Assessment of fisheries habitat tasks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 : final report for grant period 10/1/86 thru [sic] 9/30/87

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

ASSESSMENT OF FISHERIES HABITAT

FINAL REPORT

for

I ~~TASKS 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
IS

ASMOCTOBEER 1987 coSTAL H0XIT
INFORMATION CEN TEER

These projects were supported by a grant from the Florida Office
of Coastal Management, Department of Environmental Regulation,
with funds provided by the United States Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, under the Coastal Zone Manage-
I g ~ment Act of 1972, as amended.

SH
329
.H344
1987

IPropertY of CSC i4b J

ASSESSMENT OF FISHERIES HABITAT

TASKS 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

FINAL REPORT

for

GRANT PERIOD 10/1/86 THRU 9/30/87

Kenneth D. Haddad, Kristie A. Killam, Barbara A. Hoffman,
Robert H. McMichael, Jr., Paul Carlson, Gail A. McGarry,
Randall Hochberg, and Jamie L. Serino

October, 1987

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413

I c
H nh

4 ~ '~

I ~~~~~~~~~~~INTRODUCTION

This report contains Tasks 1-5 of the Coastal Zone Management program

at the Bureau of Marine Research. Task I work products focus on a project

that relates potential environmental stresses (i.e., sediment, light) to

physiological correlates (i.e., changes in amino acid pools, rates of

I ~~~oxygen production) of the seagrass, Thalassia testudinum. This work

complements previous CZM work that identified environmental stress and loss

of seagrass habitat as a major problem in long term resource management.

Task 2 work products are centered around the development of the Marine

Resource Geographic Information System (MRGIS) and the dissemination of

I ~~~both digital and hard copy data into the user community. Task 3 work

* ~~products are based on the goal to link and quantify the relationship

between fisheries species to estuarine habitats. Task 4 is accomplishing

the goal of defining population dynamics of juvenile snook and red drum in

a specific and quantifiable estuarine habitat to understand the

complexities of population size, growth, mortality, immigration, and

emigration. These three tasks now represent a major thrust of the Bureau

I ~~~of Marine Research to develop techniques and provide information to more

effectively manage our marine resources.

Since sound information on habitat quantity, location, and importance

to Florida's fisheries and non-game resources has never been addressed with

a methodical, holistic approach, this type of information has not been

I ~~~available to the researcher or resource manager. Although much of what we

are doing will require long term database development, the preliminary

information has been and continues to be requested by agencies, planners,

and researchers. We expect this program to grow and the knowledge gained

to be of critical importance to the future of our coastal natural

I ~~~resources.

Task 5 is providing the vehicle to get our information and project

results to the general public. The most effective approach to resource

management is by an informed public guiding the governmental processes. By

providing factual non-technical information to the public, they can make

better decisions when facing tough issues regarding our marine environment.

Through brochures, presentations and other forms of media, we are

I ~~accomplishing these goals and the results can only be positive for

Florida's future.

TASK 1: THALASSIA STRESS STUDY

Seagrass beds are important habitats for many species of fish and

shellfish in Florida estuaries. However, dramatic loss in

seagrass area was documented in most areas where habitat

inventories were conducted. Seagrass habitat losses occur as the

result of direct losses due to dredging and physical damage and

indirect losses resulting from dieback. The causes of seagrass

dieback are unidentified, chronic, and anthropogenic stresses,

and turtle grass, (Thalassia testudinum), seems particularly

susceptible to dieback. Field and laboratory experiments were

carried out to (1) examine the potential roles of hypoxia and

sediment sulfide concentrations in seagrass dieback and (2) to

determine indices of chronic stress in Thalassia which might be

used to identify stress in the field before a seagrass bed is

lost.

FIELD STUDIES OF COMMUNITY OXYGEN METABOLISM IN THALASSIA BEDS IN
LOWER TAMPA BAY

Introduction

Diurnal measurements of community oxygen metabolism in healthy

and stressed seagrass beds were undertaken in an effort to

determine whether hypoxia causes or contributes to the phenomenon

of dieback. Hypoxia frequently causes the death of flood-

intolerant crop plants when soils are waterlogged for long

periods of time, but one would not expect seagrasses, like

Thalassia, to be prone to hypoxic stress.

Under all but the most extreme naturally-occurring conditions

(ie., hurricanes), Thalassia is well adapted against hypoxic

stress. The most prominent adaptation is the well-developed

lacunar system which transports oxygen produced by photosynthesis

in the leaves to the roots and rhizomes which are submerged in

anaerobic sediment. We hypothesize that the capacity of this

oxygen-conducting system can be saturated by high sediment BOD

resulting from anthropogenic nutrient inputs, oxygen depletion

due to sewage or nutrient inputs, or shading due to sediment

resuspension or algae blooms.

Methods

To construct oxygen budgets for stressed and healthy Thalassia

beds, four sets of diurnal measurements of oxygen metabolism were

made at three sites in lower Tampa Bay. Measurements were made

during the summer, on 6/30-7/2, 8/18-21, and 9/25-30, when high

water temperatures enhanced possible hypoxic stresses.

The three study *sites used for the diurnal measurements of

benthic community metabolism were located in Fort DeSoto Park at

the mouth of Tampa Bay (Fig. A). Sites were selected on the

basis of previous studies carried out by this lab to represent

extremes of water quality. The sewage-impacted site was located

in a restricted embayment between St. Jeanne Key and Bonne

Fortune Key, approximately 300 m north of the outfall for the

sewage treatment plant serving the East Beach recreation area.

The stress site was located east of Bonne Fortune Key in an

embayment that had limited circulation, high water temperatures,

and generally high turbidity for most of the summer. The control

site was located on the south side of Bunces Pass to maximize

water quality by providing flushing and cool water temperatures.

At each site, four clear plexiglas chambers, 60 cm diameter x 50

cm height, were placed over the Thalassia bed. The chambers were

I ~sealed by pressing them into the sediment 5-10 cm. Water within

each chamber was recirculated by a submersible bilge pump. A YSI

Model 58 oxygen meter and probe continuously measured dissolved

oxygen in each chamber, and a Li-cor LI-1000 data logger recorded

mean, maximum, and minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations every

10 minutes for the entire logging interval. Photosynthetically-

active radiation (light wavelengths from 400 to 700 nm) was

I ~recorded from one sensor above the water surface and another

sensor at the top of the seagrass canopy. At the end of each

experiment, root and shoot samples were harvested from each

chamber to calculate biomass and leaf surface area.

Diurnal measurements at all three sites were generally made back-

to-back on four consecutive days to minimize differences in

I ~weather between sites. Each cycle of measurements began at the

stress site and ended at the sewage site. After the field

measurements were complete, lab experiments were carried out to

I ~measure oxygen exchange rates of green leaves, epiphytized

leaves, rhizomes, sediment, and overlying water from each site to

I ~partition oxygen fluxes measured in situ. Complete oxygen

budgets were calculated for all four measurement cycles, but only

data from the September series are presented below.

Results

Diel oxygen flux measurements in September were made under

virtually cloudless conditions (Figs. B, F, and J).

Photosynthetically-active radiation (PAR) varied sinusoidally,

with signficant cloudiness during the morning of day two at the

stress site and the afternoon of day two at the sewage site.

Oxygen concentrations at the control site rose during the first

three hours of measurement and then declined gradually from 1500

h until 1800 h (Fig. C). Rates of oxygen consumption in all four

chambers increased after dark, and chambers were flushed with

outside water at midnight to prevent anoxia. Post-flushing

oxygen consumption rates were considerably higher than evening

rates, probably as the result of rhizome oxygen depletion.

Chambers were exposed by tides from 0630 to 0930. Upon

reflooding, chamber oxygen concentrations rose rapidly until

logging ended at 1200 h. Oxygen fluxes at the other sites (Figs.

G and K) showed similar diurnal patterns.

When oxygen concentrations within each chamber are plotted

against bottom PAR, latent oxygen storage and demands within the

seagrass community become apparent (Fig. D). DO values lag

behind PAR until approximately 0900 each morning suggesting an

oxygen deficit within Thalassia or another major component of the

system. Oxygen concentrations then rise rapidly for the

remainder of the morning and oxygen concentrations in the

chambers approach saturation in the late morning and early

afternoon. Much of the oxygen produced at this time accumulates

in bubbles or in lacunar tissue within Thalassia leaves, roots,

I ~and rhizomes. As a result of oxygen storage in Thalassia,

I ~chamber Do values show little response to dropping PAR levels in

the late afternoon and evening. Similar patterns are observed at

the stress site (Fig. G) and the sewage site (Fig. K).

Community respiration at the control site caused rapid decreases

in chamber dissolved oxygen levels (Fig. E) . Non-linear oxygen

consumption curves at all sites (see Figs. E and 14) resulted from

(1) the Pasteur effect resulting from first-order oxygen uptake

kinetics at low oxygen concentrations and (2) oxygen transport

I ~through rhizomes from shoots outside the chambers.

Net photosynthesis, respiration, gross primary production, and

the photosynthesis/respiration ratio for each chamber at each

* ~site were estimated from the oxygen flux curves (Table A) . Net

photosynthesis was highest at the sewage site, intermediate at

the stress site, and lowest at the control site. Respiration was

highest at the stress site and lowest at the sewage site. Gross

I ~primary production, estimated by adding dark respiration to net

photosynthesis, was similar at the sewage and stress sites and

lower at the control site.

1 ~Structural parameters used in oxygen budget calculations showed

I ~marked differences among sites (Table B). Root and shoot biomass
at the control and stress site were similar but were quite low

I ~at the sewage site. Root/shoot ratios were 1.46 and 1.37,

respectively, for the control and stress sites. The sewage site
value, 0.64, probably reflected the minimal investment for

producing belowground tissue in sediments with high biological

I ~oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD).

Shoot density, blade number, and maximum blade length were

similar among sites. Blade width and green leaf area were

I ~highest at the control site, intermediate at the stress site, and

lowest at the sewage site. Epiphyte leaf area was greatest at

the sewage site, intermediate at the control site, and lowest at

the stress site.

Component fluxes and total oxygen budgets for each chamber are

shown in Table C. Sediment biological oxygen demand values were

similar among the three sites, while the sediment COD values were

quite different. Thalassia leaf respiration estimates were

I ~relatively low for the sewage site because of the small standing

crop of seagrass present. Estimates of water column respiration

rates were lowest for the stress site, considerably high for the

sewage site, and highest for the control site. The component sum

estimate of respiration is comparable for all three sites, but

I ~all three are considerably higher than chamber estimates for

respiration. The discrepancy probably results from oxygen

storage within Thalassia and transport of oxygen into the chamber

* ~from shoots outside the chamber during the field experiments.

Net photosynthesis of Thalassia was highest for leaves from the

sewage site. Net photosynthesis in the water column was very

I ~high for the sewage site, intermediate at the stress site, and

lowest at the control site. Component sum estimates of total net

I ~photosynthesis exceed chamber estimates by a factor of 3.1 for

I ~the stress site, 3.3 for the sewage site, and 4.2 for the control

site. These discrepancies also were attributed to oxygen storage

in Thalassia tissue during field measurements and poor

duplication of natural seagrass canopy light extinction

characteristics in component measurements of photosynthesis.

Conclusions

Field studies of community metabolism indicate, paradoxically,

that while gross photosynthetic rates and photosynthesis/

respiration ratios of Thalassia beds were highest in the sewage-

impacted site, seagrasses at this site are extremely vulnerable

to episodes of hypoxia and anoxia.

Several structural parameters may be useful indices of Thalassia

stress based on the three sites we studied. Mean blade width was

cited from other investigations as an indicator of salinity

stress; we find that lower blade widths may also accompany oxygen

stress. Root/shoot ratios may also be diagnostic of the BOD and

COD characteristics of sediments.

LABORATORY STUDIES OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEDIMENT
SULFIDE CONCENTRATIONS AND THALASSIA GROWTH

Introduction

The laboratory phase of this project examined the potential

toxicity of hydrogen sulfide and its effect on the growth and

survival of Thalassia testudinum. Sulfide was selected for study

because it is a potent cytotoxin, rapidly denaturing

metalloproteins (enzymes among them) when it diffuses into living

cells.

Sulfide concentrations in the sediments of natural Thalassia beds

are frequently very high, but this might play a synergistic role

in seagrass die-back when plant roots become hypoxic. Root

hypoxia may result from (1) natural causes, such as protracted

cloudy weather which reduces the amount of oxygen transported

from the shoots to the rhizomes and roots, or (2) anthropogenic

causes, such as high sediment and water column BOD values

associated with primary or secondary sewage effluent. When the

root tissue becomes hypoxic, the leakage of oxygen out of the

roots into the surrounding sediments ceases, and the immediate

vicinity of the root surface (the rhizosphere) changes from a

chemically-oxidized zone to a reduced zone. Sediment sulfide,

which was oxidized by root oxygen in the rhizosphere, is then

able to diffuse into the root tissue.

Methods

To investigate the effect of sediment sulfide on Thalassia

growth, three experiments were conducted during the summer of

1987 in laboratory culture systems. The culture systems

consisted of burial vaults filled with seawater located on the

roof of the RMI building at the Bureau of Marine Research in St.

Petersburg. Clumps of Thalassia and sandy sediment were

collected in November 1986 from a healthy seagrass bed and potted

with additional builder's sand into 50 1-gallon PVC pots.

Each of the three experiments lasted 4-6 weeks. The first

experiment began 6/2/87 and ended 7/15/87. The second experiment

began 8/1/87 and ended 9/4/87, and the third began 9/9/87 and

ended 10/14/87. While the last experiment occurred partly

outside the contract period, the results are included in this

report.

U ~Light was measured continuously during all experiments using a

Li-Cor datalogger and PAR sensor. Salinity and temperature of

the water in each vault were measured twice daily and new

seawater was used to restore salinities to values between 24 ppt

and 30 ppt after rainstorms. During the second and third

I ~experiments, each pot was fertilized once a week with ammonium

3 ~phosphate. Pore water sulfide concentrations were measured

weekly during the first two experiments and twice weekly during

the third experiment. During the first two experiments, no

sediment amendments were made. In the third experiment, four

I ~treatments were randomly applied to three groups of pots. The

three groups were assigned on the basis of initial sediment

sulfide concentration: low = pots with sulfide less than 300 u1m,

medium = pots with sulfide between 300 and 800 uMN, and high =

pots with sulfide concentrations greater than 800 uM. The four

I ~treatments were (1) bubbling sediment with air to oxidize

sulfide, (2) twice weekly injections of sodium lactate to

stimulate sulfate-reducing bacteria, (3) shading to reduce oxygen

transport to roots and allow sulfide to penetrate the plant

rhizosphere, and (4) controls.

At least five Thalassia short shoots were labelled in each pot,

* ~and all blades in labelled shoots were measured weekly between

5/2/87 and 10/14/87. Growth rates of each blade in labelled

short shoots were calculated each week during the interval. All

statistical analyses were performed using SAS.

Results

Despite the apparent homogeneity of the plant plugs collected for

the experimental units, pore water sulfide in the 50 pots ranged

from 10 micromolar to 3 millimolar. This serendipitous

concentration span was used in the first two experiments to

compare Thalassia standing crop to pore water sulfide

concentrations (Table D).

No significant correlation was observed in any of the three

experiments between Thalassia standing crop and pore water

sulfide concentrations. While F-values for the regression models

indicate a marginally signficant relationship between sulfide and

plant standing crop for experiment 2, the correlation

coefficients suggest a very weak relationship. The highest r-

squared value (0.14) was obtained during experiment 2 when the

log of total blade length at the end of the experiment for each

pot was regressed against mean pore water sulfide concentration

during the experiment (Model 4, Table D). Relationships between

growth rates and pore water sulfide concentrations in experiments

2 and 3 were also weak, but were improved by the addition of

initial total leaf standing crop as an independent variable in

the regression model (Models 9 and 14, Table D).

Manipulation of the sediment environment in experiment 3 resulted

in marked changes in pore water sulfide concentrations and

marginally-significant changes in leaf growth rates (Table E) o

High and medium sulfide groups in the control treatment showed

slight declines in pore water sulfide during experiment 3, while

the low sulfide group in the control treatment showed a slight

increase in sediment sulfide. Aeration caused marked declines in

the sulfide concentrations of high and medium sulfide groups, but

a moderate increase in the low sulfide group. Lactate addition

caused a marked increase in the sulfide concentration of high

I ~sulfide pots and a moderate increase in medium sulfide pots.

Sulfide concentrations declined dramatically in all the pots that

were shaded. Turnover times varied slightly among treatments and

groups, but the decrease in sulfide concentrations and lack of

increase in turnover time observed in the shade treatment suggest

that Thalassia is definitely light-saturated and may be inhibited

in full sunlight.

Conclusions

I ~We were unable to demonstrate a significant effect of sulfide on

Thalassia growth rates under laboratory conditions. However, the

,apparent light-saturation and possible photo-inhibition observed

in experiment 3 suggest that experiments proposed for FY 87/88

funding, examining the interaction of light and sulfide

I ~concentration, should give us valuable results.

I ~~~~~TASK 2: MARINE RESOURCE GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
UPDATED AND CLASSIFIED IMAGERY

A major update and restructuring of the primary LANDSAT database of

the. MRGIS was accomplished during this grant period. The original database

I ~~~was not designed for the flexibility now required for data dissemination.

The *demand for quantitative and geographically oriented data has increased

tremendously within the private and government sectors. When the MRGIS was

* ~~originally conceived and developed it was designed to house fisheries

habitat data. From our perspective, this meant a final form of data which

I ~~could be integrated into the development of fisheries carrying capacity

models. Our approach was successful in creating a fisheries habitat

database, but this approach did not lend itself to the flexibility needed

to provide data to a user community. We used a biased statistical approach

to delineate the fisheries habitat at the expense of the non-fisheries

I ~~~habitat (Fig. 1). With this approach we maintained the database on three

300 megabyte disk packs. Once the raw data were processed, it was deleted

and maintained on the original 9 track tape data set. Reaccessing the raw

data to meet additional needs that were not originally perceived was,

therefore, time consuming and cumbersome. Many other problems were

I ~~inherent in this approach from a data access and dissemination

perspective.

The new and flexible approach we have taken is depicted in Figure 2.

Georeferencing is done on the raw data. This allows us to generate

products in the UTM format with no margin of error in geoposition from one

I ~~~product to the other. In addition, the algorithm used for georeferencing

* ~~~the raw data is a bilinear interpolation and maintains the resolution of

the raw data much better than that of the nearest-neighbor algorithm used

to georeference classified data. The georeferenced raw data are maintained

on active 300 Mb disk packs.' A parallel-piped classifier is run on the

data to create two intermediate data sets. The first data set is the

result of classifying Bands 2 (green), 3 (red), and (4) red/near infrared

into 256 categories. The second data set results from classifying Band 3

(red)', 4 (red/near-infrared) and 5 (mid-infrared). The first

classification best depicts general land cover while the second

classification enhances wetlands delineation. Since 256 numerical

categories exist in each data set, over 500 categories can be evaluated and

combined to best present the needed final work file database. This

increases the time required to generate the final product and requires more

interactive interpretation of the data but the results are superb to any

other methods we have tested. The versatility of this approach allows us

to meet all the demands on the types of information desired. For example,

boundaries for resource maps for the Aquatic Preserve program are based on

ordinary high water and require only one category for saltmarsh. A county,

on the other hand, may be interested in separating the marsh into four

categories (Juncus sp., Spartina alterniflora, Spartina bakeri, and mixed

saltmarsh). Fisheries habitat researchers may be interested in not only

species delineation but also density differences. The point is that

everyone requires information tailored to their own needs and if the

database is not versatile enough to handle these requests, it will be of

limited value. We feel that we are now in a position to service many types

of requests.

Through this approach, we increased our actively maintained data from

storage on three disks (.9 gigabytes) to a current inventory of 17 disks

(5.1 gigabytes). Each disk represents a region of the state and the data

can be accessed on the MRGIS within five minutes by simply placing the disk

into the disk drive. We structured all data for coastal Florida in that

I ~~~format except for the lower portion of the Indian River Lagoon. This has

I ~~~not been done because we were unable to acquire a good, cloud-free Thematic
Mapper image of the area; however, an image for the area was recently

ordered. When it arrives, the coastal database for fisheries resources

will be complete. In summary, we have updated and classified the entire

fisheries habitat database for the State of Florida, not just the areas

originally specified, in a much more versatile format.

DATA DOWNLOADING

The interest in accessing the MRGIS database has virtually expanded

beyond our ability to respond in a timely manner. This was a primary

reason for our efforts in data updating and restructuring. We met all the

obligations outlined in our grant for data downloading and met many

additional data requests.

Digital data was transferred to East Central Florida Regional Planning

Council (EGFRPC) in several formats. The Cocoa/Rockledge area was

processed on the MRGIS using a parallel-piped classifier with two different

I ~~channel analyses. These data also were run through a mode filter which

reduces the number of isolated pixels in the data. In addition, a maximum

likelihood classifier was run on the raw data; this and a mode filtered

I ~~~version were transferred to the ECFRPC. By providing this versatility in

data formats, the ECFRPC then was able to determine which format(s) best

I ~~~provided the information they required. Seagrass and mangrove delineations

were provided in the downloaded data. We also provided the Wekiva River

area in several processed forms.

Processed data in several formats were also transferred to the GIS at

Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve in Naples . The data were consolidated and

I ~~ground truthed and returned for hard copy production and storage on the

MRGIS (Figsd. 3 and 4). This series of transfers demonstrates a major

concept in the, long-term development of the MRGIS. It is our feeling that

digital data transfer is the most efficient and usable format of the MRGIS

database. The micro-computer environment provides an effective means to

I ~~~address that method of transfer. In the case of the Naples facility,

* ~~~in-house expertise was employed to consolidate the fisheries habitat data

and conduct ground truthing. The final products were then transferred back

to the MRGIS for final preparation and storage. An extensive network of

this nature throughout the state would provide an effective means for

database development, maintenance, and enhancement. We also provided data

to the Naples facility that depicted sand beds off Marco Island.

I ~ ~~~Digital data also were transferred to the Marine Resources Council of

* ~~East Central Florida who recently acquired the necessary micro-computer

equipment for image data manipulation and to DNR Bureau of Aquatic Plant

* ~~~Management who also recently acquired similar capabilities.

The Everglades National Park personnel are in the process of acquiring

I ~~MRGIS-type capabilities and have substantially completed a mapping of

fisheries habitat. We currently have a hardcopy form of their maps. We do

not plan to digitize this into the MRGIS unless their funding is cut, but

* ~~~we will access their database and provide assistance in the development of

their system. This is also true with Kennedy Space Flight Center; they

I ~~~recently acquired a GIS that is compatible with the MRGIS and we will have

* ~~~direct access to their data.

Finally, digital data were also provided to the South Florida Water

Management District, University of Florida IFAS Remote Sensing Lab,

University of Florida Northeast Regional Data Center, and Florida DOT

Bureau of Topographic Mapping.

Over the last funding year, we provided the Aquatic Preserve Program

with hard copy resource maps for Ten Thousand Islands (Fig. 3), Rookery Bay

(Fig. 4), St. Martins Marsh (Fig. 5), Tomoka Marsh (Fig. 6), Wekiva River

(Fig. 7), and Big Bend (Fig. 8) Aquatic Preserves. Wekiva River Aquatic

Preserve was our first major effort using Thematic Mapper data to inventory

freshwater wetlands. The Big Bend area was the largest Aquatic Preserve we

inventoried and presented us with special challenges to produce the

preliminary hard copy map. The Big Bend area was composed of three

different LANDSAT scenes from different time periods and was housed on

three different disk packs because of the massive volume of data. The data

were standardized numerically, transferred to a single disk, and then

geographically joined into one large 21 megabyte file. The transfer of

this large file onto the IBM-AT, which has the printing capability, was not

attempted because of storage space problems. This transfer will occur

after we acquire large mass storage capabilities on the micro system. We

had to reduce the data by 60% in order to transfer and plot it (Fig. 8).

This was a logistical problem that will be rectified in the near future.

The inkjet hardcopies for this report are presented in large-scale for

convenience. Figure 9 is a full resolution print of a portion of Figure 6

to provide an example of the resolving capabilities.

The above digital and hardcopy dissemination efforts were planned and

time-budgeted for completion within the framework of our proposed work

schedule. We additionally have been deluged with requests for fisheries

habitat data to meet the requirements of local and regional comprehensive

growth management plans. These requests (Table 1), along with many others,

continue to accrue and only a portion of them have been satisfied. The

quantity of information requests prompted us to restructure the data (Fig.

2) to better accommodate the requests. From a coastal resource management

and fisheries management perspective, we believe that the long-term success

of the MRGIS will depend on our ability to meet these requests. More

importantly, the dissemination of these data (particularly resource

inventory maps) is a very basic step in effective fisheries resource

management.

In addition to providing resource maps, analyses of land use changes

were conducted of the Delaney Creek and Frog Creek watersheds in Tampa Bay

for the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. A series of hardcopy maps

were produced which delineated specific categories of land use change and

associated acreages.

A black and white image of a portion of Tampa Bay (Fig. 9A) was

produced on request by the Office of the Auditor General. The image

depicts an example of seagrass loss in Tampa Bay. This image demonstrated

the capability to produce a simplified black-and-white print out of an

MRGIS data set. In addition, it demonstrated the combining of overlays to

show both seagrass present today and that which was present in 1q48.

Numerous informal and formal presentations were given on the CZM

project at workshops, meetings, and conferences (Table 2). Numerous

interviews were conducted for newspaper articles; most are included within

Attachment 1. Local television interviews also were conducted. Special

filming of the MRGIS habitat loss information was conducted for a one-hour

PBS program called "Walking Trees" and for a Discovery (Boston PBS) program

on manatees. A non-technical article by Bruger and Haddad (Attachment 2)

I ~~is being published as a chapter in Jurisdictional Management of Marine

Fisheries. The M4RGIS was visited by and demonstrated to 1) federal, state,

regional and local agencies, 2) private citizens and companies, 3) research

3 ~~sci entists, 4) university staff, 5) state legislators, and many others.

The number of 'requested visits and the amount of advice requested by phone

I ~~~has proven to us that the MRGIS concept and development is now perceived 'as

an example of successful implementation of CIS technology and reflects

positively on the Coastal Zone Management effort in Florida.

ANCILLARY DATA DEVELOPMENT

Ancillary data development was curtailed to accommodate the data

restructuring and dissemination efforts. Again, it is our contention that

I ~~effective dissemination of data will have an immediate effect on the long

I ~~~term management of Florida's marine resources. The State of Florida is

emphasizing growth management and, other than the MRGIS habitat database,

* ~~very little information exists that documents the location and, extent of

marine resources/fisheries habitat. It is imperative that this information

I ~~be available for development of growth management plans.

in addition, we encountered some logistical problems in locating and

consolidating data to be entered into the MRGIS. We were fortunate to have

a concerted, multiagency effort to consolidate the various data overlays

into map form for the Tampa Bay area. This is not the case for other

I ~~Florida estuaries. A Charlotte Harbor database overlay set was built by

* ~~the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Research Center as part

of their manatee program. We previously developed software to access their

database and we are arranging to have that data set transferred to the

MRGIS. It is our general intent not to duplicate effort in the MRGIS

database development and we will continue to access existing digital data

where available.

We completed a drainage basin analysis for land-use changes of the

Indian River Lagoon and additionally digitized the majority of seagrass

delineations from previously contracted CZM work to Brevard County and

Robert Virstein. We lack the updated lower Indian River Lagoon Themat~ic

Mapper data but, as stated earlier, recent imagery has been ordered.

Ongoing studies by the St. Johns Water Management District, South Florida

Water Management District, Florida Institute of Oceanography, and

Bionetics/NASA are being conducted to consolidate data on the Lagoon. Much

of the data will be incorporated into the MRGIS. We are working with these

different entities to make the data compatible in digital form. FIT and

Bionetics are developing digital GIS systems compatible to the MRGIS and

digitizable maps for easy transfer to the MRGIS.

We developed special overlays for several areas in cooperation with

local and regional entities. In general, we agree to digitize data into

the MRGIS for quantitative analyses with the understanding that the data

becomes a part of the MRGIS. This allows us to gain up-to-date data with

minimal effort and provides the participating organization with needed

information. An updated and detailed seagrass analysis for Sarasota Bay

was completed using this approach and we expect this type of arrangement

to continue.

Two papers were presented at the Coastal Zone 87 conference in Seattle

which demonstrated the MRGIS data overlay capabilities and the utility of

the MRGIS. The first paper dealt directly with the GIS process and

concepts (Attachment 3). The second paper (Haddad, K.D. and D. Ekberg, the

potential of Landsat (TM) imagery for assessing the national status and

trends of important coastal habitats) used overlays of TM data and USFWS

data that were converted to raster format to assess potential problems of

I ~~~using TM data to update the National Wetland Inventory database. Final

5 ~~~re prints have not been received and, thus, only a copy of the GIS paper is

included in this report.

LINK OF TABULAR DATA TO THE MRGIS

I ~~~~A basic long-term need for effective Geographic Information System

I ~~~development is a link and access mode to tabular data which are based on

single-point geographic locations. The general approach in the past has

been to summarize CIS data and port it to a tabular database for

statistical analyses or report generation. Those CIS systems that include

I ~~~tabular information in their analyses generally require the entire map and

tabular data to be in a special format and maintained as such. We believe

that the power of a CIS lies in its versatility in data manipulation. The

less the user must restructure data, the more efficient the system. In

addition, we believe the transport of data into a GIS is the most effective

* ~~~direction of data flow.

During this grant period, specific software was developed to interface

to a multitude of outside tabular databases. We chose an industry standard

software interface by developing the ability to access DBAS III+ files.

