Technical Data Report

Transcription

1 Technical Data Report Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project Marine Fish Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Prepared for: Prepared by: Hemmera Suite Burrard Street Vancouver, B.C., V6E 2H3 Archipelago Marine Research Ltd. 525 Head Street Victoria, B.C. V9A 5S1 Canada Telephone: amr@archipelago.ca Internet:

2 Technical Report/Technical Data Report Disclaimer The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency determined the scope of the proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project (RBT2 or the Project) and the scope of the assessment in the Final Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines (EISG) issued January 7, The scope of the Project includes the project components and physical activities to be considered in the environmental assessment. The scope of the assessment includes the factors to be considered and the scope of those factors. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared in accordance with the scope of the Project and the scope of the assessment specified in the EISG. For each component of the natural or human environment considered in the EIS, the geographic scope of the assessment depends on the extent of potential effects. At the time supporting technical studies were initiated in 2011, with the objective of ensuring adequate information would be available to inform the environmental assessment of the Project, neither the scope of the Project nor the scope of the assessment had been determined. Therefore, the scope of supporting studies may include physical activities that are not included in the scope of the Project as determined by the Agency. Similarly, the scope of supporting studies may also include spatial areas that are not expected to be affected by the Project. This out-of-scope information is included in the Technical Report (TR)/Technical Data Report (TDR) for each study, but may not be considered in the assessment of potential effects of the Project unless relevant for understanding the context of those effects or to assessing potential cumulative effects.

3 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Executive Summary The Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project (RBT2 or Project) is a proposed new threeberth marine terminal at Roberts Bank in Delta, B.C. that could provide 2.4 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent unit containers) of additional container capacity annually. The Project is part of Port Metro Vancouver s Container Capacity Improvement Program, a long-term strategy to deliver projects to meet anticipated growth in demand for container capacity to Ten artificial reefs (rip-rap) were constructed between 1994 and 2009 off the southwest side of the Roberts Bank terminals. Previous reef fish surveys have identified the presence of several fish species, including copper rockfish (Sebastes caurinus), quillback rockfish (Sebastes maliger), lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus), and kelp greenling (Hexagrammos decagrammus). Quillback rockfish are listed as a Threatened species by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2009), and Strait of Georgia lingcod populations have been depressed for several decades (Surry and King 2007). The proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 (RBT2) Project may directly or indirectly affect fish use of the artificial reefs adjacent to the existing terminal. The purpose of the Reef Fish Survey is to assess seasonal fish presence and key biota (algal and invertebrate species) on the artificial reefs. The abundance and diversity of fish, invertebrates, and algae were documented on eight artificial reefs at Roberts Bank by seasonal dive surveys (i.e., summer, fall, winter and spring) between July 2012 and May 2013 using visual dive survey transects. Additionally, lingcod egg mass dive surveys were conducted in February 2013 on seven reefs and one area of the rip-rap Westshore Terminals south face. Seasonal and spatial trends are discussed and compared with information collected from past surveys on the reefs, as well as with information from other studies in the broader study region. Reef fish density on the newer, deeper reefs was significantly higher than that on the shallowest (oldest) reefs when all species were combined, and also for species tested individually (copper rockfish, lingcod, kelp greenling). Copper rockfish and lingcod densities were higher in the present study than those reported in other studies in comparable seasons and habitats, while kelp greenling densities were lower. The number of fish on the two deepest reefs (ER7 and ER7B) was equal to approximately half of all fish observed in every season, despite the fact that the two reefs comprised only 25% of the total area surveyed. In contrast, surveys in 2010 and 2011 (Balanced Environmental 2011) found more fish, and a higher species richness, on the shallow reefs compared with the deeper reefs. The change in the relative abundance of fish between shallow and deep reefs may be an indication that the newer, deeper, reefs are reaching a stable fish community composition. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 1

4 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 The highest species richness was recorded in summer (S = 11 species) compared with all other seasons. Copper rockfish were the most common and abundant fish in summer and fall when data from all sites were combined. Copper rockfish were found at seven sites in summer and eight in fall, in densities of up to 12.4/100 m 2 (July). These findings are consistent with surveys on other artificial reefs in British Columbia. Lingcod density increased in winter and spring when they moved onto the reefs for spawning, and during those seasons they were the most abundant species when data from all sites were combined. All reefs surveyed were used as spawning habitat by lingcod, with deeper reefs supporting greater densities of guarding males and egg masses. Average egg mass density was 2.3/100 m 2 and average lingcod density was 1.6/100 m 2. Count per unit effort (CPUE), defined as the number observed per hour, was also calculated for egg masses and lingcod; average CPUE for each were 14.2 and 10.6 respectively. Average lingcod and egg mass density, as well as CPUE, on the artificial reefs and rip-rap at Roberts Bank are higher than what has been documented elsewhere in the Strait of Georgia, possibly because the artificial reefs are composed entirely of ideal spawning habitat, whereas surveys elsewhere covered a range of habitat qualities. The artificial reefs, especially the deeper ones, are heavily used by lingcod for spawning. More than half the spawning on the reefs was by lingcod females five years or older, as indicated by their watermelon-sized egg masses. As lingcod often return to the same nesting sites year after year, the reefs will continue to be used as spawning habitat. Any future development activities affecting the reefs could affect spawning activity and reef productivity. A total of 47 invertebrate species were recorded on the reefs over the four seasons. Species richness (number of species) was highest in the fall (n = 34), followed by winter (n =29), summer (n =25), and spring (n =13). Twenty-eight species of algae were recorded on the reefs and total algal cover ranged from 10% to 100%. Cover was highest during the summer when red algae and kelp dominated, and generally higher on the two shallowest reefs (RR1 and RR2). Page 2 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

5 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Project Background Reef Fish Survey Overview Review of Available Literature and Data Methods Study Area and Survey Locations Temporal Scope Study Methods Reef Fish Survey Lingcod Egg Mass Survey Data Analysis Reef Fish Survey Lingcod Egg Mass Survey Results Study Results Reef Fish Survey Lingcod Egg Mass Survey Incidental Observations Discussion Discussion of Key Findings Data Gaps and Limitations Closure References Statement of Limitations Appendix A Photographs...55 Appendix B Supplementary figures ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 3

6 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 List of Tables Table 1. Reef Fish Survey Components and Major Objectives Table 2. Depth relative to chart datum (m), survey length (reef width) (m), survey area (m2), and visibility (m) for each reef on summer, fall, winter, and spring Reef Fish Surveys. For reef fish comparison purposes RR1 and RR2 were considered shallow reefs; ER1, ER3, ER5, ER5B intermediary; and ER7 and ER7B deeper reefs Table 3. Number of fish, by species, observed on each reef fish transect in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys (black-eye gobies and sculpins were recorded within 1 meter either side of the transect line rather than 3 meters) Table 4. Density (#/100 m2) of dominant fish species on each reef in summer, fall, winter and spring surveys. Average density over all reefs is shown in far column for each species and season. 38 Table 5. Invertebrate relative abundance recorded on transects in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys. (P = present, C = common, A = abundant). Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect Table 6. Percent cover (%) of all algal species recorded on each reef fish transect by season. Cover estimates were made from 2 meter swaths along each transect. Understory algae includes all species except canopy forming bull kelp Table 7. LEM transect information including width (m), length (m), survey area (m2), maximum depth (m), visibility (m), diameter of rip-rap in vicinity of egg masses averaged for each transect (m), number of egg masses and lingcod (guarding and non-guarding) encountered Table 8. Lingcod and egg mass count, density (#/100 m2) and CPUE on each transect. CPUE were calculated as number recorded x 60)/dive time (Vancouver Aquarium 2012) Table 9. Percent cover (%) of algal species observed from video footage of LEM surveys on 8 transects Table 10. Invertebrate relative abundance (P = present, C = common, A = abundant) observed from video footage of LEM surveys on 8 transects. Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect Page 4 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

7 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 List of Figures Figure 1. Survey locations on artificial reefs. A: Reef fish dive survey locations on Reference Reefs (RR1, RR2) and Expansion Reefs (ER1, ER3, ER5, ER5B. ER7, ER7B). B: LEM dive survey locations on the reference reefs (Transect 1, 3), expansion reefs (Transect 4, 5, 6, 7A, 7B), as well as the rip-rap area of the terminal (Transect 2) Figure 2. Density of all non-cryptic fish (excludes gobies and small sculpins) at each reef and an additional bar showing the density averaged from all sites Figure 3. Density of each fish species observed on transects in each season. Small schooling fish observed on summer surveys are not included Figure 4. Seasonal densities of reef fish species observed on transects Figure 5. Seasonal frequency of occurrence, or the number of transects where each fish species was observed Figure 6. Fish species richness (number of species) observed at each reef by season. Final column shows total species richness (all reefs combined) Figure 7. Total percent cover by algae type (canopy brown, understory red, understory brown, understory green) on each reef fish transect by season. Cover estimates were made from 2 meter swaths along the survey transect Figure 8. Egg mass and lingcod density (guarding and non-guarding) (#/100 m2) by transect during the LEM survey Figure 9. Count per unit effort (CPUE) LEMs, and lingcod (guarding and non-guarding). CPUE is calculated as the number of egg masses or fish encountered per hour of roving dive survey Figure 10. Proportion of LEMs by size class per transect during the LEM survey. Size classes were watermelon, cantaloupe, and grapefruit. Total number (n) of egg masses observed along each transect is noted Figure 11. Total percent cover by algal type (canopy brown, understory red, brown and green) for the LEM survey estimated from video footage of the entire surveyed area ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 5

8 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Introduction This section provides project background information and an overview of the Reef Fish Surveys. 1.1 Project Background The Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project (RBT2 or Project) is a proposed new threeberth marine terminal at Roberts Bank in Delta, B.C. that could provide 2.4 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent unit containers) of additional container capacity annually. The Project is part of Port Metro Vancouver s Container Capacity Improvement Program, a long-term strategy to deliver projects to meet anticipated growth in demand for container capacity to Port Metro Vancouver (through Hemmera) has retained Archipelago Marine Research Ltd. to undertake marine fish and fish habitat studies to inform a future effects assessment for the Project. This technical data report describes the results of the reef fish and lingcod egg mass (LEM) surveys. 1.2 Reef Fish Survey Overview A review of available information was completed for the Reef Fish Survey to identify key data gaps within the general RBT2 area. This technical data report describes the study findings for key components identified from this gap analysis. Study components, major objectives, and a brief overview are provided in Table 1. RBT2 Project activities may directly and/or indirectly affect the use of artificial reefs by fish species such as rockfish (Sebastes spp.), kelp greenling (Hexagrammos decagrammus), and lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus). The purpose of the Reef Fish Survey was firstly to document reef fish presence and abundance and any seasonal changes on the artificial reefs and make quantitative comparisons. A second objective of the study was to document fish habitat characteristics which may be affected by activities associated with the proposed RBT2 project. This study also aimed to confirm the use of the shallower artificial reefs as suitable spawning habitat for lingcod, and to determine whether previously un-surveyed reefs (particularly the deeper ones) at the site were also used as spawning habitat by lingcod. Page 6 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

