottom Within I.Om of the bottom -4- SIGNIFICANT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF WASHINGTON REVISION Land and Marine Analysis Program Department of Ecology January 1975 ..ATTACHMENT INTRODUCTION In accordance with Objective three of the Department of Ecology's Oil Baseline Study Plan of April 1974, the following species of marine oriented animals and plants have been placed on the. Significant Biological Resources list on the basis of one or .more.of the followi,ng criteria. 1. Commercially.obtained for..food or for industrial products. 2. Recreationally important. 3. A known important food item of a commercial or recreational species. 4. A known important predator or competator on a commercial or recreational species. Additional species will be added to the list as future research adds to our knowledge of the food webs of the mar.ine environment and as the geographic coverage of the Baseline.Study is expanded. MAMMALS Scientific Name Common Name Lutra canadensis Riv er otter Eumetopias-ju-bata- Northern sea lion (steller) Phoca vitulina Harbor seal Callorhinus ursinus North Pacific fur seal Orcinus orca Pacific killer whale Globicephala scammonii Pacific blackfish Phocoena 2ILo @oena Pacific harbor porpoise BIRDS: Offshore Feeders Scientific Name Common Name Gavia immer Common Loon Gavia aretica pacifica Pacific Arctic Loon Gavia stellata Red-throated Loon Podiceps grisegena holbollii Holboel Red-Necked Grebe Podiceps auritus cornutus Horned Grebe Podiceps nigricollis.californicus American Eared Grebe Aechmorphus occIdentalis Western Grebe Phalacrocorax auritus cincinatus White-Crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus albociliatus Northwestern Double-Crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Double-Crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax penicillatus Brant's Cormorant Phalacrocorax.pelagicus resplendens Baird Pelagic Cormorant Olor columbianus Whistling Swan* Branta canadensis occidentalis Western Canada Goose* Branta nigricans Black Brant* Anser albifrons frontalis Pacific White-Fronted Goose* Chen caerulescens caerulescens Lesser Snow Goose* Anas platyrhynchos platyrhynchos Mallard* Anas acuta Pintail Anas crecca cokalinensis Green Winged Teal Anas americana American Wigeon Anas clypeata Northern Shoveler Aythya valisineria Canvasback Aythya marila neararctica Greater Scaup Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup Bucephala clangula americana- Common Goldeneye Bucephala islandica Barrow's Goldeneye Bucephala albeola. Bufflehead Clangula hyemalis Oldsquaw Histrionicus histrionicus Harlequin Duck Melanitta deglandi dixoni Western White-Winged Scoter Melanitta perspicillata Surf Scoter Melanitta nigra Black Scoter Mergus merganser americanus Common Merganser Mer&us serrator Red Breasted Merganser .Fulica americana. americana American Coot* Stercorarisus parasiticus Parasitic Jaeger Larus galucescens Glaucous-Winged Gull* Larus occidentalls occidentalis Western Gull* Larus argentatus. Herring Gull* Larus californicus California.Gull* Larus delawarensis Ring-Billed Gull* Larus canus Mew Gull* Larus philadelphia Bonaparte's Gull Larus heermanni Heermann's Gull* Larus thayeri Thayer's Gull* Sterna hirundo hirundo Common Tern Uria aalge californica Common Murre Cepphus columba Pigeon Guillemot Brachyramphus marmorat .us marmoratus Marbled Murrelet BIRDS: Offshore Feeders (Continued) Scientific Name Common Name Ptychoramphus aleutica Cassin's Auklet Cerorhinca monocerata Rhinoceros Auklet Lunda cirrhata Tufted Puffin Steganopus tricolor Wilsons Phalorope Lobipes lobatus Northern Phalorope *also found on shore BIRDS: Shorebirds Scientific Name Common Name Ardea herodias fannini Northwestern Great Blue Heron Numenius phaeopus Whimbiel Actitis macularia Spotted Sandpiper Heteroscelu-s incanum, Wandering Tattler Tringa-melanoleucus Greater Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Lesser Yellowlegs Calidris canutus rufa, American.Knot Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris minutilla Least Sandpiper Calidris.alpina Dunlin Llmnodromus griseus caurinus Short-Billed Dowitcher Limnodromu.Is scolopaceus Lo ng@Billed Dowitcher Calidris mauri Western Sandpiper Calidris alba Sanderling,' Heamatopus bachmani Black Oystercatche,r Charadrius semipalmatus Semipalmted Plover Charadrius vociferus vociferus Killdeer Pluvialis squatarola BlAck-Bellied Plover Aphriza virgata Surfbird Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala Black Turnstone BIRDS: Casual Marine Feeders Scientific Name Common Name Megaceryle.alcyon Belted Kingfisher Corvus caurinus Northwestern Crow Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle Pandion haliaetus Osprey FISHES: Demersal-epibenthic.- Scientific Name Common Name Anoplopoma. fimbria Black cod Ophiodon elongatus Lingcod Citharichthys sordidus Pacific sand dab Atheresthes stomias Turbot Eopsetta jordani Petrale sole Glyptocephalus zachirus Rex sole Hippoglossus stenolepis Pacific halibut Isopsetta isolepis Butter sole Lepidopsetta bilineata Rock sole Microstomus.2acificus Dover sole Parophrys vetulus English sole Platichthys stellatus Starry flounder Pleuronichthxs coenosus C-0 sole PleuronichthXs decurrens Curlfin sole Psettichthys melanosticus Sand sole Hippoglossoides elassodon Flathead sole Lyopsetta exilis Slender sole Porichthys notatus Plain fin midshipman Gadus macrocephalus 'Pacific cod Merluccius productus 'Pacific hake Microgadus proximus Pacific tam cod Theragra chalcogrammus Walleye pollock Anarrhichthys ocellatus Wolf eel Sebastes alutus Pacific Ocean perch Sebastes brevispinis Short spine rockfish Sebastes caurinus Copper rockfish Sebastes emphaeus Puget Sound rockfish Sebastes flavidus Yellowtail rockfish Sebastes malanops 'Black rockfish Sebastes paucispinis Bocaccio Sebastes ruberrimus Red snapper Sebastes pinninger Prange rockfish Sebastes goodei Chili pepper rockfish