Data Loading...

Intertidal Biota Monitoring in the - Washington State Flipbook PDF

Intertidal Biota Monitoring in the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014 Monitoring Report Prepared for: Washington State De


113 Views
76 Downloads
FLIP PDF 2.34MB

DOWNLOAD FLIP

REPORT DMCA

Intertidal Biota Monitoring in the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014 Monitoring Report

Prepared for: Washington State Department of Natural Resources Grant #: PC-00J29801-0: Ensuring Regulatory Effectiveness in Puget Sound's Most Special Places

Prepared by: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve Citizen Stewardship Committee Intertidal Subcommittee Wendy Steffensen RE Sources for Sustainable Communities and Jerry Joyce Washington Environmental Council October 2014

Publication Information This Monitoring Report describes intertidal biota surveys conducted in 2014 in the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve. This project is funded by the National Estuary Program (NEP) of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement PC-00J29801-0 to Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR).The contents of the report do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Copies of this Monitoring Report will be available from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources at http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ResearchScience/Topics/AquaticHabitats/Pages/aqr_rsve_aquatic_reserves_pr ogram.aspx at the Aquatic Reserves website http://www.aquaticreserves.org/resources/ and at RE Sources website at https://sites.google.com/a/re-sources.org/main-2/programs/baykeeper. Cover Photo: Citizen Scientists Marie Hitchman and Nicole Miller identifying organisms in the profile swath at Birch Bay, 2014, RE Sources.

Author and Contact Information Wendy Steffensen North Sound Baykeeper, Lead Scientist, RE Sources for Sustainable Communities 2309 Meridian Street Bellingham, WA 98225 [email protected] Intertidal Subcommittee Co-chair: John Stockman Co-chair: Bob Cecile Jerry Joyce Washington Environmental Council 1402 Third Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 206-440-8688 [email protected]

Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 7 Data-collection Methodology .................................................................................................................. 7 Volunteer Training ............................................................................................................................... 8 Field Surveys and Results......................................................................................................................... 9 Birch Bay results

............................................................................................................................ 12

Point Whitehorn results ..................................................................................................................... 15 Intalco Beach results.......................................................................................................................... 18 Neptune Beach results....................................................................................................................... 21 Discussion ............................................................................................................................................. 25 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 25 Recommendations from Year 1.......................................................................................................... 25 Clarifications and considerations for Year 3 ....................................................................................... 26 Possible future uses of this data ........................................................................................................ 27 References ............................................................................................................................................ 28 Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................. 29 Appendix A: Data Forms ........................................................................................................................ 31 Appendix B: Field Instructions ............................................................................................................... 43

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

iii

Figures Figure 1: The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve and surrounding area. .......................................................... 6 Figure 2: Layout of survey sites ................................................................................................................ 8 Figure 3: Locations of the survey sites ................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4: Average Percent Cover in Quadrats of Colonial Animals and Plants in quadrats at Birch Bay ... 12 Figure 5: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Birch Bay ............................................. 13 Figure 6: Beach elevation profile for Birch Bay ....................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: Percent Cover of Colonial Animals and Plants in Quadrats at Pt. Whitehorn ............................ 15 Figure 8: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Pt. Whitehorn ...................................... 16 Figure 9: Point Whitehorn profile area................................................................................................... 16 Figure 10: Removing debris from a quadrat on Intalco Beach ................................................................ 18 Figure 11: Identifying organisms on Intalco Beach ................................................................................. 18 Figure 12: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Intalco Beach ..................................... 19 Figure 13: Squid egg casing at Intalco .................................................................................................... 19 Figure 14: Beach elevation profile for Intalco Beach .............................................................................. 20 Figure 15: Percent Coverage of Colonial Animals and Plants in Quadrats at Neptune Beach................... 21 Figure 16: Estimating percent cover....................................................................................................... 21 Figure 17: Identifying organisms ............................................................................................................ 21 Figure 18: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Neptune Beach .................................. 23 Figure 19: Beach elevation profile at Neptune Beach ............................................................................. 24

Tables Table 1: Survey Information..................................................................................................................... 9 Table 2: Site Information ....................................................................................................................... 10 Table 3: Birch Bay Percent Cover Data ................................................................................................... 12 Table 4: Birch Bay Individual Species...................................................................................................... 13 Table 5: Birch Bay Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups ................................... 14 Table 6: Pt. Whitehorn Percent Cover Data ............................................................................................ 15 Table 7: Pt. Whitehorn Individual Organisms Data ................................................................................. 16 Table 8: Point Whitehorn Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate and Species Groups ......................... 17 Table 9: Intalco Beach Percent Cover Data ............................................................................................. 18 Table 10: Intalco Beach Individual Organisms Data ................................................................................ 19 Table 11: Intalco Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups ..................................... 20 Table 12: Neptune Beach Percent Cover Data ........................................................................................ 22 Table 13: Neptune Beach Individual Organisms Data ............................................................................. 23 Table 14: Neptune Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups .................................. 24

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

iv

Abstract The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve Citizen Stewardship Committee conducted intertidal surveys in 2013 and 2014 in the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve to document beach slope, substrate, and diversity of intertidal animals and plants along four profiles. On these four profiles, the number of individual animals, and areal coverage of plants, algae, and colonial and aggregating animals within four 19.8” X 19.8” (50 cm X 50 cm) quadrats at the+1’ ,0’, and -1’ (+0.3, 0m, -0.3m) MLLW tidal elevation were recorded. Methodology closely followed that of Washington State University Island County Extension Beach Watchers, with a few noted exceptions. In both 2013 and 2014, Neptune Beach had the highest fauna counts, areal coverage, and diversity, as well as the most varied substrate. This report details the results of the 2014 study, with comparisons to the 2013 monitoring. It is hoped that baseline data will continue to be collected such that a robust baseline is generated and that trends will be detectable in the future.

Introduction The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve (CPAR) is one of seven aquatic reserves in Puget Sound managed by the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). In 2013, citizen-science programs were developed as part of a grant awarded to People for Puget Sound and transferred to Washington Environmental Council in 2012. This grant, “Ensuring Regulatory Effectiveness in Puget Sound’s Most Special Places” focused on pairing local environmental groups with committee stakeholder groups to steward designated aquatic reserves through education and outreach, technical review of development proposals, and citizen science. This document reports on the second year of the monitoring program conducted by the CPAR Citizen Stewardship Committee (CPAR CSC). The project included training citizen scientists to identify intertidal species and to measure their distribution and abundance within the aquatic reserve. Monitoring methods were based on those established by the Washington State University Beach Watcher (WSU BW) Intertidal Monitoring Program. Modifications were made to enhance the representativeness of the data, while retaining key elements to ensure that this study was largely comparable to other Beach Watcher studies. The monitoring provides a baseline for detecting future changes including the appearance of invasive species. It should also be useful for natural resource damage assessment in the event of an oil spill or other event, and in reserve management.

