ML18082A671

Forwards Second Interim Rept, 316(b) Studies,Jan 1979- Mar 1980. Rept Available in Central Files Only

ML18082A671
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	06/25/1980
From:	Shissias J Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	Allen H ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Shared Package
ML18082A672	List: ML18082A671
References
NUDOCS 8007030232
Download: ML18082A671 (288)

Text

.-;

I .~

• ~~-tt~~~J.

Public Service Electric a1d Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, N.J. 07101 201/430-5858 James A. Shissias Genual Manager*

Environmental Affairs June 25, 1980

. Dr. Harry Allen, Chief Water Resource3 Section U.S. Environr.1ental Protection Agency - Region *II 26 Federal rl~za New York, New York 10007

Dear Dr .. Allen:

SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 316(b) DEMONSTRATION SECOND SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT In accordance '.'1ith the approved Salem ?16(b) Demonstration Plan of Study, our Second Semi-Annual Report is enclosed.

This report in,~ludes information on ent.rainment, impinge-ment, baywide ?Opulation estimat~s, and experimental studies for the following species:

Blueback herring American :3had White perch Striped b~ss Atlantic croaker Any questions f)ertaining to this report should be directed to the attention of Mr. M. D. London of the Licensing and Environment Department (201/430-8016).

Very truly yours, The *En1:;rov*

so o10 so.23.:i

Dr. Harry All(:m, Chief 6/25/80 CC: T. Fikslin - EPA S. Gorski - NMFS*

D. Beech - NMFS

~. Huff - US Fish and Wildlife S~rvice J. Miller - US Fish and Wildlife Service S. Lubcw - NJDEP J. Makai - NJDEP M. Masnik - us NRC R. Miller - Delaware Department c1f Natural Resources L. Wareham - EPA M. Henderson - LACT Director NRR - us NRC Director Region I I&E - US NRC Salem Free Public Library R. Kausch DRBC F. Takacs - NJDEP

l*I

'I e SECOND INTERIM REPORT I 316(b) STUDIES JANUARY 1979-MARCH 1980

• 1

• 1 I SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION I NPDES Permit No. NJ0005622 I NRC Docket No. 50-272 NRC Operating License No. DPR-70

~'

I

- Blueback herring

=

=

Alewife American shad

- White perch I - Striped bass I - Atlantic croaker I

I Public Service Electric and Gas Company I 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 I June, 1980 Docket# r;o- z. 7 z..

C-ontrol # 8001 o~b z. ~z..

Date 25 So of Document:

R!EGULA. OHY DOCl~H FILE

~I REGULATORY DOCICET .fltE COPY

I I .*

e ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I Studies described herein were conducted by Ichthyological Associates, Inc. {IA), Middletown, Delaware under the direction* of Victor J. Schuler, Project Director, who also I edited and supervised preparation.of this report. Alan W.

Wells developed and implemented the statistical design and data reduction methodology. Principal investigators who I supervised the various programs and ~uthored pertinent

• sections of this report were:

I Field Investigations Fisheries - Scott J. Beck, Douglas R. Randle I Plankton - Alvin L. Maiden, Jason E. Krout Impingement - Harold M. Brundage III, Paul C.

Kerkhoven. ,

Experimental Studies Simulated Primary Entrainment - Steven R. Goldman,

• J. Kenneth Taft Latent Impingement Survival - John W. Meldrim, I Larry o. Horseman, William H. Whitmore Impingement Collection Efficiency - Harold.M.

Brundage III, Reese K. Simon.

I Mark D. London and Bruce A. Jones of PSE&G reviewed the

-1 report. Holly J. Jones and Margaret R. Dilling typed the manuscript.

I I

I I

-1 Ie CONTENTS I

1.0 INTRODUCTION

• *********** o * * * * *

• o * * * * * * * *

• c ., * * *

• PAGE 1-1 Program Objective **************************** l.;.?.

I 2.0 WATER BODY DESCRI.PTION ************************* 2-1 I 3.0 3.1 3.2 STATION AND COOLING WATER SYSTEM ***************

DESCRIPTION ********* **********************.**

CWS OPERATING SCHEDULE DURING PERIOD OF STUDY 3-1 3-1 JANUARY1979-MARCH 1980 ********************** 3-1 I 4.0 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS *************************** 4,..1 4.1 MATERIALS AND METHODS ************************ 4-1 I 4.1.1 Baywide Population Studies *******************

Statistical Design and Data Reduction ******

Population Estimates ******************* ~.

4-1 4-1 4-1 Density Coefficients *********************

I Depth Coefficients ***********************

Efficiency Coefficient *******************

4-2 4-:a 4-4 Confidence Interval Around Population I Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Calculation of Proportional Involvement **

4-4 4-5 Age-Group Determination* and Designation ** 4-5 I Density Distribution Plots ***************

Plankton Program ****** ~********************

Fisheries Program **************************

4-6 4-6 4-6 4.1.2 Entrainment Program ******.******************** 4-7 I 4.1.3 Impingement Program **************************

CWS Intake, Fish Rescue, and Sampling 4-7 Systems Descriptions ******************** 4-7 I 4.2 Sampling Design and Procedure **************

SPECIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ***************

Blueback herring, alewife, and American 4-8 4-8 I shad **.********..****************...**.***

Population Estimate and Distribution *****

Eggs ** c * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• o ** c:i *****

4-8 4-8 4-8 Larvae . .......*...........*............ 4-9 I Entrainment .............. e * * * * * * * * *

• o * * *

• Blueback herring ***************************

4-9 4-9 Population Estimate and Distribution ***** 4-9 I Young ******** o ** e ***************** o ****

!*mpingement ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o .

Al ew if e ************* o * * * *

• e * * * * * * *

• e o ******

4-9 4-10 4-12 Population Estimate and Distribution ***** 4-12 I Young * ********.*************************

Impingement .......... ..................*.

4-12 4-13 American shad . ...........*.. e * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 4-13 I Population Estimate and Distribution *****

Young.o********************************

4-13 4-11 I

Impingement ... o ***** **** e ****************

i 4-14

I White perch * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Population Estimate and Distribution **

Eggs ******

Larvae **

Young ***

PAGE 4-15 4-15 4-15 4-15 4-15

• • I Age l+.

Age 2+ and older *****************

Entrainment **

...... 4-16 4-16 4-17 I

Impingement *********

.. ... 4-17 Striped bass **********

Population Estimate and Distribution *.

4-19 4-19 I

Eggs ****

Larvae ** .... .... ....

4-19 4-19 I

Young ******

Age l+ and 2+. .. ....... .... 4-20 4-20 Entrainment *****

Impingement **********

Atlantic croaker ** . ...

4-20 4-21 4-22 I

Population Estimate and Distribution ** 4-22 Eggs *****

... . . ....... .... ... 4-22 I

~

Larvae ** 4-22 Young ** .... . ........ .. 4-22 Entrainment **

Impingement **

4-22 4-23 I 5.0 EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ******** .. . . . . . . . . 5-1 5.1 5.1.1 SIMULATED PRIM.ARY ENTRAINMENT STUDIES.

In trod uct ion *********** ...... 5-1 I 5-1 5.1.2 Materials and Methods~. 5-1

• specimen Procurement *.

Blueback herring.

Alewife *********.* .. . ~

5-1 5-2 5-2 I

White perch *******

Atlantic croaker *.

Test Apparatus and Procedure **

5-2 5-3 5-3 I

Data Reduction ****************. 5-4 5.1.3 Res u 1 ts ************************* . ... 5-5 I

Blueback herring (post larvae). 5-5 Alewife (post larvae). 5-5 Alewife (young} **

White perch ******

Atlantic croaker (young} . ... .

5-5 5-6 5-6 I

5.2 LATENT IMPINGEMENT SURVIVAL STUDIES ** 5-17 5.2.1 5.2.2 Introduction ************

Materials and Methods **

... . . . . .. 5-17 5-17 I

5.2.3 Results and Discussion. 5-17 Blueback herring *******

White perch ******

Atlantic croaker ***

5-17 5-18 5-19 I

5.3 IMPINGEMENT COLLECTION EFFICIENCY ** 5-34 I

ii I

I

---

~ --=======--:.----=--=-=------ - ---** -- -

.1 I*e 5.3.1 Materials and Methods ************************

PAGE 5-34 5.3.2 Results and Discussion *********************** 5-34 I 5. 4

5. 5 LARVAL TABLE AND PUMP CALIBRATION ~.STUDIES ****

IMPINGEMENT RECIRCULATION STUDY ********** ** ***

5-43 5-43 I LITERATURE CITED *************************************** 1 APPENDIX - A Technical Supplement to the First Interim I Report for 316(b) Studies for the Salem Generating Station, March-November 1979 *****

INTRODUCTION * ******************* o e o *************

A-1 A-1 SPECIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ****************** A:-1 I Bay Anchovy - Eggs *******.*******************

Baywide Population ************************.

A-1 A-1 Population Involvement with Salem ********* A-2 I Weakfish - Eggs *******.******.*.************

Baywide Population ************************

Population Involvement with Salem *********

A-2 A-2 A-3 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

~. l-l I

• • SECTION 1. 0 INTRODUCTION I This is the Second Interim Progress tep6rt of 316{b) studies*

for the Salem Generating Station cond~cted pursuant to a Demonstration Plan of Study (POS) subsnitted by Public Service Electric and Gas (PSE&G) and ipproved by the United I States Environmental Protection Agencf, Region II (EPA).

considers on-station data only for Unit I~ Unit II is It scheduled for J.00% poweroperation in late 1980 .

.I Results of impingement, entrainment, ?Opulation, and experimental studies are presented, as pertinent, for I blueback herring, Alosa aestivalis; alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus; American shad, Alosa sapidissima; white perch, Merone americana; striped b~ss, Merone s~xatilis; and Atlantic croaker, Micropogon _undulatus. Temporal and I spatial distributions; population, impingement and entrainment levels; and results of impingement latent survival, collection efficiency, and simulated entrainment I studies are discussed. Presented also, as an appendix, are egg data for bay anchovy, Anchoa mitchilli; and weakfish, Cynoscion regalis, which were not available for inclusion in I the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

Based on historical periods of species abundance near Salem the PCS included a sampling schedule for each*vf the above, and June 15, 1980 was set as the sub~ittal date for this report. The report considers impingement and entrainment during Janu~ry 1979 through Marth 19SO. Since all species except Atlantic 6roake~ are spring spawners, population estimates for eggs and larvae were gE!nerated beginning in March 1979 and continuing through No~ember 1979. Population estimates for post-larval fish were generated from October 1979 through March 1980. Data manage?ment constraints precluded the inclusion of pre-October 1979 post-larval data in this report, although these will be presented in. the 316(b) Demonstration. Additionally, in 1980, white perch and the herrings demonstrated local occurrence after the POS scheduled period, and sampling was continued until each species was essent~ally absent from the Salem region. Data management considerations for this report, however, requirec1 that.the data base be closed on March 31, 1980. Post-March 1980 data, as well as all final data analyses, will be*

incl~~ed in the Salem 316(b} Demonstration.

Th¢ Salem Unit 1 reactor was shut down for refueling and

• maintenance during April 4 through December 22, 1979. -*Since Unit 1 circulators did not operate for essentially all of the specif ica entrainment sampling period, entrainment survival samples could not be taken. One Unit 2 circulator, however, was operated during most of ~he outage, and enttainmcnt abundance s~mples were taken bcginriing in June.

1-2 I

Program Objective The objective of the Salem 316(b) study is to determine the

• • I extent and effect of impingement and* entrainment by the Salem station on selected target species. The program developed to meet this objective consists of two major

• 1 phases. The first comprises estimation of population involvement with Salem by relating impingement and entrainment levels to population levels in the Delaware I River and Bay. The second is a projection of the long-range effects (i.e., impact) of this involvement on subject populations. Towards this end life cycle projection models and the required input data on natural mortality weighted I

against plant induced mortality, age-specific fecundity, and compensatory effects are being developed. I I

I

• • I I

I I

I I

I I

I

I 2-1 I .

e SECTION 2. 0 I WATER BODY DESCRIPTION The study area comprises all of the lower and most of the I middle portion of the Delaware River Estuary, extending from the mouth of Delaware Bay (rkm O; rm 0) to Wilmington, DE (rkm 117; rm 73). The Salem Generating Station is situated I on the southern portion of Artificial Island in Lower Alloways Creek Township, New Jersey approximately 80 km (50 miles) from the mouth of the Bay (Fig. 2-1).

I Detailed descriptions of the study area including water quality, oceanographic, and physicochemical characteristics were presented in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a)

I and the preoperational summary report (PSE&G, 1980c).

I I

.I I

I I

I I

I I

I

2-2 I

• • I I

I I

I

• • • -. ....*.,O:..J*

.. I DELAWARE I N

I.

t. ~-

~*.*

i .*

1.

DELAWARE BAY z;r:*~:*-.-

~*

/*::

I

• 0

~

l

-=*

,;:CAPE MAY

~:*.~*

I I

ATLANTIC OCEAN I

CAPE I

• • I Map of .study area ( r km 0-11 7 ) and location PUPLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND CAS COMPANY of Salem Generating Stat.ton .(SGS) withi.n the Delaware River Estuary.

S~Lr.n 316(bJ STUDY Figure 2-1 I

-~------- -- - =--=-=====-~--=-=-====--- ---

I 3-1 I

3.1 DESCRIPTION

SECTION 3. 0 STATION AND COOLING WATER SYSTEM I The Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, is located on Artificial Island, Salem County, New Jersey at rkm 80 I (RM 50) of the Delaware River. The units are essentially identical and share common intake and discharge facilities of a once-through cooling system. Each consists of a Westinghouse pressurized-water reactor (PWR), with licensed I thermal ratings of 3,350 MW (Unit 1) and 3,423 MW (Unit 2) and electrical outputs of 1,090 and 1,115 MWe, respectively.

Unit 1 attained initial criticality on December 11, 1976.

I Unit 2 is scheduled for c;:ommercial operation:_oin late l980.

A detailed description of the Salem circulating and service water cooling systems was presented in the First Interim I Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

1* 3.2 CWS OPERATING SCHEDULE DURING PE~IOD OF STUDY, JANUARY 1979-MARCH 1980.

I The CWS was fully operational (5-6 circulators in service) during January - April.3, 1979 (Fig. 3-1). The Salem Unit 1 I .reactor was shut down for refueling and maintenance during April 4-December 22, 1979. All circulators were shut down during April 17-20, July 29-August 11, and September 6-10.

I One Unit 2 circulator was operated during April 4-16, A~ril 21-July 28, August 12-September 5, and September 11-23.

During September 24-December 21, 1-4 Unit 1 circulators were operated. The CWS was fully operational during December 22, I 1979-March 31, 1980 (Fig. 3-2);

I I

I I

I

IDh~I u*eu ~PUUIN.G JULIA~

PUMPS .. Of PUMPS CAUOUI DAY OAI - 1 u.n S4.15 91.JS 121.n 164.zs zoo.n z11.u zu.n !10.n !46.PS

,0.30 . tO.DO I

I I

I v.:;o

• I t.oo I

• I I

d.iJO

• t 1.00 I

I 1 I I 1 1.30 UV*4 11" 925* 4 6599 I

• r.oo 1----------D***--------------------------------*--*------**------*-------------------*-*-**---------*

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I

~.uu *¥~999Z999999~599999999999* I 68* 6.00 I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I 1.00 * *9o8~2l999999l*S9V4999l 1*

• 1.00 1 I 1 I I I I I 4.00 o *S *

• 6 2421 28 4 I I * ** oo I

1 1

I 1

I w

1---------------------------------------------------------------------*--------------*--*---*********-1

.. 1 1

1 I

• 999999& 19

• I I

!.DO I

N I I I I z.oo I Z9 9999S99999999996U9999995 z.oo I

I I

I 5~9941999 Y9v594969999Y9V99999999 999999999999999*5 z 1! 99 *8 *J1S5 z 1.00 I I I r I

I 0.3 I o.o J.li 5*-~Q 1J.Oo lu'l.Sll 141>.DO Ill.SO l19.00 Z5S.50 Z9Z.OO !le.so . !6'.00 Number of pumps in operation vs. date (Julian day-1), Salem CWS, PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AtlD GAS CO!IPAtlY 1979. The number of impingement-collections at a specific SALE~ 316(b) STUDY ntnnber of pumps is indkated ( 9 = nine or more collections).

Figure 3-1

-~ ....

- -~- - - - - *- - - - - - - -I SCIJllR,_I* o* IDO*~, PU*P* hUMBtl OJ PU*PS OPlllflNG (1(1011, DAY JUlll~ DAI

• 1 1.J

• 00 1a.25 s4.15 t1.25 121.15 164.25 200.1s 211.2s 21J.75 J10.2s >***

• ***** t****t **** t**** t**** t********* t ****t **.*******+****t****t****t ****G****t****t****t*********t*****:

u.oo I

I I

I fl.JO *I u.oo I

I I

• I u.oo I

I I

10.oil *I 10.oa l***-****------------**------------ ****o***********--****************I 9.aa *I e.oa I

I I

• I 1.00 I

I I

1.01.1 *I 1.00 I I w I I I I I

w 6.DD

• 5H9099999~9999999119V9994 I I * ** oo I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I s.oo *~~9299~56~7149199462Y469~S I

• s.oo I I I I I I I I I I I I

... au *~fl

• 2 ** I ~.oo I I I I I I I I

• ~

• I J.OD h.J So.~O IS.DU I09.5b 146.QO 1h2.50 219.00 255.50 292.00 J21.50 J65.00 Number of pumps in operation vs. date (Julian day-1), Salem cws, PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC A!ID GAS COllPA?IY Jan.-March, 1980. The number of impingement collections at a SALEll 316(b) STUDY specific number of pumps is indicated (9 = nine or more collections) - .

Figure 3-2

--==--------=----=-----====---=-=------=== :_______~-=---=-==--=:.=-=- -_-_: : -.:. :. . :. =.....:...-_ ==---- - - - - ---

I 4-1 ~------- ------- - - -------------------.-- --------

~

I SECTION 4.0 FI.ELD INVESTIGATIONS 4.1 MATERIALS AND METHODS_

I 4.1.1 Baywide Population Studies Statistical Design and Data Reduction I The statistical* design, sampling procedures, and analytical methods were presented .'in F*ir:st In t~~.m Report 316 ( b)

I Studies March-November, 1979 (PSE&G, 1980a) to which the reader is referred for detail. The following discussion centers on general departures from the -methodologies developed in _the First Interim Report and on scaling I coefficients germane to the species topic to this report.

I Population Estimates I As in the first report, population estimates were calculated by summing over area and depth as follows:

I Population = l n D.

ll. Den~

• Vol. .

• Dep ~ .

• Eff-l ( 1)

.I.. l.J l]

i=m j=l I where:

m,n = starting and ending grid number for region I of concern, respectively.

D.]. = average depth at grid i.

I Den.]. = Density coefficient. The mean numb~r of organisms per cubic meter at the mid-point I of grid i estimated from two-dimensional moving average.

Vol .. = Volume. Calculated volume, in cubic meters, I l]

of grid i at depth increment j. The volume of a one meter interval is taken as total volume of the grid divided by its average depth.

I -

Dep ..

l J

= Depth coefficient. Proportion of organisms in grid i and depth* increment j relative to the density of organisms in grid i at the I *

.depth increment actually sampled by the gear.

reflects change in nomenclature from that used in First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I

4-2 I Eff =

)

Efficiency coefficient. Proportion of organisms captured and retained by a gear relative to the total number available to gear. **I Density coefficients I In the First Interim Report target species density for each grid was estimated using trend surface analysis. In this I report a two-dimensional moving av~rage technique was employed instead because of the following:

1) Trend surface sometimes produced "edge effects", i.e.,

I extrapolation without limits near the boundaries of a map region. The exaggerated densities for boundary grids likely lead to an over-estimate of the standing I crops. (Population estimates and density plots presented in the First Interim Report are being re-evaluated.) I

2) Trend surface analysis utilizes a-11 data points in the calculation of the surface. The density value at each grid point was, therefore, influ~nced by all data I

points. With low order polynomials this gave undue importance to data points distant from the grid point to be estimated. I

3) The bay-wide density distribution pattern may not have been adequately described by the simple surface generated by low order polynomials. However, higher I

order polynomials are mathematically complex and subject to computational "blow-up" (i.e., failure. to find a correct solution). I It should be noted that the above factors are aspects of the same problem. As the order of polynomial increases, distant points exert less of an influence and the surface responds I

more closely to local density patterns. Unfortunately, besides the computational problems involved, higher order polynomials tend to produce more severe edge effects.

I A two-dimensional moving average, while conceptually similar to trend surface analysis, eliminates the above problems and is computationally simpler. The estimated density at each I

grid (Den.) is calculated as the mean.of n nearest data points (Y~)

• I Den. = l/n 1

(2 )

I I

I

- - ---------~--=-===---==-===--=~-----= - - - -

I 4-3 I

I - By choosing n to be reasonably small the estimated density of a grid will be influenced by only relatively near points.

The surface formed by this averaging process is not constrained by a mathematical model as is that .generated by trend surface analysis and is not subject to unbounded extrapolation, i.e., edge effects, at map boundary regions.

I The value of n was taken as six so as to localize the influence of the data points.

I Depth coefficients I Ichthyoplankton studies - Since ichthyoplankton samples were collected with a stepwise oblique tow which automatically I integrates density over depth, a factor of 1.0 was used for all depth increments.

I Fisheries studies - A transect across the river from Artificial Island to Appoquinimink River was established to investigate the depth distribution of the target species.

Seven zones 0-3 m, five zones >3-6 m, and four zones >6-9 m I deep-were sampled along the transect. All zones were sampled on. five dates (October 17, October 31, November 5, November 21, 1979, and March 28, 1980). During the October 17 sampling period no species covered by this report were taken, therefore, this date was not included in analyses.

Since there was no significant change in depth distribution I during the sampling period (Table 4-1), data from all four dates were pooled for each species to produce the mean number per trawl at each depth increment.

I It should be noted that this is an ongoing program and that all depth scaling coefficients reported here must be regarded as tentative pend:lng corroboration or improvement.

I Blueback herring - No significant difference among catches at the three depth increments was found (Table 4-1), indicating apparently homogeneous I distribution in, at least, waters 9 m or less in depth.

Therefore, all depth increments in zones 9 m or less in average depth and all bottom increments were set to I 1.0. To be conservative all other depth increments were set to 0.0 (Table 4-2).

I Alewife - No significant difference among catches at the three depth increments was found (Table 4-1),

indicating apparently homogeneous distribution.in, at least, waters 9 m or less in depth. Therefore, all

• 1 depth increments in zones 9 m or less in average depth and all bottom increments were set to 1.0. To be I

conservative all other depth increments were set to 0.0 (Table 4-2).

4-4 I American shad - Since none were taken during the transect program (Table 4-1), densities were applied over the

.bottom 1 m only. This value is approximately the effective fishing.height of the 4.9-m- trawl and,

.*I therefore, population estimates are conservative.

White perch - Significantly greater {P < 0.05) numbers were taken in bottom samples (>6-9 m) {Table 4-1). This I

species appears strongly demersal, with only negligible numbers in the water column. Densities were applied over the bottom 1 m of the water column only. I Striped bass - Significantly greater (P < 0.05) numbers were taken in bottom samples (>6-9 m) {Table 4-1).

This species appears to be demersal, however only three I

specimens were taken during the transect program. To be conservative densities were applied over the bottom 1 m of the water column only.

I Atlantic croaker - No significant difference among catches at the three depth increments was found (Table 4-1).

However, only 12 specimens were taken and more recerit I

information sugge~ts a more demersal distribution. To be conservative densities were applied over the bottom 1 m of the water column only.

I Efficiency coefficients A discussion of scaling coefficients for net avoidance is I

presented in the First Interim Report. In lieu of more precise information, a conservative value of 100 percent efficiency for the 0.5-m plankton net and a reasonable, but I

likely conservative, value of 25 percent efficiency for the 4.9-m otter trawl was assumed.

I Confidence Interval Around Population Estimate I Upper and lower 95 percent confidence intervals around population estimates were calculated by substituting mean I density of organisms per grid (Den.) plus or minus (plus for upper limit or minus for lower limtt) the 95 percent confidence interval of the mean density in place of (Den.)

in equation (1). l I

The 95 percent confidence interval (Cr density was calculated as: 95

) of the mean I

I I

I 4-5 I where CI95 t

= t.OS(v)~

= two-tailed Student's t with v degrees of

( 3)

I v freedom.

=n - 1 I n = sample size s2 = error or within sample variance I Since "true" replication is virtually impossible in field studies, the within~sample variance was estimated in a I manner analogous to that in regression analysis.

sswithin = l(Y. - Q.)2

l. l.

(4 )

I s2 = ( 5)

SS wi. th.in/n-2 I where A . . d Y. is estimate from the two-dimensional moving a~erage.

Any value of Deni + cr 95 less than zero was set equal to I zero.

I Calculation of Proportional Involvement I The timing of this report precludes following the right-hand side of the catch curve over a long enough period to calculate instantaneous total mortality rate (Z).

I Proportional involvement, therefore, cannot b~ calculated at this time.

I Age-Group Determination and Designation I Age groups were segregated by visual inspection of length-f requency distributions. Fishes of the 1979 year class are referred to as age O+, of the 1978 year class as age l+,

etc., throughout the period of this report.*

I I

4-6 I Density Distribution Plots Distribution plots and*population.estimates were generated only for collection periods that had sufficient samples

• • I (minimum of 23). A distribution plot for a species life stage during a given collection period was excluded if the life stage was not collected {population estimate equals I

zero) during that period.

I Plankton Program I

Ichthyoplankton samples were collected in the Delaware River Estuary between river kilometer (rkm)64-117 once monthly during March through early May, and between rkm 0 to 117 one I to three times monthly during late May through November.

Samples were collected with a 0.5-m, 0.5-mm mesh, conical plankton net towed obliquely in a stepwise manner. They were preserved in the field with 10 percent formalin~rose I

bengal solution, and the volume of water filtered was measured with a General Oceanic (Model 2030 MKII) digital flowmeter.

• I Ichthyoplankton were removed from the samples, identified, and enumerated. Larvae and young, < 25 specimens of each target species per sample, were selected at random and measured for length-frequency determination. For more specific information on field and laboratory methods, and.

data reduction, see the First Interim Report (PSE&G 1980a).

I I

Fisheries Program Fishes were sampled semimonthly by otter trawl fished on I

bottom during October, November, January, and March.

Inclement weather and river icing limited sampling to a single collection period during December and precluded I

sampling during February. Sampling was conducted within rkm 0-117 from October through January and within rkm 64-117 during March. All samples were taken with a 4.9-m semiballoon otter trawl towed for a 10-min duration at a I

standard speed. Sampling gear, deployment, sample processing, and collection of physicochemical data were as describ~d in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I In addition, surface, mid, and bottom trawl surveys (for use in generating depth scaling coefficients) were conducted \

I twice during October, twice in November, and once in March.

I I

-1 4-7 I .*.

.a

. . * . .i 4.1.2 Entrainment Program I The collection system used for entrainment sampling at Salem includes a high capacity centrifugal pump (one each at I intake and discharge), an abundance determination chamber at the intake, and a device for survival determination called a larval table (intak~ and discharge). For a more detailed I description of entrainment equipment and procedures, and data reduction, see the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

As a result of the extended outage, PCS-specified survival I sampling was impossible as there wer~ no Unit 1 circulators in operation. However, during this outage, abundance samples were pumped into the abundance chamber (Fig. 4-1)

I from outboard of the Unit 2 trash rack in front of circulator 21A. Due to irregular and unpredictable circulating pump operation, samples were collected only during nine 24-hr periods: once in March, June, ~ugust, I October, and November, and four times ~n July. Collection volume filtered ranged from 50 to 75 m depending on detritus, and samples were processed in the Delaware I laboratory in the same manner as the riverine collections

{See Section 4.1.1, Plankton Program)._

4.1.3 Impingement Program I CWS Intake, Fish Rescue, and Sampling Systems Description I The CWS intake, fish rescue, and samgling systems were described in detail in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a). In brief, the principal components of the fish re~cue system are vertical traveling water screens fitted I with fish buckets, a low pressure fish removal system, a high pressure trash removal system, troughs to return impinged organisms to the river (Fig. 2-2), and counting I pools for sampling. purposes.

During normal operation the combined flow of the fish trough I and trash trough is discharged in the direction of tide through common outfalls located at the north and south ends of the intake structure. Only the northern discharge was used during most of the present study period because of I modifications and repair work on the troughs.

For sampling, both troughs can be diverted into one of two I individual counting ~ools located at the north and south ends of the intake which have been designed to minimize collection stress. The north pool was used almost exclusively during the present study period.

I I

4-8 I

Sampling Design and Procedure Immediate impingement impact is quantified on two component

• • I factors (1) abundance of target fishes on the vertical traveling screens and estimation of population involvement, and (2) effects of impingement on individuals (i.e., initial I and latent survival). Survival sampling employs procedures designed to minimize collection stress and by its very nature cannot be done as frequently as abundance sampling.

Abundance data are obtained from counts of organisms taken I

in survival samples and from those taken in abundance-only samples where special handling procedures are not employed.

I During the present study period organisms impinged on the CWS traveling screens were generally sampled during six days per week. During three days per week a minimum of four combined survival/abundance samples and as many abundance I

samples as practicable (generally> 10) were taken per day.

On the remaining four days as many abundance samples as practicable were taken. Sample duration was 1 to 3 min I

depending on detrital loading. If impingement rate for any target species exceeded 30 specimens per minute in two I

samples per day, the frequency of survival sampling was increased to a minimum of four per day*, six days per week

• Normal sampling frequency was resumed when the impingement rate of the target species decreased to 30 specimens per minute or less during si~ consecutive sampling days. The sampling procedure was as described in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I Estimates of daily and cumulative impingement for each target species were calculated and statistical analysis conducted as described in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I I

4.2 SPECIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Blueback herring, alewife, and American shad I Population Estimate and Distribution Eggs I

Eggs, probably only of the blueback herring and the alewife I and designated as Alosa spp., were taken during the two collection periods in late April and early May 1979. During April 17-20 the population estimate was 1.06 E6, the highest level observed; it was 5.35 ES on May 1-4 (Table 4-3).

I During April 17-20 eggs were concentrated near and just I

I

I 4-9 I

north of Artificial Island, with lower de'f1sity'.-'6ccurring north of Pea Patch Island (rkm 96} (Fig. 4-3}.* By May 1-4 the population was distributed from just north of Pea Patch Island to the northern limit of the study area (rkm 117}

(Fig. 4-4}.

I Larvae I Larvae, most likely of only the blueback herring and alewife and designated as Alosa spp., were taken during two. of four 1- collection periods from late April to late May 1979. The population estimate during April 17-20 and May 29-June 1 was 3.33 ES and 5.91 E6, respectively (Table 4-3). Larval 1 length ranged from 5.0-7.0 mm TL (Table 4-4}. During April 17-20 larvae occurred from Pea Patch Island to the northern limit of the study area (Fig. 4-5). During May 29-June 1 I they were taken as far south as Artificial Island (Fig. 4-6}.

I Entrainment Alosa spp. eggs and larvae were not taken in entrainment abundance collections during March and June through November, 1979. Samples could not be taken during April and I May, the typical period of maximum abundance, because of the shutdown of Unit 1 for refueling and maintenance, and an alternate sampling location at Unit 2, as described in I Section 4.1.2 of the First Interim* Report (PSE&G, 1980a),

was not available until June.

I Blueback herring

!I Population Estimate and Distribution Young (age 0+}

II Young, age 0+ (1979 year class) blueback herring were taken in low abundance on all seven collection periods from I November 15, 1979 through January 28-29, 1980 and on March 20 and 24-27, 1980 (Table 4-5). Length range was51-116 mm FL (Table 4-6). The population increased from I~

November 15 through January 16-18 ~ut remained below 7.00 E6 (Fig. 4-7). The peak population estimate, 1.27 EB on January 28-29, may have been biased by a singularly large catch at mid-Bay (rkrn 35) and extrapolation of the resulting I

I

4-10 I

high density into unsampled (because of inclement weather) areas in the upper Bay and lower River (rkm 40-70)

(Table 4-5; Fig. 4-8). On March 24-27 the estimate was 1.31 E6 for rkm 64-117 (Table 4-5).

• • I In November most blueback herring occurred within rkm 64-117 (Figs. 4-9 through 4-11), but by December and January most had apparently moved downriver to the mid and upper Bay I

(rkm 20-50) (Figs. 4-8, 4-12, 4-13). In March they were relatively abundant near Artificial ~sland (rkm 64-90); no samples were collected in the Bay (Fig. 4-14).

I' Impingement I

During 1979, 5,479 blueback herring were taken in 425 of I

3,226 impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 398,900 specimens (Table 4-7). During January through March 1980, 2,205 blueback herring were taken in 253 of 901 I samples; estimated total impingement was 121,200 specimens (Table 4-7).

Blueback herring were taken during January through June, I

August, and September through December 1979 and during January through March 1980 (Figs. 4-15, 4-16).

In 1979, a few blueback herring were collected during 99 January and only two specimens were taken during February through mid-March. Impingement rate increased rapidly after March 18 and peaked on April 2 (daily n/min = 53.0). After I

April 3 impingement rate decreased substantially, perhaps the result of a station outage which reduced CWS operation to one pump. This spring peak is the result of movement of I

age 0+ specimens, which accompanied adults migrating from downbay and offshore overwintering areas, to spawning areas in the upper-tidal portion of the estuary. Blueback herring I again became common in impingement samples during mid-October and ~ere collected consistently, but at very low rate (daily n/min = 0.02-1.68), through mid-December. This period of occurrence reflected movement of primarily age 0+

I young from upriver nursery areas in response to decreasing water temperatures.

• In 1980, the temporal occurrence of blueback herring in the impingement sample was similar to that observed in 1979.

Moderate numbers were collected during January and small numbers during February and early March (Fig. 4-16).

I Impingement rate increased sharply after March* 15 and peakec'1

~

on March 22 (n/min = 12.0); This peak occurred about one week earlier than during 1979, probably the result of warmer I

1-- -

I 4-11

• • I water temperature in 1980, but was of a magnitude only ca.

20 percent as great as that observed in 1979. The majority of impinged blueback herring were age* 0+ (Tables 4-8, 4-9),

although small numbers of l+ were taken during October,

I November, and March and an occasional 2+ specimen was taken*

during March.

Length range and mean were similar during both years; 41-I 275 mm FL and 76 mm in 1979 and 51-260 mm and 74 mm in 1980

• (Tables 4-8, 4-9). In 1979, 98.1 percent (n = 4,944) of the blueback herring measured were between 56-110 mm; in 1980, 97.0 percent (n = 1,840) were between 61-100 mm. The upper I limit of this size range of maximum vulnerability (i.e.,56-110) was 25 mm greater than observed during 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980b), apparently due to greater relative abundance I of larger indi~iduals during October of 1979 and March of 1979 and 1980.

The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that blueback herring I impingement varied significantly with number of pumps in operation (P < 0.0001). Impingement rate increased in an apparently exponential manner with number of pumps; the I slope of a log-log regression of number of pumps against mean number per minute (b = 1.91) was _significantly greater than 1.0 (Fig. 4-17). Further, this slope was not significantly different than that calculated from 1977 and 1978 data (b = 2.58) (see PSE&G, 1980b for a detailed discussion of the relationship between pump operation and impingement rate).

I The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that blueback herring impingement varied significantly with time of day I (P < 0.0002). The mean number impinged per minute was highest at dawn (x = 2.85) and was also high at night (1.77)

(Fig. 4-18). This may be the result of increased activity at these times, temporal differences in inshore-offshore I distribution, or differences in swim speed and avoidance behavior at low or changing light intensities (see PSE&G,'

1980b for discussion of diel periodicity in impingement).

I Significant diel variation, however, was not evident in 1977 and 1978 data (PSE&G, 1980b). Tide stage did not significantly influence* blueback herring impingement rate.

I During 1979 annual percent live of impinged blueback herring was 58; 17 percent were dead and 25 percent were damaged.

During January through March 1980, percent live was 49; 18 I percent were dead and 33 percent were damaged.

Weekly percent survival ranged during 1979 from 30 in early

~

January to 100 in mid-April, and during 1980 from 27 in early February to 77 in late March (Fig. 4-19). During mid-March through late April 1979 and early February through late March 1980 survival appeared directly related to water I

I

4-12 I

temperature, however, during mid-October through early December 1980 this relationship was inverse (Fig. 4~19).

The reason for this difference may be related to physiological (i.e., osmoregulatory) differences between spring and fall run specimens.

• • I The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that survival varied significantly with tide stage (P ~ 0.0001). Mean percent I

live was significantly higher during flood 2 (x = 62.9) and ebb 1 (6S.O) than during flood 1 (40.7) and ebb 2 (46.9),

perhaps due to exposure to higher intake velocity at lower tidal elevations (Fig. 4-20). There was a highly I

significant (P < 0.0001) negative correlation (r = -0.50) between percent-live and weight of detritus taken with samples. This may be related to gill clogging and abrasion I

from fine detritus in the troughs and increased stress resulting from entanglement with heavier debris. Tide stage and detritus weight, however, did not significantly influence survival during 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980b).

I Time of day did not significantly affect survival.

I Alewife Population Estimate and Distribution I

Young (age 0+)

Young, age 0+ alewife were taken in low abundance on seven of the twelve collection periods from October through March I

(Table 4-10, Fig. 4-21). Length range was80-141 mm FL (Table 4-11). Population estimates ranged from 2.46 ES to S.60 ES between October 11 and November lS after which none were taken until December 4-7 when the population was I

estimated at 2.0S E6. Fish were subsequently taken on January 16-18 (1.02 E6) and 28-29 (3.SS ES) and, within the sampling area rkm 64-117, on March 24-27 (3.69 ES)

I (Table 4-10). ""

On October 11 alewife occurred only near Artificial Island, and subsequently they were taken progressively southward I

through January (Figs. 4-22 through 4-27J *. In March they were again taken near Artificial Island (Fig. 4-28); no samples were taken downbay.

I I

---

~----------

I 4-13

• • I Impingement During 1979, 164 ~lewife were taken in 93 of 3,226 impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 9,800 I specimens (Table 4-7). During January through March 1980, 34 alewife were taken in 29 of 901 samples; estimated total impingement was 2,200 specimens (Table 4-7).

I Alewife were taken during March, April, and October through December 1979 and January and March 1980 (Fig. 4-29, 4-30).

Impingement rate was very low during all months of I occurrence. Temporal occurrence closely paralleled that of blueback herring. Peaks occurred in 1979 during late November (daily n/min = 0.90) and in late March of both years (1979, n/min = 0.56; 1980, 0.30).

I Most impinged alewife were age O+ although several age l+

and possibly older specimens were taken during all months of I occurrence except December (Tables 4-12, 4-13).

Length range was somewhat greater in 1979 (66-275 mm FL) than in 1980 (66-155 mm) although mean lengths were similar I (1979, x = 111 mm; 1980, x = 107 mm) (Tables 4-12, 4-13).

In 1979, 65 percent (n = 106) of the ~pecimens measured were between 76 and 120 mm, while in 1980, 68 percent (n = 23) were between 86-125 mm. It appears that 76-125 mm is the size range of alewife most vulnerable to impingement.

I Data were hot_ sufficient to statistically evaluate the relationship between alewife impingement rate and number of pumps in operation, tide stage, and time of day.

I During 1979 annual* percent live of impinged alewife was 57; 11 percent were dead, and 31 percent were damaged. During January through March 1980 percent live was 45; 9 percent I were dead, and 45 percent were damaged. The number of samples meeting the criterion of impingement rate > 10 per min were not sufficient to examine the effects of number of pumps in operation, tide stage, time of day, or detritus I weight on survival.

I American shad I Population Estimate and Distribution Young (age 0+)

- Young, age 0+ American shad were taken in low abundance on three of the six collection periods in January and March I

4-14 I 1980 (Table 4-14, Fig. 4-31). Length range was71-141 mm FL (Table 4-15). Baywide (rkrn 0-117} population estimates for January 16-18 and 28-29 were 9.77 ES and 8.47 E4, respectively; fish were taken from rkm 0-60 and were most abundant near the mouth of the Bay (Figs. 4-32, 4-33}. On

• • I March 24-27 they occurred only near the southern limit of sampling (rkm 64}; the population estimate for rkm 64-117 was 1.14 E4 (Table 4-14, Fig. 4-34}. I Impingement I

During 1979, 60 American shad were taken in 48 of 3,226 I impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 2,500 specimens {Table 4-7}. During January through March 1980, 10 fish were taken in 8 of 901 samples; estimated total impingement was 480 specimens (Table 4-7).