Sebastes babcocki Flag (red banded) rockfish Sebastes aleutianus Rough eye Sebastes diploproa Split nose Sebastes elongatus Greenstriped rockfish Sebastes auriculatus Brown rockfish Sebastes proriger Redstripe rockfish Raja binoculata. Big skate @@a rhina Long nose skate Hydrolagus colliei Rat fish Acipenser transmontanus White sturgeon Acipenser medirostris Green sturgeon FISHES: Shoreline Scientific Name Common Name @Salmo clarki clarki sea run cut throat trout liexagrammo@@ decagrammus Kelp greenling Hexagrammos lagocephalus Rock greenling Hexagrammos stelleri White spotted greenling 9nophrys bison Buffalo sculpin Hemilepidotus hemilepidotus Red irish lord Leptocottus armatus Pacific staghorn sculpin Oligocottus maculosus Tide pool sculpin Scorpaenichthys marmoratus Cabezon Amphistichus rhodoterus Redtail surf perch Brachyistius frenatus Kelp perch, Cymatokaster aggregata Shiner perch Embiotoca lateralis Striped sea perch Hyperprosopon argenteum Walleye surf perch Rhacochilus vacca Pile perch Phanderodon furcatus White sea perch Apodichthys.flavidus Penpoint gunnel, Pholis ornata Saddleback gunnel Pholis laeta Crescent gunnel Sebastes maliger Qillback. rockfish FISHES: Open Water Scientific Name 'Common Name Alosa sapidissima American shad Clupea harengus pallasi Clupea pallasii Engraulis mordax mordax Northern anchovy Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho-salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Pink salmon Oncorhynchus nerka Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus keta Chum salmon Oncorhynchus masu Masu' salmon Salmo gairdneri Steelhead Hypomesus pretiosus pretiosus Surf smelt. Spirinchus thaleichthys Longfin smelt Thaleichthys pacificus Eulachon Mallotus villosus Capelin Cynoscion nobilis White sea bass Ammodytes hexapterus Pacific sand lance Squalus acanthias Spiny dogfish ECHINODERMS Scientific Name Common Name Parastichopus californicus Sea cucumber Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis Green urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus Red urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus Purple sea urchin, Pisaster orchraceus Purple starfish Pycnopodia heliantKoides 'Sunflower starfish CRUSTACEANS Scientific Name Common Names Pandalus jordani Ocean pink shrimp Pandalus borealis Pink shrimp Pandalopsis dispar Sidestripe shrimp Pandalus platyceros Spot shrimp Pandalus danae Dock shrimp Pandalus goniurtis Coonstripe shrimp Pandalus hypsinotus. Coonstripe shrimp Lopholithodes f6rmaminatus Box crab Cancer magister Dungeness crab Cancer productus Red rock crab Lopholithodes mandtii Pug et Sound king crab Orchestia traskiana. Sand flea Idothae resecata Beach isopod Euphausia pacifica Euphausid Idothae wosnesenskii Beach isopod ANNELIDS Scientific Name Common Name Nereis vexillosa Pile worm MOLLUSCS Scientific Name Common Name Crassostrea virginica Eastern oyster Ostrea lurida. Olympia oyster .Crassostrea gigas Japanese oyster Crassostrea gigas kumamoto Kumamoto oyster Mytilus edulis @Blue mussel Mytilus californianus California mussel Haliotis rufesceans Red abalone Haliotis kamtschatkana Northern abalone Saxidomus giganteus Butter clam Clinocardium nuttalli Common cockle Panope generosa Geoduck Tresus nuttalli Horse clam Iresus capax Big neck Mya arenaria Soft shell clam Venerupis japonica Japanese little neck Zirfaea pilsbrVi Piddock Siliqua patula Razor clam Protothaca staminea Rock or native little neck Chlamys hastata hericia Pacific pink shrimp Pecten caurinus Sea scallop Hinnites multirugosus Rock scallop Chlamys hindsi Hinds' scallop Polinices lewisii Moo'n snail Thais lamellosa Wrinkles purple snail Cryptochiton stelleri Giant gunboat chiton Mopalia lignosa Chiton Urosalpinx cinerea Native drill Ocinebra japonica Japanese oyster drill Loligo opalescens Pacific Coast squid Octopus hongkongensis Octopus Octopus.dofleini Octopus SEAWEEDS Scientific Name Common Name Gigartina papillata Red algae Gigartina exasperata Red algae Iridaea cordata Red algae Nereocystis Luetkeana. Brown algae, bullwhip, kel Ip @@crocysti@i pyrifera Kelp Torphyra perforata patens Red algae, nori Porphyra perforata perforata Red,algae, nori Porphyra @@1@niata Red algae, nori Porphyra.'san jaunensis, Red algae, nori frophyra iib`&ottae Red algae, nori Prophyra porphyra nereocystip Red algae,,nori GRASSES Scientific Name Common Name Zostera marina Eelgrass Phyllospadix scouleri Surf..grass OIL BASELINE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND TASKS The objective and their respective tasks are listed below: 1. Determine the magnitude and location.of recent and potential oil contamination of the marine waters of Washington. A. Determine location of oil contamination B. Determine type of oil. C. Determine quality of oil 2. Determine the economic value of man-made structures and man's activities that would be damaged by oil pollution in the marine and estuarine waters of Washington. A. List typesof structures located in/on marine and estuarine waters that would be affected by oil pollution. B... Determine,which activities in.or adjacent to,marine and estuarine waters might be affected by oil pollution. C. Map location of structures. D. Map location of water dependent activities. Determine the indiv.idual.and collective economic value of the structures and activities for an a ppropriate@base year that Would be affected by oil pollution. F Develop a method for assessing damages Against an oil polluter for negatively affecting human uses and structures'of the marine environment. 'G. Determine potential impact of oil pollution upon man's activities in the marine and,estuarine waters of Washington in appropriate future years. ATTArUMCKITn Determine and list the significant biological resources of the marine and estuarine waters of Washington. A. Determine the commercial organisms. B. Determine the recreational organisms. C. Determine food items of commercial organisms. D. Detelrmi*ne food items of recreational organisms. E. Determine organisms that otherwise directly effect commercial and recreationalorganisms. F. Determine marine oriented birds and mammals other than above that may be damaged by oil pollution. 