QL 155 . S63 Biological Report 82( 1 l 125) TR EL 82 4 December 1989 Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates ( Pacific Southwest)

CRANGONID SHRIMP no. 82 11.125 Fish and Wildlife Service U. S. Department of the Interior Coastal Ecology Group Waterways Experiment Station U. S. Army Corps of Engineers . Biological Report 82( 11.125) TR EL 82 4 December 1989 Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates ( Pacific Southwest)

CRANGONID SHRIMP bY Clifford A Siegfried Biological Survey New York State Museum and Science Service Albany, NY 12230 Project Officer David Moran U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Research Center 1010 Gause Boulevard Slidell, LA 70458 Performed for U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Ecology Group Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, MS 39180 and U. S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Research and Development National Wetlands Research Center Washington, DC 20240 DISCLAIMER The mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the Federal Government.

This series may be referenced as follows:

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983 19 . Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates. U. S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82( 11). U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL 82 4.

This profile may be cited as follows:

Siegfried, CA 1989. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates ( Pacific Southwest) crangonid shrimp. U. S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82( 11.125). U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL 82 4. 18 pp. PREFACE This species profile is one of a series on coastal aquatic organisms, principally fish, of sport, commercial, or ecological importance. The profiles are designed to provide coastal managers, engineers, and biologists with a brief comprehensive sketch of the biological characteristics and environmental requirements of the species and to describe how populations of the species may be expected to react to environmental changes caused by coastal development. Each profile has sections on taxonomy, life history, ecological role, environmental requirements, and economic importance, if applicable. A three ring binder is used for this series so that new profiles can be added as they are prepared. This project is jointly planned and Gnanccd by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Suggestions or questions regarding this report should be directed to one of the following addresses.

Information Transfer Specialist U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Research Center NASA Slide11 Computer Complex 1010 Gause Boulevard Slidell, LA 70458 or U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Attention: WESER C Post Office Box 63 1 Vicksburg, MS 39180 . . . 111 CONVERSION TABLE Multiply BY To Obtain millimeters ( mm) centimeters ( cm) meters ( m) meters kilometers ( km) kilometers square meters ( m') square kilometers ( km2) hectares ( ha) 0.03937 inches 0.3937 inches 3.281 feet 0.5468 fathoms 0.6214 statute miles 0.5396 nautical miles 10.76 square feet 0.3861 square miles 2.471 acres liters ( 1) 0.2642 cubic meters ( m3) gallons 35.31 cubic feet cubic meters 0.0008110 acre feet milligrams ( mg) 0.00003527 ounces grams ( g) 0.03527 ounces kilograms ( kg) 2.205 pounds metric tons ( t) 2205.0 pounds metric tons 1.102 short tons kilocalories ( kcal) Celsius degrees (" C)

inches inches feet ( ft) fathoms statute miles ( mi) nautical miles ( nmi)

square feet ( ft2) square miles ( mi2) acres 3.968 1.8(" C)+ 32 U. S. Customary to Metric 25.40 2.54 0.3048 1.829 1.609 1.852 British thermal units Fahrenheit degrees millimeters centimeters meters meters kilometers kilometers 0.0929 square meters 2.590 square kilometers 0.4047 hectares gallons ( gal) 3.785 liters cubic feet ( ft3) 0.0283 1 cubic meters acre feet 1233.0 cubic meters ounces ( oz) 28350.0 milligrams ounces 28.35 grams pounds ( lb) 0.4536 kilograms pounds 0.00045 metric tons short tons ( ton) 0.9072 metric tons British thermal units ( Btu) 0.2520 kilocalories Fahrenheit degrees (" F) 0.5556 (" F  32) Celsius degrees Metric to U. S. Customary iv CONTENTS Page PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 CONVERSION TABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi NOMENCLATURE/ TAXONOMY/ RANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 MORPHOLOGY/ IDENTIFICATION AIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 REASON FOR INCLUSION IN SERIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 LIFE HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Spawning and Larvae .............................................. 4 Postlarvae and Juveniles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Migrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 GROWTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Mortality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Disease and Parasites .............................................. 8 THE FISHERY ECOLOGICAL R& b . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ........... 8 ........... 9 ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS ................................. 10 Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Salinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Temperature Salinity Interactions ...................................... 11 Substrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Freshwater Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Other Environmental Requirements .................................... 13 LITERATURE CITED .............................................. 15 V ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . I am grateful for the reviews by Richard Wahle of the University of Maine and Kathy Hieb of the California Department of Fish and Game, Stockton, California, and helpful editorial comments by an unidentified reviewer, which greatly improved the readability of this work.

vi Figure 1. Representative crangonid shrimp ( from Smith and Carlton 1975).

CRANGONID SHRIMP NOMENCLATURE/ TAXONOMY/ RANGE Three species of crangonid shrimp, commonly called bay shrimp ( Figure l), are important to epifaunal decapod shrimp communities of the Pacific Southwest.

Scientific name . . . . . . . Crangon franciscotum ( Stimpson) Preferred common name . . . . . . . sand shrimp Other common names . . . grass shrimp, common shrimp. Scientific name . . . . Crangon nigricauda ( Stimpson) Preferred common name . . . . . . . black shrimp Other common names . . . . deep water shrimp, black tailed shrimp Scientific name . . . . . Crangon nigromaculata ( Lockington) Common name . . . . . . . . . blue spotted shrimp Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . Crustacea Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decapoda Suborder Natantia Tribe . . . : : : : : : . . . . : : . . .* . . .* .* . . .* . . Caridea Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Crangonidae Geographic range: sand shrimp and black shrimp are widely distributed along the Pacific coast of North America sand shrimp from southeastern Alaska to San Diego, California, and black shrimp from Alaska to Baja California ( Figure 2) ( Rathbun 1904) and possibly as far west as Japan ( Schmitt 1921). Both shrimp are abundant in bays on mud and sand bottoms and offshore in deeper waters ( Carlton and Kuris 1975). The range of blue spotted shrimp is more restricted; it occurs from the Gulf of Farallons to Baja California ( Rathbun 1904) ( Figure 2). It is rarely abundant in embayments, living more commonly offshore on mud and sand bottoms.

MORPHOLOGY/ IDENTIFICATION AIDS The crangonid shrimp of the Pacific Southwest are easily distinguished from other members of the tribe Caridea by four features ( Figure 3); ( 1) the rostrum is very short, generally not extending beyond the eyestalks, ( 2) the body is dorsally flattened, ( 3) the chelipeds are not strongly developed, i. e., they 1 CAPE MENDOCINO I /

NEVADA CALIFORNIA `/ : . .: : : . : . .: . : . : : : . .: . t. b : : 0' . . ,* : . .

~~ : : . . . . .

" aQy:: I " q. . cj : : . a . .. . : : R, .* : . : : : : . := * : : :

1 . . , m % LOS ANGELES SAN DIEGO       _ PACIFIC OCEAN Crangon franciscorum z::.* and C. nigricauda t. . . .

C. nigromaculata ezd Figure 2. Distribution of crangonid shrimp in the Pacific Southwest.

2 b  rostrum Q Figure 3. Distinguishing characteristics of crangonid shrimp ( from Smith and Carlton 1975).

are subchelate in form, and ( 4) the eyes are not covered by the carapace ( Carlton and Kuris 1975). Shrimp of the genus Crangon are further distinguished by a single median spine in the gastric region of the carapace.

The three species of Crangon are easily distinguished by the structure of the cheliped or the presence of distinctive markings. The " hand" of the cheliped of sand shrimp is slender and elongate ( Figure 3) and the " finger," when closed, turns back almost longitudinally. The hand of the cheliped of black shrimp is more robust: the closed finger of the hand is directed almost transversely. The hand of the 3 cheliped of blue spotted shrimp is intermediate in form not as elongate as that of sand shrimp and not as robust as that of black shrimp. The differences in cheliped shape are not always distinctive in small shrimp but sand shrimp have a pair of spines on the fifth abdominal segment that can be used to separate small sand shrimp from small black shrimp. Blue spotted shrimp are easily recognized ( in life) by a prominent dark circular spot with a blue center surrounded by a black and then a yellow ring on each side of the 6th abdominal segment ( Carlton and Kuris 1975).

