Marine Environmental Assessment Report 

THE EFFECTS OF SEAFOOD WASTE DISCHARGES 

ON THE BENTHIC ENVIRONMENT AT 

KETCHIKAN, ALASKA

Prepared for

Tetra Tech, Inc.

6100 219th Street SW, Suite 550 

Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043

Contract NTP No. 18-5006-14-3 

Prepared by

Germano & Associates, Inc.

12100 SE 46th Place 

Bellevue, WA 98006

G&A Project No.

R603-02 

June, 2004
June, 2004 ii Ketchikan Final Report 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ ES-1

STUDY PARTICIPANTS................................................................................................ 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 2

2.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................... 4

2.1 MEASURING, INTERPRETING, AND MAPPING SPI PARAMETERS .......................... 9 

2.1.1 Sediment Type ............................................................................................. 9

2.1.2 Prism Penetration Depth .......................................................................... 10

2.1.3 Small-Scale Surface Boundary Roughness............................................... 11

2.1.4 Thickness of Depositional Layers............................................................. 11

2.1.5 Apparent Redox Potential Discontinuity Depth........................................ 11

2.1.6 Sedimentary Methane................................................................................ 13

2.1.7 Surface Bacterial Colonies....................................................................... 13

2.1.8 Infaunal Successional Stage ..................................................................... 14

2.1.9 Organism-Sediment Index......................................................................... 15

2.2 STATISTICAL METHODS ..................................................................................... 16 

2.3 USING SPI DATA TO ASSESS BENTHIC HEALTH ................................................ 17 

3.0 .................................................................................................................. 20 RESULTS

3.1 SEDIMENT GRAIN SIZE & TOC.......................................................................... 20 

3.2 SURFACE BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS .................................................................... 21 

3.3 PRISM PENETRATION DEPTH.............................................................................. 22 

3.4 APPARENT REDOX POTENTIAL DISCONTINUITY DEPTH ..................................... 22 

3.5 FISH WASTE DEPOSITS....................................................................................... 23 

3.6 SUBSURFACE METHANE AND BACTERIAL PRESENCE......................................... 23 

3.7 INFAUNAL SUCCESSIONAL STAGE...................................................................... 24 

3.8 ORGANISM-SEDIMENT INDEX ............................................................................ 24 

3.9 BENTHIC COMMUNITY ANALYSES ..................................................................... 25 

4.0 DISCUSSION............................................................................................................ 27

5.0 REFERENCES CITED............................................................................................ 34

FIGURES 

APPENDIX A: SEDIMENT PROFILE IMAGE ANALYSIS RESULTS 

APPENDIX B: SEDIMENT PHYSICAL ANALYSES 

APPENDIX C: BENTHIC SORTING/IDENTIFICATION RESULTS 
June, 2004 iii Ketchikan Final Report 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 2-1 ADEC Fish Waste Sampling locations – eastern sampling area 

Figure 2-2 ADEC Fish Waste Sampling locations – western and reference sampling 

areas 

Figure 3-1 Percentage distribution of different bottom types 

Figure 3-2 Distribution of sediment type and mean prism penetration depth (cm) – 

eastern sampling area

 

Figure 3-3 Distribution of sediment type and mean prism penetration depth (cm) – 

western sampling area 

 

Figure 3-4 Sediment profile image from Station NQO S125 showing the wide range 

of sediment particle sizes found at many of the sandy stations 

 

Figure 3-5 Sediment profile images from Stations T200 (left) and TDock SW175 

(right) are representative of some of the few locations where fine-grained 

sediment accumulated. 

 

Figure 3-6 Sediment profile images from Stations ECP250 (left) and ECP 300 (right) 

showing a hard bottom consisting primarily of disarticulated mollusk 

shells 

 

Figure 3-7 Sediment profile image from Station ECP 400-S60 showing a rocky 

cobble bottom 

 

Figure 3-8 Sediment profile image from T150 

 

Figure 3-9 Distribution of mean apparent RPD depth (cm) – eastern sampling area 

 

Figure 3-10 Distribution of mean apparent RPD depth (cm) – western sampling area 

 

Figure 3-11 Sediment profile image from Station AGSOld-SE375 

 

Figure 3-12 Sediment profile image from Station AGS01 showing no detectable 

apparent RPD 

 

Figure 3-13 Sediment profile image from Station TDock-SW125 showing no 

detectable apparent RPD due to the high sediment oxygen demand of 

decomposing fish waste 
June, 2004 iv Ketchikan Final Report 

 

Figure 3-14 Replicate sediment profile images from Station NQ0, the center of the 

active Norquest Seafoods discharge pile 

 

Figure 3-15 Sediment profile image from Station AGSDock SW100 

 

Figure 3-16 Distribution of fish waste accumulations (cm) – eastern sampling area 

 

Figure 3-17 Distribution of fish waste accumulations (cm) – western sampling area 

 

Figure 3-18 Sediment profile images from the AGS pile showing the gradation of fish 

waste accumulation 

 

Figure 3-19 Sediment profile image from TDock SW275 showing a combination of 

both wood waste fibers and skeletal remains 

 

Figure 3-20 Distribution of subsurface methane gas presence – eastern sampling area 

 

Figure 3-21 Distribution of subsurface methane gas presence – western sampling area 

Figure 3-22 Distribution of bacterial colonies and areas with low/no dissolved oxygen 

in near-bottom waters – eastern sampling area 

 

Figure 3-23 Distribution of bacterial colonies and areas with low/no dissolved oxygen 

in near-bottom waters – western sampling area 

 

Figure 3-24 Sediment profile image showing a chunk of fish waste on the sediment 

surface covered by Beggiatoa 

 

Figure 3-25 Distribution of infaunal successional stages – eastern survey area 

 

Figure 3-26 Distribution of infaunal successional stages – western survey area 

 

Figure 3-27 Sediment profile image from Station AGSOld-SE275 showing no 

evidence of fish waste deposits 

 

Figure 3-28 The starfish seen in this sediment profile image from Station TDockSW100 is feeding on the dense assemblage of opportunistic polychaetes 

 

Figure 3-29 Evidence of a large burrow and deep bioturbation can be seen in this 

sediment profile image from the reference station 

 

Figure 3-30 Distribution of Organism-Sediment Index values – eastern survey area 

 

Figure 3-31 Distribution of Organism-Sediment Index values – western survey area 

 
June, 2004 v Ketchikan Final Report 

 

Figure 3-32 Dendrogram for cluster analysis of Bray-Curtis distance metric on species 

abundance data (4th root transformed) 

 

Figure 3-33 Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) plot illustrating in 2 dimensions the 

distance relationships between samples as described by the Bray-Curtis 

distance metric on the full species abundance data set (391 species). 

 

Figure 3-34 Dendrogram for cluster analysis of Bray-Curtis distance metric on family 

abundance data (4th root transformed) 

 

Figure 3-35 Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) plot illustrating in 2 dimensions the 

distance relationships between samples as described by the Bray-Curtis 

distance metric on the family abundance data set. 

 

Figure 4-1 Sediment profile image from Station ECP100-80S 

 

Figure 4-2 Soft-bottom benthic community response to disturbance (top panel) or 

organic enrichment (bottom panel). From Rhoads and Germano, 1982.
June, 2004 ES-1 Ketchikan Final Report 

Executive Summary

Seafood processors often discharge the unused portions or “waste” from their processing 

facilities to the sea floor via a pipeline. The discharge is comprised of solid particles as 

well as fine suspended material and dissolved organics and nutrients. For the processors 

operating along the Alaskan coast, the discharged solids have to be ground to 1⁄2” or less 

in size under the terms of their discharge permit. The discharged solids results in a pile 

termed a “Zone of Deposit” (ZOD) that varies in size from less than an acre to several 

acres in area. Annually, a pile may receive wastes ranging in total weight from 

approximately 100,000 pounds to many millions of pounds, with resulting piles of 

varying thickness. These piles have a direct impact where the material settles, and they 

may have an impact to the benthos beyond the boundary of the wastes. This study looks 

at the impacts to the sea floor from four seafood processors’ waste discharge along the 

coast of Ketchikan, Alaska, from the ZOD out to distances of approximately 500m downcurrent and 180m perpendicular to the prevailing current from the point of discharge. 

Both Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI) technology (121 stations) and sediment grabs (7 

stations) were used to characterize benthic conditions near two active (Norquest Seafoods 

and E.C. Phillips & Son) and two inactive (Trident Seafoods and Alaska General 

Seafoods) discharge facilities. The sediment profile images provided information on 

sediment grain-size, kinetic regime, relative organic loading, depth of the apparent redox 

potential discontinuity (RPD), and infaunal successional stage, while the grab samples 

were taken for ground-truth calibration of the sediment profile images and analyzed for 

sediment grain-size, total organic carbon (TOC), and benthic community structure. 

A wide variety of sediment types were encountered over the area sampled, from hard 

rock/cobble bottoms to muddy sands; most sediments were poorly-sorted, and the 

majority of stations had grain-size major modes in the fine or very fine sand size range. 

Low percentages of muds were found, and no substantial areas of fine-grained sediments 

existed, indicative of the high bottom currents that are found in this area. Sediment 

analyses from the grab samples confirmed the low percentage of fines (ranging from 

approximately 5 – 18%), with sediment TOC concentrations varying between 0.9 – 3 

percent. Camera prism penetration was severely hampered by the consolidated sands, 

shells, gravel, and cobble throughout the area, so the apparent RPD could not be 

measured at 40% of the stations surveyed; of the 71 stations where RPD measurements 

could be made, about one third of them had no apparent RPD due to the high oxygen 

demand resulting from the organic loading due to the fish waste deposits. Overall, the 

average RPD for the stations was approximately 2.5 cm, with the highest RPD values 

(greater than 4 cm) found at the inactive discharge facilities. 

The presence of fish waste on the bottom was readily apparent in the profile images from 

all four areas surveyed, and the footprint of the detectable deposit varied in size at each 

facility. Not surprisingly, the largest area of bottom affected was at the active discharge 
June, 2004 ES-2 Ketchikan Final Report 

facilities of Norquest Seafoods and E.C. Phillips & Son, where the waste signature from 

the two facilities merged. A more realistic assessment of the area of seafloor actually 

affected by the waste discharge was determined from looking at the extent of sulfurreducing bacterial colonies that had formed on the seafloor around these waste piles. 

These colonies of Beggiatoa (indicative of low oxygen conditions) were a good indicator 

of areas experiencing stress from organic loading; the area of seafloor experiencing 

adverse effects from excess organic loading around the two active facilities was almost 7 

acres. 

The benthic infaunal community is responding to the fish waste discharge with 

predictable patterns of successional recovery; there have been numerous studies 

documenting the response of benthic infauna to organic loading, and both the sediment 

profile images as well as the results from the bottom grab analysis showed the classic 

pattern of high densities of opportunistic species nearest to the source of the organic 

loading. At the 7 stations where grab samples were taken for traditional benthic 

community analysis, a total of 90,067 individuals were found belonging to 391 species in 

147 families and 12 phyla. Of the three major taxonomic groups found, polychaetes were 

the most abundant group present, representing 65 percent of the total abundance and only 

13 percent of the total biomass. Molluscs represented 10 percent of the total abundance 

but 85 percent of the total biomass. The crustaceans were the smallest group, representing 

less than 2 percent of the total abundance and less than 1 percent of the total biomass. 

The results from the benthic grabs provided ground-truth validation for the successional 

stage designations determined from the sediment profile images. 

 

As one moves away from the waste piles, evidence appears of more mature infaunal 

communities with a higher frequency of deposit-feeding infauna. The one benefit from 

the high densities of opportunistic fauna surrounding the waste discharge facilities is the 

enhanced secondary production and their ready availability as prey items for higher 

trophic levels such as demersal fish and other large epifaunal predators (e.g., crabs, 

starfish). 

The strong tidal currents are the dominant physical forcing function in Tongass Narrows; 

the high kinetic regime prevents any significant accumulation of fine-grained deposits, 

and it is precisely this high energy regime that makes this coastal area an ideal location 

for fish waste discharge. There is little chance of organic material from the fish waste 

discharge accumulating to the point of causing a severe sediment oxygen demand and 

causing either hypoxia or anoxia in the overlying waters. While the stations right under 

the active discharge points are clearly azoic, there were dense assemblages of 

opportunistic fauna within 50-100 meters of the discharge pile centers, following the 

classic pattern of benthic community response to organic enrichment. Given the large 

numbers of indigenous salmon that spawn in the area and subsequently die off, the 

ecosystem in Tongass Narrows is adapted to handling large pulses of organic matter from 

decomposing fish. The combination of the strong tidal currents with a system pre-
June, 2004 ES-3 Ketchikan Final Report 

adapted to recycle the nutrients from decomposing fish tissue work together to limit the 

area of bottom showing adverse effects from the fish waste discharge. Given the rapid 

recovery of the benthic community as one moves out from the active piles, it is safe to 

assume that the areas of seafloor closest to the active discharge points that are currently 

showing adverse effects would readily recover if fish waste discharge was ever 

discontinued in the future. 
June, 2004 1 Ketchikan Final Report 

STUDY PARTICIPANTS 

The following personnel participated in this study: 

Name Title Affiliation Address Phone/Email 

Joseph D. 

Germano 

President Germano & 

Associates, Inc. 

www.remots.com

12100 SE 46th

Place, 

Bellevue, WA 

98006 

(425) 865-0199 

joe@remots.com 

David G. 

Browning 

Senior 

Scientist 

Germano & 

Associates, Inc. 

www.remots.com

5541 Keating 

Road, NW 

Olympia, WA 

98502 

(360) 866-6806 

dave_browning@comcast.net 

Robert 

Stuart 

Senior 

Fisheries 

Biologist 

Tetra Tech, Inc. 

www.tetratech.com

6100 219th 

Street SW, 

Suite 550, 

Mountlake 

Terrace, WA 

98043 

(425) 673-3670 

bob.stuart@tetratech.com 

Anthony 

Petrillo 

President Bluewater 

Engineering 

P.O. Box 232 

Port 

Townsend,WA 

98368 

(360) 385-2680 

bluewater@seanet.com 

Kenwyn 

P. George 

Environmental 

Engineer 

State of Alaska; 

Dept. of 

Environmental 

Conservation 

410 

Willoughby 

Ave., Suite 

303, Juneau, 

AK 99801 

(907) 465-5313 

kenwyn_george@dec.state.ak.us 

Tim 

Scanlon 

Senior Diver / 

Boat Operator 

Alaska 

Commercial 

Divers 

5160 Shoreline 

Drive, 

Ketchikan, AK 

99901 

(907) 247-0771 

akcommercialdivers@kpunet.net 
June, 2004 2 Ketchikan Final Report 

1.0 

INTRODUCTION 

As part of an environmental services support contract that Tetra Tech, Inc. has with the 

State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) to study the effects 

of salmon waste discharges in southeast Alaska, Germano & Associates, Inc. (G&A) 

performed a Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI) survey and collected sediment samples at 

selected locations in Tongass Narrows off the coast of Ketchikan, Alaska between 

September 29 – October 2, 2003. The study was conceived by ADEC, and the 

information contained herein is intended for use by ADEC personnel and others who may 

find the research of interest in determining the effects of discharging large amounts of 

organic waste to the marine environment. 

Seafood processors often discharge the unused portions or “waste” from their processing 

facilities to the sea floor via a pipeline. The discharge is comprised of solid particles as 

well as fine suspended material and dissolved organics and nutrients. For the processors 

operating along the Alaskan coast, the discharged solids have to be ground to 1⁄2” or less 

in size under the terms of their discharge permit. The discharged solids results in a pile 

termed a “Zone of Deposit” (ZOD) that varies in size from less than an acre to several 

acres in area. Annually, a pile may receive wastes ranging in total weight from 

approximately 100,000 pounds to many millions of pounds, with resulting piles of 

varying thickness. These piles have a direct impact where the material settles, and they 

may have an impact to the benthos beyond the boundary of the wastes. This study looks 

at the impacts to the sea floor from four seafood processors’ waste discharge along the 

coast of Ketchikan, Alaska, from the ZOD out to distances of approximately 500m downcurrent and 180m perpendicular to the prevailing current from the point of discharge. 

A total of four seafood waste pile areas were examined: Trident Seafoods, Alaska 

General Seafoods (AGS), Norquest Seafoods (NQ), and E.C. Phillips & Son (ECP). The 

two piles surveyed to the east, those of Trident Seafoods and Alaska General Seafoods, 

were not actively receiving solid wastes, nor had they been for the 2 years prior to the 

study. For the prior year and in the year of this study, these solids were barged 10 miles 

south of Ketchikan. When they had been discharging solids, each plant had discharged 

between 7 and 11 million pounds per year. The two smaller processors to the west, 

Norquest Seafoods and EC Phillips & Son, discharge approximately 2-3.5 million pounds 

of waste each year and were actively discharging solids at the time of the study. 

Currents are stronger at the eastern facilities with a maximum around 3-4 knots, whereas 

currents are weaker at the western facilities where there is a back eddy and the currents 

reach a maximum of around 2 knots. 
June, 2004 3 Ketchikan Final Report 

The purpose of the SPI survey was to determine the extent of seafood waste pile impacts 

on the benthic infaunal community around selected waste piles that ADEC has been 

monitoring. In addition, surface sediment samples were collected for taxonomic analysis 

to provide reference data for the interpretation of the sediment profile images. 

Field operations were carried out on board the working vessel INVADER 1 from Alaska 

Commercial Divers; navigation support was provided by Bluewater Engineering of Port 

Townsend, WA. Sediment grab sampling and SPI surveys were performed by Germano 

& Associates, Inc. with assistance from Tetra Tech, Inc.; an ADEC representative was on 

board to oversee operations and make decisions about which ZOD sites to sample. While 

the original plan was to survey impacts around two seafood waste piles, a decision was 

made in the field to survey additional areas given the efficiency with which sampling 

operations were completed. 
June, 2004 4 Ketchikan Final Report 

2.0 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 

Over the course of the four days of field operations, scientists from G&A and Tetra Tech 

collected 7 sediment samples for benthic community analyses and surveyed 121 stations 

with SPI technology (Figures 2-1 to 2-2). A computerized navigation and data 

acquisition system was used during all survey and sampling operations to assist with 

vessel positioning and determine station location information. The data acquisition 

system utilized HYPACK® Windows PC-based hydrographic survey software (Coastal 

Oceanographics, Inc.). The HYPACK® software also displayed real-time vessel position 

and data collection locations over a background electronic chart of the study area. 

Positional data were comprised of horizontal positioning (x- and y-dimensional data in 

Alaska State Plane coordinates) and time (t-dimensional data). Positional data were 

collected using a Trimble AG 132 Differential Global Position System (DGPS) for all 

sampling operations; the accuracy of the Trimble AG132 is ± 1 meter at the 95% 

confidence level. All samples were taken within a target radius of 5 meters from the 

intended target position. Final sampling locations for both the SPI and grab samples 

(Table 2-1) were recorded electronically on disk as well as manually in a field notebook. 

Sediment samples for grain size, total organic carbon (TOC), and benthic community 

analyses were taken with a stainless steel 0.1 m2 vanVeen grab using Puget Sound 

protocols (PSWQAT, 1997). If a retrieved grab sample was deemed acceptable 

(PSWQAT, 1997), a small quantity (approximately 4 tablespoons) was placed in a 

Whirlpac® bag for grain size analysis, and an additional subsample (ca. 200 ml) was 

placed in a glass jar for TOC analysis. The remaining sediment was washed through a 0.5 

mm sieve for benthic community analysis and transferred to plastic 1-liter storage jars 

with buffered formalin as a preservative. Grain-size and TOC samples were stored on ice 

in coolers; the grain-size, TOC, and benthic samples were shipped to the appropriate 

laboratories for final analysis upon completion of the field operations. Sediment grain 

size and TOC analyses were performed by Analytical Resources, Inc., of Seattle, WA, 

and benthic infaunal sorting and identification were performed by Marine Taxonomic 

Services, Ltd., of Corvallis, OR. 

 

Sediment profile images were collected with an Ocean Imaging Model 3731 REMOTS 

camera; two replicate images were taken at each station sampled. SPI was developed 

almost two decades ago as a rapid reconnaissance tool for characterizing physical, 

chemical, and biological seafloor processes and has been used in numerous seafloor 

surveys throughout the United States, Pacific Rim, and Europe (Rhoads and Germano 

1982, 1986, 1990; Revelas et al. 1987; Valente et al. 1992). The sediment profile camera 

works like an inverted periscope. A Nikon D100 6-megapixel SLR camera with a 1-

gigabyte compact flash card is mounted horizontally inside a watertight housing on top of 

a wedge-shaped prism. The prism has a Plexiglas® faceplate at the front with a mirror 
AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150 T100

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T50

T175

Figure 2-1. ADEC Fish Waste Sampling locations - eastern sampling area.

Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

1800 m

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 2-2. ADEC Fish Waste Sampling locations - western and reference sampling areas.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

AIRPORT DOCK

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

AIRPORT RUNWAY

REF 6

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 5 Ketchikan Final Report 

placed at a 45° angle at the back. The camera lens looks down at the mirror, which is 

reflecting the image from the faceplate. The prism has an internal strobe mounted inside 

at the back of the wedge to provide illumination for the image; this chamber is filled with 

distilled water, so the camera always has an optically clear path to shoot through. This 

wedge assembly is mounted on a moveable carriage within a stainless steel frame. The 

Table 2-1: Ketchikan Sampling Station Coordinates (AK State Plane)

Station Name* 

Average 

Easting (ft) 

Average 

Northing (ft) 

Average 

Depth (ft) 

Average 

Easting (m) 

Average 

Northing (m) 

Average 

Depth (m) 

SPI Stations 

AGS 000 3109129.9 1284902.2 108.3 947664.7 391639.0 33.0 

AGS 001 3109309.3 1285118.6 54.9 947719.4 391704.9 16.7 

AGS 050 3109253.8 1284801.5 116.2 947702.5 391608.3 35.4 

AGS 100 3109376.2 1284692.0 135.6 947739.8 391574.9 41.3 

AGS 150 3109508.8 1284585.3 144.0 947780.2 391542.4 43.9 

AGS 200 3109622.9 1284468.9 146.4 947814.9 391506.9 44.6 

AGS OLD-SE025 3109343.9 1285009.4 77.4 947729.9 391671.7 23.6 

AGS OLD-SE050 3109413.0 1284963.0 93.4 947751.0 391657.5 28.5 

AGS OLD-SE075 3109470.8 1284909.1 101.9 947768.6 391641.1 31.1 

AGS OLD-SE100 3109531.8 1284851.4 112.5 947787.2 391623.5 34.3 

AGS OLD-SE125 3109596.4 1284811.8 112.5 947806.9 391611.4 34.3 

AGS OLD-SE150 3109650.1 1284742.0 117.3 947823.2 391590.1 35.7 

AGS OLD-SE175 3109719.3 1284702.6 110.9 947844.3 391578.1 33.8 

AGS OLD-SE200 3109777.9 1284653.8 114.4 947862.2 391563.3 34.9 

AGS OLD-SE225 3109836.6 1284602.2 113.0 947880.1 391547.5 34.4 

AGS OLD-SE250 3109907.8 1284544.2 112.6 947901.8 391529.9 34.3 

AGS OLD-SE275 3109977.7 1284491.7 114.4 947923.1 391513.9 34.9 

AGS OLD-SE300 3110034.0 1284434.3 118.5 947940.3 391496.4 36.1 

AGS OLD-SE325 3110096.4 1284379.8 122.7 947959.3 391479.8 37.4 

AGS OLD-SE350 3110160.2 1284328.1 120.8 947978.7 391464.0 36.8 

AGS OLD-SE375 3110216.5 1284285.4 117.4 947995.9 391451.0 35.8 

AGSDock-SW050 3109279.5 1285069.8 61.4 947710.3 391690.1 18.7 

AGSDock-SW100 3109166.0 1284946.7 92.7 947675.7 391652.5 28.3 

AGSDock-SW150 3109068.5 1284825.7 134.0 947646.0 391615.7 40.8 

AGSDock-SW200 3108959.5 1284691.5 154.3 947612.7 391574.7 47.0 

ECP 025 3101871.6 1289039.5 42.9 945452.3 392900.0 13.1 

ECP 050 3101792.0 1289019.7 41.0 945428.1 392894.0 12.5 

ECP 075 3101716.2 1288989.3 42.3 945405.0 392884.7 12.9 

ECP 100-A 3101670.3 1289072.5 38.1 945391.0 392910.1 11.6 

ECP 100-C 3101676.8 1288966.2 40.9 945393.0 392877.7 12.5 

ECP 100-N20 3101668.9 1289128.6 35.6 945390.6 392927.2 10.9 

ECP 100-N40 3101667.2 1289182.6 31.3 945390.1 392943.6 9.5 

ECP 100-S20 3101676.7 1288991.4 42.1 945393.0 392885.4 12.8 

ECP 100-S40 3101670.9 1288932.7 44.2 945391.2 392867.5 13.5 
June, 2004 6 Ketchikan Final Report 

Station Name* 

Average 

Easting (ft) 

Average 

Northing (ft) 

Average 

Depth (ft) 

Average 

Easting (m) 

Average 

Northing (m) 

Average 

Depth (m) 

ECP 100-S60 3101680.2 1288844.2 49.0 945394.0 392840.5 14.9 

ECP 100-S80 3101674.2 1288776.3 51.0 945392.2 392819.8 15.5 

ECP 125 3101584.0 1288931.3 39.3 945364.7 392867.0 12.0 

ECP 150 3101508.4 1288904.9 36.1 945341.6 392859.0 11.0 

ECP 250 3101187.1 1288998.2 17.6 945243.7 392887.4 5.4 

ECP 300 3101016.9 1289007.0 21.2 945191.8 392890.1 6.5 

ECP 400-N20 3100675.1 1289047.7 22.2 945087.7 392902.5 6.8 

ECP 400-N40 3100659.6 1289133.5 14.4 945082.9 392928.7 4.4 

ECP 400-S20 3100670.6 1288914.1 22.4 945086.3 392861.8 6.8 

ECP 400-S40 3100682.8 1288852.2 23.6 945090.0 392842.9 7.2 

ECP 400-S60 3100684.6 1288774.0 21.7 945090.6 392819.1 6.6 

ECP 400 3100663.4 1288987.6 20.2 945084.1 392884.2 6.1 

ECP 500 3100328.4 1288936.1 14.7 944982.0 392868.5 4.5 

ECP 750 3099555.1 1289280.2 19.9 944746.3 392973.4 6.1 

ECP 950 3098882.0 1289361.8 36.9 944541.1 392998.3 11.2 

ECP1 3101989.8 1289092.5 38.7 945488.4 392916.2 11.8 

MID 1 3108919.0 1285417.2 47.9 947600.4 391796.0 14.6 

MID 2 3102213.4 1288934.2 42.4 945556.5 392867.9 12.9 

MID 3-075 3108944.2 1285047.3 100.3 947608.1 391683.2 30.6 

MID 3-150 3108758.6 1285217.9 75.9 947551.5 391735.2 23.1 

MID 3-225 3108568.3 1285374.3 78.7 947493.5 391782.9 24.0 

NQ 0-S025 3102358.5 1288806.3 39.7 945600.8 392829.0 12.1 

NQ 0-S050 3102303.5 1288728.9 39.7 945584.0 392805.3 12.1 

NQ 0-S075 3102272.0 1288654.7 25.3 945574.4 392782.7 7.7 

NQ 0-S100 3102235.2 1288581.8 35.3 945563.2 392760.5 10.8 

NQ 0-S125 3102195.9 1288516.7 54.8 945551.2 392740.7 16.7 

NQ 0-S150 3102142.4 1288446.9 64.8 945534.9 392719.4 19.8 

NQ 0-S175 3102104.1 1288372.6 81.6 945523.2 392696.8 24.9 

NQ 0-S200 3102067.2 1288301.5 84.5 945512.0 392675.1 25.7 

NQ 0 3102383.1 1288887.2 54.3 945608.3 392853.6 16.6 

NQ 001 3102365.9 1288772.8 42.9 945603.0 392818.7 13.1 

NQ 025 3102459.9 1288848.6 44.7 945631.7 392841.8 13.6 

NQ 050 3102534.9 1288817.1 52.1 945654.5 392832.2 15.9 

NQ 075 3102610.3 1288772.6 57.0 945677.5 392818.7 17.4 

NQ 100 3102723.5 1288748.0 57.3 945712.0 392811.2 17.5 

NQ 125 3102769.8 1288721.1 56.6 945726.1 392803.0 17.2 

NQ 150 3102838.5 1288697.7 56.4 945747.1 392795.9 17.2 

REF 6 3088335.6 1296959.9 73.8 941326.6 395314.2 22.5 

T 000 3108518.7 1285619.3 63.3 947478.4 391857.6 19.3 

T 010 3108494.5 1285634.4 68.5 947471.0 391862.1 20.9 

T 025 3108258.2 1285589.2 80.9 947399.0 391848.4 24.6 

T 050 3108192.1 1285630.3 83.4 947378.9 391860.9 25.4 

T 100 3108060.6 1285712.5 83.4 947338.8 391886.0 25.4 
June, 2004 7 Ketchikan Final Report 

