[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
LONGTERM EFFECTS OF DREDGING AND OPEN-WATER DISPOSAL ON THE APALACHICOLA BAY SYSTEM (FINAL REPORT) ROBERT J. LIVINGSTON, PH D. DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32306 JANUARY, 1984 Fit 5io @o te @4 Longterm Effects oL Dredging and Open-water Disposal on the Apalachicola System (F Report) :3- lbo Funding for this project was provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration _J through the Office of Coastal Management, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. Robert J. Livingston, Ph.D. Department of Biological Science Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 January, 1984 Summary of Conclusions Using field data (physical, chemical, biological) taken in the Apalachicola Bay system from March, 1972, to the present time, a review was made concerning the impact of dredging and the deposition of spoils on the Apalachicola estuary. For the most part, data analysis was conducted on fixed (i.e. permanent) stations, which has the advantage of identifying long-term effects in specific areas of the bay. However, the use of infor- mation that was not necessarily directly related to the dredging program in the Apalachicola system disallowed a precise evaluation of certain aspects of the dredging. Such effects include immediate (short-term) area- and event-specific responses of various portions of the estuary to individual dredging events. The main dredging effort occurred within the Intracoastal Waterway although the opening of the two-mile channel (in 1976) and the contin ued dredging of Sike's Cut were considered to be important focal points of the overall analysis (from 1973 to the present). All dredging ceased in 1978, which, together with the two-mile channel opening or extension, constituted important events (or interventions) in the time-series analysis of the data. Seasonal cycles of important commercial species were reviewed in detail because of potential problems of dredging activities that could affect natural successions of estuarine productivity. Salinity effects were analyzed in some detail because of the central role of salinity in affecting biological productivity. All evaluations had to be carried out within seasonal and annual cycles of river flooding and drought. A complete review of background eco- logical conditions at most stations over the study period revealed habitat ii changes that were generally consistent with short- and long-term trends of climatological conditions. Several station-specific changes in the physical, chemical, and biological features of the estuary were related, directly or indirectly, with dredging activities: 1. Salinity at Sike's Cut was spatially and temporally related to dredging activities in the area. Prior to the 1978 cessation of dredging, there was considerable salinity stratification and generally high (stable) salinities at depth. From 1978 to the present, bottom salinities were generally lower despite periodic drought conditions, and various factors (salinity, dissolved oxygen) indicated less stratification of the water column as the cut filled in and cut off the movement of high-salinity water from the gulf into the estuary. Such salinity effects were translated into a local increase in species richness and diversity (as stenohaline gulf species penetrated the estuary) and a reduction of those organisms, many of the commercially valuable species, that usually utilize the estuary as a nursery (i.e., penaeid shrimp, blue crabs, finfishes). Such effects were supported by observed shifts in the biological (community) structure at Sike's Cut following the cessation of dredging in 1978. Preliminary sur- veys indicate that the area of impact is greater than that indicated in previous studies. This part of the study is continuing with an analysis of the distribution of salinity in Apalachicola Bay before and after the dredging of Sike's Cut in 1984. 2. No short-term effects of dredging were noted on various water quality factors and biological indices as a result of dredging operations in the Intracoastal Waterway and two-mile extension during winter months. 3. No significant long-term changes in habitat features were evident at stations that could have been affected by the opening of the two-mile extension in 1976. However, subtle (and statistically non-significant) changes in the biological response indicated altered conditions off Green Point relative to changes in the main (intracoastal) channel. The interpretation of increased freshwater input to the St. Vincent Sound area was thus not substantiated by statistically significant shifts in water quality (i.e., salinity) factors. However, long-term shifts in the biota indicate a diversion of fresh water to western sections of the Apalachicola estuary subsequent to the opening of the two-mile extension. 4. The dredged channels along the Intracoastal Waterway, the two-mile channel, and the East Point Channel created conditions for the con- centration of silt-laden sediment fractions and loading of specific (associated) contaminants such as heavy metals and organic matter. However, the propensity of such channels to act as sinks for such materials was dependent on various factors such as proximity to urban runoff, cir- culation conditions, and other seasonally adjusted variables. Infaunal benthic macroinvertebrate communities reflected such conditions and were adversely affected in certain portions of the East Point Channel and the two-mile channel. However, various areas along the Intracoastal Waterway and Sike's Cut were generally unaffected in terms of accumulations of con- taminated sediments. Thus, only those dredged areas that were proximal to contaminated storm-water runoff were characterized by contaminated sedi- ments and biological degradation. Location relative to land runoff and current structure are determinants of the impact of dredged channels in the Apalachicola estuary. iv 5. Overall analysis of dredging activities in the Apalachicola estuary indicated that such operations can affect the salinity regime and biological productivity of the system. However, such effects are complex and depend on natural, long-term changes in the bay system and the exact nature of the dredging activity in terms of timing, location, and effort. Because the dredged channels of the intracoastal waterway serve as a nur- sery area for developing young of commercially important species such as penaeid shrimp during spring, summer, and fall months, dredging of the bay should be restricted to winter-early spring months (December-March), when habitat disturbance due to dredging is minimal. v Fl ori da State Uni versi ty. Aquati c Study Group I. PERSONNEL: F.S.U. AQUATIC STUDY GROUP Robert J. Livingston (Principal Investigator, Overall Project Management) Duane A. Meeter (Associate Investigator: Statistical Analysis) DATA PROCESSINGANALYSIS Glenn C. Woodsum (Computer programming, data management and analysis) Loretta E. Wolfe (Computer programming, statistical analysis) J. Michael Kuperberg (Project coordination, field sampling and analysis) Shelley J. Roberts (Data transmission, formation of computer files) FIELD OPERATIONS Robert L. Howell IV (Field collections, epibenthic fishes/invertebrates) William Greening (Field collections, water/sediment analysis) BIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS Christopher C. Koenig (Bioassay, experimental protocols, biology of fishes) Kenneth R. Smith (Oligochaete worms, benthic invertebrates) Gary L. Ray (Polychaete worms, benthic invertebrates) Bruce M. Mahoney (Benthic invertebrates, experimental ecology) William H. Clements (Benthic invertebrates, feeding habits of fishes, experimental ecology) William R. Karsteter (Aquatic insects, benthic invertebrates, water/sediment chemistry) vi GRADUATE STUDENTS Kenneth Leber (Ph.D.) (Feeding habits of decapod crustaceans, experimen- tal ecology) Kevan Main.(Ph.D.) (Predator-prey interactions, behavioral ecology) Joseph Luczkovich (Ph.D.) (Predator-prey interactions, fish foraging, experimental ecology) Jon Schmidt (Ph.D.) (Benthic invertebrates, experimental ecology) Kelly Custer (M.S.) (Feeding habits of decapod crustaceans, food pro- cessing by benthic invertebrates) David Mayer (M.S.) (Ecology of penaeid shrimp, benthic invertebrates) Susan Mattson (M.S.) (Senthic invertebrates, experimental ecology) Carrie Phillips (M.S.) (Benthic invertebrates, experimental ecology) LABORATORY ANALYSIS Joanne Greening (Sample preparation, oligochaete worms) Kim Burton (Sample preparation, rough sorting) Howard L. Jelks (Rough sorting, sample preparation) Mike Hollingsworth (Sample preparation) Stephen B. Holm (Sample preparation) Dean lacampo (Sample preparation) John B. Montgomery (Sample preparation) Brenda C. Litchfield (Sample preparation) Mike Goldman (Sample preparation) vii Preface and Acknowledgements This project was funded by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulati.on (Project Officer, Stephen Leitman) through a contract awarded by the department to the Florida State University (Robert J. Livingston, Principal Investigator, and the Aquatic Study Group). The objective of the study was to review existing field data concerning the Apalachicola Bay System taken continuously by the F.S.U. Aquatic Study Group from March, 1972 to the present. A general review of the scope of the project, with appropriate scientific references, is given by Livingston (1983 a, b). Field work has been carried out by numerous workers over the years (Livingston 1983 a). Data processing was carried out by the principal investigator with help from Glenn C. Woodsum, Loretta E. Wolfe, and Duane A. Meeter. Data transmission was accomplished by Shelley J. Roberts while J. Michael Kuperberg handled the administration of the grant. Additional information on dredging activities in the study area was provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile, Alabama) and Mr. Stephen Leitman (Florida State Department of Environmental Regulation; Tallahassee, Florida). Data analysis was carried out using software systems developed by the Aquatic Study Group in conjunction with the.Florida State University Computer Center. viii List of Tables Table 1: A. Effects of dredging and placement of dredge spoil: General and immediate effects (from Darnell, 1976). B. Effects of dredging and placement of spoil: effects of dredging in bays and estuaries (from Darnell, 1976). Table 2: Effects of dredging and placement of dredge spoil: effects of canalization and spoil placement in marshlands (from Darnell, 1976). Table 3: Station descriptions of areas used for water and sediment quality analyses in the Apalachicola River Bay system during the summer and fall of 1983 (see Figure 1; Livingston, 1983b for placement of stations). Table 4: Daily disposal volumes (cubic yards) at specific spoil sites (Figure 6) at Sike's Cut (St. George Island), the Intracoastal Waterway, the two-mile channel and extension and the East Point Channel from 1970 to present. Table 5: Monthly totals (cubic yards) of dredging baywide and at the various disposal sites (lumped by site) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1970 to the present time. Table 6: Calendar year (January-December) totals for river flow (total; M3/sec), Apalachicola rainfall (total; cm) and East Bay rainfall (total; cm) Irom 1972 through 1982. Table 7: Monthly totals by year of river flow (m3/sec), Apalachicola rain- fall (cm per month) and East Bay rainfall (cm per month) from 1972 through 1982. ix Table 8: Dissolved oxygen (ppm), color (Platinum-Cobalt units), turbidity (Jackson turbidity units), and temperature (OC) taken monthly at permanent stations in the Apalahcicola estuary from March, 1972 through August, 1983. Table 9: Salinity (0/00) taken monthly at permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from March, 1972 through August, 1983. Table 10: Seasonal averages of Apalachicola River Flow, local rainfall (Apalachicola, East Bay) and salinity in the Apalahcicola estuary (3/72 - 6/83). Winter, spring, summer, and fall (3 month) aver- ages were used for the trend analysis. Table 11: Pearson correlation analysis of monthly salinity (surface, bottom) at stations in the Apalachicola estuary (1972-1983) and corresponding Apalachicola River Flow and rainfall (East Bay, Apalachicola). Table 12: Analysis of covariance run with salinity from permanent stations in Apalachicola Bay and Apalachicola River Flow. (Multiple com- parisons of appropriate years). Table 13: Dates of dredging activities and sampling events at stations 1, 2, and 1B in Apalachicola Bay. The storm event was associated with a hurricane in the northern Gulf of Mexico (9/27/75). Dredging events were in the immediate vicinity of our sampling stations. Table 14: Maximum daily average wind velocities and maximum wind velocities (per month) in the Apalachicola Bay region from 1975 through 1978. Data were provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Apalachicola, Florida). x Table 15: Review of the short-term response of various physical and chemi- cal water quality features of the Apalachicola estuary to high wind in the Apalachicola region. Table 16: Analysis of variance of specific physical/chemical factors at various stations in Apalachicola Bay taken before and after the cessation of dredging in 1978. Table 17: Mean (surface) salinities (ppt) in the Apalachicola Bay system before (August, 1953-August, 1954) and after (June, 1973-May, 1974) the opening of Sike's Cut. Comparison is made during periods of comparable rainf all and river flow (after Dawson, 1955, and Livingston, 1979). Table 18: Correlation coefficients for fish (A) and invertebrate (B) indi- ces taken at the Apalachicola stations over the study period (1972-1983). Table 19: ANOVA for fish and invertebrate indices before (1975-77) and after (1979-81) the cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in 1978. Table 20: Analysis of variance of selected physical/chemical variables taken at three stations in the Apalachicola estuary before and after the development of the two-mile extension in 1976. Table 21: Summary of station characteristics, water quality features, sedi- ment analyses, and biological structure at stations in the Apalachicola estuary during the summer-fall of 1983 (after Livingston, 1983b). xi List of Figures Figure 1: Chart showing the Apalachicola River-Bay system with stations used by the Florida State University Aquatic Study Group (Principal Investigator; R. J. Livingston) for analyses of water and sediment quality and the distribution in faunal benthic macroinvertebrates (Livingston, 1983b). Figure 2: Net flow of water in the Apalachicola Bay system, averaged over a complete tidal cycle (data courtesy of Dr. B. A. Christensen, University of Florida). Figure 3: Drainage from Tate's Hell Swamp into the Apalachicola estuary via East Bay as observed during periods of high local rainfall and runoff or highly colored water from the Tate's Hell swamp (Figure 1). The influence of the combination of highly colored water coming out of the Tate's Hell Swamp through East and West Bayou is illustrated. Figure 4: Factor train analysis of the major physical and chemical effects of dredging and spoil placement on bays, estuaries, and marshlands (from Darnell, 1976). Figure 5: Permanent sampling stations established by the F.S.U. Aquatic Study Group for longterm field analyses in the Apalachicola River-Bay system (March, 1972-present). Figure 6: Dredge spoil disposal sites in Apalachicola Bay for the two- mile channel and extension, the Intracoastal Waterway, the Sike's Cut (St. George Island) Channel, and the East Point Channel. xii Fi gure 7: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes in Apalachicola Bay from 1970 to present. Figure 8: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at Sike's Cut (St. George Island) from 1970 to present. Figure 9: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes in the Intracoastal Waterway from 1970 to present. Figure 10: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at the two-mile chan- nel and extension from 1970 to present. Figure 11: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at the East Point Channel from 1970 to present. Figure 12: Monthly totals (cubic yards) of dredging baywide and at various disposal sites (lumped by site) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1970 to the present time. Figure 11: Iluster analysis of total annual Apalachicola River Flow (1972-1982). Figure 14: Apalachicola River Flow from 1972 through 1982 showing: (A) monthly mean river flow, (B) 5-month weighted moving averages of the monthly mean data, and (C) monthly mean river flow averaged by season (winter December, January, February; spring = March, April, May; summer = June, July, August; fall = September, October, December). xiii Figure 15: Total monthly rainfall (cm) in the Tate's Hell Swamp (East Bay Tower) from 1972 through 1982. Data are presented as totals per month (A), five month weighted moving averages (B), and as seasonal averages (C) (as defined in Figure 14). Figure 16: Total monthly rainfall (cm) in the Apalachicola (NOAA station at the airport) from 1972 through 1982. Data are presented as totals per month (A), five month weighted moving averages (B), and as seasonal averages (C) (as defined in Figure 14). Figure 17: Cluster analysis of rainfall (year by monthly totals) in East Bay (A) and Apalachicola (8). Figure 18: Scattergrams of the raw data concerning depth/Secchi depth (m), turbidity (JTU), dissolved oxygen (ppm), color (Pt-Co units), and temperature (OC) at permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1982. Figure 19: Scattergrams of salinity (ppt) at permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1982. Figure 20: Salinity (surface and bottom; 0/00) at various stations in the Apalachicola estuary from March, 1972 through June, 1983. Data have been averaged by season as described above. Figure 21: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 22: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. xiv Figure 23: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station I and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 24: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station I and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 25: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station I from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 26: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 27: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 28: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 29: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. xv Figure 30: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 31: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station IA and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 32: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 33: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 34: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station IA and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 35: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station IA and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 36: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. xvi Figure 37: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 38: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 39: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 40: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station IB and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Figure 41: Long-term variation of salinity (bottom, ppt) at various sta- tions in the Apalachicola estuary (June, 1972, to May, 1977). Figure 42: Cluster analysis of years by species of fishes at West Past (1A) and Sike's Cut (1B) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1982. Figure 43: Plots of fish and invertebrate indices at stations 1A and 1B before (1975-77) and after (1979-81) the cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in the Apalachicola estuary in 1978. Figure 44: Analysis of salinity (ppt) at stations 1A and 1B and dredging events (cubic yards at Sike's Cut) from 1971 through 1983. xvii Figure 45: Numbers of epibenthic fishes taken per trawl tow at stations 1, 2, 3, 1A, 1B, and 1X in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 46: Numbers of spot (Leiostomus xanthurus) taken per trawl tow at stations 1A and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 47: Total numbers of species and Brillouin species diversity for fishes taken at stations 1A and 1B, in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 48: Numbers of epibenthic invertebrates per trawl tow at stations 2, 1A, and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 49: Numbers of white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) taken.per trawl tow at stations 2, 1A, and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 50: Numbers of blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus taken per trawl tow at stations 1, 2, 1A, and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 51: Numbers of pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) taken per trawl tow at stations 1, 2, 1A, and IB in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 52: Numbers of brief squid (Lolliguncula brevis) taken per trawl tow at stations 1A and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. xviii Figure 53: Total number of invertebrate species and invertebrate species diversity at stations IA and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. Figure 54: Analyses of fish and invertebrate data at stations 1A and 1B three years before and three years after cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in 1978. xix List of Appendices Appendix A: Synopsis of findings concerning dredging and the proposed East Point Breakwater (Livington, 1983a). XX Contents page Summary of Conclusions ....................................... ii Floria State University Aquatic Study Group .................. vi Preface and Acknowledgments ................................ viii List of Tables ............................................... ix List of Figures ............................................... x List of Appendices ........................................... xx I. Introduction ................................................. I A. Environmental Setting ................................... 0. 1 B. Effects of Dredging and Spoil Placement .................. 2 H. Methods and Materials ........................................ 6 A. Station Placement ........................................ 6 B. Chemical Methods ......................................... 7 1. Water Quality ........................................ 7 2. Sediments ........................... 0... *.0.0 ........ 8 C. Biological Methods ....................................... 10 D. Statistical/Computational Methods ........................ 11 III. Questions Asked ............................... 0.**0.4.00*0000 16 IV. Results and Discussion ....................................... 18 A. Dredging Activities in the Apalachicola Estuary .......... 18 B. Climatological Factors ................................... 19 1. River Flow ........................................... 19 2. Rainfall ............................................. 20 xxi C. Physical/Chemical Environment ............................ 21 1. Temperature .......................................... 22 2. Dissolved Oxygen ..................................... 22 3. Color ................................................ 22 4. Turbidity ............................................ 23 5. Depth/Secchi Depth ................................... 23 6. Salinity ............................................. 23 a. Long-term Trends, Seasonal Averages ...... .00.*0.0 24 D. Short-term Response to Specific Dredging Events .......... 26 1. Two-mile Extension (station 1) ....................... 27 2. Intracoastal Waterway (station 2) .................... 27 3. Sike's Cut (stations 1A, 1B) ....... 28 E. Impact of Dredging: Sike's Cut ......... 29 1. Habitat Features ..................................... 29 2. Salinity Changes and Biological Response ............. 30 a. Comparison with Other Estuarine Stations ......... 30 b. Temporal Changes ................................. 31 F. Impact of Dredging: Two-mile Extension .................. 37 1. Habitat Features ..................................... 37 G. Impact of Dredging: The Intracoastal Waterway ........... 38 1. Water Quality, Sediment Quality, and Tnfauna ......... 38 H. East Point Channel ....................................... 39 1. Water Quality, Sediment Quality, and Infauna ......... 39 I. Comparison of Results to Other Findings .................. 40 V. Literature Cited ............................................. 42 VI. Tables xxii I I VII. Fi gures I VIII. Appendices I I I I I I I I I I I I I I xxiii I I I . I nt roducti on A. Environmental Setting Livingston (1983, 1983a, b, c) has given a general review of the eco- logical background and socioeconomic character of the lower Apalachicola basin. The aquatic productivity of the estuary depends on three primary factors: (1) The Apalachicola River system which delivers dissolved and particulate organic matter and inorganic nutrients to the estuary while maintaining seasonally variable control of the salinity regime of major portions of the Apalachicola Bay system (East Bay, Apalachicola Bay, St. Vincent Sound, western St. George Sound; Figure 1). (2) Local rainfall and overland runoff from surrounding marshes, swamps, and wetlands. (3) The physiographic features of the system which include the shallow basin and enclosure by a barrier island system (mainly St. George Island and St. Vincent Island; Figure 1) which profoundly affect the current structure and salinity regime of the bay system. Depths in the Apalachicola Bay System average 2-3 meters. Tidal ranges are relatively small, approximating 0.3-0.4 m at the highest tides. Such tides are unsymmetrical and semi-diurnal except during periods of high winds which tend to disrupt the usual tidal pattern and have a strong influence on the current structure of the system. Current velocities in the estuary average 1.5-2 feet per second although velocities near the passes (i.e. Indian Pass, West Pass, Sike's Cut; Figure 1) may reach 3 feet per second. Net flows tend to move to the west from St. George Sound into Apalachicola Bay where they merge with water moving out of East Bay (Figure 2). There is a net westward flow through St. Vincent Sound; however, move- ment through Indian Pass may be retarded by the Picoline Bar. The major 2 outlet for low salinity water out of the estuary is West Pass although wind and tides have a major influence on net outflows at any given time (Figure 3). B. Effects of Dredging and Spoil Placement The impact of dredging and spoil placement on the physical/chemical environment and biological structure of estuaries has been reviewed by various authors (Marshall, 1968; Odum, 1970; Lee and Plumb, 1974). Such potential general effects have been summarized by Darnell (1976) (Table 1A). Specific categories of impact include alteration of bottom topography, modification of natural patterns of water circulation, altered water quality, and siltation effects because of the accumulation of fine- grained particles. Odum (1970) and others have alluded to the fact that sediments control various ecological factors in estuaries in terms of destabilization of the benthic habitat and the tendancy of fines to be associated with high organic concentrations, oxygen depletion due to high biochemical oxygen demand (B.O.D.) and high chemical oxygen demand (C.O.D.), and the concentration of toxic pollutants (i.e. oil and grease, organic materials, metals) due to absorption of such materials to the sedi- ments (Fines). These trends are evident in bays and estuaries (Table 1B) where sedimentation rates from overland runoff can be particularly high. Areas where marshes are effected can also suffer impacts due to dredging and spoiling (Table 2). Darnell (1976) has given a detailed synopsis of the combined effects of dredge/spoil activities in bay systems (Figure 4) which illustrates potential problems to be examined when analyzing the impact in any given area. 3 Since the early review of the problem, considerable research has been carried out to address specific effects of dredge/spoil activities in areas outside and within the Apalachicola estuary. The location of the dredging activity is important to the overall impact. Water from highly con- taminated disposal sites can be toxic to larval organisms when compared to the dredge site proper or areas removed from the dredge site (DeCoursey and Vernberg, 1975). However, Hoss et al. (1974) showed that such effects from contaminated sediments are species-specific, and Sissenwine and Saila (1974) demonstrated that dredge and spoil effects may have no demonstrable effect on finfish fisheries in the general area of operations. On the other hand, dredging in upland areas to form isolated canals can have profound adverse effects on water quality, sediment quality, and the natural (biological) productivity of an estuary (Kaplan et al., 1974; Lindall et al., 1975; Adkins and Bowman, 1976). Likewise, dredging and filling can have a direct, adverse impact on grassbeds (Briggs and O'Connor, 1971) and shellfish (Mackin, 1961; Rose, 1973) in the immediate vicinity of the dredging operation. Such effects may be localized (Ingle, 1952) and specific to a given environmental situation and may depend to a considerable degree on the timing and form of the dredging operations (Mackin, 1961). Field observations in some estuaries indicate that sedi- ment resuspension due to dredging.may be similar to that due to natural changes induced by storms (Bohlen et al., 1979) so that an impact analysis should be carefully designed to include the natural background variation of environmental factors in the specific estuary in question. Various studies have been carried out in the general region (i.e., the northeast Gulf of Mexico and surrounding areas). Subrahmanyam and 4 Kruczynski found that man-made islands (from dredge spoil) in Dickerson Bay (north Florida) were rapidly colonized by polychaete worms due primarily to immigration from surrounding areas. Lee and Jones (1982) showed that con- taminants such as heavy metals, organochlorine pesticides, and nutrients attached to sediments generally were not released to an appreciable degree to the associated water column. Conclusions were drawn from elutriate tests that open water disposal of contaminated sediments from a Texas estuary would not cause a significant adverse impact on water quality in the Gulf of Mexico. According to a study for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Water and Air Research, Inc., 1975), maintenance dredging in Apalachicola Bay in 1974 had no significant effects on water quality, plankton, coliform bacteria, or benthic invertebrates. According to this study, natu.ral disturbances (weather, wind, floods) had greater affects on levels of suspended solids and turbidities than dredging and no metals or coliform bacteria were released to the water column. Benthic invertebrates suffered only localized, short-term effects in the channel and on spoil banks; elsewhere, the bay was unaffected by maintenance dredging during the winter or early spring. This study was based on short-term data ("before dredging . . . after dredging"; February-July). General reviews of dredging activities in the region are given by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District (1976, 1981). Taylor (1978) evaluated the effects of dredging and open water dispo- sal on 28 sites along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Apalachicola Bay to Lake Borgne, Florida. Four sites along the Intracoastal Waterway in Apalachicola Bay were analyzed. Taylor (1978) dismissed the accumulation of silt and clay in disposal areas as not significant. It is somewhat 5 difficult to make a detailed comparison of data taken only once at dif- ferent times (i.e., November, 1977-February, 1978) at the various sites along a relatively broad area of study. Benthic infauna were comparatively rich at 2 of the Apalachicola sites. However, according to the overall totals, channel stations were relatively depauperate (2,251 individuals) relative to spoil stations (8,057) and undredged areas (9.357 individuals). The most depauperate macroinvertebrate fauna were usually noted in channels at sites 1, 2, and 3 in Apalachicola Bay relative to spoil sites and undredged areas. All four sites in Apalachicola Say were considered "environmental sensitive due to the proximity of oysters and seagrass beds." This study was carried out during winter periods when stress from high temperature and low dissolved oxygen is minimal. Taylor (1978) indicated that, although channel maintenance dredging operations are in most instan- ces disruptive, such alterations are "localized" and "largely temporary." However, because of the relatively limited sampling effort in any given area, such conclusions may not be applicable to all the portions of the survey area. In addition, impact based on system-wide alterations (i.e. current structure, salinity) due to dredging could escape detection because of the limited scope of the sampling. The relatively limited scope of the Taylor study in any given area simply disallows broad conclusions con- cerning the impact on dredging and spoil deposit operations on the aquatic areas in question. A review of the scope of the problems associated with dredging activities has been given by Darnel'l (1976). Zeh (1979) and Mehta and Zeh (1980) have studied the impact of Sike's Cut on Apalachicola Bay. The authors concluded that the maximum influence 6 of the inlet on the bay may be expected to occur during spring tides. Such influence was considered to be."fairly localized" and existing oyster reefs in the bay to be well away from the influence of the inlet on the bay. A. Station Placement H. Methods and Materials General descriptions of the various methods of field analysis of phy- sical, chemical, and biological features of the Apalachicola estuary are given by Livingston (1978, 1980, 1983) and Livingston et al. (1976). Station locations for detailed spatial relationships (Figure 1; Livingston, 1983b) and long-term studies (Figure 5; Livingston, 1978) allowed various forms of analysis of the multidisciplinary data base. Such data have been used for this report. A series of 55 stations were established in the lower Apalachicola River system (including various tributaries and creeks), East Bay, Apalachicola Bay, St. Vincent Sound, and western St. George Sound (Figure 1). Stations were designated in the following way: 1. All Apalachicola River system stations were marked with the prefix "R." 2. All stations that were permanent collection areas in the long- term analysis (12 years) of the Apalachicola system by the FSU research group were given their established numbers (1, 1A, 1B, 1C, IX, 1E, 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, 5B, 6). 3. New East Bay stations were marked with the prefix "E." 4. New St. Vincent Sound stations were marked with the prefix It V. It 5. New Apalachicola Bay stations were marked with the prefix "A." 6. New St. George Sound stations were marked with the prefix "G." 7 A detailed breakdown of exact station locations is given in Table 3. B. Chemical Methodology (water, sediments) Specific scientific methods used over the long-term research effort in the Apalachicola Bay system (Figure 1) have been given in a series of publications (Livingston et al., 1974, 1976, 1977, 1978; Livingston, 1975a, 1976 a, b, c, d, 1979a, 1981; Livingston and Duncan, 1979; Livingston and Loucks, 1979; Meeter et al., 1979; White et al., 1979), and such details will not be reviewed here., A parallel group of publications has outlined various management approaches used in conjunction with the scientific effort (Livingston, 1975b, 1976b-e, 1978, 1979a,, b. 1980, 1981, 1982a, b, 1983; Livingston and Joyce, 1977; Livingston and Loucks, 1979; Livingston et al., 1974, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1982). Livingston et al. (1974) outlined the key features of the tri-river drainage system (Figure 2) and listed various potential and real problems of development with suggestions for management initiatives to protect the resources associated with the Apalachicola valley. Livingston (1975b) listed the various state and federal laws and regulations pertaining to environmental problems in aquatic areas with application to the Apalachicola situation. The methods of analysis that relate salinity to various biological processes in the Apalachicola estuary is given by Livingston (1979a). 1. Water Quality Water samples (surface and bottom) were taken at all fixed stations with a I-liter Kemmerer bottle. Temperature and dissolved oxygen were measured with Y.S.I. dissolved oxygen meters. Salinity was determined with a temperature-compensated refractometer calibrated periodically with standard sea-water. Turbidity was taken with a Hach model 2100-A turbidi-meter. Apparent color was analyzed with an American Public 8 Health Association platinum-cobalt standard test. Light penetration was estimated with a standard Secchi disk, and water depth was routinely moni- tored at each sampling site. The pH was measured with portable pH meters. The date and time, along with appropriate field notes, were recorded at each sampling station. To collect other samples for water quality analysis, a sterile plastic bag was used. Each collection included at least 100 ml of sample. Sample containers were not filled completely; an air space of at least one-fourth the total volume was maintained. According to established procedures, samples that were not analyzed immediately were placed on ice or refrigerated (1-40C) and analyzed within six hours or less. Sterile sample containers were filled below the surface of the water; a sweeping motion was used and the open end of the container was kept in the direction of the sweep. Chemical oxygen demand (Hach system, EPA-approved), biochemical oxygen demand (Standard Methods, 15th edition), oils and greases (Standard Methods, 15th edition, partition- gravimetric method), fecal coliforms (Hach multiple-tube fermentation tech- nique, EPA approved), N03-N (Standard Methods, 14th edition, Brucini method), and P04-P (Standard Methods, 15th edition, ascorbic acid method) were analyzed using standard laboratory techniques. A Bausch and Lomb Spectronic 2000 spectrophotometer (double beam, 2 nm slit width) was used for all measurements. 2. Sediments Sediment analyses were carried out at all 55 station locations (Figure 1). Granulometric analyses were run on a well mixed 10-cm core sample from each station. Corer dimensions are 76 mm diameter and 45 cm2 cross-sectional area. Unpreserved sediments were divided into a coarse (> 62 micrometers) and a silt-clay (< 62 micrometers) fraction. The coarse fraction was 9 analyzed by wet sieving using 1/2-phi-unit intervals. The silt-clay fraction was analyzed using a pipette method in 3/2-phi-unit intervals from 4 phi to 6 phi and in 1-phi intervals for finer fractions (6 phi to 10 phi). Percent organics were determined by ashing in a muffle furnace for 1 hour or more at temperatures approximating 500-5500C. For chemical analyses, all core samples were taken and transferred to clear plastic containers. Only 6 g dry weight of sample were needed for PIXE (proton-induced X-ray emission) analysis. We collected enough sediment for 10 g dry weight. Samples were taken to the F.S.U. Marine Laboratory for drying, which was accomplished in clear plastic Petri dishes covered with kim-wipes after removal of water by means of a press. Dry samples were then delivered to Element Analysis Corporation (Tallahassee, Florida). The PIXE methodology was used as a rough scanning approach (accuracy, � 10%; precision, � 5%; H C. Kaufmann, personal communication). With sediment samples, certain metals such as cadmium, barium, arsenic, tin, and mercury were listed as "less than" a certain value. Such figures can only be considered as tentative and cannot be taken as absolute values without more detailed analysis. Again, this method was used as a broad, range-finding approach, which should be followed up with more intensive chemical (analytical) methodology. Shallow sediment temperature and sali- nity did not differ substantially from our bottom water measurements and were not listed separately. Apalachicola River flow data (Blountstown, Florida) were provided by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile, Alabama). Rainfall data were provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Apalachicola, Florida) and the East Bay tower station of the Florida 10 Department of Agriculture, Division of Forestry (Tate's Hell Swamp, near the Sumatra road in Franklin County). C. Biological Methodology Previous analyses (Livingston, unpublished data) indicated that 10 core samples (76 mm diameter, 45 cm2 cross sectional area, 10 cm depth) are adequate for a representative sample of benthic infaunal macroinvertebrates at each station. All samples were sieved through a 0.5-mm sieve. Each sieve fraction was preserved with 10% formalin and stained with Rose Bengal to facilitate picking. The samples were elutriated where necessary (if there was any heavy sand or shell residue) and all individuals removed for counting and identification to species under a dissecting microscope. Preliminary analyses of the data indicated that the following biological. indices of the data would be used: 1. Number of individuals per M2 (density) 2. Total number of individuals (per sample) 3. Species richness (total number of species per sample) 4. Brillouin species diversity 5. Brillouin evenness (equitability) 6. Hurlbert's diversity River/marsh areas were sampled for fishes with seines during the first four years of study. Offshore stations were sampled at night with. gill and trammel nets (2.5-cm mesh) and during the day and at night with 5-m otter trawls (1.9 cm mesh wing and body; 0.6 cm mesh liner). Two to seven repeti- tive 2-minute trawl tows were taken at various stations at speeds approxi- mating 2-2.5 knots on a.monthly basis from 1972 to present. The number of samples necessary for species accumulation curves exceeding 90% were determined by methods similar to those described by Livingston et al. (1976). All animals were preserved immediately in 10% buffered formalin, sorted, identified to species, counted, and measured (standard length). Larger predators and game fishes were also taken with hook and line and by examination of catches made by sports fishermen at a local fish camp. D. Statistical/Computational Methods All calculations involving fishes and invertebrates were based on num- bers of individuals. Matrices of all variables were developed according to system, date, and station. Storage, retrieval, and analysis were performed with an interactive computer program (SPECS, MATRIX; Woo dsum and Wolfe, 1983). Where necessary, skewness and kurtosis were estimated to assess the reasonableness of the assumption of normality. Log and square root trans- formations of the data.were made as indicated. A detailed review of the use of such techniques is given by Livingston (1975), Livingston et al. (1978), and Meeter and Livingston (1978). All cluster analyses were run using various similarity coefficients. The,Bray-Curtis index of similarity, which has been shown to be an effective device for discriminating clusters of animal groups, has been applied here to identify groups of locations based on similar charac- teristics across a number of variables. The index is defined as n xi - yi n (xi - yi) where 12 xi = value of ith variable at location one, and yi = value of ith variable at location two. The index is designed to range between zero and one, and for this to be true, the rel ati onshi p 0 < xi - yi (2) -Xi + y i < must hold for each variable. It is apparent from (1) that the scales upon which the variables are measured have an important influence on the relative contribution each W variable makes to the overall index. Looking at the denominator of the second term above, it is apparent that a variable whose values range from 100-280 will contribute at least 200 to this sum while a variable whose values range from 0-0.85 can contribute at most 1.70. Thus the effect of this second variable, relative to the first, is practically non-existent. To overcome this scaling difficulty prior to the application of (1), a different line of analyses was developed. A commonly used method of rescaling a variable is the "normalization" procedure, was used to trans- form the value set into a new set with mean zero and standard deviation one: xi (xi - X) (3) S where x is the mean of the value set, and s is the standard deviation. This transformation cannot be used in conjunction with the Bray-Curtis index, however, because the restriction imposed by inequality (2) above may 13 not be satisfied. To solve this problem, we considered the case where, for variable 1, the value at one location was one standard deviation above the mean (xi = +1) and at another location the value was one standard deviation below the mean (yi -1). Here xi - yi I i - (-l)j- 2 (xi + Yi T_ + (-I) which is undefined. Another approach was used to transform each variable so that its values range between zero and one (Spa**th, 1980). This is accomplished as follows: xiii xi Xmin (4) Xmax Xmin where xmin minimum value found for this variable, and xmax maximum value found for the variable. Thus the transformed value (xi") becomes zero for the smallest observation (xi = xmin) and one for the largest observation (xi = xmax), and inter- mediate values occupy the same relative positions within the new range as they did in the original range. This method of rescaling imposes a common scale to all variables and ensures equal consideration of all variables in the ca lculation of the similarity index. However, truly equal consideration of all variables may not be desirable if one of the measured variables is a quantity that varies little from one location to another, its coefficient of variation (C) is C = S/x (5) where s is the sample standard deviation and x the mean, and may be quite low. If a second variable differs more from site to site and has a 14 relatively high coefficient of variation, the following data set is possible: Rescaled V, Rescaled V2 Location Variable I Variable 2 V, V211 1 6 6 .5 .5 2 7 8 1 .75 3 5 10 0 1 4 6 2 .5 0 5 6 4 .5 .25 6 5 6 0 .5 7 7 6 1= - .5 -il = 6 -R2 = 6 il .5 x2" = .5 sl = 0.816 S2 = 2.582 s," = 0.408 S2" = 0.323 C1 = 0.136 C2 = 0.43 Cl" = 0.816 C2" = 0.646 Thus, the greater initial variability of the second variable (C2 > Cl) has been lost following data transformation (Cl > C2) while the relatively higher variability of V, will mean that V, becomes the more "important' variable in discriminating clusters of locations. This means that there is an artificial exaggeration of the importance of V1. Based on the actual values above it seems likely that V2 would be the more "useful" variable in attempting to distinguish clusters of locations. We have developed an adjustment to this rescaling procedure that minimizes the above difficulty. We therefore would define the "relative coefficient of variation" for variable k as 15 Crk = CklCmax (6) where Ck is the coefficient of variation (5) and Cmax is the largest coefficient of variation found for all variables used. We would then adjust the rescaled values computed according to (4) by xik" = (CRk - xik") + (1 - CRO/2 (7) The first term of (7) permits a transformed variable to range only in pro- portion to its original coefficient of variation. Thus the only variable allowed the full 0 to 1 range in its transformed state is that variable with the highest original coefficient (Ck = Cmax). The second term of (7) adjusts the range of each rescaled variable so that its mid-range point is 0.5. If we apply (6) and (7) to the data values of the sample data set above we find that CrI = 0.316, Cr2 = 1, and that the adjusted rescaled values are V1 V2 0.5 .5 0.66 .75 0.34 1 0.5 0 0.5 .25 0.34 .5 0.66 .5 The values of V1 have still been placed in a scale compatible with that of V2, but they have been placed in a better perspective when considering the original amounts of variation. 