4. Determine the economic.value Of'significant biological researches that would be affected by oil pollu tionin the marine and estuarine waters of Washington. A. Determine economic value of commercial organisms for an appropriate base year. B. Determine economic value of recreational organisms for an appropriate base,year. C. Determine economic value of food items for commercial organism., D. Determine economic value of food items for recreational organisms. E. Determine the economic value of eelgrass.beds.as habitats. F. Determine the economic value ofseaweed beds as habitats... G. Determine economic value'of organisms that otherwise directly affect commercial and recreational organisms. H. Determine economic value of marine oriented birds and mammals other than above that may be affected by oil pollution. I. Develop a method for*adjusting the economic. values obtained above for inflation and other variables that may vary from year to year., J Determine method for assessing damages against oil polluter for negatively affecting the commercial and recreational biological resources. K. Determine method of.assessing the damages against an oil polluter for negatively.affecting.the food items of commercial and recreational resources. L. Determine method of assessing damages against oil polluter for negatively affecti.ng all other significant biological resources. 5. Determine the types, distribution and abundance of major habitats in the marine.and estuarine waters of Washington. A., Prepare a list of habitats in the marine and estuarine waters of Vashington. B. Map habitat,distribution inNorth, Puget Sound. C., Map habitat distribution in rest of marine and estuarine waters.of Washington. D. Calculate habitat abundance by region. 6. Document the distribution and abundance of biological resources and Televant oceanographic parameter in itertidal and shallow subtidal,habitats. A. Review available-information on North Puget Sound. B. Inventory these resources during all. seasons in the North Puget Sound area for one year.. C. Review available information on other areas of Washington. Q. Extend Inventory- E. Monitor yearly variation in resources'and parameters above,in North Puget Sound area.. F. Mdnitor:yearly variation in all marine andestuarine waters of Washington. 7. Determine how and the degree to which the significant biological resources would be affected by oil pollution, A. Review data on: oil spills,..bioassays, and other sources as needed. B. Review available data on biology of significantbiological resources and estimate probability of effect by-oil pollution. C. As needed, conduct appropriate bioassays on selected biological marine organisms.for various life history stages measuring uptake, retention and release by type and amount of oil. D. As..needed, conduct appropriate.bioassays on selected marine organ.isms for var.ious life history stages measuring toxicity.. E. As needed, conduct appropriate bioassays on selected marine organ.isms for various life history stages measuring sublethal effects. F. As needed, conduct appropriate bioassays on selected marine organisms for various life history stages measuring toxicity upon consumers of contaminated organisms. G. As needed, conduct appropriate bioassays on selected marine organisms for various life history stages.measuring sublethal effects upon consumers of contaminated organism. H. Document the existing background level of oil-in selected marine organisms during various life stages, seasons and areas as well as-in marine and estuarine watersand sediments. 1. Determine the movement and biological effects of oil entrained in deeper water and/or in sediments after oil spill. J. Develop oil spill bi ological response team to analyze short term effects from an actual oil spill. K. Using data from tasks A-G, and I, predict those significant biological resources that might be damaged. 8. bevelop the capability of predicting the movement of oil discharged upon the water surface. 9. Determine the distribution and abundance of intertidal and shallow subtidal populations of significant biological resources that serve as major sources of recruitment for adjacent.areas. MARINE ANALYSIS PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS RESOURCE MANAGERS Washington Department of Game Washington Department of Fisheries Washington Department of Natural Resources Washington Department of Social and Health Services SPECIALISTS Dr. Ken Chew (Invertebrates) College of,Fisheries University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 Dr. Ron Phi'llips (Botany) Seattle Pacific University Department of Biology Seattle, Washington 98119 Dr. Walter Pereyra National,Marine.Fi,sheries Service 1700 Westlake.Avenue North Seattle, Washington 98109 Dr. Clifford Barnes (Oceanography) Department of Oceanography University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195, Dr. Gordon Alcorn (Birds) University of Puget Sound Biology Department Tacoma, Washington. 