9 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 1. Reef Fish Survey Components and Major Objectives. Component Major Objective Brief Overview Reef fish surveys LEM surveys 1. Document seasonal reef fish presence, abundance, and species richness on artificial reefs. 2. Document seasonal fish habitat characteristics including key biota (algal and invertebrates) on artificial reefs. 3. Quantitatively compare density of major reef fish species between seasons and reefs. 1. Confirm use of shallow reefs as spawning habitat for lingcod. 2. Determine if previously un-surveyed reefs are also used as spawning habitat by lingcod. 3. Quantitatively compare productivity indicators (density and CPUE) among reefs, with results from previous surveys at the study site, and with the larger study area (Strait of Georgia). Visual transect dive surveys were conducted on eight subtidal artificial reefs off the Westshore Terminals south face in four seasons (summer 2012, fall 2012, winter 2012/2013, and spring 2013) to document algae, invertebrate and fish presence, abundance, diversity, and richness. Data (fish density and species richness) were compared between reefs and seasons. Results were compared with past surveys in the study area wherever possible given different methodologies. LEM surveys were conducted using roaming diver searches on seven artificial reefs and one area of rip-rap on the Westshore Terminals south face in February and March Lingcod and egg mass densities and count per unit effort (CPUE) were calculated and compared with past surveys on the RBT2 reefs, as well as other surveys in the Strait of Georgia. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 7

10 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Review of Available Literature and Data Temperate reefs are home to many species of fish and invertebrates. Species of rockfish, greenlings and perch are conspicuous members of shallow rocky reef fish communities in British Columbia (Lamb and Edgell 2010). Rockfish species include copper rockfish (Sebastes caurinus), quillback rockfish (S. maliger), black rockfish (S.melanops), and yellowtail rockfish (S. flavidus) (Love et al. 2002, Patten 1973). Many temperate reef rockfish have experienced population declines in the Strait of Georgia and surrounding areas in the past several decades (Marliave and Challenger 2009). The abundance of the quillback rockfish (S. maliger) has declined by over 75% in the Strait of Georgia (Yamanaka et al. 2004). It is currently listed as Threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2009). The decline of rockfish populations has largely been attributed to overfishing; however, oceanographic conditions and species reproductive strategies have also lessened their ability to recover (Moser et al. 2000). In an effort to reverse the population decline of inshore rockfish species, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) closed 8% of the coastline in B.C. to many forms of fishing in 2004 (Yamanaka and Logan 2010). The network of closed areas (Rockfish Conservation Areas (RCAs)) was expanded in 2007 to include 164 closed areas representing 20% of outside, and 30% of inside rockfish habitat 1. RCA sites were chosen using consensus-based decision making involving government and all stakeholders, and a spatial model to estimate available rockfish habitat (Ardron and Wallace 2005, Yamanaka and Logan 2010). Since their establishment, few studies have been published to evaluate their success; however, a recent Master s thesis compared the density of rockfish inside and outside RCAs and found higher densities inside protected areas compared to ecologically similar areas outside (Cloutier 2011). Other studies evaluating RCA success are currently ongoing, or in press. Rocky reefs are also important habitat for lingcod (King 2001, Lamb and Edgell 2010). Adult lingcod migrate into suitable nearshore spawning habitats in the late fall in preparation for spawning (Cass et al. 1990). Males often return to the same nest site year after year (King and Withler 2005), and preferentially choose nest sites with high tidal currents or wave action to improve egg mass ventilation (Giorgi and Congleton 1984). Females lay their eggs at these sites between mid- December and mid-march, leaving the males to guard the masses until hatching occurs six to seven weeks later (Jewell 1968). Volunteer dive surveys of LEMs in Howe Sound and the Strait of Georgia have been underway for 20 years using a standardised protocol (Vancouver Aquarium 2013). The summarised results are available on the Vancouver Aquarium website. LEM and population surveys have 1 Inside and outside defined by DFO as within the Strait of Georgia, and within B.C. exclusive of the Strait of Georgia, respectively (Yamanaka & Logan 2010). Page 8 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

11 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 also been conducted by DFO using both SCUBA and trawling (Haggarty and King 2007, King 2001, King and Beaith 2001, McPhie and King 2011, Surry and King 2007, Surry et al. 2007). Years of declining lingcod biomass through the 1970 s and 80 s prompted DFO to close the Strait of Georgia to commercial lingcod fishing in 1990, and restrict recreational fishing in In 2002, all sport fishing was banned in the Strait of Georgia (Logan et al. 2005). Lingcod biomass in the vicinity of the study area is the most depleted of all regions in the Strait, and was recently estimated to be less than 1% of its historic biomass (Logan et al. 2005). Both lingcod and rockfish are considered top predators and mesopredators, and have the potential to influence the abundance and distribution of smaller reef inhabitants that form their diet (Frid and Marliave 2010). The population decline of these species could therefore impact the structure of marine reef communities. While reduced fishing can help fish populations recover at a large scale, increasing habitat availability through the construction of artificial reefs has been undertaken to increase reef fish populations at a local scale (Seaman 2000). Algae and fish colonise new reefs rapidly, and in some cases, reach an equilibrium community structure within a year (Gascon and Miller 1981). A review paper by Bohnsock and Sutherland (1985) revealed that most studies on artificial reefs show an increase in fish abundance, biomass, and diversity in an area once an artificial reef is established. In most cases, artificial reefs contained greater fish density and biomass than natural reefs, with a similar community structure. Factors such as reef complexity, size, oceanographic conditions and position in the surrounding habitat seem to influence fish density and biomass on artificial reefs. In British Columbia, lingcod, copper rockfish and kelp greenlings (Hexagrammos decagrammus) commonly colonise artificial rocky reefs at 5 to 10 m depths (Naito 2001). From 1994 to 2009, ten artificial reefs were established off the southwest side of the Roberts Bank terminals. The first reefs (n = 2 reference reefs (RR; Figure 1 A), established 1994 and 2001) were constructed to improve biodiversity and productive capacity in the area by providing habitat for invertebrates and fish, and attachment points for algae. Eight additional reefs were created as habitat compensation for expansions at Deltaport terminal from 2007 to The objectives for the expansion reefs (ER; Figure 1 A) were the same as for the reference reefs, with an additional objective of providing suitable interstitial spaces for lingcod nesting. The reefs and surrounding areas have been surveyed numerous times, for varying purposes in the past 20 years. Lingcod and rockfish have been documented in the rip-rap along both the southern and eastern edges of the Roberts Bank terminals. Prior to the construction of the artificial reefs, dive surveys were conducted in late November 1992 along the terminal rip-rap and sand substrate (to 18 m depth) off the southwest corner of the Roberts Bank ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 9

12 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 terminals to document habitat features and fish use related to a proposed grain dock and berth construction (Golder 1996). Dive surveys were also conducted in March 1992 along the northeast rip-rap bank of the container facility to document and map marine habitat and fish use related to the proposed container dock facility. Both studies provide some information on the fish communities in the area in the early 90s and included estimates of lingcod as well as other reef fish densities. In 2004 and 2008, LEM surveys were conducted along the rip-rap face and two shallow reference reefs (Triton 2004, Archipelago 2009) (survey locations shown in Appendix B: Figure B-1 and 2). LEMs, adult lingcod, and two species of rockfishes were documented on the reefs or the riprap embankment of the terminal during these studies. In 2009 and 2010, all the artificial reefs at Roberts Bank terminals were monitored for the first time to assess the fish, invertebrate and algal communities 2 (Balanced Environmental 2011) as part of the Deltaport Third Berth (DP3) Habitat Compensation Plan. These surveys showed that the oldest reference reefs contained a complex macro-algal community, and abundant and diverse fish communities (Balanced Environmental 2011). At that time, the newly constructed expansion reefs had been colonised by algae, invertebrates and fish, but the communities were believed to be in the primary stages of colonisation and succession. As part of the habitat assessment related to the DP3 development at Roberts Bank, and previous RBT2 baseline studies, LEM surveys were conducted in February 2004 and 2008 along the seaward edge of Westshore Terminals and on the existing artificial reefs (Triton 2004, Archipelago 2009). In 2004, the median egg mass density was 0.2/100 m 2, with lingcod densities ranging from 0.8 to 1.2/100 m 2. Egg mass and lingcod density recorded in the 2008 survey were very similar. Egg mass density ranged from 0.25/100 m 2 on the rip-rap embankment to 0.83/100 m 2 at site 5 (Appendix B: Figure B-2). Lingcod density ranged from 0/100 m 2 to 1.08/100 m 2 at the same sites. Average densities of egg masses and lingcod for all sites surveyed in 2008 were 0.49 egg masses/100 m 2 and 0.44 lingcod/100 m 2 respectively. These are higher than those reported on other natural reefs in the Strait of Georgia. For instance, DFO has conducted LEM surveys at Snake Island reef near Nanaimo since 1990, and has an extensive set of data for the reef that can be used as a comparison to this study. In 2006, average densities from 16 survey locations at Snake Island were reported as 0.2 nests/100 m 2 and 0.3 lingcod/100 m 2 (Haggarty and King 2007) which is lower than the average densities observed at Roberts Bank in 2004 and However, in 2010 and 2011 densities at Snake Island were similar to the 2004 and 2008 densities seen at Roberts Bank (2010: 0.25 egg masses/100 m 2 and 2 In 2009 and 2010 the following reefs were surveyed: RR1, RR2, ER1, ER2, ER3, ER5, ER5B, ER7, ER7B and the existing substrate between reefs. Page 10 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

13 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December lingcod/100 m 2 ; 2011: 0.3 egg masses/100 m 2 and 0.62 lingcod/100 m 2 ) (McPhie and King 2011). Unpublished count per unit effort (CPUE) data (number egg masses sighted per hour) from LEM surveys conducted by the Vancouver Aquarium from 1994 to 2004 inside and outside Howe Sound were 1.77 (1999) to 6.5 (2000) (mean = 4.58), and 1.94 (1998) to 7.55 (2003) (mean 4.43) respectively (reported in Triton 2004). CPUE in February 2004 at Roberts Bank ranged from 0 to (mean = 7.86) (Triton 2004) which is, on average, higher than anywhere in the Strait of Georgia. In February 2008, CPUE ranged from 1.5 to 7.8 (mean = 5.2); also at the high end of that reported in the surrounding areas (Archipelago 2009). ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 11