I American shad were taken during March, April, October, and November 1979 and March 1980 (Figs. 4-35, 4-36).

I Impingement rate. was very low during all months of occurrence. Temporal occurrence closely paralleled that of blueback herring. Peaks occurred in 1979 durin~ late October (daily n/min = 0.19} and mid-Novemb~r (n/min = 0.21)

I and during late March of both years (1979, n/min = 0.21; 1980, 0.12}.

In 1979 annual length range and mean of impinged American shad were 61-190 mm FL and 93 mm, respectively. In 1980, they were 86-155 mm and 104 mm, but only 10 specimens were I measured. During 1979 specimens in the si~e class71-125 were the most commonly impinged and comprised 93 percent (n = 55) of the total number measured. All but three American shad measured in 1979 were age 0+ (Table 4-16), as I

were the 10 taken during 1980 (Table 4-17).

Data were not sufficient to statistically evaluate the I

relationship between American shad impingement rate and number of pumps in operation, tide stage, and time of day.

During 1979 annual percent live of impinged Am.erican shad I

was 68; 7 percent were dead and 25 percent were aamaged.

During January through March 1980 percent live was 57; zero percent were dead ana 43 percent were damaged. However, these percentages are based on small sample size (i.e., 10 specimens}. Data were not sufficient to statistically examine the effects of numbers of pumps in operation, tide stage, time of *day, or detritus weight on survival.

I 4-15 Ie White Perch I Population Estimate and Distribution Eggs I No eggs were taken during 16 collection periods between March and November 1979 (Table 4-18). White perch eggs I adhere to the substrate and, unless dislodged, are unavailable to standard plankton gear (Dovel, 1971).

I Larvae I Larvae were taken during four of six collection periods from late April through mid-June 1979. The population increased I from 2.88 ES during April 17-20 to a peak of 2.25 E7 on May 1-4 (Table 4-18). From late May through mid-June the population fluctuated between zero and 1.41 E7. Larval length ranged from 2.S to_S.5 mm TL (Table 4-19).

I

.. During April 17-20 larval density was- low in the River near Artificial Island (Fig. 4-37). During May 1-4 and May 29-June 1 larvae were distributed throughout the River from Artificial Island to the northern limit of the study area (rkm 80~117) (Figs. 4-38, 4-39). On May 1-4 larvae were most abundant near Pea Patch Island (rkm 96). During June I 12-14 larvae were dispersed over a wider area of the River, ranging from about 8 km south of Artificial Island to the northern limit of the study area; however they were I concentrated north of Artificial Island (Fig. 4-40).

I Young (age 0+)

I Young, age 0+ white perch were taken on November 15 and during all eight collection periods from November 27 through March 24-27 (Table 4-18, Fig. 4-41). Length range was I 46-90 mm FL (Table 4-20). Abundance was low in November; baywide (rkrn 0-117) population estimates for November 15, 19-23, and 27 were 6.~d E4, 0.0, and 4.24 E4, respectively (Table 4-18). The population increased in December and I January; estimates were 2.78 ES, 9.80 ES, and 1.44 E6 for December 4-7, and January 16-18 and 28-29, respectively.

Subsequent sampling was limited to rkrn 64-117; within this

~

area estimated population size, which had been 1.11 E6 on January 28-29, was 5.07 ES on Ma~ch 24-27.

I I

4-16 I

.1 Throughout the period young were generally most abundant from Artificial Island northward, with abundance decreasing e southward (Figs. 4-42 through 4-47). They ranged progressively farther southward into the lower River and upper Bay from November through January but were apparently I

absent in the mid and lower Bay (Figs. 4-42 through 4-46).

By March 24-27 the population had apparently moved northward, and relatively few fish were taken south of Artificial I Island (Fig. 4-47).

I Age l+

I Age l+ white perch were taken during all twelve collection periods from October through March (Table 4-18, Fig. 4-48).

Length range was91-14S mm FL (Table 4-20). The population size was 1.10 E6 on October 11, and 4.40 E4 on October 22-23 I

(Fig. 4-48). Subsequently, except for a minor decrease in mid-November, it increased to a maximum of 2.76 E6 on January 28-29 (Fig. 4-48). Within the area rkm 64-117 I

estimated population was 1.66 E6 on January 28-29 and 9.10

• E4 on March 24-27 (Table 4-18).

I Age l+ fish were generally distributed from near the northern limit of the study region to points south of Artificial Island. Early, they were .taken only within rkm 64-117 but, like age O+ fish, they moved southward during November through mid-January (Figs. 4-49 through 4-SS). On January 16-18 most occurred south of Artificial Island (rkrn 80), and they were taken as far downbay as rkrn I

40 (Fig. 4-SS). The population apparently moved northward again by the end of March when most occurred north of Artificial Island (Figs. 4-S6, 4-S7). I Age 2+ and Older I

Age 2+ and older white perch were taken during all twelve I collection periods from October through March (Table 4-18).

Length range was 141-293 mm FL (Table 4-20).

size fluctuated widely in October and November.

Population It increased from 7.6S ES on November 19-23 to 4.66 E6 on I

December 4-7 and then decreased to 1.06 E6 on January 28-29 (Fig. 4-S8). Within the area rkm 64-117 it decreased from 6.4S ES on January 28-29 to 8.39 E4 on March 24-27 I

(Table 4-18).

Distributional trends were similar to those of age l+ fish (Figs. 4-S9 through 4-67), although in fall the population

- - - - - -----------------~-- - --

I 4-17 I

moved south farther and more rapidly. They were most widely distributed on December 4-7 when abundance was centered in the upper Bay (Fig. 4-64). These fish apparently began moving northward earlier (during January) than did the younger age groups (Figs. 4-65, 4-66).

I Entrainment I White perch eggs and larvae were not taken in entrainment abundance collections during March and June through I November, 1979. Samples could not be taken during April and May, the typical period of maximum abundance, as the result of the Unit 1 reactor shut-down.

I Impingement I

During 1979, 13,178 white perch were taken in 1,632 of 3,226 I impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 831,400 specimens (Table 4-7). During January through March 1980, 6,694 white perch were taken in 742 of 901 samples; estimated total impingement was 319,300 specimens (Table 4-7).

White perch were taken during all months in 1979 and during January through March, 1980 (Figs. 4-68, 4-69). In both I years most were impinged during February and March.

1979, white perch were collected regularly but in low to In moderate numbers. Mean daily impingement rate (daily n/min)

I was generally less than 1.5. Rate increased sharply during early February and peaked mid-month (n/min = 40.0). Rate decreased substantially in late February but increased again during March, demonstrating two secondary peaks early I (n/min = 17.4) and late (n/min = 14.0) in the month. These peaks represent movement from downbay overwintering areas to low salinity spawning areas upriver of Artificial Island.

I Age O+ specimens (1979 year class) comprised most of the fish collected in January and February, but by mid-March age l+ and 2+ individuals were also common in the screen catch (Table 4-21). Impingement rate declined steeply during the I first week of April, perhaps the result-of a station outage which reduced CWS operation to one pump. Occurrence thereafter was sporadic until early October. White perch I became abundant in impingement samples in mid-October

( n/rnin = 1. 5-6. 0), ref le9ting migration towards downbay overwintering area~ (Fig. 4-68). White perch were commonly collected through December, although daily mean rate was

e generally less than 4.0/min. Age l+ and older individuals comprised most of the scre~n catch during October and I

4-18 I November, whereas age 0+ white perch were most abundant in December (Table 4-21}.

During January through March 1980 the temporal trends in white perch impingement were similar to those observed in

• • I 1979; The major peak again occurred during early February (n/min = 26.0} and a secondary peak during late March (n/min = 10.1}. Changes in the age composition of the I

impingement sample (Table 4-22) were as described for the same period during 1979.

Length range and mean were similar during both years; 21-I 290 mm TL (x = 91 mm} in 1979 and I11-295 mm (x = 93 mm} in 1980 (Tables 4-21, 4-22}. In 1979, 96 percent (n = 11,860) of the white perch measured were between 51-165 mm, while in I

1980, 88 percent (n = 4,584) were between 56-140 mm. The upper limit of this size range of maximum vulnerability (i.e., 51-165} was 65 mm greater than that observed during I 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980), apparently due to greater relative abundance of age l+ and older individuals during October of 1979 and March of 1979 and 1980. I The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that white perch impingement varied significantly with number of pumps in operation (P < 0.0001} and tide stage (P < 0.0001}. Impingement rate I

increased in an essentially linear manner with number of ,

pumps; the slope of a log-log regression of number of pumps against mean number *per minute (b = 0.90) was not significantly diff.erent than 1.0 (Fig. 4-70). Further, this slope was not significantly differertt than that calculated for 1977 and 1978 data (b = 1.43} (see PSE&G, 1980b for a detailed discussion of the relationship between pump I

operation and impingement rate}.

The mean number impinged per minute was highest during ebb 2 I (x = 4.12) and was also high during flood 1 (3.96) and ebb slack (3.74) (Fig. 4-71). This trend was also apparent in 1977 and 1978 data (PSE&G, 1980b), and probably reflects increased intake velocity at lower tidal elevations. During I

the present stqdy period time of day did not significantly affect white perch impingement rate, although during 1977 and 1978, significantly higher impingement rate occurred at I

dawn (PSE&G, 1980b).

During 1979 annual percent live of impinged white perch was 36; 8 percent were dead and 56 percent were damaged. During I

January through March 1980 percent live was 31; 6 percent were dead and 63 percent were damaged. I Weekly percent survival ranged during 1979 from 2 in early

~I February to 100 in early May, and during 1980 from 9 in mid-February to 85 in late March (Fig. 4-72). From mid-January through late March of both years weekly survival generally I

I 4-19 I -

varied with water temperature (Fig. 4-72). This apparently direct relationship between survival and water temperature, also observed during 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980b), is probably related to cold-induced physiological stress as water temperature approaches the lower lethal level (ca.

0 C; PSE&G, 1978).

I The Kruskal-Wallis test ihowed that survival varied significantly with number of pumps in operation (P < 0.0001) and tide stage (P < 0.0001). Although survival was-I significantly lower (18 percent) during five pump operation, no consistent relationship was apparent as survival was high during both two pump (54 percent) and seven pump (59 I percent) operation (Fig. 4-73). Survival was significantly lower during ebb tide stages (Fig. 4-20). Number of pumps and tide stage, however, did not significantly influence survival I during 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980b). Time of d~y and detritus weight did not significantly affect survival, although survival did vary inversely with detritus during 1977 and 1978 (PSE&G, 1980b).

I I Striped bass Population Estimate and Distribution Eggs I Striped bass eggs were taken during three consecutive collection periods from late April through late May 1979.

The estimated egg abundance increased from 3.40 E7 on April I 17-20 to 5.27 E7 on May 1-4, then decreased to 1.54 E6 on May 22-24 (Table 4-23). No eggs were taken thereafter.

During April and early May eggs were dispersed throughout the River between Artificial Island and the northern limit I of the study area (rkm 80-117) but were most abundant north of Pea- Patch Island (rkm 96) (Figs. 4-74 through 4-76). In late May, abundance had declined, and eggs were more I sparsely distributed.

I Larvae I Larval striped bass were taken during three of four collection periods between early May and early June 1979.

During May 1-4, the population estimate was 3.55 E6, the highest level evidenced (Table 4-23). During May 29-June 1 I

and June 5-7 the estimates were 1.41 E6 and 1.93 E6, respectively. Larval length ranged from 3.0 to 5.5 mm TL I

4-20 I

(Table 4-24). During May 1-4 larvae were distributed in the River from lower Artificial Island to just north of Pea Patch Island; they were most abundant in the northern half

• • I of this reach (Fig. 4-77).. During May 29-June 1 and June 5-7, a period of declining abundance, larvae were distributed sparsely from Artificial Island to the northern limit of the study area (Figs. 4-78, 4-79).

Young (age 0+)

I Young, age 0+ striped bass were taken during. four of six collection periods during January and March 1980 (Table 4-23, Fig. 4-80). Length range was76-103 mm FL I

(Table 4-25). Estimated baywide population levels dµring January 16-18 and 28-29 were 2.79 E4 and 5.55 E4, respectively (Table 4-23, Fig. 4-80). Distribution during I January was restricted solely to the river reach rkm 64-117 (Fig. 4-81, 4-82). During March 24-27 the estimated population within this region, the only region sampled, was 5.44 E4 (Table 4-23). All fish were taken I

north of Artificial Island (Fig. 4-83). *:;...:..;::='.*>

I Age l+ and 2+

Age l+ and 2+ striped bass were taken during seven of ten collection periods from November 1979 throu~h January 1980 and during March 1980 . (Table 4-23, Fig. 4...;94) *. Length range I

was 156-261 mm FL (Table 4-25). Estimated population level fluctuated widely due to sporadic occurrence, with no apparent trend. Estimated baywide population level during I November and January ranged from 6.58 E4 to 1.11 ES. During this period fish occurred solely in the river and upper bay (Figs. 4-85 through 4-88). During March 24-27 the estimated population within rkm 64-117 was 2.23 E4. Distribution was I

restricted to near Artificial Island (Fig. 4-89*).

I Entrainment I

Striped bass eggs and lar~a~ were not taken in entrainment abundance collections* auri'n*g March and June through November 1979. Samples could not be taken during April and May, the I typical period of maximum abundance, as the result of the

~I Unit 1 refueling and maintenance outage.

I

-1 4-21

• • I Impingement During 1979, 520 striped bass w~re taken in j46 of 3,226 impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 31,300 specimens (Table 4-7). During January through March 1980, I 168 striped bass were taken in 117 of 901 samples; estimated total impingement was 8,000 specimens (Table 4-7).

I Striped bass were taken during January through May, August, and October through December 1979, and January through March 1980 (Figs. 4-90, 4-91). Impingement rate was low during all months of occurrence. Temporal occurrence closely

• I paralleled that of white perch (Figs. 4-68, 4-69). In both years most striped bass were taken during January through March; in 1979 they were also commonly taken in October.

I Peaks occurred in 1979 during early February (daily nLmin = 0.9), early March (n/min = 0.9), and mid-October

( n/min = 1. 0), and in 19 80 during early February

-( n/min *~- o. 9 ) *

• I During January through March 1979 essentially all impinged striped bass were age O+, whereas during October through I December 1979 and January through March 1980 both age 0+ and l+ specimens were taken in approximately equal proportions

-I (Tables 4-26, 4-27).

Length range was somewhat greater in 1979 (56-325 mm FL) than in 1980 (56-265 mm), although mean lengths were similar (1979, x x

= 107 mm; 1980, = 100 mm) (Tables 4-26, 4-27).

In 1979, 74 percent (n = 375) of the specimens measured ranged from 66-120 mm, while in 1980, 63 percent (n = 100) were between 66-110 mm. It appears that 66-120 mm is the I size range of striped bass most vulnerable to impingement.

Data were not sufficient to statistically evaluate the I relationship between ~triped bass impingement iate and number of pumps in operation, tide stage, and time of day.

During 1979 annual percent live of impinged striped bass was I 51; 5 percent were dead and 44 percent were damaged. During January through March 1980 percent live was 39; 7 percent were dead and 54 percent damaged. Weekly percent survival I during 1979 ranged from 11 in mid-February to 91 in early November, and during 1980 from 14 in late February to 80 in late January (Fig. 4-92). From mid-January through late March of both years and during October 1979 through mid-January 1980 weekly survival generally varied directly with weekly mean water temperature (Fig. 4-92). The number of samples meeting the criterion of impingement rate > 10 specimens per minute was not sufficient to examine-the effects of number of pumps in operation, tide stage, time of day, or detritus weight on survival.

I .1

r---

4-22 I Atlantic croaker Population Estimate and Distribution Eggs

• • I No Atlantic croaker eggs were taken during 16 collection periods between March and November 1979 (Table 4-28). Their I

local occurrence would have been unusual since Atlantic croaker spawn in offshore coastal areas. I Larvae I Atlantic croaker was taken during one collection period, October 15-17, 1979. The population estimate was 1.13 E6 I

(Table 4-28).

I Young (age 0+)

I Young, age 0+ Atlantic croaker were taken during all nine collection periods from October 1979 through January 1980 (Table 4-28, Fig. 4-93). Length range was 13-98 mm TL (Table 4-29). Estimated abundance during early October, the time when these fish began immigrating into the estuary from offshore spawning grounds, was 3.71 ES (Fig. 4-93).

Continued recruitment augmented population levels during I

November and December, with population size ranging from 1.59 E6 to 8.02 E6. However, population size apparently declined during January.

I Initially, young Atlantic croaker were found solely in the southwest portion of the Bay (Fig. 4-94), but by late October their distribution ranged northward along the I

western portion of the bay and they were also found in the river portion of the study area (Fig. 4-95). After October, they were distributed throughout the study area (Figs. 4-96 I

through 4-101).

I Entrainment I

Atlantic croaker eggs were not taken in 1979; larvae (13.5-25.0 mm TL) were taken during two of three collection periods during October 1979 and January 1980. Estimated total entrainment per date was 5.3 E3 on October 17-18 and 4.1 E3 on January 23-24.

1

~\

I 4-23 I

Impingement During 1979, 115 Atlantic croaker were taken in 33 of 3,226 impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 4,600

'I specimens (Table 4-7). During January through March 1980, 1,457 Atlantic croaker were taken in 180 of 901 impingement samples; estimated total impingement was 82,000 specimens

• (Table 4-7).

Atlantic croaker were impinged during early January, October, and December 1979 and through January and in early February 1980 (Figs. 4-102, 4-103). Highest impingement was in January during both years. Annual timing and magnitude of the peak varied. During 1979 impingement was high on January 2 (daily n/min = 1.1) and peaked on January 3

• ( n/min = 1. 3). Rate .decreased substantially through mid-:-

January after which none were taken until mid-October.

Impingement rate was quite low in October (n/min = 0.02-I 0.04) and again in December (n/min = 0.04-0.10).

During January 1980 impingement rate was initially low (n/min = 0.0-0.06), increased through mid-month, and peaked I on January 16 (n/min = 10.4). The observed two week difference in annual peak impingement *appears related to higher water temperature in 1980 which apparently delayed movement of Atlantic croaker from upriver nursery areas.

Rates decreased consistently after the peak, and they were absent after February 1.

I Length .;:ange and mean were similar durin.9_ both years; 26-85 mm TL (x = 56-mm) in 1979 and 26-90 mm (x = 50) in 1980.

All impinged Atlantic croaker were age 0+ (Tables 4-30, I 4-31). It appears that 36-75 mm is the size range of Atlantic croaker most vulnerable to impingement. In 1979, 83 percent {n = 94) of the specimens measured were from 41-75 mm, while in 1980, 94 percent (n = 1,295) were between 36-I 65 mm *

. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed that Atlantic croaker I impingement varied significantly with tide stage (P < 0.003). The mean number impinged per minute was highest.during ebb 1 (x = 2.50) and was also high during ebb I 2 (1.99) (Fig. 4-71). Time of day and number of pumps in operation did not significantly effect impingement rate, although pump operation was not sufficiently variable during the short period of abundance for adequate examination of I the latter relationship.

During 1979 annual percent live of impinged Atlantic croaker was 11; 25 percent were dead and 63 percent were damaged.

During 1980, 14 percent were live, 28 percent were dead, and 58 percent damaged. The number of samples meeting the I

I

4-24 I

criterion of impingement rate > 10 specimens per minute was not sufficient to examine the effects of number of pumps in operation, tide stage, time of day, or detritus weight on survival.

• • I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

~

I

- -. - - - - - - -*- - - - - - e- -1:  !

I Table 4-1 Results of vertical transect sampling program October 31, 1979 through March 28, 1980.

mean nwnber/trawl ANOVA F-Test (untransformed) (log catch+l transformed)

Uepth pate Depth x Date Fixed effects Random effects Mixed effects 0-3 m )3-6 m >6-9 m (df = 2 ,36) (df=3,6) (df = 6,36)

Blueback herring 0. 857 0.500 0.158 2.73 0.67 2.19 Alewife 0.036 0.350 0.105 2.08 2. 85 0. 87 American shad o.ooo o.ooo o.ooo White perch 0. 250 0.200 2. 824 36.95** 2. 71 0.24 o.ooo

""'I Striped bass o.ooo 0.176 3 .86* 1.00 1.57 N U1 Atlantic croaker 0.071 0 .400 0.118 0.64 3.00 1.00

• == pp <

0.05

• • 0 .01

. ~.

Table 4-2 Depth scaling coefficients for young, age 0+ ~lewife and blueback herring.

Maximum average water depth of* grid (metere)

~3 ~ 6-9 !:!! 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 ~ 48-51 0 - 3 1.00 1.00 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o 3 - 6 1.00 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o Ul 6°- 9 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o 1-1

.µ

<IJ 9 - 12 l.oo o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o QJ e J.2 - 15 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o Ul 15 - 18 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o

.µ c: 18 - 21 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o ""'I

<IJ e

<IJ 21 - 24 l.oo o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o m

1-1 u 24 - 27 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o c:

• ri 27 - 30 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o

.c

.µ

0. 30 - 33 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o

<IJ

'O 33 - 36 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o

...-I 11:1 36 - 39 1.00 o.o o.o o.o o.o u

• ri

.µ 39 - 42 1.00 o.o o.o o.o 1-1 QJ 42 - 45 1.00 o.o o.o 45 - 48 1.00 o.o 48 - 51 1.00

_e_ e

- - - - - - - - e - - - - - - -e- -I Table 4-3 I

I I

Population statistics for Alosa spp. prior and I subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

II r:Prior to Averagingt jf::ubsequent to Averagingl Life Stage** She Number Standard Coefficient Standard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of , Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence .!liver 3 *Variation R2 Period Date Age Crou2 (mm) Samele a (x/lOOm ) Hean Hean Variation Estimate Llmitu KUometen 1979 Har~ 27-30 l'.ar

• 27-30 87.5 81.S I!

L 4.0-7.5 11 11 0

0 ...64-117 64-117 Apr, 17-20 108.5 I! 40 o.093 o.o6e 460 0,063 426 o.us 1.06 E6 2, lS E6-5 .82 ES 64-117 Apr, 17-20 108.5 L 4,0-7.5 40 0.021 0.021 632 0.019 594 0.164 3.33 ES 6,69 E5-2,l8 ES 64-117 May 1-4 122 .5 E 19 0.016 O.Ol6 624 0.012 557 0.102 5.35 ES 1.10 E6-l .86 ES,64-117 May 1-4 122.5 L 4.0-7 .5 19 0 0 64-117 Hay 22-24 143.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 Hay 22-24 143.0 L 4.0-7.5 51 0 0 0-117 Hay 29-

~

June 1,, HO.S E 51 0 0 0-117 I

Hay 2')-

June 1 150.5 L 4.0-7,5 51 0,169 o.uo 591 0.112 476 0,047 5,91 E6 3.11 1!7-4.74 1!6 0-117 "'

.....i June 5-7 157.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 June 5-7 157 .o L 4.0-7 .s 51 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164,0 E 72 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164,0 L 4 .0-1.s 72 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177 .5 E 75 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177 .5 L 4 ,0-7 .5 75 0 0 0-117 July C)-12 191.5 E 71 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191,5 L 4.0-7,5 71 ,o 0 0-117 July 16-20 199,0 E 51 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 L 4.0-7.5 51 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 E 47 0 0 0-111 July 24-27 206.5 L 4.0-7 .5 47 0 0 0-117 Aug, ~-9 219.5 E 49 0 0 0-117

.; *.J~. 6-.:.l  :! l j.: L 4.o-7 .S ~9 0 0 0-117

..~

Table 4-3 Continued

,_-Prior to Averagingtlr-5ubeequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficientllstandard Coefficient +95:&

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River Period Date Age Group (mm) 3 Hean Variation Kean Variation SamplH (x/10011 ) Estimate Li'l!ita KUoaeten Aug. 20-24 214.0 I! 57 0 0 0-117 Aug. 20-24 214.0 L 4.0-7 .s 57 .0 0 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254.5 E 70 .o 0

- 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254.5 L 4.0-7 .s 70 .0 0  ; 0-117 Oct. 15-17 289.0 E 79 0 0 0-117 Oct. 15-17 289.0 L 4,0-7 .s 79 0 0 0-117 .

Oct. 29-Nov. 2 304,0 E 46 0 0 0-117 Oct. 29-Nov. 2 304.0 L 4.0-7 .5 46 0 0 0-117 ~

I

• Given as midpoint of collection period. ~

• • I! (egga), L (larvae), Y (age O+ young). Q)

• • • Insufficient sample size to estimate population.

t Averaging indicates moving average procea*.

_4t_ e e

Table 4-4 Length-frequency distribution of Alosa spp.

taken in ichthyoplankton sampling from March 28, 1979 through November 2, 1979.

032879 041779 050179 052279 052979 060579 061279 062579 0945 1110 1145 0825 0830 0850 0720 1041 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO 033079 042079 050479 052479 060179 060779 061479 062979 TL (MM) 1155 1130 1317 0935 1210 1404 1626 1045 4,0- 5.5 1 6.0- 7.5 5 NO, MEAS. 6 NO, TAKEN 0 l 0 0 6 0 0 0 MEAN MEAS, 6.5 RA.'lGE (MM) 5,0- 7.0 VOL, FILTERED ~

I N

l.O 070979 071679 072479 080679 0112079 091079: 101!">79 102979 0930 1052 0800 1040 *1001 1006 0910 0900 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO 071279 072079 072779 080979 082479 091379 101779 110279 TL (MM) 1540 1235 1311 1550 1250 1320 1446 1114

---

~------------------------------------------

NO, MEAS, NO. TAKEN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEAN MEAS.

RANGE (MM)

VOL. FILTERED

Table 4-5 Population statistics for young, age O+ blueback herring prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

rPrior* to Averagingt,~ubsequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficientll Standard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Hean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence lllver Period Date Age Croup (mm) Samplea (i/lOOm3 ) Heon Variation Hean Variation R2 Estimate LimiU IUloaieten Oct. 11 284.0 y 51-120 28 0 0 0-117 Oct. 22-23 295.5 y 51-120 SS 0 0 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 .y 51-120 29 0.001 0.001 539 0.001 525 0,167 S,60 ES 1,24 E6-J.29 ES 0-117 Nov. 19-Zl 325.0 y 51-120 43 0,002 0,002 656 0.001 579 0,079 2,27 ES 1,0~ E6-l,70 ES 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 y 51-120 24 0,003 0,003 4!l0 0.003 487 0,163 7,50 ES 2.44 E6-J,64 ES* 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.S y 51-120 53 0,012 0,004 219 0.003 207 O.lSO 3,91 £6 S,90 E6-2,J9 E6 0-117

~

I w

0 Jan. 16-18 17.0 y 51-120 0.020 0,009 262 0.007 202 0.394 6,21 £6 1.07 E7-3,82 E6 0-117 Jan. 21-23 22.0 y 51-120 8 0,008 *** 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.5 y 51-120 23 0.215 0.204 454 0,198 454 0,162 1.27 EB 2.ss EB-5.93 E7 0-117 Har. 10 70.0 y 51-120 s 0 *** 64-117 Mar. 20 in.o y 51-120 10 0.006 *** 64-117 Har, 24-27 es .s y H-120 26 0,037 0,010 134 0,009 123 0.166 l,Jl E6 2.os £6-7,64 ES 64-117

• Given as midpoint of collection period,

• • y (age o+ young),

• • • Insufficient sample size to estimate population.

t Averaging indicates moving average process, e e

Table 4-6 Length-frequency distribution of subsampled blueback herring taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

FL (M.~> OCT 11 OCT zz r.011 H NOii 19 NOV Z7 DH 04 JAN 16 JAN Z1 JAN Z8 MAR 10 MAR zo MAR 24

.THRU THAU THAU THllU THllU THRU THIU DC T 2J NOV H DEC 01 JAN 18 JAN Z3 JAN 29 MU 27 51-SS 5b-6U b1-6) 1 1 1 z b6-1u 3 2 1 6 71-75 4 1 6.

7o-cHJ 3 4 1 b1-o) z 2 .s 5 80-"'"' 2 it 4 z 91-95 3 1

6-11.11) 1u1-1us 1

-iei-110 111-11) 116-1.!0 ~

121-1l5 I 126*1.)LI w 131-135 136-1 lo(J hl-14) 146-1 )J 1)1-155 150-1ou 161-1'J5 NO. l't~5. 0 0 2 2 21 12 2 10 0 z 31 NO. TA~Ul 0 0 2 2 itZ 20 2 153 0 2 31

'IEAN M~AS 0 70.0 7l.U 68.0 86.8 82.7 84.5 79.9 65.5 n.8 i!A*<G~ ( :-1'1) 10- 10 73-73 58- 78 63-161 6.5-116 81* 88 63* 88 63* 68 51*151

'fable 4-7 Impingement data summary for target fishes, Salem CWS Sampling Per iod1 January-December 1979 (l,226 samples1 8,994 min sampled I Percent Survival Actual Estimated Length (mm)

S[!ecies CF L 0 o* No. No. Hin Max Blueback herring 4 25 58 17 25 5,479 398,900 41 275 Alewife 93 57 11 ll 164 9,800 66 275 American shad 48 68 7 25 60 2,500 61 190 White perch 1,632 36 8 56 13,178 831,400 26 290 Striped bass 346 51 5 44 520 31,300 56 325 Atlantic croaker 33 11 25 63 115 4,600 26 85 Sampling Period: January-March i980 (901 samplesr 2,547 min sampled)

Percent Survival Actual Estimated Length (mm) ~

S[!ecies CF L D D* No. No. Min Max I w

Blueback herring 253 49 18 33 2,205 121,160 51 260 N Alewife 29 45  !°' 45 34 2,200 66 155 American shad 8 57 0 43 10 480 86 125 Whi.te perch 742 31 6 63 6,694 319,300 11 295 Striped bass 117 39 1 54 168 8,000 56 265 Atlantic croaker 180 14 28 58 1,457 82,000 26 90 CF

• catch frequency (number of samples in which the species appeared).

Percent Survival: L

• live; D

• dead; D* .. damaged.

- ... - .. - - --(- - - - - -

Table 4-8 Length-frequency distribution of impinged blueback herring, Salem CWS, January 1979 through December 1979.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ~********************************-********-**-*******************************************************e****

U1CIU9 U1U719 011479 01 l179 012nv 0204/9 Ol1 HY 0211179 Oi!i!H9 030419 031119 OJUH 1Ul0 uuuu uuuu oouu OOOll 0000 l)OOI) ciooo uooo 0000 OiJOO OCIOiJ 10 TO TO JU TO TO TO TO 10 10 TO lO 010(){'1 0113'19 014:11111 01l119 OiWH9 021079 02117'# 02i!4 79 OlUH9 031019 031119 032419 f L lr.,.l) U30 2.!JU i!i!JU UJO 2100 2HO i! ii?Jil Zi?JO i!HO 2245 HlO 22JO

• • • • • • • • • • o*************************~************************************************************************************a*********

51* 55 1

)O* bLI s b1* bS 29 Ob* IU 71* 75

'l 4

.1 1

Sfl 1l 48 7o* 110 Ill* llS Sb* 'ilJ I.

1 ,,..

il6

""'wI 'I

'ii* .,,~

9o*10U 101-1.is 2 w li.0-110 2 111-11:.

11 b*1l0 *1 1<!1-125 1~6-1.lU 111-1 .SS

1 130.:140 h 1*14) 140-l)il 1)1"".lH 150-100 101-10~

lob-170 z 171-175 z 11o*lb0 1 101-1 o:. 1

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • G***n***********************a********

.. o. MlAS

• 10 4 J 1 1 H5 NO. I All.tN 10 4 J 1 1 Z16

$AMP 0 MlN 145 198 1Y~ 1 t11 15!i 1111 zu 164 158 131 144 11J n:At* u b9 11J 7J Ill 71

"' ,\ ~, \J t 14lA~,

(!oo*) ol* 1') ob* OU

'" ol- ,, lo* tlU fl- I'> llfl* 9u ~1*18~.

i

!1

• ~.

Table 4-8 Continued

---

~---------------------------------------~-G-----------~-----------------------------------~-

UJZ51'1 040119 OloUlllY U41H9 Oloi!J79 043079 U50719 051419 05i!Z79 OSZ919 060419 061119 ouoo OOilO uouo 0000 tlOO . 0915 09.50 TO.

. 1030 180U 1045 10.50 10JO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO . TO TO JO O.U119 u .. 0119 Ult1"/9 04i!U19 042119 050419 051119 051819 052519 060119 060819 0615!19 fl (Mrl) tBO UJU Zt.51.1 19i.u* 0'100 floOO 14j0 1850 1800 1800 1900 1110U

---

~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*------------------------------

41- 45 1 o- 50 s1- H 3 1 so- 60 16 5 61* 6S 111.1 111 1 oo- 10 354 4i!9 1 1 ii!

11- 15 508 5"7 l 4 i!

111* bO nz 440 4 i!

01-bo* YU 11!1 2ll HIS Z11 ttY i!

1 4

1 1Z 9 z

.,.,_ c,s S1 46 1 1 z 1

\11>*100 lll j1 3 101-10:, 11 4 1U6*11J 4 i!

111*115 1 1 110*111!0 3 1 1'1*1Z5 i!

120-uo l.S1 *1l5 ~

t .)11-1 i.a I

h1*11o5 w 146*HU .a:.

151*1S5 1St>*1oil 1111-1115 1 166*110 1 111-115 1711*1 tlil 1ti1-1 ci5 11>1>*190 l!Jl*Z.SS Z.H1*Z1tl z .. 1-zi.s Z~o-iSO *1 Hl*ZS!I tSll*ZoO t61*t65 lllll*UIJ t71*U5 HO. 14lAS.

• 1874 i!028 1i! 1l 35 3 1 HO. TAllEN 1961 2449 1l 13 35 3 SAHP. Ml1'1 1l'I ZH 11 V JY 119 1011 156 1711 116 1J2 11t4 111 811 89 It]

MEAN HlAS. 15 7~ 78 79 RANl.l (i-1141 51*180 51*U5 61* YS bt>* 95 66*i!50 ,86- 95 41* 0

Table 4-8 Continued 01111H9 Jlli&!lt1Y Ui'Ut IY 0701'79 011°!17'1 Ufi!219 01111'11 1)81219 U81'179 082679 090279 o9oo 09107¥ UiluO ouuu UUIJO oouo oouo 0940 uooo 0000 0004 uooo 1044 10 TO 10 TO 1CJ TO TU TO TO TO 06i!379 TO lU 06J019 011JH9 011419 Oli!179 07llll9 0111179 081819 082519 090119 090S19 091579 FL (l'lllJ i!llU 2i!JO lo!OO i!l.50 i!2l0 B!IO i!i!lO . i!2l0 i!H8 2220 i!10U Zi!lu

---

~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

101-105 NO. IH.AS.

NO. UKEN SAHP. Hlli 195 246 Z.H 234 i!lS 21 i!14 2U6 zu 86 191 HUN HEAS. 10J RANGE (f'lllJ 101*105

.s::i.

I w

U1

Table 4-8 Continued Olllb/9 OY.!Hll U9JulY 10U/lY 101'.79 1U217Y 1 Uol!H9 1104111 1111 79 1111119 112H9 ,,li09 OUOli OUU7 ouuu oouu IJIJUO UU02 UUU5 oouu ouuu oouu ouuo lJUli) 10 TO Tli TO JO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO o9U79 UY.!979 100b/9 10H79 11.12079 10U79 11U.5/9 111u79 1117 79 112479 120179 12Ub79 FL (,.,,., > 120U 2ZOO .!2JU UJU UH 22JU 224) 221) 2230 221S 2230 2232

---

u---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

51- ))

1 2 S6* bJ 1 i! j ) 7 01- bS 1 7 1 111 29 11 bb- 7U 2 2 b 14 28 43 8 4 71- 15 2 2 2 1 jj 13 45 41 4 lb- 11..i 12 11 Jll 27 2 81- bS 1 4 11 1b 34 26 6 8b- 9.) 1 J 8 4 1 ll 12 J 91- 115 4 1 4 2 ) 9 90-1uu 3 2 2 J 2 .i::.

1u1*1uS 3 2 2 I 100-llJ 2 1 1 w 111-115 2 2 0\

116*120 1 2 2 1d*1.?S 2 2 j 1 1.!o-130 2 1 U1*1.)S 1 1 4 2 136-HU 1 3 J 141*14S 2 3 j ho-1 SJ 1 2 1 2 hl-1))

Hb*lbU 2 161-165 lbb~1/J l.51-0) 2Jo*.?4U

.?41-.145 N0 0 MEAS. 2 11 20 i!7 95 611 2U4 204 34 5 2 11 21 27 218 206 JS )

UMP. HlN 170 203 139 198 117 227 217 231 224 166 240 195 HEAii lll;A5o 125 113 1211 103 116 102 90 77 77 75 71 66 AAN(il; (HH) 121*1l5 111-11!> 126-130 5b-l50 71-245 56*15U 51*1bU 56-UO 51-150 b1- 90 56- 70

--... ,_ e

'l'able 4-8 Continued

• • • • • • • • • • • e********-************************************************************************-*************************************

12U919 1.? 1619 1U.H9 1l3U1'1 UlJli6 oouu UIJ05 oouu l Ii Tu ((J TU 121~19 1.122'\I 1UY1'1 1.2.H 19 fl (HHJ 22JU Z230 221S 0600

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • u***************************-********************-********************************-***********************-********

61 - Cl~ z bb* 1.J 71* 15 z lo* di.I 111- o5 110- 9J 91* YS.

9o*1UO 101-11.15 1Ub*11U 1 *******************************************************************

kO. HEAS. 3 3 2 z

.l>-

NO. TAHN 3 3 l. z I w

$AHP 0 HlN 216 216 111 48 -..J HEAN HEAi 0 83 69 ll 85 RANGE (1114) 66*110 61- 85 11- 15 66*10~

Table 4-9 Length-frequency distribution of impinged blueback herring, Salem CWS, January 1980 through March 1980.

lllUlou "l:Johu v 11.>~J lJ I £ 110U 111 ~ /!IU Ub!.>tlU ..it llH:lii Utl/IW un~Bu ;iju£ou uj*111i:<v Uj1bOJ UvUU J<IUlJ UJlJ*J UUUll Ulil1U UuUU UUUIJ uuuu Ol!Ull uuuu (JL;Jo.J i,, "J~

10 ru lu 1(1 ru IU TU 10 lU TO ro 1 Cl U1US80 01 I li!U I) 11 Vl:IU u12011u ll20280 Ul0\18U Ul161lU 0223~0 IJ301cU J.>ul!dU u31;~u (JJ2,ljU FL 0111) 2230 221-!I i!HO c!23~ 2.>00 a 30 £.!jU Z2Jll a.rn c!2jU j!j)u 2131.l

---

~------------------------------------------------------------------

51- 55 1 5o* oo 2 1 61- b5 11 l1 lZ 2 1 64 b6* /0 1 .:I !14 111 !I 2 1£ 1b1 71- 75 4 1.S )U u 6 1 12 dS lb* l:IU 1 b 11 6 6 1 ii 112 81- 85 J 1. 3 4 47 8b* Yi> 1 1 1 2 17 91- 95 2 1 10 9o*1UU 1 101*1Ll5 luo-11J 2 111-115 2 110-1,w 1 1Z1*125 1 l.?o-1.50 151-135 1 1Jb*l~::J J hl-145 14b*1SO 1

2

"'I" w

1S1*1S5 I 00 1S6*1o0 J 1b1*1o5 2 1oci-110 1 1l1*17S 1 N0 0 llEAS 0 6 143 67 2 23 s 42 675 NO. JAii.EN 6 14l 67 2 23 5 42 101 SAl

J**~\., 11LllJ1..1 i,;1,:_ .. , 1u Ill U129EIO UHl'JU FL (MM), 11iUU B5S

• • ------------------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------

s1- )!I 2 So* 60 ., j ol- 65 4U 27 oo* 7U 12!1 64 11* i5 111 Yl 76* dO 84 o7 b1- Ii) 44 26 il6- "10 21 9 "11- 9S 13 6 "'6*Hi!J S 3 1u1-1u5 1 1li6*11J 111-115 110-l .!J 1.!1-125 llo-1 jJ H1*1H 1 jo-11o\J 141*1"5 14o*15J 2 151-155 no-1 oo 161-16) 1011-110 2 111-11!1 1 176-ldll 1111-1115 246-250 2!11-2)5 2)o*26\J 1

---

~-------------------------------------------------------------

NO. lllA~. 301 110. TAll.~N 301 UMP. lllN 25

Table 4-10 Population statistics for young, age 0+ alewife prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

'Prior to Averaglngt 1 rsubeequent to Averaglngl Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficientllstandard Coefficient +95%

Collection Jul1an* or Range of Hean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River 3 2 Period Date Age Group (mm) Samples (x/lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation R l!stl-te Limits ltllometera 1979 Oct:-Tf 284.0 y 76-95 28 0.001 0.001 529 0.001 493 o.ue 2.46 1!5 9.20 ES-1.46 1!5 0-117 Oct. 22-23 295.5 y 76-95 55 0.001 0.001 741 0.001 652 0.080 4.02 E5 7 0 14 E5-3.25 1!5 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 y 76-:95 29 0.001 0.001 539 0.001 525 0.167 5.60 1!5 1.24 E6-3.29 E5 0-117

lov. 19-23 325.0 y 76-95 43 0 0 0-117 Sov. 27 331.0 y 76-95 24 0 0 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.5 y 76-135 53 0.005 0.002 353 0.002 315 0.221 2,05 E6 3.33 E6-l.44 E6 0-117 1980 Jan-:--IT-18 17.0 y 76-135 31 0.002 0.002 557 0.001 516 0,120 1.02 E6 1.93 E6-6.48 ES 0-117 Jan. 21-23 22.0 y 76-135 8 0 *** 0-117 Jan. 28-:-29 28.5 y 76-140 23 0.001 0.001 480 0.001 483 0.164 3.55 1!5 1.25 1!6-1.62 1!5 0-117 Mar. 10 70.0 y 76-140 5 0 *** 64-117 Mar. 20 80.0 y 76-140 10 0 *** 64-117 Mar. 24-27 85.5 y 76-140 26 0.011 0.004 178 0.003 147 0.308 3,69 £5 6.19 ES-2.53 E5 64-117

• Given as midpoint of collection period.