The sexes of mature crangonid shrimp are easily distinguished. Sand shrimp sexes can be distinguished at about 26 30 mm while bluespotted and black shrimp can be separated at 22 24 mm ( Israel 1936; Krygier and Horton 1975; Siegfried 1980). The most distinguishing characteristic separating the sexes is the structure of the endopodite of the second pleopod ( Lloyd and Yonge 1947; Meredith 1952). Males have an appendix masculina ( Figure 4) on the endopodite of the second pleopod, whereas females do not, i. e., the first, second, and third pleopods look alike. The structure of the endopodite of the first pleopod is short and curved inward in males and long and straight in females. The location of the gonopore is still another distinguishing characteristic, but it is often difficult to recognize in preserved shrimp ( Siegfried 1980). The gonopore is at the base of the fifth pair of walking legs in males and at the base of the third pair of walking legs in females.

exopod appendix masculina \

kl lcm endopod cf Figure 4. Sexual dimorphism in Crangon ji anckorzun ( from Smith and Carlton 1975). REASONS FOR INCLUSION IN SERIES The crangonid shrimp of the California coast have been fished commercially since the 1800' s. This commercial fishery was centered in San Francisco Bay. Before the 1960' s, most of the catch was dried and shipped to the Orient, but part of it went to the fresh fish markets ( Israel 1936). After the 1960' s, the fishery became primarily a bait fishery, and annual harvests were less than 200,000 pounds.

The importance of crangonid shrimp in the food web of coastal estuaries is well documented. These shrimp are often the predominant food of the principal sport and commercial fishes of the Pacific coast estuaries ( Johnson and Calhoun 1952; Ganssle 1966; Haertel and Osterberg 1966; Boothe 1967). Crangonids are opportunistic predators that feed on the most abundant small epibenthic and benthic fauna and thus serve as an important step in the transfer of energy from the primary consumers and detritivores to the top predators of estuarine food webs.

The agitation of bottom sediments by crangonids in search of food and protection may be important in the cycling of nutrients in coastal systems ( Lloyd and Yonge 1947). Fecal pellets of crangonids are important substrates for bacterial colonization and may be important in nutrient regeneration in shallow water habitats ( Knight 1978). Nitrogen excretion by large populations of crangonids in shallow water may have important influences on the nitrogen budget of coastal systems ( Nelson et al. 1979). Crangonid shrimp have recently become the subject of research on aquaculture potential of native decapods ( Knight 1978) and as a standard bioassay test organism for west coast estuaries ( Dr. P. Sheehan, Aqua Terra Technical; pers. comm.).

LIFE HISTORY Spawning and Larvae Crangonid shrimp carry their eggs under the abdomen attached to and between the basal joints and inner rami of the pleopods. The distribution and abundance of ovigerous females is a useful index of reproductive activity. Several investigators have reported that the spawning season of crangonid shrimp is long. Ovigerous females have been reported to occur during 9 to 12 months of the year in various populations ( Israel 1936; Lloyd and Yonge 1947; Meredith 1952; Price 1962; Krygier and Horton 1975).

Ovigerous females of the three species reviewed in this report can be found year round along the California coast. Ovigerous sand shrimp are usually most abundant in the spring and summer in coastal embayments but are abundant offshore in winter ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The abundance of ovigerous black shrimp is generally bimodal, peaking in winter spring and summer fall. They are usually found in embayments; few are collected in nearshore areas. Ovigerous blue spotted shrimp are usually most abundant in nearshore coastal areas, peaking in winter ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987).

Israel ( 1936) reported that both male and female sand shrimp live for about one year. More recent investigations suggest that females may live 1.5 to 2.5 years and males 1.5 years ( Hatfield 1985; Kinnetic Laboratories 1987). Repeated spawning has been demonstrated by the presence of females bearing ovarian stages 5 7, early in the spawning season, as well as eggs on their egg pad ( Israel 1936; Krygier and Horton 1975).

Ovigerous black shrimp females usually remain partly buried in the sediment during the day. The eggs usually hatch at night. Females emerge from the sediment and beat their pleopods, generating currents that release the newly hatched larvae. The females are usually free of eggs by dawn ( Villamar and Brusca 1988).

The brood sizes of crangonid shrimp are related to shrimp size and species. Siegfried ( 1980) determined the best fit relationship between brood size of sand shrimp from San Francisco Bay and total length to be:

Log N =  3.66 + 4.09 Log TL, d 4 Juvenile ( and adult) black shrimp are rare in waters of < lo ppt salinity ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987).

Mgmtions Both sand shrimp and black shrimp migrate to deeper, more saline water as they mature ( Krygier and Horton 1975; Siegfried 1980, Hatfield 1985). This out migration from lowsalinity water appears to be related to reproduction, as it coincides with the development of sexual characteristics. The migration is particularly pronounced in sand shrimp. Juveniles are often found in the upper reaches of estuaries, in nearly fresh water. As the shrimp mature, they move to water of higher salinity, which may result in size gradients in sand shrimp populations. The mean length of sand shrimp collected in midsummer in the San Francisco Bay Estuary ranged from 31 mm near the upstream limit of their distribution ( 1 ppt) to > 50 mm in the central bay ( Siegfried et al. 1978; Siegfried 1980).

Further evidence for an outward migration related to reproductive state is provided by information on mean salinity of occurrence of females bearing eggs of various stages ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The range of salinity for the three crangonid species is more restricted for ovigerous females than for other life stages. Females bearing stage l eggs are found at salinities of 0.1 to 33.8 ppt ( mean 20 ppt). Gvigerous sand shrimp are generally found only at salinities greater than 14.6 ppt ( Hatfield 1985; Krygier and Horton 1975). The average salinity appears to increase with egg stage ( up to 24.6 ppt for those with stage 4 eggs; California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Females bearing stage 4 eggs were not collected from waters of salinity less than 3.7 ppt.

Ovigerous black shrimp apparently prefer somewhat higher salinities of about 25 ppt ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987); their outward migration is less extensive because they do not penetrate as Ear inland as sand shrimp. Blue spotted shrimp prefer even higher salinities; ovigerous females are scarce in embayments but abundant offshore (> 30 ppt; California Department of Fish and Game 1987).

The outward migration of crangonid shrimp is believed to be related to temperature salinity interactions. Ovigerous females are found in coastal embayments in summer but are uncommon in them in winter; they seemingly migrate offshore in winter, possibly in response to water temperature fluctuation ( Hatfield 1985). This offshore population then contributes larvae and postlarvae for the spring abundance peaks.

Sand shrimp also undergo die1 vertical migrations. Siegfried et al. ( 1978) first reported a die1 pattern in which the shrimp enters the water column and disperses through the water column at night but remains on or near the bottom during daylight. The ecological significance of this behavior remains unknown, but the habit may serve to allow feeding near the surface while protected by darkness from visual feeding predators ( fish). Migration into the water column may also be a response to the movement of their primary food, Neomysis mercedis, into the water column ( Welch 1970; Siegfried et al. 1979). Additional studies substantiated the die1 activity patterns of sand shrimp and N. mercedis ( Sitts 1978). There is no comparable information on the die1 activity patterns of the other crangonids of the California coast.

A& h Male black shrimp in Yaquina Bay, Oregon, have been reported to be mature i. e., to contain ripe sperm at lengths of 26 28 mm; male sand shrimp matured at 34 mm ( Krygier and Horton 1975). Gvigerous females as short as 36.2 mm for black shrimp and 43.6 mm for sand shrimp were reported by Krygier and Horton ( 1975) in Oregon waters. These lengths at maturity agree well with findings in California ( Israel 1936; Siegfried 1980).

Israel ( 1936) reported a seasonal variation in the sex ratio of sand shrimp from San Francisco Bay: males predominated before the breeding season and females predominated during the peak of the breeding season. This variation can Y 6 be attributed to the short life span of males, which are believed to die soon after copulation, and the longer life span of at least some of the breeding females. In general the sex ratios of crangonid populations of the Pacific Southwest appear to be about 1: l. This ratio is expected in nonsynchronously spawning populations in which a portion of the population has more than one brood ( Krygier and Horton 1975).

GROWTH In all crangonids, males and females grow at different rates ( Lloyd and Yonge 1947; Meredith 1952; Allen 1960; Price 1% 2; Krygier and Horton 1975; Siegfried 1980). The length of male sand shrimp from San Francisco Bay rarely exceeded 50 mm although some individuals as long as 71 mm long have been collected ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Female sand shrimp longer than 70 mm were commonly collected ( Israel 1936; Siegfried 1980). In the somewhat smaller black shrimp, males generally reached 40 mm and females 60 mm ( Israel 1936). The longest black shrimp reported from San Francisco Bay were 59 mm ( male) and 64 mm ( female) long. The maximum size of blue spotted shrimp is believed to be similar to that of black shrimp. The length of crangonids in San Francisco Bay are somewhat greater than in Oregon, where Krygier and Horton ( 1975) reported maximum lengths of ~ 40 mm for male and ~ 55 mm for female black shrimp and 50 mm ( males) and ~ 62 mm ( females) for sand shrimp. The shrimp may grow larger in San Francisco Bay because water temperatures are higher there than in Oregon, presumably leading to faster growth or longer growing seasons.

