CINEMar/Open Ocean Aquaculture Annual Progress Report for the period 1/01/05 through 12/31/05

Principal Investigator: Larry G. Ward, Raymond E. Grizzle, and James D. Irish

I. Accomplishments

A. Scheduled Tasks
The primary tasks for the University of New Hampshire (UNH) Open Ocean Aquaculture (OOA) Environmental Monitoring Program for 2005 included the following.

1.) Routine field monitoring of the water column and substrate at and near the OOA field site (Figure 1) in order to comply with permitting needs and to address environmental concerns. This included semi-annual (spring/summer and fall) benthic surveys to monitor infaunal characteristics (box coring), epifaunal characteristics (bottom videography), and bottom sediment textural characteristics (grain size and organic content). In addition, monthly observations of water quality (total suspended sediment concentrations and % particulate organics) and physical characteristics of the water column (e.g., salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, light transmission, and chlorophyll) were done from May until October. This information was used to determine if there were impacts to the substrate, benthic community, and water column attributable to the aquaculture activities. Factors such as biodiversity and abundance of infaunal and epifaunal communities, sediment organic buildup, detectable changes in dissolved oxygen levels, and concentrations of particulate matter were used as indicators to track environmental impacts.

2.) Deploy, maintain and upgrade the environmental monitoring buoy system at the OOA field site in order to provide high-resolution, time-series observations of critical environmental parameters (e.g., waves, water temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, turbidity or fluorescence). This includes becoming fully operational, which requires the development of another complete buoy system. This effort will also require that the original buoy be updated so that the two systems will have complete data continuity. It is anticipated the OOA environmental monitoring buoy will become part of the emerging National Observatory system. Specific project objectives for 2005 included: maintain and service the buoy, mooring and sensor systems; recalibrate all instruments at appropriate intervals; work towards building the new buoy system and operations into a full time observatory; design and construct updated buoy electronics; continue data reporting and archiving; and continue developing web-site serving of data.

3.) Monitor occurrence of listed marine species in the OOA field area.

4) Develop and implement environmental information transfer protocols that will make the physical, biological, and water quality information readily available to all project participants, federal and state regulating agencies, and other interested parties.

5.) Develop new, streamlined, and focused monitoring programs that would comply with permitting and environmental needs and be at a scale appropriate for private OOA enterprises.

B. Progress on Tasks
1. Field Monitoring of the Benthos and Water Column
Bottom Sediments and Infaunal Benthos. In 2005 a new benthic monitoring protocol was developed which facilitated more detailed sampling at the field site and placed more stations within potential impact areas for fecal matter and food wastes. The new benthic sampling protocol (described below) resulted from suggestions made by New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Prior to 2005, eight permanent monitoring stations were sampled for benthic infauna, epifauna, and sediment texture. However, the array of monitoring stations set up in 2005 included 12 new stations, as well as the 8 original monitoring stations (Figure 2). This new station array provided more detailed sampling of the bottom, while maintaining continuity with the earlier surveys. Four of the stations were located within the most likely "impact" zone for fish feces and excess fish food deposition. The impact area was estimated from current velocity and direction observations from the UNH environmental monitoring buoy and settling rates of food and fecal wastes taken from the literature. Based on the current patterns, the predicted impact zone was an area ~100 m in diameter around the center of each fish cage. The other stations were located in a "mixing" zone (four sites), a "farfield" zone (six sites), and a "distant farfield" zone (six sites).

In addition to the changes in the spatial distribution of benthic sampling stations, the number of times per year each station was sampled was changed. In 2004, the benthic sampling was done approximately every four months. However, in 2005, sampling was reduced to two times per year ­ late spring to early summer and fall. These two sampling periods were chosen based on experience at the UNH OOA field site since 1997 and from discussions with the permitting agencies. Previous work indicated that spring to early summer and fall were key periods for monitoring benthic impacts. Therefore, the benthic surveys were conducted on June 8th and July 6th (spring/early summer survey) and November 12th (fall survey). All 20 stations were occupied during the spring/summer survey, while 18 of the 20 were sampled in the fall due to weather conditions (Figure 3).