• • Y. (age O+ young).

• • • Insufficient sample eize to estimate population.

I Averaging indicates moving average process.

e

- -~ - - - -*- - - - - -e- -I Table 4-11 Length-frequency distribution of subsampled alewife taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

---

0-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FL (MM) OC I 11 OCT u i.ov 1!> i.ov 19 NOV 27 DEC 1)4 JAN 16 JAN 21 JAN 28 MAR 10 MAR 20 MAR 24 T>HIU THMU fHRU THRU TllRU THRU TMRU ocr 2.S foiOV l3 DEC (J7 JAfoi Ill JAfoi 23 JAN 29 MAR 27 76-tllJ 81-1!5 80-90 91-95 9b-1UO 2 101-10~

106-110 2 111-115 4 116-llO 121-125 126*U(J 131-1.S5 1 1.)o-140 2 .i::..

hl-145 1 I 146-1 !>'J .i::..

151-1~5 156-lbU 161*105

'-0. MtAS 0 0 0 II 3 0 0 9 NO. TA'-tN 0 0 8 4 0 0 10

'l[AN Mt AS. 80.0 88.0 81.0 107.7 144.3 161.0 126.0 121.0 HA ... lit ( 1'11) 80* 8(1 bll- 1$8 151- d1 88-133 126-161 161-161 126-126 93-141

Table 4-12 Length-frequency distribution of impinged alewife, Salem CWS, January 1979 through December 1979.

U10ll9 01U71Y 1.111419 012179 0121179 02U479 021179 0211! 79 022579 U.)0479 'O.H 179 Qj1t79 luJU UJUO uuuu CJuUU 01.JUU uuou ouou uuuo ouou Uuo:i UIJUu IJt;uU TO lu TU TU TU TU TU TO TO TU TO TC.

LJ1Ub79 iJ1 I .>79 U1.:Uf9 01/.7'9 020.iN 0.21u79 O.! 1 719 02l479 03u.S79 U31u19 0.S1 779 Ci~c4f9 fL (~.~) i!BO j!j!jU U.iJ /. z.su i!lUO c!Z3u .!23U ll31J i!2.i0 a .. s u.so a.su

---

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16- tlO 5 61- 65 4

&b- 9J' 2 91- 95 9o*lUJ 2 1 ul-1 us 2 lllb-1 Ll 111-115 110-120 1c1-12s 2.ib*2i.o*

i!i.1-245 i!i.o*i!)O

.!51-~)~

"5o*2oQ to1*.!o5 Zbo-UiJ

.!11*275

---

~----------------------------~---------------------------------------------------------

19 19 iAHP. lllll 14~ 198 19S 161 155 116 Z13 1b4 158 137 144 17.S 100 llAN"I: (Hll) 7C>.;.2n

';

-/ e

• - - - - - - - - - - - -e-Table 4-12 Continued

• • • • • • • -****u************-****************************************-*******************-*********-**********************************

Ol.!57\1 li .. u 1 i y L14iJd I~ *J<t I 5 i 'i "'"' j (~ iJ4.Hi7'J O~ll//'/ U') 14 l'.1 052'79 05l979 libU479 ub'l179 uuuu uuuu uuuu uuuu llUU \)<,/ 15 U9JU 1U3U 18UU 1045 1030 1 (Jj(J TO TO tu TO 10 10 TO ro TO TO TO TO OHl 19 040119 041U9 042U7Y 04 2119 0,,0479 . 0511711 051819 052H9 000179 OolJl:S79 001579 FL OHi> 223U 2230 ZZJO 1940 0900 1400 1430 1850 1800 16UO 1900 1 ISOU 11-*15 1 7o- 80 1 81* &5 5 3 8b* Yil 4 1 91- 95 z 1 9o-lllll 101-105 100-110 111-115 110-120 3 lll-125 z 126*1.SO z 131-135 2 130-140 141-145 14'o*150 151-155 15o-1ou 101-105 100-1(1) 171-1/5 110-ldll 2 1 1o1*1cs5 tllo-190 191-195 19o-2U:>

2u1-2us 200-210 211-215 216*.!lO Z<:1-U5

.?26-2.SJ 231-2.SS 236-240 hl-245 2 .. 6-250 251-255 25b-Zoo 201-205 h0 0 Hf.AS. Z8 8 "O* THf." 28 11 SAHP. HlN 139 21.J 119 l9 1.19 108 156 118 116 13i! 144 111 116 110 98 RANGE. (Hll) 11-zos b1*18U 96*1UU

_ _II

/

Table 4-12 Continued UD11!/9 IJD2479 ll7ll1 /Y OfUd79 ll 71 ~ 79 Ull279 UI:! 1179 0812/9 081979 08Ui79 090279 UY1079 U'>GU iiOulJ uouu uouu uuuu 0000 0940 uuoo ouuo ll004 IJVliO 1u44 TO ro IU . TO 10 TO 10 TO TO TO TO l (J 06lH9 Uol079 070179 011479 012119 0721379 081179 081879 08~579 090179 090579 091 s ,.,,

FL 0'110 2230 2230 UUil 22:SO i!i:!.50 1550 22:SO 2230 2158 U2J 2100 n:su N0 0 MEAS.

195 246 239 229 234 235 21 214 206 213 86 , 91

.. e

- -,, .. *- - - - - - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-12 Continued

---

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ull1ti79 1)"1c!.HCJ 09Jll711 1007'9 101479 1lic!1 7Y 10.!d/9 1104/Y 1111(9 111 ll /9 112579 12u279 uuu\J Uull7 OVlJO ouuu UllUll UlJOl . ouos OOUU ouuo (J(Jl)(J OU\JU  ;;uu~

10 ro 10 0 TO TO ro ru TO TO TO TO 10 092Z19 uYZY79 IU067'>' 101.H9 102079 102779 11U.57Y 1110 /CJ 111 77Y 112~ I9 120119 ,,(,~79 FL 11'111) 120U o!ZlJlJ i!BO 22JO 2Zl5 2.!30 2245 2215 l2.50 2215 4!230 2232

---

~--*------------------------------------------------------------------

bb* 70 2 71- 75 3 2 lb* 81) 2 1 Ill* liS 6 l!o* YU 9.1

• Y5 1 3

5

'2z CfC.*lUJ 2 i! 1 101*1U5 1 4 3 2 HJC.*111) 1 7 3 111-1'15 2 4 11t.i-izu 2 1 1Z1*1C!5 1 lcb*lla 1 1.H-13~ 2 130*14) 1 1 1 1~1-145 2 2 1 1 2 140-1 hi 1 2 nl-H!> 1 1 15o*1oU 1

.:=.

101-105 I 2 .:=.

1oo*1/J l11 171-115 Ho*lou 1d1*1o5 1 cio*IYO H1*1'15 t,O. ,. tA S. 8 j 8 11 50 2.S 8 J 8 11 ~o 110' 139 198 177 zn 217 2.H 224 186 240 19~

1J9 142 126 114 103 123 108 11l4 tlAh&k (1111) 1.51-145 86-195 111-155 91-145 91-170 66-180 71-170

Table 4-12 Continued 1 lu'f l'f 1~1b1'1 lU.H'll 12.rn/9 uuuo vuvv UuU~ IJUUO TO TO TO TU 1Z l 5 7Y 122.U'il 1U'f79 12l179 FL lHl'll UJO 2Z3U .l21S 0600

---

~-----------------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO. l'ltAS.

216 216 111 48 MtAN MEAS. bl!

AANGk (H'll

.. .. e

- .. - - - - - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-13 Length-frequency distribution of impinged alewife, Salem CWS, January 1980 through March 1980.

UlUllHJ "l U6(1\J ulHou u.J .!UilJ 01Uil0 IJ2ujllU U.:!lUllU U21 l tsU IJU4tsU 0.)Jo:!oU U3UVdU IJjJOOu uYUll UUlhl UUuJ uuuu UUU(J uuuu UUiJU UUUJ IJUUU Uu\JU uJiJi.i Udl)

Iv lU TCi TU 10 IU TO TO lo Tu Tu Tu iJlU)blJ IJI lioO U11 il!lU ll1,6b0 U'U.:!ilO OiU\lliU u'l6i!O U.:!,.St!U U.SU11l0 >i.suoou u.S1 )ol.l Ci.5UdJ fl ( l<o-tJ U.Su U'+!I U.su 22.SS 2.SUO z.?jQ 22.SU 22.SU 22.su .:!BiJ '3)U '1.5U 71- /S

/6- tlJ 81* IS) 1 do- 'il:J 1 111- y) 2 vo-1 u..:

1ul*lu5 lUO*l IU 2 111-115 11 b-1 "0 1 1l1*1.!) 2 1.lo*l.>J 1 1.> 1*1.:i!I 1 l30-11oJ 11.1-1-.>

ho*l)'-1 1)1-1))

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -*****************************-***********************************************~***************************a

'lUo I Ai..tN 14 132 166 1116 207 2.S\I 203 206 1111> 1111 1SS 9j 1u7 ICAl*ul I 1>11 J 116*140 86-100 11*1))

Table 4-13 Continued

• • e*************-*****************-************************************************************************************************

l.l~C: .)OU u~.s..1au Vl.lllU L1uu11 ru Iv iJ.>cYOV U.S.>1 &LI fl li*) 111uo o!.S'J'J

• • -:::*;~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11

• l'J to- 11J ol* o'J oo- 'l'J v *- ... ;

Yb-IOU I lvl-lu'J 3 luo-l Ill .s 111-111 .!

110-llJ 1 1' I *1 c) I 1.::o*l.SJ 1.s 1-1.h 1.So*l ~:J l~l-l~'J l

---

~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nv. Mc*5. 16 lo 107 AA .. iiE (PIM) 9*

- -fl' *- - - - *- *- - - -* - - - -e- -

Table 4-14 Population statistics for young, age 0+ American shad prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

!:Prior to Averagtngt lr:Subsequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number Standard Coefficient Standard Coefficient -t'J5%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River 3 2 .

Period Qat!l Age Grou2 {mm} Sam2les CxllOOm l Mean Variation Mean Variation R. Estimate Limits Kilometers_

1979 Oct. 11 284.0 y 71-145 28 0 0 0-117 Oct. 22-23 295.5 y 71-145 55 0 0 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 y n-145 29 0 0 0-117 llov. 19-23 3a.o y 71-145 43 0 0 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 y 71-145 24 0 0 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.5 y 71-145 53 0 0 0-117 1980 I

~

1.72 E6-4.70 E5 0-117 \0 Jan. 16-18 17 .0 y 71-145 31 0.015 0.006 228 0.005 188 0.37i 9.77 E5 Jan. 21-23 22.0 y 71-145 8 0 ..,, 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.5 y 71-145 23 0,001 0,001 480 0.001 472 0,164 8.47 E4 2,96 ES-3.96 E4 0-117 y 71-145 5 0 64-117

!far, 10 70,0 ***

Mar, 20 80,0 y 71-145 10 0 *** 64-117 Kar, 24-27 85,5 y 71-145 26 0,001 0,001. 510 0,001 482 0,148 1.14 E4 3.21 E4-6.30 El 64-117

• Given as midpoint of collection period,

• • y (age o+ young)

• • • Insufficient sample size to estimate population, t Averag.ing indicates moving average process, -

Table 4-15 Length-frequency distribution of subsampled American shad taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

---

*--*---------**--*-------------------------------------------r*-***------------------------------****--*-***--------

FL (I'.~) Otl 11 oc' Zl NOV 1) NOV 19 hOV Z7 DEC 04 JAN 16 JAN Z1 JAN Zll MAR 10 MAR ZO MAR 24 lHHU THllU THRU THRU THllU THRU THAU Otl B NOV 2.5 DEC 01 JAN 111 JAN 23 JAN i!9 MAR 27 71-75 76-6U 81-11~

tso-vll 91-95 z 96*1\lO 2 101-1 ... s 1011-110 111-11:i 2 116*1ZO 121-1,~ z 1~o*l.SO l.H-1l~ .::..

136-hll I h1*14~ CJl 0

i>jQ. l'ltAS. 0 0 0 *O 0 0 10 0 0 0 NO. T.Ht.N 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14EAN MtAS 0 1 OS.6 101.0 1111.0 RAtlGt. (l'l'I)71-141 101-101 118*1111 e

• rable 4-16 Length-frequency distribution Of impinged American shad, Salem CWS, January 1979 through December 1979.

---

0----------------------------------------------

JILlc!lY l,l.h1

• d IJ7 /y VIJJI, "" '" io lHuJ'u11<1 u*1l1uvu

• ' "'"~.J I(. to (Y

"'IJ" 7v *Ji!1JUvll lHJl!U 11( ... l'2 lf.I.,.

UullU l*2'.., /9 (JUIJ\I 0.l(J4 /9 u1.1Uu u.1111Y (JuUu (d1olv

\.IU.JIJ to Tf) IU IV lu 1u TU ro lu TU ,*o 10 U1,iJI~ ulU/9 02*H79 Ul 1lJ19 0.2117Y Ol.24/9 03U.3lv U.S1079 u.S1 719 (132419 fl ,,,,. )

010(>/9 22JU U11.H9

,UjO UlJ ldU l1UO z.!jO 2l30 a.su 2230 2245 2230 223U

---

G**-------------------------------------------------------------~-------------------**************************

611* YO 91* Y5 911*1U0 101*105 luo-11;.i

• 111-115 110-120 1.?1*125 126*130 Hl*H5 ll6*1'.;J llol*h5

~

---

.-------------------------------------------------------- I N0 0 ME.AS. lJ1 5

SAHP. * '11" 198 1Y5 181 155 178 l1J 164 158 137 144 173 114 lio-145

Table 4-16 Continued

'.J,il5/Y **f.t 'IJ~ I"' IJlt l) ,.,, .1eLl(a 1c, 11 .. 1.11" "" 1 ~ (-I IJI, )II (\I '*)d//*1 lJ S I~ f 't ,,~ ~' (IJ U) {V /~ 1 l.e 11lv

• JGu J 11uu,: ..:""u:* u>JUV I <Ull 11'i/ I~ uv ~*I ltJ.hl 111uu 1, ... ~ 1 u )1; 1i,) *J 10 tu ru lu Tu Iu lu 10 10 10 TO ro UH1/9 UitU/19 Ult 1 lof9 01ti!U/9 01tU79 U!>u41Y 0511 7" 05111 /\I 052579 Ob0179 060679 u61579 fl ,,..,.. > 2210 22lU Ulu 1Y40 U900 1400 14JO 111!>0 1110U 1800 1900 11iuo 150-100

---

~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hO. l1EAS 0 NO. TAKl:N SAHP. HIN H9 213 119 l9 119 108 178 11b HZ 144 111 158 RANliE UIK) 156*160

~

I Ln rv

- -;-

Table 4-16 Continued Jt-lo/C, UC>~4 /Y un.1 I~ *1 l\Je-1 y lirl;/9 .ilUl't it.j I I / '/ lJ(\ 1 l i" J~2o/Y 'J~vl/Y li't 1.; /'I vd 1 " ' "

lJ<,..,lJ vul;;i i;,JlJu UUIJU uuuu UUlJv uY~u lhJIJU uliuu UJu4 UUU\J 1 u....

fl) II) llJ ru 10 Iu I0 10 1u TO 10 f(J Oo2H9 llo.SUIY lJ/ul/9 0114/9 U/.?119 UU.IHY U.:111 /'I Ubl b Iii lHl.?; l'I ()901 /Y IJYO' 79 uy1;19 fl (H11) 2230 223lJ aou 2.?JO a.rn n;o .!1U1) 22.SO 2158 .!22:1 2100 2230

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • m******************************************.***************************************-***************************

NO. IAJl:.I:,.

SAHP 0 HlN 19~ Z46 259 Z29 235 21 214 2U6 2H 86 191

'If.AN Hf.45 0 RAr.Gf. (HM)

""'I Ul w

i I

Table 4-16 Continued

)91 bl CJ UYc!j/9 JYj.J/9 IJlJ/(Y I U 14 /Y 1 U21 79 1Uc?dl9 111J47Y 1111111 111 c l'il 112S7Y 12ui

l9 UlluCi l.)o1,17 li:J1..nl UU\l[l llLll*U *h**Jc! IJOu'> Ull*JIJ ulJIJI* ~.I !J .J ;_1 'JiJu;; UJu5 tu rv Iu Iu lo llJ fl) 10 ru lu Iv ru 0Yt279 UY2'il 79 1lJIJO/Y 1U1HY 1LUll1Y WUIY llUH\/ 111\}19 111 /fY 1124fY 12U1 /II 1ZUo/9 FL l'111) 12UU 2c?UU .!C:j,J c?HU .!c? j ) .!c?.>U c?c? 4) c?2n u.su 221) a.so 22.SZ 61- 65 6()* 70 71- 75 1 z 1 1 76- 110 .s 1 2 3 dl- 115 c? 2 1 1 8C>* 9() I J 91* 95 3 2 1 2 9C>*1ui.l 3 1 1u1-1os 1UCl*110 111-115 110*1 i:O 1(1*125 1 Ui*UO 1J1*1l5 1.sCl* 1.. i) ~

141-145 I 14C>*1)0 U1 1)1*1SS ~

150-100 1o1*165 106-110 171-115 176*1 llO 181-1115 1&0*190 4 11 1Z 8 NO. Ui.EN 2 1j 4 12 12 8 SAHP. HlN 110 201 1J9 198 177 Zll 237 224 166 .?40 195 9.5 114 96 94 9J 115 84 RANCiE (1410 £st>*1UO 71- 95 71*190 81-110 61*100 71-100 e .. 'II * *

- - - - - - - - - -* - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-16 Continued 1 CLIY lY 1' 107., IU!J/~ 1dL7'1 Ji>UO ,,iuvJ lh*lf) lJIJl.ll*

10 llJ lu ru 1~1~79 1llt!i9 1 u. '119 1.! 51 /Y FL (HH) 2Zl0 22.SO ~l 1:> OoUU NO. HEAS 0 54HP 0 Hlh i!16 216 H7 4b HEAN ME.Ali.

AANGE (HH)

• 'I" U1 U1

Table 4-17 Length:--frequency distribution of impinged American shad, Salem csw, January 1980 through March 1980.

"' i ,,, fHJ vllOM* 1i. 1 1 I .)~1: *11 tlJ~ll vldl:>U o.;c:1: ~nu \J~ I U6d **t 1 ',,., 11c:1.~t1u ;J.SIJt~u <.1.S11vou !J.Slo~u

""l* J .,,; **.: J ~.

"'*' ,.~vlJ lJ,flJIJ UvUU 1HHHi v1)1;J UIJllL1 IJ.JIJJ 0UJU UC: .J) tu Iv Iv tu 1l1 Iu ru tu IU tu Tu TU UlU)llU Ullldu II I IY~U Ul<!oblJ UtUC:bU IUU\ll!U l.121 obU lJ.U.SdU O.SCi11rn U3Uoou U3150U li3U:S*J fl ( ,,,., ) asu .?24) u~u li!.)) ~.suo a.su u.su Ci.SU 22.su 2c:.SU 2350 tl.i*J SAHP. "lN 196 207 i.!39 i!B 203 196 191 1!i)

MEAN Mi.Ai. 123 RAhCii (MM> 121-12)

.;:..

I Ul 0\

_e.. * -

- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-17 Continued

le'. j ~li ,i.) .),. ~"*'

l.11..UL. lil.'.'V 1 ii IV l)l29bll OHl&U FL (1114) 1600 i!.355 86- 91) l 91- ll5 1 9ci-1uJ i!

1u1-1 us luo-1 hl 111-11'.>

110-ll()

1"1-1l5 i.o. l1cA$ 0 8 110. I"" t '* 8 liAMP 0 1111' 115 25 ti>-

H~Ah HEASo 99 1H I l11 RAhGE (llHJ &6*1l0 121-1.25 -...J

Table 4-18 Population statistics for white perch prior to and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

~Prior to Averagingt Jls Subsequent to Averagin~

Life Stage** Size Number Standard Co**fficient Standard Coefficient * +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River (mm) 3 R2 Period Date Age Groul! Saml!les (x/lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation Estimate Limits Kilometers 1979 March 27-30 87,5 E 11 0 *** 64-117 March 27-30 87,5 L 2,0-5,5 11 0 *** 64-117 Apr, 17-20 108,5 E 40 0 0 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 L 2.0-5,5 40 0,029 0.029 632 0.021 594 0,164 2.88 E5 7,65 ES-2,06 ES 64-117 Hay 1-4 122,5 E 39 0 0 64-117 Hay 1-4 122.5 L 2.0-5.5 39 2.074 0,999 301 0,869 262 0.321 2.25 E7 3.77 E7-l,51 £7 64-117 Hay 22-24 143.0 E 51 0 0 0-117

!'.ay 22-24 143.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0 0 0-117 Hay 29-

"'I" U1 June 1 150.5 E 51 0 0 0-117 co Hay 29-June 1 150.5 L 2.0-5.5 51 0,109 0.109 714 0.091 595 0.028 3,60 E6 2.40 E7-2.89 £6 0-117 June 5.-7 157,0 E 51 0 0 0-117 June 5-7 157.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0 0 0-117 June' 12-14 164.0 E 72 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164.0 L 2.0-5 .s 72 0.234 0.107 388 0.090 325 o.362 1.41 £7 3 ,38 £7-1,21 E7 0-117 June 25-28 177.5 E 75 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177.5 L 2.0;..5 .5 75 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 E 71 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 L 2.0-5.5 71 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 E 47 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 L 2.0-5 .5 47 0 0 0-117 Aug. 'i-9 219,S E 49 0 0 0-117 Aug. 6-9 219.5 L 2 ,0-5 .5 49 0 0 0-117

\-

• e

'!'able 4-18 Continued

. !Prior to Averagingt l !Subsequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficientll'standard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River 3

Period Date Age Group (mm) Samples (x/lOOm ) Hean Variation Hean Variation Estimate Limits Kilometers Aug. 20-24 234.0 E S1 0 0-117 Aug. 20-24 234.0 L 2.0-5 .5 57 0 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254.5 E 70 0 0 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254.S L 2.0-s .s 70 0 0 0-117 Oct. 11 284.0 y 26-90 28 o.ooo 0 0-117 Oct, 11 284.0 l+ 91-140 28 0.023 0.013 305 0.009 216 0.357 1.10 E6 2.48 E6-8.68 E5 0-117 Oct, 11 284.0 2+ 141+ 28 0.013 0.007 27S 0.004 172 0.437 5,63 ES 1.21 E6-4.61 £5 0-117 Oct. 15-17 289.0 E 79 0 0 0-117 Oct. 15-17 289.0 L 2.0-5.S 79 0 0 0-117 Oct. 22-23 29S.5 y 26-90 SS o.ooo 0 0-117 Oct, 22-23 295,5 l+ 91-140 SS 0.001 0.001 742 0.001 683 0.151 4.40 E4 1.62 E5-3.53 £4 0-117 Oct. 22-23 295 .5 2+ 141+ SS o.oos 0.003 412 0.002 347 0.292 2.37 ES S.78 ES-1.89 ES 0-117 Oct. 29-Nov. 2 304.0 E 46 0 0 0-117 Oct, 29-Nov. 2 304.0 L 2.0-5.5 46 0 0 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 y 26-90 29 0.002 0.002 374 0,001 288 0.187 6.40 E4 2.44 E5-4.67 E4 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 l+ 91-140 29 0.013 0.008 306 0.006 232 0.279 4.27 ES 1.30 £6-3.14 ES 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 2+ 141+ 29 0.074 0.021 198 0.019 141 0.2S8 3.93 E6 6.83 E6-2.69 E6 0-117 Nov, 19-23 325.0 y 26-90 43 o.ooo 0 0-117 Nov. 19-23 32S.O l+ 91-140 43 o.oos 0.003 484 0.003 388 0.196 1.92 ES 5.89 ES-1.56 ES 0-117 Nov. 19-23 325,0 2+ 141+ 43 0.011 0.0.09 337 0.001 288 0.184 7.65 E5 1,84 E6-5.03 ES 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 y 26-90 24 0.001, 0.001 490 0.001 449 0.115 4.24 E4 2.30 ES-2.23 E4 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 l+ 91-140 24 0.019 0.010 252 0.001 170 0.414 9,34 ES 1.93 £6-7,09 ES 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 2+ 141+ 24 0.035 0.012 172 0.008 117 0.499 2 .45 E6 3 .73 E6-l.87 E6 0-117

Table 4-18 Continued rPrior to Averagingt subsequent to Averagingl 11 Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficientllstandard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River Period Date Age Group (mm) Samples (x/lOOm3 ) Mean Variation Mean Variation Estimate Limits Kilmneters Dec. 4-7 339,5 y 26-90 53 0.008 0.005 472 0,004 395 0.215 2,78 E5 9.05 ES-1,88 ES 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.5 1+ 91-145 53 0.031 0.013 319 0.012 278 0,252 1,70 E6 3,39 E6-l.22 E6 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.5 2+ 146+ 53 0,057 0,016 198 0.013 162 o.440 4,66 E6 6,52 E6-3,39 E6 0-117 illQ.

Jan. 16-18 17.0 y 26-90 31 0.039 0.014 198 0.010 144 0,346 9.80 E5 2.47 E6-7.38 E5 0-117 Jan. 16-18 17.0 1+ 91-145 31 0,047 0.022 255 0.019 224 0.189 2,54 E6 5.38 E6-l.57 E6 0-117 Jan. 16-18 17.0 2+ 146+ 31 0.036 0,018 280 0.012 193 0.403 2.32 E6 4,16 E6-l.69 E6 0-117 y

Jan. 21-23 22.0 26-90 8 0.028

... 0-117 Jan, 21-23 Jan. 21-23 22.0 22.0 l+

2+

y 91-145 146+

8 8

0.020 0.004 ... 0-117 0-117

~

I

°'

0 Jan. 28-29 28.5 26-90 23 0.034 0.024 341 0.020 283 0.224 l,44 E6 4.47 E6-9,07 ES 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.5 1+ 91-145 23 0.051 0.029 277 0.021 200 0.341 2.76 E6 5.98 E6-l,99 E6 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.S 2+ 146+ 23 0.020 0.012 292 0.009 221 0.307 1.06 E6 2.44 E6-7.30 E5 0-117 Kar. 10 70.0 y 46-95 5 0.013 *** 64-117 Mar. 10 70.0 l+ 96-140 5 0,039 *** 64-117 Mar. 10 70.0 2+ 141+ 5 0,0)2 *** 64-117 Mar. 20 80.0 y 46-95 10 0,036 *** 64-117 Mar. 20 80.0 1+ 96-140 10 0.010 *** 64-117 Kar, 20 80,0 2+ 141+ 10 0,003 *** 64-117 Kar. 24 85.5 y 46-95 26 0.042 0,017 200 0.012 143 0,492 5.07 ES 7.16 E5-3,91 E5 64-117 Kar. 24-27 85.5 l+ 96-140 26 0.009 o.oos 269 0.004 251 0.177 9.02 E4 1.66 E5-4.97 E4 64-117 Mar. 24-27 85.5 2+ 141+ 26 0.009 0,003 168 0.002 141 0.176 8,39 E4 1.26 E5-4.72 E4 64-117

• Given aa midpoint of collection period,

• • E (eggs), L (larvae), Y (age O+ young).

• • • Insufficient sample size to estimate population, t Averaging indicates moving average proceaa.

- --*- - - - - - - -* - - - - - - -e- - Table 4-19 Length-frequency distribution of subsampled white perch taken in ichthyoplankton sampling from

• March 28, 1979 through November 2, 1979.

032879 041779 050179 052279 052979 060579 U6!279 062579 0945 1110 1145 0825 G830 0850 072U !U4l ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro 033079 042079 050479 052479 060179 060779 Ubl479 062979 TL (MM) 1!55  !!JU 1317 U9J5 !2lU l4U4 1626 lU4~

2.0- 3.5 21 7 4.0- 5,5  ! 38 4 5 NO. MEl'\S. 1 59 4 12 NO. Tl\KEN 0 1 61 0 4 0 12 0 MEl'\N MEl'\S, 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 Rl\NGE (MM) 4.0 2.5- 4.5 4.0- s.o 2.5- 5.0 VOL. FILTERED 070979 071679 072479 080679 082079 091079 101579 102979 0930 1052 0800 1040 1001 1006 0910 0900 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO 071279 072079 072779 080979 082479 091379 101779 110279 TL (MM) 1540 1235 1311 1550 1250 1320 1446 1114

---

~---------~-----~-----------------------

---

~-------------------------------~-----------------------------~---------------------------------

NO. MEl'\S.

NO. Tl\KEN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEAN MEl'\S.

Rl\NGE I MM)

VOL. FILTERED I .

Table 4-20 Length-frequency distribution of subsampled white perch taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

FL (HM) OCT 11 OCT Z2 NOV 1S NOV 19 NOV 27 DE.C 04 JAN 16 JAN 21 JAN 28 f'lAf( 10 MAR 20 HAii ~4 THRU THflU THRU THRU THRU lHRU Th~U OCT 23 hOV 2:S Dl:C 07 JAN 18 JAN 23 JAN i!9 ~AR i!7 46*5U 3

)I*)) 1 1

)0*6U 1 1 5

• 61-o) 3 1 3 7 3 oo*7U 5 8 2 5 i! 6 71-75 5 10 5 i! 9 7o-ou 1 6 i! 1 4 81-85 1 5 5 4 bo-"lJ 1 3 i!

91-95 1 2 5 9e-luu 1 3 1 j 1LJ1-hi) 1 1 1 2 100-110 2 3 1 4 1 111-11!> 1 1 7 2 ~

11e.-1~0 2 5 4 2 1 I 121-125 120-1.so 151-U) 0 1 5

4 1 "&

9 6

5 1 5

4 1

1 1 °'

N 2 2 3 0 2 5 2 1 j 136-1'-U 5 1l 5 1 5 1 1 141-H). 4 4 6 4 1 2 1 1 .. e-150 2 4 2 7 3 2 1;1-15~ 2 2 1 9 2 2 1 15~*10\J 2 1 3 10 3 3 1 1ol-1o5 2 4 3 5 3 2 1oo-17u 111-175 1 3

2 2

4 2 5

4 3

5 1

2 17o*1~u i! 5 2 10 4 1t1-1::s 1~o-19U 1 4 7

"2 2 2

4 2

3 191-11-5 4 1 7 1 1 '1o-2u.i 3 7 2 2.il-l.J5 3 4 3 2c*o-211; j 3 3 1 211-215 1 3 21 o-U*J 2 2<1-l.!5 3

.?2~-2~U 1 2 2.Sl-235 1 2 2~:.-2 .. J 5 1 241-2-5 1 i! 2 2*o-25u 2 e * -

Table 4-20 Continued MAA lit OCT 2Z NOV 1!'1 NOV 19 NOV Z7 DEC 04 JAN 16 JA~ 21 JAN 28 MAfl 10 MAR 20 fl (MM) OCT 11 TllllU

• JHRU T1111U THRU THAU THRU THJIU DEC 07 JAN 18 JAN 23 JAN 29 MAR l.1 OCT 23 NOV 23 251-2~5 1 -f

~50-200 1 201-20~

2bo-uo 2 271-ll~ 1 270*2bU 1 2111-205 1 286*2\IU 2 291-2'i5 NO. MEAS. 10 7 80 52 41 1H 117 13 74 13 15 48 NO. TAKlN 31 10 80 52 41 157 116 13 74 13 15 .. a ii:.

I MEAN ME:AS. 150.3 17.Z.1 1114.9 152.4 159.9 H<,1.2 1ii!0.6 102.6 112.3 1i?7.1 84.1 94.4

°'w RANGE: (M) 91*222 106*220 71l-21l8 61i*243 73-2 711 68-293 46*206 46-1113 48-188 76*161 63*143 53*216 I

I, I

_ _ _ _L,

Table 4-21 Length-frequency distribution of impinged white perch, Salem CWS, January 1979 through December 1979.

VI \JC: I~ Ul'll t \I ll I 1... I" u 1c:1 /v Ul.!11 (Y UtUto/Y U.!1119 00!1 d ,.,, OUHY OJ0"79 031119 UJ11119

• \) ,JIJ vvvu lllJV.J IJU\JIJ UlJUIJ ..11.1uu uuvu uuuu uuuu uuou uuuu ouou ru ru lu ru TO TO TO

~L (r*MJ U1'1olY c:C: lll 1JllH<,

c:c.:.v ulc:ll("

C:C:!l*J

• fla111

.!C.Ju TO Ut!.UJ/\I C. IUU IJ.!1\J IY u.su fl)

UC:l f/\I U.SIJ TO UU4fY a.su ll) u.rnHY U.Sll IJ.HU/Y

.!lto!>

UJl 119 u.su UJ2419 ii!Bu

• c.r- c:~

.::o- )J Jl-

.. 1- ..

.Hi- .. J

) 1 1oo- )J  ;;  :. ~ t!. l .! 1 3 1 l

)1- 55 a 11 j4 1 .. b i!d 11 6 ll Zit 8 11

)6-ol-OU o5 toS 1u:.

63

(

lid O( 2.5 Jy 1i!

.!1 '"

11:1( lU6'" .59 1ti 11 ll 5l 1J1 l.6 J4 19 69 oo- l'J lu:. 46 1 c!ll 52 H 11!54 219 Yi. 411 201 18 118 n- /) 94 24 1111 44 u l.U6 ltH 60 40 l.15 80 85 ~

lo- CIU Sll u. lu I tol 19 I 71 1 o!.S .59 l1 1"v 66 92 I 01- d) lb 1.S f 1o 8 111 8l 12 14 91 50 1:10 eo- \IJ 9 I- '15 1j 5 'tiJ 1!;

1 'ii 11 06 j4 'I 9 6.5 J1 7.5 "'

~

~ j 11 I b H .Sl 5 l 27 18 41 9o*IUJ s 1u1-1uS 1Uo-11J l l I

1*

11

I

)

)

l 4

j l

.S2 17 9

11 6

j 2

JQ 12 ll 11 10 1.5 ii!9 1U 1.5 111-11; l 1 j 1 2 4 8 2 9 10 ~

110-lC:J

' 1 ~ l 1 II s j .5 7 10 11 1,1-ll>

1,o-1.)U

.s y lU 4 1 8 b u..

4 4 8 b 3 5 16 10 Z8 1.H-1 .S5 3 l 9 ll 4 l 9 6 .SU Ho-ltoJ l41-1~:i l

l

'1 1 1u 1U 4 1

• 1 3 1Z 9

• a 10 Z4 9

140-1 ;:i I ) J 8 s 8 1)1-1)) 2 4 4 l .5 6 d 1)6-16U 2 1 j 1 l 1 5 101-1c.; 1 j I 4 2

,.06-1 7J l l 3 111-1(5 .5 2 j! 4 110-1 .:10 1 1 J 2 1b1-1 Cl') 2 J 1 l 1110-l \l:J 1 1 1 l 191-1 '>') 1 1 .5 1 l'fo-tu.J 2 1

"' 1 *£lJ5 c!lJO-' l '.J 1

'11-, 15 l

- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -e*- -

Table 4-21 Continued

---

~-----~------------------------------------------------~-------------------------------------------~----------

u 111.l (\I Ul!l((\I IJ' 14,.,, IJllllY Ul<!CS/Y U<!U1o/Y u.i11n Oi!lCS/11 02/.'J/Y OJUi.19 O.S11/9 UJHl79 1v,;11 vuuu lluvJ IJUVU uuuu uuuu 1.HJ\JU uuuu llUUU uuuu UUIJU uuuu Tu ru f L t r1>1 l UluofY

.:(. ,u IJ 11 !JI<,

/.<!JU llJ ul "1.J/v

,,,.J Uju lu IJIUIY TO U(.U,IY

(. IUU IU Ull117Y UJu 11(.1 l/Y o!.!Jll To 0~(.4 l.i!Ju

/\I Tll UJUHY UJU TO U.HlJ/Y u .. ,

TO UJI 719 2Hl.

TO O.H4/ll i!BU

---

~--~--~------------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------------

<! 1 o-au u1-us uo-.uo dl-d; lJo-.i1ou 2

,,,l4o*/.;O

"'I */.~S

.:;o-.:ou

/.ol-/.ei; "oo-dJ

'u1-us .z:,,.

---

~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I CJ'\

NU. MtAS. 1~04 lUo.! 1110 5211 790 U1 NO. TAl<.tN 790 2111 1(.QlJ j()5 11JU 5.SO 790 SAl1P. l'llN 145 IYS 1111 lies llJ 1!;7 17.S 69 /j 14 70 n 78 19 811 91 RANCit: (l'li'IJ i.0-1110 46-210 46-19!1 46-240 21-260

Table 4-21 Continued J.,,..,,..,

J.),.,; ..

u1 1 ~u u ..... '"'

..,.,._,;,,,,

UC.h'\/V

,,.,,,J

., .. 1., , ..

4nJ011 lJ .. ,

I iiHI

~ l't lJ4Ju/,. IJ'JU//Y iJvju U'i 14 IY 1UjJ u')UfY ldUU lU4) llbU479 hi.SO lJO 11 /9 IL.13'.l I(* Ju I l* lu (\) 10 IU 10 10 TO TO TU JJ.)11 .. u .. 'J/ /'I u*.111t t y J .. ,,,,.., IJ4U/Y lJ)U<t ('I U) 1 l /'ii U')1t1/C,0 U')c!Hll UOUl/9 UOUll79 UOH79 fl ( 1*.. *1 j cl.lv c.:Ji. CCJJ I Y4'oJ uiluU l4Uu l 4J1J 111 ') lJ 111ull 111110 19UO 1111.iO

.)O*

.. 1- ) .... a

.. o- 'J.J

., 1- ))

)0- 01.1 ,.4 0

0*1- 0) oo- 1J II

.,, . IV J'> e l I

l. 'l.l 'l 'l 1 fl-lo* dJ ,,,

1.U

.>Y 4 1

j I j I z

z 111- d) J .. 5 i!

ao-110 119 .

.)

..4 j I

'1l l.

.)

91- .. ., oi c!o I 1 l z Yo-luJ .. o co

., l l 1 liJI *I v'J H

,., 1 1 uo-1 hi 111-1 !!>

1lo*lcu 1.>

1I 1

~ ' ~

"' I l.!1*1'!~ lll 9 l 1cC>*l.>J Ul-ll')

Jd 9 °'

°'

11 Ho*l"u ""

I) Q 141-llt) 14C>-1 ')II I(

1.!

0 Hl-1>:>

l)o-lou 9 ..

b 1o1-1C>!> 6 4 101>-1 IJ 1 j 111-115 1/0*ldJ .,

j 1 2

101-1:1~ 1 1110-1.,u j l 111-1 v) 1 c,oc.-luu lU1-lU)

O:Ub*c l J lll-,l'>

1.10-uu JO 19 10 3 111 1110. llf.AS. I Lil' Joo .SI 1U 10 j JU 1d j 10 j NO. IAK~r.