14 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Methods Descriptions of the spatial and temporal scopes of the Reef Fish Surveys, plus study methods are provided below. 3.1 Study Area and Survey Locations The Reef Fish Survey was conducted using transect lines on eight of ten subtidal artificial reefs located off the south face of the Roberts Bank terminals (Figure 1A). Survey locations were selected to include the range of habitats and depths encompassed by the reefs, and to overlap with locations from previous reef surveys where possible. Surveys were conducted on the following artificial reference reefs (RR) 3 and expansion reefs (ER) (depths shown are approximate and relative to the seabed): Reference reef 1 (2 m); Reference reef 2 (2 m); Expansion reef 1 (3 m); Expansion reef 3 (3 m); Expansion reef 5 (5 m); Expansion reef 5B (5 m); Expansion reef 7 (7 m); and Expansion reef 7B (7 m). The LEM survey was conducted on seven reefs and one area along the rip-rap on the Westshore Terminals south face (Transect 2; Figure 1B). Each location was named by transect number rather than reef name to avoid confusion between the reef fish and LEM survey. Transect locations were chosen to coincide with previous LEM survey locations (Archipelago 2009; Appendix B: Figure B-2) to confirm the use of the shallow reefs (RR1, RR2) as spawning habitat for lingcod, or to provide information on a previously un-surveyed reef with potential spawning habitat (Transect 7B). The LEM Survey was conducted on transects outlined below (depths shown are approximate and relative to the seabed): Transect 1 (2 m); Transect 2 (1 m); Transect 3 (2 m); Transect 4 (3 m); Transect 5 (3 m); Transect 6 (5 m); Transect 7A (7 m); and Transect 7B (7 m). 3 Reference reefs 1 and 2 were constructed in 1994/2001; Expansion reefs 1 to 7b were constructed 2007 to Note, the term reference is not meant to denote a control, or otherwise. It is a name that was given the reefs in earlier studies, and has been retained for consistency. Page 12 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

15 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December Temporal Scope Reef fish surveys were conducted over four seasons (summer, fall, winter and spring) on the following dates: July 24 to 26, 2012; November 27 and 28, 2012; March 7 and 8, 2013; and May 2, The LEM survey was conducted on February 19 and 20 and March 6 and 7, 2013 to be comparable with other LEM surveys and known lingcod spawning times in the area (McPhie and King 2011, Vancouver Aquarium 2012,). All surveys were conducted during daylight hours around the window of slack tide to minimise current experienced by the divers. As visibility on the reefs can be an issue, particularly during freshet, a minimum distance required for observing fish was established: surveys were only conducted if the visibility was three meters or greater. 3.3 Study Methods Reef Fish Survey Reef fish surveys were conducted by experienced marine biologists familiar with British Columbian marine flora and fauna, and competent at underwater videography. Methodology was similar to past reef fish surveys in the area to ensure comparability between studies (Balanced Environmental 2011). To assess fish presence and abundance, SCUBA divers conducted visual surveys along transect lines running perpendicular to the reef, and documented the abundance or percent cover of all fish, invertebrate, and algae species encountered. Each transect was laid at a point that bisected the approximate mid-point of the reef; or near sites previously surveyed. Detailed information collected for each transect included the following: Date, start and end time of each transect, and GPS coordinates of transect start and end points; Water depth (gauge depth) at base and crest of each reef surveyed; Fish counts by species, and size estimate for rockfish (adult versus juvenile); Invertebrate relative abundance and algal cover (%); Video imagery of the surveyed area; Visibility estimate or measurement; and Transect length. On the first pass of the reef, a metered transect was laid out by the lead diver as the survey was conducted. Laying the transect while surveying reduced disturbance to more mobile fish compared with laying it in advance of the survey. Surveys began at the offshore edge of the reef, at the reef-soft substrate interface, and terminated at the same interface on the near shore side of each reef. All fish visible to the diver within three meters on either side of the transect ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 13

16 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 were counted and recorded by species. Smaller, more cryptic benthic fish (e.g., sculpins, eelpouts) within one meter on either side of the transect were counted and recorded by species. On a second pass of the reef, abundance of other biota (invertebrates and algae) encountered within a two meter swath along the transect was recorded to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Algae were estimated by percent cover averaged over the transect. The relative abundance of invertebrates were recorded as present (P), common (C), and abundant (A) based on the following criteria: Present: 1 to 10 individuals, or up to 10% cover Common: 11 to25 individuals, 11 to 25% cover Abundant: More than 25 individuals, or more than 25% cover A second diver collected video imagery of the fish habitat and associated fish, along each transect, using a video camera in an waterproof housing. The diver recorded video while swimming slowly along the transect line approximately 1 meter off the bottom behind the lead diver. For each survey, the start and end points of the transect were marked with surface floats, and their locations were recorded using an onboard GPS unit. Data from the field sheets were transcribed into Excel workbooks and then analysed. Video data were saved to DVD and used to check species identification, percent cover, etc. during data analysis. The methods outlined above include three modifications that were made to the original proposed methodology. These include: To fully capture the true composition of each reef, transects were not a set length, but rather spanned the total cross sectional distance of each reef. The total length of each transect was recorded; In order to minimise disturbance to the fish on the reef, the transect line was set by diver rather than from the boat as originally proposed. The new methodology called for the lead diver to run a transect line simultaneously while surveying the reef; As a result of the reefs being narrower than anticipated, timing allowed for additional reefs to be surveyed (ER5B & ER7B; Figure 1A). The intent of adding the two sites was to include at least two sites per depth range (i.e., two sites each at 2 m, 3 m, 5 m and 7 m CD depth): and Due to decreased visibility in the summer 2012 reef survey, a transect tape was used to measure visibility more accurately at each reef on subsequent surveys. Page 14 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

17 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Incidental observations were considered to be any information that was recorded in addition to what was planned for in the study design. These observations were not presented in the results, graphs or figures, but were used wherever possible to clarify details or trends, and to provide insight into conditions that might have affected the data which were recorded Lingcod Egg Mass Survey The methods employed in this study adhere to the standard LEM survey protocol to annually monitor LEM density elsewhere in Howe Sound and the Strait of Georgia (Vancouver Aquarium 2013), and are comparable to methods used in past surveys at the study area (Archipelago 2009). The protocol involves a timed roving diver search for lingcod and egg masses, and collection of detailed information related to each egg mass found. This survey was conducted by experienced marine biologists familiar with British Columbian marine flora and fauna, competent at underwater videography, and practiced at fish size estimation. To begin a survey, the start and end points of the survey area were marked with surface floats and recorded using an onboard GPS unit. Divers then descended at one end of the survey area and began roving by swimming perpendicular to the reef starting from the offshore side of the reef, moving over the top to the near shore side of the reef, and turning around to continue back across the reef. This was continued in an S-shape along the length of the reef until the end marker buoy was reached. All egg masses visible to the diver during the survey were recorded along with details of the egg mass condition, guarding male, and the surrounding area (see below for specific attributes recorded). All lingcod encountered (whether guarding or not) were counted. During the survey, a second diver collected video imagery of the entire surveyed area, including fish and all LEMs, using a video camera in an waterproof housing. After the area was surveyed, divers used a tape measure to determine the width of the survey area at three well-spaced locations representative of the survey area. These measurements were averaged to determine the survey area width. Detailed information collected for each transect included the following: Date, start and end time of each transect, and GPS coordinates of transect start and end points; Survey area width at three points along transect; Details of variables associated with each egg mass including: Depth of egg mass (diver gauge depth); Size (descriptive; small = approximate size of a grapefruit, medium = approximate size of a cantaloupe, large = approximate size of a watermelon); Condition (new, eyed, hatched or rotten); Situation (secure in crevice, loose, out in open); ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 15

18 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Number of nest guarding males, and estimated fish length (cm); Estimated diameter (m) of rip-rap in the vicinity of egg mass; Video imagery of surveyed area and LEMs encountered; and Visibility estimate or measurement. Data from the field sheets were transcribed into Excel workbooks and analysed therein. Underwater video imagery recorded on mini-dv tapes were reviewed by an experienced biologist. Estimated percent cover for algal species (averaged over the survey area) was generated for each reef from this video. Additionally, invertebrate species and their relative abundance were determined from the video. Abundance was classified as present, common or abundant as per the reef fish methodology. One modification was made to the original design (similar to the reef fish survey): due to decreased visibility in the summer 2012 reef survey, a transect tape was used to measure visibility more accurately at each reef on the LEM survey. As with the reef fish survey, incidental observations were considered to be any data or information that was recorded in addition to what was planned in the study design. These observations were not presented in the results, graphs or figures, but were used wherever possible to clarify details or trends and to provide insight into conditions that might have affected the data which was recorded. 3.4 Data Analysis The following measures were employed to ensure all data were collected, stored and processed in a consistent and rigorous manner: Pre-field meeting with all team members to review survey protocol and data collection methodologies; All data were recorded on pre-designed underwater data sheets to minimise omissions and errors; Daily transcription of geo-referenced site location data, and plotting to check for errors; Daily review of hard copy field sheet information by field crew lead; Post-field debrief with discipline lead to review data prior to entry from hard copy field sheet to electronic format; Quality check of the entered data; and Back-up of data and imagery to a server at the Archipelago head office, and transfer of mini-dv tapes to DVD upon return from the field Reef Fish Survey Reef fish abundance (i.e., number of individual fish observed) was summarised by species and season. Fish species richness (i.e., total number of species observed) at each reef was also calculated and graphed by reef for each season. Page 16 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

19 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Because total survey area differed between reefs, fish abundance was standardised by area to allow for more meaningful comparisons. The total fish density (of all non-cryptic fishes) on each reef was calculated by dividing the species count by the survey area (m 2 ), and compared among seasons and reefs using a one-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) or Kruskal-Wallis test in the program SigmaPlot 12.5 (SigmaPlot). A general linear model (GLM) was used to compare species richness among reefs and seasons using the statistical program R (R Core Team 2013). Data were checked for normality and equal variance prior to conducting statistical analyses, and non-parametric tests were used where assumptions of normality and equal variance were not met. The density of the three dominant fish species (copper rockfish, kelp greenling and lingcod) was compared between reefs in three depth zones using a Kruskal- Wallis test on ranks. For the purpose of these tests, the reefs were categorised by depth as shallow (RR1, RR2), mid-depth (ER1, ER3, ER5, ER5B), and deep (ER7, ER7B). Algae species were categorised into four groups (canopy brown, understory red, understory brown, and understory green), and the percent cover of each was graphically compared by reef and season. The relative abundance of each invertebrate species encountered on the reefs was summarised in a table for comparison between reefs and by season. Depth of reef at crest and base recorded by divers was corrected for tide using Nobeltec-Tides and Currents (a tide and current predication software). Data were presented in table format Lingcod Egg Mass Survey Lingcod and egg mass CPUE were calculated to determine an index of abundance by multiplying the number encountered by 60, and dividing by the total dive time (Vancouver Aquarium 2012) to generate an encounter rate per hour. The number of LEMs and lingcod sighted were also used to calculate density for the surveyed area. Egg mass density was calculated as: # egg masses area surveyed (m 2 ) X 100 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 17