98416 Dr. James Bray (Economics) Division of Marine Resources University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 AD HOC MEMBERS Corps of Engineers Environmental.Protection Agency Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration METRO Sea Grant ATTACHMENT E @OIL POLLUTION ANDTHE SIGNIFICANT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF PUGET SOUND: A REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION PREPARED FOR STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PREPARED BY BEAK CONSULTANTS INCORPORATED .1336 S. W. Second Avenue. Portland, Oregon 97201 Project D2089 January.17, 1975 ATTACHMENT F 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION I-1 II. METHODS II-1 III. RESULTS COMPUTER OUTPUT III-1 A. Annotated Bibliography III-1 B. Composite Species Fact Sheets III-1 C. Composite Oil Impact Fact Sheets III-1 D.Composite Habitat Fact Sheets III-1 IV RESULTS - TEXT: Probable Impact IV-1 INTRODUCTION IV-1 A. Rock IV-4 B. Sand IV-30 C. Mud IV-49 D. Mixed - coarse IV-65 E. Mixed - fine IV-8O F. Eelgrass Bed IV-98 G. Kelp Bed IV-113 H. Salt Marsh IV-127 I. Open Water IV-133 V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS V-1 A. General V-1 B. Assessment of the Information Base V-1 C. Relative Habitat Vulnerability V-1 D. Relative Organism Group Vulnerability V-6 E. Relative Impacts of Oils and Petrochemicals V-7 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B INTRODUCTION. Beak Consultants Incorporated was. retained by,the Washington State Depart- ment of Ecology to conduct a review and analysis of the available literature on the ecology of the."Significant Biological Resources" of Puget. Sound, and on possible effects of spilled oils and petrochemical products on these biota. As. part of thestudy, fact sheets incorporating information on distribution, aspects of habitat, ecology and life,history, and susceptibility to oil and petrochemical pollution were prepared for each resource species. In addition, an annotated bibliography and a written report outlining potential effects of oil pollution were supplied. In order to provide a useful finished product incorporating a large volume of material, BEAK independently devised a general computerized information sorting and retrieval syste-i. This system, -as it was used for this project, has produced composite species fact sheets and an annotated bibliography which fulfill Objective 6, Task A of Washington State's Marine Analysis.Program.: Objective 7, Task A and part of Objective 7, Task B have been fulfilled by.computerized composite oil impact fact sheets. The remainder of Objective 7, Task B has been fulfilled by the text section.of this report. Magnetic tapes including all.raw information have.also been provided. The organization of biologicalinformation in BEAK s part of the Marine Analysis Program has followed guidelines established by the Washington Department,of 'Ecology. The species and habitats to.beconsidered were also defined by the Department. Traditional literature searches, including computerized programs, have attempted to manage information by incorporating abstracted written materials, developing annotated bibliographies, and preparing key word indices. These services are essentially the same as cross-referenced card,index systems, but allow for the management OfLmore information and faster searches of stored BEAK sources. The search for material is shortened considerably, but the user must eventually return to the original source for specific information. BEAK's system of computerizing.data on a more detailed level*was utilized here because of the unique goals of the project. Information was gathered by qualified biologists reading within their fields. Data-type information from written materials was abstracted and stored in an integrated retrievable data-!- base. The data were organized to maximize the-retrieval of information in such categories as organism group, species, area of distribution, life stage, habitat petrochemical type, and impact. The computer output from the system consists of an annotated bibliography and fact sheets which display information on distribution, habitat, and oil impact for each species in composite format. In addition to composited'information,*each fact sheet includes information for each species on life history, economic value, predators, prey, and co=ents on the article made by the reviewer. The methods section will describe r-ethodolog- ies employed by the computerized system in more detail'. For probable oil pollution impact assessment, a total.of nine general habitat types, encompasing over 150 combinations of habitat-characteristics* havil been considered in this study. The 250 species designated for the literature search have been assigned to thirteen broad organism groupings. By identifying these habitat types and gathering data for input on species groups, the number of organism-habitat combinations was reduced to a manageable size and it became possible to estimate impacts for each of these combinations.* 'A block di agram of BEAK's system as it exists,(and as it can be expanded) is presented in Figure 1. -All inputs have involved: (1) the reading and abstracting of articles, (2) coding and keypunching of selected materials, (3) several editorial steps, and '(4) storage of the information. Information BEAK in the output will be useful to planners and legislators concerned with projectec petrochemical pollution in the Puget Sound area. Further, the output will be useful to scientists interestedlin examing background data on the biota of Puget Sound and, of course, the impacts of oils upon them. If BEAK's system is expanded (as indicated in Figure 1), its application to local and regional planning, siting studies, the projection.of natural resource management needs, and the assessment of actual and potIential impacts of awide variety of human activities should be apparent. V FiGuRE I PlEDITIONAC PUGtT SWW HICAL I SPEC I ES MLOGICAL INFORMIXTION PfA;rI ON DATA BASE IMPACT INFORMATION A@D rls@ PLR.74ING Fc.7ROCHF-111CALS CI0,',W4OMIC INFOX,1ATION EDGINrl kRICLJLTURAJ. FV*FF STRIAL DISOIARGE @LITICAL STRLCMRE -ARIL4E LONSTRUCTION JOUS -DG b0CMING BIAGE -CA 17ATA FIRE-TE0iiEL(@G I xm VILL YHtERmAL EFFLUENT HPRC)C,P,W,i[C DATA L L ES rNGOITG. To, I 4NOTATED SORT/RURIEVE RIKIOGRAPHY I PROGRAM COPOSIT5 FACT @wbfs FREiO-LfiC-ETA5-AGg7SFg LSPECIES I PA31TATS IfPAECTS I Cmi I RI LIP 'AL TPAD, I T I ON EVISq, [INTERPRETATION', REPORTS I ExISTING SYSTEM ---PoTD,,TiAL E)TANsioNs F ' T'@ OTI 1: !