511,.,P .... 1~

l*J1' Ja')

.)1 111 1 LI 1'il UY 91 .....

l 1"

/j ill bO 119

\11 1Ull

/o 1!>6 YI ,

1711 1 U/.

11 b 911 1JZ llll

"'"1l4 111 105 sc.-lii:11 1o1-uu 1ol-l<1U C>l-lU!> ., 1-18(1 01-1uu 61-1YO c.1-1c,ou 1>1-1.ss 61>-1 n Ii 1 *1 7U ~1-140

• e

- - - - - - - - - -* - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-21 Continued

---

~------------------------------------------------------------~-----------------------------------------------------

LIO I "/'>I

... . ,.., 1.1/lJ 1 /"-I IJ/Utl/V J/l'>/Y ulUIY Ull 11 /'>I Uo1U'I Uol'H'I 08i!o19 U90Z1Y 1191UN uUUU uuuo \.lt.JUU uuuu u'>l .. U Ouull u!JUU ll!J\J" UllllU 11.lltlo lu V\JtJV lu Iu 111 Iv 111 ru Ill TU IU TO TO 11oi )i'w Jo~Jl'i U(VI/_, U/ 141'>1. ult I /Y u It b /'I Utl 11 /'>I Ull1ol\I Utli5/9 U9Ul1Y u9uSl9 09H/Y

~L \t"l:-Ot) tit )u jlJ i'U.J i'.)U U.>IJ I ))\I U.)U U5!J 21 ,,, 2'!2U c!1UO i!lj\l oo- 'IJ i

._I- 'O J.

'lo-1 vJ 1 lul-lu) I luo-11 J 111-11) llo-ld ltl-Ji5 ltO-DJ

• l.)J-ll> 1

) .)0-1 ~J ~

141-145 146-1);)

151-1)5 1)o-1oJ I ol-1 o) ~

1o0-1/J I 171-11) 110-11:1" °'

....J 1 ol-1 o5 11:10-1 'tlU 1 1111-1 i,; 3

---

~-----------------------------------~----------------------

flU. ri t:. A~. 5 11 NU. I ~~t:.°" ) 11 SAHP. *~l°" l'i5 i4C. (,~~ il,\I H4 2j) C!I 2:14 zuc. i!H llfl 191 1~EAr1 M~AS. ~ .. Cid 1.B IU5 113 180 1Qj 16J MA .. (,t; (;1.~) ob-l*J~ o-b- \Ill 101-1u~ 171-11~ 100-190 101-105 ljl-ll) 116-195

Table 4-21 Continued UY10/'I U'Y() (Y u'f>LI~ 1 ulJ/l'I 1tJ14 ,.,, luc I l'I l*J(Ol'J 11u .. t'll 1111 ,.,, 111 !1/9 11lHll llUllll lJUUU uuulJ liUUl uuu; UUIJ)

UlJUll lu V\.'\J (

IU ,,,

UVUd Ju Ii.I. 10 ru uuuo ru UUlJU lu JUUU IU uuuu ro IU

• j</227<, *J92'1 , .. I JvC /y 1Qljl<; I U£J/V lUU/9 llJH'i 111 ll Ill 111179 1124 /9 12U1(9 12Ud/\)

~L 1'"'1'1) l(uu c t~llJ &.1. j..J llju U)'> UjU u .. s u1; U>U Ul> u.rn 2.:Jl jl* j) jO*

41* ..4J, 1

.. o- )u I 1 1

)1* H t. 2 1 1 !I

)O* OU I l 1 1 l l 14 61* O) u oo- /u 1

t. ..

<! 2 4

j 5 12 4

"U fl - 15 l j ti u 12 lo) lY 7o*

ol*

O:J o5 0' t.

1 1

1 ..t. )

.s 9

'I it 1 2.S 2 ..

bo- YJ 91- .,,, 1l

)

5

) l

.s l j

.,,1 ll

)

19 1 ti "

4

'16-1 uu 101-1 u; llJ 0 .s 1 0 11 8 d 5 ""'I 0\

1uo-11J

su

.()

14 14 2

l ..

4 4 6

H 18 h d 11 u

l l co 111-11) 110-l(J <!

,.,(j i:5 lj 5

1 IU' 11 16

.)2 u

40 18 22 l.1 ti 7

1 cl-1 t.5 11 ,)5 14 I .?1 i,j 4/ 41 1U lco-UO .s y 2u 9 IU hi .)1 41 u 9 ljl-1.S) 2 1 tj (tl 16 '> 22 32 4l l5 d 1.so-1i.u 1 a j 1 14 lU 19 .?1 jl, 2l 1 141-145 1 1I .St. d .,, 9 20 lb Jl l.

14C>-1)U 1 .SU 4U 11 5 11 lU a lil 2 1)1-15) t.u 3U 11 I a HI 14 7 j 150-1 oil lbl-105 6

11 a

jl 1y 10 14 j

j ,..

1 .. 11 6

11 1.!

~ l.

1oC>-1fu 1(1-1()

1 j

) ,,

~y 1\1 lb j

j Cl

(

l 4

4 l 2 1 1fo-ltlu ltll*lb)

"4

) y B y

1) 1 Cl 1 6

5 .l.

6 4 4 1 1110-1 \ILi .. l 5

'1 lU 2 t. 1 191*1Y5 ... (

1Yo-,uu 201-,05 0

4 I

Cl t.

5 j

1 2Uo-l10 1.11-l 15 l 1 '

j 210-U!J 2 2ll-a5 l (lC>*,jJ t.

'.Sl-0) l

'3o*t"J

, .. 0-t)J

)

e

- -. - - - - - - - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-21 Continued.

U\llblY VIit )(<, U'fl(J I 'I lUUl/'f 1Ul4(Y I u~ 1 l'I 11.io!"(Y 11 u .. 111 1111,.,, 1111179 11H79 1lOU9 UUU*I oJUU( UllUU uuuu uuuu IJUU.! UUU) uuvu uuuu uuuo uuuu UU!J5 IU 10 IU IU 10 10 ru ru TO 10 ru Ill

• )'12Ur, u92'f1'1 I :,.;o (.,. 101 H9 1 U<!U/Y hJU19 II J.s/9 111 !J /II 111779 112419 121l1(9 12Ud19 '!

fl l*~ .. ) lo!UU o!o!'J(J i!o!j,, ,!2ju Uj5 Uj!J U4S un 2i!lU i!c!l 5 c!HO 2.!Jc!

.!~1-c!))

do-<!oO l.C>1-l.o5 200-llu Ul*U5 Uo-1.o(J t!!l*c!O) 2oo*l.'fU . 1

---

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

r.o. H~l.S 0 b1 6 jt.4 4~4 i!j4 111 jo6 415 ld9 2Sd r.o. I Al\~li 67 6 jY4 6j7 .!SO 115 276 494 434 404 261 ii:>-

I SAHP. Ml~ 110 203 19d U.I c!ll 2.!4 186 240 1115

°'

\0 1.59 171 2H MEAi* l'ttAS. llSl 171 ,,9 HI 143 l)j I 51 H4 1 i!4 1 i!5 11" 115 RUHit (11'1) 1 i:l1*1o!i 116-240 01-100 b1-U5 51-24) Sl*i!YU 51*c!4) 51-i!H 41-.!1.15. 5b-i!l0 56-215 411-180

Table 4-21 Continued I ,<I-~ (y I c: I o(Y I t!<:ll" I~ 5Uf\I

.JlJUo JIJ\JU 'Jl1U) oJLIJU lu lu I *J IU FL ( 111'1 J 1, I> /y C:'lU UUt'I

.:t!:>'J ,,,,

1 t!C: .. (" 1.!) 1('11 IJbUIJ i.o- !loJ t!

SI- h lo !I t!

so- OoJ 01- o5 oo- IU d*

Ob 1b

)

(.\I "IU 1o

)

11- /) bl u 1) lo- o*) ~o 01- 0) do- '>'ii 3:1 10 Ib

)

14 4 5

'fl- ~5 b j 1

.,.b-1 iJ'.J 1 1li1-1 u~ I 1 uo-11 ll b (.

11 i-1 i) . (.

110-llll l 1.:1-1(.) 1 4 1 ~b-1 lll ~ ".5 .S>o I

1.51-U) l (.

.;.J 1 .So-hll 1. 1 0 1i.1-1 .. 5 1 j 1i.c.-1;0 .5 1)1-1)) l 1 15c.-1o0 1 1 ol-1 b~

lbb-111) 171-11) 176-li!U ldl-ld) 1 l:lb-1 'IJ 3b9 124 1Ud llU 3111 1U 11..111 t!IJ 21b 111 411 15 !11 lo Id

- -. - - - - - - -* - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-22 Length-frequency distribution of impinged white perch, Salem CWS, January 1980 through March 1980.

---

~--------------------------~---------------------------------------------------------------------

u I IJl!l;J Ullloou Ul1.>~J vi 'UOIJ u I tlou 1J,ilJ.)Oll

• 1J( 1.uou vt17.,u u2.:!411u uJl,~tH1 uJt*llou uJ10~11 J~:JiJ IJUJIJ UVUJ UyvJ lluud lll*:..lt... l)IJIJU UIJ~U UUU1J u.iu:1 UIJUU U.!u:>

10 TO . Tu Tu TO Iv Tu Iv 111 10 fL (MM)

.i I uS~u UjiJ U1 I .!bu u .. s V 11 Y $V ldJ u I .!t.~IJ U5~

ul**to*J tlUOJ

~Jctl*~f)U UtlOdU '"

UlOll u~u u s,11 o*~ J.i**i<~u U!..i Uj I ~!llJ

.!nl*

IU u.il,dlJ

.d ju CllV UlU -lU 11- n 10- lJ Zl* .!5

~o- jl)

.H* j )

jo* 4J 41- ,.5 j 40* 5U

)1- )5 z 11

.. !I 14 l

tu l

d j z

j 0 j I 50- OJ 0 zu ll

!I u

.. c.

OY ..oY~ 11 1 I

,11.. \I IZ 01- 05 06* IJ 11- 15 15 ii I~

40 j6

.54 5!>

OJ

.. 1 C.I 99 151 1/j 116 1 c't jl u.

40 1.S l .s 19 lo

.!j 11 a

.so

.59 4.5 t,,O l"

.SI

/.Y

....I 76- oJ 111- 115 16 s

j4 . ~

.!9 a 1411 ol /.4 14 11 lU 1(1 z.s 21 H

2!1 51

.ic

-..J I-'

JO 4.! 11 IH o) 11 ilo- llU l 11 1l 4 Oj 5ll 1 0 2 10 y Id 91- 115 4 5 7 l a CCI" 4 4 5 2 I 96*1UJ l co tb 4 I 1 j 14 IJ 1ul*lllS 100-11.i 4

4 5

c.

' 1 ii n

a j4 llJ

.s j C>

2 5 12 4 l II 5

I 111-115 tl 1 II j9 lu u 7 1~ 1.S 16 llo*lcO 1 9 ~ ll 17 lo 1'!1-1c> l "

1 ~ j 15 11 .to~

12 ii ( d B 21 jl) 120-lj(J !I l 1 .w 4ll 9 12 2 2u 17 lo B1*U5 1 2 I .! I! jtl 6 Ii 4 cO 1.5 i!il 1 jo-14\J 2 l 2 !I j) 2  ; I H c6 141-1"5 1 I. j 4 z;. c 5 z 5 14 li?

14C>-1 5v 151-1))

1 I

5 j

I "j 4

)

15 Id j 5

8 1

c I

9 1.5 7

15 ll l)o*lO~ j 11 3 4 j 0 7 lU 161*1o5 z l\J j 1 7 .! 11

.,,.,..;.

IC>b-170 z I. 'I j 1 ..

111-115 1 l !I j "

4 5 170-100 1111-105 Ho*l90 1

1 l

1 j

c z I

i j

2 1

1 I.

j 191-19) 1 Yo-2u:i j 4 1

1 I

.s 3 j

1 1

j i!Ol*2U) c l l

.!Oo-c1U l 2 I 211-1.1> 1 1

Table 4-22 Continued U ICIC!~ii U100dll 1)11.)d.) ll1 ~uiilJ Ul.!lou 'J(:'J.>Oll c121u11u 1Jc17'1U U2c!4dU v.ilJlllU \JjU'lllU U.ilO:IU

()900 uuJU UUUJ UIJUJ uuu1l UUIJU U\JUU UJUJ lJ\JUu IJl*LtU L&JtJIJ lJc!lJ) ru 10 Tu Tu TO ru TU f\) lu ru 10 TU JluS~ll 01 lll!U Ul 1 Y~U U I lt.:IU ulllc!o*J UiUVOU U~l6dU U~i .)llU U)lllolJ Jj*J~~u U.S15~ll u.s.!"au FL (MM) U.SJ U45 U.)J iil j~ l.)UiJ U.Su U.Sll U3U ic!JU UjJ c! Hu c!lju

• • -********c******************G*************************************************************************************-**************

210-UJ

.!<!1-2<!5 lc!o-l.SU

.!.S1-c!.S5 2.S0-<!40

<!41-l .. 5 246-l)J *1

~51-2)5 l~6-c!60 2o1-2o5 l.oo-21.J l.11-215 c!76-c!!IU

---

*-----------------------------------------~-------- """I NO. McAs.* U7 .! 1.5 1018 1U59 .....J

.254 Z09 137 Jul 395 N NO. TAKtll &3 c!l 5 1'i78 1 HU 254 .!10 137 JJ1 399 5Ull SA"IP. MIN 132 1116 207 21.5 2U3 2U6 196 191 155 MEAN MEAS. 81.1 8U fl 74 80 96 90 1(J7 92 1 U1 101 1Ud RANGE lM*U 51-19u 41-ZOU 11-240 51-250 41-UO 21-280

• e

- -.- - - - - - - - - - - - - -e- -

Table 4-22 Continued

---

~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.i5' Sli;i !Hh*d'I iJUUU 1JU\J')

IO 10 (Jj/9dlJ U.H1 ~IJ FL ll"ll l ltHJJ d!t~

5, _ !t)  ;

5o* oO 1:1 01- o!t 4f 06- 7:1 56 11- is 44 l 76* dU 30 4 81- ll!t ,4 llO* YU 8 2 Y1- \l!t o vo-1i.JO I 101-IU!t I 1uo-110 11 111-115 ~

1 IO*llil 16 I 121-1l5 lS j

~26-1Ja 22 131*135 Jo 2 .::..

lJ0-14~ 2LJ 6 I 141-145 12 l -..J 146-1:.ll 11 j w 1;1-1 !t5 1l 1 1!t6*1oU IU 2 161-105 \I 1 166-1f0 7 171-175 6 176-180 3 181*1H5 5 186-190 J 191-195 2 196-200 J 201-205 1 Zub-210 z 211-215 216*lZO Z21*225 a6-Bu Zli6*Ci1U

---

~------------------------------------------

l91-295 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

NO. MlAS. lt64 H NU. TAl\lN 805 33 SAl'IP. 111.~ HS 25

~lAfj l'lf AS. 1ll6 1l0 WA'oGE (el>!) ~1-£9~ ~0-17~

Table 4--23 Population statistics for striped bass prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

r Prior to Averagingt l'Subsequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficient I standard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Hooan Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River 3 2 Period Date Age Group (mm) Samples (x/lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation R Ea ti mate Limits Kilocetera 1979 Mar. 27-30 Mar. 27-30 87.5 87 .5 E

L 2.0-5 .5 11 11 0

0 ...64-117 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 E 40 2.437 0.817 212 0.505 131 0.743 3.40 E7 4.28 £7-2.95 E7 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 L 2.0-5 .5 40 0 0 64-117 May 1-4 122.5 .E 39 4.411 2.537 359 2.046 290 0.163 5.27 E7 8.83 £7-4.02 E7 64-117 May 1-4 122.5 L 2.0-5 .5 39 0.504 0.279 346 0.254 315 0.118 3.55 E6 7.98 £6-1.93 E6 64-117 May 22-24 143.0 E 51 0.()28 0.028 714 0.021 679 0.191 1.54 E6 7.54 £6-1.19 E6 0-117 Kay 22-24 143.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0 0 0-117 Kay 29-

.June 1 150.5 E 51 0 0 0-117 Hay 29-June 1 150.5 L 2.0-5.5 51 0.032 0.032 714 0.030 669 0.171 1.41 E6 8.16 E6-l.10 E6 0-117 June 5-7 157.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 June 5-7 157.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0.059 0.059 714 0.049 595 0.028 1.93 E6 1.29 £7-1.55 E6 0-117 June 12-14 164.0 E 72 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164.0 L 2.0-5.5 12 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177 .5 E 75 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177.5 L 2.0-5.5 75 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 E 71 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 L 2.0-5.5 11 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 L 2.0-5.5 51 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 E 47 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 L 2.0-5*.5 47 0 0 0-117 Aug. 6-9 219.5 E 49 0 0 0-117 Aug. 6-9 219.5 L 2.0-5.5 49 0 0 0-117 e

-I

- -,; - - - - - - - - - - - -e-Table 4-23 Continued rPrior to Averagingt llSubsequent to Averagingl Collection Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficient!! Standard Coefficient +95%

Julian* or Range of Mean 3 Error of of Error of of Population Confidence IUver Period Date Age Group (mm) Samples (x/IOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation Estimate Limits KUometen Aug, 20-24 234,0 E 57 0 0 0-117 Aug, 20-24 234,0 L 2.0-5,5 57 0 0 O-ll7 Sept, 10-ll 254,5 E 70 0 0 0-117 Sept, 10-13 254 ,5 L 2,0-s .5 10 0 0 0-117 Oct, 11 284,0 y 70-130 28 0 0 0-117 Oct, l l 284.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 28 0 0 0-117 Oct, 15-17 289,0 E 79 0 0 0-117 Oct, 15-17 289,0 L 2.0-5,5 79 0 0 0-117 Oct, 22-23 295.5 y 70-130 55 0 o, 0-117 Oct, 22-2) 295 .s l+, 2+ 131-300 55 0 0 0-111 .,..

I Oct, 29- .....J

!iov, 2 304,0 E 46 0 0 U1 0-117 Oct, 2~

!\ov, 2 304.0 L 2.0-5,5 46 0 0 0-117

!\ov. 15 319,0 y 70-130 29 0 0 0-111 Sov. 15 319.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 29 0,003 0,003 539 0,003 472 0.077 7,75 E4 5.19 E5-4,87 E4 0-117 Nov. 19-23 325.0 y 70-130 43 0 0 0-117 Nov. 19-23 325.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 43 0 0 0-117 liov, 27 331.0 y 70-130 24 0 0 0-117 Nov. 27 331.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 24 0,003 0.002 339 0.002 276 0,240 l.ll E5 J,42 E5-6,86 E4 0-117 Dec. 4-7 339.5 y 70-130 53 0 0 0-117 Dec, 4-7 33 9.5 l+, 2+ 131-300 53 0 0 0-117 1980 Jan. 16-18 17 .o y 70-130 31 0.001 0.001 557 0.001 539 0,183 2.79 E4 l,80 E5-l,72 E4 0-117 Jan. l~-18 17 .o l+, 2+ 131-300 31 0,004 0,003 436 0,003 413 0,205 1,05 ES 5.70 £5-5,ln E4 0-117

Table 4-23 Continued

~Prior to Averagingt Jr:Subsequent to Averagtngl Lite Stage** Size Number Standard Coefficien Standard Coefficient Collection +95%

Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of 3 Population Confidence River Period Date Age Groul! (mm) Sameles (x/lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation R2 Estimate Limits Kllometera Jan. 21-23 22.0 y 70-130 8 0

• • • 0-117 Jan. ~l-23 22.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 8 0 y

• • • 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.5 70-130 23 0.001 0.001 480 0.001 440 0.114 5.55 E4 2,52 E5-2.79 E4 0-117 Jan. 28-29 28.5 l+, 2+ 131-300 23 0.001 0.001 480 0.001 440 0.114 6.58 E4 2.62 E5-3,32 E4 0-Ii7 Mar. 10 70.0 y 70-130 5 0

• • • 64-117

~-*_-. ~ . 10 70.0 l+, 2+ 131-300 s 0.006 ....64-117 l'.ar

• 20 oo.o y 70-130 10 0,003 ....64-117 t'.ar

• 20 Mar. 24-27 ao.o l+, 2+

y 131-300 10 0.003 ....64-117 85 .5 70-130 26 0.004 0.004 510 0.004 482 0,148 5.44 E4 1.27 ES-3.00 E4 64-117 ii=.

Mar, 24-27 I 85.S l+, 2+ 131-300 26 0.004 0.003 374 0,002 .._J 326 0,245 2,23 E4 6,43 E4-l,4l E4 64-117 O'I

• Given as midpoint of collection period,

• • E (eggs), L (larvae), Y (age O+ young).

• • • Insufficient sample size to estimate population, t Averaging indicates moving average process,

_._ I .. e

- ----- I - - - - - - -e*. -

Table 4-24 Length-frequency distribution of striped bass taken in ichthyoplankton sampling from M~rch 28, 1979 through November 2, 1979.

032879 041779 050179 052279 05297!1 060579 061279 062579 0945 1110 1145 0825 0830 0850 0720 1041 TO TO TO TO TO To TO TO 033079 042079 050479 052479 060179 060779 061479 062979 TL (MM) 1155 1130 1317 0935 . 1210 1404 1626 1045

---

~------------------------------------------------------------

2.0- 3.5 7

~.o- 5,5 *5 1 2 NO, MEAS. 12 1 2 NO. TAKEN 0 0 12 0 1 2 0 0 MEAN MEAS. 3.5 5.5 5.0 RANGE (MM) 3.0- 4.5 5~5 s.o- 5.5

"'I"'

VOL. FILTERED .....J

.....J

---

~------------------------------------------------------~-------------------------

O"/UY7!1 071679 072479 080679 082079 091079 101579 10297!1 0930 1052 0800 1040 1001 1006 0910 0900 TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO 071279 072079 072779 080979 082479 091379 101779 110279 TL (~:M) 1540 1235 1311 1550 1250 1320 1446 1114 NO. MEAS.

NO. TAKEN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEAN MEAS.

RANGE (MM)

VOL. FILTERED

Table 4-25 Length-frequen~y distribution of striped bass taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

---

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------*---------------**

Fl (HH) OCT 11 OCT 22 NOii 15 NUV 1 Y NOV 'l1 ote 04 JAN 16 JIN 21 JAN 28 ,..AR 10 MAR 20 HAR Z(o THAU THflU THMU THl!U fMRU THllU THAU OCT 2J NOV i!j DEC 07 JAN 18 JAN H JAN 29 HAR 27 76*80 81-85 Bc.*91.1 Y1*1f5 1 1 96*1UO 101-105 106*11U 111-115 116*12U 121-125 12b*1Jll 1.S1*1H 1lb*14iJ .i::i.

141-145 I 146*1 SU -..J 151*155 co 15b*16U 101*1b5 166*17U 171-175 176-l!S(J 1d1-1!15 186-190 191-195 196*2UU 201-205 20C>-~1 \) z 211-215 21 C>-220 Z21*2l5

• 1 2c6*2.SU 251-235 23C>*240 241*/4~

240*250

- - - - - -* - *- -* - - - *** - -e- -

Table 4-25 Continued

---

*-----------------~------------D*---------------------------*--------------*---------

FL (MM) OCT 11 OCT 2Z NOV 15 NOV 19 NOV 27 DEC 04 JAN 16 JAN Z1 JAN ~8 MAR 10 MAR iZO iZ4 THllU OCT Zl THflU NOV 23 THRU

. DEC 07 THRU JAN 18 THRU JAN Z3 THRU JAN 29 THRU "AR 27 251 *25'.> ..i--

25b*2b0 2b1*2b'.>

i!Ob*Z70 211-215 Z76*21l0 281-285 21!C>*29U 291-29'.>

2Y6*.HIU

> 31)0 HO. MEAS. 0 0 3 0 2 5 0 2 z 6 NO. TAKEN 0 0 3 0 2 5 0 2 z 6 ~

I

-.i MEAN ME.AS, 1Y9.o O!Ol.U 4:SU.O 1118.4 142.U Hb.O 141 .u 1~C!.u \0 RANG~ (HM) 1 YJ-21.S 186-218 4j0*430 16*261 98-186 1!io*156 91*191 8.5*221

- IA Si.GS Ff 19111

Table 4-26 Length-frequency d1str1bution ot impinged striped bass, Salem cws, January 1979 through March 1979.

U1U£(9 Ul1JIN ul 1.. /V Ul' llY IJ I tb lY lltU<o I~

Lil 11 '" Ui 1 t!fY 1Ui!~/9 UllJ<o /9 U)117Y ld 1b 79 1Uj.i uuou LlLll..i..1 uuuu UUUIJ uuuu uuuu uuou uuuu uuuu LluUO uuuu JO JU TlJ ro I0 10 JO 10 10 TO iO lu 010679 01H7Y U1C:U/9 U1Zl/9 0.?UH9 Ui!1 U /Y U21179 022479 U :SU .S79 OJ1Ul9 031779 C..S24 79 fl (MHI ZHU ZZJO UJ;J. 2i!JU 2100 UJO i!lJU 2230 22JU 2245 2230 22.30

---

~---------------------------------------**---------------------------

56- 60 61* 65 1 z 1 oo- 7oJ 2 4 j 1 1 71* IS 1 4 7 1 2 4 2 2 2 lb* tlU 1 b 11 5 1 4 l 1 4 i! 1 81* tlS J 4 II 2 2 1U 4 1 8 5 1 8b* 9() 2 4 8 3 2 8 6 5 1 2 1 91- 95 6 7 s 3 4 2 1 J 2 2 96*1UO 4. z 6 1 z 4 6 1 2 9 3 101*1uS 1 1 1 1 3 1 J 2 4 8 1Ll6*11Ll 1 1 1 2 4 2 .3 111 *1 H 1 l 4 1 J 1 3 1 116*120 1 1 1 2 2 J 1'!1*125 1 ~

1'!6*1l0 1 I 131*1.H CXl 0

136*HU 2 141*145 1 1i.e.:'1so 1 151*155 156*16;J 161*105 1 1 oo*11;J 171*1H 176*1110 1111-185 11io*19U 191*195 11lo*2UU Zl.11 *205 i!llO*.?lLl

.?11*.?15 21o*UO U1*ZZ5 22o*2JO

• NO. Hf.AS. 13 H 31 17 45 J2 12 35 42 3 18 NO. JAHN 14 3J 58 31 17 48 38 12 35 42 4 18 SAl1P 0 11111 10 1911 . 195 181 H5 1711 213 1o4 15tl 137 144 17J HUN H~AS 0 90 86 84 91 95 Yi! 98 86 92 99 106 95 RANGE UllU 11-110 61*120 61-115 61-150 56-125 61 *HO 60-230 66-105 66-200 56*155 71-165 56*120 l - * .. e

- -* -* - - - - - - -e-Table 4-26 Continued iH2)/~ U4li1 /Y *Jt.IJO (\I li4l!>IY U4,.HY ll'+.)U/11 U~ll I 1\1 lJ ~, .. (\I u5cUY U~297Y OoU4/Y IJOl 179 liUUll uJUIJ Ullv'.J JUVl.I I ~l*IJ IJ\11) ;j\l.)l} 1lijU 1bUO 1lJ45 1Ujii 1 iJj;J ro IU lU TU IU IU Tli TU TU lu TO TO ilH119 Otoull9 u'+hl9 04l.O/Y U4'71Y U)U47Y 0511/Y 0)1b1Y 05257Y Ob0179 0001179 Ob1S79 f L ( Hll J 22.ill l.?.50 c!2.:.U 1Y40 0\IUU l4UU 14.5U 1850 1 &UO hl.10 19Uu HOO

---

~-------------------------------------------------------------------

81* 85 8b* 90 91* 95 1 9b*10J 2 1 1U1*1U5 3 1 100-110 1 1 111*1 H 11 b*1ZO 121*125 12o*1.5U NO. Ht.AS. 9 i!

NO. JAii.EN 9

" 2 UHP. HlN U9 213

" ,19 .59 119 108 15b 1711 11b 132 144 111

~

co I

MEAh HHS. 101 99 1UJ 11.5 AAllfOi: UllO IU*130 86-110 101-10~ 106-120 I

Table 4-26 Continued IJO 1 tl7~ :ioc4/v ufvllv U(UIHV ui I~ fY JUUY 0 11111 /v Lib12 7Y IJb 1 "7\1 l:'>i.J2 /9 u91 v ,.,.

..i9uO uuuu iJIJl.IJ uuuu uuvu UllUU UYltU CUIJU ovuli vl.Jv47\1

""' 0 vUUU 1 v'-"

Tu TO TO ru 10 10 ro 10 ru JO 10 Io 062H9 OoJOT9 lJ7U/(9 0/1479 07l179 0721JIY Ub11/Y 011111 (9 Ub2~7Y UYU119 U9UH9 UY1579 FL (HH) l.?31) l.?JO uuu l2JO 2llU l)!JU U.\U U.\O 215b 2220 210U 22.SU

--~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NU. Hf.AS*

NO. TAKlN SAHP. MlN 195 l46. .2.34 21 214 l06 21J 86 191 HEAN MUS.

""'I O::>

N I e

Table* 4-26 Continued uv1otY .JYlJIY U'/.)U/Y luUllY 1ll14lY 1 lll I 79 1 u2ll /'ii 11 u.. IY 1111 7Y 111o7Y 112HY 1ZUU9 uuou OUUf UUliU uuuu uuuo uuoz uuu~ U(JUU uuuu liiJOO uuuo UlJU)

TO TO ro ro TO 10 TO TCI 10 TO TO 10 J92219 UYlY7Y 1UU019 101.i 1Y 1UlU79 10U7Y 11UH9 1111.179 1117'9 11.2479 1Zu179 1ZUil79 FL tllH) 12UO zzoo U.>U li!.SU i!HS li!JO a .. 5 l215 2Z30 ~21!1 i!2JO 22.)2

---

*--*-----------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------------------

56- 61)

C>1- eis b6- 70 1 2 1.

71- 15 l. J . 2 Tb- 8U 1 1 81- tl5 2 1 1 86- 90 1 2 2 2 91- 115 2 Y6-100 2 101-105 1 Ub-110 1 111-115 11C>-1.!0 1'1-1Z5 1 ue.-1.rn 2 1 1l1-1H 1Jb*l4il 1 2

1 1 1 1

""'I

())

Hl-14~ 1 1 1 w 11oei-no 6 1* 1 1 nl-15> 1 i! 1 4 1)0-1 bil 1 1 1 z 1 1o1*1o5 3 4 2 2 2 2 lb0-170 J 2 171-175 1 1 2 17ei-.180 2 i!

181-105 1 1 2 1 dO*lYO 191-195 1 1

1 zi! 1 l.

1Yo-luu 1 1 2U1*lU5 1 c:llo*l lll 211-.i!l 5 l1b*lLU i!ll-225 Z2o-BO 2l1-.!H Zlo*.!40 l .. l-245 24b-250 2~1-lS5 l5o-lb0 290-JUO Ju1-4uU

---

~-----------------------------------------~--------

NO. Hi:Ali 0 18 32 23 11 9 14 19 11 l NO. UKlN 111 53 25 11 9 1S 19 11 3 SAMPo HlN 110 20.i 139 1911 177 zu 217 237 224 186 240 1YS lltAk MEA5. 1 Ol 1J.i 140 171 113 us 129 1~1 159 1111 UNiit tH"I) 101-105 S6-0!1U 11-195 61>-li!S* 66-111S 76-205 76-175 56-235 111-215 91-140

~

'!'able 4-2 6 Continued llu9 79 l"o/v 1 i!'.>/'J 12.>U;'I UUIJll v*Juv VUIJ) U<IUIJ 10 TO IU ru 1l1H9 1i!U79 1l2Y/9 1i!!179 f L (1111) U!O l l!O UH oouu 71* 7S l 7o* bO 111- 85 116* 'ilO Yl* 95 90*1UU 1(11-105 1U0*11J 111-115 110-1za 1i!1*1 ZS 1'o*1H 1 H1*1H 1Jo*hU 11o1-11os lloO*HJ H1*15S 156*10\J 1t>1*1oS 1 bb*11il 171*1 H i!H*i!i.O z.. 1-z .. s i!1oo*i!SIJ 251-i!SS 6 l 6 l SAllP. lllN 216 i!16 111 48 MEAN MEAS. 10i! 151 911 RANGt CHll) 11 *155 11*255 96*100

_.__ .. e

.. - - ** - - - - - - - .. - - ... ...e_-

- Length-frequency distribution Table 4-27 of impinged striped bass, Salem CWS, January 1980 through March 1980.

JI vl:-111 lll**<>'>U "11 .>ot* u lluou JI" /dlJ llii.l1 lOU Jt.1 *JdJ Jl 1 l ~*J Ui:.!4!!U u.su,ou IJjUYblJ uJ1011U uVlJ\J *1;.11Jv U\.ll.*J UU1Jf,

• l'lhJO Ui.:UU U1J 1JtJ i.JlJIJU UUlJU llUvJ uuuu UlU'J lu II.I l\J llJ ro ro ro

• L , ,.,,., J llJ ul*J)ou U.>IJ II.I

.; 1 I '13" lu ulhou c<:.>'1 Iu u 1 t.to~u ld)

Uc!U.i:'diJ c!.St1U Ut.L.,,dlJ

.a.su U.!.1 t>O*l

.!Hu 1Ul.idu u.su i...iU18U 22JU U.iO!ldU

JU U51)1!0 c!551J Ujl,dU t.i3U

"" 'J

'JC>;. C>J ol* o>

oo- (J l l 11- l'J 4 () 4

(()* oJ ) 'J "I

ol* O) do* VJ I

(.

I '

I "

1 I

1 3

Y1* y'J I c!

Yo*luoJ c! 1 l 1 ~

lul*lu'J 1 l I luC>*l 1 J 2 co 111 *1 I) 1 Ul 110-llll 1 1'!1*1'~ 1 lC:o*l .iiJ 1Jl*1H 1 1.so-1 .. J 1 hl*h) l l4o*1 'JJ I 151-HS ..!

l)O*loJ j 1 I o1*1 o:i l l 1ot>*l /ll 2 1 171-115 1 110-1 dtJ 1 1o1-1 o5 l lllo*hU l Yl *1 v'J 1 19t>*~JU j!

l.01-llJ5

---

Q*--------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• o. l'lf A~. 15 ) y jd c!4 4 22 5 s 1Z

.. o. 1A11.t;;~ 15 ) y 4/ ~) 4 a 5 II 5 1 j!

lUI i!lS i!O~ ZUb Hb 1 Yl 155

!>AMP.

"l"' I j.! l~5 lC>O 1Yb t..SY bo .,,y Yo lllb lu.! 1.!.i 140 1411 174 11 d

""'~ '""' s.

dl kAO.C.t ( .~14) Of>* (** )b*ll15 oo*lh 11-1 ~** oo-Z .>5 t.>b*l(i'i 11*1Y5 7b*.!IJU 'ill*IYU

,j '

.- Table 4-27 Continued UH1,Clll 11111,, 1,.J ul I loll ullutlll u I.: /<111 11.!li Jou J'l*JCIU 1.i.! 1 '~*J (,,, .. l!IJ Jj1"11U IJiU'illllJ u.s1011u II.I IJ\JUu loJ uu"J lu uJaJfJ IU ...,

UU*IU IJIJUlJ Iv uoJ*J*J <IUIJU llllUU lu uu*~.i Ill

\)UIJ*J 10 U'U) 10 tL c..... )

u10~11" UJlJ ,,..

UI lt!tlU

)

• J 1 I 'll<IU lJ I 'btlU ld)

U.!UidU "'l;~dlJ

.:l.)U

"'I OCl*J UJu 1JU.Se1u u.su i..Jllltlu 1UUddu

,,j,J UJ I )lllJ lnu U.iUdU

.:ll" *U&JU 24!JU ".Su

'UO*<!IJ (11-'1)

'I o*UoJ al*<!O Uo*t!JU

.i!Jl*d) 2.Jo-c!i.J l4l*i4S

'4o*i~U

""'I

'CD 2)1*,)) 0\

Z~o-.?ou lol*<!o;

---

~----------

NO. "'tAS. y .Jll 4 s II s 12 1S y 41 s b s 14!

SAMP. 1'11N IH 10() ,0, 2u6 1 C,.(> 1Y1 1S~

\.

111 10() lul 140 1 ld Ob* /II So-105 oo*IH 11 *I SCI 111-us

- -. - - *- - * -* - - - -e- - .. -

Table 4-27 Continued 1..Jl Sol u ~)1,:!IJ u..;11., uuuu J(I TCJ lU.l911U OU111U fl (HMJ 1&110 2.S55

---

~------------------------------------------------------------------

11- 15 2 10- di) 2 111- d5 110- 'ti) 91- \15 9o*1UJ 1 101*105 1 100-110 1 111-115 110-1.?o 1.ll-125 1.?e*l .iCI 1.Sl*1H 130*llo0 .i::.

h1*1'o5 I lloo*HO co

....i 151-155 150-10()

101-105 1 100-110

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -*******************************~*****a**************************************************

hO. l'IEA5. 8 NO. TUi:,. 8 5AllP. HlN 115 96 120 RAhliE (1410 11*165 11*110

'l'able 4;...29 Population statistics for Atlantic croaker prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979/80.

Is Prior to Averagingt Jr:Subaequent to Averagingl Life Stage** Size Number Standard Coefficient Standard Coefficient +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence Ri.ver (mm) 3 R2 Period Date Ase Groue Sam(!lea (x/lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation Estimate Limits Kilometer*

1979 l'.ar

• 27-30 87 .5 E 11 0 64-117 Mar. 27-30 87 .5 L 12-13 .5 11 0 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 E 40 0 0 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 L 12-13 .5 40 0 0 64-117 May 1-4 122.5 E 39 0 0 64-117 May 1-4 122.5 L 12-13 .5 39 0 0 64-117 May 22-24 143.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 May 22-24 143 .o L 12-13 .5 51 0 0 0-117 ~

I l!ay 29- CX>

Jun" l 150.5 E 51 0 0 0-117 CX>

l'.ay 29-June l 150.5 L 12-13 .5 51 0 0 0-117 June 5-7 157 .o E 51 0 o. 0-117 June 5-7 157 .o L 12-13 .5 5'1 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164,0 E 72 0 0 0-117 June 12-14 164.0 L 12-13 .5 72 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177 .5 E 75 0 0 0-117 June 25-28 177 .5 L 12-13 .5 75 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 E 71 0 0 0-117 July 9-12 191.5 L 12-13 .5 71 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 .199.0 E 51 0 0 0-117 July 16-20 199.0 L 12-13.5 51 0 0 0-117 July 24-27 206,5 E 47 0 0 0-117 Jul:,. '2f.-:.7 200.5 I. 12-n .5 47 0 0 O-li7 A'.!~ I ':-~ 219.5 E ~9 0 0 0-117 AHb. ~-9 219.5 L 12-lJ,5 49 0 0 0-117

'ale

. ..._, .. e

Table 4-28 Continued rPrior to Averagingt rSubsequent to Averagingl 1

Life Stage** Size Number I Standard Coefficiendl Standard Coefficient +95%

Confidence River Collection Julian* or Range of Mean Error of of Error of of Population Period Date Ag.e Group (mm) Samples (x/lOOm3 ) Mean Variation Mean Variation Estimate Limits Kilometers 57 0 0 0-117 Aug. 20-24 23"4 .O E 12-13,5 57 0 0 0-117 Aug. 20-24 234 .0 L

. 70 0 0 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254 .5 E 12-13 .5 70 0 0 0-117 Sept. 10-13 254.5 L y 0.016 529 0,015 483 0.118 3,71 E5 2.60 E6-2.22 E5 0-117 Oct. 11 284.0 13-130 28 0.016 79 0 0 0-117 Oct. 15-17 *289*.o E 12-13 .5 79 0.014 0,014 889 0.013 855 0.224 1,13 E6 4.09 E6-9.64 E5 0-117 Oct. 15-17 289.ci L y 13-130 55 0.028 0.015 403 0.013 340 0.254 8,75 ES 2.76 E6-4.22 E5 0-117 Oct. 22-23 295 .5 Oct. 29- ~

304.0 E 46 0 0 0-117 Nov. 2 I co Oct. 29- \0 12-13 .5 46 0 0 0-117 Nov. 2 304.0 L y 13-130 29 0.180 0.111 333 0.104 313 o.i.39 8.02 E6 2.37 E7-3.29 E6 0-117 Nov. 15 319.0 y 13-130 43 0,031 0,023 498 0.022 462 0.184 1.59 E6 4.82 E6-9.57 E5 0-117 Nov. 19-23 325.0 331.0 y 13-130 24 0.035 0.015 211 0.014 190 0.277 2.32 E6 4.38 E6-l,36 E6 0-117 Nov. 27 Dec. 4-7 339.5 y 13-130 53 0,167 0.087 378 0.073 315 0.194 6,96 E6 1,75 E7-2.55 E6 0-117 1980 Jan. 16-18 17.0 y 13-130 31 0.083 0.037 250 0.033 221 0.076 5.65 E6 1.06 E7-2.75 E6 0-.117 Jan. 21-23 22.0 y 13-130 8 0.008 *** 0-117 Jan. 2s..:29 28.5 y 13-130 23 0.011 0.008 223 0.001 201 0.078 1,33 E6 2,40 E6-5 .54 ES 0-117 Mar. 10 70.0 y 13-130 5 0 *** 64-117 Mar. 20 80.0 y 13-130 10 0 *** 64-117 Mar. 24-27 85.5 y 13-130 26 0 0 64-117

• Given as midpoint of collection period.

