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












          MARINE RESOURCES GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM


                                FINAL REPOIRT

                                  MARCH   1993




                                           Z











             A report of the Florida Department of Community Affairs
          pursuant to National ooeanic and Atmospheric Adrninistration
                            Award No. NA270ZO346-01,

















                  MARINE RESOURCES GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM:








                                         FINAL REPORT





                       Gall M. MacAulay, Timothy J. Leary, Kelly B.. Donne-11y,
                 Richard E. Matheson, Jr., Sandra L. Drumm, and Kenneth Dt. Hadda'd






                                           March, 1993





                                  Department of Natural Resources
                                    Division of Marine Resources
                                  Florida Marine Research Institute







             A report to the Florida Department of Community Affairs pursuantl tot National,
             Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA270Z6345-01
                FNI











                                        1-,'X 1,7  V 1:@ SUN4MARY


                Task 1.             M,.'S0UR('1.,,'S U"OGRAPHIC INVOI@\IATION SN'S'I'E\,l


                Subtask A:        The Little \i4anatee River (LNIR) watershed, located on the
                eastern shore ot.''rampa Bay, Florida was selected for a multi-disciplinary project
                focusing on the development of watershed-oriented resource management tools
                and strategies. The project is a cooperative effort among federal, state, regional,
                and local agencies. The relatively pristine LMR watershed includes portions of
                two countl@_-s, and 36 subbasins draining 573 km2 . The dominant land use in the
                watershed is agricultural.   The recent completion of Interstate-75, however,
                provides a major corridor for growth that will undoubtedly impact a significant
                portion of the watershed.

                     Subtask A focused on the completion and analysis of data layers for the
                Little Manatee River watershed of the Marine Resources Geographic Information
                System (MRGIS). The database was also distributed and subsequently integrated
                into other GIS systems.

                     A major component of the project was the development of the Little
                Manatee River Watershed Atlas, a 20-page map atlas featuring all of the primary
                data layers for the watershed. The color atlas was developed for use as a
                desk-top reference.    The atlas consists of individual map sheets, and mylar
                overlays and the four-ring design allows easy removal of individual map sheets.
                Co-registration of map pages allows real-time analysis. For example, by placing
                the transportation mylar over the flood zone map, roads prone to flooding can
                be easily identified. This information could be useful to disaster planners in
                identifying evacuation routes for emergency situations.

                     In addition to the primary data layers, the results of analyses are also
                featured in the atlas. An example of one MRGIS-analysis is. the `identification
                .of lands within the 100-year flood plain. 'Me identified areas were subsequently
                queried based on the future land use data layer. The result of the query shows
                the future land use of only those areas that are within the 100-year flood plain.

                Data Layer Development

                     All data layers were verified and finalized during this grant period. In
                addition, two layers, section-tow ns hip -range (s-t-r) and septic tank density were
                identified as being critical to analysis, and were subsequently added to the
                database. The s-t-r coverage was created as an ARC/INFO file by the Southwest









                  	Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and imported into the MRGIS,
                  This vector based coverage was then employed as the  base coverage for a file
                  showing septic tank densities by s-t-r which were entered manually.

                  Modeling, and Analysis

                       Rainfall-runoff-water quality     relationships were modeled relative to
                                                 
                  hydrologic characteristics at the request   of SWFWMD.         Model results were
                  stippled to SWFWMD in tile form of acreage tables.   In most cases, they
                  requested that individual models be run for the entire watershed, and then
                separately for each of the 10 hydrologic gaged units. The separation into (aged
                   units allowed comparison with other SWFWMD databases. For example, the
                          
                  District. monitored water quality at biweekly intervals from January 26, 1988 to
                  January 24, 1989 at seven streamflow sites within the watershed., These seven
                  stream flow locations were used to develop the ten gaged units for the LMR
                  watershed ,project. Because the soils in proximity to the river have the greatest
                  potential , impact on the water quality of the river in terms of runoff, analyses
                  were also  conducted for a 500-ft buffer surrounding the river channels.

                    The LMR database was developed in either the vector or raster environment,
                  depending upon the source material of the coverage being created.             When
                  analyses warranted, data were transferred to the alternate format using the
                  standard conversion routines available through ERDAS and ARC/INFO software.



                  Data Distribution


                       ARC/INFO vector coverages were transferred to, and used by, Hillsborough
                  County Engineering Department, the Southwest Florida Water Management
                  District (SWFWMD), Florida Department of Natural Resources in Tallahassee,
                  and the Department of Environmental Regulation.            The LMR database is
                  currently being used by SWFWMD to conduct water quality analyses. The
                  Cockroach Bay Consensus Group, as directed by the Tampa Bay Regional
                  Advisory: Committee, identified the LMR database as a source of essential data
                  due to the proximity of the watershed to Cockroach Bay. Digital data were
                  requested by, and provided to, Hillsborough County to incorporate into their GIS.
                  County managers will use this database in decisions that will impact the
                  Cockroach Bay area, as well as the Little Manatee River watershed. An
                  Ecological Working Group was established within the Florida Department of
                  Natural Resources to identify major ecosystem issues which cross Division
                  boundaries. The Little Manatee River watershed was chosen as the Ecosystem
                  Pilot Project. As a result, the digital database was transferred to Tallahassee to







                    develop specificscenarios and. determine their potential impacts using the GIS.
                              The Working Group, is comprised of each of the FDNR Division Directors or                                                                                                       
                    their designces, with the  goal of developing a strategic plan to manage Florida's
                    natural resources using an  ecosystem approach.


                    Data Documentation


                          Coverages of the MRGIS have been used to test the functionality of the
                    metadata templates (Data Dictionary and Quality and Accuracy
                    developed through the Growth Management Data Network Coordinating Council
                    (GMDNCC). Analyses have indicated that minor changes to the     templates are
                    needed to increase their utility.          These completed templates, when. transferred
                    with the digital data, provide valuable inforniation which cam., be., used  the
                    recipient of the database in evaluating appropriate uses of the -data. -


                    Subtask B:        Over 300 requests for information were handled by.the MRGIS
                    during this grant period (average of 21.5 request s/month). There. were total of
                    147 requests answered during the previous grant period (January 1 1991                
                    January 31, 1992) for an average of 11.3 requests/month. This represents a
                    nearly 50% increase over last year.                 Information output formats included
                    hardeopy maps, digital data, presentations, and demonstrations.. ::A substantial
                    effort was focused on this subtask due to the large number of requests. The
                    significant increase in requests for information demonstrates the need for
                    effective dissemination of marine resources information, and signifies the
                    importance of the MRGIS in coastal management.
 










                Task 1.    NIARINI.,' RF,SOURCES CEOGRAPHIC INFOR\IATION SYS'IT'i I
                             i,1111c \xlaiiatee River J.NiIR) watershed database arialyses
                             atid local oovernnient Hilerface. data dissciiiiiialloii aild
                             Lip da I i no

                SUbtask A: Complete     work with regional and local governments to integrate the
                                                                                            Z-1
                kIRGIS data and concepts into the planning and policy making processes.
                Analyze MRGIS data relative to watershed characteristics, water quality, and
                fisheries distribution and abundance.


                                     INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

                     Subtask A focused on the completion and analysis of data layers for the
                Little Manatee River watershed of the Marine Resources Geographic Information
                System (MRGIS). The database was also distributed and subsequently integrated
                into other GIS systems. Rainfall-runoff-water quality relationships were modeled
                relative to hydrologic characteristics at the request of the Southwest Florida
                Water Management District (SWFWMD). SWFWMD was also the primary
                recipient of the digital database that was assembled for the watershed.

                     The comprehensive database consists of the following GIS coverages: SPOT
                satellite basemap; 1988 land use/land cover; detailed soils; 2 ft elevation
                contours; Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zones; future
                land use; drainage; game and fish habitat cover and plant communities,
                subbasins; hydrographic gage station subdrainage areas; wastewater treatment
                facility locations, consumptive use permit locations; permitted well locations;
                hydrology; transportation; section-tow ns hip -range zones, and septic tank densities.


                     A major component of the project was the development of the Little
                Manatee River Watershed Atlas, a 20-page map atlas featuring all of the primary
                data layers for the watershed. A small scale copy of the atlas is shown in
                Appendix A. These 8 1/2" x 11" sheets were printed at a scale of 1:180,000.
                The full-scale color atlas, at a scale of 1:80,000, was developed for use as a
                desk-top reference. Design of the atlas incorporates individual map sheets, and
                mylar overlays. The four-ring design allows easy removal of individual'-inap
                sheets. Co-registration of map pages allows real-time analysis. For example, by
                placing the transportation mylar over the flood zone map, roads prone to flooding
                would be identified. This information could be useful to disaster planners in
                identifying evacuation routes for emergency situations. T"he 500-ft buffer overlay
                could be used to identify sensitive areas for effective resource management.











                     In addition to the primary data layers the results of analyses are also
	featured in the atlas.  An example of one MRGIS analysis is the identification
	of lands within the 100-year flood plain.  The identified areas were subsequently
	queried based on the future land use data layer.  The result of the query shows
	the future land use of only those areas that are within the 100-year flood plain.
	Based upon the adopted future land use map designations, approximately 42,692
	dwelling units can be developed within this area of 22,464.

                                          DATABASE DEVELOPMENT


                       All spatial data are stored and analyze using the Marine Resources
                  Geographic Information System (MRGIS) at the Florida Department of Natural
                  Resources's Marine Research Institute in St. Petersburg.                 The MRGIS
                  applications, software includes the commercially available ERDAS, Inc.
                  raster-based package, ESRI's ARC/INFO vector-based package, and ELAS, a
                  non-proprietary image processing software developed by NASA.

                      MRGIS hardware configuration consists of the following: SUN 4/490
                  SparcServer with 4 1 -gigabyte drives; 2 SparcStation 1+ workstations with 669
                  megabyte disk each; and 3 SparcStation IPX workstations, each with 1.3 GB
                  disk. A five platter optical juke box, with each platter having 5 gb capacity,
                  currently serves as an archival device for the MRGIS.             Two 386 personal
                  computers are accessible through the network. Hardcopy plots are generated
                  primarily by a Calcomp 68436 XP electrostatic plotter. - In      addition, a Calcomp
                  1044GT 8-pen plotter, a Tektronix 4696 ink jet printer, and a Tektronix 4693DX
                  thermal wax     printer provide plotting/printing support.        Printing of text is
                  accomplished by a SUN SparcPrinter.

                       All data   layers were verified and finalized during this grant period. In
                  addition, two  layers, section-township-range (s-t-r) and septic tank density were
                  identified as being critical to analysis, and were added to the database. The
                  s-t-r coverage was created as an ARCANFO file by the Southwest Florida Water
                  Management District (SWFWMD) and imported into the MRGIS.                           This
                  vector-based   coverage was then employed as the base coverage for a file
                  showing septic tank density by s-t-r which were entered manually.


                  Models


                      The detailed soil database, developed in cooperation with the U.S.
                  Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (SCS), is a valuable layer











                                                                                                                     -carlto rKtranch
                                                                           /'Cy,),ess Creek

                                                                                                    Lake Wimauma


                                                                                     Dui Creek

                                             Lower Little Manatee i or


                                                                                                If


                                                                                                                                 North Fork
                                                                                    Wimaurn







                                                                                   ..... .... .
                                                                                   ...............
                                                                                   . . . . . . . . . ........



                                                                                        ........ ..........








                                                                                                                                   South Fork


                                                       T148 HYDOLOGIC GAGE 3011NDARIES OF THE LITTLE MANATEE
                                                          RIVER IDENTIFIED IN THIS OVERLAY WERE DEFINED BY
                                                         THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
                                                                              (SWFWMD).




              4-S                        F I
                                                                                                                    Gage Boundaries
                                            GURE 1. Drainage and Hydrologic

        .... ............



















                                                                                                                                         4..






                                                                         .4+


                                              ... .......
                                      ZX



                                      X

                                                                                                      Js
                                                                                                                                    0







                                                                                                                                                       .5i@- X.






                                                    THE BUFFER SHOWN IN THIS OVERLAY WAS COMPUTER GENERATED
                                                      TO SHOW THE AREAS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE RIVER CHANNELS







                                       FIGURE
                                                        500 Foot Buffer of the                                Little Manatee River





        .... .......             sm,

            . . . . . . . . . . . . .71.








                 in developing analyses relating to watershed characteristics and water quality.
                 There are 111 discrete soil class classifications, that fall within tile Little Manatee
                 River watershed ( hillsborough and Manatee Counties).    There    is    an
                 accompanying database in which 80 soil characteristics are defined for each of*
                        
                 the 111 soil characteristics, or attributes, include important
                 information pertaining to each soil. Some important soil characteristics Include:
                 texture, liquid limit and plasticity index, clay percent, moist bulk density,
                 permeability-, available water capacity, soil reaction; salinity- shrink-swell
                 potential;  corrosivity to steel-, corrosivity to concrete, erosion     factors, wind
                 erodibility groups; percent organic niatter: flooding; hydrologic groups, suitability
                 for building site development and use as construction materials; capability and
                 predicted yields for crops and pasture-, woodland suitability; wildlife suitability;
                 and potential plant    community (Doolittle et at., 1989).

                      Data for each     of the 80 attributes, arranged by soil type, were provided to
                 the Florida Marine     Research Institute as ASCII text files by SCS. These files
                 were manipulated      so the attribute array could be incorporated into both the
                 ARC/INFO vector coverage and the ERDAS raster file.

                      Several models were developed in response to requests from the Southwest
                 Florida Water Management Pistrict (SWFWMD) for use in their evaluation of
                 water quality characteristics within the LMR watershed. Results of preliminary
                 analyses pertaining to water quality are discussed in Flannery et al., 1991.
                 Model results were supplied to SWFWMD in the form of acreage tables. In
                 most cases, the SWFWMD requested that individual models be run for the entire
                 watershed and then separately for each of the 10 subdrainage areas or hydrologic
                 gaged units. The separation into gaged units allowed comparison with other
                 SWFWD databases. For example, the District monitored water quality at
                 biweekly intervals from January 26, 1988 to January 24, 1989 at seven
                 streamflow sites within the watershed. These seven streat flow locations were
                 used to develop the ten gaged units for the LMR watershed project (Figure 1).
                 Because the soils in proximity to the river have the greatest potential impact on
                 the water quality of the river in terms of runoff, analyses were also conducted
                 for a 500-ft buffer surrounding the river channels (Figure 2).

                      One of the most frequently used attributes within the soil database is
                 hydrologic group which provides information used to estimate runoff from
                 precipitation. Hydrologic units are divided into four different groups: Group A
                 - low runoff potential (soils having a high infiltration rate); Group B - (soils
                 having a moderate infiltration rate); Group C - (soils having a slow infiltration
                 rate); and Group D - high runoff potential (soils having a very slow infiltration
                 rate). The soil hydrologic units for the watershed, for each of the hydrologic












             Table 1. Area (in hectares) of* soil groups for the overall watershed, each gaged unit, and within the 5004t buffer of" the river.


                    I lydrologic
                                          Summary              Gage I             Gage 2             Gage 3            Gage 4             Ga@
                      Buffer                                                                                                                    51

                        A                          3934                 513                   0                 4               216                0

                        B                            223                 74                   0                 0                69                0

                        C                          8295               1126                  46                 63               709               14

                        D                          3912               1486                 664                 48                52                2

                       B/D                        39394               13280              1246               726                1797               70


                   Hydrologic              Gage 6              Gage 7             Gage 8             Gage 9            Gage 10            500-ft
                      Buffer                                                                                                               buffer




                        A                              3                416                852              1527                415             674

                        B                              0                   0                  0                82                  0             94

                        C                             52                401              2397               2152               1359

                        D                             27                  87               643              432                 474            1256

                       B/D                            42              1282               9395               5861               5744          1045












                       Table 2.     Area (in hectares) of soil hydrologic group by land cover for each of the 10 gaged units.



                                                   A                               C                             S/D            Water
                       Gage 1              Area         %   Area           Area         %  Area         %  Area         %   Area         %

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



                              Wetland        38         1       21      1     21        1   982       30   21B5       66      41         1
                              Water          10         1       1       <1    18        2     75      10    134       18      527     69
                         Agriculture         149        2       36      <1    711       9   198         2  6935       86        4     <1
                              Upland         187        7       6       <1    208       7     77        3  2315       83        4     <1
                              Urban          127        6       10      <1    167       8   155         7  1707       78      20         1





                                                   A              a                C              D              B/D            Water
                       Gage 2              Area         %   Area        %  Area         %  Area         %  Area         %   Area         %

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


                              WetLand        ---     ---        ---     ---     1       <1  310       67    142       31        8        2
                              Water          ---     ---        ---     ---     2       1     28      21     47       34      59      43
                         Agriculture         ---     ---        ---     ...   12        3       2       1   447       97        1     <1
                              Upland         ...     ---        ---     ---     3       3       5       4    97       92      <1      <1
                              Urban          ---     ---        ...     ---   28        3   319       36    513       58      31         3





                                                   A              B                C              D              B/D            Water
                       Gage 3              Area         %   Area        %  Area         %  Area         %  Area         %   Area         %

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


                              WetLand        ---     ---                        1       1     27      \23    92       76      <1      <1
                              Water          ---     -                        ---       ---     1     13        5     60        3     28
                         Agriculture            3       1       ---     ---   22        6     12        3   326       90      ---     ---
                              Upland            1       <1              ---   29        13      7       3   192       84      <1      <1
                              Urban          ...     ---        ---           12        9       1       1   111       86        4        3





                                                   A                               C              D              B/D            Water
                       Gage 4              Area         %   Area        %  Area         %  Area         %  Area         %   Area         %

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


                              Wettand        26         5       13      3     31        6     27        5   395       80      <1      <1
                              Water             1       7       ---     ...     1               1       7       5     28        9     50
                         Agriculture         76         5       35      2     498       35    13        1   802       56        1     <1
                              Upland         103        15      19      3     139       20      6       1   438       62      <1      <1
                              Urban             9       4       <1      <1    40        18      4       2   158       72        9        4





                                                   A              8                C              D              8/0            Water
                       Gage 5              Area-        %   Area        %  Area         %  Area         %  Area         %   Area         %

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


                              WetLand        ---                ---     ---   ---       ---     1       1       5     11      43      88
                              Water          ---     ---        ---     ---     3       <1    <1      <1        4     <1    1022      99
                         Agriculture         ---     ---        ---     ---   ---       ---     1       2    48       96        1        3
                              Upland         ---     ---        ---     ---     4       29  ---       ---       8     70      <1         I
                              Urban          ---     ---        ---     ---     8       60                      4     27        2     14














                         Table 2 continued.