Offshore populations of crangonids may reach much larger lengths. Collections of sand shrimp off the mouth of the Columbia River indicate a population with a mean length > 80 mm and maximum lengths of 110 mm ( Durkin and Lipovsky 1977). Estuarine populations of the European species, C. crangon, attained smaller body sizes than nearby populations of the same species in marine habitats ( Maucher l% l). Remane and Schlieper ( 1971) suggested that reduction in size of marine animals, although generally slight in higher Crustacea living in brackish water, is comparable to Bergmann's Law: size is related to features of the physical environment. The reduction may be attributable to the physiological effects of salinity, reduced food availability, or a combination of these and other factors. Studies of osmotic regulation indicated that smaller sand shrimp are capable of better hyper regulation but larger ones are capable of better hypo regulation ( Shaner 1978). Thus, the migration of larger shrimp to high salinity waters would be energetically advantageous and may lead to faster growth.

Growth rates are extremely difficult to estimate from size frequency histograms derived from field collections of crangonid shrimp. Immigration, emigration, temperature and salinity effects, and differential mortality combine to obscure growth patterns. Krygier and Horton ( 1975) estimated that the growth of juveniles ranged from 0.76 to 1.37 mm per week in Oregon. Growth rates of crangonids in California are somewhat higher. Kinnetics Laboratories ( 1984) estimated male and female sand shrimp > 30 mm long to grow 1.7 to 2.4 mm per month.

Length weight relationships for juvenile, male, and female sand shrimp were given by Siegfried ( 1980). The regression equations describing these relationships follow:

juveniles: Log W =  5.41 + 2.58 LogTL males: Log W =  6.12 + 3.27 LogTL females: Log W =  6.62 + 3.57 LogTL where W = dry weight in grams and TL = length in mm. Analysis of covariance revealed significant differences in slopes between the length weight regressions of juvenile and mature shrimp. The difference is at least partly attributable to gonadal development.

Mortality Annual abundance of crangonid shrimp varies widely ( Siegfried 1980; California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Annual abundance indices for sand shrimp in San Francisco Bay were several orders of magnitude higher in some years than in others from 1980 to 1985,

c 7 and that of blue spotted and black shrimp varied by more than tenfold ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Annual abundance of crangonid shrimp appears to be determined mostly by mortality of larvae and postlarvae. Mortality due to predation is undoubtedly high and may explain geographic patterns of abundance within embayments ( Kinnetic Laboratories 1983; Kuipers and Dapper 1984). Recruitment to bay populations in any one year, however, appears to depend on environmental conditions.

Recruitment of crangonid shrimp to San Francisco Bay is independent of the abundance of ovigerous females, i. e., the parent stock. Correlations between annual abundance of crangonid larvae and postlarvae and of ovigerous females are non significant ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987), suggesting that environmental conditions play a major role in determining annual abundance. Thus, management to maintain crangonid populations should be aimed at maximizing recruitment ( Christmas and Etzold 1977).

Annual abundance of crangonid shrimp has been linked to the volume of freshwater flow to San Francisco Bay ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The volume of freshwater inflow determines the magnitude of seaward and landward currents, the salinity regime, temperature, and the distribution and abundance of other organisms including crangonid predators and prey ( Siegfried et al. 1979; Armor and Herrgesell 1985). All of these factors play major roles in determining crangonid recruitment and mortality.

& ease and Parasites Crustaceans are subject to infection by bacteria, fungi, protozoans, platyhelminths, and nematodes which can cause disease ( Green 1968; Couch 1978; Overstreet 1978). Although infestation of crangonids by these groups has been observed ( C. A. Siegfried, pers. obs.), there is little information on the incidence of infection or the effects on crangonid populations. In crangonids of San Francisco Bay, the incidence of infection by microsporidian protozoans is often high ( C. A. Siegfried, pets. obs.). The bopyroidean branchial isopod, Argeia   pugettensis, an ectoparasite in the branchial chamber, often infects crangonids in San & W Francisco Bay ( Nelson and Simmons 1978) and in Yaquina Bay, Oregon ( Krygier and Horton 1975). It attacks shrimp in San Francisco Bay only in higher salinity waters. Krygier and Horton ( 1975) reported only female parasitized sand shrimp in Yaquina Bay, Oregon; however, no parasitized ovigerous females were found. In San Francisco Bay almost all parasitized shrimp appeared to be females ( Nelson and Simmons 1978). Since it is unlikely that the isopod would attack only females, and since castration by parasites is reported for other crustacean species, it is likely that the attachment of A. pugettensis results in castration in sand shrimp ( Nelson and Simmons 1978). Castration would inhibit gonadogenesis and castrated male shrimp would take on feminizing characteristics, including larger size. A larger host would presumably make more energy available to the parasitic isopod. Since host and parasite weights are positively correlated, early attachment of the parasite and growth with the host is indicated ( Nelson and Simmons 1978; Kinnetics Laboratories 1987; Jay 1989). i '

Whether female or castrated male, parasitized crangonid shrimp are still significantly smaller than nonparasitized shrimp, as shown in a field study conducted in Humboldt Bay. The study suggests that there are slower growth rates in the parasitized shrimp ( Jay 1980). Preliminary laboratory investigation reveals that parasitism by A. pugettensis depresses metabolic rates ( oxygen consumption) in sand shrimp but does not affect excretion rates ( Nelson and Simmons 1978).

THE FISHERY The earliest commercial fishing for crangonid shrimp along the California coast is believed to have been done in San Francisco Bay in the late 1860' s by Italian fishermen ( Scofield 1919; Bonnot 1932; Israel 1936). The shrimp were taken in bag seines 18.3 m long by 2.4 m deep. The catch of crangonid shrimp greatly increased when Chinese fishing camps appeared in 1871. The Chinese introduced the use of the Chinese 8 Ii A\

t shrimp net, a funnel shaped net 12.1 m long with a mouth 9.1 m wide. These nets were held stationary by a system of lines and anchors, and shrimp were captured as they were carried into the net by the tide. Chinese nets were set during a single ebb or flood tide and then lifted just before the tide turned. By 1897, 26 Chinese fishing camps operated 20 to 50 nets each in San Francisco Bay, landing 400 to 8,000 pounds of shrimp per camp per day. In the early 1890' s, crangonid shrimp were also caught in Tomales Bay, north of San Francisco, but the fishery was abandoned by about 1895 ( Bonnot 1932).

The local market for crangonid shrimp was saturated soon after the Chinese began shrimp fishing. However, a profitable export trade soon developed, based on the shipment of dried shrimp to the Orient. The use of Chinese shrimp nets was investigated by the California Fish and Game Commission in 1897 and again in 1910, largely to assess the loss of young fish ( particularly striped bass, Morone saxatiZk) in the Chinese nets. In 1901 the California State Legislature established a closed season to shrimp fishing from May to August. By 1911 the Chinese shrimp nets were prohibited, but in 1915 a law was passed to allow limited use of the nets in parts of San Francisco Bay ( Scofield 1919).

Trawl shrimp fishermen began operating in San Francisco Bay in about 1910. Trawl fishermen used trawls with beams of 5.5 to 6.1 m and an 18.3 m funnel shaped net. The trawl was dragged over the bottom in the direction of the tide. A single haul lasted from 40 min to 2 h, and a day's work consisted of making 2 4 hauls and catching a total of 100 to 1,000 pounds of shrimp ( Fry 1933).

The annual shrimp catch in San Francisco Bay exceeded 720 t for much of the 1920' s and 1930' s; the peak catch of more than 1,591 t was made in 1935 ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The annual catch did not exceed 455 t during the 1940' s and 1950' s, and had declined to less than 45 t by the late 1950' s, it did not exceed 114 t except in 1978 when 216 t were landed ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The catch of crangonid shrimp continued to be used for fresh or dried food until the 1960' s. However, the demand declined steadily after the 1930' s and the fishery became a bait fishery, supplying sport fishermen. Crangonid shrimp are too small to shell and market economically. The bait fishery relies entirely on trawls to capture shrimp.