@E T W I j @JA @II. METHODS The methods used by BEAK to accomplish the purposes of this project have been briefly mentioned in the Introduction. Essentially these involved the use of a computerized sorting and retrieval system to rearrange information from the available literature into comprehensive fact sheets on distribution and, habitat associations. To facilitate the review of all material entered into the system and to allow a reader to locate the original data source, an anno-. tated bibliography, listed alphabetically by author, was also compiled by com- puter. The textual portion of this report serves interpretive and predictive functions. In order to build the data-base from which composite'fact sheets were de- rived, information'was extracted from the literature and entered onto species and oil impact information sheets. The data,.were subsequently keypunched from these sheets directly into the data-base. The species information sheets con- tained the following categories for data entry: Species Life Stage Area Predators Location Food Month Life History Habitat Value Physical-Chemical Comments Abundance In addition to these categories, oil impact information sheets contained the following categories: Petrochemical Studied Impact Parameter Imjict Criterion' Dose Result Nine majorhabitat types (described below) were accessed by.species, life stage,.area, and time of occurrence. The habitat composite sheets are org as follows: Habitat Type Vertical Zonation Species Jan. Feb. Mar. Life Stage Area (star indicates occurrence) Each piece of information occurring on these fact sheets is accozpanied by its reference number and the value rating that had been assigned to it. Approximately 250 species of plants and animals were considered in this study (See Appendix B). For most of these species, the system recognizes five life stages (Tables 1 and 2), covering development from eggs or gametes to re- producing adults. "Area" refers to one of the following areas: Open Coast Hood Canal Strait of Juan De Fuca Southern Puget Bound San Juan Archipelago Straits of Georgia North Puget Sound Discovery PaE-.age Whidbey Basin Greater Puget Sound Admiralty Inlet General (specified) Puget Sound Basin "Location" is defined as closely as possible within the "Area," using latitude and longitude whenever appropriate. When available, the month during which the study was conducted is indicated. The habitat is specified as closely as possible. Definitions of terms used in habitat description are given in Table 3. The habitat designations which appear on the composite species fact sheets combine appropriate description word a for each of five groups of habitat char- acteristics (Table 4). For example, "Demersal-benthic/Subtidal-photosynthetic/ Inorganic/Mixed/Very coarse" might appear. By combining descriptors in this way, over 150 combinations of habitat characteristics can be applied to actual habitats observed in the field. Physical-chemical data include such parameters as temperature, salinity, light, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, etc. Abundance data assume a wide variety of forms depending upon'the information source. Predators and food organisms are indicated to the narrowest taxon. Life history information is entered in paragraph form and includes such information as migration and spawning babi- tats, fecundity, growth patterns, etc. "Value" is a qualitative category and reflects the commercial, recreational, predator, competitor or prey status of the organism. The petrochemical referred to in an oil impact fact sheet can be any one of the 35 crude oils and petrochemical products given in Table 5. Impact @a- rameters have been divided into direct and indirect impacts as follows: Direct Indirect Mortality Food supply Reproduction Predators Predation Environment (specified) Tainting Avoidance Growth Physiology (specified) Mobility Density (specified) The impact "criterion" given on oil impact fact sheets depends on the information source, and may include such entries as LD50P TLM, 2 mortality, etc. "Dose" refers to oil exposure or treatment. The outcome of a set of ex- perimental or observational conditions is given as the "result." After designing the data input system described above, the literature search was begun by using commercial search services to provide an idea of the availability of pertinent information and help define the direction in which to proceed. Commercial search services were neither detailed nor comprehensive enough in their coverage to be used alone, however. Large areas of pertinent information were defined, and these were then searched in more detail. After having been read, articles were rated regarding their usefulness to the project, not merely for their scientific excellence or validity, on a scale of 1 (excellent) to 5 (poor). Information of questionable validity is of BEAK- questionable usefulness, but information of high veracity may also be of only marginal usefulness, and may therefore receive a low rating. The suitability of the data for inclusion into the system was the major consideration behind the rating. The storage-retrieval system conceived by BEAK uses Data Management Lan- guage (DML), a computer language provided by Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC). The program was run on a Univac 1108 computer in both timesharing and batch modes. The use of a time-sharing system has the advantage that users in several locations can simultaneously access the data-base. To reduce the amount of computer storage space required, and to facilitate the cross-referencing of the information, codes were created for the major data input components of the program. Habitats were given a five-digit code, each digit representing one of the five classes of habitat descriptors given in Table 4. In this way, habitat zones could be combined with a large variety of substrate types and textures allowing much