                                                     A                                C               D             B/D            Water
                         Gage 6              Area         %   A rea       %       Area    %   Area        %   Area        %   Area          %

                         ..............    .......   ----------   -------------------------    -------    ----------                 -------


                                Wetland           -    ---     ---        ---     K1      2     16        68       2      7        6     23
                                Water             ...  ---     ---        ---     ---   ---       2       7        1      4      33      90
                            Agriculture           <1      1    ---        ...     4       11      5       16    23      71      -        -
                                Upland            ---  ...                        1       21      1       23       3    56      ---      ---
                                Urban             3       4    ---                47      73      2       3     13      20      ...      ---





                                                     A              B                 C               D             B/D            Water
                         Gage 7              Area         %   Area        %       Area    %   Area        %   Area        %   Area
                         - ---------------- ------- ------------- ----- - - - ------- ------------------ -------------------- -- - - - -----


                                WetLand           14      7    ---        ---     3       2     40        22    129     69      ---      ...
                                Water             1       15   ...        ---     <1      2       1       6        7    69         1        8
                            Agriculture           347     19   ---        ---     381     21    41        2   1062      58         1     <1
                                Upland            5       12   ---        - .     5       11      2       4     33      74      ...      ---
                                Urban             49      42   ---        ---     12      10      4       3     52      45      ---      ---





                                                     A                                C               D             B/D            Water
                         Gage 8              Area         %   Area        %       Area    %   Area        %   Area        %   Area          %
                         -----------------------     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                Wettand           32      2    ---        ...     51      2    404        19  1595      76         2     <1
                                Water             <1      <1   ---        ---     3       6     18        37    13      26       15      31
                            Agriculture           527     6    ---        ---     1947    23   149        2   6018      70         1     <1
                                Upland            277     12   ...        ...     341     14    71        3   1676      71      ---      ---
                                Urban             16      10   ---        ---     55      33      1       1     93      56      ---      ---





                                                     A              8                 C               D             B/D            Water
                         Gage 9              Area         %   Area        %       Area    %   Area        %   Area        %   Area          %

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



                                Wetland           190     10      34      2       67      4    254        13  1378      72       <1      <1
                                Water             1       5    ---        ---     2       13      5       28    10      55      ...      ---
                            Agriculture           736     14      36      1       1489    27    99        2   3084      57      ---      ---
                                Upland            599     23      12      <1      579     22    69        3   1363      52       <1         0
                                Urban             1       3       <1      .<I     7       41    <1        1        9    51         1        3





                                                     A               8                C               D             B/D            Water
                         Gage 10             Area         X   Area        %       Area    %   Area        %   Area        %   Area          %
                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                Wetland           5       <1   ---                43      3    290        23    927     73         1     <1
                                Water             8       15   ---                1       3       6       12    33      64         3        6
                            Agriculture           210     4    ---        ---     1175    24    93        2   3420      70         2     <1
                                Upland            40      3    ---        ---     118     9     49        4   1085      84      ---      ---
                                Urban             152     31   ---        ---     22      4     36        7     278     57         1     <1
























            Table 3. Area (in hectares) of soil K Factor ranges for the watershed, each gaged unit, and within the 500-ft
                       buffer of the river.


                                                                                                                                                   500-ft
                K Factor          Summary   Gage 1     Gage 2    Gage 3    Gage 4    Gage 5    Gage 6    Gage 7     Gage 8    Gage 9 Gage 10       buffer
                                                                                                       ---------------------



                  LE 0.16           54123      15290      1621       842       2841         86      124      2176     13228      10022      7979     12850
            GT 0.16 & LE   0.22          0          0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0        0
            GT 0.22 & LE   0.28         26       26           0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0      25
                  GT 0.28               10          0         0         0         0         0         0          10         0         0         0        0
             soil not rated          3454       1760       434          7         20     1069       39           2        78        32        20     1046
















            Table 4.    Area (in hectares) of soil permeability ratings within the watershed, for each gaged un             it, and within the 500-ft
                        buffer of the river.


                                                                                                                                                   500-ft
               Permeability      Summary Gage I       Gage 2     Gage 3    Gage 4    Gage 5    Gage 6    Gage 7    Gage 8     Gage 9    Gage 10    buffer



                       1@             3699       345        335         60        140       0       27        525       1345        93        832      766
                       2             14242      2599          57      201         452       55      59        734       4071      2828      3207     3384
                       3             31165     10508       1195       560      1828         31      35        722       6739      6543      3064     6271
                      1A               193       193          0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0      188
                      2A              3940       2029         35        20        212       0         0          91      822       127        605    2267
                 undefined            2830       940        434         7         98     1069       39           21       58          5       167      642










               Table 5.   Area (in hectares) of soil water table depth minima and maxima for each of the gaged units.                  Depth ranges
                          are given in feet.





                                                                Water Table Depth Minima by Hydrologic Unit


                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    Depth     ITotat Watershed I        Gage 1              Gage 2             Gage 3              Gage 4               Gage 5
                    Range     I   Area      %     I     Area    %           Area    %        Area     %          Area      %         Area
                ------------------  --    ---------------------------------------------------------------          ------------      --------------
                              I                   I                   I                  I                  I
                        0          145      < 1         134         1         0          0       0        0         0          0          0          0
                 0.0 to 1.0      44556          77      15103       89      1673         81   782       92       1869        65      1140          99
                 1.1 to 1.9        106      < 1         28          1         0          0       0        0         0          0          0          0
                 2.0 to 3.9       8757          15      1224        7       382          19    63         7      765         27         14           1
                 4.0 to 5.9        383          1       235         1         0          0       0        0        40          1          0          0
                    > 5.9         3665          6       352         2         0          0       4     <  1      187           7          0          0




                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Depth     I     Gage 6              Gage 7              Gage 8             Gage 9              Gage 10       1
                    Range     I   Area      %           Area    %           Area    %        Area     %          Area      %     I
                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              I                   I                   I                  I                  I                    I
                     < 0               0        0         0         0       11      < I  1       0        0         0          0
                 0.0 to 1.0        108          66      1371        63   10045           76  6294       63       6225        78
                 1.1 to 1.9            0        0         0         0       12           1     66         1         0          0
                 2.0 to 3.9         52          32      401         18      2385         18  2138       21       1359        17
                 4.0 to 5.9            0        0       16          1         3     < 1        89         1         0          0
                    > 5.9              3                400         18      849          6   1466       15       415           5







                                                                Water Table Depth Maxima  by Hydrologic Unit



                    Depth     ITotal Watershed    I     Gage 1        1     Gage 2             Gage 3              Gage 4               Gage 5
                    Range     I   Area      %     I     Area    %     I     Area    %        Area     %          Area      %     I   Area       %
                 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              I                   I             Ii    I                  I                  I                    I
                     < 0          3338          6       1040        6       329          16    48         6        61          2          2      < I
                 0.0 to 1.0       41469         72      14225       83      1345         65   734       86       1808        63      1139          99
                 1.1 to 1.9       1698          3       346         2         6     < 1          9        1      193           7      < 1            0
                 2.0 to 3.9       8990          16      1426        8       376          18    56         7      731         26         14           1
                 4.0 to 5.9       1063          2         5     < 1           0          0       0        0        28          1          0          0
                    > 5.9         1054          2       33      < 1           0          0       1     < 1         40          1          0          0




                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Depth           Gage 6              Gage 7              Gage 8             Gage 9              Gage 10       1
                    Range         Area      %           Area    %           Area    %        Area     %          Area      %     I
                 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                  ------
                              I                   I                   I                  I                  I                    I
                     < 0            27          17      77          4       716          5    551         6      487           6
                 0.0 to 1.0         81          50      1293        59      9352         70  5809       58       5738        72
                 1.1 to 1.9            0        0       136         6       429          3    320         3      259           3
                 2.0 to 3.9         55          34      400         18      2247         17  2488       25       1227        15
                 4.0 to 5.9            0        0         0         0       147          1    879         9         9       < I
                    > 5.9              0        0       280         13      414          3       8     < 1       279           3









                gaged units, and within the 500-ft buffer of the river arc listed in Table 1.
                Calculations for the soil hydrologic unit within the,500-ft buffer of the river acre
                also shown in Table 1. These values, in conjunction with other soil features, are
                used In landd planning that has engineering considerations. Amodel was
                developed to Investigate tile relationship between soil hydrologiC groups and
                       
                generalized land cover.  The 1988 land cover layer, interpreted       from aerial
                photography and the 1988 SPOT satellite baseniap, was employed in this
                analysis.   The results of this analysis for the whole watershed are shown in
                Table 2.


                     Soil erosion, the loss of soils by. the forces of wind and water, from
                agricultural lands negatively impacts the water quality of the river. When soil
                erodes from agricultural lands, fertilizers and pesticides are also washed into
                storm drains and into the river.        The soil K Factor is an estimation of the
                susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water (Doolittle et al., 1989).
                The K Factor is one of six factors used in calculating the Universal Soil Loss
                Equation. This equation predicts the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet
                and rill erosion. K values range from 0.02 to 0.69, higher values indicate a
                greater susceptibility of the soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Within the
                Little Manatee River watershed, K values range from .05 to .32. The soil K
                Factor within the entire watershed, for each of the gaged units, and within the
                500-ft buffer of the river are listed in Table 3.

                      Soil permeability, the ability of a soil to     transmit. water or air, was also
                investigated for the overall watershed, on the basis of each gaged unit, and
                within the 500-ft buffer. Results of these models are shown in Table 4. These
                estimates indicate the rate of movement of water through a saturated soil.
                Design of drainage systems and septic tank absorption fields must consider soil
                permeability.

                      Another attribute of interest to the SWFWMD is water table depth. This
                attribute is reported as two separate values which indicate the normal range in
                depth to a saturated zone. Depths are recorded to the nearest half foot and
                reflect the normal highest level and the normal lowest level. Water table ranges
                by gaged unit are given in Table 5.

                Data Conversion & Transfer


                     The LMR database was developed in either the vector or raster environment,
                depending upon the source material of the coverage being created.                   When
                analysis warranted, data were transferred to the alternate format using the
                standard conversion routines available through ERDAS and ARC/INFO software.









                 The complexity of tile SI-10T satellite basenlap, liowever, dictated that tile usage
                 of this data lavcr be, restricted to the raster envii-onnient. Although data analyses
                 were Conducted in both lorniats, ARC/lNl-`0 vector coveraocs were easily
                 transfen-ed to and used by 1111100FOUgh C01.111ty F111011IM-1110 Departinent, the
                 Southwest I'lorlda Water Nlanag-einent District. and I'lorlda Department of Nattiral
                 Resources in Tallahassee. Both SWFWIMI-) and FDNR have selected ARC/JNl-`0
                 as their primary vector GIS software. Hillsborough County utilizes GENAMAI'
                 software which contains algorithms capable of converting ARC/INFO export
                 coverages into a usable format.       Tile LMR database has been transferred to
                 SWFWMD and is currently being used to conduct water quality analyses.

                      Selected coverages, of the Little Manatee River watershed database were
                 transferred to the Hillsborough County Engineering Department. This transfer
                 was facilitated by the formation of the Cockroach Bay Consensus Group as
                 directed by the Tampa Bay Regional Coordinating Council (TBRCC). The
                 TBRCC, has four goals: promote the sharing of data related to growth
                 management., promote consistency of data elements; adopt common data elements
                 and formats for interagency transmission of data where feasible, and avoid the
                 duplication of effort associated with the collection of data. The Cockroach Bay
                 Consensus Group developed a matrix to identify critical data layers relative to
                 Cockroach Bay and agencies that possess them.             The LN4R database was
                 identified as providing essential data due to the proximity of the watershed to
                 Cockroach Bay. , The estuarine portion of the watershed, which includes the
                 mouth of the river, is of particular interest as it lies within the boundaries of the
                 Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve. Digital data were provided and incorporated
                 into the Hillsborough County GIS. County managers will use this database in
                 decisions that will impact the Cockroach Bay area, as well as the Little Manatee
                 River watershed.


                      An Ecological Working Group has been established within the Florida
                 Department of Natural Resources to try to identify major ecosystem issues which
                 cross Division boundaries. The Little Manatee River watershed has been chosen,
                 as the Ecosystem Pilot Project. As a result, the digital database was transferred
                 to Tallahassee so that specific scenarios may be developed, and their potential
                 impacts determined, using the GIS. The Working Group is comprised of each
                 of the DNR Division Directors or their designees with the goal of developing
                 a strategic plan for managing Florida's natural resources using an ecosystem
                 approach.

                      To maximize the utility of digital data, it is necessary to document the
                 creation of each data layer. This history or lineage is then included when the
                 digital data are transferred. Such data about data are referred to as metadata.








                The TBRCC has been working with the Growth Management Data Network
                Coordinating Council (GMDNCC) to develop a Data Dictionary and Quality and
                                  
                Accuracy Report. The Data Dictionary template is used to Mine tile data, and
                ensures  that classification systems are fully explained.  The Quality and Accuracy               
               Report documents standards and techniques employed to develop tile data. 'File
                valuable Information M the two completed templates. when transferred with the
                digital data, allow tile recipient of tile database to evaluate appropriate uses of
                the data. In some cases, the metadata provided in either template might indicate
                a discrepancy in an item definition or source map scale that would limit the
                utility of the database for the second-hand user. Knowledge of such limitations
                are critical in developing responsible uses for the data.

                     Coverages of the MRGIS database have been used to test the functionality
                of the metadata templates. Analyses have indicated that minor changes to the
                templates are needed to increase their utility.         A sample of the template is
                attached (Appendix B).










                                I)ISti-11111tC NIRGIS digital, tabular and hardcopy 11 abitat data, maps,
                  images. and otlicr pertinent NWGIS Information.            Updatc liabitat data and
                  CorldLICI treild analyses for areas of' special fOCUS.

                  Information ReCILICStS

                  Responding to requests for information to better manage and understand our
                  coastal resources is an important aspect of Marine Resources Geographic
                  Information System (MRGIS) activities. During the course of this grant, 302
                  requests for information were filled. In some cases, requests are -straightforward
                  in that the data requested are readily available on the MRGIS, and further data
                  analysis is not required. We have developed some standard map products that
                  have broad use and are capable of filling multiple requests. In most cases,
                  however, manipulation and analysis of the data are required to fit individual
                  requestor's needs.

                  The following are examples of the types of analyses conducted in response to
                  requests for assistance during this grant period:

                         A series of maps depicting the relationship among water depth,
                         seagrasses, and areas of food and bait shrimp harvesting were developed
                         as the result of a request from the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission.
                         This map series has come to be known as the Resource Impact Maps
                         (RrMs). Thirteen segments within' five regions were defined for the State.
                         The nature of the RIMs required that some databases be developed. Areas
                         of shrimp harvesting, for example, were not known. During numerous
                         public hearings, shrimpers indicated   -those areas they shrimped by drawing
                         polygons on NOAA nautical charts. Charts were returned to the FMR.1
                         and the "shrimping" polygons were digitized into the MRGIS. Seagrass
                         data for some of the segments were considered historical and required
                         updating. A contract was established to-digitize bathymetry data (3 ft, 6
                         ft, 12 ft, 18 ft, 30 ft, and 60 ft) to automate the water depth component.
                         Draft maps for twelve of the thirteen segments have been completed:
                         Pensacola Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, St. Andrew Bay, St. Joseph Bay,
                         Apalachicola, Big Bend, Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor, Everglades, Florida
                         Keys, Biscayne Bay, and St. Johns River. The Indian River segment is
                         in progress. Big Bend is the only segment that is in final form (includes
                         shrimping zones). As a result of this effort a manuscript (Appendix Q
                         has been accepted for presentation and publication at Coastal Zone '93.

                         MRGIS staff was requested to assist FMR1 Marathon Field Station








                       personnel in designing a rnal) atlas to be used for recording boater activity
                       ill tile 1-1orlda Keys and in designino a dalabase to enter tile survey restills.
                       The Flori& Keys Boat t.1se 1)altern study Is an 18-illonth long project that
                       will niap boat use patterns ill the ['101-1da Keys and dctcrimiic hoatlill,
                       pressure on sensitive mar lie habitats. The principle tool in trac I       boater
                       activity will be aerial survey. The atlas consists of a serles of 26 rnaps
                       within the boundaries of the Florida Keys National Nlarlne Sanctuary as
                       far west as the Marquesas Keys. A one-minute grid was superimposed
                       over the atlas pages to create blocks into which data Could be recorded.
                       The prototype of the survey atlas was field-tested and a preliminary
                       database design for data entry was provided. Final survey data will be
                       included in the MRGIS. To date, preliminary data have been entered and
                       draft maps have been created for interim reports to The Nature
                       Conservancy. Numerous copies (40+) of the survey atlas have already
                       been provided to the requestor for this study.         Furthermore, numerous
                       requests for the atlas have come from as far away as California and
                       Maine.

                       Dr. Gray Multer requested a map depicting benthic communities, main
                       geologic formations, latitude and longitude, and park boundaries in the
                       Florida Keys. The map was created to Dr. Multer's exact specifications
                       to accommodate his text and photographs.             The Florida Institute of
                       Oceanography plans to produce and distribute 15,000 of these maps in the
                       Florida Keys for, educational purposes.

                       A Tampa Bay Boaters' Guide          was developed in cooperation with the
                       Tampa Bay National Estuary Program (NEP) at their request. This map
                       will provide important.- marine resources information, as well as tips on
                       safe-boating pract@ces, to recreational boaters in Tampa Bay. MRGIS data
                       layers featured in the Boaters' Guide are: marine habitat, bathymetry,
                       public boat ramps and marinas, artificial reefs, navigational aids, major
                       roadways, cultural features, and landmarks.           Data were provided as
                       individual layers to a printing shop for final map assembly. The flip side
                       of the map features drawings and descriptions of fishes common to Tampa
                       Bay, and text on the importance and sensitivity of marine habitats to the
                       health of the estuary.


                       Many analyses involve conversion between raster and vector formats.
                       These conversions are routinely performed in response to requests for data.
                       In many cases, conversion also occurs between projections. Under normal
                       circumstances, MRGIS data are developed in the Universal Transverse








                       NICI-CM01- (UTNI) projection. When warranted. data are projected into other
                       coordinate systems. An example of this type of conversion was Performed
                       for tile 1-1orida Institute of Oceanography who required data in latitude and
                       )OD"IlUdc.
                          C@


                The following summarizes the types Of Output and general forms of resource
                management information provided:

                       Information has been provided in several forms, the most common form
                       of assistance requested being hardcopy maps. These maps are available
                       in three formats: electrostatic plots, thermal wax prints, and ink- jet prints.
                       Although we can produce pen plots, this is seldorn utilized due to tile
                       superior quality and significant reduction in plot time of the electrostatic
                       plotter.  The electrostatic plotter is capable of plotting maps up to 34
                       inches long on paper or clear rnylar. This plotter played a significant role
                       in the preparation of the Little Manatee River Atlas. Large-scale plots can
                       be created by joining individual plotter sheets.            Nine panels were
                       assembled to create a 144" x 76" map to fill a request from NOAA for
                       use in developing the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Management
                       Plan. 'Me thermal wax and ink jet printers continue to be used primarily
                       for printing raster data. An example of this type of request came from,
                       Mr. Peter Clark of the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, who,
                       requested prints reflecting changes in mangroves for the Sarasota Bay area
                       between 1950 and 1982. The nature of the request required the following
                       areas be defined: areas that were mangrove in 1950 that were unchanged
                       in 1982, 1950 mangrove areas that were not mangroves in 1982, and 1982
                       mangrove areas that were not present in 1950.              These trends were
                       determined and results featured in thermal wax prints suitable for inclusion
                       in a report.

                       We continue to provide digital data on a routine basis to those agencies
                       requesting it. We have noted an increase in the number of requests for
                       digital data.   When digital data are requested, the typical output is an
                       ERDAS or ARC/INFO export file. These files are machine independent
                       and are readily useable by agencies with these software packages.
                       Conversions of these data to other formats are performed on an as-needed
                       basis. Standard output media include 8 mm 5 gb tape cartridges, 1/4 inch
                       150 mb cartridges, 9-track tapes, and in the cases of small data sets,
                       floppy disks.