Background WDNR designated the CPAR as an Environmental Reserve, an area of biological importance requiring special protective management where continued monitoring is a priority. The main purpose for establishing Cherry Point as a reserve was the preservation of critical spawning habitat for a latespawning stock of Pacific herring. A broader purpose is to conserve and enhance native habitats and associated plant and wildlife species, with special emphases on herring, salmon, resident and migratory birds, Dungeness crab, groundfish rearing areas, and marine mammals (WDNR, 2010).

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

5

Most of the uplands adjacent to the Reserve are privately owned, primarily by five entities: BP, Pacific International Terminals, Alcoa-Intalco, Phillips 66, and Cherry Point Industrial Park. North of the industrial area are private residential lots and a small Whatcom County park with a public access area south and east of Point Whitehorn. Birch Bay State Park is located to the north and east of the residential lots and the eastern boundary of the aquatic reserve. The Lummi Indian Reservation is located adjacent to the south boundary of the Aquatic Reserve.

Figure 1: The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve and surrounding area.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

6

The following companies have existing use authorizations directly adjacent to or abutting the reserve (see Figure 1 showing easements, leased areas and cutouts, where a cutout is a small, designated area of tidal and subtidal lands removed from the CPAR to accommodate industrial marine docks):    

BP Cherry Point Refinery (lease and outfall easement), Intalco-Alcoa Works (lease and outfall easement), Phillips 66 Ferndale Refinery (lease and outfall easement), Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, near Point Whitehorn (outfall easement)

The fourth cutout near the end of Gulf Rd is a proposed Pacific International Terminals industrial pier for which no use authorization has yet been approved and no federal permits obtained.

Goals and Objectives The goal of this project is to provide a baseline for detection of future changes due to natural or humancaused events in intertidal habitats, species composition, and species abundance. The specific objective is to collect baseline data on beach slope, substrate, and intertidal biodiversity at four monitoring sites. Scientifically and statistically sound methods are used to ensure that data are comparable across monitoring sites, monitoring studies in other reserves, and monitoring years. This project documents animals and plants living on the beach surface sediments. Core samples to observe organisms in sediments below the surface were not taken. In future years, we hope to include core sampling. Core sampling is presently being done in the Fidalgo Bay Aquatic Reserve as a Citizen Stewardship Committee project.

Data-collection Methodology The study used a transect/quadrat model using a transect or “profile” line from ordinary high water mark to one foot below mean lower low water (-1’ MLLW) or lower if the tide allowed. The methodology is based on protocols developed by the WSU BW Intertidal Monitoring Program (Beach Watchers, 2003). This protocol for monitoring has been modified from this methodology to improve the statistical robustness of the study. Details of the sampling regime are given in Steffensen and Joyce (2013). Four types of data were collected: 1. Quadrat Data: Percent Cover. Four randomly placed 19.8” X 19.8” (50cm X 50 cm) quadrats were located at each of three tidal elevations: +1’, 0’, and -1’MLLW. Colonial and aggregating animal species, sea grass, and macroalgae cover were estimated in each quadrat. 2. Quadrat Data: Individual Species. Using the same quadrats as those for percent cover, individual animals were counted. Only epifauna were counted, organisms smaller than 3 mm were not counted. 3. Profile Data. Profile data are taken along a transect perpendicular to the beach face. Data recorded include beach slope and elevation, substrate type, and organism types. 4. Species Lists. Species lists were compiled for each 10’ portion of beach profile covering a 65.6’ (20 meter) wide swath [32.8’ (10 meters) on either side of the profile line]. This list is more

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

7

detailed and intensive than the profile data, requiring considerably more observation time. These data are presented as an Addendum to the report. Figure 2 from the Island County Beach Watchers training manual (Island County/Washington State University Beach Watchers, 2003), served as the basis for survey site layout. Instead of three quadrats as prescribed by the BW protocol, four quadrats were randomly located along each tidal height transect. The purpose of the change was to increase the representativeness of the data and improve our ability to compare results between beaches. Additional details regarding the development and design of the monitoring project are given in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (Steffensen & Joyce, 2013).

Figure 2: Layout of survey sites

Volunteer Training Training sessions were provided in Whatcom County for citizen scientist volunteers from the CPARCSC, the Whatcom County Marine Resources Committee, Whatcom County Beach Watchers, and other Whatcom volunteers. A similar training session was held in Skagit County. Volunteers who could not

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

8

attend Whatcom County trainings could attend Skagit County trainings and be similarly qualified to conduct surveys. In Whatcom County, twenty-eight citizen scientists were trained in three 2-hour sessions on April 1, 8, and 15, and one field training on April 19. Trainings included basic protocol for measuring slope, identifying and counting plants and animals, estimating percent coverage of plants and colonial animals, and completing data sheets. During the trainings, volunteers learned telltale key characteristics and habitats for common organisms, as well as both common and scientific names.

Field Surveys and Results The CSC, with additional volunteers, surveyed the CPAR beach at four locations on dates with a low tide below -1’ MLLW. Locations were chosen from historical monitoring sites (Geiger, 1982, and Schneider and Dube, 1969) and were limited to where we could obtain access (Tables 1 & 2; Figure 3). Survey forms and instructions are included in Appendix A and B. Table 1: Survey Information

Birch Bay (Seagrass Net) Point Whitehorn County Park Intalco Beach Neptune Beach

Low tide elevation MLLW

Number of surveyors

Date

Low tide time

5/18/14

2:20 PM

- 2.9’

10

5/17/14 7/11/14 7/13/14

1:40 PM 11:02 PM 12:33 PM

- 2.2’ - 2.4’ -2.6’

15 10 10

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

9

Table 2: Site Information

Compass Bearing 1

Site

Birch Bay

Point Whitehorn

Intalco Beach

Neptune Beach

Point Whitehorn230⁰ Outer end of the Cherry Point pier 135⁰ Left hand corner of first white shack on Intalco pier perpendicular to shore 181⁰ Northeast corner of tan shed on pier 311⁰

Compass Bearing 2

Compass Bearing 3

Point Lily at Point Roberts275⁰ North edge of Sucia Island 205⁰

Birch Point230⁰ West edge of Point Roberts 260⁰

Current Lat. (N)

Current Long. (W)

Historic Lat. (N)

Historic Long. (W)