16 This adjustment is sensitive to outliers because they can increase the coefficient of variation for a variable, thereby increasing the likelihood that it will be selected as Cmax in equation (6). One must examine the data prior to the application of this method, therefore, and possibly make .other data transformations (e.g. logarithms) prior to its use. One might also perform initial transformations if a linear relationship is found to exist between the mean and standard deviation of the variables to be used in the analysis. The ANOVA results will be analyzed later in this report (see Results and Discussion). When analyzing salinity at each station, it is important to consider the effects of riverflow and rainfall. A significant dif- ference between the during and after dredging mean salinities may reflect the influence of a flood more than a true dredging effect. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is helpful in eliminating this problem. ANCOVA assumes there is a linear relationship between the dependent variable and each covariate. Using a combination of regression and analysis of variance techniques, the effects of the covariate(s) (riverflow and rainfall) are removed and the residuals analyzed for the effect of the treatments on salinity. III. Ouestions Asked The salinity regime of the Apalachicola estuary is critical to the -form and processes concerned with the productivity of the system (Livingston, 1983). Relatively little information is available concerning the long-term effects of dredging on estuarine salinity and, consequently, the biological organization of the system. Accordingly, the established data base was used to address the following questions: 17 1. Has there been a change in the salinity regime in the estuary related to cessation of dredging activities in 1978? 2. Has there been a change in the salinity regime related to creation of 2-mile extension channel in 1976? 3. Is the salinity at Sike's Cut different from that of the rest of the bay? If it is different, to what extent has the bay been affected by the opening of Sike's Cut? 4. Are animal populations and communities at Sike's Cut different from those in the rest of the bay? 5. Have there been changes in animal populations or communities related to cessation of dredging or the 2-mile extension work? 6. Do specific dredge/disposal events cause any observable short-term changes in turbidity, color, or dissolved oxygen? 7. Do specific dredge/disposal events cause any observable short-term changes in animal populations or communities? Specific events will be evaluated such as the pattern of maintenance dredging at Sike's Cut and the Intracoastal Waterway from the mouth of the Apalachicola River to the boundary between Apalachicola Bay and St. George Sound (Figure 1). The opening of the two-mile extension in 1976 will also be analyzed in terms of possible changes in salinity and other factors such as biological response to potential shifts in the movement of fresh water within the estuary. 18 IV. Results and Discussion A. Dredging Activities A detailed chart of dredge spoil sites along the two-mile channel, the Intracoastal Waterway, Sike's Cut, and the East Point-Channel is given in Figure 6. Daily disposal volumes (in cubic yards) by site from 1970 to present are given in Table 4 and Figures 7-11. Monthly totals of the dredging effort in Apalachicola Bay from 1970 to present is given in Table 5 and Figure 12. Most of the dredging, almost 4 million cubic yards, occurred within the Intracoastal Waterway. The two-mile channel and extension were second and third, respectively, in spoil volumes followed by Sike's Cut and the East Point Channel (Table 5). Most of the dredging activity in the bay took place from November through March with certain notable exceptions. Sike's Cut was dredged during late spring or summer months in 1971, 1975, and 1978. The Intracoastal Waterway was dredged in April 1977 and from April to June in 1978; activity in April 1978 was concentrated at sites 9 to 11 (our station 1C) (Table 4). During May, 1978, most of the dredging occurred at disposal sites 1-4. In June, 1978, such dredging took place at site 1A (near our Station 2). Dredging in the two-mile channel was per- formed in April, 1978 with disposal at sites 1-4 and 8. The two-mile extension was dredged during March and April, 1976 (Table 4). No dredging occurred during 1973 and the most active dredging periods took place during 1970, 1976, and 1978 (Figure 12). No dredging in Apalachicola Bay has taken place since 1978. 19 Specific interventions, to be used in statistical tests, occurred as follows: 1. Sike's Cut Site; dredging ceased in 1978 (up to this point in time, Sike's Cut had been routinely dredged from year to year). 2. Intracoastal Waterway; spring-summer dredging, 1978. 3. Two-mile extension; spring, 1976. 3. Overall cessation of dredging; 1978. The above interventions were chosen for either of two reasons: landmarks of dredging activity (newly dredged area, two mile extension, 1976; cessa- tion of dredging, baywide, 1978), and deviations from the usual winter dredging (summer dredging in the Intracoastal Waterway, 1978). B. Climatological Factors Since the distribution of salinity in space and time is considered as a major ecological variable (Livingston, 1983), specific climatological features which influence salinity (i.e., Apalachicola River flow and local rainfall) have been analyzed. 1. River Flow In terms of calendar year totals for river flow (Table 6), the highest annual river flows occurred in 1973 and 1975, with secondary high levels in 1976 and 1979. The lowest river flow was noted in 1981. A clus- ter analysis of these data (Figure 13) indicates that 1981 (an extremely 20 dry year) was differentiated from a cluster of the years 1973, 1975, 1976 and 1979, the so-called wet years. Monthly variation within a given year was highest in 1973 and 1980 which indicates strong differences between the winter-early spring flooding and the rest of the year. These generaliza- tions are graphically displayed in Figure 14. Winter and/or spring peaks are particularly noticeable during 1973 and 1980. Such peaks follow pat- terns which are quite similar (Figure 13), which is in line with long-term analyses indicating 6-7 year cycles of peak river flow (Meeter et al., 1979). The period from late 1980 through 1981 represents a major drought in the region (Table 7) which adds to the observation that 1981 was an unu- sual water year. Low flows were also observed during the fall of 1972 and 1974 (preceding the winter-spring floods) while the peak flow of 1980 was followed by the major drought of 1980-81. 2. Rainfall Local rainfall depends, in part, on prevailing wind conditions in the region, According to long-term trends (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration, Apalachicola, 1982), about 75% of the annual number of thun- derstorms occur during the summer months, and September is the wettest month of the year, on average, over the period on record (1943-present). Prevailing winds usually come from the northeast or north from September through February and from the southeast, southwest, or west from March through August. Listings of local rainfall (East Bay, Apalachicola) are given in Table 7, and graphical representations of the data are given in Figures 15 and 16. Although the general pattern of long-term rainfall was similar-in East Bay (i.e., Tate's Hell Swamp) and Apalachicola, higher rainfall totals 21 occurred generally at the Tate's Hell site. The highest summer peaks were noted in 1974-1975 and 1979, following an approximate five year periodicity of local rainfall as noted by Meeter et al. (1979). Drought periods were noted in 1972, from 1976 to 1979, and from 1980 to 1981. Local rainfall was generally low during the major river flooding of 1973 which indicates that local rainfall is not only seasonally different from river flow patterns but differs on a multi-year basis as well (see Meeter et al., 1979, and Livingston and Loucks, 1979, for a more complete discussion of the relationships between temporal patterns of Apalachicola river flow and local rainfall). Cluster analyses of local, annual trends (by year) are given in Figure 17. The general trends, as described above, are shown in both dendograms; drought years (1972, 1976; 1977, 1981) were clustered together as were periods of high rainfall (1974, 1979). The overall patterns of rainfall in the respective study areas were similar. C. Physical/Chemical Environment The raw data for physical/chemical factors are given in Table 8 and Figure 18. Certain general trends were evident throughout the estuary. The major river flooding during the winter of 1973-74 was associated with high turbidity and color. The relatively low temperatures during the winter of 1976-1978 were generally associated with high dissolved oxygen levels throughout the bay. While some station to station variability is evident' such trends tend to be consistent in most portions of the study area, based on well recognized physical-chemical relationships (Livingston, 1983). 22 1. Temperature There was relatively little temperature stratification at stations 1, 2, 3, 5, 1A, 1B, and 1C (Figure 18). Seasonal ranges approximated 20-300C depending on the year. Spatial temperature distribution during any given time period was relatively uniform throughout the bay. When temperature stratification was noted, bottom temperatures tended to be lower than those at the surface, although this was not always the case at stations 1A and 1B. At Sike's Cut (1B), bottom temperature was usually higher than surface temperature from 1972 to 1977. After 1977, bottom temperatures tended to be cooler than surface temperatures. 2. Dissolved Oxygen Generally, bottom dissolved oxygen was lower during warm months; stra- tification of dissolved oxygen (lower at depth) was observed at stations 1, 2, 3, 5, 1A, 1B, and 1C. The grassbed areas (N) showed generally higher levels of dissolved oxygen at depth (especially from 1974 to 1978). However, at Sike's Cut, dissolved oxygen was more stratified vertically from 1972 to 1978 than after 1978; from 1978 to 1982, surface dissolved oxygen tended to be lower and bottom dissolved oxygen tended to be higher, a situation which indicated increased vertical mixing after 1978. 3. Color Color levels tended to reflect peaks of river flow at those stations influenced by river input. Color levels were highest in East Bay (Station 5) and lowest at stations along St. George Island in Apalachicola Bay (1A, 1B, 1C, 1X). 23 4. Turbidity Turbidity also followed river flow conditions seasonally and among years. Bottom turbidity was usually higher than surface turbidity. Following the high turbidities observed during the major flooding of 1973, there were bay-wide reductions of this factor from 1974 to 1976. Turbidity at most stations increased from 1976 to 1979-80 and was quite low during the drought of 1981. Turbidity was a good indication of river flow throughout the Apalachicola estuary. 5. Depth/Secchi Depth Secchi readings represent a simple though direct integration of the effects of color and turbidity on light penetration in a body of water. Secchi depth estimates were highest at those stations that were farthest from the influence of the river. There was a tendancy for Secchi depths to be deeper during periods of drought. Depth readings at some stations tended to be somewhat more uniform during certain years than might be reasonably expected. Consequently, this factor can only be considered as a general indication of station depth. The deeper areas include stations 2, IB and 1C. The change in depth at station 1X between 1977 and 1978 could indicate an inadvertent shift in station location during that period. A careful review of this possibility indicated that, except for station IX, station locations remained rela- tively stable over the period of study. 6. Salinity Salinity in the Apalachicola estuary (Table 9, Figure 19) is influenced by various factors such as depth, wind, tidal currents, phy- siography of the basin, river flow, and local rainfall (Livingston, 1983, 24 unpublished data). Certain generalizations are apparent from a cursory review of the data. Salinity was higher at depth at most stations and all of the study areas showed at least some salinity stratification at various times. There was considerable spatial and temporal variability of salinity throughout the estuary. Stations receiving direct river input (2, 3) followed the overall seasonal and long-term patterns of Apalachicola river flow. The trend at Sike's Cut (1B) showed a basic shift in surface and bot- tom salinity with time. After 1978, bottom salinities were generally lower while surface salinities were higher. These observations will be analyzed in more detail later in this report. Because of the importance of salinity as a determinant of the biological organization of the estuary and because of the complexity of contributing facto*rs which determine the distribution of salinity in space and time, an expanded analysis of this factor was carried out relative to known patterns of dredging in the bay. a. Long-term Trends: Seasonal Averages To present a less cluttered view of long-term salinity trends, season- al averages of salinity (surface and bottom) were computed at the various permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary (Figure 20) and compared with seasonal trends of river flow and rainfall (Table 10). While the general trends (as observed above) were apparent (i.e., high salinity in 1972, reduced salinity from 1973-1975, increased salinity from 1976 through 1981, and reduced salinity from 1982 to the present), certain station- specific trends were apparent. Bottom salinity at station 2 was generally lower from 1978 to 1983 than the previous 6 years. Bottom salinity at sta- tion 1B was relatively stable from 1972 to 1978; such salinities at depth 25 tended to be 1-ower after 1978. Surface salinities, however, were generally low from 1972 to 1978 after which time, there was a decided trend to higher salinities. The considerable stratification during the earlier period was not evident at Sike's Cut subsequent to 1977-78. At West Pass (1A), this pattern was not evident and bottom salinities were, within the usual seaso- nal ranges, relatively stable over the sampling period. Monthly determinations of salinity (surface, bottom) were run through a Pearson Correlation analysis with rainfall and river flow values to see if there was a linear relationship for analysis of covariance (Table 11). A significant (p < 0.01) negative correlation was made between salinity and river flow at each of the bay stations indicating that only river flow and salinity have a linear relationship. Another analysis was made to determine the relative influence of river flow and rainfall on salinity at the various stations. A significant dif- ference between observations before and after cessation of dredging in 1978 could reflect river flow trends rather than the pattern of dredging in the bay. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is helpful in eliminating this problem since use of ANCOVA includes the assumption that there is a linear relationship between the dependent variable and each covariate (Bryant and Paulson, 1976). Using a combination of regression and analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques, the effects of the covariates (i.e. river flow, rainfall) are removed and the residuals can then be analyzed for the effect of the treat- ment (i.e. cessation of dredging) on salinity trends at the various sta- tions. When scatterplots of the dependent variable (salinity) are run on each covariate (transformed to achieve normality), an evaluation of the 26 linear relationships is possible. If a random scatter of points is found (as was the case with rainfall), the covariate is dropped from analysis and the ANCOVA is run with the remaining covariate (i.e. river flow) (Table 12). If the p-value is less than or equal to a selected level of signifi- cance (0.05), the slope of the line relating salinity and the covariate can be considerably.different than zero. The F-tests for the factors and interactions are adjusted for the covariates so that, if a treatment effect is significant, it is not due to the covariate (i.e., the river flow). The results (Table 12) indicate significant month by year interactions at all stations. However, surface/bottom salinity by month interactions were significant at stations 1B and 2 and surface/bottom salinity by year interactions were significant at stations 1B, 1C, and 2. Thus, some factor other than river flow is influencing the salinity at dredged stations (1C, 2) and an area near a dredge operation (B). D. Short-term Responses to Specific Dredging Events An analysis was made concerning short-term response of physical, che- mical, and biological (i.e., epibenthic fishes and invertebrates) factors to specific dredging and storm events in the Apalachicola system. Livingston and Wolfe (1983) found that specific storm events do have a short-term (days to weeks) effect on benthic infaunal macroinvertebrates. Such effects are part of the natural response of shallow bodies of water such as the Apalachicola estuary to the effects of short-term increases in wind velocity in the region. A complete history of dredging events in the vicinity of our sampling stations is given in Table 13. Wind speed factors from 1975 to 1978 are given in Table 14. 27 1. Two-mile Extension (station 1) Primary dredging events near station I occurred from 3/7/75 to 3/31/75 and from 4/1/76 to 4/31/76 (Table 13). Wind speeds were high on 3/18/75 (Table 14). Surface and bottom physical-chemical data for station 1 from 1975 through 1978 are given in Figures 21 and 22. As noted previously, the salinity at station 1, subsequent to the opening of the two-mile extension in 1976, did not go up as it did at most stations in the Apalachicola estuary as a response to less overland runoff to the estuary during the latter 1970's. No overt changes (at the surface or bottom) of temperature, salinity, turbidity, color, or dissolved oxygen were apparent at station 1 during or after the dredging in 1976 or the storm in 1975. No short-term effects of dredging were noted for any of the biological indices for fishes (Figure 23) or invertebrates (Figure 24) at station 1. Dominant popula- tions of fishes and invertebrates (Figure 25) did not appear to respond to the dredging activities over the period of sampling. There were increases in the numbers of spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), anchovies (Anchoa mitchilli), and possibly blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus subsequent to 1976, but such changes could not be related to the dredging activities around station 1. Wind effects (Table 14) over the short-term were noted in terms of color and turbidity in the estuary (Table 15). Depending on the direction and velocity, win.d appears to have immediate and substantial effects on color and turbidity in the Apalachicola estuary. 2. Intracoastal Waterway (Station 2) Changes in the physical, chemical, and biological factors (described above) at station 2 (1975-1978) are given in Figures 26-27. No immediate effects of dredging on physical, chemical, or biological factors were 28 apparent at station 2 over the study period (Figures 28-29). The usual seasonal fluctuations were relatively stable from year to year, although salinity was elevated in 1977 relative to previous years. The storm could not be associated with any alterations in seasonal and annual trends of the data. Numbers of spot (Figure 30) were higher during 1978. Penaeid shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) were higher during 1976 than during subsequent years, and blue crab numbers were generally higher in 1975 and 1976 than in 1977-78, which was consistent with the changes in salinity of the period and the possible effects of diversion of fresh water by the construction of the two-mile channel in 1976. 3. Sike's Cut (stations IA and 1B) Physic al, chemical, and biological factors at station IA (Figures 31-35) and station 1B (Figures 36-40) indicate no observable, short-term changes at either station that could be associated with dredging at station 1B. Numbers of spot and anchovies were generally higher in the vicinity of West Pass during 1978. At Sike's Cut, no short-term effects of dredging were obvious in terms of physical.' chemical, or biological factors. Turbidity was higher during 1978 after dredging, but this trend was not apparent in 1976. Salinity at depth was generally lower in 1978, which could have been associated with increased numbers of fishes (notably spot) at this time. Penaeid shrimp were most numerous at Sike's Cut during 1978. Overall, no short-term (measured over several months) effects of dredging and spoiling on water quality and biological response (as measured by epibenthic fishes and invertebrates) in the Apalachicola estuary were noticeable within the context of the existing sampling regime for 1975 through 1978 (the last year of dredging in the Apalachicola Bay system). 29 Such observations do not preclude an impact of a shorter duration (measured over days or weeks), although such an impact, if it exists, is probably negligible in terms of an immediate response of the system as a whole. Wind and storm effects on turbidity and color are noticeable on a scale of days. Such effects are short-lived and cannot be noticed within weeks or months of the event. Such observations, within the scope of our sampling effort, would indicate that, in the highly (seasonally) turbid and colored Apalachicola estuary, the impact of dredging on water quality and epi- benthic organisms is not observable in terms of "short-term" (weeks to months) response relative to natural changes in the system such as storms. E. Im pact of Dredging: Sike's Cut 1. Habitat Features The long-term physical/chemical data for the four outer bay stations (1A, 1B, 1C, 1X) were analyzed to determine the effect of the cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in June 1978. The a priori hypothesis was that the surface and bottom salinities at station 18 were stratified when dredging occurred but became mixed as the channel filled in. To test this hypothe- sis, an analysis of variance was designed with a factor for surface/bottom and a factor for during/after dredging. Since the data were taken over a period of time, the residuals violate the independence assumption of ANOVA (i.e., they would be serially correlated). To remove this time dependency, a factor was entered in the table for month number as was a factor for year nested within during/after dredging (nested because a given year does not occur both during and after dredging). In order to have as balanced a design as possible, an equal number of data points for both during and after dredging were used. 30 Stations 1A, 1B, 1C 7/73 - 6/83 Station 1X 7/74 - 6/82 The ANOVA results are summarized in Table 16. The top/bottom by during/after interaction for salinity at station 1B had a p-value of .0039. This interaction means that the surface and bottom acted differently after dredging than they did during dredging. The same interaction for station 1A had a p-value of .2677 and for station IX a p-value of .4376. The scat- terplot of salinity at station 1B showed that the top and bottom salinities came closer together after June 1978. 2. Salinity Changes and Biological Response a. Comparison with Other Estuarine Stations Livingston (1979a) compared the salinity regime and epibenthic biota (fishes, invertebrates) at Sike's Cut (station IB) with other areas of the Apalachicola Bay system. A comparison with historic salinity levels in the region (Table 17) before and after the opening of Sike's Cut indicates that areas of the estuary contiguous with the new pass had higher salinities after the channel was dredged open. The salinity at Sike's Cut during the years of dredging was relatively high and more stable than that in other portions of the estuary (Figure 41). The Sike's Cut region during the period of maintenance was also associated with high levels of species rich- ness and diversity of fishes (Figure 42) and invertebrates (Figure 43) relative to other regions of the bay system. Sike's Cut was characterized by low dominance and low numerical abundance (per unit sampling effort) compared to other areas of lower and more unstable conditions of salinity. Nurserying species such as blue crabs and penaeid shrimp were low in num- bers, and the nursery function of the low salinity waters was impaired by 31 the increased salinity as water from the open Gulf of Mexico was introduced into Apalachicola Bay. The continued high salinity was inversely propor- tional to the nursery potential and productivity of the estuarine fishery. High species richness and diversity was not necessarily viewed as desirable within the context of the impaired fishery potential of the Apalachicola Bay system. The exact area of Apalachicola Bay affected by Sike's Cut was con- sidered to be relatively small according to Mehta and Zeh (1981). While Livingston (1979a) showed a biological impact due to the higher salinity, the areal extent of such increases remains relatively undetermined in terms of empirical evidence. A salinity survey (detailed surface and bottom salinities during a flooding tide along 7 transects drawn through Sike's Cut; Livingston, unpublished data) was made just prior to the dredging of the Cut in 1984. The preliminary results indicate that the area affected by high bottom salinities from Sike's Cut was greater than that predicted by Mehta and Zeh (1980). Another survey is planned to analyze such sali- nity changes after the Cut is dredged. These surveys should be able to estimate the area of the bay affected by the dredging operations around Sike's Cut. b. Temporal Changes Bottom and surface salinity (Figure 44) at West Pass (station 1A) tended to decrease from 1972 to 1980, after which time there was a general increase from 1980 to 1981 followed by a leveling off of salinity. The pattern at station IB was different. Surface and bottom salinities did not follow the same pattern at Sike's Cut. Bottom salinity was uniformly high from 1972 to 1977, after which time the salinity remained uniformly lower OCLC: 11247663 Rec stat: n Entered: 19841010 RepLaced: 19950407 Used: 19841010 $ Type: a Bib LvL: m Source: d Lang: eng Repr: Enc lvl: I Conf pub: 0 Ctry: flu Indx: 0 mod rec: Govt pub: Cont: Desc: a Int lvL: Festschr: 0 Illus: F/B: 0 Dat tp: s Dates: 1984, % $ 1 040 FDA'c FDA % $ 2 090 QH541.5.E8 'b L58 % $ 3 090 'b % $ 4 049 NO@M % $ 5 100 1 Livingston, Robert J. % $ 6 245 10 Longterm effects of dredging and open-water disposal on the Apalachicola Bay System (final report) / 'c Robert J. Livingston. % $ 7 260 [Tallahassee] : 'b (s.n.], 'c 1984. % $ 8 300 1 v. (various pagings) : 'b ill. ; 'c 28 cm. % $ 9 500 "Funding for this project was provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration through the Office of Coastal Management, 1198 Florida Department of Environmental Regulation under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended." % $ 10 650 0 Estuarine ecology 'z Florida 'z Apalachicola Estuary. % $ 11 650 0 Dredging. % $ 12 710 2 Florida office of Coastal Management. % $ 13 710 1 Florida. 'b Dept. of Environmental Regulation. % 32 through 1983. Surface salinity, within high seasonal variability, tended to decrease from 1972 through 1977, after which there was a general increase peaking in 1980-81. Such patterns tended to follow that observed at West Pass. Following the stratification noted from 1972-1977, surface and bottom salinities came together largely because of the simultaneously lowered bottom salinities and increased surface salinities. While there are too few good data to evaluate the actual sill depth at Sike's Cut over this period, the dredging events appear to be related to the bottom salinity regime. Dredging occurred with regularity from 1972 through 1976. The preci- pitous drop in bottom salinity coincided with the period of no dredging from March, 1976, to June, 1978, which would indicate a decrease of sill depth at this time. Bottom salinities went up at station 1B following the dredging of 1978 at the same time that bottom salinities at West Pass were still decreasing. After the 1978 dredging event, bottom salinities followed a bay-wide cycle of moderate increases, but the consistently high salinities never returned over the period from 1978 to 1983. This result would indicate a rapid filling of the sill depth at Sike's Cut and a reduc- tion in the amount of high-salinity water from 1977 to the present time. Thus, a combination of natural long-term salinity cycles and the pattern of dredging at Sike's Cut appear to have defined the general level of bottom salinity in this region of Apalachicola Bay. The primary question is whether or not a general decrease in salinity, from about 30 ppt to somewhere between 20 and 25 ppt, would have an effect on the epibenthic fishes and invertebrates taken at, Sike's Cut. If so, there would be a break in the faunal distributions at some time between 1977 and 1978. A related question (see above) concerning the areal extent 33 of 'such impact is also of importance to a comprehensive review of the Sike's Cut issue. A,complete community analysis was made of epibenthic fishes and inver- tebrates taken at each of the permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. For the sake of simplification, the major comparison was made between the dredged outer station 1B (Sike's Cut) and the undredged outer station 1A (West Pass), although other stations were included where necessary. The comparison of the natural (West) pass with the man-made Sike's Cut is not entirely satisfactory. It should be noted that such a comparison is not meant to be a decisive test of the hypothesis that Sike's Cut has affected the productivity of the Apalahcicola Say. However, a review of both passes, in a comparative sense, allows the possi- bility of determining biological response along natural gradients of salinity and the changes at West Pass (and other areas of the bay) relative to temporal variability of river flow and local rainfall. Gradient analy- sis (along sets of permanent stations in the estuary) thus represents a first-cut evaluation of the biological response of spatial/temporal habitat factors such as salinity. Analyses of the total numbers of fishes in the Apalachicola estuary (Figure 45) show that fish abundance increased at station 1 after 1976-77 whereas the major abundance at station 2 occurred from 1975-1977, 1981, and 1982. Fish abundance was substantially lower at stations 1A and 1B. Fish abundance was highest at West Pass during 1978, a period of relatively low overall salinity. Peaks of high numbers of fishes at station 1B occurred during periods of low salinity in 1978 and 1981. There was a generally inverse relationship between numbers of fishes and salinity. These 34 patterns of generally higher numbers of fishes at station 1B subsequent to 1977-78 were due largely to the population fluctuations of the spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), a euryhaline estuarine species (Figure 46). The trends of species richness (total number of fish species) and fish species diversity at stations 1A and IB from 1972 through 1983 are given in Figure 47. Fish species richness and diversity peaked at West Pass during 1976-1977. There was a generally increasing trend following the low levels during 1978-1979 (period of reduced salinity). At Sike's Cut, the trend was downward for both indices over the study period, which was generally in synchrony with the reduced bottom salinity in the area after 1978. Analysis of numerical invertebrate abundance (Figure 48) indicates a decline at station 2 after 1976. The generally low numbers of epibenthic invertebrates at stations 1A and 13 (Figure 48) make it difficult to see any particular trend in the data over time. However, euryhaline species such as the white shrimp declined at station 2 (Figure 49) after 1976, whereas blue crabs (Figure 50) increased at station 1 and declined at station 2 subsequent to 1976. Blue crab numbers were uniformly low at stations 1A and 1B over the study period. Animals that indicate higher salinity such as pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) (Figure 51) declined at station I after 1976, while they tended to increase at station 2 after 1977. Pink shrimp were in lower abundance at Sike's Cut after 1975. Another species that prefers higher salinities, the brief squid (Loliguncula brevis) (Figure 52), showed similar declines at Sike's Cut 0 after 1976. These distributions are consonant with the long-term salinity observations as indicated above, and indicate a biological response to the opening of the two-mile extension. 35 Long-term trends of species richness and diversity at West Pass and Sike's Cut (Figure 53) indicate patterns similar to those observed for fishes. Both indices followed general salinity trends with periodic increases at West Pass and a more or less steady decline at Sike's Cut over the study period. An integration of changes in the fish communities at West Pass and Sike's Cut is given in Figure 43. At West Pass, periods of low salinity (1972-73, 1974-75) (1977-79, 1981-82) were grouped together. Overall, the various annual groupings were mixed according to trends observed above. At station 1B, however, there were 3 main groupings: the high-salinity years (1972-1976) were associated; subsequent to 1976, two primary groupings were observed, which tended to follow the periods of low bottom salinity (1979-80, 1981-82) (1976-79, 1980-81). This analysis is further evidence that the observed shift in bottom salinities at Sike's Cut between 1977 and 1978 had an effect on the biological organization in this area. As part of the process of reduction of variables, correlation matrices were run for the chief fish and invertebrate indices for all stations over the entire study period (1972-1983, Table 18). Relatively high correlations were noted for fish Hurlbert diversity and Brillouin evenness, fish Hurlbert diversity and Brillouin diversity, invertebrate Hurlbert diversity and Brillouin evenness, invertebrate number of species and Brillouin diversity, invertebrate Briollouin diversity and Hurlbert diversity, and invertebrate Brillouin diversity and Brillouin evenness. Factors were reduced accor- dingly (where necessary) for subsequent statistical analyses. The fish correlations indicate that numbers of individuals and species richness were possitively correlated. Likewise, species richness and the various 36 diversity indices were correlated. Similar patterns of correlation were noted among the invertebrate indices although some correlation existed here between the log of numbers of individuals nad Brillouin diversity. A study of these indices allows some understanding concerning the community struc- ture of estuarine organisms in the Apalachicola Bay system. In general, high dominance is generally associated with low species diversity and evenness. An analysis of variance for various epibenthic fish and invertebrate indices at stations 1A and 1B was carried out comparing those years before (1975-77) and after (1979-81) the cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut (Table 19). A graphical representation is given for this analysis (Figure 54), which used only 6 years of data for the balanced statistical (ANOVA) model. The general increase in numbers of fishes at station 1B after 1978 is evident. Fish species richness and diversity declined at both stations during the period 1979-81 relative to the figures during 1975-77, with the most precipitous declines evident at Sike's Cut during 1981. Such trends were consistent with the general increase in the numbers of spot (Leiostomus.xanthurus taken at Sike's Cut during this period. Croaker were generally more abundant at West Pass. The invertebrate data (Figure 34) were somewhat different, with numbers of individuals and species higher at station 1B and a general decline of richness and diversity indices at both stations over the study period. White shrimp and blue crabs, however, were higher at station 1A than at 1B before the cessation of dredging in 1978; after 1978, these station positions were reversed, which is consis- tent with the observed, long-term salinity regimes. The statistical results (Table 19) indicate that there was a significant (p < 0.05) 37 difference between stations 1A and 1B in terms of invertebrate (log) numerical abundance, invertebrate number of species, and invertebrate spe- cies diversity (Brillouin, Hurlbert). There was a significant difference between two or more months of the year for fish numerical abundance, fish numbers of species, and fish Brillouin diversity. There was a significant difference between the before-dredging and after-dredging means for fish number of species (averaged over stations). F. Impact of Dredging: The Two-Mile Extension 1. Habitat Features A factorial design ANOVA was run with factors for year, top or bottom, and month. If there was a change in the surface/bottom relationship, we would expect a significant surface/bottom by before/after dredging interac- tion. There were not equal data sets before and after dredging, so a term for it was not included in the ANOVA. A second ANOVA was run with factors for before/after, surface/bottom and month. The results of the two ANOVA's were combined to calculate the surface/bottom by before/after interaction. The first such ANOVA results provided a year by surface/bottom interaction sum of squares(A). The second ANOVA provided the before/after by surface/ bottom interaction sum of squares(B) which was treated as a 1 degree of freedom contrast. By subtracting (B) from (A) we calculated the correct error sum of squares for testing the contrast (p-values summarized in table 20). None of the interactions were statistically significant. The only significant effect was at station 3 where the mean salinity before dredging was different than that after dredging; however, there were only 2 years of 38 data at that station before dredging with 7 years after. It is not possible to say that this difference was caused by dredging. In summary, this analysis showed no differences in habitat features at the subject stations due to the opening of the two-mile extension. G. Impact of Dredging The Intracoastal Waterway 1. Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Infauna In a recent regional analysis of pollution sources in the Apalachicola River-Bay system (Livingston, 1983b), specific stations were located in the Intracoastal Waterway (Figure 1, Table 3). These included stations 2, A7, and 1C. Water quality and biological (benthic infaunal macroinvertebrates) analyses (Table 21) in these areas indicated that the Intracoastal Waterway at the mouth of the Apalachicola River (station 2) was not polluted with organic matter, heavy metals, or other forms of pollution, although it was biologically stressed (low species richness, diversity, evenness), possibly as a result of natural conditions. Farther out in the bay (stations A7, 1C), despite high concentrations of organic matter and silty conditions, the water and sediment quality and biological indices were close to background conditions. This observation is qualified by relatively high sediment burdens of lead, cadmium, and chromium (Livingston, 1983a). However, the biological community was rela- tively productive and high in species richness and diversity. This survey was conducted approximately 51/2 years after cessation of dredging in the Intracoastal Waterway of Apalachicola Bay. This analysis indicates that, while the Intracoastal Waterway is con- taminated with heavy metals in certain areas (Livingston, 1983a) (possibly as a result of the increased boat traffic and concentration of silt 39 fractions of the sediments with associated metal burdens), the biological organization of the benthic infaunal macroinvertebrates at various stations (distant from urban runoff) was not adversely affected by previous dredging activities. The fact that such studies were carried out more than 5 years after cessation of dredging would qualify the above results. However, these data tend to confirm the results of other studies in the region (Water and Air Research, 1975; Taylor, 1978). H. East Point Channel, 1. Water Quality, Sediment Quality, and Infauna No long-term data were taken in the vicinity of the East Point Chan- nel. However, a short-term analysis was made of the proposed dredging and construction associated with the East Point Breakwater (Livingston, 1983a). A synopsis of the findings of this study is given in Appendix A. The dredged channel was polluted with heavy metals, oils and greases because of runoff from East Point. Channel sediments were higher in the silt/clay fractions than other stations in the area, and such sediments were also high in nutrients. The channel areas were characterized by high Biochem- ical Oxygen Demand and seasonally low dissolved oxygen. Such conditions were associated with depauperate faunal (i.e. benthic infaunal macroinver- tebrate) assemblages. The dredged areas along the East Point Channel were biologically stressed by a combination of dredging, urban runoff, and local boat traffic. The dredged channels were viewed as repositories for fine sediments along with attached pollutants (oils and greases, metals) and organic material (high B.O.D., low dissolved oxygen). These observations were con- sistent with regional analyses of the distribution of pollutants and the 40 biological organization of the Apalachicola River-Bay system (Livingston, 1983b). Such effects were dependent on two major factors: the dredged channel and the presence of urban runoff in the immediate vicinity. Thus, areas such as the St. George Island (Sike's Cut) dredge site were relati- vely free of pollution, while areas such as the two-mile channel and East Point Channel were polluted (Appendix A). I. Comparison of Results to Other Findings Most of the previous studies of the impact of dredging and associated activities on the Apalachicola Bay sytem (Ingle, 1952; Water and Air Research, 1975; Taylor, 1978) have concentrated on localized, short-term effects on a relatively limited set of physical and biological variables. The benthic macroinvertebrates have been used as indicators (and rightly so) as such organisms reflect specific forms of environmental influence. However, such organisms, when located in the Apalachicola estuary, repre- sent a relatively adaptable group of species that often have relatively short life histories and high levels of recruitment. The possibility of long-term changes in the system (due to accumulation of contaminated sedi- ments from urban runoff and altered current patterns and salinity distributions) have been largely ignored. The results of this survey indi- cate that dredging activities have affected various portions of the system because of the above-mentioned, long-term processes. Altered current and salinity structure of the estuary are partaicularly important in the deter- mination of the distribution of species that form the basis of important sport and commercial fisheries in the region. Although such changes may be either detrimental or fortuitous, depending on the action and the point of view of different sets of users of the estuarine productivity, more care 41 should be taken in the analysis of effects before the dredging is under- taken. For instance, spring and summer dredging in the intracoastal waterway can have adverse impacts on developing forms of penaeid shrimp and oth er species that use the estuary as a nursery (see Livingston, 1983, 1983c, for details of the spatial/temporal distribution of such species). In this way, serious mistakes can be avoided, and the dredging activities can be undertaken in a way that has minimal negative impacts on the bay sytem as a whole. The results of this review indicate that dredging activities in the Apalachicola estuary can have effects on the physical, chemical, and biolo- gical structure of the system, but that such effects cannot be easily predicted a priori More empirical work is needed if the productivity of the system is to be maintained and preserved in the future. 42 V. Literature Cited Adkins, G., and P. Bowman. 1976. A study of the fauna in dredged canals of coastal Louisiana. Technical Bulletin No. 18, Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission. 72 pp.. Bohlen, W. F., D. F. Cundy, and J. M. Tramontano. 1979. Suspended material distributions in the wake of estuarine channel dredging operations. Est. Coast. Mar. Sci. 9:699-711. Briggs, P. T., and J. S. O'Connor. 1971. Comparison of shore-zone fishes over naturally vegetated and sand-filled bottoms in Great South Bay. N. Y. Fish and Game J. 18:15-41. Bryant, J. L., and A. S. Paulson. 