                       Results of GIS manipulations are also commonly requested in tabular








                        formal.    Acreage of marine habitat clata for specific areas are frequent
                        recluests,  lZcquestors are asked to provide, the boundaries of tile area of
                        ill1crest and the acreages are calculated based on the defined area.             A I)
                        example of this form of rcqtiest caine froill lZoper Iolialisson of the Cily
                        of Tampa, I)epartinent of' Sanitary Sewers.           Dr. Johansson requested a
                        tabulation of the number of acres of seagrass that Occur in Tampa Bay
                        within deptlis of 3 and 6 feet for specific areas of the bay system. These
                        data are being used to assist in the determination of areas that could
                        support seagrasses as water quality problems are aniellorated.

                        Slides or overheads featuring MRGIS coverages and results of GIS
                        analyses are also supplied to individuals who use them in presentations or
                        discussions oil the health of marine resources. For example, several slides
                        and overheads of the Florida Bay area were supplied to @George Barley of
                        the NOAA Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary to be used in
                        presentations concerning the Sanctuary.

                        MRGIS       staff   have    distributed    information     by    participating     on
                        intergovernmental committees, giving public presentations, and conducting
                        tours and demonstrations of the MRGIS.              This interaction is a strong
                        component of the MRGIS and assists us in understanding management and
                        user needs. It also, provides a forum to keep recreational fish a priority
                        in research, environmental planning, growth management, and public
                        opinion.



                 The following summarizes the 302 MRGIS requests:


                 Ruth Folit, New College, Sarasota, FL - Information and review of aerial
                 photography and propeller scar mapping for the Sarasota Bay area.

                 Connie Stevens, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                 Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Review of available nautical charts and
                 marine habitat for research area to be used in presentation.

                 Walter Jaap, Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
                 Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Evaluation of nine photographs
                 for accuracy of underwater photogrammetric aperture for mapping coral growth.,
                 in the Florida Keys.








                 Alice Bard. Florida Dcpartillent of Natural RCSOLIrces@ 1.31visloii of Recreatioii and
                 Parks, Clermont. Vl_ - Prints of 1950 and 1982 land cover for tile St. Joseph
                 Sound area to be used in seminar series.


                 William Teehan. Florida N/larine Fisheries Commission. Tallahassee, l"L -
                 Resource impact Map of the Panama City area broken into three large-scale
                 sections.

                 Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Nlarine
                 Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Aerial photographs of the Dry Tortugas
                 area for reef fish research.

                 Tom Wallace, Private Citizen, St. Petersburg, FL - Revised Resource Impact Map
                 for the Cedar Key/Big Bend area featuring benthic communities and bathymetry.
                 These data will be used to determine potential aquaculture. locations in the Cedar
                 Key area.

                 Bob Heagey, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Seagrass maps of the Banana River.

                 Tom Wallace, Private Citizen, St. Petersburg, FL - Boundary map of the St.
                 Martin's Marsh Aquatic Preserve. ne information will be used to ensure that
                 potential aquaculture sites will not be selecte&within the Preserve.

                 George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida I'Viarine
                 Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Two Resource b-npact Maps of the
                 Tampa Bay area to be presented at the Tampa Bay Oil Spill Contingency
                 Workshop.

                 Scott Zengel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gainesville, FL -               Seagrass
                 distribution maps of the Cedar Key area. U.S. F&WS will be remapping the
                 seagrass in this area and will provide us with updated maps.

                 Matthew Clemons, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Crystal River, FL -
                  Information on the Weedon Island propeller scar mapping project.

                 Paula Houboulis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA - Information on the
                 mapping of boat propeller scar damage to seagrasses.

                 Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Maps of three grids (1-
                   2-, and 3-minute) to assist in the development of a geographic segmentation
                 scheme for the COMPAS project.









                Michael (111hrook-, Fast Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Winter Park,
                FI, - Infoi-niation on nianne reSOLII'Ces data for lh,6 Indian River Lagoon. These
                data will lie Included in the National Estuary I     .) rograin's, 111ventory of' natural
                I'CSOLH-ce data avallable t'or the Indiaii River area.

                Ed Irby, Florida Department of Natural RCSOLII-CCS, Office of l','Ishenes
                Management and Assistant Services, Tallahassee, FL - Two Resource Impact
                Maps of Tampa Bay and the Florida Keys.

                Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL - Digital coverage of the
                Monroe and Collier County area featuring the Florida shoreline and NOAA Aids
                to Navigation.

                Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee,
                FL - Digital file of the 1-, 2-, and 3-minute grids for the Florida Keys area.

                Barry Douglas, Coastal Technology Corporation, Vero Beach, FL - Map featuring
                benthic communities for the John's Pass (1:24,000 scale) and Tampa Bay
                (1:100,000 scale) areas.

                Mike Phillips, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL - Eight
                plots of the Little Manatee River watershed to be used for ecosystem evaluation.

                Jennifer Bexley, University of South Florida/U.S. Geological Survey, Tampa, FL
                - Assistance with aerial photography for USGS Coastal Center to be used in a
                change analysis for the St. Petersburg area from 1962 to 1992.

                Pale Beaumariage, U.S. Fish & Wildlife, Division of Federal Aid, Atlanta, GA -
                Map featuring the 1990 seagrasses, boat ramps, artificial reefs, and bathymetry
                data for the Tampa Bay area. This map was used for the American Tackle
                Manufacturer's Association Conference in Miami.


                William G. Theiss, Lindahl, Browning, Ferrari, and Hellstrom Inc., Fort Pierce,
                FL - Digital files of the Florida Keys shoreline, the Florida Keys National
                Marine Sanctuary, and road network.

                Joseph O'Hop, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                Research Institute, Fisheries Statistics Section, St. Petersburg, FL - Map of the
                Tampa Bay region featuring benthic communities, boat tamps, artificial reefs,
                bathymetry, and two insets of Cockroach Bay and Boca Ciega Bay at 1:24,000
                scale.









                Dr. Luis Lagera, continental Shelf' Associates, Jupiter, FL, - Four maps featuring
                land, seagrass, coral. and bathynie try within the Florida Keys National Marine
                Sanctuary and four maps showing everything in the map series to support phase,
                H of the water quality component.

                Joseph Szemer, Sunshine Travel, St. Petersburg FL_ - Map featuring resourceS
                                                               
                from Tarpon Key to Ft. DeSoto for fishing areas.

                Billy Causey, NOAA, Marathon, FL - Plot featuring benthic resources for the
                Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. These data were requested to evaluate
                the classification scheme for the area.

                Merrie Beth Neely, Pinellas County Department of Environmenta     I Management,
                Clearwater, FL - Information on seagrass loss in the Tampa Bay area.

                Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Five sets of aerial survey charts. These map
                atlases were distributed to sanctuary managers. In addition, nine copies of the
                master grid chart were provided.

                Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Map featuring benthic
                communities inside the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. In addition,
                three plots showing the FKNMS and land (without benthic communities).

                A. Hart, Continental Shelf and Associates, Jupiter, FL - Information on the
                Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary classification system and water quality
                monitoring.

                Mike Sole,.Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and
                Shores, Tallahassee, FL - Bathymetry and benthic resources for the Smathers
                Beach area. These-data will be used for an environmental impact assessment of
                the proposed beach renourishment project.

                Wanda Prentiss, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Submerged
                Lands, Tallahassee, FL - Evaluation of Minerals Management and National High
                Altitude Program (NHAP) photography to identify bottom features.             This
                information was used for aquatic leases.

                John Glisch, Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, FL - Information on fisheries habitat and
                the effect of seagrass, tidal marsh and wetlands loss due to development.









               Alice Bard, Florida Department  of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and
               Parks Clermont, FL - Three prints of the 1950 and 1982 land cover database for
               the norhern Pinellas County area.

               John Lable. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,Tallahassee, FL -
                Digital data of the Florida shoreline database and bathymetry for the Biscayne
                   
               Bay area.

               Bob Repenning, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida
               Aquatic Preserves Office, Bokeelia, FL - Review of aerial photographs for
               seagrass damage for the channel marking project.

               Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Sanctuaries
               and Reserves, Tallahassee, FL - Digital files for the upper, middle and lower
               Keys including: Monroe County Planning Group coverage, artificial reefs-, John
               Pennekamp coverage and great white heron coverage.

               Betsy Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data of the upper,
               middle, and lower Keys coverages. These data are being used in the COMPAS
               project.

               Patrick Wells, Florida Park Service, Islamorada, FL         Map (1:90,000 scale) of
               the Lignumvitae Aquatic Preserve.

               Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - One-minute grid of the
               Florida Keys area.

               Jim Stillwell, City of Punta Gorda, Punta Gorda, FL - Information on the
               mapping of land cover data for the Charlotte Harbor area in 1982.

               Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Six maps that reflect boat densities for the
               following time periods: weekdays; weekends; July 4th, federal lobster season;
               state lobster season; and regular lobster season.

               Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Map depicting the Keys
               benthic resources, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and all other park
               borders, I degree graticule, geologic systems. These data will be used in a
               pamphlet to educate citizens on the importance of marine habitat and the
               relationship to the fisheries.









                Jane Urquhart-Donnelly, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau 01'
                Aquatic Presrves, Tampa. FL - Resource lmpact Map of the Tampa Bay area.

                Carol Blackwell NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville. MD- Series of five maps of
                the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary featuring each of the benthic

                Charles Pittinger, Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati, OH - Information on mapping
                submerged aquatic vegetation in Florida. Proctor and Gamble is the owner of
                a pulp mill in Perry on the Fenholloway River. They are required by FDER to
                photograph and map submerged aquatic vegetation.

                Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Nine maps depicting boat densities in the
                Florida Keys. Three maps featured fishing boats, dive boats (pre-July 25), and
                dive boats (post-July 25) densities.

                Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data including:
                benthic habitats; enhanced TIGER files; bathymetry; and shoreline for the Florida
                Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

                J. Jackson, Church/Environmental Group, Orlando, FL - Seagrass information on
                the Fenholloway River.

                Dr. Mark Lindberg, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,.
                Tampa, FL - Aerial survey data and boat use sampling strategy for assessment
                of the method.


                Eva Marie Koch, U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Coastal Geology, St.
                Petersburg, FL - Provided posters of trend analysis for display at a workshop for
                Congressmen from Washington, D.C.

                Pamela McVety, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL
                Boundary map for Little Manatee River.

                Vic Klemas, University of Delaware, Wilmington, DE - Review classification for
                wetlands.


                Joel Jackson, City of Tampa, Tampa, FL - Review Tampa Bay 1982 data,
                printed a 1:100,000 wax thermal of TP1982TND.GIS (15 sheets).









               John Taylor, Taylor Biological Company. Inc., Panama City. FL - Eleven thermal
               wax prints (8 1/2" x 11") of St. Andrew Bay Preserve for CARL     application for
               the Magnolia Beach Tract.

               Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute. St. Petersburg,FL-Information on coral reefs, near Boca Chica and
               Western Sarnbo Reef off Key West, displayed area and hectares in each polygon.

               John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, Marathon, FL - Benthic community data for the FKNMS.

               Stu Marvin, Environmental Planner, Hillsborough County City-County Planning
               Commission, Tampa, FL - Information on trends in seagrass distribution in
               Cockroach Bay.

               Roy Lubke, Professor, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa -
               Information on GIS and marine resource mapping and monitoring in Florida.

               Ben Randall, National Wetlands Research Center, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
               Slidell, LA - Information. on basinwide management, remote sensing, the use of
               remote sensing to access estuarine habitats, and the federal coastal wetland
               mapping programs.

               Charles McShane, Printer, McShane and Moore, Tampa, FL - Black and white
               separates to be used in the printing of the Tampa Bay Boater's Guide.

               Georgia Cranmore, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
               Provided 30" contour maps of St. Andrew's Bay, Biscayne Bay, and the Florida
               Keys.

               Bob Wasno, Lee County Department of Community Services, Division of Marine
               Sciences, Fort Myers, FL - Slide of Little Manatee River fish distribution and
               Resource Impact Map of Charlotte Harbor.

               Wayne Small, University of South Florida, Tampa, F L - Presentation and tour
               to inform students on topics pertaining to remote sensing, GIS, and current
               marine research.


               Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Digitized. a coverage depicting the damaged area
               (due to boat grounding) of reef near Western Sambo and overlaid the coverage
               over the benthic. database and plotted at a very detailed scale.








               Dr. Don Hayward. Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota. FL - Supplied a disk of
               a conversion utility  Program for use in ongoing contracted Mote project.

               Roger Johansson City of' Tampa, Department of Sanitary Sewers, Tampa, FL-
                Calculated areas of Tampa Bay. Old Tampa Bay, Hillsborough Bay, Lower
               Tampa Bay, and west of the Skyway Bridge.

               William M. Davis. Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, Clearwater,
               FL - Provided Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.

               Bill Harding, The Nature Conservancy, Naples, FL - Information on ARC\JNFO
               and ERDAS applications software in mapping marine habitat.

               Maynard Hiss, Sarasota, FL - Provided a thermal wax print of Sarasota County
               to exhibit at an administrative hearing concerning the Comprehensive Plan for
               Sarasota County.

               Don Lord, Pinellas County Department of Communication and Information
               Systems, Clearwater, FL - Provided a plot of existing Tampa Bay Resource
               Impact Map to illustrate some of the data sets in the MRGIS.

               Peter Clark, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, Agency on Bay
               Management, St. Petersburg, FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.                 
               J. M. Kapetsky, Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Services, Rome, Italy -
                Information on marine resources, GIS, shrimping, and habitat impact.

               Bruce Ballister, Student, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL - Provided
               information on coastal changes using aerial photography.

               Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, Marathon, FL - Maps of boat use patterns in the Florida Keys
               using aerial surveys.

               George McElvey, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
               Provided Tampa Bay Resource Impact Maps.

               Robert D. Woodward, III, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL
               - Resource Impact Map of the Pensacola area.

               Dr. Hugh Putnam, Water and Air Research, Inc., Gainesville, FL - Shipwreck
               plot of existing file 'and additional file with data for explosive testing study.










               Dr. Pamela Hallock-Muller, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, FL-
               Presentation to class on  Florida Geology.

               Ken Haddad, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute. St. Petersburg, FL - Provided ten Resource Impact Maps-(five of
               Biscayne and five of the Florida Keys).

               Marion Eslich, Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary, Indian Rocks Beach, FL -
               Information on seagrass trend analysis and habitat trends and
               fisheries in Tampa and Sarasota Bays.

               Dr. Joseph Kimmel - Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Copy of low-flying aerial survey of Dry
               Tortugas, FL for a reference for habitat maps to aid in the selection of fish
               counting sites.

               Lyman Barger, Fishery Biologist, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service,
               Panama City, FL - Two sets of photographs of Warren Bayou, one from 1980
               EPA study and two 1983 NHAP color infrared.

               Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Benthic coverage of resources in the Dry
               Tortugas (1:24,000).

               Kent Smith, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
               Species Management, Tallahassee, FL - Information on mapping of marine
               habitat for the state of Florida.


               Nanette Holland, Reporter, Tampa Tribune, Tampa, FL - Photography for news
               article on propeller-scar damage to seagrass beds.
               Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Two copies of Biscayne
               Bay Resource, Impact Map and two of the Florida Keys.

               William M. Davis, Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, Clearwater,
               FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map.

               Joan Browder, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, FL - Reprints
               on marine habitat mapping and fisheries research from the MRGIS.
 








                 FlIen Aildcrson, U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Coastal Geology, St.
                 llctersburg, FL - Copy of Big Bend GIS and Trailer file frorn server to tape to
                 be tiscd as @mcfflary data for their project monitorino chaiwcs in the 1-`Iorlda Gulf
                                                       I             1@     tr
                 coast \vetlmicls bem,een Tampa and Tallahaswe.

                 I-larrY Grier, Florida Department of Natural Resources. Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Photographs and Inforniation about photograph
                 enlargement for Bishop Harbor for mapping of the habitat.

                 Dr. Clinton Da\,,,es, University of South Florida, Tanipa, FL - Information about
                 mapping and propeller scar damage in Cockroach Bay.

                 Gary Milano, Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management,
                 Miami, FL - Provided Marszalek map #1 for review in Dade County.

                 Robert Steward, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St.
                 Petersburg, FL - Resource Impact Maps of Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor, Florida
                 Bay, Everglades, and Dry Tortugas.

                 Brad Robbins, Student, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL - Conducted tour
                 of facility and gave information on seagrass mapping and aerial photography.
                 Richard Newfield, St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce, St. Petersburg, FL
                  Presented a slide show for Career Day at Northeast High School.

                 William Teehan, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL -
                 Provided Charlotte Harbor Resource Impact Map for public hearing.

                 John Marcellus, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                 Research Institute, Si. Petersburg, FL - Plot of seagrass data from their database
                 of Bishop's Harbor for use of survey of red drum habitats and movements within
                 the bay.

                 Stephen M. Hodges, Homer Hoyt Center for Land Economics and Real Estate,
                 ,Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL - Information on marine resources.

                 Ben Haskill, NOAA/OCRM, Washington, D.C. - Plot of Resource Impact Map
                 for the Florida Keys and Biscayne Bay.

                 Suzanne Yancy, Teacher, Olympic Heights Community High School, Boca Raton,
                 FL - Provided plots of the Florida Keys and Biscayne Bay'Resource Impact
                 Maps and marine research brochures for use in 9th and 10th grade science











               classes.


               .1olill Nlarccllus, Florida Departniclit of' Natural Resources, Florida %larinc
               Research Institute. St. Petersburg, FL - Showed heticliniaik svinbology grid
                                                t
               network, and tic shift on top quad sheets for Bishop's 1-larbor red d111111 Study.

               Kevin Peters, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Photographs of Emerson Point for review to
               determine enlargement feasibility for snook research area.

               Peter Clark, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, St. Petersburg           FL -
               Provided wetland trend map of Tampa Bay, 1950 and 1982.

               Harry Grier, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Reviewed aerial photograph enlargements for the
               Bishop Harbor area of Tampa Bay.

               Doug Hayrnans, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Created a plot file using 1990 Tampa
               Bay seagrass data for a base map for a sampling project.

               Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Four maps (Dry Tortugas, Western Sambo, John
               Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and Looe Key) for presentations at two
               scientific meetings.

               Alice Bard, Florida Department of Natural Resources,. Division of Recreation and
               Parks, Clermont, FL - Provided 1950 and 1982 land cover classifications of St.
               Joe Sound area.


               Monroe County, Key West, FL - Review of coastal element of the
               Comprehensive Plan.

               Tampa Bay Regional Planning, Council, Agency on Bay Management, St.
               Petersburg, FL - Map of seagrass propeller scar damage.

               R. Duncan Mathewson, Ell, National Center for Shipwreck Research, Islamorada,
               FL - Created plot of shipwrecks in the Florida Keys.

               Dr. James Miller, Florida Department of State, Division of Historic Resources,
               Tallahassee, FL - Shipwreck database and plot file for management of Florida's
               historic resources.








                Carol Blackwell, NOAA/Sl--.'A Division, lZockville. MD - I-'I()t of shipwrecks    In
                tile Floi-lda Kcys to aid in FKNMS management.