• • E (eggs), L (larvae), Y (age O+ young).

• • • lnsuffl~ient sample size to estimate population.

t Averaging indicates moving average process.

Table 4-29 Length-frequency distribution ot subsampled Atlantic croaker taken in trawl sampling from October 11, 1979 through March 27, 1980.

FL (HM) OCT 11 oc r zz NOV 15 NOV 19 NOV 27 DEC 04 JAN 16 J.AN 21 JAN 28 MAR 10 MAii 20 MU 24 THRU THNU THRO THRO THRO THRO THAU OCT 2J NOV 2J DEC 07 JAN 1 ti JAN 23 JAN 29 MAR 27 11-H lo*lU 1 21-i!S 1 8 . 1 3 .1 2'.>*3J 4 JJ 5 3 4 5 jl-35 11 1J 28 s 6 22 10 2 36-i.u J 16 21! 11 3 29 H 4 41-i.!> 10 26 16 J j8 17 1 4o-~u 3 19 6 4 36 12 2 51-55 1 11 2 3 H 12 So-ou s. J 2 18  !>

ol*b~ 1 s 13 1 C>O*/U 1 1 4 71-75 7 ~

76-tllJ I cll*/j) 3 \0 8:.-'i'\l 1 0 91-95 1 9()-llJQ 1

> 1Uu

'40. Ml:ilS. 14 49 161 52 26 i!13 80 ii? 1.i! 0 0 u NO. TA~HI 14 49 161 52 26 274 81 2 12 0 0 0 MEAl1 Ml:AS. Ji..o- 44.4 lb .1 44.8 42.2 48.2 43.9 41.o 42.4 RAP1ut 01'1) JJ- 38 23*.$1!2 18- 68 28- 88 23- 83 23- 98 23- 98 36* 46 13- 81

...... .. ____... .. .... - e

-*e-\ -

'l'ab!e 4-JO Length-frequency distribution of impinged Atlantic croaker, Salem CWS, January 1979 through December 1979.

u lli'1Y u1u779 ulh/;,o 1Jld/Y U I ~Ii /\I **lU4 IV iJ.! 11 /Y U£1o/9 Ui!l!~fY JlU4/ll UJl 11\1 Ullo {Y I J Jv ..... " ' J i.f 1J ~* ~* l.H. *vu Ul*<JIJ IJUIJu v LJil*J UuLJU IJUUU \JUUU lJUuU livuU lu lu lu tu I0 II.I [() [(J lu TO TO Iu 1Jlvo79 UllHY ul~U/9 U1UIY U~li.H9 U~lU/9 U.!1 lf9 UU.4/Y UjUJ79 OHU79 OJlllY U.lt.,19 fL (Hll) .z.uu 22JU 2.!.>IJ UJO .!IOU 2Z:SiJ a:so l230 &!.?30 224S 2230 22.sv

.31- JS 1 JC>- 40 1 2 41- liS 11 2 lo(>* 50 17 2 51- s:i 5 so- (>I) 15 C>l- 65 ()

b(>* 10 11 1 11- 1S 8 2 111- Ill) 6 1 111* llS 2 111 11 NO. JUEN 88 11 14S 198 , 111 155 118 i.!13 164 158 137 144 11.S SC> 55 UhfiE (Hi'IJ ..n- 11s lC>* 80

Table 4-30 Continued

• • • • • • • • • • • o************************-**********************************************************************************************

J:.I.) t9 t;a. ,11 Iv '"' .. ..-e tY .... 1; iY U1ol.H<1 u.,:.11 fY IJ~IJ({Y Ii~,,,.,

iJ~cUY J~i:Y79 uo*J~ /Y Ob l 1 /9 uvu(; ., ** , .* J 1,.;., LIY I~ .;11:.u 111~u 1 blll* 1 u.s:i 1 ""~

lJ,llJLI l1Ul..ti 1..;.hJ 10 Iv lu Iv tu I0 Iv TO Tu TO Tei 10 OH119 U1tul7Y Ulth/9 ll1ttu/Y ll4U7Y 0504/Y 051179 ll51i179 05i!5/9 Oblll 19 Obllci/9 Ub1HY fl (HH) UlO UlU i!HO 1940 0900 11ooo 14JO 1850 180U 11100 1900 1dUO hO. TAI\ l:.N 5AhP. hlll tl9 i!tl 1H 11 y 118 110 Ui! 144 111 llAN61:. (HIO

.. -* .. .. ,~

'I'able 4-30

• Continued

• • • • • • • • • • m***************************-********************************************************************************************

o I ci'9 UYl..li UOb* 7Y IJUu\J l* /11 *1

\)l;J

I J

lJ ll*ct't Ul}lJU ullHY lHiUU ll/£dY

\JUUU 1Jo 11/Y UY41J lJo1U'I lllllJJ uo I 't , ..

(JUUU uo2o/'t UJU4 vliut /Ii uuuu uvlu7'il 1 u ....

10 tu Iv lu lU lU Ill ru JU Ju lu lCi

)623/'I UbJv /'I IJfU//Y u/1419 UUl 19 O/~IH9 Udl 1 lY UdllllY Ui>2!>fY ii9v 1 I Y lJvv~ /Ii u'r157Y FL (l'IHJ .UlU .!23lJ UuO c!i!JU UJU 155U UJU u.rn 215b a.w 21UO 2230

• --------------------------------------------------------------~-------------------------------------------------------------------

---

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hO. TU~N U9 234 21 214 206 86 191

.i::.

I l.O w

Table 4-30 Continued

J\11 t-lY ulliS/9 ;JY~I.. f *~ I 11u11 Y 1111 ~ ,.., llJc!l /Y 11*1.

:i; '" 11 **~ , ... 111119 111li , .. 112H9 1 dJ' 79 ul:uu 1J'.,:u I i,,l*\ 1 .1 l.l.llil' UUJU Ul*1J.:: UlJU~ UL*Vu uvuu JUUJ uuuu Lo~u; tu Tu IU Tu Tu IU 10 10 Tu TO TO IU 09i!U9 UV2Y/9 liiUO(Y 1 Ul.SIY 1U.::U7Y 1UUl\I 11uH9 111 (J (\I 111719 11 or!~ I II 1t!U1711 1C:uc79 FL l 1'114 I 1200 UulJ UJIJ UlJ U.S5 u.su ai.s an u.su 2<!1 ~ a.su c!d.!

20- JU Jl- j5 Jo- loU ltl* "~

lo()* !IJ

,1- !>S

!lo* OJ N0 0 Hf.AS.

NO. lAO N SAHP 0 HJN 110 201 1J9 1118 ,,, 2U 217 2H 22/o 18t.I 21oo 195 J:>,

Hf.AN Hf.AS. 28 1,6 58 I

\.0 RANlaf. (HH) 26- lO lot.I* 50 56- 6U .::..

.. -; .. ... ..

Table 4-30 Continued

---

G*---------------------------------------------------------------m**-----------------------------------------------

1i*,'t/'il 1 clt>/<i 1,, )(., Ii! .Su/9 uuUO UUVIJ Ul.'U~ IHJUiJ ro 1.!1S79 lu 1aai; '"

IUYN Tu 12.S1t9 fl l1MJ ZHU iHU <!21~ U6UO

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • m 41* 1tS l ltC>'"' ~u 1 s1- !IS

!lo* oU 01- o!ll j

.. o. l'll:Alio 1 3 II 110. IAll. EN .s II SAllP. Hl" l16 .?h 111 411 MUN hl:Ali 0 It) 44 411  !:18 RAt.61: (H!'I) 41* ltS 41* so 46* !llU 46- 6!:1 "'I"'

l.O U1 I

I

__ L

Table 4-31 Length-frequency distribution of impinged Atlantic croaker, Salem CWS, January 1980 through March 1980.

---

G*-----------~-------~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oJ I i>C:ou u I l.lt.!1:.o I) 11 .) ~,: oJ 1ll't!U 111 ll!\1* u.:ulou *Jl 11.l<!U 11£ l lou lJll .. oU ,15u2~u ldll*OU ld1ooo.J J\luU \.iu*Jl) l1l1;JJ *Juuu *Ji.Ju uuuu 1.JllUo) IJUUU VlJl*U UlllJU uuuu u.:u~

TO Iv Ju llJ 10 J0 1u I0 10 Tu Tu JU 010580 U11211U 011 Y:IU U12bl>U OlUltlO 02UY!l0 021b!l0 on3su 0301110 U.SObllO Ol1511U UJU81J FL 'l"f'i) i!l3U 2245 2lJlJ 22J5 i!.SUO li!30 2230 i!i!30 22.SO 2230 2350 2130 ilb* jJ II 31* JS l Jl 1 1 lo* 40 12 Y5 1l 14 41* ~s l .. u l .!4 .SY 2.S

.. o- so l 5b 1 .. 1 51  :>S 51* H .l 51 1o4 4Y 18 Sb* oO 3 .!1 12~ 74 23 bl* oS 1 19 4:1 .S2 11 ob* 10 1 2 12 1 4 11* 75 1 5 l 3 lo* llJ 1 1 111

• o5 c!o* YU

---

~--------------------------------

NO. Ht.ASa 13 . 204 1ol 2oil 132 NO. IAlo.f.N ll 204 b.B 269 1ll.

iA14P. HlN ll2 1bb 19b 207 2l9 i?H 203 206 19b 191 155 Hf.Ari HEAS. Sl so 49 53 50

!IAkH CMPI) 41* 10 31* 80 l6* 90 l1* 7S l1* 75

_e_

- --- -* - - - - i - - - - - - - - *9 Tabl2 4-31

.Continued

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ~******-********w*****************-*******-**-**-***-***-***-*************************************-***************

tl ic HO 'J SJ*.1,,1.*

_,l;U*I *~ ... ,..

10 IU UJ(YlllJ l)JJl ts*J fL (HH) lllUIJ HS~

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • m***********-***ea******d***********************************q*************************************************

---

*-----------------------------~---------------------------------------G***----------------------------------------------

NO. tll::AS.

SAllP. HlN 25 RAhvE (llH)

4-98 I

• • I I

WATER FLOW I NET SUPPORT RING I I

'y.-J--+t---- 1-m PLANKTON NET (0.5 mm MESH)

I I

1------- TANK I

I I

I I

I I

Larval chamber used to collect I

J>UDLIC SEHVICE ELECTRIC /\NO GAS COrtr*l\NY entrainment abundance samples in SALEll 316(bl S'!'UOY 1979.

Figure 4-1 I

I

4-99 I

I I

I I

I I FISH BUCKET TRASH TROUGH

~""'''''''''''''"~

I LEGEND TRAVEL

..... HIGH PRESSURE WASH I -0 LOW PRESSURE FISH WASH I

I --

4 - FLOW I

I PUflLIC SERVICE EI.EC'rRIC Mm GJ\S COllPJ\tlY Modified vertical traveling water screen, Salem cws.

I Sl\LE11 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-2

4-100 I ALOSA SPF. EGGS APR 17--20, 19?9

• • I DELAWARE RIVF..R ESTUARY. RKm 0--lr? I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I

0 0.000 Id g

0.222 0.260 TO TO 026&

o.3U I

Ill I

> 0.3U

> o..ass TO TO O:.s:;s 0.400 I

I I

N NOT SAMPLED I I

DELAWARE I I

I I

Density of Alosa spp. eggs in

~I PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC /\ND G/\S 'COMPANY The Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY April 17-20, 1979.

Figure 4-3 I

4-101 I

I*e ALOSA SPP. EGGS I MAY 1-4, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0.:..117 I

LEGEND I 0 DENSITY PER 100 CUEIC METERS 0-000 g > 0.000 TO 0_100 I g > Cl100 TO 0200 o..aoo SI > 0.200 TO I I "> 0.300 TO 0.400 I

.. N i

I I

I DELAWARE I

I I

Density of Alosa - spp. eggs in the I PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Delaware River Estuary, May 1-4, 1979.

Figure 4-4 I

I

4-102 I ALOSA SPP. LARVAE APR. 17-20, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I o

LEGEND Dt:NSIIT PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

la Q

0.000 0.100 TO TO Q.100 0..200 I

BB II

> 0200

> Q.300 TO

'IO 0.300 0.400 I

I

• ID."W JERSEY I

N i SAMPLED I I

DELAWARE I

\lLAN11C

A~

I I

I Density of Alosa spp. larvae in l'UPLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY the Delaware River Estuary, April 17-20 *, 1979.

I Figure 4-5 I

I

4-103 I

I ALOSA SPF. LARVAE MAY 29 - JUN. 1, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RK1n 0-117 I

LEGEND I 0 DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo Id > OZ"/3 l'O 0.5b;i I g > 0.563 TO 0.854 Ill > 0854. TO U44 I II > UH TO l4:H I

NEW JERSEY I

.. i N

I I

I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCI<;AN I

I Density of Alosa spp. larvae in PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND Gl\S COMl'l\NY The Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY May 29-Juno 1, 1979.

I . Figure 4-6 I

4-104 I BLUEBACK HERRING O+ (1979-80)

• • I 20.0 I

I 16.0 I

r:1 14.0 I

~

~

E-1 CIJ r:1 12.0 I

z 0

~

~

10.0 I 0...

0 0...

8.0 I t.-'

0

~

6.0 I 4.0 I

2.0 I

I J A s 0 N D J M A M J I

Baywide population estimates of I

young, age 0+ blueback herring from rllllLIC SERVICE r.r.EC"l'RIC l\ND Gl\S COMl'l\NY SAf,l:n 316(b) STUDY October 1979 through January 1980.

Figure 4-7 I

I I

4-105 I

I BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

JAN. 28 -29 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RK1n 0-117 I

LEGEND I D DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS a.coo g > 0.000 ro 002.0 I g > o.ozo TO 0:040

!ill > 0.040 TO 0.060 I II > 0.000 TO 0.620 I Nlo!"W JERSEY I N I

I I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age O+ blueback herring in the Dela~are River PUnLIC SEUVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-8 I

4-106 I BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

NOV. 15. 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

a t.1 Q

0.000 o.ozo TO TO o.ozo 0.040 I

61 I

0.040 0.060 TO TO 0.060 0.060 I

I NEW JERSEY I

t N

I I

DELAWARE I ATLANTIC I

OCEA.1'\f I

I Density of young, age 0+ blueback tllfll.IC f.ERVICf. ~:U:C'l'RIC MID G1\S COMl'l\NY herring in the Delaware River SJ\.J,r.M 3 lG ( h) STU PY Estuary, November 15, 1979.

Figure 4-9 I

4-107 I

Ie BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

I NOV. 19-23, 1979 DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUDIC METERS I 0 Q.000 0.000 TO 0.0ZO

~

I g >

Q.020 Q.040 TO TO 0.010 Q.060 Bl I I > Q.060 TO o.oao I NEW JERSEY I N I

t I

I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ blueback runLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC MIO G1\S COl1i'J\NY herring in the Delaware River SM.En 316(b) S'l'UDY Estuary, November 19-23, 1979.

Figure 4-10

4-108 I BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

NOV. Zl. 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I

0 LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC MF.TERS o.ooo I

g Q

> Q.000

> 0.020 TO TO 0.020 0.040 I'

> 0040 TO 0.060 118 a >. 0.060 TO 0.060 I I

NEW JERSEY I

t N

I I

DELAWARE ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I I

Den*si ty of young, age.a+ blueback runLIC s1rnv1cr. r.r.r.crRIC J\tlD GM; COttl'J\NY herring in the Delaware River SJ\l,f:tt 316 ( h) S'l'UDY Estuary, November 27, 1979.

Figure 4-11 I

4-109 I

I BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

DEC. 4-7, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METF..RS I 0 Id 0000

> 0000 TO o.ozo I lia g

> a.ow

> 0.040 TO TO 0.04.0 0.060 I I > 0.060 TO 0.080 I

I N i

I I

I DELAWARE I ATLAN1TC OCEA.i'l I

I Density of young, age 0+ blueback

~

PllllLJC f.ERVICF. F.LF.C'l'RIC ANO G,\f, COMPANY herring in the Delaware River SM.t:M 31 G ( b) STUDY Estuary, December 4-7 ,* 1979.

Figure 4-12 I

I

4-110 I

BLUEBACK HERRING O+

• JAN. 16-18, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RI VER F.STUARY. RKm 0-117 I

0 LEGEND DEN!:H'l'Y Plili 100 CUBIC Mt:T1'l

I 0.000 lO 0.0?.0 g > 0.020 'IO 0.040

> 0.040 IO 0.060 HI I > 0.060 1'0 0.007 I I

I N

I I

I I

Al'LANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ blueback I

PUllLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY herring in the Delaware River Estuary, January 16-18, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-13 I

4-111 I

I BLUEBACK HERRING 0+

MAR. 24-27, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I

,I 0 LEGEND DENS11'Y PER 100 C:UBIC ME'l'ERS o.ooci

~ > 0.000 TO o.ozo I g > o.ozo TO o~o Bll > 0,040 TO 0.060 I D > 0.060 TO o.oao I

I I N

I*

!1 t NOT SAMPLED I

I DELAWARE I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ blueback I

punt.IC f.EUVICE ELECTRIC AND. G/\S COMPANY SALEn 316(b) STUDY herring in the Delaware River Estuary, March 24-27, 1980.

Figure 4-14 I

1979 BLUEBACK HERRING

""o~

• 501 *

,~ --------l .*o.o **o

~

I

- - J -

0....... ._ 35.0 ...-

....:I 0

rx:i 0  ::?::

• • 1 Cf)

... 30.0 ~ .

.:i 0 E-t

< ._ 25.0 ~

~

r_,

V', ~

"°l 1-1 c--.

l

- 20.0 Cf)

~

~ ~

0 - 15.0 !>

~ ~

I 20 ....... .......

=I E-t .......

r.::J

<: N

,_, ....:I

- 10.0 ::J

~

0 0

~

Cf) 1.0 l I I

I I

... 5.0

s

J u

J )! ~

0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COl!PJ\H'l' number of impinged blueback herring, Salem CWS, SALEll 316 ( b) STUDY January through December 1979.

Figure 4-15 e

e- - I 1980 BLUEBACK I1ERRING 6000.0 l 14.0

'b

..-4

~

.-J 7000.01 0

i/) ~ I r=.:l 6000.01 I I

I r e

~

...... I 10.0

<~ 5000.0 I

I I

µJ

...... I ~

(/) ~

I I

I

- 8.0 :i r=.:l

~

4000.0 l~

I I

I I

I E-<

i/)

µJ

..... I t:. 6.0

< ~ I ~

I µJ I

i 3000.0-:: I I > ......

~

I ......

i

~

I I ._ 4.0 ~ w

-b

...... 2000.0 1

~

j I

I I

I I

....l

~

0 I  ::::>

~

~

A . u I

I 2.0 1000.0 1

{/)

~

0.0 ..

---

~-; rr 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COllPANY number of impinged blueback herring, Salem CWS, SALEtt 316(b) STUDY January through March* 1980.

Figure 4-16

4-114 I BLUEBACK HERRING

• • I I

I a

I I

I I

I I I I

I MEAN NUMBER 01', PUMPS I I

Relationship of blueback herring PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY impingement rate to number of pumps in operation, Salem cws.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY

.Figure 4-17 I

4-115 I

I 3 I

2.5 I

I 2

I I -z~ 1.5 I ~

.. 1 I

I .5 I

I NIGHT DAWN DAY DUSK I

1*

Relationship of blueback herr in(J PUlll.lC St:RVl Cf: t:l.f:cTl!lC MIO G/\f. COllPA!lY impingement rate to time of day, I S/\LF:ll 316 ( b) STllllY Salem cws, January 1979 throu9h M.::irr-h lqRn Figure 4-18 I

____.TEMPERATURE 1001 ¥--If BLUE BACK 901 35 ao-30 70 25 60

~

-so 20 ~

u

)

~ l-e{

- 40

> 15 ~

°'

Q..

I/) 30 :E w

10 I-20 5

10t 0 O I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6 20 3 17 3 17 31 14 27 11 25 29 13 27 10 24 8 22 31 12 26 9 23 8 22 31 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR 1979 1980 Relationship between mean weekly survival of impinged blueback herring PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AtlD GAS CO?IPANY and water temperature, Salem CWS, January 1979 through March 1980.

SALf:!! 315 ( b) STUD'!

Figure 4-19 e

I -tc***-tc BLUEBACK 70 .___.WHITE PERCH I 60 ****

Jif-****

I ****

11

' 50 **

I ""'

I 40 w

I >

I 30 I

I 20 I

10 I

I FLOOD FLOOD EBB EBB I 1 2 1 2 TIDE I

~

Relationship of hlueback herring and white runt.IC SERVICt: t:r.t:CTRIC ,\!lD GJ\S COllI'J\tJY perch survival tb tidal stnge, Salem CWS, January 1979 throl!gh March 1980.

Sl\Lf:ll 31 G ( b) STl,JDY I Figure 4-20 I

4-118 I ALEWIFE 0+ (1979-80) *

• • I 12.0

~

~

!1

~

en

~

10.0 z

0

..... 8.0 I

~

...:i Cl.

0 Cl.

0

~

...:i 6.0 **I 4.0 I

I I

J A s 0 N D J F M A M J I

I Baywide population estimates of J'llllLJC f.ERVJCr. ELEC'rRIC AND G,\s COMPANY young, age O+ alewife from October 1979 through Januar~ 1980.

SAI.r.n 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-21

4-119 I

I ALEWIFE 0+

OCT. 11, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RK111 0-117 I D Ll:GEND DENSI'l'Y PER 100 CUBIC ID.."l'ERS 0.000 11 ra

• g 0.000 0.250 1'0 TO 0.250 0.500 I > 0.500 TO 0.750 SI

> 0.750 TO LOOO B

I I

.. N A

I I

I I DELAWARE I A1'LAN1'IC OCEAN I

I I

PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC /IND GAS COMl'llNY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Density of young, age 0+ alewife in the Delaware River Estuary, October 11, 1979.

Fiqure 4-22 I

4-120 I ALEWIFE 0+

OC'l'. 22-23, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0*-117 I

LEGF.ND 0

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ID:l'ZRS 0000 I

"> 0000 TO 02Sl id

'1 > 0250 TO 0.500 I IB > 0.500 TO 0.750 I > 0.700 TO LOOO I I

I N

t I I

• I DELAWARE I

.ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ alewife I

runr.1c SEHVJCE !:LEC"rRIC MIO G,\S COMl'l\NY Sl\J,f:M 316 ( b I STUDY in the Delaware River Estuary, October 22-23, 1979.

Figure 4-23 ..

. I I

I.

4~121 I

I ALEWIFE 0+

NOV. 15, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKn1 0--1!7 I

Ll.'GEND Dl!!N~ITI I 0 o.ooo Pr:R 100 CUBIC 'l.U:n:RS Q > o.ooo TO 0.200 I g > 0.250 TO Q.500

> 0.500 TO 0.750 Bl I II > 0.750 TO 1.000 I

I

.. N i

I I

I I DELAWARE I ATLAN"l'IC OC1':AN I

I Density O*f young, age 0+ alewife runLIC f.~:RVICf: r.r,EC'rRIC Mm Gi\S COMl'J\NY in the Delaware River Estuary, SALF.M 316(b) STUDY November 15, 1979.

Figure 4-24 1

4-122 I

ALEWIFE 0+

• • I DEC. 4-7, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGF..ND Dl!:NSIIT l'EH 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

0 0

'g

> 0.006

> 0.012 TO TO 0.012 0.01'1 I

Bl I

0.01; O.OZ6 TO TO 0.026 0.032 I

I I

N A

l I

A1'LAN1'1C OCEAN I

I Density of young, age o+ alewife in the Delaware River Estuary, PUBLIC SERVICE ELEC'rRIC AND CAS COMPANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY December 4-7, 1979.

Figure 4-25 I

4-123 I

I ALEWIFE 0+

JAN. 16-18, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKin 0-1!7 I

LEGEND I 0 DENSI1'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0000 g > 0.000 TO OZ50 I g > 0.250 'l'O 0.500 Ba > Q.500 TO 0.700 I I > 0.700 TO LOOO I

I

.. A N

I I

I I DELAWARE I

I I

I l'llllLIC f.f:RVlCF: f:r.EC'l'RIC J\ND Gi\S COMPANY SM.t:?l 316(b) STUOY Density of young, age O+ alewife in the Delaware River Estuary, January 16-18, 1980.

Figure 4-26 I

I ALEWIFE 0+

JAN. 28-29. 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I

a Li:Gt:ND DEN::>I1'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS OllOO I

> o.ooo*

~

g > (),250 TO TO 0250 0,600 I

g o.soo TO o.r..o I

> 0300 TO 1.000 II I

I N

t ..

I I

DELAWARE I I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ alewif~

runt.IC f.E!:VICr. r.Lr.C'rRIC MID GAS COM!' AN'! in the Delaware River Estuary, SM.f:rt 316 ( b) STUIW January 28-29, 1980.

Figure 4-27 I

1----

4-125 1

I e ALEWIFE 0+

I MAR 24-27, 1980 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 LF.Gl*:ND I [1 DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 g > O.Oll 10 0.014 I g > 0.01-l 10 0.011:!

6a > O.Ol!l 10 O.Di!l I B > o.o~ 10 0.024-I I N I

i NOT SAMPLED I

I DELAWARE I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ alewife l'UBLIC SERVICE El,EC'fRIC AND GAS COMPANY in the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY March 24-27, 1980.

Figure 4-28 I

1979 ALEWIFE

"'o 600.0 10.0 i4 0,_.

i...-------r ..........

...J 500.0 0 8.0 r:il 0

(f) :r::

C/)

~ Q E-< '--'

< 40001 r:il

- ~

if)

__ ,IJ 6.0 E-o

~

~

E-o 30001 ,_, ,

I (f)

>-:o

....:l

_____ _.. I I

f;::l 4.0 f;::l

~

I JI

~

200.0..,1 I I > I-'

N r....,

~ I

<: °'

~

I

.l  : ...J l

~

I 2.0 ~

I 0 . I 0 I

~

(f) 1000 I I

u

• .#'°;.

r-0.0 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COllPl\llY number of impinged alewife, Salem cws, Sl\LEtt 316(b) STUDY January through December 1979.

Figure 4-29 e

- ------ - - - - - -e- -

1980 ALEWI J:i'E 200.0 - - 2500.0 Q

Q

......:i .... 2000.0 ril 0 'Ti (f) 150.0 -  !

ifJ I <:

il I Q

...... I

< I I

t=:I l

~ I

....... I I

1500.0 ~

U) I

g

.J .......

100.0 - E-t f

{f)

~

~ r=:l

,_.... ii:.

< ,... 1000.0 ~

I

~  :> .......

N

~

.J I

I ~ -...J

• I .....::1

....... 50.0 - I

J b I I

... 500.0  :::g 0 I I  ::J

~ I I u (f) I 0.0 n-----------r 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND Gl\S COrlPAtlY number of impinged alewife, Salem cws, SALEtl 316 ( b) STUDY January through March 1980.

Figure 4-30

4-128 I

AMERICAN SHAD 0+ (1979-80)

• • I 16.0 I 14.0 I

I 12.0 I

~

~

~

E-i 10.0 I Cl.I

~

z 0

...... 8.0 I

~

H 0..

0 0..

ei 0

~

6.0 I

4.0 I z.o I

I o.o -'----.-----..--r--El-B-.--S::33-i;9--~--.--~--~-~-~-~

J A s 0 N D J li' M A M J Baywide population estimates of ru111.1c f.ERVICF. ELF:Cl'RIC AND G1\S COMPANY young, age 0+ American shad from October 1979 through January 1980.

SAI.r.11 316 ( b) STU DY Figure 4-31 I

I

4-129 I

• • I AMER I CAN SHAD 0+

JAN. 16-18, 1980 I DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I 0 LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I t;]

Iii!

0.005 o.01g TO TO 0,019 0.032 I Bl I

> 0.032

> 0.0'6 1*0 TO 0.D40 Q.059 I

I NEW JERSEY

-I N

A I

I* DELAWARE ii I

I I

I 11 OCEAN I

Density of young, age 0+ American l'UnLIC SERVICE ELEC'l'RIC AND GAS COrtl'ANY shad in the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY January 16-18, 1980.

Figure 4-32 I

4-130 I AMER I CAN SHAD 0+

JAN. 28-29. 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 LEGEND 0

DENSI'l'Y PER 0000 ioo cumc 1.u:r:r~

I

~ > TO 073)

I 0,000 g > 0200 TO 0.S00 Ba > TO 0.750 I

(l50()

D > o.100 TO 1.000 I

N I

A I *I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ American rum.IC r.1:nv1ct: f.!.f.C'l'RIC l\Nn G1\S COMl'llNY shad in the Delaware River Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

SM.f:M 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-33

• I

4-131 I

• • I AMER I CAN SHAD 0+

MAR 24-Z7, 1980 DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY, RKm 0--1!7 I

LEC1'."ND I 0 DENSl1'Y PER 100 CUBIC Ml':'l'ERS 0.000 g > Q.000 TO O;>...:;o I Q > o,z:;o TO Q.300

> 0.500 TO 0.750 Ba I I > o:r,,,o TO l..000 I

NEW JERSEY I

.. N A.

I NOT I SAMPLED I

I DELAWARE I

I' I

Density of young, age 0+ American l'UOLIC f>ERVICF. r.r,r.crrtIC Arm c;,\S COMPANY shad in the Delaware River Estuary, March 24-27, 1980.

SJ\f,l::M 316 ( h) STUDY I Figure 4-34 I

1979 AMERICAN SHAD

.90.01 ,.. 3000.0

-Q

~

BO.Ol

~

~ , - - - - - - r-2500.0 -fJ l

I 0 I I  ::?::

i./)

..._,. 70.0 I {/)

I r_, I <:

E-<

~

< 60.0 i .

I I

I I

Q 2000.0 ..._

.J

....... . ~ ~

E-<

i./)

.J 50.0 l I - 1500.0

~

~

i./)

~

....... 40.01 I

~ .c::..

<: I I

~ .._.I Q I  :> w 30.0 -:i~ I

,.. 1000.0 ......

Q

i

...,... 3~ I I

I

~

....l

...... I E-< 20.0 ~

I

J 0 ~

0 ~ _______ ], ,.. 500.0  ;:J

~

if) ~ ....I -- --------------------- ----- ()

~

10.01 .-

I

3 0.0 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated

?UtlLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC J\tlD GAS CO!!PA!-IY number of impinged American shad, Salem cws, SALEI! 316(b) STUDY January through December 1979.

Figure 4-35

- - .. e

1980 AMER I CAN SHAD 70.01 500.0

. 8

~

60.0 r

ll 400.0 ~

i./)

r ~

500

.... 300.0 ~

40.01

~

~ ......

E-<

~ ~

l i./)

~

~

~

... 200.0 r:1 I 300  :> .....

...... w w

~ 20.0 1 ~

...._. . ~

I ...:I

....... J I

I  :::J b I .... 100.0 ~

0 l l  :::>

~ l l

u VJ , l

~ l o.o . 1. ~--..--..-...!.:r_*___-.-____-;--:----:-----:-----:---:----7 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COl1PANY number of impinged American shad, Salem cws, SALEll 316 (b) STUDY January through March 1980.

Figure 4-36 i

I

4-134 I

I WHITE PERCH LARVAE *:9 APR. I7-20. 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0*-117 LECF.ND I

D DENSITY PER 100 CUDIC METERS o.ooo I' TO Q.r..,O ra > 0.000 g > Q.?.50 TO 0.000 I

u > 0.500 TO 0:150 B > o.r.io TO 1,000 I

NEW JERSEY I

N I t

I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of white perch larvae in I

ru11LIC f.EltVICE ELECrRIC r.Nn G,\S COMl'MIY the Delaware River EstuaLy, April 17-20, 1979.

Sl\J.t:n 3lf.(b) STUDY .~

Figure 4-37 I

4-135 I

I WHITE PERCH LARVAE MAY 1-4, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I 0 D~SITY o.ooo LEGEND PER 100 CUBIC ME'fEBS I ~

g 0.9U 3.000

'IO TO 3.000 5,089 I* a I

5.08" "f,r78

'IO IO 7..%78 "267 I

.1 NEW Jt:RSEY N

I i NOT SAMPLED I

I DELAWARE I

I I

Density of white perch larvae in l'UllLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMl'llNY the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY May 1-4, 1979.

Figure 4-38 I

4-136 I

WHITE PERCH LARVAE MAY 29 - JUN. 1. 1979

• • -I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I

LEGEND 0

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

~ > Q.000 TO 2.000 g > 2.000 TO 4.000 I A > 4,000 TO S.000 u > 6000 TO B.000 I

NEW :7ERSEY I

N I 4

I DEI..AWARE I

ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of white perch larvae in I

)'llllLJC m:RVICF: r.r.r.C1'RJC /\ND c,\s cm11 1 l\NY the Delaware River Estuary, May 28-June 1, 1979.

. Shi.EM 316(b) STU!W Figure 4-39 I

4-137 I

I WHITE PERCH . LARVAE JUN. 12-14, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 LEGEND I 0 D~SI1'Y o.ooo PER 100 cumc METERS TO 1.000 ra > 0.753 I g > 1.000 TO 1248

> 12*&8 TO 1.495 I BK I > Uf15 10 J.742 I

NEW JERSEY I N 4

I I

I I DELAWARE

1 il.1'LAl~TIC OCEAN I

I Density of white perch larvae in PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY June 12-14, 1979.

Figure 4-40 I

4-138 I

WHITE PERCI-I 0+ (1979-80)

• • I 20.0 I

16.0 I

16.0 I

r:r:l 14.0 I

~

~

E-i en r:r:l 12.0 I z0

....... I 10.0 E-i H

~

0...

0 8.0 0...

0 0

H 6.0 I

4.0 I

2.0 I

0.0 i_,.--~--.--!3-6--,---6--.------.---...--~-~-~--~-~

I s

J A 0 N D J F M A M J I

Baywide population estimates of I

1*u111.rc r.i:RVICr. r:r.r.crnrc [\ND Gl\S COM!'ANY young, age 0+ white perch from Sl\l,f:M JlG(b) S'l'tl!W October 1979 through January 1980.

Figure 4-41 I

4-139 I

I WHITE PERCH 0+

NOV. 15, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 cum c MF.TF.RS I 0 g >

0.000 0.000 TO o.oro I Q R >

> 0.0?.0 0.040 TO TO 0.040 0.000 I g > 0.060 TO o.oao I NEW JERSEY I N i

I I

I DELAWARE I ATI ..i'u"{1'1 C OCI*:,\N I

I Density of young, age 0+ white l'lllll.IC ~t:nv10: t:r.r:CTRIC_, J\ND GI\$ COMl'l\NY perch in the Delaware River Estuary, November 15, 1979.

SM.l:M 316(1>) STUDY Figure 4-42 I

JJ

4-140 I WHITE PERCH 0+

NOV. 2:l, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY.. RKm 0-117 I

0 LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

~ > 0.000 TO 0.02.0 g > 0.0?.0 TO 0.040 I

> 0.040 TO Q.060 Ba I > 0.060 TO 0.050 I I

NEW JERSEY N

I t I I

DELAWARE I

ATLANTIC OCEAN 1.

I Density of young, age 0+ white I

runr.xc s1:nv1 c1: r.u:crnrc Mm GAS COMPANY perch in the Delaware River Estuary, November 27, 1979.

SAf,f:n 316(h) STUOY Fiqure 4-43 I

4-141 I

I WHITE PERCH DEC. 4-7. 1979

• o+

DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I

LEGEND I a DENS11'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo g > o.ozo

t 0.000 '10 g > (),020 '10 0.040

> 0.040 1*0 0.o60 Ba I I > Q.060 10 o.oeo I

NEW JERSEY I N A

I I

I I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ white PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND C/\S COMl'/\N'i perch in the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY December 4-7, 1979.

I Figure 4-44 I

4-142 I

. I e

WHITE PERCH 0+ I JAN. 16-18, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I 0

LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUlll C METERS 0.000 I

~

~

0.000 0.02.0 10 TO o.ozo 0.0~

I Bl I

0,040 0.060 to to 0,060 Q.103 I

I I

N A

I I

I DELAWARE I A1'LAN11C 00:.\N I

Density of young, age 0+ white PURLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC ANO GJ\S COMPANY perch in the Delaware River

• Estuary, January.16-18, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-45 I

I

4-143 I

I WHITE PERCH 0+

JAN. 28-29, 1980 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKn1 0-117

,I 0 LECEND DENSITY Pllli 100 CUBIC Q.000 M1'.'1'1'~

o.ozo I Id g

0.000 0,020 TO TO 0.040 I > TO 0.040 0,060 Ba a > 0.060 TO OJ.30 I

NEW JERSEY I

N A

I I

I I

I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ white PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY perch in the Delaware River SALEM 316(b) STUDY Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

I Figure 4-46 I

4-144 I

. I e

WHITE PERCH 0+

MAR 24-27, 1980 I

DELAWARE RIVER ESTU,~RY. RKm 0-117 I

D LEGF.a'lD DENSITY FER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I.

!ti

~

> 0.000

> a.ozo TO

'10 Q.020 0.040 I

SB > a.o40 10 o.oco I > o.ooo 10 0.157 I I

N I

t SAMPLED I I

I

\lUN11C

n~EAN I I

_Density Of young, age o+ white I

PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC l\ND CAS COMPANY perch in the Delaware River SALEM 316(b) STUDY Estuary, March 24-27, 1980.

Figure 4-47 I

I

4-145 I

I

• • WHITE PERCH 1+ (1979-80)

I I

16.0 I

I P:1 E-4 14.0 I E-4

\l'l P:1

12.0

z I 0

• E:

...:I 10.0 P-4 0 B.O P-4 )

0 I 0

...J 6.0 I 4.0 I 2.0 I a.o----.---r~--...--~~,.~--.-.--.-..----.--.--.-.......,..-.-~.~1-.--.-...---.--.--.-.......,..~---.

I J A S 0 N D J F M A M J I

Baywide population estimates of

~

runLIC SERVICE ELECrRIC J\ND GJ\S COMl'J\NY age l+ white perch from October 197~

through January 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-48 I

I

4-146 I eI WHITE PERCH 1+ I OC1'. 11. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I LEGlfilD DrnSil'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

0 Id Q

> 0.000

> 0.020 IO IO O.OZO 0.040 I

sa I

> o.o"°

> o.oso ICI IO 0.060 Q.105 I

I NEW JERSEY I

N I

I I

I A1'LAN11C OCF.AN I

I I

PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GJ\S COMPANY SALEM ll6(b) STUDY Density of age l+ w~ite perch in the Delaware River Estuary, October 11, 1979.

Figure 4-49

.._I I

4-147 I

I WHITE PERCH 1+

DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm Q-,-1I7 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I a o.ooo TO o.ozo Q 0.000 I g > 0,020

> 0.040 TO Tt>

Q.D"° 0.060 8

I II > 0,060 TO o.oeo I

I N

t I

I I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OC£.i\N I

I Density of age l+ white perch in the PUnLIC f:ERVICf. F.Lf.C'rRIC /\ND G/\S COt11'/\NY Delaware River Estuary, October 22-23, 1979.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-50 I

I

4-148 I

WHITE PERCH 1+

NOV. 15, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I 0

D~SITY 0,000 LEGKND I'E!R 100 CUBIC METERS I

~

g 0.000 0.020 TO TO o.ozo 0,0*'° I

118 I

0.040 0.060 10 10 0.060 0.080 I

I I

NEW JERSEY N

A I

I I

DELAWARE I A1'LAN11C OCEAN I

I I

PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Density of age l+ white perch in the Delaware River Estuary, November 15, 1979.