1976. An extension of TUkey's method of multiple comparisons to experimental designs with random concomitant variables. Biometrika 63:631-638. Darnell, R. M. 1976. Impact of Construction Activities in Wetlands of the United States. EPA-600/3-76-045. 392 pp. Dawson, C. E. 1955. A contribution to the hydrography of Apalachicola Bay. Publ. Texas Inst. Mar. Sci. 4:15-35. DeCoursey, P. J., and W. B. Vernberg. 1975. The effect of dredging in a polluted estuary on the physiology of larval zooplankton. Water Research 9:149-154. Hoss, D. E.9 L. C. Coston, and W. E. Schaaf. 1974. Effect of sea water extracts of sediments from Charleston Harbor, S. C., on larval estuarine fishes. Est. Coast. Mar. Sci. 2:323-328. Ingle, R. M. 1952. Studies of the effect of dredging operations upon fish and shellfish. Technical Series No. 5, State of Florida, Board of Conservation. 26 pp. 43 Kaplan, E. H., J. R. Welker, and M. G. Kraus. 1974. Some effects of dredging on populations of macrobenthic organisms. Fish. Bull. 72:445-480. Lee, G. F., and R. A. Jones. 1982. Water quality aspects of dredged material disposal in the Gulf of Mexico near Galveston, Texas. In: Proeedings of the 14th Dredging Seminar. COS Report No. 263 Center for Dredging Studies, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas. pp. 234-300. Lee, G. F., and R. H. Plumb. 1974. Literature review on research study for the development of dredged material disposal cri teria. U.S.A.C.E. Contract report 0-74-1. Institute for Environmental Studies, Univer- sity of Texas-Dallas, Dallas, Texas. 145 pp. Lindall, W. N., Jr., W. A. Falle, Jr., and L. A. Collins. 1975. Addi- tional studies of the fishes, macroinvertebrates, and hydrological conditions of upland canals in Tampa Bay, Florida. Fish. Bull. 73:81-85. Livingston, R. J. 1975a. Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fish. Bull. 74:311-321. Livingston, R. J. 1975b. Resource management and estuarine function with application to the Apalachicola drainage system (North Florida, U.S.A.). Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: included in final collection of papers (reviewed and published for submission to the Congress of the United States), Estuarine Pollution Control and Assessment, Vol. 1, 3-17. 44 Livingston, R. J. 1976a. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of organisms in a north Florida estuary. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4:373-400. Livingston, R. J. 1976b. Avoidance responses of estuarine organisms to storm water runoff and pulp mill effluents. Invited paper, Proceed- ings of the Third International Estuarine Research Federation Conference, Galveston, Texas. October, 1975. Estuarine Processes I. 313-331. Livingston, R. J. 1976c. Dynamics of organochlorine pesticides in estua- rine systems and their effects on estuarine biota. Invited paper, Proceedings of the Third International Estuarine Research Federation Conference, Galveston, Texas. October, 1975. Estuarine Processes I., 507-522. Livingston, R. J. 1976d. Time as a factor in environmental sampling pop- ulations and communities. Invited paper, Symposium on the Biological Monitoring of Water Ecosystems (ed. J. Cairns, Jr.). ASTM STP 607:212-234. Livingston, R. J. 1976e. Environmental considerations and the management of barrier islands: St. George Island and the Apalachicola Bay system. In: Barrier Islands and Beaches, Technical Proceedings of the 1976 Barrier Islands Workshop, Annapolis, Maryland, May 17-18, 1976. Livingston, R. J. 1978. The Apalachicola dilemma: wetlands priorities, developmental stress, and management initiatives. Invited paper, National Wetland Protection Symposium, Environmental Law Institute and the Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S. Department of the Interior. pp. 163-177. 45 Livingston, R. J. 1979a. Multiple factor interactions and stress in coastal systems: A review of experimental approaches and field impli- cations. In.Marine Pollution: Functional Responses. Ed. F. John Vernberg. Academic Press, Inc. New York. pp. 389-413. Livingston, R. J. 1979b. Research, management and the estuarine sanctuary concept: Where are the ties that bind? Proceedings of the Workshop on the National Estuarine Sanctuary Program, The Georgia Conservancy and The Coastal Society, October, 1979. pp. 50-53. Livingston, R. J. 1980. The Apalachicola experiment: Research and Management. Oceanus 23:14-21 Livingston, R. J. 1981. Man's impact on the distribution and abundance of sciaenid fishes. Sixth Annual Marine Recreational Fisheries Symposium, Sciaenides: Territorial Demersal Resources. National Marine Fisheries Service. Houston Texas. Livingston, R. J. 1982a. Long-term biological variability and stress in coastal systems. Second US/USSR Symposium: Biological Aspects of Pollutant Effects on Marine Organisms. pp. 52-66. Livingston, R. J. 1982b. Between the idea and reality: An essay on the problems involved in applying scientific data to resource management problems. Working Papers in Science and Technology Studies, eds. A. Donovan and A. L. Berge. Vol. 1, no. 1. pp. 31-59. Livingston, R. J. 1983. The ecology of the Apalachicola estuary. Invited paper, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Series, Ecological Monograph. 46 Livingston, R. J. 1983a. Review and analysis of the environmetnal impli- cations of the proposed development of the East Point breakwater and associated dredging operations within the East Point Channel (Apalachicola Bay system, Florida). Unpublished Report for Franklin County Board of Commissioners. Livingston, R. J. 1983b. Identification and analysis of sources of pollu- tion in the Apalachicola River and Bay system. Florida legislature appropriation 1074. Unpublished report. Livingston, R. J. 1983c. Resource Atlas of the Apalachicola Estuary. Florida Sea Grant College. Livingston, R. J., and J. Duncan. 1979. Short- and long-term effects of forestry operations on water quality and epibenthic assemblages of a north Florida estuary. Ecological Processes in Coastal and Marine Systems, Ed. R. J. Livingston. Plenum Press, New York. Livingston, R. J., and E. A. Joyce. 1977. Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Florida Marine Research Publi- cations, Cont. # 26. Tallahassee, Florida. 177 pp. Livingston, R. J., and 0. Loucks. 1979. Productivity, trophic interac- tions, and food web relationships in wetlands and associated systems. Pages 101-119 in Wetland Functions and Values: The State of Our Un- derstanding, American Water Resources Association. Livingston, R. J., R. L. Iverson, R. H. Estabrook, V. E. Keys, and John Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola Bay system: Physiography, biota, and resource management. Florida Scientist 37: 245-271. 47 Li vi ngston, R. J. , G. J. Kobyl i nski , Frank G. Lewi s , I I I , and Peter F. Sheridan. 1976. Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and inver- tebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fishery Bulletin 74:311-321. Livingston, R. J., P. S. Sheridan, B. G. McLane, F. G. Lewis, 111, and G. G. Kobylinski. 1977. The biota of the Apalachicola Bay system: func- tional relationships. Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory, Publication # 26. Livingston, R. 1*, N, Thompson, and D. Meeter. 1971, Lon,-term variation of organochlorine residues and assemblages of epibenthic organisms in a shallow north Florida (USA) estuary. Marine Biology 46: 355-372. Livingston, R. J., D. Alderson, N. Friedman, S. Keller, B. Minor, J. H. Hankinson, Jr., S. Mashburn, and D. Marston. 1982. Review of the Distribution of Trace Metals in the Apalachicola-Chipola Drainage System. A detailed analysis carriedout for the River Committee of the Apalachee Regional Planning Council by the Environmental Service Center (Florida Defenders of the Environment) and the Florida Public Interest Research Group. Livingston, R. J., and L. E. Wolfe. 1983. Analysis of the spring and summer, 1983 E.P.A. Scaling Experiment. Unpublished report. Mackin, J. G. 1961. Canal dredging and silting in Louisiana bays. Inst. Mar. Sci. 7:262-314. Marshall, A. R. 1968. Dredging and filling. Proceedings of the Marsh and Estuary Management Symposium, Louisiana State University. J. D. Neusom (Editor). T. J. Moran's Sons, Inc., Baton Rouge. pp. 107-114. 48 Meeter, D. A., and R. J. Livingston. 1978. Statistical methods applied to a,four-year multivariate study of a Florida estuarine system. Invited paper, Biological Data in Water Pollution Assessment: Quantative and Statistical Analyses. American Society for Testing and Materials. Special technical publication 652. Eds., John Cairns, Jr., K. Dickson, and R. J. Livingston. Meeter, D. A., R. J. Livingston, and G. Woodsum. 1979. Short and long- term hydrological cycles of the Apalachicola drainage system with application to Gulf coastal populations. Ecological Processes in Coastal and Marine Systems, Ed. R. J. Livingston. Plenum Press, New York. t Mehta, A. J., and T. A. Zeh. 1980. Influence of a small inlet in a large bay. Coastal Engineering 4:157-176. Odum, W. E. 1970. Insidious alteration of the estaurine environment. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 4:836-847. Rose, C. D. 1973. Mortality of market-sized oysters (Crassostrea virgi- nica) in the vicinity of a dredging operation. Chesapeake Sci. 14:135-138. Sissenwine, M. P., and S. B. Saila. 1974. Rhode Island Sound dredge spoil disposal and trends in the floating trap fishery. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 103:498-505. Subrahmanyam, C. B., and W. L. Kruczynski. 1979. Ecological Diversity in Theory and Practice. J. F. Grassle, G. P. Patil, W. Smith, and C. Taillie (eds.). International Co-operative Publishing House, Maryland. pp. 279-296. 49 Taylor, J. L. 1978. Evaluation of Dredging and open Water Disposal on Benthic Environments: Gulf Intracoastal Waterway-Apalachicola Bay, Florida, to Lake Borgne, Louisana. Unpublished Report for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District. 1976. Maintenance dredg- ing of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Pearl River, Louisiana- Missippissi to Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Final Environmental Statement. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District. 1981. Section 404(b) Evaluation Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Alabama-Florida State Line to Carrabelle, Florida (operation and maintenance). Preliminary report. Water and Air Research, Inc. 1975. A study on the effects of maintenance dredging on selected ecological parameters in the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Contract Nos. DACWOI-74-C-0075, DACWOI-74-C-0086, Water and Air Research, Inc., Gainesville, Florida. White, 0. C., R. J. Livingston, R. J. Bobbie, and J. S. Nickels. 1979. Effects of surface composition, water column chemistry, and time of exposure on the composition of the detrital microflora and associated macrofauna in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. In, R. J. Livingston, ed., Ecological Processes in Coastal and Marine Systems. Plenum Press, New York. pp. 83-116. Woodsum, G. C., L. E. Wolfe. 1983. Users' manual for SPECS, MATRIX. Unpublished. Zeh, T. A. 1979. An investigation of the flow field near a tidal inlet. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 141 pp. Table 10. A. Effects of dredging and placement of dredge spoil: General and immediate effects (from Darnellv 1976). Modification of wetland bottom topography Creation of persistent dredge holes (sometimes becoming anoxic) Creation of channels creation of'*canals Modification of water circulation patterns Increased turbidity of water increased oxygen demand Reduced light penetration Reduced photosynthetic oxygen production Release of toxic organic compounds Release of pesticides, heavy metals, and hydrogen sulfide Increased temperature Bottom siltation with very fine sediments B. Effects of dredging and placement of spoil: effects of dredging in bays and estuaries (from Darnell, 1976). Modification of bottom topography Creation of bottom holes and channels Segmentation and shoaling Modification of durrent patterns (directions and velocities) Modification of flushing patterns Altered patterns of tidal exchange and mixing Acceleration of passage of freshwater through the estuary Increased penetration of saline water into the estuary Sharpening of estuarine salinity gradients Increase in turbidity Reduction in particle size of surface sediments Reduction inloxygen concentration', especially of near-bottom water Table 2: Effects of dredging and placement of dredge spoil: effects of canalization and spoil placement in marshlands (from Darnell, 1976). Interference with surface drainage patterns Acceleration of surface drainage by canals- 9 Damming of surface draina. e by spoil banks General acceletation of freshwater runoff Loss of marshland habitat Loss due to canalization Loss due to water table lowering Loss due to erosion and widening of canals Loss due to spoil coverage Loss due to acceleration of marsh subsidence Acceleration of saltwater penetration Conversion of sulfates (of saltwater) to sulfides in the canals and precipitation of iron sulfide in the canals Erosion of spoil banks and distribution of chemically reduced sediment into canals and open marsh Table 3: Station descriptions of areas used for water and sediment quality analyses in the Apalachicola River Bay system during the summer and fall of 1983 (see Figure 1; Livingston, 1983b for placement of stations). Station Location Apalachicola Bay (dredge site) 1A Apalachicola Bay, West Pass IB Apalachicola Bay, Sika's Cut ic Apalachicola Bay (dredge site) A Apalachicola Bay, Nick's Role ix Apalachicola Bayg St. George Island 2 Apalachicola Bay (dredge site) 3 East Bay .4 East Bay 4A East Bay, Round (or Blount's) Bayou 5 mid East Bay 5A upper East Bay 5B West Pass 6 Alligator Bayou Al Apalachicola boat basin A10 St. George dredged canal All Little St. George Island A2 Apalachicola Bay, between Rut restaurant and Apalachicola boat basin A3 Apalachicola Bay, off Hut restaurant A4 Apalachicola Bay Carl's Creek A5 Apalachicola Bayp Green Point A6 Apalachicola Bayp St..Vincent Point Table 3 (continued)* station Locatioft A7 Apalachicola Bay (dredge site) As Apalachicola Bayp Cat Point A9 St. George boat basin El East Bay, Gorrie bridge fill E2 East Bayq mouth of Eagle Creek E3 upper Eagle Creek E4 mid East Bay, shore Es East Bay, creek south of East Bayou Gi St. George Soundp nearshore East Point G2 St. George Sound, East Point channel G3 St. George Soundt Porter's.Creek mouth 04 St. George Sound, Bulkhead Shoal G5 St. George Sound, East Hole G6 St. George Sound, near shore G7 St. George Sound, Shell Point G8 St. George Sound, Gorrie 300 construction site G9 St. George Sound, Goose Island Rl Apalachicola River mouth off Standard Oil dock R2 Scipio Creek boat basin R3 north Scipio Creek R4 Apalachicola River, railroad trestle R5 Apalachicola Rivert pinhook R6 Murphy Creek R7 Huckleberry Creek Table 3 (continued). Station Location R8 Clark's Creek R9 Apalachicola River, St. Mark's Island R10 Brother's River below Howard's Creek Yl St. Vincent Sound, east V2 St. Vincent Sound, between 9-mile and Tilton V3 St. Vincent Sound, 11-mile v4 St. Vincent Sound, mouth, Big Bayou V5 St. Vincent Sound, 13-mile V6 St. Vincent Sound, Gulf-Franklin County line Table 4: Daily disposal volumes (cubic yards) at specific spoil sites (Figure 6) at Sike's Cut (St. George Island)p the Intracoastal Waterway, the two-mile channel and extension and the East Point Channel from 1970 to present. ST* GEORGE ISLA14D DISPOSAL SITES VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 TOTAL 700223 04 0* 0" 9444,, 9444s 700224 Of 00 09 12341* 12341* 71052S ot 04 575, Ot 5759 710526 01 00 7375* 04 73750 710527 2844o 04, 21344 e, 061 5688. 710528 7000, 00 00 04 7000* 710529 0* 0* 8593* 09 8593* 710530 04 04 10250* 06 10250* 710531 04 12444* 00 0. 12444* 710601 04 5786. 0. 578-6. 11572* 710602 00 Of 04 7120a 7120# 721219 00 0* 9574* 04 9574# 721220 00 0* 15641* ot 15641* .721221 04 04 3138* 0* 3138* 740212 00 9747* 00 ot 9747* 740214 0. 10360* 00 00 10360* 740215 3022# 00 00 3022* 750720 04 4178* 01 0* 4178* 750721 0*. 17733, 0 00 17733* 750722 5333. 1088010 09 00 16213* 750723 7333. 0. 00 2467, 9800, 750724 Of 0* 0 70714, 7071# 760324 04 0* 00 3293* 32930 760325 0* 01 0* 10413* 10413*% 760326 00 00 04 9873, 9873, 760327 0* 09 00 4067s 4067* 780607 0* 04 288* 04 288* 780608 00 0* 1525o 06 1525# 50* 780609 04 04 8750* 00 875 780610 0# 04 8402* 04 6402* 700611 01 ot 8500* 01 85004 7F.30613 00 0. 1400* 0. 1400.. 7130614 01 00 12500 , 04 12.500 * 780615 04 01 6200, 6200* 124004 700616 00 04 04 1650, 16150* 700621 0* 0. 00 1800, 18001 780622 00 00 0. 12300, 12300* 780623 01 01 0. 16900* 16900* 700624 06 04 00 2600, 26006 780627 04 0* 5100* 0* 5100, 780628 04 00 9600* 04 960091 700711 00 00 6028* 04 6028* 780712 04, 0. 10962. 0. 10962, TOTAL '122510, 74150. 137245, 1133254 GRAND TOTAL 347230. GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES VOLUKE DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 old Oil 01A TOTAL 700120 0: 10545: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 10545: 700121 0 17940 0: 0: 0: 00: 0: 0: 0: 00: 0: 0 17940 700122 17635. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 17835. 700123 13233. 0.. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 0. 0. 0. 13233 700124 16900. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18900: 700125 18383 0 0: 0 0 0: 0 0 0 0: 0: 10303: 700126 18900: 0: 0 0: 0: 0 0: 0: 00: 0: 0 0 18900 700127 17842. 0. 0. 0. 0. ot 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 17842. 700123 18700. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16700. 700129 6500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 6500. 700203 0. 12760. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22760. 700204 0. 20740. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 0. 0. 20740. 700205 0. 20440. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0. 20440. 700206 0. 21600. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21600. 700207 0. 0. 21450. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 0. 21450. 700;03 0. 0. 18050. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18050. 700209 0. 0. 21000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 04 0. 0. 21000. 700210 0. 0. 22100. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22100. 700211 0. 0. 22100. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 22100. 700212 0. 0. 19000., 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. .0. 0. 0. 0. 19000. 700217 0. 0. 21640. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21840. 700218 0. 0. 20500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20500. 700219 0. 0. 19250. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19250. 700220 0. 0. 18000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18000. 700221 0. 0. 0. 16245. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16245. 710204 0. 0. 2593. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1593. 710205 0. 0. 22910. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0* 0. 0. 0. 22910. 710206 0. 0. 23925. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23925. 7101-07 0. 0. 21780. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0., 0. 0. 0. 0. 21780. 710208 0. 0. 20650. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20650. 710209 0. 23120. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23120. 710210 0. 16740. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16740. 7102-16 0. 0. 21750. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21750. 710217 0. 0. 22500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22500. 710218 0. 0. 22500. 0. 'o. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22500. 710219 0. 0. 24500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24500. 710220 0. 0. 2201S. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22015. 710221 0. 0. 0. 24390. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24390. 710222 0. 0. 0. 18962. 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 18962. 7114)223 0. 21945. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21945. 710224 22275. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22275. 710225 10760. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18760. 710302 19320. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19320. 710303 10850. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10050. 710304 14400. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14400. 710305 21580. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21580. 710306 19890. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19890. 710307 20250. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20250. 710308 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10710. 10710. 710309 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 15660. 15660. 710310 0. 0. 0. 17980. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. os 0. 17980. 710311 0. 0. Os 14040. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0# 0. 0. 14040. 711123 0. 7260. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 7260. 711124 0. 19900. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19900. on An" OW ow m GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 Oil OIA TOTAL 711126 0. 19920. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19920. 711127 0 18720. 6. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18720. 711128 0: 0. 22770. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22770. 711129 0 0 23760. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23760. 711130 0: 0: 25760. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25760. 711201 0 0. 23100. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23100. 711207 0: 0. 0. 14560. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14560. 711208 0. 0. 0. 24360. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24360. 711209 0. 0. 0. 24750. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24750. 711210 0. 0. 0. 0. 24720. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24720. 711211 0. 0. 0. 0. 24250. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24250. 711212 0. 0. 0. 0. 22320. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22320. 711213 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19650. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19650. 711214 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 12750. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0* 12750. 721120 12306. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 12306. 721121 16407. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 18407. 721122 18109. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20109. 721123 18999. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0# 0. 0. 0. 0. 18999. 721124 7277. 7277. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14554. 721125 0. 9304. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 9304. 721127 0. 24545. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24545. 721128 0. 1307. 0.* 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1307. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 721206 0. 2726. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 2726. 7212-07 0. 20500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0* 0. 0. 20500. 721208 0. 0. 23113. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23113. 721209 0. 0. 25961. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25981. 721210 0. 0. 25939. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25939. 721211 0. 0. 33633. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 33633. 721212 0. 0. 33104. 0. 0. 0'. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 33104. 721213 0. 0. 14060. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14860. 721216 0. 0. 15656. 04 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 15656. 721219 0. 0. 13506. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 13506. 740305 0. 0. 3011. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 3011. 740306 .0. 0. 23466. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23466. 740307 0. 0. 23419. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23419. 740312 0. 0. 19606. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19606. 740313 0. 0. 29587. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 29567. 740314 0. 28992. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 28992. 740315 0. 30390. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30390. 740316 0. 25779. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25779. 740317 0. 7373. 5184. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 12-557. 740318 0. 0. 23294. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0* 0. 0. 23294. 740319 0. 0. 31520. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 31520. 740320 0. 0. 8246. 13517. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21763. 740321 0. 0. 0. 38618. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30618. 740322 0. 0. 0. 28070. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 26070. 740323 0. 0. 0. 9931. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 9931. 751120 4000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 4000. 751121 23000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 0. 0. 0. 23000. 751122 22080. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22080. 751123 21780. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21780. 751t24 20210. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20210. 751125 0. 214L5. 0. 0. 0. 0. . 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 0. 21465. 751126 0. 11000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 11000. 751202 0. 16250. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16250. 751203 0. 24380o Of 0. 0. 06 0# 0. 00 06 0. 0. 24380. M. mw @m In mom GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 oil 01A TOTAL 751204 0 0 20213 0 0 0: 0. 04 0. 0. 0. 0. 20213. 751205 0: 0: 11250: 0: 0: 0 0 0: 0: 0 0 0: lta5o: 751206 0 . 0 . 20915 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0: 0 0 0: 0: 0 20915 751207 0 . 0 . 24205 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0. 24205. '20. 751208 0 0 25520 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25, 751209 0 0 27500. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 27500. 751210 0: 0: 14658. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14658. 71,0113 0. 0. 926. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 926. 760114 0. 0. 20160. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20160. 760115 0. 0. 9012. 11521. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20533. 760116 0. 0. 0. 26670. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 26670. 760117 0. 0. 0. 20330. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20330. 760118 0. 0. 0. 22680. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22600. 760119 0. 0. 0. 24840. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24840. 760120 0. 0. 0. 76804 0. 0# 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 640. e320. 7601@1 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. ol 0. 00 0. 0. 17835. 1.7035. 760122 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 17425. 17425. 760127 0. 04 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 04 0. 00 0. 20140. 20140. 760128 0. 0. 0. 11340. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 3600. 14940. 760129 0. 0. 0. 34010. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 34010. 71,01@O 0. 0. 0. 34020. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 34020. 760131 0. 0. 0.* 32040. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 32040. 760201 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20200. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20200. 760203 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30870. 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 30870. 760204 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19600. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19600. 770329 5347. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 5347. 770330 14236. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14236. 770331 13384. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 13384. 770405 0. 0. 0. 0. 5729. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 5729. 770406 0. 0. 0. 0. 22894. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 228?4. 770407 0. 0. 0. 0. 24792. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24792. 770408 0. 0. 0. 22917. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22917. 770409 0. 0. 0. 23639. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23639. 770411 -0. 0. 4084. 19033. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23917. 770412 0. 0. 19667. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19667. 770413 0. 0. 14167. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14167. 770414 0. 0. 10792. 0.@ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10792. 770419 0. 0. 10653. 0. 0. 0. ol 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10653. 770420 0. 0. 15329. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 15329. 770421 0. 0. 16042. 06 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16042. 770422 0. 20833. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20833. 770423 0. 19231. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1923t. 770424 0. 16097. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 16097. 770425 0. 10833. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10033. 780421 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 5970. 0. 5970. 780422 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20400. 0. 20400. 760423 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 23104. 0. 23104. 780424 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 20823. 0. 0. 20023. 780425 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 14500s 0. 0. 14500. 730426 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1740. 0. 0. 1740. 730427 .0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. ol 2848. 0. 0. 2048. 780428 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22100. 0. 0. 22100. 780429 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. IB500. 0. 0. 0. 18500. 780430 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 19600. 00 06 Os 19600. 780501 0. 0. 0# 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 32600. 0. & 0. 0. 32600. 780502 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 06 0. 23200. 0. Of 0. Ot 23200. M Am GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL 6ITES 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 Oil 01A TOTAL 780503 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10300. 0. 0. 0. 0. 10300. 700508 0 1160 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1160. 760509 O: 4640: O'. O: O'. O', 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 46AO. 700510 0 16800. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 16800. 780511 0. 13200. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 13200. 780512 0. 22100. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22100. 7a0SI3 0. 17800. 00 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 27800. 700514 0. 12000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 22000. 7130515 0. 28300. 0. 0. 0. 04 0. O* 0. 0. 0. 0. 28300. 780516 0. 24800. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 24800. 780517 0. 28120. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 0. 28120. 780518 0. 0. 26854. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 26854. 780519 0. 0. 32612. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 32612. 7PO520 0. 0. 30663. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 30663. 760521 0. 0. 43098. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 43098. 780522 0. 0. 33669. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 33&6?. 780523 0. 0. 31300. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 31300. 780524 0. 0. 35400. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0. 35400. 780525 0. 0. 33000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 33000- 780526 0. 0. 21300. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. O.' 21300. 760527 0. 0. 25900. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 25?00. 780528 0. 0. O.' 21000. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 21000. 780529 0. 0. 0. 13100. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 13100. 780530 9300. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 9300. 780531 0100. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 6100. 780601 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 7600e 7600. 780602 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0 0 0. 13400. 13400. 780603 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. O: 0: 0. 6200. 6200. TOTAL 494153. 6?13832. 1434897. 571043. 124705. 52600. 30070o 531009 70700* 62011. 49474. 113210. GRAND TOTAL 3755595. TWO MILE CHANNEL DISPOSAL SITES VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 005 006 008 TOTAL 700225 7777. 0. 0* 00 0. 0* 00 7777* 700226 14833. ol 00 04 0, 0* 0, 14833o 700303 0# 19782o Of 04 04 ot 00 1?782# 700304 04 0. 22776* 0* ol ot 00 22776o 700305 04 0* 22089, 0* 0* 0, 0* 22089* 700306 00 04 ot 22100o 0* ot 00 22100* 700307 0. 04 00 21533* 0* 00 04 21533, 700308 00 00 0, 19763, ol 00 0. 19763* 700309 0* 00 04 00 13096* ot 04 13096* 700310 ot 00 04 00 10400* 0* 00 10400o 700311 04 0. 0* 04 7326* 00 ol 7326* 740215 Of 110050 00 ol 00 0* 09 110050 740216 Of 0* 22277* 0* ol 0* 0* 22277* 740217 04 0. 23384. 00 ot oe 0. 23384* 740219 04 00 13022o 13022o 0. 00 0* 26044* 740220 04 00 ot 20040o- 00 0# 0* 20040* 740221 00 ol 0. 16639o ol ol ot 16639* 740226 00 ot 00 04 00 131764 ol 13176. 740227 04 ot ov oll 604* 105814 0* 111850 740228 00 04 09 ol 15251o 00 0* 15251* 740301 00 0. ot 0* 24285, 0. 00 24285, 740302 00 00 00 00 31127, 00 00 31127* 740303 o* 0, 0* 0* ot 24720o ol 24720, 740304 09 00 0* ot 0. 22017. 04 22017* 761207 0* 00 0* 00 Of 00 82699 8269# 761209 00 0* 00 ol ol ot 3222* 3222* 761209 ot 04 00 00 0. 0, 7116, 7116. 761214 04 00 00 04 0* 0* 21644o 21644* 761215 00 00 00 ot 0* ot 15458* 1545B* 761216 00 0* ot 0* 0, 0, 17912, 17912* 761217 04 0* 00 04 ot 04 8565, 8565# 780402 00 06 00 18048o 00 ol Of 18048* 780403 Of .00 22157* 0* 04 00 0* 22157o 780404 0. 0* 29543* 04 00 ol 0. 29543* 780405 0* 24700* ol 0* 0* 00 0* 247009 7SO406 0, 23327* 04 00 ot 04 04 23327* 780407 28311, 0, 04 0. ol 0* 0. 28311, 780408 11796* 04 ot 00 0# ot ol 11796o 780409 0* 00 00 00 04 04 987. 987* 780410 00 00 0* ol 0* 00 16250* 16250* 780411 oll 04 ol 0* 00 0* 6162, 6162, 780415 06 0. ol 00 ot 0. 12133, 12133o 780416 00 04 00 .00 ol 0. 11016o 11016. 780417 00 0, 0, ot ol o* 189390 1898?0 780418 0, 0* ol 0* 00 ol 4389* 4389o TOTAL 62717o 78814. 155248o 131145* 102089'o 70494s 152112* GRAND TOTAL 752619. TWO MILE EXTENS1014 DISPOSAL SITES VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 007 008 TOTAL 760307 2333o, 00 2333, 760308 6779* 00 6779* 760309 9588# 0# 95830 760310 9588o ot 9588* 760311 9509# ol 95090 760312 8489, ol 8489# 760313 9391# 04 93910 760314 9201# 06 9201s 760315 4263* oil 4263# 760316 28891, 0# 2889, 760317 10751- 00 107510 760318 6057# 00 6057# 760319 5741* oil 5741# 760320 6637# ot- 6637# 760321 6825# 0, 68259 760322 7227# ot 7227o 760323 8580, ol 8580* 760324 4935# 00 4935* 760325 9191# 00 91910 760326 5190# 0# 51909 760327 9555# 0* 9555# 760328 10400o oil 104009 760329 9945# ol 9945o 760330 3159# 0* 3159# 760331 0* 4044, 4044* 760401 ot 47964 4796* 760402 0# 10068, 10068* 760403 0* 12124# 121249 760404 0* 13894, 13894* 760405 04 3640. 3640,, 760406 0* 10328# 10328* 760407 00 8883* 88834. 760412 00 8123* 6123* 760413 0# 7993, 7993, 760414 0# 8667# 8667* 760415 ol 8965# 8965a. 760416 04 8799* 8799, 760417 0# 4071# 4071, 760413 ol 8390, 8390, 760419 0, 4285* 42854 760420 00 10516, 10516# 760421 0, 11589, 11589t 760422 04 6847# 6847s 760423 ot 8898. 8898, 760425 ol 1141, 1141# 760426 00 4r")00# 45006 760427 ot 8711# 8711s 760428 04 14933o 14933# 760429 0, 8000, 8000, 760430 ol 9653# 9653. TOTAL 176223,o 21,1858, GRAND TO-CAL 3880814 EAST POINT DREDGE DISPOSAL SITES VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 TOTAL 711215 ol 616010 6160o 711216 oll 5800* 5000, 711221 ol 6240, 6240# 711222 ol 5787, 5787* 711223 ol 6380, 6380, 711224 4200o 010 4200t 711226 5950, ol 5950* 711212@7 5289o. 0, 5289# 711228 3667* oll 3667* 760327 0, 228, 228, 760328 ot 16871, 16871, 760329 ol 11071* 11071, 760330 ol 11342, 11342* 760331 5950, 2800o 8750o 760401 6667o 0. 6667o 770426 ot 7023* 7023* 770427 04 10796* 10796, 770428 00 4694, 4694* 780310 ol 2889* 2889* 780311 0. 9093* 9093, 780312 ol 111834 11183* 780313 ol 2512* 2512, 780314 00 8025, 8025. 760315 00 7242* 7242, 780316 6. 12644. 12644. 780317 0, 13265* 13265# 780318 3675o 3675* 7330* 780319 35550 0* 3555* 780320 8957, 0, 8957, 700321 9037. 0. 8037* 780322 7348,, ot 7348* 780323 9000, 0* 9000* 780324 12055, ol 12055. 780325 17694* 0* 17694, 780326 12436, 00 12436, 780327 4925* ol 4925* 730328 3177, 3173, 63554 780329 0. 14430. 14430* 780330 0* 15000, 15000, 780331 0, 6865* 6865, 780401 06 1179, 1179* TOTAL 122582. 206372. GRAND TOTAL 328954f --7Table 5: Monthly totals (cubic yards) of dredging baywide and at the various disposal sites (lumped by site) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1970 to the present time. ST. GEORGE ISLAND DISPOSAL SITES MONTHLY TOTALS VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 TOTAL 7002 Of 0, 21785, 217850 7105 9844# 12444# 29637* 00 51925# 7106 0, 5786, 04 12906# 18-6920 7212 04 0* 28353, 0. 28353, 7402 00 23129, 06 0. 23129# 7507 12666# 32791# 04 9538# 54995, 7603 00 Of 00 27646, 27646# 7806 04 ot 62265# 41450* 103715# .7807 Of 01 16990, 0* 16990* TOTAL 22510, 74150. 137245. 113325# GRAND TOTAL 347230# GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES MONTHLY TOTALS VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 oo@ 006 007 008 009 010 Oil 01A 7001 130293. 28'485. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0, 0, 0, ot 06 00 7002 0. 7S540. 203290* 16245. 0* 0. 06 of 00 0. 0. 0. 7102 41035. 61805. 204123. 43352. o* 01 01, 00 00 0* 0. 0. 7103 106290. 0. 0. 32020. 06 0, 01 0, 00 0* 0, 26370, 7111 0. 65800. 72290. ot 0. 0* 01 0. 0, os 06 0. 7112 0. 0. 23100. 63670. 71290s 32400* 0. 0. 00 00 0. 0. 7211 75098. 42433. 0. 0. Of 0* ot ot 00 0* 00 0. 7212 0. 23226. 185792. 0. 00 00 0, 00 0* ot 0. 0. 7403' 0. 92534. 167413. 90136. 0. oe 06 0, 01 ot 0. 0. 7511 91070, 32465, 00 01 0, 0. 00 0# 01 00 0, 0. 7512 0. 40630. 144261. 00 0. 0. 01 0. 09 00 0. 0. 7601 0. of 30098. 225131, 0* 01 01 00 0. 00 0. 59640. 7602 0. 0. 0* 00 0* 20200o 30070, 19600, 01 06 06 0. 7703 32967* 0, 0. 06 00 00 06 0. 00 0. 0. 0. 7704 0. 66994. 90734* 66389o 53415, 04 0. 01 04 0, 0, 0. 7804 0. 0. 0. 00 0. 0# 06 00 38100a 62011* 47474, 00 7605 17400. 168920. 313796. 34100. 01 0. 0, 33500, 324600, ot 01 06 7806 0. 0. 00 04 04 0* 0* 00 00 04 04 27200. TOThL 494153* 698832. 14348@7. 571043. 124705. 526009 30870* 53100o 70700. 620119 49474* 113210, TOTAL 7001 158778, 7002 295075o 7102 357 03 15 o 7103 164680 * 7111 130090* 7112 190460, 7211 117531, 7212 2090184 7403 350083, 7511 123535 . 7512 IE14891 * 7601 3141369* 7602 70670* 7703 32967, 7704 2 7 75) -3 2 * 7804 149585, 7805 600316* 71-106 27200* TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 3755595* TWO MILE CHANNEL DISPOSAL SITES MONTHLY TOTALS VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 003 004 005 006 008 TOTAI 7002 22610* 0* 0* 00 04 00 ol 22610 7003 0. 19782. 44865, 63396, 308224 ol 0. 158865 7402 ol 11005, 58683* 49701* 15855* 23757o 04 159001 7403 of ol ot 00 55412, 46737, 04 102149 7612 00 0, 0* oll ol 04 82186* 82166 7804 40107. 48027, 51700* 18048. ol 0. 69926. 227808 TOTAL 62717* 78814. 155248* 131145* 102089. 70494. 152112* GRAND TOTAL 752619* TWO MILE EXTENSION DISPOSAL SITES MONTHLY TOTALS VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS .007 008 TOTAL 7603 176223. 4044. 180267, 7604 04 207814, 2078144 TOTAL 176223* 211858, GRAND TOTAL 388081. EAST POINT DISPOSAL SITES - MONTHLY TOTALS VOLUME DISPOSED IN CUBIC YARDS 001 002 TOTAL 7112 19106o 30367* 49473o 7603 59500 42312, 48262. 7604 6667. ot 6667. 7704 00 22513, 22513* 7803 90859* 110001, 200860* 7804 ot 11794 1179* TOTAL 122582* 206372o GRAND TOTAL 328954f Table 6: Calendar year (January-December) totals for river flow (total; M3/sec), Apa lachicola rainfall (total; cm) and East Bay rainfall .(total; cm) from 1972 through 1982. PLANE 1 RIVER FLOW COLUMN-STATISTICS NBR OF NBR NBR sum MEAN STD DEV POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO 'COL 1 72 8015#00000 667.91667 368.19324 12.00000 0.00000 12*00000 COL 2 73 11581000000 960.08333 588.32527 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 3 74 7999.00000 666.58333 410.28936 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 4 75 10659.00000 888.25000 353.36033 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 5 76 8893,00000 741.08333 256.86164 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 6 77 7466*00000 622.16667 336.10546 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 7 78 8519400000 709.91667 428,41937 12,00000 6.00000 12*00000 COL 8 79 BSS7,00000 721.41667 395.13184 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 9 80 8543,00000 711.91667 591.94724 12.00000 0600000 12.00000 COL 10 81 4246.00000 353.83333 201.2S688 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 11 82 5937,00000 659.66667 306.83465 9.00000 3.00000 9.00000 PLANE SUMMARY NBR OF NBR NBR sum MEAN STD DEV POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO 90515,00000 701,66667 415,79890 129,00000 3*00000 129*00000 PLANE 2 EB RAIN COLUMN STATISTICS NBR OF NBR NBR sum MEAN STD DEY POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO COL 1 72 203090000 16.99167 12*90944 12.00000 0.00000 12,00000 COL 2 73 216*30000 16.02500 8.26956 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 3 74 197*80000 16.48333 14.86771 12.00000 0.00000 11.00000 COL 4 75 214,90000 17.90833 15.22716 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 5 76 156*60000 13.05000 8.14669 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 6 77 116.10000 9.67500 6.98533 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 7 78 153.70000 12.80833 10.00495 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 8 79 244.10000 20.34167 21.17561 12.00000 0400000 12400000 COL 9 80 163.60000 13.65000 7.43255 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 10 81 135430000 11.27500 8.48444 12.00000 0.00000 12s00000 COL 11 82 188.70000 15*72500 7.92466 12.00000 0.00000 12tOOOOO PLANE SUMMARY NBR OF NBR NBR sum MEAN STD DEV POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO 1991.20000 15.08485 11.79442 132.00000 0.00000 131.00000 PLANE 3 APAL RAIN COLUMN STATISTICS HBR OF NBR NBR sum MEAN STD DEV POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO COL 1 72 121.50000 10.12500 6.40428 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 2 73 132,60000 11.05000 6.20154 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 3 74 147.10000 12.2oa33 13.27639 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 4 75 176,40000 14.70000 10.24553 12-00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 5 76 121.60000 10.13333 6.30834 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 6 77 97.70000 8.14167 5.39317 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 7 78 112*90000 9.40833 4.2849S 12.00000 0400000 12.00000 CUL 8 79 143.40000 11.95000 11.96066 12.00000 0.00000 12.00000 COL 9 so 117.50000 9.79167 4.27625 12.00000 0.00000 12-00000 COL 10 81 102.90000 8.57500 9.2SSSS 12.00000 0000000 12.00ooo COL 11 62 PLANE SUMMARY 182.40000 15.20000 10.07788 12.00000 0.00000 12-00000 NDR OF NBR NBR sum 'MFAN STD 11EV POINTS MISSING NOT ZERO 1456-00000 11.03030 8,47464 132.00000 0.0000Q 132.00000 Table 7: Monthly totals by year of river flow (m3/sec), Apalachicola rain- fall (cm per month) and East Bay rainfall (cm permonth) from 1972 through 1982. THIS REPORT IS FOR RIVER FLOW DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 so 81 82 01 1267.000 1312.000 1118.000 905.000 854.000 1088,000 1353.000 612,000 581.000 263.000 843.000 02 1286.000 1793.000 1593.000 1100.000 914,000 641.000 1299.000 1147.000 693.000 796.000 1370.000 03 997.000 1280.000 745.000 1413.000 931.000 1290.000 1292.000 1353*000 1855.000 479.000 642.000 04 634.000 2093.000 1159.000 1706.000 1015.000 995.000 753.000 1515.000 1936.000 711.000 708.000 05 472.000 1125.000 523.000 798.000 931.000 457s000 1069.000 812.000 993.000 293.000 563.000 0 6 529.000 1200.000 468.000 759.000 798.000* 367.000 550.000 479.000 531.000 290-000 39?.000 07 544.000 555.000 362.000 704-000 583.000 321.000 369.000 435.000 434.000 274-000 433.000 08 410.000 554.000 443.000 614.000 441.000 336.000 573.000 402*000 390.000 274,000 603.000 09 324.000 425.000 448.000 500.000 403.000 361,000 373.000 436a000 318.000 258-000 376.000 10 283.000 366.000 305*000 704.000 419*000 316.000 @10.000. 468.000 274.000 204.000 -1.000 11 303.000 375.000 284.000 628*000 492.000 711.000 274,000 498.000 268o000 182.000 -1.000 12 946.000 503.000. 551.000 628.000 1112.000 555.000 304.000 500.000 270,000 223*000 -1.000 TOUL 8015.000 11581.000 7999,000 10659.000 8893*000, 7466.000 6519.000 8657.000 8543,000 4246oOOO 5937.000 TOTAL 01 102 16. 000 02 I2_632o000 03 12234,000 04 ,13225.000 O@ 8036,000 06 6390*000 07 5014*000 08 5240.000 09 4222*000 10 3649,000 11 4015,000 12 5592,000 TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 90515,000 ... .. .. ..... THlS REPORT IS FOR APAL RAIN DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 el 82 01 20.300 12.200 - 2.500 17.300 11.700 9*900 10,700 17.500 11.400 3.600 6.600 02 11.200 94700 4.800 8.600 1.300 8.4900 9.800 5.300 4.800 7.900 15.700 03 16-300 15.200 6olOO 7.400 12.400 9.100 10,900 3.900 8.900 7.600 20.300 04 11300 20.100 5.100 12,400 1.000 1.500 5.200 8.400 14,700 .500 8.400 05 4.300 6.600 22.100 80900 11.900 1.800 11.900 10.000 7.600 2.000 3.800 06 13-200 5.100 8.600 11.400 20.300 .800 15.000 3.000 12.700 2.000 14.200 07 4*100 16.000 12.700 45.700 2.000 l4o500 17.200 22.600 16.300 32.000 27.400 03 17.800 8.600 25.700 12.200 9000 17.500 6.700 9.700 12.200 19.800 11.400 09 1.500 22.600 46.500 13.200 11.200 10.400 64600 44.700 8.900 6.400 39.100 to 7.400 3.300 .300 15.500 19.300 2.500 4.800 1.000 12.700 1*000 17.500 11 13.200 5.600 3.000 8.60o 8.100 11.400 11.200 7.400 4.800 5*100 5.600 12 10.900 7*600 9*700 15.200 124700 9.400 2,900 9*100 2*500 14.200 12*400 TOTAL 121.500 132.600 147.100 176.400 121.600 97,700 112.900 143t4OO 117*500 102*900 182*400 TOTAL 01 123*700 02 83.000 03 116.100 04 78.600 O@ -j 92.500 06 106.300 07 210*500 08 1510300 09 211,100 10 65*300 11 04,000 12 106*600 TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 1456*000 im so low *6 -4o m min THIS REPORT IS FOR EB RAIN DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 so 82 01 32..500 19.600 4.800 20.600 8.600 13.200 4.600 26.400 14.700 3.300 8.600 02 16.000 14.700 12.200 9.700 2.300 80600 11.400 11.900 4.800 8.900 17.'00 03 23.600 25.100 12.700 12.200 17.500 8.400 14*700 6.600 16.500 9.900 21.