Many organizations, including DNR, DER, and National Marine Fisheries

5 ~~~Service, are using DBAS III in a micro-computer environment to enter and

retrieve data from a mainframe. By tapping into this conduit, we

tremendously increased the power of the MRGIS. A schematic (Fig. 10) of

I ~~~the process depicts this general approach. We purposely built the link in

the micro-computer environment for long-term compatability to any DOS-based

I ~~~system. A module (DB34) was created in ELAS which offers a variety of ways

to access DBAS files. The latitude/longitude of the given record in a file

is the main link from a DBAS file to the MRGIS. The DBAS file search by

the MRGIS is based on the geographic data boundaries on the graphics

display device-. Only one field of information can be transferred to the

MRGIS 'display at a time. These data can be stored as an overlay aeid

another field of information can be accessed. The process was successfully

tested with fisheries statistics data and is currently being used to assess

distributions of manatee sitings and mortalities for presentation to the

Governor and Cabinet. The methods developed to implement this phase of

MRCIS development were extremely successful, extending the utility and

versatility beyond the original link to the fisheries statistics data.

TASK 3: HABITAT CARRYING CAPACITY

GEAR TESTING METHODS

This task continues a major thrust to construct and test sampling gear

that are capable of providing quantitative assessments of living marine

resources. Considerable effort was required to design and build prototype

gear, test it, and then refine the gear before the actual gear comparisohs

could be made. Much of the gear design and refinement was accomplished

during the first half of the year and involved gear construction contracts,

in-house construction, net sewing, testing the mechanics of each gear,

redesigning, retesting, evaluating net mesh sizes and types, reviewing and

incorporating existing designs, and a multitude of logistical procedures.

Actual, comparative gear testing began in June, 1987 and was conducted

weekly. The sampling site chosen for the gear study was adjacent to Tarpon

Key, a small mangrove island (approximately 50 acres) located in Tampa Bay

between the Sunshine Skyway and Mullet Key (Fig. 11). This site provided

an extensive homogenous distribution of dense Thalassia testudinum

surrounding the island, imperative for repetitive gear sampling. Although

a different area was sampled during each sampling trip within the Tarpon

Key study site, we assumed homogeneous organism distribution.

The following information was recorded at each sample station: date,

time, tidal stage, lunar stage, wind direction and speed, and % cloud

cover. Water and air temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and

water depth were measured with a Hydrolab surveyor II. Gear soak time

and/or area sampled were recorded when applicable.

Fish and macroinvertebrates (Callinectes sapidus and Penaeus sp.) were

sorted, identified to species, measured, and returned to the water.

Measurements included standard length of fish, carapace length of shrimp,

and carapace width of crabs.' If a large number of one species was

I ~ ~collected, a subsample of 20 random individuals was measured and the

remainder was counted. Amounts of macroalgae and seagrass captured in the

shrimp trawls 'and otter trawls were also recorded. Data were entered and

I ~~~analyzed using SAS (Statistical Analysis System) programs.

U ~~~Gear Descriptions

The sampling gears utilized for this comparison study included tripod

drop nets, boom drop nets, roller shrimp trawls, and an otter trawl.

Tripods. Three tripods (Fig. 12) were constructed of 16' long, 2"

diam. aluminum pipes which were connected together by an aluminum plate (3

1/2" diam.) at their upper ends. These tripods were similar to those

described by Gilmore et al. (1978). After preliminary testing, it was

concluded that smaller, lighter tripods made of I" diameter aluminum pipes

provided the strength necessary to lift the 4m2 drop net, and were also

much more manageable by the field crew. A total of six lighter-weight

I ~~~tripods were then constructed totalling nine tripods altogether.

I ~~~~The release mechanisms (Fig. 13) for the tripods were similar to those

described by Gilmore et al. (1978). Dacron line (1/4" diam.) was attached

to a #3 brass clip that was linked to the four corners of the drop net by

stainless steel wire (1/16" diam.). The line traveled up through a pulley

I ~~~at the top of the tripod and connected to a 2" galvanized ring at the other

end. This ring, when set into a release mechanism, held the nets in place.

A trip cord (1/8" dacron line) was connected to the release mechanism and

anchored approximately 100' from the set tripod. A pull on this line

released the drop nets.

Nine drop nets (Fig. 14) were constructed: three lm2, three 2m2 and

three 4m2. These nets were similar in design to those described in the

1986 CZM Final Report. They were fixed with an upper float frame

constructed of PVC pipe (2.5 cm diam. for 1 and 2m2 nets, and 5.0cm diam.

for the 4m2 nets). The lower sink frames were constructed of stainless

steel- the lm2 sink frames had 25 mm frames (identical to those described

in the 1986 CZM Final Report) and the 2 and 4m2 nets had wider sink frames

for greater stability, 38 mm and 50 mm wide respectively. The frames were

connected by 1.5m length of nylon ace 1/8" netting. A 3/16" galvanized

chain line was suspended 6" below the perimeter of the sink frame with 1/8"

netting to reduce the chances of fish escaping if the sink frame dropped on

an uneven surface.

Tripods were erected from the stern of a 23' mullet skiff to reduce

disturbance of the bottom vegetation. At least three people were necessary

for this procedure. Tripods were allowed to stand for approximately one

hour before release of the nets. Upon release, lower frames were checked

for a level drop then pressed into the sediment. An internal seine of

1/8" mesh (described in the 1986 Final Report) was used to remove fish and

macroinvertebrates from the enclosed area. Each seine was slightly smaller

in width than the drop net frames. The seine was pulled through each drop

net eight times, twice on each frame side. If an organism was captured on

the eighth pull, three additional pulls were repeated until three

consecutive hauls captured no fish.

Boom Drop Nets

Two lm2 nets (Figs. 14 and 15) were dropped simultaneously off the bow

of a 17' Boston Whaler. Construction and deployment of this gear was.

described extensively in the 1986 CZM Final Report.

Roller Rigged Shrimp Trawls

Two roller trawls were constructed from galvanized and stainless steel

(Fig. 16). The mouth of each trawl was 5' wide and net length was 10'.

Upper 'netting, measured diagonally knot to knot, was 3/4". Cod end nettilng

was 1/8" nylon ace netting, identical to that used in the other sampling

gears. A 5' roller was attached to the rear of each trawl so the gear

rolled over the sampling area without damaging the seagrasses.

A 16' long, 2" diam. aluminum pipe was attached with brackets just

anterior to the console of the 17' Boston Whaler (Fig. 17). Rope attached

to the front of the roller trawls ran through eyebolts in the pipe and

around the bow of the whaler. Trawls were towed midway between the bow and

the stern, at a slight angle (approximately 30�) to allow organisms to

enter. Stainless steel 'rakes' on the trawl kept macroalgae from filling

the net.

Nine preliminary tows were conducted at 1300, 1500, and 1700 RPM to

determine optimum towing speed for these trawls on the 17' Boston Whaler.

The maximum speed the trawls could be towed without pulling them off the

bottom was 1700 RPM. Also, number of fish captured at 1700 RPM was

markedly larger than those captured at 1300 or 1500 RPM.

Trawls were towed over a distance of 100 m. Time of tow was recorded

and the cod-ends were pulled onto the back of the boat and emptied into two

30-gallon containers. The samples were processed immediately. Each trawl

covered an area of 152.5m2 for each 100 m tow.

Otter Trawl

The otter trawl (Fig. 18) had a mouth opening of approximately 4m.

The entire net was 20' long. The otter trawl had a body of 1" mesh,

measured diagonally knot to knot, and 1/8" ace netting in the cod-end. The

net was towed 50m from the stern of a 23' mullet boat by 3/4" nylon rope

which split~ to 2 ropes at a bridle, allowing the doors of the trawl to

spread apart. The trawl was towed at 1300 RPM over a distance of 50m.

(Preliminary tows covering 100m produced an over-abundance of catch. A

decision to shorten the transect from 100m to 50m was enacted early in the

program.) Time of tow was recorded and the cod-end was emptied into one or

more 30-gallon containers. The samples were processed after the three tows

were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 26 fish species and numerous invertebrate species were

collected during this study, however, the blue crab (Callinectes sapidus)

and the pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum) were the only invertebrates examined

quantitatively.

Area covered by each gear type differed greatly. The 6.1 m (20 ft.)

otter trawl covered the greatest area: 200 or 400m2 for a 50 and 100m

pull, respectively. The roller shrimp trawls covered 152m2 per 100 m

trawl. The drop nets covered areas of one, two, or four m2.

Because of the large difference in area covered by each sampling

method, examination of actual numbers of fish and invertebrates captured by

each method would give a biased indication of gear efficiency. However,

density of the organisms captured by each sample gear should provide a more

useful method of gear comparison. Density was analyzed by determining the

number of organisms/m2 captured by each of the gears (Table 3). The roller

trawl estimated the smallest number of organisms/m2 with a mean of 0.42.

The 6.1m otter trawl caught approximately 1 organism/m2. All of the drop

nets gave much larger estimates. of organism density, with the lm2 boom drop

nets giving the highest density, mean = 6.36 organisms/m2 closely followed

by the 2 and 4m2 tripod drop net estimates. Variability in the density

estimates can be examined by observing the coefficient of variation of each

gear (CV = 100 (mean/SD)). Of the drop nets that gave the highest density

estimates, the 2 and 4m2 tripod drop nets have a markedly lower variability

than the lm2 boom drop net and, therefore, would require smaller sample

sizes to estimate abundance.

Diversity of organisms captured by each gear type was analyzed.

Twenty-five of the 26 fish species were captured with the 6.1m otter trawl,

16/26 with the roller shrimp trawls, 14/26 with the 4m2 tripod drop nets,

12/26 with the lm2 boom drop nets, 11/26 with the 2m2 tripod drop nets, and

9/26 with the lm2 tripod drop nets. There appears to be a general trend of

increasing diversity of organisms captured as the sample area covered by

each gear increases; with increasing sample area, chances of encountering

less common species increases. Diversity estimates of number of species/m2

have been determined for each gear type (Table 3). The drop nets, both

tripod and boom, captured approximately 2.5-3.5 species/m2 while the trawls

captured .03-.04 species/m2. The species of fish and invertebrates

collected by each gear type are listed in Table 4. Seven of the species

collected were captured by each of the gear types including the gulf

toadfish (Opsanus beta), gold-spotted top minnow (Floridichthys carpio),

rainwater killifish (Lucania parva), gulf pipefish (Sygnathus scovelli),

mojarras (Eucinostumus sp.); pinfish (Lagodon rhomboides), and the clown

goby (Microgobius gulosus). The most common fish captured throughout the

study period was the rainwater killifish. This fish comprised over 60% of

the fish captured with the 1 and 4m2 tripod drop nets and the lm2 boom drop

nets, and close to 50% of the remaining gear types (Table 5). The

remainder of the fish species captured differed in percent dominance by

gear type, but generally included pinfish, mojarras, and the clown goby.

The inland silverside (Menidia beryllina) is listed as the second most

common, fish collected with the 2m2 tripod drop net. This pelagic fish

occurs in a clumped distribution and the large number of these fish

captured in 1 or 2 drops biased the results of the 2m2 tripod drop net.

Increasing the number of drops would reduce the occurrence of this type of

bias. The pink shrimp was captured with each gear type while the blue crab

was collected in each gear except the 1 and 2m2 tripod drop nets.

Preliminary analysis of a one-night sampling trip indicated that the

number of pink shrimp captured at night with the roller shrimp trawls was

markedly larger from the number caught during the day. Pink shrimp made up

0.4% of the fish and invertebrates captured during day sampling, but if the

night sampling data is included with the day sampling data, the pink shrimp

comprise over 16% of the organisms collected (Table 5). This trend is not

as readily apparent with the other gear types and additional night samples

must be collected before adequate analysis is possible.

Many of the species captured with drop nets (tripod and boom) are the

slow moving, demersal types such as the code goby and the clown goby.

An interesting situation occurs when examining the tripod drop net catch of

these organisms. The code and clown gobies respectively make up 11.6% and

5.8% of the catch of the lm2 tripod drop net, 6.6 and 5.5% of the 2m2

tripod drop net, and 2.8 and 2.5% of the 4m2 tripod drop net (Table 6).

Whether this decrease in estimated percentage of small demersal fish is due

to the increase in number of other species captured with the larger net or

decreased efficiency at sampling larger nets with larger seines will be

examined. Efficiency of each of the drop nets will be tested by releasing

a known number of fluorescently marked fish of a number of species into the

dropped drop nets and allowing these fish time to equilibrate. The nets

will be seined according to the procedure described earlier. Preliminary

findings of efficiency testing with L. parva released into 1 and 4m2 dr6p

nets indicated recapture efficiencies at 88% and 84% respectively. More

replicates will be conducted with fish species such as the pinfish, clown

and code gobies and the pink shrimp in order to determine seining

efficiency.

Average density for the seven fish species common to all gear types is

listed in Table 7. The only species captured by the otter trawl in similar

numbers to those captured by the drop nets is the pinfish. The roller

trawl produced density estimates much lower than the other gears. The

slower moving, demersal fish species like 0. beta, L. parva, S. scovelli

and M. gulosus are captured more effectively with the drop nets while it

appears the trawls may ride over these species, especially in areas of

dense Thalassia. The more semi-demersal and pelagic species such as the

pinfish and mojarras are captured almost as frequently with the trawls as

with the drop nets. These fish swim higher in the water column and are

more susceptible to capture by gears such as otter or shrimp trawls which

can rapidly sample large areas of the water column.

An attempt was made to compare average fish length (SL) between gear

types (Table 8). The data suggest a trend in the otter and roller trawls

capturing larger fish than the drop nets, however, more replicates are

necessary to confirm this because of the small sample size of the drop net

species.

DISCUSSION

Each gear type tested in this study was selective in its capture of

different organisms. Hartman (1984) compared six estuarine sampling gears

and found that although the otter trawls were easiest to use, the fewest

fish and lowest density of organisms of all but a few important species

were captured. Kjelson and Johnson (1973), using a 6.1m otter trawl,

estimated catch efficiencies for juvenile and yearling pinfish and spot

(Leiostomus xanthurus). For pinfish, efficiency of capture was 48-49%, and

with spot, 32% of marked fish were recaptured. Our sampling indicated that

the otter trawl captured the greatest number of species (n = 25 of 26), but

species density resulted in less than .04 species/m2. Also, because of the

greater area sampled with the trawls with less efficiency, organism density

was much lower than those predicted with the drop net data.

The roller shrimp trawl gave the lowest density and diversity

estimates of fish/m2, but may be useful in estimating the abundance of

penaeid shrimp, especially when this gear is used at night.

Recently, drop nets were used in studies to quantitatively sample

organism abundance and diversity in the estuarine environment. These

include studies by Jones et al. (1963), Jones (1965), Moseley and Copeland

(1969), Kjelson and Johnson (1973), Kushlan (1974), Kjelson et al. (1975),

Gilmore et al. (1978) and Fonseca (personal communication).

Kjelson et al. (1975) discussed some major limitations of drop nets:

small sample size, small number of samples/unit time, and the bias created

when organisms avoid or are attracted to the net or frame. A small sample

size is limiting, particularly for fish of lesser abundance and those with

a clumped distribution. Gilmore et al. (1978) found that the drop net

captured fewer individuals and species than a seine and the species were

mostly small demersal and semidemersal forms. However, they found that

total fish density and biomass values from the drop net surpassed the

seine. Actual values of fish density for Gilmore et al. 's drop nets ranged

from 1.8-19.3 fish/m2 (- = 9.0). Our estimates from tripod drop

nets were very. similar. For example, density estimates from the 2m2 tripod

ranged from 1.5-17.5 organisms/m2 (R = 6.07). Kjelson et a .

(1975), using a 4m2 drop net, compared density and diversity estimates with

that of a 525m2 haul seine. The haul seine captured more species, but the

drop net yielded estimates of significantly higher density of fish and

macroinvertebrates. Kushlan (1981) estimated the accuracy of lm2 throw

traps in the Everglades at about 73%. This value is much higher than those

estimated for otter trawl efficiencies of 32-50% (Kielson and Johnson,

1973).

Comparisons of drop nets (tripod and boom) with the trawls (otter and

roller) in this study suggest similar conclusions to those above. Drop

nets captured a larger density and a greater diversity of organisms per m2

while the trawls were more effective at capturing less common species.

CONCLUSION

Preliminary gear testing was completed with four sampling gears used

to sample the shallow seagrass environment. In the upcoming year we will

determine the efficiency of the three sizes of tripod drop nets. Our goal

is to determine the drop net size that is easiest to use and provides the

most accurate estimate of community structure. At this time it appears

that the lm2 drop net, which gives the lowest estimate of density and

diversity and has the largest coefficient of variation, could be

discontinued. The 4m2 and 2m2 tripod drop nets had very similar density

I ~~~and diversity estimates and als o had relatively low variability between

each drop. The 4m2 drop net -is particularly cumbersome to handle and if

I ~~these 2 and 4m2 nets provide similar results, it may be possible to

eli~minate the 4m2 net. However, further efficiency testing with marked

fish will be 'necessary to determine our sampling efficiency with the

internal seines once the nets have dropped and this also will contribute lo

our decision to use a specific drop net size. We will continue to sample

I ~~during day and night. Further night sampling is necessary to indicate

I ~~differences in number or species of fish or invertebrates captured on a

diel basis and to determine if the roller trawl provides a good indication

of Penaeid abundance. Our preliminary data suggest that average size of

fish captured by the trawls may be greater than that of those captured with

I ~~~the drop nets; we will continue this study to determine whether or not this

I ~~~is true.

Initial results suggest that our goal is attainable - we will be able

to develop a carrying capacity model based on using quantitative data

gathered by a combination of gear collection methods. New gear types and

I ~~refinements of existing methods will certainly occur to accomplish this

task, but this initial phase is encouraging. We built or are building

additional gear (i.e., breeder traps, stop nets, multimesh gill nets, and

small purse seines) to further pursue a multihabitat multi gear approach to

quantitative sampling, but statistical testing of these gear has not been

completed. We expect to accomplish much of the gear testing this coming

year along with a rigorous sampling schedule using existing techniques in

the Cockroach Bay/Little Manatee River area.

CARRYING CAPACITY MODEL

We continued to evaluate existing models that use an environmental

approach, to projecting fisheries abundance. It appears that a number of

separate model~s must be integrated into the MRGIS to develop population

estimates. We have not pursued the actual model construction because sa

sufficient database does not exist to generate all of the different model

inputs. The next year study on the Little Manatee River/Cockroach Bay

watershed will provide the most complete data overlay compilation ever

I ~~developed (from a fisheries perspective) and will provide a base for

constructing and testing a carrying capacity model. The model development

will require multidisciplinary cooperation among biologists, geologists,

I ~~hydrologistss, physicists, and ecologists to link integral parts of the

overall model. The development of this model will co-evolve with the

I ~~~database required to test and verify the model. It is important to note

* ~~that the model we are developing will be designed to input real data as

opposed to those that make assumptions on recruitment, mortality, etc.

Also, the model will use environmental and geographic parameters to define

population distributions and will only be valid for estuarine-dependent

I ~~species. We are actively working with the DNR Fisheries Statistics Section

to develop the database and conceptualize the model integration. As we

progress with each phase of development, the approach will become more

multidisciplinary and complex and only a computer system such as the MRGIS

will be capable of integrating this needed information.

I ~~~~~TASK 4: JUVENILE HABITAT UTILIZATION

The objective of task 4, was to determine the aspects of the

population dynamics (population size, growth, mortality rates,

immigration And emigration) of juvenile red drum and snook in a

specific estuarine habitat. The habitat chosen was a small

I ~undeveloped man-made canal. There is only one entrance which

makes monitoring movement somewhat simpler. Red drum and snook

were targeted because both were abundant in the canal in previous

work and DNR is establishing a hatchery which will be producing

juvenile red drum and snook for release into the wild.

* ~Population dynamics data are needed to better understand the

results of hatchery releases into the wild.

* ~Two years of juvenile snook and red drum data have now been

generated from the canal research. Unfortunately, few snook were

collected and, because of this lack of sufficient collections,

little analysis was done. However, from the snook that were

I ~collected, population estimates were made using density (the

number of fish collected per m2). This technique suggested that
the canal only supported a maximum population size of 280

individuals. The highest population values occurred during late

summer and fall. There were too few marked snook released into

I ~the canal and too few recaptured to estimate population size

I ~utilizing mark-recapture techniques. Snook recruitment, during

1986, started in July and continued into December.

Only one juvenile snook was collected in the canal through 23

September from the last spawn.

Juvenile-red drum were collected in adaquate numbers for more

detailed analysis. Standing crop was estimated in two ways. One

was a mark-recapture method where fish were marked with

fluorescent pigment granules injected under the epidermis. The

I ~second method expanded the mean density per haul to the area of

the entire canal. The canal is quite uniform thoughout and red

drum have been collected from all areas. Weekly seining trips

consisted of 12-16 hauls per trip with each haul encompassing 71

in2 Twelve hauls covered approximately 11% of the total canal

I ~area at mean tide. In order to accurately estimate standing crop

using seining techniques, efficiency of the seine must be

determined. This was done by introducing marked fish into the
3 ~seine after it was deployed. The percentage returned is then

used as an estimate of efficiency. The mean seining efficiency

for red drum in this canal was 83% and ranged from 68% to 95%.

This mean value was then used as a correction factor in

I ~calculating standing crop.

Standing crop estimates are shown in Figure 19. All years are

combined to show overall trends. Similar trends and values were

seen in both years. Also shown in Figure 19 (circled values) are

I ~the standing crop estimates based on mark-recapture data.

Largest population estimates occurred in December and January

during both years. Standing. crop steadily declined the rest of

the winter and through the spring until there were few fish

remaining-during the summer.

In order to estimate-mortality, information on immigration and

emigration is needed. To estimate movement into or out of the

canal, a stop net was placed across the mouth of the canal. This

series of nets collected all fish entering or exiting the canal.

I ~The nets were' set up weekly, for 24 hours, during times of red

drum abundance, and were emptied every three hours. Monthly

summaries of red drum movements through the canal are shown in

Table 9. Greatest movement occurred during winter at times of

greatest population size as well as during periods of coldest

I ~water temperature and lowest tides of the year. No evidence

* ~suggests that the canal population resides in the canal for a

short period of time and then moves out. Apparently, the

majority of the fish remain in the canal. This is supported by

the length of time marked fish remained in the canal (Table 10).

I ~These data suggest that small juveniles that enter the canal

remain at least through the spring, by which time the majority

have died. Fish marked throughout the fall and winter were found

I ~in the canal in the spring (in greatly reduced numbers).

Mortality estimates were made with the assumptions that no

U ~immigration or emigration occurred after the point of highest

standing crop was reached, and that the decay in standing crop

was a function of mortality.

I ~Mortality was then calculated as the percentage change in monthly
standing crop estimates. An overall estimated monthly mortality

rate of approximately 35% was calculated. Expanding this rate

through to the spring would yield similar numbers to the low

I ~numbers of fish seen in the canal. By May the remaining fish are

about 180 mmn standard length. it is possible that these fish mpve

into the bay at this time. However, samplings during the

summer occasionally collected red drum. These larger fish

probably are not as vulnerable to the seine so interpretation of

I ~collections must be guarded.

During this next year, juvenile red drum obtained either from the

DNR hatchery or collected from another site in the Alafia River

will be marked and released throughout the canal. Growth,

I ~mortality, migration, and net production will then be monitored

* ~to estimate the influence of augmentation on the natural standing

crop.

TASK 5: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND INFORMATION ON COASTAL WETLANDS AND REEFS

Efforts of Task 5 focused on the production and distribution of

educational brochures that describe Florida seagrasses, mangroves,

saltmarsh, estuaries, and coral reefs (see Brochure Pocket in back of this

report). These brochures stress the importance of estuarine environments

as fisheries habitat. The coral reef brochure was created in 1986; 40,000

were reprinted with this year's money at a total cost of $2,305.00. The

others were created in 1984 and were reprinted on demand. This year,

55,000 of each brochure were reprinted at a total cost of $7,591.00. The

new brochures will include a statement that gives credit to the DER Office

of Coastal Management and NOAA for making possible the creation and

printing of the brochures.

Pinellas Suncoast Tourism Promotion, Inc. was contracted to distribute

15,000 of each brochure to 200 locations along Florida's west coast (Table

11). The brochures were placed into literature racks within lobbies or

similar central locations of motels, restaurants, car rental offices,

banks, and more. The racks were refilled monthly by the company.

Numerous requests for this type of information were received

throughout the year. Organizations accounted for about 50% of the requests

(Table 12); the remainder were individuals. The approximate number of

brochures distributed from January through September, 1987 is as follows:

Estuaries: 12,537

Mangroves: 12,909

Seagrasses: 12,721

Salt marsh: 12,839

Coral Reef: 9,786

These numbers do not reflect the additional 15,000 distributed by Pinellas

Suncoast Tourism Promotion, Inc.., those distributed by laboratory personnel

during presentations, nor tho se taken from our Laboratory reception area.

I ~~The brochures continue to be in great demand, and public response

concerning *th eir appearance and content assures us of their success and

value.

REFERENCES

Gilmore, R.G., J.K. Holf, R.S. Jones, G.R. Kulczycki, L.G. MacDowell, III,
and W.C. Magley. 1978.
Portable tripod drop-net for estuarine studies. Fish. Bull. 76(1): 285-
289.

Hartman, R.D. 1985.
A 'study of the relative selectivity of six shallow, estuarine-marsh
sampling gears and the distribution of fish and crustaceans in the Sabine
National Wildlife Refuge, Louisiana. Briefs, Am. Inst. Fish. Res. Biol.
14(3): 8.

Jones, R.S. 1965.
Fish stocks from a helicopter-borne purse net sampling of Corpus Christi
Bay, Texas 1962-1963. Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Tex. 10: 68-75.

Jones, R.S., W.B. Ogletree, J.H. Thompson, and W. Flenniken. 1963.
Helicopter borne purse net for population sampling of shallow marine
bays. Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Tex. 9: 1-6.

Kjelson, M.A., and G.H. Johnson. 1973.
Description and evaluation of a portable drop-net for sampling nekton
populations. Southeast Assoc. Game Fish. Comm., Proc. 27th Annu. Conf.
653-662.

Kjelson, M.A., W.R. Turner, and G.N. Johnson. 1975.
Description of a stationary drop-net for estimating nekton abundance in
shallow waters. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 104: 46-49.

Kushlan, J.A. 1974.
Quantitative sampling of fish populations in shallow, freshwater
environments. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 103: 348-352.

Kushlan, J.A. 1981.
Sampling characteristics of Enclosure Fish Traps. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.
110: 557-562.

Moseley, F.N., and B.T. Copeland. 1969.
A portable drop-net for representative sampling of nekton. Contrib.
Mar. Sci. Univ. Tex. 14: 37-45.

Table A. Oxygen flux rates measured in situ during September
1987. P/R denotes the ratio of 12 hrs GPP/24 hrs RESP.

SITE/CHAMBER FLUX RATE ( g 02 m-2 h-1 )

NET GROSS
PHOTO- PRIMARY
SYNTHESIS RESPIRATION PRODUCTION P/R

A. SEWAGE

1 0.62 -0.14 0.76 2.7
2 0.42 -0.20 0.62 1.6
3 0.24 -0.25 0.49 0.98
4 0.43 -0.24 0.67 1.4

x(s) 0.43(0.15) -0.21(0.05) 0.63(0.11) 1.7(0.7)

B.STRESS

1 0.37 -0.26 0.65 1.2
2 0.41 -0.36 0.77 1.1
3 0.33 -0.32 0.65 1.0
4 0.18 -0.27 0.45 0.83

x(s) 0.33(0.10) -0.30(0.046) 0.63(0.13) 1.0(0.16)

C. CONTROL

1 0.36 -0.23 0.59 1.3
2 0.28 -0.31 0.59 0.95
3 0.26 -0.25 0.51 1.0
4 0.052 -0.17 0.22 0.66

x(s) 0.24(0.13) -0.24(0.058) 0.48(0.17) 0.98(0.26)

Table B: Structural characteristics of Thalassia testudium at three sites used for community
metabolism measurements.

SITE BLADE CHARACTERISTICS

BIOMASS SHOOT BLADES MAXIMUM MEAN BLADE GREEN EPIPHYTE
DENSITY PER BLADE BLADE WIDTH LEAF LEAF
SHOOT ROOTS SHOOT LENGTH LENGTH AREA AREA
(g m2) (g m-2) (m2) (NO) (mm) (mm) (mm) (%) (%)

CONTROL

mean 144 211 298 2.8 378 228 9.4 77.1 22.9
std. (63) (38.5) (0.6) (96.4) (126) (1.1) (27.1) (30.2)
n 4 4 4 50 50 54 20 70 75

STRESS

mean 129 177 341 3.0 406 304 8.1 65.1 11.6
std. (41) (30) (45.5) (0.8) (157) (175) (1.1) (26.1) (20.9)
n 4 4 4 50 47 74 20 70 78

SEWAGE

mean 96.0 61.4 254 3.1 382 274 6.7 43.8 33.2
std. (42) (18) (45.5) (0.9) (105) (146) (1.1) (23.4) (33.6)
n 4 4 4 50 48 69 20 75 77

Table C. Comparison of flux rates measured in chambers with
total flux rates obtained by summing component fluxes
measured in BOD bottles. Units are g 02 m-2 h-1.

SEWAGE STRESS CONTROL

A. RESPIRATION (DARK FLUXES)

SEDIMENT BOD -0.26 -0.24 -0.23

SEDIMENT COD* -3.86 -3.11 -2.73

THALASSIA -0.12 -0.18 -0.19
(ABOVE GROUND)

WATER -0.071 -0.016 -0.095

COMPONENT SUM -0.45 -0.44 -0.51

CHAMBER ESTIMATE -0.21 -0.30 -0.24

B. NET PHOTOSYNTHESIS (LIGHT FLUXES)

THALASSIA 1.21 0.93 0.96
(ABOVE GROUND)

WATER 0.22 0.099 0.039

COMPONENT SUM 1.43 1.03 1.00

CHAMBER ESTIMATE 0.43 0.33 0.24

C. BALANCE (UNITS ARE NET G 02 M-2 DAY-1

COMPONENT SUM +11.7 +7.08 +5.88

CHAMBER ESTIMATE +2.64 +0.36 +0.00

* not used in sums or balance calculation, see text

Table D: Regression models of the interaction of sulfide concentrations and Thalassia
growth in laboratory experiments. TOTLTH=Total blade length per pot, SULFIDE=
pore water sulfide concentration in micromoles per liter, BLADELOG= log TOTLTH,
MEANGROWTH= mean blade elongation rate by pot, SUMGROWTH= total length of new
blades produced, and TURNOVER= TOTLTH/SUMGROWTH.