Sediment samples were taken with a box corer (Wildco) with a design sampling area of 0.0625 m² using the UNH R/V Gulf Challenger as a platform. The sediment inside the box corer was subsampled for infauna with a 10.4 cm ID (0.0085 m²) acrylic core tube and subsequently washed through a 0.5 mm mesh, fixed in 3% formalin, and preserved in 70% isopropanol. A subsample from the box core was also taken for grain size and particulate organic content analyses. Finally, the remaining contents of the box core were washed through a 5 mm mesh sieve, fixed in 3% formalin, and preserved in 70% isopropanol. An attempt was made to measure visually the depth of the redox potential discontinuity (RPD) layer in each of the acrylic core tube samples. However, this proved to be unsuccessful in most samples.

In the laboratory, all invertebrates from both samples (5 mm mesh and 0.5 mm) were removed under 3x magnification, sorted by major taxa, identified (to family level in most cases), counted, and weighed (wet weight of preserved specimens). Grain-size characteristics of the sediments collected during the June 8th and July 6th cruises (spring/early summer sampling period) were determined using standard sieving and pipette analyses as described in Folk (1980). The organic content of the sediment samples from both cruises were determined by loss-on-ignition (LOI). Each sample was dried, heated to 450° C for four hours and the weight loss determined (modified from Ball 1964).

The overall approach to the analysis of the benthic infaunal data was to compare a variety of benthic parameters across the four predicted pollution effects zones described above. The measured parameters included total taxa, community densities and biomass (alcohol-preserved wet weight), taxonomic diversity (several calculated indices), and the ratios of percent composition (based on densities) of selected pollution "tolerant" (oligochaetes, capitellids, cirratulids, ampeliscids) and "intolerant" (nuculids, paraonids, ampharetids) taxa. The data were analyzed graphically and by ANOVAs to test for differences in means of each parameter among the four potential pollution effects zones.

Epifauna and Videography. Benthic epifauna was monitored at the UNH OOA field site using a bottom camera system (UNH Hubbard Camera) and the UNH R/V Gulf Challenger as a sampling platform. Bottom videography was done following the same general schedule as the benthic sampling for infauna and sediments. The spring to early summer survey was done on June 9th and on August 4th. The fall survey was done on November 28th. During the spring/early summer survey 18 of the 20 benthic monitoring stations (described previously) were occupied and video collected (Figure 4). Weather conditions prevented sampling two stations adjacent the mooring structures. All 20 stations were occupied during the November cruise (Figure 4).

The Hubbard Camera system is composed of a video camera mounted on a frame with synchronized strobe lights and an integrated positioning system (GPS). Data recording and power supply was located onboard the research vessel. During each cruise the camera was suspended near the bottom (within 50 cm) and 6 to 10 minutes of downward looking video taken at each monitoring station. Depending on sea conditions and water clarity, images of the surficial sediments, sediment texture, bedforms, epifauna, burrows, tracks, trails, crabs, lobsters, and occasionally fish were obtained.

Water Quality. Water samples for water quality analyses were collected monthly from May until October. During each cruise water samples were taken at three locations; adjacent to the instrument buoy, updrift of the cages, and downdrift of the cages. Each updrift and downdrift station was located as close to the fish cages as sea and wind conditions would allow. During 2005, the updrift and downdrift directions for each water sampling cruise were determined from a shipboard 300 Hz Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP). Essentially, the current directions were measured on each side of the mooring grid and the current direction at the approximate depth of the mid point of the cages (22 m) determined. However, results of this method were extremely inconsistent, and the drift direction had to be estimated from surface currents. For 2006 the method for determining updrift and downdrift directions will be modified so that more consistent results are obtained. At each station, water samples were collected with 5-liter Niskin bottles at three depths; surface, 22 meters below the surface, and within 2 to 3 meters of the bottom. Each water sample was analyzed in the laboratory for total suspended sediment concentration (after Banse et al. 1963), organic particulate content (estimated by LOI after Ball 1964), and chlorophyll concentrations (after Strickland and Parsons 1968).

