Terra Ceia aquatic preserve management plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

TERRA CEIA

AQUATIC PRESERVE

MANAGEMENT PLAN

APRIL 1987

A
L Z",
0:N r

I N F 0 R NNI A Tf () N C. I- N T EB

QH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
90.75
L46
F6
1987

TERRA CEIA AQUATIC PRESERVE

MANAGEMENT PLAN

April 21, 1987

Dr. Elton J. Gissendanner

Executive Director

Department of Natural Resources

This Plan was prepared by
The Bureau of Land and Aquatic Resource Management
Division of Recreation and Parks

Preparation of thispanagement plan was primarily supported by a grant
from the U.S. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Admi.n.i.-tration, and the Fllorlda Department of
Environmental Regulation, the Office of Coastal Management, through the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as amended.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is located in Manatee County, and comprises an

area of submerged lands located along the east side of Tampa Bay totalling

approximately 21,736 acres. This area is one of the most pristine regions in

Tampa Bay.

Terra Ceia was designated an aquatic preserve on June 24, 10,84 for the primary

purpose of preserving the biological resources of the Terra Ceia area marshes

and associated waters. This area consists predominately of fringing mangroves

and mangrove islands with some oyster bars, clam beds, and seagrasses. The

preserve is important in protecting critical habitat to an extensive array of

fish, birds and other wildlife. Maintaining the continued health of the

preserve will involve minimizing water pollution and losses of wetlands

resulting from urban, residential and industrial development in the region.

The major objective of the aquatic preserve management program is to ensure

the maintenance of essentially natural conditions. Management will also be

directed to ensure public recreational opportunities while assuring the

continued propagation of fish, birds and other wildlife resources. This task

will be guided by the identification and mapping of natural resources and

habitats necessary to meet these objectives. An additional management

objective is to review and comment on applications for the use of state-owned

submerged lands. Meeting these objectives will require a fully implemented

management program with the continuation of the on-site Environmental

Specialist for the aquatic preserve who has an office in the town of Ellenton.

Ili
i

Property Of
NOAA Coastal Se7rVieW QMtSr
Library

STATE OF FLORIDA

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND

R E S 0 L U T 1 0 N

WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund is

charged with the acquisition, administration, management, control, super-

vision, conservation, protection, and disposition of all lands title to which

is vested in the Trustees under Chapter 253, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, Chapter 258, Florida Statutes, directs that state-owned

submerged lands within aquatic preserves be set aside forever in their

essentially natural or existing condition for the benefit of future

generations; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees are charged with the adoption and enforcement of

reasonable rules and regulations to carry out the provisions of Sections

258.35 through 258.46, Florida Statutes, regarding the regulation of human

activity within the aquatic preserves so as not to unreasonably interfere with

lawful and traditional public uses of the preserves; and

WHEREAS; Section 18-20.13, Florida Administrative Code, mandates the

development of management plans for aquatic preserves; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees desire to serve the public by effectively planning,

managing and protecting aquatic preserves; and

WHEREAS, the Trustees have recognized the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve as

a biological/scientific preserve in formal action on June 24, 1984; and

iii

WHEREAS, the Trustees recognize the importance and benefits of protecting

the natural resources and preserving the natural ecosystem and aesthetics in

the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve area; and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees of the Internal

Improvement Trust Fund hereby adopts the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve

Management Plan; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve Management

Plan shall serve as a fundamental policy guideline for the Trustees and other

state and local agencies having jurisdiction relative to maintaining the

natural resources and environmental quality of this aquatic preserve, and

shall provide the overall policy direction for the development and implementa-

tion of all administrative rules and proqrams related to the management of

state-owned submerged lands within the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Department of Natural Resources, Division

of Recreation and Parks, is hereby designated as agent for the Trustees for

purposes of aquatic preserve planning and management.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF The Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement

Trust Fund have hereunto subscribed their names and have caused the Official

Seal of the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund to be

hereunto affixed in the City of Tallahassee, The Capitol, on this the twenty-

first day of April, A.D., 1987.

Governo

(Seal)

Secretary of State

lb Co ssioner of Education Attorney General

Commissioner of Agriculture Comptroller

As and Constituting the State of

Florida Board of Trustees of the Treasurer

Internal Improvement Trust Fund

Approved as to form and legality

DNR/Attorney
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

I. !NTRODUCTION .................................................. I

II. MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ......................... *................ 11

IIIo MAJOR PROGRAM POLICY DIRECTIVES. ....o ..... oo .......... oo .... o. 23

IV. RESOURCE DESCRIPTION .......................................... 29

A. Resource Setting

1. The Tampa Bay Area... ...... ........... 29

2. Historic Notes ...... o .......... ...... --o 31

3. Archaeological Sites, ..... oo .....o ........ ---- ....... 34

4. Present Population Characteristics... .......o ... oo- .... 0. 35

5. Coastal Area Land Use and Tnfrastructre ......... 37

B. Natural Systems and their Components

1. Geologic Features and Land Forms.... ..... --oo ....... 40

2. Plant Associations..... ... o ... oo.oo ........... o........... 42

a. Mangrove Forest......... ...o .......... o............... 43

b. Seagrasses ............ oo ... oo ... -oo ....... oo ......... 45

c. Benthic and Drift Alcae ........... oo ....... oo ..... oo.. 47

d. Salt Marsh..... .... o ..... ooo- ...... o................ 48

3o Animal Life... oo ...- .............. oo .... oo- ..... oo ..... 49

a. Live Bottom ... o- ... -..- ........ o ......o.......... 49

b. Oyster Beds, ..... ............. o. 50

c. Fisheries.. ...... .... o.... oo .... 51

d. Amphibians and Reptiles... ................. o...... o ... 52

e. Bird Populations .... o................................. 57

f. Mammals .... o ...... ..... o ........ ........... 53

TARLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Chapter Page

V. RESOURCE MIANAGEMENT ........................................... 55

A. Introduction .............................................. 55

B. On-site Management Objectives ............................. 55

C. Resource Mapping and Resource Protection Areas ............ 77

D. Administrative Management Objectives ...................... 80

VI. MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORK ........... 0 ................. 87

A. Federal ................................................... 87

B. State ..................................................... 90

C. Regional .................................................. 96

D. Local Governments and Special Districts ................... 98

E. Other Organizations ....................................... 101

PREFACE TO CHAPTERS VII-IX ........................................... 103

VII. PUBLIC USES .................................................. 105

A. Consumptive Uses .......................................... 105

6. Nonconsumptive Uses ....................................... 106

VITT. PRIVATE NONCOMMERCIAL USE ..................................... 109

IX. COftIERCIAL USES ............................................... 115

A. Traditional Commercial Uses ............................... 115

B. Nontraditional Commercial Uses ............................ 118

X. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ........................................... 119

XT. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION ....................................... 121

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Chapter Page

XTI. IDENTIFIED PROGRAM NEEDS ...................................... 123

A. Acquisition of Additional Property ........................ 124

B. Boundary Problems and Systems Insufficiences .............. 124

C. Legislative Needs ......................................... 125

D. Administrative Rule Changes ............................... 125

E. Data (Information) Needs .................................. 126

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities ........... 126

G. Funding and Staffing Needs ................................ 127

REFERENCES CITED ................... o ....... *..... *...* ............ 00.129

CONTENTS OF APPENDICES .......................... *............ * ....... 131

viii

TFRPA CEIA AQUATIC PRESERVE

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This plan addresses the management of the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve, located

entirely in Manatee County, Florida. This Aquatic Preserve is one of 40

officially designated aquatic preserves in the statewide system (Figure 1).

It comprises an area of submerged lands located along the east side of Tampa

Bay totalling approximately (11,736 acres.

The Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve (Figure ?) boundary @egins just south of the

mouth of Little Redfish Creek and ends at Emerson Point on Snead Island.

Preserve boundaries extend northwesterly from these points out to the

Intracoastal Waterway or Manatee County line which then cross and form the

outer most corner of the preserve. Palmetto is the only incorporated city

bordering the preserve.

Of all four aquatic preserves located in the Tampa Bay region (including the
Pinellas County, Cockroach Bay, and Boca Ceiga Bay Aquatic Preserves) the

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is the most pristine. This environmentally

sensitive and unique preserve, harbors seagrass beds which stabilize bottom

sediments, and provide food and shelter to a wide variety of species of adult,

4uvenile' MnC4 fish and inver-tebratce. M3-rcvcs which reprecent the
I -- - - 1 -11 -.,- 1-16 @ @ , @ -J I

predominant vegetation, fringe much of the shoreline. Saltmarsh grasses,

oyster bars, clam beds, drift alqae, live bottoms and tidal flats are also

intricate parts of this very dynamic and productive system.

Ric
AQUATIC
PRESERVES

AOUATIC PRESERVES ARE ESTABLISHED
BY THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE AND
INCLUDE ONLY STATE OWNED
SOVEREIGNTY SUBMERGED LANDS.
THE GOVERNOR AND CABINET SITTING
AS TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL
'IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND ARE
MANAGERS OF THESE AREAS.

me 640RE INFORMATION REGARDING
AOUATIC PRESERVES CONTACT:

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

DIVISION OF RECREATION AND PARKS

BUREAU OF LAND A14D AOUATIC
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
31100 COMMONWEALTH ILLVD
TALLAKAWEE.FLORIDA 32303

Figure 1.

BUWAI PAIG ST. PETERSBURG PINELLAS CO. T-33-i ......................................
T-33-4
%
Key 00 1.,Z%:
A u

MMLII
Key

ONO
oop v

NOMONT KEY NdIONAL 0000, 0 24
WILDLIFE REFUGE 00,0000 m 93
1110MORT Key 0000.
.0000 27
SOUT"west Off
34 36

19
402 may

H
PASSAGE KEY
4ATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGIF

PAGGA1116 KIII Me T

10 301
ANNA M@AFVA emspeops
p TT 45
4110144
23 .4 19 VIA
HOLMS BEA Now&*
42

PINSACOLA
ACKGONjILLI LEGEND

MAtIONAL MOM REFUGE
AQUATIC PRESERVE TERRA
TANIVA CORPORATE LUMTS
PRIMARY ROAD
LAKII SECONDARY ROAD
agc"ooag MAN
RAILROAD i

CANAL ON DRAINAGE DITCH
[AN ... ...... ..... IM HIGHWAY 8TA
PREPARED BY. S. SECTIO
DIVISION OF RECREATION AND PARK$ ...... I @TAT11 HI*HWAY
BUREAU OF PARK LAND$ AND DEVELOPMENT 'doce
v May ....... COUNTY NIGHWAY
-- - - a- PITIFICOAGTAL WATERWAY
Fi gure 2

drift algae, live bottoms and tidal flats are also intricate parts of this

very dynamic and productive system.

The Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is designated and will be managed as both an

Aquatic Preserve by the Florida Department of Natural Resources and an

Outstanding Florida Water by the Florida Department of Environmental

Regulation. The boundary lines of Figure 2 represent the gross boundaries of

the Aquatic Preserve. The actual preserve includes those state-owned

sovereignty submerged lands located waterward of the mean high water line

(mhw) within this boundary area. The aquatic preserve will be managed to

emphasize the maintenance and enhancement of essentially natural conditions.

As more site specific information becomes available, essentially natural

conditions shall be further identified and resources in disturbed areas

restored to a natural condition, where possible.

Currently, management of Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is being provided by

a full-time manager as of July 1986. The onsite manager provides resource

protection needs and has an office in the town of Ellenton. The adminis-

trative support for this management program is provided by the Department of

Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Park's, Bureau of Land and

Aquatic Resource Management (BLARM) in Tallahassee, known as the "central

office". Field personnel support and assistance is provided through the

Florida Park Service, Division of Marine Resources and the BLARM staff.

Initially, development of the resource inventories of the preserve has

depended heavily on LANDSAT satellite imagery, DOT aerial photography, on-site

inspection, the Future of Tampa Bay, and the proceedings from the Tampa Bay

Scientific Information Symposium (BASIC) (Treat et al. 1985) held in 1982. P's

the program proceeds and on-site managers become more familiar with the area,

additional resource information will become available and modifications to the

program and the plan will be made where appro priate.

The plan is divided into chapters according to their management application.

Chapter II cites the authorities upon which this management program and plan

are built. Chapter III (Major Program Policy Directives) highlights the major

policy areas that are applicable to this management area. Chapter IV presents

a brief resource description.

Chapter V presents the management objectives of both the on-site managers, who

actually work in the preserve, and the administrative staff in Tallahassee.

Chapter VI addresses how this plan will interface with local, regional, state,

and federal agencies and programs, as well as its relevance to nongovernmental

organizations, interest groups, and individuals.

Chapter VII through IX address the various uses, from public to private to

commercial. Chapters X and XI address the use of the aquatic preserve for

scientific research and environmental education, respectively.

rt'ap-4--e_ VTT
@1. _ I AL. is an in"Iernall -managemient improvemient SEC'6210fi ident-IFyi-ng protlems

and needs in the progressive improvement of this aquatic preserve management

plan.

This plan was written by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Division

of Recreation and Parks, Bureau of Land and Aquatic resource Management

(BLARM) staff. Funding for the plan was provided by a coastal management

grant (CM-130) through the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Admin'istration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management,

and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER), Office of

Coastal Manaaement.

Chapter II

MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

The primary management authorities available to the staff for implementing

management directives affecting aquatic preserves are found in Chapters 258

and 253,-Florida Statues (F.S.). These authorities clearly establish the

proprietary management overview role of the Governor and Cabinet, sitting as

the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and are referred

to as both the "Trustees" and the "Board". Furthermore, all management

responsibilities assigned to the Trustees by this plan may be fulfilled

directly by the Governor and Cabinet or indirectly via staff or agents of the

Trustees, pursuant to delegations of authority, management agreements, or

other legal mechanisms. All subsequent references to the Board of Trustees

should be presumed to potentially include staff and designated agents, in

addition to the Governor and Cabinet. The staff of the Bureau of Land and

Aquatic Resource Management (BLARM) acting as "agents" for the Trustees, is

able to review all requests for uses of, or directly affecting, state-owned

sovereignty submerged lands within aquatic preserve. The review and

subsequent staff comments are primarily designed to evaluate the environmental

consequences of any proposed use of state-owned submerged land. The review is

conducted within the confines of the criteria contained in the "maintenance"

provisions for aquatic preserves in Section 258.42, F.S. Formal review

comments are provided to the Department of Matural Resources (DNR), Division

of State Lands by the Bureau,of Land and Aquatic Resource Management for

inclusion in the comments and recommendations accompanying agenda items for

Trustees consideration. This mechanism allows the Trustees, sitting as owners

of the land, in trust for the public, to evaluate public interest and project

merits within the context of environmental impact upon the preserves.

BACKGROUND

In many respects, the authorities supporting aquatic preserve planning and

management are the cumulative results of the public's awareness of the

importance of Florida's environment. The establishment of the present system

of aquatic preserves is a direct outgrowth of public concern with dredge and

fill activities rampant in the late 1950's.

In 1967, the Florida Legislature passed the Randall Act (Chapter 67-393, Law's

of Florida), which set up procedures regulating previously unrestricted dredge

and fill activities on state-owned submerged lands. That same year the
legislature also provided statutory authority (Section 253.03, F.S.) for the

Trustees to exercise proprietary control over state-owned lands. In 1967,

this governmental focus on protecting Florida's productive estuaries from the

impacts of development led to the establishment of a moratorium by the

Governor and Cabinet on the sale of submerged lands to private interests. In

161 a 46- samie year, 1.110413 act-ilon wa3 foll 11 owed by tll-le creation of -- an Interagency

Advisory Committee on submerged land management. in late 1968, that committee

issued a report recommending the establishment of a series of aquatic

preserves. Twenty-six separate waterbodies were addressed in the original

recommendation. Also in 1968, The Florida Constitution was revised, declaring

in Article II, Section 7, the State's policy of conserving and protecting the

natural resources and scenic beauty of the state. That ccnstitutional

provision also established the authority for the legislature to enact

measures for abatement of air and water pollution.

It was not until October 21, 1969 that the Governor and Cabinet acted upon the

recommendations of the Interagency Advisory Committee and adopted, by

resolution, 18 of the waterbodies as aquatic preserves. Later, the Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve was established June 24, 1984 and was amended June 25, 1985.

Prior to the October 1969 action by the Governor and Cabinet, the Legislature

had created the Boca Ciega Bay Aquatic Preserve. Subsequent legislative

action in 1972, 1973, and 1974, created the Pinellas County, Lake Jackson and

Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserves, respectively.

Tn 1975, the Legislature established a Florida Aquatic Preserve Act (codified

in Chapter 258, F.S.), thereby bringing all existing preserves under a

standardized set of maintenance criteria. Additional acts were passed

Subsequent to the 1975 action, such as the addition of the Cockroach Bay

Aquatic Preserve in 1976 and the Gasparilla Sound-Charlotte Harbor Aquatic

Preserve to the system in 1978.

The Charlotte Harbor Aquatic Preserve Management Plan, approved by the

Trustees on May 18, 1983, was the first management plan for an aquatic

preserve. The following aquatic preserves have approved plans: Estero Bay-

September 6, 1983; North Fork-St. Lucie - May 22, 1984; Loxahatchee River-

Lake Worth Creek - June 12, 1984; and Indian River Lagoon - January 22, 1985.

Banana River - September 17, 1985; Indian River-Malabar to Vero Beach -

January 21, 1986; Nassau River, St. Johns River Marshes and Fort Clinch Park

March 22, 1986 and Alligator Harbor - September 23, 1986.

In June 1985, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 762 which expanded the

boundaries of the Banana River, Malabar to Vero Beach, Loxahatchee River Lake

Worth Creek, 14ekiva River and Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserves; and created Guana

River Marsh and Big Bend Seagrasses Aquatic Preserves. In June of 1986 the

Legislature passed Senate Bill 607 which added the Rainbow Springs and Lemon

Bay Aquatic Preserve to the state-side system.

The State Lands Management Plan, adopted on March 17, 1981 and amended July 7,

1981 by the Trustees, contains specific policies. The Plan also establishes

policies concerning spoil islands, submerged land leases, "Outstanding Native

Florida Landscapes", unique natural features, submerged grassbeds,

archaeological and historical resources, and endangered species. All of these

issues provide management guidance to the aquatic preserve program.