A. COMPARISONS OF THALASSIA STANDING CROP WITH PORE WATER SULFIDE

Dependent Independent
Model Expt. Date Variable Variable(s) Estimates F-Value PR > F _R

1. 1 6/20 TOTLTH INTERCEPT 2710 2.65 0.11 0.06
SULFIDE -0.25

2. 2 8/3 TOTLTH INTERCEPT 2132 5.98 0.02 0.12
SULFIDE -0.40

3. 2 8/3 SULFIDE INTERCEPT 1160 5.98 0.02 0.12
SULFIDE -0.30

4. 2 8/3 SULFIDE INTERCEPT 3794 6.92 0.01 0.14
BLADELOG -987

5. 3 10/14 SULFIDE INTERCEPT 2320 3.11 0.09 0.07
TOTLTH -0.42

Table D (continued):

B. COMPARISON OF GROWTH RATES WITH SULFIDE CONCENTRATIONS

6. 2 8/15 MEANGROWTH INTERCEPT 8.81 2.11 0.15 0.05
SULFIDE -0.001

7. 2 8/15 MEANGROWTH INTERCEPT 8.38 1.06 0.36 0.05
SUMLENGTH1 0.00021
SULFIDE 0.00139

8. 2 8/15 SUMGROWTH INTERCEPT 163.3 3.85 0.06 0.08
SULFIDE -0.03

9. 2 8/15 SUMGROWTH INTERCEPT 62.5 6.83 0.003 0.24
SULFIDE -0.021

10. 2 8/3 TURNOVER INTERCEPT 113.1 0.21 0.65 0.004
SULFIDE -0.021

11. 3 10/14 MEANGROWTH INTERCEPT 14.37 2.37 0.13 0.05
SULFIDE -1.54

12. 3 10/14 MEANGROWTH INTERCEPT 6.59 1.16 0.32 0.05
SULFIDE 0.00056
SLI 0.0000048

13. 3 10/14 SUMGROWTH INTERCEPT 121 5.73 0.02 0.12
SULFIDE -0.017

14. 3 10/14 SUMGROWTH INTERCEPT 30.27 25.6 0.001 0.54
SULFIDE -.0064
SL1 0.045

15. 3 10/14 TURNOVER INTERCEPT 141.3 1.93 0.17 0.04
SULFIDE 0.013

Table E: Responses of sediment sulfide concentrations and
Thalassia turnover times to experimental manipulation.

a. Percent change in pot interstitial sulfide concentrations in
response to experimental manipulation. Standard deviations
are in parentheses. N=4 for each cell.

GROUP TREATMENT

CONTROL AERATED LACTATE SHADE

HIGH SULFIDE -11% -61% +70% -44%
(22) (13) (1) (25)

MEDIUM SULFIDE -11% -59% +25% -63%
(51) (52) (50) (26)

LOW SULFIDE +16% +25% -43% -63%
(81) (1) (-) (26)

b. Turnover numbers of leaf biomass in response to
experimental manipulation. Higher numbers represent
slower growth, while lower numbers indicate more
rapid growth. Standard deviations are in parentheses.
N=4 for each cell.

GROUP TREATMENT

CONTROL AERATED LACTATE SHADE

HIGH SULFIDE 14.9 11.2 37.4 10.7
(5.5) (3.2) (50.9) (8.3)

MEDIUM SULFIDE 11.8 10.4 8.7 11.9
(6.5) (3.2) (2.4) (8.4)

LOW SULFIDE 10.7 14.6 8.8 8.5
(3.2) (8.4) (-) (2.3)

Table 1. Summary of data requests

1. Florida State University, Economics Dept.; wetland acreages for Florida
west coast
2. U.C.L.A., California; habitat maps of Charlotte Harbor
3. Citrus County; marine wetland maps
4. Tampa Tribune; habitat loss for Tampa Bay with slides
5. DNR, Marathon; habitat acreages for the Keys
6. Fl. GFWFC; grass bed analysis off Steinhatchee River
7. Fl. GFWFC; evaluation of a LANDSAT feasibility study
8. Fl. GFWFC; memorandum of understanding for LANDSAT non-game wildlife
habitat assessment cooperative exchange
9. Olson and Associates, Jacksonville
10. Governors Office of the Auditor General; map of Tampa Bay habitat loss.
11. U.S. Dept. of Education; Tampa Bay Habitat Maps
12. DER, OFW program; slides of Indian River Lagoon
13. Pinellas County Planning Dept.; habitat maps of Pinellas County
14. Alvarez, Lehman and Assoc., Gainesville; fisheries habitat of northeast
Fl.
15. U.S.F.W.S., Jacksonville; seagrass maps of Indian River Lagoon
16. Pinellas Planning Council; habitat maps
17. City of Jacksonville; fisheries habitat maps and report
18. Fla. State University, Library; reprints and Charlotte Harbor Report
19. Florida State Museum; habitat maps and report for Charlotte Harbor
20. West Palm Beach Planning Dept.; Lake Worth habitat maps
21. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; Landsat data for Miami
area
22. South Florida Water Management District; MRGIS data for Okeechobee
23. St. Johns Water Management District; ELAS software modules
24. Trust for Public Lands; images of Garcon Pt. in Pensacola area
25. Ducks Unlimited; ELAS software modules
26. University of Texas; ELAS documentation
27. Mote Marine Laboratory; MRGIS slides
28. Florida Marine Fisheries Commission; MRGIS slides
29. EOSAT Corp.
30. NASA
31. EPA Region IV; entire slide set of west Florida estuaries, about 100
slides
32. South West Florida Water Management District; MRGIS slides
33. Mangrove Systems Inc.; MRGIS slides
34. DSA Group, Inc.; habitat maps of Tampa Bay
35. Bradenton Herald; habitat inventory and trends for Perico Island
36. Mark Weitz, Outdoor Writer; bait shrimping and seagrass loss slides and
maps
37. Palm Beach, City Planning Dept.; Lake Worth habitat maps
38. NOAA, SE Fisheries Center; estimate of Florida east coast acreages of
estuarine water for a pink shrimp analysis
39. Tampa Bay RPC; habitat maps for Tampa Bay
40. All Release Sports Society; habitat maps of Little Manatee River
41. Hillsborough County, Planning Dept.; habitat maps and acreage analyses
for Hillsborough County
42. Dauphin Island Marine Lab; grass bed inventory of northwest Florida

Table 1 (continued).

43. Pinellas County Planning Dept.; habitat maps
44. Greiner Engineering; resource analysis for new Howard Franklin Bridge
construction
45.. University of Georgia; NE Florida Report and maps of Nassau County
46. Fl; GFWFC; maps for bear corridor analyses of Wekiva River area
47. West Florida Regional Planning Council; habitat maps for their
district
48. Barret, Daffin and Carlan, Inc., Alabama; habitat maps for Walton and
Okaloosa Counties
49. City of Dunedin; habitat maps
50. Collier County; habitat maps
51. Hernando County; habitat maps
52. DCA; habitat maps for Pensacola Bay
53. Fl. Institute of Technology; habitat maps for Dade, Sarasota, Monroe,
Jacksonville (Duval), and Broward Counties
54. Levy County; habitat maps
55. West Palm Beach; habitat maps
56. Alvarez, Lehman & Assoc., Gainesville; habitat maps for St. Johns
County
57. Univ. of Georgia; habitat maps for Pensacola and Ft. Myers

Table 2. Presentations concerning the MRGIS by Ken Haddad.

1. American Society of Photogrametry and Remote Sensing, Florida
Chapter.
2. Seventh Annual Minerals Management Service Gulf of Mexico Information
Transfer Meeting.
3. Manasota Chapter of the American Society of Land Surveyors.
4. Coastal Zone 87.
5. Marine Resource Council of East Central Florida Annual Meeting.
6. Florida Editorial Writers Conference.
7. Mote Marine Laboratory.
8. South West Florida Watermanagement District SWIM Conference.

Table 3. Density and diversity estimates of organisms captured off Tarpon Key, FL. CV
coefficient of variation.

Density CV Diversity CV
mean number mean number
Number of organisms/m2 species/m2
Gear type Samples + SD 100(x/SD) + SD l00(x/SD)

lm2 Tripod Drop Net 15 4.60 + 4.0 86.1% 2.93 + 1.6 53.9%

2m2 Tripod Drop Net 15 6.07 + 3.8 63.1% 3.33 + 1.9 57.2%

4m2 Tripod Drop Net 16 6.20 + 3.9 63.2% 3.41 + 2.6 75.8%

lm2 Boom Drop Net 36 6.36 + 5.1 80.4% 2.42 + 0.8 34.8%

6.1m Otter Trawl (100m)13 1.08 + 0.64 60.0% 0.03 + 0.01 34.1%

( 50m)18 0.99 + 0.54 54.5% 0.04 + 0.01 27.9%

Roller Shrimp Trawl 36 0.42 + 0.30 70.8% 0.03 + 0.01 33.1%

Table 4. List of species captured by each gear type, OT =otter trawl, RT
I ~ ~~~roller trawl.

Method of Capture
I ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~Tripod Boom
Species List IM2 2m2 4m2 Im2 OT RT

Brevoortia sp. X
I ~~Harengula jaguana X

*Opsanus beta X X X X X X
*~Floridichthys carpio X X X X X X
*Lucania parva X X X X X X
Menidia berylina X X X X
Hippocampus zosterae xx
*Sygnathus scovelli X X X X X X
Sygnathus louisianae X
Centropristis striata X
Mycteroperca microlepis X
Lutjanus griseus X X X X
*Eucinostomus sp. X X X X X X
Orthopristis chyotr X X X XX
Arthosargus probatocephalus X X X
*Lagodon rhomboides X x x x x x
Bairdiella chrysoura K K K
I~~~eisou xanthurs K
Chasmodes sabusiae K K X K
Gobisoma robustum K K K K K
*~Micro~gobius gulosus X K K X K K
Paralichthys albigutta K
Achirus lineatus K
Chilomycterus scholpfi x
Sympurus plagusa K

Callinectes sapidus K K K K
Penaeus duorarum x K x K K x

I ~~*Fish species captured by all gear types.

Table 5. Greatest percentage of organisms captured by each gear type.

Day and night sampling Data excluding night sampling
Gear Type (% of organism comprising sample) (% of organism comprising sample)

Roller L. parva 50.5 L. parva 64.6
Trawl Eucinostumus sp. 16.8 Eucinostumus sp. 21.5
P. duorarum 16.4 P. duorarum 0.4

Otter L. parva 41.6 L. parva 44.8
Trawl L. rhomboides 38.3 L. rhomboides 36.2
Eucinostumus sp. 7.6 Eucinostumus sp. 7.5
P. duorarum 1.7 P. duorarum 0.3

Boom L. parva 64.5 L. parva 65.7
Drop Eucinostumus sp. 6.1 Eucinostumus sp. 5.1
P. duorarum 8.2 P. duorarum 7.1

lm2 L. parva 63.8 L. parva 64.6
Drop G. robustum 11.6 G. robustum 12.3
Net M. gulosus 5.8 M. gulosus 6.2
P. duorarum 2.9 P. duorarum 0.0

2m2 L. parva 49.5 L. parva 51.2
Drop M. berylina 9.9 M. berylina 10.6
Net L. rhomboides 8.8 L. rhomboides 8.8
P. duorarum 6.6 P. duorarum 4.7

4m2 L. parva 68.8 L. parva 70.9
Drop L. rhomboides 7.3 L. rhomboides 7.0
Net P. duorarum 7.3 P. duorarum 5.4

Table 6. Density and percentage of total drop net catch estimated for G. robustum and
M. gulosus.

# different species G. robustum M. gulosus
captured as % total catch density as % total catch density

lm2 ..9 11.6 .53/m2 5.8 .27/m2
2m2 11 6.6 .40/m2 5.5 .33/m2
4m2 14 2.8 .17/m2 2.5 .16/m2

Table 7. Average density (fish/1000m2) for the seven fish species common to all gear
types. OT = otter trawl, RT = roller trawl.

Gear Type

Tripod Boom
Species lmZ 2mZ 4mZ lm2 OT RT

O. beta 130 300 230 310 20 3
L. parva 2,930 3,000 4,270 4,140 430 210
S. scovelli 70 30 20 30 10 8
Eucinostomus sp. 200 200 140 390 80 72
L. rhomboides 130 530 450 170 400 39
M. gulosus 270 330 160 170 1 0.7
F. carpio 130 100 110 360 30 8

Table 8. Average standard length (mm) for six fish species captured with all gear
types. Number in parenthesis indicates total number of this species cap-
tured with each gear. OT = otter trawl, RT = roller trawl.

Tripod Boom
Species lmZ 2mz 4mz lm2 OT RT

O. beta 57.5(2) 57.4(9) 54.6(15) 52.2(11) 85.7(143) 85.5(17)

L. parva 21.5(45) 22.6(79) 22.8(220) 22.3(148) 24.8(507) 25.7(556)

S. scovelli 95.0(1) 105.0(1) 106.0(1) 120.0(1) 111.8(93) 109.9(44)

Eucinostomus sp. 24.3(3) 28.5(6) 26.8(9) 27.0(12) 37.3(219) 30.1(311)

L. rhomboides 62.5(2) 74.1(16) 69.7(29) 85.8(6) 79.5(604) 77.9(152)

M. gulosus 22.3(4) 21.9(10) 23.9(10) 27.7(6) 23.4(9) 31.0(4)

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Table 9. Maximum residency times of red drum in the Alafia River
canal study site for each marking experiment during
1986-87.

No. of days
Color Marked Date Released Date last collected in canal

Light Green 27 Oct 86 7 April 87 162
Orange 10 Nov 86 21 April 87 162
Red 25 Nov 86 28 April 87 154
Dk Grn/Red 12 Jan 87 12 May 87 120
Dark Green 2 Feb 87 25 March 87 51
Red/Orange 24 Feb 87 5 May 87 70
Dk Grn/Orange 24 March 87 21 April 87 28

Table 10. Summary of red drum collected in the stop net from the
Alafia River study site. Average soak time per haul is
about three hours.

No. of No. Fish/Haul No. Fish/Haul
Date Hauls Incoming Incoming Outgoing Outgoing

11/85 14 2 0.14 4 0.29
12/85 30 18 0.60 11 0.37
1/86 36 145 4.03 353 9.81
2/86 30 27 0.90 5 0.17
3/86 14 12 0.86 3 0.21
4/86 7 0 0 0 0
5/86 0 .
6/86 0 - - - -
7/86 16 0 0 0 0
8/86 51 1 0.02 0 0
9/86 58 3 0.05 0 0
10/86 51 5 0.10 4 0.08
11/86 39 9 0.23 5 0.13
12/86 40 49 1.23 10 0.25
1/87 30 103 3.43 43 1.43
2/87 27 368 13.63 84 3.11
3/87 30 18 0.60 6 0.20
4/87 27 6 0.22 14 0.52
5/87 14 6 0.43 3 0.21
6/87 0 - - - -
7/87 0
8/87 0

Table 11. Distribution locations of CZM brochures.

AAA Motor Club (OR) 2170 Rainbow Dr. CLEARWATER
AAA Motor Club (OR) 4800 US 19 No. Palm Harbor
AAA Motor Club (OR) 9200 Seminole Blvd. Seminole
AAA Motor Club (OR) 1211 lst. Ave.No. St. Petersburg
Aaegean Sands Resort 421 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater
Adam's Mark 430 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Albatross Motel 346 Hamden Dr. Clearwater Beach,
A+ Rent-A-Car 3800 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
Arie Dam Resort. 14600 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
Avalon Travel Trailer Park 1960 U.S. 19 S. Clearwater
Bali Hai Suncoast Motel 350 Hamden Dr. Clearwater Beach
Bali Hai Gulfview Motel 353 Coronado Dr. Clearwater Beach
Bay Lawn Motel 406 Hamdin Dr. Clearwater Beach
Bay-N-Gulf Resort 5195 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
Bayway Motor Lodge 3501 34th. Av. S. St. Petersburg
Beachcomber Resort 6200 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
Beach House Motel East 12035 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
Beach Moorings 620 Bayway Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Beach Park Motel 300 Beach Dr. N.E. St. Petersburg
Bel Crest Beach Condo Motel 706 Bayway Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Bestwestern Gulfview Inn 504 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Best Western Sea Wake Inn 691 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Bilmar Beach Resort (OR) 10650 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
Boatyard Village-Michaels 16100 Fairchild Dr. Clearwater
Bon-Aire Resort Hotel 4350 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
Bond Motel 421 4th. Av. N. St. Petersburg
Breckenridge Resort Hotel 5600 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
Budget Rent-A-Car 5400 Gulf Blvd St. Petersburg Beach
Cadillac On The Gulf 3828 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
Camelot By The Sea 1801 Gulf Way St. Petersburg Beach
Camelot Motel 603 Mandalay Ave. Clearwater Beach
Clearwater Beach Resort 678 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
Clearwater Beach Hotel 500 Mandalay Ave. Clearwater Beach
Coca Cabana Motel 669 Mandalay Ave.' Clearwater Beach
Country Dinner Playhouse 7951 Gateway Mall St. Petersburg
COLONIAL HOTEL 126 2nd. Ave. N.E. St. Petersburg
COMFORT INN 3580 Ulmerton Rd. Clearwater
COMMODORE BEACH CLUB 13536 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
DOLPHIN-BEACH RESORT 4900 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
DOLPHIN MOTEL 1359 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
DON CE SAR RESORT (OR) 3400 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
ECHO SAILS MOTEL 216 hamden Dr. Clearwater Beach
ECONOLODGE (OR) 4770 US ( No. Palm Harbor
EL SIRATA MOTEL 5390 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
EXECUTIVE MOTOR LODGE 3080 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
FALCON MOTEL 415 Coronado Dr. Clearwater Beach
FLAMINGO MOTEL (OR) 450 N. Gulf view Blvd. Clearwater Beach
FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK 3805 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
GATEWAY MOTEL 4990 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
GLASS HOUSE MOTEL 229 Gulfview Blvd Clearwater Beach
GULF BEACH MOTEL 419 Coronado Dr. Clearwater Beach
GULF GARDENS 14141 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
GULF SANDS BEACH RESORT 655 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach

Table 11 (continued).

HAMLINS LANDING 401 2nd. St. E. Indian Rocks
HILTON INN 715 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
HILTON INN 5250 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
HI SEAS MOTEL 455 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
HOLIDAY HOUSE MOTEL 495 N. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
HOLIDAY INN CLEARWATER CENT. 400 US19 So. Clearwater
HOLIDAY INN GULFVIEW 521 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
HOLIDAY INN 1-275 3000 34th. St. S. St. Petersburg
HOLIDAY INN MADERIA BEACH 15208 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
HOLIDAY INN SOUTH 4601 34th. St. S. St. Petersburg
HOLIDAY INN SURFSIDE 400 Mandalay Ave. Clearwater Beach
HOLIDAY INN ST PETERSBURG BCH. 5300 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
HOLIDAY INN ST. PETECLWR. 3535 Ulmerton Rd. Clearwater
HOLIDAY INN TREASURE IS. 11908 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
HOLIDAY ISLE MOTEL 14711 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
ISLANDER MOTEL 4321 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
ISLAND INN SHORES 9980 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
JET EXECUTIVE CENTER 1590 Fairchild Dr. Clearwater
JOHN'S PASS-BEACH MOTEL 12600 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
LAGOON RESORT MOTEL 619 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
LA MARK CHARLES MOTEL 6200 34th. St. N. Pinellas Park
LA QUINTA MOTOR INN 7500 US 19 N. Pinellas Park
LEHIGH CORPORATION 5005 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
LINDOS RENT-A-CAR 1886 US 19 So. Clearwater
LONDON WAX MUSEUM 5505 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
MADERIA VISTA 14800 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
MAGNOLIA HOTEL 444 1st. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
McCARTHY HOTEL 326 1st. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
MIDTOWN MOTOR LODGE US 19 & 5th. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
MOLLOY GULF MOTEL 10164 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
MURPHY'S MOTEL 4900 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
PENNSYLVANIA 4th. St. & 3rd. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
PONCE DE LEON HOTEL Central Ave. & Beach Dr. St. Petersburg
PORT OF ST. PETE St. Petersburg
PRESIDENTIAL INN 100 2nd. Ave. S. St. Petersburg
PRINCESS MARTHA HOTEL 401 1st. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
QUALITY INN TRAILS END (OR) 11500 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
RAMADA INN 2560 US 19 N. Clearwater
RAMADA INN !@))) Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
REDINGTON SURF RESORT 17300 Gulf Blvd. No. Redington Beach
REDINGTON AMBASSADOR 16900 Gulf Blvd. No. Redington Beach
RESIDENCE INN 5050 Ulmerton Rd. Clearwater
ROBBY'S PANCAKE HOUSE 10925 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
ROYAL CANADIAN MOTEL 649 Mandalay Ave. Clearwater Beach
SANDPIPER RESORT 6000 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg
SANDS OF TREASURE IS, (OR) 11800 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
SANDS POINT MOTEL 433 Coronado Dr. Clearwater Beach
SATELLITE MOTEL (OR) 11205 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
SEA CASTLE 10750 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
SEA OATS 12625 Sunshine Lane Treasure Island
SEA PALMS MOTEL 4999 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg
SEA VIEW MOTEL 18 Bay Esplande Clearwater Beach
SHALIMAR MOTEL 3700 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach

|I ~ Table 11 (continued).

I SHERATON SAND KEY RESORT (OR) 1160 Gulf Blvd. Clearwater Beach
SHORELINE MOTEL 14200 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
SOUTHERN SKIES MOTEL 666 34th. St. N. St. Petersburg
ST. PETE CHAMBER OF COM. (OR) 401 3rd. Ave. N. St. Petersburg
SPY GLASS MOTEL 215 S. Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
SUNCOAST REPRESENTATION SER. 150 153rd. Ave. Maderia Beach
SUNCOAST WELCOME CENTER (OR) 2001 Ulmerton Rd. Clearwater
SUNWOOD INN 3301 Ulmerton Rd. Clearwater
SURF OF TREASURE ISLAND (OR) 11040 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
SUPERIOR RENT-A-CAR 5905 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
SUPERIOR RENT-A-CAR Gulfview Blvd. Clearwater Beach
SWEDEN HOUSE RESTAURANT 6300 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
TAHITIAN RESORT 11300 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
THUNDERBIRD RESORT MOTEL 10700 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
TIERRA VERDE ISLAND RESORT 200 Madonna Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
TRADE WINDS MOTEL (OR) 10300 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
TRADEWINDS RESORT (OR) 5400 Gulf Blvd. St. Petersburg Beach
TREASURE SHORES BEACH CLUB 10360 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
TROPIC AIRE MOTEL 35 Coronado Dr. Clearwater Beach
TROPIC ISLE MOTEL ' 23 Rockaway St. Clearwater Beach
TROPIC SHORES CONDO-MOTEL 14251 Gulf Blvd. Maderia Beach
VALUE RENT-A-CAR 15115 Maderia Way Maderia Beach
VALUE RENT-A-CAR Gulf-to-Bay Clearwater
VALUE RENT-A-CAR Fairchild Dr. Clearwater
VOYAGER BEACH CLUB 11860 Gulf Blvd. Treasure Island
WELLS MANOR 333 Hamden Dr. Clearwater Beach

SARASOTA LOCATIONS

AROUND THE WORLD MOTEL (OR) 129 Taft Dr.
BAYSHORE INN 3512 US 41 N.
BESTWESTERN GOLDEN HOST INN 4675 US 41
BESTWESTERN BRADENTON RESORT INN 2303 First St.
DIPLOMAT RESORT 3155 Gulf of Mexico
FOUR WINDS MOTEL 2605 Gulf of Mexico Dr.
GULF BEACH HOTEL 930 BenJamin Franklin Dr.
GULF TIDES 3000 Gulf of Mexico Dr.
HOWARD JOHNSONS RESTAURANT US 41 - Bradenton
LIMETREE BEACH RESORT 1050 Ben Franklin Dr.
PELICAN GARDENS MOTEL 170 Roosevelt Dr.
ROYAL HEALTH & TENNIS LODGE 4229 US 41
SEA CLUB I BEACH RESORT 4141 Gulf of Mexico Dr.
SEA HORSE BEACH RESORT 3453 Gulf of Mexico Dr.
SOUTH SEAS RV RESORT 100 Palmview Rd.
SUNTIDE ISLAND BEACH CLUB 850 Ben Franklin Dr.
TWIN SHORES RESORT 3740 Gulf of Mexico Dr.
VERANDA RESORT 2509 Gulf of Mexico Dr.

A /
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~":

I ~~Table 12. Organizations that requested and received CZM brochures.

American Boat and Yacht Council,' Inc.; Amityvil le, NY
American Littoral Society; St. Petersburg, FL
ANERR; Apalachicola, FL
Apalachee Elementary School; Tallahassee, FL
I ~ ~Boy Scouts of America; St. Petersburg, FL
Boyd Hill Nature Trail; St. Petersburg, FL
Briggs Nature Center; Naples, FL
Camelot,-by-the-Sea Resort Condominiums; Pass-a-Grill, FL
I ~~Campbell Drive Elementary School; Leisure City, FL
CaeCoral Area Chamber of Commerce, Cape Coral, FL
Central Jr. High School; Melbourne, FL
I ~ ~City of St. Petersburg; St. Petersburg, FL
Clearwater Marine Science Center; Clearwater, FL
Dept. of Environmental Regulation; Ft. Myers, FL
I ~ ~Dept. of Natural Resources, Bureau of Education and Information; Tallahassee
Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources; Naples, FL
Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve; Watsonville, CA
Environmental, Inc.; Tampa, FL
Florida Oceanographic Society; Stuart, FL
Florida State Museum; Gainesville, FL
I ~ ~~Florida State University; Tallahassee, FL
Hillsborough County School System; Tampa, FL
Jensen Beach Chamber of Commerce; Jensen Beach, FL
I ~ ~~John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park; Key Largo, FL
John's Pass Sea Food Festival; Treasure Island, FL
Lee County School Board; Ft. Myers, FL
Madeira Beach Chamber of Commerce; Madeira Beach, FL
I ~ ~~Marine Resources Council; Melbourne, FL
Miami Edison Sr. High School; Miami, FL
Mote Marine Laboratory; Sarasota, FL
I ~ ~~Nature Conservancy
New Found Harbour Marine Institute; Big'Pine Key, FL
Pinellas County School System; Clearwater, FL
I ~ ~~Pinellas Marine Institute; St. Petersburg, FL
Pt. Charlotte Chamber of Commerce; Pt. Charlotte, FL
Rookery Bay; Naples, FL
Sarasota High School; Sarasota, FL
I ~ ~~Save the Manatee Committee; Maitland, FL
Sea World of Florida; Orlando, FL
Southwest Florida Water Management District; Brooksville, FL
H ~ ~~Stonewall Jackson Jr. High School; Orlando, FL
St. Petersburg Jr. College; St. Petersburg, FL
St. Petersburg Times; St. Petersburg, FL
Suncoast Sea Bird Sanctuary; Redington Shores, FL
University of So. Florida; Tampa, FL
University of Tampa; Tampa, FL
University of Florida; Gainesville, FL'

Upper Tampa Bay Park; Oldsmar, FL

~~Th~Y AREA oo

I - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~TOLL PLAZA

I ~~~~~AREA SHO:: *SK*M SKWY
'4 ~~~~CONTROL

3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BOAT LAUNCHING RAMP,, SIT
SKIING EN BOATING AREA --i>
PICNIC AREA ~PARKING L OT

PICNIC AREA'V

OVERNIGHT
S ~~~~~~~~~~ CAMPING
< AREAS /

P~~c;AREA/~~~k~~j) ~~ STRESS

3 ~~~~~PICNIC 91T /

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PRIN( LOT.

QVI ~/R~MJAT FORT DESOTO

000 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~5

FI&HING ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~PIE NELLAS COLIN-1Y PARK DEPARTMENT

I ~~~Figure A. Location of field study sites for community metabolism measurements.

SURFACE LIGHT FLUCTUATIONS AT CONTROL SITE, 9/87

2000 -

fit

c~~~~~~~~~~~6
CD'

CD
�2000- _ ._

-z AL

--0 1000

12 186 -.III
LU.

'--

12 18 00 06 1

DAY 1 HOUR DAY 2

Figure B. Surface Light at Control Site, 9/87 Diel. Light values for each
10-minute logging interval are denoted by diamonds (maximum values),
"+" signs (mean), and triangles (minimum values). Time is expressed

m m mmmm mm - - - - - - - -- -- -

CHAMBER OXYGEN CONCENTRATIONS, CONTROL SITE, 9/87

9- -

+ A

+I~ +4+':~�b~*-
8- ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4t--
7 - +
7~~~~- tt A -
7-o f++ + A CHAMBERS A =
+1 +%+FLUSHED
-o1 5 I,
6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~
zD � ~-, �A A -*
++
-� a +
~~~~~~~+

_ 5~~~~~~~~~~- + tA +++ A q
u ++ -
= -5- + t ,-,
L.- + +
+
� +
5 +$ +
a~~~~~~~~~ + +4
+ + +
wx ++ A- +,-
4 4- ~ ~ ~+. + %,.A

o+ %
2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-H
~~~~~~~~~~~1+,
CO 3 + +t
-~~~~~~~~~~U +

2-+ +

N-

JI III I I I[ I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I I I I
10 18 00 06 12

HOUR
DAY 1 DAY 2

Figure C. Chamber Oxygen Concentrations, Control Site, 9/87. Four chambers
are represented. Chambers flushed with outside water at 0030 h to
prevent anoxia.