                Dr. James NIllier. Florida Del)artment of State, Division ol' 111storic ReSOLIFUS,
                Tallahassee,     - Flonda Keys and Tanipa Bay Resource Impact Maps.

                Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - 1982 seagrass map of Upper Tampa Bay
                (Anclote Key[Honeymoon Island area) for use in lease site inspectloil.

                Gary Waters, Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. Charlotte, NC -
                Provided benthic resources, state boundary, sanctuary boundary, and shipwreck
                databases.


                Ken Hartley, Shrimper, Pinellas Park, FL - Aerial photographs of Ft. DeSoto,
                Gulfport to Pinellas Point to study shoreline and bottom in detail.

                Dr. Bob Hall, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA -
                Reprints on mapping marine resources in Florida.

                Will Davis, Pinellas County Environmental Management, Clearwater, FL - List
                of concerns for overflight mission to photograph propeller scars and seagrasses
                at Ft. DeSoto and gather information pertaining to aerial photography.

                Clarita Lund, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Calculation of seagrass area for Indian River for
                hard clam distribution study.

                Neil Bums, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Management Division,
                Atlanta, GA - Compile list of ARCANFO databases for data exchange.

                Doug Heatwole, Ecology & Enviromnent, Ta.         Ilahassee, FL - List of aerial
                photograph acquisition companies for statewide gas pipeline project.

                Dr. Robert Aangeenbrug, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
                Tampa, FL - Invited speaker for GIS class a the USF, St. Petersburg.

                Walter Jaap, Jennifer Wheaton, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
                Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Review photographs and camera
                apparatus for accuracy in mapping coral growth.









               Toni Ash, Hillsborough Environmental Protection Commission, Tampa, FL
               Copies of aerial guidelines for propeller scar damage mapping.


               Dr. Larry Doyle, Dean Milliken, Florida Institute of Oceanography, St. 
               Petersburg, FL - Converted state plane coordinates to latitude/longitude and
               Provided digital file of the coordinates.                                

               Daryl Scherkenbach, Resource Data, Anchorage, AK - Copy of Florida shoreline
               to tape cartridge to provide sample data for oil spill application.

               Christopher P. Jones, Applied Technology and Management, Inc., Charleston, SC
               - Thermal wax prints of Hurricane Pass (Honeymoon Island and Caladesi Island)
               from 1950 and 1982.


               Dr. Robert Aangeenbrug, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
               Tampa, FL - GIS class given tour and demonstration of MRGIS.

               Tom Adams, Brevard Community College, Palm Bay, FL - Assist in setting up
               GIS base facility at Brevard Community College.

               Kent Smith, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
               Species Management, Tallahassee, Fl- - Seagrass distribution data.

               Brad Stieh, Archbold Biological Station, Lake Wales, FL - Information on
               scanning aerial photography and digital images.

               Dr. Larry Doyle, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida, St.
               Petersburg, FL - Conversion of a series of state plane coordinates into latitude
               and longitude.

               Jennifer Bexley, U.S. Geological Survey - Tampa, FL           Assist with aerial
               photography and allow use of the zoom transfer scope when available for project.

               Peter Jernakoff, CSIRO, Australia - Reprints on the trends in coastal habitat
               mapping and monitoring.

               Dr. Randy Parkinson, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL-
               Information on salt marsh loss in Florida.

               Mike Hoff, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ashland, WI - CZM conference
               material.
 








                Patrick Jodice, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Lake City, FL -
                Information on marine resources in the Tampa Bay area.

                Neil Burns, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Management Division,
                Atlanta. GA - Digital data depicting boundary of FKNMS and Florida shoreline
                for the southern portion of the state in ARC/INFO export format.

                Mark McClanahan, Student, Department of Geography, University of Florida,
                Gainesville, FL - Landsat TM imagery 15/41 Scene ID 4015115174 to Study
                spatial diffusion and urban growth.

                Eric Fisher, National Audubon Society, New York, NY - Information relating to
                habitat loss and ecosystem types for a biodiversity project.

                Joe Santo, GEONEX, St. Petersburg, FL - Information on NOAA's cost of
                reproducing aerial photography of the Florida Keys.

                Bob Virnstein, St. John's Water Management District, Palatka, FL - Reprints on
                seagrass mapping and monitoring, and seagrass distribution and abundance
                patterns.

                Paula Houhoulis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA - Information on seagrass
                experiments in Weedon Island.

                Ruth Folit, New College, Sarasota, FL - Information on propeller scar damage,
                in seagrass beds.

                Eric Fehrman, Pinellas County Department of Environmental          Management,
                Clearwater, FL - Reviewed aerial photography for propeller scar damage.

                Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
                Management, Tallahassee, FL - Supplied computer information.

                Richard Ring, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL - Request to be involved
                in Florida Bay Interagency Working Group.

                Juan A. Vega, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
                Palmetto, FL - 1:24,000 plot of soil database at Hillsborough and Manatee
                County line.

                Doug McLain, NOAA, Monterey, CA - Information on the marine resources
                mapping and monitoring in Florida, habitat trends in Tampa and Sarasota Bays,
 







               and a MRGIS summary.

               Bruce Bauer, Breedlove, Dennis & Associates, Inc., Orlando, FL -
               Reprints on marine resource mapping and monitoring in FLorida and the role of
               GIS in mapping Florida's coastal wetland resources.

               Ruth Roaza, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, FL -
                Tour and demonstration of the MRGIS.

               Joe O'Hop, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine, Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of keygroups at a large scale to help assign
               fish dealers to groups.

               Kathy Swanson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Sanctuaries
               and Research Reserves, FL - Digital data featuring polygons coded for reefs in
               the Florida Keys exported as single precision.

               Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
               Management, Tallahassee, FL - Digital coverage Florida shoreline base map.

               Kathy Nesmith, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL - Plotted out
               print data on a map of south Florida titled "Florida Natural Areas Inventory
               South Florida Element Occurrence Locations June 1992."

               Jane Urquhart- Donnelly, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Patrol, Tampa, FL - Map showing resources,in area of oil spill drill. Resources
               acreages within the spill boundary were calculated.

               Holly Greening, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program, St. Petersburg, FL
               Digital database of 1950 Tampa Bay land cover.

               Doug Haymans, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
               Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay depicting three zones:
               Bishop's Harbor, MacDill and Weedon Island, and all of Manatee River
               (showing Safety Harbor) at 1:100,000.

               Joe O'Hop, Florida Departmen     of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Import keygroup file and plot keygroups with land
               and FKNMS boundary (COMPAS).

               Mary Beth Regan, Reporter, Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, FL - Slides showing
               damage to mangroves after Hurricane Andrew for the Everglades and Paradise
 





	Point areas.

	Mary Morris, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected
	Species Management, Tallahassee, FL - Plot out and assemble a boat sampling
	atlas.  Plot out two maps (state lobster and federal lobster seasons) that show
	collected data.

	Billy Causey, NOAA, Marathon, FL - Large-scale map to display the entire Keys
	in some form of tile scheme.  Map displays bathymetry, benthic resources.
	navigational aids, boundaries, and zoning.

	Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Miami, FL - Digital data in 	ARC/INFO
	export format of benthic habitat data.

	May Zaitoon, Alghanim Industries, New York, NY - Compiled a variety of 
	statistics and information regarding the Florida Keys marinas and recreational
	facilities for a group of international investors interested in the Florida Keys.

	John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
	Institute, Marathon, FL - Provided one complete atlas of boating survey maps.

	George Jones, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, Key Largo, FL - Provided
	copy of aerial video for a documentary shown on Channel 2 in Miami.

	Cynthia Elder, Broward County, Office of Natural Resources Protection, Marine
	Resources, Fort Lauderdale, FL - Provided information of inventory of GIS
	coverages to provide advise on oil spill contingency planning and GIS.

	Bill Porter, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Office of Protected Species
	Management, Tallahassee, FL - Provided copy of CalComp shade set and a
	statewide 5-minute grid.

	Margit Crowell, South West Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL
	- Provided CalComp shade set for use in developing GIS maps.

	Vince Sclafani, National Wetlands Research Center, Lafayette, LA - Digital files
	for creating paper plots using the electrostatic plotter.

	Tom Marlow, FEMA, Miami, FL - Digital data of Florida shoreline, Florida
	county, and 5-minute grid files in ARC/INFO format to be used for Hurricane
	Andrew recovery.




                
 








               Patty Sime. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL -
               Digital National Wetlands Inventory coverages for the Florida Keys quads.

               Gary J. Reckner. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
		   Sarasota, FL - Landsat photocopy for seminar.

               Dr. Churchill Grimes, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Panama City,
               FL - Landsat imagery.

               Paul Carlson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plots of 1:24,000 quad scale of seagrass and marsh
               data in St. Joe Bay to estimate seagrass loss.

               David Camp, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
               Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of benthic community database for South
               Florida.


               Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Plot of most desirable
               color palette for modifying the colors of the "War Room" map of the Florida
               Keys and a plot of some available line types and weights.

               Mike Salcedo, Florida International University, Miami, FL - Loaned 36" x 36"
               enlargements of Hurricane Andrew with a text summary of the photographs.

               Dale Rubin, Dale Rubin Design Associates, Breesport, NY - Plot of Florida Keys
               habitat map originally done for Dr. Multer in September 1992.

               Virginia Shepherd, Eckerd College, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay
               featuring mangroves and seagrasses from the 1989/1990 Florida land use-land
               cover database.


               Betsy Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data featuring
               bathymetry (3, 6, 12 ft depths) within the Florida Keys National Marine
               Sanctuary.

               M. Marshall, Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL - Use of remote sensing to
               access estuarine habitats and machine processing of remotely sensed data.

               Daniel Williams, Architect, We Will Rebuild, Miami, FL - Loaned photographs
               of Hurricane Andrew for a presentation.
 








                 Steve Schropp, Taylor Engineering, Jacksonville, FL - Background information
                 on seagrass mapping of Indian River Lagoon for National Estuary Program RFP
                 for mapping historical seagrass data.

                 Dr. Joseph Kimmel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                 Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Map of Florida Keys benthic
                 communities.


                 Brian Julius, NOAA/Damage Assessment. Rockville, MD - Analysis of south
                 Florida benthic community database for the Grecian Rocks area.

                 George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
                 Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Two plots that are good examples of
                 work CAMRA does to show numerous coverages.

                 Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Digital data of Aids to
                 Navigation database for the upper, middle, and lower Keys and an explanation
                 of bathymetry codes.

                 Walter Jaap, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Sampling map for Fort Jefferson National
                 Monument, Dry Tortugas for ecosystem meeting in Miami.

                 Diane Richards, Geography Club, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL -
                 Several maps as examples of work done using GIS.

                 Nick Toth, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Cockroach Bay Aquatic
                 Preserve, Tampa, FL - Map of marine resources for the Cockroach Bay Aquatic
                 Preserve.


                 Jorge Laguna, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL - Reprints
                 on seagrass distribution, potential of Landsat imagery for assessing fisheries
                 habitat, and marine resource mapping and monitoring.

                 Barry Lenz, Dames & Moore, Tampa, FL - Conversation about aerial
                 photography of seagrass distribution.

                 Mike Wessel, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Aerial photography of Cedar Key/Crystal River
                 area to review oyster beds and boat ramps.
 







              lanics lZoheson, Florida Department of I'Aivironniental I@Cgulation - CIPS
              coordinate data for use In a test of GPS in Florida.

              Robert Finegold. NN0A,i\/VK1NMS. N-laratlion, 1-4,     Copy of Nllarszalek liahilat
              definitions to calculate habitat acreages.
                                                    Z:@

              George Barley, NOAA/FKNMS. Orlando, FL, - Satellite photographs of Hurricane
              Andrew and pre-1'986 Landsat imagery.

              Louis Marcotte. Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada -
               Reprints on marine wetland mapping and monitoring in Florida.

              Dr. Charles W. Finkl, Department of Geology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca
              Raton, FL - Landsat TM imagery to test land use land cover classification
              system.

              Gordon Thayer. NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, NC -
              Consultation regarding aerial photography for Florida Bay, specifically in the area
              of Johnson Key and Man-O-War Keys. Advised him the photographs for that
              area to the west are uninterpreted.

              Scot Smith, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Post-hurricane Andrew TM
              imagery for an impact study.

              Peter K. Gottfried, Natural Systems Analysts, Winter Park, FL - 7" x 7" print
              of TM data for Pithlachascotee River (Pasco County).

              Lyman Barger, Fishery Biologist, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service,
              Panama City, FL      St. Andrew Bay Resource Map coverages and plot.

              Peggy Mathews, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee,
              FL - Twenty-one slides of seagrass meadow die-off, algal blooms, epiphytic
              growth on seagrass, dead mangroves, resource map, sponge die-off

              Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Digital export files
              of bathymetry coverage contained on chart numbers 11463, 11465, and 11467.

              George Henderson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
              Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Plot of Tampa Bay oil spill drill.

              Stephen Stetson, American Forests, Chris Daniel, Comp-Tron, Baltimore, MD -
               Information from Hurricane Andrew in 8 min digital format.









                Allen Foley, Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Create turtle coverage with the following items:
                latitude/longitude, date, species, and size.

                Judy Ott. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida Aquatic
                Preserves Office. Bokeelia, FL - Blueprint of eight quads from the 1983
                Charlotte Harbor land use and vegetation maps.

                Bill Zace, Monroe County, Key West, FL - Plot featuring benthic communities
                and selected managed areas for south Florida and Florida lobster season map.

                Carol Blackwell. NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD - Map showing benthic
                resources with zoning alternative III areas within the Florida Keys National
                Marine Sanctuary.

                J. Dobson, Oakridge Laboratory - Shortened version of COASTWATCH papers
                form ASPRS/RT 1992.

                Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Plotted two copies of the
                SEAKEYS map and one mylar separate.

                Glen Woodson, Environmental Consultant, Tallahassee, FL - Consultation.
                regarding all aspects of seagrass mapping from equipment, aerial photographs to
                classification and field work.


                Cheryl Young, Chiles Communication, Tallahassee, FL - Copy of CAMRA GIS
                summary.

                Kathy Swanson, Bureau. of Sanctuaries and Research Reserves, Florida
                Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL - Plot out a boat user atlas.

                Dr. John R. Jensen, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina,
                Columbia, SC - Review comments on development of an Everglades vegetation
                map using SPOT imagery and GPS coordinate data.

                Bob Repenning, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Southwest Florida
                Aquatic Preserves Office, Bokeelia, FL - 35 mm slides of propeller sear damage
                in southwest Florida.


                K. Lollar, New Press, Fort Myers, FL - Slides of specific propeller scar damage
                to seagrass between Naples and Boca Grande.  Also provided underwater
                photographs and an interview.
 






Nanette Holland, Reporter, Tampa Tribune, Tampa, FL- Seagrass propeller
damage management and education information.

Dale Patchett. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Tallahassee, FL-
Information on seagrass distribution in Delray Beach, Florida.

Betsy G. Davis, HDR Endineering, Inc., Tampa, FL- Large-scale map of
seagrass and marsh data in Escambia and Blackwater Bays.

Carol Patterson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Patrol,
Jacksonville, FL- Jacksonville Resource Impart Map.

Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associated, Artport, NY- Changes made to the 
map featuring bethic communities inside the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary (SEAKEYS).

Marty Armstrong, Armstrong Environmental- Information for the National
Estuary Program (NEP) and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) in the Tampa
Vay area.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Forty-two maps showing
benthic communities in the Florida Keys for use by the FKNMS Advisory
Council.

Sid Flannery, Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL-
Revised calculations for water table depth (low) and water table depth (high)
for each gaged unit of the Little Manatee River watershed.

Wei Ji, NWRC/Spatial Analysis Branch, Lafayette, LA- Provided a copy of the 
oil spill RFP and ESRI legislation.

Ken Haddad, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Insitute, St. Petersburg, FL- Modified SEAKEYS map showing three more
managed areas, Coupon Bight,Lignumvitae, and Biscayne Bay for the Florida
Bay interagency advisory committee meeting.

Gary J. Reckner, Sarasota Soil & Water Conservation District, Sarasota, FL-
Information on how to obtain image of Sarasota County and surrounging area.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Copy of Tom Matthews
data in digital format for NOAA mapping for FKNMS management plan.









                Louis Coakley, Florida Power & Light, North.Palni Beacli. FL - Information oii
                OUr Atitoinated Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas being developed by the Department.

                .lord,lil I I ilics, 'I'lle Conservancy. Key West. VL - Copy ot' the boat SL11-VCy
                atlas.


                Mary Hoppe, Tampa Bay National Estuary Program, St. Petersburg. FL -
                Updated boat ranip database for the Tampa Bay Boater's Guide.

                Michael E. Cressey, State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection,
                Augusta, ME - Information on COMPAS.

                Steve Otwell, James Cato, SeaGrant, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL -
                Presentation to the North Florida Fly Fishers.

                Marsha Martin, Lake Michigan Construction Company, Naples, FL - Resource
                Impact Map which identifies the benthic resources in the Naples, Florida area.

                Nicholas W. Klobuchar, Tampa, FL - Toured the facility and requested a listing
                of the ARCANFO User's Group roster.

                Scott, Taylor, Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL - Draft copy of
                a map depicting the boundaries of selected managed areas within the Florida
                Keys National Marine Sanctuary in DXF format.

                Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL - Hurricane Andrew
                aerial photographs.

                John Hunt, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                Institute, Marathon, FL - May 1992 TM image and transparency of Florida Bay
                showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing clear water. November
                1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay with colored areas
                showing phytoplankton bloom.

                George Barley, NOAA/FKNMS, Orlando, FL -' May 1992 TM image and
                transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing
                clear water. November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay
                with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

                Mark Robertson, The Nature Conservancy, Key West, FL - May 1992 TM image
                and transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image
                showing clear water. November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of





Florida Bay with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

Besty Archer, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- 3 ft and 12 ft bathumetric
data for three areas to add to COMPAS database.

William Teehan, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Tallahassee, FL- Big
Bend Resource Impact Map with 3- mile line and new shrimp zones.

James McKenna, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Developed a hypsographic curve of
Tampa Bay.

Allen Foley, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Determine latitude and longitude of three marine 
turtle strandings in Pinellas County and add into database.

Mark Butler, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA- Slides of Florida Bay
showing phytoplankton bloom.

Linda Salisburg, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Port Charlotte, FL- Two Landsat TM
(EARTHSAT) prints of Charlotte Harbor.

Bob Thompson- Florida Departmentof Natural Resources, Bureau of Marine
Resource, Regulation and Development, Tallahassee, FL- 1989 Indian River
seagrass map.

Peter Allen, Everglades National Park, Flamingo, FL- May 1992 TM image and 
transparency of Florida Bay showing turbid water and May 1989 image showing
clear water.  November 1992 and January 1993 airplane survey of Florida Bay
with colored areas showing phytoplankton bloom.

Alan Farago, FLX Communications, Miami, FL- Information on Florida Bay
water quality. Sent four slides and thermal wax print of Florida Bay.

Tom Matthews, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine
Research Institute, Marathon, FL- Plot of new data points ad add buoys to boat
sampling atlas.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- ARC/INFO export file
of the lastest south Florida benthic resources database.