The sport fishermen of the region will probably continue to support a bait fishery landing 68 91 t of crangonid shrimp annually. The prospect of expansion of the fishery is poor.

ECOLOGICAL ROLE Little is known about the ecology of larval and postlarval crangonids. The larvae are presumably predators on small zooplankters, such as copepods. Larvae have been maintained in the laboratory on a diet of Arlemiu nauplii ( Shaner 1978).

Juvenile and adult crangonids are predaceous, their dietary differences being related to shrimp size and prey availability ( Siegfried 1982; Wahle 1985). Seasonal and geographical dietary studies have indicated that crangonid prey in the diet is generally proportional to their occurrence in an estuary ( Siegfried 1982; Wahle 1985). Wahle ( 1985) who studied the feeding ecology of sand shrimp and black shrimp in San Francisco Bay, found that these species feed on a similar array of benthic prey made up of crustaceans, polychaetes, mollusks, foraminiferans, and plant material. Amphipods were the most frequently ingested; barnacle exuvia, fish eggs, bryozoans, hydrozoans, and mites were occasionally ingested. Black shrimp ate significantly more amphipods than did sand shrimp. Larger crangonids ate larger prey. Foraminiferans, copepods, and ostracods were taken by small shrimp, while shrimp, polychaetes, and isopods were taken by large shrimp.

In the less saline regions of the San Francisco Bay Estuary the delta region the most important food of sand shrimp is the opossum shrimp, Neomy. sh mercedis, which occurred in 9 62%& l% of all sand shrimp gastric mills containing prey ( Siegfried 1982). Larger crangonids ate larger mysids. Sitts and Knight ( 1979) suggested that predation by sand shrimp affected the population structure and abundance of mysids in the delta.

The distribution of N. mercedis does affect the distribution of sand shrimp in the San Francisco Bay Delta ( Siegfried 1980). Not only is crangonid density much greater in locations where mysids are abundant, but crangonids in areas of high mysid density take more prey than those in areas of low prey density ( Siegfried 1982). The delta region of San Francisco Bay has impoverished benthic communities ( Nichols 1979) and thus the region has few potential prey organisms. This may be an important factor linking the distributions of crangonids and mysids in the delta region of San Francisco Bay.

Crangonid shrimp are important food for many estuarine fish. They have been reported to be important in the diets of striped bass ( Johnson and Calhoun 1952; Huebach et al. 1% 3; Ganssle 1966; Kinnetic Laboratories 1983); white sturgeon, Acipenser trunsmonfunus and green sturgeon, A. medirostris ( Ganssle 1966; McKechnie and Fenner 1971); and staghorn sculpin, Leptocottus armatus, ( Ganssle 1966; Boothe 1967; Kinnetic Laboratories 1983). They are also an important food of American shad, Alosu supidissimu; brown smoothhound, Mustelus henlei; Pacific tomcod, Microgudus proximus; and white catfish, Ictulurus cutus ( Ganssle 1966).

Crangonid shrimp recycle nutrients during their feeding activities. Agitation of bottom sediments by crangonids searching for food and shelter has been suggested as an important mechanism of nutrient recycling in estuaries ( Lloyd and Yonge 1947). Nitrogen excretion by large populations of crangonids can have important effects on the nitrogen budget of estuarine systems ( Nelson et al. 1979).

ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS TempemW Water temperature is a critical factor not only in survival but in the regulation of most life functions of cold blooded organisms such as crangonid shrimp. Water temperature affects + . metabolic, growth, and feeding rates, osmoregulation, movement, habitat selection, and survival ( Prosser 1950). The discharge of heated effluents may restrict the distribution of crangonids or other cold blooded organisms in estuarine systems, and sudden temperature changes may be lethal.

The seasonal migrations of crangonids have been linked to changing water temperatures. The spring onshore migration of juveniles may be a migration to warmer waters and the fallwinter offshore movement of mature shrimp may be a migration to cooler waters ( Israel 1936; Ktygier and Horton 1975; Siegfried 1980; Hatfield 1985). Decreasing water temperature resulted in the movement of C. septzknspinosu from shallow to deeper areas of Chesapeake Bay ( Haefner 1976). Havinga ( 1930) suggests that the seasonal migrations of C. crungon can be explained as a search for the warmest water mass.

Crangonids of the Pacific Southwest have been collected over a wide range of temperatures; sand shrimp, 6.3 to 23.9 " C, black shrimp, 6.7 to 22.1 " C; and blue spotted shrimp, 7.8 to 20.2 " C ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Sand shrimp are abundant at > 15 " C, black shrimp at < 18 " C, and bluespotted shrimp at 14 18 " C.

Temperature tolerance in adult sand shrimp under laboratory conditions was reported by Khorram and Knight ( 1977a). The research indicated a significant interaction between temperature and salinity on survival: water temperature affected survival at different salinities and salinity affected survival at different temperatures. In general, survival of adult sand shrimp was poor at water temperatures below 10 " C or above 20 " C, and decreased with decreasing salinity. The optimum ranges of temperature and salinity for adult sand shrimp, as determined by response surface analysis ( a statistical technique that determines optimum response to more than one variable), was 14.5 17.0 " C and 18 20 ppt. The authors concluded that temperature was slightly more important than salinity in determining adult survival ( Khorram and Knight 1977a).

10 Salinity Crangonids are euryhaline, occurring at salinities from nearly fresh water to seawater ( Siegfried 1980, Hatfield 1985). Sand and black shrimp have been collected from San Francisco Bay at salinities of O 1 34.3 ppt and blue spotted shrimp at the somewhat narrower range of 4.5 34.3 ppt ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Blue spotted shrimp are generally abundant only in water with salinity > 23 ppt. Black shrimp are generally more abundant in water with salinity > 23 ppt. Black shrimp are generally most abundant in waters of salinity > lO ppt and sand shrimp at salinities ~ 19 ppt ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). These salinity ranges are based on the abundance of juvenile and adult stages. Adult crangonids, and particularly ovigerous females, prefer the higher end of the salinity range.

The seasonal distribution of crangonids, particularly sand shrimp, along the California coast is closely related to salinity. Although the sand shrimp inhabits brackish water during much of its life cycle, it requires relatively high salinities for reproduction. Ovigerous females are rarely collected where salinity is low. Ovigerous females are found year round in San Francisco Bay, but almost never in the less saline portions of the bay ( Israel 1936; Siegfried 1980; Hatfield 1985). Energetic demands of osmoregulation at low salinities may preclude egg development and thus reproduction in low salinity waters. Broekema ( 1941) showed that low salinities retard egg development in crangonids. Salinity is thus important in larval survival; preliminary investigations suggested that survival of larval sand shrimp declined at salinities below 12 ppt ( S. W. Shaner, Univ. Calif., Davis, unpubl.)

Salinity tolerance was significantly affected by water temperature. At 5 ppt salinity, the 96 h survival was zero at 5 " C and 25 " C, but ranged from 30% to 42% at intermediate temperatures; in waters of 25 ppt salinity, survival after % h was > 80% at 10 " C and 15 " C but 60% at 5 " C ( Khorram and Knight 1977a). More recent salinity tolerance investigations indicated that juvenile sand shrimp were more tolerant of low salinity; survival was 100% in water of 2 ppt salinity ( S. W. Shaner, unpubl.) Sand shrimp from high salinity waters ( 20 30 ppt) acclimated to low salinity ( 2.2 5.5 ppt) in the laboratory within 5 6 weeks. At this time, they physiologically resembled sand shrimp from low salinity ( l 7 ppt) waters ( Shaner et al. 1985).

The upstream distribution of sand shrimp in the San Francisco Bay Estuary is limited by low salinity. In extensive collections from this system between 1976 and 1985, almost no crangonids were taken in water of < l ppt salinity ( Siegfried 1980, California Department of Fish and Game 1987).

The response of crangonids to changes in temperature and salinity are highly interdependent ( Khorram and Knight 1977a). Researchers disagree about the relative importance of each of these factors in crangonid distribution. Havinga ( 1930) and Haefner ( 1976) suggsted that temperature is the most important factor. Krygier and Horton ( 1975), Siegfried ( 1980), and Hatfield ( 1985), indicated that salinity was the most important factor determining sand shrimp distribution. Both factors are important in determining black shrimp distribution; temperature is most important in summer and salinity in the winter ( Krygier and Horton 1975).