Physical Characteristics of the Water Column. During each monthly monitoring cruise from May to October, water temperature, salinity, light transmission, fluorescence, and PAR (photosynthetically available radiation) profiles were measured through the water column with a SeaBird SBE-25 CTD data logger with associated integrated sensors. The profiles were done at the same three stations where water samples were collected for water quality analyses (described above). In addition, dissolved oxygen concentrations and percent saturation were monitored at the three stations using two methods. First, dissolved oxygen profiles were measured from the surface to a depth of ~25 meters with a YSI 85 sensor. Secondly, dissolved oxygen concentrations and percent saturation were determined on water samples collected with 5-liter Nisken bottles by chemical analysis (Winkler titration method after Strickland and Parsons 1968). The water samples were taken at the same depths as the water quality observations (surface, 22-m, and 2-3 meters off the bottom).

2. Environmental Monitoring Buoy
Deployments. Recovery, repairing, and deploying the environmental buoy system (Figure 5 and Figure 6) is the highest priority during a given reporting period. During 2005, the environmental mooring was reconfigured and upgraded as discussed below and deployed for three complete deployments, and the start of a fourth (Table 1). Data was obtained during all deployments. However, the intermittent data system had problems in the first deployment of the year, while the GPS failed in the third deployment of the year. The loss of the GPS resulted in the shutting down the system (see difficulties encountered section below).

Improvements to the Environmental Monitoring System. Major goals for improving the environmental monitoring buoy program included: 1. acquiring the hardware to have two complete buoy and sensor systems; 2. upgrading and increasing the buoys capabilities to meet all the UNH OOA monitoring and permitting requirements; and 3. preparing the buoy to be included in the National Ocean Observation System.

The purpose of acquiring a complete second monitoring buoy is to move towards becoming fully operational. With two complete mooring and instrumentation systems, one system can be serviced, calibrated and readied; while the other is deployed to keep the presently long turnaround times as short as possible. This goal was considerably advanced this year, but not completed. Additions to the original buoy to meet the increased environmental monitoring requirements and replacement of damaged, worn out and malfunctioning components slowed down the acquisition of the second complete system.

Significant efforts to troubleshoot, modify as needed, and upgrade the entire environmental buoy system in 2005 resulted in major improvements and capabilities. The changes and modifications are listed below.

• An air temperature sensor and PAR were added and tested.
• A complete mid-water sensor package was acquired (see Figure 7). This included a Sea-Bird Electronics Seacat SBE-16 plus with external sensor capability for four sensors (in addition to standard temperature and conductivity). It is anticipated a strain gage pressure sensor to measure water elevation (tides and meteorologically driven), a Sea-Bird SBE-43 dissolved oxygen sensor, a Seapoint turbidity sensor (optical backscattering), a chlorophyll-a fluorometer, and a SBE-5T pump to flush the conductivity and oxygen sensors will be added. This system will be capable of taking a point measurement every 15 minutes for four months, and in the process flush the conductivity sensor and oxygen sensor for 15 seconds before making measurements. Each observation will consist of four samples taken at ~2 second intervals and averaged.
  
  
• A Seacat SBE-16plus, previously acquired by the program, was added to the buoy system (replacing a SBE-16) to monitor bottom water conditions. The SBE-16plus will be able to measure temperature and salinity, as well as dissolved oxygen and turbidity. This system was mounted on the bottom frame with the ADCP and acoustic release (see Figure 8).
  
  
• The bottom frame was modified so that the acoustic release, recovery line and float from the flotation package could be attached (the release system was formerly at 29 m). This will provide two releases on the bottom frame for needed redundancy (a second release has been needed twice in the last four years to recover the system). The addition of the second release system at the bottom removes the need for the diver backup in the event the primary acoustic release systems fails. This configuration also makes the frame flotation more symmetric (see Figure 8), resulting in less instrument frame tilt and enhancing current data reliability.
  
  
• The flotation at ~29 m depth in the past was supplied by the release package. With the movement of the releases to the bottom frame, the required mid-water buoyancy was supplied by the addition of a 4-sphere flotation system (see Figure 9). This smaller, easier to handle packages of two flotation spheres each provide about 120 lbs of positive buoyancy.
  