Figure 4-51

.._I I

4-149 I

I WHITE PERCH 1+

NOV. 19*-23, 1979

• DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I

LF.GEND I D DENSITY PER 100 o.ooo cumc METERS

> TO o.oro 1*

0.000 Id

[;! > o.ozo TO 0.0~

Bl > 0.040 TO Cl.060 I I > 0.060 10 o.oao I

NEW JERS1'Y I

.. N A

I

.I I

I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I

. Density of age l+ white perch in PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMI'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY November 19-23, 1979.

I Figure 4-52 I

4-150 I WHITE PERCH 1+

• • I NOV. Zl, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I LEGmD Dl!:NSil'Y PER. 100 CUBIC METERS I

a o.ooo ra > 0.000 l'O o.ozo I

g > O.ool TO Q.040 ea >

0.040 0.060 to

'IO 0.000 0.080 I

I I

I N

A

-1.

DELAWARE I

.A'l'LANTIC I

OCEAN I

I Density of age l+ white perch in PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GA$ COMPANY the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY November 27, 1979.

Figure 4-53 I

I

4-151 I

I

• • WHITE PERCH 1+

DEC. 4-7, i979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I

LEG!:ND I a DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo Id > 0.000 TO O.o20 I g > 0.020 TO 0.040 Ill > Q.040 TO 0.0S0 I I > o.ooo TO <llSl I

N~ JERSEY I N A

I I

I II ii

,, ATLANTIC OCEAN II Density of age l+ white perch in PUPLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMI'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, December 4-7, 1979.

SALEn 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-54 I

4-152 I WHITE PERCH 1+

• • I JAN. 16-18, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSI1'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS I

0 0.000

!;) >

0.000 TO TO 0.020 I

Q Q.020 0.040 Bii

.a 0.040 0,060 TO TO 0.060 a.m I

I NEW JERSI!..'Y I

N A

I I

I DELAWARE I A1'LAN1'IC I

~

I I

Density of age l+ white perch in PUnLIC* SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMl'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUDY January 16-18, 1980.

Figure 4-55 I

4-153

• I I

WHITE PERCH 1+

JAN. 28-29, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I ~

LEGEND I D DENSITY PER 100 CUllIC METERS 0.000 g > 0.000 l'O o.om I g > a.om 10 0,040

> 0.040 to 0.000 BB I I > 0,060 10 0.llM I

NEW JERSEY I

N A

I I

,I II DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEru~

I

1 Density of age l;+ white perch in J>UnLIC SEnVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY the De,laware River Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-56

- 'l 4-154 I

WHITE PERCH 1+

MAR. 24-27, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I

UXiF.ND a

DENSITY PER 100 CUDIC METERS o.ooo I

> TO Id I-0.000 0.020 g > 0.020 1'0 0.040 Ba '> 0.040 TO 0.060 D > 0.060 TO 0.080 I I

N I i **I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of age l+ white perch in I

the Delaware River Estuary,

~

PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY March 24-27, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-57 I

I

4-155 I

• • I WI-!ITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER (1979-80) 20.0 I

I 180 I 16.0 I ~

14-.0

~

~

I ~

~

i/'J r:i:::i 12.0 z

I 0 10.Q

~

....:I 0..

0 9.0 0..

0 I 0

.....l 6.0 I 4.0 I

2.0 I

o.o -*---r---.-----,.--,----~---.----.----.,----.----.----'-~-~

I J A s 0 N D J F M A M J I

Baywide population estimates of aye 2+ and older white perch from PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY October 1979 through January 1980.

SALEn 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-58 I

4-156 I WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER OC'l'. 11, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENS11'Y PER 100 cum c METERS I 0 0.000 Id

'51 0.000 Q.OZO TO TO o.ozo Q.040 I

1111 I

o.o'° 0.060 TO TO 0,060 o.oao I

I NEW JERSt."Y I

I I

I A1'LAN11C I OCEAN I

I Density of age 2+ and older white perch in the Delaware River PUnLJC*SERVJCE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEn 316(b) STUDY Estuary, October 11, 1979.

Figure 4-59 I

I 4-157

• • I WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER OCT. 22-23, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I D LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I rd g

0.000 0.020 TO TO o.ozo 0.040 I Ill I

> 0.040

> 0.060 TO TO 0.060 0.080 I

I Nl!."'W JERSEY N

I i I

All.ANTIC I OCEAN Density of age 2+ and older white PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY perch in the Delaware River SALEM 316(b) STUDY Estuary, October 22-23, 1979.

Figure 4-60 I

4-158 I

WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER

• • I NOV. 15, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0*-117 I

LEGEND

• • • 1 DENSI1"Y PER 100 CUllIC METERS 0.000 0

~ > 0.000 10 .iozo I g > o.ozo lO 0.D40 sa > 0.040 TO 0,060 I

>. 0,060 1*0 Q.!16 I

I Nt.'W JERSEY I

N I I I

DELAWARE I

A1'LANTIC I

OCEAN I

Density of age 2+ and older white PUllLIC si:-:nVICE ELECTRIC AND CAS COMPANY perch in the Delaware River SALEM Jl6(b) STUDY Estuary, November 15, 1979.

Figure 4-61 i

I I

I I.

I 4-159 I .*

I - WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER NOV. 19-2:9, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I D LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUUIC METERS 0.000 I ta Q

0.000 O.o20 TO TO o.ozo Q040 I > 0.040 TO O.OGO Bl I > 0.000 TO 0.061 I

NEW JERSEY I

N I

I i

DELAWARE ATLANTIC OCEAN I

• • ~*'* PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Density of age 2+ and older white perch in the Delaware Riv'er Estuary, November 19-23, 1979.

I -

Figure 4-62 I

4-160 I 1:.

e WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER I NOV. Zl, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RK~ 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 cumc METERS I a 0.000 Id g

0,000 0.020 TO TO 0.020 0.0.W I

ill > 0.040 TO 0.060 I > o.060 To cuoa NEW JERSEY I

• • I N

A I

I DELAWARE r.

AT.L.ANTI C

[

OCEAN

[

Density of age 2+ and older white PUDLIC SERVICE ELECfRIC AND Gl\S COMPANY perch in the Delaware River Estuary, November 27, 1979.

SALEM Jl6(b) STUDY Figure 4-63 I

4-161 I

• • I WHITE PERCH.2+ AND OLDER DEC. 4-7, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKn1 0-117 I

LEGEND I 0 DID-ISITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 g > Q.000 10 oozo I g > 0.020 1*0 0.040 Ba > O.o40 1*0 0.060 I I > 0.060 10 Q.270 I

NEW .T".l:RSI!.'Y I N A

I ~' .:.:*** .

I I

I DELAWARE I A'I'L.ru.'ll'I C OCUN I

I Density of age 2+ and older white perch in the Delaware River Estuary, PUllLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY December 4-7, 1979.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-64

. ;.*.*<.

I

• 4-162 I WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER

• • I J'J\N. 16-18, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 cum c ldETERS I

Q.000

'> 0.000 TO O.OZO I TO 0.040 TO TO Cl..060 0.1'1'3 I

I NEW JERSEY N

i I:

ATLANTIC I

OCEAN I

I Density of age 2+ and older white PUDLIC SERVICE ELEcTRIC AND CAS COMrANY perch in the Delaware River Estuary, January 16-18, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-65

4-163 I

I WHITE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER IAN. *28-29, 1980 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 I a LEGEND DENSI'l'Y PER 100 CUBIC ID."l'EHS a.coo I .g 9  :;> 0.000

> a.ozo IO IO 0,020 0.0.W TO I

0.0-40 Bl  :;> 0,060 I > 0.060 TO 0.080 I

,I N

I I

i I

I DELA~\RE I A1'LAN'l1C OCEAN I

I I J>UnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC ANO CJ\S COMPANY Density of age 2+ and older white perch in the Delaware River Estua~y, January 28-29, 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY I Figure-4-66 I

4-164 I

~ _,.* WilfTE PERCH 2+ AND OLDER MAR. 24-27, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY. RKm 0-lil I

I U.'GEND DENSITY PER 100 c:umc W.'1'ERS a 0.000 g > TO O.OZO I

0.000 Q > OJl20 TO 0.040 Bl > 0.040 TO Q.060 16 > 0.000 TO O.OSO I I

N I

t NOT SAMPLED I

I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of age 2+ and oloer white I

J'UOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND Gl\S COMl'ANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY perch in the Delaware River Estuary, March 24-27, 1980. I Figure 4-67 I

I

- ---*- - - - - - - - - - - - - e-1979 WHITE PERCH "b

"'o

--! 20.0 9.0 .i4

+

,....._, 8.0 Cl ,....._,

,_J A

f:tl 0 . 7.0 ~

if) 15.0

,.--* - , ------------------- A

J

..... 6.0 ..._.,

<:: I I

r:o.1

~ I E-t I I

I 5.0

~

a if) I

=.:l , I t-f 10.0 E-4 I if)

~ I

~ I 4.0 r:o.1 ~

...._. I I Cl I

I f:tl

> ~

... ~ 3.0 ~ °'

VI

i

J I

I I ~

r

~

i-l 5.0 I ~  :::>

I 2.0  :.::s b

0 I I

f  :::>

~

,I 0

if) ' 1.0 0.0 r 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC MID GAS cortPA!IY number of impinged white perch, Salem CWS, SALE!t 316(b) STUDY January through December 1979.

Figure 4-68

1980 WHITE PERCH ..0 b....c

!Ml 35.0 *'

r Q

~

.....:i 0

120 l I I

I I

I I

30.0 s r:::l

r!

l I

if)

....._,, I Cf)

I I

25.0 ~ 4!

~ I

..... 100 I

'.:21 I I

I

i

~

I

~

l ,, '

20.0

(/) B.O l

I

~

,~

I E-<

i.fl

~

I

~

< I I

15.0 r:::l I

Q 60 I

.,I I

...... O'\

O'I Q

=J

._. 4.0 -.J I

I 10.0 ~

....... I .....:I

~

..... I  ::::>

r ~

b I 0 l I

g 2.0 1 5.0 u if)

.~ I

... r I

• • I I /

1 0.0 *, 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N* D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC l\tlO GAS COllPANY number of impinged white perch, Salem CWS, SALE!! 316(b) STUDY January through March 1980.

Figure 4-69 l

e

I- - - --- - 4-167

!I I WHITE PERCH I

I I

I I

I I

I I 10-1 I

I I MEAN NUMBER OF PUMPS I

Relationship of white perch I PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY impingement rate to number of in operation, Salem cws.

pump~

SALEM 316(b) STUDY I Figure 4-70 I

O--OWHITE PERCH v--YCROAKER 4

3..S 3

~ 25

~

~ 2 1.5

.5 FLOOD FLOOD FLOOD EBB EBB EBB l 2 SLACK l 2 SLACK TIDE Relationship of white perch and croaker impingement rate to tidal stage, PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC MID GAS COllPANY Salem cws, January 1979 through March 1980.

SALE!! 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-71

Relationship between mean weekly survival of impinged white perch and PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC: i\!ID GAS COllPANY water temperature, Salem CWS, January 1979 through March 1980.

SALf.ll 316(b) STl)DY Figure 4-72

w

> 40

...J

~

~

I 20 ....

0 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. OF PUMPS Relationship of white perch survival.to numbers of circulators in PUBLIC SERVICE ELEC'l'RIC ANO GAS CO!IPAtlY operation, Salem cws' January 1979 through March 1980.

SAr,f.11 315( h) STUDY Figure 4-73

'-----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• 4-171 I

...I STRIPED BASS °EGGS APR. 17-20, 1979 Dfil.AWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I

LECF.ND I 0 DENSITY l'l!l{ 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 la  :> O.l!i.J TO 3.1g'j' I g > 3.1Q7 TO 6.ZU Ila > s.r.u TO ~;'.85 I I >~ ro 1.ZJ29 I

I N I

I t NOT SAMPLED I

I DELAWARE I

I I

I l'UnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC ANO Cl\S COMl'ANY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Density of striped bass eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, April 17-20, 1979.

Figure 4-74 I

4-172 I STRIPED BASS.EGGS MAY 1-4, 1979

• • I I

DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 0

LEGEND Dt:NSl'l"i PER 100 CUBIC ID:l'ER!>

Qj)QO I

g g

Qi68 7,QM TO TO 7.oM 1:1960 I

l'O I

l;igf;Q 20I!S7 Ill

> 2Q.B:rl TO Zl.?SJ I

I N

I t I I

I DELAWARE I

I I

I

..I Density of striped bass eggs in the PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Delaware River Estuary, SAi.EM ll6(b) STUDY May 1-4, 1979.

Figure 4-75 I

4-173 I

• • I STRIPED BASS EGGS MAY 22-24, 1979 DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I a o.ooo

> 0.000 TO 0,250 Id I r;a I

0,2.50 Q.500 TO TO 0,600 o:r.oa I I > 0.750 '1'0 l.000 I

I N A

I I I

I I, DELAWARE I A1'LAN1'IC OCE.A!'l I

I Density of striped bass eggs in the I l'UllLIC SERVI CE ELECTRIC AND Gl\S COMPMIY SALf.M 316(b) STUDY Delaware River Estuary, May 22-24, 19790 Figure 4-76 I

I

'4-174 I STRIPED BASS LARVAE

• • • I MAY 1-4. 1979 DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I 0 0.000 Id > 02.06

> Q5M TO TO 056-4.

Qg2J.

I Q

ii I

> 0.921.

> 1.279 TO TO U'l'Q 1.637 I

I I

N I

t NOT SAMPLED I DELAWARE

\Le

1-;;EAN I I

Density of striped bass larvae in PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COl'11'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, May 1-4, 1979.

SALEM ll6(b) STUDY Figure 4-77

4-175 I

• • I STRIPED BASS LARVAE MAY 29 - JUN. 1. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0--117 I LEGEND I

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ME'l'ERS a 0.000 la > a.coo

• TO 0200 I g > 0.250 TO Q,:500 I > 0,500 TO 0."l"".:iO I* I > 0.750 TO l.000 I

I N A

I I

I I DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I I

PU[lLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC !IND Gf\S COMI>flNY SALEM 316(b) STUDY Density of striped bass larvae in the Delaware River Estuary, May 29-June 1, 1979.

Figure 4-78 I

4-176 I STRIPED BASS LARVAE JUN. 5-7, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1I7 I

a LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo I

ra > o.ooo g > Q.200 TO TO 02.50 0.500 I

I TO

• I Q,.500 0.750 I > 0.'150 TO 1000 I

N I

A I

I I

DELAWARE I

Al'l.Al~TIC OCEAN I

1-I Density of striped bass larvae in PUnLIC SEnVICF: F:Lf:CTRIC l\ND GAS COMl'AN'l SALEM 316(b) STUD'{

the Delaware River Estuary, June 5-7, 1979. I Figure 4-79 I

I

4-177 I

I STRIPED BASS 0+ (1979-80)

I I

I I

I.*

I I

I I z.o-I

--~J

,--.,r---..-f O.O _..__ _-r-- 1=:i-e...=1-i38ElH

..3---,l--..--

(-...,.I--..--,--.,--...--

1--.I I J A S 0 N D J F M A M J I

Baywide population estimates of I

J'UDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC /\ND C1\S COMl'J\NY SALEn 316(b) STUDY young, age O+ striped bass from October 1979 through .January 1980.

Figure 4-80 I

4-178 e*I STRIPED BASS 0+

JAN. 16-18, 1980

• I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I a

LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ME1'ERS o.ooo I

g Q

> o.ooo

> 0.013 TO TO Oll1:.l 0.025 I

B! > Q.025 TO Q.038 I > 0.038 TO a.coo NEW JERSEY I

N A I I

I I

DELAWARE I ATLANTIC I'

OCEAN I

I Density of young, age 0+ striped

• 'I runLIC SERVICE EI.ECrRIC /IND G,\S COMP/IN'{ bass in the Delaware River SALEM 316(b) STUDY Estuary, January 16-18, 1980.

Figure 4-81 I

I 4-179 Ie STRIPED BASS 0+

I JAN. 28-29, 1980 DELAWARE RIVER EsTUARY. RKm 0-117.

I

_, a LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo g > Q.000 TO 0.01:3 I

,, g Bl I

Q.Qt3 Q.025 o.o3a TO TO TO Q.025 Cl.038 Q.050 I

NEW JERSEY I N I* A I

.I I

I I DELAWARE I Al'LANTIC OC~'l II 1*

Density of young, age 0+ striped PUllLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC l\ND C1'\S COMl'l\NY bass in the _Delaware River Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

SALF.M 316(b) STUDY I Figure 4-82 I

4-180 I STRIPED BASS 0+

MAR. 24-27, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I

LEGEND 0

D~ITY Q.000 PER 100 CUBIC METERS I

g g

0.000 Q,01;3 TO TO 0.01:3 Q.025 11 Ill > 0.025 TO O.Q38 I > ().038 TO O.c50 I 11 NEW 1ERSEY N

I!

t **II I

DELAWARE I

1 Density of young, age O+ striped bass in the Delaware River

• 'I runLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC /IND G.i\S COMl'l\NY S~LF.n 316(b) STUDY Estuary, March 24-27, 1980.

Figure 4-83 I

--- - ---- ----- -----~--

4-181 I

Ie STRIPED BASS 1+ AND 2+ (1979--80)

I I '

I 12.0.

I~

I'\

. ' JIJ I 0 p 10.0-I P4

~

I -::a E-t en

~ ao-

,I z '

-0

~ '

~

> ao-0..

0 0..

~

0

~

4.0-1 .

J I' 2.0-I 0.0...__ _T-1--,1~-,-f1=:J-af-,l--a-l~--,l--,-- ,-"Tl--'--,--l-...,.l-'---...--

f-.;..,I I J A S 0 N D J F M A M J I"

Baywide population estimates of l'UnLIC SEnVICE ELEC'fRIC AND GAS COMl'J\NY age 0+- and l+ striped bass from October 1979 through Janµary 1980.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-84 I

4-182 I STRIPED BASS 1+ AND 2+

eI I

DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0*-117 I

LEGEND

• a DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC :W.'TERS o.coo I g > o.oco TO ow g > 0.013 TO Q.Q25 I a > 0.025 TO D.Q:38 I > 0.038 TO 0.000 I I

N I

A I I;/

I I

DELAWARE 11 ATLANTIC OCF.AN I

I Density of age*l+ and 2+ striped 1

J>UDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC l\NO Gl\S COrtl'l\NY bass in the Delaware River Estuary, November* ls, 1979.

SALEn 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-85 I

I

4-183

-1 I

STRIPED BASS 1+ AND 2+

NOV. Z'/, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC m:rERS I a a.coo

-, g g

a

> a.ooo

> 0.013

') Q.025 TO TO TO 0.013 Q.025 Q.038 I I > Cl.038 TO Q.Q50 I

I N I

A I

I I DELAWARE I ATLAN1'IC OCEAN I

I Density of age l+ and 2+ striped bass in the Delawar2 River Estuary, l'Ul\LIC SERVICf: ELECTRIC l\ND G1\S COMl'l\NY November 27, 1979.

SAI.&t1 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-86 I

I

4-184 I STRIPED BASS 1+ AND 2+

JAN. 16-18, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0--117 I

LEGEND a

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC o.ooo ldE'r~

I ra "> 0.000 IO 0.013 Q > O.Ql.3 TO OD:?S I g > 0.025 TO n038 I "> D.038 TO Q.050 I I

I i

N I

I DELAWARE I

ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I' Density of age l+ and 2+ striped I

PUOLIC SERVICE E:LEC"fRIC /IND Gi\S COMl'/\N'/ bass in the Delaware River Estuary, SALEM 316(b) STUD'/

Janunry 16-18, 1980.

Figure 4-87 I

I

-i------------- -~------------~---~----c-~ -4~ r~~s-- --------------------- -

Ie STRIPED BASS _1+ AND 2+

I IAN. 28-29. 1980 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I LEGEND I a ta DENSITY FER 100 CUBIC METERS o.ooo 0.000 I-* g > 0.01:3 TO 0025 II > o.025 TO Q.Q:38 I I > o.03s TO 0.000 I

I N A

I I

I I DELAWARE 1* ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of age l+ and 2+ striped bass in the Delaware River Estuary, runLIC ~ERVICf: r.Lr.crruc AND G,\S COMPANY January 28-29t 1980.

SALEM Jl6(b) STUDY Figure 4-88 I

4-186 I STRIPED BASS 1+ AND 2+

MAR. 24-27, 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I

I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ldf.'11':RS a o.ooo Id > Q.000* TO O.Q1:I g > Q.013 TO Q.025 I I > Q.025 TO O.Q:38 I > 0.1)38 TO Q.050 I I

N I

t I I

DELAWARE I

.*I I

Density of age -1+ and 2+ striped

.'I

~*1 runLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND C,\S COMPANY bass in the Dela\.;rare River Estuary, March 24-27, 1980.

SALF.M 3l6(b) STUDY Figure 4-89 I

- - - --- - ** ...e_, -

700.0 l 1979 STRIPED BASS b

35.0 .....

• It

- l

~

,I 3o.os

!...°l 6000 ,, ,

0

fl

,. , .- ~

r::

...._, I Cll I

• 3

. l

~ 50001 I 25.0

~_,

I I

- l

~

(/)

~

4000 I

I

.... I

,.,. ~--- --------------------- ------

20.0 ~

~

~

l I

I E:-4

~ I :fl

....

i I ~

........ 15.0

~

<: 3000 ,1 µ:i I

- l

~ .....

I .._, co

~

Q I

'T'

........ 2000 I I

I 10.0

....:i.

....J

--i ,!  :::>

r I

0 I r .

~

0 I  :::>

~

{/)

100.0 1 I

I

,I 5.0 u

~

r I

,, I I

0.0 '.I/ 0.0 J F M A M J .J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS CO!IPANY number of impinged striped bass, Salem CWS, January through December 1979.

SALE!! 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-90

1980 STRIPED BASS 400.0 I 8000.0 I

I I

..- I' 0 350.0 7000.0 -

,_"l I I

I

~

I r::l 0

if) I I

r:

6000.0 ~

._,....... 300.01 , J 1'

l I

,1 A

=--- '

< ~

I

~

~

250.0 I I

I I

5000.0 ~

._,.......Yl. , ~' ~

200.0 "1 I I

I 4000.0 *r::

(/)

~

~

I

>--.:l I r::l ~

........ I I

< I r::l ~

Q 150.01 I I

' 3000.0 !>

...... CX>

CX>

~

Q I I

l r.=.:i

...... I

..... I ....:I

~

I 20000 ::::>

0 0 1:00  :::s

~

if) o0.0 ~ , 1000.0 u

1 f

~

• I 3 I 0.0 * -: 0.0 I

J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS CO!!PANY number of impinged striped bass, Salem CWS, SALE!! 316 [ b) STUDY January through March 1980.

Figure 4-91

.. *. )

(..-- .. .. ,

e

-~

- -~' ** ~

- - - -* - '-.' -* ,- ** e-* *- ,

'1--Jf. S TR I PED BA.SS

- TEMPERATURE 10 90 35 80 30 70 60 25 u

w

-;t 50 20 oi:

_,,J

'.)

~ 40 Cl:

w

> 15 Q..

~

0:: OS:.

~ 30 w

.,_;. .....I CX>

.10 20

"° 5

10 0 0 6 20 17 3 17 31 14 27 11 25 29 13 27 10 24 8 22 31 12 26 9 23 8 22 31 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY OCT t'JOV DEC JAN FEB MAR 1979 1980 R~lationship between mean weekly survival of impinged striped bass and PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC 1\110 GAS COllPANY water temperature, Salem CWS, January 1979 thrn~nh March 1980.

SALf.rt 315(b) STUOl!

Figure 4-92

-1 4-190 11 e.

1:

ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+ (1979-80)

I I

I r:1

~

t/JJ I

~

~

Cll t':l 16.0 I

z; 0

~

15.0 I

~

~

0...

0 c..

~

0

~

14.0 13.0

• • I I

I I

J A s 0 N D J F M A M J I Baywide population estimates of PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND G1\S COMPANY young, age 0+ Atlantic croaker from October 1979 through January 1980.

SAl.F.tt ll 6 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-93 I

4-191 I

I - ATLANTIC CROAK_ER 0+

OCT. 11. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 0

I LEGEND.

Dl!lc;ITY PER 100 CUIHC Ml'.'l'ERS

• a I l!I >

o.coo 0.000 TO O,ziO I g Bl >

> 0..250 0.500 TO TO 0.000 0.750 I I ) 0.?50 TO 1.000 I NKW JERSEY I N.

I I DELAWARE Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic runLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND C1\S COMl'AN'i croaker in the Delaware River Estuary, October 11, 1979.

SALEM 316(b) STUD'!

Figure 4-94

4-192 ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+

OCT. 22£!23, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0*-117 I

LEGl."ND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0 0.000 ta > 0.000 IO O.Z:SO

'1 > ~ IO o.500 B! > 0.500 IO 0.7:;Q ril > 0.750 IO 1.000 ID.1'i' JERSEY N

11 I **

DELAWA:RE ATLANTIC OCEAN Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic runLIC f.ERVICf. f.Lf.CTRIC AND G~S COttl'ANY croaker in the Delaware River Estuary, October 22-23, 1979.

SM.EM 316 ( b I STUDY Figure 4-95

II 4-193

'I ATLANTIC CROAKER O+

NOV. 15, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I 0 U."GF..Ni:>

DENSITY PF..R 100 CUDIC METERS 0.000 I 0 9 >

> 0.000 O.Z50 ro ro CU50 Q.500 I sa 11

> o.500

"> o,-r.:;o TO ro Q.750 woo I

• I N"iW JERSI':i N

I t I

I DELAWARE I

I Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY croaker in the Delaware River Estuary, November 15, 1979.

SAi.EM 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 4-96 I

4-194 I ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+

NOV. 19-23, 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0--117 I

LEGEND a

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC o.ooo lrll.'1~

I g > TO I

0.000 0.250 g > 0200 TO Q.500 88 > Q.500 ro 0.750 II > 0.7'".lO TO l.000 I I

N t I I~

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic I

runLIC SERVI Cr. ELECTRIC Mm G1\S. COMPANY croaker in the Delaware Riv~r Estuary, November 19-23, 1979.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-97 I

4-195 I

I ATLANTIC CROAKER O+

NOV. Zl, 1979 I DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY, RKm 0-117 LEGEND I a DENSI1'Y PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 I 9 g

0.000 0,200 TO TO o.200 0.000 Bl o:r.,o I > Q.000 TO I > 0.100 TO l.000 I

I N

I i

I I DELAWARE I

I I

Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic PUDLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY croaker in the Delaware River SALEM 316(b) STUDY Estuary, November 27' 1979.

Figure 4-98 I

. *4_;196 I ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+

• • I DEC. 4-7, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0---117 I LEGEND DEN~l1'Y PER 100 cum c Ml."'TERS I

0 O.oOo 0 >

0.000 Q,;>.:;o TO TO 0.%50 I

Q 0500 ii I

> Q.000

> o.wo TO TO 0.700 1.0..36 I

I I

N i I I

I I

I Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic PUOLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY croaker in the Delaware River Estuary, December 4-7, 1979.

SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-99 I

4-197 I

I ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+

JAN. 16--18, 1980 I DELAWARE RI VER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I a LEGEND Dl!:NSITY PER 100 CUBIC Ml."'TERS o.ooo I 0 Q

0.000 Q.z:;Q TO to 02;;()

D.500 I Ba fJ Q.500 0.750 TO to 0:150 l.000 I

I NEW JERSl.'Y N

I I t I

I I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I Density of young, age O+ Atlantic PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY croaker in the Delaware River Estuary, January 16-18, 1980.

I SALEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-100 I

4-198 I ATLANTIC CROAKER 0+

JAN. 28-29. 1980

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I 0

LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC lriETERS 0.000 I

ta.

g

> o.ooo

> 02.50 TO To ozso O!iao I

e D

> o.soo

> 0.750 TO TO 0.7.50 1000 I

I N

I I

I I

DELAWARE I ATLANTIC OCEAN I

I I

..I Density of young, age 0+ Atlantic PUnLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC.AND CAS COMl'ANY croaker in the Delawar~ River Estuary, January 28-29, 1980.

SALEn 316(b) STUDY '

Figure 4-101 I i

- -.. - - - - - .- - - - - - e-1979 ATLANTIC CROAKER 600.0 -

_________,}_..:J 5000.0 s 500.0 - , ___________________ --------------------* _______ ,_,_ ~

I 4000.0 ::i::

.  :' C/l

~

40001 ~

300.01 2000 l ~ 2000.0 ~

t--t 100.01 r 1000.0 ~

.....:l

~

u

~

..l ~ J F M A M J J A s 0 N

,.J\I r 0.0 D

Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COltPANY number of impinged Atlantic croaker, Salem CWS, SALE!! 316 ( b) STUDY January through December 1979~

Figure 4-102

1980 ATLANTIC CROAKER

~ 8000.0 l ,~ - - - -- - - - - - - -

- 9.0

.- B.O _._

b~

~ ,I 7000.01 I

I

. fJ I

I

... 7.0  ::r:

!!], 6000.0 1 Cf)

~ a.o

~

~

j

~

a

~

if) r.=::i 50000 --.1

• r ~

f 5.0 ~

4000.0 1 E  ::....

~

~

E 4.o f2 0

< 3000.0 ~ r [;E::: .s:..

N I

3.0

~

~ . <: 0 0

fr 2.0 8 r.=::i

...... ~

~ 20000 i

~! l 0

.o

~

1000.0 ~

(/) < I I

t*.- 1.0 § 3~ :':

00 _!.*.::,*_~...._-~-~--~--------.---;-----:--;---;--;., 0.0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D Cumulative and smoothed seven-day estimated PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COllPANY number of impinged Atlantic croaker, Salem cws, January through March 1980.

SALE!! 316(b) STUDY Figure 4-103 e

I 5-1 I 5.1 SECTION 5.0 EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SIMULATED PRIMARY ENTRAINMENT (PRESSURE-TEMPERATURE SHOCK) STUDIES 5.1.1 Introduction I

Assessment of impact by a power plant intake system requires I a knowledge of the number of organisms removed from the population. Many, if not most, workers in power plant impact assessment agree that the qssui:nption of 100 percent I mortality of organisms pa~sing thr6ugh the plant is inappropriate (see Entrainment Survival Panel Discussion, in Jensen, 1977). Our own preliminary data sug~est I mortalitites less than 100 percent, and in some cases much less, for organisms passing through Salem's CWS.

In order to determine the most appropriate values of I entrainment mortality, the on-site survival studies are being substantiated and augmented with laboratory studies which simulate the normal and maximum temperature-pressure I history experienced by organisms during average passage time

. through Salem's CWS. Both studies are on-going, and no definitive statements may be made concerning entrainment I survival at this time. This section presents only data from simulated primary entrainment studies on blueback herring, alewife, white perch, and Atlantic croaker.

I 5.1.2 Materials and Methods * .*

I

~*:

Specimen Procurement I Larvae of the blueback herring, alewife, and white perch, were procured from artificially fertilized laboratory-I incubated eggs. Postlarval and young Atlantic croaker were collected by 1-m plankton net~ Test specimens were collected from the Delaware and Chesapeake estuaries and:

their tributaries *. Adult fish were collected either by I seine or gill net.

was done in the field.

In most cases artificial fertilization Eggs we~e transported to the laboratory under aeration and placed in recirculating I incubation troughs maintained at ambient water temperature and salinity. Eggs were incubated with gentle water flow and constant aeration. Water quality was maintained by use

~

of ultraviolet light, ozone aeration, mechanical and biological filtration. Mild prophylactic measures were also used when needed. Water was changed as necessary.

Temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and ammonia I were monitored.

I

5-2 I

Fish larvae were moved to rearing troughs as early yolk-sac fry (prolarvae) to avoid movement during transformation.

Larvae and young were fed collected or cultured zooplankters: Artemia, rotifers, copepods, protozoans, and cladocerans. Zooplankton was concentrated through a series

• • I of nitex bolting cloths ranging in mesh size from 37 to 500 u. Larvae were fed plankton of a size that approximated their mouth gape. Fish were judged to have fed or be I actively feeding when food was visible in the intestine or stomach, or when they assumed an s-shaped position and struck at a foo.d item. I Blueback herring I

Blueback herring eggs obtained from Urieville spillpool, Maryland (Chester River drainage) were field-stripped onto I

bolting cloth and artificially fertilized using the wet method. Eggs and larvae were lab cultured in fresh water at water temperature of 16-20 C (61-68 F); hatching commenced I

in 2-3 days. Acriflavine Malachite-Green Methylene-Blue solution (1 drop/20 liters) and ozone were used as prophylaxis. Larvae were fed Synchaeta spp., Brachionus I

• • I spp., loricate protozoa, and Bosmina spp.

Alewife Alewife eggs obtained from Deep Creek, Delaware (Nanticoke River Chesapeake Bay drainage) were field-stripped onto boltirig cloth and artificially fertilized using the wet method. Eggs and larvae were lab cultured at a *salinity of I

0.5 ppt and water temperature of 14-20 C (57-68 F); hatching commenced in 3-6 days. Acriflavine Malachite-Green Methylene-Blue solution (1 drop/20 liters) and ozone were I

used as prophylaxis. Larvae were fed Synchaeta spp.,

Brachionus spp., loricate protozoa, and Bosmina spp.

I White perch I Running-ripe male and female white perch were collected from Appoquinimink River, Delaware (Delaware River drainage), and I

..I

.from Unicorn Creek, Maryland (Chester River drainage). Ripe ova were field stripped onto bolting cloth and artificially fertilized using the wet method. Eggs and larvae were cultured in near-fresh water (0.5 ppt) at water temperature I

5-3 of 14-26 C (57-79 F); hatching was within 44-54 hr of fertilization. Acriflavine M~lachite-Green Methylene-Blue solution (1 drop/20 liters) and ozone aeration were used as prophylaxis. Larvae were fed field collected zooplankton (e.g., Synchaeta spp., Euglena spp., Daphnia spp.).

Atlantic croaker I Atlantic croaker postlarvae arid young were collected in the Delaware River with a 1-m plankton net fished near the I bottom. Test specimens were held in rearing troughs at an acclimation temperature of 12 C (54 F) and salinity of 7 ppt. Postlarvae and young were fed field-collected rotifers and copepods and cultured Artemia nauplii.

I I Test Apparatus and Procedure Effects of temperature, pressure, and combined temperature-pressure changes were determined in a_rigid T-shaped transparent PVC tube (Fig. 5.1-1). Temperature increases were achieved by rotating this apparatus on its axis and pouring ambient temperature water (200 ml) with test organisms into preheated water (500 ml),already in the tub.

Test organisms were exposed to a temperature increase (~T)

I of 10 C (18 F) or 18 C (32 F), the respective normal operating and maximum changes encountered across the condenser. The effects of rapid mixing of the effluent and I river water at the point of discharge were simulated by subjecting the organisms to a rapid (ca. 30 sec) temperature decrease to approximately 2 C above ambient (simulating I plume temperature) and then to a gradual decrease to ambient temperature.

Tests on exposure to pressure changes (~P) were conducted in I a sequence simulating passage from the circulating water pumps through the condenser system to the point of discharge (Table 5.1-1) by changing pressutes within the apparatus I using a pressure~vacuum pump.

Test temperature was measured with a standardized mercury I thermometer (precision+ 0.5 C) and pr~ssure with a Robertshaw test gauge (precision+ 0.5 cm Hg). Temperature in latent effect studies was recorded wit:h a Partlow thermograph (precision+ 2.0 C).

I I

5-4 I

Test specimens were randomly selected from available stock and assigned one of the following experimental treatments:

C-1 (control) - transferred from rearing facility to holding container without exposure to experimental

• • I temperature or pressure changes.

C-2 (handling control) - received standard handling in test I

apparatus without exposure to experimental temperature E-1 or pressure changes.

(experimental pressure) - only 6P regime I

(Table 5.1-1).

E-2 (experimental temperature and pressure) - both 6P I

and 6T (Table 5.1-1) of 10 C (18 F).

E-3 (experimental temperature) - only 6T of 10 C (18 F). I E-4 (experimental temperature and pressure) - both 6P (Table 5.1-1) and 6T of 18 C (32 F). I E-5 (experimental temperature) - only 6T of 18 C (32 F).

Following the experimental treatment,_ organisms in E-2 I through E-5 were subjected to a rapid temperature decrease to 2 C above ambient and then a gradual decrease to ambient.

Total test time for simulation was 6.-S min.

Upon completion of a treatment specimens were held in their test water (1,400-1,800 ml) in a container kept in a water bath maintained at acclimation temperature. Duration of I

latent observations ranged from 24 to 48 hr and was dependent on species and life stage. Mortality occurring up to 1 hr after testing was considered an initial test effect (initial mortality). Mortality occurring after this period I

was considered a latent test effect (latent mortality).

Each completed test consisted of an array of seven I

tr~atrnents (C-1 through E-5). Replication consisted of two test runs conducted within 24 hr on the same species of approximately the same age acclimated to the same water I

temperature (+ 1.0 C) and salinity (+ 1.0 ppt).

I Data Reduction I

Individual test results for blueback herring, alewife, white perch, and Atlantic croaker were analyzed for variation in treatment mortality by chi-square 2x2 tests (P < 0.05, DF = 1). Treatment C-2 was tested against C-1;-treatments E-1 through E-5 were then tested against C-2.

I I

I 5-5 Ie 5.1.3 Results Blueback herring (postlarvae)

I A replicate test (n = 2) was conducted in fresh water a~ an acclimation temperature of 19 C (66 F) (Table 5.1-2).

I Survival was relatively high in the holding controls (C-1),

70 and 100 percent (Table 5.1-2). Handling (C-2) treatments resulted in a significant (P < 0.05) increase in mortality.

I Significant (P < 0.05) mortality occurred in 80 percent of treatments E-1 through E-5 (Table 5.1-3).

I Alewife (postlarvae)

I Four replicate tests (n = 8) were conducted in fresh water at acclimation temperature of 14-16 C (57-64 F)

I (Table 5.1-4). Because of problems with food supply and attendant but non-treatment related high mortality, tests at 14 and 18 C were terminated at 24 hr, and discussion at I these is restricted to initial test effects only.

At an acclimation temperature of 14 C, handling (C-2) and I experimental pressure (E-1) substantially increased initial mortality from control levels (Table 5~1-4). At this acclimation temperature a significant (P < 0.05) increase iu I initial mortality occured at ~T of 10 C in treatments E-2 and E-3, and at a ~T of 18 C in treatments E-4 and E-5 (Table 5.1-5).

I At acclimation temperature of 15 and 16 C, latent mortality was greater than initial mortality in 57 percent of the treatments (Table 5.1-5). Chi-square analysis indicated 1 that all experimental treatments resulted in a significant (P < 0.05) increase in mortality. Mortality resulting from tre~tments E-2 through E-5 was consistently greater than for I treatments C-1 through E-1 and ranged from 14.8 to 100 percent (Table 5.1-4).

At acclimation temperature of 18 C (64 F) survival was 100 I

., percent in treatments C-1 through E-3. Exposure to ~T of 18 C (32.4 F) at this acclimation temperature resulted in significant (P < 0.05) initial mortality in 100 percent of the E-4 and E-5-treatments (Table 5.1-5).

1- Alewife (young).

I A replicate test (n = 2) was conducted in fresh water at an acclimation temperature of 18.5 C (65 F) (Table 5.1-4). In these tests survival was 100 percent for treatments c-1 I

5-6 I

through E-1. *A AT of 10 C (19 F) resulted in mortality of O and 57 percent. Mortality resulting from treatments E-4 and E-5 -( liT 18 C) was 100 percent (Table 5.1-5). -*I White perch I Seven replicate tests (n = 14) were conducted in fresh water at acclimation temperature of 15.0-18.5 C (59-65 F)

(Table 5.1-6). Tests at 15 and 17 C were terminated at 18 I

and 20 hr, respectively, because of problems with feeding and attendant high mortality, and discussion is restricted to initial test effects only.

I Chi-square analysis indicated that at all temperatures from 15-18.5 C there was no significant (P < 0.05) control (C-1) mortality (Table 5.1-7). At acclimation temperature of 15 I

to 17 C mortality due to handling (C-2) and experimental (E-1) pressure was low (Table 5.1-6), but there was a significant (P < 0.05) increase in mortality for 25 percent I

of the treatments (E-2 and E-3) employing a tiT of 10 C (18 F) and 58 percent of the treatments employing a tiT of 18 C ( 3 2 F)

• I At acclimation temperature of 18.0-18.5 C (64-65 F) chi-square analysis indicated that all treatments employing a tiT of 18 C (32 F) resulted in a significant (P < 0.05) .