Station Name* 

Average 

Easting (ft) 

Average 

Northing (ft) 

Average 

Depth (ft) 

Average 

Easting (m) 

Average 

Northing (m) 

Average 

Depth (m) 

T 150 3107917.3 1285815.4 75.1 947295.1 391917.3 22.9 

T 175 3107960.4 1285873.5 62.6 947308.2 391935.0 19.1 

T 200 3107756.3 1285812.0 77.5 947246.0 391916.3 23.6 

T 250 3107588.9 1285816.0 71.2 947195.0 391917.5 21.7 

T 475 3107021.6 1285850.9 108.4 947022.1 391928.1 33.0 

TDOCK-SW025 3108538.1 1285788.9 44.5 947484.3 391909.3 13.6 

TDOCK-SW040 3108499.7 1285746.8 58.2 947472.6 391896.4 17.7 

TDOCK-SW055 3108474.8 1285717.5 62.9 947465.0 391887.5 19.2 

TDOCK-SW070 3108441.1 1285675.3 68.1 947454.8 391874.6 20.7 

TDOCK-SW085 3108406.1 1285647.6 68.3 947444.1 391866.2 20.8 

TDOCK-SW100 3108374.8 1285606.3 72.4 947434.5 391853.6 22.1 

TDOCK-SW125 3108329.0 1285539.6 94.6 947420.6 391833.3 28.8 

TDOCK-SW150 3108279.8 1285468.3 109.6 947405.6 391811.5 33.4 

TDOCK-SW175 3108222.8 1285398.1 119.7 947388.2 391790.1 36.5 

TDOCK-SW200 3108188.5 1285328.4 123.1 947377.8 391768.9 37.5 

TDOCK-SW225 3108136.1 1285271.1 121.6 947361.8 391751.4 37.0 

TDOCK-SW250 3108082.3 1285199.5 118.7 947345.4 391729.6 36.2 

TDOCK-SW275 3108029.3 1285141.9 118.1 947329.2 391712.0 36.0 

TDOCK-SW300 3107978.1 1285085.0 102.4 947313.6 391694.7 31.2 

Sediment Grab Stations

AGS OLD-SE375 3110219.0 1284292.6 115.9 947996.6 391453.2 35.3 

NQ 150 3102843.1 1288694.2 57.3 945748.5 392794.8 17.5 

NQ 175 3102605.2 1288770.8 56.2 945675.9 392818.1 17.1 

NQ0 S200 3102065.7 1288302.9 85.4 945511.5 392675.5 26.0 

REF 6 3088302.6 1296963.4 68.5 941316.5 395315.2 20.9 

T 50 3108198.9 1285629.2 86.4 947380.9 391860.6 26.3 

T100 3108055.0 1285715.3 76.5 947337.1 391886.8 23.3 

* Naming convention for stations: Processor, distance in meters from pile center parallel to the shoreline, and 

direction from pile or transect line. For example, ECP 400-S20 is a station located off the E.C. Phillips & Son 

facility, 400 meters from the pile center and 20 meters south of the transect line at the position of the ECP 400 

station.

frame is lowered to the seafloor on a winch wire, and the tension on the wire keeps the 

prism in its “up” position. When the frame comes to rest on the seafloor, the winch wire 

goes slack (see illustration below) and the camera prism descends into the sediment at a 

slow, controlled rate by the dampening action of a hydraulic piston so as not to disturb 

the sediment-water interface. On the way down, it trips a trigger that activates a timedelay circuit of variable length (operator-selected) to allow the camera to penetrate the 

seafloor before any image is taken. The knife-sharp edge of the prism transects the 

sediment, and the prism penetrates the bottom. The strobe is discharged after an 

appropriate time delay to obtain a cross-sectional image of the upper 20 cm of the 

sediment column. After the first image is obtained at the first location, the camera is then 
raised up about 2 to 3 meters off the bottom to allow the strobe to recharge. The strobe 

recharges within 5 seconds, and the camera is ready to be lowered again for another 

replicate image. Surveys can be accomplished rapidly by “pogo-sticking” the camera 

across an area of seafloor while recording positional fixes on the surface vessel. The 

resulting images give the viewer the same perspective as looking through the side of an 

aquarium half-filled with sediment. 

The central cradle of the came a is held in the “up” posi ion by tension on the 

winch wi e as i is being lowered to the seafloor (left); once the frame base hits 

the bottom (center , the prism is then free to penetra e the bottom (right) and take

the photog aph. 

r t

r t

) t

r

Camera settings (f-stop, shutter speed, ISO equivalents, digital file format, color balance, 

etc.) are software-controlled and selectable through a water-tight USB port on the camera 

housing using Nikon Capture 4.0® software. At the beginning of the survey, the time on 

the Nikon D100's internal data logger was synchronized with the internal clock on the 

computerized navigation system to local time. Two replicate images were taken at each

station; each SPI replicate is identified by the time recorded on the digital image file and 

written to disk by the HYPACK software along with vessel position. Even though 

multiple images were taken at each location, each image was assigned a unique time 

stamp in the digital file attributes by the data logger and cross-checked with the time 

stamp in the navigational system’s computer data file. The field crew kept redundant 

June, 2004 8 Ketchikan Final Report 
June, 2004 9 Ketchikan Final Report 

written sample logs. Images were downloaded periodically throughout the day 

(sometimes after each station) to verify successful sample acquisition or to assess what 

type of sediment/depositional layer was present at a particular station. Digital image files 

were re-named with the appropriate station name immediately after downloading on deck 

as a further quality assurance step. 

Test exposures of the Kodak® Color Separation Guide (Publication No. Q-13) were fired 

on deck at the beginning and end of each survey to verify that all internal electronic 

systems were working to design specifications and to provide a color standard against 

which final images could be checked for proper color balance. Charged spare batteries 

were carried in the field at all times to insure uninterrupted sample acquisition. After 

deployment of the camera at each station, the frame counter was checked to make sure 

that the requisite number of replicates had been taken. In addition, a prism penetration 

depth indicator on the camera frame was checked to verify that the optical prism had 

actually penetrated the bottom to a sufficient depth to acquire a profile image. If images 

were been missed (frame counter indicator or verification from digital download) or the 

penetration depth was insufficient (penetration indicator), chassis stops were adjusted 

and/or weights were added or removed, and additional replicate images were taken. 

Changes in prism weight amounts, the presence or absence of mud doors, and chassis 

stop positions were noted in the log for each replicate image. All images were visually 

inspected at high magnification to provide the chief scientist with the rapid visual 

assessment for determination of the grab sampling stations as well as to determine 

whether any stations needed resampling with different stop collar or weight settings for a 

more optimal sediment profile image. 

Following completion of field operations, the digital images were analyzed from this 

survey using Sigma Scan®

 software (Aspire Software International). Calibration 

information was determined by measuring 1-cm gradations from the Kodak®

 Color 

Separation Guide. This calibration information was applied to all SPI images analyzed. 

Linear and area measurements were recorded as number of pixels and converted to 

scientific units using the calibration information. 

Measured parameters were recorded on a Microsoft®

 Excel© spreadsheet. G&A’s senior 

scientist (Dr. J. Germano) subsequently checked all these data as an independent quality 

assurance/quality control review of the measurements before final interpretation was 

performed. 

2.1 MEASURING, INTERPRETING, AND MAPPING SPI PARAMETERS 

2.1.1 Sediment Type 

The sediment grain-size major mode and range were visually estimated from the color 

images by overlaying a grain-size comparator that was at the same scale. This 
June, 2004 10 Ketchikan Final Report 

comparator was prepared by photographing a series of Udden-Wentworth size classes 

(equal to or less than coarse silt up to granule and larger sizes) with the SPI camera. 

Sediment grain-size measurements for SPI analyses are designated by the φ (phi) scale 

devised by Krumbein; phi is a unitless measure of grain size: 

phi = -log2(g/g0) 

where g is the grain size in millimeters and g0 is defined as 1 millimeter. The phi scale 

encompasses the complete size range of sediment, from very fine clay particles 0.06 

microns in diameter (14 φ) all the way up to boulders that are 4 meters in diameter (-12 

φ). Seven grain-size classes were on this comparator: >4 φ (silt-clay), 4-3 φ (very fine 

sand), 3-2 φ (fine sand), 2-1 φ (medium sand), 1-0 φ (coarse sand), 0 - (-)1 φ (very 

coarse sand), < -1 φ (granule and larger). The lower limit of optical resolution of the 

photographic system was about 62 microns, allowing recognition of grain sizes equal to 

or greater than coarse silt (> 4 φ). The accuracy of this method has been documented by 

comparing SPI estimates with grain-size statistics determined from laboratory sieve 

analyses. 

The comparison of the SPI images with Udden-Wentworth sediment standards 

photographed through the SPI optical system was also used to map near-surface 

stratigraphy such as sand-over-mud and mud-over-sand. When mapped on a local scale, 

this stratigraphy can provide information on relative transport magnitude and frequency. 

2.1.2 Prism Penetration Depth 

The SPI prism penetration depth was measured from the bottom of the image to the 

sediment-water interface. The average penetration depth was determined by measuring 

across the entire cross-sectional image. Linear maximum and minimum depths of 

penetration were also measured. Maximum, minimum, and average penetration depths 

were recorded in the data file. 

Prism penetration is potentially a noteworthy parameter; if the number of weights used in 

the camera is held constant throughout a survey, the camera functions as a static-load 

penetrometer. Comparative penetration values from sites of similar grain size give an 

indication of the relative water content of the sediment. Highly bioturbated sediments 

and rapidly accumulating sediments tend to have the highest water contents and greatest 

prism penetration depths. 

The depth of the camera's penetration into the bottom also reflects the bearing capacity 

and shear strength of local sediments. Overconsolidated or relic sediments and shellbearing sands resist camera penetration. Highly bioturbated, sulfitic, or methanogenic 

muds are the least consolidated, and deep penetration is typical. Seasonal changes in 

camera prism penetration are typically observed at the same station and are related to the 
June, 2004 11 Ketchikan Final Report 

control of sediment geotechnical properties by bioturbation (Rhoads and Boyer 1982). 

The effect of water temperature on bioturbation rates appears to be important in 

controlling both biogenic surface relief and prism penetration depth (Rhoads and 

Germano 1982). 

2.1.3 Small-Scale Surface Boundary Roughness 

Surface boundary roughness was determined by measuring the vertical distance (parallel 

to the film border) between the highest and lowest points of the sediment-water interface. 

The surface boundary roughness (sediment surface relief) measured over a horizontal 

distance of 15 cm typically ranges from 0.02 to 3.8 cm, and may be related to either 

physical structures (ripples, rip-up structures, mud clasts) or biogenic features (burrow 

openings, fecal mounds, foraging depressions). Biogenic roughness typically changes 

seasonally and is related to the interaction of bottom turbulence and bioturbational 

activities. 

The camera must be level in order to take accurate boundary roughness measurements. 

In sandy sediments, boundary roughness can be a measure of sand wave height. On siltclay bottoms, boundary roughness values often reflect biogenic features such as fecal 

mounds or surface burrows. The size and scale of boundary roughness values can have 

dramatic effects on both sediment erodibility and localized oxygen penetration into the 

bottom (Huettel et al., 1996). 

2.1.4 Thickness of Depositional Layers 

Because of the camera's unique design, SPI can be used to detect the thickness of 

depositional layers (such as fish waste or dredged material). SPI is effective in 

measuring layers ranging in thickness from 20 cm (the height of the SPI optical window) 

to 1 mm. During image analysis, the thickness of the newly deposited sedimentary layers 

can be determined by digitizing the area between the pre- and post-disposal sedimentwater interface. Recently deposited material is usually evident because of its unique 

optical reflectance and/or color relative to the underlying material representing the predisposal surface. Also, in most cases, the point of contact between the two layers is 

clearly visible as a textural change in sediment composition, facilitating measurement of 

the thickness of the newly deposited layer. 

2.1.5 Apparent Redox Potential Discontinuity Depth 

Aerobic near-surface marine sediments typically have higher reflectance relative to 

underlying hypoxic or anoxic sediments. Surface sands washed free of mud also have 

higher optical reflectance than underlying muddy sands. These differences in optical 

reflectance are readily apparent in SPI images; the oxidized surface sediment contains 

particles coated with ferric hydroxide (an olive or tan color when associated with 
June, 2004 12 Ketchikan Final Report 

particles), while reduced and muddy sediments below this oxygenated layer are darker, 

generally gray to black. The boundary between the colored ferric hydroxide surface 

sediment and underlying gray to black sediment is called the apparent redox potential 

discontinuity (RPD). 

The depth of the apparent RPD in the sediment column is an important time-integrator of 

dissolved oxygen conditions within sediment porewaters. In the absence of bioturbating 

organisms, this high reflectance layer (in muds) will typically reach a thickness of 2 mm 

(Rhoads 1974). This depth is related to the supply rate of molecular oxygen by diffusion 

into the bottom and the consumption of that oxygen by the sediment and associated 

microflora. In sediments that have very high sediment oxygen demand (SOD), the 

sediment may lack a high reflectance layer even when the overlying water column is 

aerobic. 

In the presence of bioturbating macrofauna, the thickness of the high reflectance layer 

may be several centimeters. The relationship between the thickness of this high 

reflectance layer and the presence or absence of free molecular oxygen in the associated 

porewaters must be considered with caution. The actual RPD is the boundary or horizon 

that separates the positive Eh region of the sediment column from the underlying 

negative Eh region. The exact location of this Eh = 0 boundary can be determined 

accurately only with microelectrodes; hence, the relationship between the change in 

optical reflectance, as imaged with the SPI camera, and the actual RPD can be 

determined only by making the appropriate in situ Eh measurements. For this reason, the 

optical reflectance boundary, as imaged, was described in this study as the “apparent” 

RPD and it was mapped as a mean value. In general, the depth of the actual Eh = 0 

horizon will be either equal to or slightly shallower than the depth of the optical 

reflectance boundary. This is because bioturbating organisms can mix ferric hydroxidecoated particles downward into the bottom below the Eh = 0 horizon. As a result, the 

apparent mean RPD depth can be used as an estimate of the depth of porewater exchange, 

usually through porewater irrigation (bioturbation). Biogenic particle mixing depths can 

be estimated by measuring the maximum and minimum depths of imaged feeding voids 

in the sediment column. This parameter represents the particle mixing depths of headdown feeders, mainly polychaetes. 

The rate of depression of the apparent RPD within the sediment is relatively slow in 

organic-rich muds, on the order of 200 to 300 micrometers per day; therefore this 

parameter has a long time constant (Germano and Rhoads 1984). The rebound in the 

apparent RPD is also slow (Germano 1983). Measurable changes in the apparent RPD 

depth using the SPI optical technique can be detected over periods of 1 or 2 months. This 

parameter is used effectively to document changes (or gradients) that develop over a 

seasonal or yearly cycle related to water temperature effects on bioturbation rates, 

seasonal hypoxia, SOD, and infaunal recruitment. Time-series RPD measurements 
June, 2004 13 Ketchikan Final Report 

following a disturbance can be a critical diagnostic element in monitoring the degree of 

recolonization in an area by the ambient benthos (Rhoads and Germano 1986). 

The apparent mean RPD depth also can be affected by local erosion. The peaks of 

disposal mounds commonly are scoured by divergent flow over the mound. This 

scouring can wash away fines and shell or gravel lag deposits, and can result in very thin 

apparent RPD depths. During storm periods, erosion may completely remove any 

evidence of the apparent RPD (Fredette et al. 1988). 

Another important characteristic of the apparent RPD is the contrast in reflectance at this 

boundary. This contrast is related to the interactions among the degree of organic 

loading, the bioturbation activity in the sediment, and the concentrations of bottom-water 

dissolved oxygen in an area. High inputs of labile organic material increase SOD and, 

subsequently, sulfate reduction rates and the associated abundance of sulfide end 

products. This results in more highly reduced, lower-reflectance sediments at depth and 

higher RPD contrasts. In a region of generally low RPD contrasts, images with high 

RPD contrasts indicate localized sites of relatively high past inputs of organic-rich 

material such as phytoplankton or other naturally-occurring organic detritus, dredged 

material, and sewage sludge. 

2.1.6 Sedimentary Methane 

If organic loading is extremely high, porewater sulfate is depleted and methanogenesis 

occurs. The process of methanogenesis is indicated by the appearance of methane 

bubbles in the sediment column, and the number and total area covered by all methane 

pockets is measured. These gas-filled voids are readily discernable in SPI images 

because of their irregular, generally circular aspect and glassy texture (due to the 

reflection of the strobe off the gas bubble). 

2.1.7 Surface Bacterial Colonies 

 

A primary diagnostic feature indicating an area is suffering from hypoxic conditions is 

the presence of the Beggiatoa or Beggiatoa-like colonies (note: while we cannot state 

with certainty that any bacterial colonies seen in profile images are indeed the genus 

Beggiatoa without microscopic identification, we can state with certainty that these are 

definitely in the same family of sulfur-reducing bacteria that only appear in hypoxic or 

anoxic conditions). These colonies have diagnostic morphology that has been 

documented in numerous other sediment profile imaging surveys (Karakassis et al., 2002; 

Nilsson & Rosenberg, 1997; Rosenberg et al., 2001). The presence of sulfur-reducing 

bacterial colonies appear when boundary-layer dissolved oxygen concentrations drop into 

the “hypoxic” range between 0-1 ml/L (Rosenberg and Diaz, 1993). 

 
June, 2004 14 Ketchikan Final Report 

2.1.8 Infaunal Successional Stage 

The mapping of infaunal successional stages is readily accomplished with SPI 

technology. These stages are recognized in SPI images by the presence of dense 

assemblages of near-surface polychaetes and/or the presence of subsurface feeding voids; 

both may be present in the same image. Mapping of successional stages is based on the 

theory that organism-sediment interactions in fine-grained sediments follow a predictable 

sequence after a major seafloor perturbation. This theory states that primary succession 

results in “the predictable appearance of macrobenthic invertebrates belonging to specific 

functional types following a benthic disturbance. These invertebrates interact with 

sediment in specific ways. Because functional types are the biological units of interest..., 

our definition does not demand a sequential appearance of particular invertebrate species 

or genera” (Rhoads and Boyer 1982). This theory is presented in Pearson and Rosenberg 

(1978) and further developed in Rhoads and Germano (1982) and Rhoads and Boyer 

(1982). 

This continuum of change in animal communities after a disturbance (primary 

succession) has been divided subjectively into three stages: Stage I is the initial 

community of tiny, densely populated polychaete assemblages; Stage II is the start of the 

transition to head-down deposit feeders; and Stage III is the mature, equilibrium 

community of deep-dwelling, head-down deposit feeders. 

After an area of bottom is disturbed by natural or anthropogenic events, the first 

invertebrate assemblage (Stage I) appears within days after the disturbance. Stage I 

consists of assemblages of tiny tube-dwelling marine polychaetes that reach population 

densities of 104

 to 106 individuals per m2. These animals feed at or near the sedimentwater interface and physically stabilize or bind the sediment surface by producing a 

mucous “glue” that they use to build their tubes. Sometimes deposited dredged material 

layers contain Stage I tubes still attached to mud clasts from their location of origin; these 

transported individuals are considered as part of the in situ fauna in our assignment of 

successional stages. 

If there are no repeated disturbances to the newly colonized area, then these initial tubedwelling suspension or surface-deposit feeding taxa are followed by burrowing, headdown deposit-feeders that rework the sediment deeper and deeper over time and mix 

oxygen from the overlying water into the sediment. The animals in these later-appearing 

communities (Stage II or III) are larger, have lower overall population densities (10 to 

100 individuals per m2), and can rework the sediments to depths of 3 to 20 cm or more. 

These animals “loosen” the sedimentary fabric, increase the water content in the 

sediment, thereby lowering the sediment shear strength, and actively recycle nutrients 

because of the high exchange rate with the overlying waters resulting from their 

burrowing and feeding activities. 
June, 2004 15 Ketchikan Final Report 

2.1.9 Organism-Sediment Index 

The Organism-Sediment Index (OSI) is a summary mapping statistic that is calculated on 

the basis of four independently measured SPI parameters: apparent mean RPD depth, 

presence of methane gas, low/no dissolved oxygen at the sediment-water interface, and 

infaunal successional stage. Table 2-2 shows how these parameters are summed to derive 

the OSI. 

The highest possible OSI is +11, which reflects a mature benthic community in relatively 

undisturbed conditions (generally a good yardstick for high benthic habitat quality). 

These conditions are characterized by deeply oxidized sediment with a low inventory of 

anaerobic metabolites and low SOD, and by the presence of a climax (Stage III) benthic 

community. The lowest possible OSI is -10, which indicates that the sediment has a high 

inventory of anaerobic metabolites, has a high oxygen demand, and is azoic. In our 

mapping experience over the past 15 years, we have found that OSI values of 6 or less 

indicate that the benthic habitat has experienced physical disturbance, organic 

enrichment, or excessive bioavailable contamination in the recent past. 

Table 2-2. Calculation of the SPI Organism-Sediment Index

PARAMETER 

 

INDEX VALUE 

A. Mean RPD Depth (choose one) 

0.00 cm 0 

> 0-0.75 cm 1 

0.76-1.50 cm 2 

1.51-2.25 cm 3 

2.26-3.00 cm 4 

3.01-3.75 cm 5 

> 3.75 cm 6 

B. Successional Stage (choose one) 

 Azoic -4 

Stage I 1 

Stage I → II 2 

Stage II 3 

Stage II → III 4 

Stage III 5 

Stage I on III 5 

Stage II on III 5 
June, 2004 16 Ketchikan Final Report 

C. Chemical Parameters (choose one or both if appropriate) 

 Methane Present -2 

No/Low Dissolved Oxygena

 -4 

Organism-sediment Index = Total of above subset indices (A+B+C) 

Range: -10 to +11 

a

 This is not based on a Winkler or polarigraphic electrode 

measurement, but on the imaged evidence of reduced, low 

reflectance (i.e., high-oxygen-demand) sediment at the sedimentwater interface.

 

2.2 STATISTICAL METHODS 

A cluster analysis of the benthic community data was performed to classify stations into 

groups. The objective of cluster analysis is to group stations such that stations within 

groups are similar and stations in different groups are dissimilar. Cluster analysis is an 

exploratory technique that requires little or no assumptions about the data to provide 

insight into the data structure. Once a similarity measure has been found to be appropriate 

for a particular data type, e.g., the Bray-Curtis similarity metric for benthic abundance 

data, alternative cluster results based on different clustering algorithms can be reviewed 

to determine which one makes the most sense. During the exploratory stage, several 

hierarchical clustering algorithms were used based on average, complete (farthest 

neighbor), and single (nearest neighbor) linkage. The cluster results reported below are 

based on the average link method. Average linkage is known as an “agglomerative” 

method, which starts out with each station in a separate group. At each stage the two most 

similar clusters are combined to form one bigger cluster. For the average linkage method, 

the distance between two clusters is the average of the distances between the points in 

one cluster and the points in the other cluster. 

The cluster analysis requires a measure of distance to describe the similarity between any 

two stations. The Bray-Curtis distance metric of the abundance data was used to describe 

the similarity between stations; this metric is considered to be the most robust and 

powerful metric for abundance data (Faith et al. 1987; Faith et al. 1991). The abundance 

data were 4th-root transformed prior to the distance computations to remove excessive 

skewness in these data. 

Multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) was used to graphically display similarities between 

samples in a 2-dimensional plot. An MDS plot attempts to represent in 2-dimensions the 

distance relationships observed between samples in the Bray-Curtis distance matrix. In 

this way, the MDS plot is simply a 2-dimensional representation of the information 

provided in the one-dimensional dendrogram from the cluster analysis. 
June, 2004 17 Ketchikan Final Report 

2.3 USING SPI DATA TO ASSESS BENTHIC HEALTH 

While various measurements of water quality such as dissolved oxygen, contaminants, or 

nutrients are often used to assess regional ecological health, interpretation is difficult 

because of the transient nature of water-column phenomena. Measurement of a particular 

value of any water-column variable represents an instantaneous “snapshot” that can 

change within minutes after the measurement is taken. By the time an adverse signal in 

the water column such as a low dissolved oxygen concentration is persistent, the system 

may have degraded to the point where resource managers can do little but map the spatial 

extent of the phenomenon while gaining a minimal understanding of factors contributing 

to the overall degradation. 

The seafloor, on the other hand, is a long-term time integrator of sediment and overlying 

water quality; values for any variable measured are the result of physical, chemical, and 

biological interactions on time scales much longer than those present in a rapidly moving 

fluid. The seafloor is thus an excellent indicator of environmental health, both in terms 

of historical impacts and of future trends for any particular variable. 

Physical measurements made with the SPI system from profile images provide 

background information about gradients in physical disturbance (caused by dredging, 

disposal, trawling, or storm resuspension and transport) in the form of maps of sediment 

grain size, boundary roughness, fabrics, and structures. The concentration of organic 

matter and the SOD can be inferred from the optical reflectance of the sediment column 

and the apparent RPD depth. Organic matter is an important indicator of the relative 

value of the sediment as a carbon source for both bacteria and infaunal deposit feeders. 

SOD is an important measure of ecological health; oxygen can be depleted quickly in 

sediment by the accumulation of organic matter and by bacterial respiration, both of 

which place an oxygen demand on the porewater and compete with animals for a 

potentially limited oxygen resource (Kennish 1986). 