Laboratory investigations of the interactive effect of temperature and salinity on the survival of adult sand shrimp indicated optimum temperature and salinity ranges of 14.5 17.0 " C and 18 20 ppt ( Khorram and Knight 1977a). The range of temperature and salinity optima decreased with increasing exposure times. The optimum ranges of temperature and salinity were 8.0 22.5 " C and 13 25 ppt for a 24 h exposure; 9.5 21.0 " C and 14.0 24.5 ppt after 48 h; and 12 19 " C and 15.5 22.0 ppt after 72 h.

Sub& ate Little information is available relating crangonid distribution to substrate type. Crangonids are found on substrates ranging from mud to peat to sand ( Israel 1936; Carlton and Kuris 1975). They appear to be particularly 11 suited to sand mud substrates by being able to nestle and bury themselves into the substratum using their pleopods and walking legs. Some crangonid species are reported from the rocky intertidal zone ( Carlton and Km is 1975).

The dorsally flattened crangonids usually spend days in shallow depressions in the substrate with just the eyes above the substrate. In laboratory aquaria this behavior occurs on sand as well as on softer substrates. Substrate selection by crangonids is undoubtedly influenced by prey availability as well as habitat considerations. Benthic prey is generally not abundant on coarse sediments in San Francisco Bay but is abundant and diverse on softer, more organic sediments ( Nichols 1979). These richer sediments are often the preferred substrates of crangonids.

Freshwater Flow Freshwater flow to estuarine systems affects water temperature, salinity, substrates, seaward and landward currents, and the distribution of potential prey and predators. During periods of high freshwater flows, seaward and residual landward currents are high and salinity intrusion is low. During periods of low freshwater flows, currents are reduced, high salinity waters intrude higher into the estuary, and water temperatures tend to be higher. These differences in current patterns and temperature salinity regimes lead to important differences in recruitment and habitat availability for crangonids and their prey and predators.

The recruitment of crangonids to the San Francisco Bay Estuary appears to be linked to variations in current patterns related to freshwater flow. Ovigerous females occur in high salinity portions of the estuary and in the offshore region ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). Larvae are released in these regions, and since they are generally in the water column they can bc entrained by surface currents moving seaward. Crangonid postlarvae congregate near bottom and are thus more likely to be transported upstream or landward in the landward flowing lower layer of water ( Siegfried et al. 1978). The interaction of currents flowing seaward and landward thus determines recruitment of crangonids to the estuary. & .

Correlation analysis of annual abundance of sand shrimp in relation to freshwater flow to San Francisco Bay indicates some highly positive relations ( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The annual abundances of postlarvae, juveniles, and all sand shrimp stages combined were positively correlated with freshwater flows during the period from 1980 to 1985. The abundances of early and mid stage crangonid larvae in San Francisco Bay were negatively correlated with freshwater flow. This is consistent with a life history pattern in which larvae are planktonic in the upper layers of the water column and are carried offshore during high freshwater flows. In years of high freshwater outflow, a larger proportion of the reproductive population moves from embayments to the neat shore coastal area, resulting in more larvae hatched outside the embayments ( K Hieb, California Department of Fish and Game, Stockton, CA; pets. comm.). The annual abundance of black shrimp is also correlated with freshwater inflow, but the relation is not as strong as that of sand shrimp c +

( California Department of Fish and Game 1987). The annual abundance of blue spotted shrimp, which does not show the extensive migration associated with development of sexual characteristics, is not correlated with freshwater outflows.

The volume of freshwater outflow, and thus the location of the sediment entrapment zone associated with the salinity gradient in the San Francisco Bay Estuary, has been linked to variations in the annual abundance and distribution of N. merce&, the principal food of sand shrimp in the upper estuary ( Siegfried et al. 1979). The distribution of sand shrimp in the upper estuary has in turn been related to the distribution of N. mercedis ( Siegfried 1980). Thus, the distribution of crangonids can also be affected indirectly as well as directly by freshwater flow. The distributions and abundances of many species of fshes in the San Francisco Bay system are also influenced by freshwater flows ( Armor and Herrgesell 1985). Abundance of fishes appears to be higher during years of high freshwater flows. Potential 13 predators as well as the prey of crangonid shrimp are thus affected by freshwater flow to the San Francisco Bay system.

OtherEnvironmentalRequirements Other environmental factors, such as dissolved oxygen concentration, metals concentrations, pesticides, and other agricultural, municipal, and industrial pollutants may affect the distribution and abundance of crangonids. Khorram and Knight ( 1977b) reported the toxicity to sand shrimp of Kelthane, an organochlorine miticide once commonly used on vegetable, fruit, and grain crops in regions tributary to San Francisco Bay. The lethal threshold was estimated to be about 100 ppb. Kelthane and its breakdown products bioaccumulate in body tissue ( Khorram and Knight 1977b). Shrimp exposed to this pesticide showed a characteristic sublethal response, including increased physical activity, and decreased feeding and molting rates.

Low dissolved oxygen concentrations, in combination with high water temperatures, are believed to limit the occurrence of crangonids in several streams tributary to San Francisco Bay ( Israel 1936; Nichols 1979; Kinnetic Laboratories 1983). Sand shrimp were abundant upstream from San Francisco Bay, into the Sacramento River, during years of low freshwater flows ( Siegfried 1980). Crangonid shrimp were not collected from the San Joaquin River in Siegfried's study ( 1980) even though the temperature and salinity regimes in each river are similar. The San Joaquin River receives more industrial and agricultural effluent than the Sacramento River, relative to its discharge. This increased effluent may create water quality differences between the two rivers that limit shrimp distribution.

e 13 LITERATURE CITED Allen, J. A. 1960. On the biology of Crungon aZlrnani Kinanan in Northumberland waters. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U. K. 39481 508.

Armor, C., and P. L. Herrgesell. 1985. Distribution and abundance of fishes in the San Francisco Bay estuary between 1980 and 1982. Hydrobiologia 129: 211 227.

Bonnot, P. 1932. The California shrimp industry. Calif. Dep. Fish Game Fish Bull. 38: 1 22.

Boothe, P. 1967. The food and feeding habits of four species of San Francisco Bay fish. Calif. Dep. Fish Game, MRO Ref. 67 13. 155 pp.

Broekema, M. M. 1941. Seasonal movements and osmotic behavior of the shrimp, Crungon crungon L. Arch. Neerl. Zool. 6: 1 100.

California Department of Fish and Game. 1987. Shrimp ( Caridea). Pages 39 85 i n Delta outflow effects on the abundance and distribution of San Francisco Bay fish and invertebrates, 1980 1985. Exhibit 60, Water Resour. Cont. Board 1987 Water Quality/ Rights Proc. 345 pp.

Carlton, J T., and AM. Kuris. 1975. Keys to decapod crustacea. Pages 385 412 in R. I. Smith and J. T. Carlton, eds. Light's manual: intertidal invertebrates of the central California coast. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Christmas, J. Y., and D. J. Etzold. 1977. The shrimp fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, United States; a regional management plan. Gulf Coast Res. Lab. Tech. Rep. Ser. No. 2. 125 pp.

15 Couch, J. A. 1978. Diseases, parasites, and toxic responses of commercial penaeid shrimps of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic coasts of North America. U. S. Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv. Bull. 76: 1 44.

Durkin, J T., and S. J. Lipovsky. 1977. Aquatic disposal field investigations, Columbia River disposal site, Oregon. Appendix E. Pages 119 129 in Demersal fish and decapod shellfish studies. Tech. Rep. D 77 30. Environ. Effects Lab., U. S. Army Eng. Waterways Exp. St., Vicksburg, MS.

Fry, D. H., Jr. 1933. Operation of a California shrimp trawl. Calif. Fish Game 19: 264 267.

Ganssle, D. 1966. Fishes and decapods of the San Pablo and Suisun Bays. Pages 64 94 in D. W. Kelley, ed. Ecological studies of the Sacramento San Joaquin estuary, Part I. Calif. Dep. Fish Game Fish Bull. 133.

Green, J. 1968. The biology of estuarine animals. University of Washington Press, Seattle. 401 pp.

Haefner, PA., Jr. 1976. Comparative review of the biology of North Atlantic caridean shrimps ( Crayon), with emphasis on C. septimspinosu. Bull. Biol. Sot. Washington 3: 1 40.

Haertel, L., and C. Osterberg. 1966. Ecology of zooplankton, benthos, and fishes in the Columbia River estuary. Ecology 48: 459 472.

Hatfield, S. 1985. Seasonal and interannual variation in distribution and population abundance of the shrimp Crungon frunciscorum i n San Francisco Bay. Hydrobiologia 129: 199 210. Havinga, B. 1930. Der Granat ( Crungon vulgaris) in den hollandischen Gewassern. J. Con. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer 553 87.