detailed information to be stored in limited computer space. Other input data were coded to reflect either general ecological or oil impact information using the first digit of a two-digit code. The second digit represented parameters such as month, life stage, etc. After the data were abstracted and coded, they were edited and then key- punched for entry into the data-base. The data-base was edited once in its 11rawil state and again after the compositing process. The output contained in the species and oil fact sheets was used as part o@. the basis for writing the projected impact section of this report. Using the composited species and oil impact fact sheets, the text was prepared to follow the logical sequence of the program's development. General impacts of oils (crudes, light products, and heavy products) on each of nine generalized habitats is discussed. Under each habitat type, each of thirteen organism groups were discussed relative to their occurrence in that habitat. The nine habitats are given in Table 6. Habitat types referred to in the text are independent of depth, and, with the exception of "open water," primarily represent substrate types. The five "mixed" habitats used in the composite fact sheets have been condensed into two in the text. "Mixed - Coarse" in the text combines "mixed/very coarse" and "mixed/coarse" from the composite sheets. "Mixed - Fine" in the text combines "mixed/medium," it mixed/fine," and "mixed/ very fine" from the composite sheets. Other habitat types should be self- explanatory. Under each habitat type, each of thirteen organism groups were discussed relative to their occurrence in that habitat and their susceptibility to oil impacts in those habitats. Each subsection of the "Expected Impact" portion of the text is followed by an indication of the reliability of the material presented in that subsec- tion. Criteria used for assigning reliabilities are as follows: Very reliable: The information presented is well documented in the literature and is supported by generally accepted biological and physical principles. Reasonably reliable: The information presented is supported by generally accepted biological and physical principles and is par- tially supported in the literature. Deductive: The information presented is supported by generally ac- cepted biological and physical principles and is circumstantially supported in the literature. Speculative: The information presented is consistent with generally 8 R A -K accepted biological and physical principles, and is suggested by information in the literature. z BEAK iii. REsnTS - COMPUTER OUTPUT A. Annotated Bibliography The annotated bibliography has been organized as described in the pre- ceding "Methods" section. Cross reference numbers relating data to the articles from which they were abstracted are listed on the composite fact sheets. At the end of each fact sheet, the author and date of publicatioi2 of each article cited are listed according to reference number. An article can then be located by the author's last name in the annotated bibliography and a comparison of reference numbers will assure selection of the correct abstract. B. Composite Species Fact Sheets The composite species fact sheets were organized as described in the preceding "Methods" section. Information was taken from raw data sheets and compiled by the computer into a format which presents information on each species. C. Composite Oil I!g2act Fact Sheets The composite oil impact fact sheets were organized as described in the preceding "Methods" section. Information was taken from raw data sheets and compiled by the computer into a format which presents information on each oil impact. D. Composite Habitat Fact Sheets The composite habitat fact sheets were organized as described in the pre- ceding "Ifethods" section. Habitat types were chosen to accomodate as many habitats occurring in Puget Sound as possible. The system has been constructe( to allow access to data according to general habitat type for any species. Over 150 possible combinations of habitat characteristics have been condensed BEAK into nine basic habitat types. The basic habitats correspond to combiaations of descriptors given in Table 7. -6 I i I TABLE 1 FORMAT EXAMPLE SPECIES FACT SHEET SPECIES MACROCYSTIS DYPIFERA SPP. REF.NO RATING 90 3 KELP 90 3 DISTPIATION 24 2 STAGE: SPOROPHYIE(DIPLOID) PpRF nuETRIC TONS ANNUAL HARVEST 24 2 AREA: HABITAT: LABORATORY TF-2-2pOME2pRSOUL at COMMENT REFERENCE N L TFp%I DAL -PHET I CANI pDER CT REFERENCE No. 89 PHYS-CHEM: TEMPERATURE: 17. C (OPTIMUM) AREAS: OPEN OCEAN COT REFERENCE NO* ?A ApW LOCATION I CALIFORNIA mnNT pRS-PHOTOCGpOUL p'p1p) SALINITY: (OPTIMUM) LIGHTp600 FT-CA. C LOCATION C2p41A s 9 1p/S-PH2pIC/1AN2pD STA4IT1p9p) GENERAL IA 7S 3 L TATAL/2pLp)SYNTHETO 1pF2p1E2pT SAL11p@(OPTIMUM) L1pQO FT-CA. C mYTESO NERAL LpALy WORTHS ALL HABITAT BENTHIC-DEMERSAL/SUBTIDAL-PHOTOSYNTHETIC/INORGANIC/BOULDER PHYS-CHEM: TEMPERATURE:0.-18. C (OPTIMUM) SALINITY: 26, 0/00 (OPTIMUM) LIGHT: 48-1600 FT-CANOLES AT 15. C COMMERCIAL: DOLLARS (1958 ANNUAL HARVEST VALUE ONE MILLION DOLLARS) COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL PHOTOSYNTHESIS: NOT PERMANENTLY AFFECTED BY SALINITIES OF 25.0 0/00 GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN THAT OF NATURAL SEAWATER IN 18-HR. EXPOSURE. LONGER EXPOSURES (5-DAY) AT 20. C IN SEAWATER DILUTED 10% TO 25% WITH DISTILLED WATER RESULTED IN LOWER PHOTOSYNTHETIC CAPACITY. GROWTH PROBABLY INCREASES ABOUT 2-FOLD FOR EVERY 10.0 C TEMP RISE. TEMPS ABOVE 18.0 C MAY POSSIBLY HAVE ADVERSE EFFECTS. GROWTH LAB EXPERIMENT: 90 DAYS. 15 METERS. 15-18 C1 PHOTOSYNTHETICALLY ACTIVE IN LIGHT OF SURFACE INTENSITY -- DOUBLED AREA EVERY 21 DAYS LENGTH EVERY 24 DAYS. GROWTH RATES: 7.1-50 CM/DAY FRONT ELONGATION. 7.5-A.9% INCREASE/DAY IN STIPE LENGTH. DISTRIBUTIONS IN NORTH AMERICA. FROM 27 DEG. NORTH LAT. TO THE MONTEREY PENINSULA. GROWTH RATES: 7.1-50 CM/DAY FROND ELONGATION. 