48.89830

122.77841

48.89772

122.77863

48.87778

122.77838

48.88158

122.77838

First black stack from shore on BP pier 283⁰

Pointy, triangular, flat surfaced rock that faces shore - 325⁰

48.85062

122.72043

48.85075

122.72043

State Park Red entrance marker 182⁰

Mount Constitution on Orcas Island 208⁰

48.82030

122.70952

48.82067

122.70968

Four sets of results were taken for each site. 1. Quadrat Data: Percent Cover 2. Quadrat Data: Individual Species counts 3. Profile Data: Beach slope and elevation, substrate type, and organism types 4. Species lists: By distance along profile line Results for the quadrat data are shown in tables (3-14) and associated figures. The tables show coverage estimates and individual counts as well as averages of estimates or counts for each species or species group Averages were calculated from whole numbers. Because the numbers of organisms were so low in many instances, calculated averages are used; numbers in tables are shown with a higher degree of precision than known to document the presence of organisms and provide the data used in the corresponding graph. Graphs depict averages of quadrat data for each tidal-height transect as colored columns and standard deviations are shown as error bars. Conventions used in these tables and figures include the following: 1) 2) 3) 4)

Abbreviation “spp.” is used to indicate multiple species of the same genera. Profile data are shown in a table and figure for each sampling location within the results section . Cover values in bold italics indicate that the estimate was less than the number recorded. The species lists are given in a separate Addendum, Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014 Intertidal Species Lists at Four Locations.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

10

Figure 3: Locations of the survey sites

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

11

Birch Bay results Average Percent Coverage in Quadrats of Colonial Animals and Plants—by Tidal Height for Birch Bay, 5/18/14

Percent Coverage

8%

6%

4%

2%

0% Ulva spp. Tidal Ht. = +1'

Ulva spp.

Barnacle spp.

Tidal Ht. = 0'

Mytilus trossulus

Zostera marina

Tidal Ht. = -1' Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 4: Average Percent Cover in Quadrats of Colonial Animals and Plants in quadrats at Birch Bay Table 3: Birch Bay Percent Cover Data Birch Bay Transect

Date: 5/18/2014 Species 1

Elevation 1' Substrate 0' 0' 0' -1'

Quadrat, ft. 2

3

Average 4

S

S

S

S

1

3

4

0% S

1% S

3 10% 0% 10% 1% 1% 0% C/S, S

4 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% S

Ulva spp. Substrate

0% S

2 0% C/S, S

Ulva sp. (tubular) Ulva spp. Ulva spp. (SUM) Barnacle spp. Mytilus trossulus Zostera marina Substrate

1 0% 5% 5% 1% 1% 4% S

2 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% S

percent

0.3%

2.4% 1.3% 3.6% 0.5% 0.5% 1.3%

nr = not recorded, C/S: Clay/Silt, S: Sand, G: Gravel, C: Cobbles, B: Boulders, E: Erratic Bold italic denotes instances where the species was present at less than 1%

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

12

Average Number of Individuals Found

Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats– by Tidal Height - Birch Bay; 5/18/14 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lottia alveus Tidal Ht. = 1'

Littorina sitkana Haminoea vesicula Haminoea vesicula

Pagurus sp.

Tidal Ht. = 0'

Pentidotea resecata

Pisces spp. (SUM)

Tidal Ht. = -1' Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 5: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Birch Bay Table 4: Birch Bay Individual Species Birch Bay Transect Elevation 1' Substrate 0'

Substrate -1'

Date: 5/18/2014 Species 1 S Lottia alveus Littorina sitkana Haminoea vesicula

S 1 1 1

Haminoea vesicula Pagurus sp. Pentidotea resecata Cottidae

Pisces (all fish) (SUM)

S

0 0 0

0 0 0 C/S, S 3 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

S

Pholidae. Pleuronectidae Substrate

Countable Animals Quadrat 2 3

S

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

S

Average Count

4 S/C

0 0 0

0 0 0

0.3 0.3 0.3

3 1 1

0 0 0

1.5 0.3 0.3

2 1 6 9 C/S, S

0 0 0 0

0.5 0.3 1.5 2.3

S

S

S

13

Table 5: Birch Bay Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups Seaweeds and Invertebrates (check all that apply)

30

-3.9

40

-1.2

X X X

x

x

x

3 10'

50

-1

X X X

X

X

X

4 10'

60

-1.1

X X X

X

X

X

5 10'

70

X X X

X X

X

X X

X

Survey Reading + or Ground shell debris Clay/Silt Sand (.002"-.08") Gravel (.08"-2") Cobbles (2"-10") Boulders (>10) Erratics (BIG ROCKS) Amphipods Anemones Barnacles Chitons Clams Crabs Fish Insects Isopods Limpets Mussels Nudibranch Sand Dollars Sea Cucumbers Seastars Snails Urchins Flat Worms Nemerteans Polychaetes Green Seaweeds Red Seaweeds Brown Seaweeds Seagrass Arachnid Shrimp

cumulative distance

1 30 2 10'

Entry

Length of survey section

B irc h B a y 0 5 / 18 / 14S ubs t ra t e ( c he c k a ll)

X X X

-0.4 X -0.1 X

X X

6 10'

80

x

X X

7 70'

150

-0.6

X

X

8 30'

180

-1.1 X -0.8 X -0.1 X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

0 X -0.1 X 0.6 X

X X X

X

X

15 20' 330

0.8 X 0.5 X

16 20' 350

-0.2 X

X

9 20' 200 10 30' 230 11 20' 250 12 20' 270 13 20' 290 14 20'

310

X X

X X

X

X X X X

X X

X

x

x

x

x

x

X

x

x

x

x

x

X X X X

X

X X X

X

X X X

X X X

X

X X X X X

X X

X X X x

X

X X

X

X

X

X

x

x

x

x

x

x

X

X X X

X

X X X

X

X X

X

X

X X

X X X x

x x

X X

X x

x

x

x

X X x

X

Change in Elevation (ft)

Profile Elevation: Birch Bay, 5/18/14

0

30

40

50

60

70

80

150

180

200

230

250

270

290

310

330

350

Distance From Backshore (ft)

Figure 6: Beach elevation profile for Birch Bay

At the Birch Bay survey site, no colonial or aggregating species were present at +1’ or 0’. Minimal coverage of Ulva sp., barnacles, mussels, and eelgrass was present at -1’, with very few individual animal species throughout. The profile undulates over a long expanse of shallow beach, making it difficult to determine tidal elevation because it falls and rises over hundreds of feet of beach. Colonial species and coverage amounts were very similar in 2014 and 2013. The composition of individual species in the quadrats was different, but both consisted of very low numbers.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

14

Point Whitehorn results Percent Coverage in Quadrats of Colonial Animals and Plants—by Tidal Height- Point Whitehorn; 5/17/14

Percent Coverage

100%

80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Ulva spp.

Barnacles spp.

Mastocarpus sp.