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

Chapters 18-21 and 18-20, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), are two

administrative rules directly applicable to the DtIR's/Trustees's actions

regarding allowable uses of submerged lands, in general, and aquatic preserves

specifically. Chapter 18-21. F.A.C. controls activities conducted on all

sovereignty submerged lands, and is predicated upon the provisions cf Sections

91-53.03 and 253.12, F.S. The stated intent of this administrative rule is:

"(1) To aid in fulfilling the trust and fiduciary responsibilities of the

Board of Trustees of the Internal improvement Trust Fund for the

administration, management and disposition of sovereignty lands;

(2) To insure maximum benefit and use of sovereignty lands for all the

citizens of Florida;

(3) To manage, protect, and enhance sovereignty lands so that the public

may continue to enjoy traditional uses including, but not limited

to, navigation, fishing, and swimming;

(4) To manage and provide maximum protection for all sovereignty lands,

especially those important to public drinking water supply,

shellfish harvesting, public recreation, and fish and wildlife

propagation and management;

(5) To insure that all public and private activities on sovereignty

lands which generate revenues or exclude traditional public uses

[email protected] Just compensatllon fv-r such privilleges; and,

(6) To aid in the implementation of the State Lands Management Plan."

Chapter 18-20, F.A.C. specifically addresses aquatic preserves and derives its

authority from Sections 258.355, 258.36, 258.37 and 258.38, F.S. The intent of

this rule is contained in Section 18-20.01, F.A.C., which states:

"(1) All sovereignty lands within a preserve shall be managed primarily

for the maintenance of essentially natural conditions, the

propagation of fish and wildlife, and public recreation, including

hunting and fishing where deemed appropriate by the board and the

managing agency.

(2) The aquatic preserves which are described in Section 258.39,

258.391, 258.399. and 258.393, F.S.; Chapter 85-345 Laws of Florida-,

and in Section 18-20.02, F.A.C., were established for the purpose of

being preserved in an essentially natural or existing condition so

that their aesthetic, biological and sclentific values may endure

for the enjoyment of future generations.

(3) The preserves shall be administered and managed in accordance with

the following goals:

(a) Preserve, protect, and enhance these exceptional areas of

sovereignty submerged lands by reasonable regulation of human

activity within the preserves through the development and

implementation of A- comprehEnsive mnagement program;

(b) To protect and enhance the waters of the preserves so that the

public may continue to enjoy the traditional recreational uses of

those waters such as swimming, boating, and fishing;

programs, which are compatible with the intent of the Legislature in

creating the preserves;

(d) To use applicable federal, state, and local management programs

which are compatible with the intent and provisions of the act and

these rules, to assist in managing the preserves;

(e) To encourage the protection, enhancement or restoration of the

biological, aesthetic, or scientific values of the preserves,

including but not limited to the modification of existing manmade

conditions toward their natural condition, and discourage activities

which would degrade the aesthetic, biological, or scientific values,

or the quality, or utility of a preserve, when reviewing

applications, or when developing and implementing management plans for

the preserve;

(f) To preserve, promote, and utilize indigenous life forms and

habitats, including but not limited to: sponges, soft coral, hard

coral, submerged grasses, mangroves, salt water marshes, fresh water

marshes, mud flats, estuaritie, aquatic and mar'ine reptiles, game and

nongame fish species, estuarine, aquatic and marine invertebrates,

estuarine, aquatic and marine mammals, birds, shellfish and

mollusks;

(9) To acquire additional title interests in lands wherever such

acquisitions would serve to protect or enhance the biological,

aesthetic, or scientific values of the preserves.

(h) To maintain those beneficial hydrologic and biologic functions,

the benefits of which accrue to the public at large.11

OTHER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES

Other Department of Matural Resources management authorities applicable to

aquatic preserves include: fisheries and marine mammal management and

protection; beach and shore preservation programs outlined in Chapters 370 and

161, F.S., respectively; and land acquisition programs conducted under the

Conservation and Recreation Lands Program authorized by 253, F.S.

Chapter 403, F.S., is an important adjunct to Chapters 253 and 258, F.S. This

governs, in part, the State's regulatory programs affecting water quality and

biological resources. The Department of Environmental Regulation (DER),

through a permitting and certification process, administers this program.

Section 253.77, F.S., as amended by the Warren S. Henderson Wetlands

Protection Act of 1984, requires that any person requesting use of state-owned

land shall have approval of the proposed use from the Trustees before

commencing the activity. An interagency agreement between DNR and DER

provides an avenue for staff comments on potential environmental impacts of

projects in aquatic preserves through the DER parmitting nmrace

Additionally, the DER has designated, by administrative rule, a series of

water bodies with strigent use criteria called "Outstanding Florida Waters"

(OFW). The inclusion of all aquatic preserve waters within this

classification greatly enhances the protective provisions of Chapter 258, F.S.

As the designated "306" Coastal Zone Management Agency, the DER also provides

a source of funding for data collection and planning in areas such as the

Terra Ceia area, as well as being the state agency responsible for implement-

ing "federal consistency" provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management

Act.

The DER's administrative rules of primary significance to the Aquatic Preserve

Management Program are Chapters 17-3, 17-4 and 17-12, F.A.C. These rules are

based upon the authorities contained in Chapter 403, F.S. Chapter 17-3,

F.A.C. addresses water quality standards and establishes the category of

"Outstanding Florida Waters", while Chapters 17-4 and 17-12, F.A.C. address

permit requirements and dredge and fill activities, respectively.

In December, 1982 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the DER, DNR,

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) was executed. This MOIJ clearly

establishes a process whereby the proprietary concerns of the Trustees, stated

in Chapter 253, F.S. can be integrated into the DER/COE 'Joint permit

processing system.

Other opportunities for environmental review and input into activities

potentially affecting aquatic preserves are afforded by the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA),. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Commission (TBRPC). and

the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (DHR). The

Executive Office of the Governor also provides a mechanism for public input

into federal projects via the State clearinghouse process.

The DCA and TBRPC are statutorily responsible for administering the

"Development of Regional Impact" (DRI). The DRI program, authorized by

Section 380.06, F.S. was established by the Legislature to provide a review

and monitoring procedure for those development proJects potentially affecting

more that one county. To understand the maze of authorities involved in

authorizing, permitting or reviewing development plans in Tampa Bay, the

agency prepared an Existing Authorities Matrix (Appendix E). This matrix

identifies the types of activities for which each agency is responsible.

Aquatic preserve personnel must not only coordinate with but be conversant of

these agencies policies in order to facilitate comprehensive and consistent

review input.

Chapter 267, F.S. establishes the state policy regarding preservation and

management of Florida's archaeological and historical resources. This

responsibility is legislatively assigned to the DAHRM, which holds title to

those cultural resources located on state-owned lands. This also applied to

sovereignty submerged lands, including aquatic preserves.

The Manatee County Public Health Unit, under their public mandate, administers

four programs directly affecting the aquatic preserve management program.
These programs are (1) septic tank regulation, usually administered by county
health departments (2) arthropod (mosquito) control programs, usually
implemented through local mosquito control districts (3) dredge and fill and

(4) pollution control SeCtinn Thato nrnn%-Amc nArh hold the nn+an+4=1 fnw-

creating significant impacts upon the aquatic preserves. Establishment of

close working relationships between the aquatic preserve staff and the

Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services will be a necessary element

of the aquatic preserves management program.

Each of the above referenced programs may provide an effective means of

protecting aquatic preserve and their ecologically sensitive resources.

The appendices contain a list of the appropriate statutes and administrative

rules.

Chapter III

MAJOR PROGRAM POLICY DIRECTIVES

This plan contains a number of management policy issues. This section

highlights those major policy areas that comprise the basic thrust of this

management effort. Adoption of these policies will provide specific staff

direction for implementing the day-to-day aquatic preserve management program.

Major program policy directives are:

(A) Manage all submerged lands within the aquatic preserve to ensure the

maintenance of essentially natural conditions to ensure the propagation of

fish and wildlife, and public recreation opportunities.

(B) Prohibit the disturbance of archaeological and historical sites within the

aquatic preserve, unless prior authorization has been obtained from the

Trustees and DHR, and such disturbance is part of an approved research design

or authorized project.

aquatic preserve, with an emphasis on those habitat types utilized by

threatened and/or endangered species.

(D) Protect and, where possible, enhance threatened and endangered species

habitat within the aquatic preserve.

(E) Prohibit development activities within the aquatic preserve that adversely

impact saltmarshes and other valuable intertidal, submerged, and emergent

habitats unless a prior determination has been made by the Board of overriding

public importance and that no reasonable alternatives exist.

(F) Prohibit the trimming and/or removal of saltmarsh vegetation and other

natural shoreline vegetation within the aquatic preserve, except when

necessitated by the pursuit of legally authorized projects and local

protection ordinances.

(G), Provide and actively encourage research and educational opportunities for

scientists and other interested researchers within the framework of a planned

research program in the aquatic preserve.

(H) Acquire, where feasible, privately owned submerged lands and adjacent

lands and islands located within the boundaries of the aquatic preserve
pursuant to the authorities contained in Section 253.02(4), F.S. Of greatest.

interest are the barrier islands that are located along the coastline and the

low lying areas of Terra Ceia Island adjacent to Bishop Harbor and Frog Creek.

(I) Prohibit the dr4114nri ^-F ^41 and gas w^1 1 C+to m4n4nn ^-F m4@^-ai-, and
. I . '..Z' -I - zj- "-. -, .." -, 11

dredging for the primary purpose of obtaining upland fill within the aquatic

preserve.

M Prohibit non-water dependent uses of submerged lands within the aquatic

preserve except in those cases where the Board has determined that the project

is overwhelmingly in the public interest and no reasonable alternatives exist.

This prohibition shall include floating residential units, as defined in

Section 125.0106(2), F.S.

M Prohibit storage of toxic, radioactive, or other hazardous materials

within the aquatic preserve. Any hazardous waste dumps now located within the

aquatic preserve should be closed and eliminated.

(L) Prohibit mosquito control practices within the aquatic preserve that

require habitat modification or manipulation (i.e. diking, ditching) unless

there are no reasonable alternatives and failure to conduct such practices

would result in a threat to public health.

(M) Limit pesticide and biocide use within the aquatic preserve to those that
are approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for wetland and

aquatic application.

(N) Prohibit the construction of new deep water ports within the aquatic

preserve boundaries.

(0) Prohibit any activity commercial or recreational that might impact the

integrity of hard bottom rnmmunities Within thp anwifir pracarva

(P) Insure that artificial reef construction does not adversely impact

environmentally fragile areas within the aquatic preserve and that the

construction will maintain the essentially natural condition while enhancing

the quality and utility of the preserve.

(Q) Manage spoil islands within the aquatic preserve as bird rookeries and

wildlife habitat areas.

(R) Encourage public utilization of the aquatic preserve, consistent with the

continued maintenance of its natural values and functions.

(S) Develop a well coordinated aquatic preserve management mechanism that

recognizes and utilizes local government programs and authorities.

@T) Require, through the efforts of DER and the South West Florida Water

Management District (SWFWMD), the maintenance and upgrading of the water

quality of the estuary and ensure the natural seasonal flow fluctuations of

freshwater into the estuary. Tn particular encourage the Department of

Environmental Regulation and the Environmental Regulatory Commission to extend

OFW designation to wetlands above the MHW line in areas within or adjacent to

the Aquatic Preserve.

(U) Apply the management criteria contained in the adopted Tierra Ceia Aquatic

Prpqprvp Plan to all subsequent legislative additions of land to the Aquatic

Preserve.

(V) Encourage the assistance of federal, state, and local government agencies

in implementing the aquatic preserve management plans, especially in areas of

protection of natural and cultural resources and the enforcement of applicable

resource laws and ordinances.

(W) Prohibit Marinas and associated construction activities in Resource

Protection Areas 1 and 2.

(X) Identify and document any problems caused by fishing, shellfishing, and

collecting activities and report them to the Marine Fisheries Commission.

(Y) Insure that the aquatic preserve management plans are consistent with all

other state and local planning processes and completed plans that may impact

aquatic preserves.

(Z) Recognize that successful shellfish culture and harvesting efforts in the

aquatic preserve are dependent upon pollution prevention and abatement and

careful comprehensive planning.

Chapter IV

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION

A. Resource Setting

1. The Tampa Bay Area

The Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve comprises an area of approximately 25,786

acres and is located in the lower southeastern portion of the Tampa Bay

estuarine system. Due to the fresh and saltwater influence as well as the

subtropical climate, this estuary supports a wide variety of plant and animal

communities. The preserve is composed of open water, several inlet bays, and

tidally influenced creeks and rivers. Most of the area along Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve contains extensive mosquito ditching and in Miguel, Bishop

Harbor and Terra Ceia Bay there are several areas of residential canals. The

rest of the preserve remains relatively unspoiled, but with an abundance of

adjacent upland property available, this area is likely to be further

developed.

Tampa Say is the largest estuary in Florida. It is a complex network of

creeks, rivers, and bays that drain some 2,200 square miles of Florida's west

c@?ntral peninsular coast. Lining the shsore are r1orluda's Wilrd and zt o u r t-

largest cities, Tampa and St. Petersburg, their suburbs, and the seventh

busiest port in the nation. Stresses caused by channel dredging (for

commercial and private navigational purposes), large scale urban alterations

to the natural shoreline, and discharges of thermal, biological, and chemical

pollutants have had a negative impact on the bay. The primary impact has beE!n

the loss of marine habitat and the reduction in the overall productivity of

Tampa Bay. The major problems facing this area include: development on the

mangrove islands and shoreline, sewage and industrial effluents entering the

system, and agricultural and urban runoff.

Concern about Tampa Bay's ecosystem resulted in a number of landmark studies,

including the Tampa_Fay Area Scientific InformationSymposium held in 198?
(Treat et al. 10,85), and the Future of Tampa Bay (Tampa Bay Regional Planning

Council 1985) which constitutes a comprehensive overview of 42 management

issues relating to the Bay area. These two studies, augmented by local land
use information, the Florida Statistical Abstract (Shoemyen 1985), and other

studies more particularly oriented to the lower Tampa Say area, are the basis

for most of the material found in this chapter.

Despite its overall urban context, the shoreline of Tampa Bay includes

some relatively undeveloped areas, the most extensive of which lies between

the mouth of the Little Manatee River near Ruskin and the south shore of Terra

Ceia Bay adjoining the city of Palmetto. The offshore waters of this stretch

include the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve and the Cockroach Say Aquatic

Preserve, the former of which is the subject of this management plan.

Bay management at this time is conducted by the federal, state and local

governments, often in a totally independent manner. These overlapping and

sometimes conflicting interests and jurisdictions have contributed to a number

of growth and land management problems that affect all of Tampa Bay. These

concerns stated in the Tampa Bay Area Scientific Symposium Information (Treat

et al. 1985), were the basis for the formation of a Tampa Bay Management Study

Committee. These groups, and the resulting Agency on Bay Management, have

recommended that Tampa Bay can and should be managed in a comprehensive manner

as a single ecological system. The boundaries were recognized as the uplands

and freshwaters contained within the combined watersheds of all rivers and

tributaries which flow into Tampa Bay. Because of this overall acceptance of

the importance of Tampa Bay and its watershed to the health of all areas

within its influence, this management plan, with its goals and objectives, can

make a significant contribution to Bay management. Also, the management plan

for Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve incorporates many of the issues and concerns

of the various governinq bodies in an attempt to provide consistent and

equitable management policies for all the aquatic preserves in the Tampa Bay

area; these include: Pinellas County, Boca Ceiga Bay, Cockroach Bay, and

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve.

In the remainder of this chapter a profile of the coastal area is

provided with historical notes, population characteristics, and a land and

water use overview, and those sections are followed by more particular

discussions of the various marine and emergent habitats and other resources to

be found in the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve.

2. Historic Rotes

When Panfilo de Narvaez and the first Spanish explorers arrived on the shore

of Tampa Bay in 1528, they found the area already settled by the Tocobago

Indians whose sustenance was provided by the abundant fish and shellfish

resources which were so readily harvested from the Bay. Before these

Spaniards moved on, they angered the Indians so that three subsequent attempts

during the 1500's at missionary activity or colorization resulted in armed

resistance by the Indians. European explorers left a grim legacy in the form

of smallpox and other diseases to which the indians had no resistance, and by

the early 1600's the area was almost devoid of human inhabitants. The only

lasting remains of the Tocobago Indians are the shell mounds and other

archaeological sites found throughout the Tampa Bay area, as well as the local

place names such as "Tampa", originally given to a native village in the

vicinity.

Various explorations and visitations occurred throughout the 17th and 18th

centuries. S'panish fishermen, working out of Cuba, maintained limited

settlements in the Tampa Bay area for use as a base for their Gulf coast

operations. These fishermen planted the first citrus groves in the area.

Permanent settlements, however, awaited the coming of an American named Robert

Hackley in 1823. Hackley's initial settlement was preempted by the Army which

built Fort Brooke on the site. The garrison which was established, stimulated

further settlement both in the immediate Tampa Bay area and along the lower

Gulf Coast in general. In 1834 Hillsborough County was created by the Florida

Legislature, and the 1840 census revealed a total of 452 inhabitants.

T@-M@ Paw Was =^%-4- ant. to the early s-ttlers primarily as a source of food
. --j." - j ... t'-' .I - -1- - ly I @ I

and secondarily as a harbor. This situation began to change shortly after

settlement. The Bay was the scene for numerous skirmishes between Union

4orces and Confederate blockade runners who were running local agricultural

gccds, hides, and lumber during the Civil War. During the 1880's, a much more

significant natural resource, phosphate, was discovered in the interior of

Florida, west of Tampa, and its extraction and shipment has been a major

economic focus in the area ever since.

Tn particular, the bulk tonnage of phosphate ore was an incentive for

construction of both railroad lines and port facilities. It was recognized

that the natural shallow basin of Tampa Bay would present a continual

obstacle. Therefore, the 1871 survey done by the Army Corps of Engineers

recommended that a channel be dredged in upper Hillsborough Bay. That initial

dredging has initiated excavations throughout the Tampa Bay area ever since.

Competition between the initial harbor facilities at the mouth of the

Hillsborough River and subsequent development of Port Tampa on the eastern

shore of Old Tampa Bay was later augmented by the creation of shipping

channels to serve the Big Bend and Bartow electric plants. In 1969, a 40 foot

channel to Port Manatee was built. This channel now separates the Terra Ceia

and Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserves.

The complex system of shipping channels in Tampa Bay has always presented

environmental problems. The great effort involved in creating and maintaining

what is now a 43-foot channel has resulted in major disruptions to the bottom

contours of the Bay. Spoil disposal, which in the past was responsible for

Kll%- inn ext-ensive -ac-reames ^f re%@-s- beds and cysterbars, remains one of

the most intractable problems of overall bay management.

Development within the three counties adjoining Tampa Bay has had different

economic roots. Hillsborough County in the Tampa area has emerged as a

leading business and industrial center, while Pinellas County, the most

densely settled county in Florida, has long been famous as a retirement

community. Manatee County's growth has been more recent and more mixed in

type. The north coast of Manatee County and the southwestern coastline of

Hillsborough County are still largely agricultural. Although they differ in

magnitude, both urban and rural areas impact the environmental integrity of

Tampa Bay. Stormwater runoff, wastewater treatment effluent, and

concentrations of fertilizers and pesticides all contribute to the pollution

of Bay waters.