@600 04 3.300 23.600 10.400 16.300 14000 2.300 6,400 20.100 23.400 3.000 21.300 05 9.400 14.700 26.700 4.600 18.300 3.000 15.000 15.200 11.900 31600 7.100 06 48#300 6.600 8.900 14.000 17.300 2.300 24.600 2*500 24.400 12.200 26.900 07 7.100 27.200 38.600 63.000 4.100 13.000 37.100 35.300 24.400 22.600 21.600 08 10.400 31.000 27.900 15.200 25o900 24.400 11.700 17.300 8.100 25.900 6.400 09 5.300 24.900 46.200 19.600 11.400 15.700 7.900 79*800 7.900 21*800 25.700 10 11.1200 9.100 0.000 17.000 24.100 Boo 1.000 10500 15.000 3.300 14.500 11 20.300 8.400 2.300 3,600 10.400 14*700 150500 7,400 9,400 4.300 3*800 12 16.500 11.400 1.100 18.300 15 9 700 9.700 30800 20*100 3.300 16.50Q 13.500 TOTAL 203.900 216.300 197.800 214*900 156,600 1160100 153*700 244*100 163,800 135,300 188.700 TOTAL ot 156,900 02 118.000 03 168,80*0 04 131,100 05 129.500 06 188.000 07 294.200 08 204,200 09 266,200 10 98.300 11 100,100 12 135.900 TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 1991*200 Table 8: Dissolved oxygen (ppm), color (Platinum-Cobalt units)p turbidity .(Jackson turbidity units), and temperature (OC) taken monthly at permanent stations in the Apalahcicola estuary from Marchg 1972 through Augustj 1983. STATION 1 SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 6*7 3000 010 21*0 lots 1204 8415 40*0 78*0 25*5 11300 7205 8*7 3010 20oO 24,3 1845 7206 7*7 0*0 0*0 2800 33*7 7207 7.0 1540 500 29*0 1500 7208 648 -45*0 25*0 30*0 500 7209 7*4 20,0 7*0 30*0 22o4 7210 8*2 Soo 12*0 19.0 1006 7211 9.1 5.0 7*0 21*5 29fO 7212 @9*4 1010 500 1515 20,1 7301 10*2 70*0 21*0 1040- 1000 7302 1015 18000 205,0 12,0 000 7303 962 450*0 2590 18.4 5.4 7304 8*7 140,0 96.0 21*5 1000 7305 8#5 17*0 10.0 24*4 lls2 7306 8.6 50.0 30.0 2864 1#8 7307 816 20*0 30*0 3203 809 73013 a's 25*0 15,0 28*5 -1296 7309 BOB 300 2.0 29*0 24*1 7310 808 00.0 0.0 20,10 11606 7311 7*2 Boo 12,0 20,0 12*6 7312 6*4 15*0 SOO 1567 5*2 7401 7.8 1000 16*0 1840 2*7 7402 9*4 1000 14*0 18*0 5*7 7403 80.5 20*0 17,0 21,0 10*3 7404 1010 20*0 12*0 20*5 2*9 7405 7*5 solo 700 27.9 'o.0 7406 910 1060 300 27*5 1019 7407 SOO 15.0 2.0 27*8 2100.. 7403 960 2500 2*0 27*2 9*2 740? 919 30oO 3.0 28,0 12*3 7410 7*2 20*0 Ito 20.0 23,0 STATION 1 SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7411 940 ;010 140 1840 25#2 7412 9o4 1000 2oO 1310 503 7501 10*6 30.0 Soo 13*4 2ol 7502 903 75*0 340 15*2 5*2 7SO3 10*1 15000 27oO 16.0 040 7504 8*7 1704.0 33*0 17#0 340 7505 8*5 50*0 4.0 24,5 5o2 7506 8*2 3000 310 25,0 8*5 7507 7o6 30*0 300 25o6 8.5 7508 549 2540 3.0 29*0 300 7509 7*1 20*0 640 24.0 793 7510 6*9 25.0 3,0 21.0 3*6 7511 94.6 1000 2*0 13*5 12*6 7512 9*7 20*0 2.0 16*6 5.2 7601 11*6 20*0 5*0 1000 311 7602 11,4 1010 3*0 17*0 6*2 7603 819 20*0 5,0 17,7 3,,6 7604 9*4 45#0 3,0 24*7 5*2 7605 6*9 60*0 7*0 23.5 6*1 7606 7*2 15*0 300 27*0 201 7607 6.0 3000 6,0 30*9 16*0 7608 900 060 5*0 28*2 16*6 7609 8*3 0.0 5.0 25*0 15,5 7610 3*9 0.0 6.0 1940 6*2 7611 11*3 0*0 4.0 11@18 11*7 7612 905 50*0 1690 908 0*0 7701 12*0 60oO 17*0 Soo 000 7702 903 20*0 900 16*2 2,9 7703 8*6 45*0 25*0 21*9 4*5 7704 8*5 040 1040 24,0 6o7 7705 8*4 5,0 910 27,3 1305 7706 7*8 0110 6*0 30*5 34oO 7707 7*9 is.0 4*0 32*2 21ol 7708 6*8 15*0 12*0 28,1 940 7709 6*5 60*0 12.0 29.5 11*2 7710 7,,9 45*0 910 20.0 1548 7711 7*7 010 5*0 21o6 12*8 7712 941 55*0 10*0 15*7 3*6 7801 III's 40,0 12.0 7*6 2.9 7802 12.2 60*0 1060 10.8 3o6 7803 9*4 95*0 36oO 21.1 5*9 7804 .901 1010 7*0 25*0 4*4 7805 7o6 25*0 33oO 28,1 444 7806 7,7 40*0 25,0 32*0 12,0 7807 6.6 20.0 22.0 29.1 15*0 7808 6*7 80*0 25,0 28*1 2*9 7809 6*7 20#0 11*0 30*8 1010 7810 6#7 15*0 3910 23,2 '21.0 7811 910 30*0 Soo 22*6 1019 7812 819 2*0 800 21*0 14,8 7901 10*8 1000 10.0 9.0 8.6 7902 1000 30,10 25*0 10,2 1*,6 7903 9-3 100-0 45.0 15,1 000 STATION I - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINItY 7904 7*7 1040 17*0 21.9 11%7- 7905 7,5 65*0 56*0 25.1 090 7906 7.1 500 19.0 29.4 17*9 7907 6*4 io6o 62.0 28.3 100% 7908 7.5 10.0 18.0 3001 12*4 7909 669 120,0 25*0 23*7 51 00 7910 8.3 15*0 1910 21*8 Boo 7911 9*4 25*0 @16.0 1791 18.0 7912 lots 20*0 14*0 12oS Soo 8001 10*8 2560 12.0 1800 10*0 8002 1003 10.0. 14*0 Soo 8003 8*4 1010 11*0 18*2 6*0 8004 8413 30*0 32to 1901 6*0 8005 7*1 20#0 23*0 26*0 6*0 8006 815 1500 25.0 28*7 29.0 8007 7,9 5*0 2490 29.0 12.0 8008 6.1 20*0 16*0 30*4 12*0 8009 6*6 1000 16*0 29*9 12.6 8010 7o6 Soo 16*0 22,3 1910 8011 801 10,10 4200 18.8 22*0 8012 916 1000 1800 14*a 6.0 8101 1100 1500 17*0 12*1 6*0 8102 9.3 25*0 35*0 16*9 6.6 8103 990 45*0 90.0 1345 30*0 8104 7*5 60*0 3100 23*6 12-*0 8105 8#1 40*0 25*0 22*7 25*0 8106 7.8 sto 32.0 3146 1700 8107 6*13 5*0 33.0 29*2 20.0 8108 7.6 15.0 @27.0 28,0 20#0 8109 6*6 000 4*0 26*0 1000 silo Boo 000 160 19's 15*0 8111 8#2 20-0 2-0 13.2 22*0 8112 8*7 50*0 340 12*5 15#0 8201 9*6 150,0 3,0 11*2 0 00 8202 9*4 60*0 1840 13.8 1010 B203 4.0 80110 20*0 21*6 000 8204 7o7 55*0 8*0 20*9 11*0 8205 Boo 3090 7*0 26*0 3.0 8206 7*8, 75*0 13.0 27*2 5410 8207 7*5 20*0 5*0 30,0 1900 8208 7,0 3000 14*0 28.3 5.0 8209 7*8 70*0 1040 26*9 14*0 8210 7*6 3040 6*0 2397 15*0 8211 7*6 20,00 840 17*9 15.0 8212 805 25*0 1040 14*3 15*0 8301 10*6 2540 10#0 10*7 6*0 8302 8*7 40*0 19,10 16o2 940 8303 8*4 125#0 34*0 1446 4*0 8304 8*6 130*0 29*0 16*8 0.0 8305 7*4 15.0 12.0 27*4 22*0 8306 6.8 20*0 23.0 27*3 16*0 8307 7*4 45*0 7,0 29*8 21*0 8308' 7,2 25*0 7*0 30,2 16*0 STATION 1 BOTTni VALUES CE PTH SECCHI 00 COLOR rURBID ITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 Zo4 102 791 5000 000 2000 1005 7204 2s6 05 Soo 9500 7800 2500 laso 7205 2.7 163 7*4 45*0 25*0 25*0 24*0 7206 3,0 .7 603 0*0 0.0 2800 33,7 7207 3*0 69 500 7eO 3.0 28eO 29.0 7208 3oO 09 4*9 5000 68#0 30*0 805 7209 201 1.2 608 45*0 38*0 29 esi 24oO 7210 2e4 *3 698 1000 25*0 1992 1017 7211 2o4 1.8 9o4 500 20.0 21*0 24.0 7212 lea 1.2 9.6 500 15.0 1500 1908 7301 108 06 10s3 50sO 23*0 loso 1300 7302 2*5 92 11e3 360*0 240, J 1195 3.00 7303 2oO *2 8.4 450.0 .34*3 18.3 9*4 7304 103 e 3 818 140*0 145,0 21@0 18-80 7305 201 *7 8o4 17*0 40.0 23*0 2008 7306 2*3 05 894 53*7 30*0 zsoi 1505 7307 20 1*2 8*4 35*0 3090 30*2 1901 7308 2,5 *5 8*6 30#0 5500 28o4 12.6 .7309 2ol 1*4 Soo 1500 12.0 29*0 1905 7310 1*4 101 802 20sO 000 2o.?- 1702 7311 105 *9 7*0 1240 23.0 200 l4s9 7312 2*5 101 6*3 800 3#0 1598 2401 7401 le 7 *5 7*6 1560 3690 1800 13-09 7402 1.5 93 9*1 15*0 22*0 18.10 13*8 7403 2*0 *8 800 40sO 4290 20.5 12*6 7404 9.5 09 ic.0 25.0 800 20*0 209 74C5 291 6 7*5 11*9 l4o7 2702 2@ s6 7406 105 101 802 509 100 2704 Z!o3 7407 200 08 6P5 2000 4*0 26*5 2300 7408 1*7 *7 7.0 3090 200 27*1 11*4 7409 2.0 .9 7*9 30.0 7sO z7ou 17,6 7410 21.0 1*6 8o9 2590 2.0 20*5 24*2 7411 2*0 08 901 000 2*0 18#3 29*5 7412 20(o i..z 8.8 30*0 a 0 1) 14*5 1505 7501 1*5 *6 7*4 000 4*0 14,5 6*9 75G2 ls7 09 994 70*0 3*0 1695 794 7503 lea o4 10.0 150.0 26.0 l6oO 1.5 7504 2.0 s3 7*2 145*0 3loO 17,9 4ol 7505 2*0 *4 7ou 5500 500 25*0 5 . *8 75006 2*0 *6 6*4 30*0 4*0 25*0 2693 7507 2.0 .7 6.4 30.0 3*0 25*1 1801 7508 1,9 69 309 1000 2.j 29o7 11*7 7509 2*1 1*0 407 20*0 6*0 26*3 1100 7510 2*0 1.0 6*1 20*0 2 * 0 22*5 1180 7511 200 1*2 9.68 500 200 15*0 18,4 7 5 12 2.0 101 905 15,90 2.0 16*0 13*5 7601 200 1*0 11,6 20sO 4*0 lo.u 4*1 76C2 1 a 8 1*2 12*6 2590 4*0 17*0 12.6 7603 1*3 93 a es 30*0 6oO 1701 3o6 7604 2.0 .7 8*8 45aO Ze3 23,8 1105 76111 2*2 96 6o9 40*0 400 23*u 561 7606 2,0 100 4*6 Gso 3oO 27*8 13*8 7607 2*U lel 5*5 20.0 5.0 31*0 29*7 7606 2.5 100 6o4 zoo 2100 28*Z 22,6 7609 2*2 1*4 5#3 0 * 0 IU*O 25*7 ld*8 7610 @.Q 101 7*2 010 8 0 0 19*5 2100 STATION 1 - 80TTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI Do COLOR TURBIOITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 2*0 193 900 000 12*0 11.9 15*0 7612 2e5 101 909 4000 13*0 8118 08 7761 2oO 15 11,10 1000 25.0 500 12-4 7702 2*0 *7 8o7 000 900 1493 23#4 7703 2*0 05 8*5 4o,0 280 2109 it 0 5 7704 200 1*2 7*4 20*0 15*0 2:3 *0 23#2 7705 200 1#1 7*8 040 14*0 27*8 ld *8 7706 2.6 1.2 7*7 0.0 14sO 2909 34sO 7707 200 1.2 7*9 1500 3@*O 330 ZT*Z 7708 2,0' 102 6*4 too 1800 28*4 2402 7709 2@3 *a 6*0 350 1260 30*0 2101 7710 2*0 09 7o7 50.0 15*0 20613 15*8 7711 293 1*1 7.1 000 17,0 22*1 2792 7712 201 1e4 940 50 0 20*0 15,8 16*6 7801 2oO 100 11.2 40:o 16*0 7;6 4 7802 2*0 1*0 160 30#0 43*0 11sO 12*0 7803 201 93 9*7 75*0 34*0 2000 7*4 7eO4 2*0 191 900 20.0 1060 25.0 5*9 7805 2.0 05 -7,.5 3000 27.0 28*0 4*4 7806. 2.2 .8 74 45*0 22v0 31o0 1508 r, 50.() '1807 lea 101 .0 ob -30 00 3090 2394 7808 392 o6 6o4 5000 22.0 2801 1365 7 F-09 2.2 05 605 4090 24*0 30*4 11,0 7810 2o4 *3 6o6 1000 44.0 2392 2198 7811 2o3 1*2 8.4 20.0 1160 22*2 1548 7812 1 , a 96 8*0 10.4 13*0 20*9 2,J o 2 7901 2#0 o7 lGo6 700 200 809 11*7 7902 o4 9e6 30.0 34*0 918 4*7 7903 192 * 3 9*5 70*0 35.U 1497 08 7904 2-4 o6 7.1 15*0 45*0 21-9 24*1 7905 2e5 o4 7.5 70*0 5zoo 25#0 J00 7906 2*2 09 5*6 1000 20*0 28o4 25*7 7907 3*5 *4 6*1 1000 91*0 28*1 14*8 7908 3&2 05 394 10.0 20*0 2998 1596 7909 2*4 *5 6.2 90.0 54.0 23*6 18.0 7910 2.6 .8 801 2000 21*0 21*8 1000 7911 2*1 o4 901 2uso 170 16*8 21#0 7912 290 ob ll*Z 20*0 15*0 12s2 1390 ecol 2ol 1.0 1094 30*0 13v0 17*4 1400 8002 2oO 100 1008 2u*0 1200 l3sS 5 00 8003 2,5 o6 8.0 15.0 13*0 1801 600 8004 2*2 *6 8.4- 30*0 28.j la*3 1400 8045 297 05 50 300 3090 25*9 11-00 8006 2,5 48 8*0 2000 28*0 28*7 31*0 8007 390 .7 6s5 0*0 33oO 2808 23*0 8(08 2o5 199 540 5000 23.0 30s7 19.0 -8009 2*5 49 4*6 1500 2100 29*9 1100 8ulv 294 1o4 790 590 17*0 2299 ZI 40 8011 2*5 o3 7ed 10*0 4590 1a.4 24sO 8012 207 108 9*9 10.0 1800 15*0 1900 0101 205 1*5 13.1 1000 1600 12*4 18.0 0102 2.3 o4 905 2000 30*0 16,3 15*0 8103 1*9 *3 9.u 45 ok) 9000 13*1 314 81Q4 2.6 88 7,2 5090 34*0 23*6 16*0 8105 2*5 1*0 605 45*0 30*0 2295 2560 f3i 06 2*6 1 a Z 7e6 500 3390 30,-9 Zito STATION 1 - BOTTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI Do COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 294 99 605 5.0 4090 28*9 2300 8108 2*8 *7 7*5 10*0 3290 28oJ 2)00 8109 205 1 a 4o9 000 16*0 2509 18#0 8110 2#2 le4 890 000 3#0 20*2 1500 1505 1800 8111 2,1 1*5 900 20*0 800 8112 109 105 11.4 55*0 500 13*1 1500 2.9 *4 9*2 50*0 290 10.6 6*0 8201 8202 Ise 68 6*7 20#0 15.0 14*3 laso 8203 zoo. s5 804 20*0 Is* 2009 1000 0204 201 *7 7m6 zoto 5*0 2191 2ZoO 8205 291 e7 7o3 20oO 90a 2600 1960 8206 2.2 .6 6.1 80.0 170 27*0 25*0 ISO 6*1 50.0 1500 30*3 2490 8207 2*2 29o2 1560 8208 2o2 go 6al 60*0 800 75*0 1000 Z6*7 14*0 8209 109 09 7*8 .0 8210 109 1*2 7s4 2500 7.0 22*6 22*0 8211 109 197 8,4 1540 8.0 1698 26.0 8212 108 0.8 7s2 25*0 1000 14*9 22sO 8301 lo9 1,4 16,11 20s0 2590 10*7 1400 0. .8302 109 101 e .2 4090 40*0 l6e2 Ise 0 8303 Zol #5 esi 95*0 35o 14*4 900 8304 202 o4 8*2 1.0000 2940 16*7 1.0 8305 2,2 1*1 7*3 15*0 1260 26*8 2290 8306 208 08 6*4 45.0 26*0 27*1 2100 8307 2*3 99 6*8 30*0 14*0 30,0 2400 0 8308 2.0 6*3 30*0 8*0 30*1 1900 STATION 2 - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 7#3 75#0 0*0 20.0 4*3 7204 7*3 95*0 30,0 25*5 5#5 7205 7,,6 9500 45*0 25*0 2oO 7206 7*3 15*0 1.0 3005 648 7207 7*1 35*0 910 30*0 3.0 7208 6.,7 ss.0 45*0 30,0 7,0 7209 603 3500 1000 3110 6*0 7210 7*1 1000 5*0 24sO 2#5 7211 7.@ 22*2 14*0 1900 21*5 7212 7oS 55,0 23oO 13,5 04 7301 9*4 83.5 35*0 1301 ts 7302 8*6 10540 48*0 11*5 000 7303 8.5 90.0 45,0 21*0 000 7304 8*4 90*0 53,0 2015 0#0 7305 7*0 45*0 35#0 24#8 000 7306 7*1 5540 23*0 29*4 0*0 7307 7o2 40.0 35.0 3010 101 7308 8*0 30*0 -10*0 31*0 12*6 7309 6*8 olo 2*0 29*0 oto 7310 8*4 0#0 040 20#5 12*0 7311 7*4 1010 20*0 20*7 495 7312 7*2 15*0 3090 isto 3*9 7401 7*0 20*0 40*0 17*0 010 7402 8*6 10010 34.0 16..0 010 7403 8*0 30*0 Boo 21*0 0#0 7404 eto 60*0 24,0 22,3 5*1 7405 .6*8 65*0 6*5 27*1 000 7406 7*8 10.0 2*0 27*8 5*7 7407 6*0 20.0 4.0 29.0 0*0 7408. 8.6 75*0 6*0 27.1 060 7409 6#1 40*0 5*0 27*0 2*6 7410 Boo 20*0 2*0 19*4 10*1 7411 7*6 0*0 2sO 17*0 6*9 7412 803 30.0 5.0 12.0 000 7501 9.3 65.0 19.0 12*7 000 7502 8*2 .100*0 1040 14*8 2*0 7503 9o6 155*0 27,0 1518 000 7504 7.9 250*0 51.0 17*0 0*0 7505 7*9 120*0 14*0 24*0 3*0 7506 7*8 13040 18*0 24*5 3*0 7507 6*7 S1*5 19,9 25*6 3,0' 7508 6*6 5010 4,0 28,4 2*5 7509 6.2 60*0 9*0 24*0 105 7510 693 45*0 6oO 20#5 oto 7511 8,3 60*0 14*0 15.0 060 7512 8.1 50.0 5*0 14*0 3*1 7601 .10*6 35,0 Boo 910 2*0 7602 8,3 55,0 15*0 1500 060 7603 8*7 70*0 14*0 17.0 0.0 7604 6#7 9040 7*0 23.0 3.1 7605 6*4 11010 20*0 22*0 05 7606 5*4 40*0 7.0 26.0 000 7607 5s4 1000 4*0 2'7#1 08 7608 545 2oO 13*0 28*5 4*0 7609: 6#4 oto 6*0 25#2 3s5 7610 7*9 25.0 900 18*5 08 STATION 2 SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 9o7 2040 1000 10#7 1#3 7612 9#1 7040 15*0 945 08 7701 12#0 65eO 19*0 6*0 0*0 7702 11*0 Soto 12*0 12*1 0.0 7703 8.0 60.0 15.0 20*9 2*9 7704 7.6 8560 16*0 22*5 0*0 7705 7*9 000 12oO 26.7 509 7706 Boo 1540 7*0 31*6 13#5 7707 .8*0 1540 6*0 32,0 16*6 7708 6*4 8040 19*0 27,0 2*9 7709 5*4 70*0 isoo 27*2 1*4 7710 Boo 50.0 18.0 20.8 5*2 7711 7*5 000 510 2246 10#5 7712 7*8 9000 16#0 14#8 090 7801 10*6 7000 16*0 7*4 old 7802 1003 130*0 26oO 9*8 000 7803 9*4 solo 26.0 18*3 1*4 7804 7*8 75,0, 1860 22*9 000 7805 7.2 90.0 37,0 27#3 1#4 7806 6#0 60#0 31*0 3101 194 7807 519 25*0 26#0 30,0 1*4 7808 6*0 70#0 24*0 27*6 2*1 7809 6*3 30*0 13.0 30*0 2*0 7810 8*3 20*0 13.0 23*8 17*9 7811 BOB 090 BOO 23,7 12*6 7812 7*8 3000 14*0 19,19 0*0 7901 10*6 30*0 21*0 9.3 0*0 7902 963 60*0 23*0 9*7 000 7903 8*1 85.0 65*0 14o4 000 7904 6.*6 40*0 29*0 20*4 010 7905 6#0 70*0 24#0 24*1 0*0 7906 6*4 50.0 20*0 27*7 000 7907 603 15.0 30.0 28.0 2*3 7908 5*7 15*0 26*0 30*1 0*0 7909 7*4 120,0 24.0 23.1 160 7910 6*8 25#0 24*0 21#8 040 7911 8*4 40*0 23*1 18*3 oto 7912 961 20*0 17*9 12*0 oto Gool 9.8 25*0 17*0 15*2 000 8002 10*7 30*0 17.0 12.2 000 8003 8o3 35*0 1940 18*4 000 8004 8*2 9040 40*0 l8s2 040 Boos 615 35,0 30*0 24*9 010 8006 7*-l 30*0 24*0 28*4 2*0 8007 6*0 040 27.0 29,.3 0.0 8008 5*4 25*0 17*0 30,0 3*0 8009 5*6 15*0 17*0 29*3 290 solo 7*0 Soo 1800 23*0 590 8011 7*8 5*0 isto 18*4 6*0 8012 9.8 1000 17.0 14,3 99.0 8101 1108 20*0 21*0 1094 4oO 8102 8 # 6 85.0 47oO M2 0*0 0103 743 8000 36,0 17*1 110 8104 6*8 50*0 32.0 23#2 5*0 8103 6,6 50.0 33.0 244,0 5*0 8106 6.8 Soo 3S.0 31*2 4*0 STATION 2 - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 7.7 510 33.0 30.5 12,0 8108 7eS 15.0 30.0 2840 20sO 8109 549 010 5*0 26,4 5*0 silo 6*1 040 100 21*0 590 Bill 7*5 20*0 640 15*8 5*0 .8112 900 5000 5sO 12.8 3*0 .8201 8*8 15000 3*0 9*3 8*0 8202 8#2 200*0 56*0 12*7 oto 8203 6.6 100.0 16.0 2092 090 8204 7*6 80*0 1000 20*3 100 8205 609 55sO Boo 24*0 0*0 8206 6.0 130.0 16*0 29*9 2*0 8207 5*3 75*0 14*0 28*9 2*0 8208 5*4 6010 .13*0 28*0 000 8209 4*6 8010 11#0 27*7 000 $210 7*0 40*0 7*0 23*3 4eO 8211 8*4 25*0 910 17*1 7#0 8212 7.0 120.0 2190 14*5 040 8301 9.9 100.0 25.0 9*4 oto 8302 893 200*0 43#0 14*1 010 8303 7*9 205*0 43*0 14*1 0#0 8304 8110 150,0 35*0 16*5 000 8305 5*8 50*0 16*0 26*1 4*0 8306 5*8 25*0 1940 26*9 54 8307 5*5 40*0 9*0 29*9 1000 8308 690 3500 90,0 291.2 2*0 STATION 2 -.80TTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHL D13 COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALIN17Y 7203 501 102 5,7 4000 0*0 zueo 1?00 7204 60 06 7*2 8000 31*1 2500 Isso 7205 6*0 46 6*7 80*0 4500 25,10 23o5 7206 610 9 6e2 1210 000 3190 13*0 7207 3*9 6 5*7 2240 1190 28*0 26*0 7208 4*5 4*1 145*0 75.0 3J*5 210 7209 4*5 102 5*3 35,3 12*0 2800 27#0 7210 2,4 09 6*3 150 8*0 23*7 500 7211 4eZ 161 7*5 15s4 22.0 1900 21.5 7212 594 '1e4 7*6 9000 37.0 l4eO 10*6 7301 3e8 *6 9,0 7301 5510 13,1 695 7302 3.5 06 9*4 75*0 7@0 1000 380 7303 302 *6 805 7GOO 30*0 20*0 000 7304 ISO 94 8*4 9500 5510 200 13.00 7305 3*0 06 794 500 400 23e5 908 7306 700 *5 7*1 25,0 250 29ol lies 7307 295 08 6*6 35.0 105*0 29*5 1501 7308 3.5 -9 7.3 30.() 1809 31,0 l6e6 .7309 3*5 09 6e9 6090 70*0 2805 1193 7310 105 09 8*2 10,0 000 2000 13 %Z 7311 200 09 6.8 20*0 24*0 20*7 4*5 7312 2,0 .9 7*2 30.0 36*0 28*0 3,9 7401 2a5 6e8 40*0 48,0 16*5 300 7402 3e0 @3 7,7 000 83.0 15*7 16*6 7403 4.0 06 669 2000 1000 20,0 7404 1905 1V5 e6 7*3 57o3 2895 22,2 5e3 7405 5,.0 06 7.4 32*1 10*3 27*8 2108 7406 4*0 09 7.5 2*0 1*0 27eO 2391' 7407 .500 09 6*0 1000 3.0 29,0 17*2 7408 4*8 *8 8,0 2500 3@5 2890 23e4 7409 4*0 1.1 3*5 25,0 6*0 27*0 114 *8 7410 4*0 1*6 8e4 1000 Ito 2008 27*3 7411 4*0 1-0 801 0,0 2*0 1840 2390 7412 305 Is 8*1 1010 100 l4e0 20,3 7501 400 *4 802 11000 26*0 -12*3 0*0 7502 4*0 08 8.0 40*0 290 1495 1802 7503 400 *4 9,4 15000 2790 1509 000 7504 4*5 *3 708 25000 53eO 1700 )..0 7505 3e7 *7 6*1 11000 1500 24*0 3*0 7506 300 *6 3e4 30,0 50 26*0 190 7507 3*7 *7 3*5 30*0 490 75C8 4e0 69 3*6 500 25*9 lit 0 4 100 .28*7 13*9 7509 3e5 09 6*2 2*0 100 2490 1160 7510 3*0 08 5*4 000 2.0 21*0 7.3 7511 305 *5 7.9 60aO 14*0 15,2 000 7512 3*5 09 e 0 a 60*0 7*0 160 3*1 7601 3e5 08 9*4 35*0 8.0 1005 2.0 7602 .3.0 $@ 8a4 55*0 1500 1600 300 7603 3*0 *3 8*6 350 80a 1608 @41 7604 300 *7 7,1 4500 7605 2*0 - 23*0 1608 It 0 0 e4 6#3 40*0 200 22,0 1,3 7606 395 4eO 510 2*0 1792 7607 27*0 7608 3 5 #9 6*9 10.0 4*0 2990 27*0 3:0 sh 4*9 2eO 30.0 2801 1791 7609 It.0 140 6e2 000 45o3 25*3 17,1 76.10 3,0 *6 8*4 560 900 19#2 3*0 STATION 2 BOfTfJM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI DO C OL OR TUISIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 3*0 *7 90 000 1490 1002 12's 7612 3*5 *7 807 500 1500 901 7*3 7701 395 96 11.0 65oO 17.0 6*0 000 7702 3.0 05 1100 45oO 16oO 1201 es 77C3 3oO 96 799 65*0 20*0 20o9 2 99 7704 3*0 08 792 30*0 32*0 23*0 19*2 7705 390 49 792 0.0 230 27*2 23*4 77C6 3*8 96 608 040 11*0 30*0 28*7 7707 3*0 09 6*8 2090 2800 32*5 2300 7708 39-0 05 6*5 70*0 20.0 27*2 1102 7709 300 09 499 5000 1500 28o8 1102 7710 3*5 08 7se 6000 900 2005 2191 7711 3*0 09 6*5 000 1800 22*4 21*1 7712 390 08 7@7 65#0 18.0 15*1 ;to 78(il 205 97 1c.-6 60*0 17,0 7e2 340 7802 305 *4 10*4 140*0 32*0 9.j 060 7803 3*0 05 9*4 100*0 30*0 18*3 1*4 7604 3oO s6 797 70,0 19*0 22 95 3*0 7805 3*2 05 6.8 9560 40*0 2790 *6 7806 2oS 's 6.1 5500 31*0 30*8 4,4 7807 209 *8 5.2 2300 62oO 30al 9.0 78G8 3oO *6 565 35so 3390 2800 1801 7809 297 96 see 30*0 14,0 2909 200 7810 4*3 *5 7*9 1500 16*0 23.5 23o3 7811 209 101 8*7 1000 900 22*9 Uo6 7012 3.3 *4 7e8 40*0 41*0 19*8 000 7q01 301 .4 10*6 35*0 39*0 9*3 060 7902 4*5 05 9o3 70,0 20*0 996 000 7903 3*2 01 Soo 9500 61*0 14*4 040 7904 2*4 *4 6*5 60*0 30sO 20s3 000 7905 4*5 07 5*8 55.0 24*0 24*0 000 7906 3*0 15 So3 25aO 15*0 27*6 as 7907 3*0 05 6*0 15sO 32oO 2708 5*4 7908 390 *6 5*6 15.0 27*0 29*7 08 7909 3*7 4 7*3 9000 4200 23*0 12#0 7910 '3*5 *8 6*5 3000 24oO 21*7 300 7911 4*0 97 801 30*0 23.0 1799 3.0 7912 1*3 *5 991 25*0 17*0 12*0 1190 8001 2*8 05 1004 30,0 1790 16*0 laso 8002 197 05 1100 50*0 220 12*2 080 8003 2#8 97 802 40,90 2200 18o4 3100 SQ04 396 *5 Sol 11060 4290 1801 3,00 8005 3*5 *4 6*4 45*0 5000 24,7 300 eo06 2*8 07 693 40,0 24*0 28*4 600 8C07 492 as 5*4 000 5000 29*0 2@00 6008 4.5 08 5*4 40.0 2290 30*2 1100 3009 2*9 .* 7 1o4 10 so 2300 29*3 (t 1 0 8010 4,5 1*4 694 5.0 19*0 23*0 Soo ecil 4*5 101 7s6 5*0 20oO 1894 1300 8012 118 148 905 icoo 1960 14,3 1500 8101 4o3 iso 13*2 10"o 1900 1196 110C 8102 4ol 4 8*1 80.0 4590 1501 Joc 811@3 398 08 8*1 85*0 40*3 17.1 1-00 8104 4*5 96 693 6000 33oO 6 9 C 8105 4o5 09 6*2 60*0 35.0 23*6 91C 8106 493 1*1 6*7' 10.10 40*0 30*3 17.C sTATION 2 - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 09 509 500 46*0 29*9 1800 3107 209 31*0 27*9 2).0 8108 4o6 *8 7*8 1000 0109 4*0 102 5*6 000 5.0 26o2 14*0 1qi1o 3*8 104 5.3 010 4e0 20*8 1540 Bill 3,9 1o6 7o3 4500 3*0 1505 400 8112 3*5 1.4 8*4 60*0 7.0 13-,0 l4oO 8201 3*0 *6 808 15000 iso 909 k) 00 8202 3*9 94 7*6 275oO 6303 1205 000 e203 301 as 5*2 9000 17oO 20.3 040 8204 490 08 6*8 60-0 12*0 20*3 1900 8205 3*1' o7 6,9 1000 164 24,,5 200 600 8206 3.0 97 5#2 120oO 20*0 29#1 820? 293 05 492 70*0 l2aO 29*3 20*0 8208 3*3 as 4*6 5000 14,0 2801 600 e209 3*7 09 4*6 145*0 22*0 27o4 4*0 8210 3 -'3 eg 6.1 40*0 10,0 22o5 28*0 8211 109 1*3 '7,9 20*0 9*0 l7m0 1500 300 o3 602 125eO 5500 14*4 0*0 8212 902 000 8301 20 *6, 90 100*0 22*0 000 8302 2*5 04 -8e4 160.0 40*0 1400 e303 3*2 05 7.8 175*0 4490 14sO 300 8304 3oO .94 7.9 1@0-0 33*0 l6e5 oeo 8305 2*5 108 5.4 40*0 15*0 2408 1200 8306 3*0 09 5*4 40*0 2100 2605 500 8307 299 1* 0 398 30oO 12*0 29*7 24*0 8308 3o5 :1 5*7 30*0 800 30*0 1400 STATION 3. SURFAC@ VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 7,8 ioooo 000 20*0 -110 7204 -1.0 85.0 45.0 25.0 *4 7205 -100 -110 -140 -100 -140 7206 -100 30#0 2*0 28*0 5,5 7207 6*8 41*0 1000 30*5 2o5 7208 -1.0 -100 -1*0 30,0 -1.0 7209 -1.0 .3000 1010 3110 14.0 7210 -IsO 17*0 5*0 22*0 12iO 7211 -100 -100 -110 -140 *4 7212 -100 1000 1010 14*0 1202 7301 -100 -100 -100 -110 -100 7302 -1*0 130#0 60*0 12#5 -100 7303 8*5 11000 25*0 23*0 0410 7304 -1.0 -1*0 -100 .-1410 -1*0 7305 -1*0 -160 -100 -100 -100 7306 -1110 -100 -110 -100 -110 7307 -110 -140 -1*0 -1*0 -1*0 7308 -1*0 -1*0 -10 -1*0 -100 7309 -1*0 -1160 -14.0 -1.0 -100 7310 -100 3*0 000 1900 13*8 7311 -110 -1410 -100 -100 -110 7312 -1*0 -1*0 -1#0 -1*0 -110 7401 7#1 45*0 47*0 17*0 010 7402 -1.0 -@-140 -1*0 -110 -110 7403 -140 -1.0 -1*0 -100 -140 7404 8*5 70*0 27.0 22.3 4*5 7405 7,5 40*0 2,0 25*2 000 7406 7*7 1040 5*0 27*0 496 7407 6*-4 22*5 505 30*6 010 7408 6*7 20*0 4*0 27*6 000 7409 6,8 45*0 6*0 25.5 I's 7410 9*7 15*0 2*0 22*0 1148 7411 8*8 20*0 4#0 20*5 lool 7412 1000 60,0 7*0 14.5 0,10 7501 9.0 60*0 20*0 14*0 4s 7502 8*6 110.0 16*0 17*0 2*5 7503 10*3 150.0 26,0 17*5 0.0 7504 801 140#0 22*0 1800 04.0 7505 6*2 50010 14#0 27*0 2,5 7506 7*9 11000 16*0 2500 040 7507 6*8 50#0 6*0 27*5 7*9 7508 8.2 65.0 6,,0 3Oo2 3.0 7509 8.6 25*0 440 24*2 3*6 7510 6*8 95*0 12*0 23,0 1,5 7511 910 5040 900 181.0 040 7512 9.4 85*0 13*0 10*5 oto 7601 12.5 60.0 9.0 10.0 000 7602 BOB 90.0 20.0 19*5 0410 7603 8,7 50.0 1310 17,8 010 '1604 8.7 65#0 6*0 28,0 000 1 7605 7o2 125#0 1860 25*0 1*3 7606 6,6 40*0 13.0 28*0 .5 7607 6.3 30*0 3.0 30.1 0*0 7608 7*1 20#0 15*0 29.0 12*2 7609 6ol 5*0 16.0 25.0 3.0 7610 .790 45*0 1808 20*2 05 STATION 3- SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 12*6 62*5 17.0 8.2 0:8 7612 9.5 55.0 29.0 9.3 0 7701 1110 70*0 20*0 7*5 000 7762 11*2 50*0 20,0 1300 0*0 7703 918 65,0 1800 21o3 2#1 7704 7*9 80-10 16*0 21*5 000 7705 865 60.0 27.0 24*8 *6 7706 9,.7 10.0 6.0 3118 9*0 7707 8.5 30*0 7*0 32*0 12*0 7708 7ol .10010 24*0 2791 2#9 7709 5*3 60#0 17*0 30*0 494 7710 7*8 70*0 13*0 1900 201 7711 7*3 5*0 1000 22.2 8*2 7712 Soo 105.0 15,00 16*0 1*4 7801 10*8 70*0 16*0 7*0 oto 7802- 1068 9000 164 1005 000 7803 905 10000 24,0 17*8 000 7804 8*4 70*0 18.0 23*0 oto 7805 7*5 10500 41,0 27,1 010 7806 665 50.0 28.0 31*5 2*1 7807 6,,4 35*0 24*0 29#9 5#9 7808 7ol Soto 34*0 27#1 .#6 7809 7t2 3.000 12#0 2990 4#0 7810 So4 1500 1500 23*8 7*0 7811 Sol 10*0 13*0 21.oO 000 7812 8.6 18410 900 20*1 060 7901 1105 3000 1190 1000 000 7902 10*6 45*0 23*0 9*7 0*0 7903 8*2 10010 59010 13*2 000 7904 805 45*0 26.0 23*1 000 7905 7*1 70.0 26*0 23*0 0*0 7906 6.7 25.0 21*0 28o9 48 7907 7#1 15,0 12&0 29,13 te 7908 6*2 .3040 25*0 3041 301 7909 801 15000 59*0 22*4 Ito 7910 8*0 5000 31*0 20*5 0.0 7911 8*8 15*0 11*2 17*0 000 7912 11*2 30sO 1341 13,2 040 8001 11*6 45oO 14#6 15*0 1#0 8002 1000 50.0 15*0 13*7 oto 8003 944 35*0 16*0 18,3 0*0 8004 Soo 35*0 26*3 19*7 1*2' 8005 7*8 35*0 20.2 25,3 118 8006 7,7 20,0 17*2 27*8 3*7 8007 10*7 040 25*0 314.0 2*0 8008 5*3 30*0 16sO 29*2 2*0 8009 5.6 1010 15*0 29*0 4*0 8010 6,8 10.0 20.0 22*6 4*0 8011 911 1010 20*0 18.4 4*0 8012 9*3 25oO 1810 soo.. B101 11*2 1010 1900 12*0 5*0 8102 910 75*0 40oO 14*8 000 8103 7.4 85.0 35.0 17*3 140 8104 7.2 80.0 31*0 22*7 560 8105 10*6 50*0 2240 25s3 900 6106 901 5*0 34*0 3090 1000 STATION 3.- SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 603 1000 3100 2991 510 8108 9110 20*0 25*0 28,6 1100 8109 6o3 040 300 25,2 5.0 silo 8.0 0#0 7*0 21*2 640 Bill 8.9 25.0 11*0 17*3- 8110 8112 803 45eO sto lite 2*0 8201 910 140*0 3*0 10,4 0*0 8202 7.6 250*0 5500 l4sO 000 8203 6*2 11090 25*0- 20*8 0*0 8204 7**7 9000 13.0 22.0 100 8205 e63 55,0 17*0 26,8 560 8206 7*4 60*0 15*0 2690 7*0 8207 5*8 204 1100 3010 4*0 8208 6*4 90*0 18,10 27*5 000 8209 64 6000 14,0 29*3 2.0 8210 6*4 60*0 13*0 22*8 000 8211 8*5 25*0 940 16*5 4*0 8212 7*3 55*0 lato 14*0 000 8301 1011 240*0 3690 12*2 000 8302 8*6 150*0 3790 15*.2 000 8*6 125*0 47*0 15*7 000 8304 841 140*0 35.0 17*6 000 8305 5*7 5500 26s.0 2498 2*0 8306 7*3 6000 510 27*8 1000 8307 7#2 35*0 13oO 32*1 7.0 13308 5*5 45*0 13*0 29.0 1.0 STATION 3 BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 707 -100 -100 20,0 -160 7203 2*1 *6 7Z04 09 93 -1*0 9000 45*0 2500 7905 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -1,10 _'j,0 7206 2*4 -1.0 -140 5.0 000 270 22oO 7207 11,2 -9- 7-5 330 8.0 30*0 400 7208 *6 -100 -100 -110 -100 -1*0 _L so 7209 102 1 el -100 6000 28#0 -100 1609 7210 09 *3 -100 22,0 5#0 22-0 IZOO 721.1 1-5 1-1 -1-0 -1-0 -1-0 -1-0 *9 7212 1#2 e6 -100 20#0 1200 14*0 16*2 7301 -169 -1-00 -100 -1 so -100 -100 -100 7302 205 93 -100 1404 49*0 1205 -100 7303 200 #4 e*6 11500 2500 2205 090 7304 -10-0 -100 -100 -1.0 -100 -100 -190 7305 -100 -100 !-1 00 -100 -100 -1*0 -100 7306 -100 -100 -1.0 -1.0 -100 -1*0 -1.0 7307 -100 -100 -100 -140 -1*0 -100 @1:00 0 -1*0 -100 -100 7308 -100 -100 -100 -1* 7309 @100 -1,0 -100 -100 -100 -100 @100 7310- 1*6 -100 -100 2590 40*0 20*0 17*2 7311 -100 -11.0 40110 -1*0 -1*0 -100 -1,90 7312 -100 -1.0 -100 -100 -100 -100 -1,00 7401 100 -1 00 7*1 2590 1400 17,0 000 7402 -100 @100 -100 .1*0 'mol 0 0 -100 -Igo 7403 _1*0 -100 -1.0 -100 -100 -1*0 -100 7404 109 e6 893 70w0 3190 22.3 541 7405 00 06 565 43*1 4*0 27*0 15*5 7406 Ito 09 8*3 4090 4*0 26o2 4e6 7407 1.0 1*0 5e4 1500 390 2901 a 00 7408 109 *6 6eZ 35*0 7,0 27*5 040 7409 105 08 305 3090 6*0 2790 2*6 7410 1.1 1-1 10-6 10.0 200 22,10 11,68 7411 Ie5 *6 900 2040 30 20*0 1394 7412 1*5 09 1000 '90.0 29aO 14*5 0*0 7501 1*0 #3 8*7 65*0 21#0 139Z 05 7502 2*0 05 805 115.0 1900 16-5 .2 05 7503 101 a4 10*3 1604 270 1790 000 7504 1.1 95 7e9 145 90 2500 1840 3.00 7505 101 95 6e4 650 13*0 25,7 390 7506 1*0 s4 7*4 12000 1600 25*0 09 7507 1&6 *7 7.1 90*0 20*0 27*5 l3e9 7508 le2 96 7*6 8000 7*0 29*6 3 v0 750 1*2 08 7.8 770 1000 24,60 501 7510 140 .6 6.8 75.0 1390 22*5 195 7511 195 08 9e3 40e0 14*0 1800 000 7512 *6 s3 9*4 85*0 13*0 1005 000 7601 98 108 12.5 6090 10*0 1000 000 71102 *3 8*4 9000 21*0 19*5 j., 0 7603 1*5 * 3 8*5 5040 16.0 l7a5 000 7604 100 08 1203 60.0 6*0 26*0 000 7605 105 05 7a3 130*0 zulo 25a9 2*1 7606 J.o 95 6e5 7C,0 17#0 280 45 7607 192 68 600 604 L20 3.001 090 7608 105 *7 7*9 20aO 16*0 29o4 5 e5 7609 1*0 e6 5*8 16*0 16*0 24.6 400 7610 100 .*4 7e6 40,0 21*3 1998 1*6 STAT13N 3 - BOTTOM VALUES OEPTH SECCHI ()0 COLORTURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 09 *5 lies 5500 15.0 805 3*2 7612 *a *4 995 5510 4290 901 000 7701 100 94 1100 8060 2500 7o5 j 0 0 7702 1*0 94 11*3 40oO 2100 13*0 65 7703 11.0 95 908 .60,0 2100 21*2 201 77C4 97 o6 807 80.0 18.0 22*0 000 7705 lo.4 *5 7*6 55*0 30oO 24*5 1 , it 7706 lo6 a a 892 5,0 1160 3096 25o7 770 161. 100 805 1000 1000 33oO izoo 7708 1.2 o3 7*1 S5 .0 1800 2792 209 7709 108 .19 597 5500 17*0 30eO 13*5 7710 102 *7 7*5 7010 l3oO 19*1 201 7711 1*4 *8 7o2 000 900 2200 13o5 7712 lo, 0 09 805 5coo 12oO 16,5 900 7801 08 *7 1008 7ooo 2100 700 3.* 0 7802 102 07 1180 8500 16*0 10*4 0*0 7603 *7 o4 9o4 10000 28.0 17*8 t) . 0 7804 160 o3 8o4 70*0 30*0 23*0 010 7805 1.1 .6 -7.2 11000 42@0 27*2 0*0 7806- 102 07 7o2 -35*0 27oO 31*8 lba6 7607 1*5 es 602 2500 5000 30*2 7o4 7808 141 94 7*0 7ooo 34*0 27ol 194 7809 1*3 85 7.0 40.0 900 2808 4oO 7810 lo3 #6 801 1000 16*0 23,6 1408 7811 1*4 lo2 7*5 5*0 27.0 21*1 Doo 7812 105 07 805 20*0 1000 2000 0*0 7901 *7 .6 llo5 3090 1100 10*0 1*0 7902 M *4 J0* 3 30*0 5500 9*7 as 7903 1*6 o2 801 90.0 64*0 15*1 0 C, 0 7904 lo6 e4 8o4 5000 26*0 22o9 J.0 7905 1#5 *4 7eO 70oO 52oO 23,0 000 7906 lea * (p 6o5 2000 19,10 2849 90 7907 las .7 705 1500 14.0 29*2 ft e 7 7908 107 09 5.3 3040 27eO 30*0 4o7 7909 1,61 42 7o9 95.0 6490 22o3 3.0 7910 101 o3 Boo 5000 30oO 2005 0.00 7911 09 o7 808 1500 14o3 1790 000 7912 @6 *5 lle2 30*0 16#1 13oZ 000 8001 08 o6 11*6 15oO l7e4 150 1100 000 8002 1#3 1.0 10*0 50oO 1500 13*7 8003 i's *6 7.7 2c*0 1840 1702 15*0 SC04 lo3 *6 800 35sO 35o5 1905 1.3 8005 1*3 ob 7*8 35*0 2497 25oO' 3*8 6006 1*3 *6 7o7 20*0 25e4 27*3 5*7 8007 1*3 *6 10*1 5*0 38.0 30*9 zoo 8008 193 lol 5.3 30*0 16.0 29.2 2 41) 8009 101 96 5o6 icoo 1500 29-10 440 e010 loo *8 6*8 10*0 2000 22*6 4oO 8011 190 09 901 lcoo 20oO 18o4 4*0 8012 102 1.2 9*2 2590 18*0 1502 840 8101 109 1*4 11*2 1500 16oO 12.8 l2oO 8102 109 05 809 89440 4390 1500 000 8103 lou A 7,0 85*0 35oO 17.3 100 81 Q4 2*0 o6 7o6 e0*0 31o0 22*6 5 00 81o5 1*3 69 946 5 (1 . 0 24*0 24o7 iloo 8106 1*3 09 9a3 . 5.0 39*0 30,,0 1000 STATION 3 GOTTO1 VALUES cEPTH SECCHI DO COLCR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 103 se 509 500 29*0 2808 600 8108 10 *8 e . 9 2u.0 25*3 2805 l4sO 8109 104 100 5,9 oleo 4*0 25*3 5 so 8110 9. 09 Soo 000 790 210a 690 8111 101 it% 1 905 1500 22410 17*8 500 8112. .6 *6 8*3 45*0 01,0 1108 200 8201 06 05 900 1404 3*0 10s4 0.0 8202 08 03 7*6 25000 5510 14*0 000 8203 08 *6 602 110,0 25*0 20*8 060 8204 *7 *4 7e7 90*0 l3eO 2200 100 8205 1*4 *7 e*2 554 22-,0 2691 840 8206 1*6 . 5 508 100*0 2500 26*2 14*0 8207 1*3 :7 402 1060 1403 30*2 2300 E208 le3 *4 6e2 10040 21*0 27,3 000 8209 100 *5 6eO 55*0 1390 29s2 4*0 8210 log *6 6e4 6040 13*0 22eS 000 e2-11 08 98 805 25*0 900 16,5 490 8212 1*2 07 606 80.0 21#0 14*0 300 8301 193 2 1001 140#0 2790 l2el 000 8302 .9 *4 896 150#0 37*0 15*2 0*0 8303 lv3 *4 8.5 260*0 5590 15*7 060 8304 105 .4 SOO 120*0 35*0 170 080 8305 1.3 *6 507 80,60 3460 24*5 2.0 8306 1*3 196 6*9 50*0 500 27o5 1160 8307 1*3 es 811 40,0 1490 31*9 700 8308 09 09 Sa3 45 *10 134 28*8 100 w STATION S - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 8#7 87.5 28.9 17*6 3.0 7204 GIs .612 . 6 16.8 2S.0 .4 7205 8.6 75*0 30.0 25,5 10,16 7206 So5 2.0 6#0 26.0 1142 7207 ?05 41*0 1100 30,15 7sO 7208 7,,7 70,0 5810 3145 7*5 720? 7*2 20*0 9*0 3110 17.3 720 841 3000 510 20's Is*$ 7211 9A 27.5 12.5 20-10 2.9 7212 945 500 2010 14*0 1519 7301 8*4 150to 37*6 1100 010 7302 913 116010 90#0 1200 000 7303 a's 10090 9100 18#9 0.0 7304 8.4 90.0 92*0 21,9 *4 7305 45.,0 3500 22*3 040 7306- 548 60#0 3200 27,17 0110 7307 6103 5040 6000 2?,,7 100 7308 7*5 3010 1010 27".., 111 7309 3*4 30.0 10,10 2 7310 S119 2S*0 0.0 22.8 16.1 9.1 1305 7311 8#1 2300 1305 .2008 Boo 7312 6*6 25,10 1040 1642 010 7401 55110 1900 010 7.,,S 5040 .7402 915 iio,.o 52.0 16*2 0110 7403 843 40#0 22.0 20.0 2.3 7404 843 60*0 26*0 19.0 0*0 7405 7#7 30*0 2*0 25*7 010 7406 813 20*0 740 27oO 80 7407 7*6 114,5 7,,0 28*7 *4 7408 8.2 95*0 3.0 29.2 4.3 7409 6.4 180.0 2*5 27*6 6.1 7410 7.4 25,,0 3*0 24,,6 10#1 7411 813 30-10 3*0 22*0 1243 7412 1008 40oO 500 1445 2*1 7501 ?*0 solo 1910 1341 olo 7502 9.0 100.0 1640 17,0 3410 7503 10.4 175.0 128.0 is.0 2*5 7504 811 180#0 15.0 18*5 010 7505 7*6 140*0 14*0 24*5 2,0 7506 7.1 13040 1500 25.0 3*0 7SO7 7*2 110*0 12#0 2810 12-0.3 7501a 7.4 130.0 4.0 3042 3.0 7509 $09 65.0 7*0 24,2 713 7510 8#7 60.0 810 25.7 2.0 7511 915 540 300 184.5 8,.4 7512 11*2 40,0 5*0 slo 040 1,2. 1, 0 1010 1 7601 90.0 14.0 .1.40 7602 8.8 10040 1840 20*0 1.5 7603 743 6010 15*0 17#0 105 7604 8.6 solo 9*0 26,.5 040, 7605 7*1 10010 14*0 25,2 2,1 7606 809 60,0 140 29*2 0110 7607 7.7 6000 5.0 32.0 2.4 7609 608 20110 1140 28*5 15lo 7609 a's 15. 0 20.0 26,8 5*1 7610 81*3 81*3 14#3 1960 311 STATION 5 - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 12*4 122oS 37*0 8*4 600 7612 10.2 9500 900 13*0 113 7701 1108 80,00 1900 618 000 7702 1006 95,0' 53*0 14*0 040 7703 1013 5000 27,0 19.5 4*5 .7704 806 60*0 21#0 23*0 06 7705 7*2 20*0 1200 25.0 17.3 7706 7#1 5*0 4*0 30*5 9*0 7707 7*1 23*0 Boo 27*9 7*4 7708 7*9 Soto 840 29*0 14#3 7709 7*2 .30*0 15*0 28*8 4*0 7710 7*9 70*0 7*0 21*4 900 7711 9,5 0*0 9*0 22*0 7*4 7712 8.9 90.0 16.0 13.1 0.0 7801 14*2 75#0 12a.0 6#1 010 7802 38000 87,0 5*6 040 7803 10*2 150*0 50*0 1949 4*4 7804 8*4 70.0 2040 22*6 291 7805 7*9 85*0 36*0 28*8 2,b9 7806 1090 80*0 2340 2*9 .7807 7*5 3000 25#0 31o,4 2,1 7808 6*7 17090 18#0 2999 5*2 7809 7*5 3010 910 3009 1500 7810 7*5 '1540 12*0 24*3 20#2 7811 7*8 5*0 1040 22.9 17*1 7812 7s7 900 8*0 2109 12.4 7901' 9*2 11000 Boo 840 6,2 7902 :-10*4 75*0 65*0 1008 000 7903 940 115*0 3900 15*0 040 7904 80@6 50,0 30-0 22,3 000 7905 8*2 80.0 26-0 23.7 090 7906 8*9 3000 1900 29*0 000 7907 6*0 1000 11*0 28*9 806 7908 5*8 25*0 2540 29*2 9*3 7909 6*8 175*0 21*0 22*8 2*0 7910 7*9 85.0 1800 20*6 7.0 7911 9.3 30*0 10*5 15*2 12.0 7912 11,2 70,0 1011 9411 5.0 8001 9*0 40*0 13,9 12*9 2.0 8002 11*2 40,0 1900 1608 1110 8003 7*5 13010 33*0 ists 010 8004 7.1 9540 38*0 1848 0.6 8005 7*6 70*0 31#0 26,7 010 8006 809 50*0 34*0 27o4 2*0 8007 7*8- 20*0 23*0 3048 10*0 Boos 5e4 30eO 17.0 30,1 1600 8009 7.1 1010 12*0 30.2 12.0 8010 8.3 Soo 15.0 22*3 12.0 8011 9.4 15*0 21*0 15*4 13*0 8012 1001 10*0 17,0 15*7 900, 8101 1108 1010 16*0 12*? 6,0 8102 9*0 8510 45*0 16*0 040 8103 8*4 90*0 5840 1663 too 8104 792 700 35*0 23,2 5*0 8105 8*2 50#0 26-0 2261 3*0 1-1106 7*3 Soo 33*0 31*7 960 STATION s - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 0107 7#3 5 0 2890 28,7 6*0 8108 6*8 25:0 22*0 2794 21*0 8109 8*2 40*0 300 26*5 Boo silo 7*8 0100 100 20*0 1500 Bill 7,9 25.6 7,0 17*1 1010 8112 9*4 60.0 Soo 12*0 9.0 8201 .906 15000 30*0 12*4 000 8202 900 260*0 44*0 16*4 000 8203 7*3 130,0 22#0 2390 000 8204 7*8 225*0 17*0 25,0 2*0 8205 Sol 45*0 1300 27ol 5.0 820.6 7*7 .125*0 29.0 26*1 090 8207 692 75*0 7*0 29*3 800 8208 6.4 55.0 1300 28*0 500 8209 6,4 75*0 13*0 26*7 490 8210 8.2 90.0 10-0 23oO 1100 8211 911 3000 940 164.9 1500 8212 7o4 1000 8*0 1349 1810 8301 10*3 solo 1340 1105 4,0 8302 BOB 230*0 41*0 16*0 000 8303 809 160*0 41*0 14*0 oto 8304 8*7 19010 3310 18*3 000 8305 Boo 5soo 29*0 2790 3oo 8306 6*8 15.0 19*0 27ol 7*0 8307 8.3 70*0 11.0 3165 Boo 8308 7*1 25*0 10.0 30*7 11*0 STATION 5 BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TURBIDITY TE MP SALINITY 7203 Its 05 8e4 83,7 3691 l7s6 4 *6 7204 105 09 7*5 74*0 22#4 25 *0 165 7205 2*0 as 6*8 to 00 37 9 Z 2502 1840 7206 2*7 *9 6*3 4*0 590 2690 11*2 7207 2s4 07 5e6 32*0 7*0 29*5 28*0 7208 1*5 *6 4*5 85*0 60#0 30*0 22*0 7209 201 96 5*4 11000 1500 30*0 1860 7210 lee a 697 324 500 2Ls3 zoa 7211 108 1*4 8*7 1909 17.5 21*0 3*5 7212 2*1- *6 8,m4 11000 3000 1400 1609 7301 195 #3 797 148*2 46*5 1100 300 7302 200 2 10*6 220sO 153*0 1105 300 7303 2.0 :3 811 121s2 11000 18.8 390 7304 168 15 8s4 110.0 101,3 21o2 e4 7305 109 96 7*0 60@0 9000 21s6 000 7306 205 *5 5o6 15060 70sO 27sO 1-60 7307 2*0 49 6*0 45*0 71.,6 29*2 402 7308 2e5 09 4*4 30*0 30*0 30s5 1105 7309 2.3 08 .7s8 4447 1908 29*1 5.3 7310 1*4 1*6 892 25*0 0*0 22*0 1691 7311 109 *8 7*4 -25oO 19*7 ZOm6 1008 7312 200 48 8 e7 2503 1000 1693 609 7401 1*5 *6 800 600 125*0 19*0 0*0 7402 1*4 *3 905 15C*O 58.0 16*0 j-.0 7403 200 *7 f*6 40.0 1440 1905 5*7 7404 2*0 05 892 7090 31*0 1895 300 7405 2*9 15 6s5 30*0 10*7 Z6&8 Soo 7406 2*0 09 7*3 1040 Igo 28*0 1945 7407 161 *7 6e9 57.5 84*5 28e4 4*8 7408 205 .7 296 75.0 10*0 27*3 lOe3 7409 1*3 es 500 57s5 4*5 26*6 2349 7410 101 100 60 45.0 30 2443 1108 7411 1#3 09 e*I 29*9 390 21*4 15*1 7412 105 99 1008 30*0 60 14,s 3s7 7501 108 *6 809 49.3 3096 13.1 1*7 7502 2sO '86 7,5 11000 1600 15*5 5 9 Z 7503 105 *2 908 185*u 2900 15*0 a 0 0 7504 107 05 800 18000 1590 1895 000 7505 2*0 #4 606 itc,o 1790 24,8 zoo 7506 2*0 97 6*9 13090 1700 2495 2eO 7!07 2*0 09 7*4 50*0 12.0 28.0 1361 7508 2*0 09 6#2 300 2sO 30*6 14*4 7509 200 100 6*4 46*8 6*0 23*5 1zoo 7510 200 *8 7*6 6540 700 23s5 3*1 7511 290 101 e 0 9 010 240 18.5 1799 105 1.0 11*6 2.0.0 5*0 9190 000 7765102 1*5 *5 1199 105*0 1760 lo.0 !to 7602 2sO *4 8.58 100.0 1940 19*0 las 7603 2*0 04 901 Moo 1500 1700 105 7604 2*0 94 e*4 9000 900 26sO 0-90 7605 2,0 06 7*1 11010 17*0 24s2 2.1 7606 108 *7 8.1 6000 1490 28*0 05 7607 2.5 so 5-2 25.0 3*0 31.2 1404 7608 180 06 601t 1000 2500 2900 1200 760-9 2sO *6 797 35aO 35*0 25*8 6*2 7610 1*5 05 709 7603 15oO 1809 3.2 STATION 5 BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO COLCR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 1-52 .3 12s2 12000 41*5 ass S*O 7612 1*7 *8 9*4 35*0 25#0 12*9 1993 7701 105 05 1200 8000 2000 608 000 7702 245 4 1006 9500 49*3 l4sO 300 7703 200 04 10*4 12090 64sO 19*2 4e5 7704 200 94 8.5 130.0 16*0 22sS 8*2 7705 200 7 7*3 500 2900 2405 2@62 77C6 2oO as Doe 10*3 23#0 3(0*7 21.1 77C7 200 07 608 30*0 2200 27*4 iz,a 7708 108 e6 7*5 70,0 l7sO 28s7 15*0 7709 108 08 6o3 30.0 190 29*4 3*7 7710 2160 96 7*9 70sO 1500 21-0 900 7711 2*0 09 6*2 000 20*0 22.3 is 08 7712 2&0 6 805 10500 1700 12*8 104 7801 100 96 l3s2 454 1900 7,0 5*9 7802 1 09 61 13@0 38090 80*0 6s4 0 00 7803 2*0 02 9.9 165*0 640 1909 4*4 7804 2*0 e7 861 25*0 22#0 2290 900 7805 1*9 *4 6s2 100*0 42,0 26*9 249 7806 2*0 e7 lCe2 45,0 25sO 31sZ 12*0 7807 262 6 7 *6, 35eO 5000 30*6 299 7806 1.9 *4 50.0 2000 2996 1500 7609 2.0 94 6*1 30,0 12*0 30*8 15,90 7810 2,3 .*4 606 1500 1600 23o3 2@99 7811 290 101 890 coo 13,00 2298 19#4 7el?- .109 *6 6*9 .12-00 9110 21's 1294 7901 1*3 *6 9*0 100,40 10.0 800 7oO 7902 2.0 *4 10*4 10000 80*0 1008 000 7903 2*1 *2 900 75*0 41*0 14*9 000 7904 168 *3 8.5 6090 53*0 2200 ago 7905 2*5 05 8*1 75*0 2900 23*6 000 7906 20 05 8*6 250 31.0 28*9 98 7907 202 *7 4@,6 10.0 11.0 28*7 13.2 30*0 25*0 7908 201 7 593 29sl 1001 7909 2*1 *2 6*2 6590 31*0 22*6 500 7c,10 Z.1 s6 7#1 eolo 2090 20*5 120 7911 108 as 809 2090 1905 1500 lago 7912 1*5 08 1009 35.0 21.3 9*4 7.0 8001 1.8 .6 9*2 35*0 22*6 12*7 200 8002 2*0 08 10.6 40*0 23&0 15.2 ZOO 8043 162 93 7s4 1304 3490 l8o7 300 8004 2*2 s4 608 1054 400 1841 ago 8005 2*4 05 7*3 3500 31.0 26*3 4*0 8006 205 .6 8*4 55*0 33*0 27*4 2*0 8007 2 A 7 *9 6*4 54 26*0 2998 Moo 8008, 2,63 09 4*4 6ij so 16#0 31*4 11.90 8009 2*6 1.0 5*2 1000 1600 3001 1@00 Etolo 2*5 le4 e*3 5*0 1800 23,3 15*0 8011 200 102 809 25*0 25sO l5eO 16*0 8012 2*3 1.3 908 20*0 21sO 15sS 1290 8101 2,3 ls4 1109 10.0 l7sO 1391 1-110 8102 20 *3 600 8540 49*3 15913 3*0 8103 291 e4 8.4 95*0 60*0 16*3 100 8104 2,4 *5 640 75.0 36eO 23.1 100 81C5 291 09 6,96 50.0 36*0 22,0 900 8106 *9 7*4 1000 35*0 31*1 15*0 STATION 5 BOTT04 VALUES CEPTH SECCHI 00 COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 297 08 6*9 5*0 36.0 2808 1800 8108 2*7 09 5.9 1500 34,0 28*0 25.90 8109 293 *9 602 500 900 2506 1500 8110 2*0 as 5.U 000 700 2002 1000 8111 209 1*4 808 2500 350 17*3 1200 8112 197 1*3 905 7500 900 12oZ WOO 8201 201 05 9o4 l6c*0 26*0 1200 200 8202 210 A 9e4 220.0 40oO 16*8 .000 8203 1.2 05 7.3 12000 23oO 2205 000 8204 1.8 e4 7.4 210.0 17oo 2@*6 ZOO 8205 202 07 6#2 45*0 1500 26*2 700 8206 2ol *3 7o6 170*0 34*0 25*9 zoo 8207 200 *8 4*2 5500 800 29*6 15#0 8208 201 *7 4*2 30e0 14*0 29.0 14*0 8209 1*6 .6 601 95-0 13.0 26A 500 8210 201 07 8*3 7060 10*0 220 logo 8211 198 102 7o8 30*0 1100 16o7 3090 e212 109 1*3 6*5 1000 800 14*0 23*0 8301 2o2 *6 10*2 4090 134 1160 8*0 8302 200 *3 8118 220*0 41*0 16*0 000 8303 lea o4 8.6 17590 44#0 l3o9 000 8304 1o6 93 8*7 310#0 34#0 16#5 ).,o 8305 2*3 65 7o9 6000 2900 27*0 ;10 8306 2*2 08 .4,2 500 35sO 27*6 1500 8307 2*1 102 7*5 75-.0 1200 3190 goo 8308 261 *7 7ol 70*0 16.0 30o? 1700 STATION IA - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 -100 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 7204 -1.0 -1-0 -1-0 _1*0 -i.0 7205 -140 -1.0 -100 -140 -100 7206 -100 -Ito -100 -100 -100 7207 5*4 -110 -1*0 29,8 18*7 7208 497 -Ito Soo 3000 2799 7209 5*7 -190 -1.0 _1*0 22*6 72tO So4 -1.0 -1.0 25.0 21*4 7211 -100 -110 _1*0 -100 -100 7212 6el 500 14*0 14#3 2294 7301 9*2 10510 1500 13#7 12#7 1141 5.1 7302 10*8 000 40*0 7303 9*4 17*0 40*0 1910 2797 1360 7304 8*8 26*0 22.0 22*8 7305 918 15*0 1510 23#8 18,,3 7306 9*4 Soo 35*0 28*5 1503 7307 900 solo 3040 29*4 24#2 7308 900 25*0 10*0 28-8 17#7 7309 8.8 10.0 2.0 28.8 27.7 7310 8.4 0*0 20oO 20*2 28,0 7311 Soo 0*0 500 1910 28#7 7312 7.8 9-0 5#0 15.4 21#8 7401 8*4 2000 5*0 1800 9.2 7402 9*5 0*0 14*0 17*8 1915 7403 9*1 20*0 8#5 20*2 16*3 7404 8.7 3040 8*5 22#1 503 7405 les*9 30*0 4*0 28*7 29*2 7406 9*5 1000 Ito 27*5 18#3 7407 Soo 15*0 2*0 27*6 23*0 7408 12*2 20*0 1*5 29.7 13.2 7409 1010 15*4 1*5 27t2 2005 7410 9-1 0-0 1-0 20.1 25.7 809 040 110 1810 25*7 7411 7412 9*0 25*0 100 13*0 901 7501 9*8 25,0 640 13#1 3.7 7502 9*4 60,0 @2.0 15.9 7*9 7503 9*2 95*0 17*0 16*8 3*6 7504 8.8 65.0 17,0 19*7 4*1 7505 8*6 50*0 340 26*0 12*3 7506 8*4 3500 2*0 25*8 31*2 7507 8.2 2540 1.5 26ol 1813@ 7508 7*6 20*0 1.0 31*0 1540 7509 Ss4 2040 2*0 24#7 16*3 7510 8,4 20#0 1*0 22,8 6*2 7511 909 1000 390 14..2 1698 7512 916 000 Ito 17,5 22,1 7601 12-0 loto 3.0 10.5 1005 7602 1009 1500 3,0 17*5 10*5 7603 9.9 0-0 1.0 18.0 9.4 7604 8o7 35,0 2.0 26,2 16.81 7605 7#6 40,0 7*0 24*0 1008 7606 6*4 500 2.0 71840 17,2 7607 6,6 1000 3oO 30*1 17,1 7608 7,7 060 910 29*6 18#0 7609 7*8 0#0 8#0 24o6 21*0 7610 9*2 0*0 6*0 1905 16*0 STATION 1A SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 963 0#0 860 1300 24sS 7612 10*2 2090 14*0 1002 *8 7701 10*2 1500 1115 isto 1101 7702 906 0.0, 6*0 17.1 14*0 @7703 7s9 000 900 22,1 9*3 7704 7,,9 000 6*0 24*0 27*5 7705 799 000 7*0 27*5 late 7706 7*9 0*0 3*0 28*4 34*0 7707 8413 1000 sto 3100 16,6 7708 7#1 000 15*0 29o5 16*1 7709 6.3 20*0 1040 29*0 1809 7710 801 1303 loto 22*6 20*0 7711 8*6 19*5 1296 18*5 16#2 7712 9#2 17*0 1540 14*2 16*4 7801 11.8 70.0 17*0 7.5 0.0 7802 1105 3000 12.0 11.0 15.0 7803 10*2 1500 13*0 21*1 1305 7804 819 1010 6*0 25,,0 11*2 7805 Boo 15#0 20*0 28*8 9*7 7806 7,9 35*0 25*0 32*0 1808 7807 6*6 25*0 21*0 30*8 20*4 7808 7.2 5000 20.0 29.0 6o7 7809 7*0 20*0 14*0 3001 1540 7810 8*0 1560 1500 23*2 18*7 7811 7*9 1000 10*0 -22*7 21*2 7812 803 0*0 sto 20*9 17*1 7901 10*7 15*0 1040 8419 1.4.0 7902 11*6 25.0 21*0 1101 1001 7903 9#7 15*0 2640 16*3 7#0 7904 901 1010 19100 22*2 11*7 7905 7*8 20tO 16*0 26,1 6*2 7906 7,,6 510 1100 27*1 3111 7907 7*, 1 5.0 28.0 29.1 24.1 7908 7*5 Soo 15*0 3140 17*1 7909 7*6 65*0 25*0 23*7 1000 7910 8*4 1010 20*0 22,7 1300 7911 7*9 85*0 13,2 Isto 19*0 7912 il.0 20.0 13.3 12.0 11.0 8001 10*4 1540 17*4 17,4 1690 8002 9*4 15*0 5*0 late 8110 8003 8*3 1010 29*0 18*2 2640 8004 8*2 25*0 24*0 194,2 10*0 8005 8*7 20#0 11.0, 27.2 12*0 8006 8*3 18410 3510 28*1 33*0 8007 7.'9 5.0 33,.0 29.2 12*0 8008 6*9 500 16.0 30.79 19410 8009 6*7 510 17*0 30*6 14*0 8010 7*6 1000 181*0 23*0 24sO 8011 8.0 5.0 33*0 18*8 28*0 8012 9*7 1000 16.0 15,1 22tO 8101 11.7 5.0 16,10 11,6 21*0 8102 9*2 25*0 24*0 1518 1100 8103 8,4 45oO 65tO 15*6 35*0 8104 796 60,0 2440 23o9 20*0 sios 7*8 30.0 27*0 23.4 34,0 (3106 7.2 5.0 30.0 31.1 21.0 STATION 1A SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 6*4 5*0 3390 29*4 34oO sloe 810 Soo 25.0 28*0 24oO 8109 7*4 0 *.o 300 24*8 1510 silo 7*4 060 2*0 20*1 16*0 Bill 848 2-*0 Boo 15,6 22#0 8112 so.? 3000 500 12s5 20#0 8201 9*4 5000 2*0 1300 6*0 8202 861 5040 16#0 15#0 12*0 8203 7.2 25*0 7.0 22.0 20.0 8204 7s7 30*0 .600 21*8 24*0 8205 7*6 1500 540 27*0 12*0 8206 6*7 25*0 7*0 30*6 26#0 8207 5*4 510 Boo 31*5 33*0 8208 7,0 30*0 5*0 30,1. 15*0 8209 7o9 40*0 16*0 25.9 16*0 8210. 8o7 20*0 5#0 2401 1540 8211 7*6 000 6tO 17#1 20*0 8212 992 20*0 10*0 14*7 1500 8301 9*5 20#0 940 14#1 1540 8302 Boo 3010 27*0 16*9 26*0 (3303 9*5 70*0 27*0 14.8 900 8304 8*7 9010 34.0 18.2 900 8305 6#3 40#0 900 27o2 30*0 8306 6*0 5*0 25*0 28*1 28*0 8307 7.6 60*0 1100 30*2 32*0 8308 6,2 5*0 6*0 30*1 17*0 STATION 1A - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINUTY 7203 ml*O -1#0 @190 -1*0 -1*0 -1*0 -1.0 7204 -100 -100 -100 -160 -100 -1.0 -140 7205 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -1,0 7206 -100 -160 -10(@ -100 -1.0 -100 -160 7207 -100 -100 4*9 @1,0 @100 29*3 29*2 720e -100 -190 4o7 -100 1860 29o7 33#8 7209 -100 -100 5.1 -100 -110 -100 2496 7210 -100 -100 693 -1*0 -1.0 24*5 29o6 7211 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -1,00 7212 2*4 101 5o7 20*0 900 1496 24,3 7301 3*0 o4 9*4 30oO 10.0 13o6 23*0 7302 3*0 e? 1194 000 42*0 11,3 l3o7 7,303 296 *a 10*4 1197 4297 lool 32*6 7304 2*0 08 902 2190 150*0 2108 1369 7305 2.0 100 9,7 3*0 25,0 23,,-3 2007 7306 2*6 66 9*4 0"0 28.0 28-m4 2501 1307 2e5 its 900 5000 35*0 z7o9 30*6 7308 203 1,4 900 2500 1608 28*7 19*4 7309 3eO 1.8 8*8 llo7 6*2 28*9 26*9 7310 2.3 101 803 35.0 35*0 2100 27.7 7321 3*0 08 ago 12*0 - 7.0 1900 28o7 7312 4s3 1*3 6e6 910 5*0 15,*6 2801 7401 2#5 1*3 896 000 1000 1860 Boo 7402 2*5 1*4 9*4 1000 40*0 l7eS 25*3 7403 295 1*4 808 17*7 l6e9 20-1 ZJ68 7404 2*0 1*3 7*5 26*3 100 22*1 .5o4 7405 200 1*3 802 25*5 9e5 27.5 2?oZ 7406 -@195 195 904 10.0 100 27aO 21*o 8 7407 105 100 7ol 1500 300 27*5 28o7 7408 248 101 10*2 35oO 3*5 28e8 21*0 7409 2*6 1*2 900 2797 1*5 26-7 250 7410 2*5 1.7 8.4 10.0 100 20-9 23*4 7411 2*0 1.2 8*9 000 .2*o 1800 33*2 7412 2*5 1*7 8*7 1500 loo 14,5 21*9 7501 Z65 *6 10*0 0.0 4*0 13#2 509 7502 2*5 101 809 6090 Z*o 1508 7*9 7!03 300 95 900 11560 20eO 1608 508 7!04 3o5 94 8*8 60,0 16.0 1800 805 7505 205 99 e46 45,0 4*0 25*5 2542 7506 202 1.1 7*7 20*0 2.0 24*8 35*5 7507 297 101 7*1 1500 3*0 25*6 33*0 75GS 3*0 2#3 6*9 000 4*0 30*0 32*2 7509 2*0 1.3 8.6 2091 6*0 24*7 19*7 7510 2*3 lol 8*4 1000 100 22*2 8o4 75-11 2.5 lo4 9*7 CIO 200 15.0 18*4 7512 200 1*4 9*0 2000 1*0 1795 23*2 76C1 2oO 102 1109 500 4*0 1102 19,5 7602 1*9 1*7 9*8 1C*O 3*0 17*5 l4o2 7603 2o5 09 8*3 000 100 17o5 1005 7604 3*0 1*0 7*6 35#0 2.0 24*0 27o4 7605 3.0 100 7.7 30oO 2oO 24eO 1008 7606 2o5 1*5 6o7 0*0 2*0 27o5 2560 76o7 2*5 1.6 701 10*0 4oD 31*9 32*4 7608 2*5 1*3 7.3 5oO 1660 [email protected] 2 @ 1 0 7609 205 le3 7o8 000 11*0 24*6 21*0 7610 2o5 1*2 80 000 900 19*7 23o7 STATION 1A - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI Do COLOR TURBIDITY TEMp SALINITY 7611 2s8 *7 7*4 000 14.0 12*9 25,,3 7612 295 08 9,5 060 15sO 1090 3*0 7701 205 08 9o4 1510 1200 15.1 7702 202 1*7 9.1 000 30*0 15*4 31*6 7703 205 09 7,8 1000 1290 22.1 )*3 7704 2*5 193 7*1 1000 30*0 230 33o? 7705 205 105 7*5 000 30*0 2791 2a*4 7706 2*.4 194 7o7 CIO 2000 25e7 3490 7707 1*7 105 7o5 800 20*0 30sO 3190 7708 2o5. *7 6*4 .000 21oO 2995 24sO 7709 2@5 08 5*9 10.0 3390 30*0 20,0 7710 2*6 102 7*9 17*7 33*0 22*2 23*4 7711 2o7 101 Sol 17*7 2209 18*3 23' *3 7712 206 1*1 8*7 l7o7 35*0 14*0 1907 7801 3*0 o4 11*8 70,0 45oO 793 0*0 7802 2*5 *a 11*2 30*0 4290 iiso 16*6 7803 3*0 05 901 5.0 5000 18.3 25*7 7804 295 1*5 906 1000 600 2590 1500 7805 3*0 IsO .7*8 15*0 41*0 27oO 2@0 7806 3*1 *6 7*9 3090 21*0 30,8 2!*6 7807' 2*5 1*4 692 -20,0 2590 30*3 23*0 7808 299 08 7,0 45.0 23*0 29*0 802 7809 3-3 #4 6*9 1000 1640 30*0 1800 7810 3*2 06 7o9 2000 35*0 Z3sZ 2198 7811 2*6 100 7*5 500 15o0 22*1 2!*s 7812 202 *8 7*9 7*0 800 2000 l9e4 7901 2.6 o7 10*4 15.0 24*0 8*9 l6e3 7902 3*9 05 lOo4 1040 8000 10*4 Vo4 7903 @05 o6 8*3 5*0 14*0 15*7 17,19 7904 2*6 0 S Soo 2C oO 29.0 2105 2594 7905 2*7 *6 7*5 30*0 40*3 26#1 4,3. 