  
• A MAVS current meter housed in an in-line frame was added 3.6 m below the flotation buoy to measure near surface currents (Figure 10). The buoy system already has an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) that provides current profiles throughout most of the water column. However, near bottom and near surface observations are lost due to transducer ringing and side lobe reflections. The MAV observations will be used for studying the drag on fish cages near the surface.
  
  
• Radio telemetry of the data from the wave buoy, along with the quarter- and one-ton feed buoys, was established. Data from the OOA field site is relayed via Yagi antennas and radios. Subsequently, the data is logged on a computer in the Seacoast Science Center, and sent to UNH hourly for display, control and archiving. The system has power control so that any radio, computer, etc. can be power cycled by a power switch controlled over the Internet separate from the rest of the system. This has been stable and reliable during the past year.
  
  
• The wave buoy was upgraded to include new spread spectrum radios from Freewaves. These radios are the same as the ones used in the feed buoys, and are compatible with the older Datalinc radios used on the earlier version of the wave buoy and environmental monitoring buoy. The radios had new antennas added with 3-db gain and a beam pattern that allows the buoy to tilt with the waves and still get transmissions to shore. The power to the radios is controlled by the buoy data system, and allows 1 minute for the radios to connect, then transmits the data over the next 30 seconds. The system then remains on for 3 minutes to allow the radios to complete the transmission of data. The user can also interrupt the program to allow new software to be downloaded and data files to be retrieved via x-modem. A minor problem with radio damage is discussed below.
  
  
• The software on the wave buoy was completely revised to reduce complexity and increase reliability. The wave buoy’s software has been evolving during the past four years resulting in the code becoming cumbersome and awkward to modify. Therefore, the software was revised and the program broken into subroutines. In addition, software support, which was previously done at WHOI, is being transitioned to UNH. This required a new support computer and Code Warrior C development system being installed. The new computer has codes and libraries for the feed buoys, wave buoy and load cell recorders as well. Programs written include for the following: a test program to evaluate the hardware A/D portion of the system; a test program to collect and display the serial data input to test the GPS, Microcat, Seacat and MAVS data strings to assure that the cabling is working well and good data is collected; a watchdog timer system to reboot the system if it needed; and new programs for each of the two buoys with buoy specific constants for battery voltage, air temperature and PAR.
  
  
• Coil-cord telemetry was added to the buoys system to overcome a major problem with using compliant elastic tethers (to allow the buoy to move freely with the waves). The use of the elastic tethers prohibits sending signals via cables from deep sensor packages to the buoy for telemetry. Therefore, a coil-cord (similar to a large phone cord) was installed around an elastic tether to provide telemetry of data from the mid-water sensor package to the surface (Figure 11). At present, the observations from the midwater (22 m depth) Seacat are being sent to the surface. However, if successful, the potential of telemetering all the data from the environmental monitoring buoy exists.

Calibration of Instrumentation. The quality and use of oceanographic observations depends on regular servicing and calibration of all instrumentation as part of a rigorous quality control effort. For the environmental monitoring buoy the calibration activities listed below were done during the past year.

• Return of all Seabird Electronics, Inc. sensors to the factory for servicing, repair (if needed) and calibration. This is done yearly, generally at the end of the calendar year.
• The air temperature sensor was calibrated at WHOI in a calibration facility relative to Seabird standards yearly.
• The LiCOR PAR sensor was sent back to LiCOR for calibration.
• The accelerometer was checked relative to gravity by placing the accelerometer on a flat surface and measuring the acceleration in all six orientations to get +1 g readings on all channels. (If the accelerations differ significantly from factory calibrations, the accelerometer is replaced.)
• The A/D on the data logger was checked relative to a voltage calibrator. (If the A/D is out of specification it is replaced.)

Use of Environmental Buoy for Outside Researchers. Since the environmental monitoring buoy is regularly serviced, it provides an ideal platform to test new instruments and technologies. Therefore, testing of instrumentation by UNH, as well as other institutions, is encouraged as long as normal operations are not hampered. For example, a Sontek Argonaut acoustic current meter was deployed by a University of Rhode Island researcher (Figure 12). This facilitated a comparison of the between the ADCP installed on the environmental mooring with the Sontek. In addition, a study of the records of internal tides is now underway.