The challenge of resource management in Tampa Bay entails the maintenance of
the historic assets (industrial shipping, commercial and recreational fishing,

and aesthetic and recreational use) as well as the upgrading and maintenance

of the Bay's present environmental condition. Since both the Terra Ceia and

Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserves are located in some of the least disturbed

areas of Tampa Bay, it is extremely important that they be carefully

maintained.

3. Archaeological Sites

The earliest known inhabitants of Florida were from the Paleo-Indian Period

which existed prior to 8,000 B.C. As large Pleistocene animals became

Z. fit ^ Ae,,@A-n4- on G-_11 game. F res 1,04 a It. er
extinct, the Indians b-cam., -or-; " pCilu'; 6 If .. U@J

shellfish became an important part of the Indian diet and semi-permanent

villages developed. The discarded shellfish resulted in large middens, and

Warren (1966) has shown that portions of the middens left in now sunken river

channels in Tampa Bay were left by Archaic period peoples.

Preceramic Archaeic period points were found at the southeast head of Bishop
Harbor (1979). Also, the Madiera Rickel Mound State Archaeological Site is

located on Terra Ceia Island within the Preserve. In all, 81 sites have been

identified in the area and are listed with the Division of Historical

Resources. There are many sites that have not yet been registered and

probably many more sites are undiscovered due to the undisturbed nature of the

preserve. Many archaeological sites have already been disturbed or destroyed

in the Tampa Bay region due to rapid growth, and therefore, preservation of

any remaining sites is critical.

4. Present Population Characteristics

The growth management concerns of Florida are readily reflected in the

tri-county area encompassing Tampa Bay. The 1.67 million people who dwell in

Pinellas, Hillsborough, and t-lanatee Counties represent approximately one-sixth

of the state's population and have an overall growth rate that closely

parallels that of the state's 4.35% annual growth (as averaged from, 1970 to
1984). In Manatee County, the least populous of the three counties, the

growth rate has been even greater, averaging over 5.0% per year. Projections

suggest that although the growth rate will trail that of the state, the

difference will not be very great. By the turn of the century the Tampa Bay

region is expected to be home to 2.1 m46111141on people, or roughly one-seventhl of

the projected 14.67 million in Florida.

The provision of housing for these additional 431,000 people will be a major

developmental issue throughout the region, for the above mentioned POPLIlation

increase will translate into approximately 172,000 dwelling units.

Substantial areas exist in all three counties where development could occur

that would not directly affect Tampa Bay, but virtually all of it would have

an indirect impact. The Tampa Bay watershed includes about 90% of the land

area of the three surrounding counties. Even those residents living well awaly

from the waterfront have an indirect impact in a number of ways: their sewage

is treated and pumped into the bay or its tributaries, they drive across the

Bay area bridges, they launch boats in the Bay on weekends, and they use

electricity from power plants situated near the water. Viewed from this

perspective it is clear that the overall impacts on the Bay will continue to

increase even if all growth is directed away from the waterfront.

The actual economic importance of Tampa Bey is a composite of several separate

functions. Some economic values are in partial or total conflict with each

other, as for example, the value of a pristine seagrass bed as a fishery

resource verses its value as part of a navigational channel, or the use of

waterfront site as a public access point for boat launching versus its

development as a residential waterfront community.

The waterborne commerce utilizing Tampa Bay is substantial. The Port of Tampa

in 1984 handled 47.9 million short tons of export and import goods, while Port

Maratee in 1983-84 handled anot@er 5.5 million short tons. Not only dc-es the

direct and indirect value of this commerce total several hundred million

dollars annually, but the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council in their study,

Documenting the Economic Importance of Tampa Bay, calculates that the savings
in transportation costs alone total $281. million.

Bay waters also are used extensively for receiving wastewater effluent from

several sewage treatment plants and for providing cooling water for the

production of electrical energy. These uses of the Bay result in the savings

of hundreds of millions of dollars above alternative strategies. Commercial

fishing, despite its reduction in relative value from earlier years, is still

worth some $20 million annually, while recreational fishing represents several

times that figure. Other recreation pursuits in the waterfront areas, such as

waterfront residential development, and the sale of boats and marine

accessories, contribute significantly to the overall economics benefits

provided by the bay. Finally, the Bay serves an important economic function

by providing habitat, nursery areas, and food for the various biological

communities found in the Bay.

5. Coastal Area Land Use and Infrastructure

An aerial view of the Manatee County shoreline from Port Manatee to the

Manatee River provides some visual evidence that this section of the county

continues to be in transition. The older developed communities, including

Terra Ceia, Rubonia, and central Palmetto are readily distinguished from the

more recent developments, such as those in west Palmetto and Palmetto Point,

all of which have notably higher densities and have dredged finger canals with

an armoreul shore extenuding -Into Terra Ce-ja "Day., ElisewhEre, most notalbly on

Terra Ceia Island, other residential development of lower density is

occurring.

The land use pattern from the Manatee River to Rubonia is indicative of an

overall urban area with large patches of undeveloped and agricultural land

interspersed. In particular, the land between Palmetto and Palmetto Point is;

extensively planted in citrus groves, running close to the shore for much of

that stretch. Although the Terra Ceia Bay shore on either side of the Snead

Island Cutoff is characterized by an armored shore, much of the shore north of

the sewage treatment facility is relatively undisturbed, including about a

mile and a half of mangroves south of Palmetto Point. The mixed land uses

found east of US-19 and to the north of Rubonia have experienced limited

development in part due to incomplete sewage and water availability. This

situation, however, is likely to change in the near future.

The land north of Terra Ceia Bay and south of Port Manatee includes some of

the most pristine remaining shoreline along Tampa Bay, and in the waters to

the north of Rattlesnake Key and Terra Ceia Island are some of the last

remaining open shellfishing waters in Tampa Bay. This area features an array

of mangrove lined embayments and sinkholes, although numerous mosquito control

channels cut through the area. The existing development on Terra Ceia Island

is mostly low density residential. The area is served only by septic tanks

and individual wells of sulfurous water.

A proposed major development which would include most of the Terra Ceia area,

including land north to Bishop Harbor, could change the nature of this area

drastirai lit Tha 1Jevel()nmmn+ TorrA raiA Teloc ic lnratae4 nn 1 945 acres

between US-19 and 1-7.5. Although 8,801 units plus some associated commercial

and medical facilities were initially proposed, a scaled down plan for 4,997

dwelling units, 19.44 acres of commercial development, a 300 unit resort

center, and a golf course is now proposed. The nature of the area requires

careful project planning, for the entire land area surrounding the Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve is flood prone. Additionally, the Manatee County Comprehen-

sive Plan calls for low density residential development in the area, subject

to several specific provisions of the coastal zone protection element.

The reconstruction of the Sunshine Skyway Bridge between Terra Ceia and St.

Petersbura will include some alterations to the land alignment on the Terra

Ceia causeway by 1989. Although the initial construction of this bridge has

had an impact on the circulation in the area, the proposed alterations are not

likely to be as significant. Local monitoring of the plans as to possible

impacts upon the aquatic preserve is recommended. Also, a few miles inland

from the bay runs the 1-75 corridor with exits to the Sunshine Skyway (1-275)

and Palmetto. This maJor traffic corridor will in the near future be a prime

stimulus to major land development projects in both Hillsborough and north

Manatee counties (concurrent with the expansion of the highway facilities is

the expansion of Sun City Retirement Community.

The north end of the aquatic preserve is not as developed as the section in

Terra Ceia Bay, but the land in the vicinity of Bishop Harbor represents

problems of its own. The AMAX Piney Point phosphate processing plant has in

the past periodically released toxic levels of ammonia waste into drainage

ditches whi& lead into Bishop Harbor. Agricultur.-I opcraticn in the-Isaame

area have also contributed heavy nutrient loads into the Cabbage Slough--Frog

Creek drainage system. Addressing these issues will be a function of the

stormwater management section of the forthcomina revisions to the Manatee

County Comprehensive Plan. Along the north edge of the Terra Ceia Aquatic

Preserve is another problem area initially caused by filling in connection

with the creation of Port Manatee. DER has hired an employee to research the

feasibility of a restoration project at the site.

In summary, the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is located in one of the most

pristine remaining sections of Tampa Bay and includes open shellfish

harvesting waters, mangrove shorelines and relatively clear tidal tributaries.

Adjacent land uses are highly missed and range from heavy industry to open

lands, from armored shoreline to mangroves, and from agriculture to

residential. While most of the area is relatively limited in its current

development, at least partly due to limitations on existing support services

infrastructure, there are major proposals for development in the greater Terra

Ceia area, and it seems likely that the future of the area will be continued

growth and development. All of this must be weighed against the existing

water quality, resource base, and traditional uses of the aquatic preserve.

B. Natural Systems and their Components

1. Geologic Features and Land Forms

Like most estuaries, Tampa Bay is a product of the fluctuations in sea level

caused by Pleistocene and earlier glaciation. During times of lowered sea

level, the river valley of Tampa Bay was cut into underlVing 14mestown.'es by thle

paleo-Hillsborough, Manatee, and Alafia rivers. As sea level rose during
glacial retreat, the area was flooded and became Tampa Bay (Doyle 1965).

Underlying Tampa Bay are limestones and dolomites of Oligocene age and older.

The early Miocene St. Marks formation, which consists of dolomitic limestones

interbedded with terrigenous clastics, directly underlies the unconsolidated

surface sediments in the northern portion of the Bay. The Hawthorn formation

is absent in the northern portions of Tampa Bay but is present at the surface

throughout the entire southern two-thirds of the bay, including the Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve. The Hawthorn Formation also outcrops along portions of

eastern Tampa Bay. in the deeper portions of Tampa Bay, the Pleistocene river

valley has down cut as much as 90 feet into the underlying limestones. This

archaic bed has filled in with unconsolidated estuarine and fluvial sediments

(Doyle 1985).

Surface sediments are composed of fine to very fine quartz sand with varying

amounts of organic muds and coarse carbonates, mostly in the form of mollusk

shells. A band of phosphate-bearing sand occurs just west of the Interbay

Peninsula and runs south to the eastern shore of the Bay, then southwest to

the entrance off Bradenton. This band runs parallel to the shore of the

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve (Doyle 1985).

The sand side sediments in Tampa Bay were probably derived for the major

rivers during the last rise in sea level. At the present time, essentially no

sand size material is being added to the system from the rivers but input from

the Gulf of Mexico may occur in the Terra Ceia area. Streams carry only small

11-c-ads, ^-F fine sedinients. but it m-ay be th-at
"I ..W @4 of finc

materials are added through surface runoff (Doyle 1985).

Surface sediments within the Bay are constantly being reworked by benthic

organisms by tidal currents and wind qenerated waves, as well as by dredging.

When the sand veneer is dredged from the surface, mud deposits irregularly

located beneath may be mobilized. Dredging may be a process which selectively

removes sand size materials and results in increased proportions of silt and

clay sized muds. When spoil is impounded in the physical process of dredging,

coarser material is selectively removed but the fine fraction tends to leak

back into the system (Doyle 1985).

Depending on the amount of runoff at any one time, Tampa Bay can be classified

as a moderately stratified to vertically homogenous estuary. It has been

postulated that these types of estuaries serve as fine sediment sinks, that

little fine sediment escapes them and that bottom water movement tends to

bring sediment into the system from offshore (Doyle 1985).

Estuaries serve as "filters" for suspended sediment received from the land.

Salinity distributions, circulation patterns and other factors control the

distribution and transportation of suspended sediment and the depositior of

fine particles within the estuary. In turn, the distribution of silt and fine

suspended matter affects the distribution of many constituents such as

nutrients, radionuclides, and some metals. The rate and occurrence of

sediment deposition is also greatly influenced by the biological component of

the estuary (Doyle 1985).

2. Plant Associations

The plant communities of the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve are a major factor in

the continued health and productivity of the natural systems of the Preserve.

The major plant associations recognized in the Preserve include mangrove

forests, marine grassbeds, salt marshes, and drift and benthic marine algae.

Each community is presented separately although the communities are often

intermixed and are energetically interdependent. Subsections address animal

life, particularly endangered species, associated with plant communities of

the aquatic preserve.

a. Mangrove Forest. Three species of mangrove trees dominate the mangrove

community. These trees extend from the shoreline inward to the extent of

tidal influence. Tampa Bay is generally recognized as the northern limit for

extensive mangrove forests on the west coast of Florida. Although mangroves

may extend further northward in the state, the annual occurrence of freezes

gives the mangroves a stunted growth pattern and limits their distribution.
In Tampa Bay, 17,514 acres of mangrcves have been reported (McNulty 1972) and

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is recognized as a mangrove dominated community

(Estevez and Mosura 1985).

The three species of mangroves occurring are the red mangrove (Rhizophora

mangle), found nearest to the bay; the black mangrove (Avicennia germinans)

generally inland of, but sometimes mixed with the reds; and the white mangrove

(Laguncularia racemosa) generally upland, of but also mixed with blacks. The

zonation of the mangrove association is a result of tidal inundation and

saline conditions of the soil. In Tampa Bay, due to freeze damage

tide levels, these zonation patterns have become indistinct and overlapping of

mangrove species occurs (Estevez and Mosura 1985).

The dominant mangrove forest type in Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is the

"fringe" forest type (Lugo and Snedaker 1974). This forest type is

characterized by: growth on mainland shorelines of gradual slope; exposure to

tides but not daily overwashed; having sluggish internal water flow on high

tides, and minor to no scouring; and exporting particulate as well as labile

organic matter. Also present in the preserve is the "overwash" forest in

which the island is completely inundated by daily tides.

The mangrove community is a highly productive system. The prop and drop roots

of the red mangrove along with the pneumatophores of the black mangrove trap

sediments and nutrients thus providing a rich food source for benthic,

planktonic, and fish communities. The leaf fall from the mangrove community

also adds another detrital food source to the system. Mangrove communities

filter land runoff and the above ground submerged root system acts as a sub-

strate for algal attachment. Because of the high nutritive content in

mangrove communities, they act as a habitat for small fish, invertebrates,

and birds. They also act as a food base for much of the shellfish and fish

communities. Mangroves provide a buffer against erosion and storm damage to

inland area.

Within the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve, the primary-influence on mangrove

communities is through human changing of drainage patterns in upland areas,

indirect destruction through increased wave action associated with increased

boating ac+ivity, and direct destruction through excess nw-itn4nn nnt4 +@-ee

uprooting for building or water access. Since mangroves serve to stabilize

shore bottom sediffient, disturbances to mangrove forests increases turbidity in

ad1facent waters which in turn affects seagrass and other benthic communities.

b. Seaarasses. Four species of seagrass are found in the Terra Ceia Aquatic

Preserve. These marine flowering plants occur on both sandy and organic

sediments in depths down to two feet below mean spring low tides. In Tampa

Bay 14,203 acres of seagrasses have been reported. An 81% loss of seagrasses

has occurred in Tampa Bay from human impact. Most of the seagrass beds are

now limited to inshore areas due to human increased turbidity and decreased

water quality in the Bay (Lewis et al., 1985).

The four species found in Terra Ceia Preserve include turtle grass (Thalassia

testudinum), manatee grass (Syringodium filiflorme , shoal grass (Halodule

wrightii), and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima). The seagrass communities in

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve are mainly classified as fringe perennial, and

occur mostly along shallow shore areas outward into the Bay until increased

depth or turbidity limit light penetration and therefore, growth. The

zonation of seagrasses in general starts with widgeon grass occurring closest

to the shore then shoal grass, followed by turtle grass and manatee grass.

Seagrasses may be found intermixed or in monospecific stands.

Seagrass communities play an integral part in the cycling of nutrients in an

estuarine environment. They are eaten directly by urchins, conchs, fishes, as

well as by the endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) (Zeiman

1982). Also, dn-col-Oposit"lo-11 of -jea-rasses serve as the pri-mary flood source fot-

detrital feeders, which in turn are consumed by fish and other marine life

higher up the food chain. Seagrasses serve as an attachment site for many

forms of epiphytic algae that may be consumed by small fish and juvenile

shrimp. (Zeiman and Wetzel, 1980; Dawes, 1981).

Seagrass blades provide a baffling effect that slows the water current

trapping nutrients and sediments. The roots and rhizomes of the seagrasses

bind the sediment thus promoting the building of an organic substrate which

encourages a diverse meiofauna (Zieman and Wetzel 1950). The forest-like

density of the grassblades provides shelter for many small fish and

invertebrates. Due to this sheltering effect and the high nutrient level,

seagrass beds provide nursery areas for many fishes. When the loss of

seagrass beds occurs, the effect causes a reduction in water quality, a

reduction in the survival of many larval and juvenile fishes and

invertebrates, and a reduction in the availability of food throughout the food

chain which ultimately affects humans.

The most destruction done on seagrass beds is caused by dredge and fill

activities. In Florida 60,000 acres of basic estuarine habitat have been

filled (Durako et al. 1985). Even if the fill is not deposited directly on

top of seagrass beds, they are often affected through increased water

turbidity. The unconsolidated particles of the fill are continually

resuspended into the water column so recolonization of seagrasses is

inhibited. Although providing nutrients, sewage outfall often causes a

phytoplankton bloom or a dramatic epiphytic algae growth which shade the

spaara-,ses causing a InqzS in productivity, Propeller cuts also cause damage

to seagrass beds. Since few of the grasses in Tampa Pay set seed, the

recolonization of the damaged areas is quite slow or nonexistant.

c. Benthic and Drift Algae. In Tampa Bay 217 species of algae have been

identified (Dawes, 1985). Most of these species of algae could occur in the

Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve since all habitat types are present, from deep to

shallow water and from sandy to hard substrate. These species vary from

benthic macroalgae to microscopic algae. The highest diversity and abundance.
is found in lower Tampa Bay (Dawes, 1985), which includes the Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve.

The benthic algae present may either be attached to the sand or to hard

surfaces depending upon the species. Some rhizomatous algae such as Calurpa

sp. help bind the sand in much the same way as do seagrass beds. Algae may

become detached from the substrate by wave action or because of the grazing

activity of organisms. In these ways much of the drift algae of the preserve

is generated. Algae need to settle on a substrate to begin growth, but once

growth has been initiated, attachment is often unnecessary for further growth.

Because of this ability, large quantities of algae can be found along the

shoreline during periods of high growth. These algae provide a shelter ard

food source for small invertebrates and fish.

Dredge and fill activities affect algae in much the same way as they affect

seagrass beds. The algae community is damaged by direct deposition of fill or

by low light penetration when the turbidity increases through such activities.