7.5-A.9% IMACROCYSTIS" HAS A DEPTH DISTRIBUTION OF 3-37.5 METERS. ITS INNER LIMITS ARE DETERMINED BY WAVE SHOCK. ITS OUTER LIMITS ARE FREQUENTLY SET BY WATER CLARITY. SPORES ARE PRODUCED ALL YEAR LONG, WITH THE MAXIMUM PRODUCTION OF 700 SPORES IN LATE SPRING. MINIMUM IN JANUARY. THE RELEASE OF SPORES SEEMS TO BE RELATED TO THE AMOUNT OF SUNLIGHT. AVERAGE LIBERATION RATE OF SPORES IS 3800 SPORES/4IN/50.CM. OF SOPROPHYLL SURFACE, THE SPOROPHYTE GENERATION BLOOMS IN SPRING, DEPENDING ON LIGHT INTENSITY. NO GROWTH OCCURS UNDER VERY DENSE CANIOLES. THIS KELP WHICH IS A PRIMARY PRODUCER OF PLANKTONIC MATERIAL IS PERENNIAL. HOLDFASTS CONSTANTLY REPLACE SENILE FRONDS WITH NEW ONES. MAXIMUM AGE OF INDIVIDUAL FRONDS UNDER FAVORABLE CONDITIONS IN 20 METERS OF WATER IS ABOUT SIX MONTHS. THE GAMETOPHYTE PRODUCED FROM THE MEIOSPORES MAY TAKE UP TO 80 DAYS TO DEVELOP AND MATURE IN THE SUMMER AS TABLE 1 (cont.) COMPALED TO 130 DAYS IN WINTER. THE BAMETOPHYTE PLANTS CAN SURVIVE FOR MORE THAN A YEAR UNDER CONDITIONS UNFAVORABLE TO YOUNG SPOROPHYTES. YOUNG SPOROPHYTES ARE SCARCE IN WINTER. REPRODUCTIVE MATURITY OF A PLANT IS REACHED AT AGE 9-12 MONTHS. MINIMUM TIME FOR COMPLETION OF A LIFE HISTORY CYCLE IS 12-14 MONTHS. KELP BEDS PROVIDE SHELTER. REFUGE, AND FOOD FOR LARVAL, JUVENILE, AND ADULT STAGES OF MANY FISH. PHOTOSYNTHESIS IS DEPENDENT ON THE PRESENCE OF DISSOLVED CALCIUM, AND IT WILL CEASE IN ONE HOUR IN ITS ABSENCE. HALIOTUS FULGENS (ABALONE), ASTRAEA UNDOSA (WAVY TOP), NORRIAIA NORRISII (TURBAN), GIRELLA NIGRICANS (OPALFYE), CRUSTACEANS. GASTROPODS, ECHINOIDS, STRONGYLOCENTROTUS FRANCISCANUS. STRONGYLOCENTROTUS PURPURATUS "STRONGYLOCENTROTUS SP." -- FEED ON BASE OF STIPE. "IDOTEA HESECATA" -- GRAZES NEAR PNEUMATOCYSTS CAUSING SLOUGHING OF HEALTHY BLADES. MACROCYSTIS SPP. "MACROCYSTIS" WAS NOT FOUND ATTACHED AROUND THE 90 ISLAND, BUT WAS WASHED ASHORE. IT GROWS NEAR "MEMEDCYSTIS LUETKEANA" ON THE SHORE SIDE OF THESE BEDS. PROBABLY MISIDENTIFIED, THE ALGA OBSERVED WAS MOST LIKELY MACROCYSTIS INTEOPIFOLA. THE TIME OF THE MOST RAPID TRANSLOCATION (65-78 CM/HR) OF ORGANIC PRODUCTS THROUGH THE SIEVE TUBES WAS IN MARCH. THE PEAK GROWING SEASON FOR KELP. 3 4 5 S 75 89 78 81 90 TABLE 1 (cont.) OIL IMPACT FACT SHEET SPECIES MACROCYSTIS PYRIFERA SPP. REF.NO RATING KELP OIL DIESEL #2 DIRECT IMPACTS STAGE SPONDPHYTE(QIPLOID) PAPAMETERI PHYSIOLOGY: PHOTOSYNTHESIS 42 3 HARITAT: LANDRATOPY 42 3 CHITFRIAI TEN 42 3 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM + 1 EMULSION (SHORT TERM EXPOSURE) RESULT: <7 DAYS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM + 0.1% EMULSION (SHORT TERM EXPOSURE) RESULT: <7 DAYS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM + 0.01% EMULSION (SHORT TERM EXPOSURE) RESULT: <7 DAYS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM + 1% EMULSION (CHRONIC EXPOSURE) 42 3 RESULT: <6 HOURS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM 0.1% EMULSION (CHRONIC EXPOSURE) 42 3 RESULT: <6 HOURS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.02 MM FILM 0.01% EMULSION (CHRONIC EXPOSURE) RESULT: <6 HOURS 42 3 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 42 42 3 PARAMETER: PHYSIOLOGY: PHOTOSYNTHESIS (BOTTOM BLADES) 69 2 HABITAT: LABORATORY 69 2 CRITERIA: 1-DAY % REDUCTION IN PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.01% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RESULT: -20% 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 69 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.1% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RESULT: -10% 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 69 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE: 1.0% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RESULT: 5% 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 69 42 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. : 2p4 FILM MULSION (SHORT TERM EXPOSURE) RESULT: CN PpF.01piCSURE) RESULTS l 42 COMMENT REFERENCE OHYS DOSES pW0.1HRONIC EXPOSURE) 42 n 42 CoNo. 4 pHpoS M2p0.01IC EXPOSURE) TABLE I (cont.) ckvEoTat i.oAv A oEnumn" 14 PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 PHYS-CHEM: DOSE! 0.019A OIL-SEAWATEP EMULSION 69 RESULT! 6pli 69 COmMFNT REFERENCE NO. 69 0mYS-CHFMl OOSE: 0.1% nll.-SEAwATFO EMULSION 69 PESULTf 951; 69 COMMFNT REFEWENCF NO. 69 PHYS-CHr ,0: DOSE! I.n% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 kf.%ULT: Ion% 69 2 COMMENT REFFPENCE NO. 69 PARAMETER: PmYSInLnoy: PHOTOSYNTHESIS (SURFACE BLADES) 69 2 4ARITAT: LAIJOQATOPY 69 2 CMITERIA: 3-0AY ih RFouCTInN IN PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 OHYS-CHFM: BOSE: 0.61% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 PFSULT- ;?09 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 69 9HYS-CHFm: DOSE: 0.196 nTL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 f4ES11L I gii * 69 2 COMMENT REFEPENCE NO. 69 OHYS-CHF-4: OnSEi 1.0% f)IL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 QFcblJl_T: I D096 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. 49 PAGAMETFUl PHYSIOLOGY: PHOT41,YNTHESIS (HALF-GRnWN BOTTOM BLADES) 69 2 ha%ITATI LAHOPATORY 69 2 CRITERIA: ?-HR % kEOljCTInN IN PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 PHYS-Chf-4: DOSE: 0.01% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 9tEslit.y: 5% 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE NO. o%9 CPITEDIA: I-HR 96 REDUCTION IN PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 OPYS-CmEhl: nnSE: 0.19; OlLmSEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RFSULT: -SA 69 2 COPI14FNT PEFEQENCE Ne). 