DAYTIME OXYGEN FLUCTUATIONS AT CONTROL SITE, 9/87

-O
LATE MIDL 0 0
AFTERNOON '++
EVE NING +

+ -
+++A g LATE
0 0>
20 0 6 oo oo0 oo []

~ 0 At+HTOYTEI A ALLY MORNING
71+ +
A +

F. D nl C
portions lo o /
CD 4-

CD ++ ~_ MORNING

2- MO RNING
vzp of

Figure 0. Diurnal Cycle of Net Oxygen Productivity. Arrows identify

[] I I - I - - m I - - I - - - -I-

NIGHT-TIME OXYGEN CONSUMPTION AT CONTROL SITE, 9/87

A
~Al~~ ~CHAMBERS
+ FLUSHED
I--' i a I+ rAA
+A+
-jr $ I CHAMBERS
+ A
+ A $ EXPOSED
5-
+ ++A +
^A
LLI $ ~+_ AAA +��+ A ' 1
+~n + L
>-L- �
>< ~+ + +A-
C)X~~~ A + + A CHAMBERS '
o A.~
-+ + A OPENED +
+ + A �'. I +
� + + A+ -A +
� + + + =
CD-J~~~~+ += �

- +, + + ~
U)~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, -++ , +� +.

'+. +~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1-
-+ -L+

+ +L+I
v,~~~~~~~- +I,+ ~

?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

-IL
--i.~ ~ T T T

20 2 4 02 04 06 08

HOUR
DAY 1 DAY 2

Figure E. Night-time Oxygen Consumption at Control Site, 9/87. Time
expressed as decimal hours. Chambers flushed to restore oxygen
concentrations to near-ambient levels 0300 h. Chambers opened
rnnpovfn nn' ~ n TAL n- - - -I'I -

SURFACE LIGHT FLUCTUATIONS AT STRESS SITE, 9/87

1800 -
1700 -
.--t 1500 -
1500 -
04
: 1400-
'i1oo- 2
1200- �
ot~~~~2
_1100- A
-c 1000-
+
<L + p
900-
uw -F-
800-
.--
700- +

,.5 00- .
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--
J 500- A+
400- --
'- 300
2' 00- Z;
o 200-
F- a q I-
C~~~~~~~~~ A
100 -I I0

12 18 0 0612 40

HOUR
DAY 1 DAY 2
Figure F. Surface Light Fluctuations at Stress Site, 9/87. Maximum, minimum
and mean values of surface photosynthetically-active radiation for
each minute interval are represented by different symbols.

CHAMBER OXYGEN CONCENTRATIONS, STRESS SITE, 9/87

13 -

12-

11-
+ ++
10- , + -
+-
9~~~ -

8*~~~' A CHAMBERS
FLUSHED

2- +

12 18 O 0 06 1

DAY 1 HORDAY 2

Figure G. Chamber Oxygen Concentrations, Stress Site, 9/87. Time expressed
as decimal hours on a 24-clock. O0 is midnight.
++
CD 4
+~~~~~~~
++

1 2 18 00 06 12

HOURDA2
DAY I1A

Fig ure G. Chamber Oxygen Concentrations, Stress Site, 9/87. Time expressed
as decimal hours on a 24-clock. 00 is midnight.

DAYTIME OXYGEN FLUCTUATIONS AT STRESS SITE, 9/87

13 - EVENING ' AFTERNOON

12-
0
0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 00 0
O~~~~~~~~~ 17

A A A 4� 4i-a~ ~~ ~ ~ �4~4 o 00
o c

-ilO- A A ~~~~~~+ + 00
-j r ip LATE
MORNING

+
o~ ~~ oo

Vr-

CM-~~~B 0

++f
4 + ++
v,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

U) 4� + + � MIDDLE

co ~ ~ ~ -4 MORNING
o~~~ na %
11-oomO

MA A

0 , 0 . O+

2- EARLY MORNING
0 100 200 300 400 500 500 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
PHOTOSYNTHETICALLY- ACTIVE RADIATION (uE M_2s-1)

Figure H. Diurnal Cycle of Net Oxygen Fluxes in Chambers at Stress Sites.
Arrows identify portions of day related to each group of data.

NIGHT-TIME OXYGEN CONSUMPTION AT STRESS SITE, 9/87

11
+

++++
+t,

< 7-A .� CHAMBERS
i-+ + , FLUSHED
7 ' LC tl+ +

'+++

2- t-
L1: ,+ ,+ , ,.,

F + N. +
T+ --L
L- ++., t4,

++
J3~~~~~~~- i++++ ++

1:
i I
20 22 00 02 04 06 08

HOUR
DAY 1 DAY 2

Figure I. Night-time Oxygen Consumption at Stress Site, 9/87. Time
is expressed as decimal hours on a 24-hour clock. 00 is
midnight.

SURFACE LIGHT FLUCTUATIONS AT SEWAGE SITE, 9/87

2000 -

CI,i

c:: 2000-o

LU
H-

~: 1000-
~ ~~~~+

I- - A

~~~~~~~~~~~~HOU
Z~~~~~~~~

DAY I DAY 2

Figure J. Surface Light Fluctuations at Sewage Site, 9/87. Maximum, minimum,
and mean PAR values for each 10-minute logging interval represented
by different symbols.

CHAMBER OXYGEN CONCENTRATIONS, SEWAGE SITE

12 -

++ $+
+++
lo.-+ + +
I -�
+ i+ CHAMBERS +

9 - ++ P E LST,,
z o � A~~+ ~CHAMBERS CLOSED
OPENED

1 - , . . , . . . . . . . . . , 4
7-s
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CLOS E[i�
~~~~~~~~~~~~

DAY 1HOUCHAMBERS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~LUSE
5-
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~

5-
-D

L~~~~~~~~~~~O
4-

1-
12 18 00 06 12 18

HOURS
DAY 1 DAY 2

Figure K. Chamber Oxygen Concentrations, Sewage Site, 9/87. Chambers
opened when exposed by falling tide at 0630. Chambers closed
when reflooded at 1300 h.

NIGHT-TIME OXYGEN CONSUMPTION AT SEWAGE SITE, 9/87

13 -
+

12 -

+ +
+
11 - + +

AA
10 a +
O A
c 9-- A CHAMBERS
c_ A OPENED
I-- + I AM
A +

�C Z ,+ + ++++ CHAMBERS
>~-j + +++ I+ + _
J + ++:+ + A A
x A ++
: ++++ ++++++ + + ++
o>-A _La++ ++++
W+++ A +++/
- + + r++ A +4
rl +�4

CD+. +A
3 +++++T+++ + 4-+ + ++ +t+
++,+

�2- ++ ++ p AA

1-
I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I ' I
20 22 00 02 04 06 08

HOUR
DAY 1 DAY 2

Figure L. Night-time Oxygen Consumption at Sewage Site, 9/87. Time
expressed as decimal hours. Chambers flushed at 0320 to
restore oxygen concentrations to near-ambient levels.
Chambers exposed by tides at 0700 h.

DAYTIME OXYGEN FLUCTUATIONS AT SEWAGE SITE, 9/87

13 -

12- a

-tD ~~ i A -+ + I + +
.11 ++

L 10O- . " , CHAMBER OPEN

I-------------------------------I

CD++
C-, -S[+ o

,, 7- +
r'm A + .++ +++ + +

:>-,

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

PHOTOSYNTHETICALLY- ACTIVE RADIATION (E M2 S 1)

Figure M. Daytime Oxygen Fluctuations at Sewage Site, 9/87. PAR values greater
than 2000 result from emersion of bottom light probe.
than 2000 result from emersion of bottom light probe.

5. INFRARED |
4. RED I
4. RNEAR IUNSUPERVISED ETLANDS ENHANCED MANGROVE GEOGRAPHIC
CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION RECTIFICATION
2. GREEN SH
AGAS TO UTM
1. CF 1 H LAND LAND ERASS TO UT
1. BLUE

Figure 1. Original approach to MRGIS data formatting.

MAINTAINED
AS ACTIVE

GEOGRAPHIC BANDS 2,3,4 LN FILE
RECTIFICATION 3 BANDS 3,4,5 WETLAND

I TO UTM i PARALLEL-PIPEI5 WORK RECOMBINED
CLASSIFICATION IE DATA
� TO 256 [REQUESTER
CATAGORIES & ARCHIVED
BASED UPON INDIVIDUAL
REQUESTS

Figure 2. New approach to MRGIS data formatting.

UDo Not Sca

Renren-Insert Do Not Scan
Document Here

Document ID:K 9Y. C> d

Page #:

Do Not Scan

Reoren-Insert Do Not Scan
Document Here

Document ID: . -- I. - I,-

Page #:

Do Not Scan

ReDren-Insert Do Not'Scan
Document Here

Document ID: o MS c C, `n

Page #:

Do NoUt Sca11

RepreD-Insert Do Not Scan
Document Here

Document IDW y-~.~ r,

Page #:

Do NoISa

Rep~reuI)nsert Do Not'Scan
Document Here

Document ID: \~-, ~A/-)or~ -ae

Page #:

DIo INot Scan

Repre-lInsert Do Not Scan
Document Here

Document ID: - ('5 1`

Page #:

Do Not Scan

Reoren-Insert Do Not Scan
Document Here

Document ID: 1 o<n i;--

Page #:

UL. EU.I~~Ufl97~ZD scale =1:200,000

- - "U'" j~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(l("' fill~ ~~~~~~ils

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ml

3USUUU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - - UUSUUOO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..

~~~~Figr9A SEGASAAYISFRNTHNTAPBY

~~~~~~~WITWae

UUIDOUU - -~~Lan

I~~~~~~~~~Mrhmnrv

I~~~~~~~~~egass(92

I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~Sarse prsn in14
~~~~~~~~~~~u betin18

Totalsear ss oeragern14 ass1,9 es. Coverag

in 1982 was 7,053 acres. This represents a seagrass loss of
I ~~~~~58%.

MRGIS DISPLAY & OVERLAY
CREATION IN THE
I GRAPHICS MODE

ELAS SOFTWARE

* N~~~~~~!

MICRO-COMPUTER

ELAS SOFTWARE

DBAS III MOD.
in ELAS

I DBAS III

Any other mainframe or
micro-computer that
has a DBAS III inter-
face or DBAS III file
structure.

Figure 10. Micro-computer interface with the mainframe.

7--'~'1 13

II~ TANK~ Pul A.,

II 4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~13

19 C5'1 FIR 4sec 1211 4I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MSSq fe I11
~~\GL~~~~a~~a1~~~I~~Y ru"~I

CIA. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8

b7'~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- L-'I J

p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ej~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~4 r 4~im 1
V.A. 2 2I~I
13~~~~~~~~1

16~~~~~~~~~~r 6t7 RIB .-. F1 Rl 4sec 12t IN~~9 , I
6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l" i e~ t I~zo14en~~ Itl7 14

l.~~~~ ~~~ a 9 19 2~~~~~~~5 31

C~~~~~ I ~s1
~~~~~~~VRTL 20 2
P~~~~~~ SCL " FIEBRIDGEShd2
43G1&ii ~~~~ejR CL/go FT 3

Q~~~~~~~~ '-nj 6 3 A2 6 /

5'"~~~~1 19I' 3 / , / 2

3R3 Isb , 12 1324 23 25 6 ~ F2
r- ,ore - 9S If Q&FR'7B1t/w4
2 % - ,I 14.2 26 1 C" 21
3 143 7 ~~~~ ~o1~~.7 '~~ 23 26 28 ..SBe N'2 7P%,9
41 T"" 2.~ -:~~
~~~~~t. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Nit Orr 21 CIA- /1

MOR~~~~~~~~ ~2 17 17 F

Ar - -'s VERY CL 149 Ft ETE7R 20 249
5 17~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 23 2

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 30 26
G~~~~~~~~~ 23

fl 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"e CII '-..L7- i t 46-. 4A1
3 del 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~23
- FIR~ ~~~ 2se 23 I 258
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 28260--

Cepths from I 241~~~~~~~~~~~~~G 24 21 2

ELI~~~ ~~ ~ 7 - 23 22Coe1

$~~~~~~~~~~ 267 20 199 17 16 ---

22 CS .1'2 5S 3
a17BELE 19 14 10 8I
7 2 N-a il 7 16 6
2 S 1~~~~4 9 tlenk

Pulley
/ / F ~~~A\~ Pulley ~Figure 12. Drop net assembly.

/ |~ 1/8" Dacron Line

1/4" Dacron Line

/II~ // \/ /'e- Release Mechanism (See
/#3 Brass </IC\ close up)
Clip
1/16"
ss leader

3/16" ._ ' .S.~g'-~.o~'\
Galvanized
Chain 100' Dacron
1 \ \ \ ~~Trip Line

�" Dacron Line

~-.-- 2' Galvanized
Ring

Release
Mechanism

1/"Dacron

16' Aluminum Pipe
Figue1Cls-poftiorlaemehns
I~~~~18

~~~igue1.Coeu ftio ees ehns

Angle I ron
Mast

Crossbeam Boom, 5

2" Cross
. < Piece
A-Angle Iron Piece

1m2 Drop Nets

r Bowpiece

Figure 14. Boom and drop net assembly.

After Deployment

loat Frame

Before Deployment

A 1/8" Nylon
5J"~ i/~~~ Ace Netting

Stainless Steel
m coax V X --Sink Frame

Figure 15. Drop net deployment detail.

\\ - - --Galvanized roller
Stainless steel
rakes

A T- 1~~ ~~ -- - -__
5 ft

____ ___ ~~~~~~~~~~~~1/8"' Nylon
Ace Netting

3/4"
Mesh

3 ft

Figure 16. 5' roller-rigged shrimp trawl.

5' Shrimp Trawl

2.5" Galvanized -\
Eyebolt

Al uminum-g"
Hinge

16' Aluminum

Figure 17. Towing configuration of roller-rigged shrimp trawl.

Tick 1e Chain

Bridle Trawl, doors

Ace NVetting

Figure 18. Towing configuration of 6.lm otter trawl.

JUVENILE RED DRUM POPULATION ESTIMATES

3000-

2500-

2000-
N

Z '
O
F 1500-

1000-->
o 0
0 86

0 e
500- o
0O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0

I0-- . I .2I . I I I I I I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
MONTH

Figure 19. Juvenile red drum population estimates.

I.Hllsborough Bay, the heavily damaged finger
:.Tampa Bay that extends up into the Port of
Tampa, has shown improvements in water quality
over the past decade, according to research com-
piled by the Hillsborough Environmental Protec- ;.
tion Commission. Since the city of Tampa opened
~:BaEy l W S o w s sh t L its advanced sewage treatment plant and
�:#ayshowss~ . .began pouring cleaner effluent into the __
bay, the water there has become clearer
"p"'IT -ess ma Athe .and bacteria and algae have declined. Attachment
:Lower Tampa Bay, in the relatively pris-
batntle for 'u~i~al tine areas south of the Sunshine Skyway
I'.rattl1e fr suvval Bri dge, has also shown some water quality
I improvements in the past decade, accord-
-ing to other research. SERVICE
By ION EAST ' : - 'IThe regulatory emphasis over the past P.O. 8OX 10278
Sta ff Writer TAA. FLORIOA 33679
.." Writ ecade on cleaning up or eliminating sew-
'"-Scientists have their own language to describerage effluent entering Tampa Bay has paid
the waters Mark Taylor calls home, but terms like. some dividends, according to Rick Garri- pdl 37,000
dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll A and coliform.ty, district manager of the state Depart- SLPeetmsur
counts don't mean much to him. Taylor's a fourth-ihnent of Environmental Regulation. But
generation fisherman, and he understands Tampat as the metropolitan. areas surrounding
Bay in a different way. ',Tampa Bay continue to grow, another
-He measures it everytime he empties his nets. ,,unchecked source of pollution looms as a APR- 2 1-8 6
| "We have to wear oil coats," Taylor says, winc- r more intimidating threat, he says.
ing as he describes it. "'The stuff we pull up burns so' Stormwater that rimns across fertilized
bad you don't even want it to touch you." lawns, oil-coated streets and through
When the season is right, Taylor moves his boat overloaded sewer systems pours into the
into the middle stretches of Tampa Bay and drops bay without treatment.
the nets in search of shad. What he pulls aboard "Despite all the improvements we are
eaci time, though, is more than fish. The webbing making in point sources (sewage and in-
of his nets is caked with muck, courtesy of the bay's dustrial discharges), nonpoint sources are
bottom, where sea grasses have died. He says his definitely going to have to be on the
crew members wear rain jackets and rubber gloves agenda for the future," Garrity says.
for protection, and their eyes often burn when they State legislators are considering ways.
begin peeling the muck away. to control stormwater runoff in this year's
Taylor needs no laboratory analysis to draw his session, but cities and counties have
conclusions: "Some of these sediments, I don't fought itbecause the expense is potential-
know what they are, but they're not good for us." ly enormous. Short of actual treatment,
By some gauges, the environmental quality of stormwater plans would require holding
Tampa Bay has improved over the past decade, ponds that help filter out contaminants
according to a team of marine-related professionals through vegetation. In Tampa, Mayor
who gathered Saturday to talk about the troubled Bob Martinez has proposed a stormwater
urban waters that surround us. But the intricate, control plan that calls on residents to pay
community of marine life that is a playground and a monthly utility fee.
source of commerce for the Suncoast is still behind .Even with the attention on cleaning
in its battle for survival, they say, and the increas-e up water that enters Tampa Bay, howev-
ing. stresses of growth are threatening it as neVerier, biologists say they are still not sure
before. Amid all that, those who plot strategy say what can be done to restore much of the
still too little is known. marine life that has already left it. Tampa
- "From the biological aspect, we don't under- Bay is an estuary that serves as a breeding
stand what we can do (for marine life)' once we ground for 70 percent of the area's recre-
marine research lab biologist with the state Depart- that estuarine system - the vegetated,
ment of Natural Resources (DNR). "We simply sloping shorelines, the underwater grass
don't know." - beds, the mixture-' of salt and fresh water
---The setting Saturday was Bayboro Harbor, ate_ is linked to the overall health. ~ -- -= ' C _
the University of South Florida St. Petersburg i
campus, and many of the people considered experts No research is available to be able to . . .
hil the bay environment were there to draw conclu- tell what's going on biologically in the ' ~ 3 o
sions about its health. Bay Day, as it was called, was bay," DNR's Haddad says. "We need to : - * - 0
also an attempt to gather attention to something set up long-term programs." m o D
that those who study the bay have known for years: Commercial fisherman Taylor and his �c _
Growth has harmed it. In the past 50 years, 81!remarks about bay sediments provided " -
percent of the sea grasses have died, 44 percent of illustration for another area where re- : 1 * - _
the important mangrove and salt marsh borders search is laclking. Carl Goodwin, a U. S. -= =
have been destroyed, bacteria levels have prompted Geological Survey hydrologist, says. bay o =
occasional swimming and shellfishing bans and fish bottom land can continue to plague water 3 3
populations have declined. .. .
| "We're playing catch-up," says Jacob Stowers,' qality for decades even if pollutants nev-
assistant Pinellas County administrator and er again enter Tampa Bay. , :
member of the Agency on Bay Management. "Th' Goodwin says contaminants found in R.
people (who planned growth) didn't know they4i Sedimenlts are thousands, even tens of D 3 =
weren't doing right." Etousands, times more concentrated than o;
State of the Bay 'E86, though, brought some those measured in water. When tides, 7 >
encouraging signs. rsent and turbulence stir up water,
ehiIciuragina, sig n s,

I ,t (N-

,or several hundred years, into
a movement to halt the flow of the early 20th century, man's im- CjC&Ar0 S-ta
pollutants into the lagoon and pact was limited. Only the hardi-
IL3S iazCcP; eventually restore its water est homesteaders settled along ! ,
quality. Their task is staggering. the lagoon's shores, arnd their ef-
P4RT 1 - RIVERS OF 'WASTE In an average year, nearly 170 fect was minimal.
billion gallons of freshwater Vernon Lamine, a longtime
runoff and treated sewage low newsparer.an and son orf ne of
1 - , * . a . :'. - into the lagoon. In times of the first :Ierr-i:- i-land home-
_.'. i :-.. 'l, J . -a., Al heavy rain.ail, the runoff 13 steavers.vc:e in :his ojG*k F ,-
r uch -nat-r- I dc Lore O i-h dealers re.-iSn..
,>.77 1'8'UvTn } up :The results are in..escapable: to buy :rout unless they were so
�ig P *2 ~ ~ r ! Estimates of sea grasses long that they had to be bent to
fit in the mouth of a fish barrel.

30 percent to 80 percent.
Cocoa, which once billed it. nets and fishing poles weren't
n Wself as the "Saltwater Trout Capi- needed. Instead, a few men wield-
T T oNELOI>cTOswTOR5 T R tal of the World," has long since ing clubs would wade out into the
abandoned the claim. Each year lagoon and corral a school of reds,
anglers complain about dwindling herding them like sheep.
herding them like sheep.
Six thousand years ago the la- catches. "We would rush toward the
on system known collectively Each year large areas of oys shore, driving the redfish ahead
Es Each year large areas of oys-
the Indian River Lagoons was ter and clam beds are closed of us, and when they reached
ored, made up of the Indian when massive freshwater runoffs shallow waters they would all mill
River, Banana River and Mos- raise bacteria levels, around, and we were able to
uito Lagoon. The 150-ui!e tidal m The direct financial loss to pound them over their heads with
ooll network evolved into the commercial and recreational fish- our clubs. We could have killed
richest marine environment of ing is estimated at more than $ any number, but we would take a
its kind in North America, with million annually dozen or more ashore and ...
more than 400 species of fish In just 60 years man has unrav- have a fish fry," Lamme wrote.
and 260 types of shellfish. eled a tapestry of life that had In the 1920s, however, that be-
Today, the Indan Rver and taken 6,000 years to evolve. gan to change.
Banana River are- dying, and In Palm Bay the trout fishing is
Mo t agon'sway n Palm Bay the trout fishing is Canals, causeways hurt
su .agoon'swater qualitye so poor that Barney Gottshall, a
Ea suffered. The-effects are be-.. retired Air Force colonel, has
Ing felt in the six coastal coun-t hung up his fishing rod in disgust. Entrepreneurs began draining
ties that line the lagoon, fiom When Gottshall moved to Palm freshwater swamps for develop-
ptalm Buach County on the South- Bay Point in 1959, he could catch ment, and their drainage canals
to Volusa County on the nort 15 to 20 sea trout in an hour or funneled huge
nMan has turned tie lagoon two of fishing from his backyard amounts of
system into a gigantic refuse p t dock nutrient-laden 39'6
system a dock. nutrient-laden n
for his liquid wastes - treated fresh water E-
sewage and stormwater runoff Trout, redfish disappear into the frag- .
ile lagoon. -
loaded with fertilizers and pest- Causeways
*ecides. .- Today things are different. were built b i
Everyone thought that being "The last trout I caught out across the la-
1pumped into a- lagoon, such. here was a year ago last Febru- go on th a t
waste would soon flow out to- ary," Gottshall said. "I haven't helped cut off -
sea. They were wrong. : - caught a redfish in three or four its circulation.
* Tidal flow in the 220-billion-. years." When the Thomas
igallon lagoon is so slight that': Once, he said, he could stand at developers succeeded in luring
scientists estimate only 15 per-, the end of his 60-foot dock and thousands to the new Eden, local
cent of its, water is exchanged:. see fish and crabs in the sea grass governments found themselves
with thatof theocean.4ny piSt-. 7 feet below the surface of the awash in waste, which they
Ification caused by that flushing clear water. Now the grass is pumped into the lagoon.
effect occurs within a mile or ' gone, but the water is too dirty to During the years the runoffs
two of one of the lagoon's' see it even if it were there. and sewage increased with the
.e_~ In addition, sediments carried ~growth of agriculture operations
n four inlets. -: .; -.: ::: .:: - by the runoff are rapidly filling i n d
and developments. Now they are
So whatever man pumps into ! his section of the lagoon. at critical points.
the-lagoon stays put: - :: ,; "At the end of my dock, the wa- St. Johns River Water anage-
St. Johns River Water Manage-
.- "What most people didn't un- ter used to be over my head," said ment District engineer say that a
' derstand was that it is not a lv- ' Gottshall, who is 5 feet 7. "Now 10-year storm would result in 2.9
er, so there is no flow," said: it's just up to my'armpits. trillion gallons being diverted to
Diane Barile, executive director "I used to catch big trout down the lagoon through just one canal,
of the Marine Resources Council there, but not any more," he said. the CS4 Canal on the Brevard-In-
of East Central Florida. 'The Ir- "Now you could fish for a whole dian River county line. A 10-year .
dian River is a dump - a sump. week and not even catch enough storm is one that deposits 8
Anything you dump in there is fish to keep a cat from starving." inches of rainfall on the area in 24 -C3
I going to stay there, unless it can The change has been so great hours, usually a hurricane.
evaporate." that few realize what the lagoon That's enough water to cover
Barile is one of the leaders of, <once was. the entire city of Orlando to a
depth of 3 feet..
;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~7~~~~~g.

1
- 3'

I - ed sewage that 19 sewage-treat' beds in the lagoons. Once that is
ment plants empty into the la-
goons each year. One University completed, biologists may be able
U "And that's just one canal," of Florida study estimated that to compare existing beds with
Iarie said. "T-? :.e ubeume-Til- the combi.ed nutrient loadi;g earlier aerial photos of the river
man Canal !s ev'n longer. from both runr.ofs and seae . and st th loss
SuCk ac n oh2mous volume ot ch arge s totals 1 YiliionS b.yrl 5 OPun,
wesl w:ater is, itsel. oi:hou: con- annualiy.
idering pollutants, a serious Those nutrients suse-charge
problem for the river. Organisms the water and lead to large-scale One study has determined that
ccustomed to certain salinity lev- algae blooms that also cover the 3,000 acres, or 30 percent, of sea
grasses vanished between-St. Lu-
i cie Inlet and Satellite Beach,
Is cannot cope with massive surface and block sunlight, killing while mosquito-control programs
doses of fresh water. while mosquito-control programs
doses of fresh water. more sea grasses, have impounded 6,000 acres of
Richard Thomas, an educator Brevard County biologist Con- mangrove swamps. Dikes built to
Iom Sebastian and part-time rad White compares the algae foil the breeding of salt marsh
.-Immercial fisherman, can vivid- bloom process to "cutting a real mosquitoes have raised water lev-
ly describe what happens to such heavy lawn and letting the stuff els and caused unforseen ecologi-
fi eatures. just lay there." White has been cal damage.
E"You've got organisms out taking inventory of the lagoon's Using Hoffman's calculations,
ere that are used to 25 parts per grass beds to determine how that loss of 9,000 acres of wet-
thousand salt content," Thomas much grass is left. lands means a loss of $11,313,000
aid. 'He's a slow mover - he's Just as that hypothetical lawn in annual income for commercial
to crawl or swim real slowly would die, so has grass in the la- fishermen, bait and tackle store
I and, all of a sudden, heren. owners, motel orners and others
comes this tide that's solid fresh
cowater. Ban! He's had it" solidThe Florida Department of Nat- connected with recreational fish-
Baile said that was what hap ural Resources estimates that 30 ing.
ened to ndian Rivaer chlams in percent of the lagoon's grasses Such bread-and-butter econom-
September 1985, when a one-two have vanished. ic realities have motivated com-
knockout punch killed an entire Thomas, who has been roaming mercial clammer Charles Hotca-
eneration of the shellfish . the lagoons for 30 years in his veg to report polluters and dog-

tloodgates spill out death ing at 80 percent losf. Its habitat where he learned his trade, and
Unusually heavy rainfall low- commercial fishing boat, said he gedly follow up the cases to make
eredt s alinity levels, stressed the thinks that the sea grass loss is sure tha they are corrected.
clams and forced them to spawn. greater.
111 say that's a joke. We're look- ed south three years ago after pol-

[loodgates topill ouat death lution closed the clamming waters
tersruction, fromPlain tnd simphe is afraid that the Indian River
Then the St. Johns River Water said.es e se
|lanagement District opened As the sea grasses disappear, so
_B0.od gtstreoesraew do the fish that attracted people "Those waters went from a
.,re waters o drent fceri ea
ters from the river basin, and the such as Gottshall and Thomas to beautiful, crystal-clear environ-
water went the area. t ment to a cesspool," he said, "and
brusi g ito The losses, th ough, have area. m- I'll tell you, we're not too far be-
wBruhig nt hind that here."
Slhe lagoon. pact on more than just fishermen
"The gates --they affect the economy of the Monday: Are there solutions?
were opened entire area.
Ewhi thend lar-u ~Natural Resources biological
EVa e wee e'irn ' scientist Barbara Hoffman has
the water, and calculated that an. acre of wet-
~that slug of ilands (mangrove swamp or sea
cIft e lug of grass) produces a direct fisheries
klled the lar. .i. yield - commercial and recrea-
vae, Barile white tional - of $1,257 each year.
mbsaid. e White No one knows the exact num-
didn't have clams for the next ber of acres of sea grasses that
season." have disappeared. Biologists are
When drainage canals dump taking inventory of existing grass
billions of gallons of runoff into
the lagoon at once, they create an-
otherproblem. The cascading tor-
rents also carry huge amounts of
suspended silt particles that block
the sunlight that sea grasses need
to survive.
The same runoffs contain ex-
cess nutrients from fertilizers that
combine with the nutrients in the
nearly 12 billion gallons of treat-

1 _3~

3o~~~~~~~~~~~~~

have to get nvolved - now C , ,
re than ever, Taylor said. ,. K, .- . =;
i m 3 r~~~ m o 3� ~~o ZpI o8
te learned� lot- I'm eager 2 C0 ' '='E='5
D~.~~~~~ -a_i 6i.~"'"Rr me=

to arn more." =.m o,, 5 21 m, . =' m , . . -
> N, o exb COo 3 0 L
.~~ � ,..m ,-_13ri C PD3~. 2.7 c, f o '-, = ~ o

Jan Platt, who is chairman of Bm o ,_?.c,-o~e ~~c:M --W. ?' -,' ~'
"=~~~~~~~- M . an .5'-- 1 ~--M
Ag~~~~~~~~ enc.. on Sa Maae _� Q- =- _.t~ ZM I ; ' -
now~~~~ = g~'.. ~a= 36,
r~~~~~~~re~=~.. thnee,. _alo ._m._ 3.. ~=c
am,< El ag~cCD CD�Ez~4