20 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 and lingcod density as: # guarding + non-guarding lingcod area surveyed (m 2 ) X 100 (Haggarty and King 2007). CPUE and density for both lingcod and egg masses were compared graphically between transects. Differences in density and CPUE between transects at varying depths were tested with an ANOVA using the statistical package SigmaPlot. For the purpose of these tests, the transects were categorised as shallow (Transect 1, 2, 3), mid-depth (Transect 4, 5, 6), and deep (Transect 7A, 7B) (Figure 1B). The relative abundance of each LEM size category was also compared graphically between transects. Video footage from each survey was reviewed, and abundance data for invertebrates (relative) and algae (percent cover) were extracted. Algae species were categorised into 4 groups (canopy brown, understory red, understory brown, and understory green), and the percent cover of each was graphically compared by reef. The relative abundance of each invertebrate species seen in the video footage was summarised in a table for comparison between reefs. Page 18 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

21 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December Results This section presents the results of the reef fish and LEM survey. 4.1 Study Results Reef Fish Survey Overall, underwater visibility was best outside of the summer survey. Visibility ranged from 1 to 3 m (summer), 3.5 to 5 m (fall), and 3 to 5 m (winter/spring) (Table 2). Visibility was only below the preferred limit of three meters on one transect (RR1) in summer, and did not seem to adversely affect fish counts (similar number of fish seen at RR2 where visibility was 3 m); therefore, data were included in summaries. The range of draped widths (length up and over reef crest) measured between 9.3 and 20.8 m on all reefs, except RR2 which was consistently wider than the others (21 to 28 m) (Table 2). Total surveyed area in each season ranged from 675 m 2 to 808 m 2. The artificial reefs at Roberts Bank are situated at a variety of depths. RR1 and RR2 are the shallowest reefs with measured reef crest depths (m CD) ranging from (+) 0.1 to 0.6 m, while ER7 and ER7B are the deepest (crest depths ranged from 3.8 to 4.3 m). The depths at the crests of the remaining four reefs (ER1, ER2, ER3, ER5 and ER5B) are intermediary ranging from 1.2 to 2.3 m (Table 2). Table 3 summarises the fish species recorded on the reefs in each season. Eleven unique, non-schooling, species were recorded throughout the year. The total number of fish observed in each season ranged from 27 in the winter to 68 in the summer (a 250% increase in the number of fish with only a 15% difference in surveyed area) (Table 3). Kelp greenlings, lingcod, and copper rockfish were observed in every season, while striped perch (Embiotica lateralis) and quillback rockfish were only observed in fall and winter. Schooling fish, such as sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus), were seen during the summer survey only; as their abundance could not be accurately estimated, they were not included in total fish counts. Photos of schooling fish and commonly encountered demersal (the water column near to the seabed) species can be found in Appendix A: Figures A-1 and A-2. Although rockfish size (adult versus juvenile) was recorded on surveys, only adults were encountered, thus all data presented in this section are for adult-sized fish. Most species were seen over a variety of depths; however, perches (shiner and striped) were only found on the shallowest reefs (where crest depth was 1.5 m or less), and sculpins were only found on reefs with a reef base deeper than 3 m (Table 3). On a reef by reef basis, total fish abundance was highest on the two deepest reefs in every season; the number of fish on reef ER7 and ER7B combined was approximately half of all fish encountered (57%, 48%, 57% and 48% in the summer, fall, winter, and spring respectively) despite the fact that the ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 19

22 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 two reefs comprised only 25% of the total area surveyed (Table 3). When abundance is converted to density (excluding cryptic species) and compared statistically, significant differences between reefs were found (Kruskal-Wallis: df = 7, p = 0.004); fish density on ER7 was significantly higher than RR1 and RR2 (Figure 2). When cryptic fishes are included, even more differences between reefs prove significant: ER7 had a higher density than all other reefs except ER7B, and ER7B had higher density than the two shallowest reefs (RR1, RR2) (ANOVA: df = 7, p = <0.0001). Fish density also varied between seasons; total fish density was highest in the fall survey (5.73/100m 2 ) and lowest in the winter (3.27/100m 2 ) (Figure 2). When fish density on the reefs was compared statistically between seasons, however, no significant differences were found (Kruskal-Wallis: df = 3, p = 0.263) (this was the case when cryptic fishes were included also). When density data are considered by species, copper rockfish had the highest density on the summer and fall surveys with a maximum density of 0.031/100m 2 in July, while lingcod were the most dense in the winter and spring with densities of and 0.016/100m 2 respectively (Figure 3) 4. In every season, the maximum density of most species occurred on reef ER7 or ER7B (exceptions were less common species such as dogfish, flatfish, quillback rockfish, and perches) (Figure 4). For the dominant reef species, maximum densities (#/100 m 2 ) were as follows: copper rockfish density was 12.4 on ER7 in the summer, kelp greenling density only ranged as high as 4.1 (fall), and the maximum lingcod density was 5.4 (winter). A second rockfish species, the quillback rockfish, occurred at a very low density; they were only recorded twice at a maximum density of 1.37/100 m 2 in the winter. Dominant reef species were either absent, or at lower densities, on the two shallowest reefs (Figure 4). When this trend was tested statistically, these species were shown to have significantly higher densities on the deepest reefs compared with the shallowest (lingcod: df = 2, p < 0.001; copper rockfish: df = 2, p < 0.001; kelp greenling: df = 2, p < 0.001). For copper rockfish, the density on the deepest reefs was also significantly higher than on the intermediary ones. In terms of number of observations by reef, copper rockfish were the most common species in the summer (seven reefs) and fall (eight reefs) (Figure 5). Lingcod were the most commonly observed species in the winter and spring, occurring on five and seven reefs respectively. When species richness is compared graphically by reef and season, richness appears to increase with depth. This trend was most pronounced in winter, less pronounced in summer and fall, and did not hold true in spring when many shallow reefs (ER1, ER3, ER5) had species richness equal to the deepest reef 4 lingcod data are broken into two categories on winter graph (LI (lingcod) and LIEG (lingcod with egg mass)) Page 20 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

23 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 (Figure 6). The highest species richness calculated on a reef was seven, which was recorded on reef ER5B in summer, and ER7B in winter. On fall reef fish surveys species richness was highest (S = 6) on ER5B and ER7B. In the spring, species richness was not greater than three on any reef. The species richness on all reefs combined was highest in summer (S = 11) and lowest in spring (S = 5). However, when these trends were tested in a GLM neither season, nor reef, proved to be a significant factor in determining species richness (season: df = 3, p = ; Reef: df = 7, p = ). A total of 47 invertebrate species were recorded on the reefs over the four seasons. Species richness was highest in the fall (n = 34), followed by winter (n = 29), summer (n = 25), and spring (n = 13) (Table 5). Much of this richness can be attributed to sea stars, as at least six species were found in every season. Of the 47 invertebrate species, nine (19%) were sea stars, and seven (15%) were crabs. Sunflower stars (Pycnopodia helianthoides) were the most commonly encountered invertebrate and were observed on seven or eight reefs in each season. Barnacles and hydroids were equally common in some seasons. Species that were classified as common or abundant often included: plumose anemones (Metridium sp.), hydroids, encrusting bryozoans, dogwinkles (Nucella sp.), sunflower stars (P. helianthoides), hermit crabs (Pagurus sp.), and barnacles (Balanus sp.). On a reef by reef basis, more species were found on the two deepest reefs compared with the two shallowest, and a greater proportion of the species encountered on those reefs were common or abundant. Less common invertebrate species, seen infrequently over the year, were the sunstar (Solaster sp.), transparent tunicate (Corella sp.), dorid nudibranch species (Ancanthodoris sp), sea lemon (Peltodoris nobilis), and leather star (Dermasterias imbricata). In terms of relative abundance, the majority of invertebrate species were found in low numbers. Twenty-eight unique algae species were observed on the reefs over the four seasons (Table 6). Understory red algae were the dominant algal group observed on all reefs, and in all seasons, with the exception of brown algae that dominated on some reefs in summer (Figure 7). The dominance of red algae was most pronounced on the shallowest reefs (RR1 and RR2) where they covered 70 to 80% of the substrate in every season (Appendix A: Figure A-3). In contrast, red algal cover on the deepest reefs was never more than 30%, and ranged as low as 5% in spring on ER7B. Species included in the understory red group are: Turkish towel (Chondracanthus exasperates), iridescent seaweed (Mazzaella sp), red ribbon seaweed (Palmaria sp.), Red eyelet seaweed (Sparlingia pertusa), and sea lace (Microcladia borealis). In the summer, understory and canopy brown kelps were abundant on most reefs (up to 45% and 50% respectively), but their predominance declined in the fall. By winter, almost all canopy kelps were gone; however, up to 20% cover of understory browns still remained on some reefs. By spring, canopy browns started to appear again counting up to 10% cover on ER1. Understory brown percent cover also increased in the spring ranging from 10 to ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 21

24 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December % on the shallower reefs. Species that were included in the understory kelp group are: sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima), wireweed (Sargassum muticum), five-ribbed kelp (Costaria costata), and acid kelp (Desmarestia sp.). The canopy kelp group comprised only one species: bull kelp (Nereocystis leutkeana). Lastly, understory green algae (such as Ulva sp.) were present on 3 to 4 reefs every season up to a maximum cover of 5%. Total percent cover of all understory algal groups (green, red, brown) on a reef was as low as 15% and as high as 100%. The total percent cover of understory algae on the two shallowest reefs (RR1, RR2) was generally the highest (greater than 80% in every season), although other reefs approached this total cover in the spring and summer Lingcod Egg Mass Survey Table 7 summarises the abiotic characteristics of each transect. The width of the surveyed area on each transect ranged from 6.5 to 20 m, while transect length was 100 m for all except 7A and 7B which were both only 52 m long. The total area surveyed differed greatly between transects with a minimum of 572 m 2 on Transect 7B and a maximum of 2,000 m 2 on Transect 3. The maximum depth reached on each survey also varied. Transect 2 was the shallowest surveyed at 0.7 m below CD, and Transect 7A was the deepest at 7.0 m. Visibility ranged from 3 to 5 m. A total of 130 egg masses were counted on eight transects. Fifty (38%) of these egg masses were found on the two deepest reefs, while only nine were found on Transect 1 to3 combined, which were the shallowest transects. Egg mass density ranged from 0.13/100 m 2 on Transect 2, to 5.02/100 m 2 on Transect 7A (Table 8; Figure 8) for an average of 2.3/100 m 2. The differences in density between transects in three depth categories were significant: more egg masses were found on the deep and intermediate transects, compared with the shallow ones (Transect 1, 2, 3) (df = 2, p = 0.003). Lingcod density also varied between transects. It was lowest on Transect 2 (0.13/100 m 2 ), and highest on Transect 7B (2.97/100 m 2 ) for an average of 1.6/100 m 2. Significant differences were found in lingcod density between the deep and intermediate transects compared with the shallow ones (df = 3, p = 0.002). Lingcod and egg mass CPUE (# sighted/hour) were also calculated and showed similar patterns to density; however, the differences were only significant for lingcod CPUE (df = 3, p = 0.017). CPUE for lingcod ranged from 2.6 on Transect 2 to 14.8 on Transect 7B (Table 8, Figure 9). CPUE for egg masses ranged from 2.6 on Transect 2 to 30 on Transect 7A (Table 8, Figure 9). Average CPUE for egg masses and lingcod over all transects were 14.2 and 10.6 respectively. Size of LEMs were highly variable. Watermelon-sized egg masses made up 65% of all egg masses recorded and were encountered on every transect, while cantaloupe-sized egg masses made up 29% and grapefruit-sized egg masses only Page 22 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