Porphyra

Anthopleura elegantissima

Tidal Ht. = +1'

Tidal Ht. = 0

Tidal Ht. = -1

Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 7: Percent Cover of Colonial Animals and Plants in Quadrats at Pt. Whitehorn

Table 6: Pt. Whitehorn Percent Cover Data Pt. Whitehorn Transect Species Elevation 1'

Date: 5/17/2014 Quadrat, ft. 1

Ulva sp. (tubular) Ulva sp. (bladed) Ulva spp. (SUM) Chthamalus dalli Balanus crenatus Balanus glandula Semibalanus cariosus Barnacle spp. Barnacles spp. (SUM) Mastocarpus sp. Porphyra Anthopleura elegantissima Substrate

0' 0' Substrate 0' -1'

19% 58% 77% 0% 0% 6% 1% 0% 7% 0% 4% 2% S,G,C 1 S 1

2 78% 0% 78% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 1% S,G,C 2 S 2

Average 3

6% 67% 73% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 0% 9% 0% S,C 3 S 3

4 1% 77% 78% 7% 0% 1% 0% 0% 8% 1% 11% 0% S,C 4

percent 26.0% 50.5% 76.5% 1.8% 1.5% 1.8% 0.3% 2.5% 7.8% 0.3% 6.0% 0.8%

S 4

S S S S Substrate Bold italic denotes instances where the species was present at less than 1% nr = not recorded, C/S: Clay/Silt, S: Sand, G: Gravel, C: Cobbles, B: Boulders, E: Erratic

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

15

Average Number of Individuals Found

Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats– by Tidal HeightPt. Whitehorn; 5/17/14 3

2

1

0 Limpet sp. (SUM)

Bivalves (SUM)

Isopods (SUM)

Polychaete spp.

Tidal Ht. = +1'

Tidal Ht. = 0

Tidal Ht. = -1

Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 8: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Pt. Whitehorn Table 7: Pt. Whitehorn Individual Organisms Data Pt. Whithorn Transect Elevation 1'

Substrate 0' Substrate -1' Substrate

Date: 5/17/2014 Species 1 Tectura persona Tectura scutum Limpet spp. (SUM) Littorina scutulata Nucella lamellosa Bivalves (SUM) Gnorimosphaeroma oregonensis Pentidotea wosnesenskii Isopods (SUM)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S, G, C S

Tubeworm (a polychaete)

Countable Animals Quadrat 2 3 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 S, G, C S, C S

1 S

S 0

S

0

0.3

S, C S

0 S

0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 3

Average Count 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.8 0.5 0.8 1.3

4

S

Figure 9: Point Whitehorn profile area; Photo credit: RE Sources

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

16

Length of survey section

cumulative distance

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

9.5 9.8 9.4 9.7 9.8 9.6 9.8 9.8 10.1 9.7 9.9 9.9 9.8 9.9 9.9 10.0 9.9 9.9 10.1 10.0

9.5 19.3 28.7 38.4 48.2 57.8 67.6 77.4 87.5 97.2 107.1 117.0 126.8 136.7 146.6 156.6 166.5 176.4 186.5 196.5

Survey Reading + or Ground shell debris Clay/Silt Sand (.002"-.08") Gravel (.08"-2") Cobbles (2"-10") Boulders (>10) Erratics (BIG ROCKS) Amphipods Anemones Barnacles Chitons Clams Crabs Fish Insects Isopods Limpets Mussels Nudibranch Sand Dollars Sea Cucumbers Seastars Snails Urchins Flat Worms Nemerteans Polychaetes Green Seaweeds Red Seaweeds Brown Seaweeds Seagrass Arachnid Shrimp

Entry

Table 8: Point Whitehorn Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate and Species Groups

-1.2 -1.2 -0.4 -2.2 -0.9 -0.2 -1.3 -0.9 -0.6 -1 -0.4 -1.1 -0.9 0.1 0 -0.4 -0.4 -0.5 -0.4 -0.5

X X X

X X X

X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X

X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X

No data collected.

Change of Elevation (ft)

Profile Elevation: Pt. Whitehorn, 5/17/14

0

9.5

19.3

28.7

38.4

48.2

57.8

67.6

77.4

87.5

97.2

107.1

117.0

126.8

136.7

146.6

Distance From Backshore (ft)

At Point Whitehorn, Ulva sp. was prominent in the +1’ quadrats; however no plants or colonial animals were seen in the 0’ and -1’ quadrats. We documented a total of 4 species groups and 18 individuals, most of which were in the +1’ quadrat. Compared to 2013 data, Point Whitehorn showed substantially more Ulva spp. in 2014. In 2013, the Ulva spp. Cover totaled 1.8% for all quadrats and elevations. In 2014, 76.5% cover by Ulva spp. was present, all of which was at the +1’ elevation. This difference appears to be related to a change in substrate. In 2013, the +1’, 0’, and -1’ quadrats all fell on a

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

17

sand bar between two more diverse areas with cobbles and gravel. In 2014, the sand bar shifted and the +1’ quadrats were on more diverse substrate. The average number of individuals recorded in 2014 is comparable to the number recorded in 2013.

Intalco Beach results Table 9: Intalco Beach Percent Cover Data Intalco Transect

Date: 7/11/2014 Species

Quadrat, ft. 1

Elevation

2

Average

3

4

G, C

S,G

3

4

S, G

G

percent

1' Subs tra te

S, G, C S, G, C 1

0'

2

0' Subs tra te 0'

S, G, C S, G, C 1

2

3

4

S, G

G

S, G

G

-1' Subs tra te

nr = no t reco rded, C/S: Clay/Silt, S: Sand, G: Gravel, C: Co bbles, B : B o ulders, E: Erratic B o ld it a lic

deno tes instances where the species was present at less than 1%

Figure 10: John Bremer and Jennie Tuckerman removing debris from a quadrat on Intalco Beach; Photo credit: RE Sources

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

Figure 11: Marissa McBride and Bob Lemon identifying organisms on Intalco Beach; Photo credit: RE Sources

18

Average Number of Individuals Found

Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats– by Tidal Height - Intalco; 7/11/14 2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0 Pagurus sp.

Juvenile crab

Tidal Ht. = 1'

Doryteuthis opalescens (a squid) egg case

Tidal Ht. = 0'

Tidal Ht. = -1'

Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 12: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Intalco Beach Table 10: Intalco Beach Individual Organisms Data Intalco

Date: 7/11/2014

Countable Animals

Transect

Species 1

Quadrat 2 3

4

Count

Lophopanopeus bellus

0

0

0

1

0.3

Juvenile crab

0

0

0

1

0.3

Pagurus sp.