Since the algae are able to quickly assimilate nutrients, poorly treated

se,.-!age cutf a!! may causen ex+.c-,,s4, @.C U'll gae grow-W,lCh "'11 1 ch III Inuders fishing

activities and causes odor problems for shore residents when the algae wash

ashore and decompose.

d. Salt Marsh. Salt marshes can be defined as grass dominated communities

that grow intertidally along pro-'L-.ected shorelines and backwaters that are

periodically flooded by salt or brackish water. The predominant salt marshes

in Tampa Bay are needle rush (Juncus roemerianus marshes. The salt marshes

serve as a transition zone between mangroves and freshwater marshes (McMulty
1972). Tn Tampa Bay 1,728 acres of salt marsh have been reported (McMulty

1972).

The zonation of the salt marsh normally starts with smooth cordgrass (Spartiia

alterniflora) occurring at the shoreline or behind a fringe of red mangrove

(Estevez and Mosura IL985). Landward of the smooth cordgrass, needle rush is

usually present. Landward of this band the salt flats are present with
vegetation such as seashore saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), glasswort
(Salicornia perennias), and saltwort (Batis mariLlma). The salt flats are
areas of highly saline soil which experience occasional flooding.

The salt marsh community is also important in detrital production for export

into the estuarine food web. Along the shore where there is tidal inundation,

epiphytic algae grow attached to the base of the salt marsh grasses. Salt

marshes filter land runoff, thereby maintaining the water quality of the area.

Dredge and fill activities can destroy or reduce salt marsh communities. Air

boat traffic can also severely damage the salt marsh plants. Some success has

been achieved in replanting salt marshes in Tampa S-ay, but tka -^1.1

take years to grow and may never reach the productivity of a natural marsh.

3. Animal Life

The combination of subtropical climate, diverse vegetation and habitat

provides ideal conditions for the survival of an abundant and wide variety of

wildlife species in the aquatic preserve. The mangroves, seagrass beds and

salt marshes also provide a refuge for animal species visiting this area

during migrations, for daily feeding purposes and during times of

environmental stress (i.e., drought and storms). These visitors form an

extensive species list including live bottoms, oyster beds, marine fishes,

colonial water birds, migratory waterfowl, marine mammals, reptiles,

amphibians, various shellfish and other marine invertebrates and several

endangered species. Many water and shorebirds use the mangrove islands as

nesting sites. However, mosquito impoundments, dredge and fill projects,

causeways, road and bridge construction have modified much of the original

habitat. These man-made modifications have caused a variety of changes to the

animal life of the estuary.

a. Live Bottom. Live bottom communities are present in the Terra Ceia

Aquatic Preserve. These communities represent "areas containing biological

assemblagqs of such sessile invertebrates as sea fans, sea whips, hydroids,

anemones, ascidians, sponges, bryozoans, and hard corals living upon and

attached to naturally occurring hard and rocky formations" (Harris 1981).

Although the Terra Ceia communities do not contain reef forming corals the

live bottom species that are present are an important habitat and food source

for a ran,,e of vertebr--tes and invertebrates (Derrenbacker and I.CNr,,,-, 1.9.O.S,-%,--,-

The rarity of these types of communities in the Tampa Bay area makes the

preservation of live bottom communities especially important.

Man can destroy live bottom communities by depositing fill material directly

on the site or depositing the fill nearby thereby clogging the filter feeders

in the the community. Destruction may also occur when nets are hauled across

the site, by excessive collecting by divers or by a reduction in water

quality.

b. Oyster Beds. The primary oyster indigenous in Tampa Bay is the American

oyster (Crassostrea virginica). Oysters tend to form aggregations of varing

sizes on a variety of substrates. Oysters are commonly found attached to dead

oyster shells or mangrove roots. Oyster beds and bars are usually limited to

the filid-intertidal zone where minimum inundation and heat determine the upper

limit and predation determines the lower limit of the oyster bed. Oysters

serve as attachment sites for other invertebrates and algae and also provide a

feeding area for crabs, raccoons, and wading birds (Bahr 1982).

Since oysters filter feed directly on suspended particulate matter in tile

water column, they tend to concentrate pollutants present in the water.

Because of this.characteristic shellfish harvesting is only permitted in areas

that pass stringent water quality tests. Terra Ceia is one of the few areas,

left in Tampa Bay still open to shellfish harvesting. Scallops and clams are

also present in the preserve.

Dredge and fill activities can damage oyster beds through direct removal,

denCS4+4nn nv- +k%-^Ugh Cjonn4"n cf the filtering mechanisms of the oyster.

c. Fisheries. Two hundred and three species of fish are found in the Tampa
Say area (Comp 1985). The commercial fishing industry in Tampa Bay area

accounts for 12.8% of the total landings in Florida. Manatee County landings

alone account for 44.8% of the total Tampa Bay landings.

A majority of marine species important to man are inextricably linked to the
estuarine environment (Lindall 1981). It has been estimated that up to 97.5%

by weight of the commercial fishery resources in the Gulf of Mexico and over

90% of the sport or recreational species in the United States depend upon

estuarines during all or part of their life cycle (Comp 1985). In Florida, at

least 72% of the 89 commercially-landed species of finfish and shellfish and

74% of the 84 recreational species are estuarine dependent (Durako et al.

1985). Estuaries serve as nursery grounds for invertebrate and fish species

by providing food, shelter, and refuge from predators.

Species of special concern in Florida that are found in the preserve include

the snook (Centropomus sp.) and red drum (Sciaenops ocellata). The snook has

been classified as a gamefish, which prohibits the commercial harvesting of

the species, but allows for limited sports fishing with set size and bag

'limits and season of the year. The recent rise in popularity of Cajun food

and particularly of blackened redfish (red drum) has increased the pressure on

this species and has markedly reduced its population. The Fisheries Service as

an agency of the Commerce Department's National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration has imnlernen+pd an emercenCy rpqU1A+4nn -rnv- +lip mAnAqeMen+ n-r
J J . - - - - -- -_ --.- @ 11 1

the directed net fisheries in Federal waters. This action is seen as a first

step in the regulation of commercial use of this species.

Other species of economic importance include: black drum (Pogonias cromis),
flounder (Paralichthys albigutta), black muller (kl_uqil trichodon), spotted Sea
trout (Cynoscion nebulosus), and sheepshead (Archosargus probatocephalus).

d. Amphibians and Reptiles. Information on amphibians and reptiles is

scarce. Species known to occur in the coastal areas of Tampa include nine

species of frogs and 27 species of reptiles including the American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis), two tortoises, four terrapins, five lizards and
18 snakes (Long 1975). Most amphibians and reptiles cannot tolerate the

saline environments within and immediately adjacent to the aquatic preserve

and their numbers are reduced because of this. The loggerhead sea turtle
(Caretta caretta--a threatened species), green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas--ain
endangered species) and leatherback sea turtle (Demochelys coriacea--an
endangered species) are known to nest along the coastal beaches and may

occasionally nest within the preserve. Sitings and nestings of these species

should be carefully monitored and documented.

The American alligator is designated as a species of special concern by the

State of Florida, and the indigo snake, (Drymarchon Corais), is on the State's

threatened species list. The abundance of both of these species should be

monitored within the preserve.

0. Bird Populations. Climate, vegetation and habitat combined with the

ig a C A/
geographic location of Florida and Tampa Pay Adfarent to a- major in. r t r

path contribute to the wide variety of bird species found either as permanent,

winter or summer residents or as transients to the area. Eighty-nine species

are found in the vicinity of Terra Cela Aquatic Preserve (Long, 1975). Of

those species found in the area two are classified by the Federal Fish and
Wildlife Service 1 and/or the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission2 as
endangered species (Southern Bald Eagle 1,2 , and Wood Stork1), and five as

species of special concern (Brown Pelican2, Roseate Spoonbill2, Little Blue

Heron2, Snowy Egret2 and Tri-colored Heron2).

Mangrove areas and scattered openings within the mangrove forests provide

excellent foraging and resting habitat for herons, ibis, Wood Storks and

waterfowl (Long 1975). The mangrove fringe and mangrove islands are used as

nesting habitats by both the larger wading birds (herons, ibis, egrets, etc.)

and also by vireos, warblers and Mangrove Cuckoos. There are two active

colonies in the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve. Terra Ceia Bird Key is managed

by National Audubon Society as the Washburn Sanctuary. This seven and one

half acres mangrove island is the second largest mixed colony in the Tampa Bay

area and is the breeding site for 15 species of herons, ibis, pelicans and

egrets. There are also yellow-crowned night herons nesting within Frog Creek

in the upper portion of Terra Ceia Bay. Research is needed to quantify the

number of species and individuals and habitat use of the preserve by these

populations.

f. Mammals. Twenty species of marine mammals are reported in the greater

Tampa Bay area (Reynolds and Patton 1985). Most of these species are rarely

seen in the Bay area, only the bottlenese do7phin (Tursiops truncatus) and the

West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) are considered year round residents.

In 1872 Maynard described the manatee as being "remarkably abundant" in Tampa,

Bay. The peak population in Tampa Bay now is estimated as being between 70

and 80 individuals.

Manatees are known to use Terra Ceia Bay frequently from March to December.

There are currently no protected areas, under Chapter 16N-22 of the Florida

Manatee Sanctuary Act, within this preserve, although Terra Ceia Bay is now

under consideration for being designated as a Manatee Sanctuary. As suggested

by the Manatee Protection Plan, multi-family and single family docks will be

limited to one boat slip for every 100 ft. of natural shoreline. Multi-slip

docks will also be required to be clumped to minimize the disturbance to the

shoreline. New marinas in high manatee use areas will be prohibited.

Activities within the preserve should be managed to guarantee the health and

safety of manatees and all other endangered species.

All other mammals within the preserve are fairly common with the exception of

the river otter (Lutra canadensis) and the bob cat (Lynx rufus). Both of

these species are uncommon. Species common to the coastal scrub and mangrove

area include the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinclCus), the cotton rat

(Sigmodon hispidus), the raccoon (Procyon lotor , common oppossum (Didelphis

virginiana) and marsh rabbit (Sylvilagus palustrisj.

Chapter V

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

A. Introduction

The main objective of the resource management plan in the aquatic preserve is

to protect the resources of the aquatic preserves for the benefit of future

generations (Section 258.35, F.S.). The management of this preserve will be

directed toward the maintenance of the existing or essentially natural

conditions and the restoration of degraded areas. This part of the management

plan addresses the policies and procedures which the onsite and administrative

personnel will pursue. The onsite management will involve DMR's field

personnel assigned to the aquatic preserve. The administrative management

will involve Division of Recreation and Park's personnel (both in the field

and in Tallahassee) and the Division of State Lands' personnel, cooperating in

the review of applications for use of state-owned lands and related activities

surrounding the preserve. These personnel will be interacting with various

government and non-governmental entities, interest groups and individuals.

B. Onsite Management Objectives
The onsite management objectives are reflectea in the activities that the

field peronnel become involved in (i.e., observation, research, public

interaction, emergency responses, etc.) to protect and enhance the resources

within the Aquatic Preserve. Other activities, such as the interaction with

other government and nongovernmental entities, are covered in more detail in

Chapter VI (Management Implementation Network). The field personnel's duties

are, with respect to management of the various uses of the aquatic preserve,

addressed in more detail in Chapters VII through XI. The field personnel will

generally be involved in all management activities concerning the Terra Ceia

area.

1. Plant Communities

The communities of aquatic and wetland plants within the Preserve perform five

major functions vital to the health and productivity of the estuarine system.

a. they stabilize geologic features such as beaches in the face of

dynamic forces (i.e., currents, tides, winds, and waves),

which often act in concert to both erode and deposit;

b. they create, from recycled nutrients and solar energy, the organic

material that fuels the estuarine food web which support the area's

fisheries, endangered species, migratory waterfowl, colonial

waterbird nesting colonies, raptors, marine mammals, and marine and

estuarine invertebrates;

c. they provide protected fisheries habitat for spawning and juvenile

finvolnnMonf, Mory of +kc

commercial fisheries of the state and the nation;

d. they provide roosting and nesting habitat for water birds; and,

e. they physically buffer estuarine and riverine waters from

contaminated and channelized runoff from uplands within the estuarine

watershed and, in some cases, buffer the uplands from storm waves and

winds.

The management objectives for plant communities will be to maintain and

enhance these functions. Because these plant communities are critically

important to the well-being of the Preserve, a program to work toward the

protection and restoration of those communities now damaged or destroyed by

human activities should be developed.

Management Policy

a. Field Familiarization and Documentation. Field personnel will become

familiar with the plant species and communities present in the aquatic

preserve, and locations of their occurrences. Field maps will be updated on a

bi-yearly basis.

b. Literature Familiarization. Field personnel will continue to assemble a

working library of existing pertinent literature concerning the species and

communities present in the aquatic preserve. Staff will become familiar with

the ranges, life histories, ecological requirements, productivity, importance

to ,-Mter I -44crm s+abilizttion, wildlife habitat

provision, fisheries habitat provision, and fisheries food production of the

plant communities within the aquatic preserve.

c. Preparation of Guidelines for Management of Endangered Species.

Field personnel, with the help of the scientific community, personal field

observations and literature reviews, will develop maps (using 7.5 minute

quadrangles) showing the locations of threatened and endangered plant species

within the aquatic preserve. A set of management guidelines for each species,

outlining the habitat requirements and the methods to sustain and/or restore

these habitats will be developed. Field personnel, in the course of

documenting the occurrence of threatened and endangered animals, will develop

maps showing the locations and types of plant communities used by these

animals for nesting, roosting, feeding, resting, spawning, etc. Guidelines

for maintaining or restoring "critical habitat" required by each species will

then be developed using all appropriate scientific resources available.

d. Monitoring of Plant Communities for Natural Changes. Field personnel will

become familiar with the use of aerial photography and LANDSAT imagery, for

the study and monitoring of plant communities (historical and present) and

will use this remote sensing in conjunction with field observations to monitor

and document natural changes such as:

1. freeze damage to, and recovery of, mangrove communities;

2. wind and wave damage to mangrove communities from storms and

hurricanes;

3. accretion-related seaward extension of mangrove communities;

4. erosion-related landward retraction of mangrove communities;

5. de-ositional turying of marine grassbeds communWac-

6. invasions of exotic plant species and revegetation by native species

after exotic plant removal projects;

7. pathogen damage to and recovery of plant communities;

e. Identification of Areas and Communities in Need of Restoration.

Field personnel will in conjunction with their resource mapping systematically

survey the aquatic preserve to determine the location, nature, and extent of

environmental damages from human activities and assess the possibility of

restoring each site according to whether the site is publicly or privately

owned, and the cost and effort required.

f. Protection of Plant Communities. Field personnel shall protect the plant

communities from the various uses within the aquatic preserve according to the

following guidelines.

1. Field personnel in their biological reports shall not recommend for

approval any proposed use of submerged lands when the plant

communities in the proposed use area appear to be Jeopardized.

i. Pruning of mangroves shall only be permitted for minimum access

from the mean hiqh water line to a dock or pier. The destruction

clearing of mangroves in the preserve shall be strictly

prohibited.

ii. Marine grassbed communities shall not be removed or shaded to

such an extent as to cause the death of a significant area of the

community. They shall not be subjected to unacceptable

turbidity, decreased light penetration, propeller or net damage.

2. Field personnel shall be notified of applications for uses of submerged

lands within the aquatic preserve by the Bureau of Land and Aquatic

Resource Management @RLARM) central office. No applications will be

approved within any Resource Protection Areas 1 and 2 (see section C of

this chapter) without a through review by the field personnel. The field

personnel will inspect the site, assess the potential impact to the plant

communities, and then convey their recommendations to the central office

as required.

3. Field personnel will initiate various educational programs and supplement

existing educational programs designed to increase public awareness of the

damage that recreational, private and commercial uses (i.e., propeller

damage) can inflict on marine grassbed communities. Educational programs

can also be undertaken with other federal, state or local groups (i.e.,

Florida Sea Grant, Agency on Bay Management, and school boards, etc.).

4. Field personnel will develop an exotic plant control and removal plan

after monitoring the rate and extent of invasion by exotic species, such

as Brazilian pepper, Australian pine, and melaleuca.

5. In cooperation with the Manatee County Planning Commission and staff, and

the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, field personnel will familiarize

themselves with 'The Future of Tampa Bay' The Future of the Region'

BASIS' and the federal 'Coastal Zone Management Act' so as to assess the!

ontpntial imparts, nf nil Spillq nr natural castastrophe on the natural

resources of Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve.

g. Restoration of Plant Communities. Field personnel will consult with

professionals in the wetlands restoration/vegetation field to determine the

advisability of using healthy beds of marine grasses as a stock source to

restore damaged grassbeds. They will develop guidelines for restoring

marine grassbeds in the aquatic preserve.

Field personnel will identify easily accessible mangrove communities within

the aquatic preserve where a high density of mangrove seedlings could serve as

a nursery stock source for transplanting to restoration sites. Guidelines for

restoring mangrove communities within the aquatic preserve will be developed

after consultations with professionals in the wetlands restoration/revegetation

field concerning proven procedures for transplanting and nurturing mangroves.

Because restoration/mitigation projects have had variable results,

developments that require restoration or mitigation will be discouraged. If

after careful consideration a development is found to be overwhelmingly in the

public good or no alternative plan devised, restoration/mitigation will be

considered. Tn the event that restoration/mitigation is required as the

result of a permit application with DER, DNR, or any other process, field

personnel will be responsible for monitoring and documenting all restoration

activity. This might include advising the individuals involved in the actual

restoration work on the best techniques under the available restoration

guidelines. All restoration/mitigation plans will be reviewed prior to the

commencement of the proposCU-1 -develOp-ment, , a n U-4 assessed, as@to 41411-s feasilulizilty.

Field personnel will monitor the success of all restoration projects and

document their success/failure, so as to provide more precise guidelines for

future projects or more strigent requirements if attempts are unsuccessful.

h. Identification of Research Needs. Field personnel will identify research

needs concerning plant communities within the aquatic preserve. Special

emphasis will be given to research which will provide data that increases the

capability of field personnel to manage plant communities. Immediate research

needs include how plant communities respond to environmental stress.

Included in this study should be a determination of how threshold tolerances

of plant community health and diversity are related to degraded environmental

conditions.

i. Coordination with Other Researchers. Field personnel will become familiar

with research projects being conducted within the aquatic preserve by state

and federal agency biologists and non-government researchers. Personnel will

coordinate, assist and encourage research projects by the faculty, graduate,

or undergraduate students at the seven research facilities in the area

(University of South Florida, University of Tampa, Eckerd College,

Hillsborough Community College, Manatee Community College, New College in

Sarasota, and Mote Marine Lab). Water quality research issues, as they affect

plant communities, should also be closely followed. This familiarization

should lead to a better understanding of both agencies' personnel and a better

awareness of the data finding and uses. The research liaison will also be
addressed in Chapter X (Scientific Research).