3. Monitoring of Listed Marine Species
During 2005, the monitoring of marine mammals and sea turtles in the vicinity of the OOA site consisted of a collaborative effort by UNH and the Newburyport Whale Watch Company. This collaboration has been in place since 2002. Briefly, from May through October 2005 trained naturalists on whale watch cruises identified and recorded locations (using handheld GPS units) and other data on the species sighted. Species distribution maps were produced using ArcGIS software.

4. Environmental Monitoring Information Transfer
The environmental monitoring and site description information and databases have been synthesized in annual project progress reports (e.g., Ward et al. 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004), an internal technical report (Ward et al. 2001), and outside publications. The internal reports are available on the OOA web site. Web based availability presently exists for selected data generated by the environmental monitoring buoy system on a computer in the Jere Chase Ocean Engineering Laboratory. This database is made available, along with some real-time telemetered data from the environmental monitoring buoy, online via WebCOAST. Eventually, old data will be archived and made available on this web site.

5. Refinement of Monitoring Protocols
As discussed in the benthic and water quality sections of this report, the number of stations and frequency of sampling was significantly altered in 2005. These changes resulted from meetings with New Hampshire Fish and Game, New Hampshire Environmental Services and the U.S. Environmental Protection (EPA) agency. In addition, the changes in the sampling protocol reflect the results of the analyses of observations collected at the monitoring site since 1997. The environmental monitoring program will continue to be modified if needed based on additional reviews and discussions with the permitting agencies, as well as synthesis of the databases and literature.

C. Important Results or Findings
1. Benthos and Water Quality
Bottom Sediments. In general, the bottom sediments at the OOA field site are largely composed of low organic (usually <2.5% LOI), muddy sands (Table 2 and Table 3), although slightly coarser sediments and small amounts of gravel can be found around the nearby bedrock outcrops. A number of bedrock outcrops occur near the field site that range in size from 10 to 100 meters across with elevations usually less than 5 meters. In addition, extensive bedrock outcrops occur to the south and west of the field site (see Figure 2). Comparison of the results of the bottom sediment survey in late spring/early summer 2005 to the results of earlier surveys (pre-2005) indicate little or no seasonal or year to year variations in sediment grain size has occurred. Similarly, comparison of the loss-on-ignition (%LOI) values from the late spring/early summer benthic survey with the fall survey indicate no change in the particulate organic content of the bottom sediments in 2005. This is true for samples taken at the stations within the predicted impact areas for fish wastes (excess food and feces), as well as far field. In addition, there has been no change in the organic content of the bottom sediments at the UNH field site since the beginning of the monitoring period in 1997.

Infaunal Benthos. The spring 2005 samples have been completely processed (except for the 5 mm samples, which will be reported later), and the resulting data analyzed; samples from the fall 2005 sampling are still being processed. The spring 2005 sampling occurred just before harvest of the ~30,000 cod, which had been at the site for nearly 2 years, from the large cage. Hence, the spring 2005 data should reflect near maximal cumulative loadings of feces and excess food to the seabed.

Graphical analysis of the benthic data showed no obvious trends for any of the univariate community data (density, biomass, taxonomic richness) or the ratios of pollution tolerant/intolerant taxa relative to the predicted pollution effects zones (Figure 13). One way ANOVAs on each of the three univariate benthic community parameters also showed no significant differences among the four zones (density, P=0.37; biomass, P=0.27; taxonomic richness, P=0.95).

As organic input initially increases to the seabed in areas with relatively low organic content (such as the present study site), total community density and wet weight (biomass) typically will increase as a result of increased energy flow through the community (Pearson and Rosenberg 1978; Grizzle and Penniman 1991; Diaz and Rosenberg 1995; Nilsson and Rosenberg 2000). Hence, if organic waste deposition from excess fish food and feces was affecting the benthos, a pattern of increased densities and biomass would be expected at all or some of the four sites within the "impact" zone. As already noted, no such trends were observed.

In addition to univariate community assessments, potential changes in taxonomic composition of the infauanl communities that might be pollution-related were examined in two ways. First, ratios of the densities of "pollution tolerant" taxa (oligochaetes, capitellids, cirratulids, ampeliscids) and "pollution intolerant" (nuculids, paraonids, ampharetids) taxa were calculated and compared. Polluton intolerant taxa were in the majority at all 20 sites, with no trends among the pollution effects zones (Figure 13). These data suggest that the benthic communities in all four zones were dominated by infaunal taxa that are relatively intolerant of organic pollution, providing additional evidence of no detectable impacts on the seabed.