                 Caroi Blackwell. NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, NID            Final version of the
                 South l"1011(t.1 L)C11thic resource nial) with no zones oil it. and a niap of (lie
                 Florl& Keys boal sampling atlas.

                 Dr. Gustavo Antonini, University of' Florida, Gainesville, FL - Tiger ditta file and
                 NWI data file.

                 Dr. Cathy Parker, Department of Geography, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
                 - Information on aerial photographs for mapping stands of sand pines.

                 Rod Hefling, Haff and Daugherty Graphics, Hialeah, FL - Provided Postscript file
                 for SEAKEYS map.

                 Dr. Gray Multer, Multer and Associates, Arkport, NY - Modifications to the
                 SEAKEYS map.

                 Bob Mulcahy, Continental Shelf Associates, Jupiter, FL - Draft maps of
                 explosive testing plots in support of Phase 11 of site selection for explosive
                 testing in the Florida Keys.

                 Phil Steele, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Modifications to the Big Bend Resource Impact
                 Map for the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission meeting. Calculated acreages
                 for all zones.


                 Scott Taylor,  Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL      Exp ort file of
                 1:40,000 Florida shorelineto set up their GIS.

                 Randy Imai, California Department of Fish & Game, Office of Spill Prevention
                 and Response, Sacramento, CA - Copy of FloridaiKeys boat sampling atlas to
                 help California design an atlas to be used by the primary on-scene coordinator.

                 Dr. Mark Lindberg, Department of Geography, University of South Florida,
                 Tampa, FL - Provided small coverage to test importing ARC 6.1 coverages into
                 ARCVrEW.


                 Anne Meylan, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
                 Institute, St. Petersburg, FL - Tampa Bay Resource Impact Map to assist in
                 writing MARFIN grant proposal.           Provided reprint of GIS and fisheries
                 management.







Dave Crewz, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Map showing mangroves in Tampa Bay to be used
as a display tool to show Japanese scientists the mangrove distribution and 
extent.

Michael E. Cressey, State of Marine Department of Environmental Protection. 
Augusta, ME- Provided a copy of marine facilities questionnaire to assist them
in setting up a marine facilities database.

Jill Paterson, NOAA, Seattle, WA- Provided a copy of marine facilities
questionnaire to assist them in setting up a marine facilities database.

Peter Comeau, Collier County Government, Naples, FL- Requested all data in 
the system for Collier County.

Anne Meylan, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Three copies of the Big Bend Resource Impact 
Map to be included in a MARFIN grant proposal for turtle research.

Carol Blackwell, NOAA/SEA Division, Rockville, MD- Bathymetry coverage
of the Florida Keys.

Rita Meng, Major Green, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida
Marine Patrol, Tampa, FL- Tour of the facility.

Mark Provancha, Bionetics, Kennedy Space Center, Kennedy Space Center, FL-
Information of UNIX system administration.

Clive Howard, Dale Rubin Design Associaties, Breesport, NY- Provided copy of
SEAKEYS may.

Bob Potter, McShane and Moore, Tampa, FL- Corrections to the Tampa Bay
National Estuary Program Tampa Bay Boaters' Guide.

Margit Crowell, South West Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL
- Provided water table depth (low) and primeablility typw coverages from the 
Little Manatee River watershed database in ARC/INFO export format.

Skip Snow, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL- ARC/INFO coverages
of various "managed areas" in the Florida Keys.








Hans Zarbock, Coastal Environmental, Inc., St. Petersburg, FL- Waste-water
servive areas map.

Hans Zarvock, Coastal Environmental, Inc., St. Petersburg, FL- List of septic
tank densities by section-township-range for the Little Manatee River watershed.

Jazek Balszczynski, Bureau of Land Management,Boulder, CO- Information
about the FKNMS Benthic Mapping Program.  Provided a may (8 1/2"x 11")
of the Sanctuary.

Mike Johnson, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida Marine Research
Institiuem Inglis FL- Big Bend Resource Impact map showing seagrasses from
the Lower Suwanee to the Homasassa River area.

Dr. Kathleen Sullivan, University of Miami, FL- Tour of facility and 
demonstration of MRGIS.

Dr. Kendall Carder, Department of Marine Science, University of South Florida
St. Petersburg, FL- Tour of MRGIS and demonstration of remote sensing and 
GIS techniques for graduate Hyperspectral Remote Sensing class.

Toy Livingston, Department of Consumer Affairs, Tallahassee, FL- Reprint on
seagrass distribution and Florida marine fisheries habitat.

Mike Incze, Naval Undersea Warfare Reserch & Development Laboratory,
Rhode Island- Information on marine resources and GIS particulary with respect
to oil spill applications.

Don Carter, Fry, Hammond, & Barr Orlando, FL- Developed eight scenes of 
western Florida Bay area depicting variations on position of phytoplankton bloom
and discolored water.  Eight thermal wax prints and eight slides were produced.

Estus Whitfield, Office of the Governor, Environmental and Community and 
Economical Development Policy Unit, Tallahassee, FL- Transparency images of 
Florida Bay depicting phytoplankton blooms and discolored water.

Ray L. Harris, Department of Geography and Encironmental Studies, San Jose
State University, San Jose, CA- Reprints related to GIS and coastal zone
management.

Dr. Sandy Cargo, Florida Institute of Oceanography, St. Petersburg, FL- Copy
of thermal wax print of phytoplankton bloom in Florida Bay to assist in writing





grant proposal.

Phil Steele, Florida Department of Natural Resources, Florida marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL- Two Big Bend Resource Impact Maps for Florida
Marine Fisheries Commission meeting.

Sally Patrenos, Bureau of Seafood & Aquaculture, Tallahassee, FL- Information
regarding water quality of Florida Rivers.

John Couy, Private Citizen, Punta Gorda, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte Harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeard in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Ken Hartley, Shrimper, Pinellas Park,FL- Lent 2 thermal wax prints and 4
maps of the Honeymoon Island- Caladesi Island area.

Gary Vandenberg, SAcientific Support Coordinator, NOAA, Miami, FL- Export
file of Florida Shoreline to aid in developing an oil spill response plan.

Charles G. Brown, II, Charlotte State Bank, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicate of 
Charlotte Harbor TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald
Tribune.

Margaret Harmon, Private Citizen, Punta Garda, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte
Harbor TM slide that appeared in an article in the Satasota herald Tribune.

Lucille Fenton, Atlantic Gulf Communities, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicate of 
Charlotte Harvor Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota
Herald Tribune. The enlargement will be used for the Welcome Center Office
in Port Charlotte.

C.T. Klein, Port Charlotte, FL- Duplicated of Charlotte Harbor Landsat TM slide
that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

William G. Haerr, Private Citizen, Nokomis, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Charles Eastwood, Private Citizen, Venice, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte Harbor
Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

John Blaser, Blaser's Nurseries, Inc., Tallevast, FL- Duplicate of Charlotte
Harbor Landsat TM slide that appeared in an article in the Sarasota Herald
Tribune.








REFERENCES

Doolittle. J.A. G Schellentrager, and S. Ploetz  1989. Soil Survey of 
Hillsborough County, Fl. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil
Conservation Service. 168 pp.

Flannery, M.S.. H.C. Downing, Jr.. G.A. McGarry, and M.O. Walters, 1991.
Increased nutrient loading and baseflow supplementation in the Little Manatee
River Watershed. pp. 369-395 in S.F. Treat and P.A. Clark, eds. Proceedings of 
the Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium II, 528 pp.










                                                     Little Manatee River Watershed Atlas









                                                 Florida Department of Natural Resources


                                                                             A report of the 14onda Department of Community Affairs
                                                                                                 pursuant to
                                                                   National Oceamc and Atmospheric Admimstration Award No. NA270ZD345-01












                     he Little Manatee River (LMR) watershed, located on- the                All map sheets and mylar overlays are co-registered to allow
                 eastern shore of Tampa Bay, Florida, was selected as the                    real-time analysis of the map pages. We encourage users of
                 site of a multi-agency project focusing on the development                  this atlas to explore the relationships among the map layers
                 of watershed-oriented resource-management tools and                         by removing the mylar overlays and superimposing them onto
                 strategies. The project was a cooperative effort by federal,                the thematic coverages.
                 state, regional, and local agencies. The LMR watershed
                 includes 36 subbasins that drain 573 square kilometers of                   This atlas is designed to provide a general view of the
                 land covering portions of two counties. The dominant land                   watershed and the relationships among the different types of
                 use in the watershed is agricultural. The recently completed                information. 'fhe detailed digital information can be made
                 interstate-75, however, provides a major corridor for influx                available to agencies with GIS capabilities. For additional
                 and growth and will undoubtedly impact a significant portion                information on the Little Manatee River watershed database,
                 of the watershed.                                                           or this atlas, please contact:
                 Using the Marine Resources Geographic Information- System                            Gail McGarry MacAulay
                 (MRGIS) at the Florida Department of Natural Resources                              -Florida Department of Natural Resources
                 Florida Marine Research Institute in St. Petersburg, we,                             Florida Marine Research Institute
                 through a multi-agency effort, have developed a comprehensive                        100 Eighth Avenue SE
                 database for the watershed. The maps featured in this atlas                          St Petersburg, FL 33701
                 represent a portion of that database. The following data                             (813) 896-8626
                 layers are included in this atlas: SPOT satellite basemap,
                 land cover 1988, flood zones, wildlife plant communities,
                 future land use, elevation, distribution of selected species
                 of fish, detailed soils, soil hydrologic units, locations of
                 wastewater treatment facilities, withdrawal sites of
                 permitted wells, and densities of septic tanks based on
                 sectiori-township-range. The transportation network,
                 subbasins, hydrologic gaged boundaries, hydrology, and
                 section-township-range units are shown as mylar overlays.
                 In addition, a 500-ft buffer has been calculated for the river-
                 corridor and is shown as an overlay. The results of a GIS
                 analysis are demonstrated in the map describing future   land
                 use within the 100 year flood zone. For this analysis    we
                 identified the 100 year flood zone on the basis of the   flood
                 zone data. We then evaluated these flood-prone areas     based
                 on the future land use map.
































       BEA

























                                                     THIS IMAGE WAS CREATED USING AN APRIL 1998 SPOT SATELLITE
                                                        PANCHROMATIC (10 M]ffER RESOLUTION) IMAGE THAT WAS
                                                       SPECIALLY ENHANCED WITH SPOT SATELUM MULTISPECIRAL
                                                     (20 MEIER RESOLUTION) DATAL THESE ENHANCED MULTISPECrRAL,
                                                      BANDS WERE CO]KBINED TO SIMULATE COLOR INIMARED AERIAL
                                                  PHOTOGRAMY. THIS BASE IMAGE, WITH A RESOLUTION OF 10 METERS,
                                                    WAS GEOGRAPHICALLY RECTHIIED TO THE UNIVERSAL TRANSVERSE                                                                      8CATE Idow
                                                  MRRCATOR (U]" COORDINATE SYSTEM USING U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
                                                      (USGS) 1:24,OW SCALE 7.5 MINUIE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES.



                                                                                SPOT Satellite Basemap,
             Aft-
                                                               of the          Little Manatee River Watershed





                                                                                                                                                                                        p."    I.." hw@
                                                                                                                                                                                   ub. P--        1.ft..dm ay









                                                                                                                          0D








                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               w                 E



                                                                                                                                                                        20
                                                                                                            10                                                                          28



                                                                                                                                        16                                                                                                                                   34
                                                                                                                           13
                                                               6
                                                                                                                                                17          19          21                                                          30
                                                          7                                                                                                                                                         31
                                        2                                              1                                 14                                                           22
                                                 3              8
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  32                              35
                                                                            9                                                  15              18-                        23                             29                                                              36
                                                                                                   12
                                             4                                                                                                                                     24
                                                                                                                          Reservoir
                                                                                                                                                                                      25                             33



                                                                                                                                                                                    26






                                                                           THIS OVERLAY SHOWS nIE SURBASINS OF THE IZrr1E MANA7EE
                                                                               Rr%qR WAIMRSHED AS DEF114ED, BY TEE SOU`rRWBSr FLORIDA,                                                      27
                                                                                        WATER. MANAGEMM DNIR[Cr (SWFWMD).                                                                                                                               WAM I 1-.IWAW




                                                                       Subbasins of the Little Manatee River Watershed
                                                                               I. LMR - Below SR-301                                       13. Dus Creek                                          25   Baker breach
                                                                               2. Sun City Slough                                          14. Below Dug Gap                                      26:  LMR - South Flat
                                                                               3. Wildcat Creek                                            15. LIAR - Wininums,                                   27.  Keen Branch
                                                                               4 Unnamed Drainage Ditch                                    116, Lake Wim@                                         28.  Pierce Branch
                                                                               5*Ruskin Inlet Marsh Branch                                 17. Lake Winumms Drain                                 29.  Unnamed Drain
                                                                               6. Mills Bayou                                              18., Below South Clap                                  30.  LMR - Lonesome
                                                                               7. Bay- Day-                                                19. Gully BrWWh                                        31.  Upper Howard Prairie Branch
                                                                               8. Bolster Bayou                                            20. -Carlion Branch                                    32.  Lower Howard Prairic, Branch
                                                                               9. Curiosity Creek                                          21. Below Carlton Gap                                  33.  Long Branch
                                                                               10. Cypress Czeek                                           22- - LMR - Nor& Fork                                  34.  Mined Area                                           MW
                                                                               11. Below Cypress Gap                                       23. Unnamed Streant.                                   35.  Alderman, Creek                                                  Ub. R--
                                                                               12. Unnamed Slough                                          24. Moody Branch                                       36.  Mined Area                                              Fkd&      R-h h.1ftd.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             R-



















                                                                                                                            Branch

                                                                                 s Creek



                                                                                                  Take Winmiuma




                                                                           Ole*
                                            Lower Little hbmdw River


                                                                                                                                                                                  Fort Lonesome


                                                                                                                               North Fork




















                                                                                                                                 South Fork


                                                      TM HYDOLOGIC GAGE BOUNDARIES OF THE LITZIE MANATEE
                                                         RIVER IDENTIFIED IN TE[IS OVERLAY WERE DEFENUD BY                                                                           1AWAW
                                                        TECE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATEP NW4AGEWNT DURTRICr
                                                                            (SWFWMD)-
                                                                                                                                                                                          1    4




              Ilk
              lemsi--                                    Drainage and Hydrologic                                     Gage Boundaries




                                                                                                                                                                                  HmW D,

                                                                                                                                                                                           R.-Ch Laft
                                                                                                                                                                                        G-vqf"2@87-















                                    Ab
                                                        CA


                                                                                                                                                                                  . .... . ...

                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Xti









                                                                                                                                                                                 ..........
                                                                                                                                                                                  ..........-









                                                                                                                                       .. .........






                                                                                                                                     At


                                                                                                                                                                         ..........
                                                                                                                                                                          ..........
                                                          THE ELEVATION RANGES SHOWN IN THIS MAP WERE DERIVED
                                                              FROM FIVE FOOT ELEVAnON DATA PROVIDED BY THE
                                                         SOUTHWEST IZLORMA WAMM MANAGENEW DISIRICr (SWFW?AD).






                                                                                                                                                                                                     2        4




                 .6
                        A-                        Elevation                Ranges             within the Little Manatee                                         River Watershed

                                                                               0 - 10 Fmt    ME 40 - 50 Feet IM 80           90 Feet    EZI 120 - 130 Feet
                                                                               10 - 20 Feet  = 50 - 60 Feet             90    100 Feet  M 130 - 140 Feet
                                                                               20   30 Feet = 60 - 70 Feet              100 - 110 Feet         140 - 150 Feet
                                                                               30   40 Feet  ME 70 - 80 Feet            110 - 120 Feet         150 - 160 Feet
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Dhid-.( mb.















                                          Ab
                                        ;
                                        P IN
                                        j;                                                      X

                                                              4F















                                                                                                       ......               ....

                                                                                                        ilm,g








                                                                      THE DETAHM) SOILS SHOWN IN THIS MAP WERE DIGITIZED
                                                                      FROM la4,000 SCALE SOIL, MAPS AS RECOmpum FROM THE
                                                                     FMj-qBOROUGH AND MANATIM COUNTY SOIL SURVEYS BY A
                                                                          SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE (SCS) SOIL SCIMMST


                                                                                                                                                                                                                               BCALB IdKOW


                                                                                                                                                                                                                       1 0 1


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         2

                                                                                                                  Detailed                   Soils
                                                                         w                                    *ttle Manatee River Watershed
                                                                              ithin the Li


















                                                                                                                                                                                        W



                                                                                     r                                                                                                         S
                                                                    F



                                                                                                          Jn




                                4

                                                           'Pik




                                                                                                              64                                             4





                                                                                                                                      400



                                                         TRE HYDROLOGIC aROUPS DEMC= IN 7HIS MAP WERE
                                                         DERIVED FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT' OF AGRICULTUIM
                                                           SOIL CONSERVAnON SERVICE (SCS) SOEL SURVEYS OF
                                                                EMLLSBOROUGH AND MANAMM COUNTIES.


                                                                                                                                                                                    WAL 8 1 WMWW






                                                                                       .6                                                                     A.
                                            Soil       Hydrologic Groups within the Little Manatee River Watershed

                                                           Hydrologic Group D = High Runoff Potential/Very Slow Infiltration Rate             Undefined Runoff Potential
                                                           Hydrologic Group B/D    Combination of Hydrologic Groups B and D                   Land Outside the-Watershed
         So -

                                                           Hydrologic Group C = Slow Infiltration Rate                                        Open Water
                                                           Hydrologic Group B = Moderate Infiltration Rate                                                                            P@" Dv@& N&.W R.-
                                                           Hydrologic Group A = Low Runoff Potentialffligh Infiltration Rate





















                                                                             V-1


















                                                                                             GRP-
                                       A


                                                                                                                              L






                                                THE BUFM SHOWN IN THIS OVERIAY WAS CMMMOR GENERATED.
                                                 TO SHOW THE AREAS WMHN SW FEET OF TIM RWER CHANNELS.




                                                   500 Foot Buffer of the Little Manatee River
                                                                                                                                                                            il @ 6@6









                                            'RU




























                                                                                                                                                      A![






                                                                                                                                                                 AKE
                                                ME 1988 LAM COVER CLASSUICATION DERCM IN TM MAP               ..........                                    NY,
                                                                                                                                           . . ........
                                                  WAS onERPRUrED FROM THE SPar SATELIM RASEKAP
                                                  AND 1z58;000 AND 1:26,5W SCALE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY.