25 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December % (Figure 10). LEMs were seen in various developmental stages from new to eyed (i.e., embryo developed to the degree that eyes are visible through the egg membrane) to hatched (Appendix A: Figure A-4 and A-5), however, at the time of the survey (February and March 2013) almost half of all egg masses were new. Predation on an egg mass by a red rock crab (Cancer productus) was observed on Transect 4 (Appendix A: Figure A-6). Seventy-six percent of egg masses counted on this survey were guarded by at least one male (Appendix A: Table A-7 and A- 8), while 34% (n = 45) were unguarded. The average size of guarding males was estimated to be 60 cm and ranged from 45 to 85 cm. Most of the egg masses encountered were found secure in crevices (n = 94), however 12 were found loose in a crevice and 23 were loose in the open. Of those that were found in the open, only five were unguarded. Eighteen algae species were observed in the video footage of the LEM survey area. Most of the species encountered on the transects covered less than 5% of total survey area each; however, some red algal species covered up to 25% (Table 9). Understory reds were the most commonly encountered, followed by understory browns (Figure 11). Three red algae species occurred at all eight survey locations: Turkish towel (C. exasperates), red ribbon (Palmaria sp.), and filamentous red algae. One brown kelp (S. latissima), also occurred at all eight survey locations. A total of 42 invertebrate species were observed from video footage of the LEM survey (Table 10). The most common species included acorn barnacles which were observed on all eight transects, followed by sunflower stars on seven of the transects. 4.2 Incidental Observations During all transects, observations were made regarding what part of the reefs individual algal species were most dense or absent. These notes were particularly useful for determining the overall percent cover of each algal group on the transect. Visibility along each transect was also noted to estimate overall visibility for the transect. Information about where visibility was poor also helped to determine where, and how often, fish density was potentially underestimated. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 23

26 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Discussion This section provides a discussion of the key findings of the reef fish and LEM surveys. 5.1 Discussion of Key Findings Both spatial and temporal trends in fish were observed on the reef fish surveys. Fish were found at higher densities in summer and fall months compared to winter and spring. Although these temporal trends did not prove statistically significant, the trend is consistent with fish surveys of other temperate reefs. For instance, in 1978 to 79, Gascon and Miller (1981) surveyed fish communities on artificial reefs in Barkley Sound, British Columbia and found that the number of fish almost doubled in summer and fall compared to winter. The summer increase was most apparent for rockfish, greenlings and perch. In the present study, the increase in fish in warmer months was mainly due to an influx of copper rockfish. This increase in summer months could be due to a migration of the copper rockfish onto the shallow reefs from surrounding habitats, but may also be a function of their microhabitat choices; in winter months many rockfish species move deeper into crevices and are harder to detect (Love et al. 2002). Differences in fish density were observed between reefs, with deeper reefs having both more fish, and more species (although differences in species richness were not significant). The density of fish on the two deepest reefs (ER7 and ER7B) was significantly higher than that found on shallower reefs in this study. In contrast, in 2010 and 2011 Balanced Environmental (2011) found more fish, and a higher species richness, on the reference reefs (shallow) compared with the expansion reefs (deeper). This difference can probably be attributed to the fact that in the year they conducted the survey, the expansion reefs were newly constructed and yet to attain an equilibrium community structure. This is supported by the fact that Balanced Environmental found an increase in fish and algal abundance on the expansion reefs from 2009 to 2010, suggesting that the reefs were being actively colonised at the time of the surveys, and were not yet in equilibrium. The present study began in summer 2012, three years after the last reef was constructed, which is a time frame that other artificial reef fish communities have reached maximum size and equilibrium (Bohnsack and Sutherland 1985). Thus, the community structure observed during the present study is likely stable and fully developed. Copper rockfish, lingcod, kelp greenlings and sculpins were the most commonly recorded fish species on the reefs throughout the 2012 and 2013 surveys. The predominance of these species is consistent with past survey results (Archipelago 2009, Balanced Environmental 2011), as well as those reported on other artificial reefs at similar depths (Naito 2001). Copper rockfish were the most densely populated fish on many reefs throughout this study. Their density range of 0 to 5.42/100 m 2 in winter is higher than that recorded in 2010 and 2011 surveys on natural reefs at Snake Island in the Strait of Georgia in similar habitats and season (0 to 0.80 and 0 to 0.32 respectively) (McPhie and King Page 24 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

27 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December ). In contrast, kelp greenling density in the winter survey of this study was lower than that found at Snake Island. In the current study, their winter density ranged from 0 to 1.62/100 m 2, while at Snake Island kelp greenling density ranged from 0 to 2.2/100 m 2 in 2010 and 0 to 1.9/100 m 2 in Other reef fish surveys in the Strait of Georgia included quillback rockfish as a commonly sighted species (McPhie and King 2011, Haggarty and King 2007), while in the present study, only three were sighted over 32 transects. The mean winter density of quillback rockfish (/100 m 2 ) over all reefs was 0.39, compared with 0.69 and 0.65 at Snake Island in 2010 and 2011 respectively (McPhie and King 2011). The reefs in this survey were predominantly shallow compared with the average survey depth of other studies, which could explain the lower density of quillbacks observed as they prefer slightly deeper water than copper rockfish (Love et al. 2002). A total of 47 invertebrate species were recorded on the reef fish surveys, which is higher than Balanced Environmental (2011) found on the same reefs (n = 39). However, their survey was only conducted in the fall of two consecutive years, whereas in this study, the reefs were surveyed four times in one year, once per season. The higher number of species observed during this survey is likely an effect of more surveys cumulating a larger species list over a range of seasons. Interestingly, invertebrate species richness in the present study was consistently high in all seasons except spring. No explanation for this was found; however, fish species richness was also lowest in spring compared to other seasons. Spatial and temporal trends were also seen for algal communities in this study. As would be expected given the annual life history of many canopy and understory kelps, the percent coverage of kelp was highest in the summer, and very low in winter. Seasonal differences in cover were not apparent for the understory red or green algal groups; however, red algae differed in cover between depths. Percent cover was higher on RR1 and RR2, compared to deeper reefs, in all seasons. Many understory red algal species have a perennial life history; are slower to recruit to new habitats; and are considered climax species by some (Sousa 1979). Therefore, their density on the deeper reefs may increase over time as succession takes place on these reefs. In 2009 and 2010, Balanced Environmental found a higher abundance of algae on the shallower reefs also, although they did not indicate which species accounted for this difference. Many other studies of artificial reefs have reported recruitment of red algae species within one to two years, however comparisons of algal communities between reef depths were limited, owing to the fact that most reef surveys are focused on fish communities (Naito 2001). LEM densities were variable between transects, but highest on the deepest reefs. This trend is consistent with 2008 survey results from Sites 1 to 5 (Archipelago 2009; see Appendix B: Figure B-2). In fact, Transect 2 (Site 3 from Archipelago (2009)) had the lowest egg mass and lingcod density in both the ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 25

28 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 current study and in 2008 (Archipelago 2009). Direct comparisons of density relative to depth could not be made between Roberts Bank data and other studies in the Strait of Georgia, because the overall depth range of the sites was shallower than that surveyed in other studies (McPhie and King (2011) (present study surveyed depths of 0.1 to 6.9 m CD compared to m in comparable studies). While trends in density between depths were similar to past surveys on Roberts Bank, the actual densities were not. LEM density in the current study ranged from 0.13/100 m 2 (Transect 2) to 5.02/100 m 2 (Transect 7A (mean = 1.38/100 m 2 ). In 2008, LEM densities ranged from 0.33/100 m 2 at Site 1 (Transect 1 in current study) to 0.83/100 m 2 at Site 5 (Transect 3 in current study). The overall average was 0.49/100 m 2 which is much lower than the results of this study. The density of lingcod recorded on the artificial reefs was also higher in the present study than in In 2008, the highest lingcod density was 1.08/100 m 2 at Site 5 (Transect 3 in current study), compared with 2.97/100 m 2 (Transect 7B) in These differences in density are not necessarily an indication of a trend, as survey locations differed between study years. In 2008, the deeper reefs had not been constructed and the LEM survey was limited to the equivalent of Transect 1 to 3 in the current study, where 2013 densities were the lowest. However, from the results of this study, it would appear that the new reefs have increased habitat availability for lingcod spawning. All density estimates for lingcod and egg masses were higher at Roberts Bank than in the larger study region (i.e., Strait of Georgia). For instance, in 2006, mean egg mass density at Snake Island Reef in the Strait of Georgia was estimated at only 0.2 nests/100 m 2 (Haggarty and King 2007) and in 2011, it was 0.3/100 m 2 (McPhie and King 2011) compared with 2.3/100 m 2 at Roberts Bank in Lingcod density was estimated to be 0.3/100 m 2 at Snake Island in 2006 (Haggarty and King 2007) and 0.62/100 m 2 in 2011 (McPhie and King 2011), compared to 1.6/100 m 2 in the present study. Finally, CPUE from LEM surveys conducted by the Vancouver Aquarium from 1995 to 2012 in the Strait of Georgia (excluding Howe Sound data) ranged from 1.9 to 7.6, and was 4.5 in 2004 and 2.8 in 2008 (Vancouver Aquarium 2012); lower than estimates in this study. The higher density of both lingcod and egg masses seen in this study could be an indication of an increase in lingcod biomass in the Strait of Georgia. Lingcod stocks have been depressed for several decades, but all fishing has been banned in the area for ten years, and stocks may be responding to the fishing closures. Lingcod stocks in the Strait of Georgia have not been assessed since 2001, so it is possible that there has been an undetected increase in the population. However, other explanations for the higher densities at the study site should be considered. For instance, the artificial reefs at Roberts Bank consist entirely of ideal spawning habitat: they are <10 m deep, with rock crevices for egg deposition, and are adjacent to open spaces to facilitate nest guarding (King and Page 26 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