0 S, G, C

0 S, G, C

0 G, C

2

0.5

S, G, C

S, G, C

S, G

G

1

0

2

0

0.8

0 S, G

0 G

1 S, G

0 G

0.3

Elevation 1'

Substrate

Average

0' Substrate -1'

Juvenile crab Doryteuthis (Loligo) opalescens (squid egg case)

Substrate

Figure 13: Squid egg casing at Intalco; Photo credit: RE Sources

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

19

Table 11: Intalco Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups

-1.3 -0.8 1.2 -1.9 -1.5 -1.4 -1.3 -1.3 -1.1 -1 -1 -0.9

X X X X X X X X X X X X x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

1 20' 2 20' 3 20'

cumulative distance Amphipods Anemones Barnacles Chitons Clams Crabs Fish Insects Isopods Limpets Mussels Nudibranch Sand Dollars Sea Cucumbers Seastars Snails Urchins Flat Worms Nemerteans Polychaetes Green Seaweeds Red Seaweeds Brown Seaweeds Seagrass Arachnid bryozoans

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

Length of survey section

cumulative distance

10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10'

Seaweeds and Invertebrates (check all that apply)

Entry

Length of survey section

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Substrate (check all)

Survey Reading + or Ground shell debris Clay/Silt Sand (.002"-.08") Gravel (.08"-2") Cobbles (2"-10") Boulders (>10) Erratics (BIG ROCKS)

Entry

Intalco: 7/11/2014

x x x x

20 x x 40 X x 60

x x 4 20' 80 x X x x 5 20' 100 X X x X x x x 6 20' 120 X X X X

x X

x x X x X x x x X

x x X

x x X X

x x x x x x x X x

x x x x X x x X X

x x

Change in Elevation (ft)

Profile Elevation: Intalco Beach, 7/11/14

1

2

3

4

5

6 7 8 Distance From Backshore (ft)

9

10

11

12

13

Figure 14: Beach elevation profile for Intalco Beach

At the Intalco Beach survey site, attached plants or colonial animals were absent. Very few individual organisms were present on the beach; however, a squid egg cluster was observed. The amount of plants and colonial animals in the beach decreased from 2013 to 2014. Ulva spp. and barnacles were seen in 2013 but in 2014, no colonial organisms were seen. The number of individuals animals varied from 2013 to 2014, but numbers were low in both cases.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

20

Neptune Beach results 100%

Average Percent Coverage in Quadrats of Colonial Animals and Plants—by Tidal Height for Neptune Beach, 7/13/14

80% Percent Coverage

60% 40% 20%

Tidal Ht. = +1'

Tidal Ht. = 0'

Tidal Ht. = -1'

Figure 15: Percent Coverage of Colonial Animals and Plants in Quadrats at Neptune Beach

Figure 16: Kim Clarkin and Bob Cecile estimating percent cover; Photo credit: RE Sources

Figure 17: Michael Kyte identifying organisms; Photo credit: RE Sources

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

21

Neorhodomela sp.

Mastocarpus sp.

Hildenbrandia sp.

Filamentous red

Fucus sp.

Barnacle spp.

Ulva sp.

Mytilus trossulus

Anthopleura elegantissima

Transect Elevation and Species

Neorhodomela sp.

Mastocarpus sp. (SUM)

Hildenbrandia sp.

Filamentous red

Ralfsia fungiformis

Fucus sp.

Barnacle spp.

Ulva sp.

Anthopleura elegantissima

Porphyra sp.

Barnacle spp

Ulva sp.

0%

Table 12: Neptune Beach Percent Cover Data Neptune Beach Transect Species Elevation 1' Ulva spp. Balanus glandula Barnacle spp. Barnacle spp. (SUM) Porphyra sp. Anthopleura elegantissima Substrate 0' 0' Ulva spp. Chthamalus dalli Balanus crenatus Balanus glandula Barnacle spp. Barnacle spp. (SUM) Fucus sp. Ralfsia fungiformis Filamentous red Hildenbrandia sp. Mastocarpus sp. (tar spot) Mastocarpus sp. Mastocarpus sp. (SUM) Neorhodomela larix Mytilus trossulus sp. Anthopleura elegantissima Substrate 0' -1' Ulva spp. Chthamalus dalli Balanus crenatus Balanus glandula Semibalanus cariosus Barnacle spp. Barnacle spp. (SUM) Fucus sp. Filamentous red Hildenbrandia sp. Mastocarpus sp. Neorhodomela sp. Substrate

Date: 7/13/2014 Quadrat, ft. 1 2 3 98% 47% 83% 0% 7% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 2% 0% 3% 0% 0% 1% 0% S, C S, C, B S, G 1 2 3 45% 62% 45% 5% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 4% 17% 24% 0% 0% 0% 9% 18% 24% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 2% 5% 7% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% S, G, C, B S, C S, G, C 1 2 3 24% 69% 55% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 7% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 16% 8% 4% 16% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 8% 0% 1% 1% 0% 4% C/S, S, G, S, C S, C, B C, B, E

4 45% 0% 5% 5% 7% 0% S, G, C 4 54% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 14% 0% 1% 0% 0% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% S, C, B 4 40% 1% 0% 7% 0% 0% 8% 0% 1% 0% 3% 0% S, C

Average percent 68.3% 2.3% 1.3% 3.5% 2.5% 0.3%

51.5% 1.3% 0.3% 11.3% 2.5% 15.3% 3.5% 0.3% 2.8% 0.3% 0.3% 1.0% 1.3% 3.8% 0.3% 0.3%

47% 0% 1% 4% 0% 4% 9% 0% 1% 0% 3% 1%

nr = not recorded, C/S: Clay/Silt, S: Sand, G: Gravel, C: Cobbles, B: Boulders, E: Erratic Bold italic denotes instances where the species was present at less than 1 or 2%

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

22

Average Number of Individuals Found

60

Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats– by Tidal Height- Neptune Beach; 7/13/14

50 40 30 20 10

0 Anenome spp.

Limpet spp. (SUM)

Anenome spp.

Tidal Ht. = +1'

Pagurus sp.

Polychaete

Limpet spp. (SUM)

Mopalia muscosa

Tidal Ht. = 0'

Anenome spp.