Heubach, W., R. J. Toth, and AM. McCready. 1% 3. Food of young of the year striped bass ( Roccus saxatih) in the Scramento San Joaquin River system. Calif. Fish Game 49: 224 239.

Israel, H. R. 1936. A contribution toward the life histories of two California shrimps, Crugo frunciscorum ( Stimpson) and Crag0 nigricauda ( Stimpson). Calif. Dep. Fish Game Fish Bull. 4628 pp.

Jay, C. V. 1989. Prevalence, size, and fecundity of the parasitic isopod, Argeia pugettensis on its host shrimp Crangon franciscorum. Am. Midl. Nat. 12168 77.

Johnson, W. C., and AJ. Calhoun. 1952. Food habits of California striped bass. Calif. Fish Game 3853 l 534.

Khorram, S., and AW. Knight. 1977a. Combined temperature salinity effects on grass shrimp. J. Environ. Eng. Div., Am. Sot. Civil Eng. 103: 381 388.

Khorram, S., and AW. Knight. 1977b. The toxicity of Kelthane to the grass shrimp ( Crungon frunciscorum). Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 19: 674 682.

Kinnetic Laboratories. 1983. South Bay dischargers authority water quality monitoring program: first year monitoring report. Santa Cruz, CA 217 pp.

Kinnetic Laboratories. 1987. South Bay dischargers authority water quality monitoring program: final monitoring report. Santa Cruz, CA 467 pp.

Knight, AW. 1978. Studies on bioenergetics, osmoregulation, development, behavior, and survival of several aquaculture organisms. Water Science Engineering Paper 4507, University of California, Davis. 145 pp.

Krygier, E. E., and H. F. Horton. 1975. Distribution, reproduction, and growth of Crangon nigricauda and Crangon francixotum in Yaquina Bay, Oregon. Northwest Sci. 49: 216 240.

Kuipers, B. R., and R. Dapper. 1984. Nursery function of Wadden Sea tidal flats for the brown shrimp Crungon crungon. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 17: 171 181.

Lloyd, AJ., and CM. Yonge. 1947. A study of Crungon vulgaris L. in the Bristol Channel and Severn Estuary. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U. K. 26: 626 661.

Maucher, W . D . 1961. Statistische untersuchunger in den korperporotionen wischen der Nordund Ostee form von Crangon crangon . Kiel. Meeresforsh., 17: 219 227.

McKechnie, R. J., and R. B. Fenner. 1971. Food habits of white sturgeon, Acipenser trunsmontunus in San Pablo and Suisun Bays, California. Calif. Fish Game 57: 209 212.

Meredith, S. S. 1952. A study of Crangon wIguris in the Liverpool Bay area. Proc. Trans. Liverpool Biol. Sot. 58: 75 109.

Mondo, G. S. 1980. The larval development of the bay shrimp Crangon franciscorum. M. A Thesis, San Francisco State University, CA 120 pp.

Nelson, S. G., and M. A Simmons. 1978. Effects of parasitism on the respiration and ammonia excretion of Crangon franciscorum. Pages 102 105 in AW. Knight, ed. Studies on bioenergetics, osmoregulation, development, behavior, and survival of several aquaculture organisms. Water Science Engineering Paper 4507, University of California, Davis.

Nelson, S. G., M. A Simmons, and AW. Knight. 1979. Ammonia excretion and its relationship to diet in a benthic estuarine shrimp, Crungon f ranciscorum S t i m p s o n ( Crustacea: Crangonidae). Mar. Biol. 54: 25 31.

Nelson, S. G., M. A Simmons, and AW. Knight. 1986. The energy burden of the bopyrid parasite Argeia pauper& u ( Crustacea:

16 Isopoda) on the grass shrimp Crangon franciscorum ( Crustacea: Crangonidae). Comp. B& hem. Physiol. A Comp. Physiol. 83: 121 124.

Nichols, F. H. 1979. Natural and anthropogenic influences on benthic community structure in San Francisco Bay. Pages 409 426 in T. J. Conomos, ed. San Francisco Bay: the urbanized estuary. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Pacific Division, San Francisco.

Overstreet, R. M. 1978. Marine maladies? Worms, germs, and other symbionts from the northern Gulf of Mexico. Mississippi Alabama Sea Grant Consortium MASGP 78 021. 104 pp.

Price, KS. 1% 2. Biology of the sand shrimp Crangon septimspinosa in the shore zone of the Delaware Bay region. Chesapeake Sci. 3~ 244 255.

Prosser, C. L. 1950. Temperature: metabolic aspects and perception. Pages 341 380 in C. L. Prosser, ed. Comparative animal physiology. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, P A Rathbun, M. J. 1904. Decapod crustaceans of the northwest coast of North America. Harriman Alaska Expedition 10~ 1 190.

Remane, A, and C. Schlieper. 1971. Biology of brackish water. Die Binnengewasser 25: 327 pp.

Scofield, N. B. 1919. Shrimp fisheries of California. Calif. Fish Game 5: 1 12.

Schmitt, W. L. 1921. The marine decapod crustacea of California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. No. 23. 470 pp.

Shaner, S. W. 1978. Osmotic and ionic regulation in the euryhaline shrimp Crangon franciscorum ( Stimpson) ( Crustacea: Natantia). Pages 106 121 in AW. Knight, ed. Studies on bioenergetics, osmoregulation, development, behavior, and survival of several aquaculture organisms. Water Science Engineering Paper No. 4507. University of California, Davis.

Shaner, S. W., J. H. Crowe, and A. W. Knight. 1985. Long term adaptation to low salinities the euryhaline ~ ncisc. shrimp Crangon J. Exp. Zool. 235~ 315 324.

Siegfried, CA. 1980. Seasonal abundance and distribution of Crangon fi anciscorum and Palaemon macrodactyhs ( Decapoda: Caridea) in the San Francisco Bay Delta. Biol. Bull. 159: 177 192.

Siegfried, CA. 1982. Trophic relations of Crangon franckorum Stimpson and Palaemon macrodactylus Rathbun; predation on the opossum shrimp, Neomysis mercedis Holmes. Hydrobiologia 89: 129 139.

Siegfried, CA., AW. Knight, and M. E. Kopache. 1978. Ecological studies on the western Sacramento San Joaquin Delta during a dry year. Water Science Engineering Paper No. 4506. University of California, Davis. 121 pp.

Siegfried, CA., M. E. Kopache, and A. W. Knight. 1979. The distribution and abundance of Neomysis mercedis in relation to the entrapment zone in the western Sacramento San Joaquin Delta. Trans. Am. Fish. Sot. 108: 262 270.

Sitts, R. M. 1978. Ecological aspects of the estuarine shrimps, Neomysis mercedis, Crangon franckzonun, and Palaemon macrodactylis. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of California, Davis. 79 pp.

Sitts, R. M., and A. W. Knight. 1979. Predation by the estuarine shrimps Crangon Fanciscorum Stimpson and Palaemon macrodactyhs Rathbun. Biol. Bull. 156: 356 368.

Smith, R. I., and J. T. Carlton, editors. 1975. Light's manual: intertidal invertebrates of the central California coast. Third Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley. 716 pp.

17 Villamar, D. F., and G. J. Brusca. 1988. Variation in the larval development of Crangon nigricuudu ( Decapoda: Caridea) with notes on larval morphology and behavior. J. Crustacean Biol. 8~ 410 419.

Wahle, R. A. 1985. The feeding ecology of Crangon fiancbxtum and Crangon nigricauda in San Francisco Bay, California. J. Crust. Biol. 5311 326. &

Welch, B. L. 1970. Some aspects of the vertical migration and predatory behavior of the sand shrimp, Crangon septimspinosa. MS. Thesis, University of Maryland, Baltimore. 69 pp.

18 REPORT E; MENTATION j l. REPoR: No. 1 Btologtcal Report 82( 11.125)* ,. Title and Subt* tls Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates ( Pacific Southwest) Crangonid Shrimp i December 1989 i6.

7. Author( a)

Clifford A. Siegfried I 6. Performing Or6rmzation Rept. Nt 9. Per( ormnng Organtzatlon Name and Address Biological Survey NYS Museum and Science Service Albany, NY 12230 11. Contract( C) or Grant( G) No.