The apparent RPD depth is useful in assessing the quality of a habitat for epifauna and 

infauna from both physical and biological points of view. The apparent RPD depth in 

profile images has been shown to be directly correlated to the quality of the benthic 

habitat in polyhaline and mesohaline estuarine zones (Rhoads and Germano 1986; 

Revelas et al. 1987; Valente et al. 1992). Controlling for differences in sediment type 

and physical disturbance factors, apparent RPD depths < 1 cm can indicate chronic 

benthic environmental stress or recent catastrophic disturbance. 

The presence of sulfur-reducing bacterial colonies such as Beggiatoa is diagnostic of an 

area that has experienced prolonged periods of low dissolved oxygen in the overlying 

water column. The implications for benthic community structure and ecosystem energy 

cycling once an area starts to experience seasonal anoxia or hypoxia are quite dramatic 
June, 2004 18 Ketchikan Final Report 

(Diaz and Rosenberg, 1995). The suppression of macrobenthic activity during periods 

when the water is warmest and biological activity should be peaking starts a vicious 

cycle: it leads to an increase in organic matter in surface sediments and an increase in the 

importance of microbes in energy cycling and carbon remineralization. Anaerobic 

metabolism (such as that utilized by Beggiatoa) is less efficient than aerobic pathways 

and does not burn off deposited organic matter as quickly. During hypoxic events, the 

energy from dead macrofauna and newly deposited organic matter will be sequestered by 

microfauna. This transfer of benthic energy to microbes still favors recolonization by 

macrobenthos if the duration of the hypoxia is short. However, as hypoxic events become 

longer and more intense, a larger proportion of the organic carbon will be remineralized 

by the microbial population, and less energy will be available to support benthic 

recruitment with the return of normal oxygen concentrations in the water column. Newlydeposited organic matter will continue to stay in a reduced state, depleting the water 

column of dissolved oxygen for a longer period of time due to the high SOD, and the 

periods of hypoxia/anoxia will increase in length, so that the “dead zone” of anoxia keeps 

spreading and portions of the benthic ecosystem will permanently degrade beyond the 

recovery point for macrofaunal recruitment. 

The distribution of successional stages in the context of the mapped disturbance gradients 

is one of the most sensitive indicators of the ecological health of the seafloor (Rhoads and 

Germano 1986). The presence of Stage III equilibrium taxa (mapped from subsurface 

feeding voids as observed in profile images) can be a good indication of high benthic 

habitat stability and relative “health.” A Stage III assemblage indicates that the sediment 

surrounding these organisms has not been disturbed severely in the recent past and that 

the inventory of bioavailable contaminants is relatively small. These inferences are based 

on past work, primarily in temperate latitudes, showing that Stage III species are 

relatively intolerant to sediment disturbance, organic enrichment, and sediment 

contamination. Stage III species expend metabolic energy on sediment bioturbation (both 

particle advection and porewater irrigation) to control sediment properties, including 

porewater profiles of sulfate, nitrate, and RPD depth in the sedimentary matrix near their 

burrows or tubes (Aller and Stupakoff 1996; Rice and Rhoads 1989). This bioturbation 

results in an enhanced rate of decomposition of polymerized organic matter by 

stimulating microbial decomposition (“microbial gardening”). Stage III benthic 

assemblages are very stable and are also called climax or equilibrium seres. 

The metabolic energy expended in bioturbation is rewarded by creating a sedimentary 

environment where refractory organic matter is converted to usable food. Stage III 

bioturbation has been likened to processes such as stirring and aeration used in tertiary 

sewage treatment plants to accelerate organic decomposition. These processes can be 

interpreted as a form of human bioturbation. Physical disturbance, contaminant loading, 

and/or over-enrichment result in habitat destruction and in local extinction of the climax 

seres. Loss of Stage III species results in the loss of sediment stirring and aeration and 

may be followed by a buildup of organic matter (eutrophication) of the sediment. 
June, 2004 19 Ketchikan Final Report 

Because Stage III species tend to have relatively conservative rates of recruitment, 

intrinsic population increase, and ontogenetic growth, they may not reappear for several 

years once they are excluded from an area. 

The presence of Stage I seres (in the absence of Stage III seres) can indicate that the 

bottom is an advanced state of organic enrichment or has received high contaminant 

loading. Unlike Stage III communities, Stage I seres have a relatively high tolerance for 

organic enrichment and contaminants. These opportunistic species have high rates of 

recruitment, high ontogenetic growth rates, and live and feed near the sediment-water 

interface, typically in high densities. Stage I seres often co-occur with Stage III seres in 

marginally enriched areas. In this case, Stage I seres feed on labile organic detritus 

settling onto the sediment surface, while the subsurface Stage III seres tend to specialize 

on the more refractory buried organic reservoir of detritus. 

Stage I and III seres have dramatically different effects on the geotechnical properties of 

the sediment (Rhoads and Boyer 1982). With their high population densities and their 

feeding efforts concentrated at or near the sediment-water interface, Stage I communities 

tend to bind fine-grained sediments physically, making them less susceptible to 

resuspension and transport. Just as a thick cover of grass will prevent erosion on a 

terrestrial hillside, so too will these dense assemblages of tiny polychaetes serve to 

stabilize the sediment surface. Conversely, Stage III taxa increase the water content of 

the sediment and lower its shear strength through their deep burrowing and pumping 

activities, rendering the bottom more susceptible to erosion and resuspension. In shallow 

areas of fine-grained sediments that are susceptible to storm-induced or wave orbital 

energy, it is quite possible for Stage III taxa to be carried along in the water column in 

suspension with fluid muds. When redeposition occurs, these Stage III taxa can become 

quickly re-established in an otherwise physically disturbed surface sedimentary fabric. 

SPI has been shown to be a powerful reconnaissance tool that can efficiently map 

gradients in sediment type, biological communities, or disturbances from physical forces 

or organic enrichment. Aside from the quantitative information about physical structures 

such as depositional layers that can be accurately measured, many of the conclusions 

reached at the end of this report are about dynamic processes that have been deduced 

from imaged structures; on one level, they should be considered hypotheses available for 

further testing/confirmation. By employing Occam’s Razor, we feel reasonably assured 

that the most parsimonious explanation is usually the one borne out by subsequent data 

confirmation. 
June, 2004 20 Ketchikan Final Report 

3.0 

RESULTS

A complete set of all the data measured from each sediment profile image is presented in 

Appendix A; the data from the sediment physical analyses are in Appendix B, and 

Appendix C has the list of species identified and numbers of individuals from each grab 

sample. A series of potential reference stations were explored along the coast west of 

Ketchikan and just offshore the perimeter of Pennock Island (GRV1-3, REF 1-5; see 

Appendix A) and were rejected as not representative of “ambient’ conditions due to 

bottom type; only REF6 (located just west of the airport dock) served as a suitable 

reference area because of similarity in water depth and sediment type, and it was 

definitely outside the influence of the fish waste piles. 

3.1 SEDIMENT GRAIN SIZE & TOC 

A wide variety of sediment facies were encountered, with the majority of the stations 

surveyed (70%) having a sediment grain-size major-mode in one of the sand-sized scale 

intervals (particles from 0.063 – 2.0 mm in diameter; Figures 3-1 to 3-3). While 

approximately 40% of the stations had a sediment grain-size major mode in the fine sand 

(3-2 phi) range, the sediments at the majority of stations were fairly poorly sorted, often 

times with shell fragments and pebbles mixed in with the sand (Figure 3-4); the lack of 

any area of substantial extent with fine-grained sediments was indicative of the relatively 

high bottom currents that persist in this area. 

The few stations that did have fine-grained sediment accumulation (Figures 3-2 to 3-3) 

still exhibited poor sorting (Figure 3-5) with a large range of particle sizes present. The 

frequent presence of rocks, shells, and other debris hampered the camera prism 

penetration at many locations. Areas of hard bottom with either disarticulated shells or 

cobble (where bottom currents are the strongest) were more common in the western 

sampling area (Figure 3-3) than in the eastern (Figure 3-2). The areas marked as cobble 

or rock bottom shown on the maps either had large shells (Figure 3-6) or rocks (Figure 3-

7) that served as very effective barriers to prism penetration; however, useful information 

was still available from these hard bottom locations as far as hydrodynamic regime and 

fish waste accumulation. 

The grain-size results from the sediment grabs (Table 3-1) agreed with the sediment 

classifications from the SPI analysis at 5 of the 7 stations sampled with grabs (see 

Appendix B for the complete laboratory report on the sediment analyses). The two 

stations where these two independent methods did not agree with one another were 

Stations AGS OLD-SE375 (see Figure 3-11; SPI grain-size major mode of very fine sand 
Silt-clay

6%

24%

24%

39%

6%

2%

Very Fine Sand

Fine Sand

Medium Sand

Coarse Sand

Rock/Cobble/

Hard Bottom

Figure 3-1. Percentage distribution of different bottom types (sediment grain-size major mode) 

encountered during the Ketchikan SPI survey.

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-2. Distribution of sediment type and mean prism penetration depth (cm) - eastern sampling area.

AGS 001

A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

4.14

2.69

2.41

4.50

0

2.43

0

0

2.87

4.91

4.911.26

3.97

0

5.78

0

6.31

4.69

3.03

1.17

6.79

0

0

4.83

4.75

1.71

3.62

2.29

1.69

1.69

2.30

3.99

4.63

3.89

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

AGSDock-SW100

6.15

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-3. Distribution of sediment type and mean prism penetration depth (cm) - western sampling area.

meters 4

0 20 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S20

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

1800 m

Reference sampling area

3.

2.5

2.

2.81

3.56

0

0 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1.34

0.84

Airport Dock

REF 6

6.17

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-4. Sediment profile image from Station NQO S125 showing the wide range of 

sediment particle sizes found at many of the sandy stations (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-5. Sediment profile images from Stations T200 (left) and TDock SW175 (right) representative of som

locations where fine-grained sediment accumulated. Note the poor sediment sorting and wide range of particlcross-sectional profiles; both wood fibers and fish waste can be seen in the image on the right (Scale: width o

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-6. Sediment profile images from Stations ECP250 (left) and ECP 300 (right) showing a hard bottom 

consisting primarily of disarticulated mollusk shells; note the sea cucumber crawling on the surface in the rig(Scale: width of images = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-7. Sediment profile image from Station ECP 400-S60 showing a rocky 

cobble bottom (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 21 Ketchikan Final Report 

vs. Table 3-1 results showing gravel as the major mode) and Station T50 (SPI grain-size 

major mode of medium sand vs. Table 3-1 results showing fine sand as the major mode). 

Table 3-1 Sediment Grain Size & TOC Results 

 (units = percent) 

 

 

STATIONS 

Description NQ 150 

AGSOLDSE375 T50 NQ OS200 NQ75 T100 REF6 

Gravel 1.3 32.5 4.8 0.3 1.0 6.1 2.5 

Very Coarse Sand 1.0 6.9 5.2 1.1 1.2 7.2 4.3 

Coarse Sand 3.9 7.4 8.5 2.9 2.5 9.0 7.4 

Medium Sand 9.8 10.2 11.8 8.1 7.5 10.6 12.8 

Fine Sand 41.3 18.1 39.5 32.4 41.8 38.0 33.6 

Very Fine Sand 35.6 13.1 23.2 37.3 40.9 22.2 23.4 

Coarse Silt 2.4 2.7 1.6 6.6 2.0 1.5 4.0 

Medium Silt 0.8 2.2 1.4 2.6 0.5 0.9 2.6 

Fine Silt 0.6 1.5 0.7 1.3 0.2 0.7 1.7 

Very Fine Silt 0.5 1.1 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.7 1.7 

8-9 Phi (coarse) Clay 0.5 0.8 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.7 1.6 

9-10 Phi (medium) Clay 0.4 0.6 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.2 1.0 

> 10 Phi (fine) Clay 1.9 2.9 2.7 3.7 1.7 2.2 3.4 

Total Solids 69.7 47.7 52 56.8 64.7 58.8 60.0 

Total Organic Carbon 1.1 2.2 2.3 1.4 0.93 3.0 1.3 

% Fines (> 4 phi) 7.1 11.8 7.0 17.9 5.1 6.9 16.0 

 

Total organic carbon in the sediment at the 7 stations sampled ranged from 0.93% to 

3.0%. Average concentrations for marine sediments are between 1.5 and 2 percent 

(Tyson and Pearson 1991), and any amount over 4 percent is considered enriched (Purdy 

1964). 

3.2 SURFACE BOUNDARY ROUGHNESS 

Surface boundary roughness ranged from 0.56 to 6.78 cm, principally due to projections 

and unevenness in the sediment-water interface due to large shells and rocks either lying 

on the sediment surface or partially buried in the sediment (Fig 3.8). The physical origin 

of the majority of the boundary roughness elements were caused by the strong bottom 

currents in the area, indicating that most of the area surveyed was primarily an erosional 

hydrodynamic regime and not one where we would expect significant deposition and 

fine-grained sediment accumulation to occur. 
Figure 3-8. Sediment profile image from T150; the large surface boundary roughness values 

found during this survey were mainly due to small-scale topography caused by physical 

features similar to those shown here. (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 22 Ketchikan Final Report 

3.3 PRISM PENETRATION DEPTH 

With the predominance of sand, shells, gravel, and cobble throughout the surveyed area, 

prism penetration was limited (not surprisingly) at many stations (Figures 3-2 to 3-3); 

about 20% of the stations surveyed had an effective prism penetration depth of zero, 

despite the camera being loaded with an additional 250 lbs. of lead in the weight 

carriages. Prism penetration ranged from 0 to 21.4 cm, the maximum penetration 

possible (this occurred at the stations on the fish waste piles; see Section 3.5 below); the 

average prism penetration over all stations surveyed was 3.97 cm, again reflecting the 

relatively hard bottom found over most of the area. 

3.4 APPARENT REDOX POTENTIAL DISCONTINUITY DEPTH 

Our ability to detect and measure the mean apparent RPD was heavily dependent on 

sediment type and prism penetration depth; given the hard sandy/rocky bottom with 

limited penetration depths, it was impossible to measure an apparent RPD at 

approximately 40% of the stations (Figures 3-9 to 3-10). At the 71 stations where the 

mean apparent RPD could be measured, depths ranged from 0 to 7.2 cm, with an average 

depth of 2.6 cm; a substantial number of stations (26) had no apparent RPD due to the 

high organic loads from the fish waste deposits. 

Going from east to west, a closer examination of the mean RPD depth distribution shows 

that some of the deepest values were found in the transect of stations labeled “AGS 

OLD” (Figure 3-9) off the Alaska General Seafoods facility; at this series of stations, the 

negative effects from the former waste discharge point taper off, and values steadily 

increase as one travels east until some of the greatest RPD depths are reached at the 

transect terminus (Figure 3-11). Values to the east and south of the AGS center point 

(Station AGS 000, Figure 3-9) still exceed prism penetration depth (Stations AGS 050, 

AGS 100, AGS 150, AGSDock-SW200), while a cluster of 3 stations immediately to the 

north (Stations AGS 001, AGSDock-SW050, and AGS OLD-SE025) have no detectable 

RPD and are still showing the impacts from excess organic loading from decomposing 

fish waste that settled to the bottom (Figure 3-12). 

As one moves westward to the cluster of stations off the Trident Seafoods dock, there 

was no detectable RPD at 10 of 12 stations where RPD values could be determined due to 

the high oxygen demand from the fish waste discharge (Figure 3-13). Further to the west 

(Figure 3-10), the impacts from the Norquest Seafoods discharge are readily apparent at 

the next cluster of 9 stations with mean apparent RPD values of zero. The E.C. Phillips 

pile at the western-most group of stations surveyed only had 3 stations with no detectable 

RPD (Stations ECP 1, ECP 025, and ECP 050). 
Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-9. Distribution of mean apparent RPD depth (cm) - eastern sampling area.

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

1.37

4.14

0

0

0

0

3.47

0

0 0

0

4.69

3.90

4.83

0

0

0.17

0

0

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-10. Distribution of mean apparent RPD depth (cm) - western sampling area.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

REF 6

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Airport Dock

6.17

3.19

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-11. Sediment profile image from Station AGSOld-SE375; note the thick oxidized layer of 

surface sediments (RPD = 6.88 cm) due to the bioturbating activities of Stage 3 infauna such as the 

polychaete (arrow) seen near the bottom of the image (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-12. Sediment profile image from Station AGS01 showing no detectable apparent RPD due 

to the high sediment oxygen demand of decomposing fish waste (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004

~ .... 

- .. :. .. - . 
Figure 3-13. Sediment profile image from Station TDock-SW125 showing no detectable apparent 

RPD due to the high sediment oxygen demand of decomposing fish waste; similar redox values were 

found at 9 other stations in this immediate vicinity (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 23 Ketchikan Final Report 

3.5 FISH WASTE DEPOSITS 

 

The presence of fish waste was readily apparent in the sediment profile images, often 

times producing rather dramatic images of the accumulation on the bottom, regardless of 

whether it was from the center of the pile (Figure 3-14) or toward the edge of the deposit 

(Figure 3-15). Detectable accumulations of fish waste could be seen at all four waste 

piles surveyed (Figures 3-16 to 3-17). At the AGS pile (Figure 3-16), measurable layers 

of fish waste were spread over an area approximately 60 meters in diameter, with a thin 

trace of fish waste detectable on the surface sediments extending approximately 165 

meters to the east and 120 meters to the south (Figure 3-18). 

Moving slightly to the west, the transect of stations off the Trident Seafoods dock facility 

showed a measurable layer of older fish waste over an ellipse of bottom approximately 

245 meters on the long axis but did not extend that far to the east and west of this transect 

(Figure 3-16). Prism penetration was limited due to the hard nature of the bottom at 

many of these stations; instead of just fish waste, the presence of wood waste was also 

evident at several stations (Figure 3-19). The active discharge off the Norquest Seafoods 

facility also covered a large area of bottom (Figure 3-17), extending 150 meters to the 

south and a minimum of 175 meters to the east of Station NQ 0 (Figure 3-14). To the 

west, it extended at least another 200 meters and merged with the waste layers from the 

E.C. Phillips & Son facility. Evidence of fish waste layers from at the ECP cluster of 

stations (Figure 3-17) disappeared after the north-south transect of stations at 100m west 

of ECP1; at all the stations west of ECP 100-S20, from ECP 125 to ECP 950, there was 

no trace of any fish waste or skeletal remains on the bottom. 

 

3.6 SUBSURFACE METHANE AND BACTERIAL PRESENCE 

Evidence of methane generation from anaerobic bacterial decomposition was only found 

at four of the stations surrounding the Norquest Seafoods active discharge (Figures 3-20 

to 3-21). The presence of sulfur-reducing bacteria and black, reduced sediment at the 

sediment-water interface, i.e., no apparent RPD layer, provide additional evidence of the 

areas experiencing stress from organic loading (Figures 3-22 to 3-23). Stations at all 

four of the active or former waste piles still show the effects of the excess organic loading 

in the form of either anoxic sediments or the presence of the fibrous Beggiatoa-type 

bacterial colonies (Figure 3-24). 

If one approximates the area affected by excess organic loading as an ellipse, a much 

larger area of seafloor in the western area of the survey is affected by organic loading 

than in the eastern area. Because the ECP and NQ stations more or less merge into one 

region of continuous impacts (Figure 3-23), the relative size of these 3 areas are: 
Figure 3-14. Replicate sediment profile images from Station NQ0, the center of the 

active NorQuest discharge pile; note the numerous methane gas bubbles interspersed 

throughout the fish waste chunks (Scale: width of images = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-15. Sediment profile image from Station AGSDock SW100; the obvious effects 

of fish waste discharge can be seen from this collection of skeletal remains known as a 

thanatocoenosis (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-16. Distribution of fish waste accumulations (cm) - eastern sampling area.

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

6.15

2.69

4.75

4.91

1.26

3.97

0.10

5.78

3.62

2.874.91

2.29

1.69

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-17. Distribution of fish waste accumulations (cm) - western sampling area.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Airport Dock

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

REF 6

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-18a. Sediment profile images from the AGS pile showing the gradation of fish waste accumula

(Scale: width of images = 14.2 cm). 

b). Station AGSDock SW100: Most of the organic matter hpicked clean from the remains of these skeletal fragments

a). Station AGSDock SW 50: note the dark, reduced sediment from high organic loading, skeletal remains, and whisps of bacterial colonies (arrow) on some of the waste fragments on the surface

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-18b. Sediment profile images from the AGS pile showing the gradation of fish waste accumul

(Scale: width of images = 14.2 cm). 

c). Station AGSDock SW150: A slight trace of skeletal fragments can be found in the upper layer of sand at this location

d). Station AGSDock SW200: No trace of fish waste is evidsilty sand showing a diverse benthic community

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-19. Sediment profile image from TDock SW275 showing a combination of both 

wood waste fibers and skeletal remains from fish waste deposits on the sediment surface 

(Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-20. Distribution of subsurface methane gas presence - eastern sampling area. 

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

6.15

2.69

4.75

4.91

1.26

3.97

0.10

5.78

3.62

2.874.91

2.29

1.69

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-21. Distribution of subsurface methane gas presence - western sampling area.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

REF 6

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Airport Dock

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
AGS 00

AGSDo

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-22. Distribution of bacterial colonies and areas with low/no dissolved oxygen in near-bottom waters - eastern sampling area.

Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-23. Distribution of bacterial colonies and areas with low/no dissolved oxygen in near-bottom waters - western sampling area.

meters 

0 20 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

REF 6

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Airport Dock

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-24. Sediment profile image showing a chunk of fish waste on the sediment surface 

covered by an abundant collection of the white, string-like, sulfur-reducing bacterial colonies that 

only occur in hypoxic or anoxic conditions (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 24 Ketchikan Final Report 

Table 3-2 Area of seafloor showing evidence of stress from organic loading. 

Waste Pile Area (m2) Acres 

Alaska General Seafood 1,473 0.4 

Trident Seafoods 9,424 2.3 

EC Phillips & Norquest (combined) 27,979 6.9 

3.7 INFAUNAL SUCCESSIONAL STAGE 

The mapped distribution of infaunal successional stages is shown in Figures 3-25 to 3-26. 

Starting at the eastern-most area surveyed, the series of stations in the vicinity of the 

Alaska General Seafoods processing facility showed the greatest amount of benthic 

community recovery, with many of the stations showing mature, infaunal deposit feeding 

assemblages. Polychaetes from the family Chaetopteridae were one of the obvious 

dominants at many of these stations (Figure 3-27). Moving to the west, the type of 

infaunal assemblages present at the stations just off the Trident Seafoods dock were 

impossible to determine because of the minimal prism penetration or hard substratum 

present; however, the retrograde effects of the intense organic loading could be seen at 

two stations in the center of the transect (Figure 3-25). The one benefit from the high 

density of opportunistic taxa as the benthic community starts to recover from the organic 

enrichment from the fish waste disposal is that they provide a ready food source for 

higher trophic level predators (Figure 3-28). 

Moving westward, once again the combined effects of the waste piles from EC Phillips 

and Norquest are reflected in the group of stations that have no visible macrofauna 

present (Figure 3-26); following the classic pattern of recovery with increasing distance 

from the source of organic enrichment (Pearson and Rosenberg, 1978; Rhoads and 

Germano, 1982, 1986), as one moves away from the cluster of azoic stations, the 

appearance of Stage I followed by Stage II assemblages at slightly greater distances 

occur. The deep biological reworking and mature Stage III assemblage found at the 

reference station near the airport (Figure 3-29) is a good illustration of what the very fine 

sand bottoms off these processing facilities would look like once sufficient time has 

passed for complete recovery to take place following cessation of organic loading. 

3.8 ORGANISM-SEDIMENT INDEX 

The spatial distribution of median OSI values throughout the study area can be seen in 

Figures 3-30 to 3-31. An OSI of 6 or less (outlined in orange and red on the maps) 

typically indicates that a benthic habitat has experienced physical disturbances, 

eutrophication, or excessive bioavailable contamination in the recent past. Tracking the 

same pattern of ecosystem recovery seen from the evidence provided by the successional 

stage information, the oldest, inactive waste pile to the east (Alaska General Seafood) 
Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-25. Distribution of infaunal successional stages - eastern survey area.

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

I 

I

I

II

I II

II

I

Azoic

II

II

Azoic

I

I

I

I on III

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

I on III

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Western Sampling Area

Reference sampling area

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

REF 6

Figure 3-26. Distribution of infaunal successional stages - western survey area.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

1800 m

Reference sampling area

I on III

II-> I

II

I

Airport Dock

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-27. Sediment profile image from Station AGSOld-SE275 showing no evidence 

of fish waste deposits, a healthy oxidized surface layer, and tubes of Spiochaetopterus

projecting above the sediment-water interface (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-28. The starfish seen in this sediment profile image from Station TDock-SW100 

is feeding on the dense assemblage of opportunistic polychaetes feeding on the labile 

organic matter from the fish waste discharge (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-29. Evidence of a large burrow and deep bioturbation can be seen in this 

sediment profile image from the reference station (REF6) located west of the 

Ketchikan airport (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Anchorage

ALASKA Yukon

Territory

Russia

Bering Sea

Pacific Ocean

Arctic 

Ocean

l

Ketchikan

AGS 001 A

AGSDock

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

T475

T250

T200

T150

T100

T050 T025

TDOCK-SW025

TDOCK-SW040

TDOCK-SW055

TDOCK-SW070

TDOCK-SW085TDOCK-SW100

TDOCK-SW125

TDOCK-SW150

TDOCK-SW175

TDOCK-SW200

TDOCK-SW225

TDOCK-SW250

TDOCK-SW275

TDOCK-SW300

T010

MID 3-225

MID 3-150

MID 3-075

AGS 000

AGS 

AGSDock-SW100

AGSDock-SW150

AGSDock-SW200

MID 1

T000

T175

Figure 3-30. Distribution of Organism-Sediment Index values - eastern survey area.

1800 m

Airport Runway

Reference Area

Western Area Eastern Area

3

9

-3

8

1

-8

9

11

-8

-2

-3

-1

Tongass Narrows

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan

KetchikanInternational Airport

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Figure 3-31. Distribution of Organism-Sediment Index values - western survey area.

meters 

Ketchikan

Tongass Narrows

SPI camera location

Survey conducted from D/V Invader September 29 - October 2, 2003

Western Sampling Area

Tongass Narrows

Ketchikan

Ketchikan 

International 

Airport

Airport Runway

1800 m

Reference sampling area

Airport Dock

11

ECP 400-N40

ECP 400-N20

ECP 400

ECP 500

ECP 750

ECP 950

ECP 300

ECP 250

ECP 125

ECP 150

ECP 100-N40

ECP 100-N20

ECP 100-A

ECP 100-S2

ECP 400-S20

ECP 400-S40

ECP 400-S60

REF 6

Ketchikan SPI Report April, 2004
June, 2004 25 Ketchikan Final Report 

showed the highest incidence of stations with OSI values exceeding +6 (Figure 3-30). 

Three stations in the AGS group are still showing the effects of disturbance from the fish 

waste discharge, just as a similar cluster of three stations showing the most disturbance is 

found in the center of the stations off the Trident Seafoods dock to the west. 

While OSI values could not be calculated at many of the stations in the western half of 

the survey area (Figure 3-31) because of the limited penetration and/or indeterminate 

RPD or successional stage determinations, the most dramatic effects and largest area of 

bottom showing extremely low OSI values were once again found in the combined 

footprint of the NQ and ECP piles. As before, the effects of recovery can be seen with 

increasing distance away from the center of the waste piles. 