2. ANIMAL LIFE

The richness of the animal life in the Te.--,--- ro4n 5"n '-por+-t -factor
'J "I'll'

in its designation as an aquatic preserve. The fish, shrimp, and crabs within

the aquatic preserve are valuable resources on which recreational and

commercial fisheries depend. Large areas of undisturbed wetlands are

excellent habitat for many types of wildlife. These wildlife include an

extensive list of endangered species, migratory waterfowl, colonial

waterbirds, invertebrates and vertebrates.

Management objectives for the fauna within the aquatic preserve will be

focused on the protection through preservation or restoration of habitats

within the preserve.

Management Policy

a. Field Familiarization and Documentation. Field personnel will become

familiar with the major animal species in each habitat in the aquatic

preserve. This identification process will include the location., number,

season of sighting, weather conditions and any other factors which may be

necessary to build a working knowledge of the species, and their interaction

and occurrence in the aquatic preserve.

b. Literature Familiarization. The field personnel will continue to assemble

a working library of existing pertinent literature concerning the animal

species and communities present in the aquatic preserve. Staff will become

familiar with the ranges, life histories, ecological requirements, position in

the community, habitat and other factors necessary for sound management.

c. Preparation of Guidelines for Management of Endangered Species. Field

r,erscnnel -o.,41 I k-Ccclmlle f -am. I 111 41 4,A -0 -#-V- 11-1 t 11he gul deal 4 nes of [email protected] Fl ori da Game and
r

Fresh Water Fish Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of

Natural Resources' Division of Marine Resources, National Marine Fisheries

Service, Marine Fisheries Commission, and any other applicable agencies and

non-governmental organizations involved in the management of endangered

species. These guidelines will be used in conjunction with the field

familiarization, documentation, and mapping to develop management guidelines

for each species, outlining their habitat requirements. Field personnel, in

the course of documenting the occurrence of threatened and endangered animals,

will develop maps showing the locations and types of plant communities used by

these animals for nesting, roosting, feeding, resting, and spawning, etc.

Literature information and personal observations will then be used to develop

guidelines for maintaining (or restoring if necessary) the "critical habitat"

required by each species.

d. Manatee Management. When application for the use of submerged lands

within the aquatic preserve or adjacent upland activities will affect a

manatee sanctuary, critical manatee habitat, or manatees known to use an area

(see Chap. IV-B3f), field personnel will notify the State Manatee Coordinator.

These applications or activities will require the coordinator's authorization

and approval before they can be recommended by BLARM. Field personnel will

also work with the coordinator in the practice and procedures of the following

activities:

i. Monitor the preserve for manatee activities and maintain a manatee

sighting map for the preserve. This mapping will take special note of

!a-cc ...... a! -natee repor*ino ard data collection

system will be established and will make use of other governmental

personnel and private individuals where possible.

ii. Identify and map shallow water and narrow areas where manatee

boat/barge collisions are more likely.

iii. Identify any other areas for additional manatee sanctuaries, special

channel marking, and slow speed zones.

iv. Application for use of submerged lands will be reviewed for design and

operation that are least dangerous and disruptive to manatees.

Approved uses within manatee areas should require manatee caution

signs and any other requirements that will guarantee manatee health

and safety.

v. The creation of new marinas and multiple slip residential dockina

facilities should be prohibited in manatee sanctuaries and severely

limited in.identified manatee use areas.

vi. The creation of canals and basins within or contiguous to manatee

sanctuaries shall be prohibited.

vii. Assist local governments in the incorporation of manatee issues into

their marina siting elements.

viii. Schedule and monitor activities within manatee use areas during

seasons of lowest use.

ix. Assist in public awareness education efforts.-

e. Monitoring Changes in Animal Populations. Field personnel will study and

monitor changes in animal species that are caused by natural phenomena, such

as:

i. 4reezes;

ii. storms and hurricanes;

iii. changes in habitat due to changes in plant types;

iv. changes in habitat due to water quality changes; and

v. geologic or hydrologic changes including erosion, estuarine current

flow changes, and any other physical changes.

f. Protection of Animal Life from Human Uses of the Aquatic Preserve. The

protection of animal species shall be considered when reviewing applications

in or affecting the preserve. The reviewer shall also consider the potential

effects of the proposed use on plant communities that function as habitat for

the animal life. Disturbances that alter or hinder the natural activities arid

functions of the animal species living within the preserve (e.g., air

pollution, excessive noise or bright lights affecting a bird rookery), shall

also be analyzed and concerns addressed in the permitting process. Field

personnel will be notified of any proposed activities (e.g., seismic testing,,

mammal capture by permit) within the aquatic preserve that might affect the

well-being of animal life, and personnel should be involved in planning the

activity so as to cause the least amount of stress on animal life.

a. Hentification of Research Needs. Field personnel in the course of their

duties shall identify research needs required to improve the management of

animal life in the aquatic preserve. This identification process is more
fully described in Chapter XII (Identified Program Needs).

3. GEOLOGIC FEATURES

The riiariagerrent of geologic fe-atures requirc that thic ficeld personnell

become aware of the natural geologic features and the changes, both human and

natural, which affect these features within the aquatic preserve. This

knowledge should strengthen the review process for applications on state-owned

land as they might affect these features. These geclogic features will

include inlets, islands, shoals, shorelines, embayments, and channels. The

overall objective of the management of these features is to allow the

naturally dynamic system to operate without man's influence or interference.

Active management in this area shall include the review of proposed uses that

might affect the geologic features within the aquatic preserve. The majority

of these reviews will probably concern bulkheads, revetments, groins, dredge

and fill, bridges and channels as they might affect state-owned lands.

Bulkheads are not allowed within the preserve, except as stated in Sections

258.42(2), and 258.44 F.S. and in accordance with the management objectives of

the preserve. Bulkheads placed upland of the aquatic preserve shall be

constructed following the natural contour of the shore. Drainage patterns

will be maintained or shall only be minimally altered. The use of rip-rap

with mangroves or other suitable native plantings are always preferable tu

bulkheads. Management will make every effort to educate the public about the

economic and environmental advantages of vegetated shorelines.

Existing bridges and causeways throughout the state have resulted.in losses of

grassbeds, mangroves and the degradation of the water quality. Causeways

restrict natural flushing and create unnatural circulation patterns.

Proposals for bridge and causeway construction within the preserve will be

reviewed in light of these potential impacts.

Maintenance dredging of existing channels will be carefully studied to remove

conditions that require perennial maintenance and chronic environmental

disturbances. Channel dredging has adversely impacted other waterways, with

varying influences, depending on channel location and current. Proposed

channel dredging will be reviewed in light of these past experiences.

Field personnel shall also be involved in the review of project proposals

submitted to other agencies, such as the U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers,

Department of Environmental Regulation, the Department of Transportation,

Southwest Florida Water Management District or the Tampa Port Authority, and

shall formally review and comment on any permit application that impacts the

aquatic preserve. These projects shall be reviewed jointly with those

agencies' personnel whenever possible. Field personnel will review these

proJects and act as advocates on behalf of the aquatic preserve and its

resources.

4. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AMD HISTORICAL SITES

Archaeological and historical sites have several characteristics which must be

recognized in a resource management program.

i. They are a finite and non-renewable resource.

ii. Each site is unique because individually it represents the tangible

remains of events which occurred at a specific time and place.

iii. While these sites uniquely reflect localized events, these events and

the origin of particular sites are related to conditions and events in

other times and places. They also preserve traces of past biotic

rnmmiini+iac climate, and other elements of the environment that are

of interest to both the scientific community and the general public.

iv. These sites, particularly archaeological sites, are very fragile

because their significance is derived not only from the individual

artifacts within them, but especially from the spatial arrangement of

those artifacts in both horizontal and vertical planes.

Administering Agency

The management of the archaeological and historical sites is authorized and

administered by the Division of Archives, History and Records Management

(DHR) in the Florida Department of State. The management authority for this

area of management is presented in Chapter II (Management Authority).

Management Policy

The management policy presented here is one of conservation, as recommended by

the DHR and subject to the agency's changes. Their policy is as follows:

1. The field personnel and all other agencies planning activities

within the aquatic preserve shall coordinate closely with DHR in

order to prevent any unauthorized disturbance of archaeological and

historical sites that may exist on the affected tract. DHR is

vested with the title to archaeological and historical resources

abandoned on state lands and is responsible for administration and
protection of such resources (subsection 267.061(l)(b), F.S.). it

is illegal to destroy or otherwise alter sites on state lands without

a permit from DHR (Section 267.13, F.S.). Therefore, agencies

planning activities should coordinate their plarts witl-I L-Ani-K dt d-

sufficiently early stage to preclude inadvertent damage or

destruction to these resources.

The nature of these sites' fragility and vulnerability to looting and

other destructive forces requires that the location of these sites

not be widely known, if the location is known at all. In may

instances DHR will have knowledge of the known and expected site

distribution in an area. Special field surveys for unknown areas

many be required by DHR to identify potential endangerment of a

proposed activity to these archaeological and historical sites. This

will be especially necessary in the case of activities contemplating

ground disturbance over large areas.

3. In the case of known sites, activities that are expected to alter or

damage these sites shall alter their management or development plans

as necessary, or make special Provisions so as not to disturb or

damage such sites prior to professionally acceptable and authorized

mitigation.

4. If in the course of a management activity, or as a result of

development of the permitting of dredge/fill activities, it is

determined that valuable historical or archaeological sites will be'.

damaged or destroyed, DHR reserves the right to require salvage

measures to mitigate the destructive impact of such activities on such

sites (subsection 267.061 (1) (b), F.S.). Such salvage measures

shall be accomplished before DHR would grant permission for site

destruction.

5. Excavation of archaeological sites in the near future is discouraged.

Archaeolonira! sifes within the Anuatir nrecerve should be left

undisturbed for the present, with particular attention devoted to

preventing site looting by "treasure hunters".

@7. Field personnel will note suspected sites for future surveys by DHR.

Cooperation with other agencies in this activity is also encouraged

by DHR. The DHR will help inform the field personnel about the

characteristics and appearance of these sites.

7. Any discovery of instances of looting or unauthorized destruction of

these sites will be reported to the DHR so that appropriate action

may be initiated. The Florida Marine Patrol and other enforcement

personnel of DNR shall provide enforcement assistance to DHR and

make arrests or investigate cases of looting or other unauthorized

destruction of archaeological sites. The field personnel will follow

the above management policy and become familiar with the personnel

involved with this task in DHR and their procedures for identifying

suspected sites.

5. WATER RESOURCES

Responsible management of water resources for the protection of human health

and recreational enjoyment of the Aquatic Preserve water, as well as for the

protection and enhancement of the preserve's plant and animal communities is

one of the most critical aspect of aquatic preserve management. Research to

understand how human activity can alter or detrimentally affect the dynamic

characteristics of the Preserve's various habitats can be approached

confidently after monitoring,data has been used to model the effects of

naturally occurring variations on the same habitat. A single toxic substance

A. I-
may be all that. is, riecc-ssary to initilate irreparabie ecoloyicai damage and

change in the water resources of the aquatic preserve estuarine ecosystem.

Management Policy

The successful management of the water resources of the Aquatic Preserve

depends heavily on other government agencies (i.e., DER and the Southwest

Florida Water Management District) charged with regulating water quality and

quantity. Water resource management shall have as its major objective the

maintenance of water quality and the natural seasonal fluctuations of fresh

water into the estuary. Water resource data is available from

non-governmental agencies, among them colleges, universities, scientific

foundations and private consultants working in the Tampa Bay area. These

various entities have interests at many different levels and areas within the

riverine and estuarine system. The aquatic preserve management program will

manage the water resources through coordination with these various entities.

The field personnel will not conduct water sampling, but through the review of

data from other entities and from field observations, they will identify water

resource problems in the aquatic preserve. Efforts will be made to ensure

consistency in project design and sampling techniques so that data from

various studies can be used for integrated analysis.

a. Familiarization with the Jurisdiction, Personnel and Monitoring Programs

of Government Agencies and Other Entities. Field personnel will become

thoroughly familiar with the jurisdiction, personnel and monitoring programs

of other agencies, institutions, and corporations involved in studying,

monitoring, regulation and managing water resources within the aquatic

preserve and the drainage basins which provide fresh water to this preserve.

T6^SQ -Ig@=4er -1-o be working or having potential activities affect'-
"- - - I @ 11 61119

the preserve are listed below; others may be added as they are identified.

Florida Department of Environmental Regulation

2. Manatee County Health Department

3. Manatee County Department of Land and Natural Resources

4. Manatee County Planning and Development Department

5. Southwest Florida Water Management District

6. Marine Fisheries Commission

7. U.S. Geological Survey

S. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

9. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council

10. Agency on Bay Management

11. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission

12. Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory

113. University of Tampa

14. University of South Florida

15. Manatee Community College

16. Hillsborough Community College

17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

18. Eckerd College

19. Mote Marine Lab

20. Tampa Electric Company

21. Tampa Port Authority

22. Department of Natural Resources-Shellfish Sanitation Section

23. Sea Grant Extension Service and Sea Grant College Program

b. Monitoring of Uater Resources by Cooperative Data Collection anj
U I\C V I q=VII.

Field personnel will: 1. promote coordination among involved agencies in

planning monitoring programs and in evaluating monitoring data; and 2.

monitor water resources within the preserve by reviewing the data

collected and complied by those agencies as it applies to the aquatic

preserve and its resources.

c. Review of Lease Application for Aquatic preserve Uses and Watershed

Activities that would affect the Preserve Water Resources. Field personnel

will review sovereign land lease applications, development of regional impact'

reviews, and DER/COE permit applications in cooperation with other agencies as

necessary, and as outlined in Chapter V (5a) for their potential impact on the

water resources of the aquatic preserve.

d. Familiarization with and Monitoring of Activities and Users which

Regularly Contribute Pollutants to Preserve Waters. Field personnel will

become familiar with the activities and users which regularly or potentially

contribute pollutants to the waters of the Aquatic Preserve. This monitoring

will be accomplished directly by field observations and indirectly by review

of other entities' water resource data. Field personnel will encourage and

coordinate with other agencies involved with water resource monitoring to

consider more detailed field monitoring in areas of the preserve where the

incidence of polluting activities is found to be high. These monitoring

activities will also include the monitoring of freshwater releases into the

preserve and their effect on the environment.

These activities will also be applicable to Chapter X (Scientific Research),
and the coordination through Chapter VI (Management Implementation Network).

By onsite- insprection the field pre-r-sonnel lWill K-a- -able +.^- cnvir.^n-mental

impacts as and before they occur. Tnteraction with other federal, state and

local agencies will facilitate this regulation.

6. CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

Cumulative impacts are the sum total of major and minor charges or effects

upon the natural system. Taken singularly these effects may not constitute a

notable change in the condition of the natural system, but as these single

changes or uses accumulate their combined impact may result in a substantive

environmental disturbance or degradation of the natural system.

The review of proposed uses in the aquatic preserve from the perspective of

cumulative impact analysis requires a thorough knowledge of the natural system

and the various interactions and dynamics within the system. This aquatic

preserve management program will initiate development of a cumulative impact

analysis program. The evaluation of cumulative impacts shall include the

following criteria from Chapter 18-20 F.A.C.:

"(1) The number and extent of similar human actions within the preserve

which have previously affected or are likely to affect the

preserve, whether considered by the Department under its current

authority or which existed prior to or since the enactment of the

Act; and,

(2) The similar activities within the preserve which are currently

under consideration by the department; and

(3) Direct and indirect effects upon the preserve and adjacent

preserve, if applicable, which may reasonably be expected to result

from the activity; and

(4) The extent to which the activity is consistent with management

plans for the preserve, when developed; and

.75

(5) The extent to which the activity is permissible within the preserve

in accordance with comprehensive plans adopted by affected local

governments, pursuant to Section 163.3161, F.S., and other

applicable plans adopted by local, state and federal agencies.

(6) The extent to which loss of beneficial hydrologic and biologic

functions would adversely impact the quality or utility of the

preserve; and

(7) The extent to which mitigation measures may compensate for adverse

impacts."

The availability of onsite reserve staff who are familiar with the distinctive

characteristics of this system, coupled with their ability to access LANDSAT

imagery and mapping, and other data sources, is the key to development of a

successful cumulative impact analysis program. As cumulative impacts are

identified for specific areas and/or resources, they will become an integral

part of the project analysis and decision-making process.

7. MAMAGEMEMT OF ENCROACHMENTS

The management of encroachments in the preserve will concern the unauthorized

placement of structures, unauthorized dredging or filling, or other illegal
uses in the aquatic preserve. These encroachments might also include illegal

activities associated with an approved use (e.g., extension of a dock,

construction of boat houses, extension of an approved channel).

The management policy for the field personnel, after identification of a

suspected illegal encroachment, will involve a reporting procedure and the

monitoring of the remedial action. After a field identification of a

suspected encroachment, field personnel will notify the central office to

verify the title of the property and research the possibility that the use

was an approved activity. The potential for unauthorized activities in such

an extensive area is tremendous. A progressive system of mapping and

recording will be initiated to assist the field personnel in their monitoring

of the preserve. Aerial surveys will be done to facilitate reconnaissance of

illegal activities and mapping.

The management action for verified illegal encroachment will be developed by
the agencies specifically involved (i.e., DMR, DER). Field personnel will

assist, as necessary, with field evaluation or other support activities.

Final actions will be monitored by field personnel, at the direction of the

Trustees to the central office. The procedures followed in these applications

will be decided on a case by case basis.

C. RESOURCE MAPPING AND RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS

The preliminary description and location of resources within the area

(approximately 21,736 acres of submerged land), will require the use of remote

sensing techniques. This work will be done in conjunction with DNR's Marine

Research Laboratory's Assessment of Fishery Habitat Loss Study in the Tampa

Bay area. Marine Research Laboratory personnel have developed resource and

habitat identification mapping through the use of LANDSAT (satellite) imagery

anu aerliall P1110411-0graphly.

The vegetation and land use mapping done in this study will become the basis

for the development of a Resource Protecticn Area management systen in the

aquatic preserves. This mapping system identifies and classifies various

resources within the aquatic preserves that require protection by the

management program. Acreage totals for each land use and vegetation

classification in the preserve are provided. The onsite managers will

supplement the vegetative portion of the mapping with wildlife and fisheries
information (endangered species, bird-rookeries, etc.), archaeological and

historical site information and other resource factors deemed crucial to the

continued health and viability of the aquatic preserve.