The second taxonomy-based approach involved calculating various ecological indices (Table 4). Each index distills the community taxonomic composition data into a single number that is largely determined by the number of taxa in the sample ("diversity" indices) and/or the relative distributions of the taxa by number in the sample ("evenness" indices). Hence, each represents a different measure of community characteristics. Generally, the value of each index is expected to decrease as pollution levels increase. However, this may not always be the case, especially for relatively low levels of organic input. In any case, differences among the four pollution effects zones would be expected. No formal analyses were conducted of the indices, but a comparison by pollution effects zones, indicates very similar values for samples from all four zones (Table 5). Again, suggesting that no impacts on benthic communities were detectable.

Videography and Epifauna. Bottom video was obtained at eighteen of the twenty designated monitoring stations on June 9th (stations 5-20) and on August 4th (stations 2-4) for the late spring/summer survey (Figure 3). All twenty stations were occupied for the fall survey on November 28th (Figure 3). To date a total of 13 videography cruises have been undertaken since 2002 to track possible changes in benthic epifauna at the OOA field site. A number of the problems that occurred during the earlier cruises have been resolved and we can now obtain good quality video of the seafloor on relatively consistent bases. The major limiting factor is sea conditions. Placement of the camera near the bottom requires relatively low to moderate sea conditions limiting the periods when cruises can occur. However, this problem can be overcome by flexibility in cruise days.

Depending on sea conditions and water clarity, seafloor features such as surficial sediments, sediment texture, bedforms, epifauna, and burrows could be identified in bottom video. Therefore, during the last year (and as part of several research projects), a quantitative approach was developed for analyzing seafloor video. Briefly, the video from each station is analyzed by clipping the video to isolate the highest quality segment, subsampling the video frames from ~30 to 1 per second to match the GPS positioning information, and subsequently analyzing each new scene in the video for bottom characteristics (sediment type, roughness), visible burrow characteristics (size, density), and epifauna. The inclusion of lasers beam at known distances apart in each scene allowed the total area of the bottom viewed to be determined.

The results of the video surveys in 2005 indicate no significant differences in benthic epifaunal communities located at stations within the predicted impact zones, the transition zone, and outside of the impact zones. As noted for infaunal discussion (above), when organic input initially increases to the seabed in areas with relatively low organic content (such as the present study site), total community density of epifauna typically will increase as a result of increased energy flow. Hence, if organic waste deposition from excess fish food and feces was affecting the benthos, a pattern of increased densities of epifauna would be expected at all or some of the four sites within the "impact" zone. Graphical analysis of the epifauna data from spring and fall 2005 showed no obvious trends for total densities, or those taxa (cerianthid anemones and shrimp) that commonly occurred within all four potential impact zones (Figures 14 - 16). One-way ANOVAs on each of the three epifauna measurements also showed no significant differences among the four zones for both sampling periods (spring 2005: total density, P=0.54; cerianthids, P=0.61, malacostracans, P=0.44)(fall 2005: total density, P=0.62; cerianthids, P=0.64, malacostracans, P=0.68). Hence, no pollution effects on the seabed were detected in the epifauna data.

Water Quality. Water quality at the OOA field site was monitored monthly from May to October 2005. Three stations were occupied and three depths sampled at each station. Water quality parameters measured were total suspended sediments, the particulate organic content of the water sample (via LOI), and chlorophyll. The stations were located adjacent to the environmental monitoring buoy (to help with calibration of instruments) and updrift and downdrift of the grid anchoring the fish pens. An effort was made on all cruises to place the stations as close to the edge of fish pens as possible (dependant on the weather). Examination of all the parameters measured indicate no consistent differences between updrift and downdrift stations (Table 6). Based on these results, no evidence of the aquacultural activities effecting the water quality parameters were observed. In addition, the values observed for all parameters are within expected ranges for the various depths, seasons, and locations on the inner shelf of New Hampshire.