Tidal Ht. = -1'

Transect Elevation and Species

Figure 18: Average Number of Individual Animals in Quadrats at Neptune Beach Table 13: Neptune Beach Individual Organisms Data Neptune Transect Elevation 1'

Date: 7/13/2014 1 Anthopleura artemisia Anemone sp. Anenome spp. (SUM)

Substrate -1'

Substrate

0 0 0 S, C

Substrate 0'

Countable Animals Quadrat 2 3

Species

Lottia pelta Tectura persona Limpet spp. (SUM) Anthopleura artemisia Anemone sp. Anenome spp. (SUM) Pagurus sp. Polychaete

60 0 60 6 0 6 4 0 S, G, C, B

Lottia pelta Tectura persona Limpet spp. (SUM) Mopalia muscosa Anthopleura artemisia Anemone sp. Anemone spp. (SUM) Pentidotea resecata

1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 C/S, S, G, C, B, E

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

0 0 0 S, C, B

S, C

0 1 1 S, G

0 11 11 1 7 8 0 1

14 0 14 3 4 7 0 0 S, G, C

0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0

0 2 2 1 10 0 10 1 S, C, B

S, C

1 0 1

Average Count 0.3 0.3 0.5

0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0

18.5 2.8 21.3 3.8 2.8 6.5 1.0 0.3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.3 0.5 0.8 0.3 3.0 0.3 3.3 0.3

4

S, G, C

S, C, B

S, C

23

Idotea resecata

Table 14: Neptune Beach Profile Data: Elevation, Substrate, and Species Groups

-0.5 0.2 -1.1 -1.1 -1.2 -1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.9 -1 -0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -0.6

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X X

X X X

cumulative distance Amphipods Anemones Barnacles Chitons Clams Crabs Fish Insects Isopods Limpets Mussels Nudibranch Sand Dollars Sea Cucumbers Seastars Snails Urchins Flat Worms Nemerteans Polychaetes Green Seaweeds Red Seaweeds Brown Seaweeds Seagrass Arachnid Porifera

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

Length of survey section

cumulative distance

10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10'

Seaweeds and Invertebrates (check all that apply)

Entry

Length of survey section

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Substrate (check all)

Survey Reading + or Ground shell debris Clay/Silt Sand (.002"-.08") Gravel (.08"-2") Cobbles (2"-10") Boulders (>10)

Entry

Neptune Beach: 7/13/2014

1

10

10

2

20

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

30 10 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10'

30 x x x 60 70 80 X 90 X 100 110 x 120 130 140 x

X X

X X X X X X X x x x x x

X x X X

x

No Organisms found in this swath X X x X X X X X X X X X X x X X X X X x X x x X X No Data Collected in this Swath x x x x x x x x x x x x

x

x

Change in Elevation (ft)

Profile Elevation: Neptune Beach, 7/13/14

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Distance From Backshore (ft)

Figure 19: Beach elevation profile at Neptune Beach

At the Neptune Beach survey site, species represented as percent coverage were diverse, with Ulva spp. and barnacles having the highest percent coverage values throughout all tidal-height transects. The number of countable animals at Neptune Beach was the largest and most diverse collection of all those seen at the four study sites. Limpets and anemones were the dominant species at this site. The data changed very little from 2013 to 2014.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

24

Discussion The goal of this project is to provide a baseline for detection of any future changes and the objective is to collect baseline data on beach slope, substrate, and intertidal biodiversity at four monitoring sites. The 2014 project was completed as intended. Twenty-eight volunteers were trained and participated in this year’s survey. Quality control (QC) protocols described in the QAPP were satisfactory given the parameters and limitations of the study, and these were improved in this Year 2 of study (see planned program and procedure improvements below). Across all four sites, the percent cover and number of animals was highest at Neptune Beach. This is consistent with the well-established positive correlation between substrate composition and intertidal habitat, flora, fauna, and ecology. According to Dethier and Schoch (2005), “In areas where cobbles (>~ 4” or 10 cm diam.) are abundant on the low shore, the substrate is stabilized into a complex mix of cobbles, pebbles, and sand; these habitats harbor a rich flora (on the cobbles) and fauna (both on the cobbles and infauna).” Three of the four survey sites are predominantly sandy and have little observable biota. Because of this, there is interest from the committee in changing the survey sites in upcoming years.

Recommendations In Year 1, we made a number of recommendations to improve the training, data capture, and quality control for the surveys. The implementation of some of these recommendations ensured a bettertrained cadre of volunteers and a more efficient and accurate quality control process. There remain some recommendations to be implemented or considered, and some clarifications to be made.

Recommendations from Year 1 The following recommendations and changes were implemented for Year 2:  Training: Accurate of common organisms was emphasized.  Training: Identification of invasive species was emphasized  Photographing quadrats: Photos were taken after removing debris and unattached algae  Data management: Each quadrat had at least 1 data sheet; quadrats were not pooled on 1 sheet  Data collection: The distance along the profile line was noted for each transect level.  Quality Control: The on-the beach portion included, o Ensuring that all blanks were filled out o Ensuring that animals and plants were placed in correct category (percent coverage vs. countable species) o Asking that participants total the entire percent coverage—and having them assess whether that was reasonable (some previous estimates were greater than 100%) o QC specialist reviewed estimates and verified that these seemed reasonable, on-site.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

25

The following recommendations from Year 1 were not implemented but will be implemented or considered in Year 3.  Additional Transect at -2’: Volunteers are interested in adding a survey transect at -2’ to document organisms present below -1’, especially where much richer species diversity exists. For example, at Point Whitehorn, a band of sand with very few plants and animals was present between -1’ and +1’, whereas higher and lower elevations were obviously rockier and more diverse. For these surveys to be valuable, the -2’survey must occur in all years. Ideally, it should be done at all sites.  Surveys of fauna in sediments: Future surveys may allow for the possibility of surveying fauna located within intertidal sediments (i.e., below the surface) to provide a greater representation of the ecological communities present at the CPAR. This undertaking will depend on overall interest from the community, as it does entail significantly more work. The tools would likely be available from the Fidalgo Bay Aquatic Reserve CSC.  Station identification: We will ensure that GPS information includes units and consistent coordinate format (decimal degrees or degrees, minutes, seconds) and that compass readings include declination.

Clarifications and considerations for Year 3 The following clarifications are needed to ensure greater reproducibility of fieldwork. Answers to these questions should be discussed with experts and satisfactory solutions should be amended in the QA plan.  What constitutes debris that should be removed: All dead/ unattached algae, shells and rocks (, especially if these constitute much of the substrate), and what about when they have associated life on them?  When a quadrat lands on uneven surfaces/rocks, estimates should be made taking a strictly vertical view. Is there any angle that is considered too steep for this procedure? Does this limit apply equally to percent cover and individual species?  When a quadrat lands on a boulder such that the elevation is not representative of the transect line, should the quadrat be moved to a more representative spot on the timeline? How will this be determined?  How should shell debris be noted? Is there a size classification for shell debris? Other changes to be made or considered:  Should additional or different sites be added, to ensure that data could be collected where there is sufficient biota?  When making species lists or examining quadrats, should there be a time limit to search for organisms or size limit on species? (This has been recommended by one volunteer expert but should be discussed broadly.)  The general species list (Beach Watcher D- 4, Field data sheet) does not need to be filled out when expert identifiers are compiling species on the detailed species list (Species Checklist, Appendix 1). Data can be transferred where appropriate from the detailed list to the general list.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

26





The use of scientific names and the practice of identifying organisms down to species, where possible, needs to be emphasized in training of citizen volunteers to decrease confusion about species ID. Amend the Beach Watcher D- 4, Field data sheet, to include shell debris as a substrate.