           3&.b. I.- awwhk bft..d. apt-
                                                                                                                                            A,
                                          Little      Manatee River Watershed                                     Land        Cover 1988
              LaW Outsitle the Water&W                       = Famwd Wetlan& 17,952-                     BE Hafftwow Forest              3,377*                   Commercial     542*
              Open Water ad&            5,229*                    Citrus             12,499*             F=1 RangeW4 Shrub & Brush      12,424*                   Mining         1,236*
              Mangroves                  267*                     Row Crop          26,295*                    Forested Pine Flats     - 9,360*                   Golf Course    795*
        E-1 Sahmarsh                     597*                     Fish Farm           816*                     Suburban                  7,247*                   Airstrip        56*
              Herbaceous Wetlands       5,6_32*              F-1 Pasture            37,377*                    utility                     151*                   Transportation  558*
                                                                         Area Calculations    Measured in Acres                                                                  __Jj







           6-                          Juvenile Striped Mullet                    600-                             Bay Anchovy
                                        Juvenile Red Dnun
                                      Juvenile Spotted Seatrout                       -

           5-                                                                     500-


       0
       w   4-                                                                  pq 400


           3-                                                                     300-


       'Cl
           2                                                                     '3200-
                                                                               U


                                                                                  100



           0                                                                       0
               22.7                14.38.6            2.3             0.6 0.2-          22.7                14.38.6            2.3             0.6 0.2
                                 Mean - Salinity om Pam P. m.-m                                           Mean Salinity(. Pm p. T..4

                                                     2@
                                                                         A,




















                                                                                                                         7



                                                                                                             Ga.
                                                                                                                  dill






                                                                                                                   J11


                          THIS FIGURE DEPICTS THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG SALINITY SAMPLING STATION, AND CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT FOR SELECTED SPECIES
                       OF FISH IN THE ESTUARINE PORTION OF THE LITTLE MANATEE RIVER, CATCH VALUES ARE BASED UPON A BIWEEKLY SAMPLING STRATEGY
                        WHICH UTIL]ZED SEINES AND TRAWLS FROM JANUARY 1998 THROUGH DECEMEBER 1991. SAMPLING STATIONS ARE SHOWN ON THE BASIS OF
                                                                      THE 1988 LAND COVER LAYER.











                                                             47-1










                                                                                                                                                                                              1   4




































                                                      THE WILDLIFE AM UPLAND PLANT COMMUN]TIES IN TMS MAP
                                                          WERE IN7`ERPRBTED FROM LANDSAT TEIMATIC MAPPER
                                                        SATE111TE IMAGERY (1985-1989) BY THE FLORIDA aAME AND
                                                        FRESHWATEIL FISH COMMISSION IN COOPERATION WITH 111E
                                                        FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND FLORIDA
                                                                 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.





                        Mk- R-
                      md. R-h h-ft@
                      Gvi& ld-a. s)
                 6
                                                             Wildlife And Upland Plant Communiffies
                      Land Outside the Watershed                   EM Sand Pine Scrub                       600*                 Saltmarsh               549*                Mangroves                  289*
                      Open Water                   4,151*                 SandhiR                            94*                 Freshwater Wedand      5,184*               Grassland               55,294*
                                                                                                                                                                                    5








                      UnWerpreted Area                64*                 Xeric Oak Scrub                   571*                 Cypress Swamp           793*                Shrub and Brushhmd       16,479*
                      Dry Prairie                  7,697*                 Mixed Hardwoodl?ine Forest      4,878*                 Hardwood Swamp         6,286*               Barr-en 1,and           27,356*
                      Pinelands                    2,515*                 Hardwood Hammock & Forest 9,479*-                      Sbnib Swamp              96*
                                                                                  *Area Calculations Measured           in Acres







                                                          -1x X,
















                                                                                                                        MEE%


















                                                       THE FLOOD ZONES IDENTIFIED IN TMS MAP WERE DIGTI.-.
                                                                FROM TM 1.6,000,1:12M AND 1.24@W
                                                         FEDERAL EMERCEN[CY MANAGDONT AGENCY MIMA)
                                                                FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS "M.


                                                                                                                                                                                SCALE 1:18DAW




                                                     Little Manatee River Watershed                                                   Flood Zones

                                                      M V Zone - Area of 100 Year Flood with Velocity                 240*                     Open Wder
                                                            A Zone - Area of 100 Year Flood                        22,224*                     Land Outside the Waterdied
                                                            B Zone - Area Between 10D Year & 500 Year Flood         4,018*
                                                            C Zone - Area of Minimg Flood@                        115,887*                                                          n." Dq@m d N-d I--
                                                                                                                                                                                             md.
                                                                                                                                                                                      P-M U.I.. I-b bbft
                                                                                 *Area Calculations Measured in            Acres                                                  U.I. 7  . , ",              1










                                                           41





                                                               75



        LNR Watushed                                           Stumn    Center
           B
            oundary










                41




                - - - - - - - -      - - - - - - - - - - - - -        - - - - - - - - - - -        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                               75






                                               3






                                            PmTish
                                                                                                                                                Pewmk



                                                  THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK SHOWN ON THIS OVERIAY
                                                    WAS CREATED FROM THE 1:100A00 1980 CENSUS DATA
                                                 By THE SOUTHWEffr KDREDA WATER MANAGRAENT DISMCr





              !,6
                                                                        Transportation                 Network














                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            w                  0



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      S

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SCALE I 1:18W


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    1     2


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Amiga



                                                                   . . ...............



















                                                               ... ......... ..
                                                                ......... ....

                                                             . . . ... .....




                                                                        Tim RnuRE LAND USE CLASSIRCATIONS H)EffIIqHD IN THIS MAP WERE
                                                                            DIMTMD FROM THEA-63,360 SCALE BILLSBOROUGH COUNTY MAP
                                                                            (REVISED OCTDBER 1992) AND 113E 1:40,00D SCALE MANATEE COUNTY
                                                                                     MAP IN TIMIR RESPECTIVE COMF21111ENSIVE PLANS.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ... ..............





                           DtM. & M.J.. R.-
                         P.d& mw. 1-" heft
                                       Uft.-W. 83
                                                                               Little Manatee                                     River Watershed                                                  Future Land Use
                                                                                            Hillsbolrough County Classifications                                                                                                   Manatee County Classifications
               m        Urban Level 2 00 DUIA)                      =       L@*&&umm Deniaty Urban Residential (9 DUIA)            ME       Rural Raddeniml (I DU/A) = Havmmunentally Senut-                                     Urban - Pdap                       Mixed Um
               =        Urban Level I (B DU/A)                      =       JAM Urcan Dengity Rcdd-d*,1 (6 DU/A)                            Rural Residential - Planned              Open We-                                    Residential (9 DUIGA)              ASnoultualffl .. 1 (.2 DUI"
               ME       C....&I Cid (20 DU/A)                       EM      Suburban Dwdy                  (4 DUIA)                         AgriculturWitural (.2 DUIA)              Land cansida the Watershed                  Residential (6 DUIGA)              Conamnuon I
               =        Commercial Office CZO DUIA)                         Iw Suburban Demmy RdenW C2 DU/A)                                Agricultural/Mining                                                         ffM      RmAential (3 DUIGA)
               m        1110 Density R-de-tial C20 DU/A)                    Low Suburban Demany Residential - Planned                       Agdcultm (.1 DUIA)                                                          Em       lrutcaftial -- Ligk
                        Medium Density Residential (12 DU/A)                Lw %&wftw                                                       Natural ftemervation                                                                 MajodSomi Public









                                                                                                                                bD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      N





                                                                            Fri
                                                           Off
                                                                                                                                                                                               r                                                                 SCALB I lzl8k=
                                                                                                                                                                                      IL




                                                                                                                                                                                           f



                                                                                                                                                                                             Iy


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 4-
                                                                                                               o 4%
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    r
                                                                                                                                                                                jp'



                                                                                     ..... . ......... .
                                                                                                                                                                           %

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        J



                                                            - - - - - - - - - - - -                                                                         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                    - - - - - - - - - -                                                     L - - - - -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Manatee counry



                                                                                         ...... .....










                                                                                      COVMAGE DEMONSTRAIM TIM USE OF A GBOGRAPMC
                                                                              DIFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) FOR OVERLAYING AND ANALYMNG                                                                                                                             T                  WIT
                                                                              MULTIPLE DATA LAYERS          * IN THIS EXAMPLA THE FLOOD ZONE
                                                                                 LAYER WAS USED TO DETERMINE TILE FUTURE LAND USE
                                                                               CLASSIPICA77ONS WMHN THE 10D YEAR FLA)OD BONE. BASED
                                                                                UPON THE ADOFIED FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATIONS,
                                                                               ApPRO)WAAMUM 42.6n DWHULENG UNITS CAN BE DEVELOPED
                                                                                                        TIIIS AREA OF 22,464 ACPM.



                         Fl@& Mb. 1---* h@

                       .6                                                                                                   .6
                                              Future                   Land                Use              Classifications                                  within the-                          100 Year Flood Zone
                                                                                            Hillsbolrough County Classifications                                                                                                   Manatee County Classifications
                       Urban L,;Q 2 (26 DU/A)                                LI.M.&. Density Urban Residamid (9 DU/A)              FM       Rural Residential (I DU/A)      M Bimanscattally Saask,@,.                           Urban - Fringe                      Wmd U.
                       Urbao L,,,.l I (B ]DU/A)                              Low Urban Density Residential (6 DU/A)                         Rural Resid-dial - Planned               open Water                                  Raidential (9 DUIGA)               Agricultinal (2 ]DU/GA)
                       Community Oom-vil C20 DU/A)                           Suburban Dansity Residential (4 DU/A)                          AViculturalfRinal (.2 DUIA)              Land outside the Watervilted                R.Mfial (6 DUIGA)                   Contention T
                       Commercial Office CZO DUIA)                           LOW Suburban Density Residential (2 DU/A)                      Agricultmal/Wwing                                                           FM       Residential (3 DUMA)
                             Density Residential (20 DU/A)         MMH       Low Suburban Density Residential - Planned                     Agriculture (.1 DU/A)                                                                hasaw - Lj&
                                 Density Residential (12 DUI/A)     EM       U& Imiustrid                                                   Natural Plesavatim                                                                   MjdSctd Public















                                                                                                                                                A4L

                                                                                                                                                A
                                                                                                                               A A
                                                                                                                                                A
                                                                                                                                                A
                                                                                                                                                A
                                                                                                                           A                    A h& AA   A
                                                                         A                  A                                                   A
                                                                                                                          A A   AA              AIA4 A
                                                                                            A                                                       &   A       A
                                                                                                                              A- AA                  AA    A
                                                                                        *A,                                   A                 A
                                                      A                                                                                         A           A
                                                            . .              A 9 "'a.                                                               A A
                                                          A                        a -                                                                           . A
                                                                                               AA
                                A                                                                 wr                 A                               A&
                                                                                                                                 A              A
                                                                                                                                                AA                           AA           A
                          A    A                    A                                                A       A           A     A                AA A                               A                          A
                                            A A      A  A                                                                      0 AAA                   AAAA              A
                                                A A      A  A A        A                    A                    A   A     A     A              A
                                      AA                                                    A        AA                                           A
                                                              A                             A                                                   AA  hA                                                A
                                        A            AAi A   &                              t AA                                   AA,#         JAA               A
                              A    AA A          A                    A                     A         A                  A        A             A                            AA                 A     A.
                                                                                                                                                                                             A
                             A     A    AA                                    A A              A                                                A         A
                             AA                     A A                  A                  I        A                                                                                   A A    hA    AA              X
                         AA   A   A     A @A    A      A                                    It                     A  A                         A
                                     A                                                      A                                                   a                            ---        A
                 A        a                                                                                        A                            AAAA             A         A
                                           -    -     A       A41L#                                      A             A                        A                     A
                    A    A                                        A   A                                   A   A      A AAA A                    A                       A      A
              A A          A A                A   A At A          A                                                AA             A              A              A
                  A                     A       A    A                                                       AA                                                     A      A      AN
                                                                                                                                                                   A       A
                A        A                                                                                     A
                           A
                           A                                                       A
                                   A            A                                                                                               AA A
                                                                                                                                                A


                                                                                                                              A                           A

                                                    THIS MAP SHOWS THE DISTRIBUMN AND TYFES OF PERMrrTED WELLS
                                                      WITHIN THE LZME MANATEE RIVER WATERSHED AS PROVIDED BY                                              A
                                                    THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGIRONT DISTRICT (SWFWMD)
                                                                                                                                                        A A


                                                                                                                                                                                         SCME 1:18)MO


                                                                                                                                                                                                      1  4



                                                                                            .6
                                                                      Locations and Types of Permitted Wells
                                                                                               Surface Wells                                    Ground Wells
                                                                                   Tropical Fish Farm A ReereauorW Facility        9 IndutriaMning
                                                                                   Dairy Farming     - A AgriculUuW Use            * Agriculhml Use
                                                                              A    Residential Use      A     ln@Billg             * Recreational Use
                                                                              A    Sewage Treatnent                                 *           Undefted Usage                                 nbm- a Md.
                                                                                                                                                                                              F1.d& M@ R....h bd-
                                                                                                                                                                                          Md.. I..." avqbi.    sy


















                                                                   W


                                           36 St 32 39



                                    4              4  3 2


               7  a  91  11 12 7 6  9      12 7  a    10 11
        10                            10 11                     9 9  10 11

          14   is 17
                     16 IS 14a 14 17 26 is 14 93 to 17 Id if 14 13 Is 17 16 Is 14 11


          23 20 19 23 21m23 24 19 2D 21 ZZ 23 24 19 2D 21n25  19 2D  22 25
                                                                          24

          26 25- so 29 28 27 26 25 30         so 29 28 27 26   V          25
                                                                     27 26


             96 31     14M       n            11 12 33M              14M
       94


     4  3 2  1 6  5  4 3 2       5  4  3 2         4  S 2         4


       to it 127  8  9 10           q  to it                  71
   17                                            a 9  'a 11 12-
     Id           17 IS
   cm          to
   cm                                    14 13 is 17 16 is 14 is
                9 2D
                                                              to 20
                                         20 24@_ I'D 21 21
                                                             -30
                                                 'a        2S     WALZ I 1:18DAW
                                                   2'   26
                     THE DIFORMAMON IN Mg, )VERLAY WAS MOVIDED BY f.3
                     MIE SOUIENEW FWRMA V MM MANAGENIH?a DtSMCr
                            (SWVM).


      Range 18 E     Range 19 E     Range 20 E    Range 21 E      Range 22 E
      .6
                           Section-Townsh -Range Grid
                     within the Little a ee River Watershed
                    V4
                                 @'4
                                           .2
                                                                  @.4
                                                        t140
                                         21
   '@4 1 t2l,                                   514               4
   1@7         J71                                 9


                                         ip
                                       nat



                                                                  Pd

                                                                   P."









                                                                                            41lD



                                                               Al
                                                  W
                                                  .L



                                                                              mmm







                                                                                    A







                                                                                                                                         . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                      MENE
                 0- -


                                                                                                                                                                                                 ----------
                                                                                               111UN-11

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       T
                                       ...                                                    .. .....


                                        . . .........


                     jig



                    iilit.- Ov

                     ..........




                                                                                                                                        nm                                    il!111N


                                                                                                                                                             fill m%,4,

                                                           THIS MAP DEPMTS THE DISTRIBUTION AND QUANT1TY Of
                                                           SEPTIC TANKS BY SEMON-TOWNSHIP-RANGE WITEDN ME
                                                            LITITZ XkNAM RIVER WATERSHED AS PROVIDED BY
                                                                             ]DAMES & MOOREL                                                     t
                                                                                                                                               .... ......



                                                                                                                                                                                         Simms 1019mm





                 -6                                          1L
                                                                                   Density- of Septic Tanks
                                                           Sections with No Septic Tanks = Sections with 26-30 Septic Tanks                  Sections with 3014M   Septic Tanks
                                                           Sections with 1-5 Septic Tanks EM       Sections with 3540 Septic Tanks           Sections with Mom dm 5W Septic Tanks
                                                           Sections with 6-10 Septic Taub          Sections with 50-100 Septic Tanks         Open Water
                                                           Sections with 11-15 Septic -ranks       Sections with 101-150 Septic Tanks        Land Outside the Watershed
                                                                                                                   -                                                                               4GO
                                                    M      sections with 16-2D septic -ranks       Sections with 151-200 Septic Tanks                                                        P@& DMaUl If NM@ Rm-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                Midi- of mlim It-
                                                           Sections with 21-25 S ic Tanks          Sections with 201-300 Septic Tanks









                                                                                                                              J.D


















                                                            gum


                                                             awe
                                                                                          imp




                                                                                     MIN





















                                                                                   DGIORMATION ON WASTEWATER TREATI@@ SERVICE
                                                                                     ARE" DEPICTED H4 THIS MAP WERE PROVIDED BY
                                                                                                         DAMES & MOORE










                         ,6                                                                                                .6
                                                                                             Wastewater Treatment                                                      Service Areas
                         10-=-N
                    . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                Am Serviced By County Wastewater System                                        Appmimaft Area Serviced By hiterim Wastewater
                                                                                                                                                          1. Manatee ILVY.               35.0-                 a. Rivawood Aparuneeft
                                                                                Milad-Septic Tanks And Couluty Waamater System                            i strw@ Ridge                  150.0*                9. Rivalhaven MJLF.
                                                                                                                                                          3. Ifide.A-Way Catupground     30.,D*                10. HD]idRy Pabus ILV.P.
                                                                                fiffwaW Wastewater System                                                 4 Chula Via% MIL SID           25.0-                 11. Little Manatee CwM
                                                                                                                                                          5. Neptune ALV.                26.5-                 12. Sm City MJHLp.
                                                                                                                                                          6. Little, Manatm lam          30.0*                 13. IMo Manatee River
                                                                                Open water                                                                7. Woodland Estates MJLP.      112*                  14. Effils. Co. Rea Ana
                                                                                land Inside the Watershed Not Presently Serviced                                   *Flow Measured in Thousandsof GaRons Per Day





                                                      APPENDIX B



                                               Anlio(a(cd Data Mctionary Tcinplafe

                   A. F.ntily Template

                           An entity is an 'object in sp,ace, for example a bridge, that is represented as a point,
                           line, or polygon on a map. The object is described by a Set Of Ittribffles- such as
                           composition, length, number of lanes, etc.

                      1. Label


                           The reference name for the entity.

                      2. Entity Authority

                           The source of the definition. For example, the en6ty authority could be by the
                           author, a professional organization, a dictionary, etc.

                      3., Definition

                           A definition of an ob ect potentially consists of two co              description of
                                                j                                   mponents, a
                           the object like one would find in a dictionary and the procedures that were used to
                           measure it,


                           a.: Description

                                  A general description,of the object, ie. a bridge is a foot path or road\1way
                                  that spans a water course or crevice.

                           b. Measurement/Determination

                                  This describes how the object was measured. This may not be pertinent to
                                  all entities and is left to the discredon of the documenter. An example of an
                                  entity description that would require completion of this section would be the
                                  sources of an abstraction, ie. if group of polygons describing components of
                                  an estuary were collapsed into a larger polygon at a higher level of
                                  classification, it would be important to know what the subclasses consisted
                                  of.

                      4. Point, Line, Polygon

                           This is for information purposes to describe how the object is represented in space.

                           Point: A zero-dimensional object that specifies geometric location. One coordinated
                           pair or triplet specifies the location.

                           Line: A direct line between two points. It should be inclusive of the term string
                           which is: an ordered sequence of points representing a connected non-branching










                        \cqucmc ot line ,egnicrils.

                        Po I vp()n @A set of non- intersecting lines. A-Ith closure, that represents a two
                        dillicil"lon'll oh.1ccl III ',pace,

                    S. Quantity of Data

                        A description of how much data, in temis of computer storage, this object occupies.
                        The units of measure must be provided.

                 B. Attribute Template

                        An attribute is a defined characteristic of an entity, for example, composifion is a
                        possible attribute for a bridge.

                    1. Label


                        The reference name of the attribute.