BI9.y. she added she has wit-ra.bbe'd~ ~ ~=,, U-. 11 C mL= " , ?~ = ~ , '
ished an decined on Tampaer. �1 , E , I .
wit11 3,Rgo D 2.eCr
-""0,. ~~~~Y3M C CD li~a ~~" a~

R'~~~~~~ ""
~~nt~gdcline n CD inW O'D

C ches` C' a
"We can hae very c lean *1 S' E 0 0 -' 0. , .
1 C 3 L3. rr~~~~~p, E a J�$.PP .. CD

w~er.--but Zq o."' m,,
irjrednt sth at are the hah-- C D CD "M '_ :3 " '
lit, 0" 1 co

it s for fish (seagrasses; and 9 ~ .. -�? ~=CD '---"' ~:'
mangroves) - the decline i i 'R Q- 2, eu- a- =.
t. most alarming fact"' Ms " -IDC;CD
CD~~~~~~~~~~~~ -. _,.t ,~ .~ .,. r" ::E I D ~~ ~~
Ftt noted. - M - M :0
us 0, oP, CD CD ;,iED P 3O
that aro,.~.~=.: a ......
p, 3 mF u~~~~~o ,a

m1he recommended pushing
for strong regulations on storm- = .., C=? o~ , = ~~
'a .=. ..C ~_ ~= ; _ =~- -=
ser disch arges,ase a as-
f her state laws and more =� m- MC' m. > or-�
~ --- ' '~ '~ ~.o,, e e

If for regulatory - ag en ci--s. - o
"We need to be ever aware of , '
M =w O ma -D0 CD =
factthat each piece is an o zM q C)
ortant part of the whole ," _ , - .. C . o1 e ..
.~~~� n - ~-a~L Z
Is at. i :~ -= . Pa C, 'CD
CD= A .3gn
The Agency on Say Manage- .M Co C --- M ,.
fjnt is "an important first s= CD' ~ ~ - ' = -= o 2) I'
3 y. , 3.rs g 0� ~~ ~ D = os ~ ." o o_ ~ ~.,. .,, :
ze (Ip--- c`. ---, --~ C1

the bay," Ms. Platt said. "It's L-
0, e1 =r =, ~ o ..n P'~
Platt~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' rde. := .aS2 ,,~0

to everyone's advantage for the.- I- , '" -- 0= � ~ = .~ E '-
fqthe bay,"~~~M M ;;- M Cd " ~ aII0 ~ FgO --
hav to be what we want it to be~ Ig 0 M , CA m
I ,-=' -. 0.
(omically beneficial for theL m S' m ton --,EN' 43
. ~ ~ o C"~ .- Ot: < ~
ping. and fishing indus- '0.' o
tries). "Pg pP O, o ~da 3 5V llC0 31
,jishermen want to pay their _ Q = ..
o way by buying saltwater WC.
Iciml~ng licenses, said Larry Hart. M ,.-c ~?'=~. - ..= ~-~=-=
who runs a statewide fishing a'- C _. . en CA'~, ~ ~ 7
ieywith 800 members in: == - ' ' *
bay area alone.
teach Florida fisherman paid ' - 7--
S7 for a saltwater license, CD Z.0 M ,. .me~?..;-..0 ~~ .o_, . -? ,
alut $14 million to $35 million' M~ '. = 2. < _ ' -,,===-
C~i be raised, Hart said. .4 <L _L F.o; -0_-? ~~'= -~-=--"-~
CD W MC -0 , , ZS-Q,

lobin Lewis of the Agency on 0D :n5n
Say Management said the M._r et-w~ ~ ~-=: .?0 ' _? x--,9.
,~~~~~~~~~~~ =3, ~ 'A CO' U..t E '" U1 ""
alncy is planning to replantS ' I ;- -
sgrasses in Hillsborough Say V i....=o . -" ~ .~ : . -4- '~.~ := ..
sometime this summer. 'O
"tis possible to reverse ' R C-- ._ ) a ,.~~m ~=mo m .<r~' ---"v--
Sof (the damage)," Lewis a- ,- V''~= bc ~ - ..
� ~ '"1 :~"~ ._O ~..g~'. ~ , ' CD

o.~~~~~~~~/ MD oCD ..E-Q"a-

Su DI Cr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_~

'APR-2 3-88 6 saye 4smprov4 , -

........I~~~~~~~~~~ I ng somewhat, said Rick Garrity, - seagras and mangrcve nu
ThE!enee 'focontinued "What little I saw last Thurs'.i the director of the DER's, bers were not reduced -
I e TI enedfor coandbswerinthrdue
,day in no way compared withTampa office. The misconcep-. fact, 10 percent more
vigilence was Cited what I used to see 10 or 15 tion is that "the bay years ago - -
duringBayDay '86. years ago," he said. The water was a heck of a lot better than mangroves have been add
d n Ba y Day '86 looked much cleaner than dur- it is today." Haddad said.
By Lisa Cunningham ing the early 1970s, he added. However, the bay was worse Comm erical fish catches
In B repeat of last ,all's Boat- He cautioned the- environ-, I0 years ago, he added. Tampa Bay have thus been
Ina reeto ast alsBa-mnai h ih att lgtdw rnwt e
a-cade, about 30 Bay area mentalists who might want to Pollution and sewage prob- a slight down trend, with pea
* latr, -nvlronmental~sts ~begin projects to "restore" the lems in the bay were recorded and valleys over the past 15
legislators, envIrommenm allsts bay. "Nobody restores a system as far bac . bay were recorded. 20 years, Haddad noted.
and fishermen gathered In St. bay Nobody restores a system as far back as 1 887, Garrity years lHaddad noted
Petersburg Saturday to discuss like Tampa Bay- thats a said. Now there are more than Haddad lamented the fc
whether Tampa Bay is clean or physical impossibility... 4 60 companies which discharge that he has no biological da
polluted. "What we do Is stop bullying, chemicals:and other substan- on how fish are actually affe
Alogh no definite con.. the system - (and start' patch', ces into thebay. ed by the seagrass and ma
* lusions were drawn, mos ofng it up, helping It along- Pub( "We have to be very diligent grove loss in the bay. "There
the people present agreed that the funds where theyre goingl in regulating dischargers, Gar- a relationship - we can't qua
the bay is- cleaner now than It to do the most good, Stewar= rity said. : '- . tify iL .
was about 10 or 15 years ago suggested.- The Alafia River basin, where Long-term programs
* (in the 1970s). The EPC has 55 stations I Gardinier, Inc. - which holds a' "understand what we're doii
IThe "Bay Day '86" sym- the bay where it has monitoredtemporary operating Permit- to Tampa Bay" are needE
,~~~~~~toeTmpoaBy" oeatin permit
posium - featuring speakers bacteria counts and chemical discharges into the bay, is an Haddad said.
posium - fe~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~aturin spekr aceiad.
such as Tampa Mayor Bob Mar- data for the past 14 years, said important.concern, Garrity said. The primary problem is edu
tinez; Roger Stewart, director of Rick Wilkins of the EPC. He recommended studies on ating the public on the need f
the Hillsborough County Envir- The bacteri-a counts In Hills- wasteload allocation on the these programs, he added.
onmental Protection Commis- borough Bay have usually been Alafia and Manatee rivers. recent DNR survey show(
sion;-County Commissioner Jan the highest, followed by Old "We need a final solution onr most Floridians have no id(
Platt and other officials from Tampa Bay, Tampa Bay Itself, what makes the bay tick," Gar- what an estuary is, he said
agencies such as the Depart-}and lower Tampa Bay, Wilkinsarity added. "We need an alert Biologically and chemical
ment of Naturahe, sources and )said. . regulatory program" to "regu- Tampa Bay is "much worse c
the Department of Environ-. Two additional sewage treat- late dischargers extensively." ' than 100 years ago," noted C
mental Regulation -was, ment plants (at Hookers Point! Pollution in the Alafia River Goodwin, a U.S Geological St
followed by a cruise from St. and River Oaks) have Improved! also needs to be addressed, vey scientist.
Petersburg to Port Manatee, in. water quality In Hillsborough Garrity said. Biological data, as' Hoa.ver, Tampa Bay has ah
the lower portion of Tampa Bay.:Bhentd
I the lower portIon of Tampa Bay. Bay. he noted. well' as chemical and physical experienced, a period of "tr
Ruskin fisherman-turned-en- While Hillsborough Bay Is studies of the bay, need to be mendous, positive growtt
vironmentalist Gus Muench and also high In the amount of gathered, he added. : Goodwin said.
his family also attended the algae growing In it, phosphate Yet many other agency offic- Goodwin said he studied it
* morning session and followed levels have been reduced in the ials present agreed with Garrity amount of tine sediment whi(
the cruising boat in hiS- last several years, Wilkins said. that the DER, DNR and EPC settles on thle cottom of Taml
motorboat. We're playing catch-up," could use more funds and Bay. If all the sediment th
The session and cruise were noted Jacob Stowers, Pinellas scientists, as well as graduate accumulates on the bottomrr
sponsored by the Tampa Bay County's assistant county ad- programs at state universities; Hillsborough Bay in one yeae
Regional Planning Council, its minlstrator. "I. believe Pinellas to carry on their-research. ;
ttm~ was ~ trid ou , it ou
Agency on Bay Management County is a very good example DNR environmental scientist tim was dried out, it wou
and the Florida Institute of of how you can destroy an Ken Haddad explained the im weigh million
Oceanography In St. Peters- estuarine system." portance of estuaries winsaid'
Oceanography In St Peters-. thl-I Boat activity, dredge and i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Botatiiy reg n
burg (which provided Its boatf An estuary Is an area where group. Boa ctivi, dredge and
theurgV whic provided Its boat, fish reproduce and-live; many' Seventy'percent of Florida'Si oealtir u p e edocsa
R"I think that all governments estuaries are protected by commercial and recreational; Piers can lirp sedie
th oer think that all governmento seagrasses and mangrove& fish species, such as grouperi Goodwin explained. Sedime
*tha be concer oned" Martines bay noted to Boca Clega Bay, when it was snapper, shrimp and mackerel, makes the bay look murky, I
be c oncerned," Martinez noted. developed between the 1920s utilize estuaries as a place for added. -
Tampa city officials can show to the 1-960s by many sub- food and shelter, Haddad said. "There's a lot of people th
their concern by setting aside divisions built on canals, after Although seagrasses and' don't realize there's a prohiE
money for such projects as because t.hey haven't be,
limproving the Bayshore Drive dredging and filling, had mans man groves are important to
improvindthe ayhroe rtye adverse effects on seagrasse. fish, seagrasses in Tampa Bay here very long," said Ma
seawall an d acquiring property and estuaries, Stowers noted. were reduced by 80 percent Taylor, the president of
and es~~~~~~~~~~~Tuaries, Stowepresidnoted.
a* on e d"W can't ay, sout the habita between 1940 and 1980, Ha statewide fishing society.
Drive, he added. W e c n t pthe habits'. ....... st- - ai"Itewinkea fishermng soety.
* IvSeat he adsedn- back," but agencies such as the aaa noted. ..I think as fishermen we'd
Stewarnet said t hat mor e was did Pinelas County Planning oun Mangroves were eliminated witnessed the decline in sort
�ielsCut Plannin Couny a rate of 44 percent during of our fisheries," Taylor added.
not attend t hat m ore people did.can cil may stop similar destructiont during of our fisheries," Taylor added.
I not attend Say Day. "Hwca of fish habitatsthat same time period, he said. He agreed with Goodwinth;
-of fish habitats in the future, � . H gedwt odi h
we goet to the lay public?" he Stowers said. He contrasted Tampa Bay sediment has adverse effect
Although Stewart said h Enforcing planning ordinan-with Charlotte Harbor, which is "This stuff will burn your skin E
used to travel on the bay all the ce is one tool to preserve fishstll relatively untouched by bad (that oil-skinned coats mu
time, he recently toured the bal life, he added. urban development Charlotte be worn by some fishermen)."
afti he recentl toured theix-he bay seems to be improv- Harbor represents the only I
after a six-year absence. I basemtobipr area of the state where the

--- _E& -wfl" _- - _-

WBdenton Ihsrald
AM 33000
$un 37.000

OCT-2 0- 8 6 part of thle county, showed that a artificial wetlands for every acre
large percentage of wetlands had they fill in, to allow sufficient time
been lost. The study was conduct- for the new wetlands to begin to
M ant ade wetlands ed in 1980 by Robin Lewis, presi- function, Walker said.
dent of Mangrove Systellls Inc., a Developers also would have to
con,%icern ,manasota au ~recreating w etlands.
Thatl4 stu dy frshllowed that 8le umitigation projects thallt cost over
t sudy howd per- $20,000, Walker said. They would
Cent of seagras~ Iwe and 44~i per- Ilhave to post b)onds or some other
JOHN ALLARD said Anthony Cleveland, a DER cent of the malngroves and s alt n f as ri do t h ui
}itzalo Staff Writrc otile, zngoe reanl of assuring that they build
attorney. marshet were lost between 1910 artificial wetlands, she said.
Environmentalists are con- Under the 1984 Henderson Wet- ani 1980, said Barbara Hloffman, a
cerned that the state's consider- lands Act, mitigation plans hav to lmarille biologist with tile state De- But environmentalists say the
ation of developers' plans to be considered by DER when it partumerit of Natural Rlesources' re- proposed rule won't prevent
recreate wetlands to compensate looks at requests to fill in wet- search laboratory in St. Peters- enough developers from filling in
for ones they fill in will lead to lands, Cleveland said. burg. She said 11,000 acres of more wttlandu.
approval of more fill permits for. DER's consideration of mnitiga-
salt ma-rshes and other wetlands. tion in permit decisions has an- "What they (D)ER officials) are
gered environmentalists who argue mangroves and salt marshes were really trying to do is accommodate
A case in point is the Depart- that it doesn't work in most cases. lost, while 61,965 acres of seagrass tlhe developers, while maintaining
nieat of Environmental Regula- I
tion's initial decision to approve No one has ever tried to recreate were lost. the environllmental atance," Railll
permit that would have allowed aalt rarsh m Florida, sala "''aPpa Bay has really been up- Lsd.
ManasoU 88 Csairwoman Gloria, said
developer Wilbur Boyd to fill in 17 ,Moasots 88 Cairwoman a set ils far as marine habitats are B1ut adoption of the rule would
acres of wetlmlds for a golf course ain collcerlled," l-loffman said. Ilot be aln open invitation for devel-
at his Riverbay project in North- By granting fill permits to devel- In response to complaints frolt opers to fill in wetlands, Walker
west Bradenton. opers who have offered to create envirounllletalista, D)El;R has at- said. That rule would simply give
some artificial wetlands, DER is tempted to conle up with a rule to DE1R somne criteria to use when it
Manasota 88, an influential en- 'risking tile loss of valuable marine govern thie application of uitiga- considers mitigation as part of a
vironmentul group, appealed the habitats with no guarantee that tioni to fill perlit ca.es, said Su- fill permit application, she said.
ruling to a state administrative they will ever be replaced, Rains zallnle Walker, clief of tile DlEU's
hearing officer, who probably said. bureau of permiting oul be fi eit iga by tihe end ofrule
won't issue a ruling on the matter Wetlands are important breed- Uner tle propusll, evelolers tle InoLitiL, Walker said.
for several weeks. ing and feeding grounds for fish woUld tlve tp create iwm acres of
DER'%s initial approval of Boyd's and wading birdseate two cre of
permit request was due in part to . A study of wetlands in the Tam-
his promise to create a 1�/2-acre pa Bay region, including the north
artificial salt martsh to replace
sonle of tlhe wetlands he fills in,

| Storm,- ga-ter run*off During stormy weather, the first
x,~~~~~~~~~~~~ * ~~~Inch of rainfall picks up about 90
percent of the pollutants on the
ground or street, and much of that
eventually goes Into the bay through
drainage systems that were de-
nLast of a sernes '"It's going to boil down to: Are signed before scientists recognized
we willing to pay the price?" said the problem, Betz said.
By BOOTH GUNTER Gary Kuhl, executive director of the "That first Inch can have a con-
| Tribune Staff Writer Southwest Florida Water Manage- centration of stuff equivalent to raw
ment District, the agency that would sewage," Betz said.
er on the lawn, a dead animal on water runoff In Tampa Bay under toxic substances In the water, but it
the road or the m uck that seeps legislation passed Wednesday by a also adds nutrients, such as nitro-
Add rain and the bot ecomf a dumpster. House committee. gen, phosphate and organic matter,
Add rain and it becomes storm- "It is a problem that, at this that cause rapid algae growth. This
water runoff, killer of fish and oth- point, does not have a solution," algae eventually kills fish by using
er marine life in Tampa Bay. said John Betz, a University of up oxygen in the water as it decom-
point pollution - the kind that cait non-'t South Florida marine biologist who poses.
pont p ollution-the kind that canifc source -' has been working with legislators to Studies have shown that the up-
bes ayt tisoathesnpecitimcajorurdle - draft bills to help clean up the wa- per parts of Tampa Bay, which re-
and say It L s the next major hurdle ter in Tampa Bay. ceive moqt of the pollution, have ex-
In cle a ning u p the b ay. The Surface Water Improve- tremely high concentrations of
part, of cculturalse, bpollut in the past de- ment and Management (SWIM) bill nutrients In bottom sediments, a
cadert, of couthere havese, but een thea gans de- would require the water manage- product of decades of pollution and
cade, thereating thosave been ma jor gains ment district, known locally as the bay's naturally slow circulation.
And, warns tichael werry, an Swiftmud, to complete a major Poor water quality in the bay
administrator with the Agency on study of water quality in Tampa has been blamed for the loss of
Bay banagement, unless the 20- Bay by February 1989, and develop thousands of acres of marine habl-
year battle to improve water quality a plan to control pollution from tat, Including sea grasses, which
y is won, Tampa Bay, which has been storm water and waste water treat- provide food and hiding places for
the areas biggest asset, could ben ment plants. juvenile fish and shrimp as they
othe area's biggest a sset, could be- "It's going to be a problem that mature. Studies Indicate that 81 per-
come a major liability.
Hanging i th balane is a mul- we're going to have to come up with cent of Tampa Bay's original 76,500
tiillion ollar commercial-fishing solutions for, and they won't be easy acres of sea grasses have disap-
industry and the area cohief recre- solutions," Kuhl said. "Most any peared. Some sea grass was de-
attonal and tourist attraction, study you see done by well-qualified stroyed by dredging, but the bulk of
people says that, nationwide, it disappeared "for no mechanical
"I have been here 58 years, and
� I've seen this bay go slap to hell," (storm-water runoff) is our. biggest reason," said Kenneth Haddad, a
said Robert RLchards, a commercial problem now. marine biologist studying sea-grass ' a o >
fisherman. "If the pollution gets .-Developers say the SWIM bill loss for the Department of Natural
much worse, what we catch won't could force them to add new drain- Resources. o , - _
be fit for human consumption, and age systems to existing structures as The biggest problem with storm
The biggest problem wch storm -- a :-
they are redeveloped. The cost water is not with new developments
that's. - a. a uwould be enormous, they say. because most of them are required . . a
the bay." ."It's hard to tell whether we're to have storm-water systems. The . ,, a =
Storm-water runoff is the catch .talking tens of millions or hundreds problem is with development that _, ra a.
phrase to describe the way the 'of millions until we see the effects took place before the regulations � X ' 7
scraps of everyday life are washed, *of the bill statewide," said Ron were enacted in 1982. m X :
untreated, Into the bay. Weaver, an attorney representing Most storm-water runoff systems < '
As the area around the bay be- the Natlonal Assoclation of Industri- consist of retention ponds, which al- . = 7 ,
comes more urban and ground Is al and Office Parks. - low pollutants to settle before th.' =
covered with buildings and parking Betz said It Is a mind-boggling water Is piped out to traditional = =-. , .
lots, attempts to clean up the bay proposition to control urban and ag- drainage routes, Kuhl said. e c_
E will focus on old drainage systems ricultural runoff from the 2,200 Installing storm-water systems is
and developments engineered be- square miles of land that drains into expensive enough In new develop -
fore the phrase non-point pollution Tampa Bay, Florida's largest estu- ments, but going back to add them -. c c
found Its way into the environmen- ary. It will become even more to developed areas becomes prohlb- c
tal vernacular. pressing as the population in the itive in some cases, Betz said. _ oX X X
Controlling the runoff will re. three counties surrounding the bay Weaver said current drainage o- "
quire massive expenditures by gov- tops the 2 million mark by the turn regulations are strong enough. HeO c
eminent and private industry, envi- of the century. said the SWIM bill, which would re- -m o a
ronmental officials say, and many The pollution comes from a mul- quire a master storm-water plan for >
I are wondering how much the public titude of sources, many of which Tampa Bay, would place another, c . Z
is willing to pay. Estimates for up- seem harmless. "Anything you unnecessary tier of regulation on C: 2.
dating drainage systems in the Tam- might dump around your house, the developers. � - c
pa Bay area exceed $1 billion. remains of a can of gasoline you But Kuhl said the bill would not W a _

fluid, lubricants, kerosene, the feces who now mut et stor e c
of animals, dead animals, spilled rs, w ho now must get storm-wate r
permits from the Water Manage-
ment District's board.
"What it does is ask the permit-
ting agency to ensure it Is Incorpo-

I~~~~~~~

in ad seterm effects of the pollution and search remains to be done before
~rst in a series a i9" dredging on the marine life. spending money on costly cleanup
B OTH G U !?NTER lFXWhile the harm will be felt for measures. Estimates for the total
TBribTn S , W iter generations, some of the underlying cleanup reach into the billions.
Tribune Staff Writer "' problems have been corrected, Stewart, 61, the once-radical gu-
rAAMPA - Out on the tip of -Stewart and other environmentalists ru of the cleanup movement, be-
Hiker's Point, at a place created say. Tampa has a new, advanced lieves the bay can heal itself if the
by man's desire to make a ship sewage treatment plant; industrial pollution and dredging are con-
channel, Roger Stewart stood ankle waste dumping is restricted; marsh- trolled. The dredging is gone, ex-
d in memories. es are no longer filled in to create cept for maintenance of the ship
IT'here's an awful lot of marine land for houses. channels; and major inroads have
liMlout there now," he said. "Every But the fast-track development been made in controlling municipal
little piece of seaweed you pull out of the Bay area worries environ- and. Industrial wastes.
O bere has got something living on mentalists. Population in Hillsbor- "Personally, I have a great deal
its ough, Pinellas and Manatee coun- of faith in Mother Nature," he said.
Eit's much different from the wa- ties, which surround the bay, is "I think the best way to fight ecolog-
ter lie studied as a graduate student e.xpected to explode from 1.7 mil. ical battles is to remove the bur-
atte University of South Florida in lion ,to 2.08 million in the next 13 den."
tti'late 1960s. years, bringing new pressures on To make his point, lie shows ae-
The bay was dying. the bay. rlal . photographs, which he said
At this very spot, you could New threats to the bay continue show sea grass returning naturally
smell the fetid odor of raw human to develop. to once-barren bay bottom.
vtte dumped into Florida's largest Recently, the Gardinier Inc. Restoration of the habitat, advo-
e ary from Tampa's overl oaded phosphate plant, the largest on the cated by many environmentalists, is
sewage treatment plan. aories bay, dumped almost 14 million gal- a costly venture and may not even
Toxic wastes from factories Ions of untreated acid into the wa- work, Stewart said.
fwe- d freely. ter after heavy rains. The EPC is Many fish species, including
I6'langr ove forests became condo- assessing the damage. shrimp, use the plant life in the
-trinturns. forests became condo- And Tampa Electric Co. is lob- shallow waters of the bay to feed
-rm!niums.
bying in Tallahassee to keep ave- and avoid larger fish while growing
Sea gras disappeared.
*lSo did the fish. nues open for construction of a pow- up.
*And then there woas the dredg- er-generating plant at the Once damaged, the vegetation is
. cientists are still assessing the Cockroach Bay aquatic preserve. slow to return. The decline of these
dam.age it caScientistsa asse sgd. The power company says the plant habitats has been blamed for re-
_That was all before Stewart and is needed to accommodate growth. duced fish populations. Mangrove
-ore of other environmentalists Environmentalists say the plant trees prevent shoreline erosion, fil-
rean to study the bay and to taklie would upset the fragile marine habi- ter water and provide nursery and
oan to study the polluters. tat left in Tampa Bay. feeding grounds necessary for ma-
on the polluters.
The bay hasn't fully recovered Meanwrhile, the House Natural rine life.
m the decades of dredging and Resources Committee is expected to Kenneth Haddad, a marine biol-
lution, but the signs are good, sci- vote today on the Surface Water Im- ogist at the Department of Natural
. provement and Management Resources' Marine Research Labo-
endists say. (SWINI) bill, described as the most ratory in St. Petersburg, is studying
Water quality, monitored since significant environmental legislation the loss of sea grass. The improve-
12, has improved considerably. in years. On Tuesday, both the ment :n water quality has not signif-
there are signs that sea grasses, IIouse and Senate observed Tampa icantly spurred the comeback of sea
.which help form the base of the mna- Bay Day. ' grass and other fish habitat. Sda
� rine food chain, are making a come- Sponsored by Rep. Sid Martin, grass planting is still in the trial
:-k, Stewart says. D-Hawthorne, the SWIM bill would stages and research remains a pri-
. iany bay activists are cautious make the state's five water manage- ority.
saout the gains in water quality, meat district boards responsible for Robin Lewis, a marine biologist
�saving the pressures of greater ur- protecting and restoring surface wa- and private consultant who along
I idication in the Tarmipa Bay area ters all over Florida. with Stewart and others was active
cuId cause a reversal in the trends. In the Tampa Bay area, the in the bay cleanup movement that
But Stefwart, director of the Southwest Florida Water Manage- began in the late 1960s, agrees the
teilisborough County Enviromllentatl meat District, known as Swiftniud, bay needs more study. lie and an-
lotection Cormnission, is optiniistic would take the lead in overseeing omher scientists are conmpiling all of
4mut the bay's chances. research and cleanup programs. It the scientific research on the bay
. Against a backdrop ot power would mean a small increase in into one document.
and phosphate plants, ibe pulled a property taxes to provide matching "In that'document, we point cut
j Yufrom the water. c u money for state grants. that there are many gaps in what
"You go out here and pick up a we know," he said. "We know a lot
k or soniething, vou'll find it's The Tampa Bay portion of the we ie s oe th ba . a lot
encaut ittle kinds of livain
encrusted with all intdes of liouin, bill calls for a $1.8 million state a- ut little pieces of the bay.
cd on't know a lot about tile bay as a
things." e said. propriation. Atstate trust firnd would
"TThere are nice, fat, happy litle be established to pay for cleanup e.
lie likens the bay to a living,
ters living right here in tile smp programs in the years ahead. rea in b i al sv
breathing body, In which all svs-
mnnel. The bay.s not dead by any tens depend on one another. Dan:-
means. If the water were lousy, mentalists believe they know the
'd find dead things." bay's major problems, there is con- e to one plant or fish species be-
deas damage to another.
m Scientists say they are only novw siderable disagreement about how
�initsa they areo "The first thing you do is, you
minning to understand the long- to fix the and how much more re-

/Tallahassee Democrat/Wed., April 22, 1987
A 9-rr A__ 7

what those particular prob- ,3
are, and come up with some
ons based on science," Lewis
t d. "The truth is, we have to E ,, - m
nd a couple of years examining LV - JMu
problems and only then can we
Clean Air Week is April 26 to
spend the mneyeeing to havely. May 2. Most air pollution is man-
"We are never going to have made, and motor vehicles are the m yi MF-
Ieugh money to do everything biggest contributors. Poorly adjust- '' :
ten that assumption, how do you d engines and mistreated or dis-eTar
spend the money? The answer is, connected ctaletic converters can u
l don't know." cause seven times as much pollu-
Stewart's faith remains firmly tion as a well-tuned engine and
rited in the natural resiliency of tionia werter ar\ the U.S. Senate Subconmnttee
the bay But he is ever vilienlacynt of fuctionin converter on Environmental Pollution heard
the b ay. But he i s ever vipla ofzone, a key constituent of testimony from three of the na-
the possibility that the ways of the smog, forms when unburned hydro- tion's leading doctors. They said
pt will return. He uses words like carbons from poorly-tuned gasoline that next to cigarette smoking,
aIorrent when describing the engines reacts in sunlight with ni- breathing acid particles or fine
dredge-and-fsll operations of the trogen oxides from exhaust. Tne acidic droplets is the greatest cause
pre-1970s days, "Over my dead nation has 76 air pollution control of lune disease. Florida is the 11th
bay will anything like that happen arieas in which ozone levels exceed worst state in the nation for the
IN'ampa Bay" again. the federal health standard. Seven amount of sulfur dioxide; most is
-At Hooker's Point, man's dam- Ware in Florida. produced by utilities. Exposure to
age to the bay Is still most evident. Unfortunately, a myth exists aciddeposition isdirectlyrelated to
C -crete and steel rubble, rusted among backyard mechanics that the amount of sulfur oxides being
cENT;, an old volleyball and other money can be saved using leaded emitted in any region. Now that we
gadIage litter the shoreline where fuel in a car equipped with a con- know our health is being affected,
mangroves have sprung up since the verter or that altering some of the we must join in the nation's effort
laugh was created by dredge spoils, settings on the exhaust control sys- to enact a strong acid rain bill. The
5way from the shoreline, Stew- ternm saves fuel. Joint Department of technology is already here and costs
a pies two steel, 55-gallon drums. Environmental Regulation and the have decreased greatly.
casually, he jams a finger into an Environmental Protection Agency's Acid rain in forests has recently
_,pAing in one. It comes out black random inspection of autos and been linked to disappearance of the
i3nooey. light trucks in Tampa in 1984 re- fine hairs on tree roots
rETht says 'olive oil' on it, but vealed that 38 percent of their ex- the killing of beneficial soil micro-
t's old, used motor oil. Somebody's haust systems had undergone tam- organisms that help roots absorb
lumped some old, used motor oil paring. This was the highest nutrients. The result is slower
1e5 tamnpering rate in the nation. Mi- growth.
nevitably, it's going to get out ami had the second highest rate. zone, on the other hand, has a
o e bay." Between 20 percent and 25 percent more imm ediate effect on the green
He shook his head. Some things of the vehicles had been misfueled. parts of trees by interfering with
iaj't changed. Each year states must submit photosynthesis. Both ozone and
*, |qA~j ib e lI O plans to be approved by the EPA acid rain are hermful to the lungs.
o~,9 ~ that outline efforts to clean up the The EPA adinistrator is consider-
state's air and water. On April 7, posing both stricter ozone
the EPA administrator sent letters standards and stricter sulfur diox-
let bisacks rover drive to governors of all states with areas ide emission standardsiince health
GOVERNESS - Citrus County commission- which did not meet ozone stan- effects have now been noticed in
rs expanded their support Tuesday of a move dards, giving them until Dec. 31 to human subjects at Lower levels of
9 ve the Withlacoochee River designated an meet standards or suffer the loss of both pollutants than were previous-
)uranding Florida Water. federal highway or sewer funds. ly thought to occur. This would
ie commissioners voted to back the drive Florida could comply with federal make it even harder for Florida to
2 protect a stretch of the river about 12 miles regulatidns and meet the standards meet federal air pollution health
)ngfrom the western end of Lake Rousseau to by implementing annual auto ex- standards and may mandate sulfur
ie'ulf of Mexico. haust control inspecticn. dioxide controls on the worst pol-
Etrus commissioners already had agreed to This inspection would rapidly luting utilities and auto exhaust in-
weed out those cars which have had
upport the effort for about 1510 miles of the specrion for the entire stte.
ivfrom its headwaters in the Green Swamp exhaust control tampering or mis-
eastern end of Lake Rousseau. The lake fueling. A trained mechanic can vi- a 0
; 1 included because its water does not sually inspect nine parts of the en- The DER along with the Ameri-
gine and a simple tail pipe test can can Lung Association is sponsoring
neet state standards for the outstanding desig- detect misfueling. It should not a free auto-exhaust check Mlay 2, 10
take more than a minute to do. If a.m. - 4 p.m. near Sears at the Gov-
20 percent of Florida's vehicles are ernor's Square MNall. During Clean
emitting seven times the normal Air W'eek, the Lung Association
pollution, they are contributing will also sponsor air pollution re-
more pollution than all the other ports on the CBS and ABC local
cars in. Florida, and are responsible news stations. The report will in-
I for Florida's failure to achieve the clude information on the ozone
air quality we all want. levels.
Eventually it may be necessary Patty DeTar is chairman of the
to require vapor-recovery nozzles at Air Quality Committee of the
I filling stations. American Lung Association of
During the first week of Febru- Florida.
i