I increase in mortality (Table 5.1-7). Observed mortality for these treatments ranged from 20 to 100 percent (Table 5.1-6). Exposure to a tiT of 10 C (E-2 and E-3)

I resulted in significant (P < 0.05) mortality in 43 percent of these treatments. -

I Atlantic croaker (young) 1-.

A replicate test (n = 2) was conducted with Atlantic croaker young at an acclimation temperature and salinity of 12 C I (57.6 F) and 7 ppt, respectively (Table 5.1-8).

In control and experimental treatments survival was high, 75 and 100 percent (Table 5.1-8). Chi-square analysis I

indicated that 75 percent of the treatments employing a 6T of 18 C (32.4 F) resulted in a significant (P < 0.05) increase in mortality.(Table 5.1-9). I I

I

I I 5-7 Table 5.1 Pressure/time Profile Salem Simulation I

compiled Novf!mher 15, 1970 Unit 23n 2 pumps/condenner shell 186,000 GPM nt 10.2 FPS, Transit. time simulation= 6*.0 rn\tn Total test tiMe 6.5 min Test time nnd stage Duration of test segment Prnsoure I (SiP1ulated)

A. 6: 30 to 6: 25 (sec) in cm !Jg rcadin<J I Entry into water pump hell mouth 5 Rnpid increasr.

76 to 121 B

• 6 : 2 5 to 5 : 5 5 I Entry into the circulation pump 30 Rapid decrease 121 to 22 I c. 5:55 to 5:50 Discharge froP1 circulation 5 Rapid increase pur.i.p 22 to 141 I D . 5 : 5 0 to 3 : 5 3 A distance traveled oif 1300 .117 Gradual decrease ft with a 6 ft head loss 141 to 128 I E . 3 : 5 3 to 3 : 3 4 A drop in elevation of 12 19 Gra<lual incren.se I ft 4 in 128 tfi.'157 F. 3:34 to 3:30 Vertical upward flow-toward 4 Rctpid d c~creas 2 the inlet bay 157 to 122 I G. 3:30 to 3:20 Passage through the condenser 10 R.:tpicl decrense 122 to 35 I H. 3:20 to 3:15.

Passage toward the discharge 5 Ranid increase pipe 35 to 94 I I. 3:15 to 3:10 F.ntry into the discharge pipe 5 Rapid increu~w I 94 to 107 J . 3 : 1 O to 0 : 3 O I Passage to the point of discharge 160 Gra~ual 107 to 147 incrcns0 I

K. 0!,30 to 0: 26 Decreuse to ambient simulntin<J mixing dischnrgc ~na river w~tcr L

• 0 : 30 to 0 : 26 OrgnniGms removed from test 4

26 Rapid 147 to 76

<lecr~c;s<~

nppnr~tus nnd plncea in a 1400 I ml contniner

Table 5.1-2 Summary of results of simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval blueback herring.

ACCLJH, LENGTH END OF C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 TEHP. SALIN, RANGE TEST X x x x  ;,: 7.  ;,:

DATE <C> CPPT> HIN, HAX. <HRS.> NO. SURV, NO, SIJRV. NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO. SURV, NO. SURV. NO. SURV.

llll1Ell.;c1: HERRIIJG 21 H;.Y 79 19 o.s 6.3 11.9 48 11 100 12 50.J 11 45.4 11 10.2 10 20 10 10 9 0 x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 16.7 36.4 54,5 20 20 55.6 x LATENT MORTALITY 0 2:'i 10.2 27,J 60 70 44.4 21 HAY 79 *19 o.s 6.3 11.9 48 10 70 12 58.3 10 60 10 20 11 54,5 12 B.3 12 41.7

% INilIAL MORTALITY 10 16.7 20 20 9,1 41,7 8.3

% LATENT HORTALITY 20 2:'i 20 60 36.4  ::;o 50 U1 I

co Table 5.1-3 Results of chi-square analysis on survival and mortality in simulated primary entrainments tests with postlarval blueback herring.

(*sig. (P ~ 0.05) mort.4 +=sig. (P ~ 0.05) surv.).

ACCLIH, C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 DATE TEHP, CC>

SALIN. LIFE CF> (PPT> STAGE CONTROL CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-SQUARE SIG,

• CHI-

• SQUARE SIG.

CHI- :ii SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG.

---

~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

lllllf;lACK lffPRINCl 21 HAY 79 19 66 0.5 POSTLAR, NO HORT. 5.856

• 0,381

• 3,884

• 3.316

• 5.507

• 100% HORT, IC 21 iiAY 79 19 66 0.5 POSTLAR, 0.321

• 0.006 3.316

• 6.750

• 0.667

• e

- - - - - - -* - - - - - - - - - e- -

Table 5.1-4 Summary of results of simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval and young alewife.

---

~-----------

ACCLIH. LENGTH END OF C-1 c-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-S TEMP. SALIN, RANGE TEST  %  %  %  % x  % x DATE <Cl CPPT> HIN. MAX, CHRS, l NO. SURV, NO, SURVo NO, SURV, NO. SURV, NO. SURV, NO, SURV. NO, SURV,

---

~-------------------------------------

ALEUIFE 16 APR 79 14 0 6.2 14 1 19 100 21 9'5.2 20 90 23 78.3 20 80 16 87.'5 23 69.~

x INITIAL HORTALITY 0 4.8 10 21.7 20 12.5 30.4 x LATENT HORTALITY lb APR 79 14 0 6.2 14 1 23 100 22 90.9 22 95,4 24 87.5 26 3406 23 91.3 22 77,3 x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 9,1 4,5 12.s 65*o4 B.7 22.7

% LAT.ENT MORTALITY U1 I

\0 5 APR 79 15 0 5 8 48 24 100 20 90 29 02.a 28 21.4 25 60 17 23.S 23 as.2 x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 6.9 10.7 a 11,B 7,4 x LATENT HORTALilY 0 10 10.3 67,8 32 64.7 7,4 5 APR 79 15 0 '5 8 48 22 100 21 90.5 27 05.2 26 69.2 18 38.9 23 60.9 27 37

% INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 7,4 19.2 11.1 B.7  :!9.6 x LATENT MORTALITY 0 9,5 7.4 11.5 so 30."1 33,3 J APR 79 16 0 5 7,4 48 18 94.4 21 es.7 17 70.6 20 45 24 33,3 18 0 26 0 x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 9,5 29.4 0 0 0 0

% LATENT HORT All TY 5,6 4.0 0 SS 61.. 7 100 100 3 APR 79 16 0 5 7,4 48 29 96.6 17 100 38 92.1 17 11.a

• 25 ea 28 0 36 5.6 INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 5,3 17.6 12 3.6 5.6 "x LATENT HOIHALITY 3,4 0 2.6 70.6 0 96.4 68.9

Table 5.1-4 Continued ACCLIH, LENGTH END OF C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 TEMP, SALIN, RANGE TEST  %  %  %  :.:  %  % *x DATE <C> <"PPT> HIN, MAX, <HRS,) NO, SURV, NO, SURVo NO. SURV, NO, SURVo NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO.* SURV, Al E&JIFE 27 APR 79 18 0 s.2 7.5 1 14 100 t:S 100 16 100 18 100 11 100 14 78.6 19 57,9

% INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 21.4 42.1

% LATENT MORTALITY 27 APR 79 18 0 s.2 7,5 1 16 100 21 100 18 100 14 100 16 100 15 BO 17 ~a.a

% lNIT IAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 20 41. 2 VI

% LATENT MORTALITY I 0

1e.s 29,5 48 7 100 7 100 7 100 7 .42.B 6 so 7 0 7 0 15 MAY 79 20.:s 1

% INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 100 100

% LATENT MORTALITY 0 0 0 57.1 so 0 0 100 7 100 8 100 7 100 7 100 7 0 7 0 15 HAY 79 20.s 1e.s 29.5 48 7 Ill IT I AL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

% LATENT MORTALITY

• .e

- - - - - - - -*- - - - - - - - e- -

Table 5.1-5 Results of chi-square analysis on survival and mortality in simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval and young alewife.

(*=sig. (P $_ 0.05) roort.; +=sig. (P ~ 0.05) surv.).

ACCLIH. C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-5 DATE TEHP. SALIN. LIFE (C) <F> <PPTl STAGE CONTROL CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SID, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, ALEIJIFE 16 APR 79 14 57 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, 0,92B

• 0.414

• 2.607

• 2.221

• 0,730

• 4.064 16 APR 79 14 57 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, 2.100

• 0.350 + 0.138

• 15.791

• 0.002 1.529 5 APR 79 15 *59 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, 2.514

• 0.507

• 21.943

• 5, 114

• 16.043

• 0.487 g

'5 APR 79 15 59 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, 2.197 0,302 3 .131 11.607

• * *

• 5.132

• .., 14.106 3 APR 79 16 61 0 POSTLAR, 0.803 1.293 12.597 1007. HORT, 100,; HORT,

• 7.552

• *

• l11 3 APR 79 16 61 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, + 1.420 26.842 2.197 1007. HORT. 44.707 I

• * * *

• I-'

I-'

27 APR 79 10 64 0 POSTLAR. NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT, 3.585 li.259 27 APR 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, 4.582 10.600 15 HAY 79 20.5 69 1 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT. 5.600 4,550 100% HORT, 100% HORT, YOUNG * * *

• 1 :s HAY 79  :?0.5. 69 1 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, 100% HORT, 100% HORT, YOUNG *

• Table 5.1-6 Summary of results of simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval white perch.

ACCLIH. LENGTH END OF C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 TEHP. SALIN, RANGE TEST ;. x x :c x x x x PATE CC> <PPT> HIN, MAX, <HRS,) NO, SURV, NO. SURV. NO, SURV. NO. SURV. NO. SURV. NO, SURV.' NO. SllRV.

1.lllITI: PERCH 2 HAY 79 18 0 s.2 9,5 48 13 100 15 93,3 16 100 14 92,B 14 92.B 12 e.3 25 72 x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 6.7 0 7 .* 1 7,1 8.3 e

c LATENT HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 83.3 20 2 HAY 79 18 0 5,2 9.5 48 14 100 19 94,7 13 04.6 17 82.4 18 94,4 13 69.2 10 90

c INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 5.6 7.7 0

c LATENT HORT AL ITY 0 5,3 15.4 17.6 0 23.l  :!O 10 APR 79 10 0 3.5 4.5 40 22 31,B 25 52 21 23,8 26 0 31 6.4 27 0 32 0

c INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 14.3 19.2 19.4 59,3 68.9 U1

c LATENT MORTALITY 60.2 40 61.9 so.a 74,2 40.7 31.2 I IV 10 APR 79 18 0 J,5 4.5 40 19 26.3 20 35,7 23 13 29 6,9 JO 6.7 25 0 25 0

c HI IT I AL HORTALITY 0 J.6 0 J.4 lJ.3 J2 44

c LATENT MORTALITY 7J.7 60.7 87 99,7 BO 60 56 11 llAY 79 10 0 6.9 12 ol 40 11 90.9 13 92,3 10 90 1J 100 19 26.3 14 0 12 0

c INITIAL HORT ALI TY 0 0 0 0 0 100 100

c LATENT MORTALITY 9,1 7,7 10 0 7J.7 0 0 11 HAY 79 10 0 6.9 12.1 40 12 100 17 94.1 1J 76.9 14 64 ,3- 1J SJ,B 18 5.6 lJ 0 x INITIAL HORTl\LITY 0 0 0 7.1 23.1 93.J 100

% LATENT MORTALITY 0 5,9 23.1 28.6 2Jo1 11.1 0 1B r1AY 79 10.s 0 9,4 14,B 40 10 100 12 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 11 113. 2 10 0

% INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 61.B 100 x LATENT MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 HAY 79 10.s 0 9,4 14.0 40 10 100 1J 100 11 *100 10 100 1J 100 12 41.7 12 0

% INITIAL HORT ALI TY 0 0 0 0 0 se.J 100 x LATENT MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e

- -. - - - - - - -* - - - - - - - e- -

T~ble 5.1-6 Continued

---~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ,--

ACCLIH, LENGTH END OF C-1 C-2 E'-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 TEHP, SALIN, RANGE TEST  % x x  %  %  %  %

DATE <C> <PPT> HIN. HAX. <HRS,) NO, SURV, NO. SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO. SURV, NO, SURV. NO, SURV,

---

~--

llllITE f'ERCH

~4 APR 79 15 0 s.2 7,5 1 31 100 20 100 27 100 23 100 17 100 18 100 28 89.3

r. INITIAL HORT ALI TY 0 0 0 0 0 0 10.7 x LATENT MORTALITY 24 APR 79 15 0 s.2 7,5 1 21 100 18 100 23 100 27 100 28 100 14 100 23 100

% INITIAL MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U1

% LATENT MORTALITY

.....I w

25 APR 79 16 0 5.2 7,5 48 22 100 28 100 28 100 18 100 21 100 32 84.4 28 46.4 x I ti I.TI AL HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 15.6 SJ,.;

x LATENT HORT ALI TY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 APR 79 16 0 s.2 7,5 48 32 100 32 100 28 96.4 29 96.6 29 93.1 37 83.8 30 90 x INITIAL HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 6.9 16o2 10 x LATENT MORTALITY 0 0 3,6 3,4 0 0 0 20 APR 79 17 0 4o7 s.0 1 52 100 25 96 24 100 21 95,7 21 95.2 30 73,3 26 00.s x INITIAL MORTALITY 0 4 0 14.3 4.8 26.7 11.5 x LATENT MORTALITY >ii-$ -~.

20 APR 79 17 0 4,7 s.0 1 26 100 20 75 36 97.2 24 91. 7 33 100 23 87 23 95.6 x 4,3 x

INITIAL MORTALITY LATENT MORTALITY 0

-. 25 2.0 8.3 0 13

Table S.1-7 Results of chi-square analysis on survival and mortality in simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval white perch.

(*=sig. (P ~ O.OS) mort~; +=sig. (Pi O.OS) surv.).

---~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACCLIH, c-1 C-2 E'.-1  :::-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 DATE TEHP, SALIN. LIFE

<Cl CF> CPPT> STAGE CONTROL CHI-

• SQUARE SIG.

CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-SQUARE SIG,

• CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• SQUARE ~G. -;*.

---

~-------------------------------------------------

UHITE PERf.'I 24 APR 79 15 59 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT, 2.206

• 24 APR 79 15 59 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, 2~ APR 79 16 61 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO.HORT, NO HORT. NO HORT. NO HORT, 4,773 ' 20.488

• 25 t;F*R 79 16 61 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT, 1.162

• 1.122

• 2.202

• 5,683

• 3.363

• 20 APR 79 17 63 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT. 7.293

• 6.637 + 2.265 + NO HORT, + 1.010 + 3,eoo + U1 I

10 APR 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, 1.950 + 3,eoe

• lOOX HORT,

• 14,641

• 100X HORT,

• lO~X HORT, * ......

.i::.

10 APR 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, o._46o + 3.417

• 7,119

• 7 ... 47

• lOOX HORT,

• lOOX HORT,

• 11 HAY 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, o.731

• 1.es5

• 4,377 Ji[ 6.679

• 27.451

• lOOX hC!RT.

• 11 HAY 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, o.~15 0.038 NO HORT, + 13.499

• 100X HORT, ***100% HO~T. a 2 HAY 79 1B 64 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, o.760

• 0.931

• 1.393

• 0.002* 3.809 * "1,53.i

• 2 HAY 79 18 64 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT. 0.999

• NO HORT, + 0.003 0,003 19.'508 *. 2.667

• 18 HAY 79 18,5 65 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, 16.130 ...

• 100% HOF:T, ¥ 17 HAY 79 18,5 65 0 POSTLAR, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, NO HORT, 10,532 ., . '_ 100% HORT,

• 1-

• e

- ----- - - - - - -* - - - - - - - e- -

Table 5.1-8 Summary of results of simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval and young Atlantic croaker.

---

.-------------------------------------~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACCL I H. LENGTH END OF C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-J E-4 E-5 DATE TEHP, SALIN. RANGE TEST X X X 7. X X X

<C> <PPT> HIN, HAX, <HRS,) NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV, NO, SURV.

27 llOV 79 12 7 25 49 48 5 100 5 100 5 100 4 100 5 100 4 75 5 80 INITIAL HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 25 20

" LATENT HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 NOV 79 12 7 25 49 48 5 100 5 100 5 100 5 100 5 100 5 80 5 100 lJ1 x IN-IT I AL HORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 20 (j I

x LATENT MORTALITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~

lJ1 Table 5~1-9 Results of chi-square analysis on survival and mortality in simulated primary entrainment tests with postlarval and young Atlantic croaker.

(*-si5. (P ~ 0.05) mart.; +=slg. (P ~ 0.05) surv.).

ACCLIH. C-1 C-2 E-1 E-2 E-3 E-4 E-5 TEMP, SALIN, LIFE CONTROL CHI- :IC CHI-

• SQUARE SIG, CHI-

• saur.. RE s IG.

CHI-

• SOUARE SIG, C.Hl-

• CHI- ¥ sou;.RE s IG.

DATE <Cl <Fl <PPT> STAGE SOUARE SIG, SOUM~E SIG, 27 NOV 79 12 54 7 YOUllG NO MORT, NO MORT. NO MORT, NO HORT, NO MORT. 1.406

• 27 NOii 79 12 54 7 YOUNG NO HORT. NO HORT. NO HORT, NO HORT, NO MORT. 1.111

• NO MORT,

PRESSURE LINE (TYGON TUBING)

TEST ORGANISMS IN U1 AMBIENT WATER I

°'

WATER IN MAIN CHAMBER SUPPORT BLOCK PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC l\ND Gl\S COllPl\NY Simulated Primary Entrainment test apparatus.

Sl\LEll 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 5.1-1 e*

I 5-17 I

5.2 5.2.l LATENT IMPINGEMENT SURVIVAL STUDIES Introduction Latent impingement survival studies are conducted to I estimate the long-term survival of fishes impinged on the Salem CWS intake screens *. These studies are conducted in addition to and-to provide a basis for evaluation of initial impingement s~rvival estimation, and provide a further I measure of success of the fish recovery system at Salem.

I 5.2.2 Materials and Methods I Latent impingement survival studies were conducted as described in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I Number of pu~ps and traveling screens in operation, screen speed, ambient water temperature, specimen length, and their interactions were considered independent variables possibly I influencing latent impingement survival. For the present study period data on each species were sufficient only to examine the relationship betweeri ambient (experimental)

I temperature and 96-hr percent mortality. The relative contribution of the other variables 'to mortality will be statistically determined when the number of tests at I different operating conditions is sufficient.

I 5.2.3 Results and Discussion I A total of 127 tests were conducted from October 1979 through March 1980 with blueback herring (13 tests); white perch (98); and Atlantic croaker (16). Other target species I- topical to this reporting period, namely the alewife, and striped ba~s, were not taken in sufficieht numbers during any sampling period to permit testing.

I Blueback herring I

Thirteen tests were conducted with blueback herring (61-100 mm TL) at acclimation temperature of 4-9 C (40-48 F) and ~alinity of 4-9 ppt (Table 5.2-1). All but three tests were conducted with damaged specimens (i.e., fish I demonstrating loss of equilibrium and/or abrasion). Of the I

5-18 I

13 tests, 8 (61.5 percent) resulted in at least 50 percent mortality during the first 24 hr. Fifty percent mortality occurred in all but one test at 48 hr and in all tests by 72 hr. Survival to 96 hrs. was 10 percent and occurred in only one test. No relationship between experimental (test)

• • I temperature and 96-hr percent mortality was apparent (Fig. 5.2-1). I White perch I Ninety-eight tests were conducted with white perch (50-230 mm TL) at acclimation temperature of 0.5-15 C I

(33-63 F) and salinity of 4-12 ppt (Table 5.2-2).

Fifty-two tests were conducted with damaged fish. All I specimens survived to 96 hr in twenty (38.0 percent) of these, and 50 percent or greater mortality occurred in only 12 (22.6 percent). Little difference in mortality rate was found during the first 72 hr; at 24 hr mortality = 20.0 I

percent of the initial number; 48 hr = 18.3 percent of the remaining; and 72 hr= 20.8 percent of the remaining. The steepest increase in mortality occurred between 72 and 96 hr I

when 40.8 percent of the remaining fish died; possibly the result of specimens not feeding following impingement.

I Of the forty-six tests with undamaged fish only five (11.1 percent) resulted in any mortality. Among these the greatest loss was 35 percent on December 3, 1979. The other four tests with undamaged fish on that date resulted in 100 I

percent survival.

The 96-hr percent mortality was plotted against experimental I

(test) temperature for damaged and undamaged white perch (Figs. 5.2-2, 5.2-3). A comparison of results is shown in Figure 5.2-4. Regression analysis (Table 5.2-3) showed no significant relationship between 96-hr percent mortality of I

undamaged fish and test temperature because very little mortality occurred in any of these tests. However, regression analysis showed a significant (P < 0.05)

I relationship between 96-hr percent mortality-of damaged white perch and* test temperature (Table 5.2-4), although temperature accounted for only about 29 percent of the variation. Arcsine transformation of the 96-hr percent I

mortality did not appreciably change the regression results.

The data for damaged fish (Fig 5.2-2) are skewed, with relatively low mortality occurring at ambient temperature I

below 10 C (50 F). This is likely due to differences in the type of damage observed above and below 10 C (50 F). When ambient temperature was below 10 C (50 F) most of the damage was an apparent distention of the swim bladder, possibly due ..I I

I 5-19 I

to gas embolism. Such fish exhibited loss of equilibrium but generally recovered within 24 hr. When ambient temperature was above 10 C (50 F)* the apparent swim bladder distention ceased and abtasion damage became more prevalent.

I Atlantic croaker I Sixteen t~sts were conducted with Atlantic croaker (30-74 mm TL} at acclimation temperature of 2.5-7.0 C (37-45 F) and salinity of 4-11 ppt (Table 5.2-5). All tests I were with damaged fish. Of the 16 tests, 5 (17.0 percent) resulted in at least 30 percent mortality during the first 24 hr. Fifty percent mortality had occurred in 4 tests at I 48 hr, in 7 tests by 72 hr, and in 13 tests by 96 hr.

No relationship between experimental (test} temperature and 96-hr percent mortality (Fig. 5.2-5} was apparent.

I I

I I

I I

I I

~

I I

Table 5.2-1 Summary of latent survival tests with blueback herring; Salem cws 1979-1980 at 4, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hr.

• =Experimental fish classified as damaged. Screen speed code: :l= low; 2=mixed; 3=high.

TOTAL LENGTH CHH> SALINITY NO, OF SCREEN EXPER, TEHP, NO, OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 4B HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR

[tATE HIN. HAX, HEAN Cf'PT> f'UHf'S SPEED CC> <F> EXP. ORG, X HORT, X HORT. x HORT. X HORT, :l: HORT, I<LUEI<ACK HERRING 74,7 6.S 6 2 4.S 40 10 0 100 100 100 100 *.

2B JAN 80 70 BJ 17 HAR 90 61 B2 73.3 4 6 2 '5 41 10 10 10 100 100 100

• 19 Hl\R BO 7B 89 83 8 6 2 4 39 10 90 90 100 100 100

• 19 HAR BO 72 98 BO B 6 2 4 39 10 30 so BO 100 100

• 26 HAR BO 70 8B 77,9 6 s 9 4B 10 0 30 50 50 90

• 29 111\R BO 63 91 74,4 6 s 7 45 15 0 0 0 93 100

• 31 HM: BO 72 B5 7B.7 9 5 B 46 10 0 90 100 100 100

• l11 I

31 HAR 60 67 97 79,6 9 '5 B 46 10 0 70 90 100 100

• l\.J 0

31 HAR BO 72 89 79 9 5 B 46 10 0 40 90 100 100

• 31 HAR BO 76 100 B2.4 B 5 1* 9 48 10 10 100 100 100 1:>0

• 31 HAR BO 70 92 Bo.1 8 5 9 4B 10 0 80 100 100 100 31 HllR 80 69 90 79 .t 8 5 9 4B 10 0 so 90 100 100 31 HAR BO 72 96 79 8 5 9 48 10 0 30 80 100 100

.. e

- -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - *- - 1 Table s.2-1 Summary of latent survival tests with blueback herring; Salem cws 1979-1980 at 4, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hr.

• =Experimental fish classified as damaged. Screen speed code: l=low; 2=mixed; 3=high.

---

~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SALINITY NO, OF SCREEN

. ItATE TOTAL LENGTH <Hli>

HIN, HAX. HEAN <PPT> PUMPS SPEED EXPER. TEHPo NO, OF CC>

4 HOUR 24 HOUR 4B HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR CF> EXP, ORG. X HORT. X HORT. X HORT, X HORT, X HORT.

l<LUEl<ACK HERRING 2B JAN BO 70 83 74,7 6.5 6 2 4,5 40 10 0 100 100 100 100 *.

17 HAR E*) 61 82 73,J .. 6 2 5 41 10 10 10 100 100 100

• 19 HAR BO  ;*e 89 B3 8 6 2 4 39 10 90 90 100 100 100

• 19 HAR BO 72 98 80 B 6 2 4 39 10 JO. 50 BO 100 100

• 26 HAR BO 70 BB 77,9 6 5 1 9 48 10 0 30 so so 90

• 29 H:.R 80 63 91 74,4 6 5 1 7 45 15 0 0 0 93 100

• 31 HAR 80 72 BS 78,7 s U1 9 1 B .o\6 10 0 90 100 100 100

• I N

31 HAR so 67 97 79,6 9 s 1 e 46 10 0 70 90 100 100 * ......

31 HAR 80 72 89 79 9 s 1 8 46 10 0 40 90 100 100

• 31 HAR 80 76 100 B2.4 8 5 1 9 4B 10 10 100 100 100 100

• 31 HAR eo 70 92 Bo.1 a s 1 9 49 10 0 80 100 100 100 31 tlAR BO 69 90 79.1 B 5 l 9 49 10 0 so 90 100 100 31 tlAR 90 72 96 79 8 s 1 9 4B 10 0 . 30 80 100 100

Table S.2-2 Summary of latent survival tests with white perch; Salem CWS 1979-1980 at 4, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hr.

• =Experimental fish classified as damaged. Screen speed code: l=low; 2=mixed; 3=high.

---

~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOTAL LENGTH <HH> SALINITY NO, OF SCREEN "EXPER. TEHPo NO, OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 4B HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR DATE HIN, HAX, HEAN CPPT> PUHPS SPEED (C) <Fl EXP, ORG, X HORT. % HORT. X HORT,* X HORT. % HORT, UHITE PERCH 10 OCT 79 117 168 140.4 4 3 14 57 8 0 13 50 50 BB

• 10 OCT 79 B6 ' 169 119,B 4 3 14 57 10 0 0 0 0 0 16 OCT 79 4 3 15,5 60 10 0 0 0 0 0 16 OCT 79 106 136 120~5 9 3 1 16 61 10 0 0 0 0 0 16 OCT 79 112 155 12B 3 16 61 5 0 0 0 20 20 16 OL:T 79 122 165 138.1 9 3 1 16 61 7 0 0 0 14 B6

• 0 U1 16 OCT 79 135 183 155.6 9 3 61 10 0 10 50 60 70

• I N

22 OCT 79 116 170 149 2 2 16 61 a 0 0 0 13 13

• N

. 30 OCT 79 130 175 4 2 17 63 5 0 0 20 60 BO

• 30 OCT 79 50 157 111.B 4 2 17 63 13 0 0 0 0 0 15 tlOV 79 97 152 120.2 6 2 12 54 10 0 0 0 0 .o 15 NOV 79 BS 152 126.3 6 2 12 54 12 0 0 0 0 0 15 NOV 79 94 150 115 ,4 6 2 12 54 11 0 0 0 0 0 15 NO'J 79 102 145 125 .. 7 B 2 12 54 10 0 0 0 0 0 15 NOV 79 BS 148 117.3 6 2 13 55 7 0 0 0 .o 0 19 NOV 79 116 1B1 145.B 7,5 2 2 12 54 10 0 30 30 40 60

• 19 NOV 79 90 166 127.5 B 2 2 12.s SS 10 0 0 0 0 0 19 NOV 79 135 175 148.4 B.s 2 2 12.5 55 10 0 0 10 40 BO*

19 NOV 79 69 149 124.7 9 2 2 12.s 55 12 0 0 0 0 0 19 NOV 79 7B 175 141 a.s 2 2 13 55 10 0 30 40 60 BO*

-~ * *

- -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - e- -

':!:able s.2-2 Continued

---

~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOTAL LENGTH (HH> SALINITY NO. OF SCREEN EXPER, TEHP, NO. OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 48 HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR DATE HIN, HAX, HEAN CPPT> PUMPS SPEED <Cl <Fl EXP, ORO, % HORT, % HORT, X HORT, X HORT, X HORT, WHITE PERCH 27 NOV 79 56 180 1"34 6 2 1 12 54 10 0 0 0 10 10 27 NOV 79 70 137 119.7 6 2 1 12 54 10 0 0 0 0 0 27 NOV 79 134 221 159,7 6 2 1 12.5 55 10 0 10 20 20 20

• 27 NOV 79 72 152 129.3 9 2 t 13 55 7 0 0 0 0 0 27 NOV 79 95 163 134.7 9 2 1 13 55 10 0 0 0 0 0 27 NOV 79 BO 180 *-120 *. 7 9 2 13 55 10 0 0 0 0 0 27 t1ov 79 too 142 125.4 9 2 1 13 55 10 0 0 0 0 0 U1 I

tJ 3 f*EC 79 52 122 80,6 5,5 2 1 10 50 11 Q. 0 0 0 0 w

3. [*EC 79 50 108 75 s.s 2 1 10. 50 12 0 0 0 0 0 3 CIEC 79 65 170 0s.2 s.s 2 1 10 50 12 0 0 0 0 0 3 DEC 79 62 125 B0.4 s.s 2 1 10 so 12 0 0 0 0 0 3 CIEC 79 58 162. 2 11,5 53 8 0 0 0 0 13 3 DEC 19 57 230 a2.2 2 1 11.5 53 20 0 5 10 25 35

• 10 DEC 79 69 1.05 ao.e 5,5 2 B 46 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 nEc 79 65 113 77.6 6 2 1 8 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 CIE:: 79 60 101 77.3 s.s 2 1 B 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 DEC 79 62 96 77.1 2 1. 8 46 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 DEC 79 65 76.6 2 B 46 10 0 0 0 0 0 26.DEC 79 60 80 6 5 1 8 46 B 0 0 0 0 0 7 JAN BO 60 Bt 70. t B 5 39 7 0 0 0 0 0

Table 5.2-2 Continued TOTAL LENGTH CHH> SALINITY NO. OF SCREEN EXPER, TEHP, NO, OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 48 HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR DATE HIN. HAX, HEAN CPPT> PUHPS SPEED CC> CF) EXP, ORG, X HORT, % HORT, X HORT, % HORT, % HORT, WHITE PERCH 111 JAN eo* 60 es 69.6 5 1 6 43 13 0 0 0 0 14 JAN 00 55 7B 69,B 6. 5 1 6 43 13 0 B e B B*

14 JAN BO 54 113 77.8 6 5 1 43 12 0 0 0 14 JAN BO SO 90 6 5 t' 6 43 13 0 0 0 0 22 JAN 00 65 170 B1.2 6 6 2 5 41 10 0 0 0 0 0

!2 JAN 80 56 B7 70.6 6 6 2 5 41 10 0 0 10 20 20 28 JAN BO 71 79 75.8 5 6 2 2 36 10 10 30 30 30 30

• 28 JAN 80 55 95 70.2 6 2 5 41 10 0 0 0 0 0 2a JAN BO 70 133 90.6 e.s 6 2 5 41 10 0 0 0 0 28 JAN RO 71 B6 78.1 e.5 6 2 5 41 10 0 0 0 0 O*

28 JAN BO 69 89 78.6 e.5 6 2 5 '41 10 0 0 0 0 28 JAN 80 66 139 B7.6 6 2 5 41 ' 10 0 10 10 10 10

• 2B JAN BO 62 B6 74.2 6.5 6 2 5 41 9* 0 0 0 0 0 4 FEP. 80 73 172 105.S e.5 5 2 36 10 0 0 0 0 4 FEB BO 52 150 94.8 e.5 5 2 36 10 0 0 0 0 4 FEB BO 54 133 BO e.5 5 2 36 11 0 0 0 0 4 FEB BO 61 152 92.4 5 6 43 10 0 0 0 0 4 FEB BO 58 132 90,9 6.5 5 6 43 10 0 0 0 0 0*

11 FEB BO 62 164 97.6 7 5 2 3,5 38 10 0 0 20 30 11 FEB BO 59 146 so.a 7 5 2 3.5 38 10 0 0 0 20

• e

- -. - - - - - - -* - - - - - - - e- - I Table 5.2-2 Continued TOTAL LENGTH <HH) SALINITY NO. OF SCREEN EXPER, TEHP. NO. OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 48 HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR DATE HIN. HAX. HEAN <PPT) PUHPS. SPEED <C> <Fl EXP, ORG, X HORT, X HORT, X HORT, X HORT, X HORT.

WHITE PERCH 11 FEB BO 59 78 65.5 7 5 2 o.s 33 10 20 40 60 60*.

25 FEB BO 65 155 7 5 " 2 39 10 0 0 0 0 25 FEB BO 59 159 7 2 38 10 0 0 10 10 3 HAR BO 64 94 *. B 6 1 3 37 13 0 0 0 0 e*

3 HAR BO 68 149 93.2 6 1 3 37 13 0 0 0 0 O*

3 HAR BO 62 125 91.6 7,5 6 2 3 37 13 0 0 0 0 O*

U1 7 HAR BO 72 164 102.s 12 6 2* 3 37 12 0 0 0 0 B* I r-.l U1 7 HAR 90 66 212 143 7,5 6 2 3 37 7 0 0 0 0 10 H"-R BO 60 187 1os.1 9 6 3 37 10 20 20 20 40 50*

10 HAR BO 54 BO 9 6 1 3 37 10 0 0 0 0 O*

10 Hl\R BO 61 165 102.2 9 6 3 37 10 0 10 *10 10 20*

10 HAR BO 67 162 104 9 6 3 37 10 10 10 10 10 20*

10 HAR ao 60 13B 89.2 9 6 3 37 10 0 10 10 10 10*

10 HAR BO 64 114 79.1 9 6 1 3 37 10 0 0 10 30 3il*

10 HAR ao 50 et' 69.9 9 6 5 41 10 0 0 0 *O O*

12* HAR ao so 170 103 B 6 2 39 8 0 0 0 0 25*

17 HAR 90 60 190 100 e 6 2 39 9 0 0 0 0 0 19 HAR BO 71 131 99,1 9 6 2 44 10 0 0 0 0 0 19 HAR BO 67 147 92.6 9 6 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 19 HAR BO 66 92 77,9 9 2 6.5 9 0 0 0 0 0

Table S.2-2 Continued

---

~

TOTAL LENGTH CHHl SALINITY NO, OF SCREEN EXPER, TEHP, NO, OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 48 HOUR 72 HOUR 96 HOUR DATE HIN. HAX. HEAN CPPT) PUHPS SPEED CC) CF> EXP, ORG, % HORT, X HORT, % HORT, % HORT, % HORT.

llHITE PERCH 44 10 0 0 0 0 0 19 HAP. BO 61 155 107.7 9 6 2 1B 6 2 6.5 44 9 0 11 33 33 19 HAR BO 59 15B 116.2 6 2 44 10 0 0 20 20 19 HAR BO 73 145 11408 1B 6 2 6.3 44 10 0 0 0 10 19 HAR BO 74 160 1130:\ 1B B 46 5 0 0 0 0 0 24 HAR BO 63 B2 74.B 6 6 2 B 46 7 0 0 0 0 0 24 HAR BO 73 114 BB.9 4 6 2 U1 126.4 6 6 2 B 46 10 0 10 10 10 I 24 HM< 00 73 182 tJ 46 10 0 0 0 0 0 m 26 HAR BO 52 130 B2 6 1 B 26 HAR BO 66 151 102.2 5.5 s 1 9 4B 9 0 0 0 0 o*

0 0 0 26 HAR 80 85 210 139 5.5 s 1 9 48 10 0 s 9 '48 10 0 0 0 10 10 26 HAR BO 60 142 91.6 6 0 0 0 26 HAR BO 67 146 110.2 s.s s 9 4B 9 0 9 48 10 0 0 0 0 0 26 HAR BO 65 172 115.4 6 5 9 48 10 Cl 0 0 0 26 MAR 00 BO 230 119.1 6 3,5 s 10 50 10 0 0 0 0 O*

26 HAR BO 80 144 116.9 s 10 50 10 0 0 0 0 0 26 HAR BO 73 92 B0.9 6 136.1 B.s B 46 7 0 0 0 0 31 HAR BO 81 169 B.s s B 46 8 0 0 0 0 0 31 HAR BO 64 180 119.B

• I e

Table 5.2-3 Components for the linear regression equation to estimate 96 hr percent mortality of undamaged white perch in latent impingement survival tests October 1979-March 1980.

• =Significant at P.05 or greater; and **=significant at P.01 or greater.

Constant (a) = 0.481 F(l,44) = 0.254 N = 46 Standard Error of Estimate = 4.738 R = 0.076 R2 = 0.01 Mean Correlation (r) ~egress ion Standard Variable (Xi) (Xi> With Y Coefficient (bi) Error of bi Test Temperature (C) 9.9 0.076 0.105 0.209 U1 I

Table *5.2-4 N

-....J Components for the linear regression equation to estim.ate 96 hr percent mortality of damaged white perch in latent impingement survival tests October 19.79-March 1980.

• =Significant at P.05 or greater; and **=significant at P.01 or greater.

Constant (a) 0 *. 400 F(l,50) = 20.336** N = 52 Standard Error of Estimate = 24.272 R = 0.538** R2 = 0.289 Mean Correlation (r) Regression Standard Vadable (Xi) cxi > With Y Coefficient (bi) Error of bi)

Test Temperature (C) 6.6 0.538** 3.542** 0.785

--- I Table 5.2-5 Summary of latent survival tests with Atlantic croaker; Salem CWS 1979-1980 at 4, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hr.

• =Experimental fish classified as damaged. Screen speed code: l=low; 2=mixed; 3=high.

TOTAL LENGTH <HH> SALINITY NO. OF SCREEN EXPER. TEHP. NO. OF 4 HOUR 24 HOUR 48 HOUR 72 HOUR ~6 HOUR DATE HIN, HAX, HEAN CPPT> PUHPS SPEED CC) CF> EXP, ORG, % HORT, % HORT, % HORT. % HORT,  % hORT,

---

~-------------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------

ATLANTIC CROAKER 14 JAN BO JO S9 5 6 43 13 0 0 15 15 Jl*

14 JAN eo JS 71 S0,6 7,5 5 1 6 43 11 0 9 18 27 736 JS JAN eo J9 60 48 B 5 2 3 37 16 0 0 0 6 25*

lS JAN eo JS S2 43 *. 6 11 3. 6 43 10 0 30 60 Bi> 100*

lS JAN eo J3 S7 47 6 3 1 7 45 11 0 18 45 73 B26 JS JAN eo 38 65 49,9 7 3 7 45 10 0 0 0 20 l11 JS JAN*BO JS 62 44,8 7 3 7 45 11 0 0 9 45 55* I lS JAN 80 42 60 6.5 3 46 10 . 0 0 40 50 60* CD 15 JAN 00 47 60 s2.3 6.5 J 1 7,5 46 11 0 9 9 64 62*

15 .IA!l BO 43 60 SJ 6.5 3 7,5 46 10 0 30 60 100 100*

21 JAii BO JB 6S 49,1 5 1 6 4J 9 0 0 0 22 44*

22 JAN 80 36 74 SB 6 6 2 5 41 10 10 30 80 90 90*

25 JAii 80 41 6S 49,9 4 6 2 2.5 J7 10 0 40 50 50 100*

2B JAN 80 40 68 6.5 6 2 5 41 12 0 42 42 42 67*

2B JAN BO J8 66 49.1 6 2 5 41 15 0 20 27 27 53*

2B JAN BO 38 60 47.2 6.5 6 2 5 41 10 0 10 10 JO BO*

I 5-29 I

I I 96-HOUR PERCENT HORTALITY

++---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+I I I I I I t I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I I 100.0+

I I

I 211 1 3 4 I

I I

I eo.o+

I I 60.0+

I I

I I

40.0+

I I

I 20.0+

I I I

I I

o.o+

I

.I I

I I

+---------+---------+---------+--------~+-----**---+---------+---------+

o.o s.o ~o.o 1s.o 20.0 2s.o Jo.o Js.o I EXPERIHENTAL TEMPERATURE (Cl I

I I l'ercent mortality ( 96 hr.) plotted against experimental temperature for PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC M:O G/IS COrtP/INY blueback herring; Salem CWS 1979-1980.