                    2. Attribute Authority

                        The source of the definition. For example, the endty authority could be by the
                        author, a professional organization, a dicbonary, etc. A complete reference should
                        be provided where possible

                    3. Derinition

                        A definition of an attribute potentially consists of two components, a description of
                        the object like one would find in a dictionary and the procedures that were used to
                        measure it.


                        a. Description

                                A general description of the attribute, ie. one of the attributes of a bridge
                                would be its composition, that is what it is made of.


                        b. Measu remen t/Determinat ion

                                This describes how the attribute was measured, but it may not be pertinent to
                                all entities and is left to the discrefion of the documenter. An example of an
                                attribute description that would be the Iab6ratory procedures for measuring
                                mercury. '17his could be quiet extensive and provisions have been made to
                                allow an unlimited amount of space for documentation, this information may
                                be imported from existing electronic documents. If there are aliases and the
                                documenter feels that they are important, they should be included in this
                                section.
















                               i ihc,) i I ic lomwi ihit the ittribL11C duc can tlikc. 1lic ,ct in hich a v,in2A)Jc
                          is cxpicsscd, 1 ,Jpha, alphanumeric, graphic char,ictcr, intcoer, etc.

                         a. Character   type

                                   There are six major speci ica6ons of type:

                                   A data type indicates the manner in which the field or subfield will be
                                   encoded. This is relevant to the data transfer and not to a data dictionary.

                                   A   Graphics characte  rs, alphanumeric characters, or alphabetic characters
                                   I   Implicit-point (integer)
                                   R   Explicit-point unscaled (real)
                                   S   Explicit-point scaled (real with exponent)
                                   B   Bitfield data (unsigned binary, per agreement)
                                   C   Character mode bitfield (binary in zero and one characters)

                         b. Allowable values (domain enumeration)
                                   1. Length     This ident ifies theInumber of characters in the variable field.

                                   2. Number of signifi  Icant digits

                                                 The number of decimal places that are meaningful. For
                                                 example, in dealing with dollars.and cents there are two
                                                 sianificant digits. If you have a value such as $1.53 multiplied
                                                 by .18, you will have an answer of .1754, but the answer will
                                                 only be valid (and sensible) to the second decimal. Thus the
                                                 correct answer, rounding to the nearest 1800th, is .18.

                                   3. Units of  measure

                                                 Identifies what measurement was used for a value, i.e. dollars,
                                                 francs, feet, inches, meters, pounds., kilograms, etc.

                         C. Categorical

                                   Data elements which only take up certain values, i.e., a departrhent number
                                   which can take on the values 06, 20 and 33, but no other values.
 












                                 I'he actual categones, such iis FI, Ga, AL

                     2. Nivaning

                                 Definition of the values i.e., Fl = Florida, Ga Georgia, Al
                                 Alabama.


                  d. Continuous



                           Data elements, which for all practical purposes, can take any value within a
                           range, i.e., a dollar amount from zero to $999,999,999.99 to the nearest cent.

                     1. Range of values

                                 The range of values is the minimum and maximum value.

                        a. Minimum


                           1. value


                                        Minimum numerical value.


                           2. inclusive/exclusive


                                        This defines whether or not the minimum numerical value
                                        included in the range or is it excluded in the ra'nge. An
                                        example of an excluded minimum would be a rangge of
                                        numbers from 5.000 to 10.000 where the least value would be
                                        5.001 but never 5.000. If the number was inclusive the
                                        minirnum value would be 5.00Q


                        b. Maximum


                           1. value


                                        Maximum numerical value.


                           2. inclusivelexclusive

                                        Conceptually the same as minimum inclusive/exclusive, but the
                                        maximum value.











                            2, TYpical Nalue

                                  (7jl, ,,o) Indication as to what I ivpicil value would be.     This mav be
                                  dcrihcd 'I" a 111C,111, mediall or Mode, if' appropnite   it P., not necessarV  1(i
                                  C-ak'LlIatC 01CW 'd1LJeS. The purpose is to provide a gcneral understanding of
                                  wl)atIs to be expected." Tex(ual description is also appropriate with ,suppori
                                  for the derived number.

                     5. Other editing information

                                  This would include programmatic edits from the source of data entry.
                                  Examples of edits would be upper or lower case, values = A through G,
                                  values less than 0, etc.

                                  If editing features such as date fields, dollar marks, etc. are included with the
                                  data, this Information should be included here.
 







                                              SIIIII    Data Dictionary Report:

                                                                  Soils Data Set


                    A. Entit and iLs asuciatvd attribuics

                        1. Label                          Standard Soils Data Set

                        2. FntitN Authorilv              Soil Conservation Scrv)cc

                        3. Definition of the  Entity      All auributes associated w4h each soil.

                       4. Point\Linc\Polygon              Polygon

                       5. Quantity of bata                Unknown

                    B. Attribute Template

                        1. Label                          ANFLOOD

                        2. AtIribute authority            Soil Conscrvabon Service

                        3. Def-inition

                             a. Dewription                Annual Flooding Frequency. Descriptive term used to describe the probabilky that
                                                          flooding %kill cur during any car.

                             b. Measurcment               Estimate based on the synthesis of evidence including. but not limited to: seasonal
                                                          climatic data, river and coastal hydrological data, and field observations.

                        4. Domain Value


                                       a. Value Format


                                                1. Domain


                                                          a. Character type          A (character)

                                                          b. Allowable values (domain enumeration)

                                                          1. Length                  5

                                                          2. Number of significant digits   , N/A

                                                          3. Units of Measure        N/A


                                       b.1 Categorical

                                                1. Value                             None

                                                2. Meaning                           No ,easonable possibibrqy of 2noo4d:ng (ne6w 0 PCTCCn-,
                                                                                     chance of flooding in any year).

                                       b.2 Categorical

                                                1. Value                             Rare

                                                2. Meaning                           Flooding unlikely but possible under unusual weather
                                                                                     condions (from near 0 to 5 8;>crcznt chancc of flooding
 







											In any year or near 0 to 5 times in 100 years

			6.3 Categorical

				1. Value						Oxide

				2. Meaning						Occasional Flooding is expected infrequently under
											usual weather conditions.  5 to 50 percent chance of
											flooding in any year or 5 to 50 times in 100 years.

			6.4 Categorical
			
				1. Value						Freq
	
				2. Meaning						Frequent.  Flooding is like to occur often under usual
											weather conditions (more than a 50 percoent chance of
											flooding in any year, or more than 50 times in 100
											years).

			6.5 Categorical	

				1. Range of vaules
	
					a. Minumum
				
						1. value				N/A

						2. inclusive/exclusive		N/A

					b. Maximum
						
						1. value				N/A

						2. inclusive/exclusive		N/A

				2. Typical value					N/A

			5. Other editing information 				The category COMMON does not occur as often. It is found
											primarily in the older soil surveys.







QUAILTY AND ACCURACY REPORT 

Template- Vector Data



Data Coverage Name:  Enter a name for this thematic layer, i.e. LULC for Land Use Land Cover.

Data Coverage Description:  Description of this coverage, its particulars, parameters, etc.

Organization: Name of organization that prepared/conducted this report.

Prepared By: Name of person who prepared report.

Section: Section of organization that prepared this report.

Department:	Department that prepared this report.

Updated:  Enter the update period for this report.

A. Lineage

	1. Description of source material(s)

		a. Lineage Name: Brief desctiptive name of lineage, i.e. USGS 7.5 minute quads.

		b. Specify ratio, i.e. 1:24,000. Ratio between the distance on a map, chart, photograph or image
		   cooresponding distance on the surface of the Earth.

		c. Identify datum.  Geodetic datum: ratio between the distance on a map, chart, photograph or image
		   and the cooresponding distance ont he surface of the Earth.

		d. Map Project: Systematic drawing of lines of a plane surface to represent the parallels of latitude and the
		   		    meridians of longitude of the Earth, such as

					polyconic
					UTM
					Lambert
					Transverse Mercator
					Albers
					Equidistance Cylindrical
					Miller Oblated Stereographic
					Stereographic
					Regulator Mercator
					Modified Transverse mercator
					Bipolar Oblique Conic Conformal
					Other (name and explain)

		e. Media of Source: Origins of data and physical substance, i.e., color mylar, paper, etc.

		f. Condition of Media: Qualitative statement of condition of media i.e. Excellent, Fair or Poor.

		g. Creator organization/individual: Name, address, and phone numer.

		h. Date of Source Material: History of development of source material; amy be multiples.

			1. Time Interval covered: i.e. Dates of data sampling, i.e. 1954-1989.

			2. Update Schedule: Update schedule, if known.





	2. Deriction methods for data

		The purpose of this step is to describe how the data was brought into the system. By knowning how the data
		was created and the technology used, limits inthe accuracy may be deduced.

		a. Methods of derivation

			1. Preautomation Compilation: Complation information, i.e. Photointerpieted from 1:24,000 scale maps
	
			2. Digitizing_Scanning_Transformations:

			3. Equipment

				a. Model: Model information, i.e., ANA Tech Eagle 4080 large format scanner

				b. Resolution: i.e., 400 dpi Altek Table, accuracy of .001 inches.

				c. Tolerance of Digitizer: i.e. Tolerance of Altek tables is .003 inches.

			b. Date of Automation
			
				1. Initial Date: i.e. Between 9780 to 11,090

				2. Update Schedule: i.e. Every five years.

			c. Control Points: Known information on control points used.  A control point is any station in a horizontal or
						 vertical control network that is identified in a data set or [hotograph and used for correlating
						 data show in that data set or photograph. A coordinate system is a particular kind of
						 reference frame system, such as plane rectangular coordinated or shperical coordinates, that
						 uses linerar or angular quantities to designate the position of points within that particular
						 reference frame or system.

			d. Explanation of procedures used to dugitize/scan/transform the data

				This is a description of procefures that would indicate the quality/accuracy of the data captured. Information
				that would now provide insights should not be included.  Transformation routines that are supplied by venders
				should include the name of the transformation module. User-created transformations should include the 
				following:

				1. Name of transformation methodology: Any appropriate methodology.

				2. Description of Algorithm: Description of any algorithm used.

				3. Mathematics used in the transformation: Relevant mathematics.

				4. Set of Samples Comutations: If there are any competations, enter a sample here.
					
			e. Software system and version used: i.e., DOS 5.1 OS/2, etc.

	B. Positional Accuracy

		Tests of accuracy after all transformations have been performed on a particular layer

		1. Linework Completencess Check

			a. Date: date of test.

			b. Value: Identify value

			c. Method used to Derive Value: Methodology.
		

















                           2. Linework Positional Accuracy Check 


                              a. Date: Date of test


                              b. Value:  Identify value

                              c. Method Used to Derive Value: Explanation of how the above value was derived.

                           3. Absolute Measure of error reference

                                  Provides a numerical estimate of expected discrepancies.

                              a.  Value: Value of error reference.

                              b.  Method Used to Derive Value: Select one or more of the following options.

                                  1. Deductive estimate      The deriving of a conclusion by reasoning. It may be necessary that a best guess is
                                                             given. Any assumptions that were made to derive the conclusion should be
                                                             descibed.


                                     a. Date of tests: Date of tests.


                                     b. Results: Results of above test.

                                  2. Internal Evidence (geodesy)

                                    a. Date of tests: Date of tests

                                    b. Results: Enter results of above test.


                                  3. Comparison to Source

                                  4. Independent source of higher accuracy

                                    a. Date of tests: Date of tests.

                                    b. Results: Results of above test.

                        C. Attribute Accuracy

                                  Accuracy assessment for measures on a continuous scale shall be performed using procedures similar to those
                                  used for positional accuracy (providing a numerical estimate of expected discrepancies).

                                  There has been considerable discussion on how much detail is required at this step. It is the view of the
                                  developers of the report that as much information be provided as possible. This does not mean that a test must
                                  be performed that wouldn't normally be performed, but it does mean that all performed tests should be reported.
                                  The level of reporting should be at such a level as to be useful to the recipient.

                           1. Linework Completeness Check

                              a. Date: Date of check.


                              b. Value:


                              c. Method Used to Derive Value: Method used to derive above value.

                           2. Linework Attribute Accuracy Check

                              a.  Date:  Date of check.
                              b. Value:
                              c. Method Used to Derive Value: Method used to derive above value.
 














                   3. Absolute Measure of error reference


                      a. Value:  Value of error reference


                      b. Method Used to Derive Value:  Method used to derive value of error refernce

                          1. Deductive estimate. The deriving of a conclusion by reasoning, with supporting information.

                            a. Date of tests: Date(s).

                            b. Results: Results of above test.

                          2. Internal Evidence (geodesy)

                            a. Date of Tests: Date(s).

                            b. Results: Result of above test.

                          3. Comparison to Source

                          4. Independent source of higher accuracy

                            a. Date of tests: Date.


                            b. Results: Results of above test.


                D. Logical  Consistency

                   1. Cartographic Tests

                        a. Test Performed: Cartographic tests performed.

                        b. Date: Date cartographic test was performed.

                        c. Result: Results of cartographic test here.

                        d. Do lines intersect only where intended? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                        e. Were duplicate lines eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                        f. Are all polygons closed? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                        g. Have dangles been eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                        h. Have slivers been eliminated? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                        i. Do features have unique identifiers? Answer with Yes, No or Unknown.

                   2. Topological Tests

                          Topology is a branch of geometrical mathematics concerned with order, contiguity and relative position, rather
                          than actual linear dimensions. Topological error checking is the process of ensuring the logical consistency of
                          data is intact: all polygons are closed, all arcs are connected to nodes, etc.

                        a. Test Performed: Topological test performed.

                        b. Date: Date of test.

                        c. Software Used: Name and version of software used in topological test.

                        d. Results: Results of test.

                          1. Test for polygon coverage
 













                                  a. How many polygons are represented on the digital map product? Number

                                  b. Has a polygon closure been verified? Yes or No.

                                  c. Are polygon-IDs assigned to each polygon on the digital map? Yes or No

                                     1. Do polygons have more than one polygon-Id? Yes or No

                                     2. Are the Polygon-Ids unique? Yes or No.

                               2. Test for line coverage

                                  a. How many lines are repersented on the digital map product? Number.

                                  b. Do the line segments have unique line segment values? Yes or No.

                                  c. Is the digital map topologically clean? Yes or No.

                               3. Test for point coverage

                                  a. How many points are represented on the digital map product? Number.

                                  b. Are the Point-Ids unique? Yes or No.

                      E. Completeness of Source Materials

                               The purpose of Completeness of Source Materials is to describe the set of information collected in comparison
                               to a larger set. For example, a set called "Well Data Points" may, be all manmade wells in the area described or
                               it may be only private wells used for homes.

                         1. Selection Criteria: Identify how the objects were identified.

                         2. Definitions Used: Definitions used for selection Criteria.

                         3. Other relevant mapping rules: i.e., minimum mapping units, etc.

                         4. Deviation from standard definitions and Interpretations:

                         5. Description of relationship between the objects

                         6. Tests for taxonomic completeness

                            a. Procedures: Procedures of the test used here.


                            b. Results: Test results.
 




                                             APPENDIX C















                                     CIS AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT


                                              Kenneth D. Haddad
                                           Gail McGarry MacAulay'
                                             William H. Teehan2



                                                INTRODUCTION

                        Florida's marine resources are being stressed by a multitude of
                   problems related to growth of the human population; these problems
                   include loss of wetlands, drainage alterations, urbanization, boating
                   impacts, and fishing pressures.      As pressures on marine resource.s
                   continue to Increase, It has become evident that data needed to make
                   informed management decisions are either lacking or are Inaccessible.
                   Gathering this needed information through monitoring and research is
                   an important step towards better informed management; however, simply
                   gathering this information will not solve the problems associated with
                   managing that information and making it readily available.         Unless
                   advanced in format ion-management technologies are instituted in resource
                   management agencies, effective utilization of the information to better
                   manage our resources will not occur., Geographic Information System
                   (GIS) technologies may provide the tool needed to translate and
                   synthesize geographically oriented marine resources information in
                   Florida.

                         A CIS is a data-management and information-analysis system that
                   is able to capture, synthesize, generate, retrieve, analyze, andoutput
                   spatial information.. CIS technology is revolutionizing geographical
                   analysis And has applications in many scientific fields (Cowen,.1988;
                   Parker, 1988; Peuquet and Marble, 1990). Haddad and Michener (1991)
                   foresee Geographic Information Systems evolving into the primary tools
                   for addressing coastal resource-management issues, and published
                   articles and workshops related to CIS technology are now evident in
                   almost every field of science and management. A field in which CIS has
                   not had adequate exposure or use is fisheries management.

                         Issues facing Florida's fisheries include stressed fish-stocks,
                   user conflicts, and impacts to fish habitat.      The Florida Marine
                   Fisheries commission (MFC) and the Florida Department of Natural
                   Resources (FDNR) are working together to advance CIS applications so
                   that they can be used in managing Florida's fisheries.


                   --------------- 7----
                   1 CIS Research Administrators, Department of Natural Resources, Florida
                   Marine Research Institute, Coastal and Marine Resource Assessment
                   (CAMRA), 100 8th Avenue S.E., St. Petersburg, FL 33701
                   ' Fishery Management Analyst, Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, 2540
                   Executive Center Circle West, Tallahassee, FL      32301


















                                             FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

                    Florida Marine Fisheries Commission

                          The MFC    was-created in 1983 by the state legislature and
                    consists of seven c   issioners, who are appointed by the Governor and
                    confirmed by the Senate, and a support staff. The MFC Is charged with
                    the management and preservation of Florida's renewable            marine
                    fisheries resources. Chapter 370.027, Florida Statutes, grants the MFC
                    exclusive rule-making authority in the following areas relating to
                    marine life (with the exception of endangered species): gear
                    specifications, prohibited gear, bag limits, size limits, species that
                    may n9t be sold, protected species, closed areas (except for public
                    health purpodes), quality control of seafood (except for oysters,
                    clams, mussels, and crabs), fishing seasons, and special considerations
                    relating to egg-bearing females. Rules that are adopted by the MFC are
                    subject to approval by the Governor and Cabinet.

                    Marine Resources Geographic Information System
                          The FDNR is mandated through Chapter 370, Florida Statutes, to
                    manage, protect, and enhance Florida's marine resources in the beat
                    interests of the resources and the public. The FDNR Division of Marine
                    Resources' Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI) has implemented the
                    Marine Resources Geographic Information System (MRGIS) as a tool to
                    more effectively understand andmanage coastal and marine resources.
                    The MRGIS consists of an array of computers, software, and regional and
                    statewide databases. The primary MRGIS software includes ARC/INFO and
                    ERDAS. Computer hardware and software are the essential technological
                    components of a GIS, but the power of a CIS lies in its stored
                    databases.   One of the greatest obstacles to effectively managing
                    Florida's fisheries is the lack of a consolidated information base that
                    can be manipulated and synthesized to'provide timely assistance and
                    guidance on research and management issues. We believe that the 14RGIS
                    can be used to overcome this obstacle. The MRGIS is being developed
                    as the primary tool to be used in translating and synthesizing
                    geographically oriented marine resource information in Florida" The
                    14RGIS can take information from a variety of independent research
                    programs, data-collection efforts, and management policies of federal,
                    state, and local agencies and integrate it for correlated multi-
                    disciplinary analysis and presentation, thus initiating the rudiments
                    of an ecosystem approach to resource management.      This approach to
                    effectively utilizing information and managing data will serve the
                    long-term goals of fisheries managers.