29 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Beaith 2001). The other survey sites used as comparisons (e.g., Snake Island, a natural reef near Nanaimo that has been surveyed extensively by DFO since 1990) encompass a variety of substrates, including those less than ideal for spawning, which may explain their lower egg mass densities. Secondly, the artificial reefs at RBT2 could be considered an oasis, as most of the habitat surrounding the coal terminal is sand with minimal structure. The rocky reefs are likely the only available spawning habitat over a considerable distance, which could draw in a greater density of spawning adults. Finally, the statistical sample size (# of transects) in this study is considerably smaller than those used as a comparison, thus the higher densities seen here could be an artifact of the study design. During past reef fish surveys at Roberts Bank, 65% of egg masses reported were watermelon-sized (Archipelago 2009), consistent with results reported by Vancouver Aquarium (2012) (61%). Size of egg mass relates approximately to female spawner age as follows: watermelon-sized egg masses are typically from 5+ year olds, cantaloupe-sized from 4 year olds, and grapefruit-sized are from 3 year olds. The predominance of large egg masses in this and other surveys suggests that there are many older fish in the lingcod population which is promising for the recovery of the stock. Lingcod in the Strait of Georgia lay eggs in nesting sites between mid December and mid March (Jewell 1968). In this study, the LEM survey occurred from mid- February to early March to coincide with the end of this reproductive window, which is consistent with the timing of other LEM studies and makes it possible to compare results with those in the literature. However, reef fish abundance, algal species diversity, and cover were highest in the summer survey, indicating that summer may be the best time for overall reef fish surveys. It should be noted, however, that a summer survey will not capture the peak abundance of lingcod. The data from this and past surveys suggest that lingcod are consistently using the rip-rap structures and artificial reef sites for nesting at Roberts Bank. The shallow reefs contain suitable habitat for lingcod spawning as consistent numbers of nests were found in the present study compared with past ones. The previously un-surveyed, deeper, reefs are certainly suitable spawning habitat, and seem to be preferred by lingcod, as indicated by the greater density of egg masses found there. As lingcod often return to the same nesting sites year after year, the reefs will likely continue to be used as spawning habitat. Future activities that could affect the reefs will also potentially affect spawning activity and associated reef productivity. In summary, the artificial reefs at RBT2 have been colonised by a diversity of fish, invertebrates, and algae. The species abundance and diversity seen are comparable to typical rocky reefs in the Strait of Georgia. The faunal community seems to have reached a stable community composition and abundance given the similarities seen in species richness and abundance in the present study, ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 27

30 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 compared with a 2010 survey of the same reefs (Balanced Environmental 2011). There are seasonal changes in fish abundance, algal cover and species composition, and possibly invertebrate diversity. The habitat characteristics of the reef (such as depth, substrate type, gap sizes, etc.) appear to be suitable for the attachment of invertebrates and algae, and for sheltering fish given the abundance and diversity recorded in this study. This is especially so at the deeper reefs which had significantly higher fish densities than the shallowest ones. Page 28 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

31 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December Data Gaps and Limitations There are several limitations to the interpretation of results in this study, primarily those inherent in visual survey methodologies used to assess fish abundance. Sale and Douglas (1981) found that visual census techniques will never completely sample the fish present at a site, although they can reasonably estimate reef fish abundance for species that are not cryptic or schooling in high densities. Given this, abundance of small sculpins and gobies (family Gobiidae) using the artificial reefs at Roberts Bank were likely underestimated. However, for the conspicuous members of the reef fish community such as large greenlings, rockfish and perch, abundance estimates presented here were likely representative. A second limitation to the visual survey methodology was encountered during the summer when the minimum visibility (3 m) established in the methodology was not always met. Visibility in all other seasons was consistently greater than 3 m and therefore, unlikely a limiting factor in estimates of fish abundance or LEM surveys. Due to rockfish preferences for hiding deep in crevices, their abundance may have been underestimated during winter surveys. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 29

32 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Closure Major authors and reviewers of this technical data report are listed below, along with their signatures. Report prepared by: Archipelago Marine Research Ltd. Sharon Jeffery, M.Sc. Marine Biologist Report senior review by: Archipelago Marine Research Ltd. Pam Thuringer, M.Sc. R.P.Bio Director - Marine Environmental Service Division Report peer reviewed by: Hemmera Envirochem Inc. Romney McPhie, M.Sc. Biologist Page 30 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

33 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December References Archipelago Marine Research (Archipelago) Section 11. Lingcod egg mass survey. In Hemmera Envirochem (ed.) T2 Environmental Baseline Monitoring Report. Final Report. Prepared for Vancouver Port Authority. Ardron, J. A., and S. Wallace Modelling inshore rockfish habitat in British Columbia: a pilot study. Pages in D. Wright and A. Scholtz, editors. Place matters: geospatial tools for marine science. University of Oregon Press, Eugene, Oregon. Balanced Environmental subtidal reefs: Compensation monitoring report- Deltaport third berth project. Prepared for Port Metro Vancouver. Bohnsack, J. A., and D. L. Sutherland Artificial reef research: A review with recommendations for future priorities. Bulletin Marine Science 37: Cass, A. J., R. J. Beamish, and G. A. McFarlane Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus). Canadian Special Publication Fisheries and Aquatic Science 109. Cloutier, R. N Direct and indirect effects of marine protection: Rockfish conservation areas as a case study. Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. COSEWIC COSEWIC assessment and status report on the quillback rockfish Sebastes maliger in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 71 pp. ( Frid, A., and J. D. Marliave Predatory fishes affect trophic cascades and apparent competition in temperate reefs. Biology Letters 6: Gascon, D., and R. A. Miller Colonization by nearshore fish on small artificial reefs in Barkley Sound, British Columbia. Journal of Zoology 59: Giorgi, A. E., and J. L. Congleton Effects of current velocity on development and survival of lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus, embryos. Environmental Biology of Fishes 10(1-2): Golder Marine Environmental Review of a Proposed Grain Terminal at Roberts Bank. Contract report for Vancouver Port Corporation. Haggarty, D. R., and J. R. King Lingcod egg mass density survey in the Strait of Georgia, February March Canadian Technical Report Fisheries Aquatic Science 2691:iv + 28p. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 31

34 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Jewell, E. D SCUBA diving observations on lingcod spawning at a Seattle breakwater. Washington Department Fish, Fisheries Research Paper 3(1): King, J. R Assessment of lingcod in the Strait of Georgia. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2001/132. King, J. R., and B. W. Beaith Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) nest density survey in the Strait of Georgia, January 16 April 26, Canadian Technical Report Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences King, J. R., and R. E. Withler Male nest fidelity and female serial polyandry in lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus, Hexagrammidae). Molecular Ecology 14(2): Lamb, A., and P. Edgell Coastal fishes of the Pacific Northwest. Second edition. Harbour Publishing, Madeira Park, British Columbia, Canada. Logan, G., W. de la Mare, J. King, and D. Haggarty Management framework for Strait of Georgia lingcod. Department Fisheries Oceans Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2005/048. Love, M. S., M. Yoklavich, and L. Thorsteinson The rockfishes of the northeast Pacific. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Marliave, J. D., and W. Challenger Monitoring and evaluating rockfish conservation areas in British Columbia. Canadian Journal Fisheries and Aquatic Science. 66: McPhie, R. P., and J. R. King Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) egg mass and reef fish density SCUBA survey in the Strait of Georgia, February 15-25, 2010 and Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Moser, G., R. L. Charter, W. Watson, D. A. Ambrose, J. Butler, S. Charter, and E. M. Sandknop Abundance and distribution of rockfish (Sebastes) larvae in the southern California bight in relation to environmental conditions and fishery exploitation. National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA.CalCOFi report 41: Naito, B. G An overview of artificial reefs constructed in southern British Columbia prior to Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Patten, B. G Biological information on copper rockfish in Puget Sound, Washington. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 2: R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN , URL Page 32 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

35 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Sale, P. F., and W. A. Douglas Precision and accuracy of visual census techniques for fish assemblages on coral patch reefs. Environmental Biology of Fishes 6: Seaman, W., Jr Artificial reef evaluation with application to natural marine habitats. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA. SigmaPlot. Systat Software, San Jose, CA, USA. Sousa, W. P Experimental investigations of disturbance and ecological succession in a rocky intertidal algal community. Ecological Monographs 49(3): Surry, A. M., and J. R. King Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) egg mass and reef fish density SCUBA survey in the Strait of Georgia, February 13-27, Canadian Technical Report Fisheries Aquatic Science Surry, A. M., J. R. King, and D. R. Haggarty Bottom trawl survey of youngof-the-year lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) in the Strait of Georgia, CCGS Neocaligus, July 28 August 9, Canadian Technical Report Fisheries Aquatic Science Triton Technical Volume 5: Deltaport Third Berth Project marine resources impact assessment. Deltaport Third Berth EA Application (February 2005). Vancouver Aquarium British Columbia lingcod egg mass survey Unpublished results, Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre, Vancouver B.C. Vancouver Aquarium Lingcod egg mass survey instructions pdf. Accessed 26 Oct Yamanaka, L. M., L. C Lacko, J. K. Lochead, J. Martin, R. Haigh, C. Grandin, and K. West Stock assessment framework for inshore rockfish. Department Fisheries Oceans Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2004/068. Yamanaka, L. K., and G. Logan Developing British Columbia s inshore rockfish conservation strategy. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 2: ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 33

36 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December Statement of Limitations This report was prepared by Archipelago, based on fieldwork conducted by Archipelago, for the sole benefit and exclusive use of Hemmera and Port Metro Vancouver. The material in it reflects Archipelago s best judgment in light of the information available to it at the time of preparing this Report. Any use that a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decision made based on it, is the responsibility of such third parties. Archipelago accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this report. Archipelago has performed the work as described above and made the findings and conclusions set out in this report in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession practicing under similar conditions at the time the work was performed. This report represents a reasonable review of the information available to Archipelago within the established Scope, work schedule and budgetary constraints. In preparing this report, Archipelago has relied in good faith on information provided by others as noted in this report, and has assumed that the information provided by those individuals is both factual and accurate. Archipelago accepts no responsibility for any deficiency, misstatement or inaccuracy in this report resulting from the information provided by those individuals. Page 34 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

37 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 TABLES ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 35

38 SPRING WINTER FALL SUMMER Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 2. Depth relative to chart datum (m), survey length (reef width) (m), survey area (m 2 ), and visibility (m) for each reef on summer, fall, winter, and spring Reef Fish Surveys. For reef fish comparison purposes RR1 and RR2 were considered shallow reefs; ER1, ER3, ER5, ER5B intermediary; and ER7 and ER7B deeper reefs. Reef Chart Datum Depth (m) Inshore base Crest Offshore base Width (m) Survey Area (m 2 ) Visibility (m) RR RR ER ER ER ER5B ER >3 ER7B RR RR ER ER ER ER5B ER ER7B RR RR ER ER ER ER5B ER ER7B RR RR ER ER ER ER5B ER ER7B Page 36 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