3.9 BENTHIC COMMUNITY ANALYSES 

At the 7 stations where bottom grabs were collected, a total of 90,067 individuals were 

found belonging to 391 species in 147 families and 12 phyla. Of the three major 

taxonomic groups found, polychaetes were the most abundant group present, representing 

65 percent of the total abundance and only 13 percent of the total biomass. Molluscs 

represented 10 percent of the total abundance but 85 percent of the total biomass. The 

crustaceans were the smallest group, representing less than 2 percent of the total 

abundance and less than 1 percent of the total biomass. The miscellaneous group was 

dominated by nematodes which represented 22 percent of the total abundance. The full 

dataset of taxa identified from each grab sample is presented in Appendix C and 

summarized in Table 3-3. 

 

Table 3-3. Summary of taxa recorded 

in the 7 grab stations in Tongass Narrows, Ketchikan, Alaska 

GROUP 

TOTAL NUMBER OF 

SPECIES IDENTIFIED 

TOTAL NUMBER OF 

INDIVIDUALS RECORDED 

TOTAL 

BIOMASS (g) 

Polychaeta 186 58,453 165 

Mollusca 95 9,349 1,103 

Crustacea 89 1,164 9 

Miscellaneous 21 21,101 13 

Total 391 90,067 1,290 

The mean total abundance varies substantially across stations (Table 3-4), with the 

reference station having the lowest mean abundance, the median value for biomass, but 

the highest number of species per grab. The stations with the lowest species richness 

tended to have the highest abundance values (quite common benthic community profile 

in response to organic enrichment). 
June, 2004 26 Ketchikan Final Report 

Table 3-4. Summary of benthic grab survey results by station 

 NQ 0- 

S200 

(n=5) 

NQ 150 

(n=5) 

NQ 75 

(n=5) 

AGS OLDSE375 

(n=5) 

T100 

(n=5) 

T50 

(n=5) 

REF6 

(n=5) 

Mean total 

abundance 

(count/m2 ± SD) 

8,998 

± 1,327 

26,488 

± 8,700 

32,446 

± 1,051 

16,258 

± 6,052 

21,324 

± 10,733 

66,458 

± 14,927 

8,162 

± 1,841 

Mean total 

biomass 

(grams/m2 ±

SD) 

1,356 

± 246 

785 

± 130 

93.5 

± 87.6 

450 

± 370 

27.3 

± 12.3 

66.2 

± 20.9 

120 

± 88.2 

Mean 

taxonomic 

richness 

(no. of species 

per grab ± SD) 104 ± 10 127 ± 13 14 ± 2.4 121 ± 24 38 ± 12 38 ± 2.3 143 ± 17 

We examined the complete community compositions of the 35 grab samples from the 7 

stations using cluster analysis. A cluster analysis of the Bray-Curtis distance metric of 

4th-root transformed abundance data was used to examine assemblage similarities among 

samples. Cluster analysis provides a visual summary of the results in a tree-like diagram 

called a dendrogram. The distance relationships among sample pairs are also displayed in 

a two dimensional MDS plot. The objective of cluster analysis is to create groups of 

samples, and once samples have been linked, it is only the average distance between 

groups that is important, not individual distances between sample pairs. In contrast, the 

algorithm for the MDS analysis attempts to reproduce the distance relationships between 

all sample pairs. It is important to note that the axes of the MDS plot will always 

represent the maximum separation between samples, even if the actual Bray-Curtis 

distance is small. Taken together, the MDS plot and the dendrogram can help identify 

groups of similar samples. Once distinct groups of samples have been identified, values 

for the distinguishing variables can be summarized to help identify what is causing the 

differences among, or similarities within, station groups. 

The first cluster analysis was performed based on the Bray-Curtis distance metric of 

species abundance data for all 391 species. The dendrogram (Figure 3-32) resulted in a 

grouping of three sets of samples at a distance of 0.53. The distance relationships are also 

displayed in the two dimensional MDS plot (Figure 3-33). Because the stations on the 

furthest left (i.e., REF 6 and NQ 0-S200) have a greater average distance from Station 

T100 than Stations NQ 150 and AGS OLD-SE375, these two station pairs are somewhat 

separated from one another in the MDS plot. This separation is indicated in the MDS 

plot but not in the dendrogram. We also examined these data at the family level and 

found virtually identical results for both the cluster analysis (Figure 3-34) and the MDS 

plot (Figure 3-35).
Figure 3-32. Dendrogram for cluster analysis of Bray-Curtis distance metric on species abundance 

data (4th root transformed). Clusters were formed using average linkage. Sample-IDs shown 

indicate the Station ID followed by the field replicate number after the period; AGS OLD-SE375 

was abbreviated to SE375 for ease of labeling.

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004 SE375.1 SE375.2 SE375.3SE375.4 SE375.5 NQ0S200.1 NQ0S200.2 NQ0S200.3 NQ0S200.4 NQ0S200.5NQ75.1 NQ75.2 NQ75.3 NQ75.4 NQ75.5 NQ150.1 NQ150.2 NQ150.3 NQ150.4 NQ150.5 REF6.1 REF6.2 REF6.3 REF6.4 REF6.5 T50.1 T50.2 T50.3 T50.4T50.5 T100.1 T100.2 T100.3 T100.4 T100.5

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2
Figure 3-33. Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) plot illustrating in 2 dimensions the 

distance relationships between samples as described by the Bray-Curtis distance metric 

on the full species abundance data set (391 species). Sample-IDs shown indicate the 

Station ID followed by the field replicate number after the period; AGS OLD-SE375 

was abbreviated to SE375 for ease of labeling. 

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004

MDS Axis 1

MDS Axis 2

-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

SE375.1 SE375.2

SE375.3

SE375.4

SE375.5

NQ0S200.1

NQ0S200.2

NQ0S200.3 NQ0S200.5 NQ0S200.4

NQ75.1

NQ75.2

NQ75.3

NQ75.4

NQ75.5

NQ150.1 NQ150.2

NQ150.5 NQ150.3 NQ150.4

REF6.2 REF6.1

REF6.3 REF6.4

REF6.5

T50.1

T50.2

T50.3 T50.5 T50.4

T100.1

T100.2

T100.3

T100.4

T100.5
Figure 3-34. Dendrogram for cluster analysis of Bray-Curtis distance metric on family abundance 

data (4th root transformed). Clusters were formed using average linkage. Sample-IDs shown 

indicate the Station ID followed by the field replicate number after the period; AGS OLD-SE375 

was abbreviated to SE375 for ease of labeling.

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004 SE375.1 SE375.2 SE375.3 SE375.4 SE375.5 NQ0S200.1 NQ0S200.2 NQ0S200.3 NQ0S200.4 NQ0S200.5 NQ75.1 NQ75.2 NQ75.3 NQ75.4 NQ75.5 NQ150.1NQ150.2 NQ150.3 NQ150.4 NQ150.5 REF6.1 REF6.2REF6.3 REF6.4 REF6.5 T50.1 T50.2 T50.3 T50.4 T50.5 T100.1 T100.2 T100.3 T100.4 T100.5

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 
Figure 3-35. Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) plot illustrating in 2 dimensions the distance 

relationships between samples as described by the Bray-Curtis distance metric on the family 

abundance data set. Sample-IDs shown indicate the Station ID followed by the field replicate 

number after the period; AGS OLD-SE375 was abbreviated to SE375 for ease of labeling.

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004

-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4

-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2

SE375.1

SE375.2

SE375.3

SE375.4

SE375.5

NQ05200.1

NQ05200.2

NQ05200.3

NQ05200.4 NQ05200.5

NQ75.1

NQ75.2

NQ75.3 NQ75.4

NQ75.5

NQ150.1

NQ150.2

NQ150.3

NQ150.4 NQ150.5

REF6.1

REF6.2 REF6.3 REF6.4

REF6.5

T50.1

T50.2

T50.3

T50.4 T50.5

T100.1

T100.2

T100.3

T100.4

T100.5

MDS Axis 1

MDS Axis 2
June, 2004 27 Ketchikan Final Report 

4.0 

DISCUSSION 

Tongass Narrows is a relatively narrow channel running between Gravina Island and 

Revillagigedo Island in southeastern Alaska. The southeastern end of the narrows splits 

into the East Channel and West Channel around Pennock Island. At the south end of 

Pennock Island, the narrows meets the northern end of Nichols Passage. Both Tongass 

Narrows and the landforms around Ketchikan were shaped by glacial ice and erosion 

thousands of years ago, and the evidence of this is still visible today in the rounded 

slopes, U-shaped valleys, fjords, and exposed bedrock. The high rainfall and glacial till 

or bedrock underneath Ketchikan’s soils creates a constant source of freshwater input to 

Tongass Narrows either through surface runoff or submarine groundwater discharge. 

Tongass Narrows is characterized by strong tidal currents and by steep bedrock or coarse 

gravel/cobble/boulder shorelines (HDR, 2000). Lower intertidal and shallow subtidal 

areas are often sandy or mixed gravel, sand, and shell, with varied amounts of silt (HDR, 

2000). The waterway experiences strong tidal currents as indicated by the large tidal 

range (Table 4-1). 

Table 4-1 

Tide Information for Tongass Narrows* 

Extreme High Water (EHW) +20.0 ft 

Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) +15.4 ft 

Mean High Water (MHW) +14.5 ft 

Mean Tide Level +8.0 

Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) 0.0 ft 

Extreme Low Water (MLW) –5.0 ft 

*From: NOAA, cited in HDR (2000) 

There are two major sources of “disturbance” to the benthic ecosystem in the area 

surveyed: the physical disturbance from the strong bottom currents, and the 

anthropogenic disturbance from the fish waste discharges along the city’s shoreline. The 

effects of both were readily apparent in the sediment profile images collected. A recent 

marine habitat characterization in Tongass Narrows for the Gravina Access Project 

(Pentec, 2000) characterized the subtidal margins in Tongass Narrows as “steeply sloping 

bedrock or coarse gravel/cobble bottoms extending from the lower intertidal zone to the 

deeper, flatter center of the channel at depths of -80 to -150 ft MLLW. For the most part, 

these subtidal slopes are swept by strong tidal currents and support a number of kelp and 

other algal species down to depths of about -40 ft MLLW.” Because of the geology and 

strong currents in the narrows, very few areas with silts or fine-grained muds exist; the 

majority of the bottom sediments are characterized by cobble, rock, sand, or gravel. 
June, 2004 28 Ketchikan Final Report 

The results from this recent seafloor survey in Tongass Narrows confirmed these earlier 

findings; the majority of stations surveyed were sandy or cobble bottom, and the lack of 

fine-grained sediments combined with the boundary roughness features in the images 

were testimony to the effects of the strong bottom currents due to the large tidal 

exchange. Given the poor sorting and high variability in sediment distributions, the 

discrepancy in grain-size determination in the SPI analysis vs. the grab analysis at two of 

the stations is not surprising. Because grain-size was determined from only one profile 

image and one grab sample per station, occasional departures would be expected because 

of the potential for high within-station variability. 

Both the spatial extent and impacts of the fish waste deposits were easily documented by 

SPI technology (Figures 3-16 to 3-17); accumulations of fish waste remains could be 

seen anywhere from 100-300 meters away from the discharge points of the four piles 

surveyed. While the diameter of the fish waste “footprint” on the bottom extended 

almost as far as a half-kilometer in the western part of the survey (the combined 

footprints of both the ECP and NQ piles), the area of seafloor experiencing actual adverse 

impacts from the waste deposit was much smaller than the detectable extent of the waste 

products. This is in large part due to the natural physical conditions that exist in Tongass 

Narrows: the strong bottom currents which quickly disperse a large portion of the fish 

waste throughout the channel to the point where it is quickly diluted and assimilated into 

the background nutrient flux, and the additional “flushing” action caused by submarine 

discharge of groundwater percolating up through the sediments. Evidence of groundwater 

discharge was visible in many of the profile images (Figure 4-1). Both of these physical 

actions prevent the accumulation and buildup of organic matter that would otherwise 

cause a severe oxygen demand on the bottom waters and lead to widespread hypoxia or 

anoxia; in this sense, the physical conditions off Ketchikan are ideal as far as minimizing 

potential impacts from the fish processing waste discharge. 

A much more accurate picture of the area of seafloor actually experiencing adverse 

impacts from the fish waste discharge is provided by maps showing the stations affected 

by high sediment-oxygen demand (Figures 3-22 to 3-23), which covers a much smaller 

area than that affected by fish waste deposits (Figures 3-16 to 3-17). A total of 

approximately 9.6 acres of bottom among the 4 areas surveyed (Table 3-2) could be 

considered “stressed” and of compromised quality because of the fish waste discharge. 

The relatively small area affected by high SOD at the no longer active Alaska General 

Seafoods discharge site is a good indicator of how rapidly the area would recover if 

discharge operations were ever terminated. 

The biological communities documented follow the classic pattern of benthic community 

recovery in response to organic enrichment (Pearson and Rosenberg, 1978; Figure 4-2). 

While the stations right at “ground zero” were covered with decomposing fish waste and 

apparently azoic, there were opportunistic Stage 1 assemblages immediately adjacent to 

these azoic stations (Figures 3-25 to 3-26) as one moved 50-100 meters away from the 
Figure 4-1. Sediment profile image from Station ECP100-80S; a plume of freshwater 

emanating from beneath the sediment water interface from submarine groundwater discharge 

is evident in the left half of this image; the shimmering, distorted quality of the sediment 

grains toward the left edge of the picture is caused by the different index of refraction of the

freshwater mixing in with the saltwater (Scale: width of image = 14.2 cm).

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Figure 4-2. Soft-bottom benthic community response to disturbance (top panel) or organic enrichment (bottom From Rhoads and Germano, 1982.

Physical Disturbance Time NGrossly Polluted Distance N

AB

Ketchikan SPI Report June, 2004
June, 2004 29 Ketchikan Final Report 

source of organic enrichment. Even though oxygen levels at some of these stations with 

Stage I assemblages are somewhat depressed (as evidenced by the presence of reduced 

sediments or Beggiatoa colonies), they still serve as important foraging areas for higher 

trophic predators (crabs, demersal fish) because of the high density of readily-available 

prey (Becker and Chew, 1987; Diaz and Rosenberg, 1995; EVS, 2001). 

The grab data provided some quantitative results on just how dense these populations of 

Stage I opportunists were in Tongass Narrows (Table 3-4); in fact, these opportunistic 

species were the numerically dominant taxa in all the samples. The high biomass 

numbers at all stations (with the exception of REF6; Table 3-4; see also Appendix C) 

were primarily due to contributions by Molluscs (especially the opportunist, Parvilucina 

tenuisculpta, a venerid bivalve that is typically an “indicator species” in many outfall 

impact studies and is found commonly in areas with high organic loading or low-oxygen 

basins and fjords). A closer look at the cluster analysis and MDS results (Figures 3-32 to 

3-35) reveals the basis for the between station differences. The Bray-Curtis similarities 

among Stations REF6, AGS OLD-SE375, NQ O-S200, and NQ150 are quite strong 

(within-group distance of 0.49), so these 4 stations were treated as one group. 

The MDS axes themselves simply represent distance, but the variables driving the 

distance relationships illustrated in the plot (Figure 3-33) can be identified using 

correlations between the MDS axes and the original variables. MDS axis 1 is strongly 

negatively correlated with richness, both in terms of species counts and family counts per 

sample, so that richness is highest for the samples on the left and lowest for the samples 

on the right. Neither MDS axis showed a monotonic relationship with abundance values 

by species, family, or phylum. While MDS axis 2 is positively correlated with percent 

total organic carbon (TOC), the three groups identified by the cluster analysis mainly 

represent assemblage differences along the successional continuum represented in Figure 

4-2. A summary of taxonomic endpoints, and several SPI and physical characteristics for 

these groups is presented in Table 4-1. 
June, 2004 30 Ketchikan Final Report 

Table 4-1. Mean values of benthic community endpoints, SPI and physical 

characteristics for cluster analysis groups 

Stations: 

REF6, AGS OLDSE375, 

NQ 0-S200, NQ150 

T100, 

T50 NQ 75 

Group: GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 

ABUNDANCE (counts/m2 ) 

Total Polychaetes 9,117 32,321 15,798 

Armandia brevis 3,584 18,314 264 

Capitella capitata 60 11,897 15,180 

Total Molluscs 4,504 298 88 

Parvilucina tenuisculpta 2,040 85 68 

Total Crustaceans 494 170 14 

Total Miscellaneous 863 11,102 16,546 

Nematoda sp. 454 10,983 16,510 

Total Abundance 14,977 43,891 32,446 

TAXON RICHNESS (no. of 

species per sample) 

Polychaetes 68 23 7.6 

Molluscs 31 7.9 2.4 

Crustaceans 18 4.2 1.4 

Total Richness 124 38 14 

BIOMASS (grams/m2

) 

Polychaetes 55 41 73 

Molluscs 609 4.0 19 

Crustaceans 7.6 0.21 0.05 

Miscellaneous 5.0 1.8 1.9 

Total Biomass 677 47 93 

SPI AND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS 

RPD 5.4 4.3 0 

TOC (%) 1.5 2.7 0.93 

% Fines 13.2 7.0 5.1 

The key features of the groups (Table 4-1) are as follows: 

 Group 1 had the highest mean richness (124 species per sample) and the 

lowest mean abundance. Biomass values were high due to a few very 

large individuals. This group had the largest percent abundance of 

molluscs and crustaceans, and the lowest percent abundance of the 
June, 2004 31 Ketchikan Final Report 

dominant species C. capitata and Nematoda sp. The “high richness/low 

abundance” profile is typical of benthic communities recovering toward 

the right end of the continuum shown in Figure 4-2, a late Stage II or a 

Stage I on III assemblage (deposit-feeding taxa present with a secondary 

settlement of opportunists due to the organic loading in the region). 

 Group 2 had intermediate mean richness (38 species per sample) and the 

highest mean abundance. The dominant species C. capitata, A. brevis, and 

Nematoda sp. were abundant in these samples. This profile is typical of a 

“late Stage I/early Stage II” successional assemblage (Figure 4-2). 

 Group 3 had the lowest mean richness (14 species per sample) but with 

very high abundance comprised nearly exclusively of the dominant 

species C. capitata and Nematoda sp. This is the classic “Stage I 

opportunists” assemblage illustrated by the left end of the continuum 

shown in Figure 4-2. 

The results from the benthic community taxonomic identifications served as valid ground 

truth confirmations of the SPI successional stage designations: Group 1 stations were all 

designated as Stage II or Stage I on III; Group 2 stations were both designated as Stage II 

assemblages, and Group 3 (Station NQ75) was designated as Stage I. 

The field replicates from each station grouped tightly together, with only a few 

exceptions. The fifth replicate from station AGS OLD-SE375 (identified as SE375.5 in 

Figure 3-32) was somewhat distinct from the other replicates from this station due to 

lower abundance for Armandia brevis (a non-selective deposit feeder)and nematodes, and 

fewer numbers of species (81 compared to an average of 131 per sample in the other field 

replicates from this station). Field replicates 3 and 5 from Station T100 (identified as 

T100.3 and T100.5 on the figure) were also fairly distinct from the other replicates at this 

station due to lower abundance of Capitella capitata and nematodes, and assemblages 

dominated by polychaetes (90% and 95% of total abundance, respectively). Of the field 

reps at this station, field rep 3 has the highest richness with 56 species and field rep 5 has 

the lowest with only 24 species and lacks any crustacean species entirely. 

The ten numerically dominant species, in decreasing order of dominance, are: Armandia 

brevis, Nematoda sp. indet., Capitella capitata 'hyperspecie, Parvilucina tenuisculpta, 

Acila castrensis, Prionospio steenstrupi, Axinopsida serricata, Galathowenia oculata, 

Lumbrineridae sp. indet./juv., Phyllodoce hartmanae). This selection of 10 species is 

arbitrary; the first three species listed above (all Stage I opportunists) each contributed 

over 20% to the total abundance in all stations, P. tenuisculpta (another Stage I 

opportunist) contributed just under 5%, and the remaining six dominant species each 

contributed between 1.4% and 0.9%. The remaining 381 species in the species list each 

contributed less than 0.7% to the total abundance in all stations; in other words, the high 
June, 2004 32 Ketchikan Final Report 

species richness was due to a high number of “rare individuals”, i.e., taxa represented by 

just one or a few individuals. 

Secondary cluster analyses were performed using the family abundance data (Figures 3-

34 and 3-35) as well as the ten numerically dominant species. The dendrogram and MDS 

plots for these analyses resulted in generally the same conclusions as above, illustrating 

how important these dominant species are at distinguishing among samples. The results 

based on the 10 dominant species indicated less of a distinction between Groups 1 and 2, 

because their separation is due to the much greater richness values for the Group 1 

samples. One important lesson learned from these additional analyses of the benthic data 

at the family level is as follows: any future monitoring for examining the impacts of fish 

waste discharges in Tongass Narrows that requires traditional benthic community 

sampling can be done at a significant cost savings with taxononomic identifications 

carried out to family level only. Similar conclusions have been reached in numerous 

environmental monitoring investigations that require traditional benthic community 

analyses (e.g., Chessman, B.C. 1995; Ellis, D. 1985; Ferraro, S.P. & F.A. Cole. 1990, 

1992, 1995; Kingston and Riddle 1989; Marchant et al, 1995; Olsgard et al, 1997; 

Warwick, 1988a, 1988b, 1993). 

While we stated earlier that the two main sources of disturbance in this area were the 

strong physical currents and the discharge of salmon waste, one could also argue that 

these are not, in fact, “disturbances,” but rather variations on natural system inputs. The 

strong tidal currents are what shape the bottom in Tongass Narrows as well as determine 

what sediments can reside there. The biological communities on this rocky and sandy 

bottom have adapted to living in this extreme physical regime, so to consider the strong 

currents a “disturbance” is somewhat of a misnomer: they are a natural part of this 

submarine fjord environment, and their presence is the main basis for the assimilative 

capacity of Tongass Narrows that can handle the high levels of organic loading from the 

fish waste discharge. The low TOC concentrations found in the sediment grab samples 

despite the enormous volumes of fish waste discharged in the area are testimony to the 

mitigating effects of these tidal currents. 

The discharge and accumulation of salmon waste in areas off Ketchikan could also be 

considered “part of the natural background” and a part of nutrient cycling that normally 

takes place in the Tongass Narrows benthic ecosystem. Each year, thousands of salmon 

travel up Tongass Narrows and in the associated freshwater streams and creeks for 

spawning (Lewis Reef Creek, Government Creek, and Clam Clove on Gravina Island, 

and Hoadley Creek, Ketchikan Creek, Carlanna Creek, and Ward Cove and Creek on 

Revillagigedo Island, to name a few); the presence of decomposing salmon flesh on large 

areas of the bottom are a normal part of the ecosystem landscape. The “disturbance” or 

“anomalies” from the fish waste processing discharges compared with this normal cycle 

of salmon spawning and die-off are that the processing plant wastes are: 
June, 2004 33 Ketchikan Final Report 

a). focused with abnormally high loads over a relatively small area, and 

b). occurring over a much longer time frame than the one-time seasonal pulse of salmon 

spawning. 

However, the strong tidal currents combined with a system pre-adapted to recycle the 

nutrients from this decomposing organic input work together to limit the area of bottom 

that is showing signs of adverse effects. This combination of factors also will enhance the 

recovery process, as evidenced by the recolonization that has already occurred at the 

areas off the inactive Trident Seafoods and Alaska General Seafoods facilities (compare 

Figure 3-30 to Figure 3-31). If the fish processing plants ever ceased operations, we 

would expect that the effects caused by the waste discharge on the benthic ecosystem 

would disappear over time, and the benthic community would recover within 5-10 years 

with few adverse effects remaining from these point sources of organic loading. 
June, 2004 34 Ketchikan Final Report 

5.0 

REFERENCES CITED 

Aller, J.Y. and I. Stupakoff. 1996. The distribution and seasonal characteristics of 

benthic communities on the Amazon shelf as indicators of physical processes. Cont. 

Shelf Res. 16: 717-751. 

Becker, D.S. and K.K. Chew. 1987. Predation on Capitella spp. by small-mouthed 

pleuronectids in Puget Sound. Fisheries Bulletin 85: 471-479. 

Chessman, B.C. 1995. Rapid assessment of rivers using macroinvertebrates: A procedure 

based on habitat specific sampling, family level identification, and a biotic index. 

Australian Journal of Ecology 20: 122-129. 

Diaz, R.J. and R. Rosenberg. 1995. Marine benthic hypoxia: A review of its ecological 

effects and the behavioural responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanography and 

Marine Biology: an Annual Review 33: 245-303 

Ellis, D. 1985. Taxonomic sufficiency in pollution assessment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 

16: 459. 

EVS, 2001. Silver Bay Baseline Environmental Monitoring, Sitka, Alaska. Final Report: 

Baseline Characterization. Report for the City and Borough of Sitka, EVS Project No. 

23-1015-01. February, 2001. 

Faith, D.P., P.R. Minchin, and L. Belbin. 1987. Compositional dissimilarity as a robust 

measure of ecological distance. Vegetatio 69:57-68. 

Faith, D.P., C.L. Humphrey and P.L. Dostine. 1991. Statistical power and BACI designs 

in biological monitoring: comparative evaluation of measures of community 

dissimilarity based on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in Rockhole Mine 

Creek, Northern Territory, Australia. Austral. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 421:589-602. 

Ferraro, S.P. & F.A. Cole. 1990. Taxonomic level and sample size sufficient for assessing 

pollution impacts on the Southern California Bight macrobenthos. Marine Ecology 

Progress Series 67: 251-262 

Ferraro, S.P. & F.A. Cole. 1992. Taxonomic level sufficient for assessing a moderate 

impact on macrobenthic communities in Puget Sound, Washington, USA. Canadian. 

Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Science 49:1184-1188. 

Ferraro, S.P. & F.A. Cole. 1995. Taxonomic level and sample size sufficient for 

assessing pollution impacts on the Southern California Bight macrobenthos - revisted. 
June, 2004 35 Ketchikan Final Report 

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14: 1031-1040. 

Fredette, T.J., W.F. Bohlen, D.C. Rhoads, and R.W. Morton. 1988. Erosion and 

resuspension effects of Hurricane Gloria at Long Island Sound dredged material 

disposal sites. In: Proceedings of the Water Quality ‘88 seminar, February Meeting, 

Charleston, South Carolina. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydraulic Engineering 

Center, Davis, CA. 

Germano, J.D. 1983. Infaunal succession in Long Island Sound: Animal-sediment 

interactions and the effects of predation. Ph.D. dissertation. Yale University, New 

Haven, CT. 206 pp. 

Germano, J.D. and D.C. Rhoads. 1984. REMOTS sediment profiling at the Field 

Verification Program (FVP) Disposal Site. In: Dredging '84 Proceedings, ASCE, 

Nov. 14-16, Clearwater, FL. pp. 536-544. 

HDR, 2000. Ketchikan 2020. Existing Conditions Report. Resource Inventory per ACC 

Section 85.050 of the Alaska Coastal Management Program. Prepared for Ketchikan 

Gateway Borough, April, 2000. 

Huettel, M., W. Ziebis, and S. Forster. 1996. Flow-induced uptake of particulate matter in 

permeable sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 41: 309-322. 