_ _ _ _ __. 12. Sponsonng Or6aniration Name and Address U. S. Department of the Interior U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal Ecology Group Research and Development Waterways Experiment Station Washington, DC 20240 Vicksburg, MS 39180 13. TYIX Of Report 6 Period Coveret * U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Report No. TR EL 82 4 16. Abstract ( Limht: 200 words)

Species profiles are literature summaries of the taxonomy, morphology, range, life history, and environmental requirements of coastal aquatic species. They are prepared to assist in environmental impact assessments. Crangonid shrimp once were important in an export fishery but are now the basis of a bait fishery in San Francisco Bay. The shrimp are important components of the estuarine system, serving as an important food of almost all sport and commercial fshes of west coast estuaries. Spawning occurs in waters of ~ 15 ppt salinity. Gvigerous females are found year round; abundance peaks in spring and summer in embayments and in winter offshore. Eggs hatch directly into planktonic zoea which require 30 40 days to develop into postlarvae. Larvae prefer surface waters, while postlarvae prefer bottom waters. Larvae are exposed to predominantly seaward currents and postlarvae to landward moving bottom currents. Juvenile crangonids are generally found in brackish to nearly fresh water but move to more saline waters as they mature. Crangonids are opportunistic predators of epibenthic and benthic forms. Annual abundance of crangonids in San Francisco Bay has been linked to the volume of freshwater flow to the estuary. Maintaining adequate freshwater flows to the estuary to ensure successful recruitment is vital to maintaining populations of this important component of the estuarine system.

17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors Estuaries Shrimp Fisheries b. Idsntlfisn/ Opcn. Endcd Terms Crangonid shrimp Crangon nigricauda Crangon franciscorum Crangon nigromaculata c. COSATI Field/ Group 16. Avrolability Statement Unlimited Distribution j 19. Security Class ( This Report) 21. No. of Pales 18 __ 22. Price : See ANSI 239.16) OPTIONAL FORM 272 ( 4 7 ( Formerly NTIS 35) Departm* nt Of commcrc. As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works lo assure that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U. S. administration.

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE TAKE PRIDE in America UN ITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE National Wetlands Research Center NASA Slide11 Computer Complex 1010 Gause Boulevard Slidell, LA 70458


[Federal Register: January 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 17)]
[Notices]
[Page 4360]
[DOCID:fr26ja06-40]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL06-32-000]

City of Vernon, California v. Mirant Americas Energy Marketing,
L.P.; Notice of Filing

January 20, 2006.
    Take notice that on January 11, 2006, the City of Vernon, submitted
revisions to its Transmission Revenue Balancing Account Adjustment for
the calendar year 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 30, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-982 Filed 1-25-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36021-36024]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15338]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75188; File No. SR-CBOE-2015-058]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Fees Schedule

June 17, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 9, 2015, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fees Schedule. The text of the
proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to make certain changes to its Fees
Schedule.\3\ First, the Exchange proposes to amend its Volume Incentive
Program (``VIP''). Under VIP, the Exchange credits each Trading Permit
Holder (``TPH'') the per contract amount set forth in the VIP table
resulting from each public customer (``C'' origin code) order
transmitted by that TPH (with certain exceptions) which is executed
electronically on the Exchange in all underlying symbols excluding
Underlying Symbol List A,\4\ DJX, MXEA, MXEF, XSP, XSPAM, and mini-
options, provided the TPH meets certain volume thresholds in a
month.\5\ The Exchange proposes to increase the VIP credit for complex
orders in Tier 2 from $0.16 per contract to $0.21 per contract, in Tier
3 from $0.16 per contract to $0.22 per contract and in Tier 4 from
$0.17 per contract to $0.23 per contract. The purpose of this change is
to incentivize the sending of complex orders to the Exchange and to
adjust the incentive tiers accordingly as competition requires while
maintaining an incremental incentive for TPH's to strive for the
highest tier level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee changes on
June 1, 2015 (SR-CBOE-2015-054). On June 9, 2015, the Exchange
withdrew that filing and submitted this filing.
    \4\ The following products are included in ``Underlying Symbol
List A'': OEX, XEO, RUT, SPX (including SPXw), SPXpm, SRO, VIX,
VXST, VOLATILITY INDEXES and binary options.
    \5\ Excluded from the VIP credit are options in Underlying
Symbol List A, DJX, MXEA, MXEF, XSP, XSPAM, mini-options, QCC
trades, public customer to public customer electronic complex order
executions, and executions related to contracts that are routed to
one or more exchanges in connection with the Options Order
Protection and Locked/Crossed Market Plan referenced in Rule 6.80
(see CBOE Fees Schedule, Volume Incentive Program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange next proposes to amend the Complex Order Book
(``COB'') Taker Surcharge. By way of background, the COB Taker
Surcharge (``Surcharge'') is a $0.05 per contract per side surcharge
for non-customer complex order executions that take liquidity from the
COB in all underlying classes except Underlying Symbol List A and mini-
options. Additionally, the Surcharge is not assessed on non-customer
complex order executions in the Complex Order Auction (``COA''), the
Automated Aim Mechanism (``AIM''), orders originating from a Floor
Broker PAR, electronic executions against single leg markets, or stock-
option order executions. The

Exchange first proposes to increase the amount of the Surcharge from
$0.05 per contract to $0.08 per contract. Additionally, the Exchange
proposes to eliminate the exclusion of non-customer complex order
executions in the COA and AIM mechanisms from the Surcharge.
Specifically, the Exchange notes that all complex order auction
responses executed in COA and AIM will be assessed the Surcharge (i.e.,
initiating orders and AIM Contra orders will not be assessed the
Surcharge). The Exchange proposes these changes in order to help offset
the increased rebates given to complex orders under VIP. In light of
the abovementioned changes, the Exchange also proposes to rename the
COB Taker Surcharge to ``Complex Taker Fee.'' Particularly, the
surcharge is no longer limited to COB executions as the Surcharge will
now include auction responses in COA and AIM. As such, the Exchange
believes it is appropriate to rename the Surcharge to more accurately
reflect what transactions are being charged and avoid potential
confusion. Additionally, the Exchange proposes to change the term
``Surcharge'' to ``Fee'' to avoid confusion with other surcharges
currently listed in the Fees Schedule.
    The Exchange next notes that it currently assesses a $0.65 per
contract fee for electronic executions by Broker-Dealers, non-Trading
Permit Holders (``non-TPHs'') Market-Makers, Professionals/Voluntary
Professionals and Joint Back-Offices (``JBOs'') in non-Penny Pilot
equity, ETF, ETN and index options (excluding Underlying Symbol List A)
classes. The Exchange proposes increasing this transaction fee from
$0.65 per contract to $0.75 per contract. The Exchange also proposes to
increase the Marketing Fee for all non-Penny Pilot option classes from
$0.65 per contract to $0.70 per contract. The Exchange notes that these
increases are similar to, and in line with, the amounts assessed by
another exchange for similar transactions.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``PHLX'') Pricing Schedule, Section
II, Multiply Listed Options Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the Exchange proposes to amend language in the Fees
Schedule relating to the VIX Tier Appointment Surcharge. The VIX Tier
Appointment is assessed to any Market-Maker that either (a) has a VIX
Tier Appointment at any time during a calendar month and trades at
least 100 VIX options contracts electronically while that appointment
is active; or (b) trades at least 1,000 VIX options contracts in open
outcry during a calendar month. Additionally, a description of the VIX
Tier Appointment Fee in the Fees Schedule provides that ``In order for
a Market-Maker Trading Permit to be used to act as a Market-Maker in
VIX, the Trading Permit Holder must obtain a VIX Tier Appointment for
that Market-Maker Trading Permit.'' The Exchange seeks to add
clarifying language to this sentence in the Fees Schedule.
Particularly, the Exchange seeks to clarify that Trading Permit Holders
must obtain a VIX Tier Appointment in order for a Market-Maker Trading
Permit to be used to act electronically as a Market-Maker in VIX. The
Exchange notes that Rule 8.3(i) provides that during Regular Trading
Hours, a Market-Maker has an appointment to trade open outcry in all
Hybrid classes traded on the Exchange. As VIX is a Hybrid class, a
Market-Maker does not need an appointment to trade open outcry.
Accordingly, the Exchange seeks to amend the first sentence of the VIX
Tier Appointment description to clarify in the Fees Schedule that a VIX
Tier Appointment is only necessary for acting as a Market-Maker
electronically.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\7\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitation
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\9\ which requires that Exchange rules
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its Trading Permit Holders and other persons using
its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that increasing the VIP complex order credits
is reasonable because it will allow all TPHs transmitting public
customer complex orders that reach certain volume thresholds to receive
an increased credit for doing so. The amounts of the credits being
proposed are also closer to the amounts of credits paid to market
participants by another exchange for similar transactions.\10\
Additionally, the Exchange notes that increasing the credit (and
providing higher credits for complex orders than for simple orders) is
reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it is
intended to incentivize the sending of more complex orders to the
Exchange. This should provide greater liquidity and trading
opportunities, including for market participants who send simple orders
to the Exchange (as simple orders can trade with the legs of complex
orders). The greater liquidity and trading opportunities should benefit
not just public customers (whose orders are the only ones that qualify
for the VIP) but all market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE'')
Schedule of Fees, Section II (which lists complex order fees and
rebates). For each public customer order transmitted by a market
participant (with certain exceptions) a rebate of between $0.30 per
contract and $0.46 per contract in Select Symbols and between $0.63
per contract and $0.83 per contract is given to that market
participant, depending on the qualifying thresholds that market
participant meets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed increase to the amount of
the COB Contra Surcharge from $0.05 per contract per side to $0.08 per
contract per side is reasonable because the total amount assessed to
these transactions, including the Surcharge, is still within the range
of fees paid by other market participants for similar transactions.\11\
Further, other exchanges assess higher fees for complex orders than for
noncomplex ones.\12\ Applying the Surcharge to all market participants
except customers is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because
customer order flow enhances liquidity on the Exchange for the benefit
of all market participants. Specifically, Customer liquidity benefits
all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, which
attracts Market-