7506 2*8 a8 7.5 560 14*0 27*1 31-.1 7907 299 *4 6*5 10.0 38,0 2899 27*2 7908 2*9 95 7*2 500 1700 Ut.6 1994 7909 3*0 *5 6o9 6590 61o0 23*3 21'*0 7910 202 *6 793 1000 5900 22,5 15*0 7911 202 a7 7*3 8010 22o6 17*9 22*0 7912 3.0 09 10.9 15*0 MO 13.0 20*0 8001 295 *6 10*6 1500 26*5 17*3 1100 8002 2*8 105 9*4 15.0 120 1894 10-90 E003 2*7 *4 e*o 1040 31.0 1801 264 8OC4 2o5 *7 Soo 1590 26*0 1801 15 so 8005 2,7 '.8 900 15.0 2000 26*9 17.8 8006 2s6 94 7*9 22*0 5790 2800 34oO 8007 3.1 *5 7#7 010 5600 2901 13.0 SCO8 Ze7 1*2 800 1000 22.0 30*4 1990 E009 3*1 97 6.1 15.0 19*0 30s4 2a*O 8010 2*9 lo6 7.1 5.0 26sO 22*9 2490 .8011 297 05 7*6 5.0 3590 1894 2900 8012 3o3 2*2 9*2 20*0 17*0 15.6 2300 81c$1 3.2 2*7 11*5 1003 19-0 11,4 2290 8102 2*3 97 809 20*0 2803 1691 1100 8103 2*5 *4 e*3 50.0 70*0 15.6 35sO 8104 3ol 99 7*3 60*0 24sO 23*8 20.0 8105 2#7 08 7*4 40*0 40*0 22o9 35*0 slob 3*2 1,4 7.1 .5.0 32*0 31.0 21.0 STATION 1A BOTTUM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI 00 COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 301 IOZ 6*1 0*0 35*0 2903 34*0 9108 3o9 104 708 500 2500 27o9 24*0 8109 4*1 2.0 793 000 4.0 24.7 2000 8110 2*4 *9 7.6 240 1160 20ol 1000 Sill lez *8 10,3 1000 isoo 1508 2!*0 8112 205 205 805 5000 5,90 13*5 isto 8201 206 *9 990 10*0 390 1202 20*0 8202 20 *6 800 40*0 1600 14'*S 10.0 8203 2*8 1.2 5.3 40eO 19*0 21*8 800 8204 298 09 7*4 145*0 37*0 21*2 3290 8205 2s2 09 6*8 10,k) V 00 2601 2400 8206 2*8 1*7 6*1 40*0 1700 29*7 3@ 90 3oO 1*0 8207 40 25*0 19*0 31*0 35*0 8208 3*0 100 4eB 15.0 17:0 31*1 2800 0 8209 2*8 *7 8*6 5000 is 25*4 2090 2 5 8210 1.5 7o9 20*0 900 2300 2210 8211 293 109 794 500 ic.0 16*6 24*0 8212 2*3 09 8*6 Zc*o 11*0 ltt*? 1800 8301 2s6 iso 8*7 40oO 6Z*3 14*8 2S.0 8302 1*5 06 7*3 5000 29*0 1601 32*0 8303 208 *7 9.0 8000 35*0 1501 23oO 8344 1*6 16 7*5 8000 34*0 1861 960 8305 3*2 lei 6eO 45*0 1600 25*4 31*0 8306 209 96 592 loo 23*0 27,5 2890 B307 ZOO 09 7,4 45*0 7*0 30191 35*0 600 30*2 1 e308 109 1#5 6*8 10.0 900 STATION 1D - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMF SALINITY 7203 -110 -100 -100 -100 -1*0 7204 -100 -110 -100 -1*0 -110 7205 -100 -110 -1410 -1.0 -100 7206 -110 -110 -140 -140 -1110 7207 5#4 -100 -100 29o5 1905 7208 5*1 -100 2*0 29*5 23*0 7209 5*5 -1*0 -110 -140 26*6 7210 5*7 3800 oto 22.5 25*6 7211 6.0 15.0 10.0 21.0 30,9 72t2 7ol 10.0 1840 1309 19*2 7301 9*6 75*0 41#0 1309 4#8 7302 11.0 75.0 61.0 10.7 2.2 7303 943 21*3 3010 20.0 14*4 7304 BOB 17*0 1300 23*2 20*0 730S 9.8 3.0 10.0 23.7 14*3 7306' 7,8 24oS 11.41 28*0 2#9 .7307 see 40*0 20*0 30,4 18*1 7308 8#3 20#0 5*0 2909 17*9 7309 8*4 12,10 6*0 28*8 3009 7310 8*4 000 isto 2013 29*0 7311 798 0*0 Soo 2000 26#4 7312 7.7 i0oo 5*0 16*5 20*1 7401 9*3 3010 11,2 17*6 @10*3 7402 9*4 3090 17*0 17*0 12*6 7403 9*4 20*0 4*0 21*0 1105 740'4 9.4 25*9 Soo 22*9 7.1 7405 9.3 55*0 6,0, 29,0 11A 7406 9*0 12*0 10*0 28*0 18*3 7407 7*2 15*0 2*0 27*2 26,4 7408 12*8 30*90 2*0 29.0 1505 7409 9*3 20*0 2*0 3040 15*0 7410 9*2 20*0 1.0 1919 25*2 7411 940 010 1110 1800 24*2 7412 9*2 010 110 14*2 20*5 7501 10*4 0*0 290 14*0 12*3 7502 909 60*0 100 16*5 9*6 7503 9*8 45.0 300 17*0 8*5 7504 911 70*0 18.0 1968 6*3 7505 900 25*0 2,0 26,5 24*7 7506 803 10.0 2*0 25.9 32*2 7507 7*4 20*0 500 29*0 26*8 7508 801 5*0 1.0 3115 895 7509 8*2 1540 5*0 24*9 12*1 7510 8*5 20*0 2.0 25*0 9*4 7511 9*6 010 3*0 1540 16*8 7512 9*3 10*0 100 18*5 24,3 7601 1109 20*0 4*0 10*5 6*2 7602 11*5 5*0 3*0 18*4 1015 7603 9*5 000 0410 isto 9*4 7604 9110 45*0 3.0 25.5 @13'47 7605 7*6 20,0 2,0 24*0 1516 7606 7s4 040 2*0 27*0 10*8 7607 6*5 25*0 4*0 31.1 11.7 7608 6*7 040 4,0 28.0 30.8 7609 1.7 0110 7,,0 2463 21o5 7610 8*4 040 910 19's 21,5 STATION-IB - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMF' SALINITY 7611 9*5 510 Soo 12*6 940 7612 1003 000 940 10*2 4*0 7701 1108 40.0, 17#0 398 olo 7702 9*6 1040 4*0 17*5 lots 7703 7o9 oto Soo 22*0 17#2 7704* 8*6 20#0 1000 24*5 9*8 7705 .7,8 olo 12#0 27*1 24#2 7706 7*3 060 500 3008 2547 7707 7*0 060 500 30#0 2740 7708 6*7 090 4*0 30*0 28*0 7709 7*5 7*0 7*0 29*0 2108 7710 8.4 9.2 10*1 21.4 21,7 7711 8*2 13*8 12#9 M7 16*7 7712 .911 1003 1500 13#9 17*0 0#0 7801 .12*0 100*0 27*0 7*8 7802 lito 35*0 22*0 705 6*7 7803 10*1 60oO 2400 18*3 4*4 7804 809 Soo 7oO 22#1 1841 7805 8.7 15.0 25.0 28.1 5.9 7806 6*6 25*0 21#0 31*4 1500 7807 608 510 21*0 30*6 1508 7S08 6.7 25.0 17*0 28*8 26,4 7809 6*5 .15*0 9*0 30*0 27*5 7810 7*2 1000 10.0 23.4 28*8 7811 8*4 oto 840 22#0 1945 7812 7*1 1000 12#0 20*9 27*2 7901 10*3 510 940 9*7 21*8 7902 11.1 30*0 14*0 11*8 106 7903 10#4 60.0 41.0 15.5 0*0 7904 7*9 10410 13,0 23,3 20*2 7905 7*5 1010 14#0 25,5 16#3 7906 8*1 5,0 1040 29,3 21#8 7907 6.7 5*0 1200 28*8 2491 7908 7*2 5*0 1840 30#8 17*9 7909 7*0 35*0 214.0 23*8 264 7910 8,2 15*0 17*0 23,0 184.0 7911 s*7 25*0 24#2 16*8 1910 7912 1015 40,0 14*3 lito 24*0 soot 10,4 10.0 11#3 17*4 24,0 8002 10*0 20*0 5.0 13*4 12*0 8003 8*5 10*0 7*0 18*4 20#0 8004 8*7 15*0 17#0 1900 13.0 Boos 7*5 15.0 14#0 27#2 12#0 8006 811 1010 1510 28*5 32*0 8007 894 0.0 21*0 29.,9 28+0 Boos 7*2 20,0 17,0 32*2 20*0 8009 7*0 0*0 14*0 30*4 24*0 8010 7*8 5*0 15*0 22#9 23*0 8011 8*4 MO 58*0 18*7 31.0 8012 9*6 1540 1860 15*2 1900' 8101 10*2 5.0 17.0 1109 20*0 8102 9*3 30*0 20*0 1701 12.0 8103 8.5 solo 65*0 14.7 35*0 13104 7*3 40*0 1910 24#2 21*0 8105 8"5 45*0 17*0 24oO 24*0 B106 7*1 5*0 29*0 30,7 22,0 STATION 1B SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 5*3 5,0 3790 29,3 3400 sloe 7o3 590 3290 28*1 3240 8109 7*8 o.,6 4*0 23*5 1840 silo 7*0 040 5*0 20*3 20.0 Bill 805 1500 4*0 1600 20*0 8112 8*9 45#0 4tO l3sO 27*0 8201 3#6 1510 790 1298 1040 8202 8*4 5000 14,0 15*6 1000 8203 7*4 6000 960 23,2 20 8204 8.1 25.0 7*0 21*7 20*0 8205 7*4 10*0 4*0 27*5 15*0 8206 6*6 1010 5*0 30*0 30*0 8207 6*8 1000 6*0 3001 2590 8208 7*1 25*0 6*0 29*9 20*0 8209 84,2 40*0 10*0 25o9 18*0 8210 8*2 20*0 500 24*5 240 8211 7o9 000 6*0 17*9 30oO 8212 Boo 15*0 1000 15#0 18*0 8301 900 20#0 1800 13,5 25,0 8302 9*4 30*0 22*0 16*9 900 8303 9.3 80.0 264,0 1510 600 8304 8*6 80,10 25*0 17*8 5*0 8305 6*8 30410 9*0 26#5 2090 8306 7*4 1500 1910 28*6 26*0 8307 8.2 30,0 Soo 31*l 25*0 8308 6.2 1590 6*0 30*8 14*0 STATION 18 - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHL 00 C CL CR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 -100 -100 -1.0 -100 -100 -100 -100 7204 -100 -1,9 -100 -140 -140 -140 -1.0 7Z01 -100 -100 -100 -100 -1*0 -160 -100 7206 -100 -1*0 -loo -100 -103 -1#0 -100 7207 -100 -1,0 4*8 -100 -100 28*8 3399 7208 -1.00 -100 4*0 -100 10*0 29*9 32*8 7209 -100 -100 -100 -110 -100 -1*0 29*9 7210 lea *3 4.6 30*0 000 2300 3395 7211 3o 3 105 500 14*8 1000 22*0 34*8 7212 294' 108 508 1500 1500 @15#1 27*2 7301 3eO 06 809 30*0 1890 13o4 30*2 7302 4e0 *3 11*2 0.0 5000 12o3 2495 7303 3*4 1.2 9*3 12*4 30*0 17.9 32oO 7304 2*8 1*4 808 1500 12*0 22oU 22*0 7305 390 105 909 4eO 2600 23*4 330 7306 3.0 1.1 7.6 18*8 21*5 27,1 3394 7307 3*5 108 790 40.o 25*3 2802 33*6 7308 395 2.0 6o8 1500 5060 29.9 2291 7309 3*2 109 -7*8 60oO 45*0 28*4 28*1 7310, 3el i's 893 000 000 21eO 31*6 7311 4*5 its 7*0 -1000 l2oO 2090 310 7312 6*0 105 597 800 500 15*5 3297 7401 395 1*2 9*4 17.4 18*6 18*2 25e3 7402 2*8 .7 9e2 20oO 24*0 1698 13#7 7403 5*0 09 9.1 isso 300 1905 13,8 7404 245 1*2 900 l4e9 503 21*8 2897 7405 3*3 1#3 8*7 37*5 1392 27,o5 25*6 7406 4,0 192 805 800 Soo 27*0 29*2 7407 3*5 100 6*1 2000 3*0 27eO 31*0 7408 4*0 1*3 9,3 1000 .205 27.2 27,3 740 105 561 loto 500 28oO 27*3 7410 4*0 2*2 8*3 25*0 290 21,0 3Z*6 7411 3*5 108 901 000 1*0 1790 28*4 7412 3e5 200 799 000. 100 15*4 30 o5 7501 4.0 1*4 802 000 3*0 14.2 3296 7502 3*5 104 900 3590 1.0 16*5 30*1 7503 3*5 1*2 9,2 40oO 5oO 17*0 27. e 9 7504 3,5 *6 7*8 404 1390 1900 10*6 7305 3*5 1e4 7eZ 15*0 3*0 26ol 31*7 7506 490 1o7 7*0 20*0 4*0 24*0 34*9 7507 398 1*1 - 7.1 60*0 20,10 2990 3011 7508 3o5 102 7o4 000 500 29.2 33*3 7509 3*0 102 7ol 14*6 6eO 26o2 25o2 7510 3*0 105 693 1500 2so Z491 23#2 7511 3a 5 108 8*8 000 2oO 20*0 33,8 7512 3*0 2oO 992 30.0. 200 1800 2395 7601 300 lo6 1161 000 30 1160 250 760Z 4*0 109 905 000 2oO 16o8 31*7 7603 3oO 1o6 7o7 000 100 1800 2305 7604 3eG loo 7*4 30oO 2oO 24oO 31*7 7605 4.0 2*0 6*2 15oO 2 0 23*3 33*0 7606 3oO 1*3 4o8 cou 2:0 27o3 27o6 7607 3*5 1*4 7.2 135.0 2060 29e6 3L*o3 7608 3*0 2oo 508 5*0 29oO 2690 3Z@4 7609 490 108 5o7 000 2200 24o7 25o3 7610 3.0 1*5 8*3 .0.0 5-0 2000 23o7 STATION le - BOTTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 3a0 107 8*3 000 24*0 13oO 2961 7t12 3*5 lea 809 coo 960 900 27oO 7701 300 *5 110 0.60 20*0 3*5 25s8 7702 390 193 7*4 0*0 19*0 14sS 31s6 7703 3*0 197 7*5 0.0 560 1902 3000 7704 3*0 1.6 B-2 000 1860 24*0 27#5 7705 3o8 2*7 7ob as,) 2200 26*2 3Z,S 7706 4*2 1*4 7*2 0*0 60 27o8 34*0 7707 205 108 800 300 .1000 29*5 31*8 7708 3e5 1*3 15*6 000 500 2905 26o5 7709 3*0 1*? 7*4 7*0 7*0 26*0 26*5 7710 3:0 1.5 805 16o3 11*0 2105 23o$ 7711 3s0 1*3 8*3 16*3 13*0 18,69 26s4 7712 3oO 1A 9*2 i6s3 16sO 14*3 27s3 7a0l 3*0 s2 1109 5000 23*0 8*0 It * 4 78C2 201 .6 11*0 5000 22*0 900 7*4 7803 3*0 15 919 000 60*0 17-2 2101 7804 3aO 109 7s9 0.0 703 21*4 2792 7FO5 3*5 ill 7o6 500 23,0 26*3 19*6 78C6 3*0 102 609 20aO 4100 2994 26*4 7807 3*0 107 699 5.0 23*0 29*9 27,2 7808 3*1 102 6*8 2590 150 2900 2792 i809 4*5 *7 6*9 1000 900 29*8 23.0 7810 3*8 iso 7e2 500 1010 23st 29*6 7811 4*4 190 795 000 1900 2201 2696 7812 496 s6 6o7 20@0 1800 20*2 27oZ 7901 101 10.2 500 10.0 996 2401 7902 3o6 08 9.7 2500 25*0 11.1 22*6 7903 4.0 03 1002 70*0 44oO 15e5 2*3 7904 4*5 1.3 7s6 10 so 1700 21.6 25#4 7905 4*2 100 .605 10,90 19*0 25oO 23*3 79G6 392 201 799 500 10*0 2901 24 el 7907 4*4 o7 691 500 130 27*9 23e4 7908 4*0 *8 6*8 560 21.0 30*2 23s2 7909 4sO *7 6*6 35sO 29.0 23s7 2500 7910 4*4 is2 7a9 1500 levo 22s8 1800 7911 4*0 *4 8*3 20*0 28*1 17.0 1590 7912 3o7 1*6 945 45,0 15-8 14*0 2500 8001 4*2 109 10*6 1000 1207 16,3 30*0 8002 4o5 is? 9*1 1000 1100 1391 28*0 8003 3e2 1*7 8*3 10,0 7,0 18*3 22sO 8004 491 7 8*2 2090 34,0 1893 22*0 8Q05 4,2 08 695 1000 26,0 27*0 24,0 8006 4o2 1o7 7#6 10.0 1560 28*5 33*0 8WJ7 502 1,D 8*7 000 3110 28*9 3L*&O 8CO8 4*3 1*4 3 * 4 45*0 23*0 3098 18,0 8009 4s8 lea 6*6 0-10' 15*0 3091 2490 .3010 4*7 2*5 6o6 1010 1800 22,8 26,0 8011 500 *3 e0o 1000 5800 18*4 37-*0 8012 4*5 2*7 896 2u.0 17*0 15.2 23*0 8101 40 169 9*5 590 15,10 11#5 2800 8102 4o3 1.3 e*8 20*0 1690 1693 2a*o 8103 4.0 #3 8*3 5000 68*0 1498 3590 81C4 4*6 1o2 508 4500 22*0 23,9 2490 8105@ 3*9 1.6 8,2 50*0 19,10 23.4 2)00 6106 4,5 1*6 700 5e0 2910 30*2 24*0 STATIaN 18 - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI co COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALOITY 8107 402 09 5*3 500 4190 2902 340 8108 4.9 09 7@2 500 34*0 2800 32*0 elog 44,6 2.1 7*6 000 500 23.4 idso ello 495 108 6*2 000 300 20*4 25*0 Bill 492 its 605 500 600 16.3 2590 8112 3*0 1*? 895 5000 500 1490 2900 8201 309 iss 808 1000 18*0 12*0 330 8202 44 so 718 40.0 27.0 14*6 26,0 8203 3,s 1*4 7*1 25*0 5.0 22*0 15.0 820it 4*3 1*4 7#9 20*0 7*0 21o2 22oO 8205 494 109 6o7 1060 7oO 27*0 31*0 8206 401 1*3 6o2 1000 500 29*0 31*0 8207 4.2 1.2 6.3 10*0 890 30*3 27,0 8208 4.2 1.1 605 20.0 8.0 3091 25*0 8209 3*6 110 eo 50*0 1000 26*0 la,o 8210 3*6 1,7 ?,9 15*0 500 22o8 28@0 82 11 3*7 Zs7 7*2 000 900 17*2 320 8212 3o4 1*0 60 1000 1290 1500 2040 8301 3,9 e6 805 2590 39*0 13o5 3360 8302 4.0 109 9*0 30.0 23,0 16-7 2300 8303 4*1 1*4 902 70*0 2540 14o7 Soo 8301# 4*0 *7 8*4 70*0 2400 17*6 8*0 8305 4*2 2*3 790 2590 12*0 2601 2300 9306 490 200 794 2000 2200 28s3 29*0 8307 3oS 1,4 8*2 3000 6.0 3099 2700 8308 4*0 105 6*8 1000 6*0 3092 1600 STATION IC SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 -1#0 -1#0 -100 -110 -190 7204 -Ito -100 -100 -140 _1*0 7205 -190 _1#0 -110 -Ito 7206 -100 -100 -Ito _1*0 .-too 7207 Sol -100 -1.0 29.7 22*5 7208 510 -100 100 3001 18#2 7209 4#8 -100 -140 -100 28#3 7210 513 3290 35,0 23#0 29e3 7211 6*0 25*0 20#0 21,0 33,7 19#3 7212 6#7 15*0 900 13#2 7301 ale 88.0 32o0 6.7 1*4 7302 10,18 040 140 10o4 7*6 7303 9#6 5*0 4#0 2096 597 7304 8*7 Boo 6#0 22*5 26#4 7305 805 010 010 23#7 1309 7306 608 1000 isto 27*7 4#8 7307 8,4 45.0 25,0 31.0 10*1 7308 8#1 25#0 1040 2908 1309 .730? 8#6 10*0 sto 2?#3 l?#8 7310 8#4 oto 0110 - 20*0 20#7 7311 800 000 2#0 20#0 1965 7312 7#7 12#0 Soo 1609 18#4 7401 7#5 010 000 18*5 12#1 7402 9#7 20#0 27#0 16*7 2#3 7403 8#3 20,0 7*0 21-0 2.3 7404 843 31*3 5*0 22#1 10#1 7405 8.2 40.0 2.0 26.5 12.0 7406 8#5 10.0 2.0 28#0 21.8 7407 8#7 15#0 1#0 28*3 190.5 7408 12#1 32#5 2.0 30#7 17*8 7409 9.6 50#0 2*0 28-0 14#4 7410 8.5 1000 1#0 20#8 33*7 7411 908 0#0 1.0 17.5 18*2 7412 8.9 15.0 100 14.7 18#7 7501 BOB 35#0 1740 14#4 1#6 7502 9#4 40*0 2*0 1790 10,6' 7503 9#5 40#0 4*0 17*0 11#7 7504 8.6 150.0 33.0 19*0 5.2 7505 8.6 60#0 5.0 26o2 805 7506 8#6 70#0 3*0 27#5 14,4 7507 8#6 10to 15,10 28o4 16#7 7508 8*7 000 3*.0 30#7 805 7509 900 35*0 500 25*S 12*6 7510 7,9 5000 6#0 25*0 5#2 7511 9.3 5#0 2#0 16-Pi 15#8 7512 1000 15#0 2#0 19,00 16,8 7601 11,11 5*0 4*0 12*0 7#3 7602 10.4 oto 3*0 1845 13*1 7603 901 0#0 1.0 18*8 14#7 7604 908 35.0 3#0 26#0 d.4 7605 6#3 25#0 300 24#0 1840 7606 7#6 5#0 4*0 28#8 445 7607 6,6 10.0 200 31,1 12#8 7608 7#4 0.0 11.0 29.5 32.5 7609 7.2 0.0 4#0 25,1 21.5 7610 7#9 oto 6#0 19.5 22.6 STATION 1C - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 806 600 1109 15#0 7612 948 010 9#0 908 6*2 7701 13*4 60*9 21#0 3#5 010 7702 909 1000 8#0 164,9 11,6 7703 9*2 .30*0 17#0 21#2 6*1 7704 8#9 0.0 300 24#5 13#4 7705 7#0 040 900 27*2 20#4 7706 7#6 0.0 4*0 3000 24*9 7707 740 10,10 6#0 30*9 1801 7708 6#4 2,0 940 30*0 28*5 7709 5#7 5*0 Soo 27*0 29*0 7710 8.3 1311 10#7 22#3 21#5 7711 801 21#9 13#4 18,5 18#1 7712 901 18*5 12*3 1309 20&3 7801 11#8 70#0 28*0 7#5 2#1 7802 12#0 75*0 28*0 995 1*4 7803 15*3 70#0 20*0 18*9 3#6 7804 809 1000 Soo 22#2 13#5 7805 7#6 25#0 26*0 26.9 7#4 7806 6#0 25.0 23#0 30.1 12#8 7807 6#5 15,00 21#0 29,4 10#5 7808 598 25#0 23#0 28*6 25#7 7809 5#5 15.0 12#0 28e9 29#0 7810 6#3 10.0 1040 22*9 31#9 7811 7#3 0.0 10.6 21*5 14*9 7812 74,9 510 1010 1968 16*3 7901 10#5 540 6#0 900 229-6 7902 12*4 30.0 15*0 11*0 0110 7903 9.4 65.0 49.0 1509 0*0 7904 7.6 15.0 13#0 22*7 16,3 7905 8*3 3010 17#0 27#6 44.7 7906 9*3 10#0 800 30#4 6*2 7907 648 10#0 20#0 2848 2190 7908 Soo 10*0 17*0 32,0 14.0 7909 7#6 30#0 2090 24#6 25#0 7910 8#4 15#0 19#0 23#5 27*0 7911 8*8 20,0 24#8 164,3 15,0 7912 1040 1510 14#8 10#4 1300 8001 808 10#0 17o4 16*8 26#0 8002 948 isto 11*0 12#8 1100 8003 7*8 10#0 9#0 18,7, 15#0 8004 868 30.0 41.0 .20.1 2.0 8005 7#1 1500 12#0 28#0 16*0 8006 7,8 14#0 20,0 29*2 20.0 8007 7.1 0#0 26*0 3000 3010 8008 8#3 20#0 16#-0 32#8 21#0 8009 6#1 5#0 17.0 30#2 25*0 8010 7#7 1000 17#0 23,2 24*0 8011 8101 1510 4540 18#7 32*0 8012 9#8 1000 16#0 16#0 18,10 8101 10#4 1040 1690 11#4 1540 8102 810 Soo 34*0 16#0 11*0 11103 9*2 solo 26.0 1508 25.0 8104 7o4 20#0 23sO 25*0 15#0 1-3105 8#4 40#0 17#0 23#8 190.0 8106 6*4 1; 0 0 26#0 30#5 20#0 STATION 1C - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 -6*8 510 3110 29*2 23*0 8108 7,,S 5*0 2,6*0 27*8 30*0 8109 7*3 040 4*0 23*4 1610 silo 7,6 010 5*0 20*5 12*0 Bill 8*5 20*0 340 16*8 2-6oO B112 a's 40*0 5*0 12*8 24*0 8201 9*-6 -60#0 16*0 13*0 840 8202 8*8 110*0 24*0 15*0 10.0 .8203 7*3 70sO 13*0 24*0 1*0 8204 7.9' 35*0 8.0 22*9 14,0: 8205 7*3 20*0 5*0 2891 1590 13206 8*2 1000 7.0 31*0 1640 8207 7#3 25.0 7*0 31*0 20*0 8208 5*8 20*0 16*0 29*5 26-*0 8209 5*4 30*0 18*0 25*8 16*0 8210 8*5 25#0 500 26*3 20*0 8211 7*3 0*0 7*0 18*3 32*0 8212 Be6 50*0 14*0 15*3 14*0 8301 9*6 40*0 16*0 12*3 22*0 8302 8*8 Soto 29.0- 16*3 5.0 8303 8*6 125*0 34,0 15*0 2*0 8304 8.1 100.0 28.0 18*8 4*0 8305 7#3 25#0 10#0 27#1 15#0 8306 7*7 40*0 20*0 29*8 15*0 8107 8*3 5040 sto 31.8 .20*0 8308 8.1 5*0 6*0 3110 22*0 STATION 1C BOTTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI DO COLOR TU-131DITY TEjJP SALINITY 7203 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -160 -100 7204 -1*0 -100 -190 -1.0 _1*0 -1.0 7205 -1*0 -Ito -1.0 -100 -100 -180 -100 7206 -1*0 -1.0 -100 -100 -1*0 -160 -1,00 7207 -100 -160 4s6 -100 -100 29*7 2467 7208 -100 -1*0 4s5 -100 @100 29*7 2093 7209 -10 (A -160 5.0 -1100 -100 -ieo 28e6 7210 2.4 *4 4e8 120*0 55*0 23*1 31el 7211 3e3 106 903 2500 30.0 21110 33s7 7212 2*7 le7 6*5 15,0 1100 13.7 1705 7301 3*0 e4 8*2 40*0 2060 1208 104 7302 305 193 12*2 000 45*0 10.5 8*6 7303 2*9 *8 908 lO'o 13o2 1705 1002 7304 2e3 se 899 18.0 18.0 22.1 2608 7305 2,08 101 8*5 000 45*0 22,9 1708 7306 2*7 09 6*4 1100 26*2 27*3 565 7307- 2s5 le2 e*4 55oo 30*0 2909 1606 7308 3s5 1*7 6*8 25*0 1508 29*6 16*3 7309 3*1 1,6 9.0 1201 15,8 29*0 24*7 7310 3*4 105 e*5 Q.0 0*0 2105 2sel 7311 3.2 101 8*0 06,0 - 7.0 20*0 25e3 7312 2*5 1*4 797 1040 500 1505 2694 7401 2.5 101 7*4 coo 000 1805 l3e2 7402 2*0 e4 900 20sO, 40*0 l6eS 502 7403 4*0 09 7*7 1000 liso 2000 24.1 7404 2*8 Is 7*7 25el 7,0 22*0 1201 7405 3*5 100 7o8 2803 3.9 26e5 1702 7406 3*3 Ito 7*8 1000 290 27*1 20*7 7407 4sO *8 7*8 1500 5.90 28sO 1905 7408 3*5 100 1001 1000 2*5 28*5 26*7 7409 300 105 6*0 40*0 4eO 29*0 21,09 7410 40 169 Se4 1000 2eO 20o5 32&6 7411 390 165 9*2 040 2s0 17*5 2390 7412 3*5 2#4 9*5 10*0 ISO 15*0 25s7 75C1 295 *4 948 000 1000 13*9 l8e7 7502 3*5 161 7*4 5u 90 2.0 16*2 22e5 7503 390 101 Cleo 700 900 17.0 12*8 75-C.4 205 *3 5*3 55*0 16*0 1805 11*7 7505 3*5 a4 6e8 4C*G 6*0 2509 1302 7506 3,5 1 *1 7e8 55-0 5-0 2595 27s4 7507 3o5 '.I 6s7 804 25*U 28*3 2192 7508 4*0 101 540 040 80-D 30*U 24.7 7509 30 *9 7*6 2*0 7,2 23*1 2000 7510 390 69 50.9 5.0 100 23*8 2101 7511 3*0 105 8s5 000 200 l8e2 23 * 2 7512 3*5 1*9 901 30*0 4*0 18*0 21*1 7601 3eO 1*3 12*4 0.0 4a0 1065 7s3 7602 3*0 le4 1102 0*0 4*0 17*0 23 so 7603 300 iso 8*7 000 1*0 18.5 14#7 7604 3.0 09 7*9 30.0 Ito 2490 1508 76c5 3*0 8 509 25#0 4sO 24sO 21@ s4 7606 300 09 5*7 000 3*0 27.5 21.4 7607 3*0 le6 6*3 204 4*3 31*0 32*4 7608 305 102 6*2 CIO- 8.0 29*0 31*2 7609 4*0 1.7 6.7 000 4*0 2409 22s6 7610 390 196 7*3 000 11*0 19.6 25e3 STATION 1C - BOTTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI 00 C OL OR T UR 3 ID I TY TEMP SAL14ITY 7611 4.0 1.1 993 090 27oO 12*6 2105 7612 205 09 901 0*0 1200 900 15*0 7701 390 05 1108 0.0 izoo 40 1860 7702 3*0 1,0 rt # a 1500 3090 15*2 2568 7703 205 05 808 coo 20.0 20.8 16*4 7704 390 1.7 912 10.0 1500 2490 1,3 #1 7705 3*0 1,5 708 000 zo.;) 26s9 2�02 7706 4oo 1*3 601 0 e%) 1390 2900 31,8 7707 5*0 1*4 665 700 8.3 3100 2394 7708 3*5 -la4 60 iso 2000 31.2 23 0 7 7709 2o5 1*7 5.4 000 23.0 MO 33oO 7710 207 1*3 800 15*3 1,6*6 21@8 23*3 7711 3*0 1.1 7*5 19,3 16*5 18*2 2108 7712 390 102 8,9 17*7 16*5 13*5 23 *8 7801 3@0 *3 11#0 1500 5*0 a,.? 12oS 7802 395 94 1205 7o.0 25*0 940 396 7803 3*0 05 909 9000 22*0 1809 5#2 7804 3*0 201 8*6 1010 1100 21*4 1906 780 3*0 *9 6*9 2000 2900 26*9 900 7806 3ol 08 596 2090 2800 30s2 1606 7607 2*7 165 568 2090 - 29 0 2908 15'a 7808 3*0 * 8 5*7 3000 32.0 28*1 2792 7809 3*0 9-4 6.0 15*0 14*0 28*7 2995 7810 3.2 101 693 1000 1100 22*8 31*9 7811 4oO 101 7*1 500 21#0 21.3 23&5 7812 4*6 *6 To4 600 900 1907 21*8 7901 3,.4 105 1005 500 7.0 8*9 23.3 7902 3o5 *5 11*9 20*0 1200 1000 ?00 7903 109 02 903 80.0 47*0 15o3 360 7904 4,0 110 7s4 l5sO 1190 22*4 l5o3 79G5 362 *6 7*4 1500 1690 ?.7,0 15*6 7906 3*2 100 808 20.0 900 30,1 9*3 7907 2o9 05 6.0 1000 24oO 28*3 23*5 7908 300 *6 5*7 1000 1903 31,6 lit , a 7909 2,7 o7 7*3 390 sO 2200 24o5 250.0 7910 3*1 1#0 843 15,0 33*0 23*3 2900 7911 30 * 4 694 2500 26.6 16*0 1360 7912 390 105 905 2000 14-2 11.3 2000 8001 3*2 101 8.6 10.0 19o4 16*6 26#0 8002 3.1 102 9*4 1000 16*3 1208 18*0 e003 2o4 1.1 7*5 15*0 900 1805 15#0 E004 3oZ *5 8o2 15.0 32*0 18*4 Boo BC05 3s7 105 609 2000 1390 27.5 19-0 8006 2s3 1#1 7*0 18*0 22@0 2990 22#0 8007 2.7 * 9 6*9 0.0 26*0 29*7 31*0 Boos 3*1 1.2 6.8 75oO 31.0 31*7 23*0 8G09 4#5 s6 5*9 000 33-m0 30.0 25*0 8010 3*3 108 794 10.0 18*0 Z3-0 24sO 8011 200 *3 719 1500 40*0 18*4 32#0 801Z 2*3 2*3 1096 15*0 17*0 15*6 2@*o Biel 2*5 109 11,10 10*0 2Z*3 1109 21*0 8102 3*5 09 7*1 5.0 2800 1508 1200 e103 2*2 69 9,0, 5000 30.0 1508 2900 8 1,C4 3*1 08 606 30.0 2600 24.7 - 1500 0105 3,1 119 8.6 000 24*0 23.3 2J,* 0 8106 3,7 108 301 500 36,0 30*4 2660 STATION 1C - BOTTOM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO C 0 L OR TUqBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 3*9 101 568 500 35*0 2912 2700 e108 4,2 101 609 5*0 2800 27*8 31*0 8109 3*6 1*8 7*2 Go . 0 It 6 0 230 13*0 8110 3*8 193 5*7 0.0 3eO 21e0 2200 Bill 3*7 109 8.4 10*0 5.00 16*1 2100 8112 2*8 240 8o6 45*0 500 13,0 25*0 8201 3*2 98 1001 30*0 1zso 1109 lZoo 0 1500 e202 3' 0 *6 6*4 5000 16.0 150 .20*0 82C3 3,0 as 6s9 500 21*0 20.0 8204 3s0 192 794 30sO 1100 22*0 1800 8205 3*1 le5 6,8 3000 14*0 26#9 21oO 8206 301 6*1 25*0 1540 29oO 25*0 8207 3*2 se 7*1 35#0 l3sO 3093 25*0 8208 3*6 o7 598 1500 l6eO 29*9 2700 8209 390 .6 692 30*0 1700 25*4 16.0 8210 2e0 1*4 Soo 4U*O 18*0 2395 33:60 8211 3al 265 7s9 Soo 900 17*3 34*0 8212 2*9 *7 7,9 2090, 1100 1500 2Z*O 8301 302 es 9*6 8090 3890 1200 Z400 8302 398 06 646 50*0 30*0 16*2 1000 8303 3*3 06 8,3 105*0 32*0 1590 24,0 8304 304 *7 799 7090 27*0 18*7 21*0 8305 3o2 101 7*2 45sO .13sO 26o7 15*0 e306 3*2 09 795 1000 24*0 29*4 3300 8307 3*0 101 805 5000 1290 31o4 22*0 8308 3*3 102 790 55,90 13*0 31,9 25*0 STATION 1X SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7203 -190 -100 _1*0 -100 -100 7204 -100 'i -100 -100 -140 -too 7205 _1*0 -1110 -100 -110 -110 7206 -100 _1#0 _1*0 -100 -140 7207 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100 7208 -110 -100 -110 -160 _1*0 7209 _1*0 -100 -140 _1*0 -140 7210 _1*0 -100 -1.0 -too -140 7211 -100 -100 -1010 -160 -100 7212 -100 -1.0 -100 -1.0 -100 7301 -100 -190 _1*0 -100 -100 7302 -Ito -100 -Ito -100 -110 7303 _1*0 -100 _1*0 -100 -110 7304 _1*0 -100 _1*0 -1.0 -140 7305 -100 -100 -100 -140 -Ito 7306 -100 -100 -140 -100 -Ito 7307 -1*0 -Ito -Ito -Ito -Ito 7308 _1*0 -100 -100 -100 _1*0 .7309 -110 _1*0 -110 -1.0 -100 MO -1.0 -110 -100 -100 -110 7311 _1*0 -100 -140 -100 -110 7312 -100 -100 -100 -100 -110 7401 -110 -110 -110 -140 -11.0 7402 _1*0 -1*0 -100 -100 -140 7403 _1*0 -110 -100 -100 -1.0 7404 -100 -100 -Ito -1.0 -100 7405 -too -110 -160 -160 -100 7406 1093 27#0 4#0 27#2 20*6 7407 4*5 25*0 20.0 26*6 14*9 7408 841 20.0 too 28*6 20ol 7409 9*4 1010 2.0 29*2 24*2 7410 9*8 20*0 140 21*0 28.4 7411 809 0.0 140 18*0 2:3*0 7412 1001 010 Ito 15*4 23*7 7501 10*2 090 2*0 14,9 14,4 7502 10*4 3010 2.0 17.5 12.8 7503 8*9 40#0 3*0 17.0 15*0 7504 10.0 60*0 14*0 21*0 5*2 7505 7*9 1540 Ito 27*5 1913 7506 8*6 20#0 2oO 27#0 18.7 7507 803 15,0 4,0 28,5 1610 7508 8*2 5*0 1*0 32*5 8.5 7509 10*5 15*0 4*0 24,0 14*2 7510 10-* 4 5.0 2*0 25*3 9*4 7511 11*3 5oO 2*0 18;0 17,9 7512 12'.9 5*0 110 18#0 23*2 7601 12,0 000 340 12.0 tots 7602 10*4 010 2*0 20*0 12,6 7603 9.5 000 110 .19*2 21ol 7604 9.9 30*0 2,0 25,5 1145 7605 7o5 20*0 2,0 24*5 15*6 7606 7,0 0*0 3*0 2842 6*1 7607 811 30.0 3*0 32*0 13*9 7608 0.0 0.0 10.0 30.5 31*6 7609 8.2 010 3,0 25*0 24*2 7610 806 oto 6*0 2060 23*7 STATION 1X - SURFACE VALUES - Do COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 7611 11.6 0.0 4-0 1301 15*0 7612 909 090 940 11*2 109 7701 13#0 40#Ow 14#0 4.0 0*0 7702 9-8 0-0 goo 18.0 12.4 7703 8*4 000 7,0 21*S 113*8 7704 905 10.0 6*0 24*5 14*0 7705 9o5 000 900 2891 25*7 7706 74.5 000 4#0 3093 26*4 7707 7f5 1000 4*0 3100 27*2 7708 794 000 540 27.5 14*3 7709 7.1 -49*0 13,0 29*0 12*8 7710 8*2 40.0 6*0 20*5 left 7711 7*2 000 too 22*2 28*0 7712 .8419 60*0 9*0 15*2 1290 7801 .12*0 2090 1000 Boo 12,8 7802. 12.0 75*0 37,0 845 3*6 7aO3 14,8 90.0 32.0 20*0 2,9 7804 9*6 5oO 6*0 20.6 1868 7805 8*6 20*0 26*0 28#1 4o4 7806 6*2 25*0 22*0 30*7 11#2 7807 7,0 20#0 21#0 30*2 1590 7808 695 25*0 17.0 28*7 26*4 7809 6*7 5*0 1100 29*1 26*0 7810 7.1 10*0 17#0 23#0 2808 7811 Boo 000 1000 21*9 2108 78125 7,1 10,10 14*0 19#8 26.4 7701 1005 0*0 7.0 9.3 17,9 7902 12*8 15.0 13.0 11.6 1*6 7903 10*4 35.0 40*0 16,,3 1#6 7904 7*4 1040 10410 22*7 24*1 7905 7*8 20*0 1100 27*0 15*6 7906 1000 1000 1040 29*2 7*8 7907 6#8 1040 28.4 24*1 7908 7.5 10-0 12.0 32#1 12#4 7909 6*9 30*0 21*0 24*1 26#0 7910 Sol 10*0 isoo 2398 24*0 7911 9*2 20,0 1949 16*7 1840 7912 10415 35*0 17*6 10.9 25-0 8001 9*5 1000 15*5 17.4 25*0 8002 10,3 15,10 14,0 is's 14*0 8003 Soo 10*0 740 1801 26PO 8004 Ste 20410 Me 21,5 7*6 8005 Sol 1000 isoa 26,1 16*5 8006 7*3. 1010 1548 2749 20,3 8007 7,5 oto 20,0 30t6 28*0 8008 6*8 20*0 1590 32*4 21*0 8009 8*2 010 14*0 3140 26oO 8010 8*2 5410 14-0 22,5 24*0 8011 816 1500 3900 18,7 32.0 8012 9*5 15*0 17.0 15*9 19,10 @lot 10.4 5-0 15-0 12*0 1910 G102 9.5 20*0 22oO l6o4 1000 3103 809 5040 30*0 13.2 32,0 8104 713@ 35*0 20*0 24oi 19.0 BIOS 10.0 404.0 1810 24.0 24*0 8106 74,2 Soo 30.0 29.9 22,0 STATI ON 1X - SURFACE VALUES DO COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 7#8 5410 3100 2992 3300 13108 7#6 10#0 22#0 2742 3010 8109 7#6 060 7#0 23*0 15#0 silo 7.3 0.0 4#0 20#2 1000 Bill 805 1010 Soo 16#1 22#0 8112 9#6 4590 4*0 1340 26#0 8201 902 20#0 7*0 l3tS 12#0 8202 8#4 6090 1500 16#2 16*0 8203 7#5 75*0 13.0 22*8 100 8204 7,9. 3010 6.0 21#8 18#0 8205 7.4' .15*0 9#0 28#0 14#0 8206 6*8 20#0 500 30#2 30,10 8207 7#4' 1540 6#0 3043 22,0 8208 3000 6#0 3000 22#0 8209 794 55#0 l9eO 23.7 16#0 8210 8#0 3540 990 23#9 25#0 8211 7#9 oto 6*0 17#8 34*0 8212 897 3040 1190 1501 1800 8301 9#2 50#0 1800 1340 24*0 8302 9.5 60*0 27.0 17#3 Soo 8303 910 10500 3110 1500 4#0 8304 .805 8000 25#0 18#3 !5#0 8305 7#8 35*0 1040 27*2 16#0 8306 8*6 010 18#0 29#0 30,0 8307 7-7 25#0 8.0 31#5 22#0 8308 6*9 40*0 7.0 32*1 16*0 go t2 900? 009 000 0*6 ze I gel 01 9L 20t2 OOGZ DOE 000 Zoe Est E'll 609L 0 0 ZE 606Z ()06 000 E*8 E * I t*T 809L Got? OOTE 00? 0007 E*Q 1 0 t TOT 13;1 E * f 8OLZ C* E 040T 966 64 zot 9q9z 9OCT 94@2 002 OOGT 189 211 Z I, I 909L Lott 0092 002 090E 0*21 8* 001 410 W TOIZ 9*61 DOI 000 8,111 DOT OOT E09i oocz cooz 002 0190 E*ZT be 60 Z09L SOCT GOTT COE 000 O*ET 001 c) #I T09L ZOU 0*9T 001 0*0 6*21 t, 0 1 4@ 0 1 zi GL 0 41 (1 ovel 0*2 Dog GOTT 60 60 IIGL Z*I@T T09Z o9z Clooz 426EI 0*1 0 *1 OIGZ ZftT cocz oOGz 909T 9* El 60 DOT 609L E*fT 9*OE 001 000T T*TI ZOT E*T eo5z 26cl E-8Z o4z OOGE 9169 lot gaz LOGL Go9z 0092 002 OOOZ E*6 101 zol 90GL VET GIL2 002 0OU Z"ti to to SOGL go Is to GL E 1, 9 0-oz Do El 0009 t 0 #/1 009T 9*9T 0*@ o*DG see 90 go co;z 0051 DOLT 00 01501@ TOT TOT 70CL 1@ 0 I@T OOGT DOE 000 tr*21 go go 10GL ip 0 9z 9091 001 000 Z*6 201 VT ZT'@I O'EZ 0091 0ol 000 6" 9 so so TT4)L SO'CE 890a 002 OOOE T*6 CA 0 1 !901 01tL Z " *,z z*6z 002 OOOT @9*6 101 TOT 61) @ L 11,22 TOO? 001 81612 E*6 go go 90'@L .6'@T DOW 002 I*EZ 9 a 4y go Go OOLZ *1 6022 014 OOTZ Z150I z 0 1 6 90tI 00-1- 0*1- 0*1- 0 *T- O'l- 091- 0*1- 0*1- 0*1- 0*1- O*T- V 1- 0*7- 0*1- W@L 0*1- DOI- Q 0 001- f)* T- O*T- 0'1- EOI@Z 001- DOI- 0*1- OOT- o*T- O*T- 0 *T- zo@L 0'1- 0*1- o'l- 0*1- o *I- O*T- O*T- T04@L D'T- Del- Del.. 09 1@ 091- 0*1- OOT- ?TEL 09 0" T- 0'1- O*T- T- 0*1- 0*1- ITEI 001- ()*1- 0*1- 0*1- 0*1- 0 at- O*T- 012L o*T- (NOT- 0*1- OOT- 09T- 001- o'l- 60EL 0*1- Del- DOI- 001- 0*1- 0'1- o'l- 90EL 09 1@ 001- 0*1- OOT- 001- 0*1- 0 *1- LOU 001.0 0*1- 0*1- O*T- 0 *1- 0*1- 0*1- 9ock 0*1- o'l- 001 001- 0,1- 0*1- o'l- GOEI 097- 00 1 - 091- O*T- a t- 0,11- O*T- 4;oEL 041- OOT- 0*1- 0*1- DOT- 061- o'l- EDEL 0*1- 0*1- 0'1- ost. oo T- 0`1- 0,1- ZOEL 091- Del. D*I- Del- 001- 0*1- 0*1- IOEL 091. 001- 0'1- 0*1- 0*1- 0-1-' 0 $1- ZIU 0*1- C*I- 0*1- 0*1- 091- D*T- Dot- ITU 001- 0*1- 0*1- 011- 0*1- 0*1- OOT- OTU 061- 001. 0*1- 0*1- Dot- oat- 0*1- 602L ool@ D*T- Del- O'l- Del- 0*1- 00 low sozi 0*1- oOT- to LIZ 0* 0or O*T- 09T- 001- T - 00.1- ()*1- col- 0*1- 001- 0*1- DOI- gozz 06.7- (1* 1- 001- Del- Del- 0*1- 0*1- G021 O*T- o'l- 0*1- 001- oet- O'T- 0*1- tO ZL 0*1- ol- 0*1- O*T- fj a I - 001- 0*1- E02L AIIN11VS dW31 Airoinni eoioD 00 1HO33S 141 d 3 a S3njvA W01109 XT N011VIS STATION 1X BOTT-IM VALUES DEPTH SECCHI DO CCLCR TUIBIDITY TEMP SALINI TY 7611 100 100 1102 000 4.0 12.0 1590 7612 1.2 -8 11*2 000 903 1005 70 7701 105 a6 134 4540 1840 @00 000 7702 1*4 1*2 1190 090 900 1790 1300 9,6 000 7*0 2105 1368 7703 101 7704 102 loo 908 1000 21,0 24,0 1901 2597 7705 105 105 908 460 9.0 28&0 ?706 102 192 8*8 0,10 500 29*6 3106 1,2 e*5 000 960 320 28*7 7707 102 7709 105 Is 3 t e 2 500 600 27,5 1696 7709 1e2 la2 500 5000 13-0 29*0 1801 7710 192 la2 800 40*0 70.1 2100 2101 7711 1,2 102 Bel 000 103 22*4 7712 102 102 900 50*0 8.3 1500 13*5 1208 7801 08 08 1246 30*0 13*0 840 7802 101 e4 1200 75*0 42*0 Se2 5.9 7.803 1*6 05 19*7 95*0 2600 2000 2.9 7804 105 09 1002 1060 8.0 2000 1996 MS 2*0 es 10*9 20.0 25*0 2792 900 7' E; 0 6 2*0 08 6*6 30*0 32*0 30,3 isel 7807 145 105 8*2 25.0 21#0 30*0 15's l6eO 28*3 27o2 7808 1*5 as 605 15*0 7809 1*4 7eZ 2040 13*0 29,0 VeS 7810 106 e7 74 10,0 16*0 22*9 29*6 208 08 800 060 1100 210 23*3 7812 99 *4 791 1090 1490 19*8 26att 7.0 9*3 1709 7901 1a7 105 1005 0*0 790Z -'2*4. *7 11,7 1500 13*0 10*6 1107 79(.3 3*Z *4 10*2 40.0 310 1690 .2;3 7904 393 Ise 7e2 ic9o 1590 22*0 2aoO 7905 105 08 7*4 10,0 14*0 2691 18,7 79C6 362 07 9*4 2090 10*0 2901 9e3 25*2 7907 341 *7 605 1109 13*4 27*5 7908 3*3 *7 6e6 10.0 13*0 31*8 1400 7909 3*3 07 6.6 35*0 28.0 240 2500 7910 3eS 09 7*8 1010 250 2395 2600 7911 2*0 63 809 20*0 Ual 16,2 18*0 7912 249 1*4 9*5 40*0 18*6 13*7 2590 8001 3,1 105 900 15*0 1567 1792 23oO 8002 1e5 1*5 gas 1500 10,0 18*4 1640 6003 202 lo5 7*7 10.0 7*0 1800 27#0 8004 2*5 100 6.9 20*0 16*8 21*2 100 BC05 205 1*2 7.5 1000 160 2596 19.1 8006 2*2 1*3 7,3 10*0 16*9 2702 2Z*7 8607 1 *4 69 8 el 000 20*0 30*0 29*0 841 500. 1500 3103 2Z*O 8008 2*0 1*3 a009 4*1 1*4 7*8 5.0 l3eO 30*8 2500 Selo 10 107 eel 1000 1500 22o4 2400 e0il 145 .2 802 15.0 4100 1805 3Z*O 8012 2o7 2*u 8*3 2000 20-0 15*9 2300 8101 3*0 2*5 10*6 1000 1690 lies 28oO 8102 3.3 1.2 9.7 10-0 1600 16*1 29 & C 8103 3,2 *6 see 50*0 31*0 13.4 31sC 8104 399 194 509 400 23*0 '24 e0 2590 8105 3#7 1*3 797 0.0 23*0 23*8 256C 8106 1*9 194 6*2 500 30*0 30*5 280C STATION JX BOTTOM VALUES CEPTH SECCHI Do COLOR TURBIDITY TEMP SALINITY 8107 4*0 1*3 6*3 000 30*0 Z99L 3@90 8108 295 1#4 7*9 500 2792 30#0 8109 107 is? 796 000 490 23*0 20eO ello 391 6.4 000 4*0 20*0 1000 8111 300 1.7 9*4 5*0 40 l6o2 1560 8112 3*0 200 9*2 50io 5*0 l3e0 2910 e201 390 M 10#4 15,0 700 12*3 12*0 8202 3*0 se eso 45*0 20.0 15*4 22.0 e203 3*3 98 7e3 1000 560 21.9 25oO 0204 39 4' 100 7.7 35eO 1100 2100 2800 @205 3*2 1*4 7o4 1000 6oO 26*1 2700 8206 2*5 1.1 7*2 1000 600 2902 31-90 8207 198 o9 7*2 15oO 7*0 30*1 25*0 8208 2*5 i'l 790 35*0 7*0 30*0 22-0 8209 109 06 6*9 70*0 3400 25sO 1800 e210 202 1*6 7*9 30.0 1310 23*1 30*0 e2ll 2s3 2*3 892 5.0 6sO 27,0 3@90 8212 2*3 08 7*9 20oO 11*0 14*6 20oO 8301 ls7 1,1 -9,2 30*0 1500 1268 24*0 8302. 1*7 e7 905 60.0 27*0 17*3 5*0 8303 1*3 96 8e7 -9500 2800 l4e9 700 8?04 194 07 895 60*0 22*0 l7o6 11*0 e305 2*5 1*4 802 25 0 11*0 26*4 1800 8306 2*0 1*0 e*4 5:0 25*0 2805 30aO 8307 2*0 08 7ag 5000 l2oO 31.0 22*0 .8308 2*6 100 7*0 2590 790 30.9 2300 Table 9: Salinity (0/00) taken monthly at permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from March, 1972 through August, 1983. THIS REPC97 IS FOR ST 1j, SURFACE SALINITY DER PROJECT 72 73 74 7s 76 77 78 79 so 81 S2 83 01 -160 1C*0 2*9 2,1 3*1 0*0 2*9 8*6 1090 6*0 090 6*0 02 -1.0 0.0 597 5*2 6e2 209 306 1*6 Soo 6*0 10*0 9.o 03 10.5 19*4 10.3 0*0 3*6 495 569 0.0 6.0 30.0 0.0 4.0 04 18.0 1000 2.9 3.0 5.2 6.7 4*4 11#7 640 IZOO 1100 000 C5 IS*5 2192 000 502 6.1 13.5 4a4 000 690 2590 3*0 22*0 C6 33o7 108 1009 8.5 2*1 34*0 12oO 17*9 29*0 17*0 54,0 1500 07. 15*0 8*9 21*0 80 15*0 2191 15,0 1099 12*0 2090 19*0 21*6 1 ce 5*0 IZe6 9*2 3*0 16e6 900 2.9 12.4 12.0 20o(j 50 16*0 09 22.4 24.1 12.3 7.3 15*5 11*2 100 5.0 12.0 10.0 14.0 -100 1C 10*6 l6s6 2340 3*6 6*2 15*d 21*0 8.0@ 19.0 15.0 15.0 -1.0 11 29*0 12*6 2502 12*6 11*7 12@3 10*9 18@0 2200 2200 1500 -1-0-0 12 20.1 502 5*3 5.Z DIG 3*6 14,bS Soo 6*0 15*0 15*0 -1*0 THIS REPOAT IS FOR ST It BOTT3M SALINITY DER P'?OJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 a3 01 -100 1090 1009 6*9 4.1 12.4 4.4 11.7 14.0 18.0 6aO 1@*O 02 -I&C C*V 13*8 794 12*6 24.4 120 4.7 5*0 15*0 18*0 13#0 03 1005 9:4 12.6 1.5 3eb 4o5 7*4 ' *8 6#0 31*0 10,0 900 C4 18.0 10*0 209 4*1 11,P5 20*2 5.9 24.1 14.0 16.0 22.0 1.0 05 24 94; 20.8. 24e6 548 601 19-08 4,4 0*0 11*0 26*0 l9eO 22*0 06 33 .7 15-5 22 . 3 26.3 18-8 34.0 15.8 2597 3lvO 21*0 25*0 21,0 C7 29.0 19-1 28-0 18.1 29.7 27.2 20.4 14.8 20.0 28.0 24.0 1400 Ce 8*5 12o6 l1e4 11 e7 22.6 24*2 10.5 15;6 19-0 2-3.0 15.0 900 Oc 21 sO 19*5 17*6 1 1"o C 18*8 21*1 IloG 18*0 17*0 184 14*0 -1*0 IC 1007 17#2 2462 11.0 21.C 15.8 21.8 10.0 21.C- 15-0 22.0 -1.0 11 29*0 14*9 29*5 18*4 16*0 27*2 15.8 Zl.C 24.0 18-0 26.0 -1.0 12 1908 j4*1 15#5 1005 oe 16*6 2C*2 10*0 19*0 15*4 Z2eo -1*0 TFIS REPOF7 IS FOR ST 2p SURFACE SALINITY DER PROJEC7 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 $1 82 83 01 -1.0 05 0*0 000 20c ago CIO CIO CIO 4*0 8.o 300 02 -1*0 CIO. 0*0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0*0 000 000 C3 4*3 0.0. 0.0 000 0*0 209 1*4 040 060 100 000 0,0 04 5*5 000 5.1 CIO 3*1 0*0 006) 000 060 5*0 1*0 ago 05 200 0*4; 0*0 3*0 45 509 1.4 0-0 0.0 5.0 0.0 4.0 G6 6*8 000 5.7 3.0 0*0 13#5 1*4 Coo 2*0 490 Zoo 500 07 3.0 1-1 , 0.0 3*0 *8 16*6 1*4 2.3 0.0 12,0 200 1000 08 7*0 12.6 0*0 2,5 4*0 2.9 .2.1 0.0 3-0 20.0 0.0 2.0 09 6sO 000 2*6 105 3*5 1*4 Zoo leG 200 500 0*60 -100 It 2*5 22*0 2001 090 ee 5*2 17*9 300 500 5110 4*0 -LIO 11 21.5 4.5 6.9 0.0 le3 10,5 12*6 0*0 6*0 '590 7*0 -l'a 0 12 *4 3*9 0@0 391 08 000 000 0.0 9.0 3.0 0.0 -1*0 THIS REPOPI IS FOR ST 2, BOTTOM SALINITY DER PROJECT 7 74 75 7'6 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 ,,2 73 01 -100 605 ago 0*0 26C 000 000 000 1000 11*0 Of-) 300 02 -1*0 0*0 16*6 18*2 Osc *5 040 000 CIO 000 0*0 000 03 19.0 000 19*5 coo 491 .?*9 194 000 000 100 0*0 0*0 C4 18*0 0.0 5.3 0.0 16.8 19*2 CIO 0.0 OsO 6*0 19sO 00 05 23*5 9*8 21*8 3*0 9*3 20-4. e6 000 000 900 200 1200 06 l0eO 11*5 28-1 1993 17*2 2S17 4e4 *8 6*4 17*0 6 1 J 5.0 07 26*0 1691 17*2 14*4 2790 28*0 900 5.4 24.0 1890 20*0 24*0 CP 23*0 1696 2094 13*9 17.1 11.2 18-1 ge llsO 20*0 6sO 14*0 09 VIC 1195 19s8 10*0 17al 11*2 2*0 lZeO 4eO 14*0 4.0 -lsO JE 5eO 13*2 27*3 7.3 3.0 21.1 23.3 0.0 8*0 15.0 2a.0 -1-0 2195 4*5 2390 0*0 12.8 21.1 12-6 3.0 10*0 4eO 154 -1*0 12 1,306 3*9 ZQ 93 3 *1 7*3 990 Goo IOG 1500 1440 000 -100 THIS REPOFT IS FOR ST 3v SURFACE SALINITY DiR PRCJECI 72 73 74 75 7f 77 78 79 80 al cz 83 C2 -1.0 -1*0. 0&0 .5 O*C 0*0 0-0 0.10 1*0 5*0 OZO 0*0 02 -100 -Iqo -1.0 20 0*0 090 000 000 000 000 o.0 3.0 03 -le0 0*0 -l'o t;*Q CPU 201 Geu 000 0.0 1*0 0.0 000 04 .4 -1.0 4*5 000 00c 0.0 000 000 1.2 5.0 1.0 3*0 05 -1*G -100 Goo 20 1#3 96 0 *0 0*0 108 900 500 200 06 505 -100 4o6 0.0 05 900 201 08 3.7 10.0 790 losO 07 2*5 -1*6 000 7*9 o4c 1200 549 as 2*0 50 4*0 7*0 Ce -100 -100 0*0 3*0 1292 2*9 *6 3*1 2*4 11*0 0#0 le0 09 l4sO -1*0 05 3*6 3*0 4*4 490 190 4#0 5#0 200 -t*o 10 1200 1308 11*8 105 05 2,1 7,0 0,0 490 6*0 0*0 -100 ..11 *4 -1.0 10*1 040 *a 8*2 0*0 000 fl, 0 Sao i0o -100 12 12.2 -100 0*0 040 000 1*4 0*0 000 8*0 2*0 000 -1*0 THIS REPORI IS FOR ST 3p BOTTOM SALINITY DER PRCJECI 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 at 63 01 -100 -100 000 Is 0*0 000 000 0.0 100 1200 0*0 300 02 -1.0 '-1.0 -100 2*5 000 05 040 08 000 040 000 000 03 -100 000 -100 060 000 Zol 000 0*0 1500 1*0 000 000 04 -*4 -1.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 coo 000 1@3 500 1*0 000 05 -100 -100 1505 390 2*1 1,4 00%) 0*0 3*8 11*0 8*0 Zoo Ct 22*0 -1*0 4e6 09 *5 25.*7 16*6 9*3 5*7 10*0 10*0 11*0 07 4eO -1*0 000 13 419 0.0 12.0 794 4*7 2#0 690 20*0 700 08 -100 -100 000 300 6.5 2.9 1.4 4s7 2*0 14*0 0.0 100 09 16*9 -1.0 2.6 5.1 4.0 13.5 4*0 3eO 4*0 5.0 490 -too 10 l2aO 1792 lls$ 145 1*6 2,1 14-8 OeO 490 6 a -1 000 -1.0 11 .9 -1*4 13.4 090 3eZ 13*5 OsO 090 4v0 5*0 40 -IsO 12 l6eZ -too 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 coo 000 Soo 2@0 0#0 -L*O TPIS RFPOF7 IS FOR ST 5, SURFACE SALINITY CER PRCJECl 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 so 81 82 83 C, _1,0 000 000 090 200 000 090 6#2 2#0 6*0 040 400 02 -100 cou 0.0 3,C 1.5 0.0 COO 000 100 000 0*0 4-90 C3 3.0 000 2 *3- 2*5 1.5 4.5 4*4 000 coo 1.0 000 000 C4 *4 *4 000 coo o0c *6 201 0.0 0.0 560 200 o.0 C5 13*6 c,o Q,Q 2oo 2*1 17*3 2*9 000 000 800 5*0 3eO ct. 11 .2 C.0- 8-0 3sO 000 900 207 0*0 200 900 000 700 07 700 160 *4 12 , 3 2o4 7*4 2ol 8#6 10*0 6*0 8*0 890 GE 7o5 lel 4*3 3 oQ l5sO 14*3 5 02 9o3 15,0 21*0 5*0 11*0 CC 17*3 13*5 6*1 793 5*1 4*Co- 1500 2*0 126c ato 490 1,0 10 18.8 16.'l 10.1 2.0 3.1 9.0 2C.2 7.G 12.0 15-0 11-0 -1-0 11 2*9 e*O 12o3 8*4 6 s c 7*4 17ol 12oO 13*0 10oO 15oO -1*0 12 1509 0*0 291 o0c 103 000 1204 5ow 900 900 1800 -160 T141S REPORT IS FOR ST 5* BOTTOM SALINITY CFR PRCJFCl 72 73" 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 01 -100 000 0*0 107 200 000 5o9. 7,0 2*0 1100 210 Soo -1.0 0.0 000 O.C 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 02 o.o 0.0 5.2 1.5 o 000 03 4*6 0*0. 5,7 2.0 10 4s5 4o4 060 000 100 00 04 105 o4 000 000 Q@0 6*2 900 0.1) 0,0 -94a 2,,0 3oO- 05 ls*C 000 Soo 200 241 2402 2*9 010 490 900 7.0 3.0 c6 11.2 0.0 19.5 200 5 21*1 12*0 *8 2*0 15*0 2*0 15*0 07 2$s0 492 f+.8 10.1 14.4 12.8 2.9 13.2 20.0 18-0 15.0 400 08 22.0 11.5 10 -'3 14.4 12*C 15-0 15-0 10.1 11.0 25*0 1490 VeO 09 1800 5.3 20*9 12*0 602 ael 15.0 5#0 l4oO 15.0 5#0 -1*0 jc 2,3.1 16.1 11.8 3,1 3,2 9eQ 24*9 12*0 1690 100 18.0 -1.0 11 3,5 10.3 15.1 17.9 6.0 18-8 19*4 12.0 16.0 12.0 30*0 -1*0 12 16*9 6*9 3*7 0*0 19*3 194 12 jP4 7.0 12.0 10.0 23.0 -190 THIS REFCAT IS FOR ST 1A SURFACE SALNITY., CE F PREJEC7 81 72 73 74 75 '11, 77 78, 79 WSO 82. 83 01 -1.0 12.7 9.2 3.7 10*5 llel 000 1@90 1600 2100 600. 15*0 02 -1 oi@ 501 2905 ?*9 10*5 14*-0 15*0- 10ol- 8 *-0- 11.0- 12 .0@ 25 ** *, C2 -1*0 27*7 160 *306 9*4 9*3 13*5 7@0 26*0 35oO .20#0- 900-1 04 -160 1300 5e3 4*1 1698 27o5 11#2 11*7 10*0 20#0 24eO 9-.0: 05 -1*0 18*3 29*2 12.3 10.0 18-8 997- 6*2 12*0 34*0 12*0- 30-oO- C6 -1.0 25.3r 18.3 31.2 17.2 34.u 18.8 31.1 33.0 21.0 Z6 . 0- 23-*0: C7 18.1 2491 11*0 19*3 17*1 16*6 1G*4 24*1 lZ*O 3490 33.0 31's 6 00 27o9 17*7 l3e2 15 sO 18*0 16.1 6*7 17*1 l9oO 24oO 15*0- 1790- C9 22.6 27.7 2o*5 16.3 21.0 18.9 15.0 10.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 -1-.0- 1C 21 .4 28*0 25*7 6*2 16oO 20*0 18*7 13*0 24sO 16-0 15*0 -1*0 11 -19C 28*7 25*7 16*8 2498 16e2 21*2 19*0 2.9.0 22.,j 20.0 -1-.0 12 22o4 21*8 941 22@1 v8 l6o4 1791 11*0 22*0 20*0 154 -1 O'@ TFIS REPaFi IS FCR ST 14 BOT70M SALL41,fy, DER PROJECI 7Z 73 74 75 76 71 78 79 80 81 q?, O:k 01 -lot 23&0 8*0 5o9 19.5 15.1 0.0 16.3 17.0 22*0 20*0 28*0 02 _i.0 10.7 25.3 7*9 14*2 31*6 16*6 19.4 10.0 11.0 10.0 32qq 03 -1*0 22&6* 20*8 548 10.! 9.3 25.7 17.9 26.0 35.0 8.0 23*0 C4 -1 *0 le*9 -5*4 8,5 27*4 33*7 15-0 26*4 15#0 20%Q 3200 909 05 -1.0 2C.7 29.2 25-2 l0o P. 20*4 24*9 9o3 17*8 35*0 2990 31*4 06 -1sO 26*1 21*8 35*5 26.L 34.0 22*6 31.1 3 4. r, Z1.0 34oO 2@ o Q. C7 29.2 ?Ov6 28*7 33.0 32.4 31.0 28.0 2792 13*0 34%0 35sO 35419 08 33 9d 1994 2190 32.a 24.0 24.0 8*2 19e4 19*0 24oO 2890 17*0 C9 24*6 26*9 25*0 19e7 21*0 20*0 l8oQ 21.0 28.0 20.0 20.0 -t,Q 10 2996 27*7 28o4 8*4 23*7 2394 21*8 l6oC 24oO 10#0 2290 -190 11 _loG 2e@7 33*2 16*4 2503 20*3 22*8 22so 299C 22.0 24.0 1,9 12 24.3 26- 1 21.9 23.2 3 sO 1997 19*4 20*0 29.0 18.0 18.9 -1 0 T)@IS REPOPT IS FOR ST 1B SURFACE SALINITY DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 al S2 6) 01 -1 00 4#8 10@3 l?*3 692 OoO 0.0 21.8 21.0 20.0 10.0 2500 02 -I*C 2*2 12*6 9*6 10@5 10*8 697 196 1200 1200 1000 @9#0 03 -1*0 14*4 11*5 8*5 9.4 17*2 4,4 000 20-0 35-0 2.0 6.6 C4 -1*0 20*0 7*1 6.3 13.7 9-8 18.1 20*2 13*0 21*0 20*0 5@0 05 -1@0 14#3 11*4 24*7 15,6 24*2 5*9 16*3 12*0 24*0 15*0 20#6 06 -1*C 2*9 18*3 32*2 10*8 25o7 15.0 21 .8 32.0 22.0 30.0 26.0 C7 19,5 28*1 26*4 26*e 11,7 27*0 15.8 24.1 28.0 34.0 25.0 25.6 Oe 23*0 17#9 15#5 8-5 30.8 23.o 26.4 17.9 20.0 32.0 20.0 14,0 09 26.6 30*9. 15.0 12,1 21.5 21oS 2795 26.0 24.0 18.0 18oo -loo 10 25ob 29*0 25o2 9.4 2 1 . rd' 21-7 2e.s l3sO 23*0 20*0 24 *;) -1 of o 11 30*9 i6o4 24*2 16*8 9 a C 16*7 l9s5 19*0 3190 20*0 30*0 -1-to 12 19.2 20.1. 20.5 24.3 4.0 17.0 27.2 2490 1900 27*0 18*0 -1-&0 THIS RFPGF7 IS FCR ST 1R BOT70M SALIN17Y DER PRCJECI 72 73 74 7 Of 76 77 78 79 so 81 82 83i Cl -4 *0 ?0*2 25*3 32*6 25*3 2698 4*4 24..l 30.0 28.0 30.0 33 *@ 0 CZ -1,0 24.5 13,7 30.1 31.7 31.6 7*4 ZZ*6 28*0 28oO 2690 2J*O- 03 -l'O 32.0 13.s 27-r, 2F.5 33.0 21.1 2.3 22.0 35.0 15.0 8'0@' C4 -IsD 2290 2897 10*6 31*7 27o5 27*2 26*4 2290 24*0 22oO 8:0 C! -1.0 20.0 25.6 31*7 3OoO 3Z*5 19#6 23*3 24.0 29*0 31.0 2540 06 -1*0 20.4 29*2 34.q 27*6 34*0 26*4 24*1 33*0 24*0 31sO 2-1-0-0 07 3399 33o6 31#0 3091 31*3 31o8 27aZ 28*4 31*fo 34,C 27 90 27.-,0 Of 32*8 22al 270 33,3 32.4 26.5 27,2 20*2 1800 32sO 25*0 1,3-0'0 09 2q*9 28ol 27*3 26.2 25.3 26-5 28 .0 26*0 24*0 18*0 18*0 -1,0 10 30 *5 31.6 3206 23.2 23.7 23.s 29.6 18.0 26.0 25.0 28 . 0 -1-.0, 11 34.8 31*0 28*4 33.8 29.1 26.4 26.6 15.0 32.0 25*0 32.0 -1-.0 12 27*2 32*7 30s5 28.5 27.0 27.3 27.2 25.0 20.0 29.0 20.0 -1-.4 THIS REPCR7 IS FOR ST 1C SUFFACE SALINITY DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 so 81 82 83 01 -100 194 1292 106 70 aso 201 2206 2600 1500 Soo 2200 CZ -1*C 7*6 2o3 1096 13*1 11*6 1*4 000 11*0 11*0 @10*0 500 03 -loO 5*7 2*3 llo7 14.7 6ol 396 000 1500 2500 100 200 04 -loO 26o4 10*1 5*2 8*4 13a 4 13*5 16*3 290 15*0 14*0 400 05 -1.0 13.9 12,0 8*5 18*0 2a*4 794 4*7 lb*C l9aO 15*0 15sO 06 -1*0 4*8 21*8 14*4 4.5 24 *9 12o8 6*2 20*0 20.0 16-0 15.0 07 22o5 lG*l 19*5 16*7 12.e 11.1 10.5 21-0 3090 23*0 20*0 2OeO CO 28.2 13-9 17.8 8*5 32#5 2395 25*7 1490 21*0 30*0 26*0 22*0 09 28*3 19*8, 14.4 12.6 21.-1 29.0 29.0 25.0 25.0 16.0 16*0 -1*0 10 2993 2097 33*7 5.Z 22,6 21.5 31.9 27oO Z4*0 12*0 ZO*O -1*0 11 33*7 19*5 19*2 1598 1590 j8el 1499 l5eC 32sO 26*0 32*0 -IsQ 12 19.3 18-4 18.7 16.8 6.-2 0.3 16.3 13.0 18.0 24.0 14.0 -1.0 THIS REPORT IS FOR ST IC BOTTOP SALINITY DER PR OJ E CT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 7 -9 80 al 82 83 01 -1.0 1.4 13.2 18.7 7*3 is 0 12.8 Z3.3 26.0 21.0 12.0 2J.0 02 -1 00 8o6 592 -22*5 20-0 25:8 3s6 1.0 18.0 12.0 15.0 l3-.O 03 -1,*10 -10-2 24.1 -12.-S 1.4.1 -16.4 5*2 oso 15oo 29*o Zo*o -2,94 04 -1 0 26*8 12*1 11*7 15-8 18-1 19.6 16.3 --9.0 --15.0 i8r.-o @ 1-i"o C5 -1:0 17.8 17.2 18,2 24*4 24*2 9*0 15*6 19*0 20*0 21 v'0 15's 0 06 -1.0 5*5 28*7 27o4 ZO,4 31sS 16*6 993 2!.:0 26.0 Z5,p 0 10-t-0 C7 24.7 16.6 190 21*2 32*4 2J*4 15*8 23.5 30.0 27.0 2500 22..-'0 () e 20*3 16*3 26*7 Z4*7 31*2 28*7 27.2 1408 23*0 3190 27*0 -26-A 09 28*6 24,7 21*9 20*0 22.6 30-0 29*5 26oO 25.0 18.0 16.0 -1.-0 10 31.7 ;5-1 32.6 21-1 25.3 25.3 31.9 29.0 24oO zf:o 10.0 -1--@o 11 33*7 25#3 23,0 23*Z 21,5 Zl,8 23*5 .15*0 32sO 2 0 It o 0 -1 4@0 12 1795 16 *4 25*7 21*1 16*0 23.8 21.8 23*0 Zaeo 2590 ZZ*o --le-o THIS REPORI IS FOR ST 1X SURFACE SALINITY DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 so al 82 83 01 -1,0 -1.0 -1.0 14.4 10.5 Q.0 12.8 17.9 25.0 19.0 12.0 21. .0 02 -190 -1#0 -1*0 12*8 12@6 12#4 3,6 196' 14*0 10sO 16*0 5.0 03 -100 -140 -100 15 .,u 21.1 la . a 209 196 26sO 32*0 1*0 @*a 04 -1*0 -2*0 -1*0 5.2 11.5 14.0 18.8 24.1 7*6 19.0 l8o() 5oO 05 -1*0 -1*0 -10 19*3 15#6 25s7 4.4 15.6 16.5 2400 14.0 16.0 ct -1*0 -1 * Q 2096 18.7 6.1 26.4 11,,2 7.8 20.3 22.0 30.0 30.0 07 -100 -1.0 14*9 16oO 13og 27*2 15.0 24*1 28*0 33*0 2290 22*0 Oe -1*0 -1.0 20*1 8*5 31.6 14*3 26s4 12*4 21of, 30d 22sO l6oO 09 -1 *Q. -1*0 2492 14s2 24*2 12sa 26.0 2690 26*0 15*0 16oJ -L*O 10 -1*0 -1*0 28*4 9#4 23*7 18 el 2E*8 24oO 2490 10*0 25*0 -190 11 -loO -1-0 23.0 17.9 15.0 23.0 21.8 13.C 32.0 22.0 34.0 -loo 12 -1*0 -1,0 25o7 23*2 lo9 12*0 26*4 21*0 19*0 26*0 18*0 -loll 7141S REPORT IS FOR ST V( BOTTOP SALINITY DER PROJECT 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 al sa 83 01 -lo.0 -IsO -1*0 14#4 lOo5 0.0 12.8 1769 28.0 28.0 lZoO 2@oO 02 -1*0 -190 -190 15*0 20*0 1890 599 11*7 1690 29*0 22*3 5*0 03 -10 -1*0 -1*0 16*0 21*1 18*8 2*9 2,3 27*0 31-0 2500 7eO 04 -1#0 -JoO -loO 60 13*7 18*1 19s6 28*0 10*17 2590 28#0 11*0 05 -1,0 -1,0 -1.0 19*3 15.6 25.7 9oo 18*7 1991 25 *Q 27*0 l8o0 06 -1.0 -1.0 22*9 26*8 9*3 31.8 18*1 9.3 22.7 28.0 32.0 33.0 07 -1*0 -1*0 14*9 18.2 24*8 28.7 15.8 25.2 29.0 34.0 25oO 22#0 Of -1 sO -1*0 2201 19*3 32#0 15*6 27*2 14*C 22*0 30*0 22*0 21*0 09 -1.0 -1.0 24.2 14,2 24*2 18*1 27*5 26.0 26.0 20-0 18.0 -1.0 10 -1*0 -1*0 30*5 14.2 24.6 21.1 29.6 ab.0 24.0 10.0 30.0 -1.0 11 -190 -1&0 23*0 19*0 15oC 23*7 23#3 1S@0 32*0 15#0 3400 -140 12 -1.0 -1.0 29.4 23.2 7*3 13*5 26*4 25.0 20.0 29.0 20.0 -1.0 Table 10: Seasonal averages of Apalachicola River Flowq local rainfall (Apalachicola, East Bay) and salinity in the Apalahcicola estuary (3/72 - 6/83). Winterg springt summer, and fall 0 month) avera- ges were used for the trend analysis. THIS REPOR7 IS FOR STATION 1 DFR PROJECT SEASONAL A%ERAGES RIVERFLOW APAL RAIN FB RAIN SALINITYPT SALINITYPS 7201 124.5 15*8 24*3 -100 -100 7203 701*0 703 1201 15*7 17*5 7206 494#3 11*7 2109 1769 23*7 7209 '103*3 7e4 12*3 23*7 21.2 7212 135003 1009 16*9 10*0 909 7303 1499.3 14oO 21*1 809 16*1 7306 76997 909 21*6 798 1597 7 309 388.7 1005 14*1 17#8 17*2 7312 IC7193 500 905 4*6 16*3 7403 609.0 1101 l6e6 4*4 13,,4 7406 424*3 1597 25.1 13o? 20*6 7409 345*7 16o6 16*2 20*2 23*8 7412 85200 1109 12,.5 1#02 909 7.5 03 230597 906 1140 2*7 308 7506 759*0 23*1 30e7 607 18*7 7509 610-7 l2e4 13. 7 7*8 13*5 7512 798o7 9*4 9*7 498 991 7601 95900 8*4 1293 500 7*1 7606 fG7.3 1097 1508 11 *6 23o7 7609 43800 12.9 15*3 11*1 18*6 7612 ';47eO 1005 1205 1 *0 1102 7703 916*7' 4.1 06 8*2 14*5 7706 148oO 1009 13e2 21*4 28*5 7709 462*7 Sol 10*4 13*3 21*4 7712, lC69*0 1000 8*6 304 11.0 7FG3 IC38.0 9.3 1260 4*9 509 7EO6 497*3 13*0 24* 5 10*0 1506 7809 ii9so 7*5 8.1 14*0 16*2 7812 687,7 8*6 14*0 8.3 1202 7903 1226*7 7*7 14,0 3*9 8,3 790 438*7 lies 1894 1397 18,7 7909 467*3 17*7 29.16 1093 16*3 7912 59103 ft. 4 13.2 707 10*0 8003 151- q4 * 7 10*4 17.3 503 10o3 8006 451*7 13*7 1900 1797 23#3 scog 266*7 806 1008 17*7 2007 8012 44390 497 502 69 17*3 8103 494*0 3,6 505 22*3 24*3 8106 279.3 l7a9 20*2 1900 23*0 8109 214*7 4*2 948 15*7 17*0 8112 e12*0 12*2 14.2 8.4 13,0 e2C3 637.7 1046 16*7 4#7 17 P206 478*3 17o7 18*4 9*7 21:9 8209 176.0 20.7 14.7 1447 20.7 F212 -190 12o4 13.5 10.0 1800 8?03 -100 -100 -140 807 10*7 8106 -1,0 -100 -100 17*7 23.0 THIS REPORT IS FOR STATION 2 DER PRC'JECT 4EASONAL AVERAGES RI VERFLOW APAL RAIN EB RAI.4 SALINITYPT SALINITYP8 7201 12 86 9 5 1508 24,3 -1 so -100 7203 70190 70 1201 3.9 2002 7206 '494, 3 11*7 21.9 5*6 19*7 7209 303,3' 7o4 12s3 10*0 17*8 7212 135U93 1009 16.9 03 507 7303 14990 14,0 21*1 000 3o3 73C6 769.7 909 21*6 ft *6 14*7 7309 38817 10*5 14,1 505 907 7312 lC71.3 5*0 915 1,,3 6*8 7403 eogeo 1101 l6o6 1.7 15.5 7406 424*3 15*7 2501 109 2109 7409 345.7 16*6- 1692 505 2394* .7412 E52*0 1199 12.5 *7 12.8 79-03 2?05*7 906 1140 1*0 lea 7506 759.0 23*1 30.7 2*8 1509 7!09 610.7 12,4 13*7 #5 5*8 7512 798e7 9*4 9*7 lo7 1*7 7603 959*0 So4 120 lo2 10*1 764 f07*3 10*7 15.8 1.96 zooft, 7609. 438*0 12.9 15*3 109 1100 7612 947oo 1005 12.5 *3 29 7703 916o7 491 4*6 2*9 1491 77C)6 348oO 1009 l3oZ 1100 22o6 7709 462*7 891 1094 5o7 17*8 7712 1C69*0 1000 8.6 0*0 3*0 7803 lC38,0 9*3 12.0 09 o7 7F06 497*3 13oC 24o5 1*6 1005 76G9 31900 705 8*1 1008 l2o6 7F12 f87*7 8*6 14oO 0*0 coo 7903 1226*7 7.7 1410 0*0 coo 7906 438.7 11.8 18.4 es 2*3 7909 46793 1797 29.6 o3 500 791Z 591*3 8o4 1342 300 3o? 11003 1594o7 1094 17*3 000 000 e006 4 '1; 1 s 7 13*7 1900 1*7 l3s7 8009 2 86o7 a 08 1008 4*3 703 8012 443oO 4*7 502 40 8*7 81U3 494,0 3 o6 505 3s7 593 8106 279.3 17.9 20o2 1200 180 81C9 214e7 402 M 5,0 11*0 8112 81210 12.2 14*2 3*7 4.7 8203 637.7 1008 l6o7 o3 7*0 8206 478,3 17*7 18*4 lo3 10.7 8209 376*0 20o7 1407 307 15*7 E212 -lea l2o4 l3s5 060 060 8303 -100 -100 -100 1*3 4*0 8'306 -1.0 -1.0 -140 5e7 lq*3 THIS REPORT IS FOR STATION 3 DER PROJECT SEASONAL AVERAGES RIVERFLOW APAL RAIN EB RAIN SALrNITYPT SALINITY# 8 72ol 1286* 5 15.8 24e3 -1.0 -1.0 7203 101*0 7*3 12*1 .,q 7U6 49�*3 lls7 2169 d/. 