                                       SHRIMP MANAGEMENT: A CASE STUDY

                          The integration of CIS capabilities and information into the
                    decision-making process of fisheries managers has been an arduous
                    process because of the difficulty in assembling.the necessary basic
                    information, on a statewide basis, to address the many complex issues
                    associated with Florida's marine fisheries.      However, advances are
                    being made, and the use of the information integrated by the MRGIS in
                    developing a plan for the long-term management of shrimp lays the
                    foundation for using CIS technologies in fisheries management.

                    Shrimp Management
                          Shrimp is the most important invertebrate marine animal harvested          01
                    in the state, with an estimated 1990 ex-vessel value of'$41,531,527.
                    Florida has three main targeted species of penaeid shrimp: pink shrimp,













                   Penasus duorazva; white shrimp, P. set1ferus; and brown shrimp, P.
                   artecus.   Another penaeid, the seabob, Xlphopenaeus kroyerl, Is
                   seasonally targeted In certain northwest Florida,areas. Rock shrimp,
                   Sicyonla brevirostris, and the royal red shrimp, Plootlcus robustus,
                   are also landed in Florida; however, the harvesting of these species
                   occurs exclusively in federal waters.

                         The MFC has been developing a statewide shrimp management plan
                   since 1987 with the following goals: maintaining healthy stocks,
                   ensuring fair and optimal distribution among user groups, protecting
                   habitat, minimizing bycatch, standardizing regulations, minimizing
                   conflict with other fisheries, and ensuring a high-quality product.
                   The shrimp fishery was divided into three user groups: recreational,
                   live-bait, and food production.      To account for habitat and gear
                   differences, five contiguous management regions in Florida were
                   designated: the northeast, Big Bend, southwest, southeast, and
                   northeast regions.

                         The schedule for completing the shrimp management plan calls for
                   two phases of rule-making. The first phase has been completed, and the
                   rules became effective January 1992.      Rules developed for Florida'.9
                   extensive inshore shrimp fishery during this phase of the plan
                   addressed allowable gear specifications, mesh size of nets, and shrimp
                   count for harvesting activity inside the International Regulations for
                   Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS).      In the first phase of the
                   plan, numerous local laws were repealed, which simplified inshore and
                   nearshore shrimp regulations and standardized the fishery on regional
                   and statewide levels. The Big Bend region of Florida is the only area
                   where these new regulations include harvest in all state waters. The
                   second phase of rule-making wil I address the f inf ish bycatch associated
                   with shrimp trawling and also the adoption of a zone management plan
                   to determine allowable shrimp-harvesting areas.

                   MRGIS Database Development

                         Because of the complex process involved in developing the shrimp
                   management plan and the goals of the MFC to address user conflict.,
                   maintain a high-quality shrimp population for harvest, and protect
                   habitat, the information requirements are substantial.               Basic
                   information identified as important to the planning process includes
                   nautical chart coastline, depth contours, aids to navigation, benthic
                   communities, managed areas, shrimping areas, and, in some cases,
                   potential shrimp nursery areas.          All of these, databases are
                   geographically layered in the MRGIS so that any combination of
                   information can be analyzed and produced on maps (Figure 1).

                         Each of the data layers obtained during development of the shrimp
                   management plan had unique purposes as well as unique problems.    -  Much
                   of the data were from external sources and required varying levels of
                   verification and quality control. Problems in the digital. data ranged
                   from errors in digitizing to errors introduced in converting the data
                   to make it compatible with the MRGIS. When data were not available,
                   MRGIS and MFC staffs collected the needed information or the data
                   gathering was contracted.     cooperation in data collection has been
                   essential in -our effort to develop an extensive MRGIS database.

                   Nautical Chart Coastlin

                        The nautical-chart coastline database is a generalization of the
                   Florida coastline digitized primarily from National oceanic and
                   Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical charts. A coastline from
                   nautical charts was selected after numerous options were presented to
                   the MFC and the public at a MFC meeting.         It was determined that
























                     NAUTICAL CHART
                         COASTLINE






                     DEPTH CONTOURS                     6

                                                                     6




                   AIDS TD MY IGA I ION                               Is





                  BENTHIC COMMUNffiES



                    FOOD-SHRIMPING &
                   LIVE-BAIT-SHRIMPING
                           AREAS






                   Figure 1. Conceptual view of the relationship among several CIS data
                             layers used to assist in shrimp management planning.
                                       S
                                      ')4N
                                       IES













                  because both the public and the XFC used NOAA nautical charts as coffAwn
                  reference maps, the presentation of MR%IS information would be best
                  understood in that format.   The majority of the digitized charts were
                  at a. map scale of 1:40,000 A' but some charts ranged in scale depending
                  on their availability. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developed
                  this database for the FDNR from digital line data provided by NOAA.'

                  Benthic Communities

                        Benthic communities, including seagrass, mangrove, saltmarsh,
                  non-vegetated bottom, oyster reef, and coral communities, play a
                  significant role in supporting Florida recreational and commercial
                  .fisheries.

                       The areal distribution of these communities Is important to many
                  issues fa6ing the MFC and the FDNR. Shrimp and other commercial and
                  recreational species utilize seagrass, saltmarsh, and mangrove areas
                  as habitat and nursery areas.     The seagrass communities are primary
                  ,fishing grounds in the bait-shrimping industry.       Shrimp managers
                  require information on habitat impacts, bycatch, gear use, and zoning
                  relative to benthic communities.

                        The benthic-community data    used in developing a state-wide
                  database were compiled from a myriad of sources.       Where possible,
                  existing data, which were developed and verified by other agencies,
                  were utilized. For areas about which existing, reliable data were not
                  available, standard remote-sensing techniques utilizing satellite
                  imagery,and aerial photography were employed.

                  Depth Contours

                        Depth contours are common features on NOAA nautical charts and
                  represent common features,of orientation considered important to map
                  presentation.   In addition, using depth ranges to isolate areas of
                  interest (e.g., the location of seagrass in depths of less than 3 ft)
                  allows managers to analyze the relationships between shrimping
                  activities and the resources.

                       Depth-contour data were automated for the following depths: 3 ft,
                  6 ft, 12 ft, 18 ft, 30 ft, and 60 ft. In addition, channels and spoil
                  areas were identified. Data were digitized from NOAA nautical charts
                  (primarily 1:40,000 scale) by an independent contractor and are
                  compatible with the coastline data layer.       All depth-contour data
                  ,were required to carry attributes as both lines and polygons for
                  maximum usage in the GIS. This requirement allows the flexibility of
                  highlighting individual contour lines as well as providing polygons to
                  query other layers on the basis of depth range. For example, although
                  the data are generally depicted as lines in maps, we have found it
                  useful to extract seagrass areas that occur within specif it - water
                  depths. Problems encountered during the development of this database
                  included incomplete contour lines, differences in lines an overlapping
                  charts, and a single line representing several depths.        Data were
                  interpolated to complete contour lines and a labelling methodology was
                  developed to allow selection of contours for a specific depth when a
                  single contour segment represented several depths.

                  Shrimping Areas

                    The bait-shrimp-fishing industry maintains live shrimp in holding
                  tanks for distribution as live bait, whereas food shrimp are usually
                  frozen onboard the shrimping vessels prior to processing.            The
                  locations of live-bait-shrimping and food-shrimping areas are critical
                  to the development of the shrimp management plan. The HFC..is using












                     this information to assess the location of potential habitat impacts,
                     develop an understanding of potential user conf licts, maximize habitat
                     protection, and minimize Impact to the fishing industry.

                           Locations of live-bait-shrimping and food-shrimping areas were
                     determined by a team of FDNR and MFC staff, who met with shrimpers and
                     their representatives.   Shrimpers identified those areas where they
                     fished by drawing polygons on NCAA nautical charts. When appropriate,
                     references were made to the seasonality of these shrimping areas. The
                     marked-up nautical charts were returned to the FMRI for digitizing Into
                     the MRGIS as a separate data layer. The accuracy of this particular
                     ..data layer was dependent on the cooperation of the shrimpers.

                     Aide to Navigation

                          Landmarks that can be used in determining position are Falled aids
                     to navigation.    Channel markers, lighthouses, buoys, water tanks,
                     piers,.marinas, and shipwrecks are examples of navigational aids that
                     appear on NOAA nautical charts.       Channel markers and buoys were
                     determined to be the most important features for inclusion in the aide-
                     to-navigation data layer.      ,Both provide a visual reference for
                     location,,and the MFC and other marine resource managers use them as
                     zo ne-boundary references for regulatory and management purposes.

                          Aids-to-navigation data to be entered into the MRGIS database were
                     purchased from the NOAA National Ocean Survey (NOS).       Data for the
                     entire country were provided to the FMRI as an ASCII text file. The
                     data were searched for features that fell within the minimum and
                     maximum latitude and longitude values for Florida. The data presented
                     numerous problems that proved difficult to' correct.             Labeling
                     inconsistencies (e.g., buoys were abbreviated several different ways)
                     made sorting of the data difficult. In addition, multiple entries for
                     a given location and the inclusion of outdated i      'nformation (e.g.,
                     positions of channel markers were given even if they were no longer at
                     that location) were recorded. In some cases, extraneous items from
                     the charts, such as compass roses, were included in the digital
                     database. Inconsequential data were eliminated from the database and
                     errors were corrected.



                     Managed Areas

                                ed areas have also been included in the database for some
                           Manag
                     regions of the state, which provides an understanding of jurisdictional
                     boundaries and existing management zones relative to resources and
                     issues of regulatory responsibilities.      Existing state and federal
                     jurisdictional boundaries and existing shrimp management zones have
                     been utilized. Boundaries for managed areas were either interpreted
                     from legal descriptions orwere digitized from NOAA nautical charts.
                     It is expected that the locations of additional managed areas (e.g.,
                     National' Marine Sanctuaries and Florida Aquatic Preserves) will be
                     required for future planning.


                                   APPLICATIONS OF THE SHRIMP  MANAGEMENT PLAN


                           The   identification,   collection,   control of quality,       and
                     integration of geographic data into the   MRGIS have been difficult and
                     time-consuming. Information provided to   the MFC to be used in planning
                     for shrimp management has been in the form of maps that depict various
                     combinations of data layers and in the form of results of simple
                     analyses designed to geographically relate different data layers.
















                   Man Makina

                         Until the users fully understand the analytical power of the
                   MRGIS, they will continue to request primarily information in the form
                   of maps that portray all or different combinations of the data    ' layers.
                   Several layers of information for a portion of the Tampa Bay r-'@ion of
                                                                                    eg -
                   Florida are depicted in Figure 2. These maps are produced in color on
                   an electrostatic plotter in large-scale forma@t to enhance thii Visual
                   presentation of the Information.




                                         per




                      cull of
                                            T11"
                        M
                               0
                           exic
                                      V`           WOW
                                                                         Tampa Bay


                                       .. .......... ......
                                            ...................



                                         .. ........
                                                                           LEGEND
                                                                           0 SUGUSS
                                                                           M TIDAL FLITS
                                                                           0 LAND
                                                                             LIVE Ri
                                                                             SRRIKPING
                                                                             FOOD
                                                                             SIRINPING
                                                                             VATIC. IID'

                    L


                    Figure 2.  A MRGIS map of a portion of the Ta mpa Bay region showing the
                               overlay of coastline, benthic communities (peagrasq and
                               unvegetated tidal flats only), live-bait-shrimping, food-
                               shrimping areas, and aids to navigation.

                          The  MFC staff uses these maps in formulating the management plans
                    for a given region.     Issues relative to habitat protection, user
                    conflict, seafood quality, and the like, vary among regions, and the
                    maps provide a geographic presentation of these differences. Maps are
                    of particular importance in the development of potential zones for
                    managing user conflicts and maintaining harvestable yields of shrimp.
                    The KFC staff developing the management plan also uses maps to support
                    their recommendations and present them to the commissioners of the MFC.


			In addition, maps are used at public hearings and workshops to present
			components of the management plan to the public.  It is expected that
			in the long-term, maps will be one of the more tangible types of
			information used in public presentations and will provide the focus for
			public understanding and feedback on many of the issues.

				The combining of different layers of information for presentation
			is rudimentary from the perspective of advanced GIS applications.
			However, when the result is the visualization of information in a form
			and content that previously was not available, the advantage is
			significant.

			Informatiom Analysis

				The FMRI and MFC are determining acreage (e.g., acres of seagrass
			and shrimping areas) and investigating the relationships among some of
			the layers of information. Results of an analysis of the Tampa Bay
			region to determine the depth and acreage of seagrasses that occur
			within live-bait-shrimping or food-shrimping areas are shown in Table
			1.  Habitat-impact and bycatch issues are better addressed with this
			type of information because the impacts of management options can be
			assessed.  For example, if resource managers were designing shrimp
			zoning in Tampa Bay to minimize impacts to seagrass, they could see
			from the information in Table 1 that the live-bait-shrimping areas are
			the only areas that include seagrass.  In fact, 8,464 acres (44%) of the
			total live-bait-shrimping area is seagrass.  However, 7,582 acres (90%)
			of the total seagrass found in the live-bait-shrimping areas are in
			depth of less tha 3 ft, and only 10,413 acres (54%) of the total area
			shrimped is in less than 3 ft.  This implies that zoning options
			minimizing shrimping in depths less than 3 ft would protect 90% of the
			seagrass areas shrimped but would reduce the primary shrimping areas
			by 54%.

			Table 1.  Result of a MRGIS analysis to determine the amounts of
				    seagrass found in different depth ranges within live-bait-
				    shrimping and food-shrimping areas in the Tampa Bay region.


								LIVE-BAIT SHRIMPING

				DEPTH			SEAGRASS ACRES			NON-SEAGRASS		TOTAL AREA
							  SHRIMPED				ACRES SHRIMPED		SHRIMPED

			     < 3 Feet			7,582					2,831			  10,413
			    3 to 6 Feet			  347					4,556			   4,903
			     > 6 Feet			  535					3,313			   3,848
					TOTAL			8,464				     10,700			  19,164

								FOOD SHRIMPING

				DEPTH			SEAGRASS ACRES			NON-SEAGRASS ACRES
							     SHRIMPED			     SHRIMPED

			     < 3 Feet			  0					   40
			   3 to 6 Feet			  0					  575
			     > 6 Feet			  0				     32,209
					TOTAL			  0				     32,824











                                 A visual presentation of the results of the geographic analysis
                         depicting the areas of seagrass in depths less than 3 ft that are
                         shrimped in a portion of the Tampa Bay region is shown in Figure 3.
                         Any combination of map layers and results from Table 1 can be
                         geographically depicted to enhance the understanding of the
                         information. Of course, results of shrimping-bycatch and seagrass-
                         impact studies, economic values, resource allocations, and many other
                         factors contribute to the final determination of shrimping zones. The
                         real achievement of the MRGIS analysis is that this level of
                         information and the ability to look at hypothetical management options
                         have never been available in this way before.

                                                                                                           




                                                                                       


                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                               





                                                                                                              


                                                                                                              
                                               
                                                
                              Gulf of
                                                                         
                                 Mexico
                                                                                                 
                                                                                                  
                                                                                                    Tampa Bay



                                                                                                    LEGEND

                                                                                                     SEAGRASS
                                                                                                     DEPTH TO   3FT
                                                                                                     LAND

                                                                                                     LIVE BAIT
																     SHRIMPING

                                                                                                     FOOD
                                                                                                     SHRIMPING
																     NAVIG. ATD






                          Figure 3. A MRGIS map of a portion of the Tampa Bay region showing the
                                    location of Beagrass areas in less than 3-ft depths found in
                                    the live-bait-shrimping or food-shrimping areas.








                                                                 9
 

















                                                  Conclusions

                                --a;je,,many issues facing fisheries managers in Florida. We
                           .qre
                  I chayp,r@qe          that GIS technology can be a valuable tool in
                           .W,94ptrated
                                                    p
                         VJjrii          management., lans. Because much of the information
                                  4e r I e a    . -1 f a geographic nature, it is expected
                                      managers xs.,o
                        @@;he,- pplipation of GIS technologies will continue to expand.
                    However, fisheries managers must realize that the power of"the GIS is
                    in the data. Analyses are easy. Most failures in using GIS'technology
                    result when managers and GIS experts fall to properly identify the need
                    for, plan for, and commit to data collection, acquisition, and quality
                    control. If these data issues are not addressed, GIS technologies will
                    not prove successful in the long-term.

                          The process of adapting GIS techniques to the needs of the MFC
                    staff developing the shrimp management plan has not always been easy.
                    The expectations of the KFC regarding the availability of data layers
                    necessary for the shrimp management plan and the FMRI's ability to
                    properly develop them were occasionally different.       Schedules for
                    public hearings and workshops had to be adjusted to accommodate for the
                    time required to enter accurate databases into the MRGIS. The outcome
                    of this Interactive process between MFC and FMRI staffs, however, has
                    been a successful application of GIS for fisheries management.

                            If properly implemented, GIS technology can become more
                    valuable every year in managing Florida's fisheries.       By including
                    water-quality, physical, meteorological, socio-economic, and species
                    information, management options can be explored with a better
                    understanding of the potential results of a management decision. The
                    next technological advancement will be to transfer the ability to
                    manipulate the information to the HFC staff. The FDNR and MFC staffs
                    are beginning work to provide the MFC with the capability to display
                    different combinations of map layers and the results of analyses. The
                    goal is to make these capabilities available not only for technical
                    analyses but also for low-cost, interactive displays at public
                    workshops, hearings, and meetings. Only then will the maximum value
                    of the technology be fully realized.


                    Appendix

                    Cowen, D. J. 1988. GIS versus CAD versus DBMS: What are the differ
                        ences? Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54 (11):
                        1551-1555.

                    Haddad K. D. and W. K. Michener 1991. Design and Implementation of
                        a Coastal Resource Geographic Information System: Administrative
                        Consideration. Pp 1958-1967 in 0. T. Lagoon, H. Converse, V.
                        Tippie, L. T. Tobin and D. Clark (eds.), Coastal Zone 91, V. 3
                        Proc. Seventh Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management. 1083 pp.

                    Parker, H. D. 1988. The unique qualities of a Geographic
                        Information System; a commentary. Photogrammetry Engineering
                        and Remote Sensing 54 (11): 1547-1549

                    Peuquet, D. and D. Marble 1990.    Introductory Readings in
                        Geographic Information Systems. Taylor and Francis, Bristol,
                        PA. 371 pp.

















                Acknowledgments

                      The authors would like to thank Kelly Donnelly, Henry Norris,
                Linda Tripodo, Judy Leiby, and David Camp for assistance in the
                preparation of this manuscript. This work was supported, in part, by
                grants from the Florida Office of Coastal Management, Department of 
                Environmental Regulation with funds provided by U.S. Office of Ocean
                and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, under the Coastal Zone
                Management Act of 1972 (as ammended); and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
                Service Sportfish  Restoration Program, F66.

                                                                      








                                              


                          
                                                                       












                                                                                
























                                 





                                                                          









 






                                                                                                                                                           ES C-TR LIBR
                                                                                                                                       NOAA COASTAL SERMCILE
                                                                                                                                           6668