Possible future uses of this data Ongoing annual surveys will allow comparisons from year to year. In this way, changes in overall species diversity may be detected. After detection, causes may be able to be elucidated and potentially remedied. These surveys may also be used in any Natural Resources Damage Assessment in the event of an oil spill or other event, and to identify and attend to invasive species presence.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

27

References Dethier, M.N. and G.C. Schoch. 2005. The consequence of scale: assessing t5he distribution of benthic populations in a complex estuarine fjord. Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science. 62:253-270. Geiger, N.S. 1982. 1982 Survey of the Intertidal Zone from Sandy Point to Birch Bay, Whatcom County, Washington. Island County/ Washington State University Beach Watchers, 2003. Beach Monitoring Procedures, Training Manual for Island County/ Washington State University Beach Watchers. Available at: http://www.beachwatchers.wsu.edu/island/monitoring/data/manual03.htm (accessed March 26, 2014). Schneider, D. F. and M. A. Dube. 1969. Survey of the Intertidal Zone from Sandy Point to Birch Park Marina, Whatcom County, Washington. Steffensen, W, and J. Joyce, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Intertidal Biota Monitoring in the Cherry Point and Fidalgo Bay Aquatic Reserves. Available at: https://sites.google.com/a/resources.org/main-2/programs/baykeeper/whatcom-and-skagit-county-aquatic-reserves Steffensen, W, and M. Kyte. 2014. Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014 Intertidal Species Lists at Four Locations. Available at: https://sites.google.com/a/re-sources.org/main2/programs/baykeeper/whatcom-and-skagit-county-aquatic-reserves WDNR, 2010. Cherry Point Environmental Aquatic Reserve Management Plan. http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/aqr_cp_mgmt_plan_2010.pdf (accessed December 12, 2013)

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

28

Acknowledgments Most of the sampling protocol and procedures is based on the work of the Island County/WSU Beach Watchers. We thank them for the use of their materials and assistance. In particular, we thank Barbara Bennett, project coordinator for her assistance. We also thank our partners at WDNR and especially Betty Bookheim for her assistance in refining the procedures. Finally, we thank Dr. Megan Dethier of University of Washington for her assistance in helping us resolve some of the theoretical issues in the sampling protocol. We would also like to thank Betty Bookheim, Michael Kyte, and Bob Lemon for their review and comments on this report. Gratitude goes to RE Sources interns Marissa McBride and Taylor Garrod for assisting in data entry and graph- making, and to Maddie Foutch for formatting assistance and support throughout the project. A special thank you goes to the volunteers who attended classes and who came out in both sun and rain to survey Cherry Point Beaches. Without your assistance, this work would not have happened.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

29

Appendix A: Data Forms The following data forms were used in this project: Form Quadrat Estimation Worksheet, rev1 Whatcom Quadrat Sheet, rev 1 Beach Watcher Profile data sheet Cherry Point Species List With Common Organisms Species Checklist_scientific nomenclature, rev1 Profile Start Point Form, rev1 Beach Watcher, Vertical Height Form Beach Watcher, Directions to Beach Form

Purpose Assess percentage coverage Quadrat analysis, Cherry Point AR Profile elevation, substrate type and species type Identify and tally species Species identification Record start point with multiple readings Record presence and dimensions of structure on or near the profile line Identifies general location of beach and then provides specific information to locate start point

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

31

Quadrat Estimation Worksheet Site_____________________________________ Date and Time____________________________________ Identifier:______________________________ Recorder______________________________ Other Team members:______________________________ and ______________________________ Transect Elevation (circle one): +1’ 0’ -1 Quadrat Number __________, Quadrat Distance along transect line __________ Organism: Row Totals

Row Totals

Organism:

Grand Total: Grand Total: Organism: Row Totals

Row Totals

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

Organism:

32

Whatcom Quadrat Sheet Aquatic Reserve Intertidal Biotic monitoring

QUADRAT DATA SHEET

LEAD:______________________________

Team names: ___________________________ and _____________________________ Identifier: ___________________________ Recorder: _____________________________ Site: ______________________________ Date and Time of sampling: ______________________________

OUR QUADRAT DATA: Transect elevation (circle one): +1' 0' Quadrat #: ____________________________ Quadrat distance: ________________________________ Substrate in Quadrat: ______________________________

-1'

PERCENT COVERAGE ORGANISMS: algae, plants and colonial organisms*: transferred information from QUADRAT ESTIMATION worksheet

Organism Name % Cover Organism Name % Cover 1 11 2 12 3 13 4 14 5 15 6 16 7 17 8 18 9 19 10 20 * Barnacles, mussels, sponge, bryozoans, colonial ascidians, & Anthopleura elegantissima COUNTABLE ANIMALS: Organism Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Number

Organism Name

Number

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS (i.e weather, dominant vegetation, tide, invasives, etc)

Pg. 1/1

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

33

Beach Watcher Profile Data Sheet

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

34

Cherry Point Species List With Common Organisms Site: __________________________________________ Date & Time of sampling: ________________________________________ Identifier:___________________________________Recorder:_______________________________________

Elevation Distances Kingdom/Phylum

Genus/Species name

Common Name

Animalia/Chordata

Gobiesox maeandricus

Northern cling fish

Pholis ornata

Saddleback gunnel

Oligocottus maculosus

Tide pool sculpin

Anthopleura elegantissima

Aggregating anenome

Anthopleura artemisia

Moonglow anenome

Urticina coriacea

Stubby rose anenome

Metridium farcimen

Plumose anenome Orange ribbon worm

Cnidaria

Nemertea

Mollusca

Tubulanus polymorphus Paranemertes peregrina Littorina scutulata

Purple ribbon worm Checkered periwinkle

Littorina sitkana

Sitka periwinkle

Lacuna variegata

Chink shells

Lirabuccinum dira

Dire whelk

Nucella lamellosa Onchidoris bilamellata Tresus capax Protothaca staminea Venerupis philippinarum Clinorcardium nuttallii Pododesmus macrochisma

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

Frilled dogwinkle Barnacle eating nudibranch Horse clam Pacific littleneck Japanese littleneck Heart cockle Green false-jingle

35

Cherry Point Species List With Common Organisms Site: __________________________________________ Date & Time of sampling: ________________________________________ Identifier:___________________________________Recorder:_______________________________________

Elevation Distances Kingdom/Phylum

Genus/Species name

Mollusca

Mytilus trossulus Crassostrea gigas Mopalia muscosa Mopalia ciliata Lottia digitalis Lottia alveus paralella Tectura pernosa

Arthropoda

Calliostoma ligatum Gnorimosphaeroma oregonense

Common Name Pacific blue mussel Pacific (Japanese) oyster Mossy chiton Hairy chiton Finger limpet Eelgrass limpet Mask limpet Blue top shell Pill bug isopod

Pentidotea wosnesenskii

Rockweed isopod

Cirolana harfordi

Harford's isopod

Megalorchestia californiana

California beach hopper

Hemigrapsus nudus Hemigrapsus oregonensis Lophopanopeus bellus Cancer gracilis Cyclocoeloma tuberculata Petrolisthes eriomerus Pagurus granosimanus Pagurus beringanus Heptacarpus spp.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

Purple shore crab Hairy shore crab Black-clawed crab Graceful crab Decorator crab Flat-top porcelain crab Grainy hermit Bering Hermit Broken back shrimp

36

Cherry Point Species List With Common Organisms Site: __________________________________________ Date & Time of sampling: ________________________________________ Identifier:___________________________________Recorder:_______________________________________

Elevation Distances Kingdom/Phylum

Genus/Species name

Anthropoda Cont.