0 0 7209 303-3 7e4 12*3 ass 909 7212 139,003 10*9 l6o9 /.; - cx I* - C2 7303 1499,3 1490 21.1 -100 -100 7306 76997 909 21s6 -100 -1.0 7309 38897 10*5 14ol -/10 -/.o 7312 1071s3 500 905 -100 -160 7403 E0900 1161 16*6 2*3 10*3 7406 424*3 15,7 2501 1*5 115. 7409 345*7 16*6 l6o2- 7o5 9e3-. 7412 MoO 1109 l2e5 100 100. 75 0 3' 130597 9o6 11&0 * 8 1100 7506 759,0 2391' 30*7 306@ 509. 7509 t10*7 12*4 13*7 Is? 2,2 7512 798*7 9*4 907 000 oso. 7603 95900 8*4 1293 *4 *11 7606 f0793 10*7 15*8 4*2 2*3. 7609 43800 12og 15*3 104 2*9@ 7612 547*0 10*5 12.5, 0.60 .02, 7703 916.7 401 44!6 09 192 7706 348*0 1009. 13.2: 8*0 13.5- 7709 462o7 as 1 l0e4 409 9.7 7712 ICE9.0 1000 896 05 3sO 7803 IC38*0 9*3 12*0 090 090. 7606 497e3 1390 24*5 2*9 8 * 5, 7809 ?194 a 7.5 8*1 3o7 6*3 78L2 t87*7 8*6 l4sO 000 7903 122697 797 14*0 310 0 *0 7906 438*7 1 L's a lev4 1 06 6*2. 7CY09 467,3 17*7 29o6 93 iso 7912 591.3 804 1392 *3 93 8003 1!94*7 10*4 l7e3 100 6*7 8006 451*7 13*7 1900 2*6 3s2 s,cog 286o7 898 1008 ft 00 4*0 8C12 .443*0 4*7 592 4*3 697 8103 @94*0 396 595 500 5*7 81C6 279*3 17*9 20o2 Be7 1000 81C9 214m7 4*2 908 6*3 5*3 8112 81200 12,2 14*2 *7 *7 e203 t37*7 10s8 16*7 2*0 390 8206 478*3 17*7 18*4 3,7 1000 8209 376*0 2097 l4e7 2oO 2*7 8212 -100 12*4 1395 000 0*0 8303 -100 -160 -100 7 47 8306 -100 -100 -100 .5 :0 &93 THIS REPOPT IS FOR STATIONS DER PRc!jECT SEASONAL AVERAGES RIVERFLOW APAL RAIN EB RAIN SALINITY,T SAL14ITY#B 7201 l2e6*5 1508 24..3 -100 -100 7203 70100 7*3 1201 @o7 8'.00 72C6 49493 1107 21#9 So6 2094 7209 303.3 7*4 1293 13*0 l3e9 7212 1350*3 1009 16*9 5*3 5*6 -7303 1499o3 14,0 21*1 01 *1 7306 769e7 9*9 21*6 07 5*2 7309 388*7 .1045 14*1 1205 10*7 000 2s3 7312 IC7193 560 905 7403 80900 1101 1696 as 496 7406 42403 1507 2501 4o2 1105 7409 345*7 16*6 16&2 905 1509 7412 e52*0 1109 12o5 1*7 3@5 7'103 130597 9o6 1100 105 lo3 75C6 759.0 23ol 30o7 6*1 808 7'509 elOo7 12o4 1397 509 11*0 7512 798o7 9o4 9*7 1*2 lo2 7603 S5900 8*4 12o3 162 1*2 7606 070 10o7 1508 308 900 7609 438oo 1209 15o3 s 7 501 7612 947*0 1005 12*5 04 6o4 7703 91697 491 7*5 12.i 7706 34860 1009 l3a2 13.,&2 160 7709 462.7 8.1 lo,,4 508 1202 7712 IC69oO 10*0 8*6 oa 2*4 780 lC38*0 9o3 12*0 391 5o4 7806 49793 13*0 2495 3#4 1000 7809 !19*0 7.5 801 l7o4 .1908 M2 687,7 8o6 14,0 6o2 6*5 7903 1226s7 797 14#0 0,90 0,0 7906 438*7 1108 1894 6#0 aso 7909 167*3 17*7 2996 7*0 9*7 7912 59193 8*4 13*2 2s? 3*7 8003 l!94*7 10o4 179i3 010 103 8006 45197 13,7 19*0 9*3 11*0 eoog 266@7 Me 12*3 15.3 8012 443*0 't*7 542 500 7*7 8103 494*0 396 5.5 4o7 6o3 8106 ,c* 79 , 3 17*9 20*2 12.0 190 8109 2107 492 9-68 1100 12 o3 eliz 61200 12*2 1492 .3*0 400 82(:3 f37*7 1008 16.7 293 340 e206 A78*3 1797 18.4 4*3 10*3 8209 376*0 20e7 14*7 1000 17*7 8212 -100 12*4 13*5 7,3 1043 8303 -100 -1*0 -100 1*0 100 6306 -100 -100 -190 307 l3o7 THIS REPCPI IS FOR STATION 1A DER PROJECY SEASONAL AYERAGES RIVEPFLOW APAL RAIN @EB RAIN SALIMITIPT SALINITYPS 7201 i2e6.5 15*8 24o3 -1*0 .1,0 7203 1cloo 7*3 12.1 -1*0 -100 7206 494,34 11*7 2109 23*3 31*5 7209 30303 7*4 12.3 0767. 0 .717.1 7212 135093 1009 16*9 13*4 19 *3 7303 1499*3 l4e0 21.1 19*7 24*1 7306 769*7 9*9 21s6 1901 25*4 7309 388.7 10*5 14*1 28 *1 27*8 7312. IC7193 5*0 905 16,8 2005 74C3 F,09*0 1101 1696 1509 1605 7406 424.3 15*7 25*1 18*2 23o8 7409 ?45*7 16*6 16*2 24*0 28*9 .7412 E52*0 1109 1295 6.9 11*9 7503 1305s7 916 1100 5*7 13*2 7506 75900 23*1 30.7 2105 33*6 7509 610eT 12*4 13*7 13.1 1505 7512 79807 9,,4 9*7 1494 19*0 7603 i5q.0 804 12*3 12.3 16*2 76Q6 6O7o3 1097 1508 17*4 270 76C9 43890 1209 15*3 20*6 2393 7612 S4790 10.5 1205 8*6 16*6 77C3 lql6o? 496 1805 21*1 7706 -'-48oO .1009 13*2 2202 29*7 7709 46207 801 10.4 18*4 21.2 7712 IC69eO lo-.0 8*6 10*5 1201 7603 IC38.0 9*3 12.0 11*5 21*9 7606 49793 13*0 24*5 150 19*6 7809 319*0 7*5 8.1 18*3 20*9 7612 e87*7 8,6 14*0 l3e7 18*4 790 1226*7 7*7 14*0 893 17*9 7906 43897 1108 18*4 24ol 25*9 79to9 467*3 17*7 29e6 l't #0 19*7 7912 !9le3 8*4 13*2 jls7 l5o7 8CC3 159497 10*4 17*3 6 0 19.6 8006 4 5. 1 9 7 13,7 19-0 21:3 22.0 8009 286*7 8*8 1008 2200 27.0 8012 44300 4*7 " 9 2 lad 20*7 8103 494*0 3e6 5.0 29*7 30*0 8106 279.3 1799 20*2 26*3 26*3 8109 21497 4o2 908 l7e7 17*3 8112 812sO 12*2 14o2 1Z*7 16*0 8203 63797 10*8 16.7 1997 23*0 8206 178*3 17*7 1694 2407 3Z*3 8209 ?7640 23*7 14*7 17*0 22.0 e212 -140 1294 13,5 18.7 26.0 8303 -1.0 -100 -160 16.0 21.0 8306 -100 -100 -100 25*7 2-7*3 THIS REPORT IS FOR STATION 1B DER PROJECT SiASONAL AVERAGES RIVERFLOW APAL RAIN E 8 RAIN SALINITYPT SALINITYA 7201 128605 1508 24*3 -1,0 -100 720 701*0 7.3 lf:1 -1,00 -100 494o3 11*7 2 9 21*3 3 7206 3o4 7209 303*3, 794 lZo3 27*7 31.7 7212 1250*3 - 1009 16" q 3a7 27*3. 14.0 21*1 16*2 26,00 7303 1499.3 7306 769,7 909 21*6 13*0 2807 7309 388*7 1005 14ol 28*8 30 o2' q.5 14*3 23*9 7312 IC71*3 5*0 74C3 E09*0 1101 l6o6 1300 22*7 7406 424*3 15*7 25*1 2001 29*2 7409 245*7 1696 l6o2 21,5 2904 7412 E5290 11*9 12*5 1�01 3191 -75 C3 130507 9*6 1160 13*2 23o4 7506 759oO 23*1 30*7 22*5 32o8 1208 27*7 71,9C9 t10.7 12.4 13.7 9 7512 198*7 901+ *7 l3o7 28s5 7603 559*0 8*4 12.3 J209. 30#2 7606 607*3 10*7 ises 7*8 3004 76'09 438*0 1209 15,3 17*3 2600 7612 S47*0 1()95 1205 499 28,5 7703 916,7 4*1 496 30*0 7706 348*0 1009 13*2 2609 30*8 7709 462*7 Sol 10*4 2001 2702 7712 1069*0 10.0 Ge6 709 13*0 7803 IC38.0 9.3 1260 905 22*6 7806 497*3 13,0 24*5 19 * 1 26*9 7809 319,80 7*5 8*1 2593 28,1 7012 687*7 8*6 14*0 1609 24#6 7903 122697 7o7 14*0 1202 17,3 7906 438o7 1108 18*4 21e3 24e2 7qO9 467*3 17.7 291b 2100 1997 7912 391o3 8*4 13*2 20*0 27*7 8003 1 "594 o 7 10*4 17*3 15,0 22*7 84;06 451*7 13*7 1900 26*7 27o3 9009 28697 808 10*8 26*0 27*3 8012 443*0 4,7 5o2 17*0 25*3 8103 494*0 3o6 5*5 26*7 .29.3 8106 279*3 1799 20oZ 29*3 30*0 e109 211*7 4*2 998 19*3 22*7 8112 e12.0 12*2 14*2 15*7 28*3 e203 e37*7 1008 l6e7 12*3 2207 8206 47893 1797 18.4 25*0 27*7 SM ?76oO 20*7 14o7 24sO 26*0 8 12 -100 12.4 13*5 17 * 3 23*3 0303 -1*0 -100 -100 13*3 13*7 e306 -100 -1.0 -100 2107 24*7 IMIS REPOR1 IS FOR STATION 1C DER PRCJEC1 SEASONAL AVERAGES RIVERFLOW APAL RAIN EB RAIN SALIHLTYPT SALINITYpB 7201. 1286.5 15*8 24e3 -100 -100 7203 Moo 7o3 1201 -1110 -1.0 7206 494*3 11.7 21.9 20e4 22*5 7209 30303 794 12*3 30*4 31*3 7212 1350*3 lo 0 9 1699 94@ 902, 7303 149903 14*0 21*1 1593 1803 7306 769*7 909 21*6 906 1208 7309 288*7 10*5 14.1 20.0 25*0 7312 1071*3 540 9*5 10*9 14*9 7403 E09,0 11*1 16*6 8ol 1708 7406 424o3 l5o7 2501 1907 25*0 7409 345*7 16*6 16*2 2Z*1 25*8 7412 e52.0 1109 12.5 1093 2203 75C3 1305*7 906 1160 8*5 14*2 75 06 759*0 23*1 30*7 13o2 24*4 7509 610,7 1294 13*7 1102 21*4 750 12 798*7 9*4 9o7 12*4 16*1 7603 195900 8*4 12.3 1367 18*3 76C6 607*3 10o7 15*8 16*6 28*0 7609 438,0 12*9 15*3 1907 23*1 7612 947*0 10o5 12,5 5.9 20*3 7703 51697 401 406 13*3 19#6 7706 348.0 1009 13*2 23*8 27#0 7709 462o7 Sol 1094 2209 25,7 7712 1069*0 1000 8e6 799 13*4 79C3 1c38*0 9.3 1200 8*2 1193 7806 49793 13oO 24*5 16*3 1909 7609 319,0 T95 801 25*3 28#3 7812 68797 896 14*0 13*0 17,4 7903 1226*7 7o,7 1490 7*0 10*6 7906 43897 lies 18.4 13,7 15*9 7qC9 467o3 1707 2996 21o3 23*0 8 7912 591*3 *4 13.2 16*7 2t:j eCO3 159497 10#4 17*3 11*0 1 8CC6 451*7 l3o7 19*0 2397 25*0 E009 286.7 8.8 1008 27oO 27*0 e012 443oO 4*? 5o2 14*7 17,,7 6103 494oO 3o6 505 19,7 21*3 e106 279*3 1719 2092 24*3 28*0 81C9 21497 492 908 1300 20o3 8112 E12 -,0 12*2 14o.2 14*0 17*3 9203 f37*7 1098 1697 1000 1907 F2C6 478*3 17*7 l8o4 20*7 25*7 P2C9 376.0 20*7 14*7 22e7 26e7 8212 -100 12o4 1395 13*7 18.7 e303 -1.0 -100 -100 7aO 12*7 8306 -190 -140 -100 1900 26*0 TMIS REPOPT IS FOR STATION 1X DER PRCJEC7 St ASON AL A VE R A.G E S R IV E P FL 0 W APAL RAIN ES RAIN SALINITYPT SAL14ITYPS 7201 1286s5 1508 24*3 -100 -1*0 7203 701*0 7o3 12,,l -100 -100 7206 11*7 2109 -100 -100 7209 303 9 3" 7*4 12*3 -Loo -100 7212 135093 10*9 16*9 -100 -100 7'2(3 14990 14*0 21.1 -1.0 -1.0 7306 .769e7 909 21*6 -100 -100 7309 288.7 1005 140.1 -1.0 -100 731.2 1C71s3 500 905 -100 -100 74C3 e0goo 1101 16o6 -100 -100 7406 424*3 15*7 25ol 1395 2000 7409 345*7 16*6 16.-2 2502 25*9 7412 MoO 1109 1205 1?66 19*3 7 3 13*9 , C, 1305*7 9*6 12*0 1392 7506 759*0 23*1 3097 14 2194 75C9 jio.*T 12*4 13*7 UeS 15.8 7512 9Se7 9*4 9*7 15*4 17*9 7603 959*0 8*4 1293 16*1 1608 UC6 Wo3 10*7 1508 1702 2290 760 438*0 1209 15*3 21*0 21*3 7612 S47*0 1005 12105 4*8 894 7703 51697 4*1 496 19,5 20.9 7706 248.*0 10.9 13-2 2206 25*7 7709 462*7 Sol 10.4 1906 22*6 7712 lC69oO 10*0 8*6 905 10*7 7eO3 IC38*0 90 12'00 897 1005 7eO6 4970 13,jO Z495 17s5 20.4 7809 -219.0 7*5 all 25-5 26*8 7612 687o7 8*6 14*0 1503 18.7 7903 1226.7 7.7 14*0 13*8 16@3 7CYC6 438*7 1108 18*4 14*8 16o2 7'9 09 467o3 17*7 29*6 ZZo7 23,3 7912 591*3 804 13*2 21*3 23*0 SOC3 lf.'94.7 10*4 17*3 l6o7 1809 SC06 451,7 13*7 1900 23*1 24.6 6009 28697 808 10*8 27*3 27*3 OC12 443oO 4*7 5*2 16*0 2507 e103 494oO 3o6 So.5 25*0 270 8106 279e3 17*9 20*2 23*3 30#7 8109 214*7 4,2 908 15*7 1540 8112 812oO 12*2 14*2 1800 21,0 P201 637o7 1008 16*7 11*0 26o? 0206 478*3 1797 18o4 24oT ?-6,3 8209 376#0 20*7 14*7 2590 27*3 .8212 -140 12*4 1395 15.1 16*3 P303 -100 -1.0 -100 8*3 12.0 8306 -100 -100 -100 22*7 24sO THIS REPBPI 15 FCR SALINITYvT DER PRCJECT SEASONAL AvERAGES STATION I STATION 2 STATION 3 STATIO4 5 STATION IA STATION 13 STATION IC STATION IX 7201 -100 -190 _1*0 -100 -160 -100 -100 -1.0 7?03 1507 3*9 o.4 .4.7 -1*0 -100 -100 -100 7206 1709 5o6 4.o 8*6 23.3 21*3 20*4 -1.0 7209 2007 10.0 8.8 13*0 Z2.0 27.7 30-4 -100 7212 1000 *3 lz.z 5.3 13.4 Be? 964 :100 730 8.9 0.0 -lea *1 1907 16o2 15*3 1.0, 7306 7.8 4*6 -1.0 *7 19.1 13 0 9.6 -100 7309 1796 505 .1.0 1205 2601 28:8 20.0 -100 7312 4.6 1 3 -1.0 000 16.8 1443 10*9 -100 7403 4.4 1:7 2.3 08 16*9 10.0 6.1 -160 7406 13.7 109 2.5 4&2 18.2 2001 290? 1805 7409 20.2 6*5 7.5 905 24*0 21*5 22ol 25*2 7412 4#2 07 ISO Is? 6*9 14*1 1003 17#6 750 2.7 iso .8 105 6.7 l3o2 8.5 13.2 7506 6*7 2.8 3.6 6..l 21*5 22d5 l3a2 1494 7509 7.8 5 1-7 5.9 13ol Use 1102 13.8 751a 4-8 1: ? 000 lea 1404 13.? 12*4 15*4 7603 560 102 *4 1.2 12-3 12*9 13*7 16*1 7606 11*6 1#6 442 3.8 17.4 1708 16.6 17.2 7609 11.1 1 9 1.4 4.7 20.6 1703 19.? 21*0 7612 1.0 :3 000 *4 6.6 409 5.9 4*8 71C3 8.2 2.9 09 7*5 less 17*1 13*3 ig.5 7766 21.4 1160 8.0 13 sa 2212 26o9 23.8 22*6 7709 13*3 507 4o9 608 18.4 zool 22*9 19*6 7712 3.4 0.0 .5 0.0 10.5 7.9 7*9 9.5 U03 4.9 .9 0.0 361 11.5 965 8#2 8.7 7F06 10.0 1.6 2.9 3.4 15.3 19-1 1693 1705 TE09 14.0 10:8 3o? 17.4 1803 25.3 25.3 2505 7812 8.3 0 0 0.0 5 al 13.7 1609 1300 1503 7q03 3.9 0.0 0.0 000 8.3 12*2 7.0 13.8 7906 13#7 .8 1.6 b.o 24.1 ZI*3 13.? 14*6 7909 10.3 .3 .3 7.0 14.0 21.0 22.3 22*7 7912 7.7 0.0 .3 7 lio? 20.0 16*? 21.3 e003 6.0 coo 1.0 U 16.0 15*0 Ilso 16*7 fC06 17.7 107 2.6 9.) 21.3 26 ? 23.7 23.1 6cog 17-7 4.3 4.0 12.3 22.0 26:0 27*0 27*3 P012 6.0 4*3 4.3 Sao 1860 17.0 1447 16 VIC3 22.3 3*7 5.0 4*7 290 26*7 1907 Z5 8106 19-0 12.0 8.7 12 SO 26.3 29.3 24*3 28*3 6109 15*7 Soo 6@3 11.0 17*7 l9s3 18.6 507 2112 8.3 3 7 07 3*0 12.7 15.7 14.0 to.0 e203 4.7 :3 2.0 2*3 le 7 12.3 1010 1100 F206 9.7 103 36 ? 403 24:? 2500 US? 2467 E209 14*7 3*? 2.0 1060 1700 24.o 22o7 2500 021? 1060 0*0 000 793 lea? 17o3 l3s? 15*? M3 8.7 1*3 a? 100 1600 10,3 790 803 8306 17*7 507 640 807 25.7 2107 1900 22*? T141S RIPOPI 15 FOR SALMITYRD CER PRCJEC1 SEASONAL AVERAGE$ STATION 1 STATION 2 STATION 3 STATIO4 5 STATION IA STATION 15 STATION IC STATION IX 72C1 -1.0 -1.0 -100 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -160 -100 7203 17.5 aso -1.0 -1.0 -100 :16 2002 o.4 .8 72C6 23*7 19.7 13.0 2004 310 33o4 22*5 1 72C9 21*2 17*8 169 13*9 21.1 31*7 3103 -1 go 7212 969 597 1 (0. z 5 46 1903 2703 9.2 -1.0 r3c3 16.1 3*3 -1.0 .1 24.1 28oO 18.3 -1.0 73C6 15.7 14,7 -100 5.2 25*4 28o? 12.8 -100 730Q 1?.2 9*7 -1.0 1007 27.8 30#2 2500 -100 7312 16*3 6.8 -100 2.3 20*5 2369 14*9 :100 7403 13.4 15.5 10-3 496 1805 2207 1708 1.0 7406 20.6 21*9 1.5 11.5 23*8 29oz 25.0 20*0 74C9 23.8 23.4 9.3 15.9 28.9 29.4 25*8 25.9 7412 9.9 12,8 100 3*5 11.9 31.1 22o3 1903 754;3 308 100 1.0 1 93 13*2 2304 14.2 13.9 7fC6 18.7 1309 5.9 808 33*6 32oB 24*4 Zlo4 7509 1395 508 2.2 1100 15.5 27.7 22o4 Isla 7!12 9.1 1.7 0*0 1.2 19.0 28.5 16.1 17.9 7bO3 7-1 10.1 *7 Io2 16.2 30-1 18.3 1688 7606 2,24. ? 20.4 2.3 900 7 *5 3004 28&0 22oO 7LO9 10.6 110 40 2.9 5.1 f3*3 2660 23.1 21.3 7612 11-2 296 02 6.4 16*6 zoos 20.3 8.4 7703 14.5 l4o2 1.2 Ij,.3 21.1 30.0 19.6 20*9 77C6 28.5 22*6 13*5 16.3 29.7 30*8 27.0 2517 7709 21.4 17.6 96 7 ij.z 22.2 file 2507 22*6 7712 1I.G 390 3.0 04 12.1 3.0 23*4 100? TF03 5.9 .7 040 5*4 21*9 22o6 11*3 10.5 7@c6 15-6 1065 8. 5 1300 19.6 2669 19.9 20.4 7P09 )6.2 12.6 6.3 Iq.S 20-9 28*1 20*3 26.8 7812 12.2 0.0 .3 6.5 1804 24.6 17.4 log? 79C3 8,3 0.0 000 303 1709 170 10.6 16.3 7ri06 Ia.? 2*3 6.2 6.0 n-9 21*2 1509 16.2 7,;G9. 16*3 5*0 100 907 19.7 19.7 23.0 23.3 7912 10.0 3.7 .3 3*7 15.7 27.7 21.3 23*0 8,503 10.3 000 6*7 Io3 19.6 2Z*7 14*0 1809 eC06 23.3 13.7 3.2 11.0 2200 27.3 25.0 24.6 8009 20.7 7.3 4.0 15.3 2700 2703 27.0 27*3 801? 0.3 807 6.7 r.? 20.7 25.3 17.? 254? 8103 24.3 5*3 5.7 6o3 3000 2903 2143 27.0 e106 23.0 180 10.0 19.3 26*3 30.0 2eo,O 30*7 E109 I?.o 11.0 5*3 12o3 17*3 22.7 2093 1540 8112 13-0 4*7 .7 4*0 16.0 28.3 l7o3 2.100 8203 17.0 7oO 3.0 3.0 23oO 22o? 1907 26.? 3 246 21o3 14.7 10-0 100 3Zo3 27*7 25.* 26o3 6209 2097 15*7 2.7 1?*7 22*0 26.0 26*7 27*3 e212 1860 000 0*0 10,3 2600 23*3 18*7 J6 8303 loo? 4.0 07 1.0 2140 13.7 12*7 2:3 e306 23.0 1463 6o3 13o? 27*3 24.7 2600 2400 Tabl e 11 Sal i ni ty Pearson Correl ati on S tati on 1 2 3 5 1A 18 IC 1X Flow -.55 -.38 -.43 -.64 -.43 42* -.61* -.51* EB Rai n -.09 -.10 .02 -.16 -.02 -.002 -.09 .01 AP Rai n -.10 -.09 -.04 -.08 -.04 .007 -.03 -.003 significant at .01 Table 12 Analysis of Covariance Sal i ni ty p- val ues 1A 18 1C 1 2 3 5 Cov .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 TorB .001* .001 .001 001* .001 001* .001* Mon .001 .002 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 Y r .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 .001 TM .403 .002* .853 .174 . 001* .101 .195 TY .060 001* .003 .235 . 001* .296 .516 MY . 001* 001 * .001* .001* .001* .001* .001* Cov Covari ate (R iverf I ow) TM Top/Bottom by Month Interaction TorB Top/Bottom Main Effect TY Top/Bottom by Year Interaction Mon Month Main Effect MY Month by Year Interaction Yr= Year Main Effect Table 13. Dates of dredging activities and sampling events at stations 1, 2, and 1B in Apalachicola Bay. The storm event was associated with a hurricane in the northern Gulf of Mexico (9/27/75). Dredge events were in the immediate vicinity of our sampling stations. A. Two-mile Channel an d Intracoastal Waterway (stations 1 and 2) Sampled Dredged 11/16/75 11/20-11/26/75 station 2 12/17/75 12/2-12/3/75 station 2 3/19/76 3/7-3/31/75 station 1 4/21/76 4/1/4/31/76 station 1 3/21/77 3/29-3/31/77 station 2 4/28/77 4/20-4/25/77 station 2 5/23/78 5/8-5/17 & 5/30-5/31/78 station 2 9/2/75 9/23/75 STORM B. Sike's Cut (station 1B) 7/7/75 7/20-7/24/75 station 1B 3/19/76 3/24-3/27/76 station 1B 6/29/78 6/7-6/30/78 station 1B 7/12/78 7/1-7/12/78 station 1B 9/27/75 9/23/75 STORM (S on graphs) Table 14: Maximum daily average wind velocities and maximum wind velocities (per month) i n the Apal achi col a Bay regi on f rom 1975 through 1978. Data were provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Apalachicola, Florida). Month Max. DailyAvq Speed (Day) Max Speed (Date) Dir IM 26 (10) SE 2/75 26, (22) E 3fl5 --- 31 (18) S 4fl5 24 ( 3) NW (4) N 5/75 --- 23 (15) SE 6fl5 --- --- 7/75 10.9 (17, 2) 33 6) E 8/75 10.1 ( 5) 18 6) W (28) S 9/75 18.3 (23) 32 (23) SW 10/75 14.7 (16) 25 (17) SW 11fl5 18.1 (13) 24 (12) N 12175 15.2 (29) 26 (25) NW 1176 17.0 ( 8) 25 (16) NW 2fl6 14.7 (22) 25 1) NW (2) N 3/76 12.8 (16) 23 9) NW (27) N 4fl6 10.8 (25) 17 (1, 7, 16, 17, 25, 26) 5/76 14.2 (14) 26 (28) S 6/76 11. 1 ( 5) 21 ( 4) N 7/76 10.4 (13, 14) 17 (6, 14, 22) 8fl6 11.5 (18) 23 (30) E 9/76 11.8 (12) 19 (12) SW Table 14 (continued): Month Max. Daily Avg Speed (Day) Max Speed (Date) Dir 10/76 12.5 (30) 22 (25) NW 11M 14.4 (30) 22 ( 8) N 12/76 --- --- 1/77 17.3 (10) 26 ( 3) SE 2fl7 14.0 (16) 23 (24) NW 3/77 15.2 (28) 26 (22) N 4fl7 13.7 (22) 24 ( 5) NW 5fl7 13.1 11) 19 (10, 11, 13) 6fl7 10.4 6) 22 ( 7) NW 7fl7 11.8 (17) 28 (16) SE 8/77 15.8 7) 32 (28) SE 9fl7 15.1 3) 23 ( 3) SE 10/77 12.8 (12) 21 (12) N 11/77 --- --- 12 fl7 --- --- 1/78 16.0 (26) 32 ( 9) N 2fl8 14.4 (22) 28 (21) NW 3/78 15.2 (10) 26 ( 8) SE (9) NW 4/78 14.0 (26) 25 (26) NW 5fl8 13.2 ( 3) 23 ( 3) SE 6fl8 11.2 (16, 17) 31 (28) SE 7fl8 10.5 (21) 21 (24) SW 8fl8 9.5 ( 8) 22 (21) N 9/78 10.6 (30) 24 ( 2) SE Tabl e 14 (conti nued): Mont h Max. DailyAvg Speed (Day) Max Speed (Date) Dir 10fl8 10.6 (17) 17 (12) SE 15) NE 11/78 9.6 (27) 16 (27) N 12/78 13.7 9) 24 9) N Table 15: Review of the short-term response of various physical and chemical water quality features of the Apalachicola estuary to high wind in the Apalachicola region. T - Surface; B - Bottom. Day readings taken from 1500-1615; night readings taken from 1930-2230. Color in J.T.U.; turbidity in Pt-Co units; temperature in OC; salinity in ppt. Readings on 12/14/83 taken from 1100-1430. 12/14/83 Winds 15-30 W Wind 20-25 N-NW (gusts to 30 Wind 5-10 W (there was rain on the preceding day) knots) Day 2/23/78 Night 2/23/78 Unprotected on west wind Protected on west wind Sta. Color Turb Temp Salin Color Turb Temp Salin Sta. Color Turb Temp Salin Sta. Color Turb Temp 5C T 385 33 11.8 0 480 41 10.8 0 5A T 125 26 15.0 9 58 T 145 9 15.2 9 5C B 380 38 11.8 0 535 46 10.8 0 5A B 150 31 15.0 9 5B B 145 9 15.1 9 58 T 355 37 11.1 0 420 45 11.7 0 5 T 185 60 15.1 8 4A T 80 15 15.5 9 5B B 360 38 11.0 0 430 46 11.7 0 5 B 200 60 15.1 8 4A 8 80 15 15.5 9 4A T 295 41 11.0 0 280 51 10.3 a Station 5 is the least protected station of the group. 4A B 300 48 11.1 0 310 56 10.2 0 Avg. Highest Daily Wind Rain Station 5B station 7, Surface Station 7, Bottom Table 16: Analysis of Variance of specific physical/chemical factors at various stations in Apalachicola Bay taken before and after the cessation of dredging in 1978. T D M TD TM OM D.O. 1A 0001 .0128@ C 0001 .7373 .5739 .8349 1 B .0009* . 0083 * C0001* .2035 .2936 .9476 1C .0003 * .0005 * <. 0001 * .1247 .0335@ .9628 1 x 0350 .0020 * <. 0001 * .0042 .8551 .6709 Log(color+1) IA .7899 .2220 032 3@ .3739 .2165 .7040 1B .022 6 .1415 .0703 .0798 .0181+ .1846 1 C .0044* .1823 .006& .0059 .0611 .6007 Ix .9004 .3271 .3412 .4570 .1461 .3977 Log (t ur bi d. +1) 1A .0007* .0456F .1284 .9953 .5068 .6725 1B .0009* .0612 .3780 .1621 0164F .8044 1 C .0028* .0192+ .2038 .2686 .1195 .9965 ix 0031 .0360 .6931 018-0 3467 .3665 TEm per at ur e 1A .0006* .6839 -(.0001 .2922 0424F .7531 IB .0012* -6768 C. 0001 .2056 .0167@ .8693 1C .0013* .7338 <.0001* .9122 .5451 .9326 Ix 0066* .7162 <. 0001* .8835 .1070 .9626 Table 16 (continued): T - D M TD TM DM Salinity 1A <.0001* .3213 .0001* .2677 .6350 .4924 1B <.0001* .4621 <.0001* .0039 .0002 .7009 1C <.OOO1* .1936 <.0001* .0339t .5409 .5669 ix 00005* .0416t .1738 .4376 .0742 .9831 7/73 - 6/83 Stations 1A, 1B, 1C significant at t.05 *.01 7/74 - 6/82 Station 1X T = Top/Bottom Main Effect ST 1A, 1B, 1C D = During/After Dredging Main Effect 7/73 - 6/83 Data was used M = Month Main Effect TD = Top/Bottom by During/After Interaction ST IX TM = Top/Bottom by Month Interaction 7/74 - 6/82 Data was used DM = During/After by Month Interaction T 1 = Surface D 1 = During M 1 = July 7 = Jan 2 = Bottom 2 = After 2 = Aug 8 = Feb 3 = Sep 9 = Mar 4 = Oct 10 = Apr 5 = Nov 11 = May 6 = Dec 12 = Jun Table 17: Mean (surface) salinities (ppt) in the Apalachicol a Bay system before (August, 1953-August, 1954) and after (June, 1973-May, 1974) the opening of Sike's Cut. Comparison is made during periods of mmparable rainfall andriver flow (after Damson, 1955, and Livingston, 1979). S tati on 1953 -1954L (1973-1974) 1 14.1 8.6 IA 19.8 20.3 1 B 5.0 15.2 1 E 16.8 15.0 ic 19.3 16.8 2 6.6 3.1 3 5.7 4.3 4 7.4 4.3 5 7.7 2.8 5A 7.3 4.8 7 2.7 --- Table 18: Correlation coefficients for fish (A) and invertebrate (8) indi- ces taken at the Apal achi col a stations over the study period (1972- 1983). A. FISHES NIN D NSP BRDIV HURL B REV N NSP .146 BRDIV -.113 .624 HURL -.179 .235 .788 BW-V N -.212 -.022 .616 .929 LNIN D .438 .588 .187 -.187 -.339 B. INVERTEBPATES NIN D NSP BRDIV HLRL BREVN NSP .250 BRDIV .073 .892 HLRL -.064 .621 .803 BFEV N -.074 .529 .750 .954 LNIN D .600 .618 .463 .154 .170 Table 19: ANOVA for fish and invertebrate indices before (1975-77) and after (1979-81) the cessation of &edging at Sike's Cut in 1978. S TA ERE MON S D S M DM Log(nu-nber of i ndi A dual s+1) Fish .8740 .2638 .002 3* .9558 .1826 .0864 I nvert ebr at es, .0101* .7197 .1970 .3399 .2365 .7613 Nunber of species F ish .2564 042 9* .0071 .2752 .5158 .3468 Invertebrates 0092 * .7994 .4393 .1780 .2790 .7708 Brillouin diversity F ish .7632 .0671 003 7* .1935 .7566 .3918 I nvert ebr at es 0085 * .7511 .4101 .2003 .2078 .7559 Hurl bert di versi ty F ish .5554 .1167 .4642 .3131 .2460 .4969 Invert ebr at es, 032 9* .9328 .3939 .1571 .0779 .9909 Bri I I oui n evenness F ish .3721 .1589 .6686 .3150 .6262 .1491 Invertebrates .0559 .8887 .4123 .1311 .0827 .9726 SlA = station main eff ect, significant at p< 0.05 ERE = dredge m ai n eff ect MON = month m ai n eff ect SD = station by dredge i ateraction SM = station by month i nteracti on DM = dredge by month interaction Table 19 (continued): Factors in Community Parameter ANOVA, stations 1A and 1B STA Station main effect: Is the average for station 1A different from that for station 1B when averaged over all times? DRE Dredge main effect: Is the average of all points (regardless of sta- tion) during dredging different from that after dredging? MON Month main effect: I s there at least one month whose mean differs from another month (averaged over station and time)? SD Station by dredge interaction: Does the level of station influence the difference between stations? SM Station by month interaction: Does the level of month influence the difference between stations? DM Dredge by month interaction: Does the level of month influence the during/after dredge effect? During dredging years are 75, 76, 77 After dredging years are 79, 80, 81 Table 20: Analysis of vari ance of sel ected physical/chemical vari abl es taken at three stations in the Apal achicol a estuary bef are and af ter the deve- lopnent of the two-mile extension in 1976. W2 - 8/83 Stations I 2 P-V al ues 4fl4 - 8/B3 Station 3 Two-Nil e Extension D.O. L og(Col or + 1) Log(Turbi di ty + 1) Ton per at ur e S, al i ni ty I 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 B >. 25 X 25 X 25 ).25 x 25 25 XpC.2 Xpt.2 -C. 005* X 25 x 25 >. 25 lo. 25 2%. 25 25 PT %.25 05< pt. I %. 25 X 25 25 2C pC. 25@ 25 25 X;K. 2 ).25 XIK. 2 J%. 25 B = Bef ore/A f ter Main PT = Bef ore/A f ter by T op/Bott am I nt er act i on significance at .05 .01 aw oil, 41M so M OW Table 21: Summary of station characteriaticop water quality features, sedi- ment analyseaq and biological structure at stations in the Apalachicola estuary during the summer-fall of 1983 (after Livingstonp 1983b). Water 9281ity Sediments Biology (Macroinvertebrates) (Near N) Brillouln (Far F) fecal grain species Sts- Proximity to Coliform Z size numerical species diversity tion Location Development Salinity D.O. B.O.D.&C.O.D. other -organics --(type) metals abundance richness and evenness � I Apalachicola Bay dredge site (F) mesa high silty Is 242 3 0.74 0.69 sand � A Apalachicola Day St. Vincent mesa high B.O.D. sand 374 2 0.46 0.67 Point M high C.O.D.' � A& Apalachicola Day Cat Point M mesa Ar sand 374 5 1*16 0.73 -D 4 East Bay near causeway M mesa Ar OF silty 198 1 0.0 0.0 sand D 4A Round Bay upper East Bay oligo high C.O.Do high silty 88 2 0.54 0.81 (F) sand D IC Apalachicola Bay dredge site (F) mesa Ar high silty 938 14 2.19 0.84 sand D A7 Apalachicola Bay dredge site M mesa high sandy. 616 13 1.67 0.74 silt C IE Nick's Hole St. George 1. M poly high B.O.D. sand Ar 1364 12 1.89 0.77 C V2 St.-Vincent Sound 9-mile-Tiltoa (7) poly high* C.O.DO sand 1166 9 1.71 0.79 C V3 St. Vincent Sound 11-mile (F) poly Is sand 704 it 2.09 0.89 C V6 St. Vincent Sound Gulf-Franklin poly sand* Or 704 .10 1*76- 0.78 line M C 3 East Bay causeway M Oligo high C.O.D. high silty 924 it 1,54 0.65 A sand Table 2 I(continued). Water Quality Sediments siologl (Hoevoinvertebrates) (Hear H) BrUl @Iouln (Far F) 11 . fecal gra in species Sts- Proximity to coliforn Z size numerical -species diversity tion Location Development Salinity D.O.__ B.O.D.&C.O.D. other organics (type) petals abundance richness and evenness C G4 St. George Sound Bulkhead Shoal poly Or sand Is 4268 24 2.44 0.77 (F) C 5 mid East Bay (F) mesa high C.O.D. high silty Ar 37.40 4 0.37 0.27 and C 5A upper East Bay (7) aligo high C.O.D. Ar :ilty OF .286 4 0.77 0.57. sand C 6 Alligator Bayou (F) oligo Of silty 308 4 0*97 0.71 i sand C Al Apalachicola boat (N) mesa high C.O.D. high -high silty cr, cut 770 3 .0055 0.78 basin sand Pb, Zo C A4 Apalachicola Bay Carl's Crack (9) poly Ar high C.O.D. high sandy 308 3 0.64 0.59 silt C V5 St. Vincent Sound 13-mile (Y) poly Ift sand 242 4 1.21 0.89 C VI eastern St. Vincent M poly high sandy Cr, Nit 704 6 1.27 0.72 Sound Osilt Pbp Zo. C A2 upper Apalachicola (N) mesa sand 2068 6 1.07 0.60 Bay C @l East Bay near Corris mesa high B.O.D. sand Pbp Za 1562 7 1.16 0.73 Bridge (F) C AS Apalachicola Bay Green Point (7) poly Of sand 814 7 1.68 0.87 C E4 mid East Bay shore (Y) mesa high B.O.D* high sand 770 7 1.39 0.73 C E5 uppir East Day creek (7) mesa high Or C.O.D. high send Of 1518 a 1.61 0.78 3 1A West Pass (F) eu high C.O.D. Is IF sand 1320 a 1.62 0.78 B ALL Little St. eu Is It sand 01 2442 13 1.89 0,74 George 1. 3 IB Sike's Cut M su Ar Is send Is 7194 26 1." 0.50 B IX Apalachicola 94Y St. George 1. (7) poly IN sand 7194 20 1035 0.45 M "MMOM to M M*AW-00.00,20-to M AW(M aw M Table 21 (continued). (Near - N) Water Quality Sediments Biologz (Mactoinvertebrates) Brillouin (Far - F) fecal grain species Sta- Proximity to colif ore z site numerical species diversity tion Location Development Salinity D.O. B.O.D.&C.O.D. other Organics (type) metals abundance richness and evenness B G2 St. George Sound East Point poly Ar high C.O.D. sand 484 11 2.08 0.89 Channel W B G3 St. George Sound Porter's Creek poly high C.O.D. @and 3256 16 1.95 0.71 M B G5 St. George Sound East Hole M poly high O.O*D* @and 3214 25 2.42 0.76 B G6 St. George Sound East Island W poly Is sand '5566 19 1.90 0.65- Be G7 St. George Sound Shell Point'(F) poly Or sand 244 is 1.97 0.73 B C9 St. George Sound Goose Island M poly sand 1364 is 2.36 0.83 A 2 Apalachicola Bay dredging site (N) meso sand 1958 4 0.57 0.41 A A3 Apalachicola Bay Hut restaurant meso high C.O.D, high sandy 4378 3 0.56 0.51 (N) silt A R3 north Scipio Creek (N) oligo, low silty cr, Cu, 66 2 0.60 0.92 "Band Pb, Za A E3 upper Eagle Creek W oligo low sand 22 1 0.00 0.00 A A9 St. George Boat (N) oligo low high B.O.D. Or high silty Cr, CU, 198 3 0.66 0.62 Basin high C.O.D. nd Ni, Ph, Zu A R4 Apalachicola River (F) limnetic ::ndy 22 1 0.00 0.00 silt A RI Apalachicola River Standard Oil oligo, high B.O.D. high silty Cr, Cu, 1100 7 1.42 0.74 dock (N) high C.O.D. and 7b, Zu A R2 Scipio Creek Boar W oligo low high B.O.Do high :ilty Cr, Cu# 1386 9 1.41 0.65 Basin sand Ph, Zu A GS St. George Sound construction W poly high D.O.D. hiab sand Be 1 0.00 0.00 A R5 Apalachicola River Pinhook (F) limnatiG Ar sand Or 1 0.00 0.00 A V4 St. Vince9t Bound Big Bayou (7) poly OF silty 66 a 0*60 0.92 sand An we 'do so dw OW IM *W- aw Aw I'm So so Table ZI (continued). (Neat N) Water Quality Sediments Biology (Macroinvertebrates) Brillouin (Far F) fecal grain spec tes Sta- Proximity to -colifors X site numerical species diversity tion Location Development Salinity D.O* B*O*D.&C*O,D. other organics (type)-metals abundance richness and evenness A RIO Apalachicola River (F) limnetic sand 572 4 0.83 0.60 A R9 Apalachicola River St. Hark's Island limnatic sand 264 2 0.28 0.41 k R6 Murphy Creek agricultural limnetic low high sandy Cr, "1 220 3 0.93 0.86 runoff (N) milt A R7 Huckleberry Creek ? limnetic law Is high sandy Cr, "1 198 7 1.82 0.97' silt V R8 Clark's Creek agricultural limnetic low high silty Cr, Ni 0 0 0.00 0.00 runoff (N) sand 9 53 West Bayou agricultural mesa high C.O.D. high sandy Cr, Cu, 0 0 "0.00 0.00 9 E2 mouth of Eagle runoff (N) silt Ni, Pb, Zu I urban runoff (N) mesa low high B.O.D. high sand Pb, Za 0 0 0.00 0.00 Creek high C.O.D. Z G1 St. George Sound East Point poly high C.O.D. high silty Cr, Cu, 0 0 0.00 0.00 runoff (N) sand Pb, Zu Z AIO St. George dredged urban runoff (m) poly Is hiab C.O.D. hiab silty 0 0 0.00 0.00 canal* sand within background levels Col. 'M low low "OM MW W 'no low low Figure 1: Chart showing the Apalachicola River-Bay system with stations used by the Florida State University Aquatic Study Group (Principal Investigator; R. J. Livingston) for analyses of water and sediment quality and the distribution in faunal benthic macroinvertebrates (Livingston, 1983b). no P, N r6 rd A r7 e3 r3 04 eel 9 r2 0 a2ri as V3 *a3 2 g4o gs V \MACIFE V1 Oa5 0 @\ g6 g7 ic 95 01a Oalo la P,?Ak- ACIAIC01-P ix le ib 0 all Om 'low low Figure 2: Net flow of water in the Apalachicola Bay systemg averaged over a complete tidal cycle (data courtesy of Dr. B. A. Christensen, University of Florida). Jop A A A P A A .0 Ado 40 dd AO dIL .4 .0 .0 44 MA A A Figure 3: Drainage from Tate's Hell Swamp into the Apalachicola estuar via East Bay as observed during periods of high local rainfall and runoff or highly colored water from the Tate's Hell swamp (Figure 1). The influence of the combination of highly colored water coming out of the Tate's Hell Swamp through East and West Bayou is illustrated. )oQ . .. ....... ..... 8/74 9/74 . .. ....... ..... . .. ....... ..... lost 9/74 4"S ;4.!V Flo . .. ....... ..... . .. ....... .0.6400 0go'. 466 3/76 10/76 '20 A-M 'IM M, 'JM "W" on @M PH NO @M I= Figure 4: Factor train analysis of the major physical and chemical effects of dredging and spoil placement on bays, estuaries, and marshlands (from Darnell, 1976). accelerated modification passage of of flushing freshwater patterns shoaling modification @through estuary increased loss of and of current --> penetration bay and bay and segmentation patterns altered of saltwater estuary estuary patterns of channela; zi.. creation of sediment tidal exchang.* sharpening habitat traps and mixing of salinity bottom holes gradients loss of and channels may become habitat anaerobic diversity el. r wdue-pOead Increased re cti la sediment particle size load of surface sediments reduced Dredging light and spoil penetration 'Increased placement increased Increased oxygen biological turbidity > temperature demand effects release of erosion- modified reduced Oecreation of @blockage interference water organic spoil banks-> 0f ourI ce-'-). with surface chemistry compounds dralnag: drainage release of m.arshland "acceleCation .atterns pesticides. of freshwate lowered heavy metals. canalization drainage water table @acceleratlon and hydrogen widening of f marsh sulfide creation of canals by subsidence loas of tatI.n marginal -rah - of. [email protected] @ w d p 1 w network of fo 0 @hbltat rra.tnldon 0f erosion acceleration hydrogea:t of saltwater sulfide In penetration marsh and canals low A& aw Figure 5: Permanent sampling stations established by the F'.S.U. Aquatic Study Group for longterm field analyses in the Apalachicola River-Bay system (March, 1972-present). apalachicUla dyer ,ate 's bell swamp 5A cattle ranch so I b 12C sa F UP 4 3 'ool CA ound yincedws s' k'iftent ala Sian chicola Day oyster reef Marsh In Ix .01 S -ass Ib P @Vi intra. waterway Is study area gulf of mexico kilometers i i I i___4 0 tow Figure 6: Dredge spoil diappsal sites in Apalachicola Bay for the two- A mile channel and extension, the Intracoastal Waterway, the Sike's Cut (St. George Island) Channelp and the East Point Channel. 0 ,SCIPIO CREEK &-UiT Pomr 'C"It CHANNEL TWO MILE CHANNEL 00 cc, e" Y/ @10 pl- C/ ST. GEORGE ISLAND CHANNEL Figure 7: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes in Apalachicola Bay from 1970 to present. THOUSANDS TOTAL 0AILY OISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1970 ALL (BRYWIOE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES so 40 V 0 L U M E 30 C U 20 y 0 S 10 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC MONTH - FROM 700101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1971 ALL (BAYWIOE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES so 40 L U M E 30 -C 20 y 0 S to 0 A LA JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN. JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 710101' THOUSANDS TOTAL ORILY OISPOSRL VOLUME - YEAR 1972 ALL (BRYWIOE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES so 40 v L U M E 30 C u 20 y 0 S to 0 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 720101 THOUSRNOS TOTAL ORILY OISPOSAL VOLUME YEAR 1974 ALL (eAYWI0E) OREDGING ACTIVITIES so 40 0 L u M 30 E c u 20 It y 0 S to 0 v JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 740101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1975 ALL (BRYWIOE) OREOGING ACTIVITIES so 40 V a L U M E 30 C U 20 y 0 5 to lk 0 L -T--j JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC MONTH FROM 750101 THOUSANDS TOTAL OAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME -YEAR 1376 ALL (SAYWIDE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES so 40 v 0 L U m E 30 c U 20 y 0 s to "41 0 JAN FEB MAR RPR MRY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV. DEC MONTH - FROM 790101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1977 so - ALL (BAYWIDE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES 40 - V 0 L U M E 30 - C u 20 - Y 0 S 10 0 JA N FEE MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 770101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME YEAR 1978 ALL (SAYWIOE) DREDGING ACTIVITIES so - 40 - v 0 L U M E 30 c U 20 y 0 S 1 10 ki JAN FEB MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 780101 Figure 8: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at Sike's Cut (St. George Island) from 1970 to present* J THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1970 ST. GEORGE ISLANO OISPOSAL SITES 40 V 0 L U M E 30 C U 20 Y S 10 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP, OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 700101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1971 ST. GEORGE ISLAND DISPOSAL SITES so 40 L U M E 30 c 20 y 0 S to JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT N;V DEC MONTH - FROM 710101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1972 so ST. GEORGE ISLANO OISPOSAL SITES 40 L U M E 30 c U 20 y D s 10 0 JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 720101 THOUSANOS TOTAL ORILY OISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1974 so - ST. GEORGE ISLAND OrSPOSAL SITES 40 - v L U M 30 E c u 20 y 0 s to 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV 09C MONTH - FROM 740101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1975 so - ST. GEORGE ISLANO OISPOSAL SITES 40 - 0 L U M E 30 C U 2Q y 0 S to 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 7SO101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME YEAR 1376 ST. GEORGE ISLAND DISPOSAL SITES so 40 V 0 L U M E 30 c U 20 y a s 10 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY jUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV. DEC MONTH - FROM 760101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1978 so ST: GEORGE ISLAND OISPOSAL SITES 40 0 L u M E c U 20 y 0 S 10. 0 JAN FEB MAR APR -MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 780101 Figure 9: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes in the Intracoastal Waterway from 1970 to present. THOUSANDS TOTAL OAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 19?0 so INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY OISPO .SAL SITES 40 0 L U M E 30, C U 20 y S to R Ell JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 700101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1971 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES so 40 V L U M 30 E C U 20 y 0 S to JAN FEB MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 710101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1972 so - INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY 01SPOSRL SITES 40 - L u M E 30 - c 20, - Y 0 s to 0 T- JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL SUB SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 720101 THOUSANDS TOTAL OAILY OISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1974 so INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES 40 v 0 L U M 30 E c 20 y 0 S to 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 740101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1975 so INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES 40 L u M E 30 c U. 20 y 0 s to 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY OEC MONTH - FROM 750101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1976 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES so - 40 - L u M E 30 c U 20 y 0 S JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV, DEC MONTH - FROM 760101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1977 so INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL SITES 40 v L U M E 30 C U 20 y s to 0 JAN FEB MAR- APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC MONTH - FROM 770101 THOUSANDS. TOrAL DAILY 01SPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR.1378 so INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY OtSPOSAL SITES 40 v L u M E 30 c u 20 y 0 s i! :C@ A 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM ?90101 I* Figure 10: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at the two-mile chan- nel and extension from 1970 to present. THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1970 TWO-MILE DISPOSAL SITES so 40 L U M E 30 C U 20 y 0 10 0 JAN. FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 700101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME -YEAR. 1371+ TWO-MILE DISPOSAL SITES so 40 V L U M 30 C U 20 y 0 S 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH - rROM 740101 THOUSANDS TOTAL ORILY OISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1976 so - TWO-MILE (INCLUOING EXTENSION) OISPOSAL SITES 40 - V 0 L U M E 30 c U 201- Y 0 S. 10 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH FROM 760101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1978 so - TWO-MILE DISPOSAL SITES 40 - 0 L U M E 30 - c 20 - Ys 10 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL PUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH - FROM 780101 Figure 11: Total daily dredge spoil disposal volumes at the East Point Channel from 1970 to present. THOUSANDS TOTAL DRILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1971 so EAST POINT DISPOSAL SITES 40 0 L U M E 30 c U 20 y 0 10 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV. DEC MONTH - FROM 710101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1976 EAST POINT OISPOSAL SITES so 40 0 L U M E 30 C U 20 y S 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL PUG. SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM ?60101 THOUSANOS TOTAL ORILY OISPOSRL VOLUME - YEAR 1377 so - EAST POINT DISPOSAL S@TES 40 - L U M E 30 . C U 20 - Y D s JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 770101 THOUSANDS TOTAL DAILY DISPOSAL VOLUME - YEAR 1978 EAST POINT DISPOSAL SITES so - 40 - V 0 L U M E 30 C- U 20 - Y 0 s to - 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 780101 Figure 12: Monthly totals (cubic yards) of dredging baywide and at various disposal sites (lumped by site) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1970 to the present time. THOUSANOS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEOIMENT OISPOSEO (BY MONTH) ALL (BAYWIOE) OREOGING ACTIVITIES Boo ?00 V Boo L U M Soo E 400 C U. 300 Y 0 S 200 100 0 1970 19?1 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 13?7 1978 19?9 1980 L981 1982 1983 YEAR THOUSHNOS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEOIMENT OISPOSED (BY MONTH) ST. GEORGE ISLANO OISPOSAL SITES 400 3SO - V 300 - 0 L U M 250 - E 200 - C U ISO - D S too - so- 0 19?0 19*71 1972 19?3 1974 19'75 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1991 1982 1983 YPAP THOUSANOS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENT DISPOSED (BY MONTH] 400 INTRRCOASTAL WATERWAY DISPOSAL S.ITES 3SO - v 300 - L u m 2SO .E 200 c u ISO Y 0 s -100 so 0 _T_ --r- 1970 1971 1972 1973 1374 1975 1976 1977 1378 1379 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR THOUSANDS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENT DISPOSED (BY MONTH) TWO-MILE DISPOSAL SITES (EXTENSION NOT INCLUDED) 400 - aso - V 300 - L U m 2SO - E 200 - c U ISO - Y 0 S too - so 0 1970 187 1 19172 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR THOUSANDS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENT DISPOSED (BY MONTH) TWO-MILE (EXTENSION) DISPOSAL SITES 400 - 3SO - v 0 300 - L u m 2SO - E 200 - c u ISO - Y. 0 too - so - 0 1970 197 1 1972 19?3 1974 197S 19-76 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR THOUSANDS TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENT DISPOSED (BY MONTH) EAST POINT DISPOSAL SITES 400 - 3SO - v 300 a L u m 2SO E 200 c u ISO Y 0 s too - so - 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 19'77 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR mmmmmmm mmmm mm Figure 13: Cluster analysis of total annual Apalachicola River Flow (1972-1982). DER PRCJECT - RIVERFLOW - NO LOGS OFNDAOCRAP CUTPUT PINIPUr GISTANCE 185199 160 09 of 07 *6 65 e4 93 *2 72 7,-= -------------- 74 ---------------- -------- 77 -------------------- 73 --------------------- 4 1- - - ------------- 7! ------ - ---- 7c; ----------- 7t -------------- FO ---------------- m------ 82 -- - ------------------- - - -- - - - ------------- CLLSIERING STRATEGY 15 FLEXIBLE GROUPING (WITH BETA) SIMILARITY COLFFICIENT IS CZEKANOWSKI CLUSTER CROUP WITH 1WHERE GROUP NAME NOW 1hFjR AUCLUJJER LEVEL JONS NAME SUBGROUP CONTA14ING THE FOLLOWIN L9SjJR NIT 4e1;0C 75 79 75 79 .8672 72 78 72 78 086,1'9 7? 74 72 74 78 e8322 75 76 75 76 ?9 06127 72 77 72 74 77 78 *7964 73 75 73 75 76 79 e7ell 73 80 73 75 76 79 so 9716e 72 73 72 73 74 75 76 ?? 78 79 80 95199 72 al 72 73 74 75 76 ?7 78 79 80 86P) (ALL ONE GRO. Figure 14: Apalachicola River Flow from 1972 through 1982 showing: (A) monthly mean river flow MEAN OF1 ILY RIVE7, '-'-L'-7i3/q-77 2SOO APALACHICOLA RIVER AT BLOUNi'STOWN, FL. R 2000 V E R F isoo L 0 10.00 C M Sao 0 L 1972 1973 t974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 YEAR (B) 5-month weighted moving averages of the monthly mean data 3 MERN DRILY RIVER FLC-,,' i@, /6tCj Fil FL. 2SOO S-MONTH WEIGHTED MOVING AVERRGE 2000 V F IS00 L 0 W 1000 c M S Soo 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 19?9 1980 1981 1982 YEAR (C) monthly mean river flow averaged by season (winter Decemberg January, February; spring = March, April, May; summer = June, Julyp August; fall - September, October, December) MEAN DAILY RIVER FLOW (m3/SEC) AT SLOUNTSTOWN, FL. 2000 AVERAGED BY SEASON OF YEAR. A 1500 y F 1250 L W 1000 C 750 M S Soo 250 0 1972 19?3 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 YEAR Figure 15:. Total monthly rainfall (cm) in the Tate's Hell Swamp (East Bay Tower) from 1972 through 1982. Data are presented as totals per month (A)v five month weighted moving averages (B), and as seasonal averages (C) (as defined in Figure 14). TOTAL MONTHLY RAINFALL (CM) EAST SAY, FL. too FIGURE 15A R N F so A L L 40 -20 0 19?2 1973 1974 197S 1976 19?7 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 YEAR TOTAL MONTHLY RAINFALL (CM) AT EAST BAY, FL. 70 - 5-MONTH WEIGHTEO MOVING AVERAGE so - FIGURE 15B v 0 so R A N 40 F A L 30 L 2o c m 10 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 YEAR TOTAL MONTHLY RAINFALL (CM) AT EAST SAY, FL. AVERAGEO BY SEASON OF YEAR 40 FIGURE 15C v 30- a R A 2S- N F 20- A L L IS c 10 m 19?2 1973 19774 1975 1976 1377 1978 1979 1380 1981 1982 YEAR Figure 16: Total monthly rainfall (cm) in the Apalachicola, (NOAA station at the airport) from 1972 through 1982. Data are presented as totals per month (A), five month weighted moving averages (B), and as seasonal averages (C) (as defined in Figure 14). TOTH L MONTHLY RAINFALL (CM) APALACHICOLA. FL. too FIGURE 16A 80 R N F so L L 40 -C 20 t 81 1982 75 1976 19-77 19-78 19?9 1980 Is 1972 1973 1974 19 YERR TOTAL MONTHLY RAINFALL (CMI AT APALACHICOLA, FL. 5-MONTH WEIGHTED MOVING AVERAGE FIGURE 16B 60 SO R 40 N F L 30 L c 20 m 10 0 1972 1973 19774 1975 1376 1977 1378 1979 1380 1981 1982 YEAR TOTAL MONTHLY RAINFALL (CM) AT APALACHICOLA FL. AVERAGED BY SEASON OF YEAR 40 -FIGURF. -16C 35 v 30 a R A 2S I N F 20 A L L is c to 19 ?2 19 73 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 78 1979 19 80 19 81 13 82 YEAR Am an w an @w Am M Figure 17: Cluster analysis of rainfall (year by monthly totals) in East Bay (A) and Apalachicola (B). DER PRCJEC`1 - EAST SAY RAIN - CLUSTER YEARS - NO LOGS FIGURE 17A DENOPOGRA14 OUTPUT FINIMUM DIr .TANCE *4679 09 as 07 06 05 014 e2' 01 -00 72 ---------------- - - ---- - ------ - 76 73 - ---------- - ---- - - 80 82 75 7e 74 79 77 el - - ----- DER PRCJECT EAST DAY RAIN - CLUSTER YEARS NO LOGS CLLISTERI@G STRATEGY IS FLEXIBLE GROUPING (WITH BETA$ SIMILARITY COEFFICIENT is VEKANNSKI CLUSTER GROUP WITH (WHERE GROUP NAME NOW REFER S To A UCLUJJER LEVEL JCINS NAMi: SUBGROUP CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING LUSTER NIT 97966 so 82 8C 82 o?621 ?7 el 77 el *7438 73 80 73 so 8z ,,72?3 74 79 74 79 06854 73 75 73 75 80 82 *6250 72 76 72 76 o6278 73 78 73 75 le 80 82 ,5e?7 73 74 73 74 75 78 79 00 82 *526C 73 77 73 74 ?s ?7 78 79 so el 82 *4679 ?2 ?3 72 73 ?4 75 76 T? 78 79 so el 52 (ALL ONE GROUP Aw @m DER PRrjECl APALACHICOLA RAIN CLUSTER YEARS - NO LOGS FICUPE 17B DFNDP0CRAj,qUTPUT. 111NZPUM 0 ANCc .4499 100 49 0 B *7 06 *5 014 3 02 *1 @,o ?2 76 ---------- 73 ------------------ - ----- -- 78 80 82 77 el 74 79 ---------- DER PROJECI - APALACHICOLA RAIN CLUSTER YEARS NO LOG-S CLUSTERING STRATEGY IS FLEXIBLE GROUPII@G (WITH BETA) SIPILARIlY COEFFICIENT IS CZEKANCWSKI CLUSTER GROUP WITH (WHERE GROUP NAME 0W REFERS TO A CLUSTER LEVEL JOINS NAME SUBGRCUP CONTANING T4E FOLLOWING CLUSrER dtfirs) 07951 78 80 76 8D 07587 77 81 77 81 97546 74 7'9 74 79 f s7342 75 02 75 62 ;1 *7337 73 78 73 76 i8o s687C 72 76 i2 76 4,6559 73 75 73 75 178 1 80 82 e5791 72 73 72 73 75 1 76 78 80 82 *5179 72 7? 72 73 ?5 76 7? ?a 80 el 82 *4499 72 74 72 ?3 ?4 75 76 ?7 78 79 80 OL 82 (ALL ONE GROUP) Figure 18: Scattergrams of the raw data concerning depth/Secchi depth (m), turbidity (JTU), dissolved oxygen (ppm)t color (Ft-Co units)q and temperature (00 at permanent stations in the Apalachicola LONG-TERM PmysrCnL/CHEMICAL GAYA estuary from 1972 through 1982.. Soo STATION 001 Color Pt-Co 400 300 LONG-7ERM PHYSECAL/CHEMICPL CATR 200 STATIrN 001 7 Depth and Secchi m 100 6 0 1972 IS73 1971 1375 tS76 IS77 MS 1979 ISSO 1981 1982 4 SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM 3 LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CMEMICAL DATA .6 STATION 001 2SO 2 **-1%* Oak ftwmwaft@@ IF 'r 0 a ** 9V art * Va 17, 7 WIF IF Turbidity JTU 99 *9 , IF Vw Vw, 1 7 V V %? 