V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~

i P e 01
RV~~~~~~~~~~~i3~k~ARl

'B.~~~~A

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~D

Y!, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~l,~~~<

- ~~~~~ - ~~~~~~ i~~~~ -.al)

* h~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~-Is~" *

D - G T3 37f

C 41 -D P P ,t05F

vni

--Aim 26 sm1wr-F

IM11UPH INS

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7..... . ..... I~r, -~ ~l,~II~111 l["''''' ~~ 1
1!1lil!E!"'lil"':lil1 A,! !~~~~~r] 7V,,I,,,,I, B ITT,,, A ne f

SPECIAL SERIES

ing~ %r ,..,..
Trawlinil r U.

Destruction of Gulf and ba bottom, a side effect

of shrimping, is a burning issue in Florida.

dragged across the ocean floor. Commer- a sharp decline in trout catches in
By MARK WEINTZ cial shrimpers, however, say their nets are Tampa Bay.
not the cause of the damage. "Since 1952, Tampa Bay has lost 64 per
"Trawl damage," is an issue that has "cent of its sea grasses," said Kenneth Had-
Editor's Note: Shrimp are a vital link in been smoldering for years, but which late- dad, marine biologist with the Florida Bu-
the marine food chain, directly affecting ly has burst into flames. In the wake of reau of Marine Research in St. Petersburg,
the quality of our fisheries. This is the escalating declines in marine habitats and adding that an estimated 80 per cent of
third article in an in-depth series examin- fish populations, testimony from "expert this vital grass has disappeared since 1900.
ing the handling, or mishandling, of our witnesses," most of whom are shrimpers, Seagrass losses-by no means limited to
vital shrimp stocks. The first two articles is beginning to be heard before various Tampa Bay-are linked to a serious de-
covered indications that we are allowing fisheries management councils. dcline in both shrimp landings and trout
an overharvest of shrimp, causing a basic The controversy promises to be a corn- catches. In the mid-50s, Tampa Bay bait
decline in marine life, and that officials plex one because: shrimpers brought in some 50 million
have been lax in requiring simple devices * There is a lack of scientific data on shrimp, according to Haddad. By 1981
that will save thousands of turtles and trawl impact. only three million were caught and since
megatons of juvenile fish. This month * Little money is allocated to conduct the bare-bones studies done thus far don't
covers the question of bottom destruction the necessary studies. include fishing effort, the findings are
byshrimpers. * There is a misunderstanding about not exact.
the different trawl types and how Nevertheless, the apparent magnitude
they work. of the losses is making the Tampa Bay
ar out in the Gulf of Mexico are * Waterside development arnd its doc- situation a hot topic on the West Coast.
barren stretches of bottom-ma- umentced negative impact on aq(luatic And the connection between habitat,
X rine deserts which sometimes sup- resources continues to escalate, making shrimp populations and shrimpers is be-
port green stubble if anything at it difficult to keep the trawl issue in coming even more of an issue because
all. Many of these large areas display perspective. the bait shrimpers, of course, are now
strange scars in the sand, as if something Declining shrimp and fish populations concentrating all their efforts on the lim-
heavy had been dragged through. often throw policy makers into the unde- ited areas where seagrasses remain, Had-
Those who discover these voids usually sirable posture of "crisis management" dad added.
move on if they are searchLng for fish or and a major problem with managing a A
underwater sights. But sometimes, awed crisis is that vital, long-term factors can MI any states have ongoing programs
at the sudden sterility, a diver lingers to be overlooked in the stampede to pre- that have for decades monitored the status
contemplate the mystery. serve stocks. of vital fisheries. But in Florida, research
To some, such undersea wastelands are A good example is the spotted seatrout. programs are jump-started annually and
no mystery at all. They seem obviously Grassy habitats and ample shrimp stocks are often geared to address a particular
to be the result of shrimp trawls being are vital to trout. Research has shown crisis. An example is a small, one-year

FLORID)A SPORISMAN/May I'J87 41

TRAWLING continued

| Kill the Grass . . and Kill the Shrimp county governments had jurisdiction over
Here's a rundown of how commercial bail shrimp landings in Florida have declined over the years: the issue of destruction of marine habitats
POUNDS b)y shrimp trawlers. For its part, the legisla-
ture relied largely on the same experts that
2,000,000 will be appearing before the MFC to speak .
on trawl damage.
1,750,000 After being given authority over
shrimping last year, the MFC hired a
1 1:500 0;( st.:',;;*:'~t>W~lt.~g .shrimp biologist--a position the Bureau of
1,500,000 s pe
t,500,000 ic., Marine Research never did have-but -
.;'1.-25"0-~-~ 000I,:..- ',:; ' .shrimping studies promise to be expen- K
*�~.~,..-;:..~,: 1,250 it,000 s.,~ sive and time-consuming. Any valid re-
1,000 0,00g ,./.....:: .. X? z- ............. ' search must cover different types of nets, '
1,000,000 ".Amt,:..i. rP'...:3- 'g: different types of bottoms, shrimping
grounds within the state and the different
*,750,000 er:~f.,,.~.,..14{ A�i':-:Mg~g , ._.,,. types of shrimpers presently operating in
.F.J~"~a~,?; :5,0 i;..1;...Florida waters.
500,000- . . Though Tampa Bay is targeted as a top-
;' priority area nobody can really prove who
250,000- , . i,-: . . is to blame-or to what extent blame
-:,..'. . .... '- should be shared-for the loss of sea-
~~,::'.:"- " ":~ *'";'":' '"~--;~ grasses, shrimp and trout. Development,
1,663,485 1,282,021 1,020,231 656,405 649,912 sewage, Florida's pro-growth policies and
LANDINGS waterfront construction, are all factors that
1965 19 70 1975 1980 1984 have to be taken into account when trying
to assess trawl damage.
study that just began on bait shrimping in has little money with which to conduct "There has been no research that has

Even as shrimpers converge on virtually volve around the scanty studies that have into what has caused the problem,"
every patch of grass in Tampa Bay, the been done by the DNR's Bureau of Ma- says Haddad.
Florida Marine Fisheries Commission has rine Research and the testimony of the A basic question to be resolved is simply
begun a series of workshops designed to aforementioned commercial "witnesses." "Do trawls damage the bottom?" The an-
investigate shrimping. But since the MFC Until last year, the state legislature and swer depends on who is answering it.
"Yes and no," says Bob Jones, executive
director of the Southeastern Fisheries As-
sociation, whose members represent a
broad spectrum of commercial fishing in-
How tIoW JObu y How c o o lert . terests, including shrimping. "One storm,
or a Northeaster with enough wind to
move sediment and everything around on ,
the bottom can do more damage than I
s tompi it * shrimp boats can over a long period of
rn. ~ j u m p ' on it~~ time. You cannot make a blanket state-
ElO jump on it ment such as 'they are tearing up all
the bottom.'"
Eowi td+ nit l~l| Bob Mahood, executive director of the
rq 111l J 1 l J wad1hit it South Atlantic Fisheries Management
Council, which will co-regulate Florida's
Atlantic waters with the state when both
ii Then mgejt ~serinlous I--�-eh ~ organizations get a shrimp management
e get s plan finalized, replies, "It's debatable.
tk~ A''~ " There have never been any definitive
| an d c hec k f o r: w studies that I am aware of, as far as shrimp
trawls go, that have shown destruction of
O i 11/2" - 3" DENSE POLYURETHANE FOR the bottom. The argument on one side is
SUPER INSULATION 0 EXTRASTRONG SEAMLESS INTERIOR OF that the trawls are kind of like a plow and
O THREE HUGE SIZES - 186 QT. to 320 QT. STAIN-RESISTANT ABS PLASTIC you have to cultivate the bottom to make
CAPACITIES 0 LOCKABLE HEAVY DUTY HASP CLOSURE it productive. The other side says the
[ 5 YEAR WARRANTY 0 SUPER-DURABLE'STAINLESS STEEL
'O RUGGED EXTERIOR OF UV-RESISTANT HINGE trawls tear up everything on the bottom
ROVEL�-CAPPED ABS WHITE PLASTIC O SURE GRIP TEAK HANDLES and destroy it."
"There is a lot of reason to think that
A _ trawls may destroy a lot of bottom grasses
and sponges," says Alex Jernigan, chair-
yeaCl'of the above for
man of the Florida Conservation Associa-
tion and a member of the Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council. "If you go
aboard a shrimp trawler in the southern
Gulf, you'll see a lot of sponges and bot-
ForFree Cala/log.' lI - P. O. Box 527, LEXINGTON PARK, MD 20653-0527/(301) 863-8196 tom formations that have been scraped up
off the bottom. How permanent that dam-
42 FlORIDA SPORISMAN/May 1987
II

TRAWLING continuedl I

age is, I don't know." other areas, there are sea fans and hard
"Trawl damage is a part of shrimping," habitats of the kind that concern Jernigan � _
said Dr. William Fox, Florida's Marine and other critics.
Fisheries Commission (MFC) chairman. One fact remains clear. Right now,
"There is concern about bay shrimpers neither tile state nor tile federal govern-
and inshore shrimpers who use otter ment is protecting the bottom from trawl
trawls and dig up the grass beds." How damage. Another fact that is indisputable FLORIDA DEALERS
substantial the problem is won't be known is that most of the sea grasses lie in
until after the MvIFC's workshops are corn- state waters and these habitats are vital
pleted, Fox noted. to healthy stocks of trout, shrimp, scal-
lops and scores of other species of ma- BRADENTON/
T he types of trawls used are certainly part rine life. SARASOTA
of Ihe issue. Otter trawls are large nets And( while grass and habitat(lestruction Cycle Marine
held open by wooden doors and are gen- are most ofteni associated with otter trawls, 813-758-3854
erally used by "food shrimpers" in deeper there are also problems with roller
water. The doors, the chains that hold the trawls. DUNEDIN
leading edge of the net down and the net "Basically, the idea of rollers is good," Pirate's Cove Marina
itself can all scrape and scar the bottom. says Homosassa's MacRae, who has been a 813-733-1102
The roller trawl, a different type, is most commercial and recreational shrimper all
often used by bait shriml)pers who work his life. "T hey're perfect if they work, but FERNANDINA/
the seagrass areas of shallow Iays. Inslead a Inl of shrimipers use extremely heavy JACKSONVILLE
of plowing the bottomrn, as an otter trawl is trawls wilh small rollers that just bury 14th Street Marina
likely to do, the rollers on this net are themselves in the sand." 904-261-7328
designed to allow the net to roll over the MacRae says the grass beds from Hloin-
grasses without tearing them up. osassa northward are vanishing, and while FT. MYERS/PINE ISLAND
Shrimpers, and some researchers and he calls bait and table shrimping a Pine Land Marina
fishery managers, explain that the heavy, "necessary evil," he says larger rollers 813-283-0080
bottom-dragging otter trawls are "used on the bigger trawls would help protect FOR
in deep water where there are no grass the habitat. FORT PIERCE
beds." However, a closer look indicates St. Lucie Outboard Marine
there are some flaws in that long-standing Yet another problem with bait shrimpers 305-464-1440
observation. is "black market" shrimping. Even though,
"In some areas of the Gulf," says by law, a bait shrimper is required to keep LAKE CITY
MFC executive director Connor Davis, his catch alive, lie may sometimes haul up Bob's Marine Village
"repeated use of trawls is knocking down a load that was killed in the net. Shrimp are 904-755-2611
all the hard-bottom structure and sea wanted alive or dead at the dock and
fans. This may be reducing the habitat's some "bait shrimp" are being sold illegally MIDDLEBURG/
ability to support grouper and snapper to seafood wholesalers as"food shiriml," a JACKSONVILLE
stocks. But there's not a lot of hard infor- practice state employees note does hap- River City Tackle & Marine
mnation available." pen if "sonle places at some tines." 904-282-3115
And even though otter trawls are I laddad has begun a stludy of bail
designed for deep, open water, current shrimping in Tampa Bay and the initial OKEECHOBEE
regulations leave the choice of where findings-using two roller trawls and an B.O.B.S. Marine
to work these rigs up to the individual outboard-powered boat to pull them- 813-763-0936
shrimper. indicates that the nets rolled over the grass
"Hell, they come right into 10 or 12 feet without "mowing it." But, says Haddad, in PENSACOLA
of water and they clean the bottom wilh older for tie stuy to be truly accurate, it arbor Vew Marina
those Irawls," said l)u('anl MacRae, own- sho9l0l ell-olpass shrilillping goal more 904-453-3435
er of MacRae's Bait House on the I lorno- in line with what commercial bait shrimp-
sassa River located in the Big Bend area of ers commonly use. PO MPANO BEACH
the Florida Gulf Coast. "I think the com- And, while study is just beginning in 305946-3370Hillsboro Inlet Marine
mercial part of shrimping (otter trawls) shallow-water habitats, nothing is being 305-946-3370
should be moved farther offshore." (lone on the large offshore grass beds off
The MFC's Fox said the problems of the Big end coast. TAMPA/LAND O' LAKES
otter trawls digging up grass in shallow Yet another angle of bait shrimping is Land O' Lakes Marine
water will be reviewed and when the that it is conducted on' nursery grounds. 813-949-3373
shrimp managemenit plan is taken to the It is well-known thati bait shrinipers catch
Governor and Cabinet at the end of the (quantities of juvenile fish-including baby WINTER HAVEN/
year, could contain restrictions on the seatrout. HAINES CITY
kinds of gear shrimpers use. "We recognize there is some damage to Hoppy's Marine
Outside state waters (meaning beyond some habitat as a result of bait shrimping," 813-422-4321
nine nautical miles in the Gulf) federal said Charles Futch, assistant director of
jurisdiction begins. Here, the water is gen- the Division of Marine Resources. "You
erally too deep for sea grasses, says Wayne know that shrimp is the most popular
Swingle, executive director of the Gulf bait among fishermen and I think there
Council. The byword, however, is "gener- would be a lot less fishing success if PROTECTED TERRITORIES AVAILABLE
ally." In some places, sea grasses do grow this product were unavailable. So it be- For Dealership Inquiries Contact
because the clear Gulf waters allow sun- cornes a tradeoff." 615.385-3652
light to penetrate to the bottom. And in One of the few research studies of bait
44 FlORIDA SPORTSMAN/May 1987

11c

J
TRAWLING continued
shrimping that has been completed was dance of fish reaching larger, catchable
carried out on Biscayne Bay several years size. Though conceding that the Biscayne
ago by the Florida Sea Grant College. Bay study indicated that damage to the
"They had a hard time documenting trout stocks did not appear to be "all that ei/
* any substantial long-term damage to the terrible," Davis says, "Other bait shrimp
habitat," said Futch. The findings indicat- fisheries in other areas might be totally '. . ,..
ed that the catch has remained stable from different. Every bay is totally different. And .
1971 to 1983 and suggested that the bait you do not want to make a blanket as-
shrimp fishery did not significantly af- sumption that everything is hunky-dory
fect the habitat's ability to function as a just because one study in one place said it
shrimp nursery. was all right."
This study, however, contradicts itself The commercial shrimp industry is
m4 when it claims that Biscayne Bay is not a regulated in. Florida the same way it , l
nursery area and that adult shrimp popu- was two decades ago when the fleet was
lations swim into the Bay from other much smaller and its ability to impact AERODYNAMIC FRONT FOIL E TOP MOUNTED
places. Making the study even more sus- shrimp, fish and habitats was correspond- OUTRIGGER HOLDERS * GROMETED VINYL TOP
pect are the comments of John Stevely, a ingly less. * TEE TOPS ARE EASY TO INSTALL * ALL NECES-
| Sea Grant extension agent. Though not a SARY HARDWARE INCLUDED U ELECTROSTATIC
I Sea Grant extension agent. Though not a COATING U COMPLETELY READY TO INSTALL
party to the research project, he said "I Nets are by no means all of the problem, COMPLETELY READY TO INSTALL
wouldn't stake my professional reputation however. 5' x 7' $799.00
3 on it. I don't think any of them [the re- "We had some beautiful virgin country Cons1r,,cled o,.rrucl ..r..lurn..n.,tlinless hardware
searchers] would. on this coast," said MacRae, "Then all V &
"They went out and collected some in- these people moved in and had to shape
formation that I think is fairly reasonable it, mold it, re-canal it and change the di- RA mDIO BOX
but, if you look at their statistics, there rection of the water. They never cared
could be some differences in fishing prac- what damage it did. Now the damnage is RADI BOXES FANERGLAINLESS HARDWARE
ACRYLIC DOOR AND STAINLESS HARDWARE
tices that could throw it off," said Stevely. showing up." 10 HIGH 14" DEEP 20" WIDE $175.00
Despite Stevely's reservations, the Bis- One indicator of the damage is a green 30" WIDE $220.00
cayne Bay study is frequently cited by slime nicknamed "gumbo" that has begun IE
some marine experts as evidence that bait rolling out of the canals and into the Gulf Sired By
shrimping does not harm the habitat. where it smothers the rocky bottom. UNI MAC INDUSTRIES, INC.
The MFC's Davis, who is familiar with Habitat loss isn't limited to the area 1601 HYPOLUXO RD. LANTANA, FLORIDA 33462
the Biscayne Bay study, wonders if the of Homosassa. It's a statewide problem. TELEPHONE: (305)582-4126
catch of trout in trawls affects the abun- Working with satellite photos and com- Dealer Iquwresin,,red

SI-TEX HH100 KODEN MVS-1 INTERPHASE 20/20
VHFHAND HELD Black & White VIDEO
SOUNDER
Sounder ,� Hch Resolution
VT 78 Channel � High resolution screen to 1280 It
E 4 Weather � Distance log �With T ransom
� 110 & 12V Charger Included Surface temp. Mount Tri-ducer
I * 16 Channel Override � Loran Interface w/ Triducer � Speed. Log.,
and
SPECIAL $179.00 . -. SPECIAL $289.00 Temp SPECIAL $349. 00

| SI-TEX ICOM M700 FURUNO
EZ-97 LORAN Single Side 1800 RADAR
Keyboard Entry Band . Ultra compact
ta , E'1~� k VCR Tape � Complete with and lightweight
Instruct. coupler � Steady daylight
� 60 Way Points � 150 Watt picture
if's with antenna * 48 Channel Memory � Alarm optional
SPECIAL $595.00 Call for Quote! SPECIAL $2049.00
PAPER SPECIAL- Ouifitting Your New Boat? I MERICANrenri
All 4 inch Chart Paper for Call for Special Package Quotes! I NAME
Si-Tex - Lowrance - King - I ADDRESS
Ray Jeff etc.. 1-800-824-8475 CIYSTATEZIP
~~~~~~~~Minimum Order 12 Rolls Prices and subjectAMERICAN MARINE ELECTRONICS
# Minimum Order 1 2 Rolls Prices and availablity subject |I 900 E. Atlantic Blvd. FS 5
$3.50 PER ROLL to change without notice. 3I om06ano Beach Florida

FLORIDA SPORTSMAN/May 1987 49
-B Ir ~~~~~~~ __________,e"-~ AMERICAN '" ....

TRAWLING continued

puter-enhanced aerial photographs, Had-
dad and marine biologist Barbara A. Hoff-
man have been mapping habitat declines
in specific Florida waters.
"In Charlotte Harbor we have seen a
i4\>':,P Qloss of approximately 25 per cent (of sea-
grasses)," said Haddad, adding that Char-
lotte Harbor is one of the state's best-
preserved areas. Findings such as this have
begun to generate interest-and research
Brings you |OUTBOARDS by money--to determine the cause-and,
hopefully, to recommend solutions.
A PI Y" ~~~~~~~~~~~~How to pay for this research is yet to be
44 1 1 1 l i'i I Idetermined. Very little of the billions of
and -7 i T dollars generated yearly by Florida's rec-
aI~~~~ n ~~~~~reational and commercial fishing indus-
tries finds its way into research programs.
2 hp - 225 hp Though almost everybody agrees that
Florida has steadily been losing marine
habitat-and probably shrimp production
capacity-for a long time, fishery man-
TIVIII We want to be agers can only address a portion of the
z your YAMAHA problem. Their jurisdiction does not ex-
tend to growth management, pollution
Dealer! Aquasports or development.
Call us. . . 1 7'-27' Trawl damage, however, is a part of the
problem they could address.
We're dealing! in stock! "Yeah, they cleaned the bottom with
those trawls," says Homosassa's MacRae.
LIMITED- ,o or the commercials did it. Maybe fouled-
\WIARRANTY ,,/ up rollers did it. The commercials use
m� i,.yO_ ;>,I *i chain on the bottom. They tear up your
grouper rocks and vegetation and every-
thing else with those otter trawls. They
,~-^^// / have ruined about all the coral on this
coast. They flattened it."
Jones, the perpetual advocate of the
commercial fishermen, noted that the
`.," ,/Q # trawlers try to stay away from outcrop-
7 .. *. pings of rocks and "there may be areas
that have certain types of grasses that you
, may not want to drag over."
9,. 'But if shrimpers find catchable numbers
,~ L @ .;yof the crustaceans in habitat-sensitive
i f:,. -V areas, would they trawl the bottom if it
were legal?
- OTHERS SHOW. . itatio"They'd do it," says Jones without hes-
, I F F Y St-9'~B~l~r L WE SELL! Regulating commercial fishermen isn't a
popular posture for politicians and neither
' tH^~IB~B~a$FI~Rl~i~~ . ;.,-= is regulating development. But solutions
do exist and fishery experts believe one
Aquaspor't: 250 Expr~ ~essof them is limited entry, or allowing only
Aquasport 250 Express Fisherman a set number of shrimpers to fish an area.
Many believe there are simply too many
VISIT US shrimpers working too little bottom. An-
( 0 3 6 FOR YOUR other answer could be closing depleted
(305) B 8E6S3-7T7D7EA3 FOR YOURareas altogether.
BEST DEAL! But without the basic research-and the
studies will be costly-fishery managers,
and the politicians who must pass the nec-
THE LARGEST South Florida's Largest essary legislation, are sitting ducks for
magnum loads of trawler double-talk.
SHOWROOM IN THE SOUTH! , ,0 BO AQ4 7r oDFSi I Will they get the funding? The Sea
;3751~ ~ Old Dixie Hwy. 0 7 Grant's Stevely had the best answer.
.1375 Old Dixie Hwy. DkG {0 Bass Boat Dealer "Everybody is asking for more money.
N. Palm Beach/Lake Park A, d GoAnd the fish don't vote." FS
Florida 33403
Next month: As go the fish, so goes Florida.
50 FLORIDA SPORTSMAN/May 1987

chapter from Jurisdictional Management of Marine Fisheries; Attachment 2.
proceedings of the 11th MRF Symposium held May 1-2, 1986 in
Tampa (in press).

Management Of Tarpon, Bonefish, and Snook
In Florida

Gerard E. Bruger and Kenneth D. Haddad

Game fish status is an unaffordable luxury in sizes effectively ended the snook haul-seine
many countries. Some of the factors that allow fisheries in Lee and Collier counties (southwest
society to designate a species as a game fish Florida) in 1947 and 1951, respectively, without
include availability of a number of edible ever mentioning snook. Biological data, indicat-
species, a fairly high overall standard of living, ing a need for an 18-inch fork length (457 mm
cultural preferences. a willingness on the part FL) minimum size, did not exist when the re-
of the public to be regulated, and a real or per- striction was imposed in 1953. The 1957 legis-
ceived necessity to eliminate commercial har- lation that reserved snook for recreational fish-
vest. ing was originally an attempt to outlaw nets
Tarpon (Megalops atlanticus) needed little while permitting the sale of fish caught on hook-
protection from commercial 'exploitation be- and-line. All sales were banned. snook was
cause no market existed. Tarpon are consumed granted game fish status, and limits on recrea-
in some Central and South American areas but, tional catches were also imposed.
in Florida, an array of edible species provides Most anglers may have difficulty imagining
many more attractive alternatives. Preference that game fish status could be a disadvantage to
may have precluded development of a market a species. Tarpon, bonefish, and the anglers
in the past; legislation ensures that one will not who fish for them, however, are not typical of
develop in the.future. Florida's fisheries. The fisheries are small,
Game fish status for bonefish (Albula vulpes) somewhat seasonal, and, especially in the case
generated little controversy. They were seldom of bonefish, restricted geographically. Anglers
eaten, primarily because of cultural bias and the seeking these fish spend a large amount of
ready availability of alternatives. In 1981, how- money, but they are neither extremely numerous
ever, we were asked for the names of producers nor highly vocal. As a result, other species have
who could supply to a foreign market "substan- gained higher priorities and very little is known
tial quantities" of headed and gutted bonefish about either tarpon or bonefish.
on a year-round basis. Our reply, that bonefish Snook, on the other hand, are avidly sought
is a game fish and can not legally be sold, totally by all types of anglers in coastal waters through-
amazed the requester. Game fish status, there- out central and southern Florida. Marshall
fore, prevented potentially lucrative exploita- (1958) and Volpe (1959) were conducting
tion. Such an outcome probably was not antici- pioneering research on snook in Florida during
pated when the law was enacted. the mid-1950s period of maximum controversy
The fishery for snook (Centropomus unde- when game fish status was granted. Their work
cimalis) has generated extreme emotion and con- may have been used during the legislative pro-
troversy during much of its history. Restrictions cess. Everyone assumed that elimination of
on the snook fishery had their beginnings in the commercial exploitation was sufficient to main-
public perception that the' net fisheries, both tain or rebuild stocks, and all snook research
seine and gill-net, were depleting the resource. was halted when the law passed. Snook suffered
Legislative restrictions on twine, mesh, and net from benign neglect on the part of resource man-