69 CRITEGIA: 7-4R cA HEOUCTTnN 14 PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 DHYS-CHFm: OnSE! 0.014 OIL-SEAWATER E141ILSION 69 2 WFSULTt I uA 69 2 COMMENT REFFRLNCE NO. 69 CRITFRIA: 14-HR % REr)UCTION IN PHOTO. CAOACITY 69 2 PHYS-CHEm: DOSE: 0.01% OIL-SEAWATFR EMULSION 69 2 RESULT: 20@L 69 2 CnOMF&IT REFEQENCE NO. fo COITEDIA: ?4-14" * REnuCTInN IN PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 PHYS-CHF-4: DOSE: O.nI% OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 i0 SUL T: 3;1 Z 69 2 TA= I (cant. COHWENT REFERENCE NO* 69 OMYS-CHF"? DnSE1 0.11A OIL-SEAWATEP E40LSION 69 2 RF',ULT: TSIA 69 2 COMqF4T QEFERENrE NO. 69 CRITED14: 4R-mR % QfnUCTInN IN PwOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 PHYS-CHF-4: DOSE: 0-01cg OIL-SFAWATFP EMULSION 69 2 OFSULTI 60A 69 2 COMMENT REFFRENCE NO. 69 04YS-CHP": nnsE: 0.1% nlL-SEA4ATEQ EMULSION 69 2 PESULT: 100% 69 2 COmkiENT REFERENCE NO. 69 OIL FUEL OIL' NAVY OTPECT ImPACTS STAGE 5POwnPwYTE(T)IPLnIO) PADAPAETE4: PHYSIOL05y: PHOTOSYNTHESIS (YOUNG BLADES) 69 2 o4ARITAT: LAMOQATf)QY 69 2 .CWITEPIA: &-mR 0. RED-JCTION 1*4 PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 ONYS-CHEM: DOSE: 0.1% OIL-SEAWATER E04ULSION 69 2 PESIILT' ?-3-A 1 69 COmmENT PEFFRENCE On. 69 CRITEPrA: P-AR % REDUCTION Iv PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 PP4YS-CHFM: DOSE: n.19. OIL-SEAwATEQ E'40LSTON 69 2 RPSULTc 4296 69 2 COm-;ENT PEFERENrE NO. 69 CRITEPIAS I?-HR % REntICTTnm IN P40TO. CAPACITY 69 2 -HYS-CHEm: DOSE: 0.1% OIL-SEAWATEQ EMULSION 69 2 FESULT: I 001A 69 2 COmfAFNT PEFFRENCE NO. 69 PARAmETENI wORTALTTY 77 3 AWn4T-4: 94ARIYAT: MENTHIC-DEuERSAL/SIIMTInAL-OHOTnSYNTMETIC/INGRGANIC/OOULDER 7? 3 CPITEPIA: CnmPARISON OF TnAICITY OF FUEL OIL AND DIESEL 02 77 3 RESULT: FUEL 11L IS MnRE TOXIC (CLENOENNING AND NORT149 19601 77 3 CO"MFNT REFERENCE Nn. ?7 PARAMETER: PHYSIOLOGY: PHnTOSY'JTHESIS 77 3 HARITAT: 9Et!TNTC-OE-AEQSALISIIRTInAL-OMOTnSYNTHETIC/INORGANIC/ROULDER ?? 3 CRITERIA: DFCqFASFD EvnifiTION OF OxYrEN OR PIGMENT LEACHING 77 3 PESULT: DECkEASFO PHOTOSYNTME%IS 77 3 COMMENT REFrQENCE Nn. ?T OIL DIESEL* TPUCK DIRECT IMPACTS TABLE I STAGE %POkOPWYTF(OIPLOI0) PAPAMFTEsf: 0mY%JnLOGYt PrIOTOSYNTHESIS 77 3 HA91TAT: RENTMTC-DEMERSAL/SIJRTInAL-PNOTOSY.MTHETIC/INORGANIC/BOULDER 77 3 CRITER14: I)ECREASED o@VnLUTIOAI OF OXYrvEN OR PIGMENT LEACHING 77 3 PESULT: nEC0Ffi4;Fn PHOTOSY%ITHESIS T7 3 COmmFAIT REFERENCE NO. 77 OIL FUEL OIL MRECT IMPACTS STAGE 5PPPOP4YTf(9JDLnJO) PAPA-AFTEO: -`4ySIf)LrjGy: PHOTn%YNTHESTS 42 3 19AAITAT: LAi003TORY 42 3 CRITEQIA: FT-STGNIFICANT (LOqS OF PHOTOSYNTHETIC CAPACITY) 42 3 OHYS-CHEO! nOSE: 1% EMULSION ROILrR FUEL IN SEA WATER. 42 3 PESULT: 3 n4f. 42 3 COm-AFNT REFERENCE No. 4P PAO&METEA: PHYSIOI.My: PHO!"ICYNTHESIS (YOUMG RLAOESI 69 2 riABITAT: LAAOPaT1)RY 69 2 'CRIZERIA: R-HR % REmICTION 14 PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 owy%-C"r": rMSE: 0.0"T OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RESIXI't -10% 69 2 C04MFNT REFEAENCF No. 69 CRITFOIA: If,-HR % QFhUCTlnAI IM PHOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 0HYS-CHFAI: DOSE: n.05% nIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 -FfIJL T: *23% . 69 2 CnN4FN7 REFE4ENCE NO. 69 CRITFPIA.' P4-40 % REMICTION JAI P40TO. CAPACITY 69 2 014YS-CPIEKI: DASE: 0.0%1, OIL-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 RF.SUtT: ofi4t 69 2 COA44FNT PEFFPENCE No. 69 PHYS-CHEM: DObE: q.n1% OIL-%EAWATER EMULSION 69 2 PESULT: -1147- 69 2 COMMENT REFERENCE Nn. 69 CRITFQTAI po-Hq % qfnllCTI#)N IN PMOTO. CAPACITY 69 2 04v';-CHrk4: DOSEZ o.os% nIL-SEAWATER Em'ILSION 69 2 Ok @011. T: I (jo A 69 2 COA44FNT CEFERENCE NO. 69 CPITFDTAt 49k-mm 'A RFq1jCTJn%i IN PAAOTn. CAPACITY 69 2 Po4YS-CmFmi OnSL: 0.nI-A Olt.-SEAWATER EMULSION 69 2 PV'sU(.r: 249; 69 2 CO-ENT DFFEWENCE Fin, 69 PADANETER1 moarALITe TT 3 nPOWTH: MA,%ITAT: kENTf-TC-IiE-EgdtiAL/f-')qTlr)AL-PNOTnSYNTHETIC/lt4ORGANIC/9OULDER 77 3 TABLE I (cant.) CAITEOTAS C04PAPISON OF TOXICITY OF FUEL OIL-AND'OIESEL 42 77 3 PESULT9 FUEL OIL IS HOPE TOXIC (CLENDENNING AND NORTH* 19601 77 3 COMMENT REFFPENCE NO. 77 OIL OTHE-1-CRiSOLS VIDECT IMOACTS STAAE 5P0w0P4YTF(OIPL!ID) DADAMFTERI &wYSTnl.()'3Y: -PPf0Tf)SYNTHE5IS 77 3 N661IT&TS HFNT-4 I C-rF mEQSA L /SUP T I r@AL-DHMSYNTHE T I C/I kORGANI C/RoULDER 77 3 CkITFRIA: DECREASED FVOLUTION OF OlYGEN OR PIGMENT LEACHING 77 3 PESULT: DECAEASFO PHOTOSYNTME%IS 77 3 COOMENT PEFERENCE NO. 77 OIL OTHEQt PHENOLS OYDECT IuQACTS STAGE SPOQUP4yTF(OI0L0ID) PAVA%fFTF.Qs DAYSIOL66yl PHOTOSYNTHESIS Ty 3 04AnITAT: 'iEt'T.4?C-OEMERSAL/SURTIOAL-PNOTOSYNT4ETICtINORGANICtROULDFR 77 3 .CRITFRIA: DFCREASED rvnLUTIOV OF OXYGEN OR PIGMENT LEACHING ?7 3 RESULTS DECPFbrFD PHOTOSY14THESTS ?7 3 CO"mFNT 4EFFQENCE NO. I? COmuruTS 4p Lan TItE FO;PFFECT IS 4-6 DAYS. ET-SIGNIFICANT IS 42 THF SIrveqIFIC&"T FXPOSURE TIME RFQUIQED *0 PRODUCE A NOTED LONG TFQm EFFECT. TFm IS THF MEDIAN EXPOSURE TIME REGUIRED TO POM011CE AN EFFFCT. 4p Tmr EXACT mrTARr)LIC PA74WAYq I4VOLVFrl IN THIS OIL 42 TnxTCITY TO PLfilJTq APE NOT 104OW4, HOWEVER IT IS NOT RY arntiCTIO-4 OF OXYGEN AVAILARILITY. IT IS AN ACTION ON rYTnALAS41C MFMPQAIYFS AS NOTEO RY LOSS bF TURGOQ PQF%SIJPE AF FpnNns DESULTIMM IN FLACCID APPEARANCE. NF(itilvE ofitiCTInw; IN 04nTnSYNTHFTIC CALPACITIES 69 P9:0-1ESENT I-,-CPfA-E0 CAPACITY. T14F%F OATlk FOR HALF-OPOWN Sr)TT()4 44LAOFC. Cr)&JFLTrT WITH THOcE ON THE EFFE.CTe. OF ()IF',FL F-)EL nlJ mAT114E linTTI)m tmn -;iIRFACF 13LhOES. FFFECTS ON Yf)ilo-G ;ILADF4; vitwf FAUCH MOOE SEVFQF. REFLECIT14G HIAHFR VI)LNEPARILITY. YnlJ4'; KELP FPnNi)S rAlJ HE EXPOSED To EMULSIFIED DIF%EL OIL FOR -INLf 6-17 HOLIQ5 W11HOUT IRREVERSAFILE A for, TImE nF AROUT Tw() nAYS 'aAS NOTED FOR THE APoFARANCE 11fr VIrTfiLE INJIJPY DUE TO OIL. lyf) 1,*VFSTIGATIO&I SPFCIFICS GIVEN. TABLE I (coat.) 3 5 69 42 42 77 REFFPWPICFS ;P4 'le.CAULEYo JAMES F. AND DANIL P. mANcme 1971 %r,4T.-* w-J-9 M- WFUSCHUL, JR-$ ANr) K.4, CLENDENVING9 100,4 C'.EN)E#4,iINrp9 K.A.9 19's9A 7q JwILLIOi- DONALn C.9 19T49 77 A4KFi-,q -J.M.9 197A 7.3 dALTF-) L.C.9 )OPS Al P161'. G.O.9 141@, A 9 'AtifilliCH@09 WALTFP C.9 191S 90 POPKE29 -'P'jcEl lqf@% DATE DUE GAYLORD No 2333 PA,WED,hu @ A A16,6 III T Ill @ III, J@ @@, 1@11@ -36668 141