Karakassis, I, M. Tsapakis, C.J. Smith, and H. Rumohr. 2002. Fish farming impacts in the 

Mediterranean studied through sediment profiling imagery. Marine Ecology Progress 

Series 227: 125-133.

Kennish, M.J. 1986. Ecology of estuaries. Vol. I: Physical and chemical aspects. 

CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. 

Kingston, P.F. and M.J. Riddle. 1989. Cost effectiveness of benthic faunal monitoring. 

Marine Pollution Bulletin 20: 490-496. 

Marchant, R., Barmuta, L.A. and B.C. Chessman. 1995. Influence of sample 

quantification and taxonomic resolution on the ordination of macroinvertebrate 

communities from running waters in Victoria, Australia. Marine Freshwater Research 

Journal 46: 501-506. 

Nilsson, H.C. and R. Rosenberg. 1997. Benthic habitat quality assessment of an oxygen 

stressed fjord by surface and sediment profile images. Journal of Marine Systems 11: 

249-264. 

Olsgard, F., Somerfield, P.J. and M.R. Carr. 1997. Relationships between taxonomic 

resolution and data transformations in analyses of a macrobenthic community along 
June, 2004 36 Ketchikan Final Report 

an established pollution gradient. Marine Ecology Progress Series 149: 173-181. 

Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic 

enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. 

Rev. 16:229-311. 

Pentec, 2000. Gravina Access Project Phase I Marine Reconnaissance Technical 

Memorandum. Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation and Public 

Facilities under contract to HDR, Juneau, AK. Agreement No. 36893013. 

DOT&PF Project No. 67698. April, 2000. 

Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team (PSWQAT). 1997. Recommended guidelines 

for sampling marine sediment, water column, and tissue in Puget Sound. Prepared for 

US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle WA. Available at 

http://www.psat.wa.gov/Publications/protocols/protocol_pdfs/field.pdf

Purdy, M. 1964. Sediments as substrates, pp 238-271 In: J. Imbrie and N. Newell (eds). 

Approaches to paleoecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 432 pp. 

Revelas, E.C., J.D. Germano, and D.C. Rhoads. 1987. REMOTS reconnaissance of 

benthic environments. pp. 2069-2083. In: Coastal Zone ‘87 Proceedings, ASCE, 

WW Division, May 26-29, Seattle, WA. 

Rhoads, D.C. 1974. Organism-sediment relations on the muddy seafloor. Oceanogr. 

Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 12: 263-300. 

Rhoads, D.C. and L.F. Boyer. 1982. The effects of marine benthos on physical 

properties of sediments. pp. 3-52. In: Animal-Sediment Relations. McCall, P.L. and 

M.J.S. Tevesz (eds). Plenum Press, New York, NY. 

Rhoads, D.C. and J.D. Germano. 1982. Characterization of benthic processes using 

sediment profile imaging: An efficient method of remote ecological monitoring of 

the seafloor (REMOTSTM System). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 8:115-128. 

Rhoads, D.C. and J.D. Germano. 1986. Interpreting long-term changes in benthic 

community structure: A new protocol. Hydrobiologia. 142:291-308. 

Rhoads, D.C. and J.D. Germano. 1990. The use of REMOTS® imaging technology for 

disposal site selection and monitoring. pp. 50-64. In: Geotechnical Engineering of 

Ocean Waste Disposal, K. Demars and R. Chaney (eds). ASTM Symposium 

Volume, January, 1989. Orlando, FL. 
June, 2004 37 Ketchikan Final Report 

Rice, D.L. and D.C. Rhoads. 1989. Early diagenesis of organic matter and the 

nutritional value of sediment. pp. 59-97. In: Ecology of Marine Deposit Feeders, 

Vol. 31, Lecture notes on coastal and estuarine deposit feeders. Lopez, G., G. Tagon, 

and J. Levinton, (eds.). Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. 

Rosenberg, R. and R.J. Diaz. 1993. Sulphur bacteria (Beggiatoa spp.) mats indicate 

hypoxic conditions in the Inner Stockhold Archipelago. Ambio 22: 22-36. 

Rosenberg, R., H.C. Nilsson, and R.J. Diaz. 2001. Response of benthic fauna and 

changing sediment redox profiles over a hypoxic gradient. Estuarine, Coastal and 

Shelf Science 53: 343-350. 

Tyson, R. V. and T. H. Pearson. 1991. Modern and ancient continental shelf anoxia: An 

overview, pp 1-24 In: R.V. Tyson and T.H. Pearson (eds). Modern and ancient 

continental shelf anoxia. Geological Society of London Special Publication #58. 470 

pp. 

Valente, R.M., D.C. Rhoads, J.D. Germano, and V.J. Cabelli. 1992. Mapping of benthic 

enrichment patterns in Narragansett Bay, RI. Estuaries 15:1-17. 

Warwick, R.M. 1988a. The level of taxonomic discrimination required to detect pollution 

effects on marine benthic communities. Marine Pollution Bulletin 19: 259-268. 

Warwick, R.M. 1988b. Analysis of community attributes of the macrobenthos of 

Frierfjord/Langesundfjord at taxonomic levels higher than species. Marine 

Ecology Progress Series 46: 167-170. 

Warwick, R.M. 1993. Environmental impact studies on marine communities: pragmatical 

considerations. Australian Journal of Ecology 18: 63-80. 
APPENDIX A

Sediment Profile Image Analysis Results 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

AGS OLD SE100 B 9/30/03 16:47:35 14.19 89.18 6.29 5.36 6.64 1.28 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE125 A 9/30/03 16:49:14 14.19 106.11 7.48 6.22 8.77 2.55 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE150 B 9/30/03 17:18:15 14.19 120.48 8.49 7.03 9.55 2.53 4-3 0 >4 AGS OLD SE175 A 9/30/03 17:19:39 14.19 98.66 6.95 6.05 7.55 1.50 4-3 0 >4 AGS OLD SE200 A 9/30/03 17:22:14 14.19 110.61 7.80 7.19 8.25 1.06 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE225 A 9/30/03 17:24:44 14.19 102.26 7.21 6.25 7.80 1.55 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE25 A 9/30/03 16:37:12 14.19 55.17 3.89 2.64 6.25 3.61 4-3 0 >4 AGS OLD SE250 A 9/30/03 17:27:26 14.19 133.56 9.41 8.33 10.02 1.69 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE275 A 9/30/03 17:55:56 14.19 82.49 5.81 5.11 6.44 1.33 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE300 B 9/30/03 17:59:14 14.19 88.68 6.25 4.50 8.69 4.19 4-3 0 >4 AGS OLD SE325 B 9/30/03 18:01:20 14.19 133.57 9.41 9.02 9.58 0.56 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE350 A 9/30/03 18:03:35 14.19 74.46 5.25 4.75 5.75 1.00 4-3 0 >4 AGS OLD SE375 A 9/30/03 18:05:57 14.19 119.12 8.40 8.08 8.77 0.69 4-3 0 >4 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

AGS OLD SE50 A 9/30/03 16:40:09 14.19 57.43 4.05 2.64 5.36 2.72 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE50 B 9/30/03 16:41:21 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 3-2 0 >4 AGS OLD SE75 B 9/30/03 16:44:22 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 3-2 0 >4 AGS 0 B 9/30/03 15:28:02 14.19 24.54 1.73 1.25 2.97 1.72 3-2 0 >4 AGS 1 A 9/30/03 15:15:14 14.19 65.75 4.63 3.19 5.44 2.25 4-3 0 >4 AGS 100 B 9/30/03 15:42:05 14.19 32.63 2.30 1.36 3.08 1.72 3-2 0 >4 AGS 150 A 9/30/03 15:43:35 14.19 33.97 2.39 1.56 3.03 1.47 3-2 0 >4 AGS 50 B 9/30/03 15:35:37 14.19 86.85 6.12 5.25 6.58 1.33 3-2 0 >4 AGS DOCK SW100 A 9/30/03 14:58:10 14.19 87.22 6.15 5.75 7.30 1.55 Ind Ind Ind AGS DOCK SW150 B 9/30/03 15:04:45 14.19 56.58 3.99 2.36 4.64 2.28 3-2 1 >4 AGS DOCK SW200 A 9/30/03 15:09:53 14.19 58.77 4.14 3.75 4.64 0.89 3-2 1 >4 AGS DOCK SW50 B 9/30/03 14:53:54 14.19 38.19 2.69 2.11 2.94 0.83 4-3 0 >4 ECP 1 B 9/29/03 16:36:34 14.19 108.92 7.68 6.72 8.44 1.72 >4 0 >4 ECP 100 20N A 9/29/03 18:12:33 14.19 38.84 2.74 2.14 3.28 1.14 3-2 0 >4 ECP 100 20S A 9/29/03 18:20:06 14.19 36.36 2.56 1.94 3.42 1.47 3-2 0 >4 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

ECP 100 40N A 9/29/03 18:15:06 14.19 39.93 2.81 2.00 3.44 1.44 3-2 0 >4 ECP 100 40S A 9/29/03 18:26:58 14.19 31.66 2.23 1.08 3.80 2.72 4-3 1 >4 ECP 100 60S B 9/29/03 18:38:05 14.19 40.00 2.82 2.33 3.17 0.83 4-3 1 >4 ECP 100 80S A 9/29/03 18:42:16 14.19 29.16 2.06 1.22 2.72 1.50 3-2 1 >4 ECP 100 A 9/29/03 18:05:48 14.19 42.85 3.02 2.53 3.55 1.03 3-2 -3 >4 ECP 100 C 9/30/03 11:04:27 14.19 59.53 4.20 3.42 4.80 1.39 4-3 1 >4 ECP 125 A 9/30/03 11:09:09 14.19 45.24 3.19 2.03 4.25 2.22 3-2 -3 >4 ECP 150 B 9/30/03 11:14:41 14.19 50.57 3.56 2.53 4.11 1.58 3-2 -3 >4 ECP 25 A 9/30/03 8:33:53 14.19 129.79 9.15 8.19 9.97 1.78 Ind Ind Ind ECP 250 B 9/29/03 17:59:52 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -4.00 -6 0.0ECP 300 B 9/29/03 17:54:57 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind ECP 400 B 9/29/03 17:16:12 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -4.00 -6 >4 ECP 400 N20 A 9/29/03 17:39:21 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -4.00 -6 >4 ECP 400 N40 B 9/29/03 17:43:41 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -2.00 -6 >4 ECP 400 S20 B 9/29/03 17:35:59 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -4.00 -6 0.0ECP 400 S40 B 9/29/03 17:31:34 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -2.00 -6 >4 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

ECP 400 S60 C 9/29/03 17:24:33 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -7.00 -7 -7.0ECP 50 A 9/30/03 8:37:32 14.19 78.07 5.50 5.11 5.86 0.75 4-3 1 >4 ECP 500 A 9/29/03 17:08:06 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind ECP 75 A 9/30/03 8:42:15 14.19 54.90 3.87 2.80 4.64 1.83 3-2 1 >4 ECP 75 B 9/30/03 8:44:17 14.19 36.73 2.59 1.39 3.83 2.44 4-3 1 >4 ECP 750 B 9/29/03 17:02:15 14.19 11.87 0.84 0.42 1.42 1.00 3-2 -3 >4 ECP 950 B 9/29/03 16:52:15 14.19 19.06 1.34 1.00 1.72 0.72 -2 - -3/1-0 -3 >4 GRV 1 A 10/2/03 9:45:20 14.19 46.25 3.26 2.25 4.08 1.83 3-2 0 >4 GRV 1 B 10/2/03 9:46:48 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 1-0 -1 >4 GRV 1 C 10/2/03 9:47:41 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 3-2 0 >4 GRV 2 B 10/2/03 9:52:41 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind GRV 2 C 10/2/03 9:53:25 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind GRV 3 A 10/2/03 9:58:26 14.19 64.74 4.56 4.11 5.28 1.17 3-2 0 >4 GRV 3 B 10/2/03 9:59:23 14.19 121.01 8.53 7.50 9.05 1.56 3-2 0 >4 GRV 3 C 10/2/03 10:00:22 14.19 58.00 4.09 3.22 4.66 1.44 3-2 0 >4 MID 1 B 9/29/03 15:41:33 14.19 63.80 4.50 3.86 4.91 1.06 3-2 0 >4 MID 2 A 9/29/03 16:40:59 14.19 55.75 3.93 2.72 4.80 2.08 Ind Ind Ind MID 3 150 A 9/30/03 16:12:06 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind MID 3 225 B 9/30/03 16:25:44 14.19 34.55 2.43 1.31 3.30 2.00 2-1 0 >4 MID 3 75 A 9/30/03 16:02:43 14.19 34.25 2.41 1.86 2.86 1.00 3-2 0 >4 NQO B 9/30/03 9:18:59 14.19 303.77 21.41 21.33 21.33 NA Ind Ind 0.0NQO S100 B 9/30/03 9:51:36 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

NQO S125 B 9/30/03 10:17:58 14.19 45.92 3.24 2.55 3.78 1.22 3-2 0 >4 NQO S150 A 9/30/03 10:21:17 14.19 49.32 3.48 1.94 5.53 3.58 4-3 1 >4 NQO S175 A 9/30/03 10:39:03 14.19 56.17 3.96 3.47 4.50 1.03 4-3 0 >4 NQO S200 A 9/30/03 10:44:01 14.19 86.53 6.10 5.80 6.58 0.78 3-2 0 >4 NQO S25 B 9/30/03 9:38:47 14.19 50.56 3.56 2.50 4.61 2.11 2-1 0 >4 NQO S50 A 9/30/03 9:41:43 14.19 3.57 0.25 0.00 0.61 0.61 1-0 -4 >4 NQO S75 B 9/30/03 9:47:52 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind NQ1 A 9/29/03 16:27:27 14.19 28.99 2.04 1.42 2.42 1.00 3-2 -2 >4 NQ100 B 9/30/03 8:59:43 14.19 62.22 4.38 2.11 5.25 3.14 4-3 0 >4 NQ125 A 9/30/03 10:01:00 14.19 95.14 6.71 6.16 7.41 1.25 4-3 1 >4 NQ150 A 9/30/03 10:06:45 14.19 51.66 3.64 3.00 4.33 1.33 4-3 0 >4 NQ150 B 9/30/03 10:07:50 14.19 41.45 2.92 1.89 3.83 1.94 4-3 1 >4 NQ25 B 9/30/03 9:12:41 14.19 181.75 12.81 12.05 13.36 1.31 Ind Ind >4 NQ50 B 9/30/03 9:08:44 14.19 39.01 2.75 2.25 3.47 1.22 4-3 1 >4 NQ75 A 9/30/03 9:03:04 14.19 63.09 4.45 4.00 4.66 0.67 4-3 1 >4 NQO A 9/30/03 9:18:03 14.19 303.96 21.42 21.35 21.35 NA Ind Ind >4 REF 1 C 9/29/03 13:48:45 14.19 20.88 1.47 0.75 2.19 1.44 3-2 0 >4 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

REF 2 B 9/29/03 14:16:31 14.19 31.78 2.24 1.58 3.00 1.42 2-1 -1 >4 REF 2 C 9/29/03 14:17:18 14.19 35.13 2.48 1.72 2.97 1.25 2-1 0 >4 REF 3 A 9/29/03 14:52:23 14.19 145.32 10.24 9.89 10.77 0.89 >4 0 >4 REF 3 B 9/29/03 14:53:11 14.19 108.48 7.65 6.91 8.80 1.89 >4 -2 >4 REF 3 C 9/29/03 14:53:54 14.19 143.94 10.14 8.39 10.77 2.39 >4 0 >4 REF 4 A 10/2/03 10:22:52 14.19 92.04 6.49 5.00 7.75 2.75 -3.00 -5 >4 REF 4 B 10/2/03 10:23:37 14.19 89.58 6.31 3.28 10.05 6.78 4-3 0 >4 REF 4 C 10/2/03 10:24:23 14.19 53.03 3.74 2.61 4.53 1.92 4-3 -2 >4 REF 5 A 10/2/03 10:29:09 14.19 90.59 6.38 4.64 7.72 3.08 4-3 -2 >4 REF 5 C 10/2/03 10:31:19 14.19 71.55 5.04 4.47 5.55 1.08 4-3 -2 >4 REF 5 D 10/2/03 10:32:10 14.19 74.34 5.24 4.08 5.94 1.86 4-3 -2 >4 REF 6 A 10/2/03 11:11:48 14.19 87.60 6.17 5.80 6.39 0.58 3-2 0 >4 REF 6 B 10/2/03 11:13:49 14.19 88.00 6.20 5.08 7.05 1.97 3-2 0 >4 REF 6 C 10/2/03 11:14:48 14.19 84.64 5.96 5.53 6.30 0.78 3-2 0 >4 T0 B 9/29/03 15:32:56 14.19 23.16 1.63 1.06 2.03 0.97 4-3 -3 >4 T10 B 9/29/03 15:54:53 14.19 24.28 1.71 1.14 2.11 0.97 4-3 -1 >4 T100 A 9/30/03 13:54:34 14.19 89.46 6.31 5.69 7.05 1.36 3-2 0 >4 
Station Name DATE TIME

Calibration 

factor

Penetration Area 

(cm^2)

Mean 

Penetration 

(cm)

Minimum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Maximum 

Penetration 

(cm)

Boundary 

Roughness 

(cm)

GrnSize 

MAJOR 

Mode 

(phi)

Grain 

Size Max 

(phi)

Gra

Size 

(ph

T150 A 9/30/03 13:58:24 14.19 16.60 1.17 0.19 2.33 2.14 3-2 0 >4 T175 A 9/29/03 16:01:35 14.19 42.96 3.03 2.75 3.33 0.58 3-2 0 >4 T200 A 9/30/03 14:08:58 14.19 96.31 6.79 6.08 7.69 1.61 >4 1 >4 T25 B 9/30/03 13:46:10 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind T250 A 9/30/03 14:15:29 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -4.00 -5 >4 T475 B 9/29/03 16:12:23 14.19 68.51 4.83 4.28 5.41 1.14 3-2 -2 >4 T50 C 9/30/03 13:51:41 14.19 66.59 4.69 3.22 5.11 1.89 2-1 0 >4 TDOCK SW100 A 9/30/03 12:39:10 14.19 40.77 2.87 2.42 3.08 0.67 2-1 0 >4 TDOCK SW125 B 9/30/03 12:46:06 14.19 69.69 4.91 3.92 6.11 2.19 2-1 0 >4 TDOCK SW150 A 9/30/03 12:51:56 14.19 67.37 4.75 4.28 5.36 1.08 Ind 0 >4 TDOCK SW175 B 9/30/03 13:08:04 14.19 69.63 4.91 4.33 5.47 1.14 >4 -2 >4 TDOCK SW200 B 9/30/03 13:17:32 14.19 17.92 1.26 0.56 1.64 1.08 Ind Ind Ind TDOCK SW225 B 9/30/03 13:26:46 14.19 56.40 3.97 3.08 4.19 1.11 3-2 0 >4 TDOCK T25 A 9/30/03 12:10:38 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA -2.00 -3 >4 TDOCK SW250 B 9/30/03 13:32:47 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind TDOCK SW275 A 9/30/03 14:26:20 14.19 82.08 5.78 5.36 6.41 1.06 4-3 0 >4 TDOCK SW300 A 9/30/03 14:30:29 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA Ind Ind Ind TDOCK SW40 A 9/30/03 12:17:06 14.19 51.33 3.62 2.94 4.94 2.00 >4 2 >4 TDOCK SW55 B 9/30/03 12:23:27 14.19 32.48 2.29 1.72 2.67 0.94 3-2 -1 >4 TDOCK SW70 A 9/30/03 12:27:25 14.19 24.01 1.69 0.94 2.72 1.78 3-2 -3 >4 TDOCK SW85 A 9/30/03 12:33:00 14.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 3-2 0 >4 
Station Name

AGS OLD SE100 BAGS OLD SE125 AAGS OLD SE150 BAGS OLD SE175 AAGS OLD SE200 AAGS OLD SE225 AAGS OLD SE25 AAGS OLD SE250 AAGS OLD SE275 AAGS OLD SE300 BAGS OLD SE325 BAGS OLD SE350 AAGS OLD SE375 A

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

 0.89 4.94 None No Trace Trace 0.00  3.53 6.33 None No Trace Trace 5.92  1.53 4.42 None No Trace Trace -  3.67 5.28 None No 0.00 0.00 -  2.64 4.36 None No 0.00 0.00 -  3.05 5.44 None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 None Yes Trace Trace -  1.86 4.72 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 5.11 > 6.44 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 2.25 4.72 None No 0.00 0.00 -  4.33 6.41 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 4.75 > 5.75 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 6.61 7.44 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)
Station Name

AGS OLD SE50 AAGS OLD SE50 BAGS OLD SE75 BAGS 0 BAGS 1 AAGS 100 BAGS 150 AAGS 50 BAGS DOCK SW100 AAGS DOCK SW150 BAGS DOCK SW200 AAGS DOCK SW50 BECP 1 BECP 100 20N AECP 100 20S A

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

 0.00 0.00 None Yes Trace Trace -  Ind Ind None No Trace Trace -  Ind Ind None No Trace Trace -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 0.00 0.00 - 

> 1.36 > 3.08 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 1.56 > 3.03 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 5.25 > 6.58 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 Ind Ind None No 87.22 > 6.15 > 5.75 >  Ind Ind None No Trace Trace - 

> 3.75 > 4.64 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 0.00 0.00 None Yes 38.19 > 2.69 > 2.11 >  0.00 0.00 1 Yes 108.92 > 7.68 > 6.72 >  Ind Ind None Yes Trace Trace -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 
Station Name

ECP 100 40N AECP 100 40S AECP 100 60S BECP 100 80S AECP 100 AECP 100 CECP 125 AECP 150 BECP 25 AECP 250 BECP 300 BECP 400 BECP 400 N20 AECP 400 N40 BECP 400 S20 BECP 400 S40 B

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

 Ind Ind None No Trace Trace -  Ind Ind None No Trace Trace -  0.19 2.25 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 1.22 > 2.72 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 3.42 > 4.80 None No Trace Trace - > 2.03 > 4.25 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 Ind Ind None Yes 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 1 Yes 129.79 > 9.15 > 8.19 >  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 
Station Name

ECP 400 S60 CECP 50 AECP 500 AECP 75 AECP 75 BECP 750 BECP 950 BGRV 1 AGRV 1 BGRV 1 CGRV 2 BGRV 2 CGRV 3 AGRV 3 BGRV 3 CMID 1 BMID 2 AMID 3 150 AMID 3 225 BMID 3 75 ANQO BNQO S100 B

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

 Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 None No 78.07 > 5.50 > 5.11 >  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 54.90 > 3.87 > 2.80 >  Ind Ind None Yes 36.73 > 2.59 > 1.39 >  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 2.25 > 4.08 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  2.61 4.06 None No 0.00 0.00 -  1.06 7.78 None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  2.28 3.83 None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 55.75 > 3.93 > 2.72 >  Ind Ind None No Ind Ind -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 0.00 0.00 -  0.53 2.17 None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 10 No 303.77 > 21.41 > 21.33 >  Ind Ind None No Trace Trace - 
Station Name

NQO S125 BNQO S150 ANQO S175 ANQO S200 ANQO S25 BNQO S50 ANQO S75 BNQ1 ANQ100 BNQ125 ANQ150 ANQ150 BNQ25 BNQ50 BNQ75 ANQO AREF 1 C

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

 Ind Ind None No Trace Trace - 

> 1.94 > 5.53 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 3.47 > 4.50 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 5.80 > 6.58 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 0.00 0.00 None Yes 50.56 > 3.56 > 2.50 >  Ind Ind None No Ind Ind -  Ind Ind None No Ind Ind -  0.00 0.00 None No Trace Trace - 

0.00 0.00 None Yes Trace Trace - 

 0.00 0.00 None Yes 46.72 3.29 2.31  1.00 3.24 None No Trace Trace - 

> 1.89 > 3.83 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 0.00 0.00 7 Yes 181.75 > 12.81 > 12.05 >  0.00 0.00 None Yes 39.01 > 2.75 > 2.25 >  0.00 0.00 None Yes Trace Trace -  0.00 0.00 10+ Yes 303.96 > 21.42 > 21.35 > 

> 0.75 > 2.19 None No 0.00 0.00 - 
Station Name

REF 2 BREF 2 CREF 3 AREF 3 BREF 3 CREF 4 AREF 4 BREF 4 CREF 5 AREF 5 CREF 5 DREF 6 AREF 6 BREF 6 CT0 BT10 BT100 A

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

> 1.58 > 3.00 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 1.72 > 2.97 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 4.22 8.91 None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 2.61 > 4.53 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 4.64 > 7.72 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 4.47 > 5.55 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 4.08 > 5.94 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 5.80 > 6.39 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 5.08 > 7.05 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 5.53 > 6.30 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 0.00 0.00 None Yes Trace Trace -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 0.00 0.00 -  2.78 4.69 None No 0.00 0.00 - 
Station Name

T150 AT175 AT200 AT25 BT250 AT475 BT50 CTDOCK SW100 ATDOCK SW125 BTDOCK SW150 ATDOCK SW175 BTDOCK SW200 BTDOCK SW225 BTDOCK T25 ATDOCK SW250 BTDOCK SW275 ATDOCK SW300 ATDOCK SW40 ATDOCK SW55 BTDOCK SW70 ATDOCK SW85 A

METHANE Low DO?