39 SPRING WINTER FALL SUMMER Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 3. Number of fish, by species, observed on each reef fish transect in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys (blackeye gobies and sculpins were recorded within 1 meter either side of the transect line rather than 3 meters). Species Common Names Scientific Name RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Totals Kelp Greenling (Female) Hexagrammos decagrammus Kelp Greenling (Male) Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Sculpin Flatfish (Juvenile) 2 2 Blackeye Goby Rhinogobiops nicholsii Dogfish Squalis acanthias 1 1 Shiner Perch Cymatogaster aggregata 1 1 Pacific Sand Lance Ammodytes hexapterus >200 >200 Silver Schooling Fish Present Present Present NA Total Richness (S) Kelp Greenling (Female) Hexagrammos decagrammus 1 1 Kelp Greenling (Male) Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Quillback Rockfish Sebastes maliger 1 1 Sculpin Artedius sp Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Blackeye Goby Rhinogobiops nicholsii Striped Perch Embiotica lateralis Total Richness (S) Kelp Greenling (Female) Hexagrammos decagrammus Kelp Greenling (Male) Hexagrammos decagrammus 1 1 Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Quillback Rockfish Sebastes maliger Sculpin Artedius sp Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Lingcod (with egg mass) Ophiodon elongatus Blackeye Goby Rhinogobiops nicholsii 1 1 Striped Perch Embiotica lateralis Total Richness (S) Kelp Greenling (Female) Hexagrammos decagrammus Kelp Greenling (Male) Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Sculpin Artedius sp. 1 1 Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Tubesnout Aulorhynchus flavidus 2 2 Total Richness (S) Reef ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 37

40 SPRING WINTER FALL SUMMER Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 4. Density (#/100 m 2 ) of dominant fish species on each reef in summer, fall, winter and spring surveys. Average density over all reefs is shown in far column for each species and season. Species Reef Avg Common Names Scientific Name RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B density Kelp Greenling Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Kelp Greenling Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Quillback Rockfish Sebastes maliger Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Kelp Greenling Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Quillback Rockfish Sebastes maliger Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Kelp Greenling Hexagrammos decagrammus Copper Rockfish Sebastes caurinus Lingcod Ophiodon elongatus Page 38 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

41 FALL SUMMER Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 5. Invertebrate relative abundance recorded on transects in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys. (P = present, C = common, A = abundant). Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect. Species Reef Occurrence Common Names Scientific Name RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Plumose Anemone Metridium sp. C C P 3 Rose Anemone Urticina sp. P P 2 Tube-dw elling Anemone Pachycerianthus fimbriatus P 1 Orange Sea Pen Ptilosarcus gurneyi P C C C 4 Hydroid A C A C C 5 Encrusting Bryozoan Membranipora sp. A C A 3 Bryozoan A P 2 Chiton P 1 Lined Chiton Tonicella sp. P 1 Mossy Chiton Mopalia sp. P 1 Dogw inkle Nucella sp. P P P C C C 6 Nucella egg cluster P 1 Nudibranch P 1 Barnacle A A A C C A 6 Hermit Crab Pagarus sp. P A P 3 Dungeness Crab Metacarcinus magister P C P 3 Red Rock Crab Cancer productus P P P P 4 Green Sea Urchin Stronglyocentrotus droebachiensis P C P 3 Blood Star Henricia leviuscula P P 2 Mottled Star Evasterias troschelii P P P P P P 6 Ochre Star Pisaster ochraceus P P P P 4 Painted Star Orthasterias koehleri P P P P C P 6 Pink Star Pisaster brevispinus P P P P 4 Striped Sunstar Solaster stimpsoni P 1 Sunflow er Star Pycnopodia helianthoides P C C P P C P P 8 Transparent Tunicate Corella sp. P P 2 Plumose Anemone Metridium sp. A P P 3 Orange Sea Pen Ptilosarcus gurneyi P 1 Hydroid Plumularia sp. P P P P P P 6 Breadcrumb sponge Halichondria sp. P 1 Lined Chiton Tonicella sp. P P P C P 5 Top snail Calliostoma sp P 1 Welk Neptunea sp. P 1 Dogw inkle Nucella sp. A A P 3 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 39

42 WINTER FALL (cont.) Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 5 (cont.). Invertebrate relative abundance recorded on transects in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys. (P = present, C = common, A = abundant). Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect. Species Reef Occurrence Common Names Scientific Name RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Nucella egg cluster Nucella egg cluster P P P P 4 Jingle shell Pododesmus macrochisma A P P A 4 Sw imming scallop Chlamys hastata P P P 3 Frosted nudibranch Dirona albolineata P P P P 4 Golden dirona Dirona pellucida P P 2 Barnacle nudibranch Onchidoris bilamellata P C C C 4 Yellow tip dorid Acanthodoris hudsoni P 1 Red gilled nudibranch Acanthodoris nanaimoensis P 1 Nudibranch egg ribbon N/A P 1 Winged sea slug Gastropteron pacificum P 1 Acorn barnacle Balanus glandula P P C C P P P 7 Umbrella crab Cryptolithodes sitchensis P 1 Hermit Crab Pagarus sp. P P P A A 5 Red Rock Crab Cancer productus P P 2 Decorator crab Oregonia gracilis P 1 Shrimp Pandalus sp. P A P P 4 Green Sea Urchin Stronglyocentrotus droebachiensis P 1 Blood Star Henricia leviuscula P C P P 4 Mottled Star Evasterias troschelii P P P P P 5 Ochre Star Pisaster ochraceus P 1 Sunflow er Star Pycnopodia helianthoides P P C P P P P 7 Sunstar Solaster dawsoni P 1 Leather star Dermasterias imbricata P P 2 Calcareous tubew orm Sabellaria cementarium P P 2 Hairy tunicate Boltenia villosa P 1 Broad-base tunicate Cnemidocarpa finmarkiensis P 1 Unknow n Sponge Demosponge P P P P P P 6 Plumose Anemone Metridium sp. P P P P P 5 Hydroid Plumularia sp. P P P P P P P P 8 Chiton Mopalia sp. P P P P P 5 Chiton Tonicella sp. P 1 Jingle shell Pododesmus macrochisma P P 2 Sw imming scallop Chlamys hastata P P P 3 Sea lemon Peltodoris nobilis P 1 Page 40 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

43 SPRING WINTER (cont.) Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 5 (cont.). Invertebrate relative abundance recorded on transects in summer, fall, winter, and spring surveys. (P = present, C = common, A = abundant). Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect. Species Reef Occurrence Common Names Scientific Name RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Golden dirona Dirona pellucida P P 2 Barnacle nudibranch Onchidoris bilamellata C 1 Nudibranch egg ribbon Onchidoris bilamellata P 1 Acorn barnacle Balanus glandula P P P P P P P P 8 Hermit crab Pagarus sp. A P P C A C 6 Heart crab Phyllolithodes papillosus P 1 Red rock crab Cancer productus P P P 3 Kelp crab Pugettia producta P P P 3 Shrimp Pandalus sp. P P 2 Green sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus droebachiensis P P 2 Red sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus franciscanus P 1 Giant sea cucumber Parastichopus californicus P 1 Pink star Pisaster brevispinus P P P P 4 Blood star Henricia leviuscula P P 2 Mottled star Evasterias troschelii P P P P P P 6 Ochre star Pisaster ochraceus P P 2 Sunflow er star Pycnopodia helianthoides P P P P P P P 7 Leather star Dermasterias imbricata P P P 3 Rainbow star Orthasterias koehleri P P 2 Calcareous tubew orm Sabellaria cementarium P P P 3 Transparent tunicate Corella sp. P P 2 Plumose Anemone Metridium sp. A P P 3 Chiton Mopalia sp. C P P P 4 Whelk Nucella sp. P P A A 4 Sw imming scallop Chlamys hastata A 1 Hermit crab Pagarus sp. P A 2 Decorator crab Oregonia gracilis P P P 3 Pink star Pisaster brevispinus P P P P P 5 Ochre star Pisaster ochraceus P P P P 4 Sunflow er star Pycnopodia helianthoides P P P P P P P P 8 Leather star Dermasterias imbricata P 1 Mottled star Evasterias troschelii P P P 3 Blood star Henricia leviuscula P P 2 Green sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus droebachiensis P P 2 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 41

44 WINTER FALL SUMMER Marine Fish and Fish Habitat RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 6. Percent cover (%) of all algal species recorded on each reef fish transect by season. Cover estimates were made from 2 meter swaths along each transect. Understory algae includes all species except canopy forming bull kelp. Species Site Common Names Scientific Names RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Bull Kelp Nereocystis luetkeana Bladed/leafy reds Filamentous Reds Red Opuntia Opuntiella californica 10 Iridescent Seaweed Mazzaella sp Turkish Towel Chondracanthus exasperatus Red eyelet silk Sparlingia pertusa 5 Hidden Rib Cryptopleura ruprechtiana 5 Sea Laurel Laurencia spectabilis 5 Sea Comb Plocamium sp. 5 Red Spaghetti Gracilaria / Gracilariopsis 5 Delicate Northern Sea Fan Euthora cristata 5 Frilly Red Ribbon Palmaria callophylloides 5 Red Ribbon Palmaria sp. 5 Sea Sac Halosaccion sp. 5 Sugar Kelp Saccharina latissima Wireweed Sargassum muticum Five-ribbed Kelp Costaria costata Winged Kelp Alaria marginata 5 Sea Lettuce Ulva sp. <5 <5 5 Approximate total understory algal cover 90% 95% 70% 70% 80% 80% 25% 35% Bull Kelp Nereocystis luetkeana <5 15 <5 <5 Turkish Towel Chondracanthus exasperatus <5 10 Coral seaweed Corallina officinalis 10 Encrusting corallina Corallina sp <5 5 <5 <5 sea lace Microcladia borealis red cellophane Porphyra sp. <5 <5 <5 Iridescent Seaweed Mazzaella sp <5 Hidden Rib Cryptopleura ruprechtiana 25 <5 Frilly Red Ribbon Palmaria callophylloides 5 <5 <5 Red Ribbon Palmaria sp. 5 <5 <5 <5 Filamentous red 10 Sugar Kelp Saccharina latissima 5 5 < <5 <5 Sea Lettuce Ulva sp. <5 <5 <5 <5 Approximate total understory algal cover 50% 55% 30% 45% 40% 15% 35% 30% Bull Kelp Nereocystis luetkeana <5 <5 <5 <5 Turkish Towel Chondracanthus exasperatus <5 10 <5 5 Coral seaweed Corallina officinalis 5 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 Encrusting corallina Corallina sp 5 sea lace Microcladia borealis <5 <5 red cellophane Porphyra sp. Iridescent Seaweed Mazzaella sp. 5 5 Hidden Rib Cryptopleura ruprechtiana 5 5 Red Ribbon Palmaria sp Red Eyelet Silk Sparlingia pertusa <5 5 Red sea cabbage Turnerella mertensiana 5 Winged Rib Delesseria decipiens 10 Unk Filamentous Red N/A <5 10 Page 42 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