Dissolved Oxygen. Dissolved oxygen was measured two ways during the monthly cruises; in situ between the surface and ~25 m with a YSI 85 Dissolved Oxygen sensor and by titrations of water samples collected during the cruises. The titrations are considered most reliable and are discussed here. Typically, the dissolved oxygen values were near saturation at the surface and decreased with depth. However, the titrations indicated the saturation values at depth never dropped below 76% (Table 7). The saturation values at a depth of ~22 m were typically >85%. Also, although there was some variation among the stations, there was no obvious, consistent difference between the dissolved oxygen values from updrift or down drift of the fish cages.

Physical Characteristics. Vertical profiles of temperature, salinity, light transmission, flourescence and PAR were taken during the monthly monitoring cruises from May to October 2005 (Figures 17-22). In May the water column was still relatively well mixed with respect to temperature and salinity, although the upper ~5 m of the water column was warming and freshening. By the June cruise, the water column had become highly stratified with a distinct thermocline and halocline at ~25 m. The water temperatures had warmed significantly above the thermocline to ~10° C, while below the thermocline the temperatures decreased to ~6° C near the bottom. The salinity above the halocline in June decreased to ~30 psu, while the near bottom salinity increased to ~32 psu. The water column remained stratified through the September cruise and maximum near surface water temperatures reached ~18° C. By the October cruise the stratification of the water column was breaking down with respect to temperature and becoming uniform from surface to bottom (at ~10° C). However, the water column was still stratified with respect to salinity, increasing from ~30 psu at the surface to ~32 psu near the bottom. This pattern of the water column transitioning from vertically mixed in winter to highly stratified in summer is typical for the Gulf of Maine. Light transmission, a measure of water column turbidity, generally ranged between 60 to 70%, depending on primary productivity in the water column, river runoff, or storm resuspension. Minimum light transmission values (maximum turbidity) occurred near the bottom and approached 50%. The flourescence concentrations were not calibrated with samples from the field site, so the absolute values are not reliable. However, the relative trends are considered reasonable. As expected, the flourescence values generally increased from the surface to a depth of 5 to 20 m below the surface as a result of primary productivity then decreased towards the bottom.

2. Environmental Monitoring Buoy

• The telemetry from the environmental mooring during the past year was reliable, and problems of the past appear to have been overcome.
• The Environmental Monitoring mooring has provided additional information that is developing the “climatology” of the UNH Open Ocean Aquaculture site.
• GoMOOS, NDBC and the NOAA coastal prediction effort are using, displaying or planning to present the real-time hourly data from the Environmental Monitoring Mooring on their Web sites.

3. Listed Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles
The occurrence of listed marine mammals and sea turtles in the region and the OOA field site from mid-May to early-October 2004 are shown in Figures 23 and 24. During this period, only seven sightings (6 fin and 1 humpback whale) of any listed species were made within 6 km of the study site. Fin and humpback whales were frequently sighted in the general area, but most sightings were 6 km or more from the aquaculture site.

4. Web Serving of Data
The buoy monitoring program is working with the UNH Center of Excellence for Coastal Ocean Observation and Analysis (COOA) to provide data from the OOA monitoring program to “WebCoast” (a Web-based Coastal and Ocean Analysis System) operated by COOA. The goal of WebCoast is to serve data obtained from the Gulf of Maine over the World Wide Web (see www.cooa.unh.edu/data-management). The OOA Monitoring group provides data obtained from the aquaculture site and COOA provides data management resources. Real-time data will still be provided hourly at the website, www.unh.edu/ooa/OOA-Monitor/data/wr . When the buoy system becomes fully operational, so there is a continuous, reliable data set, the Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System (GoMOOS), and the National Data Buoy Center have expressed interest in also serving this data up on their web sites. (see www.GoMOOS.org, and www.NDBC.NOAA.gov.).

D. Difficulties Encountered
Instrument Buoy. Several problems in the operation of the environmental monitoring buoy occurred in 2005. A damaged GPS receiver caused batteries to drain and data to be lost before the problem was discovered and corrected. A minor problem with the radios occurred because of static (lightening) damage. The radio is located on an antenna on the mast making it vulnerable to static (lightening) damage. One radio became intermittent during the past year and was replaced. A final problem with the operation of the environmental buoy involved data management and archiving. There are a considerable number of data files that have been obtained during the past 5 years, which are being archived and processed as time allows. However, with the many efforts underway, including completing the two buoy system, the time allocated to data processing, archiving, and posting is not adequate. Data management and availability remains a problem.