These maps will then provide the information needed to develop and update a
Resource Protection Area (RPA) mapping program. The RPA mapping system is

based on three levels of resource classification. The RPA 1 level contains

resources of the highest quality. Uses proposed for these areas receive the

most rigorous review. The RPA 1 level includes one or more of the following:

marine grassbed; live bottom; mangrove swamp; saltwater marsh; oyster bars;

archaeological and historical sites (upland and submerged); endangered species

habitat; colonial waterbird nesting sites; and other appropriate factors.

The RPA 2 areas are defined as those areas containing the resources of RPA 1,

but in a transitional condition compared to RPA 1. These resources may either

be building toward RPA 1 status or declining to RAP 3 status. RPA 2 areas

-ill
@I .4
C ve -a a s tlo t-he specil-Ir 41c area's sensitivity,to

each proposed use. Tn some respects, these areas may be more sensitive to

disturbances than RPA 1 areas. The resources of RPA 2 include: marine

grassbeds; mangroves in scrub condition or colonizing new lands; beaches

undergoing restoration; saltwater marsh colonizing new lands; and other

resources of RPA 1 type that fit in the RPA 2 condition.

RPA 3 areas are characterized by the general absence of the attributes of the

above two classes. RPA 3 areas may have small localized RPA 1 or 2 areas

within them. RPA 3 will generally have deep water areas or areas with no

significant vegetation or wildlife attributes. Nearshore and bottom areas

significantly modified by man are designated RPA 3.

These RPA maps will require periodic revisions as the onsite managers learn

more about the resource's reactions to man's uses. Scientific researc.h and

other data additions may also require modification of this system. Natural

changes will also require modification of this classification system.

Periodic checking by LANDSAT satellite imagery will become useful for remote

sensing monitoring as its use is more fully developed.

The RPA maps will become a planning tool for both onsite and central office

staff. More detailed field review will still be required to supplement this

information on a case by case basis, as necessary.

The initial development, as well as periodic review, will require the support

and.assistance of the many other resource regulating and managing agencies, as

well as local and re,,,4n-,,al government entitics. Suppert will also be

requested from the colleges, universities, foundations and other interested

groups and individuals.

The RPA mapping may use the USGS 7.5 quadrangle map format for vegetation and

these maps will be avai-lable at the central office. It is recognized that

mapping at this scale may not adequately define small areas which do not

qualify for the RPA class level assigned to a general area.

D. ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES

This section of the chapter addresses the role of the central office, in the

aquatic preserve management planning and implementation process. The central

office's role is generally interpreted within the context of coordinating

activities with the field personnel. This coordination linkage is important

to many program aspects, including project review evaluation, local contact

initiation, administrative rule development, contractual services and conflict

resolution, and the routine support (payroll, operating expenses, etc.)

usually extended by the central office to the onsite managers. All program

activities identified within this context are designed to protect and enhance

the environmental, educational, scientific, and aesthetic qualities of the

natural systems of the aquatic preserve.

1. Objectives

Specifically, the following administrative objectives are an essential part of

the aquatic preserve management program.

a. To ensure a comprehensive, coordinated review and evaluation of

proposed activities potentially affecting the environmental integrity

of the aquatic preserve.

b. To serve as the link between aquatic preserve field personnel and

state agencies and programs which originate in Tallahassee.

c. To serve as the primary staff in the development of administrative

rule additions, deletions, and revisions.

d. To serve as the administrative staff for contractual agreements and

services.

e. To establish and maintain a conflict resolution process.

f. To review all existing and past activities as to their affect on the

environmental integrity of the aquatic preserve.

2. Project Review and Evaluation

A major element in the administration of an aquatic preserve management system

is the establishment of a thorough project review process. It is the program

intent that the central office staff review all proposed activities requiring

the use of state-owned lands within the preserve. Sections 258.42 through

258.44, F.S., establish the legal context within which all proposed uses of

the aquatic preserve must be evaluated. Essentially, these sections require

that projects be basically water dependent or water-enhanced, not contrary to

the lawful and traditional uses of the preserve, and not infringing upon the

traditional riparian rights of the upland property owner.

The primary mechanism through which proposed uses are reviewed is accomplished

by participation in the state lands management process as established by

Chapter 253, F.S., and modified by Chapter 258, F.S. The central office was

administratively designated, on October 4, 1982, as an agent of the Trustees,

I -he environmental consequences of proposej uses
for the purposes of evaluation 41.

of state-owned lands within aquatic preserves.

In conducting the environmental evaluations, the central office staff will

rely heavily upon the most current, readily available data such as Department:

of Transportation (DOT) aerial photography, LANDSAT imagery, DER biological

reports, and other data resources. Tf a proposed activity is legally

consistent with the maintenance criteria outlined in Section 258.42 F.S. and

Chapter 18-20, F.A.C., and is generally of negligible environmental

concern, then the project review will likely be conducted in its entirely by

the central-office staff, utilizing the generalized environmental data.

The field personnel will be requested to conduct a more detailed environmental

assessment of the project if the central office staff, during the course of

the preliminary application review, determines that the requested use of

state-owned lands may have a significant effect upon the environmental

integrity of the preserve. Copies of all applications received will be

provided to the field personnel for project monitoring and assessment of the

possible cumulative impacts.

Field personnel will be encouraged to establish direct communication links

with the various regulatory and management agencies for purposes of obtaining

advance notifications of projects potentially affecting the preserve. All

environmental review and assessment, however, will be channeled through the

central office unless other arrangements have been previously cleared with the

central office.

While the State Lands flanagement Program authorized by Chapters 253 and 258,

F.S. and Chapters 18-21 and 18-20, F.A.C., is expected to be the primary

management implementation vehicle for the aquatic preserve, it is by no means

the only vehicle. Section 253.77, F.S., as amended, and the December, 1982

Memorandum of Understanding between the COE, DER, and ONR provide direct access

to DER 's permitting process for DNR. The Development of Regional Impact

(DRI) and other regional or state level review processes represent other

implementation mechanisms. The basic review approach and the evaluation

between the field personnel and the central office staff will be the same as

the case involving the State Lands Management program.

One aspect of the aquatic preserve review and evaluation program is the

identification of proposed activities that are either generally or

specifically prohibited. Immediately upon review of such project application,
the central office staff will notify the Division of State Lands (or other

program managers) that the proposed activity is legally unapprovable for the

stated reasons. For those proposals which are subject to denial due to their

adverse environmental impacts, even though the activity may be permissible,

Section 258.42, F.S., specifically provides that:

"(1) Mo further sale, lease, or transfer of sovereignty submerged lands

shall be approved or consummated by the trustees except when such

-sale, lease, or transfer is in the public interest.

(2) The trustees shall not approve the waterward relocation or setting

of bulkhead lines waterward of the line of mean high water within

preserve except when p 1-1 -K 14 c v- n zi A = n A k v- 4 A no c n n s t ru c tn. et + s
r, . --- -_ - ._ZJ_ @@"

have no reasonable alternative and it is shown to be not contrary

the public interest.

(3) (a) No further dredging or filling of submerged lands shall be

approved by the trustees except the following activities may be

authorized pursuant to a permit:

1. Such minimum dredging and spoiling as may be authorized for

public navigation projects.

2. Such minimum dredging and spoiling as may be authorized for

creation and maintenance of marina, piers, and docks and their

attendant navigation channels.

3. Such other alteration of physical conditions as may, in the

opinion of the trustees, be necessary to enhance the quality or

utility of the preserve or the public health generally.

4. Such other maintenance dredging as may be required for existing

navigation channels.

5. Such restoration of land as authorized by S. 253.124(8).

6. Such reasonable improvements as may be necessary for public

utility installation or expansion.

7. Installation and maintenance of oil and gas transportation

facilities, provided such facilities are properly marked with

marine aids to navigation as prescribed by federal law.

(b) There shall, in no case, be any dredging seaward of a bulkhead line

for the sole or primary purpose of providing fill for any area

landward of a bulkhead line.

not probib-it the st-a-te f%-AM lancinn +;%a nil zni nne "4nh+c =nA

permitting drilling from outside the preserve to explore for oil

and gas if approved by the board.

W There shall be ro excavation of minerals, except the dredging of

dead oyster shells as approved by the Department of Natural

Resources.

(e) There shall be no erection of structures within the preserve,

except:

1. Private docks for reasonable ingress or egress of riparian

owners;

2. Commercial docking facilities shown to be consistent with the

use or management criteria of the preserve; and

3. Structures for shore protection, approved navigational aids, or
public utility cros'sings authorized under subsection (3)(a).
M No wastes or effluents shall be discharged into the preserve which

substantially inhibit the accomplishment of the purposes of this

act.

(g) No nonpermitted wastes of effluents shall be directly discharged

into the preserve which substantially inhibit the accomplishment

of the purposes of this act."

Generally, applicants desirous of appealing staff recommendations will have to

follow those appellate procedures outlined in the appropriate authorizing

statutes. In the case where applications requesting the use of state-owned

lands are denied, three appellate procedures are available to the applicant.

Depending upon the type of application submitted, an applicant may:

a. Request the Governor and Cabinet to overturn an application decision

rendered by the Executive Director or Department of the Natural Resources

(or his designee) under a delegation of authority;

b. Request an Administrative Hearing under the procedures outlined in Chapter

120, F.S.; or

c. Appeal the action of the Board of Trustees of the Internal improvement

Trust Fund to the District Court of Appeals.

3. Liaison Between Field Personnel and Other Interested Parties
One of the most important aspects of the field personnel's job is to establish

a mutually beneficial communication link with pertinent interest groups. The

central office staff will assist in initially identifying and contacting

governmental bodies, special interest groups and interested individuals

requiring aquatic preserve program coordination.

When requested by the onsite managers, the central office staff will assist in

arranging for specialized management expertise not generally available

locally. This may include, for example, such things as arranging for DHR to

conduct a detailed cultural resource assessment for certain areas of the

preserve.

Chapter VI

Management Implementation Network

This chapter of the management plan will address the various relationships of

aquatic preserve management to the different government agencies and program,

non-governmental entities, interest groups, and individuals within the aquatic

preserve area. The activities of both field personnel and central office

staff as they relate to these other organizations will be presented.

A. Federal

Many federal agencies have property interests, land and wildlife management

programs, research activities, construction activities, and regulation

programs existing or potentially existing within the aquatic preserves. The

objective of the aquatic preserve management program will be to complement the

various activities wherever possible. The field personnel will assist those

federal agencies in areas where they have common goals. The field personnel

and central office staff will also review the federal activities as to their

effect on the objectives of the aquatic preserve mannement. This review

shall be coordinated through the DER's Office of Coastal Management for the

purposes of enforcing the provisions of the Federal Coastal Zone Management

Act of 1972, as amended.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service The aquatic preserve program will

be involve in the review of proposed preserve uses in conjunction with the

Fish and Wildlife's Division of Ecological Services in Vero Beach. This

division reviews dredge and fill requests and other federal level permitting

under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

Another management program in which the field personnel could possibly

interact with the Fish and Wildlife Service is the protection and recovery of

endangered species and bird rookeries within the aquatic preserve. Field

personnel will become involved in using available recovery techniques for this

purpose, as necessary.

2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) is

charged with providing technical guidance and planning assistance for the

nation's water resources development. The COE also provides supervision and

direction to many engineering works such as harbors, waterways and many other

types of structures. Their major responsibility, as it applies to the aquatic

preserve, is the protection of navigable waters, pollution abatement and

maintaining water quality and the enhancement of fish and wildlife.

The COE activities in the Tampa Bay area include their involvement with the

DER in the dredge and fill permitting process, technical oversight of channel,

inlet and canal maintenance, and evaluation requests for'new personnel will

'
W %;; ` `e varicus programms, policies and procedures as they
,cc f3mi, I I a r -.-V, Ite f 4-41 16 1 1

apply to the aquatic preserve.

Field personnel and central office staff will also review activities proposed

by the COE for conformance to the objectives of the aquatic preserve

management plan. This involvement should begin in the earl stages of project
y V

planning in order to facilitate the best protection of the aquatic preserve

possible.

3. U.S. Geological Survey The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) under the

Department of the Interior has the responsibility to perform surveys,

investigations, and research pertaining to topography, geology, and the

mineral and water resources of the United States. USGS also publishes and

disseminates data relative to those preceding activities. In the past the

USGS has conducted many studies on various resources in the region.

The field personnel and central office staff will become familiar with these

studies and the data reEults as they apply to their management activities.

4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), in cooperation with state and local governments, is the federal

agency responsible for the control and abatement of environmental pollution.

The six areas of pollution within which the EPA is concerned are air, water,

solid waste, noise, radiation and toxic substances. The DER is the state

agency responsible for handling most of these programs on the state level in

lieu of a federal program. Within the aquatic preserve, the field personnel

will assist the EPA In planning fieltud act-ilvit-iles and w1here there a-(@e conciuo

goals.

5. U.S. Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard is the federal agency involved in

boating safety, including search and rescue when necessary. The Coast Guard

is also charged with the permitting of structures which affect navigation and

boating safety. These structures include bridges, causeways, aerial utilities

and other structures which may be in conflict with navigational uses. The

field personnel, in conjunction with the central office staff, will also

review projects which the Coast Guard may be evaluating for permits.

6. National Marine Fisheries Service. The National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS) under the U.S. Department of Commerce is active in the Tampa Bay area

in recording commercial fish landings. The NMFS also has enforcement officers

in the area checking for illegal fishery activities. Field personnel will

work with these personnel whenever they have common goals within the aquatic

preserve.

B. STATE

Many state agencies have programs which affect the resources or regulate

activities within the aquatic preserve. There are also other DMR programs

that are within or affect the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve. This section will

describe the interactions and relationships of these various agency programs

and how they relate to aquatic preserve management.

1. Department of Environmental Regulation. The Department of Environmental

-Er quali-Ity and, in
in, c -J u 1, a t icn IDEIRI) is responsible for regulating air and wat
some cases, water quantity (through the water management district) within the

Tampa Bay area. The DER is also the local contact for the initiation of

dredge and fill applications in conJunction with the COE and DNR. With

respect to water quality and dredge and fill regulation, the DER is possibly

one of the most important agencies to the management of the aquatic preserve.

The water quality of the preserve is the most important factor to the health

of the estuarine complex, and dredge and fill activities are one of the most

potentially destructive activities within the preserve. The DER also

regulates other forms of pollution, such as air, noise, wastewater and

hazardous waste, which may be important in the future to the preserve.

Field personnel will become familiar with the water quality, dredge and fill,

and other regulatory programs that are important to the aquatic preserve. The

field personnel should develop a close working relationship with DER staff and

become familiar with DER field activities and programs that are in common with

the objectives of the aquatic preserve management program. Field personnel

should open the most efficient line of communication with the local offices to

receive the permit applications for DER as soon as possible to improve the

response time within the review process.

The DER, Office of Coastal Management is charged with coordinating activities

related to coastal management in the state and reviewing federal actions for

consistency with the State Coastal Management Program, Section 280.20, F.S.

The central office staff will maintain a close relationship with the Office of

Coastal Manaaement for assistance in the review of federal actions, data and

research needs, and other program support.

2. Department of Community Affairs. The Department of Community Affairs
(DCA) is responsible for reviewing Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) and

for designating Areas of Critical State Concern (ACSC). DRI's are major

developments that have impacts on a scale which is greater that county level

and require a regional review from neighboring local governments and state

agencies. Both the central office staff and field personnel of the aquatic

preserve program will be involved in reviewing DRI's. Field personnel should

receive notice of a DRT through the central office staff and will proceed with

the field review. The central office staff will coordinate field review

findings and work with the other state agencies in-Tallahassee in the review

of DRI.

The ACSC program is intended to protect the areas of the state where

unsuitable land development would endanger resources of regional or statewide

significance. When an area is identified as a possible ACSC, a Resource

Planning Management Program (RPMP) is established. The RPMP evaluates the

resources, and the local government's land development practices. After this

evaluation is complete, the RPMP committee makes recommendations to the local

governments on how their land development practices could be improved to

ensure an orderly and well-planned growth that would protect the critical

resources. The local governments, counties and cities, are now in the process

of making these land development modifications, based on the RPMP

recommendations. If these modification are not made to the RPMP Committee's

m n r% rv a 1 , th e _a r -a --3 el e0f 1.0cal gove-M.M.'ent that- arc, not in conformanc3 could be

designated as ACSC or the entire area may be designated an ACSC by the

Legislature. Under the ACSC designation, the local governments are required

to notify DCA of any application for a development permit. The entire land

development process will require the state's oversight until that local

government modifies its land development practices to conform to the ACSC

requirements.

3. Department of Natural Resources. The aquatic preserve management program

is associated with several other Department of Natural Resource (DNR) programs

in the Tampa Bay area.

DNR's Marine Research Laboratory in St. Petersburg, under the Division of

Marine Resources, has several programs and projects within this area which

will benefit the aquatic preserve program. The Marine Lab is presently

involved in numerous studies on fishery habitat losses in the Tampa Bay area.

The Resource Protection Area mapping, which will be used in the management of

the aquatic preserves, was created as a product of that fishery habitat loss

study. The data from this project, when it is completed, will be incorporated

into this management plan. The Marine Lab staff are also involved in manatee

protection programs and the lab is the headquarters of the State Manatee

Coordinator. Field personnel will become familiar with these studies and

programs, and will consult the Marine Lab for their data needs whenever

possible.

The Division of Marine Resources also handles the permitting for the

collection of certain marine species and use of certain chemicals. The field

we,,- 0 C r
ind central office staff will become famili-ar with this permittfing, p.---

and request notification of these permits within the aquatic preserve.

The Marine Patrol, under DHR's Division of Law Enforcement, also operates in

Tampa Bay. The field persorrel will become familiar with their programs and

operation, and will call on the Marine Patrol for law enforcement support as

required.

The Division of State Lands within the DNR is charged with overseeing uses,

sales, or transfers of state-owned lands. The aquatic preserve staff will

interact with State Lands in all transactions concerning submerged lands

within the aquatic preserve. These would include potential acquisition of

privately titled submerged lands or contiguous uplands important to the

integrity of the preserve.

The Division of Resource Management, through the Bureau of Geology and Aquatic

Plant Research and Development, is responsible for various programs

potentially affecting the aquatic preserve. Staff will establish

communication links with this Division to ensure that adequate consideration

is given to potential impacts upon the preserve that may result from the

conduct of their various programs.

The Division of Recreation and Parks, in addition to the work related to

aquatic preserves by BLARM and the Florida Park Service, is also involved in

the management of State Park Service, is also involved in the management of

State Parks and Recreation Areas nearby. The aquatic preserve will work

closely with these programs as they 1"o aqu;t4sc prEserve minanagement

objectives.