7 T7 "C4 9 V 9 IF V, V 9 'W 200 V V qq 7 IWI V I IF V VPV V 71 111 -1 1;72 1;73 19174 197S 1,376 IS77 1979 1373 iSSO 1581 1382 ISO DEPTH VERR SECCHI DEPTH too LONG-TERM PHYSICRI./CHEMICAL GAYA IF * IF STATION Dot Temperature OC eat 21 3S . T 1972 IS73 IS74 IS75 19'76 IS77 1978 IS79 1380 30 aq T is all * SURFACE YEAR OF V SOT TOM 2S ej at IF 2C' . w V flkM Hlf@;1(111 U-M;CilL WITH 10N (1111 IS It 0 ,V 14 Dissolved 02 PPm S 12 If V I to IS72 1973 1374 IVS 19-76 IS77 1378 1979 ISCO 1981 1982 YEAR V VA a StjPFnr.E V* V V % 6 I-, 1972 IS73 IVII IS7S IS-76 1977 1379 1979 ISSO IS91 t992 SURFACE YEAR .12TY214. LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMtCAL DATA Soo STATION 002 Color Pt-Co 400 300 LONG-TERM PWySICAL/C@fFmICnL DATA 9 STATION 00j 200 7 Depth and Secchi m too za 4 1972 t973 19-24 197S 1976 1977 1979 1979 1980 1991 1992 SURFACE a a YEAR 3 BOTTIm LONG-TERM PHYSICPLICHEMICAL DATA STATION 002 2SO --------- I r Turbidity JTU IF= Rq$ F 2co 1572 1973 IS711 IS75 IS-,S 197-7 Ig!?a 19f79 1980 1982 DEPTH YEAR SECCHI DEPTH ISO V LBNG-TERM PHYStCAL/CHEMICAL DATA STATION 002 so 40 *0 V VV V 0 IF V VV Temperature C V 3S 30 1972 1973 IW4 1S7S 1976 IS77 1918 1979 t980 1981 1982 VV j, It *SURFACE YEAR 2S % V V 9 82TTOm le . 20 V lb I is t;11C`,@"HF'Pf!CnL 014TA S 11 WN 0k12 Irv Dissolved 0 [a 14 2 ppm S 12 1912 19 73 19 74 19 75 19 7G 19 77 13 78 19 79 10 So 19 at 19 82 10 a SupFnC., V V. YEAR V9 9 9* *7 a9 ft 0 49 Vw V 0 db V V 11P 0,9 V V V V VV 1972 1973 1974 IS7S 1976 1977 1378 1973 1380 1981 198.1 SURFACE BOTTOM YEAR 4b LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CMEMtCAL ORTA Soo STATION 003 Color Pt-co 300 @ONG-IERM PHYSICRL/CHEMiCnL QATA 200 STATION 003 7 Depth and Secchi m 100 1P S a 1912 1973 1914 .1975 197S 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 t3a2 -SURFACE BOTTOM YEAR 3 LONG-TER" PHYSrCAL/CMSMICSL ORTA 2 2so STATION 003 Turbidity JTU V *Waft 200 1w w V%w 1972 1973 1974 1975 t976 1971 1978 197S 1980 1981 IS82 DePTH YEAR 1160 SECCMI OEPT4 Ica L9N6-TERm PHYSICAL/CHEMICRL OATR 412 STATION 003 so V, 3S Temperature OC Vi V 0 A 30 so 1912 t973 1971 131S t976 1977 19-79 t979 Ilea 1381 1982 25 SURFACE YEAR V BOTTOM 20 LONG ILRM anTn is 14 Dissolved o IQ 2 PPm S 0 1912 1913 t974 10 7S 1916 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 SuVnCg YEAR V 4 1972 1973 IS74 I3?S 1978 1917 1918 1979 1980 ISgj 1992 So URFACE YEAR OTTOm LONG-TER" PHYSICRLICMEMICRL DATA Sao STATION 005 Color Pt-Co 400 300 LONG-TERM P"ysIcnL/CHEMICAL DATA 200 W,* STATION 005 7 V Depth and Secchi m 100 A, I 0 V Z... tz I T__ 1972 1973 1974 137S WS 1377 t978 tS79 1980 1981 1982 *SURFACE ,82TTOn YEAR LON6-TERH PHYSICAL/CSEMICRL DATA STATION 005 jptwo a w"w *a ON* ow Wepf"@ 2SO Vf s. Turbidity JTU IF VV% V4 fq Vw W,@ 200 1572 1973 1974 1975 k976 1977 1378 1979 1980 1381 1982 0EPTw YEAR ISO V SECCHE GEPTH V too V A, V LONG-TERM PHYSMAUCHEMICAL DATA so STATION OOS V 0 Temperature C V V *A i Vq as fa@ I Ax 9 44.2 4,0 x - 30 1972 19@73 1@74 1@7S IS&76 1977 1979 1979 1980 1981 1982 gig if 0 :V. SURF ACE YEAR A; 1 DOT TOM V. 2S ir * 20 LONG-TERM miySirnt @c@irmlCnL WITH S1141ION 00L) WN, Is 14 %Dissolved 0 2 PPm 10 9 1P V 9 t2 S to 1972 1973 1974 197S t976 1377 1978 1979 1980 1991 1982 *1 'w ON. I V EAR V , -I V N, 97 fiv 9 99 7 V4", % V V V 1972 1973 1974 t37S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1361 1982 SURFACE YEAR vOOTTOm LING-TERM PHYSrCRL/CHEMICAL DATA Sao STATION GIR Color Pt-co 400 300 200 LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CMEMICSL DATA STRTICN Gift too V 7. Depth and Secchi m V Al" %@ri 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1378 t979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSrCAL/CHEMICAL OATA 3 2SO STATION 01A 47 2 Turbidity JTU 0% V 1w TV low T 200 VV TV 9 V7 V ;fq@flv t972 1973 t974 1375 L976 1977 IS78 1979 1980 IS81 1982 ISO DEPTH YEAR V SECCHI DEPTH so LBNG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA 9 IF STATION 018 0 36 Temperature C 1972 1973 1974 t97S 1978 1977 1978 1979 ISSO 1901 1982 SURFACE YEAR V BOTTOM N 9 2S t . 0. 0 w 20 IS IT IT* 14 Dissolved 0 2 PPM 10 w S to V 0 % 107S 19'76 1977 1918 1979 1980 1981 1992 1972 1973 1974 9 V T gj,qr@CE YEAR To T T 9 tr 1972 t973 1974 137S 1976 1977 1979 1579 logo lost 1982 :SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA Sao STATION 018 Color Pt-Co 300 LONs-TERM P)JYqICPL/DfEMICAL OnTA 200 SIRILON 010 7 Depth and Secchi 111 100 0 0 5 1 1 -T 1972 -19'73 1974 ISIS 19@76 IS'77 1@'jq 1979 IS80 199 1 1982 2: all * '* M ** % 4 SURFACE YEAR SOtTOM 3 LGNG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA 2'.- 2SO STATION 018 TV VVq 'w- -wV V 99 9V qVVf Turbidity JTU 9 9 VV TV fgwV V 9 V- V V T ff f 200 TV 1972 1973 1974 157S 1976 1977 tS78 1979 tSea 1991 1982 DEPTH. YEAR ISO SECCmf DEPTH too so w Lekb-TERM PRYSICAL/CHEMtCRL DATA STATION 018 V V V f * 0 Temperature 3S 1972 L913 1974 ISIS 197G 1977 1918 1979 1990 1981 1982 30 0 *SURFACE YEAR a ? I s o V vearTOM v I V* V 7 w 2S v 'w 9 LONU-TcRm rifystrot @Vllf MtCOL 011Tn V * % , V V SrHfLq!N t1tU 20 V 114 Dissolved 0 ppm 2 IS 12 to 10 V 19'72 t973 1974 ISIS 1977 ISIS 1979 1980 1981 19E-' YEAR V V IV 4 "A':972 1911 1374 197S 1376 1977 ISIS 1979 1990 1981 1902 SU YEAR 'OOTTOM LZNG-TERM PHYSICRL/CNEMICAL ORT01 Sao STATION WC Color Pt-Co 400 300 200 LONG-TERM PMYStCRL/CHEMICRL DATA STATION OIC 7 Depth and Secchi m too 1w 17 %V "Z sk W;. tv, Mimi 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1973 1980 1981 IS82 SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM 3 LON6-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL OATS 2SO STATION OIC 2 f VI V*, wq VF Turbidity JTU VV I V, 'Fq wq 2CO TV I V* I VV I I 'r IV "f, 1972 1973 1974 1375 1976 1977 1978 1379 1980 1981 1982 ISO DEPTH YEAR SECCHI DEPTH Ica so !TV L9NG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICRL OATS STATION GIC MP -%- 40 Temperature 0c 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1377 1978 1979 1980 1981 1382 35 SURFACE YEAR Bar TOM 30 2S LOKU- IL RM 41',IL OF17H 5 DA 116."1 U; 20 14 Dissolved 0 ppm 4w .2 is 12 to f S 10 ev at ;Ave 0 a a IV * 1972 1973 197% 1975 197G 19r77 19178 IST79 1900 1981 tS82 IF w ve w OF r119FK5 YEAR 0611 10- 19 72 t9 73 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 '28 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 SURFACE YEAR Barren LONG-TERM PHYStCAL/CHEMICAL DATA Sao StATLON DIX Color Pt-Co 300 200 XONG-TERM PHVStCnL/ChEMLCAL QATA stnTtON oix too 7 Depth and Secchi m 1972 t913 IS-74 J97S L376 1977 19@8 19'79 [Sao 13,81 1982 SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM LONG-TERM*PHYSICAL/CMEMICFIL DATA 3 srmm Dix 2SO 2 Turbi@ity JTU zoo 0 12172 19173 1374 197S t9?S 1977 1978 IS79 1980 19 81 19 182 tso *DEPTH YEAR SECCHI DEPTH - too LONG-TER" PHYSICAL/04t"ICRL BAIR so I STATION DIX 0 Tmperature C 0 "3S 1972 1973 1974 1375 1376 1371 1378 1979 1980 19,81 19'82 *SURFACE YEAR 30 90 V 80 T TOM Vw 2S 3. q LANG-UR4 501110N u1\ 20 14 V Dissolved 0 2 PP'a Is ire 12 10 10. w S to VA * f, * I. I V :! In, I 1 .1 * 't a __r_j 2 1974 MS 13-76 1917 t97S tS79 t980 t961 IM a k It. 1972 1973 -7. S WACC YEAR ft, 6 Fit' T T 9.1t 6 19r72 19F73 19174 IS17S. 19179 19177 19178 19f79 ISTSO 19191 19102 *SURFACE YEAR BOTTQm Figure 19: Scattergrams of salinity (ppt) at permanent stations in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1982. LON6-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL OATA lo STATION 001 3S S 30 v v A v If v v v L v v 1 25 v v v N v vv *7 v v v v T v y 7 v *7 7 v v 7 20 vv v v v 7 V*V v v J**v W7 V* v v P v vv P v v v T W* v v*7 v *7 * 7* * * C*v v 10 v v lu v V *v 0 A, 1972 1973 1974 197S 19-76 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR v V 130TTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL. ORTA STATION 002 40 35 S 30 A v L v VV v 2S - v N v I V7 v v T v w Y 20 - v V7 v v If v v v v v v v V* v v v VVW v P is v v 19 P v vv T v 10 V V W* v v v v v v v v v 7 v 7 vv v At W* v v If 0 A7. _T I *A if 19?2 1973 1974 137S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE - YEAR v V BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL OATA STATION 003 40 S 30 A L I 2S N I T Y 20 is p p vv T W* w v V* 10 w v * *v v w v v vw s w *WV v v v *7 w ww W * 7 v 0 4.1 =mow- -T - F 1972 19?3 1974 197S 1976 1977 1378 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR v V BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL ORTA 40 STATION 005 35 s 30 R L v 2S N v v v I T v y 20 *v v v v v Vi r w *W v qk 7 A p v v p v V v w v T v v *%V v v lo V* v % w * rw7 vt v At 7 v v V* v v Aw w w v wv I _T -T _-F I i 1972 1973 1974 197S 19?6 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR V V BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL OATA 40 STATION 01A 35 V wV v V V VIE *2 V V V V 30 V V w VV Wq WV qp w V L 0 V V. V V* V I . 25 v V V V N VV V V 17V I * '? V V V V T V V Y 20 V V w V V V* v V w vV W* 17* V * VV 7 * *,k v *V V V V* p V *7 * **I t p V T to *Vv W7 7 * v * * V* V V V V VV V 0 1972 1973 1974 197S 19'76 1977 1978 1979 ISE30 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR V V BOTTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICRL/CHEMICAL OATR 40 STATION 018 3S - V V V VV V w V V V v VV V 7 VV * V I 17 7* V w S 30 - ev *v VV V V V V V A v V7 v VV 7 V V VV L w V V 7 lb V * w V V I V V V N 2S V V* V V 17 w w I V% *t v w T V w v .y 20 V 17 w W p V V* p T to S 0 T_ 1972 1973 1974 1975 19'76 1977 9713 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR V 7 130TTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA 40 - STATION 01C 35 - 30 - v v L 25 - 17 77 v N v w I v T V7 *7 7 7 Y 20 w 7 *V *v VV* vv p p T *V S 0 w _7 1972 t9*73 19?4 19?5 MS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 SURFACE YEAR 130TTOM LONG-TERM PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA STATION DIX 40 3S - S 30 - L 17 I 2S - w w V* N T Y 20 - v v p Is - p 10 - 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 19?9 1980 1981 1992 *SURFACE YEAR BOTTOM Figure 20: Salinity (surface and bottom; 0/00) at various stations in the Apalachicola estuary from March, 1972 through June, 1983. Data have been averaged by season as described above. STATION I SEASONAL AVERAGES SURFACE 30 BOTTOM 25 S L 20 % N T Y to 0 -T-j 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1920 1981 1982-1983 YEAR STATION 2 3S - SEASONAL AVERAGES SURFACt 30 - BOTTOM 2S - S R L 20 - I N I T is Y to 0 7 1972 19*73 1974 1975 19?6 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1383 STATION 3 35 - SEASONHL AVERAGES SURFACE 30 - BOTTOM p 2S - s L 20 - N T Is y to 0 19?2 19?3 1974 1976 19?6 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR STATION 5 SEASONAL AVERAGES 3s - SURFACE 30 - - ----- BOTTOM 2S - 9 L 20 - N is .T Y 0 --- 7-T 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR STATION IA 35 - SEnSONAL RVERAGES 30 - "A. S A L 20 N T is Y 10 SURFACE 5 BOTTOM 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1378 1979 1980 1381 1982 1983 YEAR STATION IB 3s SERSONAL AVERAGES 30 25 S L 20 N T is y to SURFACE s BOTTOM 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 19?8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR STATION IC 35 SERSONAL RVERRGES 3.0 2S s L 20 N T ItI Y tURFACE BOTTOM 0 1972 1973 19?q 197S 1976 197-7 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR STATION IX 3S - SEASONAL AVERAGES 3o - 25 s L 20 N T Is Y 10 SURFACE BOTTOM 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 21: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station I and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION I SURFACE Soo 197S Color Pt-Co 1976 1977 400 1978 300 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 40 STATION I SURFACE 1 97S Temperature 0 C 200 3S 1976 1978 30 too %%% 2S .e ar JAN FES MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL RUG S@P OCT NOV DEC % Is %N MONTH FROM 0101 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS W I Go STATION I SURFACE 5 Turbidity JTU 77 .0 so --- 1378 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 .%% SHORT-rERK ORECCE EFFECrS STATION I SU014CE 20 4D Salinity ppt 37S 976 3S ........ A 30 JAN FES MfIAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT N;V DEC MONTH - rpa" cioi 2S SHORr-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION I SURFACE 20 114 Dissolved 0 ......... 2 ppm 10 12 10 ...... % s *...... \ *.%* 11A %1. 10 0 JAN FEB MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 8 MONTH - FROM 0101 I......... 97S 197G 1977 1979 4 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 22: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at.station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station I and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. SHORT-TERM ORECCE EFFECTS Sao STATION I 8OTTOM 1975 Color Pt-Co 1976 1977 400 1978 300 SHORT-TERM PREDSC EFFEC7S STAtION I 6UTTOM 40 I97S Temperature 0 C 200 3S 197S 1977 30 too 2S 20 JAN FEB MAR AFR MAY jLN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Is MONTH - FROM 0101 SHORT-TERM DRE0f;L L, _LTS 10 so STATION I BOTTOM A Turbidity JTU S 'tk;- 1377 40 1978 0 JAN FEB MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 30 Iti V 20 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 40 STATION I ezrTOM to 7S Salinity ppt .... ........... 3S 19976 1977 0 19713 MAR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 30 JAN FEB APR MONTH FPCI 0101 2S iA IN T! r"! trvICIS STATIUN I iW110M 20 14 Dissolved 0 ppm ts 2 lot 12 S to OCT DEC ;N FiS MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP NOV MONTH - FROM 0101 I - 197S 6 1976 1977 .......... 1578 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 23: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness@ diversityq and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station I and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TERM CREGGE EFFECTS STATION I - FISH 1.7S 11976 1977 % I.S 11378 1.2S .% NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL ........ . SHORT-TERM DREOGE EFFECTS A STATION I FISH Sao 197S 0.75 1576 1977 400 0.25 300 0 IIt JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 % UMBERT' SHORT-TERM OREOGIE EFFECTS STATION I FISH too 1.2 97S 1977 1978 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT N;V DEC 0.8 MONTH FROM 0101 4 0.4 NRR OF SPECIES SHORT-TERM OREDGE EFFECTS 0.2 V STATION I FISH 2S IS7S 0 1976 1977 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL A',jG SEP OCT NOV OEC 20 1978 RRILLOIJIN EVEN MOWH - FROM 0101 SHORT-rFRM ORLOGE EFFECTS Is SIRILON I FISH 1.2 1976 to 1578 0.9 0.6 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC - FROM 0101 MONTH 0.2 0 1 1__rj JAN FEB M;R R;R MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 24: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversityq and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. NBR OF INDIVI'DuALs PER TRAWL BRILLOUIN DIV Ski.!R I -IL R, IJKL dGL '. ; f f 15 SHORT-TERM CREDGE EFFECTS STRIW3 I - INVLP(b STATION I INVERtS 0 2 1 57S 97S 1926 1 .7S' 13,76 1941 1377 400 378 I.S 300 t.2S . 1.% .4, I 200 0.75 o.S Ica 0.2S a F.- 0 JAN FES MAR APR M@Y JUN JL A@G S@P O@T N@Y DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MBNTH - FROM 01CL MONTH - FROM 0101 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL RURLBERT SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS AHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION I INVERTS STATION I INVERTS -100 197S 197S 1976 1976 1977 9-7-7 so IS78 1978 0.8 so 0.6 A'@ 40 20 0.2 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG S@P OCT N;V DEC JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC MONTH - FROM nini MONTH - FROM clot NBR OF SPECIES BRILLOUIN EVEN SHOR' lfN4 11NI.tilif IfFICIS SHORT-TERM ORS00C EFFECTS 5if"104 I LN'vi.NTS STATION I ENVERTS 19 75 1.2 197S IS-16 15-76 19-2 7 1377 ...........% 'jF O.G "t %%% 2 211 0.2 0 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DFC MMMT. - @00. nlAl "dW T. . I Lill" n I (I I Figure 25: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 1 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL S) vtof o !,m ol:! :,:,! @ i i ! C?S SH6Rt-I`ERM CREOGE EFFECTS 5 1 fl It 'I N Iit 101i!*0--k @i .11%161t; RUG Sao goo STATION I ANCHOR MITCHILLI 1915 lq-?6 - 1515 11177 *,:"*19,16 400 Isis 197, 400 1378 300 300 200 200 100 1 0 JAN FED MAR APR MfiY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 MONTH - FPOM 0101 NBR bF INDIVIDUALS PER TRA14L NRR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS SHORt-rE:RM 01flXE tFFECTS too STATiION I LEIZSIOMUS XANTHURUS too s7A twN I w4own MEILHtLLI 1 75 1SIS 976 is 1976 So 1977 1977 1879 so 1878 so so 40 40 x 20 20 r 'T JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 MONTH - FROM 0101 NRR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION I CALLINECTES SRPEOUS stirteN I PENAEUS SETIFERUS too too 97S 97S 1976 1576 so 191 so 1977 1978 1970 so so 40 40 20 20 %% ........ .. r JAN FER "na APR P10Y JUN JOL PUG SEP OCT NOV DEC AN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Comm mini Figure 26: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS Soo STATION 2 SURFACE 1975 Color Pt-Co 1977 1+00 1978 300 SI IOR I - It W1 ORI 11'-i 0FIVIS sm wN 2 SLINI 'ILL 1 7 200 3S 19976, Te4erature Oc 1977 30 IS78 too 25 20 0 JAN FES MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 10 STATION 2 - SURFACE too 197S Turbidity JTU 197S 1977 so 80 1978 JAN FES MAR APR -MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NeV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 so SHORT-TER" DREDGE EFFECTS 40 97S STATION 2 - SURFACE Salinity ppt 20 3S 11976 78 20 Is 0 2S JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 20 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION'2 SURFACE Is 14 Dissolved 0 2 ppm 12 to-. 7-77@7 ....... J@N F@Q MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AU3 SEP OCT NOV DEC % MONtM FROM 0101 0 ------- .7 o-A -Is 199 76 1977 ........... Z: 1978 f I I I J;N FEB MRR RPR MAY AN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 -Figure 27: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. SHORT-TERM OREOGE F@:FECTS Soo STATION 2 - WTOM SIS Color Pt-Co 1197S 1977 400 1376 SHORt-TIRm mitiq FrFcc?s 300 4D smrION UJITOM 197S Temperature OC 3S 1976 200 1971 30 --- 19713 2S too 20 ------------ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 0 SI:J. EFFECTS S 7 too 197S STATION 2 - BOTTOM L= 1976 Turbidity iTu 1977 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC so 1978 MBNTH - FROM 0101 61) SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 40 197S STATION 2 BOTTOM Salinity ppt 40 3S 1977 1978 20 14 11 --- 30 t 25 0 20 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC I., . ...... MONTH - FROM 0101 %%% SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 2 BOTTOM to % %% 14 197S Dissolved 0 ppla 1976 2 78 12 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV CEC MONTH FROM 0101 to .14@ 0 ................ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 ft Figure 28: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and. evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SMORT-tERM DREDGE EFFECTS 2 STATION 2 - FISH t.IS 11976 IS77 1978 I.S NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL I .2S 1A It WM U@L,o- t rC IS Simi ION 1000 97S 'r 1916 0.7S .A,. 11317 --- 1578 O.S Soo 0.2S 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 400 MONTH - FROM 0101 HURLBERT SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 200 % STATION 2 FISH 116 1.2 A, 197S 1976 1977 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 0.8 ..",%1% 0.6 NBR OF SPECIES SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 2 FISH 2S 0.2 L 197S 1976 1977 16" 20 1978 a JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Is BRILLOUIN EVEN MONTH - FROM 0101 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS % STATION 2 FISH % 1.2 %% IS?S 2%. 1577 5 Z.0 1978 % %% MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC t '0/ JAN FEB MONTH FROM 0101 0.6 T. 0.2 0 T JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 29: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 2 STATION 2 - I NVERTS 1.7S 975 11376 78 1.5 NBR OFINDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL StIORr-rirm m?cn:,.i (@-t cis 1.25 Soo 2 INVLRI@ S?S LIQ it 400 0.7S 300 0.25 0 200 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL PUG SEP OCT NOV D@C MONTH - FROM 0101 HUMBERT 100 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 2 INVERrs 1.2 --------- - IS?S 197S JAN FES MAR APR *MAY 1977 JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1979 MONTH FROM 0101 0.8 A % NBR OF SPECIES SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STRTIOm 2 INVERTS 10 0.4 1376 1971 0.2 0 IS78 'A 1\ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 0101 BRILLOUIN EVEN SHORT-TERM OREOGE EFFECTS 1.% STATION 2 INVERTS x ........ 1.2 137S 2 A -:-- I 1376 977 --- 1978 0 0.8 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH FROM 010t 0.6 0.4 ............ 11-@'@ 0.2 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT N@V D@c MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 30: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthi c inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 2 from 1975' through 1978. Dredge events near station 2 and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRA14L NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-rERM CREOCr EFCECTS SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS Soo STATION 2 LEIOSTCMUS ARNTHURUS Soo STATION 2 ANCMOq MITC41LLI 197S IS?S IS76 11976 1377 977 400 --- 1978 400 1878 300 300 200 200 too too x 0 JAN FES MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR M@Y JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 MONTH - FROM 0101 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL . SHORT-TERM OREUu@ EFFECTS SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS too STATION 2 CALLINECTES SaPIOUS Soo STATION 2 PENAEUS 5; ETI;FERUS 1975 197S 1976 1976 1977 1977 so IS78 400 IS78 so 300 410 200 20 Ica 0 JAN' FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV GEC JAN 49 MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 31: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Color Ft-Co SHORT-TERM OREOGE EFFECTS too STATION IR SURFACE 1997S 1 76 00 1577 1978 0 so Temperature C 'siiqRy-rFi?4 40 SIHTIUN W tXk,HCE 40 N 197S 35 1576 971 978 20 30 25 20 % JAN FES MAR RPR M@Y J N JUL RUG SEP OCT N V 0 C MONTH - FROM 0101 is Turbidity JTU iNORT-TERM QRE00E EFFECTS STATION IS SURFACE I97S 1976 1377 0 40 --- 1378 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH - FROM 0101 30 Salinity ppt SHORT-TERM OREGGE EFFECTS 20 0.""o 40 STATION IA SURFACE SIS 10 315 IIS76 ............. 1971 A --- 1378 30 ............... 2S A. JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH - FROM 0101 20 Dissolved 02 PPM . ...... -TERM X, SHORT OREDGE EFFECTS STATION IA SURFACE ID . ..... S t2 JAN FE8 MAR APR MPY JUN JUL AuG SEP OCT NOV GEC to MONTH FROM 0101 0 I S .............. 139776 -1977 Isla JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL nUG SEP OCT NOV QEC Figure 32: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Color Pt-Co Sli@,.. - ik1%.1 Ukt USE EFFEC IS 100 STAriaN 1A BOTTOM 197S 11976 977 1978 Temperature 0C 40 11 'It It SHOR I TERM 1?N(Jrr, rFfECTS 40 SIA11j" to U.11rum I%% 20 %tI 1575 %% 1976 1976 30 0 JAN F@8 MAR A;R MAY J@N JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC 2S MONTH - FROM 0101 20 Turbidity JTU SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS is so STATION 1A BOTTOM IQ 1975 IS77 10 IS78 1% It 30 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Vt It 20 ,itt Salinity ppt SHORT-TERS DREDGE EFFECTS iIf %. ..... STATION In - BOTTOM 40 to Isis 35, 1977 .............. 30 A JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC FROM 0101 25 MONTH ov, Dissolved 0 ppm 2s 20 111@.,T-TEAM DREDGE EFFECTS ItI STATION 1A - BOTTOM 14 is to 12 S 0 MnR APR mny JUN JUL AUG SED OCT Nay 06 JAN FES FP.1M @111 a . .......... . . ""57 "37 B*, IV S7S a IIS76 1977 1978 4 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG S;P OCT NOV DEC Figure 33: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TTT. E ErrECTS STATION im - FESH 1.7S '237S I.S NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRA14L 1.25 SHORT-YER" UNICGE EFFFCrS STATION 1A FISH IN Soo 197S It 1976. 0.7S 977 100 --- 1578 ,------ O'S k% 300 O.2S Iti 111 % I 1% 11 200 JAN FED rAR, APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC M014TH - FROM 0101 IGO IA " HURIZERT SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS I % STATION IR - FISH 1977 JAN F69 MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1978 jI A, .......... MONTH FROM 0101 ,I 0.0 % ".. *.' 0.9 ....... 1,% NBR OF SPECIES SHORT -TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 0.2 STATION iR FISH 2S 137S 0 I 97S 1977 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 20 1978 MONTH FROM 010t BRILLOUIN EVEN is STATION IR FISH 1.2 197S 10 ......... ..... 137S It 1977 .......... 0.8 ir t, ........... % 0 0.6 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 It D.4 It It I%\ "IIt 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP ecr NOV DEC MONTH - FROM Mini Figure 34: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. RRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TERM CREOGE EFFECTS 2 STATION IR INVERTS 197S 1.7S 1976 978 1.5 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-TERM VNI Off CFFFCt:l 1.25 SInTION IH LNVLRrS 19 7S 7S so 0.75 078 so O.S 0.2S It _j JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL R@G SEP OCT NOY DEC I A.I MONTH - FROM 0101 HURLBERT 20 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION IR INVERTS 1.2 197S 1.97ra JAN FEB PAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1977 MONTH FROM 0101 A 0.8 ...........I It NBR OF SPECIES SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 0.4 STATION IS INVERTS to 197S 1976 0.2 It 1977 1976 It JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOY DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 BRILLOUIN EVEN 1. % SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS stRrION IA INVERTS 4 1.2 157S 2 1977 0 0.8 APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR MONTH FROM 0101 0.6 11 004 0.2 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT N9V DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 35: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 1A from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER 17AWL SIIOR 1 71 RM 010 11111 tj I ri'l @ 11 as 17 Is 1.9977 79 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION IA - CALLINECTES SAPIDUS so loo 1 $75 1976 1977 40 1It so --- 1379 20 A, V 40 Jl@ FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 NRR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL 20 SH?RT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STAT ON tfl ANCHOR MITCHILLI Soo 197S .0 to 76 JAIN FES MAR R@R MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT N;V DiC 400 99 US MONTH - FROM 0101 300 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHCRT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION IR PENAEUS SETIFERUS 200 1975 11976 so --- 1978 too JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 40 MONTH - FROM 010t NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL AMORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS ST TION IR ANCHOR MITCMtLLI 20 too ts7s 1976 1 1 " " 0 977 so 1978 JAN FES MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT N;V Dit MONTH - FROM 0101 40 Iti 111 14% JAN FEB MAR APR Mny JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MZNtH - F92M 0101 Figure 36: Surface physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS too STATION IS SURFACE Color Pt-Co 197S 1976 1977 so 1978 60 A sHorir-TURM 17IR[OnE EI'FVCIS Ito 40 S?S Temperature 0 C 'IV.: 35 1976 1977 1978 20 30 2S 20 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM CIt0I S SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS so STATION Le - SURFACE 197S Turbidity JTU 1976, 1977 S 40 1978 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 30 MONTH - FROM 0101 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS 20 1%@%,,, % STATION 18 - SLRFACE %%% % *10 to 975 Salinity ppt 3S !976 1577 1976 ........ :7 ......... 30 .:A 0 7 % JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG S;P OCT N;V DEC 2S MONTH - FROM 0101 20 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS % STATION IS - SURFACE is IN 14 Dissolved 0 2 ppm 12 S to JAN FEB MAR AIR K;Y JLN JUL 4UG S;P OCT NOV CEC MONTH FROM 0101 9 IS75 . . . . ........ 6 1976 1977 1570 __T_ T I JAN FEB MAR APR NRY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM a101 Figure 37: Bottom physical-chemical factors taken monthly at station IB from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. Color Pt-Co SHORT-TERM 0-',ECCE EFFECTS 100 STATION Is - BOTTOM 119977ss IS77 1978 0 so -Temperature C S1161RT -t[R114 OREOrT E, Icy I; suirioN it) 40 ?S 3S 197i Is 30 20 2S % 20 JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY GEC MONTH - FROM 0101 is Turbidity JTU SHORT-TERm DREOGE EFFECTS to STATION IS BOTTOM so 75 19978 1977 '40 --- 1978 .10 11AIt JAN FES MAR RPR- MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV CIEC MONTH - FROM 0101 A % 20 Sal-Itnity ppt SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFCECTS %% STATION iB - BOTTOM 40 to 3S ...... 44 .................. 30 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC 2S MONTH - FROM 0101 20 Dissolved 0 2 ppm SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 18 - BOTTOM 10 1977 12 S 1978 0 ' I I I to JAN FEB MAR APR mny JUN JI1L AlUri SEP OCT NOY DEC \%. MONTH F9JM 0101 ..... ......4.......... 1976 ........... 1378 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MANT1.1 - PRMH nint Figure 38: Fishes (numerical abundance, species richness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station A and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TERM DREDGE ECFECTS 2 STATION IS FISH 1.7S ...,%% 1.2S NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SUL.. L; * "IS LSH S F L4 A k 197S t976 0.7S 800 119977 78 D.S 1976 0.2S 1977 600 L978 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MOY JUN jL RUG SEP OCT P40V DEC 4100 MWA - FPOM alai HURLBERT SHORT-TEm 200 %% STRI'lliN"14 FISH \% 1.2 % JAN FEB M@R APR M;Y JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 0.6 NBR OF SPECIES SH.'RT-TER:-[ DREDGE EF:E:TS STATION tB FISH 2S 197S 197S 11976 0.2 11976 977 20 1978 %%%___,1 1978 a i , ___r I , JAN FEB MAR APR M Y JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV GEC Is MONTH FROM 0101 BRILLOUIN EVEN %% SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS N 18 - FISH 10 STATIO 1.2 19?5 % --- 1976 lk. .......... j. ... .......... 0.8 Y r-j lk JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC MONTH FROM 0101 0.6 0.4 0.2 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MANTW - FROM n1nl Figure 39: Epibenthic invertebrates (numerical abundance, species rich- ness, diversity, and evenness) taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. BRILLOUIN DIV SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 10 - INVERTS 1.75 197 .7 1978 NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAITL 1.2S S11;!RT-tFr4 [Nr@' '71. rif(CIS too STRrioN III LNVLNfS 97S 0.7S 't 1979 O.S A A 0.25 'D* 0 JAN FES MAR APR MAY -JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOY DEC 40 MONTH - FROM 0101 HURLBERT -TERM OREDGE EFFFCTS WWI 20 STATION 18 INVERTS P, 1.2 197S 11976 0 --- 1978 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY" JUN JUL AUG SEP 0 T NOV DEC MONTH - FROM Dial N. 0.6 NBR OF SPECIES SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION 18 - INVERTS 10 0.4 *j 197S 1976 0.2 %%% IS77 1978 0t JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV, DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 BRILLOUIN EVEN 4 fI ....... 11 SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS STATION iS INVERTS . .......... 1.2 2 ....... -------------- 0 JAN FES MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 0.4 0.2 19 IS .7 V JAN FES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 40: Numerical abundance of dominant fish and epibenthic inver- tebrate populations taken monthly by trawls at station 1B from 1975 through 1978. Dredge events near station 1B and wind (storm) conditions are also shown. NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAWL SHORT-TERM GRSOGE EFFECTS SHORT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS Soo STATICH 18 LEIJSTOMUS XR-47HURUS too STArZON IS CALLINECTES SAPICUS 197S Isis 1976 400 9977 1971 78 so --- 1978 300 so 200 40 too 20 0 -T--- JAN FEB MAR RPR MAY JUN JUL RUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM 0101 MONTH - FROM Olot NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TR,94L NBR OF INDIVIDUALS PER TRAIM SHTRT-TERM DREDGE EFFECTS SHORT-TERM ORFOGE EFFECTS STRT ON IS - ANCHOR MITCHILLI STATION IS - PE-NIIEUS SETIFLRUS too too 1975 975 19,16 ..... 1197G 1977 19-17 so 1378 So --- 1378 so Go 40 40 20 %% 20 % /A % %% %% 'P 0 1 t JAN FEB MAR APR PAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH - FROM oiai MONTH - FROM 0101 Figure 41: Long-term variation of salinity (bottom, ppt) at various sta- tions in the Apalachicola estuary (June, 1972, to Mayy 1977). 30 w 5 4A 5A 55 z 2 C, 30 10 fUtA IE 1C M&H3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 TIME IN MONTHS 6/72-5/77 q5Ak sm *a .00 an =,v ma vo Pw Figure 42t Cluster analysis of years by species of fishes at West Past (10 and Sike's Cut 0B) in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1982. STATION IA FISHP YEARS BY SPECIES (LOG NO. IND.)v BRAY-CURTIS CLUSTERING STRATEGY 15 FLEXIBLE GROUPING (WITH BETA) SZMZLARITY COEFFICIENT 16 CZEKANOWSKI CLUSTER GROUP WITH (WHERE GROUP NAME NOW REFERS TO A CLUSTER LEVEL JOINS NAME SUBGROUP CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING CLUSTER UNITS) .7902 7/77-6/78 7/78-6/79 7/77-6/70 7/78-6/79 .7526 7/75-6/76 7/80-6/61 7/75-6/76 7/80-6/81 .7337 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/80-6/01 .7145 7/72-6/73 7/74-6/75 7/72-6/73 7/74-6/75 .7066 7/77-6/78 7/81-6/82 7/77-6/78 7/78-6/79 7/81-6/82 .6590 7/73-6/74 7/79-6/80 7/73-6/74 7/79-6/80 .6223 7/72-6/73 7/75-6/76 7/72-6/73 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/00-6/81 .5868 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/79-6/80 7/80-6/81 .5447 7/72-6/73 7/77-6/78 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/77-6/78 7/78-6/79 7/79-6/80 7/80-6/81 7/61-6/82 (ALL ONE GROUP) STATION 1A FISH# YEARS BY SPECIES (LOU NO. INP.)v BRAY-CURTIS DENDROGRAK OUTPUT MINIMUM DISTANCE .5447 1.0 .9 .8 .7 .6 .5 *4 03 .2 .1 -.0 7/72-6/73 --------------------------- 7/74-6/75 ------------------------------ 7/75-6/76 -------------------------- 7/80-6/81 -------------------------- ---------- 7/76-6/77 ---------------------------- 7/73-6/74 ----------------------------------- 7/79-6/80 ----------------------------------- S 7/77-6/78 ---------------------- 7/78-6/79 ---------------------- ---------------- 7/81-6/82 ------------------------------ STntION IBP YEARS BY SPECIES (LOU NO. IND.)r BRAY-CURTIS CLUSTERING STRATEGY IS FLEXIBLE GROUPING (WITH BETA) SIMILARITY COEFFICIENT IS CZEKANOWSKI CLUSTER GROUP WIT14 (WHERE GROUP NAME NOW REFERS TO A CLUSTER LEVEL JOINS NAME SUBGROUP CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING CLUSTER UNITS) .7111 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 .7033 7/76-6/77 7/80-6/81 7/76-6/77 7/60-6/81 ..6642 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 .6634 7/77-6/78 7/70-6/79 7/77-6/78 7/78-6/79 .6518 7/79-6/60 7/81-6/82 7/79-6/80 7/81-6/82 .6448 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 .6288 7/76-6/77 7/77-6/78 7/76-6/77 7/77-6/78 7/76-6/79 7/80-6/81 .5324 7/72-6/73 7/76-6/77 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 V77-6/78 7/78-6/79 7/80-6/01 .4996 7/72-6/73 7/79-6/80 7/72-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-6/77 7/77-6/78 7/70-6/79 7/79-6/80 7/80-6/81 7/61-6/62 (ALL ONE GROUP) STATION IBP YEARS BY SPECIES (LOG NO. IND.)t BRAY-CURTIS DENDROGRAh OUTPUT MINIMUM DISTANCE .49U6 1.0 .9 .8 .7 .6 95 .4 .3 .2 .1 -.0 7/72-6/73 ------------------------------------- I---------- 7/73-6/74 ----------------------------------- 7/74-6/75 ------------------------------ I I 1 7/75@6/76 ------------------------------ I__* 1 1 7/76-6/77 ------------------------------- I I I I 7/00-6/81 ------------------------------- I I I I 7/77@6/78 ----------------------------------- I I I__* I 7/78-6/79 ----------------------------------- 7/79-6/00 ------------------------------------ S I -------------- 7/61-6/82 ------------------------------------ Figure 43: Plots of fish and invertebrate indices at stations 1A and 1B before (1975-77) and after (1979-81) the cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in the Apalachicola estuary in 1978. 30- 1B 2G 31 Sts &AS 1113 As 1 2 X 41 its 24 u 3G ILIJ U .3 CX. Uj tn 0 124 SC3 :, Xt, Ci 23 1:4 34 A3 JAI 2 J34 z z 4 ** 1 4 AA :1 3 IX2 3:4 363 *1 10, ?A .0 44 US 2 34 A;, I% tAs .43 3 1B ;S 39@.*3A*3 5@ *3 20- 513 3 1% 11.1 1A 5:3 5:4 4*2 24 SA4 32 3:1 IAI 4 113 35 1A to 1.'s io 1:5 2:0 SPECIES DIVERSITY- H SPECIES DIVERSITY- H INVERTEBRATES* BYYEAR FISHESBYYEAR FIGURE 43A. Diversity-richness relationships of epibenthic FIGURE 43B. Diversity-richness relationships of epibenthic fishes taken monthly at permanent stations in the Apalachicol@3 Invertebrates taken monthly at permanent stations in the estuary. Indices (number of species, Brillouin Diversity NJ 12 4 Apalachicola estuary. indices (number of species, Brillouin Zndex) were computed from annual total numbers of individuals Diversity Index) were computed from annual total numbers of at each station from year I to year 5. Results at st .ation IB Individuals at each station from year I to year 5. Results f5i*e's Cut) have been highlighted by dashed lines. at station IB (sike's Cut) have been highlighted by dashed lines. Figure 44: Analysis of salinity (ppt) at stations 1A and 1B and dredging events (cubic yards at Sike's Cut) from 1971 through 1983. 40 STATION Ifl S 30 :J L 2S N T Y 20 is p- p T 10 s 0 1973 1974 1975 13'76 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 STATION 1B 40 3S S 30 L 2S N T Y 20 is p p T 10 SURFACE ----- BOTTOM S 0 19?2 1973 19?4 1975 19?6 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 100 - C so - Y S 0 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 19BI 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL VOLUME OF SEDIMENT DISPOSED (BY MONTH) C1r rc*rAnr@r ?L11 MI., n@ ------ ----- Figure 45: Numbers of epibenthic, fishes taken per trawl tow at stations 1, 21 31 1A, 1B9 and IX in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. TOTAL NUMBERS OF TRAWLABLE FISH N Soo STATION I R 0 F 400 N v 300 0 U R L S 200 C PR T 100 R A W L 0 19?2 19?3 19?4 1975 1976 197? 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL NUMBERS OF TRAWLABLE FISH N Soo - STATION 2 8 R 0 F 400 - N D I v 300 I 0 U A L S 200 P E R T 100 R W L 0 IMP 1972 1973 1374 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1383 TOTAL NUMBERS OF TRAWLABLE FISH STATION 3 N Goo 8 R F 400 I N D 300 0 u A L s 200 - p E 100 - T R A w L 0 @j A 19?2 19?3 19?4 19?5 19?6 1977 19?8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL NUMBE,r-@ 1-77 7R,:@WLAKE FISH N Soo SfnT"Ir4N' 18 B R 0 F 400 I N 0 I 300 D u A L s 200 p E R T 100 R A w L 1972 19'73 t974 197S 1976 1977 1976 1979 t98O 1981 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL NUMBERS OF TRAWLABLE FISH N goo STATION 18 8 R F 400 N 0 v 300 u R L s 200 p E too T R A w L 0 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1917 t978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR NUMucmzj OF TR8WLRBLE FISH STATION IX N Soo - B R 0 F 400 - N 0 300 u L s 200 p E R T too R A w L 0 1972 19'73 1974 197S .1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 46: Numbers of spot (Leiostomus xanthurus) taken per trawl tow at stations 1A and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS STATION 1A N Soo 8 R F 400 N v 300 U L S 200 P E too T R A W L 0 T 19?2 19723 1974 197S 19')S 1977 t9?8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR LENSTOMUS XRNTHURUS STATION 1B N Soo - 8 R F 400 - N v 300 U A L S 200 - P E 100 - T@ R 0 1 Al 1972 19'73 1974 19?5 19"76 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 47: Total numbers of species and Brillouin species diversity for fishes taken at stations 1A and 1B, in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. TOTAL NUMBER OF FISH SPECIES STATION 18 20 17.S U E M R 12.S 0 F to S P E ?.S C I E 5 S 2.S 7- 1 19?2 1973 1974 1975 197G 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR BRILLOUIN OIVERSITY FOR FISH STATION IR 2.5 2 8 R I L L 0 U N D V o.S 0 T- I --T- 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1963 YEAR TOTAL NUMBER OF FISH SPECIES STATION 18 20 17.s N U is m B E R 12.5 0 F 10 s p E 7.S c I E S s ..2.5 0 -7--j 1972 1973 19?4 19?S 1976 19?7 19?8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR BRILLOUIN DIVERSITY FOR FISH 2.5 STATION 18 2 B R I L L l.s 0 u I N a I 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1381 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 48: Numbers of epibenthic invertebrates per trawl tow at stations 29 lAq and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. TOTRL NUMBER OF TRAWLABLE INVERTEBR9TES N STATION 2 B R 700 - 0 F Soo - N Soo D 400 U A L S 300 E 200 PR T R 100 W L 0 - A AAjAA, A 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 198 1 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATES N STATION IA 8 R 700 0 F 600 N 0 Soo v I 0 400 u L S 300 p E 200 R T R 100 w L 0 --T 1972 19173 1974 197S 19176 1977 19?8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATES STATION 18 N R 700 0 F Soo I N 0 Soo v I 0 400 u R L 300 p E 200 R T R 100 w L 0 A- A,@,A, 1% 1372 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 197.9 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 49: Numbers of white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus) taken per trawl tow at stations 2, 1A, and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. PENAEUS SETIFERUS N 700 - STATION 2 R 0 Soo - F I N Soo - v 1 400 - 0 U A L 300 - S P E 200 - R T R 100 - A W L 0 1972 1973 1974 19?5 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR PENAEUS SETIFERUS N 700 - STATION 1A 8 R Soo - F N Soo 0 v 1 400 0 u A L 300 S p E 200 R T R loo A w L A 7- IS72 19'73 1974 197S 1976 19?? 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR PENAEUS SETIFERUS N 700 - STATION 18 B R 0 600 - F N Soo - 0 1 v 1 400 - a .. u L 300 S p E 200 R T R 100 w L 0 A - 7-j 1972 1973 1974 197G 197G 1977 M8 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 50: Numbers of blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus taken per trawl tow at stations 19 29 1A, and IB in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. CHLLINECTES SRPIDUS N STATION I R 70 0 F so I N 0 so I v I D 40 U A L S 30 P 9 20 R T R to A W L 0 19 72 1973 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77'19 78 1979 1980 1981 19 82 19 83 YEAR CRLLINECTES SAPIDUS N STATION 2 8 R 70 - 0 F 60 - N so - v 0 40 - U L S 30 - P E 20 - R T R 10 - A W L 0 _UA 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR CRLLINECTES SAPIOUS N STATION IR R 70 - a F so - I N 0 so - I v I 0 40 - u A L s 30 - p E 20 - R T R 10 - A w L 0 A -A A A A- A 1972 191'73 19174 1917S 19176 1977' 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR CRLLINECTES SAPIOUS N STATION 1B 8 R 70 - 0 F so - N so - v I 0 40 - u A L s 30 - p E R 20 - T R 10 A. w L 0 A A- AA AT 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 L978 1979 1880 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 51: Numbers of pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) taken per trawl tow at stations 1, 21 1A, and IB in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. PENAEUS DUORARUM STATION I N R 70 F I N 0 so I v I a 40 U A L S 30 - P E 20 - R T R to - R W L 0 A A AA -- JA I I r - - I I 1--- 1 1372 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979@1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR PENHEUS DUORARUM STATION 2 N R 70 - 0 F so - I N 0 so I 40 U R L S 30 - P E 20 - R T R to - R W L 0 - A A A 1972 19?3 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 VPAP PENAEUS DUORRRUM STATION IR R 70 0 F 60 N 0 so - v 40 - u L s 30 - p E 20 R T R 10 A w L Al T 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR PENAEUS DUORPRUM STATION IB N 8 R 70 - 0 F 60 - N 0 so - v 0 40 - u L s 30 - p E 20 - R T R 10 w L 0 AA &T -A --pA -A 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 19?9 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 52: Numbers of brief squid (@qlliguykqula brevis) taken per trawl tow at stations 1A and IB in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. LOLLIGUNCULA BREVIS N STATION IR 8 R 70 F so I N 0 so I v I D 40 U A L S 30 P E 20 R T R to A W L 0 r--- 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR LOLLIGUNCULA BREVIS STHTION 18 N 8 R 70 - a F 60 - I N 0 so - 0 40 - U A L S 30 - P E 20 - R T R 10 - A W L 0 1 A A, 4,-'\ AA A^"/\ U- I I I I t - 7-j 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 t983 YEAR Figure 53: Total number of invertebrate species and invertebrate species diversity at stations 1A and 1B in the Apalachicola estuary from 1972 through 1983. TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATE SPECIES STATION 1A 17.S - N U M is - E R 12.5 - 0 F 10 - S P E 7.5 - C I E 5 S 2.S 0 1972 1973 1974 .1975 1976 1977 1979 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR BRILLOUIN OIVERSITY FOR TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATES STATION 1A 2.5 2 B R L L I.S 0 U N V 0.5 1972 1973 1374 1975 1976 1377 1978 1979 1980 1981 19B2 1983 wr-nn TOTAL NUMBER OF TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATE SPECIES 20 - STATION IS 17.5 - N u Is m E R 12.5 F to S p E 7-s c I E s 2.S 0 1972 1973 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR BRILLOUIN OIVERSITY FOR TRAWLABLE INVERTEBRATES 2.S STATION IB B 2 R L L l.s 0 u N 0 v 0 1972 t9?3 1974 197S 1976 1977 1978 1979 .1980 1981 1982 1983 YEAR Figure 54: Analyses of fish and invertebrate data at stations 1A and 1B three years before and three years after cessation of dredging at Sike's Cut in 1978. FISH DATA A=STATION 1A BBSTATION 1B TOTNiND 300+ 20*+ 10*; 0* - --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76*5 78.0 79*5 81.0 82*5 NSPECIES 800+ 6*0+ 4*0+ A>X 2*0 - --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76*5 78*0 79#5 8100 82*5 BRIL DIV 1,20+ A 0 80+ * 40+ 0000+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75.0 76.5 78#0 79*5 81#0 82*5 HUMBERT 080+ 060+ *40+ 620+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75.0 76#5 713#0 7915 81#0 82,5 BRIL EVN *80+ 060+ *40+ 4 *20+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75#0 76#5 78*0 79*5 silo 82.5 LEIXAN 30*+ 20*+ 100+ 00+ ------------------------------------- YEAR 75.0 76.5 78*0 79:5 8+100 82*5 ANCMIT 1500+ 1000+ 500+ 0*0+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 7590 76*5 7890 79.5 .81.0 82*5 MICUND 900+ 600+ 300+ 0.0+ ---------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75.0 76*5 78.0 79*5 81.0 82*5 BREiAT 2480+ 1*20+ *60+ 0400+ a ------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 7645 78.0 79,5 silo 82*5 CYNARE 600+ 4*0+ 2.0+ A 000+ ----------------------------------------- ---------- YEAR 75*0 76*5 78*0 79*5 alto. 82#5 @ZA INVERTEBRATE DATA A = STATION 1A - D = STATION 1B - TOTNIND 1590+ 1040+ 5*0+ 0.0 - --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76,5 78*0 7945 Silo 82*5 NSPECIES 6*0+ 495+ 340+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76*5 78*0 79s5 silo 82*5 RRIL DIV ls20+ 080+ t40+ 0*00+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76*5' 78.0 79.5 also 82e5 HUMBERT *90+ $65+ *40+ A --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 7500 76*5 78*0 79.5 silo 82*5 BRIL EVN *90+ .60+ 030+ 0400 - ---------------------------------------------------- YEAR 7590 76*5 78*0 79*5 81*0 82*5 CALSAP 1,50+ 1.00+ .050+ 0,00+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75*0 76#5 78*0 79*5 81*0 82*5 PENAZT 1050+ 1000+ 050+ 0.00+ --------------------------- ---------- YEAR 75*0 76.5 78*0 79o5 alto 82.5 PENSET 1*50+ 1*00+ 050+ 0100+ --------------------------------------------------- YEAR 75#0 76*5 78*0 79*5 alto 82*5 PENDUO -,75+ -050+ *25+ 0.00+ ------- i@ -------- I----------- YEAR 75oO 764.5 78*0 79o5 81.