Fish 

Waste 

Layer 

Area

Mean Fish 

Waste Layer

Fish Waste 

Depth 

Minimum

Fish 

D

Ma

RPD Minimum 

(cm)

RPD 

Maximum 

(cm)

 Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No 0.00 0.00 - 

> 4.28 > 5.41 None No 0.00 0.00 - > 3.22 > 5.11 None No 0.00 0.00 - 

 0.00 0.00 None No 40.77 > 2.87 > 2.42 >  0.00 0.00 None Yes 69.69 > 4.91 > 3.92 >  0.00 0.00 None Yes 67.37 > 4.75 > 4.28 >  0.00 0.23 None Yes 69.63 > 4.91 > 4.33 >  0.00 0.00 None Yes 17.92 > 1.26 > 0.56 >  Ind Ind None No 56.40 > 3.97 > 3.08 >  Ind Ind None No 0.00 > 0.00 -  Ind Ind None No >p > penetration - 

 Ind Ind None No 82.08 > 5.78 > 5.36 >  Ind Ind None No Ind Ind -  0.00 0.00 None Yes 51.33 > 3.62 > 2.94 >  Ind Ind None No 32.48 > 2.29 > 1.72 >  Ind Ind None No 24.01 > 1.69 > 0.94 > 

Ind Ind None Yes Ind Ind - 
Station Name

AGS OLD SE100 BAGS OLD SE125 AAGS OLD SE150 BAGS OLD SE175 AAGS OLD SE200 AAGS OLD SE225 AAGS OLD SE25 AAGS OLD SE250 AAGS OLD SE275 AAGS OLD SE300 BAGS OLD SE325 BAGS OLD SE350 AAGS OLD SE375 A

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Dark, silty fine sand with abundant small shell/skeletal remains interspersed throughout sediment column. Lignitic detritus on SWI. Fish waste reduced to trace amounts of skeletal debris. Labile organics processed. No Stage Tan silty fine sand with some subsurface organic loading at bottom of frame. Fishwaste present only as isolated skeletal (fin rays/bones) in left center subsurface. Spiochaetopterus at SWI. Abundant small shell 

fragments throughout sediment column. Detritus at SWI. No Stage Tan to gray, silty fine sand. Good RPD contrast with dark gray layer underlying surface sediment. Abundant small shell fragments scattered throughout sediment column. Spiochaetopterus at SWI. Minor terrestrial 

lignitic detritus at SWI. Some oxidized sediment at bottom of frame, suggesting periodic deposition and organic loading. No Stage 

Tan to gray, silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments throughout the sediment column. Two small voids at right. Subsurface sediment is a rich gray in hue. Small terrestrial lignitic fragments scattered at SWI. Similar to 150. No Stage 

Tan to light gray, moderately sorted silty fine sand with evenly distributed, abundant, very small shell fragments. Epiphyte encrusted Spiochaetopterus tubes at SWI. Abundant fecal material in water column and thin detrital veneer at SWI. Oxidized sediment at bottom of frame. Appear to be dominated by physical processes. No Stage 

Tan silty fine sand with scattered patches of gray organics. Subtle RPD contrast. Spiochaetopterus tubes at SWI and small shell fragments scattered throughout sediment column. Detrital dusting at SWI. Appears healthy. No Stage 

Gray to dark gray organic, firm silty sand. Epitphytes and plant debris at SWI along with incipient Beggiatoa colonies, indicative of hypoxia. Sediment reduced all the way to SWI. Piece of net twine in lower right. Organically loaded from what looks like primarily terrestrial detritus and fish waste remnants. Yes Stage Tan silty fine sand with discontinuous band of dark gray sediment below the RPD. Terrestrial plant fragments and marine algae at SWI. Abundant small scattered shell fragments throughout sediment column. SWI appears periodically washed. Epiphyte encrusted Chaetopterid tubes in left and right background. No Stage Tan, moderately sorted silty fine sand. RPD>P. Abundant epiphyte encrusted chaetopterid tubes at SWI along with some terrestrial plant debris. Sediment surface appears scoured around plant debris, high energy. Sediment column has homogeneous sedimentary fabric. Nice pic. Unusually light-hued for site. No Stage Tan to dark gray silty fine sand. Abundant shell fragments in sediment column and patch of reduced, organic sediment at right. Algae and wood debris at SWI. Many fine tubes at SWI with reticulated network of shallow burrowing deposit feeders. Episodically physically disturbed and some organic loading. No Stage Tan to gray, organic, silty fine sand. Void/burrow in upper right center of frame. Several small epiphyte encrusted tubes in background. Scattered shell fragments in sediment column, Appears to be high flow and some organic loading. No fish waste present. No Stage Tan poorly sorted silty fine sand. RPD > penetration. Tubes, fecal matter and detritus at SWI and in water column. Scattered small shell fragments in sediment column. No fish waste. No Stage Tan to light gray, poorly sorted silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments throughout sediment column. Polychaete in lower right. Deep RPD. Abundant detritus and fecal material at the SWI. Organic and well processed sand. No Stage 
Station Name

AGS OLD SE50 AAGS OLD SE50 BAGS OLD SE75 BAGS 0 BAGS 1 AAGS 100 BAGS 150 AAGS 50 BAGS DOCK SW100 AAGS DOCK SW150 BAGS DOCK SW200 AAGS DOCK SW50 BECP 1 BECP 100 20N AECP 100 20S A

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Gray, moderately sorted organic fine sand. Some shell debris and skeletal material interspersed throughout sediment column. Drink cans at left. Sediment is oxygen poor and the sand is also compositionallly dark. Either low DO in water or organic loading in sediment. Stressed area, but DO not low enough to cause Beggiatoa growth. No Stage 

Gray, slightly silty fine sand. Looking downward on sediment surface. Shell and skeletal debris at SWI, as well as small woody debris fragments. Only scattered patches of oxidized sediment and the patches appear to be diffusional. Low Do or organic loading in sediment column. Disturbed. No Stage Gray to tan, very hard fine sand. No penetration and looking downward on sediment surface. Scatetred shell debris. Low DO/high organic loading or little infauna as RPD appears diffusional. Surface more oxidized than SE50. Both reps are similar. No IndetTan to light gray shelly, firm fine sand. Abundant shell fragments and disarticulated bivalve shells at SWI. Minor woody debris/fibers in centr foeground. Surface appears washed. Both reps similar. No Stage Dark gray organic detritus with scattered wood and shell debris. Appears depositonal. Distinct fish waste not present. No RPD and appears to be due to organics and high oxygen demand. Very dark, traces of Beggiatoa on surface. Yes Indet

Tan, firm, silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments. Epiphyte encrusted tubes at SWI, likely Spiochaetopterus. Surface appears periodically washed. High energy. No Stage Tan, firm, silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments. Epiphyte encrusted tubes at SWI, likely Spiochaetopterus. Surface appears periodically washed. High energy. Very similar to AGS 100 No Stage Tan, firm, silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments througout sediment column. Appears to be periodically physically reworked. Planktonic and terrestrial detritus at SWI. Burrow/depression at right of frame. Some small patches of reduced sediment in sed column, but for the most part, entire sediment column has oxidized sediment. No distinct fish waste. No Stage Entire sediment column in frame is composed of fish skeletal remains. There appears to be little adhered flesh and remains are largely vertebrae, ribs and fin rays, Excellent and unusual picture. No IndetGray, firm, fine sand with abundant shell and scattered skeletal fragments in sediment column. RPD indeterminate although there is some oxidized sediment within the sediment column - not enough fines. Spiochaetopterus tube in foreground. SWI shows evidence of periodic hydrodynamic washing. No Stage Tan, firm, silty fine sand with abundant small shell fragments. Sediment column oxidized to depth, unsure if its due to bioturbation or physical/depositional processes. Numerous chaetopterid tubes at SWI. Surface appears appears periodically washed and production appears enhanced based on the copious amount of fecal material and detritus in sediment column - given the sandy nature of the substrate. No Stage Dark gray to black highly organic silt and sand with fish waste to depth. Very high sediment oxygen demand - no RPD at all. Beggiatoa. High inventory of labile organics due to freshly deposited fish waste. Nice pic. Yes Stage Fresh fish waste admixed with dark gray, fine sandy silt. Fish waste consists of Salmon flesh, scales, skin and skeletal remains. Highly labile. Yes Azoic 

Gray to olive slightly silty fine sand. Shell debris at SWI, piece of wood in foreground. Few fish scales at SWI and upper sediment coumn and vertebrae in center foreground at SWI. Appears washed at SWI; Beggiatoa present Yes Stage 

Gray to olive-tan, slightly silty, very firm fine sand. Amphipod tubes in background. Broken tubes and fecal castings at SWI. Apparent burrow/depression at right SWI. Oxidized sediment at SWI but RPD is ill defined at depth and is likely >P. Sand appears washed yet with high organic inventory. No Stage 
Station Name

ECP 100 40N AECP 100 40S AECP 100 60S BECP 100 80S AECP 100 AECP 100 CECP 125 AECP 150 BECP 25 AECP 250 BECP 300 BECP 400 BECP 400 N20 AECP 400 N40 BECP 400 S20 BECP 400 S40 B

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Dark gray to brown, silty, very firm, fine sand. Shell fragments, woody debris and possible small skeletal fragments at SWI. Sediment column very dark and appears organically loaded, as well as periodically physically disturbed. Unclear whether there is an RPD present and sands are very dark. Small Stage 1 tube at center,network of shallow burrows below surface with small voids No Stage Dark gray to brown, firm, organic, silty, fine sand. High surface relief in background. Abundant small shell fragments and apparent small skeletal debris. Dark sands appear organically enhanced. RPD indeterminate as there is little oxidized sediment contrast. No Stage Tan to very dark gray, silty, fine sand. Tube in center of frame. RPD appears to be more from physical (hydrodynamic mixing and floc burial than due to bioturbation. Abundant tubes in A rep but no penetration. Scattered small shell fragments at SWI. Bedform in background. No Stage Tan to gray, silty, fine sand. Several well-developed tubes at SWI. Abundant small shell fragments in sediment column. Physically reworked and SWI appears washed. Some detritus at SWI and sand appears to be organically enhanced. No visible fish waste. RPD >P. No Stage Dark gray fine sand. Shell fragments, cobble and wood fragments at SWI. Although there is some brown, oxidized sediment in the sediment column, RPD is not measurable, Very firm. Sand is composed of dark lithic grains, and also appears to have an invetory of labile organics. Several broken tubes at SWI. No Stage Tan to light gray, slightly silty, fine sand. Shell fragments in sediment column, small tubes and anenome (metridium? - possibly an onuphid tube also) in center backgorund. Minor detritus andsome fecal castings on SWI. RPD irregular and measured as >P although there are a few patches of visible reduced sediment; Beggiatoa on surface Yes Stage 

Firm, organic, tan to brown, silty sand. Cobbles in background. Abundant small and medium shell fragments at SWI. Prostrate tube at center that is covered with white filamentous bacteria. Very organic for cobbles and sand. Yes Stage 

Tan to gray, firm, very shelly, silty, fine sand. Disarticulated mussel and scallop shells on SWI along with abundant shell fragments in the sediment column. Few spiochateopterus tubes at SWI. Appears washed. Sediment also appears oxidized to deph of penetration although shell debris precludes measurement. No Stage Fish waste and shell debris to depth admixed with some silts and sand. Clrear radial bones, barnacle shells, fin rays, and scales. No discernible RPD. Methane pocket (gas gone) at lower left. Mixing mechanism of sediment and fish waste unclear, but appears to be either physical or mechanical in origin. No Azoic Cobble and shell debris at SWI. No penetration. Some algae in backgorund. Rep A is on large rock. Surface is washed of detritus. No Indet

Hard substrate littered with detrtus-free shell debris. Shell debris is large disarticulated bivalves and gastropod shell. Parastichopus at right. Hydrodymically washed. No IndetWashed cobble substrate with some uncrusting epizoan on cobble. No penetration. No detritus on cobbles. No IndetWashed cobble and disarticulated shell substrate with some uncrusting epizoan on cobble. No penetration. No detritus on cobbles. No Indet

Cobble and shell substrate with some fines around cobble. Rep A consisted of rock and algae. Surface appears washed. No Indet

Cobble and shell debris at SWI. No penetration. Some algae in backgorund. Rep A is on large rock. Surface is washed of detritus. Rep A consists of decaying algae. No IndetShell degris, wood fragment, cobble and sand substrate. Very dark. No penetration. Some epizoan encrustation on wood and cobble. Thin mantling of detritus. No Indet
Station Name

ECP 400 S60 CECP 50 AECP 500 AECP 75 AECP 75 BECP 750 BECP 950 BGRV 1 AGRV 1 BGRV 1 CGRV 2 BGRV 2 CGRV 3 AGRV 3 BGRV 3 CMID 1 BMID 2 AMID 3 150 AMID 3 225 BMID 3 75 ANQO BNQO S100 B

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Algae and epizoan encrusted rock which is wider than the frame. No penetration. Small crab and barnacles also on rock. No Indet

Light gray, silty fine sand with numerous tubes at SWI and void at lower left. Shall fragments and fragmented skeletal parts interspersed throughout sediment column. Very unusual. Both reps similar. No Stage No penetraton in both reps. Disarticulated shell in far background and minor algae pieces. No IndetLight gray, silty fine sand with small shell and skeletal fragments interspersed throughout sediment column. Similar in general appearance to ECP 50. No Stage Light gray to brown, organic silty, fine sand. Unusual filamentous aggregation of surface sediment. Skeletal pieces in sediment column. Oxidized sediment present but appears to be from physical mixing. High organic load, Beggiatoa fiber clusters on surface. Yes Stage Jumbled mixture of sand and algae with shell debris and wood fragments at SWI. Spiochaetopterus tubes at left. Very firm, little penetration. Abundant natural organic debris. No IndetCobble shingled light sand. High current area. Little penetration. No IndetLight gray tan, very shelly, silty fine sand. Large solaster at SWI. Appears to be beach-like firm sand. Abundant detritus/fines at SWI. No Stage 

Hard, very shelly, coarse sand. Several detritus covered, disarticualted shells at the SWI. No IndetLight gray to tan, shelly, silty medium sand. Disarticualted oyster and limpet shell at SWI. Kelp frond. Shell debris disrupted penetration. Very firm. No IndetAlgae and epizoan covered substrate, pebbles visible under algae, but size cannot be determined. Abundant detritus suspended in water column. Unusual. No IndetHard sand substrate with shell debris at SWI in background. No penetration and looking sideways at surface relief. No Indet

Organic, tan to gray, shelly, silty, fine sand. Spiochaetopterus tubes, algae, shell debris. Appears to be rich sand environment. Abundant detritus/fines in upper sediment column. No Stage Organic, tan to gray, silty, fine sand. Dense Spiochaetopterids at SWI, crab, and tunicate. Rich and productive. RPD may be overestimated due to smearing. Nice pic. Very organic sand. No Stage Light gray, shelly, silty, fine sand. Spiojhaetopterus tubes in background. Algae and shell debris at SWI. Rich mantling of detritus/fecal material at SWI. Abundant fine shell fragments evenly distributed throughout sediment column. No Stage 

Tan to gray, shelly, silty, fine sand. Few tubes at SWI and minor fecal castings. Incipient bedform. Sands are both organic and composed of dark lithics. Abundant small shell fragments interspersed throughout the sediment column. No Stage 

Gray and white fish waste to depth. Some shell debris mixed with fish waste. Also some dark silt/sand erratically interspersed with fish wast. No RPD and some bacterial strings in sediment column. Nasty. Yes Azoic No penetration in either replicate. Hard or sloped substrate. No IndetIntercollated terrestrial wood debris and dark, lithic sand. Some shell fragments on SWI. RPD not apparent. Area of organic deposition and mixing with transgressive sands. Both reps similar. Wood debris is small and abraded. No Indet

Dark organic silty fine sand with thin layer of terrestrial organic/woody debris at SWI. Minor shell debris at SWI. Hard substrate. Abundant organic litter from runoff. Possible radial bone at left SWI but cannot be ID'd with certainty. No Stage 

Highly methanogenic fish waste to depth. Several types of bones present, fresh flesh, talow, and herring. Very distinctive. No Azoic 

Hard substrate with veneer of shell/skeletal reamins at SWI. Vertebrae visible in left foreground. Both reps show no penetration. Unusual assemblage of shell and skeletae at SWI. No Indet
Station Name

NQO S125 BNQO S150 ANQO S175 ANQO S200 ANQO S25 BNQO S50 ANQO S75 BNQ1 ANQ100 BNQ125 ANQ150 ANQ150 BNQ25 BNQ50 BNQ75 ANQO AREF 1 C

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Firm, gray to brown, very shelly, silty, fine sand. Shell and fish bone at SWI. Minor wood debris in background. Spiochaetopterid in left background. Thin ephemeral dusting of detritus at SWI. No Stage Brown, silty, very fine sand. Firm. Shell and wood at SWI, tubes in background. Sediment appears oxidized to depth. Very dark. No sign of fished waste. Appears hydrodynamically active. No Stage Brown, firm, silty, very fine sand. Minor shell fragments at SWI and minor detritus. Appears periodically washed. Prostrate tube at right. Organic. No Stage Tan, moderately sorted, silty fine sand. On axis of bedform. Few small tubes visible. Sediment appears oxidized to depth via mostly physical processes. Minor small shell fragments at SWI. No Stage Dark gray, shelly, silty fine sand with some fish waste mixed in to depth of penetration. No RPD. Fish scales in subsurface sediment. Some shell and skeltal debris at SWI. Organically enriched and unusual sedimentary fabric as some of the sediment appears pelletized. Yes Stage Sand and shell debris with wood fragment and malted grain beverage bottle in background. Some epixoan encrustation of bottle and wood fragment. Poosible that some of the shell fragments are in fact skeletal pieces. High current as most objects are washed free of detritus. No IndetLarge rock in foreground that is larger than the frame of view (minimally - 7 phi). High current (no detritus) and very hard substrate. No penetration at all in rep A. No IndetDark gray to black, gravelly fine sand. Abundant shell fragments and minor skeletal debris in sediment column and at SWI. No RPD. Sparse tubes in far backfround. Organically loaded. No Stage Tan to light gray, firm, silty, very fine sand. Tubes at SWI and small piece of fish waste in center SWI. Minor small shell fragments. Beggiatoa at surface & traces of oxidation near the SWI. High current area with incipient bedform and no fine-grained detrtitus. Yes Stage Layer of fish waste over tan to gray silty fine sand. Fish waste layer is composed of shell, bone and scales, and appears to have a high oxygen demand as sediemtn immediately below the fish waste has been turned black. Beggiatoa throughout fishwaste layer. Nice pic. No Stage Brown to dark gray, very silty, very fine sand with abundant shell fragments and some skeletal fragments at SWI. Patches of organically enrished sediment in sediment column. Very little penetration and RPD is an estimate. Hermit crab feeding on surface at right edge. No Stage Tan, moderately sorted, slightly silty, very fine sand. Bedform. Small tubes and some detritus at SWI. Sediment appears oxidized to depth. Very different from the A rep. No visible fish waste. No Stage Fish waste greater than penetration. Fish waste is dominantly bone, tallow, and scales that are white in hue. Abundant small methane bubbles interspersed throughout fish waste deposit. No life or RPD present. Some filamentous bacterial strings near SWI. Yes Azoic Dark gray to black silty fine sand mixed with fish waste to depth. Very firm. Skeletal debris, scales, and minor shell fragments at SWI. Sediment is hishly reduced to SWI and there is no fickian diffusion oxidized layer at SWI. Some faint Beggiatoa at SWI. Highly organically stressed. Yes Stage Gray, moderately sorted silty very fine sand. Some shell and decomposing fish waste at SWI. Minor fish waste in sediment column and not evenly or continuously distributed throughout sediment column. Small tubes in background. Minor small wood debris at SWI. No distinct oxidized sediment. No Stage Fresh and older fish waste to depth. Layer of freshly depsotied salmon bits at top of frame (10 cm) underlain by older skeltal, cartilage, and decaying flesh layer. Highly methanogenic. Stunning in many ways. No Azoic Light gray to tan, shelly, slightly silty, fine sand. SWI covered with disarticulated shells. Starfish and algae at SWI. Only rep at this station with penetration. Rep A has urchin, Rep B had a lot of small wood fragments. No Indet
Station Name

REF 2 BREF 2 CREF 3 AREF 3 BREF 3 CREF 4 AREF 4 BREF 4 CREF 5 AREF 5 CREF 5 DREF 6 AREF 6 BREF 6 CT0 BT10 BT100 A

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Light gray fine sand and small shell fragments. Sediment column >50% shell. Chaetopterid tubes in background and one projecting out right at left side near faceplate. Sediment appears oxidized to depth even with the lack of fines in sed column. Thin coating of detritus at SWI. No Stage Light gray, shelly, medium sand. High percentage of sediment column consists of small shell fragments. Some disarticulated shlls at SWI. Similar to Rep B but slightly coarser grained. Chaetopterid tubes in background. No Stage 

Very organic, very fine sandy silt. Subsurface sediment at bottom of frame is black and highly reduced. Abundant terrestrial detritus in upper portions of sediment column and at SWI. Large detritus covered wood fragment in background, Many broken tube fragments at SWI. Atypical reference of area, No Stage Very organic, sandy silt. SWI is disrupted by samping. Subsurface sediment is black and shows eveidence of deposition/organic loading. Wood and metal fragments at SWI. RPD obscured by sampling-related disruption. Similar to Rep A in sediment-type and organic loading. Atypical. No Stage Highly organic, very sandy silt. Diffusional RPD that has been disrupted by sampling. Organic litter interspersed in upper portion of the sediment column. Highly reduced at depth and similar to Reps A and B but without the amount of debris/detritus at the SWI. Atypical sediment type for the area. No IndetSilt and sand mantled cobble. Numerous pieces of slate with surrounding matric of sand and silt with minor shell fragments. Not a suitable reference for most onsite stations. No IndetTan to light gray shelly, fine sandy silt. Sediment disturbed from Rep A sampling. Very different from Rep A. RPD appears on the order of 3-4 cm in non-disturbed areas of the sediment column. Abundant small shell fragments. No Stage 

Shelly, firm, fine sandy, brown to tan silt. Chaetopterid tubes at SWI and some shell and cobbles. Abundant small shell fragments in upper protion of the sediment colunmn. Similar to rep B but not Rep A. Appropriate reference for some of the sites. No Stage 

Tan to gray, shelly, sandy silt with some cobble and disarticualted shell at SWI. Sediment appears oxidized to depth. Some disruption of SWI from prism. Organic. No Stage Tan to brown, shelly, sandy silt with slaty cobble, trigs and some small shell fragments at SWI. Sediment appears oxidized to depth within the sediment column. Thick mantling of detritus (several mm). Organic. Reasonable reference and similar to rep A. No Stage Tan to brown, shelly, firm, fine sandy silt. Slate fragments, minor wood debris and twigs at SWI. Tube in center background (chaetopterid). Sediment appears oxygenated to depth. Abundant detritus. Similar to reps A and C. No Stage 

Tan, silty, very fine sand. Firm. Bivalve hole at left. Sediment oxidized to depth. Minor small shell fragments at SWI and interspersed in sediment column. Tube in background. Nice pic and most appropriate reference. No Stage 

Tan firm, silty, very fine sand. Sediment appears oxygenated to depth although there are a few clots of reduced sediment near bottom of the frame. Minor small shell fragments. Similar to Rep A. No Stage Very similar to reps A and B. Spiochaetopterus tubes in background. Ref 6 is best reference set for TN. No Stage Firm, dark, fine sand with abundant terrestrial organics at the SWI. Fish vertebrae at SWI in background. No oxidized sediment apparent at the SWI. No IndetDark, hard, organic, silty fine sand. Abundant terrestrial detritus at SWI and some disarticulated shell debris. No RPD. Organically loaded + dark lithic sand. No IndetTan to gray, shelly, silty fine sand. Abundant small shell fragments at SWI and throughout the sediment column. Minor small pieces of terrestrial detritus. RPD well defined. Small pocket of organic sediment at lower right that is likely associated with buried wood/terrestrial organics. No Stage 
Station Name

T150 AT175 AT200 AT25 BT250 AT475 BT50 CTDOCK SW100 ATDOCK SW125 BTDOCK SW150 ATDOCK SW175 BTDOCK SW200 BTDOCK SW225 BTDOCK T25 ATDOCK SW250 BTDOCK SW275 ATDOCK SW300 ATDOCK SW40 ATDOCK SW55 BTDOCK SW70 ATDOCK SW85 A

COMMENT

Bacteria 

Present? SUC.

Large, detritus covers piece of wood and bark overlying slightly sandy black to brown silt. Organically loaded. Recently-settled medusa on wood. RPD and succ. Stg indeterminate. No IndetVery dark, gray mixed fine sand, wood fragment, and shell fragments. No RPD visible. Polychaete tubes in left background. Abundant terrestrial organic matter at SWI. High SOD and organic load. B replicate is composed of a large bark/wood chip. No Stage 

Dark, organic, sandy silt with abundant small and large wood fragments at the SWI and interspersed in the sediment column. There is oxidized sediment but it is discontinuous. Some fine detritus at the SWI. Few small tubes visible. Hogh SOD and organically loaded. No Stage Very hard, terrestrial detritus covered substrate. Detritus in conifer bits and minor shell fragments. Large rock (>7 cm) at right. Very dark and organically loaded. No IndetDetritus mantled, rounded lithic cobbe and disarticulated shells. Very hard. Cobbles are rounded. No IndetUnusual. Shell and organic-rich silty fine sand. Possible void in lower left . Tubes in background. Entire sediment column has oxidized sediment and may be due to physical processes. No Stage Tan to gray, slightly silty, sorted fine sand. Bedform. Fine wood debris at SWI and layer of fine wood debris 0.7 cm below SWI. Active sediment movement and sand has progressed over wood layer (flaser). Very nice example of physical reworking and the physical entrainment of terrestrial organic material into the sediment column, Sediment appears oxidized to depth by physical processes. No Stage Older fish waste overlying coarse sand and fish waste. Starfish grazing at the buffet table. Fish waste is dominantly skeletal remains. No Stage 

Fish waste >P. Fish waste is domiantly skeletal part mixed with silt and coarse sand. No RPD. Organically stressed. Faint Beggiatoa on some of the fish remains. Both reps similar. Yes Azoic Fish waste >P. Dark silts and sand mixed with skeletal remains. Beggiatoa at SWI. No RPD. Organically loaded and stressed. Fish waste does not look "fresh". Yes Azoic Fish waste >P. Scattered sketal remains at SWI. Dusting of oxidized sediment at SWI, RPD is diffusional. Some minor shell and wood at SWI. Surface appears aggregated and hinged at penetration point. Fish waste looks old and washed. Dominantly in the surface veneer. No Stage Fish waste skeletal remains >P. Surface appears washed. Fish waste appears old. No oxidized sediment present. Hard substrate. No Indet

Fish waste >P. Older fish waste and some minor dark wood debris. Mostly skeletal remains. Oxidized sediment present but RPD not measurable. No IndetNo penetration. Compact, silt gravel with minor shell debris and wood fragmants at SWI. Both reps similar. Surface washed free of detritus. No Indet

No penetration but Swi is covered with old skeletal fish waste. Bivalve shell at left. Minor small wood debris. Vertebrae present in rep A. No Indet

Fish waste > Penetration. Fish skeletal part are devoid of fresh flesh and are old. Fish bits layer covers dark gray sandy silt mixed with old skeletal remains. RPD is not measurable although some oxidized sediment is present. Large twig at left of frame. No Indet

No penetration in both reps. Some rocks in distant background, bryozoans in foreground. No IndetMixed very dark sandy silt and fish skeletal remains. Fish bits to depth. No RPD. Highly organic and high SOD. Mostly vertebrae, radial, and scapular bones. No IndetMix of fish skeleton remain and wood fragments over silty fine sand. Some oxidized sediment present but RPD not measurable. Fish waste appears old. Surface appears washed. No IndetMix of mostly wood fragments and minor fish skeleton parts over silty fine sand. Very organic and RPD not measurable even though some oxidized sediment is present. Rep shows no oxidized sediment. Organically enriched. Surface is also washed. No Indet

Dark sand and scattered fish wast at SWI. No penetration. No oxidized sediment visible in foreground. Appears organically loaded. Both reps similar. Yes Indet
APPENDIX B

Sediment Physical Analyses: 

 

Analytical Resources, Inc. 

Laboratory Report 
S Analytical Resources, Incorporated 

AnalytIcal Chemists and Consultants 

20. October 2003 

John Virgin 

Tetra Tech, Inc . 

. 6100 - 219th Street SW Suite 550 

MO,untlake Terrace, WA 98043 

RE: Client Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

ARI Project: FX34 . 

Dear John: 

Please find enclosed the original Chain-of-Custody record (COC) and the final results for 

the samples from the project referenced above. Seven grab samples were received on 

October 7, 2003. The samples were received intact and there were no discrepancies in 

the paperwork. The samples were analyzed for TOC and grain size as requested. 

These analyses proceeded without incident of note. 