4. Marine Fisheries Commission (MFC). The MFC was established as a

rulemaking authority pursuant to Section 370.027. F.S. The seven members are

appointed by the Governor and are delegated full rulemaking authority over

marine life,(subject to approval by the Governor and Cabinet), with the

exception of endangered species. This authority covers the following areas:
a) gear specifications, b) prohibited gear, c) bag limits, d) size limits, e),

species that may not be sold, f) protected species, g) closed areas, h)

quality control codes i) season, and j) special considerations related to

eggbearing females and oyster and clam relaying. Field personnel and central

office staff will become familiar with the rules of the MFC.

The MFC is also instructed to make annual recommendations to the Governor and

Cabinet regarding marine fisheries research priorities. The field and central

office staff will use these recommendations to direct research efforts within

the aquatic preserve.

5. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (GFWFC). The GFWFC's

Environmental Services office in Vero Beach sends biologists into the preserve

to review projects which may have potential impacts on local fish and wildlife

habitat as necessary. The central office will use the GFWFC's assistance in

their review process, when possible, and in developing fish and wildlife

management for the aquatic preserve.

91 M. I r 4
The UIVIIC 'is also the state coordinatof olp the Endanyered Specie M Florida.

The field personnel and central office staff will work with CFWFC personnel in

developing program needs in this area.

6. Department of Transportation (DOT). The DOT has an office in Tampa and

the field personnel and the central office will work with the resident

engineer on anticipated projects having possible impacts on the aquatic

preserve. The field personnel and administrative staff will review any major

highway or bridge projects that may be proposed in the future.

7. Department of State, The Division of Historical Resources, History and

Records Management (DHR) in the Department of State will have a close working

relationship with the field personnel and central office staff in the

protection of archaeological and historical sites. The field personnel will

be directed by DHR, through the central office, in any activities or

management policy needs for these sites.

8. Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). Both the central office staff

and field personnel will establish communication and coordination linkages

with HRS and their locally conducted programs of septic tank regulation and

mosquito control. Although*mosquito control serves a useful public function,
the effects of pesticides (adulticides and larvacides) in the waters of the

-F
preserve are a primary concern. Additionally, the central office staff will

become involved in future meetings and management programs developed by the

Governor's Working Group on mosquito control. Subsequent policy

recommendations coming out of this group will be evaluated for applicability,

to the ongoing aquatic preserve management program.

C. REGIONAL

The regional level of the management implementation network as it applies to

the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve will include the Southwest Florida Water

Management District, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council and the Tampa

Port Authority. These organizations have broader activities than the local

government, but are on a smaller scale than the state level.

1. Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD includes

Hillsborough, Manatee, Pinellas and 13 other counties. The water management

district administers permitting programs for the local consumable use of

water, storm water discharges, and dredge and fill type activities. This

includes the withdrawal and use of water from rivers, streams, and wells. The

types of water uses they permit in the preserve area include irrigation and

public water supply. Field personnel will become familiar with the review and

permitting procedures as they apply to water supply in this area. The water

management district is also involved in various studies on water supply and

management, and other related research that may be of use to aquatic preserve

management.

Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC). The TBRPC serves as a

regional planning body for the local governments of Hillsborough, Pinellas,

Manatee, and Pasco Counties, while the Manatee County Planning Commission

serves Manatee County. The Agency on Bay Management acts as an advisory board

for the TBRPC. Among its duties, the TBRPC:

a. aids local governments with planning expertise;

b. is the regional representative for the DPvPIopmPnt of Peninnal

impact (DRI) review process;

c. serves as the regional clearinghouse for state and federal projects

and programs; and

d. conveys information from the local governments to the state and

federal levels.

In addition, the MCPC contributes to a. and d. above.

Field personnel will become familiar with the various projects, programs, and

data sources that the TBRPC, ABM, and MCPC, have within their administration

that may affect or prove useful to the aquatic preserve program.

The DU review of projects which affect the aquatic preserves will be reviewed

by the central office staff, with the field personnel's field review, when

necessary. DRTIS for large marinas, large subdivisions on the uplands above

the preserve, and commercial or industrial developments will require a field

review by the field personnel as to their effect on th e aquatic preserve.

D. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS

This section will address the relationship of the aquatic preserve management

program to the various local government agencies, special districts and their

programs. The Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve is entirely contained within

Manatee County and does not have any incorporated cities adjacent to it,
except Palmetto. The various special districts (drainage, inlet and mosquito

control) and their relationship to aquatic preserve manaqement, are also

presented.

Field personnel will be the local liaison for the aquatic preserve to these

local government entities to assist them in modifying their policies and

practices to conform to the obJectives of the aquatic preserve's management

plan, and to exchange information and expertise for mutual benefits.

1. Relationship to local management plans. The local governments are

required by the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975 (LGCPA),
(Section 163.3161, F.S.) to have a comprehensive management plan with elements

relating to the different governmental function (i.e. housing, physical

facilities, conservation, land use, and coastal zone protection). These

plans, in effect, are long-range plans for the orderly and balanced

development of the city or county. The comprehensive plans guide local zoning

policies and practices toward a future as set out in the plan. No development

is permitted that does not conform to the local government's comprehensive

plan.

The aim of the aquatic preserve, with respect to these local government

comprehensive plans, is to have their plans be consistent with the aquatic

preserve management plans. Field personnel will become familiar with the above

plans and how they support or are in conflict with the objective of the

aquatic preserve management. Field personnel will assist local planning

officials in having their plans meet these objectives. It is hoped that local

governments will join in the spirit of aquatic preserve management and be

willing to work for these changes.

2. Relation to local development codes- The local zoring and development

codes (e.g., building codes) provide the major local regulation that defines

what an owner can do on a particular parcel of property. I'he zoning

prescribes the allowable uses and the intensity of those uses. Certain uses

along an aquatic preserve can potentially have a profound effect on the

preserve.

This section will operate in conjunction with the preceding section on local

management plans. The field personnel will become familiar with the local

zoning, development codes and their potential effects on the nearby aquatic

preserve. Field personnel will assist local planning and zoning officials in

identifying areas where changes in zoning would better conform to the

objectives of the aquatic preserve management. Field personnel might also

offer to assist local planning and zoning officials in the review of proposed

subdivisions upland of the preserve.

3. Suggested policies and practices in support of Aquatic Preserve

Management. This section will address any other policy or practice not

covered in the two preceding sections. These policies and practices might

include local government mangrove ordinances; recreation problems where a park

is in or near an aquatic preserve, or any other problems as they might relate

to local governments. The field personnel will offer assistance or

information to local officials or will coordinate with other agencies to help

solve these problems as they occur. Field personnel will also comment,

through the central office, on any local practice that is identified as

the 1-11-b.-Ing of the aqU3tiC preserve.

100

4. Special Districts (Drainage, Inlet and Mosquito Control. The special

districts are taxing authorities established to correct drainage and mosquito

control problems. This is one drainage district that directly affects the

preserve. Manatee County has only one mosquito control district.

This district may not have its own official comprehensive management plan, but

it does have a management policy and program statement that is similar to such a

plan. Field personnel will become familiar with these policies and the

activities of this district and will monitor its effect on the aquatic

preserve. For example, field personnel might recommend identifying areas that

should not receive mosquito spraying or other alternative management because

of the remoteness to inhabited areas and possible, but unnecessary damage to

the resources of the aquatic preserve; or drainage districts might be asked not

to use certain types of herbicides or to use them only at certain times of the

year.

E. OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

This section will apply to the numerous organizations that have an interest in

the aquatic preserve but are non-governmental agencies. This will include,

but not be limited to, the environmental interest groups (i.e., Audubon

Society, Sierra Club and Native Plant Society), the scientific organizations,
the fishing and sports interest groups (i.e., Florida League or Anglers,
Organized Fishermen of Florida), the universities that may have research

in the proserve (i.e., University of South Florida, "n-vers"-

Tampa, University of Florida, Manatee Community College, Hillsborough

Community College) and any other interest groups or individuals. The

101

relationship of these organizations to aquatic preserve management might

include the coordination of activities, such as scientific research,

environmental education, management of rookeries or other natural areas, or

numerous other possible activities. A worthwhile aquatic preserve management

process will depend on the continued support and help of these interest groups

in the preserve. Field personnel will be active in communicating the aquatic

preserve management process and activities to the various groups and

consulting with them for their help in their areas of-expertise.

102

Preface

(Chapters VII IX)

Authorized Activities and Uses of Aquatic Preserves

The following chapters provide a description of public, private and commercial

activities/uses that are allowable pursuant to statutory direction and all

other applicable authorities in aquatic preserves. These activities/uses are

subject to the approval of the Board (Governor and Cabinet) or their designee.

Approval of these activities/uses is normally predicated upon a demonstration

that the proposed activity/use is environmentally sound and/or is, in the

opinion of the Board, necessary in conjunction with'an overriding public need.

In all cases, approved activities/uses that adversely impact the resources of

an aquatic preserve shall onl be approved when accompanied by adequate
y I

compensation measures that contribute to an overall net public benefit.

Mitigation measures, other that those associated directly with programs for

habitat reestablishment or rehabilitation, are viewed by the Board as

inadequate attempts to compensate for alteration of essentially natural

ecological conditions through the establishment of artificial resource

systems. Therefore, mitigation will only be encouraged in conjunction with on

and off-site projects that are designed to reestablish natural habitat values

and where the aquatic preserve will biologically and aesthetically benefit

from the proposed restoration actions.
103

Chapter VII

Public Uses

This chapter addresses the public use of the preserve. The public in this

case shall refer to the general public or those persons without riparian

rights. The "Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 1975" (Section 258.35, F.S)

allows for the lawful and traditional public uses of the aquatic preserve,

such as sport fishing, boating and swimming (as adapted from subsection

258.43(l), F.S.). These and other traditional uses that do not involve a

commercial intent or the use of a riparian right to place a structure in the

preserve, and do not degrade or otherwise destroy the preserve will be

considered public uses. This section will be further divided into consumptive

and non-consumptive uses as applicable to each resource.

A. Consumptive Uses

Consumptive uses involves the removal of resources from the preserve. These

uses include fishing, hunting, shellfishing, and other related activities.

They also include the unintentional removal of resources by propeller damage

to seagrass beds and air boat,damage to salt marshes. The management of these

a ^V
otcpc (qpo rhapter V. Recourre Management, Sect4nn rt- Onsit-n M n g e t

Objectives) will include the observation and monitoring of the effects of

these uses on the resources. The field personnel will periodically assess the

105

impacts through the use of the Marine Research Laboratory's LANDSAT

capabilities, aerial photography, boat surveys and current studies or data

sources for identifying habitat losses or disturbances in the Terra Ceia area.

This management will also include the protection of the resources from

unlawful or excessive practices of these uses. Field personnel will, for

example, become familiar with and monitor the success of rules adopted by the

Marine Fisheries Commission. These will include regulations on fishing gear,,

bag and size limits, closed areas, seasons, etc,

These consumptive uses will also be monitored for their effect on other

resources (e.g. bird rookeries, marine grassbeds, live bottom communities,

archaeological and historical sites). The field personnel will also be

sensitive to additional enforcement needs (i.e., the need for added

enforcement staff during nesting seasons).

B. Mon-consumptive Uses

These uses are those which do not generally remove resources from the

preserve. Examples of these include swimming, diving, boating, bird-watching,

and cther related activities. Although boating and diving are usually

considered non-consumptive uses, they can become consumptive when boat

operators carelessly place anchors in seagrass beds, navigate into waters that

are too shallow for their boats, or divers remove components of a live bottom

community. Also air boat traffic across sensitive salt marsh or other wetland

communities will be consid-e-ra-rd -a consumptive Lice (i.e. deeltructicn of plants,

disturbance of rookeries).* The management practices involved with these uses

will be the same as those previously described under Section A., except that

106

these uses are not generally controlled by law. The guiding principle in

these cases will be whether or not the activity causes a disruptions of the

preserve's resources (e.g. destroys marine grassbeds or salt marshes, disturbs

rookeries). Only in the event of these disruptions will the field personnel

become involved. Some of these uses may possibly be involved in environmental

educational programs (Chapter XI).

107

Chapter VIII

PRIVATE MON-COMMERCIAL USES

This section will apply to those private, non-commercial uses which are

derived from riparian land ownership. The management of the aquatic preserve

recognizes the traditional riparian rights of the upland property owners. The

right of ingress, egress, boating, swimming, fishing, and other incidental

uses of sovereignty lands historically allowed for the placement of certain

structures, such as docks, within the preserve. This right to make any

preemptive use of sovereign lands is a qualified one and can only be exercised

with the prior consent of the Board after a finding that such uses will not

impair public uses or destroy or damage areas of environmental significance.

The review of these will require the interaction of the Resource Protection

Area mapping with administrative and possible field review and later

monitoring by field personnel as projected by Chapter V., Section S.

Private non-commercial uses shall be designed to avoid critical Resource

Protection Areas IL and ? and shall be designed to reduce the user's impact to

the preserve in general. Individual applications for these private

non-commercial uses shall be reviewed by the applicable Resource Protection

Area Map and criteria. In addition, private dock proposals will he reviewed

by the criteria described in Section 18-20.04(5),F.A.C.) of the revised

General aquatic preserve rule:

109

@ulkheads should be placed, when allowed, in such a way as to be the least

destructive and disruptive to the vegetation and other resource factors in

each area.

Dredging within the aquatic preserve shall be held to a minimum. Dredging

proposals shall be reviewed according to the procedures in Chapter V depending

on the proposed activities location within the RPA. Proposals within RPA 1

areas (Chapter V (0) will be scrutinized to the maximum extent in order to.

find the best practical method of development and location if that use is

deemed-acceptable in that particular area of the preserve. The mitigation of

110

lost or disturbed resources shall be required. There shall be no dredging

allowed in RPA 1 or 2- areas or in nearby areas if it will adversely impact

these areas.

The location of proposed multiple docking facilities, such as condominium

developments, shall be based on the marina siting criteria described in

subsection 18-20.04(5) F.A.C. of the revised General Aquatic Preserve Rule.

1. no dock shall extend waterward of the mean or ordinary high water
line more that 500 feet or ?0 percent of the width of the waterbody at that
particular location whichever is less;
2. certain docks may fall within areas of special or unique
importance. These areas may be of significant biological, scientific,
historic and/or aesthetic value and require special management considerations.
Modifications may be more restrictive than the normally accepted criteria.
Such modifications shall be determined on a case-by-case analysis, and may
include, but shall not be limited to changes in location, configuration,
length, width and height;
3. the number, lengths, drafts and types of vessels allowed to
utilize the proposed facility may also be stipulated;
4. where local governments have more stringent standards and criteria
for dockinq facilities, the more stringent standards for the protection and
enhancement of the aquatic preserve shall prevail;
5. the area of sovereignty, submerged land preempted by the docking
facility shall not exceed the square footage amounting to ten times the
riparian waterfront footage of the affected waterbody of the applicant, or
the square footage attendant to providing a single dock in accordance with
the criteria for private residential single docks, whichever is greater. A
conservation easement or other such use restriction acceptable to the Board
must be placed on the riparian shoreline, used for the calculation of the
10:1 threshold, to conserve and protect shoreline resources and
subordinate/waive any further riparian rights of ingress and egress for
additional docking facilities;
6. docking facilities and access channels shall be prohibited to
Resource Protection Area 1 or 2, except as allowed pursuant to Section
11-58.42(3)(e)l., Florida Statutes, while dredging in Resource Protection Area
3 shall be strongly discouraged;
7. docking facilities shall only be approved in locations having
adequate existing water depths in the boat mooring, turning basin, access
channels, and other such areas which will accommodate the proposed boat use in
order to insure that a minimum of one foot clearance is provided between the
deepest draft of a vessel and the bottom at mean low water;
8. main access docks and connecting or cross walks shall not exceed six
(6) feet in width;
9. terminal platforms shall not exceed eight (8) feet in width;

10. finger piers shall not exceed three (3) feet in width, and 25 feet
in length;
11. pilings may be utilized as required to provide adequate mooring
capabilities; and
12. docking facilities shall only be located in or near areas with good
circulation, flushing and adequate water depths;
13. docking facilities and access channels shall be prohibited in
Resource Protection Area I or 2, except as allowed pursuant to Sections
258.42(3)(e)l., Florida Statutes; while dredging in Resource Protection Area
3 shall be strongly discouraged;
14. the docking facilities shall not be located in Resource Protection
Area 1 or 2; however, main access docks may be allowed to pass through
Resource Protection Area I or 2, that are located along the shoreline, to
reach an acceptable Resource Protection Area 3, provided that such crossing
will generate minimal environmental impact;
15. beginning July 1, 1986 new docking facilities may obtain a lease
only where the local governments have an adopted marina plan and/or policies
dealing with the siting of commercial/industrial and private, residential,
multi-slip docking facilities in their local government comprehensive plan;
16. the siting of the docking facilities shall also take into account the
access of the boat traffic to avoid marine grassbeds or other aquatic
resources in the surrounding areas;
17. *the siting of new facilities within the preserve shall be secondary
to the expansions of existing facilities within the preserve when such
expansion is consistent with the other standards;
18. the location of new facilities and expansion of existing facilities
shall consider the use of upland dny storage as an alternative to multiple
wet-slip docking;
19. marina siting will be coordinated with local governments to insure
consistency with all local plans and ordinances;
20. marinas shall not be sited within state designated manatee
sanctuaries; and
21. in any areas with known manatee concentrations, manatee
warning/notice and/or speed limit Siqns shall be erected at the marina and/or
ingress and egress channels, according to Florida Marine Patrol
specifications.

Authorization of such facilities will be conditioned upon receipt of

documentation evidencing the subordination of the riparian rights of ingress

and egress for the remainder of the applicant's shoreline for the life of the

proposed docking facility. Boat ramps and travel lift platforms or other

similar launching facilities, with associated temporary mooring facilities

built with minimal damage to wetlands, will be encouraged over permanent wet
storage facilities. Von-residential docking facilities (commercial) are

addressed in Chapter IX.

112

The use of seaplanes within this preserve is seen as a non-traditional use.

Applications for seaplane use within the preserve will be reviewed on a case

by case basis. These uses will only be recommended where such use will not

affect resource protection areas or natural values of the preserve, not effect

endangered species habitat, can be utilized in a safe manner, and will not

preempt traditional uses within the proposed use area.

113

Chapter IX

Commercial Uses

This section addresses the variety of traditional and non-traditional (i.e.

new uses of this area) commercial uses which might occur within the aquatic

preserve. Among the traditional uses in the Terra Ceia area are utility

crossings, marinas and yacht clubs, commercial fishing, shellfishing, and

other types of boats for hire (e.g. sportfishing, diving). Non- traditional

uses in this area include oil and gas transportation facilities, phosphate

transportation, and other commercial uses.