I-t-..' ' I

54 MARINE RECREATIONAL FISHERIES

agers and fishermen alike, from 1957 to 1974, commercial fishing pressure. It is now apparent
while Florida experienced a rapid growth iii that Marshall's (1958) observations on the ef-
human population and great changes in coastal fects of environmental alterations on snook
areas. In 1974, a conservation group from Col- populations received less attention than they had
lierCountypersuadedtheDepartmentofNatural deserved. Marshall (1958) felt that outlawing
Resources that snook in southwest Florida, the snook seines and imposing minimum size limits
historical center of abundance within the state had done little to reverse declines of the popu-
(Marshall 1958), were worthy of renewed re- lation and stated, ". . . they are more likely due
search efforts that they would fund. A major to alterations of the habitat produced by habita-
study began in 1976, within five years, we had tion and development of Florida. than to fish-
determined that the fishermen's observations ing." A total prohibition on commercial harvest
were correct: snook were in trouble. The main since 1957 obviously has not halted the decline.
results of the study (Bruger in review) included, At the 1982 Snook Symposium. in Ft. Lauder-
(1) adult population size in the Naples-Marco dale, Arthur Marshall (1983) presented the fol-
Island area was small and dropped from approx- lowing "axiomatic postulate": "In order for a
imately 28,000 individuals in 1977 to approxi- fish population to survive, it must be immersed
mately 8,600 individuals by 1981; (2) reported in water." This concept is deceptively simple,
tag return rates from recreational anglers ranged but successful management of recreational or
from 12.5 to 22% annually, and true exploitation commercial species that inhabit estuarine waters
rates were probably considerably higher because for some portion of their lives depends upon our
not all tags were reported; (3) snook in that area ability to insure that the species are immersed
are not particularly migratory - nearly 90% of in water and that the water is suitable for them.
reported tags came from fish that had moved One scenario on the development of Florida.
less than ten miles from the release site, suggest- and its related impact on the fisheries. involves
ing that Florida's total snook stocks are corm- a hypothetical Mr. and Mrs. Smith from Any-
posed of several sub-populations; and (4) poor where-but-Florida, USA. During a winter vaca-
survival of larvae and/or juveniles spawned in tion to the Sunshine State they realize that fish-
1978 produced low recruitment into the adult ing and the sunshine were never like this at
population in 1981. home in February, so they buy a beautiful new
Snook laws began to change drastically at this house on a canal. Shortly thereafter. it is sum-
point and, in 1985, nearly 80% of the snook mer, and Mr. and Mrs. Smith cannot go outside
population was illegal to catch. East coast critics after 7 p.m. because of the mosquitos. Soon,
of these measures contended that research done the elected officials have 6,000 Mr. Smiths com-
on the southwest coast did not apply to "their plaining and they must act. In some areas the
fishery." The, evidence is that snook abundance salt marsh and mangrove swamps that serve as
is much reduced from historical levels through- mosquito breeding areas are drained by exten-
out Florida di'spite this dissension. Creel surveys sive canal systems. In other areas, dikes isolate
conducted in the St. Lucie estuary, on Florida's the marsh from tidal waters. The Smiths, mean-
east coast, revealed that snook dropped from while, are applying truckloads of fertilizer and
26.3% of the total harvest in 1956-1957 to 2.2% chemicals to their lawn and watering 24 hours
in 1978-1979 (Van Os etal 1981). Snook catches a day in a valiant effort to keep it green and
in Everglades National Park declined from stop the hordes of insects. Then, one day, Mr.
19.300 to 4,000 fish between 1972 and 1977 Smith realizes that fishing is not as good as in
(U.S. National Park Service 1979). the past and demands that something be done
This presentation is not really about tarpon, to restore his fishing'. He makes his demands
bonefish, or even snook. It is about jurisdiction from the house that sits on land that once was
and management of Florida's saltwater fisheries; bay bottom and supported mangroves and sea-
snook just happen to be a convenient case his- grasses.
tory. Nearly three-fourths of. Florida's human
The snook tagging study (Bruger in review) population live in coastal areas. These people
showed that anglers could exert a major impact required alterations of wetlands habitat for resi-
once the population had been reduced to a low dential and commercial development, flood con-
level. The original decline, however, did not trol, agriculture, mosquito control, and other
result solely from recreational or, for that matter, reasons. These requirements often conflict with

~~~I, ',j i,~~~~~~

GAME FISH MANAGEMENT 55

the concept of keeping the animals immersed in in existing canals in some cases (U.S. Depart-
water and. as a result, much critical wetlands ment of the Interior 1959). The report concluded
habitat has been permanently altered. Once-pro- that, "The project, as planned, would be detri-
ductive fisheries habitats now support dense mental to the fisheries of the North Fork and
growths of condominiums. St. Lucie Estuaries." (U.S. Department of the
A general 'awareness of the intimate relation- Interior 1959). The Corps proceeded with the
ship between habitat and fisheries production project despite the warning. The 1978-1979
now exists. Unfortunately, quantification of creel survey evaluated effects of the discharges
habitat-fishery relationships has received little on angling catch rates, and the authors stated
attention historically, and the scientific com- that, "It is our opinion that the estuary is chang-
munitv has been unable to provide data for effec- ing and, as a result, the desirable sport fishes
tive management of a species. Habitat losses are becoming less abundant. Other estuarine
are now being documented and the figures for species are now surpassing them in CPE." (Van
Florida are alarming. Approximately 30% of all Os et al 1981).
vegetated coastal wetlands habitat losses in the Naples Bay, on the southwest coast, now re-
United States occurred in Florida (Frayer et al ceives 20 to 40 times more fresh water input
1982). Tampa Bay has lost 44% of its mangrove than it did before the opening of the Golden
and marsh habitat and 81% of its seagrasses Gate Canal in 1964 (Simpson 1979). This has
since development began in the area (Lewis et resulted in strong salinity stratification,
al 1979, 1985). The Indian River lagoon serves substandard dissolved oxygen concentrations
as a nursery area for tarpon (Harrington and during most of the year (Hicks 1979), and re-
Harrington 1982), bonefish (R.G. Gilmore, duced species abundance and diversity in the
Harbor Branch Foundation. personal communi- upper Bay and Gordon River (Yokel 1979).
cation: Bruger, unpublished data), and snook The situation is reversed in the Everglades.
(Gilmore et al 1983). An estimated 30% of the Approximately 1,500 miles of canals, including
seagrasses and 86% of the mangrove and marsh those connecting with the St. Lucie estuary have
have been lost in this area (Haddad et al in been dug since the late 1800s for water control,
preparation). The mangrove and marsh losses drainage, and "conservation" (Rote 1981). Re-
resulted primarily because of mosquito im- duced water levels, reduced water retention
poundments that effectively remove habitat from time, and hypersaline conditions in Florida Bay,
fisheries production. resulting from these canals, have caused a
Habitat alterations are not limited to the phys- "catastrophic reduction in nursery habitat for
ical destruction of a habitat type. They also in- estuarine finfish and shellfish." (Browder and
volve alterations to traditional water-flow pat- Moore 1981; Spear 1981; Marshall 1983).
terns. Charlotte Harbor, on Florida's west coast,
has undergoTne development, but most of it has Summary
occurred sinde the late 1960s. The area was Rational fisheries management cannot occur
targeted as one of Critical State Concern, and unless the habitat of the resource is managed as
growth management plans provide a buffer be- well. Fisheries managers may have jurisdiction
tween the estuary and upland development. over management of a species, but they have
Shoreline margins of the estuary have been pre- little, if any, jurisdiction over the physical envi-
served and mangrove acreage has actually in- ronment of that species. The Indian River lagoon
creased by 10% since the 1940s (Harris et al is a good example of a multi-jurisdictional sys-
1983). Seagrass acreage has decreased 29%, tem. The lagoon is bordered or managed by six
however, probably because of changes in am- counties, many municipalities, and at least 49
bient water quality by urban, suburban, indus- federal, state, county, or local agencies (Panico
trial, and agricultural runoff and discharge, and Barile 1986). Fisheries managers generally
dredging activities, and fresh water flow have not had too much impact on the planning
changes (Harris et al 1983). process in the system.
The 1956-1957 creel study in the St. Lucie .More than 70% of Florida's recreational and
estuary was part of an evaluation of the effects commercial finfish species utilize estuarine
of proposed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers al- areas for some or all of their lives (Harris et al
terations to the St. Lucie County Canals Project. 1983). A fundamental law of physics states that
These alterations would have doubled flow rates for every action, there is an equal, but opposite,

I I '
I~~~~~~~~~~~\

56 MARINE RECREATIONAL FISHERIES

reaction. Actions involving the wetlands or ity sections. In B.L. Simpson (ed.), The Naples Bay
water resources will affect the state's fisheries Study. CollierCounty Conservancy, Naples. Florida.
eiather pstilyoregavly.ThchieLewis. R.R.. C.S. Lewis, W.K. Fehring, and J.A. Rodgers.
either positively or negatively. The choice is 1979. Coastal habitat mitigation in Tampa Bay.
ours. Florida. In G. Swanson (tech. coord.), Proceedings
Conflicts between recreational and commer- of the Mitigation Symposium. Technical Report RM-
cial fishermen over estuarine-dependent species 65: 136-140. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Ft. Col-
generally concern allocation of resources re- [ ins, Colorado.
Lewis. R.R.. M.J. Durako, M.D. Moffler, and R.C. Phil-
duced by habitat destruction. Cooperation by lips. 1985. Seagrass meadows in Tampa Bay - A re-
both sides to protect the habitat of these re- view. In S.A. Treat, J.L. Simon, R.R. Lewis. III.
sources might forestall further conflicts. A re- and R.L. Whitman, Jr. (eds.), Proceedings Tampa
source and its environment cannot be treated as Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium. Florida
Sea Grant College Report Number 65: 210-246.
distinct entities. To maintain or rebuild our Burgess Publishing Company. Minneapolis. Min-
fisheries. habitat concerns must be considered nesota.
during the planning process. Marshall, A.R. 1958. A survey of the snook fishery of
Forty years of snook management have pro- Florida. with studies of the biology of the principal
species. Centropomus undecimalis (Bloch). Technical
duced numerous regulations on fishermen, but Series Number 22 (37 pp.). Florida State Board of
no increase in the snook population. Without Conservation Marine Laboratory, St. Petersburg.
proper management of habitat. fisheries man- Florida.
agement merelv becomes an exercise in manag- Marshall. A.R. 1983. Effects of water flow alterations on
south Florida estuaries. In G.E. Bruger (ed.), Sum-
ing people. mary of Proceedings. Snook Symposium: 9. Florida
Department of Natural Resources, St. Petersburg.
Literature Cited Florida.
Panico, C.A. and D.D. Barile. 1986. Management of the
Bruger, G.E. (in review). Assessment of adult snook popu- Indian River Lagoon. Interim report to the Indian River
lation dynamics. Naples-Marco Island. Florida. 1976- Lagoon Legislative Delegation (79 pp.). Marine Re-
1982. Unpub. Ms. Bureau of Marine Research. De- sources Council, Florida Institute of Technology. Mel-
partmnent of Natural Resources. St. Petersburg. bourne. Florida.
Florida. Rote. J.W. 1981. Role of the National Marine Fisheries
Browder. J.A.. and D. Moore. 1981. A new approach to Service in the protection of freshwater inflow estuaries.
determining the quantitative relationship between In R. Cross and D. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of
fishery production and the flow of fresh water to es- the National Symposium on Freshwater Inflow to Es-
tuaries. In R. Cross and D. Williams (eds.), Proceed- tuaries, Vol. 1:18-22. FWS/OBS-81/04 (2 Vols.). Of-
ins of the National Symposium on Freshwater Inflow fice of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
to Estuaries. Vol. 1: 403-430. FWS/OBS-8104 (2 Service, Washington, D.C.
Vols.). Office of Biological Senrices, U.S. Fish and Simpson. B.L. (ed.). 1979. The Naples Bay Study. Collier
Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-81/ County Conservany, Naples, Florida.
04. 2 Volunies. Spear, M. 1981. Freshwater inflows and Fish and Wildlife
Frayer. W.E., 'f.J. Monahan. D.C. Bowden. and F.A. Service operations. Pp. 23-30, Volume I. In Cross
GraNbill. 1 02. Statusandtrendsofwetlands and deep- and D. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of the National
water habitis in the coterminus United States, 1950's Symposium on Freshwater Inflow to Estuaries, Vol.
to 1970's. Draft Technical Report (18 pp.). U.S. Fish 1:23-30. FWS/OBS-81/04 (2 Vols.). Office of Biolog-
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. ical Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Gilmore. R.G..jti.J. Donohoe, and D.W. Cooke. 1983. Washington, D.C.
Observations on the distribution and biology of east- U.S. Department of the Interior. 1959. An interim report
central Forida populations of the common snook, Cen- on the fish and wildlife resources in relation to the
tropomus wndecimalis (Bloch). Florida Scientist. 46(3/ Corps of Engineers' plan of development for the St.
4): 313-336. Lucie County canals, Florida. 19 pp. U.S. Department
Haddad, K.D., B.A. Hoffman, and K.A. Killam. (in prep.). of the Interior, Vero Beach, Florida.
Stats of fisheries habitat Indian River Lagoon and U.S. National Park Service. 1979. An assessment of fishery
Loxaharcbe Estuary. Final Report. Florida Depart- management options in Everglades National Park,
menat of Niural Resources, St. Petersburg. Florida. Florida. 61 pp. South Florida Research Center, U.S.
Harrington, R.W. and E.S. Harrington. 1982. Effects on National Park Service, Everglades National Park,
fishes and their forage organisms of impounding a Homestead, Florida.
Florida salt marsb to prevent breeding by salt marsh Van Os, E., J.D. Carroll, Jr., and J. Dunn. 1981. Creel
mosquitoes. Bulletin of Marine Science, 32(3): 523- census and the effects of freshwater discharges on
531. sportfishing catch rates in the St. Lucie Estuary, Martin
Harris. B.. K.D. Haddad, K.A. Steidinger, and J.A. Huff. County, Florida. 34 pp. aapp. Ecological Services,
1983. Assessmen of fisheries habitat: Charlotte Har- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Vero Beach, Florida.
bor and Lake Worth, Florida. 211 pp. Florida Depart- Volpe, A.V. 1959. Aspects of the biology of the common
ment of Natural Resources. St. Petersburg, Florida. snook, Centropomus undecimalis (Bloch) of southwest
Hicks, D. 1979. Water quality and public health-water qual- Florida. Technical Series Number 31 (37 pp.). Marine

.i.'i

GAME FISH MANAGEMENT 57

Laboratory. Florida State Board of Conservation. St. sturgeon, red snapper. Since 1976, he has con-
Petersburg, Florida. centrated on population dynamics of snook in
Yokel, B. 1979. Biology Section. In B.L. Simpson (ed.) southwest Florida.
Ile Naples Bay Study. Collier County Conservancy. Kenneth Haddad is a biological scientist with
Naples, Florida. the Florida Department of Natural Resources'
Gerard Bruger is a fisheries biologist for the Bureau of Marine Research. His current research
Florida Department of Natural Resources' involves use of satellite and aircraft remote sens-
Bureau of Marine Research, St. Petersburg. ing techniques to assess and monitor both histor-
From 1969 to 1976, he worked on a variety of ical and ongoing alterations to fisheries habitat.
species including American shad, bonefish,

.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
I~~~~~~~

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,

I~~~~~

Attachment 3.

THE ROLE OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN MANAGING
I ~~~~~FLORIDA'S COASTAL WETLAND RESOURCES
Kenneth D. Haddad* & Barbara A. Hoffman*

I ~~Florida is one of the fastest growing states in the
nation and this trend is ex"6cted to continue into the
twenty-first century. The impact of this growth on our
I ~wetland ecosystems is difficult to assess and monitor. To
deal with the complex and often conflicting issues of
growth versus environment, coastal resource managers
I ~require rapid access to a comprehensive coastal resource
database from which they can extract and synthesize
pertinent data to aid in their decision-making. Although
the concept of using resource data to manage the resources
I ~is not new, the reality of such databases is that they have
been limited because of the technical and organizational
complexities associated with implementation. With rapid
I ~advances in computer and software technology, the creation
of comprehensive resource databases is now possible at the
state and local level. The data requirements of the
resource manager are often geographical in character and
much of the resource software technology is addressing this
requirement.

I ~~Geoqraphic Information Systems

"Geographic information system" (GIS) is a generic
I ~term and may be defined as a computer system or network
that has as its primary function the analysis and handling
of geographic (spatial) data. A GIS, by hardware and
software design, is able to accept large volumes of spatial
data from a variety of sources and to manipulate, retrieve,
analyze, and display the data efficiently according to
user-defined specifications (Marble and Peuquet, 1983).
I ~Any database that is geographically referenced has the
potential for GIS entry and, certainly, many aspects of
Florida's coastal wetland resources meet this criterion.
Some GIS software designs incorporate capabilities to
access attribute (tabular non-spatial) data associated with
a geographic location. An example of this would be the
ability to access, on a computer terminal, a permit
I ~application or tax record based on the location of a parcel
of property displayed graphically in a map form. GIS
* ~applications are numerous but a clear understanding of the

*Biological Scientist, Florida Department of Natural
Resources Bureau of Marine Research, 100 8th Avenue, SE,
St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5095.

U ~various types of GIS data and database development are
required for successful implementation.
I ~~~Two basic data structures are utilized in GIS systems:
rastor and vector. GIS software packages, with many
variations of these data structures, are becoming
increasingly available within both the non-proprietary
(tax-dollar developed) and commercial markets.

3 ~~~A rastor-based GIS is one in which the geographic data
are presented as discriminate cells of a predetermined
geographic size (i.e., 1/4 acre, 1/3 acre, etc.) with each
cell having one data value commensurate with the type or
layer of data being displayed (Figure 1). The user
actually sees the specific numerical values as colors or
gray shades on a computer screen. This type of GIS
I ~database is an extension of digital image processing of
aircraft and satellite scanners and, more recently, digital
photographs and video imaging.
A vector-based GIS utilizes a map display in which a
series of x,y points are connected by lines and arcs and
are presented on a map or computer screen as polygon
I ~outlines (Figure 2). Vector-based GIS's generally are
extensively modified Computer-Aided Design (CAD) packages
and are logical extensions of non-computerized map
drawings.

* ~ ~~~ 2 22 22222 2
2 1 3 1 1 2 3 3
3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
3 33 33 3 33 L
LAND COVER, RASTOR LAND COVER, VECTOR
~~~~~I 1= water ,W = water
2 = seagrass S = seagrass
3 =land L = land

Figure I Figure 2

These two basic types of data are often
interchangeable, but they also are substantially different
in many aspects of data manipulation, geographic accuracy,

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2

overlay capabilities, attribute handling, and data entry.
In addition, some GIS's give the user all possible options
and benefits of both the rastor and vector types of data.
These aspects will not be presented in detail, but one must
fully explore the ranges of GIS capabilities prior to a
database development initiative.

Marine Resource Geographic Information System

A program has been initiated at the Florida Department
of Natural Resources (FDNR), with funding through the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the NOAA
office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, to develop
a coastal wetland resources spatial database and
incorporate these data into a computer-based information
system. The initial phase of the FDNR program was to
institute a Marine Resources Geographic Information System
(MRGIS) and develop techniques in remote sensing and image
analysis for mapping and monitoring marine wetlands in
Florida's coastal zone. Haddad and Harris (1985a)
concluded that the time constraints and enormous funding
required for conventional photogrammetric mapping preclude
standard approaches to mapping and monitoring a coastline
of over 2,172 km. Thematic Mapper (TM) data from Landsat
satellite (1/4 acres spatial resolution) was evaluated and
chosen as the primary database in the mapping procedure.
The TM data are not effective in all mapping requirements
and are supplemented with aerial photography where
necessary (Haddad and Harris, 1985b). The success of the
MRGIS now depends on (1) transformation of the raw LANDSAT
TM data into a wetlands/land-use map and (2) the use of
geographically referenced TM data as the coordinate
reference system for overlays of ancillary geographic data.
We emphasize that the wetlands mapping effort provides just
one of many layers of data required for the MRGIS.

Since TM data are in a rastor format, the MRGIS
required a rastor-based GIS. ELAS, a non-proprietary
software package developed by NASA Earth Resources
Laboratory, was chosen as the primary tool for MRGIS
development. ELAS is a modular FORTRAN overlay package
that is machine independent (Junkin et al. 1981). ELAS,
as described by Marble and Peuquet (1983), may be
categorized as a rastor-based GIS. The exceptional
flexibility of the ELAS software package makes it a
powerful image processing/GIS tool., The ability to
manipulate and sort layered data is not based on a "user
friendly approach"; thus, ELAS is not recommended for
direct infusion into a management situation. Our choice
for this software was based on the variety of remotely
sensed data interfaces and image processing capabilities,
crucial elements for successful implementation of the
MRGIS. The data created on the MRGIS can be manipulated by
the GIS capabilities of ELAS or is easily compatible with

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3

any rastor-based GIS on the market (see Data

I I4~~RGIS Data Overlays
A major function of a GIS is to utilize compatible,
multiple, co-referenced layers of geographic data (Figure
3) to create a new file containing the results (pictorially
and numerically) of a user generated query. The ability to
enter ancillary data (such as bathymetry, sediment and soil
I ~~types, etc.) is the feature that gives the GIS such value
as a tool in resource management. This approach has been
applied to many different situations, such as forestry and
fire control management (Root et al., 1986) and land use
management (Nystrom et al., 1986). A comprehensive
applications review of GIS technology is in Geographic
Information Systems Workshop (1986). -The M4RGIS overlay
database is being designed specifically to provide the
Florida resource manager with the capability to assess and
monitor submerged and emerged wetland environment. This is
important for balanced and informed management of these
sensitive lands for dependent fisheries, non-game wildlife,
I ~~and burgeoning population growth in the coastal zone.
MRGIS data layers input for the Tampa Bay region of
Florida include vegetation cover? waterbird nesting sites,
sediment distribution, topography, open/closed shellfish
areas, manatee sanctuaries, pertinent jurisdictional
boundaries, water currents, and seasonal averages of
salinity, temperture, and chlorophyll. Additional data
layers can be added when necessary.
A typical query of this system could be based on the
following hypothetical scenario. An Aquatic Preserve
manager in the Tampa Bay region has determined that the
wading bird populations are declining because the parent
birds are unable to feed their young adequately during
nesting season. These birds only range three kilometers
from the nesting site during the active nesting season and
feed only in shallow, vegetated wetland areas with sandy
I ~~sediment. in order to grant special protective status on
these feeding habitats, the manager needs to know all the
areas within the Aquatic Preserve that meet these
conditions (see Figure 3).
The results of such a GIS query are immediately available
to the Aquatic Preserve manager (F~igure 4). This is just
oeexample of the many queries that could be imposed on
the data. The queries are generally based on simple
mathematical logic and can utilize various types of
I ~~modelling (i.e., soil runoff coefficients, biological
carrying capacities, etc.) to generate a final data set.

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

WADING BIRD NESTING SITES

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
VEGETATION COVER

I � I I SEDIMENT TYPES
a ~" I

I I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
II I DISTANCE FROM NESTING SITES

AQUATIC PRESERVE BOUNDARY

Figure 3

Data Dissemination

As the MRGIS database has been developed, demands to
access that information have increased. Most resource
managers deal with either hand-drafted maps or computer
produced vector-type maps from line plotters. Since rastor
data cannot easily be conveyed in these forms, two primary
approaches to data dissemination have been taken with the
MRGIS.

1. Rastor data are pictorial in character and are displayed
in color on a computer screen. Each color has a
specific meaning and the user can readily identify and
visually extract the information subsets of an image.
In the past, simple photographic techniques have been
used in the past to present a hardcopy of the data, but
this has proven expensive and impractical in many
applications. An inkjet printer, which has the
capability of reproducing 4,096 different colors in an
image (photographic like output) format, has been
interfaced to the MRGIS. Utilizing a combination of in-
house and commercially available software, the ELAS data
files can be reproduced on paper, at minimal cost, in
any scale and in a variety of earth coordinate systems.
Figure 4 is a black and white production from the inkjet

37ED00 139DB0 332000 334Dno

................. .............. .. . .. ... ............. I.......... .. .

3D5aDfD - - ------f.

..........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .jjj:)-=.... . .... .......�

_asn 'SS- SSSSSSS-SS S.-SSSSSSS.--,S - -----.',-.-.Z,. _

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... .".......W1
3054DDU- ~~~~~~~~... ..............

* *0 ,n>
30520UU~~~~~~~~~~~~~- .. ... . Ss5~ ...So; ::-02U

iarlsl *_i Imjj~j - - sssssss s ss s
3USDDUU- > -~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. .... ...
;iir~~~~~~~~~........

,~~~~~........................... .........

I~~~~~~ WADING BIRD FEEDING AREA

MANGROVE

SEAGRASS NOT LOCATED IN WADING BIRD FEEDING AREA

......WATER

I ~ ~ ~ :- UPLAND

I ~~Figure 4. Inkjet printer output ih a-Universal Transverse Mercator
mapprojection (tick marks = 1000 in). This print repre-
sents the results of a management query on a multilayered
data set (see Figure 3). A standard inkjet print would

be in color (256 shades) and more defined pictorally. The
scale of the print is 1:67000. The scale of the data on
I the MRGIS is 1:24000; thus, this print does not present
full resolution.
~~-:':IS:: :: ~~~ ;~~i,~�~~�,~,~~~;~,,,,., :.: ~~~.^ahj~~~i::....ii..`......ili~~i

I ~~'~~ j~i~i ~`��.:.I i~i:::::l~j~i:~:i�:�~�:�j�(~~~:~i~�~:~~: .,,,::,:,i�: r: _lij~fi~:;j~:,-ii':�~U i~i.............
I'::~:: ::~: j-:-:�: iw . ............
:2~~1` -~:j~IJ~llii:~-~-~ ~j_~~-. ......... .. ........................j
~' ".: ~i~ iiii~iai::i':'...............

Iloooo 130000 31YllIIO~~~~~~~~~........

ozn r BR FEDN AE

............
..............AEDI WDIG IR EEIN AE
--- ----------- . ......
........ ....... . ..... .

Figure 4. Inkjet pr................ ....... .............. ...... .. .
................................ m. . . . . _-tw t M.e
sents he reults f a maagemet quey on .........re
data set (ee Figure ). A standrd ink............l
be in color (256 shad.................... ............. .. ... - h
scale of the print is 1:67000. The....................
the MRGIS is 1:24000; thus, this print does......... .
full resolution.~~~~~.................

printer and represents the final data set created from a
query based on Figure 3. Products from the inkjet
printer for data dissemination have proven useful for
many resource queries.

2. Hardcopy products are applicable in many situations, but
the real value of working with digital data in a GIS is
the ability to manipulate and query the data in a real-
time management decision-making process. The only
method for rapid access is direct computer access.
Real-time access to a mainframe computer housing the
data is technically and economically impractical
bbecause many resource managers are in field situations
and graphic data volumes are so large. An alternative
approach is to make the data available on microcomputers
with their own GIS capabilities.

A pilot program to evaluate the potential of downloading
MRGIS data to a microcomputer for use in a management
setting has been completed. Figure 5 schematically depicts
the maximum microcomputer GIS configuration. The
peripherals in the configuration can be added or deleted,
depending on user needs and budgets. One major obstacle in