A copy of these reports will be kept on file with ARI. Should you have any questions or . 

problems, pl~ase feel free to call me at any time. 

Sincerely, 

ANALYTICAL RESOURCES, INC . 

. 7lo{a(3'~. 

Mark D. Harris 

Project Manager 

206-695-6210 

<mark@arilabs.com> 

Enclosures 

cc: File: FX34 

MDH/esj 

4611 South 134th Place, Suite 100 - Tukwila WA98168 - 206-695-6200- 206-695-6201 fax 

:'!c. 
Chain of Custody Record & Laboratory Analysis Request 

Turn Around Requested: ;jJ:~.~f"I~ QI' d • 

Report to:.Joi) n VI Y. a ,on Proj Name: ADE ( ;KddLlkt. ,..., Analyses Requested 

Company:teLra. ~Gh. Proj Number: 

~ Address: fr. liJ 0 -cJlq-Lh Sampler: I? E.:5 .N 

56,5 WI 66e 5SD ) /) ~aJlJ-t /dke. kr"a~e Jwll v) 

Phone: (<;.)5) 7710 -376 / Shipping Method: UPS ·s \j ~ Fax: ('I:l5)~73- 91/9 AirBiII: 

Sample ID 

Sample 

Date 

Sample 

Time 

Sample 

Matrix 

No 

tainers 

Con· ~ ~ A/f:1-J5D /O/o//a. ~/ltlh / X X 

liG-50LD -:5t??;;75 ~h (].rab I )( X '= .t:)O ~Jb//t~~ 5m), ) )( X' 

JJlXo - 5 - cXOD 'O/;!p; 'G}(}b / X X Alta-~5 v%/lj)~ {}-N;h ~ 

/ Y IX -r~/!JD /.:J/.;Jpj dlV/b I X' X 

If b F #fo l/obk 16Mb / X IX 

Relinquished: /)L Receive~ ,. •. - y? Special Instructions/Notes 

~. 

,co 

(Signature) " (Signature) -,-.-

/ 

Printed name: Printed name: ~ ( 

·Pt~'1 ;::.// i(;.·:t-~· 0-• 

......... f . 1 . . 

Company: Company: 

1'-) .r ~I , '" t I 

Date: Time: Date: 'f"? . _ - Time: 

Ie /"!i-I/(;. 09</!i 

Analytical Resources, Incorporated 

Analytical Chemists and Consultants 

4611 South 134th Place, Suite 100 

Tukwila WA 98168 

206-695-6200 206-695-6201 (fax) 

Notes/Comments 

M 

~ 

~ ~, 

~ 

Number of Coolers: I 

9,. 1;-

Cooler Temp(s): ;;; 

cac Seals Intact? 

Bottles Intact? 

Limits of Liability: Analytical Resources, Inc. (ARI) will perform all requested services in accordance with appropriate methodology follow ARI Standard Operating Procedures and 

Quality Assurance Program. This program meets standards for the industry. The total liability of ARI, its officers, agents, employees, or successors, arising out of or in connection with 

the requested services, shall not exceed the invoiced amount for said services. The acceptance by the client of a proposal for services by ARI releases ARI from any liability in excess 

thereof, not withstanding any provision to the contrary in any contract, purchase order or co·signed agreement between ARI and the client. 

Please sign here if you would like these samples disposed of after expiration of standard archive times (60 days for waters 90 days for soils, sediments per contr.ict). If you do not want 

these samples discarded we will begin charging you for storage after the disposal date. Samples be discarded after expiration: 

;': .. 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: MB-FX34 

METHOD BLANK 

Lab Sample 10: MB-FX34 

LIMS 10: 03-13587 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

QC Report Ne: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: NA 

Date Received: NA 

METHOD BLANK RESULTS 

CONVENT IONALS 

Analysis 

ANALYTICAL._= 

RESOURCES ~} 

INCORPORATED 

Analyte Date Method RL Units Result .. 

". 

Total Solids 10/08/03 EPA 160.3 0.01 mg residue < 0.01 U 

SM 2540 B ... 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 Plumb, 1981 0.020 Percent < 0.020 U 

Soil Method Blank QA Report for FX34 received 10/07/03 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: NQ-150 

SAMPLE 

" , 

1;--

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES - ~"" INCORPORATED 

Lab Sample ID: FX34A 

LIMS ID: 03-13587 

Matrix: Sediment 

QC Report No: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

Total Solids 10/08/03 

100803#1 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/01/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL 

EPA 160.3 0.01 

SM 2540 B 

Plumb,1981 0.020 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 

Units Result 

Percent 66.6 

Percent 1.1 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: AGSOLD-SE375 

SAMPLE 

Lab Sample ID: FX34B 

LIMS ID: 03-13588 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

QC Report Na: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/01/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL Units 

ANALYTICAL .~= RESOURCES ~ 

INCORPORATED 

Result 

Total Solids 10/08/03 EPA 160.3 0.01 Percent 47.7 

100803#1 SM 2540 B 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 Plumb, 1981 0.020 Percent 2.2 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: T-50 

SAMPLE 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES g 

INCORPORATED 

Lab Sample ID: FX34C 

LIMS ID: 03-13589 

Matrix: Sediment 

QC Report No: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

Total Solids 10/08/03 

100803#1 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/01/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL 

EPA 160.3 0.01 

SM. 2540 B 

Plurnb,1981 0.020 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 

Units Result 

Percent 52.0 

Percent 2.3 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: NQO-S-200 

SAMPLE 

Lab Sample 10: FX34D 

LIMS ID: 03-13590 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

QC Report NG: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/01/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL Units 

ANALYTICAL 1& RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

Result 

Total Solids 10/08/03 EPA 160.3 0.01 Percent 56.8 

100803#1 SM 2540 B 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 Plumb, 1981 0.020 Percent 1.4 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: NQ-75 

SAMPLE 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES ~ 

INCORPORATED 

Lab Sample .10: FX34E 

LIMS 10: 03-13591 

Matrix: Sediment 

QC Report No: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Oata Release Authorized: 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

Total Solids 10/08/03 

100803#1 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

Project: AOEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/01/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL 

EPA 160.3 0.01 

SM 2540 B 

Plumb, 1981 0.020 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 

Units Result 

Percent 64.7 

Percent 0.93 

.. !e 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Piige 1 of 1 

Sample ID: T-100 

SAMPLE 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES ~ 

INCORPORATED 

Lab Sample 10: FX34F 

LIMS 10: 03-13592 

Matrix: Sediment 

QC Report NQ: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

Total Solids 10/08/03 

100803#1 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/02/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL 

EPA 160.3 0.01 

SM 2540 B 

Plurnb,1981 0.020 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 

Units Result 

Percent 58.8 

Percent 3.0 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: REF#6 

SAMPLE 

A. NALYTICAL .IWI: 

RESOURCES ~ 

INCORPORATED 

Lab Sample ID: FX34G 

LIMS ID: 03-13593 

Matrix: Sediment 

QC Report NQ: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Data Release Authorized: 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch 

Total Solids 10/08/03 

100803#1 

Total Organic Carbon 10/15/03 

101503#1 

RL Analytical reporting limit 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: 10/02/03 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

Method DF RL 

EPA 160.3 0.01 

SM 2540 B 

Plumb, 1981 0.020 

U Undetected at reported detection limit 

Report for FX34 Received 10/07/03 

Units Result 

Percent 60.0 

Percent 1.3 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS Sample ID: DUP-FX34 

Page 1 of 1 DUPLICATE 

Lab Sample ID: DUP-FX34 

LIMS ID: 03-13587 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analyte 

ARI ID: 03-13587, FX34A 

Total Solids 

Total Organic Carbon 

QC Report NQ: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

DUPLICATE RESULTS 

CONVENT IONALS 

Method Units Sample Replicate 

Client Sample ID: NQ-150 

EPA 160.3 Percent 66.6 70.8 

SM 2540 B 71. 6 

Plumb, 1981 Percent 1.1 1.1 

1.1 

Soil Replicate QA Report Page for FX34 received1D/07/03 

ANALYTICAL Iji\ RESOURCES ~ ,. 

INCORPORATED 

RPD/RSD 

3.9% 

0.0% 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 

Sample ID: MS/MSD-FX34 

MATRIX SPIKE 

Lab Sample ID: MS-FX34 

LIMS ID: 03-13587 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

Analyte 

QC Report NG: FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Received: 10/07/03 

MATRIX SPIKE RESULTS 

CONVENT IONALS 

Method Units Sample Spike 

ARI ID: 03-13587, FX34A Client Sample ID: NQ-150 

Total Organic Carbon Plumb,1981 Percent 1.12 2.65 

ANALYTICAL I&. 

RESOURCES"'" l. . 

INCORPORATED 

MS/ 

MSD REC 

3.78 100% 

Water Matrix Spike QA Report Page for FX34 received-10/07/0s 
INORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SHEET 

Sample ID: SRM-FX34 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS 

Page 1 of 1 STANDARD REFERENCE 

Lab Sample ID: SRM-FX34 

LIMS ID: 03-13587 

Matrix: Sediment 

Data Release Authorized: ~ 

Reported: 10/20/03 

QC Report N~ FX34-Tetra Tech, Inc. 

Project: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Date Sampled: NA 

Date Received: NA 

STANDARD REFERENCE RESULTS 

CONVENT IONALS 

Analysis 

Analyte Date & Batch Method Units SRM 

NIST #8704 

Total Carbon 10/15/03 Plumb,1981 Percent 2.81 

101503#1 

Standard Reference QA Report for FX34 received 10J07/03 

True REC 

3.35 83.9% 

~~: 
Client: Tetra Tech, Inc. ARI Project No.: FX34 

Client Project No.: ADEC, Ketchikan 

Case Narrative 

1. The Samples were received on October 7,2003 and were in good condition. 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

2. The samples were tested according to Puget Sound Estuary Protocol (PSEP) 

methodology for grain size distribution. 

3. A triplicate was run with this batch and is reported in the attached QA summary. 

4. The after moisture content was used on samples AGSOLD-SE375 and T-50. 

5. Samples T-50 and NQ-75 did not contain enough fines in the sample to reach the 

5-gram limit for the pipette portion of the analysis. The balance is limited to 220 

grams for the wet sediment and tare, so it was not possible to increase the 

sample size enough to reach the 5-gram limit. The data looks acceptable, but 

should be carefully evaluated before use. 

6. There were no further anomalies to the samples or testing. 

Approved by:--.!...1l!t.~~~~~C-___ _ 

Title: Geotechnical Divis 
Tetra Tech, Inc. 

ADEC, Ketchikan 

PSEP Total Solids Analysis 

Percent of Wet Weight 

Sample No. Total Solids 

(%) 

FT75A-1 34.9 

FT75A-2 35.0 

FT75A-3 34.9 

NQ-150 66.1 

AGSOLD-SE375 54.1 

T-50 50.0 

NQO-S-200 56.9 

NQ-75 64.8 

T-100 57.3 

REF#6 54.7 

Triplicate Average 34.9 

Standard Deviation 0.06 

%RSD 0.19 

FX34 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

~. 
PROJECT: Tetra Tech. Inc. 

ARI Triplicate Sample ID: FT75A 

Client Triplicate Sample ID: FT75A 

Sample 1D -3 -2 -1 0 

FT75A-1 100.0 100.0 99.8 99.6 

FT75A-2 100.0 100.0 100.0 96.5 

FT75A-3 100.0 100.0 99.9 95.6 

AVE NA 100.00 99.90 97.24 

STDEV NA 0.00 0.05 2.11 

%RSD NA 0.00 0.05 2.17 

ARIID Client ID Date Sampled 

FT75A FT75A-1 N/A 

FT75A FT75A-2 N/A 

FT75A FT75A-3 N/A 

FX34A NQ-150 10/9/03 

FX34B AGSOLD-SE375 10/1/03 

FX34C T-50 10/1103 

FX34D NQO-S-200 10/1/03 

FX34E NQ-75 10/1103 

FX34F T-100 10/2103 

FX34G REF#6 10/2103 _. -- - ----

, REGL Internal QA limits = 95-105% 

Notes to the Testing: 

1. See narrative for discussion of testing. 

QASUMMARY 

Project No.: 

Batch No.: 

Page: 

Relative Standard Deviation. By Phi Size 

1 2 3 4 5 

99.3 95.3 92.5 89.5 84.9 

93.9 91.2 89.5 87.8 83.8 

93.4 90.5 89.2 87.3 83.0 

95.51 92.34 90.41 88.18 83.89 

3.26 2.61 1.82 1.17 0.98 

3.41 2.82 2.01 1.33 1.17 

The Triplicate Applies To The Following Samples 

Date Extracted 

10/10103 

10/10103 

10/10103 

10/9/03 

10/9/03 

10/9/03 

10/9/03 

10/9/03 

10/9/03 

-~--------- 10/9/03 - ... -_. 

ADEC. Ketchikan 

FX34 -01 

1 of 1 

6 7 

65.7 46.6 

63.5 44.3 

62.3 42.9 

63.84 44.58 

1.72 1.83 

2.69 4.11 

Date Complete 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03 

10/16/03__ _, 

.,.: .. , 

8 9 

33.0 23.8 

31.6 22.9 

30.8 21.7 

31.80 22.80 

1.12 1.09 

3.~ L_. 4.8O 

QA' 

97.5 

97.1 

98.4 

100.4 

96.8 

97.8 

100.4 

100.5 

99.9 

100.8 ---

10 

16.2 

15.1 

13.8 

15.06 

1.23 

8.20 

---

FX34 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

, 

'I 
GRAVEL 

... ~n. -

---

10000 1000 

-+-FT75A-1 

;".--,,' 

PSEP Grain Size Distribution 

Triplicate Sample Plot 

SAND 

r---+--~ I-frt ~ 

SILT 

,~ 

~ 

,~ 

~~ ~ ~ 

"~ ~ ~ 

~ 

-

, 

100 10 

Particle Diameter (microns) 

_FT75A-2 ""*- FT7 5A-3 

.;. 

CLAY 

~ ~ 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

100 

90 

80 

70 

- 60 "tJ 

(II 

., 

n 

(II 

50 :l 

-." , s· 

40 (II 

., 

30 

~ 20 

10 

0 

:;~ '';~'~''.~;' '. (. 
Very 

Sample No. Gravel Coarse 

Sand 

Phi Size -3 -2 -1 0 

Sieve Size (microns) 3/8" #4 #10 #18 

(2000) (1000) 

FT75A-1 100.0 100.0 99.8 99.6 

FT75A-2 100.0 100.0 100.0 96.5 

FT75A-3 100.0 100.0 99.9 95.6 

NQ-150 100.0 99.6 98.7 97.7 

AGSOLD-SE375 100.0 76.3 67.5 60.6 

T-50 100.0 99.7 95.2 90.0 

NQO-S-200 100.0 99.9 99.7 98.6 

NQ-75 100.0 99.4 99.0 97.8 

T-100 100.0 99.4 93.9 86.7 

REF#6 100.0 99.7 97.5 93.2 

Notes to the Testing: 

; 11. Apparent grain size distributions according to PSEP protocols. 

Tetra Tech, Inc. 

ADEC, Ketchikan 

Apparent Grain Size Distribution Summary 

Percent Finer Than Indicated Size 

Coarse Medium Very Fine Fine Sand Sand Sand Sand 

1 2 3 4 

#35 #60 #120 #230 

(500) (250) (125) (62) 

99.3 95.3 92.5 89.5 

93.9 91.2 89.5 87.8 

93.4 90.5 89.2 87.3 

93.8 84.0 42.7 7.1 

53.2 43.0 24.9 11.8 

81.5 69.7 30.2 7.0 

95.7 87.6 55.2 17.9 

95.3 87.8 46.0 5.1 

77.7 67.1 29.1 6.9 

85.8 73.0 39.4 16.0 

Silt 

5 6 7 

31.00 15.60 7.80 

84.9 65.7 46.6 

83.8 63.5 44.3 

83.0 62.3 42.9 

4.7 3.9 3.3 

9.1 6.9 5.4 

5.4 4.0 3.3 

11.3 8.7 7.4 

3.1 2.6 2.4 

5.4 4.5 3.8 

12.0 9.4 7.7 

8 

3.90 

33.0 

31.6 

30.8 

2.8 

4.3 

2.9 

6.3 

2.1 

3.1 

6.0 

1.,··r~' ••. 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES '¥ 

INCORPORATED 

Clay 

9 10 

2.00 1.00 

23.8 16.2 

22.9 15.1 

21.7 13.8 

2.3 1.9 

3.5 2.9 

2.8 2.7 

5.0 3.7 

1.9 1.7 

2.4 2.2 

4.4 3.4 

FX34 
Very Coarse Sample No. Gravel Coarse 

Sand Sand 

Phi Size > -1 -1 to 0 o to 1 

Sieve Size (microns) >#10 10 to 18 18-35 

(2000) (2000-1000) (1000-500) 

FT75A-1 0.2 0.2 0.4 

FT75A-2 0.0 3.4 2.6 

FT75A-3 0.1 4.3 2.2 

NQ-150 1.3 1.0 3.8 

AGSOLD-SE375 32.5 6.9 7.4 

T-50 4.8 5.2 8.5 

NQO-S-200 0.3 1.1 2.9 

NQ-75 1.0 1.1 2.5 

T-100 6.1 7.2 8.9 

REF#6 2.5 4.3 7.4 

~---- ------ - ------

Notes to the Testing: 

Tetra Tech, Inc. 

ADEC, Ketchikan 

Apparent Grain Size Distribution Summary 

Percent Retained in Each Size Fraction 

Medium Very Fine Coarse Medium Fine Sand Sand Sand Silt Silt 

1 to 2 2 to 3 3 t04 4 to 5 5 to 6 

35-60 60-120 120-230 62.5-31.0 31.0-15.6 (500-250) (250-125) (125-62) 

3.9 2.8 3.0 4.6 19.2 

2.7 1.6 1.8 4.0 20.3 

2.8 1.4 1.9 4.3 20.6 

9.9 41.3 35.6 2.4 0.7 

10.3 18.1 13.1 2.6 2.2 

11.7 39.5 23.2 1.6 1.3 

8.1 32.4 37.3 6.6 2.6 

7.4 41.8 40.9 2.0 0.5 

10.6 38.0 22.1 1.6 0.9 

12.7 33.6 23.4 4.1 2.6 

--

1. Apparent grain size distributions according to PSEP protocols. 

.",\',C". "',":. , <.. ~ J 

Very Fine Fine Silt Silt 

6 to 7 7 to 8 

15.6-7.8 7.8-3.9 

19.2 13.5 

19.2 12.7 

19.4 12.1 

0.6 0.5 

1.5 1.2 

0.7 0.4 

1.3 1.1 

0.2 0.3 

0.7 0.7 

1.7 1.7 

-

Clay 

8 to 9 9 to 10 

3.9-2.0 2.0-1.0 

9.2 7.6 

8.7 7.8 

9.2 7.9 

0.5 0.4 

0.7 0.6 

0.1 0.1 

1.3 1.3 

0.2 0.1 

0.6 0.2 

1.6 1.0 

" i ',:; '.,:;'; : ~ , 

ANALYTICAL. 

RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

<10 

<1.0 

16.2 

15.1 

1,3.8 

1.9 

2.9 

2.7 

3.7 

1.7 

2.;2 

3.4 

FX34 

'~'. - ':'\' " 
GRAVEL 

\ -r--; ~ r- ~t::: \ 

1\ ....... 1""-

r---

'\. 11· 

~ I'-...... 

--. ~a ........... i'-r---, ...... 

_. 

10000 1000 

-+-NQ-150 

PSEP Grain Size Distribution 

SAND 

~ 

~ 

'" ~\ ~ _\ \~ 

'" ~ ~~ \ \ 

~'" \ \ 1\ 

1\ 

~ ~ \ 

\ 

I",~ ~ 

~ i'- t'1I r-~ 

, - 100 

Particle Diameter (microns) 

_ AGSOLD-SE375 --,!r-- T -50 

SILT CLAY 

-

10 

--*""- NQO-S-200 

ANALYTICAL t& RESOURCES~ 

INCORPORATED 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 "'D 

<D 

.., 

C') 

<D 

50 :::s 

.... , "T1 :i" 

<D 

40 .., 

30 

_._------ 20 

10 

0 
PSEP Grain Size Distribution 

GRAVEL SAND 

--N ~ ~ ~ ~r-- r--. r'\. 

"-, 1I..r-., i"'" ~ \ r-- r'-

r-..... t"'-.. 

, h .... 

~ t\ !\ 

\' \\ \\\ \ 

\\\ 

\'\ -_. \ I'~ ~r-... 

1\ ~ I\~ ......... I..r"--

r't -'" 

r--... ~ 

r--

10000 1000 100 

Particle Diameter (microns) 

-+-NQ-75 _T-100 

-~ 

SILT CLAY 

1-. --c---

- ~ 

10 

-,!r-REF#6 

;.-, ;.;.' 

ANALYTICAL t&g RESOURCES .... 

INCORPORATED 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 "tI 

(!) 

.., 

(") 

(!) 

50 ;a. 

"T1 , :i' 

40 (!) 

.., 

30 

20 

- 10 

0 

' .. .',.,~.l.:~;: .. ,,, .. ~-;,. 
APPENDIX C

Benthic Sorting/Identification Results: 

Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd. 
Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 

Total Polychaeta 1282 942 1524 1347 393 5257 5550 3467 5700 3142 2832 2194 820 2279 

Ampharete acutifrons 2 21 Ampharete finmarchica 4 6 4 10 1 Ampharetidae sp. indet./juv. 2Anobothrus gracilis 1 1Aphelochaeta monilaris 1Apistobranchus tullbergiAricidea lopeziAricidea quadrilobataAricidea ramosaAricidea simplexArmandia brevis 302 313 681 558 104 2503 3000 1712 2641 1726 2097 1574 577 1666 Artacama conifera Asabellides sibirica 4 2 31 Autolytus sp. indet./juv. 1 Barantolla nr. americana Betapista dekkarae Capitella capitata 'hyperspecies 3 3 3 23 2450 2202 1563 2708 1220 546 470 68 460 Capitellidae sp. indet./juv. 14 1 Caulleriella pacifica 31 1 1 Chaetozone nr. setosa 1 Chaetozone sp. 1 (HRJ) 1Chaetozone sp. indet./juv. Chone duneri 1 1 Cirratulidae sp. 1 (HRJ) 1Cirratulidae sp. indet./juv. 21 28 24 34 8 1 1 Cirratulus spectabilis 1 Clymenura gracilis 1Crucigera irregularisDecamastus gracilis 45 42 23 14 27 Diopatra ornata 1 1 Dipolydora caulleryi 3Dipolydora socialis 1 2 Dorvillea pseudorubrovittata 1 2 2 1 2 1 10 2Dorvillea rudolphi 5 9 5 2 32 29 21 45 30 30 38 40 16 Dorvilleidae sp. indet./juv. Drilonereis falcataEhlersia heterochaetaEnipo canadensis Eranno bicirrata 11 1 Eranno lagunae 1Eteone californica 36 19 16 24 4 1 5 3 4 4 2 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 




















































































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Eteone spilotusEuchone arenae 6 1 2 61 1 Euclymeninae sp. indet./juv. 10 3 5 9 13 Eulalia bilineata 31 Eumida longicornuta 12 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 3 2Eunoe nodosaExogone lourei 1 1Exogone sp. indet./juv. 1Flabelligera affinisFlabelligeridae sp. indet./juv. 1 3Galathowenia oculata 28 33 20 26 11 Gattyana cirrosa 3 31 Glycera americana 1 1Glycera nana 7 5 6 71 Glycera sp. indet./juv. 1 2 1 13Glycinde armigera 5 4 5 2 1 4 2 7 26 15 27 15 Glycinde polygnatha 1 3 Glycinde sp. indet./juv. 1 5745 3Goniada maculataHesionidae sp. indet./juv. 1 3 Heteromastus filobranchus 3 42 Idanthyrsus saxicavus 2 Lanassa nordenskioldi 1Lanassa venustaLaonice cirrata 1 2 32 Laonice pugettensis 1 21Leitoscoloplos pugettensis 2 Lepidasthenia longocirrataLevinsenia gracilis 1 Lumbrineridae sp. indet./juv. 73 46 64 45 9 1 1 Lumbrineris californiensis 13 1 13 1Lumbrineris cruzensis 1 Lumbrineris inflataMagelona longicornis 73 38 57 46 15 2 Magelona pitelkai 1Maldanidae sp. indet./juv. 5 7 2 42 Malmgreniella sp. indet./juv. 20 13 6 10 3 1 2 1Manayunkia aestuarinaMediomastus californiensis 38 17 11 21 21 1 1 1 1 Megalomma splendida Melinna elisabethae Mesochaetopterus taylori 1Microphthalmus sczelkowii 1 2 29 19 7 1 6 1 1 3








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Micropodarke dubia 19 7 19 20 4 32 48 18 29 27 13 6 13 9 Montacellina sp. 1 (HRJ) 1 1Mooresamytha bioculata 1123 Myxicola infundibulumNephtys cornuta 72 23 84 64 25 1 2 1Nephtys ferruginea 7 3 4 5 2 1 Nephtys sp. indet./juv. 1 1 Nereidae sp. indet./juv. 1 Nereis procera 2 1 1 Nereis sp. indet./juv. 1Nichomachinae sp. indet./juv. 1 1Nicolea zostericola Notomastus hemipodus 123 4 Notomastus lineatus 1Odontosyllis phosphoreaOnuphis elegansOphelina acuminata Ophelina breviata Ophryotrocha sp. 1 (HRJ) 67 40 32 51 27 4 3 1 11 Orbiniidae sp. indet./juv. 1 1 Owenia fusiformis 1 1 Paleonotus bellis 21 1Paradoneis lyra 1Paraonidae sp. indet./juv.Paraprionospio pinnata 3 1 2 11 Pectinaria californiensis 17 5 9 11 1 Pectinaria granulata 13 3 15 8 1 2 Petaloproctus borealisPettibonia sp. 1 (HRJ) 112 1Pettibonia sp. 2 (HRJ) 1 1 15 10 20 15 2 1 3 Pherusa negligens 112Pholoe minuta 36 30 40 31 5 1 4 2 3 5 1 10 Pholoe sp. indet./juv. 21 1 2Pholoe sp. N-1 (NAMIT) 14 1 Pholoides aspera 2 3 1 12 Phyllochaetopterus prolifica 8 1Phyllodoce groenlandica 11 9 4 6 1 Phyllodoce hartmanae 7 2 1 2 1 103 148 73 162 50 51 55 15 73 Phyllodoce sp. 1 (HRJ) 11 11 10 4 19 12 24 13 32 4 5 8 Phyllodoce sp. 2 (HRJ) 1Phyllodoce sp. indet./juv. 3 4 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 Phyllodocidae sp. 1 (HRJ) Phyllodocidae sp. 3 (HRJ)








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Phyllodocidae sp. indet./juv. 1Pilargis maculata Pionosyllis sp. indet./juv. 2 5 1 1 Pionosyllis sp. 1 (HRJ)Pista bansei 1 1Pista percyiPista wuiPlatynereis bicanaliculata 1 1Podarke pugettensis 5 31 1 4 1 Podarkeopsis perkinsi 8 4 3 1 1 1 1 121 Polycirrus sp. complex 31 26 19 27 8 1 2 1 Polydora limicolaPolynoidae sp. indet./juv. 28 12 33 14 4 1 1 1 1 1 Praxillella affinis 1Praxillella gracilis 1Prionospio lighti 1 4 9 3 2 1 2 1 1 Prionospio multibranchiata 41 1 1Prionospio steenstrupi 142 73 155 124 37 1 3 7 Protodorvillea gracilis 17 7 2 5 2 3 3 1 1 4 6 10 3 Pseudochitinopoma occidentalisPseudopotamilla sp. 1 (HRJ) Rhodine bitorquataRynchospio glutaeusSabellidae sp.4 (HRJ)Sabellidae sp. 6 (HRJ) 1Sabellidae sp. indet./juv. 3 6 11 Salmacina tribranchiataScalibregma inflatum 1 Schizobranchia insignis 1Scolelepis foliosa 1Scoletoma luti 11 20 13 10 20 1 Serpulidae sp. indet./juv.Sphaerodoropsis minutaSphaerodoropsis sphaerulifer 1 1 Sphaerodorum papilliferSphaerosyllis californiensis 211 Sphaerosyllis ranunculus 10 1 19 17 6 4 2 1 2 1 Sphaerosyllis sp. 2 (HRJ) Spio cirrifera 18 15 21 17 4 Spiochaetopterus costarum 7 4 1 32 1 Spionidae sp. indet./juv. 1Spiophanes berkeleyorum 1 2 Spirorbidae sp. indet./juv.