A. Traditional commercial uses

1. Utilities crossings. There are at present time both aerial and underwater

utility crossings in the aquatic preserve. Future proposals should be

designed so that the preserve is crossed by the least destructive method in

the least vulnerable areas according to the RPA maps. Increased or additional

use of any existing utility crossings is preferable, if their condition at the

time of the proposal is acceptable. The field personnel should eventually

develop a utility crossing plan for all areas with anticipated utility

crossing needs to allow for clear advanced planning, for placement of these

crossing in areas that would cause the least disturbance to the environment.

115

The utility crossing plant, when completed, will become a part of this

management plan. Crossings should be limited to open water areas

where live bottom communities are not present, to minimize disturbance to

marine grassbeds, mangroves or other critical habitat areas.

2. Commercial Fishing. The management of the aquatic preserve shall not

include the direct management of commercial fishing activities. Field

personnel will monitor these activities and assess their effects on the

preserve only in conjunction with the Division of Marine Resources, the

Florida Marine Patrol and the Marine Fisheries Commission, and as a

cooperative effort with these agencies. The field personnel will also notify

the requisite authority in the event of illegal activities (Chapter 370, F.S..

or by special act). The field personnel, along with other agencies and

division's programs and studies, will monitor fishing activities within the

aquatic preserve. Monitoring will concentrate on boat access into certain

areas, prevention of marine grassbed destruction and other needs of the

aquatic preserve as they are associated with commercial fishing activities.

After problens with commercial fishing activities are identified and

documented, the finding will be presented to the Marine Fishing Commission.

it is the authority of the Commission and the Florida Legislature to regulate

commercial fishing within the preserve.

3. Marinas. The locating of marinas and their related uses will be a malior

concern of the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve management. Marinas rppresent a

use with many potential impacts on the preserve's resources. The siting
policy of Section 18-20.04(5) F.A.C. of the revised General Aquatic Preserve

Rule shall be used for sitina marinas in the aquatic preserve.

116

1. no dock shall extend waterward of the mean or ordinary high water
line more that 500 feet or 20 percent of the width of the waterbody at that
particular location whichever is less;
2. certain docks may fall within areas of special or unique
importance. These areas may be of significant biological, scientific,
historic and/or aesthetic value and require special management
considerations. Modifications may be more restrictive than the normally
accepted criteria. Such modifications shall be determined on a case-by-case
analysis, and may include, but shall not be limited to changes in location,
configuration, length, width and height;
3. the number, lengths, drafts and types of vessels allowed to
utilize the proposed facility may also be stipulated;
4. where local governments have more stringent standards and criteria
for docking facilities, the more stringent standards for the protection and
enhancement of the aquatic preserve shall prevail;
5. docking facilities shall only be located in or near areas with good
circulation, flushing and adequate water depths;
6. docking facilities and access channels shall be prohibited in
Resource Protection Area I or 2, except as allowed pursuant to Sections
?58.42(3)(e)l., Florida Statutes; while dredging in Resource Protection Area
3 shall be strongly discouraged;
7. the docking facilities shall not be located in Resource Protection
Area 1 or 2; however, main access docks may be allowed to pass through
Resource Protection Area I or 2, that are located along the shoreline, to
reach an acceptable Resource Protection Area 3, provided that such crossing
will generate minimal environmental impact;
8. beginning July 1, 1986 new docking facilities may obtain a lease only
where the local governments have an adopted marina plan and/or policies
dealing with the siting of commercial/industrial and private, residential,
multi-slip docking facilities in their local government comprehensive plan;
9 the siting of the dockinq facilities shall also take into account the
access of the boat traffic to avoid marine grassbeds or other aquatic
resources in the surrounding areas;
10. the siting of new facilities within the preserve shall be secondary
to the expansions of existing facilities within the preserve when such
expansion is consistent with the other standards;
11. the location of new facilities and expansion of existing facilities
shall consider the use of upland dry storage as an alternative to multiple
wet-slip docking;
12. marina siting will be coordinated with local governments to insure
consistency with all local plans and ordinances;
13. marinas shall not be sited within state designated manatee
sanctuaries; and
14. in any areas with known manatee concentrations, manatee
warning/notice and/or speed limit signs shall be erected at the marina and/or
ingress and egress channels, according to Florida Marine Patrol
sn'Dri f i cations

4. Deep Water Port Facilities. There are no major deep water port facilities

within the boundaries of the preserve but Port of Manatee is located

immediately north of the preserve. Therefore maintenance dredging and

117

potential pollution from accidental cargo leakage would adversely affect the

preserve. New activities and maintenance work will be reviewed as to their

affect on the preserve. New port facilities within the preserve shall be

prohibited.

5. Other Docking. Any other type of commercial docking, not mentioned in the

preceding sections, will follow the marina siting policy as stated in Section
18-20.04(5), F.A.C. of the revised General Aquatic Preserve Rule.

B. Non-traditional Commercial Uses

1. Power Plants. Power plants have the potential for causing major changes

in the air quality, water quality, and plant and animal life of the aquatic

preserve. For these reasons, power plants are incompatible with the purposes

of this aquatic preserve. The location of proposed power plants should be

evaluated as to the effects on the preserve.

2. Aquaculture. The Terra Ceia area could potentially have proposals for

aquacultural development in the future. These may include floating

structures or other new techniques now being used in aquaculture. The

location and type of impacts to the resources will require careful

examination. If there is not sufficient data available for a valid

evaluation, a small scale test of the use might be possible in a selected

area.

-1
.3. Other Uses. Any other use that qualifies as a commercial use of submerged

lands not mentioned above will require a review for its anticipated impact on

the aquatic preserve and the best location for the activity compatible to the

resource protection areas within the preserve.

118

Chapter X

Scientific Research

The -01feld personnel attached to the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve should serve

as the area coordinators of the scientific research in the preserve.

Scientific research, and any other type of research or testing within the

acuatic preserve, should require the clearance of both the field personnel and

the central office staff before these activities can proceed. Certain

activities could be detrimental to the resources of the preserve and should be

carefully reviewed before allowing them to occur. Factors including location,

species selection, time of year, and life history, should be carefully

reviewed for the possible disturbance or effect of the research on the other

resources of the aquatic preserve. The field personnel will be aware of the

possibility of working with other government agencies, colleges, universities,

research foundations and government programs to fill the data needs of the
aquatic preserve (see Chapter V and XII). The field personnel will assist in

the selection of possible tests sites and other research needs within the

preserve.

119

Chapter XI

Environmental Education

The aquatic preserve should be used to enhance environmental education

programs at every opportunity. The goal of maintaining the aquatic preserve

for the benefit of future generations can begin to be realized through the use

of aquatic preserves for environmental education.. Through education, the

people of Manatee County can acquire a knowledge of the natural systems and an

appreciation for the aquatic preserve program. Such appreciation helps to

ensure the future protection and support of the aquatic preserve.

The field personnel will, through their normal activities in the aquatic

preserve, select good examples of habitats and resources within these aquatic

environments for use during educational group tours. This might include the

development of environmental educational boat or canoe tours through the

preserve. Other educational activities might also include prepared
presentations for specific interest or user groups such as sport (boating,

diving, fishing, etc.), civic and conservational groups and the development of

a brochure outlining the major points of management within the preserve.

These brochures could then be circulated to the various user groups.

The field personnel would also prepare slide programs on the value of

121

management activities of the aquatic preserve for presentation to interested

groups of all ages. Educating the public about aquatic preserve management is

the key to the success and future o-F the preserve.

122

Chapter XII

Identified Program Needs

This chapter of the management plan will address the various program needs

that are expected to be identified during management activities. Meeting

these needs will correct or generally relieve some stress on the preserve or

the personnel involved in the management of the preserve. These needs may, in

some cases, require legislative or administrative rule changes or acquisition

of critical areas by the state. The need to identify problem areas and adjust

the management plan in a manner that will positively address these problems

and management needs is an essential element of any effective management

program. Both field personnel and central office staff will continually

monitor the management plan implementation process and specifically identify

observed program needs and problems. The areas to be included are but will

not be limited to:

A. acquisition of additional property,

B. boundary problems,

C. legislative needs,

D. administrative rule changes,

E. data needs,

F. resource protection capabilities, and

G. funding and staffing needs.

123

Staff will annually develop an implementation status report that will contain

a summary of identified management needs and suggested measures to be taken in

meeting these needs.

A. Acquisition of Additional Property

There are areas both within and upland of the aquatic preserve that are in

public ownership under the jurisdiction of various local, state and federal

agencies. Many of these lands contain important resources, such as bird

rookeries, archaeological or historical sites, endangered species habitat, arid

freshwater source wetlands. Formal management agreements, memoranda of

understanding etc., that will ensure the compatible management of these areas

will be developed. Other areas within or adjacent to the preserve that are

within private ownership should be closely examined to determine the

advisability of bringing them into public ownership. The acquisition of these

lands might act as a buffer to critical resources, prevent development of

sensitive areas, allow restoration of areas adversely affected by previous

development of sensitive areas, allow restoration of areas adversely affected

by previous development or allow removal of disrupting uses within the

preserve. The field personnel, during normal management activities, should be

aware of significant upland areas and submerged land areas which, if

developed, would compromise the integrity of the aquatic preserve. The field

personnel will keep a running record of these areas and will prioritize these

areas for ppssible public acquisition.

B. Boundarv Problems and Systems Trisufficiencies

The boundaries of the aquatic preserve are often artificial delineations of

the natural systems within and surrounding the preserve. A variety of

124

scientific studies are presently being conducted both within and outside the

preserve boundaries, and their results could conceivably suggest a change in

these boundaries. These changes may include the extension of the present

boundaries in some areas or the exclusion of other areas. The field

personnel, in their normal management activities, will be sensitive to the

possible need for boundary modifications. Potential boundaries changes and

acquisition projects might include areas upstream of the present boundary in

the streams flowing into the preserve, previously conveyed sovereign lands, or

other areas not presently within the preserve. Currently a sewage effluent

flows into the Aquatic Preserve. If the outfall were moved, this would open

up this area to shellfish harvesting. Any boundary change will require

legisltative approval. An additional boundary consideration would be to

include the tidally influenced Little Redfish Creek that is located alonq the

northern boundaries of the preserve and the mangrove islands within the

preserve.

C. Legislative Needs

Management needs could conceivably involve changes in the legislature

pertaining to the aquatic preserve or changes in the other statutes upon which

the aquatic preserve is based. These changes may include boundary

realignments or the strengthening of certain management authorities.

D. Administrative Rule Changes

Admin ni str.nti ve rulleer. aarc st-ntem,ents :'AA"eer4n^ the organization, procedures

and practices used in the implementation of aquatic preserve management plans

125

and.policies. This process includes identifying problems within the manaqing

agency as well as other agencies, that will affect the management of the

preserve.

E. Data (Information) Needs

The field personnel and central office staff will note data needs and promote

research or other means to obtain them. Data needs in the near future could

possibly be supplied by such ongoing projects as the U.S. Geological Survey's

and the Southwest Water Management District's studies, Department of

Environmental Regulation water quality monitoring or by the research of other

agencies. The field personnel will be aware of the data needs as they

interact with the various levels of government and with other entities. These

data needs might include additional mapping, ownership information, water

quality data or any other data. The major suppliers of data will probably be

other public agencies that are conducting programs in and around the preserve.

Other potential sources of data are the colleges and universities that have

in the past, conducted or are currently conducting, research projects in the

area.

F. Resource Protection and Enforcement Capabilities

The protection of the preserve's resources depends on the Florida Marine

Patrol in addition to field personnel. These protection needs might also

include additional enforcement support from local government or state

agenCipc. Tha need for additin-na-I marpro-le-r-, -authcrity -nh-cie,

for this task will be identified.

126

Since many of the inlets of this preserve are extremely shallow, bottom damage

due to boat groundings or propeller damage are common. To eliminate this

problem boat markers should be placed in the channels of these inlets.

The field personnel will become familiar with the staff capabilities of both

the Department of Natural Resources and other agencies with enforcement

responsibilities in the preserve. Annually, staff should fully assess the

effectiveness of the protection and enforcement capabilities of these combined

agencies.

G. Funding and Staffing Needs

The present aquatic preserve management program has been implemented with

funds from a variety of sources and programs. The writing of this

management plan was funded through a grant from the U.S. Office of Coastal

Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and through

the "Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972", as amended.

Funding for the management of Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve was provided by the

1986 Florida Legislature. This included one full-time Career Service staff

position and an office located near the city of Palmetto at 3708 Patten

Avenue, Ellenton, Florida 33532. Continued funding and staffing are

critically important to the success of the aquatic preserve program. A

proposed budget for the onsite staffing of the preserve, as well as for the

4dent.ification of the equipment and expenses for continued operation -is shown

below.

127

Proposed Continuation Budget (Fiscal Year 1987-88)
for the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve Management

Salary (Environmental Specialist 11) and = 30,000
Associated Overhead

Operating Capital Outlay = 15,000

Operation Expenses = 25,000

TOTAL $70,000

128

REFEREMCES CITED

F
Bahr, L.M.; Lanier, W.P. The ecology of intertidal oyster reefs o- th Sou..
Atlantic Coast: A community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Office of Biological Services, Vashington, D.C. FWS/OBS-Pl/15. 1-105;
10,81.

Burger, B.W.; Man in the coastal zone: Bishop Harbor/Terra Ceia Island
Manatee County, Florida. Baccalaureate thesis on file, Mew College
library, Sarasota; 1979.

Comp, G.S. A survey of the distribution and migration of fishes in Tampa Bay.
Treat, S.F.; Simon, J.L.; Lewis, R.R.111; Whitman, R.L.Jr., eds. Tampa
Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference;
1982 May 3-6; Tampa. USA: Bellwether Press; 1985:393-425.

Dawes, C.O. Macroalgae of the Tampa Bay estuarine system. Treat, S.F.; Simon,
J.L.; Lewis, R.R.III; Whitman, R.L. Jr., eds. Tampa Bay Area Scientific
Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference; 1982 May 3-6; Tampa.
USA: Bellwether Press; 1985:184-209.

Dawes, C.O. Marine Botany. Mew York: John Wiley and Sons; 1981.

Derrenbacker, J.A.Jr.; Lewis, R.R.III. Live bottom communities Tampa Bay.
Treat, S.F.; Simon, J.L.; Lewis, R.R.III; Whitman, R.L.Jr., eds. Tampa
Pay Area Scientific Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference
1982 May 3-6; Tampa. USA: Bellwether Press; 1985;385-392.

Doyle, L.J. A short summary of the geology of Tampa Bay. Treat, S.F.; Simon,
J.L.; Lewis, R.R.ITI; Whitman, R.L. Jr., eds. Tampa Bay Area Scientific
Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference; 1982; May 3-6; Tampa.
USA: Bellwether Press; 1985:27-32.

Durako, M.J.; Browder, J.A.; Kruczynski, W.L.; Subrahmanyam, C.B.; Turner,
R.E. Salt marsh habitat and fishery resources of Florida. Tn: Seaman,
W.Jr., ed. Florida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources; 1985:189-280.

Estevez, E.D.; Mosura, E.L. Emergent vegetation. Treat, S.F.; Simon, J.L.;
Lewis, R.R.III; Whitman, R.L.Jr., eds. Tampa Bay Area Scientific
Informations Symposium: Proceedings of conference; 1982 May 3-6; Tampa.
USA: Bellwether Press; 1985:248-278.

Harris, D. South Atlantic live bottom reefs. Coastal Society Bull.
4(4):11-12; 1981.

Lewis, R.R.; Durako, M.J; Moffler, M.D.; Phillips, R.C. Seagrass meadows of
Tampa Pay--A review. Treat, S.F.; Simon, J.L.; Lewis, R.R.TTT: Whitman,'
R.L.Jr., eds. Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium:
Proceedings of Conference; 1982 May 3-6; Tampa. LISA: Bellwether Press;
1985:210-246.

129

Lindall, Jr.; William M.; Saloman, C.H. Alteration and destruction of
estuaries affecting fishery resources of the Gulf of Mexico. Mar. Fish.
Rev. 39(9):1-7; 1981.

Long, R.W. Beacon Key: a biological assessment. Final report prepared for
Tampa Electric Company. Unpub. 94p; 1975.

LUqo, A.E.; Snedaker, S.C. The ecology of mangroves. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Sys.
5:39-64; 1974.

McMulty, W.M.; Lindall, Or.; Sykes, J.E. Cooperative Gulf of Mexico estuarine
inventory and study, Florida: Phase 1, Area Description. NOAA Tech.
Rep. NMFS Cir-368:1-126; 1972.

Reynolds, J.E.; Geoffry, W.P. Marine mammals, reptiles, and amphibians of
Tampa Bay and adjacent coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Treat,
S.F.; Simon, J.L.; Lewis, R.R. III; Whitman, R.L.Jr.; eds. Tampa Bay
Area Scientific Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference; 1962
f1lay 3-6; Tampa. USA: Bellwether Press; 1985 448-459.

Shoemyen, A.H.; (ed.) Florida Statistical Abstract. 19th edition.
Gainesville: Univ Presses of Florida. 1985.

Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. The future of Tampa Bay. 1985
Available from: TBRPC, 9455 Koger Blvd., Suite 219, St. Peters;urg, FL
337C2.

Treat, S.F.; Simon, J.L.; Lewis, R.R.III; Whitman, R.L.Jr., eds. Tampa Bay
Area Scientific Information Symposium: Proceedings of Conference; 1992
May 3-6; Tampa. USA: Bellwether Press; 1985.

14arren, L.O. A Dalton Complex from Florida. Flor. Anthrop. 18(1):29-32; 1965.

11'arren, L.O. A possible Paleo-Indian site in Pinellas County. Flor. Anthrop.
19(1):39-41; 1966.

Zeiman, J.C. The ecology of the seagrasses of south Florida: A community
profile. National Coastal Ecosystems Team. Office of Biological
Services. Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-82/?5. 1-1?3; 1982.

Zeiman, J.C.; Wetzel, R.G. Productivity in seagrasses: methods and rates.
in: Phillips, R.C.; McRoy, C.P., eds. Handbook of Seagrass Biology.
New'York: Garland STPM Press; 1980:87-116.

130

CONTENTS OF APPENDICES

A. Florida Aquatic Preserve Act of 197.5 (� 258.35-358.469 F.S.)

S. Administrative Rules for Florida's Aquatic Preserve (� 18-20, F.A.C.)

C. Administrative Rules for Florida Sovereignty Submerged Lands Management
(� 18-21. F.A.C.)

D. Legal Description and Lease Agreement

E. Existing Authorities Matrix

Copies of the above apperdilces may be obtaineud from:

Bureau of Land and Aquatic Resource Management
Department o-1 Natural Resources
Cedars Executive Center, Suite 232.-B
Mailbox 1, 2639 North Monroe Street
Tallahassee Florida 32303

131

HOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

3 6668 14111364 9