SALEll J 16 ( b) STUDY Figure 5.2-1 I

I

• I 5-30

• • • I I

96-MOUR PERCENT HORTALlTY I

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

+

I I

I I

I

+

I I

I I

100.0+

I I

I I

I ao.o+ u I

I I

60.0+t 2 I

40.0+

I I

1 1 I

20.0+

I I

12 21 1

1 1 1 I

2 I

I o.o+ J 4 4 s 2 1 I

I

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

o.o s.o 10.0 1s.o 20.0 2s.o EXPERIMENTAL TEHPERATURE <C>

Jo.o Js.o I

I I

Percent mortality ( 96 hr.) plotted against experimental temperature for I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC Arm GAS COllPArlY damaged white perch; Salem CWS 1979-1980.

SALE!! 3l6(b) STUDY Figure 5.2-2 I

I

.1

--~--

I 5-31

• 1 I

I 96-HtlllR PERCENT l\ORTALlTY

+

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

I I

I

+'

I I 100.0+

I I

I I eo.o+

I I. 60.0+

I I

40.0+

I I 20.0+

i

• 1 o.o+ 2 J 4 A 1 4 S2S 1 11 1 I I I

I

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

I o.o s.o 10.0 1s.o

• 20.0 2s.o EXPERll\ENTAL TEMPERATURE <C>

30.0 3s.o I

I I Percent mortality ( 96 hr.) plotted against experimental temperature for

• • undamaged white perch; Salem CWS 1979-PUBLIC SERVICE F=LECTRIC A?m Gl\S COrtPl\llY SALEll Jl6(b) STUDY 1980.

Figure 5.2-3 I

I

I 5-32

• • I I

96-llOUR f'ERCENT HORTALITY I

+----~----+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

+I I

I I

+

100.0+

I I

I I

eo.o+

I DD D D D

I I

D D 60.0+D' D D I D 40.0+

I I

D D D

D

• I D

I D 20.0+ DD u D u D

' DD D

D D

D .B DU D o.o+ D D u B DU u B9 uuu u uu u I

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

o.o :s.o 10.0 1:s.o 20.0 2s.o EXPERlHENTAL TEMPERATURE (Cl Jo.o Js.o I

I I

Percent mortality ( % hr.) plotted against experimental temperature for I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC t\tln Gl\S COllPl\tlY damaged (D) and undmnaged (U) white

• • I SALEll 316(b) STUDY perch; Salem CWS 1979-1980.

Figure 5.2-4 I

I 5-33 I

I 94*HOUR PERCENT HORTALtTY .

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

I +

I I

I 1

I I

I I

I

+ I I I I

I I

100.0+ 1 l I

I

! 11 eo.o+

I' I

I oo.o+ 11

! l I

I I

I 1 40.0+

I I 1 I

I 1 20.0+

I o.o+

I I

I I

I .

+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

o.o s.o 10.0 1s.o 20.0 2s.o Jo.o Js.o EXPERIHENTllL TEtlPERATURE <C>

I I

I I* PU BI.IC SERVICE ELECTRIC A!ID GAS COl!PANY Percent mortality (96 hr.) plotted against experimental temperature for Atlantic croaker; Salem CWS 197*9-1980.

SALE!! 316(b) STUDY Figure 5.2-.5 I

5-34 I

5.3 IMPINGEMENT COLLECTION EFFICIENCY e*I Collection efficiency study is done to determine the I

percentage of fish impinged on the CWS trav~ling screens that are not collected during spray washing and fish collection processes. During 1979 and January through March 1980 these studies were conducted with blueback herring, bay I.

anchovy, white perch, weakfish, spot, and Atlantic croaker.

Results for blueback herring, white perch, and Atlantic croaker, the topic species of this report, are presented I

herein.

I I

5.3.1 Materials and Methods I

Impingement collection efficiency study techniques were as described in the First Interim Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I 5.3.2 Results and Discussion I Nineteen collection efficiency tests were conducted~ f iv~

with only blueback herring, two with only white perch, and I

12 with mixed groups of blueback herring, white perch, and/oi.Atlantic croaker. Of the 2,667 specimens released, 2t335 (88 percent) were recovered.

test ranged from 53 to 99.

Percent recovery per I Of 941 blueback herring released in 17 tests, 779 (83 percent) wBre recovered (Table 5.3-1). Percent recovery I

ranged from 53 to 98. Length of released and recovered specimens ranged from 51-100 mm (Table 5.3-2). Recovery was highest (90 percent) for the 86-90 mm size class (n = 10) I and lowest (60 percent) for the 56-60 mm size class (n. = 10)

(Table 5.3-2). The number of blueback herring in each of the five size classes between 61-85 mm (n = 136-213) was sufficient to test for differences in recovery using a one I

way ANOVA of arcsine transformed percentages. No significant difference was found.

Collection efficiency studies were not conducted with alewife or American shad, although it is expected that results would be very similar to those reported for blueback herring due to nearly identical body size, conformation, and specific gravity.

I I

,, 5-35 I

Of 936 white perch released in 13 tests, 865 (92 percent) were recovered (Table 5.3-3). Per~ent recovery ranged from 83-99. Length of released specimens ranged from 41-185 mm and of recovered specimens from 51-185 mm (Table 5.3-3).

Recovery was 100 percent for the 101-105 (n = 5), 111-115 mm (n = 8), 14*6-175 mm (n = 19), and 181-185 mm (n = 2) size I classes and zero for the 41-45 mm size class (n = 2)

(Table 5.3-4). There was no significant difference in percent recovery among the eight size classes between 61-100 mm (n = 52-127).

,I Of 790 Atlantic croaker released in 11 tests, 691 II (82 percent) were recovered (Table 5.3-5). Percent recovery ranged from 70-92.

• Length of released and recovered specimens ranged from 31-75 mm (Table 5.3-5). Recovery was highest (92 percent) for the 56-60 mm size class (n = 129) ii and lowest (33 percent) for the 31-35 mm size class (n = 15)

(Table 5.3-6. There was no significant difference in percent recovery among the seven size classes between 36-II 70 mm (n = 136-213).

I I

I I

I I

I

'I I

r------------------------------------------------------~-----

---

~~----~~-~-~---

Table 5.3-2 Impingement collection efticiency, by size class, for blueback herring, Salem CWS, January-March 1980.

Size Class (mm) 51-SS 56-60 61-65 66-70 71-75 76-80 81-85 86-90 Test  %  %  %  %  % r.  %  %*

!} Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec 1 100 3 100 3 100 8 75 3 100 20 65 20 50 20 45 20 40 20 65 3 5 40 6 83 15 47 20 75 15 80 5 100 3 100 4 1 100 5 80 25 96 32 91 25 100 15 80 15 73 1 100 5 10 100 io 100 10 100 10 90 10 100 U1 I

6 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 90 10 100 w

....J 7 10 80 10 100 10 70 10 100 10 100 8 10 60 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 9 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 70 10 80 10 11 45 10 90 10 90 10 100 4 100 11 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 80 4 100 12 10 90 10 90 10 50 10 80 s . 100 13 9 lOp 9 100 5 100 6 100 7 86 14 9 67 9 100 5 20 6 83 7 86 15 16 69 16 88 16 100 8 100 4 100 1 0 16 16 69 16 88 16 50 6 so 4 100 17 5 60 16 88 16 81 16 75 3 100 2 100 10 60 188 80 21'3 86 206 81 175 80 136 88 10 90

5-38 I

Table 5.3-3 Results of impingement collection efficiency studies for white perch, Salem CWS, 1979-1980. **I Released Recovered Length Range

• Length Range Percent I Test. Number Number (mm) Number (mm) Recovery 1 48 71-100, 106-170, 44 76-100, 106-170, 92 I 176-185 176-185 2 76 41-55, 68 51-55, 89 I

61-100,61-175, 3 138 106-185 56-125 121 181-185 56-125 88 I:

4 60 66-95 50 66-95 83 I 5 60 66-95 54 66-95 90 6 60 66-95 58 66-95 97 I 7

8 60 60 66-95 66-95 59 58 66-95 66--95 98 97 I

9 72 61-100 66 61-100 92 I 10 79 61-100 73 61-100 92 11 80 61-100 76 61-100 95 I 12 76 61-100 75 61-100 99 13 67 61-100 63 61-100 94 I

936 865 x = 92 I

I I

'I

• I I

Table 5.3-4 Impingement collection efficiency, by size class, for white perch, Sale~ CWS, January-March 1980.

Size -Claes (mm) 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71-75 76-80 81-85 86-90 91-.95 96-100 101-J05 106-110 111-115 Test  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  % I I I I f Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec

.1 l 0 3 67 2 100 2 100 3 100 2 100 4 75 2 100 2 2 0 1 0 3 67 1 100 1 100 1 100 5 100 3 100 5 100 1 100 4 100 4 100 1 100 3 8 100 10 100 10 100 12 100 15 100 15 100 15 ~7 10 90 10 60 5 100 5 100 5 100 U1 4 10 80 10 70 10 90 10 100 10 70 10 90 I w

5 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 .90 10 70 10 80 \0 6 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 80 10 100 1 10 100 10 90 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 8 io loo 10 loo 10 loo :io lOO lo so 10 loo 9 6 100 8 100 10 80 10 50 10 100 10 100 e loo io ioo 10 10 90 10 100 10 90 10 100 10 100 10 100 9 78 10 80 11 10 100 10 100 10 90 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 70 12 11 100 10 100 8 100 8 100 8 100 14 . 93 11 100 6 100 13 11 73 10 100 8 100 8 100 13 92 11 100 6 100 TOTAL 2 0 1 0 3 67 8 100 59 93 109 98 110 92 119 94 121 98 127 87 114 95 52 83 5 100 13 92 8 100

Table 5.3-4 Continued Size Claes (moi) 116-120 121-125 126-130 131-135 136-140 141-145 146-150 151-155* 156-160 161-165 166-170 171-175 176-180 181-185 Teat  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %  %

I Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec l 2 100 3 100 3 67 6 100 1 100 3 100 l 100 2 100 2 100 *1 100 2 100 2 100 l 100 2 5 100 4 100 1 100 9 89 4 75 2 50 l 100 2 100 2 100 3 100 1 100 2 100 l 0 1 100 3 8 50 10 70 4

5 6

lTI 1 I

.c:..

8 0 9

10 11 12 13 TOTAL 15 73 17 82 4 75 15 93 5 80 5 80 2 100 4 100 4 100 4 100 3 100 2 100 3 67 2 100

[ __ _ -

I *s-41 Table 5. 3-5 e Results of impingement collection efficiency studies for Atlantic croaker, Salem cws, 1979-1980.

• 1 Recovered Released Length Length I Test Number Number Range (mm) Number Range (mm)

Percent Recovery I 1 165 31-75 36-70 130 49 31-75 36-70 79 74 2 66 I 3 63 36-70 Sl 36-70 81 61 36-70 SS 36-70 90 I 4 s 61 36-70 51 36-70 84 I 6 61 36-70 S5 36-70 90 92 7 70 36-70 66 36-70 I 8 64 36-70 5.1 36-70 80 56 36-70 84 I 9 10 67 56 36-70 36-70 48 36-70 86 I 11 56 36-70 39 36-70 70 790 691 x = 82 I

I

.I I

I*

I

_\

Table 5.3-6 Impingement collection efficiency, by size class, for Atlantic croaker, Salem CWS, January-March 1980.

Size Class {mm) 31-35 3~-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-QO 61-65 66-70 71-75 Test 7. 7. 7.  % i. 7.  %  %  %

1. Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec Rel Rec 1 15 33 25 80 25 88 25 100 25 80 25 84 16 63 6 83 3 67 2 10 70 10 100 10 70 10 60 10 100 8 63. 8 50 3 10 50 10 100 10 70 10 100 10 80 9* 78 4 100 4 10 100 10 50 10 100 10 90 10 100 7 100 4 100 U1 I

5 10 70 10 50 10 90 10 90 10 100 7 100. 4 100 or:.

IV 6 10 80 10 100 10 100 10 60 10 100 7 100 4 100 7 10 40 13 85 10 100 10 100 10 100 10 70 7 100 8 10 60 10 70 10 80 10 60 10 100 7 100 7 100 9 10 100 10 100 10 50 10 100 10 100 10 80 7 43 10 10 70 12 75 3 100 9 . 100 12 100 7 86 3 67 11 10 20 12 92 3 100 9 89 12 75 7 86 3 33 TOTAL 15 33 125 69 132 83 111 87 123 89 129 92 95 81 57 79 3 67

... _, ______ _ .. e

5-43 I

II 5.4 LARVAL TABLE AND PUMP CALIBRATION STUDIES e

I All tests conducted to date, including those on the topic species of this report, were included in the First Interim.

Report (PSE&G, 1980a).

I 5.5 IMPINGEMENT RECIRCULATION STUDY I

As a result of the reactor outage, CWS operation during the I study period was reduced to one pump during April through mid-September and 2-4 pumps during mid-September through late December. Additionally, the direction of screen wash discharge was not alternated with tide during most of the I' study period as a result of modifications and repair work on the troughs. These atypical operating con.ditions precluded meaningful studies of impingement recirculation.

I I

I I

I I

~=======================------'-=='-'---'-~----------

I 1

• • I LITERATURE CITED Dovel, W. L. 1971. Fish eggs and larvae of the upper Chesapeake Bay. Univ. Md. Nat. Resour. Inst., Spec; Report. 4. 71 pp.

I Jensen, L. D. (ed.). 1977. Fourth national workshop on entrainment and impingement. EA Co_mmunications.

Melville, N.Y. 424 pp.

I PSE&G (Public Service Electric and Gas Company). 1980a.

First interim report 316(b) studies, March-November I 1979, Salem Nuclear Generating Station. 201 pp.

PSE&G (Public Service Electric and Gas Company). 1980b.

I An interpretative analysis of impingement and entrainment at Salem Generating Station, Unit I, April 1977 through December 1978. 447 pp. + Appendix.

I PSE&G (Public Service Electric and Gas Company).

An ecological study of the Delaware River near 1980c.

Artificial Island, 1968-1976: A Summary. 303 pp.

I I

I I

I

~

I I

A-2 I eggs were most abundant on the western side of the Bay near Maurice River Cove (rkm 30} (Figs. 6-7). By July 16-20 ihrough August 6-9 eggs were most abundant from mid- to lower Bay (Figs~ 8-10). During August 20-24 and September 10-13, a period of rapidly declining abundance,

• • I they were concentrated in the upper Bay and the lower River south of Artificial Island (Figs. 11~12}.

I Population Involvement with Salem I With eggs included, the extent of involvement of age O+ bay

• anchovy (the 1979 year class) with the Salem CWS can be I inferred by comparing cumulative impingement and entrainment losses with the total mortality experienced by the year-class during the period of study. Initial population size of age 0+ bay anchovy was estimated at 1.38 El4.

I Instantaneous total mortality (Z) and percentage total 2 mortality (A), as determined from the regression line (r =

0.92} fitted to the decending limb of the catch curve., were I

15.56 and 99.99999 percent, respectively. Combined cumulative impingement and entrainment mortality, whether or not corrected for initial impingement survival, was estimated at 2.63 E9; this comprised b.03 percent of the I

total mortality experienced by the 1979 year class. The inclusion of egg data subsequently increased the age 0+

total population size and decreased the total mort~lity initially attributed to Salem in the First Interim Report (0.38 percent; PSE&G 1980b}. Entrainment survival samples were not taken due to the station outage, therefore survival I was considered zero in this model~

I weakfish - Eggs Baywide Population I

Eggs were taken during all nine collection periods from late 11 May through early August. The egg component of the population followed a seasonal pattern similar to larvae.

For May 22-24 the population estimate was 7.96 Ell, the highest level observed (Table 2, Fig. 13). By June 5-7 the I'

estimated population had decreased to 1.95 E9, possibly reflecting the end of the first spawn. During June 12-14 through July 24-27, the population again increased and estimates varied little, ranging from 1.99 ElO to 1.45 Ell.

I After July 24-27 the population steadily decreased to 2.58 EB on August 6-9 and eggs were not taken thereafter.

l I

I 1.

e I

I I

I I

APPENDIX I A Technical Supplement to the First Interim Report For 316(b) Studies for the Salem Generating Station, I March-November 1979

• I I

I

1 I

I I*

• I I

I I

A-1 INTRODUCTION This supplement summarizes bay anchovy and weakfish egg data not included in the First Interim Report for 316(b) Studies I for the Salem Generating Station - March through November 1979 (PSE&G, 1980a). These data were collected during baywide (rkm 0-117) ichthyoplankton population surveys I conducted in 1979, but were not available for inclusion in that report because high egg density in downbay samples considerably lengthened processing time. Field and laboratory methods, were those described in Section 4.1.1 I Baywide Population Studies of the First Interim Report, while the population estimation technique was that described in Section 4.1.1 Baywide Population Studies of the Second I Interim Report.

This Technical Supplement includes, for each species, brief descriptions of temporal and spatial trends~ population I estimates b'y collection period for egg data not previously reported, and the adjusted proportional involvement of the 1979 year class with Salem including eggs which supersedes I that published in the First Interim Report.

I SPECIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

.Bay Anchovy_- Eggs I '

Baywide Population I Eggs were taken during all 11 collection periods from late .

May through early September and during one period in late October-early November. The egg component of; the population I followed a seasonal pattern similar to larvae. During May 22-24 through June 5-7 the estimated population steadily declined from 1.86 El2, the highest level observed, to l.36 I Ell (Table 1, Fig. l)~ The population estimate remained relatively stable from June 12-14 to July 24-27, ranging from 5.13 Ell to 8.06 Ell. Thereafter, it decreased to 4.70 E8 on September 10-13, and 2.50 E7 during October 29-I November 2. No eggs were taken in mid-October.

During the period of occurrence bay anchovy eggs were widely distributed throughout the study area, but were generally I more abundant in the Bay than in the lower River. During May 22-24, the period of peak abundance, and May 29-J~ne 1 eggs were most abundant in mid-Bay (rkm 20-40) (Figs. 2-3)

• From June 5-7 through June 12-14 they were concentrated along the western side of the Bay from Cape Henelopen north to rkm 50-60 (Figs. 4-5). During June 25-29 and July 9-12

I A-2 eggs were most abundant on the western side of the Bay near. Maurice River Cove (rkm 30) (Figs. 6-7). By July 16-20 through August 6-9 eggs were most abundant from mid- to lower Bay (Figs. 8-10). During August 20-24 and

• • I September 10-13, a period of rapidly declining abundance, they were concentrated in the upper Bay and the lower River south of Artificial Island (Figs. 11-12). I Population Involvement with Salem I

With eggs included, the extent of involvement of ag~ 0+ bay anchovy (the 1979 year class) with the Salem CWS can be I

inferred by comparing cumulative impingemen*t and entrainment losses with the total mortality experienced by the year-class during the period of study. Initial population size I of age 0+ bay anchovy was estimated at 1.38 El4.

Instantaneous total mortality (Z) and percentage total mortality (A), as determined from the regression line (r 2 =

0.92) fitted to the decending limb of the catch curve, were I

15.56 ~nd 99.99999 percent, respectively. Combined cumulative impingement and entrainment mortality, whether or not corrected for initial impingement_ survival, was estimated at 2.63 E9; this comprised 0.03 percent of the I

total mortality experienced by the 1979 year class.* The inclusion of egg data subsequently increased the age O+

total population size and decreased the total mortality I

initially attributed to Salem in the First Interim Report (0.38 percent; PSE&G 1980b). Entrainment survival samples w~re not taken due to the station outage, therefore survival was considered zero in this model.

I I

weakfish - Eggs Baywide Population 1*

Eggs were taken during all nine collection periods from late May through early August. The egg component of the population followed a seasonal pattern similar to larvae.

I For May 22-24 the population estimate was 7.96 Ell, the highest level observed (Table 2, Fig. 13). By June 5-7 the estimated. population had decreased to 1.95 E9, possibly I

reflecting the end of the first spawn. During June 12-14 through July 24-27, the population again increased and estimates varied 1 i ttle, ranging from l. 99 ElO to l. 4 5 Ell.

After July 24-27 the population steadily decreased to I

2.58 ES on August 6-9 and ~ggs were not taken thereafter.

• • I L I

I Ie A-3 During May 22-24, the period of peak abundance, through July I 12-14, the area of greatest relative abundance of weakfish eggs shifted from the middle and eastern to the western and southern portions of the Bay (Fig. 14-17). Thereafter, eggs we~e widely distributed throughout the Bay with.localized I areas of high density; relatively few eggs were found in the upper Bay, except on July 9-12. (Fig. 19), and even fewer in the lower River (Figs. 18-22).

I Population Involvement with Salem I

With eggs included, the extent of involvement of age 0+

I weakfish (the 1979 year class) with the Salem CWS can be inferred by comparing cumulative impingement and entrainment losses with the total mortality experienced by the year class during the period of study. Initial population size I I was estimated at 9.98 Ell. Instantaneous total mortality (Z) and percentage tot21 mortality (A) as determined from the regression line (r = 0.93) fitted to the decending limb I of the catch curve were 13.47 and 99.9999 percent, respectively. Combined cumulative impingement and entrainment mortality, corrected for .initial impingement survival, was estimated to be 3.91 E6; this comprised 0.005 percent of the total mortality experienced by the year class whether or not the survival corrections were made. The inclusion of egg data subsequently increased the age 0+ total population size and decreased the total mortality initially attributed to Salem in the First Interim Report (0.65 percent; PSE&G, 1980b). Entrainment survival samples were not taken due to the station outage; therefore survival was considered zero in this model.

• i I

I I

I I

~

I I

Table 1 Population statistics for bay anchovy eggs prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979. , I I Prior to Averaglngl rubsequent to Averaglngl Life Stage** Size Number Standard Coef f lclent Standard Coeff lclent +95%

Collection Julian* or Range of Mean 3 Error of of Error of of Population Confidence River R2 Period l'*.r. 27-30 Date 87.5 Age Croue E

(me~ Samel**

11 (x/lOOm ~

o.o Mean Variation Mean Variation E*tlmate Ltmlu Kllo:i:eten 64-117 Apr. 17-20 108.5 E 40 o.o o.o 64-117 May 1-4 122.S I!. 39 o.o o.o 64-117 l'..ay 22-24 143.0 I!. 51 12617.483 2015.872 114 1035.906 59 0.547 1.86 El2 2.09 El2-l.64 El2 0-117 May 29-June 1 150.5 I!. 51* 6329.875 1661, 925 18B 1218.491 137 , 0.303 1.01. l!.12 1,28 El2-7.77 Ell 0-117 June 5-7 157.0 I!. 51 1055 .151 149,931 101 106.370 72 0.511 1,36 Ell 1,59 Ell-1,ll Ell 0-117 June 12-14 164.0 E 12 537B.416 850.970 134 633.616 100 0.413 5 .13 l!.11 6.53 Ell-3.85 Ell 0-117 June 25-29 177 ,5 E 77 4377.197 748,154 150 539.716 108 0.235 5,33 £11 6.52 Ell-4.21 Ell 0-117 ):>'

I July !}-12 191,5 I!. 71 5359. 822 706.702 111 438.545 69 0.407 5,74 Ell 6.71 Ell-4.82 Ell 0-117 "'"

July 16-20 199.0 E 51 4403.055 764.459 124 619.397 100 0.344 5.89 Ell 7.28 Ell-4.59 Ell 0-117 July 24-27 206.5 E 47 5215 .304 1292.090 170 ll46.526 lH 0.154 8.06 Ell 1.06 El2-5.75 Ell 0-117 Aug. 6-9 219.5 I!. 49 1683 ~ 866 513.517 213 384 ,54 7 160 0.230 2. 88 Ell 3.74 Ell-2.11 Ell 0-117 Aug. 20-24 234.0 E 57 11.188 3.216 217 2.420 163 0.454 8.61 £8 1.39 E9 -5.51 EB 0-117 I I,

Sept. 10-13 254.5 E 70 4,103 1.263 258 0.613 118 0.485 4.70 EB 6.63 EB -3.43 EB 0-117 '

. Oct. 15-17 289.0 I!. 19 0,0 o.o 0-117 Oct. 29-t;ov. 2 304.0 E 46 0.165 0.094 JM 0.092 317 0.112 2.50 E7 4.56 E7 -1,50 E7 0-ll7

• Given as midpoint of collection period.

• • E(eggs), L(larvae}, Y(age o+ young).

.. .. e

- -e- - - - - - - -* - - - - - - - e- - I I

Table 2 I Population Statistics for weakfish eggs prior and subsequent to moving average process - 1979.

r:Prior to A"eragfngl rSubaoquent to A"eragfngl.

Standard Coefficient Standard Coefficient +9SI Ufe StageU She Number River Hean Error of of Error of of Population Confidence Coilectlon

• Jull&n* or Range of Period Har. 27-30 Date 117 .S Aae Grou2 E

c-2 Sam2lea 11 o.o 3

~11£lOOm ) Mean Variation Mean Variation R2 Eatimate LimlU lllooeters64-111 Apr. 17-20 108.S  ! 40 0,0 o.o 64-117 Ila)' 1-4 U2.5  ! 39 o.o o.o 64-:117 1662,98S 300 13S4.987 244 0.443 7.96 Ell 1.10 El2-6.09 Ell 0-111 tla)' 22-24 143.0  ! 51 39S9. 913 Ha)' 29- 0.26S 1,29 Ell 1.78 Ell-9.21 ElO 0-111 150.5  ! 51 834.846 2S7 .699 220 217.046 186 June 1 10,479 346 7.920 261 O.l7l l.9S !9 J,13 E9 -1.14 !9 0-117 June 5-7 157.0  ! 51 21.653 361.181 256 279.192 198 0.271 1.45 Ell 2.07 Ell-9.4S ElO 0-111 June 12-14 164.0  ! 72 119S,822 171.614 187 141.997 .1S5 0.249 1.06 Ell 1.37 Ell-1.82 ElO 0-111 June 2S-29 177.5  ! 17 004. 982 Jul)' 9-12 191.5  ! 71 61S,440 152.265 208 ll5.991 186 0.219 8.40 ElO 1.14 !11-5.90 !10 0-111 >I Jul)' 16-20 199.0  ! 51 22S.ll6 48.583 1S4 42.167 134 o.22s l,62 !10 4,S6 El0-2.7S !10 0-117 U1 31,443 19S 23.619 146 0.299 1.99 ElO 2.52 El0-158 ElO 0-111 Jul)' 24-27 206.S  ! 47 110,818 0,006 344 0,735 3ll 0.180 2.se EB 4.22 EB -l.S4 E8 0-111 Aug, 6-9 219.S  ! 49 1.641 Aug. 20-24 234.0 E 57 o.o o.o 0-117 Sept, 10-13 254.S  ! 70 o.o o.o 0-117 Oct. lS-17 289.0  ! 79 o.o o.o 0-117 Oct, 29- .

Noy, 2 304,0  ! 46 o.o o.o 0-117

• Given as midpoint of collection period.

• • E(eggs), L(larvae), Y(age o+ young).

I A-6 BAY ANCHOVY - EGGS (1979)

• • I I

=1 28.0 I

~1 I

24.0 r=l

~

a E--t

=i 20:0 18.0 ,,

I U'.l e::l z

0 16.0

~

~

14.0 I p..

0 11, 0

!:!> ~*~

10.0 I

...:i

~

I

• • 1 I

~1 4.0 2.0 I

. o.o J }I.. M A M J J A s 0 N D I:

I runLIC i:i-:1w1cE Er.ECTRIC Alm c.i\S con1*ANY Baywide population estimates of bay anchovy eggs from March through I November 1979.

• • I s1.1.1:n 316(h) STUDY Figure 1 I '

I

• • I A-7 BAY ANCHOVY EGGS I MAY 22-24.. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LECEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC'&.~

0000 0

I g > Ul!a TO 106Qg.40Q g > 10609400 To ~&900 I 18 >

2121.&900 TO 3162'.400 g 31624..*!.00 TO '24;lZ.000 I

.. i N

I I

I DELAWARE I OC:EAN I

I Density of bay anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, SAl.r.n ll6(b) STUDY runLIC* s1:nv1CF. ELECTRIC MID' Cl\S conrl\!lY May 22-24, 1979 *

- Figure 2 I

I A-8 BAY ANCHOVY. EGGS

• • I MAY 29 - JUN. 1. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 .I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I a o.ooo Q

g

> Q.178 *.

> 6;t"-7Ei0 Itl TO l'.91U60 1:3~.JOQ I

la Q

1:362ll.300 20"143.QOO TO TO 20'7-'3.g()()

Z'165asoo I

I N

I t I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of bay anchovy eggs in the I

PUOLJC r.ERVICF. ELECTRIC AND C1'\5 COMr/INY .Delaware River Estuary, May 29-June 1, 1979.

SALr.n 316(b) STUDY Figure 3 I

I

I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-9

,I JUN. 5-7. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LECF.ND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC 'MEn:RS a o.oco I ~

,. 52tl' TO 6QO.B1:3 g > 6GQ.BCS TO l376.-l00 I D > 1376.400

> zoez.ooo TO TO 206Z.OOO zx;'.600 I

I I

I N

i I

DELAWARE Densi t'y of bay 'anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, J't18LIC f.EltVICf: El.F.CTRIC llND Gi\S COMl'llHY June 5-7, 1979.

SllLEM 316(b) STUDY Figure 4

I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-10

• • I JUN. 12-14, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I

LECZND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC .l.tF.!ERS I

a 0000

~ > 0.4:53 IO 4399..160 I

'1 > 43gg..16Q TO 67g'lE/O 13 >

S"n7.870 l31g&.S00 TO TO 1:31;6.SOO t'lS95.300 I

(I I

I I

t I I

DELAWARE I

I I

Density of bay arichovy eg~s in I

PUOLIC r.t:nvicE t:!.ECTRIC c,\.<; COIU',\N'l the Delaware River Estuary, I

,\NI)

June 12-14, 1979.

SALr.n 316 II>) STUDY Figure 5 I

I

I I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-11 JUN. 25-29. 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKni 0-117 I a LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ME1'ERS a.coo I Id g

'l'.820 "2ZB.S60

?O TO "228Q60

~100 I > TO l!.(.50.100 l267L200 Bl!

isag2Ml()

> l26"71.200 TO I

I N I

I t

I I

I OC."EAN I

I Density of* bay anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, runLIC: SERVICE. ELECTRIC AND C1\S COMl'llNY

. . .... June 25-29, 1979

• I *sx1:r.i-i~l16 cbl STUDY Figure 6 I

I

I

• • I A-12 BAY ANCHOVY EGGS DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY.. RKm 0-117 I

LEGEND a

DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 43.624 TO 4101710 I

la g >

-41111.710

!l.511.&0 TO TO 6159810 12ZI7.g()Q I

iB I > J22rl.POO TO 1SZ'l6.000 I

N I

t **I DELAWARE I

I I

runLIC 5ERV1Cr. r.LECTRIC J\ND CJ\S COMl'J\N¥ Density of bay anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, July 9-12, 1979.

I SAJ.r.n 316(b) STUDY

• • II Figure 7

I I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-13 I JUL. 16-20. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I U'CEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS I a g >

Q.000

'11$.691 l'D :!Z,1.610

'> ~

I

~1.610 'tO

'1 la > 64085-40 TO 93(.;..QO m > ~?!;.'70 TO lZ'i'SZ.-400 N

t DELA.WA.RE Density of bay anchovy eggs in

• :rttnLJC f.ERVlCF. F.LECTRIC: MIO G1\S conl'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, July 16-20, 1979.

SM.r.11 316(bJ STUOY Figure 8

I i

I BAY ANCHOVY.EGGS A-14

• • I JUI. 24-27, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC ~IE:n:RS I

a 0.000 0

g

~7.'84 4~.550 TO TO 4~..550 949?.~

I 18 Ii 941rr.620 14067.SOO to TO 14007.600 18637.700 I

I N

I' I

t I I

I I

I J'tlnLIC r.t:nVICt: t:LECTRIC MID C1'\S COMl'J\NY Density of bay anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, I

• • I S.M.F.ll llG(bJ STUDY July 24-27, 1979.

Figure 9 I

1-**

I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-15 AUG. 6-9. 1979.

I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 I LECEND DENSITY PER lOO CUBIC METERS a 0.000 I g > 1:;7.E.03 TO zria.550 Q > ma.550 TO .im.500 I Ba m

419G500 6220."60 TO TO 6220.-Wl az.iu10 I

I N

I t

I I DELAWARE I

I I Density of bay anchovy eggs in runr.Ic !":ERVICP. ELECTRIC l\tlD Gl\S COMPANY the Delaware River Estuary, SAL&M 316(b) STUDY August 6-9, 1979.

Figure 10 I

I

I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS

• • I AUC. 20-24, 1979

• DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I

LECEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METF.RS I

a Q.000

~ >

Ql87 TO TO Il'.~

33.Q16 I

~ Il'.o62 SI Iii

l3.Q16

0.780 TO TO 50.780 67.&U I

I I

• • I N

t I

I I

I Density of bay anchovy eggs in I

J>UllLIC f.ERVICF. F.L&CTRIC ANO Ci\."l COMl'J\NY the Delaware River Estua~y,

• • I S~Lr.n 3l6(b) STUDY August 20-24, 1979.

Figure 11 I

I I BAY ANCHOVY EGGS A-17 I SEP. 10-13. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS a

I 0.000 g > OJSl TO 7.&.a g > 7.863 TO 15566 I &I > 15.586 TO 2:3.303 D > 2::3.303 TO 31020 I

I. -.

N I

I t I

I DELAWARE I

I I Density of bay anchovy eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, I runLIC S&RVlCE F:LF.CTRIC MIO C1\S COMl'l\NY September 10-13, 1979.

SAl,f.t1 llG(b) STUDY Figure 12 I

I A-18 WEAKFISH EGGS (1979)

• • I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I Baywide population estimates of I J'URLJC :;&RVIC£ £Lf:CTRtC /\ND G1\S COMl'llNY weakfish eggs from March through sr.r.r.n llG(b) STUDY November, 1979.

Figure 13 I I

I

I I WEAKFISH EGGS A-19 I MAY 22-24. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-117 I LEGEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS.

a 0.000 I 0 > 0310 TQ ~90 g > U52,3QO TO :i:zgQ4*.WO I g > J,?.g(l4.400 TO l.Q.356.soo D > 1Q356500 TO ~l;OO I

I N

I I

i I

I DELAWARE I

I I Density of weakfish eggs in the PUOLJC f.ERVICE ELECTRIC l\NO Delaware River Estuary, I

c,"\.~ COMl'AN"t SM.t:M 316 ( b I STUDY May 22-24, 1979.

Figure 14 I

• ~

WEAKFISH EGGS MAY 29 -

A-20 JUN. 1. 1979

• • I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I a

LECEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC m:n:RS 0.000 I

0 g

2.8~

!!85.Q.iCI TO TO 88S.1)4CI

!167200 I

R > tl'67200 TO I

2$'"350

& > 264g350 TO 3531.SlO 1-N I

t I I

DEI.AWARE I

I I

Density of weakfish eggs in the I

runLIC SERVICf. f.LECTRIC t\ND C1'\S COMl'l\NY Delaware River Estuary, S~LF.l'I Jl6(b) STUDY May 29-June 1, 1979.

Figure 15 I

I

_ I

A-21 I WEAKFISH EGGS JUN. 5-7, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY, RKm 0-1!7 LEGEND I a DENSITY PER 100 CUEIC METERS 0000 9 > o~ TO :IQ9Qe I Q > SQQ8 TO 7'1.865

&a > 7Q.86S TO Jlg?:ll I B > ug,731 TO 15'1598 I

I N I

I I

DELAWARE I

I I

I runr.1 c 1a:nv1 cc &LECTRIC ANO Cl\S COMrANY Density of weakfish eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, June 5-7, 1979.

SAl.&rl 316 (bl STUDY Figure 16 I

I

I

• • I A-22 WEAKFISH EGGS.

JUN 12-14, 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I

a LEGEND Dl!:NSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.oco I

I TO

~ 0.321 1897ZSO Q > ~.250 TO* 33Q*U~

> 33g.u;o TO 50al.'30 R

D '> 50911:30 TO 6788.070 I I

I t **I I

DELAWARE I

runLIC m:nv1cr. r.Lr.CTRIC l\NP G,\S COMl'llNY

• Density of weakfish eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, I

June 12-14, 1979.

SALF.n ll6(bl ~TUOY Figure 17 I I

I

I I WEAKFISH A-23 EGG~

JUN. 25 -29, 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. R.Km 0-1!7 I a LF.CEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0.000 I 0 Ii!

0164 824.068 TO TO e2"°68 1647.950

> TO zm.e:io I

1641.llSO

&a I > Zm.830 TO :)2gS.720*

I I N I t I

I I

I I

I Density of weakfish eggs in l'UPLIC l':ERVICF. ELECTRIC AND .C,\5 COMl'ANY the Delaware River Estuary, I SAr.r.n 31 (i ( bl STUDY June 25-29, 1979.

Figure 18 I

I WEAKFISH EGGS JUL. 9-12. 1979

-I I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I a

LEGF.ND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS 0..000 I

Id g

1.610

'76l..6U TO TO 761.622 15ZUi:30 I

> ~21.630 TO 22!!1.MO B > 2:2S1.S40 TO 30.&1.650 I I

N I

t I I

I DELAWARE I

I I

I l

Density of weakfish eggs in the J'lll\t.JC :a:nVICF. F.LF.C'rRIC AND Ci\.<; COl'll'ANY Delaware River Estuary, SJ\l,t:n 316(b) STUOY July 9-12, 1979.

Figure 19 I

I I

_ _ _ _ _ __J

I A-25 WEAKFISH EGGS JUL. 16-20. 1979 I DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 U:GF.ND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC: METERS 0 0.000 I ra g

~6 t1'9.1!)8 TO TO

~158 357.BOO I e B

> 357.SOO

> S36.*H2 TO TO 536.-l-'2 715.08" .

I NEW JERSEY I N I

I t

I I

I I

I Density of weakfish eggs in the runLrc f.ERVlCE ELEC'l'RIC ANO C1'\S COt\1 1 /\NY Delaware River Estuary, July 16-20, 1979.

SAJ.r.n 31G (bl STUDY Figure 20 I

I

A-26 I

WEAKFISH EGGS JUL 24-27, 1979

• • I DELAWAR:E RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 I

LEC1':ND a

DEN!SITY PER 100 CUBIC METERS o.coo I Q > Q.11!4 TO 124..685 g > 124..ESS IO 24.IU~

I 61 > UQ.148 IO :rr.!.825

& > 373.S26 IO 4QS107 I

I N I t **I DELAWARE I

I I

I runLIC ::tnVICF. tl.ECTRIC AflD GAS conrl\NY Density of weakfish eggs in the Delaware River Estuary, July 24-27, 1979.

I SALF.n 316(b) STUDY Figure 21 I

I I

A-2_7 I WEAKFISH EGGS AUG. 6-9. 1979 DELAWARE RIVER ESTUARY. RKm 0-1!7 LF.GEND DENSITY PER 100 CUBIC J,[ETERS Q O.CIOO 9 > Ol-&8 TO ZlSS g > 2..168 TO UZl

> 4.2Z1 TO 8.2SS i

> 6.266 TO 8.305 I N

• t DELAWARE Density of weakfish eggs in the J'UDLlC f.ERVICF. r.LECTRIC NlO Ci\.<; COMl'l\NY Delaware River Estuary, August 6-9, 1979.

SAJ,f:M 316 ( b) STUDY Figure 22

Date Received  ?. . J- (O

-~

\

SPECIAL HANDLING REQUIRED By: (Circle one or more)

Availability of Mother =

Availability of Daughters = Cr Backfit: Yes ~

Other:

Write Mother's accession number here ~~?dJ>e>..2~2...

Expedite: ~ No Other:

After filming, send document to CF Change availability to PDR: Yes Other:

After filming, return to Larry Goldberg Availability of Mother = fJ)f?

Availability of Daughters =

Oversize enclosure Yes ~

Availability = ~~~~~~~~-

0th er:

Return to Larry Goldberg by '7-10-fO Control # 703--3 If there are any questions, contact:

nfa  ;..s kt_. S ho\A.,\ ~ It,~ t'vL-~- _LC>--?-~~ .

t-v~-rh PJJR. tcHer..  :.Avo. 8'" 00 7tJ":?oc::z2~