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Sthenalais berkeleyi Syllidae sp. indet. (stolon) 3 1 2 11 Syllidae sp. indet./juv. 3 32 Syllidae sp. 1 (HRJ)Syllis armillarisSyllis elongata 18 14 14 10 9 1 1 2 Syllis harti 22 23 19 42 6 Syllis sp. indet./juv. 19Syllis sp. 1 (HRJ) 3 2Tenonia priops 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 13 Terebellidae sp. indet./juv. 5 3 9 42 Terebellides californica 321 Terebellides stroemi 1Travisia brevisTravisia sp. indet./juv. Trichobranchus glacialis 4413 

Total Mollusca 336 304 329 415 201 20 20 11 8 12 69 44 51 25 

Acila castrensis 3 6 1 2 1 1 Acteocina eximia 6 5 5 24 Adontorhina cycliaAdontorhina sphaericosaAeolidacea sp. indet.Aglaja ocelligera 1 21 1 Alvania compacta 1 1 Amphissa columbiana 1Astarte ellipticaAstarte esquimalti 1Astyris gausapata 6132 1 Axinopsida serricata 50 39 59 67 32 1 1 2 11 16 5 Bivalvia sp. juv. 2 Calyptraea fastigiataCardiomya pectinataChaetoderma sp. indet.Chlamys hastataChlamys rubidaClinocardium californienseClinocardium nuttalli 1425 Clinocardium sp. juv.Compsomyax subdiaphana 2 1 1 5 1 Crepipatella dorsataCryptonatica affinis 1 Cyclocardia ventricosa 4214 








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Cylichna attonsa 1 2Delectopecten vancouverensisDiaphana californicaEnnucula tenuis 1 Epitonium indianorumEuspira pallida 1Flabellina sp. indet.Gastropoda sp. juv. 3 2 1 1 2 Gastropteron pacificum 2 1 1 2 5 11 Hiatella arctica 1Humilaria kennerleyiIschnochitona albusKurtziella plumbea Lacuna vincta 1 Lottia sp. indet. 4Lucinoma annulatum 1 1 Lyonsia californica 111 Macoma carlottensis 2 11 1Macoma elimata 1Macoma golikovi 121 1 Macoma moestaMacoma nasuta 1 11Macoma sp. juv. 3 1 1 11 1 Macoma yoldiformisMargarites pupillusMelanochlamys diomedea 10 2 4 1 3 7 1 1 4 2 4 Modiolus modiolus Mopalia imporcataMopalia phorminx 1Musculus discors 2 1Mya arenaria 6 3 1 73 Mytilidae sp. juv. 11 7 5 7 10 4 2 2 3 1 Nassarius mendicus 1 1 2 4 Neptunea tabulata 1Nuculana minutaNuculana penderi 1 Nuculana sp. juv.Nudibranchia sp. indet. 1Nutricola lordi 1 1 1 Odostomia sp. indet. 2 Oenopota cf. solidaOenopota sp. indet.Oenopota fidicula 1 11 1 4 








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Olivella baetica 7 2 Olivella sp. juv. 1 2 Onchidoris sp. indet.Pandora bilirata 1 Pandora filosaPandora sp. indet. Parvilucina tenuisculpta 170 175 178 276 138 1 1 1 23 19 16 11 Parviplustrum sp. indet. 11 1 1Philine sp. indet.Pododesmus macroschisma 1Protothaca staminea 2Pulsellum salishorum 2223 Puncturella cooperi 1Rochefortia tumida 50 41 26 21 11 1 5 5 2 2 18 6 9 2 Saxidomus gigantea 1 11Solamen columbianum 3 4 1 1 1 1 Solen sicariusTellina modesta Tellina sp. juv.Thracia challisianaThracia trapezoidesThyasira flexuosa 221 Trichotopis cancellata 6 1 Trophonopsis lasiusTurbonilla sp. indet. 112 1 Velutina plicatilisVitreolina columbiana

Total Crusctacea 47 39 45 73 9 33 38 25 14 16 15 5 14 10 

Achelia enchinata 1Acidostoma hancocki Americhelidium rectipalmum 4 41 Ampelisca careyiAmpelisca lobataAmpelisca pugetica Ampelisca sp. indet. Ampelisca unsocalaeAmphipoda sp. juv. Anonyx lilljeborgi 2 1 Aoroides sp. indet. 1 1Argissa hamatipes 2 Bopyridae sp. indet.Byblis millsi 1 5 7 11 2 2 








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Calanoida sp. indet. 2 1 Campylaspis rubromaculataCampylaspis rufaCampylaspis sp. indet.Cancer branneri 344Cancer gracilis 1 7 1 Cancer productusCancer sp. juv. 1Caprella sp. juv.Caprella striataCirripedia sp. indet.Corophiidae sp. indet. 1 Corophium sp. indet. 2Crangon alaskensis 1 Cumella vulgaris 1Cylindroleberididae sp. indet. Decapoda megalopa 1 1Diastylis bidentataDiastylis santamariensisDyopedos sp. indet. 1Eobrolgus chumashi 1Eualus pusiolusEudorella pacifica 1 Eudorellopsis integraEudorellopsis longirostris 1 Euphilomedes producta 2 1 Eusirus longipesFoxiphalus similis 7 13 6 13 5 1 Guernea reduncans 1 1Halacaridae sp. indet. 1Harpacticoida sp. indet. 1 23 25 18 2 11 3Heterophoxus affinis Heterophoxus conlanaeHeterophoxus ellisi 1 1 Heterophoxus sp. indet.Hippolytidae sp. indet. 1Kroyera carinataLamprops sp. indet. 2 1 Leptochelia dubia 2 2 1 Leucon armatusLeucon subnasica 1 1 Limnoria sp. juv.Megamoera sp. indet. 11 1 








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 



AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 













































Metacrangon munitaMetopa sp. indet. Monocorophium sp. indet. 1Munna sp. indet. 1 1 Nebalia ?pugettensis 4 1 8 12 2 2 1 3 1Neotrypaea sp. indet.Nicippe tumidaOpisa tridentata Orchomene decipiens 4 1 6 12Orchomene pacifica 111Oregonia gracilis 1Pachynus ?barnardi 1 Pagurus armatus 1 Pagurus setosusPagurus sp. indet. 1Panoploea sp. indet.Parapleustes pugettensis 5 1 2 1 6 7 5 6 3 8 257 Parathemisto pacifica 1 1Photis sp. indet. 1 1Pinnixa sp. indet 43 1 Protomedeia sp. indet. 13 1 2 Pugettia ?richiiRhachotropis oculata Rocinela bellicepsRutiderma lomaeScoloura phillipsi 12 2Spirontocaris ochotensisTiron biocellataTritella pilimanaUristes sp. indet. Westwoodilla caecula 5 24 Zeuxo normani 1 1

Total Miscellaneous 229 147 185 234 48 1935 2503 1249 2023 2206 285 855 23 8 

Acidiacea sp. Indet. 1Arhynchite pugettensis 1Asteroidea sp. indet.Chelyosoma columbianumGolfingia pugettensisHirudinea sp. indet. 1 1Holothuroidea sp. indet. 3315 Laqueus californianusLeptasterias hexactis












































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 

AGS OLD-SE375 T-50 T-100 















































Nematoda sp. indet. 140 82 137 149 28 1924 2477 1245 2017 2200 266 839 1 1 Nemertinea sp. indet. 44 32 22 44 11 11 25 2 5 6 19 16 19 6 Nynanthaea sp. indet. 3 Oligochaeta sp. indet./juv. 29 24 17 34 7 1 1 Ophiura lutkeni 521 1 Ophiura sp. indet. 3241 Pachycerianthus fimbriatusPhoronida sp. indet. 1 Platyhelminthes (Turbellaria) 323 1 Strongelocentrotus droebockiensisUnknown #1 1Virgularia sp. indet. 

Total Abundance 1894 1432 2083 2069 651 7245 8111 4752 7745 5376 3201 3098 908 2322 








































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab

Total Polychaeta

Ampharete acutifronsAmpharete finmarchicaAmpharetidae sp. indet./juv.Anobothrus gracilisAphelochaeta monilarisApistobranchus tullbergiAricidea lopeziAricidea quadrilobataAricidea ramosaAricidea simplexArmandia brevisArtacama coniferaAsabellides sibiricaAutolytus sp. indet./juv.Barantolla nr. americanaBetapista dekkaraeCapitella capitata 'hyperspeciesCapitellidae sp. indet./juv.Caulleriella pacificaChaetozone nr. setosaChaetozone sp. 1 (HRJ)Chaetozone sp. indet./juv.Chone duneriCirratulidae sp. 1 (HRJ)Cirratulidae sp. indet./juv.Cirratulus spectabilisClymenura gracilisCrucigera irregularisDecamastus gracilisDiopatra ornataDipolydora caulleryiDipolydora socialisDorvillea pseudorubrovittataDorvillea rudolphiDorvilleidae sp. indet./juv.Drilonereis falcataEhlersia heterochaetaEnipo canadensisEranno bicirrataEranno lagunaeEteone californica









               

5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

409 926 959 2922 1939 1153 881 1295 3177 1580 1370 401 4

6 

1 1 2 4

3 2

1 1 2

2 

16 16 45 22 18 31 322 781 2321 997 670 12 

2 1 1 21 4 2 4 6 2 1

1

1 873 882 2837 1897 1101 9 6 37 21 29 

1 2 1

1 31 11 2 

1 

3 1

11 

3 113 4 4 7 3 41 

1 4 624

23 9 10 3 6 11 33 

1 1 1 4 1 31 1 

1 1

1 2 1 3 2 7 35 8 5 3 

1 1

1 

4 2 2 3 8 1 13 2 15 1 

NQ-75 NQ-150 










































































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Eteone spilotusEuchone arenaeEuclymeninae sp. indet./juv.Eulalia bilineataEumida longicornutaEunoe nodosaExogone loureiExogone sp. indet./juv.Flabelligera affinisFlabelligeridae sp. indet./juv.Galathowenia oculataGattyana cirrosaGlycera americanaGlycera nanaGlycera sp. indet./juv.Glycinde armigeraGlycinde polygnathaGlycinde sp. indet./juv.Goniada maculataHesionidae sp. indet./juv.Heteromastus filobranchusIdanthyrsus saxicavusLanassa nordenskioldiLanassa venustaLaonice cirrataLaonice pugettensisLeitoscoloplos pugettensisLepidasthenia longocirrataLevinsenia gracilisLumbrineridae sp. indet./juv.Lumbrineris californiensisLumbrineris cruzensisLumbrineris inflataMagelona longicornisMagelona pitelkaiMaldanidae sp. indet./juv.Malmgreniella sp. indet./juv.Manayunkia aestuarinaMediomastus californiensisMegalomma splendidaMelinna elisabethaeMesochaetopterus tayloriMicrophthalmus sczelkowii

               





5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































1

6 37 23 

1 1 1 

1 14 6 1 

1 1

1

1 12 1 

118 21 17 11 16 29 9 

1 2 1 731 

3 2 2 5 3 8 3

7 

29 13 24 13 22 1 

1 32425 

1 

11 1

11 

2

1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 4

14 1 17 21 17 12 9 6 17 17 23 77 46 24 47 72 61 

1 4 18 5 23 30 2 2 26 1 2 3 4 6 13 10 7 1 7 24 5 8 3 1 2 11 3 

1 11112 

1

7 2 5 2 13 17 20 16 26 9 

1 11
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Micropodarke dubiaMontacellina sp. 1 (HRJ)Mooresamytha bioculataMyxicola infundibulumNephtys cornutaNephtys ferrugineaNephtys sp. indet./juv.Nereidae sp. indet./juv.Nereis proceraNereis sp. indet./juv.Nichomachinae sp. indet./juv.Nicolea zostericolaNotomastus hemipodusNotomastus lineatusOdontosyllis phosphoreaOnuphis elegansOphelina acuminataOphelina breviataOphryotrocha sp. 1 (HRJ)Orbiniidae sp. indet./juv.Owenia fusiformisPaleonotus bellisParadoneis lyraParaonidae sp. indet./juv.Paraprionospio pinnataPectinaria californiensisPectinaria granulataPetaloproctus borealisPettibonia sp. 1 (HRJ)Pettibonia sp. 2 (HRJ)Pherusa negligensPholoe minutaPholoe sp. indet./juv.Pholoe sp. N-1 (NAMIT)Pholoides asperaPhyllochaetopterus prolificaPhyllodoce groenlandicaPhyllodoce hartmanaePhyllodoce sp. 1 (HRJ)Phyllodoce sp. 2 (HRJ)Phyllodoce sp. indet./juv.Phyllodocidae sp. 1 (HRJ)Phyllodocidae sp. 3 (HRJ)

               





5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































1 8 22 33 6 45

1 31 2 1 2 

6

1 12 

14 5 3 7 3 9 6 

1 1 2 41 

1 5 3 2 111

3 11 1 

2 1 

5 2 4 3 7 1

2

1 1

2 

1 16 

34 25 54 11 15 10 4

5 1 1 1 1 1 1 131 

1 1 

1

10 3 1 3

6 6 3 14 12 16 1 

1

1 3 212

2

1 2 1

12 1 21 4 28 13 20 3 

3 5 1 

1 811

3 3 5 259 144 5 4 

242151 3 4 4 17

23 7 62 24 58

27213

1 
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Phyllodocidae sp. indet./juv.Pilargis maculataPionosyllis sp. indet./juv.Pionosyllis sp. 1 (HRJ)Pista banseiPista percyiPista wuiPlatynereis bicanaliculataPodarke pugettensisPodarkeopsis perkinsiPolycirrus sp. complexPolydora limicolaPolynoidae sp. indet./juv.Praxillella affinisPraxillella gracilisPrionospio lightiPrionospio multibranchiataPrionospio steenstrupiProtodorvillea gracilisPseudochitinopoma occidentalisPseudopotamilla sp. 1 (HRJ)Rhodine bitorquataRynchospio glutaeusSabellidae sp.4 (HRJ)Sabellidae sp. 6 (HRJ)Sabellidae sp. indet./juv.Salmacina tribranchiataScalibregma inflatumSchizobranchia insignisScolelepis foliosaScoletoma lutiSerpulidae sp. indet./juv.Sphaerodoropsis minutaSphaerodoropsis sphaeruliferSphaerodorum papilliferSphaerosyllis californiensisSphaerosyllis ranunculusSphaerosyllis sp. 2 (HRJ)Spio cirriferaSpiochaetopterus costarumSpionidae sp. indet./juv.Spiophanes berkeleyorumSpirorbidae sp. indet./juv.

               





5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































4 8 11 1 1 

1

2 

1 

1 1 1

1 

3 21 1 

3 13 25 13 6 11 3 

1 53 

2 1 2 1 4 1 6 32 2 5 7 4 18 

4

8 119 159 30 53 123 6 

13311 1

1 3

1

4 1 2 5 1 1

1

7

5 34141 

1

15 22 2 3 3 5 3 

24 22 11 

3 6 4 3 3 113 9 7 1 5 7 8 6 5 4 2 1 

2 123 
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Sthenalais berkeleyiSyllidae sp. indet. (stolon)Syllidae sp. indet./juv. Syllidae sp. 1 (HRJ)Syllis armillarisSyllis elongataSyllis hartiSyllis sp. indet./juv.Syllis sp. 1 (HRJ)Tenonia priopsTerebellidae sp. indet./juv.Terebellides californicaTerebellides stroemiTravisia brevisTravisia sp. indet./juv.Trichobranchus glacialis

Total Mollusca

Acila castrensisActeocina eximiaAdontorhina cycliaAdontorhina sphaericosaAeolidacea sp. indet.Aglaja ocelligeraAlvania compactaAmphissa columbianaAstarte ellipticaAstarte esquimaltiAstyris gausapataAxinopsida serricataBivalvia sp. juv.Calyptraea fastigiataCardiomya pectinataChaetoderma sp. indet.Chlamys hastataChlamys rubidaClinocardium californienseClinocardium nuttalliClinocardium sp. juv.Compsomyax subdiaphanaCrepipatella dorsataCryptonatica affinisCyclocardia ventricosa





               

5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































3

11 3 

2

1 

6 12 7 2 4 2 

1 5 13 5 3 3 5 

92474 

2 1 3 3 3 13 6

4 2 1 1 13 

442 3 10 11 14 6 1332 637 830 660 800 129 2186 1 1 1 64 30 55 49 85 

12 2 2 4 1 

12 

1 1 7 1 

25423 

6 1 2 46 41 24 4 

11 

13 15 9 15 15 10 67 1 221 46 51 56 81 4 

1 

2 1

1 

12 14 2 15 13 11 

1

6 3 1 1

2 1 2 1 2 
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Cylichna attonsaDelectopecten vancouverensisDiaphana californicaEnnucula tenuisEpitonium indianorumEuspira pallidaFlabellina sp. indet.Gastropoda sp. juv.Gastropteron pacificumHiatella arcticaHumilaria kennerleyiIschnochitona albusKurtziella plumbeaLacuna vinctaLottia sp. indet.Lucinoma annulatumLyonsia californicaMacoma carlottensisMacoma elimataMacoma golikoviMacoma moestaMacoma nasutaMacoma sp. juv.Macoma yoldiformisMargarites pupillusMelanochlamys diomedeaModiolus modiolusMopalia imporcataMopalia phorminxMusculus discorsMya arenariaMytilidae sp. juv.Nassarius mendicusNeptunea tabulataNuculana minutaNuculana penderiNuculana sp. juv.Nudibranchia sp. indet.Nutricola lordiOdostomia sp. indet.Oenopota cf. solidaOenopota sp. indet.Oenopota fidicula

               





5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































1 31 

1

4 1 1

2

1

1 

1 11 1

1 2 1 1 1

3

2 5

1 

2 1 3 1 5 10 112211 

1

1 3 

1

1 1 3 1 3 18 6 9 10 10 

21311 1 4 2 1 2 1

2 2 3 10 13 8 4 1 5 16 1 

1 1

1 

1

28 12 27 20 25 5 

19 8 3 7 3 6 3 

2

1

9 8 11
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Olivella baeticaOlivella sp. juv.Onchidoris sp. indet.Pandora bilirataPandora filosaPandora sp. indet.Parvilucina tenuisculptaParviplustrum sp. indet.Philine sp. indet.Pododesmus macroschismaProtothaca stamineaPulsellum salishorumPuncturella cooperiRochefortia tumidaSaxidomus giganteaSolamen columbianumSolen sicariusTellina modestaTellina sp. juv.Thracia challisianaThracia trapezoidesThyasira flexuosaTrichotopis cancellataTrophonopsis lasiusTurbonilla sp. indet.Velutina plicatilisVitreolina columbiana

Total Crusctacea

Achelia enchinataAcidostoma hancockiAmerichelidium rectipalmumAmpelisca careyiAmpelisca lobataAmpelisca pugeticaAmpelisca sp. indet.Ampelisca unsocalaeAmphipoda sp. juv.Anonyx lilljeborgiAoroides sp. indet.Argissa hamatipesBopyridae sp. indet.Byblis millsi





               

5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































2 6 19 5 4

17 9 1 2 6 

32 

1

12 

79 10 10 11 3 793 403 469 331 384 32 

1 

1

31626

1 1 1 7 

1

8 66 59 72 56 89 5 

95936 

5 1 1 1 1 1 7 

1 1

1 7 24

1 1

1

2 11 5 2 6 1 2 10 

21 

1

1 3 2 1

1 

64 1 1 2 3 24 30 40 33 36 57 

1

5 11 9 4 6 6 2 

1 13

1

1 2 

1

5 1 1 1
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Calanoida sp. indet.Campylaspis rubromaculataCampylaspis rufaCampylaspis sp. indet.Cancer branneriCancer gracilisCancer productusCancer sp. juv.Caprella sp. juv.Caprella striataCirripedia sp. indet.Corophiidae sp. indet.Corophium sp. indet.Crangon alaskensisCumella vulgarisCylindroleberididae sp. indet.Decapoda megalopaDiastylis bidentataDiastylis santamariensisDyopedos sp. indet.Eobrolgus chumashiEualus pusiolusEudorella pacificaEudorellopsis integraEudorellopsis longirostrisEuphilomedes productaEusirus longipesFoxiphalus similisGuernea reduncansHalacaridae sp. indet.Harpacticoida sp. indet.Heterophoxus affinisHeterophoxus conlanaeHeterophoxus ellisiHeterophoxus sp. indet.Hippolytidae sp. indet.Kroyera carinataLamprops sp. indet.Leptochelia dubiaLeucon armatusLeucon subnasicaLimnoria sp. juv.Megamoera sp. indet.

               





5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































4 

1 

1 1 4 12 6 3 1

1

1 3

11 

112

1 1 

1 11

1 

2 2 1 

1 

2 5 1 15 1 6 3 25 

1 1 3 

3 

1 1 2

11 

15 1 3 1 4 

14 

1 12
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab







Metacrangon munitaMetopa sp. indet.Monocorophium sp. indet.Munna sp. indet.Nebalia ?pugettensisNeotrypaea sp. indet.Nicippe tumidaOpisa tridentataOrchomene decipiensOrchomene pacificaOregonia gracilisPachynus ?barnardiPagurus armatusPagurus setosusPagurus sp. indet.Panoploea sp. indet.Parapleustes pugettensisParathemisto pacificaPhotis sp. indet.Pinnixa sp. indetProtomedeia sp. indet.Pugettia ?richiiRhachotropis oculataRocinela bellicepsRutiderma lomaeScoloura phillipsiSpirontocaris ochotensisTiron biocellataTritella pilimanaUristes sp. indet.Westwoodilla caeculaZeuxo normani

Total Miscellaneous

Acidiacea sp. Indet.Arhynchite pugettensisAsteroidea sp. indet.Chelyosoma columbianumGolfingia pugettensisHirudinea sp. indet.Holothuroidea sp. indet.Laqueus californianusLeptasterias hexactis





      

  

       

5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































21 

4 1 721 

21 1 

1

1

2 2

5 1

1

1 11 1

1

1 1 3 27 1 1 2 14 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

1 1 

1 1 1

34 393 901 3730 1698 1551 108 75 140 87 109 37 

2

11 

1 

3 4 2 

1
































Table C-1. Benthic abundance data by grab sample for 2003 Tongass Narrows Benthic Study, Ketchikan, Alaska

Station

Grab



 

Nematoda sp. indet.Nemertinea sp. indet.Nynanthaea sp. indet.Oligochaeta sp. indet./juv.Ophiura lutkeniOphiura sp. indet.Pachycerianthus fimbriatusPhoronida sp. indet.Platyhelminthes (Turbellaria)Strongelocentrotus droebockiensisUnknown #1Virgularia sp. indet.

Total Abundance





      

5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1

NQ-75 NQ-150 











































14 392 895 3726 1696 1546 57 24 73 28 65 6 15 1 5 1 2 1 44 37 48 46 27 18 

4 132

3 8 10 7 9 1 

1 1 3 7 

1 1 2 1 1

1

1 1 1 

11 1

1 

33 1

949 1323 1871 6665 3651 2713 2345 2037 4187 2360 2315 624 7
































Table C-2. Biomass measurements in grams per sample. 



 

Station Grab

 Polychaetes

 Molluscs

 Crustacea

 Miscellaneous

 Comments



AGS OLD SE-375 1

 12.402

 93.899

 0.288

 0.622

 Includes one large clam 



AGS OLD SE-375 

2

 6.341

 15.665

 0.327

 0.279 



 

AGS OLD SE-375 

3

 5.943

 14.577

 0.680

 0.126 



 

AGS OLD SE-375 

4

 6.943

 43.531

 0.646

 

0.050

 Includes one large clam 

 

AGS OLD SE-375 

5

 3.837

 18.499

 0.011

 

0.183

 Includes one large snail 

 

T-50   1

 6.671

 0.072

 0.012

 0.195







T-50  2

 6.822

 0.033

 0.009

 0.294



 

T-50  3

 5.130

 0.008

 0.013

 0.226



 

T-50  4

 9.059

 0.176

 0.023

 0.342



 

T-50  5

 3.736

 0.049

 0.017

 0.228



 

T-100  1  3.159

 1.294

 0.015

 0.144



 

T-100  2

 2.044

 0.853

 0.004

 0.099



 

T-100

3

 1.394

 0.675

 0.098

 0.091





T-100  4

 2.089

 0.301

 0.008

 0.128



 

T-100  5

 0.736

 0.456

 0.013

 0.040



 

NQ0 S-200  1

 2.274

 108.430

 0.620

 0.389



 

NQ0 S-200 

2

 2.610

 116.594

 0.127

 0.128 



 

NQ0 S-200 

3

 4.727

 165.069

 0.190

 0.202 



 

NQ0 S-200 

4

 4.707

 146.606

 0.346

 0.191 



 

NQ0 S-200 

5

 3.198

 121.143

 0.230

 0.044 



 

NQ-75 

1

 1.304

 0.023

 0.001

 0.048 



 

NQ-75 

2

 2.050

 2.529

 0.013

 0.124 



 

NQ-75   3

 19.690

 3.519

 0.004

 0.425







NQ-75  4

 8.203

 2.950

 0.000

 0.206



 

NQ-75  5

 4.981

 0.489

 0.008

 0.166



 

NQ-150  1  6.453

 70.428

 0.172

 0.278



 

NQ-150  2

 6.467

 60.847

 0.416

 0.850



 

NQ-150  3

 13.234

 66.707

 1.688

 0.984



 

NQ-150

4

 7.384

 52.146

 5.056

 0.860

 Includes one large crab 



NQ-150  5

 5.021

 91.717

 0.282

 1.286



 

REF-6  1

 1.695

 3.864

 0.263

 1.328



 

REF-6 

2

 1.456

 6.992

 0.072

 0.329 



 

REF-6 

3

 10.119

 14.147

 2.082

 0.973 



 

REF-6 

4

 4.507

 3.939

 1.730

 

0.871

 Includes 2 large crab leg

 

REF-6 

5

 1.565

 3.873

 0.067

 0.012