*0 82*5 LOLBRE 4*5+ -300+ 1-* 5+ 000+ ------------ YEAR 75*0 76*5 78#0 1 132.5- PALPUG 6150+ loo@ .0504 00000+ ------ ------------------------------------- YEAR 75.0_ 76*5 78,0 79*5 also 82*5 Appendix A: Synopsis of findings on the review of dredging and the proposed East Point Breakwater (Livingston, 1983a). Review and Analysis of the Environmental IMlications of the Proposed Development of the East Point Breakwater and Associated Dredging Operations.within the East Point Channel, (Apalachicola Bay System, Florida) Robert J. Livingston Professor, Department of Biological Science Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations 1. Because of the need (for funding purposes) for the breakwater project and the channel dredging project to be issued and evaluated as separate projects (U. S. Army Corps of Engineersp Mobile District), there was some confusion concerning whether or not the environmental impact analysis should be considered as one project. While it is true that the breakwater project does not depend on maintenance dredgiusp if the breakwater is established, such dredging will be needed and may be changed because of altered sedimentation rates and spoiling proce- dures and effects. Consequently, there is a functional association between the two projects and this evaluation was carried out under the assumption that the two projects are interrelated from the standpoint of environmental response. 2. No hard scientific data were available regarding the rate of sedimen- tation that would occur behind the breakwater; hencep while the estimates of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (i.e., 509000 cubic yards at 18-month intervals) were used for this review, such figures are tentative. The last time maintenance dredging was carried out in the East Point channel was 1978. 3. Construction of the breakwater and open water spoiling associated with the dredging of the East Point Channel will eliminate the immediate benthic (bottom) communities in areas of rock and spoil placement. Such effects will be mitigated to a certain (undetermined) degree by increased habitat diversity associated with the rock substrate and projected rapid recolonization of the spoil banks by organisms that are adapted to the natural variability of the highly turbid estuary. The relatively short life cycles of various benthic organisms in this area will add to the speed of recovery. 4. The construction of the breakwater should have negligible effects on the current structure and tidal circulation of St. George Sound and the salinity structure of the Apalachicola estuary. Construction of the breakwater (rock placement and small-scale spoiling) will have temporary, though negligiblev effects on water quality in the area. Such effects include short-term increases in turbidity and sedimentation in the immediate vicinity. Such construc- tion will probably exace*rbate, to some degree-V seasonal reductions of water quality (i.e., dissolved oxygen). However, such effects will be slight compared to the existing poor water quality conditions due to urban runoff (point and uon-point sources) from East Point, heavy boat usep and previous dredging and spoiling effects. 6. The dredging and spoiling activities associated with the East Point Channel maintenance should have a negligible influence on the current structure-and salinity regime of the estuary. 7. The dredged channel should act as a sink for nutrients and other pollutants from urban runoff from East Point and boat traffic in the area. Because of organic loading, the Biochemical Oxygen Demand in the channel, will probably be increased. Analyses in the East Point and Two-Mile channels show high concentrations of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus compounds), oils and greases, and toxic metals. Such substances are probably associated with the finer (i.e., silt) fractions of the sediments. 8. Elutriate tests that mimic the open water spoiling of dredged sedi- ments indicate that such spoiling will probably cause temporary increases in nutrient levels in the water. Elutriate studies at various dredged sites in the Apalachicola estuary also indicate that under conditions 'similar to open-water spoiling, the metal contami- uants will remain, prima ilyp with the sediments. Since iron is naturally high in estuaries and is known to have minimal toxic impact on estuarine biota, this metal should not be a cause of concern. The elutriate datat while not entirely conclusivey would indicate that water quality deterioration due to the release of metals at the spoil sites will be minimal. There is a possibility that sediment movement away from the spoil banks could lead to some movement of metals into local areas. 9.. Background information (including 11 years of field work in the Apalachicola Bay system) and detailed studies of water quality, sedi- ment composition, and benthic macroinvertebrates in St. George Sound (off East Point) were analyzed to determine existing environmental conditions in the study area. A direct relationship was noted between the degree of urban development, boat traffic and dredging activities, and the deterioration of the biological structure of associated bay areas. Such human activities were associated with the postulated destruction of near-shore grassbeds and the deterioration of the benthic macroinvertebrate community . There was a direct correlation of sediment quality (i.e. siltationg high nutrients, oils/grease, and metals) and adverse biological impact. Biotic recovery was noted in areas associated with the construction area of the proposed breakwater and spoil sites. 10. Dredged areas proximate to areas of urban runoff act as a sediment trap for silt, which is often associated with pollutants such as nutrientsp oils and greases, and metals. Such areas are largely devoid of macrobenthic organisms. Dredging and open water spoiling associated with the East Point project will have (smothering) effects at the immediate spoil sites and temporary increases of nutrients in the surrounding waters. Because of the existing deteriorated state of inshore areas of St. George Sound off East Point and the fact that there are no grassbeds or oyster bars in the immediate vicinity, adverse biological effects due to the combined projects should be minimal in areas inshore (north) of the breakwater. Adverse effects south of the breakwater should be largely confined to the local areas and should be subject to some form of recovery. 11. The determination of whether or not these projects should be carried out depends on a balan ced judgement of potential environmental impact versus community needs. It has been rightly pointed out that the Apalachicola estuary is a special area: Class II waters, an Aquatic Preserve and Special Waters, Outstanding Florida Waters, and a National Estuarine Sanctuary. For this reason, all dredging and spoiling in the area should be carefully evaluated. Upland spoiling, in environmentally appropriate areas, should be considered as a more preferable alternative to open-water spoiling. On the other side is the real need of protection that will be afforded a community that represents more than 1/3 of Florida's oyster industry. This need is a historic one, and the issue should be resolved immediately. 12. Based on the above considerations, I would recommend that a variance be issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation so that the East Point Breakwater can be constructed along with main- tenance of the East Point Channel* As part of this project, I would recommend the following stipulations: A. The search for an upland spoil site should be continued. Such an option remains preferable to open-water spoiling. B. The Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile District), the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, and the Franklin County Commission should initiate a program of study to evaluate the environmental effects of the East Point projectse Such a study could be carried out within the auspices of the Apalachicola River and Bay Estuarine Sanctuary,. Such a s-tudy would be most valuable in the evaluation of such dredging and spoiling activities throughout the bay system. In addition, should any adverse effects be noted, it would provide a stronger case for the upland spoil option. C. All construction activities, including the maintenance dredging and spoiling, should be carried out during winter-early spring months of naturally high turbidity, sedimentationg and dissolved oxygen, The above re commendations would thus allow the development of a needed facility for the people of East Point while minimizing the environmental impact and providing needed information for possible improvement of dredging activities in the estuary. 1. Review of Existing Data A. proposed Breakwater and Dredging operations A detailed description of the proposed breakwater project is given in the revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (U. S. Army Corps of Engineersp Mobile District; 1982) with further revisions as outlined in Appendix III. Briefly, the plan is to provide a sheltered harbor approxi- mately 500 ft offshore and parallel to East Point, Florida (Figure 1). This is to be accomplished by construction of a breakwater (Figure 2). The pro- posed structure would require the placement of about 18,500 cubic yards of bedding material and about 8,300 cubic yards of well graded cover stone in St. George Sound. Approximately 129000 cubic yards of sandy material dredged from the breakwater area would be placed south of the alignment. No flotation channel would be necessary (this concession was made by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to a request by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation). The proposed action would also require main- tenance dredging of approximately 5OpOOO cubic yards from the channel behind the proposed breakwater (Appendix III). It is estimated that such dredging would occur once every 18 months and spoils would be moved by a 'hydraulic pipeline and placed into open water sites adjacent to the channel (Figure 3). The disposal sites would be elevated above mean low water. An alternative plan is to use an upland disposal site (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1982; Appendix 1Iy Appendix III) for the dredge spoils from the East Point Channel. While it has been "noted that the plan for the break- water is not dependent upon maintenance dredging" (Appendix III), the obverse is probably true since maintenance dredging could be altered by the contruction of a breakwater. Further, the exact amount of spoil and timing 2 of the dredging operation remain unclear without exact data concerning sedimentation rates behind the breakwater. While these two projects have been separately presented, sedimentation rates (hence the necessity to dredge) and spoiling procedures (should the open water spoiling option be taken) would be dependent in various ways on the breakwater. This depen- deuce would mean that, in a functional sense, the breakwater and proposed channel dredging should be evaluated as a functional unit for any environ- mental evaluation. According to conversations with personnel from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Dru Barrineau, Doug Nestor, Mobile; personal communication, 1983), the breakwater operation and maintenance dredging come from two dif- ferent authorities; the breakwater is a new project while the dredging is part of an existing program. The East Point Channel was last dredged in 1978. Funding is thus from different sources and under different authori- ties for the two projects. The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation has chosen to tie the two projects together in terms of a water quality evaluation so that neither project, can be certified without the other. According to the DER (J. Craft; personal communication, 1983), the breakwater and spoiling from the dredged channel will both cause direct habitat destruction (which cannot be denied since subsrate will be lost as a result of such actions). Also, both actions will also cause degeneration of the water quality (J. Craft; personal communication, 1983); according to this line of reasoningt water quality will be affected behind the break- water (the marginal to bad water quality will be exacerbated by the breakwater) and in front of the breakwater as a direct effect of spoiling. The Army Corps of Engineers disagrees with this evaluation and consequently 3 has no problem with either action (Dru Barrineau, Doug Nestor, personal communication; U. S..A. C. 0. E.9 1982). Because of the confusing state of affairs generated by the differing points of view of the Corps and the DER, both aspects of the problem will be treated both separately and as a whole or uniform action in terms of evaluation of potential environmental effects. The environmental questions cannot be so easily separated because the impact of one project (dredging) depends on that of the other (the formation of the breakwater). Overally the enviror,=ental assessment will thus address both issues as they relate to possible habitat destruction and water quality changes in the Apalachicola system. B. Potential Phvsical/Chemical.Impacts 1. Breakwater Several factors should be considered in the construction of the break- water. These include modifications to existing current and salinity con- ditions and changes in habitat and water quality. a. Modification of current and salinity structure of the bay According to the Raney (2-dimensional) model (U. S. A. C. 0. E., 1982), which is based on a breakwater approximately 500' from shore, the breakwater should have a negligible effect on the overall tidal circulation in Apalachicola Bay. Any effects will probably be confined to the local area as delineated by a 2-mile radius from the East Point shoreline. According to model projectionsy the breakwater should produce a slight channelling effect with minor elevations of current velocities behind the breakwater. There is some controversy on this point, but the significance of this action on circulation remains minimal. 4 b. Modification of water quality behind the breakwattr- There is some reason to consider that the construction of the break- water will increase sedimentation behind the breakwater although there is no universal agreement on this issue (U. S. A. C. 0. E., 1982; J. Craft, Florida Department of Envi ronmental Regulation, personal communication). The likelihood is that water quality conditions (such as the dissolved oxy- gen and turbidity) of the water behind the breakwater will undergo a slight deterioration. This change would mean lower dissolved oxygen and higher turbidity* Such impacts would have to be evaluated within the context of the area in question (i*e*, there are already serious water quality problems in the area because of previous dredin.g and storm water runoff from East Point; see below). In this contexty it is doubtful that there would be a significant alteration of water quality behind the breakwater. c. Direct effects of rock Rlacement There is no doubt that the benthic (bottom) habitat will be destroyed by placement of the bedding material and stone on the sediments. Attendant water quality effects will probably result in localp temporary increases in turbidity and sedimentation. Such impacts will be minimal in terms of the overall turbidity levels of the area involvedg if this action is carried out during winter-spring periods of high natural turbidity, sedimentation and dissolved oxygen. Dredging directly associated with the breakwater (about 12,000 cubic yards of sandy material) will have direct adverse effects on the benthic habitat in areas of dredging and spoiling. Such effects should be relatively transitory considering the limited nature of the dredging operation and the types of spoil being placed in the area. 5 In st-aryt the environmental impact of the placement of the break- water will probably be confined to areas immediately affected by the deposition of rock and spoil associated with the project. Such loss of babitat shold be mitigated to a certain degree by new habitat or substrate provided by the breakwater itself and the relatively rapid colonization of spoil banks by organisms adapted to the high turbidity and sedimentation of the estuary, as long as the project is carried out during a winter-early spring period. 2. Dredging Operations Within the East Point Channel Considerations of the dredging operations behind the breakwater and spoiling south of the breakwater are complicated by the lack of certainty concerning the magnitude and frequency of such 'operations (see above) and the relatively low quality of the spoils (see below). Because of the lack of more exact data, I will use the projected levels for this evaluation (i.e.9 509000 cubic yards of spoil taken from behind the breakwater and deposited south of the breakwater once every 18 months; U. S. A. Ce E.9 1982; Appendix III a. Modifications of current and salinity structure of the ba Day While I can find no direct information on this point relating to effects of dredging and spoiling operations per se, it is probable that the above treatment of the breakwater (section I-B-1-a) would apply to this situation (i.e., minimal impact on current patterns and salinity structure of the bay). b. Modification of water auality it is in this area that most of the potential problems (audp correspondinglyg most of the controversy) exist for the proposed project . . .... ... . 6 (see letter from J. Craft, Appendix II). A detailed response to this issue is thus appropriate. 1. Sources of pollution and organic enrichment sources of pollution in the East Point area are varied. There is point and non-point pollution from urban runoff from East Point... Heavy boat traffic will contribute organic material and metals.. Dredging activi- ties will cause the concentration of fine sediments (clay/silt f:ractions) in the dredged channels. Estimates of organic loading Eas determined by Biochemical Oxygen Demand (B.O.D.) in mg/l; U. S. A. C. E., 1982] from the 18 oyster processing plants approximate 2,361 gallons per' day, 50% of which enters St. George Sound. This figure is considered to be a maxim= since there is considerable daily and seasonal variab ility in the oyster packing and processing industry. Since estimates of non-point B.O.D. waste loads are unavailable, the high point of the estimated range of 2 mg/l to 2,070 mg/l was used to calculate maximum dissolved oxygen deficits foi; the area. This is reasonable but is probably on the low side during specific periods of high temperature, heavy rainfallo and lateral runoff from the East Point area into the sound. The waste assimilative capacity for the existing navigation channel for various offshore breakwater alignments was calcu- lated according to these estimates. The projected dissolved oxygen (D.O.) deficits ranged from 0.0 (minimun point source B.O.D. loadings) to 3.1 mg/l Emaximum combined (point and non-point) source B.O.D. loadings for plan 3]. The D.O. deficit for the modified plan 5 (recommended) was 1.5 mg/l. According to a letter from Ms. V. Tachinkel, Secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Regulationg elimination of the direct discharge Of Washdown from seafood processing houses would be one condition for 7 permitting. Such modification would partially alleviate the loading rates* from East Point into St. George Sound. in any case, during summer periods of high temperature and local rainfall (and urban runoff), the dissolved oxygen levels at depth in the channel will probably be low. 2. Sed iment quality: a comparison The chief concernp in terms of permitting, is the water quality question relating to dredging in the East Point channel and spoiling south of the breakwater. As noted above, while this project is not part of the breakwater project per se, and while the breakwater is not directly depen- dent on maintenance dredging, the two actions are functionally associated, so the water quality issue concerning dredging activities will have an important bearing on the breakwater issue. Data concerning the quality of sediments in these areas are given in Table 1. Sediment quality in the St. George Island Channel is relatively good. Most of the sediments here fall within the range of fine to coarse grained sand. Within the two-mile chan- nel area, oils and greases are higher, especially at sites GI 2 (Gulf Intracoastal Waterway disposal area) and TM3 (Two-Mile extension channel). Sediments within these channels are enriched in nutrients and metals such as copper (Cu), iron (Fe), lead (Pb), and Zinc Qn). Sediments at TM2 and TM3 are higher in the silt/clay fractions than stations TM41 TM5 and GI 2, which are mainly characterized by fine sand. Sediments from the East Point Channel area are also relatively high in oils and greases (EPlt EP5), nutrients (EPI, EP20 EP39 EP5), and metals such as copper (EPO, iron (EPIt EP3, EPS), lead (EP3, EP5), and zinc (EP1, EP5). Silt/clay fractions are relatively high at stations EP1 (inshore, west), EP3 (within the 1b 8 dredged channel(, and EP5 (inshore, east). Stations in the spoil banks (EpZ, west; EP4y east) are dominated by fine to coarse-grained sands. Such a pattern indicates sedimentation within the dredged channels and erosion of the spoil disposal areas. As is consistent with most studies on the subject, oils and greases, nutrients, and metal contamination were most closely associated with the fine-grained sediments (i.e., the silt-clay fractions). The area off East point was higher in nutrient enrichment than either of the other study areas. Oil/grease and metal contamination was low at the St. George Channel site and comparable at the two-mile/Gulf Intracoastal Waterway site and the East Point Channel Site. 3. Associated water quality questions The environmental assessments by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (Table 2) point out certain problems with the proposed actions. The receiving area is within Class II waters of the state of Florida. This area is also an Aquatic Preserve and Special Waters ( Section 17-3.041, (2)(f) and (g)), Outstanding Florida Waters (Florida Administrative Code), and a National Estuarine Sanctuary (Coastal Zone Management Actf P.O. 92-583 with amendments P.O. 94-370). While no scien- tific data are given, a qualitative evaluation indicated low water quality in the East Pont channel (with attendant poor levels of biota in the sediments) but relatively healthy animal populations at the proposed spoil disposal sites. The biological impact of dredging in "mucky, anaerobic and possibly toxic" sediments of Two-mile, East Point and Scipio Creek would be less, according to this evaluationg than in channels further out in the bay (11sandy and aerobic"). The impact of placing of the breakwater and 9 dredging would be to destroy benthic organisms within the construction &real such organisms would possibly repopulate submerged surfaces of the breakwater after construction. The DER evalation indicates that the break- water may worsen the dissolved oxygen concentration in the existing channel; mixing of such water may cause "harm to adjacent waters" according to this evaluation. According to the DER assessmentf open water disposal of I'mucky" bottoms from such areas would generate turbidity problems although organisms of the bay are probably "moderately tolerant of turbidity." Upland spoil disposal is recommended (Figure 4). Because of concessions regarding the elimination of the work channel and direct discharge from washdown water, the primary question concerning the permitting of the East Point Breakwater and dredging and open water spoiling of sediments taken from the East Point channel pertains to water quality in the dredged channel and spoiling areas. According to an undatedv anonymous D.E.R. briefing paper (Appendix IV)l spoil quality is low because of high oil/grease levels, -onia-uitrogen, and metal con- centrations. Elutriate data (Table 1) indicate violations of water quality standards for copper, iron, and lead. Such violations in other parts of the bay evidently have been overcome by variances given by D.E.R. (J. Craft, personal communication). Judging from such da-ta in the G.I.C.W.W. and the Two-mile Channel (Table 1), there is little substantive difference in spoil quality in terms of oils and grease and metals between these areas and the East Point Channel area. Basic differences exist between the U. S. A. C. E and DER regarding water quality and water flow and sedimentation rates in the East Point Channel and water quality changes due to open water spoiling. Since 10 channel conditions are already poor, the main question centers on water quality problems associated with the disposal of dredged channel sediments. it includes the main question of whether metals such as copperl iron, and lead will disassociate from the sediments and contaminate surrounding water, For this questiony we need the elutriate analyses. 4. Elutriate analyses The results of the elutriate tests by the U. S. A. C. E. for various areas of the bay are given in Table 1. Virtually no water quality effects : re shown at the St. George Island site, as might be expected since the ediments are not contaminated to any degree. Tests in the two-mile chan- nel show increased ammonia-nitrogen, phosphorusp and iron content in the elutriates. Iron is naturally abundant in the estuary and should cause no adverse biological effects. The tests show increased ammonia-nitrogen and phosphorus levels.in the elutriate; lead levels in the elutriate are slightly increased from sediments taken in the western (inshore) and highly contaminated portions of the East Point Channel. These data indicate that there should be an immediate, short-term or temporary release of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds in the spoiling areas but that the metals will remain latgely with the sediments. There could be a movement of such metals with the sediments because of erosion of the sediments away from the original spoil site. Howeverg these data do not support water quality degeneration by metals within the spoil sediments. 11. Biological Evaluation of the East Point Study Site Materials and Methods Water quality and Sediment Composition An analysis was carried out concerning water qualityp sediment com- positionp and the benthic macroinvertebrate (infaunal) assemblages in areas associated with the proposed projects (Figure 4). Such areas include the East Point Channel (1-11 3-1), proposed breakwater and spoil sites (1-2y 3-2), channel areas (2-1, 2-2f 2-3), offshore areas (1-3, 2-31 3-3; 5-19 5-29 5-3, 5-4) and a reference transect (outside of the influence of the East Point area) 4-11 4-21 4-3). These studies were based ong and coor- dinated withq previous studies carried out within the Apalachicola Bay system (Livingston 1980, 1983; Livingston et al., 1983). All sampl-es were taken.on 15-16 March, 1983. Surface and bottom water samples were taken with a 1-liter Kemmerer bottle. Turbidity was measured with a Hach model* 2100-A turbidimeterg and color was determined using an American Public Health Association platinum-cobalt standard test. Temperature was determined using a stick thermomometer, and salinity was measured with a temperature-compensated refractometer. Field measurements of dissolved oxygen and pH were made with metering devices. A standard Secchi disk was used to determine light penetration. Sediments were taken with a corer (diameter 7.62 cm), and analyses were carried out using the top 10 cm of each core sample according to processes described by I an (1952), Folk (1966), Cummings and Waycheck (1971), and Ingram (1971). This analysis included determination of particle size and sediment organic com- Position with a computer program developed by J. P. May (Department of 12 GeologYt Florida State University). Detailed descriptions of these methods are given by Livingston (1978).' 2. Benthic Macroinvertebrates Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled with a hand-held corer (diameter 7.7 cz) at sediment depths of 15 cm. Ten subsamples were taken at each station. Each subsample was washed through a 0.5-an screen. organisms were fixed with 10% buffered formalin and rose bengal (200 mg 1-1). Animals were then transferred to 40% isopropyl alcohol, sorted and identified to species and counted. All biological sampling was based on previous assessments relative to microhabitat distribution, runoff pat- terns, and spatial/ temporal trends of biotic composition (Livingston 1976, 1978; Livingston et al., 1976a). Sampling effort in all cases was deter- mined by analysis of species accumulation using multiple sub-samples (Livingston et al., 1976b). Data analysis was carried out with an interac- tive computer program under the KRONOS operating system on a Cyber 74 computer (Florida State University Computing Center). All computations were based on numerical abundance and numbers of species. Statistical calculations were made using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Specific indices and tests for significance have been detailed by Livingston (1975, 1978), Livingston and Duncan (1979), and Livingston et al. (1978). B* Background Information Permanent sampling sites (visited monthly from Marcht 19729 to present to Collect data concerning water quality and biological structure) are shown in Figure 5. In addition, a complete habitat assessment was made by divers and scientists of all inshore waters of the Apalachicola Bay system 13 (from Indian Pass to Alligator Harbor, Livingston, 1980). The onshore por- tions of the East Point study area are characterized by 31 oyster housest vhich are concentrated on the eastern portion of the along-shore transect (Figure 4; offshore transects 1-x, 2-x, 3-x). The number of houses goes down as one proceeds from west to east; transect 4-x was established in an area.devoid of upland development (just across from the highway patrol station). Transects 1-x and 3-x were run through the existing channel and proposed spoil sites; transect 2-x ran through the existing channel. Existing grassbeds (Figure 6) are located east of the study area and, together with upland marshes, are almost entirely lacking in the East Point drainage area. Oyster bar distribution (Figure 7) is lacking in the study area. Field notes concerning the area in question (Table 3; Livingston, 1980) providemore details of the general environmental setting, which is characterized by urban runoff, high levels of boat traffic, and disturbance from dredgi ng and filling. Recovery to a more natural setting is apparent from the radio tower (our -station 4-x) eastward. Key climatological, physical, and chemical features of the Apalachicola River and Bay system are given in Figures 8-10. A general su-n y of physical and biological features (Fig. 11 indicates that, during the March study period,, infaunal macroinvertebrate numbers of indi- viduals are high but declining while numbers of species are moderately high. Long-term changes in benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in nearby East Bay (Figure 12) are the result of complex interactions (physical, che- micalg biological), which have been worked out for this area. Such 'rela- tionships are simply too involved for a reasonable discussion here (Livingston, 1983). Weekly samples of benthic macroinvertebrates at 2 14 t&tions in East Bay (Table 4) give some indication of background levels that may be expected in unpolluted portions of the estuary. Biomass trends give a detailed account of seasonal trends of macroinvertebrates around the Apalachicola Bay system. C. Results of Field Analyses at East Point 1. Physicochemical Features The results of the physical and chemical analyses are given in Table 6. station distribution is shown in Figure 13. The extreme differences in salinity reflect rapid changes due, probably, to tidal effects in the area between the two sampling dates, As might be expected for this time of the yearg dissolved oxygen levels were relatively high, as were color and tur- bidity values. The PH levels were also relatively uniform. These data conform to conditions observed previously in the estuary at this time of the year. 2. Sediment Analvses The results of the sediment analyses are given in Table 7. All classification of sediment types is based on Briggs (1977). The data clearly indicate that sediments. in the dredged, inshore channels are com- posed largely of silts. Farther offshorelat the proposed spoil sites (1-29 3-2), medium sand prevails. This appears to be the case at the end of the channel (2-3), at the inshore reference site (4-1), and on the Cat Point transect (5-2). Fine sand was noted on the reference transect (4-2, 4-3), On the offshore point on the western transect (1-3), and on the inshore portion of the Cat Point transect (5-1). As the oyster bars off Cat Point were approached, there was an increasingly hard substrate. 15 These data clearly show that dredged areas proximate to storm water runoff from urban portions of East Point act as sediment traps for finer particles (ioe*p silt). Such fine particles are also associated with various Pollutants (i.e., oils/greases, nutrients, metals) (see above). The combination of dredging and human activities have contributed to the pollution in the East Point portion of St. George Soundy and this area clo- sely resembles that along the Two-mile Channel and the Gulf Intra-coastal Waterway in terms of sediment type and quality. 3. Benthic Macroinvertebrates Resuls of the biological survey are given in Table 8. Inshore dredged channels characterized by pollutant-laden silts (1-11 1-3) were almost devoid of macroiuvertebrates. The dredged channel (inshore; 2-1, 2-2) also was depauperate of such infauna with recovery noted at the end of the chan- nel (2-3). This pattern is consistent with the sediment analysis (Table 7). The highest numbers of organisms were taken on the inshore station of the reference transect (4-1). In an unpolluted near-shore system charac- terized by medium sand, such a community should be optimal in terms of productivity, standing crop, and species richness. Farther offshore, in areas characterized by fine sand (4-2, 4-3; 5-1), the biota is charac- terized by moderate to low numbers of individuals and moderate numbers of species. This situation, also, is consistent with what we know about macroinvertebrate (infaunal) distributiono Areas of recovery, which include the proposed spoil areas (1-2, 3-2), are characterized by relati- vely high number of individuals and species. The reduction of toxic impact, together with high nutrient and organic inputt often leads to such increases of macrofauna in such recovery areas. Even in fine sand (1-3), 16 the nutrient recovery zones is characterized by high numbers of individuals and species* Cluster analysis of the data (log numbers of individuals and untransformed data) corroborate the generalizations noted above. Station -2 1-1 was generally by itself while stations 2-19 2 j and 3-1 were closely associated. In this way, the siltyp polluted areas showed the sane general form and distribution of benthic infaunal species. Recovery areas (1-21, 1-3, 3-2) were associated with inshore reference areas (4-1) and offshore recovery areas in the dredged channel (2-3). Offshore reference points (4-2, 4-3; 5-1, 5-2) formed associated clusters as might be expected. In this wayp the benthic macroinvertebrates are good indicators of natural envirortmental conditions and human activities in the area. Further analysis of the biological data (Table 10) indicate that the lowest Shannon diversity indices (AH) (as well as other community indices) occurred 'at stations 1-1, 2-11 2-29 and 3-1. Such indices give further proof of the biological response to dredging and urban runoff as noted above. When compared with those from other areas of the bay (Table 4v ?igure 12)p these data appear to show that the above areas are biologically stressed and that such areas correspond to concentrations of silt and pollutants as indicated elsewhere in this report. There is an almost direct association of urban buildup with damage to the biological integrity of St. George Sound. M. Estimation of Impact of the Proposed Breakwater and Dredge/Spoil Projects Based on the available informationg certain qualified estimates can be made concerning the environmental impact of the proposed breakwater and 17 dredging/ spoiling projects on the Apalachicola Bay system. St. George Sound, in the area of urban runoff from East Point and previous dredging and spoiling, shows all the signs of a seriously polluted system.. Crassbeds are lackingg and the effects of point and non-point urban runofft heavy boat traffic, and dredging have contributed to the elimina- tion of the biological integrity of inshore portions of the system, Construction of the East Point Breakwater will eliminate all benthic organisms in areas of construction. Such losses should be partially offset by the increased habitat of the breakwater itself. Inshore areas (north of the breakwater) will probably have slight reductions in water quality in terms of organic loading, sedimeutationt etc., as a result of the break- vater construction. Such effects will be proportional to the increased extent of the breakwater itself. However,, such effets will have a minimal impact on the biological organization of the area since such areas are already seriously affected by dredging and urban runoff (point and nou-poiut) from of East Point. On balance, considering the area and the construction activities, the breakwater project (and associatedt limited dredging) should have minimal adverse impact on the biota of St. George Sound. The sane conclusion can be reached with regard to the imupact of the breakwater on the Apalachicola estuary in general, since projected effects of the breakwater on the current structure and salinity regime of the system should be minimal. An evaluation of the dredging and spoiling associated with maintenance Of the East Point Channel (assuming the breakwater is constructed) is more cOmPlex. Such an evaluation must, by necessity, be based on relatively few data. However, the available information is relatively consistent. 18 Wberever there is a combination of dredging and urban runoff (together with associated boat traffic and related activities), there is a buildup of various pollutants (i.e., nutrients, oils/greases, metals). Su ch pollu- t&nts appear to be associated with the silt fraction of the sediments. When the sediments are placed at open water spoil sites, there is probably an immediate (temporary) release of nutrients (i.e., nitrogen and phosphorus-based compounds). The metals appear to be tightly bound to the silt particles and elutriate studies indicate that such pollutants do not get released into the water in significant amounts. What happens to the silt in the spoil bank is less clear, but it is probably eroded in time. This effect is offset by the natural high turbidity of the bay and the fact that most indigenous organisms in this portion of the estuary are adapted to heavy siltation and highly turbid conditions. Consequently, except in areas dominated by grassbeds or oyster bars, the effects of.spoiliug will probably be limited to the immediate spoil site and nearby (or adjacent) areas. Because of the rapid rate of reproduction and recruitment of asso- ciated benthic macroinvertebrates in soft -sediment areas, biological recovery of the spoil bank would probably occur on a seasonal basis. Specific exceptions to the above generalizations would apply in case there are alterations in current structure or salinity regime due to open water spoiling. Such is not the case here. The exact envirot mental effects of the dredging and spoiling depend not only on the nature and extent of such activities but on the specific area in question. There is no doubt that all adverse effects (temporary and long-term) of open water spoiling can be eliminated by upland disposal of the spoils. Assuming that the upland disposal site is suitable for such a purpose, this option will 19 ,gually be the most desirable alternative. in terms of reduction of habitat destruction and elimination of associated adverse effects in the subject aquatic system.- With respect to the deposition of spoil taken from the East Point channel and placed south of the breakwater, there will be a loss of benthic. productivity in the immediate spoil areas. Such loss will be proportional to the type and amount of spoil and the frequency of deposition. Using the. tiven conditions or estimates of, activity (i.e.9 50pOOO cubic yards at 18-month intervals), such spoiling will have an adverse (i.e.., smothering) impact on the benthic organization at spoil sites. Such organization is currently composed of a diverse and productive soft-sediment community. Because it is a relatively turbid, high-energy area (relative to other por- tions of the sytem), devoid. of grassbeds and producing oyster bars in the immediate vicinityp the effects of such an operation should be temporary and limited to the immediate area of the dr'edging and spoiling activities. Such adverse effects would increase in proportion to the dredging extent. and frequency. Adverse water quality changes should be temporary. Movement of spoil away from the spoil site could have an adverse effect on the biological integrity of the immediate vicinity. For all these reasons, there should be a careful evaluation of the benefits of such an operation to the community at large since indiscriminate dredging and open water spoiling will have adverse effects on the bay. However, because of the various environmental factors concerning the East Point area, there should not be widespread or long-term adverse effects on the water quality in the area and the envirormental impact should be largely restricted to the imme- diate impact area. If for any reason the spoil contaminants should be 20 released into the water (and thus be transported to a much broader area), such an operation could have more extensive adverse effects on the environ- ment of St. George Sound. The available.data do not indicate that this will happen, however* 21 Iv. References Briggst D. 1977. In: Sources and Methods in geography: Sediments. Butterworthsq Boston. 192 pp. Cummingsv K. W-, and J. C. Waycheck. 1971. Caloric equivalents for investigators in ecological energetics. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 18. 158 pp. Folk, R. L. 1966. A review of grain-size parameters. Sedimentology 6:73-93. Ingram, R. L. 1971. Sieve analysis. Pages 49-67 in R. E. Caever, editor. Procedures in sedimentary Petrology. Wiley Interscience, New York. Inman, D. L. 1952. Measures for describing the size distribution of sedi- ments. Journal of Sedimenary Petrology 22:125-145. Livingstong R. J. 1975. Impact of kraft pulp-mill effluents on estuarine and coastal fishes in Apalachee Bay, Florida, USA. Marine Biology 32:19-48. Livingston, R. J. 1976. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of organisms in a north Florida estuary. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4:373-400. Livingston, R. J. 1978. Short- and Long-term Effects of Forestry Operations on Water Quality and the Biota of the Apalachicola Estuary (North Florida, U. S. A.). Florida Sea Grant Report (unpublished). 400 pp. Livingston, R. J. 1980. Critical Habitat Assessment of the Apalachicola Estuary and Associated Coastal Areas. *Coastal Plains Regional Commission. Livingston, R. J. 1983. Field and semi-field validation of laboratory- derived aquatic test systems. 22 Livingston, Re J., and J. Duncan. 1979. Short- and long-term effects of forestry operations on water quality and epibenthic assemblages of a north Florida estuary. Ecological.Processes in Coastal and Marine Systems, Ed. Re J. Livingston. Plenum Pressq New York. Livingstong Re Jet Re L. Iverson, and D. C. White. 1976a. Energy Relationships and the Productivity of Apalachicola Bay. Florida Sea, Grant Programg NOAA (Final Report) 437 pp. Livingstong Re Jet Re S. Lloyd, and Me S. Zimmerman. 1976b. Determination of sampling strategy for benthic macrophytes in polluted and unpolluted coastal areas. Bull.Mar. Sci. 26: 569-575. Livingstong Re Jet N. Thompsong and D. Meeter. 1978. Long-term variation of organochlorine residues and assemblages of epibenthic organisms in a shallow north Florida (USA) estuary. Marine Biology 46: 355-372. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1982. Revised draft detailed project report and revised draft environmental impact statement' on breakwater at Eastpointt Florida. US Department of Commerce -7 .NOAA Coastal services Center Library 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405-2413