Makers. An increase in the activity of these market participants in
turn facilitates tighter spreads, which may cause an additional
corresponding increase in order flow from other market participants. By
exempting customer orders, the Surcharge will not discourage the
sending of customer orders, and therefore there should still be plenty
of customer orders for other market participants to trade with. The
Exchange believes it's reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess the Surcharge to complex order auction
responses executed in COA and AIM (and not on initiating orders or AIM
contra orders) because auction responses in COA and AIM, like other
non-customer complex order executions that take liquidity from the COB
and are assessed the Surcharge, remove liquidity from the market and
because the proposed change applies uniformly to all TPHs. The Exchange
believes renaming the surcharge from ``COB Taker Surcharge'' to
``Complex Taker Fee'' alleviates potential confusion as to what
transactions the surcharge applies to and therefore prevents potential
confusion, thereby removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, protecting investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See e.g., NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Arca'') Options Fees Schedule,
page 7 (Electronic Complex Order Executions) which provides that for
complex order-to-complex order transactions, non-customers are
assessed $0.50 in penny pilot options and $0.85 in non-penny pilot
options. Depending upon the type of market participant a CBOE TPH
is, non-customer CBOE TPHs would be assessed between $0.11 and $0.73
(which includes the proposed COB Contra Surcharge increase) for such
transactions (see CBOE Fees Schedule).
    \12\ See ISE Schedule of Fees, Section I (which lists regular
Maker rebates and fees and Taker fees for Select Symbols) as
compared to Section II (which lists complex order fees and rebates
for Select Symbols). Market participants are assessed higher fees
for executing complex orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increasing the fee for electronic executions by broker-dealers,
non-TPHs, Market-Makers, Professionals/Voluntary Professionals and JBOs
in non-Penny Pilot equity, ETF, ETN and Index options (excluding
Underlying Symbol List A) classes is reasonable because the proposed
fee amount is similar to the amount assessed by another exchange for
similar transactions.\13\ The Exchange believes that the proposed
increase is also equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the
Exchange will assess broker-dealers, non-TPH Market-Makers,
Professionals/Voluntary Professionals and JBOs the same electronic
options transaction fees in Non-Penny Pilot options classes. The
Exchange notes that it does not assess Customers the electronic options
transaction fees in Non-Penny Pilot options because Customer order flow
enhances liquidity on the Exchange for the benefit of all market
participants, as discussed above. The Exchange notes that Market-Makers
are assessed lower electronic options transaction fees in Non-Penny
Pilot options as compared to Professionals, JBOs, Broker Dealers and
non-Trading Permit Holder Market-Makers because they have obligations
to the market and regulatory requirements, which normally do not apply
to other market participants (e.g., obligations to make continuous
markets). Further, Market-Makers will pay a $0.70 per contract
Marketing Fee for many non-Penny Pilot transactions, which broker-
dealers, non-Trading Permit Holder Market-Makers, Professionals/
Voluntary Professionals and JBOs do not pay.\14\ Clearing Trading
Permit Holder Proprietary orders are assessed lower options transaction
fees in Non-Penny Pilot options because they also have obligations,
which normally do not apply to other market participants (e.g., must
have higher capital requirements, clear trades for other market
participants, must be members of the Options Clearing Corporation).
Accordingly, the differentiation between electronic transaction fees
for Customers, Market-Makers, Clearing Trading Permit Holders and other
market participants recognizes the differing obligations and
contributions made to the liquidity and trading environment on the
Exchange by these market participants. Assessing higher fees for
transactions in electronic, non-Penny Pilot classes is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory because in non-Penny Pilot classes the
spreads are naturally larger than in Penny Pilot classes, and these
wider spreads allow for greater profit potential. Limiting this fee
increase to electronic transactions is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory because electronic trading requires constant system
development and maintenance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Options Fees.
    \14\ See CBOE Fees Schedule, Marketing Fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increasing the Marketing Fee for all non-Penny Pilot options
classes is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because the proposed fee amount is in line with the amount assessed by
another exchange for similar transactions and because it applies to all
Market-Makers.\15\ Additionally, assessing higher fees for transactions
in non-Penny Pilot classes is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory
because in non-Penny Pilot classes the spreads are naturally larger
than in Penny Pilot classes, and these wider spreads allow for greater
profit potential.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See PHLX Pricing Schedule, Section II, Multiply Listed
Options Fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Exchange believes clarifying its Fees Schedule with
regards to when a VIX Tier Appointment is necessary (i.e., acting as a
Market-Maker electronically versus on-floor) maintains clarity in the
rules and eliminates potential confusion. The alleviation of potential
confusion will remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general,
protect investors and the public interest.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on competition that are not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not
believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intramarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because, while different fees
and rebates are assessed to different market participants in some
circumstances, these different market participants have different
obligations and different circumstances (as described in the
``Statutory Basis'' section above). For example, Clearing TPHs have
clearing obligations that other market participants do not have.
Market-Makers have quoting obligations that other market participants
do not have. There is a history in the options markets of providing
preferential treatment to Customers. Further, the Exchange fees and
rebates, both current and those proposed to be changed, are intended to
encourage market participants to bring increased volume to the Exchange
(which benefits all market participants), while still covering Exchange
costs (including those associated with the upgrading and maintenance of
Exchange systems).
    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule changes will
impose any burden on intermarket competition that is not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the
proposed changes are intended to promote competition and better improve
the Exchange's competitive position and make CBOE a more attractive
marketplace in order to encourage market participants to bring
increased volume to the Exchange (while still covering costs as
necessary). Further, the proposed changes only affect trading on CBOE.
To the extent that the proposed changes make CBOE a more attractive
marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market
participants are welcome to become CBOE market participants.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \16\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \17\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2015-058 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-058. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2015-058 and should be
submitted on or before July 14, 2015.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15338 Filed 6-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 92 (Thursday, May 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 26977]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11506]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3312-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Massachusetts; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an
emergency for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (FEMA-3312-EM), dated
May 3, 2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 3, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated May 3, 2010, the President issued an emergency declaration under
the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the Stafford Act), as follows:

    I have determined that the emergency conditions in certain areas
of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts resulting from a water main
break beginning on May 1, 2010, and continuing, are of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (``the Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such an emergency exists in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
    You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for
required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the
Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public
health and safety, and to lessen or avert the threat of a
catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are
authorized to provide assistance for emergency protective measures
(Category B), limited to direct Federal assistance, under the Public
Assistance program. This assistance excludes regular time costs for
subgrantees' regular employees.
    Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. In order to provide Federal assistance, you are
hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these
purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency
assistance and administrative expenses.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, Department
of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N.
Russo, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this declared emergency.
    The following areas of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have been
designated as adversely affected by this declared emergency:

    Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, and Suffolk Counties for emergency
protective measures (Category B), limited to direct Federal
assistance, under the Public Assistance program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-11506 Filed 5-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 19 (Tuesday, January 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 6152]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01960]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, January
31, 2013 at 2:00 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Gallagher, as duty officer, voted to consider the
items listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

     Dated: January 24, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-01960 Filed 1-25-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P