GIS DATA
TAPE CARTRIDGE
I MONOCHROME MONITOR TAP MAIL

I~~~~~~
VIA MAIL
GIS COLOR 30 Mb
IIMAGE DISPLAY ISK DRIVE

U ~~~~36" x 48"1I M A CRRIG
TABLE DIGITIZE IBMATCATRDEM

STANDARD
PRINTER
ERDAS, INC.
INKJET -GIS SOFTWARE
~~~~~~~~~~PINE QPIGITIZER SOFTWARE
-INKJET PRINTER SOFTWARE

Figure 5

working with geographic data is the large data volume. A
typical file exceeds 5 megabytes in storage space,
precluding data transfer by floppy disk. Direct data

transfer to microcomputer by modem is currently not
feasible due to expense and transfer times. Transfer
through the mail on a medium was considered the most viable
method. Nine track tapes are a standard data transfer
method for mainframe computers and can be used in the
microcomputer environment, but they are expensive and not
used universally. Optical disks will eventually be the
preferred method, but that technology has not advanced
sufficiently. We are currently transferring data on 1/4
inch tape cartridges. The tape cartridge industry is not
standardized, so transfer can only be accomplished on
compatible tape drives. The system we chose was an file-
oriented tape back-up unit. It can store up to 60
megabytes of data in separate files on standard tape
cartridges. Data are transferred from the mainframe MRGIS
via an RS232 serial interface to an IBM-AT. The data are
reformatted during the transfer to conform to the GIS
software used on the microcomputer. The data files are
then transferred to the tape cartridges as DOS files and
sent via mail to the field GIS.

As part of the pilot project, two commercially
available, rastor-based micro-GIS's were installed, one at
the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council and the
other at an FDNR Aquatic Preserve in Naples, Florida. The
ERDAS, Inc. GIS has a basic configuration that allows a
color display of the data, various GIS manipulations, and
data deletions and additions. Capabilities important to
the basic system and available as separate additions are
table digitizing and color inkjet printer hardcopy
generation (see Figure 4). A commercial system was chosen
because the careful software planning and design provide
simple menu-driven access to the data. This puts the GIS
within the realm of potential use by the resource manager.

The development of the MRGIS and the ability to
transfer GIS data to microcomputers has been a technical
success. Management utilization has not been fully
assessed, but the initial results are encouraging. The
East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC)
used the micro-GIS to target wetlands requiring different
levels of planning. Wetland cover for Brevard County,
Florida, was developed on the MRGIS using LANDSAT TM data
and downloaded to the ECFRPC. ECFRPC then used U.S. census
tract populations and regionally deVeloped population
projections to create a data overlay of predicted changes
in population densities throughout the county from the year
1985 to 2000. These projections were then weighted by
density and analyzed with the wetland data in order to
target wetlands of high to low potential for impact by
population growth. This information can now be used in
prioritizing wetland management in the growth management
planning process. The FDNR micro-GIS in Naples, Florida,
is being used to develop a comprehensive database on the
Rookery Bay, Cape Romano, and Ten Thousand Islands Aquatic

Preserves. This database will be an extension of the type
of overlays being developed for Tampa Bay. Again, the
wetlands resources were developed on the MRGIS using TM
data and downloaded to the Aquatic Preserve GIS.
Additional resource data are being entered using a table
digitizer capability. The micro-GIS will be the primary
management tool for these Aquatic Preserves.

Conclusion: The Role of the MRGIS in Resource
Management

MRGIS rastor database development and data dissemination
by hardcopy and, more importantly, to microcomputer, have
proven to be the techological success of the GIS concept.
This strategy for data dissemination will also provide
rapid access of large volumes of geographic data to the
resource manager. The MRGIS, combined with microcomputer
field systems, offers a desktop, user-friendly approach,
with a color map-oriented display. This system allows
resource managers to effectively utilize the best available
data in resource planning and decision-making. We also
plan to link geographically-oriented data with tabular data
(such as fisheries statistics, boat licenses, and
environmental permits) to provide state, regional, and
local resource managers and planners with additional
information regarding the use of natural resources.

Even though the MRGIS has been successfully tested in
small scale management situations, the GIS concept may not
be accepted or incorporated-into management structure,
primarily because upper level management lacks familiarity
with GIS technology. Consequently, GIS development is not
initiated at this level, but at the technical level, which
often results in a minimal and inadequate commitment to
develop a GIS.

The success of the MRGIS is attributed to definitive
goals, established in its development, that were to (1)
develop a spatial inventory of marine fisheries habitat
using remote sensing technques, (2) determine and monitor
trends in habitat change, (3) integrate ancillary data from
a variety of sources as GIS overlays for fisheries
management queries, and (4) demonstrate the potential of an
image processing rastor-based GIS for research, management,
and education. These goals currently govern the role of
the MRGIS in management of Florida's coastal resources, but
an interest in applying GIS techniques to many aspects of
resource management is growing.

Literature Cited

Haddad, K.D. and B.A. Harris. 1985a. Assessment and
trends of Florida's marine fisheries habitat: an
integration of aerial photography and thematic mapper
imagery. pp. 130-189 in S.K. Mengel and D.B. Morrison

(eds.), Machine Processing of Remotely Sensed Data.
West Lafayette, IN. Purdue University. 370 pp.

Haddad, K.D. and B.A. Harris. 1985b. Use of remote
sensing to assess estuarine habitats. pp. 662-675 in
O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, D. Minor, D. Clark, and L.T.
Tobin (eds.), Coastal Zone '85, Proceedings of the
Fourth Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, Vol.
1, New York, American Society of Civil Engineers. 1294
PP.

Junkin, B., R. Pearson, R. Seyforth, M. Kalcic, and M.
Graham. 1981. ELAS Earth Resources Laboratory
Applications Software. NASA/NSTL Earth Resources
Laboratory. Rep. No. 183. NSTL Station, MS.

Marble, D.F. and D.F. Peuquet. 1983. Geographic
information systems. pp. 923-929 in D.S. Simorett
(ed.), Manual of Remote Sensing, 2nd Ed., Vol. 1. Falls
Church, VA. American Society of Photogramettry.

Nystrom, D.A., B.E. Wright, M. Prisloe, Jr., and L.G.
Batten. 1986. USGS/Connecticut geographic information
system project. pp. 210-219 in Geographic Information
Systems, Vol. 3. Falls Church, VA. American Congress
on Surveying and Mapping and American Society for
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

Root, R.R., S.C.F. Stitt, M.O. Nyquist, G.S. Waggoner, and
J.K. Agee. 1986. Vegetation and fire fuel models
mapping of North Cascades National Park. pp. 78-85 in
Geographic Information Systems, Vol. 3. Falls Church,
VA. American Congress on Surveying and Mapping and
American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

YOUR HELP IS NEEDED
The tropical setting in Florida's reefs attracts
millions of visitors annually. In order to
minimize human damage to the corals,
everyone's cooperation is needed. The reefs are
well marked on navigation charts; if you are
not familiar with the area, refer to the charts.
Every year careless boaters run aground, . -
destroying coral colonies that are hundreds of or
years old. Seen from the surface, reefs have a
unique golden-brown color. If you see brown, e . . . ..
you may be about to run aground. Be cautious
when anchoring your boat. Do not deploy the
anchor directly in coral. Usually there are san-
dy areas close by; anchor in the sand. Many
popular reefs off Key Largo and at Looe Key
National Marine Sanctuary have special anchor
buoys for mooring. In these areas, tie up to the
buoys, rather than anchoring. Do not dispose
of trash, bilge washings and other debris on or
near the reefs! Florida coral reefs, with whom we share the
Fishermen should avoid shallow coral reefs seas, are significant, unique natural resources.
when trolling. Hooks can scar and injure the Be a responsible visitor-insure the continued
coral, leaving it vulnerable to infection by vitality of Florida's coral reefs.
vitality of Florida's coral reefs. -�
microscopic organisms that can kill the
animals. Lobster fishermen should avoid plac- Florida Department of Natural Resources
ing traps on reefs. Heavy traps break corals and Bureau of Marine Research
damage the bottom when the traps are pulled. 100 Eighth Avenue S.E.
When diving or snorkeling, look-but do not St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5095 �
touch! Do not grasp, stand or sit on living cor-
al. You may damage the coral and hurt yourself
in the process. All coral is protected. It is
against the law to collect, harvest or sell coral
in Florida and adjacent federal waters. This publication was produced at a cost of
$2,745, or $.068 a copy, to distribute
information on Florida's coral reefs. Funds
provided by DER office of Coastal
Management, through a grant from the
U.S. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
Management, NOAA, under the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972, as
amended.

Florida is the only state in the continental Coral reefs are specialized habitats that pro-
United States to have extensive shallow coral " vide shelter, food and breeding sites for
reef formations near its coasts. These reefs ex- numerous plants and animals. They form a
tend from near Stuart on the Atlantic coast to breakwater for the adjacent coast, providing
the Dry Tortugas, west of Key West, in the natural storm protection. They are very impor-
Gulf of Mexico. The most prolific reef develop- tant to southeast Florida's economy. Recrea-
ment occurs seaward of the Florida Keys. The tional and commercial fishing annually bring
reefs here are spectacular and rival those of many millions of dollars to the state. The at-
many Caribbean areas. Approximately 6,000 tractions of the coral reef communities con-
coral reefs are found between Key Biscayne and tribute greatly to the total value of Florida's
Dry Tortugas. fisheries.

Coral reef development occurs only in areas
FLORIDA REEF FACTS Stony corals are the major reef architects. with specific environmental characteristics: a
Polyps, the living portion of the coral, extract solid structure for the base; warm and predic-
Flo rida's coral reefs came into existence 5,000 car- table water temperatures; oceanic salinities;
calcium from seawater and combine it with car-
to 7,000 years ago when sea levels rose follow- bon dioxide to construct the elaborate clear, transparent waters low in phosphate and
ing the Wisconsin Ice Age. Reef growth is slow; limestone skeletons that form the reef nitrogen nutrients; and moderate wave action
estimates range from one to sixteen feet every backbone. Coral polyps are united into colo- to disperse wastes and bring oxygen and
1,000 years. nies. An individual colony grows one-half to plankton to the reef.
seven inches a year, depending on the species.
Corals start life as free-living larvae that later
settle on the sea floor and develop into massive,
sedentary limestone formations.

Though reef corals are classified as animals,
there is, in fact, a complex of microscopic
plants that lives within the animal tissues (a
symbiotic relationship). The animals benefit
from the energy that the plants provide through
photosynthesis. The plants are protected within
the coral tissues and gain nutrients from animal
wastes. These tiny plants are called zooxan-
thellae and are responsible for much of the col-
or seen in reef corals.

River from Sebastian Inlet south to St. Lucie In-
let. At the Ponce Inlet site a 100 percent loss of
seagrasses was noted. This destruction was due
primarily to dredge and fill activities for de-
velopment and the Intracoastal Waterway. A 7
mile stretch of estuary surrounding the Sebas-
tian Inlet has experienced a 38 percent decline
in seagrass habitat since 1951. Another study
site just north of Fort Pierce Inlet was assessed
for change in habitat over time. A 25 percent
loss of seagrasses was documented in this area
since 1958.

The studies documenting fisheries habitat alter-
ations in Florida, such as the seagrass losses
Star-grass (Halophila englemanni) described earlier, are proving helpful to local
and state officials. They are increasing public
awareness about the problem of fisheries habi-:
tat losses and are providing incentive to ad-
dress this serious problem in Florida's coastal
zone. V

For more detailed information about Florida's
Seagrasses, write to:
Johnson's Sea-grass Paddle-grass Florida Department of Natural Resources :'"
(Halophila johnsonii) (Halophila decipiens) Bureau of Marine Research
P.O. Box F
St. Petersburg, FL 33731
seagrasses was documented through compar- q
ison of aerial photographs from 1944 to 1982.

Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bu-
reau of Marine Research scientists are studying ;
changes in Florida's coastal fisheries habitats. : A.
By analyzing aerial photographs from the 1940's
and 1950's and satellite imagery and aerial
photographs from the 1980's, the scientists are This public document was promulgated
able to evaluate habitat change. with state and federal funds at a cost of
$9480.31, or $.05 per copy, to provide
Several sites on the east Florida coast have information about the coastal zone.
been analyzed, among them are Ponce Inlet,
just south of Daytona Beach, and the Indian Artwork by Mark D. Moffler 6/85

What Are Seagrasses? Seagrass Losses in Florida

Seagrasses are flowering plants that live under- . Seagrasses are a valuable part of Florida's ma-
water. Like land plants, seagrasses produce rine environment but they are disappearing at
oxygen. The depth at which seagrasses are an alarming rate. Dredge and fill projects and
found is limited by water clarity because they .~ degraded water quality, as well as other activi-
require light. Although seagrasses occur ties, are responsible for their precipitous
throughout the coastal areas of the state, they "d / decline.
are most abundant from Tarpon Springs north-
ward to Apalachee Bay. Seagrasses occur in \ / Along the southwest Florida coast there are
protected bays and lagoons and also in places two major bay systems with similar physical
along the continental shelf in the Gulf of features but dramatically different histories.
Mexico. Tampa Bay has experienced the stresses of a
developed, urbanized bay system. Charlotte
Widgeon-grass Harbor, on the other hand, is one of the most
(Ruppia maritima) natural estuaries remaining in Florida. During
the past 100 years, Tampa Bay has experienced
Florida's estimated 502,000 acres of seagrasses
are important natural resources that perform Turtle-grass an 81 percent decline in seagrass acreage. A 29
many significant functions: 1) they help main- (T ,# / (Thalassia testudinum) percent decrease in area of Charlotte Harbor
tain water clarity by trapping fine sediments
widgeon-grass, grows in both fresh and salt-
and particles with their leaves, 2) they can sta- water and is widely distributed throughout
bilize the bottom with their roots and rhizomes Florida's estuaries.
in much the same way that land grasses retard
soil erosion, 3) they provide habitat for many
Shoal-grass, Halodule wrightii, is an early col-
fishes, crustaceans, and shellfish, 4) seagrassesShoal-grass, Halodule wrightii, is an early col
onizer of disturbed areas and usually grows in /
and the organisms that grow on them are food
water too shallow for other species.
for many marine animals, and most importantly,
5) they are nursery areas for much of Florida's
recreationally and commercially important ma- Turtle-grass, Thalassia testudinum, the most
rine life. common of the Florida seagrasses, character-
istically has deeper root structures than any of
the other seagrasses.
Shoal-grass (Halodule wrightii)
Manatee-grass, Syringodium filiforme, is easily
Seagrass leaves provide excellent protection for recognizable because its leaves are cylindrical.
young marine animals from larger open-water Florida's Seagrasses
predators. Some animals, such as manatees, eat The other three are species of Halophila: star-
seagrass blades. Other animals derive nutrition Although approximately 52 species of marine grass, Halophila engelmannii; paddle grass,
from eating algae and small animals that col- seagrasses exist worldwide, only seven species Halophila decipiens; and Johnson's seagrass,
onize seagrass leaves. These colonizing organ- are found in Florida waters. Four of these are Halophila johnsonii. These small, fragile sea-
isms provide an additional link in the marine wide spread in Florida and extend beyond its grasses are sparsely distributed in Florida and
food chain. borders. Ruppia maritima, commonly called only limited information about them exists. Manatee-grass (Syringodium filiforme)

to evaluate habitat changes by analyzing aerial Indian River is the longest saltwater lagoon in o
PB~~~~~ a~, t, :

photographs from the 1940's and 1950's, and Florida. There are just under 8,000 acres of - , , ~

the 1980's. Frequently the changes illustrate acres are available as fisheries habitat because . .
losatlieiaeyadara poogrpyfro mangroves acri teaguyie. Thrugh only1,90
loss of mangrove acreage. Through researching of mosquito impoundments. Consequently, 76 y : ', ,;, ,/4 ,~!~':
the history of study sites, these losses are often percent of the existing mangrove areas are not
attributed to human activities. productive to fisheries. A total of 86 percent of
Tampa Bay, located on the southwest Florida the mangrove areas have been lost to fisheries :
coast, has experienced considerable change. It since the 1940's.
is one of the ten largest ports in the nation. State and local regulations have been enacted ,
Over the past 100 years, Tampa Bay has lost to protect Florida's mangrove forests. Man-
over 44 percent of its coastal wetlands acreage; groves cannot be removed, pruned or dis-
this includes both mangroves and salt marshes. turbed on either state or private land without a
The next major bay system south of Tampa Bay permit from the Florida Department of Envi-
is Charlotte Harbor. Unlike Tampa Bay, Char- ronmental Regulation. Local laws vary, so be )
lotte Harbor is one of the least urbanized estu- sure to check with officials in your area before
arine areas in Florida. However, there has been taking any action.
some mangrove destruction here also. Punta Mangroves are one of Florida's true natives and
Gorda waterfront development accounts for 59 are part of our state heritage. It is up to us to
percent of the total loss. An increase in man- ensure a place in Florida's future for one of our
grove acreage was noted in parts of the Har- most valuable coastal resources...mangroves.
bor. This is due to changes in the system. As
tidal flats were colonized by mangroves, tidal For more detailed information about Florida's
flat acreage decreased and mangrove acreage Mangroves, write to:
increased. Spoil islands, created as by-products Florida Department of Natural Resources
of dredging, also provide suitable habitat for Bureau of Marine Research
mangroves. PO. Box F
A changing system was also observed on the St. Petersburg, FL 33731
southeast Florida coast in Lake Worth, near
West Palm Beach. Lake Worth naturally evolved
from a saltwater lagoon to a freshwater lake. , \
Human changes modified the lake back to an
estuarine lagoon. Lake Worth has experienced .! '
an 87 percent decrease of its mangrove acreage
over the past forty years. Mangroves appear to
be replaced by Australian pines and urban-
ization. The remaining 276 acres of mangroves This public document was promulgated
occur in very small scattered areas and are now with 'state and federal funds at a cost of
protected by strict regulations. $9480.31, or $.05 per copy, to provide
information about the coastal zone.
Another study site included the Indian River ;.., :
from St. Lucie Inlet north to Satellite Beach. Cover Photo by Wendy Wilson 6/85
Another study ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~*', sieiclddte:ninRie noraina:u.h coasta l zone

What Are Mangroves? green, and have two distinguishing glands at
the base of the leaf blade where the stem
Mangroves are one of Florida's true natives. starts.
They thrive in salty environments because they All three of these species utilize a remarkable
are able to obtain freshwater from saltwater. method of propagation. Seeds sprout while still
Some secrete excess salt through their leaves, on the trees and drop into the soft bottom
others block absorption of salt at their roots. around the base of the trees or are transported
Florida's estimated 469,000 acres of mangrove by currents and tides to other suitable loca-
forests contribute to the overall health of the tions.
state's southern coastal zone. This ecosystem ~~~~~~~~~~Florida's mangroves are tropical species, there-
traps and cycles various organic materials, fore they are sensitive to extreme temperature
chemical elements, and important nutrients. fluctuations as well as subfreezing tempera-
Mangrove roots act not only as physical traps tures. Research indicates that salinity, water
but provide attachment surfaces for various temperature, tidal fluctuations, and soil also af-
marine organisms. Many of these attached or- fect their growth and distribution. Mangroves 12-1
gaismsrn filter an rpwater clethrough nuret.their bodies and, are Gufcommon ancosas far Caenorth Cnvrlas Cedar onKey teon Atatcthe_

The relationship between mangroves and their coast. Black mangroves can occur farther north
associated marine life cannot be overem- in Florida than the other two species. Fre-
phasized. Mangroves provide protected nur- quently, all three species grow intermixed. _
sery areas for fishes, crustaceans, and shellfish. __ People living along the south Florida coasts Black Mangrove (Avicennia germinans)
They also provide food for a multitude of marine _benefit many ways from mangroves. Mangrove
species such as snook, snapper, tarpon, jack, forests protect uplands from storm winds, waves, and floods. The amount of protection
sheepshead, red drum, oyster, and shrimp. afforded by mangroves depends upon the
Florida's important recreational and commercial Red Mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) White Mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa) width of the forest. A very narrow fringe of
fisheries will drastically decline without healthy groves the title, "walking trees." The red man- mangroves offers limited protection while a
mangrove forests. grove in particular appears to be standing or wide fringe can considerably reduce wave and
Many animals find shelter either in the roots or walking on the surface of the water. flood damage to landward areas by enabling
branches of mangroves. Mangrove branches The black mangrove, Avicennia germinans, overflowing water to be absorbed into the ex-
are rookeries, or nesting areas, for beautiful usually occupies slightly higher elevations up- panse of forest. Mangroves can help prevent
coastal birds such as brown pelicans and rose- land from the red mangrove. The black man- erosion by stablizing shorelines with their spe-
ate spoonbills. grove can be identified by numerous finger-like cialized root systems. Mangroves also filter
Florida's Magoe projections, called pneurnatophores, that pro- water, maintaining water quality and clarity.
angroves ~~~~~~trude from the soil around the tree's trunk. Mangrove Losses In Florida
Worldwide, more than 50 species of mangroves The white mangrove, Laguncularia racemosa,
exist. Of the three species found in Florida, the usually occupies the highest elevations farther It is true that mangroves can be naturally dlam-
red mangrove, Rhizophora mangle, is probably upland than either the red or black mangroves. aged and destroyed, but there is no doubt that
the most well-known. It typically grows along Unlike its red or black counterparts, the white human impact has been most severe. Florida
the water's edge. The red mangrove is easily mangrove has no visible aerial root systems. Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of
identified by its tangled, reddish roots called The easiest way to identify the white mangrove Marine Research scientists are studying changes in
"prop-roots." These roots have earned man- is by its leaves. They are elliptical, light yellow- Artwork courtesy of U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Florida's coastal habitats. The scientists are able

In Palm Beach County, a 51 percent decrease in tablished clear guidelines for defining wetland
salt marsh acreage occurred in Lake Worth be- areas that come under state jurisdiction. AllFL RD
tween 1944 and 1982 due to major land de- dredging and filling activities in state waters re- FOl hIw"
velopments. A network of canals draining low- quire permits unless specifically exempted. Local a
lying uplands diverted the natural flow of laws vary so be sure to check with officials in NW-=A RH E
freshwater away from salt marsh areas. your area before taking any action.

Salt marshes are a part of our State heritage. It is
up to us to ensure them a place in Florida's
In southwest Florida, both salt marshes and future - your future.
mangroves occur along the Tampa Bay shore.
Since 1940, Tampa Bay has been one of the fast-
est growing metropolitan areas in Florida. Con-
siderable environmental damage has occurred in
Tampa Bay along with this growth. Four major For more information about Florida's Salt ~ ~
types of dredging have impacted Tampa Bay dur- Marshes, write to:
ing the last 100 years: channel deepening, main- Florida Department of Natural Resources
tenance dredging, shell dredging, and dredging Bureau of Marine Research
for land fill construction. Ship channel dredging P.O. Box F
and port construction have brought Tampa Bay St. Petersburg, FL 33731 -
the economic benefits of being one of the
largest ports in the nation. Tampa Bay has lost
more than 40 percent of its original mangrove
and salt marsh acreage over this time. __

The elimination and alteration of Florida salt
marshes have a negative effect on fishery re-
sources. Estuaries provide nursery areas for at-
least 70 percent of Florida's important rec - j
reational and commercial fishes, shellfish, and This public document was promulgated If
crustaceans. Many of Florida's marine fisherieswihsaendferludstacotf
wil etlieandmydsaperwtou.osa $9480.31, or $.05 per copy, to provide ~~W
wetlands. ~~~~~~~~~~~information about the coastal zone.

State regulations have been enacted to protect
Florida's salt marsh systems. Specifically, the
Warren B. Henderson Wetlands Act of 1984 es- Cover Photo by Jean Smith 6/85

- ~~~or trap, some of these pollutants, reducing the

Salt marshes are coastal wetlands rich in I \pollutant load entering estuaries. Salt marshes
marine life. They are sometimes called tidal Lalso prevent sediments from washing offshore,
marshes because they occur in the zone be- oft craigmr adonwihsl ase
tween low and high tides. Salt marsh plants can grow.
cannot grow where waves are strong but they
thrive along low-energy coasts. They also occur \4
in areas called "estuaries," where freshwater 'iI!
from the land mixes with sea water. soj~~ Salt Marsh Losses in Florida
~~ ~~!~'\ I ~~S alt marsh systems are dynamic, constantly

A distinctive feature of salt marshes is the / j\%;i~changing. Society, however, emphasizes stabil-
ityand beenrmainen.Ad orfled ihsult, salt oarse
color - the plants are various shades of gray, hav bee ityaaned permanledc.A wit rsilt, sand marse
brown, and green. Salt marshes are composed IIrefuse to an elevation at which they can no

ofnalvarety ofblacknts:l rushesu us edgesan-
of a variety of plants: rushes, sedges, and Ii~~~~~~~~~~~~t longer survive. It isonge estimatedtis thatateinhaFloridaidaaa
grasses. Florida's dominant salt marsh species lat6,0 ceo ecno surn

ianus), the grayish rush ocurring along higher ,, ItAflacites
marsh areas; saltmeadow cord grass (Spartina fl ciiis
patens), growing in areas that are periodically (0T6m Cross 1985
inundated; smooth cord grass (Spartina alter- The Florida Department of Natural Resources,
niflora), found in the lowest areas that areBueuoMaieRsrcistdynchgs
motfrequently inundated; and sawgrass (Cla- the plants themselves, and on smaller organ- main form of coastal vegetation. The coastalBueuoMaieRsrcistdynchgs
dium lamaicense), which is actually a fresh- isms that also dwell in the marsh system. As area known as "Big Bend" has the greatest salt i n valoria's coastal hbitt Scientisng aeranpoo
water plant that sometimes grows along the salt marsh plants die and decompose they marsh acreage in Florida, extending from Apa- e valatephags byth comarting thera photo-95san
upper edges of salt marshes. All are tolerant of create organic detritus, another food source for lachicola Bay to Cedar Key. South of Cedar Key graphs. ofthe coangst inere the freque150s ndl
the salt in sea spray. many marsh dwellers. Tidal waters move up salt marshes begin to be replaced by man- 10s.how changs ofbfsherved hbtoofeqetly
into the marsh and then retreat, distributing groves as the predominant intertidlal plants. On so oso ihre aias
detritus throughout the estuary. Algae are also the Atlantic coast, salt marshes occur from Day-

Salt marshes are important for many reasons. aimotnfodsucinalmrhe.oaBahnrhwd.Salt marsh loss has occurred in Florida's five
Hidden within the tangle of salt marsh plants northeast counties which contain 11 percent of
are animals in various stages of life. Animals FHorida's Salt Marshes the State's total salt marsh acreage. The pri-
can hide from predators in marsh vegetation Despite their value, salt marshes are too often mary loss in Nassau County occurred because
because the shallow brackish area physically Salt marshes form along the margins of many considered to be worthless. Salt marshes pro- of dredging for the Intracoastal Waterway. Du-
excludes larger fish. Many of Florida's popular north Florida estuaries. Gulf coast salt marshes vide nursery areas for fishes, shellfish, and val County has been impacted even more se-
marine fisheries species spend the early part of occur along low energy shorelines, at the crustaceans. These plants have extensive root verely by human activity. Extending 3.5 miles
their lives protected in salt marshes. mouth of rivers, and in bays, bayous, and systems which enable them to withstand brief on either side of St. John's Inlet and 10 miles
sounds. The Panhandle region west of Apa- storm surges, buffering the impact on upland up the St. John's River, analysis indicated a 36
lachicola Bay consists mainly of estuaries with areas. Salt marshes also act as filters. Tidal percent loss of marsh habitat. The loss is pri-
Young fish often have a varied diet, foraging few salt marshes. However, from Apalachicola creeks meander through the marshes transport- marily due to dredge and fill of marsh habitat
for food in the muds of the marsh bottom, on Bay south to Tampa Bay, salt marshes are the ing valuable nutrients as well as pollutants from . since 1943.

they are one of our greatest natural resources.
This resource, however, can be destroyed. The
coast's appeal is very evident; 78 percent of
Florida's estimated 11 million residents live in
ethe coastal zone. Dredge and fill operations for .
apalacflicara Ba~ waterfront homesites and seawall construction
destroy mangrove shoreline and underwater 4

fish , s h rimpgrassbeds. Though these activities may tem-
- ~~~~~~porarily enhance real estate value, ultimately 'M
they may decrease long-term value as the natu-
<h~ll~ft 'j-'I Worth ral amenities disappear, the water becomes
,rr ~tC. foul, and wildlife leaves. These activities often.
eliminate habitat and feeding areas for young
fish, shrimp, and crabs. Without estuaries many
.~.'~i . ... important fisheries will disappear.

Estuaries are special. Help protect them. :;'
Some Major Florida Estuaries

For more information about Florida's Estuaries,
write to:
Florida's coast is available from LANDSAT sat- Florida Department of Natural Resources
ellite and other satellite information sources. Bureau of Marine Research
The scientists are also noting trends in habitat P.O. Box F
change by analyzing aerial photographs from St. Petersburg, FL 33731
the 1940's, 1950's, and 1980's. Results of the
habitat trend analyses have shown substantial I -1 4
losses of fisheries habitat throughout Florida. :
One study area on the east coast included the
Indian River from Sebastian Inlet south to the
St. Lucie Inlet. Over a forty year period, an 86
percent decline in the availability of mangrove
habitat to fisheries was documented in addition
to a 30 percent loss of seagrass acreage. Tampa
Bay, in southwest Florida, has experienced an This public document was promulgated
This public document was promulgated
81 percent loss of seagrasses and a 44 percent with state and federal funds at a cost of
loss of mangrove and salt marsh acreage over a $9480.31, or $.05 per copy, to provide
100 year period. ~i
~~~~~~100 year period. ~information about the coastal zone.

Estuarine habitat loss is a serious problem in
Florida's coastal zone. It is difficult to put a
price tag on estuaries, but without question Cover Artwork by Coe Kitten 6/85
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I~~~~~~~~~~~s

What~-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ AreEstaressaa lands. Plants use these nutrients, along with
What Are Estuaries?
tasks; BAR RIER -; L.>;> the sun's energy, carbon dioxide, and water to
Estuaries are special. They occur in areas where MAINLAND BARRIER ISLAND manufacture food. Among the most important
~freshwater meets and mixes with salty ocean -age. God He X 9 t~kgE \plant forms that contribute to estuaries are
waters. The term estuaries, according to gen- OCEAN microscopic algae called phytoplankton. Other
~:.'~B~~~~~~~~~~~~ .... la~p. lant forms include marsh grasses, mangroves,
eral usage, refers to protected, nearshore wa- SMlant forms include marsh grasses, mangroves,
ters such as bays and lagoons. TRAWLEseagrasses, and maroalgae. When these larger
TRAWLER:; ~~~~~~~~~~~ -~ ~plants die, they are broken down into detritus
Survival of plants and animals in estuaries re- and are colonized by microbes (bacteria, fungi,
;:'- %: ::i;" ' iv~ixV ESTUARY a
quires special adaptations. Estuaries are dynam- 'E. D n de.
....... :-:'~J~;~ ?'~i~ ' ~'. ~i'\ LARVAE detritus becomes smaller and smaller and the
ic systems where waters are alternately salty .ct,; i
and fresh. The ebb and flow of tides may sleave 4~c~ .!a; l00 000t EGGGS nutrients and small particles become food for
and fresh. The ebb and flow of tides may leave TRAWLER t-
RA ,~--_/:~,-~ 1~ __. / : ~ '""�"thousands of organisms. Larger animals feed
some plants and animals, such as seagrasses . AXC. :OSTLARVAE_~ TRAWLE
some plantsadanim, suchSTLARVAE directly on these tiny particles or on smaller
and oysters, temporarily high and dry. Shallow animals that fed on detritus.
animals that fed on detritus.
estuarine water temperatures can range from
freezing to more than 100� F during the course Ai ESTUARY flows and
f a yea.- AU As long as nutrient-rich freshwater flows and
of a year.
tides interact without human interference, our
Estuarine organsms are naturally adapted(B T estuaries will remain productive. Snook, trout,
Estuarine organisms are naturally adapted to mullet, jack, grouper, redfish, silver perch, spot,
withstand these ranges in salinity, tides, and .- e,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~temperatures. They must, however, have a bayl- ~ ~ 9 0 E catfish, sheepshead, spiny lobster, shrimp,
temperatures. They must, however, have a bal-
anced flow of fresh and saltwater. This balance SEAGRAS crabs, oysters, and clams are examples of the
can be upset if 1) there is too much freshwater, MEADOW diverse marine animals dependent upon
can be upset if 1) there is too much freshwater, --.healthy estuaries. Estuaries also provide breed-
as when ca-u healthy estuaries. Estuaries also provide breed-
as wthe free flow of tides; or if 2) there is too little --~ < > w-i>~^ <ing and nesting areas, or rookeries, for many
fre e flow of tides; or if 2) the diversion or damming of a coastal birds, including several endangered
frswtr si hivrinoamnLfaMARSHMANGR VE- species such as brown pelicans. Estuaries' role
river. Estuarine-dependent marine life may die LIFE CYCLE OF PINK SHRIMP
if the precarious balance of fresh and saltwater
is not maintained. phasized.
rents. The shallow waters, salt marshes, sea- tide. If successful in reaching the estuary after
grasses, and mangrove roots provide excellent this hazardous journey from the sea, the young Florida's Estuaries
Why Are Estuaries Special? hiding places from larger, open-water pred- shrimp find seagrasses and algae to conceal
ators. Some species grow in estuaries for a them from predators. Because many larger Florida is undergoing tremendous growth and
"The cradle of the ocean" is a most appropri- short time; others remain there for life. animals cannot survive in the lower salinity of development pressure which' is impacting
ate title for estuaries. More than 70 percent of the estuary, the young have the added pro- marine fisheries habitat components important
Florida's recreationally and commercially im- Shrimp, for example, spawn offshore. The tection of a "salt barrier." Once the shrimp ap- in maintaining viable commercial and rec-
portant fishes, crustaceans, and shellfish spend larvae then move toward inshore waters, proach maturity, they leave the estuary for the reational fisheries. Florida Department of Natu-
part of their lives in estuaries, usually when changing form by molting as they progress sea to spawn, and the cycle begins anew. ral Resources, Bureau of Marine Research
they are young. Many fishes and crustaceans through various stages of development. As scientists are locating and calculating the acre-
migrate offshore to spawn or breed. The eggs young shrimp, they burrow into the sea floor Estuaries are among the most productive eco- age of existing estuarine habitat components
develop into larvae (immature forms) that are at the mouth of the estuary as the tide ebbs, systems in nature. Rivers and streams drain such as salt marshes, mangroves, and sea-
transported into estuaries by tides and cur- then ride into the estuary on the incoming into estuaries, bringing in nutrients from up- grasses. Information used to map and monitor