Balanus glandula Semibalanus cariosus

Bryozoa

Membranipora membranacea

Echinodermata

Leptasterias spp. Pycnopodia helianthoides Amphiodia occidentalis Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis

Plantae/Chlorophyta

Ochrophyta

Rhodophyta

Codium fragile

Common Name Acorn barnacle Haystack barnacle Kelp lace Brooding star Sunflower star Long-armed brittle star Green sea urchin Dead man's fingers

Ulva lactuca

Sea lettuce

Ulva intestinalis

Sea lettuce

Alaria marginata

Winged kelp

Saccharina latissima

Sugar kelp

Nereocystis leutkeana

Bull kelp

Lithothamnion spp.

Encrusting corraline red

Priontis lanceolata

Bleachweed

Hildenbrandia fluccosa

Sea brush

Other:

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

37

Cherry Point Species List With Common Organisms Site: __________________________________________ Date & Time of sampling: ________________________________________ Identifier:___________________________________Recorder:_______________________________________

Elevation Distances Kingdom/Phylum

Genus/Species name

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

Common Name

38

Profile Start Point Form

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

39

Beach Watcher Vertical Height Form

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

40

Beach Watcher Directions to Beach Form

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

41

Appendix B: Field Instructions Intertidal Monitoring STEP BY STEP Do NOT walk below +1 before quadrats are set AND do Not walk in quadrats! Placement of Profile Line: A member of the CPARCS committee will do this Placement of Profile Swath: After the profile line is set, one can start setting the outer limits of the profile swath using small marker flags. The swath is 20 meters wide, thus mark 10 meters on each side the profile line, every 10 linear feet of the profile. In the +1, 0, and -1 area of the profile, do not mark the area of the swath until a’er the quadrats have been placed. Placement of Transect Lines: As the tide is going out- place markers at +1, 0, and -1. To determine placement, use the nearest tide chart location and place the marker at the midway point as tide is lapping in and out at the time designated by the tide chart. Place a line or tape measure at the +1, 0, and -1 levels as soon as possible. The transect length should be 20 meters (66 feet). Place the tape with 0 feet at the left (if back is to water) and 10 meters (33 feet) at the profile line. Placement of Quadrats: Place 4 quadrats as soon as possible after the transects are placed. In this way, quadrat placement demarcates the area where participants are not to walk. The location of the first quadrat is randomly selected and placement of subsequent quadrats are placed at equal intervals. To place the first quadrat use a prepared computer-generated randomization chart for the numbers 0-4. Add 5, 10, and 15 to the numbers to get your measure. (When materials are only in English units, transect length will be 66’, and random numbers will be from 0-16, and the numbers 16.5, 33, and 49.5 will be added to get the correct measure). Quadrats will be placed below the transect line with the top le’ corner of the quadrat placed on the random number. For example: Measuring Elevation Using Profile Poles: Begin at the starting point of the profile line. Person A has profile pole #1 with the peephole- This will always by the shoreward pole. Person B has profile pole #2. Person B walks profile pole #2 ten feet down the profile line towards shore. Level both poles. Person A peeks through profile pole #1 peephole and directs her line of sight across the water to the horizon. Person A then matches the horizon line with the height at which it intersects profile pole #2. Observe the height of this intersection as it is measured on pole #2 and record in the Profile Data Sheet. This tells us the elevation change of each profile section. Person A then walks her pole down and levels it on exactly the same spot that Person B had pole #2. Person B then walks his pole #2 down 10 more feet. Repeat the process until the end of the profile line is reached (water’s edge). Extra surveyors can be used to assist in leveling the poles and scribing. Recording Types of Organisms on Profile Swath: Record with a checkmark all of the types of substrates, plants and animals found within each profile section (10 feet long by 20 meters wide) in the Profile Data Sheet. Start at the highest profile section and Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

43

work your way down the beach, one profile section at a time. The form indicates 1-10, 10-20, etc.. This refers to the distance in feet along the profile line, towards shore. Use a key to identify findings but at this point we only need to specify ’type’ of organism. Gently lift rocks to investigate and gently roll rocks back over in the same position you found them. Depending on the number of surveyors, this can occur concurrently with ’Measuring Elevation’. Recording Species on Profile Swath: Record with a checkmark all of the species of plants and animals found within each profile section in the Species Checklist Sheet. Gently lift rocks to investigate and ensure to gently roll rocks back over in the same position you found them. Use a key to identify findings down to species. Add any plants or animals found that are not included on the form in the blank columns below. Have experts present for this part of the survey. Depending on the number of surveyors, this can occur concurrently with’Measuring Elevation’ and ’Recording Types’. Recording Organisms in Quadrat: We need to be consistent in which organisms get % coverage and which get counted. Having organisms presented in two different formats, makes data presentation difficult. All blanks should be filled out on the data sheet. 

Remove any debris, shells, unattached seaweeds or miscellaneous drift that might hinder analysis. ONLY IDENTIFY THE TOP VISIBLE LAYER. Photograph the quadrat with the appropriate quadrat identification label lying just beside the quadrat.



Record all organisms within quadrat as species specific as possible in Quadrat Data Sheet. Have experts’ present for this part of the survey.



Estimate percent cover of seaweeds, sea grasses or colonial organisms, such as barnacles or aggregating anemone. Use 2-4 people and average the estimates. Percent cover estimate methods are dynamic and can be combined. Binary method (estimators assign a value of 1 to each 1% grid section where coverage is greater than ½ for a specified organism, and 0 where coverage is less than ½ for that organism. The values are totaled to arrive at % coverage) works well for any organism that covers a large percentage of the area. Binary method is not preferred for organisms that cover small percentages of the area. Using a 1% card works well in both cases.



Identify invertebrates as species specific as possible. Count the number of animals found and record.

Intertidal Biota Monitoring: Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve 2014

44