E. Anticipated Success in Meeting Project Objectives on Schedule
We expect to accomplish all tasks and objectives of the project within the scheduled time frame.

F. Reports, manuscripts, and presentations resulting from the project
Paul, W., M. Chaffey, A. Hamilton, and S. Boduch. 2005. The use of Snubbers as strain limiters. Oceanographic Moorings, Oceans 2005.

Irish, J.D. 2005. On compliance in coastal moorings. Oceans 2005.

Irish, J.D., W. Paul and D.M. Wyman. 2005. The Determination of the Elastic Modulus of Rubber Mooring Tethers and Their Use in Coastal Moorings. WHOI Technical Report WHOI-2005-XX (in press).

II. Tasks and Activities for Next Reporting period

A. Tasks for the next reporting period
The tasks outlined in the I.A. Tasks for Reporting Period will be continued in 2006. However, if possible considering time and budget constraints, more effort will put towards working with the UNH Center for Ocean Observing Technology. The focus f this interaction will be to share resources for testing observatory information ­ including wave measuring technology, surface turbulence, and oxygen sensing. In addition, more effort will be put towards processing, archiving and serving on-line data from the environmental monitoring program. This includes developing a web page for real-time data through WebCOAST and suppling it to the NOAA coastal prediction program, the GoMOOS and NDBC websites

B. Brief work plan to accomplish tasks
The workplan for 2006 will be basically the same as for 2005 and presented in this report.

C. Anticipated concerns or difficulties
None.

III. Expenditures
All expenditures for the reporting period were within anticipated levels.

References
Ball, D.F. 1964. Loss-on-ignition as an estimate of organic matter and organic carbon in non-calcareous soils. Journal of Soil Science 15:84-92.

Banse, K. C.P. Falls and L.A. Hobson. 1963. A gravimetric method for determining suspended matter in seawater using Millipore filters. Deep-Sea Research, 10, 639-642.

Diaz, R.J. and R. Rosenberg. 1995. Marine benthic hypoxia: a review of its ecological effects and the behavioural responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 1995, 33: 245-303.

Folk, R.L. 1980. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill Publishing Company, 182 pp.

Grizzle, R.E. and C.A. Penniman. 1991. Effects of organic enrichment on estuarine macrofaunal benthos: a comparison of sediment profile imaging from traditional methods. Marine Ecology Progress Series 74:249-262.

McCall, P.L. 1977. Community patterns and adaptive strategies of the infaunal benthos of Long Island Sound. J. Mar. Res. 35:221-266.

Nilsson, H. C. and R. Rosenberg. 2000. Succession in marine benthic habitats and fauna in response to oxygen deficiency: analysed by sediment profile-imaging and by grab samples. Marine Ecology Progress Series 197:139-149.

Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review Vol. 16, pp. 229-311.

Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1968. A Practical Handbook of Seawater Analysis. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa.

Ward, L.G., R.G. Grizzle and D.W. Fredriksson. 2001. UNH OOA Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Progress Report. CINEMar OOA Internal Report.

Ward, L.G., R.G. Grizzle, D.W. Fredriksson and J.D. Irish. 2002. UNH OOA Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Progress Report. CINEMar OOA Internal Report.

Ward, L.G., R.G. Grizzle, D.W. Fredriksson and J.D. Irish. 2003. UNH OOA Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Progress Report. CINEMar OOA Internal Report.

Ward, L.G., R.G. Grizzle, D.W. Fredriksson,and J.D. Irish. 2004. UNH OOA Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Progress Report. CINEMar OOA Internal Report.

Ward, L.G., R.E. Grizzle, F.L. Bub, R. Langan, G. Schnaittacher and J.A. Dijkstra. 2001. Site Description and Environmental Monitoring: Report on Activities from Fall 1997 to Winter 2000. Internal Document, UNH OOA Environmental Monitoring.