45 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 6 (cont.).percent cover (%) of all algal species recorded on each reef fish transect by season. Cover estimates were made from 2 meter swaths along each transect. Understory algae includes all species except canopy forming bull kelp. SPRING WINTER (cont.) Common Names Scientific Names RR1 RR2 ER1 ER3 ER5 ER5B ER7 ER7B Sugar Kelp Saccharina latissima 5 5 <5 < Acid Kelp Desmarestia ligulata <5 Wireweed Sargassum muticum 5 Sea Lettuce Ulva sp. <5 <5 <5 <5 Approximate total understory algal cover 90% 85% 50% 50% 50% 45% 15% 35% Bull Kelp Nereocystis luetkeana 5 10 <5 <5 Turkish Towel Chondracanthus exasperatus <5 10 <5 Coral seaweed Corallina officinalis Encrusting corallina Corallina sp sea lace Microcladia borealis red cellophane Porphyra sp. Iridescent Seaweed Mazzaella sp. 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 Hidden Rib Species Cryptopleura ruprechtiana Red Ribbon Palmaria sp. Red Eyelet Silk Sparlingia pertusa <5 10 <5 Red leafy Red sea cabbage Turnerella mertensiana Winged Rib Delesseria decipiens Unk Filamentous Red N/A 10 < <5 Sugar Kelp Saccharina latissima <5 Fringed seive kelp Agarum fimbriatum <5 <5 3 ribbed kelp Cymathere triplicata <5 <5 5-rib kelp Costaris costata <5 Acid Kelp Desmarestia viridis <5 <5 <5 Wireweed Sargassum muticum <5 <5 <5 <5 Sea Lettuce Ulva sp. <5 <5 <5 Approximate total understory algal cover 100% 100% 45% 40% 70% 75% 15% 10% Site ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 43

46 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 7. LEM transect information including width (m), length (m), survey area (m 2 ), maximum depth (m), visibility (m), diameter of rip-rap in vicinity of egg masses averaged for each transect (m), number of egg masses and lingcod (guarding and non-guarding) encountered. Transect Survey Date (2013) Survey Width (m) Survey Length (m) Survey Area (m 2 ) Max depth (mcd) Visibility (m) 1 Mar Feb Mar Feb Feb Mar A Feb B Feb Substrate size (m) Range: Avg: 1.3 Range: 1-1 Avg: 1.0 Range: Avg 1.5 Range: Avg: 1.4 Range: Avg: 1.3 Range: Avg: 1.5 Range: Avg: 1.4 Range: Avg: 1.3 Egg mass (#) Lingcod (#) Dive time (min) Total over n = 8 transects: Table 8. Lingcod and egg mass count, density (#/100 m 2 ) and CPUE on each transect. CPUE were calculated as number recorded x 60)/dive time (Vancouver Aquarium 2012). Transect Count Egg Masses Density (#/ 100 m 2 ) CPUE Count Lingcod (guarding and non-guarding) Density (#/ 100 m 2 ) CPUE A B Mean (SE) (0.7) 14.2(3.4) (0.4) 10.6(1.6) Page 44 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

47 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 9. Percent cover (%) of algal species observed from video footage of LEM surveys on 8 transects. Species Common Names Scientific Names A 7B Sea lettuce Ulva sp. <5 <5 <5 Bull kelp Nereocystis luetk eana <5 <5 <5 <5 Sugar kelp Saccharina latissima <5 <5 10 <5 <5 <5 5 5 Acid weed Desmarestia ligulata 5 5 <5 Wireweed Sargassum muticum <5 5 Broad-ribbed kelp Pleurophycus gardneri <5 <5 Five-ribbed Kelp Costaria costata <5 <5 Turkish towel Chondracanthus exasperatus <5 <5 5 5 Red eyelet silk Sparlingia pertusa <5 5 <5 Coral seaweed Corallina officinalis 10 5 < Encrusting corallina Corallina sp <5 <5 Sea lace Microcladia borealis <5 <5 <5 Red cellophane Porphyra spp. 5 5 Iridescent seaweed Mazzaella spp Hidden rib Cryptopleura ruprechtiana Red ribbon Palmaria sp Red sea cabbage Turnerella mertensiana 5 Transect Winged rib Delesseria decipiens <5 <5 <5 Filamentous red N/A Approximate total understory algal cover 95% 90% 85% 30% 35% 35% 30% 30% ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 45

48 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 10. Invertebrate relative abundance (P = present, C = common, A = abundant) observed from video footage of LEM surveys on 8 transects. Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect. Species Transect Occurrence Common Names Scientific Name A 7B Plumose Anemone Metridium sp. A P P P P 5 Hydroid Plumularia sp. P P P P P P 6 Unknown sponge Demosponge P P P 3 Chiton Mopalia sp. P P P 3 Chiton Tonicella sp. P P P 3 Top snail Calliostoma sp P C P 3 Welk Neptunea sp. P P 2 Dogwinkle Nucella sp. A P P 3 Hairy triton Fusitriton oregonensis P P 2 Jingle shell Pododesmus macrochisma P P 2 Swimming scallop Chlamys hastata P P P 3 Limpet Lottia sp. P P 2 Sea lemon Peltodoris nobilis P 1 Golden dirona Dirona pellucida P P P P 4 Yellow tip dorid Acanthodoris hudsoni P 1 White dendronotid Dendronotid albus P 1 Pacific octopus Enteroctopus dofleini P 1 Acorn barnacle Balanus glandula P P P P P P P P 8 Hermit crab Pagarus sp. A P C A C 5 Heart crab Phyllolithodes papillosus P P P 3 Red rock crab Cancer productus P P 2 Kelp crab Pugettia producta P P P 3 Decorator crab Oregonia gracilis P 1 King crab Lopholithodes mandtii P P P 3 Sharpnose crab Scyra acutifrons P P 2 Green sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus droebachiensis P P P 3 Red sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus franciscanus P 1 White sea urchin Stronglyocentrotus pallidus P 1 Pedal sea cucumber Psolus chitonoides P 1 California sea cucumber Parastichopus californicus P 1 Pink star Pisaster brevispinus P P P 3 Blood star Henricia leviuscula P C P P 4 Page 46 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

49 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Table 10 (cont.). Invertebrate relative abundance (P = present, C = common, A = abundant) observed from video footage of LEM surveys on 8 transects. Invertebrates were assessed on 2 meter swaths along each transect. Species Transect Occurrence Common Names Scientific Name A 7B Mottled star Evasterias troschelii P P P P P P 6 Ochre star Pisaster ochraceus C P 2 Sunflower star Pycnopodia helianthoides C P C P C P P 7 Sunstar Solaster dawsoni P 1 Leather star Dermasterias imbricata P 1 Rainbow star Orthasterias koehleri 1 P 2 Calcareous tubeworm Sabellaria cementarium P P P 3 Nereid worm Nereis sp. P 1 Hairy tunicate Boltenia villosa P P 2 Orange tunicate Metandrocarpa taylori P P 2 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 47

50 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 FIGURES Page 48 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

51 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 A B Figure 1. Survey locations on artificial reefs. A: Reef fish dive survey locations on Reference Reefs (RR1, RR2) and Expansion Reefs (ER1, ER3, ER5, ER5B. ER7, ER7B). B: LEM dive survey locations on the reference reefs (Transect 1, 3), expansion reefs (Transect 4, 5, 6, 7A, 7B), as well as the rip-rap area of the terminal (Transect 2). ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 49

52 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 2. Density of all non-cryptic fish (excludes gobies and small sculpins) at each reef and an additional bar showing the density averaged from all sites. Page 50 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

53 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 3. Density of each fish species observed on transects in each season. Small schooling fish observed on summer surveys are not included. KG = kelp greenling, CR = copper rockfish, LI = lingcod, SP = shiner perch, DO = dogfish, SC = sculpin, FL = flatfish, BG = black-eye goby, QR = quillback rockfish, STP = striped perch, TS = tube-snout. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 51

54 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 4. Seasonal densities of reef fish species observed on transects. KG = kelp greenling, CR = copper rockfish, LI = lingcod, SP = shiner perch, DO = dogfish, SC = sculpin, FL = flatfish, BG = black-eye goby, QR = quillback rockfish, STP = striped perch, TS = tube-snout. Page 52 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

55 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 5. Seasonal frequency of occurrence, or the number of transects where each fish species was observed. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 53

56 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 6. Fish species richness (number of species) observed at each reef by season. Final column shows total species richness (all reefs combined). Page 54 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

57 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 7. Total percent cover by algae type (canopy brown, understory red, understory brown, understory green) on each reef fish transect by season. Cover estimates were made from 2 meter swaths along the survey transect. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 55

58 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 8. Egg mass and lingcod density (guarding and non-guarding) (#/100 m 2 ) by transect during the LEM survey. Page 56 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

59 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 9. Count per unit effort (CPUE) LEMs, and lingcod (guarding and non-guarding). CPUE is calculated as the number of egg masses or fish encountered per hour of roving dive survey. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 57

60 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 10. Proportion of LEMs by size class per transect during the LEM survey. Size classes were watermelon, cantaloupe, and grapefruit. Total number (n) of egg masses observed along each transect is noted. Page 58 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

61 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure 11. Total percent cover by algal type (canopy brown, understory red, brown and green) for the LEM survey estimated from video footage of the entire surveyed area. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 59

62 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 APPENDIX A Photographs Page 60 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

63 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure A-1. Schooling fish observed during summer reef fish surveys: sand lance (above) and unidentified fish (below). ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 61

64 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 A B C Figure A-2. Commonly occurring reef fishes: A: Kelp greenling (Hexagrammos decagrammus) (female) B: Copper rockfish (Sebastes caurinus) C: Lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus). Page 62 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

65 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure A-3. High density of foliose red algae observed at site RR 2. Figure A-4. LEM with mix of hatched and eyed eggs observed during Transect 7B survey. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 63

66 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure A-5. LEM with hatched eggs observed during Transect 7B survey. Figure A-6. Red rock crab (Cancer productus) predating on lingcod eggs observed during Transect 4 survey. Page 64 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

67 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure A-7. Lingcod guarding egg mass in crevice on reef ER7. Figure A-8. Lingcod guarding egg mass under boulder on reef ER7. ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 65

68 RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 APPENDIX B Supplementary figures Page 66 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.

69 RBT2 - Reef Fish Surveys December 2014 Figure B-1. Location of dive survey sites at Roberts Bank in 2004 (from Triton 2004). ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD. Page 67

70 Draft RBT2 Reef Fish Surveys July 2014 Figure B-2. Location of LEM survey sites at Roberts Bank in 2008 (from Archipelago 2009). Page 68 ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RESEARCH LTD.